1. Basic Engineering Process A3 Report Format
Originated: 30/4/2015
Customer/BU Model Year (Insert Below ) Program Name (Insert Below) Row (Pick One Below ) Component (Pick One Below) Prob. Description (Pick One ) Revised:
Renault 2015 Renault J92 Second Row Seat Headrest Approver (VP, Exec Dir, LPL, Dir etc.)Checker (CE, Dir, LPL, Auditor etc.) Owner (Engineer, Writer, Eng Mgr, CE etc.)
Issue Title: Renault J92 2nd Row Captain Seat Head Rest Impression Mark 1-7) Chandrakant Sharma 1-7)Vikas Choudhary 1-7) Sumit Kumar Tripathi
Problem Statement Analyze and Rank Alternatives
Establish Targets
Understand the Physics
Check Impact in all Areas
Impact of modifying The Head Rest for impression Mark
Create Visual, Detailed Double-Ended Schedule
Title Block Rev 001
Vibration/Nat. Frequency
Brainstorm Alternatives Based on study and following are options.
Confirm
By this Analysis it is clear that Option 5 will give more effectiveness for Head Rest Impression Mark.
Potential Causes of Failure :
Due to the interferance of the Trim Laminate of the Back to Head Rest we are having the impression mark on the seat.
1. In 2nd Row the Head Rest is a water Fall design.
2. 60-40 % and Captain seat has a common head rest.
3. Gap Analysis done on CAD level it found 6mm Gap with Foam and with STO 7.2 Interference with current design and it goes
on increasing from Bottom to topward side.
4. No impression mark observed in second row 60_40 Fabric seat where lamination is 2 mm.
5. The Head Rest Trim B - Surface when Assemble didn't follow the Foam Curvature, and increase the interferance.
Analysis and physical Trials for clearance:
1. Done trial by reducing the trim Laminate thickness from 12 mm to 5 mm at top area and from 5 mm to 2 mm at bottom area.
Customer Requirement: 2nd Row Captain seat Head Rest in not use condition if left must not leave
any Impression on the back Trim.
As we have selected Option 5, which is combination of both Option 3 and 4, we need to do all the HR related Regulatory
Test, which is approved by the customer.
Using the same Head Rest for 60 - 40 % will have a Gap between Head Rest and Back Foam, which has been acceptable by
the customer.
Need to verify the Head Rest Efforts and Rattle issue for the improved Head rest as we are increaing the weight and
moment for the Head Rest.
Conclusion
1- Option 5 is Effective for impression mark issue.
2- Head Rest Trim Need to be Loosed(Modified) as per New Head Rest.
3- Need to communicated to Supplier for the Head Rest Trim change for Captain Seat.
1 - Renault J92 2nd Row Captain Seat(Leather Variant) Head Rest when is in not use condition leaves a
impression mark as Highlighted in Red in the image on the Back Trim.
Current Production is having 100 % Impression Mark
~12mm lamination on Seat Back Trim at top +
2 mm Laminate thickness at B- Surface of the
on Head rest Trim
~5 mm Trim at Bottom og Head Restllow + 2
mm Head Rest Back Trim
Captain
~1 mm Interference after Trimming at bottom
~11 mm interference after trimming at top Area
of Head Rest
~At curve area impression mark will be high as
interferance is at foam level only
2mm laminate thickness on Seat Back trim + 2
mm Laminate thickness at B- Surface of the
Head rest
60 - 40 %
~2 mm Gap at the bottom of the Head Rest
~0.6 mm Gap at the middle of the Head Rest
~At curve area impression mark will be
observed as interferance is at foam level only.
3.4 mm
6.0 mm
3.4 mm
6.0 mm
Customer Go ahead for Lamination Change on 9th March
2 - Laminate Thickness reduction not feasible by supplier.
Rod Angle modification keeping developed length same to
increase clearance between back foam to HR foam
Modified Angle
Rod Length modification from 85mm to 90mm Rod Radius from 41mm to 20 mm
By increasing Rod Length + Radius change
After
Before
JCI Confidential