Reduced Receiving Inspection - Now What

[gmsqengineer]

Hello I am new to posting on a professional networking forum so allow me to introduce my self. I am working for a company that supplies electromechanical motors and devices to many different industries (more mechanical than electrical). I am the supplier quality engineer for some 150 suppliers and also incharge of our receiving inspection group and final inspection groups (within those groups we work with alot of mechanical prints and gages to inspect parts). I have been charged with reducing receiving inspection and it is still a work in process. As we continue to reduce the number of parts inspected, I need to generate activities (effective activities) for operators who are highly skilled in mechanical inspection for over 30 years, I dont want to lose the skill set. Are there any suggestions out there on what I can do to redirect employees when reduction efforts are necessary. Our goal is to focus on supplier development rather than mask issues with inspection. Thanks for your support..

 

[AndyN]

Re: Reduced Receiving Inspection Now What

Welcome:

It would help to know, for example, of your company also design product, or are a manufacturing-only location.

How many folks have to be re deployed?

 

[gmsqengineer]

Re: Reduced Receiving Inspection Now What

We do design product, but in our Corporate location. This location is manufacturing only. I have one master operator I would like to keep as we still have some products we must inspect due to the design. I have another operator who needs to be trained to do other things that will benefit the Supplier quality group.

Thanks for the quick reply this is awesome.

 

[AndyN]

Re: Reduced Receiving Inspection Now What

We do design product, but in our Corporate location. This location is manufacturing only. I have one master operator I would like to keep as we still have some products we must inspect due to the design. I have another operator who needs to be trained to do other things that will benefit the Supplier quality group.

Thanks for the quick reply this is awesome.

So, back in 1985, I was tasked with the same deal! Actually it was "Get rid of Receiving Inspection"...

I had between 3 and 4 guys, 2 contractors and 2 full time guys. One was a metrology expert, so I used to get him involved in New Product design reviews etc, to check out what was being drawn and if we had the capability to inspect. He produced the inspection schemes and identified any special gauging etc needed. He also kept the designers from doing goofy things like datuming off a thread!

One guy was laid off (contractor) but he had HR issues too.

One guy I turned into a source inspector at 'troubled' suppliers, for the parts which we made to our prints.

The remaining guy was a roving parts auditor, looking at parts (proprietary) from those supplier who had the occasional hiccup in supply or where risky - like 'O' seals.

When I went back 5 years later, my plan was still in place and working well.

 

[Chance]

Re: Reduced Receiving Inspection Now What

Please refer to this thread: Successful Validation = Reduced Inspection

 

[gmsqengineer]

Re: Reduced Receiving Inspection Now What

Well my situation is similar, they want out of receiving inspection completly. I have started something similar, roving audits or we call them On line inspection of parts we have had past problems with. However this is not enough to keep an operator busy for 8 hours. We have a metrology lab with equipment that is not being used due to lack of qualified personel. That job requires a technician and the people I have are just quality inspectors...To give more detail, we are inspecting eveything from barstock, to gears, to aluminum castings, shafts, etc...The inspection plans are generated by the engineers for the Quality inspectors...

 

[gmsqengineer]

Re: Reduced Receiving Inspection Now What

Thanks Chance I will check out the link...

 

[Greenapple]

Hi everyone!

I'm a new joiner and this is my first time to post here. I have read lots of conversations and changing of advices here. So I tried to ask some points/guidance to perform my work efficiently, of course, with the help of you guys out there. . Thanks.

I'm reviewing these Material Documents (Mechanical - MTCs, CoCs, etc.), and honestly speaking, I'm not that well knowledgeable in reviewing these Documents. That's why I'm humbly asking for some help to understand what are the points/things to focus or give emphasis/importance when reviewing these Documents.

Your effort will be very much appreciated.

Thanks

 

[Jim Wynne]

Hi everyone!

I'm a new joiner and this is my first time to post here. I have read lots of conversations and changing of advices here. So I tried to ask some points/guidance to perform my work efficiently, of course, with the help of you guys out there. . Thanks.

I'm reviewing these Material Documents (Mechanical - MTCs, CoCs, etc.), and honestly speaking, I'm not that well knowledgeable in reviewing these Documents. That's why I'm humbly asking for some help to understand what are the points/things to focus or give emphasis/importance when reviewing these Documents.

Your effort will be very much appreciated.

Thanks

Welcome to the Cove.

I'll assume that "CoC" means Certificate of Conformity, but what about "MTC"? In general, the documents should be based on a standard of some kind--some form of documented requirements. Review usually involves comparing the documented results to the documented requirements.

 

[Greenapple]

Hi.

MTC - Material Test Certificate / Mill Test Certificate

These Documents are based on EN 10204 - 3.1 and 3.2. I'm really confused when we should use the EN 10204 - 3.1 and EN 10204 - 3.2. And who will decide what Standard to be used?

What Documents should be attached in Final Dossier, I mean General/Common Documents? Since we have these Pumps, Valves, Vessels. Plates, etc...

By the way, thanks for the reply Mr. Jim.