Hi,

I'm a student writing a report comparing QS-9000 and ISO/TS-16949. I need some help with finding some evidence (a letter from the big 3, or some statement in the TS manual) that says that APQP, MSA, PPAP, and FMEA requirements have not changed from QS-9000. Is it true?

I have been reading the forums in these areas (TS16949 and PPAP & APQP) and found that many have said that those things haven't changed. I need it to support this in my report.

Thanks in advance.

The requirements of these tools are not as such part of the standard.
In QS9000 as the standard belonged to the NA auto industry it mandated the AIAG books but allowed customers to require THEIR format.
In ISO/TS 16949 the customer defines. If he is GM/FORD/DCX (in US) then the AIAG books are the same but if you supply top VW then they will ask for PPAP according to VDA 2 etc.

Do not expect the standard to say that there has not been a change or not as this is not how a standard is written.

Hope this helps

The FMEA changes we've seen since our transition from QS-9000 to ISO/TS 16949 have been greater emphasis on integrating PFMEAs and control plans (due to clause 7.5.1.1) and more analysis of PFMEA metrics (customer requirements). Not really changes, just more focus on (supposedly) existing practices. :rolleyes:

Our APQP, MSA, PPAP procedures didn't change because of the transition.

As far a documenting changes in requirements between QS-9000 and TS16949, why not try to round up the applicable customer-specific requirements? DaimlerChrysler had QS-9000, 1st ed TS & 2nd ed TS customer-specific requirements on their website during the transition period for the various standards. (Not many differences between them, as I recall). Now that all suppliers are supposed to be transitioned to ISO/TS 16949: 2002, the other requirements have been removed. But somebody may still have them.

Thanks bgwiehle, I will look for the list of changes.

Thank you Mr. Atkins for the response. It has cleared up my concerns with the AIAG books.

I am also interested in finding out differences between PPAP in VDA 6.1 and TS16949. Can you clue me in with this also?

Sincerely,

The FMEA changes we've seen since our transition from QS-9000 to ISO/TS 16949 have been greater emphasis on integrating PFMEAs and control plans (due to clause 7.5.1.1) and more analysis of PFMEA metrics (customer requirements). Not really changes, just more focus on (supposedly) existing practices. :rolleyes:

Our APQP, MSA, PPAP procedures didn't change because of the transition.

As far a documenting changes in requirements between QS-9000 and TS16949, why not try to round up the applicable customer-specific requirements? DaimlerChrysler had QS-9000, 1st ed TS & 2nd ed TS customer-specific requirements on their website during the transition period for the various standards. (Not many differences between them, as I recall). Now that all suppliers are supposed to be transitioned to ISO/TS 16949: 2002, the other requirements have been removed. But somebody may still have them.

Would you, or anyone be willing to share an example of a current PFMEA approved by TS and automotive? We have been using PFMEAs previously which were approved by our customer. However, during our TS16949 pre-assessment last week the auditor wrote a NC because we were not using the latest AIAG FMEA format addressing the additions for Current Process Controls-Prevention and actions taken. Looking at the AIAG manual, but it really does not provide clear info as to when and if this is always required.
Appreciate any help you can provide.

Would you, or anyone be willing to share an example of a current PFMEA approved by TS and automotive? We have been using PFMEAs previously which were approved by our customer. However, during our TS16949 pre-assessment last week the auditor wrote a NC because we were not using the latest AIAG FMEA format addressing the additions for Current Process Controls-Prevention and actions taken. Looking at the AIAG manual, but it really does not provide clear info as to when and if this is always required.
Appreciate any help you can provide.

I note that you posted your question in at least 2 threads. What process(es) do you want to address in particular?

I liked the transition to the 3rd edition FMEA format. By putting the prevention controls in a separate column, and using the recommended (objective!) rating scheme on the detection controls, the true risk items became very evident.

:caution: From the examples of PFMEAs that I've seen, a lot of companies that added the new column have not also done the rating review. (I now help review our supplier PFMEAs and have recommended that FMEA submissions for PPAP or Corrective Action include that supplier's rating criteria!)

One of the things we do that isn't mandated anywhere is to identify Recommended Actions as being (P) or (D) or (P)&(D). This helps when rating a completed action.

B.G. Wiehle