Supplier Denying FOD Nonconformance

[Jen Kirley]

Okay, it sounds like a PVP is a good next step, since the requirements are not 100% fulfilled at the current inspection step. It is disappointing, though not really surprising to hear the supplier is trying to duck the cleanliness responsibility. Still, the source of the contaminants yet to be identified this is still in investigation.

Can you do a supplier visit to have a look for yourself?

 

[John Predmore]

What I gained from your situation is the product is source inspected before packaging and then the sealed cartons sit, typically for weeks, before shipped. It has not been determined how or when FOD is introduced to the parts. [In case any reader doesn't know the acronym, FOD is Foreign Object Debris.]

One measure that could provide answers is to conduct what we used to call a Dock Audit. Randomly sample a final-goods package out of the warehouse, open the box and inspect the condition of its contents, the morning before the product is shipped. This special one-time audit is conducted by an internal auditor or senior quality staff of the supplier, or it could be a customer auditor, or it could be done by a third-party auditor depending on criticality and what your budget might be. After the auditor documents the contents and condition, the contents are re-packaged by operations workers and sealed. Then, if desired, the same package can be audited and compared upon arrival and opened on the customer's dock.

 

[Johnnymo62]

What I gained from your situation is the product is source inspected before packaging and then the sealed cartons sit, typically for weeks, before shipped. It has not been determined how or when FOD is introduced to the parts. [In case any reader doesn't know the acronym, FOD is Foreign Object Debris.]

One measure that could provide answers is to conduct what we used to call a Dock Audit. Randomly sample a final-goods package out of the warehouse, open the box and inspect the condition of its contents, the morning before the product is shipped. This special one-time audit is conducted by an internal auditor or senior quality staff of the supplier, or it could be a customer auditor, or it could be done by a third-party auditor depending on criticality and what your budget might be. After the auditor documents the contents and condition, the contents are re-packaged by operations workers and sealed. Then, if desired, the same package can be audited and compared upon arrival and opened on the customer's dock.

Back in the day, on an aircraft carrier the debris causes Foreign Object Damage to aircraft. Thus anything that may cause damage was FOD.

I think that your Source Inspector should be only inspecting parts by opening packages and then checking the parts coming out.

 

[optomist1]

A persistent FOD problem would seem to indicate other larger problems, escalate....

 

[magneto259]

So what is on the Parts? How do you know your guys aren’t misleading vs the supplier? Heck, if you have a guy there, why not have him get involved And follow the parts further? You may have to work up the chain if they QM isn’t responsive.

It is a gritty black dust. To me it looks like a combination of dust and possible metal grindings. The source inspector said he will keep an eye out. They are not a high volume part. We build maybe 20 of these systems a year.

 

[magneto259]

Okay, it sounds like a PVP is a good next step, since the requirements are not 100% fulfilled at the current inspection step. It is disappointing, though not really surprising to hear the supplier is trying to duck the cleanliness responsibility. Still, the source of the contaminants yet to be identified this is still in investigation.

Can you do a supplier visit to have a look for yourself?

I can’t as they are on the other side of the states and it’s not in my job description or I definitely would.

 

[magneto259]

Well I had a candid call with the owner earlier. He doesn’t want a hit on his score card so I am going to work with him on it as long as he puts a plan together to look at the parts before leaving the building. I told him I’ll need objective evidence and an email send to me to file and repeat issues will definitely generate a corrective action. I appreciate all the helpful responses. This is a great resource for sure. Thanks everyone.

 

[Golfman25]

It is a gritty black dust. To me it looks like a combination of dust and possible metal grindings. The source inspector said he will keep an eye out. They are not a high volume part. We build maybe 20 of these systems a year.

Please tell me you use multiple parts per system. 20 pcs per yer — clean them and move forward. My guess is the QM may have much larger issues to address. The owner is going to look into it, but what if he doesn’t find anything? Dust and metal fines don’t just fall out of the air. Are you sure about your inspector?

 

[magneto259]

Please tell me you use multiple parts per system. 20 pcs per yer — clean them and move forward. My guess is the QM may have much larger issues to address. The owner is going to look into it, but what if he doesn’t find anything? Dust and metal fines don’t just fall out of the air. Are you sure about your inspector?

This is the base housing for an extremely complex and expensive system. We get quite a few parts from this supplier across multiple platforms. To me if they agreed to the PO requirements for FOD free then they should be held accountable. We have had multiple issues across multiple parts over the years. Anywhere from tolerance issues to part marking. When we issue a corrective action we insist it’s applied systemically across all parts. I totally agree they don’t fall out of the sky but I can’t get out to their site. As far as the inspector, at this point, all I can do it take him at his word.

 

[Golfman25]

This is the base housing for an extremely complex and expensive system. We get quite a few parts from this supplier across multiple platforms. To me if they agreed to the PO requirements for FOD free then they should be held accountable. We have had multiple issues across multiple parts over the years. Anywhere from tolerance issues to part marking. When we issue a corrective action we insist it’s applied systemically across all parts. I totally agree they don’t fall out of the sky but I can’t get out to their site. As far as the inspector, at this point, all I can do it take him at his word.

Let us know how it turns out.