Can anyone tell me what the accepted AQLs are for various automotive components (engines, gearboxes, etc..)?

Where is this defined (or what is the industry standard for road vehicles)? ISO/TS 16949, MIL-STD-105E, ISO 2859 ?

Where can I actually see this?

I'm helping our attorneys in defence of a class action case against our firm (we import PSA vehicles) on AutoBox faults; some 'proffessional' opinions have quoted that "13 vehicles must be tested as per MIL-105-E in order to verify a generic fault in the product".
Then there is a similar relation to ISO 2859. I have no problem claiming that whatever the definition, MIL standards do not apply to motor vehicles no defined for military use, but I would like to know which standard does??

Your assistance would be much appreciated!

Aviv PSA,

I'm not in Automotive, so I don't have a specific answer on standard AQL levels, but I suspect that different manufactures have different AQL's that they use.

As for military standards not applying to civilian settings, MIL-STD-105E has been widely used and accepted in a wide range of industries, even when there is no military connection. In fact, MIL-STD-105E has been discontinued for a number of years and replaced by a civilian equivalent -- ANSI/ASQ Z1.4-2003 There are minor differences in wording (and I believe in switching rules) but the main tables are all still the same.

Can anyone tell me what the accepted AQLs are for various automotive components (engines, gearboxes, etc..)?

Where is this defined (or what is the industry standard for road vehicles)? ISO/TS 16949, MIL-STD-105E, ISO 2859 ?

Where can I actually see this?

I'm helping our attorneys in defence of a class action case against our firm (we import PSA vehicles) on AutoBox faults; some 'proffessional' opinions have quoted that "13 vehicles must be tested as per MIL-105-E in order to verify a generic fault in the product".
Then there is a similar relation to ISO 2859. I have no problem claiming that whatever the definition, MIL standards do not apply to motor vehicles no defined for military use, but I would like to know which standard does??

Your assistance would be much appreciated!

There is no standard, as such. It's up to individual customers to specify what's expected in terms of inspection by suppliers. When dealing with lawyers and product liability litigation, it's important to remember that what opposing counsel is looking for is not what makes sense, but what they think that they can make seem sensible to a jury of ignorant laypeople.

Can anyone tell me what the accepted AQLs are for various automotive components (engines, gearboxes, etc..)?

On our case AQL is specified by the customer and is stated on the contract with the customer. For some i believe, mutual understanding with the customer, or a documented company standard is enough.

First of all I'ld like to thank you all for the helpfull replies!

I can see how these standards (MIL/ISO/ANSI etc.) can be applied at the manufacturing level per component. Things become very complicated when an attempt is made to apply these processes on a complex assembly; such as a car. 100,000 components, each that may be deemed as below par in tens of ways that may cause the mechanism (sub assembly or the car itself) to fail inspection at the factory or at the end user / after sales level.

Is it possible to apply these standards at the end user level?

Would anyone know where I can find industry definitions for what AQL or percentage of defects are regarded as "Generic Faults"?

Many thanks!

I am no expert in this and I doubt you will get an answer to your question because everything is so situational and dependent.

What I would suggest is for you or your legal team to research on some similar and higher profile cases in your country or the US and find out what method other people/lawyers used. With this knowledge, you should have an idea what are the probable methods their lawyers will employ. Meanwhile you can assemble a technical team to challenge and cast doubts on the method that they use.

If you are not sure of how to defend, attack becomes the best form of defence.

I beleive this is more of a SPC Monitoring and Statistical Analysis Techniques forum questions than a TS 16949 forum question.

In general, the auto industry uses an AQL of zero. Meanig, zero defects parts are acceptable. By part and by lot we are expected to accept at zero defects and reject at one defect.

Also, you need to specifiy what confidence level you want. 80%? 90%? 99.7?

To determine how many items to inspect, you need to define if your are sampling individual pieces, lots, random sampling, skip lot, attributes, variables, confidence level, AQL, etc.

But in general, part suppliers to the world wide auto industry uses an AQL of zero.

Try the SPC Monitoring and Statistical Analysis Techniques forum with the same question.

Regards,

Dirk

You've all been a great help; thanks for your assistance!

Aviv ARIELI