MSE 618 Project Team 3 Ravinder Singh Allen Giragosian Simon Psavko Jidhin James Rijul Dhruv Chirag Contractor Introduction Team 3 is an international catapult manufacturing company, supplying IVY League Universities for their annual Catapult Fair Party. Recently a batch of 100,000 pieces supplied to these universities did not perform according to specification, creating dissatisfaction and a reduction in sales. A Six Sigma Process has been employed to rectify this situation DMAIC The DMAIC methodology has 5 main phases: • Define Phase where the problem is defined and the desired goals specifically • Measure Phase where the key aspects of the current data and the relevant data is collected • Analyze Phase where the data is investigated using detailed process map and verify the cost and effect relationship. Determine what the relationships are, and attempt to ensure that all factors have been considered. • Improve Phase where the optimization of the current process based on the data analysis obtained in the Analyze phase using technique of DOE(Design of Experiment) and the FMEA (Failure Mode Effect Analysis) is prepared. • Control Phase where controlling the future state process to ensure any deviation from the target are corrected before they result in defect Define Phase Problem Statement The catapults used by the IVY League Universities in their egg toss competition every spring experienced an X percent error in the distance travelled, this caused the sales order to decrease by Z percent Problem Objective The objective of this project is to increase the efficiency of the catapult in such a way that it travels a distance of XYZ 99 percent of the time and thus causes a 25 percent increase in sales S.I.P.O.C. Supplier Input Oregon Wood Company Material Home Depot Labor National Rubber Industry Blue Print Shell co. Cutting Machine Cut wood to specific dimensions Assemble base side and arms Process Output Customer Catapult IVY league capable of universities shooting egg 99% of the shooting time. teams. Punch Holes Fix Pins and Rubber Band Fix shooting shell Primary Metric The primary metric is the shooting range of the catapult. Secondary Metric The secondary metric is the Height of the catapult, this will be constant throughout the project. Measure Phase A set of 90 different readings collected using three different operators utilizing 10 parts and 3 trials per parts provided the data for this phase. The collected data was input into Minitab™, this process provided the MSA analysis; Gage R&R, Normality, Capability Analysis. Gage R&R Two-Way ANOVA Table Without Interaction Source Parts Operators Repeatability Total DF 9 2 78 89 SS 64207.4 356.1 6488.7 71052.2 MS 7134.15 178.04 83.19 Source Total Gage R&R Repeatability Reproducibility Operators Part-To-Part Total Variation VarComp 86.350 83.189 3.162 3.162 783.440 869.791 Source Total Gage R&R Repeatability Reproducibility Operators Part-To-Part Total Variation StdDev (SD) 9.2925 9.1208 1.7781 1.7781 27.9900 29.4922 F 85.7586 2.1402 P 0.000 0.124 Gage R&R %Contribution (of VarComp) 9.93 9.56 0.36 0.36 90.07 100.00 Study Var (6 * SD) 55.755 54.725 10.669 10.669 167.940 176.953 Number of Distinct Categories = 4 %Study Var (%SV) 31.51 30.93 6.03 6.03 94.91 100.00 Normality Test Capability Test The following things can be inferred from the capability graph: • Cp of 0.84 indicates a process whose average is not centered and whose parts may not be conforming to the specification. • Cpk of -2.02 indicates that the average is outside the specifications. • While the Pp and Ppk are similar to the Cp and Cpk it relates to the overall process rather than subgroups (within). The slight difference in values is due to the way the mean is calculated. • PPM Total (Exp. Overall Performance) indicates that there will be 1 million out of 1 million shots outside the specifications. • We are not meeting customer's requirements and should improve the process by reducing the variation. Primary Metric We have a target distance specified by the customer of 58 +/- 4 inches. Secondary Metric The secondary metric, which should remain constant throughout the process, is the height of the catapult Primary metric 28.35” Shooting Height Number of trials Secondary metric Analyze Phase Detailed process map Y’s: Components cut to size Material (C) Operator (N) Blueprint (S) Tools (C) X’s: • • • • Y’s: Y’s: Operator (N) Tools (C) Partially assembled catapult with holes (C) Catapult without bowl X’s: • • • • Y’s: Final product Final Assembly • • • • • • Partially assembled catapult with holes Drill Operator (N) Components cut to size (C) Fasteners (C) Tools (C) Pin Assembly X’s: • • • Partially assembled catapult PreAssembly CUT X’s: • • • • Y’s: Catapult bowl (C) Blueprint (S) Fastener (C) Tools (C) Operator (N) Catapult without bowl (C) Tools (C) Operator (N) Blueprint (S) Partially assembled catapult (C) Fish Bone Diagram Cost and Effect Analysis Environment Machine • Fabrication Tools (C) • Assembly Tools (C) • Inspection Tools (C) •Temperature (N) • Airflow (N) • Humidity (N) Shooting Range • Wood (C) • Rubber band (C) • Fasteners (C) Material Methods • Pin on Shooting Arm (C) • Pin on Base (C) • Pin on Fixed Arm (C) People • Inspector (N) • Designer (N) • Operator (N) • Shooter (N) Cost and Effect Metrics Cost and Effect Analysis Shooting Arm Pin Fixed Arm Pin Base Pins FMEA Improve Phase Design of Experiment Design of Experiment DOE RECCOMENDATION GOAL IS 58 INCHES ± 4 Pin Fixed Arm Location : 0 Pin Movable Arm : 0 Pin Base: 5 Control Phase Using the new and improved Catapult, obtained through the improve and analyze phase, we reran the experiment to validate that our catapult is now within client specification. Control Charts Normality Test Capability Test - Before Capability Test - After Conclusion Through the utilization of the Six Sigma Process; variation has been reduced and the catapult is now within specification. The Catapult Fair Parties may now continue!