Survey of Tier 1 & Tier 2 suppliers

optomist1

A Sea of Statistics
Trusted
#1
To All Coveers, a kind of naive survey question, do the Tier 1 & Tier 2 auto/aero suppliers routinely structure their various quality gates in conformance with AIAG APQP, do you conduct your own internal DV/PV Testing prior to conducting a Run At Rate or Production Demonstration Run...and in turn forward/submit parts from this event to PPAP Lab (DVP&R) and PPAP Dimensional....ultimately a PSW

I realize the question is a bit short on details, many many intemediate steps not addressed here....in addition the above internal quality gates may or will certainly vary depending on part pedigree; is it a customer designed part, an in-house design or merely a variation on a previously qualified part
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted
#2
Howdy,

I've been Tier 2 for quite a number of products, for three companies. In all cases, it was for highly specialized products with little chance of second suppliers being validated due to cost.
In this scenario, the two companies for which I was in a decision making capacity...we followed pretty much none of the gates, Tier 1 design team kept tweaking things until literally the last minute and the PPAP was a perfunctory paperwork exercise after start of production...in all cases on n=1.

We wanted to approach it more responsibly, with some of the key parts of PPAP such as R@R and 5lot full build validation...but we were never allowed to do so. We insisted that all PO's stated APQP not required.

The third company did a TON more paperwork, and far more PV and DV internally...but the Tier 1 threw them all out and launched into production without PPAP. The PSW was signed when we refused to ship the next lot...and we completed the R@R a few months later...

So...I certainly hope that my experience is a very rare and specialized case...I'll be interested to see the experiences of others...
 
#3
Tier 1 in automotive here.

Yes. We follow the AIAG APQP process. What is different is the number of gates and the terms, this is based on our OEM customer. If we are supply GM, we use the GM gates and lingo, etc. From my experience, all the OEMs follow the process too, the major reporting gates are the same. Everyone has a project start, off tool samples, PPAP run, DV testing, PV testing and Run at Rate. (Called different things). Then some OEMs add in a few more gates they like.

My Tier 1s (Tier 2 to the OEM) the experience I have is it is a mixed bag. Some Tier 2 companies are HUGE - for example a bearing supplier. They are typically well versed in AIAG and follow the process as well. Though we let them use the AIAG lingo. Because we know how confusing it is to use different words for the same things all the time. Most of them use the AIAG lingo. Some of them use thing lingo of their biggest customer, regardless. And some adjust the lingo based on customer like we do. (This usually happens if they tier 1 to the OEMs as well as be tier 2).

But the smaller shops - the single site, single owner specialty shops - that don't typically have a lot of overhead.... You have to ride them like a rented mule sometimes to follow the APQP process. They'll sort of do it in a loosey goosey way if left to their own. But if you need formal reporting, you have to keep after them. (If they're supplying a component on the critical path or with lots of KPCs, we ride them pretty hard. If it's a common part, we usually don't care too much, we have limited resources as well.)
 

optomist1

A Sea of Statistics
Trusted
#4
Tier 1 in automotive here.

Yes. We follow the AIAG APQP process. What is different is the number of gates and the terms, this is based on our OEM customer. If we are supply GM, we use the GM gates and lingo, etc. From my experience, all the OEMs follow the process too, the major reporting gates are the same. Everyone has a project start, off tool samples, PPAP run, DV testing, PV testing and Run at Rate. (Called different things). Then some OEMs add in a few more gates they like.

My Tier 1s (Tier 2 to the OEM) the experience I have is it is a mixed bag. Some Tier 2 companies are HUGE - for example a bearing supplier. They are typically well versed in AIAG and follow the process as well. Though we let them use the AIAG lingo. Because we know how confusing it is to use different words for the same things all the time. Most of them use the AIAG lingo. Some of them use thing lingo of their biggest customer, regardless. And some adjust the lingo based on customer like we do. (This usually happens if they tier 1 to the OEMs as well as be tier 2).

But the smaller shops - the single site, single owner specialty shops - that don't typically have a lot of overhead.... You have to ride them like a rented mule sometimes to follow the APQP process. They'll sort of do it in a loosey goosey way if left to their own. But if you need formal reporting, you have to keep after them. (If they're supplying a component on the critical path or with lots of KPCs, we ride them pretty hard. If it's a common part, we usually don't care too much, we have limited resources as well.)
So for a typical OEM, your gates would closely mirror those of the OEM, re: PDR or run at rate a rough % of parts you would submit to a PPAP Lab and PPAP DIM? Many many times schedules become compressed, and a production itent PDR may be behind schedule, some new equipment added to the production line
Howdy,

I've been Tier 2 for quite a number of products, for three companies. In all cases, it was for highly specialized products with little chance of second suppliers being validated due to cost.
In this scenario, the two companies for which I was in a decision making capacity...we followed pretty much none of the gates, Tier 1 design team kept tweaking things until literally the last minute and the PPAP was a perfunctory paperwork exercise after start of production...in all cases on n=1.

We wanted to approach it more responsibly, with some of the key parts of PPAP such as R@R and 5lot full build validation...but we were never allowed to do so. We insisted that all PO's stated APQP not required.

The third company did a TON more paperwork, and far more PV and DV internally...but the Tier 1 threw them all out and launched into production without PPAP. The PSW was signed when we refused to ship the next lot...and we completed the R@R a few months later...

So...I certainly hope that my experience is a very rare and specialized case...I'll be interested to see the experiences of others...
Thanks Ninja...given the diverse terminology in the APQP arena, this may sound a bit redundant....so in the last scenario.."The third company..", prior to conducting a DVP&R, did your firm conduct full DV/PV testing before performing R@R, and PPAP? Sometimes the terminolgy and requirments get blurred. Cheers - optomist1
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted
#5
Thanks Ninja...given the diverse terminology in the APQP arena, this may sound a bit redundant....so in the last scenario.."The third company..", prior to conducting a DVP&R, did your firm conduct full DV/PV testing before performing R@R, and PPAP? Sometimes the terminolgy and requirments get blurred.
DV/PV was something that we (Tier2) wanted done to protect ourselves from what we considered the irresponsible approach of the Tier1...it was not a part of the PPAP process, more of an attempt at CYA. R@R was a single day of "how fast can we run?" and a bunch of XL work so the SQE could check the box on the form...all after launch. We insisted on the "APQP not required" note on PO's since we were prohibited from following it by the actions (or inactions) of the Tier1.
All three were very disappointing exercises from my side, and has helped to form many of my opinions about value of published standards that you can see elsewhere on the forum. I value QMS very much, but I've seen too much like the above to put weight on a cert.

There are car brands that I will not buy as a result of seeing this...just like there are restaurants I will not eat in after I saw their kitchens...
 

optomist1

A Sea of Statistics
Trusted
#6
Thanks Ninja...great input...so if I might address the ideal condition @Tier 1 or 2....what many term as DV/PV testing is performed internally (likely one of the Quality Gates), then if all good, on to a customer witnessed (usually) R@R, then parts to formal PPAP Lab and Dim and ultimately clean launch and on-time....of course I have left out many other intermediate steps....

Along with your input re: customers selectively ignoring some steps....have you expereinced situations where the APQP/PPAP process is actually crusing along, very few issues until shortly after successful R@R the customer, usually the OEM, drops a last minute change and still expects Tier 1 parts to manufacturing location on or about what we called PS or Pre-series, the step just prior to Job 1? The sobering part of this scenario is that PS vehicles are actually saleable vehicles, so even more urgency to get it right for launch.
 

Ninja

Looking for Reality
Trusted
#7
Howdy,
I think I understand your question better now...and I don't think I can comment...
have you expereinced situations where the APQP/PPAP process is actually crusing along,
I haven't seen that part...and everything else is dependent on that...so I cannot comment on anything downstream...
 

Top Bottom