1、AECMA STANDARD NORME AECMA AECMA NORM prEN 9162 Edition P 1 May 2005 PUBLISHED BY THE EUROPEAN ASSOCIATION OF AEROSPACE INDUSTRIES - STANDARDIZATION Gulledelle 94 - B-1200 Brussels - Tel. + 32 2 775 8110 - Fax. + 32 2 775 8111 - www.aecma-stan.orgICS: Descriptors: ENGLISH VERSION Aerospace series Op
2、erator self-verification programs Srie arospatiale Programme dauto-vrification par loprateur Luft- und Raumfahrt Selbstprfungsprogramm fr Bedienungspersonal This “Aerospace Series“ Prestandard has been drawn up under the responsibility of AECMA-STAN (The European Association of Aerospace Industries
3、- Standardization). It is published for the needs of the European Aerospace Industry. It has been technically approved by the experts of the concerned Domain following member comments. Subsequent to the publication of this Prestandard, the technical content shall not be changed to an extent that int
4、erchangeability is affected, physically or functionally, without re-identification of the standard. After examination and review by users and formal agreement of AECMA-STAN, it will be submitted as a draft European Standard (prEN) to CEN (European Committee for Standardization) for formal vote and t
5、ransformation to full European Standard (EN). The CEN national members have then to implement the EN at national level by giving the EN the status of a national standard and by withdrawing any national standards conflicting with the EN. Edition approved for publication 31 May 2005 Comments should be
6、 sent within six months after the date of publication to AECMA-STAN Quality Domain Copyright 2005 by AECMA-STAN Copyright Association Europeene des Constructeurs de Materiel Aerospatial Provided by IHS under license with AECMANot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from
7、 IHS-,-,-Page 2 prEN 9162:2005Foreword This standard was reviewed by the Domain Technical Coordinator of AECMA-STANs Quality Domain. After inquiries and votes carried out in accordance with the rules of AECMA-STAN defined in AECMA-STANs General Process Manual, this standard has received approval for
8、 Publication. To continue to assure customer satisfaction, aerospace industry organizations must produce and continually improve safe, reliable products that meet or exceed customer and regulatory requirements. The globalization of the aerospace industry and the resulting diversity of requirements a
9、nd expectations have complicated this objective. This document is focussed on standardizing, to the extent possible, Operator self-verification practices in the aerospace industry. Establishing common aerospace practices should result in improved quality and safety, decreased costs, and elimination
10、or reduction of organization-unique requirements. Contents Page 1 Scope 3 2 Normative references. 3 3 Terms and definitions 3 4 General 5 5 Basic required elements. 5 6 Application . 6 6.1 General 6 6.2 Identification of processes eligible for using Operator Self-Verification . 6 6.3 Development of
11、plans for Operator Self-Verification implementation, maintenance and continuous improvement. 6 6.4 Training and competence of identified operators. 7 6.5 Development of metrics for oversight of operator and process performance. 8 6.6 Structured maintenance of processes . 8 Bibliography. 9 Copyright
12、Association Europeene des Constructeurs de Materiel Aerospatial Provided by IHS under license with AECMANot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-Page 3 prEN 9162:20051 Scope The focus of Operator Self-Verification is on traditional manufacturing operations,
13、and applications can be made wherever traditional inspection is employed. The practices recommended in this document are intended to identify the basic elements and provide a “guideline” for structuring Operator Self-Verification programs within the aerospace industry; applicable to producers of com
14、mercial and military aircraft and weapons platforms, space vehicles, and all related hardware, software, electronics, engines and composite components. Operator Self-Verification programs are applied to improve the overall efficiency and product quality of processes considered mature, as judged by t
15、he implementing organization. Operator Self-Verification programs are not stand-alone processes, but augment existing quality management systems. The identified program elements are for voluntary implementation by the organization, and are not intended for contractual flow-down unless otherwise stip
16、ulated through contractual agreement. Purpose: To provide the recommended elements for Operator Self-Verification processes within the aerospace industry. 2 Normative references The following referenced documents are indispensable for the application of this document. For dated references, only the
17、edition cited applies. For undated references, the latest edition of the referenced document (including any amendments) applies. ISO 9000:2000, Quality management systems Fundamentals and vocabulary. 3 Terms and definitions For the purposes of this document, the following terms and definitions apply
18、. 3.1 acceptance the establishment of a record that signifies verification that the product is compliant with all the specified requirements In Self Verification programs the organization should clearly specify the detail and extent of the approved operators or team members acceptance authority. 3.2
19、 critical processes those processes that if not performed properly or if improper parts or material are used could result in a failure, malfunction or defect endangering the safe operation of the product involved 3.3 escaped defect a defect discovered by someone other than the operator; provided the
20、 operator was given the training, instructions, and tools necessary to perform the verification task 3.4 independent surveillance the entity performing the close observation/review or audit of Operator Self-Verification should not be dependent on or affiliated with the entity controlling the Operato
21、r Copyright Association Europeene des Constructeurs de Materiel Aerospatial Provided by IHS under license with AECMANot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-Page 4 prEN 9162:20053.5 multi tasking the use of more than one source to perform independent perform
22、ance evaluations of an Operator Self-Verification process 3.6 objective evidence unbiased, factual data supporting the existence or verity of something Objective evidence may be obtained through observation, measurement, test, or other means. 3.7 operator the term used to identify the individuals or
23、 teams who physically perform the process Self Verification qualified individuals or teams should be referred to through terminology considered suitable by the organizations program focus, cultural and customer environment. (i.e. “Approved Operators”, “Approved Technicians”, “Certified/Approved Proc
24、ess Team Members” etc.) 3.8 operator competency a means of objectively determining that identified operators or team members, have the necessary skills and knowledge to undertake the role of self-verification 3.9 operator self-verification placement of the formal verification of applicable requireme
25、nts in the hands of the qualified and competent operator 3.10 organization as used in this text, the term refers to the implementing “organization” as defined in ISO 9000:2000 3.11 periodic operator review points, at periods of time established by the organization, at which an operator is to be asse
26、ssed to determine whether re-training or initial training is required 3.12 quality management system a set of interrelated elements established with policies and objectives to direct and control an organization with regards to quality 3.13 random surveillance a point selected for an unannounced, ind
27、ependent close observation/review to assess the individual Operator Self-Verification Process 3.14 regular metric data review an established point at which an operator and/or process is to be assessed via control metrics to determine quality of performance, where Operator Self-Verification is in pla
28、ce 3.15 should indicates a recommended action, content or path, but not mandatory application 3.16 stable and under control process a process which has operated within the established control metric criteria for an acceptable period of time, as established by the organization, and all assignable non
29、conformity causes have been eliminated via corrective action Copyright Association Europeene des Constructeurs de Materiel Aerospatial Provided by IHS under license with AECMANot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-Page 5 prEN 9162:20053.17 surveillance the
30、 act of close observation or review of an activity, operation or process 3.18 verification confirmation through the provision of objective evidence that specified requirements have been fulfilled 3.19 traditional inspection the inspection of products or processes by individuals whose sole function i
31、s the inspection of parts, assemblies or processes 4 General Operator Self-Verification places formal verification of applicable requirements in the hands of the qualified and competent operator, and augments existing, robust quality management systems to provide continued system and product quality
32、 improvement. Development and implementation of an effective Operator Self-Verification program affects the overall awareness and operating culture of the organization, and promotes reduction in traditional inspections. Integration of Operator Self-Verification into the work process, establishes pro
33、cess and operator performance metrics, and through regular surveillance reviews, allows the operators to control and improve the quality of the products. Operator Self-Verification programs can be implemented on a selective or organizational wide basis and can reduce the cost of quality, improve def
34、ect prevention and detection, improve efficiency and productivity, eliminate waste, and require operator accountability. Operator Self-Verification enriches employees through promoting active involvement in the manufacture and improvement of products. It also promotes streamlining of product and pro
35、cess flows by eliminating the need to move the product to a traditional inspector, or an inspector to the product, enhances the potential for product improvement through in depth review by various disciplines, and thus potentially provides improved quality and greater customer satisfaction. Operator
36、 Self-Verification programs should highlight the responsibility/accountability for product quality, promote employee pride of ownership, recognize superior performance, and provide operators with enhanced ability to control process performance. 5 Basic required elements In addition to an existing qu
37、ality management system, the following items are deemed essential in implementing and maintaining an Operator Self Verification program: Documention of Operator Self-Verification candidate processes; Development of plans for Operator Self-Verification program implementation; Documented training and
38、competency of Self-Verification operators; Evaluation of human performance limitations; Development of metrics for oversight of process and operator performance; Documented implementation and maintenance plans for Self-Verification processes. Copyright Association Europeene des Constructeurs de Mate
39、riel Aerospatial Provided by IHS under license with AECMANot for ResaleNo reproduction or networking permitted without license from IHS-,-,-Page 6 prEN 9162:20056 Application 6.1 General The basic elements of Operator Self-Verification are essential in establishing a robust program in compliance wit
40、h this practice. However, the details of these elements are left to the discretion of the implementing organization based on evaluation of their needs. Effective and continued communication with the customer and/or regulatory authority representatives, as well as with company personnel that will be
41、affected by the program, is essential and vital in deploying self-verification programs. Effective, two-way communication builds the necessary broad base of employee understanding, participation, involvement and commitment; promotes customer acceptance and satisfaction with the program and its resul
42、ts; and avoids unnecessary remedial activities, change costs and delays in implementing the program. Effective program implementation also requires the development of a broad based plan with provisions to inform all personnel involved of the programs objectives and intent, formalize actions required
43、, ensure management commitment, and establish the timetable for goal completion. In addition to the plan, the organization should establish and formally document the process for operator self verification program implementation and operation. The documentation should provide program philosophy and o
44、perational perspective to company and customer personnel. Subordinate documentation can be developed and deployed, as deemed necessary, to provide specific or detailed direction and instructions for the work force, management, administrative personnel, program/process records and record retention, e
45、tc. 6.2 Identification of processes eligible for using Operator Self-Verification When identifying potential processes for Operator Self-Verification, either selectively or on an organizational wide basis, the implementing organization should consider and select processes based on: acceptable levels
46、 of perceived risk associated with the candidate process and the reduction or elimination of traditional inspection (formal or informal processes for risk analysis may be used); demonstrated stability and maturity of the process through such methods as first article performance results and process g
47、enerated non-conformities within the established process performance review period/cycle time. Operator Self-Verification should not include those processes considered by the organization, customer, or regulatory authorities as “critical processes” (those that mandate traditional inspection for revi
48、ew and acceptance), unless adequate mitigation of risk is agreed to and in place, and proper delegation has been specified. The selection process is most effective when performed by multi-disciplined groups. The combined efforts of the various disciplines such as Manufacturing, Quality Assurance, Ma
49、nufacturing Engineering, Engineering and others offers a more diverse overview of candidate processes. 6.3 Development of plans for Operator Self-Verification implementation, maintenance and continuous improvement In developing the plans for implementation of Operator Self-Verification, the organization should consider the various logistical needs of program implementation, such as training and retraining requirements, oversight documentation and control
