# Charmed

## Activity

• Dear Gary:
I am coming to your post again and I think we are in full agreement.   Let’s review your remarks together.  Your message is pasted below with parenthetic comments.
Charmed,
Good post. Thank you for trying to bring up the level of discussion here. I get the message.
I have two thoughts on this.
First on the question of op…[Read more]

• Dear All:

In the previous post, Defects/Opportunities = DPO = 1/k = 0.25 to 1 depending on value of k.

From this simple equation, we do get the value DPO = 1/2 = 0.50, given by Reigle Stewart, if we take k = 2.  But, we also get DPO = 1/1 = 1 (which is the same as DPU = 1, which Reigle Stewart begins with before converting to DPO), o…[Read more]

• Dear Reigle Stewart:
I continue here the discussion from the last post. The first part is based on an exchange between Tim F and myself since I had been thinking about Gary Cone’s two articles. So, here it goes.
Total Parts = Good Parts + Bad Parts

Bad Parts = Total Parts  Good Parts

• Dear Reigle Stewart:
I am truly delighted to see that you have chosen to participate.  Let me say, upfront, that I do find some things quite confusing in your exposition. Please do bear with me since I wish to “count” this as learning “opportunity” for me at least. I beg your patience with me as we review the definition of opportunity, whi…[Read more]

• Dear Tim F:  I don’t know why these multiple font sizes appear after pasting?  Anyway, I have to fix two important points, see bolded, which I missed in editing.
Motorola’s pager which does (not) go through any inspection (final, as you have pointed out).  Does (zero) inspection mean no opportunity?

• Dear Tim F:
Thanks for asking the question.  You have given me a chance to discuss something that motivated my post. Let me start with the  definition of Opportunity, found on this website, and the direct quotes from Gary Cone’s second article, as mentioned in my first post in this thread.

• Dear Tim F:   You said, “What they apparently don’t do is any final inspection.” You are very right. I agree completely. Again, it was Gary Cone who posed the question about counting opportunities (and its relation to test/inspect) which you can find in the original article.  Your remarks actually open a potential “flaw” in the entire line of re…[Read more]

• Dar Tim F:  That is not a question that I asked.  It is a question Gary Cone asks in the original article. I thought I had made that very clear. Sorry, for the misunderstanding. With my warmest regards.

• Charmed replied to the topic Simple Question…? in the forum General 17 years, 1 month ago

Dear Peppe:
I prepared the same plot that Gabriel posted which shows how the data falls between the upper and the lower specs and the three sigma values from the mean. I think, you are insisting on looking at “target” very differently from I am and may be some others are as well.  Cannot do much about that. Each man (or woman) has his or her o…[Read more]

• Dear Nick:
Please allow me to interject. I am with you in that nobody should be verbally blasted or humiliated in anyway.  As you just pointed out, everyone does not have the same tolerance level for “abuse”, verbal or otherwise.  My suspicion is that if people have been hurt in the past they will not return and we would all be diminished in the…[Read more]

• Charmed replied to the topic Advice in the forum General 17 years, 1 month ago

Dear DL:
Since you asked twice, let me offer you this. NEVER QUIT. What you are going through is natural. These are the birth pangs of every great effort. Think about how you are managing your own time. If the system is complex, and the measurements are complex, so be it. There is much to learn. Ask questions. Solve the issues. “Resolve” the i…[Read more]

• Dear Need Direction:
Very good question. If it is not a trick question, I think you already know the answer. You don’t need direction.

• Dear JJ: When you posted the second message, I was typing my message.  There is a time delay between events. May be you did not realize that. In my humble opinion, your calculation of DPMO is inconsistent. Let’s see what others feel. No more questions. Cheers!

• Charmed replied to the topic Measure Phase in the forum General 17 years, 1 month ago

• Charmed replied to the topic Measure Phase in the forum General 17 years, 1 month ago

Dear JJ: When you posted the second message, I was typing my message.  There is a time delay between events. May be you did not realize that. In my humble opinion, your calculation of DPMO is inconsistent. Let’s see what others feel. No more questions. Cheers!

• Charmed replied to the topic Measure Phase in the forum General 17 years, 1 month ago

Dear Lizz:  The term Measure in DMAIC can also be taken to mean “counting”. If you can count something happening, you are also measuring. In every project, where we start thinking SS, something is happening and so we can count that something. We count hearbeats – it is not measuring, it is counting. But, we think of this as “measuring” the “pulse…[Read more]

• Charmed replied to the topic Simple Question…? in the forum General 17 years, 1 month ago

Dear Peppe:
Nice to hear from you again.  Now you say, …..but it is not distribuited normally within the tolerance ……. This is pasted from your message. So, you too believe the data is not obeying the famous “Gaussian” mathematical law describing the distribution of the numbers X (in this case diameters)?  Please give a simple yes or no an…[Read more]

• Dear JJ:
Thanks for coming back.  Do provide more details, if it is not considered confidential and your bosees are not going to come after you. What does data for one year look like? May be you can make a small table which includes: Month, number made, number inspected, number rejected, reason for rejects (out of spec dimension, leaking, etc…[Read more]

• Dear Gary, or should I say Gary Cone? If so, do let us know.  I would feel very honored. I am still trying to see how to tying opportuntities, defects, etc. to Taguchi’s Loss Function. Would love to hear from others as well. With my warmest regards.

• Dear Prashanth:
There may be a very simple reason why you have been unsuccessful in obtaining the data you are looking for. The data may be considered CONFIDENTIAL.  May be you simply have to dig deeper into the financial statements of some of Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae etc. Just a thought. Good luck.