Our current non-conformity procedure is that any claims raised by a customer is going through 8D process unless the claim is denied.
But our internal procedure is a bit more fluffy.
If non-conformity is found by final inspection -> 8D report
If non-conformity is found when doing in process measurements we evaluate the need for doing more than just registration.
Is there anyway this is conflicting with the requirements in AS9100. I don't believe it is, but a consultant who helped us out in the beginning of the transition from ISO9001 to AS9100 thought it were crucial to have the actual root cause and prevent the the re-occurence. And I believe our auditor agrees it him.
Our primary evaluation criteria is based on cost of the actual failure, the cost of preventing the failure, the risk of not finding the failure and the risk for our customers.
We do the registration because then we can track the costs of certain kind of mistakes like is it always like bad setup up of machine or high pressure pumps failing.
This way we are available to at some point to look at our high pressure pumps and see if doing something with those with minimize the amount and costs of NCs'.
We do a lot of non-aviation parts and we do a lot of mass production, so things like a broken drill or early wear on an insert does happen a lot. There is between 0-5 internal NCs a day, so doing 8D reports on everything is just a waste of resources in my oppinion.
Please share your thoughts.
But our internal procedure is a bit more fluffy.
If non-conformity is found by final inspection -> 8D report
If non-conformity is found when doing in process measurements we evaluate the need for doing more than just registration.
Is there anyway this is conflicting with the requirements in AS9100. I don't believe it is, but a consultant who helped us out in the beginning of the transition from ISO9001 to AS9100 thought it were crucial to have the actual root cause and prevent the the re-occurence. And I believe our auditor agrees it him.
Our primary evaluation criteria is based on cost of the actual failure, the cost of preventing the failure, the risk of not finding the failure and the risk for our customers.
We do the registration because then we can track the costs of certain kind of mistakes like is it always like bad setup up of machine or high pressure pumps failing.
This way we are available to at some point to look at our high pressure pumps and see if doing something with those with minimize the amount and costs of NCs'.
We do a lot of non-aviation parts and we do a lot of mass production, so things like a broken drill or early wear on an insert does happen a lot. There is between 0-5 internal NCs a day, so doing 8D reports on everything is just a waste of resources in my oppinion.
Please share your thoughts.