The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line
The New Elsmar Cove Forums   The New Elsmar Cove Forums
  APQP and PPAP
  3rd rev. PPAP changes

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   3rd rev. PPAP changes
Chad Eilers
Lurker (<10 Posts)

Posts: 5
From:Edmonton, Kentucky, USA
Registered: May 99

posted 02 June 1999 01:40 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Chad Eilers   Click Here to Email Chad Eilers     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
There is another major change. (4.9.2) If you submit a PPAP with a Cpk level of lets say 2.000, you MUST maintain or exceed that level for future productions.

Is this correct?

[This message has been edited by Chad Eilers (edited 02 June 1999).]

IP: Logged

Batman
Forum Contributor

Posts: 111
From:Kane, PA 16735
Registered:

posted 03 June 1999 07:47 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Batman   Click Here to Email Batman     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hi Chad:
4.9.2
"The supplier shall maintain (or exceed) process capability or performance as approved via PPAP."
I don't think it means exactly that which you are asking. There are requirements in the PPAP manual, (1.33, for example) and I think that is the "...maintain or exceed..." that they are talking about.

Also, as you continue to read 4.9.2, it mentions that suppliers will include containment of processes that are not capable.

If one wanted to read into this, one could infer that if your initial PPAP was the result of good APQP type activities, you eliminated most or all of assignable cause variation during APQP activities, you also reduced common cause variation to the point that you are now capable, you have established the capability bar. Now, under status quo conditions, nothing should change regarding capability. AND, through continuous improvement activities, you have further reduced common cause variation so that you are now more capable.

Now, Chad, I can interpret "...maintain or exceed..." to mean what you said.

Comments?

IP: Logged

Lassitude
Forum Contributor

Posts: 89
From:
Registered: Jun 99

posted 11 June 1999 01:08 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Lassitude   Click Here to Email Lassitude     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
You said it pretty well, Batman. We do know, however, that reality can set in. The question of the definition of, and extent of, Containment comes into play.

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!


Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!