contoh kasus six sigma dipublikasi oleh alumni esa unggul

A R I P I N2002 - 21 – 140

TEKNIK INDUSTRI

UNIVERSITAS INDONUSA ESA UNGGUL2004

MENURUNKAN CACAT NO POWER PADA PRODUKSI TV

DENGAN METODA SIX SIGMA DI PT LG ELECTRONICS INDONESIA





Makin bertambah nilai sigma, makin berkurang biaya kualitas dan waktu siklus

Sigma adalah ukuran satuan statistik yang menggambarkan kemampuan suatu proses dan ukuran nilai sigma dinyatakan dalam DPU (Defect Per Unit) atau PPM

Dapat dikatakan bahwa proses dengan nilai sigma lebih tinggi dalam proses akan mempunyai cacat yang lebih sedikit

Konsep Six Sigma

Six Sigma : Suatu sistem yang flexibel untuk memperbaiki kinerja yang mendukung sukses secara terus-menerus. Six Sigma dibangun berdasarkan banyak ide manajemen yang penting dan praktek terbaik dari metoda sebelumnya

Menggunakan Z sebagai satuan ukuran kemampuan proses

Bila keragaman / variasi turun, maka kemungkinan cacat juga turun, maka kemampuan (capability)

meningkat

Kemampuan 6s

1σ

• Z = 3

2σ 3σ

Kemampuan 3s

USLLSL

USLLSL

• Z = 6

1σ 2σ 3σ 4σ 5σ 6σ

= s =( Xi - X )2

i = 1

n

n - 1

Sample’s standard deviation :

= X =Xi

i = 1

n

n

Sample’s average :

Z =

x - Nilai Z (sigma level)

Konsep Six Sigma

DEFINE

MEASURE

ANALYZEIMPROVE

CONTROL

•Identify Customer’s CTQ•Develop a team charter•Define and build a process

map

•Validate problem / process

•Measure key problem

•Current condition

•Screening potential factor

•Identify vital few root causes

•Validate hypothesis

•Develop ideas to cut off root causes

•Optimation solution•Measure solution

•Standardize solution

•Establish standard measure to maintain performance

Konsep Six Sigma

μ

USLUSL

T

Tepat namun tidak akurat

Geser menuju Target

TurunkanVariasi

μ

USLUSL

T

Shifting/bergeser ke Target & Mereduksi Variasi

Objectdari 6 adalah

Shift(geser) ke target

MenurunkanVariasi

Konsep Six Sigma

USLUSL

T

μ

Akurat namun tidak tepat

Aplikasi detail Six Sigma

Perbaikan dengan Metoda Six Sigma ( DMAIC )

PT LG ELECTRONICS INDONESIA

REDUCE SMPS TRANSFORMER SHORT ( NO POWER )


2004 06 14

Incoming Quality Control


Project Registration Sheet

840 PPM

ThemeName

ProjectPeriod

Measurement

QuantityTarget

Current Target Improvement Ratio (%)

0 PPM

Customer’sNeeds

Definition

Theme

Outline

Status&

Problem

AmountOf target (US$/Year)

AnticipationEffect

100 %

Analysis

Improvement

Control

6

Member

Role Telp.DeptName

February 3 ~ 6, 2004

February 9 ~ 21, 2004

February 24 ~ 28, 2004

March ~ May, 2004


Short Test as check point at line production of Samwha and IQC LGEIN.

Good reliability part

WIRE HOLE

WIRING CROSS

CHECKING PROSSES

Aripin QA 212

• Material Checking method

• Quality System set up

$29000

$0

100%

Before After

Great Company Great People

Fun Innovation By New Culture

2 - 22

Problem Situation

Management policy said we have reduce field claim.

Data field claim show No Power is cause biggest than other.

No power is TV Set have no supply voltage. It show by not light of Indicator power and no display on tube.

No power can caused by parts, like power cord, SMPS Transformer, IC, FBT, Transistor and others.

SMPS Transformer have function as divider power voltage to several sub circuit or part like FBT, IC, and others.

If SMPS not function, it can’t supply voltage to parts or sub circuit.

840 PPM

0PPM

100%

Before After

Target

SMPS

IC

Transistor

Diode

Crystal

Fuse

FBT

Resistor

29%

27%

15%

13%

5.2%

3.4%

2.0%

2.0%

3.6%Others

Defect Analysis by No Power

5 WORST SYMPTOM IN 2003

No Power42%

Screen 16%

No Sound15%

Picture NG15%

Knowledge12%

Data field claim 2003

29%

14%

10%

8.4%

8%

No Power

No Sound

CPT NG

Sound NG

A/V NG

Defect Analysis by Model

6170VMCBO1L

6170VMCBO1K

Others

26.3%

70.2%

3.5%

3 - 22

Improve TV Quality Attribute 30% SCR Reducing

Knowledge

Little y1

Part

Process

Big Y Little y2

Bad System ConnectorAGC Circuit

Front Cabinet DentedPWB Short

Bad Wiring ConnectionLoosen PartPWB Crack

Speaker ConnectionAdjustment

Soldering

Little y3

AntennaHow to Use

Product SpecElectricity

Environment

CapacitorFuse

SMPS TransSpeakerTunerFBTCPT

TransistorIC

Resistor

TYPETYPE PIC

1P1P1P1P1P1P1P1P

IIC1P1PIIC1P1P1P1P

1P1P1P1P1P1P1P1P

1P1P1P1P1P1P1P1PIIC1P1P

IIC1P1P

Crack, BallOpt. Skill, AbilityWire Connection

HandlingHandling

Opt. Skill, AbilityWrong Connection

HandlingAGC Circuit

Opt. Skill, Ability

No connectionHow to UseHow to used

Plug Connection Environment

ChassisReliability

Screen Focus, DYC,PRTABL Short

AGC, No RusterNo Sound Problem

No Power Un Connect

ReliabilityReliability

LQC LQCIQCProduction

ProductionProductionIQC/ProdIQCProduction

OQC

OQCIQCIQCIQCIQCIQC

IQCIQC

Status

FinishedOn ProgressOn ProgressOn Progress

FinishedOn ProgressFinishedOn ProgressOn Progress

On progressOn ProgressOn ProgressOn Progress

On ProgressOn ProgressFinishedFinishedFinishedOn Progress

FinishedOn Progress

OQCOQCOQC

1P1P IQC Finished

Theme Selection

4 - 22

Process Mapping

LGEIN LQCLGEIN LQC

• PatrolPatrol

• PerformancePerformance

Final Final InspectInspect

SAMWHASAMWHAProcessProcess

•R&DR&D

• PurchasePurchase

•IQCIQC

•ProductionProduction

• LQCLQC

• OQCOQC

LGEIN OQCLGEIN OQC

• ELTELT

• LTLTLTLT

• Reliability Reliability ProductProduct

LGEIN IQCLGEIN IQC

• AppearanceAppearance

• DimensionDimension

• StructureStructure

• PerformancePerformance

• AssemblingAssembling

• Reliable PartReliable Part

High defect SMPS no power

At LGEIN production

Selecting Best Condition

for reliable Part

Find Out what isthe Main Cause of

Problem

• OS&D

5 - 22

SMPS Component :• Core• Bobbin• Wire• Insulation• Tape• Shield

SMPS

What is SMPS Transformer ?

7

5

1

2

9

8

10

14

12

13

Output of SMPS (Voltage) • Pin 9 - 8 : 24 ~ 25• Pin 10 - 11 : 10 ~ 12• Pin 14 - 13 : 110 ~ 115• Pin 13 - 12 : 13 ~ 14• Pin 1 – 2 : 7 ~ 10

Potential ShortArea

Short can be happen if one of wire on potential areaget direct connect.

6 - 22

Clarification Of Y

Indicator

Display

TV Set Power OK TV Set No Power

No Power

SMPS SMPS

DEFECTDEFECT

APPEARANCEAPPEARANCE

DIMENSIONDIMENSION

PERFORMANCEPERFORMANCE

MARKING NGMARKING NG

RUSTRUST

ISOLATION NGISOLATION NG

P/P OVERP/P OVER

WIRE SHORTWIRE SHORT

BROKENBROKEN

TURNSTURNS

Kind of defect by SMPS

Master Signal

Test Signal

Master Signal=

Test Signal

NG SIGNAL DISPLAY OK SIGNAL DISPLAY

SMPS Transformer Characteristic Display of Surge Comparison Tester ( ST-215 ) will show two signal both master and part test. If form signal different that’s part NG and if same is OK.

Demonstration of Data gathering

7 - 22

Measurement (Gage R&R)

Appraiser

Perc

ent

OPR-3OPR-2OPR-1

100

98

96

94

92

90

88

86

95.0% CIPercent

Appraiser

Perc

ent

OPR-3OPR-2OPR-1

100

98

96

94

92

90

88

86

95.0% CIPercent

Date of study: JANUARY 15. 2004Reported by: ARIPINName of product: SHORT TESTMisc:

Assessment Agreement

Within Appraisers Appraiser vs Standard

Assessment Agreement : 100 %

Operator is good in inspection Instrument is valid and reliable

Measurement System are Acceptable

Instrument : Surge Comparison Tester ( ST-215 )Agreement Analysis

Within Appraisers : Appraiser agrees with himself across trial

Appraiser # Inspected # Matched Percent 95 % CIOPR-1 25 25 100.00 (86.09, 100.00)OPR-2 25 25 100.00 (86.09, 100.00)OPR-3 25 25 100.00 (86.09, 100.00)

Each Appraiser vs Standard :

Appraiser's assessment across trials agrees with the known standard

Appraiser # Inspected # Matched Percent 95 % CI

OPR-1 25 25 100.00 (86.09, 100.00)

OPR-2 25 25 100.00 (86.09, 100.00)

OPR-3 25 25 100.00 (86.09, 100.00)

Between Appraisers :

All appraisers' assessments agree with each other.

Assessment Agreement

# Inspected # Matched Percent 95 % CI

25 25 100.00 (86.09, 100.00)

Sample Attribute Try 1 Try 2 Try 1 Try 2 Try 1 Try 21 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass2 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass3 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass4 Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail

21 Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail22 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass23 Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass24 Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail25 Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail Fail

Known Population OPR 1 OPR 2 OPR 3

8 - 22

Capability Process (Current)

Based on data October ~ December ‘03, defect SMPS 124 ea from 147595 ea.• Defect Op. = 1 ( Wire Short )

• DPU = 124 : 147595

• DPO = 124 : ( 147595 x 1 ) = 8.4E-04

• DPMO = DPO x 1.000.000 = 840 PPM

From Z Normal table, we get :

DPO = 8.4E-04

Z Value = 3.1 + 0.04

= 3.14

Our Condition now :Sigma level = 3.14+ 1.5

= 4.64

8.45E-043.1

0.04

9 - 22

Estimate Cause Analysis

By Analyzing all potential problem that could have significant effect for SMPS Performance,thru Brainstorming and screening, we succeed to collect some root cause for the problem

Material

Method

wire

Hole

Space

Finishing

Core

Turn wiring

Home pin

Varnish

Dielectric Breakdown

Press

Short (No

Power)

Potential Factor

10 - 22

Selecting Vital Factor

Test and CI for Two Proportions

Sample X N Sample p

1 0 25 0.000000

2 19 25 0.760000

Difference = p (1) - p (2)

Estimate for difference: -0.76

95% CI for difference: (-0.927414, -0.592586)

Test for difference = 0 (vs not = 0): Z = -8.90

P-Value = 0.000

- Since P-Value < 0.05, Reject HoSince P-Value < 0.05, Reject Ho- It’s mean that It’s mean that Dielectric breakdownDielectric breakdown has an effect or SMPS reliability.has an effect or SMPS reliability. Dielectric Breakdown is Dielectric Breakdown is Vital Few factorVital Few factor

X1 = Dielectric BreakdownHypothesis TestingHo : P P 2 ( There are no different Proportion Between D/B below 2250 V and D/B above 2250 V)Ho : P≠P ( There are different Proportion Between D/B below 2250 V and above 2250 V)

Sample 2250 Decision Sample 2250 Decision

1 2235 FAIL 14 1850 FAIL

2 1990 FAIL 15 2230 FAIL3 2010 FAIL 16 1990 FAIL4 2240 FAIL 17 2010 FAIL5 2125 FAIL 18 1890 FAIL6 2150 FAIL 19 2110 FAIL7 2250 FAIL 20 2225 FAIL8 1990 FAIL 21 2000 FAIL9 2000 FAIL 22 2010 FAIL10 2230 FAIL 23 1995 FAIL11 2000 FAIL 24 1890 FAIL12 1985 FAIL 25 1885 FAIL13 1960 FAIL

D/B : 2250 V

Sample 2250 Decision Sample 2250 Decision

1 5430 PASS 14 4300 PASS

2 4795 PASS 15 5800 PASS3 4500 FAIL 16 7800 FAIL4 5350 PASS 17 7900 PASS5 6000 FAIL 18 4600 FAIL6 5100 PASS 19 5800 PASS7 5700 PASS 20 5500 PASS8 5700 PASS 21 7500 PASS9 4500 PASS 22 7900 PASS

10 5000 PASS 23 5600 PASS11 4100 PASS 24 4500 FAIL12 4250 FAIL 25 6500 PASS13 5600 PASS

D/B : 2250 V

11 - 22



Sample X N Sample p

1 25 25 1.000000

2 14 25 0.560000


Estimate for difference: 0.44

95% CI for difference: (0.245420, 0.634580)

Test for difference = 0 (vs not = 0):

Z = 3.76 P-Value = 0.000

- Since P-Value < 0.05, Reject HoSince P-Value < 0.05, Reject Ho- It’s mean that It’s mean that Pin Hole WirePin Hole Wire has an effect or SMPS reliability.has an effect or SMPS reliability.Pin Hole Wire is Pin Hole Wire is Vital Few factorVital Few factor

X2 = Pin Hole WireHypothesis TestingHo : P P 2 ( There are no different Proportion Between Pin Hole Below 5 and Above 5)Ho : P≠P ( There are different Proportion Between Pin Hole Below 5 and Above 5)

Sample 5 Decision Sample 5 Decision1 0 PASS 14 1 PASS

2 0 PASS 15 1 PASS3 1 PASS 16 0 PASS4 0 PASS 17 0 PASS5 0 PASS 18 0 PASS6 2 PASS 19 1 PASS7 1 PASS 20 1 PASS8 3 PASS 21 1 PASS9 1 PASS 22 0 PASS10 1 PASS 23 0 PASS11 0 PASS 24 0 PASS12 3 PASS 25 1 PASS13 0 PASS

Sample 5 Decision Sample 5 Decision1 7 PASS 14 6 PASS

2 7 PASS 15 7 PASS3 8 FAIL 16 7 FAIL4 7 FAIL 17 6 PASS5 6 PASS 18 7 PASS6 6 FAIL 19 8 FAIL7 8 PASS 20 8 FAIL8 8 FAIL 21 6 PASS9 6 PASS 22 7 PASS

10 9 PASS 23 9 FAIL11 10 FAIL 24 7 PASS12 11 FAIL 25 8 PASS13 10 FAIL

P/H : 5

P/H : 5

12 - 22

Sample Varnish Decision Sample Varnish Decision1 V PASS 14 V PASS

2 V PASS 15 V PASS3 V PASS 16 V PASS4 V PASS 17 V PASS5 V PASS 18 V PASS6 V FAIL 19 V PASS7 V PASS 20 V PASS8 V PASS 21 V PASS9 V PASS 22 V FAIL10 V PASS 23 V PASS11 V FAIL 24 V PASS12 V PASS 25 V PASS13 V PASS

Sample Non Vr. Decision Sample Non Vr. Decision1 NV PASS 14 NV PASS

2 NV PASS 15 NV PASS3 NV FAIL 16 NV PASS4 NV PASS 17 NV PASS5 NV PASS 18 NV PASS6 NV PASS 19 NV PASS7 NV PASS 20 NV FAIL8 NV PASS 21 NV PASS9 NV PASS 22 NV PASS10 NV FAIL 23 NV FAIL11 NV PASS 24 NV PASS12 NV PASS 25 NV PASS13 NV PASS

X3 = PressureHypothesis Testing

H0 : P 1 = P 2 (There are no different Proportion Between varnish and no varnish ) H1 : P 1 ≠ P 2 (There are different Proportion Between varnish and no varnish )

Varnish

No Varnish


Sample X N Sample p

1 22 25 0.880000

2 21 25 0.840000


Estimate for difference: 0.04

95% CI for difference: (-0.152036, 0.232036)


Z = 0.41 P-Value = 0.683

P Value > 0.05, Receive H0, Varnish not significant as Vital Factor.

13 - 22


Sample Space Decision Sample Space Decision1 S PASS 14 S PASS

2 S PASS 15 S PASS3 S PASS 16 S PASS4 S PASS 17 S PASS5 S PASS 18 S PASS6 S PASS 19 S PASS7 S PASS 20 S PASS8 S PASS 21 S PASS9 S PASS 22 S PASS10 S PASS 23 S PASS11 S PASS 24 S PASS12 S PASS 25 S PASS13 S PASS

Sample No Space Decision Sample No Space Decision1 NS PASS 14 NS PASS

2 NS PASS 15 NS PASS3 NS PASS 16 NS PASS4 NS PASS 17 NS PASS5 NS PASS 18 NS PASS6 NS PASS 19 NS PASS7 NS PASS 20 NS PASS8 NS PASS 21 NS PASS9 NS PASS 22 NS PASS10 NS PASS 23 NS PASS11 NS PASS 24 NS PASS12 NS PASS 25 NS PASS13 NS PASS

X4 = SpaceHypothesis Testing

H0 : P 1 = P 2 (There are no different Proportion Between space and no space ) H1 : P 1 ≠ P 2 (There are different Proportion Between space and no space )

No Space Space

No Space

Space

P Value > 0.05, Receive H0, Space not significant as Vital Factor.


Sample X N Sample p

1 22 25 0.880000

2 24 25 0.960000


Estimate for difference: - 0.08

95% CI for difference: (-0.152036, 0.232036)


Z = 0.41 P-Value = 0.297

14 - 22


Sample Cross Decision Sample Cross Decision1 C PASS 14 C PASS

2 C PASS 15 C FAIL3 C FAIL 16 C FAIL4 C PASS 17 C PASS5 C PASS 18 C PASS6 C FAIL 19 C FAIL7 C FAIL 20 C PASS8 C PASS 21 C FAIL9 C PASS 22 C FAIL10 C FAIL 23 C FAIL11 C PASS 24 C PASS12 C FAIL 25 C PASS13 C PASS

Analyzing Finishing Method by Comparing whether Parallel winding and Cross Winding contribute a significant effect for wire short.

Parallel

Cross


Sample X N Sample p

1 14 25 0.560000

2 24 25 0.960000


Estimate for difference: -0.4

95% CI for difference: (-0.609193, -0.190807)

Test for difference =0(vs not = 0):

Z =-3.75 P-Value = 0.000

- Since P-Value < 0.05, Reject HoSince P-Value < 0.05, Reject Ho- It’s mean that It’s mean that Finishing MethodFinishing Method has an effect or SMPS reliability.has an effect or SMPS reliability.Finishing Method is Finishing Method is Vital Few factorVital Few factor

X5 = Finishing Method (Winding Method)Hypothesis TestingHo : P P 2 ( There are no different Proportion Between Parallel and Cross)Ho : P≠P ( There are different Proportion Between Parallel and Cross)

Cross Parallel

Sample Parallel Decision Sample Parallel Decision1 P PASS 14 P PASS

2 P PASS 15 P PASS3 P PASS 16 P PASS4 P PASS 17 P PASS5 P PASS 18 P PASS6 P FAIL 19 P PASS7 P PASS 20 P PASS8 P PASS 21 P PASS9 P PASS 22 P PASS10 P PASS 23 P PASS11 P PASS 24 P PASS12 P PASS 25 P PASS13 P PASS

15 - 22


16 - 22

Vital View

Material

Method

wire

Hole

Space

Cross

Core

Turn wiring

Home pin

Varnish

Dielectric Breakdown

Press

Short (No

Power)

Vital View

Vital View


Need improvedNot need improved

Result hypothesis test, get vital few factor

Selecting Optimum Condition

• Dielectric Breakdown ( ↑ 2250 V and ↓ 2250V)

• Wire Hole (↑ 5 and ↓5 / on 5 Meters)• Method Finishing Home Pin ( Cross and parallel)

Optimum condition : Dielectric Breakdown : ↑ 2250 V Pin Hole : ↓ 5 hole / 5 m Method Finishing : Parallel

P

C

H +

H -DB +DB -

MTD

H

DB

50

1000

0

40

700

0

Cube Plot (data means) for PASS ( % )

Opt. Condition

DB PH MTD Pass %DB - PH + P 0DB - PH + C 0DB + PH + P 50DB + PH + C 40DB + PH - C 70DB + PH - P 100DB - PH - P 0DB - PH - C 0

In this Step, we try to find the optimum combination of all factors which have a significant effect on SMPS Transformer Reliability.

17 - 22

Improvement

Improvement on Finishing Method at Samwha Process

Before :

Finishing wire of pin 12 is upper ( entered to home pin )

After :

Finishing wire of pin 10 is upper ( entered to home pin ) Finishing wire of pin 12 is lower then pin 10.

4 M Change Report8

╚╝

Cross Method Parallel Method

Change Wire Winding

18 - 22

Improvement

Improvement on Inspection Checking Method

BeforeBefore AfterAfter

Delivery

Sampling

Inspection(Conventional)

Storage Area

Incoming

OK

NG

IQC

• Appearance• Size

Supplier

Inspection

Check hole & D

Breakdown

Storage Area

Incoming

OK

NG

IQC• Appearance Size• 5 m each roll wire ( test hole & D Breakdown )

Supplier

Sampling

Delivery

IQC Samwha

• Involving new item inspection as an

new inspection check point :

• Check hole wire by Phenolphthalein

( > 5 hole/5m, NG )

• Dielectric Breakdown test

ContentContent

19 - 22

To keep good condition, we do : Dielectric breakdown and hole wire control at wire vendor ( monthly ) Wire hole test before to production Item CTQ Control QC and Process Irregular Audit at Supplier Total Inspection Part (100% Short Test)

D/B Control

Observation

Indi

vidu

al V

alue

2018161412108642

7

6

5

4

3

_X=5.316

UCL=7.135

LCL=3.497

I Chart of D/ B

Observation

Indi

vidu

al V

alue

2018161412108642

550

540

530

520

510

_X=529.2

UCL=549.08

LCL=509.32

I Chart of INDUCTANCE

Inductance Control

Resistance Control

Observation

Indi

vidu

al V

alue

2018161412108642

157.5

155.0

152.5

150.0

147.5

145.0

_X=152.4

UCL=158.14

LCL=146.66

I Chart of RESISTANCE

CTQ

Maintain CTQ

20 - 22

Part production on March ~ May ‘04 are 245915 EA, SMPS Transformer defect: 1 ea

DPU = 1 : 184259 = 5.427E-6 ▶ DPMO = 4 PPM , Sigma Level = 5.97

Condition part Oct ~ Dec’03

No Power by SMPS

Part No

Def

ect P

PM

BOIL BOIK OTHERS

1128

(70.2% )

423

(26.3%)

56

4.64 840 PPM

Condition part Mar ~ May ’04

No Power by SMPS

Part No

Def

ect P

PM

BOIL BOIK OTHERS

5.97 4 PPMImprov

e

21 - 22

Saving Cost

HISTORY :

October ~ December ‘03 : Analysis cost : $ 1000

Hold, rework & sorter cost : $ 1950

Material cost : $ 4000

Loss time prod : $ 300

Total : $ 7250 ( 3 Month )

SAVING COST : $ 29,000 / YEARAfterBefore

$ 0

SAVING COST

$29000

22 - 22

THANK YOUTHANK YOUTHANK YOU

contoh kasus six sigma dipublikasi oleh alumni esa unggul

Documents

Transcript of contoh kasus six sigma dipublikasi oleh alumni esa unggul