Trademark Infringements

[Nick Clarke 3Participant @nickclarke3]

Going off at a bit of a tangent – the current UK boiler test code states in clause 7.4(b) 'That, where required by the build procedure, the relevant material certificates are provided'

What build procedures – and indeed what certificates?

Edited By Nick Clarke 3 on 17/04/2021 19:24:19

[Paul KempParticipant @paulkemp46892]

Given that most ME suppliers do not 'make' the material they are selling you but purchase their stock from stock holders and seeing that stock holders are well used to the certification process as many of their commercial customers will require it, continuing traceability through ME suppliers shouldn't build any additional cost as the certs are available at purchase if they care to ask.

One area of ME that does have a requirement for traceability is steel boilers. I manage to get mill certificates with materials required for boilers by asking and there has never been an additional charge made. Recently I needed some material for boiler studs for which the (commercial) boiler inspector wanted a mill cert. Purchased from m machine and supplied with a cert at no additional charge.

Work wise we have to get mill certs for all materials used in shell plate or structural members all supplied on request with no charge, same for mig wire. So not really sure what all the fuss is about. As to how good the system is and how well the materials are marked according to the certs in some cases is another thing but no-one in officialdom seems to question that! Any material off cuts returned to the racks are marked with the number before return but I guess there is a degree of trust involved in that! The cert you actually get when the material is delivered is likely to be a copy many times over depending how big the batch was and how many times it has been divided in the supply chain but how else could it be done?

Paul.

[Paul KempParticipant @paulkemp46892]

Posted by Nick Clarke 3 on 17/04/2021 19:23:46:

Going off at a bit of a tangent – the current UK boiler test code states in clause 7.4(b) 'That, where required by the build procedure, the relevant material certificates are provided'

What build procedures – and indeed what certificates?

Edited By Nick Clarke 3 on 17/04/2021 19:24:19

A welded boiler will be welded according to a weld procedure against which the welder has been qualified, usually specifying the range of thickness' the type of material, the weld prep and the orientation (down hand, vertical, overhead, butt, fillet etc). So to comply you need the mill certs for the plate / bar / tube that make up the boiler and the welder coding cert. In the abscence of the latter you can provide other evidence such a recent test piece (usually cut and examined for side wall fusion, porosity, cold lap or other defects and a bend test in part of the sample), you can also submit the boiler for NDT (ultrasound, X Ray etc) I don't know anyone that has actually done the latter but I understand the cost is between £500 and £1000. The design of the boiler, type of welds, stay and position can be signed off by an inspector – sometimes a problem under the club scheme. Inspector will also specify or agree against a proposal the order of assembly so he is satisfied all welds can be correctly completed minimising single sided welds.

Paul.

[Robin DuftonParticipant @robindufton85682]

Posted by Hopper on 17/04/2021 06:22:12:

Posted by jimmy b on 17/04/2021 06:09:46:

I'd be surprised if any supplier to the model engineering world would be able to give a proper material cert.

Jim

Indeed. Usually only done for aircraft metals and the like. And the cert costs as much as the metal. Not something that would sit well with ME types.

Since when? A trustworthy and reliable stockholder should be able to issue a mill cert easy as that, if they hem and haw then go elsewhere. I've never had to pay for one either.

[Mick B1Participant @mickb1]

Posted by JasonB on 17/04/2021 10:15:50:

…

Also will the resulting barend left over from doing the job that is now sitting on the buyers bench be properly recorded and traceable?

…

 

It can go t'other way too. Long time ago I was working in an aircraft parts manufacturer under what was then DEF STAN 05-21.

Storekeeper phoned me to say he couldn't book in a delivery of (IIRC 'maraging' ) steel 'cos the computer said there wasn't enough in QA. Turned out storekeeper was correctly measuring bar at 3.2m, but QA had only booked in 3.0m 'cos that's what the release note said.

Chief inspector said he ought to cut off and scrap the extra 0.2m, so the storekeeper could measure and book in 3.0m.

I said how d'you know you're not cutting off part of the released 3.0m, and leaving the unreleased 0.2m bit to be booked into stock?

Can't remember how it resolved, but my typical solution would've been to create a special partcode identified as the same spec material, but unreleased – and adjust the 0.2m in under that, bypassing QA.

You might think that sloppy (QA did!), but it had been hideously worse under the previous manual system, with damagingly-late deliveries created by spurious shortages of materials held under multiple uncross-referenced identities.

Edited By Mick B1 on 17/04/2021 20:39:28

[jimmy bParticipant @jimmyb]

The company I work for has to supply a cert for everything we produce, as do our sub contractors.

Any material without a cert is routinely scrapped off (very handy for me!!).

Jim

[Nigel Graham 2Participant @nigelgraham2]

I read the original question again. It questions apparent trademark infringement – but somehow strays into the minefield of Certificates of Conformity.

They are different matters, and obviously passing-off goods under false brand-names is dishonest and illegal.

While issuing a C of C may theoretically be feasible for a retailer buying from wholesalers whose main stocks need commercially be under formal QA control anyway, but "can" is not "must". Neither Mark (the OP) nor anyone else has suggested why an amateur engineer might demand a copy of a C of C for any material other than that for a welded steel boiler where required – as Nick Clarke queries.

Why have they not? Easy. There is no need.

===

I feel a moment of mischief coming on…..

'''

The Far Tottering & Oyster Creek Amalgamated Society of Model & Experimental Engineers is emerging from lock-down, and Charlie has brought his newly-finished 7.25" gauge Merchant Navy (full 'Spam Can' form) for its first boiler test. The Admirer of Boilers and Witness to Admiring of Boilers are overwhelmed by the evident craftsmanship and perfect detailing; and even more impressed by Charlie's build-log.

"Yes" , says Charlie, " That C of C's for the injectors' and ejectors' silicon-bronze. That one covers the motion sprockets and chains. I had to contract out welding the oil-bath, but this is its paperwork. The axles are EN24T – here's their ultrasound scan receipt. If you look closely you can just see the tempered-glass and CE markings on the cab windows…. "

"That's fantastic! " enthuses the AOB. " OVSB himself would be right proud to see it! But… no documents for the frame steel? "

"Oh, them? " Charlie replies. " Band-sawn and milled from factory off-cuts. Bought 'em from Far Tottering Metals Recycling. Probably EN3. Bit tough, maybe cold-reduced stuff. Bit rusty but they soon cleaned up."

[Michael GilliganParticipant @michaelgilligan61133]

Posted by Keith Hale on 17/04/2021 08:20:49:

What is meant by a "proper certificate?".

My personal experience of certification with regards to brazing and soldering alloys, is that this is something to which lip service at best is paid.

[…]

.

Nigel,

I believe Keith Hale’s question prompted the ‘straying’ to which you refer.

MichaelG.

[Paul KempParticipant @paulkemp46892]

Nigel,

lol, absolutely correct. However in the OP case and question if he were to order his 'questionable' material and request a mill cert with it, that would surely reveal any deception? If on request the certificate is declined either the material is untraceable or it is traceable as something else which the supplier does not want you to know. If the material is as advertised then there should be no problem supplying certification and everyone is happy.

However as I alluded too previously the supplier may have a certificate that evidences but actually he is supplying a copy of it with material from a different source and different composition. That's where the fun starts and highlights the weakness of the certificate system, there is still opportunity for fraud! However in an extreme case where a particular material has been purchased with a certificate from another batch and subsequently the component manufactured from it fails, is analysed and shown to be different from the claims as sold, the supplier is firmly in the cross hairs!

As you say, outside of boilers there is no requirement for material quality control in model applications but let's suppose for your steam lorry you decide the con rods require something like EN24t which you order (without requesting a cert) and as the supplier doesn't have that in his rack the boy decides to send you something else. Later the con rod breaks. I very much doubt you would send it for analysis and even if you did as you ordered the metal over the phone and the packing note only says steel, no-one is at any real risk of being sued by you as you have no evidence to support your case!

No need to make it harder than it needs to be and if you are not concerned as to exactly what you get then why bother. In the OP example where he was concerned about what he would get then ask for a cert. It's not hard and it's not expensive and even if it is fraudulent if you want to make an issue of it you can.

Paul.

[Author]

Posts