1 / 102

Aim Macro System Model Micro System Model Taguchi Methods at Aerojet Rocketdyne Future State

The New Economics of Variation: Learning from Genichi Taguchi Presented by Bill Bellows Associate Fellow InThinking Network Aerojet Rocketdyne Email: william.bellows@rocket.com Cell: 818-519-8209 The Boeing Company October 7 , 2013. Agenda. Aim Macro System Model Micro System Model

kalei
Download Presentation

Aim Macro System Model Micro System Model Taguchi Methods at Aerojet Rocketdyne Future State

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The New Economicsof Variation: Learning from Genichi TaguchiPresented by Bill BellowsAssociate FellowInThinking NetworkAerojet RocketdyneEmail: william.bellows@rocket.comCell: 818-519-8209The Boeing CompanyOctober 7, 2013

  2. Agenda • Aim • Macro System Model • Micro System Model • Taguchi Methods at Aerojet Rocketdyne • Future State

  3. Genichi Taguchi Walter Shewhart W. Edwards Deming The aim of this session is to offer insights on how W. Edwards Deming’s “new economics” has integrated the thinking of two pioneers in the field of variation management – Walter Shewhart and Genichi Taguchi. In doing so, this presentation will contrast these systemic views of variation management with those of the prevailing style of management, in both cases offering reflections on the decisions made in quality improvement efforts under guidance from the “old” and “new “ economics.

  4. Macro System Model

  5. Process Flow P D E F I H G

  6. Process Flow P Handoff Requirements? D E F I H G

  7. Macro System Model Part Production GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part A Step N

  8. Part Quality • “Zero defects is another way of saying ‘do it right the first time’” • Quality is defined as conformance to requirements Source: Let’s Talk Quality, P. Crosby, 1989

  9. Macro System Model Part Production GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part A Step N GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part B Step N GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part O Step N GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part P Step N

  10. Macro System Model Part Production Assembly GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part A Step N GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part B Step N GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part O Step N GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part P Step N

  11. Macro System Model Part Production Assembly GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part A FIT Step N Sub- Assembly 1 GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part B Step N GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part O Step N GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part P Step N

  12. Macro System Model Part Production Assembly GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part A FIT Step N Sub- Assembly 1 GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part B Step N GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part O FIT Step N Sub- Assembly 2 GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part P Step N

  13. Macro System Model Part Production Assembly Final Assembly GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part A FIT Step N Sub- Assembly 1 GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part B Step N GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part O FIT Step N Sub- Assembly 2 GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part P Step N

  14. Macro System Model Part Production Assembly Final Assembly GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part A FIT Step N Sub- Assembly 1 GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part B FIT Step N Product Assembly GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part O FIT Step N Sub- Assembly 2 GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part P Step N

  15. Macro System Model Part Production Assembly Final Assembly GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part A FIT Step N Sub- Assembly 1 GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part B FIT Step N Product Assembly GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part O FIT Step N Sub- Assembly 2 GOOD Step 1 Step 2 Part P Step N WORKS

  16. The “Absolutes” of Part Quality • Quality is defined as conformance to requirements, not as 'goodness' nor 'elegance'. • The system for causing quality is prevention, not appraisal. • The performance standard must be Zero Defects, not 'that's close enough'. • The measurement of quality is the Price of Non-conformance, not indices. Source: Quality is Free, Philip Crosby, 1979

  17. Macro System Model (Part Work) • Quality Focus: Conformance to Requirements • Goal: Defect-Free Parts • Activities: Assess Non-Conformances, Scrap and Rework • Mindset: Reactive / Victim • Skills: Fire-Fighting and Problem Solving • Impact: No Improvement in Quality After Zero Defects, Temporary Solutions • Attributes: Physical and Mental Handoffs (separation, blame)

  18. Micro System Model

  19. Wood Management Given a piece of wood that will be cut into 2 pieces.... how many lines will be drawn across the top face before the cut is made ?

  20. Wood Management target

  21. Wood Management target

  22. Circle Management Which 2 of these 3 circles are closest to having the same diameter? diameter 0 A B C

  23. Decisions Decisions Which 2 of these 3 circles are closest to having the same quality? diameter 0 A B C MIN MAX

  24. Taguchi’s Quality Loss Function “Loss to Society” A B C TARGET (desired value of parameter) Lower Specification Limit Upper Specification Limit

  25. Micro System Model Part Production Assembly Final Assembly Step 1 Step 2 Part A Degrees of FIT Step N Degrees of GOOD Sub- Assembly 1 Step 1 Step 2 Part B Degrees of FIT Step N Product Assembly Step 1 Step 2 Part O Degrees of FIT Step N Sub- Assembly 2 Step 1 Step 2 Part P Step N Degrees of WORKS

  26. Examples of Variation Management PAGE COUNT HOLE DIAMETER MIN MAX 20 25 OUTER DIAMETER ARRIVAL TIME 6:00 PM MIN MAX 8:00 PM

  27. Examples of Variation Management PAGE COUNT HOLE DIAMETER MIN MAX 20 25 OUTER DIAMETER ARRIVAL TIME 6:00 PM MIN MAX 8:00 PM

  28. Examples of Variation Management PAGE COUNT HOLE DIAMETER MIN MAX 20 25 OUTER DIAMETER ARRIVAL TIME 6:00 PM MIN MAX 8:00 PM

  29. Examples of Variation Management PAGE COUNT HOLE DIAMETER MIN MAX 20 25 OUTER DIAMETER ARRIVAL TIME 6:00 PM MIN MAX 8:00 PM

  30. Examples of Variation Management PAGE COUNT HOLE DIAMETER MIN MAX 20 25 OUTER DIAMETER ARRIVAL TIME 6:00 PM MIN MAX 8:00 PM

  31. Taguchi Methods at Aerojet Rocketdyne

  32. Dr. Taguchi’s first visit to Canoga Park – May 1994. While here he met with 6 application teams, including manufacturing engineers on the Space Shuttle Main Engine.

  33. Taguchi Methods – History in Canoga Park • Management briefings provided by American Supplier Institute (ASI) in 1989 • "Introductory" training (36-42 hours) by ASI began in 1989 • Internal expert hired in 1990 • In-house "Introductory" seminars through the TQM Office began in 1991 • 800+ graduates to date

  34. Taguchi Methods – History in Canoga Park • First visit by Dr. Taguchi in May 1994 • Dr. Taguchi reviewed applications with 6 teams • Second visit by Dr. Taguchi in November 1994 • Dr. Taguchi reviewed applications with 4 teams • Meetings arranged with Dr. Taguchi and executives to review application strategies for R&D • Third visit by Dr. Taguchi in May 1996 • Dr. Taguchi and Professor Yuin Wu reviewed RS-68 combustion design activities

  35. Taguchi Methods – Deployment (1900 – 1993) • First application (1990) – National Launch System - turbo-machinery design • First process application (1990) – etching process problem solving study • First “advanced" application (1993) – silver plating problem solving study

  36. Taguchi Methods – Directions (1994 – present) • Focus of implementation on problems, repairs, and rework was examined for clues of how to expand applications to “proactive use” • Links established between Taguchi Methods and the management theory of Dr. Deming • Using Deming’s ideas, broader implications of the thinking of Dr. Taguchi have been re-examined • Transformational thinking efforts began in 1993

  37. Taguchi Methods – Directions (1994 – present) • Curriculum of “thinking” courses established in 1995 – “A Thinking Roadmap” • Taguchi Methods seminar expanded into 2 40-hour seminars as part of “A Thinking Roadmap” • Thinking transformation efforts focus on a need to • “manage variation”, not “reduce variation” • “manage costs”, not “reduce costs” • “manage resources”, not “reduce resources” • “continuous investment”, not “continuous improvement”

  38. Taguchi Methods – Lessons Learned • Variation Management • Quality Loss Function • Parameter (Robust) Design • Tertiary Design

  39. Variation Reduction Background: Consider the following two processes and the specification limits and target provided. What is the motive for selecting process 2 over process 1? 2 1 LSL USL TARGET

  40. TARGET 2 1 LSL USL Variation Management Background: Consider the following two processes and the specification limits and target provided.

  41. Decisions Decisions Given the following 5 criteria, which is the preferred process – 1 or 2? 1 – Equal purchase prices 2 – Equal delivery schedules 3 – Zero defects are guarantee from both processes 4 - Distributions will never change shape and/or location 5 – The “team” selected the “target” value, which is preferred, plus the tolerances target 2 1 LSL USL

  42. Taguchi’s Quality Loss Function “Loss to Society” (a greater system) 2 1 Lower Specification Limit Upper Specification Limit target (desired value of parameter)

  43. Relationship Quality “Mind the Gap” “Quality is the minimum of loss imparted to the Society by a product after its shipment to a customer” Source: Introduction to Quality Engineering , G. Taguchi, 1983

  44. Genichi Taguchi • Born in Japan in 1924 • Joined Electrical Communication Laboratories in 1949 • Received Deming Prize in 1951, 1953, 1960, and 1984 • Received Ph.D. (Science) in 1962 • Visited U.S. (Princeton and Bell Labs) in 1962 • Employed as Professor (Japan) until 1982 • Introduced Fuji-Xerox to methodology in 1972, AT&T in 1980, Xerox in 1982, and Ford in 1982 • Honored by Emperor of Japan in 1989 • Died in Japan in 2012

  45. Early Example of Applying “Taguchi Methods” BATH ROOM TILE MANUFACTURING, APPLICATION BY INA SEITO, CIRCA 1952 PROCESS FLOW APPORTION, MOLD PREFIRE PULVERIZE, AND MIX MATERIALS INSPECT, FIRE GLAZE PACKAGE, AND SHIP END VIEW OF OVEN

  46. Early Example of Applying “Taguchi Methods” END VIEW OF OVEN BEFORE STUDY TILE SIZE UPPER LIMIT BEFORE STUDY LOWER LIMIT INSIDE OUTSIDE TILES TILES

  47. Early Example of Applying “Taguchi Methods” PROBLEM: OUTSIDE TILES OUT OF SPEC (30 % REJECTED) CAUSE: NON-UNIFORM TEMPERATURE VARIATION WITHIN TILES SOLUTION OPTIONS:

  48. Early Example of Applying “Taguchi Methods” PROBLEM: OUTSIDE TILES OUT OF SPEC (30 % REJECTED) CAUSE: NON-UNIFORM TEMPERATURE VARIATION WITHIN TILES SOLUTION OPTIONS: COMMON FEATURE:

  49. Early Example of Applying “Taguchi Methods” PROBLEM: OUTSIDE TILES OUT OF SPEC (30 % REJECTED) CAUSE: NON-UNIFORM TEMPERATURE VARIATION WITHIN TILES SOLUTION OPTIONS: COMMON FEATURE: ATTRIBUTE OF "BEST" SOLUTION:

  50. Early Example of Applying “Taguchi Methods” END VIEW OF OVEN BEFORE STUDY TILE SIZE UPPER LIMIT BEFORE STUDY AFTER STUDY AFTER STUDY LOWER LIMIT INSIDE OUTSIDE TILES TILES

More Related