Problem Definition: Part Mixup

Supplier Name : Sigma Vibracoustic V. Code : Location: Mohali

M&M SQA Managers Name :

M&M SQA Officers Name:

Problem Definition
Part Name : Bush Toe Bar Frame Brief description of Problem What : Parts Got Mix up When: Internal During Packaging/Pre Despatch Inspection Who: Inspector Where: At Supplier End Why: Due to operator negligiency How: Problem noticed during pre despatch inspection/2 part reported Model : W201

Part got mixed up during packaging

Guideline for 5W 1H ( For Reference Only )

Brief description of Problem
It should include details of what, where, when, present level and target . What: What is troubling to the customer/organization, What is the issue? It can include which part/product/family/process as appropriate. Where: Where problem is produced? Where it is detected? Which location on the part (geographically or within the company) as appropriate. When : When problem was first observed?

Who :

Who has reported the Problem / Who is suffering?

Why : Why the Problem occurred? <First Investigation Report (FIR)> How: How the Problem get noticed / How many Parts reported? Specify Current level based on the average data of last 4 to 6 months.

Human Error Prevention

Part Name Bush Toe Bar Frame Part Number - 0402BA3000N Model : W201 Process Stage : Packaging Team members 1. Team leader : Mr. Parmod Makhija 2. Member 1 : Mr. Manil gogia 3. Member 2 : Mr. Jetesh Devgun 4. Stage Operator(Must) : Mr. Ram Bali

BEFORE :

Profile gauge for part inspection During packaging

Part got Mixed Up during packaging because of same profile parts it was not easy to detect the parts visually

Inspection of part with profile gauge

FMEA Detection level Before : 7

Training Date : Project Start Date :

Avg( PPMeq):
Project Completion Date :
4

Analysis of the Problem :

Why Problem is Generated

Part Mix Up

Negligiency of operator

Lack of training

Inspection method not capable enough(only visual check during packaging)

WHY

Key Word :

Human Error Prevention Check Sheet

#
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Mitigation Detection Facilitatation Replacement

Principles
Elimination

Question to be asked to the process

Can we eliminate the error-prone process? Can we eliminate harmful objects? Can we automate the process? Can we provide supporting tools like checklists/gages/samples? Can we simplify changes/differences in the operations? (standardization, code matching, etc) Can we distinct changes/differences in the operations? (color coding, unique shape, etc.) Can We adjust the properties of the operations which suits human beings?

Solution
Yes, by means of profile gauge for parts we can avoid mixup during packaging No such harmful object identified No automation is there because of process & cost constraint Profile gauge provided packaging specification available All processes have there own specific number All processes have established by considering HSE requirements

E
2 1 3 3 2 3 3 3 3 2 3 3 3

C
3 1 1 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 3 2

I SPN
2 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 2 3 2 12 1 3 18 12 27 18 18 27 12 12 27 12
6

Can we record the motion of the earlier operation and verify Yes, oiling done can be verified visually it before starting the next operation Can we restrict the motion in such way that it will notice the abnormality? Can we verify the results before starting the next operation ? (sensing shape/state/quality of work) Can we make function parellel (Redundant)?(Additional Control) Can we incorporate some shock absorbing materail/equipment?(Like Fuse) Can we make unsafe conditions more safer so as to not to produce the defects?(Protection) Yes, profile gauge can check the other profile part if any mixup is there profile can be checked by means of profile gauge Profile gauge can be implemented for other W201 parts also PPE's available Training can be provided to operators & inspectors for use of profile gauge while packaging

Improvement Photograph
Solution Implemented:

BEFORE

AFTER

100% Visual Inspection Inspection with profile gauge

Sustenance Plan
S.N. 1 Activity Through Process Audits & Product Audits Resp QA/Prod Frequency A per process/pro duct audit plan Remarks

Horizontal Deployment
S.N. 1 Activity All W201 Bushes Resp Prod/QA Target Date In process Status Open

Movie - NA

Result ( Improvement in RPN)

PFMEA Details Before After Actions taken

Severity Rating(S)
Occurance Rating(O)

5
3

5
3 6 90 Profile gauge provided in process during packaging

Detection Rating(D) 7 RPN(S x O X D) 105

10

Result
1st Time Problem Reported on : DD\MM\YY Solution Implemented on : DD\MM\YY

Trend Chart : PPMeq, R/1000, Internal Rejection

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

8
Kaizen Implemented

Quantity

4 1 Jan 0 0 0 Jul

Feb Mar Apr May Jun

11

Thanks
12

Back up Documents - MUST

13

MISQ ( Mahindra Inspection Standard for Quality)

Refer guideline if you are not aware

14

Control Plan, PFMEA, PFC,SOP ( If changed)

15