A press-shop supplier near Chakan gets a one-line email from its customer’s buyer: “Please share APQP status and PPAP timing for the new bracket.” The planner opens two folders, one called APQP and one called PPAP, and starts filling them separately. Two weeks later the two PFMEAs no longer match. It should never have been two files. APQP is the plan for the launch. PPAP is the proof at the end of it, and the proof is built from what the plan produced.
- How do PPAP and APQP differ, point by point?
- Where does PPAP sit inside the five APQP phases?
- Which rules decide what goes into APQP and PPAP?
- Can an outside desk prepare APQP documents and the PPAP pack?
- What should a supplier decide before drafting the first document?
- Which APQP outputs become which PPAP elements?
- A worked example: one bracket from APQP to PPAP
- Common mistakes when running PPAP and APQP together
- How to answer a customer’s APQP status request
- People also ask
How do PPAP and APQP differ, point by point?
The same people do both, on the same part, in the same months. They still differ in scope, timing, output and who says yes.
| Question | APQP | PPAP |
|---|---|---|
| What is it? | A planning framework for the whole launch | An approval process for one part number from one production process |
| When does it run? | From the customer enquiry to after start of production, across five phases | Inside the validation phase, before mass production and first shipment |
| What does it produce? | Special characteristics, DFMEA, process flow, PFMEA, control plans, capability and measurement studies | A package of those outputs plus test results, samples and the Part Submission Warrant |
| Who approves it? | The supplier and customer review it at phase gates | The customer grants full approval, interim approval or rejection |
| Which manual covers it? | AIAG’s APQP manual, now in its third edition, with the control plan moved into a stand-alone AIAG manual | AIAG’s PPAP manual, fourth edition |
| What does failure look like? | A late launch and a PFMEA written after the tooling is cut | A rejected or interim approval and a hold on shipments |
The simplest test: if the question is “are we ready to make this part?”, it is APQP. If the question is “will the customer accept parts from this process?”, it is PPAP.
Where does PPAP sit inside the five APQP phases?
APQP runs in five phases and PPAP lands in the fourth. A gap in an early phase shows up as a gap in the PPAP pack.
- Phase 1, plan and define. Design and quality goals, and a preliminary list of special characteristics.
- Phase 2, product design and development. The DFMEA and the engineering drawings, which become the design record in PPAP.
- Phase 3, process design and development. Process flow, floor plan, characteristics matrix, PFMEA and the pre-launch control plan.
- Phase 4, product and process validation. The production trial run, capability studies, measurement system analysis, the production control plan and the PPAP submission itself.
- Phase 5, feedback, assessment and corrective action. Reduced variation and lessons learned, which feed the next launch.
The control plan shows the handover clearly. It starts as a prototype control plan, becomes a pre-launch control plan in Phase 3, and becomes the production control plan that goes into the PPAP. Our APQP, PFMEA and control plan questions page walks through each phase’s outputs in more detail.
APQP is the plan; PPAP is the proof, and the proof is only as good as the plan behind it.
Which rules decide what goes into APQP and PPAP?
No government regulator approves a PPAP. The rules come from the industry bodies and the customer. AIAG publishes the APQP and PPAP manuals. IATF 16949, the automotive quality management standard, expects certified sites to plan design and development as a structured project, usually through APQP, and to run a product approval process that meets customer requirements. Large OEMs publish customer-specific requirements through IATF Global Oversight; Ford, for one, lists customer-specific requirements for PPAP effective 15 June 2026. Indian OEMs and Tier-1s can also add their own supplier quality manual on top. Those layers force four design decisions on the pack.
- Agree the submission level at the quote. The AIAG PPAP manual sets out five submission levels, and Level 3, the warrant with samples and complete supporting data, is the level most customers expect for a new part unless they name another. The customer’s requirement document can change that, so get the level in writing before planning the trial run.
- Name special characteristics in Phase 1, not at submission. The customer’s list of special characteristics has to carry from the drawing into the PFMEA, the control plan and the dimensional report. If it is added at PPAP time, the three will not agree.
- Convert the pre-launch control plan before the trial run. The PPAP should carry the production control plan, and the capability studies should be run against it, not against the pre-launch version.
- Draft the warrant last and leave the signature to the plant. The Part Submission Warrant summarises the finished pack. Only the supplier’s responsible official signs it, and no consultant or desk can sign in their place.
The PPAP documentation FAQ covers the 18 PPAP elements and the five submission levels in short answers.
Can an outside desk prepare APQP documents and the PPAP pack?
Part of both, yes. Documents written from the drawing, the route and the customer’s requirements can be prepared outside the plant. Evidence that exists only after parts are made stays in the plant.
The Yamm Labs PPAP Desk prepares the ballooned print and characteristic register, process flow diagram, PFMEA, control plan, process and setup sheets, checking-aid list and gauge specifications, incoming inspection standard, MSA and dimensional report formats, initial process study formats, and the draft warrant with a package index. The plant keeps the trial run, physical measurement, capability studies, Gage R&R trials, laboratory testing, samples, master sample and IMDS entry. The plant’s responsible official signs the warrant, and PSW authority always stays with the supplier.
The pilot runs on a fixed sequence: NDA and inputs on Day 0, route confirmed on Day 1, build and QA on Days 2 to 4, and a checker-ready pack on Day 5. The two-part pilot is free: no retainer and no software setup. The PPAP documentation service page sets out the split from the desk’s side.
What should a supplier decide before drafting the first document?
Three things. Which document governs the submission: the AIAG manual alone, an OEM’s customer-specific requirements, or a Tier-1’s supplier quality manual. Which submission level the customer expects. And who in the plant will check every page against the drawing before the warrant is signed. With those three answered, APQP and PPAP stop being two folders and become one sequence.
Which APQP outputs become which PPAP elements?
The clearest way to see one sequence instead of two folders is to trace each PPAP element back to the APQP phase that produces it. If an element has no source in the plan, it will be written in a hurry at submission time.
| APQP phase | What the phase produces | Where it lands in the PPAP pack |
|---|---|---|
| Phase 1, plan and define | Customer requirements and a preliminary list of special characteristics | Customer-specific requirements, and the characteristics carried into every later document |
| Phase 2, product design and development | Drawings, engineering changes and, for design-responsible suppliers, the DFMEA | Design records, engineering change documents, customer engineering approval where required, and the design FMEA |
| Phase 3, process design and development | Process flow, PFMEA, pre-launch control plan and checking-aid plans | Process flow diagram, process FMEA and checking aids |
| Phase 4, product and process validation | Trial run, measurement system analysis, capability studies, test results and the production control plan | MSA studies, dimensional results, material and performance test records, initial process studies, qualified laboratory documentation, appearance approval where it applies, samples, master sample, control plan and the warrant |
| Phase 5, feedback and corrective action | Lessons learned and reduced variation | Not in the pack, but in the next launch’s Phase 1 |
The customer decides which elements it wants to see and at which submission level. The table shows where each one comes from, so the plant knows which phase owns it.
A worked example: one bracket from APQP to PPAP
Go back to the press shop near Chakan and its two folders. The fix starts with one register of special characteristics for the bracket, built from the drawing and the customer’s requirements. Every later document refers to that register by the same numbers.
The process flow lists each operation, from blanking to packing. The PFMEA follows the process flow line by line and rates the risk for each characteristic. The control plan then takes its checks from the PFMEA, not the other way round, and starts life as a pre-launch control plan.
Before the trial run, the planner converts the pre-launch plan into the production control plan. The trial run, the gauge studies and the capability studies then run against that version. When the customer asks for the pack, the planner assembles it from the same files. There is one PFMEA, and it matches the control plan because one was built from the other. The steps here are illustrative; the customer’s requirements decide the actual level and elements.
Common mistakes when running PPAP and APQP together
- Keeping two sets of documents. An APQP folder and a PPAP folder drift apart within weeks. Keep one set and package it at submission.
- Writing the control plan first. A PFMEA drafted to match an existing control plan lines up on paper and misses the real risks. The PFMEA comes first.
- Adding special characteristics late. Characteristics named at PPAP time will not appear consistently in the drawing, the PFMEA, the control plan and the dimensional report.
- Running studies on the pre-launch plan. Capability and measurement studies belong with the production control plan that goes into the pack.
- Treating APQP as paperwork for the customer. The phases exist to catch problems before tooling is cut. A plan written after the tools arrive only records decisions already made.
- Guessing the submission level. Level 3 is common, but the customer’s requirements decide. Get it in writing at the quote.
How to answer a customer’s APQP status request
The Chakan buyer’s mail asked for APQP status and PPAP timing in one line. The best reply treats them as one plan. State the current APQP phase for the part, list the outputs finished in each phase so far, and name the next outputs with their planned dates.
Then give the PPAP date as the end of that sequence, not as a separate promise. Show what the date depends on: the trial run, gauge availability, laboratory tests and any sub-supplier certificates. If one of those is at risk, say so now rather than at submission.
Use the customer’s own status format if it has one. Some customers set out a phase-gate checklist or a timing chart in their supplier manual, and a reply in that format is read faster. Keep the same register of special characteristics attached to every update, so the customer can see that the plan and the pack refer to the same part.
People also ask
Is PPAP part of APQP?
Yes. PPAP is an output of the product and process validation phase, the fourth of APQP’s five phases. It packages the documents and results APQP produced and asks the customer to approve the part before mass production.
Can a supplier do PPAP without APQP?
It can submit a PPAP, but the pack will be weak. The PFMEA, control plan and capability studies that PPAP asks for are APQP outputs, and writing them in a rush at submission time is how they end up disagreeing with each other.
Which comes first, PPAP or APQP?
APQP comes first. It starts with the customer enquiry and runs through five phases, and PPAP is submitted during the fourth, product and process validation. The PPAP pack is built from what the earlier phases produced, so a supplier that starts with PPAP is writing the plan after the fact.
What are the five phases of APQP?
Plan and define; product design and development; process design and development; product and process validation; and feedback, assessment and corrective action. PPAP sits in the fourth phase. The customer’s requirements can add phase gates or deliverables of their own, so check the supplier manual for the exact checklist it expects.
Is APQP only used by automotive suppliers?
It began in the automotive industry, and the AIAG manuals are written for automotive supply chains. Other manufacturing sectors, including aerospace, have adopted their own versions of the same idea: plan the launch in phases, then prove the production process before shipping. The customer’s requirements decide which version applies to a given part.
Does every change to a part need a new PPAP?
Not every change, but many do. The PPAP manual lists the kinds of change that need customer notification, such as a new material source, a new subcontractor or a process change, and the customer decides whether a resubmission is required. Tell the customer before the change, and update the APQP documents at the same time.
Does IATF 16949 require APQP?
IATF 16949 expects a structured, project-managed approach to design and development, usually APQP, and a product approval process that meets customer requirements. OEM customer-specific requirements can then add PPAP rules of their own, as Ford’s published requirements do, so check the customer’s documents before the launch plan is fixed.
Sources
Running APQP and PPAP as two folders on your next launch?
Prove it on two live parts: a five-day pilot inside your existing quality process. No retainer, no software setup. Start a 2-part pilot →
One Comment