Every new launch and implementation of changes in ongoing production involves the validation and verification of process parameters. One tool worth considering in this context is a Process Parameters Audit.
Process Parameters Audit as a Result of Customer Escalation
No one likes customer escalations. They often involve “support” from other plants within the organization, which leads to increased workloads for the individuals solving the problems.
This was precisely the situation I encountered at one of the production facilities. During a customer audit, it was found that the nominal torque value and tolerances for a bolted connection were non-compliant. The best solution was determined to be a systematic approach involving the verification of all process parameters for all customers.
There were, astonishingly, more than 1,400 of them. As a leader, I was asked to prepare an appropriate methodology that would enable:
- Properly conducted meetings with teams responsible for specific customers,
- Effective management of audits,
- Formation of an audit team,
- Reporting,
- Oversight of action plans.
Process Parameter Audit – Break Down the “Elephant”
Given the complexity of the issue, we began by defining exactly what needed to be checked. Our team identified the following components:
- Production lines (and the customers they were dedicated to),
- Part numbers of the produced components (as different configurations of parts had varying requirements),
- Design requirements subject to verification,
- Workstation numbers,
- Whether the requirement was a Significant or Critical Characteristic,
- The instruction number containing relevant information or Control Plan,
- Defined process parameters at each station.
This was our starting point. In the next step, we developed an audit plan to verify the consistency of design requirements with the data in the Control Plan and the parameters set on the respective machines.
This process took several weeks. Each auditor worked with a team consisting of:
- quality engineer,
- process engineer,
- representative from engineering (if the organization shares responsibility for design).
The Audit Is Complete – What’s Next?
Of course, conducting audits is just the beginning of a process “catharsis”. For each parameter, the recorded outcome was assigned one of the following statuses:
- OK,
- Official deviation,
- Request for change,
- Internal concession until an action plan is defined.
Once all the information was collected, the role of the remaining auditors was complete. At this stage, a single coordinator was sufficient to conduct regular meetings with the teams and report to management.
During these meetings, we identified many actions that allowed us to restore parameters to meet design requirements. These actions included:
- NVH (Noise, Vibration, Harshness) workshops to redefine specific characteristics affecting noise,
- Analysis of process data with estimations of rejection levels upon restoring original parameters,
- Addressing the absence of TPM (Total Productive Maintenance) for implemented Poka-Yoke, which resulted in non-compliant values,
- Engaging the industrialization department to prepare tooling for improving process stability,
- Implementing parameters from the design documentation that had not been introduced on the production line,
- Measuring subcomponents needed for conducting appropriate tests,
- Activating limits for parameters. The “inactive” status allowed non-compliant parts to be produced when proper tolerances were applied.
Conclusion
As shown, a process parameters audit enables the organization to conduct a more detailed analysis of process data not typically covered in standard production audit frameworks.
This approach provides greater awareness and knowledge of the relationships between design requirements, documentation and process parameters.
On the Free Tools page, you can download the Excel form “Process Parameters Audit – Template” for free. Of course, you can edit it however you like.
Dariusz Kowalczyk
