Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 4040–4046

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Lean six-sigma: Panacea to reduce rejection in gear manufacturing

industry
Prateek Guleria a,⇑, Abhilash Pathania a, Rakesh Kumar Shukla b, Shubham Sharma a
a
School of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, Shoolini University, Solan, HP, India
b
School of Physics & Material Science, Shoolini University, Solan, HP, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper has covered the elimination of process variation to remove the wastages in the gear manufac-
Received 4 January 2021 turing industry. The well-known DMAIC (Define-Measure-Analyze-Improvement-Control) approach,
Received in revised form 4 January 2021 which is the part of Six Sigma was used to decrease process variability, which contributes to a decrease
Accepted 18 February 2021
the waste, thus improves total business efficiency. DMAIC methodology has been adopted for this
Available online 16 March 2021
research work in which various tools have been used, such as SIPOC (Supplier, Input, Process, Output,
Customer), Pareto analysis, MSA (Measurement System Analysis), SPC (Statistical Process Control),
Keywords:
Root & Cause analysis. A Bull gear product of the Company was selected for the improvement as this pro-
Lean Six-sigma
DIMAC
duct has the highest rate of rejection. The variation in Measurement over Teeth (MOT) and Pitch circle
Process diameter (PCD) were two defects which had a major contribution to rejection. When the framework
Measurement over teeth was successfully deployed, Bull Gear rejection level was reduced from 10641.08 to 13193.21 ppm (part
Pitch circle diameter per million) and the sigma level increased from 4.37 to 4.81 with the sigma shift. These results demon-
Measurement system analysis strated the impact of the lean six-sigma initiative at the gear company, which has operational efficiency
Statistical process control and improved consistency to improve business performance and accommodate customer’s needs.
Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Confer-
ence on Materials, Manufacturing and Mechanical Engineering for Sustainable Developments-2020.

1. Introduction demonstrated technique used to identify, calculate, evaluate,

The growth of the small and medium-sized enterprise (SME)
market in India has emerged over the last five decades as a highly
vibrant sector of the Indian economy. Small and medium-sized
businesses create immense job opportunities with relatively low
investment and thus greatly contribute to the economic and social
growth of the region. Sustainability of automotive manufacturing
industries has played a key role in the continuous development
of quality and performance in recent years [13]. As a result, the
Automotive Industry is currently in a transformative period and
is faced with a humongous amount of transformation, including
the ever-changing technical development, emerging rivals, and
the fact that the industry has changed from mass manufacturing
to mass customization paradigms [6]. In India, the implementation
of lean six sigma began with major engineering and manufacturing
firms [11]. Lean Six-sigma methodology is an empirical analysis
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: prateekguleria9@gmail.com (P. Guleria).
develop, and monitor the processes. Lean six-sigma methods were
proposed in businesses to define incentives for change, not just in
terms of efficiency of performance, but also in terms of time and
expense savings [4]. Lean manufacturing means to produce high
quality products at a minimum cost with prompt delivery [8].Value
Stream Mapping (VSM) is now one of the essential lean manufac-
turing tools that provided a larger view of material and informa-
tion flow, going to start with raw materials and ending with raw
materials [10]. The practice of Six Sigma was first introduced by
Motorola in 1987. It can be characterized as a systemic, data-
driven approach to the reduction of process variance. Six Sigma
(SS) is the calculation of six standard deviations from the mean
(arithmetic) suggesting a process production of less than 3.4
defects in a million opportunities [2]. Initially, six-sigma was
focused on manufacturing sectors only, but presently it is widely
accepted in both manufacturing as well as servicing sectors [15].
The fundamental concept of six sigma is to get the enterprise to
an increased degree of sigma capability through the systematic
use of statistical methods and techniques, thus the essence of six

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2021.02.559
2214-7853/Ó 2020 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Materials, Manufacturing and Mechanical Engineering for
Sustainable Developments-2020.
P. Guleria, A. Pathania, Rakesh Kumar Shukla et al.
sigma is the use of statistical tools to manage variability [5]. The
research consolidates the efficiency and strengthened the DMAIC
technique [17]. The DMAIC technique consists of five phases:
Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and control. These phases are
structured to take the team through a step-by-step process
improvement initiative, from the beginning to the end of which
it has been stated that the aim of the Identify phase is to decide
the focus of the project, such as a project charter and a quality crit-
ical customer [3]. In DMAIC methodology, various tools have been
used, such as SIPOC (Supply, Input, Process, Output, Control). Par-
eto analysis, MSA (Measurement System Analysis), SPC (Statistical
Process Control), X- Bar and Range chart, Root & Cause analysis,
FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis) to find and eliminate
the process variation [12].
2. Literature review
The primary objective was to provide a thorough review of the
literature in these sectors is to identify application of the LSS in
various fields. Indrawati and Ridwansyah [7] had successfully
implemented LSS in Iron Ores Industry. They observed the
33.67% non-value-added activity and 14.2% non-necessary, non-
value-added activity during the manufacturing process. They had
eliminated all the wastages by using continuous improvement
methods. Priya et al. [13] implemented LSS in an automobile
assembly plant and identified 12 crucial defects. They have
reduced 19 min unproductive work time and 37.2% defect ratio
by using DMAIC methodology. Barot et al. [1] implemented LSS
in a cast iron foundry. They have used DMAIC technique to reduce
the rejection and improved the six-sigma level from 2.6 to 3.0.
Marques, and Matthé [9] claims for the refusal rate of a specific
manufactured product due to defects in the aluminum gravity die
casting operation in the Portuguese industrial enterprise and the
sigma level increased from 2.3 to 3.1. Srinivasan et al. [17] imple-
mented six-sigma in a furnace manufacturing company. They have
increased the performance of shell and tube heat exchangers by
using DMAIC methodology and increased the sigma rating from
1.34 to 2.01. Srinivasan et al. [16] implemented the DMAIC tool
at radial drilling system in the furnace nozzle hole in the company
and increased the sigma level from 3.31 to 3.67. Priya et al. [13]
implemented the six-sigma tool in the foundry shop of a manufac-
turing industry and the proposed level of the work of the sigma
was improved from 2.6 to 3.0.
Trough Literature review, it has been found that seven wastes
are present in industries, i.e., transport, inventory, motion, waiting
time, over-production, over-processing, and defects and for all
except the defects, continuous data is needed, which indicating
that the qualitative work has done more than quantitative work.
When the DMAIC technique was used in the research papers, sam-
ple size processor was not conducted and no explanation of the
hypothesis verification process.
3. Company profile
This study was carried out in the Automotive Gear Manufactur-
ing Unit situated at the footstep of the Himalayan region in India.
The company is well-known as a manufacturing wide range of Bull
Gears, Rear Axles and planetary drive parts for automotive use. The
company produces four lakh bull gears each year, the largest pro-
ducer of Bull Gear for tractors in India. The business consists of 45
Blank turning machines, CNC (Control Numeric Control) and VMC
(Vertical Machining Center) machines, 6 Blank turning machines
comprising 20 to 60 tons of capacity. CNC gear hobber, shavers
and shaper tools, 3-axis CNC drilling unit for hole depth up to
1000 mm. The organization has a global footprint and sells to more
4041
Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 4040–4046
than 20 big OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturer) and all
around the world. Some customers of the company are ITL Son-
alika, Mahindra & Mahindra, Tafe, Terex etc. The company was fac-
ing the problem of rejection of Bull Gear2077 during the
production. This is a costly part and is used in heavy vehicles like
in tractors, JCBs and in other heavy machinery.
4. Methodology
DMAIC is a data-driven consistency approach that is used to
enhance processes. It is an important part of the Six Sigma initia-
tive but can usually be introduced as a stand-alone quality assur-
ance procedure or as part of other process improvement
programs such as leaning. DMAIC is an acronym which stands for
Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control. It is the five steps
that make up the operation. Establish challenges, development
activities, and prospects for improvement, project priorities and
consumer (internal and external) expectations. Measure efficiency
of the operation. Analyze the mechanism for identifying the root
causes of heterogeneity, bad results (defects). Improving process
efficiency by addressing and removing root causes. Control of
increased process efficiency and future process performance. The
DMAIC approach has been applied in which various tools have
been used in different phases. In define phase project charter
was made for the work and all details from the end of the acquisi-
tion to the end of the customer was assessed through the SIPOC
diagram. In measure phase Pareto chart was made to identify the
defects in the component after that MSA test was used to verify
the repeatability and reproducibility of the gage so that a potential
review was carried out. Statistical process control (SPC) was per-
formed in control the process. In analyze phase the Root Cause
Analysis of the system was analyzed, which defined the exact issue
for the process variation. Hypothesis testing was done and co-
relation between the processes was carried out. In improvement
phase kaizen approach was carried out and after that the FMEA
was determined for the actual process and in control phase pro-
cesses were compared before and after the change and control plan
was provided to similar kaizens. The software which is used to
carry out the research work is Minitab.
5. Results and discussions
5.1. Define phase
The aim of the process of specification is to identify the issue
and to explain the complexity of the project. The project charter
was made to keep the work on the right track. The project team
of lean six sigma was established in the case study organization.
Process flow for the product was given in Fig. 1, SIPOC (Supplier
Input Process Output Customer) diagram which developed for giv-
ing the consistent guidance to manufacturers, consumers, the raw
materials required, and the sequence of processes involved in pro-
duction [14].
5.2. Measure
The data related to the Bull gear was collected to analyze and
majority of maximum outcomes were considered using Bar graph.
The major problem causing component came out from the cumu-
lative graph of months. The Pareto chart was made by considering
all the issues like Measurement over teeth (MOT) variation, Pitch
circle diameter (PCD) variation, Lead and profile, dent and damage,
soft spots etc. responsible for the rejection of the Bull gear 2077
and is shown in Fig. 2.
P. Guleria, A. Pathania, Rakesh Kumar Shukla et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 4040–4046

Fig. 1. SIPOC diagram for the Gear manufacturing industry for Bull Gear 2077.

Fig. 2. Pareto chart for Bull gear 2077.

The rejection due to MOT and PCD variation were selected for
the improvement as they were contributing 55.8% in the rejection.
An average of nine months of data was considered in this paper in
which PPM comes out 63,301 which was very high and sigma level
is 3.95 with sigma shift. Measurement System Analysis (MSA) was
carried out and the Flange micrometer was used for all the mea-
surements and the least count is 0.01micron. It is clear from MSA
that variation was only due to part-to-part variability and most
of the parameters fall below those norms. There were practically
2 forms of study in the MSA (i) variance component and (ii) gage
evaluation, according to the Automotive Industry Action Group
(AIAG) standards. The highest value that can be appropriate for
4042
the variance factor is less than 10% and for gage evaluation it
should be less than 30%, which indicates whether the measuring
instruments and method supports the development of accurate
tests [16] and the number of distinct categories should be greater
than 5 as shown in Table 1.
Minitab software was used for descriptive analysis for shaving
and the mean obtained for MOT shaving was 136.07 and the stan-
dard deviation was 0.01. For sample size determination z-test for
the sample size was used and sample size came out to be 5 for fur-
ther analysis, since in SPC analysis a sample size was 125 and for
all other analysis sample size was taken 30 throughout this study
(Fig. 3).
P. Guleria, A. Pathania, Rakesh Kumar Shukla et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 4040–4046

Table 1
MSA study for variance component and gage evaluation.

Variance Components Gage Evaluation

Source VarComp %Contribution (of VarComp) Source SidDev (SD) Study Vat. %Study Var
(6  SD) (%8V)
Total Gage R&R 0.000002 2.93 Total Gage RSER 0.001429 0.008573 17.13
Repeatability 0.000002 2.92 Repeatability 0.001425 0.008551 17.08
Reproducibility 0.000000 0.02 Reproducibility 0.000103 0.000617 1.23
Part-To-Part 0.000068 97.07 Part-To-Part 0.008218 0.049309 98.52
Total Variation 0.000070 100 Total Variation 0.008342 0.050049 100
Number of Distinct Categories = 8

Fig. 3. Capability Analysis and x R chartsfor MOT Shaving.

Fig. 4. Fishbone diagram for MOT variation.

Capability analysis of MOT in shaving machine was also carried
out and Cp (Process capability) which 0.63 and Cpk (Process capa-
bility index) was 0.57. Anderson Darling test for Probability plot for
shaving was done and P-value came out 0.058 which was  0.05
which means that data was normal with 95% of Confidence
Interval.
4043
5.3. Analyze phase
Fishbone diagram was drawn for MOT variation after the brain-
storming and six variables i.e., personal, machine, method, mate-
rial, measurement, environment was considered for the root
cause. PCD variation in Hobbing, Face Parallelism out in broaching,
P. Guleria, A. Pathania, Rakesh Kumar Shukla et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 4040–4046

The low p value it means result are significant and since a high
correlation factor shows all were related to each other somehow.
Since the first part of the operation was blank parallelism so all
depends on correct blank parallelism (Fig. 6).

5.4. Improvement

Throughout this point, potential solutions that may lead to

improvements in the process was introduced, checked and

Fig. 5. One-way ANOVA (Parallelism Blank, Broaching face Parallelism).

Parallelism out in blank, MOT variation in Hobbing &absence of

drum locking mechanism were the root causes observed in the root
cause analysis. Fig. 7. CNC machine with spring-loaded plunger.

One-way ANOVA: For the entire root causes hypothesis testing

a scientific method for validating the results was done. ANOVA was
done between blank parallelism and face parallelisms of broaching.
The test indicates the high P-value that was 0.941 and for this par-
ticular test null hypothesis is: All the means were equal and alter-
native hypothesis was: All the means were not equal, so high P-
Value signifies that we failed to reject the null hypothesis, it means
all means are equal, it practically signifies that both are having no
significant change in between them and the results are shown in
Fig. 4.Hence, it was concluded that both came from the same fam-
ily and no changes were seen. Now correlating all except
broaching.
The other parameters PCD Hobbing, MOT variation in Hobbing
pair wise co-relation test is being carried out with respect to Blank
Parallelism. Since, from an ANOVA test same mean has been
observed due to which only Blank Parallelism is co-related with
the other two factors. The value of r came out to be 0.722, 0.655
and 0.763 with significant P-Value 0.000 as shown in Fig. 5. This
signifies that all the four factors co-related to each other visa vise
they all were depending upon Blank Parallelism. Hence, Blank Par-
allelism was validated as the major root cause for the MOT
variation. Fig. 8. Circular bar inside the drum of the shaving machine.

Fig. 6. Correlation (Parallelism blank, PCD hobbing, MOT variation in hobbing).

4044
P. Guleria, A. Pathania, Rakesh Kumar Shukla et al.
Fig. 9. Capability Analysis and x R chartsfor MOT Shaving after improvement.
reviewed. Organized planning steps have been carried out in such a
manner as to ensure whether for any step of project delivery was
closely pursued and that the results were properly reported.
The first Kaizen approach has been applied to the CNC turning
machines to eliminate the defect due to Blank Parallelism which
was the main contributor for the MOT variation. A spring-loaded
plunger was made which push the workpiece parallel to the chuck
face as shown in Fig. 7. This plunger was attached to the tool holder
and work as a tool and movement were done with the help of the
program in the CNC user. Failure Modes and Effect Analysis (FMEA)
carried out to find the R.P.N (Risk Priority Number) before the
improvement was 432 but after reduced to 100.
The second kaizen approach has been applied to the shaving
machines. Drum mechanisms allow to move the bed up or down
near to the shaving cutter after every pass of one single cut the
drum accumulated with limiting sensors move the bed up to cut
more. Seven passes are required to complete the process. Unfortu-
nately, the limiting sensor was not working due to technical prob-
lems and it exceeded the extra pass. This results the cut of gear
teeth resulting the MOT undersize. The circular bar inside the drum
was introduced which prevents the movement of the bed after 7th
pass as shown in Fig. 8. This had resolved the MOT and PCD varia-
tion problem. The Failure Modes and Effect Analysis (FMEA) were
performed to find the RPN improvement after the Kaizen approach
implementation. Initially, the RPN was 360 and after Kaizen it
reduced to 96.
5.5. Control
The final stage of the Six Sigma DMAIC system is the control
process. During the application of Six Sigma, the monitoring pro-
cess was implemented so that to maintain that progress achieved
during the development stage. In this step, we essentially carry
out a pre-and post-analysis of some of the findings under
consideration.
Capability analysis of MOT in shaving machine for control phase
has been done and the value of Cp (Process capability) was 0.86
and Cpk (Process capability index) value was 0.78 and Anderson
Darling test for Probability plot for shaving was done and P-value
came out 0.428 which was  0.05 which means that data was nor-
mal with 95% of Confidence Interval (Fig. 9).
6. Conclusion
The LSS was successfully implemented in a Gear manufacturing
industry. The company was facing the problem of rejection in the
4045
Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 4040–4046
Bull Gear 2077. DMAIC methodology was selected for the improve-
ment. Various tools like SIPOC, MSA, Pareto Chart, Fishbone dia-
gram, SPC, FMEA, x R charts and ANOVA was used to reduce the
defect rate. This study has decreased PPM levels from 10641.08
to 3193.21. MOT and PCD variation were taken into the considera-
tion for the improvement. Two Kaizen approaches were imple-
mented, one in CNC turning machines and other in shaving
machine. The sigma level increased from 4.37 to 4.81 after the
complete study.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing finan-
cial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared
to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] R.S. Barot, J. Patel, B. Sharma, B. Rathod, H. Solanki, Y. Patel, Lean six sigma
feasibility and implementation aspect in cast iron foundry, Mater. Today Proc.
28 (2020) 1084–1091.
[2] R. Ben Ruben, S. Vinodh, P. Asokan, Implementation of Lean Six Sigma
framework with environmental considerations in an Indian automotive
component manufacturing firm: a case study, Prod. Plan. Control 28 (15)
(2017) 1193–1211.
[3] J.P. Costa, I.S. Lopes, J.P. Brito, Six Sigma application for quality improvement of
the pin insertion process, Procedia Manuf. 38 (2019) 1592–1599.
[4] J.G. de Freitas, H.G. Costa, F.T. Ferraz, Impacts of Lean Six Sigma over
organizational sustainability: A survey study, J. Cleaner Prod. 156 (2017)
262–275.
[5] J.E. Guerrero, S. Leavengood, H. Gutiérrez-Pulido, F.J. Fuentes-Talavera, J.A.
Silva-Guzmán, Applying lean Six Sigma in the wood furniture industry: A case
study in a small company, Qual. Manage. J. 24 (3) (2017) 6–19.
[6] O.M. Ikumapayi, E.T. Akinlabi, F.M. Mwema, O.S. Ogbonna, Six-sigma
versus lean manufacturing–An overview, Mater. Today Proc. 26 (2020)
3275–3281.
[7] S. Indrawati, M. Ridwansyah, Manufacturing continuous improvement using
lean six sigma: An iron ores industry case application, Procedia Manuf. 4
(2015) 528–534.
[8] J. Liker, Y. Wu, Japanese automakers US suppliers and supply-chain superiority,
Sloan Manage. Rev. 4 (2000) 81–93.
[9] P.A.d.A. Marques, R. Matthé, Six Sigma DMAIC project to improve the
performance of an aluminum die casting operation in Portugal, Int. J. Qual.
Reliabil. Manage. 34 (2) (2017) 307–330.
[10] N. Nandakumar, P.G. Saleeshya, P. Harikumar, Bottleneck identification and
process improvement by lean six sigma DMAIC methodology, Mater. Today
Proc. 24 (2020) 1217–1224.
[11] B. Noori, M. Latifi. (2018). Development of Six Sigma methodology to improve
grinding processes. Int. J. Lean Six Sigma, 9 (1) (2018) 50-63.
[12] O. Ochoa-González, J.R. Coronado-Hernández, M.A. Macías-Jiménez, A.R.
Romero-Conrado, Quality improvement in ammonium nitrate production
using six sigma methodology, Comput. Inf. Syst. Ind. Manage. 121339 (2020)
172–183.
P. Guleria, A. Pathania, Rakesh Kumar Shukla et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 46 (2021) 4040–4046

[13] S.K. Priya, V. Jayakumar, S.S. Kumar, Defect analysis and lean six sigma [17] K. Srinivasan, S. Muthu, S.R. Devadasan, C. Sugumaran, Enhancing effectiveness
implementation experience in an automotive assembly line, Mater. Today of shell and tube heat exchanger through six sigma DMAIC phases, Procedia
Proc. 22 (3) (2020) 948–958. Eng. 97 (2014) 2064–2071.
[14] A. Pugna, R. Negrea, S. Miclea, Using six sigma methodology to improve the
assembly process in an automotive company, Procedia – Soc. Behav. Sci. 221
(2016) 308–316.
Further Reading
[15] L.R. Smith, Six sigma and the evolution of quality in product development, Six
Sigma Forum Magaz. 1 (1) (2001) 28–35. [1] P. Guleria, A. Pathania, R. Khargotra, A review on value stream mapping in
[16] K. Srinivasan, S. Muthu, S.R. Devadasan, C. Sugumaran, Enhancement of sigma lean manufacturing system, Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. 8 (6) (2018)
level in the manufacturing of furnace nozzle through DMAIC approach of Six 787–790.
Sigma: A case study, Prod. Plan. Control 27 (10) (2016) 810–822.

4046