ISO 9001 Section 7.6 - Customer has supplied torque specifications

[StevePenney]

I was just wondering if a company was using cheap uncalibrated torque wrenches to assemble customer product would it be considered a major non-conformance under ISO 9001:2008 Section 7.6? Assume the customer has supplied torque specs. I believe it is, others disagree. What do you think?
Is it a major, minor non-conformance, or really not necessary.

 

[ScottK]

I was just wondering if a company was using cheap uncalibrated torque wrenches to assemble customer product would it be considered a major non-conformance under ISO 9001:2008 Section 7.6? Assume the customer has supplied torque specs. I believe it is, others disagree. What do you think?
Is it a major, minor non-conformance, or really not necessary.

Did the customer provide an application or removal torque specification?

I was in bottle making and filling for years and removal torque was the important thing, so application torque heads were never calibrated. The removal torque tester was.

 

[pkost]

It is certainly a non conformance. There are many discussions here about the difference between major and minor, but I would probably rate this as a major as it cannot be adequately be determined that the correct torque is being set and therefore the product may be out of spec.

edit: ScottK is right and my answer was not clear enough...the fundamental question is "can it be demonstrated that the product in in specification"

 

[StevePenney]

The torque specs would be for tightening.
Steve

 

[ScottK]

The torque specs would be for tightening.
Steve

In that case I would agree with you that the tool used for applying the torque is measurement equipment and should be calibrated... or possibly verified on a shift/day basis with a calibrated tool with records kept of the verification. That way you don't have spend a lot on a calibration but can maintain traceability to a standard.

As to degree of nonconformity... that depends on your system. For internal audits I tend not use Critical/Major/Minor since a nonconformity is nonconformity.
Many of my customers do, however.
I think many of those customers would consider this a Major if there is little history of complaints about this characteristic. If there is history of complaints then it would be critical.

 

[Sorin]

The torque specs would be for tightening.
Steve

In that case it would be a major. What's there to debate? We have customer requirements and unable to provide proof that we comply with them because wrench(es) are not calibrated and thus unable to make proof of a controlled process.

 

[Jeff Frost]

It could very well be a major finding if it indicates a major failure of your process associated with clause 7.6. Here are a few questions to ask:

Does my organization understand the requirements of Clause 7.6 as it applies to measurement and test equipment?

Though Clause 7.6 relates to assuring both process equipment and inspection instruments are accurate is may company only applying it to inspection instruments?

What within my process allowed this wrench to be used when the customer specified a requirement I must meet?

What other equipment within my system should be calibrated or verified that has not been?

 

[haithamae]

according to clause no 7.6 ISO 9001:2008 the measuring equipments should be calibrated so, is it required to calibrate avometers and multimeters.

and if yes, what is meant by (where necessary ) which mentioned in that clause.


is it means it is not mandatory, waiting for your esteemed feedback

 

[Jim Wynne]

according to clause no 7.6 ISO 9001:2008 the measuring equipments should be calibrated so, is it required to calibrate avometers and multimeters.

and if yes, what is meant by (where necessary ) which mentioned in that clause.


is it means it is not mandatory, waiting for your esteemed feedback

The standard says that calibration is necessary "Where necessary to ensure valid results..." This means that you have to consider, for each relevant device or device type, the risks presented by not calibrating. There are some people, including some auditors, who believe that the clause means that everything in sight must be periodically calibrated whether it makes any sense to do so or not. If you have production measurement devices that you chose not to include in your calibration program, you will need to be able to rationally justify the choice.

 

[howste]

I agree with Jim. The standard says "Where necessary to ensure valid results..." Using uncalibrated torque wrenches may be acceptable if the torque process is validated at a frequency sufficient to give confidence that the torque applied is good. If there is no other method to "ensure valid results" then it's definitely a nonconformity. In the aerospace or automotive industries, because of they way they define the term, it would be considered major.