ERROR PROOFING

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 1
 Unit One

Error Proofing

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 2
 Error Proofing

Objectives
 Understand Error Proofing
 Understand its use in improving performance
 Develop Error Proofing analysis
 Error Proof a process
 Demonstrate how to transfer Error Proofing
skills to the plant floor

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 3
 Agenda

– Understanding &
Applying Error Proofing
– Objectives & Techniques: Quality
Expectations Program
– Error Proofing as Part – Understanding &
Applying Error Proofing
of Visual Factory
Techniques:
– How Error Proofing Implementation
supports Lean – Error Proofing Examples
– Error Proofing – Summary and closing

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 4
 Error Proofing As A Part of
Visual Factory

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 5
 Error Proofing as Part of
Visual Factory

 Visual Factory
– is the use of controls that enable an individual to
immediately recognize the standard and any
deviation from it
– through Visual Factory, anyone who enters an area
will be able to know the “who, what, where,
when, why and how” of the area without asking
anyone, opening a book or looking on a computer
screen
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 6
 Error Proofing & Visual
Factory

Mistake-ProofingisPart of Visual Factory

 Start sharing information


Establish the best way
Post the standards
Mistake-
Proofing { Zero
VisualDefects &
ControlMistakes

Visual
 Create alarms Display Shared
Information
Workplace
 Error Proof Organization
Stability

 Source inspection

Mistake-Proofing
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 7
 Integrate Error Proofing
into Lean

 Lean is a system
 The tools of lean are used to resolve
problems of implementation
 Lean evolves in phases
 Each phase builds upon the previous
 Error Proofing is used to establish quality
stability

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 8
 Error Proofing and Its Impact on
the Measurable

 Defects impact total cost - e.g. warranties

 Defects use additional inventory
 Defects make a schedule more difficult to attain
 First time through measures the need for Error
Proofing
 Quality is a part of Operation Rate.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 9
 What To Do

 Understand waste and its cost

 Describe waste in the process
 Document your findings
 Understand the total cost effect of waste
 Create a business case for elimination of waste
 Slowly change operations systems

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 12
 Unit 2

Error Proofing

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 13
 Error Proofing

On the road to
ZERO DEFECTS

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 14
 Introduction

 Error proofing is one of

the key ingredients to
achieve stability
 Stability is the
foundation to implement
Lean Manufacturing Lean
Stability
Error Proof
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 15
 What is Error Proofing?

Building quality into the process

 How do we do that?
– Eliminate defects before they occur
– Detect Errors as they occur
– Prevent bad products from passing to customer

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 16
 What will happen if Error
Proofing is not in place?

 Defects will pass to the customer (internal/external).

 Low First Time Through
– Increase cost of manufacturing

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 17
 High Cost of Manufacturing?

 Over-Production
 Over time
 Manpower--lower efficiency
 Floor space for inventory--repair area
 Low machine utilization/operation rate

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 18
 Causes of Errors

 Omissions of steps: Leaving out one or more steps during

the processing of products

1 2 4

 Not following sequence: Process operation not performed

according to standardized work sheets

1 3 2 4
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 19
 Causes of Errors

 Missing parts: Not all parts included in the

assembly, welding or other processes
– Missing bolt on moon roof housing (7 out of 8)
 Error in set-up: Using wrong tool or setting-up
machine incorrectly for the product
– Tighten bolt out of torque spec in assembly
process

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 20
 Causes of Errors

 Improper part or item: Wrong part installed in the

Rear door sub-assembly

Impact beam -A Impact beam -B

 Processing wrong part or piece: Wrong part machined

 Operations errors: Carrying out an incorrect operation.
Having incorrect standard or revision of specification.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 21
 Causes of Errors

 Dimension/Measurement errors: Error in

measurements or dimensions of a incoming part.

Inner door flange Short Inner door

flange

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 22
 Causes of Errors

 Errors in equipment maintenance or repair:

Defects caused by incorrect repairs or
component replacement. Example: wrong robot
tip installed.
 Errors in preparation: Damaged blades, poorly
designed/maintained jigs used in the process.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 23
 Red Flags

These conditions signal the potential for errors thus

allowing to detect and prevent potential Errors.

 Adjustments
– Operators having to make adjustments to parts
or equipment to complete a process step.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 24
 Red Flags

 Tooling change
– The use of perishable tools in random-
to-run production.
– Infrequent change of cutting blade at
trimming operation.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 25
 Red Flags

 Dimensions / specifications / critical conditions

– Operations which require the use of
measurements to position a part in an
operation.
 Many mixed parts
– A process which involves a wide range of
parts in varying quantities and mix.
– Installing wrong type of nuts.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 26
 Red Flags

 Multiple steps
– A process that requires many small
operations or sub -steps.
 Infrequent production
– An operation or task which is not
performed regularly.
 Lack of effective standards
– Standardized worksheets that are vague.
They do not fully describe the correct
way to perform a production process.
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 27
 Red Flags

 Rapid Repetition
– A process which requires quickly
performing the same operation over and
over again.
– Muscle fatigue or monotonous work.
 Cycle Time Higher Than Takt time
– A process which requires performing a task
faster in order to meet the set takt time.
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 29
 Red Flags

 Environmental conditions
– Physical circumstances within and around the
workplace that can influence quality and
workmanship.
– Hot, cold, abnormal noise, etc.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 30
 Steps to Error Proofing
Process

 Identify and describe

– Identify and describe the defect/red flag
condition in detail with supporting data.
– Gather the historical trend over time.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 31
 Hierarchy Of Error Proofing
Techniques

Source Prevention
• Product/Process Design
• One-Way Assembly
Self Detection
• Operator Motion
• Process Attributes (voltage, current)
• Physical Characteristics
(use of contact/non-contact switches,
use of pins, jigs)
Successive
Human Judgment
 Andon Cord
 Color Coding
 Visual Controls
 Status Indicators
© 1999 TSD
None
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 32
 Zero Defect Strategies
LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3 LEVEL 4 LEVEL 5
INSPECTION NONE JUDGMENT INFORMATIVE SELF-CHECKS SOURCE
TYPE INSPECTION INSPECTION WITHIN PROCESS INSPECTION

Identifies Can Lower The Skips the Feedback

Does Not Identify Defects Discovered
INSPECTION Defects, Does Not
Defects, But Defect Rate By Before Stage and Catches
IMPACT Does Not Giving Feedback The Product Errors at Their
Reduce Them
Reduce Them To the Work Leaves the Process Source
Process

DEFECTS DEFECTS DEFECTS

SITUATION DEFECTS ZERO
LEAVE THE DON’T LEAVE DON’T LEAVE
DECREASE THE DEFECTS
COMPANY COMPANY
PROCESS

PROCESS PROCESS
OPERATIONS OPERATIONS
OPERATIONS OPERATIONS OPERATIONS

IMPROVE
ERRORS ERRORS

IMPROVE

IMPROVE
ERRORS
FACTORY ERRORS ERRORS
DEFECTS DEFECTS DEFECTS

DEFECTS
INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS INSPECTIONS

CUSTOMER DEFECTS NON-DEFECTIVE NON-DEFECTIVE NON-DEFECTIVE NON-DEFECTIVE

ITEMS ITEMS ITEMS ITEMS
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 33
 Error Proofing
Devices

 Purpose
– Completely eliminate defects
 Respect for people
– Relieves workers of constant attention to
detail, highlights problems immediately.
 100% source inspection through mechanical or
physical control

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 34
 Error Proofing
Devices

Shift paradigm from

defect detection and
reduction to defect
prevention
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 35
 Error Proofing -
Why?

 Workers are human, inadvertent errors.

 Random and unpredictable
 Sampling inspection = zero defects?

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 36
 Error Proofing -
Why?

Error Proofing devices = 100%

source inspection at low cost

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 37
 Source Inspection

 Discovering errors in conditions that give

rise to defects.
 Performing feedback and action at the error
stage so as to keep those errors from turning
into defects.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 38
 Types of Defects

Causes Effects Results

Design:
Poor Design
Not Robust Error Results In
Poor
processing

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 39
 Materials: Method:
Damaged Non Compliance to Std
Out of Spec Work
Wrong parts Poor job instructions

Design:
Poor Design
Not Robust
DFM poor Error Results In
processing

Machine/Process:
Lack of PM Operator:
Process abnormality Inadvertent, Forgetfulness
Workpiece setup Performance, Distractions
Improper adjustment Lack of Experience.
Manufacturing difficulty
Process
© 1999 TSD
May not not written
reproduce without capable
consent Unit 1 - Page 40
 Error Proof Design
Checking Methods

 Feature Method - Physical characteristic of part is

sensed to differentiate it from standard.
 Constant Value - A predetermined number of
motions performed by operator/machine.
 Motion Step - Distinct sequence of operator
motion or process sequence.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 41
 Error Proofing Design -
Feature Method

 Establish standards for

physical characteristics of the
product / process operation
 Use sensors (limits, proximity,
micro switches fiber sensors,
photoelectric), jigs or locator
pins to uniquely identify this
characteristic.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 42
 Error Proofing Design - Constant
Value - Process Attributes
 Torque/Angle
 Air Pressure
 Weld Current/Voltage
 Flow
 Level
 Temperature
 Time
 Operator motion (light curtain, switch)
 Dimensional (vision, analog proximity)

Ensure value is within predetermined range

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 43
 Warning or Control

 Warning: Informs the operator that an error or

defect has just occurred. Typically a light
(flashing more effective), or audible alarm.
 Control: Interlocked to process. Required
operator interaction before process can
continue.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 44
 Error Proofing Components
Selected Inspection
Techniques
Source, Self
Successive

Correcting Function Error

Warning Proofing
Control Device

Check Method
Feature Method
Constant Value
Motion Step

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 45
 Final Touches

 Robust design
 Fail safe techniques
 Procedure in place to
audit functionality in
timely manner.
 Training

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 46
 Error Proofing
Summary

 Error Proofing is best designed into process for delivery to

workplace
 Error Proofing design is based on first-hand experience,
observation of processes and knowledge of errors which can occur
 Process designers must “grasp the situation” on plant floor from
current process
 If error proofing introduced into existing process, involvement of
production workers is critical
 Root cause reason for defect and start doing it. Get some
experience. If you fail dust yourself off, learn from the experience
and try again.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 47
 Error Proofing

Difficult High cost

Customer

Dealer

End of line

Next process

In process
Easy Low cost
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 48
 Unit 4
Understanding & Applying
Error Proofing Technique
Implementation

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 49
 Error Proofing Preparation
and Deployment Steps
1. Deliver Mistake Proofing Training
2. Create Mistake Proofing Log
3. Prioritize process defects
4. Choose defect by completing Defect Identification Sheet
5. Document rationale for defect solution
6. Establish objectives for implementation of Mistake Proofing
7. Deliver Mistake Proofing Development Chart overview
8. Define the source of mistake(s)
9. Create and install selected Mistake Proofing device(s)
10. Measure and document results and benefits
11. Update Control Plans, manage the Change Forms, standardize Worksheets, etc.
12. Congratulate the team
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 50
 Collect Current & Historical Data
From All Collection Points

 Data should be:

– Collected over a predefined period of
time - one week to two months is
recommended.
– Temporarily recorded before analysis.
Charts, tables, spreadsheets, and graphs
can be used for this purpose.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 51
 Categorize Collected Data
According to Defect Type
– Damaged parts/products (In shipping or handling to and from the line)
– Reversed parts/products (Wrong orientation for assembly)
– Foreign matter present (Dust and other particles in the paint operation)
– Mismatched parts (Two parts that should snap together, but don’t)
– Mis-aligned parts (Drilled holes for bolts don’t align)
– Part cannot be assembled (The original design worked, but not in volume
assembly)
– Inconsistent Test Results/Test Failure (Test machines not properly
calibrated)
– Bad Incoming Material (Supplier materials are out of specification)
– Wrong Material Parts (Box label incorrect or wrong parts delivered to line)
– Wrong or Inconsistent Dimensions (Parts are outside of dimensional
specification)

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 52
 Summarize Data for Each Defect Type
Using a Pareto Chart

 Calculate the total number of all defects using information

collected.
 Determine the percentage contribution for each defect:
– divide the total number of each type of defect by the total number
of defects and multiply by 100
 Document the percentage that each type represents.
 Plot the defect type with the highest percentage at the left
side of the graph in the form of a histogram.
 Continue plotting defect type percentages from highest to
lowest on the histogram.
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 53
 Select the Top 3-5 Defects

 Select the top three to five defects from the

Pareto Chart.
 The Pareto Chart will focus the Work Group
on analyzing defects with the highest
frequency.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 54
 Define the Reasons for Selecting
the Defect

 By completing the Defect Identification, a

Work Group develops a systematic
technique for selecting the defect for which
the Error proofing device is to be
developed.
 To help prioritize and select defects,
analyze data from Pareto charts, trend
charts and Measurables data.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 55
 Define the Reasons for Selecting
the Defect

 Additional selection criteria may include, but

are not limited to:
– Pareto charts to review top three to five
defects
– Trend charts to review defect rates which
are increasing or remaining constant
 Measurables (First Time Through, Build to
Schedule and Total Cost) to review whether or
not improvement trends are appropriate.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 56
 Define the Reasons for
Selecting the Defect
 Existing containment actions to review whether or
not using them with a particular defect is too costly
and/or not effective.
 Excess scrap levels as means of evaluation. The
cost of successive downstream workstations.
 Feedback and corrective actions to the source of
the defect. When either is slow or delayed,
additional defects/scrap continue to be generated.
 Defect identified as constraint operation.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 57
 Implementing Error Proofing

CHECKLIST
Can you answer these questions about deploying Error
Proofing to the Application Area?
Y N
1. Do you know how to estimate and document the improvement to be achieved by
using an Error Proofing device? Can you calculate its expected results on the
application area Measurables?
2. Can you describe the key components of an Error Proofing Implementation
Worksheet?

3. Can you use The 5 Why process to define the source Error causing the defect?

4. Can you create and install a Error Proofing device to eliminate or detect the identified
error and test its effectiveness?
5. Do you know how to measure and document the results and benefits produced by the
Installation of the Error Proofing device ?
6. Do you know the process for updating and communicating information about the
Error Proofing device to other areas?

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 58
 Calculate the Expected Impact on the
Application Area Measurables

 Replace the actual number of rework,

repair, returns, or scrap in the Application
Area with the objectives set.

Note: Calculations should be made for the following

Measurables:
• First Time Through,
• Overall Equipment Effectiveness, and
• Build to Schedule
© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 59
 Consider Ways to Visually Post
Improvements in Application Area

 Use white boards

 Photographs of the device
 Plant newsletters
 Problem Identification worksheet
 Instruction sheet
 Process change sheet

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 60
 Congratulate The Team on Their
Achievement
 Congratulations for the team on their effort
and achievement can be in the form of:
– Hand shakes
– Certificates
– Team photo with local manager
– etc.

Note: This is the point in the improvement

process to innovate and decide what sort of
motivation works best for you locally.

© 1999 TSD
May not reproduce without written consent Unit 1 - Page 61