🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: bit.listserv.quality
Article #222

Re: QS9000, Chapter 4.11 Dilemma

#222
From: Eric Stern
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1998 00:00
67 lines
3811 bytes
Daniel's solution seems to me equivalent to killing flies with heavy hammers.

Wrist straps have several properties quite distinct from rulers: they are
critical to the performance of the electronic equipment and they have the
frequent habit of losing their effectiveness. For that reason they need to be
constantly monitored.

Rulers seldom loose their calibration and many of their uses are trivial and
non-critical to performance. Daily checking is way out of proportion with the
need for most situations that I am aware of.



Daniel J O'Leary wrote:

> John W. Beemster asked, "Under chapter 4.11 of QS-9000, it states all tools
>   that are used to   determine conformance of a product to stated
> tolerances
> must be calibrated.    This means one must calibrate each steel ruler on
> our manufacturing floor. This also means tracking, controlling, and
> dispositioning over three  hundred rulers!"
>
> This is easy, if you think about it the right way. The problem is that you
> need a way   to know if the steel rule is telling you the truth. It must
> be easy to use   and effective.  Don't confusing calibration with recall,
> adjustment, etc.
>
> In the electronics industry we what a similar problem with wrist straps to
> control electro-static discharge. They must be check frequently to
> ensure they work, this  is analogous to calibration. The common
> method is to install wrist strap test stations around the plant and
> have each employee check his/her wrist strap every day.
> The employee writes the results in a log posted at the station. If the
> wrist strap is defective, it is replaced and discarded.
>
> The wrist strap test stations are in the calibration recall program, not
> the wrist straps.
>
> At audit time, we ask the employee which station they commonly
> use and check the  records for the day they worked.
>
> In the steel rule case, do the same thing. I assume these are six
> inch  rules. Set up a a, say, four inch measure station and ask
> each employee to check the rule daily.   If they get the right
> measurement, they are done. If not, discard the rule and issue
> a new one.
>
> Put the measurement stations in the recall program.
>
> Be smart about how you check the rule, so you really find problems.
> If your employees are allowed to measure from the end, then
> you should check the end, not start the measurement at 1 inch.
> You can also use this as a check to make sure that employees
> know the proper technique. People will think it is a silly quality
> rule, so try to get some value from it.
>
>   Dan O'Leary
>   doleary@qbe.picker.com



--
Eric Stern
Tel/Fax: (514) 483-6264
5386 West Broadway
Montreal, QC, Canada, H4V 2A4
eric@cam.org
Technical Details
Message-ID: <35DD8AAA.5034DBFB@cam.org>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail
References: <199808202159.RAA07302@Altitude.CAM.ORG>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1159be,d34d833b6a3269cd
X-Google-Attributes: gid1159be,public
From: Eric Stern <eric@cam.org>
Subject: Re: QS9000, Chapter 4.11 Dilemma
Date: 1998/08/22
Message-ID: <35DD8AAA.5034DBFB@cam.org>
X-Deja-AN: 384346134
Sender: TQM in Manufacturing and Service Industries Discussion List <QUALITY%PUCC.BITNET@vtbit.cc.vt.edu>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Approved: NETNEWS@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU                              *
References: <199808202159.RAA07302@Altitude.CAM.ORG>
Comments: ********************************************************
Approved-By: "Bill Casti (System Admin)" <help@QUALITY.ORG>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Received: from cam.org (Dialup-621.HIP.CAM.ORG [199.84.45.116]) by Altitude.CAM.ORG (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP id UAA19377 for <QUALITY@PUCC.BITNET>; Sat, 22 Aug 1998 20:48:25 -0400 (EDT)
X-Comment: VM1.MCGILL.CA: Mail was sent by Altitude.CAM.ORG
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: eric@cam.org
Newsgroups: bit.listserv.quality