Anda di halaman 1dari 17

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

E-ISSN 0976-7916

Research Article

USE OF SHAININ TOOLS FOR SIMPLIFYING SIX


SIGMA IMPLEMENTATION IN QMS/ISO CERTIFIED
ENVIRONMENT AN INDIAN SME CASE STUDY
Anand K. Bewoor*, Maruti S. Pawar
Address for Correspondence
*1Mechanical Engineering Dept.,Vishwakarama Institute of Information Tech.,Kondhwa
(Bk), Pune 411048, Maharashtra, India
2
Professor and Vice-Principal, B. M. I. T., Solapur University, Solapur Maharashtra, India.
E-mail: bewooranand@yahoo.com, drmspbmit@rediffmail.com
ABSTRACT
Six sigma for small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) is an emerging topic among many
academics and Six Sigma practitioners over the last two to three years. Very few studies have been
reported about the successful applications of Six Sigma in SMEs. Main objective of this paper is to
examine the extent of usefulness of a simpler but not very frequently used methodology known as the
Shainin methodology for simplifying the implementing Six Sigma. To confirm whether Six Sigma
implementation is simplified, this paper highlights the comparison of three DOE approaches viz.
Classical, Taguchi and Shainin methodology.
A case study based research work done in ISO certified Indian SME, concludes that, Six Sigma
implementation process can be simplified by using Shainin tools and proper use companys ISO/QMS.
KEYWORDS Six Sigma, Shainin Tools, QMS, Indian SMEs.

1. INTRODUCTION
In recent past, academicians, practitioners
and organizational researchers have
recognized that the Quality Management
System (QMS) process and the Six-Sigma
process are disciplines that have a
powerful
potential
to affect
an
organizations ability to compete within
an increasingly global and dynamic
marketplace (Falshaw et al., 2006). QMS
certification (such as ISO 9000, TS
16949) demonstrates the capability of an
industry to control the processes that
determine the acceptability of the product
or service being produced & sold. These,
traditional QMS are having some
limitations like methodological assistance
etc. (Bewoor and Pawar, 2008). But new
QM methods continue to grow (Xingxing
Zu et. al., 2008) for example, Six Sigma,
which is an organized and systematic
method for strategic process improvement

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

and new product and service development.


Six Sigma relies on statistical methods and
the scientific method to make dramatic
reductions in customer defined defect
rates (Linderman et al., 2003). Since its
initiation at Motorola in the 1980s, many
companies including GE, Honeywell,
Sony, Caterpillar, Johnson Controls etc.
have adopted Six Sigma and obtained
substantial benefits (Pande et al., 2000).
Spectacular
development
of
an
organizational performance due to Six
Sigma implementation many companies
are reported in the published literature.
Antony and Banuelas (2002) presented the
key ingredients for the effective
introduction and implementation of SixSigma in manufacturing and services
organizations as: Management commitment and involvement, Understanding of
Six Sigma methodology, tools, and
techniques, Linking Six Sigma to business

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

strategy, to customers, to suppliers, project


selection,
reviews
and
tracking,
organizational infrastructure, Cultural
change, Project management skills,
Training. All these ingredients make the
Six Sigma process as a complex process
and very little efforts has been made for
simplifying the process of Six Sigma
implementation process by making use of
existing QMS and by selecting proper
implementation tools. Some of the
criticisms of the Six Sigma methodology
perhaps stems from the fact that it is
sometimes too statistical and beyond
comprehension of the people involved in
implementing it in practice. Eckes (2001)
is of the opinion that Six Sigma initiatives
can fail if the organization believes that
better quality is possible only through the
use of sophisticated statistical tools. The
objective of this paper is to examine as to
how to simplify and demystify the use of
Shainin
tools
for
Six
Sigma
implementation tools. At present, the
impacts of QMS and Six Sigma processes
on an organizations ability to compete
have been examined independently. Very
little emphasis has been given by the
researchers to conceptually examine the
potential impact of the synergistic effects
that might be gained from merging various
quality management principles and those
of Six-Sigma process. After doing clausewise analysis Bewoor and Pawar, (2008)
had proposed the Six Sigma+QMS/ISO
an integrated concept and successfully
validated its applicability with the help of
case study based research. This has

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

E-ISSN 0976-7916

resulted in to more benefit on operational


level (Bewoor and Pawar, 2009). This
case based study helped us to understand
that if we use simple to use tools, we can
simplify Six Sigma implementation
process. The observations and experiences
in the above case study leads to question
about how to simplify the implementation
of Six Sigma with or without QMS/ISO
systems. The main complex part of the
implementation of Six Sigma is the
selection and use of tools for solving
problems. It is observed that, the efforts to
simplify the implementation of Six Sigma
are needed in the area of use of tools. One
of such efforts/studies is presented below.
2.PRESENT METHODOLOGIES FOR
SIX SIGMA IMPLEMENTATIONS
Pyzdek (2003) has classified Six Sigma
tools into three categories (refer table 1),
(i) Basic Six Sigma methods (are further
categorized as problem solving tools, 7M
tools, and knowledge discovery tools). (ii)
Intermediate Six Sigma methods include a
host of enumerative and analytical
statistical tools like Distributions,
Statistical inference, Basic control charts,
exponentially weighted moving average
(EWMA) charts etc.). (iii) Advanced Six
Sigma methods are Design of experiments
(DOE) Regression and correlation analysis
Process capability analysis etc. At the
heart of the Six Sigma approach is the
application of DOE techniques. These
techniques help to identify key factors and
to subsequently adjust these factors in
order to achieve sustainable performance
improvements.

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

Table 1 : Basic Six Sigma Tools


Problem Solving Tools

E-ISSN 0976-7916

7M Tools

Knowledge Discovery
Tools

Process mapping

Affinity diagrams

Run charts

Flow charts

Process decision program charts

Descriptive statistics

Check sheets

Matrix diagrams &

Histograms

Tree diagrams
Pareto analysis

Interrelationship diagraphs

Cause-and-effect

Prioritization matrices

Exploratory data analysis

diagrams
Scatter plots

Activity network diagrams

(Source: Pyzdek, 2003)


While the basic and intermediate methods

identification of the root cause of the

are relatively easier to understand and use,

problem

the advanced methods are perceived to be

Experimental design is one of the tried

difficult to comprehend and interpret.

and tested statistical techniques long used

Design of Experiments (DOE) is one such

by industrial engineers to identify the key

tool. The complexity of these DOE

variables

affecting

techniques

designed

experiments,

that

are

often

cited

by

out

of

the

potential

output.

Xs.

Through

changes

are

companies as to the reason why they are

deliberately introduced into the process to

unable to employ Six Sigma. A short

better understand which of the Xs are

overview of the DOE techniques is

affecting the output variable.


There are two well-known approaches

presented next.
2.1

Experimental

Design

using

to experimental design. The first approach

Classical and Taguchi Approach

is the classical design of experiments

A classical DOE approach would have

credited to Sir Ronald Fisher who initially

meant application of factorial designs

experimented in the field of agriculture.

requiring much more time and effort, and

However, this method is now widely used

above all, it would have required changes

in many fields. The second approach is the

in

Taguchi

machine

settings.

Classical

DOE

approach

pioneered

by

Dr

requires large data collection to conduct

Genichi Taguchi of Japan who adopted the

the

process

classical approach to reintroduce the

analyzing

concept of orthogonal arrays used for

relationships between an output variable

designing experiments in different fields

(Y) explained wholly or partly by process

(Rao, et al.). The commonly used classical

variables (Xs) that affect the output. A key

Design of Experiment (DOE) tools are the

step in Six Sigma projects is the

family of factorial experiments consisting

analysis.

improvements

Six

Sigma

consist

of

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

E-ISSN 0976-7916

of full factorial designs and fractional

problems into three Xs, viz., the Red X,

factorial designs. A full factorial allows us

the Pink X- the second most important

to test all possible combinations of factors

cause(s), and the Pale Pink X the third

affecting output in order to identify which

most important cause(s). According to

ones are more dominant. A fractional

him, these three Xs together account for

factorial tests just a fraction of the

over 80 per cent of the variation that is

possible combinations. Though a very

allowed within the specification limit and

popular tool, many engineers and quality

when captured, reduced, and controlled,

practitioners find design of experiments

these can eliminate this variation. Shainin

difficult

developed

primarily

because

of

the

techniques

(Shainin

and

complexity of having to create the

Shainin, 1990; 1992a; 1992b; 1993a;

conditions for conducting the experiments

1993b; Shainin, Shainin and Nelson,

in

where

1997) to track down the dominant source

interrupting production lines and changing

through a process of elimination (Shainin,

machine settings may be sometimes

1993b), called progressive search. These

difficult and unproductive.

techniques, also referred to as the Shainin

2.2

System

an

industrial

environment

Shainin DOE Approach

for

quality

improvement,

An alternative to the Classical and

developed over a period of over 40 years,

Taguchi experimental design is the lesser-

are simple but at the same time powerful

known but much simpler Shainin DOE

and easier to interpret and implement in an

approach developed and perfected by

industrial environment. In a way, these

Dorian Shainin (Bhote and Bhote, 2000),

may be considered as the non-parametric

consultant and advisor to over 750

equivalent of Taguchis DOE as they do

companies

Europe.

not make any restrictive assumptions

Shainins philosophy has been, Dont let

about population parameters. The Shainin

the engineers do the guessing; let the parts

techniques

do the talking. Shainin recognized the

produce breakthrough improvements in

value of empirical data in solving real-

eliminating chronic quality problems.

world

These are highly effective in pinpointing

in

America

problems.

He

and

introduced

the

are

primarily

known

to

concept of Red X, the dominant source of

towards the root cause and validating it.

variation, among the many sources of

No statistical software was needed to

variation of a problem that inevitably

analyze the data. In fact, Shainin DOE

accounts for nearly all the unwanted

does not even require knowledge of

effect.

difficult statistical tools. Simple operation

In fact, Shainin (Shainin, 1995; 1993b)

like counts, additions, subtractions, etc.,

had classified all causes of chronic quality

makes calculations relatively easy. In

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

E-ISSN 0976-7916

addition, the success of the projects can

an industrial operation. Applications of the

lead to a very positive effect on the morale

Classical and Taguchi methods in various

of the employees in terms of convincing

fields have been extensively researched. In

them that Six Sigma can be implemented

contrast, the Shainin system has not been

without complex statistics and big jargons.

extensively reviewed, academically, and

The subject of the Shainin methods is very

very limited studies have been carried out

vast

in this area.

and

this

paper

highlights

the

applicability of only a few of the Shainin

3.1

tools. However, there is a lot of scope for


more

research

on

this

methodology

Studies about comparison of


DOE approaches

Bhote

(2000)

compared

Shainin

particularly comparative research of some

techniques with Design of Experiments

of the Shainin methods like Paired

and Taguchi methods, in the context of the

Comparison and B Vs C Analysis vis--

electronics industry and concluded that the

vis the more popular statistical tools like

Shainin techniques are simpler, less

factorial

non-parametric

costly, and statistically more powerful

testing. Although these methods are not

than the other two. Logothetis (1990) also

necessarily the best, according to Steiner

evaluated the Shainin techniques

et al. (2008), the guiding principles of the

relation to the Taguchi methods and

Shainin tools are powerful, and at least, in

statistical

combination, unique. Also, these tools are

Verma, et al (2004) used a slightly

best suited for batch to high volume

different

production.

methods. In their study, three cases of

3.

Taguchi experiments were picked up from

CASE

designs

and

FINDINGS FROM VARIOUS


STUDIES

ABOUT

DOE

process
approach

control
to

in

methods.

compare

the

the available literature and the Shainin

APPROACHES

method was then re-applied to find out

Bhote and Bhote (2000) described these

whether it had an edge over the other DOE

tools in their books, but there have been

techniques.

many criticisms regarding their claims and

Taguchi and Shainin techniques in an

the tools described. Though, Nelson

aerospace environment was offered by

(1991) and Moore (1993) criticized the

Thomas and Anthony (2005). A few other

Shainin System as unsubstantiated and

authors who have studied these techniques

exaggerated, Steiner, et al (2008), are of

are Ledolter and Swersey (1997), De

the opinion that some of the ideas behind

Mast, et al. (2000) and Steiner and

the Shainin System are genuinely useful.

MacKay (2005). The Classical DOE,

Goodman and Wyld (2001) offered a case

Taguchi DOE, and Shainin DOE are

study involving the use of Shainin DOE in

compared with each other in Table 2.

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

comparison

between

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

E-ISSN 0976-7916

Table 2:Comparison of Classical, Taguchi, and Shainin DOE Approaches


Items for
Taguchi DOE
Shainin DOE
compari- Classical DOE
son
a. Component search,
b. Multi-vari analysis,
c. Paired comparison,
Primary
Factorial experiments
d. Product/Process Search or,
Orthogonal arrays
tools
variable search, e. Full
factorials, f. B vs. C (Better
vs. Current) analysis, Scatter
plots.
when
Effective
when Effective
Very powerful irrespective of
interaction effects are interaction
the presence or absence of
effects are not present
not present
AdvanMaximum
to
200% interactions.
(20
to
200% (20
tage
optimization possible.
improvements).
improvements).
Limited possibilities Limited possibilities for
optimization.
for optimization.
Cost/Tim
Moderate
Moderate
Low
e
3 to 5 days
3 to 10 days
1 to 2 days
Training
Low (simple & basic
Complexi
Moderate
High
mathematical operations)
ty
Requires
use
of
statistical software e.g.,
Requires
use
of
SAS, SPSS, etc. Used
statistical
software
mainly
in
pre- Software not necessary.
Facility &
e.g., SAS, SPSS, etc.
production & can be
Scope
Used
mainly
in
used at the design stage
production.
under
certain
constraints.
Moderate (Requires
High (Almost no knowledge
of
of statistics required. Easy to
Ease
of knowledge
statistics. Engineers
understand at all levels
Implemethods Poor
including shop floor workers,
mentation find
complex
to
engineers, and suppliers, thus
comprehend
and
creating an overall positive
interpret.)
impact.
(Bothe & Bothe, 2000)

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

An examination of the three approaches


clearly indicates that the Shainin tools
have an edge over the other two
approaches in terms of cost, time, training,
complexity, scope, and ease of
implementation. The following work
highlights the tools and techniques that
were used by Indian SME, a
manufacturing unit of Gange Industries
(GI) in their development of the six sigma
programme
4. CASE STUDY
This
case-study
was
successfully
completed in the welding unit of GI,
which is a SME was established in 1985,
located at Bhosari M.I.D.C., Pune,
Maharashtra State in India. GI has grown
to become a one of the major player in
processing/manufacturing of automobile
sheet-metal parts. GI is ISO 9001 and TS
16949 certified and has implemented
company wide QM, Kaizen and TPM
initiatives to good effect.
The company from their past experience
found that the QM process and its
associated systems were too slow in
identifying and responding to problems
primarily, since they were developed to
obtain long-term strategic direction and
focus. Therefore, company officials had
accepted and initiated move towards use
of Shainin tools for implementation of
Six Sigma + QMS integrated approach
for increase the process quality,
productivity intern reducing process cost.
Until the introduction of the integrated
strategy, the company attended to quality
problems in an often ad-hoc and
unstructured manner.

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

E-ISSN 0976-7916

The following section followed how


the company followed the proposed
methodology in an attempt to provide a
structured approach to solving critical to
quality (CTQ) problems within the
company and to achieve enhanced process
quality, productivity, customer satisfaction
and internal benefits through a case study
of one particular project undertaken.
Six Sigma DMAIC Process
The six sigma process concentrates on a
simple five phase methodology called
DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyze,
Improve, Control). The company followed
this approach and each stage is explained
in detail in the following section of the
paper.
Define Phase: The data available
(collected through QMS) related to type,
frequency and amount of rework done at
GI is analyzed. Our team (which includes
companys management representative,
managers, engineers and author) at GI
confirmed that, parts named Assy-sub
structure with floor (613 LP RUSSIA)
(XXX 6100 0182), which fits into
assembly frame of light commercial
vehicle after welding on Welding M/C
ST-CO2-17 machine was under rejection
because of defective welding (non
uniform welding, weld penetration, dry
welding, weld under cut and spatter etc.),
which resulted in to annual Cost of Poor
Quality (COPQ) about INR 2Lakh/-.
Process stages, where the problem
detected are in-process inspection and
final inspection. This project was
undertaken to achieve certain objectives
viz. productivity improvements in terms of

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

reduction/elimination of reworks and


reducing process cost [tangible], customer
satisfaction, and increase in confidence on
shop
floor
[intangible].
Hence,
repeatability and reproducibility study was
required for validating the measurement
system. Process Mapping is carried out
(refer figure 1),
Measure and Analyze Phase: A
brainstorming exercise was carried out by

a multi-disciplinary team of engineers


within the company. The team identified
the factors that could influence the product
quality. A cause-and-effect diagram was
developed (refer figure 2) to identify the
key sources of variation during the
welding
process.
Two
potential
Suspectable Sources of Variations (SSVs)
were finally listed as: Sheet material
thickness, Welding Process itself.

Figure 2: Cause-and-Effect Diagram

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

E-ISSN 0976-7916

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

Without taking educated guesses as to the


factors of real importance, authors have
suggested to adopt the Shainin
Techniques. The Shainins Techniques
been employed to identify whether the
primary cause of shabby/defective
welding lay within the process itself or
within the components used. This allowed
for a first stage filter to be employed that
cut down the factors to a manageable
number. Key stages, in which Shainin
tools were applied, are explained below.
Initial tool selected for measuring and
analyzing the response was Product
Process Search, as of variations in the
identified
suspectable
sources
of
variations (SSV) i.e. input material
parameter (as compared with their
standard specification) viz. SSV-1.
Material Thickness (Specifications 2.0
mm +/- 0.18), gets changed during
processing. Data was collected for 100
samples.
Observation 1 It has been observed that,
minimum and maximum value of sheet
metal (raw material) thickness as an
important input to production process
belongs to same category of response.
Therefore, as per Product Process Search
method the end-count is zero. Hence, it
has been concluded that, SSV-1: Input
material parameter (i.e. Thickness) is not
creating
problem.
Next
another
brainstorming session has concluded for
characterization of CO2-Welding process
as process itself is yielding in to
variations, which is required to be
analysed. Hence, relation can be written

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

E-ISSN 0976-7916

as; BigY (Response i.e. Defective welding)


= f [X (Sources of variations i.e. CO2
Welding process)]. Therefore, new SSVs
are now related to CO2-Welding process
are listed viz. Voltage, Current, Gas Flow
and Wire Feed Rate. To check whether
any relationship exists within the
identified parameters or not; data related
to all these parameters are collected (refer
table 3), regression analysis is carried out
and Graphs are plotted. Graph of Wire
Feed Rate vs Current clearly shows the
positive relationship (refer figure no. 3).
Hence, new SSVs identified parameters
related to CO2-Welding process are now
limited to: Voltage, Wire Feed Rate and
Gas Flow.
As the identified parameters were design
parameters of process and number of
parameters are equal to 3 hence, it has
been decided that, process characterization
analysis i.e. Full Factorial Analysis tool is
to be used. All stages of full factorial
method are explained as follows,
Stage 0: As the response is attribute in
nature, consider current setting as the
setting and identify + setting on the basis
of experience on domain expert for each
parameters (refer table 4).
Stage 1: To find out whether the
parameters and the levels identified in
stage 0 are correct or not. Then, we have
to produced 3 batches in setting and 3
batches in + setting. Calculate D/d ratio,
if D/d ratio is >=1.25 and <3 then the
settings identified in Stage # 0 are correct
and we can go for Stage # 2. Accordingly
trials are conducted; the results are

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

tabulated in table 5. D/d ratio is 0.4, which


indicates that, the levels identified in stage
0 are not correct. Hence, new parameters
levels are identified by considering earlier
+ ve setting as new - setting and new
+ ve settings for all parameters are
identified and set (refer table 6). Again
new trials are conducted and the results
are tabulated in table 7. D/d ratio is 10,
which indicates that the levels identified in
2nd settings are acceptable for further
consideration.
Stage 2: Construct factorial table and
collect the data for each combination in
the factorial table and quantify the
contributions of the interactions.
Table 8 shows factorial design and plan
of
experimentation.
Accordingly
experiments were performed, which
resulted in to following important
conclusions.
Parameter- A: As if we change from +
level to - level then response increases by
2.5 points.
Parameter- B: As if we change from +
level to - level then response decreases by
1.5 points.
Parameter- C: As if we change from +
level to - level then response decreases by
5 points.
Stage 3: Make a simple mathematical
equation based on the contribution of
significant parameters and arrive at the
optimal setting.
Y= 84.875 3.125 A + 14.162B + 4.875C
+2.625 AB 4.375 BC 7.125 CA +
7.625ABC
As
response
Y
considered
is
shabby/defective welding hence, our

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

E-ISSN 0976-7916

objective is lower the better. Using above


equation, offline iterations are done.
While doing iterations +ve settings are
refereed as 1, - settings are referred as
-1. Values some of the offline iterations
and its calculated responses are tabulated
in table 9. Then, experiments are carried
out using the levels of the parameters for
which responses are zero or less than zero
and physical outputs are analyzed.
Response for setting in case of experiment
no. 9 (shown in same table) resulted in to
proper welding (considered as an optimum
output).
Improvement Phase: Conclusions of
earlier phase (identified optimum levels of
the parameters as shown in table 10) are
used as an input to this phase. Once
optimum settings are set then, it is
necessary to validate it. This was done, by
using the Shainin B vs. C analysis, which
is a confirmation tool to verify whether
the actions taken have actually improved
the process (Bhote and Bhote, 2000). In
this case, 6B vs. 6C, i.e., 6 batches (10
units per batch) with modification and 6
(10 units per batch) without modification
(B with modification and C without
modification) was analyzed to validate the
improvement action, i.e., the modification
of CO2 machine operating parameters
(table 11).
The data in table 12 exhibited the
responses with B and C conditions. As per
rule of this technique, the final analysis is
done based on the end-count scheme. In
this case, end count is 8 (greater than 6),
which confirms that identified root causes
are correct.

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

Further, the result clearly validates the


improvement
against
the
criteria
mentioned in table 13. The data has
exhibited no overlaps of the responses
with B condition and C condition. The
conclusion being that the process has been
improved by changing the CO2 welding
machine operational specifications as

E-ISSN 0976-7916

mentioned in table 10. New specifications


not only helped to improve the quality
level but also productivity by reducing
defect/rework rate and optimizing the use
of resource and time (e.g. Wire Feed Rate
from 10 Min/min to 6.5 Min/min and Gas
Flow from15 Lit/min to 14 Lit/min).

Table 3: Data related to all these interactions among identified parameters


Sr. No. wire feed
voltage
current
1
50
27
40
2
55
13
90
3
55
16
100
4
55
18
80
5
55
20
100
6
55
22
110
7
55
22
110
7
55
25
100
9
55
28
90
10
55
30
90
11
65
17
100
12
65
19
100
13
65
23
100
14
75
30
160
15
80
20
150
16
80
27
140
17
100
26
190

Table 4: First Setting of levels of each parameter


UOM
Existing Setting (- ve )
Sr. No. Parameter
A
Wire Feed Rate
Min/min 10
B
Voltage
V
26
C
Gas Flow
Lit/min
15

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

Modified Setting (+ ve )
7
20
8

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

Table 5: First Trial


Trial
1st Trial
2nd Trial
3rd Trial
Median
Range
D = Difference Between Two Medians
d = Average of Two Ranges
D/d

E-ISSN 0976-7916

- Setting
10
50
40
40
40
10
25
0.4

+ Setting
50
50
60
50
10

Table 6: Second Setting of levels of each parameter


S. N. Parameter
UOM
Existing Setting ( - ve )
A
Wire Feed Rate
Min/min
7
B
Voltage
V
20
C
Gas Flow
Lit/min
8
Table 7: Second Trial
Trial
1st Trial
2nd Trial
3rd Trial
Median
Range
D = Difference Between Two Medians
d = Average of Two Ranges
D/d

- Setting
50
50
60
50
10
50
5
10

Table 8:Factorial Table


Factors (Main Effects)
A
B
C

+ Setting
100
100
100
100
0

Factor interaction
BC
CA ABC

Response

Median

"-"

20

"-"

"-"

"+"

"+"

"+"

"-"

50 , 50, 60

52

" + " 20

"-"

"-"

"-"

"+"

"-"

"+"

70

70

7
4
7

"-"
"+"
"-"
"+"
"-"

"+"
"+"
"-"
"-"
"+"

8
8
6
6
6

"-"
"-"
"+"
"+"
"+"

"-"
"+"
"+"
"-"
"-"

"-"
"-"
"-"
"-"
"+"

"+"
"-"
"-"
"+"
"-"

"+"
"-"
"+"
"-"
"-"

100
98
100
59
100

" + " 18

"+" "+"

"+"

"+"

"+"

100
70
100
60
100
100,
100

89.25
80.5
"-"
8.75
4.375

92
77.75
"-"
14.25
7.125

77.25
92.5
"+"
15.25
7.625

Parameters 7
Settings 4

"-"
"+"
Sign
Difference
Coeff.

AB

Modified Setting (+ ve )
4
18
6

88
81.75
"-"
6.25
3.125

18
18
20
20
18

"+" 6

70.25
99.5
"+"
29.25
14.625

80
89.75
"+"
9.75
4.875

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

82.25
87.5
"+"
5.25
2.625

100,

100

84.874

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

E-ISSN 0976-7916

Table 9:Offline iterations, its calculated and actual responses


Expt.
Wire Feed
Voltage Gas Flow
Constant Response
No.
1
0
0
0
84.875
84.88
2
-1
-1
-1
84.875
52
3
1
1
1
84.875
100
4
-.5
-2
-2
84.875
10.19
5
-0.45
-2
-2.5
84.875
0.0
6
-0.5
-3
-3
84.875
-52.50
7
-0.6
-5
-5
84.875
-248
8
-0.6
-9
-7
84.875
-507.20
9
-0.65
-9
-7
84.875
-684
10
-2
-11
-7
84.875
-1652
Table 10: Existing and Optimum Settings
Sr.
Existing Setting
No. Parameter
UOM
( -) ve
A
B
C
D

Voltage
Current
Wire Feed Rate
Gas Flow

V
A
Min/min
Lit/min

26
200
10
15

Table 11: B vs. C analysis


1
Part number selected for validation
Better Condition
2
Current Condition
3
Sample size
4
Sample type
5
Response decided for monitoring
6
Lot quantity (for batches)
Table 12:B vs. C Response
Lot no.
Better ( B )
1
0
2
0
3
10
4
10
5
0
6
0

Remark

Poor adhesion
Poor adhesion
Poor adhesion
OK
High Penetration

Optimum Setting
(0 - Target )
28
150
6.5
14

ASSY substructure with floor


Optimum Settings (Refer table 10 )
6B,6C
Batches
% Rejection
10
Current ( C )
40
30
10
40
30
40

Table 13: Criteria for validating improvements and results


Sr. no. Criteria for validating improvements
Results
1
2
3
4
5

Part selected for validation


Average of B
Average of C
Xb Xc (Amount of Improvement)
Sigma (B)
Is [Xb - Xc] greater than [K x Sigma (b)]
(Where K is std value = K = 2.96 @ 95%
Confidence Level )

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

Sub structure assembly with floor


3.33
31.66
28.33
4.71
Yes [(28.33 > 19.78]

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

E-ISSN 0976-7916

The improvements identified were also


used to set the action plan for other
varieties of such components for
horizontal deployment.

Control Phase:
The focus of the control phase is to sustain
the gains of the improvement phase. This
is usually achieved by documentation and
standardization of the control measures.
For controlling the process at Six Sigma
level, following actions were suggested.

Implemented controls to make sure


that the actions taken in Phase-III are done
forever.

Appropriate modifications have been


done in CO2 welding machine operating
and training manuals.

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

Procedure has been developed for

periodic monitoring of CO2 welding


machine operational specifications w. r. to
quality level of output.

All these modifications have been

included as a part of Company-QMS


procedure to ensure the reliability of Six
Sigma level quality of the process.
The operational framework developed and
used in this research-work is described in
figure 4.

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

It clearly shows the major stages in the


process integration and implementation. It
shows initially the sequential nature of the
stages whereby the Six Sigma phases are
using appropriate imputes from company
QMS database to continently execute the
project. The operational framework also
shows the stages in sequence whereby the
six sigma DMAIC phases are using
accurately Shainin quality tools.
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
The aim of this project is to defeat the
biggest excuses cited by SMEs as the
reasons Six Sigma is not feasible, incurs
high costs and involve complexity of
implementation. In addition, it helps to
break down so many of the barriers that
stand in the way of individuals using
statistical and/or unfamiliar problem
solving methods by acting as a step-bystep guide. This research work focus on
use of Shainin tools specifically, as they
are easy to understand, involves simple
mathematical calculations (so that bottomline people can also understand it very
easily) and time required for training is
also less, which is one of the important
requirements of SMEs. During this case
study, during use of Shainin tools, small
samples of BOB and WOW pieces were
sufficient to analyse the data as reported
earlier. A very important factor is that data
collection was done for the project
undertaken online without disturbing the
regular production.
Thus in short, we can understand that, use
of Shainin tools for simplifying Six
Sigma implementation can provides an
appropriate methodology for SMEs for

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

E-ISSN 0976-7916

delivering certain objectives set by ISO


such as: prevention of defects at all stages
from design through servicing; techniques
required for establishing, controlling and
verifying process capability and product
characterization; investigation of the cause
of defects relating to product, process and
quality system; continuous improvement
of the quality of products/services.
From the results of case study based
research work we draw following
conclusions,
i. The key phase of the DMAIC
methodology is the measure and
analysis phase. The tools and
techniques used in this phase
determine the success or failure of
the project to a large extent. In
both the projects, the Shainin tools
have been very effectively used to
pinpoint the root causes and
validate the improvement actions.
ii. No statistical software was needed
to be used to analyse the data. In
fact, Shainin DOE does not even
require knowledge of difficult
statistical tools. Simple operation
like counts, additions, subtractions
etc., makes calculations relatively
easy. Therefore the training
required for application of Shainin
tools is simple and requires less
time (1-2 days).
iii. In addition, the success of the
projects had a very positive effect
on the morale of the employees in
terms of convincing them that Six
Sigma works without complex
statistics and big jargons.

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

iv. Existing
company
QMS
procedures
has
assisted
/complimented in all stages of
implementation of Six Sigma.
v. Operational framework developed
and used in this research-work has
validated for its implementation
and found to be a useful concept
for improving quality and
productivity/performance of SME.
vi. The project was completed within
a span of almost three months. For
the company, the estimated
savings from this project was
more than INR 2 lakhs per annum.
The guiding principles of the Shainin tools
are powerful, and at least, in combination,
unique. Therefore, we conclude that,
applying simplified Shainin tools based
Six Sigma methodology to the existing
company QMS process is the best way for
SMEs to achieve the optimal results in
quality progress towards TQM in
customer satisfaction.
This paper highlights the applicability of
only a few of the Shainin tools. There is a
lot of scope for more research on this
methodology as its most of the
terminology is trademarked and legally
protected, limiting academic debate and
discussion on this system of problem
solving, which despite many criticisms
and having been largely overshadowed by
the classical and Taguchi techniques in the
past, is now gradually being given its due
recognition.
REFERENCES
1.

Antony, J., Banuelas, R., (2002),


Key ingredients for the effective
implementation of Six Sigma

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

E-ISSN 0976-7916

program
Measuring
Business
Excellence, Vol. 6, No. 4, pp. 2027.
2. Bewoor A. K., Pawar M. S., (2008),
Developing Integrated Model of SixSigma Methodology and Quality
Management System for Improving
Quality,
Productivity
and
Competitiveness.
3. 12th Annual Conference of the
Society of Operations Management
December 19-21, 2008, IIT Kanpur,
India.
4. Bewoor A. K., Pawar M. S. (2009)
Developing
and
Implementing
Quality Six Sigma(QSS) an
Integrated QMS and Six Sigma
Methodology for Improving Quality
and Productivity/ Performance of
SME An Indian Case Study, Inl. J.
of
Emerging Technologies and
Applications.
in
Engineering
Technology and Sciences, Vol. 2,
No. 2, pp. 222-228.
5. Bhote, K R and Bhote, A. K. (2000)
World Class Quality, 2nd Edition.
New York: American Management
Association.
6. De Mast, J; Schippers, W. A. J.;
Does, R. J. M. M. and Van den,
Heuvel E. (2000) Steps and
Strategies in Process Improvement,
Quality and Reliability Engineering
International, Vol. 16, pp. 301-311.
7. Eckes, George (2001)The Six Sigma
Revolution, New York: John Wiley &
Sons.
8. Falshaw, J.R., Glaister, K.W. and
Tatoglu, E. (2006) Evidence on
formal strategic planning and
company performance, Management
Decision, Vol. 44 No. 1, pp. 9-30.
9. Goodman, J. and Wyld, David C.
(2001) The Hunt for Red X: A Case
Study in the Use of Shainin Design of
Experiments (DOE) in an Industrial
Honing Operation, Management
Research News, Vol.4, No.8/9, pp. 117.
10. Ledolter, J. and Swersey, A. (1997)
Dorian Shainins Variable Search
Procedure: A Critical Assessment,
Journal of Quality Technology, Vol.
29, pp. 237-247.
11. Linderman, K., Schroeder, R.G.,
Zaheer, S. and Choo, A.S. (2003)
Six
Sigma:
a
goal-theoretic

Journal of Engineering Research and Studies

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

20.

21.

22.

perspective, Journal of Operations


Management, Vol. 21, No.2, pp. 193
203.
Logothetis, N. (1990) A Perspective
on Shainins Approach to
Experimental Design for Quality
Improvement, Quality and
Reliability Engineering International,
Vol. 6, No. 3, pp. 195-202.
Moore, D. (1993) Review of World
Class Quality, by K Bhote-1991
Journal of Quality Technology, Vol.
21, pp. 76-79.
Nelson, L S (1991)Review of World
Class Quality- by K Bhote (1991)
Journal of Quality Technology, Vol.
25, pp. 152-153.
Pande,
P.S.,
Neuman,
R.P.,
Cavanagh, R.R. (2000) The Six Sigma
Way: How GE, Motorola, & Other
Top Companies are Honing their
Performance, New York: McGrawHill.
Pyzdek, T. (2001) The Six Sigma
Handbook,
USA:
McGrawHill/Quality Publishing Tucson.
Rao, R. S., Kumar, C. G., Prakasham,
R. S. and Hobbs, P. J. (2008) The
Taguchi Methodology as a Statistical
Tool
for
Biotechnological
Applications: A Critical Appraisal,
Biotechnology Journal, Vol. 3, No. 4,
pp. 510-523.
Shainin, D. and Shainin, P. D. (1990)
Analysis of Experiments. 45th
Annual
Quality
Congress
Proceedings, ASQC, pp. 1071- 1077.
Shainin, P D (1992a) Managing SPC
-A Critical Quality System Element.
46th Annual Quality Congress
Proceedings, ASQC, pp. 251-257.
Shainin, P D (1993a). Managing
Quality Improvement. 47th Annual
Quality
Congress
Proceedings,
ASQC, pp. 554-560.
Shainin, P D; Shainin, R D and
Nelson, M T (1997). Managing
Statistical Engineering, 51st Annual
Quality
Congress
Proceedings,
ASQC, pp. 818-832.
Shainin, R D (1992b). Technical
Problem Solving Strategies, A Case
Study,
46th
Annual
Quality
Congress Proceedings, ASQC, pp.
876-882.

JERS/Vol.I/ Issue II/Oct.-Dec.,2010/177-194

E-ISSN 0976-7916

23. Shainin, R D (1993b). Strategies for


Technical Problem Solving, Quality
Engineering, Vol. 5, pp. 433-438.
24. Shainin, R D (1995). A Common
Sense
Approach
to
Quality
Management, 49th Annual Quality
Congress Proceedings, ASQC, pp.
1163-1169.
25. Steiner, S H; MacKay, R J and
Ramberg, J S (2008). An Overview
of the Shainin System for Quality
Improvement, Quality Engineering,
Vol. 20, No. 1, pp. 6-99.
26. Thomas, A J and Anthony, J (2005).
A Comparative Analysis of the
Taguchi
and
Shainin
DOE
Techniques
in
an
Aerospace
Environment, International Journal
of Productivity and Performance
Management, Vol. 54, No. 8, pp. 658678.
27. Verma, A K; Srividya, A; Mannikar,
A V; Pankhawala, V A and
Rathanraj, K J (2004). Shainin
Method: Edge over other DOE
techniques,
Engineering
Management
Conf.
2004
Proceedings, IEEE International,
Vol. 3, No. 18-21, pp. 1110- 1113.
28. Xingxing
Zu,
Lawrence
D.
Fredendall, Thomas J. Douglas,
(2008), The evolving theory of
quality management: The role of Six
Sigma, Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 26 pp. 630650.