TM 1
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Readily AccessibleReadily AccessibleReadily AccessibleReadily Accessible
Fast RetrievalFast RetrievalFast RetrievalFast Retrieval
Able to Store Able to Store Legacy DataLegacy Data
Able to Store Able to Store Legacy DataLegacy Data
Dialog Boxes
Web Based Access
Function / Feature Diagram – Fast Retrieval
Retrieve Specs by Retrieve Specs by Part NumberPart Number
Retrieve Specs by Retrieve Specs by Part NumberPart Number
Dialog Boxes
Web Based Access
Link to Component DRW
FunctionsFunctionsFunctionsFunctions Features
Link to Component DRW
Web Based Access
Fig. 4-23
TM 2
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Minimum #Minimum #Of User InputsOf User Inputs
Minimum #Minimum #Of User InputsOf User Inputs
DRW Retrievable byDRW Retrievable byLatest RevisionLatest Revision
DRW Retrievable byDRW Retrievable byLatest RevisionLatest Revision
Link to Component DRW
Data Sortable Searching
Dialog Boxes
Function / Feature Diagram – Minimum # of User Inputs
Web Based Access
Retrieve Specs by Retrieve Specs by Part NumberPart Number
Retrieve Specs by Retrieve Specs by Part NumberPart Number
Dialog Boxes
Web Based Access
Link to Component DRW
FunctionsFunctionsFunctionsFunctions Features
3D Cabinet
Fig. 4-24
TM 3
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Information isInformation isAccurateAccurate
Information isInformation isAccurateAccurate
DRW Retrievable byDRW Retrievable byLatest RevisionLatest Revision
DRW Retrievable byDRW Retrievable byLatest RevisionLatest Revision
Link to Component DRW
Data Sortable Searching
Dialog Boxes
Function / Feature Diagram – Information is Accurate
Web Based Access
Retrieve Specs by Retrieve Specs by Part NumberPart Number
Retrieve Specs by Retrieve Specs by Part NumberPart Number
Dialog Boxes
Web Based Access
Link to Component DRW
FunctionsFunctionsFunctionsFunctions Features
3D Cabinet
Fig. 4-25
TM 4
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
QFD Flow Down
Functions Lin
k t
o c
om
po
ne
nt
dra
win
gs
We
b-B
as
ed
ac
ce
ss
Dia
log
bo
xe
s
Vir
tua
l ca
b v
iew
ing
Da
te S
ort
ab
le
Se
arc
hin
g
Vie
we
r c
us
tom
iza
tio
n
Drawings Retrievable by Latest Revision
g 3 c 2 c 2 c 2 g 3 c 113
g 3 Strong Relationship
3D Representation of Cabinet c 2 c 2 c 2 g 3 c 1 c 111
c 2 Moderate Relationship
Readily Accessible g 3 g 3 c 1 c 1 c 1 c 110
c 1 Weak Relationship
Retrieve Specs by Part number
c 2 c 2 g 3 c 1 c 1 c 110
Attribute Information on Drawing (Species/Color etc)
g 3 c 2 c 1 c 1 c 1 c 19
Capable of Storing Legacy Data/Drawings
c 1 c 2 c 2 c 1 c 1 c 18
Multiple Line Weights on Drawing High Print Quality
c 1 c 1 c 1 c 1 c 1 g 38
15 14 12 10 9 9
Features
KEY
Fig. 4-26
TM 5
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
QFD Flow Down
Features Us
e C
as
e B
as
ed
T
rain
ing
M
ate
ria
ls
JS
P W
eb
Pa
ge
Bro
ws
er
Plu
g-i
n
Lin
k f
rom
Lis
t
Ja
va
Ap
ple
t In
pu
t b
ox
Lin
k f
rom
T
hu
mb
na
ils
Web based access g 3 g 3 g 3 g 3 g 3 g 3 18 g 3 Strong Relationship
Virtual cab viewing g 3 c 2 g 3 g 3 c 1 g 3 15 c 2 Moderate Relationship
Link to component drawing
g 3 g 3 c 2 g 3 g 3 c 1 15 c 1 Weak Relationship
Dialog boxes g 3 g 3 c 1 c 1 g 3 c 1 12
Date Sortable Searching g 3 g 3 c 1 c 1 c 1 c 1 10
Viewer customization g 3 c 1 g 3 c 1 c 1 c 1 10
18 15 13 12 12 10
Alternatives ( X's)
KEY
Fig. 4-27
TM 6
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Design Scorecard
LSL USLInformation is Accurate
0 Errors (6 Sigma) 0 Errors (6 Sigma)
Fast Retrieval
0sec 3.3 min 4.82 min (1.4 Sigma) .75 min (6 Sigma)
Easy Retrieval (minimal inputs)
8 12 17 (0 Sigma) 10 (6 Sigma)
Easy to Interpret Format (number of line weights)
2 4 1 (0 Sigma) 3 (6 Sigma)
0 Errors (6 Sigma)
High Level Capability
Feature Capability (from Verification
Testing)
Spec/Target
CTQs
Description
Current Capability
Fig. 4-27a
TM 7
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Verification CTQ Capability AnalysisDrawing Access Spec (combined data from Dim and Non- Dim Lookup)
Combined Access DataPoints
Perc
ent
151050-5
99
95
90
80
70
605040
30
20
10
5
1
Mean
<0.005
2.921StDev 3.422N 52AD 5.964P-Value
Probability Plot of Combined Access DataPointsNormal
Sta
cked V
eri
fy a
nd B
ase
line
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs
Verify - Dim N Non-Dim
BLine - Dim N Non-Dim
6543210
Sta
cked V
eri
fy a
nd B
ase
line
Combined Access DataPoints
Verify - Dim N Non-Dim
BLine - Dim N Non-Dim
17.515.012.510.07.55.02.50.0
F-Test
0.005
Test Statistic 44.94P-Value 0.000
Levene's Test
Test Statistic 8.46P-Value
Test for Equal Variances for Combined Access DataPoints
Alpha: 0.05
Ho: Data is Normal
Ha: Data is not Normal
P-value: <0.005, therefore reject Ho.
Data is Not Normal. Perform Levenes test for equal variance
Conclusion: Use Mann -Whitney for data statistical analysis
Conclusion: Baseline capability based on 0 DPMO is 6 sigma
5.254.503.753.002.251.500.750.00
USLProcess Data
Sample N 26Mean 1.15635
LSL *Target *USL 3.30000Sample Mean 1.15635
Overall CapabilityPp *PPL *PPU 0.37Ppk 0.37
Observed PerformancePPM < LSL *PPM > USL 0PPM Total 0
Exp. Overall PerformancePPM < LSL *PPM > USL 57624.0PPM Total 57624.0
Process Capability of Combined V dataCalculations Based on Exponential Distribution Model
Fig. 4-28
TM 8
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Verification CTQ Capability Analysis Drawing Access Spec (combined data from Dim and Non- Dim Lookup)
Customer Expectations are 1.70 minutes or faster to access and print a drawing, from CTQ Survey. Is the new system running at the customers expectations? This is the Primary CTQ on our design scorecard.
Conclusion: DDL and the design of the user interface will meet customer expectations for drawing access time.
Ho = Sample median is equal to 1.70 minutes
Ha = Sample median is not equal to 1.70 minutes
Alpha = 0.05
Ho = Sample median is equal to 1.70 minutes
Ha = Sample median is less than 1.70 minutes
Alpha = 0.05
P value = .002 < 0.05Therefore reject HoHa = Sample median is not equal to 1.70 minutes
P value = .001 < 0.05Therefore reject HoHa = Sample median is less than 1.70 minutes
Fig. 4-29
TM 9
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Design Scorecard
LSL USLInformation is Accurate
0 Errors (6 Sigma) 0 Errors (6 Sigma) 0 Errors (6 Sigma)
Fast Retrieval
0sec 3.3 min 4.82 min (1.4 Sigma) .75 min (6 Sigma) 1.07 min (6 Sigma)
Easy Retrieval (minimal inputs)
8 12 17 (0 Sigma) 10 (6 Sigma) 10 (6 Sigma)
Easy to Interpret Format (number of line weights)
2 4 1 (0 Sigma) 3 (6 Sigma) 3 (6 Sigma)
0 Errors (6 Sigma)
High Level Capability
Feature Capability (from Verification
Testing)
Spec/TargetCTQs
Description
Current Capability
Fig. 4-30
TM 10
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Finish Quality Metric - QFD
Customer Needs Film
Thi
ckne
ss
Mic
rosc
ope
and
Film
T
hick
ness
Gag
es
Smoo
th to
Tou
ch
Vis
ual I
nspe
ctio
n
Vis
ual C
ompa
riso
n to
M
aste
r
Glo
ss M
eter
Prio
rity
Sco
re
Top Coat Coverage 9 9 1 1 1 1 11
Gloss/Sheen 1 1 1 1 1 9 11
Smooth to Touch 1 1 9 9 1 1 10
Wood Harmony 1 1 1 9 9 1 9
Rough End Grain 1 1 9 9 9 1 10
Consistent Color 1 1 1 9 9 1 12
Dirt in Finish 1 1 9 9 3 1 8
Mullion Profile Rough 1 1 9 9 3 1 2
CTQ Priority Score 16 16 40 56 36 16
Target Limits
Strong 9 Moderate 3 Weak 1
WEIGHT
Ways to measure
Fig. 4-31
TM 11
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 5-2
TM 12
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 5-3
TM 13
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 5-9
TM 14
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 6-1
TM 15
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 6-4
TM 16
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 6-8
TM 17
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 6-11
TM 18
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 7-1
TM 19
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 9-1
TM 20
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 9-2
TM 21
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 11-4
TM 22
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 11-6
TM 23
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 11-7
TM 24
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 12-1
TM 25
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 12-2
TM 26
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
History of Manufacturing
Craft
Mass
Lean
• Made to customer spec.• Single-piece mfg.• Variable quality• Little inventory• High cost• High Quality • Interchangeable parts
• Division of labor (Taylor system)• Assembly lines (Henry Ford)• Low variety (Ford)• Parts per hour• Focus on costs – less quality
• High variety• Small batches• PPM quality• Engaged workforce• Higher quality lower costs
1875 1900 1925 1950 1975 2000
Fig. 13-1
TM 27
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
To
Product/process focus
Co-location, collaboration
Constant, visible communication
Multi-skilling, teamwork, balance
Product lines as businesses
1-piece flow or ‘Flow of value’
Lean Characteristics
From
Functional alignment/focus
Functional ‘silos’
Weak communications
Specialization
Overhead allocation
Slow, batch, inventory
Fig. 13-2
TM 28
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Takt Time Calculation Example:Over 10 Days
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
10
Demand30
40
50
60
10
30
40
20
60
40
380
Time available in period (840 min.)
Average demand (38)= 22.1 minutes
Based on 2 shifts of 7 hours
Determine Pace
Per Day:
Fig. 13-3
TM 29
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-4a
TM 30
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-4b
TM 31
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-5
TM 32
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-6
TM 33
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-7
TM 34
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-10
average time between release an
cou
nt
dis
cs p
er
we
ek
87654321
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
-10
-20
S 13.1169R-Sq 30.7%R-Sq(adj) 28.2%
Regression95% CI95% PI
Fitted Line Plotcount discs per week = 50.57 - 5.229 average time between release an
TM 35
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-11
Error Reduction Project Document Error Baseline
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
5500
6000
6500
5858 324 85
Cross Outs Observations Discrepancies
Nu
mb
er o
f D
ocu
men
t E
rro
rs
80%
82%
84%
86%
88%
90%
92%
94%
96%
98%
100%
SSF Mfg Documentation Errors 6267 Sum
% of Total Document Errors:
Cross Outs: 93%
Observations: 6%Discrepancies: 1%
TM 36
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-12
Combined Origin or "Miss"
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
SME RedlineCreation
Tech Writing Parallel DocApproval
Doc OwnerReview
WordProcessing
Tech EditorReview
Tech Editing QACM SequentialApproval
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
Errors, n=482 Sum
Document Development
TM 37
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-13
Pareto of Customer Needs
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
Pie
ces
of P
aper
Con
flict
ing
Inst
ruct
ions
Tot
al D
ata
Ent
ries
Com
mu
nica
tion
Rea
dab
ility
Tic
ket F
low
Tec
hnic
al c
onte
nt
Ver
ifier
Ste
ps
Tic
ket S
ize
Mul
tiple
Ver
sion
sR
equi
red
Doc
umen
ts
Atta
chm
ent
sC
ross
ref
eren
ces
Cal
cula
tions
Cam
paig
n S
tart
-Up
Labe
lmak
erS
pace
to r
ecor
d
Nov
aman
age
Sta
ffing
Fre
qu
ency
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Per
cen
t
TM 38
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-13a
p R p R p RComplexity Score 0.000 0.673 0.000 0.859 0.018 0.338Total data entries 0.000 0.632 0.000 0.829 0.093 0.242Total pages 0.000 0.618 0.000 0.925 0.006 0.385SOP/SR refs 0.000 0.617 0.000 0.748 0.001 0.457Operator Steps 0.000 0.611 0.000 0.868 0.010 0.366FNs to refer 0.000 0.600 0.000 0.773 0.018 0.336Total SOPs/SRs 0.000 0.584 0.000 0.699 0.005 0.399Other G-code 0.000 0.575 0.000 0.713 0.007 0.380Verifier steps 0.000 0.491 0.000 0.877 0.016 0.343Labeling steps 0.000 0.442 0.000 0.838 0.021 0.328Calculations 0.000 0.395 0.019 0.466 0.134 0.217Attachments 0.032 0.249 0.000 0.738 0.210 0.182Ver/Op 0.470 -0.085 0.748 -0.068 0.832 0.031
Combined Fermentation Recovery
TM 39
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-14
Discrepancies per 100 TicketsJan 2003 to Nov 2004 with change in Process
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
18.00
20.00
# D
iscr
epan
cies
Errors/100 tickets
UCL = 18.11
UCL = 4.81
LCL = 2.41
Mean = 3.61
Process Change: Reduced variation and mean
Mean = 9.87
LCL = 1.64
TM 40
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 13-15
Master Ticket Errors Per Month
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Feb
Mar
Ap
r
May
Jun Jul
Au
g
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Ap
r
May
Jun Jul
Au
g
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Ap
r
May
Jun Jul
2003 2004
Average: 49 master ticket errors
Average: 10 master ticket errors
TM 41
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 14-1
TM 42
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 15-2a
TM 43
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 15-2b
TM 44
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 15-2c
TM 45
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 15-2d
TM 46
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 15-2e
TM 47
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Fig. 15-3
TM 50
©The McGraw/Hill Companies, Inc.,2006McGraw/Hill
Validate Measurement SystemAttribute Data Analysis – MSA 1
Sample # ExpertTry 1 Try 2 Try 1 Try 2 Try 1 Try 2
1 Blister Blister Blister Blister Blister Blister Blister2 Good Light Ed. Good Good Good Good Good3 Drip Drip Drip Dirt Dirt Drip Drip4 Dirt Contam Dirt Dirt Dirt Dirt Dirt5 Contam Contam Contam Good Good Over Run Over Run6 Blister Blister Blister Blister Blister Dirt Blister7 Good Good Good Good Good Good Good8 Dirt Light Ed. Contam Good Good Dirt Dirt9 Good Good Drip Dirt Good Drip Drip
10 Good Orange P. Good Good Good Good Good11 Dirt Dirt Good Dirt Dirt Dirt Dirt12 Good Contam Light Ed. Good Good Over Run Over Run13 Good Light Ed. Light Ed. Good Good Light Ed. Over Run14 Contam Contam Contam Good Good Good Good15 Drip Drip Light Ed. Dirt Good Drip Drip16 Light Ed. Light Ed. Light Ed. Good Good Good Good17 Dirt Contam Contam Good Dirt Dirt Dirt18 Dirt Contam Contam Dirt Dirt Dirt Dirt19 Blister Blister Good Good Blister Blister Blister20 Good Good Good Good Good Orange P. Orange P.
Operator 2 Operator 3Operator 1
Fig. 15-8
Top Related