A nice, concise answer, Steve. I work in Aerospace, where Inspection costs
are a huge percentage of the overall costs. We have gradually managed to
eliminate some of the extra cost by improving certain processes, but not
that much. Nevertheless, where humans are involved, mistakes are made or
variances creep in because we're not robots (much as some employers would
like to think of us as such).
Some of the reasons for having someone else inspect work or set-ups or
whatever are:
1. Mistakes do happen and need to be detected as often and as early as
possible.
2. If the people making the mistakes could see or know about them, they
would either correct them themselves or not make them in the first place,
but they can't or don't and in the real world of fallible humans trying to
make infallable products, the more eyes on the ball the better. To
paraphrase what Steve said, human nature is such that it's always easier to
see someone else's mistakes than our own.
3. Having made a mistake, it is unfortunately a fact of human ego, vanity,
cowardice, dishonesty, whatever that we like to try and hide our mistakes,
especially if a large penalty is involved, like it affects the money in our
own pockets. Hide our mistakes and maybe they won't be noticed, or hide our
mistakes and maybe someone else will be blamed but not us. Not very nice,
but I've seen it so many times in companies where people are villified,
penalised and generally made to feel sh---y for making mistakes, rather
than involving them positively in ways to reduce the mistakes. So we
continue to need another pair of eyes to witness that things are done
properly.
I agree with Poh that in theory, viewed narrowly with naivity and with an
eye more on the $$$ and less on the people who make the $$$, all this
inspection is a waste of time in money. Why not make the processes perfect?
We're engineers and know why - nothing is infinitely and perfectly
repeatable. If you think it's stupid and time-wasting, then you're either
very inexperienced or not a very good student of the nature of things -
human or engineering particularly. If 5 out of 5 Companies have used this
method, there has to be a good reason for it, since no Company likes to
waste more money than necessary. Reflect on the reasons why something is
done instead of first condemning the stupidity of it all. Maybe, in
practical terms it's not so stupid after all, but is making the best of
things.
Here endeth the lesson.
Peter (no saint himself)
Steve Thomas <[log in to unmask]> 09/10/2002 01:37 AM
Sent by: TechNet <[log in to unmask]>
Please respond to "TechNet E-Mail Forum."; Please respond to Steve Thomas
To: [log in to unmask]
cc: (bcc: DUNCAN Peter/Asst Prin Engr/ST Aero/ST Group)
Subject: Re: [TN] First Article Buy-off Process for SMT & Wave Solder
I know of 3 reasons. The oversimplified rationale is that it's easier to
detect mistakes in someone
else's work. It's the same reason that I like to have someone else
proofread docs that I originate after I've
proofed them a time or two myself, even after running a spellcheck.
It also guarantees that two sets of eyes have witnessed the results of the
operation for better coverage.
Finally, it's the elimination of the opportunity for a conflict of
interest, or the "fox watching the henhouse".
For stuff like medical products assembly, GMP REQUIRES that any
verification of a process step has to be
performed by someone other than the individual that performed the step,
whether it's setup, assembly, repair,
etc. If you can't verify the process steps that can contribute to defects,
you have to inspect the product itself.
I'm sure similar adaptations of the same basic practice have been applied
to military, aerospace, etc., although
I haven't worked in those fields personally.
-----Original Message-----
From: Poh Kong Hui [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2002 8:54 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [TN] First Article Buy-off Process for SMT & Wave Solder
Hi Technetters,
I would to share some experience with you all.
I have been working for 5 companies. I realize that every
company that I worked for, has a buy-off system; so called
the first article buy-off before releasing the either a SMT or
wave soldering line for mass production.
I am rather curious why the people who are managing the
lines cannot perform their own self check, but rather
depends upon someone to check their work and to ensure
they loaded the right to the machine or to the boards.
I would like to hear your opinion about this system as I find it
rather stupid and it is wasting time.
Poh
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
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 or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to
[log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/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
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[This e-mail is confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the
intended recipient, please delete it and notify us immediately; you should
not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other
person. Thank you.]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Technet Mail List provided as a free service by IPC using LISTSERV 1.8e
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 or (re-start) delivery of Technet send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet NOMAIL or (MAIL)
To receive ONE mailing per day of all the posts: send e-mail to [log in to unmask]: SET Technet Digest
Search the archives of previous posts at: http://listserv.ipc.org/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
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
