User Requirement Specifications (URS) questions

imecoli

Registered
Looking for insight on URS creation for a manufacturing site. I'm working with a vendor overseas and generating some URS. His approach is you create the URS, which appears to be a wish list for some equipment functionality, not so much a requirement. Once completed you send the URS off to several equipment manufactures and see if the equipment matches what the needs are. Next you complete a Design Qualification (DQ) once you get the responses. Also, if the URS requirements aren't met you just add a note to the URS and attach it. this is a mystery to me also since the "R" is for requirement

Historically, my approach has been you either already know the equipment and its capabilities so you generate your URS based on that, or you get a manual or possibly the cutsheet and use that to identify if the needs are met . these may also be confirmed during IOQ , or if the vendor provides the IOQ paperwork you would have a supplemental IOQ capturing your requirements.

He also mentioned having several different brands and models of the same equipment. My response to this was it would require additional SOPs and potentially increase user error since the procedures would all be different.
 

bengr16

Registered
Hi, I've seen it both ways creating the URS before selecting the equipment and after, but it should probably be before as the point is to identify the requirements to choose the equipment. The URS is a living document so it can be changed as requirements change.
 

imecoli

Registered
Thanks for your response. Not trying to argue, just better understand, just curious why you feel the existing equipment that has already been used successfully for development is not acceptable for use in MFG?
My only concern with purchasing equipment for MFG before actually using it is creating an additional steps and learning curve. By selecting equipment that we already have in house and has been proven to be effective for our methods can expedite this process. I never asked the vendor for specs, but spoke to others who have experienced long delays. I already have issues having them complete supplier surveys :) the process should already be defined and you should have the necessary equipment in house to move forward.
 

v9991

Trusted Information Resource
Looking for insight on URS creation for a manufacturing site. I'm working with a vendor overseas and generating some URS. His approach is you create the URS, which appears to be a wish list for some equipment functionality, not so much a requirement. Once completed you send the URS off to several equipment manufactures and see if the equipment matches what the needs are. Next you complete a Design Qualification (DQ) once you get the responses. Also, if the URS requirements aren't met you just add a note to the URS and attach it. this is a mystery to me also since the "R" is for requirement

Historically, my approach has been you either already know the equipment and its capabilities so you generate your URS based on that, or you get a manual or possibly the cutsheet and use that to identify if the needs are met . these may also be confirmed during IOQ , or if the vendor provides the IOQ paperwork you would have a supplemental IOQ capturing your requirements.

He also mentioned having several different brands and models of the same equipment. My response to this was it would require additional SOPs and potentially increase user error since the procedures would all be different.
see the URS from two perspectives.,
a. Manufacturer / OEM from their perspective, it always evolves with time till DQ , sometimes even till shipping ( FAT!); anything later, leads to delays or rework; This is owing to the parallel evolution of the process/ product development purposes.
b. customer / client perspective is that., it ought to be initiated in two steps, a. initial and b. quantified parameters before PO, along with the design reviews.

In both the instances, it is an dynamic document till DQ is an valid approach, which should be mutually agreed in the the PO or PR. ; after that it involves lots of re-work, and nobody wins in the context of project timelines and timeliness.
 
Top Bottom