Final Project Case Study 3.1 MGMT 580 Geff Garcia Angie Deaton

Final Project Case Study 3.1MGMT 580

Geff GarciaAngie Deaton

Company Background• WP Inc, manufactures small metal parts.

• They use customer designs to create the tools, stamps, bends, and form the metal parts.

• Next, WP deburrs, washes and ships the parts to the customer.

Problem Statement• WP Inc, is having quality issues

associated with recurrent clogging of the spray nozzles, which causes the parts washer to be shut down.

• This nozzle-clogging problem leads to serious time delays in the manufacturing process.

Problem Solving Steps• Step 1: Recognize the problem exists.• Step 2: Form an improvement team.• Step 3: Develop performance measures.• Step 4: Clearly define the problem.• Step 5: Document and analyze the

problem/process.• Step 6: Determine possible causes.• Step 7: Identify, select, and implement the

solution.• Step 8: Evaluate the solution.• Step 9: Ensure permanence.• Step 10: Continuous improvement.

Problem Solving Team• Floor Operator-provides insight into the

daily parts washing operation.

• Mechanical Engineer-able to provide insight into the intended mechanical operation of the machine

• Quality Inspector- able to identify desired output of machine.




Performance Measures

• One obvious measurement is to track the number of days that the cleaning system is down due to clogged nozzles.

• Another method is to rate the contamination level of the nozzles after each solution change.

• Ultimately, the team decided that the best method to determine which solution would produce the most favorable outcome, would be to measure the volume of particles in the liquid solution.

• Next, the team brainstormed potential identities for the particles.

Brainstorming

• Problem Solving Team brainstormed possible identities for the particles:– Coils do not heat to high enough temperature– Full evaporation does not occur– Old cleansing solution does not fully drain from

system– Nozzles are not the right size for application– Improper maintenance of system– Hard Water buildup– Calcium– Chips from the parts– Paint chips– Soap Flakes

Brainstorming (continued)

• Problem Solving Team brainstormed possible identities for the particles:– Chemical reaction bi-product.– Dirt or Gravel– Coils do not heat to high enough temperature– Full evaporation does not occur– Old cleansing solution does not fully drain from

system– Nozzles are not the right size for application– Improper maintenance of system




Baseline Problem• Initial observation shows that the

automatic parts washer is shutting down consistently due to clogged nozzels.

• Initial tests find that the particles causing the clog are soap particles.

• Further investigation suggests that causes of excessive soap particles be reviewed in order to effectively mitigate the problem.




Documentation of Problem• The problem solving team created a

depository for artifacts, documents, and presentations.

• The folder was kept on the company’s internal server with controlled access to the files.

• Presentations were given to management at various stages of the problem solving project to communicate status and findings.

Analyze the Problem

• The team created a flowchart for the process:

New soap and water are put in the tank

Parts washer is turned on

Evaporation occurs; water & soap added; coils heat water

Dirty parts are placedin machine

Are parts clean?

Parts move to next step

Is water dirty?

Water is emptied

YES NO

YES

NO




Cause and Effect Diagram• The team identified possible causes:

CLOGGEDNOZZLES

ENVIRONMENT

PEOPLE METHODS

MATERIAL MACHINESIncreasing soap con-centration; wrong amount of soap

Small or wrong nozzle

Water temp fluctuation or too cold of water

No filtration system

Water only changed when dirty

Instructions are vague or interpreted incorrectly

Soap precipitates on the bottom

Film on bottom of tank is dislocated and becomes free-floating

Evaluation of ‘dirty’ water is subjective

Cause and Effect Analysis• The team then analyzed the C&E

diagram:

– Determination of contaminate levels is not regulated

• Assessment of ‘dirty’ is subjective.• Actual level of contaminates is unknown and

determination can only be made by visual inspection.

– Water temperature is not monitored and may be too low

• Soap may not fully dissolve because water temperature is too low.

• Too much soap relative to the water amount will increase soap concentration levels. Any leftover soap turns into particles that clog the nozzles.

– Lack of filter can increase build-up of precipitate in nozzles.




Force Field Analysis

Driving Forces

• 1) Reduce time delays from operator consistently having to inspect nozzles.

• 2) Improve efficiency within the WP Inc manufacturing cycle by reducing shut down time of the parts washer.

• 3) Establish uniform training standards for floor operator of parts washer.

Restraining Forces

• 1) Water and soap are continuously added due to evaporation.

• 2) Water and soap are continuously added due to dirty water.

• 3) Clogged nozzles cause shut down in parts washer, causing serious delays in the manufacturing process.

Action Plan

• 1) Operators and engineers would begin utilizing a precise and consistent ratio of soap to water, producing reduction in particles.

• 2) Floor Operator would elevate water temperature levels to reduce the number of residual particles.

• 3) Engineers would create a filtering system between tank bottom and nozzles to reduce soap build-up at the bottom of the tank.

• 4) New Training Established to ensure quality at the floor operator level.

Force Field Analysis• Driving Forces

1) Reduce time delays from operator consistently having to inspect nozzles.

2) Improve efficiency within the WP Inc manufacturing cycle by reducing shut down time of the parts washer.

3) Establish uniform training standards for floor operator of parts washer.

Force Field Analysis

• Restraining Factors1) Water and soap are continuously added due to evaporation.

2) Water and soap are continuously added due to dirty water.

3) Clogged nozzles cause shut down in parts washer, causing serious delays in the manufacturing process.

Force Field Analysis• Action Plan

1) Operators and engineers would begin utilizing a precise and consistent ratio of soap to water, producing reduction in particles.2) Floor Operator would elevate water temperature levels to reduce the number of residual particles.3) Engineers would create a filtering system between tank bottom and nozzles to reduce soap build-up at the bottom of the tank.4) New Training Established to ensure quality at the floor operator level.




Evaluation of Solution to Problem• Evaluated the solutions via testing by

improvement team members– Used a c chart to capture non-conformities

(excessive particles) under each test solution environment (Soap to water ratio and temperature)

• Outcome– Utilizing a precise and consistent ratio of

soap to water produced a reduction in particles.

– Elevated temperature levels also produced a reduction in particles.

– Created filtering system for bottom of tank.

Permanence and Improvement• Ensure permanence

– Stringent maintenance manuals and training will also be implemented by the improvement team which will further assist in quality management of the tools and parts

• Continuous Improvement– Institute Six Sigma quality levels– Share lessons learned– Implement as best practice in other areas– Consistently review procedures and training

mechanisms




Management Summary• Noticed an issue with clogged nozzles in the

parts washer; the parts washer consistently shut down

• Utilized a problem solving technique to study and analyze the base problem:– Problem: Soap Build-Up on Bottom of Tank

Problem Solving Process Flowchart

Identify Problem: Recurrent clogging of spray nozzles; parts washer shuts down.

Form Team: Floor Operator, Engineer, Quality Inspector

Define performance measures: Volume of particles in liquid.

Determine cause(s):Hard water buildup, Paint Chips, Soap flakes (etc).

Implement solution: Defined ratio of soap to water; Elevated temperature levels; Maintenance and training

Evaluate solution: Measure particles in liquid at defined soapratios and temperatures = pass.

Ensure permanence and continuously improve: Six Sigma, Lessons Learned, Training

Define and document problem: Soap buildup due to excessive Soap concentration, temperature, and lack of maintenance.

Management Summary• Examined drivers of the problem:

– Cause and Effect Diagram– Force-Field Analysis

• Implemented solution– Utilizing a precise and consistent ratio of

soap to water produced a reduction in particles

– Elevated temperature levels also produced a reduction in particles

– Stringent maintenance manuals and training were implemented by the improvement team which will further assist in quality management of the tools and parts

Management Summary• Ultimately, the use of a continuous

improvement strategy will mitigate future issues with the nozzles– Institute Six Sigma quality levels to mitigate

future issues• Also implement lessons learned to be shared

with cross-functional teams• Also implement as best practice in other areas

of the company• Consistently review procedures and training

mechanisms

References• Summers, D. (2010).Quality/5e. Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Documents

Final Project Case Study 3.1 MGMT 580 Geff Garcia Angie Deaton