Receiving Inspection Requirement in IATF

[IATFuser]

Hello!

Is there a requirement in IATF 16949 to have a receiving inspection for the incoming parts from supplier. We do 100% inspection of parts on assembly line. Do we still need to conduct incoming receiving inspection with say AQL methodology. We feel is over killing.

 

[Emmyd]

The requirement is to analyze the risk for incoming inspection. How many times do you get material or incoming parts from a supplier that have defects or don't meet specs? If the occurrence is low, you can make a case to continue as you have been. For my company, we have a list of all our approved suppliers and we rank them as below and their ranking is based on a number of factors including delivery and quality:
"1.0 Classification of Sub-Contractors
Sub-Contractors are categorized based primarily on quantity of product supplied and the level of importance of the material.(This determination is made subjectively by Project Teams and/or Purchasing, based on experience and process understanding)
A = High volume Sub-Contractor and/or provides critical components to our products and processes.
B = Low volume (secondary) Sub-Contractor and/or provides non-critical components to our products and processes.
CSP = Customer Supplied Product: Indicates that the customer is responsible for supplying components used to manufacture their own product.
CDS = Customer Directed Supplier: Indicates that the customer has directed Profile to the source from which the components are to be purchased from that are used to manufacture their own product.
EVAL = New Sub-Contractors which have not been classified, and pending initial evaluation based on the product supplied to Profile and response to quality system requirements.

2.0 Rating of Sub-Contractors
2.1 Definition of the Ratings
The following ratings will apply when applicable.
1 = "Ship to Stock" indicates that materials received from the Sub-Contractor may be released to production without a release to production inspection.
2 = "Material Certs Required" indicates that the Sub-Contractor must supply material certifications for all materials received prior to release for production. "
This has been successfully used by our company for years. Hope this helps!

 

[Sidney Vianna]

We do 100% inspection of parts on assembly line.

It looks like your incoming inspection happens at the assembly line. Most organizations perform incoming inspection before parts are allowed on the floor, for obvious reasons, but, as previously said, it is all a risk-based decision, taking into account many factors, such as supplier performance, ease of spotting nonconforming product at the assembly line, etc. If data shows that a "traditional" receiving inspection is non-value added, then you can justify it's absence in your business.

Heck, the ultimate goal would be inspection-less processes. But historical data should support it.

 

[IATFuser]

Well said @Sidney Vianna!
We feel the incoming inspection activity is non-value adding as we perform AQL inspection on receiving the parts. But then we again inspection everything 100% on line during assembly operation. Also we are not in a position where we would reject the batch based on receiving inspection.
However, we do find non-conformities on line and reject them later by segregating to the supplier.

We plan to remove the AQL receiving inspection but I wanted to confirm is there any requirement in the IATF standard regarding this.