The problem is that the biggest variable in any process is "People". I have been intructing and training operators for over 15 years. Even the most knowledgeable operator tends to "Forget" a dimension occasionally. A good way to prevent this from happening is to make sure that the operator has a guideline to follow for each procedure. We have found that using a first article inspection sheet that includes a picture
or drawing of the part with arrows indicating critical dimensions to inspect. I use this same type of procedure for layout inspection work on the CMM. This way it does not matter who inspects the parts. We will all set them up the same way and inspect the same dimensions. If any changes are added a change form can be used to document it. It is important to make any procedure "Idiot Proof" to coin a phrase. But today we must rely on something more than just our memory.
I have to agree in principle with Spiderman but... In today's society it is not politically correct to full responsibility for our own actions. Witness the scores of idiotic civil suites from "I spilled the coffee I bought at brand X while driving my overrated SUV down the perfectly maintained highway. You owe me..." to "it bit my hand while I teased it with my hand through the fence. As the owner you're an antisocial missfit that should be put away for not protecting me" or even my favorite, "I do not consider that sex, why are you mad at me?"!
I am glad to see that others may be struggling with these issues. In our organization, most people readily admit that they 'screwed up' even though SOPs exist for the area of concern. Poke-Yoke solutions are effective but somewhat expensive, for example the case of buying a piece of software that will assure the operator cannot err.
My current take on this is that every people problem is a management failure. We need to find a way to motivate people to HATE making mistakes and to initiate action THEMSELVES to prevent future occurence. The payback for this outlives Poka-Yoke and Checklists.
Besides reading there are a couple of other possibly practical approaches. You could require documentation of the most often missed check. Assuming a variable attribute, recording the result in some form will focus more attention on the detail. Another approach is more costly as it involves automating the inspection. Automated equipment such as vision systems or cmms have the benefit of reducing operator variability in your inspection process and they do not forget the features to be inspected.
The late Shingeo Shingo, a Japanese industrial engineer, consultant and prolific author, popularized the concept of "mistake proofing" a process so that errors could not occur. In Japan, "mistake proofing" is called "poka yoke." Shingo saw the use of "poka yoke" as a way to pursue the goal of zero defects. I stongly suggest you read his book, "Zero Quality Control: Source Inspection and the Poka Yoke System." It is available from Productivity Press, tel. (800) 394-6868.
rpilajr 5/14/2002
The problem is that the biggest variable in any process is "People". I have been intructing and training operators for over 15 years. Even the most knowledgeable operator tends to "Forget" a dimension occasionally. A good way to prevent this from happening is to make sure that the operator has a guideline to follow for each procedure. We have found that using a first article inspection sheet that includes a picture
or drawing of the part with arrows indicating critical dimensions to inspect. I use this same type of procedure for layout inspection work on the CMM. This way it does not matter who inspects the parts. We will all set them up the same way and inspect the same dimensions. If any changes are added a change form can be used to document it. It is important to make any procedure "Idiot Proof" to coin a phrase. But today we must rely on something more than just our memory.
helicheck 5/16/2002
I have to agree in principle with Spiderman but... In today's society it is not politically correct to full responsibility for our own actions. Witness the scores of idiotic civil suites from "I spilled the coffee I bought at brand X while driving my overrated SUV down the perfectly maintained highway. You owe me..." to "it bit my hand while I teased it with my hand through the fence. As the owner you're an antisocial missfit that should be put away for not protecting me" or even my favorite, "I do not consider that sex, why are you mad at me?"!
Leadership by example?
spiderman 5/15/2002
I am glad to see that others may be struggling with these issues. In our organization, most people readily admit that they 'screwed up' even though SOPs exist for the area of concern. Poke-Yoke solutions are effective but somewhat expensive, for example the case of buying a piece of software that will assure the operator cannot err.
My current take on this is that every people problem is a management failure. We need to find a way to motivate people to HATE making mistakes and to initiate action THEMSELVES to prevent future occurence. The payback for this outlives Poka-Yoke and Checklists.
helicheck 5/14/2002
Besides reading there are a couple of other possibly practical approaches. You could require documentation of the most often missed check. Assuming a variable attribute, recording the result in some form will focus more attention on the detail. Another approach is more costly as it involves automating the inspection. Automated equipment such as vision systems or cmms have the benefit of reducing operator variability in your inspection process and they do not forget the features to be inspected.
dld 5/14/2002
The late Shingeo Shingo, a Japanese industrial engineer, consultant and prolific author, popularized the concept of "mistake proofing" a process so that errors could not occur. In Japan, "mistake proofing" is called "poka yoke." Shingo saw the use of "poka yoke" as a way to pursue the goal of zero defects. I stongly suggest you read his book, "Zero Quality Control: Source Inspection and the Poka Yoke System." It is available from Productivity Press, tel. (800) 394-6868.