How to evaluate Material certificates

[Inspector00000008]

Hello everybody,

My company is heading towards purchasing new carbon steel pipes. We have now received several offers from different suppliers.

I want to know how to verify if the information contained in the material certificate is factual! And How to detect if the material certificate is fake!

regards,

 

[XL83NL]

You cant see if something is real or fake; you need to measure and quantify things. An example would be using a PMI=gun, depending on the alloys you want to evaluate.
You might find this (free) report on material certificates useful.

 

[Inspector00000008]

Thanks XL83NL

 

[EdStainless]

Are you buying from mills or brokers?
If brokers do you know the source mills?
As the purchaser you are the one that enforces the rules. If your company is too cheap to send people to do surveys and audits then you must be willing to accept what you get.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, Plymouth Tube

 

[mk3223]

These pipe suppliers invited by Procurement should be qualified by your Company with certain criteria, isn't it?
The criteria of the qualified Supplier should include manufacturing history, shop survey for proper equipment and product quality control, as well as the third party inspection and testing, and proper document, etc. If any doubt, don't buy from this supplier and cancel it from your qualified list.

 

[chicopee]

If made in the USA, then there is a good chance about accuracy of goods. In the USA, no company wants to be taken to court on improper documentation and on product liability issues. Careful with Asian market suppliers even Japan. I remember the case involving Japanese copper tubing used in the construction of apartment complexes and within a short period of time, leak in the piping abound. Also don't forget the case of sheetrock panels from China being infected with bugs.

 

[EdStainless]

I believe that the wall board was high sulfur compound levels and resulting H2S attack of fasteners and plumbing.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, Plymouth Tube

 

[viper3982]

My shop works with materials/vessels for Power, Oil/Gas, Chemical plants, all kinds of groups with particular quality needs.
In general, you will meet everybody's assurance requirements if:

Step 1) Make sure the supplier is trusted in the industry. Has a good history, client base, certified (ISO, API, etc)...but even that won't prevent the main problem: PEOPLE LYING...
Take Kobe Steel for example:

Link
"Kobe Steel admits data fraud went on nearly five decades, CEO to quit"

Very respectable company...until everybody found out they lied on almost all their product. People trusted them for years...you would get a certified CMTR from the mill, all the chemistry, mechanical tests, etc...it looked good on paper...until everybody found out they completely made it up.

Step 2) From a trusted source, continue to verify the CMTR's meet the specs.

Step 3) If you still don't trust it, perform your own analysis. You could use XRF/OES as a qualitative check (for us this is a standard for our dock to make sure the material matches the CMTR) as a cheaper/easier way...but it's only a verification, not actual chem report. Most customers require PMI to make sure the material matches the CMTR..but they trust the CMTR.


-chicopee is right: in general: nobody wants to be taken to court for fraud/liability issues. You are USUALLY good with the CMTR as being accurate. Most customers have a "NO CHINA" requirement or sometimes "No India, China, or former Eastern Soviet Block" requirement. This is because they *feel* less trusting of many suppliers from those countries have that 'care factor'.

-EdStainless also has a good point. ISO/API often have requirements for supplier validation: site visits, audits, etc. You might want to look at this as well.

 

[EdStainless]

There has been a big discussion in a spec committee that I am a member of because of various interpretations of rules.
My company's method is to put all of the data on one report. However for data that we didn't generate (heat chemistry, outside NDT, micro-cleanliness) we attach the original report that we took it from.
We also always identify the original source of the material (country and company).
RR was correct, trust but verify.


= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, Plymouth Tube