APQP Control Plans - MSA studies for everything listed on the plan?

We are a tier 2 supplier working on QS registration. In the past, we have prepared control plans for several of our customers per their formats. These plans listed every inspection and check done in the process.

For QS, it seems we would have to perform MSA studies for everything listed on the plan. This would be almost impossible to administer, so I have a question or two:

1. Per the APQP manual, it looks like we would list all of the process steps, but only HAVE to inlcude specifications, evaluation etc (items 22-26) for the Special Characteristics. Is it generally acceptable to do this, and leave items 22-26 blank on the plan for the other steps?

2. It has been suggested we could have "2 plans"... a "PPAP control plan" and a more detailed, manufacturing plan for internal use only. The PPAP plan would only show the special characteristics and would be submitted to the customer, but we could have the internal plan with all our actual inspection steps. Would this help us avoid the MSA requirements on everything we do?

Any suggestions or comments would be appreciated.

[Marc]

For QS, it seems we would have to perform MSA studies for everything listed on the plan.

For every critical characteristic on the control plan. So - it depends upon the content of your control plan.

1. Per the APQP manual, it looks like we would list all of the process steps, but only HAVE to inlcude specifications, evaluation etc (items 22-26) for the Special Characteristics. Is it generally acceptable to
do this, and leave items 22-26 blank on the plan for the other steps?

I have never seen them left out. To be honest I never really thought about leaving them out. Some companies use the control plan only for critical characteristics (and safety) but QS has more and more people bringing in the other process steps where once their controls were part of processing documents. Sorry I dopn't know the answer to this one. I need to 'recalibrate' myself in this area.

2. It has been suggested we could have "2 plans"... a "PPAP control plan" and a more detailed, manufacturing plan for internal use only. The PPAP plan would only show the special characteristics and would be submitted to the customer, but we could have the internal plan with all our actual inspection steps. Would this help us avoid the MSA requirements on everything we do?

This is my paradigm - and the answer is Yes.

Sorry to be so late with the response. Sometimes I 'lose' messages for a short period...

Just a couple of things to also consider. You may have identified your own "Special Characteristics" or "Key Characteristics" in your manufacturing process, and these should be addressed in your control plans.

If having two control plans works for you, good. If you are subject to a "Run At Rate" study by your customer, they will bring with them the most recently submitted PPAP information and go through the process with you. There may be some confusion on their part if they have a neat, concise control plan that you submitted, and then see the "real" stuff at the production site. I try not to have opportunities to confuse the customer.

About leaving blanks, we have had two findings in the PPAP section ( at two different times ) for leaving blanks on the PSW. This is not the control plan, but just a cautionary note.

We only put those process steps that involve "Key Characteristics" on the control plan, any steps in between are just not listed, although they are found on the flow diagram. Key characteristics need to have some indication of "control," however you define it. That way you can fill in the measurement system stuff and the control method stuff.

Probably most important, make it work for you, and be ready to defend it.

Just a couple of things to consider.