Drill Deep Worksheet

Name:

Phone:

Revision Date:

Supplier contact:
GM SQE:
Supplier Duns:

Supplier Name and Location:

Issue Title:
ID Type:

PRR

PRTS

CDP

Other

ID Number:

Failure Mode:
Effects of Failure Mode:
Cause of Failure Mode:

5 Whys
Why did the manufacturing process
not prevent this failure mode?

***************
***************
****
Manufacturing process -

M4

***************prevention &
***************
standardized work
****

M5

Why did the quality process not

protect GM from this failure mode?

M-RC
Q1
Q2

***************
***************
****

Q3

***************
***************
**** Quality process -

Q4

*************** detection &

***************containment
****

Q5

Protect

***************
***************
****

Why did the planning process not

predict this failure mode?

***************
***************
****

***************Predict
***************
**** Planning process -

informational content
***************
***************
in FMEAs and CPs
****
***************
***************
****

Due Date

M2
M3

***************
***************
****

Owner

M1

***************
***************
****

Prevent

Corrective Action

Q-RC
P1
P2
P3
P4
P5
P-RC
K1

What are the key findings based on

this quality issue?
K2
***************
***************
****

K3

***************
***************
****

K4

***************
***************
****

K5

GM1927-84

Drill Deep Worksheet Rev. 7.6

10/12/04

DRAFT

Drill Deep Worksheet

Name:

Phone:
248-555-5555
248-555-5555

Supplier contact: J. Smith

GM SQE: T. Smith
Supplier Duns:

9198213232

Revision Date:
02/24/04

Supplier Name and Location: Supplier XYZ, Pontiac, MI USA

Issue Title: End cap not fully seated into window on valve.
ID Type:

PRR

PRTS CDP

Other

ID Number:

30011223-989898

Failure Mode: End cap not fully seated into window of valve.
Effects of Failure Mode: Loose parts found in Product XYZ fuel tanks.
Cause of Failure Mode: Positive stops were not adjusted correctly for the new, low permeation family insert causing the cylinder did not travel to full insertion.

Owner

Due Date

J. Smith

03/15/04

Develop training plan for employees

and implement a layered audit of
planning process.

J. Smith

03/31/04

Re-evaluate prevention errorproofing process and implement

detection error-proofing process.

J. Smith

03/15/04

Inadequate knowledge of FMEA

methodology.

FMEA training plan to be developed

and monthly FMEA layered audit
review to be implemented.

J. Smith

03/15/04

K1

Engineering change management execution.

Develop regular change control

meetings with entire team.

J. Smith

03/15/04

K2

PPAP / PTR execution.

Develop Supplier Change Request

audit process.

J. Smith

03/15/04

***************
***************
****

K3

Insufficient error-proofing incorporated into

valve assembly.

Re-evaluate prevention errorproofing process and implement

detection error-proofing process.

J. Smith

03/15/04

***************
***************
****

K4

Inadequate knowledge of FMEA

methodology.

FMEA training plan to be developed

and monthly FMEA layered audit
review to be implemented.

J. Smith

03/15/04

***************
***************
****

K5

M1
Why did the manufacturing process
not prevent this failure mode?

5 Whys
Corrective Action
Positive stops were not adjusted correctly for
Validate correct position of stops and
the new, low permeation family insert
a PM plan to be developed to ensure
causing the cylinder did not travel to full
location of stops.
insertion.

M2

Control Plan was not updated to indicate

recalibration for new family insert.

***************
***************
****

M3

Manufacturing was not aware of a new

family insert.

***************
***************
****
Manufacturing process -

M4

Poor communication between Product

Development & Manufacturing on design
change.

Prevent
prevention &

***************
standardized work
***************
****
***************
***************
****

Why did the quality process not

protect GM from this failure mode?

M5

M-RC

Supplier XYZ Launch Planning System was

not followed.

Q1

No detection error-proofing for "end cap fully

seated".

Q2

***************
***************
****

Q3

***************
***************
**** Quality process -

Q4

*************** detection &

***************containment
****

Q5

Protect

***************
***************
****

Why did the planning process not

predict this failure mode?

Q-RC

P1

RPN number was not determined properly in

PFMEA.

P2

Occurrence and detection ratings were not

determined properly.

***************
***************
****

P3

***************
***************
**** Planning process -

P4

***************
informational content
***************
in FMEAs and CPs
****

P5

Predict

***************
***************
****

False sense of security in error proofing

prevention of positive stops in tooling.

P-RC

What are the key findings based on

this quality issue?

GM1927-84

DRAFT
Drill Deep Worksheet Rev. 7.6

10/12/04