AS9102 Form 2 Material and Process Documentation Guide

I have reviewed FAI packages where Form 3 was flawless, every dimension measured, every tolerance sourced, every GD&T captured with datum references, and the customer still rejected the submission. The reason: Form 2 was incomplete. A missing NADCAP certificate for the anodise vendor. A material specification mismatch between the drawing and the mill certificate. A heat treatment processor listed without a certification reference. This AS9102 Form 2 material and process documentation guide covers what belongs in Form 2, how to trace it, and where most shops get it wrong.

Form 2 gets less attention than Form 3 because it feels like paperwork rather than engineering. But Form 2 is what proves your part is made from the right material and processed correctly. Without it, your 95 perfect measurements on Form 3 are meaningless because the customer cannot verify that the measured part is actually the part they ordered.

We covered the three-form structure in our guide on AS9102 Form 1 vs Form 2 vs Form 3 explained. This guide goes deep on Form 2 specifically.

AS9102 Form 2 Material And Process Documentation Guide: What It Contains

Form 2 is titled "Product Accountability: Raw Material, Special Processes, and Functional Testing." It documents the material and process traceability chain from raw material through finished part. Every entry answers one question: can we prove that this material or process meets the drawing requirements?

Section 1: Raw Material

Every raw material used in the part must be listed with:

Material specification. The drawing calls out a specific material spec. On the 7-sheet bracket, this was Al 7075-T6 per AMS 4078 (sheet form). On the Boeing 777 fitting, the drawing referenced AMS 4050 (plate form). The Form 2 entry must match the drawing callout exactly. If the drawing says AMS 4078 and you purchased AMS 4050, that is a mismatch even though both are 7075-T6. The product forms are different (sheet vs plate), and the mechanical properties may differ.

Supplier name. Who supplied the raw material? This could be the mill (Alcoa, Kaiser, Constellium) or the distributor (Metals USA, ThyssenKrupp Materials).

Certificate reference. The mill certificate number and date. This document proves the material meets the AMS specification requirements: chemical composition, mechanical properties (tensile strength, yield strength, elongation, hardness), and heat treatment condition (T6, T73, etc.).

Heat/lot number. The specific material lot from the mill. This enables full traceability from the finished part back to the original melt.

Section 2: Special Processes

Every special process applied to the part must be listed with:

Process type. Heat treatment, surface treatment (anodise, chemical conversion, paint, primer), non-destructive testing (NDT: dye penetrant, magnetic particle, ultrasonic, X-ray), plating, passivation, shot peening, etc.

Process specification. The standard or specification the process must conform to. MIL-A-8625 Type II Class 1 for anodise. AMS 2770 for heat treatment of aluminum. AMS 2175 for classification of inspection. ASTM E1417 for liquid penetrant inspection.

Processor name. Who performed the process? If in-house, list your company name. If subcontracted, list the outside vendor.

Certification reference. The processor's quality certification. For aerospace special processes, this is typically a NADCAP accreditation. The NADCAP certificate number, scope, and expiry date should be verifiable. If the processor is not NADCAP accredited, they must be approved by the customer or hold an equivalent qualification.

Process report or certificate number. The specific document from the processor confirming the process was performed on this specific lot of parts. For heat treatment: the furnace load record with time, temperature, and quench data. For anodise: the process batch report. For NDT: the inspection report with accept/reject results.

Section 3: Functional Testing

If the drawing or purchase order requires functional testing (proof load testing, pressure testing, leak testing, electrical testing), the test results are documented here with:

Test specification. What standard governs the test.

Test results. Pass/fail with actual values if applicable.

Test report reference. The document number and date.

Most machined aerospace parts do not require functional testing. This section is more commonly used for assemblies, pressure vessels, and electrical components.

The Traceability Chain

The power of Form 2 is the traceability chain it creates. A customer or auditor reviewing your FAI can trace:

Part serial number (Form 1) to material lot number (Form 2) to mill certificate (supplier document) to material specification (drawing requirement).

Part serial number (Form 1) to process batch (Form 2) to processor certificate (NADCAP) to process specification (drawing requirement).

Every link in this chain must be documented and verifiable. A broken link (missing certificate, wrong lot number, expired NADCAP) invalidates the traceability and can result in FAI rejection or, worse, a shipped part that cannot be verified if a quality issue arises in service.

Common Form 2 Mistakes That Cause Rejections

Mistake 1: Material specification mismatch. The drawing says AMS 4078 (7075-T6 sheet). You purchased AMS 4050 (7075-T6 plate). Both are 7075-T6, but the specs are different. The auditor sees a mismatch and flags it. Always verify that the material spec on your purchase order matches the drawing callout exactly. If you intentionally substituted (perhaps because AMS 4050 plate was available and AMS 4078 sheet was not), document the substitution with customer approval before manufacturing.

Mistake 2: Missing special process certifications. The drawing specifies "Anodize per MIL-A-8625 Type II Class 1." Form 2 lists the anodise vendor but does not reference their NADCAP certificate or process certification. The auditor cannot verify that the process was performed by a qualified processor. Always include the NADCAP certificate number and expiry date for every outside processor.

Mistake 3: Expired NADCAP certification. The anodise vendor's NADCAP certificate expired two months before processing your parts. Even if the process was performed correctly, the certification gap creates a compliance issue. Before sending parts to any outside processor, verify their current NADCAP accreditation status on the PRI (Performance Review Institute) eAuditNet database.

Mistake 4: Missing sub-tier traceability. You purchased material from a distributor. The distributor supplied a test report, but it does not trace back to the original mill certificate. The traceability chain is broken. Always request both the distributor's certificate of conformance AND the original mill certificate from the producing mill.

Mistake 5: Not listing all special processes. The drawing requires three special processes: heat treatment, chemical conversion, and anodise. Form 2 lists heat treatment and anodise but omits chemical conversion. The auditor catches the missing process and rejects the FAI. Review the drawing thoroughly for every process callout, including those buried in the general notes or referenced via specification numbers.

Mistake 6: Wrong process specification revision. The drawing references MIL-A-8625F but your processor's report references MIL-A-8625E (an older revision). Specification revisions can change requirements. Verify that the processor is working to the revision called out on the drawing. We covered general documentation standards in AS9102 Rev C requirements explained.

How Form 2 Connects to Form 3

Form 2 and Form 3 are complementary. Form 3 documents dimensional and geometric characteristics (the "physical" verification). Form 2 documents material and process characteristics (the "chemical and process" verification). Together they answer: is the part the right shape AND made from the right stuff?

Some characteristics bridge both forms. Material hardness, for example, might appear on Form 3 as a measured characteristic (hardness test result: HRB 87, within spec range HRB 78-90) and on Form 2 as a certified property (mill certificate shows hardness HRB 85 from the material supplier). The Form 3 entry verifies the finished part; the Form 2 entry traces the raw material certification.

Surface treatment verification typically appears as a Form 3 characteristic (visual inspection: anodise coating present, uniform color, no defects) with the process documentation captured in Form 2 (processor: ABC Anodising Ltd, NADCAP cert NP-1234, process per MIL-A-8625 Type II Class 1, batch report BR-2026-0147).

Form 2 Documentation Checklist

Before submitting any FAI package, verify these Form 2 requirements:

Raw material: Every material listed with correct AMS/MIL specification matching the drawing. Mill certificate attached with heat/lot number traceable to the material in the part. Chemical composition and mechanical properties within spec limits. Material form (sheet, plate, bar, forging) matching the drawing and spec.

Heat treatment: Processor listed with certification. Furnace record or certificate of conformance attached. Time, temperature, and quench medium documented. Solution heat treatment and aging conditions matching the temper designation (T6, T73, etc.).

Surface treatment: Every surface treatment listed with processor and NADCAP certificate. Process specification and revision matching the drawing. Process batch report attached with part identification traceable to the submitted first article.

NDT: If required by the drawing, every NDT method listed with inspector certification level (typically Level II minimum for aerospace), procedure reference, and acceptance criteria. NDT report attached with results.

All certifications current: Verify expiry dates on every NADCAP certificate, processor approval, and inspector certification. An expired certification at the time of processing invalidates the traceability.

How Much Time Form 2 Takes

Quality engineers consistently report that Form 2 preparation takes 30 minutes to 2 hours depending on the number of materials and special processes involved. The time goes into chasing certifications from suppliers, verifying specification revisions, and confirming NADCAP status. On the 7-sheet bracket with aluminum raw material, chemical conversion, and anodise (three process entries), Form 2 took approximately 1 hour. We covered the full FAI time breakdown in how long does FAI preparation take in aerospace.

The real time cost is not building the form. It is tracking down missing documents. A mill certificate that was not requested at time of purchase. A NADCAP certificate that the processor did not include with their delivery paperwork. A heat treatment record that lists the wrong lot number. Each missing document requires a phone call, an email, and a follow-up. Each one delays FAI submission by 1 to 3 days.

The solution is building Form 2 requirements into your purchasing process. When you order raw material, request the mill certificate with the purchase order. When you send parts to an outside processor, specify that the delivery must include the process certificate and their current NADCAP accreditation. When the documents arrive, verify them immediately rather than during FAI preparation.

Mavlon Identifies Every Material and Process Requirement

Mavlon reads the drawing's general notes, title block, and specification references to identify every material specification and special process callout. The extraction output includes a Form 2 checklist with every material and process that must be documented, the governing specification for each, and the documentation you need to collect. This means your purchasing team knows what certifications to request at the time of order, not at the time of FAI submission.

Upload a Drawing to see every material and process requirement identified from your drawing.