Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pre-production run
Create & review preliminary process flow diagram, PFMEA, and Control Plan.
Finalize PCM & use document for any preproduct part runs.
APQP Requirements
Initiate Safe Launch practice & review supplier's data for appropriate actions.
Review MEI PPAP Requirments with the supplier (per MEI PPAP Checklist)
Validation review of "1st Off" tool/part condition(s). Address any issues that can't be contained w/n program timing.
Review supplier's manufacturing feasibility document(s) Review preliminary capacity study & initial supplier master schedule plan
Update previous phase open issues and key documents. Component Criticality Rating A= MEI SDE will coduct APQP 1 - 4 w/ Supplier B= MEI SDE will conduct APQP 1 and 4 w/ Supplier. PPAP only to SDE. Supplier is still responsible for C= maintaining APQP 1-4.
Process Owner/Department: Chris Hempsall Approved by: Justin Reaume / Pur Dir
Key Metrics contain those elements that contribute to a successful launch. This form allows for four reviews. The minimum requirement is to use the first two columns at APQP-2 and APQP-4. The APQP-3 report is generated during the first parts off run at the supplier's manufacturing location. This establishes a baseline performance on the process in its "as received" state. The APQP-4 report is generated at the time product is manufactured for the PPAP submission. The additional columns would either be used at the discretion of the SDE or based on circumstances that require additional reviews. An example of how a Supply Chain Map may appear for a typical metal component.
Form for showing multi-tier supply chain relationships involved in providing the component/assembly to MEI. The information documented here will also be used in the creation of the Product Characteristics Matrix (PCM). The PCM is used initially to define and determine appropriate controls for special characteristics, other process critical features and customer touch points. This tab is used to define the process at MEI's direct supplier. Throughout the APQP phase of launch this form is used as the Pre-Launch Control Plan and also forms the basis for Safe Launch Planning.
The use of this tab is identical to the functionality define above, with the exception that this is used to document the remaining supply chain's, below the Tier II supplier, impact on the critical features.
Format to be used for a weekly summary of the inspection results from the Safe Launch Plan. This information will be used as part of the decision making process for the removal of the Safe Launch Controls.
Open Issues
The action plan format used to document open issues, their actions and resolution throughout the APQP process. This combines several different action plans generated by different, individual tools into a single document.
It is an expectation of MEI that the PPAP Checklist is used for each new part submission to make sure that all required PPAP elements are submitted free of the errors that have been historical observed. MEI is confident that if the PPAP Checklist is used that it will help insure expedited PPAP approval. Please use the embedded PPAP ".ZIP folder" to make sure that all required PPAP elements are submitted in a softcopy format that helps with ease of review and document storage. Lists the individuals involved in the component(s) launch, for both MEI and the supplier, and their respective contact information. This tab is optional and may be used as needed.
Contacts
Part No.:
Date: ________________
Rev. No.:
YES
NO
Considerations
Is the 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 Cpk's that meet requirements? Is there adequate capacity to produce product? Does the design allow the use of efficient material handling techniques? Can product be manufactured without incurring any unusual: l Costs for capital equipment? l Costs for tooling? l Alternative manufacturing methods? Is statistical process control required on product? Is statistical process control presently used on similar products? Where statistical process control is used on similar products: l Are the processes in control and stable? l Are Cpk's greater than 1.33? Is the appropriate packaging available to protect the product during shipment? (Provide a proposal)
Are special / uncommon materials required that are not readily available? Conclusion: Feasible Feasible (Conditional) Not Feasible Issue # Open Close
> Product can be produced as specified with no revisions. > Changes recommended (see issues list below). > Design revision required to produce product within the specified requirements.
Sign-Offs: Magna Electronics Name: Title: Signature: Date: Name: Title: Signature: Date: Supplier _____________________________ Name: Title: Signature: Date: Name: Title: Signature: Date:
Year 2
52
1. Supplier Kick-Off
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7
Design FMEA Preliminary Capacity Study reviewed Manufacturing Feasibility reviewed Component Design Review Product Characteristic Matrix initiated Key Supplier Metrics initiated Supplier Project timing plan Open Issues Action Plan created Measurement/ Testing equipment Preliminary Process Flow Chart Review Preliminary PFMEA Review Preliminary Control Plan Review Tooling Capital equipment Training Process instructions Packaging Key Supplier Metrics reviewed ELV/IMDS Safe Launch Plan (PCM) finalized Sub-Supplier PPAP Approvals Supplier Ramp Plan Plant Readiness Review Launch Readiness Audit Appearance Approval Process (when applicable) Key Supplier Metrics reviewed PPAP Launch Readiness Audit Run at Rate Key Supplier Metrics reviewed OK to Launch Sign-Off
5. Other Requirements
3. Pre-PPAP
2. Product/Production Realization
KEY:
X Planned start
Planned completion
Actual start
>
Actual end
Year 2
52
1. Supplier Kick-Off
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 4.5 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.5 5.6 5.7
Design FMEA Preliminary Capacity Study reviewed Manufacturing Feasibility reviewed Component Design Review Product Characteristic Matrix initiated Key Supplier Metrics initiated Supplier Project timing plan Open Issues Action Plan created Measurement/ Testing equipment Preliminary Process Flow Chart Review Preliminary PFMEA Review Preliminary Control Plan Review Tooling Capital equipment Training Process instructions Packaging Key Supplier Metrics reviewed ELV/IMDS Safe Launch Plan (PCM) finalized Sub-Supplier PPAP Approvals Supplier Ramp Plan Plant Readiness Review Launch Readiness Audit Appearance Approval Process (when applicable) Key Supplier Metrics reviewed PPAP Launch Readiness Audit Run at Rate Key Supplier Metrics reviewed OK to Launch Sign-Off
5. Other Requirements
3. Pre-PPAP
2. Product/Production Realization
KEY:
X Planned start
Planned completion
Actual start
>
Actual end
Definition Data is derived from the 'APQP Progress Report'. This metric tracks the percentage of GREEN elements compared to the total number of elements being tracked.
Goal
Results Enter the number of GREEN elements at the time of the report.
Enter the total number of elements being tracked. There are 34 elements on the APQP Progress Report. For suppliers where the DFMEA does not apply subtract 1. For suppliers who are not providing an Appearance item, subtract 1.
Process Instructions
Total number of set-up, manufacturing and inspection instructions needed. Enter total number of process instructions needed for serial production.
Percentage of good parts to the total number of parts produced during the Run at Rate. Enter the number '1,' which represents the production of 100% good, or usable, parts.
Enter, as a decimal number, the ratio of total parts produced to good parts from the trial run.
Process Efficiency
Measured in available capacity. Expectation for open capacity is 15% minimum. This is achieved by dividing Takt time into cycle time and subtracting the result from 1. The number of designated characteristics with a Ppk > 1.67.
The amount of available capacity at the time of the review. Enter result as a decimal number. The minimum amount of available capacity should be 15% (85% utilization). Enter 0.15 Enter the number of characteristics, with a Ppk > 1.67, at the time of the review. Enter the total number of designated characteristics on the drawing.
Process Capability
Test Achievement
Total number of performance and materials tests that need to be conducted to meet the specifications shown on the drawing. This number is a combination The should represent the total number of of the number of unique tests multiplied individual tests required times the number by the number of samples required for of samples, for each test, that is required. the test.
This is the total number of samples that passed all of the required testing at the time of the review.
Metric
Definition
Goal
Results Enter the appropriate stage of process implementation in regard to manufacturing for serial production. 1. Prototype process is implemented; No released deviation of concession; No containment plan. 2. Interim process implemented, with partial production intent process; No released deviation or concession; No containment plan. 3. Prototype or partially implemented process; Released deviation or concession; No containment plan. 4. Partial or fully implemented process; Released deviation or concession; Containment plan implemented. 5. Fully implemented process; No deviation or concession required
APQP Readiness is derived from the Progress Process Implementation - Data This metric assesses the'APQP level of Report'. This metric tracks the % Completed implementation of the full production percentage of GREEN elements intent process. Processes that are not compared to the total number of fully implemented at the Start-ofelements being tracked. Production require a deviation, or concession, to allow shipment. This document needs to clearly define the state of the process implementation, provide a time line for completing the implementation, list any non-conformities to the drawing and/or specifications, and a containment plan to keep those nonconformances from reaching MEI.
5. Fully implemented process; No deviation or concession required. Launch Readiness Audit A comprehensive audit tool's score, which assesses a process's state of preparation to meet serial production requirements. The score achieved on the Launch Readiness Audit. Enter data as a decimal number. The minimum goal for full release for production is 90%. Goal is 100% and entered as "1". The number of approved sub-component and material PPAPs at the time of the report.
Number PPAPs approved for the purchased sub-components and materials that makes up the final shipped component/material, and that do not have The number of approved sub-component any deviations, waivers, and/or and materials making up the shipped concessions granted by any tier below component/material. MEI. Number of PPAP submission package elements completed compared to required number. The total number of required elements, or documents, required to be submitted.
The number of elements (or documents) completed for the PPAP package at the time of the review.
Definition Data element is derived from thea 'APQP Progress This evaluates supplier's ability Report'. This metric tracks to meet ramp-up timing andthe volumes. percentage of GREEN elements compared to the total number of elements being tracked.
Goal
Results Enter the number corresponding to the completed stage from the list below. 1. Has not received any production releases from using plant(s). 2. Is receiving production releases from the using plant(s), but no production schedule or plan documented to meet those volumes or has ramp plan, is receiving plant releases, but is not shipping to plan and/or releases . 3. Has not received production releases from plant(s), but has created a preliminary planned based on quoted volumes and program timing. 4. Is receiving production releases and has created a plan, but production schedule does not reflect the plan. 5. Is receiving production releases, has created a ramp plan and this plan is reflected in the production schedule.
Enter the goal, Level 5-Is receiving production releases, has created a ramp plan and this plan is reflected in the production schedule. Safe Launch Plan (PCM) Deployment Completion of the PCM is noted by Operations, i.e., plant, approval of the Safe Launch Plan portion of the form. Enter number of completed stage at time of review. Enter the number '5' representing the completion of the PCM, less the exit from the Safe Launch Plan. This applies to situations where the PPAP will be submitted in a span of time from before SOP to 30 days after SOP.
Stages of completion are: 1. MEI's supplier has completed the form, less SLP. 2. MEI's supplier has completed their sub-supplier form, less SLP. 3. Supplier section completed, including Enter the number '6' for situations where SLP. the SLP exit is required for closing APQP. 4. Sub-supplier section completed, including SLP. 5. Characteristic Review signed off on both tabs. 6. Complete sign-off on both tabs for "Safe Launch Exit Approval.
Primary Indicator: Goal Production Preparation Influencing Factors Number of 'Progress Report' elements with Green status 1. APQP Readiness Total number of elements from 'Progress Report' Total number of instructions completed 2. Process Instructions MANUFACTURABILITY Total number of instructions needed. Results from Run at Rate 3. First Time Capability Ideal % of good parts Available capacity based on % of cycle time to Takt time achieved Maximum acceptable % of available capacity base on %cycle time to Takt time Number of capable designated characteristics features 5. Process Capability Total number of designated characteristics features 6. Test Achievement 7. Process Implementation % Completed 8. Launch Readiness Audit 9. Sub-Component PPAP Approvals 10. PPAP Package Completion 11. Supplier Ramp Plan DLN 12. Safe Launch Plan (PCM) Deployment Number of tests passed % of total tests High volume process or Interim Process with Concession Production volumes provided off production intent process Score achieved during event Goal is 100%. Number of sub-components and materials PPAP approved Total number of purchased sub-components/materials Number of PPAP required documents completed Number of PPAP required documents required State of completed supplier ramp plan Ramp planned completed and shipping to releases Enter completed stage of PCM (see comments) Complete Stage 5 by SOP 5 Metrics Overall Score #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 5 5 Target Results
K E Y M E A S U R E A B L E S
4. Process Efficiency
SUPPLIER SIGN-OFF (MANAGER LEVEL) Function Name (print) Signature Project Leader Purch/Sales Production Control Quality Engineering Design Manufacturing
MEI SIGN-0FF SDE MEI Internal Use only Commodity Mgr/Buyer SQA Name (print) Name (print) Name (print) Signature Signature Signature
PPAP
Kojak Heat Treat Benton Harbor, MI Harden & Draw Fine Fasteners, Inc. Benton Harbor, MI M8x20 Weld Stud 59039813A Cold Forming
CUSTOMER
AAA Heat Treat Frederick, MD Harden & Draw ABC Nut Co. Summit, NJ M8x15 Staking Nut 59039812C Cold Forming
Precision Forming Amarrillo, TX Airbag Reaction Can 49019804A Stamping body, end caps, brackets
Part Number:
Tier III Tier II
Date:
ME Receiving Operation
Revision:
OEM Customer Tier
MEI/ Supplier
#
Design Characteristic
Level/ Class
DFMEA Sev.
Characteristic Review Approval Name MEI SDE MEI Plant SQA Supplier Representative Safe Launch Exit Approvals Name MEI SDE MEI Plant SQA Supplier Representative Position/ Title Date Signature Additional Comments Position/ Title Date Signature Additional Comments
TRW/ Supplier
# Design Characteristic Level/ Class DFMEA Severity PFMEA Occurrence PFMEA Detection RPN
Incident
25000
6 5 5 5 4 3 0 0
Nut thread check
3
2 2 2
0
Adjuster hole diameter
0
Wheel cylinder hole diameter
0
Brake cable hole position
0
NO paint scratch and or contamination, Blistering, runs
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
Hold down pin diameter
Example
20 10 0 W14 W15 W16 W17 W18 W19 W20 W21
Incidents
10000
5000
PPM
W18
W19
W20
W21
W22
W23
W24
W25
W26
W27
W28
W29
#VALUE! W18
#DIV/0! W19
#DIV/0! W20
#DIV/0! W21
#DIV/0! W22
#DIV/0! W23
#DIV/0! W24
#DIV/0! W25
#DIV/0! W26
#DIV/0! W27
#DIV/0! W28
#DIV/0! W29
Total 11 10 7 6 5 5 5 4 3 3 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Action
11 10 7 6 5 5 5 4 3 3 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Item Number
Source of Issue
Distribution:
1.3 Manufacturing Feasibility reviewed 1.4 Component Design Review 1.5 Key Supplier Metrics initiated 1.6 Supplier Project timing plan 1.7 Open Issues Action Plan created 2.1 Measurement/ Testing equipment 2.2 Tooling 2.3 Capital equipment 2.4 Initiate PCM (Safe Launch Plan) 2.5 Sub-Supplier PPAPs 2.6 Process Flow Diagram
2.7 PFMEA 2.8 Control Plan 2.9 Training 2.1 Process instructions 2.11 Packaging 2.12 Launch Readiness Audit 2.13 Key Supplier Metrics reviewed 3.1 ELV/IMDS 3.2 Safe Launch Plan finalized 3.3 Supplier Ramp Plan 3.4 Plant Readiness Review 3.5 Launch Readiness Audit 3.6 Appearance Approval Process (when applicable)
3.7 Key Supplier Metrics reviewed 4.1 PPAP 4.2 Launch Readiness Audit 4 4.3 Run at Rate 4.4 Key Supplier Metrics reviewed 4.5 OK to Launch Sign-Off
Revision Level:
Submitted
Complete
Required
Document
PART NUMBER INCLUDED AND CORRECT. REVISION LEVEL INCLUDED AND CORRECT WEIGHT INCLUDED SUPPLIER MANUFACTURING INFORMATION COMPLETE, INCLUDING SUPPLIER CODE SUBMISSION INFORMATION COMPLETE. 1. ALL APPROPRIATE BOXES CHECKED 2. BUYER NAME INCLUDED 3. APPLICATION INFORMATION INCLUDES MAGNA CUSTOMER AND PROGRAM ELV/IMDS INFORMATION INCLUDED: The Magna Holly IMDS # is 9822 CORRECT REASON FOR SUBMISSION BOX CHECKED 1. IF OTHER IS CHECKED, THAT THE CORRECT REASON FOR SUBMISSION IS NOTED CORRECT SUBMISSION LEVEL BOX IS CHECKED THE SUBMISSION RESULTS AREA IS PROPERLY FILLED OUT AND THE PACKAGE REFLECTS THIS 1. PACKAGE CONTENTS MUST REFLECT SUPPLIER'S STATEMENT OF COMPLIANCE 2. FOR MULTIPLE TOOLS/CAVITIES/PROCESSES THAT THE INFORMATION IS NOTED IF APPLICABLE THE DECLARATION AREA CONTAINS THE RUN AT RATE INFORMATION SIGNATURE AREA IS COMPLETED AND CONTAINS ALL INFORMATION
1 2 3 4 5 S S S S R
E. F. G. H.
I. J.
R S S
Change Documents
A. B. C. D. E. PART NUMBER LEVEL INCLUDED AND CORRECT. REVISION LEVEL INCLUDED AND CORRECT PART APPLICATION / PROGRAM / PLANTS IDENTIFIED SPECIFIES TIME SPAN OR VOLUME AFFECTED ACTION PLAN INCLUDED IF REQUEST IS FOR DEVIATION/CONCESSION SIGNED AND DATED BY MAGNA ENGINEERING
R S S
R R S
Design FMEA
A. B. C. D. PART NUMBER LEVEL INCLUDED, CURRENT AND CORRECT. REVISION LEVEL INCLUDED AND CORRECT DOES IT FOLLOW THE ENTIRE PROCESS AS SHOWN IN FLOW CHART? DO HIGH RPN FAILURE MODES HAVE ACTIONS SHOWN FOR IMPROVEMENT? AREAS OF CONCERN IDENTIFIED IN THE DFMEA ARE CARRIED OVER INTO THE PFMEA.
R R S
R R S
Process FMEA
A. B. C. D. E. PART NUMBER LEVEL INCLUDED, CURRENT AND CORRECT. REVISION LEVEL INCLUDED AND CORRECT DOES IT FOLLOW THE ENTIRE PROCESS AS SHOWN IN FLOW CHART? WHERE APPROPRIATE, DO HIGH RPN FAILURE MODES HAVE ACTIONS SHOWN FOR IMPROVEMENT? ARE CONCERNS INCLUDED THAT WERE DISCOVERED IN EARLY STAGES? CRITICAL FEATURES IDENTIFIED ON THE PCM/SLP, BUT NOT ON THE DRAWING (CUSTOMER TOUCH POINTS, CRITICAL PROCESS CONTROLS, ETC.) ARE INCLUDED IN THE PFMEA AND HAVE RPN CALCULATED.
R R S
Dimensional Results
A. ALL DIMENSIONS AND NOTES ON THE DRAWING ARE INCLUDED IN THE INSPECTION REPORT B. THERE IS A SEPARATE REPORT FOR EACH CAVITY, DIE, TOOL, LINE, ETC. EXCEPTIONS CAN ONLY BE GRANTED BY MAGNA SDE.
R S S
C. WHEN SAMPLES ARE SUBMITTED, THE SAMPLE NUMBER CORRESPONDS WITH (SERIALIZED TO) THE DATA D. IF NON-CONFORMANCES ARE DOCUMENTED, THE WARRANT LETTER DOES NOT STATE COMPLIANCE. IT IS THE EXPECTATION OF MAGNA THAT NON-CONFORMANCES ARE RECONCILED PRIOR TO PPAP SUBMISSION.
E. DIMENSIONS ARE REPORTED IN THE SAME UNITS AS ON THE MAGNA OR CUSTOMER DRAWING F. LAYOUTS OF SUBCOMPONENTS AND/OR ASSEMBLIES ARE DOCUMENTED AND AVAILABLE
R S S
R R S
Not OK
Assessment
OK
A. CAPABILITY STUDY RESULTS ARE SUBMITTED ON THE PRODUCT CHARACTERISTICS MATRIX (per MAGNA XXX) B. STUDIES ARE CONDUCTED FOR ALL CRITICAL AND SIGNIFICANT CHARACTERISTICS (EXCEPT DIMENSIONS WITH BONUS TOLERANCES). EACH STUDY MUST INCLUDE THE STUDY DATE. C. TEN (10) MEASUREMENTS FOR BONUS TOLERANCE DIMENSIONS ARE INCLUDED or PER MAGNA SDE DIRECTION D. PPK's FOR ALL CHARACTERISTICS ARE GREATER THAN, OR EQUAL TO, 1.67. E. IF NO, A WRITTEN CORRECTIVE ACTION STATEMENT, FOR EACH, IS INCLUDED AND CONTAINMENT, WHEN FEASIBLE, IS 100% INSPECTION. F. RAW DATA IS INCLUDED FOR EACH STUDY G. PROCESS AVERAGES MATCH FOR MULTIPLE CAVITIES, DIES AND TOOL PROCESSES.
R R S
R S S
13 Control Plan
A. B. C. D. E. F. G. PART NUMBER LEVEL INCLUDED AND CORRECT. REVISION LEVEL INCLUDED AND CORRECT DOES CONTROL PLAN REFLECTS LAUNCH PRACTICE ITEMS? DOES IT SHOW SAME REVISION LEVEL AS PFMEA? CONTROL PLAN ADDRESSES ALL SIGNIFICANT AND CRITICAL DIMENSIONS. CONTROL PLAN ADDRESSES THE ENTIRE PROCESS FROM RECEIPT OF MATERIAL TO SHIPPING PRODUCT. CONTROL PLAN INCLUDES ANNUAL REVALIDATION REQUIREMENTS. CRITICAL FEATURES IDENTIFIED ON THE PCM, BUT NOT ON THE DRAWING (CUSTOMER TOUCH POINTS, CRITICAL PROCESS CONTROLS, ETC.) ARE INCLUDED IN THE PFMEA AND HAVE RPN CALCULATED.
R R S
14 Appearance Approval Report (As Appropriate) 15 Bulk Materials Requirement Checklist (As Appropriate) 16 Sample Product 17 Master Sample 18 Checking Aids 19 Compliance with Customer Specific Requirements
A. DOCUMENT(S) DEMONSTRATING COMPLIANCE WITH ANY OEM SPECIFIC COMMUNICATED REQUIREMENTS.
S S S R R R R S S R R R R R S R R S
* * * * * *
R R R R R R
21 Evidence of ELV / IMDS Approval 22 Packaging Plan and Sample Label (per MAGNA XXX) 23 RUN-AT-RATE or Capacity Verification per MAGNA SDE DIRECTION (per MAGNA XXX)
A. DOES THE SUPPLIER NEED TO INCREASE THEIR CAPACITY? B. ARE BOTTLENECKS IDENTIFIED AND RESOLVED? ARE THERE ANY TOOLING CONSTRAINTS?
* * *
* R *
R R S * * S
S S S S R
S S S S R
S S R
Part Number
Contact Information
Supplier
MEI Engineering
Project Management