Post on 21-Jan-2016
Team Hot StampTeam Hot Stamp
A Data Based Continuous A Data Based Continuous Improvement Model SystemImprovement Model System
Perry Goss, Team LeaderAlan Stolzer
Greg ArbuckleDuane FloydErrol Samuel
Objectives / ScopeObjectives / Scope
Objective of Project
To reduce the Hot Stamp DPM rating by 50%
Scope of Project
Start with CF-29 project and expand to all other products.
Data Based ProcessData Based Process
Determine Characteristics to
Improve
Collect Data (attribute and
variable)
Determine whether process is in
statistical control
Determine Capability
Perform DOE Work to start improvement
Put Improvements into Effect
Establish and maintain statistical
control
Quality System
Tools to Use
Data Collection FormsChecksheetsInspection Reports
Pareto Analysis
Xbar and R ChartsX, mR Charts
Capability Study for VariablesPPM Reports for Attributes
Experimental Designs
Lean ManufacturingKaizen
Xbar and R ChartsX, mR Chartsp, np Charts
Check Measurement
Systems
GR&R StudiesAttribute Measurement Studies
Establish ControlEstablish ControlP Chart
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
0.12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Subgroup
Perc
en
t D
efe
cti
ve
Fraction Defective Pbar UCL LCL
Pareto of DefectsPareto of Defects
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
Base Hot Stamp Cover Hot Stamp Contamination Other Splay Shorts Flash
Capability StudiesCapability Studies
CF-29 Opening Force Capability
Cp = 1.13 CpK = 0.94
CF-29 Swing Torque
Cp = 0.92 CpK = 0.60
Attribute CapabilityAttribute Capability
RatingRating OverallOverall CF-29CF-29
YTD H/S DPMYTD H/S DPM 12,49712,497 136,646136,646
Feb. H/S DPMFeb. H/S DPM N/AN/A 204,687204,687
3/4 H/S DPM3/4 H/S DPM 4,0294,029 35,99135,991
Measurement System Measurement System Study - AttributesStudy - Attributes
Measurement System Study - AttributesMeasurement System Study - Attributes
Trial OneTrial One
App. 1 App. 2 App. 3
% Appraiser Score 90.00% 100.00% 93.33%
% Score vs. Attribute 90.00% 96.67% 90.00%
Screen % Effectiveness Score - 76.67%
Screen % Effectiveness Score vs. Attribute - 76.67%
Measurement System Measurement System Study - Attributes, After Study - Attributes, After TrainingTraining
Measurement System Study - AttributesMeasurement System Study - Attributes
Trial TwoTrial Two
App. 1 App. 2 App. 3
% Appraiser Score 96.67% 100.00% 96.67%
% Score vs. Attribute 96.67% 100.00% 96.67%
Screen % Effectiveness Score - 93.33%
Screen % Effectiveness Score vs. Attribute - 93.33%
Block Flow Diagram of Block Flow Diagram of ProcessProcess
Mold Parts
Receive parts from Robot
Pick and place parts to small
conveyor
Pick and place parts to dial
Index to Hot Stamp station
Hot Stamp Foil
Convey parts to pick position
Convey parts to next pick
position
Index to inspection
station
Verify parts are on nest
Hold parts in place
Hot stamp parts
Nest
Pick part with Robot
Improvement ProcessesImprovement Processes
The next series of slides show the improvement processes that were undertaken. The results will be shown after these slides.
Multi-VariMulti-Vari
Non-Outlier MaxNon-Outlier Min
75%25%
Median
Outliers
Box Plot (Team Hot Stamp Multi Vari.Resin Type vs. % Acceptable)
Median=85+5*x+eps
RESIN TYPE
%_
AC
CE
PT
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
1 2
Multi-VariMulti-Vari
Non-Outlier MaxNon-Outlier Min
75%25%
Median
Box Plot (Team Hot Stamp Multi Vari.Cavity vs % Acceptable)
Median=91.821+0.179*x+eps
CAVITY
%_
AC
CE
PT
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Multi-VariMulti-Vari
Non-Outlier MaxNon-Outlier Min
75%25%
Median
Box Plot (Team Hot Stamp Multi Vari.Cleaning Interval vs. % Acceptable)
Median=95-0.95*x+eps
CLEANING INTERVAL (MINUTES)
%_
AC
CE
PT
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
15 30 45 60
Multi-VariMulti-Vari
Non-Outlier MaxNon-Outlier Min
75%25%
Median
Box Plot (Team Hot Stamp Multi Vari.Foil Lot vs. % Acceptable)
Median=93-0.25*x+eps
FOIL_LOT
%_
AC
CE
PT
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
1 2 3
Multi-VariMulti-Vari
Non-Outlier MaxNon-Outlier Min
75%25%
Median
Box Plot (Team Hot Stamp Multi Vari.Nest vs. % Acceptable)
Median=88.758+0.083*x+eps
NEST
%_
AC
CE
PT
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
Multi-VariMulti-Vari
Non-Outlier MaxNon-Outlier Min
75%25%
Median
Outliers
Box Plot (Team Hot Stamp Multi Vari.Resin Lot vs. % Acceptable)
Median=86.667+2.5*x+eps
RESIN LOT
%_
AC
CE
PT
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
1 2 3
Multi-VariMulti-Vari
Non-Outlier MaxNon-Outlier Min
75%25%
Median
Box Plot (Team Hot Stamp Multi Vari.Shift vs. $ Acceptable)
Median=91.75+0.25*x+eps
SHIFT
%_
AC
CE
PT
86
88
90
92
94
96
98
100
1 2 3 4
Bivariate HistogramBivariate Histogram
Resin Type versus % Acceptable Bivariate Histogram
DOEDOE
Resin Type Mold Cleanin
1 2 3 1 2 3
2500
2800
3100
3400
3700
PP
M
Main Response Plots
DOEDOE
1 2
3
1 2 3
2000
3000
4000
5000
Mold Cleanin
Resin Ty pe
Mea
n
Interaction Plots
Suggested ImprovementsSuggested Improvements
Reduce the Mold Cleaning IntervalReduce the Mold Cleaning Interval Change the Base ResinChange the Base Resin
Implemented ImprovementsImplemented Improvements
Reduce the Mold Cleaning IntervalReduce the Mold Cleaning Interval Change the MaterialChange the Material
Team Hot StampTeam Hot Stamp
Average Pieces per Day (OOO P/ P)
0
5000
10000
15000
20000
7/30/99
7/31/99
8/1/99
8/2/99
8/3/99
8/4/99
8/5/99
8/6/99
8/7/99
8/8/99
8/9/99
Date
Pie
ces
per
Day
Improvements / ResultsImprovements / Results
Characteristic Before After%
Improvement
DPMO 45,284 23,716 47.6%
AnnualDollars
$68,000 $35,600 <$32,400>
Future ImprovementsFuture Improvements
Expand research to include other Expand research to include other hot stamp defect causes.hot stamp defect causes.
Expand work to include variables Expand work to include variables data not improved.data not improved.