Check Sheet Model SCC

7/31/2019 Check Sheet Model SCC

1/39

Teleflex PSO / PPAP Process

Part NamePart Number Engineering Change LevelEngineering Change Level DateSupplier ContactSupplier NameSupplier CodeStreet AddressCityStateZipPhone Number

Customer NameDivision

Application

File Name

page 1/39


2/39

PRODUCT/PROCESS QUALITY CHECKLIST

Customer or Internal Part No.

Question Yes No Comment / Action Required PersonResponsible

DueDate

1 Is the assistance of the customer's qualityassurance or product engineering activity neededto develop or concur to the control plan?

2 Has the supplier identified who will be the qualityliaison with the customer?

3 Has the supplier identified who will be the qualityliaison with its suppliers?

4 Has the quality assurance system been reviewedusing the Teleflex Automotive Group QualitySystem Assessment?

Are there sufficient personnel identified to cover:

5 l Control plan requirements?/

6 l Layout inspection?/

7 l Engineering performance testing?/

8 l Problem resolution analysis?/Is there a documented training program that:

9 l Includes all employees?/

10 l Lists whose been trained?/

11 l Provides a training schedule?/Has training been completed for:

page 2


3/39




DueDate

12 l Statistical process control?/

13 l Capability studies?/

14 l Problem solving?/

15 l Mistake proofing?/

16 l Other topics as identified?/

17 Is each operation provided with processinstructions that are keyed to the control plan?

18 Are standard operator instructions available ateach operation?

19 Were operator/team leaders involved indeveloping standard operator instructions?Do inspection instructions include:

20 l Easily understood engineering performancespecifications?

21 l Test frequencies?/

22 l Sample sizes?/

23 l Reaction plans?/

24 l Documentation?/

Are visual aids:

page 3


4/39



Question Yes No Comment / Action RequiredPerson

ResponsibleDueDate

25 l Easily understood?/

26 l Available?/

27 l Accessible?/

28 l Approved?/

29 l Dated and current?/

30 Is there a procedure to implement, maintain, andestablish reaction plans for statistical controlcharts?

31 Is there an effective root cause analysis system inplace?

32 Have provisions been made to place the latestdrawings and specifications at the point of theinspection?

33 Are forms/logs available for appropriate personnelto record inspection results?Have provisions been made to place the following at the monitored operation:

34 l Inspection gages?/

35 l Gage instructions?/

36 l Reference samples?/

37 l Inspection logs? /

page 4


5/39




ResponsibleDueDate

38 Have provisions been made to certify androutinely calibrate gages and test equipment?Have required measurement system capability studies been:

39 l Completed?/

40 l Acceptable?/

41 Are layout inspection equipment and facilitiesadequate to provide initial and ongoing layout of all details and components?Is there a procedure for controlling incoming product that identifies:

42 l Characteristics to be inspected?/

43 l Frequency of inspection?/

44 l Sample size? /

45 l Designated location for approved product?/

46 l Disposition of nonconforming products?/

47 Is there a procedure to identify, segregate, andcontrol nonconforming products to preventshipment?

48 Are rework/repair procedures available?49 Is there a procedure to requalify

repaired/reworked material?50 Is there an appropriate lot traceability procedure?

page 5


6/39


7/39

FLOOR PLAN CHECKLIST


Question Yes No Comment / Action RequiredPerso

Respons1 Does the floor plan identify all required process

and inspection points?2 Have clearly marked areas for all material, tools,

and equipment at each operation beenconsidered?3 Has sufficient space been allocated for all

equipment? Are process and inspection areas:

4 l Of adequate size?/

5 l Properly lighted?/

6 Do inspection areas contain necessaryequipment and files?

Are there adequate:7 l Staging areas?

/8 l Impound areas?

/9 Are inspection points logically located to preventshipment of nonconforming products?

10 Have controls been established to eliminate thepotential for an operation, including outsideprocessing, to contaminate or mix similar products?

11 Is material protected from overhead or air handling systems contamination?

12 Have final audit facilities been provided?13 Are controls adequate to prevent movement of

nonconforming incoming material to storage or point of use?

Revision Date

Prepared By:


8/39

PROCESS FLOW CHART CHECKLIST



ResponsibleDueDate

1 Does the flow chart illustrate the sequence of production and inspection stations?

2 Were all appropriate FMEA's (SFMEA, DFMEA)available and used as aids to develop the processflow chart?

3 Is the flow chart keyed to product and processchecks in the control plan?

4 Does the flow chart describe how the product willmove, i.e., roller conveyor, slide containers, etc.?

5 Has the pull system/optimization been consideredfor this process?

6 Have provisions been made to identify andinspect reworked product before being used?

7 Have potential quality problems due to handlingand outside processing been identified andcorrected?

Revision Date

Prepared By:

page 8/3


9/39

PROCESS FMEA CHECKLIST



1 Was the Process FMEA prepared using the AIAG/ PPAP guidelines?

2 Have all operations affecting fit, function,durability, governmental regulations and safety

been identified and listed sequentially?3 Were similar part FMEA's considered?4 Have historical campaign and warranty data been

reviewed?5 Have appropriate corrective actions been planned

or taken for high risk priority items?6 Have appropriate corrective actions been planned

or taken for high severity numbers?7 Were risk priorities numbers revised when

corrective action was completed?8 Were high severity numbers revised when a

design change was completed?9 Do the effects consider the customer in terms of

the subsequent operation, assembly, andproduct?

10 Was warranty information used as an aid indeveloping the Process FMEA?11 Were customer plant problems used as an aid in

developing the Process FMEA?12 Have the causes been described in terms of

something that can be fixed or controlled?13 Where detection is the major factor, have

provisions been made to control the cause prior to the next operation?

Revision Date

Prepared By:


10/39

CONTROL PLAN CHECKLIST



ResponsibleDueDate

1 Was the control plan methodology referenced inSection 6 used in preparing the control plan?

2 Have all known customer complaints beenidentified to facilitate the selection of specialproduct/process characteristics?

3 Are all special product/process characteristicsincluded in the control plan?

4 Were SFMEA, DFMEA, and PFMEA used toprepare the control plan?

5 Are material specifications requiring inspectionidentified?

6 Does the control pan address incoming(material/components) throughprocessing/assembly including packaging?

7 Are engineering performance testingrequirements identified?

8 Are gages and test equipment available asrequired by the control plan?

9 If required, has the customer approved the

control plan?10 Are gage methods compatible between supplier

and customer?

Revision Date

Prepared By:

page 10/


11/39

REVIEW DATE MODEL YEARSUPPLIER 0 VEHICLE LINEPART NUMBER 0 SUPPLIER COD 0PART NAME 0

Initial Risk Evaluation Checklist

Item Levels of Concern

No. Questions Low Med. High Comments

DESIGN CATEGORY

1 - New Commodity For Selected Supplier? (RISK DRIVER*)

2 - New Materials or Technology? (RISK DRIVER*)

3 -New/Different Application of a Carry-Over Part? (RISK DRIVER*)

4 - New Design Concept?

5 - Are there Safety/Emissions/Noise Requirements?

6 - Offshore Engineering Site?

7 - Will Design Need To Be Coordinated With Mating

Parts For Fit, Function, or Appearance?

8 - Are There Other Car Line Applications Planned?

9 - Any Historic Quality/Warranty Issues?

10 -Is Program Timing An Issue?

11 - Are Sample Submission Dates Too Late for MTS's?

MANUFACTURING CATEGORY

12 - New Manufacturing Facility? (RISK DRIVER*)

13 - Is there a New Manufacturing Process? (RISK DRIVER*)

14 - A Part or System With Historical Launch Problems? (RISK DRIVER*)

15 - Offshore Manufacturing Site?

16 - Will Supplier Need Source Evaluation?

17 - Is New production Equipment Required?

18 - Are Special Tools or Tooling Fixtures Required?

19 - Are Gages or Check Fixtures Required to Ensure Dimensional Integrity?

20 - Any Potential Handling or Shipping Issues?

21 - Will Parts Ever Be Shipped From a Location

Other Than The Primary Source (i.e. Warehouse,

Offshore, etc.)

22 - Will Returnable Packaging Be Required?

23 - Is JIT Delivery or Sequenced Part Delivery Required?

ASSEMBLY CATEGORY

24 - Is Part installation an Issue?

25 - Are Special Tools/Fixtures Required to Install Part in Vehicle?SERVICE CATEGORY

26 - Is part Serviceability a Problem?

27 - Are Special Tools/Fixtures Required?

OTHER CATEGORY

28 - Other?

29 - Other?


12/39

REVIEW DATE MODEL YEARSUPPLIER 0 VEHICLE LINEPART NUMBER 0 SUPPLIER COD 0PART NAME 0

NOTE: * INDICATES RISK DRIVER - PROCESS SPECIALIST ASSISTANCE MAY BE REQUIRED

Initial Risk Evaluation Summary

INITIAL RISK EVALUATION RATING (Select One Below)(Refer to Initial Risk Evaluation Checklist)

LOW LEVEL OF CONCERN INITIAL RISK EVALUATION TEAM INDICATES A LOW LEVEL OFCONCERN REGARDING THE SUCCESS OF SUPPLYING THIS PRODUCT.

MEDIUM LEVEL OF CONCERN INITIAL RISK EVALUATION TEAM INDICATES THAT THERE IS A MEDIUMLEVEL OF CONCERN REGARDING ONE OR MORE CATEGORIES

ASSURING THE SUCCESS OF SUPPLYING THIS PRODUCT.

HIGH LEVEL OF CONCERN INITIAL RISK EVALUATION TEAM INDICATES THAT THERE IS A HIGHLEVEL OF CONCERN REGARDING ONE OR MORE CATEGORIES, (OR ON

OR MORE RISK DRIVERS) ASSURING THE SUCCESS OF SUPPLYINGTHIS PRODUCT

LIST HIGH CONCERN ITEMS

LIST MEDIUM CONCERN ITEMS

SIGNATURE DATE

TEAM MEMBERS

ENGINEERING

SUPPLIER QUALITY

SUPPLIER MANAGEMENT

ADVANCED MFG.

SUPPLIER

SERVICE


13/39

PRODUCT QUALITY PLANNING SUMMARY AND SIGN-OFF

DATE:

PRODUCT NAME: 0 PART NUMBER: 0

CUSTOMER: 0 MANUFACTURING PLANT: 0

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 SAMPLESCHARACTERISTIC CATEGORY QUANTITY

CHARACTERISTICSSAMPLES PER SAMPLE ACCEPTABLE PENDING*

DIMENSIONAL

VISUAL

LABORATORYPERFORMANCE

4. GAGE AND TEST EQUIPMENTMEASUREMENT SYSTEM ANALYSIS QUANTITY


SPECIAL CHARACTERISTIC

5. PROCESS MONITORING

QUANTITYPROCESS MONITORING INSTRUCTIONS REQUIRED ACCEPTABLE PENDING*

PROCESS SHEETSVISUAL AIDS

6. PACKAGING/SHIPPING QUANTITY


PACKAGING APPROVALSHIPPING TRIALS

7. SIGN-OFF

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



* REQUIRES PREPARATION OF AN ACTION PLAN TO TRACK PROGRESS.


14/39

TELEFLEX PROCESS SIGN-OFF CHECKLIST

ALL PROCESS SIGN-OFF ELEMENTS APPROVED: YES NO

SUPPLIER PROGRAMMFG. LOCATION PART NAME(S)PART NUMBER(S) PSO PLANT VISIT DATECHANGE LEVEL(S)

PROCESS ELEMENTS TO BE VERIFIED DURING PLANT VISITDOCUMENTATION PROCESS

ACCEPT UNACCEPT ACCEPT UNACCE123456789

1011121314151617

18

CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUIRED YES NO DATE

ON-SITE REVISIT REQUIRED YES NO DATE

Note: Open issues and required corrective actions are noted on sheet 2 of this report.

Teleflex Automotive Process Sign-Off Team Supplier Sign-Off

Engineering Print Name And Sign Quality Assurance Manager Print Name And S

Supplier Quality Print Name And Sign Manufacturing Manager Print Name And S

Plant Manager Print Name And S

PROCESS AUDIT (made by the supplier)

CO-WORKER TRAINING

CONTAINMENT PLANRAMP-UP PLANPARTS PACKAGING AND SHIPPING SPECIFICATIONSLINE SPEED DEMONSTRATION (R@R) : see "EP07 - Run at Rate - Index A"

TEST SAMPLE SIZES AND FREQUENCIESGAGE AND TEST EQUIPMENT EVALUATIONPREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE PLANSTOOLING, EQUIPMENT, AND GAGES IDENTIFIEDPROCESS MONITORING AND OPERATING INSTRUCTIONSINCOMING AND OUTCOMING MATERIAL QUALIF/CERT PLAN

PART NUMBER, DESCRIPTION AND CHANGE LEVELPROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM AND MANUFACTURING FLOOR PLANPROCESS FMEA

CONTROL PLANSPECIAL PRODUCT AND PROCESS CHARACTERISTICS IDENTIFIEDENGINEERING STANDARDS IDENTIFIED


15/39

TELEFLEX PROCESS SIGN-OFFComments

And Required Corrective Actions

ITEM # ISSUE Corrective Action Required YES

Note: All corrective actions plans must be submitted to the Teleflex Supplier Quality Engineerwithin (5) business days of the signature date below.

Authorized Customer Signature Title Date Supplier Signature Title Date


16/39

page 16/39


17/39

T

ign

ign

ign

page 17/39


18/39

NO

page 18/39


19/39

PROCESS / INSPECTION FLOWCHA

Product Program 0 Issue Date

Supplier Name 0 Part Name

Supplier Location 0 Part Number

Legend:

Operation Transportation Inspection Delay

Operation or Event Description ofOperation or Event

Receiving of raw material

Receiving inspection of raw material Revi

resulprog

20 30 Transport material

Store material until trial day

Blend raw material and concentrate

50 Transport material to press

Mold parts

In-process inspection 100%shotssplayflash

Degate parts

Inspection 100%abov

Cool Parts Allow

Wrap parts in foam and pack parts 100% visu

Label box 100%

130 Transport to storage / shipping

Dock audit 100%part/

Ship parts to customer 100% rev

10

10

30

40

60

70

80

90

100

110

120

140

150


20/39

PROCESS / INSPECTION FLOWCHART

Product Program 0 Issue Date 6/

Supplier Name 0 Part Name

Supplier Location 0 Part Number

Legend:

Operation Transportation Inspection Delay

Operation or Event Description ofOperation or Event


21/39

CHARACTERISTIC MATRIX

Part Number Engineering Change Level Part Name

0 0 0

C = Characteristic at an operation used for clampingL = Characteristic at an operation used for locatingX = Characteristic created or changed by this operation sho

match the process flow diagram form

DIMENSION OPERATION NUMBERNUMBER DESCRIPTION TOLERANCE


22/39

POTENTIAL

FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSISPrint # 0 Rev. 0 (PROCESS FMEA)

Item: 0 Process Responsibility: 0

Model Year(s)/Vehicle(s) 0 Key Date 6/16/2001

Team: 0

C Potential OProcess Potential Potential S l Cause(s)/ c CurrentFunction/ Failure Effect(s) of e a Mechanism(s) c ProcessRequire- Mode Failure v s of Failure u Controls

ments s r

10 Receiving of Raw Materials Incorrect/sub -standard material

Unable to mold loss of physical properties 7

Incorrect material shipped2

Supplier Ce

Incorrect Melt FlowUnable to mold loss of

physical properties 7Incorrect physical properties

2Supplier Cert. / Melt flow

Incorrect concentratePoor appearance / wrongcolor parts after molding 7

Incorrect material shipped2

Incoming inspection / Su

Concentrate off colorPoor appearance after

molding operation 6

Incorrect blending of material

from supplier 2Incoming inspection / Su

20 Transportation Handling Damage Loss of Material6

Forklift Damage / Spillage/ Contamination 3

Trained material h

30Warehouse/Storage

Lost materialCan not make parts / Shut

down customer7

Material improperly tagged orstored, operator training

2Designated location fo

40 Color Mixing Improper Color MixPart will not meet

specifications6

Operator Error/Dirty mixer3

1) Mixing instructions fromOperator training 3) Mixing

Scale and mixer certi

50 Transportation Handling Damage Delay in production2

Forklift Damage / Spillage/ Contamination 2

Trained material h

60 MoldingOperation

Short shot Poor fit and function7

1) Incorrect molding parametersand set-up 2) Equipment failure

2

1) 100% Visual inspectionverification 3) Process parafrom material su lier 4)

Warp1) Poor fit and function 2)

Poor assembly4


4

1) 100% Visual inspectionverification 3) Process parafrom material supplier 4) P

Sink Marks Poor Appearance3


4


Excess splay on "A" surface1) Poor appearance 2) Lossof strength 3) Shearing of

material 3

1) Irregular heat and/or moisture2) color change

4

1) 100% Visual inspectionverification 3) Process parafrom material supplier 4) P

Contamination1) Poor appearance 2) Loss

of strength3

1) Contamination in mold4


Stress1) Poor fit and function 2)

Poor appearance 31) Improper demolding of part

4

1) 100% Visual inspectionverification 3) Process para

from material sup

Flash 1) Poor fit and function3

1) Incorrect molding parameters2) Tool wear

4


Off color 1) Poor appearance6

1) Improper set-up of concentrate feeder 2) Improper

hand mix of concentrate 3

1) 100% Visual inspectionverification 3) Process parafrom material supplier 4)


23/39

POTENTIAL

FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSISPrint # 0 Rev. 0 (PROCESS FMEA)

Item: 0 Process Responsibility: 0

Model Year(s)/Vehicle(s) 0 Key Date 6/16/200

Team: 0

C Potential OProcess Potential Potential S l Cause(s)/ c Current

Function/ Failure Effect(s) of e a Mechanism(s) c ProcessRequire- Mode Failure v s of Failure u Controls

ments s r

70 In-processInspection

Short shot, warp, sink, splay,contamination, stress, flash

1) Poor part quality andappearance 2) Poor fit and

function 7


41) Visual Inspection 2) P

Off color Poor appearance5

1) Improper set-up of concentrate feeder 2) Improper

hand mix of concentrate 41) Visual Inspection 2)

80 Degate Part Uneven cut1) Poor appearance 2) Poor

fit and function 3Incorrect / Dull knife

41) Operator instructions

a roval

90 InspectionNo short shots, warp, sink

marks, splay, contamination,stress, flash, color match

1) Poor appearance 2) Poorfit and function

7


31) Visual Inspection 2)

100 Cooling Warped parts1) Poor appearance 2) Poor

fit and function7

1) Incorrect molding parameters2) Inadequate cooling time

3

1) Visual Inspection 2) Partson table

110 Packaging Broken box1) Loose parts in transit to

customer 2) Un-safe internaltransit 2

1) High-lo damage 2) Wear andtear

4

1) Operator instructions 2) Vat shippin

Expendable Box too big1) Parts warped due to overpacking 2) Bar code label

wrong 2

1) Availability of correctpackaging

41) Production control order

Box too small1) Parts warped due to

packing 21) Availability of correct

packaging 41) Production control order

120 Labeling Wrong Label1) Shipped wrong parts 2)

Shortage of parts atcustomer

6 1) Wrong label applied to carton 41) Dock audit to verify lab

match

130 TransportationHandling damage

1) Parts damaged 41) Hi-Lo damages box 4 1) Operator instructions fo

2) Parts lost 2) Parts put in wrong area 2) Trained material

140 Dock Audit Misidentified parts1) Overshipement 2)

Undershipment 41) Wrong label applied to carton

41) Label verific

150 Shipping Label does not match part Shipped wrong parts 41) Wrong label applied to carton2) Shortage of parts at customer

41) Dock audit to verify lab

match


24/39

CONTROL PLAN

Control Plan Number Key Contact/Phone Date (Orig

0 0 0Part Number/Latest Change Level Core Team Customer E

0 0Part Name/Description Supplier/Plant Approval/Date Customer Q

0Supplier/Plant Supplier Code Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.) Other Appro

0 0MACHINE, CHARACTERISTICS METHODS

PART/ PROCESS NAME/ DEVICE, SPECIALPROCESS OPERATION JIG,TOOLS, CHAR. PRODUCT/PROCESS EVALUATION/ SAMP

. .TOLERANCE TECHNIQUE

10

ReceivingInspection RawMaterials

1Color Concentrate

Materialcontent

Supplier Certs andincoming inspection

2PC-GE LexanEM3110

Materialcontent

Supplier Certs andincoming inspection

20 Transport HI-Lo 1Raw material/concentrate

Material to be stored inwarehouse until needed

Visual inspection Eac

30 Warehouse/Storage 1 Material Store untilneeded Visual inspection Eac

40Color Mixingoperation

1 Color + PC Mix Ratio 50 to 1 Calibrated Scale

50 Transport 1Raw material/concentrate

Loadingsystem

Loading system must fill atappropriate intervals

100 % visualinspection

60 Molding Operation

Injectionmolding

machine 75ton

1

Raw materialinitial

processparameters

Process Set-up Sheet Visual inspection 100%

70In-process

Inspection1 Short Shot

Check for visual

defects firstpiece and

start-up

Free of short shots Visual inspection 100%

2 Warp

Check for visual

defects firstpiece and

start-up

Free of warp Visual inspection 100%

Prototype Pre-Launch Production


25/39

CONTROL PLAN




0Supplier/Plant Supplier Code Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.) Other Approv


PART/ PROCESS NAME/ DEVICE, SPECIALPROCESS OPERATION JIG,TOOLS, CHAR. PRODUCT/PROCESS EVALUATION/ SAMPNUMBER DESCRIPTION FOR MFG. NO. PRODUCT PROCESS CLASS SPECIFICATION/ MEASUREMENT SIZE FR


3 Sink Marks

Check for visual

defects firstpiece andstart-up

Free of sink marks Visual inspection 100%

4 Excess Splay

Check for visual


Free of excessive splay Visual inspection 100%

5 Contamination

Check for visual


Free of contamination Visual inspection 100%

In- processInspection con't

6 Stress

Check for visual


Free of stress Visual inspection 100%

7 Flash

Check for visual


Free of flash Visual inspection 100%


26/39

CONTROL PLAN




0Supplier/Plant Supplier Code Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.) Other Appro


PART/ PROCESS NAME/ DEVICE, SPECIAL, , .

NUMBER DESCRIPTION FOR MFG. NO. PRODUCT PROCESS CLASS SPECIFICATION/ MEASUREMENT SIZE FRTOLERANCE TECHNIQUE


8 Color Verify color Color master Visual inspection 100%

80 Degate Trim Knife 1Trim and

degate partsGates to be flush withoutgouges and white marks

Visual inspection 100

90 Inspection 1Verification

of all theabove

Visual defects, appearance,color match to master


100 Cooling Time 1 Cool parts Allow parts to cool on tablebefore packing


110 Packaging 1Proper packing

Pack in box Visual Inspection 100%

120 Labeling 1 Proper labelingLabel box inside andout/Loose label on inside of box


130 Transport HI-Lo 1 Molded partTransport molded part tostorage/shipping


140 Dock Audit 1 IdentificationProper barcode label tocontents


150 Shipping 1Shipping to

paint sourceInvoice to JCI 100


27/39

CONTROL PLAN SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICSControl Plan Number Key Contact/Phone Date (Orig.) D

0 0 0Part Number/Latest Change Level Core Team Customer Engineering Ap

0 0Part Name/Description Supplier/Plant Approval/Date Customer Quality Approv

0Supplier/Plant Supplier Code Other Approval/Date (If Req'd.) Other Approval/Date (If R

0 0No. Description/Rationale Specification/Tolerance Class Illustration/Pic



28/39

Production Part Approval -Dimensional Results

SUPPLIER PART NUMBER

0NAME OF INSPECTION FACILITY PART NAME

0NOT

ITEM DIMENSION/SPECIFICATION SUPPLIER MEASUREMENT RESULTS OK OK

SIGNATURE TITLE DATE

0

page 28/39


29/39

Production Part Approval -Material Test Results


0NAME OF LABORATORY PART NAME

0TYPE OF NOT

TEST MATERIAL SPEC. NO./DATE/SPECIFICATION SUPPLIER TEST RESULTS OK OK


0

page 29/39


30/39

Production Part Approval -Performance Test Results


0NAME OF LABORATORY PART NAME

0REF. TEST QTY. NOTNO. REQUIREMENTS FREQ. TESTED SUPPLIER TEST RESULTS AND TEST CONDITIONS OK OK


0

page 30/39


31/39

APPEARANCE APPROVAL REPORTPART DRAWING APPLICAT

NUMBER 0 NUMBER (VEHICLEPART BUYER E/C LEVEL

NAME 0 CODE 0SUPPLIER MANUFACTURING 0NAME 0 LOCATION 0 0REASON FOR PART SUBMISSION WARRANT SPECIAL SAMPLE RE-SUBMISSION

SUBMISSION PRE TEXTURE FIRST PRODUCTION SHIPMENT ENGINEERING CHANGE

APPEARANCE EVALUATION

SUPPLIER SOURCING AND TEXTURE INFORMATION PRE-TEXTUREEVALUATION

CORRECT

AND PROCEED

CORRECT AN

RESUBMIT

APPROVED TOTEXTURE

COLOR EVALUATION

COLOR TRISTIMULUS DATA MASTER MASTER MATERIAL MATERIAL HUE VALUE CHROMA GLOSS

SUFFIX NUMBER DATE TYPE SOURCE

DL* Da* Db* DE* CMC RED YEL GRN BLU LIGHT DARK GRAY CLEAN HIGH LO

COMMENTS

SUPPLIER PHONE NO. DATE CUSTOMERSIGNATURE REPRESENTATIVE SIGNATURE


32/39

GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY REPORTSHORT FORM ATTRIBUTE RESULTS

Part Number Gage Name Appraiser A

0Part Name Gage Number Appraiser B

0Characterisitic/Specification Gage Type Date Performed

APPRAISER A APPRAISER BPART # TRIAL #1 TRIAL #2 PART # TRIAL #1 TRIAL #2

1 12 23 34 45 56 67 78 8

9 910 1011 1112 1213 1314 1415 1516 1617 1718 1819 1920 20

All measurement decisions agree?

Remarks

Yes Accept Gage

No Reject Gage

page 32/39


33/39

GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY REPORTLONG FORM ATTRIBUTE RESULTS

Part Number Gage Name Appraiser

0Part Name Gage Number Date Performed

0Characterisitic Gage Type Upper Limit Lower Limit

ATTRIBUTE DATA# XT a P' a After "Press for Graph" :1 0.000 1) Copy "X Variable 1 Line Fit Plot" from the data sheet2 0.025 to here.3 0.025 2) Size and and add gridlines.4 0.025 3) Label as follows:5 0.025 X Variable Line Fit Plot to Gage Performance Curve6 0.025 X Variable 1 to Xt7 0.025 Y to Probability8 0.025 4) Click the Chart and double click a predicted Y point9 0.025 and change the line pattern to automatic.

5) Estimate the points below from the graph.6) Move the chart to cover these instructions.

FROM THE GRAPHENTER THE FOLLOWING: NOTE: If an error occurs see page 60 of the manual.

XT (P=.5) =

XT (P=.995) =

XT (P=.005) =

Measurement Unit Analysis

Bias RepeatabilityB = R == =

t Statistict = 31.3 IBI / R t0.025,19 = 2.093

==

Result

ReviewedTitle

page 33/39


34/39

GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEET GAGE REPEAVARIABLE DATA RESULTS

Part Number Gage Name Appraiser A Part Number

0 0Part Name Gage Number Appraiser B Part Name

0 0Characteristic/Specification Gage Type Appraiser C Characteristic/Specification

Characteristic Classification Trials Parts Appraisers Date Performed Characteristic Classification Tri

0 0 0

APPRAISER/ PART AVERAGE MeaTRIAL # 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Repeatability - Equipmen

1. A 1 EV = R

2. 2 =

3. 3 =

4. AVE Xa= Reproducibility - Appr

5. R R a= AV = {(

6. B 1 =

7. 2 =

8. 3

9. AVE Xb= Repeatability & Repro

10. R Rb= R & R = {(

11. C 1 =

12. 2 =

13. 3 Part Variation (PV)14. AVE Xc= PV = R

15. R R c= =

16. PART X= =AVE ( Xp ) Rp= Total Variation (TV)

17. (R a + R b + R c) / (# OF APPRAISERS) = R= TV = {(

18. (Max X - Min X) = XDIFF= =

19. R x D 4* = UCL R =

20. R x D 3* = LCLR All calculations are based upon

K1 is 5.15/d 2, where d 2 is d

* D4 =3.27 for 2 trials and 2.58 for 3 trials; D 3 = 0 for up to 7 trials. UCL R represents the limit of individual R's. Circle those that are assumed to be greater tha

beyond this limit. Identify the cause and correct. Repeat these readings using the same appraiser and unit as originally used or dis- AV - If a negative value is calculated under the square

card values and re-average and recompute R and the limiting value from the remaining observations. K 2 is 5.15/d 2, where d 2 is d

K2 is 5.15/d 2, where d 2 is dNotes: d 2 is obtained from Table D


35/39

GAGE REPEATABILITY AND REPRODUCIBILITY DATA SHEET GAGE REPEATVARIABLE DATA RESULTS - INCLUDING WITHIN-PART VARIATION

Part Number Gage Name Appraiser A Part Number

0 0Part Name Gage Number Appraiser B Part Name

0 0Characteristic/Specification Gage Type Appraiser C Characteristic/Specification G

Characteristic Classification Trials Parts Appraisers Date Performed Characteristic Classification Tria

0 0 0

PART MeasAPPRAISER/ 1 2 3 4 5 APPRAISER Repeatability - Equipment VariTRIAL # MAX MIN RGE MAX MIN RGE MAX MIN RGE MAX MIN RGE MAX MIN RGE AVERAGE EV = x

1. A 1 =

2. 2 =

3. 3 Reproducibility - Appraiser

4. AVE Xa= AV = {(XD

5. R =

6. B 1 =

7. 2

8. 3 Repeatability & Reproducib

9. AVE Xb= R & R = {(EV

10. R =

11. C 1 =

12. 2 Part Variation (PV)

13. 3 PV = RP x

14. AVE Xc= =

15. R Ro= =

16. Part Within-Part Variation (WIVAve ( X p ) R p=

17. Ave of X wiv RXwiv= WIV = ((XW

18. RREPEAT = (S RANGE(LINES 5, 10, & 15))/(#RANGE READINGS) (MAX/MIN ONLY)= R REP = =

19. Xdiff = [ Max X ] - [Min X ] = X DIFF = XWIV = S XW

20. UCLR = R x D 4* = D4= UCL R =

21. LCLR = R x D 3* = LCLR WIV = # APPRAISERS

EVWIV = K1 x

* D4 =3.27 for 2 trials and 2.58 for 3 trials; D 3 = 0 for up to 7 trials. UCL R represent s the limit of individual R's. Circle those that are =

beyond this limit. Identify the cause and correct. Repeat these readings using the same appraiser and unit as originally used or dis- Total Variation (TV)

card values and re-average and recompute R and the limiting value from the remaining observations. TV = {(R&=

Notes: =


36/39

REPEATABILITY RANGE CONTROL CHARTPLANT DEPT. OPERATION DATE CONTROL LIMITS CALCULATED ENGINEERING SPECIF

0MACHINE NO. DATES OF STUDY CHARACTERISTIC SAMPLE SIZE FREQUENCY PART N

NUMBER OF APPRAISERS APPRAISER A APPRAISER B APPRAISER C

0

X = UCL = LCL = AVERAGES (X BAR CHART)

R = UCL = LCL = RANGES (R CHART)

NUMBER 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

DATE/TIME

R 1

E A

2

DI

3

N

G

4

S 5

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

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

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

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


37/39

PART APPRAISER AVERAGE CHARTPLANT DEPT. OPERATION DATE CONTROL LIMITS CALCULATED ENGINEERING SPEC

0MACHINE NO. DATES OF STUDY CHARACTERISTIC SAMPLE SIZE FREQUENCY PART

NUMBER OF APPRAISERS APPRAISER A APPRAISER B APPRAISER C

0

X = UCL = LCL = AVERAGES (X BAR CHART)

R = UCL = LCL = RANGES (R CHART)

NUMBER 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

DATE/TIME

R 1

E A

2

DI

3

NG 4S 5

0.00

0.10

0.20

0.30

0.40

0.50

0.60

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

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

0.00

0.20

0.40

0.60

0.80

1.00

1.20

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


38/39

Part Submission WarrantPart Name 0 Part Number 0

0 Dated 0

Additional Engineering Changes Dated

Shown on Drawing Number Purchase Order No. Weight (kg)

Checking Aid Number Engineering Change Level Dated

SUPPLIER MANUFACTURING INFORMATION SUBMISSION INFORMATION

0 0Supplier Name

0 Customer Name/Division 0Street Address

Buyer/Buyer Code

0 0 00000City State Zip Application 0

REASON FOR SUBMISSIONInitial 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

Other - please specify

REQUESTED SUBMISSION LEVEL (Check one)Level 1 - Warrant, Appearance Approval Report (for designated appearance items only).

Level 2 - Warrant, Parts, Drawings, Inspection Results, Laboratory and Functional Results, Appearance Approval Report

Level 3 - At Customer Location - W arrant, Parts, Drawings, Inspection Results, Laboratory and Functional Results, Appearance

Approval Report, Process Capability Results, Capability Study, Process Control Plan, Gage Study, FMEA.

Level 4 - Per level 3, but without parts.

Level 5 - At Supplier Location - Warrant, Parts, Drawings, Inspection Results, Laboratory and Functional Results, Appearance

Approval Report, Process Capability Results, Capability Study, Process Control Plan, Gage Study, FMEA.

SUBMISSION RESULTSThe results for dimensional measurements material and functional tests appearance criteria statistical process package

These results meet all drawing and specification requirements: (If "NO" - Explanation Required)

DECLARATIONI affirm that the samples represented by this warrant are representative of our parts and have been made to the applicable customer

drawings and specifications and are made from specified materials on regular production tooling with no operations other than the

regular production process. I have noted any deviations from this declaration below.

EXPLANATION/COMMENTS:

Print Name Title Phone No. 0

Supplier Authorized Signature Date

FOR CUSTOMER USE ONLY

Part Disposition

Customer Name Customer Signature Date

Teleflex Automotive Group

Safety and/or Government Regulation Engineering DrawingChange Level Yes No

Dimensional Materials/Function Appearance

YES NO

Approved Rejected Other

page 38/39


39/39

CUSTOMER LIST FMEA RPN CRITERIA ACTIVE # IN DOCUMENT 1 SEVERITY SCALE

1 Teleflex Automotive Group 10 Hazardous - w/o warning2 9 Hazardous - w/ warning

3 8 Very High4 7 High5 6 Moderate6 5 Low7 4 Very Low8 3 Minor 9 2 Very Minor

10 1 None11 OCCURENCE SCALE12 10 >1 in 213 9 1 in 314 8 1 in 815 7 1 in 2016 6 1 in 8017 5 1 in 40018 4 1 in 2,00019 3 1 in 15,00020 2 1 in 150,000

1 1 in 1,500,000DETECTION SCALE10 Absolute Uncertainty9 Vey Remote8 Remote7 Very Low6 Low5 Moderate4 Moderately High

3 High2 Very High1 Almost Certain

Documents

Check Sheet Model SCC