9% is a high percentage. "Generally "speaking you should be looking for 5% or less, target being 1.5%. Randy ----- Original Message ----- From: Don Vischulis <[log in to unmask]> To: <[log in to unmask]> Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 9:54 AM Subject: Re: [TN] Inspection levels > Pat, > > I assume that your 9% failure rate is after operators have passed their work > on as good. Based on that, IMO you should ask the following questions: > > Would my customer identify these as failures (through observation or failure > rates) also? In other words, are internal inspection standards more > stringent than necessary to meet customer or reliability requirements? > > Are the operators able to identify the same defects as the inspection staff? > Are they adequately trained in defect identification and can they > demonstrate their expertise? > > What will be done to improve operator quality to bring defect levels into an > acceptable range prior to inspection? > > What monitoring steps will verify quality levels - customer complaints, > process audits, evaluation random of samples of finished products prior to > shipment? > > What will be done if sample evaluation indicates that failure rates are > excessive? > > These questions are meant to provoke an examination of the quality system > with regard to acceptability standards, operator training, process > monitoring, and remediation of non-conforming product. The operations you > mention are often not easily automated and rely primarily on operator skill, > attention, and motivation. Unless one is confident that these issues are > well controlled, it is foolish to remove a 100% inspection requirement. In > the long run, it is also more costly to perform 100% inspection than to fix > the causes of the defects. > > Hope this is helpful. > > Don Vischulis > > > -----Original Message----- > From: TechNet [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Diamond, Pat > Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 2:57 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: [TN] Inspection levels > > > Dear all, > > I would be interested in your thoughts/comments on 100% operator > self-inspection with no overcheck, my company is thinking of introducing > this and it frightens the life out of me. At present we run with overcheck > covering operator self inspection and and our faults to joints soldered is > running at about 9%. We do not manufacture PCB's, this is purely on solder > cup and Solder eyelets with all of it's inherent wire stripping etc. > > Does anyone out there have any experience of this? > > Regards, > > Pat. > > **************************************************************************** > *************** > The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to > which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged > material. > > Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any > action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than > the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please > contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. > **************************************************************************** > *************** > Pat Diamond > Senior manufacturing Engineer > Weston Aerospace Tel: +44 (0)1252 868194 > 124 Victoria Road Fax: +44 (0)1252 370298 > Farnborough, Hampshire, GU14 7PW Web www.westonaero.com> > England Email mailto:[log in to unmask] > > --------------------------------------------------- > 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 > ----------------------------------------------------- > > --------------------------------------------------- > 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 > ----------------------------------------------------- > --------------------------------------------------- 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 -----------------------------------------------------