Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 10

Production Readiness Study (ASQR-09.

2 Element #8)

Part Number: Part name :

Familiy Name:
Assessment date:

Select P.R.S evaluation level: Production Ready


P.R.S “Development” level = Planning, up to 1st batch >40%
P.R.S “Production Ready” level = Pre-production; before production component delivery >80%
P.R.S “Continuous Improvement” level = ZNC >90%

Total average score: 0%


Supplier Name: Supplier Code:

Supplier Mfg. Eng’g Rep.:

(Manager or Supervisor) _____________________________________(signature)

Supplier QA/QC Rep.:


(Manager or Supervisor) _____________________________________(signature)

UTC Member Focal Point:

_____________________________________(signature)

MOS 0%
MOS
Tooling 0%
FOD 100% Tooling
Gauging 0%
Mfg. E._ TPM 0% 0%
Capacity Planning 0% Gauging
KPC
Sub-Tier Control
Sub-Tier Control Mfg. E._ TPM
Capacity Planning 0% KPC
FOD 0%

391081305.xls
1 of 10
1 MANUFACTURING INSTRUCTION / OPERATION SHEETS

Evaluation goal:
The degree to which the available Mfg work instruction are considered adequate
for the task at hand.

legend
Score
Evaluation criteria:

1.1 (Dev) Summary (routing) lists all operations / machines / departments available

1.2 (Dev) Adequately detailed sketches/visual aid available

1.3 (Dev) Do all process/product characteristics and features have dedicated identifier

1.4 (Dev) Tooling list(s) available for all operations

1.5 (Dev) Gauges identified for each characteristic or feature

1.6 (Dev) ESA (Engineering Source Approval) Requirements have been adequately addressed

1.7 (Dev) Does the mfg process and applicable work station consider (EHS) Environment, Health and Safety

1.8 (Prod) For ‘special’ processes, has a qualified or qualifiable Supplier(s) been identified

1.9 (Prod) Has adequate “process proving method” been planned, reviewed & approved (incl. packaging)

1.10 (Prod) Key Product Characteristic (KPC) are identified on applicable instruction sheet(s)

1.11 (Prod) Final Inspection operation calls out the verification of all KPC's per applicable UTC procedure

1.12 (Prod) Does the instruction sheet reflect all Engineering drawing requirements

1.13 (Prod) Are all instruction sheet changes recorded and controlled

Comments / Action Plan


1.1 Comments Required
1.2 Comments Required
1.3 Comments Required
1.4 Comments Required
1.5 Comments Required
1.6 Comments Required
1.7 Comments Required
1.8 Comments Required
1.9 Comments Required
1.10 Comments Required
1.11 Comments Required
1.12 Comments Required
1.13 Comments Required

391081305.xls
2 of 10
2 TOOLING READINESS

Evaluation goal:
Does all of the required tooling exist physically? If not, what is the rate of completion
(expressed in percentile form if needs dictate)? Does a completion plan exist?

legend
Score
Evaluation criteria:

2.1 (Prod) Are all holding, forming &/or, welding tools ready for production

2.2 (Prod) Are all cutting tools ready for production

2.3 (Prod) Are all N/C programs tool proved and changes recorded

2.4 (Prod) Are schedules for special processes approved

2.5 (Prod) Is the tool proving completed (ex: poke-yoke)

2.6 (Prod) Are all tool drawings available (with change history reported)

2.7 (Prod) Does the procurement process of consumables have volume fluctuation flexibility

2.8 (ZNC) Is perichable tool life measured and controled (Part Per Grind)

Comments / Action Plan


2.1 Comments Required
2.2 Comments Required
2.3 Comments Required
2.4 Comments Required
2.5 Comments Required
2.6 Comments Required
2.7 Comments Required
2.8 Comments Required

391081305.xls
3 of 10
3 GAUGING READINESS

Evaluation goal:
Have all gauging needs been identified/qualified? Are all
necessary gauges physically available? If not, is a completion plan in place?

legend
Score
Evaluation criteria:

3.1 (Prod) Are all gauges ready for production

3.2 (Prod) Have the gauge try-out / correlation exercises been completed

3.3 (Prod) Have all the gage R&R exercises been completed

3.4 (Prod) Are all non standard gauge drawings available (with change history reported, if any)

3.5 (Prod) Have the CMM programs been tried-out and controled per Mfg process level

Comments / Action Plan


3.1 Comments Required
3.2 Comments Required
3.3 Comments Required
3.4 Comments Required
3.5 Comments Required

391081305.xls
4 of 10
4 MANUFACTURING EQUIPMENT / TPM PROGRAM

Evaluation goal:
Mfg equipment: The extent to which the selected manufacturing
equipment can meet the requirements of the product.
TPM program: The extent to which a Supplier is serious about maintain a given
(achieved) level of machine capability/capacity for the product under evaluation.

legend
Score
Evaluation criteria:

4.1 (Dev) Has the manufacturing / testing equipment selected for this production been measured for capability

4.2 (Dev) Has the manufacturing / testing equipment selected for this production been measured for capacity

4.3 (Dev) Does the Supplier have a TPM program in relation to the equipment selected for this process.

4.4 (Prod) Does the Supplier have an action plan to address shortfalls (i.e: M/C breakdown, etc...)

4.5 (Prod) Is adherence of TPM program audited regularly (see log book: M/C#, auditor name, date, comments)

Comments / Action Plan


4.1 Comments Required
4.2 Comments Required
4.3 Comments Required
4.4 Comments Required
4.5 Comments Required

391081305.xls
5 of 10
5 Key Product Characteristics ref: UTCQR09.1

Evaluation goal:
The extent to which process repeatability can be measured, process stability
established with a view toward eventual optimisation.

5 If this part is CTQ (with KPC) Yes

legend
Score
Evaluation criteria:

5.1 (Dev) Has the UTC KPC's list been validated by the Supplier

5.2 (Dev) Does the Supplier control plan refect KPC's requirement

5.3 (Dev) Does the Supplier introduced adequate "shop floor data collection tool" in line with control plan requirement

5.4 (Dev) Has Supplier completed PFMEA based on CTQ features, previous escapes and MFA

5.5 (Prod) Has the CTQ Feature (I.e., KPC1, KPC2, etc.) data been collected per established control plan per UTCQR-09.1?

5.6 (Prod) Are SPC control charts in place illustrating evidence of variation?

5.7 (ZNC) is there evidence that supplier responds with C/A for processes exhibiting low Cpk (Cpk < 1.0)?

5.8 (ZNC) Do all KPC's demonstrate an acceptable CPK/DPM

Comments / Action Plan


5.1 Comments Required
5.2 Comments Required
5.3 Comments Required
5.4 Comments Required
5.5 Comments Required
5.6 Comments Required
5.7 Comments Required
5.8 Comments Required

391081305.xls
6 of 10
6 SUB-TIER & TIER-2 CONTROL

Evaluation goal:
The extent to which supplier are in control of offloading, shop assist and sub-tier operation
If this part has Sub-Tier operation or purchase detail form Tier-2
Yes

legend
Score
Evaluation criteria:

6.1 (Dev) Is there an inspection operation prior/after shop assist operation

6.2 (Dev) Has supplier made a production readiness assessment for all Sub tiers & tier 2 for purchase detail (similar to PRS)

6.3 (Prod) Are all actions from production readiness completed

6.4 (Prod) Have UTC requirements been flowed down to sub-tier supplier(s)?

6.5 (Prod) Has supplier coordinated Process Certification requirements when applicable?

6.6 (Prod) Does a process exist to monitor the sub-tier's capacity in case of production rate increases?

6.7 (Prod) Does a process exist to monitor the sub-tier's quality & delivery performance?

Comments / Action Plan


6.1 Comments Required
6.2 Comments Required
6.3 Comments Required

391081305.xls
7 of 10
7 CAPACITY PLANNING

Evaluation goal:
Validate supplier has a formalized means to determine production capacity.
Look to see if supplier, as a minimum, utilizes the UTC Capacity Analysis Tool (CAT).
Ensure PPAP part number and/or family was subject of a capacity planning study.

legend
Score
Evaluation criteria:

7.1 Does supplier have a formal method to measure and analyze production capacity?

7.2 Does the supplier determine both cycle and set-up times as part of production planning?

7.3 Does supplier have a method for loading UTC demand forecast from UTC division Supplier Portal into their capacity tool?

7.4 Does supplier have a process to identify and mitigate production bottlenecks for current & future UTC demand?

7.5 Are top production bottlenecks clearly identified with plans/timelines to address?

7.6 Does supplier utilize any lean tools such as VSM, balance charts, machine loading charts for capacity planning?

7.7 Does the supplier incorporate machine downtime, quality yields, and factory/machine shutdowns into capacity planning?

7.8 Does supplier have formal process to track and report Raw Material, WIP, MHV and Finished Goods?

7.9 Does supplier post visual management metrics at each cell/workstation so employees know they have met their daily schedule?

7.10 Does the supplier have an inventory accuracy process in place?

Comments / Action Plan


7.1 Comments Required
7.2 Comments Required
7.3 Comments Required
7.4 Comments Required
7.5 Comments Required
7.6 Comments Required
7.7 Comments Required
7.8 Comments Required

391081305.xls
8 of 10
8 FOREIGN OBJECT DEBRIS (FOD)

Evaluation goal:
Validate supplier has a formalized means to identify and mitigate the risks of FOD.
Look to see if supplier, as a minimum, practices FOD prevention.
Ensure process steps generating PPAP part number and/or family incorporate FOD prevention techniques.

legend
Score
Evaluation criteria:

8.1 Product protection devices (such as: covers, caps etc.) are properly used.

8.2 No open cavities on parts exposed to FOD.

8.3 All parts bagged, boxed or preserved to prevent damage or corrosion.

8.4 Handling containers are free of dust, dirt, corrosion and free of contamination.

8.5 Parts are properly transported on storage carts or fixtures to preclude damage.

8.6 Special tooling is stored properly when not in use.

8.7 No unapproved tape or labels can used on product. (referenced in tech data)

Comments / Action Plan


8.1 Comments Required
8.2 Comments Required
8.3 Comments Required
8.4 Comments Required
8.5 Comments Required
8.6 Comments Required
8.7 Comments Required

391081305.xls Ref: "UTC Production Part Approval Process"


9 of 10
ASQR-09.2
Action Plan follow up
P/N 0 # 0% Pro

PRI Person Completion


Criteria Problem to be resolved Action needed Responsible date
1.1 Please Specify Comments
1.2 Please Specify Comments
1.3 Please Specify Comments
1.4 Please Specify Comments
1.5 Please Specify Comments
1.6 Please Specify Comments
1.7 Please Specify Comments
1.8 Please Specify Comments
1.9 Please Specify Comments
1.10 Please Specify Comments
1.11 Please Specify Comments
1.12 Please Specify Comments
1.13 Please Specify Comments
2.1 Please Specify Comments
2.2 Please Specify Comments
2.3 Please Specify Comments
2.4 Please Specify Comments
2.5 Please Specify Comments
2.6 Please Specify Comments
2.7 Please Specify Comments
2.8 Please Specify Comments
3.1 Please Specify Comments
3.2 Please Specify Comments
3.3 Please Specify Comments
3.4 Please Specify Comments
3.5 Please Specify Comments
4.1 Please Specify Comments
4.2 Please Specify Comments
4.3 Please Specify Comments
4.4 Please Specify Comments
4.5 Please Specify Comments
5.1 Please Specify Comments
5.2 Please Specify Comments
5.3 Please Specify Comments
5.4 Please Specify Comments
5.5 Please Specify Comments
5.6 Please Specify Comments
5.7 Please Specify Comments
5.8 Please Specify Comments
6.1 Please Specify Comments
6.2 Please Specify Comments
6.3 Please Specify Comments
7 Free comments

391081305.xls
10 of 10

Centres d'intérêt liés