TITLE: Supplier PPAP Guide

NUMBER: B45157 Revision A DATE: 7 Feb 2019 FUNCTION: SQA

BAE Systems
Supplier PPAP Guide

Prepared By: Pete Trainor

February 7, 2019

Electronic Systems Inc.  

65 Spit Brook Road
Nashua, NH 03061

SUMMARY
The purpose of the PPAP Submission Guide is to assist the supplier to
complete the various aspects of the Enhanced First Article (PPAP).

Page 1 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

Revision History
Rev Date Description
- 24 May 2018 Initial release per DCR DRB31135
A 12 Feb 2019 Updated for closer alignment to AS9145

2 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

Table of Contents
1.0 Purpose...............................................................................................................................4
2.0 Scope - When is PPAP Submission Required?.................................................................4
3.0 Reference Documents.......................................................................................................4
4.0 Terms and Definitions........................................................................................................5
5.0 Requirements for PPAP Submission:................................................................................8
5.1 Submission Method............................................................................................................8
5.2 Submission Status..............................................................................................................9
5.3 Ongoing Requirements.......................................................................................................9
6.0 Instructions for completing a PPAP Submission.............................................................9
6.1 Design Records and Ballooned Drawings............................................................................10
6.2 Approved Engineering Change Documentation...................................................................11
6.3 Customer Engineering Approvals.......................................................................................11
6.4 Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (DFMEA).............................................................12
6.5 Process Flow Diagrams.....................................................................................................17
6.6 Process Failure Mode Effects Analysis (PFMEA)...................................................................18
6.7 Control Plan.....................................................................................................................22
6.8 Measurement System Analysis (MSA).................................................................................23
6.9 Packaging........................................................................................................................24
6.10 Dimensional Results..........................................................................................................25
6.11 Material and Performance Test Results..............................................................................27
6.12 Initial Process Study (Cpk, Ppk).........................................................................................27
6.13 Qualified Laboratory Documentation..................................................................................28
6.14 Sample Parts....................................................................................................................28
6.15 Checking Aids...................................................................................................................28
6.16 Customer Specific Requirements........................................................................................29

3 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

1.0 Purpose
The purpose of the PPAP Submission Guide is to assist the supplier to complete the various aspects
of the Enhanced First Article (PPAP) as part of a process in accordance with AS9145.

The purpose of the Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) is:

1. To provide the evidence that all engineering, design record and specification requirements
are properly understood and fulfilled by the manufacturing organization.
2. To demonstrate that the established manufacturing process has the potential to produce
consistently conforming product which meets all requirements during an actual production
run at the quoted production rate.

2.0 Scope - When is PPAP Submission Required?

BAE Systems may require a PPAP submission per purchase order requirements, when any of the
following occur:

New parts, process or suppliers

1. New part or product

2. New process or technology
3. New supplier
4. New Customer Standard

Changes to existing product

1. Change to design including material, construction or component.
2. New, additional or modified tools
3. Refurbishment of current tools
4. Production or equipment transfer to a different location
5. Change of sub supplier or material source
6. New source of raw material
7. Change in production process or method
8. Product when tooling has been inactive for 12 months or greater.
9. Major environmental impact affecting fit, form or function of the product.

3.0 Reference Documents

SAE International AS9145™ – Requirements for Advanced Product Quality Planning and Production
Part Approval Process
SAE International AS9103 – Variation Management of Key Characteristics
AIAG FMEA Manual
AIAG APQP Manual
AIAG PPAP Manual
AIAG SPC Manual
AIAG MSA Manual
AIAG SPC Manual
AIAG MSA Manual
4 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

IEEE 1490:2011 Adoption of the Project Management Institute (PMI(R)) Standard; A Guide to the
Project Management Body of Knowledge
B25279: Supplier Requirements for FAI Reports
BAE Systems Supplier Variation Request (SVR)
J1739 JAN2009 PFMEA, DFMEA

4.0 Terms and Definitions

Bill of Material (BOM):
Total list of all components and materials contained in the design record of a product required to
manufacture the product.

Containment:
Recognition, identification and where possible, the segregation of the entire population affected by
the condition of nonconformance. Containment includes raw material, stock inventory, kits, work-
in-process, product in sell-off, finished goods inventory, goods in transit, and goods at BAE
Systems.

Control Plan:
A written description of the systems for controlling production parts, materials and processes.
Control plans identify the important characteristics and engineering specifications of the product
and how they are controlled to assure quality of the product. The control plan should be linked to
the process flow diagram and the process failures modes and effects analysis.

Critical Item (CI):

Those items (e.g., functions, parts, characteristics, processes) having significant effect on the
product realization and use of the product; including safety, performance, form, fit, function,
producibility, service life, etc.; that require specific actions to ensure they are adequately managed.
Examples include: safety CIs, fracture CIs, mission CIs, Key Characteristics (KCs), and maintenance
tasks critical for safety (reference AS9103 standard).

Correction:
Action taken to eliminate a detected nonconformity.

Customer:
The recipient of the supplier’s or organizations products or service.

Deliverables:
Outputs completed as part of the APQP/PPAP process.

Design Records:
The records of the engineering definition/specification, that fully define the product (system, part,
component, or assembly), including physical or electronic/digital drawings, electronic/digital
models, software, or other associated information. This includes records of authorized engineering
changes (Approved via SVR) not yet incorporated into the released engineering
definition/specification.

5 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

Design Risk Analysis:

Analytical techniques used by the design responsible organization to identify, to the extent possible,
potential failure modes related to product performance (i.e., fit, form, and function), durability,
manufacturability, and cost.

Design Validation
The assurance that a product, service, or system fulfills the needs of the customer and other
identified stakeholders. It often involves acceptance with external customers (defined in IEEE
1490:2011). Relevant types of validation include: – Confirmation through the provision of objective
evidence, that the requirements for a specific intended use or application have been fulfilled.
Testing and/or analysis to ensure the product design conforms to defined user needs and/or
requirements. Design validation follows successful design verification and may involve
preproduction product (e.g., development, prototype) [reference AIAG Advanced Product Quality
Planning and Control Plan].

Design Verification
Testing to assure that all design outputs meet the requirements of the design inputs with objective
evidence that the specified product requirements have been fulfilled. Testing and/or analysis to
ensure that all design outputs satisfy requirements may include activities such as: design review,
performing alternate calculations, understanding tests and demonstrations, and review of design
stage documents before release (reference AIAG Advanced Product Quality Planning and Control
Plan).

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA):

An organized methodology used to assure that potential design and manufacturing risks are
mitigated through mistake proofing and design/process enhancements. Potential risks are ranked
and prioritized for improvement.
PFMEA: Process FMEA
DFMEA: Design FMEA

Key Characteristic (KC)

An attribute or feature whose variation has a significant influence on product fit, performance,
service life, or producibility; that requires specific action for the purpose of controlling variation
(reference AS9103 standard).

Measurement Systems Analysis (MSA)

A study of the effects of selected elements (repeatability and reproducibility) of a measurement
process on accuracy, precision, and uncertainty of measurement.

Nonconformance:
The failure or potential failure of a characteristic to conform to the requirements specified in a
contract, purchase order, drawing, specification or other approved product description.
Potential/suspect non-conformances include improper handling, storage, transport, and exposure to
out-of-tolerance environmental, test or process conditions.

Nonconforming Material:
Any item, part, or product containing one or more nonconformance

6 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

Preliminary Capacity Assessment:

An assessment performed early in the process planning and development phase to determine
resources (e.g., people, equipment, facilities) necessary to produce product at the customer
demand rate.

Preventive Action:
Action to eliminate the cause of a potential nonconformity or other undesirable condition. If a
nonconformance has not occurred, but an action is taken to proactively reduce the risk of a
nonconformance, the action is preventive.

Process Capability:
Comparing actual process performance with process specification limits using measure e.g.: Cpk,
CP, Sigma Level and parts defective parts per million.

Process Validation:
Confirmation through physical demonstration that a process consistently produces a result or
product fulfilling its predetermined specifications, including key product or process characteristics
which are stable and capable at the desired level.

Production Process Verification (PPV):

A review of the manufacturing process (e.g., equipment, operator training, manufacturing
documentation, control plan, associated measurement tools) by a multi-disciplinary team to verify
that the production processes are appropriately defined, documented, and ready for production.

Repair:
A procedure that reduces but does not eliminate a nonconformance and is approved by the
Customer when required by contract.

Rework:
A procedure applied to a nonconformance that will completely eliminate the nonconformance, and
result in a characteristic that conforms completely to the drawing, specification or contractual
requirement.

SCAR:
Supplier Corrective Action Request

Scrap:
Nonconforming material that is not usable for its intended purpose that cannot be economically
reworked.

Supplier:
The entity or party that supplies product or services to a customer in accordance with contract
requirements.

7 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

5.0 Requirements for PPAP Submission:

BAE Systems PPAP requirements are based on AS9145 and AIAG "Production Part Approval
Process" standard. The following elements are be required:

1. Design Records (If Applicable)

2. DFMEA (if applicable)
3. Process Flow Diagram
4. PFMEA
5. Control Plan
6. MSA: Measurement System Analysis
7. Initial Process Capability Studies
8. Packaging, Preservation, and Labeling Approvals
9. FAI: First Article Inspection
10. Customer Specific Requirements
11. PPAP Approval Form

NOTE BAE Systems provides suggested templates of all forms for the PPAP submittal, however
: Supplier generated forms meeting the requirements of SAE INTERNATIONAL AS9145™ or
AIAG may also be utilized.
Completion and submission of PPAP records conveys no additional data rights to BAE
Systems than that defined in the respective Procurement Agreement

5.1 Submission Method

PPAPs ARE NOT TO BE SENT VIA REGULAR, UNSECURE EMAIL!!!

PPAPs are considered Technical Data and therefore must be controlled in accordance with
contractual requirements specified in the special provisions of the Purchase Order / Subcontract or
incorporated Terms and Conditions.  Such requirements may include ITAR, Export Control, and
Proprietary Information Agreements.  Unclassified technical data shall be submitted through BAE
Systems approved methods including but not necessarily limited to Secure File Transfer System
(SFTS), Exostar, or physical mail. 

Classified technical data shall be specially handled as specified in the Purchase Order or
Subcontract. 

Contact your BAE Systems procurement representative to confirm the approved transmittal
method. 

8 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

5.2 Submission Status

The PPAP approval process will be carried out by BAE Systems. The PPAP submission will be
reviewed and dispositioned one of the following ways:

APPROVED: A formal acceptance of the submission which has met all of the criteria set by BAE
Systems
REJECTED: The submission is not acceptable and does not meet the criteria set by BAE
Systems
INTERIM: An interim approval can be given if it is deemed by BAE Systems that product is
useable. The interim status is a temporary approval for a specified time-frame
which is determined by BAE Systems. The supplier must implement the required
corrective actions and re-submit PPAP for full approval during this time frame. If a
re-submission does not occur within the required time-frame the PPAP will be
rejected.

5.3 Ongoing Requirements

BAE Systems reserves the right to request any information you have provided in any data or
document in any element of approval, at any time, including after the approval has been granted.
The PF, CP, and PFMEA are “living” documents and should be updated as risks are mitigated, new
risks are identified, or additional controls are put in place.

6.0 Instructions for completing a PPAP Submission

The Part Submission Warrant (PSW) must be filled out and signed by the supplier.

The part number must match the Purchase Order

issued by BAE Systems.

The correct Hardware and Drawing revision level and

submission level must be entered.

Any fields that do not apply to your submission

should be filled in with “N/A” (Not Applicable).

It is important that the PPAP approval Form is filled

out correctly and contains accurate and legible
information.

Figure 1: BAE Systems PPAP Submission Form

9 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.1 Design Records and Ballooned Drawings

The purpose of designed records and ballooned drawings is to document and provide a copy of the
formal print and to provide any additional engineering records for reference.

Figure 2: Ballooned Drawing Example

A ballooned drawing shows the parts or assemblies in a part print with numbered “balloons” that
point to individual requirements of the part. The numbers on the ballooned drawing correlate with
the numbers found on the Dimensional Data Sheet. A ballooned drawing must be submitted as
part of the PPAP for every submission when dimensional results are required.

6.1.1 Completing the balloon drawing

All part requirements on the BAE Systems or Supplier print must be ballooned and numbered for
reference and measurement. These may include:

1. Dimensions and tolerance of parts

2. Electrical requirements (performance data, functional tests, etc)
3. Visual features (color, texture, etc)
4. Chemical characteristics (cure time, etc)
5. Physical and mechanical properties (tensile strength, plating thickness, heat treat hardness, etc)
6. Any other specified requirement that you have the capability to measure or that is described in
the print notes or reference specifications.

When dimensions are specified at multiple location on the drawing, the data for each location
should be numbered separately.

10 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.2 Approved Engineering Change Documentation

When a supplier identifies a drawing or specification issue/error and recommends a change to the
BAE Systems drawing. A Supplier Variation Request (SVR) may be submitted to BAE Systems to
review and approve the requested the change. The SVR should be made prior to fabrication or as
early in the fabrication process as possible.

Please note the following:

1. Material not in compliance with drawing(s) or specification(s) shall NOT be shipped without
prior BAE Systems Approval.
2. The supplier must receive an approved and closed SVR as authorization to ship product.
1. If the SVR disposition requires a drawing change then upon release of the ECO, a PO
revision change will be issued to reflect the new part revision Product should not
ship until ECO is completed and the SVR closed.
3. The supplier shall not perform any repair activity before getting BAE Systems approval via a
documented repair procedure approved on the SVR by BAE Systems.

A copy of the Supplier Variation Request form and submission instructions can be found on the BAE
Systems Supplier Quality Assurance Portal.

6.3 Customer Engineering Approvals

The supplier submission is to include BAE Systems Engineering Approval documentation when
requested. This will only be requested if the supplier has design authority of the parts/products.

11 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.4 Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (DFMEA)

A Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (DFMEA) shows evidence that potential failure modes
and their associated risks have been addressed in order to eliminate or minimize their effects
through product design changed and improvements.

The DFMEA is only required when the supplier has design authority of the product. The DFMEA
must address all Critical Items (CI).

Severity, Occurrence and Detection ratings are used when performing FMEA activities. These
rating scales must be compliant with the AIAG guidelines for FMEA.

Any potential failure mode not mitigated in the DFMEA should be included in the PFMEA.

When completing the FMEA an action plan must be established in line with the risk analysis table
shown below:

Figure 3: Risk Analysis Table

Green Area: No actions needed

No mandatory actions required, but corrective and preventative actions should be
Yellow Area:
defined and communicated to BAE Systems to reduce the risk to both parties
Mandatory corrective and preventative actions are required and shall be
Red Area:
communicated to BAE Systems to reduce the risk to both parties

NOTE BAE Systems only requires a Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (DFMEA) to be
: included if the supplier has design authority.

12 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.4.1 Completing the DFMEA

The DFMEA supports the design process by reducing the risk of failures. The DFMEA shall be
initiated before the design concept is finalized. Each item / function needs to be addressed. Any
potential failure mode of the item / function should be defined as completely as possible.
Recommended actions should be recorded.

Prevention is the preferred method to address the design failure mode. If prevention is not
possible, then highlight detection controls. The DFMEA is not a standalone document and should
also be linked to the PFMEA and Control Plans.

BAE Systems has developed a DFMEA form which can be utilized by suppliers. The form uses
embedded ratings which will automatically produce the initial Risk Priority Number (RPN)
Severity x Occurrence x Detection = RPN
DESIGN FAILURE MODE ANALYSIS
(DESIGN FMEA)
FMEA number
Item Process Responsibility No. of Pages
Part Number Key dates Prepared by
Core Team FMEA date (Orig.) Rev. Date
C O D
PROCESS Actions Results
S L Potential Cause(s) / C E R Responsibility &
FUNCTION Potential Failure Potential Effect(s) of Current Process Controls Current Process Controls Recommended S O D R
E A Mechanism(s) of C T P Target Completion E C E P
REQUIREMENTS Mode Failure V S U Prevention Detection E N Action(s) Actions Taken
S
Failure R C
Completion Date Date V C T N
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0

Figure 4: BAE Systems FMEA Example Template

13 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.4.2 Severity (DFMEA)

An assessment of how serious the Failure Effect (due to the Failure Mode) is to the customer:

Category Criteria: Severity of Effect

Ranking
(Product) (Effect on Product) - DFMEA & PFMEA

Potential failure more affects safe vehicle operation and/or

involve noncompliance with government regulation 10
Safety
without warning
and/or
Regulatory
Potential failure more affects safe vehicle operation and/or
Compliance
involve noncompliance with government regulation with 9
warning

Loss or primary function (vehicle inoperable, does not

8
Primary Function affect safe vehicle operation)

Essential Degradation or primary function (vehicle operable, but at

7
reduced level or performance)

Loss of secondary function (vehicle operable, but

6
comfort / continence functions inoperable)
Secondary Function
Degradation or secondary function (vehicle operable, but
Convenient
comfort / continence functions at reduced level of 5
performance)

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does

not conform. Defect noticed by most customers (>75%) 4

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does

Annoyance not conform. Defect noticed by many customers (50%) 3

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does

not conform. Defect noticed by discriminating customers 2
(<25%)

No Effect No discernible effect 1

Table 1: SAE J1739 Appendix A - DFMEA

14 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.4.3 Occurrence (DFMEA)

An assessment of the likelihood that a particular cause will happen and result in the Failure Mode:

Likelihood of Criteria: Occurrence and Cause - DFMEA

Rank
Failure (Design Life/reliability or item/vehicle)

Very High New Technology/ new design with no history 10

Failure is inevitable with new design, new application,

9
or change in duty cycle/operating conditions.

Failure is likely with new design, new application, or

High 8
change in duty cycle/operating conditions.

Failure is uncertain with new design, new application,

7
or change in duty cycle/operating conditions.

Frequent failures associated with similar designs or in

6
design simulation and testing.

Occasional failures associated with similar designs or

Moderate 5
in design simulation and testing.

Isolated failures associated with similar designs or in

4
design simulation and testing.

Only isolated failures associated with almost identical

3
design or in design simulation and testing
Low
No observed failures associated with almost identical
2
design or in design simulation and testing

Very Low Failure is eliminated through preventative control 1

Table 2: SAE J1739 Appendix B - DFMEA

15 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.4.4 Detection (DFMEA)

An assessment of the likelihood that the current controls will detect the cause of the Failure Mode
or the Failure Mode itself, should it occur, thus PREVENTING the Failure Effect from reaching your
customer. The customer in this case could be the next operation, subsequent operations, or the
end user:
Category DFMEA Criteria:
Rank
(Product) Likelihood of Detection by Design Control

Absolute No current design control; Cannot detect or is not analyzed

10
Uncertainty

Design analysis/detection controls have weak detection capability; Virtual

Difficult to
Analysis (e.g. CAE, FAE, etc.) is not correlated to expected actual operating 9
Detect
conditions.

Product verification /validation after design freeze and prior to launch with
pass/fail testing (sub-system or system testing with acceptance criteria e.g. 8
Ride & handling, shipping evaluation, etc.)
Post Design
Product verification/validation after design freeze and prior to launch with
Freeze and
test to failure testing (Sub-system or system testing until failure occurs, 7
Prior to
testing of system interactions, etc.)
Launch
Product verification/validation after design freeze and prior to launch with
degradation testing (Sub-system or system testing after durability test e.g. 6
Function check)

Product Validation (reliability testing, development or validation tests) prior to

design freeze using pass/fail testing (e.g. acceptance criteria for 5
 Prior to performance, function checks, etc.)
Design
Freeze Product Validation (reliability testing, development or validation tests) prior to
design freeze using test to failure testing (e.g. Until leaks, yields, cracks, 4
  etc.)

  Product Validation (reliability testing, development or validation tests) prior to

design freeze using degradation testing (e.g. data trends, before/after 3
values etc.)

Virtual Design analysis/detection controls have strong detection capability. Virtual

Analysis - Analysis (e.g. CAE, FAE, etc.) is highly correlated with actual and/or 2
Correlated  expected actual operating conditions prior to design freeze

Detection Failure cause or Failure mode cannot occur because it is fully prevented
not through design solutions (e.g. Proven design standard/best practice or
applicable; common material, etc.) 1
Error
Prevention

Table 3: SAE J1739 Appendix C - DFMEA

16 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.5 Process Flow Diagrams

The purpose of Process Flow Diagrams is to document and clarify all the steps required in the
manufacturing of a part. The primary process steps must be linked to both the PFMEA and the
Control Plan so that all process steps are addressed for risk and control. Process flows must include
the entire manufacturing process, receiving through shipping.

Figure 5: Manufacturing Flow Diagram Example

The Process Flow Diagram must also include key steps in the process and all offline activities (such
as measurement, inspection and handling). The flow of the nonconforming material such as scrap
parts, non-conforming parts and rework parts should also be included the supplier is not authorized
to perform a repair on a part.

NOTE: Suppliers may utilize their own Process Flow Diagram format.

17 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.6 Process Failure Mode Effects Analysis (PFMEA)

The Process Failure Mode Effects Analysis (PFMEA) is used to show evidence that any potential m

A PFMEA should be performed for every part, piece or equipment or process involved in
manufacturing. The PFMEA is a cross functional activity and should not be conducted in isolation.

When calculating the Risk Priority Number (RPN) for the PFMEA the following rating mechanism
should be utilized to assess Severity, Occurrence, and Detection: ( Severity x Occurrence x Detection =
RPN)

POTENTIAL FAILURE MODE ANALYSIS

(PROCESS FMEA)
FMEA number
Item Process Responsibility No. of Pages
Part Number Key dates Prepared by
Core Team FMEA date (Orig.) Re

PROCESS C O D Acti
S L Potential Cause(s) / C E R Responsibility &
FUNCTION Potential Failure Potential Effect(s) of Current Process Controls Current Process Controls Recommended
E A Mechanism(s) of C T P Target Completion Completion
Mode Failure V S U Prevention Detection E N Action(s)
REQUIREMENTS Failure Date Date
S R C
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Figure 6: BAE Systems PFMEA Template

The PFMEA worksheet is a tool used to identify and show potential process risks associated with
the manufacture of each part. It also highlights the controls at each stage of the manufacturing
process; this detail should read across to the Control Plan.

18 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.6.1 Severity (PFMEA)

An assessment of how serious the Failure Effect (due to the Failure Mode) is to the customer:

Category Criteria: Severity of Effect

Ranking
(Process) (Effect on Process) - PFMEA

May endanger operator (machine or assembly) without warning

Safety 10
and/or
Regulatory May endanger operator (machine or assembly) with warning
Compliance 9

Major 100% of product may have to be scrapped. Line shutdown or stop

8
Disruption

Significant A portion of the production run may have to be scrapped. Deviation from
primary process; decreased line speed or added manpower. 7
Disruption

100% of production run may have to be reworked off line and accepted.
6
Rework out-of-
station
A portion of the production run may have to be reworked off line and accepted
5

100% of production run may have to be reworked in-station before it is

processed 4
Rework in-
station A portion of the production run may have to be reworked in-station before it is
processed 3

Slight inconvenience to process, operation, or operator

Minor Disruption 2

No Effect No discernible effect 1

Table 4: SAE J1739 Appendix A - PFMEA

19 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.6.2 Occurrence (PFMEA)

An assessment of the likelihood that a particular cause will happen and result in the Failure Mode:

Category Criteria: Occurrence and Cause

Rank
(Process) (Incidents per 1000 items)

≥ 100 per pieces

Very High 10
>/= 1 in 10

50 per thousand pieces

9
1 in 20

20 per thousand pieces

High 8
1 in 50

10 per thousand pieces

7
1 in 100

2 per thousand pieces

6
1 in 500

0.5 per thousand pieces

Moderate 5
1 in 2,000

.1 per thousand pieces

4
1 in 10,000

0.01 per thousand pieces

3
1 in 100,000
Low
≤0.001 per thousand pieces
2
1 in 1,000,000

Very Low Failure is eliminated through preventative control 1

Table 5: SAE J1739 Appendix B - PFMEA

20 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.6.3 Detection (PFMEA)

An assessment of the likelihood that the current controls will detect the cause of the Failure Mode
or the Failure Mode itself, should it occur, thus PREVENTING the Failure Effect from reaching your
customer. The customer in this case could be the next operation, subsequent operations, or the
end user:
Category PFMEA Criteria:
Rank
(Process) Likelihood of Detection by Process Control

Absolute No current process control; Cannot detect or is not analyzed

10
Uncertainty

Defect (Failure Mode) and/or Error (Cause) is not easily detected (e.g.
Difficult to Detect 9
Random Audits)

Defect Detection Post Defect (failure Mode) detection post-processing by operator through
visual/tactile/audible means 8
Processing

Defect (Failure Mode) detection in-station by operator through

Defect Detection at visual/tactile/audible means or post-process through use of attribute 7
Source gauging (go/no-go, manual torque check/clicker wrench, etc.)

Defect (Failure Mode) detection post-processing by operator through

Defect Detection Post use of variable gauging on in-station by operation through use of
6
Processing attribute gauging (go/no-go, manual torque check/clicker wrench, etc.)

Defect (Failure Mode) or Error (Cause) detection in-station by operator

through use of viable gauging or by automated controls in-station that
Defect Detection at
will detect discrepant part and notify operator (light, buzzer, etc.) 5
Source
Gauging performed on setup and first piece check (for set-up causes
only)

Defect (Failure Mode) detection post-processing by automated controls

Defect Detection Post
that will detect discrepant part and lock part to prevent further 4
Processing
processing

Defect (Failure Mode) detection in-station by automated controls that

Defect Detection at
will detect discrepant and automatically lock part in station to prevent 3
Source
further processing

Error Detection and/or Error (Cause) detection in-station by automated controls that will detect
error and prevent discrepant part from being made. 2
Defect Prevention

Detection not Error (Cause) prevention as a result of figure design, machine design or
applicable; Error part design. 1
Prevention

Table 6: SAE J1739 Appendix C – PFMEA

21 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.7 Control Plan

A Control Plan defines the operation, processes, materials, equipment, methodologies and CIs for
controlling variations in key product or process characteristics integral to the manufacturing
process. Its purpose is to communicate the supplier’s decisions during the entire manufacturing
process from material purchase through to final shipping. Specifically the control plan should
address the following:

1. Methods of production
2. Identification of KC characteristics
3. Secondary or Outsourced Operations
4. Materials and their physical and chemical characteristics
5. Types of process equipment at each operation
6. Types of test equipment used to measure each characteristic
7. Specifications, sampling strategy, control and reaction methods used.
8. Periodic conformance testing and product verification

All processes must have a control plan that defines all methods used for process control and
complies with BAE Systems specified requirements. The control plan must clearly state each step
in the process; the specification and all KC characteristics must be addressed for product and
process. The Process Flow Diagram, PFMEA and Control Plan must be linked. Each major process
step in the process flow diagram should correlate with PFMEA steps and there should be
documented control plan actions for each of the steps.

6.7.1 Completing the Control Plan

This is a process whereby the Supplier simply documents all materials and processes involved in
the manufacturing process from start to finish. The process flow diagram, ballooned drawing, and
PFMEA all provide inputs to the Control Plan. All KCs identified as Process, First-Piece or Safety
Related by the supplier or BAE Systems must be listed on the Control Plan.

A control plan should address all testing requirements, inspection and measurements that are
required to verify product quality and conformity. The control plan must not be excessively
dependent on visual inspection and should always target prevention techniques wherever possible.

The control plan should be developed in stages, from Prototype to Pre-Production and then into
Production. The control plan is a “living” document and should be updated to reflect any changes to
the manufacturing process and its controls.

BAE Systems has developed a Control Plan format which is available for suppliers to utilize if
required.

22 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

BAE CONTROL PLAN

Proto-Type Pre-Launch Production Key Contact / Phone Date of Origination Date of Latest Revision - ref.
Control Plan Number M/DD/YY
M/DD/YY
Part Number / Latest Revision Change Core Team Customer Engineering Approval / Date (If Required)

Part Name / Description Supplier / Plant Approval / Date (If Required) Customer Quality Approval / Date (If Required)

Supplier / Plant Supplier Code Other Approval / Date (If Required) Other Approval / Date (If Required)

Part / Process Name / Machine, Device, Characteristics Special Methods

Process Operation Jig, Tools Char. Product / Process Measurement Sample Reaction Plan
No. Product Process Control Method
Number Description for Mfg. Class Specification / Tolerance Technique Size Freq.

Figure 7: Example of Control Plan document

6.8 Measurement System Analysis (MSA)

Measurement System Analysis (MSA) is a mathematical method of determining how much variation
within the measurement process contributes to overall process variability. MSA is used to ensure
the right measurement equipment is used to qualify production parts or processes.

BAE Systems requires an MSA study to be conducted on all measurement equipment that is used to
accept or fail the product. This generally covers all measurement tools identified in the control
plan.

A Gauge Repeatability and Reproducibility (GR&R) study is used to ensure that measurements
taken in the manufacturing process and reasonably consistent regardless of how many times they
are performed or how had performed them. It is important to select a sample size that
encompasses the full range of parts.

BAE Systems recommends the following acceptance levels to be used:

1. % R&R should be 10% or less for CIs

2. Marginal gauges (between 10% and 30%) should have an action plan to address and
improve the method of measurement.
3. Gauges with R&R at 30% or more must not be used.

23 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

Statistical software, IE: Mini-tab, SPC Excel or equivalent may be utilized to conduct the
measurement study. BAE Systems has also developed at GR&R worksheet for the suppliers to
utilize. Instructions on how to complete the GR&R are included in the worksheet.

GAUGE R&R TEMPLATE

Hold Cursor Here for Directions
Part Number: Comments:
Part Revision:
Part Description: Nominal=
Date Completed: + TOL=
Gage Name: -TOL =
Gage Number:
Cal Date:

Measurements
OPER1 OPER2 OPER3 OPER4 OPER5

Part trial 1 trial 2 Range trial 1 trial 2 Range trial 1 trial 2 Range trial 1 trial 2 Range trial 1 trial 2 Range
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
X-bar X-bar X-bar X-bar X-bar
# persons R-bar R-bar R-bar R-bar R-bar
# parts (n) MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR MaxR
# trial (m)
LSL 0.000 USL 0.000 Max X-bar 0.0000 R-double bar =
a 0.00 Total Tolerance 0.0000 Min X-bar 0.0000 UCLR = R-double bar x D4
b 0.00 X-bar diff 0.0000 UCLR =
D4 = 0.00 If R values in study are greater
than UCLR , these are statistical
outlier and need evaluation

Repeatability Reproductibility GAGE R&R

2 2 1/2 2 2 1/2
EV=(R-double bar) x a Av=(X-bar diff x b) -(EV) /n/m) R&R = (EV +AV )
EV= AV = R&R =

%EV = 100(EV/tolerance) %AV = 100(AV/tolerance) %R&R = 100(R&R/tolerance)

% EV = % AV = %R&R = 0.0%

Figure 8: Example of GR&R worksheet

6.9 Packaging
A packaging, preservation, and labeling plan shall at a minimum define:

1. Packaging process & pictures

2. Internal packaging material (including identification if it is ESD safe)
3. Packaging reusability (as applicable)
4. Labeling requirement, including label  content (part number, SN, barcodes, etc), label
material, and label location(s)
5. Qty per box and (as applicable) boxes per pallet
6. Box size & weight

24 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.10 Dimensional Results

The Dimensional Results are documented in the Dimensional Data Sheet referenced earlier in this
document. The measurements in this form should correlate with your ballooned drawing from Item
6.1.

The parts used for dimensional data must be from production tooling / process and randomly
sampled (if possible) from a run at production rate. The dimensional report must address all of the
following:
1. All dimensions
2. All applicable notes on the drawing
3. Any dimensions contained on reference prints

NOTE: The parts measured to obtain the dimensional results must be the same parts submitted for
PPAP approval

6.10.1 Completing the Dimensional Data Sheet

All dimensional requirements on the ballooned drawing must be listed on the dimensional data
sheet. All sections of the dimensional data sheet must be filled out completely. The measurement
method must be documented for every line item.

When a specific feature on the drawing has multiple requirements I.E. GD&T symbols the data
must be recorded on individual line items with the dimensional data sheet.

Example: This call out would require 3 lines of separate data on the dimensional report.

1. Hole diameter (25+/-0.2)

2. True Position (0.05 MMC on datum A,B,C)
3. Cylindricity (0.1)

Figure 9: Dimensional Drawing Example

Dimensional Data and all requirements should be documented via the standard BAE Systems FAI
process per BAE Systems Supplier Requirements for First Article Inspections Reports, B25279:

25 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

Figure 10: AS9102 Form 2 Example

Figure 11: AS9102 Form 3 Example

NOTE: Any concerns identified in the Dimensional Data should be brought to the attention of BAE
Systems before submitting your PPAP.

26 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.11 Material and Performance Test Results

The purpose of this item is to ensure that the material is verified for its properties and acceptable
performance is demonstrated.

Material test results should be provided in the form of a material composition report also called a
Certificate of Analysis (CofA) from an accredited lab that confirms the material content meets a
known standard, IE: Chemical and Physical Analysis Report.

It is the Supplier’s responsibility to confirm the composition of material not only at PPAP submission
stage but also ongoing during the life of the product / project. This step should be placed into the
FMEA process and the Control Plan.

A Certificate of Compliance (C of C) is acceptable during production shipping but is not acceptable

during PPAP submission as the C of C will not give actual test results.

Performance Test Results should be acceptable, and meet the agreed upon specifications to be
measured. Performance results may include data confirming any referenced specifications in the
part print or specific testing required by BAE Systems.

BAE Systems will communicate specific material, performance and testing requirements either in
the part print, reference specifications or by a specific request prior to PPAP approval. It is the
responsibility of the supplier to confirm the data and format of this requirement with the
appropriate BAE Systems representative.

Test Data should not be submitted with the PPAP unless the purchase order calls contains a
material clause such as 111, 134, 135 or 168. The prior list is not meant to be all inclusive as all
clauses should be reviewed and requirements identified as part of your contract review.

6.12 Initial Process Study (Cpk, Ppk)

The purpose of initial process studies (Cp, Cpk, Pp, Ppk) is to determine if the production process is
likely to manufacture product that will meet BAE Systems requirements. Initial process studies
(capability) are highly recommended for all CIs.

There are two primary indexes used in determining process capability.

Cpk predicts future capability and should be used when developing new parts or revising
specifications on a part. Cpk should also be used when materials, processes, manufacturing
location, or equipment have changed or Material suppliers have changed.

Ppk indicates past performance. Use Ppk when you are a new supplier to BAE Systems but have
already been manufacturing the part which BAE Systems will purchase.

The capability study is to be performed on samples taken from an actual production run at the
quoted production rates. The minimum acceptance capability for all CIs is 1.33 and 1.67 for all
safety related CI’s. In some cases, it may be impossible or prohibitively expensive to meet the
stability and capability requirements. These exceptions shall be documented by the producer and
require customer approval. An alternative control method (such as 100% gauging) may be
required.
27 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

The supplier can submit the Capability data on the format of their choice, and Mini-tab, SPC Excel
or equivalent may be utilized.

6.13 Qualified Laboratory Documentation

The purpose of Qualified Laboratory Documentation is to ensure that the testing for PPAP has been
done by a qualified lab. If your organization is performing testing or measurement internally or
externally at an outside facility, then proof of Scope and accreditation is required.

6.13.1 Internal Labs located at Supplier

All suppliers that have testing or measurement performed on site must provide the following in this
section of the PPAP submission:

A. Record / Scope that identifies the testing to be done and it must include:
B. List of your personnel’s competency and training to perform the testing.
C. List of all test equipment used in process and offline.
D. List of methods and standards used to calibrate the equipment.

6.13.2 External Labs located offsite from the Supplier

If you are sending out for measurement and testing, you must ensure that you use an accredited
lab and can provide proof of accreditation. BAE Systems prefers external labs be accredited to
known standards such as ISO 17025, ISO 10012:2004, or ANSI/NCSL Z540-1-1994.

1. Provide a copy of the lab company’s Third Party accreditation.

2. Results must be on company letterhead and include the following:
1. The name of the lab
2. Date of testing
3. Standards used for testing

6.14 Sample Parts

Sample parts are to be included and are to be the actual samples measured in the dimensional
analysis (Item 6.10). Sample parts are to be delivered with or before the PPAP submission.

The PPAP samples should be delivered with the label identifying them as PPAP Samples.

This is to avoid the PPAP sample parts being inadvertently misplaced or mixed up with production
parts.

28 of 29
 Document No. B45157
Revision: A
Date: 7 Feb 2019

6.15 Checking Aids

The purpose of this item is to provide evidence that the checking aids used to verify product exist
and have been properly validated.

There are many different types of checking aids. Examples of checking aids include but are not
limited to certified check fixtures, un-certified check fixtures, templates, custom gauges and test
equipment.

BAE Systems requires all checking aids to be verified as repeatable through an MSA study. The MSA
can be either attribute or variable depending on the type of checking aid in use.

6.16 Customer Specific Requirements

This item is to address BAE Systems specific requirements during PPAP submission.

BAE Systems will advise during the PPAP process on specific requirements as there may vary
depending on the scope of the project / product being supplied. This item is also utilized to flow
down requirements of BAE Systems customers to ensure these elements are captured during PPAP
submission.

29 of 29