Government of Canada Gouvernement du Canada

HPB Method MFHPB-06

February 2003

HEALTH PRODUCTS AND FOOD PROTECTION BRANCH

OTTAWA

METHOD FOR EXAMINATION AND EVALUATION OF HERMETICALLY SEALED

METAL CANS AND GLASS CONTAINER

Dev C. Nundy
Food Laboratory,
Ottawa Laboratory (Carling)
Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0C6

E-mail: dnundy@inspection.gc.ca

Alexander Fabricius
Fish/Food Laboratory
Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Mississauga, Ontario, L5T 2R4

E-mail: fabriciusa@inspection.gc.ca

1. APPLICATION

This method is designed to detect defects, that may adversely affect the hermetic seal. It is applicable to all
two and three piece metal cans having a conventional doubleseam and glass container with metal cap (lids)
used for products which require sterilization. It provides both qualitative and quantitative information on the
assessment of the double seam on metal cans and defects in glass enclosure. This method should be used
in conjunction with the Metal Can Defects, Identification and Classification Manual (9.1). This revised method
replaces MFHPB-25F, dated October 1991.

2. PRINCIPLE

The method describes the physical separation (tear-down) of the components of doubleseams and tests for
identifying defects in metal cans and glass containers to assess certain criteria essential to the formation of
a hermetic seal. It also provides an evaluation of can and glass container defects according to their severity
which may result in loss or potential loss of container integrity (hermeticity).

3. DEFINITION OF TERMS

See Appendix A of Volume 2.

Published on the Food Directorate’s (Health Canada's) website at http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/food-aliment.

 MFHPB-06
-2- May 2003

4. COLLECTION OF SAMPLES

See Appendix B of Volume 2.

5. MATERIALS AND SPECIAL EQUIPMENT

1. Bacti-Disc Cutters (Wilkens-Anderson Co., Dixie Canner Equipment Co.)

2. Metal nipper
3. Double blade mechanical saw
4. Torque meter (Optional)
5. Emery paper
6. Seam micrometer (.001 of an inch)
7. Seam projector or Computer with an image analysis software.
8. Safety gloves for sharp objects
9. Safety eye protection
10. Hearing protection
11. Electric Can Opener
12. Laminar Hood
13. Biohazard Hood
14. Ethanol
15. Fiberglass Eraser

6. PROCEDURE

6.1 Handling and preparation of the sample unit

Use the proper procedure and preparation when handling any swollen containers since there is a
possibility that Clostridium botulinum and or their toxins may be present. Use of safety gloves for sharp
objects, safety eye glasses and appropriate hearing protection is mandatory for cutting metal and
handling cut metal pieces.

6.1.1 Removal and identification of the label

Place two coincident marks on the label and the can about 120/ apart. The marks on the can
should be made with indelible ink, carborundum or diamond pencil so that they will not be
removed during subsequent handling of the container. These marks will permit establishment
of the position of the label on the can after its removal. A visual identification (inspection) of
sample unit (container) must be performed after removal of label from the can. Store the label
for future reference. (Only Necessary When Conducting Special Investigations). Otherwise
note any unusual liquid stains and sharp object perforations, if none present, remove the label
and place an identification mark on the can.

6.1.2 Identification of sample unit

Legibly identify each sample unit directly on the can. This must be done in a manner so that
the identity is not lost or removed during subsequent handling and testing. Ensure that the
identity relates to the sample from which each sample unit is derived. The complete code shall
be recorded for each sample unit.

6.1.3 Cleaning preparation of external and internal container surface

6.1.3.1 Clean any adhering food, dirt and soil from the surface of the can to be opened.

If the container is very dirty, scrubbing with detergent and water may be
necessary. Alternatively soak can in warm water with detergent for ½hr, then rinse
in hot water and clean with bottle brush to remove food residue if present and
throughly rinse with hot water and drain to let it dry. Place the cans in either the
Laminar or Biohazard Hood. Disinfect the surface with undiluted Ethanol prior to
opening. Let it dry.
 MFHPB-06
-3- May 2003

6.1.3.2 Locate and clearly mark any visible defects using the Metal Can Defects,
Identification and Classification Manual (8.4).

6.1.3.3 Open the cans using a sterile Bacti-disc cutter or other suitable device to cut a
hole in the can manufacturer’s end to approximately 5.0 cm in diameter (to
accommodate the 10 ½ size Laboratory Stopper) in the centre of the container
large enough to see through and remove the contents from the opening. Caution
should be exercised when opening and handling contents of cans suspected of
being contaminated.

Remove a portion of the product for pH, Microscopy, and Microbiological

Analysis.

6.1.3.4 Examine the contents for off-odours or other evidence of spoilage, e.g., frothing,
curdling, discolouration, etc., immediately after opening the container, and before
emptying contents.

6.1.3.5 Remove the contents and rinse the emptied container in running warm water to
remove adhering product.

Place the unwanted contents in a suitable container for sterilization prior to

disposing. (swollen or suspect cans only).

6.1.3.6 To clean, immerse the container in a warm (40-45oC) 5% Extran 300 detergent
solution (or other suitable grease/fat removing household dish washing detergent)
for at least 30 minutes. Use a soft brush to assist cleaning. Clean the container
throughly by rinsing in warm running tap water.

6.1.3.7 Dry the container at 35oC overnight. After drying, allow the container to cool to
room temperature.

6.1.4 Normal cans (non-swollen)

Before piercing the container, ensure that the surface is disinfected with undiluted Ethanol and
dried completely before opening.

Open the cans using a sterile Bacti-disc cutter or other suitable device to cut a hole in the can
manufacturer’s end to approximately 5.0 cm in diameter (to accommodate the 10½ size
Laboratory Stopper) in the centre of the container large enough to see through, and remove the
contents from the opening and to facilitate the micro-leak vacuum/pressure test.

Remove a portion of the product for other analyses and sterilization of the discarded product
is not required.

Swollen cans

Place the container in a shallow tray containing sufficient quantity of the buffered chlorine
solution, or its equivalent, to receive any material which may drip from the funnel after the can
is opened.

Invert the funnel and cover the end of the can to be opened. Insert the steel rod and while
holding the funnel (funnel device see Appendix A) firmly in place over the container end give
the steel rod a sharp blow sufficient to pierce the end of the container. Do not remove the
funnel until all frothing, spraying, etc., has ceased.

Alternatively place the container in a sterile plastic bag and while holding the open end of the
bag firmly about the Bacti-disc opener shaft pierce the container. Do not remove the container
until it has completely vented. This method has in practice proven to be the best for swollen
flexible pouch products. Open the can to approximately 5.0 cm in diameter and remove a
 MFHPB-06
-4- May 2003

portion of the product for other analyses.

Place the contents in a suitable container for sterilization prior to discarding.

6.1.5 Glass container with metal lids - Check for any problems and proceed to visual inspection.

6.2 Container examination and evaluation procedure

This procedure applies to all metal cans and glass containers with metal lids. The purpose of the
following sections is to provide a complete evaluation of metal and glass container. The optional tests
are for additional information if required.

6.2.1 Visual inspection and assessment of container

Place the container (can or glass) on one hand and rotate the container using the other hand
to visually determine the presence of defects around the container. On metal containers use
the thumb and the forefinger of the other hand to examine both can ends and record all defects.
An image analysis computer at 25X magnification generates more desired results without the
possible injury to one’s fingers. Run the fiber optic lens attachment around the perimeter of the
double seam and then along the side seam. A serious fault should be digitized and saved to
the computer for future consideration. Exercise caution because metal can ends may have
sharp edges. Ensure that the can body and the side seam are also examined for possible
defects.

Always indicate the area in which the defects are observed i.e. can body, side seam and the
double seam ends which correspond to either the can manufacturer or to the canner’s end.

For glass containers examine the glass enclosure, and the cap (lid) using the classification of
glass container defects in the Meat and Hygiene Manual Procedures ,15.4.3.8.3.2 (8.2).

6.2.2 External measurement of containers

Metal container - seam measurements include the counter sink measurement, seam thickness
and seam length. These measurements are deemed necessary in special investigational
situations.

Glass container - cap tilt, cap security, lug position, cap removal torque optional due to the
destructive nature of this test.

6.2.3 Measurement of Bourdon Vacuum and Net Headspace Volume (MFHPB-04)

Follow the procedure as outlined in this method. These parameters are required in special
investigational situations only and must be performed before the container is opened for other
analyses.

6.2.4 Measurement of pH (MFHPB-03). Follow the procedure as outlined in the method.

6.2.5 Determination of Micro-Leaks using Pressure/Vacuum Tests (MFHPB-05). Follow the

procedure as outlined in the method.

6.2.6 Double Seam tear-down of metal container

6.2.6.1 Preparation of a cross-section

The coded end or the food processor’s end should be emphasised in double seam
evaluations. The food processor’s seams are usually more inferior in quality than
the can manufacturer’s seams. Use the electric can opener to remove the end
plate as close as possible to the double seam. See diagram
 MFHPB-06
-5- May 2003

It is advisable to cut the uncoded end directly across from the side seam and the
coded end at about 1 inch (2.5 cm) from the side seam. Making the cut as
directed will allow identification of torn-down seams from coded end and uncoded
end. This process is needed in situations where the can manufacturer’s end is
suspect in being inferior to the food processor’s end otherwise make one cut in the
food processor’s end. Avoid any point where a leak was revealed during the
micro-leak test or where a defect was observed during the visual examination.

Lay can on side or stand it upright (Depending on Model of Saw) and make a
double cut through the seam to be evaluated. This can be conveniently done by
a double blade mechanical saw. If only a single blade saw is available, make two
cuts approximately ¼ inch (6 mm) apart.

Extend cut along can body and can end so that the cut is one inch (2.5 cm) down
the can body and completely through the remaining portion of the end plate. The
cut section is pushed outwards exposing the cross-section of the seam (see figure
1). Sand or brush away any rough edges using a fine emery board, or paper or
fiberglass eraser. (At least one cross section cut is required but in special
situations three can be made at 120O from each other).

Depending on the size and shape of the can making three cross section cuts
render the task of disengaging and interpreting double seams that much more
difficult.

Depending on the model available, mount the section in a way that allows a good
image to be obtained from the seam projector. Percent overlap is then read
directly from the nomograph as explained on Section 6.2.7.

6.2.6.2 Separation of body hook and cover hook

To begin seam tear-down, a cut must be made in the remaining portion of the end
plate. This may have already been done with the seam saw. If it has not been
done, a pair of nippers (5 inches long or a convenient size) may be used. Turn up
one corner of the can end using the nippers. Grasp the turned up a piece of can
end metal with the nippers and tear the metal back to the seaming panel radius
(figure 2). Take a new grip on the end metal with the nippers and start tearing the
can end metal along the seaming panel radius around the entire circumference.
To accomplish this, use the nippers as a lever with the doubleseam of the can as
a fulcrum. Work the nippers downward on the doubleseam, gripping but not
cutting the can end metal.

If a seam saw has not been used, cut through the doubleseam with nippers. For
coded end, make a cut about 1 inch (2.5 mm) from side seam. For the uncoded
end make a cut directly across from the side seam. Making the cut as directed will
allow identification for torn-down seams from coded end and uncoded end.

Using the flat side of the nippers, gently tap the cover hook portion of the
doubleseam down, so that it disengages from the body hook around the full
periphery of the container (figure 3). Care should be taken in this operation so that
the body hook is not distorted by excessively heavy blows in the tapping
procedure. Keep the cover hook in its original shape after it has been removed
from the container body to ensure the most representative evaluation of the wrinkle
for tightness rating. If the cover hook has been straightened out, it will straighten
out the wrinkle showing a better seam than is the case. Check both the body hook
and the cover hook for any kind of defects. Look for uniformity of construction and
record any irregularities such as unevenness.
 MFHPB-06
-6- May 2003

6.2.7 Internal Measurements of metal containers

The following measurements and observations will be made on the torn down doubleseam:

6.2.7.1 Percent or one one thousandths of an inch overlap using the seam projector

Using the seam projector measure the percent overlap from the cross section cut.
A nomograph (figure 4) is available for this purpose. Because the body hook butting
and the cover hook butting are necessary to determine the percent overlap, the
following steps are recommended for positioning the nomograph card.

a) Body hook butting

Open the caliper as wide as it will go and place the nomograph card on the
screen. Position the card so the image appears on the nomograph and the
reference lines of the nomograph are parallel to the hook images.

Adjust the position of the nomograph to the zero lines at the inside of the body
hook radius on the image; then move it forward or backward until the 100 line is
on the inside of the cover hook radius.

Read the nomograph line at the end of the body hook. This value is the body
hook butting rating percentage, as shown by figure 4.

b) Cover hook butting

To determine cover hook butting in percentage, follow the same procedure as

in the body hook except the nomograph percentage for the cover hook is from
zero. To obtain the correct percentage, subtract this figure from 100. The cover
hook butting rating percentage in figure 4 would be 90%.

c) Percent of total overlap

To determine the percent of total overlap on the nomograph add the body hook
percentage to the cover hook percentage. Subtract 100 from the sum and for
figure 4, the total overlap is 75%.

6.2.7.2 Formula method

Measure the cover hook and the body hook length to the nearest 0.001 inch
(0.025 mm) using a seam micrometer at points approximately 120O apart, excluding
the crossover. Measure to the nearest 0.001 inch (0.025 mm) body hook and cover
hook lengths, end plate and body plate thicknesses and doubleseam height.

Percent Overlap = BH + CH + EPT - SH x 100

SH - (2EPT + BPT)

where, BH =body hook height

CH =cover hook height
EPT =end plate thickness
BPT =body plate thickness
SH =double seam height

Record the percent overlap for all three sets of cover hook and body hook measurements
but report the range of values (lowest value to highest value).

The above measurements and observation of the torn down double seam can be
also performed using an appropriate Image Analysis System.
 MFHPB-06
-7- May 2003

- Updates on procedures will follow.

Refer to equipment manufacturers instructions or SOP (Standard Operating

Procedure)

6.2.7.3 Tightness rating

Examine the inner surface of the detached cover hook for wrinkles and assign a
tightness rating (percent) according to the reference scale given in figure 5 (see
Appendix A).

6.2.6.4 Juncture rating (OPTIONAL)

Examine the inner surface of the detached cover hook at the crossover area and
assign a juncture rating according to the reference scale (see Appendix A).

6.2.7.5 Pressure ridge (OPTIONAL)

Examine the inside surface of the body wall for the presence and uniformity of the
pressure ridge. Observations should be recorded, e.g., excessively heavy, or light
or uneven, etc (see Appendix A).

6.2.7.6 Body hook and cover hook lengths (OPTIONAL)

Record the cover hook and body hook height when it is measured by the seam
micrometer.

6.2.8 Glass container evaluation

There are two general types of closure inspections,

(1) Visual, non-destructive and external observations are performed initially on the glass
containers.
(2) Cap removal or destructive tests made after all visual inspection and observation are
recorded .The appropriate tests and observation for each type of closure being
considered are listed in the following sections.

6.2.8.1 CapTilt

On side-seal and PT caps, the cap should be essentially level, not cocked or
titled, and seated well down on the finish. This is judged in relation to the transfer
bead or shoulder on the side-seal and PT caps and should not exceed 3/32".

6.2.8.2 Cocked Cap (Figure.9)

The term “cocked cap” refers to the lug cap type and is caused by a lug failing
seat under the glass thread. It is readily apparent as it usually results in an
unlevel or titled cap.

6.2.8.3 Crushed Lug (Figure 10)

A crushed lug on a lug type cap may be visible on external examination but may
not be readily apparent since it does not necessarily result in a title cap. It is
caused by a lug being forced down over the glass thread by the sealing
mechanism of the capper.

6.2.8.4 Stripped Cap (Figure 10)

A stripped cap is a lug cap that has been over-applied to the extent that the lugs
 MFHPB-06
-8- May 2003

have been “stripped” off the glass threads on the finish. On visual examination
it appears that the lugs are pulled outwardly.

6.2.8.5 Vacuum (OPTIONAL)

In most cases, there will be vacuum in the package when it comes out of the
capper and the panel of the cap will show a concavity or dished-in appearance
indicating the presence of a vacuum.

On PT caps there must be at least 3 in.Hg vacuum out of the capper to avoid
loose caps. However, a vacuum button, if present, may not be down at this point.
After processing and cooling, the button must be down and return to the up
position when the cap is removed.

The exact amount of vacuum present is determined with a vacuum gauge and the
amount should read within the normal range for the product being run. This is a
destructive test which results in loss of the package integrity.

6.2.8.6 Temperature (OPTIONAL)

The product temperature should be within the normal range for the product being
run and should be recorded in conjunction with vacuum.

6.2.8.7 Headspace (OPTIONAL)

In most cases, headspace should be not less than 6% of the container volume
at the sealing temperature. Once the relationship of headspace volume for a
specific product is established for a given container, the headspace may be
measured with a depth or headspace gauge rather than by volume.

6.2.8.8 Gasket

The gasket on side seal caps (Figure 11) should be examined to determine that
it is secure and even and not pulled, looped or broken at any point. After cap
removal there should be a visible, even impressing in the gasket 360/ around the
circumference made with tight contact with the glass finish.

6.2.8.9 Cut-Thru

Cut-thru is a situation where the top of the glass finish has pushed completely
through the compound to the coating on the metal. This results in a leaky seal
and requires immediate remedial action.

6.2.8.10 Removal Torque (OPTIONAL)

Removal torque is the force required to remove a cap; it can be measured on a

standard torque meter. This measurement is used to evaluate the hermetic seal
between the glass finish and the cap. It provides an assessment of the security,
vacuum and excessive tightening of the cap which may result in stripped lugs.
This test is performed on either a Twist-off or PT cap and can be an indication of
the quality control procedures implemented.

6.2.8.11 Pull-up (OPTIONAL)

Pull-up, also known as lug position, is a non-destructive method of measuring the

engagement of the closure lug on the threads of the glass finish.

This pull-up or lug position, is defined as the distance between the leading edge
 MFHPB-06
-9- May 2003

of the cap lug and the vertical neck ring seam on the glass finish. It is measured
in 1/16 inch increments. (Figure 12) To measure this, first find the vertical neck
ring seam on the glass finish. There are two vertical seams on the glass finish
180/ apart. Remember that the vertical neck ring seams are not always aligned
with the body seams. Then simply measure the distance from the vertical line to
the leading edge of the cap lug positioned nearest it.

Lug position measurements made on the right side of the parting line as you look
at the package are referred to as positive (+), and those to the left side of the
parting line as negative (-). The normal range specified is on the positive side.
(Figure 12).

Negative lug positions could indicate over application of the cap which may, in
extreme cases, result in a stripped cap.

It is not recommended that lug position or pull-up measurements replace the

“security” measurements described below, but they are very useful once the
relationship between lug position or pull-up and security has been established for
a given lot of glass and caps.

In most cases of proper application, the leading edge of the cap lug will be
approximately 1/4 inch to the right of the parting line (or + 4 pull-up or lug
position); however, the distance can vary 1/4 inch in either direction (i.e. 0 to 8)
and still result in good security values within the specified range due to
dimensional variations in the glass finish and the cap.

6.2.8.12 Security (OPTIONAL)

Security values (lug tension of an applied closure) are the most reliable
measurement of proper lug cap application. Security value ranges at the capper
are specified by the closure manufacturer for good application of 4-lug and 6-lug
caps. If values are higher than the range specified, it indicates a secure package
with some degree of over-application and should be brought back into the range
for best overall cap performance. If values are consistently below the minimums,
it usually indicates under-application and the condition should be corrected
immediately. From time to time, conditions may vary to the extent that a
deviation from the suggested security numbers is necessary. Variations may be
coexistent with the type of plate or the compound used in the caps and/or glass
surface treatment used by the glass maker. One or a combination of these
conditions may dictate a shift of the proper security range in either direction for
the specific operation. In some cases, lower security values may be acceptable
as long as there is some positive security on packages going into the warehouse.

Security measurements are a destructive test. The security test on a lug type
closure is made as follows:

a) With a marking pen or pencil make a vertical line on the cap and a
corresponding line on the container (Figure 13) (this line has no relationship
to the vertical neck ring seam).

b) Turn closure counter-clockwise only until vacuum is broken.

c) Reapply closure to container just until the gasket compound touches the
glass finish and the closure lug touches the glass thread, or until the closure
is just finger-tight (Figure 13).

d) Measure the distance between the vertical lines which were made before
 MFHPB-06
- 10 - May 2003

opening, in 1/16 inch increments (Figure 13).

e) Security is considered positive if the line on the cap is to the right of the line
on the container and negative if the line on the cap is to the left of the line on
the container.

Security is measured after processing and cooling in the same manner as at

the capper, but the range of measurement for normal application will change
to a lower value during processing. With heat and pressure, the cap will be
pushed further down on the glass finish, changing the lug tension on the
glass thread. Proper security should be+2/16" to+5/16"(3.2mm.and 8 mm.)

7. RECORDING RESULTS

Record all measurements and/or observation for each container. Summary tables are recommended.

8. REFERENCES

8.1 Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Government of Canada. (1999). Metal Can Defects, Identification
and Classification Manual.

8.2 Canadian Food Inspection agency, Meat and Hygiene Manual Procedures, ch 15,
Section 4.3.8.3.
Available at http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/anima/meavia/mmopmmhv/table15e.shtml

8.3 Dewey and Almy Chemical Division of W.R. Grace & Co. (1971). A technical publication by
Evaluating a Doubleseam. Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.

8.4 Metal Box Limited. (1978). Doubleseam Manual, A technical publication, England.

8.5 The Food Processors Institute. (1980). "Canned Foods Principles of Thermal Process Control
Acidification and Container Closure Evaluation.” Revised Third Edition, 1133 20th Street, N.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20036.
 MFHPB-06
- 11 - May 2003

APPENDIX A

Tightness

Seam tightness is judged by the degree of wrinkling of the cover hook. During the first operation, the cover curl
is guided around and up under the body flange. This process crowds the cut edge of the curl into a smaller
circumference that results in a wavy cut edge with accompanying wrinkles around the seam. The function of the
second operation roll is to press the preformed first operation hooks together to such a degree that the wrinkles
may be as completely ironed out as possible.

Well-ironed wrinkles that can create an “image” or slight impressions should not be reported. The cover hook
should be regarded as smooth where such “images” 2 or slight impressions appear. If in doubt about this image
one should hold the cover hook in such a position that in looking down on the cut-edge it appears to be straight
rather than wavy or serrated. If it is straight, the wrinkles have indeed been ironed-out. This rating is based on
the worst individual point on the cover hook and particular note should be taken of the tightness rating on either
side of the juncture.

Pressure Ridge (Internal Chuck Wall Impression)

A good indication of a tight seam is the clear impression on the inside of the body which is made by the force of
the seaming rolls pushing the metal against the seaming chuck. The pressure ridge cannot and should not be
taken on its own as an indication of adequate tightness - it must be used with other inspections as listed.

Juncture Rating

The portion of the cover hook that intersects the side seam is called the juncture, and is approximately 3/8 inch
(5 mm) wide. The additional layers of metal at this point tend to prevent the cover hook from being tucked up
under the body hook to the extent seen in other parts of the doubleseam. It is essential to have a sound junction,
formed by sufficient overlap of the cover and body hooks. Failure to obtain a good overlap at this point will make
the can less resistant to abuse and can result in leaks and post-processing contamination.

Because the cover hook is frequently shorter at the juncture, the juncture is rated on a percentage scale, starting
at 100% as ideal and going down in increments of 25% as illustrated in Figure 6.

If the cover hook at the juncture is given a rating of 100%, it means that it is the same length as found in the rest
of the seam. However, if the length at this point is reduced by approximately 1/4, the juncture is given a 75%
rating, etc.

Although the reduction in the length of the cover hook at the juncture is usually judged visually, it can be measured
by a profile projector, a seam scope or gauges specially designed for this purpose. It should be noted that the
reduction is sometimes referred to as an internal droop.
 MFHPB-06
- 12 - May 2003

Figure 1. Cross-section of metal container

Figure 2. Technique for separation of cover hook from can body

 MFHPB-06
- 13 - May 2003

Figure 3. Technique for tearing the can end metal along the
seaming panel radius around the entire circumference.

Figure 4. Nomograph with the cross

section cut of the double seam
 MFHPB-06
- 14 - May 2003

Figure 5. Assessment of tightness or wrinkle rating

Figure 6. Assessment of juncture rating

 MFHPB-06
- 15 - May 2003

Figure 7. Pressure ridge

Figure 8. Typical cocked caps

 MFHPB-06
- 16 - May 2003

Figure 9. Crushed
lugs and stripped
caps.

Figure 10. Pry-off side seal cap

 MFHPB-06
- 17 - May 2003

Figure 11. Pull-up, lug position, or LTD

measurement of +

Figure 12. Illustration of security measurement