IATF 16949 8.5.1.3 Verification of job set-ups - Do we need secondary check?

#1
Dear Elsmar Mates,

From my past company experiences, whenever First off parts are checked by either Quality or Production associates there is always a supervisor sign off whether these checks are being performed. My new organization at one of the plants, only performs check by Operator and no supervisor signs off on the check made by Operator.
8.5.1.3 Verification of job set-ups
a) verify job set-ups when performed, such as an initial run of a job, material changeover, or job
change that requires a new set-up;
d) perform first-off/last-off part validation, as applicable; where appropriate,

Does that mean twice check/verification is needed? I was given an explanation that Auditor never had an issue with just operator checking and no supervisor sign off at Setup and First off check. And I couldn't write anything up as it has "As applicable" written in 8.5.1.3 d). I still think I can push the issue for additional supervisor sign based on 8.5.1.3 a). Considering Registrar auditor gave it a go without supervisor sign/ verification sign, I need additional inputs to cause a change if it's needed as next Registrar auditor may not give it a go.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Howard Atkins

Forum Administrator
Staff member
Admin
#2
This is a matter of your options, do you train and empower operators to approve set ups or not.

What one company does has no relevance to the next.
If you have defined your actions in a process then the current or future auditors are not relevant.
Do not be lead by the nose by "an auditor" (I am an IATF 3rd part auditor)
 
#3
This is a matter of your options, do you train and empower operators to approve set ups or not.

What one company does has no relevance to the next.
If you have defined your actions in a process then the current or future auditors are not relevant.
Do not be lead by the nose by "an auditor" (I am an IATF 3rd part auditor)
Thank you Howard. I will make sure we have defined system to reflect the current process. Our operators are surely trained and empowered to approve the set ups with checks per what I am made aware about the location.
 

Johnnymo62

Haste Makes Waste
#4
IMHO, the two are not the same. I think a) is about machine settings, raw material conditions, correct packaging present, etc. I think d) is about measuring the part (variable or attribute, per CP) to ensure it meets the drawing requirements for the new setup, FO or LO.
 

morteza

Trusted Information Resource
#6
Dear Elsmar Mates,

From my past company experiences, whenever First off parts are checked by either Quality or Production associates there is always a supervisor sign off whether these checks are being performed. My new organization at one of the plants, only performs check by Operator and no supervisor signs off on the check made by Operator.
8.5.1.3 Verification of job set-ups
a) verify job set-ups when performed, such as an initial run of a job, material changeover, or job
change that requires a new set-up;
d) perform first-off/last-off part validation, as applicable; where appropriate,

Does that mean twice check/verification is needed? I was given an explanation that Auditor never had an issue with just operator checking and no supervisor sign off at Setup and First off check. And I couldn't write anything up as it has "As applicable" written in 8.5.1.3 d). I still think I can push the issue for additional supervisor sign based on 8.5.1.3 a). Considering Registrar auditor gave it a go without supervisor sign/ verification sign, I need additional inputs to cause a change if it's needed as next Registrar auditor may not give it a go.
Hi
verification of job set-up does not mean to check twice. job set-up includes performing some activities like tool change, changing machine set-up, installing new work instructions, etc.
verification of job set-up which usually is done by a checklist includes checking tasks to verify:
• equipment, error proofing and PPE,
• environmental conditions at the workstation (cleanliness, lighting,…),
• process parameters with tolerance limits
• availability of components and materials
• etc.
It can be done by operator, supervisor, etc.
First-off part validation is applicable and appropriate for some processes like grinding, press, etc. It is not applicable for some other processes like chemical processes.

I think using the word "validation" is not suitable. It would be better to use the word "verification". validation means confirmation for intended use ...
 
Last edited:
#7
Dear Elsmar Mates,

From my past company experiences, whenever First off parts are checked by either Quality or Production associates there is always a supervisor sign off whether these checks are being performed. My new organization at one of the plants, only performs check by Operator and no supervisor signs off on the check made by Operator.
8.5.1.3 Verification of job set-ups
a) verify job set-ups when performed, such as an initial run of a job, material changeover, or job
change that requires a new set-up;
d) perform first-off/last-off part validation, as applicable; where appropriate,

Does that mean twice check/verification is needed? I was given an explanation that Auditor never had an issue with just operator checking and no supervisor sign off at Setup and First off check. And I couldn't write anything up as it has "As applicable" written in 8.5.1.3 d). I still think I can push the issue for additional supervisor sign based on 8.5.1.3 a). Considering Registrar auditor gave it a go without supervisor sign/ verification sign, I need additional inputs to cause a change if it's needed as next Registrar auditor may not give it a go.
From my past company experiences, whenever First off parts are checked by either Quality or Production associates there is always a supervisor sign off whether these checks are being performed. My new organization at one of the plants, only performs check by Operator and no supervisor signs off on the check made by Operator.
8.5.1.3 Verification of job set-ups
a) verify job set-ups when performed, such as an initial run of a job, material changeover, or job
change that requires a new set-up;
d) perform first-off/last-off part validation, as applicable; where appropriate,

Does that mean twice check/verification is needed? I was given an explanation that Auditor never had an issue with just operator checking and no supervisor sign off at Setup and First off check. And I couldn't write anything up as it has "As applicable" written in 8.5.1.3 d). I still think I can push the issue for additional supervisor sign based on 8.5.1.3 a). Considering Registrar auditor gave it a go without supervisor sign/ verification sign, I need additional inputs to cause a change if it's needed as next Registrar auditor may not give it a go.[/QUOTE]
Dear Elsmar Mates,

From my past company experiences, whenever First off parts are checked by either Quality or Production associates there is always a supervisor sign off whether these checks are being performed. My new organization at one of the plants, only performs check by Operator and no supervisor signs off on the check made by Operator.
8.5.1.3 Verification of job set-ups
a) verify job set-ups when performed, such as an initial run of a job, material changeover, or job
change that requires a new set-up;
d) perform first-off/last-off part validation, as applicable; where appropriate,

Does that mean twice check/verification is needed? I was given an explanation that Auditor never had an issue with just operator checking and no supervisor sign off at Setup and First off check. And I couldn't write anything up as it has "As applicable" written in 8.5.1.3 d). I still think I can push the issue for additional supervisor sign based on 8.5.1.3 a). Considering Registrar auditor gave it a go without supervisor sign/ verification sign, I need additional inputs to cause a change if it's needed as next Registrar auditor may not give it a go.

Hi,
1. No requirement in IATF that mention Job set up shall conducted twice
2. Job set up shall defined in control plan, (its frequency check, PIC who verify, sample) > see Clause 8.5.1.1, point a)
 

Jack Chiew

Starting to get Involved
#8
From my past company experiences, whenever First off parts are checked by either Quality or Production associates there is always a supervisor sign off whether these checks are being performed. My new organization at one of the plants, only performs check by Operator and no supervisor signs off on the check made by Operator.
8.5.1.3 Verification of job set-ups
a) verify job set-ups when performed, such as an initial run of a job, material changeover, or job
change that requires a new set-up;
d) perform first-off/last-off part validation, as applicable; where appropriate,

Does that mean twice check/verification is needed? I was given an explanation that Auditor never had an issue with just operator checking and no supervisor sign off at Setup and First off check. And I couldn't write anything up as it has "As applicable" written in 8.5.1.3 d). I still think I can push the issue for additional supervisor sign based on 8.5.1.3 a). Considering Registrar auditor gave it a go without supervisor sign/ verification sign, I need additional inputs to cause a change if it's needed as next Registrar auditor may not give it a go.

Hi,
1. No requirement in IATF that mention Job set up shall conducted twice
2. Job set up shall defined in control plan, (its frequency check, PIC who verify, sample) > see Clause 8.5.1.1, point a)[/QUOTE]

Dear Elsmar Mates,

From my past company experiences, whenever First off parts are checked by either Quality or Production associates there is always a supervisor sign off whether these checks are being performed. My new organization at one of the plants, only performs check by Operator and no supervisor signs off on the check made by Operator.
8.5.1.3 Verification of job set-ups
a) verify job set-ups when performed, such as an initial run of a job, material changeover, or job
change that requires a new set-up;
d) perform first-off/last-off part validation, as applicable; where appropriate,

Does that mean twice check/verification is needed? I was given an explanation that Auditor never had an issue with just operator checking and no supervisor sign off at Setup and First off check. And I couldn't write anything up as it has "As applicable" written in 8.5.1.3 d). I still think I can push the issue for additional supervisor sign based on 8.5.1.3 a). Considering Registrar auditor gave it a go without supervisor sign/ verification sign, I need additional inputs to cause a change if it's needed as next Registrar auditor may not give it a go.
Hi Manishbegins
I am an IATF 3P auditor. I think the answers to your question are there in the thread now.

1. verification means against the operating parameters, not some supervisor verifying the work of a subordinate. You must have some checklists to do that. Morteza gave some good examples earlier. Another example: In a plastic injection moulding process, common parameters are barrel temperature, moulding pressure and duration, chilled water temp etc. Every part and mould has its own peculiar setting. You need to retain the checking records, though. Checking by 1 person is OK. Done by operator also OK, so long competent.​
2. Closely related to this is the first-off to be inspected. You can consider the FO exercise here as the validation step. Even the first-off can be done by operators, if competent. Most companies however would use QAQC personnel to do this part, for better assurance.​
3. Last-off part is generally optional, but there is a trend for adoption recently.​
4. Remember to specify the setup step on your control plan (see comments of Ariemnugraha). It is a new requirement. Attach a specimen.​
Hope the above is helpful. Cheers.
 

Attachments

Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
J IATF 16949 Calibration/Verification records question ISO 26262 - Road vehicles – Functional safety 6
J Calibration/Verification Records (IATF 16949 7.1.5.2.1) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
J IATF 16949 7.1.5.2.1 software verification IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
C IATF 16949 Cl 8.5.1.3 - Verification of job set up IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
E IATF 16949 Cl. 7.1.5.2.1 - Calibration and Verification Records Requirements IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
E IATF 16949 Cl. 8.5.1.4 - Verification after Unplanned Shutdown IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
J IATF 16949 Cl. 7.1.5.2.1 - Gauges (Measuring Jigs) Calibration/Verification Records IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
M Clarification on Calibration/Verification Records 7.1.5.2.1d (IATF 16949) General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 11
B Calibration/Verification Records - IATF 16949 section 7.1.5.2.1 f) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
P IATF 16949 Cl. 7.1.5.2.1 "Calibration/Verification Records" Interpretation IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 12
P Setup Verification in IATF 16949 Clause 8.5.1.3 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
P IATF 16949 Clause 8.5.1.4 - Verification after Shutdown IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 27
Sidney Vianna Job Opening in the USA - IATF 16949 Lead Auditor Position Job Openings, Consulting and Employment Opportunities 0
Ron Rompen IATF 16949 8.5.1.4 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
P IATF 16949:2016 Letter of conformity IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
D IATF 16949 SI 10, External non-accredited lab IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
S IATF 16949 - Summary at a glance Clause wise - changes from ISO TS IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
T IATF 16949 Recording inspection results IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
S IATF 16949 Supplier selection criteria 8.4.1.2 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
D IATF 16949 M&TE Laboratory scope IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
M IATF 16949 SI # 10: Integrated self-calibration of measurement equipment- Needs for explanation IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
Q ISO 9001/IATF 16949 Audit Finding Question - Document Retention IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 11
D Bulk Materials (Greases) and IATF 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 11
J IATF 16949 Internal Audit question - Auditor's responsibility Internal Auditing 6
S IATF 16949 Internal Audit Example IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 18
B Remote IATF 16949 audit preparation General Auditing Discussions 10
R IATF 16949 Certification for new site with transferred product--what is the impact with CSR and scorecards? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
B IATF 16949 Cert Expire- New certification body IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
M IATF 16949 - Audit of Remote Location/Support Site and IT IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
O Informational Ford Motor Company Customer Specific Requirements for IATF 16949:2016 - 08 Jan 2021 Customer and Company Specific Requirements 0
B Updated IATF 16949 - Will IATF 16949 get revised when ISO 9001:202X is released? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
O Release of Sanctioned Interpretations (SIs) related to Rules 5th Edition and Sanctioned Interpretations related to IATF 16949:2016 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 0
S Thoughts on managing ISO 9001, 13485, IATF 16949 and 17025 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 33
P IATF 16949 requirement - error-proofing in control plan IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
R IATF 16949 - Outsourcing of internal audits Internal Auditing 11
eule del ayre Documented Information - Periodic Review of Documents? IATF 16949:2016 / ISO 9001:2015 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 34
Crimpshrine13 Laboratory Scope - Calibration vs. Test Methods - IATF 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
earl62 What is the best way to control special characteristics in Control plan? Is it Mandatory to have SPC for IATF 16949? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 12
L IATF 16949 certification costs IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
B FCA US Customer Specific IATF 16949- Critical Characteristics 8.6.2 Customer and Company Specific Requirements 1
B IATF 16949 News Six month extension on all valid IATF 16949 certs IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 10
earl62 IATF 16949 Clause 9.1.1.1 - What is the batch conformance to specification method? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
B FCA US IATF 16949 Customer Requirements updates Customer and Company Specific Requirements 3
S Can assembly manufacturing sub-supplier be certified IATF 16949? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
D IATF 16949 Requirement for CMMI in a Global Company Elsmar Cove Forum Suggestions, Complaints, Problems and Bug Reports 0
M Tips on preparing for IATF 16949 Internal Lead Auditor exam Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
A IATF 16949 4.3.1 - Determining the scope of the quality management system - supplemental IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
S Definition of "worldwide" in view of IATF 16949 and Product conformity IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
R Where does IATF 16949 address Process mapping? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
A Document "Correspondence IATF 16949 vs ISO13485" available? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 0

Similar threads

Top Bottom