%GRR was between 10-30% so we have to have a "backup plan" per auditor

[kenb]

During our Stage 1 audit the auditor said that if our %GRR was between 10-30% we have to have a "backup plan", but we cannot find anything in the IATF or ISO standards to support this. Could this be just a recommendation or is there something to it? Thanks.

 

[Miner]

Full disclosure: My automotive experience pre-dates IATF 16949, but I do consider myself knowledgeable in MSA. I recommend challenging your auditor on this. The usual terminology used for the 10-30% range is that the gage MAY be acceptable depending on the application, the cost of the measurement device, etc. There are a number of reasons that you can use to justify using a gage in this range:

• Is the feature/dimension a significant/critical/CTQ characteristic? If no, the gage may be used.
• Is the gage the state of the art? If yes, the gage may be used.
• Is the next better gage extremely expensive? If yes...
• ...

I would add these criteria (or those relevant to your business) to your procedure/documentation for MSA.

 

[Jim Wynne]

I second Miner's advice, FWIW. I'm curious, though, as to the form your auditor's advice was delivered in. Was this a verbal observation or was it cited as a nonconformity? Why did you not ask the auditor to explain?

 

[kenb]

Full disclosure: My automotive experience pre-dates IATF 16949, but I do consider myself knowledgeable in MSA. I recommend challenging your auditor on this. The usual terminology used for the 10-30% range is that the gage MAY be acceptable depending on the application, the cost of the measurement device, etc. There are a number of reasons that you can use to justify using a gage in this range:

• Is the feature/dimension a significant/critical/CTQ characteristic? If no, the gage may be used.
• Is the gage the state of the art? If yes, the gage may be used.
• Is the next better gage extremely expensive? If yes...
• ...

I would add these criteria (or those relevant to your business) to your procedure/documentation for MSA.

Yes, it is significant for some characteristics. Several tests are "quick and dirty" and widely accepted in our industry but very old. I don't think there is a better gauge for those tests other than similar ones to what we already have.

 

[kenb]

I second Miner's advice, FWIW. I'm curious, though, as to the form your auditor's advice was delivered in. Was this a verbal observation or was it cited as a nonconformity? Why did you not ask the auditor to explain?

Great questions. It was one of those verbal "I can't consult, but..." discussions. We did ask him to explain and he said it was in the MSA bluebook. I haven't read the bluebook cover to cover, but I don't recall ever seeing it in there.

 

[Miner]

You may have an argument based on state of the art, but I would be cautious since you said that they were very old. There might be newer gages available in other industries that might be adapted to yours. I used to work in the rubber industry, and they were extremely slow to adopt new technologies, even when it was only moderately expensive. Regardless, I would still recommend pushing back. An auditor cannot make a blanket statement such as you cited. They must cite objective evidence of the passage that you do not meet. The reason you do not recall having seen it is because it is not there. Ask him to cite the page and paragraph.

 

[Ashland78]

During our Stage 1 audit the auditor said that if our %GRR was between 10-30% we have to have a "backup plan", but we cannot find anything in the IATF or ISO standards to support this. Could this be just a recommendation or is there something to it? Thanks.

Hi Ken, it is in the 4th Edition, MSA book, that correlates with IATF. I think it can be as simple as the customer ok'ing the %. Hope that helps.

 

[kbg1000]

It is also found in some Customer Specific Requirements.

 

[kenb]

Miner - Most of the old gages are basically wet chemistry tests for our specific industry that involve balances, ovens, etc. There really aren't substitutions for the ones I'm asking about.

Ashland 78 - I know <10% is better, but is there somewhere it is stated that we need to have a backup? We never had a customer question anything less than 30% and only have a handful of IATF customers.

kbg1000 - we have very few CSR and that is not one of them, fortunately.

 

[Miner]

These are the relevant sections of the MSA 4th edition manual. Your auditor MAY be referring to page 128 below, but if they are, they are reading way too much into it. Note: The caution on page 78 means that you should also take the interpretation of the graphical results into account as well as the numerical.