Product Audit Process Requirements - Clause 8.2.2.3

[delorfra]

in addition to my previous post, I attach a feed-back from the SMMT body on Product Audits.

Francois

 

[Hoeyster]

Thank you so much for that attachment, it really gave me some insite to what a Product Audit really is. What is SMMT?

 

[Stijloor]

Thank you so much for that attachment, it really gave me some insite to what a Product Audit really is. What is SMMT?

Hello Hoeyster,

The Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) exists to support and promote the interests of the motor industry in the UK and abroad.

SMMT

Stijloor.

 

[Icy Mountain]

In my opinion, checking inspection records is not a product audit per TS 16949. Checking inspection records is a process audit of the inspection process.

A product audit should directly verify if the product conforms to all requirements- an independent verification from the normal process.

Your opinion matches that of my customer. I am doing product audits next week. I will be personally re-testing a product that was already tested and verifying that the readings taken are correct (product and process audit simultaneously). While I still believe that this is mostly a waste of time, it will give additional depth to the process audit as I will be auditing fixtures, test equipment calibration, adherence to the process instruction, etc. This product will then go back into the normal production stream and I'll catch it again on the dock to audit product and process from test to shipment ready. I steadfastly refuse to pull a product out of a box, transport it all the way back to the lab, perform testing that has already been performed, and then take the unit all the way back to shipping.

I don't believe I stated anywhere that my inspectors were checking just inspection records.

I said that.

I think you are assuming that my comment is directed at you since my posting follows yours. Someone on the thread stated that their Product Audit consisted of a review of the inspection records. Of course, now I can't find that posting.

That would have been me. I still don't see the efficacy of randomly retesting product that is 100% tested. If I have done a process audit and validated that the Technician is following the test procedure, the fixturing and equipment are all correct, and the test results produced show the product to be within specification, what exactly am I accomplishing by testing it again?

 

[vanputten]

"I still don't see the efficacy of randomly retesting product that is 100% tested. If I have done a process audit and validated that the Technician is following the test procedure, the fixturing and equipment are all correct, and the test results produced show the product to be within specification, what exactly am I accomplishing by testing it again?"

I don't see the value of product audits either but what does that have to do with conformity to TS requirements? I didn't know we can exclude requirements becaue we don't see the value.

 

[Icy Mountain]

I don't see the value of product audits either but what does that have to do with conformity to TS requirements? I didn't know we can exclude requirements becaue we don't see the value.

Of course we can't. It just really burns me to do something just to satisfy the standard without adding some value to the company. I am going to use this as an opportunity to cross-train technicians on product testing.