WP INC CASE STUDY PROJECT

1. MGMT 580 By Samuel & Adrienne 18 December 2013 WP INC CASE STUDY PROJECT

2. The problem at hand is the spray nozzles , which frequently clog with particles, causing the parts washer to shut down. • The part washer has been identified as one of the most troublesome or difficult operation • at WP Inc. • The consequence of the clogging is a serious time delays, the effect of this time delay is slow operations. The company will definitely experience serious lost in production time due to the fact that every part manufactured goes through the parts washer. The part washer plays a significant role throughout the manufacturing process. PROBLEM IDENTIFIED

3. The part washer contributes to the essentiality of the quality • process. The part washer is unique to the successful operation of the company, it is the only alternative for cleaning parts since EPA regulations no longer allow the use of a vapor degreaser using tricloroethan 1,1,1. • Process Monitoring Information: • One month observation shows that nozzle was not spraying properly • On seven occasions the nozzles clog completely • Two of the clogs happened in the midday and the rest at the end of the day. PROBLEM IDENTIFIED

4. Small particles clogged in the tiny orifices of the nozzles which restricts the flow of the soap and water solution through the nozzles. • This continuous clogging shut the parts washer down. • The written procedure need to be reviewed. PROBLEM IDENTIFIED

5. The possible causes of the particles could be any of the followings: • Wrong solution • Water source • Type of Soap • Concentrations • The production manager, Research and Design Engineers, Process Manager and Quality Assurance Expert are the team members. • Also involved in this process are the operators. Brainstorming team

6. To better clarify the fact that the water is not responsible for the clogging, a team of water expert will be employed to test the water for it chemical reaction, hard water build up, calcium, soap flakes. • Another important factor to add to the list is to ensure that all the pieces of equipment involved in this process are properly examined. • The solutions could be another possible issues, the level of concentrates may be responsible for reactions. • The water channel need to be examined. • Operators ability to work the system as required need to be verified. BRAINSTORMING TEAM

7. Performance Measure: • Studying the flow chart one can deduced that the water was clean throughout the process. Therefore it is possible to conclude that the clogging could not be as a result of bad water. • The monitoring team are assigned to continuously observe the parts washer performance and compute their findings. • What is the probability that the problem is caused by error from the parts washer? • Evaluate every additional chemicals used in the cleaning process. • Does the nozzle require more pressure for water to flow? PERFORMANCE MEASURE

8. Determine the risks involved in this trouble process? • Find out the impact of the time delay in production? • Analyze the most immediate cause of action to rectify the situation • Evaluate the effect of the problem on both the internal and external customers • Plan for the cause of action PERFORMANCE MEASURE

9. Cause and Effect Diagram For Soap Build Up: Heated Water tank Evaporation from water Operator add more soap & water solution Increases Concentration of soap solution Increased in soap concentration Decreased in fluid level in the tank Soap can no longer be held in solution Soap precipitate to the bottom of tank Cleaning process + New solution New solution react CAUSE AND EFFECT DIAGRAM Floating soap particles clog nozzle Reaction triggers film of soap particles Particles free floating in tank

10. The cause and effect diagram reveals the source of the problem as indicated above: • The clogging came from the particles derived from the concentrations. • Excessive temperature increases the concentration of the soap solution. In the addition to that the procedure followed by the operator contributes to the error. • Adding more soap and water solution by the operator increases the soap concentration. Once the soap reaches certain concentration level the chemical equation changes. • The changes experienced at the level of high concentration initiates precipitation which dissolves at the bottom of the tank. PROBLEM ANALYSIS

11. New solution in the tank during cleaning process triggers the floatation of the already settled soap particles that eventually clogged the nozzles. • Also the lack of filtering system contributes to the problem. PROBLEM ANALYSIS

12. Force Field Analysis • ….. FORCE FIELD ANALYSIS

13. There are a few options for corrective action: • Charts of daily temperature reveal the temperature has been too low and the soap has not dissolved in the water. We will have to determine if there is a temperature regulation problem with the tank, or if we are incorrectly setting the temperature. • Due to the fact that there is not a filtering system between the parts and nozzle we will have to have a filtering system created. • Follow Up actions: • Our team will increase the temperature of the tank for a week. During this time we will monitor and record the tank three times a day and record the temperature. PotentialCorrective Action

14. After the results have been determined concerning the temperature we will take the necessary actions to resolve the issue. • The team doing the investigative work will have to increase the temperature of the water. They will then have to monitor and record the temperature of the water until the soap is no longer dissolving in the water. • The team will also have to create a filtering system between the parts and the nozzle that will catch any floating particles that could possibly get stuck in the nozzles. • Once these actions have taken place the team will then have to monitor and test both defense mechanisms to make necessary adjustments and ensure success. PotentialCorrective Action

15. Once the team has the correct temperature setting and the filtering system in place they will have to train the employees on how to effectively use the parts washer. • There will also be a set of instructions near the parts washer that will include the following information: • • Amount of solution to use • • Amount of soap to use • • Temperature check • • How to clean the filtering system if necessary • Once the employees have used the parts washer for a one week time frame we will make take corrective action if need be. Plan of action to implement

16. If there are corrective actions needed the team will make immediate changes so that time delays are mitigated. • The team will have to determine the adjustment that should be made if corrective action is needed. • If there is any corrective action that has taken place the team will need to test and monitor the changes. Follow up on corrective Actions

17. After another 30 days of implementing the solution the investigative team observed the following: • No particles clogged the nozzles. • The team used previous records and charts to determine if time delays had decreased. It was determined that there was a significant decrease in time delays. • Temperature remained consistent and properly set after training had occurred. • Combination of proper soap and solution no longer left residue in the tank. • The ratio of clean parts increased and employees rarely rewashed parts in a single day. EVALUATE THE SOLUTION

18. Establish process analysis culture • Establish continuous monitoring pattern for the reaction • Regulate and maintain required temperature as needed • Make training and education for operators a requirement before operating the equipment • Engage quality assurance experts as part of the process • Re-evaluate the written procedures for updates each time there are changes in the process. PERMANENCE

19. WP Inc employees reported a problem with the parts washer. Parts had to be rerun through the parts washer causing serious time delays. The problem is associated with small particles that clogged the tiny orifices of the nozzles, which restricted the flow of soap and water solution through the nozzles. • An investigative team was assembled to determine the cause and resolution. Furthermore, using a cause and effect diagrams and force-field analysis chart the team was able to gain a clear picture of the parts washer workflow including determining the impact. • Through brainstorming and testing it was discovered that due to the low temperature of the tank and concentration levels of soap and solution the soap was not dissolving and leaving behind floating particles. Additionally, there was also no filtering system between the tank and the nozzle to catch any of the floating particles. Management SUMMARY

20. Through implementing an action plan the team was able to train employees on setting the appropriate temperature including using the right combination of soap and water. After installing the filtering system for a week the team recorded and observed temperatures and made any adjustments necessary. After 30 days were it was reported that time delays have significantly reduced, and parts were no longer be rerun through the washer. • Inc employees reported a problem with the parts washer. Parts had to be rerun through the parts washer causing serious time delays. The problem is associated with small particles that clogged the tiny orifices of the nozzles, which restricted the flow of soap and water solution through the nozzles. Management SUMMARY

21. Summers, D.C. (2010). Quality (5th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall REFERENCE