ppap 215 per asqr-09.2 rev b supplier awareness session course i.d. # 996971 four hours copyright ©...

PPAP 215Per ASQR-09.2 Rev B

Supplier Awareness Session

Course I.D. # 996971 Four HoursCOPYRIGHT © HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION. THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION (HS). YOU MAY NOT POSSESS, USE, COPY OR DISCLOSE THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION IN IT, FOR ANY PURPOSE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, TO DESIGN, MANUFACTURE OR REPAIR PARTS, OR OBTAIN ANY GOVERNMENT APPROVAL TO DO SO, WITHOUT HS’S EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION. NEITHER RECEIPT NOR POSSESSION OF THIS DOCUMENT ALONE, FROM ANY SOURCE, CONSTITUTES SUCH PERMISSION. POSSESSION, USE, COPYING OR DISCLOSURE BY ANYONE WITHOUT HS’S EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION IS NOT AUTHORIZED AND MAY RESULT IN CRIMINAL AND/OR CIVIL LIABILITY.

This document contains no technical data. ECCN:EAR99

INTRODUCTION TO ASQR-09.2, UTC PPAP PPAP 215, Supplier Awareness Training as prepared from PPAP 101 and PPAP 201

Course I.D. #: 996971

Course Length: 4 HOURS

Prepared by : George Bashura SDE

Date: February 29, 2012

Revision: B

Note to Instructors: DOCUMENT ALL TRAINING PER SP0809

PRODUCTION PART APPROVAL PROCESSControl Page

HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT.

THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99

2

What PPAP is and what is Hamilton Sundstrand’s vision on PPAP

PPAP key deliverables

Your role in PPAP

Risk mitigation through FMEA

OBJECTIVESBy The End Of This Session You Should Understand:



3

What’s PPAP?



4

PPAP is a specification used to establish confidence in component suppliers and their production processes, by proving that:

"....all Hamilton Sundstrand’s requirements are met by the supplier and that the process under review has demonstrated, during an actual production run, to have the potential to consistently produce parts meeting these requirements."

INTRODUCTION TO PPAPA Definition (Reference AIAG PPAP Manual)Production Part Approval Process

HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT

TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT.


5

HISTORY OF PPAPRoots in AutomotiveIn 1982 the management staff of General Motors, Chrysler and Ford Motors founded AIAG (Automotive Industry Action Group).

The group then created to Advanced Product Quality Planning & Control Plan (APQP), within these standards, the AIAG developed PPAP to advance the parts production approval process of quality planning.

The first manual spelling out the multiple requirement of PPAP was published in 1993. PPAP is part of the auto industry's overall Advance Product Quality Planning initiative, step-by-step procedures designed to ensure production of an end-product that will satisfy consumers.



6

7

UTC PPAPDeployment methods to suppliers

How deployed?Automotive (Benchmark) – ISO/TS 16949/PPAP Manual

Commercial – Supplier Quality Manuals

Aerospace – Purchase Order (ASQR-09.2)

Automotive1st Edition - 1993

BENCHMARK UTC COMMERCIAL UTC AEROSPACE



UTC PPAP Why is UTC Aerospace adopting PPAP?

COMPONENT RELIABILITY BATHTUB CURVE

Fai

lure

Rat

e

Time

Infant Mortality (Unbudgeted Costs)

Useful Life(Warranty Costs)

Wear Out

PPAP would reduce “Infant Mortality” costs incurred on a new program

KEY DRIVER - Escapes due to: * Poor/Changing designs * Poor manufacturing processes * Misunderstanding requirements * Workmanship errors * Supply Chain fluidity * Control of sub-tiers

KEY DRIVER - Inherent Design component reliability based on constant failure rate

$

* Beyond Warranty

* Aftermarket sales of spare parts

B787 TPRs initiated due to key drivers above



8

UTC PPAPBenefits to Customers, Plant Sites and Suppliers

Manufacturing process functions that are clearly planned, validated, documented and communicated that result in:

Reduced process variation

Statistically controlled processes

Enhanced customer confidence in supplier’s capabilities

Consistent approach in assuring quality and providing evidence

Reduced COPQ (infant mortality escapes)

Better controlled process changes

Development Production

Prevention through PPAPCurrent state

Time

$$ T

ota

l Co

st o

f Q

ual

ity

RedesignRe-qualifications

Escape Investigations



9

UTC PPAP PROCEDURE – ASQR-09.2ASQR-09.2 – AS9102 Comparison Matrix



COMPARISONHIGHLIGHTS

14 of 19 elements are covered in AS9102

UPPAP per ASQR-09.2 requires both design and process risk identification & mitigation

UPPAP requires more than one part to be 100% dimensionally verified (requires 5) to show process stability

ITEM #CRITICAL PRODUCTION SYSTEM ELEMENT

REQUIRING VALIDATION BY ASQR-09.2 (UTC PPAP)

AS9102 FAI REQUIRED

ELEMENT TO VALIDATE (Yes/ No)

1 Released Production Drawings Yes2 Additional Engineering & Quality Requirements Yes3 Production Purchase Order and Demand Fullfillment Yes4 Design Failure Modes Effects Analysis No5 Process Flow No6 Process Failure Modes Effects Analysis No7 Process Control Plan Yes8 Process Readiness Study No9 Initial Process Capability Studies Yes10 Measurement Systems Analysis Yes11 Engineering Frozen Planning and Source Approval Yes12 Dimensional Report Yes13 Production Verification Testing Yes14 Special Process and Nondestructive Test Approval Yes15 Material Certification Documentation Yes16 Raw Material Approval Yes17 Part Marking Approval Yes

18 Packaging, Preservation & Labeling Approval No

19 Review and Sign-Off Yes

Element not required to be reviewed by AS9102 FAI but is required by ASQR- 09.2 UTC PPAP

Element required to be reviewed by both AS9102 FAI and ASQR- 09.2 UTC PPAP

LEGEND

10

Company Private

ACCESSING ASQR-09.2 ON HS SUPPLIER PORTAL

Click on “Quality”

Click on “Aerospace QualityRequirements

Scroll down to ASQR-09.2

HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF

INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE

FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO

TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99 11



HS SUPPLIER PORTAL HELP

12

Go to: www.hssupplierportal.com

Click on “Help” tab

Get PPAP related materials concerning:

1) FMEA2) Process Certification3) Capacity Analysis Tool4) Manufacturing Process Review

forms5) Quality Clinic Implementation6) Ito University7) Training Schedule8) Supplier Gold9) Transition Process10) PPAP11) ….and much more!

Emails can be sent to the following address [email protected]

http://www.hssupplierportal.com/

VISIONWhat does HS want to achieve with PPAP?All new HS designed product (components and assemblies), significantly revised product, and/or product transitions are produced, at all times, using formally validated process in order to mitigate the risk of Customer escapes.



13

TECHNICAL PROCESS REVIEWS Findings in the production phase

HS Supplier Quality conducted 700+ supply baseTechnical Process Reviews over the last2 years for various programs

Major process weaknesses identified were:

Misinterpretation of drawing requirementsOperator work instructions inadequaciesLittle or no use of PFMEA to identify/mitigate process risksLack of using process controls and mistake-proof methodsInadequate sub-tier supplier flowdown of critical HS requirementsNot enough usage of Gage Capability Studies and SPC

PPAP will address all the short-comings discovered during these reviews



14

FORMAL VALIDATIONWhat does this mean? For a Supplier?

Supplier’s will perform formal production reviews, QC-0990.27 on processes used to manufacture HS product with PPAP requirements

Reviews conducted by SQA with functional experts where appropriate (i.e., X-Ray, Heat Treat, etc.)

Supplier’s will prepare the Objective Evidence Package QC-0990.28 and the checklist QC-0990.26 that supports each element selected

HS Supplier Quality will perform a full or partial review of Objective Evidence Package based upon Suppliers PPAP Level

UPPAP Approval Submission Form sign-off bySupplier and HS



15

Level Submitted documentationReviewed

at

1 PPAP Approval form only HS

2PPAP Approval form with limited supporting data

HS

3PPAP Approval form with complete supporting data

HS


Supplier’s location

Company Private

HSC PPAP Tool KitHamilton Sundstrand has created a “PPAP Kit” for use by internal plant sites and suppliers

Contains all the forms required for submissionIncludes instruction on the use of the formsFully compliant to ASQR-09.2, UTC PPAP specification

The HSC PPAP Tool Kit contains everything required for submission and is available on the HS Supplier Portal at www.hssupplierportal.com


INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF

RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT.


Process ReadinessStudy Assessment

QC-0990.27PPAP 215

Training Package

HT1000 PPAPImplementation Manual

Form Number: QC-0990.26

Revision: I nitial Release

Date: 6/22/2011

Element UPPAP Element Criteria

Status (N/A, Not

Started, In-Process,

Completed)

Action I tem(s)/ Comments

A) Does producer have access to applicable UTC division drawings & specifications?B) I s top level and sub-level (BOM) drawings and specifications released (i.e. signatures applied)?C) I s producer working to correct drawing revisions, including all detail drawings (e.g. casting, forging, other detail parts) as indicated on the purchase order?

D) Validate if any Critical to Quality (CTQ) features called out.

A) Verify that any supplemental customer requirements (Purchase Order, Quality or Engineering Notes/Documents) are incorporated into producer and subtier manufacturing processes and documents.

B) Verify that the producer is working to the correct released revision of any supplemental customer requirement documents as specified on the Purchase Order (e.g. Quality or Engineering Notes/Documents, other specifications).A) Verify that the producer is working to a production purchase order?B) Verify that the sub-tier PO documents flow down any UTC requirements per ASQR-01, ASQR-09.2 etc.C) Does the UPPAP package have evidence that the producer knows the latest demand schedule and is updating capacity and manufacturing plans accordingly.D) I s there evidence that the producer flows down the latest demand schedule to subtier suppliers and is updating subtier management plans accordingly.

Released Production Drawings

SPD/ SMD and SI SheetsNOTE: See Element Reference Card for UTC

divisional definitions.

Production PO and Demand Fullfillment

UTC PPAP2 ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST

PPAP Checklist QC-0990.26

Objective EvidencePackage & Forms

QC-0990.28Part Number: Part Name :

Familiy Name:

Assessment Date:

Select PRS evaluation level:

P.R.S “Development” level = Planning, up to 1st batch >40%

P.R.S “Production Ready” level = Pre-production; before production component delivery >80%

P.R.S “Continuous Improvement” level = ZNC >90%

Total average score: 33%

Supplier Name: Supplier Code:

Supplier Mfg. Eng’g Rep.:

(Manager or Supervisor) _____________________________________(signature)

Supplier QA/QC Rep.:


UTC Member Focal Point:

_____________________________________(signature)

MOS 100%

Tooling 0%

Gauging 0%

Mfg. E._ TPM 0%

KPC

Sub-Tier Control

Capacity Planning 0%FOD 0%

Process Readiness Study (Reference Element 8, ASQR-09.2)

Production Ready

100%

0%

0%

0%0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

100%

MOS

Tooling

Gauging

Mfg. E._ TPM

KPC

Sub-Tier Control

Capacity Planning

FOD

Series1


Supplier Awareness Session

Course I.D. # 996971 Four Hours

COPYRIGHT © HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION. THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HAMILTON SUNDSTRANDCORPORATION (HS). YOU MAY NOT POSSESS, USE, COPY OR DISCLOSE THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION IN IT, FOR ANYPURPOSE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, TO DESIGN, MANUFACTURE OR REPAIR PARTS, OR OBTAIN ANY GOVERNMENTAPPROVAL TO DO SO, WITHOUT HS’S EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION. NEITHER RECEIPT NOR POSSESSION OF THIS DOCUMENTALONE, FROM ANY SOURCE, CONSTITUTES SUCH PERMISSION. POSSESSION, USE, COPYING OR DISCLOSURE BY ANYONEWITHOUT HS’S EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION IS NOT AUTHORIZED AND MAY RESULT IN CRIMINAL AND/OR CIVIL LIABILITY.


PPAP1 Review ChecklistQC-0990.25

16


PPAP – PASSPORT RELATIONSHIP

P0 P1 P2 P3 P4 P5

Passport 5Approval to go to serial production

and service

Passport 4Validation & Verification

Passport 3Detailed Design

Passport 0Proposal

Element 1 Released ProductionElement 2 SPD/SMD and SI sheetsElement 3 Production PO and demand fulfillmentElement 4 DFMEAElement 5 Process FlowElement 6 PFMEAElement 7 Process Control PlanElement 8 Process. Readiness Study (PRS)Element 9 Initial Process Capabilities StudyElement 10 Measurement System Analysis

Complete PD by determining PPAP P/Ns, applicable elements and oversight levels; Begin DD working to communicate PPAP requirements, conduct training and complete the PPAP1 Review per HT0990.

4 & 111, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 14, 15,16, 17 & 18

3, 9, 10, 12, 13, & 19

Element 11 Eng Frozen Planning and/or Source ApprovalElement 12 Dimensional ReportElement 13 Production Verification TestingElement 14 Special Process Approvals & NDTElement 15 Material Certification DocumentationElement 16 Raw Material ApprovalElement 17 Parts Marking ApprovalElement 18 Pkg, Pres. & Labeling ApprovalElement 19 Review & Sign-Off

PPAP2

Review

PASSPORT GATES

KeyReviews

PPAPElement Number

ExpectedCompletion Time

Key Outcomes

DCAR PDR CDR

Complete DD and starting VV with Producer preparing package. During VV complete PPAP 2 Review per HT0990. Close any gaps with Producer. Complete VV via sign-off of UPPAP Form 1. Enter into Serial Production

Legend

1st Shipment12 months

Months 1-4 Months 5-9 Months 10-12

DCAR Design Concept Architecture Review PDR Preliminary Design Review CDR Critical Design Review

PPAP1 Review: Conducted to teach and prepare a Producer for compliance with ASQR-09.2PPAP2 Review: Conducted to validate a Producer’s compliance to ASQR-09.2

F/N=L:\SQ\SD\PPAP\PPAP-Passport Relationship – August 5, 2011

PPAP1

Review

Passport 1/2HS Awarded

ContractPreliminary Design

METHODWhat are the key elements?

PPAP specifies steps and standards for every phase of the planning and production process.

PPAP documentation, which follows the product from inception to completion, contains 19 separate elements by the time production is completed.

Key documentation requirements are validated on a form called a “UPPAP Approval Submission”

Elements are shown on next page



18

PPAP ELEMENTS PER ASQR-09.2Contents for Objective Evidence Package


Specifications

Production PO

Product Definition

11

22

33

Design FMEA

Manufacturing Process Flow

Process FMEA

Process Control Plan

Process Readiness Study

Initial Process Studies

Measurement System Analysis

Dimensional Report

Raw Material Approval

PPAP Core Activities

5555

6666

7777

8888

9999

10101010

12121212

4444

16161616

Frozen Process/Source Approval

Production Verification Testing

Special Process Approvals & NDT

Material Certification Documentation

“If Required” Activities

11111111

13131313

14141414

15151515

1919

1818

1717 Parts Marking Approval

Packaging, Preservation & Labeling Approval

HS Pre-Approved

PPAP Review and Sign-Off

HS Formal Approval



19



Process Flow & Process FMEA

GR&R, SPC & Sampling

RPN Calculation (Supplier-selected KPCs

and/or M/P controls)

Process Control Plan & Initial Process

Studies

Work instructions Visual Aids

RCCA(address poor

capability)

Process Planning

PPAP CORE ACTIVITIES SUMMARYHS CTQFeatures

Escapes, QN & COPQ

Interface

20

FAILURE MODE EFFECTS ANALYSIS (FMEA)

FMEA is a tool used to identify product or process risks

Risk mitigation plans are created to reduce probability of failure modes occurring

DFMEA (Design FMEA) is completed on a product design for suppliers with design authority per ASQR-09.2

PFMEA (Process FMEA) is completed on all the process steps of the manufacturing and assembly process per ASQR-09.2

Risk Identification and Mitigation Tool

See Appendix 1 for FMEA Guideline



21

FAILURE MODE EFFECTS ANALYSIS (FMEA)Linkages that must be demonstrated

ASQR-09.2 requires Suppliers to demonstrate this chain reaction

DFMEA

PFMEA

Control Plans

Work Instructions

Controls

Focus is on the product design and/or specificationsRequired for suppliers with design authorityLook at similar design, Customer MFA, VOC, major escapes & field issues

Focus is on the part process including its flow; begins with a flowchart of operational stepsRequired for all suppliers to performLook at internal & external escapes, defect data, labor variances, and turnbacksLook linkage to DFMEA where applicable

Focus is on how specific process steps will be controlledRequired for all suppliers to performDefine Key Process Inputs, Control Methods, Gage Capability , SPC chart and reaction planLook linkage to PFMEA

Focus is on the Operator instructions created for each specific process stepRequired for all suppliers to performLook at clarity, user-friendlinessLook linkage to Control Plan and HS requirements

Focus is on the ability to prevent high RPN failure modesRequired for all suppliers to performAssure compliance to UTCQR-09.1 and ASQR-20.1





22

New PPAP Workbook

Allow suppliers to understand exactly what needs to be completed and submitted for each of the 19 PPAP elements per ASQR-09.2

Customer: United Technologies Document Created:Part Number:311003X-01 Document Revised:Part Name:Critical widget Part Revision Level:

Please insert copy of layout approval

ACMEPWXXXX

E

Index

Process or Part No: MOS / AFS Rev. Level:

Planning group: Originator: ISSUE DATE:

Key Product Characteristic

KPCD / KPCM / KPCA KEY PROCESS OUTPUT OPER. NUM.SEQ.

NUMBER

CONT. CHART TYPE

SAMP. SIZE

SAMP. FREQ.

BASELINECP

BASELINECPK

TYPE OF GAUGE CAPABILITY (%)PROCESS

PARAMETER SETTING

CONTROL METHOD REACTION PLAN

Pro-Cert analyst approval:

DATE:

KEY PROCESS PARAMETERS

KEY PROCESS OUTPUT

KEY CHARACTERISTIC CONTROL PLAN

KEY PROCESS INPUT

Engine Model:

REVISION LETTER:

MEASURING SYSTEM

Index

PPAP MARKING AND TRACEABILITY APPROVAL (Ref.: CPW010 & CPW920)

This document revision refer to CPW 10 Rev: BA and CPW 920 Rev; (no chg)

As per P&WC drawing (or NFD drawing):

1) Indicate the Part number:

2) Revision letter: (Refer to CPW 920; 5.4 and 4.3.1 for spacing)

3) Indicate the Part Description: If the part description contains: ASSEMBLY, ASSY, ASSY-OF, ASYO or WELDMENT, the part is an assembly.

4) Is the part an assembly part? (Refer to CPW 920; 5.3.1.1b)

5) Indicate the Part type:P&WC drawing part (Refer to CPW 920; 5.1)Coordinate control part (CPW 103, CPW 154) (Refer to CPW 920; 5.1)Source control part (CPW 101, CPW 102, CPW 144) (Refer to CPW 920; 5.3, 5.3.1.1b, 5.6.4.2)

6) Indicate the drawing automation requirement: 2D data matrix UI (packaging) N/A

7) Is drawing indicate a serialization requirement: (Refer to CPW 920; 5.5 for format and TEI)

8) Indicate your supplier code; (Refer to CPW 920; 5.1.1)9) Indicate your supplier prefix; (Refer to CPW 920; 5.1.1e)

10) Indicate your final or DQCR stamp: (Refer to SQOP 09-01)

11) For source control part only; indicate your cage code: 12) For source control part only; indicate your supplier part number and part rev. letter (or equivalent)

Supplier part number: Part revision:

For validation13) 2D data matrix: Indicate the whole 2D encoded data (Show spaces with underscore “_”):

14) Packaging and WEB: Indicate the content of the “SER NO.” or “UI NO.” field of the packaging label

(Note; it will be the same format in the WEB, when required)

On one row as: Or on several rows as:

Approved by:

P&WC XXXXXX (2011-01) QUALITE DES LOGICIELS ET GESTION DE DONNES - SOFTWARE QUALITY & DATA MANAGEMENT (1570)

Pictures (use other page if necessary):

15) Human readable: Indicate the whole human readable as it should be marked on part and/or provide pictures of the whole marking (Show spaces with underscore “_”):

NOTE; All questions below shall be reply in order to obtain a correct evaluation of the mark ing format. The evaluation of the 2D data matrix quality shall be done using a 2D reader.

(Refer to CPW 920; 5.6 for 2D format and TEI and to 5.5.7.1 for Specific Labeling Requirements for DPMS Format or Packaging UI Format)

The part number shall be prefixed by Text Element Identifier (TEI) or P&WC prefix as per the following references: CPW 920; 5.3.1, CPW 920, 5.3.1.1a, CPW 920, 5.3.1.1b.

PPAP PACKAGING, PRESERVATION & LABELLING PER CPW40 APPROVAL P &WC 11187 (2009-10) CONTROLE INVENTAIRE ET AMÉLIORATION CONTINUE - INV.CONTROL&CONT.IMP ROVEMENT (5640)

Reference SQOP-01-10 REV. A paragraph 6.4.4.19.

Part Number ______________ Description ______________

Option number ______________

VENDOR MANUFACTURING INFORMATION

Supplier name ______________ Vendor Code ______________

SUPPLIER INTERACTIVE PACKAGING INSTRUCTION (SIPI)

Part number last revision date: _____________ copy attachment

PRESERVATION METHOD

Check one below

10 31 33 41 AMS2817 Others _______________

conform yes no n/a

PRESERVATION MATERIAL

Check one below

N/A PK520 PK2802 ANTISTATIC UV protection

conform yes no n/a

ENVELOP

Type _________ Dimension ________ Thickness ________ Qty parts per ________

conform yes no n/a

CONTAINER

Unit container type _________ Dimension ________ Qty parts per __________

conform yes no n/a

Intermediate cont. type ______________ Dimension __________

conform yes no n/a

Shipping cont. type ______________ Dimension __________

conform yes no n/a

PACKAGNG MATERIAL

Pilot pads Pads PK2560 PK2612 PK1500 TAPING STRAPPING

Others _____________

conform yes no n/a

For UTC Member: Contact:

Part #: C/L:

Part Name: SPD/SMD #:

Drawing #: C/L:

Purchase Order #: UTC Buyer:

Yes No N/A Yes No N/A

1. Released Production Drawings 10. Measurement System Analysis Studies

2. SPD/SMD and SI sheets (as applicable) 11. Engineering Frozen Planning/Source Approval (if applicable)

3. Production Purchase Order 12. Dimensional Reports, including Visual Appearance

4. Design FMEA (if applicable) 13. Production Verification Testing (PVT)

5. Process Flow 14. Special Process Approvals including NDT

6. Process FMEA 15. Material Certification Documentation (Copies)

7. Process Control Plan 16. Raw Material Approval (if applicable)

8. Process Readiness Study (PRS) 17. Parts Marking Approval

9. Initial Process Studies 18. Packaging, Preservation & Labeling Approval

Co

mm

ents

Approved Interim Approval - Class: _______ Estimated date of full approval: ___________________________ Not approved

Co

mm

ents

Designated MFP

ASQR-09.2 Form 1 (Rev. 01/11)

Supplier name

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION

Phone #

FOR UTC USE ONLY

Title Date

I, the supplier, submit this UPPAP data to give objective evidence that all engineering, design and specification requirements are understood and have been complied w ith, as detailed above. I have also review ed all existing part and process data w hich a

UPPAP APPROVAL

LEVEL REQUESTED (All submissions are made to the MFP - Submission Information required)

SPECIFIED REQUIREMENTS (NOTE: "No" selections require comments and a recovery plan)

LEVEL 1 Submit ASQR-09.2 Form 1 only

LEVEL 2: Submit ASQR-09.2 Form 1 & limited supporting data

SUPPLIER MANUFACTURING INFORMATION

DateFunctionMember Authorization: Clearly Print Name and Sign

Supplier Authorization: Clearly Print Name and Sign

DECLARATION

Supplier Code Unique process number and revision

Street Address Country Post CodeState/Province

LEVEL 4: Reviewed at supplier's mfg location - ASQR-09.2 Form 1 & complete supporting data

LEVEL 3: Submit ASQR-09.2 Form 1 & complete supporting data

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION

HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS

DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99

23

New PPAP Checklist

QC-0990.26• Incorporates all 19 PPAP elements required by ASQR-09.2• Spikes out specifically what to look for each PPAP element

Producer Supplier ABC PPAP Level 4

Part Name Widget Part Number 767821-1Engineering Change Level A Reason for Submission New ProgramExpected PPAP Submission Date 15-Nov-11 Production Start Date 12/15/2011

Element PPAP Submission I temsRequired

Documents

UTC Required element for this

Part/ Part Family? (Yes/ No)

Producer required to submit

objective evidence to UTC Division for

this element?(Yes/ No)

Producer'sResponse

UTC Reviewer's Response

R/ Y/ G Status(based on UTC

Response)

Comment and/ orRecovery Plan Action I tem

1) Does producer have access to applicable UTC division drawings & specifications?

Drawings and specifications

Yes Yes Completed Completed

2) I s top level and sub-level (BOM) drawings and specifications released?

Drawings and specifications

Yes Not Completed Not CompletedProduction Drawing not released; Supplier currently working to "X-Drawing". HS Engineering promise date to finalize design is 10/15/2011.

3) I s producer working to correct drawing revision? Applicable drawings Yes Partial Completion Partial Completion Supplier working to development drawing. Note above.

4) I s producer working to correct specification revisions for specifications called out on the drawing/P.O.? Refer to Control Card. Applicable specifications

Yes Completed Completed

5) Validate any CTQ Features called out.Applicable drawings and specifications

Yes Partial Completion Partial Completion HS Engineering has documented 3 CTQCs on unreleased drawing.

6) For any CTQCs/CTSCs called out, validate producer has approved KPC Management Form for lower-level selected KPCs.

KPC Management Form (ref. ProCert Database)

Yes Not Completed Not CompletedSupplier has not performed KPC Self-Selection per HSC16199/HSM17 to support HS Engineering CTQCs flowed down on drawing.

7) For drawings that call out a specific casting/forging drawing, has producer flowed down to the sub-tier the correct revision drawing? Also, refer to Element 16 for drawings that specify a specific casting/forging P/N to be used to ensure proper UTC approval.

Lower-level raw material drawing

Yes Not Applicable Not Applicable

UTC PPAP ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST


1

(NOTE: To be used in tandem with UPPAP Submission Form 1, ASQR-09.2)



24

New Process Readiness Study – Element 8

Allow suppliers to self-assess the processes building UTC product to ensure production readiness

Originally developed by PWC; added Capacity Planning and FOD

Focus areas include:

Manufacturing Operation SheetsToolingGagingEquipment & TPMControl of Key Product Characteristics (KPCs)Control of Sub-tier SuppliersCapacity PlanningControl of Foreign Object Debris (FOD)

Part Number: Part name :

Familiy Name:

Assessment date:

Select P.R.S evaluation level:











_____________________________________(signature)

MOS 0%

Tooling 0%

Gauging 0%

Mfg. E._ TPM 0%

KPC

Sub-Tier Control

Capacity Planning 0%

FOD 0%

Production Readiness Study (ASQR-09.2 Form 3)

Production Ready

0%0%

0%

0%0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

100%

MOS

Tooling

Gauging

Mfg. E._ TPM

KPC

Sub-Tier Control

Capacity Planning

FOD

Series1

HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON

THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99

25

Company PrivateHAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT.


PROCESS CERTIFICATION• Applied to HS drawings & specifications per HSC16199

• HSM17 now provides specific instructions to DQR relative to Process Certification compliance

• Suppliers must control KPCs using Statistical Process Control (SPC)

• Suppliers must enter compliance data into HS Process Certification Database available on HS Supplier Portal

General Characteristic Information

Key Process Inputs

Gage Capability Information

Initial Process Capability Results

Milestone Tracking

Supplier KPC Requirements• Documented Process Control Plan

• Completed Gage Capability Study

• SPC Data Collection at Operator Workstation

• Control Charts filled out by Operator

• Calculated Process Capability Indexes

• Action Plan to improve KPCs with Low Cpk

99.73%

95.46%

68.26%

X-3S -2S -1S +1S +2S +3S

.0214 .1360 .3413.3413 .1360 .0214

99.73%

95.46%

68.26%

X-3S -2S -1S +1S +2S +3S

.0214 .1360 .3413.3413 .1360 .0214

GOAL: Achieve Milestone IV – “Certified Process”

26



27

CAPACITY ANALYSIS REVIEW

• Recently developed to support Rate Readiness Reviews• A tool to assess current & future capacity• Conducted to assure ability to meet a ramp-up in schedule• Used to identify potential and existing over-capacity situations• Develop risk mitigation plans to address over-capacity situations

Year QuarterLoad (hrs)

Load(%)

Load (hrs)Load(%)

Q1 58.034 16.5% 102.638 31.1%Q2 84.374 24.0% 148.420 45.0%Q3 79.406 22.6% 139.457 42.3%Q4 94.116 26.7% 164.580 49.9%

Overall 315.930 22.4% 555.095 42.1%Q1 99.534 28.3% 173.714 52.6%Q2 149.060 42.3% 258.803 78.4%Q3 181.680 51.6% 313.888 95.1%Q4 189.123 53.7% 327.369 99.2%

Overall 619.397 44.0% 1073.774 81.3%Q1 174.110 49.5% 302.449 91.7%Q2 154.616 43.9% 269.219 81.6%Q3 112.168 31.9% 195.636 59.3%Q4 92.986 26.4% 162.484 49.2%

Overall 533.880 37.9% 929.789 70.4%

2010

Machine Name

2011

2012

Lathe Grinder

Lathe Grinder Hone Polish

Working days 220 220 220 220Number of machines 1 1 1 3Number of hours per day 8 8 8 8

Hours available 1408 1320 1531.2 4488

Efficiency 80% 75% 87% 85%

Variance to Process Std

Set-up 10% 15% 10% 10%

Experimental /

Downtime 5% 5% 1% 5%

Scrap/rework 5% 5% 2% 0%

Tool proving

Waiting (Quality authonomy)

Operator not availableNon Value Added Labor 20.0% 25.0% 13.0% 15.0%

Resource

No. Open A/I: 0No. Closed A/I: 0

No. Overdue A/I: 0Total A/I: 0

Item No.Machine/

Process StepOver Capacity

Projected Year

Projected Quarter

Action Item(s) to EliminateOver Capacity Situation

Person Responsible

Due Date StatusDate

Closed

1234567891011121314151617181920

Over Capacity Action Plan

CAT Tool training package and spreadsheet available at:

www.hssupplierportal.com


Click on “Quality MPR”


PPAP Deliverables



28

Gathered in a specific location, physical (binder) or electronic (e.g., Visual IPI software) to create a "PPAP Objective Evidence Package (OEP)“

PPAP Approval Submission (Form 1) summarizes its 19 elements and which elements apply to the producer and what level of PPAP surveillance is required

PPAP OEP is formally approved by the Producer & HS MFP (Member Focal Point)

A PPAP OEP approval means that:

• The supplier has reviewed and approved the evidence collected and

• HS has not identified any issues that prevent its approval• If issues are identified, interim approval can be granted (there are 5 levels

of interim approval)

WHAT DOES PPAP LOOK LIKE?

HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99

Customer: United Technologies Document Created:Part Number:311003X-01 Document Revised:Part Name:Critical widget Part Revision Level:

Please insert copy of layout approval

ACMEPWXXXX

E

Index

Process or Part No: MOS / AFS Rev. Level:

Planning group: Originator: ISSUE DATE:

Key Product

Characteris tic

KPCD / KPCM / KPCA KEY PROCESS OUTPUT OPER. NUM.SEQ.

NUMBER

CONT. CHART TYPE

SAMP. SIZE

SAMP. FREQ.

BASELINECP

BASELINECPK

TYPE OF GAUGE CAPABILITY (%)PROCESS

PARAMETER SETTING

CONTROL METHOD REACTION PLAN

Pro-Cert analyst

approval:

DATE:

KEY PROCESS PARAMETERS

KEY PROCESS OUTPUT

KEY CHARACTERISTIC CONTROL PLAN

KEY PROCESS INPUT

Engine Model:

REVISION LETTER:

MEASURING SYSTEM

Index

PPAP MARKING AND TRACEABILITY APPROVAL (Ref.: CPW010 & CPW920)

This document revision refer to CPW 10 Rev: BA and CPW 920 Rev; (no chg)

As per P&WC drawing (or NFD drawing):

1) Indicate the Part number:

2) Revision letter: (Refer to CPW 920; 5.4 and 4.3.1 for spacing)

3) Indicate the Part Description: If the part description contains: ASSEMBLY, ASSY, ASSY-OF, ASYO or WELDMENT, the part is an assembly.

4) Is the part an assembly part? (Refer to CPW 920; 5.3.1.1b )

5) Indicate the Part type:P&WC drawing part (Refer to CPW 920; 5.1)

Coordinate control part (CPW 103, CPW 154) (Refer to CPW 920; 5.1)

Source control part (CPW 101, CPW 102, CPW 144) (Refer to CPW 920; 5.3, 5.3.1.1b , 5.6.4.2)

6) Indicate the drawing automation requirement: 2D data matrix UI (packaging) N/A

7) Is drawing indicate a serialization requirement: (Refer to CPW 920; 5.5 for format and TEI)

8) Indicate your supplier code; (Refer to CPW 920; 5.1.1)

9) Indicate your supplier prefix; (Refer to CPW 920; 5.1.1e)

10) Indicate your final or DQCR stamp: (Refer to SQOP 09-01)

11) For source control part only; indicate your cage code: 12) For source control part only; indicate your supplier part number and part rev. letter (or equivalent)

Supplier part number: Part revision:

For validation13) 2D data matrix: Indicate the whole 2D encoded data (Show spaces with underscore “_”):

14) Packaging and WEB: Indicate the content of the “SER NO.” or “UI NO.” field of the packaging label (Note; it will be the same format in the WEB, when required)

On one row as: Or on several rows as:

Approved by:

P&WC XXXXXX (2011-01) QUALITE DES LOGICIELS ET GESTION DE DONNES - SOFTWARE QUALITY & DATA M ANAGEM ENT (1570)

Pictures (use other page if necessary):

15) Human readable: Indicate the whole human readable as it should be marked on part and/or provide pictures of the whole marking (Show spaces with underscore “_”):

NOTE; All questions below shall be reply in order to obtain a correct evaluation of the marking format. The evaluation of the 2D data matrix quality shall be done using a 2D reader.

(Refer to CPW 920; 5.6 for 2D format and TEI and to 5.5.7.1 for Specific Labeling Requirements for DPMS Format or Packaging UI Format)

The part number shall be prefixed by Text Element Identifier (TEI) or P&WC prefix as per the following references: CPW 920; 5.3.1, CPW 920, 5.3.1.1a, CPW 920, 5.3.1.1b.

PPAP PACKAGING, PRESERVATION & LABELLING PER CPW40 APPROVAL P &WC 11187 (2009-10) CONTROLE INVENTAIRE ET AMÉLIORATION CONTINUE - INV.CONTROL&CONT.IMP ROVEMENT (5640)

Reference SQOP-01-10 REV. A paragraph 6.4.4.19.

Part Number ______________ Description ______________

Option number ______________

VENDOR MANUFACTURING INFORMATION

Supplier name ______________ Vendor Code ______________

SUPPLIER INTERACTIVE PACKAGING INSTRUCTION (SIPI)

Part number last revision date: _____________ copy attachment

PRESERVATION METHOD

Check one below

10 31 33 41 AMS2817 Others _______________

conform yes no n/a

PRESERVATION MATERIAL

Check one below

N/A PK520 PK2802 ANTISTATIC UV protection

conform yes no n/a

ENVELOP

Type _________ Dimension ________ Thickness ________ Qty parts per ________

conform yes no n/a

CONTAINER

Unit container type _________ Dimension ________ Qty parts per __________

conform yes no n/a

Intermediate cont. type ______________ Dimension __________

conform yes no n/a

Shipping cont. type ______________ Dimension __________

conform yes no n/a

PACKAGNG MATERIAL

Pilot pads Pads PK2560 PK2612 PK1500 TAPING STRAPPING

Others _____________

conform yes no n/a

For UTC Member: Contact:

Part #: C/L:

Part Name: SPD/SMD #:

Drawing #: C/L:

Purchase Order #: UTC Buyer:

Yes No N/A Yes No N/A




4. Design FMEA (if applicable) 13. Production Verification Testing (PVT)

5. Process Flow 14. Special Process Approvals including NDT

6. Process FMEA 15. Material Certification Documentation (Copies)




Co

mm

ents

Approved Interim Approval - Class: _______ Estimated date of full approval: ___________________________ Not approved

Co

mm

ents

Designated MFP

ASQR-09.2 Form 1 (Rev. 01/11)

Supplier name

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION

Phone #

FOR UTC USE ONLY

Title Date

I, the supplier, submit this UPPAP data to give objective evidence that all engineering, design and specif ication requirements are understood and have been complied w ith, as detailed above.

I have also review ed all existing part and process data w hich a

UPPAP APPROVAL


SPECIFIED REQUIREMENTS (NOTE: "No" selections require comments and a recovery plan)


LEVEL 2: Submit ASQR-09.2 Form 1 & limited supporting data


DateFunctionMember Authorization: Clearly Print Name and Sign

Supplier Authorization: Clearly Print Name and Sign

DECLARATION

Supplier Code Unique process number and revision

Street Address Country Post CodeState/Province

LEVEL 4: Reviewed at supplier's mfg location - ASQR-09.2 Form 1 & complete supporting data


ELEMENT DESCRIPTION

Retention of Evidence

29

SUBMISSION LEVELSDetermined based on risk using Decision Tree Tool

Level Submitted documentationReviewed

at

1 PPAP Approval form only HS

2PPAP Approval form with limited supporting data

HS


HS


Supplier’s location



30

PPAP Level Decision Tree – New Parts

PPAP Element Exemption Decision Tree

PPAP Required

Member Defined Raw

Material?

Special Process Approvals

(ref HSM17)

No

Supplier Design?

Frozen Requirements?

No No

Element 11

Exemption

Element 13

Exemption

Element 14

Exemption

Element 15b

Exemption

Element 16

Exemption

Material Purchase

Requirements?

Element 15a

Exemption

NoNo

Element4

Exemption

ProductVerification

Testing

RawMaterialSource

DFMEA


THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99 32

PPAP SUBMISSION STATUS & DISPOSITIONASQR-09.2 Interim Classes Pending Full Approval

Interim class

Characteristics & deviation typeExamples (situations or

missing evidence)

A100% production tooling. Meet all drawing & specificationsNot all production approval requirements are met

Incomplete capability studiesDrawing changes desired

B100% production toolingRequire reprocess / rework to meet all drawing & specifications

Temporary operations duly documented

CMeet all drawing & specificationsProduced using non-production tooling and/or process

Temporary manufacturing operation/detail source

DDo not meet all drawing & specificationsParts can be considered salable

Deviations still existPlan to address deviations in place

EDo not meet all drawing & specificationsParts cannot be considered salable

Any unacceptable situation

Process is kept in the radar until all requirements are metHAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF

RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99

(CAD)

33

PPAP CHANGE NOTIFICATIONASQR-09.2 Form 2 - Criteria for submission

The supplier shall notify the member using the UPPAP Notification, ASQR-09.2 Form 2 when any situation described below occurs.

Ownership changes (of the Supplier).

A change in design.

A change in manufacturing source(s), process(s), inspection method(s), locations of manufacture, tooling or materials.

A change in numerical control program or translation to another media.

A natural or man-made event, which may adversely affect a manufacturing process.

A lapse in production for two years or as specified by the customer. HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF

RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99

34

PPAP SUMMARYKey take away

PPAP being implemented to reduce infant mortality escapes

Upfront validation and verification of critical part processes will enable production readiness

HS Customers in full support of this effort and strongly encouraging its deployment

Our experience with recent new programs suggest implementation of PPAP is warranted and very appropriate

PPAP is flowed out to suppliers by ASQR-09.2 via purchase order



35

IMPLEMENTATION



36

HS PPAP1 Review

• Purpose:– To prepare Producer for the PPAP2 Review prior to approval to begin serial production

– Teaches the Producer what to do to prepare a PPAP Objective Evidence Package per ASQR-09.2

• Conducted by:– HS SQE for external suppliers– Operations Quality Engineer for internal plant sites

• Who’s required to attend the PPAP1 Review?– Supplier Designated Quality Representatives– Key QA and Production personnel– Engineering representation for Producers with Design Authority

• Key elements include:– UPPAP Checklist QC-0990.26– Process Readiness Study QC-0990.27– UPPAP Workbook QC-0990.28– UPPAP Submission Form 1– UPPAP Submission Form 2 for subsequent changes



37

STANDARD WORK PPAP 215 Training


• PEG OR OQE– Provide the Producer with PPAP 215 Awareness Training

What is PPAP History of PPAP Overview of ASQR-09.2 When PPAP is invoked Producer Deliverables FMEA Overview PPAP Tools (ProCert, Capacity Analysis Tool, etc.)

on the HS Supplier Portal “Help Tab” (www.hssupplierportal.com)

Process ReadinessStudy Assessment

QC-0990.27

PPAP 215Training Package

HT1000 PPAPImplementation Manual


Revision: I nitial Release

Date: 6/22/2011


Status (N/A, Not


Completed)

Action Item(s)/ Comments









UTC PPAP2 ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST

PPAP Checklist QC-0990.26

Objective EvidencePackage & Forms

QC-0990.28Part Number: Part Name :

Familiy Name:

Assessment Date:












_____________________________________(signature)

MOS 100%

Tooling 0%

Gauging 0%

Mfg. E._ TPM 0%

KPC

Sub-Tier Control


FOD 0%


Production Ready

100%

0%

0%

0%0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

100%

MOS

Tooling

Gauging

Mfg. E._ TPM

KPC

Sub-Tier Control

Capacity Planning

FOD

Series1


Supplier Awareness SessionCourse I.D. # 996971 Four Hours

COPYRIGHT © HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION. THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HAMILTON SUNDSTRANDCORPORATION (HS). YOU MAY NOT POSSESS, USE, COPY OR DISCLOSE THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION IN IT, FOR ANYPURPOSE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, TO DESIGN, MANUFACTURE OR REPAIR PARTS, OR OBTAIN ANY GOVERNMENTAPPROVAL TO DO SO, WITHOUT HS’S EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION. NEITHER RECEIPT NOR POSSESSION OF THIS DOCUMENTALONE, FROM ANY SOURCE, CONSTITUTES SUCH PERMISSION. POSSESSION, USE, COPYING OR DISCLOSURE BY ANYONEWITHOUT HS’S EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION IS NOT AUTHORIZED AND MAY RESULT IN CRIMINAL AND/OR CIVIL LIABILITY.


PPAP1 Review ChecklistQC-0990.25

38


Conduct PPAP1 Review


• Purpose:– To prepare Producer for the PPAP2 Review prior to approval to begin serial production

– Teaches the Producer what to do to prepare a PPAP Objective Evidence Package per ASQR-09.2

• Conducted by:– HS SQE for external suppliers– Operations Quality Engineer for internal plant sites

• Who’s required to attend the PPAP1 Review?– Supplier Designated Quality Representative– Key Quality Assurance and Production personnel– Engineering representation for Producers with Design Authority

• Key elements include:– QC-0990.25, “PPAP1 Review Checklist”

– QC-0990.26, “PPAP2-FAI Review Checklist”

– QC-0990.27, “Process Readiness Study”– QC-0990.28, “PPAP Objective Evidence Package”

All forms available in Documentum and the HS Supplier Portal “Help” tab

Both PPAP1 and PPAP2-FAI Checklists are loaded in the STAT Tool

PRS Assessment

QC-0990.27PPAP 1 Checklist

QC -0990.25Form Number: QC-0990.26

Revision: Initial ReleaseDate: 6/22/2011


Status (N/A, Not


Completed)

Action Item(s)/Comments

A) Does producer have access to applicable UTC division drawings & specifications?

B) Is top level and sub-level (BOM) drawings and specifications released (i.e. signatures applied)?

C) Is producer working to correct drawing revisions, including all detail drawings (e.g. casting, forging, other detail parts) as

indicated on the purchase order?D) Validate if any Critical to Quality (CTQ) features called out.


B) Verify that the producer is working to the correct released revision of any supplemental customer requirement documents as specified on the Purchase Order (e.g. Quality or Engineering

Notes/Documents, other specifications).A) Verify that the producer is working to a production purchase

order?B) Verify that the sub-tier PO documents flow down any UTC

requirements per ASQR-01, ASQR-09.2 etc.C) Does the UPPAP package have evidence that the producer knows the latest demand schedule and is updating capacity and

manufacturing plans accordingly.D) Is there evidence that the producer flows down the latest demand schedule to subtier suppliers and is updating subtier

management plans accordingly.


SPD/SMD and SI SheetsNOTE: See Element Reference Card for UTC



UTC PPAP2

ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST

PPAP 2 –FAI ChecklistQC- 0990.26

Obj. Evidence PackageQC- 0990.28

Part Number: Part Name :

Familiy Name:Assessment Date:



P.R.S “Production Ready” level = Pre-production; before production component delivery >80%P.R.S “Continuous Improvement” level = ZNC >90%








_____________________________________(signature)

MOS 100%

Tooling 0%

Gauging 0%

Mfg. E._ TPM 0%

KPC

Sub-Tier Control

Capacity Planning 0%FOD 0%


Production Ready

100%

0%0%

0%0%0%0%0%

MOS

Tooling

Gauging

Mfg. E._ TPM

KPC

Sub-Tier Control

Capacity Planning

FOD

Series1

39

HS PPAP2 Review• Purpose:

– To formally validate the quality and delivery requirements, based on the applicable elements described in ASQR-09.2, are met for a specific part or part family

• Conducted by:– Initially by the Producer

• Supplier if externally sourced part• Operations QE if internally sourced part

– Reviewed HS SQE for external suppliers– Reviewed by Operations Quality Engineer for internal plant sites

• Approved by:– Operations QE for “make parts”– PEG for “buy parts”– Approval level based on completed element requirements and documented actions to close any

gaps

• What gets submitted?– Completed UPPAP Checklist QC-0990.26– Completed Process Readiness Study QC-0990.27– Completed UPPAP Objective Evidence Workbook for all applicable elements QC-0990.28– Producer signed UPPAP Submission Form 1– Producer signed UPPAP Submission Form 2 for subsequent changes (when applicable)


40

Producer Prepares PPAP Package


PRS AssessmentQC-0990.27

PPAP 101

Per ASQR-09.2

Awareness Session

Course I.D. # 992797 One Hour

COPYRIGHT © 2010 HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION. THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION (HSC). YOU MAY NOT POSSESS, USE, COPY OR DISCLOSE THIS DOCUMENT OR ANY INFORMATION IN IT, FOR ANY PURPOSE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, TO DESIGN, MANUFACTURE OR REPAIR PARTS, OR OBTAIN ANY GOVERNMENT APPROVAL TO DO SO, WITHOUT HSC’S EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION. NEITHER RECEIPT NOR POSSESSION OF THIS DOCUMENT ALONE, FROM ANY SOURCE, CONSTITUTES SUCH PERMISSION. POSSESSION, USE, COPYING OR DISCLOSURE BY ANYONE WITHOUT HSC’S EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION IS NOT AUTHORIZED AND MAY RESULT IN CRIMINAL AND/OR CIVIL LIABILITY. THE INFORMATION SUBJECT TO EXPORT LAWS. EXPORT PERMITTED UNDER NLR. RE-EXPORT IS NOT AUTHORIZED WITHOUT FIRST OBTAINING REQUIRED AUTHORIZATION FROM HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND. DIVERSION CONTRAY TO U.S. LAW IS PROHIBITED. NLR – NO LICENSE REQUIRED.

PPAP 101Training Package

PPAP1 ChecklistQC-0990.25


Revision: Initial Release

Date: 6/22/2011


Status (N/A, Not


Completed)

Action I tem(s)/ Comments









UTC PPAP2 ASSESSMENT CHECKLI ST

PPAP2 –FAI ChecklistQC-0990.26

Obj. Evidence PackageQC-0990.28

Part Number: Part Name :

Familiy Name:

Assessment Date:












_____________________________________(signature)

MOS 100%

Tooling 0%

Gauging 0%

Mfg. E._ TPM 0%

KPC

Sub-Tier Control


FOD 0%


Production Ready

100%

0%

0%

0%0%

0%

0%

0%

0%

100%

MOS

Tooling

Gauging

Mfg. E._ TPM

KPC

Sub-Tier Control

Capacity Planning

FOD

Series1

• Use Form QC-0990.28• PPAP Objective Evidence Package, QC-0990.28 is

used by the Producer to substantiate justification for allowance to enter serial production

• HS PEG reviews drawings and establishes the PPAP scope of work by filling out the matrix contained in Tab “A-Input Sheet”

– Place “X” if PPAP Element should be reviewed and if MFP wants Producer to provide objective evidence

• PEG forwards to SDE/OQE to use with Supplier or plant site cell

• Producer receives package from HS PEG• For supplier PPAP part, Producer DQR, per

HSM17, required to ensure package is reviewed using PPAP2 Review Checklist, Form QC-0990.26

• For internally made PPAP part, OQE required to ensure package is reviewed using PPAP2 Review Checklist, Form QC-0990.26

• Review includes Element 8, Process Readiness Study

– Form QC-0990.27 is to be used

All forms available in Documentum and the HS Supplier Portal “Help” tab

Both PPAP1 and PPAP2-FAI Checklists are loaded in the STAT Tool

ITEM #

ENTER "X" IF PPAP ELEMENT IS APPLICABLE FOR

THE SUBJ ECT PART

ENTER "X" IF THE HS MFP REQUIRES THE

PRODUCER TO SUBMIT OBJ ECTIVE EVIDENCE

FOR APPLICABLE ELEMENT

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

Raw Material Approval

Part Marking Approval

Packaging, Preservation & Labeling Approval

Review and Sign-Off

Process Readiness Study (PRS)

Initial Process Capability Studies

Measurement Systems Analysis (Gage R&R)

Engineering Frozen Planning/Source Approval (EFP/ESA)

Dimensional Report

Production Verification Testing (PVT)

UPPAP ELEMENT PER ASQR-09.2


SPD/SMD and SI Sheets


Special Process Approval and Nondestructive Test (NDT)

Material Certification Documentation

Design Failure Modes Effects Analysis (DFMEA)

Process Flow

Process Failure Modes Effects Analysis (PFMEA)

Process Control Plan

TAB A, “INPUT SHEET “ FROM QC-0990.28

41

PPAP Objective Evidence Package

HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99 Use Form QC-0990.28 available in Documentum or the HS Supplier Portal

COVER & INDEX SHEET

Click on button for tab you wish to open

When on another tab, click on “Index” button to return to “Cover & Index” control panel

• PRODUCT DEFINITION– Released Engineering drawing that defines design requirements– Specifications called out from the drawing that provide additional definition– PO Notes that specify quality & demand requirements

• UPPAP CORE ELEMENTS– Risk identification & mitigation with D/P FMEA– Process control using SPC on Key Product Characteristics and gage

Capability Studies on measurement systems– FAI dimensional reports that validate feature conformance– PRS that assesses the production process to 8 specific requirements

• UPPAP SPECIAL ELEMENTS– Frozen Process/Flight Safety approval– Acceptance of test procedure for the product being procured

• REQUIRED APPROVALS– HS approval for special processes and adherence to suppliers listed on the

80-85 Report– Part Marking approval utilizing the Part Marking Wizard– Raw Material approval for castings, forgings, etc. that require HS approval

of the supplier’s FAI

• APPENDICES– Useful spreadsheet templates the supplier or internal plant site cell may

use to support a specific PPAP process control element

MAJOR PACKAGE SECTIONS

42

43

The 19 PPAP ElementsPer ASQR-09.2

Elements

43


Element DescriptionElement 1 – Released Production Drawings

HS



Requirement per ASQR-09.2

44

Element Description Element 1 – Released Production Drawings


NOTE: Any identified action items get transferred to Form 1, UTC Approval Form. This applies to all PPAP Elements under review.

UTC Division:

Part #: Drawing Revision:

Part Name: SPD/SMD # or Rev.#:

Customer Purchasing Representative:

Purchase Order #:

Yes No WIP N/A Yes No WIP N/A




4. Design FMEA (if applicable) 13. Production Verification Testing (PVT) (if applicable)

5. Process Flow 14. Special Process Approvals including NDT (if applicable)

6. Process FMEA 15. Material Certification Documentation




No. Target Date

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Email Address

Approved Interim Approval - Class: _______ Estimated date of full approval: ___________________________ Not Approved

Co

mm

ents

Designated Function

ASQR-09.2 Form 1 (Rev. 06/11)

Supplier Management Authorization: Clearly Print Name and Sign

Customer Use Only (UTC or 1st Tier)

Title Date

Customer Name & UPPAP Focal Point:


Supplier Name

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION

Address (Street, City, State)

Act

ion

Pla

n

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION


Action Item

Country

I, the supplier, submit this UPPAP Approval form as declaration of having met all applicable requirements of ASQR-09.2, except as noted above, including having implemented the requirements at the sub-tier level where applicable. I further certify that our production process meets all product delivery, engineering and quality requirements. I understand that the approval of this form by the customer does not release me from responsibility or liability for any non-conformances.

Supplier Code

Element #

DECLARATION

Customer Authorization: Clearly Print Name and Sign Date

FORM 1 - UPPAP APPROVAL


SPECIFIED REQUIREMENTS (NOTE: "WIP" or "No" selections require Action Plan documented below) (WIP - Work in Process)


LEVEL 2: Submit ASQR-09.2 Form 1 & limited supporting data LEVEL 4: Reviewed at supplier's mfg location - ASQR-09.2 Form 1 & complete supporting data

1st Tier - UTC PO

Sub-Tier - Indirect PO

45

PPAP2-Checklist – Form QC-0990.26

Element Description Element 2 – SPD/SMD and SI Sheets


Element 2 Acceptable Not AcceptableSPD/SMD & SI Sheets (for HS, these are the PO Notes)

PO Quality Notes are reviewed and found include proper references to ASQR-01, HSC16199 in case part is a CTQ Part, FAI requirements per ASQR-01 are specified, etc.

No references made to a required HS and/or UTC specification when required by the HS drawing.

Definition per ASQR-09.2

46

Element Description Element 2 – SPD/SMD and SI Sheets




B) Verify that the producer is working to the correct released revision of any supplemental customer requirement documents as specified on the Purchase Order (e.g. Quality or Engineering Notes/Documents, other specifications).

2SPD/ SMD and SI Sheets

NOTE: See Element Reference Card for UTC divisional definitions.


UTC Division:




Purchase Order #:











No. Target Date

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Email Address


Co

mm

ents

Designated Function

ASQR-09.2 Form 1 (Rev. 06/11)



Title Date



Supplier Name

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION


Act

ion

Pla

n

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION


Action Item

Country


Supplier Code

Element #

DECLARATION







1st Tier - UTC PO


47


Element Description Element 3 – Production PO and Demand Fulfillment


Element 3 Acceptable Not Acceptable

Production PO and Demand Fulfillment

PO is a production order. 1st-tier PO to Sub-tier illustrates flowdown of HS/UTC requirements per ASQR-01.

Experimental or Advanced PO. Sub-tier flowdown of HS/UTC requirements per ASQR-01 not met.

Definition per ASQR-09.2



A) Verify that the producer is working to a production purchase order?B) Verify that the sub-tier PO documents flow down any UTC requirements per ASQR-01, ASQR-09.2 etc.C) Does the UPPAP package have evidence that the producer knows the latest demand schedule and is updating capacity and manufacturing plans accordingly.D) I s there evidence that the producer flows down the latest demand schedule to subtier suppliers and is updating subtier management plans accordingly.

Production POand

Demand Fullfillment

ABC Company, Inc.240 Charles StreetTorrington, CT 06790United States of America

48


Element Description Element 3 – Production PO and Demand Fulfillment




B) Verify that the producer is working to the correct released revision of any supplemental customer requirement documents as specified on the Purchase Order (e.g. Quality or Engineering Notes/Documents, other specifications).

2SPD/ SMD and SI Sheets

NOTE: See Element Reference Card for UTC divisional definitions.


UTC Division:




Purchase Order #:











No. Target Date

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Email Address


Co

mm

ents

Designated Function

ASQR-09.2 Form 1 (Rev. 06/11)



Title Date



Supplier Name

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION


Act

ion

Pla

n

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION


Action Item

Country


Supplier Code

Element #

DECLARATION







1st Tier - UTC PO


49


Element Description Element 4 – Design Failure Modes Effects Analysis




DFMEA DFMEA is illustrated by the Producer that meets the SAE J1739 standard. Producer can demonstrate VOC data used.

DFMEA shows risk analysis that addresses design and prior failures from similar designs.

No DFMEA produced by a producer with design authority.

Areas of high risk not addressed with adequate process controls.

Lack of linkage to PFMEA.

No evidence customer data, prior failures & escapes from a similar design used in analysis.


Learn the details of conducting a DFMEA in PPAP 301 – “MFP Certification”

50

ASQR-09.2 requires Suppliers to demonstrate this chain reaction

DFMEA

PFMEA

Control Plans

Work Instructions

Controls

Focus is on the product design and/or specificationsRequired for suppliers with design authorityLook at similar design, Customer MFA, VOC, major escapes & field issues

Focus is on the part process including its flow; begins with a flowchart of operational stepsRequired for all suppliers to performLook at internal & external escapes, defect data, labor variances, and turnbacksLook linkage to DFMEA where applicable

Focus is on how specific process steps will be controlledRequired for all suppliers to performDefine Key Process Inputs, Control Methods, Gage Capability , SPC chart and reaction planLook linkage to PFMEA

Focus is on the Operator instructions created for each specific process stepRequired for all suppliers to performLook at clarity, user-friendlinessLook linkage to Control Plan and HS requirements

Focus is on the ability to prevent high RPN failure modesRequired for all suppliers to performAssure compliance to UTCQR-09.1 and ASQR-20.1





Element Description Element 4–DFMEA linkage to PFMEA must be demonstrated!!

51




A) Validate DFMEA exists for the part number and has established revision level and that DFMEA is a "living document" subject to ongoing revision.B) Validate producer use of standardized format (e.g. SAE J1739 or as agreed to by UTC Member)C) Validate that the producer understands and has incorporated all product design requirements (e.g. performance, producibility, appearance, environmental, any other customer expectations)D) Validate that the producer has received any historical quality and or lessons learned data from the UTC member and has incorporated that learning into their DFMEA.E) Validate that the failure modes are be described in physical, technical and measurable terms. Validate that causes are described in terms of something that can be corrected or controlled.F) Validate recommended actions identified for high RPN and/or high Severity items are completed, or a plan with owners & dates exists.

G) Validate linkage to PFMEA.

H) Identification of CTQ Features (i.e., CTQC, CTSC, FSC, KPC1, KPC2). Ensure lower level key characteristics are defined that support UTC defined critical to quality features.I ) Evidence of the use of risk mitigation strategies in the design (e.g. early warning, control, system redundancies and mistake-proof design features).J ) Evidence of inspection methods, validation and testing aligned with DFMEA identified risks.

4Design FMEA

(for producers with design authority)

52




PPAP Objective Evidence Workbook – Form QC-0990.28, Tab 4 - DFMEA

QC-0990.28 contains a DFMEA template on Tab 4 with full instructions for use

Click on upper right hand corner for any column for complete instructions for that given field

This template meets the SAE J1739 standard

53

Element Description Element 5 – Process Flow



Process Flow Process flow map with operation information: Sequence, flow map symbols used, identification of CTQ Features, alternate paths and formal rework loops identified.

Identify if flow map represents a part family.

Process Flow steps clearly correlate with PFMEA and Control Plan.

Route Sheets/Travelers are acceptable if they contain adequate information.

No process flow map exists.

A process flow exists that contains insufficient information in describing the process flow.

Process Flow steps do not correlate with PFMEA and Control Plan.

Process Flow ExamplesRequirement per ASQR-09.2

54

Element Description Element 5 – Process Flow



UTC Division:




Purchase Order #:











No. Target Date

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Email Address


Co

mm

ents

Designated Function

ASQR-09.2 Form 1 (Rev. 06/11)



Title Date



Supplier Name

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION


Act

ion

Pla

n

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION


Action Item

Country


Supplier Code

Element #

DECLARATION







1st Tier - UTC PO



A) Validate that the process map exists for the actual production manufacturing process being used, has an established revision level, and that the process map is a "living document" subject to ongoing revision.

B) Validate producer uses standard flow diagram format including standard flowchart symbols, alternate formal and/or rework paths, wip storage, and covering all steps from receiving to inspection/testing and shipping.C) Assure alignment with PFMEA and control plan.D) Assure flowmap accounts for all outside operations and potential sources of variation.E) Assure flowmap steps identify where CTQ features are produced.

5 Process Flow

55


Element Description Element 6 – Process Failure Modes Effects Analysis



PFMEA Documented evidence of a PFMEA that meets the SAE J1739 standard.

PFMEA illustrates linkage to Process Flow Map.

PFMEA shows risk analysis that addresses process risks and prior internal defects and/or Customer escapes taken into account from similar designs.

Customer CTQ Features (e.g., KPC1, KPC2, etc.) identified on PFMEA.

Producer self-selected KPCs identified on PFMEA where appropriate.

No PFMEA produced by a producer.

Areas of high risk not addressed with adequate process controls.

Lack of linkage to PFMEA.

No evidence customer data, prior failures & escapes from a similar design used in analysis.

No identification of Customer and/or self-selected KPCs where appropriate.


Learn the details of conducting a PFMEA in PPAP 301 – “MFP Certification”

56




A) Validate PFMEA exists for the part number and has established revision level and that PFMEA is a "living document" subject to ongoing revision.B) Validate producer use of standardized format (e.g. SAE J1739 or as agreed to by UTC Member)C) Where applicable, validate linkage to either the UTC Member or producer DFMEA.D) Validate that the producer has collected any historical quality and/or lessons learned data for the part and/or part family and has incorporated that learning into their PFMEA.

E) Verify that the PFMEA addresses all steps, operations and sources of variation identified in the process flow map. The scope and/or depth of the PFMEA should be adequate to address all significant risks (For a Level 4 on-site review, the UTC division shall ensure the scheduled review takes place while the subject PPAP part is running in production. UTC assessor will witness key PFMEA controls by walking the production/manufacturing process) .

F) Validate that the failure modes are be described in physical, technical and measurable terms. Validate that causes are described in terms of something that can be corrected or controlled.G) Validate recommended actions identified for high RPN and high Severity score items are completed, or a plan with owners & dates exists.

H) Validate linkage to control plan.

I ) Identification of Key Characteristics (i.e., CTQC, CTSC, FSC, KPC1, KPC2, KPCM). Ensure lower level Key Characteristics are defined that support UTC defined critical to quality features.J ) Evidence of the use of risk mitigation strategies in the process (e.g. early warning, control, system redundancies and mistake-proof methods).

K) Evidence of inspection methods, validation and testing aligned with PFMEA identified risks.

6 Process FMEA

57




PPAP Objective Evidence Workbook – Form QC-0990.28, Tab 6 - PFMEA

QC-0990.28 contains a PFMEA template on Tab 6 with full instructions for use

Click on upper right hand corner for any column for complete instructions for that given field

This template meets the SAE J1739 standard

58

Element Description Element 7 – Process Control Plan



Process Control Plan Documented evidence Process Control Plan meets UTCQR-09.1.

Process Control Plan clearly illustrates linkage to PFMEA.

Electronic Control Plans are properly developed for all HS defined KPCs.

No documented evidence of a Process Control Plan or the one presented does not meet UTCQR-09.1.

Cannot link controls listed on PCP to high risk areas identified on PFMEA.

No and/or impartial evidence Electronic Control Plans are developed for HS defined KPCs in the HS ProCert Database.


59



99.73%

95.46%

68.26%

X-3S -2S -1S +1S +2S +3S

.0214 .1360 .3413.3413 .1360 .0214

99.73%

95.46%

68.26%

X-3S -2S -1S +1S +2S +3S

.0214 .1360 .3413.3413 .1360 .0214

A control plan describes how we mange and control process risks identified on the PFMEA.

A control plan is a set of written strategies which define the steps to take to maintain statistical control and capability of the process. The format seen below is used by the Producer for describing how the critical steps of the manufacturing and/or assembly process is controlled.

Note that some divisions within UTC may have specific control plan requirements just for KPCs. The next slide illustrates an example of the control plan format utilized by HS for engineering defined Key Product Characteristics.


CONTROL PLAN QUESTIONS

– What do I check?

– How do I check it?

– How often do I check?

– What gage do I use?

– What is the capability of the gage?

– What inputs do I set?

– What setting?

– How are the inputs controlled?

– What preventative maintenance do I do before I run a part?

60



Control Plan Requirements – Part 2• Documented Process Control Plan

• Completed Gage Capability Study

• SPC Data Collection at Operator Workstation

• Control Charts filled out by Operator

• Calculated Process Capability Indexes

• Action Plan to improve KPCs with Low Cpk

99.73%

95.46%

68.26%

X-3S -2S -1S +1S +2S +3S

.0214 .1360 .3413.3413 .1360 .0214

99.73%

95.46%

68.26%

X-3S -2S -1S +1S +2S +3S

.0214 .1360 .3413.3413 .1360 .0214

A control plan describes how we mange the KPC

The format seen below is used by the Producer for HS defined KPCs using the Process Certification Database available on the HS home page or the HS Supplier Portal.

Element Description Element 7 – Process Control Plan for KPCs

Each HS defined KPC must be accounted for in the HS Process Certification Database.

An Electronic Control Plan for each KPC must be developed and maintained by the supplier (externally made parts) and/or internal plant site (internally made parts)

The requirements of UTCQR-09.1 (both internally and supplier made parts), HSM17 (supplier made parts) and HT0985 (internally made parts) must be followed and complied with.

Control Plan Requirements – Part 1

61



Below is a Process Control Plan format that meets the requirements of UTCQR-09.1, “UTC Process Certification Requirements”.

Control Plan Example

62


A) Verify requirements of UTCQR-09.1 are followed.

B) Ensure that the Control Plan includes controls for all UTC Member defined KCs and any producer identified KCs from the PFMEA.C) Ensure that the Control Plan includes controls for any high severity and high RPN failure modes identified on the PFMEA (e.g. early warning, control, system redundancies and mistake-proof methods).D)Key Process Inputs, Settings, Control Methods, and SPC chart type are defined for each critical operation.E) Control Plan accounts for outside/sub-tier processes.F) Verify reaction plans exist for nonconforming condition/out of control situations (e.g. containment, customer notification, recovery, communication, stop the process)G) Verify that the listed finish dimensional and tolerances matches the drawing.H) Verify that defined inspection frequencies meet ASQR-20.1 requirements.

7Process Control

Plan



63


Element Description Element 8 – Process Readiness Study



Process Readiness Study Documented evidence Process Readiness Study completed by the Producer.

Overall results of the PRS are >/= 80%. If the overall PRS results are less than 80%, action items are in place with responsible persons and expected completion dates for areas scored 3 and below.

No documented evidence of a PRS being conducted by the Producer.

Overall PRS score results in less than 80% and no plan exists to address low scores.


64

Allow suppliers to self-assess the processes building UTC product to ensure production readiness

Originally developed by PWC; added Capacity Planning and FOD

Focus areas include:

Manufacturing Operation SheetsToolingGagingEquipment & TPMControl of Key Product Characteristics (KPCs)Control of Sub-tier SuppliersCapacity PlanningControl of Foreign Object Debris (FOD)


FORM QC-0990.27, Revision - , July 12, 2011

Part Number: Part Name :Heat Exchanger Core

Familiy Name: Large Aluminum H/ X CoresAssessment Date:


Supplier Name: Supplier Code: 123456






_____________________________________(signature)

Mfg. Work Instructions 75%

Tooling 80%

Gaging 68%

Equipment & TPM 54%

Process Certification 63%

Sub-tier Control 50%


FOD 80%


765432-1

Supplier ABC

8/ 15/ 2011

George Bashura

Joe DeFazio

Jamie Cavanaugh

75%

80%

68%

54%

63%

50%

54%

80%

0%

100%

Mfg. Work Instructions

Tooling

Gaging

Equipment & TPM

Process Certification

Sub-tier Control

Capacity Planning

FOD

Series1



65



• Capacity analysis one of the eight areas assessed as part of PRS• Capacity Analysis Tool (CAT) developed to assess current & future capacity• Conducted to assure ability to meet a ramp-up in schedule• Used to identify potential and existing over-capacity situations• Develop risk mitigation plans to address over-capacity situations

Year QuarterLoad (hrs)

Load(%)

Load (hrs)Load(%)

Q1 58.034 16.5% 102.638 31.1%Q2 84.374 24.0% 148.420 45.0%Q3 79.406 22.6% 139.457 42.3%Q4 94.116 26.7% 164.580 49.9%

Overall 315.930 22.4% 555.095 42.1%Q1 99.534 28.3% 173.714 52.6%Q2 149.060 42.3% 258.803 78.4%Q3 181.680 51.6% 313.888 95.1%Q4 189.123 53.7% 327.369 99.2%

Overall 619.397 44.0% 1073.774 81.3%Q1 174.110 49.5% 302.449 91.7%Q2 154.616 43.9% 269.219 81.6%Q3 112.168 31.9% 195.636 59.3%Q4 92.986 26.4% 162.484 49.2%

Overall 533.880 37.9% 929.789 70.4%

2010

Machine Name

2011

2012

Lathe Grinder

Lathe Grinder Hone Polish

Working days 220 220 220 220Number of machines 1 1 1 3Number of hours per day 8 8 8 8

Hours available 1408 1320 1531.2 4488

Efficiency 80% 75% 87% 85%

Variance to Process Std

Set-up 10% 15% 10% 10%

Experimental /

Downtime 5% 5% 1% 5%

Scrap/rework 5% 5% 2% 0%

Tool proving

Waiting (Quality authonomy)

Operator not availableNon Value Added Labor 20.0% 25.0% 13.0% 15.0%

Resource

No. Open A/I: 0No. Closed A/I: 0

No. Overdue A/I: 0Total A/I: 0

Item No.Machine/

Process StepOver Capacity

Projected Year

Projected Quarter

Action Item(s) to EliminateOver Capacity Situation

Person Responsible

Due Date StatusDate

Closed

1234567891011121314151617181920

Over Capacity Action Plan

CAT Tool training package and spreadsheet available at:

www.hssupplierportal.com


Click on “Quality MPR”

Element Description Element 8 – PRS Capacity Analysis Review

66





8Process

Readiness Study (PRS)

Verify that the PRS includes the following elements and that the results of the study show that for all elements, the producer is ready for production.A) Production Tooling, fixtures, manufacturing equipmentB) Operation Work InstructionsC) Process Control MethodsD) Gage SuitabilityE) Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) programF) Sub-tier Supplier flowdownG) Capacity AnalysisH) FOD prevention and controls

67


Element Description Element 9 – Initial Process Studies



Initial Process Studies All HS defined KPCs are identified on the PFMEA, Process Flow Map, Control Plan and work instructions.

In case of SDE suppliers, any HS defined CTSC/CTQC features have lower-level KPCs that were self-selected by the supplier and approved by HS Quality and/or Engineering.

Producer can show evidence that SPC is being implemented for HS defined or self-selected KPCs using control charts.

Evidence that Producer is addressing KPCs with low Cpks (e.g., Cpks< 1.0).

No documented evidence of a Process Control Plan or the one presented does not meet UTCQR-09.1.

Cannot link controls listed on PCP to high risk areas identified on PFMEA.

No and/or impartial evidence Electronic Control Plans are developed for HS defined KPCs in the HS ProCert Database.


99.73%

95.46%

68.26%

X-3S -2S -1S +1S +2S +3S

.0214 .1360 .3413.3413 .1360 .0214

99.73%

95.46%

68.26%

X-3S -2S -1S +1S +2S +3S

.0214 .1360 .3413.3413 .1360 .0214

68

QC-0990.28, “PPAP Objective Evidence Package” includes Appendix 5, “Capability Calculator” that can be used to perform the following tasks:

• Enter SPC data collected from the process

• Calculate Cp & Cpk• Produce Individuals Control

Chart based utilizing 3-Sigma Limits

• Create Moving Range Control Chart based utilizing 3-Sigma Limits


Process Capability and Individuals & Moving Range (IX-MR) ChartPart Number:

Part Name:

Number of samples (<= 50) 17 Nominal specification 10.00002 Upper tolerance limit 15.0000

Lower tolerance limit 5.0000Grand Average D3 D4 d2Average Range 0 3.267 1.128

MovingObservation Value LCLx CLx UCLx Range LCLr CLr UCLr Cp 1.67

1 8.50000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 Cpl 1.652 7.90000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.60000 0.00000 0.83125 2.71569 Cpu 1.693 8.80000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.90000 0.00000 0.83125 2.71569 Cpk 1.654 9.90000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 1.10000 0.00000 0.83125 2.715695 10.10000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.20000 0.00000 0.83125 2.715696 10.00000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.10000 0.00000 0.83125 2.715697 11.00000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 1.00000 0.00000 0.83125 2.715698 10.30000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.70000 0.00000 0.83125 2.715699 9.80000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.50000 0.00000 0.83125 2.71569

10 8.90000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.90000 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156911 11.10000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 2.20000 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156912 10.50000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.60000 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156913 10.10000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.40000 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156914 10.00000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.10000 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156915 12.00000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 2.00000 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156916 10.20000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 1.80000 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156917 10.00000 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 0.20000 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156918 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156919 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156920 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156921 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156922 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156923 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156924 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156925 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156926 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156927 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156928 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156929 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156930 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156931 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156932 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156933 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156934 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156935 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156936 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156937 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156938 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156939 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156940 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156941 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156942 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156943 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156944 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156945 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156946 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156947 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156948 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156949 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.7156950 7.73629 9.94706 12.15783 #N/A 0.00000 0.83125 2.71569

Drawing Zone:

Enter data ONLY in yellow-shaded cells.This spreadsheet is designed for up to 50 observations and a moving range from 2 to 5.Enter the sample size in cell E10. Then enter your data in the "Value" Column beginning with Cell B17.

Drawing Number:

CTQ Feature:

PROCESS CAPABILITY CALCULATIONS

Sample size for moving range(2 - 5)

9.947060.83125 Average 9.9471

Standard Deviation 0.9976

0.0000

2.0000

4.0000

6.0000

8.0000

10.0000

12.0000

14.0000

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

Va

lue

Observation number

Individuals (X) ChartIndividualsUpper control limitCenter lineLower control limit

0.00000

0.50000

1.00000

1.50000

2.00000

2.50000

3.00000

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39 41 43 45 47 49

Mo

vin

g r

an

ge

s

Observation number

Moving Range ChartMoving ranges

Lower control limit

Center line

Upper control limit

Index

ProcessCapability

ControlCharts

Raw dataentry

HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST

PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99

69




A) Evidence that SPC Control Charts and process capability indices are completed for 25 pcs, illustrating evidence of variation for all UTC Member and producer identified KCs.

B) Supplier action plan(s) in place to address unacceptable Process Capability results for all UTC defined or producer defined KCs.

C) Verify that the producer has ensured that any UTC member or producer identified KCs manufactured by a subtier supplier meet UTCQR-09.1 requirements.

9Initial Process

Capability Studies

In PPAP Objective Evidence Package, Form QC-0990.28,Producer will provide in Tab 9, “Initial Process Studies”, an example SPC output along with a summary table for the status of all other HS defined or self-selected KPCs.

70


Element Description Element 10 – Measurement Systems Analysis Studies



Measurement Systems Analysis Studies

Gage Studies (Short Form as a minimum) are conducted on measurement systems involving HS defined and producer self-selected KPCs

Results are entered into the HS ProCert Database.

Action plan exists for gage Study results greater than 20% per HSM17 (supplier made parts) or HT0985 (internally made parts).

10% rule-of-thumb employed for measurement resolution.

No documented evidence of a Gage Capability Studies performed per HSM17/HT0985.

Gage Study results not entered into the HS ProCert Database.

Lack of action plans for Gage Study results greater than 20% of tolerance.

Gages used have inadequate measurement resolution.


Gauge R&R Short Form Study

Gauge Name: Part Number: Performed By:Gauge Number: Part Name: Operator A:

Graduations: Operation Number: Operator B:

Zero Equals: Characteristic: Area: Unit of Meas: Specification: Date:

Total Tolerance:Instructions:1) Type in shaded areas only.2) Select 5 parts at random and number them 1 through 5.2) Have two operators measure each part independently. Record results below.4) Analyze the results to determine variability due to both Repeatability and Reproducibility.

Part Operator Operator Range12345

Sum of the Ranges:

Rbarm = (Sum/5) =

R&R = Rbarm * 4.33

R&R = * 4.33 =

% of Tol. Range = (R&R / Tol. Range) * 100% of Tolerance Range =

Evaluation:Gauge R&R must not exceed 20% of the Engineering Tolerance in order for the measurement system to be judged acceptable. If Short Form Study exceeds 20%, conduct Long Form Study. If the Long Form Study exceeds 20%, a change to the measurement system is needed.

71



In PPAP Objective Evidence Package, Form QC-0990.28,Producer will provide in Tab 10, “MSA”, an example Gage Capability Study output along with a summary table for the status of all other HS defined or self-selected KPCs.

Gage R&R Short Form Study

Gage Name: Caliper Part Number: 964C592-1 Performed By: Frank T.

Gage Number: 1c0013 Part Name: Tube, Insulating Operator A: Patti C.

Graduations: 0.0001" Operation Number: N/A Operator B: Nicola S.

Zero Equals: Characteristic: Outside Diameter Area: Aerospace Cell

Unit of Measure: Inches Specification: 1.807-1.817" Date: 6/20/2005

Total Tolerance: 0.01000

Instructions:1) Type in shaded areas only.2) Select 5 parts at random and number them 1 through 5.2) Have two operators measure each part independently. Record results below.4) Analyze the results to determine variability due to both Repeatability and Reproducibility.

Operator Operator RangePart Patti C. Nicola S.

1 1.8125 1.8135 0.001002 1.8100 1.8125 0.002503 1.8110 1.8135 0.002504 1.8100 1.8130 0.003005 1.8105 1.8120 0.00150

Sum of the Ranges: 0.01050Rbarm = (Sum/5) = 0.00210

R&R = Rbarm * 4.33

R&R = 0.00210 * 4.33 = 0.00909

% of Tol. Range = (R&R / Tol. Range) * 100% of Tolerance Range = 90.93000

Evaluation:Variable Gage R&R may be interpreted as a percentage of the Engineering Tolerance. Gage R&R must not exceed 20% of the Engineering Tolerance in order for the measurement system to be judged acceptable. If the Short Form Study exceeds 20%, it is recommended a Long Form Study be conducted. If the Long Form Study exceeds 20%, a change to the measurement system is needed.

Sample Gage Study


A) Producer can demonstrate Gage Capability Studies completed for all UTC member and producer identified KC.

B) Gage resolution specified meeting 10:1 rule-of-thumb.

C) Supplier action plan(s) in place to address unacceptable Gage Capability results for UTC defined CTQ Features (i.e., > 20% of tolerance requires corrective action plan).

10

Measurement System Analysis

Studies (i.e., Gage Capability Studies)

72


QC-0990.28, “PPAP Objective Evidence Package” includes the following appendices:

• Appendix 2, “Gage Capability Short Form Study”

• Appendix 3, “Gage Capability Long Form Study”

• Appendix 4, “Gage Capability Attribute Form Study”

• Templates compute Gage Capability

as a % to tolerance and 6-Sigma

• Long Form separates effects of gage

from inspector


Gage R&R Short Form Study

Gage Name: Part Number: Performed By:Gage Number: Part Name: Operator A:

Graduations: Operation Number: Operator B:Zero Equals: Characteristic: Area:

Unit of Measure: Specification: Date:Total Eng. Tolerance:

Instructions:1) Type in shaded areas only.2) Select 5 parts at random and number them 1 through 5.2) Have two operators measure each part independently. Record results below.4) Analyze the results to determine variability due to both Repeatability and Reproducibility.

Part12345

RA (Range of 5 values) = 0.000000 RB (Range of 5 values) = 0.000000 Sum of 5 ranges 0.000000RbarCV = (R A+R B )/2 = 0.000000 Rbarm = Sum/5 0.000000

NOTE: CV = Combined Variability used to calculate Process Tolerance

Product Sigma = Rbarm/1.19 = 0.000000 Process SigmaCV = RbarCV/d2 = 0.000000

* See special Supplier Note below NOTE: d2 = 2.326 for n=5

Gage R&R for Product Acceptance = Rbarm * 4.33 Process Tolerance = 6 * SigmaCV = 0.000000

0.00000 * 4.33 = 0.000000

1) GAGE CAPABILITY (GC) FOR PRODUCT ACCEPTANCE (% of Engineering Tolerance)

GC as a % of Eng. Tolerance = (Gage R&R / Total Eng. Tolerance Range) * 100 = #DIV/0!

* SPECIAL SUPPLIER NOTE: Supplier needs to enter "Product Sigma" into HS Process Certification Database when creating a new Gage File for any HS defined KPCs/TKCs. Enter the Product Sigma into the database field entitled "Gage RR Std Deviation".

2) GAGE CAPABILITY FOR CONTROL CHART PURPOSES (% of Process Tolerance)

% of Process Tolerance = (R&R / 6 x SigmaCV) * 100 = #DIV/0!

LEGEND ACCEPTABLE MARGINAL UNACCEPTABLE

Operator A Operator B Range0 0

0.0000000.000000

0.000000

0.0000000.000000

Index

Example Gage Capability Short Study Form



73

Element Description Element 11 – Eng. Frozen Planning/Source Approval



Engineering Frozen Planning/Source Approval (EFP/ESA)

Where Flight Safety Parts & Characteristics apply, processes generating FSC features have been approved by the HS Flight Safety Parts Review Board per HSC16199/HS15000.

Producer has annotated their documentation with a unique identifier per HS16199/HS15000.

Flight Safety Audit performed by HS with no findings outstanding.

No documented evidence of a HS Flight Safety Parts Review Board approval for Producer’s processes that generate Flight safety Parts/Characteristics per HSC16199/HS15000.

Flight Safety Parts/Characteristics not identified properly per HSC16199/HS15000.

Findings documented in prior HS Flight Safety Audit are overdue.



11

Engineering Frozen Planning and/ or Source Approval

(EFP/ ESA)

A) Evidence of EFP/ESA approval where required by drawing or process specification

74


Element Description Element 12 – Dimensional Report



Dimensional Report A FAIR (per AS9102A) for 1 part, and four supplementary dimensional reports for 4 additional randomly selected parts.

5 total parts must be represented of all unique process streams per ASQR-09.2, Section 5.2.12.C.

All features must meet the drawing requirements.

Note: Reductions in sample size of amount of inspected drawing characteristics shallbe documented and formally agreed to with HS MFP.

First Article Inspection Report(FAIR) only for one part

Features found to be unaccounted for.

Some features checked in an over-inspection found to be out-of-tolerance.

QN acceptednon-conformances



A) For ballooned print, validate count of dimensions/features checked on current print match those on Dimensional Report.

B) Validate all CTQ features are identified on the report

C) Validate all features recorded are within specification tolerances.

D) Validate full FAI layout (per AS9102) and 4 additional dimensional reports are completed (randomly selected from a significant production run). (For a Level 4 on-site review, the UTC assessor shall randomly witness the inspection of at least 3 pre-selected features (reference E) Validate that the producer accounted for all process streams in the selected samples

12 Dimensional Report

75


Element Description Element 13 – Production Verification Testing



Production Verification Testing ATP tests results based on the test specification called out on the engineering documentation are evident for the prescribed quantity or a minimum of 5 units.

Tests results are all acceptable to the test specification.

Less than five units of data exists.

Nonconformances present in the test results.



A) Does functional test (i.e., ATP/PAT/PVT) meet UTC division drawing and/or Procurement Specification test requirements?

B) Has functional test been completed for at least 5 units or the minimum required by the UTC division specification?

13Production Verification

Testing (PVT)

76


Element Description Element 14 – Special Process Approval and NDT


HS 80-85 Report

REPORT 80 - Lists all HS suppliers approved to perform a specific special process per an HS specification. These are suppliers that are only special process houses. They do not manufacture product.

REPORT 85 - Lists all suppliers approved by HS to perform internally a specific special process per an HS specification. These suppliers manufacture product and have as part of their operations the ability to perform special processes.

Example of Report 80 as seen from HS Supplier Portal

77




78




Special Process Approval and Non-Destructive Test (NDT)

Supplier aware of all special process/NDT requirements called out on HS documents.

Special Process and/or NDT suppliers all have proper approvals for the HS specification called out and appear on the HS 80-85 Report.

Evidence is readily available from 1st-tier supplier for any special testing required by the HS specification.

Supplier did not account for all special process/NDT requirements called out on HS document.

Supplier utilized a special process/NDT supplier not on the HS 80-85 Report.

Supplier cannot produce evidence that special testing called out in the HS specification was completed.


A) I s the Special Process supplier listed on a UTC division member Approved Vendor list specifically for the subject specification?

B) Did the product in question require special testing (i.e. grain size, microstructure), and if so is there evidence of completion and approval (i.e., is a control plan included as part of the objective evidence package that reflects any special testing requirements)?

C) I s the certificate of compliance included?

14Special Process Approvals

& Nondestructive Test (NDT)

79


Element Description Element 15 – Material Certification Documentation



Material Certification Documentation When required by HS document, C of C readily available showing material procured from an HS approved source.

For SDE suppliers, C of C available that shows material procured from SDE approved source.

Materials procured from non-approved HS source have supporting test reports from an HS approved test facility.

No evidence of approvals.



A) Materials were procured from a UTC division approved source when required.B) For Producers with design authority, materials were procured from the Producer's approved source and is stated on the C of C.

C) Materials from a non-approved sources (non LCS supplier) have material test reports from UTC division approved test facility.

15Material Certification

Documentation

80


Element Description Element 16 – Raw Material Approval



Raw Material Approval A HS approved layout report with no non-conformances

No layout report or anapproved layout report withQN accepted nonconformances.



16Raw Material Approval (i.e.,

casting approved layout)A) Ensure layout report is completed and approved by the UTC member division with zero nonconformances.

81


Element Description Element 17 – Part Marking Approval



Part Marking Approval Photo of Part Markingincluding 2D marking ifapplicable.

Copy of 2D markingapproval by HS.

No photo of marking orno evidence of 2Dmarking approval fromHS.


82




A) Documented evidence of UTC division approval of part marking per the invoked part marking specification.

B) A digital photo of part marking on a part or other evidence that demonstrates the part has been marked per the drawing.

17 Parts Marking Approval

Part Marking Wizard available on HS Supplier Portal

Aids a supplier in how to mark an HS part using a four step process

Encompasses part marking specifications from three HS design centers (Windsor Locks, Rockford and San Diego)

Will enable successful completion of PPAP Element 17

83




Part Marking Wizard – HS Supplier Portal

84

Element Description Element 18 – Packaging, Preservation and Labelling Approval

85 HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99

Requirement per ASQR-09.2(18) Packaging, Preservation and Labeling ApprovalThe UPPAP file shall contain documented evidence of member approval of packaging per the invoked packaging specification.


A) Validate PP&L requirements are met per applicable UTC division drawing and/or specification.

B) In the event no UTC division specific PP&L requirements are specified, does packaging plan meet ASQR-15.1?

18Packaging, Preservation &

Labeling Approval


Packaging, Preservation and Labeling (PP&L) Approval

Documented evidence ofHS approved packagingrequirements.

For Raw Material suppliers, email is acceptable.

For all other , evidence is copy of HS packing instructions from HS supplier portal.

No documented evidence of HS PP&L approval.


Element Description Element 19 – Review and Sign-Off

86 HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND PROPRIETARY INFORMATION. USE OR DISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION ON THIS PAGE IS SUBJECT TO THE NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS ON THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99


The Producer shall use the PPAP2-Checklist, Form QC-0990.26, to assure package integrity


Review and Sign-Off Form 1 completed and signed by the Producer.

Evidence review conducted using PPAP2-FAI Checklist to assure comprehensive review.

Action items with assigned individuals and expected completion dates for any incomplete elements.

No documented evidence of HS PP&L approval.

No evidence Producer utilized the PPAP2-FAI Checklist in their review.

No plan exists and/or incomplete plan for unfinished PPAP elements.

(19)Review and Sign-OffThe supplier shall:a. Verify all measurement and test results show conformance with member requirements.b. Ensure all required documentation is available within the UPPAP file.c. Review all applicable data for content, accuracy, and process repeatability before submitting for approval.d. Upon a satisfactory internal review, complete a UPPAP Approval, ASQR-09.2 Form 1, (refer to Appendix 1), and submit to the MFP for approval.e. Complete a separate ASQR-09.2 Form 1, for each part number unless otherwise agreed to by the MFP.

UTC Division:




Purchase Order #:











No. Target Date

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

Email Address


Co

mm

ents

Designated Function

ASQR-09.2 Form 1 (Rev. 06/11)



Title Date



Supplier Name

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION


Act

ion

Pla

n

ELEMENT DESCRIPTION


Action Item

Country


Supplier Code

Element #

DECLARATION







1st Tier - UTC PO


PPAP Validation



• Producer submits PPAP Package for approval

• Conduct PPAP2 Review. – Level 4 PPAP requires that an on-site validation to be conducted.

Review must witness the actual process at the Producer.

• Determine gaps

• Provide feedback to Producer

• Producer re-submits updated package

87

PPAP Approval



• Sign UPPAP Form 1

• Update PPAP database

• Forward Form 1 to Producer

88

1) PPAP is an acronym for;A. Purchased Part Activity Planning

B. Part Planning Approval Process

C. Production Part Approval Process

D. Part Production Activity Plan

E. Process Planning And Production

F. Part Planning And Procurement

2) PPAP has 13 elements;

A True

B False

3) There are 5 levels of PPAP:A. True

B. False

4) A DFMEA for a level 3 PPAP is required by all producers:A. True

C. False

TRIVIA QUESTIONS



89

F/N=L:\Supplier Quality\Supplier Development\Training Materials\Practical Process Control Applications – P. Teti, October 25, 2007.ppt

QUESTIONS?



APPENDIX 1

FMEA Guideline



A systematic technique to:

• Identify potential failure modes

• Identify possible causes and effects of potential failure modes

• Evaluate and manage risk by prioritizing failure modes according to:– Occurrence probability– Severity– Detection probability– Identify control methods to eliminate or minimize the effect of potential

failures– Provide a means of evolving organizational knowledge

Definition



92

• A prevention tool used to determine possible failures before they happen. – Results of an FMEA lead to the establishment of process controls.

• Can be used on a product.– Tree diagram showing how details flow into assemblies.– Understand what the “Critical-To-Quality (CTQ)” parts are to the

Customer that affect performance, reliability, and safety.– Determine Key Product Characteristics for the CTQ parts

• Can be used on a process (PFMEA)– Flowchart the key process steps (see next two pages).– Identify “what could go wrong” at each process step.– Identify controls needed on Key Process Inputs (KPI’s, i.e., poka-

yoke (timers, sensors, guide pins), control charts, etc.).– Determine Key Product Characteristics to measure output.




93


Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) is a preventive analyticaltechnique utilized by designers (product or process) to methodicallystudy the cause and effects of failures before a design is finalized.

In essence, a product or process is examined for all the ways in which a failure can occur.

For each potential failure, an assessment is made of its effect on the system and its seriousness.

In addition, a review is made of the action being taken (or planned) to minimize the probability of failure or to minimize the effects of failure.

What is FMEA?



94


The FMEA supports the design process in reducing the risk of failure by:

Aiding in the objective evaluation of design requirements and design alternatives.

Increasing the probability that potential failure modes and their effects on system operation have been considered in the design/development process.

Providing additional information to aid in the planning of thorough and efficient design test and development programs.

Developing a list of potential failure modes ranked according to their effect on the “Customer”.

Providing an open issue format for recommending and tracking risk reducing actions.

Providing future reference to aid in analyzing service concerns, evaluating design changes, and developing advanced designs.

What does FMEA do?



95


A cost reduction process, although it may result in cost avoidance.

A way to reduce testing requirements – it may result in additional testing requirements.

A replacement for formal design reviews.

A process we perform at the last minute to satisfy a customer requirement.

More useless paperwork we fill out before we get a new development program signed off.

An opportunity to document all of the ways we think the plant will “mess up” when manufacturing the product.

What an FMEA is not



96

FAILURE MODE EFFECTS ANALYSIS (FMEA)Benefits



97

Use Product or Process Guide Sheets when facilitating an actual FMEA meeting.

Key questions relevant to each FMEA column are listed and should be asked.

Have a recorder (someone with decent handwriting!) assigned and record Team inputs on a 11" by 17" blank FMEA worksheet.

Permanent recording can be done on a computer spreadsheet.

Develop action plan for RPN's calculated, such as:– KPC implementation using SPC– Create process control plan– Added test procedure– Mistake-Proof solution based on design or process

FMEA GUIDE SHEET



98

DESIGN FMEA GUIDE SHEET



PARTNAME/PARTNUMBER

PRODUCTFUNCTION

POTENTIALFAILUREMODE

POTENTIALEFFECT(S)OFFAILURE

CONTROLCRITICALITEM

POTENTIALCAUSE(S)OFFAILURE

EXISTING CONDITIONS

CURRENTCONTROLS

OC

CU

RA

NC

E

SE

VE

RIT

Y

DE

TE

CT

ION

RISKPRIORITYNUMBER(RPN)

RESULTING

ACTIONTAKEN

OC

CU

RA

NC

E

SE

VE

RIT

Y

DE

TE

CT

ION


RECOMMENDEDACTION(S)

RE

SP

ON

SIB

LE

AC

TIV

ITY

From BOMwhat partare weexamining?

What tasksmust partperform?

How canpart fail tomeetfunction?

Use verband noun.

Examples:Retainclip;Preventleaks.

Use physicalor technicalterms.

Examples:Vibration;Leaks.

What willCustomerexperienceif failuremodeoccurs?

Customersare internaland external.

Examples:Inoperative;Poorappearance.

Controlregulated.

Critical/Safety.

Significantproduct.

What is theroot causeof failure -NOT causeof effect?

Use "FiveWhys".

Examples:Lube failure;Fatiguecrack.

What canpreventcausesfromoccurring?

Examples:DOE,Qual. test,SPC KC,Mistake-Proofdevice.

SEE NEXTPAGE.

Provide riskassessmentand prioritizeneed forcorrectiveaction.

Direct correctiveaction at highestRPN and Severity.

What wasactuallyaccomplished?

SEE NEXTPAGE.

Goal is toreduce RPN's forcontinuousimprovement.

Examples:DOE,Design inredundancy,Design change,implement SPCfor selectedKC's, incorporateSupplier controls,Come up withDesign Mistake-Proof strategy,etc.

Should belower thanRPN underexistingconditions.

Who is responsiblefor theseactions?

99

PROCESS FMEA GUIDE SHEETOPERATIONDESCRIPTION

POTENTIALFAILUREMODE

POTENTIALEFFECT(S)OFFAILURE

CONTROLCRITICALITEM

POTENTIALCAUSE(S)OFFAILURE

EXISTING CONDITIONS

CURRENTCONTROLS

OC

CU

RA

NC

E

SE

VE

RIT

Y

DE

TE

CT

ION


RESULTING

ACTIONTAKEN

OC

CU

RA

NC

E

SE

VE

RIT

Y

DE

TE

CT

ION


RECOMMENDEDACTION(S)

RE

SP

ON

SIB

LE

AC

TIV

ITY

From a flowchart whatoperation are weexamining?

How canpart fail tomeetfunction?

Use physicalor technicalterms.

Examples:Contamin-action; Leaks;Eccentric;Hole miss-ing; Not flat.

What willCustomerexperienceif failuremodeoccurs?

Customeris end useror down-streamOperator.

Examples:Poor fit-up;Can't install;Corrosion;Rework.

Controlregulated.

Critical/Safety.

Significantproduct.

What is theroot causeof failure -NOT causeof effect?

Use "FiveWhys".

Examples:Machine set-up; bad heattreat; Hand-ling damage.

What canpreventcausesfromoccurring?

Examples:DOE,SPC KC,Mistake-Proofdevice,Inspectionstep, etc.

SEE NEXTPAGE.

Provide riskassessmentand prioritizeneed forcorrectiveaction.

Direct correctiveaction at highestRPN and Severity.

What wasactuallyaccomplished?

SEE NEXTPAGE.

Goal is toreduce RPN's forcontinuousimprovement.

Examples:DOE,Redesign fixture,implement SPCfor selectedKC's, incorporateSupplier controls,Come up withMistake-Proofdevice, etc.

Should belower thanRPN underexistingconditions.

Who is responsiblefor theseactions?



100

101

Holding Spot for NEW D/P FMEA

102

Severity – SAEJ1739



103

Occurrence – SAEJ1739


THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99 103

Detection – SAEJ1739


THE FIRST PAGE OF THIS DOCUMENT. THIS DOCUMENT OR FILE CONTAINS NO TECHNICAL DATA. ECCN: EAR99

104

PFMEA EXAMPLE – MAKING RICEProcess Flowchart



105

PFMEA EXAMPLE – MAKING RICE



106


QUESTIONS?


ppap 215 per asqr-09.2 rev b supplier awareness session course i.d. # 996971 four hours copyright ©...

Documents

utc ppap ppap

ppap ppap key deliverables

whats ppap

disclosure of information

ppap risk mitigation

history of ppap roots

multiple requirement

ear99 slide