Mandatory to send to the Customers FMEA in a PPAP level 3 - Doubt

[tlonkey]

In my 20+ years in the automotive sector as a Quality Manager, the companies that I worked for never had any issues with providing the PFMEA along with the other documents listed in the Level 3 PPAP Submission Checklist. I submitted PPAP Packages to all of the Big 3 (at the time) and to the major Asian automotive companies. I can also recall times when the our PPAP was rejected for simple documentation issues so it was very important for me to be sure all documents were provided. Usually the tooling money was only paid upon PPAP approval.

My thoughts were that most, if not all the processing information was available within the automotive sector; there are only so many ways you can machine a diameter, drill a hole or tap a thread that withholding these documents never occurred to me or the engineers that I worked with.

I suppose that if you are involved in a totally new unique process, product or design that there might be a case to be made for having these documents listed as proprietary could make sense but to me that would be something that was, as discussed in earlier posts negotiated prior to the PPAP submission.

tlonkey

 

[gbcqc]

I have been out of automotive for 5 years now, but our PO was the final word. When you accepted our PO you were require to follow our T&C, Supplier Requirements and to get paid, you had to have the PPAP approved. So if there was any problems with any of the above, it needed to be brought up during you contract review.

Example: We have to buy a certain part due to our customer's requirement from a certain supplier. This supplier had a patient on the part and process. Our customer and then us had to agree that they would not supply certain information. So since it was not an issue with our customer, it was a non-issue with us.

Example #2: We owned design. We design parts and had companies to bid on the development of the tooling, up keep of the tooling figured in the piece price and producing the parts. This PO stated that we were paying for the tool, process, and all information in the development of the tooling and parts. So when the supplier quoted it, the supplier knew that we owned everything with that part (except the machine it was ran on).

The main point from me, to suppliers, is to read the PO and all other requirements associated with the PO.

 

[gbcqc]

Sorry "Patent"

 

[vanputten]

"Do you believe that customers should have unilateral control over contract requirements?" You missed my point. I don't see where Citizen Cane described the request for a wavier. I see an organization TELLING the customer how things are going to be.

"Are you suggesting that customers should not have the option to waive requirements as they see fit?" Again, you totally missed my point. I don't see any text related to giving the customer this option.

My sarcastic point in my previous posting was that if the supplier is telling the customer how things are going to be, and the customer accepts it without discussion, then keep going with the approach and tell the customer that other documents are only available for review on site. Why apply this approach only to the FMEA if the customer accepts it without discussion? Tell the customer that the Control Plan is only available for review at the supplier's site. Maybe tell them the entire PPAP is only available for review at the supplier's site?

In almost the entire thread, the supplier's are saying that the customer can review the FMEA but at the supplier's site. I don't see anyone saying the customer can never see the FMEA. They are saying the customer can see the FMEA but at the supplier's site. Why?!?!?!?! What is the benefit?

Why would a supplier state that FMEA's are only available for review on site? The customer still is privy to the info. They just have to go to the supplier. Where is the trust in this approach since the customer can have the info anyway? What does this type of approach imply since the supplier is not saying the FMEA is not available. The supplier is saying that the customer has to come to their location to learn the information. What good does that do?

Is the customer allowed to take notes when they review the FMEA at the supplier's site? Is the customer required to empty their memory at the door when they leave the supplier's site?

Does the supplier not trust the customer's control of the supplier's intellectual property? Or is the supplier just trying to make things difficult for the customer in hopes that they never show up to review the FMEA?

And why isn't there more discussion about the benefit of the customer having the supplier's FMEA for mutually beneficial supplier problem solving? Probably because the relationship between the supplier and customer lacks trust.

I see no good reason to go against a clearly written requirement and make the customer travel to the supplier's location for the information. Either way, the customer gets to see the FMEA. They just have to go out of their way. Why?

Seems like a game to me.

 

[ralphsulser]

Dirk, you are right. My experience with Ford was only in the begining did they require an on site visit to review PPAP which included the FMEA, then later we submitted the entire package to Ford's designated facility. Occasionally the Ford STA would stop in if he was in the area or visiting for other reasons. Also, our PPAP package had to include the Ford DFMEA originated by Ford Design Engineering for our parts. Our PFMEA needed to align with their DFMEA for risk guidence analysis of SOD and subsequent RPN. I don't know what suppliers hope to accomplish by holding FMEAs confidential. Like Stijloor, nothing is that secrect, plus who else gives a hoot about your FMEA lists and ratings.

 

[andka907]

I recently heard from one of our suppliers, that some customers has spread their process flow chart and P-FMEA - as they have a special process they don't want this spread out around to their competitors as the process is very specific, now they refuse to send them but you are very welcome to visit and look at the papers at their place. (Retention instead of submittal)

 

[Emmamartsolf]

The PPAP book specifies DFMEA and PFMEA are submitted as a part of the Level 3 (page 18 4th ed.). So, any scheme to not submit them should be documented - and approved by the customer - not just your internal policy. You could conceivable have an internal policy not to provide any portion of the PPAP, but we are all sure that will not work. Missing parts justifies a customer's position to reject the PPAP, though, and you will not have authorization to ship. So, you should work out exceptions during quote and or contract review phase. Confidentiality agreements should be signed for any relationship with a customer in automotive prior to starting the quote process, because you will have to share some confidential information at some point - even if it is a print or pricing.

That's the right answer.