Implementing Six Sigma Quality

at Better Body Manufacturing

D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control
 Overview D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

ABC Incorporated (ABC) is not achieving Six Sigma quality levels for all critical
Body-Side Sub-Assembly dimensions as requested by their customers.
200000
Dimension DPM DPM
ASM_7Y 172475 150000

ASM_8Y 85824 100000

ASM_3Y 19786 50000
ASM_9Y 3874
0

ASM _10Y
ASM_10Y 776

ASM _8Y

ASM _3Y

ASM _9Y

ASM _6Y
ASM _7Y
ASM_6Y 4

Ensure that all critical body-side subassembly dimensions are within Six Sigma
quality levels of  3.4 DPM. Cp 2.0 and Cpk 1.67.

• Determined the correlation between body side and assembly dimensions.

• Evaluated the significance of Tonnage > 935 for ASM_7Y & ASM_8Y.
• Conducted a DOE for Clamp position for ASM_9Y & ASM_10Y.

• Change tonnage to > 935 to correct ASM_7Y and ASM_8Y

• Set clamp position to location 2 for ASM_9Y and ASM_10Y
• Re-machine A-pillar die to correct A_3Y and ASM_3Y 2
 Problem Statement & The Goal D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

ABC Incorporated’s customer wants ABC to apply Six Sigma problem solving
methodology to insure that the body side subassembly is achieving Six Sigma quality
levels of less than 3.4 defects per million for all critical body side subassembly
dimensions.

ABC needs an improvement strategy that minimizes the rework costs while achieving the
desired quality objective. ABC’s goal is to produce module subassemblies that meet the
customer requirements and not necessarily to insure that every individual stamped
component within the assembly meets it original print specifications – sub-system
optimizations vs. local optimization.
A-Pillar B-Pillar
Reinforcement Body Side Outer Reinforcement

+
+

3
 Measure Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Key Variables:
Assembly process variables:
Weld Pattern (density), Clamp Location, and Clamp Weld Pressure
Stamping process variables (body side):
Press Tonnage, Die Cushion Pressure, Material Thickness

Body Assembly Dimensions ASM_1Y through ASM_10Y

Assembly Dimensions with Highest
200000

Defects 172475
DPM

150000

100000 85824

50000

19786

3874
776
4
0
ASM_7Y ASM_8Y ASM_3Y ASM_9Y ASM_10Y ASM_6Y
4
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Resolution alternatives (based upon past experience):

1. Make adjustments to assembly process settings
2. Reduce variation of components through better control of stamping
process input variables
3. Rework stamping dies to shift component mean deviation that is off
target and causing assembly defects
Target Performance Level:
All ten critical assembly dimensions at Six Sigma quality level of  3.4 DPM.
Cp 2.0 and Cpk 1.67

Fish Bone and P-Diagrams:

Understanding potential causes of defects. From this we pick the assembly and
component dimensions that require further analysis

5
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Environment
Quality
Component Temperature Operator
Variability

Inspection Humidity Training

Process Gage R&R
Body
Assembly
Clamp Weld Yield Die Cushion
Pressure Weld Pattern Strength Pressure
(density) Material
Thickness
Elastic Press
Clamp Limit Tonnage
Location Materials Machine
Methods

For our analysis we will do a DOE to check Control Variables

for levels that contribute to better quality Clamp Location Press Tonnage
product. Weld Density Die Pressure Clamp
Pressure

Inputs Outputs
Body Side Sub-Assembly
Material Thickness Body Side Sub-Assemblies at
Stamping Process
Yield Strength Six Sigma quality levels

Error States
Noise Variables
Dimensional
Environment defects
Inherent Variation

6
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Analysis of ASM_7Y and ASM_8Y

Conclusion: BS_7Y and ASM_7Y are following a similar trend.

A correlation chart to study this further shows high correlation.
(Pearson correlation, R of 0.701).

7
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Capability of B_7Y Capability of BS_7Y

0 DPM 698416 DPM

Conclusion: B_7Y has 0 ppm compared to ~700K

DPM in BS_7Y.
Furthermore, BS_7Y shows strong correlation on
dimension ASM_7Y. (Pearson correlation, R of
0.786).
8
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

XY Plot of Tonnage vs. BS_7Y

Conclusion: Tonnage values above 935 greatly improves BS_7Y and brings it
closer to the mean. Let’s see what impact this has on ASM dimensions 7Y, 8Y, 9Y,
and 10Y by creating a subset of the data looking only at Tonnage > 935.
9
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Impact this has on ASM dimensions 7Y, 8Y, 9Y & 10Y on Tonnage
Capability Analysis of ASM_7Y at Tonnage > 935 Capability Analysis of ASM_8Y at Tonnage > 935

LSL USL LSL USL

Process Data Process Data
USL 1.00 USL 1.00000
Within Within
Target * Target *
LSL -1.00 Overall LSL -1.00000 Overall
Mean 0.09 Mean -0.12833
Sample N 12 Sample N 12
StDev (Within) 0.163174 StDev (Within) 0.101825
StDev (Overall) 0.147855 StDev (Overall) 0.089161

Potential (Within) Capability Potential (Within) Capability

Cp 2.04 Cp 3.27
CPU 1.86 CPU 3.69
CPL 2.23 CPL 2.85
Cpk 1.86 Cpk 2.85

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
Cpm * Cpm *

Overall Capability Observed Performance Exp. "Within" Performance Exp. "Overall" Performance Overall Capability Observed Performance Exp. "Within" Performance Exp. "Overall" Performance
Pp 2.25 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.00 Pp 3.74 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.00
PPU 2.05 PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 0.01 PPM > USL 0.00 PPU 4.22 PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 0.00
PPL 2.46 PPM Total 0.00 PPM Total 0.01 PPM Total 0.00 PPL 3.26 PPM Total 0.00 PPM Total 0.00 PPM Total 0.00
Ppk 2.05 Ppk 3.26

Capability Analysis of ASM_9Y at Tonnage > 935 Capability Analysis of ASM_10Y at Tonnage > 935

LSL USL LSL USL

Process Data Process Data
USL 1.00000 USL 1.00
Within Within
Target * Target *
LSL -1.00000 Overall LSL -1.00 Overall
Mean 0.52083 Mean 0.39
Sample N 12 Sample N 12
StDev (Within) 0.206010 StDev (Within) 0.215541
StDev (Overall) 0.177098 StDev (Overall) 0.187663

Potential (Within) Capability Potential (Within) Capability

Cp 1.62 Cp 1.55
CPU 0.78 CPU 0.94
CPL 2.46 CPL 2.15
Cpk 0.78 Cpk 0.94

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 -1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0
Cpm * Cpm *

Overall Capability Observed Performance Exp. "Within" Performance Exp. "Overall" Performance Overall Capability Observed Performance Exp. "Within" Performance Exp. "Overall" Performance
Pp 1.88 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.00 Pp 1.78 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.00
PPU 0.90 PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 10010.77 PPM > USL 3408.51 PPU 1.08 PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 2326.72 PPM > USL 576.00
PPL 2.86 PPM Total 0.00 PPM Total 10010.77 PPM Total 3408.51 PPL 2.47 PPM Total 0.00 PPM Total 2326.72 PPM Total 576.00
Ppk 0.90 Ppk 1.08

Conclusion: Setting Tonnage to greater than 935 resulted in ASM_7Y and ASM_8Y
meeting the goal of <3.4 DPM. ASM_9Y and ASM_10Y require further analysis.
10
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

DOE for Response Variable ASM_9Y

• DOE factorial analysis shows Clamp Position is the only significant factor in
determining ASM_9Y dimension
Input Variable Proposed ASM_9Y Setting Proposed ASM_10Y Setting
  Clamp Location Location 2 Location 2
Weld Density (welds per X inches) 1.33 1.33
Clamp Pressure 2100 psi 2100 psi

DOE Response Optimization for ASM_9Y

• Set Clamp Position to Location 2 (level 1)
• Optimizer recommends setting Weld Density to 1.33 weld per inch (level 1),

but this appears to be a robust parameter, which could be changed for the benefit
of process without reducing quality if processing time or cost shows a benefit.
• Optimizer recommends setting Clamp Pressure to 2100 psi (level 1), but this

appears to be a robust parameter, which could be changed for the benefit of process
without reducing quality if processing time or cost shows a benefit.
• Run additional tests at recommended settings to confirm results
• Weld Density and Clamp Pressure are robust parameters and can be set to optimize

the process capability to maximum level and lowest cost. 11

 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

DOE for Response Variable ASM_10Y

• DOE factorial analysis shows Clamp Position is also the only significant

factor in determining ASM_10Y dimension

 
DOE Response Optimization for ASM_10Y
• Setting clamp to location 2 also improves ASM_10Y

• Recommend same settings used to improve ASM_9Y to improve process

capability which also allows for no changes to machine setup and helps reduce
possible process concerns
• Run additional tests at recommended settings to confirm results

• Weld Density and Clamp Pressure are robust parameters and can be set to optimize

the process capability to maximum level and lowest cost.

12
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

DOE for Response Variable ASM_3Y

• DOE factorial analysis shows that no factors are significant

• Response Optimization shows no solution for response optimizer

Observe Process Capability of A_3Y and BS_3Y

• ASM_3Y and A_3Y have a similar mean shift in the -Y direction

Correlation of Output Variables

• No dimensional correlations appear to exist between ASM_3Y and

A_3Y or BS_3Y

Stepwise Regression Analysis of BS_3Y

• Tonnage and Die Pressure appear to be significant in determining

dimension BS_3Y
• Tonnage values < 920 may improve BS_3Y

• Die Pressure appears to have no clear correlation to BS_3Y

13
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Process Capability of BS_ 3Y and ASM_3Y at Tonnage < 920

• Created subset of body data looking only at dimensions with Tonnage < 935
• Tonnage < 920 appears to improve the mean of BS_3Y slightly, but has no
impact on improving the mean of ASM_3Y.
Capability Analysis of ASM_3Y
Die remachined to move mean +0.80

Capability of A_3Y and ASM_3Y with +0.80 USL

Process Data
1
LSL USL

Within

mm mean offset
Target *
LSL -1 Overall
Mean 0
Sample N 36
StDev (Within) 0.0851436
StDev (Overall) 0.0971725

•Manipulate data for A_3Y and ASM_3Y Potential (Within) Capability

Cp 3.91

by +0.80 mm to simulate re-machining CPU

CPL
Cpk
3.91
3.91
3.91

-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0

Cpm *

Process capability shows 0 defects for

Overall Capability Observed Performance Exp. "Within" Performance Exp. "Overall" Performance
• Pp 3.43 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.00
PPU 3.43 PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 0.00

A_3Y and ASM_3Y with this mean offset

PPL 3.43 PPM Total 0.00 PPM Total 0.00 PPM Total 0.00
Ppk 3.43

14
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Conclusions
• From the analysis of ASM_7Y and ASM_8Y we can conclude that:
• Setting tonnage > 935 results in ASM_7Y and ASM_8Y meeting the goal
• Analyzing ASM_9Y and ASM_10Y helps determine that:
• Setting clamp position to location 2, weld density to 1 weld every 1.33”
and clamp pressure to 2000 psi helps with dimensions ASM_9Y and
ASM_10Y
• Analyzing ASM_3Y helps us conclude that:
• Re-machine A-Pillar die to move A_3Y to nominal – which could cause
BS_3Y to shift towards nominal – effectively shifting ASM_3Y to nominal

15
 Analyze Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

With the recommended changes the process performance will improve significantly
Dimension Mean StDev DPM_Obsv DPM_Within DPM_Exp Pp Ppk Cp Cpk
Overall
ASM_1Y -0.035 0.165 0 0 0 2.01 1.94 2.47 2.39
ASM_2Y 0.259 0.152 0 0 1 2.20 1.63 2.31 1.71
ASM_3Y 0.000 0.097 0 0 0
ASM_4Y 0.009 0.115 0 0 0 2.90 2.87 3.53 3.50
ASM_5Y -0.330 0.145 0 0 2 2.30 1.54 3.72 2.50
ASM_6Y -0.284 0.160 0 1 4 2.08 1.49 2.24 1.60
ASM_7Y 0.090 0.148 0 0 0 2.25 2.05 2.04 1.86
ASM_8Y -0.128 0.089 0 0 0 3.74 3.26 3.27 2.85
ASM_9Y 0.521 0.180 0 0 0
ASM_10Y 0.395 0.191 0 0 0

16
 Improve Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Recommendations for improving the process:

• Set Tonnage to above 935 to improve ASM_7Y & ASM_8Y

• Set Clamp to Location 2 to improve ASM_9Y & ASM_10Y

• Re-machine the A-Pillar die to move the mean of A_3Y to nominal which in turn
will move ASM_3Y to nominal

Implement the above recommendations and run additional samples to verify results.

17
 Control Phase D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

Recommended controls :

• Implement a gauge on the body side component press to monitor tonnage

• Implement an alarm and shut-off feature on the body side press if tonnage
falls below 935 tons

• Implement poke-yoke clamping fixture that ensures clamp is always in

Position 2

• Establish an affordable control plan for ongoing monitoring of the 10

critical assembly dimensions.

18
 Summary D M A I C
Define Measure Analyze Improve Control

ABC Incorporated is not achieving Six Sigma quality levels for all critical Body-
Side Sub-Assembly dimensions as requested by their customers. BBM needs to
apply Six Sigma problem solving methodology to establish an improvement strategy
that minimizes rework costs, yet achieves the desired quality objective.

Bring the key process output variables within Six Sigma quality level of  3.4 DPM.

Cp 2.0 and Cpk 1.67

• Set Tonnage to above 935 to improve ASM_7Y & ASM_8Y
• Set Clamp to Location 2 to improve ASM_9Y & ASM_10Y
• Re-machine the A-Pillar die to move the mean of A_3Y to nominal

• Implement a gauge on the body side component press to monitor tonnage

• Implement an alarm & shut-off feature on body side press if tonnage falls below 935
• Implement poke-yoke clamping fixture that ensures clamp is always in Position 2
• Establish control plan for ongoing monitoring of the 10 critical assembly dimensions.

19