INTEGRATION OF DMAIC METHODOLOGY AND CAPA CONCEPT FOR .

3y ago
83 Views
4 Downloads
1.03 MB
47 Pages
Last View : Today
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Kelvin Chao
Transcription

INTEGRATION OF DMAIC METHODOLOGYAND CAPA CONCEPTFOR QUALITY IMPROVEMENTIN SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRYNURUL AIDA BINTI HARUNUNIVERSITI SAINS MALAYSIA2017

INTEGRATION OF DMAIC METHODOLOGY AND CAPA CONCEPTFOR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRYbyNURUL AIDA BINTI HARUNThesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirementsfor the degree ofMaster of ScienceJune 2017

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTIn the name of Allah Most Gracious, Most Merciful,Alhamdulillah. Praise to Allah SWT, whom with His willing and guidance ingiving me the opportunity to complete my master research.I owe my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Elmi Abu Bakar for hiscontinuous support of my master research, for his patience, motivation, and immenseknowledge. His guidance helped me throughout the research and writing process.I wish to express my warm thanks and appreciation to my husband, mymother and family for their endless love, pray and continuous support from thebeginning until the end. Without their understanding with my work it would havebeen impossible for me to finish this research.I am thankful to the QDOS Flexcircuits Sdn. Bhd. Staffs, especially Mdm.Satariah Bt Yet and Miss Puah Lai Guat for giving me lots of opportunities to learnand to do research upon my thesis. Not forgetting my friend and colleagues fromInnovative System and Instrumentation (ISI) research team for continuous supportand helped in feeding me new knowledge and make this research enjoyable andsometimes unforgettable experience.Last but not least, to all the lecturers, technicians, staff and financial supportfrom Ministry of Higher Education (MOHE), Knowledge Transfer Program (KTP)Division of Industry and Community Network (BJIM) and Universiti SainsMalaysia, (USM) are gratefully acknowledged.ii

TABLE OF CONTENTSPageACKNOWLEDGEMENTSiiTABLE OF CONTENTSiiiLIST OF TABLESixLIST OF FIGURESxLIST OF ABBREVIATIONSxivABSTRAKxviABSTRACTxviiCHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION1.1 Overview11.2 Research Background11.3 Problem Statement21.4 Research objectives41.5 Scope of research41.6 Layout of thesis5CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW2.1 Overview72.2 Quality and process improvement overview72.3 Issues related to quality improvement92.4 Common problem solving and improvement methodology122.4.1 8 Disciplines of problem solving (8D)iii12

2.4.2 4 Quadrants (4Q) Methodology132.4.3 Toyota’s A3 Problem Solving Process142.5 Quality improvement framework to develop quality report162.5.1 Definition of framework162.5.2 The importance of building a framework in developing quality17report2.5.3 Framework and quality reporting requirements2.6 Review of process improvement framework and concept19212.6.1 Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) Cycle212.6.2 DMAIC Process Improvement Framework222.6.3 Raytheon Six Sigma framework242.6.4 Carpinetti et al. (2000) Quality Improvement Framework252.6.5 Corrective and Preventive action (CAPA) concept262.6.6 Jevgeni et al. (2015) Framework for Continuous Improvement282.6.7 RADAR Matrix292.6.8 SUPER methodology for process improvement312.6 Literature Findings332.7 Summary35CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY3.1 Overview363.2 Conceptual methodology of quality improvement363.2.1 Step 1: Study on process improvement frameworks and37concepts3.2.2 Step 2: DMAIC and CAPA are identified as the bestiv38

frameworks3.2.3 Step 3: List and classify important points in DMAIC38Methodology and CAPA concept3.2.4 Step 4: Integrating the important points393.2.5 Step 5: The development of framework for QEA reporting42document3.2.6 Step 6: Validate the QEA report through two case studies443.2.7 Step 7: Analyze the results of the case studies453.2.8 Step 8: Make a survey/questionnaire to rank the effectiveness of45the report3.2.9 Step 9: Analyze the result of the survey3.3 Quality improvement through QEA reporting document3.3.1 Stage 1: Define the objective4546463.3.1(a) Product details and team formation463.3.1(b) Problem definition473.3.2 Stage 2: Measure the problem483.3.2(a) Review the situation483.3.2(b) Asses the current process capability493.3.3 Stage 3: Analyze the factor and causes503.3.3(a) Interim Containment Action (ICA)513.3.3(b) Root Cause Analysis (RCA)51i.Double-sided Ishikawa diagram51ii.5 Whys Analysis523.3.4 Stage 4: Improvement action plan54v

3.3.5 Stage 5: Control the recurrence553.4 Summary55CHAPTER FOUR: THE QEA REPORT VALIDATION4.1 Overview584.2 Introduction of case study584.3 Case study 1: Flex Part A (13297)594.3.1 Stage 1: Define the objective604.3.1(a) Detail information and team formation of the Part A604.3.1(b) Problem definition614.3.2 Stage 2: Measure the problem634.3.3 Stage 3: Analyze the factor and causes644.3.3(a) Interim Containment Action (ICA)654.3.3(b) Root Cause Analysis (RCA)65i.Ishikawa diagram65ii.5 Whys Analysis664.3.4 Stage 4: Improvement action plan674.3.5 Stage 5: Control the recurrence714.4 Case study 2: Flex Part B (13495)724.4.1 Stage 1: Define the objective744.4.1(a) Detail information and team formation of the Part B744.4.1(b) Problem definition754.4.2 Stage 2: Measure the problem764.4.3 Stage 3: Analyze the factor and causes77vi

4.4.3(a) Interim Containment Action (ICA)774.4.3(b) Root Cause Analysis (RCA)78iii.Ishikawa diagramiv.5 Whys Analysis78784.4.4 Stage 4: Improvement action plan794.4.5 Stage 5: Control the recurrence804.5 Summary81CHAPTER FIVE: RESULTS OF ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSIONS5.1 Overview835.2 Objective of distributing a questionnaire835.3 Questionnaire descriptions845.4 Scope and classifications845.5 The questionnaire findings855.6 Summary87CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS6.1 Conclusion of the Research886.2 Recommendations for Future Works89REFERENCES91APPENDICESAppendix AThe 8D report used in QDOS Flexcircuits Sdn. Bhd.vii

Appendix BThe QEA Reporting documentAppendix CThe QEA report for Part A (13297)Appendix DThe QEA report for Part B (13495)Appendix EThe QEA report validation questionnaire formLIST OF PUBLICATIONSviii

LIST OF TABLESPageTable 2.1World class progress9Table 2.24Q steps13ix

LIST OF FIGURESPageFigure 2.14Q methodology13Figure 2.2A3 problem-solving template15Figure 2.3PDCA cycle21Figure 2.4DMAIC methodology23Figure 2.5Reconstruction of DMAIC methodology23Figure 2.6Raytheon Six Sigma Six Step Process24Figure 2.7Elements of improvement deployment method25Figure 2.8Overview of CAPA concept27Figure 2.9Corrective vs. Preventive Action27Figure 2.10Jevgeni et al. (2015) framework29Figure 2.11RADAR matrix30Figure 2.12SUPER framework (layer 1)31Figure 2.13SUPER framework (layer 2)32Figure 3.1Methodology of the new framework and reporting document37Figure3.2The methodology of developing the new framework41Figure 3.3CAPA concept infuses into DMAIC methodology42Figure 3.4The new improvement framework43Figure 3.5Proposed document layout for product details and teamformation47x

Figure 3.6Proposed document layout for Define and Measure phases48Figure 3.7Example of data presentation49Figure 3.8Example of a highlighted process control flow (PCF)50Figure 3.9Example of a highlighted Ishikawa diagram52Figure 3.10Proposed layout for Ishikawa diagram52Figure 3.11Example of a 5 Whys analysis53Figure 3.12Proposed document layout for 5 Whys analysis54Figure 3.13Proposed document layout for Improve phase54Figure 3.14Proposed document layout for Control phase55Figure 3.15The QEA report56Figure 4.1Part A in panel form59Figure 4.2Close up look on Part A59Figure 4.3Part A detail information and team formation in QEA report61Figure 4.4Problem definition and problem measures for Part A62Figure 4.5Operator at ET department monitoring inspection test onPart A62Figure 4.6Detected defects on Part A are shown by red marks63Figure 4.7Measure phase for Part A in the QEA report63Figure 4.8Yield distribution data for Part A64Figure 4.9Interim Containment Actions (ICA)65Figure 4.10Ishikawa diagram for Part A65xi

Figure 4.115 Whys Analysis for Part A66Figure 4.12Improvement action (corrective action) for Part A67Figure 4.13Transcheck for Part A with two openings67Figure 4.14Implement and validate Permanent Corrective Action (PCA)for Part A68Figure 4.15Example of Part A is marked “X” and “S”68Figure 4.16New marking method for Part A provided by team membersin the QEA report69Figure 4.17Preventive action (PA) for Part A70Figure 4.18Part B in piece form71Figure 4.19Part B in panel form71Figure 4.20Part B packed in plastic bag72Figure 4.21Part B detail information and team formation in QEA report73Figure 4.22Problem definition and problem measures for Part B74Figure 4.23Measure phase for Part B in QEA report75Figure 4.24Yield distribution data for Part B76Figure 4.25Interim Containment Actions (ICA) for Part B77Figure 4.26Ishikawa diagram for Part B77Figure 4.275 Whys Analysis for Part B78Figure 4.28Improvement action (corrective action) for Part A78Figure 4.29Photo 3 and 4 of Part B in panel form79xii

Figure 4.30Adhesive tape used to join Part B into place79Figure 4.31Close up view on Part B in panel form80Figure 4.32Permanent corrective action (PCA) for Part B80Figure 4.33Preventive action (PA) for Part B81Figure 5.1Result of the questionnaire85xiii

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONSCACorrective ActionCAPACorrective and Preventive ActionCNChange NoticeDMAICDefine, Measure, Analyze, Improve, ControlDFSSDesign for Six SigmaDOEDesign of ExperimentETElectrical Test DepartmentFPCFlexible Printed CircuitFPCAFlexible Printed Circuit AssemblyFR4Fire Resistance Type 4 (support material)ICAInterim Containment ActionISOInternational Organization for StandardizationOQAOutgoing Quality Assurance (basically for data purpose)OQCOutgoing Quality Control DepartmentPAPreventive ActionPCBPrinted Circuit BoardPDCAPlan-do-check-actQERQuality Enhancement RatingQCQuality ControlQFDQuality Function DeploymentQIQuality Improvementxiv

QPQuality PlanningQTQuality ToolsRCARoot Cause AnalysisSMTSurface-Mount TechnologyTPTarget Punch DepartmentTQMTotal Quality Managementxv

INTEGRASI METODOLOGI DMAIC DAN KONSEP CAPA BAGIPENAMBAHBAIKAN KUALITI DALAM INDUSTRI SEMIKONDUKTORABSTRAKTerma kualiti di dalam industri menjadi faktor utama bagi mengukurkebolehsaingan suatu firma. Konsep, kaedah dan alat telah digunakan secara meluasdalam menambahbaik serta mengawal kualiti produk. Dengan itu, industri berusahabagi menghasilkan produk yang baik. Bagi memastikan tindakan kualiti lebih teratur,laporan kualiti yang tersusun adalah sangat penting. Tujuan kajian ini adalah untukmenghasilkan rangka kerja penyelesaian masalah yang baru di mana metodologiDMAIC (Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control) menjadi pendekatan utamauntuk gabungan konsep CAPA (Corrective and Preventive Action). MetodologiDMAIC sering diterangkan sebagai suatu pendekatan dalam penyelesaian masalahdan suatu strategi kualiti berasaskan data kerana ia adalah sebahagian daripadainisiatif kualiti Six Sigma. Manakala konsep CAPA merupakan siasatan sistematikpada punca masalah yang dihadapi. Dalam kajian ini, dua pendekatan tersebutdigabungkan dalam penghasilan Laporan Quality Enhancement Action (QEA), dimana laporan ini bertujuan untuk membawa pengurusan industri ke arah tindakanyang lebih jitu berkenaan isu kualiti dalam sektor elektronik. Laporan ini telahdisahkan melalui kajian kes dan kajian soal selidik. Hasilnya telah menunjukkanlaporan dan juga rangka kerja baru tersebut adalah praktikal. Selain itu, laporankualiti ini bukan sahaja focus kepada penyelesaian masalah, malah bolehmemecahkan jurang sesebuah organisasi. Menerusi penambahbaikan proses andkualiti, industri dapat lebih berdaya saing bagi menghasilkan produk yang lebih baikdi masa hadapan.xvi

INTEGRATION OF DMAIC METHODOLOGY AND CAPA CONCEPTFOR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN SEMICONDUCTOR INDUSTRYABSTRACTThe term quality in industry has been a key factor in measuring a firmcompetitiveness. Tools, methods, and concepts have been massively applied inimproving and controlling product quality. Thus, industries urge themselves to copewith the needs of complete goods. In order to get a structured quality action, anorganized framework is highly reliable. The purpose of this research is to develop anew problem solving framework where DMAIC (Define-Measure-Analyze-ImproveControl) is the main approach, with infusion of CAPA (Corrective and PreventiveAction) concept. The DMAIC method is often described as an approach to problemsolving and a data-driven quality strategy as it is an integral part of the Six Sigmaquality initiatives. Meanwhile, the CAPA concept is the systematic investigation ofthe root cause of identified risks or problems, widely implemented in industries. Inthis research, these two approaches are merged in designing a new quality reportingdocument named as the Quality Enhancement Action (QEA) report. The reportpresents the structured quality action in a more efficient way conducted in theelectronics sector. The report has been validated through case studies and a surveythrough questionnaire. The outcomes confirmed the application and the practicalityof the report as well as the new framework to improve quality issues. On the otherhand, the quality report is not only focus on problem solving and decision making,but can break down organizational barriers. Through process and qualityimprovement, industries will have the capability in producing better goods in future.xvii

REFERENCESAbdolvand, N., Albadvi, A., & Ferdowsi, Z. (2008). Assessing readiness for businessprocess reengineering. Business Process Management Journal, 14(4), pp. 497–511.AHRQ. (2016). General Tips for Making Your Report Appealing and Easy to Skim.Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.Arnold, K. L., & Holler, M. (1996). QUALITY ASSURANCE: Methods andTechnologies (Internatio.). McGraw-Hill.Awwwards-team. (2016). What are frameworks? 22 best responsive CSS frameworkfor web design. AWWWARDS Blog.Bendell, T. (2005). Structuring business process improvement methodologies. TotalQuality Management & Business Excellence, 16(8-9), pp. 969–978.Carpinetti, L. C. R., Buosi, T., & Gerólamo, M. C. (2003). Quality management andimprovement: A framework and a business-process reference model. BusinessProcess Management Journal, 9(4), pp. 543–554.Carpinetti, L. C. R., Gerólamo, M. C., & Dorta, M. (2000). A conceptual frameworkfor deployment of strategy-related continuous improvements. The TQMMagazine, 12(5), pp. 340–349.Collazo, N. L. (2014). Integration of Risk Management and Corrective andPreventive Action. Cordis Corporation.Davenport, T., & Short, J. (1990). The New Industrial Engineering : InformationTechnology And Business Process Redesign. Sloan Management Review, pp.11–27.De Feo, J. A., & Barnard, W. W. (2003). JURAN Institute’s Six Sigma Breakthroughand Beyond - Quality Performance Breakthrough Methods (1st Editio.).McGraw-Hill.de Mast, J., & Lokkerbol, J. (2012). An analysis of the Six Sigma DMAIC methodfrom the perspective of problem solving. International Journal of ProductionEconomics, 139(2), pp. 604–614.Furterer, S. L., & Elshennawy, A. K. (2004). A framework roadmap forimplementing Lean Six Sigma in local governmental entities, 3162092, pp. 1–131.Grover, V., & Malhotra, M. K. (1997). Business process reengineering: A tutorial onthe concept, evolution, method, technology and application. Journal ofOperations Management, 15(3), pp. 193–213.91

Gupta, P. (2005). The Six Sigma Performance Handbook: A Statistical Guide toOptimizing Results. United States of America: McGraw-Hill.Hambleton, L. (2007). Define-Measure-Analyze- Improve-Control (DMAIC).Treasure Chest of Six Sigma Growth Methods, Tools, and Best Practices, pp.13–27.Hatami Hardoroudi, A., Farhang Dareshuri, A., Md.sarkan, H., & Nourizadeh, M.(2011). Robust corrective and preventive action (CAPA). In 2011 IEEEInternational Systems Conference, SysCon 2011 - Proceedings (pp. 177–181).Hicks, B. J., & Matthews, J. (2010). The barriers to realising sustainable processimprovement: A root cause analysis of paradigms for manufacturing systemsimprovement. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing,23(7), pp. 585–602.Huertas-Quintero, L. a. M., Conway, P. P., Segura-Velandia, D. M., & West, A. A.(2011). Root cause analysis support for quality improvement in electronicsmanufacturing. Assembly Automation, 31, pp. 38–46.Indrawati, S., & Ridwansyah, M. (2015). Manufacturing Continuous ImprovementUsing Lean Six Sigma: An Iron Ores Industry Case Application. ProcediaManufacturing, 4(Iess), pp. 528–534.ISO. (2015). Guidance on the requirements for Documented Information of ISO9001:2015. International Organization for Standardization. Retrieved fromwww.iso.org/tc176/sc02/publicJevgeni, S., & Eduard, S. (2014). Quality Improvement Methodologies forContinuous Improvement of Production Processes and Product Quality andTheir Evolution. Daaam, International Conference, Baltic Engineering,Industrial, pp. 183–184.Jevgeni, S., Eduard, S., & Roman, Z. (2015). Framework for continuousimprovement of production processes and product throughput. In EnergyProcedia (Vol. 100, pp. 511–519).Jones, E. C., Parast, M. M., & Adams, S. G. (2010). A framework for effective SixSigma implementation. Total Quality Management & Business Excellence.Jorgensen, F., Boer, H., & Gertsen, F. (2003). Jump-starting ContinuousImprovement through Self-assesment, 23(10), pp. 1260–1278.Juran, J. M., & Godfrey, A. B. (1999). Juran’s Quality Handbook. Deutschemedizinische Wochenschrift 1946 (Vol. 1).Kaynak, H., & Hartley, J. L. (2005). Exploring quality management practices andhigh tech firm performance. Journal of High Technology ManagementResearch, 16(2), pp. 255–272.92

Köksal, G., Batmaz, I., & Testik, M. C. (2011). A review of data mining applicationsfor quality improvement in manufacturing industry. Expert Systems withApplications, 38(10), pp. 13448–13467.Koning, H. De, & Mast, J. De. (2006). A rational reconstruction of Six-Sigma’sbreakthrough cookbook. International Journal of Quality & ReliabilityManagement, 23, pp. 766–787.Kubiak, T. M., & Benbow, D. W. (2008). The Certified Six Sigma Black BeltHandbook (2nd Editio.).Lee, K. T., & Chuah, K. B. (2001). A SUPER methodology for business processimprovement: An industrial case study in Hong K. International Journal ofOperations & Production Management, vol. 21, pp. 56.Maleyeff, J., & Kaminsky, F. C. (2002). Six sigma and introductory statisticseducation. Education Training, vol. 44, pp. 82–89.Mandal, P. (2012). Improving Process Improvement: Executing the Analyze andImprove Phases of DMAIC better. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma,3(3), pp. 231–250.Mandouh, E. El, & Corporate, M. G. (2013). Application of Six-Sigma DMAICMethodology in the Evaluation of Test Effectiveness : A Case Study for EDATools.Mansar, S. L., & Reijers, H. A. (2005). Best practices in business process redesign:Validation of a redesign framework. Computers in Industry, 56(5), pp. 457–471.Michael, M. (2004). Raytheon Six Sigma. iSixSigma. Retrieved -and-defense/raytheon-sixsigma/Mishra, P. ., & Sharma, R. K. . (2014). A hybrid framework based on SIPOC and SixSigma DMAIC for improving process dimensions in supply chain network.International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 31, pp. 522–546.Moen, R., & Norman, C. (2009). Evolution of the PDCA Cycle. Society, pp. 1–11.Morgan, J., & Brenig-Jones, M. (2010). Lean Six Sigma For Dummies. /patron/FullRecord.aspx?p 624633Muthiah, K. M. N., & Huang, S. H. (2006). A review of literature on manufacturingsystems productivity measurement and improvement. International Journal ofIndustrial and Systems Engineering, 1(4), pp. 461–484.Nanda, V. (2005). Quality Management System Handbook for Product DevelopmentCompanies (1st Edition). Florida: CRC Press.93

NASA. (2002). QLF Mach 2002 Raytheon Six Sigma. NASA.Paradies, M. (2007). Improving an existing root cause analysis and corrective actionprogram. 2007 IEEE 8th Human Factors and Power Plants and HPRCT 13thAnn

Figure 2.1 4Q methodology 13 Figure 2.2 A3 problem -solving template 15 Figure 2.3 PDCA cycle 21 Figure 2.4 DMAIC methodology 23 Figure 2.5 Reconstruction of DMAIC methodology 23 Figure 2.6 Raytheon Six Sigma Six Step Process 24 Figure 2.7 Elements of improvement deployment method 25 Figure 2.8 Overview of CAPA concept 27

Related Documents:

Therefore DMAIC methodology was used as the basis of the improvement project with VSM applied simultaneously in order to strengthen the DMAIC methodology. To study and illustrate the "VSM-DMAIC approach" a case study was conducted at TitanX in Linköping where the thesis work was a part of a bigger project to eliminate losses in the manual .

LSS Define-Measure-Analyze-Improve-Control (DMAIC) is the core methodology used in LSS project4-8. This methodology assists medical practitioners to utilize the concept of DMAIC when a process is in existence at a company but is not as per customer specifications. DMAIC methodology also refers to practical problem that

Steps DMAIC is an abbreviation of the five improvement steps it comprises: Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control. All of the DMAIC process steps are required and always proceed in the given order. The five steps of DMAIC Define The purpose of this step is to clearly articulate the business problem, goal, potential

Part 1: DMAIC methodology 1 Scope This part of ISO 13053 describes a methodology for the business improvement methodology known as Six Sigma. The methodology typically comprises five phases: define, measure, analyse, improve and control (DMAIC). This part of ISO 13053 recommends the preferred or best practice for each of the phases of the DMAIC

To implement the six sigma methodology, one of the ways that can be used is DMAIC (Define, Measure, Analyzed, Improve and Control). According to Kakuljan and Kakuljan (2008), DMAIC phases as defined as follows: (1) Define - this stage within the DMAIC process involves defining the team's role, project scope

1.1 DMAIC APPROACH: DMAIC is similar in function such as Plan-Do-Check-Act and the Seven Step method of Juran and Gryna for problem solving approaches. In the theory of organizational routines, DMAIC is a meta-routine: a routine for changing established routines or for designing new routines.

THE DMAIC SIX SIGMA METHODOLOGY The DMAIC is a basic component of Six Sigma methodology—a better way to improve work process by eliminating the defects rate in the final product. The DMAIC methodology has five phases define, measure, analysis, improvement and control. Define Phase Goal: In this phase, define the purpose of

ASTM INTERNATIONAL Helping our world work better Standards Catalog 2016 www.astm.org Highlights in this issue: 24 ook of B Standards 2 uilding Codes B 9 nline TrainingO 6 MNL 43 - 3rd 13 Proficiency Testing Standards Books Journals and Software Training Laboratory QA Programs. What’s New from ASTM International ASTM Compass Your Portal for Standards, Testing, Learning & More Give your .