IATF clause 8.5.1.6 • Customer owned tooling identification

[bkirch]

IATF clause 8.5.1.6 states that "The organization shall verify that customer-owned tools, manufacturing equipment, and test/inspection equipment are permanently marked in a visible location so that the ownership and application of each item can be determined."

We had an audit finding because not all of our customer owned tooling is permanently marked to show ownership. The reason is because not all of our customers require this, but I realize even if customers don't require it, it is still an IATF requirement.

My question is that if we have a permanent identifier on the tool such as a serial number and this serial number can be used to look at a list that shows ownership would this satisfy the requirement of ownership being able to be determined? In my mind, I think we can determine ownership without having the ownership stamped or engraved on the tool.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

My question is that if we have a permanent identifier on the tool such as a serial number and this serial number can be used to look at a list that shows ownership would this satisfy the requirement of ownership being able to be determined?

Yes.

 

[Golfman25]

Serial number or any identifying number should work. But there is always "that guy."

I believe this was driven by problems getting tooling out of suppliers that the auto industry bankrupted. "Property of" directly on the tooling helps speed up removals.

Good luck.

 

[Johnnymo62]

I read it to say you should be able to determine ownership by looking at the tool.

 

[Sidney Vianna]

I read it to say you should be able to determine ownership by looking at the tool.

That is an example of the challenges for people writing and interpreting requirements in management system standards. I read the same requirement and reached a different conclusion. The requirement is for a permanent and visible marking that allows for the determination of tool ownership; there are different ways to accomplish that without actually marking the owner onto the tool. If the writers of the standard wanted that, they could have easily stated “….All customer owned tooling must have the customer identification conspicuously and permanently marked on the device …”

 

[Golfman25]

I read it to say you should be able to determine ownership by looking at the tool.

You read it "wrong." It says marked so that "ownership can be determined." Can be determined means you can "look it up," "trace it," etc.

If they wanted specific owner identification on the tool, they should have said "property of" or similar. That is probably want they meant, due to my comments about regarding access during bankruptcy. But it's not what they actually said.

 

[Johnnymo62]

You read it "wrong." It says marked so that "ownership can be determined." Can be determined means you can "look it up," "trace it," etc.

If they wanted specific owner identification on the tool, they should have said "property of" or similar. That is probably want they meant, due to my comments about regarding access during bankruptcy. But it's not what they actually said.

Yeah, I get that and agree it's not clear.

 

[Sebastian]

It might look similar to calibration status, but it is not. I agree with "that guy".

 

[Ashland78]

My bigger question here is if your scope is not for automotive, why are you applying IATF 16949, 8.5.1.6? I do get some CSR do require if their tooling is sent out for service there shall be a process defined.

 

[optomist1]

Good thread and discussion, my take: If this is for an Automotive Customer, from experience it is the exception that where physically possible, Dies, jigs etc, "tools" marking/labeling of customer ownership is not required. Again in the automotive arena, esp. OEMs tend to be very specific, with detailed requirements for marking of CFT or CFE. And by extension, the same OEMs typically have a TAG or Tooling Analysis Group, (or similar name) whose task is to monitor tooling, for many reasons, wear monitoring, and where appropriate tool refurbishment...hope this helps...

optomist1