Outsourcing Checking 9

[KENAT]

About 2.5 - 3 years ago a team was started here to improve the quality of documentation and part of the approach was to introduce checking.

The experienced, good, fast... checker we had was laid off last June and I got the job

This coincided with Manufacturing/operations finally deciding that they wanted everything checked not just some stuff, and so the work load doubled or more.

Since then there has been a massive backlog and/or stuff not getting checked.

We now want to outsource parts manufacture to Asia to save $ but, our drawings for the most part are still too poor for this.

They now have a plan to 'outsource checking'. Apparantly because they don't want head count to increase they don't just want to hire someone as a temp or contractor so...

So, does anyone know of any design houses or the like that do checking to ASME standards?

Also pointing out any of the obvious problems etc is fine by me.

Ken



KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[MintJulep]

Isn't the classical method to simply send crappy drawings out, and fix them in response to manufacturer questions, or receipt of parts that look nothing like what is expected?

 

[ctopher]

This sounds like purchasing wants to outsource checking.
The problem I see is anyone outside your company does not know your products. They can check per ASME standards and certain specs are followed, but that's it. IMO, it will cost more to outsource than to hire someone to check. For outsource: all dwgs will have to be sent to check form-fit-function, not one or two dwgs at a time like purchasing will do.
Also, if your own inspection checks the parts, they will have to get up to speed with standards that the outsourced checker will add.
It will be a huge learning curve for all, possibly creating unseen issues later.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 06/08
ctopher's home (updated Apr 30, 2008)

 

[ewh]

I agree with Chris, and would like to add that, if in that situation, I would choose a contractor with suitable experience, and keep the work in house, if possible, until you were comfortable with the results. The problem with having it done off-site is trusting that it is indeed being done to the standards to the degree you require and as your company interprets them. If you have a comprehensive DRM, on-site checking may not be necessary, but is still desirable. As you are aware, the standards allow for much that isn't necessarily good practice ("TYP" for example "should not be used", but is not forbidden outright), and your interpretations may vary.

Believe it if you need it or leave it if you dare. - [small]Robert Hunter[/small]

 

[KENAT]

Mint, no the classical method here is produce a crappy drawing. Have conversations with the machine shop on the prototype so that they get made right but not incorporate changes to the drawing, these changes often are remembered by the machine shop so the first few batches (sometimes for years) come in OK. At some point staff at the machine shop change, or we change vendor...

Parts come in that don't work, original designer is usually long gone no one knows what they should be and we don't have any good parts in stock to match to...

Ctopher, yes it is purchasing/operations/manufacturing driving this. In part because our CEO said we will outsource machining abroad rather than locally. (We don't have our own machining, only assy.) Engineering, at least on one side of the business, resent having their drawings checked although they've been playing nicer lately.

Agree with the problems you list/increased cost etc.

We barely do inspection so that wont be an issue;-)



KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[KENAT]

ewh, we have a DRM but it's not as comprehensive as it would need to be to support this.

I agree it's a dumb idea, my boss thinks it's a dumb idea, but his boss suggested it at a senior staff meeting so we're probably going to try and make it work.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[powerhound]

In my experience our overseas vendor (China) quotes EVERYTHING that comes across their desk. They only ask questions if the tolerance is tighter than +/-.005" and then they ask if it can be changed to +/-.020". Otherwise the GD&T, if the print has any, is completely ignored and whatever we get, we get. We rejected several thousand dollars worth of product about 6 months ago and when we asked how they got the profile tolerance so screwed up, they responded saying they didn't know what that symbol meant. Obviously I'm only talking about the one vendor that we use so it could be atypical...or not.

Powerhound, GDTP T-0419
Production Supervisor
Inventor 2008
Mastercam X2
Smartcam 11.1
SSG, U.S. Army
Taji, Iraq OIF II

 

[KENAT]

Powerhound, I can imagine that happening.

A lot of our stuff is real precise, tighter than +-.005 due to function.

A lot of it is tight due to the people creating the drawings not understanding tolerance.

It sounds like it will be a contract with a supplier that we will then send most of our production machining to, not just the stuff from our site but from all our manufacturing sites.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[btrueblood]

"Otherwise the GD&T, if the print has any, is completely ignored and whatever we get, we get." and "...they responded saying they didn't know what that symbol meant"

Hunh. Sounds like our experience with China also.

 

[ctopher]

Powerhound,
That has also been my experience.
I once had a part that was measured in microns. It was the size of a pin head. The dwg scale was 100/1. The guy in purchasing changed the tolerance to +/-.010 (the typ tol for someone that doesn't know what a tol is) without talking to engineering. This meant the part couldn't exist on the small side. But, it didn't matter, whatever to save $$ to them.
The part was sent to the China plant. 100% rejection on 50,000 parts.
The dwg was changed by purchasing (red-marked), appvd my prod and quality. Guess who got reamed?! Me! My name was on it. So, I refused to have my name on anything that I knew was outsourced (non-military).
It also depends on ITAR/Export laws who you send the dwg to.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 06/08
ctopher's home (updated Apr 30, 2008)

 

[KENAT]

Gee, if only I could have anticipated some of these issues;-).

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[fcsuper]

Kenat, sometimes I think you post questions just to share your pain with the rest of us to spread it around. Man, I cannot imagine outsourcing checking, especially to a company in a region that is nortorously lacking in discipine in standards. If outsourcing is a must, I would outsource to the guy you guys laid off (seriously).

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

 

[KENAT]

Ok, my post may have been a little unclear. It's the machining that is being outsourced to abroad.

The checking needs to be done before we can do this.

We only have one half time half qualified checker (me). We aren't allowed a direct hire or anything that looks like a direct hire, partially for financial reasons mainly for political reasons. So we are looking to outsource the checking, but not as far as I know to China!

I just found out that if we can find someone relatively local then it may turn out to be more like hiring a contractor, just by a different name! The important thing is they aren't directly employed by us or through a job shop, they must be their own company effectively.

We may have someone in the works but I still have concerns.

As to sharing my pain, you may have a point!

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[baseballninja]

Kenat,

Don't send your machining abroad. Send it to me!
;-)

The machine shop I work for just installed a huge horizontal mill pallet pool with 42 pallets, and a 5-axis vertical with 32 pallets. We feel that we'll be able to compete with China because we're eliminating setup time and doing most of the machining unmanned. We have excellent quality and we'll understand your drawings (for example, I will be taking the GDTP-S exam next month).

My advice to your company is to find a good shop that's taking similar steps and is located close to you. Give them lots of work, treat them right, and they will deliver the pricing and quality that you need.


Sincerely,
Josh Church
Vanderhorst Brothers, Inc.

 

[KENAT]

Sadly not my decision on whether to outsource to china. Letting a mere engineer have a say in such matters is madness.

The CEO has decided it's happening, who am I to argue.

I haven't yet found anyone who's convinced it's a good idea, it's a bit like the emperors new clothes.

Though one place in asia had claimed they can save us over $1,000,000 a year.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[ctopher]

I have seen products go up in price after being outsourced to anywhere. The guys in charge don't see the whole package until it's too late.

Chris
SolidWorks/PDMWorks 08 3.1
AutoCAD 06/08
ctopher's home (updated Apr 30, 2008)

 

[vc66]

Though one place in asia had claimed they can save us over $1,000,000 a year.

I think they meant 1,000,000 yuan (~$10,000 USD)

KENAT-

I don't think that our illustrious CEO realizes exactly what he's getting, outsourcing to China. I know--I'm in the same building as him.

V

 

[fcsuper]

IMO, for mass produced items that are injection molded, it makes sense, as long as you have a GREAT source to work with. The problem comes in communication. Someone WILL have to flight out their frequently in order to keep track of things (mnthly). China can do the work for a lot cheaper. If you find the right company and establish a good relationship with them, you can make it work; as long as you keep on top of things. Don't work with any vendor without personally inspecting the facilities.

YOu may even want to make sure there offices are at the same location as the equipment. It is far too easy to close an office, change a name and move to the building next door; all while still using the same shop floor in some other town.

There's plenty of not-so-good companies, but there are also good ones. Do the research and be prepared to send someone how their frequently. And don't use a U.S. broker as a middle man! That will be death!

Matt Lorono
CAD Engineer/ECN Analyst
Silicon Valley, CA
Lorono's SolidWorks Resources
Co-moderator of Solidworks Yahoo! Group
and Mechnical.Engineering Yahoo! Group

 

[KENAT]

VC66, I'm not sure I'm going to say much more about that, my manager sometimes frequents this forum!

fcsuper & others, I have no involvement or say in who gets picked etc.

However, I suspect I'll somehow share the blame if our drawings are too bad to allow it to happen.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...

 

[vc66]

KENAT-

Nuff Said. Anyway, In regards to your question about outsourcing the checking of drawings. I've never seen it done. It seems too difficult to explain the functionality of everything in a particular assembly to someone outside the company. Especially if you're not willing to share proprietary info with them. You're wasting just as much time of an engineer's salary to explain to the "outsourced checker" what needs to be for functionality's sake. You could just as easily hire someone. Should've never laid off the experienced checker. Things like that seem to always come around and bite.

I'll ask around here about it, but good luck either way.

V