Supplier Measurements vs. Incoming (Receiving) Measurements

F

freddie1997

#1
I am having a long discussion with one of my suppliers. When we measure the incoming material (glass) we find it out of specification. They have provided data showing that it was in specification when they measured it on their equipment. They have also provided the calibration data for their equipment. As I see this it is the measurment bias between the 2 systems. I have requested that they move away from the edge of the spec so that we stop these discussions. Even as they say they understand they also feel that it would cost them to do this as in their eyes they are scrapping "good" product. I am looking for another way to "fix" this issue and would appreciate any suggestions.

Byron
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#2
Re: Supplier measurements versus incoming Measurements

What happens to the material when it's found out of spec? Is it used anyway? One good way to end this sort of discussion is to review and change the specifications if the specifications don't reflect what's actually needed.

What "two systems" are you referring to with regard to measurement bias?
 
F

freddie1997

#3
Re: Supplier measurements versus incoming Measurements

So far the material has always been used with a lot of grumbling from the internal customers. I have suggested that the specification change and have always gotten the same response that this at least attempt's to keep the supplier "honest".

the systems I am talking about would be the suppliers measuremnt equipment vs ours. Each is calibrated to the same standard but there is a difference between the two systems that account for the difference in measurments.
 

bobdoering

Stop X-bar/R Madness!!
Trusted Information Resource
#4
Re: Supplier measurements versus incoming Measurements

There are a couple things I would do to better quantify the measurement system problem.

First, do gage R&Rs on the two systems. You can even use the same samples in both locations. Take a look at the resulting variation. Be sure to specify the location that each part is measured to reduce the contribution of the within variation of the part itself. That is a different issue.

Look at the process and when the parts are measured. What is the sampling technique? Is it too small to capture the entire distribution? What is the distribution of the size? Are they doing a random measurement at the end of the process? Are they doing sequential part collection of data, such as every 25th part or every hour? How are you sampling the lot?

Is the material stable? Is there any change over time from when the part is made to when the part is received (e.g. shrinkage or stress relieving)?

Bookend the process- try some of the parts just oversize and just undersize and see if they do affect the part performance - short term and long term.
 

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#5
Re: Supplier measurements versus incoming Measurements

So far the material has always been used with a lot of grumbling from the internal customers. I have suggested that the specification change and have always gotten the same response that this at least attempt's to keep the supplier "honest".
If I had a buck for every time I heard an engineer say that the specs were overly tight just to keep the supplier honest, I'd be laying on a beach somewhere right now. If the specs are wrong they should be changed.

the systems I am talking about would be the suppliers measurement equipment vs ours. Each is calibrated to the same standard but there is a difference between the two systems that account for the difference in measurements.
Bob has given good advice re: GR&R, but if you want to get the supplier's attention (and there's no hope for a design change) stop accepting the out-of-tolerance parts. It will encourage them in the direction of verifying measurement systems if nothing else.
 
M

Markaich

#6
Re: Supplier measurements versus incoming Measurements

Are we clear what the manufacturing process capability is? Have Cp and Cpk been established?

If the Cp is good, but Cpk not as good, then there is a case for moving (rather than slackening) the spec.

If Cp is not so good, then a look at the process to try and reduce its variability, as a joint project, may be an idea. If there is no way to reduce that variability then to be honest, the engineers need to face reality...either than or find a new supplier that has a suitably capable (and probably more expensive) process.

Hope this helps
M
 
J
#7
Re: Supplier measurements versus incoming Measurements

So far the material has always been used with a lot of grumbling from the internal customers. I have suggested that the specification change and have always gotten the same response that this at least attempt's to keep the supplier "honest".
The bolded section above caught my eye immediately...What are the internal customers grumbling about? The hold up at receiving inspection? Are the marginal parts more difficult to use? Are their higher failure rates internally due to marginal parts?
Beyond this - I agree with Jim about the specs. Every time you accept marginal parts you in effect "loosen" the specs regardless of what the engineers say. I've been in manufacturing and I can tell you truly that, as soon as a machinist finds out that engineering buys off on an out of spec condition, that becomes the new spec...I have no doubt but that your supplier knows this and is reacting the same way...

the systems I am talking about would be the suppliers measurement equipment vs ours. Each is calibrated to the same standard but there is a difference between the two systems that account for the difference in measurements.
Lot's of good advice so far on this.
It might even require a visit between you and the supplier to work out the differences.

Peace
James
 

Big Jim

Super Moderator
#8
Re: Supplier measurements versus incoming Measurements

The bolded section above caught my eye immediately...What are the internal customers grumbling about? The hold up at receiving inspection? Are the marginal parts more difficult to use? Are their higher failure rates internally due to marginal parts?
Beyond this - I agree with Jim about the specs. Every time you accept marginal parts you in effect "loosen" the specs regardless of what the engineers say. I've been in manufacturing and I can tell you truly that, as soon as a machinist finds out that engineering buys off on an out of spec condition, that becomes the new spec...I have no doubt but that your supplier knows this and is reacting the same way...


Lot's of good advice so far on this.
It might even require a visit between you and the supplier to work out the differences.

Peace
James
This is what caught my attention too.

You should NEVER need to put up with reworking material that doesn't meet specification. Are they a sole source supplier? If not, let them know that they either need to start paying attention to your needs or you will find someone that will. If they are a sole source supplier, it becomes a bit more difficult, but they need to know that their inattention is costing you.

If you let them know what your needs and concerns are, and they are not willing to change, it is time to consider the alternatives, and their ALWAYS are alternatives.
 
J

Jason PCSwitches

#9
Is the issue severe enough that it warrants a visit to the supplier?

If so you may want to look into that. You could take a sample of the product you received & found out of spec. that they certified in spec., compare techniques together and see if you have a gap.

If it isn't worth the time & effort, having your eng. department review the product and determining if the tolerance can be opened would be worth it. They could also review the curing aspects of the material to determine if any changes occur post production that could alter the preliminary results; perhaps your supplier measures to quickly, not allowing the total time needed for the material to cure.

Nonetheless, if it's out of spec., it's out of spec. Somethings gotta give.
Apparently you are able to use it anyhow, the eng. review may be the best way to go - but I know that's not as easy as it sounds!
 
F

freddie1997

#10
Thanks for the suggestions. I have been atempting to get the supplier to move away from the spec limits closer to target and it would eliminate the conflict. But as some have said as long as we accept it the specs are then become just suggestions or wishes.
Some facts about the product. It is a product that we have asked the supplier for tighter limits then what they normally produce and we are not willing to pay more for the product, just another part of the issue. Most of the time if not all of the time, It is a product that they could sell to our competitors and never have an issue. We have tighter specs then are cover by the industry (ASTM) because we believe it seperates us from the competition. Again Thanks for all the replies.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
S Is it alright to let the supplier do all measurements and inspection? Quality Manager and Management Related Issues 10
J Supplier not responding to PPAP request APQP and PPAP 5
D Supplier audit Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 2
lanley liao Does all of the suppliers need to integrated into the supplier list qualified of the company? Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 2
S Distinction between a critical supplier and a Virtual manufacturer EU Medical Device Regulations 2
R AS9102 FAI Change in Material / Process Supplier AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 4
John Broomfield Five ways to botch your supplier management program Misc. Quality Assurance and Business Systems Related Topics 7
C Supplier survey - 200 to 250 duppliers Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 3
J Where is the definition of a critical supplier? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
U Approved Vendor (supplier) List Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 8
M Supplier requirements - Major supplier is a Non-Profit registered with ICCBBA (FDA UDI) Supply Chain Security Management Systems 12
P Training department ideas and development for automotive supplier Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 6
B Software service provider as critical supplier ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
T AS9100D Clause 10.2.1g Supplier Corrective Action for each and every nonconformity? AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 3
S Supplier protocol for the Quality Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 6
A API Spec Q1 Purchasing Process - Supplier Reevaluation based on Supplier Risks 5.6.1.4 Oil and Gas Industry Standards and Regulations 17
D Approved supplier list - Distributors question ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
G Supplier delivered recent PPAP, should he deliver yearly layout inspection? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 4
E ISO 13485 QMS certification as a Supplier ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 8
G Supplier doesn't share drawings IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 15
S Use of raw materials by two supplier CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 2
D Are Supplier Quality Agreements Quality Records ? Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 9
G Dealing with non conformity caused by Supplier Components detected in the production line IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 14
G Supplier doesn't accept the complaints Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 20
K New supplier audit as per V3.1 by French Automotive OEM General Auditing Discussions 2
A ASL requirement when the supplier is certified for ISO 13485 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
S Supplier Management ISO 13485: 2016- Which supplier needs to fill in a self assessment form? ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
D Approved supplier list for R&D ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
M SemaTech SSQA Standardized Supplier Quality Assessment - my favorite tool ever Manufacturing and Related Processes 1
D Supplier Quality level category help - high level ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
J Supplier Controlled Shipping (GM CS1) Condition Manufacturing and Related Processes 3
L Supplier within the Organization ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 5
D Supplier Quality - How to classify a supplier level Medical Device and FDA Regulations and Standards News 10
P Understanding DFMEA and PFMEA - Supplier Related IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 21
S Can assembly manufacturing sub-supplier be certified IATF 16949? IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 6
M How Supplier Capacity check is done by competitors Manufacturing and Related Processes 0
C One Time Service Supplier - Temperature and Humidity Testing Service ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
M Supplier Audits - Stop Wasting Everyone's Time! General Auditing Discussions 15
G Supplier management when the supplier is your headquarter IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 3
V Supplier wants to perform pre-qualifications prior to every run instead of locking in parameters. Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 7
D Class 3 Device - Change of supplier of material Canada Medical Device Regulations 6
D List A IVD - Change to material supplier EU Medical Device Regulations 3
J Minimum Supplier Certifications for Food Supplements Food Safety - ISO 22000, HACCP (21 CFR 120) 4
R Supplier/Vendor Surveys (360) Supplier Quality Assurance and other Supplier Issues 1
was named killer AS9100 Supplier Approval Requirements AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 10
B AS9100 8.4.1 Supplier Selection/Evaluation criteria and reevaluations AS9100, IAQG, NADCAP and Aerospace related Standards and Requirements 13
J Sub-supplier change from manual to automated process - same specs - Report to FDA? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 2
M Supplier Audit Report - Template for second party audit wanted Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 1
T Difference between a subcontractor and a supplier ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 21
Ed Panek Corona Virus impact on Supplier Audits and Received Parts ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 4

Similar threads

Top Bottom