AS 9100

[Franklin M.]

Hello all.

I work at an aerospace company, we have (8) five axis Mitsui milling machines that are more or less the same. Pivot geometry is exactly the same, axis travel lengths vary. They all run on 31i Fanuc controls. Each machine is on a 90 day calibration schedule. Our quality department has sited AS 9100 as requiring that each part be first articled on each machine. They further admit it is an internal requirement and not a customer requirement, they site AS9100.

This causes bottlenecks in scheduling the machine load and expense doing repetitive first articles.

My opinion is the machine geometries are the same, the programs have created good parts, the machines are calibrated. Run the part wherever I have spindle time. I think the tail is wagging the dog on this...

Anyone out there experiencing this issue? How do confront it?

Franklin
UG 10,13 & 18
NX 1,2,4,6,11,12,1899 & 2206
NCL502 (yep I love Sequential Mill)

 

[rb1957]

sigh ! It seems to me that your QA/QC manager/director is trying to make a name for him-/her-self.

After a few runs, maybe you can show the parts are indistinguishable (and if QA/QC persist with this, then they should pay the costs.

"Hoffen wir mal, dass alles gut geht !"
General Paulus, Nov 1942, outside Stalingrad after the launch of Operation Uranus.

 

[WKTaylor]

FM...

My company machines designated flight critical parts per certain fairly rigid standards.

One of those standards demands that these critical parts SHALL ONLY be machined on equipment qualified for that specific part. Similar/identical-to machines/machining-centers are NOT permitted... until they-too are certified. The only machines that shall cut metal for those parts is the ones cited by PART NUMBER and SERIAL NUMBER in the work-planning documents.

OH YEAH... and these rigid criteria extend to each operator by-name... and so-on. OH YEAH... includes inspectors by name, specified materials/sources, dimensional-measurements, NDI, shot-peening, finishes, etc... ad nauseum...


Regards, Wil Taylor
o Trust - But Verify!
o For those who believe, no proof is required; for those who cannot believe, no proof is possible. [variation, Stuart Chase]
o Unfortunately, in science what You 'believe' is irrelevant. ["Orion", HBA forum]
o Only fools and charlatans know everything and understand everything." -Anton Chekhov

 

[Franklin M.]

WKTaylor, rb1957, your answers are at opposite ends of the spectrum.

WK, can you point me toward a section of the AS9100 for me review? Please...

Franklin
UG 10,13 & 18
NX 1,2,4,6,11,12,1899 & 2206
NCL502 (yep I love Sequential Mill)

 

[3DDave]

First article is first of a series for one program, one machine, one setup, one toolset. Tear it down or use a different machine and the product needs a thorough review.

https://as9100store.com/aerospace-standards-explained/what-is-as9102-first-article-inspection/

When to Conduct a First Article Inspection (FAI):
First Production run of a new product
Design change
Manufacturing process change
Materials or sources change
Computer Program update affecting product form/function
After a lapse of more than two years’ production

A new machine is a process change.

 

[MintJulep]

AS9100D Clause 8.5.1.3 discusses the need to establish, implement and document the verification of production processes (e.g., risk assessments, capability studies, control plans) to ensure the ability to produce products that meet expectations.

Clause 8.5.1.3 states: “The organization shall implement production process verification activities to ensure the production process is able to produce products that meet requirements.”

You and your QC manager need to sit down and read AS9100 carefully together.

You will likely find some acceptable compromise, perhaps along the lines that rb1957 suggested that will allow you to demonstrate that each of the 8 machines are sufficiently the same to be considered a single process.

Consider a trivial example: Parts assembled using a calibrated tool. Is a new FAI needed every time a tool goes in for calibration and a different tool is issued to the assembly station? Of course not, because you have processes in place that ensure that the tools are all equivalent.

The same logic applies to the more complicated tool (CNC machine), just the processes ensuring equivalence need to be through.

 

[SWComposites]

You say the machines are “more or less” the same. Suggest you document in great detail the exact differences between the machines, then figure out what those differences could have, if any, to the machined parts. Then sit down with QC folks and agree on an approach based on documented facts and data.

 

[Sparweb]

Is it required by your contract with your customer? In your OP, you suggest it might not be. Getting an answer to THAT question may be above your pay grade, but if your superiors and colleagues say it's not contractually required by the customer, then you could be right to ask. I have had customers that needed FAI on all parts (plus form one airworthiness release), and others that only wanted a CofC. Those that came to us because we hold AS9100 qualifications would be the ones who want the full inspection details.

 

[Franklin M.]

Guys,

Thank you for all your input. I like the idea of making the machines themselves the process that is certified. But as was also pointed out it is above my paygrade. I'm a lowly NX driver (contractor no less) and need to keep my focus on the numbers as in cartesian coordinate numbers (XYZABC).

Again, thank all of you for your input.

Franklin
UG 10,13 & 18
NX 1,2,4,6,11,12,1899 & 2206
NCL502 (yep I love Sequential Mill)