Dynamic Seal †Mba: Six Sigma / Operations Case Essay

combat-ready Seal, a precision parts manufacturer with a report for high quality, does non currently utilize a Statistical litigate suppress (SPC) clay. However, unite Airlines (UA), a major customer representing 14% of Dynamic Seals business, insists they implement an SPC placement or loose coupled Airlines business. In addition Dynamic Seal do non concur a sound preventative circular quality control transcription in place, preferring 100% inspection to cull bad quality, rather than build parts correctly from inception.Goal Reduce product variance and the consider for rework by implementing a club-wide quality control form that includes an part of Statistical Process Control. A secondary goal is to reduce yen by foc employ on Lean engineering puzzle bug asidees. Competitive purlieu Dynamic Seal atomic number 18 a successful manufacturer of machinelike components for aerospace, marine and military application. Their products require precision engineering, and the company has built an refined reputation based on high quality, innovative engineering and compressed tolerance manufacturing. The company makes use of expensive super in alloy materials manufactured to extremely lopsided tolerances, with many products selling for $10,000 to $50,000.A signifi potbellyt defective rate with such high cost materials / products will severely impact the companys bottom line. The United Airlines production line operates under a know apart department, with dedicated equipment and personnel. Dynamic Seals quality reputation is a result of highly skilled machinists and a 100% inspection policy. The company employs a workforce of approx. 400 people, in a 120,000 sq. ft. facility and has increase its sales ten-times over the last 10 years to $ one hundred thirty million. Key Facts1.Dynamic Seal does non yield a company-wide Quality counsel ethos. 2.There is a customer requirement to use SPC. 3.No SPC system is currently in place and equipment has not been tested for efficacy. 4.Quality is controlled by 35 quality inspectors and is not the office of the workforce. 5.The Quality Control Dept. is overworked and underpaid reports to the General Manager. 6.Machinists specialize informal equipment specifications, not the QC Dept. 7.The company operates a 100% inspection policy.8.In- treat inspection is infrequent, therefore antecedent of 25% of defective issues passelnot be found. 9.Inspection and assignment of rework involves signifi mucklet lag. 10.QC system generates significant volumes of paperwork 80 defective reports (DMR) per week. 11.Product blueprints and Inspection Specs (IMS) often do not match and argon not updated. 12.Initial defective rate documents (DMR) are often produced post-rework.Analysis Two sets of process entropy have been pile up for sign analysis. Before specific SPC issues can be addressed the process and equipment should be assessed to see they meet the capability requirements laid out in the cu stomer specs. The first process examined uses the Lablond Lathe machinery and requires a machined diameter of 7.7250, plus smashed tolerances of + .0005 inches. A Process Capability Ratio (Cpk) analysis of the lathes data, results in a Cpk of .379 (exhibit A). A result of less than one indicates the machine is not confident of matching the tolerances laid out in the IMS spec.Therefore the Lablond Lathe is not suitable to handle the process it is being used for. Before a more suitable machine is selected, the Lablond Lathe should be checked for calibration, as should the criterion equipment used. If all fall within calibration specs, new machinery should be selected that is capable of handling such tight tolerances. Solving machine capability issues is a low-hanging fruit method of quickly improving quality control. The second data set refers to the Cincinnati Milling Machine. Initial analysis indicates the machine is capable of run into the required specs, so X-bar and R-bar ru n charts were constructed to visualize output performance against the IMS specs. Positions 8 to 10 on the R-bar chart (exhibit B) clearly indicate the process is out of control.The X-bar chart (exhibit C) further supports this claim by showing the process is out of control at positions 9 and 10. Although a bigger concern is that all but one data point lies above the control line, indicating the process could be off-center and require recalibrating. As Dynamic Seals materials and production methods are so expensive, before machine recalibration occurs, a tip bone diagram should be used to trace the problem to its source. ersatz Options There are four significant options open to Dynamic Seal. The can opt to do nothing and potentially lose the United Airlines contract, plus risk further losses as more customers drive to get down stricter quality control requirements.They can implement a company-wide Quality trouble system such as Six Sigma that incorporates SPC analysis. They can implement an SPC system on one type of machine throughout the manufacturing plant. Or they can implement a Quality Management / SPC system within the United Airlines production cell alone. Recommendation Short-term To reduce project scope, I barrack initially focusing on the UA facility only. Once procedures have been tested and proven, they can be rolled out company-wide. Gordon Jenkins is a veracious person to head up the Quality Management program, as his initial plan (exhibit D) includes many elements of DMAIC and his review of the problems seems accurate.However, he needs senior commission backing (possibly a promotion) and further Six Sigma training, to combat negative views from Alan Schneider and Scott Palmer. Without the third of them on the same page, any new quality management system will fail. Initially Jenkins and the QC team needs to perform a UA Dept. X-ray, creating process-maps, checking equipment capability and taking base-line SPC data (exhibit E). Once data h as been received a generous DMAIC analysis using Histogram / Pareto charts should be done to identify the low-hanging fruit. Variance issues in the new SPC data can be tracked to their source using fishbone diagrams and House of Quality reviews. Equipment selection, process streamlining, reduction in paperwork and implementing work procedures are valid projects. Equipment settings and tool selection should be standardized, reducing the craftsmanship required.The responsibility to monitor quality should be moved to the machinists. Having them fully involved in the process design, and giving them responsibility to manage their own quality would reach machinist buy-in. In addition tight controls need to be laid around the production and updating of product specs, requiring improved communication and a sign-off system between the Sales, Engineering and Production Depts. Finally a measure of improvement is critical to the success of any quality management system. ameliorate SPC data will be part of that, but the company can also track rework labor hours, improvements in process throughput time, gunstock reduction, and reduction in cost-of-goods as critical measures.Recommendation Long-term SPC by itself does not promote in-depth quality management, therefore long-term I recommend Dynamic Seal implement a company-wide Lean Six Sigma system, with SPC analysis. To set the right tone and get management buy-in, long-term implementation should begin with upper-management Six Sigma training, including the GM. A dedicated approach to quality management should riddle all aspects of the company, from engineering to administration, with the goal of promoting a quality-focused Kaizen culture. The current Quality Control Dept. should train as Six Sigma black belts and be mandated to train the workforce in Six Sigma techniques and to oversee on-going Six Sigma projects. Salary incentives should be implemented that reflect advancement in Lean Six Sigma training.