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 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 12
S Thoughts on managing ISO 9001, 13485, IATF 16949 and 17025 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 26
P IATF 16949 requirement - error-proofing in control plan IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
R IATF 16949 - Outsourcing of internal audits Internal Auditing 10
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 7
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 0
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
H Remote product audits in Coivd-19 - IATF 16949 9.2.2.4 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
S IATF 16949 - Partial traceability of Aftermarket products IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 5
C Industrial scales and MSA (IATF 16949 requirement 7.1.5.1.1) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 30
V Generic IATF 16949 Audit Checklist wanted IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
M Scope of Combined ISO 9001 and IATF 16949 QMS - Non-automotive customers ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
D Postpone IATF 16949 audit due to COVID-19 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 41
J Does anyone have an excel IATF 16949 Internal Audit checklist I could use? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 7
T Reaction Plan To Drive suppliers to IATF 16949 registration IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
B IATF 16949 - Is a Deviation required for sample components in a prototype build? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
C IATF 16949 - Scope or not? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
L "IATF-Compliant" IATF 16949:2016 certification? What does this mean? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
B Go Beyond ISO 9001 WITH IATF 16949 (January 28) [Paid] Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 1
V IATF 16949 8.4.1 Control of externally provided processes, products and services - Should the CB be on our Approved Supplier List? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 10
S Can we provide training plan as corrective action for IATF 16949 Non conformity? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 9
C Design and implementation of process audits as defined within IATF 16949 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
Q VDA 6.3 questions vs IATF 16949 clauses VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 0
N IATF 16949:2016 7.1.5.3.2 External Laboratory - How to approve the Testing Laboratory without accreditation scope IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
M IATF 16949 (6.1.1 - Planning and Risk Analysis for a remote site) Process Maps, Process Mapping and Turtle Diagrams 5
D IATF 16949 FAQ 24 (8.4.2.2 Countries of Destination) - How is this actually being interpreted? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
Jimmy123 What is the difference between Error Proofing and Controls? ISO/IATF 16949 - Control Plans FMEA and Control Plans 16
P IATF 16949 8.4.2.4 Supplier Monitoring IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom