Are Special Characteristics mandatory (required)?

[bobdoering]

Re: Special Characteristics? Is this compulsory?

Be sure to look under current customer requirements - some have specified certain FMEA scores as special characteristics and other may further emphasized a need for CCs or SCs. Also remember a complete understanding of characteristics includes not just print dimensions, but also process characteristics.

 

[Richard Pike]

Re: Special Characteristics? Is this compulsory?

Be sure to look under current customer requirements - some have specified certain FMEA scores as special characteristics and other may further emphasized a need for CCs or SCs. Also remember a complete understanding of characteristics includes not just print dimensions, but also process characteristics.

Quite correct.

Even if identified as SC CC or whatever; as far as I am aware the only required outcome of such identification is to ensure that the relevant characteristic/s are included in the Control Plan?

So I am not sure why the Originator has a problem in identifying SC / CC. If it has been omitted from the system for a few years and is raised now - so what? say thank you to the Auditor and move on. Its only a NC, and one that could / should be addressed fairly easily.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Special Characteristics? Is this compulsory?

3.1.12
special characteristic
product characteristic or manufacturing process parameter which can affect safety or compliance with regulations, fit, function, performance or subsequent processing of product

Perhaps you could give us e few examples of characteristics which do not fit into the above description especially fit, function, performance or subsequent processing of product.

The question is not whether any characteristics fit that description, but rather (a) whether the customer has identified special characteristics or (b) the customer, in lieu of identification of SCs requires the supplier to do so. If either one of those is true, then the characteristics selected must fit the definition. In other words, there is no requirement to treat all characteristics that fit the definition as "special."

The confusion arises due to PPAP requirements. If the customer specifies (or defaults to) a Level 3 submission but hasn't identified any SCs, it's generally expected that the supplier will identify at least one so as to fulfill the PPAP requirement for statistical studies.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Special Characteristics? Is this compulsory?

Quite correct.

Even if identified as SC CC or whatever; as far as I am aware the only required outcome of such identification is to ensure that the relevant characteristic/s are included in the Control Plan?

So I am not sure why the Originator has a problem in identifying SC / CC. If it has been omitted from the system for a few years and is raised now - so what? say thank you to the Auditor and move on. Its only a NC, and one that could / should be addressed fairly easily.

Identification of special characteristics obliges the supplier to do a PPAP capability study, and in some cases ongoing statistical analysis in production. Also, adding a characteristic to the control plan means that MSA must also be done.

 

[Richard Pike]

Re: Special Characteristics? Is this compulsory?

The question is not whether any characteristics fit that description, but rather (a) whether the customer has identified special characteristics or (b) the customer, in lieu of identification of SCs requires the supplier to do so. If either one of those is true, then the characteristics selected must fit the definition. In other words, there is no requirement to treat all characteristics that fit the definition as "special."

The confusion arises due to PPAP requirements. If the customer specifies (or defaults to) a Level 3 submission but hasn't identified any SCs, it's generally expected that the supplier will identify at least one so as to fulfill the PPAP requirement for statistical studies.

That seriously smells of just going through the motions for the sake of it.
If I interpret correctly, then no wonder the industry is in such a mess. Time spent on nonsense is time spent away from important issues.

We certainly would not be required to do that in this part of the world, whether that is because our Customers (Customer Quality Development Reps) are better informed or poorer informed, I guess is a subjective matter.

PS Do you still have Customers that require you to identify the CC for them? I was under the illusion that this had been stopped for Product Liability reasons.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Special Characteristics? Is this compulsory?

That seriously smells of just going through the motions for the sake of it.
If I interpret correctly, then no wonder the industry is in such a mess. Time spent on nonsense is time spent away from important issues.

We certainly would not be required to do that in this part of the world, whether that is because our Customers (Customer Quality Development Reps) are better informed or poorer informed, I guess is a subjective matter.

PS Do you still have Customers that require you to identify the CC for them? I was under the illusion that this had been stopped for Product Liability reasons.

What's "special" to a supplier, in terms of his own processes, may be different from what's special to a customer. There are many automobile components that entail little or no risk in terms of product liability, so depending on the type of part involved, there may be no need for the customer to identify SCs. In those cases, suppliers will often target characteristics of the process or product that represent some form of risk that the customer might not even be aware of.

As far as the American automotive industry in general is concerned, wasted effort is generally what's expected of suppliers.

 

[Richard Pike]

Re: Special Characteristics? Is this compulsory?

What's "special" to a supplier, in terms of his own processes, may be different from what's special to a customer. There are many automobile components that entail little or no risk in terms of product liability, so depending on the type of part involved, there may be no need for the customer to identify SCs. In those cases, suppliers will often target characteristics of the process or product that represent some form of risk that the customer might not even be aware of.

As far as the American automotive industry in general is concerned, wasted effort is generally what's expected of suppliers.

That's an honest admission ! :mg:

If the Customer is not aware of a product risk, should their design department not be made aware of this? Of course if they wont disclose their Design FMEA's how would we know if they are aware or not?

With regard to the PPAP (is that Paper, Paper And more Paper)? We call it pcrap! --- if the Supplier designates a process charecteristic as CC then does this infer the MSA & PPAP additional extras. Does the same apply if they designate a Product Charecteristic as CC for reasons of importnace to the Characteristics matrix, which would not effect the Customer?

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Special Characteristics? Is this compulsory?

That's an honest admission ! :mg:

But not a big secret.

If the Customer is not aware of a product risk, should their design department not be made aware of this? Of course if they wont disclose their Design FMEA's how would we know if they are aware or not?

As far as the automotive OEMs are concerned, there is virtually no contact between designers and suppliers, except perhaps occasionally when dealing with prototypes. Even then, there are often intermediaries.

With regard to the PPAP (is that Paper, Paper And more Paper)? We call it pcrap! --- if the Supplier designates a process charecteristic as CC then does this infer the MSA & PPAP additional extras. Does the same apply if they designate a Product Charecteristic as CC for reasons of importnace to the Characteristics matrix, which would not effect the Customer?

Yes (to both questions).

 

[Stijloor]

Re: Special Characteristics? Is this compulsory?

That's an honest admission ! :mg:

If the Customer is not aware of a product risk, should their design department not be made aware of this? Of course if they wont disclose their Design FMEA's how would we know if they are aware or not?

With regard to the PPAP (is that Paper, Paper And more Paper)? We call it pcrap! --- if the Supplier designates a process charecteristic as CC then does this infer the MSA & PPAP additional extras. Does the same apply if they designate a Product Charecteristic as CC for reasons of importnace to the Characteristics matrix, which would not effect the Customer?

As quality professionals we should refrain from taking cheap shots at the PPAP process, which, when implemented correctly can add a lot of value for both supplier and customer. I do not believe that it's wrong to ask a supplier for evidence that his process is capable of meeting Customer requirements.

It's our responsibility as quality professionals to help our organizations and/or our Clients understand how this could be implemented.

If the PPAP process is too much to ask, a supplier should not engage in the automotive supply business.

Stijloor.

 

[Al Dyer]

Re: Special Characteristics? Is this compulsory?

My feeling is that you need to discuss with your registrar the reason for such a blatant inconsistency in interpretations.

Was it the same auditor as all previous audits?
Is it a new auditor to your system?
Is the auditor new to the registrar and not aware of their internal standards?
Is the auditor experienced?

Ask questions, they work for you!

Al...