Human Process Sigma Expectation
Six Sigma – iSixSigma › Forums › Old Forums › General › Human Process Sigma Expectation
- This topic has 5 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 7 months ago by
AC.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 4, 2007 at 4:41 pm #48841
Does anyone know of a Sigma Expectation for a Human Process?
0December 4, 2007 at 4:51 pm #165688
Adam L BowdenParticipant@Adam-L-BowdenInclude @Adam-L-Bowden in your post and this person will
be notified via email.Are you asking about:Typical errors – 1 key stroke error in 200Typical Sigma – I used to know this number – I think it peaked at
about 3.5 Sigma – perhaps some one else can shed light on this
more specifically.Typically though you have to “mistake proof” or automate to take
quality to the next level.Adam0December 4, 2007 at 5:01 pm #165691That is exactly what I am looking for. How much variation and error should I expect from a process that is completed by a human. Example, a human installs 300,000 screws per shift with a defect rate or 900. A robot installs 300,000 screws per shift with a defect rate of 1. Is the human process at it’s expected sigma rate? Is it worth the time and effort to try to improve the human sigma rate? By 1%? 10?
What is an expected sigma rate for a human process? Is there back up for this figure?0December 4, 2007 at 5:16 pm #165695
Adam L BowdenParticipant@Adam-L-BowdenInclude @Adam-L-Bowden in your post and this person will
be notified via email.Well – it’s always good to drive improvements by semi or full
automation. But over the last 15 or 20 years there is a shift, due to
“effectiveness” from dedicated robot assembly to more flexible
semi-automation.
Even more important is using the defect data to not only drive DFSS
but to focus on re-design to minimize defects. I.e if a screw is
driven into a thread but at an angle it will strip the threads or jam
causing a defective “mating surface”. If the assembly is re-
designed a “plot hole” may be cast in to guide the screw to
eliminate the potential for miss-alignment.I think we can all get anal and into analysis paralysis but have to
step back at times and look at the big picture and see if changing
the design or process is a better avenue rather than trying to
mistake proof a poor design.Regards,Adam0December 4, 2007 at 6:11 pm #165699
gembaguyParticipant@gembaguyInclude @gembaguy in your post and this person will
be notified via email.Some automation is ok, but if you completely remove the human from the process you also lose the brain that can see how to improve that process (see AutoNOmation)…
0December 4, 2007 at 6:32 pm #165702Without knowing what type of process you are trying to bechmark, it is difficult to give estimate definite human factor sigma level. The 3.5 sigma is a generic benchmark for developed manufacturing processes.
Also, automation doesn’t come without some baggage of it’s own. Difficulty of implementation, cost, reliability (weibull curve of reliability), and lack of ingenuity in the product are just some reasons to consider fully automating a process.
I agree with gembaguy that although automation may reduce the defect rate of a certain process, certain goods and services require the0 -
AuthorPosts
The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.