Search Results

The purpose of ARP9013/2 is to ensure conformance for each product characteristic being verified in each lot in the series. ARP9013/2 document specifies a product acceptance system using either attribute or variable lot acceptance methods documented in ANSI/ASQC Z1.4, ANSI/ASQC Z1.9, and “Zero Acceptance Number Sampling Plans” by Nicholas L. Squeglia.

The purpose of this SAE Aerospace Recommended Practice (ARP) is to ensure conformance for each product characteristic being verified in a lot, without maintaining information from previous lots. ARP9013/1 specifies a product acceptance system for isolated lots. For example, isolated lot sampling avoids keeping track of the normal, tightened, and reduced levels of sampling formerly used in MIL-STD-105 and currently used in ANSI/ASQC Z1.4. Because those switching rules provided significant long-term protection for product quality, these isolated lot tables replace that protection in other ways.

The purpose of ARP9013/4 is to ensure conformance for each product characteristic being verified under these methods. ARP9013/4 provides the requirements for continuous sampling, skip-lot sampling, and for statistical methods for product acceptance that do not derive from industry standard tables.

Operator Self-Verification can apply to a variety of processes. The primary focus is on traditional manufacturing operations, but applications can be made wherever traditional inspection methods are employed. The practices recommended in this document are intended to identify the basic elements for structuring Operator Self-Verification programs within the aerospace industry; applicable to producers of commercial and military aircraft and weapons platforms, space vehicles, and all related hardware, software, electronics, engines and composite components. Operator Self-Verification programs are applied to improve overall efficiency and product quality to processes considered mature, as judged by the organization. Operator Self-Verification programs are not stand-alone processes, but augment existing quality management system standard requirements.

Limited to the commercial aerospace industry where a request is made for a PO to have Direct Delivery Authorization (DDA), which includes an Appropriate Arrangement (AA) between the PO and the Design Organization (DO). In this process the DO is responsible for ensuring the continuous updating of design and airworthiness data to the PO, whilst the PO is responsible for assurance that the manufactured article conforms to approved design and airworthiness data. The PO is responsible to provide airworthiness release documentation.

This SAE Aerospace Standard (AS) further defines the requirements for a delegation process identified in Aerospace Quality Management System (AQMS) standards (i.e., AS9100, AS9110, AS9120). This standard establishes minimum requirements for the delegation of product verification to an organization’s suppliers; outlining requirements for the initial delegation (qualification/selection), maintenance, and removal/withdrawal of delegations.

The focus of Operator Self-Verification is on traditional manufacturing operations, and applications can be made wherever traditional inspection is employed. The practices recommended in this document are intended to identify the basic elements and provide a “guideline” for structuring Operator Self-Verification programs within the aerospace industry; applicable to producers of commercial and military aircraft and weapons platforms, space vehicles, and all related hardware, software, electronics, engines and composite components. Operator Self-Verification programs are applied to improve the overall efficiency and product quality of processes considered mature, as judged by the implementing organization. Operator Self-Verification programs are not stand-alone processes, but augment existing quality management systems.

This standard defines the common nonconformance data definition and documentation that an internal or external supplier or sub-tier supplier must submit when informing a customer of a nonconformity. The requirements shall be are applicable for reporting a nonconforming product to the owner/operator (i.e., end item user), if specified by contract. Reporting of nonconformance data, either electronically or conventionally on paper, is subject to the terms and conditions of the contract. This also includes, where applicable, data access under export control regulations.

This standard defines the common nonconformance data definition and documentation that an internal or external supplier or sub-tier supplier must submit when informing a customer of a nonconformity. The requirements shall be are applicable for reporting a nonconforming product to the owner/operator (i.e., end item user), if specified by contract. Reporting of nonconformance data, either electronically or conventionally on paper, is subject to the terms and conditions of the contract. This also includes, where applicable, data access under export control regulations.

Limited to the aerospace industry, where an approved manufacturer requests a supplier to ship an article against the approved manufacturer’s quality system directly to a customer. The direct ship process is not required or applicable to standard parts or military parts. In this process the approved manufacturer is responsible for assurance that the article conforms to type design information.

This document is limited to the aerospace industry, where an approved manufacturer requests a supplier to ship an article against the approved manufacturer’s quality system directly to a customer. The direct ship process is not required or applicable to standard parts or military parts. In this process, the approved manufacturer is responsible for assurance that the article conforms to type design information.

This document contains the minimum requirements for supplier Inspection and Test Quality System. It is emphasized that the quality system requirements specified in this standard are complementary (not alternative) to the contractual and applicable law and regulatory requirements.

This document identifies the basic elements and provides a standard for structuring operator self-verification programs within the aviation, space, and defense industry for producers of commercial and military aircraft and weapons platforms, space vehicles, and all related hardware, software, electronics, engines, and composite components. The requirements specified in this standard are complementary (not alternative) to contractual and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. Should there be a conflict between the requirements of this standard and applicable statutory or regulatory requirements, the latter shall take precedence.

The purpose of this standard is to define the requirements and industry-accepted practices for managing the ICOP scheme, which provides confidence to aviation, space, and defense customers and organizations that their suppliers with certification of their quality management systems, issued by accredited CBs, meet the applicable AQMS standard requirements. The requirements established in this standard are applicable to the IAQG and its three sectors for managing AQMS certification and associated activities. The requirements are applicable to IAQG working groups [e.g., SMS, Other Party Management Team (OPMT)], IAQG member companies, ABs, CBs, Certification Body Management Committees (CBMCs), AABs, TPABs, Training Providers (TPs), and organizations seeking/obtaining AQMS standard certification.

This standard defines FOD Prevention Program requirements for organizations that design, develop, and provide aviation, space, and defense products and services; and by organizations providing post-delivery support, including the provision of maintenance, spare parts, or materials for their own products and services. It is emphasized that the requirements specified in this standard are complementary (not alternative) to customer, and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. Should there be a conflict between the requirements of this standard and applicable statutory or regulatory requirements, the latter shall take precedence.

This standard is primarily intended to apply to new parts and products, but can also be applied to parts currently in production. The standard shall be applicable to all production processes, that influence the variation of KCs, as well as maintenance processes in which KCs are identified. It applies to assemblies and all levels of parts within an assembly, down to the basic materials including castings and forgings, and to organizations that are responsible for producing the design characteristics of the product. It does not apply to lab-scale, pilot, or pre-production processes. However, particular management of some KCs might be required using other methods than those described in the standard, during these phases of a program, when required by the customer or deemed appropriate by the organization (e.g., Engineering department requirement).

This standard is primarily intended to apply to new parts and products intended to be produced in an on-going production phase, but can also be applied to parts currently in production (e.g., manufacturing, maintenance). The standard is applicable to all production processes that influence the variation of KCs, as well as maintenance and service processes in which KCs are identified. It applies to organizations for assemblies and all levels of parts within an assembly, down to the basic materials including castings and forgings, and to organizations that are responsible for producing the design characteristics of the product. The variation control process begins with product definition, typically stated in the design documentation (e.g., digital model, engineering drawing, specification) which identifies KCs, and leads to a variation management process for those KCs. This process may also be used for producer-identified KCs (e.g., process KCs, additional/substitute product KCs).