Standard callout on an engineering drawing:
Shot Peen all over to an Intensity of 8-12A with 200% coverage using ASH-230 shot.
Typically the engineering drawing fails to call out the locations for intensity verification. However, since the drawing states 8-12A all over it appears to me that the organization performing the peening is putting itself in potentially dangerous position. What if at some point down the road someone questions the intensity in an area where it was not previously measured? What happens when itís not within the specified range? What if the part failed at location where the intensity was not within the specified range and there was a loss of life, whoís to blame, the Shot Peen process house or the OEM?
Most often itís up to the shot peener to determine the locations intensity will be verified. At times these locations are agreed to by the customer but not all. Even when they are itís been my experience that rarely are these locations approved by someone with design authority. Typically itís done by a process engineer if that. I think there is potential for a major disconnect between what the design engineer envisioned and reality. For several years I have brought this up at SAE AMEC meetings, to date not much has been done.
It makes me wonder why we are forced to so tightly control our process when the locations of measurement are not defined on the drawing.
Nor is there is any guidance whatsoever as to how accurately the intensity verification fixture needs to be made.
Itís time to address this White Elephant.