I am in a quandary over the Inspection & Test System, which leads to concerns with the control of nonconforming product. But first the Inspection & Test System - The evidence of conformity throughout In-Process and Final Inspection is primarily "acceptance" or "OK." The only evidence of conformity that gives the actual measurements is in Receiving Inspection, some set-up verifications (primarily involving CNC operations), and when the customer requires an Inspection Piece Report. I feel uneasy about this system, but this is the established system. I would appreciate feedback on if this system is okay and why, or this system needs more evidence of conformity and why.

Thanks,
Doug

I am in a quandary over the Inspection & Test System, which leads to concerns with the control of nonconforming product. But first the Inspection & Test System - The evidence of conformity throughout In-Process and Final Inspection is primarily "acceptance" or "OK." The only evidence of conformity that gives the actual measurements is in Receiving Inspection, some set-up verifications (primarily involving CNC operations), and when the customer requires an Inspection Piece Report. I feel uneasy about this system, but this is the established system. I would appreciate feedback on if this system is okay and why, or this system needs more evidence of conformity and why.

Thanks,
Doug

Doug,
What you are describing is basically the way our mfg. and receiving inspection processes operate. All of our in-process inspection is visual. We do have visual aids and evidence of training. We follow up with product audits each day, which areslso visual.
Receivinfg inspection is where the actual measuring and testing takes place, however, the majority of the product is accepted with visual inspection using samples.

The system is documented on the control plan, work instructions and training records. It's been acceptable through QS,TS2, ISO and Ford Q1 audits with no NCR's. We did have a couple of OFI's.

The evidence of conformity throughout In-Process and Final Inspection is primarily "acceptance" or "OK."

I would appreciate feedback on if this system is okay and why, or this system needs more evidence of conformity and why.

Thanks,
Doug

Well, I see no clear violation of 8.2.4. I assume someone measures the product and says "okay" or "bad" and generates a record to that effect, but there are no quantitative data shown. So long at this matches their procedures and there is no evidence of serious problems such as customer returns related to poor testing, I'd say it is okay, but maybe not how I'd do it. JMO.

Doug,
What you are describing is basically the way our mfg. and receiving inspection processes operate. All of our in-process inspection is visual.

Sam,

Unlike your system, our In-Process and Final Inspections are not just visual but involves a number of dimensional characteristics. Would that make a difference to you in your resonse to the initial inquiry?

Doug

Doug,
Only to say that, if you have dimensional characteristics you cannot use the term "accept/reject" or any other attribute term. You would need to document the measured result. Also with variables data comes the need for in-process SPC.
So, yes, I wouild also be concerned with the present status of the process.

Doug,
Only to say that, if you have dimensional characteristics you cannot use the term "accept/reject" or any other attribute term. You would need to document the measured result. Also with variables data comes the need for in-process SPC.
So, yes, I wouild also be concerned with the present status of the process.

Sam,

Please tell me where these requirements are stated. Where does it say I need to document the measured result for variables data and that I must have in-process SPC for it? I don't see it in ISO 9001. Maybe it is a TS or QS thing?

Sam,

Please tell me where these requirements are stated. Where does it say I need to document the measured result for variables data and that I must have in-process SPC for it? I don't see it in ISO 9001. Maybe it is a TS or QS thing?

True. It comes from TS/APQP/PPAP/Customer Specific Requirement documents. However, the requirement should also be "flowed" down from a tier I to the tier II who may only be ISO 9001.