Six Sigma Project Template六西格瑪報告模板

1、F/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 1DMAIC STANDARD WORK TEMPLATEDEFINEMEASUREANALYZEIMPROVECONTROL12345F/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 2Please use this

2、 DMAIC Standard Work Template to help guide you in preparing a presentation that summarizes the key team based activities that drive both revolutionary and evolutionary improvement.Feel free to contact any of the following members of the Product Integrity Group listed on this board for help.DEFINEME

3、ASUREANALYZEIMPROVECONTROL12345F/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 3The DMAIC Model Guideline for Process Improvement1.Develop Business case for 2. project.3.Identify Owner4.Define Mandate5.Select Team &6. Team Leader 7.Set

4、Team Norms8.Determine Customer and9. Business needs10.Define critical Input,11. Process and Output12. measures13.Define Process Start & End14.Define Process Inputs & 15. Outputs16.Determine Customer17. Requirements18.Map “As Is” Process4Benchmark as Needed4Establish MFA data collection metho

5、d4Establish QCPC data collection method4Establish SPC data collection method4Gather Data4Perform Root Cause Analysis on problems.4Develop / select alternative solutions4Map “To Be” Process4Develop Action Plan4Management Review 4Pilot changes and validate improvement4Implement Improvements / Mistake

6、Proofing Devices4Update Standard Work4Implement Key Characteristics4Monitor Metrics (Process KCs & Customer) to Verify Improvement4Document savings4Share Lessons Learned4ID potential future projects.Establish direction and accountability.Understand current process.Baseline Process PerformanceUnd

7、erstand Process Opportunities4Analyze current costs / potential savings4Perform Waste analysis on “As Is” process.4Understand process variation4Understand process performancePilot and Validation of ImprovementsStandardized ImprovementsF/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & S

8、TANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 4 TEAM BASED DMAIC PROCESS1. Define2. Measure3. Analyze4. ImproveRoot Cause AnalysisWhy?Why?Why?RepeatableEffectiveEfficientStandard Work5. ControlMistake ProofUCLxLCLxXMap information/process flowsProcess ManagementSelect OpportunityPROCESS WEIGHT0.250.400

9、.250.10SCOREASupplier Improvement6060402051BClinic Process6060602056CAQS Standard Work/ Documentation2060602046DCommunication40404036ESupplier (external) CTQ/KC Management40604044FAQS Facilitation/ Consulting6060602056GAQS/ Ito University Tools Training4040406042HInternal (and Remote Site) CTQ/KC Ma

10、nagement606039CORELLATION LEGEND 60 = High 40 = Medium 20 = LowBlank = NoneAQS GROUP IMPACT-MATURITY MATRIXReduce Supplier PPM by 30%Reduce Customer Escapes by 30%Reduce Internal PPM by 30%Build Organizational StrengthCOST OF QUALITY PROJECT CONTRACT(Details for Q-STARS entry)Q-STARS NO.:Business Un

11、it/Enterprise/Site Name:Air Management SystemsDate:6/12/02Client Requestor:Jack Strom, AMS Quality SupervisorProject Sponsor (May be Client Requestor):Dave Lewis, Operations Center ManagerProblem Statement:The Northrop F-18 Ejector is experiencing a 100% MRA rate and high level ofCustomer dissatisfa

12、ction due to fit-up problems on the aircraft.Activity Scope/Mission:Perform a comprehensive process and product variation study utilizing theDMAIC approach. Incorporate needed process improvements. Initiateappropriate design changes based on follow-up Process Capability Study forimproved process.Goa

13、ls & Expected Results: Reduce 100% MRA rate to zero. Achieve total Customer satisfaction.Prior History of Problem: Ejectors not fitting up properly at Northrop. Ejectors are built to an HS designby United Tool & Die, of W. Hartford, CT. Lack of robustness in both UTD welding process and desi

14、gn ofproduct.Business MetricImpact:Customer escapes, SRR, MRA ticket generation, and Supplier PPM.(i.e. Cost Reduction, Customer Satisfaction, Schedule Jeopardy)Estimated Annual Savings: TBD Current estimate is between $80,000 and $150,000 one-year savings via costavoidance.Client Team Leader:J. Str

15、omClient Functional Area Members Needed:Jack Strom (QE Supervisor), Chris Haddad (PE), Pete Teti(AQS), John Gaughan (AQS), Bob Kleza (Purchasing),Larry Tourigny (ME)(i.e., Design Eng., Buyer, Manufacturing Eng.)Central Quality/CQE Resource:Pete Teti and John Gaughan(AQS, IQA, SWQA, etc.)Estimated Ex

16、penses (Travel/Direct Charge)Estimated Project Timeline:Approximately 3 months; ECD: 8/15/02Final Report Responsibility:Jack Strom and Pete Teti(TeamLeader/Functional Area Member)NOTE: DOCUMENT SAVINGS INTO UTC Q-STARS ON-LINE SYSTEMCONTRACT SIGNATURESClient:_ Jack StromQuality Authority/Manager:_ B

17、ob CleverdonTeamLeader:_ Peter E. TetiBusiness Manager_ Dave LewisQuality/CQE Resource:_Pete TetiEngineering Manager(If needed)_F/N=L:HSDATAQUALITOCOST-OF-QUALITY PROJECTSEmbraer ERJ 170-190 Key Characteristics Project.docExtra InspectionWarrantyEscapesScrapReworkEngineering ChangesLong Cycle TimesE

18、xtra SetupsExpediting CostsLost SalesLate Delivery ChargesLost Customer LoyaltyExcess InventoryNon - Visible5-8 % of SalesVisible2-3 % of SalesRepairRecurringService BulletinsRecurringEngineering NoticesNon-Contractual WarrantySupplier QualityLost CredibilityHidden?Develop Team MandateCollect dataSP

19、C, QCPC & MFASTEPSTEPTYPETYPETOTALTOTAL1 12 23 34 4IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIITOTALTOTAL171715156 638388 815156 69 9 DATACOLLECTION SHEETCATEGORY1234567891011121314AVERAGE4.41 3.93 4.18 4.36 4.50 4.52 4.59 4.86 4.71 4.50 4.85 4.07 4.66 4.65Supplier AQS/Pr

20、ocess Certification Course Market Feedback - October 8-10, 20020.001.002.003.004.005.006.001234567891011121314CATEGORYAVERAGE RATING OUT OF 5Page 14Hamilton Sundstrand Supplier Quality Assurance, July 2002Top ECS Escapes by SupplierJanuary - September, 2002391311111098776051015202530354045UNITED TOO

21、LAND -ELMWOOD -17271P RESTOCASTING C -GLENDALE -18706OHIOALUMINUM IN -CLEVELAN -18688WALLINGFORDSP IN -WALLINGF -17370MITCHELLAEROSP A - STLAURE - 44417HITCHCOCKINDUST -MINNEAP O -10817P ARAMOUNTMACHIN -MANCHEST -20481HORSTENGINEERIN - EHARTFO - 10838CTLAEROSP ACE IN- CINCINNA -23073KULITESEMICONDU

22、-LEONIA - 11042Supplier# of EscapesNorthrop F-18Ejector Study987654321Subgroup01000050000Sample MeanSept Aug July June May AprilMarchFeb Jan Month1Mean=3027UCL=6524LCL=-468.61000050000Sample StDev1S=2958UCL=5568LCL=348.1HS Supplier PPM by Month - 2002 YTDF/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNA

23、L-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 5Display Process Improvement Status Develop a visual method to display the overall ACE Process Improvement activity within the work group. Recommended format based on the DMAIC modelFor each activity, give status on progress within each

24、of the 5 areas: Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control. Project 1Project 2Project 3Project 4DefineMeasureAnalyzeImproveControlF/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 6Type PROJECT TITLE hereDEFINEMEASUREANALYZEIMPROVECONTROL1

25、2345Type Date herePut a picture of the parthere (if applicable)F/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 7DMAIC Project SummaryDefine, Measure, Analyze, Improve and ControlDefineImproveAnalyzeMeasureControlDefine key metric trying to

26、improveDefine team playersDefine key process steps (flowchart)Define key measures (i.e., Key Characteristics)Describe the type of data that was collected at this step in the projectDescribe characteristics of the data collectionDescribe the measurement system used to collect the dataDescribe the ana

27、lysis tools & techniques used by the team at this point (RRCA, Fishbone analysis, etc.)Summarize the Teams conclusions (i.e., capability too low, accuracy off location, yield too low, cycle time too high, etc.)Summarize the both process and product improvement ideas brainstormed at this step in

28、the DMAIC processDescribe some of the improvement tools used such as DOE, Waste Elimination, PFMEA, etc.Summarize the types of Mistake-Proofing controls used to control the variation over the long termDescribe any B/P changes, SPC Key Characteristics added, and Control Plans institutedDEFINEMEASUREA

29、NALYZEIMPROVECONTROL12345F/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 8DEFINEMEASUREANALYZEIMPROVECONTROL12345ProblemDescribe here briefly the project PROBLEMF/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDM

30、AIC Project Template.pptPage 9DEFINEMEASUREANALYZEIMPROVECONTROL12345ObjectiveDescribe here briefly the project OBJECTIVE.You may show the top level metric chart herethat your team is trying to improve. What is the Team attempting to accomplish?F/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNAL

31、PM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 10DEFINEMEASUREANALYZEIMPROVECONTROL12345Project MandateOn this page put a copy of the Team Mandate thatis supported by management. Examples areCQE Project Contract Sheets, Passport JobTickets, and Supplier Investigation forms.COST OF QUALITY PROJ

32、ECT CONTRACT(Details for Q-STARS entry)Q-STARS NO.:Business Unit/Enterprise/Site Name:Air Management SystemsDate:6/12/02Client Requestor:Jack Strom, AMS Quality SupervisorProject Sponsor (May be Client Requestor):Dave Lewis, Operations Center ManagerProblem Statement:The Northrop F-18 Ejector is exp

33、eriencing a 100% MRA rate and high level ofCustomer dissatisfaction due to fit-up problems on the aircraft.Activity Scope/Mission:Perform a comprehensive process and product variation study utilizing theDMAIC approach. Incorporate needed process improvements. Initiateappropriate design changes based

34、 on follow-up Process Capability Study forimproved process.Goals & Expected Results: Reduce 100% MRA rate to zero. Achieve total Customer satisfaction.Prior History of Problem: Ejectors not fitting up properly at Northrop. Ejectors are built to an HS designby United Tool & Die, of W. Hartfor

35、d, CT. Lack of robustness in both UTD welding process and design ofproduct.Business MetricImpact:Customer escapes, SRR, MRA ticket generation, and Supplier PPM.(i.e. Cost Reduction, Customer Satisfaction, Schedule Jeopardy)Estimated Annual Savings: TBD Current estimate is between $80,000 and $150,00

36、0 one-year savings via costavoidance.Client Team Leader:J. StromClient Functional Area Members Needed:Jack Strom (QE Supervisor), Chris Haddad (PE), Pete Teti(AQS), John Gaughan (AQS), Bob Kleza (Purchasing),Larry Tourigny (ME)(i.e., Design Eng., Buyer, Manufacturing Eng.)Central Quality/CQE Resourc

37、e:Pete Teti and John Gaughan(AQS, IQA, SWQA, etc.)Estimated Expenses (Travel/Direct Charge)Estimated Project Timeline:Approximately 3 months; ECD: 8/15/02Final Report Responsibility:Jack Strom and Pete Teti(TeamLeader/Functional Area Member)NOTE: DOCUMENT SAVINGS INTO UTC Q-STARS ON-LINE SYSTEMCONTR

38、ACT SIGNATURESClient:_ Jack StromQuality Authority/Manager:_ Bob CleverdonTeamLeader:_ Peter E. TetiBusiness Manager_ Dave LewisQuality/CQE Resource:_Pete TetiEngineering Manager(If needed)_F/N=L:HSDATAQUALITOCOST-OF-QUALITY PROJECTSEmbraer ERJ 170-190 Key Characteristics Project.docExtra Inspection

39、WarrantyEscapesScrapReworkEngineering ChangesLong Cycle TimesExtra SetupsExpediting CostsLost SalesLate Delivery ChargesLost Customer LoyaltyExcess InventoryNon - Visible5-8 % of SalesVisible2-3 % of SalesRepairRecurringService BulletinsRecurringEngineering NoticesNon-Contractual WarrantySupplier Qu

40、alityLost CredibilityHidden?REQUEST FOR SUPPLIER CORRECTIVE ACTIONCORRECTIVE ACTION #:Please Check One: SUPPLIER NOTIFICATION _ SUPPLIER INVESTIGATION _MATERIAL REJECT NO.:PART NO.: 816731-1INITIATION DATE: 10/18/02SUPPLIER NAME: ParamountPHONE:FAX:SUPPLIER CONTACT:SUPPLIER E-MAIL ADDRESS:SUPPLIER C

41、ODE #:20481LOT DATE CODE:S/N:INITIATOR NAME & TEL #:David Avery 860-654-3738HS RESPONIBILITY FOR C/AAPPROVAL:Name & Tel #:Name & Tel #:Name & Tel #:Specification: (if applicable) Ref drawing HS 816731. bottom view shows hole into filter cavity. Currently the hole is pluggedsomewhere

42、between the filter and the exiting hole. Suspect cavity is filled with braze.Problem Description: F18 valves are failing performance testing. Filter pluggedNotes: All hardware will be screened on the assembly floor. paramount is to screen all hardware in house for this problem.Insert pictures &

43、description of nonconformity below line.=Passage between filterand vent/sensing hole isplugged.Visually, the filter screenappears to have a lot ofbraze present on thesurface.F/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 11DEFINEMEASUREANA

44、LYZEIMPROVECONTROL12345Part Function Describe here briefly the FUNCTION of the part if applicable using a bullet chart. Also include a picture of the unit. F/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 12DEFINEMEASUREANALYZEIMPROVECONTROL

45、12345Team Quality Engineers name Manufacturing Engineers name Design Engineers name Purchasing Buyers name Supplier Contacts name Customer Contacts name etc.List below the names of the TEAM members and their corresponding functions: F/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STA

46、NDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 13DEFINEMEASUREANALYZEIMPROVECONTROL12345MEASUREShow a picture of the part feature that you are measuring.Describe the measurement system employed to gather the data.Show examples of the data gathered from the process you are trying to improve.Show an example

47、 of the data collection sheet filled in or an Excel spreadsheet of the data.F/N=L:HSCOMPONENT UTILIZATION TEAMACE INTERNAL-EXTERNALPM & STANDARD WORKDMAIC Project Template.pptPage 14ANALYZEDEFINEMEASUREANALYZEIMPROVECONTROL12345List on this page charts of the measurements such as the following:

48、Histograms (include Cp, Cpk, Pp, Ppk for variable data) Run or Control Charts to see trends and patterns Pareto Diagrams that illustrate top turnbacks and/or defects to go after Statistical tests for accuracy or precision parameters etc.40030020010000.0750.0500.0250.000Individual and MR ChartObser.I

49、ndividual ValueMean=0.03499UCL=0.05691LCL=0.013060.0450.0300.0150.000Mov.RangeR=0.008244UCL=0.02694LCL=0380370360Last 25 Observations0.0750.0500.0250.000Observation NumberValues0.070.02Capability PlotProcess ToleranceIIIIIIIISpecificationsWithinOverall0.080.040.00Normal Prob Plot0.080.040.00Capability HistogramWithinStDev:Cp:Cpk:0.00730891.140.68Ov