AS9102 4.7.3 b.2 Part Specific Inspection Tooling

[Jameslaz]

Hi All,

I have a bit of a quandary. My company is asking for a FAI for a part that has several GD&T callouts that must be verified.

My company has a drill jig with a C of C form the manufacture that they are using to verify these parts.

So it drills the holes and because it was made and has a over 2 year old C of C that are saying the parts are verified.
I get that AS9102 4.7.3 b.2 doesn't specifically say it must be calibrated.

This is crazy to me but I need some help on if this is truly allowed.

I can tell you I have never once used a non calibrated tool/gauge on an FAI before.

Thank you,
James

 

[John Predmore]

The question about calibration of the drill jig is a red herring.

First Article Inspection, by definition, includes inspection. One tenet of quality inspection is verification by means independent of the means of fabrication. Using the drill jig that made the holes to verify the holes is a technical foul. Even checking with a different drill jig from the one which made the parts is not what FAI is about.

The OP commented what 4.7.3.b doesn’t say; let’s read what it does say: “Results from inspection shall be expressed in quantitative terms (i.e. variable data)”. 4.7.3.b includes two exceptions for attribute data (pass/fail), when “no inspection technique is feasible” or “no/no-go feature has been established for a specific characteristic” (the example given is a radius gage).

GD&T is mentioned by the OP, so quantitative dimensions are specified and feasible. If your company does not have the necessary equipment to measure, that does not mean inspection is not feasible; it is feasible to hire an inspection firm one-time to layout the first article. First Article Inspection is not done at the fabricator’s convenience; it is a risk-reduction measure to reduce risk to your customer from poor quality parts.

 

[Big Jim]

What tools is actually needed to measure that feature? Are there alternate tools? What do you have? What would it cost for such a tool? If you don't feel it is economically feasible for you to purchase due to low usage (such as a CMM), who could you outsource measuring that feature to?

In other words, explore all of your alternatives, and there are always alternatives, even if some are less desirable than others.