[xls]ppap workbook rev 1.6 2014.0228 - oshkosh …osn.oshkoshcorp.com/docs/quality/f2000.xls · web...

Oshkosh Corporation Classification: Unrestricted

Revision Date User1.6 2/28/2014 Andrea Krueger


NotesAdded Revisions History Tab, Updated PSW to unclude IPS specific information for Level 1, Added PRINT NOTES - Performance Tests Tab and updated PRINT NOTES - Welding with attaching copies of WPS/PQR; finished update of tab footers


Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)

Revision 1.6February 28, 2014

"One System…One Team...One Oshkosh”


4 of 59 PPAP: Revision 1.6Date: 2/28/14

PPAP INTRODUCTION

The Default PPAP is Level 2, unless otherwise required by the Oshkosh Segment Quality Representative

PPAP requirements apply to the following parts:

1) Initial submission 2) Engineering Change(s) 3) Tooling: Transfer, Replacement, Refurbishment, or additional 4) Correction of Discrepancy 5) Production Break to Oshkosh Corporation > 1 year 6) Change to Optional Construction or Material 7) Sub-Supplier or Material Source Change 8) Change in Part Processing 9) Parts produced at Additional Location 10) Other - please specify

Part Name PART NAMEPart Number PART NUMBEREngineering Revision Level ERLEngineering Revision Level Date ERL DATEModels / Vehicle MODEL / VEHICLE

Supplier Name SUPPLIER NAMESupplier Number SUPPLIER NUMBERStreet Address ADDRESSCity CITYState STATECountry COUNTRYZip ZIPPhone Number 555-555-5555Fax Number 555-555-5554

Email Address [email protected]

PPAP packages are expected to be received by Oshkosh Corporation by the date assigned by Oshkosh Corporation Designee. If for any reason you cannot meet this date, contact Oshkosh Corporation Designee for resolution.

It is the policy of Oshkosh Corporation to approve initial samples of supplier provided parts before receiving production orders of those parts Oshkosh has developed the PPAP PROCESS to facilitate this requirement.

Please reference the Oshkosh Corporation Global Supplier Quality Manual for more detail on PPAP requirements. The Manual can be retrieved on the http://osn.oshkoshcorp.com/ website.

The information in blue is interlinked to the other spreadsheets. FILL IN THE BLUE SECTIONS FOR AUTOMATIC INPUT INTO FORMS



Part Number: PART NUMBER Purchase Order No.Revision Level: ERL Part Description: PART NAMESupplier Name: SUPPLIER NAME Reason for Request:

Supplier Number: SUPPLIER NUMBER OSK Program: MODEL / VEHICLEDate Issued: Submission Due Date:

UNLESS OTHERWISED SPECIFIED IN WRITING BY OSHKOSH CORPORATION:

Submission LevelPPAP Submission Requirements and Detail Description 1 2 3 4

1.) Part Submission Warrant (PSW) S S S S2.) Dimensional Results * S S S3.) Design Records (Bubble Print) * S S S

* S S S

* S S ** S S N/R* * S N/R

8.) Process Flow Diagram (PFD) * * S N/R9.) Process Failure Modes Effects Analysis (PFMEA) * * S N/R

* * S N/R* * S N/R

12.) Process Control Plan * * S N/R* * S N/R

14.) Checking Aids (Fixture, gage, template, etc) - if applicable * * S N/R15.) Records of Compliance with Customer Specific Requirements - if applicable * * S N/R16.) Master Sample Photo Documentation of PPAP parts * * S N/R17.) Tooling Photo Documentation - if applicable * * S N/R

Additional Submission Instructions below:

Oshkosh CorporationPPAP Part Submission Requirements

ALL PPAP CRITERIAMUST CONFORM TO

Oshkosh Corporation Customer Specifics defined in the Global Supplier Quality

Manual

Default PPAP Submission Level 2 - Unless Otherwise Specified by Oshkosh Corportion (Segment Specific Requirements may vary)S = Supplier Must Send Items to Oshkosh Corporation for Approval* = Supplier to Send items to Oshkosh Corporation Upon RequestN/R= Documents are not required for development or submission

4.) PPAP Samples - first production order / upon request prior to production order5.) Print Notes: (Attach copy of Raw Material Certification / Performance Test Report / Surface Finish / Labeling, Paint Process, Welding)6.) Supplier Change Request (OSK-F1000) - if applicable7.) Design Failure Modes effects Analysis (DFMEA) - if supplier is design responsible

10.) Initial Process Capability - for major / critical characteristics11.) Measurement System Analysis (MSA) - for major / critical characteristics

13.) Appearance Approval Report (AAR) - if applicable



PPAP SAMPLE PARTS - LABEL

Send identified sample(s), such as, Piece#1, Piece#2, Piece#3, etc to Oshkosh Corporation with appropriate label.

PPAP SAMPLE PARTSINSPECTION VERIFICATION REQUIRED

Purchased Order#:

Part Number:

Revision Level:

Supplier Name:

Supplier Number:

Supplier Inspected By:

Please complete and attach this page on the outside of each package in plain view of a fork lift/material handler/operator. Put the Packing slip pocket near the label.

In the event parts are “Loose” shipped, a label should be placed on each part. This would also apply to parts laying on pallets. Label on a painted part must be wire tied or attached in a way such that the painted surface is protected from label adhesion.



Part Submission WarrantPart Name PART NAME Oshkosh Part Number PART NUMBER

Shown on Drawing Number Supplier Part Number

Engineering Revision Level Dated ERL DATE

Safety and/or Government Regulation Purchase Order No.

ORGANIZATION MANUFACTURING INFORMATION CUSTOMER SUBMITTAL INFORMATION

SUPPLIER NAME SUPPLIER NUMBEROrganization Name & Supplier/Vendor Code Customer Name/Division

ADDRESSStreet Address Buyer/Buyer Code

CITY STATE ZIP U.S.A.City Region Postal Code Country

MATERIALS REPORTINGDefense Segment: Compliant to requirements stated in the Suppliers Standards Guide (Section D.32) referencing Hazardous Materials.

REASON FOR SUBMISSION (Check at least one)Initial submission Change to Optional Construction or MaterialEngineering Change(s) Sub-Supplier or Material Source ChangeTooling: Transfer, Replacement, Refurbishment, or additional Change in Part ProcessingCorrection of Discrepancy Parts produced at Additional LocationProduction Break to Oshkosh Corporation > 1 year Other - please specify

REQUESTED SUBMISSION LEVEL (Check one)Level 1 - Warrant only submitted to customer. (Defense Integrated Product Support requires Material Certification along with warrant)Level 2 - Warrant with product samples, ISIR, and Material/Performance/Surface Finish/Paint Test Results(Check items that have been submitted within this PPAP submission)

Level 3 - All Level 2 Requirements in addition DFMEA, PFD, PFMEA, Control Plan, Initial Process Capability, and MSA(Check items that have been submitted within this PPAP Submission - See PPAP Requirements Tab for Definition)

Level 4 (Check items that have been submitted within this PPAP Submission)

5. Confirmation of conformance to all Print Notes:

Is each Customer Tool properly tagged and numbered?

Declaration:

Organization Authorized Signature Date

Print Name Phone No. 555-555-5555 Fax No.Title E-mail

PPAP Warrant Disposition:

Customer Signature Date

Print Name Customer Tracking Number (optional)DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT C: (Applies to all FMTV Technical Data)

I have noted on this part submission warrant any deviation from the associated design record and/or any areas of non-compliance to the Oshkosh Corporation requirements. If Yes, Explain ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

FOR CUSTOMER USE ONLY (Level 4 PPAP's do not require signed PSW)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

1. Part Submission Warrant (PSW)

5a. Print Notes: Material Tests

Yes No

Approved Rejected Other

Yes No n/a

2. Dimensional results (ISIR)

5c. Print Notes: Functional Tests5b. Print Notes: Surface Finish Tests

5d. Print Notes: Part Identification3. Design Record / Drawing5e. Print Notes: Paint, Plating, Coating Tests5f. Welding

1. Part Submission Warrant (PSW)2. Dimensional results (ISIR)

Yes No n/a

4. PPAP Samples 5. Print Notes (check all that apply)6. Engineering Change Records / Deviations

3. Design Record / Drawing4. PPAP Samples

Yes No n/a



Distribution authorized to US government agencies and their contractors, Reason: Administrative or Operational Use. Date of Determination (Part Submission Warrant Supplier Completion Date). Other requests for this document shall be referred to: The Project Manager, Medium Tactical Vehicles, Attn: Engineering Director, Mail Stop #500, 6501 East 11 Mile Road, Warren, MI 48397-5000 DSN 786-6622 or Commercial (586) 282-6622



DIMENSIONAL RESULTS

ORGANIZATION: SUPPLIER NAME PART NUMBER: PART NUMBERSUPPLIER NUMBER: SUPPLIER NUMBER PART NAME: PART NAME

NAME OF INSPECTION FACILITY: ENGINEERING REVISION LEVEL ERLDATE:

Supplier required to provide marked up drawing to identify items inspected.

ITEM DIMENSION / SPECIFICATIONORGANIZATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS (DATA)

OKMIN MAX Piece 1 Piece 2 Piece 3

Blanket statements of conformance are unacceptable for any test results.

PRINT NAME SIGNATURE TITLE DATE

SPECIFICATION / LIMITS GAGE

TYPEQTY.

TESTED

NOT

OK



DIMENSIONAL RESULTS



Supplier required to provide marked up drawing to identify items inspected.

ITEM DIMENSION / SPECIFICATIONORGANIZATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS (DATA)



TYPEQTY.

TESTED

NOT

OK





Supplier required to provide marked up drawing to identify all "PRINT NOTES" verified.

ITEM SPECIFICATIONORGANIZATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS (DATA)




PRINT NOTES (ATTACH COPY OF RAW MATERIAL CERTIFICATION, SURFACE FINISH,

& PART IDENTIFICATION)


TYPEQTY.

TESTED

NOT

OK








PRINT NOTES (ATTACH COPY OF RAW MATERIAL CERTIFICATION, SURFACE FINISH,

& PART IDENTIFICATION)


TYPEQTY.

TESTED

NOT

OK










PRINT NOTES (ATTACH COPY OF PERFORMANCE TESTS )


TYPEQTY.

TESTED

NOT

OK



ORGANIZATION: SUPPLIER NAME PART NUMB PART NUMBERSUPPLIER NUMBER: SUPPLIER NUMBER PART NAME:PART NAME



Document Painting Method / Industry Standard used to prepare these components.

Method # / Finishing Requirement on Drawing:

Cleaning Standard Utilized:

Characteristic StandardSUPPLIER TEST RESULTS (DATA)


Prime Coat:

Blast Profile

Thickness*

Thickness (including blast profile)*

Permeability

Adhesion

Oven Cure Time (if used)

Ambient Cure Time (if used)

Salt Spray

Top Coat:

Thickness (over primer)*

Total Thickness (reference)*

Permeability

Adhesion

Ambient Cure Time (if used)

Oven Cure Time (if used)

* Rejection will not be made based on coating thickness in excess of the maximum alone, but on a subsequent performance failure per MIL-DTL 53072 Sec 4.2.3.3.

Document Coating & Plating Method / Industry Standard used to prepare these components.

Coating / Plating Type Required:

Industry Standard :

(Circle) Yes / No Signed by:



PRINT NOTES (PAINT, PLATING, COATING TEST RESULTS)

Pretreat Standard Utilized: SPECIFICATION /

LIMITS GAGETYPE

QTY. TESTED

NOT

OK

Defense Segment: Compliant to the requirements stated in the Suppliers Standards Guide (Section D.32) referencing Hazardous Materials.





Supplier required to provide marked up print to identify ALL Weld items.

ITEM WELD SYMBOL WELD DESCRIPTION WPS#CHECK FOR CONFORMANCE

OKWELD SIZE WELD LENGTH WELD QTY



PRINT NOTES (ATTACH COPY OF WPS/PQR DOCUMENTATION)

PQR# (IF NOT PRE-QUALIFIED)

NOT

OK



PART DRAWING APPLICATIONNUMBER PART NUMBER NUMBER (VEHICLES) MODEL / VEHICLEPART BUYER E/C LEVEL DATENAME PART NAME CODE ERLORGANIZATION MANUFACTURING SUPPLIER / VENDORNAME SUPPLIER NAME LOCATION CODE SUPPLIER NUMBERREASON FOR PART SUBMISSION WARRANT SPECIAL SAMPLE RE-SUBMISSION OTHERSUBMISSION PRE TEXTURE FIRST PRODUCTION SHIPMENT ENGINEERING CHANGE

APPEARANCE EVALUATION AUTHORIZED CUSTOMER

ORGANIZATION SOURCING AND TEXTURE INFORMATION PRE-TEXTURE REPRESENTATIVE EVALUATION SIGNATURE AND DATE

COLOR EVALUATIONMETALLIC COLOR

COLOR TRISTIMULUS DATA MASTER MASTER MATERIAL MATERIAL HUE VALUE CHROMA GLOSS BRILLIANCE SHIPPING PARTSUFFIX DL* Da* Db* DE* CMC NUMBER DATE TYPE SOURCE RED YEL GRN BLU LIGHT DARK GRAY CLEAN HIGH LOW HIGH LOW SUFFIX DISPOSITION

COMMENTS

ORGANIZATION PHONE NO. DATE AUTHORIZED CUSTOMER DATE

SIGNATURE REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE

APPEARANCE APPROVAL REPORT

CORRECT AND PROCEED

CORRECT AND PROCEED

APPROVED TO ETCH/TOOL/EDM



System

Subsystem Design Responsibility: FMEA Number:

Component Key Date: Prepared by:

Model Year(s)/Vehicle(s): MODEL / VEHICLE Date (Orig.):

Core Team: Date (Rev.):

Requirements

C O Current DAction ResultsS l c Design e R.

e a c Controls t P. S O D R.v s u -Prevention e N. e c e P.

s r -Detection c v c t N.

DFMEA - DESIGN FAILURE MODES EFFECTS ANALYSIS

Item / Function

Potential Failure Mode

Potential Effect(s) of Failure

Potential Causes(s)/

Mechanism(s) of Failure

Recommended Action(s)

Responsibility & Target

Completion Date

Actions Taken



Product Program MODEL / VEHICLE Issue Date ECL ERLSupplier Name SUPPLIER NAME Part Name PART NAMESupplier Location ADDRESS Part Number PART NUMBER

Legend:

Operation Transportation Inspection Delay Storage

Step Operation or Event Description of EvaluationOperation or Event and Analysis Methods

Change HistoryDate Revision

PROCESS/INSPECTION FLOWCHART

Operation

Transportation

Inspection

Delay

Storage



Print # PART NUMBER Rev. ERL FMEA Number:

Item: n/a Process Responsibility: Prepared by:

Model Year(s)/Vehicle(s): MODEL / VEHICLE Key Date: Date (Orig.)

Core Team: Date (Rev.)

Requirements

C O Current DAction ResultsS l c Process e R.

e a c Controls t P. S O D R.v s u -Prevention e N. e c e P.

s r -Detection c v c t N.

PFMEA - PROCESS FAILURE MODES & EFFECTS ANALYSIS

Process Step / Function

Potential Failure Mode

Potential Effect(s) of Failure

Potential Causes(s)/

Mechanism(s) of Failure

Recommended Action(s)

Responsibility & Target

Completion Date

Actions Taken

K13

Jim Sensenbrenner: When inserting new rows, copy RPN formula to new row.

R14

Jim Sensenbrenner: When inserting new rows, copy forumlae in columns Q and R into new rows. These are needed for RPN limits for action.



Control Plan Number Key Contact/Phone Date (Orig.) Date (Rev.)1/1/1996 1/1/1996

Part Number/Latest Change Level Core Team Customer Engineering Approval/Date (If Req'd.)PART NUMBERPart Name/Description Supplier/Plant Approval/Date Customer Quality Approval/Date (If Req'd.)PART NAMESupplier/Plant Supplier Code Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.) Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.)

SUPPLIER NUMBERCHARACTERISTICS METHODS

NO. PRODUCT PROCESSPRODUCT/PROCESS EVALUATION/ SAMPLE

SPECIFICATION/ MEASUREMENTSIZE FREQ.TOLERANCE TECHNIQUE

CONTROL PLAN

PART/ PROCES

SNUMBER

PROCESS NAME/OPERATION

DESCRIPTION

MACHINE,DEVICE

JIG, TOOLSFOR MFG.

SPECIAL

CHAR.CLASS

REACTIONPLANCONTROL

METHOD

Prototype Pre-Launch Production



PPAP MASTER SAMPLE "PICTURE" DOCUMENTATION


DESIGN RECORD CHANGE LEVEL: ERL

Supplier is required to visually document the Master Sample (PPAP Parts):1.) Document how the parts are labeled. To include any date codes, vendor codes, etc.. (if applicable)2.) Document the parts as a whole what they look like in the final state in which they are provided to Oshkosh Corporation.

PICTURES OF MASTER SAMPLE LABELING

PICTURES OF MASTER SAMPLE PART




PPAP MASTER SAMPLE "PICTURE" DOCUMENTATION


DESIGN RECORD CHANGE LEVEL: ERL

Supplier is required to visually document the Master Sample (PPAP Parts):1.) Document how the parts are labeled. To include any date codes, vendor codes, etc.. (if applicable)2.) Document the parts as a whole what they look like in the final state in which they are provided to Oshkosh Corporation.

PICTURES OF MASTER SAMPLE LABELING



TOOLING & FIXTURES - PROPERTY OF OSHKOSH CORP.


TOOL / FIXTURE NUMBER: DESIGN RECORD CHANGE LEVEL: ERLDATE:

Supplier is required to identify all Oshkosh Owned Tools & Fixtures and document with Photo in PPAP workbook

PHOTO OF OSHKOSH OWNED TOOLING AND FIXTURES




Oshkosh Corporation

Supplier: SUPPLIER NAME Characteristic: Supplier #: SUPPLIER NUMBER Reason For Study:Part #: PART NUMBER Study Date:Nominal: Prepared By:Tolerance (+): Date Completed:

Tolerance (-):

Sub-Group# Value 1 Value 2 Value 3 Value 4 Value 51 <--- Fill in data horizontally for each subgroup23 Note: Complete all "white" cells in Blue Area.456

Supplier: SUPPLIER NAMEPart Number: SUPPLIER NUMBER Characteristic: PPC Number: PART NUMBER Incident: 0 CPK: #DIV/0!Nominal: 0 Incident Date: 12/30/1899Tolerance(+) 0 Prepared By: 12/30/1899Tolerance(-) 0 Date Completed: PPK: #DIV/0!

Sub-Group 1 2 3 4 5 Average Range1 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00002 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00003 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00004 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00005 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.00006 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

X-bar X-Bar: 0.0000UCL: 0.0000 WARNINGS Sigma: 0.0000LCL: 0.0000 #DIV/0! R-Bar: 0.0000

#DIV/0!

R-bar WARNINGS USL: 0.0000UCL: 0.0000 LSL: 0.0000LCL: 0.0000

X-bar X-Bar: 0.0000UCL: 0.0000 Sigma: 0.0000LCL: 0.0000 R-Bar: 0.0000

R-bar USL: 0.0000UCL: 0.0000 LSL: 0.0000LCL: 0.0000

1 2 3 4 5 6

-15

-10

-5

0

5

X-bar Chart

Average UCL LCLMean

1 2 3 4 5 60.00000.20000.40000.60000.80001.0000

R-bar Chart

Range UCL Mean



Misc. Graph DataX-bar R-bar

UCL LCL Mean subs-out UCL Mean subs-out CPU CPU0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0000 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0000 00.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0000 0 CPL CPL0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0000 0 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0000 0

N Curven d2 Assigned Bins Bin Freq2 1.128 23.6000 23.6000 03 1.693 23.7030 23.7030 14 2.059 23.7149 23.7149 75 2.326 23.7277 23.7277 236 2.534 23.7405 23.7405 257 2.704 23.7533 23.7533 218 2.847 23.7600 23.7600 179 2.970 23.7700 23.7700 610 3.078 23.8010 0

0 0

Misc. Graph Data

X-bar R-barUCL LCL Mean subs-out UCL Mean subs-out

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0280 00.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0280 0

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0280 00.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0280 00.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0280 0

0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0 0.0000 0.0280 0

N CurveAssigned Bins Bin Freq

23.6000 23.6000 0

23.7030 23.7030 123.7149 23.7149 723.7277 23.7277 2323.7405 23.7405 2523.7533 23.7533 2123.7600 23.7600 1723.7700 23.7700 6

23.8010 0

0 0



Effect Rank

10

9

8

7

6

5

Annoyance

4

3

2

No effect No discernible effects. 1

CriteriaSeverity of Effect on Product

(Customer Effect)

Failure to Meet Safety and/or Regulatory

Requirements

Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation without warning.

Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation with warning.

Loss or Degradation of Primary Function

Loss of primary function (vehicle inoperable, does not affect safe vehicle operation)

Degradation of primary function (vehicle operable, but at reduced level of performance)

Loss or Degradation of Secondary Function

Loss of secondary function (vehicle operable, but comfort/convenience functions inoperable)

Degradation of secondary function (vehicle operable, but comfort/convenience functions at reduced level of performance)

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does not conform and noticed by most customers (> 75%).

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does not conform and noticed by many customers (50%).

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does not conform and noticed by discriminating customers (< 25%).



Rank

Very High New technology/new design with no history. 10

High

9

8

7

Moderate

6

5

4

Low

3

2

Very Low Failure is eliminated through preventive control 1

Likelihood of Failure

Criteria: Occurrence of Cause - DFMEA(Design life/reliability of item/vehicle)

Criteria: Occurrence of Cause - DFMEA(Incidents per item/vehicle)

≥ 100 per thousand≥ 1 in 10

Failure is inevitable with new design, new application, or change in duty cycle/operating conditions

50 per thousand1 in 20

Failure is likely with new design, new application, or change in duty cycle/operating conditions


Failure is uncertain with new design, new application, or change in duty cycle/operating conditions


Frequent failures associated with similar designs or in design simulation and testing.


Occasional failures associated with similar designs or in design simulation and testing.

.5 per thousand1 in 2,000

Isolated failures associated with similar designs or in design simulation and testing.


Only isolated failures associated with almost identical design or in design simulation and testing.


No observed failures associated with almost identical design or in design simulation and testing.

≤ .001 per thousand 1 in 1,000,000

Failure is eliminated through preventive control.



Rank Likelihood of Detection

No current design control; Cannot detect or is not analyzed. 10 Almost Impossible

9 Very Remote

8 Remote

7 Very Low

6 Low

5 Moderate

4 Moderately High

3 High

2 Very High

1 Almost Certain

Opportunity for Detection

Criteria:Likelihood of Detection by Design Control

No detection opportunity

Not likely to detect at any

stage

Design analysis/detection controls have a weak detection capability; Virtual Analysis (e.g. CAE, FEA, etc.) is not correlated

to expected actual operating conditions.

Post Design Freeze and prior

to launch

Product verification/validation after design freeze and prior to launch with pass/fail testing (Subsystem or system testing with acceptance criteria such as ride handling, shipping evaluation,

etc.)

Product verification/validation after design freeze and prior to launch with test to failure testing (Subsystem or system testing

until failure occurs, testing of system interactions, etc.)

Product verification/validation after design freeze and prior to launch with degradation testing (Subsystem or system testing

after durability test, e.g. function check).

Prior to Design Freeze

Product validation (reliability testing, development or validation tests) prior to design freeze using pass/fail testing (e.g.

acceptance criteria for performance, function checks, etc.)

Product validation (reliability testing, development or validation tests) prior to design freeze using test to failure (e.g. until leaks,

yields, cracks, etc.)

Product validation (reliability testing, development or validation tests) prior to design freeze using degradation testing (e.g. data

trends, before/after values, etc.)

Virtual Analysis - Correlated

Design analysis/detection controls have a strong detection capability. Virtual Analysis (e.g. CAE, FEA, etc.) is highly

correlated with actual or expected operating conditions prior to design freeze.

Detection not applicable;

Failure Prevention

Failure cause or failure mode can not occur because it is fully prevented through design solutions (e.g., proven design standard,

best practice or common material, etc.)



Effect Rank Effect

10

9

8 Major Disruption

7 Significant disruption

6

Moderate disruption

5

Annoyance

4

Moderate disruption

3

2 Minor disruption

No effect No discernible effects. 1 No effect No discernible effect.

CriteriaSeverity of Effect on Product

(Customer Effect)

Criteria: Severity of Effect on Process

(Manufacturing/Assembly Effect)

Failure to Meet Safety and/or

Regulatory Requirements

Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation without warning.

Failure to meet safety and/or regulatory

requirement

May endanger operator (machine or assembly) without warning

Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or involves noncompliance with government regulation with warning.

May endanger operator (machine or assembly) with warning

Loss or Degradation of

Primary Function

Loss of primary function (vehicle inoperable, does not affect safe vehicle operation)

100% of product may have to be scrapped. Line shutdown or stop ship.

Degradation of primary function (vehicle operable, but at reduced level of performance)

A portion of the production run may have to be scrapped. Deviation from primary process including

decreased line speed or added manpower.

Loss or Degradation of

Secondary Function

Loss of secondary function (vehicle operable, but comfort/convenience functions inoperable)

100% of product may have to be reworked off line and accepted.

Degradation of secondary function (vehicle operable, but comfort/convenience functions at reduced level of performance)

A portion of the production run may have to be reworked off line and accepted.

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does not conform and noticed by most customers (> 75%).

100% of production run may have to be reworked in station before it is processed.

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does not conform and noticed by many customers (50%).

A portion of the production run may have to be reworked in-station before it is processed.

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does not conform and noticed by discriminating customers (< 25%).

Slight inconvenience to process, operation, or operator.



Rank

Very High 10

High

9

8

7

Moderate

6

5

4

Low

3

2

Very Low Failure is eliminated through preventive control. 1

Likelihood of Failure

Criteria: Occurrence of Cause - PFMEA(Incidents per items/vehicles)

≥ 100 per thousand≥ 1 in 10

50 per thousand 1 in 20


10 per thousand 1 in 100





≤ .001 per thousand1 in 1,000,000



Rank

10

9 Very Remote

8 Remote

7 Very Low

6 Low

5 Moderate

4 Moderately High

3 High

2 Very High

1 Almost Certain

Opportunity for Detection

Criteria:Likelihood of Detection by Process Control

Likelihood of Detection

No detection opportunity

No current process control; Cannot detect or is not analyzed.

Almost Impossible

Not likely to detect at any stage

Failure Mode and/or Error (Cause) is not easily detected (e.g. random audits)

Problem Detection Post Processing

Failure Mode detection post-processing by operator through visual/tactile/audible means.

Problem Detection at Source

Failure Mode detection in-station by operator through visual/tactile/audible means or post-processing through use of attribute gauging (go/no go, manual torque check/clicker

wrench, etc.)


Failure Mode detection post-processing by operator through use of variable gauging or in-station by operator

through use of attribute gauging (go/no go, manual torque check/clicker wrench, etc.)


Failure Mode or Error (Cause) detection in-station by operator through use of variable gauging or by automated controls in-station that will detect discrepant part and notify operator (light, buzzer, etc.). Gauging performed on setup

and first-piece check (for set-up causes only).


Failure Mode detection post-processing by automated controls that will detect discrepant part and lock part to

prevent further processing.


Failure Mode detection in-station by automated controls that will detect discrepant part and prevent automatically

lock part in station to prevent further processing.

Error Detection and/or Problem

Prevention

Error (Cause) detection in-station by automated controls that will detect error and prevent discrepant part from being

made.

Detection not applicable; Failure

Prevention

Error (Cause) prevention as a result of fixture design, machine design or part design. Discrepant parts cannot be

made because item has been error-proofed by process/product design.



Part Number Gage Name AppraiserPART NUMBERPart Name Gage Number Date PerformedPART NAMECharacteristic Gage Type Upper Limit Lower Limit

ATTRIBUTE DATA# a After entering data, follow the directions on the tab marked1 0.000 'Graph' to create the Gage Performance Curve2 0.0003 0.0004 0.0005 0.0006 0.0007 0.0008 0.0009 0.000

FROM THE GRAPHENTER THE FOLLOWING:

Measurement Unit Analysis Bias Repeatability

B = R == =

t Statistict = 31.3 IBI / R = 2.093

==

Result

ReviewedTitle

GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY REPORTATTRIBUTE METHOD

XT P'a

XT (P=.5) =XT (P=.995) =XT (P=.005) =

t0.025,19



Directions for Gage Performance Curve for Attribute Analytical Method Form

1) Click Tools - Data Analysis - Regression (If Data Analysis is not available load Analysis Tool Pak from the Add-Ins menu)2) In the box for Input Y Range select the cells GR&R ATT(L)!D14:D223) In the box for Input X Range select the cells GR&R ATT(L)!B14:B224) In the box for Output range select the cells below A23:M605) Check Line Fit Plots6) Press OK7) Copy the Line Fit plot graph to the space on the Analytic sheet8) Change the graph title to Gage Performance Curve9) Change the x axis to Xt10) Change the y axis to Probability



Part Number Gage Name Date Performed Appraiser APART NUMBERPart Name Gage Number Gage Type Appraiser BPART NAMECharacteristic Upper Specification Lower Specification Appraiser C

DATA TABLE

PART A-1 A-2 A-3 B-1 B-2 B-3 C-1 C-2 C-3 Reference Code1234567891011121314151617181920212223242526272829303132333435363738394041424344454647484950

GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY REPORTATTRIBUTE RISK METHOD

Reference Value



Part Number Gage Name Date Performed Appraiser APART NUMBERPart Name Gage Number Gage Type Appraiser BPART NAMECharacteristic Upper Specification Lower Specification Appraiser C

GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY REPORTATTRIBUTE RISK METHOD

Risk Analysis

A * B Crosstabulation

BTotal0 1

A

0 Count 0 0 0Expected Count


TotalCount 0 0 0Expected Count

B * C Crosstabulation

CTotal0 1

B




A * C Crosstabulation

CTotal0 1

A




Kappa A B CA -B -C -

DETERMINATIONA x BA x CB x C

Approved for Use Date



GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEETVARIABLE DATA RESULTS

Part Number Gage Name Appraiser APART NUMBERPart Name Gage Number Appraiser BPART NAMECharacteristic Specification Gage Type Appraiser C

Lower UpperCharacteristic Classification Trials Parts Appraisers Date Performed

APPRAISER/ PART AVERAGETRIAL # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1. A 1

2 2

3 3

4 AVE

5 R

6. B 1

7 2

8 3

9 AVE

10 R

11. C 1

12 2

13 3

14 AVE

15 R

16. PART

AVERAGE

17

18

19

beyond this limit. Identify the cause and correct. Repeat these readings using the same appraiser and unit as originally used or

Notes:

xa=

ra=

xb=

rb=

xc=

rc=

X=

Rp=

(ra + rb + rc) / (# OF APPRAISERS) = R=

xDIFF = (Max x - Min x) = xDIFF=

* UCLR = R x D4 = UCLR=

* D4 =3.27 for 2 trials and 2.58 for 3 trials. UCLR represents the limit of individual R's. Circle those that are

discard values and re-average and recompute R and the limiting value from the remaining observations.

F16

MSA recommends 3 trail, 10 part, 3 appraiser analysis when possible




Part Number Gage Name Appraiser APART NUMBERPart Name Gage Number Appraiser BPART NAMECharacteristic Gage Type Appraiser C

Characteristic Classification Trials Parts Appraisers Date Performed

Measurement Unit Analysis % Total Variation (TV) Repeatability - Equipment Variation (EV)

EV = Trials K1 % EV = 100 (EV/TV)

= 2 0.8865 =

= 3 0.5907 =

Reproducibility - Appraiser Variation (AV)

AV = % AV = 100 (AV/TV)

= =

= =

Appraisers 2 3

n = parts r = trials 0.7087 0.5236

Repeatability & Reproducibility (GRR) % GRR = 100 (GRR/TV)

GRR = Parts =

= 2 0.7087 =

= 3 0.5236

Part Variation (PV) 4 0.4464

PV = 5 0.4032 % PV = 100 (PV/TV)

= 6 0.3745 =

= 7 0.3534 =

Total Variation (TV) 8 0.3378

TV = 9 0.3247 ndc = 1.41(PV/GRR)

= 10 0.3145 =

= =

R x K1

{(xDIFF x K2)2 - (EV2/nr)}1/2

K2

{(EV2 + AV2)}1/2 K3

RP x K3

{(GRR2 + PV2)}1/2

For information on the theory and constants used in the form see MSA Reference Manual, Third edition.







1. A 1

2 2

3 3

4 AVE

5 R

6. B 1

7 2

8 3

9 AVE

10 R

11. C 1

12 2

13 3

14 AVE

15 R

16. PART

AVERAGE

17

18

19

beyond this limit. Identify the cause and correct. Repeat these readings using the same appraiser and unit as originally used or

Notes:

xa=

ra=

xb=

rb=

xc=

rc=

X=

Rp=

(ra + rb + rc) / (# OF APPRAISERS) = R=

xDIFF = (Max x - Min x) = xDIFF=

* UCLR = R x D4 = UCLR=

* D4 =3.27 for 2 trials and 2.58 for 3 trials. UCLR represents the limit of individual R's. Circle those that are

discard values and re-average and recompute R and the limiting value from the remaining observations.

F16

MSA recommends 3 trail, 10 part, 3 appraiser analysis when possible




Part Number Gage Name Appraiser APART NUMBERPart Name Gage Number Appraiser BPART NAMECharacteristic Gage Type Appraiser C

Characteristic Classification Trials Parts Appraisers Date Performed

Measurement Unit Analysis % Tolerance (Tol) Repeatability - Equipment Variation (EV)

EV = Trials K1 % EV = 100 (EV/Tol)

= 2 0.8865 =

= 3 0.5907 =

Reproducibility - Appraiser Variation (AV)

AV = % AV = 100 (AV/Tol)

= =

= =

Appraisers 2 3

n = parts r = trials 0.7087 0.5236

Repeatability & Reproducibility (GRR) % GRR = 100 (GRR/Tol)

GRR = Parts =

= 2 0.7087 =

= 3 0.5236

Part Variation (PV) 4 0.4464

PV = 5 0.4032 % PV = 100 (PV/Tol)

= 6 0.3745 =

= 7 0.3534 =

Tolerance (Tol) 8 0.3378

Tol = Upper - Lower / 6 9 0.3247 ndc = 1.41(PV/GRR)

= ( Upper - Lower ) / 6 10 0.3145 =

= =

R x K1

{(xDIFF x K2)2 - (EV2/nr)}1/2

K2

{(EV2 + AV2)}1/2 K3

RP x K3

For information on the theory and constants used in the form see MSA Reference Manual, Third edition.





APPRAISER/ PART AVERAGETRIAL # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101. A 12 23 34 AVE5 R6. B 17 28 39 AVE10 R11. C 112 213 314 AVE15 R16. PART AVERAGE

Anova TableSource DF SS MS F SigAppraiserPartsAppraiser-by-PartEquipmentTotal

Anova Report % Total Variation % Contribution

Repeatability (EV)Reproducibility (AV)Appraiser by Part (INT)GRRPart-to-Part (PV)Note:Tolerance = Total variation (TV) =Number of distinct data categories (ndc) =

GAGE REPEATABILITY & REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEETANOVA METHOD

xa=ra=

xb=rb=

xc=rc=X=

Rp=

* Significant at a = 0.05 level

Standard Deviation (s)





GAGE REPEATABILITY & REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEETANOVA METHOD






1. A 1

2 2

3 3

4 AVE

5 R

6. B 1

7 2

8 3

9 AVE

10 R

11. C 1

12 2

13 3

14 AVE

15 R16. PART

AVE ( Xp )

Note: The REFERENCE VALUE can be substituted for PART AVE to generate graphs indication true bias.

GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEETGRAPHICAL ANALYSIS

xa=

ra=

xb=

rb=

xc=

rc=X=

Rp=

C13

Values from GR&R VAR(Tol)






Analysis:

Analysis:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100

2

4

6

8

10

12

Average Chart -"Stacked"

Appraiser AAppraiser BAppraiser CUpper Spec

Part Number

Ave

rage

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100

2

4

6

8

10

12

Range Chart -"Stacked"

Appraiser AAppraiser BAppraiser CRucl

Part Number

Ran

ge






Analysis:

Analysis:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100

2

4

6

8

10

12

Average Chart -"Unstacked"

Appr A Appr B Appr C

Ave

rage

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100.000

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

10.000

12.000

Range Chart -"Unstacked"

Appr A Appr B Appr C

Ave

rage






Analysis:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100

2

4

6

8

10

12

Run Chart

Part

Valu

e






Analysis:

Par

t 1

Par

t 2

Par

t 3

Par

t 4

Par

t 5

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Scatter Plot

Par

t 6

Par

t 7

Par

t 8

Par

t 9

Par

t 10

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Scatter Plot






Analysis:

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100

2

4

6

8

10

12

Whiskers Chart - Appraiser A

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100

2

4

6

8

10

12

Whiskers Chart - Appraiser B

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100

2

4

6

8

10

12

Whiskers Chart - Appraiser C






Analysis:

Par

t 1

Par

t 2

Par

t 3

Par

t 4

Par

t 5

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Error Chart

Par

t 6

Par

t 7

Par

t 8

Par

t 9

Par

t 10

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Error Chart






Analysis:

-1.00

-0.90

-0.80

-0.70

-0.60

-0.50

-0.40

-0.30

-0.20

-0.10 0.0

00.1

00.2

00.3

00.4

00.5

00.6

00.7

00.8

00.9

01.0

00

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

Normalized Histogram - Error

Appr A

-1.00

-0.90

-0.80

-0.70

-0.60

-0.50

-0.40

-0.30

-0.20

-0.10 0.0

00.1

00.2

00.3

00.4

00.5

00.6

00.7

00.8

00.9

01.0

00

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Appr B

-1.00

-0.90

-0.80

-0.70

-0.60

-0.50

-0.40

-0.30

-0.20

-0.10 0.0

00.1

00.2

00.3

00.4

00.5

00.6

00.7

00.8

00.9

01.0

00

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1


Appr C






Analysis:

0 2 4 6 8 10 120

2

4

6

8

10

12

XY Plot of Averages by Size

Appr AAppr BAppr C






0 2 4 6 8 10 120

2

4

6

8

10

12

Comparison XY Plot

Appr A

App

r B

0 2 4 6 8 10 120

2

4

6

8

10

12

Comparison XY Plot

Appr A

App

r C






Analysis:

0 2 4 6 8 10 120

2

4

6

8

10

12

Comparison XY Plot

Appr B

App

r C



PART NO. CHART NO.MEASUREMENT EVALUATION PART NUMBER

PART NAME (Product) OPERATION (Process) SPECIFICATION LIMITSPART NAMEAPPRAISER A APPRAISER B APPRAISER C MACHINE GAGE UNIT OF MEASURE ZERO EQUALS

UCL = LCL = AVERAGES (X BAR CHART)

UCL = LCL = RANGES (R CHART)

X BAR & RVARIABLES CONTROL CHART

VARIABLES CONTROL CHART ( x & R )

x =

r =

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 300

2

4

6

8

10

12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 300

2

4

6

8

10

12







APPRAISER A APPRAISER B APPRAISER C

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

R 1

2

3

4

S 5

SUM

x

R

** = POINT OUT OF CONTROL

PART NUMBER

EAD ING

SUM NUM

HIGH- LOW







Computations for the Control Chart Method of Evaluating a Measurement Process

REPLICATION ERROR: r2 1.126

Number of replications = Subgroup Size = r = 3 1.6934 2.0595 2.326

CALCULATION FOR APPRAISER EFFECT: Appraiser Averages

0 Appraiser Average2 1.410 A3 1.906 Number of Samples = n = 0 B

C0.00

CALCULATIONS FOR MEASUREMENT ERROR STANDARD DEVIATION:

=

CALCULATIONS FOR SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO: Sample Averages

0.00 Sample Average2 1.410 13 1.906 Estimate Sample to Sample Standard Deviation: 24 2.237 35 2.477 = 46 2.669 57 2.827 Signal to Noise Ratio: 68 2.961 79 3.076 8

10 3.178 910

Thus the number of distinct categories that can be reliably distinguished by these measurements is:

ndc =

This is the number of non-overlapping 97% confidence intervals that will span the range of product variation. (A 97% confidenceinterval centered on a single measurement would contain the actual product value that is represented by that measurement 97%of the time.)

Average Subgroup Range = r = d2

Estimate Replication Standard Deviation r / d2 = se =

no d2* Number of Appraisers = nA =

Range of Appraiser Averages = RA =

Appraiser Effect = RA / d2* = sA =

sm SQRT ( se + sA )

no d2* Range for these Sample Averages = Rp =

sp Rp / d2* =

sp / sm =

1.41 x sp / sm =



GAGE R STUDY PART NO. CHART NO.MEASUREMENT EVALUATION PART NUMBER

PART NAME (Product) OPERATION (Process) ZERO EQUALSPART NAMEAPPRAISER MACHINE GAGE UNIT OF MEASURE UPPER SPECIFICATION LOWER SPECIFICATION

AVERAGES (X BAR CHART)UCL = LCL =

RANGES (R CHART)UCL = LCL =

READING 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

VALUE

R n/a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

** = POINT OUT OF CONTROL

GAGE R ANALYSIS

Data in control? % Repeatability =

This method CANNOT be used for final gage acceptance without other complete and detailed MSA methods.

GAGE STUDY - X BAR & R

x =

r =

HIGH- LOW

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100

2

4

6

8

10

12

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 100

0.10.20.30.40.50.60.70.80.9

1