AS9102 FAI (First Article Inspection) Full or Partial - Changes to NC programming

[J Allen]

I'm having a disagreement with management regarding changes to NC programming. We have completed FAIs per AS9102 but production has decided to change the NC program as well as change a work center from automatic to conventional machining. I have informed management that QC will have to perform a new FAI because several characteristics will be directly affected and the opportunity exists for the change controls the position of holes, may affect form, fit , or function. I believe that a new complete FAI is in order, they say I should do a partial as the part will still be the same configuration (no change in dimensions or revision.
How many changes would mandate a complete FAI.

 

[Coury Ferguson]

Re: AS9102 FAI Full or Partial

I'm having a disagreement with management regarding changes to NC programming. We have completed FAIs per AS9102 but production has decided to change the NC program as well as change a work center from automatic to conventional machining. I have informed management that QC will have to perform a new FAI because several characteristics will be directly affected and the opportunity exists for the change controls the position of holes, may affect form, fit , or function. I believe that a new complete FAI is in order, they say I should do a partial as the part will still be the same configuration (no change in dimensions or revision.
How many changes would mandate a complete FAI.

I agree with your Management to a point. When there are changes to dimensional characteristics via NC, a partial FAI is required to verify the characteristics that changed. A complete FAI is not required, on dimensions that weren't affected by the change, in my opinion.

Why waste manpower to perform a complete FAI when it isn't required?

 

[alspread]

Re: AS9102 FAI Full or Partial

Partial for the affected features only. I wouldn't go overboard. Remeber the goal of a first article to to verify the process intended to be used for production. If this change (auto to manual) is a one time thing, then just inspect the parts to be sure they conform and move on (not the intended process). But if this is intended to become the new standard production method, then a first article would be required on the affected features only.

Good luck

The Organization shall perform a full FAI, or a partial FAI for affected characteristics, when
any of the following events occurs:
1. A change in the design affecting fit, form or function of the part.
2. A change in manufacturing source(s), process(es), inspection method(s), location of
manufacture, tooling or materials, that can potentially affect fit, form or function.
3. A change in numerical control program or translation to another media that can
potentially affect fit, form or function.
4. A natural or man-made event, which may adversely affect the manufacturing process.
5. A lapse in production for two years or as specified by the Customer.

 

[nismoynr]

Re: AS9102 FAI Full or Partial

Partial for the affected features only. I wouldn't go overboard. Remeber the goal of a first article to to verify the process intended to be used for production. If this change (auto to manual) is a one time thing, then just inspect the parts to be sure they conform and move on (not the intended process). But if this is intended to become the new standard production method, then a first article would be required on the affected features only.

Good luck

The Organization shall perform a full FAI, or a partial FAI for affected characteristics, when
any of the following events occurs:
1. A change in the design affecting fit, form or function of the part.
2. A change in manufacturing source(s), process(es), inspection method(s), location of
manufacture, tooling or materials, that can potentially affect fit, form or function.
3. A change in numerical control program or translation to another media that can
potentially affect fit, form or function.
4. A natural or man-made event, which may adversely affect the manufacturing process.
5. A lapse in production for two years or as specified by the Customer.

I have 2 situation about FAIR here.

1) During Initial FAIR stage, we found a nonconformance for the part. After a few brainstorming, we claim that the tool is the cause of the defect. What we did for that part is we did a customer tag and they disposition it as UAI. What I understand is, the Initial FAIR is rejected because it have a nonconformance. For the next part, I did a delta FAIR for that particular process and still rejected. We sit with our design engineer and they said that we must do something on the tool. Since the 1st Delta FAIR rejected, I never did any Delta FAI anymore because my point of view is, we already know that we use a bad tool to produce part. What for I must re-run the Delta FAIR again and again? why not we just do a delta FAI after we 100% confirm that the new tool will give the acceptable result?
2) Continue to the situation1, prior to get a new replacement tool, we did some improvement in manufacturing process and I attach Delta FAIR for that. The report for the part is still rejected, and my Delta FAIR is failed again. After the failure of Delta Fair, I did not attach Delta FAI anymore for the next and continuous part because I know that the report is will be rejected again and it’s correct.
So, for both of the situation, Am I violate any procedure especially AS9102 to not to do the Delta FAIR for all the production part although I know that the FAIR for the part is not 100% accept yet?


can anybody answer for my questions above?