The QE's here continue to discuss exactly WHAT information goes WHERE on a control plan. Any help that can be provided would be greatly appreciated. In a typical control plan, another QE has the following information in these three columns:

Product/Process Characteristics
======================
"Headrest Assemble", followed by "Prep Cover For Pour"

Product/Process/Specification/Tolerance
============================
Ensure cover alignment is straight, no sew defects present, finesse seams as needed.. (etc.)

Evaluation/Measurement Technique
=========================
Visual check by operator



I am of the opinion that there are no product characteristics for this step of the operation, but there are process characteristics: Alignment, Sewing Quality, and Armature Location.

Therefore, the Product/Process Characteristics become the CRITERIA for knowing we are successful, and the Product/Process/Specification/Tolerance becomes how the operator knows that those criteria are being met, and the Evaluation/Measurement Technique is how the operator determines that those criteria are being met.

I would love to be right on this, but both of us are really struggling with exactly WHAT information goes WHERE on a control plan. Again, any help that can be provided would be greatly appreciated.

As far as my expierience has taken me :frust:
I have seen any number of "control plan" layouts -

Seems as if a "Control plan" - unlike an Fmea has very few rules to follow.

Many customers care less what "form" or detail is on our control plan (which in our case are really nothing more that re-titled inspection sheet layouts.

General Rules
Are inspection equiptment types identified on "the chosen control plan?
Does it identify critical characteristcs?
are frequencies of inspection detailed?

Whats possible>>>>>
Are customer SPECIFIED dimensions included?
Are customer EXPECTED (beyound print) conditions included?

One question tho ??? >>>how does one Measure and verify (show evidence of (in a repeatable manner) Visual inspection??

Good post Jim,

Many times control plans are in the eye of the beholder and since they are living documents and the view can be revised.

One thing I would like to add is that my belief is that the FMEA must precede the control plan. (I know, Quality 101):bigwave:

A look through http://Elsmar.com/APQP/ will show the normal sequence which is as Jim pointed out. And he's right on with control plan format. Ford uses what they call their 'Dynamic' Control plan. I have seen companies that use a form which has the control plan and the process flow diagram all in one. But - there ARE certain 'basic' columns which must exist. :thedeal:

Very enlightening. Like Jim, we have seen 'any number of "control plan" layouts.' Where we might disagree is in the statement that many customers care less what form or detail is in our control plan. In fact, some of our customers are very vocal about WHAT information goes WHERE.

You bring up many good points, Jim. Regarding visual inspection, how does one measure and verify?.. My take is that we use boundary samples and other product-related knowledge to determine whether the process is accomplishing it's intended result.

Without writing an epistle here, let me focus back on the original concept that us here are trying to reconcile. First: For each process step, as listed on the control plan, I stand by my original argument that a process characteristic always exists, but what about a product characteristic? I am of the opinion that there are no product characteristics for placing FIP headrest in a mold; only those related to the process – in that we have certain visual cues that tell the operator that the OIS (operator instruction sheet) is being carried out in a repeatable fashion.

I have seen control plans where the product characteristic is depicted as the ‘sub-component name’; i.e., headrest assembly. I struggle with this view of WHAT information goes WHERE. On the same control chart, the process characteristic is listed as ‘preparation’. Similar process steps (that follow this line of reasoning) would be listed as ‘clean’ or ‘demold’.

Al/Marc: If the FMEA is prepared in the Quality 101 order, then we know what those product/process characteristics are, because we have identified them during our investigation process. Since our goal is to ensure that those characteristics are being met, that information is transferred to the control plan. Further explanation of the how/when/where is described on the OIS.

Let me stop here, and see if what I am trying to say, hits home with anyone.

hMmmm.. apparently not, ehh?

TD,

Sorry for the late response:bonk:

I think? what you are saying is correct. In the following order:

Request For Quote
Contract Review
Contract Acceptance
Characteristic Matrix (What)
Process Flow (How)
FMEA (What can go wrong)
Control Plan (How do we control what can go wrong)
PPAP
PPAP Approval
Continuous Improvement through FMEA RPN's

Revise FMEA and Control Plan as needed.


Short response, anybody else??:bigwave:

Thanks, Al. I had about decided that 'views and lurkers' was the only response I was going to see.

:)

1) (True/False) A process characteristic always exists at each process step.

2) ... but what about a product characteristic?

3) ... control plans where the product characteristic is depicted as the ‘sub-component name’ ... struggle with this view of WHAT information goes WHERE.

=======================================
Those three specific questions I am looking for feedback.

Depending on your specific industry your plan may be different. This is what is on our control plan, as is more than likely is what is on most control plans: Parameter - what you look at Specifications - measurements Tolerances - measurement + or - Method - how and or what measuring Instrument used - may reference WIs Frequency - how often done Owner - who is responsible to take the measurements Data location - where info is store Reaction plan - what to do if out of tolerenceWe also have signed and dated approvals by engineering/quality and production.

1) (True/False) A process characteristic always exists at each process step.

2) ... but what about a product characteristic?

3) ... control plans where the product characteristic is depicted as the ‘sub-component name’ ... struggle with this view of WHAT information goes WHERE.

1) True in normal situations
2) tolerances / descriptions/ methods
3) :confused: Wondering why a characteristic WOULD/SHOULD be depicted as a sub-component name??

(If I wanted an automobile to achieve say 55-70 mph at 3000 rpm ...... doubtful I would/should describe the characteristic as simply "engine & drivetrain" on a control plan??)

TD,

1- True,
2- Each step in the process effects the outcome of the product. So I would say YES there is a product characteristic at each step.
3- Not clear what you mean. Could you provide an example?

Response to post by TownDawg

> In fact, some of our customers are very vocal about WHAT
> information goes WHERE.

We are talking about the Characteristics column which has 3 sub-columns - No., Product and Process. Right?

> You bring up many good points, Jim. Regarding visual
> inspection, how does one measure and verify?.. My take is
> that we use boundary samples and other product-related
> knowledge to determine whether the process is
> accomplishing it's intended result.

Sounds like a weiner to me!

> Without writing an epistle here, let me focus back on the
> original concept that us here are trying to reconcile.
> First: For each process step, as listed on the control
> plan, I stand by my original argument that a process
> characteristic always exists

Yup - if it's on the control plan it's a characteristic which must be controlled. But product characteristic(s) may also be related to the process - hence the Product sub-column.

There are also process characteristics which are not criitical/special/whatever may exist which are not on the control plan (just a thought to screw up the works here...).

> but what about a product
> characteristic? I am of the opinion that there are no
> product characteristics for placing FIP headrest in a
> mold; only those related to the process - in that we have
> certain visual cues that tell the operator that the OIS
> (operator instruction sheet) is being carried out in a
> repeatable fashion.

As long as placement is not an issue, then it's not an issue. How can you tell? It sounds to me like you're putting something in a mold and that there is something in the mold which 'fixtures' it. I don't know what an FIP headrest is - is it a metal frame or something?

Did this come from the Design FMEA or the Process FMEA? Design FMEA characteristics are Product (Characterisics sub-column) characteristics. Process FMEA characteristics are Process (Characterisics sub-column) characteristics.

> I have seen control plans where the product characteristic
> is depicted as the 'sub-component name'; i.e., headrest
> assembly. I struggle with this view of WHAT information
> goes WHERE. On the same control chart, the process
> characteristic is listed as 'preparation'. Similar process
> steps (that follow this line of reasoning) would be listed
> as 'clean' or 'demold'.

Preparation listed as a characteristic? I would think there would be preparation characteristic(s), if anything, but not preparation as a characteristic as a lone item. I'd have to see a copy of the control plan and FMEAs to see what's going on.

I would consider 'clean' or 'demold' or 'trim flash' as process characteristics - not product characteristics, but I guess you could go either way. Again, where did they come from? The Design or the Process FMEA?

> Al/Marc: If the FMEA is prepared in the Quality 101 order,
> then we know what those product/process characteristics
> are, because we have identified them during our
> investigation process. Since our goal is to ensure that
> those characteristics are being met, that information is
> transferred to the control plan. Further explanation of
> the how/when/where is described on the OIS.

What is OIS?

Or am I confusing the whole issue here? :thedeal:

I also have question

Hello all,

I joined the meeting in my company how to make Process Control Plan being used effectively. We came up with many ideas. However, one idea is to rearrange format of control plan such as input column of RPN number in order to make staffs aware of high RPN number. Also, adding sub column to input gage code (serial number).

My questions are:

1. Can we modify Control Plan format based on APAP manual? I am on the middle of looking in the manual, but not finish yet.

2. If we modify, customer will accept these control plan or not such as PPAP package? Or we are able to use internally only?

3. If we can modify control plan format, could anyone suggest what item should be placed in control plan, so more informations can help process control easier than now?

Thank you

QSMSO

Most of our customers would not accept a reformatted CP. I think there is a requirement to use the layout in the manual but I could be mistaken. We have never considered changing format so I guess it never came up. The entire FMEA book changed recently with one of the major changes being a change in the layout of the form.

Let me know if you find changes are allowable accross the board.

Dave

The format can be an issue with a customer, but in past QS-9000 registrations I have been involved with a number of companies which did not follow the AIAG control plan format in one way or the other. What it came down to is if you have the information in the AIAG form as a minimum there was no issue - several ex-clients used a combined process flow diagram-control plan, for example.

This said, whatever your specific customer wants over rides QS-9000 so if they say they wouldn't allow you to do something like the 'combination process flow diagram-control plan' then - well, you're sunk I guess. To me that would be stupid nit picking of (yes, folks) form over function... :thedeal: