SIGMA黑带项目.ppt

2023/7/8,Six Sigma,1,通过6Sigma项目改善 提高XB9138系列直通率,实施单位：研发中心中试部,实施时间：,项目 B B：龚一桂,6Sigma BB项目,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,2,定义阶段,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,3,项目选定背景,客户对此款搅拌水壶产品需求量大,品质要求严.同行业产品价格竞争激烈,外部环境,XB9138系列搅拌式水壶现时直通率为78.5%,客户要求,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,4,项目选定背景,内部环境,1.2006年1-4月成品直通率低,为78.5%2.成品合格率低，2005年QA验货合格率为86.2%3.劣质成本高，占销售额的比例大。,DMAIC,2006年1-4月产品直通率,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,5,顾客及CTQ,直通率低,DMAIC,VOC,CTQ,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,6,项目范围,PMC进料,成品入仓,OQC检验,IQC检验,总装,XB9138系列主要生产过程,过程范围,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,7,项目范围,XB9138系列主要装配流程（SIPOC),DMAIC,拆底座装脚垫与绕线盖,拆大身上座,装电源线到底座,装马达垫装固定板到电机,固定电机到大身,插插座引线装插座到大身,压连接头,装开关,焊接引线(一）,焊接引线(二）,焊接引线(三）,固定压线码与PCB板,接线,扎扎带,机身内检,吹热缩管,找出影响直通率的关键流程,装装饰圈,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,8,项目范围,XB9138系列主要装配流程（SIPOC),DMAIC,固定大身上下座,拆大杯装手柄盖与水龙头,压滚动轴承压轴承到发热盘,固定发热盘到大杯,固定FUSE与温控器,装脚垫压插片到杯座，,插杯座引线（一）,插杯座引线（二）,固定杯座,装搅拌刀组件上连接头,水温测试,耐压测试,功率测试,清洁机身，绕电源线,清洁大杯与杯盖,外观检查,找出影响直通率的关键流程,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,9,战略分析,1.高品质生活供应商2.质量上台阶，管理上层次，满足客户要求3.经市场为中心，以客户为中心，以技术为中心,2006集团战略,提高直通率，既降低了劣质成本，又降低了制造成本，而且提高了产品品质，保证了交期，提高了产品市场竞争力和客户满意度。,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,10,问题综述,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,11,总装一车间XB9138近期直通率走势图,DMAIC,问题综述,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,12,Y和缺陷定义,Y=直通率=Y1*Y2*Y3*Y4,DMAIC,Y1定义:煲水测试合格率Y2定义:耐压测试合格率Y3定义:功能测试合格率Y4定义:外观检查合格率,Y的定义,缺陷定义,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,13,项目目标,DMAIC,现状1-5月,目标11月,78.5%,90%,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,14,财务收益预计,DMAIC,无形收益：直通率的提高，同时产能也显著提高，产品品质明显改善，提高了产品的市场竞争力和客户满意度。,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,15,项目团队组织,Champion 曾展晖,BB:龚一桂,MBB：肖晨,雷有勇,杨国铭,张术强,品质监控及检验标准的制定,现场作业改善及作业方式标准化，控制文件。,FMEA分析，流程改进，工程优化,测量系统分析，人员培训计划，实验实施。,项目协调跟进及MSA、DOE、各阶段分析,品管部李红霞,工程部周建辉,总装部苏长富,数据的收集和改善的实施，生产现场的控制,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,16,阶段,6月,定义,测量,分析,改进,控制,5月,7月,11月,内容,项目进程计划,项目建立，完成 定义阶段的9个部分,Y的确认，数据收集，MSA现水平分析C&E Matrix,FMEA,数据收集，多变量分析主变量确定，方差分析FMEA改善计划作成,确立质量改进的持续有效方案，通过实验确认,工艺，管理标准化，制造系统内推广提交项目报告,DMAIC,10月,9月,8月,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,17,沟通协调,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,18,定义阶段总结,以VOB、VOC导出CTQ，定义Y.分析内外部环境找到项目范围确定项目目标和收益估算组建项目团队、成员角色分工制定项目进程计划,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,19,测量阶段,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,20,YS的确认,顾客CTQ品质投诉，成本增加,项目Y：提高直通率（计量型数据）,可操作YS(计量型数据）煲水测试合格率、功能测试合格率耐压测试合格率、外观检查合格率,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,21,YS的确认,Y的问题描述,煲水测试,不通电 反转 灯不亮 不加热 水龙头漏水 连接头漏水 温度高或低 发热盘漏水 开关不良,耐压测试,耐压不良,功能测试,INT 杂音 功率高或低,外观检查,大身刮花杯刮花机身混色丝印不良手柄盖离缝大身错位底座错位机内异物,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,22,测量日期：分析人员：雷有勇 张术强,Y的MSA-LQC成品外观判断,测试员 3名;样品 10个;反复 3次,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,23,LQC成品外观检查MSA结果,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,24,Within Appraisers Assessment AgreementAppraiser#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI1 10 8 80.00(44.39,97.48)2 10 6 60.00(26.24,87.84)3 10 8 80.00(44.39,97.48)#Matched:Appraiser agrees with him/herself across trials.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsAppraiser Response Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)1 NG 0.733333 0.182574 4.01663 0.0000 OK 0.733333 0.182574 4.01663 0.00002 NG 0.466667 0.182574 2.55604 0.0053 OK 0.466667 0.182574 2.55604 0.00533 NG 0.682540 0.182574 3.73842 0.0001 OK 0.682540 0.182574 3.73842 0.0001,Kappa值小于0.7,需要改善,每个检查员检查结果一致性(重复性)百分比,DMAIC,LQC成品外观检查MSA结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,25,Each Appraiser vs Standard Assessment AgreementAppraiser#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI1 10 1 10.00(0.25,44.50)2 10 1 10.00(0.25,44.50)3 10 1 10.00(0.25,44.50)#Matched:Appraisers assessment across trials agrees with the known standard.Assessment DisagreementAppraiser#OK/NG Percent#NG/OK Percent#Mixed Percent1 3 60.00 4 80.00 2 20.002 2 40.00 3 60.00 4 40.003 2 40.00 5 100.00 2 20.00#OK/NG:Assessments across trials=OK/standard=NG.#NG/OK:Assessments across trials=NG/standard=OK.#Mixed:Assessments across trials are not identical.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsAppraiser Response Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)1 NG-0.610774 0.182574-3.34535 0.9996 OK-0.610774 0.182574-3.34535 0.99962 NG-0.477441 0.182574-2.61505 0.9955 OK-0.477441 0.182574-2.61505 0.99553 NG-0.666667 0.182574-3.65148 0.9999 OK-0.666667 0.182574-3.65148 0.9999,Kappa值小于0.7,需要改善,P值大于0.05,说明一致性检验结果不可靠,检验错误次数,每个检查员检查结果与标准一致性(重复性)百分比,DMAIC,LQC成品外观检查MSA结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,26,Between Appraisers Assessment Agreement#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 10 3 30.00(6.67,65.25)#Matched:All appraisers assessments agree with each other.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsResponse Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)NG 0.343891 0.0527046 6.52488 0.0000 OK 0.343891 0.0527046 6.52488 0.0000 All Appraisers vs Standard Assessment Agreement#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 10 0 0.00(0.00,25.89)#Matched:All appraisers assessments agree with the known standard.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsResponse Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)NG-0.584961 0.105409-5.54942 1.0000 OK-0.584961 0.105409-5.54942 1.0000,所有检验员检查结果）一致性(重复性）百分比,所有检验员检查结果一致性Kappa小于0.7，需改善,所有检验员检查结果与标准一致性百分比,所有检验员检查结果与标准一致性Kappa小于0.7，需改善,DMAIC,LQC成品外观检查MSA结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,27,Y的MSA-LQC成品功能测试,测试员 3名;样品 10个;反复 3次,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,28,LQC成品功能测试MSA结果,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,29,Within Appraisers Assessment AgreementAppraiser#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 1 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)2 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)3 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)#Matched:Appraiser agrees with him/herself across trials.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsAppraiser Response Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)1 NG 1.00 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 OK 1.00 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 2 NG 1.00 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 OK 1.00 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 3 NG 0.85 0.182574 4.65564 0.0000 OK 0.85 0.182574 4.65564 0.0000,Kappa值大于0.7,每个检验员检验结果一致性可以接受,P值小于0.05,说明一致性检验结果可靠,LQC成品功能测试MSA结果,每个检查员检查结果一致性(重复性)百分比,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,30,Each Appraiser vs Standard Assessment AgreementAppraiser#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 1 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)2 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)3 10 8 80.00(44.39,97.48)#Matched:Appraisers assessment across trials agrees with the known standard.Assessment DisagreementAppraiser#OK/NG Percent#NG/OK Percent#Mixed Percent 1 1 25.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 1 25.00 0 0.00 1 10.00#OK/NG:Assessments across trials=OK/standard=NG.#NG/OK:Assessments across trials=NG/standard=OK.#Mixed:Assessments across trials are not identical.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsAppraiser Response Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)1 NG 0.78022 0.182574 4.27344 0.0000 OK 0.78022 0.182574 4.27344 0.0000 2 NG 1.00000 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 OK 1.00000 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 3 NG 0.71459 0.182574 3.91398 0.0000 OK 0.71459 0.182574 3.91398 0.0000,检验错误次数,Kappa值大于0.7,每个检验员检验结果与标准一致性可以接受,P值小于0.05,说明检验员检验结果与标准一致性结果可靠,所有检查员检查结果一致性(重复性)百分比,DMAIC,LQC成品功能测试MSA结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,31,Between Appraisers Assessment Agreement#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 10 8 80.00(44.39,97.48)#Matched:All appraisers assessments agree with each other.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsResponse Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)NG 0.840077 0.0527046 15.9393 0.0000 OK 0.840077 0.0527046 15.9393 0.0000 All Appraisers vs Standard Assessment Agreement#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 10 8 80.00(44.39,97.48)#Matched:All appraisers assessments agree with the known standard.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsResponse Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)NG 0.831604 0.105409 7.88928 0.0000 OK 0.831604 0.105409 7.88928 0.0000Attribute Agreement Analysis,Kappa值大于0.7，说明所有检验员检验结果一致性可靠,所有检验员检查结果一致性(重复性）百分比,所有检验员检查结果与标准一致性百分比,Kappa值大于0.7，说明所有检验员检验结果与标准一致性可靠,DMAIC,LQC成品功能测试MSA结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,32,Y的MSA-LQC成品耐压测试,测试员 3名;样品 10个;反复 3次,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,33,Y的MSA-LQC成品耐压测试结果,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,34,Within Appraisers Assessment AgreementAppraiser#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 1 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)2 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)3 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)#Matched:Appraiser agrees with him/herself across trials.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsAppraiser Response Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)1 NG 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 OK 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 2 NG 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 OK 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 3 NG 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 OK 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000,Kappa值大于0.9,每个检验员检验结果一致性非常好,P值小于0.05,说明一致性检验结果可靠,每个检查员检查结果一致性(重复性)百分比,DMAIC,Y的MSA-LQC成品耐压测试结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,35,Each Appraiser vs Standard Assessment AgreementAppraiser#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 1 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)2 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)3 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)#Matched:Appraisers assessment across trials agrees with the known standard.Assessment DisagreementAppraiser#OK/NG Percent#NG/OK Percent#Mixed Percent 1 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 3 0 0.00 0 0.00 0 0.00#OK/NG:Assessments across trials=OK/standard=NG.#NG/OK:Assessments across trials=NG/standard=OK.#Mixed:Assessments across trials are not identical.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsAppraiser Response Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)1 NG 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 OK 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 2 NG 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 OK 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 3 NG 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000 OK 1 0.182574 5.47723 0.0000,所有检查员检查结果一致性(重复性)百分比,没有检验错误,Kappa值大于0.9,每个检验员检验结果一致性非常好,P值小于0.05,说明每个检验员检验结果可靠,DMAIC,Y的MSA-LQC成品耐压测试结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,36,Between Appraisers Assessment Agreement#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)#Matched:All appraisers assessments agree with each other.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsResponse Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)NG 1 0.0527046 18.9737 0.0000 OK 1 0.0527046 18.9737 0.0000All Appraisers vs Standard Assessment Agreement#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 10 10 100.00(74.11,100.00)#Matched:All appraisers assessments agree with the known standard.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsResponse Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)NG 1 0.105409 9.48683 0.0000 OK 1 0.105409 9.48683 0.0000,Kappa值大于0.9，说明所有检验员检验结果一致性非常好,所有检验员检查结果一致性(重复性）百分比,所有检验员检查结果与标准一致性百分比,Kappa值大于0.9，说明所有检验员检验结果与标准一致性非常好,DMAIC,Y的MSA-LQC成品耐压测试结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,37,Y的MSA-LQC成品煲水测试,测试员 3名;样品 10个;反复 3次,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,38,Y的MSA-LQC成品煲水测试结果,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,39,Within Appraisers Assessment AgreementAppraiser#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 1 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)2 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)3 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)#Matched:Appraiser agrees with him/herself across trials.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsAppraiser Response Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)1 NG 0.856459 0.182574 4.69102 0.0000 OK 0.856459 0.182574 4.69102 0.0000 2 NG 0.864253 0.182574 4.73371 0.0000 OK 0.864253 0.182574 4.73371 0.0000 3 NG 0.864253 0.182574 4.73371 0.0000 OK 0.864253 0.182574 4.73371 0.0000,Kappa值大于0.7,每个检验员检验结果一致性可以接受,P值小于0.05,说明检验员检验结果一致性结果可靠,每个检查员检查结果一致性(重复性)百分比,DMAIC,Y的MSA-LQC成品煲水测试结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,40,Each Appraiser vs Standard Assessment AgreementAppraiser#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 1 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)2 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)3 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)#Matched:Appraisers assessment across trials agrees with the known standard.Assessment DisagreementAppraiser#OK/NG Percent#NG/OK Percent#Mixed Percent 1 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 10.00 2 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 10.00 3 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 10.00#OK/NG:Assessments across trials=OK/standard=NG.#NG/OK:Assessments across trials=NG/standard=OK.#Mixed:Assessments across trials are not identical.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsAppraiser Response Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)1 NG 0.926740 0.182574 5.07596 0.0000 OK 0.926740 0.182574 5.07596 0.0000 2 NG 0.932660 0.182574 5.10839 0.0000 OK 0.932660 0.182574 5.10839 0.0000 3 NG 0.932660 0.182574 5.10839 0.0000 OK 0.932660 0.182574 5.10839 0.0000,检验结果本身不一致次数,Kappa值大于0.,每个检验员检验结果与标准一致性可以非常好,所有检查员检查结果一致性(重复性)百分比,P值小于0.05,说明检验员检验结果一致性结果可靠,DMAIC,Y的MSA-LQC成品煲水测试结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,41,Between Appraisers Assessment Agreement#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 10 7 70.00(34.75,93.33)#Matched:All appraisers assessments agree with each other.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsResponse Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)NG 0.862315 0.0527046 16.3613 0.0000 OK 0.862315 0.0527046 16.3613 0.0000 All Appraisers vs Standard Assessment Agreement#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 10 7 70.00(34.75,93.33)#Matched:All appraisers assessments agree with the known standard.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsResponse Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)NG 0.930687 0.105409 8.82927 0.0000 OK 0.930687 0.105409 8.82927 0.0000,Kappa值大于0.7，说明所有检验员检验结果一致性可靠,Kappa值大于0.9，说明所有检验员检验结果与标准一致性非常好,DMAIC,Y的MSA-LQC成品煲水测试结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,42,1.成品外观检查结果不可以接受，需对检验员进行培训。责任人：苏长富、李红霞。培训结束后需进行第二次MSA分析。2.成品功能、耐压、煲水测试结果可以信赖。,MSA结果分析,人员培训,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,43,成品外观检查培训,DMAIC,培训记录,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,44,LQC成品外观检查第二次MSA,测试员 3名（同第一次）;样品 10个;反复 3次,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,45,LQC成品外观检查第二次MSA结果,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,46,Within Appraisers Assessment AgreementAppraiser#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 1 10 8 80.00(44.39,97.48)2 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)3 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)#Matched:Appraiser agrees with him/herself across trials.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsAppraiser Response Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)1 NG 0.728507 0.182574 3.99020 0.0000 OK 0.728507 0.182574 3.99020 0.0000 2 NG 0.866071 0.182574 4.74367 0.0000 OK 0.866071 0.182574 4.74367 0.0000 3 NG 0.866071 0.182574 4.74367 0.0000 OK 0.866071 0.182574 4.74367 0.0000,Kappa值大于0.7,每个检验员检验结果一致性可以接受,P值小于0.05,说明检验员检验结果一致性结果可靠,每个检查员检查结果一致性(重复性)百分比,DMAIC,LQC成品外观检查第二次MSA结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,47,Each Appraiser vs Standard Assessment AgreementAppraiser#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 1 10 8 80.00(44.39,97.48)2 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)3 10 9 90.00(55.50,99.75)#Matched:Appraisers assessment across trials agrees with the known standard.Assessment DisagreementAppraiser#OK/NG Percent#NG/OK Percent#Mixed Percent 1 0 0.00 0 0.00 2 20.00 2 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 10.00 3 0 0.00 0 0.00 1 10.00#OK/NG:Assessments across trials=OK/standard=NG.#NG/OK:Assessments across trials=NG/standard=OK.#Mixed:Assessments across trials are not identical.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsAppraiser Response Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)1 NG 0.865320 0.182574 4.73955 0.0000 OK 0.865320 0.182574 4.73955 0.0000 2 NG 0.932660 0.182574 5.10839 0.0000 OK 0.932660 0.182574 5.10839 0.0000 3 NG 0.932660 0.182574 5.10839 0.0000 OK 0.932660 0.182574 5.10839 0.0000,检验结果本身不一致次数,Kappa值大于0.7,每个检验员检验结果与标准一致性可以接受,所有检查员检查结果一致性(重复性)百分比,P值小于0.05,说明检验员检验结果一致性结果可靠,DMAIC,LQC成品外观检查第二次MSA结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,48,Between Appraisers Assessment Agreement#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 10 8 80.00(26.24,87.84)#Matched:All appraisers assessments agree with each other.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsResponse Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)NG 0.821870 0.0527046 15.5939 0.0000 OK 0.821870 0.0527046 15.5939 0.0000All Appraisers vs Standard Assessment Agreement#Inspected#Matched Percent 95%CI 10 8 80.00(26.24,87.84)#Matched:All appraisers assessments agree with the known standard.Fleiss Kappa StatisticsResponse Kappa SE Kappa Z P(vs 0)NG 0.910213 0.105409 8.63504 0.0000 OK 0.910213 0.105409 8.63504 0.0000 Attribute Agreement Analysis,Kappa值大于0.7，说明所有检验员检验结果一致性可靠,Kappa值大于0.9，说明所有检验员检验结果与标准一致性非常好,DMAIC,LQC成品外观检查第二次MSA结果,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,49,现状能力分析,DMAIC,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,50,不良率控制图，失控,SIGMA水平,百万不良数,DMAIC,现状能力分析,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,51,主要问题分析,DMAIC,需改善范围,现状能力分析,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,52,1.进料胶件品质 C2.外购零件品质 C3.自制零件品质 C4.产品工程问题 C5.工艺流程执行度 C6.生产工艺改善 C7.人员判定能力 U8.工装夹具/设备 C9.检测方法/手段 U10.产品规格标准 U,宏观流程分析,1.机身刮花2.连接头漏水 3.水龙头漏水 4.耐压不良5.杯刮花6.手柄离缝7.丝印不良机身混色8.不通电.开关不良.9.机内异物10.温度高或低,进料检测,主机总装,大杯总装,功能测试,外观检查,成品包装,耐压测试,煲水测试,进料检测,DMAIC,流程,输出,输入,2023/7/8,Six Sigma,53,-电铬铁温度-作业员技能-桌面保护垫,CU,-大身刮花-丝印脱落-机身混色,电机品质,-INT,流程,输出,输入,流程,输出,输入,拆底座装脚垫与绕线盖,拆大身上座装电源线到底座,-机身混色,装固定板到电机装马达垫,固定电机到大身,插插座引线装插座到大身,-INT-无功能-不发热-大身刮花,-端子尺寸-端子材质-桌面保护垫-作业员技能,压连接头,装开关,-开关品质-连接头品质,焊接引线（一）,焊接引线（二）,焊接引线（三）,固定压线码与PCB板,接线,绑扎带,流程分析(微观）,-开关不良-灯不亮-异音,-不通电-大身刮花,-机内异物-大身刮花,底座品质作业员判断能力,-大身刮花,-反转-INT-大身刮花,-作业者技能-闭端子品质-桌面保护垫,大身上座品质丝印附着力作业员判断能力,桌面保护垫,-电铬铁温度