Overwhelmed with attribute MSA requirement for visual inspection

Irshah88

Registered
My company is supplier of electronics part for audio system used in vehicle for various manufacturer. Our product consists of plastic part and PCB. We just obtained our IATF16949 accreditation about 2 years ago.

We have control plan in place for each product/model run in our production line. As required by IATF, all measurement need MSA study. We have problem to choose which process is actual need cross-tab study(MSA for attribute data).

For example, for assembly process of plastic housing, operator need to evaluate their work at the end of the process so we considered the evaluation as one of measurement, so we decided to do cross tab for the operator. 50pcs sample by 3 appraisals. We keep doing but end up with all processes need cross tab evaluation. It is overwhelmed the staff and took most of the time. We do not know whether this is correct practice or not.

Need advice from one who has experience with this kind of situation on how to effectively tackle MSA in production floor.
 

bkirch

Involved In Discussions
We have gone through many third party audits and have never been asked to supply an MSA for visual inspection. I also just reviewed the standard to see what it stated about MSA's and clause 7.5.1.1 "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 word that pops out to me is "equipment". Yes, visual inspection is a measurement method, but I would not call someones eyes or ears a form of inspection, measurement, or test equipment.
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Leader
Super Moderator
‘Self inspection’ really shouldn’t require an MSA as it is a normal part of the process for each operator. I’ve never seen an auditor (who knows what they are doing) ask for an MSA on this. Usually it falls under training and effectiveness for the operators performing the process...
 

Irshah88

Registered
We have gone through many third party audits and have never been asked to supply an MSA for visual inspection. I also just reviewed the standard to see what it stated about MSA's and clause 7.5.1.1 "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 word that pops out to me is "equipment". Yes, visual inspection is a measurement method, but I would not call someones eyes or ears a form of inspection, measurement, or test equipment.

Agree with you. But, in last IATF audit we were asked about MSA list. In the list we did not include MSA(cross-tab) study result for visual inspection in production line. We received comment from auditor that that was not follow clause IATF 7.1.5.1.1. We were given recommendation to conduct the study on annual basis.
 

Irshah88

Registered
‘Self inspection’ really shouldn’t require an MSA as it is a normal part of the process for each operator. I’ve never seen an auditor (who knows what they are doing) ask for an MSA on this. Usually it falls under training and effectiveness for the operators performing the process...

Thank you for your reply. If we refer to clause IATF16949 7.1.5.1.1 Measurement System Analysis

Statistical studies shall be conducted to analyse the variation present in the results of each type of inspection, measurement, and test equipment system identified in the control plan.

From my understanding, MSA are needed wherever inspection, measurement, and test equipment list/mention in control plan. I do not know whether my understanding has stand in this matter.
 

Ron Rompen

Trusted Information Resource
The wording of the standard is a little ambiguous, and you can (sort of) choose how to interpret the clause 'each type of inspection, measurement, and test equipment system'.
If you forget about the requirements of IATF for a moment (oh the horror), and think about the benefits to yourself, then it is fairly evident that understanding the effectiveness of your measurement system (visual inspection) is important. I would suggest doing the GRR study on the process step (with visual inspection) that generates the MOST rejects, and also on the step which generates the LEAST rejects. Compare the effectiveness of your measurement system against itself.
Once you have completed this with the appropriate documentation (and taken any actions determined to be necessary) you have covered a 'family' of gauges (operators eyes). If the process or product changes, you need to re-evaluate the study, but not necessarily repeat it. Again, document this evaluation. That way you have evidence to present to your auditor.
 

Irshah88

Registered
The wording of the standard is a little ambiguous, and you can (sort of) choose how to interpret the clause 'each type of inspection, measurement, and test equipment system'.
If you forget about the requirements of IATF for a moment (oh the horror), and think about the benefits to yourself, then it is fairly evident that understanding the effectiveness of your measurement system (visual inspection) is important. I would suggest doing the GRR study on the process step (with visual inspection) that generates the MOST rejects, and also on the step which generates the LEAST rejects. Compare the effectiveness of your measurement system against itself.
Once you have completed this with the appropriate documentation (and taken any actions determined to be necessary) you have covered a 'family' of gauges (operators eyes). If the process or product changes, you need to re-evaluate the study, but not necessarily repeat it. Again, document this evaluation. That way you have evidence to present to your auditor.

Thank you very much for your advise. I will try to implement in our company.
 

Buford

Registered
‘Self inspection’ really shouldn’t require an MSA as it is a normal part of the process for each operator. I’ve never seen an auditor (who knows what they are doing) ask for an MSA on this. Usually it falls under training and effectiveness for the operators performing the process...

The visual MSA, Attribute GRR, however you perform the validation, is really a test for how well your visual inspection training is being applied to your product for customer protection from alpha and beta errors. Do the visual inspectors agree with themselves during inspection of seeded parts (10 parts perhaps) over 3 trials, and then do multiple inspectors of the same seeded population agree with each other at some designated acceptance rate.
 

Bev D

Heretical Statistician
Leader
Super Moderator
If the OP is really talking about ‘self inspection’ no MSA is required. Self inspection is just a quick check by you that you did what you are supposed to OR what the guy before you was supposed to do. You are supposed to to install the green bolt did you install the green bolt? It is a lean or Toyota Production System thing. It is not QC release testing or In-process SPC measurements.
If they are talking about the last two then they need to clarify that
 

Ashland78

Quite Involved in Discussions
We had gotten same finding before. If on control plan you have visual inspection you do need MSA. You can have 3 known bad parts, 7 known good ones and randomly have 3 people measure 3 times randomly. It is too show this is capable.
 
Top Bottom