[经管营销]六西格玛应用实例.ppt

Content (Awareness),1) Six Sigma Methodology a) D.M.A.I.C Define Measure Analyze Improve Control b) Project Review on D.M.A.I.C,6,Project from Machine-shop Project from Cleanroom,Optimized Process,30 - 50,10 - 15,4-8,Key Process Input,Variables (,KPIVs,),8 - 10,KPIVs,Critical KPIVs,Inputs Variables,Process Map,Multi-Vari Charts,Correlations , Hypothesis test;,Design Of Experiments, Response Surface Methods,Cause & Effect Matrices,Gage Repeatability & Reproducibility, Process Capability,T-Test, ANOVA, Multiple Regression,Quality Systems, SPC;,Measure,Analyze,Improve,Control,Average,Range Control Charts,Failure Mode Effect Analysis,Six Sigma Methodology,Define,Problem Statement, Baseline study,6,Project Exploration Process Flow Diagram C&E Matrix, Process FMEA, Fishbone Diagrams Data Collection System Measurement System Analysis Attribute/Variable Gage Studies Capability Assessment (on each Y-Response) Cp, Cpk, Pp, Ppk, DPU. Graphical & Statistical Tools Project Summary Conclusions Issues,Measure Phase,6,Process Data Analysis Graphical Analysis (histograms, box plots, trend/control charts, etc.) Multi-Vari Studies Tests of significance (Means, Standard deviations, proportions) DOE Planning Sheet Update Process FMEA Project Summary Conclusions Issues,Analyze Phase,6,Improve Phase,Design of Experiments DOE Planning Sheet (Doe.doc) Factorial Experiments RSM (Response Surface Methodology) Updated FMEA Project Summary Conclusions Issues,6,Control Phase,Plan for Monitoring Ys (Response) Plan for Controlling Xs (Process) Sustaining the gain: Updated FMEA Process Control Plan Action Plan Project summary: Conclusions Issues,6,Project Title :,Optimization of Cheetah X15-Top Swaging Stop Pin,Project Title :,Six Sigma Project,Tampoi Cleanroom,Champion : Kevin Lim Project Team Members: a) Engineering - Aozzudin (Team Leader) b) Quality - Nizam, MK Lai c) Production - Afidah d) Finance - Rohayati e) BB - GS Lim / LL Lim,Project Team,Define Phase,Project Defined,Project Description,Problem Statement : The present high rejection of CX15 Top Swaging Stop Pin is affecting the production yield performance, resulting in unnecessary scraps. Past 7 weeks data (WW44 WW50) show rejection rate ranges from 0.2% to 15.4% in WW50.,Goal/Objective Statement : To study & optimize swaging stop pin process so as to reduce average rejection rate from 3.20 to 0%. Defects : The rejection rate of stop pin is 0 %.,Projected Business Benefits : Yield improvement. Savings in scraps. Savings in re-inspection & resources. Able to meet production output target.,Define Phase,Baseline, Entitlement & Goal,Define Phase,Note : There was no production in WW 47,Baseline 3.2 %,Goal 0 %,Entitlement 0 %,Initial Cost Savings Estimation,Define Phase,Average weekly yield loss of 3.20% when translated to quantity of stop pins being scrapped = 320 pcs (estimated) Estimated qty. scrapped per month = 320 x 4 = 1,280 pcs Estimated qty. scrapped per year = 1280 x 12 = 15,360 pcs Scrap cost per pc = RM 0.722 Estimated scrapped cost per year = RM 0.722 x 15,360 = RM 11,090 Inspection cycle time (inspection + rework) = 50 sec/pc; Then, inspn cycle time incurred per year based on scrapped qty. = 213 hrs Inspection cost based on scrapped qty. per year = RM 1,225 (1hr = RM 5.75) Hard savings per year = RM 11,090 Soft savings per year = RM 1,225 (Validated by Finance Rep on 1/10/2001),Source VarComp StdDev 5.15*Sigma Total Gage R&R 3.22E-09 5.68E-05 2.92E-04 Repeatability 2.94E-09 5.42E-05 2.79E-04 Reproducibility 2.86E-10 1.69E-05 8.72E-05 Operator 2.86E-10 1.69E-05 8.72E-05 Part-To-Part 9.08E-09 9.53E-05 4.91E-04 Total Variation 1.23E-08 1.11E-04 5.71E-04 Source %Contribution %Study Var %Tolerance Total Gage R&R 26.21 51.20 36.55 Repeatability 23.88 48.87 34.89 Reproducibility 2.33 15.26 10.90 Operator 2.33 15.26 10.90 Part-To-Part 73.79 85.90 61.33 Total Variation 100.00 100.00 71.39 Number of Distinct Categories = 2,GR&R Study,Measure Phase,Gage name: Micrometer Date of study: 9-7-2001 Reported by: Anita,GR&R Study,Measure Phase,Gauge Run Chart,Measure Phase,Macro Process Map,Measure Phase,Cause & Effect Diagram,Measure Phase,Baseplate flatness calibration (C),Measurement,Materials,Men,Methods,Machines,Potential FMEA,Measure Phase,Priority Ranking of KPIVs,Measure Phase,Holding time of puncher,Chamfer of insertion hole,Stop pin ID/OD,Cheetah X-15 Swaging Fixture Parameter,1. The followings were established Macro Process Map Cause and 3. varying punch-up timer from 0 to 1.6 seconds at 0.2 sec intervals 4. varying punch-down timer from 0 to 1.0 second at 0.1 sec intervals,Measure Phase,Cheetah X-15 Swaging Fixture Parameter,Analyse Phase,1st Evaluation Result,Analyse Phase,2nd Evaluation Result,Analyse Phase,Varying Punch-Up Timer,Analyse Phase,Varying Punch-Down Timer,Analyse Phase,Analyze Phase Conclusion,Analyse Phase,1. Cylinder Pressure - No rejects detected for cylinder pressure settings at 7.0 the result shows 100% rejects 2. Punch-Up Pressure - No reject was detected at 6.5, 7.0 & 7.5 bar 3. Punch-Up Timer - At 1.0 & 1.1 seconds, the results were good 4. Punch-Down Timer - At 0.5 & 0.6 second, the results were good,DOE,Improve Phase,DOE,Improve Phase,General Linear Model Factor Type Levels Values Cylinder Pressure fixed 2 7.5 8.0 Punch-up Pressure fixed 3 5.5 6.0 6.5 Punch-up Timer fixed 2 1.4 1.5 Analysis of Variance for DPPM, using Adjusted SS for Tests Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P Cylinder 1 208333333 208333333 208333333 0.84 0.391 Punch-up 2 104166667 104166667 52083333 0.21 0.816 Punch-up 1 8333333 8333333 8333333 0.03 0.860 Error 7 1745833333 1745833333 249404762 Total 11 2066666667,Interaction Plot,Improve Phase,Main Effect Plot,Improve Phase,RSM - 1,Improve Phase,RSM - 2,Improve Phase,RSM - 3,Improve Phase,Optimum Settings at Lowest DPPM,Sample size = 500 pcs Plate supplier - Selekta Settings : Cylinder Pressure = 8.0 bar; Punch-up Pressure = 5.5 or 6.5 bar; Punch-up Timer = 1.45 bar. Result : All samples passed