Plantillas Core Tools

APQP Gantt
Customer : Customer P/N : Start date :
Description : Part Number: Revision date : Initiated by :
Target January February March April May June July August September October November Dicember
No. Activity Responsable Función Date 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 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
1 Prospectacion Marketing 0
2 Recepcion de dibujos y plano Ing. Producto 0
3 Especificaciones de Producto Acct. Mgr. 0
4 Demanda Anual (EAU) Acct. Mgr. 0
5 Analisis de Factibilidad Proj. Mgr. 0
6 Cotizaciones Cotizaciones 0
7 Negociacion Acct. Mgr. 0
8 Revision de Contrato Proj. Mgr. / Acct. Mgr. 0
9 Lista de caracteristicas especiales Ing. Producto 0
10 Lista de procesos especiales Ing. Producto / Ing. Manufactura 0
11 Lista de requisitos especificos de cliente Ing. Calidad 0
12 Lista de procesos subcontratados Proj. Mgr. 0
13 CAPEX Proj. Mgr. 0
14 Lecciones Aprendidas Proj. Mgr. 0
15 Elaboracion de BOM Ing. Producto 0
16 Compra de materiales Proyectos 0
17 Liberacion y Certificacion de materia prima Insp. Recibo 0
18 Aprobacion de proveedores SQE / SQA 0
19 Lista de herramental Ing. Manufactura 0
20 Elaboracion de Tooling Mantenimiento 0
22 Lista de parametros criticos Ing. Manufactura 0
23 Desarrollo de Procesos Ing. Manufactura 0
24 Diagrama de Flujo Ing. Manufactura 0
25 PFMEA Ing. Manufactura 0
26 Control Plan Ing. Calidad 0
27 Lista de instrumentos y calibradores Ing. Manufactura 0
28 MSA Calibracion 0
29 Analisis SPC
Liberacion y Certificacion de herramientas, equipo y proceso de Calidad 0
30 produccion Ing. Manufactura 0
31 Desarrollo de Prototipos Ing. Producto 0
32 Retroalimentacion del Cliente Proj. Mgr. / Ing. Calidad 0
33 Primeras Muestras Ing. Producto 0
34 Especificacion de empaque Ing. Manufactura 0
36 PPAP documentacion Ing. Producto / Ing. Manufactura 0
37 Corrida PPAP Proj. Mgr. 0
38 Reporte de corrida PPAP Proj. Mgr. 0
39 Reporte dimensional Calidad 0
40 PSW Ing. Calidad 0
42 Inventario de seguridad Logistica 0
43 Carta de Obsolescencia Proj. Mgr. 0
0 0 0 0
Remarks:
Cliente : (C)
: Dirección
:Ventas
: Ingeniería
: Calidad
: R. Humanos
: Logística
: Mantenimiento
APQP Gantt
Customer : Customer P/N : Start date :
Description : Part Number: Revision date : Initiated by :
Target January February March April May June July August September October November Dicember
No. Activity Responsible Function Date 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 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52
1 Product Specifications
2 Feasibility Study
3 Contract Review
4 Process Flow Diagram.
5 List of Special Characterstics
6 List of Special Processes i.e Heat Treatment/Surface Coating.
7 List of Customer Specific Requirements
8 List of Out Sourced Process
9 List of Suppliers.
10 Prodn. Development Plan at Supplier's end.
11 List of Tools.
12 Tool Development Plan.
13 List of Instruments & Gauge.
14 Packing Specification.
PROTOTYPE 0
15 PFMEA
16 Control Plans.
17 Sample Reports.
18 Target Date of Sample Submission.
19 Feed Back For Sample & Review Customer Reply/C/P action.
PRELAUNCH 0
20 Review for Process Flow Diagram.
21 Review PFMEA
22 List of Critical Parameters.
23 Tool Development Plan Review.
24 Packing Specification Review.
25 Control Plans.
26 Work Instructions
27 Prodn. Planning of Pilot Lot.
28 SPC Study.
29 MSA Study.
30 Pilot Lot Sample Report.
31 Target Date For Pilot Lot Submission.
32 Feed Back & Review Customer Report & C/P action.
33 PPAP.
34 Master Sample
35 Feed Back from Customer.
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
Remarks:
Cliente : (C)
: Dirección
:Ventas
: Ingeniería
: Calidad
: R. Humanos
: Logística
: Mantenimiento
F/F
CONTROL PLAN SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
Prototype Pre-Launch Production
Control Plan Number Key Contact/Phone Date (Orig.) Date (Rev.)
Part Number/Latest Change Level Core Team Customer Engineering Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
Part Name/Description Supplier/Plant Approval/Date Customer Quality Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
Supplier/Plant Supplier Code Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.) Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
No. Description/Rationale Specification/Tolerance Class Illustration/Pictorial
Page 4 of 42
POTENTIAL
System FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS FMEA Number:
Subsystem (DESIGN FMEA) Page
X Component: Design Responsibility Prepared By:
Model Year(s)/Program(s) Key Date FMEA Date (Orig.)
Core Team:
Item Current Design
Classification
Responsibility
Severity
Occurrence
Potential Potential Potential
Detection
Recommended & Target
Requirement Failure Effect(s) Causes(s) Controls Controls RPN
Action Completion
Mode of Failure of Failure Prevention Detection Date
Function
Page 5 of 42
Page 6 of 42
1
1 of
Action Results
Occurrence
Detection
Severity
Actions Taken
RPN
Completion Date
Page 7 of 42
Page 8 of 42
TEAM FEASIBILITY COMMITMENT
Customer: Date:
Part Number: Part Name:
Revision Level
Feasibility Considerations
Our product quality planning team has considered the following questions.
The drawings and/or specifications provided have been used as a basis for
analyzing the ability to meet all specified requirements. All "no" answers are supported with attached comments
identifying our concerns and/or proposed changes to enable us to meet the specified requirements.
YES NO CONSIDERATION
Is product adequately defined (application requirements, etc. to enable
feasibility evaluation?
Can Engineering Performance Specifications be met as written?
Can product be manufactured to tolerances specified on drawing?
Can product be manufactured with process capability that meet requirements?
Is there adequate capacity to produce product?
Does the design allow the use of efficient material handling techniques?
Can the product be manufactured within normal cost parameters? Abnormal cost considerations may include:
- Costs for capital equipment?
- Costs for tooling?
- Alternative manufacturing methods?
Is statistical process control required on the product?
Is statistical process control presently used on similar products?
Where statistical process control is used on similar products:
- Are the processes in control and stable?
- Does process capability meet customer requirements?
Conclusion
Feasible Product can be produced as specified with no revisions.

Feasible Changes recommended (see attached).
Not Feasible Design revision required to produce product within the specified requirements.
Sign-Off
Team Member/Title/Date Team Member/Title/Date

PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM
Product Program Issue Date ECL

Supplier Name Part Name
Supplier Location Part Number
Prepared By:
Legend:
Operation Transportation Inspection Delay Storage
Operation or Event Description of Evaluation

Tools /
No. Equipment
Operation or Event and Analysis Methods Used
Page 10 of 42
CHARACTERISTIC MATRIX
Part Number Engineering Change Level Part Name
#REF!
C = Characteristic at an operation used for clamping

L = Characteristic at an operation used for locating
X = Characteristic created or changed by this operation should
match the process flow diagram form
DIMENSION OPERATION NUMBER

NUMBER DESCRIPTION TOLERANCE
Page 11 of 42
POTENTIAL
FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS FMEA Number:
(PROCESS FMEA) Page
Item: Process Responsibility Prepared By:
Core Team:
Process Current Process
Classification
Step
Responsibility
Severity
Occurrence
Detection
Action Completion
Function
2 10 0
4 10 0
Page 12 of 42
POTENTIAL
FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS FMEA Number:
(PROCESS FMEA) Page
Item: Process Responsibility Prepared By:
Core Team:
Process Current Process
Classification
Step
Responsibility
Severity
Occurrence
Detection
Action Completion
Function
Page 13 of 42
1
1 of
Action Results
Occurrence
Detection
Severity
Actions Taken
RPN
Completion Date
Page 14 of 42
1
1 of
Action Results
Occurrence
Detection
Severity
Actions Taken
RPN
Completion Date
Page 15 of 42
CONTROL PLAN
Prototype Pre-Launch ✘ Production
Control Plan Number Key Contact/Phone Date (Orig.) Date (Rev.)
Part Number/Latest Change Level Core Team Customer Engineering Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
Part Name/Description Organization/Plant Approval/Date Customer Quality Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
Organization/Plant Organization Code Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.) Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.)
MACHINE, CHARACTERISTICS METHODS

PART/ PROCESS NAME/ SPECIAL
DEVICE REACTION
PROCESS OPERATION CHAR. PRODUCT/PROCESS EVALUATION/ SAMPLE
JIG, TOOLS CONTROL PLAN
NUMBER DESCRIPTION NO. PRODUCT PROCESS CLASS SPECIFICATION/ MEASUREMENT
FOR MFG. SIZE FREQ. METHOD
TOLERANCE TECHNIQUE
Page 16 of 42
System POTENTIAL
FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS
Subsystem (MACHINERY FMEA) FMEA Number:
X Component Supplier Name #REF! Prepared by:

Program(s) / Plant(s) Key Date Date (Orig.)
Core Team: Date (Rev.)
C O D
S l c e R.
Potential Current Current Responsibility
Machinery Potential Potential e a c t P.
Causes(s)/ Process Process Recommended & Target
Description Function / Performance Failure Effect(s) v s u e N.
Mechanism(s) Controls Controls Action(s) Completion
/Requirements Mode of Failure
of Failure Prevention Detection Date
s r c
Unidad de
Refrigeracion
#1 Compresor Elevar la presión del fluido

refrigerante Presion
min 3psi max 6 psi (4.5 +/-
1.5 psi)
#2
Condensador
#11
Evaporador
Page 17 of 42
Page 18 of 42
#REF!
Action Results
S O D R.
e c e P.
Actions
Taken
v c t N.
Page 19 of 42
Page 20 of 42
Production Part Approval Page 21 of 42 Pages
Dimensional Test Results

ORGANIZATION: #REF! PART NUMBER: #REF!
SUPPLIER / VENDOR CODE: #REF! PART NAME: #REF!
INSPECTION FACILITY: DESIGN RECORD CHANGE LEVEL: #REF!
ENGINEERING CHANGE DOCUMENTS:
DIMENSION / SPECIFICATION / TEST QTY. ORGANIZATION MEASUREMENT NOT

ITEM OK
SPECIFICATION LIMITS DATE TESTED RESULTS (DATA) OK
Blanket statements of conformance are unacceptable for any test results.
SIGNATURE TITLE DATE

March CFG-1003
2006
Page 22 of 42 Pages
March CFG-1003
2006
Material Test Results

MATERIAL SUPPLIER: DESIGN RECORD CHANGE LEVEL: #REF!
*CUSTOMER SPECIFIED SUPPLIER / VENDOR CODE: ENGINEERING CHANGE DOCUMENTS:
*If source approval is req'd, include the Supplier (Source) & Customer assigned code. NAME of LABORATORY:
SPECIFICATION / TEST QTY. NOT
MATERIAL SPEC. NO. / REV / DATE SUPPLIER TEST RESULTS (DATA) OK
LIMITS DATE TESTED OK

March CFG-1004
2006
Page 42 of 24 Pages
March CFG-1004
2006
Performance Test Results

NAME of LABORATORY: DESIGN RECORD CHANGE LEVEL: #REF!
*CUSTOMER SPECIFIED SUPPLIER / VENDOR CODE: ENGINEERING CHANGE DOCUMENTS:
*If source approval is req'd, include the Supplier (Source) & Customer assigned code.
SPECIFICATION / TEST QTY. SUPPLIER TEST RESULTS (DATA)/ NOT

TEST SPECIFICATION / REV / DATE OK
LIMITS DATE TESTED TEST CONDITIONS OK

March CFG-1005
2006
Page 26 of 42 Pages
March CFG-1005
2006
APPEARANCE APPROVAL REPORT
PART DRAWING APPLICATION
NUMBER ### NUMBER (VEHICLES) ###
PART BUYER E/C LEVEL DATE
NAME ### CODE ###
ORGANIZATION MANUFACTURING ### SUPPLIER / VENDOR
NAME ### LOCATION ### ### ### CODE #REF!
REASON FOR PART SUBMISSION WARRANT SPECIAL SAMPLE RE-SUBMISSION OTHER
SUBMISSION PRE TEXTURE FIRST PRODUCTION SHIPMENT ENGINEERING CHANGE
APPEARANCE EVALUATION
AUTHORIZED CUSTOMER
ORGANIZATION SOURCING AND TEXTURE INFORMATION PRE-TEXTURE REPRESENTATIVE
EVALUATION SIGNATURE AND DATE
CORRECT AND
PROCEED
CORRECT AND
PROCEED
APPROVED TO
ETCH/TOOL/EDM
COLOR EVALUATION
METALLIC COLOR
COLOR TRISTIMULUS DATA MASTER MASTER MATERIAL MATERIAL HUE VALUE CHROMA GLOSS BRILLIANCE SHIPPING PART
SUFFIX 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
March CFG-1002
2006
Part Submission Warrant
Part Name Cust. Part Number
Shown on Drawing Number Orig. Part Number
Engineering Change Level Dated
Additional Engineering Changes Dated
Safety and/or Government Regulation Yes No Purchase Order No. Weight (kg)
Checking Aid Number Checking Aid Eng. Change Level Dated
ORGANIZATION MANUFACTURING INFORMATION CUSTOMER SUBMITTAL INFORMATION
Organization Name & Supplier/Vendor Code Customer Name/Division
Street Address Buyer/Buyer Code
City Region Postal Code Country Application
MATERIALS REPORTING
Has customer-required Substances of Concern information been reported? Yes No n/a

Submitted by IMDS or other customer format:
Are polymeric parts identified with appropriate ISO marking codes? Yes No n/a
REASON FOR SUBMISSION (Check at least one)
Initial submission Change to Optional Construction or Material
Engineering Change(s) Sub-Supplier or Material Source Change
Tooling: Transfer, Replacement, Refurbishment, or additional Change in Part Processing
Correction of Discrepancy Parts produced at Additional Location
Tooling Inactive > than 1 year Other - please specify
REQUESTED SUBMISSION LEVEL (Check one)

Level 1 - Warrant only (and for designated appearance items, an Appearance Approval Report) submitted to customer.
Level 2 - Warrant with product samples and limited supporting data submitted to customer.
Level 3 - Warrant with product samples and complete supporting data submitted to customer.
Level 4 - Warrant and other requirements as defined by customer.
Level 5 - Warrant with product samples and complete supporting data reviewed at organization's manufacturing location.
SUBMISSION RESULTS
dimensional material and functional statistical process
The results for appearance criteria
measurements tests package
These results meet all design record requirements: Yes NO (If "NO" - Explanation Required)
Mold / Cavity / Production Process
DECLARATION
I affirm that the samples represented by this warrant are representative of our parts, which were made by a process that meets all Production
Part Approval Process Manual 4th Edition Requirements. I further affirm that these samples were produced at the
EXPLANATION/COMMENTS:
Is each Customer Tool properly tagged and numbered? Yes No n/a

Organization Authorized Signature Date
Print Name Phone No. Fax No.

Title E-mail
FOR CUSTOMER USE ONLY (IF APPLICABLE)
PPAP Warrant Disposition:

Approved Rejected Other
Customer Signature Date
Print Name Customer Tracking Number (optional)
March CFG-1001
2006
A-1 DESIGN FMEA CHECKLIST
Person
Question Yes No N/A Comment / Action Required Due Date
Responsible
1 Was the DFMEA prepared using the DaimlerChrysler,
Ford, and General Motors Potential Failure Mode and
Effects Analysis (FMEA) reference manual, and applicable
customer specific requirements?
2 Have historical campaign and warranty data been
reviewed?
3 Have best practices and lessons learned from similar part
DFMEAs been considered?
4 Does the DFMEA identify Special Characteristics?
5 Have pass-trough characteristics (glossary) been

identified and reviewed with affected suppliers for FMEA
alignment and appropriate controls in the supply base?
6 Have special characteristics designated by the customer

or organization been reviewed with affected suppliers to
assure FMEA alignment?
7 Have design characteristics that affect high risk priority
failure modes been identified?
8 Have appropriate corrective actions been assigned to
high risk priority numbers?
9 Have appropriate corrective actions been assigned to
high severity numbers?
10 Have risk priorities been revised when corrective actions
have been completed and verified?
Revision Date:
Prepared By:
Page 29 of 42
A-2 DESIGN INFORMATION CHECKLIST
Person
Question Yes No Comment / Action Required Due Date
Responsible
A. General
1 Does the design require:
a New materials? /
b Special tooling? /
c New technology or process?
2 Has assembly build variation analysis been considered?
3 Has Design of Experiments been considered?

4 Is there a plan for prototypes in place?
/
5 Has a DFMEA been completed?
/
6 Has a DFMA (Design For Manufacturability and Assembly)
been completed?
7 Have service and maintenance issues been considered?
8 Has the Design Verification Plan been considered?

9 If yes, was it completed by a cross functional team?
10 Are all specified tests, methods, equipment and
acceptance criteria clearly defined and understood?
11 Have Special Characteristics been selected?
/
12 Is bill of material
complete? /
13 Are Special Characteristics properly documented?
B. Engineering Drawings
14 Are reference dimensions identified to minimize
inspection layout time?
15 Are sufficient control points and datum surfaces identified
to design functional gages?
16 Are tolerances compatible with accepted manufacturing
standards?
17 Can existing and available inspection technology measure
all design requirements?
18 Is the customer designated engineering change
management process used to manage engineering
changes?
Page 30 of 42
C. Engineering Performance Specifications
19 Have special characteristics been identified? /
20 Are test parameters sufficient to address required use
conditions, i.e., production validation and end use?
21 Have parts manufactured at minimum and maximum
specifications been tested as required?
22 Will all product testing be done in-house?
23 If not, is it done by an approved supplier?
/
24 Is the specified in-process performance test sampling
size and/or frequency consistent with manufacturing
volumes?
25 Has customer approval been obtained, e.g., for testing
and documentation, as required?
D. Material Specification
26 Are special material characteristics identified?
/
27 Where the organization is design responsible, are
specified materials, heat treat and surface treatments
compatible with the durability requirements in the
identified environment?
28 Where required, are the material suppliers on the
customer approved list?
29 Has the organization developed and implemented a
process to control incoming material quality?
30 Have material characteristics requiring inspection been
identified? If
so,
a Will characteristics be checked in-house?
/
b If checked in-house, is test equipment available?
/
c If checked in-house, are competent people available to
assure accurate testing?
31 Will outside laboratories be used? /
a Does the organization have a process in place to assure
laboratory competence such as accreditation? NOTE:
Competency needs to be assured, regardless of the
organization's relationship with the laboratory.
32 Have the following material requirements been
considered:
Page 31 of 42
a Handling, including environmental aspects?
/
b Storage, including environmental aspects?
/
c Have the materials/substance composition been reported
in accordance with customer requirements e.g., IMDS?
d Have polymeric parts been identified/marked per

customer requirements?
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 32 of 42
A-3 NEW EQUIPMENT, TOOLING, AND TEST EQUIPMENT CHECKLIST
Person
Responsible
1 Does the design require:
a New materials? /
b Quick change? /
c Volume fluctuations? /
d Mistake proofing? /
Have lists been prepared identifying: (Include all
2
suppliers)
a New equipment? /
b New tooling? /
c New test equipment (including checking aids)?
Has acceptance criteria been agreed upon for: (Include
3
all suppliers)
a New equipment? /
b New tooling? /
c New test equipment (including checking aids)?
4 Will a preliminary capability study be conducted at the
tooling and/or equipment manufacturer?
5 Has test equipment feasibility and accuracy been
established?
6 Is a preventive maintenance plan complete for
equipment and tooling?
7 Are setup instructions for new equipment and tooling
complete and understandable?
8 Will capable gages be available to run preliminary
process capability studies at the equipment supplier's
facility?
9 Will preliminary process capability studies be run at the
processing plant?
10 Have process characteristics that affect special product
characteristics been identified?
11 Were special product characteristics used in determining
acceptance criteria?
12 Does the manufacturing equipment have sufficient
capacity to handle forecasted production and service
volumes?
13 Is testing capacity sufficient to provide adequate testing?
Page 33 of 42
14 Has the measurement equipment been verified and
documented showing qualifications for the required scope
of measurement and testing?
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 34 of 42
A-4 PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST
Person
Responsible
1 Is customer assistance or approval required for the
development of the control plan?
2 Has the organization identified who will be the quality
liaison with the customer?
3 Has the organization identified who will be the quality
liaison with its suppliers?
4 Has the quality management system been reviewed and
approved per customer specific requirements?
5 Are there sufficient personnel identified to cover:
a Control plan requirements? /
b Layout inspection? /
c Engineering performance testing? /
d Problem reaction and resolution analysis?
/
6 Is there a documented training program that:
a Includes all employees? /
b Lists whose been trained? /
c Provides a training schedule? /
7 Has training been completed for:
a Statistical process control? /
b Capability studies? /
c Problem solving? /
d Mistake proofing? /
e Reaction Plans? /
f Other topics as identified?
8 Is each operation provided with process instructions that
are keyed to the control plan?
9 Are standard operator instructions accessible at each
work station?
10 Do operator instructions include pictures and diagrams?
11 Were operator/team leaders involved in developing

standard operator instructions?
12 Do inspection instructions include:
a Easily understood engineering performance
specifications?
b Test frequencies? /
Page 35 of 42
c Sample sizes? /
d Reaction plans? /
e Documentation requirements?
/
13 Are visual aids:
a Appropriate, easily understood and legible?
/
b Available? /
c Accessible? /
d Approved? /
e Dated and current? /
14 Is there a procedure to implement, maintain, and
establish reaction plans, for issues such as out of control
conditions based on statistical process control?
15 Is there an identified problem solving process that
includes root cause analysis?
16 Are the latest drawings and specifications available for
the operator, in particular at the points of the inspection?
a Have engineering tests (dimensional, material,

appearance, and performance) been completed and
documented as required in accordance with customer
requirements?
17 Are the current forms/logs available for appropriate
personnel to record inspection results?
Are the following available and placed at the appropriate
18
points of the operations?
a Monitoring and measurement devices?
b Gage instructions? /
c Reference samples? /
d Inspection logs? /
19 Have provisions been made to certify and calibrate gages
and test equipment at a defined frequency that is
appropriate?
20 Have required measurement system capability studies been:
a Completed? /
b Acceptable? /
21 Have initial process capability studies been conducted per
Page 36 of 42
22 Are layout inspection equipment and facilities adequate
to provide initial and ongoing layout of all details and
components in accordance with customer requirements?
Is there a documented procedure for controlling incoming

23 material that may include, for example, the following
items:
a Characteristics to be inspected? /
b Frequency of inspection? /
c Sample size? /
d Designated location for approved product? /
e Disposition of nonconforming products? /
24 Have sample production parts been provided per
25 Is there a procedure to identify, segregate, and control
nonconforming products to prevent shipment?
26 Are rework/repair procedures available to assure
conforming product?
27 Is there a procedure to requalify repaired/reworked
material?
28 Has a master sample, if required, been retained as part
of the part approval process?
29 Is there an appropriate lot traceability procedure?
30 Are periodic audits of outgoing products planned and
implemented?
31 Are periodic surveys of the quality system planned and
implemented?
32 Has the customer approved the packaging and the
packaging specification?
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 37 of 42
A-5 FLOOR PLAN CHECKLIST
Person
Responsible
Have lean concepts been applied in considering material
1
flow?
2 Does the floor plan identify all required process and
inspection points?
3 Have clearly marked areas for all material, tools, and
equipment at each operation been considered?
4 Has sufficient space been allocated for all equipment?
5 Are process and inspection areas:
a Of adequate size? /
b Properly lighted? /
6 Do inspection areas contain necessary equipment and
record storage?
7 Are there adequate:
a Staging areas? /
b Impound areas? /
8 Are inspection points logically located to prevent
shipment of nonconforming products?
9 Are there controls for each process to eliminate
contamination or inappropriate mixing of product?
10 Is material protected from overhead or air handling
systems contamination?
11 Have facilities been provided for final product audit?
12 Are facilities adequate to control movement of
nonconforming incoming material?
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 38 of 42
A-6 PROCESS FLOW CHART CHECKLIST
Person
Responsible
1 Does the flow chart illustrate the entire process from
receiving through shipping, including outside processes
and services?
2 In the development of the process chart, was the DFMEA
used, if available, to identify specific characteristics that
may be critical?
3 Is the flow chart keyed to product and process checks in
the control plan and PFMEA?
4 Does the flow chart describe how the product will move,
i.e., roller conveyor, slide containers, etc.?
5 Has the pull system/optimization been considered for this
process?
6 Have provisions been made to identify and inspect
reworked product before being used?
7 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.
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 39 of 42
A-7 PROCESS FMEA CHECKLIST
Person
Responsible
1 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?
2 Have all operations including subcontracted, or
outsourced processes and services been considered?
3 Have all operations affecting customer requirements
including, fit, function, durability, governmental
regulations and safety been identified and listed
sequentially?
4 Were similar part/process FMEA's considered?
5 Have historical campaign and warranty data been
reviewed and used in the analysis?
6 Have you applied the appropriate controls to address all
of the identified failure modes?
7 Were severity, detection and occurrence revised when
corrective action was completed?
8 Do the effects consider the customer in terms of the
subsequent operation, assembly, and product?
9 Were customer plant problems used as an aid in
developing the PFMEA?
10 Have the causes been described in terms of something
that can be corrected or controlled?
11 Have provisions been made to control the cause of the
failure mode prior to subsequent or the next operation?
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 40 of 42
A-8 CONTROL PLAN CHECKLIST
Person
Responsible
1 Was the control plan developed according to the
methodology described in Chapter 6 of APQP manual?
2 Have all the controls identified in the PFMEA been
included in the control plan?
3 Are all special product/process characteristics included in
the control plan?
4 Were DFMEA and PFMEA used to prepare the control
plan?
5 Are material specifications requiring inspection identified?
6 Does the control pan address incoming

(material/components) through processing/assembly
including packaging?
7 Are engineering performance testing and dimensional
requirements identified?
8 Are gages and test equipment available as required by
the control plan?
9 If required, has the customer approved the control plan?
10 Are the gage methodology and compatibility appropriate

to meet customer requirements?
11 Have measurement systems analysis been completed in
accordance with customer requirements?
12 Are sample sizes based upon industry standards,
statistical sampling plan tables, or other statistical
process control methods or techniques?
Revision Date
Prepared By:
Page 41 of 42
PRODUCT QUALITY PLANNING SUMMARY AND APPROVALS
DATE:
PRODUCT NAME: PART NUMBER/ REV:
CUSTOMER: MANUFACTURING PLANT:
1. PRELIMINARY PROCESS CAPABILITY STUDY QUANTITY

REQUIRED ACCEPTABLE PENDING*
Ppk - SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS
2. CONTROL PLAN APPROVAL (If Required) APPROVED: YES / NO* DATE APPROVED
3. INITIAL PRODUCTION SAMPLES

CHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY QUANTITY
CHARACTERISTICS
SAMPLES PER SAMPLE ACCEPTABLE PENDING*
DIMENSIONAL
VISUAL
LABORATORY
PERFORMANCE
4. GAGE AND TEST EQUIPMENT

MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS QUANTITY
SPECIAL CHARACTERISTIC
5. PROCESS MONITORING
QUANTITY
PROCESS MONITORING INSTRUCTIONS REQUIRED ACCEPTABLE PENDING*
PROCESS SHEETS
VISUAL AIDS
6. PACKAGING/SHIPPING QUANTITY
PACKAGING APPROVAL
SHIPPING TRIALS
7. SIGN-OFF
TEAM MEMBER/TITLE/DATE TEAM MEMBER/TITLE/DATE
* REQUIRES PREPARATION OF AN ACTION PLAN TO TRACK PROGRESS.

Plantillas Core Tools

Cargado por

Información del documento

Descripción original:

Derechos de autor

Formatos disponibles

Compartir este documento

Compartir o incrustar documentos

Opciones para compartir

¿Le pareció útil este documento?

¿Este contenido es inapropiado?

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

Plantillas Core Tools

Cargado por

Copyright:

Formatos disponibles

APQP Gantt

Customer : Customer P/N : Start date :

Description : Part Number: Revision date : Initiated by :

Customer : Customer P/N : Start date :

Description : Part Number: Revision date : Initiated by :

Part Name/Description Supplier/Plant Approval/Date Customer Quality Approval/Date (If Req'd.)

No. Description/Rationale Specification/Tolerance Class Illustration/Pictorial

Part Number: Part Name:

Feasible Product can be produced as specified with no revisions.

Team Member/Title/Date Team Member/Title/Date

Team Member/Title/Date Team Member/Title/Date

Team Member/Title/Date Team Member/Title/Date

Product Program Issue Date ECL

Operation or Event Description of Evaluation

C = Characteristic at an operation used for clamping

DIMENSION OPERATION NUMBER

Part Name/Description Organization/Plant Approval/Date Customer Quality Approval/Date (If Req'd.)

MACHINE, CHARACTERISTICS METHODS

X Component Supplier Name #REF! Prepared by:

#1 Compresor Elevar la presión del fluido

Dimensional Test Results

DIMENSION / SPECIFICATION / TEST QTY. ORGANIZATION MEASUREMENT NOT

Blanket statements of conformance are unacceptable for any test results.

SIGNATURE TITLE DATE

Material Test Results

Blanket statements of conformance are unacceptable for any test results.

SIGNATURE TITLE DATE

Performance Test Results

SPECIFICATION / TEST QTY. SUPPLIER TEST RESULTS (DATA)/ NOT

Blanket statements of conformance are unacceptable for any test results.

SIGNATURE TITLE DATE

ORGANIZATION PHONE NO. DATE AUTHORIZED CUSTOMER DATE

Shown on Drawing Number Orig. Part Number

Engineering Change Level Dated

Additional Engineering Changes Dated

Checking Aid Number Checking Aid Eng. Change Level Dated

ORGANIZATION MANUFACTURING INFORMATION CUSTOMER SUBMITTAL INFORMATION

Organization Name & Supplier/Vendor Code Customer Name/Division

Street Address Buyer/Buyer Code

City Region Postal Code Country Application

Has customer-required Substances of Concern information been reported? Yes No n/a

REQUESTED SUBMISSION LEVEL (Check one)

Is each Customer Tool properly tagged and numbered? Yes No n/a

Print Name Phone No. Fax No.

FOR CUSTOMER USE ONLY (IF APPLICABLE)

PPAP Warrant Disposition:

Print Name Customer Tracking Number (optional)

5 Have pass-trough characteristics (glossary) been

6 Have special characteristics designated by the customer

3 Has Design of Experiments been considered?

8 Has the Design Verification Plan been considered?

d Have polymeric parts been identified/marked per

11 Were operator/team leaders involved in developing

a Have engineering tests (dimensional, material,

Is there a documented procedure for controlling incoming

6 Does the control pan address incoming

10 Are the gage methodology and compatibility appropriate

PRODUCT NAME: PART NUMBER/ REV:

CUSTOMER: MANUFACTURING PLANT:

1. PRELIMINARY PROCESS CAPABILITY STUDY QUANTITY

3. INITIAL PRODUCTION SAMPLES

4. GAGE AND TEST EQUIPMENT

TEAM MEMBER/TITLE/DATE TEAM MEMBER/TITLE/DATE