Hello Quality Pros:

We assemble pneumatic staple and fasteners application tools.
We purchase some of the components for the fasteners application tools to assemble the tools from an oversea supplier, thus we have many types of components. These many types of components are stored in small bins on shelves. What we don't have are prints to verify whether the component in the bin would be what the bin's number says it is. The assembly manager believes that it is not necessary to have the prints; on the other hand I believe we should have prints just in case to verify the component current specs and even incoming inspection. My question is how could we know as to the component's type and number without a print, the manager thinks that it is not important.

what is your input to the above??

Hello Quality Pros:

We assemble pneumatic staple and fasteners application tools.
We purchase some of the components for the fasteners application tools to assemble the tools from an oversea supplier, thus we have many types of components. These many types of components are stored in small bins on shelves. What we don't have are prints to verify whether the component in the bin would be what the bin's number says it is. The assembly manager believes that it is not necessary to have the prints; on the other hand I believe we should have prints just in case to verify the component current specs and even incoming inspection. My question is how could we know as to the component's type and number without a print, the manager thinks that it is not important.

what is your input to the above??

Hello juliov,

How is the assembly process currently working? Are there instances where a drawing would have helped to identify the correct part? Drawings require additional controls and would that add value?

The main concern is to have the correct part in the correct location. You could actually attach a sample part to the bin as a visual aid. Unless the differences between parts would not be obvious, I am not in favor of drawings because of the control they require.

This is a great opportunity to Poka-Yoke (error-proof) this process. Have you given that some thought?

Stijloor

Thanks for the good advice Stijloor, our assembly department does not have issues regarding mixing up parts or identification of parts. The parts when they come in from our overseas suppliers are clearly identified and we then simply shelf them away in clearly identified bins by part number. I too am not in favor on the introduction of prints due to the high print control they would require, in addition these parts are fabricated overseas and thus obtaining the prints might be troublesome. How could we reply to an auditor if this type of question would be prompted during an audit? regarding compliance.

Attaching a sample part to each bin is a good idea, Poke-Yoke any suggestions? how have other pros handled issues such as our concern?
Thanks,

How could we reply to an auditor if this type of question would be prompted during an audit? regarding compliance.

Hello juliov,

You just describe to the auditor your process and how it works. You should be able to demonstrate that this process is working as designed. And that means excellent inspection and test results, no evidence of customer issues, no part shortages, excellent inventory results, etc.

If it works for you and your customer, the auditor should not have an issue with this.

Stijloor.

I'm with Stijloor on this - would having prints really help? I doubt it, no-one would look at them and it appears you don't have a problem anyway.

Clause 7.5.3 states that we can identify the product by suitable means. If your existing method works - carry on.