MSAs required for sorting or references?

[Jayfaas]

Good morning all. I had some situations come up that I wanted to run by you. We are under the IATF16949 automotive standard at our facility. My questions are:

1) Are studies required for gauges that are used for sorting if they are not normally used on production parts/material? Some gauges we only purchase for sorting purposes. The general rules I have heard before are "If its on the control plan/inspection plan, it has to have an MSA" and "If its used to determine conformance of parts, it must be". If the second rule is true, then that would mean any sorting gauges must undergo an MSA study, correct?

2) What about gauges that are just used to determine a particular model or size? We use one machine to take a length measurement to determine if we are checking the correct model because some of the model numbers only vary by a few millimeters. If we run our parts in that machine just to ensure that that part falls within the part program being ran based off of a reference measurement, will that also need an MSA? I know that sounds crazy, but its checking friction welding seam to seam, and this measurement is just a reference based on the length of the part minus the material on each end that is removed or "curled over" during welding. Its even a reference dimension on the print, but its more used to ensure that we dont send out the wrong product.

Thoughts?

 

[gakiss2]

Statistical studies shall be conducted to analyze the variation present in the results of each type of inspection, measurement, and test equipment system identified in the control plan. The analytical methods and acceptance criteria used shall conform to those reference manuals on measurement system analysis. Other analytical methods and acceptance criteria may be used if approved by the customer.

Records of customer acceptance of alternative methods shall be retained along with results from alternative measurement systems analysis (see Section 9.1.1.1).

NOTE Prioritization of MSA studies should focus on critical or special product or process characteristics.

(per FAQ 6, measurement equipment can be grouped by family and a representative instrument selected for the MSA study)

Confirming that MSA is only needed on items shown in the Control Plan.
At the same time I do it may be worth a few minuets to validate results if it is not on the Control Plan. Since the MSA requirement is not there then there would be no need for a formal activity / report. If you have a few parts that are near the borderline then try the gauge a few times and make sure it leads to a correct accept / reject decision.

 

[Miner]

However, this leads to another question that must be answered. Should your uses of these measurement devices be included on the control plan? I'm not saying that that they should. That is for you to determine and be able to defend. It does seem to be a control "to ensure that we don't send out the wrong product" (OP's words).

 

[Golfman25]

Good morning all. I had some situations come up that I wanted to run by you. We are under the IATF16949 automotive standard at our facility. My questions are:

1) Are studies required for gauges that are used for sorting if they are not normally used on production parts/material? Some gauges we only purchase for sorting purposes. The general rules I have heard before are "If its on the control plan/inspection plan, it has to have an MSA" and "If its used to determine conformance of parts, it must be". If the second rule is true, then that would mean any sorting gauges must undergo an MSA study, correct?

2) What about gauges that are just used to determine a particular model or size? We use one machine to take a length measurement to determine if we are checking the correct model because some of the model numbers only vary by a few millimeters. If we run our parts in that machine just to ensure that that part falls within the part program being ran based off of a reference measurement, will that also need an MSA? I know that sounds crazy, but its checking friction welding seam to seam, and this measurement is just a reference based on the length of the part minus the material on each end that is removed or "curled over" during welding. Its even a reference dimension on the print, but its more used to ensure that we dont send out the wrong product.

Thoughts?

Context matters. Why are these coming up as issues? Internal debate or audit finding?

As was pointed out, the hard and fast rule for IATF is if it's on the control plan, then it must have an MSA associated with it. Now it would seem to me, that your sorting operation would be part of your control plan, no? Of course, I'll assume you sorting gage is a simple go/no go type. Not sure what the value would be, but a simple attribute study would keep you "out of trouble."

We have run in your number 2 issue. We use a simple tape measure to reference check incoming parts -- is it part A or part B, which might be a 1/2 inch difference. Got "busted" for that, which was complete nonsense. Keep it off the control plan, and just use it as an "identification" technique -- you may have some luck.

 

[Jayfaas]

It is unreal sometimes the amount if stuff we are subjected to. So for the first one, we are sorting parts for incoming inspection, but this is stemming from some fit issues we had on the floor. It is a variable gauge, not just a go/no-go. We receive them from another vendor, so I dont even know if you can conduct an attribute study effectively if you cant change the part to run near the limits. With regards to the 2nd topic, it is on the control plan unfortunately but I am not sure if it was required or not. I think there may have been instances where some other close parts got out of the building and this was something put in place.