Skip to main content
    QHSEtech

    1factory

    1factory connects inspection planning with manufacturing measurements and quality follow-up. Evaluate a drawing revision, its inspection characteristics and the resulting measurements together. The range also includes supplier collaboration and QMS records; identify the purchased roles and options before treating those workflows as one licence.

    Evidence: Researched profile

    Built from vendor sources checked ; AI-assisted drafting. Documentation review, not a hands-on test. How pages are made

    Who is 1factory for?

    Manufacturers managing part-level inspection evidence, first article reports and process variation alongside quality records. File import, automated equipment capture and ERP interfaces have different setup and commercial requirements. Confirm the device output, purchased options and validation responsibilities in your proposed environment.

    1factory can justify its minimum QC subscription when drawing-linked inspection and first-article evidence are routine manufacturing work. It is less attractive for occasional checklist use or if buyers assume QMS, supplier collaboration and ERP interfaces are included in the QC seat price.

    Watch for: Multiple licensing units require a combined proposal. API and automated equipment options need Enterprise scoping.

    Published price: $75/QC user/month (5 minimum; billed annually); currency unconfirmed. Sources checked .

    Product tour

    Vendor visuals—not a QHSEtech hands-on test.

    1factory manufacturing plan MXA0001 table of specifications with operation, type, inspection method and sampling columns

    Manufacturing inspection plan with specifications

    Source
    Grid of small run charts for numbered part features with green and yellow measurement points

    SPC run charts for many features

    Source

    Capabilities and scope

    1factory separates Quality Control, Supplier Collaboration and Quality Management System subscriptions. Standard and Enterprise options have different entitlements; a manufacturing inspection workflow is not the same as an audit programme. Quality Control, Supplier Collaboration and QMS have separate licensing units. Automated CMM imports, API access and specialist hosting are Enterprise options. Do not infer a released MES from the quality-control scope.

    1factory capabilities, evidence status and source links
    CapabilityEvidenceScope and source
    Inspection planning and FAIDocumented by vendor

    Manufacturing scope includes drawing ballooning and first article reporting. Verify the required AS9102 revision and customer form output.

    Manufacturing inspection, FAI and SPC scope
    SPC and capability analysisDocumented by vendor

    Published manufacturing analysis scope; suitable sampling and interpretation remain process-specific.

    Manufacturing inspection, FAI and SPC scope
    Automated CMM and vision importDepends on scope

    Distinct from selected-file import. Match Enterprise options and actual equipment output before assuming connectivity.

    CMM file import and automatic captureCurrent subscription units and Enterprise options
    ERP and PLM data interfacesDepends on scope

    APIs cover part/order inputs and inspection/measurement retrieval. Published APIs do not prove a turnkey connector to your system.

    API objects and integration boundariesCurrent subscription units and Enterprise options
    Document, training and audit recordsDepends on scope

    QMS scope is separately licensed; demonstrate audit scheduling, findings and reviewed closure for your programme.

    Quality management system scopeCurrent subscription units and Enterprise options
    Offline inspection synchronizationNot verified

    Not established by the reviewed material.

    Incoming inspection and risk-based samplingDocumented by vendor

    Incoming Quality supports receiving-inspection plans, certificates, dimensional or visual results, supplier scorecards and stricter or reduced sampling based on part and supplier risk. Sampling changes still require an approved statistical and customer-specific policy; confirm whether IQC is in the purchased QC scope.

    Incoming inspection, risk-based sampling and supplier scorecards
    Gage calibration and measurement-system analysisDocumented by vendor

    The gage module covers calibration schedules and reminders, internal or vendor calibration records, barcode issue/return, gage kits, links from gages to inspection lots and Gage R&R studies. Buyers should test out-of-tolerance impact assessment and confirm the required study method and acceptance criteria rather than rely on default calculations.

    Gage calibration schedules, transactions and measurement-system analysis
    NCR, CAPA, SCAR and complaint workflowsDepends on scope

    The separately licensed QMS scope supports nonconformances, tasks, CAPAs, 8D supplier corrective actions, complaints and audit findings with notifications and escalations. Demonstrate disposition authority, effectiveness verification and closure controls; issue tracking does not by itself establish regulatory complaint or adverse-event reporting compliance.

    NCR, CAPA, SCAR, complaint and audit-finding workflowsQuality management system scope
    Validated environment and electronic signaturesDepends on scope

    1factory describes a separate validated instance, release verification packages, role-based controls, change history and an optional electronic-signature function. Its guidance explicitly assigns intended-use definition, risk assessment, testing and validation records to the customer; vendor verification evidence does not complete customer validation.

    Validated-instance responsibilities and electronic-signature controls
    GOV hosting environmentDepends on scope

    The vendor states that its GOV environment achieved FedRAMP Moderate Equivalence following a 3PAO assessment and is intended for CUI workloads. This is environment-specific and must be contracted and evidenced with current assessment documents; do not apply the claim automatically to the standard commercial environment or treat it as an agency Authorization to Operate.

    GOV environment and FedRAMP Moderate Equivalence statement

    Also watch for: No standard implementation duration or independently verified review score was established.

    1factory pricing

    Separate named-user and connected-supplier subscriptions

    Entry price as recorded: $75/QC user/month (5 minimum; billed annually); currency unconfirmed.

    Pricing sources checked : Checked against the vendor's published pricing.

    The 1factory pricing page has 3 published prices (unit, term, minimum and source) and the entry cost worked out.

    See the full 1factory price table →

    Offline workflow not verified

    Test connection loss, queued measurements and recovery in the actual deployment.

    What we could not verify

    1 not verified · 6 depend on scope · 3 notes

    Demo script

    Drawing revision to first article evidence

    1. Prepare the drawing and confirm its revision and inspection characteristics.
    2. Collect or import measurements and reconcile exceptions against the correct plan.
    3. Generate the requested first article package and review traceability to the measured part.

    Production measurement to reviewed disposition

    1. Load representative production measurements using the agreed equipment route.
    2. Review variation and investigate a selected signal or nonconformance.
    3. Record disposition, assign follow-up and demonstrate closure evidence and any ERP handoff.

    Incoming defect through supplier corrective action

    1. Receive a representative supplier lot and execute the approved visual, dimensional and certificate checks.
    2. Fail one characteristic, create an NCR directly from the inspection and retain the affected lot and measurement traceability.
    3. Issue an 8D SCAR through the supplier workflow, reject an incomplete response and track containment and permanent actions.
    4. Verify effectiveness, update the supplier scorecard or sampling status under an approved policy, and export the linked evidence.

    Ask the vendor to show you

    1. Change a drawing revision and show which inspection characteristics change while prior results remain traceable.
    2. Import an actual output file from our CMM with GD&T, mixed units and multiple parts; demonstrate mapping errors and corrections.
    3. Show a process signal leading to an investigation, disposition and reviewed corrective action.
    4. Pass a work order from our ERP, then return inspection status and quantities; identify middleware, retries and reconciliation ownership.
    5. Separate QC users, QMS users, connected suppliers and Enterprise options in the quote, including the required hosting and validation support.
    6. Request an implementation plan for one representative drawing, CMM file and ERP handoff, with owners, acceptance evidence and dates supplied by the vendor rather than assumed from the subscription tier.
    Use demo checklist

    Questions the sources answer

    How fast can 1factory be implemented?

    The reviewed official pricing and demo pages do not publish one standard implementation duration. Request a dated plan for drawing and master-data preparation, CMM mapping, ERP interfaces, validation, training and acceptance using your representative part.

    Does this profile include a 1factory user-review score?

    No independently verified, product-specific review aggregate is asserted here. This profile evaluates official product, pricing and technical documentation; use reference calls and your own demonstration results as separate evidence.

    Is 1factory a flat per-site subscription?

    The current pricing page uses QC users, QMS users and connected suppliers as different billing units. Scope the required purchases together.

    Does CMM import mean every device connects automatically?

    No. Selected-file and automated capture are separate paths. Demonstrate your file format, mapping and selected options.

    Is an ERP connector included?

    The vendor documents APIs. Confirm your interface implementation, entitlement, error handling and support; API availability alone is not a turnkey integration.

    Does FAI support guarantee customer acceptance?

    No. Validate the report revision, required fields and evidence with your customer and quality team.

    Is the sign-up page a free trial?

    The official page is a demonstration request. A free trial was not established by this review.

    Is Traveler/MES part of the current evaluated scope?

    The reviewed Traveler/MES page shows the label "(Available: Dec 2026)" beside its manufacturing execution heading, which this record reads as December 2026 availability. Confirm release status separately; this profile does not treat it as already delivered.

    Sources and change log

    13 sources, checked
    • : Rechecked the published subscription units and added explicit implementation-time and review-evidence boundaries for the current AI research query.
    • : The compact starting-price label now retains the currency caveat already present in the full plan details. Amounts and whole-profile research dates are unchanged.
    • : Replaced flat-price and broad interface assumptions with current licence units, manufacturing workflows, equipment boundaries and source-linked checks.

    Compare with

    Drawn from the profiles behind the Alternatives list above: most category tags shared with 1factory first, then the closest overlap in documented capability names, then A to Z. Ratings, search demand and sponsorship are not used; rows are shown A to Z.

    • InfinityQS ProFicient

      No shared category tag.

      Differs: price no verified amount (this profile: amount published).

      Same: scope, offline and trial.

    • Minitab Real-Time SPC

      No shared category tag.

      Differs: offline connection required (this profile: unclassified); price no verified amount (this profile: amount published).

      Same: scope and trial.

    All 1factory alternatives

    Reviews on qhsetech.com

    Star ratings and review counts from the old catalog are not shown: no source for them was recorded.