Greenbelt Six Sigma Final Outline
-
Upload
guest098cf2fe -
Category
Design
-
view
4.863 -
download
2
description
Transcript of Greenbelt Six Sigma Final Outline
1
Dryer Timer Stripped Drive Gear System
Emerson Appliance Controls Division
Indianapolis, Indiana
Final Report
Project Start Date: Jan 28, 2001 Project Completion Date: July 1, 2001
Greenbelt Candidate: Stan E. Mitchell
2
Table of Contents
0.0 Table of Contents page 2 1.0 Executive Summary page 3 2.0 Key Words page 4
3.0 Problem Statement page 4 4.0 Action Items page 6 5.0 Manufacturing Implementation page 8 6.0 Conclusions and Lessons Learned page 8
7.0 Team Members page 9 8.0 Acknowledgements page 9 9.0 Appendices page 9
3
1.0 Executive Summary
For the fiscal year 2000, the parts per million (PPM) level of the customer field failure returns of the M460 dryer timer manufactured at Sparta, Tn and Juarez, Mx was 1400. This resulted in a cost of non-value added of $100,000. The objective is to reduce the PPM level of customer field failure returns from 1400 to 700 by July 2001. The cost of non-value added savings for this project is projected at $50,000. Results from the customer dryer timer teardowns (analysis of dryer timer field failures) shows that 50% of the timer failures was due to the pinion dislodgment from the output gear assembly. The project was narrowed to analyzing the output gear assembly / drive gear interface. The output gear assembly consists of a powdered metal pinion that is pressed into a plastic output gear causing an interference fit. The drive gear is a stamped part that interfaces with the pinion. A motor powers this drive gear system. (Appendix 16.0) Capability analysis of key customer specifications dimensions of the output gear, pinion, and drive gear concluded that the manufacturing process was capable of consistently producing quality parts. Capability analysis of the pinion pullout force (the force it takes to dislodge the pinion from the output gear assembly) concluded that the pinion / output gear joint was adequate. The one-sided customer specification for the pullout force is a minimum of 60 lbs. Since the drive gear interfaces with the pinion, this joint was analyzed. Capability and engineering design analysis proved that the drive gear does not apply enough force to dislodge the pinion from the output gear. The customer specification for the rotational torque for the drive system is 250 in-oz. Because this drive gear system problem occurred during fiscal year 2000, EAC engineering personnel implemented some design changes to the drive gear system for manufacturing and customer analysis in the 4th quarter of 2000. Internal Highly Accelerated Stress Testing (HALT) and external Multiple Environment Over Stress Testing (MEOST) proved that the engineering design changes would eliminate the stripped drive gear system problem. The scope of the project is to verify that the enhanced drive gear system is more robust after the engineering design changes. Six sigma tools and methodology were used to statistically analyze the project metrics.
4
2.0 Key Words • PPM - units defective per 1 million units produced • CVNA - cost of non-value added • Pinion Pullout Force – the force (lbs) it takes to dislodge the pinion from the
output gear assembly • Output Gear Assembly – metal pinion and output gear sub-assembly • MEOST – multiple environment over stress testing • HALT – highly accelerated life testing 3.0 Problem Statement
For fiscal year 2000, the PPM level of customer field failures of the M460 dryer timer drive gear system manufactured at Sparta, Tn and Juarez, Mx was 1400. This resulted in a CNVA of $50,000 in scrap and labor.
3.1 Customer Requirements The M460 dryer timer is used on 100% of the domestic clothed dryers. Due to increased global competition and new technologies, it is critical that Emerson Appliance Controls stay “quality focused” and keep all internal and external customers happy. Since the drive gear system is an integral part of the dryer timer, robust functionality is key. Because quality “cost”, it was important for EAC to find the root cause of the drive system stripped gear problem and eliminate it. 3.2 Project Objective The objective of this project was to reduce the PPM level of customer returns of the M460 dryer timer from 1400 to 700. This resulted in a CNVA of $100,000 in scrap and labor. The goal of this project is to reduce the CNVA by 50% and save $50,000. 3.3 Outline of Project Strategy / Timeline • First level pareto of dryer timer customer returns were analyzed by the
team. Actual data shows that 42% of customer returned timers failed because of drive system stripped gear.
5
• Identify the critical (X’s) that the team felt would contribute to the problem solution. Tools such as Cause and Effect Diagram (Fishbone) and X-Y Matrix were used.
• A preliminary (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) was performed to prioritize variables that contribute to key characteristics of the output gear assembly pinion pullout force. This is an active document subject to be updated.
• A Gage Reproducibility and Repeatability study (GR&R) was performed on the output gear assembly machine. The equipment was found to be capable of measuring the parameters specified over the range of the “Y” of interest.
• Capability analysis was performed on the pinion pullout force of the current drive gear system (before engineering design changes). The output gear / pinion interface joint is marginal at best.
• Hypothesis testing proved that the drive gear system engineering design changes increased the robustness.
• Conclusions from the design of experiments proved that 94% of the pinion pullout force variation was not explained by the regression equation using the output gear sub-assembly parts. Because the drive system piece parts are inter-connected, one input factor alone did not cause the stripped gear field failures. Internal and external dryer timer testing (MEOST and HALT) proved that the engineering design changes to the drive gear system would eliminate the stripped gear problem.
3.4 Project Schedule
See Attached Project Timeline (Appendix 1.0) 3.5 Final Project Description The object of this project was to reduce the PPM level of customer field returns on the M460 dryer timer because of stripped gears from 1400 to 700. This CNVA for the stripped gear problem was $50,000. The original goal was to save $25,000 in scrap and labor. The results of this project are projected savings of 100% with “zero” customer returns because of stripped drive gear.
6
4.0 Actions Taken
The following is an outline of the experimental data associated with this project. It is organized by the four phases of six sigma methodology: Measurement, Analyze, Improve, and Control
4.1 Measurement Phase • Process Maps are outlined identifying all manufacturing process steps
(Appendix 2.0) • Dryer Timer pareto of field failures was generated. Because of the high
rate of stripped gear failures (42%), the team agreed that the drive gear system should be the primary metric for problem resolution. (Appendix 3.0)
• Established a Cause and Effect Diagram (Appendix 4.0) • XY Matrix was completed to prioritize project focus (Appendix 5.0) • FMEA was created and used to rank the areas for the most opportunities
for improvement (Appendix 5.1) • A Gage R&R was conducted on the output gear assembly machine. The
study concluded that this machine was acceptable. (Appendix 6.0) • An initial capability study was completed on the pinion pullout force of
the current output gear assembly. The current manufacturing process pinion pullout force mean was 73 lbs with a Cpk of 0.53 and a Sigma Level of 1.6 for Celmex manufacturing process. The study concluded that the output gear / pinion interface joint needs to be more robust. (Appendix 7.0 ,Celmex), (Appendix 7.1, Sparta)
4.2 Analyze Phase
• After determining that the manufacturing process for the output gear sub-
assembly parts was capable of consistently producing good parts, a multi-vari study was performed to determine if any categorical factors such as shift, date, and machine no. caused any variation in the pinion pullout force. Conclusions from the multi-vari study proved that the categories did not significantly affect the mean manufacturing process value of the pinion pullout force. The day-to-day variation of the pinion pullout force was about 2 lbs. The manufacturing process mean value of the pinion pullout force was 105 lbs vs. a target of 85 lbs and a lower specification limit of 60 lbs. The “take away” was that the output gear sub-assembly manufacturing process is in control. (Appendix 8.0)
7
• A One Sample T test was performed on the pinion pullout force vs. the
customer specifications. The “take away” is the current manufacturing process mean of the pinion pullout force in “better” than the customer specifications. Manufacturing process mean of 105 lbs vs. customer specification of 85 lbs. (Appendix 8.1)
• A Multi-Vari study and One Sample T test was performed on the critical output gear assembly / drive gear interface height. This dimension is critical for form/fit/function in achieving an adequate drive gear / pinion contact ratio. Conclusions from the multi-vari study and one sample t test prove that the manufacturing process of the output gear sub-assembly is in control. (Appendix 9.0 and 9.1)
• A capability study was performed on the rotational torque of the pinion /drive gear interface. If was inferred that due to design tolerance stack-up, the force from the drive gear at worst case dimensionals would cause the pinion to dislodge from the output gear assembly. Although a possibility, design engineering calculations prove that the drive gear/ pinion interface joint is not a major factor since the actual design rotational torque of 5.32 in-oz in much less than the customer specification of 250 in-oz. (Appendix10.0)
4.3 Improvement Phase • Design of Experiments results proved that the output gear sub-assembly
piece parts (individually) do not have a major impact on my project metric
• Drive gear system engineering design changes (Appendix 11.0)
Drive gear / pinion contact ratio changed from 1.3 to 1.6 Drive gear and output gear diametral pitch changed from 64 to 57 Drive gear thickness changed from 0.032 in to 0.036 in Contact area between metal pinion and plastic gear lengthened by 0.050 in.
• HALT and MEOST test were performed on the drive gear system with the engineering design enhancements. The conclusions of the test are listed below: ♦ Highly Accelerated Life Test
Shipping and Storage, Environmental Thermal Shock, and Durability test were conducted
Timer motor was accelerated to 180hz (3 times normal speed) Timers were tested to 4300 resets (simulates 11 years of timer life) The drive gear system had “zero” failures
8
♦ Multiple Environment Over Stress Test
Old drive gear system vs. New drive gear system testing Test levels ranged from 1 to 11 (11 being the highest “input” stress level)
Test parameters: vibration, temperature cycling, humidity and durability
Two timers with the old drive gear system failed at level 2 Two timers with new drive gear system did not have any failures at level 11.
4.4 Control Phase • An engineering change order was initiated with the output gear design
changes. Suppliers have been notified of these engineering drive gear design changes.
5.0 Manufacturing Implementation
• The customers are very happy with the results of the HALT and MEOST
testing. EAC was given customer approval to implement the new drive gear system into full production by Mar 2001.
6.0 Conclusion and Lessons Learned
This project is projected to cause a 100% PPM level reduction of the dryer timer customer returns because of the drive system gear “stripping” failures. The original goal was to reduce the PPM by 50% from 1400 to 700. It was concluded statistically using six sigma tool and empirically that the new drive gear system is more robust. The savings for this project were targeted at $50,000 The projected savings is 100% or $100,000. This project was very important to Emerson and the customer base. Many customers are requiring much more “up front” analysis of solutions to dryer timer mechanical and electrical problems. Dryer timer customers want root cause analysis to problems with timely production implementation. The success of this effort is directly proportional to the committment of the EAC management team. EAC management recognizes the importance of Six Sigma Tools and Methodology.
9
• Further improvements to the output gear sub-assembly manufacturing
process Punch added to enhance the alignment of the output gear and pinion during assembly
Lessons learned from this project include the importance of understanding the goal of the project. It is very important that the project scope is written to focus on a desired metric. This metric should be easily measured and analyzed. Secondly, it is vital that the Six Sigma Tools and Methodology are understood and applied correctly for accurate statistical analysis.
7.0 Team Members – Thank You !
Stan E. Mitchell Green Belt Candidate / EAC Project Manager Andre White Master Black Belt Howard Andrews Sparta Quality Engineer Jack Holtz Celmex Resident Engineer Cesar Gutierrez Celmex Quality Manager Hector Mendez Celmex Quality Engineer Ted Maynard Sparta Quality Engineer
8.0 Acknowledgements Rick Burns Master Black Belt / Six Sigma Qualtec Chris Reynolds Black Belt / White Rodgers Harrison Fidel Gutierrez Black Belt / MMM Pardeep Sood EAC President Russ Epplett EAC Vice President of Engineering George Adams EAC Director of Product Engineering Ben Chestnut EAC Engineering Manager John Bonnema EAC Vice President of Quality
9.0 Appendices
1.0 Project Timeline 2.0 Process Map
10
3.0 Pareto of Field Failures 4.0 Cause and Effect Diagram 5.0 XY Matrix 5.1 FMEA 6.0 Gage R&R 7.0 (Celmex) Initial Short-Term Process Capability 7.1 (Sparta) Initial Short-Term Process Capability 8.0 Multi-Vari Study (pinion pullout force lbs) 8.1 One-Sample T-test (pinion pullout force lbs) 9.0 Multi-Vari Study “Y” sub-assembly dimension 9.1 One-Sample T-test “Y” sub-assembly dimension 10.0 Capability Analysis of Rotational Torque in-oz 11.0 Drive System Engineering Design Changes 12.0 Celmex Capability Analysis of Pinion Pullout Force lbs
(after drive system engineering design changes) 12.1 Sparta Capability Analysis of Pinion Pullout Force lbs
(after drive system engineering design changes) 13.0 Celmex Two Sample T-test (pinion pullout force lbs) 14.0 Sparta Two Sample T-test (pinion pullout force lbs) 15.0 Design of Experiments Results 16.0 Project Primary Matrix 17.0 Project Secondary Matrix 18.0 Drive System Components 19.0 Dryer Timer X-Section 20.0 Output Gear Assembly Machine 21.0 Pinion Location and Alignment 22.0 Staking Punch, Output Gear Assembly
11
12
Appendix 2.0 Process Map (Overall)
START
STOCKROOMOUTPUT GEAR
STOCKROOMPINION
SECURE PINIONAND OUTPUT
GEAR INFIXTURE
INSPECTION
SHIP TOCUSTOMER/DOMESTICMARKET
ASSEMBLEOUTPUT GEAR
AND PINIONSUB-ASSEMBLY
(S) OPERATOR STANDARDS
(S) OPERATOR STANDARDS
(S) OPERATOR STANDARDS(C) PRESS FORCE(C) PRESS SPEED(C) ALIGNMENT FIXTURING(C) PINION / OUTPUT GEAR INTERFACE DIMENSIONS
(X) INPUT
(Y) OUTPUTPINION PULLOUT FORCE
SCRAP
GOOD
NVA
NVA
NVA
NVA
BAD
FAILED DRYERTIMERS RETURNEDTO SUPPLIER FOR
ROOT CAUSEANALYSIS
(Y) OUTPUTFIELD RETURNS PINION POP OFFS
STOP
NVA
output gear inside diameter (C) 0.393 - 0.0015 inoutput gear inside diameter depth (C) 0.202 +/- 0.005 inoutput gear assy working height (C) 0.442 +/- 0.008 in
pinion base diameter (C) 0.311 +/- 0.002 inpinion height (C) 0.371 +/- 0.003 in
pinion diametral pitch (C) 57drive gear thickness (C) 0.036 in
drive gear diametral pitch (C) 57housing gear centers distance (C) 0.468 +/- 0.002 in
test procedures (SOP) N/A
13
Appendix 3.0 Pareto of Field Failures
STRIPPED PINION /GEAR
NO APPARENT DEFECT
IMPROPER ASSY
DAMAGED / BROKEN
OPEN COIL
Others
47 39 10 8 3 342.7 35.5 9.1 7.3 2.7 2.7
42.7 78.2 87.3 94.5 97.3 100.0
0
50
100
0
20
40
60
80
100
DefectCount
PercentCum %
Perc
ent
Cou
nt
DRYER TIMER FIELD FAILURES 2000
14
Appendix (4.0) Cause and Effect Diagram
DISLODGED PINIONS
documented
up to date
documented
scheduled
knowledgeable
trained
documented
understood
per customer specs
dimensonally correct
robust
set-up
calibration
MACHINES
PARTS
CUSTOMER SPECIFICATIONS
PERSONNEL
MAINTENANCE
WORK INSTRUCTIONS
cycle time
handlingoperator
designenvironment
accessible
15
Appendix (5.0) XY Matrix
CHARACTERISTIC SELECTION MATRIX RESULTS
0%2%4%6%8%
10%12%14%
outsi
de ge
ar be
aring
inside
diam
eter h
eight
outpu
t gea
r ass
ebly
beari
ng ou
tside
diam
eter
outpu
t gea
r bea
ring
outsi
de di
amete
r
pinion
base
diam
eter
pinion
heigh
t
INPUT CHARACTERISTICS
CH
AR
AC
TER
ISTI
CS
IMPO
RTA
NC
E %
Input Variables Rank %
outside gear bearing 271 12.34 inside diameter height output gear assembly 185 8.42
bearing outside diameter output gear bearing 290 13.20
outside diameter pinion base diameter 252 11.47
pinion height 241 10.97
pinion base surface finish 165 7.51
output gear sub-assembly 290 13.20 machine alignment
output gear sub-assembly 271 12.34 machine press force
output gear sub-assembly 232 10.56 machine press speed
16
Appendix (5.1) FMEA
17
Appendix 6.0 (Gage R&R)
GOOD GAGE
GOOD GAGE
GOOD GAGE
18
Appendix 7.0 Initial Short-Term Capability Analysis
Celmex
30 40 50 60 70 80 90
L S LL S L
P R O C E S S C A P A B IL ITY A N A L Y S IS F O RP IN IO N P U L L O U T F O R C E F O R C E L M E XB E F O R E D R IV E S Y S TE M D E S IG N C H A N G EC a lc ula tio ns B a s e d o n W e ibull D is tr ibutio n M o de l
Mean: 73.8 Std. Dev.: 9.5 Cpk: 0.53 PPM: 55,000 Sigma Level: 1.6
19
Appendix 7.1 Initial Short-Term Capability Analysis
Sparta
40 50 6 0 70 80 90 100
L S LL S L
P R O C E S S C A P A B IL ITY A N A L Y S IS F O RP IN IO N P U L L O U T F O R C E F O R S P A R TAB E F O R E D R IV E S Y S TE M D E S IG N C H A N G E
C a lc u la tio ns B a s e d o n W e ibu ll D is tr ibu tio n M o de l
Mean: 82.4 Std. Dev.: 9.2 Cpk: 0.80 PPM: 8155 Sigma Level: 2.4
20
Appendix 8.0 Multi-vari study
4/19/014/18/014/17/014/16/01
SP1SP1
SP1SP1
110
105
100
DATE
PIN
ION
PU
LLO
UT
FOR
CE
(LBS
)
A
B
Multi-Vari Chart for PINION PULLOUT FORCE by MACHINE POSITION - DATE
MOLD TOOL NO
MACHINE POSITION
TAKEAWAY: OUTPUT GEAR SUB - ASSY MACHINE “IN” PROCESS
F
21
Appendix 8.1 One Sample T-test
One-Sample T: PINION PULLOUT FORCE (LBS) Test of mu = 85 vs mu > 85 Variable N Mean StDe SE Mean PINION PULLOUT 30 105.56 4.80 1.20 Variable 95.0% CI T P PINION PULLOUT( 103.00, 108.12) 17.1 0.000
Current Manufacturing Process
TAKEAWAY: CURRENT PROCESS MEAN IS DIFFERENT / BETTER THAN THE STANDARD
22
Appendix 9.0
Multi-Vari Study
4/16/01 4/17/01 4/18/01 4/19/01
A B A B A B A B
0.439
0.440
0.441
0.442
0.443
0.444
0.445
DATE
Y D
IMEN
SIO
N (I
N)
1
2
Multi-Vari Chart for Y DIMENSION by SHIFT - DATE
MACHINE POSITIONSHIFT
TARGET
TAKEAWAY: OUTPUT GEAR SUB - ASSY MACHINE IN” CONTROL
Y SUB-ASSEMBLY DIMENSION
0.442 +/- 0.008 IN
23
Appendix 9.1 One Sample T-test
TAKEAWAY: MANUFACTURING PROCESS MEAN EQUAL TO TARGET MEAN
MANUFACTURINGPROCESS MEAN
24
Appendix 10.0 Capability Analysis of Rotational Torque
220 240 260 280 300 320 340
LSLLSL
Process Capability Analysis for ROTATIONAL TORQUE (IN OZ)
USLTargetLSLMeanSample NStDev (Within)StDev (Overall)
CpCPUCPLCp
Cpm
PpPPUPPLCPk
PPM < LSLPPM > USLPPM Total
PPM < LSLPPM > USLPPM Total
PPM < LSLPPM > USLPPM Total
* *
250.000284.438
1622.044420.7086
* *
0.520.52
*
* *
0.550.55
125000.00 *
125000.00
59121.85 *
59121.85
48160.33 *
48160.33
Process Data
Potential (Within) Capability
Overall Capability Observed Performance Exp. "Within" Performance Exp. "Overall" Performance
Within
Overall
TAKEAWAY: DRIVE GEAR INTERFACE WITH PINION NOT A FACTOR (ACTUAL DESIGN TORQUE OF 5.32 IN OZ <<< 250 IN OZ)
25
Appendix 11.0
Drive System Design Change
• Gear mesh contact ratio changed from 1.3 to 1.6 • Drive gear / output gear diametral pitch changed from 64 to 57 • Drive gear thickness changed from 0.032 in to 0.036 in • Contact area between metal pinion and plastic gear inside
diameter lengthened by 0.050 in.
- DESIGN CHANGES IMPLEMENTED DURING PROJECT PHASE - ANALYSIS VARIFIED THAT DESIGN CHANGES ELIMINATED STRIPPED GEAR FIELD PROBLEM
26
Appendix 12.0
Capability Analysis
14013012011010090807060
LSLLSLAFTER DRIVE SYSTEM DESIGN CHANGEPINION PULLOUT FORCE FOR CELMEXPROCESS CAPABILIITY ANALYSIS FOR
Mean: 110.4 Std. Dev: 10.7 Cpk: 1.57 PPM: 213 Sigma Level: 4.7
27
Appendix 12.1
Capability Analysis
60 70 80 90 100 110 120
L S LL S L
P R O C E S S C A P A B IL ITY A N A L Y S IS F O RP IN IO N P U L L O U T F O R C E F O R S P A R TAA F TE R D R IV E S Y S TE M D E S IG N C H A N G E
C a lc ula tio ns B a s e d o n W e ibull D is tr ibutio n M o de l
Mean: 105.3 Std. Dev.: 4.83 Cpk: 1.59 PPM: 0.90 Sigma Level: 4.8
28
Appendix 13.0 Two Sample T-test
CELMEX MANUFACTURING
SINCE P< 0.05, THE PINION PULLOUT FORCE MEDIANS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT BEFORE AND AFTER DRIVE GEAR DESIGN CHANGE
29
Appendix 14.1 Two Sample T-test
SPARTA MANUFACTURING
SINCE P< 0.05, THE PINION PULLOUT FORCE MEDIANS ARE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT BEFORE AND AFTER DRIVE GEAR DESIGN CHANGE
30
Appendix 15.0 Design of Experiments Results
SINCE ALL P VALUES ARE > 0.05, NON ARE SIGNIFICANT TO MY OUTPUT VARIATION
94.4% OF THE VARIATION IS NOT EXPLAINED BY THE REGRESSION EQUATION USING THESE FACTORS CONFIRMING THAT THESE DO NOT HAVE A MAJOR IMPACT ON MY PROJECT
31
Appendix 16.0 Primary Metrix
STRIPPED GEAR BASELINE
0 0 00200400600800
1,0001,2001,4001,600
TargetActual
Drive system design changes implemented into production
Projected Field Failure returns
32
Appendix 17.0 Secondary Metrix
INTERNAL MANUFACTURING DEFECTS
200
250 250
200 200 200
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
TARGETACTUAL
33
Appendix 18.0
Drive System Components
PINION
OUTPUT GEAR
SHAFT
DRIVE GEAR
34
Appendix 19.0 Dryer Timer X-Section
TIMER HOUSING
PINION
OUTPUT GEAR
SHAFT
DRIVE GEAR
35
Appendix 20.0 Output Gear Assembly Machine
OUTPUT GEAR SUB - ASSEMBLY
PINION INSERT LOCATION
36
Appendix 21.0
Pinion Location and Alignment
PINION FIXTURING
37
Appendix 22.0 Staking Punch, Output Gear Assembly Machine