QFR No - 8000885867
Defect Details
NC No. 8000885867
NC Date 07/08/2024
NC Submission Date
Part No. 550DZ05202
Part Name FORK BOLT :PRFH-006
Supplier Name & Code 100106-SHARP ENGINEERS.
ETL Plant 1116-ETL K-120 Suspension
Defect Details NOT AS PER SPECIFICATION-BURR AT GROOVE WIDTH
 
1. Problem Description
Defect Description Fork Bolt Groove ID Burr
Detection Stage Receipt
Problem Severity Function
NG Quantity 50
Is Defect Repeatative? Yes
Defect Sketch / Photo 0sppjw30xuq1bpksvo5u13ck.jpg
Supplier Communication Details
Quality Head Email ID quality@apw3.co.in
Plant Head/CEO Email ID kurund.ma@sharp-engineers.com
MD Email ID urkhandelwal@sharp-engineers.com
2. Stock Details & action taken for NG parts
Location ETL End Warehouse Transit Supplier FG Supplier WIP Total
Total Qty
8000
0
0
2000
5000
15000
Check Qty
8000
0
0
2000
5000
15000
NG Qty
50
0
0
0
9
59
 
Scrap 0
Rework 59
Under Deviation 0
Containment Action
Segregated all pipeline material at customer end and sharp end
 
3. Process Flow
Process Flow Description
RM incoming-Parting and drilling-Tip grinding-CNC 1st -pre thread drilling and chamfering-OD grinding-Thread rolling-Tapping M10-plating - final inspection-PDI-Packing and forwarding
 
4. Process Details
Process / Operation Plating
Outsource Yes
Machine / Cell Plating
Machine / Cell No. Plating Plant
5. Problem Analysis
Type Possible Cause Fact Verification Jud
ManNew operatorNo new operatorO
ManUnskilled operatorOperator skilled as per skill matrixO
MaterialMaterial grade changeMaterial grade is as per requirementO
MachineBurr particle deposited in plating tankBur particle found in plating tankX
MachinePlating process parameter not as per specificationPlating process parameter is as per specificationO
MethodPlating tank cleaning method not followedPlating tank cleaning method followed as per control planO
 
6. Inspection Method Analysis (Current)
Inspection Method Other
Other Inspection Method Visual Inspection
Check Point at Final Inspection Yes
Checking Freq. 100%
Sampling No
Sample Size 100%
7. Root Cause Analysis (Occurance)
Why 1 Burr observed in the groove
Why 2 Burr stick on part during process
Why 3 Burr from dangler stick into groove
Why 4 Barrel dangler not clean
Why 5 Barrel dangler cleaning frequency once in week
Root Cause (Occurance) Barrel dangler cleaning frequency once in week
 
Root Cause Analysis (Outflow)
Why 1 Burr observed in the groove
Why 2 Skip from inspection
Why 3 Inspection size is less
Why 4 Inspection size was 10 nos per lot
Why 5
Root Cause (Outflow) Inspection size was 10 nos per lot
 
8. Countermeasure ( Occurrence , Outflow & System side Actions )
Type Countermeasure Details Responsibility Target Date Actual Date Status
OccuranceBarrel dangler frequency changed from one week to Daily basisMr.Pradip Bhagwat10/08/202410/08/2024Completed
OutflowInspection size increased to 20 nos per lotMr. Pradip Bhagwat10/08/202410/08/2024Completed
 
9. Inspection Method After Customer Complaint
Change In Inspection System Yes
Change Details Dangler Barrel cleaning frequency changed.
Inspection Method Other
Other Inspection Method Visual inspection
Check Point at Final Inspection Yes
Checking Freq. 100%
Sampling No
Sample Size 100%
10. Evidance of Countermeasure
Occurance (Before) Dangler not clean
1001_Occurance_Before.jpeg
Occurance (After) Dangler clean
1001_Occurance_After.jpeg
Outflow (Before) Inspection frequency is 10 nos per lot
1001_Outflow_Before.jpg
Outflow (After) Inspection frequency ins 20nos per lot
1001_Outflow_After.jpeg
 
11. Horizontal Deployment
Horizontal Deployment Required Yes
Applicable Machine / Model / Plant All Barrels
 
12. Document Review
Documents ControlPlan, PFMEA, WISOP
Specify Other Document NA
 
13. Effectiveness Of Action
Reviewed Quantity 500
Reason for submission OK