PPAP TRAINING Quality Learning Education PPT

• PPAP OVERVIEW
• PPAP APPLICABILITY
• PPAP IMPLEMENTATION
• PPAP DELIVERABLES
• PPAP APPROVAL
• PPAP RECORDS
• PPAP CHANGES
AG ENDA
2

What is PPAP?
PPAP OVERVI EW
4

W H A T T H E A C R O N Y M S T A N D S F O R :
PPAP OVERVI EW
PPAP
Production
Part
Approval
Process
5

PPAP OVERVI EW
G O A L
Production Part Approval Process
“… to ensure that all Member engineering and
quality requirements are understood and
fulfilled and that the manufacturing processes
have been proven to consistently meet these
requirements at the intended production rate by
integrating upfront quality planning.”
6

W H E R E I T S T A R T E D
PPAP OVERVI EW
• Automotive – ISO/TS/IATF16949/AIAG PPAP Manual
• Aerospace – ASQR-09.2 Rev.2
BENCHMARK
7

B E N E F I T S T O U S I N G PPAP
Manufacturing process functions that are clearly planned, validated, documented and
communicated that result in:
• Reduced process variation
• Statistically controlled processes
• Enhanced customer confidence
in supplier’s capabilities
• Consistent approach in assuring
quality and providing evidence
• Reduced COPQ (infant mortality escapes)
• Better controlled process changes
PPAP OVERVI EW
8

D Y N A MI C I N T E G R A T E D P R O D U C T D E V E L O P M E N T
PPAP OVERVI EW
10
Escape
DFMEA
ENGR. CHANGE
WORK TRANSFER
PROCESS CHANGE
Closed Loop
Knowledge Management
Accumulates
Product and Process
Learnings
PPAP Triggers
NEW PRODUCT
PPAP Triggers
Detailed
Design
Learning Organization
PFMEA
Control
Plans
Work
Instructions
Ship to
Customer
RRCA
8-D

Supplier Portal PPAP Links
Get PPAP related forms and tools:
1. PPAP Forms
2. Capacity Analysis Tools
3. Training Slides
4. Measurement System Analysis
5. FMEA Forms
6. Control Plan Forms
7. PFMEA Example
8. Flow Diagram Example
PPAP OVERVI EW
10

E L E ME N T S
PPAP OVERVI EW
19
Elements
reduced
to
11
11

P P A P T O O L K I T
• Items in the “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 (PPAP specification)
PPAP OVERVI EW
14
Process Readiness
Study Assessment
COL-FRM-1005
PPAP 215
Training Package
ASQR-09.2 PPAP Checklist
COL-FRM-1004
Objective Evidence
Package & Forms
COL-FRM-1006
PPAP 215
Per ASQR-09.2 Rev B
Supplier Awareness Session
Course I.D. # 996971 Four Hours
COPYRIGHT © HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND CORPORATION. THIS DOCUMENT IS THE PROPERTY OF HAMILTON SUNDSTRAND
CORPORATION (HS). YOU MAY NO
T POSSESS, USE, COPY OR DISCLOSE THIS D
OCU
ME
NT OR A
NY INFORMATION IN IT, FOR A
N
Y
PURPOSE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, TO DESIGN, MA
NUFA
C
TUR
E OR REPAIR PARTS, OR OBTA
IN A
NY GOVERNMENT
APPROVAL TO DO SO, WI
THO
UT HS’S EXPRESS WR
ITT
EN PERMISSION. NEITHER RECEIPT N
OR POSSESSION OF THIS DOCUMENT
ALONE, FROM ANY SOURCE, CONSTITUTES SUCH PERMISSION. POSSESSION, USE, COPYING OR DISCLOSURE B Y A
NYONE
WITHOUT HS’S EXPRESS WRITTEN PERMISSION IS NOT A
UTHORIZED A
N
D MA
Y RESULT IN CRIMINA
L A
ND/OR CIVIL LIA
BILITY.
This document contains no technical data. ECCN:EA
R99
UTAS Enterprise
Producer
C
o
d
e
Producer
N
a
m
e
Producer
Contact
Producer
Contact
P h o n e
Number
Producer Contact
E
m
a
i
l
A
ddress
Drawing
Number
Drawing N
a
m
e Drawing Revision
Level:
Part Number Part N
a
m
e Part Revision Level:
Reason for
Submission
A
dditional
Comments
UPPAP
Level
Level 3 - Form 1 with complete
supporting d
a
t
a
First
Production
Delivery D
a
t
e
UPPAP Initial
Submission
D
a
t
e
UTAS Member
Focal Point
(
M
F
P
)
UTAS
Contact
P h o n e
Number
UTAS Contact
E-M
a
i
l
A
ddress
ITEM #
ENTER "X" I
F
PPAP ELEMENT I
S
APPLICABLE F
O
R
THE SUBJECT
P
A
R
T
ENTER "X" IF THE UT
A
S
MFP REQUIRES T
H
E
PRODUCER TO SUBMIT
OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE
FOR APPLICABLE
ELEMENT
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
1
1
1
2
1
3
1
4
1
5
1
6
1
7
1
8
Supplier Information:
The "PPAP Level Decision Tree" is used to determine the PPAP oversight level.
The supplier will review this input sheet and perform what is in column F and submit what
is in column G
.
PPAP INPUT SHEET
Special Process Approval and Nondestructive Test (NDT)
Material Certification Documentation
Design Failure Modes Effects Analysis (DFMEA)
Process F
l
o
w
Process Failure Modes Effects Analysis (PFMEA)
Process Control P
l
a
n
Dimensional Report
Production Verification Testing (
P
V
T
)
UPPAP ELEMENT PER ASQR-0
9
.
2
Released Production Drawings
SPD/SMD and SI Sheets
Production PO and Demand Fulfillment
Raw Material Approval
Part Marking Approval
Packaging, Preservation & Labeling Approval
19 Review and Sign-O
f
f
Process Readiness Study (
P
RS
)
Initial Process Capability Studies
Measurement Systems Analysis (Gage R&
R)
Engineering frozen Planning/Source Approval (EFP/ESA)
Element U P P A P E l e m e n t
Criteria
Status
( N / A , N
o
t
Process,
Completed)
Started, In- Action
Item(s)/Comments
1) Does producer have access to
applicable UTC division drawings
& specifications?
2) Is top level and sub-level (BOM)
drawings and specifications
7) Verify that the producer is working to
a production purchase order?
all product design requirements (e.g.
performance, producibility, appearance,
environmental, any other customer
expectations)
14) Validate that the producer has received
any historical quality a
n
d or
lessons learned data from the UTC
member and has incorporated that
learning into their DFMEA.
16) Validate recommended actions
identified for high RPN and/or high
Severity items are completed, or a plan
with owners & dates exists.
17) Validate linkage to PFMEA.
18) Identification of CTQ Features (i.e.,
CTQC, CTSC, FSC, KPC1,
KPC2). Ensure lower level key
characteristics are defined t
h
a
t
support UTC defined critical to quality
features.
19) Evidence of the use of risk mitigation
strategies in the design (e.g.
early warning, control, system redundancies
and mistake- proof design
features).
20) Evidence of inspection methods,
validation and testing aligned
with DFMEA identified risks.
manufacturing process being used, has
an established revision
21) Validate that the process map exists for
the actual production
level, and that the process map is a
"living document" subject t
o ongoing
revision.
potential sources of
variation.
25) Assure flowmap steps identify
where CTQ features a
r
e
produced.
UTAS PPAP2- ASSESSMENT CHECKLIST
Fullfillment
knows the latest demand schedule and is updating
capacity a
n
d
m anufacturing plans
accordingly.
10)
Is there evidence that the producer
flows down the latest demand
schedule to subtier suppliers and is
updating subtier manage ment plans
accordingly.
11)
Validate DFMEA exists for the part number
and has established revision
level and that DFMEA is a "living
document" subject t
o ongoing
revision.
12)
Validate producer use of standardized format
(e.g. SAE J1739 o
r as agreed
to by UTC Member)
13)Validate that the producer understands and has
incorporated
15) Validate that the failure modes are
be described in physical,
Design F
ME
A
technical and measurable terms.
Validate that causes a
r
e
(fo r producers
4
with design
described in terms of something that can be
corrected o
r controlled.
authority)
22) Validate producer uses standard flow
diagram format including standard
flowchart symbols, alternate formal and/or
rework paths,
5 Process Flow wip storage, and covering
all steps from receiving t
o
inspection/testing and shipping.
23)Assure alignment with PFMEA and control p
l
a
n
.
24)Assure flowmap accounts for all outside
operations a
n
d
Released released (i.e.
signatures applied)?
1 Production
3) Is producer working to correct drawing
revisions, including a
l
l
Drawings
detail drawings (e.g. casting,
forging, other detail parts) a
s
indicated on the purchase order?
4) Validate if any Critical to Quality (CTQ)
features called o
u
t
.
SPD/SMD and
5) Verify that any supplemental customer
requirements (Purchase
SI Sheets
Order, Quality or Engineering Notes/Documents) are
incorporated
NOTE: See
into producer
and subtier manufacturing processes and documents.
2
Eleme
nt
Reference Card 6) Verify that the producer is working to the
correct released
for UTC revision of any supplemental customer
requirement documents a
s
divisional specified on the Purchase Order
(e.g. Quality or Engineering definitions.
Notes/Documents, other specifications).
8) Verify that the sub-tier PO documents flow
down any U
T
C
Production PO
requirements per ASQR-01, ASQR-09.2 e
t
c
.
3 and Demand
9) Does the UPPAP package have evidence that the prod
uce
r
Previous
A B A B A A B A B A
B
1 Tooling and
Gaging
2 Capacity
3 Sub Tier
Management
4 Metrics &
Performance
5 Business Planning
and Management
PROCESS READINESS STUDY
(Supports UPPAP, Rate Increase Analysis, and Retrofit Initiatives)
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r P
O
C
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r (
C
o
m
p
a
n
y Name)
Manufacturing
Capabilities
Total of employ
ees
Annual Sales
UTAS % of sales
Major Customers
L
o
c
a
t
i
o
n (including City & State)
U
T
A
S T
e
a
m
S
u
p
p
l
i
e
r T
e
a
m
Value S
t
r
e
a
m / Program
Aggregate Performance ######
######
Aerospace % of S
a
l
e
s
Ratings automatically
populated unless otherwise
noted
A= Supplier self-rating
U
TAS score
Supplier UTAS Supplier UTAS Supplier
E
Supplier UTAS
Supplier UTAS Supplier U
T
A
S (manual input)
B = UTAS rating on Supplier
D
a
t
e o
f A
ssessment
ROLL-U
P
Number of Aircraft
per month
Number of Parts
per month
PROCESS REA
DINESS STUDY ROLL-UP
O
b
s
e
r
va
t
i
o
n
s / P
l
a
n
s
C
o
m
m
e
n
t
s / R
e
c
o
m
m
e
n
d
at
io
ns
F
o
r Progression
Aggregate Readiness Percentage #VALUE! UPPAP Requires Aggregate
>80% with zero Red categories in Current (Initial) R
a
t
e
Previous Performance Future Plan Future Plan Future Plan
Future Plan Future P
l
a
n
(Current Rate) (Rate Change) (Rate Change) (Rate
Change) (Rate Change) (Rate Change)
P
e
r
f
o
r
m
a
n
ce (To D
a
t
e
) R at ing
Table
F
u
t
u
r
e P
l
a
n
Not currently meeting target,
countermeasures
are not developed or are
behind p
l
a
n
1 Issues, Problems and
Opportunities n
o
t
recognized
Not currently meeting target,
countermeasures
are on plan to recover
2
Issues, Problems and
Opportunities a
r
e
recognized,
but the plan for
countermeasures has g
a
p
s
Meeting target,
countermeasures a
r
e
implemented and on
p
l
a
n
3
Issues, Problems and
Opportunities a
r
e
recognized;
planned countermeasures
will support r
a
t
e
M
g
mt
To-Do-List Tab
Tooling &
Capacity
Metricsand
B
u
s
i
n
es
s
Gaging
Sub-Tier Mgmt
Performance
Planning and LeanGl
o
s
s
ary
Capacity
Tooling and Gaging
1
.
0
0
.
9
0
.
8
0
.
7
0
.
6
0
.
5
Business Planning and
0
.
4
0
.
2
0
.
1
0
.
0
Management
0
.
3
Aggregate Future Plan ###### ###### ###### ###### ###### ###### ###### ###### ###### ###### Process Readiness
Study Radar Trend P
r
e
v
i
o
u
s
C
u
r
r
e
n
t
ENTER "X"
IF T
H
E
ELEMEN
T
ELEMEN
T
APPLICABLE FOR SUBMIT OBJECTIVE COMPLETION COMPLETION
COMPLETION
THE SUBJECT EVIDENCE FOR INTERIM B INTERIM
A
PART APPLICABLE SUBMISSION SUBMISSION
FULL SU
B
MI
SSIO
N
X X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
X X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
X X 8/30/2017 11/28/2017
2/26/2018
X X 8/31/2017 11/29/2017
2/27/2018
X X 9/1/2017 11/30/2017 2/28/2018
X X 11/1/2017 1/30/2018 4/30/2018
X X 10/31/2017 1/29/2018
4/29/2018
X X 7/31/2017 10/29/2017
1/27/2018
X X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018
5/30/2018
X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018
5/30/2018
X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
X X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
Supplier Date
Clearly Printed Name And Signature
J o h n Smith
U PPAP P
L
A
N
PRODUCER/SUPPLIER
N
a
m
e
Aerospace
Widget I
n
c
1
2
3
4
D r a wi n g
R e v i s i o n Level:
A
PRODUCER/SUPPLIER
C
o
d
e
PRODUCER/SUPPLIER
Contact
PRODUCER/SUPPLIER
Contact E
m
a
i
l
john.smith@anywhere.com
000-000-0
0
0
0
Anytown,
U
S
A
PRODUCER/SU
A
P
d
PL
dr
I
e
ER
ss
Contact P
h
o
n
e
Number
PRODUCER/SUPPLIER A
ddress
D r a wi n g Number
123456
D r a wi n g
N
a
m
e
Muffler
Bearing
UPPAP OEP Initial
Submission D
a
t
e
12/1/2018
Part N
a
m
e Muffler
Bearing
Part Number 1 2 3 4 5 6
- 2
Part Revision
Level:
N
C
UPPAP L
e
ve
l 3
First Production
Delivery D
a
t
e
1/1/2019
1 R e l e a s e d P r o d u c t i o n
Draw
ings
U T A S M e m b e r F o c a l
P o i n t (
M
F
P
)
T o m B
a
s
s
U T A S C o n t a c t
P h o n e Number
860-654-7
7
2
7
UTAS Contact E-Mail
A
ddress
tom.bass@nowwhere.com
Additional
Comments
It’s a great day for
UPPAP.
ENTER "X" IF PPAP UTAS MFP REQUIRES TARGET DATE FOR TARGET DATE FOR
TARGET DATE F
O
R ELEMENT IS THE
PRODUCER TO ELEMENT ELEMENT
ITEM # UPPA
P ELEMENT PER A
SQR-0
9
.
2
2 Supplementary Product Requirement
Documents (SPRD)
3 Production PO and Demand
Fullfillment
4 Design Failure Modes Effects
Analysis (DFMEA
)
5 Process Flow
Diagram (
P
F
D
)
6 Process Failure Modes Effects
Analysis (PFMEA
)
7 Process Control
Plan (
P
C
P
)
8 Process Readiness
Study (
P
R
S
)
9 Initial Process
Studies (
I
P
S
)
10 Measurement Systems
Analysis (
M
S
A
)
12 Dimensional
Report
13 Production Verification
Testing (
P
V
T
)
Form Number:
UTAS-FRM-1
0
1
1
Revision: 0
0
U T A S MFP Date
Authorizing Document: UTAS-GUI-1
0
0
0
1 7 Part M a r k i n g
A
pproval
18 Packaging, Preservation &
Labeling A
pproval
19 Review and
Sign-O
f
f
14 Special Process Approval and
Nondestructive Test (NDT)
15 Material Certification
Documentation
16 Raw Material
A
pproval
1 1 E n g i n e e r i n g f r o z e n P l a n n i n g / S ou r c e
A p p r o v a l (EFP/ESA
)
PPAP Plan
COL-FRM-1011

F A I L U R E MO D E E F F E C T S A N A L Y S I S ( F M E A )
Risk Identification and Mitigation Tool
• FMEA is a tool used to identify product or process risks
• Risk mitigation plans are created to reduce probability of failure modes occurring
• DFMEA (Design FMEA) is completed on a product design for suppliers with design
authority per ASQR-09.2
• PFMEA (Process FMEA) is completed for all manufacturing, assembly and test
process steps of the per ASQR-09.2
• The Input Data Sheet or IDS (ASQR-09.2 Form 3) can be used by suppliers with
design authority to communicate significant design risks (KCs, KPCMs, testing, etc.).
This form should also be provided by Collins Aerospace to build to print suppliers to
provide valuable design information for the PFMEA.
PPAP OVERVI EW
13

S U M M A R Y
• PPAP is being implemented to identify risk and eliminate or reduce the risk of failures
within products and processes
• Upfront validation and verification of critical part processes will enable production
readiness
• The supplier is responsible for flowing down PPAP through their Supply Chain
• The supplier is responsible for determining Element applicability based on risk and
creating a PPAP Plan
• Our experience with recent new programs suggest implementation of PPAP is
warranted and very appropriate
• PPAP is flowed out to suppliers by ASQR-09.2 via the purchase order
PPAP OVERVI EW
14

NPI /APQ P RELATI ONSHI P
17
P0 P2 P3 P4 P5
Complete PD by determining PPAP P/Ns, applicable
elements and oversight levels; Begin DD working to
communicate PPAP requirements, conduct training
and complete the PPAP1 Review per COL-GUI-1000.
2 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10.1 6, 7, 9, 10.2, 11
PPAP
Review
Key
Reviews
PPAP
Element Number
Expected
Completion Time
Key Outcomes
DCAR PDR CDR
Complete DD and starting VV with Producer preparing package
During VV complete PPAP 2 Review per COL-WRK-1000
Close any gaps with Producer
Complete VV via sign-off of PPAP Form 1
Enter into Serial Production
1st Shipment
12 months
Months 1-4 Months 5-9 Months 10-12
Passport 1 / 2
UTAS Awarded Contract
Preliminary Design
P1
Passport 0
Proposal
Passport 4 / 5
Serial Production
and Service
Passport 2 / 3
Detailed Design
Passport 3 / 4
Validation &
Verification
Program
Approval
Prototype Pilot Launch
Concept
Approval
NPI
Phase 1
Planning
Phase 2
Product Design and Development
Phase 3
Process Design and
Development
APQP
Phase 4 Phase 5
Product and On-Going Production,
Process Validation Use, and Post-
(PPAP) Delivery Service

RI SK BASED PPAP PART APPLI CABI LI TY
Example PPAP Parts:
• Housings
• Castings
• Heat Exchangers
• Fuel Controls
• Shafts
• Disks
• Bearings
• Brackets
• Landing Gear
• RAT
• Valves
• Tubes/Ducts
• Electronics
Design Risks
• Flight Safety
• CTQ’s
• Special Processes
• Material
Manufacturing
Risks
• High risk parts
based on
manufacturing
risks (new
technology, high
complexity, etc.)
Part Family
History
• Quality
• Escapes
• PPM
PPAP Parts
Methodology applied to all new designs and major re-designs for existing programs.
17

E L E M E N T WA I V E R S , A P P L I C A B I L I T Y, A N D D E F E R R A L S
No
Waivers
Element
Applicability
There are no waivers in PPAP. If a part received
a PPAP requirement, then it means Collins
Aerospace has committed to the customer that
PPAP will be executed on that part. Your support
is needed to meet these requirements.
There are no waivers of elements in PPAP, but
there is element applicability. For example,
elements such as DRA (DFMEA) would not be
applicable for Build-To-Print (BTP)
In VERY rare circumstances, Collins Aerospace
may agree to a deferral of when the initial PPAP
approval is due for a specific part number. This
is NOT waiving the requirement, only agreeing
to a short deadline extension.
18

• If the supplier is not going to achieve
their target date(s) per the PPAP Plan, a
deferral request needs to be submitted
on ASQR-09.2 Form 1 Sheet 2
• The deferral request can happen at any
point in the PPAP process prior to Interim
B Approval.
• Each additional deferral request must be
escalated to the next level of
management within Collins Aerospace .
PPAP DEFERRAL
Note: This form must be accompanied by a completed ASQR-09.2 Form 1
PPAP Deferral
ASQR-09.2 Form2 (Rev 1, 1/2019)
Part Number: Deferral Iteration:
Part Name: Initial Submit Date:
Part Revision Level: Revised Commit Date:
SupplierName: SupplierContact Name:
Supplier / Vendor Code: SupplierEmail:
Justification
IMPACTED ELEMENTS
NEW ELEMENT
COMMIT DATE
COMMENTS Additional Feedback Attached
1 Design Records
2 Design Risk Analysis
3 Process Flow Diagram (PFD)
4 Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (PFMEA)
5 Control Plan
6 Measurement System Analysis (MSA)
7 Initial Process Capability Studies
8 Packaging, Preservation and Labeling Approvals
9 First Article Inspection Report (FAIR)
10.1 Part Marking Approval
10.2 Production Process Run(s)
SUPPLIER DECLARATION & AUTHORIZATION
On behalf of the Supplier, I submit this Request for PPAP Deferral and commit to completing all open action items to satisfy the requirement of each Element needed to achieve the
Interim and Full Approval commitment dates on the associated PPAP Approval (Form 1). On behalf of the Supplier, I understand that this exception is only allowing shipment of
hardware to support UTC Member production during the exception period and does not negate the criticality of meeting PPAP requirements. Any extensions required to this
exception due to lack of achieving PPAP Approval (Form 1) commitment dates shall require resubmission and escalated approvals or no additional hardware shipment allowance.
On behave of the Supplier, I have reviewed this form for technical data and have classified as required.
Export Control Statements: This Form Contains No Technical Data This Form Contains Technical Data - Jurisdiction & Classification:
Clearly Print Name & Sign Title Date
CUSTOMER USE ONLY
Cause Category (check all that apply, include details in Comments):
Incomplete Element(s) Supplier Resources
Development Source only Part will be Superseded
UTC Member Resources Quality of Submission
Late Requirement
Other:
Comments
UTC Member Approvals (Customer Purchasing Representative responsible to obtain):
Print & Sign Name Title
Iteration 1 Approvals*: Iteration 2 Approvals*:
Procurement Manager Procurement Leadership
Quality Manager Quality Leadership
MFP Manager MFP Leadership
Date
Date
Date
Iteration 3 Approvals*:
Vice President Procurement
Vice President Quality
MFP Leadership
*Or delegate
This document contains no technicaldata subject to the EARor the ITAR (Review for technicaldata is required once this form is filled in, which may require a change in Jurisdiction & Classification).
Include Export Control Statements as directed by the ITC Focal.
19

PPAP PRO CESS STEPS (PHASES )
SOW will flow down PPAP
requirement for NPI (for
Supplier Owned Designs
only)
RFQ will include PPAP
Supplier to develop PPAP
plan identifying applicable
elements and Interim B, A
and Full commitment dates
MFP will review PPAP plan
for element applicability and
Interim B, A and Full
commitment dates.
PPAP Plan
Acceptable?
Supplier will start collecting
OE for individual elements
per ASQR-09.2 and the PPAP
Plan and share with the
Collins MFP
No
Yes
Collins MFP will review
PPAP elements working with
the supplier
OE package (UTAS-FRM-1006
or equivalent)
MFP will review the PPAP OE
package
OE Complete?
MFP Dispostion with
appropriate interm approval
class (B or A)
Supplier works action items
to closure and resubmits
Form 1 and OE package for
MFP Approval
No PPAP Full Approval
Yes
PPAP flowed down on
Production Purchase Order
Supplier to take PPAP 215
Video Training on Collins
Supplier Portal
Supplier will submit PPAP
OE package (COL-FRM-
1006 or equivalent)
21

PPAP FLO W- DO WN PHASE
only)
plan idenifying applciable
commitment dates.
PPAP Plan
Acceptable?
Collins MFP
No
Yes
the supplier
or equivalent)
package
OE Complete?
MFP Dispostion with
class (B or A)
MFP Approval
Yes
PPAP flowed down on
Supplier Portal
1006 or equivalent)
22

PPAP FLO W- DO WN
• ASQR-09.2 on PO or Statement of
Work
• Collins Aerospace PPAP procedure
• COL-PRO-0027
• Collins Aerospace procedure
referencing ASQR-09.2
• All design KCs flowed directly on B/P
PO or SOW
ASQR-09.2
COL-PRO-0027
23

• The first-tier supplier (Collins Aerospace purchase order holder) shall develop a
process of assessing part risk and apply PPAP on high risk parts.
• The supplier shall make their process of assessing sub-tier part risk available to the
MFP for review.
• The first-tier supplier shall flow down ASQR-09.2 to suppliers/producers providing high
risk parts via purchase order for external producers and work order or equivalent to
internal producers.
• The first-tier supplier is responsible for reviewing and approving sub-tier PPAP
objective evidence.
• The first-tier supplier is responsible to assure sub-tier Form 1’s are approved and
signed by the sub-tier and first-tier.
• The first-tier shall include all applicable sub-tier part Form 1’s with their Objective
Evidence submission to Collins Aerospace.
PPAP & SUB- TI ERS : FO LLO W THE RI SK
24

PPAP PLANNI NG PHASE
only)
commitment dates.
PPAP Plan
Acceptable?
Collins MFP
No
Yes
the supplier
or equivalent)
package
OE Complete?
MFP Dispostion with
class (B or A)
MFP Approval
Yes
PPAP flowed down on
Supplier Portal
1006 or equivalent)
25

• Planned completion dates for all
applicable elements
• PPAP Individual Element submittal dates
for interim B, A and Full commitment
dates
• Requires approval and sign-off by the
supplier/producer and the Collins MFP
DETERMINE ELEMENT APPLICABILITY AND
CREAT E PLAN
• Create a PPAP plan using COL-FRM-
1011 located on the UTC Supplier Portal
in PPAP section
ITEM #
ENTER "X" IF PPAP
ELEMENT IS
APPLICABLE FOR
THE SUBJECT
PART
ENTER "X" IF THE
UTAS MFP REQUIRES
THE PRODUCER TO
SUBMIT OBJECTIVE
EVIDENCE FOR
APPLICABLE
ELEMENT
TARGET DATE FOR
ELEMENT
COMPLETION
INTERIM B
SUBMISSION
TARGET DATE FOR
ELEMENT
COMPLETION
INTERIM A
SUBMISSION
TARGET DATE FOR
ELEMENT
COMPLETION
FULL SUBMISSION
1 X X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
2
3 X X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
4
5 X X 8/30/2017 11/28/2017 2/26/2018
6 X X 8/31/2017 11/29/2017 2/27/2018
7 X X 9/1/2017 11/30/2017 2/28/2018
8 X X 11/1/2017 1/30/2018 4/30/2018
9 X X 10/31/2017 1/29/2018 4/29/2018
10 X X 7/31/2017 10/29/2017 1/27/2018
11
12 X X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
13 X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
14
15 X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
16
17 X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
18 X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
19 X X 12/1/2017 3/1/2018 5/30/2018
Date
Supplier
Date
UTAS MFP
John Smith
UPPAP PLAN
PRODUCER/SUPPLIER Name Aerospace Widget Inc
PRODUCER/SUPPLIER Code 1234
Drawing Revision Level: A
john.smith@anywhere.com
PRODUCER/SUPPLIER Contact
PRODUCER/SUPPLIER Contact Email
PRODUCER/SUPAdPdLreIEsRsContact Phone
Number
000-000-0000
PRODUCER/SUPPLIER Address Anytown, USA
Drawing Number 123456
Drawing Name Muffler Bearing
UPPAP OEP Initial Submission Date 12/1/2018
Part Name Muffler Bearing
Part Number 123456-2
Part Revision Level: NC
UPPAP Level 3
First Production Delivery Date 1/1/2019
Released Production Drawings
UTAS Member Focal Point (MFP) Tom Bass
UTAS Contact Phone Number 860-654-7727
UTAS Contact E-Mail Address tom.bass@nowwhere.com
Additional Comments It’s a great day for UPPAP.
UPPAP ELEMENT PER ASQR-09.2
Supplementary Product Requirement Documents (SPRD)
Production PO and Demand Fullfillment
Design Failure Modes Effects Analysis (DFMEA)
Process Flow Diagram (PFD)
Process Failure Modes Effects Analysis (PFMEA)
Process Control Plan (PCP)
Process Readiness Study (PRS)
Initial Process Studies (IPS)
Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA)
Dimensional Report
Production Verification Testing (PVT)
Form Number: UTAS-FRM-1011
Revision: 00
Authorizing Document: UTAS-GUI-1000
Part Marking Approval
Packaging, Preservation & Labeling Approval
Review and Sign-Off
Special Process Approval and Nondestructive Test (NDT)
Material Certification Documentation
Raw Material Approval
Engineering frozen Planning/Source Approval (EFP/ESA)
26

PPAP EXECUTI ON PHASE
only)
commitment dates.
PPAP Plan
Acceptable?
Supplier wi
OE for ind
per ASQR-0
Plan and
Col
No
Yes
or equivalent)
OE Complete?
MFP Dispostion with
class (B or A)
MFP Approval
Yes
PPAP flowed down on
Supplier Portal
ll start collecting
ividual elements
9.2 and the PPAP
share with the
the supplier
1006 or equivalent)
package
lins MFP
27

What Does This Mean For You?
• Suppliers will execute PPAP methods into their processes based on the PPAP Plan
COL-FRM-1011 and Approved Element Applicability.
• Supplier will create a PPAP file where all Objective Evidence for all applicable
elements will be stored and maintained for each PPAP Part Number. Some elements
(2, 3, 4, 5, and 8) can be based on product/process families provided traceability to the
parts is documented.
• The Use of Form COL-FRM-1004 is recommended to baseline your process and
identify gaps.
• Suppliers will perform formal process readiness review, COL-FRM-1005, on processes
used to manufacture Collins Aerospace products with PPAP requirements.
• Take advantage of Part Families when generating process flow diagrams, PFMEAs
and Control Plans.
• Submit individual elements for initial review based on PPAP Plan.
EXECUTE PPAP
28

PPAP APPRO VAL PHASE
only)
commitment dates.
PPAP Plan
Acceptable?
Collins MFP
No
Yes
UTAS MFP will review PPAP
elements working with the
supplier
or equivalent)
package
OE Complete?
MFP Dispostion with
class (B or A)
MFP Approval
Yes
PPAP flowed down on
Supplier Portal
1006 or equivalent)
PPAP elements working
with the supplier
29

Objective Evidence Package
• Suppliers will prepare the Objective Evidence Package,
COL-FRM-1006, using the checklist, COL-FRM-1004, as
a review guide for each element to assure integrity and
completeness of the Objective Evidence Package.
• The PPAP Package will include Objective Evidence
required for the MFP Review based on PPAP level.
• PPAP level is assigned based on supplier gold rating with
the exception of flight safety parts requiring PPAP level 4
submissions.
• Complete COL-FRM-1006 by uploading
evidence into the appropriate element tabs.
Element # Target Date
11
Date
Comments
Date:
UTC Member:
Customer Purchasing Representative:
Purchase Order:
Part Number:
Supplier Name: Street:
Drawing Number:
Part Name:
Part Revision Level:
Drawing Revision Level: Submission Iteration:
Email: Country:
Supplier / Vendor Code: City:
Contact Name: State / Province:
Phone Number: Zip / Postal Code:
PPAP Approval
ASQR-09.2 Form 1 (Rev 5, 1/2019)
SUBMISSION
SUPPLIER MANUFACTURING INFORMATION
On behalf of the Supplier, I submit this PPAP Approval form certifying that the Supplier has met all applicable requirements of ASQR-09.2, except as noted above, including having
implemented the requirements at all levels of the supply chain where applicable. On behalf of the Supplier I further certify that the Suppliers production process meets all product
delivery, engineering and quality requirements. I acknowledge that the approval of this form by the Customer does not release the Supplier from responsibility or liability for any non-
conformances.
On behave of the Supplier, I have reviewed this form for technical data and have classified as required.
Note: "No" selections under PPAP Element Provided require an Action Plan item documented below
Action
Plan
Action Item
Achieve Full Approval (always required for anything less than Full submission)
SUPPLIER DECLARATION & AUTHORIZATION
CUSTOMER USE ONLY
Clearly Print Name & Sign Title
Customer Authorization - Clearly Print Name & Sign T
itle Date
This document contains no technical data subject to the EAR or the ITAR (Review for technical data is required once this form is filled in, w hich may require a change in Jurisdiction & Classification).
LEVEL 1: P P AP Approval form (E l ement 11) only
LEVEL 2: PPAP Approval form (Element 11) and any additional MFP requested evidence
LEVEL 3: PPAP Approval form (Element 11) with complete supporting data for all Elements per 4.2.3
LEVEL 4: PPAP Approval form (Element 11) with complete supporting data for all Elements per 4.2.3, reviewed by the Member at the Supplier’s manufacturing location
PPAP ELEMENTS PROVIDED CUSTOMER PPAP ELEMENT ACCEPTANCE
Yes No N/A Element Description Yes No Customer Comments
1 Design Records
2 Design Risk Analysis (DRA)
3 Process Flow Diagram (PFD)
4 Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (PFMEA)
5 Control Plan
6 Measurement System Analysis (MSA)
7 Initial Process Capability Studies
8 Packaging, Preservation and Labeling Approvals
9 First Article Inspection Report (FAIR)
Additional Feedback Attached
Not Authorized to Ship: Rejected
Additional Feedback Attached
Authorized to Ship: Full Approval Interim A Interim B Deferral - Form 2 Attached
30

Supplier Form 1 Submission
• Element 11 (ASQR-09.2 Form 1) will be completed by the
producer with all gaps identified and action plans
established. Attach to COL-FRM-1006.
• For supplier PPAP part, DQR is required to ensure
package is reviewed.
• PPAP Approval Submission Form (ASQR-09.2 Form 1)
sign-off by Supplier.
• Email PPAP Objective Evidence
Package to your MFP.
31

MFP Review
• Collins (MFP) will perform a review of the Objective
Evidence Package based upon Supplier’s PPAP Level
• Level 4 on-site reviews reviews conducted by SDE
assigned to supplier. May invite functional experts where
appropriate (i.e., X-Ray, Heat Treat, etc.). SDE to provide
MFP with details of review.
• PPAP Approval Submission Form Disposition and sign-off
by MFP
32

PPAP ELEM ENTS PER ASQ R-09 .2
34

Correlating all requirements including revision level
Released drawings or definition
Supplemental Records
Anticipated peak production rate
Applicable internal and external specs readily available
Delivering what the contract asks for
ELEM ENT 1 – DESI GN RECO RDS
(Made up
drawing)
Submit a request for clarification to the Member for any concerns or issues
35

C O L L I N S D E S I G N E D H A R D W A R E ( B U I L D T O P R I N T )
Engineering identifies KCs and populates the
Input Data Sheet (IDS)
The IDS is submitted under Element 1 as a
Design Record.
Incorporated into PFMEA
ELEM ENT 2 – DESI GN RI SK ANALYSI S (DRA)
PPAP INPUT DATA SHEET (IDS)
ASQR-09.2 Form 3 (Rev 3, 1/2019)
UTC Member Engineering and/or Design Responsible Supplier (DRS) Instructions:
This form is to be completed by the UTC Member or DRS to communicate Key Product Characteristics as defined by the output of the Design Risk Analysis.
List all KCs (KPC-D, 1 & 2, etc.) and any additional features to ensure proper risk mitigation by the Supplier will be completed.
This form must communicate all Key Characteristics identified via Design Risk Analysis, as defined by ASQR-09.2 as well as Member specific variation management
specifications.
Part Name: Date Completed:
Drawing Part Number: Revision (of this sheet):
Drawing Revision: Engineering Contact Name:
Item
No.
KC DESCRIPTION
(holes, surface finish,
soldering joint, etc.)
KC REQUIREMENT
(dimension w ith
tolerance)
REFERENCE
(draw ing w ith location,
manual, specification,
etc.)
IMPACT
(manufacturing,
assembly,
performance,
durability, …)
SEVERITY
SOURCE
(MFA, QFD,
Engineering, QN's, etc)
COMMENTS
and/or
LESSONS LEARNED
The supplier is required to address all these Key Product & Process Characteristics in Elements: 2 - Design Risk Analysis, 3 - Process Flow Diagram, 4 - Process
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (PFMEA), 5 - Control Plan, 6 - Measurement System Analysis (MSA), and 7 - Initial Process Capability Study.
Comments
This document contains no technical data subject to the EAR or the ITAR (Review for technical data is required once this form is filled in, w hich may require a change in Jurisdiction & Classification).
36

S U P P L I E R D E S I G N E D H A R D W A R E
Execute Design Risk Analysis
• DFMEA as per SAE J1739 or equivalent
• Risks to Safety, Performance, Durability, Reliability, Manufacturing, and
Assembly
• High risks have mitigation activities identified, prioritized, completed (no
threshold)
• Identifies design/product KCs
• Addresses historical part family failure modes
Optional template online at www.utc.com/suppliers in the PPAP Toolbox
ELEM ENT 2 – DESI GN RI SK ANALYSI S (DRA)
DRA Output Feeds PFMEA with Design KCs
37

ELEMENT 2 - DESIGN FA ILURE MODES AND
EFFECTS ANALY SIS
Requirement
Element 2 - Design Risk Analysis
INSTRUCTIONS:
For DRP suppliers a complete Design Risk Analysis (DRA) or a summary of results (e.g. list of recommended
action items etc.) shall be included in the PPAP evidence package.
A copy of the UTC member provided ASQR-09.2 Form 3 - IDS may satisfy this requirement for non-DRP
suppliers.
OBJECTIVE (ASQR 09.2):
DRPs shall ensure that a Design Risk Analysis methodology related to performance, durability, reliability,
assembly and manufacturability is executed and appropriate mitigation activities are identified, prioritized and
completed. A Design Failure Modes and Effect Analysis (DFMEA) per SAE J1739 or other DRA that achieves the
same objectives shall be used. The Supplier shall include evidence of the risk analysis in the PPAP File.
Product KCs defined by design to control identified risks and any additional features shall be communicated to the
Supplier via the product definition using ASQR-09.2 Form 3, or Member equivalent means. Any product related
risks that may be affected by the manufacturing process and cannot be eliminated through the design shall be
communicated to the Supplier as product KCs via the product definition using ASQR-09.2 Form 3, or equivalent
means. Any Build-to-Print (BTP) Supplier shall include the latest copy of ASQR-09.2 Form 3 in the PPAP File.
Note 1: DRAs may be derived from part family DRAs as long as any unique product characteristics have been
reviewed and included.
Note 2: DRPs may use the ASQR-09.2 Form 3 to communicate product and process KCs defined to control
identified risks to all levels of its supply chain.
Element
Pratt & Whitney
(PW)
Pratt & Whitney Canada
(PWC)
UT C Aerospace
Systems
(UTAS)
4 Design Risk Analysis IDS required for BTP
For DRP - DFMEA in
accordance with SAE J-
1739
For BTP - IDS if
applicable
38

( W H Y T H E Y A R E N O T T H E S A M E )
FM ECA VS. DFM EA
FMECA
• Assumes Product made to engineering
nominal specs
• Intended to design redundancy into
product
• Focused on system reliability only
• Only performed at the system level
DFMEA
• Takes producibililty into consideration
• Intended to mistake proof the design
process
• Focused on overall design process
• Performed at System/Sub-
system/component level
39

Why?
• DFMEA is an analytical technique utilized primarily by a Design-Responsible
Engineer/Team as a means to ensure that potential failure modes and their associated
causes/mechanisms are considered and addressed.
• End items, along with every related system, sub-system, and component should be
evaluated.
• This systematic approach parallels, formalizes, and documents the mental disciplines
that an engineer normally goes through in a typical design process.
• The DFMEA supports the design process.
DFM EA
40

DFM EA GUI DELI NE
2 10 100 5 1 10 50
Target
Completion
Action Results
Responsible
Date
Action
Taken
S O D R
E C E P
V C T N
D R
E P
T N
Prevention Detection
System
S
E
V
CLASS
Input from QFD
VOC, VOE
Compliance
Matrix & start
Performance
Mapping
Input From
Block /
Boundary
Diagram
What can be
done?
- Design
Changes
- Process
Changes
- Error Proof
- Improved
Capability
- Special
Controls
- Changes to
Standards,
Procedures,
or Guides
What can go
wrong?
- Input from
Parameter
Diagram’s Error
States &
Interface Matrix
Performance
Mapping &
Engineering
Manual
How often
does it
happen?
- Input P
Diag
from
ram
How can this
be prevented
and detected?
- Input from
P Diagram
Control
Factors &
QFD
How good is
this method at
detecting it?
- Input from
- Qualification
Testing
1
Design
Function /
Requirement
1
2
2
Potential
Failure
Mode
3
Potential
Effect(s) Of
Failure
3
5
5
Potential Cause /
Mechanism of
Failure
4
How bad is
5 2 the failure
mode?
7
Current Design Control
7
6
6
O
C
C
4
8
8
9
Recommended Action(s))
9
41

ELEM ENT 3 - PRO CESS FLO W
Requirement
Element 3 - Process Flow Diagram
INSTRUCTIONS:
A copy of the process flow chart for the part shall be included in the PPAP package.
The Supplier shall create a Process Flow Diagram or equivalent to facilitate the development of
a robust PFMEA and Control Plan. The Supplier shall include a copy of the Process Flow
Diagram in the PPAP File. The Process Flow Diagram shall include:
• Production process steps and sequences from receiving material to shipment of end product
• Standardized flowchart symbols
• Alternate process paths and formal rework loops
• Outside operations
• Transportation and handling
• Key inputs and outputs of each process step
• Identification of steps that impact product or process KCs including any additional features
identified in the DRA or on the IDS and Supplier identified process KCs (e.g. KPC-M)
Note 1: Process Flow Diagrams may be derived from part family diagrams as long as any
unique processing steps and characteristics have been reviewed and included.
Note 2: The Supplier should consider the maximum expected volume as communicated by the
Member to define the process flow.
42

Why?
Graphical Representation of process that:
• Clearly shows all steps in the process
• Identifies opportunities to reduce process steps and eliminate waste
• Shows all turnback steps parts go through
• Highlights risk areas where the part might not be made correctly or could be damaged
• Heightens awareness to exactly what the part goes through
PRO CESS FLO W DI AG RAM
43

UTAS-FRM-1254
• From receiving to shipping and all steps
in between
• Unique individual identifiers for each
step
• Using flow diagram symbols
• Show rework locations, hidden factories
and in-process storage
• Includes Key Inputs and Outputs for
each process step
• Can be based on part family
PRO CESS FLO W DI AG RAM
UTAS-FRM-1254-00
Process Flow Diagram
Flow Diagram Number: 12345 Prepared By: Jordan Smith Date Created: 11/16/2015
Part Number(s):
If creating for part family, include all PNs
associated w ith the family
56789 Core Team:
Jordan Smith, Taylor Jones, Sam
Washington
Revision Number: 2
Part Name/Description: Circuit Card Assembly Supplier/Plant: Plant # 3 Date Revised: 1/12/2016
Op # Description Key Process Inputs Process Flow Diagram Product Characteristics Process Characteristics
Operation Move Store Inspection Planned
Rework
R
Planned
Off-Load
O/L
10
Receive Material
Part Count and
Condition
X
20
Receiving Inspection
Purchase Order,
Drawing and
specifications
X
Printed Circuit Board
Thickness, Plated
Through Hole Diameter,
Solder Mask Coverage
25
Printed Circuit Board 10 Hour
Bake
Oven Temp, Time X
30 Finished Goods/POU X X
40 Serial Number Label Printing Program X
50 S/N Label Pasting X
60
Offline Component
preparation
X
70 Kitting Kit Sheet X
80 Manual insert assembly
90 CS400 Program X
100 Automatic Inspection Program X X First Pass Yield
110 Pre-insert assembly X
120 Manual insert assembly X
130 Wave soldering Program, Setup X
140 Inline cleaning Resistivity of Final Rinse X
150 Ionic Testing PWB Surface Area X Ionic Contamination Level
160
Post wave verification Visual Aid X X
Defects Per Million
Opportunities
170 X-ray inspection Program X X
180 In-circuit test Program, Test Fixture X X First Pass Yield
190 Clean, mask, coat and
unmask CCA
X X Coating Thickness
200 Final inspection X X First Pass Yield
210
Shipping
Packaging, Shipping
Label
X
44

ELEMENT 4 - PROCESS FA ILURE MODES AND
EFFECTS ANALY SIS (PFMEA)
Requirement
Element 4 - Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
INSTRUCTIONS:
The complete PFMEA shall be included in the PPAP package. In case of intellectual property issues, a summary
of the analysis and results shall be included in the PPAP package and may require an onsite visit by the member.
The Supplier shall ensure risks associated with the manufacturing or assembly process have been identified and
mitigated using a PFMEA per SAE J1739 (or an equivalent process that achieves the same objectives).
The Supplier shall develop, document and maintain the part or assembly PFMEA and ensure consideration of the
following:
• Process Flow Diagram alignment
• Product features, tolerances, KCs etc.
• Features identified in the DRA or on the IDS
• Supplier identified process KCs (e.g. KPC-M)
• Product family quality history, including but not limited to non-conformances, escapes and lessons learned.
The Supplier shall include a copy of the PFMEA in the PPAP File.
Note: PFMEA’s may be derived from part family PFMEA’s as long as any unique product characteristics and/or
processing steps have been included.
E l e m e n t
P r a t t & W h i t n e y
( P W )
P r a t t & W h i t n e y C a n a d a
( P W C )
U T C A e r o s p a c e
S y s t e m s
( U T A S )
6
P r o c e s s F a i l u r e M o d e a n d
E f f e c t s A n a l y s i s
P F M E A i n a c c o r d a n c e
w i t h S A E - J - 1 7 3 9
45

Why?
• Identify risks in process
• Helps to focus resources on solving major risks in process
• Process focus allows for other part numbers (additional training provided by Collins)
• Expand thinking around solutions
• Function/ process steps should review and update when “out of control” conditions
arise
• Part family focus
• Focus on process not operator
• Improvement activities (Mistake proof level 2 or better)
PFM EA
46

PFM EA
Example
UTAS-FRM-1252
47

PFM EA PO TENTI AL RI SK SCO RI NG ( R E F. S A E J 1 7 3 9 )
48

ELEM ENT 5 - CO NTRO L PLAN
Requirement
Element 5 - Process Control Plan
INSTRUCTIONS:
A complete Process Control Plan shall be included in the PPAP evidence package.
The Supplier shall ensure any manufacturing risks are adequately controlled by developing a Process Control Plan
(refer to UTCQR-09.1). The Process Control Plan shall be used to ensure sustained process control throughout the
manufacturing life of the part and/or assembly. The Process Control Plan shall identify the product and process
KCs, Key Process Inputs (KPIs) and associated controls. The Process Control Plan shall include:
• Operation/process step where any product or process KC is measured
• Specification/tolerance for all product and process KCs
• Measurement system used
• Sample size and frequency
• Control method (type of control chart, set-up inspections, etc.)
• Reaction Plans
The Supplier shall include a copy of the Control Plan in the PPAP File.
Note: Control Plans may be derived from part family Control Plans as long as any unique product characteristics
and/or processing steps have been included.
E l e m e n t
( P W )
( P W C )
U T C Ae r o s p a c e
S y s t e m s
( U T AS )
7 P r o c e s s C o n t r o l P l a n
P r o c e s s c o n t r o l p l a n is
r e q u i re d f o r all U P P A P
p a r t s a n d / o r p a r t f amilies
f o r h i g h ris k f ailure m o d e s
identif ied o n t h e P F M E A
P r o c e s s c o n t r o l p l a n is
r e q u i re d f o r e v e r y P F M E A
49

Why?
• Focuses on important aspects of design and manufacturing risk in one place
• Drives risk mitigation controls into work instructions
• Drives direction when things go wrong (what to do and & who to contact)
• The process control plan provides a documented summary of the methods used to
minimize process and product variation.
• It provides a structured approach for the design, selection and implementation of value
added control methods.
• It provides and input into development of work instructions.
CO NTRO L PLAN
50

CO NTRO L PLAN
CONTROL PLAN QUESTIONS
– What do I check?
– How do I check it?
– How often do I check?
– What gage do I use
(AIAG)?
– What is the capability of
the gage (AIAG)?
– What inputs do I set?
– What setting?
– How are the inputs
controlled?
– What preventative
maintenance do I do before I
run a part?
– How do I react when things
go wrong (AIAG)?
.1360 .3413
.3413 .1360
99.73%
95.46%
68.26%
-3S -2S -1S X +1S +2S +3S
..0214 .1360 .3413 .3413 .1360 ..0214
A control plan summarizes how we manage and control process risks identified on
the PFMEA.
51

PRO CESS CO NTRO L PLAN TEM PLATE
PROCESS CONTROL PLAN Page of
PROTOTYPE PRE-SERIES PRODUCTION DATE ORIGINAL
CUSTOMER ENGINEERING
APPROVAL/DATE (if required)
CONTROL PLAN NUMBER DATE REVISED
CUSTOMER QUALITY
APPROVAL/DATE (if required)
PART NUMBER/
LATEST CHANGELEVEL
PREPARED BY
OTHER APPROVAL/DATE
(if required)
PART NAME/
DESCRIPTION
APPROVED BY
OTHER APPROVAL/DATE
(if required)
DRAWING NUMBER DRAWING REV
OTHER APPROVAL/DATE
(if required)
SUPPLIER/PLANT SITE VENDOR CODE KEY CONTACT/PHONE/EMAIL
PART/ PROCESS NAME/ MACHINE,DEVICE CHARACTERISTICS SPECIAL METHOD
PROCESS OPERATION JIG,TOOLS CHAR. PRODUCT/PROCESS EVALUATION SAMPLE CONTROL REACTION
NUMBER DESCRIPTION FOR MFG NO.
PRODUCT FEATURES
(KPOs)
PROCESS VARIABLES
(KPIs) SPECIFICATION MEASUREMENT SIZE FREQ. METHOD PLAN
TOLERANCE TECHNIQUE
This item
number is
usually
referenced
from the
Process Flow
Chart. If
multiple part
numbers
exist
(assembly),
list the
individual part
numbers and
their
processes
accordingly.
All steps in the
manufacturing of a
system, subsystem or
component are described
in a process flow
diagram. Identify the
process/operation name
from the flow diagram
that best describes the
activity being addressed.
For each operation that is
described, identify the
processing equipment,
e.g., machine, device, jig,
or other tools for
manufacturing, as
appropriate.
Assign a
cross
reference
number to
all
applicable
documents
Product characteristics are the
features or properties of a part,
component or assembly that are
described on draw ings or other primary
engineering information. The
Supplier/Plant Site individual preparing
the control plan shall identify the special
characteristics that are either flow ed
dow n by the Customer or self-selected.
In addition, the preparer may list other
product characteristics for w hich
process controls are routinely tracked
during normal operations.
Process Characteristics are the process
variables (Key Process Inputs (KPIs))
that have a cause-and-effect
relationship w ith the identified Product
Characteristics (Key Process Outputs
(KPOs)). A Process Characteristic can
only be measured at the time it occurs.
The preparer should identify Process
Characteristics for w hich variation must
be controlled to minimize product
variation. There could be one or more
KPIs listed for each KPO. In some
processes one KPImay affect several
KPOs.
Use the
appropriate
classificatio
n as
required by
the UTC
Division to
designate
the type of
Special
Characteristi
c or this field
can be left
blank for
other
undesignate
d
characteristi
cs.
Specifications/tolerance
may be obtained from
various engineering
documents, such as, but
not limited to, draw ings,
design review s, material
standard, computer-aided
design data, manufacturing
and/or assembly
requirements.
This column identifies
the measurement
system being used.
This could include
gages, fixtures,
tools, and/or test
equipment required
to measure the
part/process/manufa
cturing equipment. A
Gage Capability
Study should be
done to ensure
control of monitoring
and measuring
devices prior to
relying on a
measurement
system. Emphasis is
on Repeatability &
Reproducibility, but
one should also
consider gage bias,
linearity and stability.
Measurement
resolution, utilizing
the industry standard
10:1 rule-of-thumb,
needs also to be
addressed here.
When
sampling is
required list
the
correspondi
ng sample
size and
frequency.
Ensure
adherence
to ASQR-
20.1 if
Process
Control Plan
is ow ned
by a UTC
supplier.
When
sampling is
required
list the
correspon
ding
sample
size and
frequency.
Ensure
adherence
to ASQR-
20.1 if
Process
Control
Plan is
ow ned by
a UTC
supplier.
This is one of the critical
elements to an effective
control plan. This column
contains a brief
description of how the
operation w ill be
controlled, including
procedure/set-up card
numbers w here
applicable. The control
method utilized should be
based on effective
analysis of the process.
The control method is
determined by the type of
process and the risks
identified during quality
planning (i.e., FMEA).
The reaction plan specifies the
corrective actions necessary to
avoid producing nonconforming
products or operating out-of-
control. The actions should
normally be the responsibility of
the people closest to the process,
the operator, job-setter, or local
area supervisor, and be clearly
designated in the plan. Provisions
should be made for documenting
actions taken.
52

PPAP CO RE ELEM ENT LI NKAG ES
ASQR-09.2 requires Producers to demonstrate this linkage
• Focuses on product design and/or specifications
• Required for producers with design responsibility
• Identifies inputs to PFMEA
• Focuses on sequence of steps used to create product
• Required for all producers
• Includes sequence of steps, KCs, KPIs, KPOs
• Receives input from DRA
• Built from part Process Flow Map
• Identifies KCs for MSA, Process Control Plan, Initial Process Studies
• Receives input from PFMEA, MSA
• Focuses on controlling processes affecting KCs.
• Required of all producers
• Feeds work instruction creation
• Utilizes KCs from Control Plan
• Mitigation plan activities should be included in Process Control Plan
• Utilizes KCs from Control Plan
• Mitigation plan activities should be included in Process Control Plan
Process
Control Plan
Process
Flow Map
DRA
(DFMEA)
PFMEA
Measurement
System Anal.
Initial
Process
Studies
53

Linkages
56
O P # Description
Process
Function
Potential
C a u s e
Potential
Failure
M o d e
Potential
E f f e c t s of
Failure
Sev
Potential
C a u s e s of
Failure
Occ
Prev entiv e
Controls
Detectiv e
Controls
Det
+++
P F ME A
P F ME A
Control Plan
O P # Description Tool
Characteristics
Process Product
M e t h o d s
S p e c M T E
S a m p l e
C C T S i z e Freq
Control
M e t h o d
Reaction
Plan
+++
O P # Description
Process
Function
Potential
C a u s e
Potential
Failure
M o d e
Potential
E f f e c t s of
Failure
Sev Chr
Potential
C a u s e s of
Failure
Occ
Prev entiv e
Controls
Detectiv e
Controls
Det
+++
O P # Description
Process
Function
S o u r c e s
of
Variation
P r o c e s s F l o w D i a g r a m
Characteristics
P r o d u c t Process
+++
P r o c e ss Flow Diagram
D F ME A
Item Description
Potential
Failure
M o d e
Potential
E f f e c t s of
Failure
Sev Chr
Related
Char
Potential
C a u s e s
Occ
Prev entiv e
D e s i g n
Control
Detectiv e
D e s i g n
Control
… … . . + + +
ELEM ENTS 2, 3, 4 AND 5

ELEMENT 6 - MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS
ANALY SIS
Requirement
Element 6 - Measurement Systems Analysis
INSTRUCTIONS:
A complete listing of all MSA studies (including supporting data) shall be included in the PPAP package.
The use of the applicable member focal point R&R capability tools available in the supplier portal and/or MINITAB may to be used.
The Supplier shall ensure adequacy and applicability of the measuring systems to evaluate and monitor product and process KCs,
any additional features identified on the ASQR-09.2 Form 3 and Supplier identified process KCs (e.g. KPC-M).
The PPAP File shall contain copies of the Measurement Systems Analysis (including Gage R&R) conducted on all instruments used
for measuring all product and process KCs. For custom designed gaging, evidence of inspection and acceptance testing (gage
inspection, try-out reports, etc.) shall also be included in the PPAP File. Any Gage R&R studies shall have a Precision-to-Tolerance
(P/T) ratio ≤ 20% unless a lower maximum ratio is required by the Member.
When P/T ratio is not achieved, or when other deficiencies are identified such as bias, stability, linearity, repeatability, or
discrimination, the Supplier shall provide a mitigation plan which ensures conformity of product. MFP acceptance of any mitigation
plan is required.
Where attributes are used to assess feature acceptability (e.g. pass/fail criteria) the evaluation of measured variable data is not
possible. The following criteria shall be used to determine acceptance of the measurement system:
Pass/Fail: Kappa >= 0.8. Ordinal: ICC >= 0.75.
Note: MSA’s may be derived from part family MSA’s as long as any unique product characteristics and/or processing steps have
been included.
E l e m e n t
( P W )
( P W C )
U T C A e r o s p a c e
S y s t e m s
( U T A S )
1 0
M e a s u r e m e n t S y s t e m s
A n a l y s i s
A l l P W A 7 9 3 4 5 K P C s
r e q u i r e t h a t G a g e R & R
a n a l y s i s o f v a r i a b l e d a t a
m u s t u s e t h e A n a l y s i s o f
V a r i a n c e ( A N O V A )
m e t h o d a n d G a g e
a n a l y s i s o f a t t r i b u t e d a t a
m u s t ( a t a m i n i m u m ) u s e
a n a t t r i b u t e a g r e e m e n t
m e t h o d .
55

Why?
• Ensure that tool variation does not cause an out of tolerance part to pass as
acceptable
• Don’t want to reject a good part or accept a bad part
MEASUREM ENT SYSTEM S ANALYSI S
USL
X
Tool Variation
Measured Part
56

MEASUREM ENT SYSTEM S ANALYSI S
59
Element 6 Acceptable Not Acceptable
Measurement Systems
Analysis Studies
Gage Studies (Short Form at
a minimum) are conducted on
measurement systems
involving Collins defined and
producer self-selected KPCs
Results are entered into the
Collins ProCert Database.
Action plan exists for gage
Study results greater than
20%.
10% rule-of-thumb employed
for measurement resolution.
No documented
evidence of a Gage
Capability Studies
performed.
Gage Study results not
entered into the Collins
ProCert Database.
Lack of action plans for
Gage Study results
greater than 20% of
tolerance.
Gages used have
inadequate
measurement resolution.
Instructions for this form:
1) Type only in the shaded blocks.
2) If using coded data, be sure to write in the "Total Eng. Tolerance" in coded form.
3) This spreadsheet is set up for either a 5-part or 10-part study. Do not use for any other quantity!!
4) "Total Eng. Tolerance" and "Operator Names" MUST be filled in for the form to work properly!!
Gage Name: Part No.: Performed By:
Gage No.: Part Name: Operator A:
Graduations: Operation No.: Operator B:
Zero Equals: Characteristic: Operator C:
Unit of Measure: Specification: Area:
Total Eng. Tolerance: Date:
Instructions for data collection:
1) Select 10 parts at random and number them 1 through 10. (5 parts may be used if necessary)
2) Have two or three operators measure each part independently, two or three times each. Record results below.
3) Analyze the results to determine variability due to both Repeatability and Reproducibility.
Operator A: 0 Operator B: 0 Operator C:
Replications Replications Replications
Sample
Number 1 2 3 R
Sample
Number 1 2 3 R
Sample
Number 1 2 3 R
1 1 1
2 2 2
3 3 3
4 4 4
5 5 5
6 6 6
7 7 7
8 8 8
9 9 9
10 10 10
Totals Totals Totals
Means Means Means
Xbar1 Xbar2 Xbar3 RbarA Xbar1 Xbar2 Xbar3 RbarB Xbar1 Xbar2 Xbar3 RbarC
XbarC = Xbar1 + Xbar2 + Xbar3
XbarA = Xbar1 + Xbar2 + Xbar3
Replications
XbarB = Xbar1 + Xbar2 + Xbar3
Replications Replications
XbarA = XbarB = XbarC =
Test for Statistical Control of Ranges
Rbar1 = RbarA + RbarB + RbarC = #VALUE! = #VALUE!
Operators 2
2.574 * #VALUE! = #VALUE! = Range Upper Control Limit
UCLR = D4 * Rbar1 =
Note: D4 is based on the number of Replications. (See table below)
/ 1.693 = #VALUE!
Repeatability (Gage Variation)
SGV = Rbar1 / d2 = #VALUE!
Note: d2 is based on the number of Replications. (See table below)
Repeatability = 5.15 * SGV #VALUE!
= #VALUE!
0.000000 - 0.000000 = 0.000000
/ 1.906 = 0.000000
Percent of Engineering Tolerance Consumed by the Gage:
100 * 5.15 * SGV = #VALUE!
Eng. Tolerance 0.000000
Reproducibility (Between Operator Variation)
Rbar2 = XbarLargest of ABC - XbarSmallest of ABC =
SOV = Rbar2 / d2* = 0.000000
Note: d2* is based on the number of Operators. (See table)
Number of parts =
Number of trials =
d2* =
0
0
1.906
Percent of Engineering Tolerance consumed by Operator Variation: Reproducibility = {(Rbar2) X (5.15/d2*)}2
- {(Repeatability)2
/ (No. parts X No. trials)} = #VALUE!
= #DIV/0!
100 * 5.15 * SOV = 0.000000
Tolerance 0.000000
Combined Reproducibility and Repeatability (Measurement System)
PRODUCT SIGMA - * See special Supplier Note below
SMV =
2
+ S 2
=
SOV GV 0.000000 + #VALUE! = #VALUE!
1) Percent of Engineering Tolerance consumed by measurement system:
= #VALUE!
100 * 5.15 * SMV = #VALUE!
Tolerance 0.000000
2) Percent of Process Tolerance (Combined Variability) consumed by measurement system:
R&R = (Repeatability)2
+ (Reproducibility)2
= #VALUE!
Percent Process Tolerance (Combined Variability) = (R&R)/(6/d2)*RbarCV = #VALUE! * 3.078 / 0.000000 = #VALUE!
Operator 1st trial 2nd Trial 3rd Trial TOTAL CAUTION: Percent Process Tolerance value is only valid for 5-part or 10-part studies.
A 0.00000 0.00000 0.00000
Range of Observations Within Each Trial
* SPECIAL SUPPLIER NOTE: Supplier needs to enter "Product Sigma" into HS Process
Certification Database when creating a new Gage File for any HS defined KPCs/TKCs. Enter
the Product Sigma into the database field entitled "Gage RR Std Deviation".
Gage R&R Long Form Study
Gage R&R Long Form Study Analysis

ELEMENT 7 - INITIAL PROCESS CAPA BILITY
STUDIES Requirement
Element
Pratt & Whitney
(PW)
(PWC)
UTC Aerospace
Systems
(UTAS)
9 Initial Process Studies
A complete listing of the capability results for all product KCs including any substitute KCs and additional features identified on the ASQR-
09.2 Form 3 and Supplier identified process KCs (e.g. KPC-Ms) shall be included in the PPAP package.
In addition, a complete SPC Control Chart for each KC shall be included to demonstrate the result with the supporting data readings.
The Supplier shall conduct an initial capability study of the manufacturing processes used to produce all product and
process KCs. The PPAP File shall contain documented evidence that initial process studies have been conducted for all
product and process KCs including any substitute KCs and additional features identified on the ASQR-09.2 Form 3 and
Supplier identified process KCs (e.g. KPC-Ms). Any exception to this requirement shall be approved by the MFP and
documented on ASQR-09.2 Form 1.
Data shall be captured from a minimum of 25 consecutive parts representing process variation approved by the MFP and
documented via ASQR-09.2 Form 1. Any out-of-tolerance or out-of-control conditions shall be addressed by the Supplier.
Note 1: Provided the same tooling, equipment and processes intended for production are used, data collected from
development or pre-production parts can be considered.
Note 2: Process variation includes variability associated with piece to piece, setup to setup, machine to machine, time to
time and lot to lot.
58

INI TI AL PRO CESS CAPABI LI TY STUDI ES
Requirement
U
Acceptance Criteria:
The Supplier shall use the following as acceptance criteria for evaluating initial Process Study results.
Results Interpretation
Cpk ≥ 1.33 - The process currently meets requirements.
Cpk < 1.33 - The process does not currently meet the acceptance criteria.
Contact the MFP to review the process study results and propose necessary process and control plan improvements.
Process capability indices shall only be calculated after the process is determined to be stable, in statistical control and the
requirements of Element 10 (MSA) have been met.
The capability indices shall be calculated using the appropriate distribution that the process represents (normal, exponential,
W eibull, etc.). Measures of process capability other than Cpk may be used only if such measures have received documented
approval by the MFP.
Variable data shall be used wherever feasible. If using attribute data, refer to UTCQR-09.1 to establish the capability index.
Note 3: W ith MFP agreement of the approach and source of data, use of short run S P C techniques (e.g. target, group, part
family charts) may be allowed to meet the 25 part minimum requirement (where full production run is less than 25 parts or 25
parts will take an unreasonable amount of time).
Note 4: Execution of this P P A P Element does not automatically grant any sampling authorization. For UTC Supplier
sampling requirements, refer to ASQR-20.1.
If a conflict arises between ASQR-09.2 and Member defined specifications or procedures for raw material dimensional
qualification and process monitoring requirements, the latter shall take precedence.
For any additional Member specific requirements, refer to Appendix A.
59

Why?
• Provides an understanding of the suppliers initial process capability (ability to
consistently meet design requirements prior to entry into service)
• Provides a means to identify, correct and control special causes process KCs
• Needs to be performed on Customer defined KCs
• Provides method to identify manufacturing KCs that drive variation in Customer KCs
and/or the supplier’s manufacturing/assembly/test processes which drives controls
upstream for immediate corrective action
60

Requirement per ASQR-09.2
Initial Process Studies
The PPAP file should include documented evidence that initial process studies have
been conducted on twenty-five (25) parts for all product & process KCs.
Note: Provided the same tooling and equipment intended for production is used, data
collected for development or pre-production parts can be considered.
Element 7 Acceptable Not Acceptable
Initial Process Studies All Collins defined KPCs are
identified on the PFMEA,
Process Flow Map, Control
Plan and work instructions.
In case of SDE suppliers, any
Collins defined CTSC/CTQC
features have lower-level
KPCs that were self-selected
by the supplier and approved
by Collins Aerospace Quality
and/or Engineering.
Producer can show evidence
that SPC is being
implemented for Collins
Aerospace defined or self-
selected KPCs using control
charts.
Evidence that Producer is
addressing KPCs with low
Cpks (e.g., Cpks< 1.0).
No documented
evidence of a Process
Control Plan or the one
presented does not meet
UTCQR-09.1.
Cannot link controls
listed on PCP to high risk
areas identified on
PFMEA.
No and/or impartial
evidence Electronic
Control Plans are
developed for Collins
defined KPCs in the
Collins ProCert
Database.
9
9
9
9
.
.
7
7
3
3
%
%
9
9
5
5
.
.
4
4
6
6
%
%
68.26%
-3S -2S -1S X +1S +2S +3S
..0214 ..1360 ..3413 ..3413 ..1360 ..0214
61

COL-FRM-1006, “PPAP
Objective Evidence Package”
includes Appendix A, “Capability
Calculator” that can be used to
perform the following tasks:
Enter SPC data collected
from the process
Calculate Cp & Cpk
Produce Individuals Control
Chart based utilizing 3-Sigma
Limits
Create Moving Range Control
Chart based utilizing 3-Sigma
Limits
Process
Capability
Control
Charts
Raw data
entry
62

Requirement
• Need to see a copy of work instruction operator uses
• Need to see photo(s) of packaging
• Recommend supplier uses COL-FRM-1018 packaging form
ELEMENT 8 - PA CKAGING, PRESERVAT ION AND
LABELING APPROVA LS
Element 8 - Packaging, Preservation and Labeling Approval
INSTRUCTIONS:
A copy of the pre-approved Packaging form, specific to the part number shall be included in the PPAP package.
The Supplier shall verify that the production intended packaging meets the Member defined specifications by
obtaining packaging approval from the Member. The Supplier shall include evidence of Member approval in the
PPAP file.
Note: Packaging, Preservation and Labeling may be derived from part family Packaging, Preservation and
Labeling as long as any unique product characteristics and/or processing steps have been included.
63

PA CKAGING, PRESERVAT ION AND LABELING
APPROVA LS
COL-FRM-1018 Packaging Form
64

Why?
• Consistency in packaging method
• No damage to part during shipment
• Proper packaging material used
• At least best commercial practice ASTM D3951 packaging standards are used
PA CKAGING, PRESERVAT ION AND LABELING
APPROVA LS
65

• The supplier shall perform and document a FAIR in accordance with ASQR-01.
ELEM ENT 9 - FAI R
66

Rev2 FAIR/PPAP Interaction
69
PPAP Execution
FAIR Execution
Approved
FAIR
PPAP
Package
to Collins
MFP
AS9102
FAIR added to
PPAP
File & Pkg.
Ship
Production
Quality Parts
Continue toward Full Approval
Note: ASQR-09.2 Rev2 changes the relationship between
the FAIR and PPAP. In Rev1 and an interim approved
PPAP package was needed before the FAIR could be
approved, this is no longer the case as PPAP doesn’t
affect fit, form or function of the part.
PPAP
Interim
Approval

Requirement
• May be satisfied with a Collins Aerospace approved FAIR
Element 10.1 - Part Marking Approval
INSTRUCTIONS:
ELEM ENT 10 .1 - PART MARKI NG APPRO VAL
The Supplier shall include evidence of Member approval and a photograph of the approved part
marking in the PPAP File.
The Supplier shall ensure all Member part marking requirements are met by obtaining part
marking approval from the Member. The Supplier shall include evidence of Member approval
and a photograph of the approved part marking in the PPAP File.
Element
Pratt & Whitney
(PW)
(PWC)
U TC Aerospace
Systems
(UTAS)
17 Part Marking Approval P & W F-9236
C P W 1 0 / CPW 920 /
P & W C Form 11477 or
P & W C Form 11876 for
APS
May be satisfied with the
part marking group
approval contained in the
producer approved FAIR
68

Recommended that the
Collins part marking form
(COL-FRM-1017) be used as
objective evidence
PART MARKI NG APPRO VAL
Form Number: UTAS-FRM-1017
Revision: 00
UPPAP Part Marking Approval Form
UTAS Part Number: UTAS Part Revision:
UTAS Part Description:
Serialization Required:
If yes, serialization marking needs to be included in the marking
approval submission and marking photo.
Part Marking Approval Section
specification in the blue box marked "Insert Part Marking Approval Documented Evidence Here" under the part marking approval documented
evidence section. The documented evidence shall consist of a copy of the UTAS drawing requirement and a copy of the supplier work
instruction. If applicable, the part marking documented evidence should be sent to the UTAS part marking team mail box at
gphspartmarking@hs.utc.com for approval. Otherwise approval is the responsiblity of the UTAS Strategic Business Unit Part Marking focal (per
MFP direction).
2. Attach a digital photo of part marking on a part or other evidence that demonstrates the part has been marked per the drawing in the blue
space below. The Photo and 2-D scan printout shall be used by the UTAS Member Focal Point (MFP) to verify marking on part meets objective
evidence provided.
Marking location is in accordance with drawing.
Insert Part Marking Photo Here
3. 2D Matrix Required*: If Yes,
*Note: The evaluation of the 2D Matrix shall be done using a 2D reader.
1. Attach a copy of the UTAS approval of the 2D marking in
question.
2. Attach scanned print out of marking, displaying the human
readable interpretation (HRI) of the scan.
69

Why?
• Reduce turn backs by getting early approval
• Provides evidence that the part is marked correctly and that the part marking is located
in the proper location
• Provides evidence that the 2D matrix marking is per the drawing requirements, is
readable and contains the correct marking per the drawing requirements
PART MARKI NG APPRO VAL
70

Requirement
ELEMENT 10.2 – PRODUCTION PROCESS RUNS
Approval
Level
Results Interpretation
Full
Minimum 25
consecutive parts with
no QNs and second
dimensional report
The process satisfies the
acceptance criteria.
Interim A
90% part yield.
Minimum 25 samples
The process does not meet
the acceptance criteria. The
Supplier shall implement
Corrective Action as
necessary and continue data
collection
Interim B
FAIR with data from
any additional parts
available at time of
submission
Completed prior to the Production Process Run to verify
that the manufacturing process is documented and ready
for production while operating at the customer demand
rate. Upon Member request, the Supplier shall record and
submit the results of the review, including corrective action
to resolve any identified risks or issues.
▪ Performed at the intended production site(s) under
production conditions (i.e., tooling, gauges, processes,
sequence, operations, instructions, materials,
personnel, environment) to demonstrate the ability to
satisfy Member requirements.
▪ Supplier shall track and document the defect rate of all
parts produced during the Production Process Run.
▪ Subsequent to the complete FAIR the Supplier shall
perform and document one additional dimensional
report (AS9102 Form 3 or equivalent form may be
used) at the end of the Production Process Run yielding
25 consecutive pieces with no QNs.
71

Why?
• The goal of the Production Process Run is to ensure that the Producer/Supplier’s
manufacturing processes and all levels of their supply chain will meet the production
requirements at projected full demand.
PRO DUCTI ON PRO CESS RUNS
Part Number: Part Name:
UTAS-FRM-1005-03
REF: UTAS-GUI-1005
Assessment Date: Familiy Name: Owner:
Select Evaluation Level: Revision Date:
Development = Planning, up to 1st batch >40%
Production Ready = Pre-production; before production component delivery >80%
Continuous Improvement = ZNC >90%
Supplier Name: Supplier Code:
Producer Mfg. Eng’g Rep.:
(Manager or Supervisor) (signature) Date:
Producer QA/QC Rep.:
(Manager or Supervisor) (signature) Date:
UTC Member Focal Point:
(signature) Date:
Category Scores
MOS 0%
Tooling 0%
Gauging 0%
Mfg. E. & TPM 0%
KPC 0%
Sub-Tier Control 0%
Capacity Planning 0%
FOD 0%
Process Readiness Study (ASQR-09.2 Element #8)
Total Average Score: 0%
0
%
1
0
0
%
MOS
Tooling
Gauging
Mfg. E. & TPM
KPC
Sub-Tier Control
Capacity Planning
FOD
Supplier Name: Supplier Code:
Total
Average
Score:
0%
PRS
Criteria Score Issues to be Resolved
Person
Responsible
Completion
Date
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.9
1.10
1.11
1.12
1.13
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
4.5
5.1
5.2
5.3
5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8
6.1
6.2
6.3
6.4
6.5
6.6
6.7
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
7.5
7.6
7.7
7.8
7.9
7.10
8.1
8.2
8.3
8.4
8.5
8.6
8.7
Action Plan Follow Up
PRS
Evaluation
Level:
Part Number: Part Name: Family Name:
Action Needed Auto Fit
72

Requirement
• You need to complete a Production Readiness Report (same form as the old PRS
(COL-FRM-1005)). You will also have 2 dimensional reports (1st is the FAIR and 2nd is
on the last part of the 25 pc run). Also looking for any evidence of non-conformances
in between (see Table).
Production Readiness Acceptance Criteria
PRO DUCTI ON PRO CESS RUNS
73

Requirement
• Completed ASQR-09.2 PPAP Approval Form
• Any WIP Element requires an action item with
target date
• Sign and date by producer
• Should include a copy of all Sub-Tier supplier’s
ASQR-09.2 PPAP Approval Forms approved by
the supplier, as applicable
ELEM ENT 11 – PPAP APPRO VAL
75

Requirement
• Completed ASQR-09.2 Form 1
• Any WIP Element requires an
action item with target date
• Sign and date by producer
• Should include a copy of all Sub-
Tier supplier’s ASQR-09.2 Form 1s
approved by the supplier, as
applicable
78
ELEM ENT 11 – REVI EW AND SI GN-OFF

Why?
• Summarizes the status of the PPAP process at time of initial production
• Communicates open actions items and indicates target closure dates
• Indicates Sub-Tier Supplier’s PPAP implementation
• Contains approval disposition
• After being dispositioned, allows shipment of parts
PPAP APPRO VAL
77

PPAP APPRO VAL LEVELS
Interim Approval B*
Escape Containment
Interim Approval A*
Process Monitoring
Full Approval
Process Capability
Pro
d
Def
.
1 Design Records
Require
d
Approval
s
8 Packaging Approval
9 FAIR
Core
Elements
2 DRA/DFMEA/IDS
3 PFD
4 PFMEA
5 Process Control Plan
6 MSA data collected, risks
mitigated
Approved FAIR
6 Measurement System
Analysis done (<20% tol.)
7 Initial Process Studies >1.00 cpk
Approved FAIR and at least 15
parts inspected
7 Initial Process
Studies > 1.33 cpk
10.2 Production
Process Runs(s) 25
parts inspected and
final Dimensional
Completed
PPAP
Approval
11 Interim B Approval 11 Interim A Approval 11 Full Approval
All Elements
Complete
*
Action
Plan
to
Achieving
Full
PPAP
Approval
Required
78

• The supplier should target full approval and use interim approval levels in the event
that full approval cannot be achieved
• Effort should be made to improve product and process family synergy through:
• Part and Process Family FMEAs
• Short Run SPC
• Leader/Follower Submissions
PPAP APPRO VAL INTENT
79

• Once the PPAP Approval Form has been approved by the Collins MFP, the Supplier
needs to:
• Ship parts upon receipt of dispositioned ASQR-09.2 PPAP Approval Form
• Complete any open action items identified on the PPAP Approval Form for interim approvals
or deferrals
• Work diligently to achieve PPAP Full Approval
PPAP APPRO VAL FI NAL STEPS
80

Package vs File
• PPAP File: A collection of data and documents at the supplier’s location documenting
compliance to PPAP requirements. The file is a living document, maintained and
updated by the supplier for the life of the part and is available for audit upon request.
• PPAP Package: The evidence that meets the required Submission Level and is
provided to the Collins Aerospace Member for review and disposition. The package is
the PPAP file at the point of submission.
PPAP RECO RDS
To
MFP
Package
Snapshot
sent to
Collins
File
Living
PPAP
Records
82

Retention of Evidence
• Producer retention requirements same as for FAI
• Submissions from suppliers to Collins Aerospace are reference only
• Recommend electronic storage location & process
• By part or process family
• By part number
• Supports living document revision control
PPAP RECO RDS
M OS / A F
S
Process or Part N o:
Originat
o
r
:
ISSU E D
A T
E
:
Characteristic
T
Y
P
E
SEQ.
CONT.
SAM P. SAM P.
BASELINE BASELINE
KPC
D/ KPC
M / KPCA K
E
YPR
OC
ESS OU
TPU
T OPER
. N
U
M.
NUMBER
CHART
SIZE FREQ.
CP C
P
K
TYPE OF
GAUGE
CAPABILI
TY (
%
)
PROCE
SS
Pro-Cert
analy
st
approval:
D
A
T
E
:
Key Product
KEY PROCESS
OUTPUT
KEY CHARACTERISTIC CONTROL P
L
A
N
K EY PR OC ESS I
N
P
U
T
K
E
Y PROCESS PARAM ETERS PARAM ETER
CONTROL M ETHOD
REACTION P
L
A
N
SETTING
Engine M
odel:
R ev. Level:
REVISION
LETTER:
Planning group:
MEASURING
SYSTEM
Index
83

ASQR-01 Form 2 - Criteria for Submission
• The supplier shall notify the member using the PPAP Notification,
ASQR-01 Form 2 when any situation described below occurs:
• Ownership changes (of the Supplier)
• A change in design
• A change in manufacturing source(s), process(s), inspection
method(s), locations of manufacture, tooling or materials
• A change in numerical control program or translation to another
media
• A natural or man-made event, which may adversely affect a
manufacturing process
• A lapse in production for two years or as specified by the customer
• A significant increase in ramp rate if the production quantity increased
requiring additional capacity
PPAP CHANG E NO TI FI CATI ON
11. Supplier code
12. DUNS Number
PFMEA Special Processes & NDT
Process Control Plan
Comments
Concurrence ? Yes No Additional Engineering Substantiation Required? Yes No
Comments
Requirements
6. Member Purchasing Rep.:
10. Address (Street, City, State, Code) 13. Country
SUPPLIER PROCESS CHANGE NOTIFICATION
1. Part # (s):
2. Part Name:
5. UTC Member:
7. Supplier Contact Name:
Obsolescence
Sub-Tier Issue
Mgmt/Ownership change
Cost
14. PROCESS CHANGE DESCRIPTION
9. Supplier name
14a. Detail part number(s)
affected by the change, if
applicable
SUPPLIER MANUFACTURING LOCATION INFORMATION
15. REASON(S) FOR PROCESS CHANGE
Other (specify):
Capacity
Quality
16. POTENTIAL QUALITY ITEMS AFFECTED BY PROCESS CHANGE (Check all that apply)
Design Risk Assessment
First Article
Member Driven Change
Capability
Member Concurrence
Member Authorization: Clearly Print Name and Sign Title Date
ASQR-01 Form 2 (Revision 7/2018)
This document contains no technical data subject to the EAR or the ITAR (Review for technical data is required once this form is filled in, which may require a
change in Jurisdiction & Classification). Include Export Control Statements as directed by the ITC Focal.
Contains Technical Data - Jurisdiction classification:
17. Supplier Management Authorization:
I, the supplier, have reviewed this form for technical data and have classified as required:
This Form Contains No Technical Data
Clearly Print Name and Sign Title Date Phone Email Address
3. Purchase Order:
4. Frozen Process/ESA/Flight Safety Part Yes No 8. Supplier Contact Phone:
14b. Describe change and
potential impact on the process
or product
14c. Planned date of change incorporation: 14d. Are the parts subject to ASQR-09.2? Yes No
85

PPAP CHANG E CO NTRO L
1) Determine which PPAP elements are affected
by the planned change
• Design
• Manufacturing source, process, inspection,
location, tooling or material
• NC program or translation media
• Natural or man-made event
• Lapse in production for 2 years
2) Make change while updating affected PPAP
elements
3) PPAP Approval Form Submission & Approval
prior to shipping parts from the change
AS9102
FAI
Definition
A new ASQR-09.2 PPAP Approved PPAP Approval Form is required to ship parts made with change (like FAI)
86

PPAP TRAINING Quality Learning Education PPT

More Related Content

Similar to PPAP TRAINING Quality Learning Education PPT (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

PPAP TRAINING Quality Learning Education PPT