This website is not affiliated with, sponsored by, or approved by SAP AG.

Double limits

Logistics QM

Moderators: Snowy, thx4allthefish, Ha Tran

Double limits

Postby Trygve » Fri Nov 23, 2012 3:29 am

Hi

We're running ECC 6.0, and I think it's EHP 3.
I've got the following scenario :

We have continous production and passive release of goods, thus we're only using insp.type 03 with inspection points, posting directly to unrestriced, not using insp.type 04.

During the production we're checking the weight at regular intervals by weighing 5 samples.
We've got two set of limits.
- If all samples are within the tightest spec everything is fine.
- If one sample is between the spec's we'll accept it (as long as it doesn't happen again on the next insp.point).
- If one sample is between spec's for two consecutive inspection points we'll put the product in quarantine while doing an evaluation.
- If two samples are between specs or one is outside the wider spec we'll manually block the goods.


Parts of it I could fix by making two MIC's one with the tight spec and one with the wide spec. The tight MIC would have a sampling procedure accepting if 4 out of 5 is within spec. The wide MIC would be calculated, just copying all results from the tight MIC (avoiding double entry of results) with a sampling procedure requiring 5 of 5 within spec. Alternatively we'll run the tight MIC also requiring 5 out of 5 allowing the insp.point to be rejected, making it visible that everything wasn't OK.

This setup would take care of case 1, 2 & 4, but it wouldn't help me handling case 3 with two insp.point in a row where one sample is between the spec's.
It might be different operators handling it and we can't depend on someone remembering that the previous insp.point was

Any suggestions to how to solve this ?
Regards
Trygve
Trygve
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 1:53 am
Location: Norway

Re: Double limits

Postby Craig » Fri Nov 23, 2012 2:56 pm

Have you considered a custom valuation procedure for the inspection point?

Craig
Craig
 
Posts: 5505
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 11:07 pm
Location: Heading back to the Milky Way...

Re: Double limits

Postby Trygve » Tue Nov 27, 2012 4:32 am

Hi Craig.

No, I haven't concidered it but that is becuse I haven't been working that much with IPC and inspection points.
There's still quite at lot in that area I don't know much about, and I didn't think this issue was unique for my company, thus I assumed it might be a 'standard' way of handling it.

I prefer going for 'standard' instead of 'home made' if possible, but then it looks like I might have to concider 'home made' in this case.

Thanks. :) :)
Regards
Trygve
Trygve
 
Posts: 966
Joined: Mon Oct 21, 2002 1:53 am
Location: Norway

Re: Double limits

Postby Craig » Wed Nov 28, 2012 8:04 am

Yep.. I like to go standard as much as possible.

But valuation needs are one area that really can be different from company to company depending on the product line. So I can understand why SAP provided the capability. I'm somewhat a perfectionist so I'd want to fail anything that had anything wrong with it! But I know that is not practical in many areas.

Craig
Craig
 
Posts: 5505
Joined: Sun Oct 20, 2002 11:07 pm
Location: Heading back to the Milky Way...


Return to Logistics QM

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests





loading...


This website is not affiliated with, sponsored by, or approved by SAP AG.