E
I think this is more of a discussion than really a question. If this has already been discussed, I would be happy to follow a link, but I searched and couldn't find a related question/issue.
I worked at a company that required the parts to be 10 mm +/- 0.5 mm. We were using a tape measure that was in mm. An auditor said we didn't have the correct equipment to measure to 0.5 mm, so we received a finding. We ended up changing the requirement to 10 mm +/- 1 mm because the results really didn't impact our process. Based on the tolerance, we were supposed to measure to 10.0 mm. I agreed with the auditor that we could not have made a determination if a part was 9.4 mm or 9.5 mm therefore we could not use the equipment we were using to make that determination.
Is there anyone that could have defended keeping the criteria and the same measuring equipment? Due to the nature of the part, we could not use calipers, but would an auditor accept using calipers to "estimate" the length of the part?
Thanks!!
I worked at a company that required the parts to be 10 mm +/- 0.5 mm. We were using a tape measure that was in mm. An auditor said we didn't have the correct equipment to measure to 0.5 mm, so we received a finding. We ended up changing the requirement to 10 mm +/- 1 mm because the results really didn't impact our process. Based on the tolerance, we were supposed to measure to 10.0 mm. I agreed with the auditor that we could not have made a determination if a part was 9.4 mm or 9.5 mm therefore we could not use the equipment we were using to make that determination.
Is there anyone that could have defended keeping the criteria and the same measuring equipment? Due to the nature of the part, we could not use calipers, but would an auditor accept using calipers to "estimate" the length of the part?
Thanks!!