PRESENTED BY:

Umesh Kumar
Symphony Limited, Ahmedabad
 Histogram/Frequency Diagrams
 Cause and Effect (Ishikawa) Diagrams
-Brain Storming
 Check Sheets
 Pareto diagrams
 Flowcharts
 Scatter Diagrams
 Control Charts
FREQUENCY
DIAGRAMS
(Histogram)
 Displays large amounts of data that are difficult to
interpret in tabular form
 Shows centering, variation, and shape
 Illustrates the underlying distribution of the data
 Provides useful information for predicting future
performance
 Helps to answer the question “Is the process
capable of meeting requirements?
 Measurements of 50 items from process XYZ
147 179 185 125 210

131 137 141 142 166

198 142 205 150 141

190 161 157 165 155

165 155 169 158 150

170 125 177 108 193

178 181 155 186 145

157 135 148 171 124

168 141 151 162 150

145 177 154 137 160

 TALLY CHART
RANGE TALLY NUMBER
100-109 | 1
110-119 0
120-129 ||| 3
130-139 |||| 4
140-149 ||||| |||| 9
150-159 ||||| ||||| | 11
160-169 ||||| ||| 8
170-179 ||||| | 6
180-189 ||| 3
190-199 ||| 3
200-209 | 1
210-219 | 1
TOTAL 50
Lower Tolerance (125)
Spec. (155)

Upper Tolerance (185)

 Normal Distribution

Bi-Modal Distribution Multi-Modal Distribution

Positively Skewed Negatively Skewed

CAUSE & EFEECT
DIAGRAM
 Enables a team to focus on the content of a
problem, not on the history of the problem or
differing personal interests of team members
 Creates a snapshot of collective knowledge and
consensus of a team; builds support for solutions
 Focuses the team on causes, not symptoms

Effect

Cause
 Cause and Effect Diagrams
 Cause and Effect Analysis
 Ishikawa fish bone diagramming

Easy to draw like on paper

 Identification of Root causes

 Mark a cause as a root cause

 Assign a priority number

 Cause and Effect Diagrams
Machines Man
Main Connection loose

Fatigue unskilled

Power Source
Untrained
Any of
the speed
off in
Technique
motor
Soldering
Manual Terminals
Flux

Stripping
Gauge
Wire
Methods Winding not as
per standard Materials
 Cause and Effect Diagrams
Man
Material
4 4
1 1 5
5
2 2 6
6
3 3

4 4
1 5 1
5
2 6 2
6
3 3
Machine Method
CHECK SHEETS
 Easy-to-understand data.
 Builds, with each observation, a clearer
picture of the facts.
 Forces agreement on the definition of each
condition or event of interest.
 Makes patterns in the data become
obvious quickly. xx
xxxxxx
x
Products Faults
Colour Speed Other Total
Mismatch OFF Visual
Defects
Sumo Go ||| | || 6

Winter | | 2

Jumbo || | 3

Jumbo Jr |||| | 5

Total 8 3 5 16
Product Code: XYZ OEM Name: Ravikiran
Product Name: Sumo Slim Process Name: Final Inspection

Defective part 30/7 31/7 1/8 2/8 3/8 TOTAL

|||| ||| |||| | ||| ||||

Warpage 21

|| |||| |
Low RPM 8

|||| || ||| ||||

Dent, Scratch 14

| |||| || |
Vibrations 9

| |
Connection Loose 2

| ||| |||
Other 7

TOTAL 13 14 15 11 8 61
PARETO DIAGRAM
 Helps a team focus on causes that have the
greatest impact
 Displays the relative importance of
problems in a simple visual format
 Helps prevent “shifting the problem” where
the solution removes some causes but
worsens others
 Rejection Categories Rejection Qty

Joint Short 50

Medium & Low speed open 41

Aux Winding short 170

Jam 14

Burnt 44

Loop Burnt 9
Step 1 : Arranging Data in Decreasing Order
Rejection Categories Rejection Qty

Aux Winding short 170

Joint Short 50

Burnt 44

Medium & Low speed open 41

Jam 14

Loop Burnt 9
Step 1 : Calculate rejection % & Cumulative % of each factor
Rejection Rejection Qty Rejection % Cumulative %
Categories (rej qty/total
rejection)*100

Aux Winding short 170 51.83 51.83

Joint Short 50 15.24

67.07
Burnt 44 13.41
80.49
Medium & Low 41 12.50
speed open 92.99
Jam 14 4.27
97.26
Loop Burnt 9 2.74
100.00
FLOW CHARTS
 Shows unexpected complexity, problem areas,
redundancy, unnecessary loops, and where
simplification may be possible
 Compares and contrasts actual versus ideal flow of
a process
 Allows a team to reach agreement on process steps
and identify activities that may impact
performance
 Serves as a training tool
Terminator Decision
Used to Start/Stop Shows the points in the
flowchart process where yes/no
questions are asked

Data
Used to indicate data
Delay
in or out of the process Used to indicate delays
or stock points in the
process.

Activity Connector
Used to show a task or
activity performed in the A Used to link different
Points in the flowchart.
process.
 Does Y
Start Patient Waiting Consultation
patient have
arrives an app’t room
?
N
Y
Wait Need
Make an to see a follow-up Y
A doctor A
Appointm’t app’t
? ?
N N
Need
N to pick up
drugs
?
Y
Fill prescrip’n
at pharmacy
Stop Patient
leaves
SCATTER DIAGRAM
 Supplies the data to confirm a hypothesis that
two variables are related
 Provides both a visual and statistical means to
test the strength of a relationship
 Provides a good follow-up to cause and effect
diagrams
*
* *
* *
*
Car Age Price
(in years) (in £’s)

1 2 4000

2 4 2500

3 1 5000

4 5 1250

. . .

. . .

. . .

44 7 1000
 Positive
Positiv Correlation Negative Correlation

No Correlation
An increase
increas in y may depend An decrease in y may depend
upon an increase in x. upon an increase in x.
E.g.

Positive Correlation?
Negative Correlation?
There is no demonstrated
connection between x and y.

If X is increased, y may also If X is increased, y may

increase. decrease.
CONTROL CHARTS
 Focuses attention on detecting and
monitoring process variation over time
 Distinguishes special from common causes
of variation
 Serves as a tool for on-going control
 Provides a common language for discussion
process performance
* *
* *
* * *
Upper Control
Limit (UCL)

Average
(Xbar)

Lower Control
Limit (LCL)
 Variables data
 Temperature
 Length
 Cost
 Attributes data
 Number of porous castings in a sample (defective
parts)
 Number of cavities in a porous casting (defects)
 Shipping errors
 Choose appropriate
control chart

Attribute data: Variable data:

Counted and Measured and
plotted as plotted on a
discrete events continuous scale
Defect = failure to meet one of the acceptance criteria.
Defective = An entire unit fails to meet acceptance criteria.
(Defectives may have multiple defects)

Attribute Data

Defect Data Defective Data

Constant Variable Constant Variable

Sample Size sample size sample size sample size
c

c Chart u Chart np Chart p Chart

Number of defects Number of defects Number defective Fraction defective
per unit
Symbols Terminology
n Sample Size

d No. of defectives in a sample

p d/n

p Proportion of defectives
produced by entire process
UCL Upper Control Limit

LCL Lower Control Limit

 Factors Formulae
Defectives/number of
p
pieces inspected
Sum of defectives/sum of
p
pieces inspected
σ Sq root[p(1-p)/n]
Upper Control Limit
p + 3σ
(UCL)
Lower Control Limit p - 3σ
(LCL)
Date Number of coolers inspected No. of defective coolers
1 600 77
2 500 78
3 540 64
4 610 90
5 670 96
6 660 110
7 650 78
8 730 88
9 750 80
10 720 90
11 670 71
12 660 75
13 650 85
14 510 70
15 550 58
16 590 61
17 630 65
18 650 115
19 700 82
20 740 55

Total 12780 1588

Da Number of coolers inspected No. of defective Fraction 3σ = 3 X Sq P‾ + 3σ P‾ - 3σ
te coolers Defectives (p) root[p‾(1-p‾)/n]
1 600 77
2 500 78
3 540 64
4 610 90
5 670 96
6 660 110
7 650 78
8 730 88
9 750 80
10 720 90
11 670 71
12 660 75
13 650 85
14 510 70
15 550 58
16 590 61
17 630 65
18 650 115
19 700 82
20 740 55

To 12780 1588
tal
Da Number of coolers inspected No. of defective Fraction 3σ = 3 X Sq P‾ + 3σ P‾ - 3σ
te coolers Defectives (pi) root(p‾(1-p‾)/n)
1 600 77 0.128 0.040 0.164 0.084
2 500 78 0.156 0.044 0.168 0.08
3 540 64 0.119 0.042 0.166 0.082
4 610 90 0.147 0.040 0.164 0.084
5 670 96 0.143 0.038 0.162 0.086
6 660 110 0.167 0.038 0.162 0.086
7 650 78 0.120 0.039 0.163 0.085
8 730 88 0.121 0.037 0.161 0.087
9 750 80 0.107 0.036 0.160 0.088
10 720 90 0.125 0.037 0.161 0.087
11 670 71 0.106 0.038 0.162 0.086
12 660 75 0.114 0.038 0.162 0.086
13 650 85 0.131 0.039 0.163 0.085
14 510 70 0.137 0.044 0.168 0.080
15 550 58 0.106 0.042 0.166 0.082
16 590 61 0.103 0.041 0.165 0.083
17 630 65 0.103 0.039 0.163 0.085
18 650 115 0.177 0.039 0.163 0.085
19 700 82 0.117 0.037 0.161 0.087
20 740 55 0.074 0.036 0.160 0.088

To 12780 1588 p = 1588/12780 = 0.124

tal
0.18

0.16

0.14

0.12

0.1

0.08

0.06
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Mean Upper Control Limit Lower Control Limit P bar
Symbols Terminology
n Sample Size

d No. of defectives in a sample

p Fraction defective in a sample

np Total number of defectives

produced by entire samples
inspected
UCL Upper Control Limit

LCL Lower Control Limit

 Factors Formulae
Defectives/number of
p
pieces inspected
Total defectives/no. Of
np
samples inspected
σ n*Sq root[p(1-p)/n]
Upper Control Limit
np + 3σ
(UCL)
Lower Control Limit np - 3σ
(LCL)
 These chart is used when production process
involves assembly of large number of
components (this chart cannot be used here in our
case). For examples aircrafts and automobiles.
 C charts relates to the sample size constant.
 In case of sample size varies, u chart is used.
 Symbols Formula
Total no of defects in all
C (Average no. Of defects in a
samples/total no of samples
sample)
inspected

σ Sq root(C)

UCL C + 3σ

LCL C - 3σ
 Symbols Formula
u (Average no. Of defects in a
Sum of C/sum of n
sample)

σ Sq root(u/n)

UCL u + 3σ

LCL u - 3σ
 Control chart for sample mean
(x-Chart)
 Control chart for sample range
(R-Chart)
 Symbols Terminology Formulae

Sum(x)/n where n is
x Mean
sample size

Sum(x)/k where k is no of
x Average mean
successive samples

UCL Upper Control Limit x + A 2R

LCL Lower Control Limit x - A2R

Where A2 is a constant which depends on sample size

 Symbols Terminology Formulae

R Individual Range Max(x)-min(x)

Average(individual
R Average Range
Ranges)

UCL Upper Control Limit D4R

LCL Lower Control Limit D3R

Where D3 & D4 are constants which depends on sample size.

n A2 D3 D4
2 1.88 0 3.27

3 1.02 0 2.57

4 0.73 0 2.28

5 0.58 0 2.11

6 0.48 0 2.00

7 0.42 0.08 1.92

8 0.37 0.14 1.86

9 0.34 0.18 1.82

10 0.31 0.22 1.78

11 0.29 0.26 1.74

12 0.27 0.28 1.72

13 0.25 0.31 1.69

14 0.24 0.33 1.67

15 0.22 0.35 1.65

16 0.21 0.36 1.64

17 0.20 0.38 1.62

18 0.19 0.39 1.61

19 0.19 0.40 1.61

20 0.18 0.41 1.59

 We are doing final audit of 100% coolers in all
OEM.
 Let us take an example of RPM checking.
 Suppose hourly we are considering 4 coolers &
take observation for RPM at any of the speed.
 Data as follows on next slide...
S No. Cooler 1 Cooler 2 Cooler 3 Cooler 4
1 1201 1215 1190 1215
2 1198 1218 1197 1222
3 1220 1190 1210 1209
4 1200 1191 1205 1240
5 1203 1205 1205 1194
6 1205 1210 1210 1190
7 1180 1235 1160 1189
8 1196 1219 1187 1195
9 1199 1179 1185 1200
10 1201 1197 1190 1208
11 1210 1196 1193 1210
12 1215 1199 1250 1220
13 1190 1203 1208 1250
14 1185 1203 1215 1198
 Individual Range
S No. Cooler 1 Cooler 2 Cooler 3 Cooler 4 Mean (Avg) (max-min)
1 1201 1215 1190 1215
2 1198 1218 1197 1222
3 1220 1190 1210 1209
4 1200 1191 1205 1240
5 1203 1205 1205 1194
6 1205 1210 1210 1190
7 1180 1235 1160 1189
8 1196 1219 1187 1195
9 1199 1179 1185 1200
10 1201 1197 1190 1208
11 1210 1196 1193 1210
12 1215 1199 1250 1220
13 1190 1203 1208 1250
14 1185 1203 1215 1198
 Individual Range
S No. Cooler 1 Cooler 2 Cooler 3 Cooler 4 Mean (Avg) (max-min)
1 1201 1215 1190 1215 1205.25 25
2 1198 1218 1197 1222 1208.75 25
3 1220 1190 1210 1209 1207.25 30
4 1200 1191 1205 1240 1209 49
5 1203 1205 1205 1194 1201.75 11
6 1205 1210 1210 1190 1203.75 20
7 1180 1235 1160 1189 1191 75
8 1196 1219 1187 1195 1199.25 32
9 1199 1179 1185 1200 1190.75 21
10 1201 1197 1190 1208 1199 18
11 1210 1196 1193 1210 1202.25 17
12 1215 1199 1250 1220 1221 51
13 1190 1203 1208 1250 1212.75 60
14 1185 1203 1215 1198 1200.25 30
 Average of Individual mean (x) = 1203.71
 Average of Range (R) = 33.14

 A2 = 0.73, D3 = 0, D4 = 2.28

 UCL = x + A2*R = 1203.71 + 0.73*2.28

UCL = 1227.902
 LCL = x - A2*R = = 1203.71 - 0.73*2.28

LCL = 1179.518
 Let us plot line diagrams between individual mean, UCL,
LCL & Average of individual mean
 Average of Individual Mean
S No. UCL LCL individual mean (Avg)
1 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1205.25
2 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1208.75
3 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1207.25
4 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1209
5 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1201.75
6 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1203.75
7 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1191
8 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1199.25
9 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1190.75
10 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1199
11 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1202.25
12 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1221
13 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1212.75
14 1227.902 1179.518 1203.71 1200.25
 Outlier Grouping Shift

Point above or below

Run of 7 points above Shift in readings
control limit.
or below the mean Causes: change in mat’l,
Causes: “special cause”,
Causes:changed dist’n, change in operator, etc
misread, data entry, etc.
new method, etc.

Trend Erratic Cycle

Run 7 points increasing Erratic readings Cyclic readings

or decreasing Causes: over adjustment, Causes: work pattern,
Causes: maintenance, wear, measuring equipment not Environment, etc.
environment, etc capable, etc
 As all the observations lies within control limit,
therefore process is under statistical control
 But according to mean chart there are 7 readings
lie below the central line, so there is something
change which requires to be improved or
modified
Application of 7 QC Tools in Our Organization

 Histogram
1. Before X Chart & R Chart, to establish whether
data is normal or not.
 Ishikawa/CE Diagram/Fishbone
1. Brainstorming with teams (anywhere in
our organization). It gives best result
when people from all levels involved in
one problem discussion.
Application of 7 QC Tools in Our Organization

 Pareto Chart
1. Can be used in line Rejection of all OEMs. To be
presented in all monthly quality meeting.
Corrective actions to be taken on the prioritized
causes & to be presented in next meeting.
 Check Sheet
1. Service return data.
2. IQC & Line Rejection in all OEMs
Application of 7 QC Tools in Our Organization

 Flowchart
1. All vendors & all OEMs process charts to be
submitted here in our organization.
 Control Charts
1. OEM line processes, critical parameters to
be identified by line QA.
Thank You All