Reworked components in PPAP production

T

tamster

#11
Stijloor,
Thank you for responding to my question. I didn't read Jim's reply correctly at first and I found that it was exactly what I was looking at in the manual. Thank you very much for your help.
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Stijloor

Staff member
Super Moderator
#13
Stijloor,
Thank you for responding to my question. I didn't read Jim's reply correctly at first and I found that it was exactly what I was looking at in the manual. Thank you very much for your help.
Tammy,

Jim Wynne deserves all credit. I was just wondering about exactly what happened. Putting the issues in the proper context helps to come up with an answer and the appropriate references.

Please come back!

Stijloor.
 

howste

Thaumaturge
Super Moderator
#14
I think you're heading the right direction. The PPAP process is to qualify the actual manufacturing process, using production processes and production tooling. Reworked parts should definitely not be included in this production run.

:topic:
Umang,
I did not ask the question inferring that we were trying to do anything unethical and I do not appreciate the suggestion that we are. I was simply trying to get help from others in this forum on how to explain this to some people who may not have the understanding of a Quality System that you do. I was under the impression that this site was to help others in the Quality field. I was not aware that it was a forum to get attacked for asking for help. I can assure you that the primary reason for my question was to make absolutely sure that we provide a fully conforming product to our customer without doing anything to compromise the quality of it. Please excuse my ignorance.
My impression was that Umang was not directing the comment toward you, but to your colleagues who were asking you to "prove it" to them.
 
U

Umang Vidyarthi

#15
Umang,
I did not ask the question inferring that we were trying to do anything unethical and I do not appreciate the suggestion that we are. I was simply trying to get help from others in this forum on how to explain this to some people who may not have the understanding of a Quality System that you do. I was under the impression that this site was to help others in the Quality field. I was not aware that it was a forum to get attacked for asking for help. I can assure you that the primary reason for my question was to make absolutely sure that we provide a fully conforming product to our customer without doing anything to compromise the quality of it. Please excuse my ignorance.
Hello Tamster,

Apparently you have misconstrued the whole thing. There is no intention on my part to attack or hurt you or anyone for that matter. Since your colleagues were adamant to see in writing, that rework parts can not be sent for PPAP approval, I thought it will be a lot easier to make them understand from a different angle.

I said, the only option to send the reworked components in the PPAP lot was, without a mention of the rework, for which I opined is against ethics. Tell me if I am wrong. Since this is the only way, I said "..which perhaps your colleages want to do (I may be wrong)." Hope you understand the use of PERHAPS here. Furthermore I have said 'I may be Wrong' in drawing the inference. So where is the so called 'attack'?!

The whole content of my discussion was hypothetical. How have you deduced that I am charging you or anyone of unethical practice, since I was only trying to caution you to avoid such a course of action. Please do'nt try to make mountain of a mole hill.

You are most welcome to continue posting on this wonderful forum. Let there be no hard feelings. :agree:

Umang :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
M

mwebs

#16
Ok, I am sure I am in the wrong place or whatever, I'm new to all of this. I have a question about rework. If you are sorting parts because of possible nonconformity or a failed poke yoke. Do you have to have a documents instruction or do you write a temporary one. If temporary, do you give it a experation? Does anyone have an example?:eek::topic:
 
U

Umang Vidyarthi

#17
Ok, I am sure I am in the wrong place or whatever, I'm new to all of this. I have a question about rework. If you are sorting parts because of possible nonconformity or a failed poke yoke. Do you have to have a documents instruction or do you write a temporary one. If temporary, do you give it a experation? Does anyone have an example?:eek::topic:
Wellcome mwebs :bigwave:

You are in the right place with your qyerry. Clause 8.3 deals with Control of Non-Conforming Product. Section 8.3.2 deals with Control of Reworked Product :

"All Reworkable items will be reworked as per the rework instruction by trained persons only, reworked material will be re-inspected & records will be maintained. No visible rework will be done on exterior of the products supplied for service application without prior approval of the customer service part organisation.
All repaired & reworked products are re-inspected as per control plan."

For this you may keep two formats, one for Non conforming products and one for deviation control.

Hope this helps.

Umang :D
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#18
Wellcome mwebs :bigwave:

You are in the right place with your qyerry. Clause 8.3 deals with Control of Non-Conforming Product. Section 8.3.2 deals with Control of Reworked Product :

"All Reworkable items will be reworked as per the rework instruction by trained persons only, reworked material will be re-inspected & records will be maintained. No visible rework will be done on exterior of the products supplied for service application without prior approval of the customer service part organisation.
All repaired & reworked products are re-inspected as per control plan."
Where does this quote come from? 8.3.2 of TS16949:2002 says in full:
Instructions for rework, including re-inspection requirements, shall be accessible to and utilized by the appropriate personnel.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#20
Does each rework instructions have to be controlled?
The extent of control depends on how the instructions will be used. If you provide instructions that you don't expect to use again, they should be devised and approved by someone with sufficient authority and knowledge to be doing that sort of thing. You'll want to keep the instructions as a record in order to be able to demonstrate in the future (if necessary) that 8.3.2 was complied with. You don't need to give the instructions a document number, revision level, etc. if they're not going to be used again.

On the other hand, if you anticipate that the type of rework being done could be done again in the future, you would probably want to control them in your document system, if that's easier than recreating them in the future.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T IATF16949:2016 8.7.1.4 Control of non-applicable reworked product IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
I IATF 16949 Cl. 8.7.1.4 Control of reworked product IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
SATHYABALARAMAN 8.7.1.4 Control of Reworked Product & 8.7.1.5 Control of Repaired Product IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
P IATF Definitions - Reworked product (8.7.1.4) vs Repaired product (8.7.1.5) IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 40
N Reason for determining no adverse effect on reworked product ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 8
S When to give a new Batch Number for a reworked batch ? Nonconformance and Corrective Action 3
S Reworked DOA (Dead On Arrival) Return back to Inventory as New? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 7
Q Reworking and identifying these 'Reworked' PCBAs Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 8
Q Proof of defect - Customer reworked all the defective parts Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 8
I Difference between Repaired and Reworked QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 5
T Device & Accessory, Components in device, or System EU Medical Device Regulations 0
S Reporting REACH - Electronic components distributor REACH and RoHS Conversations 5
R Components to a finished medical device, MDR requirements Other US Medical Device Regulations 1
U Procedure pack components EU Medical Device Regulations 3
T Sterilized components expiration date ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
T Sterilized components shelf life Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 1
C Warehousing two separate components to a finished device while meeting regulations Other US Medical Device Regulations 7
G Dealing with non conformity caused by Supplier Components detected in the production line IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 14
C Shelf life electronic components 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
J Process FMEA Template with examples - Cold and Hot Forged components FMEA and Control Plans 4
F Biocompatibility evaluation for Hardware/Interface Components? Other Medical Device Related Standards 12
K 510K new manufacturer but same components Other US Medical Device Regulations 6
D Using non-conforming components even though the final assembly is conforming? Manufacturing and Related Processes 5
R DHR question: Traceability of components ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 2
R What is meant by Use of COMPONENTS WITH HIGH-INTEGRITY CHARACTERISTICS in ME EQUIPMENT (clause no 4.9) IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 3
J Medical Device Components US to EU commercialization EU Medical Device Regulations 7
B IATF 16949 - Is a Deviation required for sample components in a prototype build? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 13
A Components of a medical device - Hardware robotic hand EU Medical Device Regulations 3
D IMDS for Like Components (Interior Plastic, Leather/vinyl Armrest, etc.)other than Color APQP and PPAP 1
JoshuaFroud Serial numbers and labelling when sharing device components ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
A How to deal with changed shared components in 510k 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
Nicole Desouza Plastic Extrusion of Medical Device Components - No ISO or AS 9100 Certifications Other Medical Device and Orthopedic Related Topics 7
Q Handling Off-the-Shelf Components 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 1
I PPAP Assembly and Components Manufacturing and Related Processes 3
D CB Certificate - Distributor for a product with electrical components CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 4
K Selling Medical Device Components to US hospitals and doctors US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 4
S Need Assistance in Visual Inspection - Tiny electronic components AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 11
R FDA - How to discontinue/obsolete medical devices that share sub-components with others that will still be distributed Other US Medical Device Regulations 5
F Mig Welded Components - IMDS International Material Data System RoHS, REACH, ELV, IMDS and Restricted Substances 1
D Software Validation - Contract manufacturer of Components (PCBA's) Qualification and Validation (including 21 CFR Part 11) 7
G Audit finding - Components being transferred inter-plant Internal Auditing 3
J Referencing Medical Device in FDA records - Package contains several other components Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 1
K Article 23 (Parts and components) - Economic Operator EU Medical Device Regulations 1
S How are Medical Device Components and Subassemblies defined? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
H Classification of a Class IIb Medical Device with 3 Components CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 1
P REACH - A few of the hundreds components in my product no longer meet requirement REACH and RoHS Conversations 2
C Medical device file for components such as adhesives, gaskets, films, etc. ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 13
S Do suppliers of prototyping components need to undergo supplier qualification? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
Q Is it acceptable to mix components from two different lots into an assembly? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
M CE / FCC Compliance for components + final product CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 2

Similar threads

Top Bottom