Error Proofing2011

Error Proofing
Overview
© 2001 Ford Motor Company

Error Proofing
Introduction
Course beginning and end times

Lunch and breaks
Facilities
Emergency procedures
© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-2

Error Proofing
Course Materials
Participant Guide

Error Proofing
Purpose
This course provides an introduction to

the Ford Motor Company error proofing
tools and processes, and the
fundamentals required to identify and
develop error proofing solutions during
site assessments.
Participants will lean how to develop
error proofing processes and identify
opportunities to apply these practices.

Error Proofing
Goal
The goal of the Error Proofing course

is to develop working knowledge of
error proofing to enable participants to
apply the concepts to site assessment
responsibilities.

Error Proofing
Course Objectives
1. Assess error proofing implementation at
a supplier site.
2. Identify error proofing opportunities
during site assessments.

Error Proofing
The Need for Error Proofing
Error proofing is based on two

essential attitudes about human
behavior:
Mistakes are inevitable
Errors can be eliminated

Error Proofing
Error Proofing and Ford

Error proofing is used :
In processes that require extensive inspection
At stations where parts are hard to tell apart
For processes where reliability is uncertain
In processes where risk of safety incidents is
high
To support Lean Manufacturing

Error Proofing
Cost Analysis
Cost of time to work on defective parts
Cost of all materials used
Cost of time spent in rework
Cost of material used for rework
Cost of time spent inspecting defective parts
Lost production time spent on defective parts
Impact of lower customer satisfaction
Impact of lower worker morale

Error Proofing
Site Assessment Needs

The Q1 Site Assessment checklist
provides objective evidence that satisfies
the Q1 site expectations.
Suppliers are required to provide the
completed checklist to the responsible
STA engineer upon request.
Suppliers are required to keep the Q1 2002
Site Assessment checklist and
accompanying corrective action plans for
the prior 24 months.

Error Proofing
Course Agenda
Introduction
Definitions and Applications
Site Assessment
Tool Review
Application Activity
Course Summary

Definitions and
Applications

Error Proofing
Section Objectives
1. Distinguish between error proofing
and mistake proofing.
2. Evaluate error proofing devices.
3. Describe the process of implementing
error proofing devices.
4. Identify root cause in Global 8Ds and
FMEAs.
5. Explain the purpose and benefits of
using error proofing.

Error Proofing
Error
An error is any deviation from a specified
manufacturing process
•All defects are created by errors
•Not all errors result in defects
Process Flow ERROR To Next Process

Possible
DEFECT

Error Proofing
Error Examples
The wrong option package is
sequenced into the assembly
An oil sender unit is defective
A hose clamp is not positioned
correctly during the assembly
A worn installation tool causes molding
clips to be installed incorrectly
A door is left open on an assembly
finishing line

Error Proofing
Defect
A defect is the result of any deviation

from product specifications that may lead
to customer dissatisfaction.
To be a defect:
The product must have deviated from
specifications
The product does not meet customer
expectations

Error Proofing
Errors vs. Defects

Error Defect
The wrong option package was sequenced into Vehicle is equipped with wrong
assembly. option package
An oil sender unit is defective. Engine oil/coolant leak
A hose clamp was not positioned correctly during
assembly.
A worn installation tool caused molding clips to be Squeaks, rattles, or loose parts
installed incorrectly.
A door was left open on an assembly finishing line The door is damaged due to
hitting an object

Error Proofing
Error Proofing
A process improvement designed

to prevent a specific defect from
occurring.

Error Proofing
Error Proofing Example

Error Proofing
Mistake Proofing Definition

The application of tools and devices
applied to a process to reduce the
possibility of errors occurring
The application of tools and devices to
a process to reduce the possibility of
defects that have occurred continuing
to the customer
The use of functional design features to
reduce the possibility of parts being
assembled incorrectly

Error Proofing
Mistake Proofing Example

Error Proofing
Prevention vs. Detection
Error Proofing Approaches
Prevention Detection
Prevents errors from Detects that a defect has been
occurring or defects from created and initiates a
being created corrective measure in station

Error Proofing
Microvave
Microwave ovens
have interlock
switches that will
not allow the oven
to operate if the
door is not closed.

Error Proofing
Refrigerator
When a refrigerator
door is opened, a
switch cuts off the
compressor and fan
to prevent the
compressor from
cycling
continuously.

Error Proofing
Automatic Faucet
Automatic faucets
automatically turn
the water off after
a set amount of
time so that the
water cannot be
left running.

Error Proofing
Computer Cable Connectors
Computer cables
connectors will
only attach when
oriented in one
direction.

Error Proofing
Activity
Brainstorm lists of error proofing

Devices for:
Home
Vehicle
Work

Error Proofing
Example 1 – Frames
A green stripe is on the limo wheel base, and

purple on the long wheel base.

Error Proofing
Example 2 – Canadian Stock
A piece of paper with a maple leaf covers

the Canadian side of the rack.

Error Proofing
Example 3 – Stoplight
A stoplight indicates when it is safe to cross.

Error Proofing
Screw Jig – Before

Error Proofing
Screw Jig – After

Error Proofing
Transmission Gasket– Before

Error Proofing
Transmission Gasket – After

Error Proofing
Door Closers

Error Proofing
DC Nut Runner

Error Proofing
Hood Latch Alignment

Error Proofing
Push Buttons

Error Proofing
Alignment Pins

Error Proofing
Door Magnet

Error Proofing
Section Summary
Definitions
Prevention vs. detection
Identifying error proofing devices
Case studies

Error Proofing
Review Question 1

Error Proofing
Review Question 2

Site Assessment

Error Proofing
Section Objectives
Identify error proofing devices.
Identify applications for error proofing
devices.
Apply FMEAs in the error proofing
process.
Apply G8Ds in the error proofing
process.
Identify error proofing questions to be
asked during an APQP review.

Error Proofing
When to Assess
During normal site assessment

APQP reviews
FMEA reviews
Global 8D reviews

Error Proofing
What Is Assessed – Q1
I.2.1. All Ford parts have documented design and process failure and
effects analysis (DFMEA, PFMEA), and Control Plans (or DCPs).
I.2.3. All defect detection areas are reviewed and plans exist to move to
defect prevention. There is evidence that defect prevention is
replacing defect detection.
II.8.1. Supplier has a maintenance system that contains reactive,

preventive, and predictive maintenance. The maintenance system
supports process capability improvement.
II.8.5. Supplier takes measures to minimize foreign material, chips, debris,

contamination, excessive oil, etc. where part quality can be
negatively affected.

Error Proofing
What Is Assessed – APQP

APQP Checklist Checklist Question
4. Design FMEA Item 12: Consider process improvement techniques (DOE,

Robustness Methodology, Mistake Proofing (Poke-Yoke), Global
8D/Prevent Recurrence, etc) to develop preventative and
corrective actions for Severity ratings of 5 - 8, with an Occurrence
of 4 or more and high RPN items.
14. Process FMEA Item 8: Address the impact of failures as applicable to each of the
following items: each part, subsequent operation, system, vehicle,
customer wants, government regulations, and operator safety.
8. Facilities/Tools/gages Question 8: Ensure that Tooling and Equipment design

incorporates the recommend actions from the Process FMEA.

Error Proofing
What Is Assessed – FMEA POTENTIAL

FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS
___System (DESIGN FMEA) FMEA Number: Design FMEA Jobaid
___Subsystem Page 1 of 2
_X_Component: 00.00.01 Total vehicle Requirements Design Responsibility: enter the organization here Prepared By: A Engineer (AEngin4@Ford.com)
Model Year(s)/Program(s): 2004 Typical Program Key Date: 9/5/2000 FMEA Date (Orig.): 1/22/1998 (Rev.): 8/29/2000
Core Team: Person 1, Person 2, Person 3, A Engineer
Item C O Current D Action Results

l Potential c Design e
Potential Potential Cause(s)/ Recommended Responsibility
Failure Effect(s) of S a c Controls t R. & Target Actions S O D R.
e s Mechanism(s) u – Prevention e P. Action(s) e c e P.
Mode Failure of Failure Completion Date Taken
Function v s r – Detection c N. v c t N.
Function: 4 Thought starters: Including: For cause: Why has Current controls are List the action. Enter who Enter a brief
Needs, wants, No function Government/safety this happened or how 2 types: If no action (not just the description of
requirements. Partial /over function/ Ultimate customer, might this happen? 1. Prevent a planned, enter department) will the action
degraded over time Vehicle cause/mechanism of "None" or "None at complete and after it has
Must be Intermittent function Other systems, Use 2 Assumptions: failure this time" when. been
verb-noun-measurable Unintended function subsystems, 1) Item will be 2. Detect the failure 11/5/2001 completed.
include special components, item, manufactured/ mode or Detect the Must have a
conditions or Methods: Manufacturing/assembly/ assembled to cause/mechanism of Recommended Enter the
constraints Brainstorm using 4 service specification failure (D) Action for any Revised
Methods: thought starters 2) Design includes a Special Severity,
Brainstorm List each in separate field Methods: deficiency that may Methods: 1) Rate Characteristic item Revised
Brainstorm cause unacceptable each detective Occurrence or
Inputs include: Inputs include: Rate each; put highest in variation control, 2) Put best Revised
Function tree, P diagram, Interface next column (lowest) or Detection
previous/similar FMEAs, Matrix, Similar FMEAs, Methods: 1) composite in the number to the
SDS, Boundary diagram, 8D's, Warranty, TGW Inputs include: Brainstorm, 2) Rate Detection column. right to reflect
QFD P diagram, Interface each Occurrence -put 10 if no detection. (D) the result of
matrix, Warranty, 8D, in next column. the action.
TGW Controls are already
previous similar FMEAs Inputs include: planned, or are Recalculate
Warranty, 8D, TGW normal and
For classification: See previous/similar customary for this
FAP 03-111 or section 6 FMEAs, P diagram, type item (P)
of this handbook. As of Interface diagram, test
this date =YC or YS or data. Remember that
blank. Prevention Controls It is possible to There should be
have an affect on have multiple a name here,
the Occurrence (P) actions against a XYZ
Cause or Failure department
Inputs include: Mode. 5/10/2001
Warranty, 8D,
TGW , previous/similar
FMEAs, test data,
previous DV plan,
P diagram (P)
Lift vehicle Does not lift vehicle Cannot change tire (10) 10 YC This must be "Root 2 Detection control (3) 2 40 There MUST be an Mary O., XYZ
-X inches Stripped threads on gear Cause" for Special (D) action here department
Current
-<=100 # effort (7) Characteristic items Detection control (2) 1/31/1998
O
-Z cycles/years Bent handle (7) (D)
There could be a S. Jones, XYZ
Preventative control second action here department
(P) 5/18/2001
YC This is cause 2 3 Detection control (3)

(D)
Detection control (4)
(D)
3 90 There MUST be an
action here
There must be a
name and
department
5/11/2001
Potential c Design
Preventative control
(P)
Cause(s)/ c Controls
Mechanism(s) u – Prevention
of Failure r – Detection
For cause: Why has Current controls are
this happened or how 2 types:
might this happen? 1. Prevent a
cause/mechanism of
Use 2 Assumptions: failure
1) Item will be 2. Detect the failure
manufactured/ mode or Detect the
assembled to cause/mechanism of
specification failure (D)
2) Design includes a
deficiency that may Methods: 1) Rate
cause unacceptable each detective
variation control, 2) Put best
(lowest) or
Methods: 1) composite in the
Brainstorm, 2) Rate Detection column.
each Occurrence -put 10 if no detection. (D)
in next column.

Error Proofing
What Is Assessed – G8D

G8D Report
Title Date Opened Last Updated
Product/Process Information Organisation Information
Dø Symptom(s)
Dø Emergency Response Action(s) % Effective Date Implemented
Verification/Validation
D1 Team (Name, Dept., Phone) D2 Problem
Champion: Problem Statement
Team Leader:
Team Members: Problem Description
D3 Interim Containment Action(s) % Effective Date Implemented
D4 Root Cause(s) % Contribution
Verification
D5 Chosen Permanent Corrective Action(s) % Effective
Verification
D6 Implemented Permanent Corrective Action(s) Date Implemented
Validation
D7 Prevent Actions Date Implemented
D7 Systemic Prevent Recommendations Responsibility
D8 Team and Individual Recognition Date Closed Reported By
D5 Chosen Permanent Corrective Action(s) % Effective
Verification
D6 Implemented Permanent Corrective Action(s) Date Implemented
Validation

Error Proofing
What Is Assessed – G8D (Cont’d)

Critical Features
Fit
Form
Function
Adherence to government regulations
Adherence to safety items
Customer satisfaction features
Customer Concern Issues
TGR/TGW (Things Gone Right/Things Gone Wrong)
reports
Service bulletins
Field actions and stop shipments

Error Proofing
Other Site Assessment

Documents
STA Guidelines
Audit information
Q1References
APQP Guideline and forms
FMEAs
Global 8Ds

Error Proofing
Error Proofing Questions

1. Is error proofing methodology considered in
the planning process for product design?
Process design?
2. Is the implementation of error proofing noted
as a measurable in the suppliers QOS? Is
this measurable tracked and displayed?
3. Is error proofing methodology considered for
all:
Inverted delta items?
HICs?
CCs?
SCs?

Error Proofing
Section Summary
Where error proofing is identified

When and how site assessment is
completed
Questions to ask
Specific tools available for site
assessment.

Tool Review

Error Proofing
Section Objectives
Identify error proofing devices.
Identify applications for error proofing
devices.
Identify how FMEAs are used in the
error proofing Process.
Identify how G8Ds are used in the error
proofing Process.
Identify questions to be asked during an
APQP review.

Error Proofing
Planning Implementation
Methods
Detection during Global 8D
Prevention implementation during
FMEA
The error proofing Implementation
Worksheet

Error Proofing
Overview of Tools
Best practices from similar components

DFM Strategies
DFA Strategies
Error Proofing Checklists
Generic product design error proofing
strategies
Lessons learned documents

Error Proofing
Error Proofing Opportunity and

Tracking Form
This tool is used by Ford and the UAW,

and is part of the Global 8D process.

Error Proofing
Error Proofing
Information Worksheet
1. Identify and describe the defect.
2. Show the defect rate by charting the defect
occurrence over time.
3. Identify where defect was found.
4. Identify where defect was made.
5. Describe the current process where the defect
was made by detailing the standard procedures
used in the operation.
6. Identify any errors or deviations from process
standards where the defect was made.

Error Proofing
Error Proofing
Information Worksheet (Cont’d)
7. Use The 5 Why problem-solving technique to
identify the root cause of the defect or error.
8. Develop ideas for improving the process using
5-Why tools to eliminate or detect the error.
9. Improve the process by creating an error
proofing device.
10. Measure/Document results of error proofing.
11. Standardize the improvement.
12. Ask where else could this improvement be
used?

Error Proofing
Error Proofing Devices
Sticky notes on Probes

components Proximity
Electronic eyes switches
Components Profile plates
that will only Alignment tabs
attach one way Broken tooling
Limit switches indicator
Photo eyes Color striping

Error Proofing
Error Proofing Exercise

Directions
1. Form table teams.
2. For each of the 10 scenarios, determine the
following:
Is it a design or process issue?
What are possible solutions? (Brainstorm as
many as possible.)
Which solution is most cost-effective?
Which solution would the team recommend?
3. Prepare to present the results to the class

Error Proofing
Exercise Scenarios
1. Blue Oval nameplates are being installed upside
down on vehicles during final assembly.
2. Engine front cover uses both M6 and M8 bolts to
secure. The operator sometimes installs M6 bolts in
M8 holes.
3. Operator is selecting the wrong speaker for the
required audio option in the SUV.
4. A 200 ton press requires PM at the start of every
shift. If the PM is not performed in a timely fashion
non-conforming product will be produced.

Error Proofing
Exercise Scenarios (Cont’d)

5. Headlight plugs are not being pushed to depth on the
back of the headlight during assembly.
6. During the installation of washer fluid tank, not all
bolts are tight. The operator is using a DC runner
7. Improper amount of antifreeze is being dispensed in
the radiator.
8. Throttle bodies are installed 180 degrees off location.
9. The wrong build manifest is being attached to the
frame
10. Operator selects the wrong bearing insert for the
crankshaft bore.

Error Proofing
FMEA
1. Recognize and evaluate the

potential failure of a product or
process and its effects
2. Identify actions which could
eliminate or reduce the chance of
the potential failure occurring
3. Document the process

Error Proofing
P O T EN TI A L
FMEA Outputs
F A IL U R E M O D E A N D EF FE C T S A N A L YS IS
_ __ S ys te m (D E SI G N F M E A ) FM EA N u m be r : D es i gn F M E A Jo b ai d
_ __ S ub s ys te m Pa g e 1 o f 2
_ X_ C o m p on e nt : 0 0 .0 0 .0 1 T ot al v e h ic le R e qu i rem en ts D es i gn R es p on s ib il it y : e n te r t he or ga n iz a ti on he re Pre p a re d B y : A E ng in e e r ( A En g in 4 @ F o rd. c om )
M o de l Y e ar (s )/ Pro g ra m (s ): 2 00 4 T y pi c al P ro gr am K ey D at e : 9 / 5/ 2 00 0 FM EA D a te ( O ri g .) : 1 / 22 / 19 9 8 (R e v .) : 8 /2 9 /2 0 0 0
C o re T e a m : P e rs on 1 , P er so n 2 , Pe rs o n 3 , A E ng in e e r
It e m C O C u r re n t D A ct io n R e s u lt s
l P o t en t ial c D es ig n e
P o t en t ial P o t e n tia l Ca u s e (s )/ R e c om m e nde d R e sp o n s ib ilit y
F a ilu r e E ff ec t( s) o f S a c C o n t ro ls t R. & T ar g e t A ct io n s S O D R.
e s M e c h a n is m ( s) u – P re v e ntio n e P. Ac tio n ( s ) e c e P.
M od e F a ilu re Co m p let io n Da t e T ak e n
F u n c tio n v s o f F a ilu r e r – D ete ctio n c N. v c t N.
F un c tio n : 4 T h o ug h t s ta rte rs : In c lu d ing : F o r c au s e: W hy h a s C u rr en t c o ntr ols ar e L is t th e a c tio n . E nte r w ho E n ter a br ief
Ne e ds , wa nts , N o fu nc tion G o v er nm en t/s a fe ty th is h a pp e ne d o r h ow 2 ty pe s : If no ac tion (n o t jus t th e d e sc r iptio n o f
re qu ire m e n ts . P a rtia l /o v er fu nc tion / Ultim a te c us tom er , m ig ht th is h a pp e n? 1 . P r ev e n t a p la n ne d , e nter de p ar tm en t) w ill th e a ctio n
d eg r ad ed ov e r tim e V eh ic le c a us e /m ec h an is m of "N on e" o r "N on e a t c om p le te an d a fte r it h a s
M us t b e Inter m itten t fu nc tio n O the r s ys tem s , U se 2 A s s um ption s : fa ilu r e this tim e" wh e n. b e en
v er b- n ou n- m e a su r ab le U n inten d ed fu n ctio n su b sy s te m s , 1) Item will b e 2 . D e te c t the fa ilu re 11 /5/2 00 1 c o m p leted .
in c lu de sp e c ia l co m p o ne nts , item , m a nu fac tur e d/ m od e o r D ete c t the M u st ha v e a
co n ditio ns or M e th o ds : M an ufa c tu r in g /a s s em bl y/ as s e m b le d to c a us e /m ec h an is m of R ec o m m e n de d E n ter th e
co n str ain ts B r ain s to rm u s in g 4 se rv ic e s pe c ific a tio n fa ilu r e (D ) A c tio n for an y R e v is ed
M eth od s : tho u gh t s tar ter s 2) D es ign inc lu d es a S p ec ia l S e v e rity,
B ra ins tor m L ist ea c h in se p ar ate fie ld M etho d s : de fic ie n c y tha t m ay M e tho ds : 1) R a te C ha r ac ter istic ite m R e v is ed
B ra ins tor m c au s e u na c ce p ta b le e ac h de tec tiv e O c cu r re nc e o r
In pu ts in c lud e : Inp uts inc lu de : Ra te e ac h ; p ut hig he s t in v ar iatio n c o ntro l, 2 ) P u t b es t R e v is ed
F un c tio n tre e , P d ia g ra m , In te r fa c e ne x t c olu m n ( low e s t) o r D e tec tio n
pr ev io u s/s im ila r F M E A s, M a tr ix , S im ila r F M E A s , M eth od s : 1 ) c o m p os ite in th e n u m b er to th e
S D S , B o un da r y d iag ra m , 8 D 's , W a r ra nty, T G W In pu ts in c lud e: B ra ins to rm , 2) Ra te D e te c tio n c o lum n. r igh t to r efle c t
QFD P d iag ra m , In ter fac e ea c h O cc u rr en c e - pu t 1 0 if n o d e te c tio n . ( D) th e re s u lt of
m atr ix , W a rr an ty, 8 D , in n ex t c o lum n. th e a ctio n.
TG W C o ntr ols a r e a lre ad y
pr ev io us s im ila r F M E A s In pu ts in c lud e : p lan n ed , o r a re R e c alc u late
W ar ra n ty , 8 D , T G W n or m a l a n d
F or cla s s ific a tio n : S e e pr e v io u s /s im ila r c u sto m a ry fo r this
F A P 0 3 -1 1 1 or se c tio n 6 F M E A s , P d iag ra m , typ e ite m (P )
of th is h an d bo o k. A s o f In te r fa c e d iag r am , tes t
th is d ate = YC o r Y S o r da ta. R e m e m b er th at
bla nk . P r ev e n tio n C o ntr ols It is p os s ib le to T he re s ho u ld be
h av e an affec t on h av e m ultip le a n am e h er e,
th e O c c ur r en c e (P ) a ction s ag a ins t a XYZ
C au s e o r F a ilur e de p ar tm en t
Inp u ts inc lu d e: M o de . 5/1 0/2 00 1
W arr a nty, 8D ,
T G W , p re v iou s /s im ila r
F M E A s, te s t d ata ,
p re v io us D V p lan ,
P d ia g ra m (P )
Lift v e hic le D o e s n ot lift v eh ic le C an n ot ch a ng e tire ( 1 0) 10 YC T h is m us t b e "R o ot 2 D ete ctio n c on tro l (3 ) 2 40 T h e re M U S T be a n M ar y O ., X Y Z

-X inc h es S tripp e d thr e ad s o n g ea r C a us e " fo r S p ec ia l (D ) a c tio n h e re de p ar tm en t
C u rre n t
-< = 1 00 # e ffo rt (7 ) C h ar a cte ris tic item s D ete ctio n c on tro l (2 ) 1/3 1/1 99 8
O
-Z c yc le s /ye ar s B en t h a nd le ( 7) (D )
T h e re c o u ld b e a S . J o ne s , X Y Z
P re v e nta tiv e co n tr ol s e c on d a c tio n h er e de p ar tm en t
(P ) 5/1 8/2 00 1
YC T h is is c au s e 2 3 D ete ctio n c on tro l (3 )

(D )
D ete ctio n c on tro l (4 )
(D )
3 90 T h e re M U S T be a n
a c tio n h e re
T he re m u st be a
na m e an d
de p ar tm en t
5/1 1/2 00 1
P o te n tia l c D e s ig n
P re v e nta tiv e co n tr ol
(P )
C a u s e (s )/ c C o n tro ls
M e c h a n is m (s ) u – P re v e n tio n
o f F a ilu re r – D e te c tio n
For cause: W hy has C u rre n t c o n tro ls a re
th is h a p p e n e d o r h o w 2 typ e s :
m ig h t th is h a p p e n ? 1 . P re v e n t a
c a u s e /m e c h a n is m o f
U s e 2 A s s u m p tio n s : fa ilu re
1 ) Ite m w ill b e 2 . D e te c t th e fa ilu re
m a n u fa c tu re d / m o d e o r D e te c t th e
a s s e m b le d to c a u s e /m e c h a n is m o f
s p e c ific a tio n fa ilu re (D )
2 ) D e s ig n in c lu d e s a
d e fic ie n c y th a t m a y M e th o d s : 1 ) R a te
c a u s e u n a c c e p ta b le e a c h d e te c tiv e
v a ria tio n c o n tro l, 2 ) P u t b e s t
(lo w e s t) o r
M e th o d s : 1 ) c o m p o s ite in th e
B ra in s to rm , 2 ) R a te D e te c tio n c o lu m n .
e a c h O c c u rre n c e -p u t 1 0 if n o d e te c tio n . (D )
in n e x t c o lu m n .

Error Proofing
Exercise Directions
2. Review the partially complete sample
FMEAs.
3. Identify the following for each FMEA:
Identified concerns
Recommended actions
Error-proofing plans
Error proofing devices
4. Prepare to discuss your results with the
class.

Error Proofing
Global 8D
Global 8D provides a common process that
effectively defines and resolves concerns and
prevents their recurrence. It also attempts to:
Increase management understanding
Improve concern resolution and prevention
Improve performance to Quality/Cost/Timing
Promote frank and open problem solving
Provide automated computer support

Error Proofing

Tracking Form
1. Identify Problem.
2. List Possible Errors.
3. Determine Most Likely Error. (Verify that this is the error.)
4. Purpose Multiple Solutions.
5. Evaluate Solutions' Effectiveness, Cost, and Complexity.
6. Determine Best Solution. Verify that this solution will
resolve the problem.
7. Develop Implementation Plan.
8. Analyze Preliminary Benefits.
9. Develop Plan for Long-Term Measure of Benefits.

Error Proofing
Exercise Directions
Review the example of the completed
Tracking form in the appendix and
prepare to answer the following
questions:
What are the outputs for this
example?
What is the root cause for the
example?

Error Proofing
APQP
A structured method for defining and

executing the actions necessary to
ensure a product satisfies the
customer.
APQP can be applied to an error
proofing methodology by identifying
actions and defining methods resolving
potential concerns.

Error Proofing
APQP Exercise
Your team will have 5 minutes to review one or
more of the 23 APQP Element Checklists.
2. Identify at least three questions or statements that
could be used as part of an error proofing process.
3. Prepare to present your results to the class. Include:
From which element the question is taken
When (FPDS) in the production cycle the question
would be used
Whether it is a product or process question
What the outputs would be for that question

Error Proofing
Tracking and Displaying Data
Percent of errors proofed

Percent of errors detected vs.
percent of errors prevented
Percent of errors attributed to
design
Percent of errors attributed to
process

Error Proofing
Trend Charts
Expenses
$300
$250
$200
$150
$100
$50
$0
t
r
ay
b
ne
ar
ly
ov
ec
n
ct
p
Ap
Au
Ja
Fe
Ju
O
Se
M
D
Ju

Error Proofing
Pareto Diagrams

Error Proofing
Section Summary
Implementation Methods
Review of Tools
FMEAs
Global 8Ds
APQP questions
Tracking and displaying data

Error Proofing
Review Questions
1. Which tool is most effective in

detecting design errors?
2. Explain why it is difficult to develop a
single error proofing strategy.
3. Explain which error proofing tool from
the list covered in this section is best
at identifying process errors.


Error Proofing
Section Objectives
Apply the steps in the error

proofing process.
Identify resources for correct site
assessment.

Error Proofing
Directions
Form table teams.
Review the scenario assigned by the instructor.
Draw further assumptions as if you were to assess
the plant.
Begin to complete the Global 8D.
Begin to complete the Process FMEA.
Recommend error proofing solutions.
Complete the Global 8D and Process FMEA.
Estimate the cost involved in your changes.
Prepare a presentation to the rest of the class
including flip chart diagrams of the work flow, total
cost of the solution, and other necessary details.

Error Proofing
Presentations
What is the situation?

What are the results of the FMEA and
G8D processes?
What were the error proofing processes
used?
What are the outputs of the solution?
How can this be applied to Site
Assessment?

Error Proofing
Section Summary
The steps in the error proofing

process
Resources for correct site
assessment

Course Summary

Error Proofing
Course Goal
The goal of the Error Proofing course

is to develop working knowledge of
error proofing to enable participants to
apply the concepts to site assessment
responsibilities.

Error Proofing
Course Objectives
1. Assess error proofing implementation at
a supplier site.
2. Identify error proofing opportunities
during site assessments.

Error Proofing
Section One Objectives

1. Distinguish between error proofing
and mistake proofing.
2. Evaluate error proofing devices.
3. Describe the process of implementing
error proofing devices.
4. Identify root cause in Global 8Ds and
FMEAs.
5. Explain the purpose and benefits of
using error proofing.

Error Proofing
Section Two Objectives
1. Identify when a site assessment

should occur.
2. Identify what should be
assessed.
3. Identify what questions should
be asked.

Error Proofing
Section Three Objectives

1. Identify error proofing devices.
2. Identify applications for error proofing
devices.
3. Identify how FMEAs are used in the
error proofing process.
4. Identify how G8Ds are used in the
error proofing process.
5. Identify questions to be asked during
an APQP review.

Error Proofing
Section Four Objectives
1. Define the steps in the error

proofing process.
2. Identify resources for correct site
assessment.

Error Proofing
Section Five Objectives
Identify the outputs for each error

proofing tool.
Identify appropriate error proofing
tool application for site
assessments.
Identify site assessment outputs.

Error Proofing
Site Assessment Requirements

The Q1 Site Assessment checklist
provides objective evidence that satisfies
the Q1 site expectations.
Suppliers are required to provide the
completed checklist to the responsible
STA engineer upon request.
Suppliers are required to keep the Q1 2002
Site Assessment checklist and
accompanying corrective action plans for
the prior 24 months.

Error Proofing
Course Agenda
Introduction
Definitions and Applications
Site Assessment
Tool Review
Course Summary

Error Proofing2011

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Error Proofing2011

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Error Proofing

© 2001 Ford Motor Company

Course beginning and end times

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-2

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-3

This course provides an introduction to

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-4

The goal of the Error Proofing course

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-5

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-6

The Need for Error Proofing

Error proofing is based on two

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-7

Error Proofing and Ford

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-8

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-9

Site Assessment Needs

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-10

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-11

© 2001 Ford Motor Company

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-13

Process Flow ERROR To Next Process

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-14

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-15

A defect is the result of any deviation

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-16

Errors vs. Defects

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-17

A process improvement designed

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-18

Error Proofing Example

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-19

Mistake Proofing Definition

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-20

Mistake Proofing Example

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-21

Prevention vs. Detection

Error Proofing Approaches

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-22

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-23

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-24

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-25

Computer Cable Connectors

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-26

Brainstorm lists of error proofing

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-27

A green stripe is on the limo wheel base, and

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-28

Example 2 – Canadian Stock

A piece of paper with a maple leaf covers

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-29

A stoplight indicates when it is safe to cross.

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-30

Screw Jig – Before

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-31

Screw Jig – After

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-32

Transmission Gasket– Before

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-33

Transmission Gasket – After

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-34

© 2001 Ford Motor Company Intro-35