8D - Full Report

QSS #: 123 ✘
Reported failure, initial Repetitive error,
view (8D title):
Damage of the grain Others (internal, KAIZEN, etc.)
Re- occurrence YES
NO
location/ site La-La Land

8D opening date: Done (Date) Picture/ Sketch - Details of the problem:

8D Rev. (A,B, etc.): A [DD/MMM/YYYY]
22-Jul-2019 [DD-MMM-YYYY]

8D Revision date: 22-Jul-2019 D3 deadline: 23-Jul-2019 23-Jul-2019 OK NOK

[DD-MMM-YYYY]

Claim # (Customer.-Supplier)/ No claim- Internal

D6 deadline: 5-Aug-2019 2-Aug-2019
- Date(s): improvement project

Customer/Supplier name: ABC ABC D8 deadline: 20-Oct-2019 9-Oct-2019

8D- Champion
Team members - Name -
Nicolas

Name Role Contact details

Telephone email
Carl Junior 8D Leader
-/- -/-
Telephone email
NA Faurecia Contact
-/- -/-
email
Mikael UAP Manager Not required

email
Linda Supervisor Not required
To
email Y ✘
Fernanda Operator Shift A Not required D2 Risks for similar products/ processes investi
E
email RHD version to check as well, all LHD improvements to gate
Tomasz Operator Shift C Not required
consider for RHD S
Information of plant Asia/Pacific as they produce the same
part for the local market, identical industrialization
D1 Problem Description 5W2H's (detailed view)
What is the problem? (Detailed failure description (after first, quick internal FA)
How many parts affected? How was the problem detected?
Which specification has not been met?
Collision of the instrument panel, upper side LHD, with "Sensor 7", during unloading the part at the ultrasonic welding machine, which Quantity
Visual inspection according to work instruction at the end of the line NOK/ OK samples
may create a significant scratch (Size: Between 1,5 up to 4 mm) on the IP close to the left air vent area No claim approved by the customer. 1000 Lux = OK!
claimed:

Quantity Customer/Supplier Part

All internal TZK 1234 1234 Revision C
returned: #(s)/ incl. revision level :

At the end of the IP upper assembly Date parts Faurecia part #(s)/
Where was the problem found? When was the problem found? All internal BA 575 9187 C
workstation (GAP4-UAP1) received: incl. revision level :

Defect reported since the beginning of the Quantity 123 parts in 5

Who found/reported the problem? Operators at Final Inspection of all shifts Part name/ -description: B3B4 IP upper part LHD
project approx. 5 month ago defective: month

Significant scrap costs for the site, average Quality Alert S/R Mileage: -/- Delivery number(s) /
Why is it a problem (failure effect)?
is 2.5 k€ doing the last 4 month initiated? YESrelated? YES
NO date code (converted)
All internal
✘ NO ✘ VIN- Number: -/-

D3 Containment Actions (Immediate actions) What is defined until corrective actions are implemented and effective ? Area tagging and NC- material segregation to ensure !

Location of action Date due Date done Action effective

Action Responsible Evidence [incl. Clean Points] Remarks
(gate/standard) [DD-MMM-YYYY] [DD-MMM-YYYY] (gate/standard)?
23-Jul-2019
Protect the sensors for the clips 7 and 3 by a No full clean point, as the currently
Faurecia - Manufacturing line Eric 23-Jul-2019 25-07-2019 Partially effective
piece of foam used foam is not resistant enough
26-Jul-2019

Rework by paint not allowed by

Faurecia - Manufacturing line Investigate a rework solution Linda 30-Jul-2019 29-Jul-2019 Not effective
customer, not durable!

Instruction of the operators of all shifts, how

Start 23.07.2019 for No clean point yet, but reduction of
Faurecia - Manufacturing line to manipulate the IP's with care and how to Linda the next two days 26-Jul-2019 Partially effective
scrap rate by 50 % in the first week
unload them

Detailed description how the whole supply chain will be protected.

D3 Inventory Control (All stocks to take into consideration: Supplier, manufacturing, parts in transit, components, distribution centers, JIT/JIS, customers, … ...)

Location of Lot Number(s)/ Date due Date done Quantity Quantity Special
Part Number Location of Material Action Responsible
Containment Production Date [DD-MMM-YYYY] [DD-MMM-YYYY] Checked NOK Identification

BA 575 9187 C 4711 / all parts from July Quick check up if damaged parts are in the pipeline/
Faurecia - Manufacturing line UAP 1 Fernanda 22-Jul-2019 22-Jul-2019 70 0 NO
LHD 22nd 2019 WIP

BA 575 9187 C 4712 / all parts from July Quick check up if damaged parts are in the pipeline/
Faurecia - Manufacturing line UAP 1 Fernanda 22-Jul-2019 22-Jul-2019 39 0 NO
LHD 21st 2019 WIP

BB 575 9186 C 679 / all parts from July Quick check up if damaged parts are in the pipeline/
Faurecia - Manufacturing line UAP 1 Tomasz 22-Jul-2019 22-Jul-2019 12 0 NO
RHD 22nd 2019 WIP

D1-D3 Comments/ Additional information (Pictures of agreed inspection methods, - product identification, labeling, … )
- Insert pictures or other supporting information as "Object - display as icon" , to avoid formatting issues of the 8D template

Please check the latest version of this document. Page 1 of 8 FAU-F-LSG-0230 - Issue 8 - Nov'19
Property of Faurecia 8D Full Report EXAMPLE
 8D - Full Report
QSS #: 123 ✘
Reported failure, initial Repetitive error,
view (8D title):
Damage of the grain Others (internal, KAIZEN, etc.)
Re- occurrence YES
NO
location/ site La-La Land

D4-D5 Failure Analysis/ Investigation (Actions - Results - Conclusions, …) For details see folder "Failure Analysis Details"

D4 Root Causes of NON-DETECTION - Why not seen? D5 Root Causes of OCCURENCE - Why happened?
[Link to 5-WHY/ incl. systemic weakness/ -gap] [Link to 5-WHY/ incl. systemic weakness/ -gap]
To keep in mind: Do you confirm the influence of a factor with facts and data? No guessing! To keep in mind: Do you confirm the influence of a factor with facts and data? No guessing!
Root cause confirmed by reproduction of the defect/ problem (Turn on- Turn off the problem).
Does a standard/gate for checking exist? Was the standard respected? Is the existing standard sufficient? Does a standard exist? Was the standard respected? Is the existing standard ensuring OK status?

No.: Root Cause (in detail) Evidence ! No.: Root Cause (in detail) Evidence !

CHECK-DO-CHECK not executed properly, as most defect are just found at Final Distance of Sensor 7 (left side, Zone D1) to small due to incorrect position of sensor, not
ND-1 Example: Current SW-Instr. OCC-1 Failure Analysis -Details-
Inspection pinned to ensure position Standard: 30 mm / Real: 15 mm

ND-1 Missing support of level "L". Operators (as they can not follow the required speed
Example: Link to PV-Matrix OCC-2
SYS. for inspection during CHECK-DO-CHECK)

Missing Stop@Defect rules for the individual workstations (not just for final
ND-2 OCC-3
inspection), incl appropriate thresholds

### ND-2
SYS.
No (deep dive) process audit scheduled and executed during the first 6 month after
SOP
Example: Link to audit plan
OCC-
SYS.
Maintenance plan incomplete, check item missing D5 Occurrence BD-option'!A1

D6 Corrective Actions definition D7 Effectiveness of Corrective Actions

Root Cause #: Verification by ? Evidence
[ND-1, OCC-1 SYS- Action # Action Responsible Due date Date done Effectiveness (Who and how/ trial,
1.etc.]
[DD-MMM-YYYY] [DD-MMM-YYYY]
3D, visual,..) [incl. Clean Points]

Definition of new standard for the distance between IP surface and sensor, was 30 mm - Crosscheck by
OCC-1 1 Joe Bean 5-Aug-2019 5-Aug-2019 Effective
now 35 mm (-5/+0 mm), both sides Nicolas

Crosscheck by
OCC1- SYS 1 Pinning the tool surface (pin was lost) as corrective maintenance measure Marguerithe 7-Aug-2019 7-Aug-2019 Effective
Nicolas

Crosscheck by
2 Adding the sensor area 7 (left) and 3 (right) into the monthly maintenance plan Denis 7-Aug-2019 6-Aug-2019 Effective Example: link to upgraded documentation
Nicolas

Review/ Update of all work instructions related to CHECK-DO-CHECK, to ensure that Crosscheck by
ND-1 1 Angelo 5-Aug-2019 5-Aug-2019 Effective Example: link to upgraded documentation
the assigned tasks are well described Carl

Training of the staff, and introduction of modifications made, incl. the update of the OK- Crosscheck by
2 Linda 20-Aug-2019 20-Aug-2019 Effective Example: link to training documentation
first piece check sheet Carl

Ensuring adequate support for operators not at "U" level, or to ensure qualified staff at 15-Aug-2019 Crosscheck by
ND-1-SYS 1 Linda 15-Aug-2019 Partially effective GAP leader support required
relevant positions ("U- level) ongoing! Carl

Crosscheck by
ND-2 1 Definition of Stop@Defect rules for all key workstations, execution by Linda Pradeep 15-Aug-2019 10-Aug-2019 Effective Example: link to upgraded documentation
Carl

ND-2-SYS 1 Execution of a VDA 6.3 process audit Eric 7-Sep-2019 7-Sep-2019 Effective NA B rank 87%, see specific action plan

Start: Aug. 10th

2 Reinforcement of daily SW- audits Linda Ongoing Effective
2019

D8 Lesson Learned/ Prevention to avoid re-occurence !

Incl. update of documentation

Item Due date Date done Evidence!

Action Responsible Verification by?
[updated, verified, performed] [DD-MMM-YYYY] [DD-MMM-YYYY] (New revision #, confirmation, ...)

Drawing Not required

Specification Not required

List of Key Characteristics Not required

D-FMEA / P-FMEA
Pinning added to Process FMEA Marcel 30-Sep-2019 30-Sep-2019 Carl Example: link to upgraded documentation
(new risk rating ?)

Control Plan Not required

Avoid re-occurrence !

Std. work instructions, directives for

Updated Angelo 15-Sep-2019 14-Sep-2019 Carl Example: link to upgraded documentation
manufacturing and inspection

Visual aids
Upgrade of pictures in SW- Instructions Laura 5-Sep-2019 5-Sep-2019 Carl Example: link to upgraded documentation
(Boundary samples, etc. )

Training completed Bi - weekly reminders Linda 30-Sep-2019 30-Sep-2019 Carl Example: link to tracking documentation

Error proofed & verified Not required

Gages & test procedures Not required

Preventive Maintenance Maintenance plan updated and execution accordingly Marguerithe Ongoing Ongoing Carl Example: link to tracking documentation

Added to LPA Criteria added to Kamishibai Checks Charles 30-Aug-2019 Ongoing Carl Example: link to upgraded documentation
(Layered process audit/plan)

ECO Not required

(Product/Process change request)

Lessons Learned for ND & OCC, LL created and shared within the BG
Renkceolk 9-Oct-2019 9-Oct-2019 Carl FAU-F-LSG-0240
created and shared

Check up of RHD Version confirmed, not the same problems! Carl 25-Oct-2019 Alejandra Morales (PM)

Please check the latest version of this document. Page 2 of 8 FAU-F-LSG-0230 - Issue 8 - Nov'19
Property of Faurecia 8D Full Report EXAMPLE
 8D - Full Report
QSS #:
Reported failure, initial Repetitive error,
view (8D title):
Supplier Quality Quality
Re- occurrence ✘ YES
NO
location/ site Nelas

8D opening date: Done (Date) Picture/ Sketch - Details of the problem:

8D Rev. (A,B, etc.): A [DD/MMM/YYYY]
25-Jan-2022 [DD-MMM-YYYY]

8D Revision date: D3 deadline: 26-Jan-2022 29-Sep-2021 OK NOK

[DD-MMM-YYYY]

Claim # (Customer.-Supplier)/
25-Jan-2022 D6 deadline: 8-Feb-2022
- Date(s):

JOUBERT PRODUCTIONS
Customer/Supplier name: D8 deadline: 25-Apr-2022
SAS

8D- Champion
Team members - Name -

Name Role Contact details

Telephone email

Telephone email

mohamedzied.j@joubert-tunisia.com
email

email
To
email Y
D2 Risks for similar products/ processes ✘ investi
E
email gate
S
D1 Problem Description 5W2H's (detailed view)
What is the problem? (Detailed failure description (after first, quick internal FA)
How many parts affected? How was the problem detected?
Which specification has not been met?
Quantity
claimed:

Quantity Customer/Supplier Part

returned: #(s)/ incl. revision level :

Date parts Faurecia part #(s)/

Where was the problem found? When was the problem found?
received: incl. revision level :

Quantity
Who found/reported the problem? Part name/ -description:
defective:

Quality Alert S/R Mileage: Delivery number(s) /

Why is it a problem (failure effect)? initiated? YES related? YES
NO date code (converted)
NO VIN- Number:

D3 Containment Actions (Immediate actions) What is defined until corrective actions are implemented and effective ? Area tagging and NC- material segregation to ensure !

Location of action Date due Date done Action effective

Action Responsible Evidence [incl. Clean Points] Remarks
(gate/standard) [DD-MMM-YYYY] [DD-MMM-YYYY] (gate/standard)?

Detailed description how the whole supply chain will be protected.

D3 Inventory Control (All stocks to take into consideration: Supplier, manufacturing, parts in transit, components, distribution centers, JIT/JIS, customers, … ...)

Location of Lot Number(s)/ Date due Date done Quantity Quantity Special
Part Number Location of Material Action Responsible
Containment Production Date [DD-MMM-YYYY] [DD-MMM-YYYY] Checked NOK Identification

D1-D3 Comments/ Additional information (Pictures of agreed inspection methods, - product identification, labeling, … )
- Insert pictures or other supporting information as "Object - display as icon" , to avoid formatting issues of the 8D template

Please check the latest version of this document. Page 3 of 8 FAU-F-LSG-0232 - Issue 3 - Dec'19
Property of Faurecia - Internal 8D Full Report
 8D - Full Report
QSS #:
Reported failure, initial Repetitive error,
view (8D title):
Supplier Quality Quality
Re- occurrence ✘ YES
NO
location/ site Nelas

D4-D5 Failure Analysis/ Investigation (Actions - Results - Conclusions, …) For details see folder "Failure Analysis Details"

D4 Root Causes of NON-DETECTION - Why not seen? D5 Root Causes of OCCURENCE - Why happened?
[Link to 5-WHY/ incl. systemic weakness/ -gap] [Link to 5-WHY/ incl. systemic weakness/ -gap]
To keep in mind: Do you confirm the influence of a factor with facts and data? No guessing! To keep in mind: Do you confirm the influence of a factor with facts and data? No guessing!
Root cause confirmed by reproduction of the defect/ problem (Turn on- Turn off the problem).
Does a standard/gate for checking exist? Was the standard respected? Is the existing standard sufficient? Does a standard exist? Was the standard respected? Is the existing standard ensuring OK status?

No.: Root Cause (in detail) Evidence ! No.: Root Cause (in detail) Evidence !

ND-1 OCC-1

ND-2 OCC-2

ND-3 OCC-3

## ND-
SYS.
OCC-
SYS.

D6 Corrective Actions Definition D7 Effectiveness of Corrective Actions

Root Cause #: Verification by ? Evidence
[ND-1, OCC-1 SYS- Action # Action Responsible Due date Date done Effectiveness (Who and how/ trial,
1.etc.]
[DD-MMM-YYYY] [DD-MMM-YYYY]
3D, visual,..) [incl. Clean Points]

Select Effectiveness

Select Effectiveness

Select Effectiveness

Select Effectiveness

Select Effectiveness

Select Effectiveness

Select Effectiveness

Select Effectiveness

Select Effectiveness

D8 Lesson Learned/ Prevention to avoid re-occurrence!

Incl. update of documentation

Item Due date Date done Evidence!

Action Responsible Verification by?
[updated, verified, performed] [DD-MMM-YYYY] [DD-MMM-YYYY] (New revision #, confirmation, ...)

Drawing

Specification

List of Key Characteristics

D-FMEA / P-FMEA
(new risk rating ?)

Control Plan
Avoid re-occurrence !

Std. work instructions, directives for

manufacturing and inspection

Visual aids
(Boundary samples, etc. )

Training completed

Error proofed & verified

Gages & test procedures

Preventive Maintenance

Added to LPA
(Layered process audit/plan)

ECO
(Product/Process change request)

Lessons Learned for ND & OCC,

created and shared

8D closed by/
when:

Please check the latest version of this document. Page 4 of 8 FAU-F-LSG-0232 - Issue 3 - Dec'19
Property of Faurecia - Internal 8D Full Report
 8D - Failure Analysis, Details
QSS #: Reported failure, initial
Supplier Quality Quality
Repetitive error, YES
location/ site view (8D title) : Re- occurrence
NO
8D Rev. (A,B, etc.): 8D opening date: Done (Date ê)
[DD-MMM-YYYY] [DD-MMM-YYYY]

8D Revision date: D3 deadline:

[DD-MMM-YYYY]

Claim # (Customer.-Supplier)/
D5 deadline:
- Date(s):
Customer/Supplier name: D8 deadline:

8D- Champion
Team members - Name -

Name Role Contact details

D1 Problem description - What is the problem?

0

Failure Analysis (details & evidence) Which failure analysis tool(s) has/ have been selected and why utilized ? What is the failure analysis / investigation action time line ?

Please check the latest version of this document. Page 5 of 8 Pages FAU-F-LSG-0232 - Issue 3 - Dec'19
Property of Faurecia -Internal D2 Failure Analysis Details
 D3 - Containment Instruction
Date of
QSS #: Part- description Plant complaint
[DD-MMM-YY]

Name of Containment
ContainmentC Review date Line/GAP initiation date
hampion [DD-MMM-YY]

Problem- To
consider/
Description Remark!

Picture/ sketch / detail of the problem

OK NOK

Remarks: Remarks:

Step by Step Containment / Inspection method/ qualification … …

Traceability
Acceptance Checking What to do
No.: Action (What to check/ Which check point/-area?) How to check? Documentation/ Remarks
criteria frequency? in case of non- conformity?
Registration?

10

Inspection instruction (Picture of inspection flow/or details/…) Identification certified material (Details of marking/ labeling product & packaging)

Disposition of non- conf. material Release Instruction/ Remarks

Containment notification and training sign off

Given name Last name Position Shift Date Initials Given name Last name Position Shift Date Initials

Please check the latest version of this document. Page 6 of 8 FAU-F-LSG-0232 - Issue 3 - Dec'19
Property of Faurecia - Internal D3 Containment Instruction
 8D - ISHIKAWA/FishBone
QSS #: 0 Reported failure, initial
Supplier Quality Quality
Repetitive error, YES
location/ site view (8D title) : Re- occurrence
NO
8D Rev. (A,B, etc.): A 8D opening date:
[DD-MMM-YYYY]

8D Revision date: D3 deadline:

[DD-MMM-YYYY]

Claim # (Customer.-Supplier)/
D5 deadline:
- Date(s):
Customer/Supplier name: D8 deadline:

8D- Champion
Team members - Name -

Name Role Contact details

D1 Problem description - What is the problem?

D4/D5 ISHIKAWA - FISHBONE - 6M Occurrence

3. Measurement
2. Machine
1. Man
4. Environment

5. Material

6. Process

D4/D5 ISHIKAWA - FISHBONE - 6M Non detection

3. Measurement
2. Machine
1. Man

Please check the latest version of this document. Page 7 of 8 FAU-F-LSG-0232 - Issue 3 - Dec'19
Property of Faurecia - Internal D4-D5 ISHIKAWA-FishBone
 8D - CLASSIC 5 WHY
QSS #: Reported failure, initial
Supplier Quality Quality
Repetitive error, YES
location/ site view (8D title) : Re- occurrence
NO
8D Rev. (A,B, etc.): 8D opening date: Done (Date ê)
[DD-MMM-YYYY] [DD-MMM-YYYY]

8D Revision date: D3 deadline: 29-Sep-2021

[DD-MMM-YYYY]

Claim # (Customer.-Supplier)/ -
D5 deadline:
Date(s):

Customer/Supplier name: D8 deadline:

8D- Champion
Team members - Name -

Name Role Contact details

D1 Problem description - What is the problem?

D4/D5 5 WHY

D5-Challenge/ state why the failure could occur/ D4-Challenge/ state why the failure was not detected/ why not
why made? seen?
Root cause #1 Root cause #2 Root cause # 3 Root cause #1 Root cause #2 Root cause #3

because
WHY- 1

therefore
because
WHY- 2

therefore
because
WHY- 3

therefore
because
WHY- 4

therefore
because

WHY- 5 therefore

Systemic gap: Systemic gap:

Challenge/ state why the failure could occur/ did happen, not predicted Challenge/ state why the failure was not detected/ not seen,
(by current FMS system - FMEA/CP/etc.)? not predicted (by current FMS- system)?
because

therefore
because

therefore
because

therefore
because

therefore

Corrective actions ( OCCURRENCE - Why not predicted?) Corrective actions ( NON DETECTION - Why not predicted?)
to close identified systemic gap: to close identified systemic gap:

What What

Who Who

When When

Please check the latest version of this document. Page 8 of 8 FAU-F-LSG-0232 - Issue 3 - Dec'19
Property of Faurecia -Internal D4-D5 5 CLASSIC 5WHY