QUALITY IMPROVEMENT DESIGN OF SHOULDER FOR E CLIP USING SIX SIGMA METHODOLOGY IN PT PINDAD (PERSERO)

• Main Author: Isyana Agustina Aleh, Debora
• Format: Final Project
• Language: Indonesia
• Online Access: https://digilib.itb.ac.id/gdl/view/39731
• Institution: Institut Teknologi Bandung

PT Pindad (Persero) is an Indonesia state-owned company who manufactures defense and security products and industrial products. One of the departments that produces industrial product is Casting Department. Currently, one of the products that is produced by Casting Department, namely Shoulder for E Clip has the highest production number and highest defective product rate compared to other railway products those are produced by Casting Department. Therefore, this study aims to design quality improvement for Shoulder for E Clip by minimizing defective product number. The methodology that is used in this study is Six Sigma with Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, Control (DMAIC) approach. At the define stage, problem formulation was carried out as well as observation of product characteristic, production process, and defect of the product. In observing defect of the product, a selection of dominant types of defects was also carried out using Pareto chart. Then at the measure stage, measurement of process stability (using control chart for fraction non-conforming or p chart) and process capability (using sigma value calculation) were carried out. Furthermore, at the analyze stage, root cause identification using the Delphi method in four stages and involving five respondents to obtain the subfactor for each type of defect was done. The defect subfactors which had been identified were then prioritized using the FMEA method and discussions with the company. At the improve stage, alternative solutions for the selected defect subfactors were formulated. Lastly, at the control stage, the design of monitoring the implementation of the proposed solution was carried out. Through the define stage, it was known that the dominant type of defects were misrun and mismatch. After calculating the stability and capability of the process at the measure stage, it could be concluded that the production process was stable with 3.26 sigma value. Furthermore, at the analyze stage sixteen defect subfactors were obtained for the misrun and mismatch defects, specifically thirteen defect subfactors causing misrun and three defect subfactors causing mismatch. Among sixteen defect subfactors, four defect subfactors were selected and the proposed solutions were formulated at the improve stage. From eight alternative solutions submitted to the company, there were seven alternative solutions accepted. Those seven alternative solutions include the implementation of standard procedures for re-examining the composition of metal fluids, the use of electric warning systems, the use of visual displays for disamatic operators, the application of abrasive paper in specimen preparation, the use of logbooks for inspection with spectrometers, the use of visual displays for quality operators, and the use of different container for each type of specimen material’s electrode. Then at the control stage a timeline for the implementation of the proposed solution and supporting documents in the form of a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) were prepared.