I did a quick search on QA vs QC and this was the first site found. They even have a picture.
![](https://www.eevblog.com/forum/blog-specific/eevblog-315-korad-ka3005p-reviewfail/?action=dlattach;attach=27600)
What that graph is not explaining is that QA is about defining and managing the processes in a company, not the quality of products. As QC is a subset of the processes in a company, it is under the QA, but the QA processes are only concerned that your QC is running in a proper way. A manager in the company defines how QC should operate, and then QA ensures that these rules are followed. QA is about defining comprehensive processes and rigorously following these processes, rather then making it up as you go along. So if a product fails, rather then a manager saying "What will I do now?", people look up the QA manual to see what steps have to be taken, and they follow the steps. QC is only shown as part of QA in the same way that every other process in the company will become part of QA.
Quality Control does not ensure quality, it only finds instances where quality is missing. Obviously it's better than nothing, but it has its limitations. The most important of these is that you only find out that things aren't OK at the end of the process.
Quality Assurance developed from the realisation that quality could be improved by looking 'further up the line'. It is aimed at preventing nonconformities/defects.
QA still has QC at its core to control the quality of service/product, but it goes beyond mere testing or inspection to also consider related activities or processes (such as training, document control and audits) that may be resulting in defects further down the line.
I dont know if it's right or wrong but it is not consistent with what you say.
It is consistant if you understand what I have been saying. QA means you are dealing with a company that will handle complaints in a standard manner. You are not at the mercy of the mood of the representative you are talking to. Dealing with company with good QA standards is a good thing, but not in the way that I think you want.
I think you want a quality product.
QA does not care less about the quality of a product unless the company has written rules defining a process to determine the quality of a product. Once there are rules, then ISO9001 QA requires that the rules are followed, and if they are not followed properly, a non-conformance report
must be raised within the company. This non-conformance report must then be acted on in some way - it cannot be ignored. If the independent ISO9001 inspectors see there are non-conformance reports that have not been addressed, they can suspend the company's ISO9001 accreditation.
If you are not knocking Trio Smartcal's QA, what on earth have you been whinging about?
The nub of what I have been trying to say is that a company having QA accreditation doesn't assure me personally of anything.
The psu failing only reinforced this view.
Whereas the brand name Trio Smartcal does give me reason to feel assured, because I have heard of them, have dealt with them and know of others that do the same.
It does not assure you that a product the company is selling is high quality. If they are selling a low quality product, you get a low quailty product, and that is totally fine with a good QA system.
However, a good QA process is important when companies have to cooperate as it means that the QA processes of the 2 companies can be set up to work together efficiently. A big reason Trio Smartcal has ISO9001 is because many other potential clients, particularly governmental organisations, require they have ISO9001. These customers will not do business otherwise. That is why the ISO9001 compliance is advertised.
Richard.