From: Fetterman, Pat [Glen.Fetterman@Infineum.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2002 4:24 PM To: Aimin Huang (E-mail); Aung N. Oo (E-mail); Bill Buscher (E-mail); Bill Larch (E-mail); Bob Campbell (E-mail); Charlie Passut (E-mail); Dick Patrick (E-mail); Glenn Mazzamaro (E-mail); Greg Shank (E-mail); Gutzwiller, James; James Matasic (E-mail); Jeff Clark (E-mail); Jim McGeehan (E-mail); Jim Moritz (E-mail); Jim Rutherford (E-mail); Jim Wells (E-mail); Joe Franklin (E-mail); Ken Goshorn (E-mail); Mark Cooper (E-mail); Mark Sutherland (E-mail); Mike Zaiontz (E-mail); Norbert Nann (E-mail); Redescal Gomez (E-mail); Riccardo Conti (E-mail); Robert Mainwaring (E-mail); Ron Buck (E-mail); Scott Richards (E-mail); Steve Kennedy (E-mail); Tom Boschert (E-mail); Warren Totten (E-mail); Wim Van Dam (E-mail) Subject: Unconfirmed Minutes of the July 22, 2002 teleconference of the Mack Surveillance Panel. The teleconference dial-in was set for 1:00 pm, and at 1:05 the meeting was called to order by the Chairman, Wim Van Dam. Participants - Bob Campbell; Greg Shank; Jim Rutherford; Jim Moritz; Jim Matasic; Ken Goshorn; Mark Cooper; Pat Fetterman; Ron Buck; Riccardo Conti; Scott Richards; Frank Farber; Lew Williams; Don Bryant; Bill Larch; Wim Van Dam. Agenda (circulated by Wim) - 0) Two motions by Jeff Clark that remain on the table. 0) Review of outlier criterion. 0) Batch size of engine parts. 0) Pre-notification of changes in hardware. 0) Any other business. Wim indicated that Jim Rutherford would need to leave our telecon early, so we moved the outlier criterion discussion to the first topic. Jim began reviewing the brochure attached below which compares the ring and liner wear profiles from the RSI candidate data base and the various reference oils. <> Jim noted that RSI did not have individual liner wear data recodred prior to 1Q 02. Following a brief discussion of what RSI should by tracking, Wim agreed to follow up with RSI/ACC to insure that they continue to track at least all of the data currently track. Jim noted that there are 18 tests in the 1Q 02 data set and 20 tests in the 2Q data. For ring weight loss, RSI had four quarters worth of data. After noting that there were differences among the reference oils and differences between the reference oils and the RSI data, Jim suggested that, perhaps, the RSI data better predicted the true cylinder to cylinder variations. It was noted that the major impact of a change in the profile model would show up in cylinders #2 and #4. Greg Shank asked what the avreage wear results are for the RSI data, and it was indicated that level of detail was not available due to concrens over confidentiality. Concern was expressed that the reference oil results fall near the pass/fail line, and the use of candidate data, which could be significanlty better that the P/F limit could bias the distribution of wear. There was a discussion regarding whether the RSI data set had been outlier screened, and the opinion was probably not, but we couldn't be sure. There was a group censensus that more data is needed before deciding how to proceed. Wim agreed to re-approach RSI to request more detailed wear data, such as average, min, max and standard deviation of the results. Wim suggested that we should hold another teleconference to discuss this further in August. Jim Moritz asked if the RSI data could also be segregated and analyzed by hardware batch, and Wim indicated that he would ask, but we should not let that level of detail slow down our other decision-making needs. Bob Campbell asked if we could have a table showing how either continuing the use of reference oil profiles or using RSI candidate data to generate the profiles would impact either candidate results or referencing requirements. Jim Rutherford said, "Yes", he could do that quickly. The group then moved to the first agenda item, Jeff Clark's two open motions. Pat Fetterman read motion 1 to remove the liner wear measurement procedure from the T-9 document and put it into a stand-alone TMC maintained document. Following a discussion the motion was amended to also add the ring-cleaning procedure to the document and to add a document history that would allow users to track changes. In addition, it was suggested that the new document should be prepared, but the T-9 procedure should not be changed until the Cummins group has time to also reference the new TMC document in their procedure. The revised motion passed with unanimous support. (Jim Matasic had left the meeting before this ballot, but he sent an e-mail to the secretary supporting all actions taken by the group in his absence.) Pat read Jeff's second motion on the inspection/servicing requirements for the fuel injectors on the T-10A test. Following a lengthy discussion Greg Shank offered a revised motion requiring injector servicing in the T-10A test at every rebuild which is defined as a maximum of three reference periods or 1350 hours. This revised motion passed with one abstention. Greg also moved to change the injector service interval in the T-10 test to once every reference period form the earlier requirement of every 300 hours. This motion passed with one abstention. Ron Buck discussed the attached table reviewing the cylinder kit batch sizes and service periods. <> He indicated that his projected kit life was based on some drop-off in testing rate over the next couple of years. There was a lengthy discussion regarding the desirable batch size - should it be five years? - double the current batch size? Ron indicated that larger batch sized did not represent any particular technical issue, but it does increase inventory risk. Eventually it was decided that we do not need to make a batch size decision until about 10 months from now. During the time from now until then, Wim asked TEI to keep the Panel informed of parts usage, and Greg Shank asked that the TMC also track reference oil usage and supply. The final topic was Panel notification changes in test hardware. After significant debate over what changes need to be tracked, Ken Goshorn agreed that it is possible to pre-notify the panel of any changes to "critical parts", and Wim indicated that the Panel would like that notification. Respectfully submitted, Pat Fetterman, Secretary, Mack Surveillance Panel