Identification and Traceability - Mixing different work orders of the same part 7.5.3

R

Russ

I have found that one department here in my facility has been routinely mixing different work orders of the same part through several processes, just grabbing what is available to get an order out. Who believes that this breaks the chain of traceability, even if they are made from the same material per cert.?
Russ
 
D

David Mullins

YES/NO
Please pick one, 'cause I don't have enough information to answer correctly.
When I teach staff quality auditing I use an icebreaker exercise which focuses on the human need to come to conclusions even when conclusive information has not been provided. Therefore I should stick to my guns - not enough information.

------------------
 
R

Russ

David-
I have a grinder that is using parts out of one (batch) same part #, to fill the needed parts for another (batch) of that part #. Our traceability is through part #, work order (batch), and material certs. What I am asking is...does doing this break the chain of traceability for that work order when a different work order of the same part is used to fulfill the needed parts? I believe that it does indeed in fact do so, and am looking for input from others as to what they think here. Thanks....Russ
 
M

Michael T

Good morning Russ,

Yes, I believe that when you are using parts from one batch # to fill an order that specifies a different batch #, you break the tracability cycle, even if the part numbers are the same. If you trace your batch #'s to material certs and if you have a defective part from an order that calls out one batch # but filled with a different batch #, you cannot trace this back to the material used (and material cert) to manufacture the part.

Hope this helps...

Cheers!!!

Mike
 
M

Michael T

Originally posted by David Mullins:
YES/NO
Please pick one, 'cause I don't have enough information to answer correctly.
When I teach staff quality auditing I use an icebreaker exercise which focuses on the human need to come to conclusions even when conclusive information has not been provided. Therefore I should stick to my guns - not enough information.


Hi David,

I would be really interested in your icebreaking exercise, if you would care to share it.

Thanks!!!

Mike
 
D

David Mullins

The easy answer is that you shouldn't mix the batches. But really, we still don't have sufficient information to know.

Do you currently record materials against batches through to final product (full traceability)? This is expensive, the customer had better be requesting and paying for this service. If you're providing this traceability for free the company is getting ripped off.

If this part was being bolted onto the a space shuttle, would each part have to be traceable to its material batch? Yes.

In your case, if all the batches of the same part have material certificates that all say they are within spec, what's the big deal?

How reliable at material test certificates anyway (not much from my experiences)?

Is each batch inspected for visible compliance to the correct ID CODE for the material? Did the guy marking it at the foundry mark it correctly? What about half lengths that may not be marked?

What happens to the different material batches through you processes before they get to the grinder? Any chance of mixing?

What does the customer stipulate?
What does the Work Order state?

If the part was being used in a garden shed does anyone care about the material?

Sorry, I've ranted again.


------------------
 
D

David Mullins

The audit training icebreaker I use:
(the trainees can turn back to look at the paragraph after the one minute reading time has elapsed, nor can they look at the questions before hand. )


COMMUNICATIONS TEST
It does not take more than 15 seconds to read the following paragraph of 43 words. Read it carefully, you have one minute.

·¸¹º»¼½¾¿ÀÁÂ

The householder opened the door when he heard a knock. A man pushed his way in. He asked for money. The householder opened a cashbox, the contents were scooped out and the robber sped away. A policeman was notified by the householder.

·¸¹º»¼½¾¿ÀÁÂ

Please turn over this page and answer the questionnaire.



Assess the following statements
based on the paragraph contents (it's a table and doesn't come out well)


True False Information not given
1 A man knocked on the front door.
2 The man who knocked on the door pushed his way in.
3 The householder opened the door.
4 The man who knocked at the door demanded money.
5 The man who scooped up the contents of the cash box sped away.
6 The cash box contained money.
7 Did the houseowner open the cash box?
8 The robber was a man.
9 The householder notified police.
10 The police were phoned.
11 The man who pushed his way in did not ask for money.

ANSWERS:
1. ING
2. ING
3. T
4. ING
5. ING
6. ING
7. T
8. ING
9. T
10. ING
11. F

------------------
 
M

Michael T

Thanks for the icebreaker, David... great training tool!

If you don't mind, I would like to incorporate this into my training.

Cheers!!

Mike
 
D

Dawn

Would anyone care to do a benchmarking study with me on traceability?
 

barb butrym

Quite Involved in Discussions
I have seen similar with the option "T -F-?" and the majority of the people don't realize there is a ? option, which further complicates matters..usually have them sit once, read it alone, then as a team....it comes out them,and adds team building concepts to the exercise. Works great.
 
Top Bottom