Documents of External Origin II - Three types of Documents of External Origin

[KenS]

I have identified three types of documents of external origin

1. Specifications and such, CE documents, ISO documents etc.
2. Manufacturer's manuals for subcomponents in the units we manufacture, which ship with the unit
3. Supplier's catalogs when supplier part numbers are indicated on the PO
   [/list=1] The first two I have a handle on, the last type gives me heartburn. The Supplier's part number is listed in the "Item Master" and on the PO. The item is ordered by our part number and the supplier reference is in a seperate text field in the line below. There is (supposed to be?) an internal drawing (controlled) for all items, and generally there is. The items are accepted/rejected on the basis of the internal drawing. While I would feel better if the supplier's part number were not even mentioned, my contention is that the Supplier Catalog does not need to be controlled for ISO purposes.
   
   Opinions?

 

[SteelMaiden]

I wouldn't consider catalogs a controlled document. If your suppliers are like ours, they send 100 catalogs every month, to anybody whose name they can find..

Your controlled information should be the info that is in your purchasing program, be it canned software, a spreadsheet, or a database of your own making.

 

[JodiB]

Ken,

We don't consider our supplier catalogs to be controlled docs. But all of our orders are placed verbally with the vendor. We know we'll get what we want without relying on using a currently accurate part number.

I'm interested in hearing what you are doing with your part ordering. Are you saying that you keep schematics with each part labeled with an internal number ? And then when that part has to be replaced, there is another doc that correlates that internal part number to specs and the purchasing department orders something to meet those specs?

 

[Al Dyer]

Maybe consider it in this light:

Is it a throw-away document that you could replace with access to the internet or a website?

I have had all type of gage product manuals that each contain a list of gages and associated replacement parts needed. The same is available on a website, and that is propably about as current as you can get.

MHO

 

[KenS]

Engineering has internal drawings with the manufacturer's P/N identified where necessary, or has a copy of the manufacturer's spec sheet/catalog page from the revision in place at the time the part was designed in/approved. If the part changes, it must be re-approved and a new spec sheet is added. As I stated in my original post, FOR ISO I think that's plenty of control. However, looking at it from a workable QMS, maybe not.

In the past two weeks there have been two problems with manufacturer's P/N's, investigation into these suggests they are not isolated instances (understand the I am putting the first QMS in place that this place has ever seen, QA still doesn't get informed of many things).

First was a simple one, the manufacturer unilaterally changed all part numbers, in the middle of a blanket purchase agreement with several scheduled shipments. The parts, needed on the floor, were held up in Inspection awaiting clarification. As an aside, the manufacturer's website had the new P/N's listed, but no cross reference, and no new catalog was to be found here. They e-mailed us a spec sheet with both P/N's on it and everybody was happy.

The second was much more severe. The manufacturer modified the controller for a turbo pump, positioning the controller on the pump, rather than in the associated electronics rack. This also changed the layout of the hard lines. Purchasing and Engineering were aware that this change was coming up. However, this was a case of no part number change and nobody admitts knowing the part change was now in effect. Put the tool two days behind schedule.

What I want to do is pick brains here at the forum and see if I can come up with a process to control this kind of issue in the real world.

 

[David Mullins]

reflections

Some time back there was a very lengthy thread on external doc control. It included discussion about supplier catalogues, and the consensus was overwhelmingly that these DO NOT need to be controlled.
That said, if it were a major tool that your business absolutely lived and died by, then yes, you would want to include them. Not for ISO, but for the sake of good business sense.
(I recall that was almost the case for one contributor to that thread.)

So if you're interested, run a search.

Cheers.

 

[M Greenaway]

Sounds more like you have an issue with the broader concept of engineering change, rather than perhaps document control.

However you did say that engineering knew of the change, which kind of suggests problems with your design function.

Hmmm gets deeper and deeper.

 

[Marc]

SteelMaiden said:

I wouldn't consider catalogs a controlled document.

It depends entirely upon how they are used.

 

[energy]

Sounds like!

Marc said:

It depends entirely upon how they are used.

As a supplier, advertising on the internet, you must exercise control of catalog content to ensure the customer gets what he ordered. Your catalog becomes somebody else's external document. How best to do that? You as the buyer would sure blame the supplier if you ordered a yoyo with lights and received a yoyo without string. All I'm trying to say is that if a catalog is used for any type of verification, it has to be controlled and you must be able to verify it's authenticity. What did I say? I haven't a clue.Sorry