Message

Prior to the meeting, Perkin Elmer distributed the conrod and main bearing weight loss results from a T-10 test on TMC PC-9A (attached). The group was generally surprised at the amount of weight loss that was shown. LZ commented that they also have run a test that showed a similar 60/40 split (conrod/main). Wim suggested that no more T-10 tests be run with the tin flash main bearing, due to the concern that the main bearings may originally have been contributing to the Pb in the oil. The group kicked around the idea of running reference oil tests with unflashed conrod and unflashed main bearings. After much discussion, that three of the unflashed main and conrod bearings will be examined to make sure they are what we want prior to reference testing. TEI will send test kits to any labs that desire to run. PE and SR will run a test once the bearings are available. LZ and EV may be able to test but were unsure at the time of the call. There was much discussion on possible industry ramifications that come about as a result of these tests, whether the results are successful or not. Greg stressed that he believes that ways exist to make the situation as equitable as possible for all parties involved and he was willing to work this offline.

Jim Rutherford reviewed his presentation. This analysis shows the effects of the prediction equations on the Mack Merits for Pb. The group offered no new comments and the same concerns exist as with previous iterations. It was felt that the IR round robin will help clarify whether the variability in the data is due to IR measurement variability, IR real variability, or real lead variability. No further discussion occurred. Wim asked that members examine the model against their own data and be prepaired to discuss the model next time we meet.