“PPAP in Aerospace”, by P. Teti, ASQ Hartford Monthly Meeting, April 12, 2012 PPAP IN AEROSPACE Components, Challenges & Enablers Hartford ASQ Monthly Meeting Presented by: Peter E. Teti Thursday, April 12, 2012 This document contains no technical data.
57
Embed
PPAP IN AEROSPACE - ASQ Hartford...Similar to a PPAP package. In general this is the aerospace equivalent of the automotive PPAP, Production Part Approval Process. PPAP requires larger
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
“PPAP in Aerospace”, by P. Teti, ASQ Hartford Monthly Meeting, April 12, 2012
PPAP IN AEROSPACE Components, Challenges & Enablers
Hartford ASQ Monthly Meeting
Presented by: Peter E. Teti
Thursday, April 12, 2012
This document contains no technical data.
PRODUCTION PART APPROVAL PROCESS Presenter summary
Technical Fellow – Product Quality
27 years at HS and PW
Authored many quality & training documents
Developed many supplier quality key processes
Adjunct Professor at CCSU and NGS last 13 years
CQE instructor for ASQ Hartford over last 15 years
What is PPAP?
Why are UTC Aerospace units implementing PPAP? Why
now?
What are the components (key elements) of UTC Aerospace
PPAP?
Producer expectations
How will PPAP be implemented?
Key challenges
Key enablers
KEY TAKE-AWAYS
3
“PPAP in Aerospace”, by P. Teti, ASQ Hartford Monthly Meeting, April 12, 2012
What’s PPAP?
4
PPAP is a protocol used to establish confidence in component suppliers
and their production processes, by proving that:
"....all UTC Aerospace business unit’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 PPAP A Definition (Reference AIAG PPAP Manual)
5
HISTORY OF PPAP Roots in Automotive
In 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
HISTORY OF AEROSPACE & DEFENSE Product & Process Integrity Progression
7
1990’s
FAR 9.308
Early 2000’s
AS9100/AS9102
Mid-2000’s
Characteristic
Accountability
& Verification
2010’s
PPAP
SOURCE: Renaissance Services
“Do First Article
Inspection”
First true industry
Standard – driven
by commercial
Characteristic
accountability
Disciplined
approach
Widely adopted
across industry
today
Characteristic-
level data flow
and verification
Emphasis on
complete
technical data
package
National
Aerospace
Standard 3500
Based on automotive
industry approach
Gaining momentum,
but mostly at talking
stage
Challenge to apply in
Aerospace & Defense
job shop environment
“PPAP in Aerospace”, by P. Teti, ASQ Hartford Monthly Meeting, April 12, 2012
Why PPAP?
8
PPAP AT UNITED TECHNOLOGIES Why is UTC Aerospace adopting PPAP?
COMPONENT RELIABILITY BATHTUB CURVE
Fail
ure
Ra
te
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
9
Special Cause Common Cause
“PPAP in Aerospace”, by P. Teti, ASQ Hartford Monthly Meeting, April 12, 2012 10
"We made too many changes at the same time -- new technology,
new design tools and a change in the supply chain -- and thus
outran our ability to manage it effectively for a period of time."
WHY PPAP IN AEROSPACE?
Boeing 787 – Major causes of multi-year delay
SOURCE: AOL Daily Finance article entitled “Boeing's Dreamliner Delays: Outsourcing Goes Too Far”, by Peter Cohan, 1/21/2011
New technology
New materials
Underestimating the
global supply chain - Lack of robust designs
- Lack of robust mfg. processes
- Lack of familiarity with component integration
Boeing executive quote to Reuters
“PPAP in Aerospace”, by P. Teti, ASQ Hartford Monthly Meeting, April 12, 2012 11
WHY PPAP IN AEROSPACE?
Airbus 380 – Major causes of multi-year delay SOURCE: Wikapedia
System complexity
Rewiring due to mis-matched
design software between
Toulouse and Hamburg
Complex supply chain - Lack of robust method to ensure production readiness
- Lack of familiarity with component integration
- Suppliers not able to deliver components on time
Controls • Focuses on ability to prevent high RPN failure modes.
• Required for all suppliers.
• Assures compliance to UTCQR-09.1 and ASQR-20.1.
• Focuses on Operator instructions created for each specific process step.
• Required for all suppliers.
• Looks at clarity, user-friendliness.
• Look at linkage to Control Plan and PW requirements.
Work
Instructions
• Focuses on how specific process steps will be controlled.
• Required of all suppliers .
• Defines Key Process Inputs, Control Methods, Gage Capability , SPC chart and
reaction plan.
• Look at linkage to PFMEA.
Control
Plans
ASQR-09.2 requires Suppliers to demonstrate this chain reaction
PPAP CHECKLIST
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 767821-1
Engineering Change
Level A Reason for Submission New ProgramExpected PPAP
Submission Date 15-Nov-11 Production Start Date 12/15/2011
Element PPAP Submission ItemsRequired
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's
Response
UTC Reviewer's
Response
R/Y/G Status
(based on UTC
Response)
Comment and/or
Recovery Plan Action Item
1) Does producer have access to applicable UTC division
drawings & specifications?
Drawings and
specifications
Yes Yes Completed Completed
2) Is 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) Is producer working to correct drawing revision? Applicable drawings Yes Partial Completion Partial Completion Supplier working to development drawing. Note above.
4) Is 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
Released Production
Drawings1
(NOTE: To be used in tandem with UPPAP Submission Form 1, ASQR-09.2)
PPAP SUPPLIER EVIDENCE PACKAGE Allow suppliers to understand exactly what needs to be completed and
submitted for each of the 19 PPAP elements per ASQR-09.2
Process o r Part N o : M OS / A FS
R ev. Level:Planning g roup: Orig inat o r: ISSU E D A TE:
Key Product
Characteristic
KPCD / KPCM / KPCA KEY PROCESS OUTPUT OPER. NUM .SEQ.
NUM BER
CONT.
CHART
TYPE
SAM P.
SIZE
SAM P.
FREQ.
BASELINE
CP
BASELINE
CPKTYPE OF GAUGE CAPABILITY (%)
PROCESS
PARAM ETER
SETTING
CONTROL M ETHOD REACTION PLAN
Pro-Cert analyst
approval:
DATE
:
KEY PROCESS PARAM ETERS
KEY PROCESS OUTPUT
KEY CHARACTERISTIC CONTROL PLAN
KEY PROCESS INPUT
Eng ine M odel:
REVISION LETTER:
MEASURING SYSTEM
Index
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 Sheets
Tooling
Gaging
Equipment & TPM
Control of Key Product Characteristics
(KPCs)
Control of Sub-tier Suppliers
Capacity Planning
Control of Foreign Object Debris (FOD)
Company Private 41
UTC AEROSPACE PPAP TOOL KIT
UTC Aerospace has created a “PPAP Kit” for use by internal plant sites and
suppliers
Contains all the forms required for submission
Includes instruction on the use of the forms
Fully compliant to ASQR-09.2, UTC PPAP specification
The UTC PPAP Tool Kit contains everything required for submission and is
available on the UTC Suppliers/Partners Portal at www.utc.com
Process Readiness
Study Assessment
PPAP 301
Training Package ASQR-09.2
PPAP Procedure Form Number: QC-0990.26
Revision: Initial Release
Date: 6/22/2011
Element UPPAP Element Criteria
Status
(N/A, Not
Started, In-
Process,
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.
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) Is there evidence that the producer flows down the latest
demand schedule to subtier suppliers and is updating subtier