How external co-heat and surface processing is included in the vendor audit is based on the real production scene of the plant and cannot be viewed only in the diameter or price of the screw. It is recommended that the drawings version, documentation, size reports, turn-overs and services be organized first, followed by three consecutive shifts to avoid a single test model representing the production status. The aim of this step is to establish comparable old programme benchmarks so that subsequent screw changes can be supported by data.

The most easily overlooked aspects of the topic are needs deviations, creation deviations and acceptance disputes. Plants should examine the remaining plasticization capacity on the basis of order peaks rather than average annual production, and write quality standards into quantum sets, sample numbers, upper and lower limits and determination rules. Vendors can make retroactive trade-offs between interoperability, earmarking and cost when there are clear values for product weight, daily production, customer quality caps and allowed stop times.

The main line of the case [design focus] is the management of the supply chain with uniform data packages and performance acceptance standards. In geometric and material programmes, the measurement segment should be synchronized with the required back pressure, without excessive back pressure to compensate for geometric deficiencies; and the retrofitting and refuelling of dead-angle, reflow and screwhead residual areas should be checked. The final solution would also need to be compatible with the wear and tear of the cylinder, the drive, the physical velocity and the current cleaning process, and would not cover up co-operation or process problems with a single high-level material.

The new [comparison-valid] programme proposes to operate for at least 72 consecutive hours, extracting 50 sims per stabilization phase and recording the number of downtimes, maintenance hours and the combined cost per 10,000 items. The test shall first establish a stabilization point at a medium rotation rate and a medium back pressure, then gradually expand the process window, and also maintain sufficient time to observe the twist, temperature and measure drift under the normal upper load. If only the first one is checked, it is easy to miss the risks associated with heat drifting, material stoppage, reversal loop return and prolonged wear and tear.

When the [stabilized production] spiral is shaped, a single asset-numbered associated drawing, repair, up and down is used to record, and trend maps are created for the perforation, the reverse ring gap and the inside of the cylinder. The time of storage, back pressure, screw velocity, noise and mass of the product shall be recorded in a uniform manner in the shift. When the above indicators change at the same time, the mechanical gaps and the state of the raw materials should be checked before the process is adjusted to avoid the use of parameters to compensate for hardware degradation.

The cost statement [of the combined cost] should not simply be a screw price, but should be based on the true purchase price for test moulds, cleaning materials, transitional materials and bad goods, and separate the planned shutdown from the unplanned shutdown, which would include the loss of late delivery. It is recommended that the cost per 10,000 eligible items be exported simultaneously, the cost per 1,000 operating hours and the estimated number of return months. When new programmes reduce waste, refuelling or sudden shutdowns, higher initial inputs are often offset during production.

The [Closed Ring Management] will eventually include drawing numbers, screwdriver materials, heat treatment, critical dimensions, portable tubes, process windows and acceptance data in the curriculum vitae cards. It is recommended that a reference set of data be maintained before and after maintenance to determine wear and tear trends, together with a system of metal heterogeneity separation and magnetic insulation, and to check for prune damage after anomalies. When there is a clear change in the raw material formulation, retrospection ratio, product structure or target rhythm, the applicable boundary between “extrahesive and surface” treatment should be reassessed, rather than defaulting that the old conclusion is permanently valid.

Topic: Procurement, acceptance and vendor management