A
amanbhai
Why ISO 9001:2000 does not emphasize on statistical techniques like ISO 9001:1994?
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
C
CHETAN
Qms Consultant-india
Data Analysis Is Reqd. Due To Different Size Of Organisation & Different Processes Involved, The Genric Standard Can Not Insist For Sqc Techniques.at Times The Sample Size Is Small & There Is No Possibility Of Determining The Variables. Also At Times The Acceptance Norms By Specification Is Very Large & Leads To Cp/cpk>2 To 3 Even To Start With.
C.b.kapadia
Data Analysis Is Reqd. Due To Different Size Of Organisation & Different Processes Involved, The Genric Standard Can Not Insist For Sqc Techniques.at Times The Sample Size Is Small & There Is No Possibility Of Determining The Variables. Also At Times The Acceptance Norms By Specification Is Very Large & Leads To Cp/cpk>2 To 3 Even To Start With.
C.b.kapadia
amanbhai said:
What do you mean?
My personal preference is the analysis of data that allows us to choose the analytical tools that will benefit us and our management system.
Element 20 really focused only on process capability and product characteristics. Clause 8.4 broadens the scope to include the management system within the analysis by looking at trends beyond those dealing with production processes and product.
Claes Gefvenberg
Admin
Not to mention the fact that lots of people regarded the old element 20 as a requirement for SPC Full stop. The fact that there are other statistical techniques available was largely ignored. I even heard about companies getting dinged by auditors for not having SPC in spite of being able to show results from other techniques.RCBeyette said:
/Claes
E
engjane
Not doing SPC
Heres a thread close to my heart rigth now.....
We're having debates with the MD about SPC....he wants to know why we do it and if we can stop doing it?
Makes me say EEEEeeeeekkk!
OK - I know we have a choice and can do what we like to control variation. I know that we are not being held over a barrel to chart our process but as the removal of SPC moves us into unknown territory, I am nervous.
Maybe someone can talk to me about how they control variation (its an extrustion process) withouth using SPC?
That would be interesting!
Heres a thread close to my heart rigth now.....
We're having debates with the MD about SPC....he wants to know why we do it and if we can stop doing it?
Makes me say EEEEeeeeekkk!
OK - I know we have a choice and can do what we like to control variation. I know that we are not being held over a barrel to chart our process but as the removal of SPC moves us into unknown territory, I am nervous.
Maybe someone can talk to me about how they control variation (its an extrustion process) withouth using SPC?
That would be interesting!
What do you mean by "MD"? Are you arguing with your doctor about thisengjane said:
If you have an efficacious SPC program, you should have no trouble explaining why you do it and why you shouldn't stop. You have the data.
You can't control variation without understanding it, and you can't understand it without expressing it in numbers. "SPC" is a broad term that describes having a mathematically sound understanding of process variation, and using that understanding to make predictions about process output. Those predictions can be used as the justification for improvement efforts, or you can just wait for something bad to happen and then get out the fire extinguishers. I'm sure you understand this, hence your trepidation. Use your data to make your point--that's why you have it.
R
ralphsulser
Decisions are better if made using data. Identify it, trend it, and quantify it.
Put it into a form easily understood, attach value such as $$$ or related to $$$ that top management understands the impact.
I have used SPC to quantify and justify capitol appropriations of excess equipment variability and effect on product capability, and acceptability in the market. Apparently your MD needs some education of the benefits that can be available analyzing data.
Put it into a form easily understood, attach value such as $$$ or related to $$$ that top management understands the impact.
I have used SPC to quantify and justify capitol appropriations of excess equipment variability and effect on product capability, and acceptability in the market. Apparently your MD needs some education of the benefits that can be available analyzing data.
engjane said:
Engjane
MD = Managing Director in the UK?
If you are an automotive supplier you MUST do SPC.
If you are not, you should WANT to do SPC anyway.
Kind of scary to have such conversations with senior leadership people who are paid serious bucks and don't seem connected to the state of the art isn't it?
SPC is 65 years old now - I'm keen to see what is easier or better than SPC...heck I'll adopt it in a minute.
Whoa...just re-read your post!
Maybe extrusion can be controlled with feedback controllers on the machine itself. No need for SPC is there is a mechanical or electronic control.
It is not worth run SPC charts to try to control room temeprature when a $15 mercury thermostat can do an adequate job all by itself.
So perhaps your MD asked a perceptive and leading question....
Which is he, smart or not?
E
engjane
Caster said:Engjane
MD = Managing Director in the UK??
Thank you for clarifying....If I type PM, all I think about it preventive maintenance so I used MD. Im still learning how to talk North American.
Caster said:
Valid point - thank you again for that ray of light
I darent answer that one....Caster said:
I think, after all the conversations this week, he is OK to stay with SPC but he was just trying to probe for root causes of why we do things.....which is a clever way to be (apart from scaring the living daylights out of me). At this moment in time, we are not technological enough to have feedback control so we have to use another form of control.
And I agree, SPC is the accepted way, the same as breathing air is the accepted way to stay alive.....
Similar threads
