proficiency testing programme for chemical testing … report_final... · iso 13528:2005...

of 32

PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01

PT Scheme Code: PTM/CHEM/02/14-15

PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAMME FOR

CHEMICAL TESTING OF STEEL ALLOY [PTM/CHEM/02/14-15]

FINAL REPORT

2014-15

ORGANIZED BY

GLOBAL PT PROVIDER PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI PT SCHEME NAME : CHEMICAL TESTING OF STEEL PT SCHEME CODE : PTM/CHEM/02/14-15 PT REPORT NO. : C02AD/14/01 DATE OF ISSUE : 06/11/2014 AUTHORISED BY : MR. UMESH GUPTA (TECHNICAL DIRECTOR)

of 32



PT PROVIDER DETAILS

NAME & ADDRESS OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROVIDER:

GLOBAL PT PROVIDER PRIVATE LIMITED E-41, OKHALA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE II NEW DELHI 110020, INDIA TEL: 91-11-40522050, 09873001501, 09873001545 EMAIL: [email protected]; [email protected]

COORDINATORS OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAMME:

MR. RAM TIRATH PT COORDINATOR EMAIL: [email protected]

MS. SHIPRA AGGARWAL TR. PT COORDINATOR MOB: 09873001545 EMAIL: [email protected]

ADVISORY GROUP OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAMME:

MR. KULDEEP DHINGRA

REPORT PREPARED BY REPORT CHECKED BY REPORT AUTHORISED BY

MR. ASIM DASH PT COORDINATOR

MR. RAMTIRTH MANAGER (QA)

MR. UMESH GUPTA TECHNICAL DIRECTOR

mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]:[email protected]

of 32



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. Participants 6

8. Design of PT Scheme PT Programme Schedule Preparation of PT Items Parameters for the PT Scheme Homogeneity Testing Distribution of PT Items Stability Testing Submission of Results Analysis of Result

7-10

9. Subcontracted Activities 10

10. Confidentiality in Proficiency testing 10

11. Conclusion 10

12. Summary of the test methods used by the participants 11-12

13. Summary of Results [Data Tables] 13-22

14. Robust Z-Score Chart: Lab Code Vs Z Score 23-32

15. Outlier Results 33

16. References: Intimation Letter (Annexure: I) Participant Instruction Sheet (Annexure: II) Sample Receipt Form ((Annexure: III) Result Sheet (Annexure: IV) Laboratory Summary Sheet (Annexure: V)

34-39

of 32



ABRIVIATION USED PT PROFICIENCY TESTING NABL NATIONAL ACCREDITATION BOARD FOR TESTING AND

CALIBRATION LABORATORY ISO INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION FOR STANDARDISATION IEC INTERNATIONAL ELECTROTECHNICAL COMMISSION PTM PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAMME IN METAL CHEM CHEMICAL H & S HOMOGENEITY AND STABILITY C CARBON Si SILICON Mn MANGANESE S SULPHUR P PHOSPHORUS Ni NICKEL Mo MOLYBDENUM Cu COPPER Cr CHROMIUM

of 32



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 programme on chemical composition of low

alloy steel. The elements determined in this programme are Carbon, Silicon, Manganese, Sulphur,

Phosphorus, Nickel, Molybdenum, and Copper & Chromium.

The chemical composition of low alloy Steel is routine analysis items for most laboratories. The function of the testing laboratories is to provide 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 Programme are useful to both participating laboratories and accreditation bodies. Successful participation in a specific proficiency testing programme may represent evidence of competence for that exercise. Similarly, unsuccessful performance may reflect a random departure from a laboratories normal state of competence.

OBJECTIVES OF PROFICIENCY TESTING

The main objective of the programme was to evaluate the performance of participating

laboratories in the analysis of low alloy steel for the content Carbon, Silicon, Manganese,

Sulphur, Phosphorus, Nickel, Molybdenum, and Copper & Chromium by means of inter-

laboratory comparison.

Test results from participants are evaluated according to the statistical techniques outlined in ISO 13528:2005 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 programme.

of 32



PARTICIPANTS

Invitation of Proficiency Testing was done through Intimation Letter as given in annexure I. Participants have sent their consent by submitting dully filled Registration form. PT samples were sent to each laboratory after their registration for this programme. Participants were advised to carry out testing of PT sample as soon as possible after receiving samples as per standard test method. The PT sample is to be treated by laboratory in the same way as routine laboratory samples. 28 laboratories have participated in this PT programme.

DESIGN OF PROFICIENCY TESTING SCHEME PT PROGRAMME SCHEDULE:

TABLE 2: PT PROGRAMME SCHEDULE

S. No. PT Activities Actual PT Schedule

1. Invitation & Registration 30th May to 20th July 2014

2. Purchase of Raw Material 31st May 2014

3. Material Verification 2nd June to 4th June 2014

4. Sample Preparation 5th June to 9th June 2014

5. Homogeneity Testing & Evaluation 10th June to 30th June 2014

6. Sample Dispatch 21st July to 15th September 2014

7. Stability Testing 30th July to 30th September 2014

8. Result Received 10th August to 27th September 2014

9. Data Analysis 28th September to 11th October 2014

10. Draft Report 13th October to 15th October 2014

11 Final Report Generation & Distribution 20th October to 25th October 2014

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Invitation & Registration

Purchase of Raw Material

Material Verification

Sample Preparation

Homogeneity Testing & Evaluation

Sample Dispatch

Stability Testing

Result Received

Data Analysis Draft Report Final Report Generation & Distribution

No

. of

Day

s

PT Activities

PT Programme Schedule

of 32



PREPARATION OF PT ITEMS:

The EN-24 material was procured in the form of hot rolled steel rod of 40mm diameter. Chemical compositions of 6 samples from steel rod were analyzed using optical emission spectrometer & randomly 4 samples were analyzed for microstructure by microscopic Analysis. 120 samples were cut into 40X25 mm pieces. The samples were grinded and the buffing was done on the samples. All the samples were marked.

PARAMETERS FOR THE PT SCHEME:

TABLE 3: PARAMETERS FOR THE PT SCHEME

S. No. Test Parameter Test Method Suggested Range of Testing 1. CARBON (AS C), % ASTM E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-1) 1997 0.30-0.70

2. SILICON (AS Si), % ASTM E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-8) 1989 0.10-0.35

3. MANGANESE (AS Mn), % ASTM E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-2)1987 0.50-0.80

4. SULPHUR (AS S), % ASTM E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-9)1989 0.01-0.04

5. PHOSPHORUS (AS P), % ASTM E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-3)1987 0.01-0.04

6. NICKEL (AS Ni), % ASTM E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-5)1987 1.2-1.6

7. MOLYBDENUM (AS Mo), % ASTM E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-7)1990 0.2-0.4

8. COPPER (AS Cu), % ASTM E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-15) 1992 0.05-0.09

9. CHROMIUM (AS Cr), % ASTM E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-6)1987 0.09-1.4

HOMOGENEITY TESTING: Homogeneity Testing was subcontracted to NABL Accredited Laboratory. 20 samples were randomly selected from total samples. These samples were analyzed for the chemical composition using optical emission spectrometer. Two sparks were taken on the individual sample. The Analysis of Variance for homogeneity test (ANOVA) & Annexure-B of ISO 13528:2005 were used for examining the homogeneity of the test material.

DISTRIBUTION OF PT ITEMS: Participating laboratories were supplied one sample of 40X25mm labeled as LS02. The samples were packed in plastic container with Sponge & bubble paper to ensure that no rust formation should be there on the surface of the sample. Samples were distributed to the participant by speed post and courier. Conformation of sample receipt was ensured through the return receipt of duly filled Sample Receipt Form from each participant. Participation Instruction Sheet and Receipt Form are given in Annexure II & III respectively.

STABILITY TESTING: Stability Testing was subcontracted to NABL Accredited Laboratory. 6 samples were randomly selected in the month of August & September for chemical composition. The stability of the PT samples was checked as per Annexure-B of ISO 13528:2005.

of 32



SUBMISSION OF RESULTS: Participants were requested to perform the test according to the Instruction 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/any other mark. The results of the individual laboratories were received through duly filled Result Sheet format. The original data is tabulated in (TABLE 5 - 13).

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 ISO 13528:2005. Robust Z score has been analyzed as per ISO 13528:2005 for each laboratory for each parameter to keep the result free from disturbances due to the extreme values.

DETERMINATION OF ASSIGNED VALUE:

The Assigned values, x* and standard deviation of proficiency testing, s*( ) were derived from the

consensus of the results submitted by the participants (Algorithm A , Annexure C of ISO 13528 : 2005 ).

No results were excluded from the calculation of assigned value.

PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PARTICIPANTS:

The performance of the individual laboratory was evaluated by adopting Robust Z score technique given in ISO 13528:2005, 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.

of 32



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 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.

SUBCONTRACTING ACTIVITIES The following activities have been subcontracted for this PT programme as given below:

Material Testing Sample Preparation Homogeneous Testing

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 authorisation. Confidentiality will be maintained at all levels. The results of the PT can be disclosed to Accreditation/Regulatory body.

CONCLUSION Total 28 nos. laboratory has participated in this PT programme. Out of twenty eight laboratories twenty six has participated in all the nine parameters. Out of twenty six laboratories sixteen laboratories have satisfactorily results in all the nine parameters. The no. of unsatisfactorily results from the laboratories in Carbon, Silicon, Manganese, Sulphur, Phosphorus, Nickel, Molybdenum, Copper & Chromium are 2, 1, 3, 0, 3, 3, 2, 2 & 1 respectively. The no. of questionable results from the laboratories in Carbon, Silicon, Manganese, Sulphur, Phosphorus, Nickel, Molybdenum, Copper & Chromium are 0, 2, 0, 3, 1, 0, 1, 3 & 1 respectively.

of 32



SUMMARY OF THE TEST METHODS USED BY THE PARTICIPANTS

TABLE 4: SUMMARY OF TEST METHODS USED

S. No. Test Parameters

C, % Si, % Mn, % S, % P, % Ni, % Mo, % Cu, % Cr, %

01 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

02 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

03 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

04 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

05 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

06 IS 228 (P-1)

1997 IS 228 (P-8)

1989 IS 228 (P-2)

1987 IS 228 (P-9)

1989 IS 228 (P-3)

1987 IS 228 (P-5)

1987 IS 228 (P-7)

1990 IS 228 (P-15)

1992 IS 228 (P-6)

1987

07 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

08 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

09 IS 228 (P-1)

1997 IS 228 (P-8)

1989 IS 228 (P-2)

1987 IS 228 (P-9)

1989 IS 228 (P-3)

1987 IS 228 (P-5)

1987 IS 228 (P-7)

1990 ---

IS 228 (P-6) 1987

10 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

11 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

12 IS 228 (P-1)

1997 IS 228 (P-8)

1989 IS 228 (P-2)

1987 IS 228 (P-9)

1989 IS 228 (P-3)

1987 IS 228 (P-5)

1987 IS 228 (P-7)

1990 IS 228 (P-15)

1992 IS 228 (P-6)

1987

13 ASTM E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

14 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014


E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

16 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014


E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

18 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

19 IS 228 (P-1) 1997 IS 228 (P-8)

1989 IS 228 (P-2)

1987 IS 228 (P-9)

1989 IS 228 (P-3)

1987 IS 228 (P-5)

1987 --- --

IS 228 (P-6) 1987

20 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

of 32



S. No. Test Parameters

C, % Si, % Mn, % S, % P, % Ni, % Mo, % Cu, % Cr, %

21 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

22 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS 8811:1998

23 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

24 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

25 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

26 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

27 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS

8811:1998 IS 8811:1998

28 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014 ASTM

E415:2014

of 32



SUMMARY OF RESULTS [DATA TABLES]

of 32



TABLE 5: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR CARBON

Carbon (as C)

S. No.

Reported Value (%)

Test Method Adopted Z

Score Performance

01 0.408 ASTM E415:2014 1.06 Satisfactory





06 0.390 IS 228 (P-1) 1997 -0.07 Satisfactory



09 0.396 IS 228 (P-1) 1997 0.31 Satisfactory




13 0.371 ASTM E415:2014 -1.26 Satisfactory






19 0.341 IS 228 (P-1) 1997 -3.14 Unsatisfactory



22 0.530 IS 8811:1998 8.72 Unsatisfactory





27 0.370 IS 8811:1998 -1.32 Satisfactory


Total No. of Participants 28

Maximum Reported Value (%) 0.530 Minimum Reported Value (%) 0.341 Robust Average (%) 0.391 Standard Deviation of Proficiency Testing () 0.016

of 32



TABLE 6: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR SILICON

Silicon (as Si)

S. No.

Reported Value (%)


Score Performance






















22 0.240 IS 8811:1998 -0.81 Satisfactory


24 0.224 ASTM E415:2014 -2.18 Questionable



27 0.256 IS 8811:1998 0.56 Satisfactory




of 32



TABLE 7: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR MANGANESE

Manganese (as Mn)

S. No.

Reported Value (%)


Score Performance






















22 0.560 IS 8811:1998 0.62 Satisfactory









of 32



TABLE 8: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR SULPHUR

Sulphur (as S)

S. No.

Reported Value (%)


Score Performance





















21 0.014 IS 8811:1998 0.12 Satisfactory

22 0.020 ASTM E415:2014 2.80 Questionable





27 0.019 IS 8811:1998 2.36 Questionable




of 32



TABLE 9: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR PHOSPHORUS

Phosphorus (as P)

S. No.

Reported Value (%)


Score Performance








08 0.040 ASTM E415:2014 10.05 Unsatisfactory



















27 0.009 IS 8811:1998 -2.69 Questionable




of 32



TABLE 10: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR NICKEL

Nickel (as Ni)

S. No.

Reported Value (%)


Score Performance






















22 1.310 IS 8811:1998 -0.56 Satisfactory





27 1.251 IS 8811:1998 -4.29 Unsatisfactory




of 32



TABLE 11: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR MOLYBDENUM

Molybdenum (as Mo)

S. No.

Reported Value (%)


Score Performance





















21 0.230 IS 8811:1998 -2.55 Questionable









of 32



TABLE 12: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR COPPER

Copper (as Cu)

S. No.

Reported Value (%)


Score Performance









09 0.036 ASTM E415:2014 -5.51 Unsatisfactory











20 0.050 IS 8811:1998 -3.23 Unsatisfactory





25 0.086 IS 8811:1998 2.61 Questionable




of 32



TABLE 13: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR CHROMIUM

Chromium (as Cr)

S. No.

Reported Value (%)


Score Performance



















19 1.234 IS 228 (P-6) 1987 4.85 Unsatisfactory



22 1.040 IS 8811:1998 -0.19 Satisfactory





27 0.976 IS 8811:1998 -1.85 Satisfactory




of 32



ROBUST Z- SCORE CHART: LAB CODE VS Z-SCORE

of 32



Graph 1

Graph 2

19

12

14

24

23

27

13 26

6 3 10

11

20

5 8 18

25

9 21 28

16

17

2 1 15

7 4

22

-6.00

-4.00

-2.00

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

Carbon

0.2

0.25

0.3

0.35

0.4

0.45

0.5

0.55

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Carbon

Carbon (C)

Red Color Indicates Outlier Pink Color Indicates Questionable Green Color Indicates Satisfactory

of 32



Graph 3

Graph 4

LS

19

LS

24

LS

26

LS

6

LS

8

LS

12

LS

13

LS

23

LS

14

LS

22

LS

16

LS

9

LS

1

LS

4

LS

25

LS

11

LS

27

LS

18

LS

15

LS

28

Ls2

1

LS

2

LS

3

LS

17

LS

20

LS

5

LS

10

LS

7

-8.00

-6.00

-4.00

-2.00

0.00

2.00

4.00 Silicon

0.15

0.17

0.19

0.21

0.23

0.25

0.27

0.29

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Silicon

Silicon (Si)


of 32



Graph 5

Graph 6

LS

19

LS

9

LS

26

LS

23

LS

12

LS

13

LS

6

LS

14

LS

8

LS

24

LS

15

LS

1

LS

16

LS

7

LS

11

LS

3

LS

20

LS

5

LS

10

LS

22

Ls2

1

LS

28

LS

17

LS

2

LS

18

LS

4

LS

25

LS

27

-10.00

-8.00

-6.00

-4.00

-2.00

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

Manganese

0.5

0.51

0.52

0.53

0.54

0.55

0.56

0.57

0.58

0.59

0.6

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Managanese

Manganese (Mn)


of 32



Graph 7

Graph 8

LS

10

LS

1 LS

20

LS

12

LS

13

LS

17

LS

6

LS

8 LS

5 LS

2

LS

19

LS

28

LS

18

LS

16

LS

3

LS

9

LS

11

Ls2

1

LS

25

LS

26

LS

7

LS

15

LS

14

LS

4

LS

24

LS

23

LS

27

LS

22

-4.00

-3.00

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

Sulphur

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Sulphur

Sulphur (S)


of 32



Graph 9

Graph 10

LS

19

LS

27

LS

26

LS

12

LS

16

LS

15

LS

14

LS

1

LS

10

LS

20

LS

13

LS

5

LS

9

LS

11

Ls2

1

LS

17

LS

18

LS

2

LS

3

LS

6

LS

7

LS

24

LS

25

LS

4

LS

28

LS

23

LS

22

LS

8

-6.00

-4.00

-2.00

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

Phosphorus

0

0.005

0.01

0.015

0.02

0.025

0.03

0.035

0.04

0.045

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Phosphorus

Phosphorus (P)


of 32



Graph 11

Graph 12

LS

27

LS

11

LS

3

LS

6

LS

12

LS

28

LS

7 LS

1

LS

8

LS

18

LS

22

LS

2

LS

5

LS

17

LS

19

LS

20

Ls2

1

LS

25

LS

9

LS

4

LS

15

LS

23

LS

13

LS

14

LS

16

LS

24

LS

26

LS

10

-8.00

-6.00

-4.00

-2.00

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

8.00

10.00

12.00

Nickel

1.2

1.25

1.3

1.35

1.4

1.45

1.5

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Nickel

Nickel (Ni)


of 32



Graph 13

Graph 14

LS

22 LS

24

LS

14

LS

12

LS

13

LS

23 L

S15

LS

11

LS

1

LS

6

LS

7

LS

8

LS

18

LS

28

LS

10

LS

5

LS

2

LS

9

LS

16

LS

3

LS

25

LS

4

Ls2

1

LS

17

LS

26

LS

27

LS

20

-4.00

-2.00

0.00

2.00

4.00

6.00

Molybdenum

0.2

0.22

0.24

0.26

0.28

0.3

0.32

0.34

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Molybdenum

Molybdenum (Mo)


of 32



Graph 15

Graph 16

LS

10

LS

22

LS

1

LS

13

LS

12

LS

14

LS

23

LS

5

LS

18

LS

2

LS

11

LS

6

LS

25

LS

28

LS

16

LS

17

LS

3

LS

20

LS

4

LS

24

LS

15

Ls2

1 LS

8

LS

7

LS

27

LS

26

-8.00

-6.00

-4.00

-2.00

0.00

2.00

4.00

Copper

0.02

0.03

0.04

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.08

0.09

0.1

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Copper

Copper (Cu)


of 32



Graph 17

Graph 18

LS

27

LS

14

LS

24

LS

13

LS

23

LS

12 LS

9

LS

8

LS

10

LS

20

LS

25

LS

18

LS

22

LS

15

LS

2

LS

5

LS

7

LS

11

Ls2

1

LS

28

LS

17

LS

1

LS

6 LS

3

LS

16

LS

4

LS

26

LS

19

-3.00

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00 Chromium

0.9

0.95

1

1.05

1.1

1.15

1.2

1.25

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Chromium

Chromium (Cr)


of 32



OUTLIER RESULTS

Overall 28 Laboratories have participated in this proficiency testing programme and the results are given below in tabulated form

TABLE 14: OUTLIER RESULTS SUMMARY

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

1. Carbon (as C), % 28 Nil 2

2. Silicon (as Si), % 28 2 1

3. Manganese (as Mn), % 28 Nil 3

4. Sulphur (as S), % 28 3 Nil

5. Phosphorus (as P), % 28 1 3

6. Nickel (as Ni), % 28 Nil 3

7. Molybdenum (as Mo), % 27 1 2

8. Copper (as Cu), % 26 3 2

9. Chromium (as Cr), % 28 1 1

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.

proficiency testing programme for chemical testing … report_final... · iso 13528:2005...

Documents