Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [agile-testing] The Whole Team approach

Expand Messages
  • Strg Pune
    quote Good point, I have wondered that myself before - is manufacturing QC similar to software QC? One of my coworkers is an industrial engineer, I will ask
    Message 1 of 44 , Jan 31, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      quote
      Good point, I have wondered that myself before - is manufacturing QC similar to software QC? One of my coworkers is an industrial engineer, I will ask him. It seems like quality values would translate from one industry to another. Maybe the feedback loop in a machine shop is quicker? If you don't size the part exactly right, it gums up the works right away? 
      unquote

      QC in Manufacturing:

      Conceptually is the same as in software engineering. 
      Their Specification: 
      1. Independent part drawings and tolerances, surface finish defined by various associations such as API, IEEE, SAE, DIN, etc
      2. Assembly drawings and specifications for RPM, vibrations, torque, etc for a gearbox, for example. 
      3. Metallurgical properties are defined wrt standards such as SAE, DIN, etc

      Methodology of testing:
      Destructive and non-destructive
      Destructive: Metal is broken to check metallurgical properties, tensile strengths, etc
      Non-destructive testing: using eddy current, ultrasonic etc to check whether the metal has inside cracks without damaging the part

      QA and QC:
      QA: The quality assurance plan is defined upfront and submitted to customers about how the quality will be achieved and what standards will be referenced.
      QC: Randomly parts are picked for testing. records are maintained using SPC, process is controlled if the charts show that dimensions are moving out of the tolerance zone

      Inspections:
      Done by outside agencies appointed by customers or as agreed in QA plan. For example, Boiler inspector will come and pick any part randomly and ask teams to carry out tests in front of him/her. 

      The difference that I find in QC of software engineering and manufacturing is that there is never a uncertainty over the specification. Specs are drawings or standards written by governing bodies and mostly very clear. If you have the drawings, and start making a car, nobody will end up in producing a bike or a car that has only one door. 
      Concepts like "working software" are not applicable there. 

      Pressures to produce high-quality product:
      very high. 

      In my opinion, if at all we have to compare software engineering with manufacturing, the right analogy will be comparing SE with design activity in manufacturing and not the manufacturing itself. Design activity is a mental process and mistakes in assumptions, choosing right standards, tolerances, loads, environmental conditions, etc will affect the final product. and therefore, design activity is more comparable with software development and testing process. 

      STRG


      From: Lisa Crispin <lisa.crispin@...>
      To: agile-testing@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Saturday, 31 January, 2009 4:54:20 AM
      Subject: Re: [agile-testing] The Whole Team approach

      On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 4:00 PM, John Overbaugh <john.overbaugh@ gmail.com> wrote:


      I was thinking about something on my long drive home yesterday... You don't really hear of QA specialists who work in machine shops, checking the work of every machinist. To be a machinist, it's just inbuilt to the personality that everything be built to the highest specification. There is some amount of QC which validates parts are built to spec, but most of the push for quality comes from on-the-floor leads and the machinists themselves.
       
      Why can't we be like that in software? Why can't all who 'write code' write it from that super-high quality perspective? Not sure, and I recognize my example breaks down here because software is inherently more complex than building a car, but the question is out there anyhow...














      Good point, I have wondered that myself before - is manufacturing QC similar to software QC? One of my coworkers is an industrial engineer, I will ask him. It seems like quality values would translate from one industry to another. Maybe the feedback loop in a machine shop is quicker? If you don't size the part exactly right, it gums up the works right away?
       





      Check out the all-new face of Yahoo! India. Click here.
    • Bob Clancy
      ... Thanks for your comments Kim. I was thinking that many of the checklist items should be automated too. With better build tools (for instance: ant/Maven
      Message 44 of 44 , Feb 5, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In agile-testing@yahoogroups.com, Kim Gräsman <kim.grasman@...> wrote:
        > ... the idea of standardized work is good, I think. Checklists
        > are a great way of capturing monotone work, if it can't be
        > automated with any reasonable effort.

        Thanks for your comments Kim. I was thinking that many of the
        checklist items should be automated too. With better build tools (for
        instance: ant/Maven instead of Make) deployment is now more
        automatable than it was in the past when I was using those checklists.

        -- Bob Clancy
        http://agiletester.net
        http://agiletesterdotnet.wordpress.com
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.