Please critique this procedure....

Hi All -

I guess this post is more or less just to vent. Because in the end, we all know the customer is right.... This is a procedure (one of dozens) that our customer - yes, I said customer - has been working on and is implementing.

I fielded a rejection from them today, because they said that the parts were too "bowed". I included a copy of the procedure that they use "sometimes" during receiving inspection. Again - yes, I said "sometimes" that is what I was told when I contacted them. Sometimes parts are just visually inspected, other times, they use this procedure.

Take a look at the procedure... I could think of a dozen problems with it off the bat - oh yeah - the profile of our parts is not flat/symetrical - fairly complex profiles when layed out on a flat surface - they will never lay "flat"

Simple comments:
1. Aproval date and signature
2. Rev. number
3. List of standards or optional replacements of same.
4. list of spec(s) for test
5. A possible sample test record.
6. Humidity is always listed, it seems. Maybe R/H 15-90%
7. A table of Contents for this and other procedures. Some procedures grow, and a Contents table would have hyperlinks.
8. A possible cleaning of part(s) section
9. A wrapp-up section with what happpens next?
10. Maybe part number(s) and specs listed with them.
11. Mentioning refferences for procedure layout, testing, and prep is always good.
Better comments to follow by others

What do you think the gage R&R study would look like?

I have two questions:

Is there any 'preconditioning' of the parts - can they be 'hot off the press' or do they need some time to 'normalize'?

When you mention 'proper' lighting, what do you mean? What's proper to one person may not be so to another.

I'm guessing you didn't want to be told about document control issues since you will have a procedure for dealing with such.