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.