Ciclo de deming
Páginas: 3 (585 palabras)
Publicado: 2 de mayo de 2011
[pic]
The first task QC Group agreed to undertake was to identify the magnitude of the problem. Therefore, the team members obtained and reviewed quality data had been accumulated by theInspection Department. The Inspection Department summarized the monthly defect rate from April to September.
The Group member believed that the most important sources of information were 381 randomlyselected Reports on Product Failure, which described defects related to Thermal Treatment. (A typical form is depicted in Exhibit). The QC group used the information contained in 381 reports to again abetter understanding the nature of the defects, as well as to determine whether or not a common defect pattern could be identified. After examining each report, the Inspection Department summarized itsfindings.
• 353 units cracked at the place where the diameter changed from 57 to10 mm
• 21 units cracked at a common point among the central holes in the flat surface.
• 4 units crackedat the oil hole
• 3 units cracked at the small head
The QC Group quickly realized that a vast majority of the defects (93 per cent) occurred at the point where the DGS diameter changed from57mm to 10mm. The team speculated that this was due to the dramatic change in the diameter of the DGS body, coupled with the possibility that the transitional circle was too small. This, in turn, mighthave caused the structure to experience high stress, particularly after the DGS passed through the thermal treatment processes. Further evidence and explanations were needed, however, to remove anyremaining uncertainty surrounding this speculation.
Having identified the principal type of defect, the QC group then established a new target defect rate of six per cent. The QC group then assignedmembers to specific areas of responsibility (Exhibit 2)
The members met as a group at least once each week for one hour in order to update each other on any new developments. The meetings were...
The first task QC Group agreed to undertake was to identify the magnitude of the problem. Therefore, the team members obtained and reviewed quality data had been accumulated by theInspection Department. The Inspection Department summarized the monthly defect rate from April to September.
The Group member believed that the most important sources of information were 381 randomlyselected Reports on Product Failure, which described defects related to Thermal Treatment. (A typical form is depicted in Exhibit). The QC group used the information contained in 381 reports to again abetter understanding the nature of the defects, as well as to determine whether or not a common defect pattern could be identified. After examining each report, the Inspection Department summarized itsfindings.
• 353 units cracked at the place where the diameter changed from 57 to10 mm
• 21 units cracked at a common point among the central holes in the flat surface.
• 4 units crackedat the oil hole
• 3 units cracked at the small head
The QC Group quickly realized that a vast majority of the defects (93 per cent) occurred at the point where the DGS diameter changed from57mm to 10mm. The team speculated that this was due to the dramatic change in the diameter of the DGS body, coupled with the possibility that the transitional circle was too small. This, in turn, mighthave caused the structure to experience high stress, particularly after the DGS passed through the thermal treatment processes. Further evidence and explanations were needed, however, to remove anyremaining uncertainty surrounding this speculation.
Having identified the principal type of defect, the QC group then established a new target defect rate of six per cent. The QC group then assignedmembers to specific areas of responsibility (Exhibit 2)
The members met as a group at least once each week for one hour in order to update each other on any new developments. The meetings were...
Leer documento completo
Regístrate para leer el documento completo.