IATF Definitions - Reworked product (8.7.1.4) vs Repaired product (8.7.1.5)

A

alaslistas

I may be mistaken but from what I understand the ISO 9000 Definitions should be applied while interpreting IATF standards or there is more confusion
 
A

alaslistas

This guy was asked the same question and answered abouthte same as I am explaning.. "Ask the expert
Question
I see in IATF 16949 reference to both rework and repair, however there is no
definition. What is the difference?
Answer
Good questions, I asked the same question when I reviewed the draft and have
yet to get an answer. However, in the historic QS-9000 the definition was:
• Repair: Action taken on nonconforming product so that the product will fulfill the intended usage
although the product may not conform to the original requirements.
• Rework: Action taken on nonconforming product so that it will meet the specified requirements.
I have proposed to IATF Oversight that a definition is communicated as a FAQ, watch this space"
 

AndyN

Moved On
I like the Led Zepplin parody. Lets give the example of a circuit board. To know if its bad or good you test it. If a technician gets mixed up and cant remember which ones are good or bad he tests them all. The ones that wherre tested twice are rework. When it goes into the field and is sent back to the supplier on suspicion its bad (after running for a while) and tests good it is then considered a repair even though nothing was changed

It's not a "parody". It's a simple quote of their lyrics.

Testing twice isn't "rework", it's testing twice. In my example - which is a practical description of actual bare board manufacturing - the description fits. Since the IATF requirements apply (for the most part) to product BEFORE it enters service, talking about things being returned would be handled under warranty etc. The primary concern is differentiating between rework and repair in the production of new products. It can apply after delivery, but that would require a different QMS scope to be described.
 
A

alaslistas

Re: DIATFefinitions - Reworked product (8.7.1.4) vs Repaired product (8.7.1.5)

I could be wrong but testing a unit twice is considered rework. Per definition iatf
Rework – Bringing a non-conforming part back into conformance by simply reprocessing a prior sequence.
 

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
See Andy's post above. No - Testing something twice isn't rework. It just isn't.

Rework vs. Repair has been discussed here a number of times, and with respect to a number of standards.

E.g.: Rework vs. Repair - What's the practical difference?

and Overhaul vs. Repair vs. Rework - FAA Definitions

and Rework vs. Repair - ISO 13485 definition

Having first worked in automotive around 1988, and having done QS-9000 implementations in the 1990's (and then TS 16949 implementations), and having done quite a few contract jobs in automotive over the years, I may not be "Ask the Expert" but testing twice doesn't meet the definition of either rework, reprocessing or repair.
 
A

alaslistas

(In a new part environment) I agree that retesting is retesting. It also falls in the catagory of an Inspection operation. It also falls into rework since it is an extra applied step to make it conform.
 

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
Testing does NOT make anything "conform". Testing in no way changes anything.

A test may indicate whether a product is conforming or not, but a test its self does absolutely nothing to the product unless it is a destructive test:

Wikipedia reference-linkDestructive_testing

To try to make the argument you are making, every product which is subjected to one or more in-process test, every product which is subjected to one or more final inspection test, would be reworked product. Were that the case, every item a company makes which is tested in any way would be "reworked" product which would mean 100% of that product would be "reworked" product.

Can you name one test, other than a destructive test, which changes the item and in what way the test changes the item?
 

howste

Thaumaturge
Trusted Information Resource
I could be wrong but testing a unit twice is considered rework. Per definition iatf
Rework – Bringing a non-conforming part back into conformance by simply reprocessing a prior sequence.

I agree with Marc. Testing doesn't make nonconforming parts good.

By the way, where did you find this definition of rework? The definition is found in ISO 9000:2015:
3.12.8
rework

action on a nonconforming product or service to make it conform to the requirements
 

ganke

Registered
What is rework ?

If I make a sorting of parts can you define this as rework ?
You do nothing with the products.
We have machines for 100% mesurement inspection that we use to sort batches with bad products. This is not in the orginal control plan.
If I use my machine to sort is this rework ?
 

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
If what you are doing does not change or affect the part/product, it is NOT rework. Sorting is not rework.
 
Top Bottom