REISSUE

- DATE -
QUALITY PROBLEM NO.
COUNTERMEASURE REPORT (QPCR) CONTROL QPCR-2013-
DATE 24.09.2013
NO. 017
COMPONENT COMPONENT PART
EFC Rotor 204711372
DESCRIPTION NO.
LINE FEEDBACK
VENDOR NAME Core Auto 23.09.2013
DATE
CUSTOMER -
VENDOR CODE
FEEDBACK DATE
DESCRIPTION OF ABNORMALITIES RECOMMENDED REPLY DATE
Within fiften days
Thread Miss

FBML
Prepared By: Ashish Patel

Approved By: Mr. Siby Joseph

Interim Reply received:

Final Reply received:

Sr. Investigation Result Countermeasure Responsibility & Status

No. Target Date

After implement the corrective

VENDOR
action, 100% inspect the thread We doing the 100% inspection Pramod
1 hole and dot marked with of thread holes and dot Upadhyay / Under Monitoring
permanent marker. Not found marked on thread hole . Immediate.
the same defect.

DETAIL OF FOOLPROOFING (POKA-YOKE ) DONE(IF ANY) :

COUNTERMEASURE VERIFIED:

VERIFIED BY APPROVED BY
MONITORING OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF COUNTERMEASURES SIGNATURE DATE
FBML

LOT 1

LOT 2

LOT 3
 FBML
INSTRUCTION TO VENDOR : THE QPCR SHOULD BE IN THE TIME FRAME SPECIFIED ABOVE OTHERWISE
WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ACCEPT FURTHER SUPPLY

QAR F 02 00 018
 No.:

Problem solving sheet 5

Man Machine
1 Problem description: Thread Missing in EFC Rotor

Sketch, Photo:
Plant/ dept./
Core Auto component Pvt. Ltd.
workshop
Definition of the problem

Line/station Final Inspection

Thread Missing in
Product/component EFC Rotor EFC Rotor.
Date, time 23.09.2013

Shift A

Root cause analysis

Employee Mr. VIDHYANAND

Teamleader PRAMOD UPADHYAY

2 Description The problem is The problem is not Material Method

Facts analysis

What exactly is the problem? Theread missing in part .

1 2 3

Where exactly does the problem occur? Thread missing part arrest on customer end.

Why?

Why?

Why?
Thread missing in EFC Rotor

When exactly did the problem occur? Component was slip During the final inspection.

Why?

Why?

Why?
Component slip during the final inspection
100% inspection to done of thread hole and dot mark
How often did the problem occur? with permanent marker.

Why?

Why?

Why?
No. Containment action (prevent problem being passed on) Responsible Date/ time Status Final inspector not aware
3
1 100% inspection to be done and dot marked with permanent marker. PKU 23.09.2013
Quality awareness given to Final Inspector. He

Why?

Why?

Why?
will be check 100% and marked with permanent
Containment

2 marker.

Escalation by Escalation to Date/ time

Why?

Why?

Why?
Responsible for Problem : Team:- Mr. Sagun Jain , Pramod Upadhyay, U.S Gupta, Ajeet Rai, Ashwani Rai. 6 No. Root cause Actions Responsible Date Status
4
During the Final Inspection Thread
missing Part Slip & mix in OK parts. 100% inspection to be done of thread hole and dot marked with
1 permanent marker.
Pramod Upadhyay 23.09.2013 ok

Corrective Actions
7 2

5
Effectiveness analysis
Data analysis

8 Standardisation Resp. Date Yokoten (Lessons learned passed on) Resp. Date

QA-Matrix (Firewall)
P-FMEA
Standardisation

PQP (Control Plans)

Standards
Drawings
Process

Reason if no standard is altered/changed: Reason if no yokoten is neccessary:

Date of completion:

9
Group Leader Industrial / Production engineer Supervisor / Manager Teamleader Responsible for Problem