DOE Training

Consulting Sourcing Technology
Abyss Management Consultancy
(Design Of Experiments - DOE)

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK
Problem Solving
– When can we say that Problem is Solved?
– If it doesn’t repeat.!!!!
– I KNOW How to solve the problem as I have
solved this Problem so many times!!!!!
– When Should we go for a structured problem
solving.
– When cause is not known to us!!!
– If cause is known to us, IMPLEMENT
SOLUTION!!!

Problem Solving
– In some cases solutions set is known to US.
– Just select the solutions which justify the
business.
– If your New Tyre gets FLAT, have you ever
used G8D, DOE etc.
– We have two practical solutions:
– Repair the tube.
– Replace the tube.
– Just Implement the Solution!!!(We know the
cause)
Human Thinking
• Human thinking is a panacea or a curse

• Right Application is the Key.
• Can we solve a problem Just by Thinking.
• Take an Example.
• I have two board markers.
• One is GOOD other is BAD (Not writing).
• Can you tell the reason why BAD is BAD.
• Let’s Start the the exercise.

Human Thinking
• List the reasons!!!!!

• Tip damage.
• No ink.
• Writing method
• Writing surface.
• Ink flow inadequate.
• Date expired (Old Marker).
• Ink Dried up……
• BUT CAN YOU TELL WHICH IS THE ROOT
CAUSE FOR PROBLEM OF MARKER NOT
WRITING!!!!
Human Thinking
• All are Possible causes not the Root Cause.

• For a simple problem, If we can’t tell the root
cause by thinking, how can we tell in
complex cases in industry .
• We need to see the product, Analyze it to drill
down to root cause.
• JUST BY THINKING WE CAN ONLY KNOW
THE POSSIBLE CAUSES NOT THE ROOT
CAUSE!!!
• Utilize human thinking in listing all the
possibility of causes (Advantage of diverse
thinking).
DOE TOOLS CONVENTIONAL TOOLS
No Engineering Judgment Based on engineering judgment and the

skill & knowledge of the team analyzing the
problem. 100% depends on capability of
Team
Works On Elimination Principle Is not based on elimination. All causes are
listed down & sometimes actions are taken
directly. Thinking that the actions will solve
the problem
With Patience, 100% sure that the cause(s) Does not guarantee the elimination of the
creating the problem are identified & problem
Eliminated
Levels less than 60ppm can be achieved Does not ensure the same levels of quality
within few months performance
More Focused on few parameters which No Focus on Parameters. All the like causes
create the problem. This is achieved by are discussed
using the application of initial DOE tools
Most of the tools do not disrupt the No Data Collection
production line when experimenting. Data is
collected from the normal production
process
DOE TOOLS CONVENTIONAL TOOLS

Most of the engineering problems are Does not help in identifying the
not due to single cause contribution interaction
but because of the interaction between
various process
parameters/components.
DOE tools help to identify the cause of
interaction easily.
Methods to verify the effectiveness of Only verification method is test cause
the actions before implementation to worksheet, which again is based on
save money brain storming.
Process can be optimized to better No Process optimization

levels once the problem is solved.

Methodology
• It means we require a systematic way or
Approach.
• Do we have any structure to easily follow the
route.
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Tools Application
• How to execute every step?
• We have tools in all the steps
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control
SPC
MSA, C&E, Tool Validation
Pareto, 9W 2H Pokayoke
PFD, FMEA Kit Tool
visual

DMAIC (Tool KIT)
• BASIC TOOL
• PAIRED COMPARISION
• PROCESS PARAMETER SEARCH
• COMPONENT SEARCH
• MUTI VARI ANALYSIS
• CONCENTRATION CHART
• VALIDATION TOOL
• ADVANCE TOOL
• FULL FACTORIAL (2k Factorial)

DMAIC (Define)
• Do we really understand the problem?
• Clearly understanding the problem is
defining the problem
• “WHAT” is the reported problem.
• “WHO” has reported the problem.
• “WHY” is he saying that it is a problem
• “WHERE” location on the part of
Geographical location also.
• “WHEN” do you observe the problem.
• “HOW” is the problem coming.
• “How Big” is the problem.
DMAIC (Define)
• Now with this you again define a refined
problem which can be attacked.
• Is this definition acceptable to target
customer.
• By solving this problem, will customer
reported problem be solved?
• Take an example?
• In a car head lamp reported for water ingress.
• Can we ask same 5W + 2H to understand this
in a refined manner.

DMAIC (Define)
• What: Water ingress in Head lamp part
noXX001 Zen Model.
• WHO: Reported from assy line.
• WHY: During shower test water seen inside
the the Head Lamp (visually seen)
• Where: It’s seen in Left side of the set H/L LH
• When: A regular Lot supplied for Head lamp
• HOW: Head Lamp to be leak proof : No water
inside Specs: Sheet NO.AD-001
• How Much: 3 Pieces in 700 assy

BYE BYE to DOCTOR!!!

• Does not it look like a Doctor ASKING Q’s?
• WHAT is the problem. Baby Crying
• Mother!!!
• She is stubborn but doesn’t do like this
normally
• Continuously from 9:00PM to 12:00PM
• WHEN???
• HOW: 3 hrs continuous I have never seen her
crying.
• HOW MUCH:Crying like she is in pain with
very loud pitch
Define Consulting Sourcing Technology
DMAIC (Define)
• Checked : NO PROBLEMS CLINICALLY
• Given Some Medicine to go for a sleep.
• WHEN: She is passing the urine in the night.
• After analyzing could find that skin allergy is
the cause.
• If you know the cause, Implement the
Solution.
• Applied Cream for immediate relief.
• BYE BYE to DOCTOR!!!

Define Consulting Sourcing Technology
DMAIC (Define)
•
•
Y = f ( )
Funneling Approach
Y= f(x)
X
Y
Y X
X11…..X
…..XNN
•• Dependent
Dependent •• Independent
Independent
•• Output
Output •• Input
Input Variable
Variable
•• Effect
Effect •• Cause
Cause
•• Symptom
Symptom •• Problem
Problem
Monitor
Monitor Control
Control

DMAIC (Define) Consulting Sourcing Technology
Y = f (X)
•
•
Y = f ( )
Funneling Approach
Y= f(x)
X Y1
Funneling
Funneling f(X)
Approach
Approach
Y2
f(X)

DMAIC (Define)
• Y= Response
• Where Y is detected.
• Are you sure that Y is an Output of which
process?
• Look for X = KPIVs in that process.
• Use human potential to list down all the
KPIVs
• Use Tools like C&E, Brain Storming, FMEA
etc.
• Prioritize all the KPIV to verify one by one.
• Don’t decide at this stage that this is the
cause or not.
Measure DMAIC (Measure) Consulting Sourcing Technology
Col # 1 2 3 4 5 6
Inspector A B
Sample # 1st Trial 2nd Trial Diff 1st Trial 2nd Trial Diff
1 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.0
• Start Measuring Y 2
3
2.0
1.5
3.0
1.0
1.0
0.5
2.5
2.0
2.5
1.5
0.0
0.5
4 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.5 0.5
• There can be two nature of Y

5 2.0 1.5 0.5 1.5 0.5 1.0
Totals 10.5 9.5 3.0 9.5 8.5 2.0
Averages 2.1 1.9 0.6 1.9 1.7 0.4
• Attribute OR Variable. Sum
X
A
4.0
2.0 R
A
Sum
X
B
3.6
1.8 R
B
• What is Attribute and Variable data.

• Is there an measurement Issue.
• Is R&R required for your response.
• Is R&R precision issue or Accuracy Issue?
• How much is R&R % with respect to
Tolerance?
• For Attribute what is the effectiveness, Miss
rate and False Alarm Rate.
Tool Selection Guide Consulting Sourcing Technology
Select Y Component
Search
Attribute Y Variable Y
CTP Known CTP unknown

Convert
Graphical
into Likert Large No. KPIV Narrowed KPIV analysis
scale
Multi-Vari Concentration
X Measure on X Not Measure
Analysis Chart
component on component
K Level X
N Level Y
Graphical Paired
Contingency Process
analysis Comparison
Table Test Parameter search

MUTIVARI ANALYSIS

MUTIVARI ANALYSIS
• INTRODUCTION TO MUTIVARI.
• TYPE OF VARIATION.
• COMMON AND SPECIAL CAUSE.
• PROCESS AND PRODUCT STREAM.
• EXAMPLES FOR MUTIVARI.
• DATA COLLECTION PLAN.
• MINITAB APPLICATION.
• GRAHICAL ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION.

B2B
Variation can come due to:
Poor product Design
Poor Process Design
Process variation (man,material, method, machine)
WHERE to Attack first?
Design related causes or Variation related causes??
Design to be addresses at the last.
First attack variation related causes (KPIV)
If problem is 100% in each part then we may go directly into design
related Issues, how.

INTRODUCTION
• Work on principle of elimination.
• Do we understand the importance of law of
elimination in problem solving.
• Let’s have fun with playing card game.
• In above what is the basic fundamental.
• So how Mutivari eliminates
• Variation is the enemy, so we should know
where the variation is high in the process.
remember we know that ‘y’ or’x’ is an output
of which process.
• How to know where the variation is high
INTRODUCTION
• Variation analysis is for ‘y’ or ‘x’
• DO you know whether ‘y’ or ‘x’ is an output
of which process .
• How it is linked with process mapping.
• But where to apply, when to apply and how
to apply…
• What is the application of the tool.

TYPE OF VARIATION
• Bounce a Ball and measure the level of
bounce in terms of distance traveled.
• Do this three times.
What type of variation
• Are all readings Same!!!
• Why this variation. (No change in setting)
• It can be due to
• Inherent variation in the process (machine
related etc.)
• Input material variation.
• Measurement Variation.

Multi Vari Analysis

What type of variation
• Do this Exercise Again.

• Bounce the Ball and measure the level of
bounce in terms of distance traveled.
• Do it three times.
• All three readings are different from previous
Three set of readings.
• I have changed the Ball!!!!! (Same color)
• Calculate the average of each time Block.
• Why this variation:
• Events happening in between (External to
system)
Multi Vari Analysis
• Can we relate this with Common Cause

and Special Cause
• Part to Part Variation is related with
common cause
• Time to Time variation is linked with
Special cause.

TYPE OF VARIATION
• There are three categories of variation in a

process.
• part to part variation
• time to time variation
• stream to stream variation.
• They give you three different direction to act.
• Let’s understand what are the three variations.

Causes of Variation
Common Causes of Variation
Are an intrinsic part of the process
Give consistent Variation
Affect each data point equally
Are reflected in Unit to Unit Variation
Special Causes of Variation
Are usually outside the process
Appear some time and not at the other times
Affect some data points more than others
Are reflected in Time to time Variations

APPLICATION OF MUTIVARI
A
NO IS THIS A ASSY YES CONVERT INTO
PROBLEM LIKERT SCALE
IS THIS A NO
IS Y VARIABLE
COMPONENT PROBLEM
YES
LEVEL OR
WHICH PARAMETER ‘Y’ GROUP X
YES
A YES NO
IS PARAMETER VARIABLE IS X ATTRIBUTE
YES
APPLY MUTIVARI

How to Do Mutivari Analysis

•How many types of streams are there
•Product streams (diameter at various locations on the
product, diameter across the length)
•Process streams (Multiple cavities, Multiple spindles
etc..)
•To collect data and find out the following variations
in the process
Part to Part
Stream to Stream
Time to Time
Find which variation is highest
STREAM IDENTIFICATION Consulting Sourcing Technology
What Type of variation for study

Other than PTP and TTT
B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6
Machine
1. There are six bobbins in a winding machines,

the wires are feeded to six rotating bobbins.
2. What type of stream.
3. How many streams.

STREAM IDENTIFICATION
• In a speedometer counter the problem is for setting

the zero.
• Are there any stream issue.
• Which zero is a problem as there are many digits.
• A travel agency wants to reduce it’s ticket booking
time. Are there any stream.
• A consulting firm wants to study the variation in the
client response in training programme offered by the
them.

The following data sheet contains the three types of possible variations
in a Multi-Vari study (DRIVERS, PETROL PUMP and LOCATION)
and the output.
tran-day location drivers caravg pertol pump
1 ggn chaman 16.5723 JANAK
2 ggn nagesh 18.2773 JANAK
3 ggn nagesh 12.0488 JANAK
Let’s do an example 4 ggn chaman 10.1503 JANAK
8 ggn chaman 16.8687 VIKAS
9 ggn nagesh 8.6222 VIKAS
File: logistics.mtw

Examples;
• Scenario;
• current leakage in stator assy measured in milli
ampere. Coil to coil leakage can happen, coil to
core leakage can happen. Runs in two shift. Change
in coils and operator.
• A computer AMC provider wants to study the
time to repair for it’s existing client. He has 4
service engineers and 3 product groups, desktops,
servers and printers.
• Fax processing time , 10 person processing fax.
Per day 80 fax processed.
DATA COLLECTION PLAN

• Do you know the total variation of response.
• Do you know what are the events playing.
• Use FMEA and and process map.
• How long to collect data.
• How many samples to be collected.
• Collect 3-5 samples in a particular time block.
• Are parts selected randomly or consecutive pieces.
• Collect in different time blocks.
• How many time blocks.
• How many streams


• Selection of time block based on following;
• Event list.
• Don’t collect parts during the events.
• Cycle time of the process and measurement time.
• Don’t change any setting in the process.
• Collect on-line data.
• Collect data unless 80% of the variation is
captured.
• Record all the events happening in between.
• Collect data for all factor at a time efficient way of
data collection

Sub- Date Time Head# Mid Hot
group
(Attribute (Attribute (Attribute (Variable (Variable
#
Data) data) data) data) data)
Specification Limits -3 / +2 - 5 / +5
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 1 0 1
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 1 0 1
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 1 0 1
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 2 0 1
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 2 1 6
1 01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 2 -1 1
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 3 1 1
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 3 1 6
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 3 -1.5 0
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 4 -2 0
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 4 -4 -2
01-Nov-04 12:30 PM 4 -2 5
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 1 -2 0
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 1 -9 -5
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 1 -2 1
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 2 -3 0
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 2 1 3
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 2 -2 0
2 01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 3 -2 0
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 3 0 1
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 3 0 0
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 4 -1 5
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 4 0 3
01-Nov-04 1:30 PM 4 -2 2


VISCOSITY
TIME RESPONSE (y)
(x)
9:30 40 s 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 2
9:48 45s 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 2 2 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
10:04 48s 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
10:45 40s 2 1 2 2 2 1
1 1 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2
11:05 43s 2 1 2 2 2 1
1 1 1 2 2 2
2 2 1 1 1 2

CALCULATION
• How to calculate part to part variation.
• Ranges of 3-5 consecutive parts.
• Time to time variation is averages of each time block.
• Stream to stream variation is averages of each stream.
• Events variation is averages of event changes.
• Variation can be known through Max Avg minus Min
average.
• Calculate each variation and findout which is the
highest variation.
• Can we graphically analyze the variation
phenomenon to get further clue.
CALCULATION Stream to stream ?
VISCOSITY
TIME RESPONSE (y)
(x)
Time to time
9:30 variation
40?s 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 2
9:48 45s 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 2 2 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
10:04 48s 1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 1 1 1
Part to part variation? 1 1 1 1 1 1
10:45 40s 2 1 2 2 2 1
1 1 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2
11:05 43s 2 1 2 2 2 1
1 1 1 2 2 2
2 2 1 1 1 2

SCENARIO
• Scenario;
• A company has 100% rework problem a part of
their process design. The problem is described as
paint trickling problem on the opposite side of the
mirror plate used in automobiles as rear view
mirrors. This extra paint after baking is buffed. BB
in the organization has taken it as a challenge. They
have started with Mutivari and collected data. You
have to analyze and conclude the results of Mutivari
analysis using minitab.

The following data sheet contains the four types of possible variations
in a Multi-Vari study (day, piece-to-piece, location and time to time)
and the output.
Day Time Location Part Paint
1 1 1 1 1
1 1 1 2 2
1 1 1 3 2
1 1 2 1 2
1 1 2 2 2
IS GRR ISSUE THERE
1 1 2 3 2
1 1 3 1 3
1 1 3 2 2
1 1 3 3 3
1 1 4 1 2
1 1 4 2 2
1 1 4 3 2
File: paint.mtw

The following data sheet contains the four types of possible variations
in a Multi-Vari study (day, piece-to-piece, location and time to time)
and the output.
Main Effects Plot (data means) for Paint

Day T ime
2.5 0
2.2 5
2.0 0
1.7 5
Mean of Paint
1.5 0
1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Lo cat io n Part
2.5 0
2.2 5
2.0 0
1.7 5
1.5 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3
File: paint.mtw

CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION
CAN YOU CONCLUDE WITH MAIN EFFECT PLOT

Inputs:
− TIME TO TIME
− Piece-to-piece
− LOCATIONAL
− DAY TO DAY
Analysis
WHICH VARIATION IS HIGH.
WHY PART TO PART ARE THREE POINTS.
WHAT IS THE CORRECT WAY TO STUDY.

Stat>Quality Tools>Multi-Vari Chart

Shift>Piece>Position
M ulti-V a r i C ha r t fo r P a int by P a r t - T im e
1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 456 1 23 456 1 234 56
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 P ar t
4 .0 1
2
3
3 .5
3 .0
Paint
2 .5
2 .0
1 .5
1 .0
12 34 56 12 345 6 123 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6
Lo c a t io n
P a ne l va r ia b le : T im e

CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION
CAN YOU CONCLUDE WITH MUTIVARI CHART

Inputs:
− TIME TO TIME
− Piece-to-piece
− LOCATIONAL
− DAY TO DAY
Analysis
WHICH VARIATION IS HIGH.
WHY 14TH TIME BLOCK PART TO PART VARIATION
IS HIGH
WHAT IS THE CONCLUSION. WHY IT LOOKS DIFFERENT FROM

MAIN EFFECT PLOT

The following data sheet contains the three types of possible variations
in a Multi-Vari study (within piece, piece-to-piece and shift-to-shift)
and the output.
O utp ut
S hift P ie ce P o sitio n % Im p uritie s
1 1 1 0.02
1 1 2 0.02
1 1 3 0.02
1 1 4 0.01
1 2 1 0.06
1 2 2 0.04
1 2 3 0.03
1 2 4 0.05
2 1 1 0.01
2 1 2 0.01
2 1 3 0.04
2 1 4 0.00
2 2 1 0.05
2 2 2 0.04
2 2 3 0.01
2 2 4 0.03
File: Impurity.mtw

Objective:
Objective:To
Todetermine
determinethe
theeffects
effectsof
ofNoise
Noiseon
on%%Impurities
Impurities
from
fromaaMulti-Vari
Multi-Varistudy
study(File:
(File:Impurity.mtw).
Impurity.mtw).
Output: % Impurities
Inputs:
− Within piece (or within a time period)
− Piece-to-piece (or period to period)
− Shift-to-Shift
Analysis
− Boxplots
− Main Effects Plot
− Interactions Plot
− Multi-Vari Chart
What are the variables that are important in explaining the

variation in % Impurities?

Boxplots Consulting Sourcing Technology
By Position By Piece
0.04 0.04
0.04 0.04
0.03 0.03
0.03 0.03
Output
Output
Output
Output
0.02 0.02
0.02 0.02
0.01
0.01 0.01
0.01
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4 1 2
position 1 2
position piece
piece
0.04
By Shift
0.04
You
Youare
aretrying
tryingto
to 0.03
0.03
detect
detectnonrandom
Output
nonrandom
Output
patterns
patternsand
and 0.02
0.02
Minitab:
important
importantdifferences
differences 0.01
0.01
Graph >Boxplots
1 2
1 2
shift
shift

Main
Main Effects
Effects Plot
Plot for
for Shift,
Shift, Piece,
Piece, and
and Position
Position Consulting Sourcing Technology
Stat>Anova>Main
Stat>Anova>Main Effects
Effects Plot
Plot
Main Effects Plot - Data Means for Output
shift piece position
0.034
0.030
Output
0.026
0.022
0.018
1 2 1 2 1 2 3 4
Evidence of a strong piece-to-piece effect.

Effects
Effects Plot
Plot for
for Shift,
Shift, Piece,
Piece, and
and Position
Is it possible that 2plus 2 is not 4 either greater or less.

Can we have an example on this…..
Let’s do a simple exercise of tower building.
Constraints; eye closed.
One person to guide.
Objective; build tower by putting blocks.
Two person to do separately.
Third time both together.
Can you analyze the results.
Is It possible that individually factor has no significant main
effect but along with some other factor it makes an impact
or an effect over response.

Interaction
Interaction Plot
Plot for
for Shift,
Shift, Piece,
Piece, and
and Position
Interaction Plot - Data Means for Output

1 2 1 2 3 4
0.04
shift
2
0.03
0.02
0.04
piece
2
0.03
0.02
position
HOW TO SEE
INTERACTION
Minitab: Stat>Anova>Interaction Plot

Factors: Shift Piece Position
Raw Response: Output

Stat>Quality Tools>Multi-Vari Chart

Shift>Piece>Position
Multi-Vari Chart for Output By shift - position
piece
1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
shift
1
0.04
2
0.03
Output
0.02
0.01
1 2 3 4
position

TIME TO TIME
LAW OF ELIMINATION VARIATION IS HIGH
Let’s do an elimination exercise.

Look into following KPIVS
SLIDE PLAY
FEED CHANGE.
OPERATOR SETUP.
CAN YOU DO THE
TOOL WEAR.
ELIMINATION
MATERIAL HARDNESS.
TOOL DRESSING
OPERATOR CHANGE.
LUBRICANT FLOW.
DIFFERENT SUPPLIERS LOT

Example Problem Consulting Sourcing Technology
Manufacturing: A black belt or process engineer needs to determine the

significant variables for a process before conducting a design of experiments.
Question:
Question: Which
Whichfamily
familyaccounts
accountsfor
formost
mostof
ofthe
thevariation?
variation?
Within Piece Pcs to Pcs Time to Time Gloss Level
1 1 1 2.15
2 1 1 1.93
1 2 1 2.05
2 2 1 1.80
1 3 1 2.20
2 3 1 1.90
1 1 2 2.20
2 1 2 1.95
1 2 2 2.15
2 2 2 1.95
1 3 2 2.10
2 3 2 2.00
1 1 3 2.10
2 1 3 2.00
1 2 3 2.30
2 2 3 1.90
1 3 3 2.10
2 3 3 1.85 File: Gloss.mtw

PAIRED COMPARISON Consulting Sourcing Technology

Paired comparison Consulting Sourcing Technology
When we get informed about the parts/

components got rejected, what we
normally do??
When we receive samples from the field
due to application failure, what we
normally do ?
Why we always study rejected parts or NG
Parts only ?
If we study ok parts also, do we get some
vital information??
let’s make a strategy to compare good and
bad parts
Data collection Consulting Sourcing Technology
Select 8 parts good and 8 parts bad.

Good should be best-of-best.
Bad should be worst-of-worst samples.
HOW TO SELECT BOB AND WOW.
Select from the actual situation or online
situation.
Measure x on all the 16 parts.
Arrange the data in ascending or descending
order.
CALCULATE COUNT BASED ON CHANGE IN
RESPONSE.

SCENARIO Consulting Sourcing Technology
Problem reported from the customer of gap in

assembly in the rear view mirror.
The engineer suspect the dimensions of the
housing including rib dimension and thickness
of the mirror plate.
CAN WE MEARSURE THE SUSPECTED X ON
THE PARTS.
Can we select worst assembly but how ?
Arrange the data in ascending order based on
x.
calculate count. HOW ?

EXAMPLE Consulting Sourcing Technology
4.8 G 4.8 G Count Tell us

4.84 G 4.84 G
WHAT?
4.88 B 4.85 B
4.89 B 4.88 B
5.1 G 4.89 B
5.2 B 4.89 G
5.15 G 4.95 G
5 B 4.95 G 2+3=5
4.95 G 5 B
4.95 G 5.1 G
5.24 B 5.1 G
5.13 B 5.13 B
Clarity Zone
4.85 B 5.15 G
4.89 G 5.2 B And left is
5.1 G 5.24 B ambiguous
5.25 B 5.25 B

Application of Paired comparison Consulting Sourcing Technology
Select Y attribute or
variable
Y attribute Y variable
YES Process parameter

Select x attribute or Search
Convert into likert scale
variable
NO
Apply paired
comparison X variable
X measured on the product Select x measured directly

or situation directly or indirectly

Decision Using Paired comparison Consulting Sourcing Technology
Collect data on X and

Paired Comparison
Select Parts based on Y
Data in Ascending or
Descending order KPIV is the Significant X
YES
Calculate Count upper YES Not Significant
and Lower
Is Count> 7 NO
Mark the change in Response
in upper and lower zone
Measure count where good Add upper and Lower

Changes to Bad or Vice-versa Count

Example Consulting Sourcing Technology
Customer Complaining on rejection of tubes

used for fuel transmission in passenger cars
during assembly. They found leakages issues.
They have following list of KPIVs:
Alignment during assembly.
Hardness of the tube.
Torque value.
Angle of the end flare (Gets changed after
fitment)
For which Parameter will you apply paired
Comparison?

Analysis Consulting Sourcing Technology
Hardness Leak
47 B
46 B Calculate Count
58 G
67 G And Conclude
57 G
60 G
56 G
50 B
39 B
62 G
65 B G and B values
57 B are same at
78 B
transition line?
96 G
79 G
75 B

PROCESS PARAMETER SEARCH Consulting Sourcing Technology

Scenarios Consulting Sourcing Technology
In case we can’t measure a KPIV on the

parts. What should we do?
Apply Process parameter Search.
Can we have examples where we can use
Process parameter Search?
Input Bar Dia as KPIV in final tube
extrusion.
Temperature as KPIV in Copper pick-up
in brazing process.
Slide play in machine for flaring
operation as KPIV.

Decision Using Process Parameter Consulting Sourcing Technology
Collect data on X and

Process Parameter search
Select Parts based on Y
Data in Ascending or
Descending order KPIV is the Significant X
YES
Calculate Count upper YES Not Significant
and Lower
Is Count> 7 NO
Mark the change in Response
in upper and lower zone
Measure count where good Add upper and Lower

Changes to Bad or Vice-versa Count

3 Steps Analysis process Consulting Sourcing Technology
What to
conclude
Speed Coating Calculate
3.4 20.7 Speed Coating Speed Coating
Count
3.7 23.15 3.4 G 3.4 G
3.8 21.89 And 3.7 B 3.4 B
4.7 24.83 Conclude 4.7 B 3.7 B
5.3 13.07 5.3 G 3.7 B
5.5 14.33 5.5 G 3.8 B
5.7 23.5 6.1 G 4.7 B
6.1 14.33 6.7 G 4.7 B
6.7 13.07 3.4 B 5.3 G
3.4 25.31
3.7 B 5.3 B
3.7 25.11
3.8 B 5.5 G
3.8 25.11 Less than 4.7 B 5.5 G
4.7 27.56 20 micron
5.3 27.56 5.3 B 5.7 B
is Good 5.5 G
5.5 15.52 6.1 G
5.7 28.05 5.7 B 6.1 G
6.1 15.52 6.1 G 6.7 G
6.7 15.03 6.7 G 6.7 G

Data collection Consulting Sourcing Technology
Know you defect % in the population.

Select sample size N that will fetch 8 WOW
parts and 8 BOB parts in actual production.
Measure all “N” samples for the KPIV under
study.
Good should be best-of-best.
Bad should be worst-of-worst samples.
Keep on checking the pieces till you find 8
WOW and 8 BOB samples.
Select from the actual situation or online
situation.
Follow same loop for count calculation as done
in paired comparison
Application of Process Parameter Consulting Sourcing Technology
Select Y attribute or
variable
Y attribute Y variable
YES Process parameter

Select x attribute or Search
Convert into likert scale
variable
NO
Apply paired
comparison X variable
X measured on the product

Select x measured directly
or situation directly

EXAMPLE Consulting Sourcing Technology
Current Thickness Current Thickness

Count Tell us
605 B 497 G
586 B 513 G WHAT?
601 B 518 G
583 B 518 G
590 B 534 B
599 B 543 G
590 G 572 G 3+4=7
585 G 583 B
572 G 585 G
594 B 586 B
513 G 590 B
497 G 590 G
518 G 594 B Current is Vital in
543 G 599 B Thickness variation???
534 B 601 B
518 G 605 B

PROCESS VALUE ANALYSIS Consulting Sourcing Technology

Application Consulting Sourcing Technology
When Cycle time study is required.

When project is CTD.
It Helps in Finding Waste
It helps in finding Value added steps and
Flow.
It explores the current state of a process.
It helps in identifying and applying lean
tools like SMED, CELL Mfg., Waste
elimination etc..

Data Collection#1 Consulting Sourcing Technology
• Understand the current process by experiencing it

- Examine and document the current process flow
- Identify areas of waste, problems, and opportunities
- Collect and analyze process data in preparation for
process improvement plan.

Determine the responsibilities for each team

member during the process walk
- PFD Maker
- Distance Marker
- Map Maker
- Waste Observer
- Queue Counter

Parallel Internal or
Process Human Value External
Process Aggregate 0=Parall Effort Occurren Distance Added Checking Setup Process
Time Process el Time ces per Traveled Status Step Hand-Off Process 1=internal
Process Step (Min.) Time (Min.) 1=Serial (Min.) Batch (Paces) 1=Yes 1=Yes 1=Yes 1= Yes 0 = External
Look in to Monthly Planning sheet 30 30.0 1 8 1.0 0 0 0 1 1 1
Talking to Faculty 10 30.0 1 0 3.0 0 0 0 0 1 1

Waiting time for confirmation 24 72.0 1 0.5 3.0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Refer to attendance register 10 30.0 1 1.5 3.0 20 0 0 0 1 1

Final list of participant 10 30.0 1 1.7 3.0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Prepare Circular for the training + participant 10 30.0 1 0.6 3.0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Writing an Approval E-mail for conducting
training 10 30.0 1 1.1 3.0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Waiting time for approval 24 72.0 1 0.5 3.0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Routing of Circular to Unit Head 10 30.0 1 1.3 3.0 16 0 0 0 1 1
Routing of Circular to participant 15 900.0 1 0.3 60.0 200 0 0 0 1 1
Verify the Signature of participant 10 10.0 1 1 1.0 0 0 0 0 1 1

Reconfirmation on Phone 20 20.0 1 1 1.0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Attach GAFF filter at the outlet of Tub 2 0.5 0.5 1 0.5 1.0 0 0 0 0 1 1
Attach Compressed Air / power

Connections 2 2.0 1 2 1.0 52 0 0 0 1 1

Metrics Table - Current State Filling Process

# Steps 74
# Value Added Steps 3
% Value Added Steps 4%
Distance Travelled (Km) 2.3
Labor Content (min) 368
Overall Process Time (Hours) - No parallel 28
Value Added time (hours) 2
% Value Added Time 7.3%
Estimated Wait Time, Hrs 17
# of Checking Steps 5
# of Handoffs 4
Square footage for packing process (m2) 24
Current filled yield % 97.0%
Front Side Setup time - (Min.) 1505
Wetted surface area for potential contamination (m2) 10

Storage
Work Bob's
Area Mail Office
Room
Map #1
Diagram
Before
Storage
Work Bob's
Area Mail Office
#1 Room
After

Analyze Consulting Sourcing Technology
Think in following Sequence to

improve the current situation
Eliminate the activity
Reduce the occurrence per unit.
Reduce the contents.
Make activity external or Parallel.

Action Plan Consulting Sourcing Technology
Make an action plan for the the analysis

done.
Keep a action plan tracking mechanism.
Use Improvement and Control Tool Kit
to Implement actions which includes 5s,
standardization, Takt Time study,
SMED, Cell Manufacturing etc.

CONCENTRATION CHART Consulting Sourcing Technology

When defect is having pattern on the part.

With in a part defect variation.
It helps to drill down to Important KPIV.
Categorizing defect based on
concentration chart to focus on certain
KPIV.
This tool will not find the root cause but
help to follow a certain direction and also
narrowing down of KPIVs.
This can be clubbed with Multi-Vari when
within part variation is high.

Data Collection Consulting Sourcing Technology
Collect data that captures 80% of the

historic rejection.
In case of multiple defects, categorize
defect and scale defect based on severity.
Make a drawing of the part.
Mark all defects on the sketch or drawing.
Calculate Numbers for all defect
categories.
Prioritize defect Code.
For one type of defect, study the
concentration pattern on the part by
marking on the drawing.
Concentration Chart Consulting Sourcing Technology
Paint overflow
Appears on a
Particular location

SCENARIO Consulting Sourcing Technology
Leakage in tubes for fuel transmission

from the area of weld joint in 90% cases.
Blow holes pattern in a Pressure-Die
casted part.
Paint overflow in a painting process on a
mirror plate as shown in the picture.
Black spot, Silver Streak, Scratch on the
Moulded Housing plastic part.
Leakages in Head Lamp assembly based
on location and severity of leakage.

Concentration Chart Consulting Sourcing Technology
Reading Taken
Defect Code: 01, 02
On 200 Nos.
Housing

COMPONENT SEARCH Consulting Sourcing Technology

Component Search Consulting Sourcing Technology
Measurement done on
List Components for
Y not on X
Swapping
IS assembly Process
A problem OR Component Components as KPIV
Get Good assembly and YES

Assembly is
Bad assembly
the cause
Is BAD remains
Dismantle and assemble
BAD and GOOD
Twice and study the response NO
Remains Good

• Used for assembly related problems (functional failures

of assembly like leakage, opening pressure, current
drawn, noise from motor, torque)
• Is a fantastic tool to troubleshoot “process assemblies
and machine problems also”
• Helps to find out whether the problem is generated due
to the process of assembly or due to components in
assembly
Y = f (x)
Y= response (KPOV)
X= KPIV
Here x’s are assembly process/components in assy
Remember Here response is measured in this tool

Four Stages in component search Consulting Sourcing Technology
Stage 1 – To identify whether assembly process is cause

or not
Stage 2 – To identify which component (s) are causes for the
problem
Stage 3 - To validate the findings of Stage – 2
Stage 4 - Paired comparison on components
We can proceed to stage 2 and 3 only if in stage 1, the

conclusion is assembly process is not the reason for
the
problem

Stage # 1 – Data Collection Consulting Sourcing Technology
• One best of best assembly (bob) and One worst of worst (wow) assy
is selected based on response
• If the response is attribute it should be scaled e.g. gear
shifting smoothness or gear shifter vibration can be scaled
on 1 ~ 5
• If the attribute response cant be scaled then just select one
assy which is working and one which is not working e.g.
helmet lock assy working and not working
• Actual values of response are entered in table as given in
next slide
• Disassemble and reassemble the bob and wow assy TWICE,
measure and enter the responses (same disassembled parts should
be used in reassembly every time)

Stage # 1 – Data Collection example Consulting Sourcing Technology
Response : end torque ;spec : 0.1 mm

Good Bad
Initial value 0.1 0.3
First disassy & 0.1 0.3

reassy
Second disassy 0.1 0.28

& reassy

Stage # 1 – analysis Consulting Sourcing Technology
Calculate D/d ratio

Good Bad
First disassy & reassy 0.1 0.3
Second disassy & reassy 0.1 0.28
Median 0.1 0.3
Range 0 0.02
D(diff between two medians) 0.2
Average of ranges (d) 0.01
D/d ratio 20

Stage # 1 – Conclusion Consulting Sourcing Technology
Good Bad
Median 0.1 0.3
Range 0 0.02
D/d ratio 20
If D/d ratio < 3, assembly process is reason for problem

If D/d ratio > 3, then components in assy are reason for problem
• proceed to stage # 2 only if D/d ratio >= 3

• if D/d less than 3 we have to list down KPIV’s related to assy
• process like torque applied, method of tightening, selection
• of spacers etc and use paired comparison or product/process
• search tool to investigate further
Stage # 1 – Conclusion if response is
attribute and can’t be scaled
• if good remains good and bad remains bad during both disassy and
reassy then components in assy are creating problem
• if good turns bad and bad turns good during disassy/reassy,then

assy process is reason for problem

Stage # 1 – Data Collection example
Response : helmet lock assy (attribute)

Good Bad
Initial value Good Bad
First disassy & Good Bad

reassy
Second disassy Good Bad

& reassy

Stage
Stage ## 11 –– Data
Data Collection
Collection Consulting Sourcing Technology
• Before we proceed to stage 2, make a graph with responses

on y axis and indicating initial value, 1st reassy and 2ND reassy
on X-axis
• Find out average of good and bad medians
• Draw a horizontal line at the average value
• The graph for example on torque is given below
• Mark “+” (good values) with “x” legend and mark the “-” (bad
values) with “o” legend
• Connect all “+” points with solid line and all “o” with dotted
• line, we can also use different colours to distinguish
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
Average of
0.05 median line
0
initial Ist assy 2nd assy

Stage
Stage ## 22 –– Data
Data Collection
Collection Consulting Sourcing Technology
• List down the components suspected in order or suspect level

• Name the components as A,B,C
• For the problem following components in order were selected
A – Housing
B – Housing cover
C- Worm
D- Sector shaft
• Start with first component. Diassemble the first component from Good
and assemble it in bad and disassemble the component from Bad and
assemble it in Good (swapping)
• If the component is represented as A this interchange is called A+R- and
A-R+(R stands for remaining component or assembly in which component
A is assembled Remember Sign above R is rule for
+ indicates good assy deciding good and bad
- indicates bad assy
• After swapping measure the response and note down in the table as
• shown in next slide

Good assy Response Bad assy Response
A-R+ 0.1 A+R- 0.18
• Plot these values using following guidelines

~ plot the value with R “-” with “o” legend
~ plot the value with R “+” with “x” legend
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
initial Ist assy 2nd assy A

0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Conclusions are selected based on following rules

• If the “+” line crosses the middle line and goes into the “-” zone and
the “-” line crosses the middle line and goes into “+” zone then the
conclusion is “THE COMPONENT INTERCHANGED IS THE ONLY REASON
FOR THE PROBLEM (complete reversal)
• If any one line crosses middle line and other line did not cross the middle
line then conclusion is “THE COMPONENT INTERCHANGED IS ONE OF THE
REASONS FOR THE PROBLEM” (partial reversal)
• If none of the line crosses the middle and remains in its respective zone then the
conclusion is “THE COMPONENT INTERCHANGED IS NOT AT ALL REASON FOR
THE PROBLEM” (No reversal)
Stage
Stage ## 22 –– Conclusion-
Conclusion- Attribute
Attribute response
response Consulting Sourcing Technology
Conclusions are selected based on following rules :

• After interchanging first component A if good assy remains good and bad remains
bad then component interchanged is not reason for the problem
• After interchange if Good becomes bad and bad becomes good, then interchanged
component is the only component creating the problem
• After interchanging the component if good becomes bad but bad remains bad or if
good remains good and bad turns good then component interchanged is one of the
reason for the problem
In our example on torque there is partial reversal meaning Housing is one of the
components creating the problem
Proceeding further and taking housing cover (B) and repeat the
Same process of swapping, results of which are given below
A-R+ 0.1 A+R- 0.18
B-R+ 0.28 B+R- 0.10

Graph after interchanging component B

0.35
0.3 There is complete

0.25
reversal
So B is only
0.2
component
0.15 Creating the problem
0.1
0.05
0
initial Ist assy 2nd assy A B
Now if we get a partial reversal after interchanging component B before

We proceed with component C we need to swap both A and B together. This is indicated
As A+B+R- and A-B-R+
After this if we get complete reversal then component A and B are causes for problem
After this if we get partial reversal then A & B are one of the components creating problem.
There are more components along with this.
DO STAGE # 2 TILL WE GET COMPLETE REVERSAL

Stage # 3 – Data collection Consulting Sourcing Technology
• This is a validation stage

• Swap the components identified in stage #2 back to original assemblies and
again swap them
• there should be complete reversal happening strengthening our root cause
• identification in stage # 2
• if not redo from stage # 1
• results of this are also plotted
Graph after interchanging component B (final swap)
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
initial Ist assy 2nd A B final
assy

Stage # 4 – Paired Comparison Consulting Sourcing Technology
• After we have identified the components creating the problem, now

we have to find out what dimensions/parameters are creating the
problem
• For this we use paired comparison
• Select 8 BOB and 8 WOW assemblies based on assembly response
• From 16 assemblies remove the components that have been

identified as reasons for problem
• Proceed as per paired comparison approach

Exercise – Component search Consulting Sourcing Technology
Data for component search done on mirror assy for noise is

Given below. Following is stage # 1 data
BOB WOW
Initial value 4 25
First reassy 6 27
Second reassy 5 24
Is assy problem or not

DOE Tool– Component Search

• used for assembly related problems (functional failures

of assembly like leakage, opening pressure, current
drawn, noise from motor, torque)
• is a fantastic tool to troubleshoot “process assemblies
and machine problems also”
• helps to find out whether the problem is generated due
to the process of assembly or due to components in
assembly
Y = f (x)
Y= response (KPOV)
X= KPIV
Here x’s are assembly process/components in assy
Remember Here response is measured in this tool


Exp Response Exp Response Decision
A-R+ 21 A+R- 8
B-R+ 6 B+R- 22
C-R+ 7 C+R- 21
D-R+ 8 D+R- 6
Draw graph and conclude which component is creating

the problem

Four Stages in component search Consulting Sourcing Technology
Stage 1 – To identify whether assembly process is cause

or not
Stage 2 – To identify which component (s) are causes for the
problem
Stage 3 - To validate the findings of Stage – 2
Stage 4 - Paired comparison on components
We can proceed to stage 2 and 3 only if in stage 1, the

conclusion is assembly process is not the reason for
the
problem

• One best of best assembly (bob) and One worst of worst (wow
assy is selected based on response
• If the response is attribute it should be scaled e.g. gear
shifting smoothness or gear shifter vibration can be scaled
on 1 ~ 5
• if the attribute response cant be scaled then just select one
assy which is working and one which is not working e.g.
helmet lock assy working and not working
• actual values of response are entered in table as given in
next slide
• disassemble and reassemble the bob and wow assy TWICE,
measure and enter the responses (same disassembled parts
should be used in reassembly every time)

Stage # 1 – Data Collection example Consulting Sourcing Technology
Response : end torque ;spec : 0.1 mm

Good Bad
First disassy & 0.1 0.3

reassy
Second disassy 0.1 0.28

& reassy

Stage # 1 – analysis
Calculate D/d ratio

Good Bad
Median 0.1 0.3
Range 0 0.02
D(diff between two 0.2
medians)
D/d ratio 20

Good Bad

Median 0.1 0.3
Range 0 0.02
D/d ratio 20
If D/d ratio < 3, assembly process is reason for problem

If D/d ratio > 3, then components in assy are reason for problem
• proceed to stage # 2 only if D/d ratio >= 3

• if D/d less than 3 we have to list down KPIV’s related to assy
• process like torque applied, method of tightening, selection
• of spacers etc and use paired comparison or product/process
• search tool to investigate further
Stage # 1 – Conclusion if response is
attribute and can’t be scaled
• if good remains good and bad remains bad during both disassy and
reassy then components in assy are creating problem
• if good turns bad and bad turns good during disassy/reassy,then

assy process is reason for problem

Stage # 1 – Data Collection example
Response : helmet lock assy (attribute)

Good Bad
Initial value Good Bad
First disassy & Good Bad

reassy
Second disassy Good Bad

& reassy

Stage # 1 – Data Collection
• Before we proceed to stage 2, make a graph with responses

on y axis and indicating initial value, 1st reassy and 2ND reassy
on X-axis
• Find out average of good and bad medians
• The graph for example on torque is given below
• Mark “+” (good values) with “x” legend and mark the “-” (bad
values) with “o” legend
• Connect all “+” points with solid line and all “o” with dotted
• line, we can also use different colours to distinguish
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
Average of
0.05 median line
0
initial Ist assy 2nd assy

• List down the components suspected in order or suspect level

• Name the components as A,B,C
• For the problem following components in order were selected
A – Housing
B – Housing cover
C- Worm
D- Sector shaft
• Start with first component. Diassemble the first component from Good
and assemble it in bad and disassemble the component from Bad and
assemble it in Good (swapping)
• If the component is represented as A this interchange is called A+R- and
A-R+(R stands for remaining component or assembly in which component
A is assembled
+ indicates good assy Remember Sign above R is rule for
deciding good and bad
- indicates bad assy
• After swapping measure the response and note down in the table as
• shown in next slide
A-R+ 0.1 A+R- 0.18
• Plot these values using following guidelines

~ plot the value with R “-” with “o” legend
~ plot the value with R “+” with “x” legend
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0

Stage # 2 – Conclusion
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
Conclusions are selected based on following rules

• if the “+” line crosses the middle line and goes into the “-” zone and
the “-” line crosses the middle line and goes into “+” zone then the
conclusion is “THE COMPONENT INTERCHANGED IS THE ONLY REASON
FOR THE PROBLEM (complete reversal)
• If any one line crosses middle line and other line did not cross the middle
line then conclusion is “THE COMPONENT INTERCHANGED IS ONE OF THE
REASONS FOR THE PROBLEM” (partial reversal)
• If none of the line crosses the middle and remains in its respective zone then the
conclusion is “THE COMPONENT INTERCHANGED IS NOT AT ALL REASON FOR
THE PROBLEM” (No reversal)
Stage # 2 – Conclusion- Attribute response Consulting Sourcing Technology
Conclusions are selected based on following rules :

• After interchanging first component A if good assy remains good and bad remains
bad then component interchanged is not reason for the problem
• After interchange if Good becomes bad and bad becomes good, then interchanged
component is the only component creating the problem
• After interchanging the component if good becomes bad but bad remains bad or if
good remains good and bad turns good then component interchanged is one of the
reason for the problem
In our example on torque there is partial reversal meaning Housing is one of the
components creating the problem
Proceeding further and taking housing cover (B) and repeat the
Same process of swapping, results of which are given below
A-R+ 0.1 A+R- 0.18

B-R+ 0.28 B+R- 0.10

Graph after interchanging component B

0.35
0.3 There is complete

0.25
reversal
So B is only
0.2
component
0.15 Creating the problem
0.1
0.05
0
initial Ist assy 2nd assy A B
Now if we get a partial reversal after interchanging component B before

We proceed with component C we need to swap both A and B together. This is indicated
As A+B+R- and A-B-R+
After this if we get complete reversal then component A and B are causes for problem
After this if we get partial reversal then A & B are one of the components creating problem.
There are more components along with this.
DO STAGE # 2 TILL WE GET COMPLETE REVERSAL

Stage # 3 – Data collection Consulting Sourcing Technology
• This is a validation stage

• Swap the components identified in stage #2 back to original assemblies and
again swap them
• there should be complete reversal happening strengthening our root cause
• identification in stage # 2
• if not redo from stage # 1
• results of this are also plotted
Graph after interchanging component B (final swap)
0.35
0.3
0.25
0.2
0.15
0.1
0.05
0
initial Ist assy 2nd A B final
assy

Stage # 4 – Paired Comparison Consulting Sourcing Technology
• After we have identified the components creating the problem, now we have to
find out what dimensions/parameters are creating the problem
• For this we use paired comparison
• Select 8 BOB and 8 WOW assemblies based on assembly response
• From 16 assemblies remove the components that have been identified as reasons
for problem
• Proceed as per paired comparison approach


BOB WOW
Initial value 4 25
First reassy 6 27
Second reassy 5 24
Is assy problem or not


Exp Response Exp Response Decision
A-R+ 21 A+R- 8
B-R+ 6 B+R- 22
C-R+ 7 C+R- 21
D-R+ 8 D+R- 6
Draw graph and conclude which component is creating

the problem

Catapult
Catapult
Exercise
Exercise
Or
Or
Helicopter
Helicopter
Exercise
Exercise
Champion
Black Belt Training

Ball
(Peg Position)
Cup Position
Hook Position

Current Situation Consulting Sourcing Technology
Product Development has designed a new catapult and it’s been

delivered to the field without much input from the army’s catapult
crew commander (design thrown over the mote).
The target for the catapult can range anywhere from 91 cm
to 305 cm depending on where the castles are located.
The tolerance is 30.5 cm (+/-15.25 cm)
Setup: One rubber band, C-Clamp, Tape Measure & Ball
and Catapult.
C-clamp
Tape Measure 120”

Catapult Workshop Plan Consulting Sourcing Technology

Measurement
MeasurementPhasePhase
−−Measurement
MeasurementSystem
SystemVariation
Variation
Analysis Phase
Analysis Phase
−−Process
ProcessMapMap
−−Potential
PotentialKey
KeyInput,
Input,Output
Outputand
andNoise
NoiseVariables
Variables
−−Cause
Cause&&Effect
EffectDiagram/
Diagram/Matrix
Matrix
Improvement Phase
Improvement Phase
−−Screening
Screening&&Optimization
OptimizationDOE`s
DOE`s
−−Pareto
ParetoofofSignificant
SignificantFactors
Factors
−−DOE
DOEPrediction
PredictionModel
Model
Control Phase
Control Phase
−−Capability
CapabilityStudy
Study(3(3Shooters
Shooterswith
with10
10shots
shotseach)
each)

Roles for Catapult Workshop Consulting Sourcing Technology
•• Catapult
Catapult Crew
Crew Commander
Commander
•• Data
Data Collectors
Collectors // Observers
Observers
•• Shooter(s)
Shooter(s)
•• Data
Data Analyzer
Analyzer -- All
All

Workshop #1

Measurement System Study Consulting Sourcing Technology
Designate three observers to view the catapult range.

Shoot 2 balls at each of 5 Catapult setups to get a feel for the
process variables and observer variation.
Each observer will record the distance observed for each ball,
but will not share the results until the end of the study.
Using the flip chart, record each observers distances for each
shot.
Complete the Gage study. Remember to fill in the data form:
5 parts, 3 operators, 2 trials.
The Tolerance is +/- 15.24cm (+/- 6 inches)
Report results on a PowerPoint Slide: %R&R, etc.

Analyze Process Consulting Sourcing Technology
Develop
Develop Process
Process Map
Map
Define
Define KPIV`s
KPIV`s (Factors)
(Factors) and
and KPOV`s
KPOV`s
(Responses)
(Responses) onon aa Process
Process Map
Map
Develop
Develop // Analyze
Analyze Cause
Cause &
& Effect
Effect Diagram
Diagram //
Matrix
Matrix
Determine
Determine Key
Key Controllable
Controllable and
and Noise
Noise Input
Input
Variables
Variables
Determine
Determine Key
Key Output
Output Variables
Variables

Workshop #2

CATAPULT DOE STUDY Consulting Sourcing Technology
Follow
Follow thethe DOE
DOE roadmap:
roadmap:
•• List
List Factors
Factors (( controllable,
controllable, SOP,SOP, noise
noise ).).
•• Use
Use DOE
DOE worksheet
worksheet to to relate
relate the
the inputs
inputs to to the
the outputs
outputs
of
of in-flight
in-flight distance,
distance, precision
precision of of aim
aim and
and trajectory.
trajectory.
•• Conduct
Conduct aa screening
screening DOE
DOE to to reduce
reduce thethe number
number of of
factors
factors toto 3.
3.
•• Perform a replicated 2 kk factorial experiment with 3
Perform a replicated 2 factorial experiment with 3
factors.
factors.
•• Determine
Determine the the Catapult
Catapult prediction
prediction model.
model.
•• Run
Run aa capability
capability study
study (( 33 shooters,10
shooters,10 shots
shots eacheach ).).

Deliverables for Catapult Presentation Consulting Sourcing Technology

Measurement
MeasurementPhasePhase
−−Measurement
MeasurementSystem
SystemVariation
Variation(%R&R)
(%R&R)
Analysis Phase
Analysis Phase
−−Process
ProcessMap,
Map,Cause
Cause&&Effect
EffectDiagram
Diagram//Matrix
Matrix
−−List
Listof
ofPotential
PotentialKey
KeyInput,
Input,Output
Outputand
andNoise
NoiseVariables
Variables
on
onDOE
DOEWorksheet
Worksheet
Improvement Phase
Improvement Phase
−−Screening
ScreeningDOEDOEPlan
Planon
onDOE
DOEWorksheet
Worksheet
−−KPIV`s
KPIV`s&&levels
levelsused
usedininDOE`s
DOE`s
−−DOE
DOEPrediction
PredictionModel
Model
Control Phase
Control Phase
−−Capability
Capability((Cp,
Cp,Ppk)
Ppk)
−−Updated
UpdatedProcess
ProcessMap
Map

Rules for the catapult competition Consulting Sourcing Technology
1. Each team will set up their catapult and take 4 shots at each of 5 target positions (20 shots total).
2. The five target positions will be (in inches from the rear of the catapult) 102, 147, 188, 229, 277cm. (40, 58,
74, 90, 109 inches) Throws to be made in this sequence.
3. Each team will have 20 minutes to calculate the catapult settings they think will hit the targets using their
math model.
NO PRACTICE SHOTS ALLOWED.
4. Scoring is based on where each shot lands as defined below::
• Inside Castle = 5pts
• Hits Castle wall = 2pts
• Misses Castle = 0pts
5. Total points from 20 shots determines the winner.

LET
LET THE
THE GAMES
GAMES BEGIN:
BEGIN:
Catapult
Catapult // Helicopter
Helicopter Competition
Competition

2kk FACTORIAL EXPERIMENTS Consulting Sourcing Technology
DOE Experiment
Trial Temperature Pressure Yield
Number Factor A Factor B Response
1 -1 -1 20
2 +1 -1 40
3 -1 +1 30
4 +1 +1 50

Purpose Consulting Sourcing Technology
Describe the overall concept of 2 kk Factorials

Describe the overall concept of 2 Factorials
•• Create
Create standard
standard order
order designs
designs
•• Design and Analyze 2kk factorials
Design and Analyze 2 factorials
-- using
using Anova
Anova
-- using
using Effects
Effects plots
plots
-- Graphs
Graphs and
and Residuals
Residuals Plots
Plots
•• Using
Using center
center points
points inin your
your designs
designs

What does a 2k Factorial mean? Consulting Sourcing Technology
22indicates
indicatesthe
thenumber
numberof
offactor
factorlevels
levels
kk indicates
indicatesthe
thenumber
numberof
offactors
factors
22kkindicates
indicatesthe
thenumber
numberof
oftreatment
treatmentcombinations
combinations
for
foraafull
fullfactorial
factorialdesign
design
Example:
Example:
AA2244factorial
factorialrefers
refersto
tofour
fourfactors
factorseach
eachwith
withtwo
twolevels.
levels.
This
Thisexperiment
experimentcancanbebedone
doneinin2x2x2x2
2x2x2x2oror16
16runs.
runs.

What
What are
are the
the advantages of 22kk Factorials?
advantages of Factorials? Consulting Sourcing Technology
They
They require
require relatively
relatively few
few runs
runs per
per factor
factor under
under
investigation
investigation
They
They can
can be
be aa building
building block
block for
for more
more complex
complex designs
designs
They
They lend
lend themselves
themselves well
well to
to sequential
sequential studies
studies
They
They can
can be
be used
used atat an
an early
early stage
stage ofof investigation
investigation
since
since they
they enable
enable usus to
to study
study aa large
large number
number of of factors
factors
with
with relatively
relatively few
few runs
runs

Standard Order of 2k Designs Consulting Sourcing Technology
• Factor levels may be shown in a coded data form where “-”

or “-1” is the low level and “+” or “+1” is the high level.
A 22 Factorial A 23 Factorial
Temp Conc Temp Conc Catalyst

-1 -1 -1
-1 -1
1 -1 -1
1 -1 -1 1 -1
-1 1 1 1 -1
1 1 -1 -1 1
1 -1 1
-1 1 1
1 1 1

Exercise Consulting Sourcing Technology
Create aa 2244 Factorial

•• Create Factorial design
design matrix
matrix
•• What
What are
are the
the minimum
minimum number
number ofof
Treatment
Treatment Combinations
Combinations required?
required?

Example of a 23 Factorial
••This
Thisisisan
anexample
exampleofofaaFull
FullFactorial
FactorialExperiment
Experimentwith
withonly
only
one
oneobservation
observationper
perTreatment
TreatmentCombination
Combination(Cell)
(Cell)
••There
Therearearetwo
twoquantitative
quantitativeinput
inputvariables
variables(Temp
(Tempand
andConc)
Conc)
and
andone
onequalitative
qualitativeinput
input(Catalyst)
(Catalyst)
Temp Conc Catalyst Yield

-1 -1 -1 60
Factor
Factorlevels
levelsare
are
Temp: 0 0
1 -1 -1 72 Temp:160
1600CC((-1
-1),),180
1800CC((+1+1))
-1 1 -1 54 Conc
Conc((%%):20
):20((-1
-1),),40
40(+1
(+1))
1 1 -1 68 and
-1 -1 1 52
and
1 -1 1 83
Catalyst
CatalystAAvsvsCatalyst
CatalystB. B.
-1 1 1 45
1 1 1 80

Calculating Main Effects
We will now calculate the main effects of the experiment. First we’ll look at
Temperature. We simply add the yields associated with (-1) and the Yields
associated with (1) and calculate the average (Sum/4).
-1 -1 -1 60
1 -1 -1 72
-1 1 -1 54
1 1 -1 68
-1 -1 1 52
1 -1 1 83
-1 1 1 45
1 1 1 80
Total - -211
Total + 303
Sum 92
Mean Eff 23
This can be interpreted as the yield going up by an average of 23 points as

temperature moves from Low to High

Calculating Main Effect of Concentration

-1 -1 -1 60
1 -1 -1 72
-1 1 -1 54
1 1 -1 68
-1 -1 1 52
1 -1 1 83
-1 1 1 45
1 1 1 80
Total - -211 -267

Total + 303 247
Sum 92 -20
Mean Eff 23 -5
This indicates that, as the Concentration moves from 20% to 40%, the yield
goes down by an average of 5 points

Now calculate the main effect for catalyst

and interpret the result.

The Main Effect for Catalyst (Answer) Consulting Sourcing Technology

-1 -1 -1 60
1 -1 -1 72
-1 1 -1 54
1 1 -1 68
-1 -1 1 52
1 -1 1 83
-1 1 1 45
1 1 1 80
Total - -211 -267 -254

Total + 303 247 260
Sum 92 -20 6
Mean Eff 23 -5 1.5
By going from Catalyst A to Catalyst B, we improve our yield by 1.5 points.

Interactions Consulting Sourcing Technology
••So
So far
far we
we have
have calculated
calculated the
the main
main effects
effects (( singular
singular
effects
effects )) for
for each
each of of the
the individual
individual factors
factors thatthat are
are
Temperature
Temperature (( TT ),), Concentration
Concentration (( C C )) and
and
Catalyst
Catalyst (( K K ).).
•• We
We are
are also
also interested
interested in in the
the combined
combined effects
effects of of
these
these factors
factors inin order
order to
to determine
determine ifif there
there isis aa
particular
particular combination
combination of of input
input settings
settings that
that will
will
improve
improve yield
yield over
over and
and above
above the
the singular
singular effects.
effects.
•• There
There areare three
three possible
possible combinations
combinations of of two-way
two-way
interactions
interactions (( T*C,T*C, T*K
T*K andand C*K
C*K ),), and
and oneone possible
possible
combination
combination for for aa three-way
three-way interaction
interaction (( T*C*K
T*C*K ).).

Calculate the Interaction Effects Consulting Sourcing Technology
Temp(T) Conc(C) Cat(K) T*C T*K C*K T*C*K Yield

-1 -1 -1 60
1 -1 -1 72
-1 1 -1 54
1 1 -1 68
-1 -1 1 52
1 -1 1 83
-1 1 1 45
1 1 1 80
Total - -211 -267 -254

Total + 303 247 260
Sum 92 -20 6
Mean Eff 23 -5 1.5

Calculate the Interaction Effects Consulting Sourcing Technology
Temp(T) Conc(C) Cat(K) T*C T*K C*K T*C*K Yield

-1 -1 -1 1 1 1 -1 60
1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1 1 72
-1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 54
1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 -1 68
-1 -1 1 1 -1 -1 1 52
1 -1 1 -1 1 -1 -1 83
-1 1 1 -1 -1 1 -1 45
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 80
Total - -211 -267 -254 -254 -237 -257 -256

Total + 303 247 260 260 277 257 258
Sum 92 -20 6 6 40 0 2
Mean Eff 23 -5 1.5 1.5 10 0 0.5

Determine the Statistically Significant Effects Consulting Sourcing Technology
••To
Todetermine
determine which
whicheffects
effectsare
arestatistically
statisticallysignificant
significantwe
we
begin
beginby
bycalculating
calculating
Column
ColumnContrast
Contrast==Sum
Sumofofthe
thevectored
vectoredresponses
responses
••These
Thesevalues
valuesare
areobtained
obtainedby
bymultiplying
multiplyingthe
theresponse
responseby
bythe
the
individual
individuallevels
levelsof
ofaagiven
givenfactor
factoror
orinteraction
interactionand
andsumming
summing
them.
them.
••This
Thisequates
equatesto
tothe
the“SUM”
“SUM”rowrowininthe
theprevious
previoustables.
tables.
Let’s
Let’stake
takethe
theexample
exampleof
ofthe
thecolumn
columncontrast
contrastfor
forTemp.
Temp.

Calculating Column Contrasts Consulting Sourcing Technology
Temp Yield Temp. Contrast

-1 60 -60
1 72 72
-1 54 -54
1 68 68
-1 52 -52
1 83 83
-1 45 -45
1 80 80
Column 92
Contrast

Computing the Sum of Squares Consulting Sourcing Technology
( Contrast ) 2
SSFactor =
N
Where N is the total number of runs.

• Compute the Sum of Squares for all

factors and interactions.

Sum of Squares Answer Consulting Sourcing Technology
Source SS
T 1058
C 50
K 4.5
T*C 4.5
T*K 200
C*K 0
T*C*K 0.5
Error 0
Total 1317.5

Reducing the Model Consulting Sourcing Technology
• If we only consider the effects of temperature and

catalyst, our design matrix may be reduced as follows
(the singular effect of catalyst, although not significant,
must be included to calculate the interaction)
T K T*K Yield 1 Yield 2

-1 -1 1 60 54
1 -1 -1 72 68
-1 1 -1 52 45
1 1 1 83 80

Building the ANOVA table for the Reduced Model Consulting Sourcing Technology
•• By
By only
only considering
considering the the significant
significant effects
effects ofof
temperature
temperature (( 11 degree
degree of of freedom
freedom ),), Catalyst
Catalyst
(( 11 degree
degree of
of freedom
freedom )) and
and temperature*
temperature* catalyst
catalyst
interaction
interaction (( 1x1=1
1x1=1 degree
degree of of freedom
freedom ),), four
four degrees
degrees
of
of freedom
freedom have
have now
now become
become available
available for
for the
the error
error
term,
term, enabling
enabling usus to
to construct
construct thethe ANOVA
ANOVA table table
remembering
remembering that: that:
MS
MS == SS/df
SS/df and
and FF == MS
MSsource/ MS
source MSerror
/ error

Analysis of Variance for Yield Consulting Sourcing Technology
Source
Source DF
DF SS
SS MS
MS FF
Temp
Temp 11 1058
1058 1058
1058 76.95
76.95
Catalyst
Catalyst 11 4.5
4.5 4.5
4.5 0.33
0.33
Temp*Catalyst
Temp*Catalyst 11 200
200 200
200 14.55
14.55
Error
Error 44 55
55 13.75
13.75
Total
Total 77 1317.5
1317.5
The critical F value for 1 and 4 degrees of freedom is

7.71 for an α risk of 0.05

Mathematical Model
The predicted value for yield Y may be expressed

by:
Y = Y + b1 T + b2 C + b3 K + b4( T*C )
+ b5 ( T*K ) + b6 ( C*K ) + b7 ( T*C*K )
Where Y is the grand mean for yield and bn

values are the half effects ( mean effect/2 )
for each factor or interaction , including those
which have no statistical significance.

•• Write
Write the
the mathematical
mathematical model
model for
for yield
yield
•• What
What isis the
the predicted
predicted value
value for
for yield
yield when
when
all
all factor
factor levels
levels are
are set
set at
at -1?
-1?
•• Predict
Predict yield
yield when
when all
all factor
factor settings
settings are
are at
at +1
+1

Exercise Answer
Yield
Yield == 64.25
64.25 ++ 11.5T
11.5T -- 2.5C
2.5C ++ 0.75K
0.75K
++ 0.75(
0.75( T*C
T*C )) ++ 5(
5( T*K
T*K )) ++ 0(
0( C*K
C*K ))
++ 0.25(T*C*K
0.25(T*C*K ))
•• When
When factors
factors are
are set
set at
at -1,
-1, Yield
Yield == 60.
60.
•• When
When all
all factors
factors are
are set
set at
at +1,
+1, Yield
Yield == 80.
80.

Analyzing the data in Minitab. Consulting Sourcing Technology
•• Open
Open file
file Bhh3fact.mtw
Bhh3fact.mtw
•• Since
Since the
the data
data file
file contains
contains the
the factorial
factorial design
design
matrix,
matrix, itit must
must bebe defined
defined in
in Minitab
Minitab asas follows:
follows:
Stat
Stat >> DOE
DOE >> Define
Define Custom
Custom Factorial
Factorial Design
Design
Select
Select Factors
Factors ““ Temp
Temp Conc
Conc Catalyst”
Catalyst”
Select
Select 2-
2- Level
Level factorial
factorial design
design
>> OK
OK

Analyzing the data in Minitab Cont.
•• Now
Now wewe can
can start
start analyzing
analyzing the
the design
design
Stat
Stat >> DOE
DOE >> Analyze
Analyze Factorial
Factorial Design
Design
Select
Select Response
Response ““ Yield”
Yield”
Select
Select Graphs
Graphs “Normal
“Normal effects
effects plot”
plot” and
and “Pareto”
“Pareto”
Select
Select “Regular”
“Regular” Residuals
Residuals for
for plots”
plots”
>> OK
OK >> OK
OK

The Session Window Consulting Sourcing Technology
Estimated
Estimated Effects
Effects and
and Coefficients
Coefficients for
for Yield
Yield (coded
(coded units)
units)
Term
Term Effect
Effect Coef
Coef
Constant
Constant 64.250
64.250
Temp
Temp 23.000
23.000 11.500
11.500
Catalyst
Catalyst 1.500
1.500 0.750
0.750
Conc
Conc -5.000
-5.000 -2.500
-2.500
Temp*Catalyst
Temp*Catalyst 10.000
10.000 5.000
5.000
Temp*Conc
Temp*Conc 1.500
1.500 0.750
0.750
Catalyst*Conc
Catalyst*Conc 0.000
0.000 0.000
0.000
Temp*Catalyst*Conc
Temp*Catalyst*Conc 0.500
0.500 0.250
0.250
Analysis
Analysis of
of Variance
Variance for
for Yield
Yield (coded
(coded units)
units)
Source
Source DF
DF Seq
Seq SS
SS Adj
Adj SS
SS Adj
Adj MS
MS FF PP
Main
Main Effects
Effects 33 1112.50
1112.50 1112.50
1112.50 370.833
370.833 ** **
2-Way
2-Way Interactions
Interactions 33 204.50
204.50 204.50
204.50 68.167
68.167 ** **
3-Way
3-Way Interactions
Interactions 11 0.50
0.50 0.50
0.50 0.500
0.500 ** **
Residual
Residual Error
Error 00 0.00
0.00 0.00
0.00 0.000
0.000
Total
Total 77 1317.50
1317.50

Comments on the Session Window
•• The
The ““ effect”
effect” column
column gives
gives the
the mean
mean effect
effect
you
you previously
previously calculated.
calculated.
•• The
The ““ coef”
coef” column
column corresponds
corresponds to to the
the half
half
effects
effects or
or bbnncoefficients
coefficients in
in the
the mathematical
mathematical
model.
model.
•• The
The FF ratio cannot be
ratio cannot be calculated
calculated since
since there
there
isis only
only one
one response
response value
value per
per cell
cell i.e.
i.e. the
the
experiment
experiment isis unreplicated.
unreplicated.

Normal Probability Plot of the Effects

(response is Yield, Alpha = .10)
1.5 A: Temp
A B: Conc
C: Catalyst
1.0
AC
0.5
Normal Score
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
-1.5
0 10 20
Effect

Pareto Chart of the Effects

(response is Yield, Alpha = .10)
A: Temp
A
B: Conc
C: Catalyst
AC
AB
ABC
BC
0 10 20

Normal Probability Plot of Effects Consulting Sourcing Technology
• If the data had occurred as the result of random

variation about a fixed mean and the changes in
variable levels had no real effect on the response,
we would expect the contrasts to be approximately
normally distributed around a mean of zero.
• Those effects which diverge from the straight line are

probably not chance events and may be considered
as potentially statistically significant. In this case the
effects of A (Temp ) and the A*C interaction
( Temp* Catalyst ).
Reducing the Model Consulting Sourcing Technology
using the Anova Procedure
Stat>
Stat> ANOVA>
ANOVA> General
General Linear
Linear Model
Model
Select Response
Select Response ““ Yield”
Yield”
Select
Select Model
Model ““ Temp
Temp || Catalyst”
Catalyst”
>> Storage
Storage Select
Select ““ Fits
Fits and
and Residuals”
Residuals”

The Session Window Consulting Sourcing Technology
General Linear Model
Factor Levels Values

Temp 2 -1 1
Catalyst 2 -1 1
Analysis of Variance for Yield
Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P

Temp 1 1058.00 1058.00 1058.00 76.95 0.001
Catalyst 1 4.50 4.50 4.50 0.33 0.598
Temp*Catalyst 1 200.00 200.00 200.00 14.55 0.019
Error 4 55.00 55.00 13.75
Total 7 1317.50

Comments on the Session Window Consulting Sourcing Technology
•• Four
Four degrees
degrees of
of freedom
freedom have
have become
become available
available
for
for the
the error
error term
term now
now that
that the
the model
model has
has been
been
reduced.
reduced.
•• The
The pp values
values confirm
confirm the
the significant
significant effects
effects of
of
Temp
Temp and
and Temp*Catalyst.
Temp*Catalyst.
•• We
We must
must now
now verify
verify that
that the
the three
three fundamental
fundamental
assumptions
assumptions of
of Anova
Anova have
have not
not been
been violated
violated
by
by running
running the
the residual
residual model
model diagnostics.
diagnostics.

Evaluate the Highest Order Interaction
Stat> ANOVA> Interactions Plot

Interaction Plot - Data Means for Yield
Temp
1
80 -1
70
Mean
60
50
-1 1
Catalyst

Stat> Anova> Main Effects Plot Consulting Sourcing Technology
Main Effects Plot - Data Means for Yield
Temp Conc Catalyst

75
70
Yield
65
60
55
-1 1 -1 1 -1 1

Cube Plot (data means) for Yield
45 80
54 68
1
Conc 52 83
1
Catalyst
60 72
-1 -1
-1 1
Temp
Stat > DOE >Factorial Plots> Cube >Setup

Conclusions Consulting Sourcing Technology
••Temperature
Temperatureand andTemperature*Catalyst
Temperature*Catalystinteraction
interaction
have
havebeen
beenfound
foundtotobe
bethe
thestatistically
statisticallysignificant
significant
effects
effectsfor
foryield,
yield,and
andexplain
explain95.5%
95.5%of ofthe
theresponse.
response.
••Within
Withinthethelimits
limitsof
offactor
factorlevels
levelsthat
thathave
havebeen
been
studied,
studied,the
thebest
bestyield
yieldisisobtained
obtainedusing
usingsettings
settingsof
of
-- Temperature: 180 00C (most critical input to be controlled).
Temperature: 180 C (most critical input to be controlled).
-- Catalyst
CatalystBB
-- For
Foreconomic
economicreasons,
reasons,concentration
concentrationcan
canbebemaintained
maintained
at
ataalevel
levelof
of20%.
20%.
•• Further
Furtherexperimentation
experimentationisisrecommended
recommendedin
inorder
orderto
to
determine
determineoptimum
optimumsettings
settingsfor
foryield.
yield.

Real World Example & Exercise Consulting Sourcing Technology
•• The
The most
most critical
critical defect
defect for
for aa brake
brake pad
pad isis poor
poor
adhesion
adhesion of
of the
the friction
friction material
material to
to the
the backing
backing plate.
plate.
•• The
The process
process consists
consists in
in bond
bond polymerization
polymerization
between
between the
the backing
backing plate
plate and
and the
the friction
friction material.
material.
•• An
An engineer
engineer wanted
wanted to to study
study the
the effect
effect of
of the
the three
three
adjustable
adjustable parameters,
parameters, temperature,
temperature, time
time andand
pressure
pressure on
on shear
shear strength
strength ofof the
the bond.
bond. A A minimum
minimum
shear
shear of
of 1450
1450 isis required.
required.

Real World Example & Exercise Cont. Consulting Sourcing Technology
•• The
The current
current settings
settings are
are
time
time +1,
+1, pressure
pressure +1,+1, temp
temp -1.-1.
•• The
The bonding
bonding process
process isis aa bottleneck
bottleneck andand the
the
engineer
engineer wanted
wanted toto reduce
reduce the the time
time factor
factor to
to
increase
increase throughput.
throughput.
•• He first ran a 233unreplicated factorial
He first ran a 2 unreplicated factorial
experiment.
experiment.
•• The
The results
results are
are given
given in
in file
file Asfm1.mtw.The
Asfm1.mtw.The
data
data has
has not
not been
been randomized.
randomized.
•• Analyze
Analyze andand report.
report.
Fractional Factorial Fit
Estimated Effects and Coefficients for shear (coded units)
Term Effect Coef

Constant 1233.75
temp -52.50 -26.25
press 330.00 165.00
time 17.50 8.75
temp*press -65.00 -32.50
temp*time -2.50 -1.25
press*time -10.00 -5.00
temp*press*time -165.00 -82.50
Analysis of Variance for shear (coded units)
Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F

P
Main Effects 3 223925 223925 74642 **
2-Way Interactions 3 8662 8663 2888 **
3-Way Interactions 1 54450 54450 54450 **
Residual Error 0 0 0 0
Total 7 287038

Normal Probability Plot of the Effects

(response is shear, Alpha = .10)
1.5 A: temp
B B: press
C: time
1.0
Normal Score
0.5
0.0
-0.5
-1.0
ABC
-1.5
-100 0 100 200 300
Effect

Pareto Chart of the Effects

(response is shear, Alpha = .10)
A: temp
B
B: press
C: time
ABC
AB
BC
AC
0 100 200 300

Intermediate Results Consulting Sourcing Technology
•• So
So far,our
far,our data
data indicates
indicates that
that the
the three-way
three-way
interaction
interaction and
and the
the pressure
pressure main main effect
effect are
are
significant.The
significant.The next
next step
step isis to
to reduce
reduce thethe model.
model.

Reduced Model Consulting Sourcing Technology
Fractional Factorial Fit Session Window Reduced model
Estimated Effects and Coefficients for shear (coded units)
Term Effect Coef StDev Coef T P

Constant 1233.75 19.00 64.94 0.000
temp -52.50 -26.25 19.00 -1.38 0.261
press 330.00 165.00 19.00 8.68 0.003
time 17.50 8.75 19.00 0.46 0.676
temp*press*time -165.00 -82.50 19.00 -4.34 0.023
Analysis of Variance for shear (coded units)
Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS F P

Main Effects 3 223925 223925 74642 25.85 0.012
3-Way Interactions 1 54450 54450 54450 18.86 0.023
Residual Error 3 8663 8663 2888
Total 7 287038

Main Effects Plot - Data Means for shear
temp press time

1400
1320
shear
1240
1160
1080
-1 1 -1 1 -1 1

Cube Plot (data means) for shear
1545 1260
1370 1420
1
press 995 1170

1
time
1130 980
-1 -1
-1 1
temp

Interactions plot Consulting Sourcing Technology
•• Since
Since we
we cannot
cannot drawdraw aa 44 dimensional
dimensional graph
graph
to
to represent
represent the
the three-way
three-way interaction
interaction ofof
pressure,
pressure, temperature
temperature and and time
time with
with respect
respect
to
to shear,
shear, we
we split
split the
the data
data with
with respect
respect toto
pressure
pressure soso that
that we
we can
can study
study the
the interaction
interaction
of
of temperature
temperature andand time
time at
at each
each level
level of
of
pressure.
pressure.
Data>Split
Data>Split Worksheet
Worksheet

Interactions Plot of Temp and Time

with Pressure at -1
Interaction Plot - Data Means for shear
temp
1
-1
1150
1100
Mean
1050
1000
-1 1
time

Interactions Plot of Temp and Time

with Pressure at +1
Interaction Plot - Data Means for shear
temp
1550 1
-1
1450
Mean
1350
1250
-1 1
time

Attribute Data Example Consulting Sourcing Technology
••Problem
Problem--Determine
Determinethe
theeffect
effectof
ofShot
ShotLength
Lengthand
and
Shot
ShotSpeed
Speedon
onDie
DieCasting
CastingQuality
Quality(File:
(File:
DOEAttr.mtw)
DOEAttr.mtw)
••Shot
ShotLength
Lengthvaries
variesbetween
betweenshort(-1)
short(-1)and
andlong(+1)
long(+1)
Shot
ShotSpeed
Speedvaries
variesbetween
betweenslow(-1)
slow(-1)and
andfast(+1)
fast(+1)
Number
NumberofofTreatment
TreatmentCombinations
Combinations==22xx22==44
••Die
DieCasting
CastingQuality
Qualityisisdetermined
determinedthrough
throughvisual
visual
inspection
inspection(defectives
(defectives--good
goodor
orbad)
bad)
••The
Theexperiment
experimentwaswasrun
runin
inaarandom
randomorder
orderwith
with36
36
replications
replications ((NN==22xx22xx36
36==144
144runs
runs))
Hypotheses
Hypotheses Testing
Testing Analysis
Analysis of
of Shot
Shot Length
Length Consulting Sourcing Technology
Ho : p1 = p 2 Ha : p1 ≠ p 2
Shot Length: p1 = 25/72 = .347 p2 = 34/72 = .472
Stat>Basic Statistics>2 proportions
Test
Testand
andConfidence
ConfidenceInterval
Intervalfor
forTwo
TwoProportions
Proportions
Sample
Sample XX NN Sample
Sample pp
11 25
25 72
72 0.347222
0.347222
22 34
34 72
72 0.472222
0.472222
Estimate
Estimate for
for p(1)
p(1) -- p(2):
p(2): -0.125
-0.125
95%
95% CI
CI for
for p(1)
p(1) -- p(2):
p(2): (-0.284343,
(-0.284343, 0.0343433)
0.0343433)
Test
Test for
for p(1)
p(1) -- p(2)
p(2) == 00 (vs
(vs not
not == 0):
0):
ZZ == -1.53
-1.53 P-Value
P-Value == 0.127
0.127
Accept Ho: No difference between Short or Long Shot Length

Hypotheses
Hypotheses Testing
Testing Analysis
Analysis of
of Shot
Shot Speed
Speed Consulting Sourcing Technology
Ho : p1 = p 2 Ha : p1 ≠ p 2
Shot Speed: p1 = 40/72 = .556 p2 = 19/72 = .264
Test
Testand
andConfidence
ConfidenceInterval
Intervalfor
forTwo
TwoProportions
Proportions
Sample
Sample XX NN Sample
Sample pp
11 40
40 72
72 0.555556
0.555556
22 19
19 72
72 0.263889
0.263889
Estimate
Estimate forfor p(1)
p(1) -- p(2):
p(2): 0.291667
0.291667
95%
95% CI
CI for
for p(1)
p(1) -- p(2):
p(2): (0.138247,
(0.138247, 0.445087)
0.445087)
Test
Test for
for p(1)
p(1) -- p(2)
p(2) == 00 (vs
(vs not
not == 0):
0):
ZZ == 3.56
3.56 P-Value
P-Value == 0.000
0.000
Reject Ho: A difference between Slow & Fast Shot Speed

Hypotheses
Hypotheses Testing
Testing Analysis
Analysis of
of Interaction
Interaction Consulting Sourcing Technology
Ho : p1 = p 2 Ha : p1 ≠ p 2
Interaction: p1 = 30/72 = .417 p2 = 29/72 = .403
Test
Testand
andConfidence
ConfidenceInterval
Intervalfor
forTwo
TwoProportions
Proportions
Sample
Sample XX NN Sample
Sample pp
11 30
30 72
72 0.416667
0.416667
22 29
29 72
72 0.402778
0.402778
Estimate
Estimate for
for p(1)
p(1) -- p(2):
p(2): 0.0138889
0.0138889
95%
95% CI
CI for
for p(1)
p(1) -- p(2):
p(2): (-0.146741,
(-0.146741, 0.174519)
0.174519)
Test
Test for
for p(1)
p(1) -- p(2)
p(2) == 00 (vs
(vs not
not == 0):
0):
ZZ == 0.17
0.17 P-Value
P-Value == 0.865
0.865
Accept Ho: No difference due to the Interaction

Summary Consulting Sourcing Technology
In
In this
this module
module we:
we:
•• Described the overall concept of 2kk Factorials
Described the overall concept of 2 Factorials
•• Created
Created standard
standard order
order designs
designs
•• Designed and analyzed 2 kk Factorials
Designed and analyzed 2 Factorials
•• Analyzed
Analyzed aa DOE
DOE with
with Attribute
Attribute Data
Data

DOE CASE STUDY
SITE: XXX
PROBLEM
Problem Definition:
Y= Paint trickling in Mirror plates during
painting process on the opposite side.

COPQ
Cost of poor quality breakup

Rework Cost: Rs.96,000/ Annual
Medical Check up Cost: Rs.8000/- per annum
Intangible savings
•Elimination of buffing stage which is harmful from employee health and
safety point of view
• Savings in space Area (221Sqft)
• Lead time reduction 40%
• Improved RTY (To be calculated)

DOE PROJECT
Problem Definition:
Y= Paint trickling in Mirror plates during
painting process on the opposite side. Z= 0
(DPU = 1;100% rework)
Response : Attribute (Y/N)

DOE PROJECT
Process Map (Top Level)
Raw strip Strip Strip Cut as per template

Cutting(Manual)
Profile marking
CNC Marking
Profile cutting, No Chip Off
Blanking
DM Water No Spots OR foreign Particle
Washing
No etching
Pad Printing

DOE PROJECT Consulting Sourcing Technology
Process Map (Top Level)
ROC, NO Distortion
Convexing
No Spots, temp of plate
Cooling Profile marking
Reflectivity
Al. Coating
Uniform Layer, Env test,
Painting
No paint trickling
Buffing
Final Inspection

DOE PROJECT
Process Map (Detailed)
Coated Plates
Method of placing Placing the 6 plates on
Conveyor Plates orientation
Plates transferred to high Transfer all plates

speed Conveyor
Paint Viscosity
Curtain width Plates Enters the paint Surface area coverage,
Speed of conveyor curtain No paint trickling
Paint flow rate
height of the roller Plates transferred to low Transfer all plates
speed conveyor
Plates Passed through Compliance to test

baking oven
Rework paint defects
Plates send for buffing
DOE PROJECT Consulting Sourcing Technology
Scale Severity
1 Almost negligible
trickling and not visible
after assy fitment
2 Minor upto 2mm from
edge but visible
3 Upto 3mm from
tangent and which is
visible after assy
4 fitment
Upto 4 mm from
tangent

DOE PROJECT
• Converting Attribute into a scale of 1-4

for study the SSVs
• A scale is decided by studying plates from
buffing station (1 days data)
• Scale is made on a template.
• Method of measuring defined and taught
to appraiser involved in the study.
• R&R study done on this.

SCALING PHOTOGRAPH
1
2
3
4

DOE PROJECT
Is R&R study required for the Measurement system

Yes
(Data sheet attached)
Result of Attribute R&R study
EFFECTIVENESS %. = 80.7 (1~2), 94.74 (2~3),86(3~4)

MISS RATE = 2 % (1~2)
FALSE ALARM = 28 % (1~2)

ATTRIBUTE R & R DATA SHEET Consulting Sourcing Technology
Group 1 (1-2) Group 2 (2-3) Group 3 (3-4)

No. of trials No. of trials No. of trials
master
S.no 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
value
1 1 2 2 2
2 1 1 1 1
3 1 2 2 2
4 1 1 1 1
5 1 1 1 1
6 1 1 1 1
7 1 1 1 1
8 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
9 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
10 2 2 2 2 3 2 2
11 2 3 2 2 2 2 2
12 2 2 3 2 2 2 2
13 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
14 2 3 2 3 3 2 3
15 2 2 2 2
16 2 2 2 2
17 2 2 2 1
18 3 3 3 3
19 3 3 3 3
20 3 3 3 3
21 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
22 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
23 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
24 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
25 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
26 3 3 3 3 3 4 4
27 3 3 3 3 3 3 4
28 4 4 4 4
29 4 4 4 4
30 4 4 4 4
31 4 4 4 4
32 4 4 4 4
33 4 4 4 4
34 4 4 4 4
35 4 3 4 4
36 4 3 4 4
37 4 3 3 3
38 3 3 3 3
39 3 3 3 3
41 4 4 4 4
42 4 4 4 4
43 2 2 2 2
44 2 2 2 2
DOE PROJECT
LISTING OF FIRST LEVEL SSV’S
• Method of placing plates

• Convexing of plates (Radius of curvature)
• Painting process
• Painting process KPOV’s
• No paint trickling
• Surface area coverage
• Passing of paint test (Adhesion etc.)

DOE PROJECT
Prioritized SSV’s (FMEA & Team discussion)
• Convexing of plates
PAINTING PROCESS SSV’S
• Curtain pressure throughout length (Design and variable)
• Curtain viscosity (Design and variable)
• Speed of conveyor (Design and variable)
• Roller rod height w.r.t component (Design but fixed)
• Paint curtain angle w.r.t plate (Design but fixed)
• Width of curtain (Design but fixed)
Painting process KPOV’s
• No paint trickling
• Surface area coverage
• Passing of paint test (Adhesion, hot water etc.)

Paired
Paired Comparison
Comparison analysis
analysis
SPECIFICATION : 1250±200 mm
radius of
S.no response
curvature
4 1333 G
Conclusion:
8 1333 B
5 1379 G Since minimum value
6 1379 G belongs to both good
7 1379 B and bad ROC is not
10 1379 B the cause
11 1379 B
2 1403 G
3 1403 G
1 1428 G
9 1454 B
12 1454 B
DOE project Consulting Sourcing Technology
Elimination and prioritization of SSV’s after paired comparison
• Convexing of plates (ROC)


Multivari Analysis Consulting Sourcing Technology
•To Study further the SSV and prioritized List we started to

collect data for Mutivari
• Data collected over two days, we run two shift, two operator.
• Event only is, adding of thinner to maintain the viscosity
• We collected data for one shift but couldn’t found plates for
scale of “4”
• We continue for next day and found few pieces of 4th scale.
• We collected 17th subgroup and every subgroup has 18
readings.

Multi- vari data
Planned/unpla
S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 S6
nned events
Thinner added to
m aintain
T1 11:00 AM 1 2 3 2 2 3
vis cos ity at 10:55
am
2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 3 2 2 1
RANGE 1 0 1 0 0 2
AVERAGE 1.67 2.00 2.67 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.06
T2 11:30 AM 2 1 3 2 2 2
2 2 2 1 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2
RANGE 0 1 1 1 0 0
AVERAGE 2.00 1.67 2.33 1.67 2.00 2.00 1.94
Thinner added to
m aintain
T3 12:10 3 2 2 2 2 2
vis cos ity at 12:05
am
3 2 2 2 2 3
2 2 2 2 2 3
RANGE 1 0 0 0 0 1
AVERAGE 2.67 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.67 2.22
T4 12:45 2 3 2 3 2 1
2 1 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 3 2
RANGE 0 2 0 1 1 1
AVERAGE 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.33 1.67 2.06
T5 1:35 1 3 2 2 1 2
19/11/04
1 1 2 2 1 1
2 2 2 2 1 2
RANGE 1 2 0 0 0 1
AVERAGE 1.33 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 1.67 1.67
Thinner added to
m aintain
T6 2:10 2 1 2 2 2 2
vis cos ity at 2:00
pm
2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2
RANGE 0 1 0 0 0 0
AVERAGE 2.00 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.94
T7 2:35 3 2 2 1 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 2 2 2 2
RANGE 1 0 0 1 0 0
AVERAGE 2.33 2.00 2.00 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.00
tea break at 3:00
T8 3:25 2 2 2 2 2 1
pm to 3:10 pm
2 1 2 2 2 2
2 1 2 2 2 2
RANGE 0 1 0 0 0 1
AVERAGE 2.00 1.33 2.00 2.00 2.00 1.67 1.83
Thinner added to
m aintain
T9 4:15 2 2 1 2 1 2
vis cos ity at 4:00
UAE INDIA SINGAPORE
pm BANGKOK
UAE INDIA 2 1 1 2 1 SINGAPORE
2 BANGKOK
MULTI VARI DATA …….Continued Consulting Sourcing Technology
Thinner added to
maintain
T1 9:35 AM 2 2 1 2 2 2
viscosity at 09:30
am
2 2 2 2 2 2
1 1 2 2 2 1
RANGE 1 1 1 0 0 1
AVERAGE 1.67 1.67 1.67 2.00 2.00 1.67 1.78
T2 10:00 AM 1 2 2 1 2 1
1 1 2 2 1 2
1 2 2 2 1 2
RANGE 0 1 0 1 1 1
AVERAGE 1.00 1.67 2.00 1.67 1.33 1.67 1.56
T3 22:35 2 2 2 2 2 2
Thinner added to
maintain Part to part variation : 3
viscosity at 10:30
2 3 4 3 2 4
am Time to time variation : 0.94
3 3 2 2 3 2
RANGE 1 1 2 1 1 2
AVERAGE 2.33 2.67 2.67 2.33 2.33 2.67
1 2 2 2 2 1
2.50 Location to location : 1
T4 23:15
2 1 2 2 2 3
20/11/04
2 3 2 3 2 2
RANGE 1 2 0 1 0 2
AVERAGE 1.67 2.00 2.00 2.33 2.00 2.00 2.00
Thinner added to
maintain
T5 11:45 3 4 4 2 2 2
viscosity at 11:35
am
2 1 1 2 2 1
2 1 2 2 2 3
RANGE 1 3 3 0 0 2
AVERAGE 2.33 2.00 2.33 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.11
T6 12:15 2 3 2 1 2 2
1 2 2 2 2 2
2 2 1 2 2 3
RANGE 1 1 1 1 0 1
AVERAGE 1.67 2.33 1.67 1.67 2.00 2.33 1.94
T7 0:50 2 2 2 2 1 2
1 1 1 2 2 1
2 2 2 2 1 2
RANGE 1 1 1 0 1 1
AVERAGE 1.67 1.67 1.67 2.00 1.33 1.67 1.67
power b/d at
T8 1:15 2 2 2 3 2 2
1:10
3 2 2 2 1 2
2 2 2 2 2 3
UAE RANGE 1 0 0 INDIA
1 1 1 SINGAPORE BANGKOK
UAE AVERAGE 2.33 2.00 2.00 INDIA
2.33 1.67 2.33 2.11 SINGAPORE BANGKOK
Mutivari Analysis
Main Effects Plot (data means) for Paint

Day T ime
2.50
2.25
2.00
1.75
Mean of Paint
1.50
1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
Locat ion Part

2.50
2.25
2.00
1.75
1.50
1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3

Interaction Plot Analysis Consulting Sourcing Technology
Interaction Plot (data means) for Paint

1 2 3 4 5 6 1 2 3
3 Tim e
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Time 2 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
1
3 L o ca tio n
1
2
3
4
5
6
2
Location
Part

MutiVari Chart
M ulti-Var i C har t for P aint by P ar t - Time

1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 456 1 23 456 1 234 56
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 P ar t
4.0 1
2
3
3.5
3.0
Paint
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
12 34 56 12 345 6 123 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6 1 23 45 6
Loc a t ion
Pa nel va ria ble: T im e

Conclusion:
• Part to Part variation is High
• 6 location doesn’t make any difference.
• With this information we reviewed our SSV list and
eliminated few and taken few for further study

Elimination and prioritization of SSV’s

• Curtain viscosity since it is the only event

Process parameter search
Data Collection Viscosity Paint

Method: 35 G
•Studying batch to 37 G
batch relationship 37 B
with Viscosity 37 B
•One Batch: each 40 G
41 B
location three
41 B
Consecutive part and
41 B
Collecting for 6 42 B
Location. 43 G
• Data collected till 45 G
6 good and 6 bad 48 G
batches are made
Conclusion:
Count = 0
Since Min and Max.
value belongs to
same category
Viscosity is not the cause .
Scatter Plot
Scatterplot of Vis vs Paint
47.5
45.0
42.5
Vis
40.0
37.5
35.0
1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.2

Paint

Review SSV’s Consulting Sourcing Technology
Elimination and prioritization of SSV’s

• Curtain viscosity

OBSERVATION AT FLOW COATER
• Swaying of curtain observed thru naked eye
• If everything is off curtain becomes almost stable
• We experimented with suction pipe in on condition and

found swaying increasing
• Similarly with conveyor in on condition it swayed much

much more
• Speed and viscosity also has some relation with swaying

Next Step….. Consulting Sourcing Technology
We left with all design related parameters:

• Paint Viscosity(Linked with Speed)
• Roller rod setting condition
• Suction pipe setting condition
Conclusion: We have decided to design an experiment:

• 2k Factorial
• Deciding “+” and “-” levels for all factors.
• Width of curtain and paint angle can’t be changed.
• Roller rod height cannot be taken in experiment since alteration
requires more time
•Experimental
UAE
Matrix
INDIA
will be (2 levels 4 factors)
SINGAPORE BANGKOK
DOE (Experimental Design)
Four factors were chosen & “-” and “+” settings were set in
following manner
“- setting” “+
setting”
Speed (A) 30 Speed (A) 18
Viscosity (B) 35 ~40 Viscosity (B) 45 ~50
Suction pipe (C) On Suction pipe (C) Off
Roller rod (D) Moving Roller rod (D) Stationery

Batch of 18 pieces was made

One batch was made with all “-” setting and one with all “+” setting and
the process was alternated two more times . Following is the response
First trial 52 24
Second Trial 45 24
Third Trial 49 23
D – Difference in median = 49 – 24 = 25
d - average of ranges = 4
D/d ratio = 25/4 = 6.25
Conclusion : My settings are correct

Factorial analysis was done with 16 experiments in randomized manner

RESP
A B C D AB AC AD BC BD CD ABC ACD BCD ABD ABCD ONSE
1 - - - - + + + + + + - - - - + 58
2 + - - - - - - + + + + + - + - 28
3 - + - - - + + - - + + - + + - 47
4 + + - - + - - - - + - + + - + 23
5 - - + - + - + - + - + + + - - 55
6 + - + - - + - - + - - - + + + 26
7 - + + - - - + + - - - + - + + 54
8 + + + - + + - + - - + - - - - 24
9 - - - + + + - + - - - + + + - 55
10 + - - + - - + + - - + - + - + 25
11 - + - + - + - - + - + + - - + 58
12 + + - + + - + - + - - - - + - 31
13 - - + + + - - - - + + - - + + 52
14 + - + + - + + - - + - + - - - 50
15 - + + + - - - + + + - - + - - 42
16 + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 21
Total 193 49 1 19 11 50 33 35 11 7 29 39 61 21 15
Contribution 24.1 6.13 0.13 2.38 1.38 6.25 4.13 4.38 1.38 0.88 3.63 4.88 7.63 2.63 1.88
OPTIMIZED EQUATION
Equation is y = 40.56-12.06A- 3.06B-.06C-1.18D-.68AB+3.12AC+2.06AD-2.18BC-0.68BD-0.43CD-1.8ABC+2.43ACD

-3.8BCD-1.31ABD-0.98ABCD
Conclusion : Speed contribution maximum
Four solutions are possible

A = 1.6 A = 1.39 A = 1.39
B= 0 B= 0 B = +1
C= +1 C = -1 C= -1
D= -1 D= -1 D = -1
We run production on these parameters and find out the response

Measure and analyze (Validation)

6 best and 6 current setting pieces were taken and response noted
6B 6C
25 49
Total count = 12
20 47
21 49
19 44
23 47
20 47
Quantifying the amount of improvement
Average of best condition – 21

Average of current condition – 47
Difference = 26
K value from table = 2.96
Sigma of best condition = 2.25
Difference 26 > 2.96 *2.25 =6.66
Conclusion : Improvement has taken place at 95 % cl and trickling will

reduce by 26

Result : 1. We are getting consistently 1 scale piece
2. There are still certain pieces in scale 2 which requires

further study
Further observation at flow coater reveals the following :
• There is a paint on rod which needs to be eliminated

• There is a mud guard which is also having paint marks
• Controlled environment missing in room where this
arrangement is installed
• Cleaning issues i.e. conveyor, baking oven conveyor
• Viscosity maintenance needs improvement

Before DOE

After DOE

PHASE 3 : IMPROVEMENT
Following improvement actions have been planned
• Viscosity monitoring to be done at exit every half an hour
• Detachable type rod which is to be removed whenever pump is
in off condition to avoid any paint
• Mud guard cleaning and to be brought down
• Filter cleaning to be done daily
• Room should be closed every time and controlled ambient
conditions to be maintained
• Entire arrangement to be brought down
• SOP’s at flow coater stage shall be updated
Horizontal deployment
Same actions are to be deployed for another flow coater which is
to be commissioned later
PHASE –4 : CONTROL
For all above root causes following control methods are being
planned
S.no Root cause Control method

1 Speed Mistake proofing
2 Viscosity Mistake proofing thru auto viscometer
3 Mud guard cleaning Periodic monitoring thru check sheet
4 Roller rod Periodic monitoring thru check sheet
5 Filter cleaning Daily monitoring thru check sheet
6 Room closure Daily monitoring thru check sheet

Questions?
1. ____________
2. ____________
.
.
.
n. ____________


DOE Training

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

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

DOE Training

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Consulting Sourcing Technology

Abyss Management Consultancy

(Design Of Experiments - DOE)

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

• Human thinking is a panacea or a curse

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

• List the reasons!!!!!

• All are Possible causes not the Root Cause.

DOE TOOLS CONVENTIONAL TOOLS

No Engineering Judgment Based on engineering judgment and the

DOE TOOLS CONVENTIONAL TOOLS

Process can be optimized to better No Process optimization

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

DMAIC (Tool KIT)

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

BYE BYE to DOCTOR!!!

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

1 2.0 1.0 1.0 1.5 1.5 0.0

4 3.0 3.0 0.0 2.0 2.5 0.5

• There can be two nature of Y

Totals 10.5 9.5 3.0 9.5 8.5 2.0

Averages 2.1 1.9 0.6 1.9 1.7 0.4

• Attribute OR Variable. Sum

• What is Attribute and Variable data.

CTP Known CTP unknown

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

Multi Vari Analysis

• Do this Exercise Again.

Multi Vari Analysis

• Can we relate this with Common Cause

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

• There are three categories of variation in a

• They give you three different direction to act.

• Let’s understand what are the three variations.

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

WHICH PARAMETER ‘Y’ GROUP X

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

How to Do Mutivari Analysis

What Type of variation for study

B-1 B-2 B-3 B-4 B-5 B-6

1. There are six bobbins in a winding machines,

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

• In a speedometer counter the problem is for setting

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

DATA COLLECTION PLAN

UAE INDIA SINGAPORE BANGKOK

DATA COLLECTION PLAN

DATA COLLECTION PLAN