Search the Elsmar Cove!
**Search ALL of** with DuckDuckGo including content not in the forum - Search results with No ads.

Microsoft Access APQP type database for Process Flow, FMEA, Control Plan, etc.

Joe Cruse

Mopar or No Car
This would be a nice project to work on, but I tend to agree with Marc and nickh that MySQL would be a more appropriate platform, at least for the Back End of the project. Might do a MySQL back end and craft an MS Access front end for the data entry and bells and whistles. There are too many folks out there that would have enough data entry to overload Access.

I would also tend to agree on linking to other applications for stuff like charts, as MS Access chart capabilities are not all that great. It tends to be more limiting than Excel, even though they use the same application for charts. Just harder to deal with in Access.

We are a smaller company, and Access has worked great for relational database work for us, including a LIMS, safety records, and quality records. We had, to this point, only captured CA/PA activity in our setup, but I'm transferring all our customer complaint, raw material nonconforming, in-process nonconforming, and customer complaints into this system. Internal audits are next, once I get my changes to a process-based audit style in place.

I'd love to learn MySQL and VB, bt there's not enough time in the day.

nickh - 2011

Someone will need to double check this if they're interested, but I don't think that MySQL natively supports transactions yet. I believe that you need to use InnoDb tables to do this. Last I checked using InnoDb required a $$ license. I've only used MySQL for personal projects - several years back - so I'm no authority on it. If you're going to develop a database system to support quality systems, I think that you'd definitely want to use a system that supported transactions.

Also, if you're using Access, I assume that you're an MS shop. PostgresQL (which does natively support transactions) nows will run on Windows as of their 8.0 release.


The closest I've come is to develop and ECN tracking and input system and a Corrective Action Report database in Access. I'd be glad to purge the records and send you a sample if you are interested.




I'd be interested in a purged version of your database - I'm getting ready to start trying some similiar type stuff for auditing stuff


any version

I would like to get any version of some PPAP software. Can anyone help me with this?


Get Involved!!!
Re: Microsoft Access - APQP type database for process flow, fmea, control plan, etc.

This thread seems to have evolved over the last 6 years, and is the only one I can find when talking about using Access as a tool for integrating APQP activities and documentation.

I am looking to implement a similar system, I am calling it the "Project Portal". This will allow me to record all Project specific data ONCE, and use this data for numerous activities and documentation.

I currently find that there are so many separate requirements and forms etc.... that I am replicating so much data, and jumping around between Word, Excel, Form to Form, checklist to checklist.

We are a small organisation and on the APQP and Project Management side of things I am the main man. Maybe one or two others may also be involved, but the database will probably not used by many users at all.

My main question I put to you all is, has anyone used Access on any element of the APQP/PPAP/Project Management side of things? If so is anyone prepared to share their experiences, tools, tips and techniques?

I am interested to know if there are any more Canned products out there, but really, given the size of our operation, these are not always viable, and simply create yet another bit of software/location in which to store data! I want something that will help minimise the duplication of effort, and effectively mould to the way we work.

Input always appreciated......I hope this thread does not get lost in the ether, just didn't want to start a new one as this thread is just a perfect place to discuss (or continue to discuss as it were).
Top Bottom