I've heard that we need to "secure" our raw material - which for us is bar stock, steel. I don't see that requirement in AS9100. Is it a common customer specific requirement in the aerospace industry?

Sounds like you need to get some more info. from whomever told you that you needed to do it. Was it a customer? If so, can they supply their requirement in writing? I'd be curious to see what it is they're after and why.

Hi Mike,

Nah - it wasn't a customer. We are doing a "clean sweep" and a little rearranging back in the saw department where we store our raw bar stock. We want to designate some racks for aircraft quality steel and others for other stuff. Anyway - someone piped up that the certified AQ material had to be totally segregated and "secured".

I didn't think this was true, but I wanted to check it out because I don't have prior aerospace experience and he does. Perhaps that was just the practice wherever he worked before.

I also emailed a customer SQA that I deal with regularly (and he is a pleasure to deal with - no kidding) - he said they don't require this, nor does he know of anyone who does.

This is probably a throw back to the old mind set. Remember the old ISO 9001 required (under 4.15.3) "... The supplier shall use designated storage areas or stock rooms.... Appropriate methods for authorizing receipt and dispatch to and from such areas shall be stipulated...."

Many people in Aerospace still think that you have to have a LOCKED MRB crib/room.

Old habits are hard to die. I am not aware of any Aerospace Customer or FAR or other regulatory requirement that requires you to "secure" raw material.

Thank you, Sidney. That clinches it for me.

I think you are correct about the old mind set. I was soooo hoping this was the case. What a PITA that would have been were it required. :mg:

As long as you can show that you use the appropriate "raw material" for the job, and that you do this by plan, not accident ;) , all should be good. When dealing with something like steel, it is not always easy to set up warehousing to totally segregate material physically. Most of the systems I've seen, or worked with, did this by allocating raw material to appropriate "jobs" or orders when it was received.

This is probably a throw back to the old mind set...
...Many people in Aerospace still think that you have to have a LOCKED MRB crib/room...
...Old habits are hard to die...
:topic: The FAA Inspector that will be handling our certification said he is really looking forward to seeing how we novices will approach a lot of things compared to some of the organizations that have "always done it this way".

Most of the systems I've seen, or worked with, did this by allocating raw material to appropriate "jobs" or orders when it was received.
Yep - this is what we do right now - when I order the steel, I use our internal job number for the PO number. That way the saw operator knows I ordered that bar for that job. We also have a minimum inventory of commonly used sizes and types that we always keep on the rack - so we keep the bronzes together on one rack, the Thomson Shafting has it's own rack, etc - however, we've always been pretty lax about what's on what rack because it is all identified by color code or tag and you could still see everything.

We're doing the reorganizing because we are starting to buy steel in larger quantities than just what the job requires - so we need to enforce the rack designations now that there is so much more steel back there.

The concept behind the "secure" statement is to ensure traceability of materials and components which go into finished products. In my opinion, if you have procedures and processes in place to prevent misidentification or "mixing" of materials, you have satisfied the requirement. Frankly, no one of your customers gives a Tinker's Dam (google that term for fun) if anybody steals your raw material, they just don't want someone substituting plain 1040 steel for high strength super alloy (15-5PH)

In our machining business, we were absolutely meticulous in keeping materials identified and segregated even according to mill heat numbers for the same grade of material. Part of our routine was to cut a "coupon" of the bar stock (sometimes multiple coupons) to be kept with the quality records for testing in the event any problem was ever encountered with a machined product.

...if you have procedures and processes in place to prevent misidentification or "mixing" of materials, you have satisfied the requirement.
Thanks - that's what I thought.
In our machining business, we were absolutely meticulous in keeping materials identified and segregated even according to mill heat numbers for the same grade of material. Part of our routine was to cut a "coupon" of the bar stock (sometimes multiple coupons) to be kept with the quality records for testing in the event any problem was ever encountered with a machined product.
There wasn't really a need to do more than our simple color code or tag until we jumped into the aerospace market. Not often, but occasionally, we were requested to provide a material cert for some of our OEM work. If there is a drop left, we write the heat/lot # in paint marker right on the bar and the cert is forwarded to me to retain.

Now is a different story. We are doing a lot more production quantity work and therefore ordering more steel. All of our aerospace work requires certified material - so we have much more steel out there that we have to identify by heat/lot - not just grade. In a nutshell - it's getting too crowded to be able to tell at a glance that we are indeed preventing misidentification or lost traceability.

Your comment about the coupon is right on the mark. This is what I intend to put in place for certified material - the coupon will be retained with the material cert. At a certain frequency, I'll take that coupon and send it for testing to satisfy the AS9100 requirements for periodically validating test reports for raw material.

I'm actually having a hard time determining a frequency. I'm thinking that I could somehow keep track of how much we receive of each grade from each mill...?

...Tinker's Dam (google that term for fun)...
Interesting!

In one of the links from the google search, someone was explaining that it is not the profane language of the lowly tinker. :) That made me giggle.

I've learned my something new for the day - can I go home now? :tg:

Interesting!

In one of the links from the google search, someone was explaining that it is not the profane language of the lowly tinker. :) That made me giggle.

I've learned my something new for the day - can I go home now? :tg:
As an amateur etymologist, I can tell you that the phrase derives from the clay dam a tinker (itinerant repairman) used when repairing holes in tin or pewter pots. It had value in use, but once it served its purpose, it was discarded. (Kind of like the fate of Quality Professionals today, huh?)

The Oxford English Dictionary gives equal weight to my definition and to the phrase being a corruption of "tinker's dam n" (dam with the "n" added) (probably since oaths were common as the tinker's repair would fail and he'd have to start all over again.)

Tin melts (449.47 °F) at roughly the temperature paper burns (458 °F), but if you had liquid in the tin pot, you could reliably boil liquids over wood fires until the pot boiled dry, at which point you had a puddle of tin. Tin also is soft and could easily be penetrated by a sharp knife or even a sharp stick with enough force. Damaged pots were often mended rather than discarded. Very badly damaged pots were salvaged by tinkers to use as repair material on other pots.

Personally, I don't see why enough weight would be given to a tinker's cursing to give it a meaning of "worthless" do you? Why would the Tinker's cursing be so worthless compared to a blacksmith or a cobbler or any of the countless tradesmen folks counted on from the Middle Ages to current time? These were usually personable men who had to charm and inveigle customers to come to them versus a competitor. Contrary to being worthless, a tinker and his activity of recycling were valuable in the economy of their time.

Hi Cari
I'm not sure anyone has answered your question about the frequency of raw material validation. I've seen a few successful approaches to it and even more attempts. Probably the most effective I've seen is a supplier who identifies their top 3 or 4 'raw material' suppliers and takes a quarterly sample of test certificates for independent validation. The independent test is done by a teaching laboratory so they have managed to keep the costs quite reasonable.

I have put 'raw material' in quotation marks as I understand some CRB's are taking a fairly broad view to what constitutes raw material. Some say validation is only required for material that has a material certificate, for example a mill certificate. But the clause refers to 'test reports' so this could equally apply glues and resins used for composite components or any other item that arrives with a test report.

As a machine shop I guess your definition of raw material is more obvious but I would be interested to hear other views on the question of what constitutes raw material for the purpose of determining when periodic validation is required?

Perhaps a new thread is in order??

Cheers

Chris

This is an excellent addition to THIS thread, in my opinion. The requirements for aerospace are primarily for traceability in the event ANYTHING goes wrong. This allows recall of any other products in the field which may contain material from the batch that failed. The "coupons" allow testing of material like steel or aluminum. Similarly, samples of lots of chemicals or cable or electronic connectors can be tested for compliance to the design requirements.

Actually, this traceability works to the supplier's advantage. Consider the difference between the costs for

a recall of ONLY parts/products made with steel (or cable or sheet aluminum or electronic connectors) from Lot #1234
versus
a recall of ALL parts/products made from steel (or cable or sheet aluminum or electronic connectors)simply because the traceability didn't include differentiation between lots.

One of the problem areas in failed material is simply bad communication of REAL requirements and of the consequences if the material does not meet the design parameters. Some of my posts in the past have discussed the failure of exterior heat shield tiles on a space shuttle because a supplier used a non-approved scouring pad to clean the tiles (which left an invisible coating which defeated the holding power of the space-age adhesive used to hold the tile to the hull of the shuttle.) The supplier had no notice of the potential failure point although the knowledge was prominent on the OEM's in-house documents. The documents given to the supplier had a simple note in the Bill of Materials about the "approved scouring pad model number." The non-English speaking staff assigned to the grunt work of actually scouring the tiles had both approved and non-approved pads at the work site. When they ran out of the approved pads, they merely switched to the non-approved ones, hence the hit or miss result of some tiles detaching and others adhering.

This little anecdote is one of the tales in my seminars on the importance of ALL workers having a clear idea of the big picture of the products or services they provide.

The lesson here is simply KNOW WHAT THE POSSIBLE RAMIFICATIONS OF A MIXED LOT AND FOULED TRACEABILITY CAN BE AND TAKE APPROPRIATE MEASURES TO LESSEN THE LIABILITY. Obviously, the ramifications can be completely different for every product.

Keeping with the topic....

What we do on receipt of steel stock is colour code in its grade - i.e. Blue full length stripe on all AISI 4145H. Then we issue a stock code that is dot stamped on both ends of the bar. This unique number is added to the original material / mill cert and our stocklist is updated. Saw cutters will replace the stock number on all the cut ends on all bars and work pieces. Its a simple system that is effective and easy to work.

Hope that helps.

Would someone mind starting a new thread on the periodic validation of test reports question above???

Thanks,

Chris

Cari

I was curious about your system for lot identification of barstock. You stated that you use the internal job number as PO number for the barstock, which struck me as a great idea.

Will this have to change when you order large quantities of material and use it for different orders? I was thinking perhaps the original job number made of this lot could be referenced for material cert. This would logically work, but might require an additional entry into JobBoss or Vista or what-have-you. I was thinking maybe that would work well.

However, what if there was an order for material that no jobs were waiting on? How would you earmark this?

The reason I'm asking is because it's a good system and keeping tags and separating bar stock lots is a major PITA. Especially because in some shops the pigeons nest over the 80 tons of mystery material.

By the way, are you related to Britney Spears?

Love, Erik

You stated that you use the internal job number as PO number for the barstock, which struck me as a great idea. Will this have to change when you order large quantities of material and use it for different orders? I was thinking perhaps the original job number made of this lot could be referenced for material cert.I do frequently order more than I need for the job so that we have some stock left over. The job number used as the PO number is mostly helpful to the Saw Operator so he can match it up to the router. Even though I originally order for a certain job, the balance of the material is identified and put on the material storage racks and can be pulled for any future job. I keep the material certs with the original POs in my vendor files - so if that material is pulled for use for another job - we do reference the original PO number so I can pull material certs for the Inspection Packet. The Saw Operator notes on the router the original PO number and the material heat/lot number from the Product Identification Tag.

However, what if there was an order for material that no jobs were waiting on? How would you earmark this?There are a lot of material types and sizes that we maintain minimum inventory of - if I'm not ordering for a specific job, I use the date and the Saw Department # - which is 89. So if I ordered a bar of steel today for stock it would be PO#512-89.

By the way, are you related to Britney Spears?No - but I sing just as well.:tg:

Hi Cari
I'm not sure anyone has answered your question about the frequency of raw material validation. ... Probably the most effective I've seen is a supplier who identifies their top 3 or 4 'raw material' suppliers and takes a quarterly sample of test certificates for independent validation.
Hi kiwisfly.:bigwave: I didn't really have a question. I'm not sure what frequency we'll have raw material validated - but I'm leaning towards something like "every 5,000# of each type of material for each mill" rather than a time frame like "quarterly" because of the way we purchase material.

Some say validation is only required for material that has a material certificate, for example a mill certificate. But the clause refers to 'test reports' so this could equally apply glues and resins used for composite components or any other item that arrives with a test report. As a machine shop I guess your definition of raw material is more obvious but I would be interested to hear other views on the question of what constitutes raw material for the purpose of determining when periodic validation is required?We are including some of our lubricants and some of the plastics/nylons we use too. We'll do the same thing as with steel - we'll come up with a frequency based on the amount we buy.

No - but I sing just as well.:tg:Post a clip, so we can verify that.:biglaugh:

I realize this is an old thread but I have just recently been asked a question about Annual Supplier Materail Validation Requirements, and was hoping to get some input from you on what the requirement is, where it is, and how anyone is handling this. Any info on this would be greatly appreciated.

I realize this is an old thread but I have just recently been asked a question about Annual Supplier Materail Validation Requirements, and was hoping to get some input from you on what the requirement is, where it is, and how anyone is handling this. Any info on this would be greatly appreciated.See AS9100 7.4.3Where the organization utilizes test reports to verify purchased product, the data in those reports shall be acceptable per applicable specifications. The organization shall periodically validate test reports for raw material.(my emphasis added) The frequency is up to you.

...I have just recently been asked a question about Annual Supplier Materail Validation Requirements...
Hi, Billie :bigwave:

As Al pointed out, AS9100 requires periodic validation. Who asked you about annual validation? It could be a customer requirement...maybe?