I am a relatively new Qual Tech for a tier 1 supplier of small internal drivetrain do-dads to OEM's and their sub's e.g. GKN (whew!). It seems that every possible supplier is coming out of the woodwork asking for level 3#'s. :confused: Yet they don't want the sample parts, they just want my 24 pages of fresh data.
(BTW I have found that Most QE's are reading my doc's because they tell me how page 7 doesn't jibe with page16)

I understand that the customer is always right but shouldn't PPAP's be used for what their name sake is? Or print changes?

Why do so many large companies (DANA and GKN not exclusive) insist on "emergency PPAP's" because they have an audit coming up? Is it their paranoia? Beyond the customer always being right, are their any guidelines for people such as myself to go to a 1 million pc. volume/year cust. and suggest they just go with a warrant, MSA, 32 piece special characteristics check and a material cert?

When one is truly swamped, how best might one handle the situation?:nopity:

Thanks

I am a relatively new Qual Tech for a tier 1 supplier of small internal drivetrain do-dads to OEM's and their sub's e.g. GKN (whew!). It seems that every possible supplier is coming out of the woodwork asking for level 3#'s. :confused: Yet they don't want the sample parts, they just want my 24 pages of fresh data.
(BTW I have found that Most QE's are reading my doc's because they tell me how page 7 doesn't jibe with page16)

I understand that the customer is always right but shouldn't PPAP's be used for what their name sake is? Or print changes?

Why do so many large companies (DANA and GKN not exclusive) insist on "emergency PPAP's" because they have an audit coming up? Is it their paranoia? Beyond the customer always being right, are their any guidelines for people such as myself to go to a 1 million pc. volume/year cust. and suggest they just go with a warrant, MSA, 32 piece special characteristics check and a material cert?

When one is truly swamped, how best might one handle the situation?:nopity:

Thanks
Welcome to the cove
You do not say whether there was an approved PPAP at the start.
If there wasn't then there is some sort of failure at their end and you should have done the work anyway.
Are you QS or TS? Do you normally submit PPAP?
I agree that there is no reason why they have to request lev 3 but start checking where you were if you didn't supply.
Maybe if you have already got approval for the part you can start charging them!
Don't let them grind you down

Welcome to another fellow Badger :bigwave:

Been through that song and dance a few times.

What type of product are you making? One of my issues with an annual PPAP is with the dimensional layout results. We will, invariably, have an "insignificant" radius or rib thickness out of tolerance. When asking my customers "What do we do now?", the pat answer is "fix it". This is not always the best solution in die casting. But I'm off topic already......

Regarding your question, I have given my customers differing time lines dependant on what they truly require. Capability studies and Gage R&Rs we are pretty good at keeping updated within a 12 month period. PFMEAs and Control Plans are pretty well kept up also. As mentioned above, the 100% dimensional layout is a different matter - if we have multiple cavity sets currently in production, they either get the last layout or they must wait until we can cycle through all currently production (PPAP) approved cavities. If they wish to interrupt our production scheduling, they are given a fairly hefty setup cost. (It's kind of funny that, many times, when the "wait date" doesn't match up with their audit schedule, a "level 1" is all they end up needing :rolleyes: )

Thanks for the 2 quick reply's. We are audited twice a year for ts16949 and we are automotive internal engine, transmission component suppliers. They are small items, some as small as a dime, others, larger than a calculator,yet multifacateted and radii'd(up to 40 call outs for me to number on a print). We suppy direct to the alphabet; DCX to Toyota, and their sub's GKN and Dana among tons of others.

The PPAP's are already done in many cases. I understand when they have a print change but there seems to be no reason except (sometimes international) ignorannce that they don't ask for level #1's vs. 3's for annuals.

Howard's suggestion that we charge for annuals was just brought up a few weeks ago. :applause: I looked at the threads on the cove for guidance there. Problem is that these are existing contracts.....further research neeeded there. Excellent idea if we could make QC a "profit center" vs. just another nessesary support function.
2 more followup questions:

Is $1250.00 A number that would get noticed but not be outlandish?

What is an "Annual" by most definitions anyway?

TSA,PFMEA,CP,CPHeatTreat, I put on a happy face but the customer must be satisfied. More guidance Gents?

See you at ASQ in MAy 06.

The PPAP's are already done in many cases. I understand when they have a print change but there seems to be no reason except (sometimes international) ignorannce that they don't ask for level #1's vs. 3's for annuals.

The difference between the various PPAP levels exists only in what gets submitted and not in what actually gets done. Even if your customer asks for a Level 1 submission, you're still expected to have all of the relevant elements, so I don't understand the problem.

Howard's suggestion that we charge for annuals was just brought up a few weeks ago. :applause: I looked at the threads on the cove for guidance there. Problem is that these are existing contracts.....further research neeeded there. Excellent idea if we could make QC a "profit center" vs. just another nessesary support function.
Is $1250.00 A number that would get noticed but not be outlandish

How and when (and for how much money) PPAP gets submitted is a matter of contract review. What did you agree to in the beginning? The AIAG PPAP manual (at least until March 1) defines the events that trigger submissions, those that require notification to the customer, and those that don't require notification or submission. If your agreement with customers specifies annual submissions, then you either need to renegotiate or do the submissions. As I said earlier, whether it's a Level 1 or Level 3 is irrelevant because you have to compile the data in either case.

What is an "Annual" by most definitions anyway?

It varies with the customer. For some it's a full PPAP submission and for other it might be just a dimensional layout and/or performance testing.

The difference between the various PPAP levels exists only in what gets submitted and not in what actually gets done. Even if your customer asks for a Level 1 submission, you're still expected to have all of the relevant elements, so I don't understand the problem.



How and when (and for how much money) PPAP gets submitted is a matter of contract review. What did you agree to in the beginning? The AIAG PPAP manual (at least until March 1) defines the events that trigger submissions, those that require notification to the customer, and those that don't require notification or submission. If your agreement with customers specifies annual submissions, then you either need to renegotiate or do the submissions. As I said earlier, whether it's a Level 1 or Level 3 is irrelevant because you have to compile the data in either case.



It varies with the customer. For some it's a full PPAP submission and for other it might be just a dimensional layout and/or performance testing.
While I certainly agree with your response, the OP mentioned something about an impending audit. That implies (to me) that there probably is nothing in the CSRs or contract that an annual PPAP is required much less what level is to be submitted.

While I certainly agree with your response, the OP mentioned something about an impending audit. That implies (to me) that there probably is nothing in the CSRs or contract that an annual PPAP is required much less what level is to be submitted.

If it hasn't been agreed to beforehand (as I stated earlier), then the supplier is within its rights to protest and reopen the existing agreement. Allowing a customer to make the business equivalent of unfunded mandates is a very slippery slope; with many, it's give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile. Customers should be prepared to pay for what they're asking for, but a lot of customers (especially big ones) will use bullying tactics to get what they want. It makes it difficult for small suppliers to draw the line between making a prudent accommodation and giving away the store just to keep the business.

Sorry to have brought on the misunderstanding. what I meant was that the work IS all done. So in that regard it wouldn't matter if it is just a warrant or a level 3. It is just the 4 to 8 hours to pull the various data off inspection sheets or measure on the contracer, or pull test on the MTS etc. and then enter it in their format etc. (If they came in for a visit, I could show them the reams of data and the 'proof' would be in front of them and that would only take 1/2 hour, I could print them a warrant and they would be on their way)

I guess that is seems that a level 3 seems to be a default by many customers and I'll have to ask sales to look at the contracts, as I have, and found the question of how often to submit full layouts to be very grey by both parties.

I suppose we should have a standard, non-threatening, clause in the contract stating that pulling the 'tons of paperwork' together outside of a print change or other AIAG PPAP defined event would cost a nominal fee of $xxx.

to that end;
1. does anyone have std. contract language that they can share w/ me?
2. what is a non-threatening price to charge for the extra work that is truely busywork? $625, $875 $1250?

Thanks

Sorry to have brought on the misunderstanding. what I meant was that the work IS all done. So in that regard it wouldn't matter if it is just a warrant or a level 3. It is just the 4 to 8 hours to pull the various data off inspection sheets or measure on the contracer, or pull test on the MTS etc. and then enter it in their format etc. (If they came in for a visit, I could show them the reams of data and the 'proof' would be in front of them and that would only take 1/2 hour, I could print them a warrant and they would be on their way)
Thanks

My own expectation is that when a Level x PPAP is requested of a supplier, a complete PPAP package will be compiled and filed by the supplier, and be available immediately. You haven't done PPAP if all of the information is still scattered all over the building. If at the time you sign the warrant, there isn't a compliant PPAP package available, you're not doing PPAP, imo.

Thanks, I am learning alot about semantics too! A complete PPAP is done already to the current print. It's just not updated to the parts that ran off the machine last week which is what the customer is leading me to believe they are asking for. That is why we would like to charge them $ for the extra work that is quite duplicitous to the PPAP on file.

It may go back to the contract but a recent example is a Brazilian company that requested a re-PPAP this past friday just as I was filing their signed PSW for the exact same part. Nothing changed. Not the print or CP or PFMEA-wise.

Maybe thier trying to look busy as to not have their jobs eliminated.

My own expectation is that when a Level x PPAP is requested of a supplier, a complete PPAP package will be compiled and filed by the supplier, and be available immediately. You haven't done PPAP if all of the information is still scattered all over the building. If at the time you sign the warrant, there isn't a compliant PPAP package available, you're not doing PPAP, imo.


The PPAP evidence either has to be in the binder or file, or can be cross referenced to electronic docs and records.

However, as Jim and this thread demonstrates, not being able to lay hands on it when you need it, because it is all over the place, misses the point. You should not be using today's inspection records, but the ones that pertained to the parts as they were when you submitted PPAP. Today's records should only corroborate you are still maintaining that level of performance.

Why not have an electronic file for each PPAP submission, where you can simply print off another copy if requested and go get a coffee while it prints?

...I guess that is seems that a level 3 seems to be a default by many customers....

...found the question of how often to submit full layouts to be very grey by both parties.

I suppose we should have a standard, non-threatening, clause in the contract stating that pulling the 'tons of paperwork' together outside of a print change or other AIAG PPAP defined event would cost a nominal fee of $xxx.




Level 3 is a default among the Big 3, unless they tell you otherwise.

Some CSRs req. annual layouts, but they may not specify that they have to be submitted. In other words, you use them to validate the product is still good.

You stand a better chance, IMO, of reducing the effort needed to produce a PPAP, than you do of getting them to agree to a clause for payments.

My thanks to you and everyone at the cove for speeding up my learning curve.
To carify; If the PPAP is in the drawer with a bag full of original parts for that submision, I can resend that same information yearly provided NO print or process change has taken place?

My current set up, lot audit reports and hourly SPC charts still demonstate that everything is the same. So I can get a coffee and print off the electronic report on file? How neat is that? I have been under the impression that I had to go to the partial lot box, get new parts and measure them 3 ways from sunday! (all over again).

What about the age of the PPAP or parts. Can I re-submit annually with the same electronic paperwork? What if the measurements are 1 or 2 years old? Are there AIAG reqs. on this? They ARE still the same parts, as measuring would prove out.

Then I don't have to be all stressed out!

Like everyone else in automotive we are doing more with less and I am trying to keep my head above water untill I get up to speed in my knowledge of quality. I have only been doing PPAP's for 4 months.

Thanks for the guidance! comments?

I'm not clear about some of your questions...

To clarify; If the PPAP is in the drawer with a bag full of original parts for that submision, I can resend that same information yearly provided NO print or process change has taken place?

A PPAP is an agreement to deliver parts as described in the PPAP data. Kind of like a mortgage contract. You don't resubmit a new mortgage each year. You just make payments.

I'm not aware of any customers who require a new PPAP each year. PPAPs should be updated if something about the part changed. Are you perhaps confusing PPAP with an Annual Layout, where you verify all the dimensions each year to ensure that the part still meets all specs? Some customers might be wanting you to submit that part.


My current set up, lot audit reports and hourly SPC charts still demonstate that everything is the same. So I can get a coffee and print off the electronic report on file? How neat is that? I have been under the impression that I had to go to the partial lot box, get new parts and measure them 3 ways from sunday! (all over again). What about the age of the PPAP or parts. Can I re-submit annually with the same electronic paperwork? What if the measurements are 1 or 2 years old?


Should not need to print off or submit a new one unless the customer lost the original one. Unless the part changed, or there are significant problems maintaining capability in your process. Same as the mortgage idea I described in the previous paragraph.



Are there AIAG reqs. on this? They ARE still the same parts, as measuring would prove out.



Just the PPAP, APQP, FMEA manuals and TS standard.


Then I don't have to be all stressed out!

Like everyone else in automotive we are doing more with less and I am trying to keep my head above water untill I get up to speed in my knowledge of quality. I have only been doing PPAP's for 4 months.

Thanks for the guidance! comments?[/quote]


Not saying this with any disrespect, but the best way a company management could "do more with less," is to provide nice folks like you the proper training when they give you new responsibilities. Then you could get more done and have less stress. It would save mney and time. It is no wonder companies have trouble when they make their people jump through hoops.

Make sure you read the AIAG manuals I mentioned above, and maybe get subscriptions to Quality Progress and Quality Digest. That would help. Also, AIAG and ASQ both provide good training on various subjects. It's esasier to do this stuff when you understand it.

I've gone through this requirement with several customers.

The first thing to understand is WHY they want a 'PPAP' (if that is indeed what they want; customers tend to use PPAP as a generic term). If it was part of their original Supplier Quality Requirements, then you're stuck; shame on your APQP team for not catching it in contract review. Talk them down to the bare minimum required, and DON'T call it a PPAP submission (otherwise you're stuck with the AIAG requirements).

If they didn't note it in the SQR, then (depending on what they need, what resources are required, how important they are, phase of the moon, shade of blue, etc) charge them whatever is appropriate. I have done PPAP's for free (extremely complex part, that took about 72 man-hours of labour), and have charged $2500 for a PPAP that took me about 25 minutes of work.

Each case, and each customer is different. Understanding what they want and why they want it is usually the key....but at the end of it all, they ARE the customer, and they WILL get what they want, whether we like it or not.