Divisions

Transportation Decorated Products Plating & Enameling Southern Operations

Sidney - Dan Lombardo Sidney - Darryl Leatherman PC 1 (Lima) - Regina Evans Cullman - Phillip Bess
PC 2 (Lima) - Linda Cummings PC 3 (Wapak) - Joanna Neu
PC 4 (Wapak) - Jack Madden PC 5 (Lima) - TBD
OCP - Inks (Wapak) - TBD Erie - Mark Euliano

Q's to be addressed:

Plant level vs. Division level (e.g. Mgmt Review)

Revision: 2004-10-18 Slide 1

 Project Failure Modes
Anecdotal Complaints - Failure modes identified during manufacturing

Capacity
Realistic Dates Quote Failure Modes.
Safety and Environmental 'Up Front'
Packaging - Not available
Release drawing - Not available
Purchase order - Not available

Other situation specific issues

Issue of transfer tooling and related material(s).

Customer

Account Manager Tooling Cost Account Manager

Kathy Beck (Sales)
(Sales) Engineer Analyst

Visa Quote Visa Quote Visa Quote Visa Quote

NOTE: Current Sidney 'system'. In Sidney, the 'APQP Minutes' tracking sheet is
started when the contract is accepted as I understand it.

Revision: 2004-10-18 Slide 2

 Contract Review Proposal
Where a Customer HAS to have a FAST
quote, a ROM (budgetary) quote should be
issued with the limitations clearly defined. Request for Quote

ROM
(Rough Order Yes
of Magnitude)
Quick?

Send
Customer 'Standard' Quote
'Qualified' Process
ROM Quote

Quote Review
(Independent)
Temporary 'Training Wheels'
to gage the process.
Send
Customer
Quote

Revision: 2004-10-18 Slide 3

 Current Contract Review 'Points'

Key considerations * NOTE: #4 Product Reliability Studies is open for discussion as to extent and detail.
This will typically be derived from previous 'similar' jobs. However, as is evident with
the plant 4 situation with respect to the door jam plates, previous 'similar' jobs often
are not 'exactly' like 'similar' jobs.

Revision: 2004-10-18 Slide 4

 APQP System Skeleton
New Product or Engineering Change
Copy Sheet
Name file appropriately
Corporate defines minimum
requirements for each plant.
Fill in as appropriate
Use as tracking sheet
Excel Spreadsheet
File with PPAP file

Minimum Required 'Gates' will be in this tracking sheet.

Stages / Events Defines Minimum Stages / Events for each facility to address.
Project manager maintains and acquires required signoffs.
MASTER Sheet
Each plant
has process
specific
Department /
aspects which
Function Specific
To Project must be
Requirements
Tracking Sheet considered.
Documents
Form MFG 100-07 Feed from APQP - Phil Bess
(Functioning) Internal Ct0230-01g Cullman
Departments

APQP Minutes Feed from

Internal
VisiQuote Sidney APQP - Kathy Beck
(Functioning)
Departments

APQP Checklist Feed from

Ct0230-01
Lima
Internal APQP - Kathy Simpson (PC 4)
(Draft)
Departments
Wapak

Erie

Revision: 2004-10-18 Slide 5

 Step 1 - Procedure Development
Distribute to each
facility for review. Marked up MASTER
Cullman RESPONSIBILITIES KEY:
Minimum Stages / Minimum Stages / C = Coordination
Events Master Events Master
Stolle R = Primary Responsibility
Sheet Sheet
A = Assistance
Superior I = Input (Information)

Feedback - Second Review / Approval Review

• The Draft 'Organizational APQP Responsibilities and Interfaces' MASTER sheet is a number of steps
however it may or may not directly include all sub-processes of each facility. The intent is to come up with a
generic 'Everyone must do these minimums' listing.
• Each facility will review the DRAFT and insert:
1. The appropriate 'KEY' items in the left most columns. As reference of 'typical' responsibilities, please reference
APQP_Matrix.xls
2. The plant level document which you use to control each aspect in the right most columns.
• Note that the header, as with the body, is temporary with suggested entries. The header can be 'tuned', as
can the body, in response to feedback from the reviews.
• As you go through this list, you should ask yourself "What document do we use internally to address this
requirement?" If you do not have an internal document, how do you now ensure the list item is addressed?
Focus on Records which prove the step was addressed (TS 16949 Output requirements).
• Sequence
1. The sequencing in the sheet is approximate. Obviously some of the line items will be occurring simultaneously. This is a first
DRAFT so I expect sequence related feedback.
• Content
1. Because of differences in products and processes at each facility, the MASTER is not intended to address every aspect. For
example, Stolle no longer has anodize, while Cullman does, thus Cullman will have requirements which are not currently on
this list.
2. It may be that there is something on the MASTER which is not applicable to your facility. In that case, Put NA in the 'Applicable
Procedure / Form' box.

Revision: 2004-10-18 Slide 6

 'Gates' and Critical Aspects
• There are currently only 2 critical 'Gates' defined in the MASTER.
• The first is after Contract Review. We can call everything up to Contract Review Phase 1.
1. This is the most critical gate. During Contract Review, the intent is to ensure that all disciplines agree
that the contract is both desirable and doable. This is a 'verification' process - It is 'Best Guess' with the
knowledge at hand with the understanding that an agreement by an individual assumes they have done
an necessary research and, where appropriate, applicable calculations.
2. Once the contract is agreed to, investment of time and money begins.
• The second gate is after what we can as of now define as Phase 2.
1. We have accepted the contract and are now starting to invest time and money. During this phase,
starting out with timing documents, the requirements are followed through. During this phase many of
MASTER line items will be occurring simultaneously and any one of which is subject to an error in
Contract Review 'assumptions'. If an individual did not 'do their homework' a costly failure may show up
here - Which should emphasize the importance of a strong Contract Review process.
• Critical Aspects
• Within Phase 2 there are Critical Aspects. Technically they are not gates, however their effect on any
given program can be catastrophic. Typically this is where an assumption is made in Phase 1 but is
found to be incorrect in Phase 2.
• We want to come up with a short list of critical aspects - line items after contract review, but before
PPAP, which could significantly impact a program. These should be determined in part by consideration
of currently identified failure modes from historical data.

Revision: 2004-10-18 Slide 7

 Initial Distinctions
Distinctions were discussed with respect to the following 'categories'. Whilst we can set
'standard' corporate definitions, the path followed with respect to APQP by each facility will
be somewhat different. Typically each of these is a subset of the total potential APQP
requirements. That is to say New Sales, Existing Customer, Similar Part Type will require a
subset of what New Sales - New Customer, New Part/Process requires.

New Sales - New Customer, New Part/Process Type

New Sales - New Customer, Similar Part/Process Type
New Sales - Existing Customer, New Part/Process Type
New Sales - Existing Customer, Similar Part/Process Type

Existing Sales - Contract Change

Existing Sales - Engineering Change
Existing Sales - Quantity Change

Part Numbers
Vs.
Programs

Revision: 2004-10-18 Slide 8

 Example APQP Team
= T T T T F
- - - R -
F F F
- - - I 0
(Timing Templates )
X
Ele me nt
Business Plan / Marketing Strategy
R 1 Contract Review - Initial Feasibility Review
- R - - - - - - I 2 Initial Layout (Prior to Formal Kick-off))

Internal (Company)
- A - R - - - A 3 Market Research Information
C R I I I I I I I 4 X X Confirm All Customer Requirements
(Including Engineering Research Data)
- R - - - - - - - X Design Analysis

Coordination and
5
- R - - - - - - - 6 X Preliminary Product (Detail) Design
C R - - A - - A - 7 Design for Manufacture Review
- R - - - - - - - 8 X Planning Release

Tracking C
-
-
R
I
I
-
I
I
-
-
-
I
R
A
I
I
-
-
I
I
I
I
R
I
-
I
9
10
11
X X
X
X
Design FMEA
Manufacturing Concept
Significant Characteristics
C - - - R I I A - 12 X X Preliminary Process Design & Flow Chart
- I - - I I I R I 13 X Quality History Review
C R - - - - - - - 14 Prototype Build Control Plan
C R - I - - - - I 15 X X Prototype Build
In this example, you can see the company has defined C
C
I
R
-
-
-
-
R
-
A
-
A
-
A
-
-
I
16
17
X
X X
X X Process FMEA
DVP&R Testing

sequential steps in a spreadsheet. Line items can be broken out -

C
-
R
-
R
-
I
-
-
R
-
A
I
-
-
I
-
I
I
-
A
I
-
-
I
-
18
19
20
X X
X
X
X
Feasibility Sign-Off
Contract & Investment Approval
Final Product Design

and aligned with inputs / outputs of the APQP Phases as C

C
R
-
-
-
-
R
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
I
21
22
X X
X X X
Production Level Drawings & BOM; Eng. Change Date
OK to Tool Date (Design Freeze)
- I R - - - - A I 23 X Select, Review, Rate Suppliers
defined in the APQP and Control Plan manual. Note that each C
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
R
A
-
I
-
I
-
R
-
-
24
25
X X
X
Production Equipment Specifications
Process Control Plan (including Pre-Launch version)

line item carries a defined responsibility as well as ‘input’, C

C
-
-
-
-
R
R
-
-
-
-
I
R
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
26
27
28
X
X X
X
Kick Off Suppliers (Pre-Award meeting)
Production Equipment Sourcing
Mfg. Equipment/Process Design Approvals

assistance and coordination responsibilities. There is no exact C

C
-
-
I
R
-
-
R
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
29
30
X
X X
Order Production Tooling, Gages, Test Equipment
Production Tooling Complete
- I I - - - - R - 31 X Approve Suppliers
indication of critical path in this example, however in general the -
C
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
R
-
-
-
-
R
-
-
-
32
33 X X
X Audit and QA Work Instructions
Equipment Construction

line items are sequential. -

C
-
I
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
R
R
-
-
-
R
-
-
-
I
I
-
-
-
-
34
35
36
X
X
X
Equipment Pass Off Run
Ship, Install, Debug & Test
Work Instructions (Manufacturing)
- R - - - - - - - 37 X Valve Freeze Date
- A - - - - A R - 38 X Develop Product Training Plan
C A A - I - - R - 39 X X Supplier (Component) PSW Review & Sign-Off
This said, one should also understand that many of these items C
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
R
R
-
-
A
A
A
A
-
-
40
41
X X X Preliminary Capability Studies For Production Processes
Final Process Design

will be proceeding in parallel. The design FMEA, the process

- - - - R - A A - 42 Process Optimization
C I - - R I I I - 43 X X Establish BOM & Routings
- - - - - - R - - 44 Product Training

flow diagram, the process FMEA and the control plan will -
C
-
I
-
-
-
-
-
A
-
-
-
-
R
R
-
-
45
46 X
X
X
Select & Train Quality Personnel
Process Review (PFMEA Walk Through - QA Sys. Review)
- A - - R - A A - 47 X PPAP - Production Run
probably all be ‘in process’ at the same time. C
C
-
-
R
-
-
-
-
R
-
A
-
I
-
I
-
I
48
49
X
X X
Finalize Supplier Contracts
Define Packaging
C - R - - - - - - 50 Source Packaging
C R - - A - A A - 51 X X X X IES Testing
C A - A A A A R A 52 X X X X PPAP - Part S ample Warrant S ubmis s io n

Most of the critical path links are going to be self-evident. For - - -

Do we , if if s o , WHERE DO WE WANT TO FIT THESE ( Be lo w) IN?
- - - - R - X M&TE Needs, Costs, Procurement

example, you cannot finish your control plan until your process - - -
- R -
- - -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
- R -
- - I
- - -
X
Measurement and Test Equipment Verification
Ridework (Ongoing)

FMEA and Flow diagram are complete. If you do not know why A=
C=
Assistance
Coordination

this is true, you may need specialized training.

I= Input (Information)
R= Responsibility

F = Production
T = Technical Facility

Revision: 2004-10-18 Slide 9