J
juliov
Please let me know your input to the following question:
Our assembly department keeps prints of previous machines that were assembled and sold to our customers; new machines naturally have new components and thus new prints’ revisions to account for the new machines that will be sold to our customers.
Keep in mind that the new machines have updated revisions due to modifications,
and these prints are used during assembly as they should be to control quality.
Our customers sometimes send the older machines for repair and logically we dig out the older prints (previous revisions) to repair because the older prints refer to the returned machine. Here is the question, how do we control these prints?? Should we use a “for reference” stamp on them, or store them away and use them when needed to repair older versions of machines, how can we ensure that we don’t get a nonconformance during an audit. What classification should the older prints be under? The new prints are clearly controlled and in file and available at points of use. Our tech leader has a folder with many prints of previous versions of the machines with a “for reference” stamp on the folder cover, is this conforming? Let me know. I would really look forward to find a correct method to include in our QMS that would address this issue correctly and simply.
Our assembly department keeps prints of previous machines that were assembled and sold to our customers; new machines naturally have new components and thus new prints’ revisions to account for the new machines that will be sold to our customers.
Keep in mind that the new machines have updated revisions due to modifications,
and these prints are used during assembly as they should be to control quality.
Our customers sometimes send the older machines for repair and logically we dig out the older prints (previous revisions) to repair because the older prints refer to the returned machine. Here is the question, how do we control these prints?? Should we use a “for reference” stamp on them, or store them away and use them when needed to repair older versions of machines, how can we ensure that we don’t get a nonconformance during an audit. What classification should the older prints be under? The new prints are clearly controlled and in file and available at points of use. Our tech leader has a folder with many prints of previous versions of the machines with a “for reference” stamp on the folder cover, is this conforming? Let me know. I would really look forward to find a correct method to include in our QMS that would address this issue correctly and simply.
Last edited by a moderator: