Product Safety Responsibility - Job shop such as a machine shop

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#1
When AS9100D was first introduced during training we were taught that there really isn't much that a job shop such as a machine shop that is not involved with design really could not really do much about product safety as it fell into the responsibility of the design entity. Pretty much all they could do is diligently build to print.

The following year we were told that the information from the prior year was incorrect. Some guidance document was cited saying that the machine shop should be asking the customer what the part would be used for.

The second year instructions really don't seem practical as many customers don't want to tell you the application, especially if it is classified information. It also would be time consuming for the customer to provide that information for every part.

I'm wondering what some of you are doing about it and what you have seen out there.

I have seen most companies ignoring it but I have also seen a couple that email the customer for that information with every order so they can show they made the effort. In both of those cases the customers are not responding.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration
Staff member
Admin
#2
The following year we were told that the information from the prior year was incorrect. Some guidance document was cited saying that the machine shop should be asking the customer what the part would be used for.
Who told you this and what document was referenced?
 

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#3
The trainer was Buddy Corcione (I'm not sure of the spelling of Buddy's last name). I did not make note of the referenced document but it dimly seems that Sydney may have posted it a few months earlier.
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
#4
Back when I was designing machine parts, and knowing they would be used as parts of a larger assembly...sometimes we would be asked to make parts according to provided designs.
This was not AS9100 or any system...may have predated the systems...

If a part had obvious dangers (sharp edges, corners not called out to be broken or chamfered), or if we knew (or inferred) what the part would be used for, we would warn the customer of the danger in writing (this predated email).

A guide shaft with a collar where the attached part was likely to turn (meaning that the collar would leave the shaft to turn, then re-fit onto the collar for extraction) is a pinch point that could take a finger or punch a hole in a hand...that sort of stuff.
We would often say something like "our understanding of this design is that it works like {this}, which can be potentially dangerous unless adequate guards are in place. We see no guards in the part list ordered."

More of a CYA than anything else, though once we got a "Thank you" and an order for guards...

Not sure if it is applicable to your OP, but HTH...
 

Marc

Hunkered Down for the Duration
Staff member
Admin
#5
The trainer was Buddy Corcione (I'm not sure of the spelling of Buddy's last name). I did not make note of the referenced document but it dimly seems that Sydney may have posted it a few months earlier.
The second trainer (the person, not the company) is the issue. I come back to the 'show me were it says that' which we often ask. Without knowing that document there is no way to see what the referenced document actually says. I always want to see the actual text of the document. Just because a person is a trainer doesn't mean they 'know and understand' everything.

As to your position, it is correct that build to print companies often simply can not get information, and even when they do do not have personnel trained to evaluate many issues that are print related. They depend on the customer to provide any such information in one way or another. If no information is provided there isn't anything you can do (Ninja's caveats are appropriate IMO).
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted Information Resource
#6
FWIW...I lost that job (my first out of college)...when I refused to build a design that could take a hand off...

Now, 20+ years later, I've learned that it has taken more than one finger...
It's the only job I ever got fired from...and (20yrs later and financially stable) I can say that I'm glad I made that call.
Not 100% sure I would feel the same if I wasn't financially stable, which gives me plenty of food for thought...they weren't my fingers...
 

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#7
The second trainer (the person, not the company) is the issue. I come back to the 'show me were it says that' which we often ask. Without knowing that document there is no way to see what the referenced document actually says. I always want to see the actual text of the document. Just because a person is a trainer doesn't mean they 'know and understand' everything.

As to your position, it is correct that build to print companies often simply can not get information, and even when they do do not have personnel trained to evaluate many issues that are print related. They depend on the customer to provide any such information in one way or another. If no information is provided there isn't anything you can do (Ninja's caveats are appropriate IMO).
It was the same trainer both years. The second year he said he was wrong the prior year and we needed to forget that earlier instruction.

The reason I opened the thread now is to see what companies were actually doing in the field.

It is interesting that the IAQG Clarifications version published October 2019 is silent concerning element 8.1.3 Product Safety. Maybe that tells me all I need to know.
 

outdoorsNW

Involved In Discussions
#8
I work for an electronics contract manufacturer. Our quality manual for AS9100D says we only build products designed by the customer, and therefore product safety is the customer’s responsibility. Our product safety obligation is to build the product to conform to the customer’s requirements. This has gone through three audits with two different external auditors, plus several AS9100 focused customer audits without any problems.

Plus we also have many customers who will not tell us what the product is used for or other details needed to assess product safety.
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Staff member
Admin
#9
Product safety in a "build-to-print" environment certainly encompasses product conformity to customer specifications, but don't forget other issues that can jeopardize product integrity such as FOD, ESD, damage due to handling, preservation, transportation, etc....All of those issues are contained in the AS9100 standard, nevertheless...
 

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#10
I work for an electronics contract manufacturer. Our quality manual for AS9100D says we only build products designed by the customer, and therefore product safety is the customer’s responsibility. Our product safety obligation is to build the product to conform to the customer’s requirements. This has gone through three audits with two different external auditors, plus several AS9100 focused customer audits without any problems.

Plus we also have many customers who will not tell us what the product is used for or other details needed to assess product safety.
Thank you. This is the kind of feedback I'm looking for.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
V VAG Customer Specific Requirements - Product Safety Responsibility Customer and Company Specific Requirements 1
M Differences in post market safety reporting for Combination Product Applicants Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 1
S VW Supplier Product Safety Representative (PSB) upgrade to PSCR VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 4
C Safety lettering on a product CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 5
M EMC Directive and product safety standards CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 1
M Informational Design for new product safety marking for the no-deal Brexit scenario Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 1
L IATF 16949 requirements for Product Safety Procedures IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 14
M IATF 16949 - Who should be assigned as the Product Safety Officer? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
C IATF 16949 - Product Safety Escalation Process Timeliness IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 8
A AS9100 Rev D - Procedure for Product Safety & Control of Counterfeit Part (Format) AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 6
J IATF 16949 Product Safety IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
Q IATF 16949 Cl. 4.4.1.2 - Product Safety - How to interpret IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
A VW Supplier Product Safety Representative (PSB) Responsibilities and Requirements VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 4
R How to make sense of IATF 16949 Product Safety IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 1
M IATF 16949 Clause 4.4.1.2 - Product Safety - Concept of the Title IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
G Process for Product Safety - Ideas for Documenting Process for 4.4.1.2 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
M Exclusion of IATF 16949 Clause 4.4.1.2 - Product Safety IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
D Product Safety in AS9100D Clause 8.1.3 - Hazards Analysis AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 18
M IATF 16949 Clause 4.4.1.2 - Product Safety IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
A Can someone provide an example of a Product Safety Policy? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 1
L Product Safety Officer - How to keep VW Happy VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 24
S Searching for a Lab to test Patient Safety for Product used in Mouth CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 2
S AS9110B ? Product Safety Inputs to Management Review AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 2
6 Catering HACCP/Food Safety - Traceability from Receipt to Finished Product Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 1
M Combining EcoDesign with Compliance (Product Safety/EMC) Engineer Career and Occupation Discussions 2
C Product Safety Control example procedure wanted Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 4
somashekar Product audit for using the safety mark (ETL) on label Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 2
Hershal Product Safety Testing - Interested in safe products? Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 2
Icy Mountain Personnel safety to achieve product quality - TS16949 Section 6.4.1 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
M 7.2.1.c Product requirements - Determining product, enviroment, health, safety, etc IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
S Personnel safety to achieve product quality as required by TS 16949 Clause 6.4.1 IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
Y New Japanese EMC/electrical safety standards - Additional product testing required? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
Q Product Safety - Damage or hurt to our or Client's Installations or Employees QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 6
B 4.2.3.4 Product Safety - What does this element want? I find it very ambiguous QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 1
D Product Safety - 4.2.3.4 - Safety considerations relative to the supplier's product? QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 2
L AS9100 - Product and Service Provision 8.5.1q AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
J 1.11 Preliminary Identification of Special Product and Process Characteristics APQP and PPAP 4
J Possible to get ISO 13485 certified with only OEM Product? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
Felony Melony New Product Launch - Safe Launch Customer and Company Specific Requirements 1
Marcel DS How do I know if my product is required be RoHS certified? REACH and RoHS Conversations 6
I Control Plan (Product/Process specification/ Tolerance) acceptance FMEA and Control Plans 27
DuncanGibbons Technical Data Package vs Digital Product Definition APQP and PPAP 0
A ISO 11135:2014, B.1.4, BI resistance x product bioburden ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
Sravan Manchikanti How to interpret '8.3 Control of nonconforming product' for SaMD device while implementing ISO 13485 & MDSAP ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4
R Product Recall - medical devices in the hospital warehouse Canada Medical Device Regulations 2
A Software bug fixes after shipping a product EU Medical Device Regulations 3
silentmonkey How to measure severity if my product is designed for emergency use and failure would result in death? ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 9
D IATF16949 7.5.3.2.1 Record Retention - Our Product or Customer Product? Elsmar Cove Forum Suggestions, Complaints, Problems and Bug Reports 1
H Operational planning and product and service provision when things happen so fast ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 11
T Letter to file for Product Certification CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 0

Similar threads

Top Bottom