Superiority of Drawing vs First Samples

P

pecan08

#1
Hello everybody,

I work in a company that produce machined parts for various types of industry (automotive as well).

We bumped into following problem: Our new customer placed an order for part samples . Drawing was clear, all dimensions and specifications marked. GT according to ISO 2768mk. So we produced first samples. They were accepted and we started batch production for about 1000 pcs. Then the new types of parts were ordered again with sampling. Sampling approved, production started. This has repeated for about 5 types of different parts.

Now about a week ago (after about a half year of non problematic business) the claim arrived, that one of the part's dimension does not comply with the drawing. We found out - that there is reference in every drawing to customer's norm which we have not received. We clearly made a mistake by not noticing this reference which closely specified the hole tolerances (in this case H13).

So my questions are:
1) which side is in the right
2) how can we advocate ourselves
3) what is superior in general (drawing vs approved parts).

Thank you very much for your comments
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Elsmar Forum Sponsor
T

t.PoN

#2
that is a bit of dilemma

Now it all goes to the contract and ordering process.

what does your contract says about finalizing the delivery process? is their an acknowledgment that the parts were inspected and approved? if yes, then that would finalize the purchasing order. unless their is a warranty.

now to simplify things: the first order was based on drawings and it was closed. there is no problem here.

Now, the last order is a new order.
was the last order was based on drawing, or based on provided samples?
if it was based on drawing, then you have to correct it. if it was based on samples, then you will be expected to manufacture them based on the provided samples not the drawings.

You should state in your contract how the delivery is closed. how is the samples taken and what is limit of your insurance if the samples was rejected.

But my advice, handle it as a complaint, make an investigation. and don't lose your customer based on one order
 
P

pecan08

#3
Thank you t.pon for your answer.

what does your contract says about finalizing the delivery process? is their an acknowledgment that the parts were inspected and approved? if yes, then that would finalize the purchasing order. unless their is a warranty.
There are no additional statements in the contract - just order which specifies amount of parts, deadline and type of transport and - if necessary - special packing condidtions.
Yes, parts (first samples as well as batch production) were approved, no claims whatsoever. There is no agreement regarding warranty. Every order so far was finished, paid and considered closed. Just now came the claim regarding non-compliance to customer's specific norm defined in the drawing. When we produced samples we filled customer's predefined dimension report and tolerances there were according to GT 2768-mk and not his special norm - obviously he has chaos in processes as well :)

I think that main issue here is this:
was the last order was based on drawing, or based on provided samples
This is the real question which we have not secured by any kind of agreement.

So what am I asking in the discussion is: Are there some general rules or codex which states that drawing is superior to samples approval or it is vice versa. But I already anticipate the answer - there is not :)
 
#4
The answer here is really very clear. Your company screwed up. Take responsibility for your actions and figure out what you need to do to please the customer. If the parts are truly usable, try to negotiate a settlement that allows the existing parts to be accepted while you ensure future parts meet the full specification.

Where did you screw up? You screwed up by agreeing to do something when you did not account for all the specifications. The requirement was there, you just missed it.

The only thing you can hang your hat on is that they accepted the samples, and you should remind them of that as you negotiate, but when you get right down to it, you failed to "build to print".

Taking accountability for your actions is what separates the men from the boys. Quit whining and take care of it. You will have a better relationship with your customer if you do.
 
P

pecan08

#5
Big Jim, thank you for answer. Our company and I don't have the problem to accept our fault. Although maybe my post does not seem like that, it is our intention to please the customer and to find win-win solution for both parties also considering future cooperation in this case.

Some of the parts will definitely be usable or at least reworkable. However this will be the subject of negotiation.

Anyway I just wanted to know the opinion of more experienced which I received and I am glad for that.
 

Ron Rompen

Trusted Information Resource
#6
Take this as a learning experience, and move on. You have already indicated that you and your company are going to do the right thing.

In my experience, the drawing supplied by the customer is king; everything else is to support that drawing.

One key thing to do when you receive a new revised drawing, is to verify EVERYTHING on it, not just the items noted in the change block. Customers can be careless (or sneaky) and include changes that they forgot to mention, which can come back and bite you in the end.
 

TPMB4

Quite Involved in Discussions
#7
At the end of the day the customer will only see what they want to. They probably missed that this one characteristic of feature of the drawing was missed previously. Having been caught out they are bringing it up now, probably some inspector in the customer has raised it irrespective of whether the part is fit for use. I personally think better to try and negotiate the best way round this for both. Perhaps a concession where the missing element is not critical or re-working where it is. If re-working is not possible and scrapping the only option is there still some way to cooperate? If nothing else what is the scrap value??

Hierarchy of outcomes. Somewhere at the bottom is arguing the toss and losing a customer. Near the top is a concession in this instance and changes to your production to accommodate specific requirement in future. That last option is the best all round.

I don't expect there will ever be a defined standard that defines what you want, namely that a physical sample of the work overrides drawings. Production is geared towards making the part to drawings, to all of the drawing with no exceptions unless expressly agreed via contractual agreements or a waiver/concession. I am relatively new to this Quality role but that seems to be the way I have experienced even before my conversion to Quality.
 
T

t.PoN

#8
So what am I asking in the discussion is: Are there some general rules or codex which states that drawing is superior to samples approval or it is vice versa. But I already anticipate the answer - there is not :)
No, you will not find a general rule or codex

The issue here is the following:
You can't provide what they need exactly, there should be tolerances and a method to evaluate these tolerances for acceptance/rejecting.

unfortunately it seems that it is not stated.

Your argument, The customer asked something and you said, well: here is what i can do. is it ok? if they said Yes. then its done thats the order. if they didn't explicitly said "yes". its up to the drawing.

remember, the last order is a new order. saying yes for the first order will not count

the question is: why did they reject the last samples? it worked for the last six orders! you should ask them this and try to work something out
 

Golfman25

Trusted Information Resource
#9
The answer here is really very clear. Your company screwed up. Take responsibility for your actions and figure out what you need to do to please the customer. If the parts are truly usable, try to negotiate a settlement that allows the existing parts to be accepted while you ensure future parts meet the full specification.

Where did you screw up? You screwed up by agreeing to do something when you did not account for all the specifications. The requirement was there, you just missed it.

The only thing you can hang your hat on is that they accepted the samples, and you should remind them of that as you negotiate, but when you get right down to it, you failed to "build to print".

Taking accountability for your actions is what separates the men from the boys. Quit whining and take care of it. You will have a better relationship with your customer if you do.
If you had an approved dimensional layout when you submitted samples for approval, your customer missed the "secret" tolerance too. I would stand on that. Otherwise, what is the point of the layout.

You need to figure out whether this is a just a print issue or a functional issue. Many times the quality guys will "reject" a part based on the drawing even though there is no functional defect. If the hole tolerance was really that important, then it should have been called out. At the end of the day, do what you can to make it right. But don't take any **** from the customer. If they are a customer worth having, they will work with you. Good luck.
 

silver ring

Involved In Discussions
#10
Hi,

Here are my answers

1) Your customer is right (as always)
2) you can say that your customer should have send you the norm
3) Drawing is superior, as it represents the customer requirement The Customer should be informed about the deviations. They may or may not accept these deviations.

Cheers
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Drawing title block - approval history Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 1
S Defining special characteristics beyond customer drawing FMEA and Control Plans 11
V Would the customer drawing change necessitate re-PPAP of the Product? APQP and PPAP 3
S Drawing Requirements for Catalog Items (Class II Medical Device) US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 3
M Customer Dimensions on Internal Drawing, all of them? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
8 Drawing Feature Question Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 8
H Prodigit DC Electronic Load - Drawing current but showed 0 on the screeen Manufacturing and Related Processes 0
J Drawing Example Request: Inspection Section Plane of Aluminum Casting Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 1
T CSE 5.01 reference on drawing Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
N Drawing tolerance vs. Measurement device General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 7
2 GDT of datums - Putting Datum C on a drawing Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 6
D Partial FAI - AS9102 - One single drawing has 10 part numbers AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 5
A Help with Drawing Review - ISO 9001:2015 ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 6
V Manufacturing without a Formal Drawing ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 12
V ISO 9001: 2015 Production drawing Control ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
D Engineering Drawing Review and Approval Requirements ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 10
C Thread Tolerance - Can I use a 3A Ring on a part that the drawing calls out for a 2A? Manufacturing and Related Processes 5
D GD&T Drawing Question - I have a drawing and it makes no sense to me whatsoever Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 7
Prashant G AS9100 Requirement - Verification of characteristics results with drawing requirements AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 13
Q How do you interpret this dimension in my drawing Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
D Drawing (print) does not specify restrained or free state Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
A Drawing Issue with Supplier - xb file did not match that of the pdf drawing Nonconformance and Corrective Action 4
M Best Practice for setting tolerances on a Drawing Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 14
M PCBA Drawing Best Practices IPC Class 3 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 1
G Decimal places on Drawing (Print) Callouts Measurement Uncertainty (MU) 7
M True Position / GD&T - I'm staring at this drawing and I'm lost Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 4
I Engineering Drawing = Record or Document? Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 8
B Profile of a Surface Callout on this Drawing General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 4
J Is there a specification that provides directions on Drawing Revision Changes Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 5
R Location Interpretation on Drawing - Hole to Hole? Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 7
I Delta FAIR due to a Drawing Change AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
J Drawing Callout - Arrow pointing to an inner edge where there is a radius Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
M What is 'Loft' which is used in Boeing company to express 1/1 scale 2D drawing Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
V Dimension marked with "frame" on 2D drawing Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 5
A Measurement of a Radius on Drawing Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 4
K Accounting for Drawing Notes in PPAP APQP and PPAP 1
I Drawing standard (VDA) - Drawings in 3 different status VDA Standards - Germany's Automotive Standards 4
T Engineering Drawings - Once a customer has signed off on an engineering drawing ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 3
C Use of white-out or obliterating a portion of a controlled drawing or document Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 7
L How to document use of wrong engineering drawing Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 22
K Tolerances on Drawing Title Block Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 3
M 4 Datums Referenced in a Print (Drawing) Feature Control Frame Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 5
J Help with a Metric Drawing Callout Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 3
T How to interprete .600/.625 depth in the drawing callout ? Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 2
Q AS9102 Handwritten Revisions on Ballooned Drawing AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 20
alonFAI Mechanical Drawing Version Change Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 8
T AS9102 FAIR - Customer Drawing Revision Change AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
D ISO 8062-3 Angle Tolerances - The drawing states ISO 8062-3 DCTG 11 Other ISO and International Standards and European Regulations 1
R FAI Prototype Drawing Revision Levels AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4
D Drawing Revision Control Software Document Control Systems, Procedures, Forms and Templates 3

Similar threads

Top Bottom