I need some advise. I have just had a TS Assessment audit and the Auditor wrote us up on not having a MSA study done on a gage. I understand the write up, but my concern is this, I work for a large company that puts no merit in MSA studies and only performs them when a customer requires them on a case by case basis. We have a lot of gages here and few of them have had any kind of Gage R&R study done on them. I am surprised that we haven't been written up before, but the issue has always been averted. We have been lucky but there is coming a time when the auditor is going to "open up a can of worms". Mgmt is aware of all of this, but will not give us the manpower to perform the necessary studies. They don't feel that it is important enough. My question is this, how do I answer the Auditor on his finding with regard to Root Cause Analysis? Any suggestions to get me out of this with some dignity would be truly appreciated.:frust:

Sigh.

In my (not necessarily humble) opinion, if management does not supply sufficient resources, the problem is not MSA or clause 7.6.1. Instead the problem is clause 5.1, Management commitment.

TS says to conduct studies to analyze variation in each type of measuring and test equipment system. This arguably does not mean every single gage. The gages that need coverage must be identified and addressed through a program that recognizes needs and addresses them. For example, I've seen the definition as gages that measure critical aspects and are not monitored by SPC.

TS says the program needs to conform to customer reference manuals on MSA and other acceptance criteria that's approved bythe customer. That allows a bit of flexibility, but the program must be appropriately designed and followed.

I hasten to add I am not the resident expert on MSA here. So, others please feel free to chime in...

Potential action plan:

1) define a procedure to determine if a gage needs an MSA or not (usually customer requirement or special characteristic or process that is not capable, etc).

2) define gage families (similar gages measuring similar features) to reduce the amount of studies.

3) do a $$ risk analysis of the consequences if a gage would accept a NoGood part.

4) create a GRR plan based on high risks found in analysis

5) discuss GRR plan with $$ risk analysis with mgmt and ask for resources.

Translating the GRR need into $$ might get Managements attention.



Hope this helps.

... My question is this, how do I answer the Auditor on his finding with regard to Root Cause Analysis? Any suggestions to get me out of this with some dignity would be truly appreciated.:frust:

Tough one and I've been in the same type of situation. While Kale Veggie offers a potential avenue to pursue, I think it's more of a long term solution and doesn't help you answer the finding.

One "wormy way" :notme: you might consider could be to state the particular gage does not measure a KPC and was, therefore, not deemed to require an MSA study. Obviously, the "stretching" would need to continue throughout the 8D. That approach might satisfy the immediate concern. Another approach might be to ask your management team to answer the finding :lmao: (although I'm pretty sure how far that would go :rolleyes:).

Sorry I can't be of more help but I do empathize with your situation. It certainly puts your ethics "on the line". As Jennifer mentioned, the finding should be against the Management commitment.

Tough one and I've been in the same type of situation. While Kale Veggie offers a potential avenue to pursue, I think it's more of a long term solution and doesn't help you answer the finding.

One "wormy way" :notme: you might consider could be to state the particular gage does not measure a KPC and was, therefore, not deemed to require an MSA study. Obviously, the "stretching" would need to continue throughout the 8D. That approach might satisfy the immediate concern. Another approach might be to ask your management team to answer the finding :lmao: (although I'm pretty sure how far that would go :rolleyes:).

Sorry I can't be of more help but I do empathize with your situation. It certainly puts your ethics "on the line". As Jennifer mentioned, the finding should be against the Management commitment.
Thanks everyone for your help. I appreciate the comments and totally agree with all of them. At least it helps to know that others have gone thru this and understand.

Jennifer, I agree it is Mgmt's baby, but our customers don't "demand" it, as a general rule, so I have a hard time having a leg to stand on.

Katie, thanks for your ideas. That will give me an avenue. My head was sore from beating it on the wall!!!

Bill,
thanks for the kind words. At least you have given me a possible short-term "fix" for this until I can do better.

I need some advise. I have just had a TS Assessment audit and the Auditor wrote us up on not having a MSA study done on a gage.

Putting aside the fact that doing gage studies is just good business practice that should be in place irrespective of customer requirements, I'm curious as to why an auditor would cite you for something for which there's no normative requirement. In general, automotive customers require MSA for all devices shown on the control plan. If this is not the case with the finding, then you should ask the auditor to show you the "shall."

Putting aside the fact that doing gage studies is just good business practice that should be in place irrespective of customer requirements, I'm curious as to why an auditor would cite you for something for which there's no normative requirement. In general, automotive customers require MSA for all devices shown on the control plan. If this is not the case with the finding, then you should ask the auditor to show you the "shall."

Hello All,

I hope that this is considered "fair use...."

From ISO/TS 16949:2002:

7.6.1 Measurement system analysis
Statistical studies shall be conducted to analyze the variation present in the results of each type of measuring and test equipment system. This requirement shall apply to measurement systems referenced in the control plan. The analytical methods and acceptance criteria used shall conform to those in customer reference manuals on measurement systems analysis. Other analytical methods and acceptance criteria may be used if approved by the customer.

Here is the requirement.

Hope this helps.

Stijloor.