Core Tools Forms V5

Core Tools Forms Disc V5
Copyright 2008 March Quality Services
Part Name
Part Number
Engineering Change Level
Engineering Change Level Date
NAME
NUMBER
ECL
ECL DATE
Organization Name
Organization Code
Street Address
City
State
Zip
Phone Number
ORGANIZATION
CODE
ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
555-555-5555
Customer Name
Division
Application
CUSTOMER
DIVISION
APPLICATION
File Name
FILE.XLS
For sales and technical support contact AIAG at 1-248-358-3570
THE FOLLOWING LEVELS OF DOCUMENTS WERE USED TO PREPARE THIS WORKBOOK.
DOCUMENT
ADVANCED PRODUCT QUALITY PLANNING AND CONTROL PLAN
REFERENCE MANUAL
MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS
POTENTIAL FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS
PRODUCTION PART APPROVAL
EDITION
Second
PRINTING
Jul-08
Third
Fourth
Fourth
Mar-02
Jun-08
Mar-06
A-1 DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER
Question
Yes No N/A
Comment / Action Required
Person
Responsible
1 Was the DFMEA prepared using the Chrysler,

Ford, and General Motors Potential Failure Mode
and Effects Analysis (FMEA) reference manual,
and applicable customer specific requirements?
2 Have historical campaign and warranty data been
reviewed?
3 Have best practices and lessons learned from
similar part DFMEAs been considered?
4 Does the DFMEA identify Special Characteristics?
5 Have pass-through characteristics (glossary) been
identified and reviewed with affected suppliers for
FMEA alignment and appropriate controls in the
supply base?
6 Have special characteristics designated by the
customer or organization been reviewed with
affected suppliers to assure FMEA alignment?
7 Have design characteristics that affect high risk
priority failure modes been identified?
8 Have appropriate corrective actions been
assigned to high risk priority numbers?
9 Have appropriate corrective actions been
assigned to high severity numbers?
10 Have risk priorities been revised when corrective
actions have been completed and verified?
Revision Date:
Page 3 of 181
A-1 DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
Prepared By:
Page 4 of 181
DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 5 of 181
DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 6 of 181
A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
A. General
1 Does the design require:
a l New materials?
b
Special tooling?
New technology or process?
2 Has assembly build variation analysis been

considered?
3 Has Design of Experiments been considered?
4 Is there a plan for prototypes in place?
5 Has a DFMEA been completed?
6 Has a DFMA (Design For Manufacturability and
Assembly) been completed?
7 Have service and maintenance issues been
considered?
8 Has the Design Verification Plan been
considered?
9 If yes, was it completed by a cross functional
team?
10 Are all specified tests, methods, equipment and
acceptance criteria clearly defined and
understood?
Page 7 of 181

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
11 Have Special Characteristics been selected?

/
12 Is bill of material complete?
/
13 Are Special Characteristics properly documented?
B. Engineering Drawings
14 Are reference dimensions identified to minimize
inspection layout time?
15 Are sufficient control points and datum surfaces
identified to design functional gages?
16 Are tolerances compatible with accepted
manufacturing standards?
17 Can existing and available inspection technology
measure all design requirements?
18 Is the customer designated engineering change
management process used to manage
engineering changes?
C. Engineering Performance Specifications
19 Have special characteristics been identified?
20 Are test parameters sufficient to address required
use conditions, i.e., production validation and end
use?
Page 8 of 181

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
21 Have parts manufactured at minimum and

maximum specifications been tested as required?
22 Will all product testing be done in-house?
/
23 If not, is it done by an approved supplier?
/
24 Is the specified in-process performance test
sampling size and/or frequency consistent with
manufacturing volumes?
25 Has customer approval been obtained, e.g., for
testing and documentation, as required?
D. Material Specification
26 Are special material characteristics identified?
/
27 Where the organization is design responsible, are
specified materials, heat treat and surface
treatments compatible with the durability
requirements in the identified environment?
28 Where required, are the material suppliers on the
customer approved list?
29 Has the organization developed and implemented
a process to control incoming material quality?
Page 9 of 181

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
30 Have material characteristics requiring inspection

been identified?
If so,
a
Will characteristics be checked in-house?

/
b l If checked in house, is test equipment
available?
c l If checked in house, are competent people
available to assure accurate testing?
31 Will outside laboratories be used?
/
a
l Does the organization have a process in place

to assure laboratory competency such as
accreditation? NOTE: Competency needs to be
assured, regardless of the organization's
relationship with the laboratory.
32 Have the following material requirements been

considered:
a l Handling, including environmental aspects?
b l Storage, including environmental aspects?
/
c l Have the materials/substance composition
been reported in accordance with customer
requirements e.g., IMDS?
d
l Have polymeric parts been identified/marked

per customer requirements?
Page 10 of 181

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 11 of 181
SIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 12 of 181
Due Date
Page 13 of 181
Due Date
Page 14 of 181
Due Date
Page 15 of 181
Due Date
Page 16 of 181
A-3 NEW EQUIPMENT, TOOLING, AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
1 Does the design require:

a l New materials?
/
b l Quick
change?
/
c l Volume fluctuations?
/
d l Mistake proofing?
/
2 Have lists been prepared identifying (include all
suppliers)?:
a l New equipment?
/
b l New
tooling?
/
c l New test equipment (including checking aids)?
3 Has acceptance criteria been agreed upon for
(include all suppliers):
a l New equipment?
/
b l New
tooling?
/
c l New test equipment (including checking aids)?
4 Will a preliminary capability study be conducted at
the tooling and/or equipment manufacturer?
Page 17 of 181
A-3 NEW EQUIPMENT, TOOLING, AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
5 Has test equipment feasibility and accuracy been

established?
6 Is a preventive maintenance plan complete for
equipment and tooling?
7 Are setup instructions for new equipment and
tooling complete and understandable?
8 Will capable gages be available to run preliminary
process capability studies at the equipment
supplier's facility?
9 Will preliminary process capability studies be run
at the processing plant?
10 Have process characteristics that affect special
product characteristics been identified?
11 Were special product characteristics used in
determining acceptance criteria?
12 Does the manufacturing equipment have sufficient
capacity to handle forecasted production and
service volumes?
13 Is testing capacity sufficient to provide adequate
testing?
14 Has the measurement equipment been verified
and documented showing qualification for the
required scope of measurement and testing?
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 18 of 181
TOOLING, AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 19 of 181
TOOLING, AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 20 of 181
A-4 PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
1 Is customer assistance or approval required for

the development of the control plan?
2 Has the organization identified who will be the
quality liaison with the customer?
3 Has the organization identified who will be the
quality liaison with its suppliers?
4 Has the quality management system been
reviewed and approved per customer specific
requirements?
5
Are there sufficient personnel identified to cover:

a
Control plan requirements?
/
b
Layout inspection?
/
c
Engineering performance testing?
/
d
Problem reaction and resolution analysis?

/
6 Is there a documented training program that:

a l Includes all employees?
/
b l Lists whose been trained?
/
c l Provides a training schedule?
/
7 Has training been completed for:
a
Statistical process control?
Capability studies?
/
b
/
Page 21 of 181

Revision Level
Question
c
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
Problem solving?
/
d
Mistake proofing?
/
e
Reaction plans?
Other topics as identified?

/
8 Is each operation provided with process
instructions that are keyed to the control plan?
9 Are standard operator instructions accessible at
each work station?
10 Do operator instructions include pictures ad
diagrams?
11 Were operator/team leaders involved in
developing standard operator instructions?
12 Do inspection instructions include:
a l Easily understood engineering performance
specifications?
b l Test frequencies?
/
c l Sample sizes?
/
d l Reaction plans?
/
e l Documentation requirements?
13 Are visual aids:
a l Appropriate, easily understood and legible?
b l Available?
/
Page 22 of 181

Revision Level
Question
c
d
Accessible?
Approved?
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
/
e
Dated and current?

/
14 Is there a procedure to implement, maintain, and
establish reaction plans for issues such as out of
control conditions based on statistical process
control?
l
15 Is there an identified problem solving process that

includes root cause analysis?
16 Are the latest drawings and specifications
available for the operator, in particular at the
points of the inspection?
a
l Have engineering tests (dimensional, material,

appearance, and performance) been completed
and documented as required in accordance with
customer requirements?
17 Are the current forms/logs available for

appropriate personnel to record inspection
results?
18 Are the following available and placed at the
appropriate points of the operation?
a l Monitoring and measurement devices?
b
Gage instructions?
/
c
Reference samples?
Page 23 of 181

Revision Level
Question
d
Yes No N/A
Inspection logs?
Person
Responsible
19 Have provisions been made to certify and

calibrate gages and test equipment at a defined
frequency that is appropriate?
20 Have required measurement system capability
studies been:
a l Completed?
/
b l Accepted?
21 Have initial process capability studies been
conducted per customer requirements?
22 Are layout inspection equipment and facilities
adequate to provide initial and ongoing layout of
all details and components in accordance with
23 Is there a documented procedure for controlling
incoming material that may include, for example,
the following items:
a
Characteristics to be inspected?
/
b
Frequency of inspection?
Sample size?
Designated location for approved product?
/
/
/
e
Disposition of nonconforming products?

/
Page 24 of 181

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
24 Have sample production parts been provided per

25 Is there a procedure to identify, segregate, and
control nonconforming products to prevent
shipment?
26 Are rework/repair procedures available to assure
conforming product?
27 Is there a procedure to requalify
repaired/reworked material?
28 Has a master sample, if required, been retained
as part of the part approval process?
29 Is there an appropriate lot traceability procedure?
30 Are periodic audits of outgoing products planned
and implemented?
31 Are periodic assessments of the quality system
planned and implemented?
32 Has the customer approved the packaging and
the packaging specification?
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 25 of 181
CT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 26 of 181
Due Date
Page 27 of 181
Due Date
Page 28 of 181
Due Date
Page 29 of 181
Due Date
Page 30 of 181
A-5 FLOOR PLAN CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
1 Have lean concepts been applied in considering

material flow?
2 Does the floor plan identify all required process
and inspection points?
3 Have clearly marked areas for all material, tools,
and equipment at each operation been
considered?
4 Has sufficient space been allocated for all
equipment?
5 Are process and inspection areas:
a l Of adequate size?
l Properly
lighted?
/
6 Do inspection areas contain necessary equipment
and record storage?
7 Are there adequate:

a l Staging areas?
b
Impound areas?
/
/
8 Are inspection points located to prevent shipment

of nonconforming products?
9 Are there controls for each process to eliminate
contamination or inappropriate mixing of product?
Page 31 of 181
A-5 FLOOR PLAN CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
10 Is material protected from overhead or air

handling systems contamination?
11 Have facilities been provided for final product
audit?
12 Are facilities adequate to control movement of
nonconforming incoming material?
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 32 of 181
5 FLOOR PLAN CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 33 of 181
5 FLOOR PLAN CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 34 of 181
A-6 PROCESS FLOW CHART CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
1 Does the flow chart illustrate the entire process

from receiving through shipping, including outside
processes and services?
2 In the development of the process flow chart, was
the DFMEA used, if available, to identify specific
characteristics that may be critical?
3 Is the flow chart keyed to product and process
checks in the control plan and PFMEA?
4 Does the flow chart describe how the product will
move, i.e., roller conveyor, slide containers, etc.?
5 Has the pull system/optimization been considered
for this process?
6 Have provisions been made to identify and
inspect reworked product before being used?
7 Are material controls for movement and staging of
product including appropriate identification
properly defined and implemented? The controls
should address incoming supplier product as well
as subcontracted processes.
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 35 of 181
CESS FLOW CHART CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 36 of 181
A-7 PROCESS FMEA CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
1 Was the Process FMEA prepared by a cross

functional team? Has the team taken into account
all customer specific requirements, including
FMEA methodologies as shown in the current
edition of the FMEA?
2 Have all operations including subcontracted, or
outsourced processes and services been
considered?
3 Have all operations affecting customer
requirements including fit, function, durability,
governmental regulations and safety been
identified and listed sequentially?
4 Were similar part/process FMEA's considered?
5 Have historical campaign and warranty data been
reviewed and used in the analysis?
6 Have you applied the appropriate controls to
address all of the identified failure modes?
7 Were severity, detection and occurrence revised
when corrective action was completed?
8 Do the effects consider the customer in terms of
the subsequent operation, assembly, and
product?
9 Were customer plant problems used as an aid in
developing the Process FMEA?
10 Have the causes been described in terms of
something that can be corrected or controlled?
11 Have provisions been made to control the cause
of the failure mode prior to subsequent or the next
operation?
Revision Date
Page 37 of 181
A-7 PROCESS FMEA CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
Prepared By:
Page 38 of 181
PROCESS FMEA CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 39 of 181
PROCESS FMEA CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 40 of 181
A-8 CONTROL PLAN CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
1 Was the control plan developed according to the

methodology described in Chapter 6 of this APQP
manual?
2 Have all the controls identified in the PFMEA been
included in the control plan?
3 Are all special product/process characteristics
included in the control plan?
4 Were DFMEA and PFMEA used to prepare the
control plan?
5 Are material specifications requiring inspection
identified?
6 Does the control plan address incoming
(material/components) through
processing/assembly including packaging?
7 Are engineering performance testing and
dimensional requirements identified?
8 Are gages and test equipment available as
required by the control plan?
9 If required, has the customer approved the control
plan?
10 Are the gage methodology and compatibility
appropriate to meet customer requirements?
10 Have measurement systems analysis been
completed in accordance with customer
requirements?
12 Are sample sizes based upon industry standards,
statistical sampling plan tables, or other statistical
process control methods or techniques?
Revision Date
Page 41 of 181
A-8 CONTROL PLAN CHECKLIST

Revision Level
Question
Yes No N/A
Person
Responsible
Prepared By:
Page 42 of 181
CONTROL PLAN CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 43 of 181
CONTROL PLAN CHECKLIST
Due Date
Page 44 of 181
TEAM FEASIBILITY COMMITMENT

Customer:
CUSTOMER
Part Number:
NUMBER
Revision Level
ECL
Date:
Part Name:
NAME
Feasibility Considerations
Our product quality planning team has considered the following questions.
The drawings and/or specifications provided have been used as a basis for analyzing the ability to meet all
specified requirements. All "no" answers are supported with attached comments identifying the organization's
concerns and/or proposed changes to enable the organization to meet the specified requirements.
YES
NO
CONSIDERATION
Is product adequately defined (application requirements, etc. to enable
feasibility evaluation?
Can Engineering Performance Specifications be met as written?
Can product be manufactured to tolerances specified on drawing?
Can product be manufactured with process capability that meet requirements?
Is there adequate capacity to produce product?
Does the design allow the use of efficient material handling techniques?
Can the product be manufactured within normal cost parameters? Abnormal cost
considerations may include:
- Costs for capital equipment?
- Costs for tooling?
- Alternative manufacturing methods?
Is statistical process control required on the product?
Is statistical process control presently used on similar products?
Where statistical process control is used on similar products:
- Are the processes in control and stable?
- Does process capability meet customer requirements?
Conclusion
Feasible
Feasible
Not Feasible
Product can be produced as specified with no revisions.

Changes recommended (see attached).
Design revision required to produce product within the specified requirements.
Approval
Team Member/Title/Date
PRODUCT QUALITY PLANNING SUMMARY AND APPROVALS

DATE:
NAME
PRODUCT NAME:
CUSTOMER:
PART NUMBER / REV:
CUSTOMER
NUMBER
CITY
MANUFACTURING PLANT:
1. PRELIMINARY PROCESS CAPABILITY STUDY
ECL
QUANTITY
REQUIRED
ACCEPTABLE
PENDING*
Ppk - SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS

2. CONTROL PLAN APPROVAL (If Required)
APPROVED: YES / NO*
DATE APPROVED
3. INITIAL PRODUCTION SAMPLES

CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY
QUANTITY
CHARACTERISTICS
SAMPLES
PER SAMPLE
REQUIRED
ACCEPTABLE
REQUIRED
ACCEPTABLE
REQUIRED
ACCEPTABLE
ACCEPTABLE
DIMENSIONAL
VISUAL
LABORATORY
PERFORMANCE
4. GAGE AND TEST EQUIPMENT
MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS
QUANTITY
PENDING*
SPECIAL CHARACTERISTIC
5. PROCESS MONITORING
QUANTITY
PROCESS MONITORING INSTRUCTIONS
PENDING*
PROCESS SHEETS
VISUAL AIDS
6. PACKAGING/SHIPPING
QUANTITY
PACKAGING APPROVAL
SHIPPING TRIALS
7. Approvals
TEAM MEMBER/TITLE/DATE
* REQUIRES PREPARATION OF AN ACTION PLAN TO TRACK PROGRESS.
PENDING*
PENDING*
PART HISTORY
Part Number
Part Name
NUMBER
Date
NAME
Remarks
Page 47 of 181
Page 48 of 181
PROCESS / INSPECTION FLOWCHART

Product Program
Supplier Name
Supplier Location
ORGANIZATION
CITY
STATE
Issue Date
ECL
Part Name
NAME
Part Number
ECL
NUMBER
Legend:
STEP
Operation
Transportation
Operation or Event
Inspection
Description of
Operation or Event
Page 49 of 181
Delay
Storage
Evaluation
and Analysis Methods
PROCESS / INSPECTION FLOWCHART

Product Program
Supplier Name
Supplier Location
ORGANIZATION
CITY
STATE
Issue Date
ECL
Part Name
NAME
Part Number
ECL
NUMBER
Legend:
STEP
Operation
Transportation
Operation or Event
Inspection
Description of
Operation or Event
Page 50 of 181
Delay
Storage
Evaluation
and Analysis Methods
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM

NUMBER
DATE:
ECL:
PREPARED BY:
INSPECT
STORE
MOVE
OPERATION
DESCRIPTION
ITEM #
STEP
FABRICATION
NAME
PRODUCT AND
PROCESS
CHARACTERISTICS
Page 51 of 181
ECL
ITEM #
PART NUMBER:
PART DESCRIPTION:
CONTROL
METHODS
PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM

NUMBER
DATE:
ECL:
PREPARED BY:
INSPECT
STORE
MOVE
OPERATION
DESCRIPTION
ITEM #
STEP
FABRICATION
NAME
PRODUCT AND
PROCESS
CHARACTERISTICS
Page 52 of 181
ECL
ITEM #
PART NUMBER:
PART DESCRIPTION:
CONTROL
METHODS
Process Flow Diagram

Department
Prod/Serv
NAME
Sources of Variation
(Experience-Based)
Operation
or Activity
100%
Inspection
ID Number
Date
Storage
Page 53 of 181
Delay
(Results of this Step)
Operator
(Full time)
Operation/Activity with Inspection
Transportation
Page 54 of 181
(Part time)
CHARACTERISTIC MATRIX
Part Number
NUMBER
Part Name
ECL
NAME
C = Characteristic at an operation used for clamping
L = Characteristic at an operation used for locating
X = Characteristic created or changed by this operation should
match the process flow diagram form
DIMENSION
NUMBER
OPERATION NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
TOLERANCE
Page 55 of 181
CHARACTERISTIC MATRIX
Part Number
NUMBER
Part Name
ECL
NAME
C = Characteristic at an operation used for clamping
L = Characteristic at an operation used for locating
X = Characteristic created or changed by this operation should
match the process flow diagram form
DIMENSION
NUMBER
OPERATION NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
TOLERANCE
Page 56 of 181
DESIGN MATRIX Product Code / Description:
Project #:
NEGATIVE IMPACT ON CUSTOMER EXPECTATIONS: HIGH = 3; MED = 2; LOW = 1; NONE = 0; UNKNOWN = ?
ENVIRONMENTAL
PROCESS ABILITY
PERFORMANCE
APPEARANCE
UNITS
FUNCTION - DESIRED ATTRIBUTES (POTENTIAL FAILURE MODES)

ROBUST THRESHOLD RANGE
CATEGORY /
CHARACTERISTICS
FAILURE
Prelim. Special Characteristics
POTENTIAL CAUSES
POTENTIAL
FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
Model Year(s)/Program(s)
Design Responsibility
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 58 of 181
Current
Design
Controls
Current
Design
Controls
Prevention
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item /
Function
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 59 of 181
Current
Design
Controls
Current
Design
Controls
Prevention
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item /
Function
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FILE.XLS
Page 60 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
FILE.XLS
Page 61 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 62 of 181
Current
Design
Controls
Current
Design
Controls
Prevention
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action(s)
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 63 of 181
Current
Design
Controls
Current
Design
Controls
Prevention
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action(s)
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FILE.XLS
Page 64 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
FILE.XLS
Page 65 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 66 of 181
Current
Design
Controls
Prevention
Current
Design
Controls
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item /
Function
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 67 of 181
Current
Design
Controls
Prevention
Current
Design
Controls
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item /
Function
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FILE.XLS
Page 68 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
FILE.XLS
Page 69 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 70 of 181
Current
Design
Controls
Prevention
Current
Design
Controls
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action(s)
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 71 of 181
Current
Design
Controls
Prevention
Current
Design
Controls
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action(s)
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FILE.XLS
Page 72 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
FILE.XLS
Page 73 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Numbe
Prepared b
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev
Page 74 of 181
Controls
Prevention
Current Detection
Design Controls
Cause
Failure Mode
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action(s)
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Numbe
Prepared b
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev
Page 75 of 181
Controls
Prevention
Current Detection
Design Controls
Cause
Failure Mode
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action(s)
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 76 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 77 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 78 of 181
Current
Design
Controls
Prevention
Detection
Recommended
Action(s)
Responsibility
Current
Design
Controls
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item
Severity
Core Team:
POTENTIAL
(DESIGN FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component;
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 79 of 181
Current
Design
Controls
Prevention
Detection
Recommended
Action(s)
Responsibility
Current
Design
Controls
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Item
Severity
Core Team:
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Page 80 of 181
RPN
Effective
Date
Detection
Actions
Taken
Occurrence
Action Results
Severity
Target
Completion Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Page 81 of 181
RPN
Effective
Date
Detection
Actions
Taken
Occurrence
Action Results
Severity
Target
Completion Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
Process Responsibility
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 82 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process Step
/ Function
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 83 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process Step
/ Function
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FILE.XLS
Page 84 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
FILE.XLS
Page 85 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 86 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 87 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 88 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 89 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Page 90 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process Step
/ Function
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Page 91 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process Step
/ Function
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FILE.XLS
Page 92 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
FILE.XLS
Page 93 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 94 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Current
Process
Controls
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Number:
Prepared by:
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.)
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 95 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Current
Process
Controls
Detection
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 96 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 97 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Numbe
Prepared b
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Page 98 of 181
Current Detection
Process Controls
Cause
Failure Mode
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Numbe
Prepared b
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Page 99 of 181
Current Detection
Process Controls
Cause
Failure Mode
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 100 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 101 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Number
Prepared by
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.
Page 102 of 181
Prevention
Detection
Recommended
Action
Target
Completion
Date
Current
Process
Controls
Responsibility
Current
Process
Controls
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Number
Prepared by
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig.
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev.
Page 103 of 181
Prevention
Detection
Recommended
Action
Target
Completion
Date
Current
Process
Controls
Responsibility
Current
Process
Controls
RPN
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Detection
Function
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Occurrence
Requirements
Potential
Failure
Mode
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 104 of 181
RPN
Detection
Effective
Date
Occurrence
Actions
Taken
Severity
Action Results
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 105 of 181
RPN
Detection
Effective
Date
Occurrence
Actions
Taken
Severity
Action Results
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Numbe
Prepared b
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev
Process
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Page 106 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Detection
RPN
Product
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Detection
ID
Potential
Failure
Mode
Occurrence
Function
Requirements
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Numbe
Prepared b
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev
Process
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Page 107 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Detection
RPN
Product
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Detection
ID
Potential
Failure
Mode
Occurrence
Function
Requirements
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 108 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 109 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Numbe
Prepared b
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev
Process
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Page 110 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Current
Process
Controls
Detection
RPN
Product
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Detection
ID
Potential
Failure
Mode
Occurrence
Function
Requirements
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
POTENTIAL
(PROCESS FMEA)
Item:
APPLICATION
FMEA Numbe
Prepared b
ORGANIZATION
FMEA Date (Orig
Key Date
FMEA Date (Rev
Process
Potential
Causes(s)
of Failure
Page 111 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Current
Process
Controls
Detection
RPN
Product
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
Detection
ID
Potential
Failure
Mode
Occurrence
Function
Requirements
Classification
Process
Step
Severity
Core Team:
Recommended
Action
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 112 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FMEA Number:
FILE.XLS
Prepared by:
FMEA Date (Orig.)
FMEA Date (Rev.)
Page 113 of 181
RPN
Detection
Occurrence
Actions Taken
& Effective Date
Severity
Action Results
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(MACHINERY FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component
Supplier Name
Program(s) / Plant(s)
FMEA Number:
ORGANIZATION
Prepared by:
Key Date
Date (Orig.)
Core Team:
Machinery
Function /
Requirements
Date (Rev.)
Potential
Failure
Mode
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
S
e
v
C
l
a
s
s
Potential
Causes(s)/
Mechanism(s)
of Failure
Page 114 of 181
O
c
c
u
r
Current
Machinery
Controls
-Prevention
-Detection
D
e
t
e
c
R.
P.
N.
Recommended
Action(s)
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(MACHINERY FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component
Supplier Name
FMEA Number:
ORGANIZATION
Prepared by:
Key Date
Date (Orig.)
Core Team:
Machinery
Function /
Requirements
Date (Rev.)
Potential
Failure
Mode
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
S
e
v
C
l
a
s
s
Potential
Causes(s)/
Mechanism(s)
of Failure
Page 115 of 181
O
c
c
u
r
Current
Machinery
Controls
-Prevention
-Detection
D
e
t
e
c
R.
P.
N.
Recommended
Action(s)
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FILE.XLS
Action Results
Actions
Taken
S
e
v
O
c
c
Page 116 of 181
D
e
t
R.
P.
N.
FILE.XLS
Action Results
Actions
Taken
S
e
v
O
c
c
Page 117 of 181
D
e
t
R.
P.
N.
POTENTIAL
(MACHINERY FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component
Supplier Name
FMEA Number:
ORGANIZATION
Prepared by:
Key Date
Date (Orig.)
Core Team:
Machinery
Function /
Requirements
Date (Rev.)
Potential
Failure
Mode
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
S
e
v
C
l
a
s
s
Potential
Causes(s)/
Mechanism(s)
of Failure
O
c
c
u
r
Page 118 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Current
Process
Controls
Detection
D
e
t
e
c
R.
P.
N.
Recommended
Action(s)
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
POTENTIAL
(MACHINERY FMEA)
System
Subsystem
Component
Supplier Name
FMEA Number:
ORGANIZATION
Prepared by:
Key Date
Date (Orig.)
Core Team:
Machinery
Function /
Requirements
Date (Rev.)
Potential
Failure
Mode
Potential
Effect(s)
of Failure
S
e
v
C
l
a
s
s
Potential
Causes(s)/
Mechanism(s)
of Failure
O
c
c
u
r
Page 119 of 181
Current
Process
Controls
Prevention
Current
Process
Controls
Detection
D
e
t
e
c
R.
P.
N.
Recommended
Action(s)
Responsibility
& Target
Completion
Date
FILE.XLS
Action Results
Actions
Taken
S
e
v
O
c
c
Page 120 of 181
D
e
t
R.
P.
N.
FILE.XLS
Action Results
Actions
Taken
S
e
v
O
c
c
Page 121 of 181
D
e
t
R.
P.
N.
CONTROL PLAN
Prototype
Control Plan Number
Pre-Launch
Production
Key Contact/Phone
Date (Orig.)
FILE.XLS
555-555-5555
Part Number/Latest Change Level
NUMBER
Date (Rev.)
1/1/1996
1/1/1996
Core Team
Customer Engineering Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
Organization/Plant Approval/Date
Customer Quality Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
ECL
Part Name/Description
NAME
Organization/Plant
ORGANIZATION
PART/
PROCESS NAME/
PROCESS
OPERATION
NUMBER
DESCRIPTION
Organization Code
CODE
MACHINE,
DEVICE
JIG, TOOLS
FOR MFG.
CHARACTERISTICS
NO.
PRODUCT
METHODS
SPECIAL
PRODUCT/PROCESS
EVALUATION/
SAMPLE
CHAR.
SPECIFICATION/ MEASUREMENT
PROCESS CLASS
SIZE
FREQ.
TOLERANCE
TECHNIQUE
Page 122 of 181
CONTROL
METHOD
REACTION
PLAN
CONTROL PLAN SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS

Prototype
Control Plan Number
Pre-Launch
Production
Key Contact/Phone
Date (Orig.)
FILE.XLS
555-555-5555
Part Number/Latest Change Level
NUMBER
Date (Rev.)
1/1/1996
Customer Engineering Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
Organization/Plant Approval/Date
Customer Quality Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
ECL
Part Name/Description
NAME
Organization/Plant
1/1/1996
Core Team
Organization Code
ORGANIZATION
CODE
No.
Description/Rationale
Specification/Tolerance
Class
Page 123 of 181
Illustration/Pictorial
DATA POINT COORDINATES

Control Plan No.
FILE.XLS
Customer
CUSTOMER
Char. Point
No. Ident.
Date(Orig):
Char. Point
No. Ident.
Page 124 of 181
1/1/1996
Char.
No.
Date(Rev):
Point
Ident.
1/1/1996
Y
Page 125 of 181 Pages
Production Part Approval

Dimensional Test Results
ORGANIZATION
CODE
ORGANIZATION:
PART NUMBER:
NUMBER
NAME
SUPPLIER / VENDOR CODE:
PART NAME:
INSPECTION FACILITY:
DESIGN RECORD CHANGE LEVEL:
ECL
ENGINEERING CHANGE DOCUMENTS:
ITEM
DIMENSION /
SPECIFICATION
March CFG-1003
2006
SPECIFICATION /
LIMITS
TEST
DATE
QTY.
TESTED
ORGANIZATION MEASUREMENT
RESULTS (DATA)
OK
NOT
OK

Dimensional Test Results
ORGANIZATION
CODE
ORGANIZATION:
PART NUMBER:
NUMBER
NAME
PART NAME:
INSPECTION FACILITY:
ECL
ITEM
DIMENSION /
SPECIFICATION
SPECIFICATION /
LIMITS
TEST
DATE
QTY.
TESTED
ORGANIZATION MEASUREMENT
RESULTS (DATA)
OK
Blanket statements of conformance are unacceptable for any test results.

SIGNATURE
March CFG-1003
2006
TITLE
DATE
NOT
OK

Material Test Results
ORGANIZATION:
ORGANIZATION
CODE
PART NUMBER:
NUMBER
NAME
PART NAME:
MATERIAL SUPPLIER:
*CUSTOMER SPECIFIED SUPPLIER / VENDOR CODE:
*If source approval is req'd, include the Supplier (Source) & Customer assigned code.
NAME of LABORATORY:
MATERIAL SPEC. NO. / REV / DATE
SPECIFICATION /
LIMITS
TEST
DATE
QTY.
TESTED
ECL
SUPPLIER TEST RESULTS (DATA)
OK
March CFG-1004
2006
NOT
OK

Material Test Results
ORGANIZATION:
ORGANIZATION
CODE
PART NUMBER:
NUMBER
NAME
PART NAME:
MATERIAL SUPPLIER:
NAME of LABORATORY:
MATERIAL SPEC. NO. / REV / DATE
SPECIFICATION /
LIMITS
TEST
DATE
QTY.
TESTED
SIGNATURE
March CFG-1004
2006
ECL
SUPPLIER TEST RESULTS (DATA)
OK
TITLE
DATE
NOT
OK

Performance Test Results
ORGANIZATION:
ORGANIZATION
CODE
PART NUMBER:
NUMBER
NAME
PART NAME:
NAME of LABORATORY:
ECL
TEST SPECIFICATION / REV / DATE
SPECIFICATION /
LIMITS
TEST
DATE
QTY.
TESTED
SUPPLIER TEST RESULTS (DATA)/

TEST CONDITIONS
OK
March CFG-1005
2006
NOT
OK

Performance Test Results
ORGANIZATION:
ORGANIZATION
CODE
PART NUMBER:
NUMBER
NAME
PART NAME:
NAME of LABORATORY:
ECL
TEST SPECIFICATION / REV / DATE
SPECIFICATION /
LIMITS
TEST
DATE
QTY.
TESTED
SIGNATURE
March CFG-1005
2006
SUPPLIER TEST RESULTS (DATA)/

TEST CONDITIONS
OK
TITLE
DATE
NOT
OK
APPEARANCE APPROVAL REPORT

PART
DRAWING
NUMBER
NUMBER
APPLICATION
NUMBER
PART
NAME
NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
LOCATION
REASON FOR
PART SUBMISSION WARRANT
SUBMISSION
PRE TEXTURE
DATE
ECL
MANUFACTURING
ORGANIZATION
NAME
E/C LEVEL
CODE
ORGANIZATION
APPLICATION
(VEHICLES)
BUYER
SUPPLIER / VENDOR
STATE
ZIP CODE
SPECIAL SAMPLE
RE-SUBMISSION
FIRST PRODUCTION SHIPMENT
ENGINEERING CHANGE
CODE
OTHER
APPEARANCE EVALUATION
AUTHORIZED CUSTOMER
ORGANIZATION SOURCING AND TEXTURE INFORMATION
PRE-TEXTURE
REPRESENTATIVE
EVALUATION
SIGNATURE AND DATE
CORRECT AND
PROCEED
CORRECT AND
PROCEED
APPROVED TO
ETCH/TOOL/EDM
COLOR EVALUATION
METALLIC
COLOR
TRISTIMULUS DATA
MASTER MASTER MATERIAL MATERIAL
SUFFIX DL* Da* Db* DE* CMC NUMBER
DATE
TYPE
SOURCE
HUE
RED
YEL
GRN
VALUE
BLU
LIGHT
DARK
CHROMA
GRAY
CLEAN
GLOSS
HIGH
LOW
COLOR
BRILLIANCE SHIPPING
HIGH
LOW
SUFFIX
COMMENTS
ORGANIZATION
SIGNATURE
March CFG-1002
2006
PHONE NO.
DATE
AUTHORIZED CUSTOMER
REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE
DATE
PART
DISPOSITION
ATTRIBUTE GAGE BIAS REPORT

ANALYTICAL METHOD - LOW LIMIT
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser
Gage Number
Date Performed
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Gage Type
ATTRIBUTE DATA
XT
P'a
a
#
1
0.000
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Upper Limit
Lower Limit
After entering data, follow the directions on the tab marked

'Graph' to create the Gage Performance Curve
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
FROM THE GRAPH

ENTER THE FOLLOWING:
XT (P=.5) =
XT (P=.995) =
XT (P=.005) =
Measurement Unit Analysis

Bias
B
=
=
=
=
=
Repeatability
R
=
=
t Statistic
t0.025,19
31.3 IBI / R
Result
Page 132 of 181
2.093
Page 133 of 181

ANALYTICAL METHOD - HIGH LIMIT
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser
Gage Number
Date Performed
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Gage Type
ATTRIBUTE DATA
XT
P'a
a
#
1
0.025
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Upper Limit
Lower Limit
After entering data, follow the directions on the tab marked

'Graph' to create the Gage Performance Curve
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.000
FROM THE GRAPH

ENTER THE FOLLOWING:
XT (P=.5) =
XT (P=.995) =
XT (P=.005) =

Bias
B
=
=
=
=
=
Repeatability
R
=
=
t Statistic
t0.025,19
31.3 IBI / R
Result
Page 134 of 181
2.093
Page 135 of 181

ANALYTICAL METHOD - GAGE PERFORMANCE CURVE
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser
Gage Number
Date Performed
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Gage Type
Upper Limit
LOW LIMIT RESULTS*
Lower Limit
HIGH LIMIT RESULTS*
Bias
GRR
GRR
Bias
GRR
GRR
*Curve can be generated from low or high limit results if symmetry is assumed.
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
REMARKS
Signature
Title
Page 136 of 181
Date
0.9
Page 137 of 181
Directions for Gage Performance Curve for Attribute Analytical Method Form
1) Click Tools - Data Analysis - Regression
(If Data Analysis is not available load Analysis Tool Pak from the Add-Ins menu)
2) In the box for Input Y Range select the cells ATT BIAS(Analytic)!D14:D22
3) In the box for Input X Range select the cells ATT BIAS(Analytic)!B14:B22
4) In the box for Output range select the cells below A23:M60
5) Check Line Fit Plots
6) Press OK
7) Copy the Line Fit plot graph to the space on the Analytic sheet
8) Change the graph title to GPC - Low Side Normal Prob Paper
9) Change the x axis to Xt
10) Change the y axis to Probability
11) Repeat for high side data
GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY REPORT

ATTRIBUTE HYPOTHESIS TEST METHOD
Part Number
Gage Name
Date Performed
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Gage Type
Appraiser B
Upper Specification
Lower Specification
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
DATA TABLE
PART
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
A-1
A-2
A-3
B-1
B-2
B-3
C-1
C-2
Page 139 of 181
C-3
Reference
Reference
Value
Code

Part Number
Gage Name
Date Performed
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Gage Type
Appraiser B
Upper Specification
Lower Specification
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
40
DATA TABLE CONTINUED

PART
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
A-1
A-2
A-3
B-1
B-2
B-3
C-1
C-2
C-3
Reference
Risk Analysis
A * B Crosstabulation
B
0
A
1
Total
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
Total
0
0
1
0
B * C Crosstabulation
C
0
B
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
0
0
1
0
Page 140 of 181
Total
0
0
Reference
Value
Code

Part Number
Gage Name
Date Performed
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Gage Type
Appraiser B
Upper Specification
Lower Specification
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Count
Expected Count
Total
A * C Crosstabulation
C
0
A
1
Total
Kappa
A
B
C
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
A
-
Total
0
0
1
0
DETERMINATION
AxB
AxC
BxC
0.75 or higher indicates good agreement

Between 0.40 and 0.75 indicates some agreement
Less then 0.40 indeicates poor agreement
A * REF Crosstabulation
REF
0
A
1
Total
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
Total
0
0
1
0
Page 141 of 181

Part Number
Gage Name
Date Performed
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Gage Type
Appraiser B
Upper Specification
Lower Specification
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
B * REF Crosstabulation
REF
0
B
1
Total
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
Total
0
0
1
0
C * REF Crosstabulation
REF
0
C
1
Total
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
Count
Expected Count
Total
0
0
1
0
Kappa
DETERMINATION
A x REF
B x REF
C x REF
0.75 or higher indicates good agreement

Between 0.40 and 0.75 indicates some agreement
Less then 0.40 indeicates poor agreement
Page 142 of 181

Part Number
Gage Name
Date Performed
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Gage Type
Appraiser B
Upper Specification
Lower Specification
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
% Appraiser1
Appraiser B
Source
Appraiser A
Total Inspected
# Matched
0
0
False Positive (appraiser biased towards rejection)
False Negative (appraiser biased towards acceptance)
Mixed
% Score vs. Attribute2

Appraiser C Appraiser A Appraiser B Appraiser C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
95% UCI5
Calculated Score
95% LCI5
Total Inspected
# in Agreement
System % Effective Score3
System % Effective Score vs. Reference4
95% UCI
Calculated Score
5
95% LCI5
Notes:
(1) Appraiser agress with themself on all trials
(2) Appraiser agrees on all trials with the known standard
(3) All appraisers agreed within and between themselves
(4) All appraisers agreed within and between themselves and with the reference
(5) UCI and LCI are the upper and lower confidence internval bounds, respectively (Wilson score method)
H0:
The effectiveness of both appraisers is the same
(Null hypothesis)
HA:
The effectiveness of both appraisers is not the same
(Alternative Hypothesis)
Acceptance criteria:
The calculated score of the appraiser falls between the confidence interval of the other.
EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION
Appraiser A vs. Appraiser B
Reject Null Hypothesis Accept Alternative
Appraiser A vs. Appraiser C
Appraiser B vs. Appraiser C
Page 143 of 181

Part Number
Gage Name
Date Performed
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Gage Type
Appraiser B
Upper Specification
Lower Specification
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Second Analysis
EVALUATION CRITERIA
Measurement System
Decision
Effectiveness
Miss Rate
False Alarm
Rate
Acceptable for the appraiser
>90%
<2%
<5%
Marginally acceptable fo the

appraiser - may need
improvement
>80%
<5%
<10%
Unacceptable for the appraiser

- needs improvement
<80%
>5%
>10%
Miss Rate
False Alarm
Rate
RESULTS SUMMARY
Appraiser
Effectiveness
A
B
C
Final Analysis
Approved for use as is

Not approved for use as is
Signature
Page 144 of 181
Title
GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEET

VARIABLE DATA RESULTS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Characteristic Classification
Trials
Parts
1. A
2.
3.
4.
AVE
5.
6. B
7.
8.
9.
AVE
10.
11. C
12.
13.
14.
AVE
15.
Date Performed
PART
APPRAISER/
TRIAL #
Appraisers
AVERAGE
6
10
xa=
ra=
xb=
rb=
xc=
rc=
X=
16. PART
Rp=
AVERAGE
17.
(ra + rb + rc) / (# OF APPRAISERS) =
18.
xDIFF = (Max x - Min x) =
19.
* UCLR =
R=
xDIFF=
R x D4 =
UCLR=
* D4 =3.27 for 2 trials and 2.58 for 3 trials. UCLR represents the limit of individual R's. Circle those that are
beyond this limit. Identify the cause and correct. Repeat these readings using the same appraiser and unit as originally used or
discard values and re-average and recompute R and the limiting value from the remaining observations.
Notes:
Page 145 of 181

Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Characteristic
Gage Type
Appraiser C
Trials
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
% Total Variation (TV)
Repeatability - Equipment Variation (EV)

EV
R x K1
Trials
K1
% EV
0.8865
0.5907
100 (EV/TV)
Reproducibility - Appraiser Variation (AV)

AV
{(xDIFF x K2)2 - (EV2/nr)}1/2
% AV
n = parts
Appraisers
K2
0.7087
0.5236
r = trials
Repeatability & Reproducibility (GRR)

GRR
K3
0.7087
0.5236
0.4464
0.4032
0.3745
0.3534
0.3378
0.3247
10
0.3145
{(EV2 + AV2)}1/2
RP x K3
Total Variation (TV)

TV
% GRR
Parts
Part Variation (PV)

PV
=
=
{(GRR2 + PV2)}1/2
% PV
ndc
100 (AV/TV)
100 (GRR/TV)
100 (PV/TV)
1.41(PV/GRR)
=
=
For information on the theory and constants used in the form see MSA Reference Manual, Third edition.
Page 146 of 181

Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
APPRAISER/
TRIAL #
1
2.
3.
4.
AVE
5.
6. B
7.
8.
9.
AVE
10.
11. C
12.
13.
14.
AVE
15.
Date Performed
PART
1
1. A
Appraisers
AVERAGE
6
10
xa=
ra=
xb=
rb=
xc=
rc=
X=
16. PART
Rp=
AVERAGE
17.
(ra + rb + rc) / (# OF APPRAISERS) =
18.
xDIFF = (Max x - Min x) =
19.
* UCLR =
R=
xDIFF=
R x D4 =
UCLR=
* D4 =3.27 for 2 trials and 2.58 for 3 trials. UCLR represents the limit of individual R's. Circle those that are
beyond this limit. Identify the cause and correct. Repeat these readings using the same appraiser and unit as originally used or
discard values and re-average and recompute R and the limiting value from the remaining observations.
Notes:
Page 147 of 181

Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Characteristic
Gage Type
Appraiser C
Trials
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
% Tolerance (Tol)
Repeatability - Equipment Variation (EV)

EV
R x K1
Trials
K1
% EV
0.8865
0.5907
100 (EV/Tol)
Reproducibility - Appraiser Variation (AV)

AV
{(xDIFF x K2)2 - (EV2/nr)}1/2
% AV
n = parts
Appraisers
K2
0.7087
0.5236
r = trials
Repeatability & Reproducibility (GRR)

GRR
K3
0.7087
0.5236
0.4464
0.4032
0.3745
0.3534
0.3378
{(EV2 + AV2)}1/2
RP x K3
Tolerance (Tol)
Tol
% GRR
Parts
Part Variation (PV)

PV
Upper - Lower / 6
0.3247
( Upper - Lower ) / 6
10
0.3145
% PV
ndc
100 (AV/Tol)
100 (GRR/Tol)
100 (PV/Tol)
1.41(PV/GRR)
=
=
For information on the theory and constants used in the form see MSA Reference Manual, Third edition.
Page 148 of 181

ANOVA METHOD
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
APPRAISER/
TRIAL #
1
2.
3.
4.
AVE
5.
6. B
7.
8.
9.
AVE
10.
11. C
12.
13.
14.
AVE
15.
Date Performed
PART
1
1. A
Appraisers
AVERAGE
6
10
xa=
ra=
xb=
rb=
x c=
rc=
X=
16. PART
Rp=
AVERAGE
Anova Table
Source
DF
SS
MS
Sig
Appraiser
Parts
Appraiser-by-Part
Equipment
Total
* Significant at = 0.05 level
Page 149 of 181

ANOVA METHOD
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Anova Report
Trials
Parts
Standard
Deviation ()
Appraisers
% Total Variation
Date Performed
% Contribution
Repeatability (EV)
Reproducibility (AV)
Appraiser by Part (INT)
GRR
Part-to-Part (PV)
Note:
Tolerance =
Number of distinct data categories (ndc) =
Page 150 of 181
Total variation (TV) =

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
APPRAISER/
TRIAL #
1
2.
3.
4.
AVE
5.
6. B
7.
8.
9.
AVE
10.
11. C
12.
13.
14.
AVE
Date Performed
PART
1
1. A
Appraisers
AVERAGE
6
10
xa=
ra=
xb=
rb=
15.
R
16. PART
xc=
rc=
X=
AVE ( Xp )
Rp=
Note:
The REFERENCE VALUE can be substituted for PART AVE to generate graphs indicating true bias.
Page 151 of 181

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Page 152 of 181
Appraisers
Date Performed

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
Average Chart -"Stacked"

12.00
10.00
Appraise
rA
Appraise
rB
Appraise
rC
8.00
Average
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1
10
Part Number
Analysis:
Range Chart -"Stacked"

12.00
10.00
8.00
Appraise
rA
Range
6.00
Appraise
rB
4.00
2.00
0.00
1
Part Number
Page 153 of 181
10
12.00
10.00

8.00
Appraise
GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Range
rA
6.00
Part Number
Part Name
4.00NUMBER
2.00 NAME
Characteristic
Specification
0.00
1
Lower Upper
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
4Trials
6Parts 7
Part Number
Analysis:
Page 154 of 181
8 Appraisers
9
Appraise
rB
10 Date Performed

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
Average Chart -"Unstacked"

12.00
10.00
8.00
Average
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Appr A
Appr B
Appr C
Analysis:
Range Chart -"Unstacked"

12.00
10.00
8.00
Average
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Appr A
Appr B
Page 155 of 181
Appr C

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Analysis:
Page 156 of 181
Appraisers
Date Performed

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
Run Chart
12.00
10.00
8.00
Value
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1
6
Part
Analysis:
Page 157 of 181
10

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Page 158 of 181
Appraisers
Date Performed

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
Scatter Plot
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
Part 1
Part 3
Part 5
Scatter Plot
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
Part 6
Part 8
Analysis:
Page 159 of 181
Part 10

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Page 160 of 181
Appraisers
Date Performed

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
Whiskers Chart - Appraiser A

12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1
10
10
10
Whiske rs Chart - Appraise r B

12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1
Whiske rs Chart - Appraise r C

12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1
Analysis:
Page 161 of 181

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Page 162 of 181
Appraisers
Date Performed

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
Error Chart
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Part 1
Part 3
Part 5
Error Chart
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Part 6
Part 8
Analysis:
Page 163 of 181
Part 10

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Page 164 of 181
Appraisers
Date Performed

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
Normalized Histogram - Error

1
0.8
0.6
Appr A
0.4
0.2
0
-1.00-0.90-0.80-0.70-0.60-0.50-0.40-0.30-0.20-0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00

1
0.8
0.6
Appr B
0.4
0.2
0
-1.00-0.90-0.80-0.70-0.60-0.50-0.40-0.30-0.20-0.100.00 0.100.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.700.80 0.90 1.00

1
0.8
0.6
Appr C
0.4
0.2
0
-1.00-0.90-0.80-0.70-0.60-0.50-0.40-0.30-0.20-0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
Analysis:
Page 165 of 181

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Page 166 of 181
Appraisers
Date Performed

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
XY Plot of Averages by Size

1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
0.60
Appr A
Appr B
0.50
Appr C
X=Y line
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00
Analysis:
Page 167 of 181

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Page 168 of 181
Appraisers
Date Performed

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
Comparison XY Plot
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
Appr0.60
B
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00
Appr A
Comparison XY Plot
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
Appr0.60
C
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
Appr A
Page 169 of 181
0.60
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
GAGE
REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEET
0.60
Appr C
GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
0.50
Part Number 0.40
Gage Name
Appraiser A
0.30NUMBER
Part Name
Gage Number
Appraiser B
0.20
NAME
Characteristic0.10
Specification
Gage Type
Appraiser C
Lower Upper
0.00
Appraisers
Date Performed
0.00 0.10 0.20 Trials
0.30 0.40Parts0.50 0.60
0.70 0.80
0.90 1.00
Appr A
Page 170 of 181

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Appraisers
Date Performed
Comparison XY Plot
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
Appr0.60
C
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
Appr B
Analysis:
Page 171 of 181
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00

GRAPHICAL ANALYSIS
Part Number
Gage Name
Appraiser A
Gage Number
Appraiser B
Gage Type
Appraiser C
NUMBER
Part Name
NAME
Characteristic
Specification
Lower Upper
Trials
Parts
Page 172 of 181
Appraisers
Date Performed
VARIABLES CONTROL CHART ( x & R )
PART NO.
CHART NO.
MEASUREMENT EVALUATION
PART NAME (Product)
NUMBER
OPERATION (Process)
SPECIFICATION LIMITS
NAME
APPRAISER A
APPRAISER B
x=
APPRAISER C
UCL =
MACHINE
GAGE
UNIT OF MEASURE
ZERO EQUALS
AVERAGES (X BAR CHART)
LCL =
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1
r=
UCL =
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
RANGES (R CHART)
LCL =
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1
10
11
12
13
14
15
APPRAISER A
PART
NUMBER
R
E
A
D
I
N
G
S
1
2
3
4
5
SUM
SUM
NUM
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
APPRAISER B
7
10
26
27
28
29
30
APPRAISER C
7
10
10
VARIABLES CONTROL CHART ( x & R )
PART NO.
PART NAME (Product)
CHART NO.
NUMBER
OPERATION (Process)
SPECIFICATION LIMITS
NAME
APPRAISER A
APPRAISER B
APPRAISER C
MACHINE
GAGE
UNIT OF MEASURE
ZERO EQUALS
HIGHLOW
** = APPRAISER OUT OF CONTROL
Computations for the Control Chart Method of Evaluating a Measurement Process

REPLICATION ERROR:
Average Subgroup Range = r =

Number of replications = Subgroup Size = r =
Estimate Replication Standard Deviation r / d2 = e =
CALCULATION FOR APPRAISER EFFECT:

no
d2*
2
3
1.410
1.906
d2
r
2
3
4
1.128
1.693
2.059
2.326
Appraiser Averages
Number of Appraisers = nA =
Number of Samples = n =
Range of Appraiser Averages = RA =
Appraiser
A
B
C
Average
0.00
Appraiser Effect = RA / d2* = A =

CALCULATIONS FOR MEASUREMENT ERROR STANDARD DEVIATION:
m
= SQRT ( e + A )
CALCULATIONS FOR SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO:

no
d2*
2
3
4
1.410
1.906
2.237
5
6
7
2.477
2.669
2.827
8
9
10
2.961
3.076
3.178
Sample Averages
Range for these Sample Averages = Rp =
0.00
Estimate Sample to Sample Standard Deviation:

p
Rp / d2* =
Signal to Noise Ratio:

p / m =
Sample
1
2
3
Average
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Thus the number of distinct categories that can be reliably distinguished by these measurements is:
ndc =
1.41 x p / m =
This is the number of non-overlapping 97% confidence intervals that will span the range of product variation. (A 97% confidence
interval centered on a single measurement would contain the actual product value that is represented by that measurement 97%
of the time.)
GAGE R STUDY
PART NO.
PART NAME (Product)
CHART NO.
NUMBER
OPERATION (Process)
ZERO EQUALS
NAME
APPRAISER
MACHINE
GAGE
UNIT OF MEASURE
AVERAGES (X BAR CHART)

x=
UCL =
UPPER SPECIFICATION
LOWER SPECIFICATION
LCL =
12.00
10.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
2.00
0.00
1
RANGES (R CHART)
r=
UCL =
10
LCL =
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
1
READING
10
n/a
VALUE
R
HIGHLOW
** = POINT OUT OF CONTROL
GAGE R ANALYSIS
Data in control?
% Repeatability =
This method CANNOT be used for final gage acceptance without other complete and detailed MSA methods.
10
Bulk Materials Requirements Checklist
Project:
Required / Primary Responsibility

Target Date Customer Supplier
Product Design and Development Verification
Design Matrix
Design FMEA
Special Product Characteristics
Design Records
Prototype Control Plan
Appearance Approval Report
Master Samples
Test Results
Dimensional Results
Checking Aids
Engineering Approval
Process Design and Development Verification
Process Flow Diagrams
Process FMEA
Pre-launch Control Plan
Production Control Plan
Measurement System Studies
Interim Approval
Product and Process Validation
Initial Process Studies
Part Submission Warrant
Elements to be Completed as Needed
Customer Plant Connection
Customer Specific Requirements
Change Documentation
Supplier Considerations
Plan agreed to by: Name / Function
Company / Title / Date
Comments /
Conditions
Approved
by / date
BULK MATERIAL INTERIM APPROVAL FORM

ORGANIZATION
(VENDOR) NAME:
ORGANIZATION
ORGANIZATION
(VENDOR) CODE:
MANUF. SITE: CITY
ENG. CHANGE #: ECL
RECEIVED DATE:
SUBMISSION LEVEL:
TRACKING CODE:
CODE
PRODUCT NAME:
NAME
ENG. SPEC.:
PART #:
FORMULA DATE:
RECEIVED BY:
EXPIRATION DATE:
RE-SUBMISSION DATE:
STATUS: (NR - Not Required, A - Approved, I - Interim)

Design Matrix
DFMEA:
Engineering Approval
Control Plans
PFMEA:
Special Process Characteristics
Process Flow Diagram
Test results
Process Studies:
Measurement Systems Studies:
Dimensional Results
Master Sample
Appearance Approval Report
SPECIFIC QUANTITY OF MATERIAL AUTHORIZED (IF APPLICABLE):

PRODUCTION TRIAL AUTHORIZATION #:
REASON(S) FOR INTERIM APPROVAL:
ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED, EXPECTED COMPLETION DATE

(CLASSIFY AS ENGINEERING, DESIGN, PROCESS, OR OTHER):
ACTIONS TO BE ACCOMPLISHED DURING INTERIM PERIOD, EFFECTIVE DATE:
PROGRESS REVIEW DATE:

DATE MATERIAL DUE AT PLANT:
WHAT ACTIONS ARE TAKING PLACE TO ENSURE THAT FUTURE SUBMISSIONS WILL CONFORM
TO BULK MATERIAL PPAP REQUIREMENTS BY THE SAMPLE PROMISE DATE?
SUPPLIER (AUTHORIZED SIGNATURE)

(PRINT NAME)
CUSTOMER APPROVALS (as needed):
PRODUCT ENG. (SIGNATURE)
(PRINT NAME)
MATERIALS ENG. (SIGNATURE)
(PRINT NAME)
QUALITY ENG. (SIGNATURE)
(PRINT NAME)
PHONE:
DATE:
PHONE:
DATE:
INTERIM APPROVAL NUMBER:
PRODUCT / PROCESS CHANGE NOTIFICATION

Complete this form and e-mail to your customer organization whenever customer notification is required by
the PPAP Manual in Table 3.1. Your customer will respond back with an acknowledgement and may
request additional change clarification or PPAP submission requirements.
To:
Customer: CUSTOMER
Organization Part Number:
Engineering Revision Level:
NUMBER
Customer Part Number:
DIVISION
Dated:
ECL
Engineering Revision Level:
Purchase Order Number:
Dated:
ECL DATE
Safety and/or Government Regulation:
APPLICATION
Application:
ORGANIZATION MANUFACTURING INFORMATION

Name:
Street Address:
City, State, Zip:
ORGANIZATION
ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
CODE
Code:
ZIP
Change Type (check all that apply)
Dimensional
Customer Plants Affected:
Design Responsibility:
Materials
Functional
Customer
Appearance
Organization
Organization Change That May Affect End Item:

Product
Change
Engineering
Change
Drawing
New or Revised
Subcomponent
Expected PPAP Completion / Submission Date:

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PRODUCT / PROCESS CHANGE:
Planned Date of Implementation:

DECLARATION:
I hereby certify that representative samples will be manufactured using the revised product and/or process
and verified, where appropriate, for dimensional change, appearance change, physical property change,
functionally for performance and durability. I also certify that documented evidence of such compliance is
on file and available for customer review.
Explanation/Comments:
NAME:
TITLE:
BUSINESS PHONE NO:

E-MAIL:
FAX NO:
DATE:
NOTE: Please submit this notification at least 6 weeks prior to the planned change implementation!
Contact your customer to determine if this form is available in an electronic format or if this form should be faxed.
March
2006
THE-1002
Truck Industry
NAME
Part Name
NUMBER
Customer Part Number
Rev.
If applicable
Tool PO Number
ECL
Engineering Drawing Change Level
Dated
Additional Engineering Changes
Dated
Shown on Drawing Number
Purchase Order No.
Checking Aid Number
Weight (kg)
Dated
SUBMISSION INFORMATION
ORGANIZATION
CUSTOMER
CODE
Organization Name and Code
DIVISION
Customer Name/Division
ADDRESS
Street Address
Customer Contact
CITY
STATE
ZIP
APPLICATION
City
State
Zip
Application
Note:
Does this part contain any restricted or reportable substances?
Yes
No
Are plastic parts identified with appropriate ISO marking codes?
Yes
No
REASON FOR SUBMISSION

Initial submission
Change to Optional Construction or Material
Engineering Change(s)
Sub-Supplier or Material Source Change
Tooling: Transfer, Replacement, Refurbishment, or Additional
Change in Part Processing
Correction of Discrepancy
Parts produced at Additional Location
Tooling inactive > than 1 year
Other - please specify
REQUESTED SUBMISSION LEVEL (Check one)

Level 1 - Warrant only (and for designated appearance items, an Appearance Approval Report) submitted to customer.
Level 2 - Warrant with product samples and limited supporting data submitted to customer.
Level 3 - Warrant with product samples and complete supporting data submitted to customer.
Level 4 - Warrant and other requirements as defined by customer.
1
10
11 12
13 14 15 16
17 18
19
(check)
Level 5 - Warrant with product samples and complete supporting data reviewed at supplier's manufacturing location.
DECLARATION
I affirm that the samples represented by this warrant are representative of our parts and have been made to the applicable customer
drawings and specifications and are made from specified materials on regular production tooling with no operations other than the regular
production process. I also certify that documented evidence of such compliance is on file and available for review.
EXPLANATION/COMMENTS:
List Molds / Cavities / Production Processes

Organization Authorized Signature
Date
Print Name
Phone No.
Title
555-555-5555
E-Mail
FOR CUSTOMER USE ONLY
PPAP Warrant Disposition:
Customer Signature
Print Name
March
2006
THE-1001
Approved
Interim
Approval
Rejected
Comment:
Date
Fax No.

NAME
Part Name
NUMBER
Cust. Part Number
Shown on Drawing Number
Org. Part Number
ECL
Dated
Additional Engineering Changes
ECL DATE
Dated
Yes
Safety and/or Government Regulation

Checking Aid Number
No
Purchase Order No.
Weight (kg)
Checking Aid Eng. Change Level
Dated
CUSTOMER SUBMITTAL INFORMATION
ORGANIZATION
CODE
CUSTOMER
Supplier Name & Supplier/Vendor Code
DIVISION
Customer Name/Division
ADDRESS
Street Address
Buyer/Buyer Code
CITY
STATE
ZIP
City
Region
Postal Code
APPLICATION
Country
Application
MATERIALS REPORTING
Has customer-required Substances of Concern information been reported?
Yes
No
Yes
No
Submitted by IMDS or other customer format:
Are polymeric parts identified with appropriate ISO marking codes?
n
/
a
REASON FOR SUBMISSION (Check at least one)

Initial submission
Change to Optional Construction or Material
Engineering Change(s)
Sub-Supplier or Material Source Change
Tooling: Transfer, Replacement, Refurbishment, or additional
Change in Part Processing
Correction of Discrepancy
Parts produced at Additional Location
Tooling Inactive > than 1 year
Other - please specify
REQUESTED SUBMISSION LEVEL (Check one)

Level 1 - Warrant only (and for designated appearance items, an Appearance Approval Report) submitted to customer.
Level 2 - Warrant with product samples and limited supporting data submitted to customer.
Level 3 - Warrant with product samples and complete supporting data submitted to customer.
Level 4 - Warrant and other requirements as defined by customer.
Level 5 - Warrant with product samples and complete supporting data reviewed at organization's manufacturing location.
SUBMISSION RESULTS
The results for
dimensional
measurements
These results meet all design record requirements:
material and
functional tests
Yes
NO
appearance
criteria
statistical
package
process
(If "NO" - Explanation Required)
Mold / Cavity / Production Process

DECLARATION
I affirm that the samples represented by this warrant are representative of our parts, which were made by a process that meets all
Production Part Approval Process Manual 4th Edition Requirements. I further affirm that these samples were produced at the production
rate of ____/____ hours. I also certify that documented evidence of such compliance is on file and available for your review. I have noted
any deviation from this declaration below.
EXPLANATION/COMMENTS:
Is each Customer Tool properly tagged and numbered?
Yes
No
n/a
Organization Authorized Signature
Date
Print Name
Title
Phone No.
555-555-5555
Fax No.
E-mail
FOR CUSTOMER USE ONLY (IF APPLICABLE)
PPAP Warrant Disposition:
Approved
Rejected
Other
Customer Signature
Print Name
March
2006
CFG-1001
Date
Customer Tracking Number (optional)

Core Tools Forms V5

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Core Tools Forms V5

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Core Tools Forms Disc V5

Copyright 2008 March Quality Services

For sales and technical support contact AIAG at 1-248-358-3570

THE FOLLOWING LEVELS OF DOCUMENTS WERE USED TO PREPARE THIS WORKBOOK.

A-1 DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER

Comment / Action Required

1 Was the DFMEA prepared using the Chrysler,

A-1 DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER

Comment / Action Required

DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST

DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST

A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER

Comment / Action Required

New technology or process?

2 Has assembly build variation analysis been

A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER

Comment / Action Required

11 Have Special Characteristics been selected?

A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER

Comment / Action Required

21 Have parts manufactured at minimum and

A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER

Comment / Action Required

30 Have material characteristics requiring inspection

Will characteristics be checked in-house?

l Does the organization have a process in place

32 Have the following material requirements been

l Have polymeric parts been identified/marked

A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER

Comment / Action Required

SIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

SIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

SIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

SIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

SIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST

A-3 NEW EQUIPMENT, TOOLING, AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER

Comment / Action Required

1 Does the design require:

A-3 NEW EQUIPMENT, TOOLING, AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER

Comment / Action Required

5 Has test equipment feasibility and accuracy been

TOOLING, AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST

TOOLING, AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST

A-4 PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER

Comment / Action Required

1 Is customer assistance or approval required for

Are there sufficient personnel identified to cover:

Control plan requirements?

Engineering performance testing?

Problem reaction and resolution analysis?

6 Is there a documented training program that:

Statistical process control?

A-4 PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No. NUMBER