iSixSigma

BB

Activity

  • I should have also asked:
    5. Do the constraints apply to Harry’s 1.5 “drift” as well as Harry’s 1.5 “correction” and Reigle’s “dynamic” 1.5 ?

  • RE: “Dr. Harry has put severe constraints around his derivation of the 1.46 shift and has never assumed it to be a constant as it is often used.”

    What are the constraints ?
    How are the constraint levels calculated ?
    What is the derivation or proof of these constraint levels ?
    Do you have a link to the proof of the constraint levels ?

  • To Everyone Who shared their expertise , knowledge  and advice to my querry Thank You Very Much !
    Regards ,
    BB

  • Reigle,
    This is clearly fraud. 
    Where is that lawyer ?
    You have obviously read Wheeler and you understand the point he is making.  Wheeler makes the point that process averages may shift by any amount. Shifts are not in any way “limited” to 1.5.  Points out of control can fall anywhere.
    You have also suggested that the 1.5 is a “c…[Read more]

  • BB replied to the topic Fraud in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    Spoon – Reigle,
    We get your message – you have defrauded lots of companies. 
    No wonder Motorola had to sack 60,000 and lost market share.  No wonder GE customer satisfaction dropped and GE turned to outsourcing 70% of manufacturing.

  • BB replied to the topic 4.5 sigma Control Limits in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    Pyzdek’s article is a farce.  He pulls 1.5 out of the air without any justification whatsoever.  He still calls it a “shift” instead of a “correction”.
    If the 1.5 were really a shift it would mean that every process in America was out of statistical control at least 13-14% of the time.  With the idiots that are running six sigma programs, suc…[Read more]

  • BB replied to the topic 4.5 sigma Control Limits in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    QualityColorado,
    Wake up sleeping beauty.  Nobody here believes that 1.5 crap.  Even Harry changed his tune on the 1.5 shift about 4 years ago.

  • BB replied to the topic Fraud in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    Matthew,
    When you know that someone like Harry has made false statements in order to make more money do you:
    1. FEEL it is fraud
    2. KNOW it is fraud
    ???

  • BB replied to the topic Fraud in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    Yes, it’s far better to have processes screwed up by idiots who have done a 2 week SS course, than statisticians.

  • He probably read that crap about increasing sales by 20-40% and was stupid enough to believe it.  I wonder how many other sales people have been conned ?
    I’d love to see Harry on a DOE project with a group of used car salesmen … or earth moving equipement salesmen … they would bury him.

  • BB replied to the topic Fraud in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    Can’t anybody explain to this poor fellow what Harry’s accomplishments are supposed to be ?  Frankly I can’t think of any right now … maybe if I wait for a million years …

  • BB replied to the topic Fraud in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    Rather than appearing a fraudster like Harry, perhaps you can give us a link to these “studies” ????? 
    Your statement “4Sigma-products can  cause 15-20% of sales  revenue” is meaningless.  What are you trying to say ?

  • BB replied to the topic Fraud in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    Lebowski,
    A simple example might help those new to SPC.
    My target is 10cm +/-0.02  giving specs of :
    USL = 10.02 cm
    LSL = 9.98 cm
    My process runs with a variance indicated by :
    UCL = 10.01 cm
    LCL = 9.99 cm
    Mean = 10.0 cm
    My process is on target.  Reducing variance will bring control limits closer to the mean.
     

  • BB replied to the topic Fraud in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    Six Sigma has never implicitly said we were trying to achieve target and the way we still teach SPC (yes even Wheeler) reflects that.”
    Stan, this is correct but in fact the situation is much worse.  Six Sigma is fundamentally a specification based methodology.  The very idea of 3.4 DEFECTS relates to the specification, not the target.
    Six Sig…[Read more]

  • BB replied to the topic Fraud in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    “Maybe, you can suggest something more constructive about the shift in the process mean. ”
    Aren’t you the nut case who claims “because of the 1.5 shift all processes are out of control 13-14% of the time ”  ?
    At least you don’t seem to be fraudulent, just stupid.

  •  Detroit News Sept 2006:
    10,000 black belts and they still made a mess of it ! :
    “Shortly after Ford Motor Co. recruited quality expert Kathi Hanley away from Toyota Motor Corp. late last year, she was handed an important assignment.
    Ford asked her to take a hard look at a new crossover it was developing called the Ford Edge. Trained on the…[Read more]

  • BB replied to the topic What is six sigma in the forum General 15 years, 6 months ago

    Don’t people here ever learn ?  How many times does this have to be explained ?  Are you all sheep ?
    There is no 1.5. 
    No wonder so many SS companies are in trouble.

  • Andy,
    I think we posted almost simultaneously.  Interesting to see we have similar conclusions.

  • DPMO,
    Wonderful to see that you are one of the small band of thinkers.  My apologies for getting a bit excited but I get very frustrated with the masses that follow Harry and Reigle’s nonsense so blindly.
    I can also understand you being a slave to management’s addiction to numbers.  If they must have a measure as a number, why not use MSD ?  Thi…[Read more]

  • You guys just don’t get it do you.  Let me spell it out  DPMO CALCULATIONS ARE MEANINGLESS. They are a total waste of time.  How many posts does it take to get this across ?
    You can also forget about 1.5 drifts, 3.4 DPMO, six sigma tables, Zshifts.  It is all crap invented by Harry and Reigle to get you to buy their snake oil.
    Do some searc…[Read more]

  • Load More