Tooling change control

Tooling corrections: close the issue without losing the approved configuration.

A corrected sample is only credible when the original issue, root cause, authorised action, tool revision, affected evidence and retrial result remain linked. PartVerity runs corrections as controlled engineering changes—not workshop conversations.

Structure a correction loop Injection moulding overview

Decision premise

Correction question: which approved action changed which tool state, and what evidence proves closure without creating a new risk?

Engineering control

Six controls from issue to correction closure

Speed matters, but an undocumented steel change can erase the configuration that produced the previous evidence.

Issue identity

Create one numbered record per dimensional, cosmetic, functional, tool or process issue with sample and requirement references.

Evidence route

Issue log, images/results and affected requirement

Cause and ownership

Distinguish part design, tool design/build, material, process, measurement and handling causes before selecting action.

Evidence route

Cause rationale, accountable owner and required approvals

Approved correction

Define exact steel, insert, gate, vent, texture, process or drawing action plus expected effect and reversal risk.

Evidence route

Signed action record, marked-up tool/part data and due date

Configuration update

Update tool revision, drawings, insert list, programmes and maintenance history so the physical change matches the dossier.

Evidence route

As-changed record and controlled tooling revision

Retrial scope

Identify which original and collateral characteristics must be rechecked, with stable sample genealogy and process state.

Evidence route

Retrial plan, affected CTQ list and actual results

Closure authority

Close only when evidence meets the stated requirement or a named authority approves a documented deviation.

Evidence route

Closure signature, residual-risk statement and next-gate status

Decision matrix

Issue type to controlled correction route

The fastest physical change is not always the lowest programme risk.

Observed issue	Correction decision	Closure evidence
Dimension consistently shifted	Tool steel versus process or drawing review	Cause evidence and affected-feature retrial
Sink or visible witness	Wall/tool/process interaction and visual-zone authority	Controlled sample under final viewing criteria
Intermittent short shot	Vent, gate, resin and process-window investigation	Repeat build with complete cavity/run evidence
Ejection mark or deformation	Ejector layout, cooling and removal-state review	Free-state geometry and cosmetic result
Correction moves adjacent CTQ	Collateral-risk review before steel action	Original plus neighbouring CTQ results

Claim boundaries

False correction closure signals

A supplier message saying ‘fixed’ is not configuration evidence.

One hand-picked sample does not prove repeatable closure.

Process compensation should not silently replace an authorised tool correction.

Closing the original issue does not excuse a new collateral non-conformance.

Technical context

Use guidance to frame the review—not to replace project evidence.

External context for stage gates, change control, configuration records and cross-functional approval. PartVerity applies those controls to tooling corrections.

Autodesk NPI process guide