Effectiveness of 200% Visual Inspection to Identify Defects and Defectives

beaser3

Involved In Discussions
#1
Can anyone tell me what the increase in effectiveness is if you go from 100% visual inspection to 200% visual inspection?

We have a part that gets inspected 100% by the operator prior to getting packaged. Our customer found 2 defective parts out of a shipment of 500 pieces. We are not able to prevent the problem from happening at all and the suggestion at our corrective action meeting was to put have another operator "audit" the parts prior to boxing them. I know that this would not eliminate our chances of a defect but would it even help increase the detection number?:confused:

Thanks in advance!
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
#2
Re: Effectiveness of 200% inspection

:topic:
I cannot say much about how effective it would be, but I guess that the first operator will feel relaxed since now there is a second operator to do the same stuff and the second operator will feel relaxed since his stuff is already been done by the first operator ...
 
T

TShepherd

#3
Re: Effectiveness of 200% inspection

Hello,

What I have been taught and what I have experienced since 1967 is that 200% inspection is less effective than 100% and 300% inspection is again less effective than 200% inspection and so on and so forth.:(

The reason being is that each added 100% inspection is looking for fewer and fewer non-conforming parts and the probability increases that a non-conformance will get through.:mad:

I believe that you had said that your discussion for resolution was an audit after 100% inspection was being considered, in which case the probabilty is even greater that an additional 100% sort would fail.

You might consider mistake proofing through a vision system or fixturing element, however not knowing the part perhaps this is not feasible.

Tom
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ScottK

Not out of the crisis
Leader
Super Moderator
#4
Re: Effectiveness of 200% inspection

I think you are far better off making that 100% inspection more effective through engineering controls or, better yet, eliminating the problem altogether.

But even before that - did you sell the part at 0 defects? Clearly the process is not capable of 0 defects and additional inspection is adding cost.
 
J

jasonb067

#5
Re: Effectiveness of 200% Visual Inspection

How many parts were inspected to get to the 500 which were sold?

I am reading that you are trying to convince yourself or others that 200% inspection is not going to be worthwhile. Is that the case?
 

beaser3

Involved In Discussions
#6
Re: Effectiveness of 200% Visual Inspection

We ran a total of 518 pieces to get the 500 that were sold. 8 out of the 18 rejected were for the same defective condition that the customer found. I don't necessarily want to convince anyone that this is not the way to go but I don't want everyone to walk away from the table thinking we are making a large improvement. I am also concerned about the added labor cost considering that these are low volume/low profit jobs to begin with. The group has already decided that we cannot prevent the reject from being produced so we have moved to detection. I would be more comfortable with doing a final box audit vs. putting another operator at the press if they will provide the same end result. Does that make sense?
 
T

TShepherd

#7
Re: Effectiveness of 200% Visual Inspection

Clarification

In my response I was not saying that 200% inspection is not worth while but rather was refering to the effectiveness - which decreases from a statistical and practical view.

If it is the only alternative until a better resolution is found and it placates the customer (until another non-conforming parts arrives) it may be the right thing to do.

I get an inkling that the team may be looking to reduce the Detection Number of the RPN on the FMEA based on 200% inspection (not sure) - however it shouldn't unless the customer buys it.
 

ScottK

Not out of the crisis
Leader
Super Moderator
#8
Re: Effectiveness of 200% Visual Inspection

We ran a total of 518 pieces to get the 500 that were sold. 8 out of the 18 rejected were for the same defective condition that the customer found. I don't necessarily want to convince anyone that this is not the way to go but I don't want everyone to walk away from the table thinking we are making a large improvement. I am also concerned about the added labor cost considering that these are low volume/low profit jobs to begin with. The group has already decided that we cannot prevent the reject from being produced so we have moved to detection. I would be more comfortable with doing a final box audit vs. putting another operator at the press if they will provide the same end result. Does that make sense?
I don't know what industry you're serving but maybe it's time to manage the customer's expectations and tell them that the process is simply not capable of producing perfect quality and set a limit of, say 1% defective where you will refund them for all defectives but not write a corrective action response for 1% or less by lot.
If the rate is over 1% you will define actions to bring it back below 1%.
 
J

jasonb067

#9
Re: Effectiveness of 200% Visual Inspection

I would say that based on 10 being defetive and 8 being found you have a 80% effective visual sort criteria. Keep in mind this is one data set and one is not a trend.

So, any secondary sort could only expect worse results for the reasons stated above, "i do not need to look so hard because that guy up there is looking to".

If this is a geometric feature I would think that a simple gage in the hand of the first inspector would be more effective from a cost and effectiveness stand point.

Is something like that just not possible?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

bobdoering

Stop X-bar/R Madness!!
Trusted Information Resource
#10
Re: Effectiveness of 200% Visual Inspection

I don't know what industry you're serving but maybe it's time to manage the customer's expectations and tell them that the process is simply not capable of producing perfect quality and set a limit of, say 1% defective where you will refund them for all defectives but not write a corrective action response for 1% or less by lot.
If the rate is over 1% you will define actions to bring it back below 1%.
OR...you might track the number of rejects you are finding, do an attribute chart. If you see a jump in defects found, react accordingly.

Make sure you have effective sorting area - lighting, inability to mix parts, etc.

Using you customer as the sorter of last resort is always a problem. Why can they sort better than you? It is even worse if the defect causes an automated system to jam, creating irritation and downtime. They may have the right to charge back the part value and downtime, overhead, etc.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
J How to evaluate the effectiveness of management review? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
qualprod QMS global effectiveness? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
Zero_yield Effectiveness Checks - Segregation of Duties ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 7
H CAPA effectiveness verification methods for different types of CA Nonconformance and Corrective Action 10
Watchcat Raising new questions of safety and effectiveness Other US Medical Device Regulations 4
H Effectiveness and efficiency indicators ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
K Visual Inspection Effectiveness Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 16
M ISO14971:2019 - Verification of implementation and effectiveness of risk control ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 14
C Quality, efficiency and effectiveness of daily work routines Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 4
V CAPA effectiveness check Nonconformance and Corrective Action 3
N How to monitor the effectiveness of the CAPA system ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 8
qualprod ISO 9001 5.1.1 - How to measure System effectiveness ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 4
qualprod Add new action plans in CA, while waiting effectiveness - Same problem reappears ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 13
qualprod Best criteria to measure Corrective Action effectiveness - Poor Maintenance ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
C CMDR Essential (Safety & Effectiveness) Requirements Checklist? Canada Medical Device Regulations 9
J AQL for Effectiveness Check - What AQL tiers to use on this type of sampling? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 9
M Medical Device News FDA - Transformative new steps to modernize FDA’s 510(k) program to advance the review of the safety and effectiveness of medical devices Other US Medical Device Regulations 0
S Nonconformance to a Note in ISO13485 clause 6.2 Human Resources Effectiveness ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 13
J Recall Effectiveness - Accessory to Medical Devices shipped through Distributors Customer Complaints 3
qualprod To Evaluate Effectiveness in All Improvements? (ISO 9001:2015) ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 9
M Corrective Action Effectiveness Nonconformance and Corrective Action 5
Uriel Alejandro Evaluation of the effectiveness of correction actions General Auditing Discussions 15
L Verifying training effectiveness for procedure changes ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
T Hot dogs and process operation and control effectiveness? 4.1.3 a) ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
S ISO 9001:2015 4.4.1 (c) Process Effectiveness ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 17
M Effectiveness Measuring and Efficiency Measuring In ISO 9001:2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 2
A IATF 16949 - Non-conformity on 5.1.1.2 Process effectiveness and efficiency IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
S What are some ways to demonstrate Effectiveness of Training? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 29
B IATF 16949 Cl. 7.3.2 - Documented Process (Effectiveness & Efficiency) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 10
R Documenting Self-Training and Effectiveness - ISO 13485:2016 Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 4
B Auditing Senior Management to determine the Effectiveness of Management Processes IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
J Process Effectiveness and Efficiency (IATF 16949) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 29
P Is ISO 9001 Model tested for its effectiveness by ISO before its release? ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 1
D Do people read PEARS (Process Effectiveness Assessment Report)? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 15
B IATF 16949 Cl. 9.3.2.1 - Management Review Inputs - Process Effectiveness and Efficie IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 14
Colin Effectiveness of IRCA Registered Training ASQ, ANAB, UKAS, IAF, IRCA, Exemplar Global and Related Organizations 4
R ISO 13485:2016 Clause 6.2 - Effectiveness Check ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
Q Evaluating Effectiveness of a Preventive Action after Closure Preventive Action and Continuous Improvement 7
M Training Effectiveness TS 16949 Clause 6.2.2c Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 5
Q Corrective Action Effectiveness also for correction? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 11
S AS9100C 8.2.2 - Selected Tools & Effectiveness of IA Process and Performance AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
armani Performance vs. Effectiveness - ISO 9001:2015 par. 9.1.1 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
S How to Monitor Training Effectiveness Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 13
Q Effectiveness Plan for CAPA initiated from External Audit US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 3
Buckyb Are KPIs a requirement to determine Process Effectiveness? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 44
M Auditing ISO9001/AS9100 7.3 Design and Development Quality System Effectiveness Manufacturing and Related Processes 12
I Not having "effectiveness" in the Quality Policy ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 8
M Can OEE (overall equipment effectiveness) exceed 100%? Manufacturing and Related Processes 2
A Effectiveness of Risk Control Measures ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 4
M Where does OEE (Overall Equipment Effectiveness) belong? Quality Tools, Improvement and Analysis 11

Similar threads

Top Bottom