Quality Assurance Agreement with Production Material Suppliers
8D-Report
Concern title Complaint no. 214999999 Complaint opening date
Axial run-out of precision ring NOK Supplier: 12345
Supplier Production site Revision 8D-Report Revision Date
Sample supplier Sample city 04
Drawing no. Drawing revision Part name
F-123456789 AC Precision ring Ø20
Plant(s) Quantity delivered Quantity claimed
XYZ 100 12
1 Team 2 Problem description
Name Contact (Email, Phone) Axial run-out from face to inner bore Ø N.O.K.
Mayer F. Quality meyer@[Link] Nominal: 0,05
Mueller S. Production mueller@[Link]
Huber A. R&D huber@[Link]
Champion
Boss G. Q-Mgr. boss@[Link]
3 Corrective action(s) Implementation date
1. Check of stock: No parts on stock at present 2020-08-01
2. Check customer stock: In the XYZ plant, another lot with the same defect was found. In the XYZ plant, no parts were on 2020-08-02
the stock.
3. Check of stock in transit to the customer: At present, there are no parts on the way to the customer
2020-08-01
The stock parts of similar types 18, 19, 21 were checked also for the claimed defect. No defects were found on these
2020-08-01
Amendment: After return shipment, the complained delivery was sorted 100%. During the sorting, another 5 defective parts
were found. We kindly ask you to adjust the ppm-relevant quantity in your ERP-system (actual defective quantity = 17).
4 Root cause(s) First occurrence defect Repetitive defect
Root cause analysis for the creation of the defect (3x5 Why method applied):
The root cause was detected as "wear of the ball screw spindle" in the face-grinding machine. The wear at the spindle head caused a play in the
spindle guidance. When wearing the grinding-wheel the grinding pressure will rise and - in combination with the increasing play in the spindle
guidance- lead to deviations in the axial run-out. Planned maintenance and check of this play was not part of the maintenance plan.
Root cause analysis for non-detection of the defect (3x5 Why method applied):
The defect was not detected during the quality inspection (operator self-inspection) because the control plan defined the measurement of the axial
runout in the machine chuck directly (simulation of the end customer application). During analysis, we found out that the parts measured directly in
the chuck (thus an elastic deformation of the part) reach the required value for the run-out. When measuring the same parts out of the machine
some do not reach the required value.
Also, the point of time for the inspection was not defined and so not all produced parts showed the deviations. The root cause for this is the lower
grinding pressure after dressing of the grinding wheel (after dressing the deviation of the run-out is at the lowest).
5 Chosen corrective action(s) 5a Verification check by method of
Corrective actions regarding the creation of the defect: Check of the maintenance plan at the
1. Add check of spindle play in the maintenance plan machine
2. Check if regular moving of the spindle is leading to lower/ no wear of the spindle Tech. discussion machine manufacturer
3. Conduct clamping tests to identify the effect of the clamping force, if the necessary adjustment Empirical with different a clamp. forces
Corrective actions regarding the detection of the defect:
1. Update control plan: Point of time for check changed to "before dressing" (biggest influence of the
Check of revision in ERP-system
clamping pressure)
Empirical check, series of measurement
2. Purchase tapered gauges for measurement of axial run-out outside the machine
Check of revision in ERP-system
3. Update of control plan: Add additional check of axial run-out with tapered gauges
6 Implemented corrective action(s) Implementation date
Corrective actions regarding creation of the defect:
1. Check of spindle play added to the maintenance plan
2020-08-10
2. Movement of the spindle head added to the maintenance plan
2020-08-10
3. Process-FMEA no. M20-12345 updated, new revision = 03; clamping force added
2020-08-17
Corrective actions regarding detection of the defect:
1. Control plan updated: Point of time for check changed to "before dressing" (biggest influence of the clamping pressure)
2. Tapered gauges purchased 2020-08-12
3. Control plan updated: Additional check of axial run-out with new tapered gauges outside the machine chuck. 2020-08-17
2020-08-17
S 296001 Part 4 Appendix 1 Page 1 of 2 Revision: August 2011
Quality Assurance Agreement with Production Material Suppliers
7 Action(s) to prevent recurrence Implementation date
For each action below a documented evidence must be attached
Update of Design FMEA no.
Update of Process FMEA no. M20-12345-V08
2020-08-17
Update of Control plan no. PP001-M20, Revision 03 2020-08-17
Update of work instruction(s) no. Maintenance plan machine no. 0815 2020-08-10
8 Congratulations . Author 8D-Report Closing date supplier
Signature Champion M. Fritz 2020-08-17
.8D-Report accepted . Closure
Yes
No: Update required until 2020-08-18 S. Ralf
Decision
Date Name / Signature
Attachments, photos, evidences:
1. Process-FMEA: Extract of the modified chapter
2. Control plan no. M20-12345-V03: Extract from the modified control plan, tapered gauges added
3. Extract of the modified maintenance plan machine no.0815
4. Photo of new testing method with tapered gauge 5. Extract from the 3x5 Why analysis
S 296001 Part 4 Appendix 1 2 of 2 Revision: August 2020