Pilatus PC-12 Assembly Line: Industrialization,

Manufacturing and Process Improvement

Raúl Diego Guichón Aguilar

Thesis to obtain the Master of Science Degree in

Aerospace Engineering

Supervisors: Prof. Filipe Szolnoky Ramos Pinto Cunha

Prof. Luís Filipe Galrão dos Reis

Examination Committee

Chairperson: Prof. Fernando José Parracho Lau

Supervisor: Prof. Filipe Szolnoky Ramos Pinto Cunha
Members of the committee: Prof. Pedro da Graça Tavares Alvares Serrão
Eng. Miguel Guerreiro da Graça Pedro

July 2014
Acknowledgements

This thesis was only possible with the support and guidance of many people to whom I leave a written
testimony of my gratitude. First, I thank my supervisors at OGMA and IST: Eng. Miguel Pedro for his
tireless collaboration during the Internship at OGMA. I am also very grateful to Professor Filipe
Szolnoky Cunha and Professor Luís Reis for their advice and guidance throughout the thesis
development. I also would like to express my gratitude to all professionals at OGMA: Rui, Sérgio,
Miguel, David and Alfredo, for their technical guidance, accessibility and for make me understand the
complexity and the importance of manufacturing in aircraft design.
Finally, I would like to specially thank my parents who have encouraged me to realize this challenge
and who have strongly supported me since my first school day onwards.

i
Abstract

Due to globalization and emerging markets competition, European industry has taken forward efforts
to increase the volume of high added value exports, namely technological equipment. During the last
years, Portugal has followed this trend developing a cluster of aerospace Tier-1 suppliers focused on
primary aircraft structures, being OGMA one of those.
With the purpose of increasing quality and profitability of aircraft manufacturing operations, Tier one
companies develop methods and solutions focused on improving shop-floor performance and on
reducing processes that do not add value from customer perspective. This continuous improvement is
possible by recording data, analyzing and studying potential improvements, proposing new solutions
and controlling its implementation.
Within this context, the present work develop industrialization, manufacturing and process
improvement of aerostructures at Pilatus PC-12 assembly line, including analysis of nonconforming
components using FEM tools and operations optimization by implementing
state-of-art automatic fastening equipment.
This work was made possible through the cooperation of OGMA and its employee’s collaboration,
which have shared their experience and provided the required technical documentation.
This document is a practical approach to aeronautic engineering, analyzing the importance of
manufacturing processes on the configuration of current aircrafts and defining future trends of
aerostructures production.

Keywords: Industrialization, Aerostructures manufacturing, Lean, Automation.

ii
Resumo

Motivado pela globalização e competência dos mercados emergentes, a indústria europeia está a
centrar esforços no sentido de aumentar a exportação de bens de alto valor acrescentado,
nomeadamente de equipamento tecnológico. Seguindo esta tendência, nos últimos anos Portugal
desenvolveu um cluster de fornecedores aeronáuticos “Tier-one” focados em estruturas aeronáuticas,
sendo a OGMA aerostruturas um destes exemplos.
Pela necessidade de aumentar a qualidade e rentabilidade do fabrico de componentes aeronáuticos,
estes fornecedores desenvolvem métodos e soluções focadas em melhorar o desempenho na linha
de produção e em reduzir processos que não acrescentam valor ao produto. Esta melhoria contínua é
possível após obter informação de parâmetros de processo, analisar e estudar potenciais melhorias,
propor novas soluções e controlar a implementação destas.
Neste contexto, o presente trabalho aborda a industrialização, fabrico e melhoria de processos de
aeroestruturas na montagem do Pilatus PC-12, incluindo a análise do impacto de não conformidades
no produto mediante ferramentas FEM e estudo de aplicabilidade de automatização na linha de
montagem, nomeadamente, do equipamento de rebitagem automática.
A realização desta tese foi possível graças à cooperação da empresa OGMA e à colaboração dos
seus profissionais, que não só partilharam a sua experiência como forneceram a necessária
documentação técnica.
Este documento pretende ser um enfoque prático à engenharia aeronáutica, analisando a importância
da manufatura na configuração dos aviões atualmente em produção e futuras tendências na análise e
automatização de processos.

Palavras-chave: Industrialização, Produção aeronáutica, Lean e Automatização.

iii
Index

Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................................i
Abstract..................................................................................................................................................... ii
Resumo ................................................................................................................................................... iii
List of Illustrations .................................................................................................................................... vi
List of Tables ......................................................................................................................................... viii
List of Acronyms ...................................................................................................................................... ix
Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 1
Aerostructures Industrialization ............................................................................................................... 4
1. Product Engineering ............................................................................................................................ 5
2. Industrialization Process...................................................................................................................... 6
2.1. Technical documentation .......................................................................................................... 6
2.1.1. Routings and Bill of materials creation ................................................................................ 6
2.1.2. Work orders ......................................................................................................................... 8
2.1.3. First article inspection ......................................................................................................... 8
2.2. Industrialization process chronology ........................................................................................ 9
2.3. Configurations management................................................................................................... 13
3. Process Design ................................................................................................................................. 17
3.1. Process Selection ................................................................................................................... 17
3.1.1. Process selection decisions .............................................................................................. 18
3.1.2. Product- Process Strategy ................................................................................................ 18
3.1.3. Plant – within – a – plant Concept..................................................................................... 19
Aerostructures Manufacturing ............................................................................................................... 21
1. Process Engineering ......................................................................................................................... 21
2. Manufacturing process ...................................................................................................................... 23
2.1. Process analysis ..................................................................................................................... 23
2.1.1. Process-Flow Analysis ...................................................................................................... 29
2.1.2. Capacity ............................................................................................................................ 29
2.1.3. Flowchart Analysis ............................................................................................................ 29
2.1.4. Materials - Flow Analysis .................................................................................................. 30
2.1.5. Information - Flow Analysis ............................................................................................... 31
2.2. Process support tools ............................................................................................................. 31
2.2.1. Management support tools ................................................................................................ 31
2.2.2. Production support tools ................................................................................................... 34
2.2.1. Quality support tools ......................................................................................................... 36
2.3. Production Supply ................................................................................................................... 40
3. Nonconformance analysis ................................................................................................................. 42
3.1. Nonconformance case study .................................................................................................. 44
3.1.1. Standard repairing procedures for notch and scratch damaged components .................. 44
iv
 3.1.2. Scratch-damaged Rear Pressure Bulkhead ..................................................................... 47
3.2. Static Structural Analysis ........................................................................................................ 47
3.3. Thickness decrease sensibility analysis ................................................................................. 50
3.4. Outer face and Inner face defects .......................................................................................... 51
3.5. Stress concentration at edges ................................................................................................ 52
3.6. Refined mesh analysis ............................................................................................................ 53
Process Improvement............................................................................................................................ 55
Lean methodology ......................................................................................................................... 55
1. Lean Tools ......................................................................................................................................... 55
1.1.1. Kaizen, continuous improvement ...................................................................................... 55
1.1.2. Flux cell ............................................................................................................................. 56
1.1.3. Heijunka ............................................................................................................................ 57
1.1.4. Muda, Mura and Muri ........................................................................................................ 57
1.1.5. Jidoka ................................................................................................................................ 58
1.1.6. Quality Clinic Process Charts (QCPC) .............................................................................. 58
1.1.7. Poka-yoke ......................................................................................................................... 58
1.1.8. 5S and Visual Control ....................................................................................................... 59
1.1.9. SMED ................................................................................................................................ 59
1.1.10. Value stream mapping .................................................................................................... 59
1.1.11. Process Standardization ................................................................................................. 60
2. OGMA Lean implementation ............................................................................................................. 61
2.1. PC-12 drilling holes anomalies resolution case study ............................................................ 61
2.2. Wing Assembly process improvements .................................................................................. 65
Automation ..................................................................................................................................... 72
1. Gemcor G-86 implementation at PC-12 Assembly Line ................................................................... 72
Conclusion and further work .................................................................................................................. 76
Bibliographical references ..................................................................................................................... 77
Annex A ................................................................................................................................................. 78

v
List of Illustrations

Fig. 1 – Pilatus PC-12. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................................................................. 2

Fig. 2 – Pilatus PC-12 Production Line, FMT Layout. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................. 3
Fig. 3 – Engineering structure based on applied technologies. Courtesy of OGMA ............................... 4
Fig. 4 – Filled FCCF. Courtesy of OGMA ................................................................................................ 8
Fig. 5 – Industrialization planning development tasks........................................................................... 17
Fig. 6 – Example of SIPOC analysis of a screw fastening process. ..................................................... 23
Fig. 7 – KPI and KPO in molding process. ............................................................................................ 24
Fig. 8 – Pareto chart. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................................................................. 25
Fig. 9 – Histogram. Courtesy of OGMA ................................................................................................. 25
Fig. 10 – Time series. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................................................................ 25
Fig. 11 – Scatter chart. Courtesy of OGMA........................................................................................... 25
Fig. 12 – Ishikawa diagram example. Courtesy of OGMA .................................................................... 26
Fig. 13 – Causes-effects matrix. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................................................ 26
Fig. 14 – Key process output variable capability status sheet. Courtesy of OGMA .............................. 27
Fig. 15 – FMEA example. Courtesy of OGMA ...................................................................................... 27
Fig. 16 – Operational excellence control plan. Courtesy of OGMA ...................................................... 27
Fig. 17 – RCCA example. Courtesy of OGMA ...................................................................................... 28
Fig. 18 – Example of Flow-process Chart and Added-Value analysis of Wings Assembly and symbols
legend. Courtesy of OGMA ................................................................................................................... 30
Fig. 19 – FMT 2013 productivity analysis .............................................................................................. 32
Fig. 20 – META layout. Courtesy of OGMA .......................................................................................... 33
Fig. 21 – META placed on shop-floor. Courtesy of OGMA ................................................................... 33
Fig. 22 – Cockpit assembly ITM example. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................................. 34
Fig. 23 – Mizusumashi IOP. Courtesy of OGMA ................................................................................... 35
Fig. 24 – Rivets AV. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................................................................... 35
Fig. 25 – Top 3 defects evolution at Assembly Plant. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................ 36
Fig. 26 – Number of complaints by type of defect. Courtesy of OGMA ................................................ 37
Fig. 27 – RAC cycle. Courtesy of OGMA .............................................................................................. 37
Fig. 28 – Days to take decision RAC by month. Courtesy of OGMA .................................................... 38
Fig. 29 – Days to close RACs by month. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................................... 38
Fig. 30 – Days to close RACs by areas. Courtesy of OGMA ................................................................ 38
Fig. 31 – Pareto diagram of Assembly Plant defects. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................ 39
Fig. 32 – PACs during 2013. Courtesy of OGMA .................................................................................. 39
Fig. 33 – Nonconformance product flowchart. Courtesy of OGMA ....................................................... 42
Fig. 34 – Flowchart for the classification of the primer defect. Courtesy of Pilatus Aircraft .................. 44
Fig. 35 – Jig for the classification of the defect, each scratch thickness has a color code (red the worst
case, green the better). Courtesy of Pilatus Aircraft ............................................................................. 44
Fig. 36 – Flowchart for the classification of mechanical defects. Courtesy of Pilatus Aircraft .............. 45
vi
Fig. 37. A – Rear pressure bulkhead placement at rear fuselage…………………………………….......47
Fig. 37. B – Example of typical anomalies found in a Pressure dome, 3 scratches on the inner face. 47
Fig. 37. C – Scratch example. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................................................... 47
Fig. 38 – Geometric model and mesh used for structural analysis and loading validation. .................. 48
Fig. 39 – SHEL181 geometry. Courtesy of ANSYS .............................................................................. 49
Fig. 40 – SHEL181 stress output. Courtesy of ANSYS ......................................................................... 49
Fig. 41. A – Von Misses Equivalent Stress plot of outer face. .............................................................. 50
Fig. 41. B – Inner PRB surfaces. ........................................................................................................... 50
Fig. 42. A – Thickness decrease analysis mesh, modified area identified in blue at the right picture. . 50
Fig. 42. B – Detail of the defect. ............................................................................................................ 50
Fig. 43 – Real contour of repaired area (red) and FEM model contour (grey). ..................................... 50
Fig. 44. A – Von-Misses stress distribution for inner face thickness decrease of 25% at inner face. ... 51
Fig. 44. B – Von-Misses stress distribution for same thickness decrease at outer face. ...................... 51
Fig. 45 – Repairing on outer face and pressure distribution direction (black arrows). .......................... 51
Fig. 46. A – Von-Misses stress distribution for outer face thickness decrease of 10% on outer face. . 52
Fig. 46. B – Von-Misses stress distribution for same thickness decrease of 10% on inner face. ......... 52
Fig. 47 – Repairing on inner face and pressure distribution direction (black arrows). .......................... 52
Fig. 48. A – Von-Misses stress distribution for inner face thickness decrease of 10% on outer face... 52
Fig. 48. B – Von-Misses stress distribution for same thickness decrease of 10% on inner face. ......... 52
Fig. 49. A – Edges stress concentration at outer face thickness decrease of 10%, on outer face. ...... 53
Fig. 49. B – Edges stress concentration at outer face thickness decrease of 10%, on inner face. ...... 53
Fig. 50 – Refined mesh. ........................................................................................................................ 53
Fig. 51. A – Von-misses stress analysis of inner face using initial mesh. ............................................. 54
Fig. 51. B – Von-misses stress analysis of inner face using refined mesh. .......................................... 54
Fig. 52. A – Von-misses stress analysis of outer face using initial mesh .............................................. 54
Fig. 52. B – Von-misses stress analysis of outer face using refined mesh. .......................................... 54
Fig. 53– Value stream mapping process flowchart. .............................................................................. 60
Fig. 54 – Pilatus PC-12 Wings assembly process VSM. ....................................................................... 60
Fig. 55 – Pareto chart of number of RAC’s by PN at FMT. Courtesy of OGMA ................................... 61
Fig. 56. A – Pareto charts left wing of RAC’s openings causes. ........................................................... 62
Fig. 56. B – Pareto charts of right wing RAC’s openings causes. Courtesy of OGMA ......................... 62
Fig. 57 – Drilling process diagram. Courtesy of OGMA ........................................................................ 62
Fig. 58 – Fishbone or Ishikawa analysis. Courtesy of OGMA ............................................................... 63
Fig. 59 – Pilot plan for drilling and countersinking anomalies solving. Courtesy of OGMA .................. 63
Fig. 60 – Information point. Courtesy of OGMA .................................................................................... 64
Fig. 61. A – Marked holes...................................................................................................................... 64
Fig. 61. B – tools identified by colors. Courtesy of OGMA .................................................................... 64
Fig. 62 – Visual aids. Courtesy of OGMA.............................................................................................. 64
Fig. 63 – Component being riveted by an automatic fastening machine. Courtesy of Gemcor ............ 73
Fig. 64 – Profitability analysis of LH and RH PC-12 sidewalls riveting automation. ............................. 75

vii
List of Tables

Tab. 1 – Type of FAI by reason. .............................................................................................................. 9

Tab. 2 – Product-process Matrix with examples. .................................................................................. 19
Tab. 3 – Pressure Rear Bulkhead thicknesses. .................................................................................... 48
Tab. 4 – Rivets on right sidewall. .......................................................................................................... 73
Tab. 5 – Rivets on left sidewall. ............................................................................................................. 73
Tab. 6 – Gemcor G86 specifications. .................................................................................................... 78

viii
List of Acronyms

AIM Introduction of Modifications Agreement

BoM Bills of Material
CAD/CAM Computer-Aided Design/Computer Aided Manufacturing
CoC Certificate of Conformity
ETS Procurement Technical Specification
FAF FAI Evaluation Form
FAI First Article Inspection
FAIR First Article Inspection Report
FCCF Characteristic Accountability and Verification Report for Manufactured Components
FEPTT Heat Treatment Specimen Test Record
FF Manufacturing Sheet
FPF Tooling Request
FRPP Paint Data Record
FRTT Heat Treatment Technical Record
FTCR Technical Record for Bearing Stacking
FTF Manufacturing Technical Data Sheet
FTM Assembly Technical Data Sheet
FTMV Sealant Data Sheet
FTP NC Programming Technical Sheet
FTPP Painting Record
FTSF Fusion Welding Technical Instruction
FTTT Heat Treatment Technical Sheet
GRR RAC Resolution Group
MRB Material Review Board
MRP Material Requirement Planning
MSP Miscellaneous Standard Parts
NA Aerostructures Business
NC Numerical Control
NDT Non-Destructive Testing
NRC Non-Recurring Costs
OEM Original Equipment Manufacturer
OF Work Order
PAR Reference Number Request
PME Measuring and Test Equipment
P/N Part number
PO Purchase Order
PVU Shelf-Life
ix
RAC Discrepancy Report
RC Recurring Costs
RNC Nonconformance Report
SIGMA Information and Management System
WIP Work in Process

x
Introduction

This study is based on a real case, the Pilatus PC-12 assembly line.
As major aircraft original equipment manufacturer (OEM), Pilatus Aircraft tends to focus more on
systems integration. As a result of this approach, manufacturing services are subcontracted to tier-one
companies, such as OGMA Aerostructures, which produces the Pilatus PC-12 green aircraft.
A tier one company is the most important member of a supply chain, supplying components directly to
the original OEM that set up the chain. Its aim is to link important business functions and processes in
the supply chain into an integrated business model. Tier one companies are generally the largest or
the most technically-capable companies in the supply chain. They have the skills and resources to
supply critical components that OEMs need and they have established processes for managing
suppliers in the tiers below.
In this case, Tier one company provides a manufacturing service for the OEM, leaving the OEM to
concentrate on final assembly, design and support engineering and marketing.
OGMA also develops close working and business relationships with OEMs. Both organizations
recognize the value of collaboration to improve quality, eliminate waste, cut costs and reduce lead
times.
The main objective of this study is to analyze industrialization and manufacturing processes and
applicability of state-of-art optimization techniques for those processes.

OGMA Aerostructures
OGMA is a supplier of integrated solutions to OEMs and a first tier supplier, committing to the
aerostructures market for over 30 years. As a full service provider OGMA is able to deliver
aerostructures assemblies and sub-assemblies, either from metallic or composite materials, covering
a broad spectrum of Aerostructures family products.
Approved by EASA (European Aviation Safety Agency) as POA (Production Organisation Approval),
Part 21, Sub-Part G, its technical competence, quality and performance allow OGMA to deliver on-
time, low risk competitive solutions with a broad portfolio of major players in the global aviation market.
OGMA Aerostructures supply the following major OEMs: Boeing, Embraer, Dassault, Airbus Military,
Lockheed Martin, Pilatus Aircraft, AgustaWestland and Eurocopter.
The Pilatus PC-12 program started at OGMA’s facilities in 1994. The production of assemblies and
sub-assemblies was in charge of the OGMA’s subsidiary Listral based in Bobadela and the final
assembly line was placed in OGMA facilities. Nowadays, the PC-12 green aircraft is entirely
assembled at Alverca’s facilities because of a corporate reorganization.

1
Pilatus PC-12 Program
Over 1200 PC-12s have been delivered world-wide as at the beginning of 2014.
The PC-12 is a pressurized single turbine powered by a Pratt & Whitney PT6A-67B turboprop engine
utility aircraft, which operates up to 30,000 feet and 250 knots as it is takes off from or landing on very
short dirt runways. It has the range to fly six passengers up to 1560 NM, or the ability to fly one and a
half tons of cargo over 400 nautical miles with IFR reserves. Maximum certificated passenger capacity
is nine in the airline configuration, or eight in the optional executive configuration. The aircraft is
unique in its class in that it has both a forward air stair door for passengers and a powered rear cargo
door, which makes the aircraft unique in its market segment.
Pilatus Aircraft continuously improve its products, and as part of that effort plans introduced the Next
Generation PC-12 at the end of 2007, which is the current type produced. Every system upgrade that
affects the PC-12 green aircraft is followed by a re-industrialization process implemented by OGMA
Engineers.
Parts and assemblies of PC-12 Program
The Pilatus PC-12 structures produced by OGMA are shown and listed below:

Fig. 1 – Pilatus PC-12. Courtesy of OGMA

1-Wings 2-Fuselage
3-Dorsal Fairing 4-Vertical Stabilizer
5-Rudder 6-Ailerons
7-Flap Fairings 8-Ventral Fairing
9-Passenger and Cargo Doors 10-Harnesses
11-Flaps

2
Pilatus PC-12 Production Line
The PC-12 assembly line is located inside a multi-program plant, where several aerostructures are
assembled. The Production planning and the Plant Layout enables to manufacture up to five different
aerostructure programs within the same plant: EH-101 tail assembly, Pilatus PC-12 green aircraft,
Dassault Falcon engine pylons, ADS C-295 Central Fuselage and Embraer KC-390 Central Fuselage.
The PC-12 assembly line is composed by 8 main different stages, where 13 structures are
manufactured: cockpit, floor, rear fuselage, fin (including rudder), wings (including flaps and ailerons),
sidewalls (RH and LH), rooftop, fuselage and doors.

Fig. 2 – Pilatus PC-12 Production Line, FMT Layout. Courtesy of OGMA

1-Cockpit 2-Rear Fuselage

3-Sub-assemblies 4-Doors
5-Wings, aileron and flaps 6-Sidewalls and floor
7-Cabling 8-Rooftop
9-Fuselage integration

3
Aerostructures Industrialization

Industrialization of aircraft manufacturing products includes a set of activities of engineering, logistics,

quality, scheduling, production and process control, focused on ensuring production according to
applicable regulations. While manufacturing is a process consisting in converting raw materials,
components or parts into finished goods that meet customers’ specifications.
Product engineering, process engineering and manufacturing personnel are involved in both
processes during the whole production cycle. A clear structure must be designed with the purpose of
sharing responsibilities and attributions, several OGMA Aerostructures departments are created taking
into account the primary technology applied: plating, machining, assembling, composites, cabling and
tooling, for each technological process there is a Technical Manager [1].
Those processes are grouped in three factories: FFA, FMT and FCO.

Fig. 3 – Engineering structure based on applied technologies. Courtesy of OGMA

Responsibilities and attributions of Engineering

Engineering has the transversal responsibilities of promoting, developing and implementing the
following actions:
• Reduction of manufacturing costs
• Increasing process productivity
• Improving quality of final good
• Protecting environment
• Ensuring customer satisfaction
One of the main objectives of Engineering is supporting production of aircraft manufacturing products,
sustaining production, as well as, industrializing new products.
The Industrialization process includes all activities executed from the process support documentation
release to the FAI execution. Production Sustainability includes all support processes for correct
execution of production activities.

4
Attributions of engineering:
• Budgeting of aircraft manufacturing products
• Industrialization of aircraft manufacturing products
• Post-Industrialization and Sustainability of Production (this task begins after FAI is obtained
and mass production begins). Post-Industrialization includes the following activities:
o Handling of nonconforming products
o Supporting production processes
o Process Improvement
o Technical Management of manufactured goods
o Technical Documentation Management
o Configurations Management
o Methods and Scheduling Engineering
o Training
o Subcontractors support
o Tooling
In following chapters budgeting and industrialization of aircraft manufacturing products are grouped as
Product Engineering and the post-industrialization and sustainability of production are grouped as
Process Engineering.

1. Product Engineering
Attributions of Products Engineering are Budgeting and Industrialization. Those ones are presented in
the following lines by detailed description of their attributions.
Budgeting of aircraft manufacturing products
Budgeting activities are focused on valuation of direct and indirect costs, called “RC” and “NRC”,
respectively. Engineering department is in charge of time estimation, which integrates a set of
activities: analysis of recurrent and non-recurrent costs, deadlines definition for engineering and
industrialization activities, estimation of resources and investments required.
Budgeting attributions of engineering are:
• Creating the product structure according to regulations provided by the customer
• Listing required materials on the “Bill of materials”, including specifications and quantities of
each P/N for later valuation by the Materials Planning Board
• Determining dimensions and weights of product packaging
• Defining all manufacturing process operational requirements of certification and associated
technical budgets
• Identifying processes and analyzing current capacity and associated risk
• Identifying needs of qualification/certification of manufacturing processes, excluding
processes called “specials”
• Time valuation of identified technologies (man/hours and machine/hours), as well as
identifying the direct human resources required to each task/process
• Identifying P/N’s to be subcontracted (hours and materials or P/N and its quantities)
5
 • Identifying internal/external training and ensure qualification of human resources
• Defining lead-times for Engineering tasks and industrialization tasks
• Identifying areas, infrastructures and equipment required for manufacturing and assembling
activities
Industrialization of aircraft manufacturing products
The industrialization process begins after the PO is delivered by the customer. During industrialization,
attributions of engineering are:
• Ensuring documentation management and analysis
• Integrating and promoting processes of analysis and assessment to “make or buy process”
• Design of Tools and Jigs
• Promoting and developing certification of manufacturing processes, according to contractual
arrangement and/or defined by the Quality Plan applicable to each product
• Developing the required actions for proper operation of Process Engineering
• Developing and monitoring FAIs
• Industrialization of aircraft manufacturing products

2. Industrialization Process

2.1. Technical documentation

2.1.1. Routings and Bill of materials creation

Routing is the documentation that includes the set of required operations to obtain a product according
to specifications. Each of those operations is a phase of the routing.
In order to create a routing is required to define manufacturing processes: its sequence and the
required resources. Those processes could be executed by one or more departments, or could be
subcontracted. Capacity planning and production and repair orders are based on routings.
Bill of materials is the set of required components (raw materials, consumable products, hardware,
basic components and subassemblies) and their quantities, which are used for a specific aircraft
manufacturing product. A bill of materials is always associated to a routing and both are released at
the same time.
Creation of Routings and Bill of materials
Phases to create routings and bill of materials:

A. Creation of Bill of materials

The process begins specifying the required materials for each operation, defining its Part-
Number or Items and quantities. Then, items/components must be inserted into the bill of
materials and fill the details of required materials to each operation:
• Raw materials
• Components and Parts
• Hardware
• Standard quantity

6
 • Economical quantity
• Percentage of use

B. Creation of routings
At this stage, components and operations of routings are identified and the need of technical
sheets is analyzed. The goal of these support tools is to complement drawings, identifying
products during production and adding detailed information about the product.
In a second phase, details of every operation are defined:
• Plans, Part-lists and Technical Sheets
• Required Tools
• Detailed descriptions
• Additional notes

C. Component identification
The first routing created for an item is called primary routing. However, due to production
needs, more than one type of routing could exist at the same time for the same item.

D. Operation definition
Manufacturing process or routing phases are defined by specific manufacturing operations.
I. Resources assignment
Human and machine or only human resources are assigned to each operation. Every resource
has an associated cost and when it is assigned to a routing the total cost is calculated.
II. Technical Documentation
Drawings, part-lists, production technical sheets and workbooks are created, registered, and
associated to a routing.
A specific type of industrialization technical document is the “Manufactured Components
Control Sheet” (FCCF), it is used to give critical information about parameters that must be
checked during or after production. The FCCF must be filled when at least one of these
conditions occurs:
• Contract arrangement
• Machining parts
• Components which are statistically controlled or inspected for sampling
• Components with reproducibility issues
• Components produced at high production rates
• Batch of 10 or more items
• Robust manufacturing processes (low rate of NC/ high level of automation)
When FCCF is not required, control parameters must be identified and registered in the
detailed description of the routing. If tolerances are not defined explicitly at drawings and
technical sheets, they must be indicated in the detailed description. When measurements are
directly obtained from the machine the FCCF creation is mandatory.
7
 Fig. 4 – Filled FCCF. Courtesy of OGMA

2.1.2. Work orders

The work order is the production document that results from the routing release. It specifies the
actions to be followed at each operation phase.
The successful completion of each phase is followed by the sign of the operator or the qualified
inspector in case of production inspection. One work phase could be validated only when the previous
ones are already done and verified, there are some exceptions of this rule:
• Re-work as a result of an inspection issue
• Existing Anomaly and Corrections Report (RAC), whose final disposition is not defined. For
those cases, a note must be added to the current work phase identifying that inspection was
already done and adding the number of opened RACs.
Modifications of work orders must be validated by Engineering or Product Quality department.

2.1.3. First article inspection

FAI is a documented physical and functional inspection process to check that production methods
produce an acceptable item as per customer specifications and contractual requirements [2]. This
process further ensures that Production and Quality personnel are fully aware of product
requirements.
FAIR is a report resulting from the FAI process, composed of the documents and records required and
necessary to evidence conformance of the first article produced.
FAF is the FAI Evaluation Form, a document where deviations to production process standards are
recorded, as well as anomalies detected over the production process requiring FAI, thus providing the
necessary corrective and improvement actions to mitigate such deviations and anomalies.
FAI, generically analyses the following parameters:
• Production sequence
• Adequacy of production and control methods
• Raw-materials and traceability
• Special processes and qualification
• Quality records (dimensional, testing, etc.)

8
FAI inspection requirements
FAI shall always be done before series production, which shall only be started further to approval of
FAI and, where applicable, to the issuance of the related FAIR.
OGMA shall provide full FAI or partial FAI (delta FAI) in case a specific product is affected, as follows:
• Manufacturing of a first part (new)
• Change to product design, which may affect fit, form or function of the part
• Changes to manufacturing process, inspection methods, facilities, tooling or materials, which
may adversely affect product fit, form or function
• A natural or man-caused event, which may adversely affect the productive process
• A lapse in production for a certain period of time (usually 2 years)
• Change of subcontractor performing at least one of the operations in the product
manufacturing sequence
• Customer requirement

The table below shows, in further detail, the cases (reason) where full or partial FAI shall apply:

New part Full FAI

Design change Full FAI Partial FAI
Manufacturing process change Partial FAI
Inspection method change Partial FAI
Change in facilities Full FAI Partial FAI
Change in tooling Partial FAI
Change in materials (non-standard) Full FAI Partial FAI
Process adversely affected by natural or man-caused event Full FAI
Lapse in production for over two years Full FAI
Change of subcontractor Partial FAI
Customer requirement Full FAI Partial FAI

Tab. 1 – Type of FAI by reason.

2.2. Industrialization process chronology

The industrialization process is started upon Customer PO issuance with provision of the applicable
technical data.
The activities constituting the industrialization process are developed as follows [3]:

9
 A. Receiving technical data
Technical data supporting the realization of aircraft manufacturing products is composed of
information concerning the development of the Aircraft Manufacturing activity:
• Customer standards and technical specifications, under contractual requirements, including
product specifications and work instructions
• Part Lists and drawings (3D and 2D Models) provided by Manufacturing Customers
• Technical Data Sheets and similar documentation to support the realization of aircraft
manufacturing products

B. Analysis of technical data

At the beginning of the industrialization process, Customer requirements shall be identified against
OGMA current procedures, in case of no discrepancy was detected in the previous budgeting phase.
This phase is intended to verify that all applicable technical data is made available, so that definition of
the engineering and manufacturing product structure can be initiated.

C. “Make or Buy” analysis and decision

“Make or buy” analysis and decision is the industrialization phase in which the contractor decides to
externalize manufacturing processes, because of no installed capability in regard to technical or
process related aspects (dimensions, technologies, equipment, etc.), certification of special processes
or competitive production. Subcontractors shall be monitored as specified in the applicable Quality
Plan. Where required, subcontractors shall apply the FAI process to every new product.

D. Tool and jig design and manufacturing

a. Tool and jig design and manufacturing under OGMA’s responsibility
Tool and jig design and manufacturing is one of the most relevant activities in the industrialization
process, since it impacts directly on manufacturing and assembling processes.
Prior to starting design, the tooling concept shall be specified. Tooling concept shall closely relate to
the process where the tool will be used and to the function it will perform.
b. Transfer of Customer tools or jigs
Tooling or jigs are provided by the Customer, as well as, a list of all the tools applicable to the
specified work and related technical data, drawings, part list and models.
c. Transportation packages
Design and development of aircraft manufacturing product transportation packages shall consider
volume and weight of the material to be packaged, transportation and storage conditions and material
fragility.

10
 E. Process certification
a. Manufacturing
The certification process of aircraft manufacturing product is provided through FAI. However, where
contractually specified, a specific procedure may be established to provide for process and part
certification.
b. Special processes
Special processes shall be certificated. Such certification shall comprise a number of tasks developed
in accordance with specific procedures including approval criteria related to qualification of
workmanship, facilities and equipment and the special process itself. The Customer shall identify the
applicable special processes, which are to be specified in the related Quality Plan.

F. Defining engineering product structure

Aerostructures Engineering shall define the engineering product structure based on the technical data
provided by the Customer.
Product configuration shall be supported on the bill of material, drawings, models and other
documentation provided by the Customer. Once the product configuration is defined the engineering
product structure shall be created, specifying product P/N, materials used and quantities, drawings
and revision indexes, tooling list and special process list. The engineering product structure is
commonly known as a “breakdown structure”.
Every Program has its own manufacturing quota. This quota allows procuring material, products,
standard parts and sale P/N, identification of the tool concept to be developed for several operations,
identification of process limitations and product configuration control.

G. Defining manufacturing product structure

After engineering product structure is released, a set of technical data shall be prepared to support the
productive process, which, further to approval shall be issued to production:
a. Manufacturing Technical Sheets, intended to complement drawings at production line
b. Special Process Technical Sheets, intended to provide clear operating instructions
and control parameters, in accordance with Customer specifications. Special Process
Technical Sheets include Heat Treatment Technical Sheets (FTTT), Painting Records
(FTPP)
c. Procedures, work instructions, manuals and workbooks. Manufacturing Engineering
determines the need of further detailed work instructions to complement the
applicable technical data.
Manufacturing processes should be defined, and those ones shall proceed following the steps below:
a. Item definition and creation
b. Preparation of bill of material
c. Preparation of production routing

11
 H. Creation of Items, Bills of Material and Production Routings
After all information is released, Engineering shall define manufacturing and inspection processes,
which are included in routings and BOMs.

I. Intermediate and Final Inspection

At this stage intermediate or final inspections shall be specified. Part complexity shall determine the
need to perform intermediate inspections. Inspections that are carried out:
a. Visual inspection;
b. Dimensional inspection;
c. Hardness and conductivity inspection;
d. Liquid penetrant inspection, magnetic particle inspection, X-ray inspection, ultrasonic
inspection
e. Organic and inorganic coating inspection (visual inspection, thickness, adhesion,
corrosion, etc.)
f. Verification of working hours and conditions within acceptable tolerances.

J. Material procurement
Prior to starting material procurement, the purchase item shall be identified. Item identification consists
in recording data required to establishing its main characteristics and providing its differentiation from
any other item.

K. Realizations of FAI product

Realization of FAI product is mainly intended to provide clear evidence that the manufactured product
complies with all specifications, validating production process and methods.
After the industrialization activities specified above are completed, FAI product shall be realized, prior
to series production begining. Production shall only start following FAI approval by Manufacturing
Product Quality and by the Customer. Such approval validates the productive processes, including
tooling and numerical control programming used for part machining.

L. Manufacturing Product Handling, Storage, Packaging and Shipment

Transportation, handling and preservation of parts in between operations shall be specified in the
respective production routing by Manufacturing Engineering, as necessary, in accordance with the
applicable technical specification.
Where additional protection/packaging of finished product is required by the Customer, such
requirement shall be specified in the applicable paperwork.

M. Support or Post-industrialization phase

After the completion of the FAI, the industrialization process ends and the manufacturing or
assembling process begins. During this stage, the following activities are developed:
• Process improvements, process or time improvement
• Customer modifications, after analysis and definition of new engineering product structure.
12
 • Implementation of production support actions

N. Industrialization management
Industrialization management mainly focuses on controlling:
• Evolution of planned activities in accordance with deadlines
• Lead times
• Costs
• Provision of raw material
• Provision and manufacturing of tooling and equipment
• Certification of special processes
• Providing documentation to production

2.3. Configurations management

Configuration control of aircraft manufacturing products ensures that the current product configuration
and the applicable technical data are provided at all times throughout the process. This activity does
not apply to configuration changes of the product itself, since these are the responsibility of the project
owner [4,5].
Configuration control of aircraft manufacturing products is limited to:
• Control of product related technical data changes/revisions
• Implementation of changes in the support technical data and in the productive process
• Verification of change and implementation in product
Configuration management is based on the definition of a functional baseline, from which every
change will be registered, so that the current design status can be enquired at all times. For that
purpose, every program shall open a change register account providing change identification, report
origin and date, implementation time - frame, change status and other relevant data.
In order to control the configuration of the product and implement changes, the following activities are
carried out:
A. Establishing the configuration of aircraft manufacturing product
a. Product Configuration
The product configuration is established by the Customer, who, as a rule, is the
project owner and is based on the applicable BoM, drawings and specifications. The
product structure establishes the components and quantities required for the
manufacturing of one unit of a given product.
b. Technical data
The Technical Data supporting the aircraft manufacturing product realization process
encompasses all information and can be one of the following categories:
• Technical Publications: Customer standards and specifications, under
contractual requirements, including product specifications and work
instructions

13
 • Drawings from Manufacturing Customers
• Drawings made by Production Engineering
• Technical sheets
c. Engineering Product Structure
After the documentation is received from the Customer, Manufacturing Engineering
shall define the engineering product structure, based on the technical data provided by
the Customer, such as part, sub-assembly and assembly drawings, part lists and raw-
material lists. The engineering product structure provides indication of P/N, application
factor, allocated materials and quantity, drawings and revision index, applicable tool
list and special processes involved.
From the engineering product structure a listing is issued. That one can initiate the
procurement of material, define the concept of the tool to be developed for the
necessary operations, identify all process constraints and proceed to product
configuration control.
d. Manufacturing Product Structure
After the engineering product structure is made available, a number of technical
documents shall be prepared, which support the productive process, as follows:
• Manufacturing Technical Sheet (FTF)
• Special Process Supporting Technical Sheet
• Procedures, Work Instructions, Manuals and Workbooks
• Production Routings or manufacturing routings
After all information is made available, the manufacturing process can be studied and
prepared defining the several process phases.

B. Controlling the configuration of an aircraft manufacturing product

Manufacturing Engineering shall control the configuration of an aircraft manufacturing product as
follows:
a. An index number is assigned to every aircraft manufacturing product
b. Production routings indicate the product and related drawing index
c. During the productive process, products permanently travel with the work order that
identifies the applicable drawings and technical data
d. Products shall be manufactured in accordance with the applicable indexes, which are
verified upon inspections and testing executed over the productive process
e. Work order number. Every aircraft manufacturing product has a marking phase
included in its productive process
f. Final inspection shall be performed in the final phase of the productive cycle to
confirm that the manufactured products comply with the configuration required in the
production routings and with the technical data provided by the Customer

14
 C. Managing changes to an aircraft manufacturing product
Engineering changes with impact on the product configuration baseline may affect specifications,
performance, drawings, bill of materials, weight-stability, configuration of other P/N’s, provisioning,
delivery time frames, estimated costs, operational constraints, safety, service life, personnel training,
work procedures, logistic support, spares management, packaging, technical manuals, support
equipment and test equipment.
Action to be followed in order to manage or change configuration of aircraft manufacturing products
are:
a. Incoming Changes
Product modifications travel with customer documentation that includes all affected P/N’s,
drawings and material list, and specifications, with reference to the applicable index.
Every incoming change is handled by the Commercial department and then sent to the
related Manufacturing Engineering and Product Quality areas.
b. Updating of Productive Process Support Documentation
After the technical documentation is received, Manufacturing Engineering and Product
Quality assess its impact on current processes, materials, consumables and quality
requirements, and take required actions to coordinate the updating of the technical
documentation:
• Drawings: Evidence of changes to the drawings and models being analyzed shall
be registered on AIM. Changes shall be registered on the production routings and
on bills of materials.
• Technical sheets and similar documentation directly supporting the realization of
Manufacturing products
• Production Routings and Bills of Material: The production routing/bill of material
corresponding to the Part Number being revised enter to “Design/Review” status.
Further to this operation the production routing and bill of material can be changed
and shall not be made available for production. After the production routing and
bill of material is reviewed, its status shall be changed to “Awaiting Quality
Approval” for further approval. Upon changing of the production routing/bill of
material, the review index shall be changed accordingly and the revision
description block shall be completed with the reason for revision.
• Numeric Control Programs (NC)
Changes to NC programs require updating of index number and of the applicable
Programming Technical Sheet (FTP).
c. Change effectiveness
The change date is the date in which the old part is to be replaced with a new one.

15
d. Assigning a new part number
Upon changing of a part or assembly, the project owner has to decide between assigning
a new part number or adding a revision to the old part number. As a rule, when the
modified part and the original part are not interchangeable, the modified part is assigned a
new number. The same criterion shall apply to further assemblies including the modified
part, which shall be revised and re-identified.
Modified parts often affect other parts belonging to different assemblies (in other branches
of product structure), because they are close to or interface with each other. In such
cases, these parts and further assemblies can also be revised and re-identified.
e. Current Account Status
The current account is a control document prepared by Manufacturing Engineering that
provides a historical record of reported changes and respective status (time frames or
implementation dates) and identification (report number, title, justification and date, as well
as involved items).
f. Changes occurring over productive process
Every change requiring implementation over the productive process must be accepted by
the Manufacturing Engineering engineer approving the production routing or by the related
Product Quality technician.
g. Introduction of Modifications Agreement (AIM)
Implementation of product configuration changes shall be controlled through the
“Introduction of Modification Agreement” form.
This form is used whenever changes occur and affect the following activities:
• Approved budget
• Manufacturing process
• Final Product Configuration
• Delivery time frames
Every change meeting the requirements above shall comply with the following diagram:

16
 Fig. 5 – Industrialization planning development tasks.

3. Process Design

3.1. Process Selection

Process selection decision determines the type of process used to make the product. For instance,
mass mobility solutions (cars, motorbikes, and cycles) are produced using an assembly-line type of
process, while sailboats are made using a batch production method. The considerations required for
process selection include the volume of production and the level of customization.
Process selection decisions tend to be capital intensive and cannot be easily changed. Therefore, the
firm is committed to the process choice and bound by these decisions for years to come.
There are three types of product flow: line, batch and project.
Pilatus PC-12 is assembled in a production line: line flow is characterized by a linear sequence of
operations. The product moves from one step to the next in a sequential manner from the beginning to
the end. Mass production and continuous flow are line flow type production models. Mass production
generally refers to the use of assembly lines to assemble discrete parts into a finished product.
Continuous production refers to a so-called process industries such electricity, beverage or paper.
Those products are made in a continuous fashion and tend to be highly standardized and automated
with very high volumes of production.
Traditional line operations are very efficient but also very inflexible. The line operation requires high-
volume products that are very standardized. At the same time, this makes it difficult to make changes
17
in the product itself and in the volume of flow leading to inflexibility of operations. Line operations can
only be justified in certain situations. They generally require large amounts of capital investment and
must have high volume to justify the investment.
Pull systems, as the PC-12 line one, are characterized by the use of make to order systems, which
conditions the beginning of product assembly to the PO delivery.
The MTO process has higher flexibility for product customization. In the MTO process, individual
orders can be identified during production. As each order is made following customer specification, the
jobs in process are actually associated with customers. In contrast, the MTS process is building
products for inventory, and the jobs in process are not identified for any particular customer.
In MTO process, the cycle of production and order fulfillment begins with the customer order. After
receiving the order, the design must be completed, if it is not already done, and materials are ordered
that are not already on hand or on order. Once the materials begin to arrive, the order can be
processed until it is completed. Then the order is delivered to the customer. Once the customer pays
for the order, the cycle is completed.
The key performance measures of an MTO process are the length of time it takes to design and make
the product. This is often referred to as lead time. Another measure of performance in an MTO
environment is the percentage of orders completed on time.

3.1.1. Process selection decisions

There are four main factors to decide which product flow fits best our product requirements.
First of all, the company should consider the market condition. The line approach requires a mass
market for inexpensive products; the batch process requires a lower-volume market for medium-priced
products; and the project process requires a market for expensive products.
Second, the company should consider capital. The line-flow process will require a great deal more
capital than the project or the batch flow. The line-flow process requires capital to equip the factory
assembly line. By way of contrast, construction of custom project houses would require much less
capital since few products are built and automation is not applied.
The third factor that should be considered is the availability and cost of labor. The project and batch
processes require costly skilled labor.
Finally, the company should consider the state of technology for both process and product. Assessing
if innovations likely to come along that will make a process obsolete before costs are recovered is part
risk evaluation for the process. The risk in order of highest to lowest is line, batch and project.
Four factors appear to influence process selection: market conditions, capital requirements, labor and
technology.

3.1.2. Product- Process Strategy

Hayes and Wheelwright [6,7] have proposed a product-process matrix that describes the dynamic
nature of product and process choices.

18
 Product Structure (Product Life Cycle Stage)
Low volume-low Low volume, Few major Higher volume-
standardization multiple product, high
products higher standardization,
volume commodity
products
Process Jumbled flow Commercial
Structure Printer
(Process Disconnected Heavy
Life Cycle line flow Equipment
Stage) Connected OGMA Automobile
line flow Aerostructures Assembly
Continuous Sugar Refinery
flow

Tab. 2 – Product-process Matrix with examples.

On the product top side of the matrix is the life cycle of a typical product, ranging from a low-volume,
one-of-a-kind product to a high-volume, standardized product. A product usually evolves from the left
side to the right side of the matrix.
On the process side of the matrix the various processes are represented, ranging from the job shop
(jumbled flow) to a continuous process. The process has a similar life cycle to the product life cycle
evolving from a very fluid job shop type of production at the top of the matrix to a standardized and
high volume continuous process at the bottom. For instance, electronics are often produced in batches
until the volume becomes sufficient to support an assembly-line process.
The product-process matrix represents the strategic choices available to firms in both product and
process dimensions. Process selection can provide a unique capability that the firm can exploit in the
market. Thus, a patch on the matrix represents a strategic choice of both product and process. This
type of strategic position will require cross-functional cooperation between marketing and operations in
order to to ensure the firm will use the existing processes when considering new products.

3.1.3. Plant – within – a – plant Concept

The lack of focus in manufacturing plants has resulted from excessive attention to economies of scale.
In some cases, product proliferation in the markets served by the company has led to incompatible
products being mixed together in the same facility. In the name of efficiency due to economies of
scale, different missions are being served by the same operation. The solution is to arrange each
product as a plant – within – a – plant (PWP), which may sacrifice some economies of scale while
doing a better job of meeting market requirements and improving profitability.
Several types of focus need to be considered:
• Product focus

19
 • Process type
• Technology
• Volume of sales
• Type of customer order (Make – to – stock and make – to – order)
• New products and mature products

Focus can be through of as positioning facilities or PWP along the diagonal of the product-process
matrix. For example, a product with a low volume, low standardization, and one-of-a-kind should be
made in a job shop process, while a product with high volume and high standardization should be
made on an assembly line process. Since these two types of products occupy different positions on
the product-process matrix, they should be produced in different facilities or PWP.

20
Aerostructures Manufacturing

1. Process Engineering
Once the industrialization process finishes by accomplishment of the FAI, the manufacturing process
begins. At this stage a set of actions are implemented:
• Process improvement, in terms of operations sequencing, timing and methods
• Implementation of customer modifications, after analysis and engineering product structure
definition
• Production support actions
Process engineering is responsible for nonconforming product, process support during manufacturing,
process improvement, manufacturing products management, technical documentation, manufacturing
modifications implementation, timeframes and methods engineering, production resources training,
subcontractors support and tooling.

A. Nonconforming product
During the manufacturing process (support phase), it is required analyzing and solving product
nonconformities generated by the manufacturing process, as well as implementing required
corrective actions. Nonconformance attributions of engineering are: analyzing and solving the
product nonconformity occurred during the manufacturing process (excluding MRB activities),
creating the required disposition and identifying improvement opportunities, implementing
corrective activities according to customer’s requirements, evaluating nonconformities impact,
implementing the required corrective actions, analyzing the repeated nonconformities reported
in RAC’s, promoting new improvement opportunities and ensuring the right implementation of
corrective/preventive actions after the PAC/P release [8].

B. Manufacturing support
a. Process support: technical support to production in no-special processes, promoting
research in new equipment and technologies, training production resources, ensuring
cells optimization (using viability, economic and environmental criteria), conceiving and
ensuring process support to industrialization and functionality of the products, ensuring
technical sheets availability, whenever manufacturing or inspection information is not clear
for users, ensuring availability of NC programs according to production volume, solving
productive process problems in order to eliminate their causes, implementing new
technology and equipment, creating specific technical documentation to support the
productive process, work instructions and documents in accordance to ONS-OGMA
Normative System, manuals, workbooks and related documentation, approving technical
documentation to support productive processes attributions of Manufacturing Product
Quality, participating in investment programs, ensuring technical, operational and
economic viability and analyzing the productive processes deviation.

21
 b. Manufacturing Products Technical Management: receiving technical documentation from
customer to technical documentation management section, keeping drawings, BOM’s and
applicable specifications updated, ensuring integrity of data in the information system,
ensuring customers’ connection to “Query-Notes”, in terms of process modifications and
modifications management, internal and External auditing of the program and
collaboration analyzing and solving complaints and ensuring budget accomplishment, in
terms of time and costs.
c. Aircraft manufacturing Technical Documentation Management: updating technical
documentation, searching technical documentation on customer’s repositories, archiving
and registering originals, and also distributing technical documentation to Logistics and to
Subcontractors
d. Modifications management: releasing and implementing production modifications, creation
and filling of AIM (Modifications Introduction Agreement), archiving and managing this
document, identifying and planning engineering activities required to implementing
modifications and monitoring the progress of modifications implementations on FAIs.
e. Training: identifying the planning status of processes analyzed, considering collaborators
attributions and production requirements of the product, ensuring right distribution of
updated technical documentation that affects production processes and participating
actively in training resources for productive processes.
f. Subcontractors support: identifying the technical capacity of execution (during
industrialization and budgeting phase), technical support to subcontractors during
products manufacturing, releasing a DTS to support Manufacturing/Assembling of P/N
produced or processed by subcontractors, ensuring correct modification management of
Subcontractors through AIM, collaborating with Product Quality Department to evaluate
technically and select subcontractors, ensuring technical documentation availability to
subcontractors and managing PNC (product nonconformities).
g. Tooling: designing and modifying tools and jigs, creating and updating a database of
partners of tooling and jigs engineering services, approving tool manufacturing and
repairing routings, creating, updating and Archiving of the Tool Design Sheet (FPF), in
order to control the design of tooling. All tool design cycle is registered in FPFs.

C. Industrial Engineering
Specific programs of continuous improvement are required for manufacturing, such as time
and costs reduction, reduction of process parameters variability and quality improvement.
Consequently, Continuous Improvements plans are implemented (PMC) after requests for
continuous improvement (PMP’s). PMC’s are mid/long-term plans, which resolution and
implementation takes time and additional costs.
PMP’s are punctual request for process improvements, whose main objective is a fast
resolution and implementation. PMP’s usually don’t have additional costs.
Industrial engineering attributions of Engineering are detailed below:

22
 a. Process improvement: Identify improvement opportunities (product/process modification),
proposing manufacturing or assembling processes modifications and corrections,
analyzing productive processes deviations, proposing improvement plans, solving
productive processes problems in order to eliminate its causes, implementing specific
methodologies to solve PMC project problems, supporting and solving PMC and PMP,
introducing continuous improvement specific knowledge at all levels and analyzing and
solving productive problems with immediate operational solutions.
b. Timeframes and Methods Engineering: defining manufacturing processes and Standards,
ensuring required process adjustments, in terms of process scheduling, methods and
timing in order to reduce timeframes and costs and reduce process variability and
ensuring manufacturing, inspection or repair routings availability

2. Manufacturing process

2.1. Process analysis

A process is a set of continuous and specific actions oriented to a common objective. Processes
objectives could be: creating, inventing, designing, transforming, producing or controlling. Processes
transform inputs to outputs, and usually add value to the output.
In order to optimize processes, data collection is required. Data is obtained from the ERP, quality
records and production records. Some information can only be obtained by observing (creating
records or estimating parameters from related data) or creating a recording system.
A proposed methodology to optimize and implement new processes is DMAIC: define processes,
measure control parameters, analyze obtained data, improve current processes and control them [9].

A. SIPOC analysis
Process definition and mapping is done by SIPOC analysis, a tool that consists in identifying the most
important elements in the process and, consequently, mapping the process.
SIPOC means: analysis of Suppliers, Inputs, Process, Outputs and Customers, where suppliers and
customers are departments, enterprises or cells that supply or demand process items.

SUPPLIERS INPUTS PROCESS OUTPUTS COSTUMERS

•WAREHOUSE •SCREW •ATTACH •ATTACHED •QUALITY TESTING

COMPONENT BY COMPONENT
FASTENING THE
SCREW

Fig. 6 – Example of SIPOC analysis of a screw fastening process.

B. Process Flowchart
The next step to analyze the production process is the Process Flowchart. Information that could be
obtained by implementing this analysis methodology is:

23
 • Current status of the process development
• Critical inputs and outputs
• Added-value at each step
• Steps where data or records must be obtained
• Production rework and redundancy
In the following chapter Process, Materials and Information Flowcharts are analyzed in detail.

C. Key parameters indicators and key performance objectives

To control a process is required to obtain critical data and focus activity to desired objectives. Critical
data extracted from a process that informs about its performance is called key parameters indicator
and desired value or goal for this parameter is called key parameter objective.

KPI Process KPO

•% Release agent •Moulding •Mold temperature

concentration •Product without
•cycle time permanent visual
•Pot life defects
•cooling liquid flow rate
•mold temperature
•aluminum temperature
•Cooling circuit cleaning

Fig. 7 – KPI and KPO in molding process.

D. Graphical analysis
Due to the large amount of data obtained through KPI and process data collecting methods, graphical
analysis is required. The proposed method is based on reduction analysis, determining which
processes generate major anomalies, what type of anomaly they generate and its causes. The most
common anomaly in a process is the lack of added value, in terms of value the analysis must be
focused on:
• Client complaints
• Scrap rate
• Required rework
• Deviation from planned delivery date
• Nonconformities associated costs
Graphical analysis allows extrapolating conclusions about the most relevant items, evolution over
time, scatter and relationship between different parameters.

24
Common used charts:
• Pareto

Fig. 8 – Pareto chart. Courtesy of OGMA

• Histogram

Fig. 9 – Histogram. Courtesy of OGMA

• Time series

Fig. 10 – Time series. Courtesy of OGMA

• Scatter

Fig. 11 – Scatter chart. Courtesy of OGMA

25
 E. Characterization of variables distribution
Three different methods are proposed in order to characterize variables distribution: Ishikawa diagram,
5 whys and cause-effect matrix.
a. Ishikawa diagram: tool used to identify causes of problems. Usually it is implemented in team
workshops where every component of the group identify one cause associated to each main
factors to be analyzed by the diagram, the result is a multi-disciplinary approach to problem
causes.

Fig. 12 – Ishikawa diagram example.

b. 5 whys: it is an empirical method to discover real causes of problems, it is simple to
implement: asking several times about causes-effects relationships starting from the specific
problem.
c. Cause-effect matrix: The matrix link process inputs to critical quality characteristics (CTQ)
through process mapping. CTQ are evaluated by customers’ priority and inputs are evaluated
by its relationship with outputs.

Fig. 13 – Causes-effects matrix. Courtesy of OGMA

The result of this analysis is a Pareto chart of the critical inputs.
To elaborate a Cause-effect matrix it is required to follow these steps:
I. Listing inputs and outputs (obtained through process mapping)
II. Evaluating outputs by relevance for the customer (from 1 to 10)
III. Evaluating inputs-outputs relationship one by one
IV. By multiplying each output relevance by the input-output relationship factor most
important input are found
26
 V. Those inputs are further analyzed in a FMEA (Failure Modes and Effect Analysis),
outputs are evaluated in the “Key Process Output Variable Capability Status Sheet”
and inputs are evaluated in the “Operational Excellence Control Plan”
i. Key Process Output Variable Capability Status Sheet
It guides required actions to obtain statistical records of capacity.

Fig. 14 – Key process output variable capability status sheet. Courtesy of OGMA

ii. FMEA
FMEA is a continuous improvement document that prevents from process problems. It is used
to prioritize resources, in order to focus improvement planning on customer’s priorities.
FMEA evaluate process modification risks and it is a “living document”.

Fig. 15 – FMEA example. Courtesy of OGMA

iii. Operational Excellence Control Plan

The control Plan is used to evaluate inputs of the process and to avoid some potential failure
causes at the beginning of the improvement process.

Fig. 16 – Operational excellence control plan. Courtesy of OGMA

27
 F. Implementation
After root causes are found, corrective actions are implemented. The definition of those actions is not
enough, direct implementation and support actions are also required in order to validate their
effectiveness.
a. Implementation of corrective action and improvement support: Fundamental phase to maintain
improvements and avoiding loss of effectiveness. Usual support actions are:
I. Communicate to all members involved in the process the need to improvement.
II. Creation of Improvement effectiveness managers positions
III. Train operators, create records for trained personnel.
IV. Update technical documentation
V. Create support informatics tools to ease the process change
b. Key actions support
I. In order to directly support the process change, information must be regularly
updated
II. Report the new or improved process
III. Train personnel
IV. Create all possible Poke-Yokes
V. Measure required parameters of the new or improved process
VI. Monitor results
c. Progress report: the RCCA template is used. That format resumes easily and simply the
analyses, all methodologies presented above are applied to fill that report.

Fig. 17 – RCCA example. Courtesy of OGMA

28
 2.1.1. Process-Flow Analysis
The Little’s law describes that the average number of items in a system is the product of the average
arrival rate to the system and the average length of time that any item stays in the system:

=· (1)
Where: “I” is the inventory, “T” the throughput time and “R” the average flow rate into the process. An
assumption is that the process is in steady state where the average output rate equals the average
input rate to the process.
Little’s law is useful when any two of the three variables in the formula are known and the third can be
calculated.

2.1.2. Capacity
That is the maximum rate of output of a process or the maximum flow rate that can be sustained over
a period of time. One of the most important tools to study capacity is queuing (or waiting line) theory,
that is the mathematical study of waiting lines, or queues. In queuing theory a model is constructed so
that queue lengths and waiting times can be predicted. Queuing theory is generally considered a
branch of operations research because the results are often used when making business decisions
about the resources needed to provide a service.
In general if there are n resources that process each transaction then:
Process capacity= minimum (capacity of resource (1), …, capacity of resource (2))
Capacity of the entire process can’t be larger than the capacity of the most constraining (the smallest
capacity) resource, also called bottleneck. The amount a process actually produces will depend not
only on its capacity, but also on the supply and demand of the process. The flow rate is:
Flow rate= minimum (supply, demand, capacity)

2.1.3. Flowchart Analysis

Flowcharts analyses are used to describe and improve the transformation process in business. In
improving effectiveness, some or all of the following process elements might be changed:
• Raw materials
• Product Design
• Job design
• Processing steps used
• Management control information
• Equipment and tools
• Suppliers
Process-flow analysis is dependent on process thinking. To analyze process flows, a relevant system
is selected, and the customers, outputs, inputs, suppliers, boundaries, and transformations are
described. The process-flow problem is described as a system.

29
 adiocionado
Desperdício

Desperdício
necessário
Encarnada
Actividades do Processo

Bandeira

Valor
puro
N.º Passo do Processo
O p er aç ão
T r ansp o r t A rmaz e-
/ C o nt r o lar Esp er a
e nag e m
Pro c ess ar

1 Montar Estaleiro x

Posicionar e fixar a Main Spar e Rear Spar no

2
Estaleiro. Registar o nº Estaleiro de Montagem
Posicionar Nose Rib e Middle Rib 1 e 6 com
3
respectivos parafusos
Posicionar e fixar alongamentos da Main e Rear
4
Spar

5 Montar e fixar suportes de Aillerom e Rib 20

6 Montar e fixar Nose Rib da 2 á 5 e da 7 á 19

7 Montar e fixar Mid Ribs da 2 á 5 e da 7 á 19

8 Montar e fixar End Ribs da 2 á 15A

9 Furar estrutura Nose Rib da 1 á 6

10 Furar estrutura Mid Rib da 1 á 6

11 Furar estrutura Nose Rib da 7 á 15

12 Furar estrutura Mid Rib da 7 á 15

13 Furar estrutura Nose e Mid Ribs da 16 á 20

14 Furar End Ribs da 2 á 15A

15 Montar Stingers nas Nose Ribs 1 á 6

16 Montar Stringers Mid Ribs 1 á 6

17 Montar Stringers nas Nose e Mid Ribs 7 á 15

18 Montar Stringers na Nose e mid Ribs 16 á 20

Retirar uma ferramenta do estaleiro e montar 2

19 X
para a Maguetometers

20 Montar Maguetometers entre Rib 17 e 19

21 Furar Stringers da Nose Rib 1 á 6

22 Furar Stringers da Mid Rib 1 á 6

23 Furar Stringers da Nose e Mid Ribs da 7 á 15

24 Furar Stringers da Nose e Mid Ribs da 16 á 20

25 Furar 2 Maguetometers

Desmontar a estrutura do Estaleiro para

26
rebarbar
Montar a Estrutura no estaleiro com interposição
27
de PS (892-C12 ou C24)

28 Cravar a estrutura no estaleiro

29 Rebarbar Stringers

30 Cravar Stringers com PS

Totais

Fig. 18 – Example of Flow-process Chart and Added-Value analysis of Wings Assembly and symbols
legend. Courtesy of OGMA

The following steps are taken in a process flowchart analysis:

A. Select a relevant productive process.
B. Form a team to analyze and improve the system, usually a cross-functional team.
C. Decide on the objectives of the analyses.
D. Define the customers and suppliers for the system, those ones could be either external or
internal to the organization.
E. Describe the existing transformation process by means of flowchart and efficiency
measurements.
F. Develop an improved process design by revising the process flows or inputs used. Usually the
revised process is also described by a flowchart.
G. Gain management approval for the revised process design.
H. Implement the new process design.

2.1.4. Materials - Flow Analysis

The analyses of material flows emphasis on reducing manufacturing throughput time (cycle time), the
total time to order, manufactures, and distribute a product from the beginning to end. This is being
done by seeking to reduce waste in the process. Only actual processing time of the material by
machine or by labor adds value.

30
As part of materials-flow analysis, it is necessary to describe the flow of materials in great detail. For
analysis purposes, a flow-process chart is usually constructed.
The flow-process chart is a key tool for improving the flow of materials. After examining it, the analyst
may be able to combine certain operations, eliminate others, or simplify operations to improve overall
efficiency and reduce throughput time. This may, in turn, require changes in layout, equipment, and
work methods and possibly even changes in product design.

2.1.5. Information - Flow Analysis

Information flows can be analyzed in a manner analogous to that used for the flow of materials.
Although information flows are sometimes recorded on a flow-process chart. However, the purpose of
information-flow analysis is the same as for the analysis of materials flow: to improve the efficiency
and effectiveness of the process.
There are two types of information flows: The first one, information is the product of the operation.
The second case, the information flow is used for management or control purposes. Although the
methods of analysis are the same, the purposes of these two types of information flows are different.
After the information flowchart is completed, the analysis proceeds in much the same way as the
analysis of materials flow. The analysis should include the five key question of what, who, where,
when, and how.
As a result of the analysis, it should be possible to consolidate or simplify information flows. This may
result in changes in equipment, in jobs and in procedures.

2.2. Process support tools

2.2.1. Management support tools

A. Productivity control
Productivity is controlled and analyzed by elaborating an Operational Report. In such study several
parameters are used to define the performance indicators, those ones are presented below [7]:
a. Finished Work Orders (hours)(A)
b. Daily scheduling (hours)(C)
c. Time of finished Work Orders in a week period (hours)(D)
d. Indirect labor in a week period (hours)(E)
e. Total time of Work Orders in a week period (hours)(F)
f. Attendance (hours)(G)
g. Training (hours)(H1)
h. Union activities (hours) (H2)
i. Borrowed resources (hours) (I)
j. Received resources (hours) (J)
k. Total attendance (hours)(K):
 =  − 1 − 2 −
+  (2)
l. Overtime (hours)(L1)

31
From this data, performance indicators could be calculated as follows:
m. % Plan accomplishment
஺

 = (3)
஼
n. % Indirect labor time
ா
 = (4)
௄
o. % Overtime
௅ଵ
= (5)
௄ି௅ଵ
p. Workforce utilization factor
ி
= (6)
௄
The minimum accepted workforce utilization factor is 88%
q. Standard accomplishment
஺
=஽ (7)

The minimum accepted standard accomplishment factor is 85%

r. Productivity
= ∗ (8)
The minimum accepted productivity level is 75%

Productivity analysis
100

80

60

40

20

0
enero fev mar abr mai jun jul ago set out nov dez

Workforce utilization factor (%) Standard accomplishement (%) Productivity (%)

Fig. 19 – FMT 2013 productivity analysis

32
 B. META
META is the workflow control tool for Aerostructures assembly. This visual tool is placed on the shop-
floor to directly control of production status. META contains the following information: component to
control, current deadlines and estimated deadlines for detailed processes, takt-time accomplishment
and quality considerations.

1-Aircraft identification 2- Timeframe and Resources

3-Working progress 4-On-time production and Delay
5-Aircraft/ takt-time

Fig. 20 – META layout. Courtesy of OGMA

Fig. 21 – META placed on shop-floor. Courtesy of OGMA

33
 C. Flexibility matrix
The flexibility matrix is a document that contains all operators and processes in a cell, and shows the
skill of each operator in each process/operation. The range of expertise goes from Q1(acquired skill),
Q2(medium level) and Q3 (expert) and there is a training status: OJT (on job training).
That tool allows production management to balance production, redistributing workforce to different
cells/processes when required.
Work continuity must be ensured at each step of the process, what means that more than one
operator must be capable to execute each operation. Backups must be planned. The responsible for
the flexibility matrix release is the cell leader.

2.2.2. Production support tools

A. ITM
An ITM is an assembly technical instruction, a written document that includes specific procedures of a
component assembly [8]. It contains:
• Index and reference of ITM to identify the document
• Aerostructures program
• Aircraft model
• Component
• Component localization
• Routing
• Associated drawing
• Production area
• Sign of approval and author
• Graphic and text information that describes the procedure
• Key containing related items and its reference

Fig. 22 – Cockpit assembly ITM example. Courtesy of OGMA

34
 B. IOP
The standard operating instruction is a written instruction created to achieve uniformity of performance
of generic processes during manufacturing. IOP can help operators to solve doubts during this
process without having to interrupt supervisors [8].
ISO 9001 requires determination on manufacturing processes that could affect the quality of the
product, and that is achievable through IOP and ITM implementation. Unlike ITMs, IOP are used for
generic operations and not those ones directly related to specific processes.

Fig. 23 – Mizusumashi IOP. Courtesy of OGMA

C. AV
Visual aid is a visual written instruction to help operators or to standardize a specific operation in a
process. AV’s are designed for generic use, not specific programs.

Fig. 24 – Rivets AV. Courtesy of OGMA

35
 2.2.1. Quality support tools
In order to support quality inspections and quality related activities, process engineering realizes
performance indicators about: complaints, RACs, component defects, scrap and spot-checks [10].
A. Number of complaints by program
In this table appear the number of complaints by customer and program, what aids process
engineering to understand what programs have more improvement potential. In order to determine
which programs to focus improvement efforts, more data will be required (as program complexity and
costs, learning curve evolution and type of technologies implemented in the program).

B. Top 3 defects evolution at Assembly Plant

This chart shows the top three anomalies by month, where material fractures (scratches and notches)
are the most common defect found at the assembly plant.

Evolução do Top 3 - FMT Fracturas

300 Ajustes, folgas , interferências

Dimensional

250 Falta de aderência

16
Montagem
24
200 5 Riscos, marcas e golpes
7 8 14
21 26
6 8 13
150
15 3 21
6 4
5 8 7 8
100 24 4 208
8 161 161 171 162
126 130
50 110 109 113
81 95

0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC

Fig. 25 – Top 3 defects evolution at Assembly Plant. Courtesy of OGMA

Great number of production defects is result of cracks on structures. The second most common
defects at assembly plant are scratches or notches on components, produced by manufacturing
processes. Tolerances, gaps or dimensional defects, as well as those ones affecting assembly
operations, are responsible for almost the rest of defects.

36
 C. Number of complaints by nature of defect (2013)
Once programs improvement potential is defined, is important to determine what kind of defects are
more common in each program. The best way to easily understand the relationship between programs
and type of defects is the chart shown below: number of defects by program and nature of defect.

Fig. 26 – Number of complaints by type of defect. Courtesy of OGMA

D. RACs Cycle
A RAC is a Discrepancy Report, from its release to the discrepancy solving there are 6 steps that
could be grouped in two phases: the four first steps in the taking decision phase and the rest in the
RAC closing phase.

Fig. 27 – RAC cycle. Courtesy of OGMA

37
a. Days to take a decision (RACs) by month (2013)

DECISÃO DE RACS - ANTIGUIDADE MÉDIA

14.06
15
13.5

10.7
9.79
10
8.7 8.3 7.9 8.5
7.8 6.7
7.3
Dias 6.6

0
JAN FEV MAR ABR MAI JUN JUL AGO SET OUT NOV DEZ

Fig. 28 – Days to take decision RAC by month. Courtesy of OGMA

b. Days to close RACs by month (2013)

RACS FECHADOS - ANTIGUIDADE MÉDIA

OBJECTIVO
30
≤ 15 DIAS

17.44
17.9 17.9 15.9 18.3
14.8 16.4 15.75
Dias

15
11.4 11.5
10.9 10.3

0
JAN FEV MAR ABR MAI JUN JUL AGO SET OUT NOV DEZ

Fig. 29 – Days to close RACs by month. Courtesy of OGMA

c. Days to close RACs by areas (2013)

RACs FECHADOS - ANTIGUIDADE AREAS

NOV

25.0 DEZ

22.4 Object ivo (3 Dias)

20.0
Linhas (Qtd)

15.0
11.412.3
10.0
8.0
6.4
5.0 2.3 3.5
1.3 1.0
1.2
0.0
Eng. Eng. Qual MRB rArea Insp.

Fig. 30 – Days to close RACs by areas. Courtesy of OGMA

38
 E. Pareto diagram of Assembly Plant defects (December 2013)
Numbers of RACS are analyzed by defect nature. From this data could be extrapolated the empirical
Pareto principle, 80% of consequences (open RACs) are generated by 20% of causes (types of
anomalies).

Pareto de Defeitos FMT - Dezembro 2013

140 100% 100% 100%
98% 99%
94% 96%
90%
120 85%
80%

100 69%
Qty Linhas RAC

80

130
60

40
11%
5% 5% 4%
20 2% 2% 2% 1% 0% 0%
21 10 9 7 4 4 3 1 0 0
0

Fig. 31 – Pareto diagram of Assembly Plant defects. Courtesy of OGMA

F. PACs during 2013 by month

A Corrective/Preventive Action Request (PAC/P), may be raised to the responsible entity for the non-
conformity so it would be defined the root cause and the corrective action to be implemented and
when. Product Quality Manufacturing Engineering is responsible for the analysis and the follow-up of
the corrective actions defined.

50 PACs NA - EVOLUÇÃO GLOBAL Auditorias

Externas
45 Delinquentes

Recorrentes
40 37 37
35 35
35 33

28
30 27 27
26
25 23 23 23

20

15
11 11
9
10
5 5 5 5 5 5
5 4
0 0
0
JAN FEV MAR ABR MAI JUN JUL AGO SET OUT NOV DEZ

Fig. 32 – PACs during 2013. Courtesy of OGMA

39
 2.3. Production Supply

In order to supply parts, components and hardware to production lines, points of use are defined.
Those ones are defined as follows:
• POUs are not warehouses but places where production material could be stocked temporally,
waiting for “being pushed” to work centers
• POU are designed for low-unit-cost products, with high turnover and critical from the workflow
sustainability point of view
• These points are designed to reduce logistics operations inside the plant, increasing agility of
operations and avoiding interruptions of the production line
• POU placements are clearly defined and flagged
• All products contained in a POU are charged directly to their respective cost center before
leaving the warehouse, that is why POUs have physical stock but they are costless
• Free access to these stocks is allowed. The material movement follows the “Kanban
philosophy”, the replenishment backup happens just when the material “in use” finishes. FIFO
or FEFO method are used in order to control materials “PVU”
• Replenishment operations follow clearly defined pathways and frequencies. Replenishment
responsible is the PPCP
• In order to ensure a correct and flexible use of POU, its processes and layout are
standardized
• POUs are not designed for chemical products: that require specific stocking conditions

A. Traceability
All items received in POUs by the PPCP must have its own identification that allow traceability control,
ensuring that POUs replenishment is made with certified items.
The issued labels are:
a. Material Reception Control Label
b. Traceability Control Label
c. Material Debit Control Label
d. Usable Material Label
All of those labels must be linked to Conformance Certificates, EASA Form 1 or FAA 8130-3 or
Suppliers Conformance Certificates.
For MSP material, traceability of a defined batch is defined by crosschecking of material debit and
work in progress stocks. That allow users to know where a certain product was used (aircrafts,
engines, components) and ensuring its traceability. Current stock must be used before replenishment.

B. POU utilization procedure

a. Consumption/ Need of material (Production)
The operator could pick material from MSP, reserve can only be used when current stock
finishes.

40
 b. Material shortfall indication (Production)
When at MSP the usable part of a product finishes the operator must identify the situation
by sticking a yellow label on this product. If it is necessary, reserve material could be
used.
c. Replenishment request indication (Mizusumashi)
Missing product identification must be visual and it must be done during Mizusumashi
cyclic routines.
d. Replenishment request (Mizusumashi)
Material request must be done at the cost center just after the visual identification of the
missing product.
e. POU replenishment (Mizusumashi)
Once identified the missing product, material is transferred from reserve status to usable.
f. Material reception
After material reception, material must be placed in the right position of MSP with its
certificate. If the product is identified by “Supply Chain Disruption”, the new material must
be identified as usable immediately.

C. POU creation
Steps to create a POU/MSP
a. MSP creation proposition
b. Identify P/N to integrate MSP
c. Define required product quantities for a defined period of time.
d. Verify that the product have the right specifications to integrate a POU (turnover; cost;
criticality)
e. Incorporate POU to replenishment routes
f. Validate safety and hygienic requirements (RSA)

D. Evaluation and validation of POU

POU localization must accomplish a set of hygienic and safety requirements, depending on the type of
material that it contains, as well as, installation and storage conditions. RSA is in charge of verifying
the accomplishment of that requirement, in terms of safety and environmental protection.

41
 3. Nonconformance analysis
It is the responsibility of every OGMA’s employee to report nonconformity detected at any stage of a
process, in order to provide for its timely analysis and correction, even when it involves products
already delivered to Customer.
The product related functional areas (Production, Product Quality, Engineering, Planning,
Programming & Control and Logistics) shall assess the nonconformity and decide on the action to be
taken on the nonconforming product, involving in the decision, where applicable, the Customer, the
manufacturer and the competent Aviation Authority [11-14].

Fig. 33 – Nonconformance product flowchart. Courtesy of OGMA

A. Manufacturing specific procedures

Product nonconformities detected over the productive process shall be object of a Discrepancy Report
(RAC).
The RAC description of the nonconformities detected shall provide the following parameters, as
applicable: detailed description of defect type, productive process phase that originated it, part or
component area affected and defect size, required value and value measured.
As for discrepancies detected on single parts that integrate an assembly, defect description shall also
provide the number of the respective work order.
A team formed by Production, Aerostructures Product Engineering and Manufacturing Product Quality
staff shall be designated as RAC Resolution Group (GRR). Several groups shall be formed depending
on the programs running at NA, which shall analyze and decide on every detected nonconformity.

42
RAC may go through the following agents:
• Inspector (Issuance)
• Area Manager (Production)
• Engineering
• Quality Engineering
• Inspector (Closure)
The GRR Quality Engineering representative, based on the group decision, shall issue one of the
following opinions, duly accounted for:
a. Use as is
b. Repair
c. Reject (Scrap)
As for items a) e b) above, should the product be manufactured in accordance with the Customer
technical data or when nonconformity derives from a deviation to contract requirements, a
Nonconformance Recording Card shall be prepared.
Decisions leading to repairs, either made by the RAC Resolution Group or by the Customer, shall be
supported, as necessary, with Repair Sheets.
The GRR Quality Engineering representative shall:
• Send RAC to the Area Manager, in case nonconformities can be corrected in accordance with
the applicable technical data (Rework) or decision leads to repair.
• Send RAC to the Inspector (Closure), should the issued opinion be “Use as is” or “Rejection
(Scrap)”.
Engineering shall only make the final decision instead of Manufacturing Product Quality in case MRB
(Material Review Board) authority is assigned by the Customer. The MRB activity shall be established,
on a case by case basis.

B. Handling of nonconformities detected further to product delivery to Customer

Should nonconformities be detected that may affect products already delivered to Customer, including
those possibly affecting product reliability or safety, they shall be reported to the Customer by
Manufacturing Product Quality.

C. Handling of nonconforming product

Nonconforming product shall be segregated by the inspectors in clearly identified and closed areas,
where practicable, and shall await decision of the RAC Resolution Group on its condition. Should the
product be kept outside segregation areas, for dimension related reasons, it shall be permanently
identified with the “Nonconforming Material Tag”. In order to ensure traceability of nonconforming
product, where applicable, the number of the related Discrepancy report shall be written on the
respective Manufacturing Sheet.
Nonconforming product rejected upon final decision shall be clearly marked and permanently identified
with the rejected material tag, until its disposal (scrap).

43
 D. Defect and cause codes
Defects and causes occurring more frequently shall be codified so that they can be analyzed and the
applicable corrective or preventive actions can be taken.

3.1. Nonconformance case study

3.1.1. Standard repairing procedures for notch and scratch damaged

components
Primer defects may require a different rework method depending on type, size and location. Therefore,
a thorough study of this section is required before starting the rework. A classification can be done by
following the flow chart below.

Primer defect

Mechanical defect

YES NO

Repairing Primer defect

procedures for smaller than 5x5
mechanical defects cm

YES NO
Less than 4 similar
NO
primer defects on Non-conformance
part

YES Rework and

reapplication of
corrosion
protection

Fig. 34 – Flowchart for the classification of the primer defect. Courtesy of Pilatus Aircraft

Fig. 35 – Jig for the classification of the defect, each scratch thickness has a color code (red the worst
case, green the better). Courtesy of Pilatus Aircraft

44
Mechanical Defects
If the defect has been identified as a mechanical induced primer defect, the defect has to be classified
according to the classification jig (Fig. 35) and the flow chart (Fig. 36).

Defective substrate

Safety class 2 or 3
(safety criticality of the
component, range from
1(higher) to 3(lower))

YES NO

No fastener area
Non-conformance
affected

YES NO

Length of the
mechanical Non-conformance
defect≤150mm

YES NO

Number of mechanical
Non-conformance
defects per m2≤2

YES NO

Classification according
Non-conformance
to Jig

Orange/ red Green/ yellow

Blend out of Reapplication of the

mechanical defects corrosion protection

Red Orange

Determine the
Reapplication of the
remaining thickness at
corrosion protection
blent out location= tr

tr≥0,9*nominal
thickness

Yes No

Reapplication of the
Non-conformance
corrosion protection

Fig. 36 – Flowchart for the classification of mechanical defects. Courtesy of Pilatus Aircraft

45
Rework procedures
If the decision from the flow charts in Fig. 34 and Fig. 36 refers to this section, the corresponding
rework procedure has to be accomplished. The process to blend out mechanical defects and reapply
the corrosion protection is realized as follows:

A. Blend out of Mechanical Defects

a. Clean the defect and its adjacent area with a cloth soaked with cleaning agent.
Smooth blend out of the defect by treatment with a diamond lap, 320 grit or finer abrasive
paper mounted on a piece of wood and/or a 240 grit fine abrasive pencil. An eccentrically
rotating polishing device equipped with a grit of 320 or finer grinding disc may also be used. If
the adjacent sealant is affected, remove it with a plastic scraper or make it rough using
aluminum wool.
Abrade in the direction of the scratch and in the immediate surroundings of the scratch only -
the area to be treated shall be as small as possible. If suitable, use adhesive tape to mask the
defect area to prevent secondary damage in the vicinity of this area.
b. Although it is required that an “as small as possible” area is treated, a visible indentation due
to local material thinning around the scratch is not permitted, i.e. the material removal shall run
out smoothly from the scratch outwards. The width of the treating should be 30 times the
depth of the scratch.
Thoroughly clean the bare metal surface by means of a cloth soaked with cleaning agent and
make sure that any residues from the grinding operation are removed.

B. Reapplication of the corrosion protection

a. Clean the defect and its adjacent area with a cloth soaked with cleaning agent.
b. Starting from the damaged area, use a plastic scraper and peel off as much of the primer as
can be easily removed by applying only slight force. A slightly difference in color can indicate a
poor primer adhesion. The boundary between non-sufficiently and sufficiently adhering primer
is found when the primer puts considerable resistance against its removal.
c. If a primer defect does exceed the size of 5x5 cm or more than three similar primer defects on
the same part are present, a non-conformance report is required.
d. Use abrasive paper of grit 320 or finer to smooth the transition of properly adhering primer to
the defect area. Use wet abrasive paper of grit 400 and “Scotch Brite” to further smooth the
boundary and bare aluminum area. If the adjacent sealant is affected, remove it with a plastic
scraper (if the sealant puts no resistance against its removal) or make it rough with aluminum
wool.
e. Thoroughly clean the bare metal surface by means of a cloth soaked with cleaning agent and
make sure that any residues from the grinding operation are removed.
f. Apply chemical conversion coating to the area where the defect is removed.
g. Apply primer to the affected area preferably with a spray gun.

46
 h. Reworked primer defects, which are adjacent to sealant, shall be resealed with 2 layers of
over-coat sealant. The lateral overlap in all directions shall be at least 10mm. The sealant
shall not be applied earlier than 36h after the primer application.

3.1.2. Scratch-damaged Rear Pressure Bulkhead

According to the nonconformance product procedures, the report delivered to the customer must be
followed by substantiation (document that contains the engineering analysis of the anomaly solution).
Scratch damage is the main cause of RAC openings at the rear fuselage. In order to understand how
those anomalies affect the product life of the component a structural analysis is realized. This analysis
is based on typical skin repairing procedures described above.

B C
A

Fig. 37. A – Rear pressure bulkhead placement at rear fuselage

Fig. 37. B – Example of typical anomalies found in a Pressure dome, 3 scratches on the inner face.

Fig. 37. C – Scratch example. Courtesy of OGMA

3.2. Static Structural Analysis

This analysis deals with the stress distribution and loading of the rear pressure bulkhead and the
sensibility of this structure to a repairing operation, the skin thickness decrease. This is an academic
study, results cannot be used for other purposes.
Fuselage experiences a small percentage of lift loads, but the dominating load on the fuselage is the
Inertia load. When the aircrafts fly over high altitude an internal pressurization is applied to create the
sea level atmospheric pressure inside the fuselage cabin. This internal pressurization is considered to
be one of the critical load cases in the design and development of the aircraft.
A Pilatus PC-12 rear pressure bulkhead with all stiffening members is considered in this analysis. The
rear pressure bulkhead is connected to the airframe by a doubler that is connected simultaneously to
a stiffener frame (frame36), rear fuselage and central fuselage skins and stringers. The frame is much
more rigid than the pressure bulkhead flange, and that is because all tension loading at this section is
supported by the frame. That is the reason why the selected loading for this analysis is only the
pressure load, 5.7 psi, which the maximum pressure differential of the Pilatus PC-12 NG.

47
Geometric modelling
A rear pressure bulkhead with all stiffening members is considered for the analysis. The RPB is
manufactured from a solid formed sheet of aluminum of a constant thickness. The flange
reinforcements and stiffeners are formed on the outer surface of the RPB by chemical milling.

Fig. 38 – Geometric model and mesh used for structural analysis and loading validation.

Geometrical specification of the rear pressure bulkhead was given in the Table 3. The material used
for RPB is Al 2024-T3.

Color in Fig.31. Relative Thickness (%)

Stiffeners Magenta 62.5
Central Surface Red 50
Flange and hole-reinforcements Cyan 100

Tab. 3 – Pressure Rear Bulkhead thicknesses.

After RPB geometry definition some constraints are considered: symmetry of the component could
simplify the analysis, working with a half and using the right boundary conditions, and a mapped mesh
of quad elements would increase reliability of the model. Geometry complexity makes this mesh
implementation difficult, manual area-by-area meshing was implemented in order to mesh as
described. Even though, more complex areas are meshed using free-quad elements.
Selected elements
The selected element is Shell-181 for all component surfaces. SHELL181 is suitable for analyzing thin
to moderately-thick shell structures. It is a four-node element with six degrees of freedom at each
node: translations in the x, y, and z directions, and rotations about the x, y, and z-axes.
SHELL181 is well-suited for linear, large rotation, and/or large strain nonlinear applications. Change in
shell thickness is accounted for in nonlinear analyses. In the element domain, both full and reduced
integration schemes are supported. SHELL181 accounts for follower (load stiffness) effects of
distributed pressures.

48
 Fig. 39 – SHEL181 geometry. Courtesy of ANSYS

The element formulation is based on logarithmic strain and true stress measures.
The element kinematics allow for finite membrane strains (stretching). However, the curvature
changes within a time increment are assumed to be small.

Fig. 40 – SHEL181 stress output. Courtesy of ANSYS

Boundary Conditions and Load

All translation degrees of freedom of the RPB flange are fixed and rotation is free (supported flange).
The load condition is the pressure load acting at the entire skin (from inner to outer surface).
Linear-static structural analysis
Applied boundary condition is a conservative approach to real boundary conditions, because stress at
studied areas (flange and central membrane are not considered for this analysis) are over-estimated
but in an acceptable range, and that means a safety factor greater than 1.5 for maximum pressure
differential.
At flange, stress is under-estimated because the selected boundary condition (supported flange),
reduces stress at flange and increase stress at the rest compared to real loading. Even though, it is a
good boundary condition approach for this analysis and no sensibility analysis is done at this area.

49
At central membrane (the most stressed area), tension is over-estimated because of lack of stiffeners
and, as at the rest of the central zone, PRB stress is sensibly over-estimated because of selected
boundary conditions.

A B

Fig. 41. A – Von Misses Equivalent Stress plot of outer face.

Fig. 41. B – Inner PRB surfaces.

3.3. Thickness decrease sensibility analysis

A sensibility analysis is done in order to understand the impact of standard scratch repairing
processes on pressure rear bulkheads. The selected defect is a scratch on the bottom center side of
the PRB and the standard repairing process is a progressive thickness decrease at the surrounding
area. The mesh used for this analysis has 12846 shell-181 elements.
The modified area is 30 ଶ , and the modification is of 10% or 25% decrease of the nominal thickness.

A B

Fig. 42. A – Thickness decrease analysis mesh, modified area identified in blue at the right picture.

Fig. 42. B – Detail of the defect.

The thickness decrease simulated generates a stress concentration at the surrounding area (shown at
figure 44 A and B). The stress concentration generated at the FEM model is greater than in the real
RPB because of the smoother contour of the last, even stress levels remain in an acceptable range
and the approach is conservative.

Fig. 43 – Real contour of repaired area (red) and FEM model contour (grey).

50
 A B

Fig. 44. A – Von-Misses stress distribution for inner face thickness decrease of 25% at inner face.

Fig. 44. B – Von-Misses stress distribution for same thickness decrease at outer face.

In the FEM simulation of RPB with a repaired area with a thickness decrease, a stress peak is found
at the proximity of the defect because of area and inertia reduction of the section at this point,
membrane stress is expected to increase as well as bending stress.

3.4. Outer face and Inner face defects

Production defect on the rear pressure bulkhead usually occurs on the inner face, because of
assembling procedures. Equivalent Von-Misses stress increases more at defect surroundings when
the defect is placed on the inner face. Even though, the RPB with a defect on the outer face presents
a peak of tension near of the defect and both defect locations produce similar stress distributions and
maximum stress values (of around 170 MPa).

Fig. 45 – Repairing on outer face and pressure distribution direction (black arrows).

51
 A B

Fig. 46. A – Von-Misses stress distribution for outer face thickness decrease of 10% on outer face.

Fig. 46. B – Von-Misses stress distribution for same thickness decrease of 10% on inner face.

Fig. 47 – Repairing on inner face and pressure distribution direction (black arrows).

A B

Fig. 48. A – Von-Misses stress distribution for inner face thickness decrease of 10% on outer face.

Fig. 48. B – Von-Misses stress distribution for same thickness decrease of 10% on inner face.

3.5. Stress concentration at edges

The maximum thickness reduction allowed during manufacturing is 10 %, and this is the reference to
analyze criticality of the repairing operation. As it is shown in Fig. 49 B, at inner face the effect on
stress of the repairing operation is slight compared to stress concentration at milling edges, where
stress value is almost the double of the value found at defect surroundings. At outer face, repair effect
is slight as the edges effect on stress. To conclude, the 10% of thickness reduction effect is almost
negligible in front of the edges effect.

52
 A B

Fig. 49. A – Edges stress concentration at outer face thickness decrease of 10%, on outer face.

Fig. 49. B – Edges stress concentration at outer face thickness decrease of 10%, on inner face.

3.6. Refined mesh analysis

A much more refined mesh (42841 elements, 330% more elements than the reference mesh) is used
to validate the stress distribution on the PRB. Results show that stress peaks and general stress
distribution remains equal for both analysis. The increase of maximum Von – Misses equivalent stress
is 4.29%.

Fig. 50 – Refined mesh.

53
A B

Fig. 51. A – Von-misses stress analysis of inner face using initial mesh.

Fig. 51. B – Von-misses stress analysis of inner face using refined mesh.

A B

Fig. 52. A – Von-misses stress analysis of outer face using initial mesh

Fig. 52. B – Von-misses stress analysis of outer face using refined mesh.

54
Process Improvement

Lean methodology
Production optimization, from a first perspective, is the improvement of effectiveness in all processes
involved in industrialization and manufacturing. Two methodologies were developed based on this
principle: TPS and, later on, Lean manufacturing.
The Toyota Production System (TPS), originally called just-in-time production, is an integrated socio-
technical system, developed by Toyota that comprises its management philosophy and practices. The
TPS is a tool to improve productivity and quality on manufacturing and logistics, including interaction
with suppliers and customers. The main developers of this system are Taiichi Ohno, Shigeo Shingo
and Eiji Toyoda. This system was born as an answer of the Japanese industry to the constraints of the
Post-war situation, optimizing the use of resources and increasing the internal flexibility in order to
adapt the range of products and industrial capabilities to customer preferences.
Lean manufacturing is a management philosophy derived mostly from the Toyota Production
System (TPS). The steady growth of Toyota, from a small company to the world's largest
automaker has focused attention on how it has achieved this success and bigger companies all
around the world tried to develop similar methodologies.
Lean is a production practice that considers the expenditure of resources for any goal other than the
creation of value for the end customer to be wasteful, and thus a target for elimination. Value, from the
Lean perspective, is defined as any action or process that a customer would be willing to pay for.
Both lean and TPS can be seen as a loosely connected set of potentially competing principles whose
goal is cost reduction by the elimination of waste. These principles include: Pull processing, Perfect
first-time quality, Waste minimization, Continuous improvement, Flexibility, Building and maintaining a
long term relationship with suppliers, Autonomation (Jidoka), Load leveling (Heijunka) and Production
flow and Visual control [15].

1. Lean Tools
1.1.1. Kaizen, continuous improvement
Kaizen is the Japanese term that stands for continuous improvement, it is considered as an attitude
and a way of thinking. At OGMA, 10 rules are set in order to define what a Kaizen implementation is:
A. Problems must be anticipated and faced when they happened, but they must not waste
resources before it is required. People must not be worried about them, anomalies result from
complexity of industrial operation.
B. Discuss and analyze issues only from real facts and information.
C. Problems are opportunities to improve current status of processes and operations.
D. Total achievement of improvement objectives is not the goal of the methodology, the goal is
process development.
E. Make things happen fast (“Trystorming”).
F. Don’t waste a lot of resources to get results; ideas are the best way to get them.

55
 G. Transform no needed activities to productive activities.
H. Discuss every established procedure that affects operations without prejudices.
I. Continuous improvement is a process that involves regular development control.
Kaizen is implemented in workshops that last a week. During this week: change must be visible and
meaningful, objectives must be clear and focused and first results must be achieved from the first
week (Tryout) [16].
Kaizen workshop phases:

A. Planning
a. Define clearly the objective of the Kaizen workshop and team functions
b. Define the team to work with
c. Current status mapping and data recording: material flow, information flow,
activities/operations flow, waiting time, technical documentation and involved systems
and logistics. (walk the process)
d. Identify activities without added value.
e. Use the right tools to collect and analyze all data
f. Keep information visible at the War Room (room where Kaizen activities are planned)

B. Executing
a. Developing the future status for the process: creating new ideas, evaluating and
measuring and comparing to current processes.
b. Proceed according to real facts (“Genchi gembutsu”).
c. Implementing a pilot-process or a simulation of it
d. Measure the performance of actions to achieve goals
e. Set an action planning for activities that cannot be done during the workshop week

C. Follow-up
a. Meet Kaizen team regularly after the workshop week
b. Quantify the performance of the process.
c. Standardize operations
d. Implement standardized operations
e. Create visual control
f. Discuss additional improvement opportunities
g. Continue to improve the process

1.1.2. Flux cell

A cell is made up a group of people from different departments, that supply and process services or
products. The cell components work in a supplier/customer system and they share the same results.
Cells must involve all organization and each member must work for only one cell. All cells have a Cell
Leader (CL) and a Continuous Improvement Agent (AMC). AMC is a full time function.

56
E+ team (OGMA designation for process improvement department) in collaboration with Area leaders
define the number and composition of cells, depending on their value, sizing, scheduling and
placement.
The AMC must set as main objective to promote all Continuous Improvement activities at Cell. AMC
and CL achievements and team performance must be evaluated during the implementation and
sustainability of the cell.
Cells are managed by their Cell Leaders (CL). The Continuous Improvement Agents report to Leaders
and their function is to improve the value-stream at the cell, in order to achieve the defined objectives.

1.1.3. Heijunka
Heijunka, production smoothing or leveling, is a tool to facilitate Just-In-Time production; it means
keeping average production volumes and is used to smooth out production in all departments as well
as that of the supplier over a period of time.
Heijunka is important to sequence production: if the factory’s ordering system send batches of high
specification product orders down its assembly line at the same time, more workers would be required
to manage lots of complex build tasks not present in less complex equipment.
Furthermore, the disruption of production flow is minimized by making sure that components are
sequenced to be available in the right quantity and at the right time, while changeover periods for vital
processes are as short as possible.

1.1.4. Muda, Mura and Muri

Muda is a traditional general Japanese term for an activity that is wasteful and doesn’t add value or is
unproductive. It is also a key concept in the Toyota Production System (TPS) and is one of the three
types of waste (Muda, Mura, Muri) that it identifies. Waste reduction is an effective way to increase
profitability. A process adds value by producing goods or providing a service that a customer will pay
for. Waste occurs when more resources are consumed than are necessary to produce the goods or
provide the service that the customer actually wants.
Muda has been given much greater attention as waste than the other two, which means that whilst
many Lean practitioners have learned to see muda they fail to see in the same prominence the wastes
of mura (unevenness) and muri (overburden). Thus whilst they are focused on getting their process
under control they do not give enough time to process improvement by redesign.
Mura is traditional general Japanese term for unevenness, inconsistency in physical matter or human
spiritual condition. It is also a key concept in the Toyota Production System and is one of the three
types of waste (Muda, Mura, Muri) it identifies. Mura is avoided through Just-In-Time systems which
are based on little or no inventory, by supplying the production process with the right part, at the right
time and in the right amount. Just in Time systems create a “pull system” in which each sub-process
withdraws its needs from the preceding sub-processes, and ultimately from an outside supplier. When
a preceding process does not receive a request or withdrawal it does not make more parts. This type
of system is designed to maximize productivity by minimizing storage overhead.

57
Muri is a Japanese term for overburden, unreasonableness or absurdity, which has become
popularized in the West by its use as a key concept in the Toyota Production System. Muri is one of
three types of waste (Muda, Mura, Muri) identified in the Toyota Production System.
Muri can be avoided through standardized work. To achieve this standard condition or output must be
defined to assure effective judgment of quality. Then every process and function must be reduced to
its simplest elements for examination and later recombination. This is done by taking simple work
elements and combining them, one-by-one into standardized work sequences.

1.1.5. Jidoka
Jidoka is the automation using human characteristics, human intelligence is transferred to automated
equipment in order to detect anomalies and stop the process wherever it is required, avoiding error
propagation.

1.1.6. Quality Clinic Process Charts (QCPC)

Is a tool for quality control and improvement. A process data recording method must be defined for
the selected processes. Data must include the following information:
• Internal improvements identified by the cell members
• Environmental, hygienic and safety improvements

• Customer complaining

• Scrap and Rework

• RAC/ RNC

• PACs
The cell must define priorities while analyzing the recorded data. Data collecting methodology must be
clear and defined in the act, sources of data and number of anomalies must be identified.
Data must be transparent and displayed graphically to all cell members.

1.1.7. Poka-yoke
Tool designed to achieve the “zero defects” status, through the use of a mistake-proofing device or
procedure that prevents a defect from passing on to the next operation or process.
Mistakes must be physically not possible through the use of poka-yokes.
Examples of Poka-yokes are: smoke detectors, circuit-breakers., caps with safety sealing, etc.

58
 1.1.8. 5S and Visual Control
5S is a method whose objective is to eliminate the “muda” waste, as a result of its implementation the
shop floor becomes a cleaner, neater and a high performance place. The meanings of 5S’s are the
following:
• Sort: make needed and not required items look different.
• Straighten: keep required items at a defined place, ease and speed up utilization
• Shine: keep the shop-floor clean
• Standardize: Work procedures, tools and sign must be uniform and recognizable in the entire
enterprise. 5S implementation must be rational and uniform.

• Sustain: Develop the habit of the defined procedures. Visual controls are used to keep the
shop-floor clear and neat: tags, visual identification of locals, color codes to ease identification.

1.1.9. SMED
Single Minute Exchange of Die (SMED) is a methodology focused on fast tool change with the
purpose of reducing setup times. Setup time is the time required to prepare an equipment or tool to
execute a defined task. That time includes the time spent on the following operations:
A. Tools or equipment assembly, disassembly or fixing
B. Tools logistics
C. Process parameters adjustments after tools change
D. Cycle time for first item produced
E. Execution of all required adjustments

1.1.10. Value stream mapping

Tool based on the Lean principles, its main objective is to show the process status through a visual
representation of materials/information flux for a specific product family. It identifies the required
activities, from customer’s PO to product/service delivery.
That analysis allow engineering department to identify waste. In order to set an activities plan to
improve processes, two VSM are made, one for the current status and another one for the future
desired process.
To implement VSM the following steps are required:
• Product identification, product family or service;
• Creation of a value stream map for the current status and representation of the stages,
setbacks and information flux required to product delivery. It could be Production Value
Stream (raw material to customer) or Project Value Stream (from conception to release).
• Value Stream mapping analysis of current status, identification of activities that add value and
those ones that are waste.
• Identify activities that are waste but are required for the process.
• Creation of a value stream map for future status.
• Define activities to achieve the future desired status

59
 Define activities
Identify Product Create current Create future to achieve the
Family status map status map future desired
status

Fig. 53– Value stream mapping process flowchart.

OGMA has developed some actions in order to reduce WIP (work in progress) and waste during wing
assembly operations. A value stream mapping of the whole process was made, including precise time
information about processes in order to identify non-added value operations and which of those were
not essential for the assembly process. The map resulting from this study is shown below:

Fig. 54 – Pilatus PC-12 Wings assembly process VSM.

1.1.11. Process Standardization

Process standardization consists on describing clearly and simply the best way to perform an action,
in order to ensure:
• Understanding of the operator
• Obtaining the best result possible, without reproducibility problems
• Reducing of waste
The standardization results in work instructions definition or procedures that describe clear working
methodologies that ensure the best results.
A stable standardized process is the base to implement new process improvements. The introduction
of process improvement in a process and its stabilization make possible to standardize that improved
process, as a result, a continuous improvement cycle is created.

60
 2. OGMA Lean implementation

2.1. PC-12 drilling holes anomalies resolution case study

This case study analyzes the resolution of drilling anomalies found on the Airframe due to unknown
reasons. First of all, it is required to identify the main problem: For PN 557.05.12.137 and
557.05.12.138, of Pilatus PC-12 program, the “drilling or countersinking anomaly”, represents 53,1%
of total anomalies. Right and left wings have the greater contribution, 34.7% and 49.2% respectively,
of “drilling or countersinking anomaly”. That means that drilling and countersinking anomalies are
concentrated in wing assembly processes, specially left wing processes. Pareto analyses are used to
identify which PN’s generate more RACs.

Followed methodology
The implemented methodology is developed in the following diagram:

Fig. 55 – Pareto chart of number of RAC’s by PN at FMT. Courtesy of OGMA

61
 A

Fig. 56. A – Pareto charts left wing of RAC’s openings causes.

Fig. 56. B – Pareto charts of right wing RAC’s openings causes. Courtesy of OGMA

The quality critical aspect is that each RAC represents a product nonconformity (NC), work could be
stopped at this stage and, if it is required, the customer is informed about the anomaly, reducing
customer’s quality perception. Rework consumes time and resources, increasing production costs.
In order to reduce the previous mentioned inefficiencies, some objectives are defined: 50% reduction
of opened RACs due to “drilling our countersinking anomalies” and for an optimistic perspective: 60%
reduction of opened RACs due to “drilling our countersinking anomalies.

Fig. 57 – Drilling process diagram. Courtesy of OGMA

62
 Medição Materiais Mão de obra

Furo
FishBone Analisys Diametro
Acima
Problema : Anomalias de furação
PILATUS Meio Ambiente Método Máquina

Medição Materiais Mão de obra Meio Ambiente Método Máquina

Formação Brocas Concentração Arrumação e Organização Passagem de informação Template furação
Calibres de Inspecção de
Berbequins Formação Geral Climatização Padronização Identificação ferramenta
Furos/Escariados
Espessura de material Formação Especifica Luminosidade Sequência de Furação Tipo de berbequim

Tipo de material a furar Reprodutibilidade Angulos de furação

sequência de trabalho não
Transição do horário
continua
Consulta de doc Técnica tipo de marcação utilizada

Consulta de
Gestão do tempo documentos(Desenho, ITM,
Protocolo)

Rotação de Recursos Robustez do processo

abastecimento e brocas
Ferramenta a mais na
bancada

Fig. 58 – Fishbone or Ishikawa analysis. Courtesy of OGMA

Steps to find wing anomalies causes are defined through a pilot plan, implementing process
improvements, apply improvements to the rest of airframe structures and control processes.

Fig. 59 – Pilot plan for drilling and countersinking anomalies solving. Courtesy of OGMA

Process improvements
After a shop-floor analysis of current status and root-causes of most common drilling or countersinking
anomalies, some process improvements are proposed and implemented. An important point is to
inform to all shop-floor operators about which processes are critical and process improvement
implementations through information points.

63
 Fig. 60 – Information point. Courtesy of OGMA

Another critical point is to make drilling areas and tools easy to identify at work cells. With the purpose
of improve visual control the following measures are implemented: marking skin holes using colors
and identifying tools using different colors.
Eventually, most common anomalies are reported and shown at the information point as a visual aid.

A B

Fig. 61. A – Marked holes.

Fig. 61. B – tools identified by colors. Courtesy of OGMA

Fig. 62 – Visual aids. Courtesy of OGMA

64
 2.2. Wing Assembly process improvements

With the purpose of exemplifying process improvements at Pilatus PC-12 assembly line, some actions
implemented after a kaizen workshop of wings assembly optimization are presented as follows:

65
66
67
68
69
70
71
 Automation

Choice of technology must be based on technology strategy. A technology strategy begins with a
business and operations strategy that describes the vision and mission of the firm. For example, if the
mission is to be a low-cost producer, the technology strategy should be aimed at developing
technologies that enable low costs. On the other hand, if the mission is to produce differentiated
products, the technology strategy should be oriented towards product differentiation.
A technology strategy sets an overall framework for development of new technology to support the
mission. It ensures that technology is not merely developed and justified one at a time, but
implemented in a coherent strategy. The technology is integrated and provides a competitive
advantage. Acceptable finance return can be seen as a constraint on technology strategies, the
technology strategy must provide at least the minimum acceptable return on investment.
Usually industrial automation is related to robotics, an industrial robot is a computer controlled
machine programmed to perform various production tasks. The robot usually is integrated by a
gripper, part similar to a hand, and an arm, which can make human like movements. Use of robots has
been expanded to several production jobs, such as: welding, painting, fixed assembly work and
materials handling.
Another way to automatize is the numerically controlled (CNC) machine tools; those ones are
controlled by a computer and can be programmed for several jobs, such as: milling, machining or
drilling. NC tools are not flexible as robotic arms, but future factories will consist in a mixture of NC
machines, conventional machines and robots.
Robotics provides reduction of direct labor, flexibility to redesign parts, 24-hour operation,
performance on hazardous tasks, and a more uniform quality. Despite of the general cost-reduction
oriented strategy, reasonable robotization could boost productivity in a mid-term horizon.

1. Gemcor G-86 implementation at PC-12 Assembly Line

Nowadays, state-of-art aircraft assembly lines use the automated riveting process. Automated
fastening proved in to be vastly superior in most of its implementations, in quality and speed, to
manual or semi-automatic operations.
An assembly process is analyzed in order to automate it: right and left sidewalls assembly process.
Sidewalls are plane components and few types of rivets are used on it. The high number of similar
rivets makes this process time-consuming and labor intensive; these two characteristics make
automation a good way to achieve great improvements, specially increasing productivity.
An automatic fastening machine is selected for both components (Gemcor G86) in order to reduce
timeframes and quality variability. Extra investments are required to its installation and its
implementation at PC-12 line, further profitability research is required to justify its use for this program.

72
 Fig. 63 – Component being riveted by an automatic fastening machine. Courtesy of Gemcor

Parametric analysis methodology

A parametric analysis is realized with the purpose of estimating savings implementing an automatic
fastening machine. Once the structures to assembly at this machine are selected, number and type of
rivets must be analyzed (this analysis is summarized at tables 4 and 5).

SOLID RIVET BLIND RIVET TOTAL

MS20470AD4

MS20470AD5

NAS1097AD3

NAS1097AD4

NAS1097AD5

CR3223AD4

CR3223AD5

R3224AD4

R3224AD5

Description

SIDEWALL RH 1 1053
SIDEWALL RH 2 1189
SIDEWALL RH 3 1665
ESTIMATED TOTAL: 3907

Tab. 4 – Rivets on right sidewall.

SOLID RIVET BLIND RIVET TOTAL
MS20470AD4

MS20470AD5

NAS1097AD3

NAS1097AD4

NAS1097AD5

CR3223AD4

CR3223AD5

R3224AD4

R3224AD5

Description

SIDEWALL LH 1 838
SIDEWALL LH 2 1652
ESTIMATED TOTAL: 2490

Tab. 5 – Rivets on left sidewall.

73
Next, an operator hourly rate is defined, as well as, hourly cost of the machine. In order to estimate the
second one a costs breakdown is required:
A. Machine costs and financial associated costs (machine amortization study)
B. Power consumed and estimated price for kW/h
C. Machine maintenance and spare parts costs
D. Two operators are required to operate the machine
Some assumptions are made in order to calculate operation costs for sidewalls assembly:
A. 5% of those rivets are considered not appropriate for automatic riveting, because of the lower
tolerances at frame-stringers intersection.
B. Power consumption of 50 Kw. Due to the use of reactive power regulation devices, no reactive
power is considered while estimating power price.
C. Power price is assumed to be almost constant during the amortization period and an average
price, based on EDP medium voltage electricity tariff.
D. Estimated setup time is about 10% of operation time
E. Machine Mean Time Before Failing is 95%
F. Current total time obtained from updated work orders
G. Operator hourly rate constant during amortization period
H. Machine maintenance and spare parts is estimated as 20% of the amortization amount
I. Amortization period of the machine is of 10 years and it will be used by 3 shifts of 8 hours
each, and the amortization rate is considered to be constant during this period.
Calculations:
SF = setup factor
NR = number of rivets
CT = cycle time
COT = current operaton time
MCT = mean manual cycle time
MMTBF = machine mean time before failing
PC = electricity cost
RP = required power
HRO = operator hourly rate
MAR = machine amortization rate
MSC = machine maintenance and spare parts cost
PAV = production annual volume

∗∗.∗
DCRM timeDrill + Countersinking + Riveting + Move = 
(9)

Saved time = DCRM time − current time (10)

Hourly machine cost HMC = PC ∗ RP/h + 2 ∗ HRO + MAR/h + MSC/h (11)
Savings = COT ∗ HRO − HMC ∗ DCRM + 0.05 ∗ NR ∗ MCT ∗ HRO (12)
∗
Utilization factor of the machine = ∗∗
(13)

74
  
= (14)
 "#$% &  '(∗)'

After all data is collected and calculations are done, the savings-current costs ratio is calculated in
order to evaluate the profitability of the machine implementation. The result for that parameter is:
Savings
= 10.64%
current assembly costs
That value is a great achievement in terms of costs and time reduction and efficiency improvement at
assembly operations. Even though, the combined machine utilization factor for both sidewalls is
6.27%, which is a low value. That means that other structures or programs must supply more than
90% of the machine workload.
Due to the difficulty to define a mean cycle time for all structures and programs and to predict real
machine costs, most of associated costs are related to unknown parameters, a study of the
relationship between cycle time and machine costs is required.

35
savings/current assembly cost

30 cycle
25 time (s)
20 3,5
(%)

15 4
10 6
5 12
0
30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240
Machine hourly cost (€)

Fig. 64 – Profitability analysis of LH and RH PC-12 sidewalls riveting automation.

As it is expected to happen, the slower is the machine operation the smaller is the machine hourly cost
range. Once the technological requirements and tolerances are defined, the appropriate machines
could be selected and the final machine hourly cost could be estimated.
A chart could be created from each structure (like the one shown at Fig. 64) to easily identify operation
profitability.
Automation issues
A. At frame-stringer connections skin tolerances are critical. During the detailed project phase a
manufacturing analysis must be done to allow machine to rivet those connections. For that
implementation, connections must be riveted manually.
B. Sealants are applied on each skin installed, skin by skin. Automated operation requires
applying sealant on all surfaces at the same time and a setup time must be considered. As a
result of that, processing time of sealants must be longer enough to realize all required
operations.

75
Conclusion and further work

Process analysis is an everyday procedure for manufacturing companies all over the world. Not only
used by aircraft’s OEMs, but also other industries, specially automotive and heavy equipment ones. In
order to enhance methods and resources employed on aerostructure manufacturing it is important to
define and standardize work in both industrialization and manufacturing phases. This results in great
performance improvement, which are achieved through specific methodologies, technical
documentation and software focused on boosting productivity. Even though, continuous improvement
methods must be implemented in order to adapt current capacity and resources to demand, predicting
bottle necks and reducing waste of resources. The proposed methodology for waste reduction is Lean,
including Kaizen workshops implementation.
With these methods, Engineers can validate process data in a faster way, take decisions and improve
systematically and, at the same time, operations becomes more reliable, which can ultimately lead to
lower costs and improve productivity.
The RPB sensibility analysis enables to determine the static loads acting on the component and how
defects affect its structural behavior, as well as understand standard rework operations for this type of
component. Even being a conservative approach, the component stress distribution is in an
acceptable range and maximum admissible defects don’t change significantly stress distribution.
Through this analysis it is demonstrated that contours of milled areas have more affection on stress
distribution than admissible defects. A more detailed validation would require the use of real testing
and/or finite element method software using real boundary conditions and discussion of linear and
non-linear analysis.
The current trend of Aerospace manufacturing industry is to automate processes, new concepts of
mobile jigs and all-in-one machines (riveting, countersinking, sealant applying). In order to analyze this
trend and optimize the fuselage assembly process, automatic fastening machine implementation is
analyzed for multi-program use. Sidewalls assembly automation increases productivity, reduces
timeframes and costs and improves quality, but requires further analysis of profitability and assembling
related issues.

76
Bibliographical references

[1] ONS 000403, Estrutura, organização, atribuições e responsabilidades da engenharia- fabricação.

May 2014.
st
[2] AS 9102, Aerospace First Article Inspection Requirement. Rev. 1 , Jan 2004.
st
[3] Guia para la aplicación de la norma EN 9100 en industrias del sector aeronáutico. 1 ed. Sevilla:
Instituto Andaluz de Tecnologia, 2003. ISBN 84-923464-8-5
th
[4] DEF-Stan 05-57, Configuration Management of Defense Material. Rev. 5 , 17 June 2005.
[5] NP ISO 10007, Quality Management Systems. Guidelines for Configuration Management, March
2006.
[6] Hayes, R. H. and S. C. Wheelwright (1979). "Link manufacturing process and product life cycles."
Harvard Business Review (January-February), p.133.
[7] Hayes, R. H. and S. G. Wheelwright (1979b). "The dynamics of process-product life cycles."
Harvard Business Review (March-April), p. 127.
th
[8] SABRe – Non-conformance Control, Rev. 18 : October 2007.
nd
[9] Ricardo Anselmo de Castro- Lean Six Sigma: para qualquer negócio. 2 ed. Lisboa: IST Press,
2012. ISBN 978-989-8481-21-4
st
[10] Ruy Aguilar da Silva Leme- Contrôles na Produção. 1 ed. São Paulo: CEPAI, 1967.
[11] Kiyoshi Suzaki- Gestão no Chão da Fábrica Lean: sustentando a melhoría contínua todos os
st
dias. 1 ed. Rio Meão: LeanOP, 2013. ISBN 978-989-20-4069-1
[12] NP EN ISO 9001:2000, Quality Management Systems.
[13] EASA PART 145.A.42: Acceptance of Components. 24 September 2003.
[14] AC 21-38, Disposition of Unsalvageable Aircraft Parts and Materials.
[15] Jeffrey k. Liker- Las claves del éxito de Toyota: 14 principios de gestión del fabricante más
st
grande del mundo. 1 ed. Barcelona: Gestión 2000, 2010. ISBN 978-84-9875-074-4
th
[16] Masaaki Imai- Kaizen: La clave de la ventaja competitiva japonesa. 13 ed. México: Compañía
Editorial Continental, 2001. ISBN 968-26-1128-8

77
 Annex A
With the purpose of understanding the Gemcor G86 capacities to fit the riveting operation presented in
the automation chapter, machine specifications are presented as follows:
Rivet feeding:
Alimentation system and load station AHG System
Optional cassette for small rivet (to avoid tumble inside tube) Yes
Riveting cycle:
Mode force Yes
Mode position Yes
Upgrade possible the rivet spec Yes
Automatic thickness measure and selection of rivet length Yes
Complete Cycle:
Cycle time (clamping-drilling-sealant-rivet insertion-upset-unclamping) 2.5 sec
Hole to hole cycle ( cycle time + axes travel ) 3.5
Positioning:
Positioning accuracy of X, Y and Z axes +/- 0.150 mm
Repeatability of X, Y and Z axes +/- 0.080 mm
Rotational axis accuracy +/-3arc minutes
Rotational axis repeatability +/-1arc minutes
Speed in the X and Y axes 10.000 mm/min
Speed in Z axis 5000 mm/min
Speed in rotational axis 180 degrees/min
Pneumatic System:
Pneumatic power 90 psi
Safety:
Noise level 80 db
Collision detector Yes
Sensors to prevent the part from contacting the upper pressure foot bushing Yes
Panel protection (movements stop when rivet is tilted) Yes
Tipped rivet detector at the injector Yes
Missing rivet detector Yes
Broken drill detector Yes
Electrical Equipment:
Power supply 220V 3F 60Hz
Protection against transient voltage surges Yes
Protection against power failures Yes

Tab. 6 – Gemcor G86 specifications.

78