Quality Management

International Technology Quality Management
Transfer Management Prof. Sondermann

Summersemester 2004 Lecture Notes by Phillip Kern
Quality Management
Content
CONTENT ................................................................................................................................ 1
1 TERMS.............................................................................................................................. 3
1.1 QUALITY ..................................................................................................................... 3
1.2 QUALITY MANAGEMENT.............................................................................................. 3
2 QFD – QUALITY FUNCTION DEPLOYMENT......................................................... 4
2.1 HOUSE OF QUALITY .................................................................................................... 4
3 KANO MODEL OF SATISFACTION .......................................................................... 6
4 TQM .................................................................................................................................. 6
5 ISO 9000 ............................................................................................................................ 7
5.1 ISO 9001..................................................................................................................... 7
5.2 9004............................................................................................................................ 9
6 FMEA – FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS......................................... 10
6.1 EXAMPLE PROCESS FMEA ........................................................................................ 10
6.2 ASSIGNMENT OF PROBABILITIES ................................................................................ 11
6.3 RPN RISE PRIORITY NUMBER ................................................................................... 13
6.4 EXERCISE FOR FMEA ............................................................................................... 13
7 ISO CONTROL CYCLE............................................................................................... 14
8 CONTROL PLAN.......................................................................................................... 15
9 PROCESS CONTROL AND CAPABILITY .............................................................. 15
9.1 PROCESS CAPABILITY ................................................................................................ 16
9.2 MEASUREMENT ......................................................................................................... 18
10 SYSTEMATIC INSPECTION METHODOLOGY AS MEASURE OF QUALITY
ASSURANCE ......................................................................................................................... 22
10.1 OPERATIONAL CURVE (OC)....................................................................................... 22
10.2 LARSON – NOMOGRAMM........................................................................................... 23
10.3 DURCHSCHLUPF – CURVE (ESCAPE-CURVE) .............................................................. 24
10.4 ATI (AVERAGE TOTAL INSPECTION)......................................................................... 24
11 CENTRAL LIMITING THEOREM............................................................................ 26
11.1 SHEWART-CONTROL-CHART ..................................................................................... 26
11.2 NON-SHEWARD CONTROL CHARTS ........................................................................... 27
12 QUALITY CAPABILITY ............................................................................................. 28
12.1 RATING RESULTS & FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES............................................................. 29
12.2 CERTIFICATION AND AUDITING ................................................................................. 30
1/41
12.3 POTENTIAL ANALYSIS ............................................................................................... 31

12.4 QUALITY CONTROL CHARTS ..................................................................................... 32
13 BASIC TOOLS FOR QM.............................................................................................. 33
13.1 DATA COLLECTION ................................................................................................... 33
13.2 CHECK SHEETS .......................................................................................................... 33
13.3 HISTOGRAM .............................................................................................................. 33
13.4 PARETODIAGRAM ...................................................................................................... 33
13.5 ISHIKAWA/FISHBONE/CAUSE-EFFECT-DIAGRAM ...................................................... 33
13.6 SCATTERED DIAGRAM............................................................................................... 33
13.7 (CONTROL CHART).................................................................................................... 33
13.8 AFFINITY DIAGRAM .................................................................................................. 33
13.9 RELATION DIAGRAM ................................................................................................. 33
13.10 TREE DIAGRAM ..................................................................................................... 33
13.11 MATRIX DIAGRAM ................................................................................................ 33
13.12 RADAR CHART ...................................................................................................... 33
14 USING OF METHODS - MATRIX DIAGRAM ........................................................ 34
15 QUALITY ENGINEERING METHODS STRUCTURE .......................................... 35
15.1 POKA-YOKE .............................................................................................................. 35
15.2 DOE.......................................................................................................................... 36
16 REQUIREMENTS FOR POTENTIAL ANALYSIS (OF SUPPLIERS).................. 37
17 STAGES OF QUALITY................................................................................................ 40
18 SUMMARY FOR EXAM.............................................................................................. 41
LINKS:
www.vfh.de/qm
user: QMDMT03
pw: sonn-!
automotive recalls:
www.nhtsa.dot.gov
2/41
1 Terms
1.1 Quality
concerns:
- products
- process
- company TQM(Total Quality Management)
Definition:
Degree to which a set of inherent characteristics fulfils requirements.
1.2 Quality management
3/41
1st layer
2nd layer
3rd layer:
Objects
4th layer:
Methods
5th layer: House of Quality

documents (HoQ)
2 QFD – Quality Function Deployment

www.vfh.de/qm LE08
team-based methods to develop customer focused

specification for products and processes
Documentation House of Quality (HoQ)
2.1 House of Quality

“Translates the voice of the customer into the voice of the company.”
4/41
(1) Customer requirements

(2) Degree of importance (1..5 or 1...10)
- e.g. by paired comparison (by matrix)
(3) Service complaints
(4) Customer rating
(5) Design requirements
(6) Maximize, minimize or achieve target goal
(7) Correlation
(8) Relation matrix
(9) Technical difficulties
(10) Technical comparison
(11) Technical objectives
- must be measurable
Fill in by Symbols. Assign values to the symbols!
symbol value Value

(preferred by
Prof.
Sondermann)
5/41
● Strong relationship 5 9
○ Medium relationship 3 3
/∇ Weak relationship 1 1
2004-04-01
3 KANO Model of satisfaction
example railway:
- basic: safety
- performance: just in time
- additional: comfort, food service
4 TQM
Formerly(Quality Inspection) Today and Tomorrow (TQM)
Company Goals - better products - better company
- production cost - customer satisfaction
reduction - high flexibility
- batch optimization
Basic orientation Product Market
Organization of Strong quality department Quality: part of al activities
quality assurance
6/41
2004-04-06
5 ISO 9000
LE02
5.1 ISO 9001

Basis of business
certificate for QMS

effectivness “doing the right things”
belongs to integrated management Systems

enhanced
• ISO 14001 ecological management system
Management
• working safety & health protection (SCC)
systems
QS9000
TS16949
VDA 6.1
5.1.1 Characteristics of ISO 9001
process orientation
aiming at the ability of an organization to assure conformity of products (to

requirements)
striving at fulfilling requirements with customer satisfaction
continuous improvement
According to this declarations one need processes!!!
Q-Objectives:
- general
o policy
- specific
o time & quantity relations
7/41
5.1.2 structure of ISO 9001
0 Einleitung Enthält Hinweise auf:

- Den Prozessorientierten Ansatz
- Die Beziehung zur DIN EN ISO 9004
- Die Verträglichkeit mit anderen
Managementsystemen (z.B. für Umwelt,
Arbeitssicherheit und Gesundheitsschutz)
- Die Nichtunterstellung, dass einheitlich strukturierte
und dokumentierte QM-Systeme verlangt werden
1 Anwendungsbereich
2 Normative Verweisungen
3 Begriffe
4 Qualitätsmanagementsystem Enthält Ausführungen zu:
- Dokumentationsanforderungen
- Lenkung von Dokumenten und Aufzeichnungen
5 Verantwortung der Leitung Definiert Anforderungen, die die Leitung verpflichten,
- Eine Qualitätspolitik und Qualitätsziele festzulegen
und
- Mittel und adäquate Organisations- und
Kommunikationsstrukturen bereitzustellen, mit dem
Ziel, dass Kundenbedürfnisse und -erwartungen
erfüllt werden.
6 Management der Ressourcen Enthält Anforderungen:
- Zur Bereitstellung von Mitteln zur Umsetzung und
Verbesserung des QM-Systems
- Zu Personalfragen wie adäquate
Aufgabenzuordnung und Schulung
7 Produktrealisierung Anforderungen werden aufgestellt zur:
- Planung der Produktrealisierung
- Kundenbezogenen Ermittlung der Anforderungen
an das Produkt
- Gestaltung des Entwicklungsprozesses mit
Verifizierung und Validierung der
Entwicklungsergebnisse
- Beschaffung inklusive der Verifizierung beschaffter
Produkte
- Produkt- und Dienstleistungserbringung sowie
- zur Lenkung von Überwachungs- und Messmitteln
8 Messung, Analyse und Verbesserung Enthält Anforderungen:
- zur Messung der Kundenzufriedenheit
- für interne Audits
- zur Überwachung und Messung von Produkten und
Prozessen
- zur Datenanalyse
- zur kontinuierlichen Verbesserung, Korrektur- und
Vorbeugemaßnahmen
standardized is the „WHAT“ not the „HOW“!
8/41
5.2 9004
refers to improvement of efficiency (guideline)
approaches
- step to TQM
- as addition 6Sigma-Approach
9/41
2004-04-08
6 FMEA – Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
LE09
Failure and defect prevention
analytical method
team based (inter-disciplinary)
used for (single) parts not for (complete) systems
based on preliminary but evaluable designs of processes of products
6.1 example Process FMEA

Target: Assembly of a new car
System / Operation
↑ ↑
Design Process
search for potential failures (by experience)
FMEA doesn’t ask in the first time whether a defect can occur, but how a defect
would look like
look for effects of these failures
evaluate the effects
10/41
6.2 Assignment of probabilities

RPZ = A x B x E
Die folgenden Schemata geben praxisrelevante Werte wieder. Die Tabellen sind aber
dennoch unternehmensspezifisch zu hinterfragen und ggf. anzupassen.
1. Zuordnungsschema für die Bewertung

der Auftretenswahrscheinlichkeit A
Prognostizierte (max.) Punktezuordnung

Prozesssituation Auftretenswahrscheinlichkeit A A
in %
Fehlerauftreten gegen 0 1
unwahrscheinlich
Beherrschter Prozess mit 0,005 2
cp >= 1,33 bzw.
Fehleranteil (vor Prüfung) <
1/20000
1,0 <= cp >= 1,33
bzw. Fehleranteil zw.
1/2000 bis 1/20000
0,8 <= cp >= 1,00 bzw. 0,2 5
Fehleranteil zwischen 1/200 0,5 6
bis 1/1000
Beherrschter Prozess mit 1 7
cp <= 0,8 bzw. Fehler- 2 8
anteil zw. 1/100 bis 1/50
Nicht beherrschter Prozess 10 9
mit Fehleranteil zwischen 50 10
1/10 bis 1/2
2. Zuordnungsschema für die Bewertung

der "Bedeutung (Auswirkung, Fehlerfolge)" B
Prognostizierte Bedeutung der Fehlerauswirkung (f. Kunden) Punktezuordnung

Nicht wahrnehmbare Auswirkung 1
Unbedeutende Fehlerauswirkung 2
Geringfügige Beeinträchtigung 3
Geringfügige Belästigung 4
11/41
Unzufriedenheit des Kunden 5

Verärgerung des Kunden 6
(Werkstattbesuch, Reklamation, Beschwerde, nicht 7
fahrbereites Kfz) 8
Funktionsverlust mit besonderer Verärgerung 9
und Risiken für Kunden (Liegenbleiben mit dem Kfz)
Sicherheitsgefährdung 10
3. Zuordnungsschema für die Ermittlung der "Entdeckung"

bzw. des "Risikos der Nichtentdeckung" E
Prognostizierte (max.) (max.) Nicht- Punkte-

Möglichkeiten der Wahrscheinlichkeit entdeckungs- zuordnung
Fehlerentdeckung der Entdeckung E in wahrscheinlichkeit in E
% %
Sichere Entdeckens- 99,999 0,001 1
wahrscheinlichkeit
Hohe Entdeckens- 99,99 0,01 2
wahrscheinlichkeit 99,95 0,05 3
99,9 0,1 4
99,7 0,3 5
Mäßige Entdeckens- 99,5 0,5 6
wahrscheinlichkeit 99 1 7
98 2 8
Geringe bis sehr > 90 10 9
geringe Entdeckens
wahrscheinlichkeit
Keine Entdeckens- 0 100 10
möglichkeit (nicht
geprüftes bzw.
prüfbares Merkmal)
12/41
2004-04-15
6.3 RPN Rise Priority Number
RPN = Occurance * Detectability * Effect(=Severity)
(1..10) (1..10) (1..10)
Range RPN 1…1000
- no absolute risk measurable

- not comparable between teams
Example:
Occ. =5 ; Det.= 5; Sev.=5 RPN=125
!!!But RPN is not always objective to judge about failures!!!

e.g. O=2 * S=9 * D=3 RPN=54
O=3 * S=6 * D=3 RPN=54
but the first is much more risky because of much higher severity!
6.4 Exercise for FMEA

necessary:
- Name of Process
- Process Objectives
- Process owner (efficiency & effectiveness)
- Trigger
- Input
- Resources
- Procedure
- Measurements/Controls
- Output
- Reactionplan in case of failures(irregularities)
13/41
2004-04-20
7 ISO Control Cycle
ISO 9001 5 Management Responsibility

6 Resource Management
7 Product Realization
14/41
2004-04-27
8 Control Plan
Ishikawa:
2004-04-29
9 Process control and Capability
Processes should be under statistical control and should be capable.
Processes can produce parts(components) and services or software etc.
Industrial processes should be analysed in order to state the ability to meet
requirements.
Def.: Industrial processes is under control if

- the parameter of distribution (e.g. µ & δ in case of quality characteristics are
following a Gaussian distribution) do not change overtime
or
- change in a predictive manner
or
- vary in know boundaries
in other words: you must be able to assign a so called theoretical process-time-model

to process outcome
Process-time-model A1 (according to DIN)

samples: Gaussian distributed
process: Gaussian distributed
µ & δ: constant
Process-time-model A2 (according to DIN)

samples/process non Gaussian
characteristic variables: constant
15/41
9.1 Process capability

- is capable if quality is guaranteed without e.g. additional sorting processes
case 1: µ, δ are constant

upper and lower specification level (USL/LSL) are outside the sample
distribution
Process is capable
case 2: µ, δ are constant

upper and lower specification level (USL/LSL) are inside the sample
distribution
process predictable, theoretical level is assignable
process is under control (not directly linked to requirements)
but not capable (directly linked to requirements)
2004-05-04
9.1.1 Process capability index cP, cPK
- machine capability index cm, cmK

- measurement (equipment) capability index cg, cgA (g=gauge)
cp = T/p =Tolerance width/Process width

USL − LSL
= ≥ 1,33(!) (6δ = +/-3δ area)
6σ
+/-1δ area corresponds to 68,26% of

all samples
all samples
all samples
16/41
TV – Target Value
p=8 (presumption)
difference between
minimum & maximum
sample is 8
assuming that +/-3δ
covers all my samples
(99,73%):
δ=p/6=4/3
cp = T/p = 10/8 = 1,25 (too low, should be ≥ 1,33 in automotive industry)
cp does not take the position of the process into account (red curve)
cpK – Value is taking into account the position(mean) of the process either as
deviation from target value or its approximation to the specification limits
(1) c pK = (1 − k ) ⋅ c p
µ − TV
k=
T
2
⎧USL − µ µ − LSL ⎫
(2) c pK = Min⎨ ; ⎬
⎩ 3σ 3σ ⎭
Cases:
cpK < 0 µ^ is outside the specification level

cpK = 0 µ^ is equal to USL or LSL
cpK = cp k=0 µ=TV centred process
17/41
2004-05-06
9.2 Measurement
Characteristics:
1. Resolution R
requirement: R ≤ 0,05 ⋅ T T = USL – LSL
R should be smaller than 5% of your tolerance width
2. Correctness (bias)
xc is a known standard (e.g.

sample for calibrating)
e.g.
xc = 20,039
x = 20,045
∆ = 0,006
3. precision, repeatability
measure for precision 4δ area
4. accuracy
correctness + precision
5. reproduceability
Measurement for
reproduceabilities
xOP1 is measured by an other

technique than xOP3
18/41
6. linearity
A measurement is linear if the ∆

between the samples and the
means is constant. (in case of
different techniques or different
samples)
7. stability
A measurement is stable if ∆ is not varying over time.
19/41
2004-05-11
9.2.1 Index Cg
0,2 ⋅ T
cg = !≥ 1,33
4S g
0,2 ⋅ T 0,15 ⋅ T
cg = !≥ 1,33 same as cg = !≥ 1,0
4S g 4S g
If not met by measurement device lack of resolution
20/41
0,1 ⋅ T − ( x g − xc )
c gk = !≥ 1,33 [ xg – xc = bias ]
2S g
example:
Weight Measurement Device
- standard 10mg ( xc)

- specification 10±0.6[mg]
- LSL = 9.4mg
- USL = 10.6mg
xg = 10.006
sg=0,04242426
|Bi| = |xg – xc| = 0.00600
cg= 0,2 *1,2/(4 * 0,042426) =1,41

cgk= (0,1 *1,2-0,006) / (2 * 0,042426) =1,34
21/41
2004-05-13
10 Systematic Inspection Methodology as Measure of Quality
Assurance
LE14 Stichprobensysteme
(DIN) ISO 2859 Part 1 … 3
basis for establishing acceptance tests or inspection (lot inspection)
• simple inspection plans

o decision of acceptance and rejection based on the results of 1 sample
only
o form: n-c (n=sample size; c=acceptance number)
or n-c/d where d = c+1 (d=rejection number)
• double inspection plans
o results of sample inspection are treated in following:
defects ≤ c1 accept (c1 = acceptance number)
defects > d1 reject (d1 = rejection number)
defect rate of 1st sample > c1 an < d1
2nd sample needed
o form: n-c1/d1-c2/d2 where c2/d2 is the combined defection rate of
1st & 2nd sample
example: 20-2/5-4/5 (1st sample:
accept in case of 2 or less failures
reject in case of 5 or more failures
2nd sample in case of 3 or 4
2nd sample:
accept in case of 4 or less failures at all
(1st + 2nd sample)
reject in case of 5 or more failures at all
(1st + 2nd sample)
• and others
10.1 Operational curve (OC)

PA Probability of Acceptance
p failures per lot size
AQL Acceptable Quality Level
up to this level you accept
(otherwise test 100%)
LQ limited Quality
causes troubles
22/41
2004-05-18
10.2 Larson – Nomogramm
x
⎛ n⎞
binomial distribution G ( x; n, p ) = ∑ ⎜⎜ ⎟⎟ p i (1 − p ) n −i
i =0 ⎝ i ⎠
23/41
10.3 Durchschlupf – curve (Escape-curve)

D (Durchschlupf) = AOQ (Average Outgoing Quality)
AOQ = p ⋅ PA
example for n-c = 50-1:
p PA AOQ AOQ - curve

0 1 0
0,018
0,011 0,9 0,0099
Average Outgoing Quality
0,016
0,02 0,74 0,0148 0,014
0,012
0,03 0,56 0,0168 0,01
AOQ
0,04 0,4 0,016 0,008

0,006
0,05 0,275 0,01375 0,004
0,06 0,18 0,0108 0,002
0
0,07 0,12 0,0084
0 0,011 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07
Values from Larson - Nomogramm
failure rate p
highest AOQ at p = 3% !!!
operational curve for this example:

Operational Curve
1,1
1
Acceptance Probability
0,9
0,8
0,7
PA[%]
0,6
0,5
0,4
0,3
0,2
0,1
0
0 0,05 0,1 0,15 0,2
failure rate p[%]
10.4 ATI (Average Total Inspection)

Calculated for the average of parts inspected either on sample base or (plus) those
lots which are 100% inspected after a lot was stopped.
24/41
( N − n) ⋅ (1 − PA )
ATI = n + n = sample size; N = lot size
lots
25/41
2004-05-27
11 central limiting theorem
based on U-Transformation table
95,4%
182 − 180
u= =2
1
δ is population standard deviation (over all)

S=1 s is the standard deviation of one sample
178 180 182 [cm]
UCL 99% distribution limit of x taken out of a process

µˆ ± AE ⋅ σ
LCL
u
AE =
u
UWL µ ± AW ⋅ σ 95% distribution limit of x taken out of a process

LWL
UCL/LCL Upper/Lower Control Level

UWL/LWL Upper/Lower Warning Level
example: typical sample sizes
n-sample AE AW
3 1,487 1,132
5 1,152 0,877
7 0,974 0,741
10 0,815 0,620
20 0,576 0,438
Out of these values it is possible to establish a control chart.

for a full control chart, additional information are necessary (e.g. frequency of
samples)
11.1 Shewart-Control-Chart
notes missing!
Interaction relevant for exam!!!

Ping fragen! ☺
26/41
α-Risk the risk to interfere a process, where it is not necessary

= 1% because we defined 99% of distribution are inside UCL and LCL
β-Risk
2004-06-01
What’s wrong with these samples? They do not follow the distribution on what
control and warning levels are based. (There should also be some samples close to
the levels.)
Possible Reason:
The process was improved but the levels were not adopted. This can be a problem
because samples that would be outside of new levels will not be discovered by these
levels. This process is not capable.
11.2 Non-Sheward Control Charts

- no middle line (value)
- no Warning-Levels
- based on Tolerance Levels not on Levels based on process statistics
27/41
2004-06-03
12 Quality Capability
28/41
2004-06-10
12.1 Rating Results & following activities
29/41
12.2 Certification and Auditing
Documents:
30/41
12.3 Potential Analysis

12.3.1 Auditing and Evaluation process
12.3.2 Evaluation/grading
31/41
12.4 Quality Control Charts

Prerequisites for Control Charts:
process must be capable and under control !!!
are the limits process(statistical Experience) or product(ToleranceLevel) oriented?
Process distribution
Process moved but maybe will not

be recognized because most
parts are still inside specification
levels
(only focused on tolerance)
Sample distribution
By defining Control Lines/levels

you will recognize this process
shift!
Quality Control Charts are an excellent tool to support JIT
32/41
2004-06-08
13 Basic Tools for QM
Copy “BASIC TOOLS FOR QUALITY MANAGEMENT AND
PROCESSIMPROVEMENT (ISO 9004-DRAFT)”
13.1 Data Collection

- WHY, WHAT, WHEN, WHO, WHERE, BY WHAT, HOW
13.2 Check Sheets
13.3 Histogram
to check the kind of distribution
13.4 Paretodiagram
sort different characteristics by occurance
13.5 Ishikawa/Fishbone/Cause-Effect-Diagram
13.6 Scattered Diagram
13.7 (Control Chart)

- not really a basic tool, because to complicated
13.8 Affinity Diagram

- e.g. based on Brainstorming to classify the ideas/results
13.9 Relation Diagram

to find root cause(s) elements with only outgoing errors
13.10 Tree Diagram
13.11 Matrix Diagram

- e.g. House of Quality
13.12 Radar Chart
- e.g. Mr. Möbius Slides of Part- & Component-Suppliers
33/41
2004-06-15
14 Using of Methods - Matrix Diagram
Quality
Lead times
Productivity
Costs
Teamwork
Brainsttorming(METAPLAN)
Cause-effect-diagram
Relationship diagram
Overall Improvements
(Streuungsdiag.)
Net plan (CPM)

Matrix diagram
Control Chart
Tree diagram
Check lists
Histogram
graphs
Pareto
Methods
Improvement steps
(1) Estimation of Understanding the situation

Problem size Defining problem
Assessment of scattering of data
Timely scattering
Layering and comparision of data
Discussion of importance of problems
(2) Defining Discussion of difference of problems
Improvement objective Assessment of importance
Estimation about possibility of improvement
(3) Analysis of Potential factors (identification)
influencing factors Choose of most important factors selection
Test relation
Time relation
(4) Finding & Discussion Generation and structuring of ideas
of improvements Selection of improvements steps/actions
Evaluate
Estimate of improvement results
Improvement plan
(5) Realization of Realize the Plan (execution)
improvements Collecting data after improvement
(6) Test of improvement Check effectiveness
results Check data variations
Confirm results
(7) Improvement lasting lead improvement to persist
Detect deviations
Report
34/41
2004-06-17
15 Quality Engineering Methods Structure
FTA = Fault Tree Analysis

MEOST to take care of interactions between different environment conditions
15.1 Poka-Yoke
Main principle:
Prevent errors to become defects.
35/41
2004-06-22
15.2 DOE
- first define problem
- define factors (conditions)
15.2.1 Full Factorial (Vollständiger Versuch)
example: 2 parameters A, B
1. Matrix for experiment
A B Conditions for experiment

+ +
- + + high level of parameters (e.g. estimated improvement)
+ - - low lever of parameters(e.g. actual state of parameter)
- -
No. of experiments Lk (L=no. of levels; k=no. of parameters)
2. Analyse matrix
Result Result is measuring of the value

A B AB Trail1 Trail2 what you want to improve
+ + + 24 22
- + - 11 12
+ - - 20 19
- - + 9 11
3. Impact of the factors
Impact of A I(A):
A(+)=24+22+20+19=85
A(-)=11+12+9+11=43
I(A)=|A(+)-A(-)|=42
Impact of B I(B):
B(+)=24+22+11+12=49
B(-)=20+19+9+11=59
I(B)=|B(+)-B(-)|=10
Impact of AB I(AB):
AB(+)=24+22+9+11=66
AB(-)=11+12+20+19=62
I(AB)=|AB(+)-AB(-)|=4
36/41
16 Requirements for Potential Analysis (of suppliers)

read pages 43-75 from the “VW.pdf” document!
37/41
38/41
39/41
2004-06-24
17 stages of quality
see copies!
additionally to stage 2:
40/41
2004-06-29
18 Summary for exam
Basic principle process under control (see definition)
Capable can produce parts to specification without sorting mechanism
1. ISO 9000
o structure
o difference 9001 9004
o effectiveness efficiency
o QM page 4
o QFD
o process approach write down typical ISO process (management
review or supplier evaluation or Internal Audit, Design review)
Process Audit (Input Control Plan, Operation/specification
documents); Output report
o
2. Process Capability & Control
o calculation of Capability Index
o
3. Measurement system capability
4. FMEA
5. paired comparison (open book question)
2004-07-06
6. tree structure page 4
7. what to do to become a potential supplier (p.43-75 in VW.pdf)
8. QFD
9. HoQ
10. Larsson
11. no shewart control chart
41/41

Quality Management

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Quality Management

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

International Technology Quality Management

Transfer Management Prof. Sondermann

12.3 POTENTIAL ANALYSIS ............................................................................................... 31

1.2 Quality management

5th layer: House of Quality

2 QFD – Quality Function Deployment

team-based methods to develop customer focused

Documentation House of Quality (HoQ)

2.1 House of Quality

(1) Customer requirements

Fill in by Symbols. Assign values to the symbols!

symbol value Value

5.1 ISO 9001

certificate for QMS

belongs to integrated management Systems

5.1.1 Characteristics of ISO 9001

aiming at the ability of an organization to assure conformity of products (to

According to this declarations one need processes!!!

5.1.2 structure of ISO 9001

0 Einleitung Enthält Hinweise auf:

standardized is the „WHAT“ not the „HOW“!

based on preliminary but evaluable designs of processes of products

6.1 example Process FMEA

search for potential failures (by experience)

look for effects of these failures

evaluate the effects

6.2 Assignment of probabilities

1. Zuordnungsschema für die Bewertung

Prognostizierte (max.) Punktezuordnung

2. Zuordnungsschema für die Bewertung

Prognostizierte Bedeutung der Fehlerauswirkung (f. Kunden) Punktezuordnung

Unzufriedenheit des Kunden 5

3. Zuordnungsschema für die Ermittlung der "Entdeckung"

Prognostizierte (max.) (max.) Nicht- Punkte-

Range RPN 1…1000

- no absolute risk measurable

Occ. =5 ; Det.= 5; Sev.=5 RPN=125

!!!But RPN is not always objective to judge about failures!!!

6.4 Exercise for FMEA

ISO 9001 5 Management Responsibility

Def.: Industrial processes is under control if

in other words: you must be able to assign a so called theoretical process-time-model

Process-time-model A1 (according to DIN)

Process-time-model A2 (according to DIN)

characteristic variables: constant

9.1 Process capability

case 1: µ, δ are constant

case 2: µ, δ are constant

- machine capability index cm, cmK

cp = T/p =Tolerance width/Process width

+/-1δ area corresponds to 68,26% of

cp = T/p = 10/8 = 1,25 (too low, should be ≥ 1,33 in automotive industry)

cpK < 0 µ^ is outside the specification level

requirement: R ≤ 0,05 ⋅ T T = USL – LSL

R should be smaller than 5% of your tolerance width

xc is a known standard (e.g.

measure for precision 4δ area

xOP1 is measured by an other

A measurement is linear if the ∆

A measurement is stable if ∆ is not varying over time.

If not met by measurement device lack of resolution

Weight Measurement Device

- standard 10mg ( xc)

cg= 0,2 *1,2/(4 * 0,042426) =1,41

cg= 0,2 1,2/(4 0,042426) =1,41