TestAuto2 implements IATF 16949 compliance through Control Plans and Process FMEA (PFMEA) workflows integrated with the broader V-Model traceability framework. This integration creates a unified environment where design requirements (from ISO 26262 functional safety analysis) flow seamlessly into manufacturing process controls (IATF 16949 APQP outputs), ensuring quality and safety are managed as complementary disciplines rather than isolated activities.
The APQP Framework
APQP defines five phases that span product development from concept to launch:
TestAuto2 supports Phase 2 (DFMEA) through Design Failure Mode work items linked to System Elements and Characteristics, Phase 3 (PFMEA and Control Plans) through Process Step and Control Plan Item work items, and Phase 4 (validation evidence) through Test Run integration. The V-Model Methodology page explains how these phases integrate with ISO 26262’s safety lifecycle.
Control Plans in TestAuto2
A Control Plan documents the systematic approach for monitoring and controlling critical process characteristics during manufacturing. Unlike design specifications (which define what to build), control plans define how to verify that manufacturing processes consistently produce conforming parts.
Control Plan Structure
TestAuto2 implements control plans as Risksheet documents containing Control Plan Items linked to Process Steps and Characteristics:
Each Control Plan Item specifies:
- Characteristic being controlled (target value, tolerance, SC/CC classification)
- Measurement method (tool, technique, acceptance criteria)
- Sample frequency and size (continuous, periodic, first/last piece)
- Control method (SPC chart, error-proofing, visual inspection)
- Reaction plan (what to do when out-of-spec parts detected)
Special Characteristics (SC/CC)
IATF 16949 requires identification and control of Special Characteristics — product or process features that affect safety, regulatory compliance, function, fit, or customer satisfaction. TestAuto2 implements SC/CC classification through an enumeration field applied to Characteristics, Functions, and Design Requirements:
| Classification | Symbol | Definition | Example in TestAuto2 |
|---|
| Critical Characteristic (CC) | ▲ (red) | Affects vehicle safety or regulatory compliance | Brake sensor alignment tolerance, airbag trigger threshold |
| Special Characteristic (SC) | ◇ (orange) | Affects fit, function, or customer satisfaction | Mounting hole position, sensor response time |
- CC characteristics require 100% inspection or error-proofing (detection rating ≤2 in PFMEA)
- SC characteristics require enhanced control methods (detection rating ≤4)
- Both require documentation in Control Plans with defined reaction plans
- Automatic propagation: CC/SC Design Requirements inherit classification to derived Characteristics
The SC/CC Classification concept page explains the classification methodology in detail.
Process FMEA (PFMEA)
Where Design FMEA (DFMEA) analyzes what can go wrong with the product design, Process FMEA analyzes what can go wrong during manufacturing. TestAuto2’s PFMEA workflow follows the AIAG-VDA methodology with three hierarchical levels:
PFMEA to Control Plan Linkage
PFMEA directly informs Control Plan development. Each Process Failure Mode receives three ratings:
- Severity (1-10): Impact if defect reaches customer
- Occurrence (0-10): Likelihood process will create defect
- Detection (1-10): Effectiveness of current controls at catching defect
These combine to determine Action Priority (H/M/L), which drives control planning decisions:
| Action Priority | Control Plan Response |
|---|
| High (H) | Mandatory error-proofing or 100% automated inspection; SPC charting insufficient |
| Medium (M) | Enhanced controls required: SPC with documented reaction plan, first-piece inspection |
| Low (L) | Standard controls acceptable: periodic sampling, visual checks |
Integration with ISO 26262
A critical distinction: ISO 26262 prevents safety failures through design, while IATF 16949 prevents quality failures through process control. TestAuto2 unifies both disciplines:
Safety-Critical Characteristics Flow
This integration ensures:
- CC classification propagates from safety goals to characteristics to control plans
- ASIL-rated requirements automatically trigger enhanced PFMEA detection requirements
- Post-mitigation PFMEA ratings provide objective evidence of safety control effectiveness
- Traceability chains link customer safety requirements through design to manufacturing verification
PPAP and Production Approval
Production Part Approval Process (PPAP) requires automotive suppliers to demonstrate manufacturing process capability before series production. TestAuto2 supports PPAP evidence collection through:
- Design Records (PPAP Level 1): Design FMEA documents, drawing references in Design Requirements
- Process Data (PPAP Level 2): Control Plans, Process Flow Diagrams (linked wiki pages), PFMEA documents
- Performance Data (PPAP Level 3): Test Case results linked to Characteristics, measurement system analysis (MSA) evidence via attachments
- Product Samples (PPAP Level 4): Physical sample tracking references in Control Plan Items
- Master Sample (PPAP Level 5): Reference sample work item ID in project properties
The Control Plans Report generates PPAP submission-ready documentation by extracting all Control Plan Items, linked Process Steps, and verification test evidence into a formatted report template.
TestAuto2’s V-Model traceability enables phase-gate enforcement. Configure Polarion workflow conditions to block Phase 3 process design approval until Phase 2 DFMEA documents reach “approved” status, ensuring process planning never begins before design failures are analyzed.
Common Misconceptions
Misconception 1: “Control Plans are just inspection checklists”
Control Plans define systematic process monitoring, not one-time inspections. They specify ongoing measurement systems (SPC charts, automated gauging), reaction plans for out-of-spec conditions, and continuous improvement cycles. Inspection checklists tell operators what to check; Control Plans define how the process maintains control.
Misconception 2: “PFMEA and DFMEA are redundant”
PFMEA analyzes manufacturing process failures (tool wear, setup errors, environmental variation), while DFMEA analyzes product design failures (material selection, geometry, stress concentration). A perfect design (DFMEA = all Low AP) can still experience manufacturing defects (PFMEA = High AP) if processes lack adequate controls. TestAuto2 links upstream DFMEA failure modes to PFMEA analysis, showing how design risks inform process control strategies.
Misconception 3: “CC characteristics require 100% inspection forever”
Error-proofing (poka-yoke) can satisfy CC control requirements without 100% inspection. If the manufacturing process physically prevents defects (e.g., asymmetric connectors that only fit one way), Detection rating = 1 meets CC requirements with zero inspection cost. TestAuto2’s PFMEA Detection enumeration explicitly rates error-proofing as the highest detection effectiveness.
Practical Workflow
- Phase 2 (Design): Complete DFMEA analysis identifying Characteristics requiring control
- Phase 3 (Process): Define Process Steps using System Structure Navigator
- Phase 3 (Process): Conduct PFMEA to identify process risks for each Characteristic
- Phase 3 (Control Planning): Create Control Plan specifying measurement methods and frequencies
- Phase 4 (Validation): Execute production trial, record results in Test Cases
- Phase 4 (PPAP): Generate Control Plans Report for customer submission
How-To Guides
