The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line

The New Elsmar Cove Forums   The New Elsmar Cove ForumsThe Elsmar Cove Forums
  Tooling and Equipment Suppliers
  tracking sub-assemblies

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   tracking sub-assemblies
Forum Contributor

Posts: 22
From:Rochester Hills, MI
Registered: Feb 2000

posted 26 July 2001 12:48 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for louie     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
How does everyone track "sub-assemblies"?

We are a TE company - manufacturing specialized machines - we build "units" (sub-assemblies" which are then "assembled" into the "final unit" / "machine". Our new Plant Manager does not feel we need to track sub-assemblies. HELP !

1. How do you define "sub-assemblies"
2. How do you track them through the assembly process.


IP: Logged

Forum Contributor

Posts: 33
From:Southfield, MI
Registered: May 2001

posted 27 July 2001 08:37 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for tomvehoski   Click Here to Email tomvehoski     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
A job router/traveler/shop order (whatever your term may be) is usually sufficient. If the router has a reference to the finished machine, project no, etc. - this would be good for tracking.


IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4367
From:West Chester, OH, USA

posted 30 July 2001 12:46 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I'm not sure how important traceability of sub-assemblies in the T&E environment. I have not done a QS-TE and am not up on the TE Suppliment.

I just finished an ISO 9K2K registration audit of an equipment manufacturer. To them, tracking sub-assemblies was not important. They didn't do it. The question was, what value? For example, if a controller goes bad they had no way to 'easily' determine what controller went into what machine (box sealers).

What is a sub-assembly? Well, it depends. Just as you can use the word 'system' and say that a system is made up of sub-systems which is made up of smaller sub-systems (or, in the case of business systems, processes). At some point you sorta get lost. This is because of the perspective issue. How you define something depends upon how and from where you are observing.

At the 'top' level, there is the turn-key who brings a number machines together into a line. Bump down a level and there is the equipment manufacturer. At that level the product is a machine - a 'black box' system. The next level would be things like controllers and action elements ('immediate sub-systems). They in turn are made up of smaller sub-systems. Sooner or later you reach the component level.

All this said, you have to determine within your company what you internally consider 'sub-assemblies'. For some products it's clearer than others. In the ISO example above, the company (and again, this is 'equipment', not tooling) assembles their controllers, among other 'sub-assemblies'. They do not track components to lots per se. That is, they could not tell you what components from what lot went into what controller. In a round about way one could 'approximate' what went into what by date, receivers and such but it would be a good guess, not a sure thing. The important part here is that it didn't matter. If you reviewed their nonconformance system there was no evidence that component failures were a problem. Controller failure was rare until you reached a certain age - like 4 or 5 years or something like that. Even after that, failure rates were very low.

The tracking of the controllers (sub-assemblies) was by a traveler. They used Mapix (an ERP software 'solution') for orders and part of the output was the 'traveler' for the sub-assembly. When it hit the 'main machine' for installation, all that paperwork (completed traveler, etc) went into the main folder for the machine.

I probably agree with your plant manager. But - your nonconformance system data should be analyzed to ensure you know what is and is not a problem. Then make a reasoned determination of whether traceability makes sense.

All this is written assuming that traceability is not a customer requirement or 'industry standard' (such as in explosives and aerospace / marine industries).

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply
Hop to:

Contact Marc Smith | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Please Visit the new Elsmar Cove Forums! All these threads are there and much more!

Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!