This 8D template provides an 8D format to Bosch suppliers having no other official format available.

ATTENTION: SupplyOn Problem Solver is the official 8D tool for suppliers and to be used by default.
The structure follows the Bosch 8D requirements to the suppliers.
Use of this form does not guarantee 100% correctness or completeness of the 8D report.
PLEASE COMPLETE ALL FIELDS. USE N/A IF NOT APPLICABLE.
Add lines, information and filelds as necessary to completely present your problem solving activities.
Version: 1.0
Issued by: Bosch CP/PQA
Date: 15.10.2013
8D report
SUPPLIER
Complete all fields. Use n/a if not applicable.
Add lines, information and filelds as necessary to completely present your problem solving activities.

Aswini Enterprises 8D started on: 26.02.2019

Attachment
Complaint No.(Q2): 200000157906 Intermediate report: 29.03.2019

No.
Concession No.: Final report: 24.05.2019

Header data
Complaint Date: 26.02.2019 Product: Pivot housing DS
8D-Title: Depth 14.3mm & 12.3mm interchanged Bosch Material No.: 0198 04L 306
Warranty Decision: NA Bosch Production plant: Bosch-RBDI
Complaining Customer: NA Customer Material No.: NA
Complaint type/mode: FER/ Mail Serial No.: NA
Supplier No.: 97033193
Supplier name: Aswini Enterprsies Issuer: Mohammed Irshad M/PQA1-Chi
Contact Person at Bosch: Mohammed Irshad M/PQA1-Chi Telephone:
Business Address: Bosch plant ,RBDI, Telefax:
Email: Irshad.mohammed@in.bosch.com
Contact Person at Supplier: N.Karthikeyan Telephone: +91 9381285888
Aswini Enterprsies No.9 Developed Plot Sidco Industrial Estate MaraimalaiNagar
Business Address: Telefax: NA
,Chennai
Email: aswinienterprsies@gmail.com
D1 Problem Solving Team
Sponsor MR.H.Giri Email aswinienterprises@gmail.com Phone Function/Department CEO
Team Leader MR.BALAJI Email aswinienterprises@gmail.com Phone Function/Department HEAD-OPERATION
Team Member MR.KARTHIKEYAN Email aswinienterprises@gmail.com Phone Function/Department CUSTOMER SUPPORT-MR
Team Member MR.VASANTHA KUMAR Email aswinienterprises@gmail.com Phone Function/Department PRODUCTION HEAD
Team Member MR.HARIHARAN Email aswinienterprises@gmail.com Phone Function/Department QUALITY ENGINEER
Team Member MR.DURAI Email aswinienterprises@gmail.com Phone Function/Department QUALITY ENGINEER
Team Member MR.MUTHUKRISHNAN Email aswinienterprises@gmail.com Phone Function/Department PRODUCTION SUPERVISOR
Team Member MS.SUMATHI Email aswinienterprises@gmail.com Phone Function/Department QUALITY
Team Member MS.MEGALA Email aswinienterprises@gmail.com Phone Function/Department QUALITY FINAL HEAD

D2 Problem Description Bosch Manufacturing Date: NA

Bosch description:
Date of Detection 26.02.2019

Location of Detection WSL Bush Pressing Stn.

Quantity Complained 1023 Batch No. NA

Quantity Delivered 1120 Nos.

Quantity Returned 1023

Date of Part Return (leaving Bosch) 27.02.2019

Problem description:
In Pivot Housing 0 198 04L 306 DS Diameter 15 bore depth 14.3+0.2 and 12.3+0.2 got interchanged during the turning operation , leading to bush projection outside
during the Pivot Housing assembly.
Failure effect at Bosch:

Pivot Housing Assy. Is affected. Bush projection 2mm outside Washer can't be assembled.
Failure effect at OEM (car maker; 0 km):

Nil-Wipers cannot be assembled due to the bush projection. (Parts will not miss and will be detected at the WSL Bush assy. Line)
Failure effect on final customer (field):

Nil-Wipers cannot be assembled due to the bush projection (Parts will not miss and will be detected at the WSL Bush assy. Line)

Supplier description:
What exactly is the problem?
Diameter 15 bore depth 14.3+0.2 and 12.3 +0.2 height got interchanged in the orientation. It means 12.3+0.2mm depth was mainatined at the spec of 14.3 +0.2 mm
and 14.3 +0.2 depth was mainatained as 12.3 +0.2mm
Where exactly is the problem observed? / Geographical, in the process, on the object (from analysis), etc./

During Bush pressing at the WSL line in RBDI.

When exactly did the problem occur?

22.02.2019 - Second shift At Aswini & observed on 26.02.2019 at RBDI

How often does the problem occur?

First Occurrence
What is the problem history? / First occurrence, trend, repeat complain etc./

First Occurrence

Other Bosch Parts potentially affected? No If yes, please specify NA

Other Bosch Plants potentially affected? No If yes, please specify NA
Total suspected parts: 1120 produced on the second shift with defect and
the dispatch 1120Nos
Preliminary Risk Assessment
Occurrence: High since all the parts are having issue. End of D2: 26.02.2019
Severity: Medium, parts will be detected during bush assembly in RBDI and
will not reach the end customer
D3 Containment actions

Containment actions
Effective- Quantity Quantity Quantity
No. Part number Where Action Responsible Introduced on Effective from Control Method
ness [%] blocked TOTAL checked TOTAL NOK parts

0198 04L 306 Bosch RBDI 100 % Checked The Karthikeyan 26.02.2019 26.02.2019 Depth 100% 1120 1120 1023
-store Flush pin gauge at checking with
1. Xods logo side and flush Pin
green Marked at Gauge
Parts
0198 04L 306 At Aswini 100 % Checked The Hariharan 26.02.2019 26.02.2019 Depth 100% 1000 Nos 1000 Nos 0
Flush pin gauge at checking with
2. Xods logo side and flush Pin
green Marked at Gauge
Parts
199 04L 306 In Transit Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

2.

Labeling after complaint / Acc. to specific request applicable to this complaint. How? Which shipments? /

100% Flush Pin Gauge Checked and Identification mark on Part (Photo attached )
Are all affected areas and departments informed? /If yes, please specify. If no, why not?/

Yes,Production,Quality,final inspection,Stores Informed through Q alert.

Description of Firewall (until verification of actions in D6) /refer to the list of containment actions above/

100% Checked and Green colour Marked on the Part near X0DS for Every Batch send to RBDI after flush pin gauge inspection.

Agreement of the customer on process or product-changing containment actions. Date: 26.02.2019 Responsible: N.Karthikeyan

D4 Root Cause Analysis

OCCURRENCE
Probable Root causes: why could the non-conformity occur?

Technical Root Cause x (TRCx) 1: X0PS program called for X0DS machining Responsible verification: Vasantha kumar Verific. completed on: 2/3/2019

In CNC turning program common workoffset was provided for

all the three tools used, there by changing the work offset in
the same program different variants can be run . Also there is
Technical Root Cause x (TRCx) 2: Responsible verification: Vasantha kumar Verific. completed on: 2/3/2019
only Height difference in the PS and DS pivot hosuing hence
the workoffset (max 0.1mm) can be provided in the program
but setter given 0.5 mm work offset.

Failure mode of the depth interchangability was not

Managerial Root Cause x (MRCx)1: Responsible verification: Verific. completed on:
anticpated in the PFMEA.

Setting Part control work instructions/checksheet not

Managerial Root Cause x (MRCx)2: Responsible verification: Hariharan Verific. completed on: 2/3/2019
available.

NON DETECTION
Root causes: why has the non-conformity not been detected?

Inspector not aware of checking which side of pivot housing to

Technical Root Cause y (TRCy): Responsible verification: Vasantha kumar Verific. completed on: 2/3/2019
be checked for what depth. (TRC)1

Technical Root Cause y (TRCy): Workoffset W.I is not followed by the setter during setup Responsible verification: Verific. completed on:
approval. (TRC)2
Method of depth checking in position gauge not defined at
Technical Root Cause y (TRCy): final inspection. (TRC)3 Responsible verification: Verific. completed on:

Only undersize and oversize was checked by flush pin gauge.

Technical Root Cause y (TRCy): Responsible verification: Verific. completed on:
Depth Interchange was not checked. (TRC)4

Managerial Root Cause y (MRCy): Checking work instruction for the setup approval parts in not Responsible verification: Hariharan Verific. completed on: 2/3/2019
available. (MRC)1
 WI for workoffset is not available for setup approval. (MRC)2
Managerial Root Cause y (MRCy): Responsible verification: Verific. completed on:

Managerial Root Cause y (MRCy): Failure mode is not anticipated in the PFMEA. (MRC)3 Responsible verification: Hariharan Verific. completed on: 2/3/2019

Causing Process: /Explanation of the causing process. /

CNC Turning, Common work offset in the program

In case of BLD
Occurrence: Does(Baseline Defectiveness;
the analysis e.g.other
prove that no blowholes or cavities
root cause can befor casting
linked andparts
that or
thedefect
failuredensity
rate is in semiconductor
coherent manufacturing):
with baseline? /YES or NO/-
YES YES
If no, Please specify:
Detection: Proof that the test coverage is sufficient. /YES or NO/ YES
If no, Please specify:
Responsible Verification: Hariharan Date: 2/3/2019

Reproduction of the defect possible

If yes, Result: yes
If no, Why not:
Responsible: Hariharan completed on: 2/3/2019

Expected effects/Risk assessment (Probability):

Risk analysis: /A first risk estimation regarding further affected parts has to be performed, based on the available data; probability of occurrence, probability of detection /

Zero Stock At our End , In Containment actions all the parts are segraed and Scrapped. No parts will reach OEM since Wiper motor cannot be assmebled due to bush
projection.
Production period affected from: 22.02.2019 to: 26.02.2019 Responsible: Vasantha kumar completed on: 5/3/2019
Expected number of further non-conformities: NIL

D5 Corrective actions and proof of effectiveness:

Actions against Probable root causes (in D4):

1. Poka yoke for wrong variant loading, additional pin need to

TRCx: Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from: 5/22/2019
be provided in the fixture to avoid the wrong variant loading.

2. Pokayoke to be made in the program by providing the

Individual work offset to the tools for all the Pivot Housing
TRCx: Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from: 5/22/2019
variants, If the worng part loaded automaticaly the locator
will go and hit the part and will stop the machine.

Failure mode of the depth interchangability to be considered

MRCx: Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from: 5/3/2019
in P-FMEA.

Setting Part control work instructions/checksheet to be made

MRCx: Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from:
and training to the setter will be provided.

Awareness/Training to the Inspector to be given checking

TRCy: Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from:
which side of pivot housing to be checked for what depth.

Workoffset W.I to be made and followed by the setter during

TRCy: Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from:
setup approval. (TRC)2

Method of depth checking in position gauge to be defined and

TRCy: followed at final inspection. (TRC)3 Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from:

Depth Interchange to be checked by flush pin gauge following

TRCy: the W.I in additon with undersize and oversize of the depth Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from:
during machining. (TRC)4

Checking work instruction for the setup approval parts to be

MRCy: Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from: 5/3/2019
made and followed by the setter for every setup. (MRC)1

WI for workoffset to be made and followed for setup approval

MRCy: by the setter for every setting. (MRC)2 Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from: 5/3/2019

MRCy: Failure mode to be recorded in the PFMEA. (MRC)3 Estimated effectiveness [%]: 100% effective from: 5/3/2019

Responsible: Hariharan completed on:

D6 Introduction of corrective actions and tracking of effectiveness

Customer agreement on: by:

Actions against:

1. Poka yoke for wrong variant loading, additional pin need is

Effectiveness [%] 100% Responsible:
provided in the fixture to avoid the wrong variant loading.

Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:

2. Pokayoke made in the program by providing the Individual

work offset to the tools for all the Pivot Housing variants, If
Effectiveness [%] 100% Responsible:
the worng part loaded automaticaly the locator will go and hit
the part and will stop the machine.
Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:

Failure mode of the depth interchangability is considered in P-

FMEA.

Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:

Setting Part control work instructions/checksheet is made and

Effectiveness [%] Responsible:
training to the setter will be provided.

Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:

Awareness/Training to the Inspector is given checking which

Effectiveness [%] Responsible:
side of pivot housing to be checked for what depth.
Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:

Workoffset W.I is made and followed by the setter during

setup approval. (TRC)2

Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:

Method of depth checking in position gauge is defined and
followed at final inspection. (TRC)3 Effectiveness [%] Responsible:

Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:

Depth Interchange is checked by flush pin gauge following the
W.I in additon with undersize and oversize of the depth during Effectiveness [%] Responsible:
machining. (TRC)4
Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:
Checking work instruction for the setup approval parts is
Effectiveness [%] Responsible:
made and followed by the setter for every setup. (MRC)1
Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:
WI for workoffset is made and followed for setup approval by
the setter for every setting. (MRC)2 Effectiveness [%] Responsible:

Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:

Failure mode is recorded in the PFMEA. (MRC)3 Effectiveness [%] Responsible:

Planned introduction on: introduced on: effective from:

Responsible: VASANTHA KUMAR,HARIHARAN completed on: 21.05.2019

Removal of containment actions:

Conatinment will be removed after 6 months of implementing and monitoring of corrective actions.

Responsible: Hariharan removed on:

D7 Prevention of recurrence of the non-conformity

Update of documentation (FMEA, directives, PQP, drawing, ...):
SETUP APPROVAL SHEET,CONTROL PLAN,FMEA

Responsible: HARIHARAN due date: 25.03.2019 completed on: 24.05.2019

Lessons Learned transfer to other Processes, Products, Plants

Could the root cause affect other processes, products or sites? Yes
If yes: Which other processes, products or sites may be concerned? All PH part nos.
If yes: Which departments do you inform (e.g. Lessons Learned Coordinators)?
If no: Why don't you expect other processes, products or plants to be concerned?

D8 Final Meeting
Participants: BALAJI,VASANTHA KUMAR,HARIHARAN,DURAI SARVESH
Accomplished on: 24.05.2019
Results:

Signatures

Plant manager: Name: Balaji Date: 24.05.2019 Signature: BALAJI

Sponsor: Name: Giri Date: 24.05.2019 Signature: GIRI

Team Leader: Name: Karthikeyan Date: 24.05.2019 Signature: KARTHIKEYAN

1. Problem description
317 Part was DS
Fixture DS
Program PS

PFD Casting part CNC machined

Setting
Changing fixture
Calling program
Tool setting- tools (facing tool, boring tool, back facing)
Part loading
tool-offset
workoffset offset setting
Setup approval Qcheck
if correction is there workoffset is given
Setupapproval parts- min 5 parts- kept separately in line until completion of mass production.
At the same work table with numbering 1,2,3,4,&5 (if the parts are nok its red painted and
lock and key bin)
Series production

Final inspection
Visual
dimensions check
 22.2.2019 (2nd shift)- setting change checksheet
Setter - Robin - 3yrs in Aswini

setter- Robin - 3yrs in Aswini 3 setters (2+1 incharge)

setter- Robin - 3yrs in Aswini
setter- Robin - 3yrs in Aswini
setter- Robin - 3yrs in Aswini
setter- Robin - 3yrs in Aswini
setter- Robin - 3yrs in Aswini
Qinspectors (Ajith- 6months) Setup approval report- Q inspectors
setter- Robin - 3yrs in Aswini

Qinspectors (Ajith- 6months) Setup approval report- Q inspectors

Operator

Inspectors- Sandhya and lavanya - New 3-4 months code on the part
 Failure Visualization sheet

8D Title Depth 14.3mm & 12.3mm interchanged Complaint No.

Bosch Part Pivot housing DS/ 0198 04L 306 Date

Version
 OK PART NOT OK PART

Depth of 12.3+0.2 is in customer complaint part insteed of depth 14.3mm

Depth of 14.3+0.2 must be in top side or XODS logo side in parts
process interchanged
e Visualization sheet

200000157906

26.02.2019

NA
 NOT OK PART

Depth of 12.3+0.2 is in customer complaint part insteed of depth 14.3mm

process interchanged
 QUALITY ALERT Doc. No :

Date : 26-02-2019

OM CNC
PART NAME PIVOT HOUSING DS PART NO 0198 04L 306 CUSTOMER BOSCH
Awareness
Operator 1 Name Sign. QA Inspector 1 Name Sign.

Operator 2 Name Sign. QA Inspector 2 Name Sign.

Operator 3 Name Sign. QA Inspector 3 Name Sign.

Shift Production Incharge 1 Name Sign. Shift QA Incharge 1 Name Sign.

Shift Production Incharge 2 Name Sign. Shift QA Incharge 2 Name Sign.

Shift Production Incharge 3 Name Sign. Shift QA Incharge 3 Name Sign.

Complaint Description : DEPTH 14MM AND 12MM INTERCHANGED AND PART NOT ASSEMBLED AT CUSTOMER END.

OK (√) NOT OK (X)

PHOTO

DEPTH OF 12MM OBSERVED ON

XODS LETTER SIDE & 14MM ,12MM
DEPTH OF 14MM SHOULD BE IN INTERCHANGED AT CUSTOMER
XODS LETTER SIDE AND 12MM END.
DEPTH IS IN OPPOSITE SIDE. NOTOK SAMPLE
OK SAMPLE

DESCRIPTION DEPTH OF 12MM OBSERVED ON XODS LETTER SIDE & 14MM ,12MM INTERCHANGED AT CUSTOMER END.

NOTE
Ensure all the Parts 100% 14mm Flush pin gauge Inspection on xods letter side and give green commitement mark near xods letter above shown in fig,
Reject the part if flush pin not ok to avoid customer complaint.

PREPARED BY :R.HARIHARAN APPROVED BY :BALAJI

Format No : Rev.No : Rev.Date :

 Ishikawa

8D Title Dimension interchange

Bosch Part 0198 04L 306

1. man 1. machine

New CNC programmer/setter

New Setup approval inspector

Man
New Final inspectors

1. Environment 1. material

Flux lights
Fixture
Please specify:

Ishikawa
No. Ishikawa Category Cause Item Description
(Possible Cause)

1 Man Excluded Cause New CNC setter

2 Man Possible cause New Setup approval insp

3 Man Possible cause New Final inspectors

4 Environament Excluded Cause Flux light- proper visibility

5 Method Most probable cause Tata X0 PS Program call

6 Method Excluded Cause TataX0 PS fixture used fo

7 Method Excluded Cause Wrong tool used for mac

8 Method Possible cause Wrong Setup approval in

9 Method Excluded Cause Tool offset wrongly given

10 Method Most probable cause Work offset wrongly give

Ishikawa

Complaint No.

Date

Version

machine 1. measurement
Machine

material 1. method

Tata X0 PS Program called

TataX0 PS fixture used for loading parts

Material

Wrong tool used for machining

No clarity on the setup approval

Tool offset wrongly given

Work offset wrongly given

 Relevancy for
consideration
(relevant for futher root
escription cause analysis, Reason for excluding
or
to be excluded from
analysis)

ew CNC setter Excluded Experienced person

ew Setup approval inspector Relevant

ew Final inspectors Relevant

Ohm's level monitoring

ux light- proper visibility Excluded
throuogh checksheet.

ata X0 PS Program called for DS Relevant

Checked by the Hari

and fixture holding dia
ataX0 PS fixture used for loading X0DS parts Excluded
varies in PS and DS-
attachment

Machining
abnormalities of the
Wrong tool used for machining Excluded part. Tool may break
and part will damage-
refer attachement

Wrong Setup approval inspection Relevant

Machining
abnormalities of the
ool offset wrongly given Excluded part. Tool may break
and part will damage-
refer attachement
Work offset wrongly given Relevant
 omplaint No. 200000157906

ate 26.02.2019

ersion

ment
Measurement

Depth
interchanged

rogram called

ture used for loading parts

Method

sed for machining

the setup approval

ongly given

rongly given
 5 Why Form

8D Title Dimension interchange

Bosch Part 0198 04L 306

The problem with which

the 5Why question chain 1st Why? 2nd Why? 3rd Why?
is started

1) Why did it Q: Why Tata X0 PS CNC program called Q: Why did the setter did not Q: Why tool stn numbers and the
happen? to produce Tata X0 DS part.? change the program from X0PS workoffset is same for both the
to X0DS? DS and PS pivot housing in CNC
(Why did the A:Because during the setting change the program?
manufacturing setter did not change the program from A:Because tool stn numbers
process not prevent X0PS to X0DS. (1.2.3) and the workoffset is A: In CNC turning program
the incident? ) same for both the DS and PS common workoffset was
pivot housing in CNC program. provided for all the three tools
used, there by changing the
Tata X0 PS Program called for work offset in the same
DS program different variants can
(Tata X0 PS CNC program used be run . Also there is only
to produced Tata X0 DS part.) Height difference in the PS and
DS pivot hosuing hence the
workoffset (max 01.mm) can be
provided in the program but
setter given 0.5 mm work
offset. (TRC) 1
 Q: Why did the setter did not Q: Why setter forget to change
change the program from X0PS the program from PS to DS but
to X0DS? only changed the loading fixture

A: Setter forget to change the A:Setting control work

program from PS to DS but only instructions/checksheet not
changed the loading fixture. followed.

Work offset wrongly given by Q: Why workoffset given wrongly by Q: Why DS part height found Q:Why X0PS program called for
setter setter ? oversize 0.5mm during setting? X0DS machining?

A: DS part height found oversize 0.5mm A: Because X0PS program A: Refer point 1.
during setting. In order to compensate called for X0DS machining.
this work offset was given. (TRC) 2

2) Why wasn't it Tata X0 PS Program called for Q:Why X0PS program calling for X0DS Q: Why there is no Q:Why setup approval inscpector
detected? DS program detected? alarming/reminding function failed to detect the depth
(Tata X0 PS CNC program used available in the CNC machine for interchange?
(Why did the quality to produced Tata X0 DS part.) A: There is no alarming/reminding wrong program calling?
process not detect function available in the CNC machine for A: Inspector not aware of
the incident?) wrong program calling. A:Linking between the program/ checking which side of pivot
fixture/job is not feasible. Only housing to be checked for what
checkpoint is setup approval depth. (TRC)1
inspection by inspector.

Work offset wrongly given by Q: Why wrong workoffset by the setter is Q: Why workoffset W.I is not
setter not detected ? followed by the setter?

A: Workoffset W.I is not followed by A: WI for workoffset is not

the setter during setup approval. available for setup approval.
(TRC)2 (MRC)2
 2) Why wasn't it
detected?
(Why did the quality
process not detect
the incident?)

Depth Interchange is not
detected at final Inspection
Q: Why depth Interchange is not detected Q: Why method of depth
at final Inspection? checking in position gauge not
defined at final inspection.?
A: Method of depth checking in
position gauge not defined at final A: Depth checking by flush pin
inspection. (TRC)3 gauge is in place during
machining operation itself by the
machine operators.
Q: Why machine operator missed
to detect the depth interchange in
PH during maching operation
using flush pin gauge?
A: Only undersize and oversize
was checked by flush pin
gauge. Depth Interchange was
not checked. (TRC)4

Q: Q: Q:
A: A: A:

Q: Why-Question, A: Answer, TRC: Technical Root Cause, MRC: Managerial Root Cause, R: Responsible Person, D: Deadline.
5 Why Form
4th Why?
Q: Why setter given 0.5 mm
work offset in spite of 0.1 mm
work offset.
A: To correct the height variation
(0.4mm) in DS part produced
with PS program without
anticpating the defect- depth
inetrchange.
Complaint No.
Date
Version
5th Why?
Q: Why the depth interchange
defect is not considered.
A: Failure mode of the depth
interchangability was not
anticpated in P-FMEA for the
program writing stage and
also the fixture designing for
the similar part variants.
(MRC)1
200000157906
26.02.2019
Root Causes
6th Why? … (TRC, MRC)
Measures (R, D)
Q: Wy depth interchange Failure TRC1 :
mode is not anticipated in P-
FMEA? X0PS program called for X0DS
machining. (TRC) 1
A: No past experience regarding
these complaints. TRC 2:
In CNC turning program common
workoffset was provided for all
the three tools used, there by
changing the work offset in the
same program different variants
can be run . Also there is only
Height difference in the PS and
DS pivot hosuing hence the
workoffset (max 01.mm) can be
provided in the program but
setter given 0.5 mm work offset.
(TRC) 2
MRC 1:
Failure mode of the depth
interchangability was not
anticpated in P-FMEA for the
program writing stage and also
the fixture designing for the
similar part variants.
MRC 2:

Q: Why setter given 0.5 mm
work offset in spite of 0.1 mm
work offset.
A: Machine allowed the input of
0.5mm work offset in the
program.
Q: Why setting control work
instructions/checksheet not
followed?
A: Setting Part control work
instructions/checksheet not
available. (MRC) 2
Q:
A:
Q:Why Inspector not aware of
checking which side of pivot
housing to be checked for what
depth?
A: Checking work insptruction
not followed for approving setup not available. (MRC)1
approval part.
Q:
A:
Q: Why machined allowed the
input of 0.5mm workoffset?
A: Work offset is manually
controlled by the setter.
Q:
Q:
A:
Q: Why checking W.I not
followed for validating setup
approval parts?
A: Checking work instruction
for the setup approval parts in
Q:
A:
setter given 0.5 mm work offset.
(TRC) 2
MRC 1:
Q: Work offset is manually Failure mode of the depth
controlled by the setter. interchangability was not
anticpated in P-FMEA for the
A:It is not feasible to control work program writing stage and also
offset in CNC machine. the fixture designing for the
similar part variants.
MRC 2:
Setting Part control work
instructions/checksheet not
Q: Q: available.
A: A:
Q: Q: Inspector not aware of checking
A: A: which side of pivot housing to be
checked for what depth. (TRC)1
Workoffset W.I is not followed by
the setter during setup approval.
(TRC)2
Method of depth checking in
position gauge not defined at
final inspection. (TRC)3
Q: Q:
Only undersize and oversize was
A: A:
checked by flush pin gauge.
Depth Interchange was not
checked. (TRC)4
Checking work instruction for the
setup approval parts in not
available. (MRC)1
WI for workoffset is not available.
(MRC)2
 Inspector not aware of checking
which side of pivot housing to be
checked for what depth. (TRC)1

Workoffset W.I is not followed by

the setter during setup approval.
(TRC)2

Method of depth checking in

position gauge not defined at
final inspection. (TRC)3

Only undersize and oversize was

checked by flush pin gauge.
Depth Interchange was not
checked. (TRC)4

Checking work instruction for the

setup approval parts in not
Q: Why Only undersize and Q:Why no instructions given to Q: Q:
available. (MRC)1
oversize was checked by flush check the depth interchange. A: A:
pin gauge and depth Interchange
WI for workoffset is not available.
was not checked? A: Failure mode is not
(MRC)2
anticipated in the PFMEA.
A: No instructions given to check (MRC)3
Failure mode is not anticipated in
the depth interchange.
the PFMEA. (MRC)3

Q: Q: Q: Q:
A: A: A: A:
Final gauge checking method visually displayed in final Inspection
description
 PART TATA XODS &
NAME: XOPS

ONE POINT LESSON PART

NO:
0198 04L 306 & 307

TOPIC : XODS & XOPS LOADING AREA ,GAUGE CHECKING S.L NO DATE
IMPROVEMENT
BASIC KNOWLEDGE TROUBLE CLASS OPL - 01 26/02/2019
CLASS
LOADING AREA XOPS LETTER OPPOSITE SIDE NEED TO
MAINTAIN DEPTH OF 12.3(+0.2)

R
XOPS LETTER SIDE NEED TO
MAINTAIN DEPTH OF 14.3(+0.2)

XOPS

XODS LETTER OPPOSITE SIDE

NEED TO MAINTAIN DEPTH OF
12.3(+0.2)

R
LOADING AREA
XODS LETTER SIDE NEED TO
MAINTAIN DEPTH OF 14.3(+0.2)
XODS

DATE
TRAINER
TRAINEE
 Lessons Learned Cover Sheet Version
18Feb2009

LL Number LL Title Compilation

Date
Division Aswini Enterprises Department Originator

Product/Process Q2 Number

Problem Description

Relevant Conditions (Operational, Environmental, Application … for the failure to occur)

Root Cause(s)
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

Lessons Learned
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.

Contact Person Hariharan

Attachments Nil E-Mail Address :

Team Acknowlegment

Name Name Name

Department MD Department Production Department Quality & Inspection
Date Date Date
Signature Signature Signature
original signed Work instructions with location it is displayed
CNC machine program display As per compaint
Actually what it should be
Modification done in the program
 Quality Ma

SETU
CUSTOMER NAME : BOSCH LTD.

PART NAME : PIVOT HOUSING TATA XO

PART NO : 0198 04L 306

DRAWING REVISION NO: 01

PRODUCTION DATE :

16
14
15
13

BACK BORE
 FRONT BORE

18

20

S.NO CHARACTERISTICS

1 BORE DIAMETER

2 Bore inner diameter(Front)

3 Bore inner diameter Depth

S.NO CHARACTERISTICS

Bore inner diameter Depth

4
(Reference Distance side)

5 Bore inner diameter(back)

6 Height
S.NO CHARACTERISTICS

7 Concentricity

8 Concentricity

9 Roundness

10 Roundness

11 Concentricity

12 Chamfer

13 Distance

14 Distance
 S.NO CHARACTERISTICS

15 Distance

16 Distance

17 Angle

18 Distance

19 Distance

20 Angle

21 Visual

PROGRAM NO: TOOL NO: OFFSET NO:

 S.NO CHARACTERISTICS

INSPECTED BY:
DATE:
 Quality Management System- IATF 16949 : 2016

SETUP APPROVEL SHEET

BOSCH LTD. INSPECTOR NAME :

OT HOUSING TATA XO - DS PROD. BATCH NO :

0198 04L 306 INSTRUMENT NO :

01 MACHINE NAME /NO :

SAMPLE INSPECTION QTY:

17

11
1 5

BACK BORE
 6
NT BORE

12

19

SPECIFICATION CLASS CHECK METHOD OBS

Digital vernier/
13.5 +0.6
Plug gauge

15 (+0.01 / -0.05) ICL Air plug gauge

(Cut piece)
Profile
14.3+0.2 ICL
projector/Flush
pin gauge
SPECIFICATION CLASS CHECK METHOD OBS

(Cut piece)
Profile
12.3+0.2 ICL
projector/Flush
pin gauge

15 (+0.01 / -0.05) ICL Air plug gauge

Digital height
53 (+0.04 / -0.08) ICL
gauge
SPECIFICATION CLASS CHECK METHOD OBS

0.07 CMM

0.07 CMM

0.06 CMM

0.06 CMM

0.2 CMM

0.5x45º Profile projector

19 ± 0.1 ICL CMM

8 ± 0.1 ICL CMM

 SPECIFICATION CLASS CHECK METHOD OBS

51 ± 0.15 ICL CMM

70 ± 0.15 ICL CMM

86°51'±0°20' ICL CMM

20.4±0.2 CMM

34.4 ± 0.2 ICL CMM

5.6° ± 1° CMM

Free From Dent,

Damages, Line mark,
Chatring Mart, Loose ICL Visual
Burs,Sharp Corners &
White Rust

setup approval verification

OFFSET NO: CLAMPING PRESSURE; POKA YOKE:

SPECIFICATION CLASS CHECK METHOD OBS

APPROVED BY:
DATE:
 QR-QC-04/1.0/04.01.2013

AG,PG,FPG,HG-02,CMM

5 NO'S

10

7
3
 9
4

2
8

OBSERVED REMARKS
OBSERVED REMARKS
OBSERVED REMARKS
 OBSERVED REMARKS

PREVIOUS SETTING PART,

POKA YOKE: TOOL,FIXTURE MOVED
OR NOT:
OBSERVED REMARKS
 Anlage 3 zu CDQ0403 Ausgabe 5 vom 25.05.2007

Prototype Cont
Pre-launch Product description TATA XO PIVOT HOUSING DS

ASWINI
Plant: P.D.C Production Work plan number

Dept.: Quality Line:

Characteristics
Identi-
Production test Machine fication of
Production Process Mainten-
Part step and Equipment special
flow chart number ance plan
Process step Tooling Process Product characteri
stics

CASTING MOV

Receiving of casting
and storage
100.0 manual Quantity

110.0 incoming inspection manual visual

EN 31 Front Stopper

CCGT 060204 K10 dia 13.5 bore

120.0 Bore diameter

C/QMA 442790826.xlsx nach CDQ0403

 Anlage 3 zu CDQ0403 Ausgabe 5 vom 25.05.2007
120.0 Bore diameter

CCGT060204
Dia 15 Fornt bore
(Diamond)

CCGT060204 Dia 15 back side

(Diamond) bore

0198 04L 306

Bore inner diameter
ICL
(front)
120.1
TATA XO PIVOT HOUSING DS

Bore inner diameter

Depth
120.2

Turning operation Bore inner diameter

120.3 Depth
(Reference Distance side)

Machine: CNC Lathe

(JOBBER LM), Bore inner diameter
120.4 ICL
(back)

C/QMA 442790826.xlsx nach CDQ0403

 TATA
Anlage 3 zu CDQ0403 Ausgabe 5 vom 25.05.2007

Machine: CNC Lathe

(JOBBER LM),

120.5 Height ICL

120.6 Height

120.7 Distance ICL

120.8 Distance ICL

Test
Process Components
characteristics

C/QMA 442790826.xlsx nach CDQ0403

 Anlage 3 zu CDQ0403 Ausgabe 5 vom 25.05.2007

Control Plan Change date of revision:

NG DS Part number: 0198 04L 317 Date (original):

CP number: ASW/ CP / 70 Written by
Drawing revision
01/28.10.2014 Page OF
date:

Product/process Test method

Rejection specifications Reaction plan for
Test equipment Records
devices Tolerances (Reference nonconformities
document)
Registration by Scope Freq-uency

ASTING MOVED TO OM CNC FOR MACHINING PROCESS

counting visual DC store incharge all qty every lot

asper casting limit Incoming

free from visual defects visual Quality incharge. 5 no's every lot
sample inspection Report

PRODUCTION
visual EVERY SHIFT
INCHARGE

DAILY CHECK PRODUCTION

speed, feed 1500rpm,0.2F visual EVERY SHIFT
LIST INCHARGE

plug gauge Set-up approval QC inspector 5 NO'S every setting

13.5+0.6

C/QMA 442790826.xlsx nach CDQ0403

 Anlage 3 zu CDQ0403 Ausgabe 5 vom 25.05.2007
13.5+0.6

plug gauge in-process OPERATOR 3 NO'S once in hour

DAILY CHECK PRODUCTION

speed, feed 1600rpm,0.2F visual EVERY SHIFT
LIST INCHARGE

DAILY CHECK PRODUCTION

speed, feed 920rpm,0.2F visual EVERY SHIFT
LIST INCHARGE

Set-up approval QC inspector 5 NO'S every setting

15 (+0.01/-0.05) Air Plug gauge in-process Operator 1 NO'S once in hour

SPC CHART Operator 5 NO'S once in hour

Set-up approval QC inspector 5 NO'S every setting stop the machine.block

(Cut piece) the rejected parts and
Profile move to quarintine area
14.3+0.2
projector/Flush pin and Segregate the
gauge in-process Operator 1NO'S once in hour parts

(Cut piece) Set-up approval QC inspector 5 NO'S every setting

Profile
12.3+0.2
projector/Flush pin
gauge
in-process Operator 1NO'S once in hour

Set-up approval QC inspector 5 NO'S every setting

15 (+0.01/-0.05) Air Plug gauge in-process Operator 1NO'S once in hour

SPC CHART Operator 5 NO'S once in hour

C/QMA 442790826.xlsx nach CDQ0403

 Anlage 3 zu CDQ0403 Ausgabe 5 vom 25.05.2007

HG-02
Set-up approval QC inspector 5 NO'S every setting
(L.C. 0.01)

53 (+0.04/-0.08)
Total height gauge
in-process Operator 1NO'S once in hour
(special )

19±0.1 C.M.M Set-up approval QC inspector 3 NO'S every setting

24±0.2 C.M.M Set-up approval QC inspector 4 NO'S every setting

18±0.2 C.M.M Set-up approval QC inspector 5 NO'S every setting

ICL -Important charaterstics list

DC- DGITIAL CALIPER, HG- HEIGHT GAUG
provided by customer

C/QMA 442790826.xlsx nach CDQ0403

 Anlage 3 zu CDQ0403 Ausgabe 5 vom 25.05.2007

02/ 09.03.2019

12.03.2015

6/8

Capabili
FMEA
ties

C/QMA 442790826.xlsx nach CDQ0403

 Anlage 3 zu CDQ0403 Ausgabe 5 vom 25.05.2007

REFER F/70

C/QMA 442790826.xlsx nach CDQ0403

 Anlage 3 zu CDQ0403 Ausgabe 5 vom 25.05.2007

HG- HEIGHT GAUGE.

C/QMA 442790826.xlsx nach CDQ0403

 8D Team Review
Part Name: Complaint No (Q2 no): 200000160879
Part number: 0198.04C.084 Complaint : Wiper Motor continuous running at
Date parking position.

To be improved:
Q: What did not go well? (Description, result, idea for improvement)
A:

Q: What was hard, challenging in this 8D?

A:

To be celebrated:
Q: What went well that we want to continue doing in future?
A:

Q: Was the feedback from production, maintenance, quality, managers on time, pro-active, with reminder?
A:

Q: How was the team work inside PPP along with Bosch?
A:

Q: What was good or interesting in this 8D?

A:
0160879
tinuous running at
position.

eminder?
8D evaluation checklist
8D Title Dimension interchange

Complaint
200000157906
No.

Bosch Part 0198 04L 306

Date

Version

done by N.Karthikeyan

Completed Requirements Comments

Please select:
Yes N/A No
BASIC: (4 points)
Quantitative and precise problem description (Bosch, supplier) based on collection of facts.
D2 Problem Description

Answers to questions:
What
Where
When
How many parts affected / How much
NOK and OK pictures available.
EXCELLENT: (additional 1 point)
Effect at Bosch plant.
Effect at OEM.
Effect on final customer.

BASIC: (1 points)
D3 Containment Actions

Containment actions are clearly described and in time.

Containment actions for current production in effect
Containment actions with adequate for defect mode.
Sorting results given.
Responsibility and implementation date given.
Whole supply chain covered.
All relevant customers (int./ext.) informed; if necessary authorities notified.
EXCELLENT: (additional 1 point)
Proof of efficiency of containment action.

BASIC: (4 points)
D4_a Root

Occurance

TRC and MRC (Management System) systematically analyzed.

Cause

Risk assessment is available.

EXCELLENT: (additional 2 points)
MRC (leadership and/or business process) analyzed.

BASIC: (4 points)
D4-b Root

detection
Cause

TRC and MRC (Management System) systematically analyzed

Non

EXCELLENT: (additional 2 points)

MRC (leadership and/or business process) analyzed

BASIC: (2 points)
D5/D6-a Corrective Action

Defined corrective actions covering all TRC and MRC of D4_a

Effectiveness for all corrective actions is given.
Occurance

Responsibilities and implementation dates defined.

Reason for withdrawal of containment actions is documented.
EXCELLENT: (additional 1 point)
Effectiveness is assessed and evaluated with regard to risks on other product /processes. A
x protection, e.g. thorugh Poka Yoke could be introduced.
The MRC in the business processes and/or leadership are found and corrective actions
x effectively introduced.

BASIC: (2 points)
Non detection

Defined corrective actions covering all TRC and MRC of D4_a

Corrective
D5/D6-b

Action

Effectiveness for all corrective actions is given.

Responsibilities and implementation dates defined.
EXCELLENT: (additional 1 point)
Plan for monitoring effectiveness provided. Redundant tests/controls have been stopped.

BASIC: (2 points)
Preventative

Update of documents (FMEA, CP, PQP, directives, drawing etc.)

Actions
D7

Lessons learned (LL) transfer to all relevant products, processes and plants
EXCELLENT: (additional 1 point)
Feedback from LL network documented.

BASIC: (1 point)
Signatures from 8D sponsor, team leader and QM represantative.
D8 Final
Meeting

EXCELLENT: (additional 1 point)

Team review of 8D process.
Signatures of plant or division manager.
8D self-evaluation.
points %
0 0 Final Score
 x

8D evaluation sheet Q2 Notification No. ###

###
Part/
Supplier/production site Aswini Enterprsies 0198 04L 306 Part Number 8D Title ###

Defect Type or
Affected Bosch Plant Bosch-Nhp Code Date

8D STEP NOT SATISFYING BASIC LEVEL EXCELLENT SUM REMARKS

Fundamental (real) problem, occurrence and effects

D2 Empty or only symptom description, data are described comprehensibly and unambiguously Additional information with regard to interface
Problem collection is missing. (including detailed quantitative data: what, where, and effect at customer are available. 0 / 5
description [0 P] when, how much, who, …). [+1 P]
[4 P]

Containment actions are described clearly and

D3 Arbitrary or incomplete containment action Efficiency is quantitatively assessed
introduced
Containment (not concrete, no deadline).
(Deadlines and responsible are defined).
(for example in %) 0 / 2
actions [0 P] [1 P]
[1 P]

Technical Root Cause (TRC) and Managerial Root

D4_a Managerial Root Cause (MRC) in BUSINESS
Only direct causes determined Cause (MRC) in MANAGEMENT-SYSTEM are worked
PROCESS and/or LEADERSHIP, are worked
Cause and Effect
Analysis
(superficial or hypothetical). out. Risk assessment (including effect on other
out. Use of Problem Solving Methods is proven.
0 / 6
(Occurrence) [0 P] products / processes) is defined.
[+2 P]
[4 P]

Technical Root Cause (TRC) and Managerial Root

D4_b Managerial Root Cause (MRC) in BUSINESS
Only direct causes determined Cause (MRC) in MANAGEMENT-SYSTEM are worked
PROCESS and/or LEADERSHIP, are worked
Cause and Effect
Analysis
(superficial or hypothetical). out. Risk assessment (including effect on other
out. Use of Problem Solving Methods is proven.
0 / 6
(Non-detection) [0 P] products / processes) is defined.
[+2 P]
[4 P]

Arbitrary corrective actions Corrective actions cover completely all root causes
All MRC (in BUSINESS PROCESSES and/or
D5/D6_a (not concrete, unclear link to root cause, no (TRC and MRC in MANAGEMENT SYSTEM) from D4
LEADERSHIP) from D4 are solved and
Corrective Actions deadline / responsible). and are documented.
documented
0 / 3
(Occurrence) Efficiency not proven. Efficiency is proven.
[+1 P]
[0 P] [2 P]

Arbitrary corrective actions Corrective actions cover completely all root causes No more action needed for TRC as occurrence
D5/D6_b (not concrete, unclear link to root cause, no (TRC and MRC in MANAGEMENT SYSTEM) from D4 completely prevented. All MRC (in BUSINESS
Corrective Actions deadline / responsible). and are documented. PROCESSES and/or LEADERSHIP) from D4 0 / 3
(Non-detection) Efficiency not proven. Efficiency is proven. are solved and documented
[0 P] [2 P] [+1 P]

QM-Documentation updated. Comprehensible

Feedbacks / evaluations from LL-Network are
D7 Missing or unclear indication. Lessons Learned was started on all concerned
Preventive Actions [0 P] products, processes and locations.
available. 0 3
[+1 P]
[2 P]

Signatures from Team leader, Review by Sponsor with all team members done
D8 Missing signature or only by initiator. Sponsor (Department manager level) available. For and documented. Signatures from Plant-, BU-
Final Meeting [0 P] external 8D also -/QMM. Management available.
0 / 2
[1 P] [+1 P]

Overall comment

Date : evaluated by: Signature 0 / 30

score % 0 / 100
Yes No
Evaluation done with witness on
the spot and/or training on the
job

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal, exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial property rights.
8D Step Description of requirements

D2 Problem Description
Key question: Has the fundamental (real) problem been
and understood?

Requirement for ‘BASIC level’

·         The problem has been quantitatively
and clearly identified from customer’s and
supplier's view. It includes facts, figures
and dates, usually listed under: what,
where, when, how much, who.

·         The whole environment should be

taken into account as far as possible.

·         Evidence is provided for description

and simplification of the problem analysis.

·         The Problem description is the input for

efficient Problem Solving.

Requirement for ‘Excellent’

·         Additional information regarding
interfaces and impact on customer is
provided.

·     All parameters which allow the

reproduction of the defect are available.
·         Preliminary risk assessment is
available.

D3 Containment Actions
Key question: Has the customer Bosch been protected fro
defective products?

Requirement for ‘BASIC level’

·     The containment actions ensure that
there are no defective products received
by, delivered to or used by the customer.

·         The necessary customer information

(internal / external) has been processed
and required notifications to authorities
done.

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal,
exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial
property rights.
 (internal / external) has been processed
and required notifications to authorities
done.

·         Measures are effectively implemented

and evidence is given

·         If no containment action can be

implemented, then the decision process
must be transparently depicted.

Requirement for ‘Excellent’

Effectiveness of containment actions must be
documented. Evidence for the efficiency
evaluation has to be supplied.
Not all containment actions ensure a 100%
filtering, in such cases the evaluation of the
efficiency is to been fed into the risk assessment.

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal,
exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial
property rights.
D4 Cause and Effect Analysis
Key question:
- Has the Root Cause been established?
- Why did our processes not identify the defective part?

Requirement for ‘BASIC level’

·         The Technical Root Cause (TRC) and
the Managerial Root Cause (MRC) in the
Management-System, in reference to all
facts compiled in D2, is fully established,
validated and reproducible.

·         The root cause was efficiently worked

out thanks to the use of methodical quality
tools.

·         The non-detection was clearly

addressed and understood.

·         A risk assessment provided.

Requirement for ‘Excellent’

·         The complete MRC (including
Business processes and Leadership)
was worked out.
·         The causal relationship between
problem, TRC and MRC is transparently
depicted.

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal,
exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial
property rights.
 ·         The evidence of the use of methodical
tools is proven by submitting the analysis
process as well as the results.

D5/ D6 Corrective Actions

Key questions:
- Is the problem eradicated?
- Can the problem be detected with certainty?
Requirement for ‘BASIC level’
·         The corrective actions define and fully
cover the causes listed in D4. They are
documented.
·         Evidence of effectiveness of corrective
actions taken is provided before immediate
measures are withdrawn.

·         Responsible persons are designated

and dates set. Reason for withdrawal of
containment actions is documented.

Requirement for ‘Excellent’

Occurrence:

·         Effectiveness is assessed and

evaluated with regard to risks on other
products / processes. A protection via Poka
Yoke could be introduced.

·         The MRC in the business processes

and/or Leadership is fixed.

Detection:
·         Plan for monitoring effectiveness
provided. Tests / controls which have
become redundant by introduction of Poka
Yoke have been stopped.

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal,
exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial
property rights.
D7 Preventive Actions
Key question: Is the problem eradicated (even somewhere else)?
Requirement for ‘BASIC level’
·          The defect is prevented from occurring
elsewhere by transferring findings to
related products / processes / locations.

· The changes for example in FMEA are

to be exemplified via keywords.

Requirement for ‘Excellent’

·         The findings are transferred to ALL
relevant products / processes / locations
using the Lessons Learned Network and
confirmation / evaluation from LL Network
is provided.

D8 Final Meeting
Requirement for ‘BASIC level’
·        Signatures from team leaders, sponsors are
provided (department manager level). The -/QMM
signature has to be added in case of 8D linked to
external (customer) complaint.

Requirement for ‘Excellent’

·         The discussion / debriefing and
evaluation of the 8D steps is complete.

·     Signatures from plant- and BU-

management are provided.

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal,
exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial
property rights.
 Description of requirements

y question: Has the fundamental (real) problem been identified

understood?

Examples
·         Pareto analysis concerning all
customers built up over time.
Number of rejected parts corresponding to
production period.
Flow charts, trend charts, sketches, photos,
drawings.

·         Specific events that occurred (shift

change or maintenance/setting in
manufacturing), changes in the
environment (seasonal climate variations,
change in project teams, …)

Examples
·     History chart, accumulation of facts,
situation/problem analysis according to
Kepner-Tregoe, BASIC conditions,
description of problem in assembly or
vehicle.

·         Effect on end customer (loss of some

functions, complete product break down…).

y question: Has the customer Bosch been protected from using

ective products?

Examples

Customers to be informed are for example:

·         Production (follow-up shifts, other

production lines/ plants)

·         Warehouses (Bosch, Logistic Service

Provider, Transit)

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal,
exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial
property rights.
 ·     Original Equipment Manufacturer and
AA,
·     End Customer

Containment actions are, for example:

·         sorting actions or warehouse blocking,

·         build up for firewalls,
·         fast design review by development,
·         statistical analysis (Plant, 0 km, field),
·         start of endurance test or HALT (Highly
Accelerated Lifetime Test),
·         …

Examples
Efficiency check by sorting of product lots with
known defect rate, confirmation of the stability of
this check over time (especially shift end in case
of human visual control…). Multiple checking of
same lots…

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal,
exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial
property rights.
y question:
Has the Root Cause been established?
Why did our processes not identify the defective part?

Examples
·         Reproduction of the incident can be
validated, for example through simulation
or testing (errors can be switched on and
off). Non-detection can be validated with,
for example, a test setup.

·         The MRC is clarified in regard to the

management system and the way it is
used on daily base (quality of FMEA,
Control Plan, use of design rules and
norms, product and process release…).

·    Using a cause-effect diagram

(Ishikawa) and a deep dive Why-Why-
question (5xWhy, Naze Naze) technique. If
needed or useful, use Fault Tree Analysis
(FTA), Shainin, Six Sigma, process analysis
etc… The focus is not only set on how deep
and precise the tools were used, but also
how understandably it was explained. This
explanation shall give the evidence that
the root cause was found.
·       In case of defect types that cannot be
erased completely, but are approved of in a
specified extent (like sinkholes for casting
parts or defect density in semiconductor
manufacturing), the analysis proves that no
other root cause can be linked and that the
defect rate of a certain defect type is no
higher than the approved threshold.

·      Check if the defect was latent and

could have been activated internally, or if
external parameters are needed especially
in regard to customer interface. Review if
the test coverage is sufficient.
·         The risk assessment includes the
severity of the problem, the probability of
occurring and detction, and an estimation
of the potential extent of loss.

Examples
·         The focus is set on the business
processes (for example how the use of a
preventive quality tool or design rules is
defined or regulated), as well as on the
leadership (how the organization was set
up, tasks and responsibilities defined and
how competences and capacities were
managed, how decisions were taken).

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal,
exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial
property rights.
 preventive quality tool or design rules is
defined or regulated), as well as on the
leadership (how the organization was set
up, tasks and responsibilities defined and
how competences and capacities were
managed, how decisions were taken).

questions:
the problem eradicated?
the problem be detected with certainty?
Examples

·    Photos, sketches, Tests, simulations,…

·     QAM/Firewalls do not catch defective

parts anymore after implementation of
corrective actions.

·     In case of defect types that cannot be

erased completely, but are approved of in a
specified extent (like sinkholes for casting
parts or defect density in semiconductor
manufacturing), a specific action on a
singular event is not requested, if defect
rate reduction measures are defined and
monitored.
Examples
·         A theoretical representation of the
changed process sequence is possible
using a flow chart.
·         Procedure or design rule were revised
(for example how to define, release and
control the use of a product or process
design rule, how to define a maintenance
interval, how to define validation test). Or if
the organization was changed (new
responsibility split, clarified interfaces,…),
or competences/capacity was adapted.

·         The decision taking process can also

be changed (rules for strategic override,
management release,…).
·         e.g. “Check the Checker”
·         While protecting the manufacturing
flow via Poka Yoke, it must be assessed
whether test or controls have become
redundant (for example visual check by
operator, sensor control, ….), in such cases
the detecting process could be suspended.

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal,
exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial
property rights.
eradicated (even somewhere else)?
Examples
·    Failure Mode and Effect Analysis
(FMEA), Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), “Control
Plan”, drawings, development / design
guidelines, test plans. Updating of work
instructions or process descriptions is
proven.

Examples
·         New knowledge should be readily
stored in a Lessons Learned database.

·         Change / adjustment of products /

processes inareas not directly affected.

·         The application of Lessons Learned

should be checked on a regular basis (e.g.
by audits).

Examples

Examples
·         Conclusion of Problem-Solving with
consent from participants and, if necessary
from customer. Analysis of teamwork and
8D process is documented.

CP/PQA | 05.07.2012 | © Robert Bosch GmbH 2012. All rights reseved, also regarding any disposal,
exploitation, reproduction, editing, distribution, as well as in the event of applications for industrial
property rights.