Scribd
Upload
1K views

Capacity Verification

The document provides results from a production readiness review and RUN@RATE trial for a supplier producing an inflator retainer bracket. Key details include: - The trial was conducted on February 14, 2004 at Acme Machining in Cleveland, OH. - The results show overall process utilization of 97.13%, meeting KTTM's capacity requirements. - Corrective actions were required and addressed by May 16, 2004. - The capability study results met KTTM's requirements.

Uploaded by

Harsha MP
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as XLS, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
1K views

Capacity Verification

The document provides results from a production readiness review and RUN@RATE trial for a supplier producing an inflator retainer bracket. Key details include: - The trial was conducted on February 14, 2004 at Acme Machining in Cleveland, OH. - The results show overall process utilization of 97.13%, meeting KTTM's capacity requirements. - Corrective actions were required and addressed by May 16, 2004. - The capability study results met KTTM's requirements.

Uploaded by

Harsha MP
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Available Formats
Download as XLS, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 5

CAPACITY VERIFICATION (Production Readiness Review / RUN@RATE)

1 2 3 7 8

Part Number Part Description KTTM Annual Capacity Planning Volume pcs/year Process Step Process Description Units hours shifts days weeks hours % pcs/hour % % pcs/hour pcs/year % X hour pcs pcs % pcs pcs/ hour pcs/ hour hour text % X STEP 1 120 STEP 2

4 5 6

Run@Rate Date Supplier Name Supplier Location STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 6

I - Supplier Working Standards

9 10 11 12 13 14

Working hours/shift Shifts/ day Days/ week Weeks/ year Total hours/year (9*10*11*12) % of line for KTTM parts (Allocation %) Quoted Production Rate (part # item 1) Quoted % scrap Quoted % line efficiency Adjusted production rate (15*(1-16)*17) Available capacity (15*14*(1-16)*17)*13 Utilization % (3/19) Bottleneck operation Trial run duration Total parts produced Number of bad parts First time capability % ((23-24)/24)*100 Number of good parts (23-24) Net output (26/22) Takt Time Rate (Target) (3/13*14) Downtime Reason

II - Supplier Capacity Data III - RUN@RATE Results

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

30 31 32

Run-Off utilization % (3/(27*13*14)) Bottleneck operation

SHADED CELLS ARE CALCULATED and protected

34

SUMMARY

35

The RUN@RATE results are acceptable and meet KTTM capacity planning volume requirements:
33

The attached capability study results meet KTTM requirements: Corrective actions are required: New production readiness trial run is required: Date: Date:

Overall Process Utilization % 0.00%

Status Acceptable

Auditor Information Name: Company: Location:

36

Supplier representative signature:

Auditor signature:

D20.503.B0

Run at Rate Form

February 11 2004

CAPACITY VERIFICATION (Production Readiness Review / RUN@RATE)


1 2 3 7 8

Part Number Part Description KTTM Annual Capacity Planning Volume

30301458B Inflator retainer bracket pcs/year Process Step Process Description Units hours shifts days weeks hours % pcs/hour % % pcs/hour pcs/year % X hour pcs pcs % pcs pcs/ hour pcs/ hour hour text % X 28.1% 700,000 STEP 1 Stamp Part 7.5 3 5 48 5400 100% 720.0 2% 97% 684 3,695,933 19% 2.00 929 5 99.46% 924 462 130 STEP 2 CNC #1

4 5 6

Run@Rate Date Supplier Name Supplier Location STEP 3 CNC #2 STEP 4 Weld Fasteners 7.0 3 5 48 5040 100% 164.0 5% 95% 148 745,970 94% 2.00 290 4 98.62% 286 143 139 7.0 3 5 48 5040 100% 240.0 9% 92% 201 1,012,677 69% 1.25 252 12 95.24% 240 192 139

February 14, 2004 Acme Machining Cleveland, OH STEP 5 Paint 10.5 1 5 48 2520 50% 1200.0 5% 95% 1,083 1,364,580 51% 1.00 794 4 99.50% 790 790 556 STEP 6

I - Supplier Working Standards

9 10 11 12 13 14

Working hours/shift Shifts/ day Days/ week Weeks/ year Total hours/year (9*10*11*12) % of line for KTTM parts (Allocation %) Quoted Production Rate (part # item 1) Quoted % scrap Quoted % line efficiency Adjusted production rate (15*(1-16)*17) Available capacity (15*14*(1-16)*17)*13 Utilization % (3/19) Bottleneck operation Trial run duration Total parts produced Number of bad parts First time capability % ((23-24)/24)*100 Number of good parts (23-24) Net output (26/22) Takt Time Rate (Target) (3/13*14) Downtime Reason

8.5 2 5 48 4080 87% 210.0 2% 94% 193 686,677 102% X 1.00 249 2 99.20% 247 247 197 0.5 Reprogramming 79.8%

II - Supplier Capacity Data III - RUN@RATE Results

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

30 31 32

Run-Off utilization % (3/(27*13*14)) Bottleneck operation

SHADED CELLS ARE CALCULATED and protected

97.1% X 34 SUMMARY

72.3%

70.3%
35

The RUN@RATE results are acceptable and meet KTTM capacity planning volume requirements:
33

The attached capability study results meet KTTM requirements: Corrective actions are required: New production readiness trial run is required: Date: Date: April 1, 2404 May 16, 2004

Overall Process Utilization % 97.13%

Status Acceptable

Auditor Information Name: Gerald Biggs Company: KTTM Location: Mesa, AZ

36

Supplier representative signature:

Tom Alison

Auditor signature:

Gerald Biggs

D20.503.B0

Run at Rate Form Example

February 11 2004

RUN AT RATE ACTION PLAN


DATE ITEM
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

STANDARD CHECKLIST ITEMS


ARE ALL TOOLING GAGES AND FIXTURES IN PLACE? IS A MANUFACTURING FLOOR PLAN DEVELOPED? ARE ALL PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS MET? IS PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE IN PLACE?

RESPONSE

REQUIRED ACTION

RESPONSIBLE PARTY DUE COMPLETED

COMMENTS

conditional rejected conditional rejected Fax # re Fax # IS MISTAKE PROOFING ACCEPTABLE?

conditional Fax #

ARE BOTH THE SUPPLIER AND RUN-OFF UTILIZATIONS <100%

Tool Backup Builder Tool 70% FIRST Tool Backup Builder Tool Tool Backup Builder Tool ARE ALL OPERATIONS ABOVE TIME CAPABILITY?
IS SPC IN PLACE AND VISUAL NEAR PRODUCTION? HAS THE RAMP PLAN BEEN DISCUSSED AND VERIFIED? HAVE ALL OPEN 8-D'S AND DEVIATIONS BEEN REVIEWED? ARE MANUFACTURING INSTRUCTIONS IN PLACE AND VISUAL? HAS A CONTINGENCY PLAN BEEN DEVELOPED? ARE ALL CAPABILITY STUDIES ACCEPTABLE?

ITEM
14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

ADDITIONAL ISSUES/ACTION ITEMS

RESPONSE

REQUIRED ACTION

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

DATE DUE COMPLETED

COMMENTS

D20.503.B0

Action Plan Form

February 11 2004

SUPPLIER PROCESS CAPABILITY


SECTION 1 -SPECIFICATION DATA AND MEASUREMENT RESULTS

Part Number

Sample Size Critical and Signficant?

Note: If no USL/LSL, then leave cell blank

Characteristic or Specification

Average

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Part Number

Sample Size Critical and Signficant?

Note: If no USL/LSL, then leave cell blank Upper Specification Limit Lower Specification Limit

Characteristic or Specification

Average

Standard Deviation

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Part Number

Sample Size Critical and Signficant?

Note: If no USL/LSL, then leave cell blank Upper Specification Limit Lower Specification Limit

Characteristic or Specification

Average

Standard Deviation

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Part Number

Sample Size Critical and Signficant?

Note: If no USL/LSL, then leave cell blank Upper Specification Limit Lower Specification Limit

Characteristic or Specification

Average

Standard Deviation

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Part Number

Sample Size Critical and Signficant?

Note: If no USL/LSL, then leave cell blank Upper Specification Limit Lower Specification Limit

Characteristic or Specification

Average

Standard Deviation

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6
D20.503.B0

Process Capability Form

February 11 2004

SUPPLIER PROCESS CAPABILITY


SECTION 1 -SPECIFICATION DATA AND MEASUREMENT RESULTS

Part Number

30301458B Critical and Signficant?

Sample Size

30

Note: If no USL/LSL, then leave cell blank

Characteristic or Specification

Average

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit


3.5500 6.8200 0.5100 0.0550

Lower Specification Limit


3.4500 6.7800 0.4950 0.0450

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Hole Diameter 3.5 mm 6.8 mm dimension .5 radius .05 chamfer

3.4800 6.7900 0.4990 0.0510

0.0300 0.0500 0.0100 0.0010

0.333 0.067 0.133 1.333

Part Number Critical and Signficant?

Sample Size

Note: If no USL/LSL, then leave cell blank Upper Specification Limit Lower Specification Limit

Characteristic or Specification

Average

Standard Deviation

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Part Number Critical and Signficant?

Sample Size

Note: If no USL/LSL, then leave cell blank Upper Specification Limit Lower Specification Limit

Characteristic or Specification

Average

Standard Deviation

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Part Number Critical and Signficant?

Sample Size

Note: If no USL/LSL, then leave cell blank Upper Specification Limit Lower Specification Limit

Characteristic or Specification

Average

Standard Deviation

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Part Number Critical and Signficant?

Sample Size

Note: If no USL/LSL, then leave cell blank Upper Specification Limit Lower Specification Limit

Characteristic or Specification

Average

Standard Deviation

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6
D20.503.B0

Process Capability Form Example

February 11 2004

You might also like