AS9100C 8.2.4 a-d Requirements

[littleRoot]

AS1900C Clause 8.2.4 has additional requirements identified as a) through d). I'm wondering how to comply with d) and any specific measurement instruments required.

We use a traveler with accept/reject operations for Quality inspectors but the instruments used are not recorded on the traveler, it is recorded on the Production First Article and Final Inspection reports. Is this enought to comply with d) requirement above?

 

[Sidney Vianna]

AS1900C Clause 8.2.4 has additional requirements identified as a) through d). I'm wondering how to comply with d) and any specific measurement instruments required.

AS9100C 8.2.4 d refers to the availability of instructions for any specific gage, fixture or device to be used and, potentially, any special instructions for the measurement being made. It would be totally appropriate to have that information captured on the router/traveler.

We use a traveler with accept/reject operations for Quality inspectors but the instruments used are not recorded on the traveler, it is recorded on the Production First Article and Final Inspection reports. Is this enought to comply with d) requirement above?

That section of the standard does not talk about "traceability" of the device being used to inspect/test the product and the hardware itself. Many organizations don't keep such traceability available, which can become a challenge when/if they have to comply with the requirement contained in section 7.6 which reads:

In addition, the organization shall assess and record the validity of the previous measuring results when the equipment is found not to conform to requirements. The organization shall take appropriate action on the equipment and any product affected.

 

[rickpaul01]

I think you are fine. Keep in mind that if a specific tool is required, it needs to be listed in the instructions.

 

[Big Jim]

It would be totally appropriate to have that information captured on the router/traveler.

I totally agree with everything else in Sidney's post, somewhat disagree with this statement.

Although a bit unusual, there is nothing wrong with having this information on the traveler. It is common to have some sort of work instruction included on the traveler, although they are usually light comments, but it certainly is one viable way to convey this kind of important detail.

If you find this is an effective way to handle it, there is nothing to keep you from doing so.

The standard certainly is not prescriptive on this point, and that provides you with flexibility to do this if it works for you.

That said, if it were my choice, I probably would not do it that way.

 

[andygr]

You are not required to have traceability to the inspection tools but need to address this section of the standard:

7.1.2 Risk Management
The organization shall establish, implement and maintain a process for managing risk to the achievement of applicable requirements, that includes as appropriate to the organization and the product

Per Sidney's last comment you need to consider the impact if during calibration you were to find the inspection tool to be such that you could have accepted nonconforming product.

Can you show where and or when the tool was used in the shop to limit what product it might have been used on? Based on the type of product you need to consider the impact to your customers.

In critical processes/parts it is not unusual to have the planning identify a specific inspection tool to be used and require the serial # to be recorded but this is the exception and not the rule in my experience.

 

[dsanabria]

AS1900C Clause 8.2.4 has additional requirements identified as a) through d). I'm wondering how to comply with d) and any specific measurement instruments required.

We use a traveler with accept/reject operations for Quality inspectors but the instruments used are not recorded on the traveler, it is recorded on the Production First Article and Final Inspection reports. Is this enough to comply with d) requirement above?

Totally agree with every other statement in this forum. In addition - take a few seconds and read the following items from the standard - Clauses 7.1 c & d, 7.5.1 d, and 8.2.4 d) - the standards point to monitor your results. Best practices is to record any dimensions that are acceptable and final during the process - this way your inside supplier (station to stations) can ascertain if the product he is using meets requirements.

Putting in other words, if a dimension or a feature is not correct - how much time will you invest in identifying root cause (machine, equipment, instruments etc) and correcting the problem.

 

[Big Jim]

It would be totally appropriate to have that information captured on the router/traveler.

I totally agree with everything else in Sidney's post, somewhat disagree with this statement.

Although a bit unusual, there is nothing wrong with having this information on the traveler. It is common to have some sort of work instruction included on the traveler, although they are usually light comments, but it certainly is one viable way to convey this kind of important detail.

If you find this is an effective way to handle it, there is nothing to keep you from doing so.

The standard certainly is not prescriptive on this point, and that provides you with flexibility to do this if it works for you.

That said, if it were my choice, I probably would not do it that way.

Looking back on this earlier post I realize that I misread Sidney's post. I thought I read "inappropriate", not "appropriate".

Please disregard my earlier response. Sidney and I are in agreement. Sorry about cluttering up this thread with my "inappropriate" response.