California State University Northridge

Catapult Six Sigma Project

MSE-618 Six Sigma Quality Engineering
Proffessor: Jay Hamade

Team 1
Gina, Henry, Anusha, Harshitha, Alborz
 Agenda
� Define Phase

� Measure Phase

� Analyze Phase

� Improve Phase

� Control Phase

� Conclusion
 Define Phase

� PROBLEM STATEMENT

� PROBLEM OBJECTIVE

� SIPOC

� METRICS
 Define Phase
Problem Statement : In 2018, a company in California has received many customer
complaints, stating the dissatisfaction with the shooting range of catapult. The shooting range was
resulting as “63.7”, where the customer requirement was “67 ± 2”. Due to not meeting the
customers requirement, the profit of the company has decreased to 28% in 2018 compared to
2017. What: Quality - shooting range.

● What: Problem in the catapult shooting range.

● When: 2018
● Where: At a Company in California
● To what extent: Company sales and profit reduced to 28%.
● How do we know: Customer feedback and also based on 2017 financial report.

Problem Objective: Objective is to Increase the shooting distance of catapult from 63.7
to 67 ± 2, to meet the customer requirement. This increase will result in customer satisfaction and
also company sales by 40%
 SIPOC

SUPPLIE PROCES OUTPUT CUSTOME

INPUTS
S S S RS
• Hardware • Labor Establishing • Well • Customers
Supplies • Measuring designed and
(Lowe’s) tape Base catapult Feedback
• pins Sides • Quality
• 99 cents • Glue Fix Arm validation • Prof. Jay
• Blue print Moving Arm Hamade
• Home • Cannon
depot ball/Objects
• Elastic band
 METRICS

Primary metric: Distance between the catapult and where the objects
hits the ground.

Secondary metric: Height of catapult from the ground. It will be

constant.
 Measure Phase

� MSA ANALYSIS (using Gage R&R)

� NORMALITY ANALYSIS

� CAPABLITY ANALYSIS

� METRICS
 GAGE R&R RESULT

Total Gage R&R is 14.04%.

Total gage R&R is < part to part , so the system is
considered to be good.

Part to Part variation is 85.96. This is due to the

difference between parts.

Number of distinct categories is 4.

This should be ≥ 4. The system is considerable.
MSA ANALYSIS USING GAGE R&R
NORMALITY TEST

P-value > 0.05

0.159 > 0.05
The data is
normally
distributed
CAPABILITY
TEST

Our current data is

out of the
acceptable range
i.e. Cpk<1.33
-0.41<1.33
 METRICS: PRIMARY

• Distance Measured: We got

many variations in our
measured value .
Out of 30 shots we got
only 6 within target range.

• Average Distance : 63.97

• Upper Control Limit:69
• Lower Control Limit: 65

• Changes need to be
implemented to improve the
outcome so that the object lands
between the target LSL and
USL
 Analyze Phase

Cause & Failure Mode

Detailed Fishbone Effect
Effect Matrix Analysis
Process Map Diagram
(C&E) (FMEA)
 DETAILED PROCESS MAP

Outputs (Y’s) Outputs (Y’s) Outputs (Y’s) Outputs

• Finished • Attached • Attached Fix (Y’s)
Base Sides Arm Catapult

Start Base Sides Fixed Arm Moving Arm End

Inputs (x’s) Inputs (x’s) Inputs (x’s) Inputs (x’s)

• Wood (C) • Tools (S) • Wood (C) • Assembled base and fixed arms (C)
• Blueprint (S) • Labor (N) • Base and Sides (C) • Sides (C)
• Tools (S) • Base (C) • Labor (N) • Tools (S)
• Labor (N) • Blueprint (S) • Pins (C) • Pins (C)
• Supplier (C) • Cut wood Pieces (C) • Tools (S) • Labor (N)
• Rubber Band (S)
• Wood Pieces (C)
 FISHBONE DIAGRAM
• Elasticity of Band (N) • Temperature (S)
• Loose base (S) • Wind (N)
• Position of launching catapult (C) • Brightness (N)
• Pin location of Fixed Arm (C) • Humidity (N)
• Pin location of Moving Arm (C)

Machine Environment

Shooting Range

Material Methods
People

• Wood quality (S) • Measurers (N) • Measuring Process (C)

• Measuring tape (S)
• Aluminum foil (C)
• Rubber band (N)
• Pins (C)
• Shooting Objects (C)
• Shooter(N) • Shooting angle (C)
• Quality inspectors (N) • Placement and holding of the shooting object (C)
• Lack of training (C) • Height of the Catapult (C)
• Rubber band position
CAUSE AND EFFECT MATRIX
FAILURE MODE EFFECT ANALYSIS
(FMEA)
 Improve phase
▪ DOE SETUP
▪ PARETO CHART
▪ NORMAL PLOT
▪ MAIN EFFECTS PLOT
▪ INTERACTION PLOT
▪ CUBE PLOT
▪ OPTIMIZATION PLOT
DESIGN OF EXPERIMENT
✔ Full Factorial – 3 factors
✔ Total Measurements : 2^3 = 8
PARETO CHART

• The Pareto chart shows that

Factor ‘A’ ,Moving Arm has
the largest effect in reaching the
target distance significantly

• From the chart we can see that

the combination of all factors
has the effect on the experiment
NORMALITY CHART

• The normal plot shows

which factor has a major
influence on the target
distance.
 FACTORIAL PLOTS

• These plots show the effect of

changing the Angle and the pins
on the moving arm and fixed arm

• From the plot we can see that the

angle has the major effect on
achieving the target distance, and
then the position of the pin on
the moving arm and fixed arm
 INTERACTION PLOT
• This plot helps us look at the
interaction between the 3 sources of
error

• If there is no interaction between the

factors, then the lines are almost
parallel

• Moving Arm and Pin on Moving

arm has interaction with each other.

• Moving Arm A and Pin on Fixed

arm has interaction which each
other.
CUBE PLOT

� Relationship between Factors and

factors
� The most effective way of reaching
the target distance is
� Moving Arm Angle – 180 Degrees
� Pin on Moving Arm – 4
� Pin on Fixed Arm – 1
� With this combination we are right
on target in reaching the Customer
specification
 RESPONSE OPTIMIZER

Optimal solution

Moving Arm Pin on Moving Arm Pin on Fixed Arm

180 4 1
 Control phase
� Xbar – R Chart

� I-MR Chart

� Improved Process Normality plot

� Improved Process Capability plot

METRIC CHART
I MR Chart and Xbar and R Chart
 Comparison
Before After

Cpk = -0.41
Cpk = 1.11
 Learnings
� The DMAIC process of Six
sigma helped to bring the out of
spec and out of control Catapult
to with in specification and
operating consistently
� Moving angle and pin location
has major effect in reaching the
customer specification
� Using this set up , we could see a
Sigma shift of -1.29 to 3.29
 Conclusion
� Reduction in process variation.

� Objective to decrease the catapult shooting distance from 63.7 to 67”

± 2” to meet the customer requirements has met. This will result in
customer satisfaction and improve company sales by 40%.

� Improved Cpk from – 0.41 to 1.11.

� Increased company efficiency and effectiveness.

� Designed a Statistical process Control to sustain the implemented

improvements.

� Recommends future six sigma project to look at the special and

common causes of variation to further improve the process capability.
Thank you for listening!

Questions?