Template version 1.

7
Product Group: Stamping Incident Ref.: APQP PLAN
Site: LLC Ref.: TIP 001-2012
APU/Line: LLC Type: NON DETECTION
Tech. Product Line: Category: L1
Author: Responsibility: Supplier name:

INCIDENT
What was the problem? (5W+2H)
What happened? Project get delayed by 2 Weeks
Why is it a problem? It was a Logistic /Freight related problem
When detected? When Shipment date get dilayed as per timeline plan
Who detected?
Where detected? At JNPT With logistic Staff
How were the NC parts detected? When there was consistent failures,then it was detected
How many NC parts reported by Plan? one Shipment
How many NC parts sent to plan? one Shipment
What is the symptom? What is the root cause?

After analysis we found that the root cause was that we have changed
new freight forward for just time in important & urgent Project . Further
Insert here the BAD part or BAD Insert here the GOOD part or GOOD
When was there is company to company transaction in this case need
factor image factor image
to submit SVB which may to the extruded time for new Freight
forwarded to get approved.

BAD Part GOOD Part

WHAT WE LEARNED
BEFORE AFTER

should not deploy new frieght forwarded or suppliers for any new urgent important
Regular freight forwarded was aware and was processing all procedures & documentations
projects. Later to deploy new supplier as frieght forwarded Supplier Selection to be
required to clear trend technologies consignmnt.
approved after Audit & only after trial run approve business.

CONTROL FACTOR METHOD

projectsAfter approval only the supplier select for importnant What Delayed in project due to shipment date delay

CRITERIA How As per APQP Review meeting

What is conform? Project as per APQP Timeline ( Shipment dfate delay) Who Project manager

What is non-conform? Project delayed due to transportation . Where At APQP Summary Report

When At the project timing plan

STANDARD
Highest level of standard FMEA Type

Description of Standard(s) Reference / Rev. N° of Standard(s) RPN Before RPN After

POTENTIAL APPLICABILITY: Create a LLC ToDo to record / create transversalization.

Consequences if the corrective actions are not respected?

(cost, product failure, line stoppage, ...)
 LESSON LEARNED CARD
Template version 1.7
Product Group: Behr India ltd Incident Ref.: CC06
Site: Trend Technologies LLC Ref.: QA/06
APU/Line: Behr Assembly Line LLC Type: NON DETECTION
Tech. Product Line: Progressive Stamping Category: C1
Author: Shyamal/Santosh Responsibility: SUPPLIER Supplier name: Trend Technology

INCIDENT
What was the problem? (5W+2H)
What happened? Cracks appear during heater tank assembly
Why is it a problem? Wall thickness not ok as per requirement
When detected? 13/12/2013
Who detected? Customer QA
Where detected? Behr Assembly Line
How were the NC parts detected? Crack found at heater tank due to less wall thickness
How many NC parts reported by Brose? 200 Nos
How many NC parts sent to Brose? 200 Nos
What is the symptom? What is the root cause?

Occurance : ( *Crack appear during hearter tank assembly * The

Insert here the BAD part or BAD factor
image
Thinning observed on part.
Required thickness 0.7(Min) but
observed 0.65
radius of wall thickness required 0.7 mm found 0.65 mm * Due to radius
of die plate less than requirement * R3 value placed in radius due to
Insert here the GOOD part or GOOD process validation has not been done as per frequency through DOE
factor image approach. ) Detection : * This criteria has not been addressed in the
control plan and inprocess inspection checklist.* In FMEA risk analysis
it has not been addressed * This criteria has not been detected in the
reverse FMEA.
OK Part

BAD Part GOOD Part

WHAT WE LEARNED
BEFORE AFTER

The correct radius ensured through process validation and 1 st .Pc. Inspection it to be
Rejection occurred due to the wall thickness is not as per requirement in Heater tank
detected ensuring that the wall thickness as per requirement.

CONTROL FACTOR METHOD

The process validation to be conducted through DOE approach regarding die radius and control
What Wall thickness inspection during 1st piece and inprocess.
plan inprocess inspection checksheet and FMEA revised

CRITERIA How Through point micro meter

What is conform? Wall thickness as per requirement Who Inspector

What is non-conform? Wall thickness less as per requirement. Where Workstation

When During 1st piece and inprocess.

STANDARD
Highest level of standard FMEA Type
PROCESS
Description of Standard(s) Reference / Rev. N° of Standard(s) RPN Before RPN After

8-D 70

POTENTIAL APPLICABILITY: Create a LLC ToDo to record / create transversalization.

Consequences if the corrective actions are not respected?

Product Reject at Customer End
(cost, product failure, line stoppage, ...)
 LESSON LEARNED CARD
Template version 1.7
Product Group: Incident Ref.:
Site: LLC Ref.:
APU/Line: LLC Type:
Tech. Product Line: Category:
Author: Responsibility: Supplier name:

INCIDENT
What was the problem? (5W+2H)
What happened?
Why is it a problem?
When detected?
Who detected?
Where detected?
How were the NC parts detected?
How many NC parts reported by Valeo?
How many NC parts sent to Valeo?
What is the symptom? What is the root cause?

Insert here the BAD part or BAD Insert here the GOOD part or GOOD Insert here the 5 Why analysis, with a highlight on the 'Why' addressed
factor image factor image in this LLC.

BAD Part GOOD Part

WHAT WE LEARNED
BEFORE AFTER

CONTROL FACTOR METHOD

What

CRITERIA How

What is conform? Who

What is non-conform? Where

When

STANDARD
Highest level of standard FMEA Type

Description of Standard(s) Reference / Rev. N° of Standard(s) RPN Before RPN After

POTENTIAL APPLICABILITY: Create a LLC ToDo to record / create transversalization.

Consequences if the corrective actions are not respected?

(cost, product failure, line stoppage, ...)