Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

# Final quality ppt

1,795 views
1,635 views

Published on

Published in: Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
• Full Name
Comment goes here.

Are you sure you want to Yes No
Your message goes here
• Be the first to comment

• Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,795
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
32
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
31
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

### Final quality ppt

1. 1. MSE 617 Seminar in Quality Assurance & Management California State University - NorthridgeTeam F includes:Dhruv, RijulHabibi, ShayaanKalantari, Mahram Professor:Ravinder Singh LUIS ECHEVERRIAAl-Doukhi, Murtadha
2. 2. * The Manufacturing unit consists of four teams A, B, C and F* Our main concentration is to detect a defect trend from our data related to workstation F* Our manufacturing flow consists of:  Machine Shop (Internal Supplier)  Plant out of State (Internal Supplier)  Paint Shop (Internal Supplier)  External Suppliers
3. 3. Machine Plant out of Paint shop External Shop (MS) shape (OR) (PS) Suppliers (V) TEAM FA1 F4 F3 F2 F1 C6 C5
4. 4. Data Selection Data sorting Analysis based on Pareto charts Corrective action plan Assumptions:1. The data under consideration is not subject to change.2. The cost of execution corrective action plan doesn’t influence our conclusion.3. Type N/A in the charge back column pertains to the defects in the same workstation.
5. 5. Breakdown of data into four major workstations F1, F2, F3, F4 Total Number of Defects in Team F Workstation (internal)Workstati Total % % 1200 120%on defects cumulative 1078 1000 100%F1 1078 71% 71% 800 80%F2 416 27% 98% TOTAL DEFECTS % CUMULATIVE 600 60%F3 10 1% 99% 416 400 40%F4 21 1% 100% 200 20%Total 1525 100% 10 21 0 0% F1 F2 F3 F4
6. 6. Total number of defects in F due to external charge backs Workstation Defects Charged Total back (external) F1 1078 1 1079 F2 416 12 428 F3 10 7 17 F4 21 0 21 Total 1525 20 1545 The total numbers of defects due to external charge backs are negligible Maximum defects were found at the workstation F1 with charge back N/A (internal defects) Hence, our entire concentration would be to work on workstation F1 and plan corrective action to reduce the defects.
7. 7. Work Station Workstation Workstation WorkstationMonths F1 F2 F3 F4 Total F Workstation F1 isJAN 314 212 4 4 534 a majorFEB 370 122 3 4 499 contributor of defects in MarchMARCH 394 82 3 13 492 2003.TOTAL 1078 416 10 21 1525 Our further 450 analysis will 394 400 370 include the 350 314 breakdown of data 300 Work Station F1 to reduce Workstation F2 250 212 Workstation F3 maximum defects 200 Workstation F4 in March 2003. 150 122 100 82 50 13 4 4 3 4 3 0 JAN FEB MARCH
8. 8. Workstation F1 has the maximum of internal defects N/A that were identified within the team. Based on the result, we breakdown the charge backs for the month of March.CHARGE JAN FEB MARCH Total % Monthly charge back analysis by FBACK cumulat 120 ive 100F1(N/A) 69 54 106 229 21.24F2 35 75 86 196 39.42 80 JANPS 29 97 28 154 53.71 60 FEBV 66 8 63 137 66.42 40 MARCHA1 37 24 12 73 73.19C1 7 36 10 53 78.11 20B1 18 16 15 49 82.65 0 F1(…C6 9 9 24 42 86.55 F2 C3 C1 C6 C2 F3 C4 F4 V A1 B1 A2 DS MS T B2 A3 B3 PS PDA2 20 2 13 35 89.80DS 0 11 15 26 92.21MSC2 3 14 20 3 2 3 25 20 94.53 96.38 Overall charge back – F1 250 120.00T 1 7 1 9 97.22F3 0 1 6 7 97.87 200 100.00B2 1 0 5 6 98.42 80.00C3 2 3 1 6 98.98 150A3 2 2 1 5 99.44 60.00 Total 100 % cumulativeB3 1 1 1 3 99.72 40.00C4 0 0 1 1 99.81 50 20.00PD 0 0 1 1 99.91F4 0 1 0 1 100.00 0 0.00TOTAL 314 370 394 1078
9. 9. 120 The internal defects are 106 Charge back - March again higher for the month100 of March. 86 80 Therefore, we concentrate extensively on defects 63 MARCH 60 found in F1 which further strengthens our decision 40 towards accurate corrective 28 24 action plan. 20 15 12 10 13 15 6 5 2 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
10. 10. DEFECT CODE JAN FEB MARCH DEFECTS % cumulative 350 Overall family of defects – F1 120.00B 98 86 116 300 27.80 300E 66 87 61 214 47.64 300 100.00H 19 30 64 113 58.11 250K 10 47 56 113 68.58 214 80.00 DEFECTC 11 65 22 98 77.66 200 SD 21 23 29 73 84.43 60.00R 60 0 0 60 89.99 150 113 113X 6 1 23 30 92.77 98 40.00 100 73J 8 5 11 24 95.00 60F 2 19 2 23 97.13 50 29 24 23 20 20.00 11M 8 7 5 20 98.98 0 0.00A 5 0 6 11 100.00 B E H K C D R X J F M ATOTAL 314 370 395 1079 The family of defect B is causing the maximum number of defects viz. 300 in workstation F1. We further breakdown the family of defect code B to find out which family code is a major contributor overall as well as in the month of March.
11. 11. Defect Code Jan Feb March Total % Cumulative B05 family defect code isB05 22 18 65 105 35%B02 17 30 27 74 60% responsible to cause theB01 23 0 14 37 72% maximum defects overall.B08 2 23 1 26 81%B10 9 8 4 21 88%B04 12 0 0 12 92%B06 3 5 1 9 95% It is also the highest in theB07 5 2 2 9 98% month of March.B03 5 0 2 7 100%Total 98 86 116 300 120 120%70 65 105 100 100%6050 80 74 80%40 March 60 60% Total Jan % Cumulative30 Feb 37 40 40%20 26 21 20 20%10 12 9 9 7 0 0 0% B05 B02 B01 B08 B10 B04 B06 B07 B03 B05 B02 B01 B08 B10 B04 B06 B07 B03
12. 12. UNIT JAN FEB MARCH TOTAL % S/N DEFECT Cumulativ S e 140 133 165 0 42 133 175 16.23 277 0 56 103 159 30.98 120 272 65 49 0 114 41.56 103 275 27 60 27 114 52.13 100 88 166 0 22 88 110 62.34 80 83 MARCH 80 274 15 80 0 95 71.15 65 FEB 164 28 61 0 89 79.41 60 61 60 56 55 JAN 162 83 0 0 83 87.11 49 42 41 163 55 0 0 55 92.21 40 276 41 0 0 41 96.01 2727 28 22 22 167 0 0 22 22 98.05 20 15 13 7 278 0 0 13 13 99.26 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 00 00 100 168 0 0 7 7 99.91 0 279 0 0 1 1 100.00 165 277 272 275 166 274 164 162 163 276 167 278 168 279 TOTAL 314 370 394 1078200 120.00180 175 Unit number 165 not only has 159 100.00160140 maximum number of defects 114 114 110 80.00120 95 89 TOTAL DEFECTS overall but also during the 3100 83 60.00 % Cumulative 80 month period (Jan 2003-March 55 40.00 60 40 41 22 2003) with the highest in March 13 20.00 20 7 1 2003. 0 0.00 165 277 272 275 166 274 164 162 163 276 167 278 168 279
13. 13. 160 Overall analysis of Job number – F1 120.00%140 134 100.00% 119120 104 80.00%100 86 84 78 80 60.00% TOTAL DEFECTS % Cumulative 60 55 45 44 43 40.00% 40 40 36 30 27 25 22 19 20.00% 20 12 10 8 8 7 7 7 6 6 4 3 2 2 1 1 0 0.00% F1-07 F1-10 F1-19 F1-13 F1-18 F1-14 F1-20 F1-12 F1-11 F1-01 F1-09 F1-08 F1-05 F2-02 F1-06 F2-01 F1-03 F1-17 F1-02 F2-13 F2-17 F1-04 F2-09 F2-16 F1-15 F1-16 F2-04 F2-07 F2-05 F2-10 F2-19 F4-02 Working towards Job number F1-07 will help us reduce the maximum number of defects
14. 14. Group Jan Feb March Total defects % cumulative Operations Group is the highestOperations 243 324 312 879 81.54 potential root cause of total numberExternal supplier 66 8 63 137 94.25 of defects in the workstation F1Engineering 1 18 16 35 97.50Internal supplier 4 20 3 27 100.00 during the period of Jan 2003 –Total 314 370 394 1078 March 2003.350 324 312 1000 120.00300 879 900 243 100.00250 JAN 800 FEB 700 80.00200 MARCH 600 500 60.00 TOTAL150 DEFECTS 400 40.00 %100 300 cumulative 66 63 200 137 50 20.00 18 16 20 8 4 100 35 27 1 3 0 0 0.00 OPERATIONS EXTERNAL ENGINEERING INTERNAL OPERATIONS EXTERNAL ENGINEERING INTERNAL SUPPLIER SUPPLIER SUPPLIER SUPPLIER
15. 15. Total Defects: Team F constitutes of 1525 defects out of which 1078 are contributed by workstation F1. Charge backs: Internal charge backs N/A maximum for workstation F1 Monthly Defects: Maximum numbers of defects caused in Jan 2003. However, F1 contributes 80% of defects (394/492) in March 2003 as compared to 59% of defects (314/534) in Jan 2003. Therefore, team decided to concentrate on March 2003 data. Family defect code: B was found to cause maximum number of overall defects. Further breaking down the defect code B resulted in family defect code B05 to cause the maximum number of defects overall as well as in March 2003. Unit S/N: 165 accounted to maximum number of defects when the data was broken down even more. Job no.: F1-07 causing maximum defects. Group: Operations group is the one that is causing the maximum defects. Hence improvement is needed on that group. Therefore, Focusing on workstation F1 especially for the month of March 2003 with charge backs N/A (internal defects), family defect code B05, Unit S/N 165, Job No. F1-07 and group of Operations, Team F would be able to reduce the maximum number of defects.
16. 16.  The corrective action plan will be done using the Plan-Do-Check-Act problem solving technique. A thorough inspection team should be at place to keep internal defects in F1 at the minimal. It is very important for team F since it is the last team in the manufacturing flow and the final output of production maybe input to customers in the form of finished goods. Placing a very strong quality team (quality engineers, inspectors, etc.) to strengthen the quality process to achieve ‘zero defects’. Pilot test the model to identify any technical issues and make changes as necessary in order to reduce defects generating from family code B05.
17. 17. Hold brainstorming sessions and organize teammeetings with all the members that were responsible forJob no. F1-07 as maximum defects had occurred whileperforming the job.Analyze and refine current tools and processes andensure that equipments are up to date with propercalibration thereby reducing machine wear andmaintenance issues.Employee training and seminars to be provided torefresh quality control standards and deliver high qualityproducts.An improved quality plan in place which includes anyprocess, procedure or system changes requirement andany monitors or controls necessary to preventrecurrence of the problem.
18. 18. Continuous Improvement Once the above corrective actions are implemented to improve the efficiency of team F, we would continuously monitor the process to make sure there is continuous improvement according to the PDCA cycle. Workstation F1 needs the most improvement due to high number of defects. The suggested corrective action plan will improve each area assessed in workstation F1. As per our recommendation, the next or alternate corrective action would be to concentrate on maximum defects occurring from other workstations too (especially F2) to improve overall efficiency and quality performance of team F. With potential utilization of all the statistical tools and problem solving techniques we believe that the ideal quality aim of ‘zero defects’ can be achieved.