Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Tollgate Review
Contract
D M A I C
Total Months: 6
Champion: Marybeth Cunningham
Role
Eric Crump
Ken Dillon
Marne Cario
Chris Kushmaul
Jim Altier
Tom Catheline
William Katko
John Salerno
Donnell Conner
Customer (internal/external):
internal: PC&L
CTQ addressed:
Premium / IPM (Internal & External)
Business Driver(s) Impacted:
Premium Cost Reduction / IPM Internal And
External Delivery Improvement
Project Scope:
In Scope - Reduction of all Premium from Pt 11
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
Tools Used
Contract / SIPOC / Graphs
actual
actual
Analyze
Improve
actual
Control
actual
Tollgate Review
$200,000
$180,000
$1
83
,4
11
$160,000
$140,000
$120,000
$100,000
$80,000
$1
24
$6
4
$1
08
$2
00
$7
74
4
$1
,2
2
$20,000
$5
,5
8
$40,000
$1
1,
18
1
$1
9,
57
1
$60,000
$0
Behind
Schedule
Internal
Quality
Supplier
Quality
Trans /
Customs
Deliver
Miss
Tollgate Review
Req /
Inventory
Adj.
Part Cert.
Delay
$250,000
$2
20
,0
19
$200,000
$150,000
$6
59
$3
00
$1
,1
1
2
$1
,6
1
0
$1
,8
5
$7
,3
3
$2
0,
49
2
$50,000
$100,000
Req /
Inventory
Adj.
Tool
Capacity
$0
Behind
Schedule
Trans /
Customs
Data
Processing
Engineering
Internal
Quality
Deliver Miss
Tollgate Review
10,000
7,
65
5
9,000
8,000
7,000
4,
89
4
6,000
3,
83
4
5,000
2,
89
2
2,
16
9
2,
04
7
3,000
2,
50
7
4,000
Jan
27
23
9
1,000
26
1
2,000
0
May
June
July
Aug
Sept
Tollgate Review
Oct
Nov
Dec
YTD
3,500
3,
22
5
2,
08
9
2,
20
6
2,500
1,
59
6
2,000
1,
97
6
3,000
1,500
50
8
79
9
1,000
24
3
500
0
Jan
Feb
March
April
May
June
Tollgate Review
July
YTD
SIPOC
Process Name:
Process Owner:
Suppliers
(Providers of the
required resources)
(Resources required by
the process)
Customer
Forecast
Pulls
Orders
PC&L
Production Schedules
Quality
PPAP
Tool Release
Press Release
Part Inspection (PPC)
Manufacturing
Production
Tool Room
Tool & Die Makers
Tools
Set - UP
Outputs
(Deliverables from
the process)
D M A I C
Customers
Requirements
Parts Shipped on Time
Customer
Requirements
Forecast
Pulls (Internal)
Orders (External)
Scheduling
Manufacuturing
TERMINALS
Good Quality Parts
Right Quantities
Correctly Labeled
Tool Engineer
Support
Maintenance
Support
Change-over
Terminal Store
Matrial Handling
Shipping
Develop Store Goal
Suppliers
Raw Material
Tollgate Review
SHIP
from
OHIO
INTERNAL
Mexico
Mississippi
EXTERNAL
Lear
Yazaki
PS&G
Condumex
D M A I C
Tollgate Review
Manufacturing
Information Systems
7
(x) Uptime
(x) Absenteeism
(x) Label
(x) Shipping
Patterns
1
(x) Press
Availability 4
(x) Operator
Training
(x) Scrap
6 Tool Capability
(Goal Changes)
(x) Unforseen
Orders/Pulls
(x) Goal
Changes
(x)
Defective
Raw
Customer/Supplier
Tollgate Review
Labor
Resourcing/Job Ass
Changeover
Time
6
Mtce. Response
Time
6
Spare Tooling
Parts
4
6
Setup Times
Why do We have
missed/late
shipments?
Spare Equip.
Parts
Tool
3
Availability
(x) Labor
Allocation/Job
(x) Inventory
Visibility
D M A I C
Make vs Buy
(x) PPAP
(1 - Group with FTQ?)
Issues Running 2
Precious Metal
Unplanned
3
Mtce. Downtime
Eng/Tool Room/Maint.
Should add up to
84
D M A I C
Measure
Data Collection Plan
Time Period
Name of Factor:
Operator (1)
(2)
Trial
Part Number
(Y)
(X1)
(X2)
(X3)
(X4)
(X5)
Joe Bonneau
John Salerno
Joe Bonneau
Ken Dillion
Ken Dillion
John Salerno
Uptime
Set up / Change
Over
Tool
Availability
Press Availability
Is an acceptable
press available to
the run part?
Dicrete
Continuous
Operational Definition
Type of Data:
Continuous
Specific to:
P/N's
Tollgate Review
Time to convert
good part to good
part
Sitting on
ready rack
Continuous
Discrete
D M A I C
Measure
Data Collection Plan
(Y)
Time Period
(X6)
Operational Definition
Type of Data:
Specific to:
P/N's
Tollgate Review
Operator (1)
(2)
Trial
Part Number
(X7)
(X8)
(X9)
(X10)
John Salerno
Marne Cario
Marne Cario
Bill Katko
Unforeseen
Orders / Pulls
Low Volume
Red Tag
Is this part
number low
Volume?
Time from
The difference in time
Difference
when a call is
between when a tool
between the
placed to the has failed & marked on forecast & the
time the work the board & when the
actual pull
is complete
machine is running
Continuous
Continuous
Continuous
Rounded to the hour Build
area
checked
1118
Discrete
Discrete
First time?
Quality?
D M A I C
Repeatability
Within Appraisers
Appraiser
#
Inspected
# Matched
% Percent
95.0% CT
21
30
30
100
(90.5 , 100)
30
29
96.7
(82.8 , 99.9)
Reproducibility
Between Appraisers
# Inspected
# Matched
% Percent
95.0% CT
30
29
96.7
(82.8 , 99.9)
Tollgate Review
D M A I C
Tollgate Review
Descriptive Statistics
D M A I C
Variable: (Y)
USL = 2 Days
DPMO = 1.4
sigma process
10
13
5.269
0.000
Mean
StDev
Variance
Skewness
Kurtosis
N
3.18609
2.89036
8.35419
1.32074
1.59636
115
Minimum
1st Quartile
Median
3rd Quartile
Maximum
0.3000
1.0000
2.3000
5.4000
14.0000
2.5
3.5
3.7200
3.3212
2.7000
The median time for parts on backorder is 2.3 days. With a target of 2 days
our process defect rate is 53%
Tollgate Review
Descriptive Statistics
D M A I C
(Y)
8
6
4
2
0
10
60
110
Observation
Number of runs about median:
Expected number of runs:
Longest run about median:
Approx P-Value for Clustering:
Approx P-Value for Mixtures:
58.0000
58.4957
10.0000
0.4630
0.5370
76.0000
76.3333
3.0000
0.4704
0.5296
Name
Press Uptime
Data Type
Analysis Tools
D M A I C
Statistically Significant
Continuous
No
No
X2
Continuous
X3
Tool Availability
Discrete
X4
Press Availability
Discrete
X5
Discrete
X6
Mantenance Response
Time
No
No
No
Continuous
X7
Continuous
X8
Discrete
X9
Low Volume
Discrete
X10
Discrete
X11
Start-Stop Part
Discrete
Tollgate Review
No
No
No
No
D M A I C
Y1 = 4.632 - 0.04227 X1
30
S
R-Sq
R-Sq(adj)
25
3.69418
3.7%
2.9%
Y1
20
S = 3.69418
15
R-Sq = 3.7%
R-Sq(adj) = 2.9%
Analysis of Variance
10
Source
Regression
Error
Total
DF
1
120
121
SS
62.52
1637.63
1700.16
MS
62.5237
13.6470
F
4.58
P
0.034
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
X1
60
70
80
90
Data analysis shows that machine uptime and time to fill a backorder do not
have a strong correlation not statistical root cause
Tollgate Review
D M A I C
Y1 = 3.108 + 0.08494 X2
S
R-Sq
R-Sq(adj)
14
12
2.95590
0.7%
0.0%
Y1
10
x2 speed
Long
Short
6
4
2
N<=
10
49
N>
9
47
Median
2.30
2.30
P = 0.899
Q3-Q1
5.60
3.90
0
0
8
X2
10
12
14
N<=
34
24
N>
35
22
Median
2.40
2.15
Q3-Q1
4.40
4.10
P = 0.761
Individual 95.0% CIs
--+---------+---------+---------+---(-------------------*------------)
(--------------*-----------------)
--+---------+---------+---------+---1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
Data analysis shows that Set Up / Change Over Time and time to fill a
backorder have no correlation not statistical root cause
Tollgate Review
D M A I C
X3 Tool Availability
Mood Median Test: Y1 versus X3
Mood median test for Y1
Chi-Square = 0.00
DF = 1
Boxplot of Y1 vs X3
30
X3
N
Y
25
Y1
20
N<=
7
55
N>
7
53
Median
2.35
2.30
Q3-Q1
5.63
4.30
P = 0.948
Individual 95.0% CIs
---+---------+---------+---------+--(--------*--------------------------)
(---*--)
---+---------+---------+---------+--1.5
3.0
4.5
6.0
15
X3
N
Y
0
N
N
14
108
Lower
2.12450
3.32853
StDev
3.06088
3.84031
Upper
5.31933
4.52931
Y
X3
D M A I C
X4 Press Availability
Mood Median Test: Y1 versus X4
Mood median test for Y1
Chi-Square = 1.11
DF = 1
Boxplot of Y1 vs X4
30
X4
N
Y
25
Y1
20
N<=
22
40
N>
16
44
Median
1.65
2.40
Q3-Q1
5.00
4.40
P = 0.293
Individual 95.0% CIs
---+---------+---------+---------+--(---------*-------------------)
(-----------*------------)
---+---------+---------+---------+--1.20
1.80
2.40
3.00
15
10
X4
N
Y
N
38
84
Lower
4.11245
2.47510
StDev
5.18848
2.90730
Upper
6.98004
3.51331
Y
X4
The p values are greater than .05; we accept the null hypothesis ~ there is
no difference in backorder time when a press is available yes vs. no
Tollgate Review
D M A I C
Boxplot of Y1 vs X5
14
X5
N
Y
12
N<=
2
54
N>
4
52
Median
4.30
2.30
Q3-Q1
5.83
4.40
10
P = 0.401
Individual 95.0% CIs
-------+---------+---------+--------(-------------*--------------------)
(--*-)
-------+---------+---------+--------2.5
5.0
7.5
Y1
8
A 95.0% CI for median(N) - median(Y): (-2.00,9.70)
X5
N
Y
0
No
N
6
106
Lower
2.34663
2.46978
StDev
4.00221
2.85313
Upper
11.4501
3.3707
Yes
X5
Although the medians appear different, there is not enough data to statistically
conclude there is a difference there were only six samples when spare
tooling was not available
Tollgate Review
D M A I C
X6 Maintenance Response
Time
Mood Median Test: Y1 versus X6 > 4
Boxplot of Y1 vs X6 > 4
14
X6 > 4
No
Yes
12
10
8
N<=
53
5
N>
40
17
Median
1.70
5.70
P = 0.004
Q3-Q1
3.00
4.73
Y1
F-Test
Test Statistic
P-Value
No
X6 > 4
Test Statistic
P-Value
Yes
0
No
Yes
2.0
X6 > 4
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs
5.0
X6 > 4
No
Yes
Statistical Root Cause with a p-value of .004 we reject the null hypothesis;
there is a difference in times. When the maintenance call takes over 4 hours
then the backorder time goes up significantly!!
0
Y1
Tollgate Review
0.67
0.197
10
12
14
2.41
0.124
D M A I C
P = 0.001
Boxplot of Y1 vs X7 > 4
X7 > 4
No
Yes
14
N<=
22
36
N>
6
51
Median
1.00
2.70
Q3-Q1
1.53
5.00
12
Overall median = 2.30
10
8
Y1
F-Test
Test Statistic
P-Value
No
X7 > 4
6
4
Test Statistic
P-Value
Yes
2
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs
0
No
4.0
Yes
X7 > 4
X7 > 4
No
Yes
10
12
14
Statistical Root Cause with a p-value of .001 we reject the null hypothesis;
there is a difference in times. When the maintenance call takes over 4 hours
then the backorder time goes up
Y1
Tollgate Review
1.02
0.897
3.63
0.059
D M A I C
Boxplot of Y1 vs X8
14
X8
No
Yes
12
N<=
28
30
N>
28
29
Median
2.35
2.30
Q3-Q1
3.55
4.40
10
8
P = 0.928
Individual 95.0% CIs
---+---------+---------+---------+--(----------*--)
(---------------*-----------------)
---+---------+---------+---------+--1.40
2.10
2.80
3.50
Y1
Test Statistic
P-Value
No
X8
Test Statistic
P-Value
Yes
No
Yes
2.0
X8
2.5
3.0
3.5
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs
4.0
X8
No
Yes
10
12
14
Y1
0.76
0.299
1.21
0.273
D M A I C
X9 Low Volume
Mood Median Test: Y1 versus X9
14
X9
N
Y
12
N<=
53
9
N>
53
5
Median
2.35
1.85
Q3-Q1
4.10
6.98
(Y)
10
P = 0.315
Individual 95.0% CIs
-------+---------+---------+--------(---*-)
(-----*--------------------------)
-------+---------+---------+--------2.0
4.0
6.0
F-Test
Test Statistic
P-Value
(X9)
Test Statistic
P-Value
0
N
(X9)
4
5
6
7
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs
(X9)
10
12
14
(Y)
0.35
0.007
1.17
0.282
D M A I C
Boxplot of Y1 vs X10
14
X10
No
Yes
12
N<=
21
37
N>
15
42
Median
1.85
2.40
Q3-Q1
4.30
4.40
10
8
P = 0.253
Individual 95.0% CIs
------+---------+---------+---------+
(-----------*-------------)
(----------*------------)
------+---------+---------+---------+
1.40
2.10
2.80
3.50
Y1
6
Test for Equal Variances for Y1
F-Test
Test Statistic
P-Value
No
X10
2
0
Test Statistic
P-Value
Yes
No
Yes
X10
2.50
2.75
3.00
3.25
3.50
3.75
4.00
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs
4.25
X10
No
Yes
8
Y1
10
12
14
1.17
0.567
0.01
0.941
D M A I C
X12
No
Yes
12
N<=
29
29
N>
19
38
Median
1.50
2.40
Q3-Q1
4.60
4.40
10
P = 0.070
Individual 95.0% CIs
---+---------+---------+---------+--(-------*--------------------------)
(-----------*---------)
---+---------+---------+---------+--1.20
1.80
2.40
3.00
(Y)
8
Test for Equal Variances for (Y)
F-Test
Test Statistic
P-Value
No
X12
Test Statistic
P-Value
Yes
0
No
2.0
Yes
2.5
3.0
3.5
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs
4.0
X12
X12
No
Yes
10
12
14
(Y)
1.49
0.131
0.51
0.476
D M A I C
Tollgate Review
Next Steps
D M A I C
Tollgate Review
D M A I C
Tollgate Review
Develop Solutions
-
D M A I C
Tollgate Review
D M A I C
N<=
62
789
N>
150
574
Median
2.40
1.40
P = 0.000
Q3-Q1
2.68
1.80
Subscripts
Lower
2.01797
1.82901
StDev
2.23877
1.90766
1119
1.38
0.001
1108
1.8
Upper
2.51152
1.99312
Subscripts
Subscripts
1119
1108
Test Statistic
P-Value
1.9
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
95% Bonferroni Confidence Intervals for StDevs
16.49
0.000
2.5
1119
1108
10
15
20
25
The p values are less than .05; we reject the null hypothesis ~ there is a
difference in backorder. The solutions have impacted both variation and median
Tollgate Review
D M A I C
Capability Analysis
Characteristic
Defs
Units
Opps
TotOpps
DPU
DPO
PPM
ZShift
ZBench
1108
414
1363
1363
0.304
0.303742
303742
1.500
2.014
1119
117
212
212
0.552
0.551887
551887
1.500
1.370
Total
531
0.337143
337143
1.500
1.920
1575
Applying the goal of less than 2 days on backorder the solutions implemented
improvement our process from 1.4 sigma to a 2 sigma process.
Tollgate Review
D M A I C
Tollgate Review
Financial Impact
-
D M A I C
Over the last two months departments without the improvements have
accounted for significantly more premium than department 110x.
- March
- April
Dept 110x
18.0 %
27.8 %
Non-Improved Depts
52.0 % (1119)
58.9 % (1116)
Our implemented solutions reduced our median time to fill a back order
by 41.6 %
- From a median of 2.4 to a median of 1.4
Tollgate Review
Control Plan
-
D M A I C
Tollgate Review
Intangibles
-
D M A I C
Tollgate Review
D M A I C
Back-up
Tollgate Review
$16,000
$1
1,
42
0
$14,000
$12,000
$8,000
7
$6
,8
3
$6
,8
3
$10,000
$1
,5
7
$5
12
$1
,5
5
$2,000
$6
78
4
$2
,6
9
$2
,3
8
0
$2
,5
8
$4,000
$3
,6
0
$6,000
Tollgate Review
em
be
r
D
ec
N
ov
em
be
r
er
ct
ob
O
Se
p
te
m
be
r
t
A
ug
us
Ju
ly
Ju
ne
ay
M
A
pr
il
ar
ch
M
ra
ry
Fe
bu
Ja
nu
a
ry
$0
$1
,8
4
$2
,1
6
$2,500
$2,000
$1
,0
5
$1,500
$4
56
$1,000
$500
$0
January Feburary
March
April
Tollgate Review