Suriyan QCC welcomes you all

To eliminate over ball tapper in Spain

broaching machine

1/72
 Team details

QCC NAME: SURIYAN

WORK AREA: RACK MODULE

Team leader S.PARASURAMAN

A.MOUROUGAN
Team members M.MOHAN
K.KUMARAVEL
RAMESH

S.NAVEEN KUMAR
Facilitator P.SATHISH KUMAR

R.BALAKRISHNAN
Co-ordinator
M.KAMALAVASAN
2/72
 Company profile

Rack & Pinion steering gear for passenger car

Our Customers are:

- Maruti Suzuki India Ltd
Deming Prize Deming -Tata Motors Ltd
Winner grand Prize
Winner
- Ford India Ltd
- Diahatsu, Piaggio, Mahindra
3/72
 Company structure and steering gear with parts

We are
working
in rack
line

4/72
 Problem solving methodology

7 Conclusion

6 Standardization
5 Check Result

4 Counter Measure

3 Analysis

2 Understand current situation

STEP-1 1 Problem Identification

5/72
 1.1.Problem identification Step 1

OVERALL PARETO ANALYSIS OF MFG – May 13 to Jul 13 (3 month Avg. rejection PPM)

Conclusion

29% rack cell rejection PPM contribute in overall trend

6/72
 1.1.Problem identification Step 1

“A” which can be solved by QC Members

“B” which needs other department help to solve
“C” which requires Management help to solve
By our experience we have categories our rack module problems as per ABC ranking

Conclusion

We identified 10 problems to solve

by QCC team

7/72
 1.1.Problem identification Step 1

Which one issue we give first priority to address out of 10 issues?

We have to resolve our problem based on ‘Problem selection evaluation criteria methodology’

Conclusion

Our team have decided to evaluate the ‘A’ category problems in

P,Q,D,C,S,M manner 8/72
 1.1.Problem identification Step 1

Conclusion

Based on PQCDSM methodology we found more score for Over ball

variation rejection, So we have to taking this issue as a QCC 9/72
 1.2.Importance of the problem Step 1

Rack

Rack - Definition
Rack is used to convert the rotary motion into linear motion in the steering gear
It is one of the major part in the steering gear assembly

What is over ball dia. variation?

Over ball dia. Is checked in teeth portion of the rack

Over ball dia. is over or under the specification is called over ball dia. Variation

How to check over ball dia. Variation?

Over ball dia. is checked by using over ball and micrometer.

Conclusion

Rack over ball dimension is one of the important parameter in the

steering gear performance
10/72
 1.2.Importance of the problem Step 1

Control aspects for Rack over ball dimension

1.Internal control aspects in module 2.External control aspects in Gear Assembly

1.Internal control aspects in module

Micro meter
Rack

Over ball

 First off inspection -Before starting the production

 Process inspection -Every 10 no's once
 Patrol inspection - Every 1 hour

Conclusion
We have internal control in the shop floor to identify the rejection
11/72
 1.2.Importance of the problem Step 1

2.External control aspects in Gear Assembly

Torque limit - 10 kg/cm to 20 kg/cm2

Conclusion

We can identify the rack over ball variation in SGP assy if free pinion torque
exceed the specification

12/72
 1.3. Undesirable Result Step 1

End tight and feeling problem in assembly

Continuous size correction in broaching
High rejection in over ball dia. variation – 1127 PPM
Non value added activity in SGP assembly due to rework
While doing rework in gear 2 IBJ,2 lock washer,1 pinion cover and oil
seal got rejected
Operator fatigue high while doing rework
Internal customer (SGP Assy) dissatisfaction

Conclusion

Found more undesirable results due to “Rack over ball variation”

13/72
 1.4.Theme & Target Step 1

TO ELIMINATE OVER BALL DIA.

THEME
VARIATION IN BROACHING

TARGET FROM 1127 PPM. TO 0 PPM.

WHEN SEP’13

Conclusion

We arrived our target to solve the over ball dia. Variation in broaching
machine
14/72
 1.5.Schedule for Improvement Step 1

SCHEDULE FOR IMPROVEMENT

PERIOD Aug '13 Sep '13
Sl.No.
Activities 1W 2W 3W 4W 1W 2W 3W 4W
P
1 Problem identification
A
P
2 Observation
A
P
3 Analysis
A
P
4 Counter measures
A
P
5 Check Result
A
P
6 Standardization
A
P
7 Conclusion
A

Conclusion

We arrived a road map to resolve our problem through ‘problem solving

methodology ‘ 15/72
 Summary of step 1 Step 1

Problem identified through PQCDSM methodology

Importance of the problem

Undesirable results

Theme & Target

Schedule for improvement

STEP 2

16/72
 Problem solving methodology

7 Conclusion

6 Standardization
5 Check Result

4 Counter Measure

3 Analysis
STEP-2 2 Understand current situation

1 Problem Identification

17/72
 2.1.Understand current situation Step 2

Rack cell process flow

BAR PARTING BROACHING TEMPERING

CENTERLESS
WASHING STRAIGHTENING
GRINDING

DATE CRACK
TURNING
PUNCHING DETECTION

FLAT INDUCTION
BUFFING
MILLING HARDENING

Conclusion

Problem occurred in the highlighted area

18/72
 2.1.Understand current situation Step 2

Rack over ball specification

Measuring area Over ball diameter

Rack diameter 23 mm
Over ball Specification 19.87-20.02 mm
Instruments Over ball & Micrometer

Tapper should not exceed

0.03 mm max.

Conclusion
All the teeth should be maintain 0.03 mm tapper max
19/72
 2.1.Understand current situation Step 2

Trial for elemental study

Conclusion

Found frequently over ball variation rejection where we checked in

Spain broaching with different operators and different shifts
20/72
 2.2.Investigation of rejections Step 2

Type of over ball dia. Variation rejections

Conclusion

By closely observing the rejected parts, We come to know that all the
rejection comes under “Over ball tapper” type
21/72
 Summary of step 2 Step 2

Rack cell process flow

Rack over ball specification

Trial for elemental study

Investigation of rejections

Found the rejection type

STEP 3

22/72
 Problem solving methodology

7 Conclusion

6 Standardization
5 Check Result

4 Counter Measure

STEP-3 3 Analysis

2 Understand current situation

1 Problem Identification

23/72
 3.1 Funneling approach Step 3

Conclusion
In this problem we are going to analysis the root cause by funneling
approach
24/72
 3.2.Possible causes identified through brainstorming Step 3

Possible causes identified for Over ball tapper issue

1. Clamping pressure 6. Machine jerking

2. Fixture mounting base 7. Anvil position

3. Fixture mounting bolt 8. Broaching tool

4. Anvil mounting fixture 9. Bolster mounting ram

5. Anvil mounting bolt 10. Bolster mounting bolt

Conclusion

10 possible causes identified through brainstorming. So we have to

apply in fish born diagram
25/72
 3.3.Cause and Effect diagram(Possible causes) Step 3

We put all our possible causes into cause and effect diagram

Conclusion

All the possible causes segregated through 4M methodology. Those

to be validated
26/72
 3.4.Probable causes Step 3

Conclusion

Two causes identified as a significant causes through validation and gemba audit
27/72
 3.5.Root causes Step 3

Conclusion

We found 2 root causes by validating the probable causes. So we take

why why analysis for these two root causes
28/72
 Summary of step 3 Step 3

Funneling approach

Possible causes identified through brainstorming

Cause and Effect diagram(Possible causes)

Probable causes

Root causes

STEP 4

29/72
 Problem solving methodology

7 Conclusion

6 Standardization
5 Check Result

STEP-4 4 Counter Measure

3 Analysis

2 Understand current situation

1 Problem Identification

30/72
 4.1.Why? Why? Analysis Step 4

NATURE OF PROBLEM : ROOT CAUSE : 0.2 mm Anvil

Over ball tapper deflection while clamping

CM-1 fixture with

burr
accumulated
Anvil got loosen while clamping holes

WHY ?

Anvil mounting bolt not seated

properly
WHY ?

Burr jammed inside the thread COUNTER MEASURE :

To remove the jammed burr
portion from the thread portion

Conclusion
We identified counter measure for the first root cause 31/72
 4.1.Why? Why? Analysis Step 4

NATURE OF ISSUE : ROOT CAUSE : Found 0.25 mm gap

Over ball tapper between bolster and ram

CM-2

Bolster
Bolster got loosen while ram up and with worn
down out holes

WHY ?

Bolster mounting bolt not seated

properly in the ram
WHY ?

Burr jammed inside the thread COUNTER MEASURE :

To remove the jammed burr from
portion the thread portion

Conclusion
We identified our counter measure for the second root cause 32/72
 4.2 Counter measure Step 4

NATURE OF ISSUE :
Over ball Tapper

ROOT CAUSE : ROOT CAUSE :

0.2 mm Anvil deflection while Found 0.25 mm gap between
clamping bolster and ram

Counter measure 1 Counter measure 2

To remove the jammed burr from To remove the jammed burr from
the thread portion the thread portion

Team to think various ideas to remove the burr from thread portion

Conclusion

Ideas to be generated to remove the burr from thread portion

33/72
 Interim action Step 4

Before going to implement our counter measure we need a temporary solution

because Spain broaching line (YR9 model)is one of the busiest production line in
continuous production, rejection at such high numbers cannot be afforded and
immediate action was necessary, so a simple and temporary solution was needed
initially. So our team decided to make interim action

Action

To provide Helical coil spring for temporary

action
Implementation

Re-tapped hole with helical

1.Re-tap the hole in the fixture and ram fit coil spring
M10,M16 size helical coil spring respectively

Conclusion

We implemented our interim action. Now we fully focused T-slot and

T-Nut action plan
34/72
 Possible ideas Step 4

Two ideas generated to remove the jammed burr from the thread portion

1. Air wash the thread portion in the fixture and ram

2. Re-tap the thread portion in the fixture and ram

Conclusion

We found two possible ways to resolve our problem

35/72
 Action 1 Step 4

1. Air wash the thread portion in the fixture and ram

Conclusion

We completed the action 1,and we are going to validate the action 1

36/72
 Validation 1 Step 4

1. Air wash the fixture and ram

Conclusion

We validate the action 1,found 0.18 mm anvil deflection and mm gap

between bolster and ram. So air wash is not a solution. 37/72
 Action 2 Step 4

2. Re-tap the thread portion in the fixture and ram

Conclusion

We completed the action 2,and we are going to validate the action 2

38/72
 Validation 2 Step 4

2. Re-tap the thread portion in the fixture and ram

Conclusion
We validate the action 2,found o.03mm anvil deflection and mm no gap between
bolster and ram. So we taken re-tap the thread in fixture and ram.
39/72
 Confirmation trail Step 4

Trail for confirmation of action 2

Conclusion
We found the over ball tapper rejection again. So our team decided to further
validating the counter measure
40/72
 Analysis the counter measure Step 4

Conclusion
We found the over ball tapper rejection again. So our team decided to further
validating the counter measure
41/72
 Validation of counter measure Step 4

Burr jammed inside the thread

portion in the fixture and ram

WHY ?

No way to escape the burr in the

thread portion

COUNTER MEASURE : Provision for automatic burr removal

Conclusion
Team decided to think various ideas for automatic burr removal
42/72
 Possible ways Step 4

1. Full thread with through hole

Making through hole in the fixture and ram it self is not a

good solution because

Making T-slot in the fixture and ram and provide full thread
with through hole T-nut

Conclusion
Team decided to think various ideas for automatic burr removal
43/72
 About anvil mounting fixture Step 4

Fixture drawing

 M10 X 30 mm full thread Allen type bolt used

 Totally 12 bolts using for anvil mounting

 Thread portions in the fixtures are case

hardened

Anvil mounting holes are highlighted by red circles

Conclusion

We had done detail investigation about anvil mounting fixture

44/72
 Bolstar clamping ram Step 4

Ram drawing

 M16 X 160 mm full thread Allen type bolt used

 Totally 12 bolts using for bolster mounting

 Thread portion in the bolster are case hardened

Bolster mounting holes are marked in the red

circles

Conclusion

We had done detail investigation about bolster mounting ram

45/72
 Action plan 3W1H Step 4

Action plan for T-slot making in the ram

What Making T-slot in the ram and T-nut

When Sep-2013

Who Team

How

Conclusion

We planned for our counter measure implementation by 3W1H

46/72
 Implementation Step 4

Before After

T-NUT

Holes T-SLOT
for bolt

MAIN RAM

Action Taken: Benefits:

 Modified the Mounting holes by making of  Easy to Replaced When Thread Worn-out . 47/72
“T” slot & provide T Nut For Bolster mounting  Capability improved to modified the Machine parts 2.
 implementation Step 4
Before After

T-nut
Bolster
with holes

Ram with
T-slot

Conclusion

Modification done in ram to eliminate gap between bolster and ram

48/72
48
 Action plan 3W1H Step 4

Action plan for fixture

What Making T-slot in the fixture and T-nut

When Sep-2013

Who Team

How

Conclusion

We planned for our counter measure implementation by 3W1H

49/72
 Implementation Step 4

Before After

Anvil mounting holes are highlighted by red circles T-nut with threaded hole

Action Taken: Benefits:

 Modified the Mounting holes by making of  Easy to Replaced When Thread Worn-out .
“T” slot & provide T Nut For anvil mounting  Capability improved to modified the Machine parts .
50/72
 Implementation Step 4

Before After

fixture with
worn out
holes

Conclusion

Modification done in fixture to eliminate anvil deflection

51/72
 Summary of step 4 Step 4

Why? Why? analysis

Counter measure

Interim action

Counter measure validation

Action plan 3W1H

Implementation

STEP 5

52/72
 Problem solving methodology

7 Conclusion

6 Standardization

STEP-5 5 Check Result

4 Counter Measure

3 Analysis

2 Understand current situation

1 Problem Identification

53/72
 Confirmatory trail Step 5

Conclusion

After implementation of countermeasures we have taken trial with different

operators in different shifts and found no over ball tapper rejection
54/72
 Rejection trend graph Step 5

2000 Tapping the fixture and ram and inserting

M10, M16 helical coil spring respectively
Rejection in PPM.

1500
1127
986 1038
1000 878
Making T-slot in the fixture and ram,
and T-nut with thread for the
fixture and ram.
500

0 0 0 0 0
0
May'13 Jun'13 Jul'13 Aug'13 Sep'13 Oct'13 Nov'13 Dec'13

Month

Conclusion

After implementation of counter measures rejection due to over ball

tapper is reduced from 1127 ppm to 0 ppm.

55/72
 Cpk study Step 5

Before After

Conclusion

We have taken cpk study after implementation of counter measure.

Cpk value is more than the previous one

56/72
 PQCDSM Benefits Step 5

Rejection
reduced from
Rejection cost No Accident
Production 1127 ppm to 0 Delivery Operator
saved 0.91 found in
achieved as ppm. adherence fatigue
lacks/Annum Accident
per plan Cpk improved met 100% reduced
report
from 1.405 to
1.935

Conclusion

All the benefits are applied into the PQCDSM methodology

57/72
 Check undesirable results Step 5

End tight problem in assembly

Continuous size correction in broaching
High rejection in over ball dia. variation – 1127 PPM
Non value added activity in SGP assembly due to rework
While doing rework in gear 2 IBJ,2 lock washer,1 pinion cover and oil
seal got rejected
Operator fatigue high while doing rework
Internal customer dissatisfaction

Conclusion

All the undesirable results are eliminated

58/72
Summary of step 5 Step 5

Confirmation trail

Rejection trend graph

Cpk study

PQCDSM Benefits

Check undesirable results

STEP 6

59/72
 Problem solving methodology

7 Conclusion
STEP-6 6 Standardization
5 Check Result

4 Counter Measure

3 Analysis

2 Understand current situation

1 Problem Identification

60/72
 Standardization 5W-1H Step 6

WHAT WHY WHEN WHERE WHO HOW

(Action)

Making T-slot in
the fixture and
Avoid thread • FMEA
ram, and T-nut Douc.
washout in fixture Sep-2013 • Book of VP
with thread for Updated
and ram learning
the fixture and
ram.

Conclusion
We are updated our project in FMEA and Book of learning

61/72
 FMEA Step 6

Conclusion

We have Updated our project in FMEA

62/72
 Book of learning Step 6

Conclusion

We have updated our project in book of learning

63/72
Summary of step 6 Step 6

Standardization 5W1H

FMEA

Book of learning

STEP 7

64/72
 Problem solving methodology

STEP-7 7 Conclusion

6 Standardization
5 Check Result

4 Counter Measure

3 Analysis

2 Understand current situation

1 Problem Identification

65/72
 Mile stone chart Step 7

SCHEDULE FOR IMPROVEMENT

PERIOD Aug '13 Sep '13
Sl.No.
Activities 1W 2W 3W 4W 1W 2W 3W 4W
P
1 Problem identification
A
P
2 Observation
A
P
3 Analysis
A
P
4 Counter measures
A
P
5 Check Result
A
P
6 Standardization
A
P
7 Conclusion
A

Conclusion

We complete our task as per plan

66/72
 Lessons learnt and tools used Step 7

Lesson learnt

QCC Tools and techniques used

o Cause & effect diagram o Brain storming

o Control charts and Graphs o Genba Audit

o Why Why analysis
o Pareto diagram
o 3W 1H
o Histogram
o 5W 1H

Conclusion
These are the tools and techniques which we are used to solve our
problem
67/72
 Horizontal deployment Step 7

What? T-slot taking in fixture and ram

Where? Rack Cell 1,3 and 4

When? Nov ‘13

Who? QCC Team

How? T-slot and T -nut making in Ram and fixture

Conclusion

We have planned to implement the action in rack cell 1,3,and 4

68/72
 Summary of step 7 Step 6

Mile stone chart

Lesson learnt and tools used

Horizontal d deployment

End of
presentation

69/72
 Project detail

Project Started on : 01.08.2013

Project Completed on : 30.09.2013
No. of Meeting conducted : 16
Meeting scheduled on : Monday, Friday
Meeting Time : 3.30 – 4.30 pm
Attendance : 95%
Methodology : QC Story Methodology
No. of Projects completed : 15

Next project : Broaching setting time reduction

70/72
 Machine jerking Step 3

Dial gauge Ram

Conclusion

Machine jerking checked at various position with dial and found no

abnormality. Hence it is Insignificant. 71/72
 Clamping pressure Step 3

Spain broaching clamping pressure verification

Conclusion

The clamping pressure checked and found 58 bar against the spec of
50 – 60 Bar. The variation with in the spec, Hence it is Insignificant
72/72
 Broach tool Step 3

Online tool life monitoring

All the broaching machines are connect to online tool life monitoring. Every
6000 no's we have to regrind the tool. Online tool life monitoring update the tool
output, When the tool output reach 6000 no's, TMS will stop the machine.
Conclusion

Tool condition and grinding frequency are monitored in online tool life
monitoring. So it is insignificant. 73/72
 Fixture mounting base Step 3

Spain broaching fixture mounting base checked

with feeler gauge

Fixture

Fixture mounting
base

Feeler gauge

Conclusion

Found no gap in fixture mounted along with machine base.

The experiment conducted by feeler gauge. Hence it is insignificant 74/72
 Fixture mounting bolt Step 3

Fixture mounting bolt

 No damage in the thread portions of the bolts

 Found correct specification bolts used in the required areas

 We have a bolt changing frequency check sheet

Conclusion

We checked the current bolt which is used to mount the fixture, All the
specifications are verified and found ok. Hence it is insignificant. 75/72
 Anvil position Step 3

Dial gauge

Anvil

Observed no height variation during anvil clamping

Conclusion

We checked with dial gauge and found No height variation observed in

the anvil while clamping. Hence it is insignificant. 76/72
 Anvil mounting fixture Step 3

Anvil allowable deflection 0.05 mm max

Anvil deflection checked by dial gauge Anvil deflection of 0.2mm observed while
while clamping clamping

Conclusion

Anvil deflection of 0.2mm observed in the dial gauge reading against

the spec of 0.05mm while clamping. Hence it is significant. 77/72
 Anvil mounting bolt Step 3

Anvil mounting bolt

 No damage in the thread portions of the bolts

 Found correct specification bolts used in the required areas

 We have a bolt changing frequency check sheet

Conclusion

We checked the current bolt which is used to mount the anvil, All the
specifications are verified and found ok. Hence it is insignificant. 78/72
 Bolster mounting ram Step 3

Spain broaching bolster mounting ram

Bolster
Ram

Feeler gauge

Conclusion

Found 0.25 mm gap between bolster and ram during feeler gauge
measurement. Hence it is Significant 79/72
 Bolster mounting bolt Step 3

Bolster mounting bolt

 No damage in the thread portions of the bolts

 Found correct specification bolts used in the required areas

 We have a bolt changing frequency check sheet

Conclusion

We checked the current bolt which is used to mount the bolster, All the
specifications are verified and found ok. Hence it is insignificant. 80/72