23-09-2014, 04:16 PM
Heavy rejection in forging observed during final inspection and at customer end in Gear fuel injection . This product is of M/S R.S.B who is regular customer of Samrat Forgings Ltd. These rejection bad impression to customer and also are waste of Money , Manpower and Material. A lot of 1500 nos. was forged and dispatched to the customer to study the problem we have collected the rejection data from internal records and from the email received from customer regarding rejection from their end. We used pareto Chart for analysis and the data is filled in pareto chart to study the major project. Then loss for rejection in rupees for production 6000 pieces = 58140X4= Rs. 2,32,560/- The project was great success and it gives great results rejection reduced in large extend by doing work in this problem. By using quality tool we find out the concern problem which is the root cause of rejection and by implementing corrective action we reduce the rejection.
PROJECT REPORT
NAME: NAVDEEP SINGH
ROLL NO: 1187007
MECHANICAL ENGG.
PROJECT UNDERTAKEN
Project Title :
TO REDUCE THE REJECTION IN GEAR FUEL INJECTION PUMP, 7511069 FROM 13% TO LESS THAN 1.5 %.
COMPONENT SELECTED FOR PROJECT
GEAR FUEL INJECTION PUMP (D-966)
PRODUCT SPECIFICATION
1. Component Name- Gear Fuel Injection Pump
2. Material – Steel Grade 16MnCr5
3. Cut weight – 3.8 Kg
4. Net weight – 3.1 Kg
5. Heat Treatment – Normalized
6. Application : Automotive
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
Heavy Rejection in forging observed during final inspection and at customer end in GEAR FUEL INJECTION PUMP. This is a product of M/S R.S.B Transmission who is regular customer of Samrat Forgings Limited. These rejections give bad impression to customer and also are waste of Money, Manpower & Material.
If your customer is not satisfied then your production is waste, to make our customer satisfied we have to improve our quality.
So I took this component and try to solve the quality problems. There can be any reason like material problem, undersize, oversize, pitting, lap/crack, mismatch etc.
DATA COLLECTION FOR ANALYSIS
A lot of 1500 Nos. was forged and dispatched to the customer.
To study the problem we collected the rejection data from internal records and from the email received from customer regarding rejection at their end.
We used Pareto Chart for analysis and the data for internal rejection and rejection at customer end is filled in the Pareto chart to study the major defects.
Pareto Analysis is a statistical technique in decision making that is used for the selection of a limited number of tasks that produce significant overall effect. It uses the Pareto Principle (also know as the 80/20 rule) the idea that by doing 20% of the work you can generate 80% of the benefit of doing the whole job. Or in terms of quality improvement, a large majority of problems (80%) are produced by a few key causes (20%). This is also known as the vital few and the trivial many.
From the above results of Pareto Chart it is clear that the major defect is Web thickness oversize.
Now we have to study the process to find out the root cause for the Web thickness oversize.
Problem Title: Web Thickness 6.00mm +1.5 /-0.5 found oversize upto 0.7mm
ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS
WHY?
Web thickness oversize
WHY?
Die depth maintained on higher side
WHY?
To over come undersize problem after cold coining.
CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN
· Dimension to be maintained 6.8 - 7.5 mm during hot forging operation.
· Web dimension inspection frequency shall be increased to 5pcs per hour.
· 100% inspection of web thickness shall be done after cold coining operation.
· Product audit shall be done for every die run.
· Control Plan shall be modified.
· Awareness Training shall be given to hot control & final inspection inspectors about this issue.
IF WE CALCULATE A LOSS FROM REJECTED PIECES:
· Now if we consider that in a lot there is 1500 pieces
· From 1500 parts average 190 pieces were being rejected
· For per part being rejected company experienced a loss of Rs. 306.
· Now the probability of rejection of per part is 190/1500 = 12.6%
· Hence for 1500 part loss incurred = 306 x 190 =58,140Rs.
Now if in a Monthly schedule 6,000 PIECES are made.
· Then, loss for rejection in Rs for production of 6000 pieces = 58140 x 4 = Rs2,32,560.
· Loss that company is suffering @ 12.6 % rejection Per 6000 pcs = Rs2,32,560.
Now after implementation of corrective actions rejection rate is 2.3 % (35pcs/1500 pcs) and the loss @ 2.3 % rejection is = 306 x 35
= Rs. 10710
Loss per 6000 pcs =Rs. 10710 x 4 = Rs. 42840
FINAL RESULT OF THE PROJECT:
The project was a great success and it gives great results, rejections reduced in large extent by doing work on these problems.
SFL product D–966 which constantly over a period of time experiencing the defect in its production which was becoming a great matter of concern for the Forging & QA department, which was constantly getting complaints from “M/s R.S.B Transmissions”.
By using quality tools we find out the concern problem which is the root cause of rejection. And by implementing corrective actions we reduce the rejections.
And results are immediately come,
Rejection After This Project Decrease from 13% to 2.3%.
PROJECT REPORT
NAME: NAVDEEP SINGH
ROLL NO: 1187007
MECHANICAL ENGG.
PROJECT UNDERTAKEN
Project Title :
TO REDUCE THE REJECTION IN GEAR FUEL INJECTION PUMP, 7511069 FROM 13% TO LESS THAN 1.5 %.
COMPONENT SELECTED FOR PROJECT
GEAR FUEL INJECTION PUMP (D-966)
PRODUCT SPECIFICATION
1. Component Name- Gear Fuel Injection Pump
2. Material – Steel Grade 16MnCr5
3. Cut weight – 3.8 Kg
4. Net weight – 3.1 Kg
5. Heat Treatment – Normalized
6. Application : Automotive
PROBLEM DESCRIPTION
Heavy Rejection in forging observed during final inspection and at customer end in GEAR FUEL INJECTION PUMP. This is a product of M/S R.S.B Transmission who is regular customer of Samrat Forgings Limited. These rejections give bad impression to customer and also are waste of Money, Manpower & Material.
If your customer is not satisfied then your production is waste, to make our customer satisfied we have to improve our quality.
So I took this component and try to solve the quality problems. There can be any reason like material problem, undersize, oversize, pitting, lap/crack, mismatch etc.
DATA COLLECTION FOR ANALYSIS
A lot of 1500 Nos. was forged and dispatched to the customer.
To study the problem we collected the rejection data from internal records and from the email received from customer regarding rejection at their end.
We used Pareto Chart for analysis and the data for internal rejection and rejection at customer end is filled in the Pareto chart to study the major defects.
Pareto Analysis is a statistical technique in decision making that is used for the selection of a limited number of tasks that produce significant overall effect. It uses the Pareto Principle (also know as the 80/20 rule) the idea that by doing 20% of the work you can generate 80% of the benefit of doing the whole job. Or in terms of quality improvement, a large majority of problems (80%) are produced by a few key causes (20%). This is also known as the vital few and the trivial many.
From the above results of Pareto Chart it is clear that the major defect is Web thickness oversize.
Now we have to study the process to find out the root cause for the Web thickness oversize.
Problem Title: Web Thickness 6.00mm +1.5 /-0.5 found oversize upto 0.7mm
ROOT CAUSE ANALYSIS
WHY?
Web thickness oversize
WHY?
Die depth maintained on higher side
WHY?
To over come undersize problem after cold coining.
CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN
· Dimension to be maintained 6.8 - 7.5 mm during hot forging operation.
· Web dimension inspection frequency shall be increased to 5pcs per hour.
· 100% inspection of web thickness shall be done after cold coining operation.
· Product audit shall be done for every die run.
· Control Plan shall be modified.
· Awareness Training shall be given to hot control & final inspection inspectors about this issue.
IF WE CALCULATE A LOSS FROM REJECTED PIECES:
· Now if we consider that in a lot there is 1500 pieces
· From 1500 parts average 190 pieces were being rejected
· For per part being rejected company experienced a loss of Rs. 306.
· Now the probability of rejection of per part is 190/1500 = 12.6%
· Hence for 1500 part loss incurred = 306 x 190 =58,140Rs.
Now if in a Monthly schedule 6,000 PIECES are made.
· Then, loss for rejection in Rs for production of 6000 pieces = 58140 x 4 = Rs2,32,560.
· Loss that company is suffering @ 12.6 % rejection Per 6000 pcs = Rs2,32,560.
Now after implementation of corrective actions rejection rate is 2.3 % (35pcs/1500 pcs) and the loss @ 2.3 % rejection is = 306 x 35
= Rs. 10710
Loss per 6000 pcs =Rs. 10710 x 4 = Rs. 42840
FINAL RESULT OF THE PROJECT:
The project was a great success and it gives great results, rejections reduced in large extent by doing work on these problems.
SFL product D–966 which constantly over a period of time experiencing the defect in its production which was becoming a great matter of concern for the Forging & QA department, which was constantly getting complaints from “M/s R.S.B Transmissions”.
By using quality tools we find out the concern problem which is the root cause of rejection. And by implementing corrective actions we reduce the rejections.
And results are immediately come,
Rejection After This Project Decrease from 13% to 2.3%.