IATF 16949 Clause 8.7.1.7 Nonconforming Product Disposition - Scrap Rendered Unusable

[AndyN]

Scrap is a disposition. It's possible to take perfectly good parts and disposition them scrap. I'm asking what's "wrong" with them. Calling them "scrap" and treating them as scrap doesn't mean the parts are out of specification.

 

[Marc]

I'm asking what's "wrong" with them

I'm thinking you haven't worked in High Volume metal forming. There may be nothing "wrong" with them. There is the potential that there could be, though. It's akin to "...we found a bad one, so scrap the lot because it's too expensive to check each one..."

 

[Golfman25]

Scrap is a disposition. It's possible to take perfectly good parts and disposition them scrap. I'm asking what's "wrong" with them. Calling them "scrap" and treating them as scrap doesn't mean the parts are out of specification.

Could be a mark, a burr, a chipped punch that leaves a "booger," bad plating, etc. Not quite to print, but still "usable."

 

[Eredhel]

Possibly similar to CNC tooling. Sometimes when running a high volume long term job a tool might break every 53-57 parts. But rather than slow down the cycle times to squeeze 53-55 parts out of it you just change that tool every 52 parts and keep rocking and rolling.

 

[AndyN]

No, in fact I have worked a lot in stamping, in particular. I was simply asking (the OP) what was wrong with them (not debating my personal expertise). I've also worked where a cnc machining line was breaking taps frequently and the yellow scrap tags on parts could be seen all the way down the line and fork trucks were running parts around like headless chickens. What's your point?

 

[SamuelB]

We also have the same problem, we need to somehow render our bonded seals unusable. The only way I see that this can be done is by shredding/bending them.

 

[IvanHF]

No, in fact I have worked a lot in stamping, in particular. I was simply asking (the OP) what was wrong with them (not debating my personal expertise).

There are a variety of potential issues: burrs, dents, scratches, misfeeds, laminations, rust, dimensional defects, dishing, pilot marks, etc. That said, Marc is correct in that sometimes we have to scrap parts even if we don't know whether they are nonconforming. Most of these parts are worth 1/10th of a cent or less so the cost of sorting or inspecting to remove defects which might affect 1 in 10 pieces is rarely worth it. Better to just scrap them and move on.

 

[IvanHF]

So here's a creative solution I've had proposed to me. Why not rust the parts? Dump some salt water on them to accelerate the process. Surely a severely rusted washer would be considered rendered unusable?

 

[Golfman25]

So here's a creative solution I've had proposed to me. Why not rust the parts? Dump some salt water on them to accelerate the process. Surely a severely rusted washer would be considered rendered unusable?

It could take a while to rust. Plus, someone could clean off the rust. And what if it is stainless?

 

[IvanHF]

Trust me, it wouldn't take long to rust. We have enough trouble keeping these parts rust free as is (we're not allowed to use inhibitors). We don't make any parts from stainless either. As for cleaning off the rust, it's possible certainly, but we don't have any good alternatives.