E
Recently I?ve been working on an Excel model to predict capability of machined components based on historical data of similar parts. This is in an attempt to move away from fixed targets in our product commercialisation process.
Some background stuff
? Previous New Product Introduction (NPI) projects employed hard targets/goals for machining capability, such as - 1.33 Cpk or 4 Sigma / 95% yield, which in some cases were not achievable in the time-frame or technology available
? The acceptance criteria needs to be agreed using historical analysis and balanced with commercial viability.
? Ensuring capability figures are managed pragmatically and kept flexible presents the following advantages:
? More focus can be given to critical features/tolerances.
? A strengthened relationship is created between NPI and Operations.
? Manufacturing Readiness (MR) deliverables can be agreed to suit business requirements.
? Use of historic data allows us to understand & improve upon past errors.
? Flexible approach provides the ability to predict capability results for any future changes.
To this end, I would like to undertake a peer review of the capability gap analysis model with some (well regarded) external contacts that may find this sort of work interesting and may be able to utilise the framework within their own roles. The model has been created to predict capability and yield % and provide a meaningful metric for future projects but could easily be adapted for processes other than machining. Attached is the model that I have created for one of our most recent product commercialisation projects.
Please start by visiting the ?Read me? tab on the model before reviewing the sheet.
Any comments or feedback will be welcomed. If you have any questions, then please don?t hesitate to contact me. Feel free to use this model and adapt it for you own needs if you so wish, with the normal accreditations.
Please note, that currently this model is only intended to predict adverse scenarios and will not predict improved capability or yield based upon tolerance trade-off?s or other favourable process improvements. This will be a consideration for future versions
Some background stuff
? Previous New Product Introduction (NPI) projects employed hard targets/goals for machining capability, such as - 1.33 Cpk or 4 Sigma / 95% yield, which in some cases were not achievable in the time-frame or technology available
? The acceptance criteria needs to be agreed using historical analysis and balanced with commercial viability.
? Ensuring capability figures are managed pragmatically and kept flexible presents the following advantages:
? More focus can be given to critical features/tolerances.
? A strengthened relationship is created between NPI and Operations.
? Manufacturing Readiness (MR) deliverables can be agreed to suit business requirements.
? Use of historic data allows us to understand & improve upon past errors.
? Flexible approach provides the ability to predict capability results for any future changes.
To this end, I would like to undertake a peer review of the capability gap analysis model with some (well regarded) external contacts that may find this sort of work interesting and may be able to utilise the framework within their own roles. The model has been created to predict capability and yield % and provide a meaningful metric for future projects but could easily be adapted for processes other than machining. Attached is the model that I have created for one of our most recent product commercialisation projects.
Please start by visiting the ?Read me? tab on the model before reviewing the sheet.
Any comments or feedback will be welcomed. If you have any questions, then please don?t hesitate to contact me. Feel free to use this model and adapt it for you own needs if you so wish, with the normal accreditations.
Please note, that currently this model is only intended to predict adverse scenarios and will not predict improved capability or yield based upon tolerance trade-off?s or other favourable process improvements. This will be a consideration for future versions
Attachments
-
757 KB Views: 471