It was a very interesting and informative summit. There were about 300 attendees (my rough estimate). There were representatives from the IMDS steering committee (including chairman James Lundstrom) and from Ford, Chrysler, GM and Honda.
- EDS is working on release 6.0 for IMDS with an expected release of June 2008. There are several functional improvements (checking of MDS, version control, showing accept/sent dates for MDS).
- GADSL 2008 will have very few limited changes.
- China might adopt its own version of IMDS (including verification of submitted material data sheet by Chinese laboratories).
- REACH will have a large impact in the coming years.
- GM/Ford and Chrysler will have no or very small changes to the restricted substances standard in 2008 (unless REACH will force them to, not likely tough).
The AIAG plans to publish the presentations on their website in the near future. The presentations of the 2006 summit are still available on their web site.
__________________
Kees de Wit
Auditor/Consultant People: The vital few
Thanks to Kales Veggie for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
Now that the IMDS requirements have changed for submissions using standard materials to pick them from the IMDS committee's list rather than creating their own entry, was there any mention at the summit about the Steering Committee planning on getting more of the North American standard materials entered into the system?
I recently spent about 12 hours dealing with the "helpdesk" in regards to a material coating per an ASTM standard that has no reasonable counterpart in a European standard. I put helpdesk above in quotation marks because they were pretty much the most unhelpful bunch of people I've ever dealt with and while I was at home sick (and thus already cranky for having to do work from home instead of getting well in bed) at the time, the magnitude of suckage that was this experience was enough to make me want to choke the life out of the next person who mentioned IMDS to me for the next week or so.
I'll stop there before this goes from a question to a rant about how much IMDS is a complete and utter waste of time (non value added).
__________________ "Got no time to for spreadin’ roots, the time has come to be gone.
And tho’ our health we drank a thousand times, it’s time to ramble on."
Now that the IMDS requirements have changed for submissions using standard materials to pick them from the IMDS committee's list rather than creating their own entry, was there any mention at the summit about the Steering Committee planning on getting more of the North American standard materials entered into the system?
I recently spent about 12 hours dealing with the "helpdesk" in regards to a material coating per an ASTM standard that has no reasonable counterpart in a European standard. I put helpdesk above in quotation marks because they were pretty much the most unhelpful bunch of people I've ever dealt with and while I was at home sick (and thus already cranky for having to do work from home instead of getting well in bed) at the time, the magnitude of suckage that was this experience was enough to make me want to choke the life out of the next person who mentioned IMDS to me for the next week or so.
I'll stop there before this goes from a question to a rant about how much IMDS is a complete and utter waste of time (non value added).
Let me start with that I understand your situation. EDS (in my experience) does not have a helpful support desk for technical problems. (just like Comcast, LOL)
There was some discussion about the IMDS steering committee standards (like what you are trying to do), but no discussion on bringing more US standards into the IMDS system.
I have a suggestion for you. Goto to the AIAG website and look events. The AIAG has published the presentation of the last summit. The presentation contain email addresses and phone numbers of IMDS steering committtee and AIAG IMDS group. For example both Doris Hill (GM) and Dave Mattis (GM) have been very helpful in the past when I had questions. You can also try your Tier1 customer steering commiitte contact
If you can not get your question answered through them, let me know by a private email and we will dug further.
__________________
Kees de Wit
Auditor/Consultant People: The vital few
Thanks to Kales Veggie for your informative Post and/or Attachment!
Now that the IMDS requirements have changed for submissions using standard materials to pick them from the IMDS committee's list rather than creating their own entry, was there any mention at the summit about the Steering Committee planning on getting more of the North American standard materials entered into the system?
Just because standard IMDS-committee materials are encouraged does not make them mandatory. You can still create your material or get your supplier to prepare a submission (if applicable). If your materials are metals, there are sites that help identify equivalent standards across jurisdictions.
More IMDS-committee materials have been added this past year. I've found various coatings and Asian-spec metals now available. Wherever possible, I have phased out the in-house material MDS that we were using, but that isn't always possible.
A more key requirement is supplier development. If your supplier is not making the material to the spec, then using a standard material is actually incorrect and possibly fraudulent.
Just because standard IMDS-committee materials are encouraged does not make them mandatory.
I agree with you, but unfortunately my customer does not. This is a quick rundown of how my experience went (the short short version).
Customer: I want IMDS for part x.
Me: Done.
Customer: Rejected. You didn't use the standard materials per IMDS. See page 3 on this document.
Me: Ok. But steel x per ASTM x and coating y per ASTM y doesn't exist.
Customer: Contact helpdesk, not my problem.
Me: Ok.
Helpdesk: Find the European equivalent.
Me: Doesn't exist. You need to add this material, here is all the work that I've done for you.
Helpdesk: We don't do research.
Me: *headdesk* I already did the research for you.
Helpdesk: We don't actually provide help, sorry.
Me: I'm using my own entry because it doesn't exist.
Customer: No, use this item number instead.
Me: No, it isn't the same thing.
Customer: But that's what we use here.
Me: *headdesk* It isn't what your north american operations are using, knucklehead. Take my submission or YOU deal with helpdesk.
Customer: Fine, we'll accept it but we don't like it and will complain about this for every future submission until YOU get it fixed.
Me: *headdesk*
Other customers have no problem with me just creating my own entries for the base materials, publishing them internally, and then using those to create their submissions. Those would be my customers whose home offices are in Michigan, not the ones with corporate HQ in Germany. So I am aware that it isn't just the unhelpfullness of IMDS helpdesk causing me problems, but also the unhelpfulness of my customer as well.
__________________ "Got no time to for spreadin’ roots, the time has come to be gone.
And tho’ our health we drank a thousand times, it’s time to ramble on."
I agree with you, but unfortunately my customer does not. This is a quick rundown of how my experience went (the short short version)...
Me: *headdesk*... Me: *headdesk*... Me: *headdesk*...
Wow...
I haven't experienced anything like that. My worst IMDS recipients have demanded that missing submissions be sent, without looking for them first (other Tier 1's who should know better). Even they are reasonable about it.
If you don't mind, what are the specs in question (customer's requirement, actual material and print callout)? You indicated that this customer has both European and North American operations - if their head office is in USA, maybe there is recourse there. (I don't think it's us )
AIAG IMDS/ELV Summit Oct 10, 2007
Re: AIAG IMDS/ELV Summit Oct 10, 2007
Re: AIAG IMDS/ELV Summit Oct 10, 2007
)
Linear Mode
