Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Planning Product Design & Development Process Design & Development Product & Process Verification
1
Purchase Agreement
Formal document to define responsibilities and expectation of both customer and supplier.
Design Responsibility
Design responsibility must be clearly defined, agreed within the team, and documented.
DVP and R
When the supplier has design control or is performing design related activities, a DVP and R must be developed and agreed within the team.
Design F.M.E.A.
Conducted cross functionally with customer and supplier.
Design Review.
Scheduled meeting to review design proposals or changes prior to implementation.
10
11
12
13
14
Cummins and the supplier to mutually agree on logistical requirements. -Transportation - Ordering method - Shipping frequency and Quantities etc.. All appropriate functions at the supplier must be registered in iSCM and be able to complete their repsective functions via iSCM.
Packaging Specifications
15 The supplier must ensure that packaging is designed to ensure that the quality of the product is maintained during shipping.
Process F.M.E.A.
17 A disciplined analytical technique that looks at the probability and effects of failure, focused on the complete manufacturing process. 18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Production Readiness
Closed status on all previously addressed 24 elements.
28
29
IMDS
A repository for storing supply chain components and assembly materials data (weights and chemical structure) for the automotive industry.
Date:
Company/Title
Phone/Fax
CAPABILITY COMPATIBILITY CLASS I CLASS II CLASS III CLASS IV CLASS V APQP Elements AIAG APQP Element Program Need Date
Date Closed
RFQ 1 - Purchase Agreement * 2 - Manufacturing Process Layout * 3 - Design Responsibility * 4 - DVP & R * 5 - Design FMEA 2.1 6 - Design Review(s)/sign off with supplier 2.4 7 - Prototype Build Control Plan 2.5 8 - Drawings/Specifications 2.6/7/8 9 - Facilities, Equipment and Tools/sign off with supplier 2.10 10 - Gauging and Test Equipment/comparison with TCL test equipment 2.12 11 - Preliminary C of C, Compatibility Matrix * 12 - Subcontractor Status - APQP * 13 - Team Feasibility Commitment 2.13 14 - Logistics/EDI Capability/iSCM * 15 - Packaging Specifications & sign off 3.1 16 - Manufacturing Process Flow Chart 3.3 17 - Process FMEA 3.6 18 - Manufacturing Quality Verfication * 19 - Measurement Systems Evaluation 4.2 20 - Pre-Launch Control Plan 3.7 21 - Operator Process Instructions 3.8 22 - Production Trial Run (Capacity Verified) 4.1 23 - Production C of C, Compatibility Matrix * 24 - Production Control Plan 4.7 25 - Production Source Approval 4.5 26 - Production Part Approval (PPAP) 4.4 27 - Production Readiness * 28 - Production Capability Certification * 29 - IMDS * * = Cummins Specific Requirement. See Attached Reference Element # G/Y/R/B Status Summary APQP Chg Closed Green Yellow Red Total
Comments:
Address :
B R Y G
3. Design Responsibility
* Who has design control, Cummins or the supplier? * How is design control documented? * Will this component be released as a 15-1? * Does Cummins have input into the design? * Is the supplier providing significant input into the design? * Is the supplier performing any design development or validation tasks? * Is a warranty agreement in place?
B R Y G
4. D V P & R
* DVPandR = Design validation planning and report * Has a DVPandR been developed and jointly agreed between Cummins and the supplier? * Has each component and process had expert review? Note: Each component and process shall have expert review and input into DVPandR and DFMEA activities. Note: Design related activities apply when the supplier has design control or in situations where Cummins retains design control but has the supplier complete design development and/or validation activities.
B R Y G
5. Design FMEA
* Has a design F.M.E.A. been developed? * Is there documented evidence? * Was it conducted prior to - D - phase * Continually updated as needs changed? * Are all issues closed out? * If not, note outstanding issues and responsibilities? * Were all actions corrected prior to - L - phase? Note: Design related activities apply when the supplier has
design control or in situations where Cummins retains design control but has the supplier complete design development and/or validation activities.
R Y G
6. Design Review
* Were reviews conducted prior to - D - phase? * Is there documented evidence? * How many changes were deemed necessary? * Are all issues closed out? * Were all actions closed out prior to - L - phase? Is the supplier participating in design reviews? Note: The supplier should participate in design reviews regardless of design responsibility.
B R Y G
B R Y G
B R Y G
B R Y G
B R Y G
* Has the supplier established the A.P.Q.P. requirements with their sub contractors? * Are all elements at GREEN? * If not, what actions are still outstanding? * Are all these elements documented for review? * Has / will the supplier, provide P.P.A.P. data? * Has Cummins SQI reviewed the sub-contractor PPAP? * Has Cummins SQI participated in a joint APQP review with sub-contractors? * Is your sub contractor QS9000 or Equivalent approved?
B R Y G B R Y G
B R Y G
B R Y G
B R Y G
B R Y G
* Have key learnings from SQSW been applied to the MQV and all other applicable quality documents and processes? * Is there evidence of an active MQV capturing: - OEM Touch Points - Part functionality - Defect history of this type component
B R Y G
B R Y G
B R Y G
B R Y G
B R Y G
B R Y
P.P.A.P. requirements.
B R Y G
B R Y G
29. IMDS
* Have all materials been entered into IMDS website? www.mdsystem.com is the website to be utilized.
94018166.xls.ms_office
9 of 17
GYR Definitions
Blue: Green: Blue ratings are given when the element is completed and/or considered closed. Green ratings are given prior to the program need date to indicate that the element will meet the program need date and meets all quality expectations. Yellow ratings are given prior to the program need date to indicate an element may not meet the program need date or quality expectations. To be considered yellow, a recovery plan must be in place for the element. Yellow ratings indicate a need for program management attention. A yellow rating can only be given to an element prior to the program need date. Red ratings are given prior to the program need date to indicate an element will not meet the program need date or quality expectations. Red signifies the program is at risk and needs immediate management attention. Any element rated red at its program need date must carry the rating through the remainder of the program. Completion of the element after the program need date does not change the timing status of the element; the element is late and must stay red.
Yellow:
Red:
Supplier Process FMEA: Audit Summary Name of Component, Sub-System or System: Part Number(s) Responsible Supplier: Responsible Supplier Quality Improvement Engineer: Name of Auditor: Date Reviewed: Date of PFMEA (Original or Rev. Level): Overall Rating: "X" Header "Yes" overall and no more than three sections "E" overall = "Green" Neither "Green" nor "Red" criteria met = "Yellow" Six or more non-Header sections "No" overall = "Red"
"No"______
Note: If response is N/A, check "Yes" and include "N/A" and reason in "Auditor Comments."
1 1a 1b 1c 1d Does the Header Contain Adequate Information ? Yes E No Auditor Comments Name of Program(s) included? N/A Name of Supplier included? N/A Part Number and Description included? N/A Core Team includes all names with title or area? Note: Phone #'s recommended, but not mandatory for this audit. N/A 1e Key Date Shown is Cummins VPI Program Beta Build Date? N/A 1f FMEA Date (Orig.) is shown? N/A 1g FMEA "(Rev.)" date within past 60 days? Note: "N/A" if "(Orig.)" date is within 60 days. N/A N/A 1h All else ok (no other issues)? If all answers "Yes," check "Yes." If one or more "No," check "No." N/A
No Auditor Comments
4 Potential Effects of Failure Column Adequate? Yes 4a Effects written in terms of what customer (downstream process or end user) will notice/experience ("unable to assemble" do not use "scrap")? 4b All else ok (no other issues)? If all answers "Yes," check "Yes." If one or more "No," check "No." Otherwise, check "E" 5 Severity Yes 5a Severity rankings not underrated based on AIAG Manual criteria? Note: Overrating not recommended, but not requirement for this audit. 5b Severity rankings identical for identical Potential Effects? 5c All else ok (no other issues)? If all answers "Yes," check "Yes." If one or more "No," check "No." Otherwise, check "E" 6 Class Yes 6a Are all Key, Major or Critical characteriustics identified? 6b All else ok (no other issues)? If all answers "Yes," check "Yes." If one or more "No," check "No." Otherwise, check "E"
No Auditor Comments
No Auditor Comments
No Auditor Comments
94018166.xls.ms_office
11
Name of Component, Sub-System or System: Part Number(s) Responsible Supplier: Responsible Supplier Quality Improvement Engineer: Name of Auditor: Date Reviewed: Date of PFMEA (Original or Rev. Level): Supplier Process FMEA: Audit Summary-Page 2
7 Potential Causes Column Adequate? Yes 7a Descriptions specific? Note: 1) "Incorrect set-up", "improper cooling", etc. must be replaced by or include specific description of what was "incorrect" (temp. set too high) or "improper" (time too short). 2) Replace "operator error" with "operator installed widget upside down." 7b All else ok (no other issues)? If all answers "Yes," check "Yes." If one or more "No," check "No." Otherwise, check "E" 8 Occurrence Yes 8a There is one Occurrence ranking for each cause ("worn/broken tool" must have two separate rankings)? 8b All else ok (no other issues)? If all answers "Yes," check "Yes." If one or more "No," check "No." Otherwise, check "E" 9 Current Controls Column Adequate? Yes 9a Controls correctly identified as either Detection ("D") (Mistake Proof, 100% visual insp., etc.) or Prevention ("P") (visual aids, training, PM, etc.) controls? Note: 1) separate set-up process (P.) from 1st piece inspect. (D.). 2) Error-Proofing is preventive (can't make), but may be listed as "P" or "D" or both. 9b Controls are adequately explained or easily referenced? 9c All else ok (no other issues)? If all answers "Yes," check "Yes." If one or more "No," check "No." Otherwise, check "E" 10 Detection Yes 10a One Detection ranking for each Occurrence ranking? 10b Detection ranking consistent with AIAG Manual (Visual Inspection=8, etc.)? Note: Detection ranking is no better than the best detection method (SPC + visual inspection + hourly audit=6 [SPC is best]). 10c All else ok (no other issues)? If all answers "Yes," check "Yes." If one or more "No," check "No." Otherwise, check "E" 11 Recommended Actions & Responsibility Columns Reasonable? Yes 11a Do all Severity rankings of 9 or 10 with a Detection ranking greater than 3 have a Recommended Action which will lower the Detection? Notes: 1) "None" only to be used if Detection ranking is less than 4. 2) Justification for "None" in this column recommended, but not mandatory for this audit. 11b Recommended Actions are assigned to a specific person (not a department)? 11c Target Completion dates are shown and not past due? 11d All else ok (no other issues)? If all answers "Yes," check "Yes." If one or more "No," check "No." Otherwise, check "E" 12 12a 12b 12c Action Results Effectively Executed? Yes Re-rankings affected Occurrence and/or Detection (not Severity)? Occurrence and/or Detection re-rankings consistent with AIAG Manual? All else ok (no other issues)? If all answers "Yes," check "Yes." If one or more "No," check "No." Otherwise, check "E" E No Auditor Comments
No Auditor Comments
No Auditor Comments
No Auditor Comments
No Auditor Comments
No Auditor Comments
94018166.xls.ms_office
12
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
PPAP Run
Casting / Forging Source Tool Details Tool Development Post Casting / Forging activity Heat Treatment
Machining Location
Facility Address
Facility Address
Operation No
Operation No
Shopfloor Layout plan Completed Assembly Location Designated Area Inhouse Operation No
Operation No
Shopfloor Layout Plan completed Environmental Factors Considered Capacity Adequate SubContractor APQP Item Supplier Name Selection process used
Shopfloor Layout Plan completed Environmental Factors Considered Capacity Adequate Item Supplier Name Selection process used
Tooling List
Tool
Source
Tool
Source
Machine
Source
Due Date
Machine
Source
Due Date
Supplier Name :
Product Name :
Volume considered :
COMP0NENT.
P.NAME
OPN.NO.
OPN.
M/C DETAILS
SET OF MACHINING SET OF SET OF & ASSEMBLY CUTTING CUTTING FIXTURES UNDER TOOLS TOOLS REQD. MANUFACTURING AVAILABLE
Supplier Name :
Product Line:
P.NAME.
OPN.NAME
FOR Ist SAMPLE ,PPAP & Mass Production ( Time )- MACHINES ORDER STATUS EXP. DELIVERY DATE FIXTURE DETAIL
FOR Ist SAMPLE ,PPAP & Mass Production ( Time )- FIXTURE ORDER STATUS EXP. DELIVERY DATE
M/C DETAIL
SUPPLIER
STATUS ON
SUPPLIER
STATUS ON
10
20
30
4 5 6 7
40 50 60 70
Supplier Name:
AVAILABLE SL NO DESCRIPTION OF GAUGES & INSTRUMENTS L.C. IN MM GAUGE NO. CALIBRATION SATUS YES NO
AVAILABLE
YES
NO
GAUGES
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
INSTRUMENTS
DATE:
PREPARED BY
APPROVED BY