Beyond Shingo: Prompt, Do, Check, Act (PDCA) & Universal Mistake Prevention and Quality Verification (UMPQV)
•Descargar como PPT, PDF•
2 recomendaciones•1,043 vistas
Introduction to PDCA & UMPQV
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (19)
Destacado
Destacado (20)
Similar a Beyond Shingo: Prompt, Do, Check, Act (PDCA) & Universal Mistake Prevention and Quality Verification (UMPQV)
Similar a Beyond Shingo: Prompt, Do, Check, Act (PDCA) & Universal Mistake Prevention and Quality Verification (UMPQV) (20)
Último
Último (20)
Beyond Shingo: Prompt, Do, Check, Act (PDCA) & Universal Mistake Prevention and Quality Verification (UMPQV)
- 1. Beyond Shingo: Prompt, Do, Check, Act (PDCA) & Universal Mistake Prevention and Quality Verification (UMPQV) New tools for your "Lean" toolbox Tom Wiesen VP Engineering & Product Development - AVOW, LLC
- 2. Copyright 2005 Page Agenda • Introduction to PDCA • Poke-Yoke & UMPQV • Relationship between PDCA & UMPQV
- 3. Copyright 2005 Page What is PDCA? • Prompt, Do, Check, Act • Based on Shewhart Model (Plan, Do, Study, Act) for continuous improvement • Model for any manual process Operation Post Operation Prompt Do Check Act
- 4. Copyright 2005 Page “Prompt” Explained • What does a Prompt do? – Initiate action – Authorize – Indicate • What actions need to be performed • How the action is to be performed • Parameters of the action • What constitutes completion of the action
- 5. Copyright 2005 Page “Prompt” Explained • A Prompt encourages humans to perform the required process steps correctly. • PROACTIVE prompts are much more effective than passive prompts
- 6. Copyright 2005 Page “Prompt” Examples Passive Proactive • Paper Manuals • Printed Instructions • Files that musts be opened manually • Training (Memory) • Buzzers • Lights • Voice • Electronic displays
- 7. Copyright 2005 Page “Do” Explained • Perform (Control) the task – Methods • Automatic (PLC, PC, etc) – Inputs: sensors, electronic data, software – Outputs: actuators, data, alarms • Manual (Human Brain) – Inputs: touch, see, smell, hear, taste – Outputs: muscles, speech
- 8. Copyright 2005 Page “Do” Examples • Picking parts from storage locations • Placing parts in machines • Assembling parts • Operating hand tools (hammer, drill, screwdriver, etc.) • Mixing solutions • Medical examinations/procedures
- 9. Copyright 2005 Page “Check” Explained • Verify that the “Do” was done right – Operation completed – Quality metrics – Quantity – Functionality • Automatic checks are much more effective than manual checks • Check should be objective
- 10. Copyright 2005 Page “Check” Explained • Types of Checks – Judgment – Informative • Source Inspection • Self Check • Successive Check – “Inspection” is controversial (non-value added)
- 11. Copyright 2005 Page “Check” Explained • Inspections should strive to be: – Frequent (100%) • Occurrences of mistakes in human controlled processes are inherently unstable, making sampling operations useless – Inexpensive – Simple
- 12. Copyright 2005 Page “Check” Examples • Visual inspection • “Feel” • Sound • Measurement (distance, torque, etc.) • Test equipment (pressure/leak test, etc) • Functional test
- 13. Copyright 2005 Page “Act” Explained • Act - Negative Outcome – Communicate outcome to: • Operator • Control system • Quality/Production/Enterprise system – Resolve negative outcome • Fix/Re-work/Scrap part • Find root cause • Correct cause
- 14. Copyright 2005 Page “Act” Explained • Act - Positive Outcome – Communicate outcome to: • Operator • Control system • Quality/Production/Enterprise system – Identify part – Transfer part
- 15. Copyright 2005 Page “Act” Examples • Indicating light or display • Transfer part to next station • Engrave serial number • Communicate results electronically • Repair defect • Remove part from line for disposition
- 16. Copyright 2005 Page Part of a Lean Strategy • What methods makes up Lean? – 5S – Kanban – Kaizen – Mistake Prevention (Poka-Yoke) – Total Productive Maintenance – Value Stream mapping – Takt Time – Cellular Manufacturing
- 17. Copyright 2005 Page Part of a Lean Strategy • How does PDCA fit into Lean? – Prompting • Reduces wasted production time through increased productivity • Reduces mistakes – Check • Reduces Re-work & Scrap • Informative Inspection promotes Kaizen
- 18. Copyright 2005 Page Part of a Lean Strategy • How does PDCA fit into Lean? – Act • Reduces time, money, and effort through communication with other systems – Supply chain – Production systems – Quality systems • Visibility of the entire enterprise allows what was previously seen as waste to be seen as added value
- 19. Copyright 2005 Page Applying PDCA • Use as design criteria for design of new manual processes • Incorporate into Process FMEA – Instead of just looking at ways the process can fail, look for absence of PDCA steps that ensure that process is correct • Use to evaluate/improve current manual processes
- 20. Copyright 2005 Page Overview of Poke-Yoke • Japanese for “Mistake proof” • Developed by Shigeo Shingo • Primarily focused on preventing mistakes before they become defects • Poke Yoke devices help prevent errors and defects • Product Focused devices • Based on 100% inspection (Informative)
- 21. Copyright 2005 Page Overview of Poke-Yoke • Generally applied to discrete systems or processes • Best applied to high volume, low variety production • Generally not well applied to high variety production or complex operations
- 22. Copyright 2005 Page UMPQV vs. Poka-Yoke Universal Mistake Prevention and Quality Verification • Includes all the elements of Poke-Yoke • Universal – Process Oriented, not product oriented – Inexpensive, Redeployable, COTS • “Mistake-Proof” split into Mistake Prevention and Quality Verification
- 23. Copyright 2005 Page UMPQV - Universal • Process oriented, not product oriented – Configurable to multiple product applications • Easy to Integrate – Standard physical and electronic interfaces – Programmable (Configurable) • Expandable & Easy to change • Communication
- 24. Copyright 2005 Page UMPQV - Mistake Prevention • Essence of Poke-Yoke – Prevent mistakes before they happen • Source Inspection • Self Check • Subsequent Check – Based on 100% informative inspection
- 25. Copyright 2005 Page UMPQV - Quality Verification • Verify that the outcome is “Good” not just “Not Bad” • Mistake Prevention is a precursor • “Mistake-Proof” does not imply that quality is verified • Informative - If quality is not verified, find out why and correct
- 26. Copyright 2005 Page UMPQV - Examples • DC Torque Tools – Socket Tray Indicates socket and proper torque program (Prompt, Mistake Prevention) – Operator presses trigger, Controller Controls (Do) – Transducer/Current sensor verifies torque (Check, Quality Verification) – Controller displays & communicates result (Act) – Tool is process oriented (torquing), product independent, and provides communication (Universal)
- 27. Copyright 2005 Page UMPQV - Examples • Sensor-based Pick-to-light – Prompt light indicates bin (Prompt, Mistake prevention) – Worker picks parts (Do) – Sensor detects proper pick (Check, Quality Verification) – Controller communicates result (Act) – Tool is process oriented (part picking), product independent, and provides communication (Universal)
- 28. Copyright 2005 Page UMPQV – Poke-Yoke Conversion • UMPQV devices do not have to be COTS – Go/No-Go gage used to verify/modify several critical dimensions – Started with a few product variations – New Poke-Yoke devices (Custom designed reference fixtures) were created for each product variation – Over time, more than 30 custom devices created at significant expense and are complicated to use
- 29. Copyright 2005 Page UMPQV – Poke-Yoke Conversion • Poka-Yoke Issues – No method to ensure correct gage is used – No method to ensure any gage is used – Operator dependent results (subjective) – No communication or requirement for correction of negative results
- 30. Copyright 2005 Page UMPQV – New UMPQV Solution • Electronic Measuring Device – Custom tool developed to measure critical dimensions – Device has highly repeatable results – Communicates results to operator and electronically to other systems – Setup/measurement requirements selected by product model (Barcode or RFID) – Applicable to all product variations – Can require defect resolution (tagging, electronic acknowledge, etc.)
- 31. Copyright 2005 Page Example Comparison – Array of Physical gages – No method for selecting proper gage – No method to ensure that any gage was used – High level of variation in results – No communication – No requirement for defect resolution – One electronic measuring device – Barcode/RFID selects proper program (Prompt, Mistake prevention) – High repeatability and objectivity in results (Check, Quality Verification) – Communication to Operator and electronically (Act, Universal) – Lower life cycle cost of device Poke-Yoke UMPQV
- 32. Copyright 2005 Page Poke-Yoke vs. UMPQV – 100% inspection – Poke-Yoke principles – Simple, Fast, Cheap – Product specific – Low level communication – Best applied to high volume, low variety production – 100% inspection – Poke-Yoke principles+ – Simple, but more complex and higher initial cost – Process specific – High level communication – Best applied to high variety, complex production Poke-Yoke Device UMPQV Device
- 33. Copyright 2005 Page Mistake Prevention Strategy • Design mistakes out of product/process • Analyze process using PDCA Manual Process Model • Where mistakes can occur, use Source Inspection to prevent occurrence of mistakes that lead to defects • Use Self and Subsequent inspections to detect defects (100%) • Use Control methods over warning methods when feasible • Use UMPQV solutions where there are common processes and/or high variety • Use end-of-line testing as a last resort
- 35. Copyright 2005 Page Pick-to-Light examples
- 36. Copyright 2005 Page Torque Tool Examples
- 37. Copyright 2005 Page SPC Example SPC Error Catching 0 1 2 1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61 65 69 73 77 81 85 89 93 97 Samples Inspected Samples Actual Defects
Notas del editor
- Tom Wiesen VP Engineering & Product Development, AVOW, LLC
- What Prompt, Do, Check, Act is and what PDCA is not Relevance Manual operations are used much more than automation, and the rate is increasing due to increasing product variety and shorter product lifecycles Manual operations are moving overseas (China, India, Mexico) - Application: Designing Manual Processes Analyzing Manual Processes Improving Manual Processes PDCA Application Example
- Prompt, Do, Check, Act steps Based on Shewhart PDCA Continuous Improvement Model/Deming Cycle I will compare and contrast the models to try to minimize confusion PDCA is designed for a Defined Manual Process PDCA is a four step process of carrying out a human controlled (Manual) process Prompt initiates and directs the operator to perform the desired operation correctly Do is the human controlled operation Check is the verification of the the Do step Act is the action that takes place in response to the Check step This is a finite sequential model designed to be performed once, but flexible to allow repetition in a number of ways to fit a given situation I will explain each of the steps in more detail first, then go over the model as a whole.
- Initiate Lights, Buzzers, Displays, Presence of parts/equipment Authorize (Used infrequently in Manual Assembly) Swipe card of a teller Computer logon Door key Indicate Signs Electronic Displays Drawings Instructions Checklists Verbal Commands
- Feed Forward/Proactive approach is best Passive requires operators to get the prompt Proactive is a “Pulled” Prompt, Passive is a “Pushed” prompt (from the perspective of the operator) Proactive actively presents the correct information to the operator or restricts operation until a prompt is acknowledged.
- Passive Example Operator must get the information Information training assumes that operator has been trained Proactive example Information is presented to operator in a manner that gets their attention Information describes what, where, when, and how Controls can be used to restrict operation until a passive/proactive prompt is acknowledged. Prompts should show just the amount of information that is required to perform the task
- Human performs the task as directed by the prompt, using their knowledge and experience Human control vs. Automatic control Human control has many influencing factors that make them “Unstable” Forgetting Lack of focus Distractions Other humans Environment (Noise, Temp, Humidity, Lighting, etc) Daydreaming Task complexity The instability of the human controlled process makes it generally unsuitable for SPC as sampling is ineffective for unstable processes
- Manual operations that are controlled, in whole or in part, by the human brain Some operations may be automated, but are set up manually or started manually by an operator
- Visual Check Sensors (force, weight, dimension, barcode, temperature, presence, etc) Test systems (complex sensors, leak testers, dimensional measurements, vision systems, ph, hardness, etc.) Functionality checks Verify that the Do Step was properly completed Automatic checks don’t require action by the operator. The more effort the operator has to do to perform the check means more time and higher likely hood of not performing the check or performing the check properly. Automatic checks tend to be more objective Subjective checks tend to be less stringent as egos, politics, personal feelings, pressure, and other feelings can affect the outcome.
- From Shigeo Shingo Judgment provides no feedback to the process for improvement, simple Accept/Reject test Informative uses information to improve the process, to prevent future occurrences Source – Inspect the process or elements fed into the process to prevent mistakes from occurring Control - Try to embed the inspection as part of the process (as a control mechanism) Self Check – Provides immediacy, lacks objectivity Successive Check – Next best immediacy, provides more objectivity Inspection is seen as non-value added By using the inspection result information, process improvements can be made, adding value to the process Inspections need to be simple, inexpensive, and as close to the originating process as possible Try to “Design out” the inspection need, by removing the need for inspection out of the product or process
- Frequent because mistakes are intermittent, They must be checked for all the time (100%) – Human controlled processes are inherently “Unstable” Because “Check” is a non-value added step, It should be simple and inexpensive Source inspection (Pick-to-light sensor, Fixture sensor for part present or correct part orientation) Self Inspection (Pick-to-light push button acknowledge, verbal acknowledge, visual inspection, checklist) Subsequent Inspection (Visual inspection, checklist, comparison pictures, etc.)
- Visual Inspection is the most common “Feel” Feeling the play between moving parts Moving the parts to check for smooth operation Feeling the surface finish of a part Sound Listen to part when functionally tested Measurement Gages, Scales Test Equipment Semiautomatic Functional test
- Communication of Outcome: To the operator; can be used to resolve a problem and change process to prevent the problem from happening again To the control system; to stop or modify the process Record the data of the problem or reject and use for quality, production, or other enterprise level intelligence Resolve the Outcome Fix/re-work, scrap the part, document the problem Find the root cause (Informative inspection) Correct the cause so that it doesn’t happen again
- Acknowledge to the operator that the part was good (Pro-active) Better to know that the part was GOOD than to only know that the part was not identified as BAD Inform the control system to allow production to continue (Proactively) Pass information up to business systems for inventory, production, quality, etc. Identify the part (Part Label, Serial Number, engraving, Special packaging, etc Move the part to the next operation, package, place with other good parts, etc.
- Communication to higher level systems Provides process visibility M2M components are making the communication more capable, more streamlined, and cheaper.
- Reducing Waste in the form of time, material, cost 5 S - Sort, Set in order, Shine, Standardize, Sustain Kanban/POLCA – Material movement system Kaizen – Continuous Improvement Mistake Prevention (Poka-Yoke, UMPQV) Total Productive Maintenance Value Stream Mapping Takt Time Cellular Manufacturing
- 100% inspection (informative) reduces immediate errors Informative Inspections strive to find root causes of problems and solve them, improving the process
- Communication M2M concept addresses intelligent devices that provide communication to higher level systems and operate more autonomously Visibility Extra communication capability now more usable Three elements to communication: Data Collection Transfer Data Present data as information (process raw data and make relevant)
- For Evaluation, look at the lowest level with problems Design Use PDCA model as a design criteria for manual operations in a process. Check each process step with the PDCA model When used as part of a FMEA, map process into macro operations and then break them down into micro operations Example - Assembly Operation Install pipe plugs - HMI displays locations for pipe plugs Operator installs pipe plugs Light prompts correct bin for plugs Operator torques plug with Torque wrench Torque controller controls and checks proper torque and annunciates results to operator/others Operator counts installed plugs Perform Leak Test Evaluation Identify all four PDCA steps with each process step, identify missing steps and rate all others. Find ways to complete all four steps and improve identified weak areas. Use metrics to track.
- Shigeo Shingo developed Zero Quality Control to combat overuse of SPC for manual operations (100% inspection) Focuses on Source inspection, or finding and correcting mistakes before they become defects
- Baca-Yoke (or “Fool-Proof”) was originally used by Shigeo Shingo until a worker was upset because a “Fool-Proof” device was implemented to prevent left or right handed parts from being improperly installed. The worker was so upset because they thought that the change was because they were a fool, that they missed a day of work. “Mistake-Proof” or Poke-Yoke became a more acceptable term. Discrete systems (Go-No-go results) Part present, part oriented correctly, Machine set-up is correct Inspection is seen as “Bad” or non-value added The “Bad rap” usually comes from high cost inspection or judgment inspections Good inspections are: Inexpensive Fast Close to the source of the mistake Unbiased/objective
- Includes elements of Poka-Yoke 100% inspection, Simple, Inexpensive Informative Inspections Source Self Subsequent Poka-Yoke is “Mistake-Proof” Broadly defined term Better to use the terms Mistake Prevention and Quality Verification Mistake Prevention ≈ Prompt, Do Quality Verification ≈ Check, Act Universal Communication is important Process oriented, not product oriented, redeployable
- Universal is a key element in today’s manufacturing Four elements Process oriented can be applied to many products Integration is more valuable as other systems become more integrated Expandable to accommodate new parameters and process modifications Communication To the operator, to other processes, to quality metrics
- Mistake Prevention Follows concepts from Poke-Yoke Informative Inspections Source Self Subsequent 100% Inspection (ZQC) Mistake Prevention is focused on specific deficiencies, does not address all potential problems
- Quality Verification Different from Mistake Prevention Mistake Prevention is focused on specific deficiencies Quality Verification focuses on all things being correct
- Prompt Socket Tray light Electronic (RFID, Shift register, etc) to set proper program Do Operator starts torque operation Check Torque controller controls torque with instrumentation Act Torque controller communicates raw data to operator as well as good/bad Communicates to higher level systems Releases part to next station (Electronically) Can determine cause of defect (Stripped, cross threaded, bad/dirty threads, etc) Mistake Prevention Prompt, Torque control Quality Verification Torque control Release of part Detection of failure cause Universal Process oriented (Torque process can be used for many products) Communication Integration capability with associated systems
- Prompt Job/Prompt light Do Operator picks part Check Pick Sensor Act Communicates Pick status Communicates inventory change to higher level systems Releases part to next station (Electronically) Mistake Prevention Prompt Quality Verification Pick Sensor Release of part Universal Process oriented (Part picking) Communication Integration capability with associated systems
- Poke-Yoke device perceived to be low cost at start Questions to be considered when looking at Poke-Yoke vs. UMPQV How much variety? Will it increase over time and by how much? Are there other similar processes that could benefit from a similar UMPQV solution? How important is result of device? Cost of mistakes/defects? Frequency of mistake/defect?
- COTS (Commercial of the shelf) UMPQV devices can be customized, but typically constructed of mostly COTS components with custom fixtures Universal may apply to many similar parameters on a single niche process
- Off the self components, customized for particular operation or family of operations.
- Single device would have been cheaper overall than the series of single devices created over time. Quality would have been higher Electronic monitoring is more objective and reliable than visual inspection Lead time to adapt to new product varieties would have been lower over time
- General comparison (not competing solutions) Poke-yoke is not bad, just limited in scope Poke-yoke is still a best fit for many applications More of today’s applications need the benefits of UMPQV By looking at a situation in the context of a PDCA manual process model, Poke-Yoke, and UMPQV, more questions will be asked, and the outcome will be more suited and justified.
- Design mistake opportunities out of product first Source inspection, using 100%, cheap and simple solutions Self and subsequent inspections to verify quality Control methods are better than warning methods UMPQV to gain economies of scale for equipment, gain more ROI from higher level systems that can use the data, and provide higher quality Use end of line inspection as a last resort
- Various Pick to light examples The two lower examples use sensors
- Common torque tools use socket trays to prompt operator to select the proper socket, or selecting proper socket triggers associated program in controller. Common torque controllers can provide local and remote indications of torque, angle, limits, and torque status (pass/fail) Intelligence can be added to help determine cause of failure (stripped threads, galling, burrs, wrong size threads/lubrication, etc.)
- Chart shows that uncontrolled mistakes are easily missed in an SPC sampling SPC relies on a minimum level of process stability to use sampling Human errors could be viewed as common variation that has high magnitude