Product Requalification Test - Auditor want us to carry out

[Panayiotis]

Thank you All for your great support!!!
I will come back with clarifications from my QM in a few hours.

 

[bpritts]

Well, I was ready to state that Ford requires an annual requalification as one of their C.S.R.'s... but, when I checked, they do not specifically require
engineering spec tests, only dimensional layout. (Ford CSR 4.42). Meanwhile my experience with GM is that they do not require periodic requalifications, at least at the system/ C.S.R. level. Of course, what matters is what your specific customers demand. I agree with the others who do not believe that there is any general requirement for periodic test requalification.

Another document that might help to define testing is the DVPR (Design
Verification Plan and Report). This is usually done by the design function, whether customer or supplier.

Regards...........Brad

 

[Panayiotis]

Dear All
The Auditor was referring to 8.2.4.1 Layout Inspection and Fuctional testing.But my question is that although the standard says "shall be performed" I dont have any CSR and I can have also in writing that is not required can I get away with it or in a next audit will be a NC

 

[Jim Wynne]

Dear All
The Auditor was referring to 8.2.4.1 Layout Inspection and Fuctional testing.But my question is that although the standard says "shall be performed" I dont have any CSR and I can have also in writing that is not required can I get away with it or in a next audit will be a NC

8.2.4.1 says nothing about, and doesn't even hint at, revalidation, or requalification, or re-anything. If this is your auditor's sole criterion, he's just wrong. You shouldn't try to fix something that's not broken.

 

[Marc]

8.2.4.1 says nothing about, and doesn't even hint at, revalidation, or requalification, or re-anything. <snip>

That's where the definition aspect came into play. The original post stated "Requalification", but as the thread has progressed it has come down to:

This reintroduces the question of how "Requalification" and "Product Requalification" are defined.

Dear All
The Auditor was referring to 8.2.4.1 Layout Inspection and Fuctional testing.But my question is that although the standard says "shall be performed" I dont have any CSR and I can have also in writing that is not required can I get away with it or in a next audit will be a NC

In short, there was a language or wording issue. This is all about the aspect of the TS 16949 requirement for "8.2.4.1 Layout Inspection and Functional testing" and has nothing to do with "Requalification" or "Product Requalification".

I think the question now is: If the company is registered (aka certified) to TS 16949, can a customer give the company some sort of "Not Required" exemption statement to avoid having to comply with the TS 16949 Clause 8.2.4.1 requirements.

I'm sorta flying blind because I don't have a copy of the current TS 16949 at hand to reference.

I'm adding this:

Yes, I think these are in the customer specific requirements (paragraph numbers may not be the latest version)

Chrysler CSR 4.2.8 Continuous Conformance - Annual
Ford 4.42 Layout Inspection and Functional Testing - Annual
GM 4.2.5 Layout Inspection and Functional Testing - None unless told

Is your customer one of these companies? If so, why are you exempt?

Secondarily, are you only supplying 1 automotive customer?

Lastly, are you a Tier 1 supplier?

 

[Howard Atkins]

I repeat what I posted before

Did he say Re-qualification or verification? because

8.2.4.1 Layout inspection and functional testing
A layout inspection and a functional verification to applicable customer engineering material and performance standards shall be performed for each product as specified in the control plans. Results shall be available for customer review.

This is a specific TS requirement not connected to CSR's or customers. The control plan MUST control layout inspection, if or if not the customer requires it

 

[1010011010]

Hi,

it might be a little late, but to untangle the wording confusion a bit...it all comes down to the translation of the ISO/TS 16949 into other languages:

English: "8.2.4.1 Layout inspection and functional testing"

German: "8.2.4.1 Requalifikationspr?fung"

Now take the German and put it back into English - "Requalification Testing"

You probably can imagine how much I was struggling myself with the wording. However, some things seem a bit clearer to me now - even though it's foggy outside