FINAL REPORT NO. 23 STAINLESS STEEL BOX WORK ORDERS QK-15-545, QK-15-545.1 AND QK-15-545.2

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 242
• Document Creation Date: December 22, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 21, 2011
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: March 1, 1955
• Content Type: REPORT

Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
Copy No. / of 5
Number of Pages
30 1 FINAL REPORT NO. 23
STAINLESS STEEL BOX
Work Orders QK-15-545, QK-15-545. 1
and QK-15-545. 2
"This document contains information affecting
the national defense of the United States within
the meaning of the Espionage Act, U. S. C. 50:31
and 32. Its transmission or the revelation of its
contents in any manner to an unauthorized person
is prohibited by law. "
March 1, 1955
CON Fl ?-,
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
DISTRIBUTION
Copy No.
1 through 4
5
DL~l I JAL.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
C - ~, ~ 3 i l k
SW
.. owerooo"
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
INTRODUCTION
SUMMARY
CONTRACTUAL HISTORY
DEVELOPMENT
PRODUCTION
TESTING
Shell and Bottom Test
Static Load Test
Internal Pressure Test
External Pressure Test
Hardware Test
Hot Water Test
Gasket Compression Test
Weld Coupon Test
Explosion Test
Gasket Test
WELDING
GASKET
COATINGS
DISPOSITION OF UNITS
Page
62
GON t~DN T1AL
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
err ._ ,._~, F"*'R t
c iK itdl-8 3 A
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Page
BURIAL PROGRAM 93
PACKAGING 101
RECOMMENDATIONS 104
ACKNOWLEDGMENT 105
APPENDIX A - DIES 106
APPENDIX B - SOIL CORROSION TESTS CONDUCTED BY
U. S. BUREAU OF STANDARDS 107
APPENDIX C - MANUFACTURING, INSPECTION AND
PACKAGING SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE
SS BOX - SPECIFICATION NO. T238,
USED TO PRODUCE THE 100 SEMI-LOT 108
APPENDIX D - TENTATIVE MANUFACTURING AND
INSPECTION SPECIFICATIONS FOR SS BOX -
USED TO PRODUCE THE 1000 LOT 109
APPENDIX E - TENTATIVE MANUFACTURING AND
INSPECTION SPECIFICATION FOR SS BOX -
TO BE USED FOR FUTURE PRODUCTION 110
APPENDIX F - MAP OF AREA SHOWING BURIAL SITES 111
APPENDIX G - RESEARCH REPORT -
CORPORATION 112
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET V
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
Title
Page
1
SS Box
3
2
Component Parts
4
3
Prototypes
8a
4
Bottom illustrating strain breakage
19
5
Top sections after acid test
20
6
Bottom sections after acid test
20
7
Hasp illustrating torn section
22
8
Box in carrying position
30
Box handle
30
Shell heli-arc tack welded
32
11
Seam welding fixture
32
12
Bottom welding fixture
33
13
Body in position for welding
33
14
Shop working area
34
15
Soap test
36
16
Cold Water Test
36
17
Static Load Test
38
18
250 pound pull test
41
19
500 pound pull test
41
20
Test box in hot water tank
44
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Figure Title Page
21 Proposed method of production testing 44
22 Revised production testing 45
23 Vernier height gauge reading on body lip 47
24 Vernier height gauge reading on cover 47
25 Weld coupon test 56
26 Hasp and body shrapnel 58
27 Cover Shrapnel 58
28 Hinge Shrapnel 59
29 Breakdown of double pack 60
30 Breakdown of single pack 60
31 Method of packing box 61
32 Welding samples after acid test 68
33 Weld sample - no filler rod, butt weld 70
34 Weld sample - 310 filler rod, lap weld 70
35 Weld sample - 316 filler rod, lap weld 71
36 Weld sample - 316 filler rod, butt weld 71
37 Weld sample - 310 filler rod, butt weld 72
38 Original and revised gaskets 75
39 Test method used by 83
40 Original gasket mold 85
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET vii
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Figure Title Page
41 Two cavity gasket mold 85
42 Gasket compression jig 86
43 One unit burial pack 94
44 Double unit burial pack 94
45 Units packed for submergence 96
46 Pack buried in clay 96
47 Pack buried in swamp 97
48 Pack buried in sand 97
49 Pack buried in dry loam 98
50 Pack buried in wet loam 98
51 Components of gross package 101
52 Boxes in wood shipping container 102
53 Completed shipping container 103
54 Bottom blanking and first draw dies A-1
55 Finish draw for bottom A-i
56 Blanking die for cover A-2
57 Drawing die for cover A-2
58 Forming dies for sides of cover A-3
59 Trimming die for corners of cover A-3
60 Folding die for cover A-4
61 Blanking die for body hinge A-4
62 Blanking die for hinge A-5
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET viii
LIST OF FIGURES (C ontinued)
Figure Title Page
63 Precurling die for hinge A-5
64 Curling die for hinge A-6
65 Right angle die for cover hinge A-6
66 Bending fixture for link A-7
67 Curling die for retainer, latch link A-7
68 Precurling die for retainer, latch link, also A-8
interchangeable part for offset for body hinge
69 Gasket retainer blanking die A-9
70 Hole blanking die for gasket retainer A-9
71 Forming die for gasket retainer A-10
72 Blanking die for retainer, latch link A-10
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 1
INTRODUCTION
The SS Box was developed as a container to be buried in a va-
riety of soils and to serve as an underground storage unit for relatively
prolonged periods of time if necessary. This unit was fabricated from
stainless steel, type 316, has over-all dimensions of 17-1/4"x 10"x7-1/2",
inside dimensions of 16-1/2" x 9" x 7'?, and weighs 7 pounds 14 ounces.
Figure 1 shows the unit as finally developed and figure 2 an exploded view
of the component parts. Reference to the latter figure will aid in deter-
mining the function and location of the various parts throughout the fol-
lowing discussion of the development of this item.
The box is equipped with a quick acting closure patterned
after the standard Army . 30 and . 50 caliber ammunition boxes. Like
the ammunition box, the SS Box is easy to open and close and yet main-
tains a near hermetic seal.
The gasket originally followed the same general size and mate-
rial specifications but had to be changed. The gasket specification was
changed to include some natural rubber and the width and corner space
was increased. The hardware was stamped from 16 gauge, the shell and
gasket retainer from 22 gauge, and the cover and bottom from 20 gauge
stainless steel, type 316. Although the initial weight requirement was
five pounds, service and test requirements dictated that the above gauges
be used.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
The SS Box was painted to cover the bright reflecting surfaces
and to provide additional corrosion resistance to the stainless steel.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Figure 1
SEC ETA
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Figure 2
SS Box Component Parts
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21 : CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
ET t
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SUMMARY
Under Work Orders QK-15-545. 1 and QK-15-545. 2 the necessary
tooling and production facilities have been established at
for the manufacturing and testing of a stainless
steel box to be used as an underground storage container.
A limited production of 100 units by
. and the complete testing both for structural design and
unit performance by
has been accomplished.
All the units of this limited production have been expended in
testing and evaluation here at the Reservation or elsewhere.
The tooling is being held at the Brockton, Massachusetts
and the production
and test fixtures are being held at the Mansfield, Massachusetts location.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
CONTRACTUAL HISTORY
The contractual history including over-all cost figures is sum-
marized in the following table:
September 3, 1952 Work Order QK-15-545 to $500.00
cover preliminary investigation.
September 3, 1952 Work Order QK-15- 545. 1 to fabricate
10 prototypes. 500. 00
April 13, 1953 Work Order QK-15- 545. 1 to fabricate
100 SS Boxes. 15,000-00
February 18, 1954 Work Order QK-15-545. 2 for redesign
and construction of jigs, testing,
report, and specification. 22, 000. 00
May 7, 1954 Work Order QK-15-545.2 for additional
test jigs and equipment, broadening of
scope of Burial Program. 2,000.00
Total Appropriated $40,000.00
Total Expended 39,917-65
Unexpended Funds as of
January 31, 1955 $82. 35*
*The figures do not represent audited or accounting costs, but represent
the major costs chargeable to those appropriations and cover the work
reported herein. The figures do not reflect the final status of the Work
Orders since additional work will be required.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 7
DEVELOPMENT
On August 28, 1952, the Client's Project Engineer indicated a
need for a small box to be used as an underground storage container.
was at
this meeting and submitted a verbal quotation of $410 for 10 different
designs, to be fabricated of stainless steel, type 316. Due consideration
was given to the use of aluminum and various grades of stainless steels.
Aluminum was eliminated due to its greater vulnerability to corrosion
than stainless steel. It was realized that types 347 and 316 ELC (extra
low carbon) were better types of stainless as far as carbon precipitation
due to welding was concerned. However, normal delivery of these steels
was impossible to obtain and the 316 ELC was, in addition, more expen-
sive. Conversely, 304 ELC is a poorer grade in respect to welding, but
is approximately ten cents per pound cheaper. On the basis of the above,
316 type was chosen as the best all-around available material.
Verbal permission was given by the Client for preliminary work
on this project to begin and was designated the Project 25X1
Engineer for 25X1
On September 18, 1952,
submitted 4 boxes of two different designs. The two designs were patterned
after the toggle clamps used on skis. Two of the boxes were made of
rigidized stainless. One of the types was made with locked seams which
would be normally sealed with the standard compound used for this purpose.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET
This design was eliminated immediately due to storage in unknown soils
which could very possibly affect the compound. Figure 3 indicates
several of the original prototypes. At this time, it was also decided that
all boxes regardless of design would be passivated. We were informed
by Mr. Meyers that this was standard procedure in the fabrication in-
dustry. Upon review of these initial units the following actions were to
be taken:
1) Rigidized stainless would not be used since it was felt that
rigidized material would greatly increase the difficulty of
fabrication and decrease the over-all corrosion resistance
of the unit.
2) Latch closure would be of a stainless design.
3) The boxes would have a rib 1/4 inch wide located 1 inch
from the top.
4) A rod would be incorporated into the rim of the box to
stiffen the edge.
On September 22, 1952, a telephone call was received from the
Client with the following changes:
1) The new dimensions were to be 7" x 9" x 16-1/2" (inside
dimensions).
2) The closure was to be made twice as wide and the bar to be
lengthened accordingly.
3) The outer dimension of the cover was to be as close as
possible to the shell of the box.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET!.
Figure 3
Prototypes
8A
SECRET,,
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET
4) Cover was to be the same gauge as the shell. All corners
were to be round. A hole in the latch assembly was to be
provided for the use of a securing wire.
A Work Order was received from the Client dated September 3,
1952, for $500 to fabricate 10 containers, 6-7/8" x 8-3/4" x 16-1/2"
(inside dimensions). Five (5) of the containers were to be 20 gauge and
the remaining five (5) of 22 gauge stainless; all boxes were to be suitably
painted. This Work Order was designated QK-15-545. At that time, the
question arose again as to which material should be used to provide the
greatest amount of protection against corrosion by soil. At the August 28th
meeting a tentative decision was reached that type 316 would be the best
all-around type stainless to use. Type 347 would possibly be a better
suited stainless since it contained Columbium, but due to unavailability
it was ruled out. Some thought was given to aluminum, but this was
also eliminated. A chemist at Industrial Stainless Steel Company,
Cambridge, Massachusetts was contacted and he recommended type 316.
He felt that the passivated 347 type did not offer sufficiently greater pro-
tection if cost was not a factor. He also felt that 316 should not be annealed
and water quenched as the warping would be very bad and the gain would be
little. He cited the American Cyanamide Company's use of stainless 316
pipe which showed corrosion after four years' use, but it was the con-
sensus of opinion that this was due to the formaldehyde solution being
carried in the pipe, rather than the corrosion due to soil conditions.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
The International Nickel Company was also contacted, but they informed
us that their organization carried on no work pertaining to soil corrosion.
A letter was received from the Client on October 23, 1952 which
specified that all future prototypes would have the top belled upward similar
to the early prototypes since this would permit stacking. The next prototype
would have a second rib 5 inches from the bottom.
The next step in the development was to establish a good closure.
The Client's Project Engineer planned to contact an expert in closure hard-
ware to get his recommendations. These recommendations were to be
forwarded to us as soon as possible. The first of the two boxes was to be
coated with Hypalon (chlorosulfonated polyethylene) by the flame spraying
process and second box coated with liquid neoprene. The Plax Corporation,
Hartford, Connecticut and the Gates Engineering Company, Wilmington,
Delaware were recommended as sources for the above work.
At this time it is well to point out that the terms of our pro-
gram were not in accordance with the original purchase order forwarded
to Technology Engineering Company providing 10 different types of stain-
less boxes. However, after submission of four (4) prototypes the pro-
gram was to fabricate one box and then to provide additional engineering
and changes before the next box was to be fabricated. This change was
pointed out to Technology Engineering Company and also that the cost of
such a program would differ widely from the $410 originally quoted. How-
ever, they declined to request more money.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 11
On November 7, 1952, a visit was made to Technology Engi-
neering Company and the following points were discussed:
1) The prototype on hand had a rolled back edge on the top of the
shell which included a rod. In the next prototype, the top
edge was to be sharp to insure a good seal.
2) The top was to be made of a heavier gauge material than the
shell, 22 gauge was to be tried first.
3) The sides of the top were to run down as closely as possible
to the side of the container.
4) The belled or offset section of the top was to be as close to
the edge as possible.
5) The type closure or hardware in all future prototypes would
be of the ammunition can type. This hardware was manu-
factured by the National Lock Company, Rockford, Illinois.
6) The gasket was to be of GRS type, 40 durometer hardness.
7) The top was to be made of non-rigidized stainless.
8) Three ribs were to be used and located near the top, center,
and bottom of the shell. The bottom was to be deep drawn
or stamped out and welded approximately 2 inches from the
bottom.
A new prototype was made incorporating all the above-mentioned
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
On December 15, 1952, during a meeting between Technology
Engineering Company and the Client, the following changes to the latest
prototype were agreed upon:
1) The lid and side skirts were to be made in one piece. The
side skirts were to come down to the upper ridge on the
side of the box. Location of the ridge was satisfactory.
2) The lid was to be flat with two crisscross ridges from corner
to corner and of such a length that the bottom of the box would
fit over the ridges.
3) Incorporate a blanked out section of 22 gauge metal inside of
lid to hold the ~asket in place.
4) Eliminate portions of the closure latch and its catch to lighten
the weight of the hardware.
5) Gasket was to be 40 durometer GRS-400 BFZ. When the lid
was closed the gasket was to be 30 to 40% compressed.
6) All fittings on the box were to be heli-arc welded.
7) was to try a Veloform coating.
Firestone Tire and Rubber Company, Ohio was recommended
as a source of this material.
On January 5, 1953, a letter was received from the Plax
Corporation on flame spraying polyethylene. They had forwarded our
request to DeBell and Richardson, Hazardville, Connecticut.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
At this particular time, a letter was received from
pointing out that they had engineered and fabricated
eight (8) different containers to date and requested that the original purchase
order for $410 be considered complete. A letter was forwarded to
concurring with their request.
1)
On February 2, 1953, a visit was made to
and the following points were discussed:
The over-all weight was 7 pounds and, although 5-1 /2 pounds
was specified, little hope was held to obtain the specified
weight. The hardware on the ammunition can was 14 gauge
and made of steel. During production the hardware on the
SS Box was to be 16 gauge stainless. However, the wire
and hinge bar was to be held to the same thickness. The
bottom and shell were to be 24 gauge and top 22.
2) It was re-emphasized that all welding during production
would be done by the heli-arc method. This method was
more expensive but it was felt that the added expense would
be counter-balanced by corrosion resistance.
3) The sharp edges on the bottom were to be eliminated in
future boxes, since the bottom section would be deep drawn.
was to prepare a cost
estimate for 25, 50 and 100 boxes. The estimate was to
include a die for the bottom.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET
4) A molded gasket would be required. The price of a one
cavity mold with additional space for 5 cavities would be
obtained.
5) It was agreed that the primary source of failure would be
the top and/or gasket. Therefore, no die for the top was
considered at that time.
6) The Client's Project Engineer was to show the prototype
to his Consultants for their comments. He would also
work out the packaging details for the contents to insure
that the unit was the size desired.
7) Tentative specifications and drawings were to be prepared
by
Inc. These were to generally follow the ammunition box
specifications.
8) A complete test agenda was to be prepared by the Client's
Project Engineer. This would include such tests as drop,
stacking, underwater, salt, fog, temperature, humidity, etc.
On February 5, 1953, a letter was received from Technology
Engineering Company with the following quotation:
1)
Bottom Die
$3,980
2)
Top Die
$1, 200
3)
One cavity mold for gasket
$ 480
4)
In lots of 25
$ 42 each
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
5) In lots of 50 $ 37 each
6) In lots of 100 $ 34 each
If the covers or top were not to be made with a die an additional
$15 each would be required to hand form this piece. It was agreed that
handforming the top or cover would not be representative of any production
item and in addition, that if any additional work was required or changes
made, it would be appropriate at this time to iron out these difficulties.
Therefore, a die was to be used to stamp out the covers.
On March 30, 1953, a memorandum was forwarded outlining
the cost of producing 100 units as requested by the Client. A Work Order
of $11, 500 was requested.
On April 13, 1953, a Work Order for $15, 000 was received from
the Client that included the funds for the coating program. This coating
program was conducted by P. L. Young. By April 16, 1953, suitable
drawings had been prepared by and re-
viewed by us.
At this time we pointed out that the heli-arc method of welding
should not be insisted on, since it was not only more expensive than arc
welding but not necessary on all parts of the box. A request was made
to permit both types of welding during production for comparison and
evaluation. Upon completion of the 100 containers, sufficient data would
be available for a final decision regarding production quantities. This
request was granted by the Client.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
PRODUCT ION
Although the purchase order for 100 boxes had been placed with
on April 23, 1953, they were in-
structed to purchase the material but to hold up the fabrication until the
design was frozen.
In view of the forthcoming test program, a visit was made on
June 24, 1954 to the United Metal Box Company, Brooklyn, New York by
or the purpose of viewing their
test procedures. This organization was currently manufacturing the
. 30 caliber ammunition boxes from which the current project is being
patterned. The following tests were observed:
(1) A destructive hammer test of top hinge and weldment
(2) Leakage test for container body
(3) Destructive hammer test of container bottom in lieu
of test coupon
(4) Visual assembly test
(5) Air pressure test of assembly body.
This visit was very informative and, with slight modifications,
the test procedures could easily be adapted for our use.
On July 28, 1953, a letter was received from
stating that the National Lock Company would not
manufacture the hardware from stainless because of the difficulty they
had experienced in the past with their dies when working with stainless.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 17
estimated that they could furnish these
dies within 8 weeks at a cost of $1, 980. This information was forwarded
to the Client and on August 3, 1953, authorization was given for the de-
velopment of the hardware dies.
By October 1, 1953, drawings for the test jig similar to that
used by United Metal Box Company had been completed and bids requested.
The following quotations were received:
Ober Tool and Die Company, Everett, Massachusetts $433.00
General Tool Company, Leominster, Massachusetts $ 485.00
Technology Engineering Company, Inc., Boston, Mass. $ 325.00
On October 28 a visit was made to the fabrication shop of
and the Client's
Project Engineer. The following is a summary of the items discussed:
(1) Cover die would not be completed until the first week in
November.
(2) The shells were being fabricated to everyone's satisfaction.
However, the length was increased to allow a lap weld
instead of the planned butt weld.
(3) The material used was 22 gauge, rather than the 24 gauge
originally specified. In addition, the depth of the draw had
been shortened 1/4 inch. The reason for these changes
was that strain breakage had occurred around the corners
and by incorporating these changes, this failure was
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
eliminated. Figure 4 indicates the strain breakage in the
bottom. Approval was given by the Client to investigate
the effects of stress corrosion.
(4) The hasp die was not in accordance with the drawings since
it had been notched. It was notched to prevent tearing when
the corners were formed. The nothhing operation was elimi-
nated.
(5) One sample gasket was given to the Client.
During this period the danger of stress corrosion due to the
forming methods employed in the fabrication of the cover and bottom was
considered and the possibility of stress- relieving by annealing was in-
vestigated. It was the opinion of several fabricators that the lesser of
the two evils was the possible stress corrosion, rather than the added
cost of annealing. It was felt that the general over-all resistance of the
316 stainless would be lowered and would result in less protection than
any possible benefits resulting from annealing. Concern was also given
to warpage since the gauge was so light.
However, several bottoms and tops were to be annealed and
tested. Corner sections of the tops and bottoms were cut and subjected
to a nitric-hydrofluoric acid bath. (Details of the procedure are outlined
in the Welding section.) Figures 5 and 6 illustrate that no apparent
difference relative to corrosion exists between the stress-relieved and
the normal samples. Based on the results of the acid bath tests, it was
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 SECPET Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
19
Figure 4
Bottom from original die showing strain breakage
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21 : CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 ECR T'? Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3 20
Figure 5
Top sections after acid test
Figure 6
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET
decided not to stress relieve the tops and/or bottom since the over-all
cost of the box would be increased without any apparent benefits.
By December 1, 1953, a sample hasp had been forwarded to
the Client showing the torn sections as illustrated in figure 7. It was
agreed that this difficulty must be eliminated. It was felt that if the
tearing could be held to a minimum, this failure could be eliminated
by spot welding and grinding to smooth out the area. Samples were
tried, submitted to the Client and approved. Two sample boxes only
were to be fabricated until the component parts were evaluated. It
was found that the tearing could be completely eliminated by a slight
modification in design. This tearing is shown in figure 7 and was elimi-
nated by lessening the severity of the bend at this particular point.
It was decided at this time to attempt to spot weld the bottom
to the shell prior to heli-arc welding. The gasket retainer was also
spot welded to the cover. When the shell and bottom was submerged,
it was found to leak at eight of the twelve spot welds and had to be cor-
rected by heli-arc spot welding. The same results occurred on the
cover when the box was subjected to the hot water test. Due to the
failure of spot welding, it was specified that all welding during the pro-
duction of the 100 units would be by the heli-arc method.
On December 15, 1953, a shell and bottom was examined and
found to be satisfactory. Although the samples formed by the head die
were found to be in accordance with the drawing, minor changes had.to
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 ,SECRET Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Figure 7
Hasp Illustrating Strain Breakage
22
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET
be made in the auxiliary die, since tearing at the corners of the side
flanges was apparent. It was felt that this fault could be eliminated by
extending the side surface parallel with the outer rim of the top 1/8 inch
further before curving in towards the body of the container. The curve
would be less severe than originally designated.
On December 23, 1953, two prototypes were delivered to the
Client. One box was returned with the following comments:
(1) The cover would be made of 20 gauge material unless this
meant changes in the die.
(2) The torn section of the hasp was to be worked over as out-
lined above.
(3) The cover gasket and gasket retainer are to be redesigned.
The gasket is to be made slightly wider and the corners
filled in. The retained is to be changed accordingly.
On December 28, 1953, a call was received from the Client
and changes requested as follows:
(1) Since the top edge of the body is folded, a slight bulge results
inward of the fold. An investigation is to be conducted to
determine the feasibility of cutting a small section from the
rim and spot welded to alleviate the situation.
(2) All welding to be ground smooth.
(3) The gasket to be widened and the thickness increased 1/8 inch.
(4) The rib at the bottom is to be placed one inch from the weld.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
On January 5, 1954, a meeting was held at
to review the progress of the box. Present were the Client's
Project Engineer and his assistant and Messrs.
The major fault of the prototype was the tendency of the
cover to rise away from the gasket. This occurs more radically at the
hinge end, but is apparent at the hasp end also. It was decided that the
following steps would be taken to correct the above:
(1) Increase the cover to 20 gauge although this meant die changes.
(2) Redesign of the hinges in accordance with the sketch supplied
by the Client.
In addition, the following comments were added:
(1) Twenty-five (25) covers are to be stamped from 22 gauge
metal. Die changes are to be made and the remaining
seventy-five (75) covers are to be stamped of 22 gauge
material.
(2) Authorization was given to initiate the production of the shells
and bottoms. Assembly of these units is to begin as soon as
possible.
(3) A 1-1/2 inch wide cut is to be made on the internal fold of the
top as outlined in the telephone call of December 28, 1953, as
outlined above.
(4) The retaining gasket will be a solid piece and heli-arced to the
cover.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 25
(5) The edge of the gasket retainer is to fall 1/16 inch below the
surface of the gasket. This will insure that the top edge of the
body will always rest on the gasket.
(6) The internal height of the box will be 16-1/2 inches.
As a result of this meeting, changes were necessary in several
of the dies. The cover and body hinges were to be altered, in addition to
the alteration of the retainer latch link. The cover gasket mold was to be
changed to comply with the new dimensions of the gasket. The cover dies
would be altered after the 25 covers were stamped from 22 gauge stainless.
Since delivery was to be expedited in every way possible, the Client
authorized all necessary overtime. Technology promised delivery in 3-4
weeks on this basis, although normal delivery would be 12-14 weeks.
On January 25, 1954, a survey of the entire program was made.
The survey included all past requests and changes, in addition to the test-
ing program to be conducted in the future. Accordingly, a request was
forwarded to requesting cost estimates
on the following:
(1) 4 bottoms and tops, stress relieved
(2) 6 handmade gaskets
(3) 2 shell and bottom units (butt welded)
(4) 2 shell and bottom units (lap welded)
(5) 3 shell and bottom units (notched)
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
(6) Die changes for:
a. Bottom
b. Gasket Mold
c. Cover Hinge
d. Body Hinge
e. Latch Link Retainer
f. Gasket Retainer
(7) Engineering and drawing costs on Item 6
(8) Jigs
a. 5 lb. pressure test
b. 3 lb. pressure test
c. Shell seam welding jig
Bottom welding jig
Hardware positioning jig
Block for pull test
(9) Design of "Standard Box" for 3 pound test.
(10) Re-evaluation of cost on 100 boxes due to the changes
accrued during past several months.
The gasket compression jig was designed by
constructed by
On February 1, 1954, a letter was received from
outlining the costs of changes and requests com-
pleted and their estimated figures for the die changes or new dies. The
estimated and actual costs are listed as follows:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 27
Estimated Cost
Actual Cost
1.
6 Handmade gaskets
(Greene Rubber Company)
65. 00
2.
Stress relieving, 4 covers and bottoms
18.00
3.
6 shell and bottom units (butt weld)
240. 00
4.
2 completed boxes
390. 00
5.
Alteration of bottom die
600.00
6.
Alteration of gasket mold
$ 350.00
7.
Blanking, forming, curling dies
for cover hinge
1,670.00
1,674.00
8.
Blanking, forming, curling dies
for body hinge
1, 560.00
1, 542.00
9.
Blanking, forming, curling dies
for latch link retainer
1,430-00
1,384.00
10.
Blanking and forming die for
gasket retainer
1,290-00
1,460-80
11.
Cover die alteration
700.00
645. 00
12.
5 pound pressure test jig
800. 00
758. 00
13.
3 pound pressure test jig
1, 200.00
835.00
14.
Seam welding jig
400. 00
744.00
15.
Bottom welding jig
800. 00
940.00
16.
Hardware positioning jig
400. 00
386. 00
17.
Completion of pull test jig
600.00
480.00
18.
Increase in unit price per box of $7. 00 was due to additional cost of
the gasket, new covers, heavier hardware, painting, and packaging.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
On February 4, 1954, a request was made by the Client for
five semi-production boxes. It was pointed out that the gasket and gasket
retainer would not be in accordance with the latest changes and the welding
would not be typical of the production units, since the welding jigs had
not been completed.
The hardware dies were completed by February 7, 1954 and
individual pieces stamped out. These were checked and found to be in
accordance with the drawings.
On February 24, 1954, a meeting was held to review the pro-
gram. The following points were discussed:
(1) In order to expedite the specifications, we are to forward
drawings to Technology, who will prepare the hardware
drawings as soon as the pieces are finalized.
(2) The over-all height dimension was not considered realistic.
The allowable tolerances were changed to -0, plus 1/16 inch.
(3) A painted box was exhibited. The flat surfaces were excellent,
but the bottom rim and hinges had chipped. Two coats of
paint had been applied.
(4) The width of the gasket retainer is to be increased, since
the gasket must be pushed up against the side of the cover.
(5) The existing tentative specifications called for a pull test
on the welding coupons of 500 pounds. This pull was revised
to 1000 pounds.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 29
(6) The boxes will be packed in corrugated fiberboard cartons
for shipment to us. The purpose of the packaging is to
provide protection to the painted surfaces.
On April 2, 1954, the Client was informed that the 22 gauge
covers would bow due to the thinness of the metal. The Client stated
that the 22 gauge tops be eliminated. Technology was requested to
replace the 22 gauge covers with 20 gauge pieces.
On April 13, 1954, a revised cost estimate was forwarded
to the Client. The revised expenditures are as follows:
(1)
A 360 pound test fixture
$ 275.00
(2)
Dial Weston Thermometer
18. 00
(3)
Revision of 3 pound test fixture
75. 00
(4)
25 - 22 gauge covers
200.00
(5)
Vernier type height gauge
75. 00
(6)
10 Armco Reports
150.00
(7)
Burial Program
500. 00
(8)
Additional costs on final report
200. 00
During this period a request was made by the Client for the
possibility of the addition of a handle. Figures 8 and 9 indicate one
possible solution. The curled sections of the latch link retainer were
welded on to the body hinge. Both pieces are 16 gauge material, thus
resulting in a strong weld. No definite action was taken on this subject.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET . 30
Figure 8
Box with handle in carrying position
Figure 9
Box Handle
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 31
Sixty (60) shells and bottoms were welded prior to assembly
of hardware. The shell was heli-arc tack welded as shown in figure 10
prior to the continuous seam weld. Figure 11 shows the seam welding
fixture, while figures 12 and 13 show the welding fixture for the bottom
and the method of welding. After completion, the shells and bottoms
were given the five pound pressure test. It was interesting to note the
increase in proficiency of the seam welds between the first and tenth
box. Figure 14 indicates the shop working area for the production of
the 100 boxes.
During the welding of the first twenty boxes, the gasket com-
pression test was run on each box before the hardware on the next box
was welded. By this method the average location was found for the
body hinge and once this point was reached, production continued with
the basket compression tests conducted by
twice a week. The welder conducted this type of
test on every fourth box as a check on the hardware location.
Details of the test program can be found in the section entitled
`'Testing. " Pictures of the test fixtures and procedures are also located
in this section.
Sixty-six (66) of the boxes were completed by April 21, 1954,
and the remaining thirty-two (32) by May 6, 1954. The difference (seven
boxes) had been picked up during the production at various times.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SICRET, 32
Figure 10
Shell hell-arc tack welded
Figure 13.
Seam welding fixture
`SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 E T Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21 :CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
33
Figure 12
Bottom welding fixture
Figure 13
Box body in position for welding
SECR ET,f
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 ECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
34
Fide 14
Shop Working Area
sECRErI
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
TESTING
During the pilot production, each of the 100 boxes were 100%
inspected and numbered using paper slips inside the box. The numbering
system was initiated to help provide background information for units
that were field tested in the burial program. The tests included a five
pound internal pressure test on the shell and bottom, a five pound inter-
nal pressure test on the completed box, gasket compression test, static
load test, weld coupon tests, hardware pull tests, and a gasket composi-
tion test. These tests and testing results are given in the following sections.
Shell and Bottom Test
The purpose of this test was to insure that the quality of welding
met the standards and would result in the absence of pinholes in the welds.
A hose was attached to an air line which included in the system a dia-
phragm valve and a pressure relief valve set at eight pounds. The line was
connected to a jig as shown in figure 15. The jig prevented distortion and
insured a firm setup against the gasket. The first 15 or 20 units were given
a soap test in addition to the hydrostatic test as an added precaution. How-
ever, it was found that the minute pinholes would not show. The best method
was the submergence of the box in the tank as shown in figure 16. After the
water had settled, the box was rotated on each side and the weld areas ex-
amined. This test would require a minimum of 6-8 minutes per test.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21 : CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Figure 15
Soap Test
Figure 16
36
SECREtf
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
Another method of testing was tried with unsatisfactory results.
The same jig was used but the box tested in a vertical position. This
would allow the escaped air bubbles to go up the side and accumulate on
the underside of the top plate of the jig.
Of the initial twenty units, six rejects were found. The pinholes
were either on the shell seam or at the junction of the bottom weld and
shell seam weld.
A total of nine rejects were found during the production of the
100 units. These units were reworked, retested, and approved for as-
sembly of hardware.
Static Load Test
The early specification called for a static load test of 360 pounds
on the maximum area.. Five boxes were tested in the test jig shown in
figure 17. On one box a static load of 550 pounds was applied and the box
was then tested in the hot water tank. No apparent damage had been caused.
Internal Pressure Test
A fitting was welded to the bottom of a box and the unit gradu-
ally filled with water. Once filled, the pressure was gradually increased
until the box leaked at 15 pounds. A leak occurred at two corners of the
gasket. The compression on the gasket had been previously checked and
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 ,~ ~ Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3 8
Figure 17
SECRET,
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21 : CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
found to be between .081" to .089" compression. When the full line
force of 75 pounds was applied to the box, the four sides bulged but did
not rupture. The leak continued in the same spots but only at a slightly
greater rate.
External Pressure Test
One box was placed in a water tank and pressure applied until
the equivalent of a five foot depth was reached. The box was removed
and examined for leakage. No leakage occurred. The same procedure
was followed for the equivalent of 10, and 15 foot depths. Leakage oc-
curred at a depth of 17 feet and was due to the crushing effect of the side
at the gasket. The resulting reduction of effectiveness of the gasket
allowed the water to flow by into the box.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 40
Hardware Test
Ten boxes were tested for the security of welds and attach-
ment of component parts on the "bridge." This test unit was designed
b to not only test the attachment of parts as well as
weld coupons.
The box was clamped in the fixture with the body supported
from distortion or collapse by a snug fitting wood filler block. The
bottom rested on the bottom with the cover raised at a right angle and
the force applied in a vertical direction with the force bearing against
the face of the latch when positioned parallel to the box bottom. A force
of 250 pounds was slowly applied for two minutes. Figure 18 indicates
this procedure which is a test comprised of the following parts: latch,
latch link, latch link retainer, cover, cover hinge, body and body hinge.
The boxes would pass the 250 pound test, but when a force of
500 pounds was applied the latch link retainer would bend and effectively
destroy the box. However, as an added precaution, several extra welds
were added to prevent this bending. These welds were added at the sides
of piece making a total of five welds on this piece.
The box was then rotated and a force of 500 pounds applied in
a similar manner as shown in figure 19 to the underside of the lip of the
hasp. The ten units passed this test.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
41
Figure 18
250 Pound Pull Test
Figure 19
500 Pound Pull Test
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 42
Upon completion of these tests, the cans were then tested
Hot Water Test
The original tentative specifications called for the completed
box to be submerged in hot water for 2-3 minutes until three pounds in-
ternal pressure was built up inside the box. Experience had shown that
the minute leaks were not readily seen at three pounds, but became ap-
parent at five pounds. Based on this experience, the "hot water test"
was conducted at the five pound internal pressure level.
The tank was equipped with three immersion heaters(manu-
ally controlled) located at the bottom. After the water came to the de-
sired temperature of approximately 170?F, the two outer heaters were
shut off. It was found that the controlling factor in the test was the
room temperature. At 6-8?F change of the air inside the box would cause
the time interval required to raise the internal pressure to vary from 18
seconds on one occasion (room temperature 52?F) to 4 minutes (room
temperature 58?F) while the bath temperature remains constant.
One of the early prototypes had a fitting welded to the top and
a pressure gauge attached. The box was placed in the rack and sub-
merged as shown in figure 20. Considerable experimenting on water
bath conditions was conducted with this box. It was planned to use this
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
box during the testing of the 100 units. However, it was found that a
second test box became necessary as the test units required approxi-
mately 15 minutes to approach room temperature. Plans indicated
that the test unit would be placed in the center with boxes to be tested
on either side as indicated in figure 21. This method of testing was
eliminated since a, "leaker" was not readily recognized since the air
bubbles had collected under the lip of the cover. The test rig as
shown in figure 22 was the designed unit and was used very success-
fully, since the box can be rotated during the test. This test unit was
a second good check on the body and bottom welds, in addition to find-
ing any adverse affects resulting from the hardware welding.
It was found that the reduction in room temperature would
have a direct effect on the time required for the internal box pres-
sure to reach the desired figure if the bath temperature remained con-
stant. The converted box was always tested first to determine the
proper time interval required for the five pounds internal pressure
while spot tests were conducted throughout the testing period.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
~ECET-
Test box in hot water tank
Figure 21
Proposed method of production testing
44
SECHET,
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 T Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3 45
B It
Figure 22_
Revised Production Testing
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 46
Gasket Compression Test
The completed box was placed in a device designed and built
under the supervision of A set of six readings were taken
in the manner shown in figure 23. The cover was then closed and a
second set of readings taken. (Figure 24. )
An example of the method of calculating the compression was
as follows:
0. 465" - Box closed
0. 250" - Top of shell
0. 290" - Top and gasket
0. 215" - Difference
0.075" - Compression
These readings were obtained by measuring the distance from
the top of the device to the lip of the body, closing the cover of the box
and measuring the distance at the same spot. The difference of these
two readings was subtracted from the thickness of the cover and gasket
and used as the compression figure. The specified allowable tolerance
was 0. 090" + 0. 020".
The first forty (40) boxes were tested without the gasket re-
tainer in place. This program was initiated to expedite production,
since the retainer had been redesigned just two weeks prior to the first
available boxes. Thirty-six (36) of the boxes had compression readings
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-347
Figure 23
Vernier height gauge reading: on body lip
Figure 2t+
Vernier height gauge reading on cover
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 48
between 0. 100" and 0. 120". The remaining four boxes had readings
ranging between 0. 090" and 0. 116" compression. Ten of the forty
boxes were retested after the gasket retainer had been welded in place.
It was found that the average reading was 0. 075" to 0. 080" compression.
An attempt was made to hold the compression values con-
sistantly in the nineties. However, it was found that the hinges would
cause the cover to bend even with the compression values held in the
seventies.
The following set of values in Table I are the compression
readings for the semi-production lot. The figures are expressed as
whole numbers rather than as thousandths. Hence a reading of 85 is
actually 0. 085" compression.
The readingswere taken in the following manner:
~5 41
~1 2 3
Readings 2 and 5 were taken at the center of the shell lip
while the remaining 4 readings were taken approximately 1-1 / 2 inches
from the end. The pegs in the fixture (figure 23) made it possible for
the readings to be taken in the same place on each can.
While the average readings were excellent on the retest of
the initial 40 units, it was decided to retest the initial units with the
gasket retainer in place.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Unit No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
1
82
79
78
79
84
84
2
85
83
84
87
82
81
3
89
80
85
79
78
84
4
82
81
78
80
82
87
5
89
86
84
81
79
80
6
75
72
76
77
74
71
7
84
80
74
80
81
84
8
90
88
89
83
81
86
9
70
68
75
70
74
74
10
81
74
75
73
81
87
11
86
79
75
79
84
89
12
88
75
80
93
79
83
13
80
80
81
74
85
80
14
85
80
85
79
81
84
15
79
85
79
72
70
75
16
80
78
75
69
73
79
17
78
80
82
79
78
79
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Gasket Compression Readings - 2
Unit No. 1 2 3 4 5 6
18 92 87 82 88 81 82
19 80 75 75 79 74 77
20 94 90 95 95 94 95
21 83 81 77 72 78 80
22 84 82 80 77 78 80
23 75 79 72 70 78 79
24 72 73 68 70 74 79
25 77 82 82 80 80 82
26 79 88 84 92 82 89
27 93 80 83 87 92 96
28 91 88 93 88 94 97
29 99 95 96 87 86 80
30 79 82 80 77 76 70
31 79 82 80 73 76 77
32 81 72 72 78 77 72
33 99 85 81 86 84 98
34 94 85 89 91 88 99
35 89 92 89 78 82 75
36 80 79 77 78 74 71
37 77 73 80 74 79 69
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET
51
Gasket Compression Readings - 3
Unit No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
38
86
86
89
91
93
92
39
81
79
83
72
83
89
40
76
71
73
72
70
71
41
68
72
73
76
69
76
42
70
71
70
75
79
72
43
79
72
79
73
71
72
44
80
82
81
79
84
87
45
80
83
84
80
86
90
46
79
88
88
78
91
92
47
87
86
88
90
90
98
48
85
89
89
90
90
91
49
95
92
96
96
94
95
50
83
85
84
83
88
87
51
82
91
91
86
84
90
52
83
84
83
86
85
82
53
87
81
86
80
82
84
54
88
82
81
75
83
86
55
89
82
87
87
84
86
56
70
68
69
67
69
68
57
88
84
80
95
91
94
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Gasket Compression Readings - 4
Unit No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
_
58
81
84
80
88
92
80
59
73
74
69
74
72
71
60
86
88
93
92
85
99
61
89
92
94
89
83
80
62
85
90
89
90
80
82
63
72
71
67
86
84
95
64
84
84
94
85
80
96
65
87
78
83
80
79
84
66
75
88
84
89
83
85
67
81
78
82
90
99
96
68
89
84
83
90
90
89
69
75
70
71
75
70
75
70
98
76
73
77
66
74
71
89
78
75
91
88
90
72
81
81
79
80
81
84
73
76
78
90
81
85
82
74
78
72
75
70
75
83
75
76
71
70
71
71
85
76
85
70
70
69
72
93
77
91
74
68
69
67
71
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Gasket Compression Readings - 5
Unit No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
78
74
70
66
68
76
83
79
86
82
79
74
72
69
80
90
78
76
84
74
74
81
71
75
72
79
73
74
82
80
73
65
81
81
84
83
93
81
71
70
81
86
84
82
73
74
69
68
73
85
72
77
74
73
72
75
86
73
69
75
79
79
89
87
89
78
81
78
78
82
88
85
74
79
90
89
95
89
79
70
69
73
76
78
90
77
71
70
75
70
82
91
77
66
70
74
71
72
92
67
66
66
64
66
70
93
85
79
72
71
70
73
94
71
77
72
90
99
96
95
91
92
94
90
91
94
96
91
84
85
83
91
97
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET
54
Gasket Compression Readings - 6
Unit No.
1
2
3
4_
5
6
97
84
84
94
75
80
96
98
75
88
84
89
83
75
99
81
81
86
76
80
86
100
71
69
71
82
71
78
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 55
Weld Coupon Test
Prior to any semi-production welding, three welders were
chosen and given a rough rating. This rating consisted of several
sample pieces of 22 gauge stainless being welded with butt joints. These
pieces were cut into 1/2 inch wide strips 8 inches long. The strips
chosen appeared to be the less desirable welds. The strips were placed
in the jaws of the "bridge" as shown in figure 25. The smaller weights
shown to the right are 25 pounds and the larger 100 pounds. Since the
over-all length ratio is 10:1, these weights represented 250 and 1000
pounds pull respectively. Once the strip was placed in position, the
valve azthe hydraulic brake was released and the weights added slowly.
It was not deemed advisable to add more than 1250 pounds to the bridge.
Six weld samples of this type were tested to destruction at Wentworth
Institute and the breakpoints varied between 1800 and 2250 pounds.
It was the practice of the test personnel to run several tests
of this type during the day, since it is a quick method of determining
the loss of efficiency due to fatigue.
The "hooks" on the table were used to test the hardware as
described in the hardware test section. The wood filler block used in
this test is placed under the table.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
trn uwff 56
Figure 25
Weld Coupon Test
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 57
Explosion Test
Two boxes were packed in accordance with the wishes of the
Client for detonation here. In each box two cans of 50 blasting caps
(equivalent of #8) were placed at the top and set off by remote control.
Figures 26, 27, and 28 are pieces of shrapnel found in the vicinity
which indicate the effects of the blast on the different parts. The cover
(figure 27) was torn across the center due to the 1/16 inch hole drilled
for the lead wires to the blasting machine.
A breakdown of the items packed in the box is shown in figures
29 and 30. The method of packaging is shown in figure 31. The test
results indicated that the cans of blasting caps should not be considered
as part of the kit (for shipping purposes only) but packed and shipped
in a separate container.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 ,CET Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
58
Figure 26
Hasp and body shrapnel
Figure 27
Cover Shrapnel
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 UC UIRET , Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
59
Figure 28
Hinge Shrapnel
SECRE'r
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
60
Figure 29 -
Breakdown of double pack
Figure 30-
Breakdown of single pack
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3b
Figure 31
Method of packing box
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 62
Gasket Test
A closed box was placed in a. laboratory oven for a, period
of 24 hours at a temperature of 165 + 3?F. When opened the gasket
showed no signs of stickiness.
The test was also conducted on the second lot of gaskets and
the same results found.
It was found that the sides of the box would bulge if the box
was closed and placed in the heated oven. These sides could not be
straightened for reuse. However, if the can is placed in the heated
oven for 10-15 minutes with the cover open, the bulging can be prevented
if the box is removed, the cover closed and the box replaced in the oven
for a 24-hour period.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
In the limited production of the SS Boxes, it became apparent
that, next to the gasket, the most vulnerable part of the container were
the welded sections. Because of the thinness (22 gauge) of the shell,
much consideration was given to the possibility of excess carbon par-
ticipation around the weld areas.
Carbon precipitation could be held to a minimum by several
means; i. e. selection of material, heat treatment and welding technique.
The first factor, namely the proper selection of stainless steel, would
require the use of type 347 or 316 ELC stainless. These materials
were ruled out for reasons discussed earlier in the report (Reference:
Development Section.)
Serious consideration was given to heat treatment of the en-
tire container and/or individual parts. This subject was discussed with
metallurgical engineers, fabricators and foundry operators. The gen-
eral consensus was that the process would be very complicated and ex-
pensive because of the gauge and structure of the box. In addition,
they were not certain that annealing would be beneficial in that the over-
all corrosion resistance of the parent metal would be reduced. These
conclusions pointed out that the welding technique would determine the
ultimate useability of this item in the field.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 64
On the basis of the above recommendations, information was
requested from the following sources:
(1) Air Reduction Sales Company
(2) The American Brass Company (Anaconda Welding Rod Division)
(3) G. E. Linnert, Research Welding Metallurgist, Armco
Steel Corporation
(4) Rodney Hunt Company, Orange, Massachusetts
The Air Reduction Sales Company representative recommended
the use of 316 filler rod. They felt that this rod has less carbon than the
316 type stainless sheet stock and would, therefore, prevent excess car-
bon precipitation.
The American Brass Company produces rods for welding brass
and copper and could not assist our project.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
The Rodney Hunt Company has wide experience in working
all types of stainless, although they primarily work with heavy stock.
When contacted they stated that they would be happy to act as a sub-
contractor, but would prefer not to give out "company know-how".
The recommendations from the above sources indicated that
no definite information was available for our specific needs. On this
basis it was decided to conduct various tests on welded samples pre-
pared by the welder, who would be working on the boxes for Technology
Engineering Company. This would also establish the quality of the oper-
ator, as well as establishing the possible working limitations. The
amperage would be varied in addition to the use of various type rods.
Samples of 22 gauge, 316 type stainless were prepared in
accordance to the following sketch:
Discard
Hold for
Future
Acid
2 Test
`. 4
Section
r
Hold for
Future
Discard
611
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 66
The current was controlled by the use of an AC Miller
Electric Welder bought by Technology for this work. All samples
were passivated in a 30% solution of nitric acid at a temperature of
160?F for 30 minutes. Prior to the acid tests the welded area was
cleaned with No. 180 grit emery cloth to remove discoloration and
fused slag while care was taken not to heat the welded section.
The first group (Samples 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 8, 80) was sus-
pended on wooden rods in a Saran beaker containing 500 mil of 10%
nitric and 3% hydrofluoric acid (by weight) in solution. All specimens
were immersed in the solution together. The solution was maintained
at 176?F ? 3?F for three 4-hour periods. At the end of each period,
the acid solution was replaced with fresh solution.
The following specimens were prepared and tested in the
above manner:
Specimen Number Description
310 filler rod, welded and
passed over, Position of
welder - standing, strip-
horizontal, current 25-170/V10,
copper back-up with groove,
polarity- straight.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET
Specimen Number Description
2 & 4 No filler rod, current 3-35/V35. 6
Copper back-up with groove,
Position: sitting, horizontal.
5 No filler rod, current 3-35/V55
Copper back-up plate with groove.
6 Current 3-35/V56, No filler rod,
copper back-up strip.
8 No filler rod, Current 3-35/V40,
lap joint.
80 316 filler rod, 3-35/V48
The conclusions as shown by figure 32 indicates that welds
made with 316 filler rod and the parent metal are the weakest. Type 310
filler rod showed no weld decay.
The second group of specimens was prepared and each speci-
men placed in a 500 ml glass beaker on a steam table and held at the
desired temperature.
Specimen Description
No filler rod, butt weld
310 filler rod, lap weld
316 filler rod, lap weld
316 filler rod, butt weld
310 filler rod, butt weld
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
68
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
The solution consisted of 10% nitric and 3% hydrofluoric
acid which was changed after the first four hours and every two
hours thereafter, for a total of twelve hours. Prior to the test,
the specimens were passivated in 30% solution of nitric acid at a
temperature of 160?F for 30 minutes.
The conclusions as shown in figures 33, 34, 35, 36, and 37
indicate that the specimens welded up type 310 filler rod proved to be
the superior method. Noticeable weld decay was found in both butt
and lap welds were type 316 filler rod and no filler rod was used. How-
ever, no filler rod is better than the weld made with the 316 rod.
The above results are, in general, in accordance with the
results published by Armco Steel Corporation. Their report, entitled
"Corrosion Resistance of Shielded Metal-Arc Welded Extra-flow-Carbon
Austenitic Chromium-Nickel Stainless Steels", is located in the appendix.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
70
Figure 33
Weld sample - no filler rod, butt weld
Figure -34
Weld sample - 310 type filler rod, lap weld
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21 : CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
71
Figure 35
Weld sample - 316 type filler rod, lap weld
Figure 36
Weld sle - 316 type filler rod, butt weld
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
72
Figure 37,
Weld sample - 310 type filler rod, butt weld
f SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
GASKET
For the original prototypes fabricated during the develop-
ment period, each gasket was cut from flat stock. The purpose of
each gasket was to provide a. seal until the box design was finalized.
Six (6) handmade gaskets were purchased from Greene Rubber Com-
pany, Cambridge, Massachusetts in accordance with the original
gasket drawing. These gaskets were used until the gasket mold was
completed.
On February 5, 1953,
submitted a cost estimate of $480. 00 for a, one cavity mold. On
April 13, 1953, the Work Order was received from the Client and
a purchase order was forwarded to
Upon completion of the mold, a request by
was forwarded with the specifications to the Lubron Gasket
Company, Everett, Massachusetts for three sample gaskets. The
samples were examined for dimensional compliance with the drawing
and, in essence, a. check on the mold. One gasket was given to the
Client's Project Engineer who forwarded it to the Rock Island Arsenal
to determine compliance to Grade RS400BFZ of Specification MIL-R-3065,
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET
The results of test are as follows:
Test
Sample
Specification
Polymer
Nitrile
Synthetic
Tensile, psi
935
Elongation, %
660
Hardness
50
40 + 5
Compression Set, %
19
As low as possible
(1" length)
ASTM D1043, Stiffness
-20?F
Failed
ASTM D746, Solenoid Brittleness
-40?F
Pass -40?F
Ages 70 hours @ 150?F
Tensile 915
Elongation 460
Hardness 60 40 + 5
The sample did not meet the hardness or low temperature
requirement.
On December 23, 1953, during a conference of all parties
concerned, the decision was reached to fill in the existing corners
and make the gasket slightly wider. On December 28, 1953, a tele-
phone call from the Client resulted in the width being increased 1/8
inch. By January 5, 1954, these changes in the gasket mold had been
incorporated. Figure 38 indicates the changes as outlined above.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
75
Figure 38
original and revised gaskets
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
The mold was then forwarded by
Company to the Tillotson Rubber Company, Needham, Massachusetts
in order that several preliminary samples be made. Dimensions of
the gasket were checked and approved. The fit in the cover of the
box was very satisfactory and production of 120 gaskets was started.
The test report submitted by T. R. Weaver, Chief Chemist,
Tillotson Rubber Company on the lot of gaskets was as follows:
Material Specified Material Used
MIL 3065 Tillotson Rubber Co.
Compound #420
Class RS Grade 400 BFZ made from GRS
Durometer 40 + 5 38
Compression Set 25% max. 23%
Low temperature - not brittle at -40?F Below -50?F
After aging 70 hours at 158?F
Must still pass above tests
Durometer 40
Compression Set 21%
Brittle Point Below -50?F
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Additional Test Results
Permanent Set 15.5%
Tear Resistance 625 lb./sq. in.
Tensile Strength 1105 lb. /sq. in.
During the fabrication operation it was necessary to place the
gasket inside the retainer on the cover, in order to complete the
gasket compression test. During the testing of the first sixty-six
(66) units, one (1) gasket was rejected due to a crack at one corner.
The next lot of eight (8) were forwarded to Somerville the afternoon
of the completion of the gasket compression test. A visit was made
to Somerville the next morning to observe the painting technique.
A casual examination of these boxes indicated two faulty gaskets. A
closer examination indicated slight cracking in four additional boxes.
Examination of the sixty-six boxes already delivered here resulted in
twenty-eight additional faulty gaskets.
A meeting was held here at which time
Inc. , reviewed the series of events leading to the current situation.
At this meeting on April 30, 1954,
Tillotson Rubber Company expressed an opinion that the cracks were
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
due to either ozone cracking or elongation beyond the elastic limits
of the gasket. A copy of Specification MIL-R-3065 indicated that
Grade 400BFZ was the only material on the chart that did not
specify the tensile strength and ultimate elongation. GRS type
rubber is most liable to be affected by ozone. Six (6) defective
gaskets were given to Mr. Weaver who planned extensive tests to
pinpoint the failure. He felt that once the source of the difficulty
was located, it could be easily remedied.
On May 6, 1954, three sample gaskets were forwarded
to us and each installed in a box. No cracking was apparent after
four days of testing. A purchase order was forwarded to Tillotson
for 60 gaskets only, to cover an emergency request.
A report was submitted by
results as follows:
Material Specified
MIL 3065
Class RS Grade 400 BFZ
Durometer 40 + 5
Compression Set 25% Max.
Low temperature - not brittle at -40? F
outlining his test
Tillotson Rubber Co.
Compound #256 made from
GRS + Natural
Durometer 44
23. 5%
Not brittle at -65?F
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 79
Additional Test Results
Permanent Set 12. 5%
Tear Resistance 560 lb. /sq. in.
Tensile Strength 1230 lb. /sq. in.
Elongation 500%
After aging 60 hours at 158?F
Permanent Set 9.4%
Tear Resistance 475 lb. /sq. in.
Tensile Strength 1125 lb. /sq. in.
Elongation 360%
NOTE: Test section of gasket clamped in 70% compression under
1/16 inch radius metal ring for seven days showed no
evidence of cracking whatsoever.
Three boxes were checked each day for indications of
cracking. Five weeks elapsed and no indications of cracking was
apparent.
The gasket material in the tentative specification has not
been finalized as yet. Tillotson Rubber Company and
felt that any final specification should include minimum
figures for tear resistance, -tensile strength and ultimate elongation.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 80
The original gaskets were made in accordance with
Specification MIL 3065, Class RS, Grade 400BFZ and designed
at Tillotson compound #420.
The revised gasket material now in use is made from
the following formula. and is designated as Tillotson compound #256.
Natural rubber
29. 1% by weight
GRS
29.1
Carbon Black
29.1
Process Oil
5.7
Zinc Oxide
2. 9
Sulfur
1.43
Anti-oxident
1. 15
Accelerator and Activator
1.52
Total
100. 00%
When contacted on tying in the above formula with a MIL
specification, the following was reported by Tillotson:
"After studying Specification MIL 3056 we feel that about
the best way to tie it down would be an addition to the Z portion of
the specification. We might suggest a minimum tensile of 100 p.
sec. and a minimum elongation of 400% but we don't consider these
essential. We might also suggest that 50% by volume of the total
elastomer content be natural rubber but here again it is possible
that someone could make a satisfactory compound without doing this.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 81
Under the Z section it now reads in effect that the proper-
ties must maintain original levels through 70 hours of over aging at
158?F. To this we would recommend adding ar section:
"Test section of gasket clamped in 70% compression under
a metal edge having a 1/16 inch radius for seven days at ambient
temperature shall show no evidence of cracking. "
Although the above information was helpful, it was decided
to attempt to tie in the gasket material directly with the MIL specifi-
cation. Tillotson was again contacted and they were unable to furnish
the requested information, but suggested that a better way to approach
the problem was to describe the test and let someone more familiar
with the specification phrase it in the language suitable for a specifi-
cation.
The following information was received in a letter from
Tillotson:
"It is our feeling that the test we performed will insure the
customer of an adequate compound. The only other alternative would
seem to be placing our formula on the print of the part. We have done
work where the compound was written out on the blueprint but it is our
feeling that it is not as satisfactory a procedure since every company
has its own approach to a compound for any given application. Also
this makes changes or improvements difficult.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 82
In actual practice we tested the gaskets as follows:
A section of a molded gasket about 1-1/2" long was cut out.
This piece was then placed on a flat 1/4" metal place of approximately
the same size as the piece of gasket. A piece of tubing 1" 0. D. x 7/8"
I. D. by 1" long which was then placed on top of the piece of gasket.
The edge of the tube which rested on the gasket was rounded over to
a 1/32" radius. The entire assembly was then placed in a "C" clamp
which was tightened up until that portion of the gasket which was under
the edge of the tube had been compressed 70% of its original thickness.
It was left in this clamped condition for seven days. Gaskets which
had failed in service cracked within 24 hours but no cracking at all was
found on the latest compound #256 which we developed for the job.
Various means of speeding up the cracking by heating and weathering
were tried but it was found that the action took place at room tempera-
ture as fast as under special conditions. You will notice that we have
compressed the gasket more than it is in actual practice to insure its
proper function in the field. "
Figure 39 is a sketch of test method used.
The Client's Project Engineer plans to forward information
and sample gaskets to Rock Island Arsenal where the MIL specifica-
tion was originated. It is hoped that this source can furnish the
desired information.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 CRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Figure 39
Testing method used by Tillotson Rubber Company
83
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 84
Figure 40 is the original mold used by Tillotson for the
production of the 100 gaskets. Figure 41 is the two cavity mold used
during the production of the gaskets for the 1000 lot.
During the initial lot, all gasket compression readings were
taken by a vernier height gauge. This method was time consuming in
that approximately 10 minutes per unit was required. A gasket com-
pression jig was designed which reduced the time required to obtain
the readings to approximately one minute. Figure 42 illustrates this
jig. The gauge is a precision unit manufactured by the B. C. Ames
Company, Waltham, Massachusetts and mounted on a piece of excess
equipment no longer used on another project. The 0. 290 inch difference
has been built into the fixture at the bottom of the gauge spindle.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
85
Figure 40
Original gasket mold
Figure 41
Two cavity gasket mold
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
86
Figure ,42
Gasket compression jig
SECREI
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 87
COATINGS
Since the gauge used in construction of the boxes was very
light, a coating was to be applied to the box. The Client recommended
that consideration be given to Veloform F-10 (Firestone Tire and Rub-
ber Company), liquid neoprene (Gates Engineering Company) and
flame sprayed polyethylene (Plax Corporation). These organizations
were contacted during the latter part of December, 1952.
The Gates Engineering Company submitted several samples
of neoprene. However, this coating was ruled out since the base
metal (22 gauge) had to be sand blasted. This operation had to be per-
formed to establish a, rough surface, in that the rubber would not bond
properly on a smooth surface. Additional difficulty would be en-
countered in the closure area of the box.
The letter to Firestone Tire and Rubber Company was directed
to However, no answer on the original letter or the follow-
up was ever received.
The letter sent to the Plax Corporation on flame spraying poly-
ethylene was in turn forwarded by Plax Corporation to the De Bell and
Richardson Company, Hazardville, Connecticut, who were not interested
in this application.
In addition to the coatings recommended by the Client, informa-
tion and samples were requested from the following organizations:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
Company
(1) U. S. Rubber Company
(2) U. S. Stoneware Company
(3)
New Chemical Production Company
(4) Heresite Chemical Company
(5) Norton Chemical Company
(6)
Industrial Metal Protection, Inc.
(7) Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company
(8)
Pyrene Manufacturing Company
(9) David E. Long Corporation
(10)
Alvin Products Company
Material
Royal Guard
Tygon
NUKENITE 35
Parasite 500
Durmite 316
Zincilate
ML 27574
Lube Lok
Delco
Lab Metal
On June 3, 1953,
at M. I. T. is head of the Corrosion Department at
M. I. T. and the author of a recent handbook on Corrosion. He stated
that to his knowledge very little research had been conducted on pro-
tective coatings for underground storage. It was his opinion that any
attempt at an accelerated test would be of little value except to determine
the quality of the application of the coating. stated that type
316 stainless steel used underground was better off corrosion-wise
without any coating than with any coating he knew. For this reason he
suggested a cocoon type coating which could be peeled off before bury-
ing the container. Other suggestions were a vinyl type paint, a tar and
paper wrap and cathodic protection.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
On August 6, 1953, the test program on various coatings
had been completed by Strips of 22 gauge stainless
steel (including a welded section) were coated with paint in accord-
ance with the manufacturer's instructions. All samples were the
air-dry type coatings, suitable for brush or spray applications.
The following types and brief description of each were prepared
and examined:
(1) -S- Navy #TT-E-484: Standard Navy Vinyl, rapid
drying, used with one coat of wash primer, supplied
by the Client, bonded well.
(2) -S- Navy Vinyl Alkyd: Similar to the above coating,
but recommended for the most severe corrosive
conditions.
(3) -S- Delcoat Series "A" Vinyl Coating: Excellent
bonding, tough finish, dried quickly, four or five coats
required.
(4) -B- Prufcoat Series "A" Vinyl Coatings: one coat
of primer, two top coats, bonded well.
(5) -B- Type VR-504, Air Dry Heresite Phenolic Coat-
ings: bonded well, thick, tough coat, required a longer
drying time than vinyl coatings, more expensive.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 90
(6) -B- Zincilate or Galvicon: very similar coatings.
Zincilate is, (one coat only), used by Army Ordnance
bomb storage.
(7) -B- Tygon Type K: self-priming, bonded well, tough,
not recommended for as highly corrosive conditions as
vinyl paints.
(8) -B- Tygon Vinyl Process: very poor bond, primer
stripped off.
(9) -B- Tygon Transparent Coating: stripped from metal.
(10) -S- Tuffy Paint: Similar to the vinyl paints, did not
bond as well.
(11) -S- Eastern Lacquer Company Vinyl: bonded fair,
(12)
-S- Gates Engineering Company: Bonded well,
abrasive resistant, one (1) coat primer (N-100-1)
and three (3) coats of N-700. The "-S-" indicates
spray and the "-B-", brush as a recommended means
of application.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 91
A meeting with the Client's Project Engineer was held and
it was decided that ninety (90) of the initial lot would be coated with
the navy Vinyl Alkyd material and that the remaining ten (10) units
would be painted with other coatings from the above list. These
units are to be buried and examined at a. later date which would
be specified.
On October 14, 1953, information was received from the
Client that a wash primer was to be used in conjunction with the
Navy paint. The wash primer will comply with Specification
MIL-P-15328 (Ships). The Navy paint was forwarded by the Client
and transmitted to Technology by us.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
DISPOSITION OF UNITS
In Out On Hand
Semi-production units 5
Client
Test Standard
Expended
Production Units
On Hand
Shipment s
Client
Expended
Testing
100 98
*Available for test purposes but not suitable for shipment.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 93
BURIAL PROGRAM
The initial burial program was to bury boxes painted
with Navy Vinyl Alkyd paint and such other paints specified by
7_ _il_
and
e C
i
t
t11
f
l
en
. These units were
to be buried in sand, loam, day, cinders, swampy location and
sunk in water.
During May, 1954, the scope of this program was en-
larged to include other types of containers and methods of packaging.
This change was due to the scarcity of SS Boxes caused by the en-
larged requirements of the Client.
71 at
Two types of wood boxes were to be used; i. e.,
and
cypress. The boxes were delivered to the Area in September, 1954
in the knocked-down condition. The items to be packaged inside the
boxes were also forwarded to this location. The wood boxes were
assembled and packaged under the direction of the Client.
Figure 43 indicates the general arrangement of a one unit
burial pack, while figure 44 indicates the layout of a double unit pack.
Figure 45 illustrates the method used to secure the various boxes for
the submergence program.
These "burial kits" were buried in the following locations:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
94
Figure 43__
one unit burial pack
Figure 44
Double unit burial pack
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
(1) One unit in clay (figure 46). The location of this
area is to the right of the road leading into Demoli-
tion Area #1 and is marked by a figure 1 on the map
of the Reservation.
(2) Two units in a swampy area. (figure 47). These
units were buried at the edge of a cranberry bog
along the patrol road near building T-432 and
marked on the map by a figure 2.
(3) Two units in sand (figure 48). These units were
buried across the road from Igloo 322 and is shown
on the map by a figure 3.
(4) Two sets in a well drained loamy area (figure 49).
These units are located in a, loam mound near the
concrete slab on the north side of track "E" and is
marked on the map by a figure 4.
(5) One set in wet loam (figure 50). This set is buried
across the road from building T-451 and is marked
on the map by a figure 5.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21 : CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 EC ET Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Figure 45 -
Units packed for submergence
Figure 46
Pack buried in clay
96
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
97
Figure k7
Pack buried in swamp
Figure 48
Pack buried iii sand
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
98
Figure
Pack buried in dry loam
Figure 50
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 99
(6) One set was submerged in Puffer Pond off shore
from the old log cabin. This set is marked on the
map by a, figure 6.
(7) One set in running water. This set is under the
culvert on the patrol road relatively close to
building T-418. The location is marked on the
area map by a figure 7.
The map of the area indicating the burial locations is
located in Appendix F.
Samples of soil from each location were taken and forwarded
to the University of Massachusetts Field Station, Waltham, Massachusetts.
The analyses were conducted by
and followed the procedures outlined by of the University of
Connecticut. The results are as follows:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SOIL TEST
Waltham Field Station, University of Massachusetts
VL - very low L - low M - medium H - high
VH - very high EH extra high
1 ton per acre - 50 lb per 1000 sq ft or 5 lb per 100 sq ft
Ph 7. 0 - neutral pH 6. 0 slightly acid
pH 5. 0 - acid
pH Nitrogen Phos-
Alumi-
Soluble
Soil
Acidity Nitrate Ammonia phorus
Potash
Calcium
num
Salts
Sand
5.0
VL
L
L
VL
VL
M
0
Dry Loam
5.5
VL
L
L
VL
VL
MH
10
Wet Loam
5.0
VL
L
ML
VL
VL
H
0
Clay
6.0
VL
L
ML
VL
VL
H
0
Swamp
5.2
VL
L
L
VL
VL
H
0
Pond
6.1
VL
L
M
VL
VL
L
0
Creek
6.8
VL
L
M
VL
VL
L
0
C/1
tid
n
t 0
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 9 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
(0(
Method of Packaging for Shipment
Figure 51
Components of gross package, including two (2)
stainless steel boxes, two (2) double-face
corrugated liners one (1) JAN-P-105A Style
plywood box with top. The steel strapping is
not shown.
The outer box is as follows:
Spec: JAN-P-105A, Style A.
Mat'].: 3/8" plyscore and 3/4" soft pine.
Size: 16-1/2" x 10-5/8" x 18-3/8" inside
dimensions.
SEC17ET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 UET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
102
Figure 52
Components of box inserted and box
ready for closure.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
103
Figure 53
Completed box, closed and strapped with
3/4" steel. Gross weight is 38 lbs.,
gross cube is 3.0 ft.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
RECOMMENDATIONS
field, the following pilot lots are recommended for fabrication:
(1) 10 - 20 units of 347 type stainless steel
(2) 10 - 20 units of 316 ELC type stainless steel
(3) 10 - 20 units of 304 ELC type stainless steel
(4) 10 - 20 units of 304 type stainless steel
The above units can be fabricated from existing tools, dies,
fixtures, etc. Any difficulty in fabrication can be indicated prior to
production. These units can also be subjected to a severe test pro-
gram and evaluated.
If for any reason 316 stainless may not be available, the
problems of the above materials will be known. In addition, the
limitations of boxes made from the above types can be determined
and selection of another type stainless can be based on facts if type
316 is not available.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET 105
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The Project Engineer wishes to express his thanks
and appreciation to
for the design of the
"bridge" which greatly expedited the test program;
25X1
25X1
Research Division, Armco Steel Corporation for his
help in providing excellent background material on welding; to
for his able assistance during the production
and test phases of the program; and to
, for his assistance and cooperation
during the design and production of the boxes even though he
did not approve all the changes requested and incorporated in the
design.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 106
APPENDIX A
Dies made by 25X1
Brockton, Massachusetts and used in forming parts of box.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
A-I
Figure 51 -
Bottom blanking and first draw dies
Figure 55
Finish draw for bottom
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 CT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
A-2
Figure 56
Blanking the for cover
Figure 57
Drawing the for cover
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 ET Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
A-3
Figure 58
Forming the for sides of cover
Figure 59
Trimming die for corners of cover
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 G I Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
A-4
Figure 60
Folding die for cover
Figure 61
Blanking die for body hinge
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
A-5
Figure 62
Blanking the for hinge
Figure 63
Precurling the for hinge
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
A-6
Figure 64 _
Curling the for hinge
Figure 65
Right angle the for cover hinge
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21 : CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
A-7
Figure 66
Binding fixture for link
Figure 67
Curling the for retainer, latch link
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
A_8
Figure 68
Precurling the for retainer, latch link, also
interchangeable part for offset for body hinge.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 tT
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
A-9
Figure 69-
Gasket Retainer Blanking Die
Figure 70
Hole Blacking Die for Gasket Retainer
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
A-10
Figure 71
Forming Die for Gasket Retainer
Figure 72
Blanking Die for Retainer, Latch Link
SEcRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
APPENDIX B
Soil Corrosion Tests
Conducted by
U. S. Bureau of Standards
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
AND A HIGH ALLOY CAST IRON EXPOSED TO SOIL C;UIU-tOSlUly '1'~A 1 b UU1v L uU t r:L 13 x
U. S. BUREAU OF STANDARDS - K. H. Logan
Soil Properties
Total
Composition of Water Extract -
Me Equivalent per 100 -' of Soil
Mois-
ture
Aera-
tion
Acidity
Mg Equiv.
No.
Soil Type & Location
Na K
Mg
CO3
HCO3
Cl
SO4
Equiv.
in jo
of
Soill
per 100 g
of Soil
51
Acadia Clay
10.27
15. 55
5.03
0
. 56
5.75
22.0
47.1
P
13.2
53
Spindle Top, Texas
Cecil Clay Loam
55
Atlanta, Georgia
Hagertown Loam
56
Baltimore, Md.
Lake Charles Clay
3.12
.69
.47
0
.8
1.59
3.04
28.7
P
4. 5
57
El Vista, Texas
Merced Clay Adobe
40.9
P
A( 4)
58
Tranquillity, Calif.
Muck
2.03
2.23
1.29
0
0
.47
2.54
57.8
VP
79.3
59
New Orleans, La.
Carlisle Muck
1.03
3.08
2.70
0
0
3.47
1.04
43.6
VP
33. 3
60
Kalamazoo, Mich.
Rifle Peat
2.91
10.95
2. 86
0
0
0
56.7
43.4
VP
297.4
New Orleans, La.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
1 -4
~.0 00
41 m
a) .>
-W?-4
0
rn
4-4
0
O
0
~-1
a)
r.
1-4
01
W
bD
"r
0
cd I
U
co cq C14
cIq 0
co CD N
co NV
CD N CA
CD CV O C) co
co to c~ c~
o N 00
L- 00 0 r- 0
C14 C6 cj~ c~
-I c1q
1.4 C)
N 0 co co
co LO N
N L) Co
0
0
N N r-4 LC) GV
c7
00 LV 6) .-I M
CD 00 N L) O
c M
cd
Z
cd
CD .-I CO
co 00 N
a)
co di LO CD N C1) O r
O . cv ?
Z
0 Z I CD cD co CD CD CD cD CD N Z
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
-3-
Notes: (Continued)
2. Pitting is measured in mils. The symbols are:
M - Shallow metal attack, roughening of surface, but no definite pitting.
P - Definite pitting, but no pits greater than 6 mils.
U - Apparently unaffected by corrosion.
+ - One or more specimens contained holes because of corrosion, rendering
the computation of the exact penetration impossible. The thickness of the
specimen has been used as the maximum pit in this case.
3. Figures for the corrosion rates are expressed in milligrams per square decimeter
per day. Calculations for these weight losses were made from ounces lost per
s quare foot per test period. All the specimens were exposed for a period of 9
years except the following:
(a) All 20 Cr-22 El, 18 Cr-il, Ni steels - 2 years.
(b) 18 Cr steel in soils Nos. 51, 53 and 56 - 2 years.
(c) 18 Cr steel in soil No. 58 - 4 years.
(d) 18 Cr steel in soil Nos. 57 and 64 - 5 years.
(e) 18 Cr-8 Ni steel in soil No. 63 - 5 years.
(f) 17. 2 Cr, 8. 95 Ni, . 44 Mn steel in soils Nos. 51 and 63 - 7 years.
4. Alkaline soils are expressed as A.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET B-4
o co co c11
,--i -.4 GV LO
O O M O1
O O 1-4 O
co
o
41
't+ N co
O O
O O O N
O O O co
N
1l 0
N CO co o co co co CO LC)
O)
10
It 0 N O .--I O r-I O CV
O
0
10
O O d) O 0 0 O O O
t
O
ri U
Ln ,~
rnN
O 0 0 O O 0 0 0 0
0
co
41
+
41
Ua
0
O~
,--I
co
to
co
N
co
o)
o
,? c1q M
da
LO
0
Lf)
LO
LO
LO
LC)
co
co co co
to
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
co to
cq e-4
T-4 CV
N CO
co to
In to
M
Q)
co
CD
m
e--i
,-?
e-i
.,t
0
O
CV
O
O
CV
O
0
O
O
Z
O
CJ
bn
74 o o to cn N C?) O
m o ca cn CD cn -
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET B-6
to
to CD LO CD
-4 N t() 'd
O 0 0 0 O
0 O 0 0
LO co 00 M to
O 0 0 C -1 O
O 0 O O O 0
0 0 0 o 0 0
co
1-+ o
oz
m
r M LO CD C- Co m O .-I CV co IM LO O C- m
LD L LC L to m t.f) CD CD Co to Co Co Co CO GO
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
O O
0 0
co co
14 CD
.-i 1-i
r. cd
.0 -0
0
zo
U
x
r, o
O Z
M
co o
co O ~+
0 .-1 co ~t+ rn
O O .-4 0
--4 co LC) CO Lam- CO O 0 .-+ CI] co to L`- O 0
tD LO Lt) LD tt) it) CD CD CD to cc CD CD cD CD r
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
cd
co
co
N
O
N
O
co
tD
cc
N
d+
It
O
N
.--r
114
N
1-4
LO
L
O'
co
L)
C-
Co
N
-4
O
N
N
N
rI
N
N
C
N
N
M
N
N
M
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
0
O
O
O
O
0
O
CA
O
O
U
b4
4-jH
a)
41
cd
N
co
CO
N
N
CO
O
'qV
N
N
co
CO
N
N
O
LO
co
Lam-
Lam-
N
CO
CO
N
O')
to
O
C-
to
O
1-1
N
1-4
O
0
.-4
O
.-1
O
.-1
.-1
-4
O
1-4
0
0
0
0
O
0
O
O
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
U
bA
.10 -4
N
41
cd
N
d{
to
O
It
O
N
N
N
N
O
.-?i
O
u")
0
0
0
O
O
O
O
O
U
.,-i
?O 0
1-4 Co
lf)
CD
t-
CO
m
O
-4
co
N
N
C
CD
M
.144
LO
to
Lam-
O)
O
LC LC
LO
U')
L
LfD
LC
CO
co
CD
to
CO
cm
CO
CD
CO
C-
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET 108
APPENDIX C
Manufacturing, Inspection and Packaging
Specifications for the SS Box - Specification T238
These specifications were used to produce the semi-lot of 100 boxes.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
TENTATIVE MANUFACTURING AND INSPECTION
1. Purpose: The purpose of the specification is to insure the SS
Box is properly manufactured, assembled, and inspected.
2. Marking: No part of the SS Box shall carry the manufacturers
name or any means of identification.
3. Applicable Drawings:
3.1 Box, Assembly
3.2 Body, Assembly
3.3 Body
3.4 Bottom
3.5 Hasp
3.6 Hinge, Body
3.7 Pin, Hinge
3.8 Cover, Assembly
3.10 Retainer, Gasket
3.11 Gasket, Cover
3.12 Hinge, Cover
3.13 Latch
3.14 Retainer, Latch Link
3.15 Link, Latch
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET C-2
4. Material: Material shall be in accordance with drawings.
All metallic parts to be fabricated from stainless steel, type 316,
in accordance with Specification
5. Finish: This finish shall be suitably cleaned, free of deep
scratches, sags, runs, chips, dirt or other foreign particles.
6. Dimensions: The dimensions shall be in accordance with
the applicable drawing. The boxes shall satisfactorily pass the
gauges measuring the following dimensions:
Maximum over-all outside length
Maximum over-all outside width
Maximum over-all outside height
Minimum inside width
Gasket Compression
Camber of Cover
Camber of Body
7. Assembly: The SS Box shall be assembled so as to be in
accordance with drawings. All weldings shall be done by the
heli-arc method.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET C-3
8. Requirements:
8. 1 Covers of boxes shall open and close without binding
or requiring undue force. Gaskets shall not stick to top edges of
boxes nor shift within the gasket retainer when the covers are opened.
8. 2 Mating parts of the body hasp and the latch shall meet
without requiring deformation of any box part, and the hasp shall
close and open freely. The latches of assembled boxes shall re-
main closed without the use of artificial aids.
8. 3 The latch, cover, and hinge assembly shall with-
stand an upward verticle force of 250 pounds for 1 minute without
breakage or distortion of any of the components or welds.
8.4 The box bodies shall withstand, without leakage, and
internal air pressure of 5 p. s. i.
8. 5 The box with cover latched shall withstand, without
leakage, an external air pressure of 5 p. s. i.
8.6 A 1-inch section across the seam weld shall with-
stand a load of 500 pounds without separation of the weld joint.
8. 7 Spot welds shall have sufficient strength to meet the
test specified 9. 1. 3.
8. 9 Workmanship shall be in accordance with applicable
drawings and specifications. The box shall be free of burrs,
projections, or other imperfections which may interfere with the
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET C-4
9. Inspection: The SS Boxes shall be inspected in lots not less
than 300 or more than 500, as established by the contractor and
approved by the inspector.
9. 1 Inspections by manufacturer.
9. 1. 1 All box bodies shall be tested by the manufacturer
prior to painting by subjecting them to an internal air pressure of
5 p. s. i. maintained for 15 seconds while they are submerged
completely under water, with the bottom nearest the surface and
approximately 1 inch beneath it. Leaky boxes, indicated by air
bubbles coming from a corner, a welded seam, or other portion,
shall not be processed further nor presented to the inspector as
finished boxes. Boxes passing this test after repair by heli-arc
method welding may be processed further.
9.1.2 Every 4 hours of production a coupon (consisting of
two pieces of metal of the same type and thickness as that used for
the box body) shall be welded by each seam welder. A 1-inch cross
section coupon shall withstand a static load of 500 pounds without
separation.
9.1.3 Every 4 hours of production a. coupon (consisting of
two pieces of metal of the same type and thickness as that used for
the box) shall be welded by each spot -welder with five spot welds
and tested to destruction by any method satisfactory to the inspector.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET C-5
Satisfactory welding is indicated if the parent metal, failing
around the fuze spot, leaves a hole no smaller in diameter than
75 percent of the diameter of the weld specified on the drawing
and deeper than 50 percent of the thickness of the parent metal.
If all five welds are not satisfactory, the equipment shall be shut
down immediately and not allowed to operate again on production
until the condition is corrected and a satisfactory coupon is
obtained.
9.1.4 All finished boxes, completely assembled, and with
covers latched into closed position, shall be tested by the manu-
facturer by submerging them in water and maintaining them for a,
minimum of 15 seconds at an air pressure differential of 3 p. s. i.
in excess of the outside pressure. Leaky boxes, indicated by
escaping air bubbles, shall be removed by the manufacturer.
9. 2 Inspection by Contracting Authority's Inspector. Two
samples shall be selected from each lot by the inspector. Sample
A for visual inspection, gauging, functioning, and airtightness
acceptance tests, and sample B for tests of security of welds
and assemblies. The size of sample A shall be 10% of the lot
submitted, for inspection. The size of sample B shall be5%
of the lot submitted for inspection.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET C-6
9. 2. 1 Sample A
9. 2. 1. 1 Each box of sample A shall be visually inspected
for completeness of manufacture, assembly, finish, and workman-
ship. Special examination shall be made to assure that boxes are
free of imperfections that would damage contents or injure personnel
handl ing them; that curls of the cover and cover hinge close tightly
and evenly over latch link and cover hinge pin, respectively; that
the body hem closes tightly and smoothly against the box body; that
the gasket bears snuggly against the cover skirt at sides and ends;
and that the cover skirt bears snuggly against the sides of the box
when the cover is latched.
9. 2. 1. 2 One box of sample A shall be measured to assure
conformance with all dimensions shown on applicable drawings.
Any deviation from the drawing dimensions and commercial toler-
ances shall be reported to the manufacturer who shall make appro-
priate correction.
9. 2. 1. 3 All boxes of sample A shall be gauged for di-
mensions specified in 6.
9.2.1. 4 All boxes of inspection sample A shall be stored
at a temperature of 165?F for a period of 24 hours and shall be
tested thereafter by opening and closing each cover to check
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET C-7
functioning, opening each cover to the fully open position to deter-
mine security of assembly. Inspection shall be made to assure that
the gaskets are snug within the gasket retainer and do not stick to
top edges of the boxes.
9.2.1. 5 All boxes of inspection sample A shall be tested by
closing the cover of each latching the hasp down in the fully closed
position and then opening to check function and security of closure
and ease of opening.
9.2.1.6 All boxes of inspection sample A shall be tested as
specified in 9. 1. 1. Leaky boxes are considered serious defects in
determining the acceptability of the lot.
9. 2. 1. 7 All boxes of inspection sample A shall be tested as
specified in 9. 1. 4. Leaky boxes are considered serious defects in
determining acceptability of the lot.
9. 22 Sample B
9. 2. 2. 1 All boxes of inspection sample B shall be tested by
applying a static load of 360 lbs. on their maximum area. The
boxes shall then be tested as specified in 9. 1. 4.
9. 2. 2. 2 All boxes of inspection sample B shall be tested for
security of welds and attachment of component parts of the assembly
(comprising the latch, latch link, latch link retainer, cover, cover
hinge, body, and body hinge) by clamping the assembled box in a.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET
suitable fixture with the body supported from distortion or collapse
by a. snug fitting wood filler block, and slowly applying a force of
250 pounds for a period of 2 minutes. During this test the box
shall rest upon its bottom with the cover raised at a right angle
and the force applied in a vertical direction with bearing against
the face of the latch when positioned parallel to the box bottom.
9. 2.2.3 All boxes of inspection sample B shall be tested
for security of attachment of hasp by clamping the assembled box,
in a suitable fixture and slowly applying a, force of 500 pounds for
a. period of 1 minute. During this test the box shall rest upon its
bottom with the cover fully open and the force applied in a vertical
direction with bearing against the underside of the lip of the hasp over
the entire surface available. The box body shall be supported
against distortion or collapse by a snug fitting filler block.
9. 2. 2. 4 All boxes of the inspection sample B that have been
subjected to the tests specified in 9. 2. 2. 1, 9. 2.2.2, and 9. 2.2.3
shall be tested again for airtightness as specified in 9. 1.4 at the
completion of such tests. Boxes found to be airtight may be placed
with the remainder of the lot of boxes undergoing acceptance tests.
Boxes found to have lost airtightness in the retest shall be discarded,
but without penalty for such loss, in the airtightness test.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET C-9
10. Rejections:
10. 1 If any box is found unsatisfactory when inspected under
9. 2, it shall be rejected.
10. 1 If more than two boxes are found unsatisfactory under
9.2.1.1, or 9.2.1.5 the lot shall be rejected.
10.3 If more than one box is found unsatisfactory under 9. 2. 1. 3,
9.2. 1. 4, 9.2.1.6, 9.2. 1. 7, 9.2.2. 1, 9. 2. 2. 2, or 9.2.2.3 the lot
shall be rejected.
10. 4 A lot of boxes which has been rejected for failure to com-
ply with this specification may be returned to the manufacturer for
the removal of defective and presented again to the inspector for
retest. The retest shall be limited to the failing test or tests, un-
less the inspector has reason to believe that, additional tests are
necessary to determine compliance with the specification, in which
case the additional tests shall also be performed.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
APPENDIX D
Tentative Manufacturing and Inspection
Specifications for SS Box
These specifications were used to produce the production lot of 1000boxes.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET D-1
Specification No. T238
MANUFACTURING, INSPECTION AND PACKAGING
1. Purpose: The purpose of this specification is to insure that
the SS Box is properly fabricated, assembled and
will operate in the desired manner.
2. Markings: No part of the SS Box or any component of the
packaging, or packing, shall carry any trademarks,
names, specification numbers, or other means of
identification. Your attention is directed to the fact
that some of the specifications cited herein may re-
quire symbols and marks on the material. The
elimination of all such marks is required.
3. Parts: The SS Box consists of the following parts and assem-
blies that are described in the below listed specifica-
tions and drawings:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Specifications and Drawings
3. 1
Box Assembly
T238-100
3. 2
Cover Assembly
T238-200
3.3
Body Assembly
T238-201
3. 4
Retainer and Latch Link Sub.
Assembly
T238-300
3.5
Body and Bottom Sub. Assembly
T238-301
3.6
Hasp
T238-401
3.7
Hinge, Body
T238-402
3.8
Pin, Hinge
T238-403
3.9
Hinge, Cover
T238-404
3.10
Latch
T238-405
3.11
Link, Latch
T238-406
3.12
Bottom
T238-407
3.13
Retainer, Gasket
T238-408
3.14
Gasket, Cover
T238-409
3.15
Cover
T238-410
4. Materials:
4. 1 The body and bottom shall be fabricated of 22 gauge stain-
less steel, type 316, cold rolled, annealed and pickled, 2B
finish.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
SECRET D-3
Materials:
4. 2 The cover shall be fabricated of 20 gauge stainless steel,
type 316, cold rolled, annealed and pickled, 2B finish.
4.3 The hardware shall be made of stainless steel, type 316,
cold rolled, annealed and pickled, 2B finish.
4.4 The welding rod shall be type 310 Mo (25-20-2 Mo) bare
welding rod.
4. 5 The gasket shall be specified by the Contracting Authority.
5. Finish:
5. 1 The completed can, less gasket, shall be passivated in
accordance with good shop practice.
5. 2 One coat of wash primer shall be applied on outside only.
The wash primer shall be the type designated "Pretreatment,
Wash Primer" in accordance with Specification MIL-P-15328
(Ships).
5. 3 Two coats of paint, supplied by the Contracting Authority,
shall be applied by spray painting on the outside only.
6. Dimensions:
6. 1 All dimensions shall be in accordance with the drawings
listed in Section 3 above.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET D-4
7. Assembly:
7.1 The parts shall be assembled in accordance with assembly
drawings T238-100, T238-200 and T238-201.
7. 2 No spot welding to expedite assembly of parts shall be used.
8. Inspection:
3.1 The SS Boxes shall be inspected in lots of 100 unless a
larger quantity is established by the fabricator and approved
by the Contracting Authority.
8. 2 Inspections by the fabricator
8. 2. 1 All box bodies shall withstand, without leakage, an internal
air pressure of five pounds per square inch for a period
of 2-3 minutes when completely submerged in water and
held below the surface at a depth of at least six inches.
Air bubbles indicating a leak in the unit constitutes cause
for rejection. A unit rejected for failure to pass this
test may be re-submitted for test after the defect has
been properly corrected and will be accepted when a. re-
test has been successfully passed.
8. 2. 2 Every fourth completed box shall be inspected to insure
proper compression of the gasket on Drawing T238-100.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
Specification No. T238
15 June 1954
If the box fails to meet these requirements, welding of
the body hinge and hasp shall stop until the locating fix-
ture has been corrected. Faulty boxes shall be corrected.
8. 2. 3 All the completed boxes shall withstand, without leakage,
an internal air pressure of five pounds per square inch.
The internal pressure shall be accomplished by submerging
the container in a bath of heated water to a temperature in
the ranges of 170?F.
CAUTION: Experience has been established that the inter-
nal air pressure of the box varies abruptly with the room
temperature. Prior to any testing a standard box with an
appropriate air gauge shall be submerged in the bath to check
the actual internal pressure before any production testing is
accomplished. The temperature of the water should be re-
gulated so as to obtain a stabilized pressure of 5 psi for a
period of one minute, after which two or three minutes should
be allowed for thorough inspection to find any leaks.
8. 3 Inspection by the Contracting Authority's Inspector.
8. 3. 1 Ten percent of the boxes bodies shall be inspected by the
Contracting Authority's Inspector, as outlined in section
8.2. 1 above.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Specification No. T238
15 June 1954
8. 3. 2 Ten percent of the completed boxes shall be inspected by
the Contracting Authority's Inspector as outlined in
sections 8.2.2 and 8.2.3 above.
8. 3. 3 Three percent of the completed boxes shall be tested by
applying a static load of 400 pounds on their maximum area.
8. 3. 4 Five percent of the boxes shall be tested by clamping the
completed box in a suitable fixture with the body supported
from distortion or collapse by a snug fitting wood filler
block, and slowing applying a. force of 250 pounds for a.
period of one minute. During this test, the box shall rest
on its bottom with the cover raised at a right angle and the
force applied in a vertical direction and bearing against the
face of the latch when positioned parallel to the box bottom.
8. 3. 5 Five percent of the completed boxes shall be tested for the
security of attachment of hasp by clamping the box in a
suitable fixture and slowly applying a force of 500 pounds
for a period of one minute. During this test, the box shall
rest on its bottom with the cover fully open and the force
applied in a vertical direction with bearing against the
underside of the lip of the hasp over the entire surface
available. The box shall be supported against distortion
or collapse by a snug fitting filler box.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET
Specification No. T238
15 June 1954
8. 3. 6 Five boxes shall be stored at a temperature of 160 + 5?F
for a period of 24 hours. Inspection shall be made to assure
that the gasket is snug within the gasket retainer and does
not stick to the top edges of box. Each lot or mix of gaskets
shall be tested in this manner.
8. 3. 7 During fabrication weld coupons shall be made at the dis-
cretion of the Contracting Authority's Inspector following
certification of individual welders as outlined in section 10.
A 1/2 inch section taken across the seam of the weld shall
withstand a load of 1000 pounds dead load without separation
of the welded joint. A similar section shall be bent 180
degrees over a 1/8 inch mandrel without injury to the
welded section.
9. Rejections:
If any box body is found unsatisfactory when tested in
accordance with section 8. 2. 1, the lot shall be rejected.
If more than one box is found unsatisfactory when tested
in accordance with section 8. 3. 2 through 8. 3. 5, the lot
shall be rejected.
If more than one gasket sticks to the top of the box when
tested in accordance with section 8.3. 6, the lot or mix of
gaskets shall be rejected.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Specification No. T238
15 June 1954
9.4 Rejects reworked.
10. Welders and Welding:
10.1 Welders - Prior to the assignment of any welder to work
covered by this specification, the contractor shall provide
the Contracting Authority's Inspector with the names of
welders to be employed in the work, together with certifi-
cation that each welder has passed qualification tests as
prescribed by any of the following listed codes for the type
of welding operation to be performed and that such qualifi-
cation is effective as defined by the particular code.
Welding qualifications of A. S. M. E. Standard
Qualification Procedure of the American
Welding Society.
Qualification tests for welders of the Navy
Department.
All welders shall qualify as class A operators for the type
welding performed. The Contracting Authority's Inspector
shall require any welders to retake the tests when in the
opinion of the inspector, the work of the welder creates
a reasonable doubt as to his proficiency. Recertification
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
Specification No. T238
15 June 1954
of the welder shall be made by the Contracting Authority
only after the welder has taken and passed the required
tests.
10.2 Welding - All welding shall be welded by the heli-arc
method. Prior to welding all weld areas shall be properly
cleaned. The edges shall be held securely in position by
appropriate welding jigs or frame. Complete and regular
penetration shall be obtained on all welds. Special pre-
cautions shall be taken to make welds air tight. A copper
backing strip will be used to avoid cracking of the base
metal adjacent to the welds during cooling. Skips and blow
through holes made while welding may be corrected manually.
10.3 All welding equipment shall be kept in proper working order
and shall be checked daily before production is started to
insure satisfactory performance. PARTICULAR ATTENTION
WILL BE GIVEN TO THE PROPER GROUNDING OF WORK
AND WELDING MACHINES.
10.4 Type 310 Mo (25-20-2 Mo) bare welding rod shall be used on
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639A001500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET D-10
Specification No. T238
15 June 1954
10.5 The size of the welding rod or wire shall be so adapted to
the base metal and thickness of parts to be welded so as
to insure effective penetration and an intimate fusion of
the filler and base metal. The work shall be positioned
for flat welding whenever practicable. Before welding over
previously deposited weld metal, all traces of slag shall
be removed, the deposit and adjoining base metal shall be
properly cleaned at all points.
11. Packaging:
11.1 After painting, the box shall be placed in a double-faced
corrugated carton. This carton only serves to protect
the painted edges while in transit or storage.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
APPENDIX E
Tentative Manufacturing and Inspection
Specification for SS Box - to be used for future production.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET
Specification No. T238
1 April 1955
MANUFACTURING, INSPECTION AND PACKAGING
SPECIFICATION FOR THE SS BOX
Purpose: The purpose of this specification is to insure that the
SS Box is properly fabricated, assembled and will operate
in the desired manner.
Markings: No part of the SS Box or any component of the packaging,
or packing, shall carry any trademarks, names, specification
numbers, or other means of identification. Your attention
is directed to the fact that some of the specifications
cited herein may require symbols and marks on the material.
The elimination of all such marks is required.
Parts: The SS Box consists of the following parts and assemblies
that are described in the below listed specifications and
drawings:
Specifications and Drawings
3.1
Box Assembly
T238-100
3.2
Cover Assembly
T238-200
3.3
Body Assembly
T238-201
3.4
Retainer and Latch Link Sub. Assembly
T238-300
3.5
Body and Bottom Sub. Assembly
T238-301
3.6
Hasp
T238-401
3.7
Hinge, Body
T238-402
3.8
Pin, Binge
T238-403
3.9
Hinge, Cover
T238-404
3.10
Latch
T238-405
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Specification No. T238
1 April 1955 - 2
3.11
3.12
3.13
Link, Latch
Bottom
Retainer, Gasket
Gasket, Cover
Cover
Specifications and Drawings
T238-406
T238-407
T238-408
T238-409
T238-410
4.3
4.4
5.3
6. Dimensions:
6.1
The body and gasket retainer shall be fabricated of 22 gage
stainless steel, type 316, cold rolled, annealed and pickled,
2B finish.
The cover and bottom shall be fabricated of 20 gage stainless
steel, type 316, cold rolled, annealed and pickled, 2B finish.
The hardware shall be made of 16 gage stainless steel, type
316, cold rolled, annealed and pickled, 2B finish.
The welding rod shall be type 310 Mo (25-20-2 Mo) bare
welding rod.
The gasket shall be specified by the Contracting Authority.
The completed can, less gasket, shall be passivated in
accordance with good shop practice.
One coat of wash primer shall be applied on outside only.
The wash primer shall be the type designated "Pretreatment,
Wash Primer" in accordance with Specification MIL-P-15328
(Ships).
Two coats of paint, supplied by the Contracting Authority,
shall be applied by spray painting on the outside only.
All dimensions shall be in accordance with the drawings
listed in Section 3 above.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET
7. Assembly:
Specification No. T238
1 April 1955 - 3
The parts shall be assembled in accordance with assembly
drawings T238-100, T238-200 and T238-201.
8. Inspection:
8.1 The SS Boxes shall be inspected in lots of 100 unless a
larger quantity is established by the fabricator and
approved by the Contracting Authority.
8.2 Inspections by the fabricator.
8.2.1 All box bodies shall withstand, without leakage, an internal
air pressure of five pounds per square inch for a period of
2-3 minutes when completely submerged in water and held
below the surface at a depth of at least two inches. Air
bubbles indicating a leak in the unit constitutes cause for
rejection. A unit rejected for failure to pass this test
may be re-submitted for test after the defect has been
properly corrected and will be accepted when a retest has
been successfully passed.
8.2.2 Ten per cent of gaskets received from the subcontractor
shall be tested for compliance with the hardness specifi-
cation of 40 + 5.
8.2.3 Two per cent of each lot shall be examined for compliance
with the required physical dimensions.
8.3 Inspection by the Inspecting Authority
8.3.1 At the beginning of each production, the welding of the
body hinge and hasp shall not commence except in the
presence of the Inspecting Authority. The first ten units
shall be inspected with a compression gage (furnished by
the Contractor) to insure proper compression of the gasket
as specified on DrawingT238-100. If any box fails to meet
the gasket compression requirements, further welding of
the body hinge and shell shall be stopped until the locating
fixture has been corrected.
Once the setting of the locating fixture has been proven
satisfactory, every alternate box of the next fifty units
shall be inspected.
Every fourth box shall be inspected for gasket compression
after the initial lot of 60 has been completed.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Specification No. T238
1 April 1955 - 4
If at any time the gasket compression readings fall outside
the allowable limits, every succeeding box shall be checked
until the fault has been corrected.
8.3.2 All the completed boxes shall withstand, without leakage, an
internal air pressure of five pounds per square inch. The
internal pressure shall be accomplished by submerging the
container in ? bath of heated water to a temperature in the
ranges of 170 F.
CAUTION: Experience has established that the internal air
pressure of the box varies abruptly with the room temperature.
Prior to any testing a standard box with an appropriate air
gage shall be submerged in the bath to check the actual
internal pressure before any production testing is accomplished.
The temperature of the water should be regulated so as to
obtain a stabilized pressure of 5 psi for a period of one
minute, after which two or three minutes should be allowed
for thorough inspection to find any leaks.
8.3.3 Three per cent of the completed boxes shall be tested by
applying a static load of 400 pounds on their maximum area.
8.3.4 Five per cent of the boxes shall be tested by clamping
the completed box in a suitable fixture with the body
supported from distortion or collapse by a snug fitting
wood filler block, and slowly applying a force of 250
pounds for a period of one minute. During this test, the
box shall rest on its bottom with the cover raised at a
right angle and the force applied in a vertical direction
and bearing against the face of the latch when positioned
parallel to the box bottom.
8.3.5 Five per cent of the completed boxes shall be tested for
the security of attachment of hasp by clamping the box
in a suitable fixture and slowly applying a force of
500 pounds for a period of one minute. During this test,
the box shall rest on its bottom with the cover fully
open and the force applied in a vertical direction with
bearing against the underside of the lip of the hasp
over the entire surface available. The box shall be
supported against distortion or collapse by a snug fitting
filler box.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET
Specification No. T238
1 April 1955 - 5
8.3.6 Five boxes shall be stored at a temperature of 160 ? 5*F
for a period of 24 hours. Inspection shall be made to
assure that the gasket is snug within the gasket retainer
and does not stick to the top edges of box. Each lot or
mix of gaskets shall be tested in this manner.
8.3.7 During fabrication weld coupons shall be made at the
discretion of the Contracting Authority's Inspector
following certification of individual welders as outlined
in section 10. A 1/2 inch section taken across the seam
of the weld shall withstand a load of 1000 pounds dead
load without separation of the welded joint. A similar
section shall be bent 180 degrees over a 1/8 inch mandrel
without injury to the welded section.
9. Rejections:
9.1 If any box is found unsatisfactory when tested in accord-
ance with sections 8.3.1 and 8.3.2, it shall be rejected.
9.2 If more than one box is found unsatisfactory when tested
in accordance with section 8.3.2 through 8.3.5, the lot
shall be rejected.
9.3 If more than one gasket sticks to the top of the box when
tested in accordance with section 8.3.6, the lot or mix
of gaskets shall be rejected.
9.4 Rejections shall not preclude the manufacturer from
correcting the conditions which form the basis of rejections,
nor precludes the manufacturer from reworking a rejected lot
for re-submission for inspection and testing. However, all
such units and lots so reworked shall be so indicated to
the inspector, who may select twice the quantity of units
submitted to test in the first inspection.
10. Welders and Welding:
10.1 Welders - Prior to the assignment of any welder to work
covered by this specification, the contractor shall provide
the Contracting Authority's Inspector with the names of
welders to be employed in the work, together with certifi-
cation that each welder has passed qualification tests as
prescribed by any of the following listed codes for the type
of welding operation to be performed and that such qualification
is effective as defined by the particular code.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET
Specification No. T238
1 April 1955 - 6
Welding qualifications of A.S.M.E. Standard
Qualification Procedure of the American Welding
Society,
Qualification tests for welders of the Navy
Department.
All welders shall qualify as class A operators for the
type welding performed. The Contracting Authority's
Inspector shall require any welders to retake the tests
when in the opinion of the inspector, the work of the
welder creates a reasonable doubt as to his proficiency.
Recertification of the welder shall be made by the Contracting
Authority only after the welder has taken and passed the
required tests.
10.2 Welding - All welding shall be welded by the heli-arc
method. Prior to welding all weld areas shall be properly
cleaned. The edges shall be held securely in position by
appropriate welding jigs or frame. Complete and regular
penetration shall be obtained on all welds. Special
precautions shall be taken to make welds air tight. A
copper backing strip will be used to avoid cracking of the
base metal adjacent to the welds during cooling. Skips
and blow through holes made while welding may be corrected
manually.
10.3 All welding equipment shall be kept in proper working
order and shall be checked daily before production is
started to insure satisfactory performance. PARTICULAR
ATTENTION WILL BE GIVEN TO THE PROPER GROUNDING OF WORK
AND WELDING MACHINES.
10.4 Type 310 Mo (25-20-2 Mo) bare welding rod shall be used
on all welds of the container.
10.5
The size of the welding rod or wire shall be so adapted
to the base metal and thickness of parts to be welded so
as to insure effective penetration and an intimate fusion
of the filler and base metal. The work shall be so
positioned for flat welding whenever practicable. Before
welding over previously deposited weld metal, all traces
of slag shall be removed, the deposit and adjoining base
metal shall be properly cleaned at all points.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SECRET
11. Packaging:
Specification No. T238
1 April 1955 - 7
11.1 After painting, the box shall be placed in a double-faced
corrugated carton. This carton serves only to protect the
painted surfaces while in transit.
SECRET
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 1.
132
24
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
SAM Bt COMM
PART NAME MATERIAL
`TYPE 316 S.S. ,' , 26
ZO MAY 54
MW AVINKY T 238-201
FU L L
HASP
IMAM
1955
NO DATE
PER AMPLE
UN UM SPEOR ALL TOLENANCES AM
RACTIONt6 DECIMALS ?,oos ANOtES t
e
T-238-4'1
SHEET I OF 15 SHEETS
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 ---,730
5 02O
- .375 L--
-730-
R 4 CORN F -R-5
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09121: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
__-
[--715 .
,375-
-N
?158 -000 FREE FIT WITH HINGE PIN.
-.062 !GGAGE U.S.ST'D)
PAR QQANIITY
NuAwm
PART NAME I MATERIAL.
TYPE 316 S.5.
0 AWN m F.J,G
'21 MAY 54?
A2MMKVT?38_?0j
2B
APPIOVELb LIT
FULL
HINGE -BODY
I MAY
1955
PER `-AMPLE
F. F
IRILESS SFEaRM ALL TOLERANCES AM
FRACTIONS t,'4 DECIMALS t , 005 ANGLES t I ?
B wT-238-402
SHEET 2
OF 15 SHEETS
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09121: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
r - - . 7
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
-.005
.156 4.ooo FREE FIT WITH COVER 4 BODY HINGES.
PAN QUANTITY
NIM11 u no
PART NAME I MATS L
TYPE 316 S.S.
OMNW By F' J. e.
DAN
2I -MAY 54
T 238-x00 I
FF.
B
AFFBOMlp M
acm z?.I,l
PIN- HN6E
NO DATE AEVISIONS > to 3161 56592 11211 Plato Tyr a 316 E,ab
5' 58 ~,u 1/ 8" c aoet ;;9: .C1
59.60 1/ 8" 07,11 Sheet
b-- 6% ;6740 1/ 2 Plate
6' 6t 1/3" Sheet
7 74 56592 1/2" Plate Type 316 .,.&h
L;r,(,? x:;15&r;a,ti
i&uatentt1c)
;i
4-7/378 1112" Plate y ; a 3181A i rco J-41)
77- 78
1/+8~a Sheet ( reoe 1',6 ~. .?a
79--80 1/21f :Late Type 309 Airco
81 812 1/8" Shoe Cb B6 2'.+i3
61;- 66
fJ'f 66
571-13 1/ 2" Kate T.;r~ e 347 ?al)
1 /,3f' ;', ane? r,LC e'>1? Y:a 2
1/3"
Z7 -
of ,~,Tobolq
.. ~,y A nea1.t-d 1t; 5O F 30 i 1^xutee water auanc .ed.
A,aYxeal.ed 19500' 30 minute ;.ir cooled
Sec Rel1ered, 1600,:11F 2 hour;) a a.i.r cooled
0 romluui n!eke l..ruol;ybe a um grades of base metal wore a nea'~,. 'row
a 4emperature o:f 20,500?<
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
0 j
cvoD a 4 k
04 C9 _4
00 0 0 0 Qt.) 040) O
C'1 4.. C- '- 0 0 0 N. 0 N \ L r4 03
0 ION .;y 41, tf} '-! C'1 1.0 .-4 CV .0' ul
(7. iL (V (J ('4 -4 r-4 0'. 1" 1 C?! (`'1 0
r^; r-i r-4 ?-{ r1 --4 r-t
C] N C7 ^- 0 r( LID ' Na r.1 s; t 7f7
t , C C~ C~ 0 C) 0) 0 (0 C- 00 a)
r-4 r-4 : - ,-4 r-4 r. r-[ .-4 r.4 r-I --1 -4
-4 . P C- V' Cti vg CCU C
.^.., .. a .. r. . ., ..
v -i ca t+1 r~ r4 a . 13 0-13 O
Ti I/2 { r 4 r ! C l N L) C~ -4 D 0 r4 rd ! G'4
Y. 0 C: C:> t? O C 0 C) 0 0 0 0 CS mt
C'- )r r-4 C'-. '.L? c- 0 cr% Cn
G' C') 0 -?# C3 0 u'S N- C) r-1 -4 0
Z C ,D 0C,0 C'-Oo 0r0 00
'0 C'1 .0 .O C -4 (1) C) ~ Cr!
d - J ) (?a N n ('3 C') CA ter
0 0 0 0 CS _~ 0 O 0 ~'~ O 0 O
)t\'0 0< cc cam- 0 0'- C C?1 7
a) Cl) Z. R 10 -C C. a) 01 4-
r i r-3 -i t ,-4 ,-4 r-4 r 4 r 4
00 ' 00 (C14 J CQ n M ON
?, ?s; u -'sues 'J
C7 C,~ is ,J0 C)0 00 000 0
4X1 r-{ r' '-r 00 14 ('4 0 CC] O j
'0 r?4 -4 0 CV Os ' F- C-% (' a} '0 . N. c - 4` :Z tor' C - Cr! -4
v'1 'f % WN 4 Ul
`i
K41
J -i f'?1 4r}
141 M W 00
0 0 '-'3 CZD
N Cv , -t ,--4
(D o_> 0
1"i r'1 ?(:, .4
N CO N N
0 0 0 0
7 , 4 J,, u?1
r_;,q r-. C-- N-'0
.3-
fi 6 N 0
r r~ ..4 C'1 ri
rl.~ ~~ ~ F
v1i .4
r-r
alit
`?f ni
.~ r
I
si ~;
Ks m
am pi cry crl t
'0 T3 ("I M.
0
C1 r4 CV vl C"\
C?t '.~a N N C.{ ry
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
Table 17 ~Con't)
; - e icq?. ar~~ns .*,is~n of 4aterials
e11 Metal Sraad~rd i a.1-14el d -i-ii%aJ Fads (cop
t )
o, Source
Code
CP
144
A o
Cb
ub/ C
Rar3.uc~
;w;, .n; rco
5/32_, 5
.160
1.>>
025
.008
.65
19.37
9.65
. 87
14.5
3/ !(>-B6
.063
1-94
.024
e008
-?0
19.30
9.59
.91
14.4
308 ?, 1 Tai?
x / 32 = .7
032
L 20
.026
o i6
.13
1.9.06
:.0.69
s/16--Z8
-0;30
1.18
.023
.o16
.17
19.09
10.66
308 ?LC Lab
5/32.- 13
.030
1.10
:027
.019
.14
18:59
12.93
11/3-6-M4
.028
10
_02 3
, 018
.12
18.54
13,03
3161 L0 Lab
5/32.=E9
.033
1.20
-023
.010
.15
17.71
1341
2.56
3/16 E10
.028
1.22
.023
007
.15
17.86
13.148
2.61
316 TLC Lab
5/32L15
,032
1.12
.024
.009
.1)
17.40
15.56
2.56
Austenitic
3/16-E16
033
1.14
.022
.008
.14
17.52
15,.66
2.56
318
Airco
5/32143
.073
1.:99
017
.008
,65
19.07
12.62
2.17
.58
8.0
Arcos
3/16-E61
.057
1.83
.020
010
,47
18.42
13:88
2.15
.76
13.,3
309 Cb
Nirco
5/32.-,E62
,086
1.59
-017
,013
.62
23:14
13.12
.60
9.3
3/16-163
,086
1.95
.019
.111.
66
23,39
13-42
.89
10"3
34? .L0
Lab
5/32-1:11
.038
1.05
026
.019
44
18.46
10.48
:51
13.4
3/16-:112
:037
1 0,
025
,0.1.9
;45
18.48
10,41
.51
13.8
(1) For the base materials, the carbon, columbium and nitrogen determinatiQric were ata.;te
on sheet bare, while the remaining eleeeut.u repr estat the ladle ar t4ys s:
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
LtYVAlt.~ LTit Ic . ci, 3
?ype or
i1 L! 2" .C:'! At8
1./ _. n $Jheet
t/ _$" OR Sheit
L121 la, e
r a 75.
2.522+
P a ,e it6 8 j
1.r'n 't183.+ =e663
tf: n C'1.t eat
1./ E1 (`R Sh e st? 66'>
81 Sheet
1.; 't axes 5 `i67l3
31+7
5'1 :;.tweet
Set
k at e rt5(.a 1,
~ti [l.Qfi4
ver~es
Range of
yo ? of Values r : can -A e = can
Specimens For 5?. 48 tiou r ? r: c; t;aiz;r
0007/.c. r3 ;;c:
0007/ .
C00S/ L 0L2 .. 0009
C~03
0007/ CO CS
ti oo08,1 01-19 0005
0008/ 0020 0012
o0o8;' C 0J 5 0c 1.2
.0009/ C-w 3 00i o
.001o/ C: ('1 Q 003.0
0O 9,1 C0 i,2 00.;.v
0oo8i/ C (,~.v 00,09
OQO9,; C00).5 (11 ..1.2
ooo6/ C.0 )8 0Ct:1-'
ooo6/ cor 7 Ot~!1?
0008/ C 1.0 0009
.0006/ c c 0 F,
0,,,0 00.'109 .0L:09
0005 co 6 ooo
She
0oo5; :c,-,o6
. ooo6
1 OR S) eat
0006/ .., rGO66
0006
I -late
?~f42
009ci 06
0006
is . S 1e t
0005 C,=)r~
, 0906
000 x`/ 0008
00;07
C
E
2
t i "i ;:11119r
0006,
COO?
ooo6
td tt C)l Sheet
.0000/,0007
. tocoa6
'.. ? -)n Pla.te
` 674,?
00113
0009
1!an ghee.
L
.0008/O009
o;()8
i'1IX,,
11211 t'late
:`;?172
0005/ . 0006
, o 9'06
3..~ heat
0005" 0o06
00o6
{`1 3heat.
0006/ oa07
.000(,
( _.) "test
coniacted in Cb
ch% Pout P219
Researc?.h ,Fborato.ry at
V Lt.r i nr.; t : '1
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
308
qIA
3/1,6t
~rY7 ~3 f A, +x 1 .. i ?.s
F42 90,800 61,700 39,5
+55.11
3& 7 _ 7O 0 66, 1
No weld defects w&.fd defectz
308 1 23-- . 55 7 3 3 T=? '~ 000 49, ono X40 O No weld dofectz
u }!
s3 ~s v> v Fv, 3 v Q deld (is `8 t
308 a 3/1 6" eJ 2r;19I 5578 114250 0 39, 200 14t o i4any intergr nu1ar hot
Austenit,ic cracks ir. weld metal
?1 L-03 16 liX,.i28-A. 4 Material_._ 1,a Affected Zone of Base
plate Slz'.s .zAav 1-(I1 ue !iEtal Ae'al Ad3acent to `.`,'e1 ;eld
1 1;/2n Plate 4524
La - a 0-
A'1 Austen t:i,, :aa1 . amount Austenlte, few carbides Austenite, moderat Austen_ vc, it, iax i. ide Aas %enit. , Ynodera I.
n t; ork amount of ferrite,
traces of carbides
x+o annarerct Cliff ;. erce Auste i t e aa:an
ia,t r air, C,U 1v o c? ~.t i.:
ferrite, no carb{d.
Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
 Sanitized Copy Approved for Release 2011/09/21: CIA-RDP78-03639AO01500140001-3
>"os'.r,ic'11-a -3 o ;' side( Spacii?ieni5
--- S?{~ utie
td ' r te) ".
5224.1
seat Affected ?-one
Weld ketaL
o azoarerLt difference. flu..