Annexure A Customer End Line Rejection Reduction in Hyundai i20 RR FLR Assy.

BITS ZC423T: Project Work

By

S Rengarajan
200918TS148

Project Work carried out at

Sungwoo Gestamp Hitech (Chennai) Ltd Irungakkatukottai, Chennai

BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & SCIENCE PILANI (RAJASTHAN Mar2012

Page - 1 - of 64

Annexure B Customer End Line Rejection Reduction in Hyundai i20 RR FLR Assy.
BITS ZC423T: Project Work

By

S Rengarajan
200918TS148

Project Work carried out at

Sungwoo Gestamp Hitech (Chennai) Ltd Irungakkatukottai, Chennai

Submitted in partial fulfilment of B.S. Engineering Technology Degree Programme

Under the Supervision of

M.S. Balajee, Deputy General Manager Sungwoo Gestamp Hitech (Chennai) Ltd
Irungakkatukottai, Chennai

BIRLA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY & SCIENCE PILANI (RAJASTHAN) Mar2012

Page - 2 - of 64

Certificate

Page - 3 - of 64

Page - 4 - of 64

Page - 5 - of 64

Evaluation Sheet

Page - 6 - of 64

Page - 7 - of 64

Abstract

Page - 8 - of 64

Page - 9 - of 64

Acknowledgement

Page - 10 - of 64

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am deeply indebted to Mr. C.S. Kim, General Manager (Quality) for having given me an opportunity to work on this project.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my project supervisor cum mentor Mr. M.S. Balajee, Deputy General Manager, SGH and to my additional examiner Mr G.Giridharan Senior Manager, Head - Production Dept, SGH. I acknowledge their valuable suggestions throughout the course of this project work. It is worth mentioning that without their guidance and help, the completion of the project would have not been possible.

I would like to express my sincere thanks to Prof. S Gurunarayanan Dean WILPD BITS and Dr. G Venkiteswaran Asst Dean for the opportunity given to present the project successfully.

Also I am very much appreciating the extended support rendered by Mr. S Dhanasekar, Asst Manager Production, Mr. K Ramesh, Dy. Manager Quality, N Gobikrishnan, Sr.Engineer Quality, Mr. P. Venkatesan, Sr.Engineer Quality for their enthusiastic cooperation, without which the project would not have been successful. Finally I wish to express my sincere thanks to people contributed directly & indirectly for the successful completion of this project.

S Rengarajan

Page - 11 - of 64

Abbreviations (Key words)

Annexure - II
Page - 12 - of 64

ABBREVIATIONS
MNC ISO TS - Multinational Company - International Standard Organization - Technical Specification

OHSAS - Occupational Health and Safety Assessment System NABL - National Accreditation Board for Laboratories QC MNT PED TQM TPM MTBF HMI HMC SGH - Quality Control Department - Maintenance Department - Production Engineering Department - Total Quality Management - Total Productivity Maintenance Mean Time between Failures - Hyundai Motor India Ltd - Hyundai Motor Company Sungwoo Gestamp Hitech (Chennai) Ltd

RR FLR Rear Floor Assy QTR RH LH Assembly Quarter complete Right hand side Left hand side

COPQ Cost of Poor Quality B/D Breakdown

X- Matrix Policy matrix UOM - Unit of measurement

Page - 13 - of 64

PQCDMS Production, Quality, Cost, Delivery, Morale & Safety PPM 4M 1E KA mm Nm L/ + Rej. Drg 2D Parts Per Million (Defective parts) - Man. Machine. Method & Material - Environment - Kilo Amphere - Millimetre - Newton Meter - Coordinate L (Y-Axis) - Rejection - Drawing - 2 Dimensional

Page - 14 - of 64

Table of Contents

Page - 15 - of 64

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter Unit
Introduction 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 2.1 2 2.2 2.3 2.4 Analysis 3.1 3 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 Action 4 4.1 4.2 Check 5.1 5 5.2 5.3 5.4 6 Evaluation of results Cost analysis Scope for Horizontal deployment Benefits Development of solutions for root causes Trial implementation Cause & Effect Diagram - Level 1 Gemba Audit Cause & Effect Diagram Level 2 Validation & Root Cause Identification Cause & Effect Diagram Level -3 Company profile Our Major Customers Organization structure Responsibilities of Quality Head Production shops in SGH Process Flow of Operations SGHs understanding of TQM Introduction to the project Plan of Work Theme & Target Current level of rejection Observation Collect & Analyze data Understanding the Phenomena Defect generating & Revealing area

Title

Page No.
20 21 23 24 25 26 27 27 29 32 32 33 34 34 35 35 36 37 37 38 38 41 42 43 43 49 50 51 51 52 53 54 57 58 58 59 61 63

Observation

Standardisation 6.1 Standardisation

Resolution of results 7 8 9 10 7.1 7.2 Upadated planning sheet Used QC tools & Techniques

Bibliography Conclusion Checklist

Page - 16 - of 64

List of Figures & Tables

Page - 17 - of 64

LIST OF FIGURES
List of Figures
Fig. 1 Fig. 2 Fig. 3 Fig. 4 Fig. 5 Fig. 6 Fig. 7 Fig. 8 Fig. 9 Fig. 10

Details
SGH Chennai Plant Products View Major customers SGH Organisation Structure Press shop Weld shop Process Flow of Operations Understanding the phenomena Robot programme master Weld bolt drawing

Chapter
1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 6 6

Page No.
21 23 23 24 26 26 27 35 54 55

LIST OF TABLES
List of tables
Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9 Table 10 Table 11 Table 12 Table 13 Table 14 Table 15 Table 16 Table 17 Table 18 Table 19 Table 20 Table 21 Table 22 Table 23 X-Matrix Planning Schedule Theme and target i20 RR FLR Assy Customer end line rejection trend i20-RR FLR Assy Rejection Defect Pareto Defect generating & Revealing area Cause & Effect Diagram Level-1 Audit sheet Cause & Effect Diagram Level - 2 Validation of root cause - 1 Validation of root cause -2 Validation of root cause -3 Validation of root cause -4 Validation of root cause -5 Validation of root cause - 6 Cause & Effect Diagram Level-3 Tree diagram for development of solution Trial implementation results - 1 Trial implementation results - 2 Trial implementation results - 3 Good & Bad analysis table Trial implementation results - 4 1 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4

Details
Customer end line rejection Stratification of all part-wise

Chapter
1

Page No.
31 31 32 32 34 34 35 37 37 38 38 39 39 40 40 41 41 43 43 44 44 45 45

Page - 18 - of 64

List of tables
Table 24 Table 25 Table 26 Table 27 Table 28 Table 29 Table 30 Table 31 Table 32 Table 33 Table 34 Table 35 Table 36 Table 37 Table 38 Table 39

Details
Stud separation Rejection Trend chart Comparative Pareto Before Vs After Kaizen sheet Sub-Part miss phenomena Kaizen sheet Nut hard entry phenomena QC Story at a glance Target Vs Actual comparison graph Overall customer rejection of i20 - RR FLR Cost incurred analysis Horizontal deployment parts Cost saving details table Standardisation plan Master Spares list Standardization summary HODs feedback Updated Gantt chart Used QC tools & Techniques

Chapter
4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7

Page No.
46 46 47 47 48 50 50 51 51 52 54 55 56 56 58 58

Page - 19 - of 64

Chapter-1. Introduction

Page - 20 - of 64

About the organization 1.1. Company profile:

Fig.1: SGH Chennai Plant

1. Background
Sungwoo Gestamp Hitech Limited (SGH) is one of the largest automotive components manufacturing group in worldwide with total sales revenue of more than Rupees 8,000 crores. The group has been able to achieve this pre-eminence in view of its commitment to the cherished values of promoting trust, value and customer service.

2. The company
Sungwoo Gestamp Hitech (Chennai) Limited (SGH), is one the Korean based company located in Irungakkatukottai near Chennai, Tamilnadu.

Page - 21 - of 64

M/s Sungwoo Hitech Korean based company having collaboration with M/s.Gestamp, Spain.

Sungwoo Hitech has 16 manufacturing, Technical and Administrative facilities in 6 countries.

SGH, Irungakkatukottai division produces sheet metal bodies for various automobile applications and supplying to the following automobile OEM customers. Hyundai Motor India Ltd, Ford India Ltd, Ashok Leyland Ltd, Tata Johnson Ltd.

SGH, Chennai plant have 20 heavy duty and light duty application Presses and fully Automized welding facilities to meet the car body and various auto applications.

It is ISO/TS16949 certified company, proving its quality of supply with all of its customers. Every employee is the responsible for the quality of component produced. Quality is assured in the every sphere of Operation.

Even though the stamping and welding Operations are involved with Dust and Noise, SGH has proved its best in the way of controlling parameters affecting the environment and certified for ISO 14001 and ISO 18001.

Page - 22 - of 64

Our Products:

Fig 2: Products View

1.2 Our Major Customers:

Fig. 3: Major customers

Page - 23 - of 64

1.3 Organization structure:

Chairman

Managing Director

Vice president

Materials

PPE

Production

QC

Finance

HR & IR

GM - QC

Head - QC

Team Leader QC HMI

Team Leader QC Ford

A - Shift Incharge

B - Shift Incharge

C - Shift Incharge

A - Shift Incharge

B - Shift Incharge

C - Shift Incharge

Inspectors

Inspectors

Inspectors

Inspectors

Inspectors

Inspectors

Fig. 4: SGH Organisation Structure

Page - 24 - of 64

1.4 Responsibilities of Quality Head:

As a Head of Quality Control Department, the following are my responsibilities:
Prepare and adhere departmental target, policy and individual goal setting. Ensure adherence to Customer requirements Ensure adherence to quality systems Sustain and reduce process rejections Corrective actions for abnormalities Driving the team and correct abnormalities Daily PDCA of all aspects Customer complaint handling Process capability improvement Process audits Product audits New product development Improve customer satisfaction Reduce customer rejections Reduce scrap cost Manpower planning and controlling Motivate the team members for improvements and cost reduction activities

Page - 25 - of 64

1.5. Production Shops in SGH

PRESS SHOP WELDING SHOP

1.5.1 Press Shop

Fig. 5: Press shop

In Press Shop all the sheet metal panels, like, the floor, doors, roof, fenders, hood and tailgate of a car are produced using equipment like Blanking Line, Tandem press line etc., these panels are stored in pallet and send to the Welding shop for assembling.

1.5.2. Welding Shop

Fig. 6: Weld shop

The major process of an automotive body is electric resistance welding. Welded sub- Assy parts are sent to customer after de-burring and final inspection.

Page - 26 - of 64

1.6. Process Flow of Operations:

Fig. 7: Process Flow of Operations

1.7. SGHs Understanding of TQM:

Page - 27 - of 64

Project Introduction

Page - 28 - of 64

1.8. Introduction to the project:

Globalization of automotive industry in India, an era of high quality at low cost has become the motive of all the automobile manufacturers. Sungwoo Gestamp Hitech (SGH) is being the Major supplier source for Hyundai Motor India Limited for all types of Sheet metal Car Body products for i10, i20, Santro, Accent, Verna, Eon Model passenger cars. We are required to work hand in hand with our customer to work for their goal.

The major challenges to achieve the motto of customer satisfaction are quality and cost which in turn are interrelated. At present we are facing major problem with Customer in Hyundai i20 RR FLR Assy sheet metal car body part. Hyundai i20 RR FLR Assy is having a heavy rejection due to Stud

separation in customers vehicle assembly shop. This is directly has the impact on customer capacity / productivity on some occasion leads to vehicle production line stoppages and field failures.

As our customer commits zero defect at assembly to their customers, rejection elimination becomes the ultimate goal for Sungwoo Gestamp Hitech Limited (SGH). SGH manufactures and supplies RR FLR Assy for i20 passenger car to Hyundai Motor India Ltd (HMIL). This model was introduced in 2009. The daily customer requirement is 400 Nos per day. And SGH is the single source supplier for this component. This sub- Assy part is supplied in De-burred and stacked condition free from Aesthetics dent & Damage free and appearance within acceptable level. HMIL carry out Body assembling, painting, Vehicle assembly, Pre-Delivery Inspection.

Page - 29 - of 64

Customer has the Assembly shop with the capacity of 408 Nos only per day with a defect level of 2% rework / rejection. Considering customer constraints on their assembly line quality requirements becomes important for SGH to focus their product to achieve customer requirement in this stipulated time. Therefore I have chosen this project as part of my studies in BITS.

This project is highly important because of the following reasons.

Q - Reducing rejection at customer end is our departmental goal

(< 300 PPM) - Our Customer Vision is Zero Defect Vehicle

- High rejection leads to cost loss (Rs 7 Lakhs / Annum)

D - Single source supplier to the customer.

The project background area as follows i20 - RR FLR Assy rejection contributes to 30% of the total rejection leads to customers line capacity loss. Hyundai i20 RR FLR Assy rejection is high in model wise also.

Page - 30 - of 64

Background of the Problem:

Table 1: Customer end line rejection Stratification of all part-wise

Inference:
i20 - RR FLR Assy contributes to 30% of the total rejection at Customer end. Customer end line rejection directly affects the business opportunity of SGH.

Inference:
Departmental target is to reduce i20 - RR FLR Assy from 3000 to 30 PPM

Page - 31 - of 64

1.9. Plan of Work:

7 Steps of Problem methodology is adopted to solve our issue as,
Sl No. Week number (2011 - 12) Jan'12 Feb'12 Dec'11
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4

Step

Mar'12
1 2 3

Plan Actual Plan 2 Observation Actual Plan 3 Analysis Actual Plan 4 Action Actual Plan 5 Check Actual Plan 6 Standardisation Actual Plan 7 Conclusion Actual Plan 8 Presentation Actual 1 Problem
Table 2: Planning Schedule

1.10. Theme & Target:

Table 3: Theme and target

Page - 32 - of 64

Chapter-2. Observation

Page - 33 - of 64

2.1. Current level of rejection

Table 4: i20 RR FLR Assy Customer end line rejection trend

Inference: i20- RR FLR rejection is fluctuating which shows variation in 4M

conditions.

2.2. Observation Collect & Analyze data

Table 5: i20-RR FLR Assy Customer end line rejection Defect Pareto

Inference: Stud separation defect contributing 87% of the rejection is taken

for 4M condition analysis.

Page - 34 - of 64

2.3. Understanding the Phenomena:

Fig. 8: Understanding the phenomena

2.4. Defect generating & Revealing area:

Table 6: Defect generating & Revealing area

Inference: Process flow showing the defect generating in SGH

(Inhouse) & Revealing area in HMI (Customer end).

Page - 35 - of 64

Chapter-3. Analysis

Page - 36 - of 64

3.1 Cause & Effect Diagram - Level 1:

Table 7: Cause & Effect Diagram Level-1

Inference: All the probable causes are categorized under 4 Ms and 1 E.

3.2. Gemba Audit:

Table 8: Audit sheet

Inference: Based on the Gemba audit, the probable causes are listed
Page - 37 - of 64

3.3. Cause & Effect Diagram Level 2:

Table 9: Cause & Effect Diagram Level - 2

Inference: All the probable causes are categorized under 4 Ms and 1 E

3.4. Validation & Root Cause Identification:

Table 10: Validation of root cause - 1

Inference: Stud welding on the already spot welded surface

Significant to the phenomena

Page - 38 - of 64

Table 11: Validation of root cause - 2

Inference: Welding current parameter found to be within specification

Insignificant to the phenomena

Table 12: Validation of root cause - 3

Inference: No variation in gap between panel & sustainer Insignificant to the phenomena
Page - 39 - of 64

Table 13: Validation of root cause - 4

Inference: Chemical composition found to be within specification

Insignificant to the phenomena

Table 14: Validation of root cause - 5

Inference: Stud and panel not perpendicular

Significant to the phenomena

Page - 40 - of 64

Table 15: Validation of root cause - 6

Inference: Wrong selection of stud head type

Significant to the phenomena

3.5. Cause & Effect Diagram Level -3:

Table 16: Cause & Effect Diagram Level -3

Inference: All the 3 Root causes are categorized under 4 Ms + 1E

Page - 41 - of 64

Chapter-4. Action

Page - 42 - of 64

4.1. Development of solutions for root causes:

Table 17: Tree diagram for development of solution

Inference: Various possible solutions have been developed for the identified
root causes. Those are to be tried out and validated.

4.2. Trial implementation:

Table 18: Trial implementation results - 1

Inference: Repositioning of welded spot resulting reduction in stud

separation from 3000 to 1600 PPM.
Page - 43 - of 64

Table 19: Trial implementation results - 2

Inference: By maintaining the stud perpendicularity rejection has been

reduced from 1600 to 1100 PPM.

Table 20: Trial implementation results - 3

Inference: By converting the stud head type from PIP to conical type
rejection has been reduced from 1100 to 700 PPM. But the rejection level has not reduced and still gap in the target to the actual, which has trigged for innovative thinking.
Page - 44 - of 64

Alternate types of studs were analyzed and the results are shown here.

Table 21: Good & Bad analysis table

Inference: From the comparison table, Weld bolt is recommended to

increase strength.

Table 22: Trial implementation results 4

Inference: Welded bolt is withstood to the strength of 320 Nm against the

stud strength of 150 Nm. Hence the customer end rejection has been reduced to 30 PPM.
Page - 45 - of 64

Table 23: Stud separation Rejection Trend chart

Inference: By implementing all the above actions the stud separation

rejection at customer end has been reduced from 3000 PPM to 30 PPM.

Table 24: Comparative Pareto Before Vs After

Inference: From the comparative Pareto, it is clear that the Stud

separation has been shifted from first major rejection to third position. Further reduction of rejection, Sub-part miss & Nut hard entry phenomenas have been taken for corrective action. From the learning of the analysis, the sub-part miss phenomenon is resolved and which has been explained through this Kaizen sheet.
Page - 46 - of 64

Table 25: Kaizen sheet Sub-Part miss phenomena

Inference: By providing the proximity sensor, subpart miss eliminated.

Table 26: Kaizen sheet Nut hard entry phenomena

Inference: Next phenomena of nut hard entry have been eliminated by

providing the tooling pin in the welding jig.
Page - 47 - of 64

Table 27: QC Story at a glance

Inference: All the root causes and countermeasures are summarized

with merits and demerits. By carrying out all the activities, we could achieve the i20- RR FLR Assy customer end rejection from 3000 PPM to 210 PPM against the target of 300 PPM by Feb2012. As the tryouts are in giving positive result, they have been implemented permanently.

Page - 48 - of 64

Chapter-5. Check

Page - 49 - of 64

5.1. Evaluation of results:

Table 28: Target Vs Actual comparison graph

Table 29: Overall customer rejection of i20 - RR FLR

Inference: i20 RR FLR Assy customer end rejection has been reduced. I
am proud to express that the target of reducing the rejection from 3000 PPM to 210 PPM has been achieved.

Page - 50 - of 64

5.2 Cost analysis:

Table 30: Cost incurred analysis

Inference: Total cost spent for this project is Rs 3600 / - One time for the
purchase of materials and die correction. Internal manual work content is not accounted for cost calculation purpose.

5.3. Scope for Horizontal deployment:

Table 31: Horizontal deployment parts

Inference: Improvements are deployed horizontal for the possible model & parts.
Page - 51 - of 64

5.4. Benefits:

Table 32: Cost saving details table

Inference: Tangible benefits from this project are evaluated in terms of

PQCDMS. Intangible benefits are as follows. Knowledge level improved by challenging die design flaw. Innovative thinking gives good result. Learnt about importance of the team work. Doing things in different way. Success inspires to aim higher.
Page - 52 - of 64

Chapter - 6 Standardisation

Page - 53 - of 64

6.1. Standardisation:

Table 33: Standardisation plan

Inference: To sustain the improvements forever, Updation plan is

scheduled with target dates in the relevant documents / Programme masters.

Fig. 9: Robot programme master

Inference: Robot programmes have been updated in Programme

master vide (i20/RR FLR/ A03 Stn / MNT/2012-1).

Page - 54 - of 64

Fig. 10: Weld bolt drawing

Inference: Stud drawing has been replaced with Bolt drawing.

Table 34: Master Spares list

Inference: All the newly introduced parts are included in the Spares list.
Page - 55 - of 64

Table 35: Standardization summary

Inference: All the standardization documents are summarized.

Table 36: HODs feedback

Inference: Approval and feedback comments are obtained from all

departments HODs.
Page - 56 - of 64

Chapter-7. Resolution of results

Page - 57 - of 64

7.1. Upadated planning sheet

Table 37: Updated Gantt chart

Inference: Planning sheet is compared with the actual.

7.2. Used QC tools & Techniques

Table 38: Used QC tools & Techniques

Inference: All the 7 QC tools and 7 techniques are used for this project.
Page - 58 - of 64

Chapter-8. Bibliography

Page - 59 - of 64

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Mahadevan, B. Operations Management: Theory and Practice, 2th Ed., Pearson Education, 2010.

Rusell, R.S. & Taylor, B.W., Operations Management, Wiley Student Edition, 6th Ed., 2009

Arnold, J.R. Tony & others, Introduction to Materials Management, Pearson Education, 6th Edition, 2007.

Callister & R. Balasubramaniam, Materials Science and Engineering, WSE, 7th Edition, 2007.

Rangan C.S., et. al., Instrumentation Devices and Systems, Tata McGraw Hill, 1st Edition, 1989

Rudramurthy, Quality Control, Assurance & Reliability,Pearson Edition, 2001.

Rowe, Richard, and Larry Jeffus. The Essential Welder: Gas Metal Arc Welding Classroom Manual. Albany: Delmar, 2000 William L. Galvery and Frank B. Marlow, Welding Essentials: Questions & Answers, Second edition, Industrial Press 2006 (336 pages) Citation

Kles weman, Welding processes handbook, St.Lucie Press : 2003

Regis Blondeau, Metallurgy and Mechanics of welding: Processes and industrial applications International Scientific and Technical Encyclopedia 2008

Websites

www.weldingtechnology.org www.efunda.com/processes/metal_processing/welding.cfm
Page - 60 - of 64

Chapter-9. Conclusion

Page - 61 - of 64

9.0 CONCLUSION:
By implementing this project we are extremely satisfied and happy about the outcome of this project work which enabled a rejection reduction at customer end by implementing the actions to overcome the root cause. We also more satisfied with corrective actions has been effectively implemented and adhered and the results are consistent and reliable.

Further improvement was achieved with the reduction of in house rejection. It has also reduces the cost of the rejection and satisfying the customer through Nil customer complaints good Quality parts and timely delivery of pats to them.

This same kind of project can be horizontally deployed in all the parts with desire process modification. The TPM QM 8 Step Methodology of this project is very attractive and we suggest that similar kind of projects would help any management in reducing its overheads.

It only increases the effectiveness of the project through mandatory participation and continuously strives to achieve excellence in each of the following area.

Quality Cost Health & Safety Morale

Beyond the theory I have engaged with data collection, training of operators, creating formulae for monitoring the results, data analysis and problem solving by team approach. In this project, the following learnings were made: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Systematic approach leads to better understanding and yields a better result. Usage of technology helped in achieving the targets. Team work yields the best result. Able to reach the customer expectations within time limit. It will be helpful in Launching of the new product at the least rejection levels.

Page - 62 - of 64

Chapter-10. Checklist

Page - 63 - of 64

Page - 64 - of 64