Ford Esbc3p-7w092-Ba

Engineering Specification
PART NAME PART NUMBER
TDE Contamination Specification ESBC3P-7W092-BA

(Solid Particle Contamination Measurement and Control)
LET
FR
LET
FR
LET FR REVISIONS DR CK REFERENCE
2007/11/05 Initial release: NT00-E-12012914-170 ES5L2P-7W092-AA
2008/02/22 A NT00-E-12012914-239 WR LP PREPARED/APPROVED BY
2 Added "axle" to General statement /s/L. Pekarsky / /s/W. Riley
3 Added "gear lubricants" to non hydraulic definition CHECKED BY DETAILED BY
5 Added "gear lubricant" and "axle" to IIIA.1 W. Croonen
10 Added Table 2b CONCURRENCE/APPROVAL
10 Changed "ATO" to "TDE" in IIIA.7 SIGNATURES
12 Changed "ATO" to "TDE" in IIIA.8 Design Engineering Supervisor
12 Changed "ATO" to "TDE" in IIIA.9 R. Gawronski
20 Added "Axle Carrier" to Table 3 Design Engineering Management
32 Added Axle Rust Preventative information K. Norris / K. Walega
2009/07/10 B NT00-E-12131805 007 Manufacturing Engrg.
4 Added "milligram" to "Test Characteristics" column in
Table 1.
5 Changed "ISO 16322" to "ISO 16232" Quality Control
10 Added 6R80 Trans. From 2011 Job #1

10 Added HF35 Trans. Limit Chart Purchasing
20 Changed "ISO 16322" to "ISO 16232" – two places
24 Added "mg/part" to Table 5 and Table 6 Supplier Quality Assistance
2011/06/17 C NT00-E-12236910 006
2 Added content table
5 Added definitions: EDS, Plant, QS-9000 repl. w TS16949
7 Added test G, Added ESM to test D, ref. to ISO 16232
8 Added ref. to Attachment VIII, added transmission coolers,
9 requirement for to
Added descrip. Visual
Test and Patch
E and Image analysis
G, clarified documentation of
extraction methods, added ref. to Attach. III
10 Added ISO 16889 requirements for Plants filters
11 Revised equipment recommendations for test E & G

12 Added HIC requirement
14 Added an independent lab requirement
16 Added minimum equipment requirement
17 Added suppliers solvent recommendation
24 Added trans. Coolers inspection procedure to table 3
25 Added extraction study linkage to ISO
26 Added new chemical analysis methods
33 Added "rust removal process" section
34 Updated Attachment IV with new recommended sources
35 Added BIC gravimetric examples
40 Added Attachment VIII Bench for trans. coolers
20110824 D NT00-E-12478367-000
Revised to include 6F35 CH9L8P-7W092-AB
FRAME 1 OF 45 REV G
FRAME 2 OF 45 REV. LET. G PART NO. ESBC3P-7W092-BA
20120619 E NTOO-E-12579844-001
13 Revised to include 4F27E CH5S4P-7W092-BA
3 Revised table of content due to added frame 2
20130410 F NT00-E-12550797-075
8 Added reference to 10R and 9F programs
14 Table 2A revised added 10R and 9F
13 Revised to include required YS characteristic
14 Revised to include 6F15 CHED8P-7W092-AA
22 Revised reference information for filter holders
38 Revised Attachment IV
2014/10/10 G NT00-E-12857734-067
13 Corrected abbreviation to YS
13 Added section III.A.6.1
14 Revised table 2a added ES 9F spec number
15 Added note restricting marking materials
PD
May 92 3947a2e (Previous editions may be used)
Contents
I General ………………………………………………………………………………………………… …5
I.A Scope of Specification ………………………………………………………………………………….5
I.B. Definitions ……………………………………………………………………………………………….5
II. Summary of production validation and in-process tests ……………………………………………..7
III. Test Procedures …………………………………………………………………………………………8
III.A Test procedures General……………………………………………………………………………...8
III.A.2 Exclusions to this specification……………………………………………………………………. 8
III.A.2 Inspection method summary………………………………………………………………………..8
III.A.2.1 Extraction methods summary…………………………………………………………………….9
III.A.2.2 Contamination measurement methods summary………………………………………………9
III.A.3 Point-of-Use Sampling Rationale…………………………………………………………………..10
III.A.4. Tests A, B and C and Applicable Surface Definition…………………………………………….10
III.A.5 ES Test D – ATF Fill…………………………………………………………………………………11
III.A.5A ES Test F – Rust Protection………………………………………………………………………12
III.A.5B ES Test E – Particle size and count for Hydraulic surfaces…………………………………...12
III.A.5C Es Test G – Particles nature determination……………………………………………………..12
III.A.6 Engineering Documentation requirements………………………………………………………..12
III.A.6.1 General Requirements…………………………………………………………………………….12
III.A.6.2 Contamination inspection data…………………………………………………………………...13
III.A.6.3 General instructions for calculation of gravimetric limits……………………………………….13
III.A.7 Component Collection Points and Process Control………………………………………………14
III.A.7.1 General Requirements…………………………………………………………………………….14
III.A.7.1.1 Correlation study inspection process requirements – reproducibility………………………15
III.A.7.2 Product launch or new supplier PSW / PPAP requirements…………………………………. 15
III.A.7.3 Product launch or new supplier POS –POU correlation study……………………………….. 15
III.A.7.4 Pre-production contamination capability studies (Gap Study)……………………………….. 15
III.A.8 Disposition of inspected samples………………………………………………………………….. 16
III.A.9 Inspection frequencies……………………………………………………………………………… 16
III.A.10 Sample sizes – PV and IP tests………………………………………………………………….. 16
III.A.11 Inspection Facilities………………………………………………………………………………... 16
III.B Test Procedure, Equipment and Specification Details and Examples…………………………… 17
III.B.1 Equipment……………………………………………………………………………………………. 17
III.B.1.1 Solvent……………………………………………………………………………………………… 18
III.B.1.2 Rinse gun…………………………………………………………………………………………... 19
III.B.2 Procedure…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20
III.B.2.1 Safety……………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20
III.B.2.2 Sample collection point…………………………………………………………………………… 20
III.B.2.3 Collection Tray Preparation……………………………………………………………………… 20
III.B.2.4 Filter patch preparation; "Tare Weight"…………………………………………………………. .20
III.B.2.4.1. General Requirements………………………………………………………………………… 20
III.B.2.4.2 Detailed instructions…………………………………………………………………………….. 21
III.B.2.5 Series Filter Apparatus…………………………………………………………………………… 22
III.B.2.6 Sample Disassembly & Pressure Rinse………………………………………………………... .23
III.B.2.7 Collection of Rinsed debris………………………………………………………………………. 26
III.B.2.8 Filter Preparation and Weighing………………………………………………………………… 26
PD
III.B.3 Inspection procedures validation methods………………………………………………………..26

III.B.3.1 Blank Test…………………………………………………………………………………………..26
III.B.3.2 Extraction Study……………………………………………………………………………………27
III.C Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………………………...28
III.C.1 Part Averaging………………………………………………………………………………………..28
III.C.2 Visual Analysis………………………………………………………………………………………..28
III.C.3 Patch image analysis………………………………………………………………………………...28
III.C.4 Chemical Analysis……………………………………………………………………………………28
IV Revalidation Requirements………………………………………………………………………………30
V Instructions and Notes…………………………………………………………………………………….31
VI Compilation of Reference documents…………………………………………………………………..31
Attachments:
Attachment I Example of Pre-Production contamination capabilities study (Gap Study)…………….32
Attachment II Example of a reaction plan………………………………………………………………… 33
Attachment III Rust Contamination………………………………………………………………………... 34
Attachment IV Analytical Inspection Equipment…………………………………………………………. 36
Attachment V Calculation of gravimetric limits…………………………………………………………… 37
Attachment VI Example: Parts disposition matrix………………………………………………………... 40
Attachment VII Example: Supplier Contamination Report out........................................................... 41
Attachment VIII Example of a functional test bench for coolers and heat exchangers……………… 42
PD
I GENERAL
Release Note: ESBC3P-7W092-BA shall be used for all new programs starting from 6R140. Previous release level
ES5L2P-7W092–AA could be used by production programs (transmissions). See table 2 of ES5L2P-7W092 – AA
release for the list of individual transmission Limit Charts affected by the ES-Spec.
Reliable automatic transmission and axle performance requires control of solid contaminates suspended in the
transmission fluid or gear lubricants that can contribute to hydraulic circuit, clutch, seal, gear and bearing failures.
This specification is concerned exclusively with the control of manufacturing, shipping and handling contaminates
introduced or built-in during transmission/axle assembly operations where control limits have been correlated to
failure modes. Rust (corrosion products) is also considered a special type of contaminant and addressed in this
specification.
I.A Scope of Specification

This specification describes methods, procedures and equipment required to establish, measure and report:
• Gravimetric levels of contaminants remaining on automatic transmission/axle components or assemblies at

point of use.
• Particle counts or levels of contaminates suspended in the automatic transmission fluid (ATF).
• Particle sizes and counts of contaminates remaining on automatic transmission components or assemblies at
the point of use
• Rust and rust protection requirements
The locations of associated quantitative contamination limits (Limit Charts) for specific components or assemblies
associated with this specification are found in Table 2. Limit Charts could also include exceptions to this
specification. Limit Charts contents supersedes any conflicting content in this specification.
In order to achieve contamination requirements, in addition to this specification, Ford Plants must follow "Global
Contamination control" Powertrain Quality Procedure PTP07-131 for additional related procedures and information.
Non-Ford supplier plants are recommended to follow the principles of PTP07-131 also, but are not required to do so.
This specification supersedes any conflicting content in PTP07-131 when released by a specific transmission
commodity. Engineering should address any noted discrepancies in future revisions of this specification and/or
PTP07-131.
Suppliers should also follow ISO/TR 10949 "Hydraulic fluid power – Component cleanliness – Guidelines for
achieving and controlling cleanliness of components from manufacture to installation"
This specification may not address all of the safety concerns associated with its use
I.B Definitions
• Contamination – solid or insoluble contaminates of any chemical composition. Contamination could be
loose or loosened by the inspection process as described below.
• Particle size:
o Particle size, microscopic - as defined by the particle's longest dimension (length, diameter or
diagonal).
o Particle size, automatic particle counter (APC) - size definition for particle suspended in ATF when
automatic particle counter (APC) is used. Particle size is defined as diameter of circle with surface
area equal to particle's randomly oriented projected area.
PD
o Particle size, gravimetric analysis – as defined by mesh size used for collection of particles
per procedures below. Example: 150 micron and larger particles – means particles collected
on woven screen with rated mesh size of 150 micron.
• Rust - A visible corrosion product consisting of hydrated oxides of iron. Applied only to ferrous alloys. Rust
can't be loosened by the inspection process as described below.
• Point-of-Use (POU) – location of collection (extraction) of an inspected component or assembly located as
close as practically possible to the final transmission assembly point and identified in the control plan
• Point-of-Shipment (POS) – Location of collection (extraction) of an inspected component or assembly
located as close as practically possible to a supplier's shipping point (i.e. pack-out, shipping dock, etc.) and
identified in Control Plan
• Gravimetric Measurement – Contamination data resulting from the collection of contaminant from a specific
part/assembly, which has been segregated on a specific size filter patch (or filter membrane with a specific
pore size), and has been weighed on an analytical balance, to determine its net mass.
• Hydraulic Components and Surfaces – Components, assemblies or their functional surfaces that form or
have direct interface with the hydraulic circuitry downstream of sump filter media of the transmission (e.g.
case and valve body worm trails, servo bores, clutch cylinder and torque converter interiors, pump interiors).
• Passive hydraulic component – Component that does not set the fluid in circulation and not actuated by
fluid, for example: cooler line, case worm-trail, lubrication passage, etc.
• Non-Hydraulic Components and Surfaces – Components, assemblies or their functional surfaces that are
exposed to the transmission fluid or gear lubricants during operation, but do not form or directly interface with
the hydraulic circuitry downstream of sump filter media of the transmission (e.g. clutch plates, planetary gears
and carrier assemblies).
• External Components and Surfaces – Components, assemblies or their surfaces that are not exposed to
the transmission fluid during operation (i.e. external case surfaces, external manual lever hardware, exterior
torque converter surfaces).
• Analytical Balance – A balance with a resolution (readability) of 0.1 milligram or better used to determine the
weight of contaminant
• EDS (Energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy) – Method of elemental analysis that can be performed by a
specially equipped SEM (scanning electronic microscope).
• Should – This is a recommended best practice
• Shall – This is a Ford requirement
• Plant -- Ford Motor Company manufacturing and assembly operations for all transmission and driveline
components and assemblies
• Common Cause Contamination Team (CCCT) – A team comprised of representatives (plant’s contamination
champion) from each of the Plants, a representative from Manufacturing Engineering, and led by a
representative from a Plant. The team may include a representative from Product Engineering.
NOTE: A number of industry standard definitions used in this document to describe contamination inspection
methods can be found in ISO 16232-1 Road Vehicles – Cleanliness of components of fluid circuits – Part 1:
Vocabulary
This Engineering Specification is a supplement to the released drawings covered by this specification, and
all requirements herein must be met in addition to all other requirements of the part drawing.
The Engineering Specification is intended to evaluate specific characteristics as a supplement to normal
material inspections, dimensional checking, and in-process controls, and should in no way adversely
influence other inspection operations.
Preparation and submission of an acceptable Control Plan are the responsibility of the manufacturing
source. The manufacturing source will retain the original Control Plan and any later revisions per TS 16949
and provide a copy to the design responsible Product Engineering activity.
PD
II. SUMMARY OF PRODUCTION VALIDATION AND IN-PROCESS TESTS
Production Validation (PV) tests are used to obtain an initial estimate of the process potential to produce
parts that conform to engineering requirements, and to identify causal or predictive relationships between
significant design and process characteristics (to be used for process control). These tests must be
completed satisfactorily using initial parts from production tooling and processes before Part Submission
Warrant (PSW) approval and authorization of production parts can be issued. Sampling plans for PV testing
must be included in the Control Plan.
In-Process (IP) tests are used to further understand the relationship between significant design and process
characteristics and to establish a basis for continuing improvement. Tests must be completed with
production parts on an ongoing basis. Sampling plans for both IP testing and evaluation of the significant
process characteristics must be included in the Control Plan. When the process is found to be out of control
or the test acceptance criteria are not met, the reaction plan in the approved Control Plan shall be invoked.
See attachment II for an example of a reaction plan.
The table that follows summarizes the various PV and IP tests and the acceptance parameters for each.
They form the basis on which to develop a complete Control Plan for these and their related significant
process characteristics. The Control Plan will include frequencies, sample sizes and reaction plans; see
Ford Quality System Requirements, TS-16949.
Table 1 - SUMMARY OF ES TEST AND ACCEPTANCE PARAMETERS

Minimum inspection requirements
Test Test Test Low Target Upper Minimum Preliminary
Number Characteristics Use Toler. Value Tolerance Conformance to Control
Limit Limit Tolerance Plan
Parameters
A Contamination, PV, NA NA See Table 1.33 Cpk TBD
Hydraulic milligram - size IP 2 (list of
Surfaces 150 um and Limit ES
above, IIIA.4 Specs)
B Contamination, PV, NA NA See Table 1.33 Cpk TBD
Hydraulic milligram - size IP 2 (list of
Surfaces between 10 and Limit ES
150 um, IIIA.4 Specs)
C Contamination, PV, NA NA See Table 1.33 Cpk TBD
Non- milligram - size 10 IP 2 (list of
Hydraulic um and above, Limit ES
Surfaces IIIA.4 Specs)
D ATF Particle PV, NA NA See Table 1.33 Cpk TBD
ATF Fill Count IP 2 (list of
IIIA.5 Limit ES
Specs)
F Zero % of rust PV NA NA NA No rust allowed TBD
Rust covering per on machined
protection IIIA.5A surfaces per
ASTM D610-01
Optional inspection procedures*
E Particle size, PV, NA NA See Table 2 1.33 Cpk TBD
Particle size micron and count IP (list of Limit
PD
and count as determined by ES Specs)

Hydraulic and optical or
Non- scanning
Hydraulic electronic
surfaces microscope
(SEM), III.A.5B
G Particle nature PV, NA NA See Table 2 TBD
Particle determination by IP (list of Limit
nature SEM analysis per ES Specs)
determination ISO 16232-8
*Inspection procedures mandatory for 10R, 9F and 8Fxx programs and optional for other programs.
III TEST PROCEDURES
IIIA Test Procedures General
Test procedures described in this specification in general are based on ISO 16232 "Road vehicles –
Cleanliness of components of fluid circuits" that was adapted for transmission and driveline components.
IIIA.1 Exclusions to this Specification
This specification applies to Hydraulic and Non-hydraulic components and surfaces only. External components and
surfaces do not contribute to the level of suspended contaminate in the ATF or gear lube and are therefore excluded
from this specification. If the exterior of the transmission or axle requires certain cleanliness levels for other reasons
(i.e. aesthetics, shipping requirements, etc.), these requirements must be specified on the applicable assembly print.
For components or assemblies with both internal (hydraulic and/or non-hydraulic) and external surfaces,
contaminates from external surfaces are to be excluded from the contamination measurements and limits associated
with this specification.
Raw or semi-finished parts are also not included in this specification since their cleanliness levels are not likely to
reflect the cleanliness levels of their finished versions due to additional manufacturing operations. If any raw or semi-
finished part requires cleanliness specifications due to downstream manufacturing operations or for process control,
these requirements may be added to the control plan and/or the BS or RF print, but not to this specification.
Rust Protection specification applies only to hydraulic and non-hydraulic components and surfaces only during
manufacturing, shipping and assembly and does not address long term corrosion protection of external components.
IIIA.2 Inspection Method Summary

All contamination inspection test procedures (except corrosion inspection test procedure) established by this
specification or individual limit chart specification shall consist of the following steps:
1) Sample collection per III.A.7
2) Contaminants extraction (e.g. rinsing, agitating or ultrasonic washing) per III.A.2.1
3) Contaminants measurement and reporting (e.g. particle weight, size or count)
All contamination inspection test procedure shall be validated according to section III.B.3 using Blank Test and
Extraction test.
All contamination test procedure conducted by suppliers at Point of Shipment (POS) shall be reproducible
(procedure, solvent, etc,.) by a respective Ford transmission plant
PD
III.A.2.1 Extraction methods summary
Contamination extraction method by pressure rinsing is similar to that described in ISO 16232 Part 3. This method is
the one most frequently used by TDE plants and suppliers. A detailed description of the method is included in this
specification (see section IIIB). According to this test method, an assembly is torn down and defined surfaces of a
component or an assembly are washed in a suitable solvent. The solvent is then filtered using specified filtration
media (screens) to remove contaminants for inspection. This extraction method shall be used by default if either
alternative extraction method below is not specified in an individual limit chart (see table 2).
It is possible and in some cases necessary to use other extraction methods such as:
a) Method of extraction by agitation (a.k.a. sloshing). This method is used for components and assemblies that can't
be disassembled for a pressure rinsing without generating significant amount of debris (e.g. torque converter). The
contaminants are extracted by partially filling the component with a known volume of solvent, sealing its openings,
and agitating it in order to extract particles from surfaces. ISO 16232 Part 2 should be used to develop agitation
procedure for a specific component. Procedure description (i.e fill volume, agitation method, time, etc.) shall be
included in individual limit chart and control plan)
b) Method of extraction by ultrasonic techniques. This method is most often used for friction components – (i.e. see
ESF2VP-7F219-BA). Ultrasonic cleaning has a potential to generate additional debris by removing component
based material due to cavitation. If this method is used ultrasonic cleaning test parameters such as frequency and
time of exposure shall be developed and validated using the extraction test according to section III.B.3 and
documented in the individual transmission limit chart (see table 2) and control plan. ISO 16232 part 4 should be used
to develop ultrasonic extraction procedure for a specific component.
c) Method of extraction of contaminants on a functional test bench. In this case contaminants are extracted on a
laboratory functional bench by solvent circulating under pressure or under vacuum. This test method shall be used
for transmission coolers, cooler lines and should be considered for solenoid assemblies, pumps and other hydraulic
components. ISO 16232 Part 5 should be used to specify functional test bench procedure for a specific component
if required. If this method is used parameters such as flow rates, pressure, temperature and time of exposure shall
be developed and validated using the extraction test according to section III.B.3 and documented in the individual
transmission limit chart (see table 2) and CONTROL PLAN.
A basic functional test bench (Attachment VIII, Figure 1) for transmission coolers is installed in PD contamination lab
and recommended for duplication by Plants and Suppliers.
III. A.2.2 Contamination measurement methods summary
Contamination gravimetric measurement method is one the most frequently used by ATO plants and suppliers. A
detailed description is included in this specification (see section IIIB). According to this test method particles are
extracted by any method above, placed on filter patches of specified mesh size and known mass, and the mass of
the collected particles is determined by weighing the patches with contaminants. Gravimetric measurement shall be
followed by Visual Analysis per sections III.C.2
Particle sizing and counting by Automatic Particle counter (APC) is described in III.A.5. This method shall be used to
measure contamination levels in all ATFs used by ATO and VO plants. ATF contamination levels shall be measured
immediately (or as close as practically possible) upstream of point of transmission fill.. Note: This ES Spec does not
address ATF contamination level at ATF supplier facility or POS. Also POS to POU correlation shall not be used for
this measurement.
The same method can be used (if required by the individual specification) for contamination inspection of
transmission fluid cleanliness when tested at end of the line test stand. No limits should be established for this
inspection and data should be used for process monitoring and continuous improvement only. The particle counters
PD
should be connected to any appropriate hydraulic circuit including line pressure or case out transmission taps and
calibrated according to ISO 11171, reporting data per ISO 4406 or ISO 4406 modified to include larger size particles.
It is acceptable to use on-line particle monitors (e.g. HIAC PM4000) with reproducibility of at least 0.5 ISO 4406 code
and do not comply with ISO 11171 if approved by Product Engineering.
Particle sizing and counting by microscopic (optical and SEM) analysis Table 1 Test E. This method can be used
with gravimetric measurement or as a separate method. This method shall be used if maximum particle size or
particle sizes and counts distribution is specified by Product Engineering. ISO 16232 Part 7 or should be used to
specify this method. If SEM particle and sizing method is used it could be combined with Table 1. Test G. This test
is also recommended for root cause contamination analysis.
It is possible to use extraction methods a, b and c described in IIIA.2.1 for any of the tests shown in Table 1. The
optional test E and G per III.A.2.2 or above extraction methods shall be approved by the Product Engineering activity
through engineering release and included in the individual transmission ES specification chart shown on table 2. If
the above methods are used they shall be indicated in "Extraction Method" column of an individual transmission limit
chart (see Table 5). In a case of any discrepancies between this specification and the individual limit chart the latter
takes precedence.
The level of contaminates suspended in transmission fluid is established using an Automatic Particle Counter (APC)
calibrated according to ISO11171 and ISO 11943 if on-line APC is used.
Rust protection requirement is established in Attachment III for machined surfaces of in-process (prior to final
assembly) components.
IIIA.3 Point-of-Use Sampling Rationale
The contaminate level of a component or assembly is a feature of that part. Unlike dimensional features, the
“contaminate” feature has the potential to change at any time prior to final assembly. This specification, in order to
control the level of contaminates introduced or built-in during transmission assembly, specifies allowable
contamination levels of all applicable parts at the transmission final assembly Point-of-Use (POU) or as close as
practically possible for parts collection.
IIIA.4 ES Tests A, B, and C and Applicable Surface Definition.
Each component or assembly can have as many as three numeric gravimetric contamination limit specifications (not
including supporting component specifications) associated with it. Each corresponds to one of the three possible ES
tests—A, B, and C. Also optional particle size and count limit according to tests E and G can be used. The number
of limit specifications and ES tests is dependent on the component/surface types included in each component or
assembly.
As stated above, external components and surfaces are not included in this specification and therefore do not have
any associated limits.
Non-hydraulic components and surfaces have a single contamination gravimetric limit specification—the amount of
debris rinsed from the part surface that is captured on a 10 um filter disk. All non-hydraulic components and
surfaces of a given part are to be rinsed with solvent per the detailed procedures in the following sections. This
rinsed solvent is to be collected and filtered separately from any hydraulic component or surface rinse solvent from
the same parts.
PD
This solvent is then filtered through a single 10 um filter disk (see III.B.1.5, no series filter adaptor needed) to obtain
a net gravimetric contaminate weight for the non-hydraulic parts of a given assembly. This is referred to as ES test
C in table 1.
Hydraulic components and surfaces have two contamination limit specifications—corresponding to the amount of
debris captured on 10 and 150 um disks. These disks are mounted in a series filter apparatus that filters out larger
debris (>150 um) before filtering the solvent to capture the smaller debris (10 um < XX< 150 um). The 150 um limit
may be a very low value per part, and thus may require multiple parts grouped together to collect a measurable
mass (see Table 4). All hydraulic components and surfaces of a given part are to be rinsed with solvent per the
detailed procedures in the following sections. This rinsed solvent is to be collected and filtered separately from any
non-hydraulic component or surface rinse solvent from the same parts. This solvent is then filtered through a series
filter adaptor with 150 and 10 um filters mounted in series (see III.B.1.4, III.B.1.5, and III.B.2.5) to obtain two net
gravimetric contaminate weights for the hydraulic parts of a given assembly. The 150 um contaminate weight is
referred to as ES test A in Table 1. The residual 10 um contaminate weight is referred to as ES test B in Table 1.
Hydraulic and non-hydraulic surface designation is to be used to derive limits, and for limit tables, but it is
permissible for both to be combined for an individual component so that surfaces do not have to be shielded during
the pressure rinse process. Hydraulic limit (>10 micron <150 micron and >150 micron) should be used in this case
for both (combined) surfaces.
Collection of contaminate from an area of a part larger than required is allowed to address pressure rinsing method
feasibility issues (i.e. when surface types cannot be accurately or repeatably separated during the contamination
stripping process). The Product Engineering activity is responsible for revising the applicable transmission limit
specification(s) following agreement with manufacturing engineering on the new stripping area.
Most questions about identification of surface types will be answered by more detailed procedures later in this
specification. The Product Engineering activity is responsible for answering any questions about surface type or
stripping area not fully defined by this specification. Clarifying illustrations of the intended inspection surfaces may
also be added to the part prints as required by Ford or supplier engineering.
IIIA.5 ES Test D – ATF Fill
This test should be performed downstream of the last oil supply system filtration operation at the point(s) of
transmission ATF fill (POU). An in-line test (using an APC connected to a fill system hydraulic circuit) is the
preferred method, but bottle sampling is allowed. Report test results according ISO 4406 modified to include particle
sizes larger than 14 micron. At least one additional size range shall be reported e.g. size >21 micron. Actual
particle counts (in addition to ISO codes) shall be reported for SPC purpose. Calibrate Automatic Particle Counter
(APC) according to ISO11171 and ISO 11943 (online system).
Final fluid fill ATF particle count of Vehicle Operations (VO) plants shall be specified as a separate line item and
included in the Transmission Limit chart. It is recommended that VO fluid cleanliness comply with the same
requirements as the transmission ATF fill in the transmission plant. This requirement is mandatory if VO adds more
than 25% of the total transmission full fill volume.
Filter elements specified for Plants or VO plants ATF filtration shall have filtration efficiency below 99.5% at 10
micron (or below beta 200 at 10 micron) per ISO 16889. Higher efficiency filters can be authorized by Product
Engineering in writing after confirming that it does not result in removing additives (i.e. anti-foaming additives) from
ATF. All filters used for ATF filtrations (Plants or suppliers) shell be rated according to ISO 16889 and filter suppliers
shall provide test reports upon request.
As a minimum requirement for any added ATF (top off, repairs, etc,) a single pass filter shall be installed immediately
upstream of ATF fill nozzle. Filter element shall have filtration efficiency from 99.5% at 10 micron to 99% at 20
PD
micron rated per ISO 16889. Filter housing shall be equipped with a pressure gauge or pressure differential sensor.
Filter service intervals and maximum allowable pressure gauge limit shall be recorded in control plan.
IIIA.5A ES Test F – Rust protection
See attachment III for test procedure description and list of recommended chemicals (rust preventatives).
IIIA.5B ES Test E - Particle size and count for Hydraulic surfaces
This test is primarily recommended for sensitive hydraulic components such as solenoids, Main Controls and
Pumps, but can be used for any hydraulic and non hydraulic component where maximum particle size is critical or
quantity of particles of any specific size range need to be restricted. This test shall be used for all new solenoids.
This test should be performed if critical (maximum) particle size or maximum number of particles of a given size
range is specified in an individual Limit Chart. This test can use filters with collected contaminants per tests A, B or
C above using any extraction methods described in this specification. Inspection procedure validation shall be
performed per III.B.3. In addition microscope / software gauge R&R shall be performed to demonstrate that
displacement / rotation of the same filter disc on microscope's table do not affect particle count and size distribution.
At least 6 filter discs shall be used for this study. Filter discs used for the study should have gravimetric particle
weight (load) of at least 70% of expected maximum weight to demonstrate that capability of system and software is
not affected by excessive number of particles.
An optical stereo microscope or SEM equipped with a computer controlled motorized sample stage for multiple
automated image analysis, digital camera or other video source connected to the microscope and digital image
processing software is required for this test. See attachment IV for a recommended instrumentation and software
.
At this time the only one known source for SEM automated particle counting system and software approved by Ford
Product Engineering for contamination inspection is ASPEX Corporation.
It is recommended to use 10 micron filter for this test because 150 micron filter coarse weaves can interfere with
digital images of particles.
Recommended minimum particle size specified for optical microscope: 15 micron but most suitable for particle size
over 50 micron.
Definitions of particle size and detailed procedures for optical microscopic and SEM analysis per ISO 16232 part 7
"Particle size and counting by microscopic analysis".
IIIA.5C ES Test G - Particle nature determination
This test should be performed if Test E is required and performed by means of Automated SEM particle analysis.
Test should be conducted according to ISO 16232-8. Acceptance criteria could include reporting of material
composition of individual particles / sizes or include restriction of size ranges for specified materials. For example:
Maximum particle size <300 micron for all metallic particles. Note: This test is not suitable for elements with atomic
numbers less then 11 (Na) and as result this method can't be used for nature determination of majority of
engineering plastics and other organic materials.
IIIA.6 Engineering Documentation Requirements

IIIA.6.1 General Requirement
PD
All components and subassemblies that contain hydraulic or non-hydraulic surfaces and whose next assembly
operation is at the transmission/axle final assembly line should have associated ESBC3P-7W092-BA specification
limit(s). Limit values for any finished components of these subassemblies may also be added at the request of Ford
or suppliers to support the contamination requirements of their associated up-assemblies, but are not required.
These limits shall be released on a single limit chart for each transmission family. The location of the applicable
limits for each transmission family (CH limit chart number) must be noted in Table 2 below. Chart must be released
in conjunction with the release ESBC3P-7W092-BA and table 2 updated accordingly. See Tables 5 and 6 for typical
examples of individual ES specification limit charts.
Any exceptions from this ES spec shall be noted in the individual limit chart listed in table 2.
For every component and subassembly that has ESBC3P-7W092-BA specification limits, the part print must include
a note requiring adherence to ESBC3P-7W092-BA. Example: "Sold particle contamination per ESBC3P-7W092-BA "
Components or assemblies that do not have ESBC3P-7W092-BA specification limits should not have such a note
added to their prints.
Also component surface area information shall be included on component part prints and limit charts (for reference
only). It is recommended that hydraulic and non hydraulic surface area break-down be recorded in the limit charts if
separate hydraulic and non-hydraulic test is required.
VO full fill ATF cleanliness requirements (when applicable) shall be also added to VO installation drawing and -7000-
transmission assembly drawing.
POU and POS (for purchased finished parts) sample collection points must be established by Product Engineering,
Manufacturing Engineering and the supplier and reflected in the control plan(s).
IIIA.6.1 Engineering changes affecting components cleanliness level and contamination inspection
procedures
Contamination inspections labs (Ford and suppliers) must have documented inspection procedures for all inspected
components.
Copies of approved inspection procedures must be shared with Ford PD. Video recording of all custom / manual
extraction procedures is required to assure compliance with section III.A.7.1.1 Correlation study inspection process
requirements – reproducibility
Engineering changes affecting components surface area (hydraulic and non hydraulic), addition of hydraulic
passages (e.g. gun drill holes) must be reflected in engineering documents (e.g. DFMEA, DCC, etc.) as potentially
affecting parts cleanliness and contamination inspection procedures.
All affected inspection procedures must be updated accordingly by Plants and Suppliers and updates shared with
Ford PD.
IIIA.6.2. Contamination inspection data

Suppliers shall include contamination inspection report (see Attachment VII) along with documented inspection lab
procedure with PPAP documentation.
Ford Product Engineering DFMEA shall list all contamination limits at least as Potential Significant Characteristics
(YS) and which require Manufacturing Controls (S=5-8) with expectation of contamination data charting by Plants
and Suppliers.
Ford Plants should have web based database that allows for data retrieval and post processing (i.e. charting,
benchmarking). Sharonville Transmission Plant contamination database represent an example of such a best
practice.
PD
IIIA.6.3. General instructions for calculations of gravimetric limits
Description of the recommended methods is included in the Attachment V.

Product Engineering / System Engineering departments are responsible for the individual limit charts (see table 2).
Table 2a - Transmissions and Converter Assemblies Gravimetric Specification Limits*
Item Transmission Name ES-Spec Limits Location

1 4F27E CH5S4P-7W092-BA
2 CD4E CH5L8P-7W092-AA
3 4F50N CH4F2P-7W092-AA
4 4R75W CH4L3P-7W092-AA
5 4R100 NA - for release status see C11093559
6 5R55S CH4L2P-7W092-AA
7 5R55E CH4L5P-7W092-AA
8 5R110W
ES3C3P-7W092-AA
9 6R CH6L2P-7W092-AA
10 6R80 CHBR3P-7W092-AA from 2011 Job #1
11 6F CH7T4P-7W092-AA
12 6F-35 CH9L8P-7W092-AB
13 6R140 ESBC3P-7W092-AA
14 HF35 ESDG9P-7W092-AA
15 6F15 CHED8P-7W092-AA
16 10R ESHL1P-7W092-AA
17 9F ESJM5P-7W092-AA
18 8F TBD
• This ES Spec release (ESBC3P-7W092-BA) is for 6R140, 6R80 (from 2011 Job #1), HF35, 6F35,4F27E and
6F15 transmissions. This ES Spec is also used for future 10R, 9F and 8F programs (9F and 8F are presently
at pre-release level). Per-release specifications can be provided by Ford PD organization. Remaining
transmissions currently use ES5L2P-7W092-AA
Table 2b – Axle Gravimetric Specification Limits
Item Axle Name ES-Spec Limits Location

1 7.5" Dept 17 ES-CH-4001-ABF Table 1
5 8.8" Dept 96/98 ES-CH-4001-ABF Table 1
PD

IIIA.7 Component Collection Points and Process Control
III A.7.1 General Requirements

All TDE Contamination Specification limits (See Table 2a and 2b) apply to their respective components or
assemblies at the final assembly operation POU. All top-level parts and sub-assemblies assembled on the
transmission final assembly line, regardless of manufacturing location, must demonstrate capability to this
specification at the POU. Because POU sampling of purchased finished (PF) parts by suppliers is not feasible for
process control, suppliers of these parts shall control their contamination levels at the "point-of-shipment" (POS).
For PF parts, "correlation" between POS and POU contamination measurements must be established and verified
during production validation or according to section III.A.7.3. Correlation in this case is defined as statistically
significant difference (smaller is better) between POU / POS samples distribution means. Ford TDE manufacturing
and suppliers must agree on and document (Control plan, Process Sheets, etc.) that the shipping processes,
including dunnage design and cleaning, handling, and storage (including TDE plants handling and storage), are
sufficient to establish and maintain a POS to POU contamination correlation, and that those processes are included
in the production validation that establishes this correlation. If the correlation study shows there is a repeatable
offset (or statistically significant shift of distribution means) that exists between the POS and POU contamination
levels and the POU does not meet the individual limit spec (see table 2), the POU deficiency must be addressed by
either reducing the allowable POS contamination level (must be reflected in supplier's control plan), revising the
shipping processes or packaging, or introducing a POU cleaning system.
For those PF components that are built into higher level subassemblies before delivery to the transmission final
assembly line, the POU measurement, for purposes of correlation to POS, may be obtained at the first Ford
assembly operation. Since these higher level assemblies must be regularly contamination checked and controlled
according to this specification, the only required individual contamination checks of their as-received PF components
by TDE manufacturing is to establish and validate the correlation to the POS cleanliness data.
PF components received by Ford Motor Company ready for transmission final assembly must be contamination
checked at both POS and POU at frequencies sufficient to ensure process control until a POS to POU correlation
has been established and validated.
Following successful validation of a POS to POU correlation for a PF part, the supplier POS contamination
inspections become the process control and POU contamination inspection frequency of that component by Ford
may be reduced to an audit level according to PTP07-131.
Note: Paint, crayon, or any other marking substances which could flake are considered contamination and must not
be used on any internal transmission hydraulic and non hydraulic surfaces. All materials (including materials that
can dissolve in ATF) used for components identification must be approved by Ford PD in writing prior to use.
III.A.7.1.1 Correlation study inspection process requirements - reproducibility

Suppliers shall demonstrate that the contamination inspection procedure (collection, extraction and measurement
procedures per III.A. 2) is identical (or as close as possible) to one used by the ATO Plant for the same or similar
component (including solvent) used by a specific TDE Plant. If a different solvent is used, solvent correlation
extraction study shall be conducted by the supplier using "master" solvents per III.B.1.1. A copy of inspection
(extraction) procedure with supporting visual aids shall be provided to ATO Plant & CCC Team along with the
Attachment 7
PD
III.A.7.2 Product launch or new supplier PSW / PPAP requirements

Due to a large number of samples required and in some instances need to scrap samples the following minimum
requirements are applicable to a PPAP documented process./
Minimum of 6 samples (not parts) shall be below the specification upper limit to be acceptable for PPAP. Inspection
shall continue per III.A.9 until the sample size per III.A.10 is reached and initial process capability established.
III.A.7.3. Product launch or new supplier POS – POU correlation study

POS to POU correlation study must be completed within 9 months after Job #1. Contamination limits will be
controlled at POS until study is completed. Ford transmission plant is responsible for POU inspection unless a
provision for supplier's POU inspections is reflected in purchase agreement. Correlation study is considered
minimum acceptable if at least 6 samples collected during 30 to 90 day period are below specification upper limit. At
the same time if statistically significant difference between POS and POU means is present investigation should be
initiated by the CCC Team and supplier to minimize the gap.
III.A.7.4 Pre-production contamination capabilities studies (Gap Study)

It is acceptable for the purposes of the initial Gap Study only, to use similar or surrogate process flows and
components. Ford (Product Engineering/STA) and Supplier must agree on selection of surrogate
components/processes. A minimum of six (6) samples (not parts) should be used for this Gap Study. Such an
agreement must be in writing, such as an electronic note to supplier from Ford.
If on-site contamination lab is not available suppliers should use an independent contamination inspection
laboratory compliant with ISO 16232 or this Engineering Specification.
The Gap Study addresses the following points:
• If there is a gap between the contamination values measured for the surrogate process when compared to
the target, then the Gap Study Process (Attachment 1 Fig. 1) will occur. The purpose of the Gap Study Process
is to eliminate this gap.
• Contamination shall be measured from VP hardware. Ford will review the results and determine whether
redistribution of targets or additional process changes (potential added cost) is required to meet the total
contamination level.
Timing for the Gap Study Process will take place between VP and Job1 plus 3 months. Ongoing continuous
improvement, beyond initial production, is expected as part of the contamination control process.
Note: The dunnage cleaning process, reasons for deviation from the best practices (e.g. parts and dunnage
simultaneous washing process) and shipping / handling assumptions must be clearly documented in the Gap
Study. A Point-of-Use (POU) to Point-of-Shipment (POS) correlation study is not required for the Gap study, but
shipping and handling procedures need to be reviewed for adherence to best practices and PTP-07131
IIIA.8 Disposition of inspected samples
Components containing any friction materials must be scrapped after inspection. Scrap of Rubber parts, plastic parts
and electronic parts should be considered unless re-use is approved by CCC Team. Scrap or re-use disposition of
any other inspected components must be recorded in control plan or the ES specification limit chart (see table 2) and
approved by Ford manufacturing and the Product Engineering activity.
TDE plants should have a "Part disposition Matrix" approved by Ford Manufacturing and Product Engineering
activity. Matrix shall include supplier-made parts. Example of the above matrix is shown in attachment VI.
IIIA.9 Inspection Frequencies
PD
Beginning whenever a production validation or revalidation is required, the minimum sampling frequency is once per
Ford TDE assembly shift, but not less than once per day (i.e. when assembly operations are not running
concurrently to production operations) for both Ford TDE and supplier facilities. After process (re)validation has
been completed, parts must be sampled at a frequency sufficient to reflect potential opportunities for change. As
process stability and capability are demonstrated, the frequency of samples may be decreased per SPC standards.
Inspection frequency must be included in the control plan.
IIIA.10 Samples sizes – PV and IP tests
In order to establish process capability, an initial contamination test of a minimum of thirty (30) production samples*
is to be analyzed. Each test sample shall be of a sufficient number of pieces to provide a measurable weight,
(suggested sample sizes are shown on table 4– i.e. the transmission case might require 1 part per sample and small
main control springs might require 25 parts per sample).
Sample size could be significantly reduced if Tests E & G are specified instead of gravimetric analysis.
*30 samples are collected from the normal production IP inspection process and cost structure.
IIIA.11 Inspection Facilities
Ford Plants must have inspection laboratories equipped and maintained according to PTP07-131.
Ford suppliers should contact Ford chemical and metallurgical engineering for approval of their facilities prior to
inspections. A copy of an approval letter should be provided to the design responsible Product Engineering activity
IIIB Test Procedure, Equipment and Specification Details and Examples
PD
III.B.1 Equipment
A typical Gravimetric Contamination Station* is illustrated in Figure 1.

The following materials/equipment must be used:
* Description below represents the minimum acceptable requirement for equipment & materials. To improve
inspection repeatability and reproducibility Ford Plants and Suppliers are encouraged to follow BIC inspection
practices and consider use of dedicated contamination inspection test stands and cabinets with solvent filtration and
semi-automatic rinsing and other extraction cycles.
III.B.1.1 Solvent
For metal parts:

Use suitable oil and grease cutting solvent, as specified for individual
Ford plant use in the control plan and ESF6AP-1A290-AA. Solvent must be filtered to at least 5 um absolute
(maximum particle size that can pass through filter's media) filter and loaded into a suitable pressure vessel
for dispensing. If filter absolute rating is not available use minimum requirement of 99% filtration efficiency or
beta ratio of 100 at 5 micron per ISO 16889
PD
Any solvent not listed in ESF6AP-1A290-AA for the individual Ford Plant shall be approved by Plant's
Chemical and Metallurgical Lab in writing. Copy of the letter shall be made available to CCC Team. This
action is required to support reproducibility of gravimetric inspections by Ford plant and Supplier as described
in section III.A.7.1.1
Suppliers should use the same solvent as the individual Ford Plant to improve reproducibility. If the same
solvent can not be used for any reason then solvent extraction efficiency and contamination removal
capability shall be compared with Ford Plant's solvent (see below).
For non-metal parts, solvent selection is the same as for metal parts, but has one extra step: Solvent must be
confirmed not to have any chemical reaction with the inspected non-metal components.
If a component has a complex geometry or internal passages not open to direct inspection or porous
surfaces (such as a filter element) solvent (except specified in ESF6AP-1A290-AA for the individual ATO
plant) shall be compared with a "master" solvent. This comparison is done by an extraction study per section
III.B.3.2. The same precautions shall be used for all heat treated / induction harden parts that have the
known propensity to form heat treat scales that could be readily loosened and removed by automatic
transmission fluid or by a solvent such as HFE-72DE (see below), but not affected by a number of mild
solvents.
Solvents that qualify as "master" solvents: Low surface tension bi-polar solvent such as HFE-72DE
referenced in ESFAP-1A290-AA or if not available 99% or higher concentration isopropanol (a.k.a. Isopropyl
alcohol) and the proposed solvent. CCC Team can select and approve another type(s) of "master solvent"
At least 6 sample sizes should be used for this study. Result of this study is acceptable if a selected solvent
demonstrated average contamination gravimetric result that is at least 70% of base line master solvent
average result and acceptable extraction capability greater or equal to 0.6
Distilled water with cleaning agent can in some cases be used for clean parts (no oil residue, RP) if it
complies with above "master solvent" requirements.
Note 1: Debris collected using water (water based solvent) shall be rinsed with an oil cutting solvent to
remove any grease and RP from filter patch.
Note 2: Use of water based solvents requires longer cycles of patches drying and can lead to scrap of steel
parts due to rusting.
In general using water based cleaners is not recommended and must be pre-approved by a Ford
Plant Chemical and Metallurgical laboratory prior to the above investigation.
Solvent reclamation / re-use:
Solvent used for inspection of oil free parts can be re-filtered and re-used if approved by CCC Team in
writing and documented in control plan and lab instructions. In this case all inspection validation procedures
such as filter patch weight evaluation, extraction test and blank test shall be conducted using re-filtered
solvent. Solvent multi-pass filtering system (see filtration efficiency requirements below) is required in
addition to rinse gun filter below.
Note: Oil mixed with solvent tends to block filter patches and affects results of inspection.
III.B.1.2 Rinse gun - Trigger operated solvent dispenser gun with replaceable, fan pattern spray
nozzles must be used, such as Millipore "Filterjet Solvent Dispenser", P/N XX67-025-00, with "fan spray".
See Figure 1 for typical Gravimetric Station. Supply pressure should be set at 70 kPa (10psig) + 20%
downstream of the filter. The gun must have, at least, a 5 um (or finer) absolute filter immediately prior to the
nozzle. If filter absolute rating is not available use minimum requirement of 99% efficiency or beta ratio of 100
at 5 micron per ISO 16889.
PD
Pressure can be increased in increments of 5 psi, but not more than to 30 psi (40 psi for water) if extraction
study target per section III.B.3 can't be achieved by using 10 psi standard. Pressure setting should be
reflected in CONTROL PLAN (suppliers), Lab instructions / procedures (Ford Plants) and CCCT notified in
writing.
Other types of nozzles can be used if justified by extraction study and recorded as specified above.
III.B.1.3 Collection tray - multiple polished stainless steel trays are required. They must be
large enough to contain the part or assembly, and collect all solvent and debris during the initial
rinse, scrub and final rinse operations.
III.B.1.4 Filter patch - 149 -160 um (a.k.a. "150 um"), polyester or nylon square weave, such as Great
Lakes Filter Co. stock no. 310-041-8000. It is recommended to use a 47 mm diameter filter patch.
III.B.1.5 Filter patch – 10-11 micron (a.k.a. "10 um") polyester or nylon square weave, such as Great
Lakes Co. stock no. 325-041-8000. It is recommended to use a 47 mm diameter filter patch. Note:
Smaller size patch can collect larger amount of debris due to pores plugging.
III.B.1.6 Vacuum flask - Multiple sizes of glass, stainless steel or stable elastomer flasks are required.
1.0 liter, 2.0 liter and 4.0 liter vacuum flasks are recommend, such as model no. 5340-1L, 4340-2L,
and 5340-4L, made by Pyrex Div, Corning Glass.
III.B.1.7 Vacuum Source – A vacuum source is necessary to provide efficient filtration and drying of filter
patches. All components, connections and conduits used for the vacuum source must be
compatible with Trans. fluid, and the solvents used in the lab. A vacuum regulating valve or airflow
restriction from vacuum source may be required to limit maximum vacuum downstream of filter
patch. This arrangement could help to prevent pass through of debris that would be otherwise
retained on the patch.
III.B.1.8 Oven - An oven is required to evaporate solvent from wetted filters and samples (depending upon
solvent type). Example: Lab Line Inc., Model 3608-R Vacuum Oven.
III.B.1.9 Analytical Balance – At minimum, an analytical balance capable of 0.1 milligrams precision is
required to determine contamination mass. A balance capable of 0.01 milligrams may be required
for very low mass contaminants. An example of a low mass balance is a Mettler Model AG 285
balance, calibrated to 0.01 milligrams and with a capacity of 30 grams.
II1.B.1.10 Brushes & Miscellaneous Hand Tools - Common lab tools should include an
assortment of forceps, tongs, picks and nylon bristle brushes to hold, clean and
handle samples and filter patches. Squirt bottle and eyedroppers should also be on
hand.
III.B.1.11 Gloves & Protective Clothing - Personal protective clothing must be available for
all lab personnel and visitors. Appropriate eye protection, impermeable aprons,
gloves/gauntlets must be worn when handling solvents and fluids, as specified in
the MSDS for the solvent.
III.B.2 Procedure
III.B.2.1 Safety - Review all safety procedures, MSDS sheets and HAZMAT literature
PD
relative to the equipment, materials and chemicals being used. Locate and verify that local eye
wash and decontamination showers, where applicable, are functional. Verify that all safety
equipment, (i.e. gloves, goggles, aprons etc.) are on hand and in useable condition. Verify that
proper ventilation is maintained. Verify compatibility of all materials, equipment, personal
protective equipment and parts with any solvents or chemicals used.
III.B.2.2 Sample collection point - All samples must be collected at point of use (e.g. at the final ass'y
line, where that part or assembly is installed into/onto the transmission). The sample must be
protected from collection or loss of debris during transportation from the point of collection to the
laboratory. The material used to protect the sample must be known to be free of extraneous
debris.
III.B.2.3 Collection Tray Preparation - Wash collection trays with solvent and clean, lint-free wipes prior
to use. Rinse tray to remove any loose dust or lint immediately prior to collecting debris from test
specimens. Collection tray preparation shall be validated per section III.B.3.1
III.B.2.4 Filter Patch Preparation; "Tare Weight"
III.B2.4.1 General requirements – Each location should verify that the filters being used do not lose or gain
weight, merely from the solvent used during the testing process. If this discrepancy is noted, then
a "filter correction factor" must be determined and applied to the testing process. Select the
appropriate number of 150 um and 10 um patches, weigh each and record mass on mounting
cards. This value, known as "tare weight", will be subtracted from the gross weight after the filters
have been used.
III.B2.4.2 Detailed instructions

Detailed instruction of filter patch preparation must be followed unless similar process has been
documented and the requirements below are successfully met and documented. Note:
Section III.B.2.4.2 "Detailed Instructions" are based on PTP07131 that takes precedence in
a case of any discrepancies.
Filter Patch Pre-Cleaning – Prior to contamination testing, filter patches shall be pre-cleaned with
solvent by rinsing or ultrasonic immersion. Filters may contain some residual particles as
received from the supplier. Pre-cleaning the filters ensures that these particles are removed prior
to contamination testing.
1. For rinsing, place filters one at a time on the filter holder, turn on the vacuum and rinse the filter
with clean solvent. Allow the filter to vacuum dry, turn off the vacuum and transfer the filter onto
a clean container (e.g. watch glass, Petri dish, pan or card).
2. For ultrasonic immersion, completely submerge the filters in clean solvent in a clean pan or
beaker, ultrasonically clean for two minutes, then transfer the filters onto a clean container (e.g.
watch glass, Petri dish, pan).
3. Filter patch pre-cleaning is not required for axle parts and assemblies with ES weight limits
greater than or equal to 10.0 mg/part
4. Filter Patch Drying – Filter patches shall be dry before tare weighing, and also before the final
gross weighing
5. Place the filters on a clean transfer container and dry them in an oven to remove all residual
solvent and moisture. Filters should be weighed immediately after removal from the oven.
PD
Alternatively, the filters may be oven dried, stored immediately in a desiccator, and weighed
immediately after removal from the desiccator.
6. Filter Materials and Solvents - Filter materials, including Nylon and Polyester, are hygroscopic
and will absorb moisture from the relative humidity in the lab ambient air. Different solvents
may require different oven drying cycles due to differences in boiling point, vapor pressure and
evaporation rates. Retained moisture or residual solvent may affect the weight measurement,
so they must be removed from the filters.
7. Oven Drying Cycle - Each plant shall develop the oven drying cycle necessary for its specific
solvent, laboratory facilities, and filter patches. The oven drying cycle for the filter patches
shall be documented in the laboratory's contamination testing instruction and shall include the
minimum drying time and oven temperature range.
Filter Patch Weight Change Evaluation – A filter patch weight change evaluation shall be conducted and
documented by each plant to ensure its solvent and patch materials are compatible. The solvent must not
dissolve or react with the filter patch material. The filter patch weight change evaluation also validates the
laboratory's filter patch drying cycle and handling methods by weighing filter patches after successive solvent
applications and drying cycles. The evaluation shall be completed and documented for each type of filter
patch (micron rating, diameter, material and manufacturer) that is used by the laboratory. The evaluation
shall be completed for each type of solvent. A minimum of six (6) filter patches shall be used for the weight
change evaluation.
1. Pre-rinse the six (6) filter patches and place them in the drying oven
2. After the drying cycle is complete, remove a filter patch and immediately weigh it (this is W1).
Record the weight as soon as the balance stabilizes.
3. Repeat the W1 weighing for the remaining five (5) filter patches
4. Pre-rinse the same six (6) filter patches again and place them in the drying oven
5. After the drying cycle is complete, remove a filter patch and immediately weigh it (this is W2).
Record the weight as soon as the balance stabilizes.
6. Repeat the W2 weighing for the remaining five (5) filter patches
7. Calculate each filter patch's weight change (W2 – W1). Absolute magnitude of the weight gain
(W1<W2) or the weight loss (W1>W2) for each individual filter patch must be less than or
equal to 0.20 mg.
8. If the weight change is greater than 0.20 mg, the filter patch drying cycle may not be removing
all of the residual solvent or moisture. Increase the oven during cycle time and/or
temperature. Inspect the filters using a stereomicroscope to ensure they are not contaminated
by solid particles. If debris is found on the filters, determine its source and eliminate it. Check
the solvent supply and check the inline filters for correct micron rating and proper function.
9. If the filter patch consistently loses weight after successive solvent exposures and drying
cycles, the solvent may be dissolving the filter membrane material, and they may be
incompatible. In this case, a different solvent or filter patch material should be selected and
evaluated.
PD
III.B.2.5 Series Filter Apparatus - Assemble the 150 micron and 10 micron filters in a series
arrangement. Figure 2. shows an example of such an arrangement using a "series filter adapter.
Note that the 150 micron filter must be mounted in the series filter adapter, for this arrangement.
Note: Adaptor shown on Figure 2 was custom made for Ford Plants Lab. Adaptor's drawings can be obtained from
CCC Team. For reference only: a few standard optional parts that can be arranged in series filter adaptor. For
example they can be found in Fisher Scientific Catalog web link: http://www.fishersci.com – use keywords “vacuum
filter holder” when searching this catalog or Millipore Catalog -- web link: http://www.millipore.com . Use
keywords:“47 mm holder”
PD
III.B.2.6 Sample Disassembly & Pressure Rinse (a.k.a. flushing)

Place the test specimen inside the collection tray and
disassemble as required – see Table 3. Place removed bolts in a separate tray, and plug all blind threaded
holes with pre-cleaned bolts and/or plastic plugs. Be sure to perform disassembly operation inside the tray.
Rinse all loose parts (except bolts and screws), castings and partial assemblies and collect rinse (solvent and
debris) in tray. Hold parts being pressure rinsed above the tray so that all rinsing solvent drips into tray and
does not collect on the part. For hydraulic controls with spool valves in place, use a suitable holding fixture to
support valve body. It will be necessary to manually shuttle valves in their bores while directing a solvent
stream in the adjacent ports and worm trails in order to ensure any trapped debris is captured. Rinse
holding fixture, backsplash, gloves and tools used during the valve shuttling operation and collect rinse
solvent in tray.
Pressure rinsing time, gun position, spray pattern min and max amount of solvent used shall be recorded and
included in Lab procedures / instruction. Copy of instruction sheets shall be made available to CCC Team.
Pressure rinsing can be automated by using fixed or rotating spray nozzles and inspection cabinets with fluid
collection system if approved by CCC Team. All inspection validation tests should be conducted as described
in this ES-Spec.
Table 3 -- Subassembly Disassembly and Extraction Procedures
Part/ Disassembly / Extraction Procedure

Assembly &
Part No.
-Valve Body Preferred method: Break into separate sub assemblies so that all worm trails are exposed.
Assembly Remove separator Plates, covers and/or ditch plates as required. Do NOT remove valve
plugs/retaining plates or valves from bores. Plug all blind threaded holes with pre-cleaned bolts
and/or plastic plugs.
Optional Method:
Inspect all parts immediately prior to Valve Body assembly. Optional method could be used in
addition to preferred method or separately if capability study showed that it's more effective in
extracting contaminants than Preferred Method above and that assebly process does not generate
debris.
- Clutch Preferred inspection method (PF module assembly):
Assembly Plug clutch cylinder feed holes with suitable plugs. (a) Remove snap ring(s), friction & steel
(separator) plates, and any related "non-hydraulic hardware. These components will be rinsed and
measured on a 10 micron filter, as specified for non-hydraulic components. Be sure to rinse
internal and external clutch cyl/hub surfaces before opening the hydraulic cylinder. (b) Remove
cylinder feed hole plugs, and drain into a second collection tray. Remove snap ring(s) and clutch
piston. Rinse cylinder and piston hydraulic surfaces and feed holes into the second tray. This
debris will be analyzed on 150 and 10 micron patches, per the procedure for '"hydraulic" hardware.
Note: Use ultrasonic extraction method per III.A.2.1 for friction materials unless specified otherwise
in transmission limit ES-spec
Optional Method:
If clutch parts are purchased finished and assembled by ATO plant, inspect all parts immediately
prior to Clutch assembly. Optional method could be used in addition to preferred method or
separately if capability study showed that it's more effective in extracting contaminants than
Preferred Method above and that assebly process does not generate debris.
In this case hydraulic and non-hydraulic areas of hydraulic parts (i.e. piston, cylinder, etc,.) can be
combined. Gravimetric limits should be established based on hydraulic area requirements and
extrapolated to total inspection area proportionally to surface area.
- Torque Because contamination may be added at the converter weld operation, two tests will be required to
PD
Converter define converter contamination.

Assembly
The charted average values for Test 2 are to be added to the measured values of Test 1 to
calculate the total converter contamination if Test 2 is not run at the same time as Test 1.
Note: Steps should be taken to ensure there is not double counting of the cover and impeller
component contamination when performing Test 1 and Test 2. This can be achieved by either
cleaning the impeller and cover prior to running Test 2, or by omitting the cover and impeller from
Test 1.
Test 1:
A fully assembled converter, just prior to welding, will be tested for contamination on both 150 and
10 micron filters. The components are to be removed from the assembly, rinsed and collected on a
Series Filter Apparatus.
Test 2:
Another converter from the same production lot will be disassembled and welded without the
internal components. If necessary, a dummy post may be used in the converter to mimic the
internal components for the purpose of overriding the endplay setting in the welder. Use agitation
(sloshing) extraction method per III.A.2.1. This assembly should then be filled with approximately 1
liter of solvent and agitated for 20 seconds. The fluid should then be emptied from the converter,
without cutting it open, and measured on both 150 and 10 micron filters. The contaminants should
be weighed. These values will be added to the results of Test 1 to determine the total
contamination for the converter. The frequency of this test will be monthly or less as long as
capability is demonstrated.
- Pump Separate bodies and handle bolts and blind holes as in Valve Body Assy. Use a separate pan for
Assebly each half. In Pump Assemblies that have valves and exposed wormtrails, do NOT remove the
valves, plugs and springs – see III.B.2.6 for valves inspection process.
Hydraulic and non hydraulic surfaces shall be inspected separately
It is recommended to use extraction on functional test bench method III.A.2.1 for hydraulic areas
and pressure rinsing for non-hydraulic areas.
If pressure rinsing extraction method is used hydraulic and non-hydraulic areas shall be inspected
separately.
- Solenoid / Pressure rinse as an assembly, then remove solenoid valve sub-assemblies for the manifold (body)
Solenoid where applicable. If solenoid valve are retained by screws and plates, remove these attaching
Module parts outside of the collection tray. Plug blind threaded holes as in 7A100 above.
Assembly
Suppliers of solenoid module type components that would require destructive disassembly
(molding, welding or gluing) should be tested using procedure similar to described in CH7-7W092-
AA "Solenoid Body procedure" where solenoids are removed from sub-assembly collected and
inspected prior to welding or gluing process, but after installation solenoids into assembly.
Method of extraction of contaminants on functional bench per III.A.2.1 can be used as an option if
agreed by Product Engineering. This test should be performed without band filters as they can
cause contaminants to be trapped inside a solenoid. If solenoid assembly uses a screen gasket,
this gasket should be removed prior to the test. If disassembly of the filter could cause additional
contamination some additional methods such as perforation of the filter screen can be appropriate.
Test method should be agreed between Ford and Supplier and included in control plan.
Transmission Remove any seals and/or tags from filter assembly and cap the inlet & outlet ports. Rinse the
Filter exterior of the filter and discard rinse solvent. Remove the inlet cap and pour assembly 1/3 to ½
full of solvent and recap. Agitate the filter and pour the solvent from outlet out into a clean
collection pan. Repeat this procedure twice (total of 3 rinses). Filter and weigh collected
PD
contaminant. Number of rinses can be reduced if confirmed by an extraction study

Cooler lines Method of extraction of contaminants on functional test bench per ISO 16232 part 5 and
III.A.2.1.shall be used for cooler lines with diameter smaller than 5/16 inches. For larger diameter
lines and hoses agitation extraction method (sloshing) can be used per ISO 16232 part 2 and
III.A.2.1
All test settings and parameters such as solvent flow rate, pressure, agitation time, agitation fill
volume etc., shall be documented in lab procedures and instructions.
Above settings and parameters shall be validated by Inspection procedure validation methods
"Blank Test" and "Extraction study" described in section III.B.3
It is recommended to use a maximum gravimetric limit of 150 mg/per square meter (>10 micron) of
internal surface area when establishing limits for individual cooler lines.
Transmission Method of extraction of contaminants on functional test bench per ISO 16232 part 5 and
coolers and III.A.2.1.shall be used for all transmission cooler and heat exchangers. See Attachment VIII for a
heat diagram of a basic functional test bench developed by TDE Contamination Lab.
exchangers All test settings and parameters such as solvent flow rate, pressure, etc., shall be documented in
lab procedures and instructions.
Above settings and parameters shall be validated by Inspection procedure validation methods
"Blank Test" and "Extraction study" described in section III.B.3
It is recommended to use a maximum gravimetric limit of 75 mg/per square meter (>10 micron) of
internal surface area when establishing limits for individual coolers.
- Axle Carrier Remove bearing caps and bolts. Do not include in contamination test.
III.B.2.7 Collection of Rinsed Debris - Pour all rinsed debris into funnel and begin filtering through
series filter arrangement (see inset photo, Figure 2). Continue until all wash solution from tray
has passed through the filters. Rinse the tray to remove any clinging debris and pour into the
filter funnel. Inspect the tray to verify that all debris has been rinsed and collected in the filters.
Note: To prevent 10 micron filter loading with layer of compacted debris that act as secondary
filter (a.k.a. cake filtration) for smaller debris reduce sample size if excessive amount of
contaminants is observed. For example friction elements are prone to generate large volume
of fibrous debris that can create above effect.
III.B.2.8 Filter Preparation and Weighing –
III.B.2.8.1 With the funnel, adapter and filters still assembled, rinse the inside of the
upper funnel. Use adequate solvent to thoroughly rinse the 150 um
patch, for removal of all oily residue and allow to visibly dry. Remove
the funnel and 150 um patch from the assembly. Place the 150
um patch on a Petri dish or other suitable clean container, using
forceps, and ensure patch is dried.
III.B.2.8.2 Carefully rinse any residue left on the series filter arrangement onto the
10-um patch, before disassembling. Again, use adequate solvent to
thoroughly rinse the 10 um patch, and allow to visibly dry. Remove
the 10 um patch, as above and dry.
III.B.2.8.3 Individually weigh the dried filter patches and record their gross weights.
The gross weight minus the tare weight of each filter patch yields the
mass of the collected contaminants.
PD
III.B.2.8.4 Retain the filter patch per PTP 07-131 or for at least one year for visual
reference. All retained patches should be identified (at least) with date of
inspection, component number and weight of contaminant in milligrams.
Note: It is recommended to use Petri dish for filter patches that can be used for root cause
analysis i.e. patches that weight exceed reaction limit.
III.B.3 Inspection procedure validation methods
Note: Section III.B.3 "Inspection procedure validation methods" are based on

PTP 07-131.
III.B.3.1 Blank Test

A blank test (or background test) shall be used to check the cleanliness of the solvent and the
laboratory workstation that are used for the contamination testing process. This is necessary
because at small particle size ranges such as 10 micron, ambient airborne particles can accumulate
and may contaminate the laboratory facilities and workstation. Additionally, new drums or pails of
solvent as received from the solvent manufacturer may have significant levels of particles per milliliter
in the solvent. Blank tests ensure the workstation cleaning methods are sufficient and solvent in-line
filters are adequate, so that workstation surfaces and solvent supply systems do not contribute
significant contamination to the overall contamination testing process. Blank tests also ensure that
filter patch drying, handling and weighing methods are adequate to produce consistent and
repeatable gravimetric contamination measurements.
• Blank Test Frequency - Blank tests shall be conducted prior to PPAP and
recommended whenever a new contamination inspector is first trained for
contamination testing. Blank tests should also be conducted if a problem is
encountered or suspected with the laboratory test facilities (e.g. solvent, in-line solvent
filter, Millipore gun filter, drying oven, analytical balance).
• Blank Test Method - To conduct a blank test, use a 10 micron filter patch and measure
the total contaminant weight. Perform the entire contamination test procedure, but
omit the parts. Only spray the bowl, collection pans, fixtures, funnels, series filter
adapter, tools and gloves. Use the same amount of solvent as would be used for
testing a part.
• Blank Test Results - Maximum blank weight should be less than or equal to 0.20 mg at
> 10 micron. If the blank weight is greater than 0.20 mg > 10 micron, clean the
workstation, bowl, collection pans, fixtures, funnels, series filter adapter, tools and
gloves. Check the in-line filter and spray gun filter to ensure they are intact and
working properly, and replace if necessary. Check the analytical balance and the
drying oven for proper operation.
III.B.3.2 Extraction Study
Extraction study procedure and extraction target value that is included in this ES does not
adhere completely to ISO 16232. ISO standard could be used instead if specified by a
individual transmission / driveline specification.
An extraction study shall be used to measure the percentage of contamination removed from the
same sample over repeated contamination tests. Because 100% of the contamination is usually not
removed from a part during a single test, an extraction study is used to measure the effectiveness of
PD
the contamination inspector's technique. The amount of contamination that is extracted from the
sample during the contamination testing process depends on the individual inspector's spray time and
spray pattern. Each contamination inspector should establish the spray time and spray pattern
needed to give a consistent and adequate extraction for each part.
Extraction Study Frequency – At PPAP, the contamination inspector should complete

an extraction study. After PPAP, an extraction study should be completed whenever a
new contamination inspector is first trained for contamination testing."
• Extraction Study Method - To conduct an extraction study, perform the contamination

test procedure on one sample and measure the total contaminant weight (this is E1).
Then test the same sample again using the same spray time and spray pattern, and
measure the total contaminant weight (this is E2). For E1 and E2, use only the finest
filter patch that is specified for the part in ES5L2P-7W092-AA. For example, if the part
specification requires 10 and 150 micron filter patches, E1 and E2 would be measured
using only the 10 micron filter patch total contaminant weight.
• Valid Extraction - If E1 / (E1 + E2) > 0.60, the extraction is valid. The contamination
inspector's spray time and spray pattern has achieved an adequate extraction.
Proceed with part testing.
• Invalid Extraction - If E1 / (E1 + E2) < 0.60, the extraction is not valid. The
contamination inspector's spray time and/or the spray pattern did not achieve an
adequate extraction. Repeat the extraction study using a fresh sample with a longer
spray time and/or different spray pattern until a valid extraction is achieved, then
proceed with part testing.
III.C Data Analysis – The following techniques may be useful in determining sources of
contamination and in root cause analysis.
III.C.1 Part Averaging – Part averaging may be useful technique in a situation where a single particle with
at least one dimension at 150 um has a mass of less than 0.03 milligrams. Mass measurement at
these levels requires extremely sophisticated equipment and environments. Therefore, this
specification permits averaging a group of like parts or subassemblies when the permitted levels are
less than 1.0mg/part. The schedule listed in Table 4 below establishes the recommended size of
each group based on the permitted mass of solid contaminant per part.
III.C.2 Visual Analysis - The 150 um patch must be visually (microscopically) inspected if any debris has
been captured. Visual inspection (i.e. optical microscope) will direct remedial action within the
production process and/or Purchased Finished parts process. For example, small (less than 500um)
flakes of aluminum would likely come from casting operations, (delamination flakes, or flash), small
chips (less than 500 um) may indicate washer and/or debur operations, long slender "eyelash" slivers
(1000um x 50 um) may be assembly debris generated when sharp edged valve spools are inserted
into bores. Drill curls, gasket chips, even debris from clothing, tools etc. may be found and must be
used to work "upstream" to develop remedial actions.
III.C.3 Patch image analysis – should be used to monitor and characterize collected debris in order to
detect any special causes undetected by gravimetric data due to low rate of occurrence or especially
harmful debris such as fiber, plastic and machining chips or other types of debris as defined by
DFMEA.
Particles atlas established during short term capability run and compared with new inspection results
to determine if they are resulted from new or special causes
PD
Ford and Supplier must agree and document (Control plan) inspection procedure, equipment and
retention of images and samples. A number of major items are listed below
• Magnification / Image Resolution:

• Type of microscope (a stereo microscope is recommended)
• Digital acquisition procedure
• Software / automated image processing (if applicable see Attachment IV)
III.C.4 Chemical Analysis - Scanning Electron Microscopy (SEM with EDS capabilities), FTIR (plastics) and
similar tools may be used to further identify 150+ um debris. Chemical composition will assist
identification of component parts that may be parent to debris especially when debris has migrated.
Table 4 - Averaging – Recommended Number of Parts/Assemblies per Sample
! " $ # %
# #
# & "
Table 5 - Typical Contamination Specification - Hydraulic Parts – Example only
Base # Description Next Level-up Assembly 10- 150+ µ Tar Extract Wetted Qty / Comments**
150 µ USL, get ion area, trans
USL , mg/ Tota metho cm2 ref. **
mg/ part l, d* only
part mg/
part
7010 PLG ASY-TRANS CSE HSG 9L8P 7005 AA1 TBD TBD 4
7902 CONV ASY -7000- COMPLEXITY TBD TBD a 1
7A100 CONTR ASY TRANS MN 9L8P 7A091 AA TBD TBD 1
7B201 SPG-TRANS CONTR PRESS REG 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD TBD 1
VLV
7B431 PIN-TRANS CONTR UPR VLV BDY 9L8P 7002 AA1 TBD TBD 1
PLT
7C389 VLV-TRANS CONTR MAN 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD TBD b 1 Water based
solvent
7D102 VLV TRANS CL CONTR PRESS REG 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD TBD 3
7E195 BL-TRANS COSTG BST VLV SHTL 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD TBD 4
7F187 PLG-TRANS VLV RET 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD TBD 1
7F187 PLG-TRANS VLV RET 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD TBD 4
7F194 PLT-TRANS SPG RET 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD TBD 8
PD
Base # Description Next Level-up Assembly 10- 150+ µ Tar Extract Wetted Qty / Comments**
150 µ USL, get ion area, trans
USL , mg/ Tota metho cm2 ref. **
mg/ part l, d* only
part mg/
part
7F472 PST ASY-TRANS INTERM CL(2-6) 9L8P 7002 AA1 TBD TBD c 1 Supplier test
bench per ES
spec XXX
7G033 SUPT ASY TRANS(LOW-REV & 9L8P 7002 AA1 TBD TBD 1
1234)
7G179 VLV TRANS CL CONTR BYP 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD TBD 1
7G186 FLTR & SE ASY-TRANS OIL 9L8P 7002 AA1 TBD TBD 1
Table 6 - Typical Contamination Specification – Non-Hydraulic Parts – Example only

Base # Description Next Level-up Assembly 10+ *Extract Wetted Qty / **Comments
µ ion area, cm2 trans
USL method ref. only
Mg/
part
7G307 VLV-TRANS CONV REG 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD a 1
7G316 SPG-TRANS CONV REG VLV 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD 1
7G391 BDY ASY TRANS CONTR SOL 9L8P 7A100 AA1 TBD 1
7G411 SPG-TRANS SOL REG VLV 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD 1
7G473 VLV-TRANS SOL PRESS REG 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD 1
7H389 PLG-TRANS CSE ORFC 9L8P 7005 AA1 TBD b 1
7H392 VLV-TRANS SH SOL 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD 1
7H528 SPG-TRANS SHTL VLV 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD 1
7J135 SE TRANS CTR SUPT 9L8P 7002 AA1 TBD 2
7J183 VLV TRANS CL D2 REG 9L8P 7A099 AA1 TBD c 1
* Pressure rinsing (a.k.a. flushing) is assumed by default if other methods are not indicated. If noted: a – agitation, b
– ultrasonic and c- functional test bench per section III.A.2.1
** Non-ES solvents shall be indicated
IV. REVALIDATION REQUIREMENTS
The manufacturing source and the design responsible Product Engineering activity will jointly determine
which potential changes to the process, materials or material sources would have significant impact on the
product's function, performance, durability or appearance. The supplier will describe these conditions in
the Control Plan, along with either (1) the revalidation plan that would be followed in each case, or (2) a
provision to submit an amended Control Plan for approval if any of these process changes are planned.
The Control Plan must include a provision that for any change in processing the entire PV program must be
successfully completed.
No change to processing may be allowed without prior engineering approval of the process changes and
the attendant Control Plan changes.
V. INSTRUCTIONS AND NOTES
Control Plans address all significant design and process characteristics, which include all ES tests and
Control Item characteristics. They describe the process potential studies that will be performed for product
PD
validation (including PV tests) and the ongoing product and process evaluation for continuing improvement
(including IP tests). They include acceptance criteria, sample sizes, frequencies, data analysis methods and
reaction plans.
The Control Plan is developed, and updated as necessary, by the manufacturing source in conjunction with
the design responsible Product Engineering activity and other appropriate functions such as STA. The
Control Plan defines the management of the upstream production process and part variables (significant
process characteristics) that affect the outcome of the ES tests or other significant design characteristics.
The Control Plan also identifies the specific ES tests, with their sample sizes and frequencies, that will be
performed in order to:
• Confirm whether the process is being managed effectively
• Further identify significant process characteristics
• Evaluate performance of marginal processes
• Better anticipate the customer effect of proposed process improvements
For any part on which ES tests have been specified, the manufacturing source must present the Control
Plan and any revisions to the design responsible Product Design activity for review. This Product
Engineering activity has flexibility to honor business relationships with suppliers having proprietary
processes.
Examples of formats for Control Plans are shown in Quality System Requirements, QS-9000.
VI Compilation of Reference documents

Ford suppliers should request all Ford reference documents from the Purchasing activity.
"Global Contamination control" Powertrain Quality Procedure PTP 07-131 can be accessed at PTP(PTO) Global
Quality Documents Registry.
The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For dated references,
only the editions cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any
amendments) applies
ISO 16232 Road Vehicles – Cleanliness of components of fluid circuits
ISO 4406 Method of coding the level of contamination by solid particles
ISO 11171 Calibration of Automatic particle counters for liquids
ISO 11943 On-line automatic particle-counting systems for liquids – Methods of calibration and validation
ISO 16889 Hydraulic fluid power filters -- Multi-pass method for evaluating filtration performance of a filter element
ISO/TR 10949 "Hydraulic fluid power – Component cleanliness – Guidelines for achieving and controlling cleanliness
of components from manufacture to installation”.
PD
ATTACHMENT 1
Example of Pre-production contamination capabilities studies (Gap Study)
Collect 6 samples from VP parts.
Yes
Is contamination ? <
target?
Implement best
practices.
No
Supplier, Product Eng & STA to review process for opportunities.
No
Best practices utilized?
Yes
Contamination Steering Team to review & determine if target value needs

increased or additional processes need to be implemented (potential cost
increase).
Are additional Yes

process changes
recommended?
No
Increase target value.
Collect 6 samples in the first 2 months after PPAP
No
Is contamination ?
target?
Yes
Establish interim reaction limits and process. Collect 30 samples before
September 1, 2008.
No
Is contamination ?
target?
Yes
Target becomes upper spec limit.
Continuous improvement.
PD
Attachment II
Example of a reaction plan
Sample and test per
ES
Retest minimum of
1 sample during
shift / same lot to
Exceed part verify results.
Exceed Upper
Reaction Limit (URL)
print spec / Follow facility /
per DCP/ES? ES limit? No component reaction
plan. Identify 160µ
contaminants on
appropiate parts per
ES.
No
Yes
Yes No
Continue
normal process Continue
Exceed Upper
Verification - Immediately Reaction normal process
Retest TBD (minimum of 1) limit? No
additional sample(s) from
same lot for verification of
out of Engineering
Specification (ES) condition
per facility/ component
reaction plan Yes
-------------- Follow DCP reaction plan for
Is there a
Special cause Notify production for non-conformance to URL **
associated to it possible hold
Suggested Actions:
Notify quality control
Exceed ES /
part print supervision. Production
No
spec limit? department to take following
action:
Yes
Yes
** Follow component / facility

reaction plan for non-conformance Examine
Inform to the to ES ** contaminant to
appropiate Suggested Actions: determine:
team. Notify quality control supervision. -Type
Production department : -Origin
-Size
-Determine root cause and

Shutdown and contain implement corrective
action
___________
-Document actions taken
___________
Examine contaminant
-Report actions to Q.C. and
to determine:
Production
-Type
-Origin
-Size
-Determine root cause and

implement corrective
action
___________
-Document actions taken
___________
-Report actions to Q.C. and
Production
Can parts be
rewashed?
Rewash
Yes
Parts
No
Alert
or
Scrap
PD
Attachment III
Rust Contamination
Scope of the section:
This section of the contamination specification for automatic transmission components addresses rust and
corrosion protection. Rust is a type of contaminant that can’t be measured using standard gravimetric
methods because it is adhered to a part’s surface. Rust on transmission components can contribute to
contamination within the assembled transmission if the oxide is rubbed off or flakes off or results in surface
pits that can cause damage to mating components. Therefore, it is important to address the requirements for
rust-free components and test procedures to assure parts remain rust-free, at least until they can be
assembled. Once assembled and coated with automatic transmission fluid (ATF), corrosion of internal
components should cease.
Required duration of rust protection:
Unless specified otherwise all affected components must have at lest 30 days of corrosion-free Ford plant
shelf life when stored in original undisturbed packaging in addition to component-specific shipping time and
shipping conditions.
Acceptance criteria:
No signs of rust of any type (zero percent rust surface covering) are allowed on affected ferrous components
machined surfaces based on visual examination per supplier's procedure or ASTM D610-01 that could be
used as guidance for visual examination.
Rust preventative ATF compatibility:
Ford uses transmission fluid as described in WSS-M2C938-A and is nicknamed “A-oil” (unless specified
otherwise in Limit Chart). ATF is a complex mixture of petroleum-derived hydrocarbons and an “additive
package” designed to enhance the ATF’s performance for viscosity, friction-reduction, wear-reduction, color,
anti-foaming, corrosion protection, elastomer compatibility and temperature resistance among other things. It
is important that no materials assembled into the transmission, including RPs applied to component parts,
interfere with the performance of the various additives. Since RPs are generally organic in nature, it is
important any RP that interfere with the ATF be prohibited from use on transmission parts. See Table 1.
Transmission "A" type Automatic Transmission Fluid Approved Compatible Rust Inhibitors. Note: Inclusion
on this list does not signify endorsement of that product nor does it indicate the RP is an effective rust-
preventive agent – only that it doesn’t interfere with A-oil. Suppliers need to contact Ford STA in writing if
they intend to use an un-listed RP.
Note: Use of wet or sticky RP (oils) that could result in additional contaminants capture must be avoided.
Rust preventative Axle Gear Lubricant compatibility:
Ford uses synthetic and petroleum based Extreme Pressure (EP) lubricants that may also contain friction
modifiers in axle assemblies. Axle gear EP lubricants are a complex mixture of base oils, additive packages
design to enhance the gear lubricants performance for viscosity, friction-reduction, wear-reduction, anti-
foaming, corrosion protection, elastomer compatibility and temperature resistance among other things. It is
important that no materials assembled into the axle, including RPs applied to component parts, interfere with
the performance of axle EP gear lubricants and friction modifiers. Approved RPs for use in axle assemblies
are found in ESE-M9921-A. Note: Inclusion on this list does not signify endorsement of that product nor does
it indicate the RP is an effective rust-preventive agent – only that it doesn’t interfere with EP lubricants.
Suppliers need to contact Ford STA in writing if they intend to use an un-listed RP.
Note: Use of wet or sticky RP (oils) that could result in additional contaminants capture is prohibited from use
in axle components per ESE-M99P21-A
PD
Table 1. Transmission "A" type Automatic Transmission Fluid Approved Compatible Rust Inhibitors
Rust Inhibitors
Name Tox # Spec Supplier Contact #
Unicoat 672 024313 ESA-M7C62-A NATIONAL CHEMICAL & OIL CORP 248-548-5950
Unicoat 627 125984 NATIONAL CHEMICAL & OIL CORP 248-548-5950
Anti Rust 118H 155761 WSK-M7C80-A INTERNATIONAL CHEMICAL CO -
Cal Proof 779-AQ 166119 CALVARY INDUSTRIES INC 513-874-1113
Eco-Kor 450 138348 NATIONAL CHEMICAL & OIL CORP 810-548-5950
Eco-Kor 430 180511 NATIONAL CHEMICAL & OIL CORP 810-548-5950
HT-109 138273 Producto Chemicals 734-422-2010
Steelgard 8703 135235 HARRY MILLER COR P 215-324-4000
FERROCOTE 5856-BF-T1 147271 QUAKER CHEMICAL 610-832-4000
Axxanol 33CD 170722 NORTHERN TECH INT 612-784-1250
Kanguard G-141 141073 KANAMARK INDUSTRIES 905-854-4654
CI-38 SOLVITE 042978 ESE-M99P21-A SOLVITE CHEMICAL CO
Rustilo 4105 175471 Castrol North America 800-621-2661
Ferrocote 112LVX
Protech 1999LC 171583 Nalco Company 630-305-1000
Protech 1999LCM 155142 Chemical Technologies 800-462-5378
Rust veto 4221 136927 HOUGHTON INTERNATIONAL IN C 800-424-9300
VCI-377 150789 CORTEC CORP 612-429-1100
DA Stuart NPD 415
Prevox 505
Metal Medic 7977
Rustbeat 198
Rust Veto 4240 HOUGHTON INTERNATIONAL IN C 800-424-9300
SORP-1 Chemtool
Rust veto 4222
Washing fluids
Prowash 256-C 173095 Diversified Chem Tech 313-867-5444
Dasco Kleen 2100
112-DT FERROCOTE 019836 M7C63-A QUAKER CHEMICAL 610-832-4000
LPS1
DA Stuart NPD 415
Prevox 505
NC-130 NATIONAL CHEMICAL & OIL CORP 810-548-5950
Water based products
PD
Rust Removal Process

All rust removal processes should be avoided, but if allowed as an exception it must be approved in writing by Ford
Product and Manufacturing Engineering. A special cleaning and contamination inspection plan shall be developed
and validated as a part of an approved rust removal process.
Note: Use of abrasive shot blast media such as glass beads, ceramic shots, etc., is not allowed for rust removal
purposes.
Evidence of sufficient rust protection:
Suppliers must provide a written document that indicates that they have sufficient evidence such as accelerated RP
(panel or component) corrosion testing results, surrogate (similar) components shipping and shelf life data, or prior
experience with the same RP, packaging and shipping method (@ temperature and humidity) that indicate that
components should meet or exceed the above requirements. This evidence in writing shall be provided to Ford Plant
and CCC Team prior to PPAP.
PD
Attachment IV Analytical Inspection Equipment
Optical Microscopic equipment recommended for Test E
At this time the known sources for optical microscopic automated particle counting system approved by Ford Product
Engineering for contamination inspection are:
• GT-Vision LLC with Filtrex imaging software.
• Jomesa Inc. with the latest version of proprietary software
Other systems could be used if they demonstrate compliance with ISO 16232 and demonstrate measurement
system capability (e.g. Gage R&R).
SEM / EDS Automated equipment recommended for Tests E and G
At this time the only one known source for SEM / EDS automated particle counting system and software approved
by Ford Product Engineering for contamination inspection is ASPEX Corporation.
Other systems could be used if they demonstrate compliance with ISO 16232
PD
Attachment V Calculation of gravimetric limits
1. Calculations of gravimetric limits – general instructions.
Two methods can be used to establish transmission contamination limit and cascade to individual components limits.
Method A is recommended. Method B has been used in the past and could be used for the current production
programs.
Method A (6R140 and new programs)
Attention: Particles larger than 150 micron in hydraulic components (downstream of sump filter clean side) can
contribute to instantaneous failure (a.k.a. stuck valve) and should be focus of contamination reduction actions!
BIC cleanliness studies results (and results captured in individual contamination limit chart) can be used to establish
gravimetric limits by using actual parts under controlled cleaning conditions or specially prepared test panels. Study
reports shall include total part / panel area along with material information and calculated contaminants weight per
unit area expressed in milligram per square meter @ indicated particle (filter patch) size. Individual samples
gravimetric results, calculated mean values, sample size, number of sample sizes and standard deviation should be
reported. New part limit can be estimated as product of part's area (hydraulic or non-hydraulic) and weight per unit
area (based on BIC studies results)
For example: Based on controlled study results: 6R Valve body, aluminum, area 0.40 m2. Contamination: >10
micron 2.4 mg / m2 (mean + 3 sigma), 10 samples, 6 parts per sample. To calculate target 6F Mid valve body
gravimetric limit multiply above result by surface area ratio – 0.6 6F Mid limit – 1.44 mg.
Sub-assembly limits can be found by statistical stack up analysis (i.e. Monte-Carlo method see below). Typically
>150 micron hydraulic limits need to be increased as compared with individual components due to assembly
generated debris.
As a rule of thumb the total transmission contamination >10 micron calculated using this method shall not exceed
130 mg that supports acceptable ATF particle contamination (typically ISO 4406 -/22/18) at final test stand. This
value (130 mg) should be reduced by 20-25% for smaller transmissions.
In some cases individual non-hydraulic components limits can be adjusted upward based on overall contamination
levels being below target (limit trading) because sump filters protect against debris larger than 100 micron
There is no statistical correlation established between amounts of 10 micron and > 150 micron particles, but a few
recommendations based on BIC studies suggests that percent of >150 micron debris out of total (10-150 micron and
>150 micron ) contamination should be below:
• Machined parts <10%
• Complex assemblies i.e. pump, torque converter < 25%
• Stamped parts < 5% (i.e. clutches)
• Parts with very low gravimetric limits (i.e < .02 mg / part) that require large sample size does not follow this
trend and may have up tp 50% of 150> particles due to random occurrence of small number of particles on
individual (averaged) parts.
Examples of BIC contamination levels >10 micron (mean + 3 sgma):

• Aluminum machined component after high pressure deburr and rinse stations (i.e. valve body) -- 3 mg / m2
• Steel gear after ultrasonic wash – 10 mg/m2
• Pump assembly (steel / aluminum / Powdermetal) – 20 mg/m2
• Steel cooler line - ID -- 150 mg /m2
PD
Materials density should be taken in account when calculating contamination limits. For example an aluminum part
would have a lower gravimetric limit as compared with a steel part with the same size and count particle distribution.
In the same time respective contamination limits are not directly proportional to difference in density between base
materials because a significant amount of contaminants are introduced from external sources (shop dirt, lint, plastic
fibers, etc.).
Method B (acceptable for current programs)
Calculated gravimetric contamination levels shown in limits specs described above should be derived from as-
assembled and functional (such at end of line test stand) transmission fluid cleanliness requirements expressed in
particle counts of indicated size per unit of volume reported using ISO 4406 format or modified ISO format that
includes larger particle sizes, but not larger than 70 micron due to lack of particle counting methods capable of
reliably detecting larger particles.
The allowable fluid cleanliness level is based on the critical hydraulic components (typically solenoid or control
valves) contamination sensitivity requirements based on test data and FMEA.
The allowable cleanliness levels can be converted to gravimetric value (weight per unit of fluid volume) that is based
on an empirical conversion coefficient. This coefficient is based on the average density of transmission
contaminations.
Limits should be cascaded to individual components using corresponded wetted volumes (hydraulic components)
and weights (non hydraulic components). Statistical methods such as Monte-Carlo analysis should be used.
2. Transition from 44 micron spec to 10 micron
Transition from 44 micron to 10 micron based specification (a few current production programs)
In general correlation studies using 10 micron and 44 micron limit inspections are required, but based on internal
benchmarking inspection data 44 micron spec limit need to be increased by 1.5 to 3 times – average 2 times to
account for significant amount of debris distributed between 10-44 micron range.
3. Failure mode analysis
Gravimetric limits for particles larger than 150 micron build into hydraulic components should be established based
on failure mode analysis of control system and BIC cleaning capability study of individual components. Components
material density should be taken in account.
If manufacturing and assembly process capability does not satisfy product requirements for sensitive hydraulic
components (e.g. valves, solenoids, etc.) hydraulic sub-assembly and components could be cleaned on function test
bench (e.g. final test stand, pump test stand, torque converter test stand, main control air cycling test stand, etc)
prior to final assembly Note: This will result in "wet" assembly and inspection process that requires additional
handling protection due to potential for contamination of wet parts.
Calculation of individual components contamination limits
Total transmission or sub-assembly contamination limits can't be calculated as an arithmetic total of components
contamination limits, but should be based on statistical simulations such as Monte-Carlo analysis. Any SPC analysis
should address potential non-normality distributions of individual gravimetric test results. Note: Most contaminations
gravimetric sampling distributions are not normal.
PD
Example: Contamination data must be normalized prior to analyzing process capability. First try to
normalize the data using a BoxCox transformation. If the transformed data is not normal, it is necessary to
normalize the data using another method. This can be done in Minitab 14 by selecting the stat menu-
reliability/ survival- …… Also, when processing capability, the low spec 0 is to be set as a boundary
condition.
It's admissible to combine non-hydraulic and Hydraulic areas of hydraulic components for inspection purposes.
Contamination limits established for such components should be based on hydraulic limits.
PD
Attachment VI Example : "Parts disposition Matrix"

XYZ Transmission Final Assembly Line Part Disposition Matrix
!
( & '
$ % & #
!!" !! # # ' ) #
' *# *
( & '
$ % & #
+" + # # ' ) #
' *# *
( & '
$ % & #
1
, - . *&# / 0+" / 0+ # # '
) )*
'
&
2 '
$ % & #
*& ) 3
0 1& " # # '
) ' &
'
$ % & # 2 ' 1
0 1& ' " # # ' )
' *
2 ' 1
$ % & #
*&
0 1& " # # '
) &
'
$ % & # 2 ' * )
1& , !" ! # # ' )* & &
'
$ % & #
( & ' #
4 & , ''& 5 !" 5 ! # # '
'
$ % & #
( & ' #
6 1& 7 # " # # '
*
'
( & '
$ % & #
)
6 8 & ' 28 9 # : " : # # '
)
'
( & '
$ % & #
* ) )' '
!6 '' 9 * ; * 6" 6 # # '
** *#
'
*
( & '
*&
$ % & # < .
+" + # 1 && 1 ' ' )2 &
' & )
*#
*
$ % & # ( & ' #
+ 5 *&# / ++" / ++ # * ' *#
' *
$ % & # ( & ' #
! '' & 5 0 " ; ' : " : # * ' *#
' *
PD
Attachment VII Example: Supplier Contamination Report out

XYZ Transmission Gravimetric Contamination Test Data
Supplier Input
a. Part Number: f. Solvent:

b. Supplier Name: g. Rust Inhibitor:
c. Supplier POC: (Refer to ESBC3P-7W092-BA Attachment III, table 1)
d. Phase (e.g. VP2, PPAP): h. Woven Filter (Yes / No):
e. Date: i. Blank Test Result: mg
j. Extraction Study Result: %
r te r r ter n. Images Available: (Y/N)______

Fil
te Fil Fil
te Fil
m m m m o. Material Analysis: (Y/N)_______
0 0
10 15 10 15
Target (mg/part) k . Targets Limit Chart, see ESBC3P-7W092-BA table 2
Sample Size (# of Parts) l . Sample Size from transmission Limit Chart
Sample Contaminant Weight (mg) m. Test Results

# Per Sample Per Part
Supplier Instructions:
1
2 1. Review ESBC3P-7W092-BA (Transmission Contamination Spec)
3 Limit Chart (see table 2), and ensure that your gravimetric testing method
is in conformance.
4
5 2. Note the specific filter size requirements for parts listed
6 in Limit Chart (table 2 ESBC3P-7W092-BA). Also note that the gravimetric values
7 shown in these tables are targets, not final specifications.
8
3. Pay particular attention to the sample size requirements of
9 ESBC3P-7W092-BA (Table 4) and Limit Chart, and ensure that you use
10 the correct sample size(s).
11
12 4. Perform gravimetric tests and record the results on this form. Make
13 inputs only in highlighted cells to prevent overwriting formulas. Refer
to the following specific instructions for filling in each section of this form:
14
a . Enter complete Ford part number.
15 b . Enter supplier name.
16 c . Enter name of supplier point-of-contact.
17 d . Enter appropriate study phase, e.g. VP2 or PPAP.
18 e . Enter date study was performed or completed.
f . Enter solvent type. Supplier must use solvent per ESF6AP-1A290-AA or
19
obtain Ford Plant's concurrence for a substitute.
20 g . Enter rust inhibitor used. Refer to Refer to ESBC3P-7W092-BA
21 Attachment III, table 1
22 h . Confirm use of woven-type nylon or polyester filter patch.
23 Woven-type is prescribed.
i. Enter blank test result, per ESBC#P-7W092-BA Section III.B.3.1
24
Acceptance criteria is < 0.2 mg.
25 j. Enter Extraction Study result, per ESBC3P-7W092-BA Section III.B.3.2
26 Acceptance criteria is > 60%.
27 k . Enter target contaminant weight values from Limit Chart
28 l . Enter sample size.
m . Enter total sample weights in the shaded cells. Average weights per part will
29
display in the adjacent columns. A minimum of six samples each is required
30 for VP2 and PPAP.
n. Document contamination inspection procedure - Lab Instructions.
High 5. Send completed form and contamination lab instructions as e-mail attachment to
Low Ford Plant & CCC Team
XYZ@ford. com
Sample Mean
form Sample Std Deviation
PD
Attachment VIII
Example of a functional test bench for extraction of contaminants from transmission coolers and heat
exchangers **
Figure 1. Hydraulic diagram of a simplified functional test bench for transmission coolers
compr. air
cooler flow
fluid return
t
exhaus
Inspected Valve 4
Solvent Cooler
compr. air
dispenser
(spray gun) Valve A1
Valve A2
t
exhaus
Max Level
Valve B1
Valve B2
Min Level
Valve 3 Solvent Clean solvent

Collection tank tank "A"
"B"
Solvent main
filter
Inspection
patch holder
Valve
Cycle A1 A2 B1 B2 3 4
Extraction Air Cooler Cooler Exhaust Closed Open
Filtering 1 Exhaust Return Air Closed Open Closed
Filtering 2* Air Cooler Cooler Exhaust Closed Closed
Filtering 3 Same as "Filtering 1"
* solvent tank cover open, solvent dispenser is used to clean remaining debris.
** Test stand is installed in ATNPC Contamination Lab.
PD
Example: TDE Cooler Contamination inspection Lab Procedure on Functional Test Bench.
Limitations:
This procedure applies only to the functional test bench shown in Figure 1 installed into TDE
Contamination Lab
Health and safety are not addressed in this procedure.
General Description:
Transmission and engines coolers (radiators) contamination extraction must be performed on functional
bench test per ISO 16232 and ESBC3P-7W092-BA. Test bench extraction assures turbulent flow
conditions in coolers passages and extraction of trapped debris. TDE Test bench uses compressed air or
nitrogen gas energy to generate solvent flow through an inspected cooler. The test bench uses a closed
loop process by filtering and re-using solvent after each cycle.
During the first cycle solvent flows from first (clean - A) tank through a cooler into second (dirty - B) tank.
After contamination extraction cycle is completed, during the second cycle compressed air is used again to
flow solvent from the second (B) tank through an inspection filer patch and a solvent main filter back into
the first (A) tank.
A solvent dispensing gun is used for cleaning the tank B after each cycle.
An inspection filter patch with collected debris could be removed and used to perform a number of
contamination analyses per ESBC3P-7W092-BA including, but not limited to gravimetric, Optical
microscopic, SEM - EDS, etc.
Test stand minimum requirements:

All metal components must be made from non-magnetic stainless steel or non-corrosive alloys (brass,
aluminum). Hoses and flexible lines must be capable of operating under pressure of 120 psi in presence
of solvent. Solvent tanks must have air tight removable leads to allow for cleaning and must be capable of
operating at 120 psi minimum pressure. Minimum solvent tank volume: 10 liters.
Solvent tank B must have a cone shaped bottom (90 debris angle maximum) to allow for flushing of debris.
The test stand main filter must be at least 99.5% efficient at 5 micron (recommended – 99.5 % at 3 micron)
per ISO 16889.
The test stand must be equipped with a fixture that allows a positive retention of a tested cooler in a fixed
position and height relative to Tank B that allows maximum un-assisted (gravity) solvent drain into the tank
B.
Recommended optional features:

Differential pressure gauge for test stand filter, quick connects for flex lines, added re-circulating pump and
filter (a.k.a. "kidney loop") connected to tank A for continuous solvent clean-up, dedicated compressed air
filter, a sight tube on tank A and clear flex line to allow detection of start and end of a flushing cycle. Also
please note that this test stand could be automated (except of installation and removal of filter patches).
Test Stand Instrumentation:
Compressed air or Nitrogen gas Pressure reducer with a pressure gauge, dipstick, stop watch.
PD
Test set-up:
Verify solvent level by using dipstick in the tank A. Add solvent if required.
Verify that all valves are in “Test” position as shown in Figure 1 cycle table. Verify that inspection filter
patch is not installed. If it’s installed set up could continue, but patch would need to be discarded.
Verify that air pressure is set up to 60 psi or use pressure that result in cooler flow rate at least higher than
the maximum functional cooler operating flow rate (at least 1.5 times is recommended).
Install a flushing adapter (a short line with cooler's fittings) in a place of inspected cooler. Run a complete
inspection cycle to clean up system prior to inspection test. Return all valves in "Test" position, Remove
flushing adaptor and install inspected filter and a new filter patch prepared in accordance with ESBC3P-
7W092-BA.
Test Procedure
Verify that inspection 10 micron rated filter patch prepared for gravimetric contamination inspection per
ESBC3P-7W092-BA is installed in patch holder
Install inspected cooler as shown in Figure 1of this Attachment. Cooler adaptors must be cleaned with
solvent prior to installation.
Run procedure:
A) Follow all steps shown in Figure 1 cycle table to extract debris from a tested cooler and filter collected
debris through the inspection filter patch. "Filter" cycle is broken down into three steps (Filter 1, Filter 2,
and Filter 3) to assure complete removal of debris extracted from the cooler during Extraction cycle from
Tank B. During the step "Filter 2" a solvent dispensing gun is used to clean an open Tank B and step
"Filter 3" is required to flow a small amount of used solvent with remaining debris through filter patch back
into Tank A.
B) Remove filter patch from filter patch holder and proceed with the required contamination inspection.
PD

Ford Esbc3p-7w092-Ba

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ford Esbc3p-7w092-Ba

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Engineering Specification

PART NAME PART NUMBER

TDE Contamination Specification ESBC3P-7W092-BA

10 Added 6R80 Trans. From 2011 Job #1

11 Revised equipment recommendations for test E & G

III.B.3 Inspection procedures validation methods………………………………………………………..26

I.A Scope of Specification

• Gravimetric levels of contaminants remaining on automatic transmission/axle components or assemblies at

II. SUMMARY OF PRODUCTION VALIDATION AND IN-PROCESS TESTS

Table 1 - SUMMARY OF ES TEST AND ACCEPTANCE PARAMETERS

and count as determined by ES Specs)

IIIA Test Procedures General

IIIA.1 Exclusions to this Specification

IIIA.2 Inspection Method Summary

III.A.2.1 Extraction methods summary

III. A.2.2 Contamination measurement methods summary

IIIA.3 Point-of-Use Sampling Rationale

IIIA.4 ES Tests A, B, and C and Applicable Surface Definition.

IIIA.5 ES Test D – ATF Fill

IIIA.5A ES Test F – Rust protection

IIIA.5B ES Test E - Particle size and count for Hydraulic surfaces

IIIA.5C ES Test G - Particle nature determination

IIIA.6 Engineering Documentation Requirements

IIIA.6.2. Contamination inspection data

IIIA.6.3. General instructions for calculations of gravimetric limits

Description of the recommended methods is included in the Attachment V.

Table 2a - Transmissions and Converter Assemblies Gravimetric Specification Limits*

Item Transmission Name ES-Spec Limits Location

Table 2b – Axle Gravimetric Specification Limits

Item Axle Name ES-Spec Limits Location

8 9.75" Dept 49 ES-CH-4001-ABF Table 1

IIIA.7 Component Collection Points and Process Control

III A.7.1 General Requirements

III.A.7.1.1 Correlation study inspection process requirements - reproducibility

III.A.7.2 Product launch or new supplier PSW / PPAP requirements

III.A.7.3. Product launch or new supplier POS – POU correlation study

III.A.7.4 Pre-production contamination capabilities studies (Gap Study)

IIIA.9 Inspection Frequencies

IIIA.10 Samples sizes – PV and IP tests

IIIA.11 Inspection Facilities

IIIB Test Procedure, Equipment and Specification Details and Examples

A typical Gravimetric Contamination Station* is illustrated in Figure 1.

For metal parts:

Solvent reclamation / re-use:

III.B.2.4 Filter Patch Preparation; "Tare Weight"

III.B2.4.2 Detailed instructions

III.B.2.6 Sample Disassembly & Pressure Rinse (a.k.a. flushing)

Table 3 -- Subassembly Disassembly and Extraction Procedures

Part/ Disassembly / Extraction Procedure

Converter define converter contamination.

contaminant. Number of rinses can be reduced if confirmed by an extraction study

III.B.2.8 Filter Preparation and Weighing –

III.B.3 Inspection procedure validation methods

Note: Section III.B.3 "Inspection procedure validation methods" are based on

III.B.3.1 Blank Test

III.B.3.2 Extraction Study

Extraction Study Frequency – At PPAP, the contamination inspector should complete

• Extraction Study Method - To conduct an extraction study, perform the contamination

• Magnification / Image Resolution:

Table 4 - Averaging – Recommended Number of Parts/Assemblies per Sample

Table 5 - Typical Contamination Specification - Hydraulic Parts – Example only

Table 6 - Typical Contamination Specification – Non-Hydraulic Parts – Example only

IV. REVALIDATION REQUIREMENTS