Reduction of defects in High Pressure Bolts

Project Review

By,
K.Prasanna Venkatesh
V.Vignesh
High Pressure Bolts Banjo Bolts
Perforated and hollow bolt
for fluid transfer.
Commonly found in
automotive fuel, oil and
hydraulic systems (e.g.:
brakes and clutch).
Main advantage high
pressure application - Banjo bolts
(Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banjo_fitting)
>50bar.
Process flow for High Pressure Bolts

Wire Axial Heat Thread

Forging and Cross
Drawing Treatment Rolling
hole drilling

Phosphating

Pack &
Dispatch
Banjo Bolt Dimensions

Axial and Forging

Cross hole Source: TVS SFL Drawing sheet
Literature Review
Warren Brown et all, 2016
The various damages causing joint leakages high
pressure bolts automobile industry.
Bearing face damage one of the leading factors.

Cenk Kilicaslan, 2016

Failure of bolt damages at collar and bearing
face standardizing spacer length.
Literature Review
Bhabesh K Thakur, 2007
Methodology for using the QC tools - finding the
root cause and implementing the counter
measures eliminating problem.
Failure Analysis and Prevention, ASM
Handbook, 2002
QC tools - root cause analysis - cause and effect
analysis.
Venkatesh Kodur et all, 2017
Effect of heat treatment AISI 10B21 (alloy of
 Problem Formulation
Top 5 rejected bolts
100% 3.170
614803
5.351 1.200
186727 0.875
120222 1.110
93388
50133

90%

Banjo bolt produced in 80%

2016 ( April to 70%

December) = 9,36,850
60%

50% 15565000 13735831 8413400

nos
19394400 936850

40%

Number of bolts 30%

rejected = 50,133 nos 20%

Percentage of rejection 10%

= 5.35% 0%
M67750 M66500 M65330 M65340 M62120

Percentage of rejection No. of Defects No. of Produced

The graph shows top 5 bolts that has higher rejection

percentage
Pareto Chart (Defect wise)
Graph different
defects for M10
Rejection from customer end
Banjo bolt. - high
A/F & B/F damage,
Bearing Face damage
and C/F damage 80%
defectives.
Bearing face damage
focussed upon
rejection at customer
end high compared
to other defects.
Bearing face damage Defectives in 2016 (Apr-Dec)
(Source: FQA- DHS Data from TVS SFL)
Bearing face damage

Bearing
Face
Damage
Objectives
To find the rejection percentage of bearing face
damage at different stages of production.
To find and analyse the root cause for bearing face
damage.
To suggest counter measures to reduce bearing
face damage rejection.
To validate the counter measures by sampling
analysis.
Methodology to meet objectives
Literature
review

Data
Collected Problem
from FQA- identification
DHS
Paretto charts

Framing
Objectiv
es

Results of
Observation
implemented
Paretto charts measures
Sampling analyzed and
standardized

Analysis
Cause and Suggest Counter
effect measures and
Implementation
Root Cause
analysis
Works Completed
Sampling Data at different stages
Defects looked for : bearing face
damage
After Forging:
Inspected samples : 3000
No. of defects : 89
% of defects : 2.967%
After Axial and Cross hole drilling:
Inspected samples : 2770
No. of defects : 49
% of defects : 1.768%
After Weighing:
Inspected samples : 2721
No. of defects : 7
% of defects : 0.257%
After Heat treatment:
Inspected samples : 2714
No. of defects : 11
% of defects : 0.404%
After Roll Forging:
Inspected samples : 2703
No. of defects : 71
% of defects : 2.62%
 Cause and Effect Diagram
Re-drill and Cross hole drill fixture
Ma countersunk done hitting bearing face. machin
n without fixtures. Bolt falling over one e
Improper inspection
by quality persons
another at collection
and operator trolley.
Improper initial Incorrect usage of
setting by operator spacers for forging.
Bearing face
damage

Usage of
different Transfer mechanism of
materi
al class of bolts in forging stations. metho
material. Weighing method during d
(10B21/15B25) loading and unloading.
Expected Outcomes
The rejection percentage of bearing face damage
at different stages of production is found.
The root cause for bearing face damage is
analysed.
The counter measures are implemented and
validated.
The rejection percentage for the High Pressure
Action Plan

Januar Februa
y ry March April

Data Implementin
Observation
Collection g Counter
Analysis Standardizati
Problem Measures
Suggesting on
Identification Validating
Counter
Framing Counter
Measures
Objectives Measures
References
1. Debbie Aliya and Aliya Analytical, The Failure Analysis Process: An
Overview, ASM Handbook, Volume 11, 2002.
2. Bhabesh K Thakur, Root Cause Analysis, Expander Intake Flange
Stud failure, Turbomachinery Symposium, 2007.
3. Warren Brown, Geoff Evans and Lorna Carpenter, Case Histories
of bolted joint leakage in oil and gas industry, ASME Pressure
vessels and Piping conference, 2016.
4. Cenk Kilicaslan, Umut Ince, Failure analysis of cold forged 37Cr4
alloy M10x28 Bolts, 2016.
5. Venkatesh Kodur, Mahmood Yahyai, Abbas Rezaeian et all,
Residual mechanical properties of high strength steel bolts
subjected to heating cooling cycle, 2017.
Thank You