ENHANCED REFERENCE SYSTEM (ERS)

Transcription

1 Assessor Task Guide Digital Product Definition/Model Based Definition Checklist Notes Rapid change of equipment capabilities requires changing quality control practices. Guide questions/examples must be interpreted in a non-prescriptive manner. They are not necessarily applicable to each supplier s manufacturing process. Please consult with a technical representative when supplier provides a different method to accomplish process intent. The Tech Rep Response option for checklist answers only operates in the PQAA database. When a checklist is saved there an notification will be sent to the tech rep if this has been selected. Reps not using PQAA may not use the TR button; they must contact a tech rep if additional assistance is needed. All questions in this checklist (sections A. and B.) correspond to the type, C. Process Control in a standard PVA checklist. Predictive Indicators have been programmed to accept this checklist format. Definitions MASTER DATASET This is the engineering definition provided in a 3D representation of the product, viewable on a Computer Aided Design (CAD) system. In addition to the master dataset (aka CAD model), the entire product definition may typically include additional media such as parts lists, part coordination documents, material specifications, etc. The master dataset will exist in one of three possible formats. 1) The master dataset may include both the CAD model and fully dimensioned 2D drawing sheets. 2) It may include the CAD model and 2D drawing sheets having engineering requirements but not all linear dimensions. 3) Or the master dataset may only include the 3D model, with no 2D sheet and the engineering requirements displayed as text within the 3D viewing area of the model. All three formats are considered Digital Product Definition (DPD). The second case is a reduced content format, and is sometimes labeled as Reduced Dimension Drawing (RDD) or Simplified Drawing (SD). The third case is termed Model Based Definition (MBD). The purpose of the DPD/MBD checklist is to verify that the supplier has processes to use any of these formats received from any Boeing site, to manufacture and inspect the product. DATASET DERIVATIVE The media created any time data is extracted from a master dataset for machine programming, visual aids, inspection aides, FAIs, tool fabrication/measurement, plotting mylars, or what have you. ACCEPTANCE SOFTWARE This is software used during manufacturing that potentially affects product conformity where there is no further, downstream verification of the product. (E.g., CAD, LEV, CMS, data handling/analysis, and in some cases, NC) ENHANCED REFERENCE SYSTEM (ERS) This is a permanent reference system usually for large assembly tools, with a large number of digitally-defined, fixed target locations readable by coordinate measurement systems. It provides better repeatability than conventional tooling datum features. MACHINE TO NOMINAL At many suppliers, the NC machining process creates parts with excess material that must be further worked. Machine to Nominal controls seek to eliminate this practice, to improve flow, part fit and assembly. When coordinated with Boeing engineering, an NC process under sufficient control may allow use of standard tolerances in lieu of tighter ones. IGES, STEP, DXF, PARASOLID Standardized formats for CAD data that are readable by multiple systems. COORDINATE MEASUREMENT SYSTEMS (CMS) CMS devices check the 3D shape of products. Typical examples are the fixed Coordinate Measurement Machine (CMM), and several portable devices, Theodolite, Laser Tracker, Photogrammetry (includes Videogrammetry), and Portable CMM. LOW END VIEWER (LEV) An entry level, visualization CAD system used to view, analyze, extract, and print dimensional and other required data from the DPD dataset. 1 of 7

2 A. Data Control: (Master Datasets) Documented procedures for the DPD Process. 1.0 AS , Is there a process to control configuration of datasets throughout the manufacturing process? This means from the point when the dataset is received from Boeing, through whatever programming is done, through planning, through manufacturing (including visual aides), in-process inspections, through final inspection, and anything else that is applicable. What we are looking for is that the original model is secure and can not be changed, and only the appropriate people have write access to program and inspection datasets, backups are in place where necessary, identification is clear and consistent, etc. Competent system administrator(s) with sole access to retrieve and store incoming customer datasets. What methods does the supplier use to check dataset integrity upon receipt? Segregation of data types (by status e.g., release, in-work, obsolete or by using department, customer, etc.) in secure directories or other distinct environments. Password or other access protection, regular back up for disaster recovery, archive storage per contract requirements Is the suppliers' system software compatible with design system software when required by Boeing site sending data? 3. Does the supplier verify software translations, and ensure verification of translations at subtier suppliers, when used for product acceptance? Determine which Boeing sites send or will send datasets to the supplier (see PQAA) and see matrix at end of this Guide for site-specific data exchange requirements. Compatibility requirements may involve CAD systems or data exchange software. Data exchange software could handle encryption, FTP or web connection. Common scenarios of CAD translation are transfer of a master dataset from one company to another, or from a CAD system to a measurement system when the sending and receiving CAD systems are not the same brand. Distortion of model surfaces or loss of model elements may occur. Reliable verification methods are IGES_CHK software or another point cloud method. Alternatively, customer may control outgoing datasets per supplier equipment to ensure reliable translation, or supplier may use testing to demonstrate capable translation process. See matrix at end of this Guide for site-specific data exchange requirements. Supplier records of sub-tier CAD systems/format and provision of means to verify CAD translations when used by sub-tier for acceptance of Boeing product. 3.0, 9.0 AS , Do the supplier's processes include handling of obsolete datasets? 5. Is there a process in place for validating the geometric changes associated with a design change notice (DCN)? What we are interested in here, is how does the supplier make sure that the old (previous revision) model isn't used as the master dataset past whatever effectivity is attached to the change. Segregation and clear identification of current and past revision level datasets in supplier s directories. Geometric changes are dimensions, locations, holes, etc. Usage of software to identify changes to DPD model is a best practice. If software is not available, is existing practice sufficient to catch all changes? 2.0 AS A AS A of 7

3 How does the supplier react to the revised master dataset and any textual notice of revision from the customer? 6. Is a first article inspection (FAI) update triggered when a DCN is incorporated? 2.0 A (Software) 7. Is there a process in place to validate acceptance software? 8. Does the supplier's corrective action process provide for resolution of software and dataset issues? 9. Has the supplier identified training requirements for personnel associated with digital datasets? (Sub-tier Suppliers) 10. Does the supplier have a process that addresses flow down of datasets or dataset derivatives to a sub-tier supplier/ processor? Measurement equipment -- OEM calibration/certification met. Other party or supplier testing/certification of software functions for each version level. What kind of support does user get when new versions are installed? Process to identify current software version released for production. Secure storage of software version master copy. Artifact. Process to report troubles to OEM, alert all users, and take appropriate measures (including removal of software from production) when product conformity may potentially be impacted by software glitch/failure. Process to contact customer to resolve problems with received datasets. Does the supplier have processes to reinspect, recall, or disclose products inspected with discrepant media, equipment, and/or tooling? (Before and after shipment to customer.) Have quality assurance or other persons responsible for product acceptance been brought into the digital measurement and measurement planning process? How does the supplier train and document tasks when product acceptance or media generation is performed by non-qa personnel? Is OJT encouraged and documented? What is the supplier s program for training users of CAD, NC, CMS equipment? What training occurs at software version rolls? List of sub-tier suppliers receiving datasets to be used for product acceptance. Clear dataset name and rev level identified on transmitted data. How does sub-tier system administrator identify master datasets received? Process to ensure dataset format (complete product definition) is readable by sub-tier. See also question A , , AS A AS Does the supplier have a process to assess sub-tier supplier digital data capability? What we're looking for is if the supplier is aware of the digidata ability of their sub-tiers so they don't send a dataset of some kind to a sub-tier that can't work with it. Supplier has records of current sub-tier DPD capabilities (equipment and process) sufficient to provide confidence in sub-tier quality control of digital data/processes when used to accept Boeing product. If the supplier sends datasets to a subtier, but doesn t assess the subtier capability, answer this no. If the supplier doesn t send datasets to a subtier, then answer this N/A. 6.0 AS of 7

4 B. Derivatives: 1. Is there a process to control configuration and traceability of datasets when derivative media are created? Derivatives mean sets of data that are extracted from the original model. Examples are NC/CNC type programs, visual aides, mylars, digital tool designs and tools, inspection datasets (in-process and final), FAI datasets, etc. Traceability is looking at whether or not the derivative can be clearly tied back to its master dataset Revision level of derivative media and process to keep current with authority dataset revisions. Is derivative inspection media stored, including obsolete revisions of derivative inspection media per product acceptance documentation retention requirements? 2.0, 8.0 A0436 (Manufacturing) 2. Is planning traceable back to the current master dataset? Planning meaning the usual, route sheet, travelers, work instructions, etc. Traceable and current master dataset are the important parts here. We need to know that the info from a model that needs to get into the planning is getting there. Watch out for change notices (CNs) here. Which dataset is master may change based on the effectivity of a CN. (Ex: production run is 10 parts, change notice #1 has an effectivity at s/n 5, and you are in the shop performing a PVA when s/n 4 is being manufactured. Master here would be the original model. If you were in when s/n 6 was being manufactured, master would be model rev 1.) A Are terminals for viewing datasets available on the manufacturing floor? 4. Are visual aides furnished to the manufacturing floor when a terminal is not available to access geometric information? 5. Are visual aides, if any, traceable back to the current master dataset? 6. Are manufacturing and measurement programs traceable back to the current master dataset? Terminals (LEVs) are a best practice to improve clarity and accessibility of engineering requirements for manufacturing personnel. Is the viewer capable of transmitting product definition information? Validated software capability. Process to determine when inspection views/sketches are needed to supplement authority dataset. Are work instructions and illustration of product features clear? Utilization of equipment capability (CAD, LEV, CMS) to minimize/automate creation of inspection views. For a stand alone sketch, typical traceability information includes: Creator/Date Sketch Revision Level Authority Dataset(s) Name, Location, Revision Level Other Derivative Dataset(s) Name, Location, Revision Level Feature Requirement(s) Identifier (e.g., GDT frame ID) Product identification Supplier may have alternative means to ensure traceability and revision control. How is the traceability maintained? Programs refer to NC/CNC/DNC/CMM/CMS/NC probing, etc. Scope, 3.0, 8.0 A ,. 8. A A , 2.0, , 4 of 7

5 Is there a system or software in place to verify NC cutter path (e.g.vericut). The use is to verify a program (NC machine cutter path) on the computer before cutting chips. Simulation software is a best practice to reduce NC machine try out time. 7. Is simulation software being used? 8. Does the master dataset require the supplier to machine to nominal? Nominal machining is a best practice that improves accuracy of manufactured product to engineering definition. Special cases may exist where nominal machining is not advantageous. Finished or final NC programs shall machine to the nominal 3D model feature location. If nominal machining is a requirement, there will be an engineering general note stating "Part shall be NC programmed and machined to the nominal 3D model feature location " Look for statement of requirement in the supplier s planning media. 9. Is the supplier programming to nominal? 10. Is simulation software utilized to confirm that programming is to nominal? See question B8 for requirement applicability of questions B9 B13. For all situations, questions B9 B13 are a best practice. Check NC planning and programming process. S/W such as Vericut can confirm amount of NC program deviation from master dataset definition. Guideline for acceptable program is 25% of engineering tolerance. 11. Are processes in place to ensure that down-stream processes do not modify the program's geometry parameters? Is there any possibility of modification of the NC program after it has been verified. Does supplier have adequate controls to prevent modification or control results of necessary modifications? 12. Is the supplier machining to nominal (programming, cutters, machine & machinist/operator interaction, etc.)? Do machine operator choices potentially alter the nominal machining program? Does the machine operator understand how to make operation adjustments that maintain nominal parameters? 13. Is the supplier weighing parts as a method to verify that the part was machined to nominal? 14. Does the supplier have a process for NC probing? If part weight is not a requirement, it is a best practice to warn that NC processes are moving out of control even when all features remain within engineering tolerance. NC probing uses NC manufacturing equipment to measure the product for SPC or product acceptance purposes. It is a best practice for in-process acceptance but only useful in certain situations. Check for machine baseline and periodic calibration, and probe calibration. Does process take part restraint and other subsequent feature changes into account when used for product acceptance? If the supplier does it, but has no process, answer no. If the supplier doesn t do it, mark N/A. 4.0, Scope, 7.0, , 5 of 7

6 (Inspection) 15. Is product acceptance based upon the master dataset? Integrated Process Team or other method to ensure QA/measurement review of manufacturing flow to determine effective methods and location for inspection, and an inspectable design. Sufficient quality control of in-process inspection, e.g., operator training, inspection method sufficient to indicate feature conformance, inspection media provided to operator. Methodology to extract/create inspection media from authority datasets and provide to all potential users. If customer provides reference only digital data, does supplier have a process to control this? 8.0 A , Are product acceptance datasets traceable back to the current master dataset? Doesn't matter if the product is accepted to paper or a dataset, but is the dataset or paper used for final inspection traceable to the master dataset? Remember to be careful of DCN implementations here when you are looking at the current model and production hardware. Ensure traceability is complete when several, successive dataset derivatives are created in order to arrive at a derivative used for inspection A , Is the supplier verifying required features defined in the master dataset? Process for reduced content datasets (MBD, RDD, SD, etc.) to ensure all engineering feature requirements (GDT frames, notes) are planned for verification. Unique identification of each feature requirement in the 3D model is likely the most effective method when feature requirements are not provided on a 2D sheet. Has the supplier defined typical (guidelines) surface and feature measurement practices (i.e., quantity of points)? This process is best verified by review of the FAI for a specific product. 8.0 A , Is the supplier verifying and documenting 100% of the mandatory inspection criteria inspection results? 19. Is feature information associated with the dataset translated to downstream equipment? When master dataset specifies mandatory inspection criteria, supplier must measure and retain results for these features for every unit. Can the equipment actually use the dataset itself, or does info need to be extracted from the dataset, and if the info is extracted, does the feature info make an accurate transfer. Translated means sent to or used at. 8.0 A , Does the supplier verify accuracy of transferred measurement data? If multiple steps, softwares, media are needed to get all needed information to measurement device, does supplier sufficiently control this process? Methodology to extract/create inspection media (e.g., inspection views/sketches, mylars, tools, CMS programs, nominal dimensions, nominal point values) from authority datasets. Plotters must be certified and dimensional accuracy of plots checked before use. Process to assure integrity of measurement program creation , Does the supplier have a process to control critical functions of their portable coordinate measurement systems? In addition to certification and data input/output requirements common for all measurement devices, the critical functions for portable ones are: Setting survey scale, coordinate system establishment, targeting and measuring features, use of correct operating parameters (per OEM or supplier procedures), field calibration, and survey stability (acceptance). Supplier performance of a measurement survey is an effective method to check these processes. If supplier does not have or use portable CMS, mark this N/A. 7.0 AS of 7

7 (Tooling) Checklist Question what to look for Reference 22. Is there a process to maintain check tools/fixtures/media and datasets to the current master definition? Digital definition of physical tooling (including templates, check fixtures) must conform to digital engineering definition or approved tool design. Release process and secure storage of released tool design datasets. Process to review tool configuration when engineering authority dataset is revised. Clear identification/traceability of tools and tool design/inspection datasets to current revision of engineering authority dataset Is there a process to ensure the repeatability and reproducibility of check tools/ fixtures/media? Reinspection of tools verifies the digital tool definition and occurs at a frequency related to tool wear and stability Is there a process to install Enhanced Reference Systems when used on large assembly tools? 25. Is coordinate measurement system equipment used to troubleshoot problems with tooling and/or problems throughout the manufacturing process? ERS is a best practice for datuming large assembly tools. Installation procedures should address tool structure condition, fixed target type/location, measurement device, source of (datum) nominal values, and scaling method. Refer to BCAG(N) D A. Configuration control of released ERS dataset. If the supplier doesn t have large assembly tools or doesn t use ERS, mark as N/A. Portable coordinate measurement systems collect measurements at different locations in the manufacturing process to discover the source of dimensional product discrepancies. This is a tooling best practice. Supplier responds to and investigates/resolves assembly center reporting of problems. Scope, 11.0 Scope, 11.0 A Site specific data connection requirements SITE FORMAT IDENTIFICATION INTEGRITY A&M Long Beach UG PSN Version level A&M Long Beach IGES PSN As received A&M Long Beach STEP PSN As received A&M Long Beach DXF PSN As received A&M Philadelphia All CITIS As received A&M Seattle All SMI/Transmittal form As received A&M St Louis All CITIS As received BCA Seattle/Wichita CATIA Stamp in model D , D BCA Seattle/Wichita IGES Stamp in model D , IGES_CHK BCA Seattle/Wichita STEP Stamp in model D , Point cloud BCA Long Beach UG Transmittal form Version level BCA Long Beach IGES Transmittal form As received S&C SoCal All CITIS Point cloud 7 of 7