AS9102 Assembly Component FAIs

[QAhib63]

Should I suggest Internally Generated AS9102 FAIs for proprietary Aerospace Assembly Components?

The first part of my question - When performing a Top-Level AS9102 for an Assembly where all Design information is proprietary (with exception of top-level outline drawings and test data), is there a requirement to perform internally Generated AS9102 FAIRs for Assembly components?
(PER CONTRACT, The customer does not get a detail FAI for assembly components)

The second part of my question is - Would a normally documented manufacturing First Piece full inspection be sufficient as a FAIR? (Just the component lot used in the Assembly FAI). Understood that this is manufacturing approval, not process verification.

The third part of my question is - Provided part two is answered yes, would a properly managed nonconformance present in the manufacturing lot that has been accepted to inventory require a "yes" to be checked on form 1 of the Assembly FAI for "is there a documented nonconformance present in the FAI?" ?

• Page 1 of the AS9102 form does require identifiers (For the component used in the assembly).
• The contract is for Top-Level only.
• Although the Standard is clear on AS9102 FAIs for detail parts if the customer provides the prints, it does not clearly go into proprietary design aspects. My assumption is that since AS9102 clearly defines evaluation activities (Section 4.4), and since it is not simply lot inspection but process verification - AS9102 should be performed and internally retained for any Aerospace component.

I need support from others for yes or no on this. Clearly stated, yet thorough "Readers Digest" versions are greatly appreciated!
Thank you - greatly- for your responses

 

[John Predmore]

For other readers, FAI is First Article inspection. If any FAI documentation will be shared with the customer and you need their approval, you should take your questions to their quality representative and come to agreement during the FAI planning phase. In the spirit of the Cove, I am happy to share my thoughts.

First question, yes AS9102 says detail FAI is performed except for COTS (commercial off-the shelf) parts. If parts are proprietary, the question of how much FAI information to share is a separate question,.

Second question, I say no. I think you are asking about your manufacturing's full inspection, normally done, so that interpretation is the basis of my answer. I think activities called for in AS9100C 4.4 go beyond what an in-house inspection department routinely measures, in a full inspection. For example, AS9102 4.4 calls for you to evaluate (4.4.a) routers are correct, (4.4.b) supplier documentation is complete, (4.4.c) raw material and special process certifications correct, (4.4.d) correct sources were used, (4.4.f) designed tooling was used, (4.4.1) part marking meets all requirements.

Third question, no. The FAI reports on the one piece selected and measured. If on the other hand, you are repeatedly drawing samples before you find one that passes, that would be a violation of the intent of AS9102. According to AS9102 1.2, "the primary purpose of FAI is to verify and validate product realization processes are capable of producing characteristics that meet requirements." If other pieces in the same lot as the selected piece are found to be non-conforming, that discovery does not negate the demonstration the process is capable of making good parts.

 

[QAhib63]

For other readers, FAI is First Article inspection. If any FAI documentation will be shared with the customer and you need their approval, you should take your questions to their quality representative and come to agreement during the FAI planning phase. In the spirit of the Cove, I am happy to share my thoughts.

First question, yes AS9102 says detail FAI is performed except for COTS (commercial off-the shelf) parts. If parts are proprietary, the question of how much FAI information to share is a separate question,.

Second question, I say no. I think you are asking about your manufacturing's full inspection, normally done, so that interpretation is the basis of my answer. I think activities called for in AS9100C 4.4 go beyond what an in-house inspection department routinely measures, in a full inspection. For example, AS9102 4.4 calls for you to evaluate (4.4.a) routers are correct, (4.4.b) supplier documentation is complete, (4.4.c) raw material and special process certifications correct, (4.4.d) correct sources were used, (4.4.f) designed tooling was used, (4.4.1) part marking meets all requirements.

Third question, no. The FAI reports on the one piece selected and measured. If on the other hand, you are repeatedly drawing samples before you find one that passes, that would be a violation of the intent of AS9102. According to AS9102 1.2, "the primary purpose of FAI is to verify and validate product realization processes are capable of producing characteristics that meet requirements." If other pieces in the same lot as the selected piece are found to be non-conforming, that discovery does not negate the demonstration the process is capable of making good parts.

Thank you for your well stated response! We are of the same mind on this, as I think anyone who reads the full standard and understands the intent would agree.

 

[QAhib63]

Thank you for your well stated response! We are of the same mind on this, as I think anyone who reads the full standard and understands the intent would agree.

Customer approval for FAIs is assumed of course if they accept the parts, but their signature on the FAI is not usually required and will be mentioned in the customer Quality Requirements Clauses or T&Cs. (For what it's worth).