From:	Jeff Clark
Sent:	Friday, August 20, 2004 1:05 PM
To:	Jim Moritz (E-mail); John Haegelin (E-mail); Ken Goshorn (E-mail); Jim Wells (E-mail); Bob Campbell (E-mail); Pat Fetterman (E-mail); Jim Matasic (E-mail); Andy Broff (E-mail); Jeff Clark (E-mail); Ron Buck (E-mail); Greg Shank (E-mail); Wim Van Dam (E-mail); Mark Cooper (E-mail)
Cc:	Frank Farber; Scott Richards (E-mail)
Subject:	Notes from the T-10 Pb Ad Hoc Meeting
Attendance:
Jim Moritz, John Haegelin, Ken Goshorn, Jim Wells, Bob Campbell, Pat Fetterman, Jim Matasic, Andy Broff, Jeff Clark, Ron Buck

Review of Operations and Test Results
1. Operational differences were found from test to test, but no one lab was found to be doing anything consistently different.
2. Stage 1 CO2 exhaust levels for the tests on all the experimental bearing batches are lower than levels seen during normal referencing. This produces slightly higher EGR rates. Further examination of this is necessary.
3. Variability of ring and liner wear indicates that the test may be struggling with more than just lead.
4. For lead, the experimental bearing tests appear to break later and harder than the prior references.

Proposed Path Forward
1. Use the batch of bearings that were intended to be made to the original 80/20 Pb/Sn design. This data appears to be better behaved than the other experimental bearing tests. There is the added benefit of having approximately 190 test builds of these bearings remaining.
2. Investigate options to move forward including correction factors for lead, possible switch to bearing weight loss and delta ir, or a combination of both options. These should be derived comparing both the 3 and 5 test data (two tests were invalid) set to all operationally valid tests on 820-2.

Other Actions
1. Look at possible fuel batch effects.
2. Look at possible build oil effect (if Bulldog has changed).
3. Check availibility of PC-9J for confirmation of proposed solution.

General Comments
1. Any proposed solution is likely to meet with disatisfaction; ultimately, however, a choice will need to be made between living with the disatisfaction or killing the test.
2. IR round robin indicates that problems exist with the measurement results between labs. Any solution that uses the full magnitude of the values is not acceptable due to lab bias. A delta IR may be more palatable if it removes the lab bias. The IR measurement problems need to be resolved or a new oxidation measure needs to be found.
3. Any T-12 development should consider all possible options for oxidation, including bearing weight loss (total bearing weight loss and main bearings could possibly be included).

Attached is the spreadsheet, including modifications, used during the meeting.

This group will reconvene via teleconference on Tuesday,  August 24th at 10:00am eastern time.

Regards,

Jeff Clark
Staff Engineer
ASTM Test Monitoring Center
6555 Penn Avenue
Pittsburgh, PA 15206
412-365-1032
412-848-8843 (cell)
jac@astmtmc.cmu.edu