Supplier 8D report supplier logo

Customer plant Supplier Date of claim

Customer contact SAP no. Date of QR
Claim reference Author Update of QR

QUICK RESPONSE
- This document must be validated by Nidec within 24 hours after claim notification / Blue fields filled out by Nidec -

D 1. Description of the problem

1.a What is the problem ? Use 5W+2H to describe what is the current situation.

What happened?
Problem description

Why is it a problem?
Incident level
Part number When did it happen? date + time
Part description Who detected it?
Traceability of nok parts Where was it detected?
Recurrence How was it detected?
Defect S/R no How many parts ?
picture / sketch

picture / sketch
nok part

ok part

1.b Supplier problem solving team

Name Position Location Telephone Email

1.c Tool to use (defined by Nidec)

Ishikawa FTA 5why's LLC Audit Other

1.d Problem description from supplier / first analyse of problem / potential root causes

Samples of nok parts required at supplier location yes Express shipping supplier account

D 2. Risk on similar products and processes

Can this defect happen on similar parts ? Comments (compulsory if yes)
Other family product
Other machine
Other tooling
Other

D 3. Containment see sorting approval

What are the actions to detect all non-conforming parts in the process flow ?
Location in the process flow Nb to be sorted Nb parts sorted Nb nok parts ppm Date Resp.
Parts at Nidec plant
Parts at Nidec logistics platform
Parts at Nidec's customer (C1 claim)
Parts in transport
Parts at supplier / supplier platform
Parts at sub-supplier

How are the ok parts identified ?

How are the ok paletts identified ?
First contained shipment information

What are the immediate actions to prevent production/delivery of nok parts ?

Actions Nidec decision Resp. Date plan. Date clos.
Nidec suspect stocks to be sent to supplier not required
Express delivery to Nidec to avoid production stop not required
ex: Quality alert at working area
ex: Information to all related employees

357319990.xls Edition 1 - January 2008 Print 06/07/2017

 Supplier 8D report supplier logo

Customer plant 0 Supplier 0 Date of claim 12/30/1899

Customer contact 0 SAP no. 0 Date of D4-D8
Claim reference 0 Author 0 Update of D4-D8

ANALYSE AND COUNTERMEASURES (D4-D8)

Commitment date from the supplier to send D4-D5-D6 (to be filled in with the quick response) : dd/mm/yy

D 4. Root cause of occurrence Ishikawa FTA 5 why's

Work out the root causes using first Ishikawa, then FTA and finally 5 why's (Tools to use chosen by Nidec).

Root cause of occurrence :

How was the defect reproduced ?

D 5. Root cause of non detection Ishikawa FTA 5 why's

Work out the root causes using first Ishikawa, then FTA and finally 5 why's (Tools to use chosen by Nidec).

Root cause of non detection :

D 6. Countermeasure to non detection and occurrence

Actions Resp. Date plan. Date clos.

D 7. Effectiveness of action plan

Actions to check effectiveness (to plan with part D6) Resp. Date plan. Date clos.

D 8. Lessons learned
8.1 Do following documents require an update ? 8.2 Generalization of countermeasures to similar lines/ products
Resp. Date plan. Date clos.
PFMEA
Control Plan
Work instruction 8.3 Audit done by supplier (if required)
Control instruction Date Results
Procedure Comments
Control gage
Maintenance instruction
Lesson Learned Card
Other
Other 8.4 Validation of 8D closure from supplier management
Other Name / Position Date

CLOSURE OF 8D FROM NIDEC

open Chargeback open Efficiency of 8D proven open Nok stocks at zero Name 0 Date

Validation from NIDEC management (if required) Decision Name Date

357319990.xls Edition 1 - January 2008 Print 06/07/2017

 Ishikawa Diagram SUPPLIER LOGO

Customer plant 0 Supplier 0 Date of claim 12/30/1899

Customer contact 0 SAP no. 0 Date of Ishikawa
Claim reference 0 Author 0 Update of Ishikawa

Material Work environment Method

Problem

Machine Manpower Measurement

357319990.xls Edition 1 - January 2008 Printed 06/07/2017

 Factor Tree Analysis SUPPLIER LOGO

Customer plant 0 Supplier 0 Date of claim 12/30/1899

Customer contact 0 SAP no. 0 Date of FTA
Claim reference 0 Author 0 Update of FTA

Problem description: 0
Action to
Factor Std Def. Direct
Factors Control point Standard OK parts NOK parts Std OK reproduce the Resp. Date
Nb meet rep. link ?
defect
OCCURENCE
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
NON DETECTION
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
All validated causes (direct link or doubt) must lead to a 5 Why's analysis

357319990.xls Edition 1 - January 2008 Printed 06/07/2017

 5 Why's SUPPLIER LOGO

Customer plant 0 Supplier 0 Date of claim 12/30/1899

Customer contact 0 SAP no. 0 Date of 5 why's
Claim reference 12/30/1899 Author 0 Update of 5 why's

Problem description : 0

Check

Check

Check

Check

Check
Factor Relevant factors
1st WHY? 2nd WHY ? 3rd WHY ? 4th WHY ? 5th WHY ?
nb from FTA
OCCURENCE

NON DETECTION

'Check' box: Verification is done based on tests, measurements & data to confirm root cause. > : cause is confirmed x : not root cause

357319990.xls Edition 1 - January 2008 Printed 06/07/2017

 Lesson Learned Card SUPPLIER LOGO

Customer plant 0 Supplier 0 Detection Logistics

Claim reference 0 Author 0 LLC Type Occurrence Process
Date of incident 12/30/1899 Date of LLC Management Product

1. WHAT WAS THE PROBLEM? (5W + 2H) 2. WHAT IS THE CAUSE?

What happened ?
0
Why it is a problem ?
0
When did it happen ?
date + time Explain the root cause that led to the occurrence or the non detection of the problem
Who has detected it ? according to the type of LLC.
0
Abstract of FTA & 5 Whys (Occurrence or non detection).
Where has been detected ? Why and How the Factor is linked the failure.
0 It is not the defect description
How has it been detected ?
0
How many ?
0

3. DESCRIPTION OF THE APPLIED MODIFICATION

BEFORE AFTER
Add a picture or a descriptive graph which explains the countermeasure on the part/process
Add a picture or a descriptive graph which explains the conditions that led to the problem IMPORTANT : "AFTER" picture or graph should be SIMILAR (same point of view, same size) to
"BEFORE" picture

Good part
Bad part
Situation prior to countermeasures Situation after countermeasures
application application
Process: Process:
Photographs of machine, control Photographs of machine, control
device device
OK: Picture is same size, Method:
Method: same angle Flow chart
Flow chart Test method - conditions
Test method - conditions Product:
Product: Component design
Component design

NOK : Picture is not the

same size,
not same angle

4) WHAT WE LEARNED?
ERADICATION CHECKING
SIGNALING
What is the countermeasure that was put in place to avoid What is the countermeasure supposed to do or make or hightlight
What is the method (who, what, how) for the countermeasures?
recurrence ? when detecting a non conformity ?

Who? Operator
Automatic Air pressure sensor at the stroke inlet must If measurement is out of range, red bulb is lighted
What? Measure air pressure
be between 5 and 6 bar and line automatically stopps
How? Using pressure gauge Nb 123, every 2 hours

5. WHAT HAS BEEN MODIFIED ?

c. Procedures and work
been validated with the

correctly describe what

h. Operators and other
been updated and has
b. All documents have
a. Proces is modified

avalaible (records,5 '

functions are trained
according to Before/

i. Proof of training is
d. Control Plan and

f. Records (start-up
checklists, reaction
sheets, preventive

g. Visual aids are

j. Operators can
maintenance...)
e. Maintenance

they must do
instructions

instructions
After sheet

operators

meeting)

k. Other:

l. Other:
PFMEA

posted

6. POTENTIAL APPLICABILITY
Product :
Line / process :
Plant :

357319990.xls Edition 1 - January 2008 Printed 06/07/2017

 Supplier 8D report supplier logo

Customer plant 0 Supplier 0 Date of claim 12/30/1899

Customer contact 0 SAP no 0 Date of page
Claim reference 0 Author 0 Update

APPROVAL OF SORTING / REWORK

-This document must be sent to Nidec within 5 hour(s) after claim notification -

Claim issuer Claim receiver

Name Name
Position Position
Telephone Telephone
Fax Fax
Email Email

Immediate actions required at Nidec

Problem description
0

Description of sorting/rework

Quantity and part numbers concerned

Location in the process flow Quantity Part number(s) concerned
Parts at Nidec plant 0
Parts at Nidec logistics platform 0
Parts at Nidec's customer (C1) 0
Parts in transport 0

Sorting company chosen to do the sorting/rework

Name Tel.
Location Fax
Contact Email

Comments from Nidec

All costs for semi-finished goods and finished goods with nok components will be invoiced to the supplier. Nok components
will be returned to the supplier.

Supplier's approval to accept responsibility for the defect and related costs

Name of authorized person Signature Date

Approvals have to be given in written format !

357319990.xls Edition 1 - January 2008 Print 06/07/2017