logo

Msc Lean and Manufacturing

   

Added on  2021-04-21

21 Pages4414 Words30 Views
MSC LEAN AND MANUFACTURING & MSC ENGINEERING PROJECTMANAGEMENTNameDate

Executive Summary This report analyzed the observed problems in finished products at Hot Drip Galvanizing Ltd, basedon the supplied data. The data was collated and used to generate Pareto charts in various categories, based on the machines, the workers, the days of the week, and morning and afternoon times when production is done. The Pareto analysis identified the biggest problem as being scratches to surfacesof the finished products in all the aspects of classification. Based on this information, it is recommended that all (or most) efforts (80%) should focus on tackling the issue of eliminating surface scratches. The recommendation is to use other tools to identify the exact causes for the surface scratches, and also to reduce variability in quality between the machines as one machine was identified to be responsible for more problems than the other. The workers also need training, particularly worker B who was culpable for most of the identified problems. Another recommendation is to improve the product handling process at each stage. The tools recommended for use in helping solve the problem include the cause and effect diagram, and the check sheet. The cause and effect diagram will evaluate the 6Ms relevant to manufacturing: these include methods, machines, materials, measurements, mother nature, and manpower. The tool is useful in identifying the root causes for the surface scratches to finished products. The check sheet entails developing a sheet showing the frequency of occurrence of the problem over a six week period and helping narrow down to the problem causes. The Six Sigma approach based on DMAIC can also help solve the manufacturing problems at Hot Drip Galvanizing Ltd, following the steps of defining issues, measuring current processes, analyzing the collected information, looking for solutions to make improvements, and controlling he process

Table of ContentsExecutive Summary..............................................................................................................................2Introduction..........................................................................................................................................4Pareto Analysis.....................................................................................................................................51) Pareto Charts....................................................................................................................................51) Analysis of Findings.......................................................................................................................173). Suggested Tools to Solve the Problems at Hot Dip Galvanizing Ltd...........................................174). Six Sigma DMAIC Approach in the Hot Dip Galvanizing Ltd Case...........................................20References........................................................................................................23Illustration IndexIllustration 1.........................................................................................................................................5Illustration 2.........................................................................................................................................5Illustration 3.........................................................................................................................................6Illustration 4.........................................................................................................................................7Illustration 5.........................................................................................................................................8Illustration 6.........................................................................................................................................9Illustration 7.........................................................................................................................................9Illustration 8.......................................................................................................................................10Illustration 9.......................................................................................................................................11Illustration 10.....................................................................................................................................12Illustration 11.....................................................................................................................................12Illustration 12.....................................................................................................................................13Illustration 13.....................................................................................................................................14Illustration 14.....................................................................................................................................15Illustration 15.....................................................................................................................................16Illustration 16.....................................................................................................................................16

Introduction The goal of manufacturing processes is to provide products and solutions that add value to the customer, and in the process, make a profit. For many organizations involved in manufacturing, the goal is to have zero defects and fully satisfy customer needs. However, this is usually not the case, there are variabilities in finished products, that due to quality control measures, are considered rejects or wastes (Badiru & Thomas, 2009). Such wastes increase costs and reduce margins for organizations. Various tools are available with which manufacturers can reduce and eliminate problems, and constantly monitor the processes to attain continuous improvements and customer satisfaction. This paper evaluates Hot Drip Galvanizing Ltd, a company experiencing some problems in its finished products. The paper uses the Pareto analysis method to evaluate the provided data and identify the main problems and then makes recommendations on how to make improvements. Further, the paper proposes additional methods of using the cause and Effect diagram and a check sheet to help eliminate problems in finished products. The paper ends by a discussion of how Six Sigma can be applied, based on DMAIC, to solve the problems faced by the company.

Pareto Analysis 1) Pareto Charts Illustration 1Illustration 2

Overall, machine 1 contributes most of the problems experienced at the facility, with the highest count of the total experienced problems at 116 for 60.75 of the problems, while machine 2 contributes a total count of 75 of the problems, representing 39.3% of the total. For both machines, the biggest problem area is surface scratches to the finished product, which account for more than 80% of the problems in all machines (88%). Blow holes is the next major problem, at 40% for machine 1 and just 14% for machine 2. The rest of the problems (improper shapes and defective finish, and others are not significant problems, being below 20% for both machines. Looking at the charts, the graphs show that surface scratches are the biggest contributors to the manufacturing problems: the cumulative line is also rising steeply towards the right, showing that the problems represented by bars on the left side are the biggest contributors to problems incrementally. 80% of the problems are thus caused by surface scratches to the finished products for both machines, ad machine 1 has the highest count of problems. The cumulative problems due to workers show that Worker B is the biggest contributor to problems in the finished products, accounting for more than 85% of all problems. The cumulative line is also steep, showing that Worker B and A contribute to most of the problems. However, Workers A, C, Illustration 3

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Application Quality Tools and SPC in an Industrial Environment
|13
|648
|193