Difficult to do according to PPAP Manual? Big plastic parts, over 100 dimensions

M

Mobobo

#1
hello all,
According to PPAP manual (3rd rev.), the supplier should submit full dimensions report, and I often ask 6pcs for the full dimensions.
But, for some big plastic parts, such as shroud (supporting the fan and motor to cool the engine of a car), it has over 100 dimensions, so the problem are:
the suppliers often don't submit the full dimensions report, even miss some SC and CC dimensions in print because those dimensions are difficult to check, like the "R" and angle, therefore, is it necessary to do full dimensions inspection? of course excepting the SC and CC. :thanx:
 
Elsmar Forum Sponsor

Jim Wynne

Staff member
Admin
#2
Mobobo said:
hello all,
According to PPAP manual (3rd rev.), the supplier should submit full dimensions report, and I often ask 6pcs for the full dimensions.
But, for some big plastic parts, such as shroud (supporting the fan and motor to cool the engine of a car), it has over 100 dimensions, so the problem are:
the suppliers often don't submit the full dimensions report, even miss some SC and CC dimensions in print because those dimensions are difficult to check, like the "R" and angle, therefore, is it necessary to do full dimensions inspection? of course excepting the SC and CC. :thanx:
If your customer expects compliance with the default requirements, your supplier is required to do a complete dimensional layout (including any requirements shown on the control plan that aren't referenced on the drawing) for at least one part from each position in a multiple-cavity tool, or just one part if the tool in single-cavity.
 

Caster

An Early Cover
Trusted Information Resource
#3
Miller time

Mobobo said:
hello all,
According to PPAP manual (3rd rev.), the supplier should submit full dimensions report, and I often ask 6pcs for the full dimensions.
But, for some big plastic parts, such as shroud (supporting the fan and motor to cool the engine of a car), it has over 100 dimensions, so the problem are:
the suppliers often don't submit the full dimensions report, even miss some SC and CC dimensions in print because those dimensions are difficult to check, like the "R" and angle, therefore, is it necessary to do full dimensions inspection? of course excepting the SC and CC. :thanx:
Mobobo

My first quality job we had 2200 dimensions per mold. It was just awful.

My very smart boss got our layout people to meet with the customers layout people and the design responsible engineer over beers (back in the day when you could do that).

Once they got talking they found a lot of dimensions that neither knew how to measure and a lot that were meaningless (rads, etc). They agreed on a reduced inspection set. These dimensions MATTERED, and we got them right.

Everyone was happy except the customers buyer, he went ballistic. They are trained from birth to ask for more work for less money.

It's worth trying, but pick your customer contact carefully.

The basic idea behind PPAP is sound, check the part so you know it is right. But then the committee got to it and it grew to become impossible.

So make your own vital list. You know what will cause problems. Make sure you cover those. Then you and the customer are protected.

I'd be a little worried if your suppliers are not checking SC and CCs. If the part does not fit or someone gets hurt and you <or your supplier> did not verify these at PPAP....the lawyers will have a field day.
 
C

cokyat

#4
I think that as a supplier, what we did in this particular problem was that we submitted a waiver to the customer together with a letter asking them which dimensions and parts are most critical to them that will cover the SC and CC, say for example, the part drawing indicates a width of 500mm (and were sub-divided into widths, 200mm, 150mm, and 150mm as indicated in the drawing), we asked them if it's ok to measure the 500mm instead of the three subdimensions. This can also apply to radii, angles or diameters.In short, simplifying the data will help lessen the full dimensional evaluation.
 
R

Rob Nix

#5
Back in the late 70's I, as a young quality engineer for an injection molding outfit, did a LOT of dimensional layouts with +100 dimensions as part of our "PPAPs" (back then they were called source warrants, GM-1386, I.S.I.R.s, etc.). It was not uncommon. But I did try to use common sense. If 20 of the dimensions were radii, I just used a radius gage and rounded to the nearest fitting one. I focused my attention on accuracy to the critical dimensions.

Back to the present: Your concern is why so much more attention is being paid to Design for Manufacture/Assembly (DFM/DFA) and Geometric Dimensioning & Tolerancing (GD&T), where the suggestion is to use as many BASIC DIMENSIONS as possible, opening up tolerances as much as possible, and keying in on the functional dimensions (and those needed for durability). Problem is, the drawings are the customers, and getting them to make sensible revisions is not easy.

To make a short story long, Caster makes the right points: key in on the dimensions that matter.
 
M

Mobobo

#6
:thanks: thanks for all suggestion, all decisions based on the familiarity to parts and products, and the final goal is to ensure the security and function of the parts.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
T Is 510k Anesthesia group particularly picky/difficult to work with during 510k? 21 CFR Part 820 - US FDA Quality System Regulations (QSR) 0
P Best approach to tackle difficult certifications Career and Occupation Discussions 2
M How difficult is it to appoint a new Authorized Representative in India? Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 2
S How to determine part that is most difficult to sterilize Other Medical Device Related Standards 10
P Inspecting a difficult part - Measuring the centre of a hole to the edge of a rod Inspection, Prints (Drawings), Testing, Sampling and Related Topics 7
P Advice on dealing with difficult Colleagues Career and Occupation Discussions 24
F RAPS Qualification - How Difficult to get are they? Professional Certifications and Degrees 4
U Easy-Difficult Coffee Break and Water Cooler Discussions 0
D Difficult Inspection Level/AQL - Verifying it is the correct part AQL - Acceptable Quality Level 5
T Employee Reviews not completed - Audit Finding - Difficult Finding to Answer Internal Auditing 31
N Component Specifications - Difficult to get Component Specifications from Customers ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 3
P Lean Terms - 3Ds (Dirty, Dangerous, Difficult) Lean in Manufacturing and Service Industries 24
L How difficult is the test at the end of the TS16949 Lead Auditor Course? Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 27
E How difficult is the 14001 lead auditor training course and Exam? Training - Internal, External, Online and Distance Learning 7
M Never though ordering breakfast was so difficult! Funny Stuff - Jokes and Humour 0
Y How to handle difficult customer - Improving my communication skill and techniques Service Industry Specific Topics 5
J Torque Wrench Calibration - Difficult time with repeatable measurements General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 12
MarilynJ6354 Corrective Action Database Question - Difficult to automatically assign a document ID Nonconformance and Corrective Action 15
SteelMaiden Working with difficult people Career and Occupation Discussions 20
L Gage Suppliers Requirements - TS 16949 Section 7.6.3.2 - Difficult to purchase gages IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 16
M Anyone make "difficult" employees Internal Auditors? Internal Auditing 17
M MSA Study for tensile tester - Its difficult to do an MSA study on a destructive test Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 5
S QS9000 to TS16949 Transition - How difficult was it, REALLY?? QS-9000 - American Automotive Manufacturers Standard 4
M Cost of Implementing ISO 9001:2000 - Difficult time finding hard numbers ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 26
J A difficult child... ISO 9000, ISO 9001, and ISO 9004 Quality Management Systems Standards 7
Marc Brute Force Validation - Difficult to show 10-year calibration cycle is sufficient General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 0
T Clearance and Creepage according to Subclause 8.9.1 for MOPP IEC 60601-1 IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 4
G Is impact test according to IEC 60601-1 applicable for HAND-HELD equipment if also classified as BODY-WORN? IEC 60601 - Medical Electrical Equipment Safety Standards Series 1
M What are the changes in supervising according to ISO17025? ISO 17025 related Discussions 7
M How do you Audit an Distribution Facility according to MAQMSR IATF 16949 - Automotive Quality Systems Standard 2
M Saudi Arabia (KSA) - Medical Device Vigilance according to 93/42/CEE Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 0
C What falls under the 'Customer Property' according to ISO 13485:2016 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 10
Ahang "DIRECT MODE" or "ADJUSTED MODE" according to ISO 80601-2-56 Other Medical Device Related Standards 1
H Communication plan according to ISO9001 - Pharmaceutical field Pharmaceuticals (21 CFR Part 210, 21 CFR Part 211 and related Regulations) 3
D Risk management according to ISO 14971 - When to document risk controls? ISO 14971 - Medical Device Risk Management 10
S Medical device CER (clinical evaluation report) according to MDR EU Medical Device Regulations 10
S EN 285:2006 and EN 285:2015 - Can we test according to EN 285 ourself? Other Medical Device Related Standards 2
S Class II Medical Device Conformity Assessment Route according to Annex V only CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 7
W TF according to MDR 745/2017 CE Marking (Conformité Européene) / CB Scheme 5
T I need to make test reports according IEC 62304 & IEC 62366 IEC 62366 - Medical Device Usability Engineering 2
B Attribute Gage R&R study according to "Charbonneau" Gage R&R (GR&R) and MSA (Measurement Systems Analysis) 2
P Sample of an end-use-letter for drugs according to FDA requirements US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 2
R Clinical Evaluation according to MEDDEV 2.7.1 (Rev 4) - seeking template ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 6
J Bill of Materials required according to MDD93/42/EC Annex II Section 3.2 ISO 13485:2016 - Medical Device Quality Management Systems 5
T Formulas for Calculating Coefficients for RTD / PRTD Calibration According to ITS-90 General Measurement Device and Calibration Topics 5
H Functional Safety PFH vs PFD according to IEC 61508 Reliability Analysis - Predictions, Testing and Standards 3
T Cadastro according RDC40/2015 (Brazil) Cadastro Registration Requirements Other Medical Device Regulations World-Wide 1
Z Failure Mode Identification in PFMEA according to AIAG FMEA Rev.4 FMEA and Control Plans 6
M Mention "according to Work Instruction" in Control Plan FMEA and Control Plans 3
K Understanding Risk Management Requirements according to AS9100 AS9100, IAQG 9100, Nadcap and related Aerospace Standards and Requirements 11
Similar threads


















































Top Bottom