Requirement for SPC on at least 1 characteristic on all parts?

[Satellite]

Requirement for SPC on all parts

Back when QS was just getting started I remember our consultant sharing the requirement that all parts we make/sub contract must have at least 1 characteristic that we monitor through SPC. Fast forward a few years, our current registrar brought this up during the TS registration.

I'm at a loss to find the reference in any of the "core tools". Does anyone know where I can find it?

 

[Wes Bucey]

Back when QS was just getting started I remember our consultant sharing the requirement that all parts we make/sub contract must have at least 1 characteristic that we monitor through SPC. Fast forward a few years, our current registrar brought this up during the TS registration.

I'm at a loss to find the reference in any of the "core tools". Does anyone know where I can find it?

In my opinion, you are the victim of the party game "Telephone"

Telephone:
Host tells joke to first person from written text. That person tells to next from memory and so on through all guests. Final guest tells it out loud to entire assemblage and they compare that version to the original written text. (Rarely are the versions identical.)

Throughout ISO9001:2000 and the Standards based upon it (AS & TS), the Standard uses "weasel phrases" such as "where appropriate" or "conform to customer requirements."

Frequently, consultants and field auditors try to impress folks by appearing as experts and so they convert the weasel phrases into absolutes by inserting the words "shall" or "must" in their oral interpretation when the word does not exist in the written document. Here's a brief excerpt from the 207 page
ISO/TS 16949:2002 IMPLEMENTATION GUIDE (from AIAG)
text in blue is MY emphasis of pertinent phrases as they appear in context

Some of the ISO/TS 16949:2002 customer specifics still require use of the core tools identified in the QS-9000 manual. It is suggested that copies of these manuals are on hand when designing and implementing a quality management system.
•Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)
•Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP)
•Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA)
•Statistical Process Control (SPC)
•Potential Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
Refer to each customer’s requirements for applicability.
When transitioning to ISO/TS 16949:2002, it is recommended that the certification body be contacted with any questions regarding the interpretation of any requirements. Sanctioned Interpretations, Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) and other useful information can be found on the International Automotive Oversight Bureau Web site at www.iaob.org.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@
4.9.1
Process Monitoring and Operator Instructions
The supplier shall prepare documented process monitoring and
operator instructions for all employees having responsibilities for
operation of processes. These instructions shall be accessible at the
workstation.
Note: Job instructions should be available at the time
needed without disruption to the job being performed by the
operator. These instructions should be derived from the sources
listed in the Advanced Product Quality Planning and Control Plan
reference manual. Process monitoring and operator instructions
may take the form of process sheets, inspections and laboratory test
instructions, shop travelers, test procedures, standard operation
sheets, or other documents normally used by the supplier to provide
the necessary information.

Process monitoring and operator instructions shall include or
reference, as appropriate: * Operation name and number keyed to
the process flow diagram * Part name and part number, or part
family * Current engineering level/date * Required tools, gages
and other equipment * Material identification and disposition
instructions * Customer and supplier designated special
characteristics * SPC requirements * Relevant engineering and
manufacturing standards * Inspection and test instructions (see
4.10.4) * Reaction plan * Revision date and approvals * Visual
aids * Tool change intervals and setup instructions
@@@@@@@@@@@@@
ISO/TS 16949:2002 Supplier Auditor Certification
This intensive four-day course and certification exam is the “supplier version” of the official ISO/TS 16949 third-party auditor certification course. You will gain knowledge of ISO/TS 16949:2002 by focusing on the differences between this standard and ISO 9001/QS-9000. ISO/TS 16949:2002 knowledge is linked to the appropriate use of the core tools (i.e., APQP, FMEA, PPAP, MSA, and SPC) in an ISO/TS 16949 quality system. You will be evaluated through an oral examination, written examination, and a performance assessment; however, the supplier course evaluations have been modified to meet the particular needs of an internal or second-party auditor.

Note, this is not to say your field auditor is ignorant or incompetent, only human.

I hope this helps you keep field auditor comments in perspective.

 

[Howard Atkins]

Back when QS was just getting started I remember our consultant sharing the requirement that all parts we make/sub contract must have at least 1 characteristic that we monitor through SPC. Fast forward a few years, our current registrar brought this up during the TS registration.

I'm at a loss to find the reference in any of the "core tools". Does anyone know where I can find it?

I agree with Wes, there is no specific requirement for SPC on production if there are no Critical Characteristics.
There can be requests from customers to include SPC in which case you have to do this but..

In my opinion there has been in a lot of cases a demand for SPC when it is not relevant because there is a reference to it in the standard.

Despite the mathematicians SPC is not the ultimate control tool and I have even persuaded clients that it is not relevant.


When you say he brought it up, was this a discussion or a non conformity?

 

[Bill Ryan - 2007]

I agree with Wes and Howard.

I once had an SQE "demand" SPC on a cored hole in a casting which we, subsequently, machined to size. I asked him why he wanted the charting and he mumbled something to the effect of needing to monitor a KPC all the way through the process. I then asked him what he expected us to gain from charting this "as cast" hole, when we would not necessarily shut down the die cast machine just because we were "out of control" (read: undersized). To shorten the story, we had to go "higher up" (read: Customer Purchasing Dept.) and the SQE backed off.

SPC is wonderful if there is a purpose to it. To use the discipline "just to use it" is MUDA (waste), unless there is a benefit from the training angle.

JMO,
Bill

 

[Satellite]

When you say he brought it up, was this a discussion or a non conformity?

It was intended for NC but never made it into the write up, maybe just because it was interpretation. I knew I had not seen a requirement for SPC.
Thanks for your guidence

 

[Howard Atkins]

A pleasure
Just keep the questions rolling

We all benefit, it helps us focus our thinking