First article inspection mini lesson
A first article inspection report should speak for itself: anyone can tell which part it is, what was checked, what the results were, and who signed it off.
Your task here: read a first article inspection report and spot where the nonconformances are.
Made by AeroQuality InsightThis lesson is mainly about reading a first article inspection report (FAIR). It is not a full AS9102 course. If you’d like to know more, this article is a good place to start:
First-piece inspection: evidence before production releaseWhat the report says has to match the evidence on the floor.
Auditors often ask: Which drawing revision is this? Was every item measured? What were the results? How were the nonconformances handled? Was it checked again after the change?
When it’s done, who’s responsible, and how much it covers
Each item to check has a number, a measured result and a source
All three forms tell the same story, and nonconformances don’t contradict each other
If the process or design changed, or production restarted after a long stop, decide whether to redo it and keep a record
Spot any of these? Ask one more question.
Chances are there’s a nonconformance.
The number could be measured, but the report just says OK or NG, with no actual value.
Some numbers are missing on the drawing, and someone says “oh, those are reference dimensions”, but the drawing doesn’t say so.
A nonconformance is only mentioned in the remarks, and the ticks and document number on the forms don’t line up.
A partial first article says only “about the same as the old part”, with no word on which version it’s compared to or why.
Data was added to the report afterwards, with no new revision and nobody reviewing or approving it.
Where do auditors start?
Tap a dot on the radar to see how auditors usually ask, and what you need to show on the floor.
Text version: the 6 radar items
📋 How it was planned in the first place
A first article is meant to show that doing it the normal production way gives you a good part. It isn’t picking any part and measuring it.
What to show on the floor: Planning records, who’s responsible, notes from talking with the customer when needed, and proof that the real production process and equipment were used.
What the auditor might ask: Was this part made the real production way? Who decided between a full and a partial first article? Should the customer take a look too?
A common mix-up: Thinking that once the customer has received the goods, the first article has passed.
📐 Have all the items to check been found?
If the list of items isn’t complete, even carefully measured results can’t make up for it.
What to show on the floor: A numbered (ballooned) drawing or an equivalent list, a record of how characteristics were identified from the 3D model, and a number for every item.
What the auditor might ask: How did you find the characteristics defined only in the 3D model? Where are the ones missing from the 2D drawing recorded?
A common mix-up: Listing items from the 2D drawing only, and missing characteristics that exist only in the model.
🪪 Form 1: the part’s identity
This form is like the ID card of the whole report. Every other form has to match it.
What to show on the floor: Part number, drawing or model revision, report number, full or partial, signature and date.
What the auditor might ask: Is this the current revision? If it’s a partial first article, which version is it compared to? Where’s the reason written?
A common mix-up: The revision is blank, or different from the drawing actually in use on the floor.
🧾 Form 2: product accountability (materials, special processes, functional tests)
Proof for materials and special processes has to be trustworthy, and it has to trace to this batch.
What to show on the floor: Material certificates, special process certificates and functional test records, all traceable to this report’s batch.
What the auditor might ask: Is this certificate for this batch? Was the special process done by an approved source?
A common mix-up: Every field is filled in, but the certificates can’t be traced to this batch.
📏 Form 3: what was each item’s result?
This is the most important evidence in the whole report. You should be able to follow it number by number back to the drawing and the measurement report.
What to show on the floor: Numbered drawing, Form 3 and the measurement report attachment, with all the numbers matching.
What the auditor might ask: Where did the missing numbers go? What was the actual measured value for this dimension? How was OK decided?
A common mix-up: Just writing OK; attachments that don’t match the numbers; missing numbers with nothing on the drawing to explain them.
🔄 When there’s a nonconformance, or something has changed
Once the product or process changes, earlier first article results can’t just be reused.
What to show on the floor: The nonconformance document number, the first article redone after the fix, the change evaluation record, and the evaluation after a long production stop.
What the auditor might ask: Was it checked again after the fix? Which items does this change affect? After a long stop, who decided whether to redo it?
A common mix-up: Saying the equipment and people haven’t changed, so there’s no need to evaluate.
Match it up: evidence and what it shows
On the left is evidence you’d see on the floor. On the right is what it’s trying to show. Connect them!
Computer: hold down the left item, drag it to the right, then let go. Phone: tap the left item, then tap the right.
A correct match leaves a green line. A wrong one shows a red line, but no worries, it springs right back. Just try again.
Keyboard: Tab to an item on the left and press Enter to select it; then Tab to an item on the right and press Enter to connect.
This activity needs JavaScript to work. The content below is the static version; see “Answers” for the full answer list.
Correct matches and explanations
8 pieces of evidence, what each one shows, and why they go together.
| Evidence on the floor | What it shows | Why |
|---|---|---|
| The numbers on the drawing match Form 3 one by one | Every item has a number you can trace back | With a number you can find the result. If one is missing or doesn’t match, you can’t find that item’s measurement. |
| Every item that can be measured has its actual value recorded | Let the numbers speak, not just OK | For items with a tolerance, the actual number shows how close it is to the limit. A bare OK can’t be checked again. |
| Form 1 says which version it is compared with, and why only a partial was done | A partial first article needs a reason | To be convincing, a partial first article has to explain three things: compared with what, why only these items, and which items are affected. |
| The nonconforming item has a document number, and the Form 1 tick says the same | The story about the nonconformance is consistent | A remark alone doesn’t count. There should be a document number, and every form should say the same thing, so nobody reading the report gets confused. |
| Material and special process certificates trace to this batch | You can check the certificate is for this batch | If the fields are filled in but the certificate can’t be traced to this batch, it’s still a nonconformance. |
| Appearance is judged against a standard photo that has a revision | Appearance judgments have a basis | For appearance that can’t be measured in numbers, a standard photo can be used, but that photo must have a revision you can look up. |
| After a change, someone evaluated whether to redo the first article and wrote down the conclusion | After a change, think about re-verifying | After a change you can’t just reuse the earlier results. Once you’ve evaluated and decided, keep a record. |
| When data is added to a report, there’s a new revision, and someone reviews and approves it | Records are looked after | A first article report is a formal quality record. If you need to add data, go through the formal process. Don’t quietly edit it. |