100% Testing

[former_member184666]

Dear,

Inprocess ( 03) & Final Inspection (04) requirement is to do 100% testing. ie, if the lot is for say 50 qty, all the 50 qty to be tested one by one and results of all MIC to be recorded individually for each qty. Every qty results will be entered against the unique serial number. How the sampling procedure to be created to map the requirement & what settings i need to do ? Pl guide.

Thanks & Regards,

RSR

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Create the sampling procedure with sampling type as "100% inspection" and in control indicators of all MICs, select "individual recording.

Vishal

[former_member184666 · Accepted solution]

Hi Vishal,

What valuation mode to be taken?. When ever individual recording is ticked in MIC system is allowing to enter the results individually, but valuation box like accept or reject is displayed only after giving the results for entire lot qty. Requirement is valuation to be completed immediately after giving the results for each mic with pop up of accept or reject.

Thanks

RSR

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

on the left side of all MICs, Accept and Reject indiactors are available.You can do valuation by clicking on any one of them.

Vishal

[Former Member · Accepted solution]

Hi,

In your sampling procedure you can select the option under valuation mode as "valuation according to char.attrib.code".

Regards,

Roderick

[former_member184666 · Accepted solution]

Hi,

In MIC i have selected individual recording. If i take "valuation according to char.attrib.code" in valuation mode ,system is throwing error as "The sampling procedure requires summarized recording and selected sets".

For 100% inspection process,selecting the individual recording in MIC is the only option or any other way by inspection points with summarized recording can also be mapped.

Thanks

RSR

[Former Member]

Hi

I think you are using Quantitative MIC so the sampling procedure is not matching with this MIC type.

for this try using Sampling Procedure Valuation type as attributive non-conforming units; this will avoid the error.

Thanks

Devichandra