Run at Rate Audit

Synthesis :
RUN@RATE PROCESS AUDIT

Auditor name:
Dpt (SQ/TSD/Supplier):
Audited component:
Part Number:
Supplier:
Parikshit
Plant location:
SQ
Bangalore, India
NPO Number:
Vane
Customer / Application
795030-0009
Drawing revision
INDO-US MIM TEC PVT LTD
Dash revision:
Launch Buyer / ISC Leader: Abel Francis
Audit date:
Objective of the Audit:
To know the actual capacity availbe against Quoted Capacty
Process audited:
Statement
All process against PFD, Control plan and PFMEA are audited.
Date
Initial audit
Number of criteria
1
2
3
115
Number of criteria
audited
Audit rating
Capacity
(OK/NOK)
Run@rate decision
(Passed/Open/Failed)
115
100.00%
OK
pass
Validation audit
Synthesis Process Audit

Positive Points
Were all points in APQP list closed ?

Reject rate (%) /
casting
Negative Points
Y
machining
<--- (print Y or N)
assy
others
Synthesis of the Run@rate capacity audit
Status
PASS
<--(print Y or N or N/A)
Agreed ramp up plan?
--> Y
(acceptation record from buyer / launch buyer)
Max customer demand (/day)
41667
Purchased capacity (/day)
34722
Demonstrated capacity (/day)
43806
PPAP decision
Full approval
Interim / Level
Rejected
NA
Interim recovery worksheet prepared and agreed with the supplier (Y/N)
Not assessed
Honeywell Representative Name / Signature
Form 5407_attachment A_rev C
APQP open issue list up-dated (Y/N)

Detail main reasons:
Supplier Representative Name / Signature
Y/N
Y
PPAP CHECK LIST AUDIT
SYNTHESIS BY CHAPTER
AUDITOR RESPONSIBLE:
Parikshit
EDITION: 2009
AUDIT DATE:
PROCESS AUDITED:
PAGE:
PART AUDITED:
Vane
2
Parikshit
1- Organization - procedures - documents ("D")

Number of criteria per rating
0
1
2
3
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
28
TOTAL
28
TOTAL
13
TOTAL
21
TOTAL
20
TOTAL
11
TOTAL
22
TOTAL
115
100%
2- People - workforce ("W")

0
1
2
3
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
13
100%
3- Component - Product - Material ("M")

0
1
2
3
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
21
100%
4- Equipment ("E")
0
1
2
3
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
20
100%
5- house keeping - conditions ("C")

0
1
2
3
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
11
100%
6- Documentation validation - see "Doc" worksheet

0
1
2
3
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
22
100%
GLOBAL
0%
20 %
4 0%
6 0%
Form 5407_attachment B_rev C
80%
1 00 %

0
1
2
3
115
Process Operations
Process Name
OP Number
Cycle time (no. of parts / time observed)
Process Operation 1 name
Molding
OP1
1600 / hr
Debinding
OP2
9000 / 7 hrs
Sintering
OP3
50000 / 24 hrs
Thermal Sintering
OP4
40000 / 8 hrs
Profile Grinding
OP5
260 / hr
Drilling
OP6
600 / hr
Barrelling
OP7
900 / hr
Ultrasonic Cleaning
OP8
440 / hr
Form 5407_attachment C_rev C
PPAP CHECK LIST AUDIT
SYNTHESIS BY AREA
EDITION: 2009
AUDITOR RESPONSIBLE:
Parikshit
AUDIT DATE:
PROCESS AUDITED:
PAGE:
PART AUDITED:
Vane
3
Parikshit
Reception / Shipment
0
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
25

1
2
TOTAL
25

1
2
TOTAL
37

1
2
TOTAL
31

1
2
TOTAL
93
100%
Process, all operations

0
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
37
100%
Quality
0
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
31
100%
GLOBAL
0%
20%
40 %
6 0%
80%
0
93
Global Confidence Level:

shows how many subjects were not missed from the audit
Form 5407_attachment D_rev C
100%
100%
not required
Not audited
NA: Not Audited

NR: Not Required
'0: Satisfactory
1: Potential failure: Action required
2: Non-conformity without impact on current production: Action required
3: Non-conformity with impact on current production: containment + action required
3 COMMENTS (MANDATORY IF QUOTED 1, 2 or 3)
1
2 22 0
PPAP Requirements
Team Feasibility Commitment or APQP open issue list with all points closed can replace TFC
Process Flow Chart / Should be identified the machines approved through current ppap and their placement
FMEA review evidences / risks >32/50 with actions, due date, responsibles, also CICs and KCCs identified
Control Plan / all characteristics from drawings and applicable standards controlled, CICs and KCCs identified
Measurement Systems Analyses (e.g. R&R) for all systems used to measure KCC and CIC, including BIAS when necessary
1
1
1
1
1
Measurement protocols validation or correlation results (important features, including attribute gages, mandatory
for new features, not validated in the past by the supplier)
Primary components PSW (full approved by Honeywell or, if not applicable, at least by supplier)
Functional tests evidence (like pouring simulation for casting) , when required
Honeywell property tooling identification evidences (e.g. pictures with toolings labels)
Shipping packaging specification, including pictures and materials used
Honeywell production site (named in PSW) approval for packaging specification
Quality Laboratory Competence 3rd party evidence (if not ISO/TS certified)
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
IMDS submission / accepted

Material and coating certificates (inclusive microstructure, mechanical properties, chemical composition as specified by
standard, released by supplier, also by external accreditated laboratory dated max. 1 year before)
Microstructure analyse for castings or where required by Honeywell standards, relevant in report
with number of cavities / toolings and parts complexity
Sample products when requested, ISIR (Initial Sample Inspection Report) relevant number of parts
Process Capability Studies / on CICs and KCCs, sampled from all toolings combinations, for HTT relevant statistic
characteristics being followed through PCD in SCC, otherwise being used Excel approved forms, normality tests being necessary before
using capability formulas
Cleanliness control reports, where applicable according drawings and QCI-9310-122

Appeareance reports when required, e.g. by IFP
Back to back measurements for transfers / new capacities, on relevant number of parts
1
1
1
Traceability evidence, when needed

Early production containment plan (standard 5 deliveries inforced control)
Interim recovery worksheet, if applicable
Capacity ramp-up plan if capacity buyed is not yet achieved, approved by the buyer
1
1
TOTAL
24 lines, confidence:
Form 5407_attachment E_rev C
100%
RUN @ RATE CALCULATION WORKSHEET
795030-0009
Honeywell T.T. Monitored
Type of Run @ Rate:
Honeywell T.T. Part Number:
Supplier Monitored
Supplier Name: INDO-US
MIM TEC LTD
J'
Part Number Rev. Level:
Supplier Code: 122666
Honeywell Part Name:
Supplier Contact Name: Natarajan.G
VANE
Program:
GTD 12
Manufacturing Address: Indo-Mim, Bangalore
Supplier Data
A.
PURCHASED CAPACITY
(PC) (quantity / week):
B.
Production Days [days /

week]:
Honeywell Turbo Technologies Data

208,333
please fill in all bordered blank cells to enable MAX CUSTOMER DEMAND
(MCD) [quantity / week]:
formulas
Workdays of Honeywell T.T. plant
[days / week]:
Purchased Daily Capacity

C.
[quantity / day]:
34722
Working Days per Year

D.
[days/ year]:
To be agreed by HTT and

supplier
230- Eu& North America
240- Korea
241- Japan
245- China
300- India
300
Planned Machine Loading:

Gross Hrs./Day( total shift
time)
[hrs / day]
Planned Machine Loading
E.
For Honeywell T.T.
[%]:
Planned Machine Loading
F.
For This Part
[%]:
Gross Hrs./Day allocated for
G.
this part [hrs / day]
D.
Supplier Tooling Information: (quantity, description, etc.)
700.0%
168.0
Planned
(by the supplier)
Date of Run@Rate:
Downtime during Run@Rate period
Data from the actual

Run@Rate. Used to
determine the status of the
Run@Rate.
Actual
20/05/2014
Duration of Run@Rate [hrs]:
8.0
minutes
hours
minutes
hours
breaks / shift change over
10
0.17
10
0.17
2.
lunch
30
0.50
30
0.50
3.
maintenance
part # changeover /
setup time
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
5.
unplanned
0.08
0.08
6.
Total [1 through 5]
45
0.75
45
0.75
7.
% Downtime
{=(H6 /G )}
[%]
Net Productive Time

I.
{=(F*(1-H7)
[hrs]
J.
Part Quantities Produced during the

Run@Rate
9.4%
9.4%
152.25
152.25
2090
1.
Total Parts
[# of ]
2100
2.
Rejected
[# of ]
3.
Net Good
2099
2086
4.
Net Parts / Hr
262.38
260.8
R@R Planning Data. Not for

determining final status.
ACTUAL DC
{=J1-J2}[#
{=J3 / G}
of ]
[# / hr ]
Production line / Tool Capacity / Schedule

K. Demonstrated Daily Capacity
[quantity / day]
L. Demonstrated Weekly Capacity [quantity / week]
MCD
44079
43806
34722
41667
262836
208333.333333333
208333.33333333
Capacity
Quality
Final Status
PASS
OPEN (Failed QTC)
OPEN (Failed MSV)
FAIL
*Consult with the Buyer
Rerun Date (if required):
Form 5407_attachment F_rev C
PC
264474
RUN @ RATE SUMMARY Result

ACTUAL DC > PC and ACTUAL DC > MCD
ACTUAL DC < PC but ACTUAL DC > MCD
ACTUAL DC > PC but ACTUAL DC < MCD
ACTUAL DC < PC and ACTUAL DC < MCD
Comments:
Action plan for capacity presented
20/05/2014
8.0
1.
4.
41667
[quantity / day]:
24
Run @ Rate Results:
H.
Daily volume
100.0%
Supplier Planning Data.

Used for preliminary runs
and adjustments.
G.
208,333
not required
not audited
Criteria
RECEPTION / SHIPMENT
NA: Not Audited
NR: Not Required
'0: Satisfactory
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
1
0
2
0
3
Organization, procedures, documents

Documentation
- Only sub-components from agreed suppliers ?
- Are the transport companies under contracts with HON TS / supplier to avoid quality risks?
RD1
- How are established the levels of quality control ? Criteria should be based on clear records
- Is material certificate checked by operator before raw material acceptance?
- Are the working instructions displayed where is needed for an apropriate control?
Lapsing/expiration
RD2 - Are the rules of lapsing/expiration defined (eg: elastomere for membranes, sand-cores, )?
- Is any expired good on the shelve? (or affected by environment but still in validity)
RD3
Flow
- Is a flow defined from raw material arrival up to supply to production lines?
- Is FIFO (First In First Out) defined?
- How FIFO is affected by parts reintroduced in flow by quality / tooken for final control
Storage and handling

RD4 - Is a working instruction defined to store and handle raw material?
- Are there protecting materials unsealed ? What are the actions in such case ?
RD5 Is the control plan adequate to meet the quality target ?
RD6 Is a ECP (Early Containment Plan) defined, in place, and adequate?
Non conformities
- Is the process defined to isolate non-conform components?
RD7 - Are the roles and responsabilities defined for scrap boxes management?
- Are the roles and responsabilities defined to manage storage of non-conforms?
- Is a rework procedure defined for components / finished goods? Agreed with HON TS?
Organization - procedures: Sub total

N
Criteria
People - workforce:
0
NA
0
NR
7
0
Training and qualification

RW1 - Is the operator understanding documentation supplied with raw material?
- Based on skills matrix, is the operator audited identified and competent?
Specific qualifications / quality risks

- Have the operators specific authorization to use specific devices (forklifts licence, non destructive
inspection , packaging materials .)
RW2
- Is the operator aware of quality risk at his operation?
- Is the operator aware of defined reaction procedure in case of non-conformities?
- What are the risks of having one gage out of calibration?
RW3
Knowledge/respect of procedures
- Is the control plan known and followed?
- Is the contingency plan / EPC known?
- Is the visual defect catalogue known?
Special characteristic and Safety / Regulation and ESD

- Is the operator aware of presence and justification of critical caracteristic?
RW4 - In case of SPC, is the operator aware of SPC rules and reaction modes?
- Does the operator know specific symbol?
- Why CIC are important? Give some examples of issues?
People - workforce : sub total
N
Criteria
Component - Product - Material
Product identification / status of parts
- Are the components identified in according to their status (part number, date of manufacturing,
RM1
before/after operation, control done/not done, )?
- Is there traceability back to raw material or sub supplier ?
RM2
Traceability / follow-up sheet

- Is the status of the product clearly defined at the operation (OP number, control status, )
Form 5407_attachment G_rev C
0
NA
0
NR
4
0
Quality records
- Are the controls done as per working instructions and control plan?
RM3 - Are associated records available?
- In the history of records, if non-conformity has been detected, has any containment activity been
rolled-out?
RM4
Product packaging
Is the packaging adequate to ensure product integrity?
Product change management

RM5 - Is the current revision of the drawing being used on process, documents, instructions?
- In case of various dash numbers, are the variants properly managed in the workshop?
- Has a pass-thru defect been detected out-side normal control plan?
RM6
- If yes, are the non-conform parts identified as per supplier procedure?
Component - Product Material : sub total
N
Criteria
Equipment (if applicable)
0
NA
0
NR
Identification of means (machines, gages)

RE1 - Are the gages and masters at the station identified?
- Are tools paid by Honeywell identified "HON TS propriatery"?
RE2
Capability/MSA
- Have the gages R&R studies been performed?
- Is the gage device adequate to measure the parameter?
- Does the manufaturing process demonstrate required capability as per QCI-9310-190?
0
2
0
3
0
1
0
2
0
3
4
0
0
1
25
0
100%
0.333
0
2
0
0
3
0

- Is the storage adequate to secure product integrity?
Non conformities
RE5 - Are the non conform parts identified, segragated and separated?
- Is there a quarantine area established, secured and properly identified?
Equipment : sub- total
N
Criteria
house keeping (conditions)
0
1
Poka-Yoke, mistake proofing

- Are the poka-yoke identified?
RE3
- Are the poka-yoke validated in accordance with the control plan?
- Are P-Y verified periodical?
RE4
5
0
1
0
NA
0
NR
5
0
RC1
Order, cleanliness and environment

- Is the warehouse clean?
- Storage rules are clear?
- Are all the parts stored in the offices properly identified ?
RC2
Lighting
- Is the lighting adequate in the quality inspection areas?
Flow
- Is the flow adequate to avoid mix, damages?
RC3 - Is FIFO respected?
- Is the single piece flow implemented? If not, is the justification acceptable?
- Is an access to all boxes (to pick the oldest)?
Health and safety

RC4 - Are the rules of safety defined and applied? (ear protection, masks, gloves )
- Are the working conditions compliant? (noise, vibration, smokes, temp, )
House keeping at workstation : sub total

N
Criteria
Total
Confidence level ( % ) 26 lines
Global contribution of confidence level
Legend
NR : Not required
NA : Not audited
0 : Satisfactory
1 : Potential failure: Action required
2 : Not conformity without impact on current production : Action required
3 : Not conformity with impact on current production : Containment+action required
Form 5407_attachment G_rev C
0
NA
0
0
NR
0
not required
not audited
Criteria
Process, all operations

NA: Not Audited
NR: Not Required
'0: Satisfactory
COMMENTS (MANDATORY IF QUOTED 1, 2 or 3)
Organization, procedures, documents

Documentation specific to the audited part:
- Are the working instructions displayed on workstation (dated and approved)?
- Is the control plan (or equivalent for operator level) displayed at the workstation?
PD1
- Is there a visual defect catalogue available and displayed?
- Is the procedure defined to avoid mixed components and finished goods?
- Are the record-sheets available as described in the control plan?
PD2
Lapsing/expiration
- Are the rules of lapsing/expiration defined (eg: elastomere for membranes, sand-cores, )?
Flow
PD3 - Is the flow between the operations defined?
- Is FIFO (First In First Out) defined?
Contingency plan
PD4 - In case of poka-yoke, machine or specific gage failure, is a procedure defined to contain the
process?
PD5

- Is the inter-operation packaging defined?
- Are the storage areas defined?
- Is the storage procedure taking care of cleanliness?
KCC and CIC

- Are all KCC and CIC identified in the control plan, P-FMEA and working instructions?
PD6 - Is statistical monitoring (eg: SPC) defined for each KCC / CIC?
- In particular, is 100% inspection for capabilities below required level in place? Notified on the control
plan?
Gages & machines (set-up, maintenance, use, calibration) for the specific part
- Is maintenance plan adhered to workstation?
- Are the machine settings parameters defined?
- Are the tool lists defined?
PD7 - Is the set-up and change-over procedure defined?
- Are the parts used for set-up managed in adequate manner (identification, ...)?
- Are the acceptance limits used for set-up taking into account the capabilities for each parameter?
- Is a procedure defined to ensure that gages are identified/calibrated periodically?
- Is the plan to manage/maintain/calibrate the poka-yoke clearly defined?
Training and skills

PD8 Is the skill matrix available and up-dated on regular basis?
Are operators trained to use quality instruments?
PD9 Is the control plan adequate to meet the quality target ?
PD10 Process flow has all elements needed ? (including P-Y, rework processes)
PD11 Is a ECP (Early Containment Plan) defined, in place, and adequate?
Are all the failure modes identified in the P-FMEA ? (see each dwg. + doc. statement)
- Are all RPN<32 (50) ?
Rework
- Are the parts susceptible to be reworked isolated, identified and protected against damages?
PD13 - Which are the possible reworks?
- Are the operators trained according to approved documents?
- How a reworked part is identified in HON TS plant?
Non conformities
PD14 - Are the roles and responsabilities defined for scrap boxes management?
- Is a rework procedure defined? Agreed with HON TS?
PD12

N
Criteria
People - workforce:
1
NA
0
NR
13
0
Specific qualifications
PW1 - If specific habilitation is required: does the operator have valid habilitation?
- Are enough people trained to cover the expected capacity?
- Is the working instruction known?
- Is the control plan known and followed (including filling of record-sheets)?
- Is the contingency plan known?
PW2 - Is the management of poka-yoke known?
- Is the visual defect catalogue known?
- Is the procedure of non-conformity management known and applied?
- Is the identification+storage procedure respected (eg: color boxes ...)?
- Are the records requested by the control available?
Quality risks
- Does the operator know what is the impact on the next operation?
PW3 - Does the operator know what is the impact on the final product?
- Is the operator aware of purpose of the poka-yoke?
- What are the risks of having one gage out of calibration?
Special characteristic and Safety / Regulation and ESD

- In case of SPC, is the operator aware of SPC rules and reaction modes?
PW4 - Does the operator know specific symbol?
- Does the operator understand what is a capability?
- Does the operator know if his machine is capable?

N
Criteria
- Are the components at the station identified according to their status (before/after operation, control
PM1 done/not done, )?
- Is the marking of the component in accordance with the HON TS specifications ?
- Are parts entering in an operation clearly segregated by the parts resulting from op?
PM2

- Is the status of the product clearly defined (OP number, control status, part number, )
Quality records
PM3 - Are associated records available?
rolled-out? Was it validated by qualified personnel?
PM4
Product packaging
- Is the internal operation packaging adequate to ensure product integrity?
Form 5407_attachment H_rev C
0
NA
0
NR
4
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
1
0
2
0
3
Applicable to OP no.

PM5 - Is the current revision of the drawing being used on process, documents, instructions?
Specials caracteristic et S/R

- Do all the KCC and CIC meet QCI-9310-190?
PM6 - Are the individual measurements of KCC (5 parts report) included in the capability distribution?
- In particular, is 100% inspection for capabilities below required level in place? Notified on the control
plan?
Product dimensional conformity

PM7 - Are all the dimensions recorded conform to HON TS specification?
- Are the parts in accordance with all QCIs (eg: 9310-020, 023, 024, 122, )?
Non conformities
- Has the normal control plan identified non-conformities?
- Has a pass-thru defect been detected out-side normal control plan?
- If yes, are the non-conform parts identified as per supplier procedure?
- Has proper containment plan been put in place?
- Were the non-conformities identified in the P-FMEA?
PM8

N
Criteria
Equipment
PE1
0
NA
0
NR

- Are the gages and masters at the station identified?
- Are tools paid by Honeywell identified "HON TS property"?
- Is a list of critical component available (which determine process stoppage)?
8
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
1
0
2
0
3
4
0
0
1
37
0
100%
0.333
0
2
0
0
3
0
Capability/MSA
- Have the gages R&R studies been performed (at least for all KCC and CIC)?
- Is the gage device adequate to measure the parameter? (eg: 3 points contact for circularity)
PE2 - Does the manufaturing process demonstrate required capability as per QCI-9310-190?
- Are statistical records documented? Analyzed? And corrective actions undertaken in timely manner?
- Are Scrap rate and rework at target (10% for cast and 5 % for machined)
- Are the equipment in place and fully operational (Final layout, automatic mode,....)

PE3 - Are the poka-yoke identified?
- Are the poka-yoke periodical validated in accordance with the control plan?
PE4
The toolings and machines used are deffinitive ?

- are they named in the process flow?
Contingency plan
- In the subsitute mode in case of poka-yoke failure available?
PE5
- How can be replaced a gage in case of accidental failure?
- What if a critical component of machines is failed and replaced by a different one?
PE6

- Is the storage adequate to secure product integrity?
Gages and machines (set-up, maintenance, use, calibration)

- Are the gages calibrated (date still valid)?
PE7 - Is the maintenance plan displayed on the machine and up-to date?
- Is a procedure in place to rotate operators at visual inspection station?
- Are spare parts for equipment and gages available ?
Non conformities
PE8 - Are the non conform parts identified, segragated and separated from the manufacturing process?

N
Criteria
house keeping - conditions
PC1
0
NA
0
NR

- Is the station clean? (machine, ground, toolings, )
- Is there any tooling or parts not stored in adequate area?
- Are all the parts stored out of standard (defined) places properly identified ?
Lighting
PC2 - Is the lighting adequate to perform visual inspection?
- Has the operator the necessary visual accuracy ?
PC3
Flow
- Is the flow adequate to avoid mix, damages?
- Is the single piece flow implemented? If not, is the justification acceptable?
- Is the ergonomy of the station adequate?
Health and safety

PC4 - Are the rules of safety defined and applied? (ear protection, masks, gloves )
- Are the working conditions compliant? (noise, vibration, smokes, temp, )
N
Criteria
Total
Confidence Level (%) 38 lines
Legend
NR : Not required
NA : Not audited
0 : Satisfactory
2 : Not conformity without impact on current production : Action required
3 : Not conformity with impact on current production : Containment+action required
Form 5407_attachment H_rev C
8
0
1
0
NA
1
0
NR
0
not required
not audited
Criteria
QUALITY DEPLOYMENT
NA: Not Audited
NR: Not Required
'0: Satisfactory
COMMENTS (MANDATORY IF QUOTED 1, 2 or 3)
Organization - procedures
QD1
Documentation specific to the audited part:

- Procedure related to gage management - known by people, respected ?
- Are all the latest QCI/PI/drawing revision available in quality department?
- Is the measurement protocol available?
- Is the measurement protocol validated by HON TS?
- Is a procedure defined to calibrate all gages?
QD2
Flow
- Is the flow for parts entering in quality department defined?
- How the parts are identified (process step, stage of inspection, date) ?
QD3
Capacity ramp-up plan

- Is ramp-up plan clear ?
- The quality risks are assessed?
- The delays are secured?
QD4

- Is a flow defined for parts arriving in metrology up to return in the workshop?
QD5
Special characteristics KCC and CIC

- Are the process capabilities assessed and reviewed on regular basis?
- Is a procedure defined to react in case of capabilities not reaching QCI-9310-190 requirements?
QD6
Gages & machines (set-up, maintenance, use, calibration) for the specific part
Are the gages seen on workstation recorded in a database ensuring periodic calibration and
conformity?
QD7
Actions in case of MSA/Capabilities NC

- Are run R&R values > 10 % ? What is done in such case?
- Is R&R NC value contained (e.g. by adjusting tollerance)? Alternative method investigated?
- Same if a capability is NC
QD8
Non conformities
- Are the roles and responsabilities defined for scrap boxes management?
- Is a rework procedure defined? Agreed with HON TS?

N
Criteria
People - workforce:
0
NA
0
NR
Training and qualification

QW1 - Is the quality operator/technician audited identified and certified (eventually a skill matrix)?
- Does quality dpt store production operators certification of various gage usage?
QW2
Specific qualifications
- If specific habilitation is required: does the operator/technician have valid habilitation ?
0
NA
0
NR
5
0

- Is product sampled identified in production records;
QM2 - Products reintroduced in flow are marked / recorded ?
- How the operators know quality decision?
- Quality decision is taken in real time ? (to not compromise eventual sorting operations)
Quality records
QM3 - Are associated records available? (including interpretation)
rolled-out?

QM5 - Is the current revision of the drawing being used on process, documents, instructions?
Special characteristics and S/R

QM6 - KCC and CIC controlled in metrology meet QCI-9310-190 ?
- The samples selected for capability studies are rapresentative for the entire batch ?
Full Dimensional report

- the parts are sampled from serial production?
- the dimensional reports are identifying all Honeywell hexagons (and numbers)?
QM7
- is selected at least 1 part / cavity / clamping device / specific tooling apparently identic?
- if the values for KCC / CIC are introduced in capability studies the capability remains OK?
- are all normal characteristics covered?
Form 5407_attachment I_rev C
0
2
0
3
Product packaging
- Is the internal operation packaging adequate to ensure product integrity?
0
1

- Are the components in quality areas identified OP / NC / controls / date / owner ?
QM4
0
3
Special characteristic and Environmental / Safety / Regulation

- In case of SPC, is the operator aware of SPC rules and reaction modes?
QW5 - Does the operator know specific symbol?
- Does the operator understand what is a capability?
- Does the operator know if his machine is capable?
QM1
0
2
Quality risks
- How an operator can know all gage are calibrated and in validity period?

Criteria
0
1
- Are the procedures known?
- Is the control plan known and followed (including filling of record-sheets)?
QW3 - Is the contingency plan known?
- Is the procedure of non-conformity management known and applied?
- Is the identification+storage procedure respected (eg: color boxes ...)?
- Are the records requested by the control available?
QW4
8
0
Product dimensional conformity

- Preferable to attended to full measurement on 2 parts (necessary for each config. different).
QM8 - Cleanliness analysis should be attended (not necessary / each audit if everything was OK).
- Are all the dimensions conform to HON TS specification?
- Are the parts in accordance with all QCIs (eg: 9310-020, 023, 024, 122, )?
Criteria
Equipment
QE1
0
NA
0
NR

- Are the gages and masters at the stations identified?
- Are they valid?
- Is the traceability ensured to national standards?
8
0
0
1
0
2
0
3
0
1
0
2
0
3
3
0
0
1
31
0
100%
0.333
0
2
0
0
3
0
Capability/MSA
- Have the gages R&R studies been performed? (results >10% or 30% contained)
QE2 - Is the gage device adequate to measure the parameter? (accuracy, specifics)
- Are statistical records documented? Analyzed?
- Are the equipment in place and fully operational (Final layout, automatic mode,....)

- Are all failure modes covered?
QE3 - Can be missed (by-passed)? See analyse also for production equipments
- Is periodical analysed against pre-defined parameters of normal functionality?
- Are kept records of periodical verifications? The parameters degradation is under control?
QE4
Substitution process
- Is the subsitute mode in case of gage failure available?

QE5
- Is the storage of quality equipments adequate to secure product integrity?
Correlation (max. 20% of tolerance / individual part admissible)

- min. on 2 parts (preferable 5);
QE6 - mandatory for all KCCs and CIC;
- necessary also for normal characteristics found in ISIR near tolerance limit;
- method and instruments should be clear for both HON TS plant and supplier
QE7
Non conformities
- Are the non conform parts identified, segragated and separated from the manufacturing process in
quality areas ?

Criteria
house keeping (conditions)
1
0
NA
0
NR

- Is the metrology room maintained under adequate ambiant temperature and humidity?
- Are the different gages isolated from ground vibrations?
QC1
- Is the station clean?
- Is there any tooling or parts not stored in adequate area?
- Are all the parts store in the officice properly identified ?
QC2
Lighting
- Is the lighting adequate?
Flow
QC3 - Is the flow adequate to avoid mix, damages?
- Is the ergonomy of the station adequate?
N
Criteria
Total
Confidence Level (%) 31 lines
Legend
NR : Not required
NA : Not audited
0 : Satisfactory
2 : Non-conformity without impact on current production : Action required
3 : Non-conformity with impact on current production : Containment+action required
Form 5407_attachment I_rev C
7
0
1
0
NA
0
0
NR
0

Run at Rate Audit

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Run at Rate Audit

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Synthesis :

RUN@RATE PROCESS AUDIT

INDO-US MIM TEC PVT LTD

Launch Buyer / ISC Leader: Abel Francis

To know the actual capacity availbe against Quoted Capacty

Synthesis Process Audit

Were all points in APQP list closed ?

Synthesis of the Run@rate capacity audit

Max customer demand (/day)

Purchased capacity (/day)

Demonstrated capacity (/day)

Honeywell Representative Name / Signature

Form 5407_attachment A_rev C

APQP open issue list up-dated (Y/N)

Supplier Representative Name / Signature

PPAP CHECK LIST AUDIT

1- Organization - procedures - documents ("D")

2- People - workforce ("W")

3- Component - Product - Material ("M")

5- house keeping - conditions ("C")

6- Documentation validation - see "Doc" worksheet

Form 5407_attachment B_rev C

Number of criteria per rating

Cycle time (no. of parts / time observed)

Process Operation 1 name

Process Operation 2 name

Process Operation 3 name

Process Operation 4 name

Process Operation 5 name

Process Operation 6 name

Process Operation 7 name

Process Operation 8 name

Form 5407_attachment C_rev C

PPAP CHECK LIST AUDIT

Number of criteria per rating

Number of criteria per rating

Number of criteria per rating

Number of criteria per rating

Process, all operations

Global Confidence Level:

Form 5407_attachment D_rev C

NA: Not Audited

3 COMMENTS (MANDATORY IF QUOTED 1, 2 or 3)

for new features, not validated in the past by the supplier)

IMDS submission / accepted

Cleanliness control reports, where applicable according drawings and QCI-9310-122

Traceability evidence, when needed

RUN @ RATE CALCULATION WORKSHEET

Honeywell T.T. Monitored

Type of Run @ Rate:

Honeywell T.T. Part Number:

MIM TEC LTD

Part Number Rev. Level:

Supplier Code: 122666

Honeywell Part Name:

Supplier Contact Name: Natarajan.G

Manufacturing Address: Indo-Mim, Bangalore

Production Days [days /

Honeywell Turbo Technologies Data

Purchased Daily Capacity

Working Days per Year

To be agreed by HTT and

Planned Machine Loading: