tensile testing of metals proficiency testing program round 2ptaasnau/documents/649.pdftensile...

y

REPORT NO. 649

Tensile Testing of Metals

Proficiency Testing Program

Round 2

March 2010

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

PTA wishes to gratefully acknowledge the technical assistance provided for this program by Mr T Strachan, BlueScope Steel Limited. This assistance included providing input into the design of the program, technical advice and discussion of the final report, as well as supplying the samples.

© COPYRIGHT PROFICIENCY TESTING AUSTRALIA 2010

PO Box 7507 Silverwater NSW 2128 AUSTRALIA

CONTENTS

1. FOREWORD 1

2. FEATURES OF THE PROGRAM 1

3. FORMAT OF THE APPENDICES 2

4. DESIGN OF THE PROGRAM 2

5. EXTREME RESULTS 3

Table A: Summary Statistics for All Tests 3

Table B: Summary of Statistical Outliers 4

6. PTA AND TECHNICAL ADVISER'S COMMENTS 4

7. REFERENCES 8 APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

Summary of Results

Diameter / Thickness A1.1 - A1.3

0.2% Proof Stress A2.1 - A2.3

Upper Yield A3.1 - A3.2

Lower Yield A4.1 - A4.2

Tensile Strength A5.1 - A5.4

Percentage Elongation after Fracture A6.1 - A6.5

Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture A7.1 - A7.2

Method Information and Other Reported Results A8.1 - A8.5

APPENDIX B

Homogeneity Testing B1.1 - B1.2

APPENDIX C

Instructions to Participants C1.1 - C1.2

Results Sheet C2.1

-1-

1. FOREWORD This report summarises the results of a proficiency testing program on the

tensile properties of metals. It constitutes the second round of an ongoing series of programs.

Proficiency Testing Australia conducted the testing program in December

2009. The Program Coordinator was Dr M Bunt. The aim of the program was to assess laboratories' ability to competently perform the nominated tests.

2. FEATURES OF THE PROGRAM (a) A total of 37 laboratories participated in the program, five of which did not

return results for inclusion in the final report. Laboratories from the following states and countries received samples:

8 VIC 6 NSW 4 SA 4 WA 3 QLD 1 TAS 3 IRAN 2 BRAZIL 2 MALAYSIA 1 INDONESIA 1 MEXICO 1 NEW ZEALAND 1 THAILAND

To ensure confidential treatment of results, each laboratory was allocated a unique code number. All reference to participants in this report is by allocated code numbers. Please note that one laboratory reported more than one set of results and, therefore, this laboratory’s code number (with letter) could appear several times in the same data set.

(b) The results reported by participants are presented in Appendix A.

(c) Laboratories were provided with one steel round bar sample and three steel strip samples and were asked to perform tests for:

• Diameter / Thickness; • 0.2% Proof Stress (non-proportional elongation) (Rp0.2); • Upper Yield (ReH); • Lower Yield (ReL); • Tensile Strength (Rm); • Percentage Elongation after Fracture (A%); and • Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture (Z%).

-2-

(d) All testing, recording and reporting was to be performed in accordance with the laboratory’s routine test methods, but testing in accordance with AS 1391 [2] or ISO 6892 [3] were the preferred test methods.

(e) Laboratories were requested to perform the tests according to the Instructions

to Participants provided and to record the results on the accompanying Results Sheet, which was distributed with the samples. Copies of these documents appear in Appendix C.

(f) Ten randomly selected specimens from each of the four samples were tested

and analysed for homogeneity by BlueScope Steel Limited. Based on the results of this testing, the homogeneity of the samples was established (see Appendix B).

3. FORMAT OF THE APPENDICES (a) Appendix A is divided into eight sections (A1-A8).

Sections A1-A7 contain the analysis of results reported by laboratories for Diameter / Thickness, 0.2% Proof Stress (non-proportional elongation) (Rp0.2), Upper Yield (ReH), Lower Yield (ReL), Tensile Strength (Rm), Percentage Elongation after Fracture (A%) and Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture (Z%). These sections contain: i) a table of results reported by laboratories for each sample, and the

calculated z-scores for these results; ii) a listing of the summary statistics; iii) ordered z-score charts.

Section A8 contains information on the methods used by laboratories and the results reported by laboratories for Tensile Specimen Width, Tensile Specimen Gauge Length, Elastic Stress or Strain Rate and Plastic Strain Rate.

(b) Appendix B contains details of the homogeneity testing. (c) Appendix C contains copies of the Instructions to Participants and Results

Sheet. 4. DESIGN OF THE PROGRAM

The samples for this program comprised of one steel round bar (Sample 1) and three steel strips (Samples 2, 3 and 4). Samples 1 and 2 were continuous yielding steel grades, while Samples 3 and 4 were discontinuous yielding steel grades. All four samples differed for Diameter / Thickness, 0.2% Proof Stress, Upper Yield, Lower Yield, Tensile Strength, Percentage Elongation after Fracture and Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture.

-3-

5. EXTREME RESULTS

Robust z-scores have been used to assess each laboratory’s testing performance. When calculated from single results, z-scores are used to detect excessively high or excessively low results in comparison to the consensus value (the median). Any result with an absolute z-score greater than or equal to three (ie ≤ -3 or ≥ 3) is classified as an outlier. For further details on the calculation and interpretation of robust z-scores, please see the Guide to Proficiency Testing Australia (2008).

The following table summarises the results submitted by participants for the program.

Table A: Summary Statistics for All Tests

Test Summary Statistics Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

No. of Results 28 28 26

Median 1.1920 1.9850 0.7485 Diameter / Thickness

(mm) Normalised IQR 0.0048 0.0098 0.0022

No. of Results 27 26

Median 611.0 210.0 0.2% Proof Stress (non- proportional elongation)

(Rp0.2) (MPa) Normalised IQR 10.0 8.3


Median 302.0 159.8 Upper Yield

(ReH) (MPa) Normalised IQR 23.0 16.5


Median 276.3 154.6 Lower Yield

(ReL) (MPa) Normalised IQR 16.5 11.9

No. of Results 28 28 28 26

Median 687.0 317.5 360.0 270.5 Tensile Strength

(Rm) (MPa) Normalised IQR 11.5 5.3 6.5 12.0

No. of Results 28 28 28 26

Median 12.5 59.8 48.6 69.9 Percentage Elongation

after Fracture (A%) Normalised IQR 2.2 4.2 3.2 5.6

No. of Results 28

Median 48.3 Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture

(Z%) Normalised IQR 1.5

-4-

Table B: Summary of Statistical Outliers (by laboratory code number)

Test Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

Diameter / Thickness 2, 12, 31 2, 6, 13, 23, 32, 37 2, 6, 9, 12,

35, 37

0.2% Proof Stress 4, 9, 13, 23, 26, 32 9, 11, 34

Upper Yield - -

Lower Yield - -

Tensile Strength 27 11, 12, 31, 34 9, 23, 31 -

Percentage Elongation after Fracture 8, 21 12 29, 32 29

Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture 5, 20, 32

Notes: 1. Summary statistics and z-scores for the Diameter of Sample 1 were not

calculated, as the results were not normally distributed. 2. Summary statistics and z-scores for Percentage Elongation after Fracture

were calculated by converting the results to a proportional gauge length.

6. PTA AND TECHNICAL ADVISER’S COMMENTS

The summary statistics and outliers identified for each of the tests are reported in Tables A and B above. Complete details of the statistical analyses appear in Appendix A.

6.1 Return rate

Thirty-two of the thirty-seven laboratories (86%) that participated in the program returned results. Of the thirty-two laboratories that submitted results for the program, the return rate for all tests is as follows: • Diameter / Thickness 32 out of 32 100% • 0.2% Proof Stress 32 out of 32 100% • Upper Yield 27 out of 32 84% • Lower Yield 26 out of 32 81% • Tensile Strength 32 out of 32 100% • Percentage Elongation after Fracture 32 out of 32 100% • Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture 28 out of 32 88%

-5-

6.2 Performance summary

One or more statistical outliers were reported by twenty laboratories (54%) for this round of the Tensile Testing of Metals program. For comparison, 54% of the participants reported outlier results in Round 1 of the Tensile Testing of Metals program (see Report No. 558 for more details). A total of 474 results were analysed in this round of the program. Of these results, forty-one (9%) were outliers. For comparison, 12% of the results analysed in Round 1 of the Tensile Testing of Metals program were outliers (see Report No. 558 for more details).

6.3 Diameter / Thickness

The Diameter results submitted for Sample 1 could not be analysed, as these results were not normally distributed. For the Thickness results for Samples 2, 3 and 4, ten laboratories reported outliers. This is a disappointing result, as accurate dimension measurements are essential, along with load, for accurate determination of any of the strength variables. Laboratory 2 reported outliers for all 3 samples. Laboratories 6 and 37 reported outliers for Samples 3 and 4. Laboratory 12 reported outliers for Samples 2 and 4. Laboratory 31 reported an outlier for Sample 2. Laboratories 13, 23 and 32 reported outliers for Sample 3. Laboratories 9 and 35 reported outliers for Sample 4. The robust CVs of 0.4%, 0.5% and 0.3% for the results for this round compare well with the values of 0.2%, 1.0%, 0.5% and 0.3%, obtained for the results in Round 1 of this program (see Report No. 558). All laboratories, particularly those with outlier results, are reminded that they must check their micrometers with a standard block each day before use.

-6-

6.4 0.2% Proof Stress

Eight laboratories reported outliers for 0.2% Proof Stress. Laboratory 9 reported outliers for Samples 1 and 2. Laboratories 4, 13, 23, 26 and 32 reported outliers for Sample 1. Laboratories 11 and 34 reported outliers for Sample 2. The range of Proof Stress values reported by the participating laboratories was much higher than expected (541 MPa for laboratory 32 to 672 MPa for laboratory 13 for Sample 1 and 180 MPa for laboratory 34 to 242 MPa for laboratory 9 for Sample 2). This is also reflected in the robust CVs of 1.6% and 4.2% for the results for this round, which are slightly higher than the values of 1.6% and 2.4%, obtained for the results in Round 1 of this program (see Report No. 558). From the information provided there was no obvious indication for these large differences.

6.5 Upper Yield

There were no outlier results reported for Upper Yield. The robust CVs of 7.6% and 10.3% for the results for this round are higher than the values of 4.1% and 5.4%, obtained for the results in Round 1 of this program (see Report No. 558). The wide spread in the reported Upper Yield results was to be expected. Upper Yield measurements are very sensitive to sample preparation, alignment of the specimen in the tensile machine, straining rate and machine stiffness.

6.6 Lower Yield

There were no outlier results reported for Lower Yield. The robust CVs of 6.0% and 7.7% for the results for this round are higher than the values of 1.7% and 4.2%, obtained for the results in Round 1 of this program (see Report No. 558). The spread in the reported Lower Yield results was smaller than it was for the Upper Yield results (CVs of 6.0% and 7.7% versus CVs of 7.6% and 10.3%). This was to be expected, as Lower Yield strength is less sensitive to the conditions that affect the measurement of the Upper Yield strength.

-7-

6.7 Tensile Strength

Seven laboratories reported outliers for Tensile Strength. Laboratory 31 reported outliers for Samples 2 and 3. Laboratory 27 reported an outlier for Sample 1. Laboratories 11, 12 and 34 reported outliers for Sample 2. Laboratories 9 and 23 reported outliers for Sample 3. There were no outliers reported for Sample 4. This is a disappointing result, as Tensile Strength should be the easiest of the strength properties to measure. It is the least sensitive to sample preparation, alignment, machine stiffness and strain rate (0.008/sec max). From the conditions reported, it was difficult to offer an explanation for the outlier results reported. An obvious explanation would be a load cell calibration error, but this was not always seen in the other strength results reported by the laboratories with outlier results. The robust CVs of 1.7%, 1.7%, 1.8% and 4.5% for the results for this round compare well with the values of 1.5%, 2.0%, 1.8% and 1.4%, obtained for the results in Round 1 of this program (see Report No. 558).

6.8 Percentage Elongation after Fracture

Because the participants employed different width specimens and different gauge lengths for their tensile testing in this program, it was necessary to convert the Percentage Elongation after Fracture results submitted by the participants to a proportional gauge length. The results, converted to a proportional gauge length, are displayed in Appendix A6, while the formulas used to convert the results for the round bar and steel strip samples are given on page A6.3 of Appendix A6. Five laboratories reported outliers for Percentage Elongation after Fracture. Laboratory 29 reported outliers for Samples 3 and 4. This laboratory was the only one to use the 200 mm gauge length by 30 mm tensile width and this may have contributed to these results. All other laboratories used either the 50 mm or 80 mm gauge length test pieces referenced in the AS 1391 [2] and ISO 6892 [3] standards. Laboratories 8 and 21 reported outliers for Sample 1. Laboratory 12 reported an outlier for Sample 2. Laboratory 32 reported an outlier for Sample 3. The robust CVs of 17.3%, 7.0%, 6.7% and 8.0% for the results for this round are slightly higher than the values of 7.7%, 5.4%, 7.3% and 12.6%, obtained for the results in Round 1 of this program (see Report No. 558).

-8-

6.9 Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture

Three laboratories (5, 20 and 32) reported outliers for Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture. The robust CV for the results was 3.1%.

6.10 Method Information and Other Reported Results

The most commonly used method for testing by the participants in this program was AS 1391 [2], followed by ISO 6892 [3]. Two laboratories (8 and 34) did not provide any information on the methods they used for testing. More complete information on the methods used for testing by the participants in this program can be found in Appendix A8. In addition to reporting results for Thickness, 0.2% Proof Stress, Upper Yield, Lower Yield, Tensile Strength, Percentage Elongation after Fracture and Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture, participants were also asked to report the Tensile Specimen Width, Tensile Specimen Gauge Length, Elastic Stress or Strain Rate and Plastic Strain Rate. The details reported by each of the participants are also displayed in Appendix A8. The information reported is limited, but it was requested in the hope that it would assist in the analysis of the results, especially in converting the Percentage Elongation after Fracture results to a proportional gauge length. In very few instances, it was possible to explain the variation in reported properties using this data. The range of test conditions and test pieces (allowed by the standards), along with test setups, will always allow for variation in the test results obtained. A possible future improvement to this type of program would be to provide more specific requirements as to what conditions and test pieces should be used. This may provide a more meaningful direct comparison for the laboratories involved in the program. It is still the responsibility of the participating laboratories that reported outliers to review their procedures, determine the cause of the non-conformance and take effective corrective action.

7. REFERENCES

1. Guide to Proficiency Testing Australia (2008). (This document is located on the PTA website at www.pta.asn.au under Programs / Documents).

2. AS 1391 (2007) – Metallic materials – Tensile testing at ambient

temperature.

3. ISO 6892 (2009) – Metallic materials – Tensile testing.

APPENDIX A

Summary of Results

Section A1

Diameter / Thickness

A1.1

Diameter / Thickness (mm) – Results and Z-Scores

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Lab Code Result Result Z-Score Result Z-Score Result Z-Score

2 10.010 1.21 3.74 § 2.02 3.56 § 0.79 18.66 §

4 9.98 1.19 -0.42 1.98 -0.51 0.75 0.67

5 15.820 - - - - - -

6 10.028 1.188 -0.83 1.922 -6.41 § 0.715 -15.06 §

7 10.003 1.191 -0.21 1.983 -0.20 0.744 -2.02

8 15.742 1.192 0.00 1.989 0.41 0.750 0.67

9 11.981 1.205 2.70 1.995 1.02 0.7678 8.68 §

10 15.80 1.191 -0.21 1.99 0.51 0.747 -0.67

11 - 1.180 -2.49 - - - -

12 15.796 1.221 6.02 § 2.001 1.63 0.765 7.42 §

13 10.014 1.195 0.62 1.939 -4.68 § 0.748 -0.22

14 - 1.196 0.83 1.986 0.10 0.748 -0.22

15 9.960 1.19 -0.42 1.99 0.51 0.75 0.67

16 - 1.192 0.00 1.991 0.61 0.754 2.47

18 9.982 1.196 0.83 1.990 0.51 0.748 -0.22

19 9.950 1.198 1.25 2.000 1.53 0.750 0.67

20 15.810 1.189 -0.62 1.982 -0.31 0.746 -1.12

21 9.98 - - - - - -

22 9.97 - - 1.98 -0.51 - -

23 9.970 1.182 -2.08 1.931 -5.50 § 0.747 -0.67

24A 10.010 1.191 -0.21 1.980 -0.51 0.742 -2.92

24B - 1.182 -2.08 - - - -

25 9.997 1.196 0.83 1.991 0.61 0.749 0.22

26 15.83 1.20 1.66 1.99 0.51 0.75 0.67

27 13.806 - - 1.984 -0.10 - -

28 15.82 - - - - - -

29 9.880 1.192 0.00 1.978 -0.71 0.745 -1.57

31 - 1.209 3.53 § 1.997 1.22 0.750 0.67

32 10.033 1.187 -1.04 1.947 -3.87 § 0.748 -0.22

33 9.97 1.20 1.66 2.00 1.53 0.75 0.67

34 12.518 1.195 0.62 1.977 -0.81 0.747 -0.67

35 9.99 1.19 -0.42 1.97 -1.53 0.74 -3.82 §

37 12.619 1.194 0.42 1.934 -5.19 § 0.759 4.72 §

A1.2

Summary Statistics

Statistic Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

No. of Results 28 28 26 Median 1.1920 1.9850 0.7485 Norm IQR 0.0048 0.0098 0.0022 Robust CV 0.40% 0.49% 0.30% Minimum 1.180 1.922 0.715 Maximum 1.221 2.020 0.790 Range 0.041 0.098 0.075

Notes:

1. § denotes an outlier (i.e. |z-score| ≥ 3). 2. Summary statistics and z-scores for the Diameter of Sample 1 were not

calculated, as the results were not normally distributed.

Thickness - Sample 2

24B

32

6 20

4 15 35

7 10

24A

8 16 29

37

13 34

14 18 25

19

26 33

9

31 2 12

2311-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

A1.3


37 13 32

35

34 29

4 22

24A 2

0 7 27

14

8 10 15 18 26 16 25

9

31

19 33 12

2

6 23

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core


24A

7

29

20

10 23 34

13 14 18 32

25

4 8 15 19 26 31 33

16

37 12 9 2

6 35

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

Section A2

0.2% Proof Stress

A2.1

0.2% Proof Stress (non-proportional elongation) (R p0.2) (MPa) – Results and Z-Scores

Sample 1 Sample 2 Lab Code Result Z-Score Result Z-Score

2 619 0.80 193 -2.04 4 644 3.30 § 223 1.56 5 611 0.00 - - 6 610 -0.10 216 0.72 7 610 -0.10 216 0.72 8 610 -0.10 209 -0.12 9 567 -4.40 § 242 3.84 § 10 625.689 1.47 194.426 -1.87 11 - - 236 3.12 § 12 628 1.70 207 -0.36 13 672 6.10 § 210 0.00 14 - - 207 -0.36 15 607 -0.40 228 2.16 16 - - 208 -0.24 18 617 0.60 209 -0.12 19 623.8 1.28 213 0.36 20 610 -0.10 210 0.00 21 600 -1.10 - - 22 593 -1.80 - - 23 554 -5.70 § 211 0.12

24A 610 -0.10 218 0.96 25 608 -0.30 194 -1.92 26 670 5.90 § 204 -0.72 27 621 1.00 - - 28 611 0.00 - - 29 618 0.70 222 1.44 32 541 -6.99 § 217 0.84 33 621 1.00 216 0.72 34 604 -0.70 180 -3.60 § 35 617 0.60 203 -0.84 37 - - 205 -0.60

A2.2

Summary Statistics

Statistic Sample 1 Sample 2

No. of Results 27 26 Median 611.0 210.0 Norm IQR 10.0 8.3 Robust CV 1.64% 3.97% Minimum 541 180 Maximum 672 242 Range 131 62

Notes:

1. § denotes an outlier (i.e. |z-score| ≥ 3).

A2.3

0.2% Proof Stress (non-proportional elongation) (Rp0.2) - Sample 1

23 9

22

34

15 25

6 7 8 20

24A

5 28

18 35 29 2

27 33

19

12

4 26 13

10

21

32

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

0.2% Proof Stress (non-proportional elongation) (Rp0.2) -Sample 2

26 37 1

2 14 16 8 18

13 20 23 1

9

6 7 33 32 24

A 29 4

15

11 9

35

25 10

34

2

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

Section A3

Upper Yield

A3.1

Upper Yield (ReH) (MPa) – Results and Z-Scores


2 274 -1.22 - - 4 336 1.48 194 2.07 6 318 0.70 181 1.28 7 308 0.26 - - 8 286 -0.70 143 -1.02 9 275 -1.17 153 -0.41 10 292.278 -0.42 161.664 0.11 12 294 -0.35 157 -0.17 13 275 -1.17 - - 14 323 0.91 173 0.80 15 292 -0.44 145 -0.90 16 314 0.52 158 -0.11 18 313 0.48 153 -0.41 19 304 0.09 164 0.25 20 349 2.05 162 0.13 22 302 0.00 - - 23 296 -0.26 152 -0.47

24A 318 0.70 186 1.59 25 303 0.04 157 -0.17 27 280 -0.96 - - 29 315 0.57 152 -0.47 31 281 -0.91 199 2.37 32 284 -0.78 189 1.77 33 303 0.04 171 0.68 34 273 -1.26 133 -1.63 35 318 0.70 - - 37 283 -0.83 - -

Summary Statistics



A3.2

Upper Yield (ReH) - Sample 4

29

9 18

12 16

10 20 19

33 14

6

24A 32

4

31

25

15

23

34

8

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

Upper Yield (ReH) - Sample 3

2 9 13

31 37 32

15 10 12 23

22 25 33 19 7

18 16 29 6 35 1

4

4

20

8

24A

27

34

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

Section A4

Lower Yield

A4.1

Lower Yield (ReL) (MPa) – Results and Z-Scores


2 266 -0.62 - - 4 295 1.13 189 2.90 6 314 2.29 172 1.47 7 298 1.32 - - 8 278 0.10 138 -1.40 9 273 -0.20 163 0.71 10 276.597 0.02 154.550 0.00 12 277 0.04 156 0.12 13 267 -0.56 - - 14 276 -0.02 150 -0.38 15 273 -0.20 145 -0.81 16 272 -0.26 146 -0.72 18 272 -0.26 152 -0.21 19 278 0.10 157 0.21 20 271 -0.32 159 0.38 22 262 -0.87 - - 23 289 0.77 135 -1.65

24A 293 1.01 168 1.13 25 296 1.19 148 -0.55 27 275 -0.08 - - 29 299 1.38 147 -0.64 32 275 -0.08 171 1.39 33 295 1.13 - - 34 261 -0.93 - - 35 315 2.35 - - 37 275 -0.08 - -

Summary Statistics



A4.2

Lower Yield (ReL) - Sample 3

22

2 13

20 16 18

9 15 27 32 37

14 10 12 8 19

23

24A

4 33 25 7 2

9

6 35

34

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

Lower Yield (ReL) - Sample 4

8

15 16 29 25 1

4 18

10 12 19 2

0

9

24A 32 6

4

23

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

Section A5

Tensile Strength

A5.1

Tensile Strength (R m) (MPa) – Results and Z-Scores

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Lab Code Result Z-Score Result Z-Score Result Z-Score Result Z-Score

2 690 0.26 309 -1.61 352 -1.23 257 -1.12 4 680 -0.61 321 0.66 358 -0.31 278 0.62 5 681 -0.52 - - - - - - 6 687 0.00 322 0.85 368 1.23 305 2.86 7 683 -0.35 320 0.47 363 0.46 303 2.70 8 677 -0.87 316 -0.28 360 0.00 287 1.37 9 678 -0.78 328 1.98 340 -3.08 § 246 -2.03 10 686.490 -0.04 310.432 -1.34 351.70 -1.28 268.499 -0.17 11 - - 418 18.98 § - - - - 12 683 -0.35 299 -3.49 § 349 -1.70 262 -0.71 13 676 -0.96 302 -2.93 360 0.00 256 -1.20 14 - - 318 0.09 360 0.00 277 0.54 15 685 -0.17 315 -0.47 357 -0.46 270 -0.04 16 - - 316 -0.28 359 -0.15 270 -0.04 18 693 0.52 318 0.09 364 0.62 277 0.54 19 698 0.96 319 0.28 361 0.15 274 0.29 20 690 0.26 319 0.28 362 0.31 280 0.79 21 710 2.00 - - - - - - 22 696 0.78 - - 364 0.62 - - 23 698 0.96 332 2.74 384 3.70 § 305 2.86

24A 686 -0.09 318 0.09 360 0.00 276 0.46 24B - - 317 -0.09 - - - - 25 685 -0.17 302 -2.93 374 2.16 257 -1.12 26 698 0.96 314 -0.66 353 -1.08 267 -0.29 27 753 5.74 § - - 360 0.00 - - 28 680 -0.61 - - - - - - 29 689 0.17 330 2.36 368 1.23 270 -0.04 31 - - 301 -3.12 § 339 -3.24 § 261 -0.79 32 706 1.65 317 -0.09 374 2.16 271 0.04 33 707 1.74 320 0.47 364 0.62 285 1.20 34 671 -1.39 288 -5.57 § 346 -2.16 256 -1.20 35 687 0.00 322 0.85 367 1.08 282 0.95 37 700 1.13 315 -0.47 374 2.16 268 -0.21

A5.2

Summary Statistics

Statistic Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

No. of Results 28 28 28 26 Median 687.0 317.5 360.0 270.5 Norm IQR 11.5 5.3 6.5 12.0 Robust CV 1.67% 1.67% 1.80% 4.45% Minimum 671 288 339 246 Maximum 753 418 384 305 Range 82 130 45 59

Notes:


A5.3

Tensile Strength (Rm) - Sample 1

9 28 5

7 15 25 24A 10

6 35 29 2 20

18

22 19 23 26 37

32 33 2

1

27

34

13

8

4 12

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core


2 10

26

24B 32

14 18 24A 19 20

7 33

4

6 35

9

29

23

11

13311234 25

15 37

8 16

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

A5.4


2 26

15

14 24A

27 19 20 7

18 22 33

35 6 29

25 32 37

23

12

34

9

31

10

4 16

8 13

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core


31 12

26

29 32 1

9 24A

14 18 4

20 35 3

3 8

7 6 23

2

3413

9

25

37 10

15 16

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

Section A6

Percentage Elongation after Fracture

A6.1

Percentage Elongation after Fracture (A%) – Results and Proportional Gauge Length (PGL) Results

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Lab Code Result PGL Result Result

PGL Result Result

PGL Result Result

PGL Result

2 11 11 39 59 34 47 42 70 4 13 13 41 57 39 49 42 64 5 10 10 - - - - - - 6 12 12 40 61 37 51 48 81 7 13 13 58 58 55 55 66 66 8 21 21 43 66 39 54 44 74 9 12 12 32 49 31 42 35 58 10 18.84 16 44.41 57 42.43 48 47.20 66 11 - - 43 66 - - - - 12 16 16 31 41 37 49 41 68 13 12 12 45 63 34 43 46 70 14 - - 41.6 64 41.6 57 44.3 74 15 12 12 42 64 35 48 44 74 16 - - 40 61 36 50 43 72 18 11 11 41 58 37 47 43 66 19 14 14 43 60 40 50 46 70 20 11 10 42 59 40 50 46 70 21 36 36 - - - - - - 22 13 13 - - 33 46 - - 23 12 12 41 63 31 43 43 72

24A 14 14 46 64 35 48 41 69 24B - - 39 60 - - - - 25 12 12 43 66 39 54 43 72 26 12 10 41 63 35 48 37 62 27 13 13 - - 51 50 - - 28 13 11 - - - - - - 29 11 11 26 53 43 78 68 151 31 - - 36 50 36 45 36 54 32 7 9 31 52 25 38 34 62 33 14 14 43 60 38 48 47 72 34 13 13 45 63 39 49 42 64 35 13 13 36 55 38 53 38 64 37 14 14 43 60 36 46 46 70

A6.2

Percentage Elongation after Fracture (A%) – Proportional Gauge Length (PGL) Results and Z-Score s

Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Lab Code PGL

Result Z-Score PGL

Result Z-Score PGL

Result Z-Score PGL

Result Z-Score

2 11 -0.69 59 -0.07 47 -0.58 70 -0.03 4 13 0.24 57 -0.62 49 0.17 64 -1.01 5 10 -1.15 - - - - - - 6 12 -0.23 61 0.35 51 0.87 81 2.06 7 13 0.24 58 -0.44 55 1.94 66 -0.65 8 21 3.95 § 66 1.44 54 1.62 74 0.72 9 12 -0.22 49 -2.65 42 -1.90 58 -2.08 10 16 1.48 57 -0.71 48 -0.20 66 -0.66 11 - - 66 1.37 - - - - 12 16 1.66 41 -4.52 § 49 0.08 68 -0.31 13 12 -0.23 63 0.68 43 -1.73 70 0.08 14 - - 64 0.90 57 2.71 74 0.80 15 12 -0.22 64 1.04 48 -0.12 74 0.68 16 - - 61 0.28 50 0.28 72 0.35 18 11 -0.68 58 -0.49 47 -0.64 66 -0.75 19 14 0.71 60 -0.03 50 0.46 70 0.03 20 10 -0.97 59 -0.29 50 0.54 70 0.10 21 36 10.89 § - - - - - - 22 13 0.25 - - 46 -0.94 - - 23 12 -0.22 63 0.73 43 -1.71 72 0.43

24A 14 0.70 64 0.99 48 -0.08 69 -0.16 24B - - 60 0.00 - - - - 25 12 -0.22 66 1.42 54 1.61 72 0.42 26 10 -1.16 63 0.69 48 -0.12 62 -1.38 27 13 0.24 - - 50 0.56 - - 28 11 -0.77 - - - - - - 29 11 -0.66 53 -1.73 78 9.18 § 151 14.47 § 31 - - 50 -2.40 45 -1.18 54 -2.87 32 9 -1.51 52 -1.90 38 -3.32 § 62 -1.35 33 14 0.71 60 0.00 48 -0.29 72 0.36 34 13 0.22 63 0.67 49 0.13 64 -1.02 35 13 0.24 55 -1.11 53 1.23 64 -1.04 37 14 0.68 60 0.02 46 -0.95 70 0.05

A6.3

Summary Statistics

Statistic Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

No. of Results 28 28 28 26 Median 12.5 59.8 48.6 69.9 Norm IQR 2.2 4.2 3.2 5.6 Robust CV 17.32% 7.02% 6.68% 7.99% Minimum 9 41 38 54 Maximum 36 66 78 151 Range 27 25 41 97

Notes:


2. To analyse the Percentage Elongation after Fracture results, the results submitted by participants were converted to a proportional gauge length using the formula:

for the round bar sample and the formula:

for the steel strip samples.

0.4

2

Result Tensile Specimen Gauge LengthPGL Result =

2 Diameter

2π

×

×

0.4

Result Tensile Specimen Gauge LengthPGL Result =

2 Thickness Tensile Specimen Width

× ×

A6.4

Percentage Elongation after Fracture (A%) -Sample 1

28

2 18 29

6 13 25 9 23 15

34 27 7 35 4 22

12

8 21

3324A

37

32

26

5

19

10

20

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core


7 20

2

19 33 24B

37

16 6

34 13 26

11 8

4

1524A

14

25

23

18

10

35

29

32

319

12

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

A6.5


18

33 10 15 26 24A

12 34 4 16 1

9 20 27

7

29

32

9 13 23

31

37 22

2

6

14

35

25 8

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core


18

7

12 24A

2 19 37 13 20

16 33 25 23

29

31

9

26 32

35 34 4

10

15 8 14

6

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

Section A7

Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture

A7.1

Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture (Z%) – Results and Z-Scores

Sample 1 Lab Code

Result Z-Score

2 47 -0.90 4 48 -0.23 5 39 -6.30 § 6 47 -0.90 7 49 0.45 8 49 0.45 9 48 -0.23 10 48.67 0.23 12 46 -1.57 13 49 0.45 15 50 1.12 18 50 1.12 19 49.9 1.06 20 39 -6.30 § 21 45 -2.25 22 49 0.45 23 49 0.45

24A 48 -0.23 25 49 0.45 26 48 -0.23 27 49 0.45 28 50 1.12 29 49 0.45 32 41 -4.95 § 33 48 -0.23 34 44 -2.92 35 48 -0.23 37 50 1.12

A7.2

Summary Statistics

Statistic Sample 1

No. of Results 28 Median 48.3 Norm IQR 1.5 Robust CV 3.07% Minimum 39 Maximum 50 Range 11

Notes:


Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture (Z%) -Sample 1

21

12

2 6

4 9

24A 26 33 35

10

7 8 13 22 23

18 28 37

292725

5

20 32

19 15

34

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Laboratory Code

Rob

ust

Z-S

core

Section A8

Method Information and Other Reported Results

A8.1

Method Information

Lab Code

Diameter / Thickness 0.2% Proof Stress Upper Yield Lower Yield

2 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 4 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 5 Micrometer AS 1391 - - 6 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 7 Mic Machine direct read - - 8 - - - - 9 MS ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 10 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 11 AS 1391 - 2007 PLT.W1 3205 - - 12 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 13 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 14 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 15 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 16 AS 1391 - - - 18 - LRTM 306 LRTM 306 LRTM 306 19 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 20 - ISO 6892: 98 ISO 6892: 98 ISO 6892: 98 21 AS 1391 AS 1391 - - 22 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 23 ISO 6892 - - -

24A AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 24B AS 1391 - 2007 - - - 25 AS 1391 - 2007 - AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 26 AS 1391 AS 1391 - - 27 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 28 - AS 1391 - - 29 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 31 AS 2470 - AS 2470 - 32 MS ISO 6892: 2002 MS ISO 6892: 2002 MS ISO 6892: 2002 MS ISO 6892: 2002 33 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 34 - - - - 35 AS 1391 - - - 37 ASTM E-8M 04 ASTM E-8M 04 ASTM E-8M 04 ASTM E-8M 04

A8.2

Method Information (continued)

Lab Code Tensile Strength

Percentage Elongation after Fracture

Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture

2 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 4 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 5 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 6 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 7 - - - 8 - - - 9 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 10 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 11 - - - 12 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 13 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 14 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 - 15 AS 1391 AS 1391 - 16 - - - 18 LRTM 306 LRTM 306 LRTM 306 19 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 ISO 6892 20 ISO 6892: 98 Extensometer Calculate 21 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 22 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 23 - - -

24A AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 24B AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 - 25 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 26 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 27 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 AS 1391 - 2007 28 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 29 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 31 AS 2470 AS 2470 - 32 MS ISO 6892: 2002 MS ISO 6892: 2002 MS ISO 6892: 2002 33 AS 1391 AS 1391 AS 1391 34 - - - 35 - - - 37 ASTM E-8M 04 ASTM E-8M 04 ASTM E-8M 04

A8.3

Tensile Specimen Width and Tensile Specimen Gauge L ength

Tensile Specimen Width (mm) Tensile Specimen Gauge Length (mm) Lab Code Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4 Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

2 20.02 20.18 20.10 50 80 80 80 4 12.47 12.38 12.47 50 50 50 50 5 - - - 79 - - - 6 19.98 20.01 20.00 50 80 80 80 7 19.954 20.021 19.958 50 27.5 35.5 22 8 20.00 20.00 19.99 79 80.00 80.00 80.00 9 20.38 20.78 20.40 60 80 80 80 10 49.05 54.35 49.30 50 80 80 80 11 20.65 - - - 80.00 - - 12 21.05 20.70 20.60 80 57 73 80 13 12.54 12.45 12.51 50 50 50 50 14 20.08 20.08 20.08 - 80 80 80 15 20.25 20.26 20.24 50 80 80 80 16 20.43 20.41 20.43 - 80 80 80 18 11.81 12.46 12.54 50 50 50 50 19 12.69 12.67 12.73 50 50 50 50 20 12.51 12.48 12.50 68.51 50.07 50.07 50.07 21 - - - 50 - - - 22 - 20.11 - 50.0 - 80.0 - 23 20.00 19.98 19.97 50 80 80 80

24A 12.64 20.04 20.00 50 50 80 80 24B 20.00 - - - 80 - - 25 20.03 20.02 20.01 50 80 80 80 26 19.95 20.26 19.95 50 80 80 80 27 - 20.42 - 69 - 35 - 28 - - - 50 - - - 29 31.14 31.30 31.43 50 200 200 200 31 12.86 13.14 13.90 - 50 50 50 32 20.20 20.20 20.20 100 100 100 100 33 12.55 12.55 12.45 50 50 50 50 34 12.58 12.58 12.56 62 50 50 50 35 19.94 19.95 19.87 50 80 80 80 37 12.50 12.47 12.47 62.5 50 50 50

A8.4

Elastic Stress or Strain Rate (number / sec)

Lab Code Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

2 10 MPa/sec 12 MPa/sec 15.5 MPa/sec 8.0 MPa/sec 4 - - 20 MPa s-1 20 MPa s-1 5 0.0025 - - - 6 0.0002 - - - 8 0.00025 0.00010 0.00010 0.00010

11 - 0.04 mm - - 12 0.25 0.35 0.27 0.25 14 - 0.0008 0.0008 0.0008 15 8.5 0.0003 0.0003 0.0003 16 - 0.0004 0.0004 0.0004 18 0.001 0.001 0.001 0.001 20 5 mm/min 5 mm/min 5 mm/min 5 mm/min 22 85 µE/s - 85 µE/s - 25 10 22 16 20 27 0.00005 - 0.00005 - 28 0.00008 - - - 29 62 54 60 127 32 10 N/mm2 sec 10 N/mm2 sec 10 N/mm2 sec 10 N/mm2 sec 33 Range A Range A Range A Range A 34 0.00026 0.00023 0.00023 0.00023 37 0.053 mm/sec 0.053 mm/sec 0.053 mm/sec 0.053 mm/sec

Notes:

1. Range A: 250 – 2500 × 10-6.

A8.5

Plastic Strain Rate (number / sec)

Lab Code Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

2 0.0007 - - - 4 0.0025 0.0025 - - 5 0.0025 - - - 6 0.0016 0.00095 0.0012 0.0015 8 0.00050 0.00025 0.00040 0.00040 11 - 0.33 mm - - 12 0.22 0.24 0.20 0.18 14 - 0.0075 0.0075 0.0075 15 - 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 16 - 0.003 0.003 0.003 18 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.005 20 20 mm/min 20 mm/min 20 mm/min 20 mm/min 22 30 mm/min - 30 mm/min - 25 0.0013 0.0010 0.00099 0.00086 27 0.0005 - 0.0005 - 29 0.0082 0.0063 0.0078 0.0082 32 10 N/mm2 sec 10 N/mm2 sec 10 N/mm2 sec 10 N/mm2 sec 33 Range A Range A Range A Range A 34 0.00026 0.00023 0.00023 0.00023 37 0.433 mm/sec 0.433 mm/sec 0.433 mm/sec 0.433 mm/sec

Notes:

1. Range A: 250 – 2500 × 10-6.

APPENDIX B

Homogeneity Testing

B1.1

HOMOGENEITY TESTING

Before the test pieces were distributed to participants, ten specimens from each sample were selected at random and tested by BlueScope Steel Limited. This was done to assess the variability of the four samples to be used in the program. The results of this testing appear in the following tables.

Homogeneity Testing Results

Sample 1

Sample Number

0.2% Proof Stress (MPa)

Tensile Strength (MPa)

% Elongation after Fracture

% Reduction in Area

1 596 689 10 49.1 8 620 694 11 50.8 15 627 701 11 49.1 17 625 698 11 50.4 23 618 690 10 48.5 29 622 693 12 49.6 32 615 692 11 50.0 37 612 687 10 49.6 43 593 690 11 50.2 48 610 689 10 48.9


Sample 2

Sample Number

Thickness (mm)

0.2% Proof Stress (MPa)



E20000 1.193 211 316 61 E20001 1.194 210 315 64 E20002 1.196 207 315 62 E20003 1.196 208 315 63 E20004 1.194 207 315 61 E20005 1.194 207 315 62 E20006 1.193 209 315 61 E20007 1.191 208 315 63 E20008 1.195 210 315 62 E20009 1.193 209 315 60

B1.2


Sample 3

Sample Number

Thickness (mm)

Upper Yield (MPa)

Lower Yield (MPa)



E30000 1.991 316 270 356 51 E30001 1.991 311 268 357 51 E30002 1.987 311 270 357 51 E30003 1.988 309 264 356 55 E30004 1.988 305 264 356 57 E30005 1.986 307 265 358 51 E30006 1.99 308 268 356 49 E30007 1.987 307 264 356 55 E30008 1.988 314 267 355 48 E30009 1.983 307 270 355 52


Sample 4

Sample Number

Thickness (mm)

Upper Yield (MPa)

Lower Yield (MPa)



E40000 0.752 148 144 269 75 E40001 0.751 151 145 268 71 E40002 0.751 152 144 268 72 E40003 0.753 151 146 268 75 E40004 0.753 149 145 268 72 E40005 0.753 150 146 268 74 E40006 0.755 151 144 267 72 E40007 0.754 151 146 268 74 E40008 0.754 152 145 268 74 E40009 0.756 151 144 267 73

Please note that the Percentage Elongation after Fracture results reported in the tables above have been converted to a proportional gauge length. Analysis of the homogeneity testing data indicated that the samples were sufficiently homogeneous for the program and, therefore, any participant results identified as extreme cannot be attributed to sample variability.

APPENDIX C

Instructions to Participants

and

Results Sheet

C1.1

Tensile Testing of Metals, Round 2 December 2009 Page 1 of 3

PROFICIENCY TESTING AUSTRALIA

Tensile Testing Of Metals Proficiency Testing Progr am Round 2, December 2009

Instructions To Participants

To ensure that the results of this program can be analysed correctly, participants are asked to note carefully: 1) The samples for this tensile testing program comprise of one steel round bar

sample and three steel strip samples. The round bar sample is labeled 1-x, and the steel strip samples are labeled 2-x, 3-x and 4-x. The set of samples includes both continuous (Samples 1-x and 2-x) and discontinuous (Samples 3-x and 4-x) yielding steel grades.

2) The tests to be performed in this program are:

• Diameter / Thickness; • 0.2% Proof Stress (non-proportional elongation) (Rp0.2); • Upper Yield (ReH); • Lower Yield (ReL); • Tensile Strength (Rm); • Percentage Elongation after Fracture (A%); and • Percentage Reduction in Area after Fracture (Z%).

3) All of the samples have been aged and the tests may commence as soon as samples are received. The samples are to be treated in the same manner as routinely tested samples.

4) All testing, recording and reporting is to be performed in accordance with your

routine test methods, but testing in accordance with AS 1391 – Metallic materials – Tensile testing at ambient temperature (2007) or ISO 6892 – Metallic materials – Tensile testing (2009) are the preferred test methods.

5) Report only one result per sample, based on the determination for each

property. For each determination, results are to be reported to the accuracy and in the units indicated on the Results Sheet.

6) The method of testing used should also be reported on the Results Sheet (eg. AS 1391, ISO 6892, etc.)

7) Testing for 0.2% Proof Stress (non-proportional elongation) is to be performed

on Samples 1-x and 2-x only. Testing for Upper Yield (ReH) and Lower Yield (ReL) are to be performed on Samples 3-x and 4-x.

C1.2


8) For this program, your laboratory has been allocated the code number on the attached Results Sheet. All reference to your laboratory in reports associated with this program will be via this code number, ensuring the confidentiality of your results.

9) Return the Results Sheet, either by mail or facsimile, to:

All results should arrive at the above address by no later than Friday 18

December 2009 . Results reported later than this date may not be analysed in the final report.

Mark Bunt Proficiency Testing Australia PO Box 7507 Silverwater NSW 2128 AUSTRALIA

Telephone: + 61 2 9736 8397 (1300 782 867) Fax: +61 2 9743 6664

C2.1


PROFICIENCY TESTING AUSTRALIA

Tensile Testing Of Metals Proficiency Testing Progr am

Round 2, December 2009

RESULTS SHEET

Laboratory Code:

Results Test

Report results to nearest Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

Method

Diameter / Thickness 0.001 mm

0.2% Proof Stress (non-proportional elongation) (Rp0.2)

1 MPa

Upper Yield (ReH) 1 MPa

Lower Yield (ReL) 1 MPa

Tensile Strength (Rm) 1 MPa

Percentage Elongation after Fracture (A%) 1 %

Percentage Reduction in Area (Z%) 1%

Where possible, please also report the values for the following:

Results Test

Report results to nearest Sample 1 Sample 2 Sample 3 Sample 4

Tensile Specimen Width 0.01 mm

Tensile Specimen Gauge Length 1 mm

Elastic Stress or Strain Rate number / sec

Plastic Strain Rate number / sec

Print Name: _____________________ Signature & Date: ____________________

-----End of Report-----