TECHNET Archives

May 2001

TechNet@IPC.ORG

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Dave Girard <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
TechNet E-Mail Forum.
Date:
Mon, 14 May 2001 13:02:33 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (51 lines)
Kevin, I agree with you and your 1st inspector.  Test is by far no guarantee that wrong components will be found.  Even a full blown operational test at temperature extremes will not weed-out "all" wrong components.  I remember an experiment I did about 20 years ago where I tested a group of PWAs before they were inspected.  Of the ones that passed test, about 20% of them had wrong or reversed components that I later found.

Dave Girard, CQE, CQA, NCE
Group Leader, Quality Engineering
CAE USA

"TechNet E-Mail Forum." <[log in to unmask]>,
        "PERALTA, Kevin (BREA)" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> We have a situation at our facility in which I feel two inspectors are
> correct from two perspectives. I would like to ask members to submit
> situations and, or fixes to the following:
>
> IPC-A-610 does not mention acceptance criteria for component location &
> identification for components that are too small to identify (e.g.; SMT).
> One inspector does not want to accept something by faith, and there's no
> callout for the ID of a component on an electronic assembly that is too
> small to identify on our blueprint. He would like to reject them, and let
> MRB disposition the rejection, which I feel is correct.
>
> Our other inspector will still accept the assembly on the basis that testing
> will confirm if the component is the correct or incorrect one.
>
> From a production supervisor's perspective, the latter is preferred. But,
> from a Quality perspective, the former process should be followed. There is
> no mapped out process for this situation. I actually had an engineer tell
> one of our inspectors, "that if it was the wrong component, it would not fit
> in it's place on the assembly" (I think we shipped him off to Alaska)!
>
> I'd appreciate any response sent to me, and would invite any questions
> concerning such situations. Thank you!
>
>
> Kevin L. Peralta
> Class "A" Instructor
> Senior Quality Systems Analyst
> TRW Aeronautical/Lucas Aerospace
>
__________________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE, personal Netscape Webmail account today at http://webmail.netscape.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8d
To unsubscribe, send a message to [log in to unmask] with following text in
the BODY (NOT the subject field): SIGNOFF Technet
To temporarily halt delivery of Technet send the following message: SET Technet NOMAIL
Search previous postings at: www.ipc.org > On-Line Resources & Databases > E-mail Archives
Please visit IPC web site (http://www.ipc.org/html/forum.htm) for additional
information, or contact Keach Sasamori at [log in to unmask] or 847-509-9700 ext.5315
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2