What's new
What's new

ISO9000 and AS9100

camscan

Titanium
Joined
Sep 5, 2011
Location
Norfolk
Not speaking for others, but "the problem" with ISO, is that it is a be-all and non-specific.
My customers mandated me to have it, so I revised my QA manual, hired a consultant for 2 days, we applied and received.
There were 2 of us in the company (total) at the time.
When I sold the business, there were 4.5 and we were a gnats chuff from going for AS (all I had to implement was a full stock control for materiel stores).
It's doable.
It's not a big deal.
If it's a mandate from your Customers, you don't have a choice, so you do it or change customers.
BUT, IMHO, it's not really suited for manufacturing (see attached)....

Some of my customers (before I went for it) insisted that I had to have ISO9000 or lose their work. I said fine, get on your bike, I will see you in a fortnight. The reply was no chance. Sure enough I would get the call, can we discuss this? I replied that there was nothing to discuss, we do it my way or not at all. But we cant find anybody else to make our cams. OK I will make them, but stand by for a price increase.
Other customers said just carry on, make them under our umbrella.
 

barbter

Diamond
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Location
On Tour...
Other customers said just carry on, make them under our umbrella.

And as it should be - the umbrella. A QA manager should get off his backside, actually leave the office, and visit the Supplier and audit them theirself.
Not just box-tick the supplier when the ISO piece of paper (suppliers certificate) drops in his inbox.
But the problem now is, (talking Aero), the airframe makers in a lot of instances, have mandated a flow down stating accreditation is required.
So all sub Tiers, have to ensure their sub tiers, are all approved.
There were 3 or 4 additions I had to implement into my 9001 manual - flow downs from LazyB and a couple from Honeywell by memory.
 

ttrager

Aluminum
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
I can't speak to AS9000, because I've never dealt with that standard.

There's some good news on the ISO 9001:2015 front though, when that revision took over for 9001:2008. You have less focus on raw paper work checking and more demonstration of practices. Paper still exists mind you, but the grunt-work in paper you used to have to do under 9001:2008 is gone (e.g. you are no longer required to have a massive "Quality Manual").

Good Luck.
 

ttrager

Aluminum
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
ISO is the biggest load of bullshit ever. When I was certified I was asked how I checked my plug gauges. I never checked or had checked anything but I told him that I used my digital calipers. He accepted that and it was entered in my procedures.

The better answer to your Auditor would have been the truth. Not an "ISO" problem, per se. Maybe a new/weak Auditor, maybe he was relying on your expertise and knowledge of your business forming the basis for that "check" of a gage pin.

You can't calibrate a gage pin, or block, or any other standard with a digital caliper. But you can use a digital caliper, or hand mic, to check a worn pin for open tolerance work (e.g. Vermont Gage BLACK PINS, Class ZZ - that paint and "engraving" wears off really fast, but the pins are still just fine for the purpose intended).

Your Auditor isn't an enemy. If anything he should be your "friend". Intentionally lying to him is a sure fire way to pollute your audit results, and pollute your own perceptions.

My experience with ISO has been; 1) It's a useful standard in the sense it requires demonstration of some basic organization and follow up practices (e.g. Corrective Actions), along with a method of proving accountability and tracking. 2) Like any other Standard you can make it an unholy pain in the ass to manage, or you can figure out how to keep it almost invisible, not some administrative monster that has to have clerks crawling on it all the time. 3) And some clients want, or even require, their suppliers to be ISO Certified.

You'll make it whatever it's going to be to you. Worthless waste of time, or something with some value. Just like anything else we do.
 
Last edited:

CarbideBob

Diamond
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Location
Flushing/Flint, Michigan
....
You'll make it whatever it's going to be to you. Worthless waste of time, or something with some value. Just like anything else we do.
Far to many go into this or hire people because the customer said to do it.
If doing so adds costs to your part of the process stream with no change in quality or better throughput it is just plain wrong.
Often the production people do not understand the QC guys and the often that the QC guys do not understand the job of the production people.
Bob
 

Trueturning

Diamond
Joined
Jul 2, 2019
ISO is the biggest load of bullshit ever. When I was certified I was asked how I checked my plug gauges. I never checked or had checked anything but I told him that I used my digital calipers. He accepted that and it was entered in my procedures.

Many can set it up that way. Things get or can get negotiable and should if everyone is set on improving. That is the major goal it is a sizeable change. I have seen extremes in both directions. Overall using these regimens improve things quite a bit. The most interesting is when the main customer of a shop takes this effort after demanding it and monitors on site. If a shop does not like the interference then they move the work to the next vendor competing and willing to expend effort.
 

barbter

Diamond
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Location
On Tour...
Far to many go into this or hire people because the customer said to do it.
If doing so adds costs to your part of the process stream with no change in quality or better throughput it is just plain wrong.
Often the production people do not understand the QC guys and the often that the QC guys do not understand the job of the production people.
Bob

Personally....it gave my business "kudos", as any subsequent new Customer couldn't believe our small company had accreditation.
So it was a great "sales tool" as a door opener.
From a business standpoint - it had zero benefit for productivity or quality of parts.
What it was good for, is the MOPS and Measures - I chose various things to measure - the obvious such as Customer returns, OTD, but also Orders received, Quotes won versus lost etc.
I ran stats every 6 months, and could see where we stood over the previous 6 months, year, etc.
This was all pretty automated via a couple of spread sheets so all told including annual audit, I reckon ISO cost me 3x days per year.
 

ttrager

Aluminum
Joined
Jul 23, 2015
Personally....it gave my business "kudos", as any subsequent new Customer couldn't believe our small company had accreditation.
So it was a great "sales tool" as a door opener.
From a business standpoint - it had zero benefit for productivity or quality of parts.
What it was good for, is the MOPS and Measures - I chose various things to measure - the obvious such as Customer returns, OTD, but also Orders received, Quotes won versus lost etc.
I ran stats every 6 months, and could see where we stood over the previous 6 months, year, etc.
This was all pretty automated via a couple of spread sheets so all told including annual audit, I reckon ISO cost me 3x days per year.

This sounds well thought out.

I've been doing the same type of thing where I'm at, step by step. Without going into detail this generally revolves around a bunch of "metrics" that just come out of peoples heads in water cooler discussions, or on the fly with the boss. No more word of mouth memory talking for those things I'm tracking.

As our ERP doesn't really have anything setup for what I call "Status Monitoring" of selected things, I've setup a couple of spreadsheets. Blueprint reviews is one example. Now, if the Owner, or anyone else, want's to know about "X", there's a live, real data based view of that, including dynamically updated Pie / Bar Charts.

For us there has been an improvement in Quality & Risk Mitigation in the sense that we've tightened up processes to include, for instance, writing down your measurements on the blueprint, not just peeling the steel, then checking it, doing that all in your head. If you take a measurement, or setup a block stack, your best first risk mitigator is to actually write down your finding next to the dimension on the blueprint. You have, real time, an arbitrary flag in your field of view if you made a mistake in putting together your block stack and/or you machined the feature out of tolerance for some reason. What you wrote down right next to the DIM doesn't match the DIM.

Anyway, it does sound like you have a Method of going about business. Bravo!
 

metal-ica

Aluminum
Joined
Jan 19, 2019
As part of iso qualification how do you guys handle traceable calibration?

I have a set of master gages. OD, ID, Height, Tri-Square, and have my surface plates conditioned and certified annually.

With these masters I can calibrate/ certify my other measuring tools.

When it comes to gage pins though...I have a 4-drawer set of gage pins from .010 - .500 in .0005 increments. Customer came by the other day and said they send theirs out every year for calibration and asked how we deal with it.

Well...we measure with a mic that was measured against a certified master.

I understand this might not be ideal.

On the flip side though, I think Meyer's want's something like $2.5 per pin to re-certify. So that 4-drawer box would cost $2,500 annually and 90% of the sizes wouldn't even be used once to check a hole between calibrations.

class zz is .0002" tolerance so qualifying them with a mic should be OK...right?
 

CarbideBob

Diamond
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Location
Flushing/Flint, Michigan
I'd use something with a tad more resolution than a normal micrometer.
To self certify you want something that can measure down in the 10 to 20 millionths. $1500 to $2500 to get into this type of gauge and a stand.
Mu-checkers and that ilk. LVDTs.
I have laser mics but they only do well on nice round pins or shanks and worthless on a endmill.

That is a lot pins to certify once a year. Same deal if you have 10 88 piece block sets.
Only the often used ones change size.
Bob
 

john.k

Diamond
Joined
Dec 21, 2012
Location
Brisbane Qld Australia
Its not production people ,its the boss who is wanting to bend every facet of the QA.....I used to have to "entertain" the QA audit people at audit every year....same as the Environmental Audit people when they came once a year.
 

barbter

Diamond
Joined
Oct 27, 2007
Location
On Tour...
Ref Pins - I had a "calibrate before use" sticker on all my boxes.
And used a digi mic to measure before use.
All mics were mitutoyo digis, all individually numbered and traceable back to national standards, via their annual calibration by an outside lab.
All customers were happy.

But for tight limit - I'd check with a diatest (split point bore gauges) - again set via a digi mic before use (although the gauge/plunger clock were all calibrated annually too, the points were not as there were a lot per set)
 

metal-ica

Aluminum
Joined
Jan 19, 2019
I like the idea of "calibrate before use" sticker. If you're working with +/- .001 this should be totally acceptable and even half that tolerance.

My process is to have the masters pictured calibrated annually and we should be able to self calibrate from those to satisfy traceability.

We calibrate some tools daily or multiple times a day and others sit in a drawer for months or years before they get used. Swapping stickers every time is annoying but I guess a necessary evil?

Also, what does a "lab" do to a Mitutoyo digi mic to calibrate it? Don't they just measure a set of pins? I mean even with a digital there is certain amount of 'feel' when measuring.

I have to say, aside from accounting/taxes this is probably my least favorite part of this business.

master gage.jpg
 

jccaclimber

Hot Rolled
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Location
San Francisco
I like the idea of "calibrate before use" sticker. If you're working with +/- .001 this should be totally acceptable and even half that tolerance.

My process is to have the masters pictured calibrated annually and we should be able to self calibrate from those to satisfy traceability.

We calibrate some tools daily or multiple times a day and others sit in a drawer for months or years before they get used. Swapping stickers every time is annoying but I guess a necessary evil?

Also, what does a "lab" do to a Mitutoyo digi mic to calibrate it? Don't they just measure a set of pins? I mean even with a digital there is certain amount of 'feel' when measuring.

I have to say, aside from accounting/taxes this is probably my least favorite part of this business.

View attachment 347996

I can’t speak to a formal lab, but ours used to measure at a few places in travel, as well as a few places on the anvils. If there was a standard rod with the tool they would also verify that as you would a gage block or pin. I suspect the electronics either work or don’t, but the anvils can still wear out of parallel just like any other mic.
 

greif1

Aluminum
Joined
Oct 1, 2013
Location
Rochester, NY, USA
We got certified ISO 9000 about 3 years ago, then as an ISO 17025 (calibration Lab) two years ago.

My advice is;
-Write your procedures based on what you actually do, not what you intend to do.
-Don't make procedure too detailed, (to easy to lock yourself in a corner come audit time)
-Find a consultant that will review what you have written and not one that will come in dumping their system on you. We had previous false starts that failed and fizzled until we found the right person (she was also a part time ISO 9000 auditor and really knew her stuff!)The consultant can take some of the load off by writing the brand new things that you need to do.
-There is no requirement that records and documents be computerized, but with a network it is much easier to show one location for a master document that everybody knows is always the newest.
-Records can take various forms; notebooks, spreadsheets, etc. Lots of computer programs for ISO9000, but we never found one to our liking.
 

Larry Dickman

Titanium
Joined
Jan 30, 2014
Location
Temecula, Ca
Food for thought,

The thread gages I've been buying the last couple years have been coming in Tin coated.
Is it reasonable to assume that if the Tin coating hasn't worn through, that the gage is still full size,
as it left the factory when new?
 

Ox

Diamond
Joined
Aug 27, 2002
Location
West Unity, Ohio
Who makes coated thread gauges?

That doesn't sound very precise to me.
ESPECIALLY on a thread!


----------------------

Think Snow Eh!
Ox
 

Larry Dickman

Titanium
Joined
Jan 30, 2014
Location
Temecula, Ca
Who makes coated thread gauges?

That doesn't sound very precise to me.
ESPECIALLY on a thread!


----------------------

Think Snow Eh!
Ox

When I said Tin coated, I assumed it was understood I meant Titanium Nitride, not Sn
Most of mine are Balax. I understand the coating thickness is less that a tenth.
 

CarbideBob

Diamond
Joined
Jan 14, 2007
Location
Flushing/Flint, Michigan
PVD Tin coat on these should be easily controlled between 2 and 4 microns thickness.
No way you are doing CVD on steel parts..
We comp the grind on tools for the coating thickness in CVD where you can go 10 microns per side.
PVD makes HSS grow so a comp here is needed also and depends on the steel and it's previous heat treat.
Also a small difference in growth with coating vendors. A few test runs and you know.
One such be able to nail this within +/- a micron or two.

Bob
 

jccaclimber

Hot Rolled
Joined
Nov 22, 2015
Location
San Francisco
Our coating was a few microns thick at the time, but a place I worked use TiN wear through as the replacement indicator on a few production fixtures. The problem we ran into was that operators would decide the wear through was “just a little bit” and keep using them instead of reporting the issue.
 








 
Top