TS 16949 Section 8.2.4.1 - Layout inspection vs. QS-9000 Section 4.10.4.1

[Aggie]

Section 8.2.4.1 of TS requires layout inspection and functional verification for product as specified in the control plan. The QS-9000 requirement for this (section 4.10.4.1) mandated layouts per "customer requirements". Question: Is the TS more lenient on this? If the Production Control Plan doesn't reflect an annual revalidation, is it no longer needed? Thanks for inputs.

 

[Howard Atkins]

Section 8.2.4.1 of TS requires layout inspection and functional verification for product as specified in the control plan. The QS-9000 requirement for this (section 4.10.4.1) mandated layouts per "customer requirements". Question: Is the TS more lenient on this? If the Production Control Plan doesn't reflect an annual revalidation, is it no longer needed? Thanks for inputs.

This depends on the interpretation of 8.2.4.1

See also http://elsmar.com/Forums/showthread.php?t=7424

In QS9000 the requirement was as per customer requirements- GM for example had no customer requirement and thus if you supplied to them you did not have to perform a layout.

TS says according to the control plan.
Do you have to put it in the control plan?
Annex A to TS does not include the layout as a requirement to the control plan.
As Teri says in the quoted thread

As long as your customers are approving PPAP's, it is not in your control plan and basically does not apply to you

The question is will the auditors accept this or say that it should be in the control plan.
The pre launch control plan -

Pre-launch: a description of the dimensional measurements, material and performance tests that occur after
prototype and before full production. Pre-launch is defined as a production phase in the process of product realization which may be required after prototype build.

Includes the PPAP run and you have to perform a layout for this run so you can place the layout in this Control Plan without any problems.
You can also reference the layout in the production control plan with a frequency of "new PPAP submission" this does not add any extra burdens but maintains the integrity of the clause.

 

[Sam]

No, it is not more lenient than QS,only more confusing.
IMO, layout inspection and functional verification, when specified by the customer,should be referenced somewhere, either in the CP, process description or work instruction. Else how would you know to do it?
Regardless of how you do it, the auditor will eventually ask for your process definition.