PPAP vs VDA 2 PPF: production part approval compared
AIAG PPAP and VDA volume 2 production process and product approval (PPF) side by side: submission levels, documents, the PSW and the cover sheet, and when each is used.
Short answer
Both prove, before series delivery, that the parts meet all requirements and that the process can produce them consistently. PPAP (AIAG) is used by most North American and many global customers; PPF (VDA volume 2) by German OEMs and their suppliers. The content is largely the same; the forms, levels and terms differ.
Side by side
| Aspect | AIAG PPAP | VDA 2 PPF |
|---|---|---|
| Levels | 5 submission levels, level 3 default | Submission levels 1–3, plus customer-specific scope |
| Summary document | Part Submission Warrant (PSW) | PPF cover sheet and self-assessment (Deckblatt) |
| Number of elements | 18 elements | Similar content in the PPF report and annexes |
| Capability requirement | Ppk ≥ 1.67 initial study (Cpk ≥ 1.33 long term) | Usually Ppk ≥ 1.67 / Cpk ≥ 1.33 per customer requirements |
| Triggers | New part, change, tooling, source, location, inactive > 1 year | Similar triggers, change matrix in VDA 2 |
Practical tip
Build one internal checklist that covers both: the documents (FMEA, control plan, MSA, capability, dimensional and material results, appearance, samples) are the same, only the cover form changes. Agree with the customer which standard and level apply before the project starts.
Written by Ľubomír Blažek, automotive quality manager. Standards are summarised in our own words; use the official publications for formal work.