The Elsmar Cove Forum and Site Map The Elsmar Cove Wiki More Free Files The Elsmar Cove Forums Discussion Thread Index Post Attachments Listing Failure Modes Services and Solutions to Problems Elsmar cove Forums Main Page Elsmar Cove Home Page

Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > Common Quality Assurance Processes and Tools > Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Process, Machine, etc.


The Elsmar Cove Forum SideBar!
Monitor the Forum
Monitor New Forum Posts
New Threads Feeds
RSS FeedRSS Feed
Sponsor Link










$ Contributor Forum Access
Courtesy Quick Links

Links that Elsmar Cove visitors will find useful in your quest for knowledge:


Howard's International Quality Services

Atul's Symphony Technologies

Dave Scott's Scott Quality Solutions

Praxiom Research Group


NIST's Engineering Statistics Handbook

IRCA - International Register of Certified Auditors

SAE - Society of Automotive Engineers

Quality Digest Portal

IEST - Institute of Environmental Sciences and Technology

ASQ - American Society for Quality


All the Important Standards and Related Web Sites in the World
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Rate Thread Content Display Modes
  #1  
Old 30th March 2000, 04:48 PM
BWoods
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Question QS Cert w/o 100% Cpk

Question:
What if you are going for QS-9000 certification and don't have 100% of your processes at Cpk 1.33 or better? We have 2 processes running about 1.00 and estimate the cost to be greater than $5 million to correct. Our customer is happy. What about the QS auditors?
Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
  #2  
Old 31st March 2000, 03:32 AM
Brian Dowsett
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
3 Possibles :
1)If you are making sure the customer is happy by doing something extra (like 100% inspection) make sure this is documented in your reaction plan for processes under 1.33
2) If you aren't doing anything extra and the customer is happy, could it be that the tolerance is uneccesarily tight and you could ask for it to be changed (that'll be the day!)
3) Get your happy customer to write a waiver saying they are happy with the capability at 1.0 Cpk and would rather live with it than have you spend 5 million and either increase your price or go out of business.

Regards

Brian
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links

  #3  
Old 31st March 2000, 09:05 AM
Spaceman Spiff's Avatar
Spaceman Spiff Spaceman Spiff is offline
Inactive Registered Visitor

Registration Date: Mar 1999
Location: FL
Age: 44
 
Posts: 73
Thanks Given to Others: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Karma Power: 45
Karma: 10
Spaceman Spiff has less than 100 Karma points so far.
I Say...

Another thing to consider is when was the product approved for production. In my past experience, I was able to convince the customer that since the product was designed back in the early 80's, the design requirement was Cpk of 1. If we were required to increase our capability to the new requirement, there will be additional costs, i.e., new tooling, new equipment, etc. They happily signed the waiver.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 31st March 2000, 03:44 PM
BWoods
Unregistered Guest

 
Posts: n/a
Thumbs up

Thanks for your comments, guys.
What you suggested was what I was planning.
1. We currently do 100% inspection on those process points.
2. The customers are happy the the final product - these points are internal and not measurable in the finished product state. And our products meet and exceed final customer specs.
3. The when designed is also a good point. The original design is several years old and of course dates prior to QS.

Again, thanks for your input!

Reply With Quote
Reply

Lower Navigation Bar
Go Back   The Elsmar Cove Forum > Common Quality Assurance Processes and Tools > Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Process, Machine, etc.

Bookmarks


Visitors Currently Viewing this Thread: 1 (0 Registered Visitors and 1 Unregistered Guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Forum Search
Display Modes Rate Thread Content
Rate Thread Content:

Posting Settings
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Discussion Threads
Discussion Thread Title Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post or Poll Vote
Cpk Calculation - Tolerance to maintain 1.33 & 1.67 Cpk respectively gianni Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Process, Machine, etc. 20 24th July 2009 11:23 AM
Is Cpk a good measure of capability? There are several shortcomings of Cpk Tim Folkerts Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Process, Machine, etc. 31 12th February 2009 07:39 PM
Evaluating Process Stability - Unstable Processes - Cpk/Ppk? niotusen Capability, Accuracy and Stability - Process, Machine, etc. 6 31st January 2005 03:58 PM
Key processes - Aged care facility - Cert IV in aged care CQI maxifrog Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 6 23rd November 2004 01:49 AM
QS 9000 TE Cert mniem QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 2 11th January 2000 12:56 PM



The time now is 05:31 PM. All times are GMT -4.
The time zone can be changed in your UserCP --> Options.



   

All Y'All Come Back Now, Y' Hear?

Made With A Mac! FreeBSD OS Powered by Apache!
Using php4 Forums provided and maintained by Marc Smith Database by MySQL

FAIR USE and CORRECTNESS NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe herein constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/ If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. In addition, I do not guarantee the correctness of the content. The risk of using content from the Elsmar Cove web site and forums remains with the user/visitor.

Responsibility Statement: Each person is responsible for anything they post in the Elsmar Cove forum. Neither I, Marc Timothy Smith, nor any of the forum Moderators, are responsible for the content of posts people make. Liability for post content resides with the poster as does interpretation and/or acceptance and/or use of advice by the reader.

Complaints: If you have a complaint with a post in a forum discussion thread, including Content in general, fighting, flaming, copyright infringement, defamation and/or 'slander', please use the 'Report This Post Report This Post Button button which appears at the top of every post in every thread.

Site courtesy of:
Marc Timothy Smith - Cayman Business Systems, 8466 Lesourdsville-West Chester Road, West Chester, Ohio 45069-1929 - USA
(513) 341-6272

To contact me, click the Google Voice link below, enter Your Name and Your Phone Number and Google will ring your phone and connect you for free!

The Elsmar Cove Web Site is *CopyFree*
no new posts