Taking the composites auditing trail

Nadcap is an approach to conformity assessment that brings together technical experts from the aerospace and defence industry to manage the programme by establishing requirements for accreditation, accrediting suppliers and defining operational programme requirements. This results in a standardised approach to quality assurance and a reduction in redundant auditing. Nadcap is administered by the Performance Review Institute (PRI), a not-for-profit organisation headquartered in the US with satellite offices in Europe and Asia.

Nadcap conducts audits in seventeen different areas, from the traditional heat treating and welding to the new electronics and composites. The audit and accreditation process is managed by industry experts at every stage: from technical checklist development to auditor qualification and selection, through to the acceptance of corrective actions and accreditation.

The Nadcap Composites (COMP) Task Group was established in 1990 and is currently led by chairperson Richard Perrett of GKN, supported by vice-chairperson, Tara Campbell of Rolls-Royce. Within the Task Group, there are over 70 industry representatives – 48 Nadcap subscribers and 25 suppliers who actively participate in the technical discussions and decision-making.

Much of this activity takes place at the Nadcap meetings that are held three times per year. But the Task Group recognises that not all industry stakeholders are able to participate and benefit from the opportunities that the meetings represent, such as learning, debating and networking.

The Nadcap Composites Task Group conducts audits to the audit criteria AC7118, which regroups five different scopes: PAR (Prepreg-Adhesive-Resin Infusion); MB (Metal Bond); LRP (Liquid Resin Processing); CMP (Compression Moulding); CP (Core Processing); KSP (Kitting Service Provider).

The checklist AC7118 is available on www.eAuditNet.com under Resources – Documents – Audit Checklists.

Additional information on the checklist requirements, question intent, acceptable objective evidence, examples of NCRs and helpful hints are included in the audit handbook which is available in eAuditNet in the Public Documents section.

In common with many other Nadcap Task Groups, the Composites Task Group analyses and publishes common non-conformances identified during Nadcap audits on a regular basis. The intent is to help suppliers avoid some common pitfalls and strengthen their internal process control. To that end, as well as the common non-conformances, the Task Group often also provided guidance and further information about each non-conformance.

A number of additional useful documents are posted in eAuditNet under Public Documents on a regular basis. It is strongly recommended that you review the relevant files to gain insights that will assist in Nadcap audit preparation and success.

Nadcap Composites Audit insights

The following checklist questions are the most common that NCRs are written against. Additional information on the checklist requirement, including acceptable objective evidence, is included in the audit handbook that is available in eAuditNet under Public Documents.

1. “Does the manufacturing process accurately reflect the documented work instructions?” This is a compliance question which is in paragraph 11.3.4. It had the most findings against during the calendar 2015.


2. “Are materials stored in a manner to prevent damage or contamination?” This question had the second most observed findings against the checklist AC7118. It is a compliance question and is in paragraph 5.1.11.


3. “Have housekeeping requirements been met as per applicable procedure?” and “Are FOD area requirements, boundaries, and type, clearly identified or understood?” These two questions are respectively from paragraph 11.4.1 and from paragraph 11.4.6 Both are adequacy questions and had about the same number of findings against.


4. “Does the manufacturing and/or inspection record have sufficient detail to produce the part?” This question is another common that NCRs are written against. It is a compliance question and sits in the paragraph 11.3.2.


5. “Have all corrections to the recorded information been performed in accordance to established policies, procedures, and customer requirements?” Being one of the most common question that NCRs are written about, this is a compliance question which can be found in the paragraph 11.3.11.


6. “Are curing parameters (e.g. heating and cooling ramp rates and holds, pressure, vacuum, time, etc.) monitored, recorded and verified per customer requirements?” As one of the most common questions that NCR are written against, this is an adequacy and compliance question which is part of the paragraph 21a.2.1.


7. “Does the supplier have a verification method to ensure that all poly film/backing paper (or other support or protective material) has been removed prior to lay-up?” This is a relatively new question which can be found in the paragraph 16a.2.10.


8. “For re-accreditation audits, was corrective action from previous audits implemented and sustained?” This is a compliance question which stands in paragraph 3.4.1 of the checklist AC 7118.


9. “Do the work instructions identify in-process/verification points when verification of conformance cannot be performed at later stages of realisation per customer requirements?” The final top NCR discussed in this article is written against paragraph 11.3.15. This is an adequacy question.

The key takeaway here is to conduct a good and thorough self-audit prior to the Nadcap audit itself. It makes the auditors’ job a lot easier when you list out where in your procedures or specifications that Nadcap questions are covered, plus it is a requirement to show evidence in AC7118 Rev.E.

Hopefully, this article reaches many of the suppliers thinking about getting accredited or about to go through a reaccreditation audit in Composites, and helps them avoid the most common non-conformances.

www.p-r-i.org/Nadcap