ADAMA SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY UNIVERSITY

School of Mechanical, Chemical & Materials Engineering Department of

Mechanical Design & Manufacturing Engineering

DEFECT ANALYSIS USING STATICAL (PROCES CONTROL)

ON PRODUCTION OF BOLT AND NUT

A CASE OF ETHIOPIAN SHIPPING AND LOGISTICS SERVES ENTERPRISE

KALITY INLAND TRANSPORT BRANCH

BY: Kebebe Urgie: ID: A/PE20988/12

Advisor: Dr, Moera Gutu

Date submitted: Jan/30/2021

Table of Contents
Introduction ................................................................................................................................................... 1

History of the Company ESLSE ............................................................................................................... 1

1. Statement of the problem ...................................................................................................................... 3

2. Methodology ......................................................................................................................................... 5

2.1. Data Collection ............................................................................................................................. 5

2.2. Data Gathering Instrument ............................................................................................................ 5

2.3. Data Gathering Procedure ............................................................................................................. 6

2.3.1. Data Quality .......................................................................................................................... 6

2.3.2. Quality and Non-Conformity ................................................................................................ 6

3. Data collection .................................................................................................................................... 10

4. Data Analysis ...................................................................................................................................... 12

4.1. C- chart........................................................................................................................................ 12

4.2. Pareto Analysis ........................................................................................................................... 12

5. Reducing Defects Using PDCA Cycle................................................................................................ 14

CONCLUSIONS......................................................................................................................................... 17

References ................................................................................................................................................... 19

i
List of Table

TABLE 1, COUSE OF PROBLEM HAPPENED ..................................................................................................... 4

TABLE 2, TYPE OF DEFECT/VARIATION SOURCE ............................................................................................ 7
TABLE 3, COLLECTED DATA FROM SEP 2019 TO AUG 2020 ...................................................................... 10
TABLE 4. CAUSE IDENTIFICATION USING PDCA AND WH QUESTIONS ...................................................... 15
TABLE 5. IMPLEMENTING 5S ....................................................................................................................... 16

List of Figure

FIG 1. EFFICIENCY OF MACHINE ................................................................................................................. 11

FIG 2. DEFECTED BOLT ............................................................................................................................... 11
FIG3. THE C-CHART FOR NUMBER OF DEFECTS IN THE BOLT WITH NUT ................................................... 12
FIGURE 4. PARETO ANALYSIS OF THE DEFECTS........................................................................................... 13
FIG 5, CAUSE EFFECT DIAGRAM FOR CLASS A, B & CLASS C .................................................................... 13
FIG 6 . TOTAL NO OF NON CONFORMITY DEFINED BY PIE CHART .............................................................. 14

ii
 1. Introduction
1.1. History of the Company Ethiopian Shipping and Logistics Service Enterprise
Ethiopia started shipping activities by sea around 1917 and it has been modernized since60 years back. The
government established a modern shipping company in 1964 with 50,000 ETB capital with a 49% share of
foreign company and a 51% share from government.
The company is giving service using their own fleets, chartered vessels, and slot carriers and the oil tankers
are chartered for ship management company in the Middle East. The company’s headquarters are located
in the capital city of Ethiopia, Addis Ababa with the main branches outside the city Djibouti, Modjo, and
Kality and other branches in Mekelle, Dire-Dawa, Kombolcha, Semera and Gelan towns and maritime
training institute at a place called Babogaya in Bishoftu (former Debrezeit) Town as well as owning
equipment and buildings such as heavy-duty trucks, sea and dry port facilities, chicaneries, headquarter
buildings, among others.
ESLSE works with foreign shipping companies (container lines) through carrier arrangements such as APL,
PIL, Maersk, CMA/CGM and Evergreen to extend its port coverage.
In general the company’s objective is to provide international and coastal inland and water transportation
services, freight forwarding services, shipping and air agency services, stevedoring, shore-handling, dry-
port, warehousing and other logistics services, to engage in port development, operation, and management
services, establish maritime training and human development centers, and engage in the study of the
country’s import/export activity to develop technological and systematic solutions for the transportation
service.
Currently, the enterprise is organized by the issuance of regulation by the Council of Ministers in 2011,
consisting of eight higher officials of board management supervised by the Ministry of Transport and
supported by Ethiopian Maritime Affairs Authority.
ESLSE restructures its organization several times to bring together the merged enterprises to an integrated
operation and to facilitate giving a better service system to its customers. According to a recent study for
the new organizational structure in 2018 the enterprise is organized on the basis of which, under the
executive board it has one chief executive officer appointed by the government and five deputy chief
executive officers selected by the board to lead and direct the enterprise at top management level. The
structure is organized in a hierarchical way starting from executive board and chief executive officers
namely Shipping Service Sector, Freight Forwarding Service Sector, Dry Port and Branch Coordination
Service Sector, Corporate Strategy Service Sector, and Support Service Sector supported by other
departments such as Internal Audit, Insurance, Claims, and Legal Department, Maritime Training Institute,
Gender and Social Service Department, Finance and Accounts Department. These sectors and departments

1
have sections and teams under them consisting of more than 2000 employees including seafarers and branch
and Djibouti offices.

Quality is a measure of how capable an item or service meets the needs of consumers according to certain
standards. Certain standards may relate to time, materials, performance, reliability or quantifiable
characteristics. Quality is also a conformance to specifications, and a level of conformity is a measure of
quality. If the specifications do not satisfy customer needs, these specifications must be changed.(Ishak
2020)
Quality data and reporting involve using costs of poor quality such as rework, scrap and warranty costs,
and control charts to identify quality problems and provide information on areas of possible
improvement.(Kaynak, 2003)
Most industrial fasteners are covered by two basic standards: one for materials and properties; the other,
for dimensions and tolerances. Specifications for materials and properties are published by the American
Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), although other groups such as the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE) also publish specifications covering these requirements.( Marshadi, 2019)
Non-conformances are a key part of the Quality System for medical device manufacturing. When you don’t
pay proper attention to non-conformances, you may end up distributing non-conforming product. You will
have to deal with the direct cost of the non-conforming product and possible recalls; but you also will have
to deal with the indirect cost of liability, brand image and market share loss.(Gopal et al., n.d.)
more emphasis is placed on advanced quality planning, training, critical problem solving tasks, improving
the design of the product, process and services, improving control over the process and involving and
motivating people (Dale, 2008)
Although fracture is not the only defect of importance, it certainly is in most cases the only one that is
recognized as a defect. Cracking is also the defect that has been researched most extensively.(Faculty
Engineering, 1993)
In the study of defects through Root Cause analysis for TBR Models of Isuzu Philippines by Culla et al.,
(2014) focused on how to reduce the defects. The researchers formulated a proposed plan of action to reduce
the product defects in which the company may consider for application. Each defect was assessed through
tabulated Five Why analysis and Pareto analysis were used to determine the most occurring defect which
composed 80% of problem. The study helps to know the causes of defects and possible way to reduce and
with these the quality of the product will be maintained by improving the material handling and providing
efficient method. After improving the material handling and proposed a new action the product defect
reduced. In acceptance sampling by attributes each item tested is classified as conforming or non-

2
 conforming. (Items used to be classified as defective or non-defective but these days no self-respecting
manufacturing firm will admit to making defective items.)(Sampling, n.d.)

The intensity of global competition has led to significant changes in the way companies conduct their
businesses (Al-Rfou et al., 2012). Providing a higher quality service as a strategy for achieving competitive
advantage has become a strategic imperative for organizations and senior managements around the world.

2. Statement of the problem

This study dealt with the analysis and documentation of production processes in Bolt with Nut Production at
Ethiopian Shipping and Logistics Service Enterprise Company. It aimed to determine the root cause/s of Bolt
defects and determine right and appropriate improvements that would minimize the number of the mentioned
defects through Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) Cycle.
This study sought to answer the following questions:
1. What is the current percentage of Bolt Defects in Production Line?
2. What is the current set up Bolt and Nut Production in terms of its:
2.1. manpower;
2.2. machine;
2.3. material; and
2.4. method
3. What are the possible root causes of Bolt and Nut production defects?
4. What improvements can be made to prevent such causes and will minimize the number of Bolt and
Nut defects?
5. After implementing the proposed improvements, how will it affect the Bolt with Nut Production in
Ethiopian Shipping and Logistics Service Enterprise Company.? Some possible causes for these problems
are workers not able to follow or are not following the standard operation procedure (SOP),

✓ inadvertent error,
✓ carelessness and
✓ no sensing device. Since human cause is the major factor in this problem, as well as method and
machine factor

3
 Table 1, Couse of problem happened

Defective cause Cause description

Parameters of the Working parameters (speed, speed rate, feed, cutting depth, etc.) are not
technological defined, monitored or measured; non-observance of the working parameters of
operation. the established technical requirements. For special processes: non-observance
of the indicated parameters (time, machinery, monitoring, etc.) and inter-
operational control.

The technological Technological capacity (capability) is not able to generate the product
process according to drawing or documentation; failing to meet the specified product
requirements; non-correlation of the technological sheet with the Quality Plan;
non-compliance with contract requirements.

Cutting tools An error caused by the cutting tool that breaks, cracks, presents deviations from
the machining axes, is incorrectly sharpened, is used over the length of use
between two sharpening, etc.; lack of cutting tools indicated in the execution
documentation.

Machine tool Working parameters that do not ensure the conditions imposed on the product;
presents unforeseen failures during execution, numerically
controlled/inadequately controlled or inadequate product to be executed.

Fixtures or clamping Improperly chosen/unprotected or damaged.

devices

Measuring systems Erroneous measurements due to lack of maintenance, inappropriate

and devices exploitation, or erroneous calibration/ verification.

Operators training/ Incomplete or inadequately qualified personnel for the execution of the planned
operations; not properly trained for current work.
qualification

Human error Execution documentation, instructions, or technical procedures for the related
processes have not been followed, or any deviations of the staff from the
specified requirements have been worked out, resulting in non-conformities.

4
 3. Methodology

The study was conducted at Ethiopian shipping & logistics service Enterprise Kality Inland Transport
Brunch, where the data taken are total production and disability in the Sep 2019 to Aug 2020 period the
study uses Total Quality Management.
The general objective of the research is to reduce the number of defects in bolt with nut products by
identifying the causes of defects and improvement efforts in order to produce quality products, so that it
will be obtained:
• Calculating the value of Defect
• Getting the biggest risk of failure in the production process in the Risk Priority Number (RPN)
• Provide improvement suggestions to reduce the number of defective products

3.1. Data Collection

Data can be obtained from two main sources namely primary sources and secondary sources. Data obtained
from primary sources is called primary data that is data obtained by searching / digging directly from the
source by the relevant researcher. Secondary data is data that has been collected and processed by other
parties so that it does not need to be explored / sought by the relevant researcher but only to quote or retrieve.
The data used in this study is secondary data while the data is obtained indirectly which can form file
documents, archives or company records.
This study uses SPSS, SPC, QI macrons & Excel in data processing which consist of:
• Critical to Quality Control (CTQ)
• Control Charts
• Defect Per Product
• Pareto Diagram
• Cause and Effect Diagram
• Failure Mode and Effect Analysis (FMEA)
3.2. Data Gathering Instrument

The instruments used in data gathering are

1. Informal interview to the production management/personnel,

2. The Document Control Center of Ethiopian Shipping & Logistics Service Enterprise Company

5
3. Ishikawa Diagram and

4. Different research material such as on web, article, journals and other related studies are used to gather
more relevant information. These are used to gather proofs about the line which produces number of defect
bolt with Nut and to obtain more information on how to deal regarding the current situation of the
production.

3.3. Data Gathering Procedure

In order to gather good information for the study, the data collect by means of the following procedures:

historical data from the document control center of Ethiopian Shipping & Logistics Service Enterprise
Company and identified which production line encountered numerous problems specifically defects on
products. The data conducted series of observations particular in the Bolt with Nut production area. The
observation is an actual operation and the flow process of the line and focused only on manpower, machine,
material and methods used.

3.3.1. Data Quality

Quality is a multidimensional concept. Normative document ISO 9000:2000 defines quality as "the totality
of characteristics of an entity that allow capacity of satisfying explicit and implicit needs". Explicit needs
are defined as those expressed in the producer’s definition of the proposed requirements. They are
composed by the utilization terms of the product, their goals, functions and expected performance. Implicit
needs are those necessary for the users, although not expressed by the producer. One can identify three
main approaches to data quality in the literature: theoretical, empiric and
stochastic. The theoretical approach focuses on the data that could become deficient during the production
process.
3.3.2. Quality and Non-Conformity
In Statistical Process Control (SPC), one traditional method of analyzing the quality of a process is
by using control charts for non-conformities. A non-conformity is a defect according to some specification
of a quality attribute. The Control Chart counts non-conformities detected in the units produced by the
process, be it a manufacturing one or not. When counting non-conformities, it is also possible to distinguish
between the degrees of effect that a defect can have in a produced unit. This is very interesting for complex
units that can be affected in different ways by different non-conformities, and with different results,
according to the users` perspectives. This approach is known as a “Demerit System”, which can be defined
in the following classes:

6
Class A - serious or critical defects that affect the product’s essential function, preventing its use?
Class B - serious defects that reduce the product’s efficiency; and?
Class C - small or irregular defects that, without modifying the performance of the product, constitute
imperfections.
A unit’s demerit value can then be calculated by multiplying the number of non-conformities of each class
by the weight of that class. Each class has a weight that is defined according to the specific problem for
which this technique is adopted. The result of this procedure is the weighted average of non- conformities
in a product. In this way, a quality evaluation by non-conformities uses all non-conformities found, taking
into account the weight of each one of them, to verify if the quality of the evaluated product has degraded.
Table 2, type of defect/variation source

Class defects Defect

1. Incorrect or incomplete specification

2. Incorrect or incomplete specified material

3. Requiring inappropriate specific technology documentation

Class A 4. Component of the product improperly specified

(Constructive design 5. Inappropriately specified procedures and applications

defects)
6. Inappropriate drawing detail

7. Incorrect dimensional specification

8. Non-specification of deviations in form and position in drawings

9. Highlights identified inappropriately in the project

10. Conflict of specifications in the drawing

11. Inadequate project documentation requirements

12. Incorrect adaptation or non-adaptation of external documentation

1. Incorrect or incomplete specified material

7
 2. Inappropriately specified size

3. Inappropriately specified procedures and applications

4. Inappropriate sketch detail

5. Non-specification in sketches of deviations of form and position

Class A 6. Inappropriate choice of machine tools

(Technological design 7. Mistaken choice of the base and catch of the piece in the device
defects)
8. The wrong choice of the base and the catch of the piece on the tool
machine

9. Inappropriate indication of cutting tools

10. Inappropriate indication of the means of measurement

11. Misrepresentation or misrepresentation of cutting regimes

12. Non-specification in all technological documentation

13. the requirements in the constructive documentation

14. Specifying documents in the technical documentation that are not

permanently accessible to the performer

1. Dimensional deviations

2. Deviations of form

3. Position deviations

4. Deviations of balance

5. Inappropriate rug

6. Inappropriate hole

Class C 7. Tool inlet on the processed surface

8
 8. Traces of scratches, cuts and/ or strokes on the surface processed

(Processing defects) 9. Threaded holes with splines, broken spines, incomplete or overlapped
splines

10. Absence or extra hole

11. Holes/ holes in the grille offset

12. Addition of insufficient processing

13. Use of inappropriate devices

14. Use of inappropriate tools

15. Using an inappropriate machine

16. Stepped surfaces

17.Addition of insufficient material for the finishing operation

1. Certificate of non-conforming material (incomplete)

Class B 2. Deviations from specified chemical analysis

(Material defects) 3. Deviations of the specified mechanical characteristics

4. Blows, inclusions, voids, cracks, overlaps, pores (highlighted with END

controls)

5. Specific heat treatment improperly applied

9
 4. Data collection

Based on the cluster of volume production, the data is collected from machine capacity in 24 months
commenced from Sep/2019 to Aug/2020.

Table 3, Collected Data from Sep 2019 to Aug 2020

Total No
machine Mahine Conformi Non Total no
Month Class A Class B Class C
A B n conformit product
y
Sep-19 378 342 621 39 30 30 99 720
Oct-19 323 233 467 30 25 34 89 556
Nov-19 312 321 555 35 29 14 78 633
Dec-19 342 345 596 27 30 34 91 687
Jan-19 400 390 680 45 27 38 110 790
Feb-19 453 398 731 44 45 31 120 851
Mar-19 432 435 742 55 24 46 125 867
Apr-19 532 542 940 37 30 67 134 1074
May-19 432 212 565 21 32 26 79 644
Jun-19 290 300 521 27 29 13 69 590
Jul-19 433 324 670 31 20 36 87 757
Aug-19 345 246 506 28 31 26 85 591
Sep-20 345 398 684 20 19 20 59 743
Oct-20 400 390 730 22 20 18 60 790
Nov-20 450 399 751 31 35 32 98 849
Dec-20 465 491 847 34 36 39 109 956
Jan-20 398 382 690 30 30 30 90 780
Feb-20 389 387 719 15 19 23 57 776
Mar-20 391 378 706 19 18 26 63 769
Apr-20 389 328 634 34 21 28 83 717
May-20 395 393 723 24 22 19 65 788
Jun-20 391 381 684 24 32 32 88 772
Jul-20 389 378 680 34 35 18 87 767
Aug-20 383 356 690 14 18 17 49 739
Total 9457 8749 16132 720 657 697 2074 18206
% 52% 48% 89% 11%

10
 machine A Mahine B

10000
9000
8000
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0

Fig 1. efficiency of machine

Machine A is more efficient than machine B because of operator on machine A is need training how to
operate machining system correctly at low time than operator of machine B.
The Total Number of defective bolt and Nut is 2074 pieces and 228140 birrs when it converts to cost.

Fig 2. defected bolt

11
 5. Data Analysis

Control chart is an important tool of the statistical process control (SPC) that has been widely used in the
industry and service company for the monitoring of the manufacturing process. In the industry,
specifications are set to manufacture the product.(Aslam & Al-Marshadi, 2019)

a. C- chart

In statistical quality control, the c-chart is a type of control chart used to monitor "count"-type data,
typically total number of nonconformities per unit.

139.7

129.7

119.7
UCL 114.305

109.7
Total No Non conformity

99.7

89.7 CL 86.417

79.7

69.7

59.7 LCL 58.528

49.7

39.7

Sep-19 - Aug-20

Fig3. The c-chart for number of defects in the bolt With Nut

b. Pareto Analysis
From the above data, Pareto analysis shows the top defect positions.

12
 2000 100%
Total No of defect 90%
80%
1500 68.3% 70%
60%
1000 720 50%
697 657 40%
34.7% 30%
500 20%
10%
0 0%
Class A Class C Class B
Type of Defect

Figure 4. Pareto analysis of the defects

Observations from Pareto Analysis for Top Defect Positions

1. Class A is the most frequent defect with as much as 34.7% of the total Defect.

Cause Effect Diagram

Cause effect diagram for Class A:
From the Pareto chart, it is clear that Class A is a major type of defect in the production section. The reporter
has identified the major causes, which are responsible for man, machine materials, and methods. The cause-
effect diagram as shown in below:

Fig 5, Cause effect diagram for Class A, B & Class C

13
Fig 6. Total No of Non conformity defined by Pie chart

From the Total no of defect Class, A contain 34.72%, Class B, 31.68 & Class C, contain 33.61%

6. Reducing Defects Using PDCA Cycle

The theory of the PDCA cycle process was promoted by ISO 9001:2000, which systematically identifies
and manages the processes that combine the quality systems and the interactions between the processes.
This process is explained as Plan-Do-Check-Action cycle (PDCA). This method applies to all processes to
control the production quality. For implementing PDCA cycle, initially, it is required finding the
opportunity.
The defect percentages are calculated in the following table where PDCA will be applied to reduce and
eliminate waste:

14
Table 4. Cause identification using PDCA and WH questions

5 WH Questions: Answers of the 5 WH Questions:

PLAN Q (1): What is needed to be done?
Q (2): How much is needed to be
done?
Q (3): Where it is needed to be done?
Q (4): Who should do it?
Q (5): When it is needed to be done?
A (1): Perfect Machining is needed.
A (2): Goal is to reach zero defects.
A (3): In every Machining on production line.
A (4): The Operator should do it.
A (5): It is needed to be done during machining

Process implementation according to PLAN:

DO Install, adjust and use the machine properly.
Using a good needle, quality-Making thread and supported equipment’s.
Recruit expert operator.
Spend proper time for each operation.

Inspection of the process:

Planned monitoring and measure the process and the products.
CHECK Check if the defects are reduced or not?
If the defects are not occurring or reducing then continue the action of the process
successfully.
If defects are occurring, then go back to the PLAN stage and develop some more ideas for
solving and reducing defects and go through the cycle again.

Take action on the accurate process for continually improving process performance.
If any defects are found, then start the PLAN stage for solving it.
ACTION

15
A. Plan
This is the first phase of the cycle. In this stage, a proposal was submitted for improvement of the process.
Before submitting the proposal, major defects that occurred in the 24 months study span were identified.
The major defects were:

Class A, 34.7%, Class B, 31.68% & Class C,33.61%

There were other types of defects too. However, these 3 defects sum up to most of the total defects. As a
result, for this study only these defects were kept under consideration. Being able to reduce these effects
will reduce the no. of nonconforming items and will make the process more stable. It is not possible to
change everything overnight. So, the idea that was suggested was to reduce these defects one by one.
Among the 3 major problems, dirty spot had the highest percentage of occurrences. The plan that was
proposed was to implement 5s or Japanese housekeeping technique and revise again to see the variation in
the process.

B. Do
This is the second phase of the cycle. It is also known as implement. In this phase, the planning should be
carried out on a small or pilot scale first. As it was proposed to apply 5s, the first step should be informing
the employees about 5s. Introducing the employees with the idea of 5s would make it easier to implement
it. The summary of the steps that should be followed are:

Table 5. Implementing 5s

Name of the Step Activities under it

1. Sort a. Remove unnecessary items

b. Tag everything that is not needed in the
workstation.
c. Discard the items in a holding area.

2. Set in order a. Locate the necessary items in their proper

place.
b. Use marker, labels, paint to make the
position of any item clear for everyone around
the workstation.

16
 a. Clean the workstation daily.
3. Shine b. Daily inspection should be arranged to
enforce the cleaning process.

a. Routine inspection should be done to check

4. Standardize the first 3 steps are running properly.
b. All the three steps before it should be
standardize using written notice and memo to
both the management personnel and the
employees.

a. Commitment from each employee is needed

5. Sustain to achieve this.
b. Periodic review of the 5s process should be
done.

C. Check
After implementing the 5s process as proposed in the planning phase, new control charts should be
developed using new data. The control chart will show how much change was done in the process variation
after implementing 5s.
D. Act
Based on the analysis of the new data either the management will adopt the proposed plan or a new set of
plans should be proposed. After implementing 5s, if the process shows more stability than before and
produces less defects than 5s process should be implied as a part of operation. Implementing 5s alone cannot
make a lot of changes. For making the process completely stable, more PDCA cycle session had to be done
with newer proposal to reduce defects.

CONCLUSIONS
• This approach has significant advantages over current techniques: reproducible, fast, full data
storage, auditable, interpretable locally or remotely.
• There are many set-up options, depending on:
✓ Physical contact area, length of bolt and thread section diameter dimensions
✓ Material properties, grain structure and attenuation

17
 ✓ Physical configurations and geometrical considerations
✓ Phased arrays can be readily adapted to the different bolt conditions by using pre-prepared
set-ups
Continuous quality improvement is an approach to analysis of performance in the laboratories and
systematic efforts to improve it to attain excellence. This maintains the quality of service and reliability.
PDCA cycle is very essential in getting rid of losses in dairy laboratories. The most important features of
PDCA methodology are making the improvement continuous and maintaining zero defects/errors and
wastes.
Adoption of PDCA principles does not require huge capital investments. Therefore, factories using PDCA
cycle methodology will decrease losses and misuse, give immediate outcomes, enhance production and
quality, and lessen costs.

Recommendation

Daily training on quality management culture can improve employees’ idea of ‘Quality first’ which can
cause their quality attention during working. That is because quality management refers to all departments
and all business process of company, so the implementation of TQM needs the cooperation of all
departments and employees. Training on the topic of quality management culture can help to improve
employees’ quality consciousness on the importance of TQM on the strategy development level. Deming’s
Principle of institute training on the job should be applied together in support of 5S, can solve the issue.

18
 References

Aslam, M., & Al-Marshadi, A. H. (2019). Design of a Control Chart Based on COM-Poisson Distribution
for the Uncertainty Environment. Complexity, 2019. https://doi.org/10.1155/2019/8178067

Dale, B. G. (2008). Discuss the key elements of Total Quality Management within the context of the
emerging business environment.

Faculty, T., & Engineering, P. (1993). Defects and defect avoidance in cold forging .

Gopal, V., Officer, C. S., Education, C., Objectives, L., Action, P., & Objectives, T. (n.d.).
Nonconforming Product. 1–7.

International Journal of Asian Social Science TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT ( TQM ): A SOURCE
OF COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE . A COMPARATIVE STUDY OF MANUFACTURING AND
SERVICE FIRMS IN GHANA. (2013). 3(6), 1293–1305.

Ishak, A., & Zalukhu, N. E. (2020). Bolt Product Quality Control Using Six Sigma DMAIC Method (
Case study : PT XYZ Company ) Bolt Product Quality Control Using Six Sigma DMAIC Method (
Case study : PT XYZ Company ). https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/1003/1/012094

Kaynak, H. (2003). The relationship between total quality management practices and their effects on firm
performance. Journal of Operations Management, 21(4), 405–435. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0272-
6963(03)00004-4

Sampling, A. (n.d.). 9 ACCEPTANCE. 167–188.

19