right to repair
Over the past year, ABr has been running quite a few articles around the issue of Right to Repair. Most of these have been around the push for legislation to
allow consumers more choice when repairing their much loved vehicles. But there are many other intriguing aspects that underlie this debate. One of these
aspects is the different perceptions of quality, and how these perceptions are formed. This is the second of three articles written by Andrew D. Graham,
managing director of SUPLEX GmbH. This series has been extracted from a letter Andrew wrote to Peter Lawton, editor of “CAT Magazine”, one of the UK’s
leading automotive aftermarket trade magazines.
Credible Independent Testing
deflection, spring fit and compatibility with
the original spring pans and last but not
least, full batch traceability (because springs,
let’s not forget, are safety critical parts).
The specification would be reviewed on a
regular basis and updated to include any
new technologies introduced by the vehicle
manufacturers. Manufacturing tolerances
would be in line with those specified by the
vehicle manufacturer.
I discussed this issue at length with
my colleague Dan G. White, managing
director of SUPLEX UK Ltd. at the end
of the IAAF conference and together,
we hatched a plan to introduce
independent testing of our products and
validation of our product development
and manufacturing processes, employing
the services of an internationally
recognised body, specifically, in this case,
the Institute of Spring Technology (IST)
which is based in Sheffield.
I
ST members are located worldwide and
include spring wire suppliers, suppliers
of spring making- and testing machinery,
spring manufacturers and spring users.
SUPLEX has been a full member of the
IST since 1997 but this should in no way
suggest any bias towards our choice of
independent testing body.
Here, in Britain, we can and indeed should
be proud that an institute like the IST not
only exists but also enjoys global recognition
and clout. I’d add at this point that SUPLEX
is an associate member of the Federation
of German Spring Manufacturers (VDFI –
Verband der Deutschen Federnindustrie).
Our company was, in fact, the first associate
member of this prestigious organisation.
My initial approach to IST’s managing
director, Adrian May, was at the SpringsTec
Fair in Stuttgart in late February 2013 and
was well received. During the following
months, IST developed a testing procedure
that not only examines the physical
characteristics of the aftermarket coilspring itself, comparing these with the OE
equivalent part, but which also validates the
processes and mechanisms installed by the
manufacturer and supplier and which play a
fundamental part in guaranteeing the quality
of the finished product. This two-pronged
approach would involve IST representatives
visiting the supplier’s engineering/
manufacturing facility and warehousing,
examining the processes by which springs
for the aftermarket are developed and
manufactured, the supplier having to provide
worked examples demonstrating how the
quality of each critical process is controlled.
Discussions with Brian Spratt at the IAAF
suggested any IST technical approval of
product and validation of the development
and manufacturing processes could receive
an “IAAF endorsement”. This new, “IAAF
Endorsed Quality Certificate” (the final
terminology has yet to be established)
would carry significant weight because the
testing and validation has been carried out
by an independent and widely recognised
body and, importantly, the specification
defining the quality of the coil-spring itself
could be made available to everybody in the
distribution chain. It could, for example, be
downloaded from the supplier’s or IAAF’s
website. Transparency is thus assured.
The specification itself would set minimum
standards and deal with the most important
issues; spring material, fatigue resistance,
corrosion resistance, spring geometry
(which determines spring rate), free length
(which ensures sufficient pre-load in the
full-droop position and prevents dislocation
under extreme driving conditions), residual
| words in action
42
april 2014
First approval of any supplier would obviously
be a more involved and lengthy process
than later “audits” which would entail
suppliers submitting parts to the IST for a
full examination on an annual basis. The
parts submitted would include the supplier’s
part itself, the corresponding OE spring and
spring seats in addition to a complete set of
documentation. The IST would specify the
quantity of parts required for submission
choosing parts randomly from the supplier’s
catalogue. An appropriate level of sampling
is currently being defined by the IST. All of
these parts would be supplied to the IST
free of charge for testing and, assuming they
satisfy the criteria defined in the specification,
a new certificate would be issued by the IAAF.
The supplier would receive separate invoices
from the IST and the IAAF, providing, at the
same time, welcome revenue for both. This
procedure sounds laborious and expensive
but good suppliers are, in practice, doing this
work anyway and will have all the parts to
hand, so the costs, we have every reason to
believe at this stage, will be affordable for any
supplier serious about the quality of the parts
they are offering.
This process, once finalised, could provide
a template for any other product line and
the supplier of that product would employ
the services of the appropriate independent
body. Brake discs, for example, the majority
of which are manufactured from cast iron,
could, I am sure, be satisfactorily tested by
the Institute of Cast Metal Engineers (ICME).
Manufacturers and suppliers of high quality
parts will know who they need to be talking to.
More in the next issue of aBr.