QAR: Click Here
Conditions for approval required by: Julien Gauther
Certification of Aerospace Products to international quality Standards
Certification of Aerospace Products to international quality Standards
Form restricted to registered, logged in users. Please return to the home page and use the Create Account option.
EN4127-050 (mfg batch 569235):
FPI: sample size applied is 125 instead of 200.
LISI AEROSPACE VDR have already stated that they will comply with right interpretation of ISO2859-1.
EN4127-060007 (mfg batch 568416):
Since this bolt reference is too short to carry out tensile test directly on bolts, we should have some results on test specimens as per ISO9152, clause 5.4.1 (“On test specimen: ISO6892. The test specimens to be produced from the same material batch as the bolts and treated with them”.)
Shall we have these tensile test results on specimens?
EN4127-080028 (mfg batch 433241):
FPI: sample size applied is 20 parts instead of 100% inspection.
LISI AEROSPACE VDR have already stated that they will comply with right interpretation of ISO2859-1.
In mechanical test summary, it is said that this test is not applicable due to drilled shank.
The hole is located in threaded area, not the smooth shank.
Maybe there are different interpretations since, from my point of view, tension fatigue test is not applicable when bolts have drilled shanks (in the axis) / axial bores (lightened bolts).
EN4127-100020 (mfg batch 559714):
FPI: sample size applied is 80 parts instead of 200 parts.
LISI AEROSPACE VDR have already stated that they will comply with right interpretation of ISO2859-1.
This bolt has a sufficient length to be tensile tested (diameter = 10 mm, grip length = 20 mm). Thus why don’t we have any tensile test results?
The same length restriction is applicable to fatigue test (protruding head bolts of grip length < twice the nominal shank diameter) and we do have tension fatigue test results.
Many thanks in advance,
Best regards.
Sampling is well taken into account on new products, here it is a validation of parts manufactured in 2009.
regarding the test pieces for the short rods at that time it was not required by ASD CERT and the manufacturer was applying the ISO9152 spec exactly
Noted for NDT sampling, agreed, thank you.
EN4127-060007 (mfg batch 568416):
Since this bolt reference is too short to carry out tensile test directly on bolts, we should have some results on test specimens as per ISO9152, clause 5.4.1 (“On test specimen: ISO6892. The test specimens to be produced from the same material batch as the bolts and treated with them”.)
The current edition of ISO9152 is 1998.
Back in the days, the same edition of ISO9152 was applicable for this bolt and batch.
Thus, we should have tensile test test results on test specimens and for the qualification of this diameter, we may have a length restriction.
EN4127-080028 (mfg batch 433241): analysis in progress on my side.
EN4127-100020 (mfg batch 559714):
Fatigue test was carried out (3 bolts – thread failures at 106247, 48524 and 52347 cycles).
Tensile test should have been performed since we have the same bolt length restriction, which is “protruding head bolts of grip length < twice the nominal shank diameter".
Many thanks again,
Best regards.
EN4127-060007 (mfg batch 568416):
I agree that the tensile tests on specimens were to be carried out. However, the batch was manufactured more than 10 years ago, we no longer have any parts or samples to carry out new tensile testing. We are ok to have a length restriction for this reference on this certificate only.
EN4127-100020 (mfg batch 559714):
It is an oversight, the test was then regularized. You will find attached a copy of the CC of OF 593215 (2012) which shows that the tests have been carried out.
Many thanks for repling.
All is clear for me except the following topic:
EN4127-080028 (mfg batch 433241):
In mechanical test summary, it is said that this test is not applicable due to drilled shank.
The hole is located in threaded area, not the smooth shank.
Maybe there are different interpretations since, from my point of view, tension fatigue test is not applicable when bolts have drilled shanks (in the axis) / axial bores (lightened bolts).
What is LISI’s interpretation?
Thank you again and hace a nice day,
Best regards.
Hello M. GAUTHER
In our interpretation, testing is not required for a drilled part even for thread drilling. The shank (“tige” in French) designates the whole section under bolt’s head, including threaded portion. Moreover, the technical specification does not mention that only axial holes are concerned.
Thank you
Best regards,
Many thanks for replying!
I agree with the fact that ISO9152 should be more explicit.
For instance, NAS4004 technical specification is quite clear: see Table 4, clause /c/, sub-clause 3.
Approved on my side.
Best regards.