Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 15

COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING

Department of Industrial Engineering

Case Study of Prepatent Factors Affecting the Standard of


Identification Cards in Xavier University

Cabizon, Angelie G.
Cozo, Julien Myka
Heraña, Pamela Kaye F.
Lopez, Ryan Miguel
Tonido, Cyle

Laboratory Report #3
Industrial Quality Control
September 23, 2018
PART I - PRESENTATION OF THE CASE

The Office of Student Affairs in Xavier University has been bustling with defected IDs

that would not swipe to the machines from the gate. It is well known that software

production organizations spend a sizeable amount of their project budget to rectify the

defects introduced into the software systems during the development process. An in depth

understanding of the mechanisms that give rise to defects is an essential step towards the

reduction of defects in software systems. A control system manages commands, directs, or

regulates the behavior of other devices or systems using control loops. It can range from a

single home heating controller using a thermostat controlling a domestic boiler to

large Industrial control systems which are used for controlling processes or machines. For

continuously modulated control, a feedback controller is used to automatically control a

process or operation. The control system compares the value or status of the process

variable (PV) being controlled with the desired value or set point (SP), and applies the

difference as a control signal to bring the process variable output of the plant to the same

value as the set point. For sequential and combinational logic, software logic, such as in

a programmable logic controller is used.


PART II - ANALYSIS OF THE CASE

METHODOLOGY

This study involves gathering sufficient data to act as the basis of evaluation and

examination. The recorded data are subjected to examination and analysis; formalized

versions of this process are critical examination and systems analysis. The aim is to identify,

often through a structured, questioning process, those points of the overall system of work

that require improvements or offer opportunity for beneficial change. The aim here is to

identify possible actions for improvement and to subject these to evaluation in order to

develop a preferred solution. The researchers must acquire data from the Office of Student

Affairs and the University book store where the IDs are made to know certain information

regarding the study. The researchers must then identify the causes of defective IDs with the

help of IE tools and methods such as Ishikawa diagram, Surveys and other forms. After

arriving with the most probable or main reason for defective IDs the researchers must

create a proper recommendation on how to eliminate or minimize defective IDs.


PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION

Figure 1.0- Ishikawa Diagram

This diagram is a product design and quality defect prevention to identify potential factors

causing an overall effect. Each cause or reason for imperfection is a source of variation. One

of the reasons why there are Identification cards that are defective is that the machine itself

have been jamming with its sticky roller delaying and distracting the analyst. This affects the

inexperienced analyst who types the wrong code causing the system to improper calibration

and information contamination. Since the demand would out pressure on time the analyst

or the person in charge will not double check the information of the ID specially barcodes

with the right inspection and trial. Also since there some students that did not follow the
rules and took the delayed step some of the ID's are in rushed that is why there are more

defected IDs in the late batch.

Data Gathered
N JUNE (4th JULY (1st JULY(2nd JULY(3rd JULY(4thweek) X R
week) week) week) week)
1 14 13 18 53 18 23.2 40
2 13 15 15 17 23 16.6 10
3 13 16 16 12 14 14.2 4
4 15 23 23 14 17 18.4 9
5 16 16 15 17 67 26.2 52
6 23 23 16 18 16 19.2 7
7 14 14 23 19 17 17.4 9
AVE 19.31429 18.71429

UCL = 27.15557
LCL= 11.473

LCLR 1.422286
UCLR 36.00629

Control Charts
R - Chart
60.0

50.0

40.0
UCL 36.0

30.0

20.0 CL 18.7

10.0

LCL 1.4
0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Period

Figure 1.1- Control chart for complaints in Identification Cards in Xavier University (Range)

The control chart is a graph used to study how a process changes over time. Data are

plotted in time order. A control chart always has a central line for the average, an upper line

for the upper control limit and a lower line for the lower control limit. These lines are

determined from historical data. The control chart is a graph used to study how a process

changes over time. Data are plotted in time order. A control chart always has a central line

for the average, an upper line for the upper control limit and a lower line for the lower

control limit. These lines are determined from historical data.


X Chart
28.9
UCL 27.16
26.9

24.9

22.9

20.9
CL 19.31
18.9

16.9

14.9

12.9
LCL 11.47
10.9

8.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Period

Figure 1.2-Control chart for complaints in Identification Cards in Xavier University (Median)

The chart contains a center line that represents the mean value for the in-control

process. Two other horizontal lines, called the upper control limit (UCL) and the lower

control limit (LCL). This shows the X-control chart for complaints in Identification Cards in

Xavier University. The upper control limit is 27.16 complaints. The center line is 19.31

complaints and the lower control 11.47complaints.


CONCLUSION

Based on the data gathered, one of the reasons why there are Identification cards that

are defective is that the machine itself have been jamming with its sticky roller delaying and

distracting the analyst. This affects the inexperienced analyst who types the wrong code

causing the system to improper calibration and information contamination. Since the

demand would out pressure on time the analyst or the person in charge will not double

check the information of the ID specially barcodes with the right inspection and trial. Also

since there some students that did not follow the rules and took the delayed step some of

the ID's are in rushed that is why there are more defected IDs in the late batch.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. To make more observations to increase the accuracy rate of the study. Having more

observation will suffice the accuracy.

2. Before conducting the ID processing make sure that the machine or other variation

related to the process is always double checked.

3. Person in charge should always be active and avoid many errors. Make notes beside

their table to prevent error in inputting information.

4. Early ID processing and punishment for delayed students.

5. Test IDs designed with the attribute of repeatability and universality within the

University.
APPENDIX

N JUNE (4th JULY (1st JULY(2nd JULY(3rd JULY(4thweek) X R


week) week) week) week)
1 14 13 18 53 18 23.2 40
2 13 15 15 17 23 16.6 10
3 13 16 16 12 14 14.2 4
4 15 23 23 14 17 18.4 9
5 16 16 15 17 67 26.2 52
6 23 23 16 18 16 19.2 7
7 14 14 23 19 17 17.4 9
AVE 19.31429 18.71429

UCL = 27.15557
LCL= 11.473

LCLR 1.422286
UCLR 36.00629

R - Chart
60.0

50.0

40.0
UCL 36.0

30.0

20.0 CL 18.7

10.0

LCL 1.4
0.0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Period
X Chart
28.9
UCL 27.16
26.9

24.9

22.9

20.9
CL 19.31
18.9

16.9

14.9

12.9
LCL 11.47
10.9

8.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Period
JUNE (4th week) - X Chart
28.9
UCL 27.2
26.9

24.9

22.9

20.9
CL 19.3
18.9

16.9

14.9

12.9
LCL 11.5
10.9

8.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Period
JULY (1st week) - X Chart
28.9
UCL 27.2
26.9

24.9

22.9

20.9
CL 19.3
18.9

16.9

14.9

12.9
LCL 11.5
10.9

8.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Period
JULY(2nd week) - X Chart
28.9
UCL 27.2
26.9

24.9

22.9

20.9
CL 19.3
18.9

16.9

14.9

12.9
LCL 11.5
10.9

8.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Period
JULY(3rd week) - X Chart
58.9

53.9

48.9

43.9

38.9

33.9

28.9 UCL 27.2

23.9
CL 19.3
18.9

13.9
LCL 11.5

8.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Period
JULY(4thweek) - X Chart
78.9

68.9

58.9

48.9

38.9

28.9 UCL 27.2

CL 19.3
18.9

LCL 11.5
8.9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Period