Finished Goods Testing - Using historical test data to prove finished goods OK

[Jim W]

Can anyone lend an opinion ?? Situation: Company A decides to reduce lab staff by moving majority of product testing to production lines. Current ASTM, ISO,FORD, JIS, etc... testing standards require a waiting period (24 hrs) prior to final testing. Company A decides that they can use historical test data to prove finished goods test results will be the same for product tested without waiting period, as for product tested with waiting period. Is the B3 going to allow Company A (tier 3) to provide product to it's customers (tier 1-2) that is not tested according to recognized standards?

 

[Mike S.]

I'm not involved with automotive supply, so my comment may be all wet, but my guess would be no, unless... If I were "Company A" I would present my data (showing no change in results after the 24 hour wait) to my customer(s) and ask for a waiver on the 24 hour wait for testing.

I'm sure some of the automotive experts in the Cove will be able to give a better answer.

 

[Geoff Cotton]

If the previous "process" is stable, capable and robust why would the product change over 24 hours?

Are we talking here about some sort of finishing operation that needs to cure, or is there an age hardening effect in your process?

We use a lubricant on our finished product which has to stand for 24 hours before being effective, but we never test it as the 24 hours standing time is taking place during the shipping to the B3.

Final inspection has'nt been part of our operation for at leasst 10 years. When we ceased doing the inspection the product quality didd'nt deteriorate.

 

[M Greenaway]

My advice would be that if you are contractually obligated to perform a test to national/international standards that require a 24 hour waiting period then you must do so until you change the contractual requirements (whatever channels you need to go through).

If you are not specifically contractually obligated to test to a certain standard then I would imagine you are free to change your test to suit yourself. Be sure that the scrapping of the waiting period really does not affect the product, or validity of the test. Clearly some technical guy somewhere has thought of some good reason for it, be sure you understand why, and why your process doesnt need it (and validate this change).

 

[D.Scott]

Jim - We are in a similar position. 6124M is a good example of what you are talking about. We have to let the finished product sit for 24 hours then assemble with test nuts and cure for 72 hours - then perform torque tests. - QS requires test results are known before shipping but customer can't wait.

We get a waiver on the "results before ship" issue and have a positive recall system in place in case of failure. We have tried going on past data for certification but that was flatly denied (and rightfully so I think). The test must be on the lot you are shipping.

We have found that even when we get the same results without the initial 24 hours, they still require it so we have given up trying to re-invent the wheel. We do it the way it is spelled out.

Dave

 

[Jim W]

Gentlemen, Thanks for the input ! As I now understand it, Company A, being a tier 3, is only required to prove that the product they supply to the tier 1's & 2's meets certian criterion set forth by the B3. Contractually, Company A is obligated to their customers to ensure the product they supply meets the requirement. Testing frequency for Company A is not specified by the B3, but can be established based on customer requirements. Therefore,any change in testing frequency should be contingent upon customer approval. Many Thanks....