Capacity Verification 6k6u6n

CAPACITY VERIFICATION (Production Readiness Review / RUN@RATE) 1

Part Number

4

Run@Rate Date

2

Part Description

5

Supplier Name

3

KTTM Annual Capacity Planning Volume

6

Supplier Location

Process Step Process Description Units hours shifts days weeks hours

7

I - Supplier Working Standards

8 9 10 11 12 13

II - Supplier Capacity Data

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

III - RUN@RATE Results

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Working hours/shift Shifts/ day Days/ week Weeks/ year Total hours/year (9*10*11*12)

120

pcs/year

% 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

% pcs/hour % % pcs/hour pcs/year % X

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

hour pcs pcs % pcs pcs/ hour pcs/ hour hour

Reason

text

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

% X

STEP 1

STEP 2

STEP 3

STEP 4

STEP 5

STEP 6

30 31 32

SHADED CELLS ARE CALCULATED and protected

34

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

36

D20.503.B0

The attached capability study results meet KTTM requirements: Corrective actions are required:

Date:

New production readiness trial run is required:

Date:

Supplier representative signature:

SUMMARY

Overall Process Utilization % 0.00%

35

Status Acceptable

Auditor Information Name: Company: Location:

Auditor signature:

Run at Rate Form

February 11 2004

CAPACITY VERIFICATION (Production Readiness Review / RUN@RATE) 1

Part Number

30301458B

4

Run@Rate Date

2

Part Description

Inflator retainer bracket

5

Supplier Name

3

KTTM Annual Capacity Planning Volume

pcs/year

6

Supplier Location

Process Step Process Description Units hours shifts days weeks hours

7

I - Supplier Working Standards

8 9 10 11 12 13

II - Supplier Capacity Data

14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

III - RUN@RATE Results

22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Working hours/shift Shifts/ day Days/ week Weeks/ year Total hours/year (9*10*11*12)

700,000 STEP 1 Stamp Part

STEP 2 CNC #1

February 14, 2004 Acme Machining Cleveland, OH

STEP 3 CNC #2

STEP 4 Weld Fasteners

STEP 5 Paint

STEP 6

7.5 3 5 48 5400

8.5 2 5 48 4080

7.0 3 5 48 5040

7.0 3 5 48 5040

10.5 1 5 48 2520

% 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

% pcs/hour % % pcs/hour pcs/year % X

100% 720.0 2% 97% 684 3,695,933 19%

87% 210.0 2% 94% 193 686,677 102% X

100% 164.0 5% 95% 148 745,970 94%

100% 240.0 9% 92% 201 1,012,677 69%

50% 1200.0 5% 95% 1,083 1,364,580 51%

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

hour pcs pcs % pcs pcs/ hour pcs/ hour hour

2.00 929 5 99.46% 924 462 130

1.00 249 2 99.20% 247 247 197 0.5

2.00 290 4 98.62% 286 143 139

1.25 252 12 95.24% 240 192 139

1.00 794 4 99.50% 790 790 556

Reason

text

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

% X

72.3%

70.3%

Reprogramming

30 31 32

28.1%

79.8%

97.1% X 34 SUMMARY

SHADED CELLS ARE CALCULATED and protected

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

36

D20.503.B0

The attached capability study results meet KTTM requirements: Corrective actions are required:

Date:

April 1, 2404

New production readiness trial run is required:

Date:

May 16, 2004

Supplier representative signature:

Tom Alison

Run at Rate Form Example

35

Overall Process Utilization %

Status

97.13%

Acceptable

Auditor signature:

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

Gerald Biggs

February 11 2004

RUN AT RATE ACTION PLAN DATE ITEM

STANDARD CHECKLIST ITEMS

RESPONSE

REQUIRED ACTION

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

COMMENTS DUE

1

ARE ALL TOOLING GAGES AND FIXTURES IN PLACE?

2

IS A MANUFACTURING FLOOR PLAN DEVELOPED?

3

ARE ALL PACKAGING REQUIREMENTS MET?

4

IS PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE IN PLACE?

5

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

6

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

7

Tool Backup Builder Tool 70% FIRSTTool Backup Builder Tool Tool Backup Builder Tool ARE ALL OPERATIONS ABOVE TIME CAPABILITY?

8

IS SPC IN PLACE AND VISUAL NEAR PRODUCTION?

9

HAS THE RAMP PLAN BEEN DISCUSSED AND VERIFIED?

10

HAVE ALL OPEN 8-D'S AND DEVIATIONS BEEN REVIEWED?

11

ARE MANUFACTURING INSTRUCTIONS IN PLACE AND VISUAL?

12

HAS A CONTINGENCY PLAN BEEN DEVELOPED?

13

ARE ALL CAPABILITY STUDIES ACCEPTABLE?

ITEM

COMPLETED

conditional Fax #

ADDITIONAL ISSUES/ACTION ITEMS

RESPONSE

REQUIRED ACTION

RESPONSIBLE PARTY

DATE DUE

COMPLETED

COMMENTS

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

D20.503.B0

Action Plan Form

February 11 2004

SUPPLIER PROCESS CAPABILITY SECTION 1 -SPECIFICATION DATA AND MEASUREMENT RESULTS

Characteristic or Specification

Critical and Signficant?

Sample Size

Part Number

Average

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

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Characteristic or Specification

Critical and Signficant?

Sample Size

Part Number

Average

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

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Characteristic or Specification

Critical and Signficant?

Sample Size

Part Number

Average

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

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Characteristic or Specification

Critical and Signficant?

Sample Size

Part Number

Average

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

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Characteristic or Specification

Critical and Signficant?

Sample Size

Part Number

Average

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

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

D20.503.B0

Process Capability Form

February 11 2004

SUPPLIER PROCESS CAPABILITY SECTION 1 -SPECIFICATION DATA AND MEASUREMENT RESULTS

30301458B

Characteristic or Specification

Sample Size Critical and Signficant?

Part Number

30

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

Average

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1

Hole Diameter 3.5 mm

3.4800

0.0300

3.5500

3.4500

0.333

2

6.8 mm dimension

6.7900

0.0500

6.8200

6.7800

0.067

3

.5 radius

0.4990

0.0100

0.5100

0.4950

0.133

4

.05 chamfer

0.0510

0.0010

0.0550

0.0450

1.333

5 6 7

Sample Size

Characteristic or Specification

Critical and Signficant?

Part Number

Average

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

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sample Size

Characteristic or Specification

Critical and Signficant?

Part Number

Average

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

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sample Size

Characteristic or Specification

Critical and Signficant?

Part Number

Average

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

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Sample Size

Characteristic or Specification

Critical and Signficant?

Part Number

Average

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

Standard Deviation

Upper Specification Limit

Lower Specification Limit

PpK

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

D20.503.B0

Process Capability Form Example

February 11 2004