Family of similar parts - Control Plans - One or more?

[Joe_winter]

The blades of my inc. are similar, so I just must do a CP instead of four separated? of course, the commonality of them have been reviewed. Do it will reduce a number of CP in my inc.That is good idea! but my trouble is what will be submitted to demonstrate the understandings with my customers? more appropriate explaination are ppreciated!

 

[Marc]

One control plan for similar parts is not unusual. I've seen control plans which are machine specific. Same as with Process FMEAs. See https://Elsmar.com/FMEA/sld041.htm

I'm sure others will chime in on this.

 

[Jonell]

From my experience, alot depends upon the customer that you will be submitting the control plans to. Some will let you submit one for a family of parts, while other customers will insist on a seperate control plan for each part. I'd recommend that you ask your customer if he will accept the one for the family of parts.

Jonell

 

[Joe_winter]

Thank you all! but my suspicions are
@ I have to advise and affirm to my customers that one family but not every part.
@ which are included in a certain family? how to distinguish and determine? same processes just with different dimensions?
your comments? hope!

 

[Joe_winter]

One control plan for similar parts is not unusual. I've seen control plans which are machine specific. Same as with Process FMEAs. See https://Elsmar.com/FMEA/sld041.htm

I'm sure others will chime in on this.

oh, machine specific but same FMEA? families of CP are in the same with ones of FEMA, for CP ahead, FMEA rearwards, which will be convenient to continue processes study. do you agree to ?

 

[Marc]

Yes - I've seen tier 1's with control plans and process FMEAs which were machine specific. In some cases they were not even part family specific. The only differences were part aspects such as length, diameter or similar and those were addressed in a matrix or similar. The failure mode of the process (remember - we're talking process here, not design), for example, will typically be the same no matter what part you're running through the process (machine, plating tank, paint, or whatever the process many be).

 

[Joe_winter]

Only processes need considering?

thank your opinions!
only to consider processed characteristics instead of parts attributes,regress to prcess studyundefined. the point is appreciated. as is, the CPs for plastic gears with different diameter, made by the same injector and separated molds,are the same,if they are in one product part matrix. yes?
Joe

 

[Marc]

I would say that is correct. A key aspect to consider would be whether tolerances are the same, but I have seen where a matrix was used to address such aspects.

Opinions from others?

 

[Joe_winter]

tolerance to consider

being agreeable to! but the specifications for parts, identifing all families parts, will benefit your customer acception.
hope you all opinions.

 

[Siddhi01]

Yes - I've seen tier 1's with control plans and process FMEAs which were machine specific. In some cases they were not even part family specific. The only differences were part aspects such as length, diameter or similar and those were addressed in a matrix or similar. The failure mode of the process (remember - we're talking process here, not design), for example, will typically be the same no matter what part you're running through the process (machine, plating tank, paint, or whatever the process many be).

Exactly where should be the location of this matrix on our control plan?