control of surface, shape and dimension corresponds to the order

[JACEK1]

Hello everybody!

Control of surface, shape and dimension corresponds to the order.

In my opinion, the above sentence should read "After performing control, surface, shape and dimension were found to correspond to the order.

What do you think?

It is about a cold-drawn hexagonal steel bar.

Upsetting tests were also done.

 

[J&K Tutoring]

The original breaks down to: Control corresponds. This means that the parameters mentioned are within the specifications of the order.

1. Is this a statement by the mill, some outside (neutral) party, or an internal memo within the buyer company?
2. Why do you feel the need to 'improve' the original?

It's not bad as is, though I does rather lump these three different things together. I might suggest: Surface quality, shape, and dimensions are as specified.

 

[JACEK1]

It is a Czech company that produces rolled steel.

I didn't seem to understand the sentence in question.

To my way of thinking, it is strangely formulated.

 

[tedmc]

What do you mean by "control of surface"? Flatness? Smoothness? Material pure and free from defects? You can say the attributes of the product comply with the specifications of the order.

Czech company?

 

[SoothingDave]

They are saying these attributes are under control. That is, their manufacturing is a controlled process. Control by definition in process control means that variation is within prescribed limits and not trending in a direction of exceeding the limits.

 

[J&K Tutoring]

Perhaps I should clarify control. The word quality is missing. It should be Quality Control- often abbreviated as QC- the inspection process whereby either the client or some independent agency certifies that the product(s) meet the specifications of the order.

That's why I asked question 1 in post #2 (once again, not answered). JACEK1's post #3 indicates that this comes from the manufacturer, which doesn't make much sense. What else are they going to say? It's a bit like the guy in Times Square saying, "Of course it's a real Rolex!"

 

[JACEK1]

Why would the producer lie?

 

[Tarheel]

I didn't seem to understand the sentence in question.

The only thing that makes sense here is:

I don't understand the sentence in question.

 

[J&K Tutoring]

JACEK1- I'm not saying the producer is lying ("It's a bit like..."). The point I didn't make very well is that it is not for the producer to verify the products meet the standards of the buyer. Nor should the buyer assume the producer is lying. If they did, they would never have contracted with that producer in the first place. The buyer should always be the one to arrange the QC inspection. Or, the buyer and the producer agree on some neutral party to do the inspection.

"Trust but verify" is sometimes attributed to Ronald Reagan, but more likely comes from an old Russian proverb.

 

[SoothingDave]

Sellers are certified by third parties for quality and if they issue a certificate, that is auditable and traceable. That's the point of a quality system. A buyer can't have the means of inspecting everything, and if using trusted and certified suppliers, should not have to do more than occasional random inspections. That's how manufacturing works.

 

[tedmc]

Sellers are certified by third parties for quality and if they issue a certificate, that is auditable and traceable. That's the point of a quality system. A buyer can't have the means of inspecting everything, and if using trusted and certified suppliers, should not have to do more than occasional random inspections. That's how manufacturing works.

Quality system works well with run-of-the-mill items but not with one-off, custom-made items like factory equipment. This is where factory visits to witness the fabrication and testing come in.

 

[J&K Tutoring]

How does this relate to the OP?