recherche

ANPQP v 3.1
ANPQP - 8D CONCERN & COUNTERMEASURE REPORT SUMMARY

Supplier Name Supplier Code: Nissan Impt A Impt B Impt C OBD Doc. Ref. No./Ver.
Safety
Doc Rev. Date:
Supplier Plant Name: Regulation Renault 1 2 Doc. Origin Date:
Completed by : E-mail:
Job title : Tel. No: Date :
Part Name: Authorized by :
Part No. & Issue Level: Job title :
Design Note No. / DEVO: Date:

1. Concern Details
Description (include photograph or sketch): Report No.
Rank

Incident Date & Time

Model
Quantity Affected
Affected Lot No's.
Recurrence Y N

2. Similar Part Consideration

Can the concern appear on other parts?
Consider: Yes No Comment / Result
- Other models
- Generic parts
- Other colours
- Opposite hand
- Front / Rear
- Other (please state):

3. Initial Analysis
Where should the non-conforming parts have been detected Yes No Reason for non-detection
- During process / manufacture?
- After manufacture (e.g. Final Inspection)
- Prior to dispatch
- Other (please state):

4. Temporary Countermeasures - Immediate Action

What actions have been taken to prevent the delivery of reject parts to Renault / Nissan Plants?
Consider: Actions Taken Qty. OK Qty. NG % Effective
- Work in progress
- Stores stock
- Warehouse stock
- Service parts
- Other (please state):
Temporary Countermeasure Details:
Delivery Date for 1st OK parts after temporary countermeasure

Delivery Reference for 1st OK parts after temporary

countermeasure

How are OK parts identified?

5. Final Analysis
5 WHY Analysis to identify root cause *Consider: Man, Material, Machine, Method, Who, Where When Why, How, Process settings, Rework, Maintenance etc. Attach extra detail sheets where necessary
Why was the non conformity made?
Why was the non conformity not
1 2
detected?
Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Mandatory Mandatory
Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Mandatory Mandatory
Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Mandatory Mandatory
Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Mandatory Mandatory
Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Mandatory Mandatory

Root Cause:
Responsibility Responsibility Responsibility Responsibility Responsibility

Mandatory Mandatory
Department Department Department Department Department

4M Factors 4M Factors 4M Factors 4M Factors 4M Factors

Machine OCC_Mat03. Rang1: Man OCC_Man03. Poka Yoke
Gestion de non vérifié.
modification/validation
insuffisante

6. Permanent Countermeasures
What actions have been taken to prevent the manufacture of reject parts in the future? *Consider: Error proofing, Testing, Process Control etc.
Actions Responsibility Department Timing

7. Countermeasure Confirmation
Have the countermeasures implemented been confirmed as effective?
Countermeasure Action Confirmation method

8. Follow-up Actions (Lessons Learned / Recurrence Prevention Activities)

Review the following documentation and update as a result of this concern. *Please attach relevant data, e.g. Dimensional Report, Capability study, Attribute data, Fault tree analysis etc.
Consider: Updated? (Y/N) Details Responsibility Department Timing
- DFMEA
- Drawing / CAD data
- Design / Development / QA Standards
- Special Characteristics & Key Features Diagram
- PFMEA
- Process Flow Chart
- Control Plan / Chart
- In house Work / Inspection Instructions
- Gauges / MSA
- Sub-supplier Follow-up
Have the countermeasures taken been horizontally deployed to similar parts, processes and other plants?
Countermeasure Action Deployment? (Y/N) Details

Copyright (C) Renault/NISSAN All Rights Reserved

ANPQP - 8D CONCERN & COUNTERMEASURE REPORT SUMMARY

Supplier Name Supplier Code: Doc. Ref. No./Ver.FM/CAPA/01

Safety Nissan Impt A Impt B Impt C OBD ✘
Moonlight tools Pvt. Ltd. Doc Rev. Date: 0
Supplier Plant Name: Regulation Renault 1 2 Doc. Origin Date: 01.09.2019
Completed by : Badal Kumar E-mail: qc@moonlighttools.com
Job title : Tel. No: Date : 12.03.2024
Manager,QA
Part Name: WRENCH WHEEL NUT 17 MM Authorized by : Jetesh Sharma
Part No. & Issue Level: 995454EA0A Job title : HOD
Design Note No. / DEVO: Date: 12.03.2024

1. Concern Details
Description (include photograph or sketch): Report No.
Problem :- Double Punch issue in Wrench Wheel Nut 17 mm Part. Rank

07.03.2024
Incident Date & Time

Model BNA
Quantity Affected 01 Pcs
Affected Lot No's. RZ4MW78

17mm Double Punch Issue OK Part Recurrence

2. Similar Part Consideration

Can the concern appear on other parts?
Consider: Yes No Comment / Result
- Other models Yes Same Action Implement in Other Model also WW 21mm.
- Generic parts No
- Other colours No
- Opposite hand No
- Front / Rear No
- Other (please state): No

3. Initial Analysis
Where should the non-conforming parts have been detected? Yes No Reason for non-detection
- During process / manufacture? √ Checking Frequency In FOA / 2 Pcs Per 2 Hrs / LOI By QCI at during inprocess Inspection
- After manufacture (e.g. Final Inspection) √ Sampling Inspection at Final Inspection.
- Prior to dispatch √ Sampling inspection at PDI stage.
- Other (please state):

4. Temporary Countermeasures - Immediate Action

What actions have been taken to prevent the delivery of reject parts to Renault / Nissan Plants?
Consider: Actions Taken Qty. OK Qty. NG % Effective
- Work in progress 1. 100% verification of parts lying in WIP. 340 0 0.0%
1.100% Visual Inspection to be done for Double Punch Issue.
- Stores stock ( Packing Area ) 200 0 0.0%
2. Green Dot marking done on part after 100% Visual inspection.
- Warehouse stock Nill
- Service parts
- Other (please state):
Temporary Countermeasure Details:
1.100% Visual Inspection to be done for Double Punch Issue. Cut off invoice no will be
Delivery Date for 1st OK parts after temporary countermeasure
2. Green Dot marking done on part after 100%Visual inspection. shared
3. Refer attached identification marking pics.
Green Dot marking done on
parts near Punch after
Delivery Reference for 1st OK parts after temporary countermeasure
100%
Visual inspection.

Cut off invoice no will be

How are OK parts identified?
Green Dot marking in Specific area as shared
evidence

5. Final Analysis

5 WHY Analysis to identify root cause *Consider: Man, Material, Machine, Method, Who, Where When Why, How, Process settings, Rework, Maintenance etc. Attach extra detail sheets where necessary

1 Why was the non conformity made? 2 Why was the non conformity not detected?
Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

WW 17 mm double stamp issue WW 17 mm double stamp issue

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Part was made during Stamping

Part was not detected at PDI Stage.
Process.
Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Stamp Depth was set during Operator was not able to Judge properly
Process. due to excess powder near Stamp.
Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Set-up part was mixed with OK Un-availability of Limit Sample

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Why?

Set-Part Rule was not adequate

Root Cause:
Responsibility Responsibility Responsibility Responsibility Responsibility

Set-Part Rule was not Navneet San Set - up part handling Rule Navneet San 100% Inspection started at Maninder San 100% Inspection Shantanu San
adequate Department was made. Department Department Final Stage. Department started at PDI Stage. Department
Q.A Q.A Prod. PDI

5M Factors 5M Factors 5M Factors 5M Factors 5M Factors

6. Permanent Countermeasures
What actions have been taken to prevent the manufacture of reject parts in the future? *Consider: Error proofing, Testing, Process Control etc.

Actions Evidences Responsibility Department Timing

1. Set-up part Handling Rule was made. Jitesh Sharma Q.A 22.03.24

2. OPL cum Training given to concerrn person Badal Kumar Q.A 12.03.24

3. 100% Inspection started at Final Stage. Maninder San Prod. 12.03.24

Set-up Rule Made

4. 100% Inspection started at PDI Stage. Shantanu San PDI 12.03.24

5. Limit Sample Displayed at Station Shantanu San PDI 12.03.24

OPL Cum Training

7. Countermeasure Confirmation
Have the countermeasures implemented been confirmed as effective?
Countermeasure Action Confirmation method
1. Set-up part Handling Rule was made. Rule made & approved by SQM Manager.
2. OPL cum Training given to concerrn person OPL made & displayed at Station.
3. 100% Inspection started at Final & PDI Stage. Inspection started
4. 100% Inspection started at PDI Stage. Inspection started
8. Follow-up Actions (Lessons Learned / Recurrence Prevention Activities)
Review the following documentation and update as a result of this concern. *Please attach relevant data, e.g. Dimensional Report, Capability study, Attribute data, Fault tree analysis etc.
Consider: Updated? (Y/N) Details Responsibility Department Timing
- DFMEA
- Drawing / CAD data
- Design / Development / QA Standards Procedure Set-up Rule made & approved by SQM Manager Jitesh Sharma QA 22.03.24
- Special Characteristics & Key Features Diagram
- PFMEA
- Process Flow Chart
- Control Plan / Chart
- In house Work / Inspection Instructions OPL OPL made & Displayed at Station after awareness. Badal Kumar QA 12.03.24
- Gauges / MSA Limit Sample Limit Sample Displayed at Station Shantanu PDI 12.03.24
- Sub-supplier Follow-up
Fixture Check list updated
Have the countermeasures taken been horizontally deployed to similar parts, processes and other plants?
Countermeasure Action Deployment? (Y/N) Details
Y Will be Implement in WW 21mm or Similar Part

Copyright (C) Renault/NISSAN All Rights Reserved