FAI (First Article Inspection) of Prototype Parts

[lorenambrose]

Hello All,

Well here is my delima. We are trying to comply with AS9102 FAI requirements and It states that you are not to FAI prototype parts.

During the final stages of prototyping the engineering dept will sub-contract a widgit at prototype revision 01 and build the unit. At some point the design is complete and all documentation is released at revision (-) and is now "released".

The problem is that the widget ordered at rev 01 was ordered at a qty of 250 due to ordering minimums and was since released to rev (-) with NO changes. The Rev 01 widgets will be reveived into inventory at the new Revision level of rev (-). Purchasing will ask for a FAI from the vendor at Rev 01 but I need one for rev (-).

My issue is that I need a FAI for rev (-) but will not be ordering more for a good while as I now have 250 in stock.

How can I handle this and be compliant? Can I use the rev 01 FAI and add a statement referencing the rev (-) documentation?

 

[Stijloor]

A Quick Bump!

Can someone help?

Thank you very much!!

Stijloor.

 

[JAltmann]

If the processing for the rev (-) is the same as the rev (01) and their were no print changes you could re-mark the rev (-) parts as a rev (01).

The flag going off in my head is you mentioned "prototype" and as such that usually means the part was not built per the production process you are trying to FAIR.

If all things but the rev are the same you could actually do a full FAIR on the rev (-) and and a delta or aprtial FAIR on the rev (01) against the rev (-) FAIR.

 

[andygr]

There is not a definition provided for prototype parts only first production run parts. This plus in my view the wording is open to interpertation that per the definition provided for prototype parts if your widgits are run just like those would be for the next production run you could perform a FAI on them and not focus on the term being used "prototype"
From AS9102
"FIRST PRODUCTION RUN PARTS: The first group of one or more parts that are the result of a planned process designed to be used for future production of these same parts. Prototype parts, or parts built using methods different from those intended for the normal production process, shall not be considered as part of the first production run."

 

[dsanabria]

There is not a definition provided for prototype parts only first production run parts. This plus in my view the wording is open to interpertation that per the definition provided for prototype parts if your widgits are run just like those would be for the next production run you could perform a FAI on them and not focus on the term being used "prototype"
From AS9102
"FIRST PRODUCTION RUN PARTS: The first group of one or more parts that are the result of a planned process designed to be used for future production of these same parts. Prototype parts, or parts built using methods different from those intended for the normal production process, shall not be considered as part of the first production run."

Not sure if your understood the text above

"Prototype parts, or parts built using methods different from those intended for the normal production process, shall not be considered as part of the first production run."

INTERPRETATION: AS9102 is not for "Prototype Parts."

Usually Prototype parts have a unique identification on prints and parts so that it is clearly visible to production in order to prevent unintended use.

Was that done in this case?

 

[andygr]

In some facilities, such as the originals poster's , there are case where in the configuration system a part design is not released to production but there is a formal tracking of configuration for test run or prototype parts and they are created using methods that would be used by production.
This methodology is done to validate not just the design but also the fabrication process since many times what looks good on the computer screen does not stand up well in the reality of the production process. Once verifed that parts are acceptably produced by the process(s) in the "prototype" fabrication process the design is then released for production in the configuration system.

To account for the change in revision in the FAI process, which is nothing more than accounting for a book keeping/paperwork item, you just would complete a new form 1 for the (-) revision stating that the FAI to rev (-) is to just account for release to prodution and that there is no change to parts or process from rev (01).

 

[treesei]

First article inspection/approval not only verifies the drawing specs but also (implicitly) examines the process.

In the case of the OP, if the 250 pieces were built under the same process conditions to be used for mass production, there could be room for flexibility.

 

[lorenambrose]

In some facilities, such as the originals poster's , there are case where in the configuration system a part design is not released to production but there is a formal tracking of configuration for test run or prototype parts and they are created using methods that would be used by production.
This methodology is done to validate not just the design but also the fabrication process since many times what looks good on the computer screen does not stand up well in the reality of the production process. Once verifed that parts are acceptably produced by the process(s) in the "prototype" fabrication process the design is then released for production in the configuration system.

To account for the change in revision in the FAI process, which is nothing more than accounting for a book keeping/paperwork item, you just would complete a new form 1 for the (-) revision stating that the FAI to rev (-) is to just account for release to prodution and that there is no change to parts or process from rev (01).

This has been VERY heplful.

 

[lorenambrose]

Here is another issue I have with this.

Lets assume the prototype issue is resolved, which I think it is.

If these parts are plastic and I order 250 of them and they are "SOFT MOLDED" parts that can produce 50 parts per mold. So in this case with a 250 part order the vendor has to make 5 soft molds.

IS THIS:

a) 1 250 part run requiring 1 FAI
b) 5 50 part runs requiring 5 FAI's

Is there a way to include the the "SOFT MOLD" making process in the whole FAI process.

Am I overthinking this?

 

[lorenambrose]

Any thoughts?