Document 37pbO8k0ZwMaao66BELXB3xga

.. -2sat r*- r< /c 'S CD- // ?/S TENNESSEE COAL AND IRON DIVISION Department of Metallurgy, Inspection and Research Development Section To;. Mr, R. H. Madden Date: June II, 1959 From: W. C. Mayer Subject: Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferros tan Line__________________________ ______ _ INTRODUCTION - The Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage on the No. 4 Ferrostan Line was static tested by Electrical Engineering and found to be accurate within +2% on No. 100 Ferrostan test panels. In order to determine the accuracy of the Quantrol Gage during actual' line operation, a series of tests was scheduled to evaluate the gage. These tests had to be postponed several times because of difficulties encountered with the gage, the tracking mechanism and the electrostatic oiler. The first satisfactory tests were made on May 25-27; 1959. The results of these tests on No. 25 Ferrostan are included in this report. Tests have not been made as yet on heavy coated Ferrostan because scheduling of this material has not coin cided with periods when the Quantrol Gage was operative. CONCLUSIONS - If properly maintained and carefully calibrated, the Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage provides an accurate measure ment of average tin coating weight on No. 25 Ferrostan. 'The present'location of-the Quantrol page.is unsatisfactory due to drippings from the electrostatic oiler. RECOMMENDATIONS - It is recommended that: 1. The Quantrol Gage be used by Operations as the primary ^ control monitor of .25 lb. coating weight on No.. 4 Ferrostan Line. 2. The Quantrol Gage be moved from under the electrostatic oiler. 3. The programming of the Quantrol Gage traversing mechanism be modified to include an automatic calibration check every hour. 4. The Quantrol Gage recorder be provided with a means of indicating whether the gage is positioned on the left edge, center, right edge or calibration panels. USHO 002258 2- - Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferros tan Line______________________________ 6/11/59 PROCEDURE - The Quantrol Gage was carefully calibrated prior to each days testing, and the calibration was checked before each test. The tests were conducted a$ follows: Quantrol Gage readings were averaged over a two minute period while the gage was tracking one edge of the strip. Twelve to fifteen sample sheets were selected from the line during this two minute per iod. Three test spots were punched from each sample sheet on the edge checked by the Quantrol Gage. One spot was masked on the bottom sur face and one on the top surface. The third spot was not masked. The spots were then coded for identification purposes. After completion of the line testing, the spots were divided in to a masked and an unmasked group and each group- shuffled to provide a random sequence of testing. Bendix coating weight tests were then run on the spots. The results of these tests were tabulated and re-., suits of several sample sheets discarded due to misidentification of one or more spots. The average*maximum, minimum, range and standard deviation of the top surface, bottom surface and total surface (un masked spots) were calculated for each series of test spots. Using the Student's "t" distribution for small samples the 99% confidence limits of the mean coating weight was calculated from the average and standard deviation of each series of Bendix tests. RESULTS - The results of the tests are shown in the attached tableT" Coating weights are tabulated in coating points: one coating point equals .01 pounds per base box. Some of the,;difference between~.the...Quantrol readings and the Bendix tests can be attributed to the differences in area tested. The Quantrol Gage measures the average coating weight of a 1-3/8" wide band located 1-5/16" to 2-11/16" from the edge of the strip. The Bendix method tests a single 2-1/4" round spot located 1" to 3-1/4" from the edge of the strip. It is noted from the table that the average Quantrol readings fall within the range of individual Bendix spots on all tests. The standard deviation of the Bendix tests on each test series is a function of the variation in coating weight along the approxi mately 1700 feet of strip tested and the variation in the Bendix coat ing weight test. Assuming normal distribution for these spot test results, 99% of the individual spots would fall within three standard deviations of the average spot test, 95% within two standard devia tions and 68% within one standard deviation. On the top surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings fell within one standard devia tion of the average spot test. On the bottom surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings fell within two standard deviations of the average spot test and 92% fell within one standard deviation. On the 'total surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings USHO 002259 Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferrostan Line _____________ ___________ 6/11/59 fell within three standard deviations of the mean coating weight, 92% fell within two standard deviations and 58% within one standard devia tion. On the top surface tests, the greatest deviation of a single Bendix test from the average Bendix test was 4.0 coating points (Test No. 9); the greatest deviation of an average Quantrol reading from" the average Bendix test was only 1.1 coating points (Test No. 4). On .the bottom surface tests, the greatest deviation of a single Bendix test from the average Bendix test was 5.9 points (Test No. 11); the greatest deviation of an average Quantrol reading from the average Bendix test was only 1.5 points (Test No. 9). On the total surface tests the greatest deviation of a single Bendix test from the average Bendix test was 3.9 points (Test No. 12); the-greatest deviation of an average Quantrol reading from the average Bendix test was only 2.0 points (Test No. 1). The above discussion on range, standard deviation and greatest deviation indicate that the Quantrol gage is as good or a better measure of mean tin coating weight than individual spot tests if 'the average spot test is taken as the mean coating weight. However, the average spot test is only an estimate of the mean coating weight. On the top surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings fell within the 99% confidence limits of the actual mean coating weight calculated from the spot tests. On the bottom surface tests, 83% of the Quantrol readings fell within these limits and the other 17% fell within 0.2 points of the limits. On the total surface tests-, 50% of the Quantrol readings fell within these limits and 25% fell within 0.2 points of . the., limits. These results indicate that the Quantrol reading may be as good an estimate of the actual mean coating.weight as the average of the 10-15 test spots. The results of these tests show that the Quantrol Gage is a better test for controlling average tin coating weight than the in dividual spot tests now used. However, the Quantrol Gage will not detect short time variations in coating weight which sometimes occur immediately after order changes, particularly order changes involv ing different coating weights or strip widths. It will be necessary to continue the Bendix tests to detect low coating spots after such order changes. DCarlin/r USH0 002260 -4- Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferrostan Line_____________________ ___________ Copies: J. W. Ogletree C. W. Harrison M. F. Glascock V. W. Vaurio H. A. Caldwell P. L. Kendrick J. R. English 6/11/59 > t USHO 002261 Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gaga Evaluation Test rip Id go t st Ho. Left Right Right Left "5725" ' 5725" "5755" 6/26 1234 nber of Bendlx spot Tests 13 10 10 11 p Surface Quantrol Reading peerage of Bendlx Tests aifference 26.8 28.6 "+72 27.0 26 6 "+7T 28.5 25.8 -+T7 25.0 26.1 ITT 93% Confidence Limits of Kean Coating Height 26.6 (Calc, fros Bendlx Tests) 1.2 28.6 +1.2 25.8 +1.0 26.1 +1.4 Rsxlsus Bendlx Test 29 28 28 29 'rlnlmum Bendlx Test 21 26 24 24 flange 634 5 Standard Deviation 1.6 1.3 1.1 1.6 Sreatest Dev. of single Bendlx Test from Avg. 2.6 1.6 2.2 2.9 itom Surface quantrol Heading ' Average of Bendlx Teats aifference 26.6 21.2 +ra 28.0 28.5 27.5 +2T6T.32 26.1 25.0 +T7T 99% Confidence Limits of dean Coating Woight 24.2 (Calc, from Bendlx Teqts) +1.4 28.6 +1.9 26.3 +1.1 25.0 + .9 laxlmura Bendlx Test 28 32 28 26 minimum Bendlx Test 22 26 24 23 Range 664 3 Standard Deviation 1.8 , 2.0 1.2 1.0 Greatest.Dev. of-Single 3endix Test from Avg. 3.8 3.6 2.3 2.0 tal Surface luantrol Heading (Avg. top and bottom) Avg. of Dondj- Tests 31fforence 26.2" 24.2 +2.0 27.5 27.0 175 27.0 25.7 . +T73 25.6 25.2 + .4 99% Confidence Limits of dean Coating Height (Calc, from Bendlx Tests) 24.2 +.7 27.0 +.4 25.7 +1.1 25.2 +1.1 'laxlmum Bendlx Test 26 27.5 27 27 IniauB Bendlx Test Range 23 26 23 23 3 1.5 4 4 Standard Deviation 0.0 0.4 1.2 1.2 Greatest Dev. of Single Sendlx Test from Avg. 1.8 1.0 2.7 2.2 Right "5727" Left ' 5/2V" Right V2V Right "5727" Left "5727" 5 67 8 9 12 12 15 11 13 Right Loft Rlghl 5/2Y 10 "5757" 11 "5/1227' 13 . 15 13 28.8 29.3 "=75 24.0 24.4 -=Tt 28.5 28.0 175 28.0 28.6 "15 25.0 24.0 +175 28.0 28.4 24.8 2+4..71 27.0 27 .1 29.3 +1.2 32 26 6 1.5 3.3 24.4 +1.6 28 22 6 1.9 3.6 28.0 '9 30 26 4 1.3 2.0 28.6 +1.0 30 26 4 1.2 2.6 24.0 +1.8 28 20 8 2.3 4.0 28.4 +1.2 31 28 5 1.6 2.6 24.7 + .B 27 22 5 1.2 2.7 27.1 +1.4 29 24 5 i:a 3,1 26.3 27.3 ita 25.8 25.4 +74 26.9 26.0 "+3 27.5 26.6 173 25.0 23.5 +175 28.6 27.7 +.B 27.3 25.4 +1.0 +1.3 29 28 25 22 46 1.2 1.8 2.3 -3.4 26.0 26.6 +1.1 +1.3 28 29 24 24 45 1.6 1.5 2.0 2.6 23.5 +1.5 27 21 6 1.9 3.5 27.7 +1.0 30 26 4 1.3 2.3 23.6 23.1 + .4 27.0 25.9 171 23.1 + .8 29 22 7 1.2 6.9. 25.9 +1.6 30 22 6 ` 2.0 4.1 27.6 27.1 "+75 27.1 + .9 29 24 5 l.l 3.1 24.9 24.6 + .3 24.6 + 8 26 23 3 1.0 1.6 27.7 26.8 173 27.8 27.5 +.2 26.8 5 28 28 2 0.7 1.2 27.5 +.9 29 25 4 1.0 2.5 25.0 24.2 175 28.3 . 26.9 +n 24.2 + .6 25 23 2 0.8 1.2 26.9 .7 ' 28 26 2 0.9 1.1 24.2 24.1 "+7T 27.0 26.9 + .1 24.1 +1.0 27 22 6 1.4 2.9 26.9 +1.3 29 23 6 1.7 3.9 Hote : All coating weights are expressed in coating points: 1 coating point .01 lb/BB USHO 002262 Hr, R, V. Holme* June 8, 1959 C. w. 'Harrison . X-Bay Coating Thicknssa Gage. Kot-4 Ferrostan Lina - Fairfield Tin Kill Zq response to your verbal request, we are submitting an opinion of the value of the subject cage to T.C.& X. This gage ia a pre cision instrument requiring a prociaion installation and precision maintenance thereafter. Due to several factors, we have not been able to attain the desired mechanical precision in Che installation and operation of the instrument. Since this was a prototype instrument several errors were made in the original installation. The gage should never have been located in its present restricted space whore it la physically impossible to perform maintenance on the x-ray unit while the line is in operation. The supporting rails for the gage should have been designed so that their position could be adjusted after installation. The desired installation tolerancs of plus or minus 1/32" in ths vertical and horixental dimensions of the rails, proved impossible to attain. The general environment et the gage has become much worse aince the* installation of ~a new type of- electrostatic- oiler above the gage. ... The old oiler -produced some oil mist at the gaga. The new oiler keeps the gsge bathed in dripping oil. Due to apace limitations, adequate protection against this oil cannot be installed. Because of this oil and the general inaccessibility of the unit, fiber rolls installed for pass line stabilisation cannot be kept dean. They in turn cause marks and oil spots on ths strip. To produce an acceptable produce, the opera tors remove these rolls from contact with the strip, causing cho pass 11ns to vsry more than the prescribed plus or minus 1/8" tolerance. ^ "' i Electrically, the instrument has given very little trouble. The top unit, purchased in 1957, has been in operation approximately 10,000 hours while ths bottom unit purchased in 1958 has opsrated approximately 3.000 hours. In summary, vs believe that if cho instrument was properly installed and maintained, a reasonably accurate indication of the average coating weight on Che section of Che scrip examined by the gage can be secured. Ths gage manufacturer guarantees a deviation of less than plus or minus ,11 frorathe true coating weight. We do not believe that an inaccuracy of twice this amount would seriously affect the usefulness of the gage. USHO 002263 Mr. &. W. Holman 2 June 8. 1959 It should bs noted that to date the sag0 has perfonaed no useful service to T.C.& X. If the current metallurgical test proves that the Instrument is accurate, we recommend that steps be taken to relocate the gags, providing it will bo used to an advantage. He recommend that this decision be clear, i.e. either the instrument is to be used consistently, or it is to be removed from the line. Due to the required manual anode positioning.' weaving or offset of the strip in the plating tanks, transport time, etc., we do not believe chet-tt would be practical to try to automatically control the tin coating tblcknass from the gage Information. EVALUATION OF X-EAY COAXING THICKNESS CAGE On May 25, 1959, the Metallurgical Department started evaluation teats. To date, thirteen series of test samples of oae-quartor pound tin plate have been taken. The coating thickness of thess samples is being determined end correlated with the gage readings. We are now advised by Metallurgical that an interim evaluation report, baaed on above testa, will be issued on June 10, 1959. Testa of throe-quarter, one pound, and differencial coatings will be evaluated as soon as this type material is processed on the line. After these final testa, a composite evaluation report on the gaga will be issued by Metallurgical. HBB/Jc Chief Electrical Engineer USHO 002264 vrc, ,L .V.'C- .aid ntrol CIVISIOR . : "'v./.. Acnfric!-: Sv.bjco'1: Qusntrcl Tin Ccali,-.g Jj-dght Qau;-,o ~ rh Perron--.r.! Lins 3i-.cs the ir.str.llaticn. of tills equipment on </h ferrcatan Line, cover:-:'!, suaveas have boon made by Qua 1:1 <..7 Control Personnel to evaluate the eff-cciry-onens of this piece of equipment, The original installation '-us mad' to measure the top surface, and the unit normally measures in the centra portion of the strip with croviaions Trade for the manual nositioning at any position across the 3trip width. Our observations of the relationship of chemical test values $ versus Quantrol values indicates that differences in the magnitude of 7 + >'o bse/bb exist at times. Approximately 80?5 of the time this ' difference is in the magnitude of or - ,03 lbs/bb, and approximately liO;e of the time in the -magnitude of < or ,03* Ibso/bb, Thesa discre pancies, at time3, have teen traced to the following factors: '-m The greatest differences in readings occur after the line has bear, down for several minutes and starts up; the agreement becoming closer as line "continues to run, 2- Voltage- settings on the X-?.ay tube drops off at frequent intervals, 3, The area measured by the'Quahtrol gauge and qhemical tests are. .not -identical due to weaving of the strip, U, JOff-calibration, We feel that this equipment i3. a useful tool; however, we do r.-ot feel that-its effectiveness can bo thoroughly evaluated until a sHf for scanning the strip width has been installed, the?Engineering Department has indicated that no major main1 ilfficqlties have been encountered, we have noted the equip- ment of use on a number of occasions for extended periods of time du^ Component parts having failed, for which no replacements ware available. The use of this instrument for control purposes would necessitate its continuous operation during line' operating periods and additional maintenance as required to keep it in this condition. FMD/ja cc: Mr,- R. H-, Madden Mr. C, W, Harrison Mr. J . R,.English CC-//S/S- TENNESSEE COAL AND IRON DIVISION Department of Metallurgy, Inspection and Research Development Section To; Mr. R. H. Madden Date: June 11, 1959 From; W. C. Mayer Subject: Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferrostan Line INTRODUCTION - The Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage on the No. 4 Ferrostan Line was static tested by Electrical Engineering and found to be accurate within +2% on No. 100 Ferrostan test panels. -In order to determine the accuracy of the Quantrol Gage during actual line operation, a series of tests was scheduled to evaluate the gage. These tests had to be postponed several times because.of difficulties encountered with the gage, the tracking mechanism and the electrostatic oiler. The first satisfactory tests were made on May 25-27, 1959. The results of these tests on No. 25 Ferrostan are included in this report. Tests have not been made as yet on heavy coated Ferrostan because scheduling of this material has not coin cided with periods when the Quantrol Gage was operative. CONCLUSIONS - If properly maintained and carefully calibrated, the Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage provides an accurate measure ment of average tin coating weight on No. 25 Ferrostan. The present location of the Quantrol page is unsatisfactory due to drippings from the ^electrostatic oiler............... . _ . RECOMMENDATIONS - It is recommended that: 1. The Quantrol Gage be used by Operations as the. primary control monitor of .25 lb. coating weight on No. 4 Ferrostan Line ' 2. TtteiQuantrol Gage be moved from under the electrostatic oiler.- ' 3. The programming of the Quantrol Gage traversing mechanism be modified to include an automatic calibration check every hour. 4. The Quantrol Gage recorder be provided with a means of indicating whether the gage is positioned on the left edge, center, right edge or calibration' panels. 2- - Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferrostan Line 6/11/59 PROCEDURE - The Quantrol Gage was carefully calibrated prior to each days testing, and the calibration was checked before each test. The tests were conducted as follows: Quantrol Gage readings were averaged over a two minute period while the gage was tracking one edge of the strip. Twelve to fifteen sample sheets were selected ffrom the line during this two minute per iod. Three test spots were punched from each sample sheet on the edge checked by the Quantrol Gage. One spot was masked on the bottom sur face and one on the top surface. The third spot was not masked. The spots were then coded for identification purposes. After completion of the line testing, the spots were divided in to a masked and an unmasked group and each group' shuffled to provide a random sequence of testing. Bendix coating weight tests were then run on the spots. The results of these tests were tabulated and re-., suits of several sample sheets discarded due to misidentification of one or more spots. The average, maximum, minimum, range and standard deviation of the top surface, bottom surface and total surface (un masked spots) were calculated for each series of test spots. Usingthe Student's "t" distribution for small samples the 99% confidence limits of the mean coating weight was calculated from the average and standard deviation of each series of Bendix tests. RESULTS - The results of the tests are shown in the attached table.. Coating weights are tabulated in coating points: one coating point equals .01 pounds per base box. Some of the difference between the Quantrol readings and the Bendix tests? can. be attributed, to _the,,differences in area tested. The Quantrol Gage measures the average coating weight of a 1-3/8" wide band located 1-5/16" to 2-11/16" from the edge of the strip. The Bendix method tests a single 2-1/4" round spot located 1" to 3-1/4" from the edge of the strip. It li^|^d.'from the table that the average Quantrol readings fall witljjraaBfe-range of individual Bendix spots on all tests. The/al|pllfcrd deviation of the Bendix tests on each test series is a funet^wSf^f the`variation in coating weight along the approxi mately 1700'feet of strip tested and the variation in the Bendix coat ing weight test. Assuming normal distribution for these spot test results, 99% of the individual spots would fall within three standard deviations of the average spot test, 95% within two standard devia tions and 68% within one standard deviation. On the top surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings fell within one standard devia tion of the average spot test. On the bottom surface.tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings fell within two standard deviations of the average spot test and 92% fell within one standard deviation. On the total surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings fi 1 -3- Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferrostan Line 6/11/59 fell within three standard deviations of the mean coating weight, 92% fell within two standard deviations and 58% within one standard devia tion. On the top surface tests, the greatest deviation of a single Bendix test from the average Bendix test was 4.0 coating points (Test No. 9); the greatest deviation of an average Quantrol reading from the average Bendix test was only 1.1 coating points (Test No. 4). On the bottom surface tests, the greatest deviation of a single Bendix test from the average Bendix test was 5.9 points (Test No. 11); the greatest deviation of an average Quantrol reading from the average Bendix test was only 1.5 points (Test No. 9). On the total surface tests the greatest deviation of a single Bendix test from the average Bendix test was 3.9 points (Test No. 12); the greatest deviation of an average Quantrol reading from the average-Bendix test was only 2.0 points (Test No. 1). The above discussion on range, standard deviation and greatest deviation indicate that the Quantrol gage is as good or a bettermeasure of mean tin coating weight than individual spot tests if/the average spot test is taken as the mean coating weight. However, the average spot test is only an estimate of the mean coating weight. On the top surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings fell within the 99% confidence limits of the actual mean coating weight calculated from the spot tests. On the bottom surface tests, 83% of the Quantrol readings fell within these limits and the other 17% fell within 0.2 points of the limits. On the total surface tests, 50% of the Quantrol readings fell within these limits and 25% fell within 0.2 points of the limits. These results indicate that the Quantrol reading- may. be_.as.good an estimate of the actual mean coating weight as the average of the 10-15'test spots. The results of these tests show that the Quantrol Gage is a better test for controlling average tin coating weight than the in dividual spot testa now used. However, the Quantrol Gage will not detect shost&time variations in coating weight which sometimes occur iramediatoI|f*;'.ter order changes, particularly order changes involv ing diffi*ra^coatiitg weights or strip widths. It will be necessary to continuipft&e Bendix tests to detect low coating spots after such order changes.' DCarlin/r Chie Development Engineer i J* >n* -4- Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferrostan Line ___________ ________ Copies: J. W. Ogletree C. w. Harrison U. F. Glascock V. W. Vaurio H. A. Caldwell P. L. Kendrick J. R. English 6/11/59 Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage Evaluation Test Strip Edge Date Test No. Left 0/25 1 Number of Bend lx Spot Tests 13 Top Surface Quantrol Reading Average of Bend lx Tests Difference 26.8 26.6 +.2 99% Confidence Limits of Mean Coating Weight 26.6 (Calc, from Bendlx Tests) +1.2 Maximum Bendlx Test 29 Minimum Bendlx Test 24 Range s Standard Deviation Greatest Dev. of single Bendlx Test from Avg. 1.5 2.6 Bottos Surface Quantrol Reading ' Average of Bendlx Tests Difference 25.6 24.2 +174 99% Confidence Limits of Kean Coating Weight 24.2 (Calc, from Bend.lx Tests) +1.4 Maximum Bendix Test 28 Minimum Bendix Test 22 Range 6 Standard Deviation Greatest Dev. of Single Bendix Test from Avg. 1.8 3.8 Total- SurfaceTM-- Quantrol heading (Avg. top and bottom) Avg. of Bendi" Tests Difference 26.2 24.2 +575 99% Confidence Limits of Mean Coating Weight 24.2 (Calc, from Bendix Tests) +.7- Maximum Bendix Test 2+*- Minimum Bendix Test Range 2ir3-- Standard Deviation Greatest Dev. of Single Bendlx Test from Avg. 0.9 1.8 Right 5/26 2 10 Right Left 5/26 "vas 34 10 11 27.0 26 6 "+'.'4 26.5 25.8 ~77 25.0 26.1 -T7I 26.6 +1.2 28 25 3 1.3 1.8 25.6 "+1.0 28 24 4 i.i 2.2 28.1 +1.4 29 24 5 1.6 2.9 28.0 28.5 -5 27.5 26.3 +r:s 26.1 25.0 +T7I 28.5 --+1.9 32 26 8 2.0 3.5 26.3 *+"* 1.1 28 24 4 1.2 2.3 25.0 "+ .9 26 23 3 1.0 2.0 27.5 27.0 -+75 27.0 25.7 . +H3 25.6 25.2 "+75 27.0 +.4 27.5. 28 1.5 0.4 1.0 25.7 +1.1 27 23 - 1.2 2.7 25.2 1.1 27 23 4 1.2 2.2 night Left Right Right Left ' V27 1 5/27" ~i7fr "5727- "5727 5 6789 12 12 15 ii 13 Right Left Right 5/57 "5727" ~S727~ 10 11 12 13 IS 13 28.8 29.3 ~=75 24.0 24.4 -4 28.5 28.0 ~+75 28.0 28.6 ~=7% 25.0 24.0 +T7TJ 28.0 28.4 ~=TZ 24.8 24.7 + .1 27.0 27.1 29.3 *+* 1.2 32 26 6 1.5 3.3 24.4 28.0 +1.6 . +.9 28 30 22 28 64 1.9 1.3 3.6 2.0 28.6 +1.0 30 26 4 1.2 2.6 24.0 +1.8 28 20 8 2.3 4.0 28.4 +1.2 31 26 5 1.5 2.8 24.7 + .9 27 22 5 1.2 2.7 27.1 +1.4 29 24 5 i:a 3.1 26.3 27.3 =T70 25.8 25.4 ~T5 26.9 26.0 "+TS 27.5 26.8 -+T5 25.0 23.5 +r;s 28.5 27.7 TTS 23.5 23.1 ~+75 27.0 25.9 +T7T 27.3 +1.0 29 25 4 1.2 2.3 25.4 *+* 1.3 28 22 6 1.8 3.4 26.0 26.6 +1.1 +1.3 28 29 24 24 45 1.8 1.5 2.0 2.6 23.5 "+" 1.5 27 21 6 1.9 3.5 27.7 "+1. .0 30 26 4 1.3 2.3 23.1 + .8 29 22 7 1.2 5.9 25.9 +1.5 30 22 8 2.0 4.1 27.6 27.1 -+7S 27.1 + .9 29 24 5 1.1 3.1 24.9 24.6 '+.3" 27.7 28.8 -+7S 27.8 27.5 " +;3 24.6 +.8 26 23 3 1.0 1.6 26.8 + .5 28 26 2 0.7 1.2 27.5 + .9 29 25 4 1.0 2.5 25.0 24.2 -+."S 24.2 + 6 25 23 2 0.8 1.2 28.3 . 26.9 +175 28.9 + .7 28 28 2 0.9 1.1 24.2 24.1 "+7I 27.0 26.9 "+TT 24.1 +1.0 27 22 5 1.4 2.9 26.9 +1.3 29 23 6 1.7 3.9 Note : All coating weights are expressed in coating points: 1 coating point .01 lb/BB Mr R. W. Holnen C. W. Harrison June 8, 1959 Qw. *9. rT9l line r foirflcld Tin Hill Xa response to your verbal rofuoot* wo or* subedtriog so opinion of cho voluo of tho oubjoce gago Co T.C.4 X. This gago lo pre cision instrument requiring precision installation and proeioioo nalntenanee thereafter. Duo to oaveral factors, wo hm oot boon bio to attain tba desired aochsolcol proolalow la tbo ioatallatioa and opoxatiow of cho Inotruaont. Since thia mi a prototype laatnwint several errors woro nodo lo cho original iaatallatioo. Tbo gago should novor hawo boon located la its proaoat restricted apaeo whoro it la physically iapoooiblo co parform aaiatoaaaeo oa cho x-ray unit whilo tho lino la ia eporation. Tho supportlog rails for tho gago should havo boon doaignod so that thoir position could bo adjuatad after ioatallatioa. Tho doairod installation caloraaoo of plus or alms 1/32" in tbo vortical and horiaoatal dinoaalooa of tbo rails* proved impossible to actala. Tho general environment at cho gago has bocom aueh wsrao aiaco tho installation of a now typo of eloctroacatio oiler abovo cho gage. Tho old oiler produced some oil mist at tho gago. Tho now oilor keeps cho gago bathod In dripping oil* Duo to specs llalcatioaa, adequate protection agaiaat thia oil caaaot bo iastallod. locaooo of thia oil and the genoral inaccessibility of tho unit, fiber rolls iastallod for pass lino stab! Hostlea caaaot bo kept clean. Thoy la fxrn cause narks and oil spots oa tho strip. To produce so acceptable produce* tho operator* roaovo thoao rolls frea eaataat with tbo strip* couslsg tho pass lias to vary aora thee tho prescribed pins or aims l/f* toUroari. glootrioally* tho laotrmoot has given vary little trouble. Tho top unit* pwrchaaod in 1937* has bean la operation approximately 100M hours whila the bottom unit purchased ia 193d has operated sppvoalmtoly 3,000 bears. Xa suaaary* wa believe that if ths inatruaeat was properly Installed and naiataiand* a reasonably accurate indication of tha JBBSflt casting might oa tho section of the atrip exadaed by tho gaga can bar aacuwd. Tha gaga aaaufacturar guarantees a dsviatlaa of lass than plus or minus 11 from tha trna caatlag might, tfs da not believe that am laatsurory of twice this mount would aoriouoly affect tho uaofolaooo of tho gago- USHO 002273 Mr. R. tf. Bolaea 2 June It 1959 Ie should b noted that to date the gage haa perforaed no useful service to T.C.& I. If the current Metallurgical teat proves that the InstTuaent is accurate, ve racoaaend that steps be eyksa to relocate the sge, providing it will be used to aa advantage. We rei n--ml that this decision be clear, i.e. either the inatnaeat la to be used consistently, or it la to be raaoved froa the line. Due to the required annual aaode positioning, weaving or offset of the atrip la the plating tanks, transport tiae, etc., as do net believe that-* would be practical to try to auteaatioally central the tin coating thickness froa the gage infovaatiea. SVALDAIXOM Of X-RAY COAIZM TBXCEMRM OACK On May 25, 1959, the Metallurgical Depertasnt started evaluation testa. To date, thirteen series of teat aaaples of one quarter pound tin* plate have been taken. The coating thickness of these eanples la being deteialaed and correlated with the gage readings. Me are now advised by Metallurgical that an lateria evaluation report, based eo above testa, will be issued on June 10, 1959. Teats of three-quarter, one pound, and differential ceatinga will be evaluated as soon aa this type notarial is processed on the line. After these final testa, a coapoeite evaluation report on the gaga will be issued by Metallurgical. HBS/jc Chief Xleetrleal Engineer USHO 002274 r. S. W. SfeAtfft am a* im 'r. ? 1. ]Uu& -2- Jwa* 4, IS I"* '-i.i .* vstod uijc ; doto t&a gaga iiu porfocuod *a **& x ~tt t; .1 '... :. li tito cast-- eetoliargioal t*t ?4wso / ^ -ct - . v,a:n;s, -<o t-icort--oli toot *C*pa M taiwa Cv> .-u-i ., ,*3#, i, vtii * to o mHU|4. Wo rocoa--Kut ;...*i- Mlwioa '* l*r, 1.4. Utbo* Inotn--o U to 1m oo4 oowoU^-at ;, , -'r it U ia 1m rorenroi fir*n tfro lioo. *m to tlto rogaifo4 owwol 0o4o pool if--log, Wfrl^ or ii*t si cm o*r# t* ;fr plating ear**, trooo4Tt tiao, c., -- foswc vao* fc io >rctiol to try to ootoo*tiooliy ooatvol tfe* tia -toot a.-, .`cm iaictoetioo, miSttKN or 2-MT CQATOH TMTCTf IMS Do Hoy 25, 1954, Um Motoilmrgiogi Vogaxtaoat oCCYtoi ovoi^otlaa tiu. to Aki tUrtMo urtM of eooc oaaploo of IQQ |irtot ptmt4 ti* >!** m*o from tofroa. Tfra moot log iMilnii of tfro00 Maploo to boin* iotonrtaoi oH tttnUM wtcfr tfro gogo r--iff Vo now iirim >? incolinc^iool taat oo tacorta ml--><a togart, froooi oa ofrorc tooto, bo >jo Juoo 19, 1959. .`s*ij of '.<wo6>^uorer, oao fioUt oai iilforoatlol Mating* *1U 49 m iiu. typo notorial lo yroooOOoi oa tfro lias, i .:* fLaoi soot*, caapooito mi--I too --port *a tfro gogo oiil bs >f MtAli'ifjlcol. - -O v CU( UacttiMl T C. W. Uarriasa Mstallutgleal IwluitiM H#wt - X-wy Caatit Wthm Caga - fr..A. Inman Hftf .-.HU Itt ttH At Matallurgieal flapartaaat has a** esaeladsd tha ralaittM of tha Qaaatxal m M, 25 ItovNtnk MImUm csta of cha gas* tc kaavy oaatad farrastaa will ka aada whan this tjrpa aatarial la piaaasaad oa tha lias. Tha abeva la aa wa rawtlM la 1stCar ta yat oadar data ot Jmm 1959. Attachad aza taa oaplas ef sakjaot raluctlo* npatt on m, 25 fSrrastaa. KlS/sl)i C,, is)/. Ckiaf Ilaatzlaal ftafna USHO 002277 To: Mr. R. H. Madden Date: June 11, 1959 From: W. C. Mayer Subject: Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferrostan Line INTRODUCTION - The Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage on the No. 4 -Ftorrostan Line was static tested by Electrical Engineering and found to be accurate within +2% on No. 100 Ferrostan test panels. In order to determine the accuracy of the Quantrol Gage during actual line operation, a series of tests was scheduled to evaluate the gage. These tests had to be postponed several times because of difficulties encountered with the gage, the tracking mechanism and the electrostatic oiler. The first satisfactory tests were made on May 25-27, 1959. The results of these tests on No. 25 Ferrostan are included in this report. Tests have not been made as yet on heavy coated' Ferrostan because scheduling of this material has hot coin cided with periods when the Quantrol Gage was operative. CONCLUSIONS - If properly maintained and carefully calibrated, the Quanfrol 'fin Coating Weight Gage provides an accurate measure ment of average tin coating weight on No. 25 Ferrostan. , _The present location of the Quantrol Gage is unsatisfactory due to drippings from the electrostatic oiler. RECOMMENDATIONS - It is recommended that: 1. The Quantrol Gage be used by Operations as the primary control monitor of .25 lb. coating weight on No,. 4 Ferrostan Line. 2. The Quantrol Gage be moved from under the electrostatic oiler. 3. The programming of the Quantrol Gage traversing mechanism be modified to include an automatic calibration check every hour. 4. The Quantrol Gage recorder be provided with a means of indicating whether the gage is positioned on the left edge, center, right edge or calibration panels. USHO 002278 -2- Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferrostan Line 6/11/59 PROCEDURE - The Quantrol Gage was carefully calibrated prior to each days testing, and the calibration was checked before each test. The tests were conducted as follows: Quantrol Gage readings were averaged over a two. minute period while the gage was tracking one edge of the strip. Twelve to fifteen sample sheets were selected from the line during this two minute per iod. Three test spots were punched from each sample sheet on the edge checked by the Quantrol Gage. One spot was masked on the bottom sur face and one on the top surface. The third spot was not masked. The spots were then coded for identification purposes. After completion of the line testing, the spots were divided in to a masked and an unmasked group and each group- shuffled to provide a random sequence of testing. Bendix coating weight tests were then run on the spots. The results of these tests were tabulated and re-., suits of several sample sheets discarded due to raisidentification of one or more spots. The average, maximum, minimum, range and standard deviation of the top surface, bottom surface and total surface (un masked spots) were calculated for each series of test spots. Using the Student's "t" distribution for small samples the 99% confidence limits of the mean coating weight was calculated from the average and standard deviation of each series of Bendix tests. RESULTS - The results of the tests are shown in the attached table.. Coating weights are tabulated in coating points: one coating point equals .01 pounds per base box. Some of the difference between the Quantrol readings and the Bendix tests can be attributed to the differences in area-tested. The Quantrol Gage measures the average coating weight of a 1-3/8" wide band located 1-5/16" to 2-11/16" from the edge of the strip. The Bendix method tests a single 2-1/4" round spot located 1" to 3-1/4" from the edge of the strip. It is noted from the table that the average Quantrol readings fall within the range of individual Bendix spots on all tests. The standard deviation of the Bendix tests on each test series is a function of the variation in coating weight along the approxi mately 1700 feet of strip tested and the variation in the Bendix coat ing weight test. Assuming normal distribution for these spot test results, 99% of the individual spots would fall within three standard deviations of the average spot test, 95% within two standard devia tions and 68% within one standard deviation. On the top surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings fell within one standard devia tion of the average spot test. On the bottom surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings fell within two standard deviations of the average spot test and 92% fell within one standard deviation. On the total surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings USHO 002279 -3- Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferrostan Line 6/11/59 fell within three standard deviations of the mean coating weight, 92% fell within two standard deviations and 58% within one standard devia tion. On the top surface tests, the greatest deviation of a single Bendix test from the average Bendix test was 4.0 coating points (Test No. 9); the greatest deviation of an average Quantrol reading from the average Bendix test was only 1.1 coating points (Test No. 4). On the bottom surface tests, the greatest deviation of a single Bendix test from the average Bendix test was 5.9 points (Test No. 11); the greatest deviation of an average Quantrol reading from the average Bendix test was only 1.5 points (Test No. 9). On the total surface tests the greatest deviation of a single Bendix test from the average Bendix test was 3.9 points (Test No. 12); .the greatest deviation of an average Quantrol reading from the average Bendix test was only 2.0 points (Test No. 1). The above discussion on range, standard deviation and greatest deviation indicate that the Quantrol gage is as good or a better measure of mean tin coating weight than individual spot tests if the average spot test is taken as the mean coating weight. However, the average spot test is only an estimate of the mean coating weight. On the top surface tests, 100% of the average Quantrol readings fell within the 99% confidence limits of the actual mean coating weight calculated from the spot tests. On the bottom surface tests, 83% of the Quantrol readings fell within these limits and the other 17% fell within 0.2 points o% the limits. On the total surface tests-, 50% of the Quantrol readings fell within these limits and 25% fell within 0.2 points of the limits. These results indicate that the Quantrol reading may be as good an estimate of the actual mean coating weight as the average of the 10-15 test spots. The results of these tests show that the Quantrol Gage is a better test for controlling average tin coating weight than the in dividual spot tests now used. However, the Quantrol Gage will not detect short time variations in coating weight which sometimes occur immediately after order changes, particularly order changes involv ing different coating weights or strip widths. It will be necessary to continue the Bendix tests to detect low coating spots after such order changes. DCarlin/r cEIe Development _____ Engineer USHO 002280 -4- Evaluation of Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage No. 4 Ferrostan Line Copies: J, W. Ogletree C. W. Harrison M. F. Glascock V. W. Vaurio H. A. Caldwell P. L. Kendrick J. R. English 6/11/59 USHO 00228 Quantrol Tin Coating Weight Gage Evaluation Test ip Edge :o lit No. Left S/25 1 Right s/2t> 2 Right 5/26 3 Left 6/26 4 rber of Bend lx Spot Tests 13 10 10 ii surface iuantrol Reading .verage of Bend lx Tests Hf fere nee 26.8 26.6 172 27.0 26 6 ~+7Z 26.5 25.8 177 25.0 26.1 ITT >9% Confidence Limits of lean Coating Weight 26.6 (Calc. from Bend lx Tests) +1.2 taxinum Bendix Test 29 26.6 "+1.2 28 25.8 "+1.0 28 26.1 +1.4 29 linimum Bendix Test 21 25 24 24 tango S3 4 5 Standard Deviation 1.5 1.3 1.1 1.6 ireatest Dev. of Single lendix Test from Avg. 2.6 1.6 2.2 2.9 :tom Surface iuantrol Reading average of Bendix Tests )lf ferenoe 25.6 24.2 +T7T 28.0 28.5 -=75 27.5 26.3 +T72 26.1 25.0 +rr 19% Confidence Limits of fean Coating Weight 24.2 !Calc. from Bendix Tests) +1.4 taximum Bendix Test 28 28.5 +1.9 32 26.3 +1.1 28 25.0 + .9 -- 26 tinimum Bendix Test 22 26 24 23 Cange 6643 ;tandard Deviation 1.8 , 2.0 1.2 1.0 sreatest Dev. of Single lendix Test from Avg. 3.8 3.5 2.3 2.0 :al Surface Luantroi Reading (Avg. . :op and bottom) Avg. of Bondi" Tests Difference 26.2 24.2 +2.0 27.5 27.0 175 7 25.7 . +T73 25.6 25.2 n 33% Confidence Limits of tfean Coating Weight 24.2 (Calc, from Bendix Tests) + .7 27.0 + .4 25.7 +1.1 25.2 1.1 maximum Bendix Test 26 27.5 27 27 tinimum Bendix Test .ange standard Deviation Greatest Dev. of single lendix Tost from Avg. 23 3 0.9 1.8 26 1.5 0.4 1.0 23 4 1.2 2.7 23 4 1.2 2.2 Right "5/27 5 12 Left 5727" 6 12 Right 5/'2V'1 7 15 Right Left S727 "572T"' 89 11 13 Right Left 5/27 *3737- 10 11 13 15 Right 6/ 27 12 13 28.8 29.3 15 24.0 24.4 IT 28.5 28.0 175 28.0 28.6 15 25.0 24.0 +175 28.0 28.4 IT 24.8 24.7 17T" 27.0 27.1 IT 29.3 +1.2 32 26 6 1.5 3.3 24.4 +1.6 28 22 6 1.9 3.6 28.0 . +.9 30 26 4 1.3 2J0 28.6 +1.0 30 26 4 1.2 2.6 24.0 "+1.8 28 20 8 2.3 4.0 28.4 +1.2 31 26 5 1.5 2.6 21.7 --+ .9 27 22 5 1.2 2.7 27.1 +1.4 29 24 5 i;8 3.1 26.3 27.3 =175 25.8 25.4 ITT 26.9 26.0 "+79 27.5 26.6 "+V9 25,0 23.5 +175 28.5 27.7 175 23.5 23.1 "+.4 27.0 25.9 +T7T 27.3 +1.0 29 25 4 1.2 2.3 25.4 +1.3 28 22 6 1.6 3.4 26.0 "+1.1 28 26.6 + 1.3 29 24 24 45 1.6 1.5 2.0 2.6 23.5 "+* 1.5 27 21 6 1.9 3.5 27.7 "+1. .0 30 26 4 1.3 2.3 23.1 +.8 29 22 7 1.2 5.9 25.9 +1.5 30 22 8 2.0 4.1 27.6 27.1 175 27.1 + .9 29 24 5 1.1 3.1 24:9 24.6 "+;3" 27.7 26.8 "+.'9 27.8 27.5 173 24.6 + .8 26 23 3 1.0 1.6 26.8 .5 28 26 2 0.7 1.2 27.5 +9 29 25 4 1.0 2.5 25.0 24.2 28.3 . 26.9 +T7T 24.2 +6 25 23 2 0.8 1.2 26.9 +.7 ' 28 26 2 0.9 1.1 24.2 24.1 IT 27.0 26.9 + .1 24.1 +JL .0 27 22 5 1.4 2.9 26.9 +1.3 29 23 6 1.7 3.9 Note: All coating weights are expressed in coating points: 1 coating point = .01 lb/BB USHO 002282 RCV. COPY OF LETTER TENNESSEE COAL & IRON IVISION / Mr. 0. W. MalF*n meeh 17, 1959 Purchasing X^partaent \ Order -U$lJ AXL DBI-7o90 ,1i i Ilagl* HA* Coating Weight (Jag* - Me am milag to you ftar Snots* data! n-- 13, 1959, fraa inUai BMeerwh lakontiriM, Deo., wrariac --nrlues of their eaglaaar for period JUaaery 7 ta 1--17 11, 1959, la nrs--rtina ltt etfhjeet egdiawt. Snrolo* la la the oanuat of aad la baaed oa eervlee Mr thre* (3) day* at $100.00 per day, plaa trowel erpenaee of $1*0.55. naaa* handle for proaet pay--at. 1m e. aura frtjea:> Attai *. /.I. Mroofca^ Mr. . I. papM Mr. *. I. meegwr Mr. J. f. lather Pile - I Mr. lanlrt--tea MB letter 1-19-59 Mr. L. C. Twgu* January 19, 1959 C. H. Harrison CB-11115 - Smm4 Singls-flda Tin Caatlas Waight (Saga - Pair 1aid xyuau this is to Mm pan that tha iaatallatian aagiaasr, Mr. C. fl. CIniI, furalshad bp tka aaauiaoturar af tha sobjaet lastruaaat, arrlvad on tha aornlag of Jaaanrp 7, 1959. 8a spant a total af tkraa daps working aa tha laotruaaat, laaviog Fridap avaaiag, Jaaaarp 9* 1959* On this data tha aqtilpawnt ana aaaaldarad to ba la oparatlag condition, although tha aquipasat will not ba put lata aoMsralal usa until tha oparatlag dapartaant raplaeaa a sat of paaa lino rolls that Kara a daflalta offset upon tha aeeuraep of tha laatrunswt. KU/afh Chlaf llaatrloal Engineer  v> / United States steel corporation 7 Deceafeer 26, 1958 Applied Research Laboratories 3717 Park Place Glendale Q, California MAILGRAM RSCRDBt CD-11815 AID TELEGRAM 12/22/% PL2A08 ADYIES* IT Wimn WILL BI HSR5 12/29 AS RttgJKSTS) Howard Laabert, Purchasing Department Tennessee Coal fc Iron Division HL/ba* Resp. 561 8:^7 a.a. copy to: Kr. J. W. Ogletree Mr. C. W. Harrison Mr. V. M. Stevart 1 F YOUR-MESSAGE CAN~POSSIBUY GO M'AIUGRAM, PUEASE INDICATE-ABOVE- reorder CD-11B15 vm axqrax ssncs or annxn sicaaat 29, 1958, TO COKKBCT POWBI TO OAOTX, START OF, AMD MUCK KADIATXGM 8IKTXZ. ADTI3* ir anxixnt cai bx xnx ixai Howard aaberfc, Porehaslac Dapnrtaeat Tumessaa Coal k Irm Division HT./h--r Rasp. 5& 11:10 a.a. copy to: Mr. J. V. Ogletrea Mr. C. W. Harrison Mr. V. M. Stewart IF YOUR.MESSAGE CAN POSSIBLY GO MAILGRAM, PLEASE INDICATE ABOVE PACKING LIST Applied Research LahoraiorleS II spectrochemical 3717 PARK PLACE GLENDALE 8, CALIFORNIA equipment CHAPMAN S&m- N? 15365 SHIP TO Tennessee Goal 3c Iron Div. U.S. Steel Corp. Fairfield Steel Works Fairfield, Alabama RETURN TO DATE 5/5/58 PACKED BY gh VIA AIR-MAIL ARL PART No. QUANTITY DESCRIPTION Ref: Your P.0. CDll8l5 12000-09 This print was not included with the rest of the Quantrol instructions when it was mailed on May 1, 1938. Please include it with that package and include one with the package for the installation engineer. 3 Copies supplement print #12,175 2M FSOERTMS A3R-3L826MAS j i CUSTOMER'S COPY Mr. J. J. NctlijeCC C. d. Harrises October 29, 19541 CM-UttS toy Ceatil TMcIhmm Oh# to ItttM fids d Rttf i fWTWm UW * WffttW II* HU1___________ I* ear Utter u yw laced Aiy 17, 19St, ve wfiiMd tkat tie lasrallattea < Uw eohjeat pgi h held iy ytaleg the aetr--e af a we heelre1 tatfaaerieg atedy lseeivtet a preytead relecetieo ef thia taatwaat. Ala *t4y haa star beee yailywM Car ee ladaflatte peeled. It ia, therafatra, reooaaaadad Uts this lastraaaat he leetalled, far eeatestlee teeta, at the erltlaal laeatiea aa eat tank ia caaetreetUa erdara l-M, sheet 2* and 0-13223, Marti 2t and 2. After the lastreseat haa here teatailed aad caayietely aired hy t.c.a x., aa receaaaad that yea ehtala the acrricae af a lacttty M|tim ta calibrate the laatwest, twearriaa the leafHatlea af Mceaaary tadlatlaa ableidles, aad ta yarfMe the ****! cadlatlaa eatery. Ala ahaald nfiln a tatal tiaa af ipymtwtaly ala <13 days. Zha sack ad teatiat aad cellhtsttes the laefraaaat U1 aacayy the first three <3> days aad the radfatlta eatery 1U ha >itliwi< aa flaaa tha rail sties MUWa| U1 have ta ha laataUad aa a eat aad try haste, it ia tayiratles that a stetaaa ad fear (!) ahlfta, Itriai shirk the Uaa la lnyrmlw, ha aahadalal aa aa ta ssteslda with the g-------- - faatth aad fifth day* at t.e.h X. it thia ttee the services ad las at aace ireassrhscs mil ha milwl. teat this atfcedcla has heaa tatfellakad aad tha factary finer ratified, it thrall ha tiflilf tlhcril ta If U forties lawwil Mms tha first alt are iaatallad tha faatwy aaflaaar mim imnl oyaalw aad eaalaas trlfs fraa fill ifId ta X.M X. ta laf11 tha retails! ehUUtat, aaljr ta flad that a yaayaaad "dees" parted ad tha recreates Uaa failed ta atterfHas. Mr. J. J. NaftllfOtC 2 Ootohor 29 1954 ra buia tbo aorvicaa of cfcia w|1mx, ploaao aafca Cha ooccaaary rrng--oaf vie* Mr. J. t. vfcito. Coor4laaclag Socttao, Maanfaiii.ni. Liig *aglnaorlt OopartaaaC. Ola accaocioo aboaA4 ho 4iroct*4 to purchaao oviar C8-U41S ao4 a latter frooi cIh vaufter'a ryrtMautif*, Mr. tf. C. uhelahel co Mr. IM0W| 4ata4 March U, 1994 la ahlah the par dtaa raco of tch mlnriif HTrlctt m atata4 U ho 4100.04 for 4ay plua ttwaportatlao charter of 1200.00. The ftlaetriael roptoaefiat napcifaat ao4 Utnaiiry MU aaaiat ia this laacallatloo aa yaw 4ae eacaaaary. /-- P <4>/io mi Mr* ft. . ftaloco Mr. J. . Gfclatroo Mr. k. ft. Clark, Ir. Itilttlllt |||jkBMt m H-* f l. ?. W. 3*rriMi C^-itW - Si**l au* Mvr Coatio# !*< * - a*. 4 Iloetral/tts ,yft.r. fo.&&*! UaJBJl------------------------------------------------------- M fearra \mmm x 5**t*4 C# tovalop far acrobat!** puryo* tM coat of tfca arlgiMl caaoai* cafclaat fvriM4 aa I.C.* I. jrcS*a* or4r TUi a*t aMalf eavar Mil/ tha csVIjmC fclac!>*, >r ^nln < tfc* HtifMBt cmc tU c M trtufmtf ta, ar la COIjtMKtlM oitll, CtMl MM fll)Mtt frfcM*4 0*1111). t' * otla thl* IxforoaciM ter a (t A/fH*4 ftMoareh 'jkuuiUo, Calltexmla* ets Sr. 1. C. Chiaf IlcitflMl ltfMT U:-H- t- <&*/ \// r - ut~.` r'rz'W ,-cr. H. V, nai^an August 19, 1956 J. V. Qgletrt* Casting Weight Thlekneef Oeugee At the tins soiling facilities were* Vl line prevision vu esd* for inatalliag'a d^lo-hesd. coating weight thickness gauge* All of the-eeuatiag *ad\trsyersig; squipesnt mi fabricated and installed. A second gauge. head:] '< <!*: The perfqreaoce of the single heed'hag;; has net been operated except for tisn Bept. To properly evaluate the second head is necessary. ' of- There ore a axssber of lsprcrenents such ss saaple punch, injprove lighting for scan-a-web, sod s more suitable location for the coating weight thickness gauge, whiah are new being studied in the Inglneerlng Oeparteent. It eay .bi-'eaeetlee..before these " studies oen he developed for fins&.resolwtioo.'-.. ^3*A5 ?r. 4, 4. iMUcKI C, 0. mdUKL , 1*5* ta mr UlMr M jm wm*mt 4mm mi 4mm U, m NMlM UM ! mmUIm i witwrtlw. ' |w Imm l--tiai flaw Mr ImmUMIm mt Umm Um b4 a apfCMiaa* |m ManiMk - MV MfM* MV Ml M yrnm, MV. J. MM IM MMlttMUf rafiMH< Umm Iim i mi *mm ti ltM (MnnI (44t MM Mm to* 4 furwcw um) nt Im tamlM cUMMil l# IM KMt locMiMU iMXUnil, Milt ym fiMM MU J? l*Clitlan mt tkm tmmix% wti*kC tM* wM.il fiMtlMM mUm Mr. J. W. Oglecrae June 26, 1958 C. w. Harrison X-Ray Coating Thickness Gaaa - So. 4 llectrolytlc Tinning Lina - USS-769Q We hope Co coaplete eba slaeCrical installation of Cha final conpo--ncs of subject instt--ant during cha aonch of July, la order for Cha device Co function proparly it will ba nacaaaary Chat Cha aachanical eabla candor, licit awiCeh --untings, and photaeall --tings, ba iascallad so chat thay will function proparly. Mechanical drawings covering cha cable candor and lialt awicch --anting platan wara issued prior Co cha initial inatallation in April, 1957} however, cha equip--nt waa noc inacalled in accordance with Chase drawings. Since this error has occurred, -- believe it desirable to aodify cha drawings so chat cha cable tender will ba supported by --ana of wheals or other devices co ainiaisa cha force required Co nova cha candor as cha instruasnt auto--tically eraueraea Cha width of cha ttewed strip. The present design calls far a --cal co --tel sliding support* Will you pi--so expedite cha iaprovad design of the cable candor and advi-- if -- any be of assistance in cha new design. EXB/je Chief Bloctries1 laglneer Du Ullwrti kmm m Mkjwt boa* laraUait law *t 1. MWl lt4l wtt% wljkt $ * li< 4 fm*Un Um. OnMmUM k4h *, MO*OI> Ikiwt 2* FnlwtUi oatiysor * D-9SK0 Shook l . **. 3 (14* frlaatt 3. ItaUK trr--4uor - D-45S-C Shoot 1 < *. 3 _ *14# TriaMr. 4. Fftabalo D~333-00 hMt i ami 6-231-00 laat 2 Vi* 3 IK* trtiar, Par rooocSo ladtwt* tfco trUl fioo b*Ma itUwnd ao4 BW&mtlai or4oo *md 4tMia$a tea* Immm fonatKet t* >wj. 1 Va aaali MftwUtt jwut wpKIUai tk* lMtalkUM of r *Wm itaaa. Ul/tA C3xlf Sloctrlc*; iss^.iri^or *-12 Rot. C.I. ...cMORANDUM OF GOODS RECEIVE m Shipper _ P lUod '.jtixuri rtHbsf ORIGINAL TO. COPY TO _ ft Pleas Inspect the following material, approve, and return this report to Storekeeper, as vendor's bill will not be paid without approval as to quality* Duplicate copy to be considered as notice of arrival of material only and is to be retained for your file# SHIPPED VIA . s-iee 111* FREIGHT QUANTITY DESCRIPTION COMM. No. 1 uatfcmi .**6 with - -Sam. 1 'ssfc s & X l .iOOO-cf .jNtxrtygwutf ^<msolo Cs.^-tot% -8a* i$ i oo&rtim oof, ISO .r%* zoii CMtte a - Sat QUANTITY RECEIVED iD STANDARD PRICE 4 HM 2968 r WfcirTi*!*, J* !*. fettmtwt ___ 'received DATE 1 (Remarks or notes as to condition of goods) } WORKS If* J____________________ *4 %,_________________ V. -A V % a/_ f >$ TOTAL STD. COST QUANTITY O.K. EXCEPT AS NOTED A^PRotpuiigm^. QUALITY aK. EXCEPT AS NOTED ACCOUNT No. PLACE^JLgfp.ED DATE INSPECTED ORDER NUMBER j02Cy5 b. |COMPLETE INCOMPLETE 2-rZ aIV COPY OF LETTER !t division UNITED STATES (lS) STEEL CORPORATION GENERAL OFFICES, FAIRFIELD, ALABAMA tic. J. w. Cglatroa April 14, 1958 O . 11315 USS>7690 PI Cnttnctta Stonboao fipiriantal CaiUag fmeOUSm tat fin Plate, #4 Slaatralytla Tlaaiag Um Swai Siagla Site 1* rap ratefag Cage AppHaA taaaarali kabaraBarfoa Jute pete* te tea irhataTait Shipping date of tea Cteatrol, am of tea *-roy tabaa fatlai. wo aeo aw aaolclag a to* plaaotaaat te te fm au* fariar aad wa will abip aa aoea aa nu. iMteaaatefc tote tea teas roeaftaad. ua anoat teat tedLa tell te a attar of a tar iapa date. apt Mr. J. J. ttafHgatt S Mr. I. i. daapte Mr. v. M. Sttant te. c. 9. Bantam---- Mr. L C. league C. J. Harrison April 3, i953 Order CD-11815 - X-Ray Coatlog Weight Gage Ho. 4 Perrostaa Line ____________________________________________________ _ In reply to pMttiou raised la letter of March 21, 1938, Iran Applied Research Laboratories, Glendale, California, please advise as follovst 1. The installation of this second-side gage is indefinite due to present work schedules. We will advise as far in advance as possible as to the need for a service engineer. 2. Since the Servo system Motioned in second paragraph is included in tbs equipment, we will determine its usefulness after trial. CSK/Jc Chief Electrical Engineer AA j -a: t t M,rHOt 9t` o#0fASC* fO* <5> * !C ` , 'I r I' U i: it ou(.o 9f./t*#ei.nAii-TAT ' < k r i i.;tu M OP Tk<A$]f $3|IY Ott TH C 4 0M YOw TM MIOVC# ' : . rou 3 p A'F- i -'j! 3saac# 71 i ., /vs l ^.us & L~*"C Applied Research J~aboratories If ,'. -*lM C A l l y U I f * ' MAIN OAttCES 1M7 Ma PlACf GtENOAtl . CALIFORNIA Ia,i >sy Nm OBNt 1710 ~ S, CM . . . tea SUB . L: 3 CC ;_,o At * ABB ' lAO OIVI-. to* '.TATFS ^TtCC CORPORATION -f|'LO, V-A8A%A * . v-'ur IM. !. * "* . r i. - U FT N y ` ** '-'&X if **'* 7 * 3~' " * > / Jw ' ' \ / ?C ;v A J(<r A *; * ;1 .* y&, ' V:* y f*T; Poi'OHASC O0KR NO. 'V . ` _ 4 '? ~P ' Vs i. ' t ia ' JUST iNfOBUCa YtfUB Mb. iVf,l KA*TNA^*wAtC $4 .JHCOUte OtTVKTMff 'TL QIM L ~OVEAfO Y |tf&t W:0M&fk <. oAsc oabe*, *#q exAfr...t-j -*akb 9N#iiiei*4^.ii^iMrilWP*i' A.. .H 30*f .$>. iqfBTBJjlHEMr * tWfBtoWlr fcW. aftcb- it^ ah^>vac: In ~ a i a r ig^yVB'g. . ; PATIO* FRQ* YOU- A> TO 4MCTHCA .THg OCT :;n * t ut. " ` V or T <5T.,t he - ~ t .'A * iiu ieoauu" r'io*ir :*> Iifren 'V-'V"may 2*J,j IjroppWT - service tc "OOI.C 'Iff VlOC^O ' . - t > N CHARe**j'rt*tn*AT0 AT A P Rft &X MiA T fcfx i. A !,js>C AT^f- AS[ $U0ll-ABVamCC TICS ASTJA^j^l filgj WjJIBUIt oPBiArf. ;c*Ctyj|tM4 Ban ee AfCoa.l V f ~fr -A V *J I Ot Q* ., * i-v ^ u v ^" 4 <r TAK t $ .1 i 3 CJM*ft3Hsi -j'": ,T> *B iMta.;iOr jfjtfyti l t-tMC __ l t *'* 6** --------------------------- *-------------------- ' E I KOI 111OTRU rfAt < ' UOBC&'HlrOAiA TO S , f*l* A|t|*n V. T-'IPOlfc.'A J.KItlAartf R<*3 - ^erRCuv^.9^9 'ou, fT^'plfl :.r *wt>' `rOV* OBt#!! "I " -2 ' "r. ri vl.| T% 1I 1**9"-. miHOMl CH9a MM9 -?*: v^: fe5-"?Mr > ^4-. yrjwjpr - : - 4> I- 1 $ %'K ' *r J 1 Uoii4'. 2*0 COPY OF LETTER r TENNE?' "E COAL & IRON DIVISION UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION GENERAL OFFICES, FAIRFIELD, ALABAMA Mr. J. 4. OtUtCM cuu USS-74M ter TUi Ttte*. #* 7 ItjM QmMm Mife* GiH Affltei smmccIi LteacaterlM Siafls Site ttm AyrlM iMMMh 1 tenosterlte teMnt tetette fcf jwr tejitt ante* is wv ia te ft--I stagM < amMy sad tot, i 1U te cnsylsrte te phljaMr mi r Mm March 30, 1938. y a* tel te. i. J. tMeO.. *8.. iI.. te. c. . s . Oil- ' a-c ntv. COPY OF LETTER mssBw" Tennessee Coal a iron DIVISION UNITED STATES (UjS) STEEL CORPORATION GENERAL OFFICES, FAIRFIELD, ALABAMA Sr. j. v. OtUcxM 2. 1959 o - uns *t r--iniirti tui*iim - i i~i---* oatiiat rmutiw te Tim rUtt, #4 B MMlytU ttabi U* Uttni ttagte ! IfH Coatlaft **ltft* tea Ha IhmitiI Sta^U tUm r--rta H# t ta Upail tea w >lwr m Sate 30, ,, L/ \J V Mr. L. C. Teague January 7, 1958 C. W. Harrison Order CD-11815 - Coating Weight Gage Control - #4 Karrostan Line Fairfield Tin Hill please return to Applied Research laboratories the attached print of their Drawing #12200-1 which we haws approved with changes as Indicated. We have also narked this print to include inforastien requested by then in their letter of December 26, 1957. AHP/afh Kncloeure Chief electrical Brig!near 3717 PARK Hr. L. C. Teague Purchasing Agent Maborateried ICAL EQUIPMENT 8, CALIFORNIA Your Reference CD-ll8lf? Enclosed are two copies of our drawing #12200-1 covering the special dual Quantrol console with stainless steel front and overall dimensions to match existing Clark Controller Company cabinets on No. 4 Perrostan Line. One copy of 12200-1 is for your files. The other should be approved and returned to us as authorization to start fabrication. Tf we receive the approved drawing by January 15, 195>8, we shall be able to meet our scheduled shipping date of March 30, 19i?8. In certifying the proposed dimensions of drawing 12200-1, may U we suggest that your Engineering Department cheok these against the existing control, bank on No. h Perrostan Line.. This., applies o, n to the contemplated utility access panels, door openings, etc., V. 7 in addition to the overall physical dimensions of the cabinet. Also, please have them indioate which utility opening will be used for the top wight gauge and which for the bottom weight gauge, so that the panels may be pro-wired at our factory. u fa/,TThank you for your continued interest in our product. Yours very truly, v/ APPLIED^afeSSARCn E0HAT0RIE8 A i 'C3' Paul si Goodwin''' Managenftfr i Analyt icfcjgflfcyifcema' Division PifS^neb'* c.cV'srfiaies'' "HRL-Detroit Tefcas f/i6 COPY OF LETTER / /7 I/J, \lf *Z *7 Tenn, see coal a iron DIVISION UNITED STATES (UjS/ STEEL CORPORATION GENERAL OFFICES, FAIRFIELD, ALABAMA ar* J. v. aglotruo ,, lt37 G - 11*13 fefCdMMA CtUiit Footllttoo tm TUl FUM Hte. 4 Hit. *Ui of tfco Uk llao criU tm * onrtlly tm mi j-- mpilr--r wo Ml tewei oor i wLSkt*ttLIm1?JwrtLSy1?tj itipi, Ah ta Cte Mk choc tfco wifW < could bo aodo gpffwlMfly am* 1. to oyt Mr \ /#5L!t7%<>x /3 RfOEIVED % | DEC 217 2 Vsi ' - VV Mt It* C Ti r (j April 30, 1957 C. V. Sarriac Vo m'\ _______________ > Tin Camtin* Wight Ann - W. k T.lr* - flwae obtain a potation iron Affiled. Iwarrh Uboeitcrlw, Glendale, California, oororia* aa additional tlm ooatlag wrlgtt cm* ffo>Hw>Hig opipaont pwnrhaM* on ate>ct orter (a a frnnfl bail}, bnt alth the Halloa" lag aseeptlon* 1. Ttamiah a aal cult roonTdlig WMbt 99* high* 3* deag, eidth to nit, alth attaint-- ataal fiat war usd, or now ioato, to aateh uA 11wn alth aalatlng tuning Haa control oabiaata. Tfcia tel wit mold boa-- roenrrtlag onaanto aplpniit am balag 02 tejort ooftr, together **> ^Ngoaag ng oaDaola opljnr.pt. Bnrtnja the pr--oat ataal aahlnet ooold ba rotunwt far credit and a aw baraoee oppltod for tea electron!* ecagcnaa*a. GB/aba Copy tat Ihi ft* ft* naan* Mr* M* W* flOanaaak Mr. ft. X. Mall!on CiSHO ' '0'2'f r C-u //< v. ^Applied Keiearck Xaboraioried am spectsocne f4, fe.tf MAIM OFFICES 3717 7AEK PLACE GLENDALf IUr 29, I95| .^T'-iXP*Mr >'O>p-MmJ^wQb-g%^, vs'<^e'~,:`'vx4`f^&^jIIS^* 'S--> * - ) L. C. TKAUC >M OKA I N AfY - Txnmcssic CAt 4^1 UHITt STAtl* TfftJ^ Mil* N. "'.* x*vcHi $UIT|nORIK>; ocA*jttjtit< CMOLOtK* A#* ft*..M*0*A(>i lK:\lt4'#t ttTTCA r may 9, l957* ft MMm explanatory, nwcvci fC4f9Afc,;.*T NOTE TN fOLLONti:v^=vt'!|- `t ('!. *c Iron Of* HX*4< -CU FOR 'OUR CONTINUED INTEREST IX THJ3 EQUIPMENT. r *c CAN FR 0 V I C C A 3 D I T ! O N A L i N FC. WA T I0 N , PLEASE LET US ^NO. Me Itl* rORfARD ITH A 6REAT DEAL OF PLEASURE TO ''OyH PURCHAjI Vfi TH | ? ? GCCNO V*t T# VERY r*ULY YOURS* APPLIED RESEARCH LABORATORIES William E. Davis General Sales Manasc* l- ` WCWstA Encl. * cv# William C. . Whclohcl Technical Sales Mamascr ' . .. ... - /. cc* JJRL-Detnoit Dallas' UR* PAUL S. GOO OSIN USHO 002308 I QUOTATION Applied Re5earck Xakoratoried II SPECTROCHEMICAl EQUIPMENT 3717 PARK PLACE GLENDALE 3 CALIF. PHONE CHAPMAN 5 - 2688 NEW YORK CHICAGO DETROIT PITTSBURGH LOS ANGELES s to Tennessee Goal & iron Division United states steel Corporation MDATE ay 29, 1957 Fairfield, Alabama copy to ARU-Oetro it Dallas REPLYING TO YOUR INQUIRY OF may 3, 1957 REFERENCE^^ * PAUL S# WE TAKE PLEASURE IN QUOTING YOU UPON YOUR REQUIREMENTS AS FOLLOWS: GOODS IN QUANTITY CATALOG ACQUIRED NUMBER DESCRIPTION LIST PRICE F.O.S. POINT PROPOSAL #1 ARL Quantrol, single side coating weight gage for TIN PLATE, CONSISTING OF THE FOLLOWING COMPONENT!IJ f Gaging head Standard ARL single cabinet ratio recording console X-RAY TUBE POWER 3UPPLY Set cables, speotroueter to tank, 35* SET CABLES, TANK TO CONSOLE, 65 * 0 r 922-I. Excluding installation* $100*00 REFUNDABLE IF ALL PACKING ORATES RETURNS^ IN GOOO CONDITION* $t6,59iolFAIRFI ELS ALABAMA Sola Voltage Regulator For supplying regulated and harmonioally COMPENSATED ELECTRICAL POWER TO THE X-RAY TUBE POWER'SUPPLY OF ABOVE UNIT. 725*0 Fairfi elo] Alabama Equipment to be similar to Gage furnished on TCI Purchase Order No* CD-3290, DELIVERY: 60 - 90 days from receipt of order. TERMS: r Of I% 10 days, net 30 days from date or SHIPMENT* this quotation .is fop acceptance within so days of above quotation date. AS STATED.IN OUK PRICE LISTS. ALL PRICES ARE SUBJECT TO CHANCE WITHOUT NOTICE. HOWEVER, IN THE INTEREST OF THE CUSTOMER. IT SHALL BE OUR POLICY TO NOTIFY HIM IN ADVANCE OF ANY CHANGES AND EXTENO TH* PRIVILEGE OF CAN CELLATION. OELIVERY OATES LISTED ARE BASED ON OUR PRODUCTION CAPACITY ANO THE AVAILABILITY OF SUPPLIES AT THE PRESENT TIME. OELIVERY OF EQUIPMENT IS CONTINGENT UPON THE ABILITY TO GET SUPPLIES AND RAW MATERIALS ANO IS FURTHER AFFECTED BY REQUIREMENTS AND/OR REGULATIONS OF THE U 5 GOVERNMENT. CANCELLATION OF OPOERS PLACED AND ACCEPTEO CAN BE MADE ONLY WITH OUR CONSENT. AND WITH PAYMENT OF A S Mi CANCELLATION CHARGE IN THE EVENT THAT THE MATERIAL HAS ALREADY BEEN SHIPPED, A 25% CANCELLATION CHARGE WILL BE MADE. TERMS: to % IO DAYS. NET SO. F O.B. SHIPPING POINTS SPECIFIED IN OUR PRICE LISTS TAXES___TO THE PRICES AND TERMS QUOTED. ADD ANY M <NUF ACTURERS' OP SalES TAX PAYABLE ON THE TRANSACTION UNDER ANY EFFECTIVE STATUTE. EXCISE TAX EXEMPTION CERTIFICATE SHOULD ACCOMPANY OROER. USHO 002309 V?-' f. nfccaya i JUN-4-1957 B - .M YOURS TRULY. APPLIED RESEARCH LABORATORH Wjlliam E. Davis Q 3ace*7 ma4a g4 PDL WlLXTfMsTCT WHEtOHEL Technical Sales manager 1 5 QUOTATION Applied Research Hah oratorled '! SPECTROCHEMICAL EQUIPMENT 3717 PARK PLACE GLENDALE 8 CALIF. PHONE CHAPMAN 5 - 2688 NEW YORK CHICAGO DETROIT PITTSBURGH LOS ANGELES 1 to Tennessee Coal & Iron Division DATE May'29, 1957 United States Steel Corrijration Fairfield, Alabama COPY TO ARL-Detroit Dallas REPLYING TO YOUR INQUIRY OF May 3, 1957 MR. Paul S. Goodwin REFERENCE WE TAKE PLEASURE IN QUOTING YOU UPON YOUR REQUIREMENTS AS FOLLOWS: QUANTITY CATALOG REQUIRED NUMBER DESCRIPTION LIST PRICE F 0.8. POINT PROPOSAL #2 ARL QUAHTROL,IOENTIOAL TO PROPOSAL #1, EXCEPT TO INCLUDE ONE SPECIAL DUAL CABINET WITH STAINLESS STEEL FRONT, 90" HI OK, 3^" DEEP X 52" wide. Lett hand section to be all new V EQUIPMENT FOR THE SECOND COAT IN9 WEIGHT BASE COVERED BY THIS PROPOSAL. RlSHT HAND SECTION TO BE EMPTY. EXCEPT FOR CHASSIS INTERCONNEOT ^urnaceV Chassis, recorder and panel oontrols FOFT-ffT GWT HAND SECTION TO BE TRANS FERED FROM THE EXISTING QuANTROL INSTALLATION. BALANCE AS IN PROPOSAL #1. $19,091.OOFaihfi elo ALABAMA 01922- Sola Voltage Regulator For supplying regulated and harmonically COMPENSATED ELECTRICAL POWER TO THE X-RAY TUBE POWER SUPPLY OF ABOVE UNIT. 725.00FAI BFI ELBl ALABAMA DELIVERY: 60-90 DAYS FROM REOEIPT OF ORDER. TrRMSt k or \% 10 DAYS, NET 30 *>*YS FROM DATE OF SHIPMENT. iu"P iwlw . n w j USHO 002310 J# HtS^. THIS QUOTATION IS FOR ACCEPTANCE WITHIN 30 OATS OF ABOVE QUOTATION DATE. AS STATED IN OUR PRICE LISTS. ALL PRICES ARE 8UBJECT TO CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE HOWEVER. IN THE INTEREST OF THE CUSTOMER. IT SHALL BE OUR POLICY TO NOTIFY HIM IN ADVANCE OF ANY CHANGES AND EXTEND THE PRIVILEGE OF CAN* CELLATtON. OELIVERY OATES LISTED ARE BASED ON OUR PRODUCTION CAPACITY AND THE AVAIL ABILITY OF SUPPLIES AT THE PRESENT TIME. OELIVERY OF EQUIPMENT IS CONTINGENT UPON THE ABILITY TO GET SUPPLIES AND RAW MATERIALS AND IS FURTHER AFFECTED BY REQUIREMENTS AND/OR REGULATIONS OF THE U S GOVERNMENT CANCELLATION OF OPOERS PLACED AND ACCEPTEO CAN BE MADE ONLY WITH OUR CONSENT. AND WITH PAYMENT OF A 3 % CANCELLATION CHARGE. IN THE EVENT THAT THE MATERIAL HAS ALREADY BEEN SHIPPED, A 28*', CANCELLATION CHARGE WILL BE MADE TERMS: /* 10 DAYS. NET 30. FOB. SHIPPING POINTS SPECIFIED IN OUR PRICE LISTS. TAXES___ TO THE PRICES AND TERMS QUOTED. ADO ANY MANUFACTURERS' OR SauES TAX PAYABLE ON THE TRANSACTION UNDER ANY EFFECTIVE STATUTE. EXCISE TAX EXEMPTION CERTIFICATE SHOULD ACCOMPANY ORDER. '' , 2'w`i- Y2* a*,.P* :* a .A*. tu:--- YOURS TRULY. APPLIED RESEARCH LABORATORIES STLLIAM C. WHEttXHEL Technical sales manager F' .^ppliod Hesearch laboratories 3717 tek Plao* Glendale 8, California Bbrvaafcar U, 1957 cot J. W. Ogletree A. S. Bussell J. J. MsSUgott J. D. Brooks V. M. etawart J. S, Lather - -CT W, Harrison D CD-11819 1 - ABL Quantrol, single aIda coating weight gaga for tinplate, consisting of the following ac^ansntsl l - Staging bang 1 - X-rap tube power supply 1 - Sat cables, spectronetar to tank (39*) 1 Sat aablas,tank to aonaole (69') 1 - Special teal cabinet with stainless stool front, 90" high, 30" deep by 5*" wide. left bant section to ba all new agulpwrnt far tha secant coating weigh* 0*0*1 right bant seation to ba lapfry, iniyt for ebaasis intsrooaaset harmso* flpaaa to ba allowed for seurllag of amdlisorlaa bp TCI* $ 19,091*39 net all $100*99 refundable if all packing oases ora returned in good condition* Par poor quotation data* tetesr 7, 1957, identical to poor proposal Jte. 2 dated-Hap 29, 1997, *ai duplicating agwlpnant purohaeat on our arte CD-8290 xcapt far special cabinet* SSLXVSOr HOtUZHXDt Decteer 19, 1957 vN awB-pc Fairfield, Alabene 1/29 10 daps uMJl ZSSl 9' ,\QN s' Fairfield Meal Fairfield, nsbnm l 9* (Hnsgsr, 9u #1 Constreatiss Warebouse #1 Canstrustion Storabouss Ssperlneatal telling Faailitiaa for Tin Plata, fa Aartrslptla Tinning Una Second Single Side X-cap testing light 9aga ------------------- J* 1* Caap/< TW-769O W5 Frey. s CB-U815 U;fHn c^t-^V*a=^ sS *^- ff^***^ <l^ 4-.-. A, ^t.. //-// "-? ~'~' A~-<L' ^yf^r'^' L-^jUt'/s/ Tl-* **? f~**~ 4ts (^t^iJL^r //-rtf.-S'! USHO 002257