Get documents about "Ctq Template Excel
Description
Ctq Template Excel document sample
Document Sample
Using DFSS QFD Scorecard in
Designing Manufacturing Equipment and
Tooling
Keynote Speakers
Brian Coyle – Delphi Thermal Systems
Sr. Project Engineer; DFSS Black Belt
Frank J. Leitch – Delphi Thermal Systems
Product Line Program and Advanced Quality Manager;
DFSS Black Belt, Six Sigma Green Belt, Shainin LLC RED X
Apprentice
2
1
Using DFSS QFD Scorecard in Designing Manufacturing
Equipment and Tooling
• This session will highlight …..
– Capturing the voice of the customer (VOC)
– House of Quality
– Applied Creativity
– DFSS QFD scorecard
• Actual Case Study will be used to illustrate the concepts.
3
What Is Design for Six Sigma (DFSS)?
DFSS is a systematic methodology utilizing tools, training
and measurements to enable us to design products and
processes that meet or exceed customer and business
expectations, and can be produced at appropriate Sigma
quality levels.
– A proactive method to consider the best problem prevention
methods early in the design process
– It includes a strong focus on:
» Voice of the Customer
» Voice of the Business
» Understanding product function
» Modeling/predicting performance
» Robust Design
» Manufacturing capability
DFSS
DFSS
Six Reliability
» Managing variation Sigma Robust
Engineering
4
2
Quality Function Deployment (QFD)
QFD is a methodology for Customer
translating customer Requirements
requirements into design
and manufacturing
requirements. Design
– Ensure that your Product or Process Requirements
meets the Customer’s Requirements.
– Prioritizes and allows balancing of
requirements to be analyzed
Manufacturing
Requirements
5
“DFSS QFD Scorecard” Knowledge Flow
Product Planning
Product
Deployment
Functional Requirements
(HOWS)
Process
Planning Production
Customer Requirements
Physical Characteristics
House (HOWS)
Planning
Of
(WHATS)
House Process
Functional Requirements
Characteristics (HOWS)
Quality Of
Process Control
Scorecard
(WHATS)
(HOWS)
Physical Characteristics
House
#1 Quality
Process Characteristics
House
Scorecard
Of
(WHATS)
#2 Of
Scorecard
prioritized Quality
(WHATS)
Functional
Quality
Requirements
Performance CTQ’s
prioritized
Physical
#3
Characteristics
Product Design CTQ’s prioritized #4
Process prioritized
Characteristics Process Control
Process CTQ’s Characteristics
Identify Define Develop Optimize Verify
6
3
“DFSS QFD Scorecard” Knowledge Flow
Adapted for Mfg & Equip Mfg & Equip
Mfg Design Planning Design
Deployment
Functional Requirements
(HOWS)
Physical Characteristics
Creativity (HOWS)
Voice of Customer
Customer Requirements
House Benchmarking This version of QFD includes a
- Kano House
Functional Requirements
SCORECARD.
- Pairwise Of This SCORECARD is linked to
(WHATS)
HQ2, HQ3, HQ4 where:
Of
(WHATS)
- Affinity
Quality • HQ2 tracks how well we are
meeting Performance CTQ’s
Quality • HQ3 tracks the capability of
#1 #2
meeting specifications for
physical characteristics –
Product Design CTQs
prioritized • HQ4 tracks the capability of
Functional meeting the specifications for
prioritized process characteristics –
Requirements Physical Process CTQs
Performance CTQ’s Characteristics
Product & Equip
Design CTQ’s
7
Introduce the Case Study
• Background: The new Radiator Air Center Development Design for Six
Sigma project was initiated in response to customer requests for a higher
performance radiator . This radiator required a new parallel panel center
design. A “center” is one of the primary components within a heat exchanger
than enables heat dissipation. The challenge was to develop innovative tooling
and process to manufacture parallel panel centers for the next generation high
performance radiator in addition to optimizing the initial center design.
• Project Description: Develop a manufacturing process and product design
for parallel panel centers.
• Key Objective: Design and develop center tooling and process to
manufacture parallel panel centers for the next generation high performance
radiator. The center design must be produced for a new compact heat
exchanger.
Won IQPC DFSS Award 8
4
Core Rooms: The “What” Room
• Implies the voice of the customer (VOC) located at the
left portion of the matrix.
• It answers the question, “what requirements should be
satisfied, or are there any special features which the
customer would be delighted to discover?”
– Uses our KANO and Affinity Diagram information
Functional Requirements
(HOWS)
Customer Requirements
(WHATS)
HOQ #1
Functional
Requirements
Performance CTQ’s
9
Core Rooms” The “How” Room
• Voice of the Engineers or Designers
(“hows”) Functional Requirements
(HOWS)
• Each "what" item must be converted
Customer Requirements
(translated) to “how(s)” HOQ #1
(WHATS)
– Translate “What” to design “Functions” (HOQ#1)
• They have to be actionable (quantifiable
Functional
or measurable) Requirements
Performance CTQ’s
The tools required the “hows”
to be measurable which
drove us to go from
a general shape to specific features
10
5
Functional Process Map
• A Functional Process Map aids in “thinking through” the
process
– Describes what happens within the operational steps
– Captures the physics of the process
– Captures the functional relationships between components in a system, parts in
a piece of equipment, etc.
• Similar to traditional Six Sigma Process Map (P-map)
– Functional steps may or may not be the same as operational steps
Process Map Functional Process Map
Formed Center Formed Center with correct
geometry (meets CTQ)
Create Center
Form Center
Geometry
Center Material Form Disk Design
Form Disk Back tension
Operator Pin to pin
11
Core Rooms: The “Relationship Matrix” Room
• It is the linkage between the engineering
design requirements and voice of the Functional Requirements
(HOWS)
customer.
• Relates how “hows” satisfy or align to
Customer Requirements
“whats” HOQ #1
(WHATS)
• Enter numbers for depicting weak, medium,
and strong relationships.
– Generally
Functional
» 9 points - strong correlation between the two. Requirements
» 3 points - moderate correlation Performance CTQ’s
» 1 point - weak correlation.
12
6
Core Rooms: The “How Much” Room
• “How much" of the “Hows” (measurement)
Functional Requirements
• Answers a common design question: "How (HOWS)
much is good enough to satisfy the
customer?”
Customer Requirements
HOQ #1
(WHATS)
• Located in the box beneath the
relationship matrix.
How Much
Functional
Requirements
• Clearly stated in a measurable way as to Performance CTQ’s
how customer requirements are met
• Provides designers with specific technical
guidance
13
House of Quality #1 Example
• Now we are
going to start a
House of Quality
for our “Case
Study”
– An Affinity diagram and
Kano Model are useful
tools to populate the
“wants”. Functions
must be
measurable
14
7
Organizing VOC Data - Kano Model
• What is it?
– Dr. Kano defines quality using two
dimensions:
Satisfied
» The degree to which a product Feeling
or service performs (x-axis)
Surprise and
» The degree to which the user Delighters More is Better
• Specified
(customer) is satisfied (y-axis) •
•
Required
Desired
Unknown
ty)
ali
• Why use it? Need is not met en l Qu Physically fulfilled
ok a (Need is met)
Sp sion
– To identify and prioritize the full e n
im
range of customers’ expectations -d
ne
(O Must Be
» Categorizes the VOC
customer into wants and Unspoken
needs Dissatisfied
Feelings
– Identification of a customer’s
latent needs may lead to “delight
factors”
» Provide “breakthrough”
product solution
» Fulfill niche market
15
Kano Model
Surprise and
Delighters Satisfied Unanticipated Center Height Adj
• Excitement Re-Use
Feeling • Surprise Optimum Material $
New Prod / Process Unknown More is Better
Design • Specified
IP • Required
ty)
ali
• Desired
Need is not met en Qu Physically fulfilled
ok na l
Sp sio (Need is met)
Poor FTQ en
Low OA - dim Basic Unstated Q, dP,
ne
Excessive Tool Wear (O Expectation pct, CH, brazeable,
• Essential
Form at speed
Unspoken
Dissatisfied Must Be
Feelings
16
8
Affinity Diagrams
• A tool that:
– Organizes large lists of data into groups or categories based on
similarity or likeliness
– The main purpose is to REDUCE data and make it manageable
» Puts focus on higher level ideas or categories
– May be use in conjunction with the Kano Model
17
Affinity Diagram Example
Specific
Title or statements are
grouped &
Subject Area
summarized
AXR Center Manufacturing
Performance Tooling Process
Long Tool Low
Pressure Drop cost Meet PCT
Q Life investment
High FTTQ
Appearance Adjustability Design Guides BOP
High OA
18
9
Example: Translating VOC to QFD HOQ#1
Attractive Long tool
Design life
High
Performance
Low
Design investment
Good Guides
Image
Trr
Ta
an
nsl
sla
attiin
ngg
Topic
Affinity Statement Affinity Statement Affinity S
Data Card Data Card Data Card Data Card Data Card
Data Card Data Card Data Card Data Card Data Card
Data Card
Affinity Statement
Data Card Data Card
Data Card
19
Example: Ranking Our VOC Data
How do we determine the
Customer Importance Ranking?
Ans: The pair-wise comparison
Who is the Customer?
20
10
Example: Pair-wise Comparison
Pairwise Ranking
14
12
10
8
Rank
6
4
• Compares each 2
0
Customer Want
requirement to all other
requirements
Comparative
Rank
• Should be done by the
Count
Stakeholders
Resulting customer importance rating
21
QFD#1 Example: Customer Importance Ranking
• Pair wise comparison can be used to determine importance
ranking of the customer in HOQ#1
– Highest Number (i.e.10) = Most important to Customer
– Lowest Number (i.e. 1) = Least important to Customer
22
11
HOQ #2 requires Design Concepts
Common to All Specific to Design Concept
Design Concepts •HOQ #1 – Requirements are Functional
Mfg & Equip Planning Mfg & Equip •HOQ #2 – They become Physical
(i.e. features of a design concept)
Functional Requirements
Design “Form Follows Function”
(HOWS)
Deployment
Process
Customer Requirements
Physical Characteristics
House (HOWS)
Planning Production
Of Planning
Functional Requirements
Process
(WHATS)
House Characteristics (HOWS)
Quality Of
Process Control
Scorecard
(HOWS)
Physical Characteristics
House
(WHATS)
#1 Quality
Process Characteristics
House
Scorecard
Of
(WHATS)
Scorecard
#2 Quality Of
(WHATS)
Functional
Specifications Quality
Performance CTQ’s Design Physical #3
Characteristics/Features
Part / Product CTQs Process #4
Characteristics Process
Process CTQs Control
Identify Define Develop Optimize Verify
23
Moving to QFD HOQ 2
HQ 1
HQ 2 Physical Characteristics
/ Features (How)
How
becomes
the what
24
12
Applied Creativity
Where Do We Deploy Deliberate Creativity Within DFSS?
♦Ideas or Design Concepts generated at the beginning of the Develop stage.
• We need to generate innovative solutions to our critical customer requirements
(CTQ’s) to be competitive
♦A baseline design concept is selected at the end of Develop and improved
upon in the Optimize stage.
♦Idea generation/selection can be an iterative process throughout Develop and
Optimize Stages of IDDOV process
p
Generate Concepts to Meet CTQ’s
Develop Estimate Reliability
Concepts
Assess Risk
No Concept Selection
Concept
Selected
Optimize Design for Robustness
Yes
Evaluate Manufacturability
Optimize
Allocate Tolerances
Design
Predict Capability
25
QFD HOQ#2
Concepts developed which led to
HOQ#2 prioritized our functional requirements and allows us to match the physical
characteristics of the design. This tool enables us to define what we should be measuring
Patents and Trade Secrets
and define what we currently have specifications for.
Physical Characteristics / Features (How)
- The physical characteristics / Features
as they relate to mfg. tools and
equipment. These are determined
from engineering knowledge (using
tools such as the Functional P-Map,
Benchmarking, Brain Storming, Pugh
Matrix)
26
13
Scorecard Objectives
• Understand how the DFSS QFD Scorecard allows use
to determine if we can meet our requirements
throughout development.
• Understand the Scorecard Elements of QFD
– Relationship to QFD Houses
– Identifies requirements that need to be balanced
– Identifies risks and where we need to improve our design
• How to Use the DFSS QFD Scorecard Excel
Template
– How DPU’s get calculated
27
Why Do We Need A DFSS QFD Scorecard?
• The Balanced Scorecard was first introduced in the early 1990s
through the work of Robert Kaplan and David Norton of the Harvard
Business School.
– Since then, the concept has become well known and its various forms widely
adopted across the world.
• A DFSS Scorecard is a tool which can aide in the trade-off analysis of
competing requirements during the early design phase.
• The Scorecard quantifies the risk and balance requirements
• DFSS QFD scorecard:
– Quantifies the risk
– Enables engineering to identify areas for improvement by calculation of Defect’s
per unit (DPU) for each requirement
– Linked directly to customer wants and needs (i.e. QFD Houses of Quality)
– Pareto of Defect Drivers
– Summarizes Requirements
– Standardized Work
– Metrics
– Quantifies the risk
• Future product/process development can be done faster when building off
of completed “DFSS QFD Scorecards.”
28
14
DFSS QFD Scorecard
Scorecard Tools
Integration of HQ and DFSS contain additional columns
• HQ#2, HQ#3, HQ#4 worksheets
beyond the HQ to record data and track the score of meeting the
requirements (i.e. DFSS Scorecard)
HQ Matrix Scorecard Section
(prioritized CTQ’s) (Data Collection &
Verification)
Are we meeting
our CTQ’s?
29
Primary Methods for Computing DPU
• To compute Defects per unit you MUST have:
– Specification defined:
» The target and specification limits will be transferred from the
QFD Houses
» Need a target and at least 1 specification limit (upper or
Lower)
– Performance or capability data in the following format:
» Use a probability distribution and its parameters (mean, std.
deviation)
» Use a defect rate computed by Process
Average
USL
• P = # defects in sample size n (Mean) Probability
sample size n of
Defect
1 2 3
» Use historical ppm (parts per million) data 66,807 PPM
Standard Deviations Or DPU
» Three point estimate
30
15
Case Study Example
Verify Requirement …….
The DFSS scorecard calculates the DPU (defects per
unit) based on this principle. It assume the data is
from a normal distribution with the Mean and standard
deviation and determines the DPU based on the spec
limits entered.
Note: DPU Formula uses Long term standard deviation.
31
What is Long Term Sigma?
• The DFSS QFD Scorecard reports “Long Term (LT)” sigma which
captures the “variation over time”. This is a more realistic and
conservative approach to estimating capability and therefore
ensuring that you have met your specifications.
• Motorola has determined, through years of process and data
collection, that process means vary and drift over time due to
noises in the process. This variation around the mean is
estimated to drift 1.5 sigma over time. Typically, this is referred to
as the “1.5 sigma mean shift.”
Long Term:
1.5 Shifted
distribution
Short Term
distribution
Short
Term
distribution
μ for time 4
Short term data is adjusted by
μ for time 1 multiplying it’s sigma value by
μ for time 2 μ for time 1.5 to capture the variation
3 over time
Long Term
Distributio
n
32
16
QFD HQ converted to CTQ Scorecard Summary
Select the CTQ Type: Elements will be
sorted in the CTQ Scorecard
worksheet by Functional Performance,
Safety, Reliability, Cost, Delivery or
Other
33
Summary Sheet
• CTQs Score card is a summary of all requirements.
Total DPU and Long
Term (LT) Sigma are
calculated
All Individual
Requirements from
HQ2, HQ3 and HQ4
are listed as well as
their importance
level and Individual
DPU’s
34
17
DFSS QFD Scorecard Items to Consider
• Performance – QFD HQ#2
• Process – QFD HQ#4
– How will I detect the defect? – Highest dpu by process step
– Highest dpu by CTQ – Can we improve the process?
– Are we over-designing or under-designing? – Design out high dpu process steps?
• Parts – QFD HQ#3 – Is another technology available?
• Process Control - QFD HQ#4
– Highest dpu by part
– Is our control costly in frequency or method?
– Design out high dpu parts? – Would a different process characteristic
provide a better control?
35
DFSS QFD Scorecard Summary
• Tool to help manage project complexity
• Focus on Customer expectations – linked to QFD
• Balance competing requirements/voices
–Prioritize requirements
–Manage trade-offs
• Help identify risk areas
– High DPU items
• This is a simple graphical representation of your project
and enhances your ability to make data driven decisions.
• DFSS QFD Scorecard is a living document and should
change as better data becomes available.
36
18
The End
19
Related docs
Other docs by tjq20921
Integrated Lesson Plan Template Teacher Name Jeff Wallock Title of Lesson Inquiry The
Views: 122 | Downloads: 0
