Engineering Change Order...Modification Order

[JimS]

You're right - I was addressing mainly drawings. Our assembly drawings and BOMs are tied to the same number and revision. If a "clerical" change needed to be made to a BOM, well, I don't know what kind of change you could make to a BOM that doesn't impact it. Spelling error, that's about it. Anything adding or deleting lines in the BOM materially affects it and needs to be tracked with a revision.

If I understand your original post, you have an old electronic BOM that doesn't reference the assembly drawing number, which presumably is a different number than the BOM. If you're adding that missing number to the BOM, proper doc control requires that you revise it. Otherwise, you don't really have control, except when it's convenient. In my early days I would sometimes be tempted to cheat on things like this that seemed harmless. And I was bitten every time, causing some sort of confusion, frustration and extra time spent when someone else came across the information.

It wouldn't take much hallway conversation to take up more time and effort than the ECO would take to do it correctly.

 

[Ninja]

VP Ops and a draftsperson...zero quality training, never read ISO9001.

Fair enough...but we aren't talking about "quality training" or ISO...we're just talking about base logic here. You can't have two copies of "This is the right one" that don't match each other without increasing risk substantially.

"There is a principle in things, about which we cannot be deceived, but must always, on the contrary recognize the truth, - viz. that the same thing cannot at one and the same time be and not be, " -Aristotle-

 

[Icy Mountain]

Ninja expects "base logic"?
Since I wrote the OP, right before a four day holiday weekend, I have received no further inquiries or suggestions. I have not said another word about it (in order to encourage the silence). I did see an ECO come through to add the drawing to the BOM, along with a new revision with changes to the drawing that started all this muda.

 

[Ninja]

Yeah, well...sorry.
Just visited my old job today...OMG...bugging out was totally the right call. I don't do corporate well...
Background...

 

[Wes Bucey]

Late to the party (hope you folks saved some cake and ice cream), BUT I know that some pack rat has stashed an old copy of Rev. xyz and will raise a stink if a different Rev. xyz comes into his line of sight. My advice: FMEA and Murphy's Law prevail: What can go wrong, WILL, and at the worst [and most expensive and embarrassing] moment.

In my practice, any change gets a new rev level PLUS an explanatory note of changes from the previous rev level.

 

[Nicole Desouza]

Hello,
I am having a similar problem. Our customer has rejected parts that were made according to their drawing. They claim that the parts were out of tolerance, but our operators made the parts to be in spec with the customer's part drawing.
1.To correct the problem the customer sent us a go/no go gauge but the when the operators tried to use the gauge the part would not fit into the gauge.
2. We tried to make a tool set for out PLV system using the customer drawing and found that there was a mistake on the drawing. We brought this to the customer's attention but they REFUSE to send us a corrected drawing or gauge.

I do not see any way to meet the customer requirements if they refuse to clarify what the want and put it in writing. Not sure what to do because they are demanding parts and they expect them to be right

How should we go about getting them to address the problem with their drawing and the gauge?

thanks,
Nicole

 

[Ninja]

clarify what the want and put it in writing

That's how...right there.

#1, confirm by data that the drawing and the gage are in conflict. I do not see evidence of this in your post.
#1a. Get in writing what about the parts sent were "out of tolerance "
#2, send them the data highlighting the conflict and ask for clarification in writing.
#3, it's up to your sales or top management whether or not to proceed without clarification (I can see reasons where I might proceed within the conflict for maintaining the relationship).

If it were me in the TM role, I would get on the phone with the customer's management asking WTH?

FWIW, "our operators made the parts to be in spec with the customer's part drawing " has little weight. Measurements after fab do have weight.

 

[Nicole Desouza]

That's how...right there.

#1, confirm by data that the drawing and the gage are in conflict. I do not see evidence of this in your post.
#1a. Get in writing what about the parts sent were "out of tolerance "
#2, send them the data highlighting the conflict and ask for clarification in writing.
#3, it's up to your sales or top management whether or not to proceed without clarification (I can see reasons where I might proceed within the conflict for maintaining the relationship).

If it were me in the TM role, I would get on the phone with the customer's management asking WTH?

FWIW, "our operators made the parts to be in spec with the customer's part drawing " has little weight. Measurements after fab do have weight.

Thank you for your recommendations. I will get busy on these right away

 

[Wes Bucey]

Ninja's response holds true in most conflicts between customer and supplier: get facts (not opinions), put them in writing.
The defense of most folks (like your customer) when confronted with their own errors is to deny them or ignore them by stonewalling. Ultimately, the matter may have to be put before an independent expert for a decision on who is correct.

Also, MY own FWIW: sometimes the grief associated with a customer outweighs the profit