Auto Defect Recording for Accepted MIC

[Former Member]

Dear Gurus,

There is request from user,  system to auto prompt defect recording for MIC result which is even accepted or Pass.

so far what system provided is only when MIC is rejected then only auto prompt the defect recording.

The request from user where their concern is Inspection of MIC is accepted but also want to recording those minor defect on the product by using auto prompt feature without manual click .

Any clue on this, Gurus?

[Former Member]

Dear Anand, Arijit, Nitin,

thanks for your reply and advice !

I think I further explain on the actual business process.

one of the example : inspection based on 13 sample sizes, maybe only 2 of them has defect but overall inspection for the MIC is still accepted as 11 of them is accepted. so user would required to record the 2 of the sample 's defect, and the defect might be more than 1 defects as well.

For the said product's sampling plan , there is quite of number of MIC having this valuation based on sampling scheme with Single value entry result. So user found that system should not just auto prompt the defect recording if MIC rejected.

[busyaban7]

Hi Calista,

Honestly, I am very confused now with your explanation. What exactly do you mean by "...So user found that system should not just auto prompt the defect recording if MIC rejected....". So you DO NOT wish to record defects even for rejected MIC's or??

Please be informed - If you activate defect recording functionality, you can either auto-record defects for rejections, or manually records defects for all MIC [Even if MIC's are Accepted or Reject]. If this being the case, you can't avoid recording defects for rejected MIC's... then how will your process work?

Have you explored the functionality of INSPECTION POINT, where you can record results multiple times for same set of MIC? I think this functionality may help you to gather defects per iterations for any MIC, in case if reject happens.

Else, as I said, just simply activate 'Documentation Required' radio button and process new example. You will be forced to capture additional explanations for all MIC's for all Scenarios.

Thanks,

Arijit

[Former Member]

Hi Arijit,

Thanks for reply.

User request system to be functioned that auto prompt defect recording whenever MIC is rejected OR MIC is accepted .

About the inspection point, it is not suitable for this product inspection as this inspection is actually just only one time sampling 13 samples from total big lot size of product output.

For the "Documentation Required" is not suitable for them as it is like a remark , not able to track the defect code from Quality Notification at later stage.

That's why I am headache on this request from user.

[busyaban7]

Hi Calista,

Honestly, none of us answered your query for this business requirement, understands this to be a practical one to follow, and as per my understanding there no automatic ways of doing it either.

If you have no choice, then please follow Anand's proposal and manually create 'Defects' for all relevant MIC's, whenever required and whatever be the acceptance or rejection criteria.

Please be informed that, as soon as a defect is created, you will get a notification created at the background, with the notification type added to the inspection type you are working with. So you will have two choices, while you add defects -

a) Activate the Notification icon while recording defects - In this case, you first have to close the notification by manually processing it to system status NOCO NOTI or NOCO NOTE. Then only I think UD can be applied.

b) Don't activate the Notification icon while recording defects - In this case you can go ahead and apply UD directly, and the notification will set the system status NOCO NOTI or NOCO NOTE in the background, based on origin selected.

Please test both the processes and suggest your business what is most suitable to them. Finally, please close this thread if this works for your business case.

Thanks,

Arijit

[Former Member]

Hi Arijit,

Thanks for advice.

For notification, we are currently using method (B).

Users always think of improvement,  and request enhancement for such automate prompt defect recording for accepted MIC to save up user data entry's time.

I am not sure is there any other industry outside there has the same inspection method and having the same request ?

[busyaban7]

Hi Calista,

I have never come across such a requirement before where defect recording is done for accepted MIC. So can't really confirm if business uses such a functionality in any domain. If so - I am not aware of.

Thanks,

Arijit

[nitin_jinagal]

It's bit ironical that users seek an auto prompt tab to save time only to spill out extra time to make not needed entries.

You should also make them understand the logic from audit's point of view. How can one justify the 'Accepted' valuation of MIC when there is a defect recorded against it?

NJ

[Former Member]

hi NJ ,

It is actually request where user just wish to has same features for auto prompt for rejected MIC. For users, inspection accepted but does not mean there is no defect.

There is another example of inspection I can clarify here:

MIC : Major Defect

Result : 4 (mean found 4 major defects after inspection)

Acceptance: Accepted (based on sampling scheme and sample lot size if defect more than 7 only consider rejected)

at this point, if system can auto prompt defect recording for user direct to enter defect codes for the 4 defect types ?

[nitin_jinagal]

I got your point and requirements will always come up with strange logic. What I intend to say that you got to understand the influence of third party audit over the design you build. Questions will be asked.

Even in a long run, periodic audit will find discrepancies in the system and users will keep on updating the audit finding with different justification.

If I were into your place, I would have adopted the system where all MICs be valuated as rejected (Wherever defect recording is required) and others accepted (only when no defect is there).

Considering user concept of accepted or rejected inspection (irrespective of the MIC valuation), I'll emphasis on valuating the Usage decision accordingly. If inspection is accepted, give the Accepted UD otherwise Rejected valuation should be given.

As far as you requirement to contain more than one result against a single MIC (Correct me if my understanding is not right), change the control indicators of MICs from Summarized recording to Single recording. You might need to modify the sampling procedure also if sample size is one (1). This will allow you to expand the MICs field and multiple entries can be entered, all against a single MIC.

NJ

[nitin_jinagal]

Don't adopt such process. It is never advisable and may create different unknown discrepancies in the system. If there a minor defect, consider it as 'Defect' and don't accept the MIC. Reject it every time there is defect. As a consultant, you should convince your client for the best practice which are always best in a long run.

I stand with Anand and Arijit on this front.

[busyaban7]

Hi Calista,

I am so confused with this requirement and have same idea, as suggested by Anand.

Instead of having the additional inputs for each MIC as 'Defects", which is not a good Idea to have it like that even for OK MIC's too, please can you activate -

a) Material Master QM view -> Documentation Required ===> If this is flagged, any change to inspection lot will need additional documentation at inspection lot level.

b) For MIC's used in Inspection Plan/Routing for result recording -> go to control Indicator -> Documentation Confirmation -> Activate the radio Button for Documentation Required ===> If you set this indicator, additional text must always be entered to document the inspection results during results recording for this characteristic.

Thus, I believe, you NEED NOT activate defect recording against each MIC's even if they are accepted, but you will be forced to add some additional documentation during result recording.

Please speak to your business team to check if this proposal is suitable.

Thanks,

Arijit

[anand_rao3]

Difficult to justify!! Well, you can still record the defects although the MICs are accepted. This is possible as your inspection plan may not cover all the inspection parameters and you find the defect during inspection which is not covered in the plan.

But it is manual. System will not prompt it automatically. I don't see this as logical enough. How system would come to know that for this accepted MIC the user want to record the defects and that too which defect code? I would suggest to revisit the requirement or let us know some more facts about the requirement.

Anand