Engineering Change Notification - Required Timeline?

" The Customer is ALWAYS right! " Actually, some customers require that there product only run on certified production lines. If this is the case, everything sounds normal. If not, your customer is just being critical. If this just started recently, I would try to find out why. Your customer might be looking for a way out..... That's just my opinion, I could be wrong!

reply »

This is always the case in the automotive industry, even if you move a machine a foot it needs to have an R&R study submitted. Now you could built product on the line and put it in MRB until the study is done and then release it.

This message was posted the Electronics Forum @

reply »

If you require a prgram to control the documentation of the ECN process - I would reccomend this company they helped out our process no end by writing a customised Microsoft Access based database

visit this site:-

http://www.tekno-media.com

also if you have any Fuji SMD machines you may wish to visit the following site:-

http:/www.fujispares.co.uk

This message was posted the Electronics Forum @

reply »

I�d expect my supplier to comply with: * ISO-9000 * J-STD-001

So, how much do you like it when your suppliers change their process, don�t tell you, and you end-up with problems they caused? We have a process that defines classes of process change, approval cycle before accepting each class, and customer notification requirements for each class.

There are probably times when the 30-day notice requirement is excessive. Although, off-hand none comes to mind. So that class of change [when 30-day notice may not be reasonable] would have a best effort to notify.

As far as the classes you mentioned: 1) direct materials used => No problem. Your buyer knows what she should order from the BOM. If she can�t order that, she submits an alternate part approval request to the customer early in the order cycle. If the supplier sends the wrong part: it�s rejected at incoming, gets MRB�d, etc. No problem. You�re not going to change tape [er sumpin like thet] without some prior investigation and approval within your company, anywho. So, notifying your customer should be no BIG whoop. 3) machine configuration => No problem. You�re not going to change the machine configuration without substantial prior investigation and approval within your company, anywho. So, notifying your customer should be no BIG whoop. 4) change in SMT Line we run the product => No problem. You�re not going to change the line configuration without substantial prior investigation and approval within your company, anywho. So, notifying your customer should be no BIG whoop. 5) process flow changes => No problem. You�re not going to change the process without substantial prior investigation and approval within your company, anywho. So, notifying your customer should be no BIG whoop. 6) change of equipment/machine used to produce the product => Not much of a problem. While you may want the freedom to choose between alternate resources to build a job, based on production schedule requirements, this should be accomplished easily in the clever approach you take in defining �alternate resources�. As long as the alternate resources have comparable capabilities, and you specify them to your customer, one machine is the same as the next. 7) etc... => Whatever.

Finally, you should pass this requirement on to your suppliers, especially your board fabricator.

reply »

There is another way around this.

Tell 'em nuttin'.

Do whatever suits your mob.

Do they still rave on about critical relationships and all that other feel-good business speak? Not too much much trust emanating from their corner is there?

I think Mr JAX may be right, or, as he says, "That's just my opinion, I could be wrong!"

reply »