doug, design is not in the scope of our QMS. even when somebody calls looking for 500 to 1000 widgets that will go into this and space it this far and we basically do design it, we simply send the guy the drawing and carefully explain that for two reasons the design is his responsibility. 1. ISO 9001:2000 scope excluding design, 2. Liability for any product damage or safety.
Be careful who you do this for though. Some people will never never never understand anything because they're unreasonable and dumb. Still, if you have to deal with that, you have explained that they are responsible for the design of the product and they've signed the drawing I cooked up.
WALLACE, most of our customers are very sophisticated and their drawings are CAD based and spec'd and toleranced very very well. I have been learning alot just from the designs and GD&T I see come across my desk.
Wes, I have become very interested in the following concern:
I am writing a new FMEA / Control Plan for a pair of very simple parts to involve and satisfy a CQE quality manager for a TS-16949 organization. We had product nonconformity on both parts because our quality system is not flexing its muscle yet.
What I'm doing now is flexing the muscle of the process and procedures for corrective action and preventive action all the way.
To get to the point, what this means is my FMEA is three pages long for each part. It also resulted in a tooling & machinery FMEA done on a tool. With the information contained in the FMEAs and Control Plans and Corrective Actions, someone knowledgeable could easily determine what machines and tooling we are using.
Originally I was warned by a man much wiser that if they know these things they might start trying to manage the way we work. After reading your warnings, I can see that these documents might lead to something worse.
How do I avoid shooting myself in the foot here?
Regards, Erik
Be careful who you do this for though. Some people will never never never understand anything because they're unreasonable and dumb. Still, if you have to deal with that, you have explained that they are responsible for the design of the product and they've signed the drawing I cooked up.
WALLACE, most of our customers are very sophisticated and their drawings are CAD based and spec'd and toleranced very very well. I have been learning alot just from the designs and GD&T I see come across my desk.
Wes, I have become very interested in the following concern:
Wes Bucey said:
- All these intermediary characteristics and the drawings which represent them are strictly in-house and often NOT shared with a customer, but retained as "trade secrets" to prevent them from falling into the hands of competitors who may take the fruit of your process design and undercut your price (customers have been known to be active agents in such piracy)
What I'm doing now is flexing the muscle of the process and procedures for corrective action and preventive action all the way.
To get to the point, what this means is my FMEA is three pages long for each part. It also resulted in a tooling & machinery FMEA done on a tool. With the information contained in the FMEAs and Control Plans and Corrective Actions, someone knowledgeable could easily determine what machines and tooling we are using.
Originally I was warned by a man much wiser that if they know these things they might start trying to manage the way we work. After reading your warnings, I can see that these documents might lead to something worse.
How do I avoid shooting myself in the foot here?
Regards, Erik
BTW - a 3 page