Implementing Six Sigma Quality at Better Body Manufacturing

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Submitted By: Dipty Joshi u106016 Harbir Singh u106019

Overview

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

ABC Incorporated (ABC) is not achieving Six Sigma quality levels for all critical Body-Side Sub-Assembly dimensions as requested by their customers.
200000 150000 DPM

Dimension ASM_7Y ASM_8Y ASM_3Y ASM_9Y ASM_10Y ASM_6Y

DPM 172475 85824 19786 3874 776 4

100000 50000 0 ASM_10Y ASM_7Y ASM_8Y ASM_3Y ASM_9Y ASM_6Y

Ensure that all critical body-side subassembly dimensions are within Six Sigma quality levels of < 3.4 DPM. Cp 2.0 and Cpk 1.67. Determined the correlation between body side and assembly dimensions. Evaluated the significance of Tonnage > 935 for ASM_7Y & ASM_8Y. Conducted a DOE for Clamp position for ASM_9Y & ASM_10Y. Change tonnage to > 935 to correct ASM_7Y and ASM_8Y Set clamp position to location 2 for ASM_9Y and ASM_10Y Re-machine A-pillar die to correct A_3Y and ASM_3Y
2

Problem Statement & The Goal

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

ABC Incorporateds customer wants ABC to apply Six Sigma problem solving methodology to insure that the body side subassembly is achieving Six Sigma quality levels of less than 3.4 defects per million for all critical body side subassembly dimensions. ABC needs an improvement strategy that minimizes the rework costs while achieving the desired quality objective. ABCs goal is to produce module subassemblies that meet the customer requirements and not necessarily to insure that every individual stamped component within the assembly meets it original print specifications sub-system optimizations vs. local optimization.
A-Pillar Reinforcement Body Side Outer B-Pillar Reinforcement

+ +

Measure Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Key Variables: Assembly process variables: Weld Pattern (density), Clamp Location, and Clamp Weld Pressure Stamping process variables (body side): Press Tonnage, Die Cushion Pressure, Material Thickness

Body Assembly Dimensions ASM_1Y through ASM_10Y Assembly Dimensions with Highest Defects
200000
172475
DPM

150000

100000

85824

50000
19786 3874 776 4

0 ASM_7Y ASM_8Y ASM_3Y ASM_9Y ASM_10Y ASM_6Y

Analyze Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Resolution alternatives (based upon past experience): 1. Make adjustments to assembly process settings 2. Reduce variation of components through better control of stamping process input variables 3. Rework stamping dies to shift component mean deviation that is off target and causing assembly defects Target Performance Level: All ten critical assembly dimensions at Six Sigma quality level of 3.4 DPM. Cp 2.0 and Cpk 1.67 Fish Bone and P-Diagrams: Understanding potential causes of defects. From this we pick the assembly and component dimensions that require further analysis

Analyze Phase
Environment Quality Component Variability Gage R&R Yield Strength Humidity Temperature Operator

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Inspection Process Clamp Weld Pressure Weld Pattern (density) Clamp Location Methods

Training Body Assembly

Material Thickness

Die Cushion Pressure Press Tonnage Machine

Elastic Limit Materials

For our analysis we will do a DOE to check for levels that contribute to better quality product.

Control Variables
Clamp Location Press Tonnage Weld Density Die Pressure Clamp Pressure

Inputs
Material Thickness Yield Strength

Body Side Sub-Assembly Stamping Process

Outputs
Body Side Sub-Assemblies at Six Sigma quality levels

Noise Variables
Environment Inherent Variation

Error States
Dimensional defects 6

Analyze Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Analysis of ASM_7Y and ASM_8Y

Run Chart for ASM_7Y
1.0

Run Chart for ASM_8Y

1.0

ASM_7Y

ASM_8Y

0.5

0.5

0.0

0.0

12

12

Subgroup Number
Nu mber of runs abou t median: Expectednumber of run s: Lon gest runabou t median: Approx P-Value for Clusterin g: Approx P-Value for M ixtures: 4.00000 7.00000 5.00000 0.03464 0.96536 Nu mber of ru ns up or down: Expected n umber of runs: Longest run u p or down: Approx P-Value for Trends: Approx P-Value for O scillation: 6.00000 7.66667 3.00000 0.10778 0.89222
Number of ru ns about median : Expected number of runs: Lon gest runabout median: Approx P-Value for Clu stering: Approx P-Value for Mixtu res:

Subgroup Number
4.00000 7.00000 5.00000 0.03464 0.96536 Nu mber of run s up or down: Expected nu mber of ru ns: Longest ru nu p or down: Approx P-Value for Trends: Approx P-Value for Oscillation : 8.00000 7.66667 2.00000 0.59781 0.40219

XY P lot of A S M_8Y and A S M_7Y

Conclusion: BS_7Y and ASM_7Y are following a similar trend. A correlation chart to study this further shows high correlation. (Pearson correlation, R of 0.701).

1 .0

A SM_7Y

0 .5

0 .0

0.0

0 .5

1. 0

A S M _8Y

Analyze Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Capability of B_7Y
Process D ata USL Targ et LSL Me an Sa mp le N 0 .7 0 * -0 .7 0 0 .1 1 3 6

Capability of BS_7Y
US L
W ithin O verall
USL Targ et LSL Me an Sa mp le N Process D ata 0.700 00 0 * -0.700 00 0 0.899 44 4 3 6

LS L

LS L

US L

0 DPM

698416 DPM

W ithin O verall

StDev(W ith in) 0 .0 788 12 2 StDev(Overa ll) 0 .0 791 21 5

StDev(W ith in) 0.149 64 0 StDev(Overa ll) 0.383 69 1

Po ten tial(W ith in )Cap ability Cp CPU CPL Cpk Cpm 2 .9 6 2 .5 0 3 .4 3 2 .5 0 *

Po ten tial(W ith in )Cap ability Cp CPU CPL Cpk 1 .5 6 -0 .4 4 3 .5 6 -0 .4 4 *

-0 .8

-0.6

-0.4

-0 .2

0 .0

0 .2

0.4

0.6

0 .8

Cpm Overa llCap ability Pp PPU PPL Pp k

-1 .0

-0.5
Ob served Perform an ce

0.0

0 .5

1 .0

1.5

2.0

Pp PPL Pp k

Overa llCap ability 2 .9 5 2 .4 9 3 .4 1 2 .4 9

Ob servedPerform an ce PPM<LSL 0.00 PPM>USL PPMTo ta l 0.00 0.00

Exp. "W ith in " Perform an ce PPM<L SL 0 .00 PPM>U SL PPMT otal 0 .00 0 .00

Exp . "Ove rall" Pe rfo rma n ce PPM<LSL 0.0 0 PPM>USL PPMT ota l 0.0 0 0.0 0

Exp. "W ith in " Perform an ce PPM<L SL PPM>U SL PPMT otal 0 .00 9 087 06 .09 9 087 06 .09

Exp . "Ove rall" Pe rfo rma n ce PPM<LSL PPM>USL PPMT ota l 1 5.3 3 698 40 0.0 6 698 41 5.3 9

PPU

0 .6 1 -0 .1 7 1 .3 9 -0 .1 7

PPM<LSL PPM>USL PPMTo ta l

0.00 66 666 6.67 66 666 6.67

1.3

BS_7Y

Conclusion: B_7Y has 0 ppm compared to ~700K DPM in BS_7Y. Furthermore, BS_7Y shows strong correlation on dimension ASM_7Y. (Pearson correlation, R of 0.786).

1.2 1.1 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.5 1.0 1.5

AS M_7 Y

Analyze Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

XY Plot of Tonnage vs. BS_7Y

1 .5

BS_7Y

1 .0

0 .5

905

915

9 25

93 5

945

T o n n ag e

Conclusion: Tonnage values above 935 greatly improves BS_7Y and brings it closer to the mean. Lets see what impact this has on ASM dimensions 7Y, 8Y, 9Y, and 10Y by creating a subset of the data looking only at Tonnage > 935.
9

Analyze Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Impact this has on ASM dimensions 7Y, 8Y, 9Y & 10Y on Tonnage
C a p ab il it y A n al y s is of A S M _ 7 Y a t T o nn a ge > 9 35
L SL
1 .0 0 * - 1 .0 0 0 .0 9 12 0. 163 17 4 0. 147 85 5

C a p ab il it y A n al y s is of A S M _ 8 Y a t T o nn a ge > 9 35
U SL
W i t h in O ve ra ll
US L Ta r g e t LS L M ea n S a m p le N S t D e v ( W i th i n ) S t D e v ( O v e r a l l)

P roc es s D at a US L Ta r g e t LS L M ea n S a m p le N S t D e v ( W i th i n ) S t D e v ( O v e r a l l)

P roc es s D at a 1 .0 0 0 0 0 * - 1 .0 0 0 0 0 - 0 .1 2 8 3 3 12 0. 101 82 5 0. 089 16 1

L SL

U SL
W i t h in O ve ra ll

P o t e n t ia l ( W i th i n ) C a p a b i lit y Cp CP U CP L Cp k Cp m O ve r a ll C a p a b il it y Pp PPU PPL P pk 2 .2 5 2 .0 5 2 .4 6 2 .0 5 2 .0 4 1 .8 6 2 .2 3 1 .8 6 *

P o t e n t ia l ( W i th i n ) C a p a b i lit y Cp CP U CP L Cp k 3 .2 7 3 .6 9 2 .8 5 2 .8 5 * O ve r a ll C a p a b il it y Pp PPU PPL P pk 3 .7 4 4 .2 2 3 .2 6 3 .2 6

-1. 0

- 0. 5
O b s e r v e d P e r fo rm a n c e

0 .0
E x p . "W i th in " P e r f o r m a n c e PPM < L SL P P M > US L P P M T ot al 0 .0 0 0 .0 1 0 .0 1

0. 5

1. 0
E xp . "O ve r a ll" P e rf o r m a n c e PPM < L SL P P M > US L P P M T ot al 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00

Cp m

-1. 0

- 0. 5
O b s e r v e d P e r fo rm a n c e

0 .0
E x p . "W i th in " P e r f o r m a n c e PPM < L SL P P M > US L P P M T ot al 0 .0 0 0 .0 0 0 .0 0

0. 5

1. 0
E xp . "O ve r a ll" P e rf o r m a n c e PPM < L SL P P M > US L P P M T ot al 0. 00 0. 00 0. 00

P P M < LS L P P M > US L P P M To ta l

0. 00 0. 00 0. 00

P P M < LS L P P M > US L P P M To ta l

0. 00 0. 00 0. 00

C a p ab il it y A n al y s is of A S M _ 9 Y a t T o nn a ge > 9 35
L SL US L
W i t h in O ve ra ll
US L Ta r g e t LS L M ea n S a m p le N S t D e v ( W i th i n ) S t D e v ( O v e r a l l)

C ap a bi lit y A n a ly s i s o f A S M _1 0 Y a t T o nn a ge > 9 35
L SL
1 .0 0 * - 1 .0 0 0 .3 9 12 0. 215 54 1 0. 187 66 3

P roc es s D at a US L Ta r g e t LS L M ea n S a m p le N S t D e v ( W i th i n ) S t D e v ( O v e r a l l) 1 .0 0 0 0 0 * - 1 .0 0 0 0 0 0 .5 2 0 8 3 12 0. 206 01 0 0. 177 09 8

P roc es s D at a

US L
W i t h in O ve ra ll

P o t e n t ia l ( W i th i n ) C a p a b i lit y Cp CP U CP L Cp k Cp m O ve r a ll C a p a b il it y Pp PPU PPL P pk 1 .8 8 0 .9 0 2 .8 6 0 .9 0 1 .6 2 0 .7 8 2 .4 6 0 .7 8 *

P o t e n t ia l ( W i th i n ) C a p a b i lit y Cp CP U CP L Cp k 1 .5 5 0 .9 4 2 .1 5 0 .9 4 * O ve r a ll C a p a b il it y Pp PPU PPL P pk 1 .7 8 1 .0 8 2 .4 7 1 .0 8

-1. 0

-0. 5
O b s e r v e d P e r fo rm a n c e

0 .0

0 .5

1. 0
E xp . "O ve r a ll" P e rf o r m a n c e PPM < L SL P P M > US L P P M T ot al 0. 00 3 40 8. 51 3 40 8. 51

Cp m

-1. 0

-0 . 5
O b s e r v e d P e r fo rm a n c e

0. 0
E x p . "W i th in " P e r f o r m a n c e PPM < L SL P P M > US L P P M T ot al

0. 5

1 .0
E xp . "O ve r a ll" P e rf o r m a n c e PPM < L SL P P M > US L P P M T ot al 0. 00 57 6. 00 57 6. 00

E x p . "W i th in " P e r f o r m a n c e PPM < L SL P P M > US L P P M T ot al 0 .0 0 1 0 0 1 0 .7 7 1 0 0 1 0 .7 7

P P M < LS L P P M > US L P P M To ta l

0. 00 0. 00 0. 00

P P M < LS L P P M > US L P P M To ta l

0. 00 0. 00 0. 00

0 .0 0 2 3 2 6 .7 2 2 3 2 6 .7 2

Conclusion: Setting Tonnage to greater than 935 resulted in ASM_7Y and ASM_8Y meeting the goal of <3.4 DPM. ASM_9Y and ASM_10Y require further analysis.
10

Analyze Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

DOE for Response Variable ASM_9Y DOE factorial analysis shows Clamp Position is the only significant factor in determining ASM_9Y dimension DOE Response Optimization for ASM_9Y Set Clamp Position to Location 2 (level 1) Optimizer recommends setting Weld Density to 1.33 weld per inch (level 1), but this appears to be a robust parameter, which could be changed for the benefit of process without reducing quality if processing time or cost shows a benefit. Optimizer recommends setting Clamp Pressure to 2100 psi (level 1), but this appears to be a robust parameter, which could be changed for the benefit of process without reducing quality if processing time or cost shows a benefit. Run additional tests at recommended settings to confirm results Weld Density and Clamp Pressure are robust parameters and can be set to optimize the process capability to maximum level and lowest cost.
11

Analyze Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

DOE for Response Variable ASM_10Y DOE factorial analysis shows Clamp Position is also the only significant factor in determining ASM_10Y dimension DOE Response Optimization for ASM_10Y Setting clamp to location 2 also improves ASM_10Y Recommend same settings used to improve ASM_9Y to improve process capability which also allows for no changes to machine setup and helps reduce possible process concerns Run additional tests at recommended settings to confirm results Weld Density and Clamp Pressure are robust parameters and can be set to optimize the process capability to maximum level and lowest cost.

12

Analyze Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

DOE for Response Variable ASM_3Y DOE factorial analysis shows that no factors are significant Response Optimization shows no solution for response optimizer Observe Process Capability of A_3Y and BS_3Y ASM_3Y and A_3Y have a similar mean shift in the -Y direction Correlation of Output Variables No dimensional correlations appear to exist between ASM_3Y and A_3Y or BS_3Y Stepwise Regression Analysis of BS_3Y Tonnage and Die Pressure appear to be significant in determining dimension BS_3Y Tonnage values < 920 may improve BS_3Y Die Pressure appears to have no clear correlation to BS_3Y
13

Analyze Phase
Process Capability of BS_ 3Y and ASM_3Y at Tonnage < 920

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Created subset of body data looking only at dimensions with Tonnage < 935 Tonnage < 920 appears to improve the mean of BS_3Y slightly, but has no impact on improving the mean of ASM_3Y.
Capability Analysis of ASM_3Y
Die remachined to move mean +0.80

Capability of A_3Y and ASM_3Y with +0.80 mm mean offset Manipulate data for A_3Y and ASM_3Y by +0.80 mm to simulate re-machining Process capability shows 0 defects for A_3Y and ASM_3Y with this mean offset

LSL
Proc ess Data USL Target LSL Mean Sample N 1 * -1 0 36

USL
Within Overall

StDev (Within) 0.0851436 StDev (Overall) 0.0971725

Potential (Within) Capability Cp CPU CPL Cpk Cpm Overall Capability Pp PPU PPL Ppk 3.43 3.43 3.43 3.43 3.91 3.91 3.91 3.91 *

-1.0

-0.5
Observed Performance

0.0
Exp. "Within" Performance PPM < LSL PPM > USL PPM Total

0.5

1.0
Exp. "Overall" Performance PPM < LSL PPM > USL PPM Total 0.00 0.00 0.00

PPM < LSL PPM > USL PPM Total

0.00 0.00 0.00

0.00 0.00 0.00

14

Analyze Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Conclusions From the analysis of ASM_7Y and ASM_8Y we can conclude that:

Setting tonnage > 935 results in ASM_7Y and ASM_8Y meeting the goal

Analyzing ASM_9Y and ASM_10Y helps determine that:

Setting clamp position to location 2, weld density to 1 weld every 1.33 and clamp pressure to 2000 psi helps with dimensions ASM_9Y and ASM_10Y

Analyzing ASM_3Y helps us conclude that:

Re-machine A-Pillar die to move A_3Y to nominal which could cause BS_3Y to shift towards nominal effectively shifting ASM_3Y to nominal

15

Analyze Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

With the recommended changes the process performance will improve significantly
Dimension Mean ASM_1Y ASM_2Y ASM_3Y ASM_4Y ASM_5Y ASM_6Y ASM_7Y ASM_8Y ASM_9Y ASM_10Y -0.035 0.259 0.000 0.009 -0.330 -0.284 0.090 -0.128 0.521 0.395 StDev Overall 0.165 0.152 0.097 0.115 0.145 0.160 0.148 0.089 0.180 0.191 DPM_Obsv DPM_Within DPM_Exp 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 2.90 2.30 2.08 2.25 3.74 2.87 1.54 1.49 2.05 3.26 3.53 3.72 2.24 2.04 3.27 3.50 2.50 1.60 1.86 2.85 Pp 2.01 2.20 Ppk 1.94 1.63 Cp 2.47 2.31 Cpk 2.39 1.71

16

Improve Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Recommendations for improving the process:

Set Tonnage to above 935 to improve ASM_7Y & ASM_8Y Set Clamp to Location 2 to improve ASM_9Y & ASM_10Y Re-machine the A-Pillar die to move the mean of A_3Y to nominal which in turn

will move ASM_3Y to nominal

Implement the above recommendations and run additional samples to verify results.

17

Control Phase

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

Recommended controls :
Implement a gauge on the body side component press to monitor tonnage Implement an alarm and shut-off feature on the body side press if tonnage

falls below 935 tons

Implement poke-yoke clamping fixture that ensures clamp is always in

Position 2
Establish an affordable control plan for ongoing monitoring of the 10

critical assembly dimensions.

18

Summary

D M A I
Define Measure Analyze

Improve Control

ABC Incorporated is not achieving Six Sigma quality levels for all critical BodySide Sub-Assembly dimensions as requested by their customers. BBM needs to apply Six Sigma problem solving methodology to establish an improvement strategy that minimizes rework costs, yet achieves the desired quality objective. Bring the key process output variables within Six Sigma quality level of < 3.4 DPM. Cp 2.0 and Cpk 1.67 Set Tonnage to above 935 to improve ASM_7Y & ASM_8Y Set Clamp to Location 2 to improve ASM_9Y & ASM_10Y Re-machine the A-Pillar die to move the mean of A_3Y to nominal

Implement a gauge on the body side component press to monitor tonnage Implement an alarm & shut-off feature on body side press if tonnage falls below 935 Implement poke-yoke clamping fixture that ensures clamp is always in Position 2 Establish control plan for ongoing monitoring of the 10 critical assembly dimensions.

19