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.

This document shall be applied by accreditation bodies, registrars and other providers of training for the instruction of auditors or other professionals for specialization for the aerospace industry per the requirements of AIR5359. Additionally, this document applies to all organizations qualifying Aerospace Auditors in support of Aerospace Quality Systems standards AS9000 and AS9100.

This document shall be applied by course approval bodies, accreditation bodies, CRBs and other providers of training for the instruction of auditors or other professionals for specialization for the aerospace industry per the requirements of SAE AIR5359. Additionally, this document applies to all organizations qualifying Aerospace Auditors in support of Aerospace Quality Systems standards.

This document has been declared “CANCELLED” as of July 2009 and has been superseded by AS9104/3. By this action, this document will remain listed in the Numerical Section of the Aerospace Standards Index noting that it is superseded by AS9104/3.

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.

These requirements are applicable to IAQG global sectors when utilizing Aerospace Industry Controlled Other Party (ICOP) schemes for the assessment and certification of supplier quality systems in accordance with the requirements contained in 9104. IAQG member companies have committed to perform sufficient oversight of the Aerospace accreditation/certification assessment processes in order to ensure conformance to established requirements contained in 9104. NOTE: The IAQG OPMT oversight structure is depicted graphically in Appendix A.

This document defines the minimum requirements for auditors, CBs, Auditor Authentication Bodies (AABs), Training Provider Approval Bodies (TPABs), and Training Providers (TPs) who participate in the IAQG Industry Controlled Other Party (ICOP) scheme. The requirements in this standard supplement those defined within the 9104/1, 9104/2, ISO/IEC 17021-1, and ISO/IEC 17021-3 standards. Data protection for the parties subject to this document and other relevant requirements of the ICOP scheme are managed via bi-lateral contracts between the joint controllers of the data.

This document provides the minimum requirements (Body of Knowledge) for AQMS auditors who will participate in AQMS certification/registration activities, including the auditor authentication process and requirements for a training organization. It is applicable to auditors seeking formal approval to conduct audits of the AQMS in support of the IAQG, and those who manage the competency element of an AQMS audit program and/or training organizations.

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 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).