Counterfeit Chinese Parts

[Reloadron]

Been on some vacation and finally back at work cleaning out my email and voice mail. We all know about the counterfeit parts that roll out of China, however, I never quite realized the magnitude of the problem in key US defense systems:

Counterfeit Chinese Parts Slipping Into U.S. Military Aircraft: Report

By LEE FERRAN | ABC News – Tue, May 22, 2012

Related Content

Counterfeit Chinese Parts Slipping …

Counterfeit electronic parts from China are "flooding" into critical U.S. military systems, including special operations helicopters and surveillance planes, and are putting the nation's troops at risk, according to a new U.S. Senate committee report.

A year-long investigation conducted by the Senate Armed Services Committee found more than one million suspected counterfeit parts made their way into the Department of Defense's supply chain and were bound for use by "critical" military systems, according to the 70-plus-page document released Monday. In addition to Navy helicopters and surveillance planes, the parts were slated to be put into the Air Force's newest cargo planes.

"The failure of a single electronic part can leave a soldier, sailor, airman, or Marine vulnerable at the worst possible time," the report says. "Unfortunately, a flood of counterfeit electronic parts has made it a lot harder to prevent that from happening."

Chinese companies were identified as the "primary source" of the counterfeit goods and the Chinese government was criticized for its alleged disinterest in cracking down on counterfeiting there. The report said that Chinese companies take discarded electronic parts from all over the world, remove any identifying marks, wash and refurbish them, and then resell them as brand-new – a practice that poses a "significant risk" to the performance of U.S. military systems.

But the committee also pointed a finger at the Pentagon and U.S.-based defense contractors that rely on "hundreds of unvetted independent distributors."

According to the document, the investigation "revealed failures by defense contractors and [the Department of Defense] to report counterfeit parts and gaps in DoD's knowledge of the scope and impact of such parts on defense systems."

"Our committee's report makes it abundantly clear that vulnerabilities throughout the defense supply chain allow counterfeit electronic parts to infiltrate critical U.S. military systems, risking our security and the lives of the men and women who protect it," said Senate Armed Services Committee ranking member Sen. John McCain (R.-Arizona). "As directed by last year's Defense Authorization bill, the Department of Defense and its contractors must attack this problem more aggressively, particularly since counterfeiters are becoming better at shielding their dangerous fakes from detection."

A spokesperson for the Department of Defense did not immediately respond to requests for comment on this report, but another spokesperson told CNN the Pentagon was aware of the report and officials "looked forward to reviewing it."

"The Department takes very seriously the issue about counterfeit parts," Col. Melinda Morgan said. "We are working aggressively to address this issue..."

Months after the Senate committee launched its investigation, the Pentagon said in November it was moving to protect against counterfeit parts by modifying policies and improving its internal process as well as working more closely with private companies in the industry.

Then, Defense spokesperson George Little noted that "there has been no loss of life or catastrophic mission failure as a result of these parts entering the supply chain."

Representatives for the Chinese government at its embassy in Washington, D.C., and consulate in New York, New York did not immediately respond to request for comment on this report.

This is why we beat up our suppliers and vendors to make sure we get what we pay for. This follows something from a few months back regarding cheap Chinese counterfeit bolts that were turning up.

Ron

 

[jpanhalt]

This is why we beat up our suppliers and vendors to make sure we get what we pay for. This follows something from a few months back regarding cheap Chinese counterfeit bolts that were turning up.

Ron

And you are probably a for profit company, too. The DOD is not.

Coincidentally, I read a bit of paranoia today that blamed the landing of an American drone in Iran on a counterfeit Chinese chip that had a secret embedded program to make it vulnerable to a ground override. Talk about stealth. It is as bad the the Cold War spy, counterspy, counter-counterspy, etc.

John

 

[Sceadwian]

jpan, unless you can provide documented proof that that is actually the case, you're right it is just paranoia, not worth spreading as rumour. There's enough conspiracy nuts out there as it stands we don't need more!

Given how complex these systems are I'm surprised more haven't been downed before.

 

[Reloadron]

And you are probably a for profit company, too. The DOD is not.

Coincidentally, I read a bit of paranoia today that blamed the landing of an American drone in Iran on a counterfeit Chinese chip that had a secret embedded program to make it vulnerable to a ground override. Talk about stealth. It is as bad the the Cold War spy, counterspy, counter-counterspy, etc.

John

Actually John I work for B&W (Babcock & Wilcox) Nuclear Operations Group in Euclid, Ohio. So yes, we are a for profit company. However, we manufacture for DoD and DoE with a focus on the US Naval Reactor Systems. We manufacture the control rod drive mechanisms, the only moving part in the core of naval warship reactors. The thought of counterfeit parts scares the hell out of me even though the product receives extensive testing before it ever leaves the door.

What surprised me is how much of this crap has infiltrated the system. I knew it was there just not to the extent that it is there.

Ron

 

[jpanhalt]

Ron,

I couldn't agree with you more. There is no way that quality control and testing can ever replace built-in quality. You simply cannot test for everything, nor can a specification say everything that should not be there. The incident with Mattel toys and lead paint from China comes to mind. Who would have even thought that a specification for toys made in the 21st century must mention that lead paint should not me used. Mattel didn't and got burned by it.

Specifications mean so little, and that fact is so easily forgotten. A good friend used to lecture on the commoditization of xxx. Meaning that people tend to make into a commodity something that really is not.

As a personal example, today I finally bought an auto-darkening welding helmet. I have been electric welding since 1982 and gas welding since 1961. They are "on sale" at Harbor Freight (Parma Heights) for $50. I bought one for 4 times that price with the same "specifications." Why? I tried both, and there was no comparison.

John

 

[Reloadron]

As a personal example, today I finally bought an auto-darkening welding helmet. I have been electric welding since 1982 and gas welding since 1961. They are "on sale" at Harbor Freight (Parma Heights) for $50. I bought one for 4 times that price with the same "specifications." Why? I tried both, and there was no comparison.

That's it John, you get what you pay for. I figure the government is paying a good price for what is supposed to be a flawless product and they damn sure deserve what they are paying for. Quality isn't cheap but continuous quality inspection throughout the build process insures a quality product for the result.

What scares the hell out of me is it becomes one thing if a Chinese crap piston fails in a lawnmower but what happens when a crap part (counterfeit) fails in a FA 18 running Mach 2? Closer to home what happens when a Chinese crap part fails in your new welding helmet when you may be welding in a cramped space and the system goes full light? Scary stuff.

Ron

 

[strantor]

so this is the weaponless war china has planned for us? Get us hooked on their drugs and then lace them till we fall apart? [/joke]

 

[jpanhalt]

Exactly, my eyes are worth more than $150, at least to me. I got the Lincoln series 3350 Black, in case you are considering one too.

John

 

[Sceadwian]

Closer to paranoid ReloadRon, especially if you know about the testing the parts undergo.

 

[Reloadron]

Exactly, my eyes are worth more than $150, at least to me. I got the Lincoln series 3350 Black, in case you are considering one too.

John

Welding is not my forte. I can join a few pieces of steel with a stick. I get over to our weld areas every now and then, I always admired the art of welding. Maybe in a few years when I retire I'll get more into it. I know Lincoln offers schooling locally on various types of welding.

On another note, sometimes the enemy is not China but comes from within. (bad link removed) right here in the Cleveland area. That was before B&W who we were a prime supplier to bought us. We were formerly MMC (Marine Mechanical Corporation). We knew something wasn't kosher and when an employee of the company in question came forward it iced the investigation. I figure they got off as I would have shot them at sunrise.

Ron

 

[Reloadron]

Closer to paranoid ReloadRon, especially if you know about the testing the parts undergo.

Paranoid? Me?

Ron

 

[strantor]

ron your link won't work unless you have an account @ dailypress and login. I just sent them this email

"I thought I would just take a moment to tell you how irritating your website is. NO. I will not create an account just to view one article. You've put me off and lost the opportunity to advertise to me in the future. I won't be back."

I hate that crap, especially in facebook where in order to read an article you have to sign away access to all your privacy. never. won't do it.

 

[Reloadron]

strantor, sorry as I had no idea? Initially I just Googled the story and had no problem? Like you I hate that sort of ****. Initially using Google it came up fine. Dammit, if I get to the site using Google I have no problem, but then using the same link from Google I get that ********.

I found an article in Cleveland Business that is not as detailed but sums things up also:

https://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070130/FREE/70130001/1008#

I'll try the link and see what happens. I'll also remove the link I posted.

<EDIT> The second link, though not as indepth seems to work OK and again sorry for the bum link. </EDIT>

Ron

 

[strantor]

Wow, I never heard about that story. I figured I would have, as I spent a season in Northrop Grumman, Newport news. I was stationed aboard the USS Oklahoma City (SSN723) while it was drydocked there. I guess the "new" had worn off that news by the time I got there in 2005.

 

[edeca]

This story came from a US Senate Committee, their findings are available here: https://www.electro-tech-online.com/custompdfs/2012/06/Counterfeit20Electronic20Parts.pdf

The paper was released two weeks ago, hence the media interest at the moment. It is an interesting, current and very believable story.

 

[jpanhalt]

Wow, thank you. It is way too much to read in one session, but just reading a few case histories, like the Lockheed Martin case of the C130J display (begin p. 36) is scary.

When President Eisenhower left office he described the growing military-industrial complex as one of the greatest dangers facing the United States. His words should not have been taken lightly.

It is disappointing that 50 years later, that wisdom is still being ignored (source, p.71):
View attachment 64771

John

 

[Reloadron]

Yeah, the entire senate committee paper is a tad long. We are expected to read those as well as other findings. Also a small mountain of security documents. Gawd, I look forward to retiring.

I also strongly feel if a contractor screws up they should eat the hardware. The government should not bear the cost in any way.

Strantor, you were a submariner huh? Cool! I have been on and off several but not real big on being submerged. Given a choice I like something along the lines of a carrier.

Ron

 

[MrAl]

Hello,

I am no stranger to this problem and have had to deal with it first hand in an actual computer power supply. If i remember right it came with the computer case i bought, but it was sometime back a ways now. I must have gotten fake electrolytic capacitors in the power supply because they all went bad (all the ones that had to handle any appreciable ripple current such as the main filter caps). They actually spit out some brown gunk too, and their ESR went sky high (at least 10 times normal) and even their capacitance went down.

The symptom showed up as the PC shutting down every now and then, and eventually got so bad that it would shut down at least once a day.

Removing the power supply and inspecting the inside, it was hard to tell if the brown stuff was paint or gunk from the inside. Removing one of the capacitors and testing it for ESR showed it went very very high, which easily prevents it from providing the required filtering action with that alone, but even the capacitance went way down from some 2000uf to some 200uf. The age of the power supply was still very short so it wasnt that it was used for so long that it went bad of natural causes.
Replacing the main filter caps fixed the problem completely.

I had read about the Chinese fake caps and thought it would be hard to run across one, but they eventually get into everything because nobody knows they are there.

My only thoughts on this is that for the military special tests would have to be designed to exploit the trouble areas of all parts. There are various ways to do this such as testing under elevated temperatures and such, with quite well known correlations to normal operating environments. That's the only way to be sure anymore, and even that is subject to error because the parts would probably have to be tested using a random selection procedure. And whole bins of parts would have to be discarded once a failure is detected.

It's a shame this kind of problem has to exist. It's a criminal action of the worst kind and should be dealt with accordingly.

 

[Mr RB]

This reminds me a little of the "simulators vs reality" arguments. As a product designer I test in hardware, always, and also for more critical parts like power transistors/FETs/diodes etc I buy samples from different manufacturers and test the parts. Things like sat voltage for transistors, Rdson for FETs and Vf for diodes will quickly spot fakes and bad quality parts.

Re the counterfeiting itself probably the most common one is they get a large run or end of run of a transistor or diode before it is laser marked, and just laser mark on the number for a much more expensive part. The testing for max currents and forward voltages etc shows up the part as not being anywhere near as good a part as it should be.

Another issue is that they sell off factory seconds which look fine and are marked ok, but testing shows wild variations in performance. What they are is rejects booted off the production line for being out of spec then bagged up and sold in bulk, commonly seen in ebay bulk LED bags.

 

[Mickster]

I also strongly feel if a contractor screws up they should eat the hardware.

Some time ago, I had to assist a fire investigator with his subsequent on-site inspection on a job I had been given to initially diagnose & compile a list of parts + labour to repair. I can't go into specifics or name names, for obvious reasons, but we got talking about some of the previous cases he had dealt with.

One case involved a major, big name, global supplier with a high rate of 'thermal incident' failure for a particular product line, due to water ingress. Our manufacturer's investigation team had rigged up cameras and other monitoring equipment to diagnose the problem and had observed moisture being drawn up between the insulation and strands of a particular wire within a wiring harness. I sort of blurted out "poor venting?", which he confirmed, but then went on to state that they had previously reported the same suspicions to the supplier, which the supplier dismissed, before they carried out these tests.

To cut a long story short, following extensive and expensive testing by our manufacturer, the final solution was a re-design of the product vent by the supplier, but the real kicker is this - each 'manufacturing division' owned by the global supplier is operated as a separate company. If incidents of failure and subsequent returns of faulty parts result in a particular division becoming unprofitable, they 'fold it', then open up a new one.

Apparently, our manufacturer lost millions, as did other manufacturers using the same product.

Not sure if the above scenario is 100% true as it is 2nd hand info, but the investigator was quite open and honest about where the failure was in the case of the job I had been given (unrelated to the above, but the fault was attributed to the manufacturer and all costs were covered) so I have no reason to doubt his sincerity at this point.

Regards.