WORKING IN THE

AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

MIND SET, SKILL SET & TOOL SET

FOR PEOPLE WORKING IN THE AUTOMOTIVE INDUSTRY

H. Broekman; D. Ekert; M.I. Kollenhof

A.E. Riel; H.C. Theisens; R. Winter

FIRST EDITION

Lean Six Sigma Academy©

LSSA BV, 2017

Amstelveen, the Netherlands

3
 Title: Working in the Automotive Industry
Mindset, Skill set & Tool set for people working in the automotive industry

Author: H. Broekman; D. Ekert; M.I. Kollenhof; A.E. Riel; H.C. Theisens; R. Winter

Graphics: R. Verreijt

Publisher: Lean Six Sigma Academy

LSSA BV, 2017
Amstelveen, the Netherlands

Contact: Contact us or visit our website for more information, volume discounts,
online sales and training material licensing.

www.lssa.eu
info@lssa.eu

1e edition, 2017
ISBN 978-94-92240-15-6
NUR 100

Printed in the Netherlands

The “Automotive Engineer” project is financially supported by the European

Commission in the Erasmus+ Lifelong Learning Programme under the project
number 2014-1-NL01-KA200-001189. The project’s website and publications
reflect the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held
responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

4
 1.2 Characteristics in the Automotive

Learning Objectives
1. Understand how products and processes are released within the automotive industry.
2. Understand what change notifications are and why they are necessary.
3. Recall what customer requirements and expectations, and their roles are.
4. Understand what customer focus means.
5. Understand the engineering job roles in the automotive industry.
6. Recall how these job roles differ from each other.

1.2.1 Product and Process Release

Supplying to an automotive company cannot just start from one day to another. An automotive company
always needs evidence that the products and processes of a supplier meet their requirements. Therefore,
a formal product and process release by the customer will take place.

In case of changes on products, a change notification process must be started [see also 3.4.2]. The supplier
sends a change notification to the customer. The next step is the customer reviewing the change
notification and the consequences of the impending change for the customer’s product and process. After
approval and submission of all necessary evidence, the customer can release the changed product for serial
production.

Different tools can be used for those releases. The most common are Production Part Approval Process
(PPAP) and VDA Volume 2 Quality Assurance for Supplies, Production process and Product approval (PPA).
VDA is the German Association of the Automotive Industry. The VDA published a series of standards and
recommendations. Among those is the VDA Volume 2.

The purpose is to determine whether all customer engineering design records (for example, a drawing) and
specification requirements are properly understood by the supplier. Another purpose is to demonstrate
that the supplier’s manufacturing process has the potential to produce products that consistently meet all
requirements during an actual production run. In paragraph 3.3, the product and process release using
PPAP or PPA will be further discussed.

1.2.2 Customer Focus

An automotive supplier serves many customers, each using different products. Each customer will have
different needs for those products and each will have different requirements. To meet everyone’s needs,
the automotive supplier must be customer focused. This means that a supplier should understand current
and future customer needs, meet customer requirements and strive to exceed customer expectations.

Customer focus is usually a strong contributor to the overall success of a business. You have to ensure that
all company aspects put customer satisfaction first. Customer focus also includes maintaining effective
customer relations.

To be aware of customer needs and requirements, a supplier must maintain a good communication process
with customers. The more the supplier knows about his customers, the better he is able to help out.
Research each customer thoroughly, and ask questions that deepen the understanding. Such knowledge

24
will make selling easier and increase the percentage of prospects that become customers. With current
customers, a supplier will reach a higher level of customer satisfaction.

Another good element of customer focus is working on a strong relationship with the customers. The
supplier should show the corporate strategy that matches with the strategy of the customer. A supplier
should sell solutions instead of a product. Think long-term partnership, rather than short-term sales goals.

Identifying Customers and their Requirements

To become customer-focused, different steps are important:

• Identify the customer. A supplier must identify all external customers who use their products and
also potential customers who might start using the products in the future.
• Determine the customer’s requirements. A key part of good customer-focused service and a quality
management system is defining the customer’s needs and requirements for each product they use.
Not only are the technical requirements important, but also the customers’ application of the
product. One may use a product differently from another. A supplier needs to know how and under
what circumstances their product will be used by the customer. For example, a brake system that
is used in a truck for road transport has different technical requirements than a brake system that
is used in a truck that rides the Dakar rally. At high level, the same brake system, but each customer
has different needs.

The first step after defining the customer needs is a translation of these needs into functional requirements,
technical requirements, product specifications and process parameters. All these requirements and
parameters should be linked to each other to be able to meet customer requirements and needs. A supplier
has to implement a good requirements management process. It is important that everyone in the company
is aware of customer needs and requirements. Every automotive supplier should have a good internal
communication process to communicate customer needs and expectations throughout the organization.
Especially in environments where the customer needs and expectations quickly change, a good
communication process is very important.

25
 1.2.3 Job roles

Engineers in the automotive industry are involved in the design, manufacture, operation, service and
maintenance/repair of vehicles, such as automobiles, buses and trucks and their respective engineering
subsystems. They are involved in the whole product design life cycle [see also 2.1] from the initial concept
through to delivery, but generally work in one of these main areas:

• Design engineering.
• Research and Development (R&D).
• Test engineering.
• Quality engineering.
• Process engineering.

Engineers in this field need to have a combination of engineering and commercial skills in order to deliver
projects within budget. Once established, they usually specialize in a particular area, for example structural
design, exhaust systems or engines.

Typical Work Activities

Automotive engineers usually specialize in a particular area of work. Typical functions and work activities
may include:

• Design engineer (mechanical, software, electrical, system):

o designing and producing visual interpretations of automobiles and their component.
o innovating, researching and developing new designs for components on automobiles.
o preparing material and design specifications.
o deciding on the most appropriate materials for component production.
o developing and supporting software packages.

• R&D engineer:
o studying the energy, environmental and safety aspects of the planned work.
o undertaking relevant research.
o developing and realizing innovative ideas and concepts in mechanics, electrics, electronics,
software, etc.

• Test engineer:
o developing and implementing test procedures.
o organizing and carrying out tests.
o interpreting and analyzing results and data.
o writing reports and documentation.

• Quality engineer (supplier, customer, system):

o investigating failures or unexpected production and field problems.
o making improvements to vehicles and/or process in response to customer feedback.
o measuring, assessing and reporting on the quality performance of a supplier.
o establishing improvement processes at suppliers.
o verifying and validating of production/assembly lines.

26
• Process engineering (production, assembly, equipment):
o ensuring continuous improvement of production processes.
o assisting in the prevention of process failure.
o developing new assembly methods.

1.2.4 Specification documentation

There is a difference between customer requirements and expectations. Requirements are the technical
requirements most times defined on an engineering drawing or specification. But besides these technical
requirements, a customer often has some expectations which sometimes are not clearly defined on an
engineering drawing or specification.

Customer Expectations
There is a difference between customer requirements and expectations. Requirements are the technical
requirements most times defined on an engineering drawing or specification. But besides these technical
requirements, a customer often has some expectations which sometimes are not clearly defined on an
engineering drawing or specification.

Besides the technical requirements like dimensions, type of material, etc., most customers expect the
products they receive to have a certain level of cleanliness. Cleanliness means the level of contamination
of components used in a vehicle. Cleanliness is often required in customer documentation, but the
expectation is not always clear, like “state of the art”. Another example of customer expectation is the
degree of damage. Often, customers expect no damage. But what means no damage? Is there a small
scratch allowed?

Translating this vague expectation into a clear requirement helps understand the voice of the customer.
Example of a clear requirement is the allowed number of scratches at a given surface area of a certain size.
For example: two scratches of maximum one micron on each square centimeter.

To reach the highest level of customer satisfaction, it is important to understand the customer expectations
as well and not only focus on the technical requirements defined on an engineering drawing or
specification.

Customer Specific Requirements

Most automotive customers not only have product requirements, but they also have some requirements
for the processes, production and quality management system of an automotive supplier. These
requirements are often defined in so-called customer specific requirements manual or a supplier quality
manual. Customer specific requirements are often based on IATF 16949 (priory ISO/TS 16949), the quality
standard in the automotive industry. IATF 16949 is explained in the paragraph 1.3.

27
 Summary

Being focused on the customer is one of the main challenges for suppliers in the automotive industry.
Customer focus means knowing your customer and meeting customer requirements and expectations.
Establishing a good relationship with the customer and good communication processes helps the company
to become customer focused.

Besides the technical requirements, a customer often has some expectations which are not on an
engineering drawing or specification. These expectations are focused on, for example, cleanliness or the
degree of damage.

There are different automotive engineering job roles. In general, automotive engineers are involved in the
whole product design life cycle, from the initial concept through to delivery and beyond. In general, they
work in design, research and development, production or quality processes.

Keywords in paragraph 1.2:

• Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) • Customer Requirements

• Verband der Automobilindustrie (VDA) • Customer Expectations
• Production Process and Product • Customer Satisfaction
Approval (PPA) • Cleanliness
• Customer Focus • Customer Specific Requirements Manual
• Customer Needs • Supplier Quality Manual
• Functional Requirements, • IATF 16949
• Technical Requirements, • Product Design Life Cycle
• Product Specifications • Job Roles
• Process Parameters • Design Engineer
• R&D Engineer
• Test Engineer
• Quality Engineer
• Process Engineer

28
1.3 Legislation, Regulation and Standards

Learning Objectives
1. Recall different laws, regulations, and directives important in the automotive industry.
2. Understand the term “homologation”.
3. Recall the most common standards in the automotive industry.
4. Recall the key objectives and concepts underlying the several norms and standards in the automotive
industry.
5. Recall the complexity and the relations between these several norms and standards.

1.3.1 Legislation and Regulations

The main challenge of the automotive industry lies nowadays with the compliance of the increasing number
or rules and norms, especially in the areas of environmental protection and safety. Manufacturers of motor
vehicles, automotive systems and their components have to comply with these regulations based on the
destination country of their product.

The regulations often differ very much from country to county (e.g., USA, Japan and Europe), therefore they
have to be considered already in the development phase. Currently, it is not possible to produce a car that
complies with the USA and EU regulations. Therefore, most of the manufactures are producing vehicles for
left-hand, right-hand and the US market.

Automotive homologation is the process of certifying vehicles or components in a vehicle if they match the
requirements laid out by various statutory regulatory bodies in the destination country. Homologation is
mandatory in order to export automotive products or components.

The homologation process has several steps:

• Component approval.
• Component fitting to the vehicle.
• System approval.
• Whole Vehicle Type Approval (WVTA).

Currently, there are about 40 system approvals (breaks, steering, lights...) required in a vehicle. With the
European 'Whole-Vehicle-Type-Approval' (WVTA), manufacturers can approve a vehicle “type” in one
member state and sell it in all other EU member states without further approvals.

EU Regulations and Directives

In Europe, there are three basic types of EU legislation: regulations, directives and decisions. A regulation
is a binding legislative act. It is similar to a national law and must be applied in all EU countries. A directive
is a legislative act that sets out general rules to be transferred into national law; it is up to each Member
State to decide how. A decision is related to specific cases and directed to an EU country, persons or
organizations.

The Regulation EC 443/2009 [5] and its amending Regulation 333/2014 [5] had a big impact on the
automotive industry and its development to reduce the C02 emissions for new passenger cars. This
regulation mandates that new cars registered in the EU do not emit more than an average of 130 grams of
CO2 per kilometer by 2015. By 2021, the average should reduce to 95 grams of CO2 per kilometer. Due to

29
 this regulation, carmakers started to reduce the weight of the vehicle, by using lightweight materials for
the vehicle body, replacing pure mechanical and hydraulic components with lighter and more efficient
mechatronic systems (e.g., steering gear), and downsizing and optimizing the internal combustion engine.

The vehicle type-approvals can be issued according to national regulations or EC regulations (Directives
2002/24/EC, 2003/37/EC, 2007/46/EC):

• Directive 2002/24/EC: type-approval of two or three-wheel motor vehicles.

• Directive 2003/37/EC: type-approval of agricultural or forestry tractors, their trailers and
interchangeable towed machinery, together with their systems, components and separate
technical units.
• Directive 2007/46/EC: establishing a framework for the approval of motor vehicles and their
trailers, and of systems, components and separate technical units intended for such vehicles.

These directives set out the safety and environmental requirements that vehicles have to comply with
before being placed on the EU market.

Technical requirements are set out in: Regulation 661/2009, concerning type-approval requirements for
the general safety of motor vehicles, their trailers and systems, components and separate technical units
intended therefor.

Another legislation which is tightly linked to the materials used in the automotive industry is the End-of-
Life Vehicles (ELV) EU Directive 2000/53/E. The goal of this directive is to increase the rate of re-use and
recovery and reduce the quantity of waste that occurs when motor vehicles are junked.

The rate of re-use and recovery (in average weight per vehicle and year) should reach:

• 85% no later than 1 January 2006.

• 95% no later than 1 January 2015.

The rate of re-use and recycling (in average weight per vehicle per year) should reach:

• 80% no later than 1 January 2006.

• 85% no later than 1 January 2015.

According to the End-of-life vehicle statistics [6], all reporting EU Member States were in compliance with
the recycling targets. Italy was the only Member State that did not comply with the recovery and reuse
target in 2012, having achieved a share of 82.3 %. A list of all EU Directives, Regulations and Decisions can
be found on the EUR-LEX website: http://eur-lex.europa.eu.

30
Product Liability
Great care is taken when vehicles are being manufactured. However, there is still a slight chance that vehicle
parts may be defective. If a defect is more common in particular vehicles and involves a risk of physical
injury, the manufacturer of the vehicle must organize a product recall. In the event of a product recall,
producers and distributors recall the vehicle or vehicle part in order to resolve a defect.

Therefore, one of the most influential laws in the automotive industry is the product liability and safety law,
which has a big impact on the car industry and is the basis for the fact that manufacturers sometimes have
to recall thousands of cars.

The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe agrees on product liability and safety requirements
worldwide. The EU then creates European directives, and all member states have a timeline to implement
that in the national law.

The EU Directive concerning product liability and product safety are the Directive 85/374/EEC [7]and the
Directive 2001/95/EC [8]. The objective of the 85/374/EEC is that the producer of a product is liable for
damages caused by a defect in his product. The purpose of the Directive 2001/95/EC is to ensure that
products placed on the market are safe. Article 5 of the Directive 2001/95/EC states:

“Within the limits of their respective activities, producers shall provide consumers with the relevant
information to enable them to assess the risks inherent in a product throughout the normal or reasonably
foreseeable period of its use, where such risks are not immediately obvious without adequate warnings,
and to take precaution against these risks.

Where producers and distributors know or ought, to know, on the basis of the information in their
possession and as professionals, that a product that they have placed on market poses risks to the consumer
that are incompatible with the general safety requirement, they shall immediately inform the competent
authorities of the Member State thereof under conditions laid down in Annex I, giving details, in particular,
of action taken to prevent risk to the consumer.”

Directive 2001/95/EC is the base for the market surveillance, to ensure that only safe products are placed
in the markets in the European Union.

The above directives effectively mean that if a problem arises which represents a hazard for the consumers,
the manufacturer must inform the public, must recall the cars and repair them, or even withdraw the cars
from the market and refund the users. The manufacturer has the burden of proof that the product was not
defective.

Due to the increase of complexity in car design (caused by the integration of electronic, software, mechanics
and vehicle functions spanning across components), more and more cases become visible. The EU Member
States have implemented the Directives in their laws, e.g., in Germany, Directive 85/374/EEC was
implemented in the Produkthaftungsgesetz and the 2001/95/EC in the Produktsicherheitsgesetz.

The Directives had a direct big impact on the quality and safety engineering required for the car industry.
Therefore, a growing number of quality management and functional safety standards (e.g. ISO 26262) were
being implemented across all manufacturers and suppliers.

31
 1.3.2 Standards

In the automotive industry, there are numerous standards. They are developed and published by one or
several standardization organizations or bodies. Also OEMs have a lot of standards. Most standards in the
automotive industry were published by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) and the
Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE). We can usually distinguish between standards which apply to an
organization and/or process and standards which apply to a product. The ISO/TS 16949 [9] is probably the
most well-known and widely recognized standard in the automotive industry. It was developed by the
International Automotive Task Force (IATF), in conjunction with the International Organization for
Standardization (ISO). The ISO/TS 16949 is based on the ISO 9001, including or supplementing existing
requirements with new requirements specific for the automotive industry. It is targeted towards any
organization in the automotive & motorcycle supply chain. It defines the quality management system
requirements for the design and development, production and, when relevant, installation and service of
automotive-related products. The ISO/TS 16949 aligns and supersedes existing automotive quality system
standards, such as QS-9000, EAQF 94, VDA 6, AVSQ ‘94, and ASQ. To become certified according to ISO/TS
16949, an automotive supplier has to work according to automotive core tools (reference documents), such
as:

• Advanced Product Quality Planning [10] – a structured approach to the design and development of
products and processes.
• Production Part Approval Process [11] – formal release by the customer of a supplier’s product and
process.
• Failure Mode Effect Analysis [12] – risk analysis tool in which a supplier analyses the major risks of
not fulfilling the required functions in the current design or process.
• Measurement System Analysis [13] – evaluation of the reliability of the measurement systems used
by a supplier in its process.
• Statistical Process Control [14] – a method of quality control which uses statistical methods to
monitor and control a process.
• 8D Problem Solving – structural approach to analyze problems. Core steps of 8D are root causes
analysis and implementation of measures to prevent the problem from occurring again.

IATF 16949:2016
In October 2016 the IATF 16949:2016 1st edition has been published. This international standard cancels
and replaces the ISO/TS 16949 3rd edition. In the preparation of the determination of the requirements for
this new Automotive QMS Standard, feedback was requested from certification bodies, auditors, suppliers,
and OEMs to create IATF 16949:2016. IATF 16949 is aligned with and refer to the most recent version of
ISO 9001. The most important additions of IATF compared to ISO/TS are:

• Requirements for safety related parts and processes.

• Enhanced requirements with respect to product traceability (latest regulatory changes).
• Requirements for products with embedded software.
• Clarification of the requirements with respect to sub-tier supplier management and development.
• Requirements with respect to corporate responsibility.

32
In addition, a number of subjects are defined more clearly and more specific. In order to achieve an effective
utilization of end-of-life vehicles directives, a good start is the implementation of the ISO 14001 [15]
standard. The standard outlines how to put an effective environmental management system in place and
help organizations to minimize their environmental impact.

With the increasing complexity of car components and their safety-critical functionality, the following two
standards focusing on the development of mechatronic systems, have been established in the automotive
industry:

• Automotive SPICE® [16]as a common framework for the evaluation of the supplier’s software
process capability.
• ISO 26262 [17] as road vehicle specific adaptation of the Functional Safety standard IEC 61508 for
electric/electronic/programmable electronic systems.

The above mentioned standards are focused mainly on the organization and its processes. However, there
is also a wide set of Embedded Software standards towards technology level. The most common are:

• AUTOSAR (AUTomotive Open System ARchitecture) – the worldwide Automotive standard for
Electrical/ Electronic systems.
• OBD-II (On-Board Diagnostic) – specifies the type of diagnostic connector and its pinout, the
electrical signaling protocols available, and the messaging format.
• CAN (Controller Area Network) – the de-facto standard serial communications protocol for
embedded systems.
• FlexRay - robust, scalable, deterministic, and fault-tolerant digital serial bus system designed for
use in automotive applications.
• MOST (Media Oriented Systems Transport) - the de-facto standard for multimedia and
infotainment networking in the automotive industry.

In addition to the international standardization bodies, associations such as the VDA (German Association
of the Automotive Industry) or Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) also publish standards for the
automotive industry (e.g., VDA 6.1 or APQP/PPAP). In addition to that, carmakers have their own norms
(e.g., VW NORM) which also have to be considered/implemented by their suppliers.

33
 Summary

The automotive industry is highly regulated by various laws, directives and regulations, especially when
vehicle safety or environmental protection is in question. From the consumer point of view, the product
liability and safety law in the member states of the European Union ensures that if a problem arises which
represents a hazard for consumers, the manufacturer must inform the public, recall the cars and repair
them, or even withdraw the cars from the market and refund the users.

Like other industry branches, in the automotive industry, there are several different standards applicable
to the quality management system, development, functional safety, communication, etc. The most well-
known and widely recognized is the IATF 16949 targeted towards any organization in the automotive and
motorcycle supply chain.

Keywords in paragraph 1.3:

• Compliance • IATF 16949

• Homologation • QS-9000
• Whole Vehicle Type Approval (WVTA) • EAQF 94
• Regulations • VDA 6 / VDA 6.1- AVSQ ‘94
• Directives • ASQ
• Decisions • Automotive core tools
• Regulation EC 443/2009 • Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP)
• Regulation 333/2014 • Production Part Approval Process (PPAP)
• Directive 2002/24/EC • Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA)
• Directive 2003/37/EC • Measurement System Analysis (MSA)
• Directive 2007/46/EC • Statistical Process Control (SPC)
• Requirements (Safety, Environmental, • 8D
Technical) • ISO 14001
• Regulation 661/2009 • Automotive SPICE®
• Directive 2000/53/E • IEC 61508
• Product Recall • AUTomotive Open System ARchitecture
• Product Liability and Safety Law (AUTOSAR)
• Product Liability • On-Board Diagnostic (OBD-II)
• Safety Requirements / Product Safety • Controller Area Network (CAN)
• Directive 85/374/EEC • Media Oriented Systems Transport (MOST)
• Directive 2001/95/EC • AIAG
• European Product Liability Provisions
• ISO 26262
• International Organization for
Standardization (ISO)

34
1.4 Process Thinking

Learning Objectives
1. Understand the primary process of a company.
2. Understand the automotive process landscape.
3. Recall that changes on product and process have consequence(s).
4. Understand the multidisciplinary (process) approach.

1.4.1 Primary Processes

Within an organization, there are a lot of processes. During a process, the input will transform into output.
This is called transformation. Sometimes, transformation is the transportation of a product from A to B. In
an organization, several processes are linked to each other. The output from one process can be input for
another process.

For an organization to function effectively, it has to determine and manage numerous linked activities. An
activity or set of activities using resources, and managed in order to enable the transformation of inputs
into outputs, can be considered a process. Often, the output from one process directly forms the input to
the next.

Figure 6: Process

In every organization, there are processes that are jointly focused on satisfying the customer. The amount
and complexity of the processes depend on the size and nature of the organization. It is important to have
a clear overview of all the processes. To keep the overview, we distinguish management, primary and
supporting processes. The primary process should be focused on customer satisfaction. It starts with
defining customer requirements and needs, and ends with delivery of the product to the customer. All the
necessary activities in between are part of the primary process. In quality standards like IATF 16949 and ISO
9001, the primary process is called the product realization process.

Supporting processes are other business processes. Their task is to do everything necessary so that the
primary process can do its job without disruption. Supporting processes provide resources for the primary
process, like machines, people, information, etc. Examples of supporting processes are processes related
to human resources, administration, IT system administration, maintenance, etc. Management processes

35
 are responsible for determining the strategy and objectives of an organization. In general, management
processes are responsible for the control of the organization.

Figure 7: Overview of different process within an organization

1.4.2 Automotive Process Landscape

To design a vehicle, multiple disciplines are required. Not only is the car’s technique important, but also the
design and look and feel of the car. All these disciplines must work together to design the vehicle:

• What materials will we use? Carbon, aluminum or plastic.

• What kind of engine will we use? Petrol, diesel, battery or hydrogen.

A multidisciplinary approach is thus necessary to design a vehicle. So-called simultaneous engineering

teams (SE-Teams) should be working together in the development of a vehicle.

The designer can come up with something very beautiful, but if the engine does not fit, we will have a
vehicle that does not meet OEM/customer demands. The complexity of the car has only increased in recent
years, making it necessary for more disciplines to be involved in the development of a new vehicle. For
example, think of the software in vehicles as an alternative for the combustion engines, safety features,
etc. Especially during development, a lot of disciplines need to work together, in particular electronics and
software. This is difficult because in a lot of companies, these disciplines are typically separated in
organization departments, which makes collaboration very difficult.

This also applies to the production of vehicles. To produce a vehicle, there are many suppliers needed for
the production of different parts. The more complicated the production process of the vehicle, the more
the supplier will be involved in it. The processes of the automotive industry are linked in such a way, using
Just In Time (JIT) and Kanban principles, that all parts are delivered just in time at the assembly plant. When
a supplier is too late, the factory will stop production. JIT and Kanban principles will be explained in
paragraph 4.2.

The examples above emphasize the need for a multidisciplinary approach, not only in design, development
and production of vehicles, but also in supporting processes like claim handling.

36
1.4.3 Changes on Product and Process

Special attention should be paid to changes on product and production processes. These changes must
always be reviewed in multidisciplinary teams. A salesman cannot oversee the consequences of a small
change on the product asked for by the customer. He needs the input from technical designers and
production operators.

An example to illustrate: workers in production cannot change something in their standard work (SOP:
Standard Operating Procedure without consulting other disciplines. They might have ideas about
simplifying their activities by leaving out a bolt, for example, but they cannot oversee the consequences for
the customer. They also need input from other processes. So in case of any change, a multidisciplinary
approach is necessary.

1.4.4 Multidisciplinary Approach & Simultaneous Engineering

"You cannot make a tasty omelet with rotten eggs."

This phrase expresses very well that as an employee, you are responsible for your own activities and that
there should be a process owner, someone who is overall responsible for a complete (sub) process.
However, the input of your process will affect the quality of the complete process. Everything that goes
wrong in an earlier stage can be difficult to repair later. Everything has to be First Time Right (FTR).

Crossing different departments is one of the main principles of multidisciplinary approach. A lot of
companies still work from separate "boxes", also called departments.

Figure 8: Thinking in departments

One department does its job and pushes its output to the next department. Here, the following section
picks it up and does its job. It is important not to think in boundaries but to secure that everyone is thinking
in processes. Avoid focusing on your department only, but aim to control the whole process from beginning
to end.

The final product is not the most important part. Every step in the process is equally important to come to
the final product. Once the final product is there (right or wrong), nothing can change the final result, except
repairing the product or throwing the product away. It is clear that this is a waste of, time, material, energy
and thus, a waste of money.

37
 Therefore, follow the next rules:

• Do not accept errors made by colleagues or during other processes.

• Avoid making errors yourself.
• Avoid passing errors to the next process.

From the beginning of the process, everything should be first time right. When an error occurs, it should be
immediately detected and repaired. The cause of the error should be eliminated as well to prevent
reoccurrence. Faulty products should never continue to be used in to the process, as the expenses of the
error will increase – due to additional time, money and material the later we detect faults. It is therefore
necessary to detect errors as soon as possible, before the final result.

38
Summary

The primary process should be focused on customer satisfaction. It starts with defining customer
requirements and needs and ends with delivery of the product to the customer. All the necessary activities
in between are part of the primary process / product realization process. Supporting processes like human
resources, administration, IT system administration, maintenance, etc. must ensure that the primary
process can do its job without disruption.

To control risks, it is necessary to look across all departments of an organization. Crossing different
departments is one of the main principles of a multidisciplinary process approach. ‘Do not only work from
your own "box", also called department’.

Process approach also means a multidisciplinary approach. People from different processes come together
to control risks in, for example, product and process development. Also, in other processes, a
multidisciplinary approach is necessary, especially in the case of changes to product or processes and claim
handling. Multidisciplinary teams can include suppliers, customers or other interested parties.

Keywords in paragraph 1.4:

• Process Thinking • Simultaneous Engineering Teams (SE-

• IATF 16949 Teams)
• ISO 9001 • First Time Right (FTR)
• Process • Multidisciplinary Approach
• Management Process
• Primary Process
• Supporting Processes
• Automotive Process Landscape

39
 1.5 Summary

The automotive industry has a long history. Since the first car was produced in 1889 by the French company
Panhard et Levassor, the sector can be characterized by several important periods. The demand for cars
increased rapidly after World War I. Cars became more practical and comfortable, and the production of
components were outsourced to specialized suppliers. After World War II, technological developments
followed rapidly, the fuel injection system being one of the most important in the end of the 50s. In the 60s
and 70s, safety became an issue resulting in legislation. Safety improvements were the safety cage, seat
belts, third brake light and crash tests. Due to the oil crisis in 1973, fuel consumption became important, as
did environmental friendliness, resulting in hybrid and electric cars. The supply chain from Original
Equipment Manufacturer (OEM) to Tier 1, Tier 2 etc. is important for the best quality in automotive.
Suppliers are more partners than just a supplier of parts. Currently, all OEMs focus on the development of
an electric car. More and more purely mechanical parts will be replaced by mechatronic parts, electronics
and software.

The automotive industry will face some challenges in the future. Competition will increase. On the one
hand, the demand for cars will change and even decrease due to fewer car ownership, smaller cars, less
driven kilometers and less maintenance because of better quality. On the other hand, there will be an
increasing number of market players. Customer focus will be essential. You need to know your customers
in order to meet their requirements and expectations.

The need for electronics and software will result in more partnerships with parties from outside the
automotive industry. Also, companies will have more difficulties to find and hold adequate employees. The
technical changes will demand other skills and expertise. Automotive engineers are involved in the whole
product design life cycle, from the initial concept through to delivery. In general, they work in design,
research and development, production or quality processes.

Using a multidisciplinary approach will help you control risks. A multidisciplinary team consists of suppliers,
customers and other interested parties. People from different processes work together thoroughly keeping
customer focus in mind.

40
41
 2. Product and Process Development
Case
You have just picked up your new cabriolet and you proudly show it to your friends. As you step out of the
car, you see smoke coming out of the hood. Within a few minutes, the car is on fire and burns down
completely. You call the dealer immediately and he calls the car manufacturer. After a thorough analysis, it
is clear that a short circuit in the powertrain has caused the fire.

The manufacturer does not like his sold cars to catch fire by short circuit. Such a problem can lead to severe
hazards, high recall costs, and claims. Before the cars are sold, the manufacturer wants to know for sure
that the cars are safe and that they meet the requirements and expectations of the customer. The car is
extensively tested and analyzed before a manufacturer puts it on the market.

42
2.1 Product Life Cycle Management

Learning Objectives
1. Understand the Product Life Cycle.
2. Understand Product Life Cycle Management (PLM).
3. Understand the link between Life Cycle Engineering (LCE) and sustainability.

2.1.1 Different Levels

Product Life Cycle Management (PLM) is the process of managing the entire life cycle of products. The
product life cycle denotes the sequence of stages that a product goes through, from its conception and
design, through to its ultimate disposal. PLM objectives are to reduce Time To Market (TTM), improve
product quality, reduce development costs, identify potential sales opportunities, and reduce
environmental impacts most notably at End-of-Life (EOL). American Motors Corporation (AMC) initiated
the process of PLM in 1985, when the carmaker was looking for a way to improve its competitiveness by
speeding up innovation and shortening the required time to market. PLM is associated with manufacturing,
but the management structure can also be used for software development and service provision.

To accomplish these objectives, organizations must understand its customers, markets and competitors.
PLM systems help organizations cope with the increasing complexity and engineering challenges of
developing new products. PLM integrates all resources, processes, business systems and available data. As
such, it provides product information and data backbone for companies, down to the individual parts.

Figure 9: Product Life cycle Management objective

PLM incorporates all available information about business and production in the development process of
new products and services. It aims at reducing the development process time and associated costs. This is
shown in Figure 9, where the red curve indicates the cost/profit curve serving as the reference for the green
objective curve. The red curve could, for example, represent the current generation of a specific vehicle,
while the green one is the one to be reached for the new generation. An early launch of new products will
increase competitiveness and profitability. The indicated product life cycle phases (Development, Growth,
Maturity, Decline) represent the business-oriented view on a vehicle generation. A company’s PLM
activities are supported by PLM tools. Common PLM tools in the automotive industry are, e.g., PTC
Windchill and Siemens EMEA.

43
 2.1.2 Designing for End-of-Life

The “life” of a car begins long before it first takes to the road, and continues beyond its disposal. From an
engineering point of view, the life cycle of a product or system comprises all phases that the product/system
goes through, from the idea to its end-of-life and “revival”. The principal phases that a product or system
typically runs through in its life cycle are research, development (i.e., engineering design), manufacturing,
distribution, usage, end of life, and revival by recycling, remanufacturing and/or reuse. When it comes to
sustainable automotive engineering, we always have to take into account the closed life cycle, and
therefore, we have to go beyond the often-cited notion of “from cradle to grave” to “from cradle to cradle”.
Recycling, remanufacturing and reuse are the most typical ways of closing the life cycle. They lead to what
is often called the “circular economy”, which is a generic term denoting an industrial economy that
minimizes waste and pollution by design for being able to re-introduce materials in the life cycle at the end
of the product’s useful life time.

Figure 10 presents the major automobile life cycle stages in the form of a process diagram [18]. Extraction
and processing of raw materials, basic material production, assembling process, use of the car and material
recovery, recycling and disposal are the main phases. There are five main process groups:

• Car production (including material production and car assembly).

• Spare parts production (tires, batteries, lubricants and refrigerants).
• All fuel transformation process upstream to fuel consumption (WTT = well-to-tank).
• Fuel consumption for car driving (TTW = tank-to-tank-to-wheel).
• Car disposal and waste treatment (EOL = end-of-life).

The WTT and TTW together correspond to the well-to-wheel (WTW), i.e., the complete fuel chain from the
well (the original source) of the energy source to the wheels of the car.

Figure 10: Car process flow diagram [18]

44
It has to be stressed that this view on the main phases omits many other life cycle activities that may be
relevant to consider for specific purposes, such as the transport of materials, car components, and the car
itself, the road infrastructure, etc.

In recent years, increasingly stringent environmental legislation forces the automotive industry to make
sustainability over the complete life cycle one of the key criteria for any engineering decision. Sustainability
over the life cycle covers the three areas: ecology, economy, and society, as shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11: Sustainability dimensions

Very often, sustainability is reduced to the ecological factor only. Sustainable engineering, however, takes
into account all three areas, including their overlapping regions. They make up our environment, the
environment being defined as “everything that surrounds us”. Life cycle sustainability engineering is an
integrated approach to ecological, social and economic impact issues (both internal and external), which
leads to long-term, sustainable added value.

• Ecologic factors are permit and license compliance, bio-diversity management, emissions to air,
water-chemical usage and discharges, etc.
• Economic factors are consistent, profitable growth, risk management, total shareholder return, etc.
• Social factors are respect for the individual, equality, opportunity, diversity, outreach programs,
human rights, etc.
• Socio-ecological factors are health and safety, legislation and regulation, climate change, crisis
management, etc.
• Eco-economic factors are resource efficiency, energy efficiency, global energy issues, etc.
• Socio-economic factors are employment, training and development, local economies and
enterprise, social and community, sponsorships, etc.

45
 The Importance of Designing for the Life Cycle
Within the life cycle, the design process is essential to create a product: technological choices such as
materials to be used, mechanisms to be implemented, fuels needed, etc. made at this time ensure success
and define the cost of a product. For instance, about 80% of the total manufacturing cost of the product
results from decisions that designers make during the design process. Practically, the total cost of the
product (95%) is actually engaged (i.e., determined) in the early product design and development phases.
The paid cost, however, is very low in these phases (typically up to 20%). These costs start to rise strongly
as soon as the product (or parts of it) are actually realized, i.e., manufactured. The subsequent strong cost
realization is during use and end of life. Likewise, in terms of environmental impact, the biggest contributor
to the total life cycle environmental impact of a vehicle is its service life, i.e., while it is out on the road. For
a mid-sized vehicle, this phase accounts for almost three quarters of total life cycle CO2 emissions. That is
over three times more than the manufacturing phase.

For example, how much fuel a new car consumes will, for a significant part, depend on its weight, and on
external resistances, in particular the aerodynamic drag. These are factors that designers can influence by
appropriate styling, choice of materials and construction methods. Aerodynamically designed bodywork
can contribute a lot to reduce drag, just as the use of new joining techniques, or underbody trays can be
specially designed to smooth under-car airflow. For the same reason, one of the most important areas of
innovation for the life cycle in automotive, which is not linked to mechatronics, is lightweight engineering.
In this increasingly important field, Audi set an initial landmark innovation by its aluminum SpaceFrame®
body. Another remarkable contribution is the hot stamping process specially developed by Volkswagen.
Although this technique consumes more energy during manufacturing than conventional processes,
thereby increasing CO2 emissions per vehicle at the manufacturing stage, across the life cycle as a whole, it
actually has net environmental benefits. The reason is that hot-stamped components are stronger than
conventional ones. Consequently, less steel is needed to produce them and to achieve the desired stability
levels. The currently most promising fields of development in this area are the carbon reinforced plastics
(CFRP or CRP) and magnesium.

Obviously, engineering measures for reducing energy consumption while still providing the required
vehicle’s performance and drivability mostly affect the engine and transmission. There is no doubt that the
efficiency of internal combustion engines (ICEs) and transmissions has considerably improved since their
introduction. The question is therefore to identify areas where further progress can be carried out.
Generally, energy losses from ICEs are classified within three main categories [18]:

• Energy losses at the exhaust (due to released hot gases).

• Energy losses due to heat transfer through surfaces.
• Energy losses due to friction (i.e., moving parts), especially the piston within the cylinder (pumping
losses belong to this category).

The objectives are then to reduce these losses by using more efficient engines and transmissions. Table 1
shows several typical measures that engine and transmission engineers have been developing over the last
few years in order to meet the directives.

46
Table 1: Technical powertrain improvements to reduce life cycle impacts [18]

Experts agree that the potential of these improvements to the ICE and the transmission is far from
completely exploited, even after more than 100 years of research and development. They also agree,
however, that major steps forward meeting current and future emission legislations while keeping up with
the vehicle’s desired performance and drivability levels will only be possible by a strong hybridization of the
powertrain, i.e., the intelligent combination of the ICE and one or several electric engines.

Another motivation for OEMs to take into account the vehicle’s complete life cycle from the very early
design phases is to create new after-sales business opportunities for them. Most OEMs have been moving
into complete service-oriented product strategies or product-service systems in scientific terms. Simply put,
they strongly take into account the complete service (or: usage) life of a vehicle, from the very early design
phases, and the provision added-value services in design already. Such services go far beyond the “classical”
services of maintenance, repair and spare part provision. They are, rather, linked to financing and assuring
the vehicle, providing emergency and mobility services in case of breakdowns and/or accidents, etc. Such
kind of added-value services allow OEMs to both influence the life cycle cost, value-in-use, and
environmental impact during use of their vehicles, and also stay in business with end-users over the
complete life cycle. This goes far beyond traditional business models, where the producer’s cost
responsibility is limited to all the development phases that happen at the producer’s side, i.e., from
specification to manufacturing. Users are cost-responsible during usage and end of life. By contrast, the
product-service system paradigm demands the producer to take over cost responsibility over a significantly

47
 extended range of the process, including usage and end-of-life. Evidently, this shift has fundamental
implications on the responsibility of designers as well.

Life Cycle Assessment

Life Cycle Assessment or Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) is a structured method which is applied in a lot of industrial
sectors in order to analyze and assess the environmental impact of each single phase of a product, system
or service life cycle, depending on different design decisions. In these LCAs, the creation of new vehicles
and drivetrains is analyzed with respect to the environmental impacts of components and materials from
the initial design sketch via their production and service life, all the way to recycling, remanufacturing, or
reuse. The specific LCA used for transport fuel/vehicle systems is called Well-to-wheel (WTW). This method
takes into account the environmental impact of the vehicle with a strong focus on its fuel, starting from the
very exploitation of the environmental resources used to create fuel to its conversion into propulsion
energy in the vehicle.

In terms of LCA standards in automotive, ISO (14040/14044) standards provide general guidelines, which
ensures that different models, methodologies and assumptions are often used. Many OEMs conduct ISO
compliant high quality LCA studies of their vehicles as part of their Environmental Management strategies.
Also, several OEMs publish the results from their LCA. However, it is not clear if different OEMs use the
same set of assumptions or input data sets. Environmental Commendations [19] certify the OEM’s
successful efforts to conduct LCAs and include the results in the engineering design of their vehicles.

According to the ISO standards cited above, LCAs are carried out according to a structured methodology
that is depicted in Figure 12.

Figure 12: Steps for performing an LCA according to ISO standards [20]

As this Figure indicates, in practice, the three main phases of goal and scope definition, inventory analysis
and impact assessment are revisited several times as an increasing amount of information and insights
become available. In the following, the main objectives and activities of each of these three phases will be
discussed.

48
Goal and Scope definition
The LCA essentially predicts a vehicle’s environmental impact before it is actually designed, built and used.
This means that it has to be based on assumptions which may or may not hold true or be precise during the
vehicle’s actual life. Also, the scope and significance of environmental impact has to be defined and limited
very clearly. From the explanation of the term environment earlier in this chapter, it is evident that the
term environment is very wide one, and that there are a number of ways that a vehicle can impact the
environment. While the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions are probably most popular, there are countless
other impacts that are more or less relevant to be considered by the OEMs LCAs.

Inventory analysis
In the inventory analysis, all the important facts over the entire life cycle of the vehicle have to be collected
and backed up with Figures. For each step in the product creation process, the volume of raw materials is
determined, as well as the energy that goes into its production and the production of the fuel it requires.
This process is carried over into the vehicle’s whole assumed service life, which is variable according to
country and vehicle type. In Europe, the average total passenger car vehicle mileage is between 215,000
(petrol) and 240,000 (diesel) cars in an average lifespan of 12.5 years. Every OEM is free to derive their own
assumptions from these statistical Figures.

The fuel consumption and the resultant emissions of carbon dioxide during this phase are worked out based
on the legally prescribed New European Driving Cycle (NEDC). In addition, the amount of energy consumed
during the dismantling and/or recycling of the vehicle parts is calculated. Together, all these calculations
allow the calculation of all airborne and water-borne emissions, soil pollutants, waste and wastewater
generated during the entire life cycle of the vehicle.

The data collection process is based on the vehicle parts lists, material and weight information stored in the
company’s own Material Information System (MIS), technical datasheets and drawings, as well as the
threshold values for regulated emissions in line with the current EU regulations. These are joined by
processing-related data taken from an LCA database or drawn up in conjunction with the production plants,
suppliers or industrial partners. Thinkstep GaBi is a very broadly used LCA data base which supports this
step. It is one of the leading LCA data sources on the market, providing more than 8,000 environmental
profiles of materials and processes. These data can be used to design new or more sustainable products,
track supply chain performance, improve compliance, or optimize production processes.

Impact assessment
All emissions, waste and wastewater generated during the lifetime of a car impact different aspects of the
environment. The greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, CO2, for example, affects the climate. The amount of CO2
generated by a car over its entire life cycle has a global warming potential that can be calculated. This is
done in this second step of the LCA. The various material flows from the manufacturing, service life and
recycling phases are assigned to the relevant environmental impact categories. This involves defining an
indicator substance for each of these categories. CO2, for example, is the indicator substance for “global
warming potential”. Then, all the other substances that also contribute to global warming are converted to
CO2 equivalents using what are called equivalence factors. Along with global warming potential, other
environmental impact categories may be considered, such as the photochemical ozone creation potential
(which impacts local air quality, not least in the form of summer smog), ozone depletion potential
(concerning depletion of ozone in the Earth’s atmosphere), and the acidification and eutrophication of
water and soil. Each of these four environmental impact categories also has its own indicator substance.

49
 Interpretation
The results of the Life Cycle Assessment are typically depicted in the shape of a material composition
analysis, a Life Cycle Inventory and a Life Cycle Impact Assessment for the product or process concerned.
The material composition analysis shows the materials of which the car being studied is made up. The
results of the Life Cycle Inventory show which amounts of which emissions – e.g., carbon dioxide (CO2),
carbon monoxide (CO), Sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), hydrocarbons (NMHC, non-methane
hydrocarbons) and methane (CH4) – are generated over the life cycle of the car. They also reveal how much
primary energy was consumed. These data are presented for each of the models compared and broken
down by the life cycle phases (typically manufacturing, service life and recycling). For the service life of the
vehicle, the environmental impact of the fuel production and supply process and the direct driving
emissions can be distinguished. The Life Cycle Inventory data allows depicting the potential impacts on the
environment, comparing the environmental profiles of the respective vehicles for the environmental
impact categories specified in the LCA scope definition.

Recycling
Nowadays, one of the key criteria considered in automotive LCAs is recycling. The ultimate objective of
OEMs is to achieve 100% recyclability of their cars, and they are getting very close to this number. The VW-
SiCon post-shredder technology, for example, allows recycling a full 95% of a vehicle by weight [18]. The
end-of-life vehicle is first drained of fluids, then a range of components which are capable of being recycled
and used in new products, as so-called secondary raw materials, are removed. Any parts not subject to
statutory end-of-life dismantling requirements, or which cannot be cost-effectively remanufactured into
replacement parts, are put through the shredder (a machine cutting the parts in small pieces). The shredder
residue is sorted and separated on the basis of its physical properties, producing different streams. The
process is sought to be developed and adapted to the growing diversity of plastics used in cars. In this sense,
the process design is market-driven, taking into account the product requirements, the expected
destination of the outputs (for instance, plastic granulate being used in furnaces, what are their standards
for combustibility). The technology allows continuous adaptation to the evolution of cars, from the
currently processed cars produced fifteen years ago to the cars manufactured today. In this technology, the
different outputs and market potentials are as follows (see Table 2 below):

Table 2: VW-SiCon recycling fractions and their market potentials [18]

50
Summary

Product Life Cycle Management can be considered one of the key activities in modern automotive product
creation processes. Its main objective is to gather and consolidate all technical and business related
information such that they are consistent and can help maximize value creation and profit. Driven by ever
more stringent regulations and political pressure, automotive OEMs and suppliers alike are obliged to take
into account sustainability in its three dimensions (economic, ecologic, social) in all their products and
activities all along the life cycle. In order to do so, they apply Life Cycle Assessment techniques before and
during development in order to be able to predict the environmental impact of their products and
processes. OEMs also make efforts to brand their environmental development activities. To further
elaborate on VW’s showcase, they use environmental commendations to make their efforts related to
assuring sustainability of each particular vehicle model public.

Recycling and remanufacturing techniques have been gaining particular importance in the last few years,
making modern cars almost completely recyclable (95% of reuse and recovery according to the EU Directive
on End-of-Life 2000/53/EC as of 2015).

Key words in paragraph 2.1:

• Carbon Reinforced Plastics (CFRP or CRP) • Eco-economic

• Environmental Commendations • Tank to Tank to Wheel (TTW)
• Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) • End of Life (EOL)
• Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) • Product Life Cycle Management (PLM)
• Material Information System (MIS) • Product/Service/System Life Cycle
• New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) • Recycling
• Well to Wheel (WTW) • Remanufacturing
• Well to Tank (WTT) • Sustainability
• Socio-ecological • Sustainable Automotive Engineering
• Socio-economic • ISO 14040
• ISO 14044

51
 2.2 Advanced Product Quality Planning

Learning Objectives
1. Understand the objectives of APQP.
2. Understand why APQP is used.
3. Understand when APQP is used.
4. Identify the different phases of APQP.

Example APQP
While the previous chapter dealt with the complete automotive life cycle, this chapter will focus on the
product and (manufacturing) process development, which is an essential part of the life cycle. From the
engineering point of view, this process comprises all the stakeholders and activities involved in creating a
ready-to-sell vehicle from an initial concept idea. We will take a simplified look at this complex process in
order to capture its most essential elements.

Imagine you are working in a metalworking company. Your company’s activities consist of machining all
kinds of metals with processes like laser cutting, punching and rolling. A strength of the company is the
adaption of specific requirements and needs of the client. 95% of sales goes to customers in the automotive.

One of your most important customers provides electronics to almost all major OEMs in the automotive.
Your customer asks you to develop a new product. He needs a metal plate with 4 round holes. Between
those round holes, there will be a circuit board placed. As a starting point of the development process, your
customer sends you a first drawing of the products he wants you to produce.

Figure 13: Customer drawing of metal plate

Your customer defined the most important dimensions, the so-called critical characteristics. These
dimensions are marked on the drawing with (cc). In addition, the product should be burr, scratch and dent-
free. Type of material and manner of construction of the printed circuit board (PCB) are up to your
expertise.

52
Your company has an Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP) process implemented. This process covers
the design of the product and the process needed to produce the product. Different phases and important
milestones must be followed to be able to meet customer requirements.

An APQP process starts with the review of customer requirements and ends with product and process
release. The first thing you have to do is preparing a project plan, including planning with corresponding
milestones.

2.2.1 Objectives

Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP) is a structured approach to the design and development of
products and processes. An effective product quality planning depends on the involvement of top
management and the effort to fulfill the needs, requirements and expectations of the customer as much as
possible.

Some benefits of APQP are:

• high level of customer satisfaction;

• identifying changes in the development of a new product or process as early as possible;
• delivering a quality product on time with the lowest possible costs;
• minimum quality issues;
• effective communication with everyone involved in the design and development process.

Every APQP process is unique. Fundamental issues in APQP are:

• multidisciplinary approach including customer and (sub) suppliers;

• defining clear scope and requirements;
• communication between different teams;
• involvement of customers and suppliers;
• simultaneous development processes.

53
 Phases of the APQP
An APQP process often starts with a customer sending a request for quotation (RFQ) to potential suppliers.
A process or product change on suppliers’ own initiative is also a possible start of an APQP process.

Figure 14: APQP timeframe

Phase 1: Plan & define program

• Planning and definition of customer requirements.
• Where do we want to go?

Phase 2: Product design & development verification

• Product development; focus on design and functionality of the product.
• Can we design one?

Phase 3: Process design & development verification

• Development of a production method and control plan to meet customer requirements.
• Can we make one?

Phase 4: Product & process validation

• Validation and proof of phases 2 and 3.

Phase 5: Feedback assessment & corrective action

• Regular production, continuous improvement, prevent recurrence.

54
2.2.2 Phases

Phase 1: Plan & Define Program

It often starts with a customer sending a supplier a RFQ. An RFQ is a standard business process in which
suppliers are invited into a bidding process to bid on a specific product. An IFB (Invitation for Bid) can also
be the start of the APQP process.

RFQ includes the item specifications that the customer needs. Sometimes a preliminary drawing is added
to the RFQ, as seen in the example at the beginning of this chapter. The first thing for the supplier to do is
review the RFQ and defines if this request fits the supplier’s business plan and marketing strategy and goals.
If a request does not fit within the strategy, a supplier can decide not to offer a quotation and inform the
potential customer about it.

Calculation and Project Planning:

If the supplier decides to offer a quotation, one of the first things within an APQP process is the startup of
a multidisciplinary team. This team has to review the RFQ in detail and translate the requirements of the
customer into a calculation, including project planning and milestones.

The suppliers will form an APQP team to prepare the quotation for the customer. The team members should
be people from product and process engineering, quality assurance, production department, purchase and
sales. Participation of the members may depend on the topics to be discussed and the different phases.

The most important purpose for the APQP team is to understand, review and agree with customer
requirements and expectations. That information is essential for a supplier to assess the feasibility: “Can
we make the product?” Important inputs for the feasibility review are benchmark information,
assumptions, reliability studies and lessons learned. Of course, feasibility and prices of sub-components
must be asked of sub-suppliers. A sub-supplier has to start his own APQP process after receiving a quotation
request.

Voice of the Customer:

The "voice of the customer" (VOC) includes complaints, recommendations and requirements of internal
and external customer(s) for the new product. The required information can be gathered through market
research and important information from the past and experience of the project team.

Benchmark Information:
Benchmarking is the process of comparing one's business processes and performance metrics to industry
bests or to best practices from other companies. Dimensions typically measured are quality, time and cost.

Product/Process Assumptions:
Different people have different ideas about the product. Ensure that all these ideas about material type,
etc. are used as input for the new product.

55
 Product Reliability Studies:
Gathering information about the reliability and durability of various components of the product.
After review of the customer requirements, the supplier should have a first, preliminary idea about:
• design goals;
• reliability and quality goals;
• bill of material;
• process flow chart;
• listing of special product and process characteristics.

Management Support:
One of the keys to get a successful APQP is the commitment and motivation of management. It is important
to keep management informed, and management should actively contribute to the process. An RFQ is
always sent to multiple suppliers. From all the received quotations, the customer selects the best quotation.
Based on this selection, the APQP project will be continued or not.

Phase 2: Product Design and Development Verification

If the quotation is accepted by the customer and the supplier gets the project, the second phase of APQP
starts, which is all about the translation of customer requirements into design. Customer requirements are
translated into all kinds of engineering drawings and specifications. Prototypes are made and completely
measured to check if the translation is well done and if the product can be made in practice. Often,
customers ask their suppliers to set up a design verification plan (DVP) – a systematic planning of all tests
or calculations to check whether the product or design is suitable for the application.

Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (DFMEA):

Before a design can be presented to the customer, the supplier must identify the main risks of the design.
This can be done by using a Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (DFMEA). A DFMEA is proactive
assessment and quantification of potential failure modes in the design of systems, subsystems or
component levels. Relationships between other components or systems and functions or features of the
product are reviewed as if they may affect other components. It is the supplier’s responsibility to identify
all related vehicle systems and to confirm that there is no interference with correct vehicle functioning. This
should be part of the DFMEA and must be focused on the functions of the different components and how
these functions can fail. The output of a DFMEA is an overview of the main risks of the current design.

Design for Manufacturability and Assembly (DFM / DFA):

To prevent problems during production, the APQP team has to think about the manufacturability of the
product during design phase. A design for manufacturability and assembly plan is often made to let different
departments work together more efficiently and effectively. The design for manufacturability and assembly
plan must at least contain the following topics:

• design, concept, function and sensitivity of the manufacturing process variation;

• changes in process, production or assembly;
• dimensional tolerances;
• performance requirements;
• number of components;
• material handling.

56
As you can imagine, the input for the design for manufacturability and assembly plan can be best delivered
by assembly people. That is the reason that they should be a member of the APQP team as soon as possible.

Design verification and reviews:

During this phase, a lot of communication concerning requirements and expectations takes place between
customer and supplier. It is important for the supplier to periodically review if the current state of design
still fits the requirements. Design verification and review checks if the needs, requirements and
expectations of the customer(s) match the design of the product. At a certain moment, the customer and
supplier will agree on the requirements and expectations. This moment is called ‘design freeze’.

Engineering drawings and specifications:

Outputs of the product design phase are engineering drawings of the product. These drawings must be
checked:

• Is the information in the drawings sufficient to manufacture the product?

• The product in the engineering drawing should be verified for functionality, reliability, durability
and with legislation and standards.

It is important to know if products and components in the drawing can be produced. If changes are made
in drawings or specifications, the team must ensure that these changes are documented and communicated
to the relevant parties.

Special product and process characteristics:

Some characteristics are critical for the functioning or safety of a vehicle. These characteristics are identified
during development and formally documented in engineering drawings and specifications. The purpose is
to focus on the few vital characteristics that are most important for product function. A supplier should
know these characteristics as early as possible.

Prototypes:
In order to check if the design on engineering drawing with its specifications can be made in practice, a first
prototype is made. This prototype will be measured on all dimensions from the engineering drawing. The
prototype (including the measurement report) will be sent to the customer. The customer also reviews and
checks the prototype according to the engineering drawing. Often, more prototypes are necessary to be
sure that the product can be made. In automotive, these are called prototype A, prototype B, etc. For
prototype approval, it is not necessary for the suppliers to use the serial production conditions. Many
companies have special prototype processes and/or tools.

Team feasibility commitment and management support:

One of the most important things during an APQP process is management support and commitment. The
team should perform a complete review check on design feasibility. Important questions are:

• Can the designed product be manufactured, assembled, tested and packaged?

• Can the supplier deliver the required quantities at the right time at acceptable costs?

Open issues and concerns are reported to the management team. Depending on the feasibility, the
management team is also recommended in this phase, whether to continue or drop the project.

57
 Phase 3: Process Design and Development Verification
Simultaneously with the product design in phase 2, the supplier starts to develop everything that is needed
to produce the product. Figure 15 shows simultaneous engineering (product and process) by the red lines.

Figure 15: APQP timeframe

Phase 2 focuses on product design and prototype approval. The purpose of phase 3 is to be ready for serial
production. The supplier has to check if everything that is needed for serial production is available and is
according to the requirements. Things like packaging standards and specifications, process flow chart, floor
plan layout, Process Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (PFMEA) and control plan, process instructions should
be ready before validation can take place in phase 4. In order to determine the capability of the process
and to check if all product requirements can be fulfilled, a preliminary process capability study should be
executed.

Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (PFMEA):

In product design, the potential risks in process design should be identified by using the FMEA technique.
The PFMEA is an overview of potential failure modes of the process and the effect on customer satisfaction.
Development of a PFMEA can be started after DFMEA. However, it must be done before committing to new
tools and equipment and before the start of production. Often, the start of a PFMEA is too late. A PFMEA
is a living document and needs to be updated regularly.

Packaging standards:
If the customer has packing specifications, these should be used to design the packaging of the product. If
not, the supplier needs to develop different packaging standards to guarantee product quality until it is
opened.

Process Flow Diagram (PFD):

A preliminary process flow chart is often made in phase 1. In phase 3, the flow chart will be updated
describing the current process flow. A process flow chart is needed for process FMEA and control plan.

Floor layout plan:

A floor plan is an overview of the locations and different workstations. In addition, packaging and rework
stations and nonconforming material storage need to be included. The floor plan layout gives the customer
an overview of the efficient design of the production line.

58
Control Plan (CP):
A control plan is a description of dimensional measurements, materials and functional tests based on the
risk in the PFMEA. The purpose is to prevent or detect (potential) nonconformities using frequent (in
process and/or end of line) inspections and tests.

Process instructions:
It is important that all process instructions are clear and sufficiently detailed. The goal is to ensure standard
work and that everyone knows what his/her task is.

Measurement Systems Analysis plan (MSA):

It is important to develop a plan containing different issues. This can be done using a Gage Repeatability
and Reproducibility (GR&R) and answering the following questions:

• which properties of the product have to be measured?

• how are the properties measured?
• variety in measuring instruments?
• variation of the person measuring?
• etc.

Preliminary Process Capability study plan:

The control plan contains several measurable elements (like critical product dimensions) which form a basis
for statistical process control (SPC). SPC is a method to study the capacity and quality of the process.

At the end of phase 3, a supplier should be ready for the PPAP production run. Of course, the supplier
should execute some internal trial runs before inviting the customer for the official product and process
release.

Phase 4: Product and Process Validation

Checking if the supplier has developed and implemented everything needed to comply with all customer
product and process specifications. This check is done during a PPAP production run. In this phase, all
information necessary for product and process approval will be gathered and sent to the customer. This is
called the PPAP file. During the PPAP production, run important process data will be gathered.

PPAP production run:

The necessary information for the PPAP file will be collected during a significant production run. The
production can focus on both the qualitative aspect and the quantitative aspect of the process. The
question to be answered is: ‘Can we make enough good products within the required time?’

The availability of production tooling, equipment, facilities, operators and environment are important
conditions for the PPAP production run. Also the control plan and process instruction must be available.
The minimum quantity of the production trial run is set by the customer.

Measurement systems evaluation:

All measurement studies in the measurement systems analysis plan should be completed. In case of
measurement unreliability, it is necessary to plan and implement action. The values in the measurement
system analysis plan should be evaluated, and if necessary, measures taken.

59
 Process Capability (CPK):
During the PPAP production, run data will be collected to calculate the process capability. Is the supplier’s
process able to meet customer requirements?

Quality sign-off:
The APQP team should make sure that all control plans and flow charts are respected. Reviewing the control
plan, process instructions and the test material is required for quality sign-off.

Phase 5: Feedback, Assessment and Corrective Action

After the PPAP approval, the supplier starts series production. The purpose is to reduce the variation in the
products produced and continuous improvement.

Reduced variation:
Control charts and other statistical tools can be used to identify process variation. Purpose is to reduce the
process variation. Before implementing improvements, customer review is needed.

Customer satisfaction:
Some metrics have to be developed and monitored to measure customer satisfaction.

Delivery and service:

At this stage, continuation of the supplier-customer partnership in problem solving and continuous
improvement is ensured. Cost reduction is one of the most important topics.

60
Summary

Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP) is a structured approach to the design and development of
products and processes. When an OEM develops a new car, he needs all kinds of components to assemble
the car. These components are developed and produced by a supplier. Before supplying the parts, the
supplier needs to go through the different phases of the APQP process.

The first phase starts with an RFQ and is about planning and definition of customer requirements. During
phase 2, the focus is on design and functionality of the product. Approval of the design and prototype are
important milestones. Phase 3 is the design & development of the process. The supplier’s readiness for the
PPAP production run is the most important milestone. Although phase 2 focuses on product design and
phase 3 on process design, in practice, you will see simultaneous engineering of both product and process.
A product will be designed and simultaneously, the supplier will think about how to produce that product.

In order to prevent failures during serial production, it is very important to use an FMEA in both phases 2
and 3. The FMEA is applied to identify risks.

In phase 4, the validation and proof of phases 2 and 3 takes place. This phase ends with PPAP approval. In
phase 5, the suppliers should focus on continuous improvement of the product and process.

Key words in paragraph 2.2:

• Advanced Product Quality Planning • Serial Production

• CC • PPAP Production Run
• Request for Quotation • Design Review
• IFB • Special Characteristics
• Customer Requirements • Product Design
• Simultaneous Engineering • Process Design
• Invitation for Bid • Product and Process Validation
• FMEA and Control Plan • DVP
• Prototype • DFMEA
• PFMEA

61
2.3 Systems Engineering

Learning Objectives
1. Understand the complexity of a vehicle and its systems.
2. Understand the Product Development Process
3. Understand the V-Model.
4. Understand the development life cycle.

2.3.1 Breakdown Structure of a Vehicle

The automotive industry is in full swing. Cars are getting safer, more comfortable and more luxurious. This
is fantastic for the driver, but what are the induced challenges for the carmakers and their suppliers?
Systems engineering is the interdisciplinary field of engineering and engineering management that focuses
on how to design and manage complex systems over their life cycles. Systems engineering ensures that all
likely aspects of a project or system are considered and integrated into a whole. Systems engineering
involves both technical skills such as industrial-, mechanical-, electrical- and software engineering as
human-centered disciplines, such as project management and change management.

The T-Ford vs. Modern Production Cars

The first car which was produced in mass production was the T-Ford. It is clear that the T-Ford does not fit
any longer in the streets of today. The developments in the automotive industry the past years have not
stood still. In fact, the developments are still going on and will not stop.

The first car produced in masses, the T-Ford (1908-1927), and modern cars, share the same principal
objective: to transport persons and/or material from location A to location B. In addition to that, they still
have four wheels and a steering wheel, they drive forward or backward, steer left or right, and have a
human driver. Except this, almost everything is different in modern cars with respect to their early
predecessors. These differences are mainly driven by the objective to assist and ultimately replace the
human driver. Figure 3 in Chapter 1.1 shows the tremendous amount of electronic driver assistance systems
that we can find in cars nowadays.

Apart from the huge amount of electronic subsystems, other aspects of cars have changed significantly as
well. For example, the aerodynamics have been improved and the appearance of the vehicle modified
significantly. The bodywork has other forms and is produced with higher quality and more lightweight
materials. In addition, they are treated against corrosion during the production process and the color
coating has been improved many times. The varnish is more resistant to weather changes and there is
virtually no longer any question of discoloration.

Modern Production Cars

Customers are getting more and more demanding when choosing their cars. They want them to look nice,
be useful, be safe, having a low environmental impact, a good driving behavior and connectivity with their
electronic devices. They may ask for luxury or simplicity, comfort or sportiness, combustion engine or
electric or hybrid powertrains, etc. Automakers have to tackle the challenge of responding to all the
different kinds of individual expectations and preferences, which leads to an exponentially growing amount
of vehicle variants (contrary to the T-Ford, which was available in one single configuration and color only).
Figure 16: Image showing the variety of car variants offered by one OEM

All these numerous car variants are assembled from a huge number of single mechanical, hydraulic and
electrical parts (about 30.000 in total when counting every single screw). Parts constitute larger
components which contribute to the implementation of functions in a networked manner. In modern cars,
most components are mechatronic, i.e., mechanics controlled by electronics and software. While cables
were used to connect all these components in earlier times, nowadays, the sheer length at weight of the
wiring harness would make this kind of linkage impossible. Therefore, a bus system was introduced to
ensure that less wiring is required to transport all data. The most common bus system in cars is the CAN-
bus, which is relatively inexpensive and provides multiple information flows over one single network.
Despite the bus architecture, the total length of the cables can add up to about 2000 meters, leading to a
wiring harness weight of about 100 kg.

The CAN-bus system can connect up to 8000 nodes without network overload. The nodes are the control
units that are sending or receiving information. For example, there is a node for your rear view camera,
radio, airbag, ABS, ESP etc.

When a node is sending information, all nodes receive this information via the CAN-bus. The application
interface of the node receives the information and sends this to the microcontroller. The microcontroller
analyses the information and decides what to do and sends this information to the CAN-controller. The
latter knows how the message should be sent and can choose a suitable point of time to send the
information to the CAN-bus.

Figure 17: Image showing the variety of car variants offered by one OEM ( [21])

63
 Let us look at the rear view camera as an example. At the time you put the car in reverse gear, a signal is
sent to the CAN bus. The application interface of all nodes receives this signal and sends this information
to the microcontroller. The latter will analyze the information and determine which actions shall be taken.
All the nodes not affected by this signal will simply ignore it. The microcontroller of the rear-view camera
analyses the information and knows that it has to turn on the camera. To do this, it sends another message
to the CAN-controller, which assigns a priority to it. Unless there are other messages with a higher priority
on the bus at this moment, the CAN-controller will send this message to the CAN-interface for transport on
the CAN-bus to the camera node.

In this example, the input signal leading to the execution of a control action via the CAN-bus has been
generated by a switch actuated by the driver through the gearshift. In many control systems of a car, input
signals are generated by sensors. These signals are processed by electronic control units (ECUs), which
output signals targeted at actuators. In the following paragraphs, we will take a look at each of these
elements.

Sensors
Sensors come in different shapes and sizes and have many application areas. In automotive, they are very
widely used. Think of, for example, the rain sensor, light sensor, speed sensor, temperature sensor and
crankshaft position sensor.

Sensors can be divided in two categories: active and passive sensors. A passive sensor does not need a
power supply and mass to deliver a signal. One example of such a passive sensor is a temperature sensor:
when the temperature changes, the electrical resistance in the sensor changes accordingly. Contrary to
that, an active sensor needs power and a mass to create a signal. An example of this is hall sensors. This
kind of sensor can be used to determine the position of the camshaft by means of magnetism. Without
power supply (e.g., in the case of a cable break), this sensor will be unable to build up the electromagnetic
field that is necessary for the sensor to work correctly.

Figure 18: Example of a Rain Sensor by ZF TRW, [downloaded from ( [22], [23]

64
Electronic Control Unit (ECU)
Electronic signals are inputs for ECUs (Electronic Control Units) which process them and generate output
signals for controlling various functions of the car influencing the engine, transmission, drivability, comfort,
entertainment, etc. Modern passenger cars usually have around 100 ECUs, luxury cars more than 150. Most
of them are interconnected, which increases the complexity of the electronic subsystems significantly. The
ECUs’ performance levels are widespread, ranging from basic ASICs (application specific integrated circuits)
to multi-core processing units similar to the ones we can find in modern high-performance computers. ECUs
controlling safety-critical functions such as breaking and steering have sophisticated integrated monitoring
and diagnosis facilities.

Figure 19: Example of a ABS ECU by Continental, [downloaded from [24]

Software
The various functions on vehicle and subsystem levels are actually implemented in software that is executed
on ECUs. This kind of software has to fulfil a lot of constraints imposed by the system it is embedded in.
Such systems are called Embedded Systems, and the software controlling them is called Embedded
Software.

• Runs on ECUs.
• Embedded System.
• Real-Time performance (ECU clock).
• Lines of Code.
• Updates.

Case Study: Electric Power Steering (EPS)

Most modern cars have electrically assisted power steering (EPS), where the hydraulic pump for steering
power support is replaced by an electric engine controlled by an electronic control unit (ECU). The key
advantages of such a system are the significantly reduced fuel consumption (up to 0,7 l/100 km), as well as
improved safety, comfort, and convenience thanks to the ability to implement innovative driver assistance
systems (e.g. Evasive Steering Support, Traffic Jam Assist, Parking Maneuver Assist, Lane Assist, etc.).

Figure 20 shows the BOSCH Servolectric® Electromechanical steering system [25] integrated in the vehicle,
including its major system components (1 – Torque Sensor, 2 – Electronic Control Unit, 3 – Electric Motor)
and connections with other components (4 – Ultrasonic Sensors, 5 – Battery, 6 – Stereo video Camera, 7 –
Radar, 8 – Engine Control Unit).

65
 Figure 20: BOSCH Servoelectric® [26], [27]

The steering system is powered by the car battery (bold blue line in Figure 20), and exchanges data with
the other linked components via the CAN-bus (light blue lines in Figure 20).

Figure 21: Electrically Assisted Power Steering from Bosch Automotive Steering [28]

The EPS has a torque sensor which tracks the position of the steering column. Depending on the required
position and torque, the software in the steering gear’s ECU controls the electric motor. By configuring the
software, engineers can apply different steering modes, such as sport, comfort, city, and parking modes. As
mentioned above, based on the interconnection with several different sensors on vehicle level, it can
implement driving assistance features such as lane assist, park assist, and thereby facilitate autonomous
driving modes in the future. Thanks to the use of the electrically assisted power steering, we can also
decrease fuel consumption and the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions as the EPS does not consume energy
when no steering assistance is required.

However, the increased use of software and electronics also has its drawbacks. When developing a
mechanical steering gear, the system’s durability and reliability can be calculated and tested. By contrast,
how reliable is hardware and software? What will happen if due to a software bug or an electronic
malfunction, the steering system executes an unwanted steering maneuver? How can we prevent any faults
in the electronics or software which could lead to injuries or even endanger the lives of passengers or
pedestrians? How can we assure the safety of the electronic and the software? How can the carmakers
make the vehicle safe and reliable despite the fact that the majority of the vehicle’s subsystems are
developed and produced by suppliers?

66
Modularization
Offering every customer a tailor-made product at the right time. That is the principle of Modularization.
Each product is made entirely to the customer’s specification. Combining customization and Operational
Excellence at the same time is possible by using a limited number of components. In one way you can
compare Modularization with LEGO: one set of standardized parts and components with the same
interface. The concept of modularization contributes to shorter Lead Times, higher quality, lower
operational costs and reduced stock levels and inventory.

The Swedish truck and bus manufacturer Scania is one of the leading industry examples in Modularization.
It has been developing its modular product range since the 1930s. The cabs are strongly modularized with
a common frame, same door structure (different heights) and modularized side panels (different heights
and lengths). The windscreen and rear wall are the same on all cabs. The axles are standardized and used
in the 2, 3, 4 and 5-axle trucks and buses. Scania’s engine range is based on the three series featuring five,
six or eight cylinders, while using the same cylinder and components in all engines.

Applying standardized components lowers development time. For example the Scania engine developers
can focus on optimizing the combustion in one cylinder, which can then be used in all engines. Servicing
vehicles is cheaper as well. Imagine when a truck driver faces a chipped windscreen while he is 1,000
kilometers away from home. He is able to drive to the first service point where they will have only one type
of windscreen in stock. And this one windscreen fits!

Modularization is based on standardization of the interface’s connection points between component series
to ensure that they fit together in different combinations. These interfaces are designed in such a way that
they do not change over time. This makes it possible to install new components with improved product
performance without any need to change the associate components.

Now try to extrapolate this approach of Lego-like modular components to your own organization. Do you
see the opportunities? Of course your first reaction may be that it is not possible to meet customers’
requirements (Black thinking hat). Then realize that the focus of Scania is to deliver customized cars to each
of its customers. Now try to use your ‘Green thinking hat’ instead and imagine how your organization might
look like if you were able to start product development from scratch. Keep in mind that Scania started 85
years ago with its modular concept. It is not done overnight either.

Figure 22: Scania’s Modular system

67
 2.3.2 Systems Level Development

To cope with the challenge of delivering high quality and safe vehicles, carmakers and suppliers have
established structured system development processes (PDP - Product Development Process) that are
composed of a series of stages separated by quality gates (Stage-Gate Process). As seen in Figure 23, the
product development process describes all phases in product development, starting from the idea
(concept) to the start of series production.

Figure 23: Product development process

In order to detect deviations in the product and process development, so called quality gates are defined
where, in order to proceed to the next phase, they have to be passed. At each gate, various checks are
performed to evaluate the maturity of the product and/or process. Once all requirements are passed, the
project “passes” the gate and continues with the next activity.

The example of a product development process from Figure 23 is based on the activities, phases and its
quality gates from the VDA Volume 4 “Ensuring quality before the start of series production” [29].

The product development process often also includes the so-called samples, which are used to describe the
completeness, maturity and quality of the product. The sample phases are defined as following [30]:

68
 • A sample - functional prototypes, usually with limited drivability and low degree of maturity;
• B sample - functional, basic prototypes with full drivability and a high level of maturity. They may
be created using pilot tools;
• C sample - fully functional sample manufactured with series production tools;
• D sample - same as C-Sample, provided by suppliers for the purpose of the design sample release.

In Figure 24, for each sample phase, one or more systems are delivered to the customer.

Figure 24: Samples and System/Software releases

The system releases consist typically of:

• Mechanical components – most mechanical components are developed and changed in the early
development phases to validate the design against different customer requirements (e.g.,
reliability, durability, thermal changes). Within the C samples, the mechanical components are
manufactured already with series production tools.
• Hardware components – similar to the mechanical components, the hardware components (ECUs,
sensors, electric motors) are developed and validated within the A and B samples. The development
and release of the hardware components is not always synchronized with the mechanical releases.
For example, a system can be released with a B sample mechanic, C sample ECU and D sample
sensor. This could mean that the mechanic components were developed new for the customer, the
ECU is reused from another development project, and the sensor is a standard sensor bought from
a supplier.

69
 • Software releases – the software is developed iteratively in several releases. Each release has a
higher maturity, implementing more functionality and diagnostic functions. In most cases, within
the C sample components, the software has a so called function freeze, which means that all
functions are implemented and only bug fixing is performed. When new software is released, care
has to be taken that the hardware components are compatible with the new software release (e.g.,
changes of a CPU during the B sample phase).

In the automotive industry, the V-Model (Figure 25) has become the established process model for the
development of mechatronic system with software. A characteristic of the V-Model is that for every
specification step, a suitable testing strategy is defined, which forms the basis for the component and
system validation branch on the right hand side [31].

Figure 25: V-Model

As seen, the V-Model starts on the left branch with the customer specification. The customer defines the
requirements for the product, including technical requirements, process requirements, production
requirements, as well standards and norms to be fulfilled. The supplier must demonstrate to the customer
that all his requirements are implemented and validated. In order to do that, the supplier starts to derive
system requirements from the customer requirements and design the system and its interfaces in the
system architecture. From the system requirements and system architecture, the software relevant
requirements and interfaces are specified in the software requirements specification. The high and low
level software design is documented in the software architecture and detailed design document. The “V”
reaches its end in the software implementation and continues on the right side, where all requirements
and interfaces must be integrated and tested.

70
The V-Model is the backbone of related development quality standards such as Automotive SPICE® and ISO
26262. If we map the V-Model to the different releases and samples, each software or system release would
be developed according to the V-Model, starting from the requirements for the release, ending with
relevant tests for the release. We would undergo several iterations of a complete V in the model.

But how can we demonstrate that all customer requirements were implemented and tested? One of the
key aspects of systems engineering is the traceability of requirements and test cases. Each requirement
must be linked on the horizontal line to a test case and on the vertical line to a decomposed requirement,
interface description or architectural design. The main objective is to demonstrate that the implementation
of each customer requirement is traceable through the whole V-Model. The traceability must be even
bilateral (arrows pointing in both directions in Figure 26), which means that each requirement or test case
must have a source and destination link.

Figure 26: V-Model and traceability

One of the benefits of linking the requirements together is that we get a tree structure, which we require
for an impact analysis. Requirements change through the lifetime of the project; with the help of the
traceability, we can quickly identify the impact of a change or fault to other requirements and components.
Bidirectional traceability is also one of the key requirements of development quality standards such as
Automotive SPICE® and ISO 26262 (see section 2.4.3).

71
 2.3.3 Component Level

As suggested by the V-model, the system-level development translates itself to component-level

development once the system architecture and the functional flows have been established. The
component-level development is concerned with the design and implementation of individual mechanical,
hardware and software components which constitute the complete system. A general trend that has been
strongly influencing development processes and methods over the last decades is the strong presence of
digital technologies to facilitate design, implementation, manufacturing and testing on both component
and system levels.

Back in the 1970s, Computer-Aided Design (CAD) was the mainstream development tool, which used a mix
of hardware and software to create 3D models that could be turned and flipped, giving designers a view of
the potential product from every angle. By the 1980s, Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAM) was a major
breakthrough: when paired with CAD, CAM could create physical models of the drafts that were designed
on the computer. The advancement of computer models carried into the 1990s, when Computer-Aided
Engineering (CAE) became a common development tool. This system simulates how a component will
perform based on mathematical models and thereby help significantly cut the time and money that goes
into product testing.

Computer Aided Design (CAD)

Computer Aided Design (CAD) is probably the most prominent area of modelling and simulation in the
automotive industry. In the context of this chapter, CAD denotes Mechanical CAD (M-CAD) rather than
Electrical CAD (E-CAD). M-CAD is about visualizing the later product (or parts of it) and planning for the
required production tools. The best-known and most widely established CAD concept is the DMU (Digital
Mock-Up), which originated in the aerospace industry, and later became the leading concept for the
development and management within automobile projects.

Design has always had a central position in the development process of an engineering enterprise.
According to the links and information flows between the individual areas and departments, the product
realizing areas of manufacturing and assembly depend on the product planning and conceptualizing design
areas. Conversely, the design is heavily influenced by the insights and experiences from the production
areas.

Designers fix important product properties regarding functions, safety, ergonomics, production, transport,
usage, maintenance, dumping and recycling. They have a huge influence on production and usage costs, on
quality, and on run-through times in production. Considering the increasing need of car manufacturers to
distinguish their products from the competition while at the same time react to market trends and squeeze
prizes by, for example, leveraging platform concepts, the design will gain even more importance in the
future. It is one of the most creative and innovative areas in the creation process of a vehicle. The wide
application of computer aided design techniques is meanwhile common practice. However, it is time to
rethink and/or optimize many practical concepts that have been developed around these systems in the
course of time. Although the missing interoperability (i.e., ability to work together and exchange data easily)
of different CAD systems and tools is still a problem (see section 0), there is a huge unexplored potential
hidden in the less isolated and thus more synergetic use of individual powerful tools like simulation tools,
databases and networked information systems in a development process that brings CAD and CAE as close
together as possible. Standard design tasks will get increasingly automated, while higher sophistication will
be supported by knowledge-based methods. Similar to the trend towards self-contained components in the

72
software industry, there is a very strong tendency towards increasingly feature-based modelling [41].
Features are self-contained geometry models of system components that are maintained in a library and
adapted to a concrete design by a number of clearly defined parameters. The ultimate aim is to implement
the “intelligent” CAD system that actively supports the designer in assembling a concrete system from as
many ready-made features as possible.

Over the last few years, significant progress has been made in the use of simulation throughout the very
early phases of product development. This particularly applies to the automotive and aerospace industries,
where the Digital-Mock-Up (DMU) has become state-of-the art. Representing the geometric shapes of
individual parts and assemblies, the DMU typically supports the design and production phases of the
product creation process, where the most important application of DMU is traditionally
assembly/disassembly investigations for the whole range of simple sets of parts up to very complex product
structures.

Digital Mock-Up has also become an umbrella term for the many different software modules that are used
for early validation and verification checks. The investigations are based on 3D-CAD-models, and they
typically address collision detection, checks for minimal distances, etc. A complete 3D-CAD-representation
of the vehicle is a prerequisite for a development process that is backed by seamless simulation. The
challenge is to have a seamless DMU tool-chain that allows the designers to respect as many aspects of the
vehicle and its total life cycle as possible in their early designs. Among those increasingly crucial aspects are
modularity, manufacturability, reusability and scraping.

Tecoplan, Engineering Animation, Clarus, and Division (among others) pioneered DMU solutions that make
efficient use of tessellated three-dimensional component solid models. These allow efficient design
collaboration, mark-up, fly-through, and interference/collision detection. Integrated with Product Data/Life
cycle Management (PDM/PLM) Systems, these Digital Mock-Up products provide an excellent means to
insure that all of the parts of the product will fit together properly and that the product will appear as
specified. Despite this broad establishment, however, there is enormous yet unused potential in realizing
the complete vision of the DMU, especially in regard to applying it in all phases of development. Current
and near future developments aim at supporting products during their complete life cycles by digital
technologies. This also includes sales, marketing and recycling. The according digital product represents all
the physical and functional properties of, as well as all further relevant information about the corresponding
real product. By integrating the DMU in existing PDM environments, direct associations between the DMU
and further product data can be established.

Some typical current uses of the DMU in vehicle development are:

• Plausibility checks of parts/components geometry.

• Assembly/disassembly investigations.
• Investigation of whether and how parts can be produced and assembled.
• Basic shape information for various engineering methods like CFD for aerodynamics engineering.
• Planning of manufacturing devices.
• Basis for Virtual Reality (VR) and Augmented Reality (AR) applications.
• The “Virtual Vehicle” as the information platform for increased project transparency for all project
members and improved co-operation between the individual skill areas.

73
 The steps towards virtual product development based on DMU are roughly defined as follows.

1. Definition of the properties and functions that will be analyzed during the product creation process.
2. Specification of the methods that will be used to conduct these analyses.
3. Specification of the different configurations of the virtual prototype.
4. The results of the subsequent property assessment leading to a project status that corresponds to
the commissioning drives with real prototype vehicles.
5. All the project members refer to the same reference, which leverages and eases the mutual
coordination.
6. All the design and calculation models, project reports, and simulation results that are created
throughout the development process have to be maintained in a platform that allows every user to
conveniently extract only the information that is relevant for their particular work.

Computer Aided Engineering (CAE)

Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) is what is often denoted as the field of classical “simulation”. Originally,
CAE was mostly used to prepare and afterwards verify powertrain and chassis component development in
terms of emissions, fuel consumption, performance, etc. It was considered to be an academic approach to
pre-calculate what would later be measured and experienced, and/or to verify measurement results from
prototype hardware. In modern simulation-driven (“virtual”) development, however, CAE provides a
powerful means to model the virtual components and systems. Modern integrated development processes
therefore leverage close interdisciplinary co-operation between simulation and test engineers, which is
highly beneficial for both sides: the simulation people can use real measured data to verify and improve
their simulation models, while the test engineers benefit from high-quality calculation results in terms of
being able to set up more efficient test procedures, and to supplement missing measurement data.

The first and foremost aim to be achieved in a simulation-driven development process is the consistent
involvement of simulation experts in all stages of the project. This will avoid misconceptions about the use
of simulation and will make the other people’s expectations more realistic.

In the concept phase of a new car project, CAE mainly serves to calculate the overall structural behavior of
the car – an approach that should be the basis for any good design. Such global parameters as the static
torsion and bending stiffness, the structural balance, the overall vehicle vibration modes and standard crash
responses should be calculated in a sufficiently precise manner (relative statements). For CAE to be able to
“push on” the design in its early phases, the vehicle models must be generated before CAD data are made
available and they must also be quickly modifiable. Such vehicle-concept models consisting of several
hundreds of thousands of elements are the only ones allowing the rapid concept-variation cycles to be
evaluated using CAE within the limited periods of time available. Intensifying the investigation of concept
variants in the early phases of vehicle development can considerably reduce later development costs.

In the series development phase, most of the interfaces are clearly defined and each task is assigned to its
own specialist. As a result, the number of staff increases considerably (to about 10 times as many). Within
the scope of Simultaneous Engineering the suppliers, too, are involved at the earliest possible stage.
Complete component and module development packages are outsourced and manufacturing, and
assembly aspects are increasingly taken into account.

CAE calculations performed in the series development phase must be very reliable (absolute statements).
Very detailed simulation models are used, which include all the relevant parts (e.g., up to about 600,000

74
elements for crash investigations). Major geometry changes are performed in exceptional cases only. The
optimization of major design parameters (wall thickness, material quality, production feasibility, joining
techniques, tolerance, etc.) is becoming increasingly important. In addition, multifunctional optimizations
with regard to, e.g., stiffness, crash behavior and NVH will be used more intensively.

The most obvious limits of simulation lie in modelling emotionally dominated effects. Within the
automotive area, this becomes most evident in the calibration of drivability, as well as in the optimization
of exterior and interior design. The factors that finally lead to a purchase decision are mainly unconscious.
Similarly, the terms used to characterize vehicle-handling capabilities are highly subjective. These terms are
still very difficult to be expressed by objective measurable quantities and are thus inappropriate to calibrate
simulation models.

Critical design that attributes for many vehicle components, in particular the powertrain, are:

• Noise and vibration.

• Ride and handling.
• Comfort.
• Safety and durability.

The number of core disciplines of the functional design of a vehicle can be extensive. For the development
of an engine for instance, we can distinguish the following development elements:

1. Thermodynamics:
• Cam profile and timing.
• Intake and exhaust manifold dimensions (lengths, diameters, and volumes).
• Layout of turbo-charging systems.
• Prediction of engine performance.
• Rate of heat release analysis.
• Gas exchange analysis.
• Engine friction.
• Etc.

2. Structural Mechanics:
• Transient temperature analysis.
• Thermal cycle as loading condition.
• Plastic material model.
• Main analysis objectives:
o Calculation of number of cycles to crack initiation.
o Part optimization in view of thermal mechanical fatigue.
o Material benchmark, engine test benchmark.
o Application to cylinder head, exhaust manifold, piston.

75
 3. Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)/Heat Transfer:
• Optimization of intake system / manifold: Minimize pressure drop, realize equal filling, and optimize
discharge.
• Optimization of intake ports: Minimize pressure drop, realize desired swirl level, and optimize
discharge.
• Optimization of piston bowl shape: Optimize turbulence distribution, realize desired swirl level,
optimize efficiency, minimize pollutants, and increase performance.
• Optimization of exhaust gas recirculation (EGR) supply: Optimize EGR distribution to all cylinders,
realize good air - EGR mixing.
• Optimization of water cooling jacket: Minimize pressure drop, realize homogeneous cooling, realize
precision cooling, minimize heat-up times, increase cooling efficiency, and calculate heat thermal
coefficients (HTC).
• Optimization of water pump: Minimize pressure drop, realize homogeneous flow distribution for
V-type engine, and optimize cooling efficiency.
• Optimization of injector type / spray direction: Optimize spray development, optimize flame
development, and minimize emissions.
• Optimization of flow onto turbo charger / exhaust manifold: Minimize pressure drop, realize
homogeneous mass flow distribution, and optimize efficiency, HTC for heat transfer
• Optimization of intercooler flow: Minimize pressure drop, realize homogeneous flow distribution,
and optimize cooling efficiency.

The above description clearly shows that computational optimization in CAE is of great importance. The
general trend in CAE is clearly towards simulating more, faster, and more accurately. This is necessary to
be able to introduce a mainly CAE-driven development process. Some more specific trends are:

• Integration of generic, powerful numerical solver packages.

• Specialized solvers to maximize speed and accuracy.
• CAE tool integration.
• CAE workspaces and platforms.
• Integration of CAE tools into CAD environments.
• Enforced CAE involvement within enterprises to drive virtual quality gates, milestones, and design
decisions.

Several computational methods are used to simulate the behavior of components and systems. In the
automobile case, this entails predominantly the simulation of mechanics and thermodynamics, which
provides the basis for the optimization of the analyzed structural elements for a given application. In
powertrain development, the most important basic methods are:

• Finite Element Method (FEM) calculation.

• Multibody System (MBS) simulation.

The FEM is very widely used, and is suitable for the simulation of component behavior such as resultant
stresses respectively strains under given boundary conditions. The geometry of the analyzed mechanical
component is meshed by means of a generation of finite elements. Those finite elements approximate the
original geometry for computation. The calculation results are displayed directly in the geometry model.

76
The most established application domains of FEM in vehicle development are acoustics, fatigue, durability,
Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD), and Noise-Vibration-Harshness (NVH).

To simulate the dynamic system behavior, the application of Multi Body System (MBS) simulations is
appropriate. MBS simulations give information about the complete dynamic behavior of the system, such
as the load-time-history of a specific mechanical component included in the system. Primarily due to the
extensive usage of active systems in the automotive industry, the demands on MBS are continually
increasing. The design of active systems such as ESP or damping control requires maximum flexibility for
the combined simulation of control and mechanical systems – in terms of software technology, price and
communication between the involved companies.

The MBS models used for these applications have very different levels of complexity, which is primarily
determined by the frequency ranges they have to cover. These ranges depend on the relevant control
systems that influence the investigated effects. Handling models, for example, have a frequency range of
interest of up to 10 Hz, but with a frequency content of a magnitude of 100 Hz. Ride models have to cover
a frequency range of some 10 Hz up to sometimes above 100 Hz. This requires the extensive usage of
flexible bodies (primarily for the car body, sub frames, and a number of suspension wish-bones), which are
imported from FEM tools. The number of degrees of freedom is thus much higher (generally tripled)
compared to handling models. Durability models require complexity levels that are comparable to
advanced ride models. The MBS results are transferred to FE-tools in order to determine the resulting
stresses, and to predict the durability of the part(s) with the help of specialized fatigue simulation tools.

Further CAE-methods are the topology and shape optimization, which are based on the finite element
method. Shape optimization is suitable to reduce stress peaks caused by geometrical features such as
notches. Topology optimization can provide basic design proposals and is often used to decrease material
in low-stressed regions of the structure in order to reduce the component’s weight. Moreover, many
applications demand the coupling of FEM, MBS, and HIL (Hardware in the Loop). One representative
example is the Integration of CFD and MBS for the simulation of wind effects on vehicle dynamics and
validating the results using HIL.

77
 Computer Aided Testing (CAT)
The term Computer Aided Testing (CAT) is not as heavily used in the automotive literature as CAD and CAE.
Here, it is used to denote all the testing activities that are done on various kinds of testbeds throughout the
powertrain development process.

Table 3 lists some state-of-the art development activities that are done on different kinds of testbeds during
the testing and calibration phase. This is of course only a small subset of the large number of possible
activities.

Category Actions

Series Optimization of driving performance and fuel

Application/Calibration consumption

Optimization of controller functions (e.g., calibration of

controllers for optimized reference actions and
disturbance reactions)
Commissioning tests

Validation of Legal Requirements Optimization of emissions and fuel consumption (NEFZ-,

FTP-, Japan legal cycles).

Testing of Parts Fatigue tests

Wear optimization

Reproduction of field failures

Development of Principles Development and optimization of new exhaust after

treatment strategies (e.g., particulate filters, NOx
catalytic converter regeneration)

Development of powertrain concepts

Model Development Development of real-time models of engines (e.g., fuel

path model, air path model, lambda calculation model,
emissions model)

Table 3: Selected automotive development activities done in CAT environments

The testing and calibration phase is characterized by the fact that the units under test are a mixture of
hardware prototypes and simulation models. In such environments, it is highly important that the real
prototypes operate like they should in the complete real system. In the case of electronic control units, this
requirement poses enormous challenges on signal conditioning and on the real-time performance of all the
simulation models. In the automotive industry, the term “Hardware-in-the-Loop” (HIL) denotes systems
where one or more electronic control units (ECU) are available as real hardware, and the rest of the vehicle
is simulated in real-time. Vehicle manufacturers (OEMs) use such HIL-environments primarily for
automated tests of individual and networked control units.

78
ECU suppliers use them for ECU function development as well. They first design the individual ECU functions
in a modelling environment like MATLAB/Simulink, where they are embedded and tested in the complete
ECU software model as “Model-in-the-Loop” (MIL). At a later stage in the process, those functions are
compiled to the target-specific code of the ECU hardware and operating system, and are executed in real-
time on the development platform in the context of the other ECU functions as “Software-in-the-Loop”
(SIL). Only if they also pass these tests, will they be added to the complete ECU software code and tested
on the final ECU platform within a HIL-environment.

Table 4 contains the names and characteristics in terms of tested items and simulated parts of different
kinds of testbeds that are in commonly used at OEMs, suppliers, and service providers.

Testbed Tested Vehicle Components Simulated Parts

HIL Electronic Control Units, Bus Systems, Powertrain, Chassis, Environment

Car IT

Component Single-Cylinder, Clutch, Two-mass Environment

Flywheel, Brakes, Steering, etc.

Engine Engine (for Steady-state or Dynamic Powertrain Without the Engine,

Operation) Environment

Transmission Gearbox Powertrain without the gearbox,

Environment

Drivetrain Engine and Gearbox Rest of the Powertrain, Environment,

(Powerpack) Driver

Powertrain Powertrain without the Wheels Wheels, Environment, Driver

Chassis - Complete Vehicle Environment

Dynamometer

Hydropulse Complete Vehicle Environment

Table 4: Different types of automotive testing environments

Simulation obviously has a very important position in all these configurations. Throughout the different
phases of development, components of the vehicle may be tested or simulated at several such testbeds. To
make the data and results comparable and reusable among the various testbed “stations”, the simulation
models must have defined relationships among one another.

The dynamic engine testbed promises to have a particularly high, yet almost unexplored potential for front-
loading, since it requires just the engine to be physically available for full dynamic vehicle operation. The
main uncertainties about the possible applications of dynamic engine testbeds lie in the answer to the
question of how detailed the rest of the powertrain and the environment have to be simulated for a given
testing task, and how well this can be achieved in terms of data that has to be provided, the constructive
testbed layout, and the simulation models of the missing powertrain components.

The testing activities throughout the powertrain development process are subject to change in order to
fulfil the new testing requirements that modern powertrains raise. There is an overall trend towards

79
 increasingly complex test procedures on various kinds of testbeds without the traditionally clear separation
between pure test and calibration procedures. There is consequently a demand for adequately qualified
testing personnel. Many of the current testing activities will be run automatically in unmanned operation
or be included in more complex procedures in the future.

In order to be able to front-load testing activities, testability has to be included in design. Testing must be
done throughout the whole development process in iterative cycles according to the paradigm to “test early
and often”. This is also a fundamental rule of good software and electronic hardware development practice
that has to be introduced more deeply into powertrain development. Moreover, tackling the time-quality-
cost dilemma requires testing to be done throughout the whole development phase – not only as a
sequential part within individual development cycles. This implies that a large share of testing needs to be
done within the simulation environment rather than with physical prototypes.

Automotive Supplier Structure

It is important to understand that suppliers have a very significant role in all of the above mentioned
activities. Actually, about 75% of the vehicle components are engineered and manufactured by the
suppliers. Several hundreds of suppliers all around the globe contribute to the creation of a single vehicle
model. In order to better tackle the complexity of the resulting supplier relationships, the traditional
approach, to buy parts and components from a huge variety of suppliers, will be increasingly replaced by
purchasing more complex, mostly pre-assembled systems (e.g., front-end systems) from only a few
suppliers. Against the background of globalization and because of the ever-growing requirements of the
OEMs— e.g., shorter development times and life cycles of the models or the increasing relevance of
electronics in vehicles—a further reinforced consolidation process within the supplier industry will take
place. The trend is towards a few system suppliers and/or mega-suppliers developing and delivering almost
the complete vehicle to the OEMs who will become system integrators assuming the overall project
responsibility and coordination. These relationships will result in an interdependent manufacturer-supplier-
network replacing the current hierarchical supplier structure of tier-1, tier-2, and tier-X suppliers.
Consequently, due to the fact that the trend is moving away from components towards complex and self-
consistent systems, new supply chains of strategic partners are coming up (Figure 27).

80
Figure 27: Automotive Supplier Structure Evolution

This trend leads to the assumption that

• The technology leadership in the automotive industry shifts more and more to the suppliers.
• The changing structures in the supply chain require automotive suppliers to enlarge their
knowledge about relationships with their organizational partners.
• Suppliers need to build up system competence, as they are assuming responsibility for self-
consistent system and subsystems rather than individual parts and components.
• As system providers, suppliers have to master the complete life cycle of the systems they develop.

These four factors demand from both automotive OEMs and suppliers, innovations on an organizational
level. Modern organizations are heavily focused on innovation by the integration of several different
stakeholders. Renault’s Techno-center in Guyancourt and BMW’s development center in Munich are
stereotype examples of such modern organization forms.

81
 Summary

The complexity of electronic and software functionality in cars is increasing at a tremendous pace.
Automotive companies have to tackle this challenge in terms of product quality, functional safety,
reliability, and numerous other characteristics that are important to customers. Modern advanced driver
assistance systems (ADAS) have led to the replacement of purely mechanical or hydraulic systems by
mechatronic ones. Nowadays, software already controls about 70% of all functions in the car, with a clearly
rising trend. Software is executed on interconnected, networked electronic control units (ECUs) which have
to interact in real-time in order to provide the desired functions on vehicle level. Most of these systems are
developed and manufactured by suppliers such that car manufacturers (OEMs) increasingly assume the role
of system integrators.

To cope with all these challenges, product development processes have been defined and deployed in
automotive companies. Furthermore, standards like Automotive SPICE® and ISO 26262 are used for the
development of complex mechatronic systems according to the V-Model. The key characteristic of this
model is that it starts with the customer requirements specification and covers requirements analysis,
architecture and design processes for the system and software development, as well as the software
implementation on its left branch. The “V”s right branch covers the verification, validation and integration
of all requirements and interfaces on both the system and software levels.

On the system and component level, the presence of digital technologies for the design, implementation
manufacturing and testing has been strongly influencing the development processes and methods over the
last decades. Tools like Computer-Aided Design (CAD), Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAM), Computer-
Aided Engineering (CAE) and Computer-Aided Testing (CAT) have become indispensable elements of the
development of automotive systems and components.

Key words in paragraph 2.3:

• Complexity • V-model
• Functional Safety • Requirements
• Mechanic • Testing
• Electronic • Automotive SPICE ®
• Hydraulic • ISO 26262
• Mechatronic • Traceability
• Software • Safety Engineering
• CAN-bus • Computer-Aided Design (CAD)
• Electronic Control Unit (ECU) • Computer-Aided Manufacturing (CAM)
• Sensors • Computer-Aided Engineering (CAE)
• Safety – critical Functions • Computer-Aided Testing (CAT)
• Embedded Software • Digital-Mock-Up (DMU)
• Product Development Process (PDP) • Finite Element Method (FEM)
• Quality Gates • Hardware-in-the-Loop (HIL)
• Samples • Original Equipment Manufacturer (OEM)
• System Release • Advanced Driver Assistance Systems (ADAS)
• Software Release

82
2.4 Risk Management

Learning Objectives
1. Understand the risk management of A-SPICE.
2. Understand failure mode effects and analyses.
3. Understand the process FMEA.
4. Interpret the process risks.
5. Understand failure mode effects and diagnostic analyses.
6. Interpret the hazard and risk analyses based on ISO 26262 and IEC 61508.

2.4.1 Risk Management process

Project Risk Management is an important aspect within project management. A project risk is defined as an
unintended event or condition with a certain probability and a certain negative effect on the project’s
objectives. An example of an unintended event is delay of time. Project objectives are often related to time,
costs, quality or technology.

Project Risk Management is the identification, assessment and mitigation of risks. Risks can be identified in
a brainstorm session by the team. The assessment can be done to qualify the probability and severity of
each risk. A tool, called the Risk Matrix, that can be used for the risk assessment is demonstrated in Figure
28.

Figure 28: Risk Matrix

During the project, the team should try to mitigate the risks. Mitigation is trying to reduce the risk by either:

• Reducing probability: Reducing the likelihood of the event to occur.

• Reducing severity: Eliminating the negative effect of the event.
 On many occasions, it is not possible to reduce the severity of the event (effect). In that case, the team
should focus on taking actions or measures to reduce the probability of the event. Usually, we differentiate
risks between:

Project Risks:

• Impacting the resources, timing and/or quality of the project.

Product Risks: Affecting the function of the system or product:

• H&R – Product Failure Risk Assessment for Functional Safety requirements specification.
• FMEA – dependent on when the FMEA is performed (System FMEA, Design FMEA).
• FMEDA – FMEA including diagnosis functions for Functional Safety.

Process Risks (Production): Affecting the good functioning of the process (steps):

• FMEA – Process FMEA.

• HAZOP – Security risks for factory workers.

2.4.2 Failure Mode and Effect Analysis

FMEA stands for Failure Mode and Effect Analysis and is a structured risk analysis method. A FMEA is used
to identify potential failure modes in processes, products or services and to plan actions to minimize
negative effects. It was one of the first systematic techniques of failure analysis.

Figure 29: Cause & Effect

FMEA was developed in the 1950s to study problems that might arise from the malfunction of military
systems. In 1993, the Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG) and the American Society of Quality Control
(ASQC) established the standardized FMEA method as a part of APQP. Ford, GM and Chrysler describe FMEA
steps in a FMEA manual. Today, FMEA is used more and more in industry, high-tech and other sectors like
service providers. FMEA includes review of:

• the process (the activities) or the design (components)

• failure modes (what could go wrong?)
• failure causes (why would the failure happen?)
• failure effects (what would be the consequence of each failure?)

Teams apply FMEA to evaluate processes or products for possible failures and to prevent them by correcting
the processes proactively, rather than reacting after failures. FMEA is particularly useful in evaluating a new
process prior to implementation and in assessing the impact of proposed changes to an existing process.

84
An FMEA identifies the potential of failure (failure modes) in each step of the process. Each failure mode
gets a numeric score that reflects:

• Likelihood that the failure will occur.

• Likelihood that the failure will not be detected.
• Amount of harm the failure mode may cause to a person.
• Damage the failure mode may cause to a system or equipment.

Different Types of FMEA

• System FMEA:
o Is used to analyze systems and sub-systems of a product in the early conceptual and design
stages?
• Design FMEA:
o Is used to analyze product designs before the production release?
• Process FMEA:
o Is used to analyze production and assembly processes?
o Machinery FMEA
o Is used to analyze tools and equipment?

12 Steps to construct an FMEA:

1. Process Step/Item Record process steps or components of a product.

2. Function Functions of process step or product component/system.
3. Requirements Requirements necessary to perform the functions.
4. Potential Failure Mode Potential failure if requirement is not met.
5. Effect The effect of potential failure.
6. Severity The severity of the effect to the customer or production process.
7. Cause Determine cause of the failure.
8. Current Controls Current prevention/detection of measures.
9. Occurrence Estimate the chance of failure occurrence.
10. Detection How well failures/causes can be detected.
11. Risk Priority Number RPN = Severity × Occurrence × Detection.
12. Improvement Actions How a product/process can be improved.

In step 11, the ‘Risk Priority Number’ (RPN) indicates the result of three quantitative ratings 1 to 10. For
each type of FMEA, there are different ratings, which are related to the effects, causes and controls. The
higher the score is, the higher the risk priority is. Based on the highest RPN scores, the team will determine
action plans to decrease the RPNs.

• Severity: the severity of the effect on the customer

• Occurrence: estimate the chance of failure occurrence
• Detection: how well can failures/causes be detected before they lead to the effect?

!"# = %&'&()*+ × -../((&0.& × 1&*&.*)20

85
86
Severity of Effect on Product Severity of Effect on Process
(Customer Effect) (Manufacturing/Assembly Effect)
Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or
May endanger operator (machine or assembly) without
10 involves noncompliance with government regulation without 10
Failure to Meet Failure to Meet warning.
warning.
Safety and/or Safety and/or
Regulatory Regulatory
Requirements Potential failure mode affects safe vehicle operation and/or Requirements
9 involves noncompliance with government regulation with 9 May endanger operator (machine or assembly) with warning.
warning.

Loss of primary function (vehicle inoperable, does not affect Major 100% of product may have to be scrapped. Line shutdown
8 safe vehicle operation). 8 Disruption or stop ship.
Loss or Degradation
of Primary Function
A portion of the production run may have to be scrapped.
Degradation of primary function (vehicle operable, but at Significant
7 7 Deviation from primary process including decreased line
reduced level of performance). Disruption
speed or added manpower.

Loss of secondary function (vehicle operable, but comfort /
6 convenience functions inoperable).
Loss or Degradation
of Secondary
Function Degradation of secondary function (vehicle operable, but
5 comfort / convenience functions at reduced level of
performance).
Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does
4 not conform. Noticed by most customers ( > 75% ).
100% of production run may have to be reworked offline and
6 accepted.
A portion of production run may have to be reworked offline
5 and accepted.
Moderate
Disruption
100% of production run may have to be reworked in station
4 before it is processed.

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does A portion of production run may have to be reworked in

Figure 30: AIAG process FMEA guidelines (4th edition) – Severity

3 Annoyance 3
not conform. Noticed by many customers ( 50% ). station before it is processed.

Appearance or Audible Noise, vehicle operable, item does Minor Slight inconvenience to process,
2 not conform. Noticed by discriminating customers ( < 25% ). 2 Disruption operation or operator.

1 No effect No discernible effect. 1 No effect No discernible effect.

 Occurrence Detection
≥ 100 per thousand,
Almost No detection opportunity. No current process control;
10 Very High ≥ 1 in 10 incidents 10 Impossible Cannot detect or is not analyzed.
per items/vehicles

50 per thousand,
Very Not likely to detect at any stage. Failure Mode and/or Error (Cause)
9 1 in 20 incidents 9 Remote is not easily detected (e.g., random audits).
per items/vehicles

20 per thousand,
Problem Detection Post Processing. Failure Mode detection post-processing
8 High 1 in 50 incidents 8 Remote
by operator through visual/tactile/audible means.
per items/vehicles

10 per thousand, Problem Detection at Source. Failure Mode detection in-station by operator through
7 1 in 100 incidents 7 Very Low visual/tactile/audible means or post-processing through use of attribute gauging
per items/vehicles (go/no-go, manual torque check/clicker wrench, etc.).

2 per thousand, Problem Detection Post Processing, Failure Mode detection post-processing by operator
6 1 in 500 incidents 6 Low through use of variable gauging or in-station by operator through us of attribute gauging
per items/vehicles (go/no-go, manual torque check/clicker wrench, etc.).

Problem Detection at Source. Failure Mode or Error (Cause) detection in-station by operator
.5 per thousand,
through use of variable gauging or by automated controls in-station that will detect discrepant
5 Moderate 1 in 2,000 incidents 5 Moderate
part and notify operator (light, buzzer, etc.).
per items/vehicles
Gauging performed on setup and first-piece check (for set-up causes only).

.1 per thousand, Problem Detection Post Processing. Failure Mode detection post-processing by automated
Moderately
4 1 in 10,000 incidents 4 controls that will detect discrepant part and lock part
High
per items/vehicles to prevent further processing.

.01 per thousand, Problem Detection at Source. Failure Mode detection in-station by automated controls that will
3 1 in 100,000 incidents 3 High detect discrepant part and automatically lock part in station
per items/vehicles to prevent further processing.
Low

Figure 31: AIAG process FMEA guidelines (4th edition) –Occurrence & Detection
≤ .001 per thousand, Error Detection and/or Problem Prevention. Error (Cause) detection in-station by automated
2 1 in 1,000,000 incidents 2 Very High controls that will detect error and
per items/vehicles prevent discrepant part from being made.

Failure is eliminated
1 Very Low
through preventive control.
Detection not applicable; Error Prevention. Error (Cause) prevention as a result of fixture design,
Almost
1 machine design or part design. Discrepant parts cannot be made because item
Certain
has been error-proofed by process/product design.

87
 Figure 32: Failure Mode and Effect Analysis

88
Example Process Failure Mode & Effect Analysis (PFMEA)
We will now discuss an example about a Process FMEA for a metal plate component. The first step is
determine the process flow. The standard operation steps are: cut, drill holes, glue on PCB.

Start

10
Receive material

Block
Material OK? No
material
Yes

20
Cutting material

Dimensions Block
inside spec No
OK? material

Yes

30
Drilling holes

Dimensions Block
holes inside spec No
OK? material

Yes

40
Gluing PCB on
metal plate

End

Figure 33: Process flow diagram

Despite the production steps are known, the organization has to identify the potential risks of the various
process steps for this particular product. In Figure 33 we can see that the biggest risk is the “PCB on the
wrong position”, with a RPN of 336.

This RPN is very high and measures need to be taken. Not much can be done about the effect to the
customer (Severity), but it is possible to reduce the chance the failure will occur (Occurrence). We can also
take measures to increase the possibility to detect the failure (Detection). For instance, we can add a
camera to inspect the process. Taking measures to reduce Occurrence and improve Detection, will reduce
the RPN value.

89
 Occurrence

RPN
Severity

Detection
Process step Requirements Potential Potential Potential Control Control
and Function failure mode effect of cause of (prevention) (detection)
failure failure

10. Received Right material Wrong Material 2 Wrong Purchase on 2 Check with 6 24
material and right material sent back identification order, no order
amount of to on material stock
material warehous
e and
asked for
new
material
Too little Delay of 2 Wrong Purchase on 2 Check with 6 24
material order amount on order, no order
material stock
requisition
note
Too much Extra 1 Wrong Purchase on 2 Check with 6 12
material handling amount on order, no order
material stock
requisition
note
20. Cutting Right Too small Scrap 8 Wrong set up Set up check 2 First product 6 96
metal plate dimensions material control
Too Big Rework 6 Wrong set up Set up check 2 First product 6 72
material control
Burr free Not Burr Free Rework 6 worn out 6 First product 6 216
material tools control
30. Drilling 4 holes Too many Scrap 8 Wrong Set up check 2 Automatic 3 48
holes holes material program control of
selected order and
program
Less than 4 Rework 6 Wrong Set up check 2 Automatic 3 36
holes material program control of
selected order and
program
Right place Holes on Scrap 8 Wrong Set up check 2 Automatic 3 48
wrong material program control of
position selected order and
program
Right Holes too big
Scrap 8 Wrong drill 4 First product 6 192
dimensions of material control
holes Holes too Rework 6 Wrong drill 4 First product 6 144
small material control
Holes not Scrap 8 worn out 5 First product 6 240
round material tools control
Burr in holes
Rework 6 worn out 5 First product 6 180
material tools control
40. Gluing Right position PCB on wrong Scrap 8 Wrong 7 First product 6 336
PCB on metal of PCB position material measurement control
plate Enough PCB does not Rework in 4 Use of wrong Only one kind 1 Visual 7 28
adhesive bond productio glue of glue being control
power n line used in
production
4 Use of wrong material 3 Visual 7 84
metal check at start control
of order

Figure 34: Example Process Failure Mode & Effect Analysis

90
2.4.3 Functional Safety

With the increasing number of electronically controlled systems, safety-critical functionality that was
formerly hidden in the mechanical or hydraulic part of the system is now implemented in the electronics
and software. In order to be able to handle the complexity and ensure safety, functional safety standards
like the IEC 61508 and the automotive passenger car specific ISO 26262 are specifying requirements and
methods how to address faults caused by the electronic or software which could lead to a hazard on vehicle
level, endangering the life of persons inside and outside the car.

The V-model is used in safety engineering for design and test. The different phases are extended by safety
related content, methodologies, requirements and work products (see Figure 35). The process starts with
the Functional and Technical Safety Concept (FSC and TSC, respectively), where the functional safety
engineer, together with the system architect, analyze the system and outline the elements and functional
flows needed to detect or prevent hazardous situations. Additional safety software requirements are
derived and documented in the software requirements specification. The validation includes additional
methods and tests to ensure the safety of the system.

Figure 35: V-Model including elements of functional safety development

One very important aspect of system and safety engineering is the thinking in functional flows. In the
steering gear example, if we move the steering wheel to the left, the whole chain of effects, starting with
the torque sensor measuring a value, converting this value in the software, controlling the motor and
moving the mechanical rack must be considered. It is therefore crucial that the system is designed in
multidisciplinary teams including experts from different departments.

Safety engineering is a complex discipline which extends existing design engineering principles and adds
concepts such as hazard and risk analysis, signal flow based Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA),
Failure Modes, Effects and Diagnostics Analysis (FMEDA), Fault Tree Analysis (FTA), functional safety
concepts, technical safety concepts and technical safety architectures to the system engineering world. It
is important that safety managers and engineers are experienced and trained persons, since functional

91
 safety means more than just managing safety in a project. It is the complex integration of understanding
standards, managing and planning a safety life cycle, integrated design including design parameters related
to safety on all levels (product, system, software), as well as legal aspects to handle liabilities.

Automotive Safety Integrity Level (ASIL)

In the automotive sector, the ISO 26262 provides requirements and methods specifically for the
development and production of safety-critical subsystems controlled by electronics and software. These
methods all aim to reduce the risk of failure to a specified level in order to avoid hazards. A hazard is a
failure of the concerned subsystem (e.g., unwanted steering) in a particular (hazardous) situation on vehicle
level (e.g., a car driving at high speed on a motorway).

Depending on the situation in which these malfunctions occur, the consequences will be fatal. In order to
derive the required risk reduction for these malfunctions at the beginning of the V-development process, a
hazard and risk analysis is performed. In this analysis, the worst-case situations are assumed. The resulting
hazards are rated by the following three parameters (see Figure 36):

• Severity (S): the severity of potential injuries as consequences of the accident

• Exposure (E): the probability with which the vehicle can be in the investigated situation
• Controllability (C): the difficulty for a “normal” driver to control the vehicle despite the malfunction
in the assumed situation.

Figure 36: Classification schema used to analyze hazards

The major result of the Hazard and Risk Analysis is a safety goal per investigated hazard with an associated
required safety integrity level (ASIL, Automotive Safety Integrity Level). This ASIL represents the probability
of the safety goal’s violation (and consequently the violation of safety requirements linked to this safety
goal). ASIL-D is the highest possible rating on a scale of QM, ASIL-A, ASIL-B, ASIL-C, and ASIL-D. QM means
that basic Quality Management has to be in place; however, no special other risk reduction methods need
to be applied for achieving the related safety goal.

92
The ISO 26262 requires a specific method to determine the ASIL of a safety goal. This method is based on
the risk tree depicted below.

Figure 37: Risk graph used to determine ASIL (Automotive Safety Integrity Level)

Given the values for the three aforementioned parameters S, E, and C, the ASIL is the result of a lookup in
this risk tree. For example, for S = S2, E = E3, and C = C3, the table in Figure 37 gives B as a resulting ASIL.

As shown in Figure 37, in a next step, a Functional Safety Concept (FSC) is elaborated in order to derive
functional safety requirements from the safety goals determined and rated previously. As soon as the
system architecture has been designed, this FSC has to be translated to a Technical Safety Concept (TSC)
specifying how the safety functions are actually implemented in hardware and software. The ASIL
associated with these functions translates itself to a specific FIT (Failure in Time) rate, which has to be
applied to all the hardware elements which are impacted by the related safety goal. One FIT means 1
hazardous hardware fault in 109 (1 billion) operating hours. Likewise, there are specific methods to be
applied to the software involved in the functional chain that implements a safety goal.

Considering the fact that the automotive industry is a mass industry with low product margins, it is
impossible to use electronic parts with one FIT because they are far too expensive! Therefore, the ISO 26262
foresees the so-called decomposition concept, which allows the use of redundant lower quality and thus
less expensive hardware components, provided that these are independent of each other. The signals
delivered by these components are verified by software functions which also determine the actual output
values. Further software functions are used for the diagnosis on signal level, component level, as well as on
operating system level. If diagnosis functions detect a fault or an error (as the consequence of a fault), they
will try avoid a failure. If this is not possible, they will instead switch the malfunctioning subsystem into a
safe state. According to ISO 26262, a safe state of a subsystem is an operational mode of this subsystem,
rendering the vehicle controllable by the driver and consequently preventing an accident.

93
 Case Study (ctd.): Electric Power Steering (EPS)
Let us have a look at the steering system example Figure 38. Some potential failures of this system can be:

• unwanted steering (left or right);

• blocking of the steering gear;
• loss of the steering function (steering impossible);
• sudden loss of steering power support;
• etc.

For the malfunction “Unwanted Steering”, the Hazard and Risk Analysis delivers the following values:

Figure 38: Example for the “malfunction unwanted actuation of the steering system”

The related safety goal can be formulated as “Unwanted steering has to be prohibited”. According to the
risk tree in Figure 37, this goal ASIL D critical. Given the design of the EPS, some faults leading to a violation
of this goal (i.e., to unwanted steering) are as follows:

• The steering angle sensor delivers the wrong steering angle value.
• The steering wheel torque sensor delivers the wrong driver steering torque value.
• The e-motor control calculates a wrong torque demand value.
• Etc.

All the hardware components involved in the above listed faults would need to have a FIT rate of 1, as they
contribute to the achievement of an ASIL-D critical safety goal. As argued before, decomposition can be
applied. In the case of the steering angle sensor, we could use a double channel system (i.e., two parallel
redundant and independent measurements) for determining the steering angle with two different
mathematical functions. If the difference between the two steering angle values exceeds a defined
tolerance level, the involved software function will put the steering system in a defined safe state. Due to
the fact that in the EPS, the steering wheel is mechanically connected to the steering gear via the steering
column, the safe state of the electric power steering support is the switched off state (i.e., no steering
power support).

94
Summary

Risks can be analyzed from different points of view: project, product and process. In the research and
development phase of a vehicle, it is necessary to identify all potential risks of the vehicle and its systems
and components. By using FMEA, it is possible to identify the product and process risks and quantify them
with the risk priority number. The FMEA has 12 steps. A hazard and risk analysis reviews the functional
safety aspects of the design.

Keywords in paragraph 2.4:

• Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA) • Project Risks

• Severity • ASIL Level
• Occurrence • Exposure
• Detection • Controllability
• Risk Priority Number (RPN) • Functional Safety
• Opportunity for Detection • ISO 26262
• Potential Failure Mode • Failure Modes
• Effect • Failure Causes
• Hazard and Risk Analysis • Failure Effect

95
 2.5 Summary

To develop a new car an OEM needs all kinds of components, delivered by the supplier. The supplier needs
to go through five different phases of the Advanced Product Quality Planning (APQP) before supplying the
components. An APQP is a structured approach to the design and development of products and processes
and leads up to several benefits. To monitor the process, each phase has important milestones. Phase 2
focuses on product design and phase 3 on the design and development of the process. In practice, this will
result in simultaneous engineering: product design and how to produce the product. Phase 4 ends with a
PPAP-approval.

By using an FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis), the supplier can identify and prevent potential risks
in advance rather than reacting on the effects of the risks. An FMEA consists of 12 steps and includes review
of the process, failure modes, failure causes and failure effects. To quantify risks, each failure mode has a
numeric score. The FMEDA (D = design) is an extension to the FMEA and expands on the interaction
between software, electronics and components in the vehicle. In the near future, an integrated design
approach focusing on the design of the entire system (hardware, software and mechanics) will become very
important.

96
3 Production
Case
After your car completely burnt out, the manufacturer delivered a new improved car. The manufacturer
has ensured you that a short circuit cannot happen again. The cause of the short circuit has been removed:
it turned out to be a design error. The temperature in a cable was so high that the insulation of the cable
melted and caused a short circuit.

You are very pleased that the manufacturer has solved the problem. However, a few days later the
dashboard starts to vibrate. You directly return to the dealer. The dealer looks at the dashboard and sees
that the bolts are loose. The bolts are not secured with the right torque. In consultation with the
manufacturer, it is clear that the bolts were only tightened by hand instead of accurately tightened with a
torque wrench.

The dealer adjusts the bolts on the right torque value and jokes that you should be happy that this error
did not occur on the wheels. You probably would not have survived a mistake like that.

97
 3.1 Process Capability

Learning Objectives
1. Describe machine variation (Special cause and Common cause).
2. Participate in collecting, measuring and interpreting data.
3. Interpret short-term variation: Process Capability (Cp and Cpk).
4. Interpret long-term variation: Process Performance (Pp and Ppk).

3.1.1 Variation

Variation is everywhere. A driver has variation when parking his car; the arrival times of trains have
variation; the human race shows enormous variation and products extracted out of a process are never the
same. Every process demonstrates variation. The less variation a process has, the better we can predict its
outcome and the better a process can meet customer requirements. We distinguish two types of variation:

• Special cause variation: caused by factors that result in a non-random distribution of output.
Special cause variation is a shift or sudden change in output, caused by a specific factor such as
environmental conditions or process input parameters.
• Common cause variation: caused by the process itself. Every process has some amount of fluctuation
caused by unknown factors, resulting in a steady but random distribution of output around the average.

3.1.2 Process Capability indices

When discussing process capability, two concepts need to be considered: ‘Process capability’ (what the
process can do) and ‘Process performance’ (what the process is actually doing). The gap between these two
concepts can be seen as an opportunity for improvement.

Process capability is the potential of a process to produce products or services within the design
specifications. These design specifications are called ‘Lower Specification Limit’ (LSL) and ‘Upper
Specification Limit’ (USL). Process capability assumes only common cause variation and not special cause
variation.

Process capability represents the best performance of the process itself. This is demonstrated when the
process is operated in a state of statistical control. The process must first be brought into statistical control,
by detecting and acting upon special causes of variation. Then its performance is predictable, and its
capability to meet customer expectations can be assessed. This is the basis for Continuous Improvement.

98
Example Capability Study
A part of the APQP process is to prove that the production process is capable of producing within the
specification limits. Parts manufactures uses a pilot run for the capability study. During the pilot run, the
work instructions, machine settings and forms should be available.

In the chapter Advanced Product Quality Planning and FMEA, there was an example given about a metal
plate with four round holes. Between those round holes, there will be a circuit board placed. However, the
OEM wants to know if the processes are capable of producing those metal plates. With a capability study,
we can analyze if a process is capable of producing a product.

In this example, 50 products are taken and measured by QC. The results of measurements shall be
processed in a capability study and a control chart. The results are shown below in Figure 39.

Process Capability of Lengte

LSL USL
P rocess Data Within
LS L 24,5 O verall
Target *
USL 25,5 P otential (Within) C apability
Sample M ean 24,6981 Cp 2,06
Sample N 50 C P L 0,82
StDev (Within) 0,0807558 C P U 3,31
StDev (O v erall) 0,0888519 C pk 0,82
O v erall C apability
Pp 1,88
PPL 0,74
PPU 3,01
P pk 0,74
C pm *

24,60 24,75 24,90 25,05 25,20 25,35 25,50

O bserv ed P erformance E xp. Within P erformance Exp. O v erall P erformance
PP M < LS L 20000,00 P P M < LS L 7088,50 P PM < LS L 12898,47
PP M > U S L 0,00 PPM > USL 0,00 P PM > U S L 0,00
PP M Total 20000,00 P P M Total 7088,50 P PM Total 12898,47

Figure 39: Example of Process Capability

In Figure 39, you see left the Lower Specification Limit (LSL) and Upper Specification Limit (USL) indicated
by the red dotted lines. The curve shows the process data and its variation. On the right, you see the Cp
(2.06) and Cpk Value (0.82).

Cp value is the ratio between the customer specification (USL-LSL) and the total process variation (6 σ). The
Cpk value is an index which measures how close a process is running to its specification limits, relative to
the natural variability of the process. The larger both indexes, the less likely it is that any item will be outside
the specification. The formulae are shown below.

Figure 40: Formulas for calculating Cp, CpK (LSL) and CpK (USL)

99
 When looking at the Cp value, the machine variation fits within the specification limits. A Cp of 2.06 means
that the specification limit is twice as wide as the process variation. But when you look at the Cpk, you see
that the batch is outside the lower Specification limit. The Cpk value 0.82 indicates that you are producing
out of specification.

In the (automotive) industry, a minimum value of 1.33 is claimed for the Cp and Cpk value. For safety critical
items, a minimum value of 1.67 or 2 is required.

Figure 41: Example of applying Cp and CpK

The capability study Cp/Cpk is trying to predict the future of the process. The following conditions are
required:

• the study must be long enough to identify the common variation of the process (change of
operators, change over times, environmental factors, wear of tooling and machines, etc.);
• the process should be statistical ‘in control’; there should be no special causes of variation. There
are two reasons:
o The formula of Cp and Cpk does not take into account the special causes of variation.
o A process that is not stable due to special causes of variation is not predictable. It is
impossible to predict which special causes of variation in the future return and which not.

100
3.1.3 Process Performance indices

Process performance is defined as what the process is currently doing. Therefore, process performance is
what typically concerns customers more than process capability. Process capability is based on one
production run, and process performance is based on several production runs. Process performance is
based on the total variation of several production runs over the long term. Since a process is seldom
perfectly stable, its mean will drift in time, and the standard deviation may vary in time too.

The Pp- and Ppk value will calculate the long term variation of a process. These process performance
indicators show how the process performed over several batches for a long-time production period and in
relation to customer requirements.

Figure 42: Short vs long term (total) variation

Figure 43: Formulas for calculating Pp, PpK (LSL) and PpK (USL)

The formulas look a lot like the Cp- and CpK formulas; the only difference is the word overall. In this
calculation, you have to take the data from all production runs and calculate the standard deviation of this
data.

In the performance study for the Pp/Ppk, the time period of collecting data is not important. The special
causes of variation are included in the study results, because it is plausible that changes occur during data
collection due to special causes of variation. For example, machine breakdown, man failure, poor
adjustment of equipment, power surges, etc.

101
 Summary

In the automotive industry, controlling risks is very important. By calculating Cpk and/or Ppk, you can prove
that the production processes are in control and that the process is capable of producing between the
specification limits of the customer. Cp and Cpk ratios describe the short-term process capability. Pp and
Ppk describe the long-term process performance. In automotive, a minimum level of 1.33 is required for
these ratios. Cpk/Ppk ratio are important subjects in PPAP release.

Keywords in paragraph 4:

• Common Cause variation • Long Term variation

• Short Term variation • Process Performance study
• Process Capability study • Pp and Ppk
• Cp and Cpk • Upper Specification Limit
• Special Cause variation • Lower Specification Limit

102
3.2 Process control

Learning Objectives
Describe what measurement system analysis (MSA) is.
Describe what measurement system analysis is used for.
Participate in a measurement system analysis and interpret its outcomes.
Describe how and why processes are controlled during production.
Describe what statistical process control (SPC) is.
Describe what statistical process control is used for.
Describe what a control plan and Out-of-Control Action Plan (OCAP) are.
Describe what a control plan and OCAP are used for.
Describe the relations between process FMEA, control plan and OCAPs.

3.2.1 Measurement System Analysis (MSA)

It is necessary to ensure that the measurement system and data are valid and reliable before you make a
decision. Do you adjust the process or will you scrap the part? In this section, we will give an introduction
of Metrology, the ‘Science of measurement’. Metrology includes all theoretical and practical aspects of
measuring. In the following sections, we will review a number of topics that are related to evaluating the
measurement system (gage).

Measurement Errors
When you measure your weight several times in a row, it will probably show a little variability between
these different attempts. How is this possible? You should actually ask yourself ‘How important is the
variability?’. Or even better: ‘Is the variability of the measurement system small enough to draw conclusions
concerning further improvement actions?’

Figure 44: Example of a measurement instrument

Every measurement instrument shows variation. Besides the variation of the instrument, there are other
sources of variation, for example:

• Operators performing the measurements.

• Operating procedures.
• Data collection forms.
• Tools and aids used.
• The way and frequency samples are taken from the line.
• Calibration technique.
• Environment (temperature, moisture, vibration, light, etc.).

103
 The ideal measurement system would produce the same value every single time. However, we all know
nothing is perfect! Just like any other process, the collection of data and performing measurements of the
product is a process in itself. Obtaining data and doing measurements will always demonstrate variability
and produce defects.

Using a ‘Measurement System Analysis’ (MSA), we will review how the measurement system will perform.
The MSA tells you how precise the measurement tool is (the equipment) and how large the impact of the
measurement process is (e.g., operator and procedure). An MSA evaluates the test method, measuring
instruments, and the entire process of obtaining measurements in order to quantify measurement accuracy
and variability. This is important for making decisions about a product or process.

The process variation that we observe by reading the measurement data on the instrument is always larger
than the actual process variation. This is because we have to take into account the variation caused by the
Measurement System (gage). The ‘Observed variation’ is also called the ‘Total variation’. The actual ‘Process
variation’ is also called ‘Part-to-Part variation’.

Figure 45: Observed variation and Measurement system variation

To minimize measurement system variation, it is important to identify and understand the factors of
influence. Measurement system errors can be characterized into the following three categories:

1. Accuracy: How big is the systematic error?

• Bias:
The difference between the measured average and the true value.
• Linearity:
Equal accuracy over the entire range of the instrument.
2. Precision: How big is the measurement variation?
• Repeatability:
The amount of variation that is caused by the measuring instrument itself.
• Reproducibility:
The amount of variation that is caused by the measurement procedure, operator, etc.
• Uniformity:
Extent to which measurement variation is constant (uniform) over the whole range of the
measurement scale.
3. Stability: Is the measurement system stable over time?

104
If you ask someone how precise a measurement system is, he might tell you ‘It has been calibrated recently,
so it is perfect’. Keep in mind that calibration of the system is only one aspect of a good measurement
system. A calibrated system is no guarantee for accuracy, precision or stability. An MSA is always executed
in combination with the objects to be measured.

Figure 46: Measurement system errors

Accuracy
The accuracy of a measurement system is also called the systematic difference between the measured
average and the true value or bias. Bias effects include:

Employee bias:
Several employees get different measurement averages for the same object. Also, different observations
or retrieving data from different database systems will cause this type of error. An effective measurement
instruction, training and clear definitions will limit the extent of employee bias.

Instrument bias:
Several instruments get different measurement averages for the same object. This can be minimized by
performing calibration of the gauge. Realize however that the bias after the calibration process will be
determined by the reference value that is used for the calibration process.

Figure 47: Measurement system Accuracy (Bias)

105
 Precision (Repeatability & Reproducibility)
Precision is the total amount of variation of the measurement system. This includes variation caused by the
measurement instrument and the measurement process. The amount of precision variability can be
determined by a Measurement System Analysis (gage R&R), where the two Rs stand for Repeatability and
Reproducibility.

Repeatability:
Repeatability is the proportion of the inherent variation that is caused by the measuring instrument itself,
also called ‘test-retest error’. This variation occurs when repeated measurements are taken on the same
object without changing the circumstances (e.g., same employee, same samples, same set-up, same
measurement instrument, short time period, etc.).

Figure 48: Measurement system precision (Repeatability)

Reproducibility:
Reproducibility is the variation caused by the measurement procedure. This is the variation that occurs
when repeated measurements are made of the same object under different conditions (e.g. different
operators or employee, different set-ups, different test units, different environmental conditions, long time
period).

Figure 49: Measurement system precision (Reproducibility)

106
3.2.2 Controlling Processes

As risks are identified in the process FMEA, so we know where we should pay attention during the process.
The identified risks can be controlled in different ways. The best thing is to eliminate a risk, but
unfortunately, this is not always possible. To reach the required level of quality, process control is very
important. Within processes, there are continuously risks. You can wait until a risk becomes a problem, but
it may be wise to control the risk before it occurs. Controlling all risks will prevent you from the
consequences of the risks. Within the automotive industry, there is continuous attention for controlling
risks. The risks are recognized and identified through a FMEA. By identifying and recognizing these risks, it
is possible to control them. How to manage risks by structural measures is specified in a ‘Control plan’.

Organizations should try to take preventive measures in order to avoid the occurrence of the risk.
Preventive measures include maintenance of machines, training and education of employees, Poke Yoke
solutions (monkey proof), supplier audits, etc. The preventive measures are mentioned in the process
FMEA.

Unfortunately, we cannot control every risk by taking preventive measures. Occasionally, it is necessary to
take measures in the production to detect risks. Measurements during production include measurements
on product and processes, visual checks, video or cameras, etc. These corrective actions are mentioned in
the control plan.

Figure 50: Process Control

107
 3.2.3 Statistical Process Control (SPC)

Statistical Process Control (SPC) helps detect special cause variation. Special cause variation is variation that
cannot be explained by common causes alone. Compared to common cause variation, this type of variation
is large. It is caused by problems that can be identified and often eliminated.

Process variation is calculated with the data from the process itself, normally based on a capability study.
The variation (Range, R) caused by common variation and the average (Mean, x̅) of the process will be used
by calculated the control limits, as shown in Figure 51.

A 2
B 4
C 5
D 3
E 5
F 8
G 1
H 10
I 2
J 10
Mean A + B + C + D + E + F + G + H + I + J 50
x= = =5
10 10
Range
R = MAXIMUM − MINIMUM = 10 − 1 = 9

Figure 51: Example calculating Mean and Range

Control limits (Upper control limit (UCL) and Lower Control Limit (LCL) are set in such a way that almost
everything of the process variation falls within these limits. There is no relation to the specification limits.
Knowing whether the process meets customer demands is extremely important, but specification limits do
not belong in a control chart. The control limits are normally set at +3 standard deviation (also noted as
Sigma, σ), which is equivalent to 99.73% of the data falling within the two Control limits.

There are different SPC charts available. The chart you need to apply depends on the type of data that you
want to analyze or control. The Xbar-R chart is a chart that is mostly used for monitoring the means and
ranges of subgroups of continuous data.

108
Xbar-R chart
The Xbar-R chart is used for monitoring process variation and for detecting the presence of special causes,
by collecting subgroups from the process at regular intervals. The Xbar-R chart is used when the subgroup
size is small at each of these intervals. Xbar can also be represented by 34 (an X with a bar over it).

Xbar-R Chart of Weight

UCL=10.598
10.5
Sample Mean

__
10.0 X=9.948

9.5
LCL=9.299
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Sample

UCL=1.128
1.00
Sample Range

0.75

0.50
_
R=0.345
0.25

0.00 LCL=0
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25
Sample

Figure 52: Example of Xbar-R chart (for Weight)

Example Metal Plate:

When we want to control the cutting process during the production of the metal plate with the 4 round
holes. We have to make a Xbar-R chart. First, we have to calculate the control limits for the mean and range.
In this example, they were calculated for the length (Mean UCL=25.0690 and for LCL=24.3456) and for
(Range UCL=0.443 and LCL=0.000). This means that when you measure between these values, the operator
does not have to adjust the process, because the process is in control.

I-MR chart
In some production processes, it is necessary to plot individual measurements. Then you have to use the I-
Chart, as seen in Figure 53.

I-MR Chart of Lengte

U C L=25,0690
25,0
Individual V alue

24,8
_
X=24,7073
24,6

24,4
LC L=24,3456
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46
O bser vation

U C L=0,4443
0,4
Moving Range

0,3

0,2
__
M R=0,1360
0,1

0,0 LC L=0
1 6 11 16 21 26 31 36 41 46
O bser vation

Figure 53: Example of I-MR chart

109
 3.2.4 Control Plan

The control plan (sometimes called an inspection plan) comprises all actions that should be performed to
minimize or mitigate the potential failures as identified in the process FMEA. The control plan should be a
direct reflection of the process FMEA, while the actions in the control plan should be listed sequentially in
the controls section of the process FMEA. The FMEA and the control plan are two completely different
tools, but they are linked by the process and by the controls.

Control actions include activities like setup checks, measurement of components, number of samples
needed from the processes for inspection, mistake proofing activities, the use of measurement equipment,
statistical process control charts, etc. The control plan states who will control what, how, how many, and
how often. This includes both product and process characteristics like equipment measures. The control
also states what needs to be done if a so-called ‘Out of Control situation’ is observed. This is called the ‘Out-
of-Control Action Plan’ (OCAP). The OCAP is an action plan (or roadmap, or flowchart) which indicates what
the operator has to do when an error occurs.

Example Metal Plate

In the chapter Advanced Product Quality Planning, FMEA and process capability, there was an example
given about a metal plate with four round holes Figure 54. Between those round holes, there will be a circuit
board placed. We have identified the potential risks with the Process FMEA; the process capability is also
analyzed now we can produce the product, but we need to stay in control to be sure were are producing
inside specifications. Therefore, we need a control plan.

Figure 54: Example of a metal plate

110
Figure 55: Example control plan

As risks change over time, it is necessary to monitor them in order to know what the possible effects are.
The FMEA and control plans are therefore "living" documents, which means that during the year, they
change several times. Throughout the year, processes and products will change because of changing
customer needs or customer demands, or because an extra process step is carried out. Figure 56 shows the
possible changes. In order to continue process control, it is important to identify the changes in potential
risks. Be sure to determine if there are either new risks or eliminated risks.

Figure 56: Changes having influence on PFMEA and Control Plan

111
 By implementing well-structured changes, the organization will be able to continuously meet clients’
specific requirements. In the automotive, it is necessary to conduct these changes with methodologies such
as APQP and 8D-problem solving.

3.2.5 GR&R study

When you perform an MSA study, it is necessary to take 10 products during a pilot run. The 10 products
should give a representative picture of the actual products that are produced.

After the products are selected, you need three operators to do measurements. Each operator measures
each product three times. Of course, the products are given randomly. This means that the operators
perform a total of 90 measurements.

To determine if the result is acceptable, the measurements are analyzed. The result is displayed in a
percentage, the R&R-value (Repeatability and Reproducibility).

If the result is smaller than ten percent, it means that the measurement is acceptable. Between 10% and
30%, the measurement can be acceptable, but it depends on whether or not you have a safety critical
characteristic. Above 30%, the measurement is unacceptable.

Example Metal plate

When we want to control the cutting process during the production of the metal plate with the four round
holes, it is necessary to have a valid and reliable measurement system. Therefore, we analyzed the
measurement system:

Gage R&R (ANOVA) for Meetwaarde

Reported by :
G age name: Tolerance:
Date of study : M isc:

Components of Variation Meetwaarde by Product

100 % Contribution 25,10
% Study Var
Percent

24,95
50

24,80
0
Gage R&R Repeat Reprod Part-to-Part 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Product
R Chart by Operator
Meetwaarde by Operator
1 2 3
0,2 25,10
UCL=0,1845
Sample Range

24,95
0,1 _
R=0,0717
24,80
0,0 LCL=0
1 2 3
Operator
Xbar Chart by Operator
1 2 3 Operator * Product Interaction
25,1
25,1 Operator
Sample Mean

1
UCL=25,0157
Average

25,0 25,0 2
_
_ 3
X=24,9423
24,9
24,9
LCL=24,8690
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Product

Figure 57: Example of GR&R results

In the example above, the measurement system is not good enough because the GR&R is above the 30%,
namely 88.53%. This means that it is necessary to improve the measurement system.

112
Summary

To control a process, it is important to know the risks (Process FMEA). If you know the risks, you are able to
control them by taking preventive measures and controls (Control Plan). The preventive measures focus on
the chance of occurrence, and detective measures focus on identifying a risk.

A production process has as a risk of drifting. If you want to signal if a production process is drifting, you
can use X and R Chart. This means of course that you should use a reliable measurement (MSA).

Keywords in paragraph 3.2:

• Process Control • Out of Control action Plan (OCAP)

• Control Plan • Process Variation
• Statistical Process Control (SPC) • Repeatability & Reproducibility
• Evaluation SPC • Precision
• Xbar & R chart • Accuracy
• I-Chart • Bias
• Measurement System Analysis (MSA) • Linearity
• Gage R&R

113
 3.3 Supplier Quality Assurance

Learning Objectives
1. Understand how suppliers are controlled in the automotive industry.
2. Understand PPAP and EMPB, and their differences.
3. Understand how a supplier audit (VDA 6.3) is performed.
4. Understand Automotive SPICE®.
5. Understand why and how Automotive SPICE® Assessments are performed.
6. Understand capability of the design and development process (A-Spice).

Example: Your customer asks you to develop a new product (metal plate with four round holes and circuit
board in between) using the APQP method. Before you can deliver the serial products to your customer,
you need to submit evidence that you can meet all customer requirements. In automotive, it is common
that a customer asks a supplier to submit a Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) or an ErstMuster
PrüfBerichte (EMPB) German for First Sample Test Report in order to obtain the evidence.

3.3.1 Controlling Suppliers

OEMs have to manage the quality of components received from suppliers, as they are liable for any quality
or safety failures arising from their products. To this end, OEMs must be able to identify and evaluate
whether suppliers and the products they provide meet specific requirements. Suppliers have to provide
adequate assurance of product quality and performance to the OEMs, by demonstrating a reliable and
comprehensive quality system. The system must cover the components or raw materials that they receive
from their upstream suppliers, as well as ensure that final products meet specifications. Most OEMs have
defined their requirements in a manual, a so-called ‘supplier quality assurance manual’. A supplier quality
assurance manual is a document that is intended as a reference for the supplier to better understand the
requirements and their role in the shared responsibility to deliver the highest quality and safety. The goal
of an OEM is to work with suppliers to develop a strong, long-term, structured relationship. Important tools
to use are PPAP, EMPB and VDA 6.3 process auditing.

3.3.2 PPAP and EMPB

The purpose of PPAP is to determine whether all customer engineering design record and specification
requirements are properly understood by the supplier. The second purpose is to demonstrate that the
supplier manufacturing process has the potential to produce products that consistently meets all
requirements during an actual production run at the quoted production rate.

Production Part Approval Process is the formal product release for delivery to the
customer. PPAP can be seen as a closure of an APQP project, in which documents
and products from the APQP-project will be offered to the customer for release.

PPAP is applicable to organizations that supply manufacturing parts, service parts, production material or
bulk material. Even organizations which provide standard catalog products or service parts will have to
perform a PPAP unless they have previously received a formal exemption.

114
Suppliers delivering to German customers like VW, BMW can be requested to use the VDA publication
‘Quality Management in the Automotive Industry, Volume 2: Quality Assurance of Supplies’ [32]. This
manual is similar to PPAP. An important term from VDA 2 is EMPB. In this paragraph, we will discuss the
PPAP process, but the PPAP and EMPB process are quite similar to each other.

A PPAP is required in the following situations:

• New parts.
• Engineering change(s).
• Tooling: transfer, replacement, refurbishment.
• Correction of discrepancy.
• Tooling inactive for more than one year.
• Change to optional construction or material.
• Sub-supplier or material source change.
• Change in part processing.
• Parts produced at a new or additional location.

In general, PPAP is required for any significant change on the product or process. A supplier has the
obligation to report a change to the customer. The customer determines, based on the impact of the
change, the required level and PPAP documentation.

PPAP Requirements
PPAP-data must be obtained from a production run using:

• Production equipment and tooling.

• Production employees.
• Production rate.
• Production process and setting.

All data reflect the actual production process to be used at start-up. This means that a supplier is not
allowed to use any kind of test equipment. The duration of the production run must be agreed between
supplier and customer. This can be a certain time period or a certain number of products produced.

PPAP file
Based on the results of the PPAP-production run, a supplier completes his PPAP-file. The PPAP-file is the
collection of documents created during the APQP-process and necessary for the formal customer release.
The customer decides about the content of a PPAP-file.

There are five different PPAP submission levels. The following needs to be delivered to the customer:

1. Part Submission Warrant (PSW) and Appearance Approval Report (if applicable).
2. PSW, product samples and dimensional results.
3. PSW, product samples and complete supporting data.
4. PSW and other requirements, as defined by the customer.
5. PSW, product samples and complete supporting data (a review will be conducted at the supplier's
manufacturing location).

115
 There are 18 different PPAP elements which can be requested by the customer. Based on the submission
level, a supplier must send the documents to the customer or the document must be retained at the
supplier’s office and made available upon request. The different PPAP elements are explained below.
Several of these elements are described in this book in more detail.

1. Design record
All customers’ drawings include dimensions and tolerances.

2. Authorized Engineering Change Documents

The supplier shall provide authorized change documents for those changes not yet recorded in the design
record, but incorporated in the product, part or tooling.

3. Engineering Approval
This approval is usually the engineering trial, with production parts performed at the customer plant. A
“temporary deviation” usually is required to send parts to customer before PPAP. Customer may require
other “Engineering Approvals”.

4. Design FMEA
A tool used to identify and prioritize risk areas in the design. An FMEA identifies potential failure modes,
causes, and effects. Input for Design FMEA comes from customer specifications and drawings.

5. Process Flow Diagram(s)

A visual diagram of the entire process from receiving through shipping, including outside processes and
services

6. Process FMEA
A tool used to identify and prioritize risk areas in the process. An FMEA identifies potential failure modes,
causes, and effects. Input for a Process FMEA comes from the process flow diagram (see section 2.4.2).

7. Control Plan
A document that describes how to control the critical specifications to continue to meet customer
expectations of the output (see section 3.2.4).

8. Measurement Systems Analysis Studies (MSA)

An MSA is a statistical tool used to determine if a measurement system is capable of precise measurement.
Purpose is to determine how much error there is due to the measurement process itself (see section 3.2.1).

9. Dimensional Results
Evidence that dimensional verifications have been completed and the results comply with specified
requirements.

10. Records of Material/Performance Test Results

The supplier will perform tests for all parts and product materials when performance, functional, chemical,
physical or metallurgical requirements are specified by the design record or Control Plan.

116
11. Initial Process Studies
A set of tools used to understand process capability. The purpose is to evaluate the supplier’s process
performance in comparison with specification limits. Is the production process likely to produce products
that will meet customer requirements? Process Capability (Cp/Cpk) and Process Performance (Pp/Ppk) are
described in section 3.1.

12. Qualified Laboratory Studies

Inspection and testing for PPAP will be performed by a qualified laboratory as defined by customer
requirements (for example, an ISO 17025 accredited laboratory). The qualified laboratory (internal or
external for the supplier) has a laboratory scope and documentation showing that the laboratory is qualified
for the type of measurements or tests conducted.

13. Appearance Approval Report (AAR)

A report completed by the supplier containing appearance and color criteria to demonstrate that the part
has met the appearance requirements on the design record. An AAR typically only applies for parts with
color, grain or surface appearance requirements.

14. Sample Production Parts

Actual samples that reflect the parts documented in the PPAP.

15. Master Sample

The supplier will hold a master sample for the same period as the PPAP reports, when a new master sample
is made or when the sample is needed for the control plan. The master sample is clearly identifiable and
contains the customer's approval date.

16. Checking aids

When special tools are used for checking parts, this PPAP element shows a picture of the tool and calibration
records, including dimensional report of the tool.

17. Records of Compliance with Customer Specific Requirements

Each customer may have specific requirements to be included on the PPAP package.

18. Part Submission Warrant

Document required for all newly tooled or revised products for which the supplier confirms that inspections
and tests on production parts show conformance to customer requirements. PSW is the official release
sheet which shows that the customer has released the product and process of the supplier for serial
production.

117
 PPAP Status
After submitting the PPAP file, the customer reviews the documentation and samples. The customer can
provide the following status:

• Approved:
o The part meets all customer requirements, including all sub-components.
o Supplier is authorized to ship production quantities of the part.

• Interim Approval:
o Permits shipment of the part on a limited time or piece quantity basis.
o Supplier action plan in order to solve the problems is required.

• Rejected:
o The part does not meet customer requirements.

Figure 58: PPAP approval

3.3.3 Auditing Suppliers

The quality of an organization is in part determined by the quality of the supply chain. In order to create
quality products, it is essential for an organization to be supplied with the correct parts. In order to increase
the quality of the total supply chain, these processes must be continuously assessed and improved. A key
instrument in this respect is the quality management system and the process audit.

VDA 6 Quality Standard German Automotive

Within the German automotive sector, VDA 6 is a major standard designed for auditing quality systems,
processes and products.

Figure 59: Overview VDA 6

118
The most commonly used parts are VDA 6.1 and VDA 6.3 [33] . Based on ISO 9001:2008, VDA 6.1 is the basis
of quality management system audits. VDA 6.3 is the standard for the automotive sector, specifically geared
towards performing process audits in the entire supply chain. Many automotive customers use the VDA 6.3
to audit their supplier processes in order to improve the quality of these processes and the products coming
from the suppliers.

Figure 60: VDA 6.3 Process audit

Process Audits in accordance with VDA 6.3.

Process audits may be carried out both internally and externally throughout the entire product life cycle.
Figure 61 shows how the individual questions regarding process elements can be geared towards a
product’s life cycle, independent of its position in the supply chain.

Figure 61: Different processes within the product life cycle

119
 For each process element, a separate questionnaire has been designed to assess these topics. A potential
analysis (P1) can be completed before launching a project, with the purpose of assessing potential suppliers’
suitability for serial production. In a process audit, the effect of the individual processes on the product is
key. A process audit must therefore be carried out from the perspective of the risks involved with the
products. Possible risks within the process must be determined during preparation.

The following processes may be assessed during a VDA 6.3 process audit:

• P2: Project management

• P3: Planning Product and Process Development
• P4: Execution Product and Process Development
• P5: Supplier management
• P6: Process analysis / production
• P7: Customer support / customer satisfaction

Audit Process
VDA 6.3 describes the audit (Figure 62), including all input and output by phase. OEM customers have an
audit program in which all supplier audits have been scheduled. Also, event-based audits (for example in
case of big quality issues) can be performed.

Figure 62: The audit process

Audit Contract
The purpose of this phase is to clarify the starting situation with the customer and to prepare an audit
contract containing the necessary information to ensure structural performance of the audit. The
information below must be arranged in an audit contract.

• Reason of the audit

o Scheduled: new supplier / technology, shift in production, change to process, product
launch and process release, continuous improvement process.
o Event based: targets not achieved, customer complaint, supply problems, production stop.
• Purpose of the audit: process release, assessment of current situation,
• Assessment of effectiveness action plan resulting from previous audits, etc.
• Audit team: names and functions of the auditors.
• Scope of the audit: processes and sites to be audited, etc.
• Audit date: scheduled date of audit.
• History: complaints, rejections, performance, etc.

120
Preparation
During the preparation phase, the audit team collects the information necessary to perform the audit. The
detailed audit plan and the required questionnaires are prepared in this phase. The following information
can be consulted:

• organization charts;
• process flow, FMEA & control plan;
• customer-specific requirements;
• product specifications;
• objectives (PPM, reliability of supply, etc.);
• audit results and action plans resulting from previous audits;
• complaints / rejections.

Execution
The execution of the audit starts with a kick-off meeting with the management, discussing the objectives
and timeline of the audit. After the kick-off meeting, the audit is initiated. The audit team assesses whether
the process to be audited complies with all requirements determined by the organization, the customer
and the authorities. The questionnaires form the basis of the audit. The auditor selects the process
elements relevant to the audit. This depends on the phase in the product life cycle.

Review
After performance of the audit, the audit team assesses individual questions based on the information
collected. The assessment basis is in compliance with the relevant regulations and the extent of risk. The
assessment of individual questions leads to the overall audit result. Table 5 lists the criteria for assessment
of the individual questions.

Points Assessment of compliance with the requirements

10 Full compliance with requirements

8 Adequate compliance (>75%); minor deviations

6 Partial compliance; significant deviations

4 Inadequate compliance; major deviations

0 Non-compliance
Table 5: Assessment criteria levels

121
 The overall audit result is determined by adding up the scores of each process and dividing these by the
number of audited processes.

Supplier status Overall audit assessment Classification

A ≥ 90 Quality- capable
B 80 ≤ EG < 90 Conditionally quality capable

C EG < 80 Not quality- capable

Table 6: Supplier Status List

The overall audit result (Table 6) is something between the customer and this specific supplier. A supplier
can have, for example, supplier status A for a customer and supplier status B for another customer. This
depends on the customer specific requirements and off course of the assessment of the VDA 6.3 checklist
done by the customer. In general, only suppliers with status A may offer for new projects.

Presentation
During the final meeting, the audit team presents the audit report to the organization. In this report, at
least the following issues are reviewed:

• Presentation of the audit results by the audit team.

• Presentation of the immediate actions that were initiated by the organization.
• Description of the follow-up steps.

Evaluation and Closure

Based on the audit report, the supplier should prepare an action plan and present this to the audit team
for assessment. The organization is responsible for the implementation of the action plan.

Follow-up
The customer will require a written update on the status of the action plan. The supplier must provide
evidence that the action plan is effectively implemented. Depending on the nature of the finding, a
customer will perform a re-audit.

122
3.3.4 Automotive Spice Assessment

Carmakers started evaluating suppliers focusing on the software capability in the 1990s. However, each
carmaker had a different approach for evaluating the capability and maturity of its suppliers (e.g., ISO/IEC
TR 15504 (1999), CMM, CMMI). In 2005, the Automotive Special Interest Group (SIG) with its members
AUDI AG, BMW Group, Daimler AG, Fiat Auto SpA, Ford Werke GmbH, Jaguar, Land Rover, Dr. Ing. h. c. F.
Porsche AG, Volkswagen AG and Volvo Car Corporation with a joint special interest group of The SPICE User
Group and The Procurement Forum launched Automotive SPICE®.

Automotive SPICE® is a common framework for the evaluation of the supplier’s software process capability
in the automotive industry and has become the benchmark for the development of embedded software in
the automotive industry. The majority of Tier-1 companies developing mechatronic systems have aligned
their processes according to the V-Model and the requirements from Automotive SPICE®.

Many software suppliers in the automotive industry are eventually confronted with Automotive SPICE®
assessments. The objective of such an assessment is to determine the capability level of processes in a
specific development project carried out by this supplier. The (re)nomination of a supplier depends on the
results of the assessment. Automotive SPICE® defines six capability levels (see Figure 63) indicating the
maturity of the assessed processes:

0. Incomplete - The process is not implemented or fails to achieve its purpose.

1. Performed -The process is implemented and achieves its process purpose.
2. Managed - The process is managed and work products are established, controlled and maintained.
3. Established - A defined process is used based on a standard process.
4. Predictable - The process is enacted consistently within defined limits.
5. Optimizing - The process is continuously improved to meet relevant current and projected business
goals.

Figure 63: Capability Levels and Process Attributes

123
 The assessment is performed by an independent INTACS (www.intacs.info) accredited assessor. Each
process attribute is rated on a scale indicating the achievement of the process. A process reaches its level
if the associated process outcomes are largely or fully achieved.

The result of the assessment is an assessment report which typically includes:

• Summarized findings of the assessment.

• Capability level per process.
• Process attributes per process.
• Observed strengths and weaknesses.
• Risk factors.

An assessment report forms the basis for potential improvement actions. Figure 64 shows a typical
assessment profile, with some processes reaching level 1 and some reaching level 2.

Figure 64: Assessment Results: Capability Levels

124
Summary

OEMs have to manage the quality of components received from suppliers, as they are responsible for any
quality or safety failures arising from their products. To this end, OEMs must be able to identify and evaluate
whether suppliers and the products they provide meet specific requirements. Before delivering serial
products, a supplier must prove that all customer requirements are met. Therefore, the supplier must
deliver a PPAP file containing all kinds of documents from his process, as well as samples. When changing
something in the product or process, a new PPAP approval must be requested. Some German OEMs use
‘VDA band 2 Production process and product approval (PPA)’. This requirement is similar to PPAP.

VDA 6.3 is used to audit the process of a (potential) supplier. For different processes, checklists are available
to review the process and its capability to fulfill customer requirements.

Automotive SPICE® is used for auditing software capability at suppliers. Automotive SPICE® is a common
framework for the evaluation of the supplier’s software process capability in the automotive industry and
has become the benchmark for the development of embedded software in the automotive industry.

Keywords in paragraph 3.3:

• Supplier Control • VDA 6

• Production Part Approval Process • VDA 6.3 Checklist
(PPAP / PPA) • VDA Band 2
• PPAP levels • Supplier Status
• Erst Muster Pruf Bericht (EMBP) • Automotive SPICE® Assessment
• Part Submission Warrant (PSW) • Capability Levels
• Customer Release • Software Capability
• Process Auditing

125
 3.4 Management of Change

Learning Objectives
1. Describe the risk of changes.
2. Describe change notification, PPAP and EMPB.
3. Understand the interface with change management in design and development.

3.4.1 Risk of Changes

Changes can be proposed to products everywhere in the product life cycle; during design and development
of the product, but also to PPAP approved products. The process of how to deal with changes depends on
the status of the product: before or after PPAP approval by the customer. For both, the supplier must
implement a management of change process. An analysis of the potential risks and its effects before
implementing the change is very important. Tools to use are DFMEA and PFMEA that are discussed in the
chapter about risk management. Not only does the supplier have to identify and analyze the risks associated
with the impending change, the customer has to do that as well. Based on this risk assessment and
additional actions to reduce the risks, the customer allows the supplier to implement the change.

3.4.2 Change Notifications

Suppliers and sub-suppliers are not allowed to make any unauthorized changes to a product (e.g., material,
component, sub-assembly) or production process that has already been PPAP approved by the customer.
Most OEMs and large automotive companies have therefore defined requirements in their supplier quality
assurance manual for management of changes. This requirement is approximately defined as follows:
‘Suppliers must have a management of change process in place to promptly and accurately notify their
customer of changes in manufacturer products. The management of change process must include all
proposed changes in parts, materials, and processes in production. Suppliers are also responsible for
managing changes made by subordinate manufacturers within their supply chain. Different OEMs may
define it in a different way, but the scope of the message is as described above. In the end, the supplier is
responsible for managing the changes in the right way.

Most of the time, a Product/Process Change Notification (PCN) or a change request is the starting point for
the process. With a PCN, a supplier informs his customer about an impending change to a product. Part of
a PCN is:

• Description of the change.

• Effect of the change (prototyping, testing, simulation).
• Reason for the change.
• Launch plan for the change if requested by the customer.

Adjustments to or modifications of new or existing products concerning conditions of form, fit, or function
need special attention. Customers often require a certain due date for submitting a PCN. For example: ‘all
PCNs shall/have to be submitted at the minimum 90 days before implementation’. Customers often have a
standard PCN format which suppliers have to use.

126
The following changes require a PCN:
• Design and/or Specification.
• Safety critical items.
• Software changes.
• Manufacturing Plant Environmental Conditions.
• Manufacturing Process, Equipment and Tooling.
• Product Name or Identification.
• Packaging, Labeling or Storage.
• Supplier Name/Company Ownership Change.
• Manufacturing Facility Site Location.

PCN Submission Process

The PCN submission process starts with the supplier submitting the PCN to the customer. This means he
asks his customer for review and approval of the proposed change. Figure 65 shows the different steps in
the PCN submission process.

Figure 65: Steps in the PCN submission process

After PCN submission by the supplier, the customer should send an acknowledgement to the supplier. The
next step is customer review of the PCN, indicating/giving the consequences of the impending change for
the customer’s product and process. Based on this review, the customer communicates the PCN decision
to the supplier. The length of time to process a PCN will vary depending on the request. It can vary from a
few days to a several months, depending on complexity.

If the supplier may/can implement the change, communication about the moment of implementation of
the change is very important. The customer needs the number of the first production batch or even the
first product number produced after implementation of the change. Therefore, a well-functioning First in
First out (FIFO) system is very important in order to comply with this requirement. Changed parts will often
get a revised item number.

127
 3.4.3 Changes during Design and Development

The supplier of the product that will be changed has to meet all the requirements. Design and development
changes need to be identified, reviewed and approved before implementation. The review of design and
development changes have to include evaluation of the effects of changes on parts and products already
delivered.

Maintaining records is an important part of the process in terms of the product’s development history and
future. These records are part of the APQP process and PPAP file. For example, if you are designing the
brake disc and during its development, discover that it needs to be interchangeable with an old one, that
change should be documented immediately. The supplier is also required to evaluate the effect of the
design change on constituent parts and product already delivered.

PPAP Approval
Implementation of the change and communication about the moment of implementation is not the last
step in the process. We have already learned that in case of a change, the supplier is required to resubmit
the PPAP file.

Depending on the requirements of the customer, the supplier must send PPAP documents and samples to
the customer. The number of samples and documents vary, depending on the consequences of the
change. The customer may ask a full PPAP submission if he has reason to do so. In general, the customer
will ask for samples and documents like a FMEA, control plan or measurement report. Obviously, the
customer will ask for a completely filled PSW. Only after receiving the PSW signed by the customer is the
supplier is allowed to deliver the changed parts.

128
Summary

A PCN is a document that a supplier uses to inform his customer about an impending change to a product
provided by the supplier. As every change in product or process can lead to rejects, a good analysis of the
risk must be done by the supplier before submitting a PCN to the customer. In practice, it means a review
of the already existing DFMEA or PFMEA.

The customer reviews the PCN and the consequences of the impending change. If there are no major
objections, the customer approves the impending change. The supplier may then implement the change.
Before supplying new orders, PPAP submission and signing of the PSW is required.

Potential risks in a management of change process are insufficient assessment of the consequences of the
change in advance. Documents like DFMEA, PFMEA and control plan are not consulted and updated. In
addition, the lack of communication to people involved is a major risk in a management of change process.

Keywords in paragraph 3.4:

• Product/Process Change Notification (PCN)

• Part Submission Warrant (PSW)
• Risk Identification and Effect Analysis
• PPAP Submission
• Management of Change

129
 3.5 Summary

OEMs continuously control the quality of the components they receive from their suppliers. They are held
responsible for the quality and failures in safety of the vehicle. In a supplier quality assurance manual, the
OEMs define requirements, and the suppliers have to prove if they can meet these requirements. A
Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) is the formal product release for delivery to the customer and can
be seen as a closure of an APQP- project (explained in previous chapter). A PPAP is required for any
significant change to product or process. Quite similar to a PPAP process is an
Erstmusterprüfbericht (EMPB), used for suppliers delivering to German customers like VW and BMW.
Production quantities may not be shipped before customer PPAP approval. Within the German automotive
sector, VDA 6 is a major standard designed for auditing quality systems, processes and products. VDA 6.3
describes the audit process, including all input and output by phase.

Process capability is the potential of a process to produce products or services within the design
specifications. Process performance is defined as what the process is currently doing. The gap between
these two can be seen as an opportunity for improvement. The values Cp, Cpk, Pp and Ppk prove if the
production processes are in control and if the process is capable of production between the specification
limits of the customer.

Identified risks in FMEA can be controlled in different ways. The best thing is to eliminate them, but
unfortunately, this is not always possible. Instead, you should try to take preventive measures to avoid the
risks next time. Managing risks by taking structural measures is specified in a control plan. This plan is a
‘living’ document and comprises all actions that should be performed to minimize or mitigate the potential
failures as identified in the process FMEA. Measurement System Analysis (MSA) is used to review reliability
of the measurement systems defined in a control plan.

Suppliers require a ‘change notification’ (PCN) to inform their customer about an impending change to a
product. Before submitting a PCN to the customer, the supplier should have a good risk analysis (review of
FMEA or DFMEA). For every change, the supplier is required to resubmit the PPAP file. Potential risks in a
management of change process are lack of communication, not consulting a control plan, FMEA, and
insufficient assessment of the consequences of the change.

130
4. Continuous Improvement
Case
You have been driving your cabriolet for a number of years, and despite all the problems in the beginning,
you are now satisfied with the car. You are thinking of buying a newer version and you decide to go to the
dealer. When you arrive at the dealers, he brings you directly to the newer version. To your great surprise,
the car has improved on a number of points. The action radius of the car has enormously improved: the
electric motor recharges itself through the road surface. Another improvement is self-driving. You can enter
the place of destination while the car drives itself. In the meantime, you can spend your time on social
media.

Logically, you think that all these new gadgets will cost a lot of extra money. However, to your surprise, the
price is not much higher than the old one. The dealer explains that the production processes in the chain
are very efficient and effective and are a lot better compared to the old production processes. Therefore,
the price of the car remains approximately the same. You are completely convinced and buy the newer
version of the cabriolet.

131
 4.1 Problem Solving

Learning Objectives
1. Describe the 8D process.
2. Identify containment actions (e.g., recall, corrective actions during service, etc.).
3. Participate in root cause analyses (e.g., Ishikawa, 5Why, etc.).
4. Describe tools that are used for root cause analyses (e.g., Ishikawa, 5Why, etc.).
5. Describe the relations between problems, FMEA, and control plan.
6. Identify a customer waiver.

4.1.1 8D

The automotive industry is subject to extremely strict standards and requirements imposed by the major
car manufacturers, including Ford, General Motors and Mercedes. Customers require a supplier to have a
good problem solving process and to take the necessary measures in case of problems to prevent re-
occurrence.

In the automotive industry, the 8D method is commonly used for problem solving. The 8D method was
developed by Ford in response to serious problems in the past that in fact even cost several people their
lives. The 8D method was developed to improve products and processes according to problems as soon as
they arise. The technique is therefore ideally suited to supply brief and concise reports to customers and
others to demonstrate how you have dealt with the problem.

When a supplier detects non-conforming products, for example, a casting part with dimensional deviation,
in his own process, he can ask his customer for permission to deliver the products anyway. This permission
must be asked formally via a customer waiver. The customer reviews the supplier’s request. If he considers
that he can use the products in his process, he can give the supplier temporary approval to deliver non-
conforming products.

The ‘D’ in 8D stands for discipline. The method comprises 8 disciplines that must be completed in order to
tackle a problem. This provides an excellent structure for effectively tackling a whole range of problems
and delivering uniform and consistent reports on the problem-solving approach. The strength of this
method lies in the fact that it is perfectly suited to problems that go beyond the sphere of influence of a
single manager or employee or a single department.

8D is a quality TOOL (not mainly a reporting form) which is often used also outside automotive business.
Incompletely performed 8Ds often lead to re-occurring rejects (the problems have not been solved in a
robust way and the lessons learned have not been forwarded to similar production areas).

The method attaches considerable value to teamwork so that the problems can be assessed from various
different points of view. 8D can be used for both product and process improvement. The method itself uses
an approach commonly employed by many employees and managers during their daily work activities. The
8D method can therefore rapidly and easily be introduced and used within an organization.

132
The 8D problem-solving process consists of the following steps:

• D0 Symptom and Emergency Response Action (ERA)

• D1 Team
• D2 Problem description
• D3 Interim Containment Action (ICA)
• D4 Root cause analysis
• D5 Identify and verify Permanent Corrective Action (PCA)
• D6 Implement and validate Permanent Corrective Action
• D7 Prevent re-occurrence
• D8 ‘Congratulate the team’ and spread the knowledge

D0: Symptom and Emergency Response Action (ERA)

D0 covers two areas: Symptom and Emergency Response Actions. Symptom describes how the customer
will notice the problem, for example, a company producing steel door frames receives a customer
complaint. When the door is closed, the fitted frames rattle (even if the problem is that there is a gap in
between the door and the rattle).

ERA describes supplier actions on material already produced. This can be found in several locations like
customer plant, surface coater or internal warehouse. ERA is often checking for errors in already
manufactured products. Checked material should be marked in such a way that it is evident that it has been
checked. The check results should be documented. This activity is often ‘quick and dirty’.

D1: Team
The 8D working methodology assumes a (cross-functional) team working together in order to get as many
inputs as possible from different parts of the organization. The problem manager will support, if, for
example, the team is restrained by lack of recourses. The champion position is often the quality
(alternatively production) manager at the supplier site.

The team leader is often a quality engineer or a problem manager (alternatively production leader). In order
to get feedback from the people who work with the equipment, it is important to have at least one operator
in the team. The operator is also to spread the 8D mindset to the other operators.

In principle, representatives of all departments involved in the problem are invited to take part. It is also
possible to invite experts from outside these departments – to ensure a fresh new look at the problem or
because there is a suspicion that the knowledge available within the organization is insufficient. If the
problem occurs outside the organization itself, it is even possible to invite a representative of the customer,
the supplier or some other party.

D2: Problem Description

Step 2 is describing the problem. The obvious choice would seem to stick to the description already used
for identifying the problem. However, such a choice engenders a number of risks.

Example: A company producing steel door frames receives a customer complaint. When the door is closed,
the fitted frames rattle. At one point, there is also a gap where flaking paint has been observed. The
complaint is a problem, but the description remains too vague for drawing up measures for a solution.

133
 A carefully considered description provides a framework for investigating the causes of the problem. It also
guides the efforts of the team members in a particular direction. This avoids energy being wasted on issues
that have little or nothing to do with the problem.

Describe the problem as objectively and clearly as possible. Keep asking yourself ‘what is’ and ‘what is not’.
This will let you think consciously about the problem. Specifically, about the boundaries of what the
problem IS or IS NOT. A tool for describing the problem is the 5W2H method (‘Who, What, Why, Where,
When, How and How many’, see Figure 66.

Figure 66: 5W2H method

You have now obtained a greater insight into the problem. In the example, the team tasked with solving
the problem of the rattling doorframes arrives at the following problem description.

Example: Customers (who) discover that the already installed (where) door frames (what) produced in the
period XYZ (how many) rattle (how) when closing the door (when), reveal gaps (how) and have a flaking
coating (how). This description offers a sound basis for the team members to carry out further
investigations.

D3: Interim Containment Action (ICA)

The problem is known. Now the task is to ensure that the consequences remain within the bounds. Interim
Containment Action describes activities preventing material produced after detection of the problem from
reaching the customer (in difference to ERA (D0) describing material produced before detection of the
problem).

ICA describes production activities before fully understanding the cause of the problem and before the final
solution to prevent the problem is identified and implemented. ICA addresses more of the problem than
the root cause. ICA could, for example, be to implement an extra operation step (washing, polishing) or a
100% inspection of products (also incoming material) before forwarding to storage.

Parts produced with ICA should be marked, making it possible to identify the production method. If 100%
inspection has been made, the result should be documented.

134
The following are possible methods for containing the problem: Rework or re-treat products; the
consequences of the problem can no longer occur. Remove or destroy defect products; this is only done
when it has been determined that the errors cannot be corrected or that the consequences are such that
they are unacceptable (for example, if they represent an acute hazard).

D4: Root Cause Analysis

Root cause describes the underlying reason(s) why the problem happened. The root cause can be found in
different areas, for example, unsuitable design of the part, unsuitable production process or unsuitable
instructions and procedures. The same problem can have root causes in all of these areas, for example,
ingoing screws with same thread, but different lengths, assembly fixture missing sensors for screw length
and missing design instruction to prevent use of screws with the same thread but different length.

Identifying the root cause is the most difficult discipline in the 8D program. In practice, this is above all a
consequence of the fact that symptoms, consequences and causes are all too often confused with one
another. It is clear that cause and effect are opposites. Nonetheless, effects or consequences are all too
often misidentified as causes. After determining the root cause of the problem, it is essential to verify
whether the identified cause is the actual cause of the problem.

• It must be possible to isolate the cause; as soon as the cause is removed, the problem should no
longer occur.
• It should be possible to reproduce the cause; if the cause returns, the problems immediately recur
too.
• It must be possible to explain all the symptoms of the cause and its consequences. If this is not
possible, the actual root cause has not yet been identified or there are multiple causes.

D5: Identify and Verify Permanent Corrective Action (PCA)

The cause of the problem is now known. The next step is to establish corrective measures: the root cause
must be eradicated. Permanent Corrective Action is the solution you finally want to implement in order to
avoid the problem from happening again. Contrary to ERA and ICA, where the solution is often limited to
inspection and sorting of produced parts.

A range of corrective measures is often possible. Sometimes, it may be necessary to implement a

combination of measures. The solutions should be numbered in the same way as the root causes to ensure
that root causes are not forgotten. Each root cause can have different possible solutions. To avoid
unwanted effects on the quality, every single solution should be evaluated. However, before taking the
decision to implement, the solutions should be verified first to assure that they really prevent the problem
happening again. Under all circumstances, corrective measures are subject to the following requirements:

• The measure(s) must be effective.

• The cause must be fully eliminated.
• The measure(s) must be realistic.
• The measure(s) must be technically, economically and practically viable and achievable within a
realistic period.

The suggested measures will then have to be tested to identify which are the most desirable. As in the
example: the best measure is to take more random samples for dimensioning of the cut strips.

135
 D6: Implement and Validate Permanent Corrective Action
It is understood that talking about a problem is not enough. The selected measure will have to be
implemented in order to eradicate the cause of the problem. Plan the implementation and implement the
final solutions.

Implementation processes can sometimes be a difficult and cost considerable effort. A good
implementation program is under all circumstances characterized by the Kaizen approach and the PDCA
cycle. We will discuss this approach later on in more detail.

D7: Prevent Re-occurrence

If all is well, the corrective measure has eradicated the cause of the problem. It is however undesirable that
the cause re-occurs again at some point in the future. That would mean nothing has been learned from the
mistakes. This requires a method of assuring continued implementation of the measure. D7 covers what
should be modified on a higher level to prevent similar problems happening with other parts. This means
that the team should discuss:

• Can the problem happen in some other production area (are there similar fixtures, sensors, control
plans or routines in the plant)?
• Is there a need to update specifications, training, process flows, maintenance instructions, generic
quality documents or P-FMEAs and control plan?

The D7 step is often incompletely carried through, leading to similar problems happening repeatedly.

D8: Congratulate the Team!

Clearly, this is an entirely logical final step. The cause of the problem has been identified and the problem
solved. The 8D project has been successful.

Nonetheless, this final step must certainly not be rushed through as being unimportant. The team has
probably spent a great deal of time and energy on the project, over and above their normal work activities.
Through their joint efforts, they have probably saved the company a great deal of money, and those efforts
deserve to be rewarded!

In this way, gratitude and respect are shown to the people who have worked hard on the project. This gives
the members of the team (and probably other employees of the organization) additional motivation to
participate in a similar project next time.

It is important to spread the lessons learned from the 8D through the company. How this is executed
depends on the size of the company and local conditions. One minimal demand is the 8D being presented
to the operators working with the very equipment.

136
4.1.2 Problem solving techniques

‘Root Cause Analysis’ (RCA) is a method of problem solving that tries to identify the root causes of faults or
problems. RCA arose in the 1950s as a formal study following the introduction of Kepner-Tregoe Analysis.
There are many different approaches for performing RCA though different techniques. RCA is typically
applied after an event has occurred as a reactive method of identifying and eliminating root causes. Using
the correct terminology is necessary within RCA to prevent confusion. To identify root causes, a number of
different techniques can be used, i.e.:

• 5-Why.
• Fishbone diagram / Ishikawa diagram / cause & effect diagram.
• Brainstorming.

5-Why
Ask the question ‘Why did this happen?’ at least 5 times, or until you reach a level impossible to influence.
This method is simple, but when used correctly, extremely effective. The basis of this method is to keep
asking questions until you arrive at a satisfactory and meaningful answer.

All children at some stage enter the ‘why phase’. They repeatedly and continuously ask ‘why’ despite the
given explanation and much to the frustration of everyone around them.

Let us apply this technique to the example of the doorframes. The problem description is: ‘Customers
discover that the already installed door frames (produced in period XYZ) rattle when closing the door, reveal
gaps and suffer from flaky coating’.

• 1st why: ‘Why does the door frame from period XYZ rattle when the door is closed?’
Answer: ‘Because there is a gap.’
• 2nd why: ‘Why is there a gap?’
Answer: ‘Because one strip is too long.’
• 3rd why: ‘Why is the strip too long?’
Answer: ‘Because it was cut off at the wrong length.’
• 4th why: ‘Why was the strip cut off at the wrong length?’
Answer: ‘Because the set value had shifted.’
• 5th why: ‘Why had the set value shifted?’
Answer: ‘Because the machine is unable to permanently maintain the same tolerance over long
periods of time due to the impact of the strip against the end stop.’

After the fifth why question, the cause of the rattling has finally been identified. The cause is not the
presence of the gap, but instead, a machine that is unable to maintain the required tolerance over the long
periods of time due to the way in which it is used. In the 5-Why method, it is important not to jump to
conclusions too quickly. That is the greatest pitfall.

137
 Ishikawa diagram / Fishbone diagram
The purpose of the Ishikawa diagram is to collect possible Causes for a certain Effect by conducting a
brainstorm session. In most cases the Effect is a failure mode or problem statement. Kaoru Ishikawa (1968)
created this type of graphical visualization. The Ishikawa diagram is also known as the Fishbone or Cause &
Effect diagram. Fishbone refers to the graphical shape of the diagram, because it looks like a fish.

Causes can be derived by performing a brainstorming session with a group of people. The outcome of this
brainstorm session is often enlightening but also depends very much on the people who participate in the
session. To facilitate the thinking process of the attendees, six major groups of causes have been
determined. These are called the 6 Ms. The group should focus on one M at a time to identify as many as
possible potential causes within that group.

1. Manufacturing: Technology or equipment related causes.

2. Method: Process related causes.
3. Material: Raw Material or information
4. Man: Causes related to people or employees.
5. Measurement: Causes related to measurement tools or inspection methods.
6. Mother Nature: Environmental causes.

In the first phase of the brainstorm session, as many potential causes as possible per major group will be
collected. Of course not all these potential causes will be the actual or significant cause of the effect.
Therefore a second round is needed to group causes and to highlight the causes that are highly suspected.
At the end of this second round the result should be a limited number of potential causes that need further
investigation.

Figure 67: Example fishbone diagram

138
Brainstorming
There are several important guidelines for holding a brainstorming session. The team leader has to ensure
that all team members are aware of these guidelines before the session begins:

• Ideas put forward may not be criticized or discussed:

The objective is generating as many ideas as possible (as many possible faults in the process as
possible). Discussion about an idea costs valuable time. In addition, an idea that initially seems
pointless can subsequently emerge as particularly important.

• Thinking must be creative:

Only by thinking creatively do most ideas actually emerge. It is important to free yourself from all
restrictions. For example, a machine operator can come up with ideas about his working area, but
he can also come up with ideas about product design.

• Generate as many ideas as possible in the shortest possible time:

By working quickly, you avoid thinking too analytically or critically. Thinking analytically or critically
may restrict you in putting forward new ideas. In other words, say everything that occurs to you
and do not think about whether or not it is a good idea.

• Build on other people’s ideas:

Do not stick to your own ideas, but also listen to the other team members. You will probably come
up with ideas based on what someone else has said.

The team leader has the responsibility to make sure that everyone knows what is expected from them and
that they have sufficient knowledge of the process. In brainstorming sessions, it is essential to invite people
who look at the subject from different points of view.

Figure 68: Brainstorming rules and tips

139
 4.1.3 Kaizen events

Kaizen focuses on Continuous Improvement. A Kaizen event is typically about a small improvement project,
like Waste elimination and Cycle Time reduction. Examples of Kaizen events are:

• Improving equipment set up and tooling change.

• Improving ergonomics and safety.
• Improving quality.
• Reduction of cost.
• Designing bins and racks for storage of raw components and finished goods.
• Designing forms, templates and inspection criteria.
• Waste identification and elimination.
• Problem solving activities to prevent quality issues.

Kaizen is about teamwork and empowerment. Participation is voluntary, but not without commitment. It is
a bottom-up approach and encourages the involvement of all employees. As such, Kaizen is an approach
that is often used to create a culture of Continuous Improvement. Kaizen is carried out at the place where
it happens: the ‘Gemba’. When problems occur you should ‘Go to the Gemba’ rather than looking for
solutions behind a desk or in a meeting room. Problems on the shop floor are experienced mostly by
employees on the shop floor, rather than by managers sitting behind spreadsheets and PowerPoints.
Employees on the shop floor very often have good ideas for solutions and improvements. The only issue is
that managers forget to ask them and involve them.

The five foundations of Kaizen and its principles are listed in Table 7:

Kaizen principle Description

Teamwork Create commitment for all

Personal discipline Follow the standards

Better moral Ensure good work morale

The Quality Circle Follow the PDCA improvement cycles

Suggestion for improvement Be receptive to new ideas and suggestions

Table 7: Kaizen principles

Kaizen events are coupled very often to Standardized Work. If an abnormality occurs, always ask yourself
the following: ‘Was there no standard?’, ‘Was the standard followed?’, ‘Was the standard insufficient?’

The customer should always be the starting point of improvement projects. This not only concerns the
external customer, but also the internal customer (e.g. colleagues and departments). Each step in the
process has a customer who receives the outcome of its process step. At the same time each process step
is a customer itself, as it receives products from the prior process step. Therefore it is important that each
process step is treated like a customer. Each process step should not accept errors from prior steps; it
should not make errors and it should not forward errors to consecutive process steps. If everybody follows
this principle, the quality of the entire process will be better and at the end of the process the customer
will receive a good product or service.

140
A Kaizen event is about getting things done immediately, not about making weeks of analysis and then
taking a few more weeks to implement the solution. The solution will not always be perfect after the first
event, but a big improvement will be made. Later on, we can start another event and make another step.

“Better to be 80% right today

than 100% right in six months!”

Masaaki Imai

A typical Kaizen event is the Kaizen Blitz. It is the most well known and most effective way of achieving
immediate and obvious gains within any environment (service or manufacturing). The Kaizen Blitz event
takes from a few days up to a week and is led by a facilitator (e.g. Lean facilitator, supervisor or external
consultant). The team focuses on one specific area. Typically a Kaizen Blitz concentrates on the removal of
the eight types of ‘Waste’. The first Kaizen Blitz can be very much like an initial 5S implementation, looking
at work cell design, layout and safety. The strength of any Kaizen approach is gaining the result within a
short period of time.

Genchi Genbutsu
‘Genchi Genbutsu’ means “Go and See". It is one of the principles of the Toyota Production System. It means
that in order to truly understand a situation one needs to go to Gemba or Genba, as the Japanese call it.
‘Gen’ means actuality or reality. When we look at the word Gen-Ba, it means the actual place or the place
where the work is done.

Taiichi Ohno, creator of the Toyota Production System, had a special way of teaching managers the power
of Genchi Genbutsu. He drew a circle on the shop floor with a piece of chalk. The manager would be told
to stand in the circle, observe and note what he saw. Several hours later, Ohno would return and ask the
manager “What did you see?”. Usually Ohno had spotted an irregularity, and wanted the manager to see
the same. So if the manager’s reply was something else than what Ohno had already seen, his response
would be “Watch some more”. The chalk circle is therefore also called the ‘Ohno Circle’.

Ohno’s statement was that the only way to truly understand what happens on the shop floor was to go
there and observe. He truly believed that value is created at the shop floor only, and also problems should
be solved on the shop floor. Therefore the shop floor is where managers should spend their time.

141
 Deming circle / PDCA circle
Many small improvement projects, like Kaizen events, follow the PDCA approach. The PDCA abbreviation
stands for Plan-Do-Check-Act and is also known as the Deming or Shewhart Cycle. We will briefly review
each of the four steps:

Plan:
Within the Plan-phase we will identify a relevant issue, followed by forming a team that has the knowledge
and time to work on the problem and is empowered to implement the solution. We will define the problem
description and establish the objectives. Then the problem will be analyzed and possible causes will be
determined. Quality tools and brainstorm techniques like the Ishikawa (or Fishbone) diagram or 5-Whys
can be used in this phase. Finally, the team will generate a solution and an implementation plan. The plan
will be presented to the department leader to get approval to execute the plan.

Do:
Within the Do-phase the team will execute the implementation plan and put in place the solutions that will
take away the root cause. Data of the improved process will be collected.

Check:
Within the Check-phase the team will compare the data of the improved process with the initial data. The
team will measure the effect of the solution and verify if the root cause has indeed been eliminated. The
team will also verify if the output of the improved process is what would be expected.

Act:
Within the Act-phase the team will review whether the actions taken have achieved the right effect and if
any additional actions need to be initiated. Second, the team has to sustain the established improvement.
This is an important step to ensure that the process performance will not deteriorate over time again. This
step is the wedge as shown in Figure 69. Without securing the improvement properly we will be certain to
face the same problem again in the future.

Figure 69: Deming circle & PDCA Circle

142
Six Sigma
Most OEMs and Tiers employ Green Belts and Black Belts who apply Six Sigma, which is more sophisticated
than applying simple problem solving tools. Six Sigma is a long-term, forward-thinking initiative designed to
fundamentally change the way corporations do business. It is first and foremost a ‘Business improvement
method’ that enables companies to increase profits by streamlining activities, improving quality and
eliminating defects or mistakes in everything a company does. While traditional quality programs have
focused on detecting and correcting defects, Six Sigma encompasses something broader. It provides specific
methods to recreate the process so that defects are significantly reduced or even completely prevented.

‘Critical to Quality’ measures (CTQs) are the key characteristics of a product or process which performance
standards or specification limits must meet in order to satisfy the customer. CTQs can be measured and its
data can be analyzed. A measurement that falls outside the CTQ-specification limits is called a defect. A
‘defect’ in a product does not necessarily mean that the product is damaged or broken, but that the CTQ is
outside its specification. Products that perform outside the specification, can still be functional. The
objective of Six Sigma is to reduce the variation of the CTQ values by identifying and removing its causes of
variations.

The maturity of a process can be described by a Sigma rating, indicating the yield or percentage of defect-
free products it creates. A process performing at a Six Sigma level means that 99.99966% of the products
produced are within specification and 0.00034% are outside specification (defective). Processes that
perform at the ‘level of 6 Sigma’ are assumed to produce less than 3.4 ‘Defects Per Million Opportunities’
(DPMO). Six Sigma's implicit goal is to improve a process, but not with the intention that in all cases the
above mentioned level of 6 sigma (eq. to 3.4 DPMO) should be achieved. Actually, the Six Sigma philosophy
is to realize breakthroughs in quality performance. A process that originally operated at the level of 2 sigma
(equal to 31% defective or 308,538 DPMO) and after a Six Sigma project now operates at the level of 3
sigma (equal to 6.7% defective or 66,807 DPMO) can still be called a ‘Six Sigma improvement project’
because a significant improvement has been achieved.

Six Sigma applies statistical tools to identify and remove causes of variation for which measures are needed.
For applying statistical tools you need to keep in mind the statistical fundamental rules. Most noteworthy
is that you have to be very careful how you apply statistical tools when the set of data represents an instable
process. For instance, it is not allowed to apply a normal distribution analysis on a set of data that contains
outliers from an instable process or measurement. The first step in a breakthrough process should always
be to investigate the stability of the data set and the process performance over time. The Six Sigma toolbox
contains a number of tools that can be applied to visualize and analyze the stability performance of a
process. When the defects are mainly caused by an instable process, the process of searching for its root
causes is more likely to involve the application of basic problem solving tools. A proper maintenance
program or a Lean or Kaizen approach should be applied in order to remove the cause for the instability
before continuing with a variation reduction initiative with sophisticated Six Sigma tools.

143
 DMAIC roadmap
Six Sigma projects follow a special roadmap, called the DMAIC roadmap. This is an abbreviation for Define,
Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control. DMAIC refers to a data-driven improvement initiative used for
improving, optimizing and stabilizing business processes and products. The DMAIC roadmap offers a
focused and structured approach to improve processes and solve problems in an organization. The roadmap
is used mainly for Six Sigma projects. Lean projects use both PDCA as the DMAIC roadmap. Kaizen projects
are advised to follow the PDCA roadmap because it is less complicated.

In the Define phase of the roadmap the operational problem is defined and the Project Charter as well as
the ‘Critical To Quality’ metric (CTQ). In the Measure phase the measurement system that needs to measure
the CTQ is validated. In the Analyze phase, the current process is analyzed and potential factors of influence
are identified. In the Improve phase improvements are defined, implemented and verified. Finally in the
Control phase measures will be put in place to sustain the improvements.

Figure 70 Lean Six Sigma DMAIC roadmap

144
Summary

To prevent the recurrence of a problem, the 8D process is commonly used in automotive. The method
comprises 8 disciplines which must be completed in order to tackle a problem. The first important issue is
quick response to the customer to contain the problem and prevent (further) escalation. Containment
action often involves checking for errors in already manufactured products.

An important next step is to understand the problem of the customer. A tool for describing the problem is
the ‘5X W and 2x H method’ (Who, What, Why, Where, When, How and How many). Before solving the
problem, the root cause should be allocated. Fishbone diagram and 5-WHY are useful tools to find out the
root cause. Only when the root cause is found can the problem be solved. Preventing re-occurrence of the
problem can be achieved by asking yourself the questions ‘can the problem happen in some other
production area’ and ‘is there a need to update specifications, training, instructions or P-FMEAs and control
plan?’ An 8D can be closed when the customer is satisfied with all the actions implemented.

Keywords in paragraph 5:

• Problem Solving • Emergency Response Action (ERA)

• Interim Containment Action (ICA) • Corrective & Preventive Action
• Root Cause Analysis • Prevent Re-occurrence
• Fishbone Diagram • Brainstorming
• 5WHY • Plan Do Check Act (PDCA)
• Permanent Corrective Action (PCA) • 8D

145
 4.2 Lean Manufacturing

Learning Objectives
1. Describe Lean Manufacturing.
2. Interpret Lean Manufacturing in the automotive chain.
3. Describe why Lean Manufacturing is applied in the automotive industry.

4.2.1 Lean Manufacturing in the Automotive Industry

Lean Manufacturing focuses on stability and elimination of waste. Lean Manufacturing began with Henry
Ford, who was the first person to truly integrate an entire production process. He did this by lining up
fabrication steps in process sequence using Standardized Work and interchangeable parts. Ford called this
‘Flow’ production (1913). The problem with Ford’s system was its inability to provide variety: the Model-T
was limited to one color and to one color specification. As a result, all Model-T chassis were essentially
identical until the end of production in 1926.

In the 1930s, and more intensely just after World War II (1950), Kiichiro Toyoda, Taiichi Ohno, and others
at Toyota started looking at Ford’s situation. While Ford was producing 8,000 vehicles per day, Toyota had
produced only 2,500 vehicles in 13 years. Toyota wanted to scale up production, but lacked the financial
resources required for the huge quantity of inventory and subassemblies as seen at the Ford’s plant. It
occurred to them that a series of simple innovations might make it possible to provide both continuity in
process flow as well as a wide variety of product offerings. Soon after, Toyota developed the ‘Toyota
Production System’ (TPS). TPS borrowed ideas from Ford, but developed the ‘Just In Time’ philosophy (JIT),
the ‘Pull Concept’ and ‘Jidoka’ to address the issues of high cost associated with Ford’s large inventories.
The Lean thought process is thoroughly described in the book ‘The machine that changed the World’ [34]
and in a subsequent volume, ‘Lean Thinking’ [35] which specifically describes the five Lean principles.

In 2008, Toyota became the world’s largest auto manufacturer in terms of overall sales. Over the past two
decades, Toyota’s continued success has created an enormous demand for further knowledge concerning
Lean Thinking. There are literally hundreds of books, papers and other resources currently available to this
growing Lean Management audience.

Lean Thinking or Lean Management has been widely distributed around the world. Lean principles and tools
are being used in production, logistics and distribution, services, trade, health, construction, maintenance
and even in government with the common goal of reducing turnaround time and operational costs, while
at the same time improving quality. One of the most important activities within Lean programs is the
identification and elimination of Waste or Muda.

146
4.2.2 Appling Lean Manufacturing

Value Adding versus Non Value Adding

Like many other quality programs, Lean manufacturing places the customer at the center of its activities.
The first Lean principle is ‘Value’. The definition of Value is ‘what is of value to the customer’. Specific Value
means ‘the activities the customer is willing to pay for’. It is obvious that by using this definition, not all
activities in your process will add value to the customer. Why do it then? What is the point of doing things
nobody wants to pay for?

The purpose of Value Stream Mapping is to visualize the process and distinguish the Value Adding Activities
from the Non-Value Adding Activities. Let us review a little more in depth what the meaning of an ‘Activity’
is. Every activity in your process can be classified as:

• Value Adding Activities (VA) Customer is willing to pay for.

• Non-Value Adding Activities (NVA) Customer is not willing to pay for.
• Necessary Activities Necessary for the process.

Necessary Activities are needed to keep the process running. These activities cannot be taken out of the
process easily, but should be limited as much as possible. An example of a Necessary Activity is an inspection
required by the customer or by the government.

Reducing Muda (Waste)

Reducing Muda can be achieved by assuring that a process will not consume more resources than necessary
to produce the goods or provide the service that the customer actually wants. Reducing Muda can be
achieved by avoiding activities that do not add value to the product, meaning producing ‘First Time Right’,
without loss of materials, loss of resources, rework, repair and waiting. In most Lean programs, this is the
first variation that will be addressed, because it is easier distinguished than the other types. In addition,
redesigning processes or products (Innovation) can result in using fewer resources.

A Value Adding Activity must meet the following criteria:

• The customer is willing to pay for the activity.

• It must be done correctly the first time (First Time Right).
• The action must change the product or service in some way.

If one of these criteria is not met, the activity is classified as a ‘Non-Value Adding Activity’ and therefore as
‘Waste’ or ‘Muda’, which should be eliminated. Initially, there were seven types of Waste, but many also
acknowledge an 8th type of Waste, as seen in Figure 71.

147
 Figure 71: Muda - 8 types of waste

It is difficult to remember the Muda’s above, but Tim Woods is easy to remember. T(ransport), I(nventory),
M(ovement), W(aiting), O(ver-processing), O(ver production), D(effects), S(kills (unused expertise)).

1 – Overproduction
Overproduction occurs when more products than are required at a certain time are produced by the
internal or external customer. One common practice that leads to this Muda is the production of large
batches.

Overproduction is considered the worst Muda because it hides and/or generates all the others.
Overproduction leads to excess inventory, which then requires the expenditure of resources on storage
space and preservation, activities that do not benefit the customer. There is also the possibility that
customer demand or customer requirements change. As a consequence, goods may become obsolete or
services may be provided while there is no customer request.

2 – Waiting
Goods or documents that are not being processed are ‘waiting’. Waiting is not about people who are
waiting, but goods or documents that are waiting to be processed. In traditional processes, this is mostly
the largest type of Waste. Waiting for information or approval in order to continue the process is also
classified as ‘Waiting’.

3 – Transportation
Each time a product is moved between process steps, we qualify it as Waste. Transportation between
operation steps does not make any transformation to the product that the consumer is willing to pay for.
Transport therefore adds to costs without adding value. There is also a risk of the product or service being
damaged, lost, delayed, etc.

4 – Over-processing
Over-processing occurs any time work is done to the product for which the customer is not willing to pay.
Examples are the use of components that are more precise, complex, expensive, or higher quality than
absolutely required. In service organizations, it means unnecessary inspections, verifications and stamps. It
also means unnecessary, redundant or superfluous information.

148
Measuring quality or inspection is also classified as ‘over-processing’ as long as the measurement is used
for verification only and not used to adjust or improve the quality of the product. Unfortunately, many
companies cannot do without inspection in order to deliver good products or services. This is due to a low
performance capability and low reliability of the process.

5 – Inventory
Inventory is the excessive quantity of raw materials or excessive semi-finished products (Work-in-Process)
between operations and finished goods. Inventory represents a capital outlay that has not yet produced an
income either by the producer or for the consumer. In service organizations, inventory refers to documents
(complaints, requests, orders, etc.) waiting between operations in the process.

A certain amount of inventory is needed in order to assure ‘Flow’ in the process, but it should be limited as
much as possible. In a situation where activities within the process are perfectly balanced, there is almost
no inventory between operations. Slowly reducing the amount of inventory is the best way to realize the
opportunities for improvement.

6 – Motion
Motion refers to the movement (walking) of operators and employees from one activity to the other.
Searching for information (not walking) is also classified as ‘Motion’, because during the searching process,
no value is added to the product.

7 – Defects
Products with defects cannot be delivered to the consumer. Documents that are not complete and perfectly
clear to the customer are also classified as ‘Defects’. Not producing ‘First Time Right’ is classified as ’Defects’
as well.

In the event the product can be repaired or reworked, it requires resources to do so. If it cannot be repaired
or reworked, it should be scrapped. In both cases, extra costs will incur for reworking, new components,
rescheduling, etc.

8 – Unused expertise
Initially, there were only seven types of Waste. The 8th type of Waste was added later. Not using the
available knowledge, skills or expertise that is present in the organization, is also Waste. Young people can
learn from older and experienced people. Management can learn from the expertise at the shop floor, etc.

149
 Organized Work Environment (5S)
5S is about smart workspace organization (‘Good Housekeeping’). Employees are made familiar with the
methodology, and companies are assisted in the actual realization of a more structured working
environment. The workspace is the mirror of the organization and is the starting point for every
improvement initiative. All employees directly or indirectly involved in the improvement project on the
work floor should be involved in this process. The 5S technique itself is not very complicated, but because
all employees will be involved and it requires a change in behavior, it will take quite some effort to
implement 5S properly.

Figure 72: Structured work environment

The 5S technique exposes waste and prevents it from recurring in the future. It supports the communication
process of operational standards of the organization to all employees. It will result in improved workplace
efficiency, a professional representation to clients, and a safer and more pleasant work environment. The
process of implementing good housekeeping consists of five consecutive steps:

Japanese English Description

S1: Seiri Sort Only necessary items are at the workplace

S2: Seiton Straighten Everything has a fixed place

S3: Seiso Shine Everything is constantly kept clean

S4: Seiketsu Standardize Procedures and standards are visible

S5: Shitsuke Sustain Procedures are followed with discipline

Table 8: Consecutive steps of 5S

The goal of the sorting step is to distinguish between what is necessary and what is superfluous. What is
necessary, what can we get rid of? In this first step, you make sure that only items that you regularly need
are present at the work location. Items that are superfluous get in the way of the real work and potentially
make the workplace unsafe. These items should be thrown away or removed to other areas.

150
Logistic Flows Within Automotive
As mentioned in the previous paragraph, stock is a form of waste. Stocks cost space as well as money.
Logistics processes within the automotive play an important role. In addition, every car has its own options.
In short, a good coordination between the different suppliers is very important. This passes through the
entire automotive chain. In the picture below, you see the different colored trucks, but the options can also
be different; we call this one-piece flow.

Figure 73: Logistic flow

How do you make sure that the right part at the right time is provided to the production line? The
automotive uses multiple techniques such as just-in-time, deliver in production sequence, kanban, twobin,
etc. All these examples are lean manufacturing techniques. Should something go wrong in the chain, then
it might mean that a complete factory is standing still.

Push
Imagine if every sub-process or supplier can make unlimited stocks. This would mean that many semi-
finished products have to be stored in warehouses. This will cost a lot of money but also additional work,
transport to the warehouse store, etc. (think of the eight forms of waste). Eventually, this will result in a
chaos with huge piles of parts around the respective machines. These piles are pushed to the next process
step in the operation in order to create space. Improving the efficiency, a single machine or process step
will increase the logistical chaos even more. It will result in excessive quantities of raw materials and
excessive semi-finished products. Observing many different products on the shop floor and many people
being very busy is a signal that the organization is not Lean. As mentioned earlier, excessive Inventory
means Waste. Lean organizations are organized, have oversight, and demonstrate no stress. Many
operations apply Push, sometimes even without realizing it. Operation managers focus on optimizing
individual process steps or equipment, especially when it concerns expensive equipment.

Pull
To avoid Waste, it is necessary to work according the ‘Just In Time’ (JIT) principle. This can be achieved by
supplying each operation step in the process with the right part, at the right time, in the right amount. This
can be achieved by implementing Pull. Working according with the principle Pull instead of Push will avoid
inventory and overproduction (which is explained in Figure 74). This starts with the demand of the
customer, who pulls first! Pull means that the subsequent process determines the number of items that

151
 needs to be delivered by the downstream process. The picture below shows a push process with an output
of 1 part per minute and an inventory of 24 parts. The second picture shows a pull process in which the
inventory is 10 parts.

Figure 74: Push production

Figure 75: Pull production

Pull can be applied in the process before the so-called ‘de-coupling point’. This is the point where products
will turn from generic parts to customer-specific parts. The de-coupling point is the point where the
forecast-driven elements (Pull) meet the demand-driven elements (Push). An inventory buffer will always
be needed just before the de-coupling point to cater for the discrepancy between the sales forecast and
the actual demand (i.e., the forecast error).

Figure 76: Kanban system to achieve pull production

In the example above (Figure 76), there are only 5 left doors and 5 right doors. When one of the carriers is
empty, it can be filled not any sooner. Pull can be achieved by the use of tools like Kanban and Just In Time.

152
Kanban
Kanban is one of the tools through which ‘Just In Time’ (JIT) and Pull are achieved. It was developed at
Toyota by Taiichi Ohno. Kanban systems control the logistical chain between operation steps, by aligning
inventory levels with actual consumption. It is not an inventory control system though. Kanban systems
allow each sub-process to withdraw from the downstream sub-processes only the parts needed. The
Kanban itself is a physical card or a digital signal that is sent to the preceding process step to indicate that
certain parts are needed. Such a Kanban is called a withdrawal Kanban. It contains information about the
parts that are needed, like the amount and specification. The earlier process delivers the exact number of
items that are indicated by the Kanban. The process will not produce parts when there is no demand.

A Kanban is sometimes called a ‘Supermarket’, as the development of Kanban is based on the way
supermarkets schedule demand. In a supermarket, customers obtain the required quantity at the required
time, no more and no less. The supermarket puts only products on the shelves that are expected to be sold
within a certain timeframe. Customers take only what they need for the next couple of days, and no more.
Lean organizations should treat each process step both as an internal client to upstream processes and as
an internal supplier for downstream processes. As a client, it should request no more than is needed for
the timeframe and as a supplier, it should prepare or produce no more than what is requested by its
customer.

Figure 77: Warehouse Kanban card

153
 Two-bin system
A two-bin system is a special Kanban system that is often applied for standard parts and small items. At a
certain work location, a rack is placed in a number of positions. Each position can contain two boxes (bins)
for a certain item. When the box is empty, it will be placed behind the filled box or at the bottom of the
rack, as shown in Figure 78. There is no Kanban card since the empty box itself is the Kanban. In some cases,
there might be a flag available at the back of the rack that indicates that an empty box needs to be replaced
by a full one. When the box contains standard (inexpensive) parts like screws or bolts, the amount in the
box is not counted, but is weighted or just filled. For inexpensive articles, a two-bin system is cheaper than
controlling the stock by an ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning) system.

Figure 78: Two bin system

154
Summary

Lean Manufacturing is used in the automotive to reduce costs and to align processes in the automotive
chain. Lean manufacturing focuses on reducing waste in processes. There are eight types of waste. An
important tool to identify waste is Value Stream Mapping. After identifying waste, the question is how to
eliminate them. Important tools for eliminating waste are working according the pull and Just in Time
principles, implementation of Kanban or two-bin systems. Also, 5S good housekeeping program helps
reduce waste in processes.

Keywords in paragraph 4.2:

• Lean Manufacturing • 5S Organized Work Environment

• Value Stream Mapping • Logistic Flow
• Muda • Just In Time (JIT)
• Push and Pull • Jidoka
• Kanban • Lean Thinking
• Toyota Production System (TPS) • Waste
• Two-bin System • Value Adding
• First Time Right (FTR)

155
 4.3 Quality Awareness

Learning Objectives
1. Understand the disciplinary approach of projects, problem solving, and continuous improvements.
2. Describe the type of leadership needed in the automotive industry.
3. Describe what commitment is, and its importance.
4. Participate in gaining commitment.
5. Describe different types of people's soft skills and their importance.
6. Understand cultural diversity, not only nationalities, but also between job roles.

4.3.1 Leadership and Commitment

What is the difference between a manager and a leader? There are many different opinions on this
question. In general the manager’s job is to plan, organize and coordinate. The leader’s job is to inspire,
motivate and coach. Ideally leadership and management should go hand in hand. They are not the same
thing, but they are necessarily linked and complementary to each other. Any effort to separate the two is
likely to cause more problems than it solves.

Leaders maintain trust relationships with employees by valuing their loyalty, treating people with respect,
creating and maintaining individual relationships with employees, encouraging belief and trust in others
and treating people fairly. They also should work with integrity and should be role models to others. Leaders
are honest and sincere. They show commitment, enthusiasm and respect, have a strong set of ethics and
standards, are credible and consistent, maintain a sense of vulnerability and are not complacent. Leaders
coach and facilitate employees to achieve better results by being supportive, helping them, protecting them
from outside interference and by being available to them.

Managers are decisive, action-focused decision-makers, avoid over-analysis and propose decisions and
effective actions, while fostering action-taking by others. They hold people responsible for results and are
decisive about non-performers by always focusing on the outcome of results, maintaining clear
accountability for performance and making tough decisions. Managers develop an effective, confident and
strong management style by communicating the organizations values and by making sure the strategy is
known to and embraced by all organizational members.

Leadership influences culture beyond management (Burman and Evans, 2008). Whether a big project will
be successful or not depends strongly on the organizational culture and the role that leadership plays. A
leader's task is to coach and facilitate improvement initiatives to achieve better results. This can be done,
inter alia, by inspiring, motivating, facilitating and respecting the employees.

“Management is efficiency in climbing the ladder of success;

Leadership determines whether the ladder is leaning against the right wall.”

Stephen Covey

156
4.3.2 Interdisciplinary Nature of Quality

The increasing amount of electronically controlled functions in modern cars leads to a level of complexity
that has never been experienced before – both of the system “car” and the related development processes.
There is a strong common agreement in the sector that interdisciplinary expertise is the absolutely
fundamental basis for being able to tackle this complexity under the heavy pressure of shorter development
and innovation cycles [36]. Moreover, this demand is reinforced by the necessity of mastering essential
“horizontal” topics such as product and process quality, reliability, and functional safety.

International standards about Development Quality (Automotive SPICE®, ISO/IEC 15504), Functional Safety
(ISO 26262, IEC 61508), Quality Management system IATF 16949 and improvement tools as mentioned in
lean Six Sigma (production and process quality) form the backbone of the modern automotive and supplier
industry. These standards make the smooth coupling of the different companies along the supply chain
possible, and enable the successful integration of all parts and subsystems. In order to be eligible for OEMs,
suppliers have to implement and master all these standards. This applies equally well to big companies as
to small and middle-sized ones.

The holistic nature of these quality requirements and the ever-increasing need for shortening development
cycles imply that the topics linked to quality aspects have to be addressed in a totally integrated way.
Furthermore, the capability of suppliers to master this integration is increasingly a subject of rigorous
assessments demanded by OEMs. This strong need, however, requires not only many qualified specialists,
but interdisciplinary “all-rounders” that can act as the links between different expert groups [37].

Therefore, automotive OEMs and suppliers are challenged to take into account the multi-disciplinary and
multi-dimensional nature of product and process quality in their development organizations, mainly based
on the IATF 16949. Classic product development organizations typically resemble expert domains in their
departmental and/or project structures, thus further intensifying and augmenting the difficulties of
realizing integrated engineering. With increasing system complexity, obtaining the competence of the
completely final product as a system and as a result of a networked system of development tasks has
become practically impossible in such environments. System competence is, however, the fundament of
being able to perform consistent integrated engineering and gives thus an increasingly important
competitive advantage. This applies to incremental innovation and product development, as well as to
radical innovation and the development of completely new and weakly specified products. In order to get
the systemic view and understanding required to handle product quality appropriately, the following
disciplines shall be covered in engineering organizations:

• Systematic requirements engineering (to capture and understand requirements even in lack of an
exhaustive product specification).
• Knowledge capitalization and contextualization (to apply experiences from other projects and
different domains and industrial sectors).
• Systems engineering and functional re-use design (to tackle complexity).
• Design thinking (which by its very definition puts designers in the position of being engines for
radical new development).

These skills, while also highly relevant to incremental development tasks, give designers particular abilities
to build up an integral overall system understanding in the lack of clear specifications and existing physical
product realizations. Since once cannot expect designers to have sufficient expertise in all the disciplines

157
 involved in automotive engineering (electrics, electronics, software, mechanics, thermodynamics, etc.), as
well as in all the interconnected subsystems, the only way to face the systems engineering challenge is to
build multi-disciplinary teams in which experts in different disciplines work very closely together during the
entire development process. This is a necessary requirement to support an integrated engineering
approach, where the multi-dimensional quality aspect is considered an intrinsic property of the whole
system “vehicle”. The key challenge associated with the integrated engineering paradigm in mixed expert
teams mainly lies in collective decision-making and intensive communication.

4.3.3 Cultural Diversity and its Influence

Culture can be described as a shared set of basic assumptions and values, with resultant behavioral norms,
attitudes and beliefs that manifest themselves in systems and institutions, as well as behavioral patterns
(e.g. gestures, tokens) and non-behavioral items (e.g. value understanding). There are various levels to
culture, ranging from the easily observable outer layers (such as behavioral conventions) to the increasingly
more difficult to grasp inner layers (such as assumptions and values). Culture is shared among members of
one group or society, and has an interpretative function for the members of that group. Culture is situated
between the human nature on the one hand and the individual personality on the other. Culture is not
inheritable or genetic, but learned. Although all members of a group or society share their culture,
expressions of culture-resultant behavior are modified by individuals’ personality.

One can distinguish between different levels of culture:

• National culture.
• Regional culture.
• Ethnical / religion culture.
• Mother language culture.
• Genus culture.
• Generation culture.
• Social class culture.
• Organizational culture.
• Etc.

In terms of cultural dimensions to be taken into account, the study of Hofstede is very often cited and used
[38], [39]. In this study, Hofstede defines the following five cultural dimensions:

1. Power distance.
2. Individualism versus Collectivism.
3. Masculinity versus Femininity.
4. Uncertainty Avoidance.
5. Long or short term Orientation.

Power distance focuses on the nature of human relationship in terms of hierarchy. Individualism/
collectivism focuses on relationship between the individual and the group. Masculinity and femininity take
into account the equality of chances and treatment of the two genders in society. The uncertainty
avoidance addresses the willingness of people to take risks. Long and short-term orientation signifies the
ability and practice of a given culture to deal with long-term planning and decision making.

158
This multi-dimensional model of national culture is very helpful in taking into account pro-actively the
challenges to be faced when putting together local or global development teams in which experts from
different countries and different national cultures will work closely together in the same development
project. This has become more and more common, as globalization has led to international cooperation
among product manufacturers, spanning not only production and assembly, but also product development.
By becoming active worldwide, companies try to gain benefits from local markets, both in the sense of work
force as well as customers. In such cooperation, engineering designers from different cultural and
educational backgrounds participate in one design process to develop or adapt products under the
contributions of local engineering designers.

Some outstanding selected aspects to be taken into consideration in multi-cultural design organizations are
as follows [40]:

• Design process: Which course(s) is (are) taken in different cultures, for example, the order in which
the steps in a design process are carried out?
• Problem-solving strategy: Does an engineering designer approach the design problem by dividing
it into smaller sub-problems or rather considers the problem as a whole?
• Problem-solving steps: Are different steps of problem-solving carried out one by one or rather in
parallel?

As an example, problem-solving approaches of Western cultures are typically driven by dividing the
complete problem in more specialized sub-problems, each of which are treated according to a specific
working principle. Individual solutions are then merged to a common principle solution, which is the basis
of the embodiment design. The 8D process, for example, is coined by such an approach.

Figure 79: Problem solving approach typically found in Western cultures [40]

Opposed to the problem division approach is the holistic approach, which is more typical for Asian cultures.
Sub-problems are defined where needed, and working principles are applied from a kind of toolbox to the
complete problem, to sub-problems, as well as directly to the principle solution and the embodiment
design.

159
 Figure 80: Problem solving approach typically found in Eastern cultures [40]

It is not always evident to bring together these two (and other) problem solution approaches in one
particular project.

Other selected aspects:

• Subjective view: How does it affect the approach of an engineering designer, for example, in case
of interpreting the problem or preferring particular criteria to others while selecting a solution?
• Contextual perception: Is the information which is used for making decisions directly linked to the
problem (i.e., seen in close context to the problem) or does it relate to the broader context of the
problem (i.e., not only the problem but its environment also)?
• Social Awareness: How are aspects like environment, health and safety considered? How big is the
appreciation of individual and collective values?
• Barriers: Which obstacles appear during an activity and block its progress, for example, difficulties
in making a decision?
• Technical Competence: Where are experience and/or knowledge gaps based on cultural and
geographical differences?

The bottom line is that automotive engineers and managers need to develop a huge set of intercultural and
teamwork soft skills in order to neatly integrate into modern automotive development organizations.
Mastering diversity in culture and expertise has become the key challenge and opportunity in modern
automotive engineering teams and with it, respect and openness the key success factors to face them.

160
All the outstanding quality dimensions in automotive (ISO TS 16949 for the complete product creation
process, Automotive SPICE®, Functional Safety and Design for Six Sigma mainly for the product
development) require clearly defined roles and responsibilities to be represented in multi-disciplinary
teams:

• In the IATF 16949, roles and responsibilities are defined in the overall process quality management
activities.
• In Automotive SPICE®, roles and responsibilities are defined in the development process, in
improvement teams, in assessment teams, etc.
• In Functional Safety, outstanding roles are Safety Engineers, Safety Managers (on company,
business unit and project levels), and Safety Auditors (internal, external).
• In Six Sigma, roles and responsibilities are defined as belt levels (Black Belt and Green Belt on
project level, Orange Belt and Yellow Belt on support level on the shop floor), of which each belt
level has a very particular significance and set of competences.

In the integrated view of the product creation process with a systemic quality awareness, we need
interdisciplinary project management teams integrating mechanical engineering, electrical engineering,
software engineering, system architects, Functional Safety managers and Six Sigma experts (Green/Black
Belts). In audits and assessments the team also has to maintain and transport to the assessors an integrated
view. The more there is collaboration between the different disciplines during the development process,
the easier this is to accomplish.

An organization culture that leverages integrated automotive quality engineering has to overcome barriers
that exist in existing automotive engineering organizations:

• Expert departments.
• Expert education and terminology.
• Customer project teams.
• Diverging business and engineering priorities.
• Diverging project and organization priorities.
• Etc.

A key lever to achieve a quality engineering culture will evolve from giving priority to interdisciplinary teams
on both management and engineering levels. In interdisciplinary (development, management, assessment,
improvement, etc.) teams, we need stakeholders who can mediate between experts from the involved
expert domains. To be able to do this, these stakeholders have to understand and speak the expert
languages, i.e., know and understand the key terms of Automotive SPICE, Functional Safety, IATF 16949 and
lean Six Sigma, as well as know and understand the mindset and context of the three expert groups.

161
 The automotive functional safety standard ISO 26262 even comes up with a characterization of a good and
a bad safety culture. According to the ISO 26262-1 definition, safety culture signifies the policy and strategy
used within an organization to support the development, production, and operation of safety related
systems. ISO 26262-2, 5.4.2 lists as requirements for a safety culture the following items:

• The organization shall create, foster, and sustain a safety culture that supports and encourages the
effective achievement of functional safety.
• The organization shall establish, execute, and maintain organization specific rules and processes to
comply with the requirements of ISO 26262.
• The organization shall institute, execute and maintain processes to ensure that unresolved
functional safety anomalies are explicitly communicated to the safety manager, and other
responsible persons.
• The organization shall ensure the fulfilment of the functional safety activities over the safety life
cycle, including the associated documentation.
• The organization shall provide adequate resources for the achievement of functional safety.
• The organization shall institute, execute and maintain a continuous improvement process, based
on:
o learning from the experiences made in the safety life cycle of each item, including field
experience, and
o deriving improvements for application on subsequent items.
• The organization shall ensure that the persons performing, or supporting the safety activities are
given sufficient authority to fulfil their responsibilities.

Based on this list, a good safety culture meets the following requirements:

• The reward system supports and motivates the effective achievement of functional safety.
• Supporting communication and decision-making channels exist and the management encourages
their usage.
• Continuous improvement is integral to all processes.
• Safety is the highest priority.

By contrast, the following items characterize an unacceptable safety culture:

• Personnel assessing safety, quality, and their governing processes are influenced unduly by those
responsible for execution.
• Cost and schedule always take precedence over safety and quality.
• Processes are "ad hoc" or implicit.

These characterizations comply with experiences from practice, although the ultimate requirement in the
list of best practices, i.e., “Safety is the highest priority”, typically needs to be weakened, since there are lot
of other equally transversal objectives to be achieved by the development organization. Product quality in
the broadest sense is one of them!

162
A quality culture based on integrated engineering teams and processes cannot be implemented by one
measure only and in a short term. Instead, there has to be a long-term strategy to which the top
management has to commit themselves in a way that is clearly visible and tangible for the involved
employees. The latter have to be empowered to carry out the mission that is expected of them. As this
mission is intrinsically involved with change, they will be confronted with resistance. They need the
assurance and means to come over this.

Commitment, empowerment and strategy are the necessary requirements for an organization-wide
improvement program to be successful. Further success factors are the following:

• Establish and identify a clearly defined and focused improvement project, and do not try to improve
all projects at once in the organization.
• Define your processes: start by defining and modeling/documenting your existing processes. In
order to define your improvement objectives and path, you first need to know your point of
departure.
• Train your staff; otherwise, they will not be capable of carrying out the project’s mission.
• Define a process group of experts who will be responsible for the implementation and maintenance
of processes. Define process owners.
• Get additional support from “external” consultants for guidance and the “outside view”.

163
 Summary

The most successful quality-oriented engineering and manufacturing organizations have quality as part of
their organization culture. This means that quality tasks are not perceived as additional cumbersome work,
but much rather as an integral part of any process and activities. Achieving such kind of organizational
culture requires a strategy of targeted actions carried out collectively with a high level of commitment,
leadership and teamwork. More generally speaking, team work and soft skills have become an
indispensable fundamental requirement for any automotive engineer to integrate neatly into modern
organizations. Strong intercultural skills and the ability to communicate with colleagues from many
different disciplines are of outstanding importance.

Keywords in paragraph 4.3:

• Commitment • Multicultural Local and Distributed

• Integrated Quality Engineering Teams
• Intercultural Competences • Quality Awareness
• Leadership • Diversity
• Multidisciplinary Teams • Quality Culture

164
4.4 Sustain Improvements

Learning Objectives
1. Describe how to sustain improvements or changes.
2. Understand the importance of lessons learned.
3. Describe the role of quality management.

4.4.1 Sustaining Improvements and Changes

It is important to pay attention to solutions that have been implemented to improve process performance.
To ensure that the improvements will be sustained after the project has been closed; the solutions need to
be embedded in the process and organization.

There are a lot of tools and techniques that can be used to sustain the improvements. For example, 5S,
Standardized Work, Poka Yoke ("mistake-proofing"; a poka-yoke is any mechanism in a process that helps
avoid mistakes) and the Control plan are very important for process control. In Figure 81, you can see an
overview of all the techniques that can be used. Most of these techniques have been previously described
in the book, like FMEA, MSA, SPC, OCAP.

Figure 81: Control methods

4.4.2 Quality Management

Each organization needs to ensure customer satisfaction by meeting the demands and requirements of its
clients. Organizations should also meet legal requirements. Each organization should be able to manage its
business processes properly. The quality procedures should be made known to all employees and they
should work according to the agreed procedures. The ‘Quality Management System’ (QMS) is a set of
policies, processes and procedures required for planning and executing (production/development/service)
in the core business area of an organization, such as areas that can impact the organization's ability to meet
customer requirements.

165
 Quality Management System
To interpret quality management most companies implemented a ‘Quality Management System’ (QMS). A
Quality Management System is a collection of all kind of business processes focused on achieving the quality
policy and quality objectives to meet customer and legal requirements. There are different standards for
quality management systems, but ISO 9001 is one of the most widely used systems in the world today. Over
one million organizations worldwide are independently ISO 9001 certified. Quality activities can be divided
into the following three groups:

• Quality Planning:
Focused on planning - how to fulfil process and quality requirements.
• Quality Control (QC):
Focused on detection of mistakes - inspections and approvals that are applied in the
realization process to ensure only good products and services will be delivered to the next
process step or the final customer.
• Quality Assurance (QA):
Focused on prevention - not only preventing defects in delivered products and services, but
also preventing all kind of problems in the company’s processes by preparations and inline
control measures.

Quality Planning
Quality Planning defines everything a company is going to do to ensure the quality to the customer. Creating
a Quality Management Plan is the first step in the quality management process. It is essential to provide
the customer with confidence that his requirements will be met. Examples of Quality Planning are:

• Formulating the quality policy.

• Identifying customers’ requirements.
• Listing the deliverables to be produced.
• Setting quality targets for these deliverables.
• Defining quality standards for the deliverables.
• Communicating the above items to all employees.

Quality Control
Quality Control is product or service-oriented and focuses on defect identification and detection. It is very
often planned inspection, installed at the end of the line or process. Examples of Quality Control are:

• Final visual inspection for damage or scratches.

• Functional test on electronics.
• Testing software solutions.
• Management approval or signature on the final document.
• Applying Jidoka when problems occur.

Quality Control activities are short-term solutions to prevent the customer from defects. Although this is of
course a very good initiative, all Quality Control measures mentioned above are classified as ‘Non-Value
Added’ or ‘Waste’ in terms of Lean Six Sigma. This is because the measures are not adding any value to a
product. They only prevent a bad product from being delivered to the customer. The measures result in
rework or scrap. Therefore, Quality Control alone is not enough. Organizations should focus on prevention
rather than detecting. This can be achieved by implementing Quality Assurance.

166
Quality Assurance
Quality Assurance is a way of preventing mistakes or defects in products and processes and ensuring
continuous improvement. Quality Assurance is process-oriented and focuses on defect prevention rather
than defect identification. Quality assurance activities are to ensure that the process implemented to
produce the product or service satisfy customer and legal requirements. It covers all activities from design,
development, production, installation, servicing and documentation.

Two principles included in Quality Assurance are: ‘Fit For Purpose’, i.e., the product should be suitable for
the intended purpose; and ‘First Time Right’ (FTR), i.e., mistakes and damage should be prevented, rather
than repaired or inspected. Examples of Quality Assurance are:

• Applying Poka Yoke in product design.

• Composing a risk assessment before implementing a change.
• Validation and verification of software before release.
• Using formats (eg. FMEA, control plan).
• Execution of internal and external audits.

While Quality Control is focused on inspection and blocking the release of defective products, Quality
Assurance is focused on improving production and associated processes to avoid issues that led to the
defects in the first place. However, Quality Assurance does not necessarily eliminate the need for Quality
Control. Some product characteristics are so critical that inspection is still necessary just in case Quality
Assurance fails.

Quality Ethics
Besides Quality Planning, Quality Control and Quality Assurance are important as well. This can be called
‘Quality Ethics’. This is about taking the appropriate actions when you find a mistake. Read the article about
General Motors on the next page about how it should not be done. Another bad example of Quality Ethics
is the use of ‘Emissions-rigging Software’ by Volkswagen in 2015.

167
 GM settles criminal case over ignition switches
Associated Press, Sep. 17, 2015 (Summary)

NEW YORK (AP) - General Motors agreed to pay $900 million to fend off criminal prosecution over the
deadly ignition-switch scandal, striking a deal that brought criticism down on the Justice Department for
not bringing charges against individual employees.

The switches, which can slip out of the "run" position and cut off the engine, have been linked to at least
169 deaths. Despite evidence that GM's legal and engineering staffs concealed the problem for nearly a
decade, no employees were charged, though U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara said the investigation is still
going on.

"They let the public down," Bharara said. "They didn't tell the truth in the best way that they should
have — to the regulators, to the public — about this serious safety issue that risked life and limb."

In this case, court papers showed that GM engineers knew of the problem in 2004 and 2005 when other
employees, the media and customers complained. But the engineers left it alone, rejecting a cheap and
simple fix, court papers said. Even after the dangers became plain in 2012, GM did not correct its earlier
assurance that the switch posed no safety concern. Instead, Bharara wrote, it concealed the defect from
regulators and the public "so that the company could buy time to package, present, explain and manage
the issue."

Last year, GM recalled 2.6 million older small cars worldwide, including the Chevrolet Cobalt and Saturn
Ion, to replace the faulty switches. Amid the scandal more than a year ago, GM fired 15 employees for
failing to act to resolve the switch problem. Last year, GM set up a fund to compensate victims. Lawyers
administering it accepted 124 death claims and 275 injury claims. GM has set aside $625 million to
compensate people who settled with the fund. The twin agreements bring to more than $5.3 billion the
amount GM has spent on a problem authorities say could have been handled for less than a dollar per
car.

Even with the settlements, GM cannot close the books on the scandal. It still faces more than 400 death
and injury cases that have yet to be settled.

The deal with GM comes a year and a half after Toyota agreed to a $1.2 billion penalty from the Justice
Department for withholding information about deadly unintended acceleration in its vehicles.

168
4.4.3 Standardized Work

An important tool not yet discussed is ‘Standardized Work’. Following this philosophy, it is important that
the standards defined in the quality management system are not just listed in a dusty book that is only
brought out for audits. They should be visible and attainable for everyone in the organization. Standardized
Work is applicable everywhere and is necessary to create a solid foundation.

“Without a standard there is no logical

basis for making a decision or taking action.”
Joseph Juran

Standard Operating Procedure (SOP)

When using Standardized Work, we define who is trained and permitted to operate the process and how
many people it takes to operate the process. Standardized Work also documents what is needed to start
the process. For each operation step, a ‘Standard Operating Procedure’ (SOP) is composed. Do not confuse
it with Start of Production, which is also abbreviated SOP. The SOP is more than a work instruction
document. The SOP is created by the employees together, by agreeing on the best way to operate the
process. After agreeing, by applying consensus if needed, this will become the standard and all will follow
accordingly.

Managers should generally defer to employees when determining the content of the SOP, as employees
are usually more knowledgeable about the process than anyone else. They are also the ones who have to
commit to the Standardized Work.

The SOP describes what tools are required and the sequence of the process activities. The SOP also clearly
describes what the final product should look like and what quality checks need to be performed on the
product. This will prevent the need for each employee to determine by himself which quality criteria the
product or service should meet. The SOP procedure mentions the ‘Cycle Time’ for the process step. This
means that it defines how long the employee is expected to work at the operation step before the product
should be passed on to the next operation step.

Best Practices
Standardized Work also includes how much raw materials or components should be on hand in the
operational step and how often component levels must be replenished. It also includes how often products
are retrieved from the work cell and how they should be packed or stored.

The best practices are documented in the SOP, but they can always be questioned and employees should
always look for further improvement opportunities. Lean and Kaizen encourage employees to question
Standardized Work and look for improvements. If an employee thinks he has found a better way, he should
discuss this with his colleagues. If his proposal should become the new standard, the current standard
should be updated.

169
 Training within Industry
A practical approach to establish and maintain standardized work is ‘Training Within Industry’ (TWI). This is
a program of hands-on learning and practice, teaching essential skills for supervisors, team leaders, and
anyone who directs the work of others. TWI has a long history of success in both industrial and transactional
environments and is an essential element of Lean and Continuous Improvement programs. TWI generates
cooperation and positive employee relations; it teaches supervisors how to quickly and correctly train
employees and is used to solve problems efficiently and effectively. TWI consists of the flowing three pillars:

1 – Job Relation (JR):

Job Relation teaches the foundations of positive employee relations. Developing and maintaining these
good relationships prevents problems from arising and is paramount to earning the loyalty and cooperation
of others.

2 – Job Instruction (JI):

Job Instruction is designed to develop the basic stability of processes by implementing ‘Standardized Work’.
This program teaches the method to instruct an operator how to perform a job correctly, safely and
conscientiously. As is frequently the case, most processes are performed by various workers using different
methods. Job Instruction requires how to identify the ‘One best way’ and to teach the process to this one
way. The basis of stability is generated by doing the same thing the same way across operators and shifts.

3 – Job Methods (JM):

Job Methods lead individuals to break down jobs into their constituent operations. Every detail is
questioned in a systematic manner to generate ideas for improvement. The improved standard is
developed by eliminating wasteful tasks, combining and rearranging necessary tasks and simplifying
required tasks.

4.4.4 Lessons Learned

The purpose of lessons learned is to bring together any insights gained during a project or improvement
that can be usefully applied on future projects. If you do not understand the mistakes of past projects,
then you are doomed to repeat them. Lessons learned can make all the difference on future projects and
help them succeed. Therefore, lessons must be documented correctly, so always document what you have
learned. Once all the information is collected and reviewed, it is important to make sure that it is published
so that everyone involved in the project is aware of the lessons learned, both positive and negative. It is
also important to preserve this information so that others in the organization can have it the next time a
similar project is being executed. Before a lesson can be learned, the right input from all the different parties
should be involved.

170
4.4.5 Ongoing Monitoring, Evaluation and Auditing

Ongoing monitoring, evaluation and auditing consists of two main components:

1. Ongoing risk assessment.

2. Ongoing control assessment.

Ongoing Risk Assessment

During ongoing risk assessments, audit activities take place that identify and evaluate risks by examining
current process performance trends compared to past performance or to the performance of a similar
process elsewhere in the organization. While management is responsible for developing and maintaining a
system that identifies and mitigates risk, auditors should assist the organization by identifying and
evaluating significant exposures to risk.

Ongoing Control Assessment

During ongoing control assessment, audit activities take place that identify whether selected process
controls are working properly. The audit procedures are often based on a sampling approach and include
activities such as reviews of policies, procedures, approvals and reconciliations. A well-defined set of control
rules warns organizations when processes or systems are not working as intended or are compromised.

Auditors should always be independent of the focus of the audit, either by being part of an internal audit
function or by being part of an external audit service. The practice of internal audit helps maintain clear
management support of the process controls currently in place, and further helps identify opportunities for
improvement. External audits equally support the same benefits as the internal audit function. Additionally,
they act as third party independent assessment that can be used to maintain the confidence of customers
and clients. Indeed, in many sectors, third party audit is a pre-requisite of doing business.

171
 Summary

Solutions that have been implemented to improve the process performance should be embedded in the
process and organization to assure that improvements will sustain; otherwise we will revert to the old
situation. An important part of sustaining improvements is Standardized Work. For all activities in a process,
a ‘standard’ should be available describing how and in which sequence the job must be done. All people
must be trained in using this standard.

Learning from the mistakes of past projects and applying this on future projects is called ‘lessons learned’.
The purpose of lessons learned is to bring together any insights gained during a project or improvement
that can be usefully applied on future projects. Lessons learned can make all the difference on future
projects and help them succeed.

Quality management is important to ensure that customer satisfaction is assured by meeting customer
demands and requirements. Quality activities can be divided into Quality Control (QC) and Quality
Assurance (QA) activities. QC focuses on inspections of finished products to ensure that only good products
will be delivered to the customer. QA is about assuring only products that meet customer expectations will
be produced.

Keywords in paragraph 4.4:

• Sustain Improvements • Quality Planning

• Standardized Work • Quality Control
• Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) • Quality Assurance
• Lessons Learned • Quality Ethics
• Quality Management System • Training within Industry
• Quality Management

172
4.5 Summary

In the automotive industry, the 8D method is commonly used for problem solving. The method comprises
eight disciplines which must be completed in order to tackle a problem. The problem can be described by
using the if/if not method. A tool to use is the 5W and 2H method (D2). Actions to prevent material
(produced after detection of the problem) from reaching the customer are called interim containment
actions. For example, rework or retreat products, remove or destroy defect products (D3). Root cause
analysis describes the underlying reason(s) why the problem happened. To identify root causes, a number
of methods can be used: 5-why, fishbone diagram, FMEA, brainstorming (D4). After determining the root
cause, it is essential to verify if this is the actual cause of the problem. The next step is to establish corrective
measures: the root cause must be eradicated (D5). The selected measure(s) can be implemented in an
implementation plan (D6). Preventing re-occurrence of the problem can be achieved by asking yourself the
question: ‘can the problem happen in some other production area’ and ‘is there a need to update
specifications, training, instructions or P-FMEAs and control plan? (D7)’ An 8D can be closed when the
customer is satisfied with all the actions implemented (D8).

Lean Manufacturing is used in the automotive to reduce costs and to align processes in the automotive
chain. Lean manufacturing helps identify waste in processes and how to eliminate waste (e.g., pull or push,
Kanban or two-bin). The objective of ‘Value Stream Mapping’ (VSM is to reduce lead-time and to eliminate
Waste. Reducing Muda (waste) can be achieved by assuring that a process will not consume more resources
than are necessary to produce the goods or provide the service that the customer actually wants. There are
eight types of waste.

To avoid reverting to the old situation, it is important to assure that improvements will sustain. An
important part of sustaining improvements is Standardized Work. This means that for all activities, it is
described what is the best way to and sequence to perform a job. Everyone should follow then the defined
and agreed standards. Learning from the mistakes of past projects and applying this on future projects is
called ‘lessons learned’. Lessons learned can make all the difference on future projects and help them
succeed.

Finally

The automotive industry is a very special and challenging sector. It has been a sector that has shown
enormous innovation in the last century. Also in the coming years there will be many more innovations,
including alternative fuels, self-driving cars and new software applications. The automotive industry is also
a sector that focuses heavily on quality management, in which methods such as Kaizen, TPM, Lean, Six
Sigma and DfSS are applied at a high level. The sector is an example for many other sectors. As such, the
automotive industry is a very dynamic, educational and interesting sector to work and to build a career.

173
 Annex A – Abbreviations

Abbreviation Definition

5W2H Who, What, Why, Where, When, How, How many

8D 8 Disciplines
AAR Appearance Approval Report
ABS Anti-lock Braking System
ADAS Advance Driver Assistance Systems
AIAG Automotive Industry Action Group
APQP Advanced Product Quality Planning
ASIL Automotive Safety Integrity Level
ASQC American Society for Quality Control
BEV Battery Electric Vehicle
CAD Computer Aided Design
CMM Capability Maturity Model
CMMI Capability Maturity Model Integration
CP(K) Process Capability (Index)
DFMEA Design Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
DVP Design Verification Plan
ECU Electronic Control Unit
EMPB Erstmusterprüfbericht
EOL End-Of-Life
ELV End-of-Life Vehicles
ERA Emergency Response Action
EREV Extended-Range Electric Vehicle
ERP Enterprise Resource Planning
ESP Electronic Stability Program
FMEA Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
FMEDA Failure Mode and Effects Design Analysis
FTR First Time Right
GR&R Gage Repeatability and Reproducibility
HEV Hybrid Electric Vehicle
HIS Hardware Software Interface
ICA Interim Containment Action
I-chart Individual Chart
IATF International Automotive Task Force
ICT Information- and Communication Technology
IEC TR International Electrotechnical Commission Technical Reports
IFB Invitation for Bid
IMDS International Material Data System
ISO International Organization for Standardization
IVI In-Vehicle Infotainment
JI Job Instruction
JIT Just In Time

174
JM Job Methods
JR Job Relation
KPI Key Performance Indicator
LCL Lower Control Limit
LSL Lower Specification Limit
MSA Measurement System Analysis
MPV Multi-Purpose Vehicle
NVA Non-Value Adding Activities
OCAP Out of Control Action Plan
OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer

175
 Annex B – Figures & Tables

Table of Figures
FIGURE 1: THE FIRST STANDARDIZED CARS: DURYEA MOTOR WAGON AND BENZ VELO (SOURCE: WIKIPEDIA) ......... 12
FIGURE 2: FORD MODEL T .............................................................................................................................................. 13
FIGURE 3: DEVELOPMENT OF EMBEDDED SYSTEMS IN A VEHICLE ............................................................................... 15
FIGURE 4: AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLY CHAIN ........................................................................................................................ 17
FIGURE 5: GOOGLE SELF-DRIVING CAR PROTOTYPE & PALV-FILE ................................................................................. 22
FIGURE 6: PROCESS ........................................................................................................................................................ 35
FIGURE 7: OVERVIEW OF DIFFERENT PROCESS WITHIN AN ORGANIZATION ................................................................ 36
FIGURE 8: THINKING IN DEPARTMENTS ......................................................................................................................... 37
FIGURE 9: PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE MANAGEMENT OBJECTIVE ......................................................................................... 43
FIGURE 10: CAR PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM [18] ............................................................................................................ 44
FIGURE 11: SUSTAINABILITY DIMENSIONS..................................................................................................................... 45
FIGURE 12: STEPS FOR PERFORMING AN LCA ACCORDING TO ISO STANDARDS [20] ................................................... 48
FIGURE 13: CUSTOMER DRAWING OF METAL PLATE .................................................................................................... 52
FIGURE 14: APQP TIMEFRAME ....................................................................................................................................... 54
FIGURE 15: APQP TIMEFRAME ....................................................................................................................................... 58
FIGURE 16: IMAGE SHOWING THE VARIETY OF CAR VARIANTS OFFERED BY ONE OEM ............................................... 63
FIGURE 17: IMAGE SHOWING THE VARIETY OF CAR VARIANTS OFFERED BY ONE OEM ( [21]) .................................... 63
FIGURE 18: EXAMPLE OF A RAIN SENSOR BY ZF TRW, [DOWNLOADED FROM ( [22], [23] ........................................... 64
FIGURE 19: EXAMPLE OF A ABS ECU BY CONTINENTAL, [DOWNLOADED FROM [24] ................................................... 65
FIGURE 20: BOSCH SERVOELECTRIC® [26], [27] ............................................................................................................. 66
FIGURE 21: ELECTRICALLY ASSISTED POWER STEERING FROM BOSCH AUTOMOTIVE STEERING [28] .......................... 66
FIGURE 22: SCANIA’S MODULAR SYSTEM ...................................................................................................................... 67
FIGURE 23: PRODUCT DEVELOPMENT PROCESS ............................................................................................................ 68
FIGURE 24: SAMPLES AND SYSTEM/SOFTWARE RELEASES............................................................................................ 69
FIGURE 25: V-MODEL ..................................................................................................................................................... 70
FIGURE 26: V-MODEL AND TRACEABILITY...................................................................................................................... 71
FIGURE 27: AUTOMOTIVE SUPPLIER STRUCTURE EVOLUTION ...................................................................................... 81
FIGURE 28: RISK MATRIX ................................................................................................................................................ 83
FIGURE 29: CAUSE & EFFECT .......................................................................................................................................... 84
FIGURE 30: AIAG PROCESS FMEA GUIDELINES (4TH EDITION) – SEVERITY.................................................................... 86
FIGURE 31: AIAG PROCESS FMEA GUIDELINES (4TH EDITION) –OCCURRENCE & DETECTION ...................................... 87
FIGURE 32: FAILURE MODE AND EFFECT ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................... 88
FIGURE 33: PROCESS FLOW DIAGRAM .......................................................................................................................... 89
FIGURE 34: EXAMPLE PROCESS FAILURE MODE & EFFECT ANALYSIS ............................................................................ 90
FIGURE 35: V-MODEL INCLUDING ELEMENTS OF FUNCTIONAL SAFETY DEVELOPMENT .............................................. 91
FIGURE 36: CLASSIFICATION SCHEMA USED TO ANALYZE HAZARDS ............................................................................. 92
FIGURE 37: RISK GRAPH USED TO DETERMINE ASIL (AUTOMOTIVE SAFETY INTEGRITY LEVEL) ................................... 93
FIGURE 38: EXAMPLE FOR THE “MALFUNCTION UNWANTED ACTUATION OF THE STEERING SYSTEM” ...................... 94
FIGURE 39: EXAMPLE OF PROCESS CAPABILITY ............................................................................................................. 99
FIGURE 40: FORMULAS FOR CALCULATING CP, CPK (LSL) AND CPK (USL) ..................................................................... 99
FIGURE 41: EXAMPLE OF APPLYING CP AND CPK......................................................................................................... 100
FIGURE 42: SHORT VS LONG TERM (TOTAL) VARIATION ............................................................................................. 101
FIGURE 43: FORMULAS FOR CALCULATING PP, PPK (LSL) AND PPK (USL) ................................................................... 101
FIGURE 44: EXAMPLE OF A MEASUREMENT INSTRUMENT ......................................................................................... 103
FIGURE 45: OBSERVED VARIATION AND MEASUREMENT SYSTEM VARIATION .......................................................... 104
FIGURE 46: MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ERRORS ............................................................................................................. 105

176
FIGURE 47: MEASUREMENT SYSTEM ACCURACY (BIAS) .............................................................................................. 105
FIGURE 48: MEASUREMENT SYSTEM PRECISION (REPEATABILITY) ............................................................................. 106
FIGURE 49: MEASUREMENT SYSTEM PRECISION (REPRODUCIBILITY) ......................................................................... 106
FIGURE 50: PROCESS CONTROL ................................................................................................................................... 107
FIGURE 51: EXAMPLE CALCULATING MEAN AND RANGE ............................................................................................ 108
FIGURE 52: EXAMPLE OF XBAR-R CHART (FOR WEIGHT) ............................................................................................. 109
FIGURE 53: EXAMPLE OF I-MR CHART ......................................................................................................................... 109
FIGURE 54: EXAMPLE OF A METAL PLATE .................................................................................................................... 110
FIGURE 55: EXAMPLE CONTROL PLAN ......................................................................................................................... 111
FIGURE 56: CHANGES HAVING INFLUENCE ON PFMEA AND CONTROL PLAN ............................................................. 111
FIGURE 57: EXAMPLE OF GR&R RESULTS ..................................................................................................................... 112
FIGURE 58: PPAP APPROVAL ........................................................................................................................................ 118
FIGURE 59: OVERVIEW VDA 6 ...................................................................................................................................... 118
FIGURE 60: VDA 6.3 PROCESS AUDIT ........................................................................................................................... 119
FIGURE 61: DIFFERENT PROCESSES WITHIN THE PRODUCT LIFE CYCLE ...................................................................... 119
FIGURE 62: THE AUDIT PROCESS .................................................................................................................................. 120
FIGURE 63: CAPABILITY LEVELS AND PROCESS ATTRIBUTES ........................................................................................ 123
FIGURE 64: ASSESSMENT RESULTS: CAPABILITY LEVELS .............................................................................................. 124
FIGURE 65: STEPS IN THE PCN SUBMISSION PROCESS ................................................................................................. 127
FIGURE 66: 5W2H METHOD ......................................................................................................................................... 134
FIGURE 67: EXAMPLE FISHBONE DIAGRAM ................................................................................................................. 138
FIGURE 68: BRAINSTORMING RULES AND TIPS ........................................................................................................... 139
FIGURE 69: DEMING CIRCLE & PDCA CIRCLE................................................................................................................ 142
FIGURE 70 LEAN SIX SIGMA DMAIC ROADMAP ........................................................................................................... 144
FIGURE 71: MUDA - 8 TYPES OF WASTE....................................................................................................................... 148
FIGURE 72: STRUCTURED WORK ENVIRONMENT ........................................................................................................ 150
FIGURE 73: LOGISTIC FLOW ......................................................................................................................................... 151
FIGURE 74: PUSH PRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................... 152
FIGURE 75: PULL PRODUCTION .................................................................................................................................... 152
FIGURE 76: KANBAN SYSTEM TO ACHIEVE PULL PRODUCTION ................................................................................... 152
FIGURE 77: WAREHOUSE KANBAN CARD..................................................................................................................... 153
FIGURE 78: TWO BIN SYSTEM ...................................................................................................................................... 154
FIGURE 79: PROBLEM SOLVING APPROACH TYPICALLY FOUND IN WESTERN CULTURES [40] .................................... 159
FIGURE 80: PROBLEM SOLVING APPROACH TYPICALLY FOUND IN EASTERN CULTURES [40] ..................................... 160
FIGURE 81: CONTROL METHODS ................................................................................................................................. 165

Table of Tables
TABLE 1: TECHNICAL POWERTRAIN IMPROVEMENTS TO REDUCE LIFE CYCLE IMPACTS [18] ....................................... 47
TABLE 2: VW-SICON RECYCLING FRACTIONS AND THEIR MARKET POTENTIALS [18] .................................................... 50
TABLE 3: SELECTED AUTOMOTIVE DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES DONE IN CAT ENVIRONMENTS .................................... 78
TABLE 4: DIFFERENT TYPES OF AUTOMOTIVE TESTING ENVIRONMENTS ..................................................................... 79
TABLE 5: ASSESSMENT CRITERIA LEVELS...................................................................................................................... 121
TABLE 6: SUPPLIER STATUS LIST ................................................................................................................................... 122
TABLE 7: KAIZEN PRINCIPLES........................................................................................................................................ 140
TABLE 8: CONSECUTIVE STEPS OF 5S ........................................................................................................................... 150

177
178
Annex C – References

[1] International Automotive Task Force, IATF 16949:2016 Quality management system requirements for
automotive production and relevant service parts, International Automotive Task Force, 2016.
[2] R. Nader, Unsafe at Any Speed, Grossman Publishers, 1965.
[3] Eurostat/UNECE/ITF, „Illustrated Glossary for Transport Statistics,” Publications Office of the European
Union, Luxembourg, 2010.
[4] „Crain Communications Inc,” Automotive News, nr. June 2015.
[5] European Parliament, Council of the European Union, „Regulation (EU) No 333/2014 of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2014 amending Regulation (EC) No 443/2009 to define the
modalities for reaching the 2020 target to reduce CO 2 emissions from new passenger cars.,” 3 11 2014.
[Online]. Available: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal
content/EN/TXT/?uri=uriserv%3AOJ.L_.2014.103.01.0015.01.ENG. [Geopend 26 January 2016].
[6] May 2016. [Online]. Available: http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/End-
life_vehicle_statistics.
[7] „Directive 85/374/EEC,” [Online].
[8] „Directive 2001/95/EC,” [Online].
[9] International Organizational for Standardization, ISO/TS 16949: Quality management systems
Particular requirements for the application of ISO 9001:2008 for automotive production and relevant
service part organizations., Genè ve, Switzerland: International Organizational for Standardization,
2009.
[10] AIAG, Advanced Product Quality Planning and Control Plan, Southfield: Automotive Industry Action
Group, 2008.
[11] AIAG, Production Part Approval Process, Southfield: Automotive Industry Action Group, 2006.
[12] AIAG, Potential Failure Mode & Effects Analysis, Southfield: Automotive Industry Action Group, 2008.
[13] AIAG, Measurement Systems Analysis, Southfield: Automotive Industry Action Group, 2010.
[14] AIAG, Statistical Process Control, Southfield: Automotive Industry Action Group, 2005.
[15] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 14001:2015 Environmental management systems
- Requirements with guidance for use, Genè ve, Switzerland: International Organization for
Standardization, 2015.
[16] VDA QMC Working Group 13 / Automotive SIG, „Automotive SPICE Process Assessment / Reference
Model Version 3.0,” 16 7 2015. [Online]. Available:
http://www.automotivespice.com/fileadmin/software-download/Automotive_SPICE_PAM_30.pdf.
[Geopend 4 1 2017].
[17] International Organization for Standardization, ISO 26262:2011 Road vehicles — Functional safety,
Genè ve, Switzerland: International Organization for Standardization, 2011.
[18] JRC, „JRC Study EUR 23038 EN – Environmental Improvement of Passenger Cars (IMPRO-car),” 2008.
[19] V. A. G. Research, „The Life Cycle of a Car – Environmental Commendations Document Progress,”
Environment Affairs Product, Art. No. 015.1240.07.18, 2010.

179
 [20] Wikipedia, „Life-cycle assessment,” [Online]. Available: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life
cycle_assessment. [Geopend 12 09 2015].
[21] Right Connections , [Online]. Available: http://www-rightconnections-co-uk.
[22] TRW, [Online]. Available: http://www.trw.com/body_control_systems/sensors . [Geopend 25 01 2016].
[23] EasyCounter, [Online]. Available: www.cvel.clemson.edu.
[24] Continental Automotive , [Online]. Available: http://www.continental
automotive.de/www/automotive_de_de/themes/passenger_cars/chassis_safety/passive_safety_sens
orics/ch_electronic_control_units_de/elektronik_abs_esc_de.html. [Geopend 25 01 2016].
[25] Robert Bosch Automotive Steering GmbH , „Servolectric® Electromechanical steering system for a
dynamic driving experience and highly automated functions,” 2015. [Online]. Available:
http://www.bosch-automotive-
steering.com/fileadmin/downloads/Flyer_Nkw/AS_Systemmappe_Servolectric_E_lowres_20150513.p
df. [Geopend 4 1 2017].
[26] Bosch, [Online]. Available: http://www.bosch-automotive-steering.com. [Geopend 25 01 2016].
[27] Car Engineer, [Online]. Available: www.car-engineer.com-esp-electronic-stability-program.
[28] Bosch, [Online]. Available: http://bosch-automotive-steering.com.
[29] Verband Deutscher Automobilhersteller, VDA Volume 4 “Ensuring quality before the start of series
production”, Verband Deutscher Automobilhersteller.
[30] M. Mueller, K. Hoermann, L. Dittmann en J. Zimmer, Automotive SPICE in Practice, Rockynook
Computing, 2008.
[31] M. Maurer en H. Winner, Automotive Systems Engineering, Berlin: Springer, 2013.
[32] Verband Deutscher Automobilhersteller, VDA Volume 2 "Sicherung der Qualität von Lieferungen
Produktionsprozess- und Produktfreigabe PPF", Verband Deutscher Automobilhersteller, 2012.
[33] Verband Deutscher Automobilhersteller, VDA Volume 6.3 “Prozessaudit”,, Verband Deutscher
Automobilhersteller, 2010.
[34] J. P. Womack, D. T. Jones en D. Roos, The machine that changed the world, Free Press, 1990.
[35] J. P. Womack en D. T. Jones, Lean Thinking, Simon & Schuster, Inc., 1996.
[36] O. Wyman, „Oliver Wyman Automotive: 2015 Car Innovation. A comprehensive study on innovation in
the automotive industry.,” 2013.
[37] C. Kreiner, R. Messnarz, A. Riel, D. Ekert, M. Langgner, D. Theisens en M. Reiner, „Automotive
Knowledge Alliance AQUA – Integrating Automotive SPICE, Six Sigma, and Functional Safety,” Systems,
Software and Service Process Improvement, vol. 364, pp. 333-344, 2013.
[38] G. Hofstede, Cultures and Organizations, Intercultural co-operation and its importance for survival,
Software of the mind, UK: McGraw-Hill, 1994.
[39] „Geert Hofstede,” [Online]. Available: http://www.geert-hofstede.com. [Geopend 13 09 2015].
[40] V. Gautam en L. Blessing, „Cultural Influences on the Design Process,” in Intl. Conference on Engineering
Design (ICED’07), Paris, 2007.
[41] European Parliament, Council of the European Union, „Directive 2000/53/EC of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 18 September 2000 on end-of life vehicles - Commission Statements,”
18 9 2000. [Online]. Available: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal
content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:32000L0053. [Geopend 26 1 2016].

180
[42] AIAG, Production Part Approval Process (PPAP), Southfield, 2006.
[43] -
[44] VDA.
[45] VDA, Quality Management in the Automotive Industry, VDA, 2012.
[46] B. Avolio, F. Walumbwa en T. Weber, „Leadership: current theories, research, and future directions,”
Annu. Rev. Psychol. , vol. 60, p. 421–449 , 2009.
[47] K. Boal en R. Hooijberg, „Strategic leadership research: Moving on,” Leadership Quarterly, vol. 11, p.
515–549, 2000.
[48] [Online]. Available: http://www-rightconnections-co-uk.
[49] „Car Engineer,” [Online]. Available: www.car-engineer.com-esp-electronic-stability-program.
[50] H.C. Theisens, Lean Six Sigma Black Belt, Climbing the Mountain, Amstelveen: LSSA, 2016.

181
 Index

CMMI ................................................................................ 123

5 Common cause variation .................................................... 98
Communication systems .................................................... 21
5S 150 Component Level Development ......................................... 72
5W2H method .................................................................. 134 Computational Fluid Dynamics ........................................... 76
5-Why ............................................................................... 137 Computer Aided Design...................................................... 72
Computer Aided Engineering ............................................. 74
Computer Aided Testing ..................................................... 78
6 Connected car .................................................................... 21
Containment Action ......................................................... 134
6 Ms fishbone ................................................................... 138 Control limits .................................................................... 108
Control plan ................................................................ 59, 110
Controllability ..................................................................... 92
8 Controller Area Network .................................................... 33
Cp value .............................................................................. 99
8D Problem Solving .................................................... 32, 132 Cpk value ............................................................................ 99
Cultural dimensions .......................................................... 158
Culture .............................................................................. 158
A Customer focus .................................................................. 24
Customer requirements ..................................................... 25
A sample ............................................................................. 69
Accuracy ........................................................................... 104
Advance Driver Assistance Systems ................................... 14 D
Advanced Product Quality Planning ............................. 32, 53
Aftermarket ........................................................................ 17 D sample ............................................................................. 69
Appearance Approval Report ........................................... 117 Design engineer .................................................................. 26
Automotive industry .......................................................... 15 Design failure mode and effects analysis ........................... 56
Automotive process landscape .......................................... 36 Design for manufacturability and assembly ....................... 56
Automotive Safety Integrity Level ...................................... 92 Design review ..................................................................... 57
Automotive SPICE ....................................................... 33, 123 Design verification .............................................................. 57
Automotive Supplier Structure........................................... 80 Designing for the life cycle ................................................. 46
AUTOSAR ............................................................................ 33 Detection ............................................................................ 85
Directive 2002/24/EC ......................................................... 30
Directive 2003/37/EC ......................................................... 30
B Directive 2007/46/EC ......................................................... 30
Directive 85/374/EEC ......................................................... 31
B sample ............................................................................. 69 DMAIC .............................................................................. 144
Battery Electric Vehicle ...................................................... 20
Bias ................................................................................... 105
Brainstorming ................................................................... 139 E

Ecologic factors .................................................................. 45

C Economic factors ................................................................ 45
Electric car .......................................................................... 19
C sample ............................................................................. 69 Electric Power Steering ...................................................... 65
CAN-bus system ................................................................. 63 Electronic Control Unit ....................................................... 65
Capability levels ................................................................ 123 Emergency Response Action ............................................ 133
Capability study .................................................................. 98 End-of-Life .......................................................................... 43
Carbon reinforced plastics.................................................. 46 ErstMusterPrüfBerichte.................................................... 115
Cause & Effect diagram .................................................... 138 EU decision ......................................................................... 29
Change Notification .......................................................... 126 EU directive ........................................................................ 29

182
EU regulation ...................................................................... 29
Exposure ............................................................................. 92
Extended-Range Electric Vehicle ........................................ 20
F
Failure Mode and Effect Analysis ................................. 32, 84
Failure modes ..................................................................... 84
Failure Modes, Effects and Diagnostics Analysis ................ 91
Fishbone ................................................................... 138, 142
Fishbone diagram ............................................................. 138
FlexRay ............................................................................... 33
Flying car ............................................................................ 22
G
Gemba .............................................................................. 140
Genchi Genbutsu .............................................................. 141
GR&R study ...................................................................... 112
H Mechanical components .................................................... 69
Hardware components ....................................................... 69
Homologation..................................................................... 29
Hybrid Electric Vehicle........................................................ 20
I
IATF 16949:2016................................................................. 32
I-Chart............................................................................... 109
IEC 61508............................................................................ 91
Initial Process Studies ....................................................... 117
Internal audit .................................................................... 171
Ishikawa............................................................................ 138
ISO 14040 ........................................................................... 48
ISO 14044 ........................................................................... 48
ISO 17025 ......................................................................... 117
ISO 26262 ..................................................................... 33, 91
ISO/TS 16949 ...................................................................... 32
J Out-of-Control Action Plan ............................................... 110
Jidoka ............................................................................... 146
Job roles ............................................................................. 26
Just In Time ...................................................................... 151
K Permanent Corrective Action ........................................... 135
Kaizen ............................................................................... 140
Kaizen Blitz ....................................................................... 141
Kanban ............................................................................. 153
L
Leadership ........................................................................ 156
Lean Manufacturing ......................................................... 146
Lean Thinking ................................................................... 146
Legislation and regulations................................................. 29
Lessons learned ................................................................ 170
Life Cycle Analysis ............................................................... 48
Life Cycle Assessment ......................................................... 48
Life cycle stages .................................................................. 44
Lower Control Limit .......................................................... 108
Lower Specification Limit ................................................... 98
M
Machinery FMEA ................................................................ 85
Master Sample ................................................................. 117
Measurement System Analysis................................... 32, 103
Media Oriented Systems Transport.................................... 33
Modern production cars..................................................... 62
Modularization ................................................................... 67
Muda ................................................................................ 147
Multidisciplinary approach ........................................... 36, 37
N
New European Driving Cycle .............................................. 49
Non-Value Adding Activities ............................................. 147
O
Occurrence ......................................................................... 85
Ohno Circle ....................................................................... 141
On-Board Diagnostic .......................................................... 33
One-piece flow ................................................................. 151
Organized Work Environment .......................................... 150
Original Equipment Manufacturer ..................................... 16
P
Part Submission Warrant ................................................. 117
PDCA ................................................................................. 140
Plan-Do-Check-Act............................................................ 142
Plug-in Hybrid Electric Vehicle ............................................ 20
183
 Poka Yoke ......................................................................... 165
S
Pp value ............................................................................ 101
PPAP file ........................................................................... 115
Safety engineering .............................................................. 91
Ppk value .......................................................................... 101
Sample Production Parts .................................................. 117
Precision ........................................................................... 104
Segment passenger cars ..................................................... 16
Primary process .................................................................. 35
Self-driving car .................................................................... 22
Problem description ......................................................... 133
Sensors ............................................................................... 64
Process audits................................................................... 119
Severity ......................................................................... 85, 92
Process capability ............................................................... 60
Simultaneous engineering teams ....................................... 36
Process Change Notification............................................. 126
Six Sigma........................................................................... 143
Process design and development ....................................... 58
Social factors ...................................................................... 45
Process engineering ........................................................... 27
Software ............................................................................. 65
Process failure mode and effects analysis .......................... 58
Software capability ................................................... 123, 125
Process flow chart .............................................................. 58
Software releases ............................................................... 70
Process performance........................................................ 101
Special cause variation ....................................................... 98
Processes ............................................................................ 35
Special product and process characteristics ....................... 57
Product and Process Release.............................................. 24
Stability............................................................................. 104
Product Change Notification ............................................ 126
Stage-Gate Process ............................................................. 68
Product design and development ...................................... 56
Standard Operation Procedure ........................................ 169
Product Development Process ........................................... 68
Standardized Work ........................................................... 146
Product liability .................................................................. 31
Standards ........................................................................... 32
Product life cycle phases .................................................... 43
Statistical Process Control .......................................... 32, 108
Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) ............................... 43
Structural Mechanics .......................................................... 75
Product realization process ................................................ 35
Supermarket ..................................................................... 153
Production Part Approval Process ........................ 24, 32, 114
Supplier audits .................................................................. 118
Prototype ........................................................................... 57
Supply Chain ....................................................................... 16
Pull.................................................................................... 151
Supporting processes ......................................................... 35
Push .................................................................................. 151
Sustainability ...................................................................... 45
Sustaining Improvements ................................................. 165
Q System FMEA ...................................................................... 85
Système Panhard ................................................................ 13
Systems Level Development ............................................... 68
Qualified Laboratory Studies ............................................ 117
Quality Assurance ............................................................. 167
Quality Circle .................................................................... 140
T
Quality Control ................................................................. 166
Quality engineer ................................................................. 26
Tank-to-tank-to-wheel ....................................................... 44
Quality ethics.................................................................... 167
Test engineer ...................................................................... 26
Quality gates ...................................................................... 68
Thermodynamics ................................................................ 75
Quality Management ....................................................... 165
Tier ..................................................................................... 16
Quality Management System ........................................... 166
Time To Market .................................................................. 43
Quality Planning ............................................................... 166
Toyota Production System ............................................... 146
Training Within Industry ................................................... 170
R Two-bin ............................................................................ 154

R&D engineer ..................................................................... 26

U
Recycling ............................................................................ 50
Regulation EC 443/2009 ..................................................... 29
Uniformity ........................................................................ 104
Repeatability ............................................................ 104, 106
Upper control limit ........................................................... 108
Reproducibility ......................................................... 104, 106
Upper Specification Limit ................................................... 98
Request for quotation ........................................................ 54
Risk management ............................................................... 83
Risk Priority Number .......................................................... 85
Root cause analysis .......................................................... 135

184
V W

Value Adding Activities ..................................................... 147 Waste ............................................................................... 147

Value Stream Mapping ..................................................... 147 Well-to-tank ....................................................................... 44
Variation ............................................................................. 98 Whole Vehicle Type Approval ............................................ 29
VDA 6 Quality Standard German Automotive .................. 118
VDA volume 2 ................................................................... 115
VDA volume 4 ..................................................................... 68 X
VDA volume 6.3 ................................................................ 119
V-Model.............................................................................. 70 Xbar-R Chart ..................................................................... 109
Voice of the customer ........................................................ 55

185