Apqp Forms

Table of Contents
Appendix Reference Revision

1 APQP Open Issues Appendix_8 4/27/2007
2 APQP Timing Plan Appendix_9 4/27/2007
3 APQP Contact List Appendix_21 6/9/2006
4 AIAG APQP Checklists Appendix_11 11/3/2008
5 Program Review - Paper & Electronic Appendix_6_1 11/21/2008
6 Program Review - Express Appendix_6_1 3/12/2008
7
All Run@Rate Forms (R@R forms not included in the
APQP forms due to size) Appendix_15 2/20/2008
8 Delphi PFMEA Severity Rankings QFP Training Website 9/6/2005
9 Delphi PFMEA Occurrence Rankings QFP Training Website 9/6/2005
10 Delphi PFMEA Detection Rankings QFP Training Website 9/6/2005
Click on the title below and you will be linked to the appropriate
worksheet. To get back to the Table of Contents, use the
worksheet tab keys at the bottom or click on the back key at the
top.
APQP Open I ssues
Supplier/Mfg
Location: Part Number(s):
Supplier Contact: Program(s):
Delphi SQE Contact: Part Name:
Issue
No.
Issue
Origin/Date
Forecast
Completion
Date Progress
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Progress Key:
Issues
Description and/or Sketch
Assigned
Date/Status
Date Action Plan Responsibility
Issue Identified Action Plan Proposed Action Plan Implemented
Issue Resolved
APQP Timing Plan
Supplier Duns: Part Number(s):
Supplier/Mfg Location: (CL) (CL) (CL)
PPAP Date:
Supplier Contact: Description:
Supplier Telephone:
Tool Supplier
AQE/SQE Contact: (If applicable):
AQE/SQE Telephone: MY/Program: SOP Date:
Program Event Start Finish Status
Planned
(mm/dd/yy)
Actual
(mm/dd/yy) Planned Actual
1) Submit Team Feasibility Commitment Form
2) Source Selection by Delphi P.O. Issued
3) Initiate APQP Activity
4) Develop Product Quality Timing Plan
5) Complete Preliminary Process Flow Diagram
6) Complete Preliminary Listing of Special Product and Process Characteristics
7) Design FMEA- Develop or Obtain Copy
8) Design Review
9) Review Specifications:Engineering, Material, Drawing
10) Review Subcontractor APQP Status
11) Complete Facility & Layout
12) Complete Machinery & Equipment , Tooling Design & Build
13) Prototype Builds
14) Gage Reviews- Design, Build, R&R
15) Submit Team Feasibility Commitment Form - Design
16) Review Quality Systems-Procedures and Operator Work Instructions
17) Complete Final Production Process Flow Chart
18) Complete Process FMEA
19) Complete Pre-Launch Control Plan
20) Define Packaging Specifications
21) Complete PPAP Production Run, Capability Studies, Production Control Plan
22) Submit Supplier PPAP
23) Conduct Run @ Rate
24) Complete Early Production Containment Plan
Potential Issues exists (comments must be noted)
Comments
Supplier Quality APQP Project Contact List
Supplier Code Manufacturing Address
Supplier Name
Contacts Name and Title Mailing Address and E-Mail Address Contact Numbers
Sales Contact
Product Engineer
Quality Resident
Program Manager
in Sales Office
Program Manager
in Manufacturing Facility
APQP Contact
Quality Manager
Quality Engineer
1st Shift Contact
2nd Shift Contact
3rd Shift Contact
PRR Response
Responsibility
Delphi Engineering
Delphi Buyer
Delphi SQE
A-1 DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST
Customer or Internal Part No. Revision Level

Person Due
Responsible Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 1
Prepared By:
Have risk priorities been revised when corrective
actions have been completed and verified?
Question
Was the DFMEA prepared using the Chrysler,
Ford and General Motors Potential Failure Mode
and Effects Analysis (FMEA) reference manual,
and applicable customer specific requirements?
Have historical campaign and warranty data been
reviewed?
Have best practices and lessons learned from
similar part DFMEAs been considered?
Does the DFMEA identify Special
Characteristics?
Have pass-through characteristics (glossary) been
identified and reviewed with affected suppliers
for FMEA alignment and appropriate controls in
the supply base?
No N/A Comment/Action Required Yes
Have special characteristics designated by the
customer or organization been reviewed with
affected suppliers to assure FMEA alignment?
Have design characteristics that affect high risk
priority failure modes been identified?
Have appropriate corrective actions been assigned
to high risk priority numbers?
Have appropriate corrective actions been assigned
to high severity numbers?
A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST
Person Due
Responsible Date
1
a
b
c
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 3
Comment/Action Required
Does the design require:
A. General
Are all specified tests, methods, equipment and
acceptance criteria clearly defined and
understood?
Have Special Characteristics been selected?
Has assembly build variation analysis been
considered?
Has Design of Experiments been considered?
Question
- New materials?
- Special tooling?
Yes No N/A
Has a DFMEA been completed?
Has a DFMA (Design for Manufacturability and
Assembly) been completed?
Have service and maintenance issues been
considered?
Has the Design Verification Plan been
considered?
If yes, was it completed by a cross functional
team?
- New technology or process?
Is bill of material complete?
Are Special Characteristics properly
documented?
Is there a plan for prototypes in place?
A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST - CONTINUED
Person Due
Responsible Date
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Revision Date:
Pg. 2 of 3
Are test parameters sufficient to address required
use conditions, i.e., production validation and end
use?
Have parts manufactured at minimum and
maximum specifications been tested as required?
Has customer approval been obtained, e.g., for
testing and documentation, as required?
C. Engineering Performance Specifications
Is the specified in-process performance test
sampling size and/or frequency consistent with
manufacturing volumes?
Will all product testing be done in-house?
If not, is it done by an approved supplier?
Are reference dimensions identified to minimize
inspection layout time?
Are sufficient control points and datum surfaces
identified to design functional gages?
Are tolerances compatible with accepted
manufacturing standards?
Is the customer designated engineering change
management process used to manage engineering
changes?
Have special characteristics been identified?
Question
Can existing and available inspection technology
measure all design requirements?
Yes No N/A
B. Engineering Drawings
A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST - CONTINUED
Person Due
Responsible Date
D. Material Specification
26
27
28
29
a
b
c
31
a
32
a
b
c
d
Revision Date:
Pg. 3 of 3
Prepared By:
- If checked in-house, are competent people
available to assure accurate testing?
- If checked in-house, is test equipment available?
Will outside laboratories be used?
- Does the organization have a process in place to
assure laboratory competency such as accreditation?
NOTE: Competency needs to be assured,
regardless of the organization's relationship with
the laboratory.
Has the organization developed and implemented
a process to control incoming material quality?
Have material characteristics requiring inspection
been identified?
If so,
30
- Will characteristics be checked in-house?
Are special material characteristics identified?
Where the organization is design responsible, are
specified materials, heat treat and surface
treatments compatible with the durability
requirements in the identified environment?
Yes No
Where required, are the material suppliers on the
customer approved list?
N/A Comment/Action Required Question
- Have polymeric parts been identified/marked per
customer requirements?
Have the following material requirements been
considered:
- Handling, including environmental aspects?
- Storage, including environmental aspects?
- Have the materials/substance composition been
reported in accordance with customer requirements
e.g., IMDS?
A-3 NEW EQUIPMENT, TOOLING AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST
Person Due
Responsible Date
1 Does the design require:
a
b
c
d
2
a
b
c
3
a
b
c
4
5
6
Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 2
- New materials?
- Quick change?
- New test equipment (including checking aids)?
Have lists been prepared identifying: (Include all
suppliers)
Have acceptance criteria been agreed upon for:
(Include all suppliers)
- New equipment?
- New tooling?
- New test equipment (including checking aids)?
Will a preliminary capability study be conducted
at the tooling and/or equipment manufacturer?
- Volume fluctuations?
- Mistake proofing?
- New equipment?
- New tooling?
Has test equipment feasibility and accuracy been
established?
Is a preventative maintenance plan complete for
equipment and tooling?
Yes No N/A Question
A-3 NEW EQUIPMENT, TOOLING AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST - CONTINUED
Person Due
Responsible Date
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Revision Date:
Pg. 2 of 2
Prepared By:
Has the measurement equipment been verified
and documented showing qualification for the
required scope of measurement and testing?
Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required
Will capable gages be available to run
preliminary process capability studies at the
equipment supplier's facility?
Will preliminary process capability studies be run
at the processing plant?
Have process characteristics that affect special
product characteristics been identified?
Were special product characteristics used in
determining acceptance criteria?
Are setup instructions for new equipment and
tooling complete and understandable?
Question
Does the manufacturing equipment have
sufficient capacity to handle forecasted
production and service volumes?
Is testing capacity sufficient to provide adequate
testing?
A-4 PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST
Person Due
Responsible Date
1
2
3
4
5
a
b
c
d
6
a
b
c
7
a
b
c
d
e
f
8
Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 4
- Control plan requirements?
- Layout inspection?
- Engineering performance testing?
- Problem reaction and resolution analysis?
Has training been completed for:
Is there a documented training program that:
- Includes all employees?
- Lists whose been trained?
Question
Is customer assistance or approval required for
the development of the control plan?
Is each operation provided with process
instructions that are keyed to the control plan?
Are there sufficient personnel identified to cover:
Has the organization identified who will be the
quality liaison with the customer?
Has the organization identified who will be the
quality liaison with its suppliers?
Has the quality management system been
reviewed and approved per customer specific
requirements?
- Other topics as identified?
- Provides a training schedule?
- Statistical Process Control?
- Capability studies?
- Problem solving?
- Mistake proofing?
- Reaction plans?
A-4 PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST - CONTINUED
Person Due
Responsible Date
9
10
11
12
a
b
c
d
e
13
a
b
c
d
e
14
15
16
a
Revision Date:
Pg. 2 of 4
- Have engineering tests (dimensional, material,
appearance, and performance) been completed and
documented as required in accordance with customer
requirements?
Is there an identified problem solving process that
includes root cause analysis?
Are the latest drawings and specifications
available for the operator, in particular at the
points of the inspection?
Question No N/A Comment/Action Required
Were operator/team leaders involved in
developing standard operator instructions?
Do inspection instructions include:
- Easily understood engineering performance
specifications?
Are standard operator instructions accessible at
each work station?
Do operator instructions include pictures and
diagrams?
Yes
- Accessible?
- Documentation requirements?
- Test frequencies?
- Sample sizes?
- Reaction plans?
- Appropriate, easily understood and legible?
- Available?
Are visual aids:
- Approved?
- Dated and current?
Is there a procedure to implement, maintain, and
establish reaction plans, for issues such as out of
control conditions based on statistical process
control?
Person Due
Responsible Date
17
18
a
b
c
d
19
20
a
b
21
22
23
a
b
c
d
e
24
Revision Date:
Pg. 3 of 4
Are layout inspection equipment and facilities
adequate to provide initial and ongoing layout of
all details and components in accordance with
- Accepted?
- Monitoring and measurement devices?
- Gage instructions?
Is there a documented procedure for controlling
incoming material that may include, for example,
the following items:
Have sample production parts been provided per
- Characteristics to be inspected?
- Frequency of inspection?
- Sample size?
- Designated location for approved product?
- Disposition of nonconforming products?
Question
Have provisions been made to certify and
calibrate gages and test equipment at a defined
frequency that is appropriate?
Are the current forms/logs available for
appropriate personnel to record inspection
results?
Are the following available and placed at the
appropriate points of the operation?
Have initial process capability studies been
conducted per customer requirements?
Have required measurement system capability
studies been:
- Completed?
- Reference samples?
- Inspection logs?
Person Due
Responsible Date
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
Revision Date:
Pg. 4 of 4
Prepared By:
Question
Is there an appropriate lot traceability
procedure?
Are periodic assessments of the quality system
planned and implemented?
Is there a procedure to requalify
repaired/reworked material?
Is there a procedure to identify, segregate, and
control nonconforming products to prevent
shipment?
Are rework/repair procedures available to assure
conforming product?
Has a master sample, if required, been retained as
part of the part approval process?
Has the customer approved the packaging and the
packaging specification?
Are periodic audits of outgoing products planned
and implemented?
A-5 FLOOR PLAN CHECKLIST
Person Due
Responsible Date
1
2
3
4
5
a
b
6
7
a
b
8
9
10
11
12
Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 1
Prepared By:
Are facilities adequate to control movement of
nonconforming incoming material?
- Of adequate size?
- Properly lighted?
- Staging areas?
- Impound areas?
Is material protected from overhead or air
handling systems contamination?
Question
Has sufficient space been allocated for all
equipment?
Are there adequate:
Are inspection points located to prevent shipment
of nonconforming products?
Are there controls for each process to eliminate
contamination or inappropriate mixing of
product?
Have facilities been provided for final product
audit?
Have lean concepts been applied in considering
material flow?
Does the floor plan identify all required process
and inspection points?
Have clearly marked areas for all material, tools,
and equipment at each operation been
considered?
Do inspection areas contain necessary equipment
and record storage?
Are process and inspection areas:
A-6 PROCESS FLOW CHART CHECKLIST

Person Due
Responsible Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 1
Prepared By:
No Comment/Action Required N/A
Are material controls for movement and staging
of product including appropriate identification
properly defined and implemented? The controls
should address incoming supplier product as well
as subcontracted processes?
Has the pull system/optimization been considered
for this process?
Have provisions been made to identify and inspect
reworked product before being used?
In the development of the process flow chart, was
the DFMEA used, if available, to identify specific
characteristics that may be critical?
Is the flow chart keyed to product and process
checks in the control plan and PFMEA?
Does the flow chart describe how the product will
move, i.e., roller conveyor, slide containers, etc.?
Yes Question
Does the floor chart illustrate the entire process
from receiving through shipping, including
outside processes and services?
A-7 PROCESS FMEA CHECKLIST

Person Due
Responsible Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 1
Prepared By:
Have you applied the appropriate controls to
address all of the identified failure modes?
Were severity, detection and occurrence revised
when corrective action was completed?
Do the effects consider the customer in terms of
the subsequent operation, assembly, and product?
Were customer plant problems used as an aid in
developing PFMEA?
Have the causes been described in terms of
something that can be corrected or controlled?
Have provisions been made to control the cause of
the failure mode prior to subsequent or the next
operation?
Have all operations affecting customer
requirements including fit, function, durability,
governmental regulations and safety been
identified and listed sequentially?
Were similar part/process FMEA's considered?
Have historical campaign and warranty data been
reviewed and used in the analysis?
Was the Process FMEA prepared by a cross
functional team? Has the team taken into account
all customer specific requirements, including
FMEA methodologies as shown in the current
edition of FMEA?
Have all operations including subcontracted, or
outsourced processes and services been
considered?
Question Yes No N/A Comment/Action Required
A-8 CONTROL PLAN CHECKLIST

Person Due
Responsible Date
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Revision Date:
Pg. 1 of 1
Prepared By:
Have measurement systems analysis been
completed in accordance with customer
requirements?
Are gages and test equipment available as
required by the control plan?
Are engineering performance testing and
dimensional requirements identified?
Are sample sizes based upon industry standards,
statistical sampling plan tables, or other statistical
process control methods or techniques?
Does the control plan address incoming
(material/components) through
processing/assembly including packaging?
Were DFMEA and PFMEA used to prepare the
control plan?
Are material specifications requiring inspection
identified?
Was the control plan developed according to the
methodology described in Chapter 6 of this APQP
manual?
Have all the controls identified in the PFMEA
been included in the control plan?
Question
Are all special product/process characteristics
included in the control plan?
If required, has the customer approved the
control plan?
Are the gage methodology and compatibility
appropriate to meet customer requirements?
Meeting Plan Checklist
AQE Input
Utilize Program Review Form -or -
Utlize Express Program Review Form
Engineering Input
Buyer Input (from quote)
Supplier Input
Other Potential Supplier Input
Pilot and Prototype requirements and timing.
Key/Critical characteristics for PPAP
PPAP Requirements
R@R Timing and Requirements
Delphi's Customer Specific Requirements
Introduction/Instructions to all Delphi Supplier Websites.
Latest part prints and specifications
Program Timing / Critical Characteristics
Technical Documents including sub-component drawings.
Supplier issues/concerns not associated with Delphi.
Questions/concerns needing to be addressed by Delphi
Supplier Scorecard, be prepared to discuss
Program Timing including tooling, PPAP, R@R
Supplier issues/concerns caused by Delphi Delphi.
Packaging plan
Quoted Tool Capacity
Estimated Annual Volume
Manufacturing Site Organizational chart
Subcontractors/Sub-Tier Mgt
Capability studies on similar parts.
Preliminary Process Flow Diagram (PFD)
Preliminary Control Plan
Preliminary Timing Charts
Preliminary PFMEA
Description of Operator Training program
Tooling / Equipment Plans
Checking Fixture Plan
Prototype Plan
On-Going Product Assurance Testing
Completed Team Feasibility Commitment
Error Proofing/ Poke-Yoke Techniques
Information on the manufacturing facility (Location, Capacity, etc.)
Updated supplier information (Supplier Profile) including contact list.
Program Information such as estimated annual usage, PPAP dates, SOP dates, etc.
Major disruptions, Problem Cases, PPM/Total Defects Reduction Plan
Proof of Delphi required quality certifications or transition plans
(Should be posted in Supplier Profile)
Plan for communication between technical support and manufacturing plant.
Page 19 Last Revised: 8/22/07
DELPHI PROGRAM REVIEW SUMMARY
Date of Review: New Risk Level of Product(s)
Supplier : (Determine upon completion of Program Review)
Supplier Duns: Sub-Tier Supplier **:
Supplier/Mfg Location:
PART NUMBER DESCRIPTION MODEL DELPHI PLATFORM HIGH VOLUME
YEAR START OF SCENARIO
PRODUCTION (Vehicles)
1
2
3
4
5
6
CHECK IF IN ATTENDANCE
DELPHI CONTACTS
TITLE NAME
AQE
SQE
BUYER
PROGRAM MGR
PPAP COORDINATOR
COMPONENT ENGINEER
PRODUCT ENGINEER
RESPONSE TEAM
SUPPLIER CONTACTS
NAME
PRESIDENT
QUALITY MANAGER
KEY CONTACT
PPAP CONTACT
QUALITY CONTACT
RUN@RATE CONTACT
Highlight first column in color to indicate activity requirements.
LEGEND: COMPLETE (Ctrl-g) OPEN WITH RECOVERY PLAN (Ctrl-y) NO PLAN OR PLAN DOES NOT MEET PROGRAM TIMING (Ctrl-r)
A
1
2
3
4
B
1
2
3
4

** List if sub-tier supplier contributes more than 50% of manufacturing, controls a key process or directly affects a key product characteristic. A separate program review
may be required for this supplier. Reference Team Feasibility document on RFQ.
Critical process sub-tiers for heat treating, coating and plating must comply with the AIAG assessment requirements stated in CQ9, 11 and 12. Including qualified auditors
to complete the assessments. See Section K
Progress
Actual
Completion
Date
Forecast
Completion
Date Action Plan Responsibility
Issues
Actual
Completion
Date Responsibility
Forecast
Completion
Date Action Plan Progress
Intended use of product.
End use application of product.
Issues
Product Application
Does the supplier have working knowledge of the
following items?
Latest Prints and Specifications, Traceability
Source restrictions specified by engineering.
Design Review
Identify characteristics that will require controls. (KPC's, KCC's,
CQC's, QCI's) Ideally, a six sigma capability is the goal. Note gaps
between desired and actual, with action plans to close.
Critical dimensions and interfaces of product
KPC's, KCC's, CQC's, QCI's, Pass-Through Characteristic/Feature
Fit & Function, Safety Compliance
Part Packaging Specification
Part Labeling requirements
(SQ can note date that this Delphi
PC&L requirement was reinforced with
the supplier). Supplier
PHONE EMAIL
PHONE EMAIL
Link to AIAG Web Site

Note: Shipping Container Pkg & Labeling requirements (Suppliers must
comply with requirements. Communicate to suppliers that they should contact
their Delphi PC&L rep. if they have questions or need assistance. Information
can also be found on the Delphi
Page 20
C
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
D
1
2
3
E
1
2
F
1
2
3
G
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
H
1.1
1.2
1.3
2
3
4
I
1
2
3
4
5
Progress
Progress
Can your process meet Cpk =/> 1.67?
Responsibility
Measurement System Analysis Guidelines
Add equipment used for Capability Assessment
and MSA requirements Details
Forecast
Completion
Date Action Plan
Actual
Completion
Date
Progress
Progress
Progress
Progress
Progress
Actual
Completion
Date
Actual
Completion
Date
Actual
Completion
Date
Actual
Completion
Date
Actual
Completion
Date
Actual
Completion
Date
Action Plan
Action Plan
Action Plan
Action Plan
Action Plan
Action Plan
Forecast
Completion
Date
Forecast
Completion
Date
Forecast
Completion
Date
Forecast
Completion
Date
Forecast
Completion
Date
Forecast
Completion
Date
Responsibility
Responsibility
Responsibility
Responsibility
Responsibility
Responsibility
Details
Details
Details
Platform
Model Year
Delphi Estimated Annual Volume
Supplier PPAP Due Date
Delphi SOP
Delphi Manufacturing Site
Supplier Quoted Tool Capacity (5 days)
Can your process meet Ppk =/> 1.33? Goal is 2.0
Product Requirements & Timing
Record the following if applicable.
Prototype requirements.
Product Measurement Plan
Have acceptable measurement methods been confirmed and
correlated?
Has Delphi received the suppliers plan for dimensional layout and
measurement of the component? (Should include the measurement
methods, layout, datums, tools, equipment and fixtures (if
applicable))
Has engineering reviewed and approved the supplier plan for
dimensional layout and measurement?
Has the Delphi Receiving Facility, reviewed and approved the
supplier plan for dimensional layout and measurement?
(Applicable for sites with a Receiving Inspection)
Gaging Completion Dates
Capability Assessment Guidelines
List Characteristic(s) to be used in capability study.
Measurement Equipment #2
& Methodology
KPC / QCI (note details in column)
& Methodology
Not applicable: The supplier has received dimensional accreditation
by the using division.
Supplier Tooling Requirements
Develop a program review for the tooling supplier on critical
components.
Supplier Tooling Completion Dates
& Methodology
Tooling Supplier Name (if different)
Supplier Gage Review
Mutual Agreement on gage concept proposal.
Certify Gage to product design record.
& Methodology
& Methodology
Gage Evaluation including Measurement System Analysis (MSA)
Capability Study Parameters
Details
Details
Details
Program Information
List information required below
Pre-Production Requirements
Other Product Requirements
Development and Approval of Gage Design Plan
Page 21
6
J
1
2
3
K
1
2
3
L

1
2
3
4
5
M
1
2
3
4
N

1
2
3
4
5
O
1
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
Link to Run@Rate Plan
(Use attached link or worksheet version provided.)
Actual
Completion
Date Responsibility
Forecast
Completion
Date
Run@Rate Requirements
The link below will take you to the Delphi R@R Plan. Utilize the
R@R Plan for discussions. List potential issues below for tracking
purposes.
Determine if preliminary data from supplier accurately depicts FTQ
results.
Progress
https://delphi.portal.covisint.com/c/document_library/get_file?folderId=114313&name=DLFE-103455.xls
Details Action Plan
Check procedure or methods in place to comprehend FTQ
documentation and improvement.
FTQ Improvement Process Documentation
Review the use of Gate Charts / Step Down Charts / Alarm Charts
(Appendix 31_2 & 57_3)
First Time Quality (FTQ) Improvement Process
Details
FTQ Improvement Process Initiation
Review Delphi's FTQ procedure and training presentations as
required.
Action Plan Responsibility
Forecast
Completion
Date
Actual
Completion
Date Progress
Forecast
Completion
Date
Actual
Completion
Are DFMEA open items addressed on an action plan and
communicated to Delphi's PDT?
Responsibility
Actual
Completion
Date
PPAP Guidelines
The link below will take you to the Delphi SUPPLIER PPAP
SUBMISSION CHECKLIST. Utilize the Checklist for PPAP
discussions. List potential issues below for tracking purposes. Details Responsibility
Forecast
Completion
WEBSITE INFORMATION
Determine the suppliers access and working knowledge of each
Delphi database below. Details Responsibility
Forecast
Completion
Date Action Plan
Actual
Completion
Date Progress
Supplier Profiles (Discuss Red/Yellow/Green status)
Capability to access/update the following:
Supplier Scorecard (Updated copy if current supplier)
Supplier Suggestions Program (SSP/SCR)
Problem Solver
Customer Specific Requirements / Quality Expectations
Run@Rate Plan
Run@Rate Worksheet
Design Responsible Suppliers
List all issues/requirements if the supplier is design responsible. Details
& Methodology
Was a Design Failure Modes & Effects Analysis (DFMEA) initiated by
the supplier?
Has the Delphi PDT reviewed the DFMEA?
Link to SUPPLIER PPAP SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
CHECKLIST
(Use attached link or worksheet version provided.)
Action Plan
Actual
Completion
Date Progress
CQI 9 Heat Treatment assessment is required:
Special Process
For Suppliers and Sub-Suppliers with CQI-9, 11 or 12 requirements,
complete the following: Audit Completion Date Responsibility
Forecast
Completion
Date
CQI 11 Plating assessment is required:
CQI 12 Coating assessment is required:
Page 22
1.6
2
2.1
2.2
Initial electronic PPAP submissions
SSP/SCR required PPAP submissions
Registered to the Delphi Supplier Website
Mainly used for electronic PPAP submissions
Additional Forms & Procedures available on the website
Page 23
The following instructions are intended to help the AQE/SQE in performing the Program Review. Take a moment to review the
Instructions. The intent of the program review is to engage the supplier in conversations about various aspects of the current
program/parts and determine areas of concern that will need further action.
The form is protected/locked so that users can tab through fields. To allow attachments (such as program rosters) and/or
and/or additional information into any open field within the form, the form can be unprotected. The password is "unlock".
This will allow each user to customize the program review to fit their needs while continuing to use a common form and process.
We will start the instructions with definitions and acronyms:
KPC Key Product Characteristics
Most important product features or material properties for meeting customer requirements.
The two kinds of KPCs are 1) safety and compliance, and 2) fit and function. KPCs may be attributes (present or not).
It is required to target variable KPCs at nominal and reduce variation continuously because these characteristics are optimized at the nominal
specification and have a loss function associated with deviating from nominal.
KCC Key Process Control Characteristic
Most important process characteristics that have a direct effect on the KPCs.
Suppliers may designate additional process characteristics as KCCs.
QCI Quality / Customer Interface
A feature or property of a product that is contacted directly by the customer and has an immediate impact on their satisfaction
if not within limits. Or, a characteristic that does not meet the KPC criteria, but is deemed critical to the final product or its manufacturability.
QCC Quality Control Characteristic
Most important process characteristics that have a direct effect on the QCI's. Suppliers may designate additional process characteristics as QCI's.
PPAP Product Part approval process.
Pass-Through Characteristic
Is a characteristic/feature where an anomoly only declares itself under certain conditions such as environmental stimulation and cannot be tested
in Delphi's operations (i.e. soft tie rods, stepper motor with step loss and steering hose with incorrect rubber component.
The first part of the Program Review is an informational list used by Delphi and the Supplier for better communication.
Fill in the following information as thoroughly as possible:
Date of Review
Supplier -include both the facility name and parent name where applicable
Supplier Duns Code -this is in reference to the manufacturing site producing the product.
Supplier/Mfg Location
Part Numbers
PPAP Date
Description
Platform
Model Year
SOP Date
Supplier Contacts: -List key supplier contacts
Key Contact
PPAP Contact
Quality Contact
Run@Rate Contact
Delphi Contacts -List key Delphi contacts
AQE
SQE
Buyer
Program Manager
PPAP Coordinator
Component Engineer
Product Engineer
Response Team
New Risk Level of Product -Once the review has been completed, evaluate the program risk based on your findings.
Sections A through M are used to track the progress of the supplier through various aspects of building a new product. Each section
focuses on a specific area and is as comprehensive as possible.
The formatting for these three colors has been automated. Go to the cell you want to change, then hit the following key:
for red use "Ctrl-r" for yellow use "Ctrl-y" for green us "Ctrl-g" this coding will also show up in black/white copies with patterns for each color.
.
The columns represented in each section are used to promote communication between Delphi and the supplier. It also determines responsibility,
forecasts completion dates, action plans, actual completion dates and progress. Each block is expandable to add information as necessary.
The following gives an explanation of each section:
Section A
Section B Review prints/specs/ QCI/KPC, and pass-through characteristic/feature, packaging and labeling requirements.
Section C Review with supplier so they understand the final product and it's requirements.
Section D # of parts required, type of product (saleable vs non-saleable) to be recorded.
Section E Tooling completion and possible roadblocks should be discussed.
Product Application
The first columns will be used to color code each line item. Green indicates completed, Yellow indicates Open with recovery plan,
Red indicates the suppliers process will not meet Delphi requirements.
Supplier Tooling Requirements
Review how the product will be used at Delphi and the customer, etc.
Product Requirements & Timing
Program Information
Design Review
Section F Evaluate and approve gage designs.
Section G Consider the measurement req't and techniques that will be used for dimensional layout on the component prior to ppap.
Section H Determine based on the print requirements, customer requirements. Detail this section well.
Section I Based on the item listed in section H, detail equipment and methodologies that will be used.
Section J If your supplier is responsible for the design, this section should be discussed.
Section K Special Process Evidence of conformance to required CQI assessment required here.
Section L Hyperlink to Delphi's PPAP checklist
Section M Training and or evidence of conformance is reviewed in this section.
Section N Hyperlink to Delphi's R@R plan
Section O Lists all websites and programs the supplier will need in working with Delphi. Website Information
Run@Rate Requirements
First Time Quality (FTQ) Improvement Process
PPAP Guidelines
Product Measurement Plan
Design Responsible Suppliers
Measurement Systems Analysis Guidelines
Capability Assessment Guidelines
Supplier Gage Review
Section A: Supplier Program Review
Part Number:
Delphi Information (From Roster Database & Request for Sourcing): Family Parent Part No. (if any):
1 Delphi Start Of Production Date Prod. Mfg. Loc.:
2 Year:
3 Annual Usage:
4 Peak Weekly Usage:
5 Type of Build:
6 Parts required Date:
7 Quantity:
8 PML
9 Build when PPAP is required:
10 Supplier PPAP Due Date
11 PPAP Level Required 3
12 Comments
Section B: Supplier Commitments (Supplier complete):
13 Supplier First Parts Promise Date
14 Estimated PPAP package delivery
15 Supplier Quoted 5 Day Capacity
(vs. Peak Usage in question #4)
16 The supplier is responsible to register and use the Delphi Supplier Websites and must be capable to update and access the following:
Supplier Profiles
Supplier Suggestion Program (SSP / SCR)
Problem Solver
Customer Specific Requirements/ Quality Expectations
IMDS system (reportable Chemicals)
17 The Supplier agrees to and understands the following:
"Express" Program Review
Volume
Information
Forecasted
Builds
1. The only authorization to implement Delphi engineering changes (including marked up prints) must be issued by the Delphi Buyer.
2. No change, of any kind, shall be made in material content, processing methods, testing methods, or location of manufacture without the
prior written approval of Delphi Corporation.
Agreed by:
Date
18 Supplier Comments/ Concerns:
Section C: Run @ Rate :
19 Is Part Commodity Exempt? Y/N Letter Location:
20 Exemption Calc. (highest # 15 / # 4) (if less than 40%, may exempt Run @ Rate)
21 Approving Supplier Quality Manager Date:
22 Comments:
"Express" Program Review
For Semiconductors Run at Rate is exempt. To ensure commitments are met a CAPACITY STUDY is required.
Authorized representative
SPDP Express Form
Instructions
PRINT IN PORTRAIT MODE
l
SPDP Express forms should be filled in, transmitted, and stored electronically. For E&S - They
should be stored in T:\PURCHASING\SUPL_DEV\AQE\RISK
ASSESSMENTS\EXPRESS\"COMMODITY"\"SUPPLIER NAME"\"PART #"
Please use the part number as the first part of the filename and put a zero in front of 9 million part
numbers (to achieve 8 digits and proper sort order by Windows Explorer).
l
The tab key can be used to move to the next available field in the form to enter data. Similarly,
shift_tab will move to the previous available field.
For filling in the SPDP Express form:
l
Section A: Volume Information and Scheduled Builds (lines 1 to 10) should be filled in by the
Product Engineer or the Program Team Leader. Line 11 will be filled in by the AQE Analyst.
l
Section B should be filled in by the Supplier (lines 13 to 18). Enter the Supplier Name in the
appropriate cell and enter the name and date of the authorized Supplier Representative who is filling
in the form.
l
Section C should be filled in by the AQE. If the part commodity is exempt (see Express form for
criteria), it should be listed in the Commodity Exemption letter signed by the Supplier Quality
Manager. This is expected to be one letter listing all exempted commodities and stored in one
location for reference by all of Supplier Quality.
DELPHI Supplier Quality FMEA SEVERITY RANKINGS

Note #1: Any Failure Mode affecting the Vehicle Assembly Plant MUST be ranked an 8 or higher.
Note #2: Any Failure Mode affecting a Delphi Plant MUST be ranked 5 or higher.

Select from the categories below, using the highest applicable ranking.

Ranking Effect End Customer Vehicle Assembly Plant Delphi Plant Supplier Plant
10 Hazardous-
without warning
Potential failure mode affects
safe vehicle operation and/or
involves noncompliance with
government regulation without
warning.
Potential failure mode may
cause unsafe condition for
plant personnel without
warning.
warning.
warning.
9 Hazardous-with
warning
Potential failure mode affects
safe vehicle operation and/or
involves noncompliance with
government regulation with
warning.
plant personnel with warning.
8 Very High Vehicle/item inoperable (loss
of primary function); failure
mode may cause customer
walk home, field return, or
durability issue.
cause a spill/major disruption,
repair, assembly difficulty,
rework, or sorting at the
Vehicle Assembly Plant
cause a spill/major disruption
at a Delphi Plant.

7 High Vehicle/item operable but at a
reduced level of performance.
Customer very dissatisfied.
Failure mode may cause
vehicle repairs at Dealer.
Includes Noise issues
(squeak/rattle).

See Note #1
cause repair, assembly
difficulty, rework, sorting at a
Delphi plant.

6 Moderate Vehicle/item operable but
comfort/convenience item(s))
inoperable/not performing to
customer expectation (e.g..
Noise)

See Note #1
cause special handling of
components at Delphi-S.

5 Low Vehicle/item operable but
comfort/convenience item(s)
operable at a reduced level of
performance.

See Note #1
cause inconvenience to Delphi
prior to assembly.

4 Very Low Fit and finish item does not
conform. Defect noticed by
most customers.

See Note #1
See Note #2
3 Minor Fit and finish item does not
average customers.

See Note #1
See Note #2
2 Very Minor Fit and finish item does not
discriminating customers.

See Note #1
See Note #2
1 None No effect. See Note #1 See Note #2

Probability Likely Failure Rates Ppk Ranking
Very High: Persistent Failures

100 per thousand pieces


< 0.55

> 0.55

10

9

High: Frequent Failures



> 0.78

> 0.86

8

7

Moderate: Occasional
Failures



> 0.94

>1.00

>1.10
6

5

4
Low: Relatively Few Failures

0.5 per thousand pieces

0.1 per thousand pieces

>1.20

> 1.30

3

2
Remote: Failure is unlikely

< 0.001 per thousand pieces *

> 1.67

1

Note: Identical to Manual except for Ranking of 1. Manual allows for .01 per thousand (10 PPM)
DELPHI Supplier Quality FMEA OCCURRENCE EVALUATION RANKINGS
Sample calculation to determine Ppk value from a likely failure rate of 5 per thousand pieces (see FMEA third Appendix I) .
Ranking

Effect PFMEA
10

Absolute Uncertainty

Cannot detect or is not checked.

9

Very Remote

Control is achieved with indirect or random checks only.

8

Remote

Control is achieved with visual inspection only.

7

Very Low

Control is achieved with double visual inspection only.

6

Low

Control is achieved with charting methods, such as SPC
(Statistical Process Control) OR gauging performed on setup
and first-piece check. *
5

Moderate

Control is based on variable or attribute gauging performed
100% of the parts after parts have left the station.

4 Moderately High Error detection in subsequent operation. *
3

High

Error detection in-station, or error detection in subsequent
operations by multiple layers of acceptance: supply, select,
install, verify. Cannot accept discrepant part.

2

Very High

Error detection in-station (automatic gauging with automatic
stop feature). Cannot pass discrepant part.

1

Almost Certain

Discrepant parts cannot be made because item has been
error-proofed by process/product design.

* Note: Identical to Manual except for Rankings of 6 and 4. Words OR gauging performed on setup and first piece
check moved from a detection of 4 to a detection of 6
DELPHI Supplier Quality FMEA Detection Rankings

Apqp Forms

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Apqp Forms

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Table of Contents

Appendix Reference Revision

Você também pode gostar