Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Table of contents
1 Terms ...................................................................................................... 2
2 Resposibilities ..................................................... Fehler! Textmarke nicht definiert.
3 Details ...................................................................................................... 2
3.1 General ....................................................................................................................... 3
3.1.1 Commitment for execution of the PPA instruction .........................................................3
3.1.2 Approvals of other MS sites .................................................................................... 3
3.1.3 Possible trigger events for a PPA ............................................................................. 3
3.1.4 Performing PPA Procedure ....................................................................................... 4
3.1.5 Submission Level ................................................................................................... 4
3.1.6 Period of archiving ................................................................................................. 5
3.1.7 Result of approval .................................................................................................. 5
3.1.8 Form of the documentation ...................................................................................... 6
3.1.9 Preparing PPA....................................................................................................... 6
3.1.10 Noncompliance ....................................................................................................... 6
3.1.11 State of the art of science and technology ................................................................. 6
3.1.12 Zero defect strategy ............................................................................................... 6
3.1.13 Traceability............................................................................................................ 6
3.1.14 Other samples/ Submission level other ................................................................... 7
3.1.15 Additional information .............................................................................................. 7
3.1.16 Schedule of first article inspection ............................................................................. 7
3.1.17 Labeling of the samples .......................................................................................... 7
3.1.18 Maturity workshop (supplier day) ............................................................................. 7
3.1.19 Process release ..................................................................................................... 7
3.1.20 Supply of sample parts and first article inspection documentation ....................................8
3.2 Attachments.................................................................................................................. 9
3.2.1 Attachment Parts History (example) ...................................................................... 9
3.2.2 Attachment Evaluation Matrix First Article Inspection ................................................. 10
1 Terms
AIAG Automotive Industry Action Group
APQP Advanced Product Quality Planning
PAA Production Action Authorization
CAD Computer Aided Design
Cpk Process capability parameter (see SPC Manual from AIAG)
PSW Part Submission Warrant
FMEA Failure Mode and Effect Analysis
MS Maschinenfabrik Spaichingen
PPAP Production Part Approval Process
PPA Production Part Approval
Q Quality
QAA Quality Assurance Agreement
SOP Start of series Production
VDA Verband der Automobilindustrie e.V.
IMDS International Material Data System
2 Responsibilities
Quality Management MS is responsible for updating this instruction and controlling of the compliance of its
requirements.
3 Details
The supplier is only authorized for delivering automotive series parts to MS Spaichingen hereinafter
referred to as MS- after the official approval of the production process and the product. MS will approve
the process and the product in the case the requirements of the following instruction are met.
Additional attention should be paid to the QAA.
3.1 General
For a whole scope of supply as well as for included single parts MS may require a warrant.
While this document shows discrepancies to other customer requirements, the harder requirements are
binding.
The following matrix is preferred, while content of this document shows no discrepancies:
The supplier will supply sample parts for PPAP according the mentioned schedule also without special
production order and unpaid unless MS has waived the shipment of samples formally.
The supplier is requested to supply dimensional test results for uncoated parts in the case coated parts
require dimensional test results.
For casting and forging parts the supplier is requested to create cuts and perform measurements
referencing to the CAD model as defined to have evidence of required radii and wall thicknesses. The
cutted parts have to be submitted with the sample parts.
The supplier is requested to obtain a PAA from MS before shipping parts to MS site if parts dont comply
with the required specifications. Before the PAA expires the supplier has to perform PPA again with an
optimized version.
In the case special characteristics are not defined by MS or the customer of MS the supplier is requested
to define in minimum one characteristic autonomous. Special characteristics have to be analyzed with SPC
during production. Process capability studies are required for prototype parts as well as for initial sample
parts. Until the required capability values are met, all the parts have to be checked 100%. This is also
required if the capability values are not achieved or differences are detected. As long as the required
capability values are met, testing according control plan is essential.
As minimum the following values are required for SPC, while nothing different is agreed by MS in writing
form:
1 Warrant x x X X
2 Test results (e.g. dimension, function (approval from X x X
Daimler), material (e.g. resistance, physical
characteristics), process capability, weight, etc.)
3 Sample (numbers per cavity; for color samples differing 5 5 5 1
only 2 parts)
4 documents (e.g. blue prints and CAD-Data, Specs, x X E
released design changes, etc.)
5 Design- development releases of the supplier in the x X X
case of design responsibility
6 System FMEA Product E E
7 System FMEA Process E E
8 Process flow chart (production and inspection steps) X x
9 Control Plan E E
10 Test/ inspection equipment X
11 MSA, Gage R&R, there appropriate (results) x X X
12 Evidence of requirements by law, as far as agreed with E E E E
MS (e.g. environment, safety, recycling)
13 Material data sheet per IMDS (ID-Nr. has to be shown x x x X
on the warrant) and paper form
14 Software test report, it applicable - - - -
15 Bill of material, if required by MS with blueprint - - -
16 List of all worker instructions and test instructions with E E
release level
17 Tooling list (with quantity / numbers of cavities and x x
tooling quality)
18 Evidence of achieving the required cycle time, e.g. E E
production test results
19 Overview of buy parts and inbound parts of the supplier x x
with release level for part and process
20 Approval in writing form according characteristic matrix x x X
maturity degree part and process
21 Parts history for quality x x x
22 Parts labeled as PPAP parts X X X X
23 Approval of paint system by MS if applicable - -
X = requirement for submission level, E = only available for inspection at suppliers site, documentation
stays at supplier site
3.1.10 Noncompliance
If the agreed first article inspections (per maturity degree) do not end in a release and the supplier has
to represent the negative result, the supplier has to cover all cost caused by an additional PPA (cost
which are in direct context with the PPA)
In the case the supplier is responsible or has a share of responsibility for design of the scope of supply,
the vendor has to define special characteristics for safety relevance and homologation relevance by himself,
all products and/ or documents have to be marked correct. The marking has to be done according MS
or other customer requirements. In the case no requirements are available, the supplier shall use his own
requirements. For all countermeasures which are derived from marking the supplier is responsible for
implementation. All related documents have to be archived according to the requirements of this document.
3.1.13 Traceability
For traceability of parts the supplier is requested to label all special defined parts with a consecutive
number or a batch number and respectively with the production date, cavity number.
The scope of parts and the way of marking/ labeling will be defined by MS or its customers.
For the chosen scope of supply the supplier has to produce in minimum the quantity for one shift and in
maximum the quantity for 3 production days during the last production test (variations can be agreed if
required). The production test has to be carried out under peak production conditions.
For complex or critical parts from sub suppliers the vendor has to carry out production releases in an
analogous procedure, where applicable with participation of MS or its customers. The required scope has to
be agreed with the Supplier Management of the goods receiving MS site.
3.2 Attachments
3.2.1 Attachment Parts History (example)
Parts History
Quality
rejected or not
vendor parts approved conditional approved
approved