One of our plants uses a lot of sample parts for visual ID of incoming material. I will have these parts ( couple hundred) put into our gage tracking system with all receiving a calibration sticker. Currently all of our gages are re calibrated on a yearly bases. However these sample parts will be hanging on a wall and will not change until a rev change comes through. I want to set the recal time on these to *until next rev change* but am not sure how to word this on the very small sticker we use and at the same time keep the ISO auditors happy. As a side note if a sample part is damaged or in anyway altered somehow on the wall it will be re calibrated.
Certified Part Samples for Visual ID of Incoming Material
- Thread starter qcman
- Start date
Re: Certified part samples
While it's a good idea to control the type of samples you're asking about, it's not necessary to include them in the calibration system. If that's the easiest way to keep track of them, it's fine, but it's not necessary. You can use the limited space on the labels by creating a different category of "gauge" in your system. You can describe them in your documentation, along with the required methods used to preserve and replace them, call them "approved samples" and then just put something like "sample" on the label, with the understanding that the presence of the label signifies approval.
Personally, and I've dealt with this in the past myself, I think it's better to just create a spreadsheet to keep track of them, and document a separate process for approving, marking, handling and replacing them.
While it's a good idea to control the type of samples you're asking about, it's not necessary to include them in the calibration system. If that's the easiest way to keep track of them, it's fine, but it's not necessary. You can use the limited space on the labels by creating a different category of "gauge" in your system. You can describe them in your documentation, along with the required methods used to preserve and replace them, call them "approved samples" and then just put something like "sample" on the label, with the understanding that the presence of the label signifies approval.
Personally, and I've dealt with this in the past myself, I think it's better to just create a spreadsheet to keep track of them, and document a separate process for approving, marking, handling and replacing them.
You can make the verbiage anything you want it to be. Part of the problem with putting them in the gage calibration system is that they're treated differently than gages: they don't require actual calibration (which is comparison to traceable standard); they could conceivably be "good" forever, and the approval process is different.
D
David DeLong
I would have the visual samples in the gauge programme and once a year, probably December, they should be reviewed for damage or deterioration. That is it.
One cannot confirm the calibration on them as in other gauges but they are gauges so into the programme they go.
One cannot confirm the calibration on them as in other gauges but they are gauges so into the programme they go.
That can be done without putting them in the calibration system.
This is a matter of personal interpretation. I suggest that they aren't gages in the sense that's important to the calibration system, that being that there is no traceable standard to compare them with. It just isn't necessary in terms of requirements of the standard. Nonetheless, as I suggested earlier, if it's somehow more convenient to have them in the system, then by all means put 'em in.
R
ralphsulser
When I have been involved in this type situation some time ago, the parts were tagged with appropriate name, number ,date, customer and revision level.
We called them master samples which have been part of our customer submission program for approval. GM, Ford, Saturn, Freightliner, Mercedes were the customers. These were body panels and structural parts. They were taken out to the job when the part started up for production and used by QC to make the first part approval. When not in use they were hung in a cage by customer designated areas. They were replaced if/when a newer revision was approved. Worked OK and we were ISO90001 and QS9000 audited and approved.
We called them master samples which have been part of our customer submission program for approval. GM, Ford, Saturn, Freightliner, Mercedes were the customers. These were body panels and structural parts. They were taken out to the job when the part started up for production and used by QC to make the first part approval. When not in use they were hung in a cage by customer designated areas. They were replaced if/when a newer revision was approved. Worked OK and we were ISO90001 and QS9000 audited and approved.
I've had similar experience with molded plastic parts. In that experience, I had one person who was responsible for storing, issuing, and generally keeping track of the sample parts. My predecessor had developed a "system" that didn't work very well for a number of reasons, and I told the guy whose job it was to design his own system with the only requirements being positive identification of the parts (part number, revision level, date of manufacture), verification that the parts were in conformance to requirements, protecting the parts from degradation, making sure that if he wasn't there that anyone could find the samples needed, insuring that parts were replaced (or re-identified) when there were revisions, and making sure that samples were issued to production when needed, and documenting all of the above. He did all of that, and did it very well.
Because my predecessor had been an inveterate micromanager in general, I wound up receiving what I still consider the best compliment I ever got from someone who worked for me, and in some ways the most disturbing. After the revised system was in place and I had complimented its designer on a job well done, he said, "I like working for you because you let me do my job."Similar threads
- Locked
- Sticky
