WEL – COME Hi- tech Quality Circle S. J. Iron & Steels Pvt. Ltd. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

kenny
wel come hi tech quality circle s j iron steels pvt ltd n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
WEL – COME Hi- tech Quality Circle S. J. Iron & Steels Pvt. Ltd. PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
WEL – COME Hi- tech Quality Circle S. J. Iron & Steels Pvt. Ltd.

play fullscreen
1 / 45
Download Presentation
WEL – COME Hi- tech Quality Circle S. J. Iron & Steels Pvt. Ltd.
138 Views
Download Presentation

WEL – COME Hi- tech Quality Circle S. J. Iron & Steels Pvt. Ltd.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. WEL – COMEHi- tech Quality CircleS. J. Iron & Steels Pvt. Ltd. Area – 3 Acres Manpower of company – 325 nos. Turnover - 40 Cr. (Target 55 Cr. For 2011-2012)

  2. Our Valuable Customers

  3. Our Products

  4. QUALITY POLICY OF THE COMPANY It is our policy to provide customers with Product or Services that meet or exceed their expectations emphasizing product & employee safety. Everyone should look at their next process as ‘The Customer ’. Continual Improvement shall be the way of our life by which we shall strive to achieve Customer delight in our business of finished castings.

  5. Date : 18th FEB. 2011

  6. Team Formation Meeting • Date Of Quality Circle Formed :- 18th Feb. 2011 • Co-ordinator, Facilitator & Team leader formed • Name of quality circle decided. • Logo of quality circle – • Next meeting on 25th Feb.2011

  7. Name of Quality Circle – Hi-tech Quality Circle • Circle formed on – 18.02.2011 • Name of the members

  8. Our Team

  9. TeamMembers

  10. Team Members

  11. Date : 25th FEB & 6th March. 2011

  12. Data collection Date:- 18th March 2011

  13. Pie Chart Part selection for reduce rejection Overall rejection (at foundry Stage & at M/c Shop Stage)

  14. Date : 11th March 2011

  15. Problem Selection To Reduce rejection from 14.80% to 5 % of Oil Filter Adapter till April end 2011 Activities performed • Data collection of last three months. • Group discussion on rejection analysis. • Rejection details studied for all parts. • Problem Selected based on data collection in three meetings – 25th Feb. 2011, 6th,11th & 18th Mar. 2011

  16. Part Selection for reduce rejection Part Name : -Oil Filter Adapter Casting Part No. :- R 101234 Customer :- John Deere Pvt. Ltd.

  17. Data collection Of Oil Filter Adapter

  18. Pie chart Cause Selection for reducing rejection Cause wise rejection for Oil Filter Adapter

  19. Parato ChartFrom Dec. 2010 to Feb. 2011 100 % 75 % Cause Selection for reducing rejection 50 % 25 % 0 % Causes of rejection for Oil Filter Adapter

  20. Problem Definition – oil filter adapter GAS REJECTION

  21. Cause & effect diagram for Gas rejection of Oil Filter Adapter Machine Man Is it due to improper handling Is the specified M/C used ? M/C Setting parameters Is operator trained ? Is core supply through proper planning? Is Jolting & squeezing proper? Is gas vent opened properly? Pouring time in sec. Is operator temporary ? Is M/C in good condition ? Gas vent opening by air? Is it due to improper Rework ? Is Air pressure adequate? Absenteeism Gas Rejection Pattern venting system inadequate Core scratch hardness is not proper? Laddle not cleaned Pattern Mismatch Is core baking proper? Are Control Plan followed ? Is Sand properties ok? Pattern Gas vent provision Pouring Process not proper ? Gas vent drill size Is core color is proper? Green Sand Moisture % is high? Metal temperature meter are not calibrated Is Mould hardness is ok? Core moisture is not removed? Discontinuity of pouring? Core sand gas is high? Pattern Damage Core Box Damage Pouring height? Core gas is not removed Method Material Tooling

  22. Root Cause analysis of Oil Filter Adapter Machine Man Gas Rejection Pattern venting system inadequate GAS REJECTION– OIL FILTER ADAPTER GAS REJECTION– OIL FILTER ADAPTER Three Causes are select for further analysis Pouring process is not proper ? Core moisture is not removed? Method Material Tooling

  23. Why-why analysis Why-why analysis for caused 1 – Core Moisture 24

  24. Action Taken- Date 12.04.11 Before :- Timer & Temp. Controller not available. After 25

  25. Action Taken Activities performed • Watch has been displayed near core oven for maintaining & monitoring correct time for core baking. • Temperature controller has been displayed for maintaining constant temperature for core baking i.e 250o C for 1hr. • Modified Work instruction formed for the carrying out core baking process. • Proper instructions has been given to core baking operator.

  26. Trialtakenon12.04.2011 for cause 1 • Trial Results • Qty. produced – 300 Nos. • Qty. rejected – 11 Nos. • Gas Rejection% - 3.66 %

  27. Why-why analysis Why-why analysis for caused 2 – Pouring Process 28

  28. Action Taken- Date 22.04.11 Before 29

  29. Action Taken- Date 22.04.11 Before 30

  30. Action Taken- Date 22.04.11 After 31

  31. Action Taken Activities performed • Monorail laddle which was initially used in two stage pouring , avoided & three hand laddles are introduced. • Stand for hand laddle is placed in front of furnace. • Proper instructions about the new pouring process are given to pouring supervisor & pouring operators. • New work instructions are formed for Oil filter adapter pouring process.

  32. Why-why analysis Why-why analysis for caused 3 – Pattern venting system 33

  33. Action Taken- Date 22.04.11 In gates thickness increased by 2 mm 34

  34. Action Taken- Date 22.04.11 Gas vent Drill size increased To 8 mm 35

  35. Action Taken Activities performed • As per shown in the photo, in-gate thickness is increased by 2 mm size at the circled place. • The in gate thickness is increased to 6 mm from 4 mm. • Pouring time is reduced from 10-12 sec. to 8-9 sec. per box. • Gas Vents drill size are increased to 8 mm from 6 mm.

  36. Trial taken on 22.04.2011 for cause no. 2 &3 • Trial Results • Qty. produced – 1028 Nos. • Qty. rejected – 16 Nos. • Gas Rejection% - 1.55 %

  37. Tangible benefits Rejection Reduction For Oil filter adapter in the Month of April 2011

  38. Tangible benefits • Total Rejection Reduced = 14.8% - 4.75% = 10.05 % • Total Casting saved = 633 Castings. • Total Saving in the Month Of April 2011 • = 633nos. X 110Rs. = 69630 Rs. • Estimated Annual Saving • = 8.35 Lacs.

  39. Achievement Rejection reduced of Oil Filter Adapter From 14.80% To 4.75%

  40. In tangible benefits • Knowledge of our group increased. • Result successfully achieved while working in group • Confidence level increased in total group. • Awareness increased among employees. • Internal customer satisfaction. • Group Discussion daring increased. • Stage Daring Increased

  41. Future plans • After completion of our target we select next project is Rejection Reduction based on the pie chart in the project. • 55Hp & 35Hp Flywheel is selected for reduce rejection.

  42. Project completed • 3 Nos. Of project completed up to 05.08.2011 • Reduced rejection% of 35 Hp Flywheel 7.93 – 3.06 % • Reduced rejection% of 55 Hp Flywheel 10.83 – 3.15 % Current status of project completed 1) Oil Filter Adapter Rejection % - 5.5 2) 35 Hp Flywheel Rejection % - 3.4 3) 55 Hp Flywheel Rejection % - 5.07 Our current project No. 4 12892 Brake Cylinder rejection reduction.

  43. Any Questions

  44. Thank you…