PT Draft Report - Low Alloy Steel - 22!16!17

PT Scheme: Chemical Composition of Low Alloy Steel PT Scheme Code: PTM/CHEM/22/16-17
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM

ON
CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF LOW ALLOY STEEL
[PTM/CHEM/22/16-17]
DRAFT REPORT
2017-18
ORGANIZED BY
GLOBAL PT PROVIDER PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI
PT SCHEME NAME : CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF LOW ALLOY STEEL

PT SCHEME CODE : PTM/CHEM/22/16-17
PT REPORT NO. : LOW22SR/17/D-1
DATE OF ISSUE : 28/01/2017
AUTHORISED BY : MR. UMESH GUPTA (TECHNICAL DIRECTOR)
Page 1 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
PT PROVIDER DETAILS
NAME & ADDRESS OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROVIDER:
GLOBAL PT PROVIDER PRIVATE LIMITED
E-41, OKHLA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE II
NEW DELHI 110020, INDIA
TEL: 91-11-40522050, 09873001545, 09582999061
EMAIL: care@globalptprovider.com; info@globalptprovider.com;
COORDINATORS OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM:

MS. SAKSHI RANA
PT COORDINATOR
Mob.: 09873001545
EMAIL: care@globalptprovider.com/info@ globalptprovider.com;
ADVISORY GROUP OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM:

MR. K. DHINGRA
REPORT PREPARED BY REPORT CHECKED BY REPORT AUTHORISED BY

MS. SAKSHI RANA MR. RAM TIRTH MR. UMESH GUPTA
PT COORDINATOR MANAGER (QA) TECHNICAL DIRECTOR
Page 2 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
CONTENTS
S. No. Description Page No.

1. Cover Page 1
2. PT Provider Details 2
3. Contents 3
4. Abbreviations used 4
5. Introduction 5
6. Objectives of Proficiency Testing 5
7. Registration Procedure 6
8. PT Program Details 6-9
Effective Schedule
Preparation of PT Items
Parameters for the PT Scheme
Homogeneity Testing
Distribution of PT Items
Stability Testing
Submission of Results
Analysis of Data
DETERMINATION OF A SSIGNED VALUE
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PARTICIPANTS:
INTERPRETATION OF THE PERFORMANCE
9. Subcontracted Activities 9-10
10. Confidentiality in Proficiency testing 10
11. Comments from Technical Expertise 10
12. Summary of Results [Data Tables] 11-20
13. Robust Z-Score Chart: Sl. No. Vs Z Score 21-30
14. Outlier Results 31
Page 3 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
ABBREVIATION USED
PT PROFICIENCY TESTING
NABL NATIONAL ACCREDITATION BOARD FOR TESTING &
CALIBRATION LABORATORIES
GPTP GLOBAL PT PROVIDER (P) LTD
ISO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION FOR STANDARDIZATION
IEC INTERNAL ELECTRO TECHNICAL COMMISSION
PTM PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM IN METAL
PTP PROFICIENCY TESTING PROVIDER (GPTP)
PTC PROFICIENCY TESTING COORDINATOR
CHEM CHEMICAL
OES OPTICAL EMISSION SPECTROSCOPY
H&S HOMOGENEITY & STABILITY
C CARBON
Si SILICON
Mn MANGANESE
S SULPHUR
P PHOSPHORUS
Cr CHROMIUM
Ni NICKEL
Mo MOLYBDENUM
Cu COPPER
X NOT PARTICIPATED
Page 4 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
1. INTRODUCTION
Proficiency Testing has become an essential aspect of laboratory practice in all areas of testing,
calibration and inspection. Participation in proficiency testing schemes provides laboratories
with an objective means of assessing and demonstrating the reliability of the data they are
producing. One of the main uses of PT scheme is to assess laboratories ability to perform test
competently.
This report summarizes the results of Proficiency Testing program on Chemical Composition of
Low Alloy Steel. The Elements determined in this Program are C, Si, Mn, S, P, Ni, Mo, Cu &
Cr.
The Chemical Composition of Low Alloy Steel testing is a routine analysis items for most of the
laboratories. The function of the testing laboratories is to provide testing data. On the basis of
this data the decision are made in the Trade and Commerce industry. Thus, the reliability of test
data in the laboratories can provide quality services and practicing good quality management
system.
The results from Proficiency Testing Program are useful to both participating laboratories and
accreditation bodies. Successful participation in a specific proficiency testing program may
represent evidence of competence for that exercise. Similarly, unsuccessful performance may
reflect a random departure from a laboratories normal state of competence.
2. OBJECTIVES OF PROFICIENCY TESTING

The main objective of the program was to evaluate the performance of participating laboratories
in the analysis of low alloy steel by means of inter-laboratory comparison.
Test results from participants are evaluated according to the statistical techniques outlined in ISO
13528:2015 Statistical methods for use in proficiency testing by inter laboratory comparisons.
The z-score is used as a numerical indicator to assess individual participants performance in the
program.
Page 5 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
3. REGISTRATION PROCEDURE
Participants were intimated through PTP Brochure. Participant or stakeholders interest were entertained
by PTC (Verbally/by email). Interested participants were registered themselves through registration
form (RF/GPTP/PTM/CHEM/22/16-17/00) for this PT program. After getting minimum number of
participants, an Intimation letter was sent to concerned participant to inform about the status of PT
program.
4. PROGRAM DETAILS
One sealed steel sample (approx 40X25 mm) was distributed to concern participants (25 participants).
Participants were advised to carry out test as soon as possible after receiving samples as per standard test
method (ASTM E 415/ IS 8811/IS 228 /Any Validated Instrumental Method). The PT item is to be
treated by laboratory in the same way as routine laboratory samples. Twenty-five laboratories have
participated in this PT program.
4.1 EFFECTIVE PT SCHEDULE:
TABLE 1: PT PROGRAM SCHEDULE
Sl. No. PT Activities Effective Date

1. Invitation & Registration 18th Nov 2016 - 20th Dec 2016
2. Purchase of Raw Material 31st May - 09th June 2014
3. Material Verification 2nd June - 04th June 2014
4. Sample Preparation 05th June - 09th June 2014
5. Homogeneity Testing & Evaluation 10th June - 30th June 2014
6. Sample Dispatch 29th Nov - 17th Dec 2016
7. Stability Testing 26th Nov - 30th Dec 2016
8. Result Received 9th Dec 2016 - 06th Jan 2017
9. Data Analysis 07th Jan 2017 - 18th Jan 2017
10. Draft Report 19th Jan 2017 28th Jan 2017
11. Final Report Generation & Distribution -
Page 6 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
PT SCHEDULE
Draft Report Invitation &
Data Analysis Purchase of
Registration
Raw Material
Result Received Material

Verification
Sample
Stability Preparation
Testing
Homogeneity
Testing &
Evaluation
Sample Dispatch
Figure - 1
4.2 PREPARATION OF PT ITEMS:

The raw material was procured in the form of hot rolled wire rod of 40mm diameter. Six samples
were selected from two ends for analysis of chemical compositions of analyzed by using optical
emission spectrometer & randomly 4 samples were analyzed for microstructure by microscopic
Analysis. The samples were grinded and the buffing was also done.
4.3 PARAMETERS FOR THE PT SCHEME:
TABLE 2: PARAMETERS FOR THE PT SCHEME
Sl. No. PT Parameters Test Method Range of Testing

1. C (Carbon), % 0.25-0.50
2. Si (Silicon), % 0.15-0.40
3. Mn (Manganese), % 0.45-0.75
4. S (Sulphur), % ASTM E 415:2015/IS:228/IS 0.01-0.04
5. P (Phosphorous), % 8811:1998/ Any Validated 0.01-0.04
6. Cr (Chromium), % Instrumental Method by 0.09-1.4
7. Ni (Nickel), % using Optical Emission 1.0-1.6
8. Mo (Molybdenum), % Spectroscopy 0.2-0.4
9. Cu (Copper), % 0.05-0.09
Page 7 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
4.4 HOMOGENEITY TESTING:
The samples from previous PT program (PTM/CHEM/02/14-15) are used for this PT program
(PTM/CHEM/22/16-17). Homogeneity was checked in previous PT program. The stability is
checked as per Annexure-B of ISO 13528:2015.
4.5 DISTRIBUTION OF PT ITEMS:
Participating laboratories were supplied one sealed sample of 40X25mm labeled as LS02. The
samples were packed in plastic container within Polly pouch and Sponge to ensure that no rust
formation should be on the surface of the sample. Samples were distributed to the concerned
participants by speed post and courier. Conformation of sample receipt was ensured through the
return receipt of duly filled Sample Receipt Form from each participant. Instructions Sheet and
Receipt Form are given in Annexure II & III respectively.
4.6 STABILITY TESTING:
Stability Testing was subcontracted to NABL Accredited Laboratory. 6 samples were randomly
selected in the month of Nov16 (26/11/16) and Dec16 (27/12/16) for chemical composition
testing. The stability of the PT samples was checked as per Annexure-B of ISO 13528:2015.
4.7 SUBMISSION OF RESULTS:
Participants were requested to perform the test according to the Instructions Sheet (Annexure II)
and to submit their laboratories test results to the accuracy specified in the result sheet (Annexure
IV). Reporting of test results were to be done by each parameter. In case of laboratory does not
carry out of the specified parameters then indicate the same by marking the result columns for
these parameters, with cross the mark. The results of the individual laboratories were received
through duly filled Result Sheet format. The original data is tabulated in (TABLE 3 to TABLE
13).
4.8 ANALYSIS OF DATA:
In order to maintain the confidentiality of the participants of the PT Scheme, the individual
participant laboratories were given unique Lab Code numbers in result sheet format. Robust
Average is calculated from submitted results and used as assigned value as per Clause 7.7 of ISO
13528:2015. Robust Z score has been analysed as per Annexure C (Algorithm-A) of ISO
13528:2015. Extreme results/ unsuitable for statistical evaluation or taken out by Grubbs Test.
Page 8 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
DETERMINATION OF ASSIGNED VALUE:
The consensus value from the participants results have been taken as the assigned value for the
proficiency testing program.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PARTICIPANTS:
The performance of the individual laboratory was evaluated by adopting Robust Z score
technique given in ISO 13528:2015, as per the following formula:
Z=
Where,
is the test result reported by the individual laboratory
is the Assigned Value
& is the standard deviation of the Proficiency Assessment.
INTERPRETATION OF THE PERFORMANCE :
The calculated Z-scores are tabulated in the report alongside the corresponding results and the results
are assessed based on their Z-Scores. The results of Z-Score are interpreted as follows.
|Z| < 2 = Satisfactory
2 < |Z| < 3 = Questionable
|Z| > 3 = Unsatisfactory.
An Outlier defined as any results / pair of results with an absolute Z-Score greater than 3 i.e. Z >3 or Z<-
3. The outlier criteria |Z| > 3 has a confidence level of about 99.73% i.e. there is less than 1% chance
that the result is a true member of the population and it is for more likely that there is a problem with
this result/ pair of result. Laboratories which have a Z-Score in the region 2 < 3 are encouraged to take a
close look at their results. However the sign of the value of Z-Scores must be considered. The value > 3
indicate the both of results for pair is too high. Similarly negative (-3) indicates the results are too low.
5. SUBCONTRACTING ACTIVITIES
The following activities have been subcontracted for this PT program as given below:
Testing for Material Verification
Sample Preparation
Testing for Homogeneity Check
Testing for Stability Check
Page 9 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
6. CONFIDENTIALITY IN PROFICIENCY TESTING

In order to maintain confidentiality of participants of the PT scheme, each participant laboratories are
given unique Lab ID which is only disclosed to that participant. Participant identity, performance and
report will not be disclosed to any other party without the prior permission of the participants and
written authorization. Confidentiality will be maintained at all levels. The results of the PT can be
disclosed to Accreditation/Regulatory body.
7. COMMENTS FROM TECHNICAL EXPERTISE
Total twenty-five laboratories have participated in this PT program. The performance of twenty five labs
is given below:
Carbon: Twenty-five labs have participated in analysis of Carbon. Twenty labs have shown satisfactory
results, four labs have shown unsatisfactory results and one lab has shown questionable result.
Silicon: Twenty-four labs have participated in analysis of Silicon. Twenty labs have shown satisfactory
results, one lab has shown unsatisfactory result and three labs have shown questionable
results.
Manganese: Twenty-four labs have participated in analysis of Manganese. Twenty-two labs have shown
satisfactory results and two labs have shown questionable result.
Sulphur: Twenty-five labs have participated in analysis of Sulphur. Twenty-two laboratories have shown
satisfactory results, one lab has shown unsatisfactory result and two labs have shown
questionable result.
Phosphorus: Twenty-five labs have participated in analysis of Phosphorus. Twenty-one laboratories
have shown satisfactory results, one lab has shown unsatisfactory result and three labs
have shown questionable results.
Chromium: Twenty-two labs have participated in analysis of Chromium. Nineteen labs have shown
satisfactory results and three labs have shown questionable results.
Nickel: Twenty-two labs have participated in analysis of Nickel. Twenty laboratories have shown
satisfactory results and two labs have shown unsatisfactory results.
Molybdenum: Twenty-one labs have participated in analysis of Molybdenum. Eighteen laboratories

have shown satisfactory results, two labs have shown unsatisfactory results and one lab
has shown questionable result.
Copper: Eighteen labs have participated in analysis of Copper. Fifteen labs have shown satisfactory
results and three labs have shown questionable results.
Page 10 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
SUMMARY OF RESULTS [DATA TABLES]
Page 11 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
TABLE 3 : ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR CARBON
Carbon, %
Reported Value
SL. No. Test Method Adopted Z Score Performance
(%)
SL-01 0.39 ASTM E 415:2015 -0.47 Satisfactory
#
SL-03 0.42 ASTM E 415:2015 3.78 Unsatisfactory
SL-04 0.40 IS 8811:1998 0.95 Satisfactory
SL-05 0.39 IS 8811:1998 -0.47 Satisfactory
SL-06 0.41 ASTM E 415:2015 2.37 Questionable
SL-07 0.40 IS:228 (P-1) 1987 0.95 Satisfactory
SL-08 0.38 ISO 9556:1989 -1.88 Satisfactory
SL-09 0.40 ASTM E 415:2015 0.95 Satisfactory
SL-10 0.39 IS 228 (P-1):1987 -0.47 Satisfactory
SL-11 0.39 ASTM E 415:2015 OES -0.47 Satisfactory
#
SL-12 0.35 ASTM E 415:2015 OES -6.13 Unsatisfactory
#
SL-15 0.34 IS:228 (P-1) 1987 -7.54 Unsatisfactory
SL-16 0.39 IS:228 (P-1) 1987 -0.47 Satisfactory
SL-18 0.40 IS 228Part 1-1987 RA 2002 0.95 Satisfactory
SL-24 0.39 IS 8811:1998/ASTM E 415:2014 -0.47 Satisfactory
#
SL-25 0.36 ASTM E 415:2015 -4.71 Unsatisfactory
No. of Participants 25
Maximum Reported Value (%) 0.41
Minimum Reported Value (%) 0.38
Assigned Value (xpt), % 0.39
Standard Deviation for Proficiency Assessment (pt), % 0.01
#RESULT IS NOT CONSIDERED IN ROBUST Z-SCORE CALCULATION.
Red Colour Indicates Unsatisfactory Green Colour Indicates Satisfactory Pink Colour Indicates Questionable
Page 12 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
TABLE 4 : ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR SILICON
Silicon, %
Reported Value
(%)
SL-06 0.241 ASTM E 415:2015 -2.41 Questionable
SL-07 0.240 IS:228 (P-8) 1989 -2.54 Questionable
SL-08 X X X X
SL-10 0.265 IS 228 (P-8):1989 0.82 Satisfactory
SL-11 0.280 ASTM E 415:2015 OES 2.84 Questionable
SL-12 0.268 ASTM E 415:2015 OES 1.22 Satisfactory
#SL-15 0.305 IS:228 (P-8) 1975 6.20 Unsatisfactory
SL-24 0.267 IS 8811:1998/ASTM E 415:2014 1.09 Satisfactory
Page 13 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
TABLE 5 : ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR MANGANESE
Manganese, %
Reported Value
(%)
SL-08 X X X X
SL-24 0.569 IS 8811:1998/ASTM E 415:2014 0.82 Satisfactory
Page 14 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
TABLE 6 : ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR PHOSPHOROUS
Phosphorous, %
Reported Value
(%)
SL-08 0.018 IS:228 (3):1987 0.49 Satisfactory
SL-11 0.011 ASTM E 415:2015 OES -3.33 Unsatisfactory
SL-15 0.013 IS:228 (P-3)1972 -2.24 Questionable
SL-18 0.022 IS 228Part 3-1987 RA 2002 2.68 Questionable
Page 15 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
TABLE 7: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR SULPHUR
Sulphur, %
Reported Value
(%)
#
SL-08 0.030 ISO 4935:1989 8.47 Unsatisfactory
SL-18 0.013 IS 228Part 9-1989 RA 2004 -0.63 Satisfactory
Page 16 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
TABLE 8 : ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR CHROMIUM
Chromium, %
Reported Value
(%)
SL-07 X X X X
SL-08 X X X X
SL-12 1.01 ASTM E 415:2015 OES -2.03 Questionable
SL-15 1.13 IS:228 (P-6) 1987 2.89 Questionable
SL-16 X X X X
Page 17 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
TABLE 9 : ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR NICKEL
Nickel,%
Reported Value
(%)
SL-07 X X X X
SL-08 X X X X
SL-10 1.231 IS 228 (P-5):1987 -1.86 Satisfactory
SL-16 X X X X
#
SL-18 1.520 IS 228Part 5-1987 RA 2002 5.28 Unsatisfactory
#
SL-24 1.502 IS 8811:1998/ASTM E 415:2014 4.84 Unsatisfactory
Page 18 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
TABLE 10: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR MOLYBDENUM
Molybdenum,%
Reported Value
(%)
SL-07 X X X X
SL-08 X X X X
SL-10 X X X X
SL-12 0.278 ASTM E 415:2015 OES 2.52 Questionable
#
SL-15 0.204 IS:228 (P-7) 1990 -11.89 Unsatisfactory
SL-16 X X X X
#
SL-18 0.240 IS 228Part 7-1990 RA 2001 -4.88 Unsatisfactory
Page 19 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
TABLE 11:ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR COPPER
Copper,%
Reported Value
(%)
SL-07 X X X X
SL-08 X X X X
SL-10 X X X X
SL-12 X X X X
SL-15 X X X X
SL-16 X X X X
SL-18 X X X X
Page 20 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
ROBUST Z- SCORE CHART: SL. NO. VS Z-SCORE
Page 21 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479 Carbon (C)
Carbon
SL-03
3.00
SL-06
2.00
SL-04
SL-07
SL-09
SL-17
SL-18
SL-19
SL-23
1.00
0.00
SL-13
SL-01
SL-02
SL-05
SL-10
SL-11
SL-16
SL-20
SL-21
SL-22
SL-24
-1.00
SL-08
SL-14
-2.00
SL-25
-3.00
SL-12
-4.00
SL-15
-5.00
Figure 2
Carbon
0.45
0.40
SL-03
SL-06
SL-04
SL-07
SL-09
SL-17
SL-18
SL-19
SL-23
0.35
SL-13
SL-01
SL-02
SL-05
SL-10
SL-11
SL-16
SL-20
SL-21
SL-22
SL-24
SL-08
SL-14
SL-25
SL-12
0.30
SL-15
0.25
0.20
0.15
0.10
0.05
0.00
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 3
Page 22 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
Silicon (Si)
Silicon
SL-15
7.00
6.00
5.00
SL-11
4.00
3.00
SL-12
SL-24
SL-03
SL-10
SL-19
2.00
SL-22
SL-21
SL-09
SL-16
SL-18
SL-02
SL-04
SL-25
1.00
0.00
SL-01
SL-23
SL-14
SL-17
-1.00
SL-05
SL-20
-2.00
SL-13
SL-07
SL-06
-3.00
Figure 4
Silicon
0.350
0.300
SL-15
0.250
SL-11
SL-12
SL-24
SL-19
SL-03
SL-10
SL-22
SL-21
SL-09
SL-16
SL-18
SL-02
SL-04
SL-25
SL-01
SL-23
SL-14
SL-17
SL-05
SL-20
SL-13
SL-06
SL-07
0.200
0.150
0.100
0.050
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure - 5
Page 23 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
Manganese (Mn)
Manganese
SL-03
SL-02
SL-19
1.50
SL-24
SL-11
SL-17
SL-21
SL-04
SL-23
1.00
SL-10
SL-25
SL-09
SL-12
SL-18
SL-01
0.50
0.00
-0.50 SL-20
SL-16
SL-22
SL-05
-1.00
SL-13
-1.50
SL-14
SL-06
-2.00
SL-07
-2.50
SL-15
-3.00
Figure 6
Manganese
0.580
0.570
SL-03
SL-02
SL-19
SL-24
SL-11
SL-17
SL-21
SL-04
0.560
SL-23
SL-10
SL-25
SL-09
SL-12
SL-18
SL-01
0.550
SL-20
SL-16
SL-22
SL-05
0.540
SL-13
SL-14
SL-06
0.530
SL-07
0.520
SL-15
0.510
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 7
Page 24 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
Phosphorus (P)
Phosphorus
4.00
SL-14
SL-18
3.00
SL-13
SL-01
SL-16
2.00
SL-02
SL-08
SL-10
SL-12
SL-17
SL-22
1.00
0.00 SL-03
SL-07
SL-09
SL-19
SL-24
-1.00
SL-04
SL-06
SL-20
SL-25
SL-05
SL-21
SL-23
-2.00
SL-15
-3.00
SL-11
-4.00
Figure 8
Phosphorus
0.025
0.020
SL-14
SL-18
SL-01
SL-13
SL-16
SL-02
SL-08
SL-10
SL-12
SL-17
SL-22
0.015
SL-03
SL-07
SL-09
SL-19
SL-24
SL-04
SL-06
SL-20
SL-25
SL-05
SL-21
SL-23
SL-15
0.010
SL-11
0.005
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 9
Page 25 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
Sulphur (S)
Sulphur
SL-08
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
SL-22
SL-25
SL-10
SL-14
SL-13
SL-19
SL-01
SL-03
SL-16
2.00
0.00
SL-05
SL-15
SL-20
SL-24
SL-04
SL-07
SL-06
SL-02
SL-09
SL-11
SL-12
SL-17
SL-18
SL-21
SL-23
-2.00
Figure 10
Sulphur
0.035
0.030 SL-08
0.025
0.020
0.015
SL-22
SL-25
SL-10
SL-14
SL-13
SL-19
SL-01
SL-03
SL-16
SL-05
SL-15
SL-20
SL-24
0.010
SL-02
SL-09
SL-11
SL-12
SL-17
SL-18
SL-21
SL-23
SL-04
SL-06
SL-07
0.005
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 11
Page 26 of 31
Nickel (Ni)
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
Nickel
SL-18
SL-24
6.00
5.00
4.00
SL-22
3.00
SL-19
SL-06
SL-23
2.00
SL-01
SL-17
SL-04
SL-21
SL-20
SL-12
1.00
0.00
SL-05
SL-25
SL-02
SL-13
-1.00
SL-14
SL-03
SL-09
SL-11
SL-15
-2.00
SL-10
-3.00
Figure 12
Nickel
1.600
1.400
SL-18
SL-24
SL-22
SL-19
SL-06
1.200
SL-23
SL-01
SL-17
SL-04
SL-21
SL-20
SL-12
SL-05
SL-25
SL-02
SL-13
SL-14
SL-03
SL-09
SL-11
SL-15
SL-10
1.000
0.800
0.600
0.400
0.200
0.000
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 13
Page 27 of 31
Molybdenum (Mo)
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
Molybdenum
10.00
8.00
6.00
SL-12
SL-17
4.00
SL-09
SL-19
SL-06
SL-21
SL-01
SL-14
SL-23
2.00
0.00
SL-04
SL-05
SL-24
SL-13
-2.00
SL-02
SL-22
SL-11
SL-25
SL-20
SL-03
-4.00
-6.00
SL-18
-8.00
-10.00
SL-15
-12.00
Figure 14
Molybdenum
0.300
0.250
SL-12
SL-17
SL-09
SL-19
SL-06
SL-21
SL-01
SL-14
SL-23
SL-04
SL-05
SL-24
SL-13
SL-02
SL-22
SL-11
SL-25
SL-20
SL-03
SL-18
0.200
SL-15
0.150
0.100
0.050
0.000
0 5 10 15 20
Figure 15
Page 28 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479 Copper (Cu)
Copper
4.00
SL-03
SL-14
3.00
SL-01
2.00
SL-22
SL-23
SL-09
SL-11
SL-17
1.00
0.00
SL-04
SL-21
SL-02
SL-20
-1.00
SL-05
SL-19
SL-24
SL-25
SL-13
-2.00
SL-06
-3.00
Figure 16
Copper
0.090
0.080
SL-03
SL-14
0.070
SL-01
SL-22
SL-23
SL-09
SL-11
SL-17
SL-04
SL-21
SL-02
SL-20
0.060
SL-05
SL-19
SL-24
SL-25
SL-13
SL-06
0.050
0.040
0.030
0.020
0.010
0.000
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18
Figure 17
Page 29 of 31
Chromium (Cr)
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
(Cr)
Chromium
4.00
SL-15
3.00
SL-19
SL-05
2.00
SL-04
SL-11
SL-21
SL-22
SL-23
1.00
SL-01
SL-02
SL-03
SL-10
SL-17
SL-18
0.00
SL-09
SL-20
SL-25
-1.00
SL-06
SL-24
SL-13
-2.00
SL-12
SL-14
-3.00
Figure 18
Chromium
1.14
1.12
SL-15
1.10
SL-19
1.08
SL-05
SL-04
SL-11
1.06
SL-21
SL-22
SL-23
SL-01
SL-02
SL-03
SL-10
SL-17
SL-18
1.04
SL-09
SL-20
SL-25
SL-06
1.02
SL-24
SL-13
1.00
SL-14
SL-12
0 5 10 15 20 25
Figure 19
Page 30 of 31
CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479
OUTLIER RESULTS
Twenty-five laboratories have participated in this proficiency testing program. The results are
summarized as below in tabulated form
TABLE 12: OUTLIER RESULTS SUMMARY
Sl. No. Test Parameters No. of Results Questionable Outlier
1. C (Carbon), % 25 1 4
2. Si (Silicon), % 24 3 1
3. Mn (Manganese), % 24 2 Nil
4. S (Sulphur), % 25 2 1
5. P (Phosphorous), % 25 3 1
6. Cr (Chromium), % 22 3 Nil
7. Ni (Nickel), % 22 Nil 2
8. Mo (Molybdenum), % 21 1 2
9. Cu (Copper), % 18 3 Nil
In case the Performance of the laboratory in the proficiency testing is not found satisfactory, the laboratory
should find out its causes of inadequacy. Once the causes are analyzed it would be possible for the
laboratory to identify the number of areas where improvement is needed.
-----------------------End of Report----------------------
Page 31 of 31

PT Draft Report - Low Alloy Steel - 22!16!17

Încărcat de

Informații document

Descriere originală:

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

PT Draft Report - Low Alloy Steel - 22!16!17

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

PT Scheme: Chemical Composition of Low Alloy Steel PT Scheme Code: PTM/CHEM/22/16-17

PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM

PT SCHEME NAME : CHEMICAL COMPOSITION OF LOW ALLOY STEEL

COORDINATORS OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM:

ADVISORY GROUP OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM:

REPORT PREPARED BY REPORT CHECKED BY REPORT AUTHORISED BY

S. No. Description Page No.

2. OBJECTIVES OF PROFICIENCY TESTING

4.1 EFFECTIVE PT SCHEDULE:

TABLE 1: PT PROGRAM SCHEDULE

Sl. No. PT Activities Effective Date

Result Received Material

4.2 PREPARATION OF PT ITEMS:

4.3 PARAMETERS FOR THE PT SCHEME:

TABLE 2: PARAMETERS FOR THE PT SCHEME

Sl. No. PT Parameters Test Method Range of Testing

4.4 HOMOGENEITY TESTING:

4.5 DISTRIBUTION OF PT ITEMS:

4.6 STABILITY TESTING:

4.7 SUBMISSION OF RESULTS:

4.8 ANALYSIS OF DATA:

DETERMINATION OF ASSIGNED VALUE:

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PARTICIPANTS:

INTERPRETATION OF THE PERFORMANCE :

|Z| < 2 = Satisfactory

2 < |Z| < 3 = Questionable

|Z| > 3 = Unsatisfactory.

6. CONFIDENTIALITY IN PROFICIENCY TESTING

7. COMMENTS FROM TECHNICAL EXPERTISE

Molybdenum: Twenty-one labs have participated in analysis of Molybdenum. Eighteen laboratories

SUMMARY OF RESULTS [DATA TABLES]

#RESULT IS NOT CONSIDERED IN ROBUST Z-SCORE CALCULATION.

#RESULT IS NOT CONSIDERED IN ROBUST Z-SCORE CALCULATION.

#RESULT IS NOT CONSIDERED IN ROBUST Z-SCORE CALCULATION.

#RESULT IS NOT CONSIDERED IN ROBUST Z-SCORE CALCULATION.

#RESULT IS NOT CONSIDERED IN ROBUST Z-SCORE CALCULATION.

ROBUST Z- SCORE CHART: SL. NO. VS Z-SCORE

CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479 Carbon (C)

CIN.- U74140DL2010PTC201479 Copper (Cu)

TABLE 12: OUTLIER RESULTS SUMMARY

Sl. No. Test Parameters No. of Results Questionable Outlier

S-ar putea să vă placă și