# PPAP 18 Elements Reference Table > Source: https://netray.co/tools/ppap-18-elements-reference > Publisher: Netray (netray.co), AI and integration engineering for ERP and manufacturing systems. > Section: Free Tools ## Short answer Searchable table of the 18 PPAP elements, the evidence a customer expects for each, and the common reasons submissions get rejected. ## Category quality ## Industry Automotive ## Audience - Supplier quality engineer - Quality engineer - APQP team lead ## Tool **Kind:** worksheet **Mode:** reference **Columns:** #### No. **Key:** no **Type:** text #### PPAP element **Key:** element **Type:** text #### Typical evidence **Key:** evidence **Type:** text #### Common rejection reason **Key:** reject **Type:** text **Rows:** **No:** 1 **Element:** Design records **Evidence:** Customer drawing or CAD data, ballooned copy, BOM for the part **Reject:** Drawing revision does not match the revision on the purchase order **No:** 2 **Element:** Authorized engineering change documents **Evidence:** Approved ECNs or deviations not yet reflected in the drawing **Reject:** Change is in the part but no approval document is attached **No:** 3 **Element:** Customer engineering approval **Evidence:** Written trial approval or engineering sign-off when required **Reject:** Approval requested by phone or email without a record **No:** 4 **Element:** Design FMEA **Evidence:** DFMEA for design-responsible suppliers, or a statement that the customer owns design **Reject:** Missing or not linked to special characteristics **No:** 5 **Element:** Process flow diagram **Evidence:** Flow from receiving to shipping showing each operation and inspection **Reject:** Flow does not match the PFMEA or control plan operation numbers **No:** 6 **Element:** Process FMEA **Evidence:** PFMEA covering every step in the flow with actions on high severity items **Reject:** Severity ratings differ from the DFMEA or customer rules **No:** 7 **Element:** Control plan **Evidence:** Prototype, pre-launch or production control plan per the customer format **Reject:** Inspection frequency or reaction plan is blank or generic **No:** 8 **Element:** Measurement system analysis studies **Evidence:** Gauge R&R, bias, linearity, stability for gauges used on special characteristics **Reject:** Gauge R&R above customer limit or attribute study missing **No:** 9 **Element:** Dimensional results **Evidence:** Measured values for every ballooned dimension from the production tooling **Reject:** Fewer parts measured than required or one value out of tolerance **No:** 10 **Element:** Records of material and performance test results **Evidence:** Material certificates, lab reports, performance and endurance test data **Reject:** Test performed on a different lot or lab not accredited **No:** 11 **Element:** Initial process studies **Evidence:** Control charts and Ppk or Cpk for special characteristics from a significant production run **Reject:** Ppk below the customer minimum or process not stable **No:** 12 **Element:** Qualified laboratory documentation **Evidence:** Lab scope of accreditation, for example ISO/IEC 17025, covering the tests used **Reject:** Scope of accreditation does not list the test method **No:** 13 **Element:** Appearance approval report **Evidence:** AAR for parts with colour, grain or appearance requirements **Reject:** Master sample or colour data missing **No:** 14 **Element:** Sample production parts **Evidence:** Parts from the significant production run, quantity as requested **Reject:** Samples not from production tooling or not labelled **No:** 15 **Element:** Master sample **Evidence:** Signed sample retained at the supplier and kept for the life of the part **Reject:** Sample not signed or dated **No:** 16 **Element:** Checking aids **Evidence:** Description and calibration record of fixtures, gauges and templates **Reject:** Checking aid not covered by the calibration system **No:** 17 **Element:** Records of compliance with customer-specific requirements **Evidence:** Evidence against each applicable customer-specific requirement **Reject:** Customer portal requirement missed, such as a special form **No:** 18 **Element:** Part submission warrant (PSW) **Evidence:** Signed PSW with part number, revision, submission level, reason and declaration **Reject:** Revision, weight or tooling data on the PSW disagree with the package **No:** Add **Element:** Bulk material requirements checklist **Evidence:** Used only for bulk materials such as adhesives, sealants and chemicals in place of some part elements **Reject:** Checklist used for a discrete part or left incomplete **Notes:** Which elements you submit versus retain depends on the submission level the customer assigns and on customer-specific requirements. Always confirm with the customer's supplier quality contact. ## Content **Intro:** PPAP is the evidence package a supplier gives an automotive customer to show the production process can make the part to specification at the quoted rate. This table lists the 18 elements, what a reviewer normally looks for, and where packages usually fail. **Sections:** #### How to use the table **Body:** Use the search box to filter by element name or by a word such as gauge, lab or sample. Work down the list when you build the package, and tick off each element against the submission level and customer-specific requirements you have been given. The Excel export is useful as a cover index for the package so the reviewer can find each document quickly. **Bullets:** - Match every document to the part number and drawing revision - Keep operation numbers identical across flow, PFMEA and control plan - Record the date and reason for every resubmission #### Where the elements come from **Body:** The 18 elements follow the AIAG Production Part Approval Process manual, fourth edition, which is the reference most OEMs and Tier 1 suppliers use. IATF 16949 clause 8.3.4.4 requires a documented product approval process aligned with the customer's recognised process, so many suppliers also reference it in their quality manual. Customers may add their own forms or portals on top of the 18 elements. #### Reading the rejection column **Body:** Most rejections are consistency problems rather than missing studies. A control plan that lists a characteristic not found on the PFMEA, a drawing revision that differs between the PSW and the dimensional report, or a gauge that is not under calibration will all be caught by a careful reviewer. Use the right-hand column as a pre-submission review prompt before the package leaves the building. #### Common mistakes **Body:** Teams often start the package a week before the due date and discover the MSA or process study needs a production run that has not happened yet. Others treat the warrant as paperwork and sign it with wrong data. Plan the significant production run early, and have a second person review the PSW against the rest of the package. **Cta:** If you pull PPAP status and part data out of an ERP or QMS by hand, we can help automate the package index and status reporting. Tell us your system. **Faq:** #### Are all 18 PPAP elements required for every submission? **Answer:** No. The submission level and the customer decide which elements you submit and which you only retain for review on request. Level 3 normally means the warrant plus supporting data for all required elements, but customers can change this. Confirm in writing with your customer contact before building the package. #### Which PPAP edition does this table follow? **Answer:** It follows the structure of the AIAG PPAP manual, fourth edition, which lists 18 elements and a bulk material checklist for special cases. Some customers still reference older editions or add their own elements, so check customer-specific requirements for any differences. #### Does the table reproduce the AIAG manual? **Answer:** No. It is a short summary of what each element is and what reviewers commonly look for. The AIAG manual is the authoritative text and should be purchased and followed by teams preparing real submissions. #### Who signs the part submission warrant? **Answer:** An authorised supplier representative signs the PSW declaring that the evidence is true and the parts meet requirements. The customer then approves, rejects or grants interim approval. The signer should review the whole package, not only the warrant. ## Search terms ppap 18 elements, ppap elements list, ppap requirements checklist, what is included in a ppap package, ppap documents list, ppap 4th edition elements, production part approval process elements, ppap submission contents --- Talk to an engineer: https://netray.co/contact?intent=erp_ai | Machine catalog: https://netray.co/agent/catalog.json