All entries for January 2014
January 24, 2014
For the tuesday class, we learnt about Failure Modes Effects and Analysis (FMEA). it is an useful tool that help to evaluate potential failures of products or service that might occur. It also helps to illustrates causes, effects, and improved actions. In my opinion, I think it is better for an organization, especially in design department, to use the FMEA tool before launching products or service, and during testing it. This is because FMEA analysis is kind of a forcast tool for the department to plan for the solution for problems that might occur toward products or service. If the department previously concern on doing this, it will help to reduce possibility of failure occurance. In the serving tea excercise, I was really enjoyed. In my group, we tried to come up with the worst scenario, we helped each other thought of the possible failure that might occur.
During the afternoon session, Jane talked about Fault Tree Analysis (FTA). In my view, I thought this one is more difficult to understand comparing with FMEA due to in the FMEA tool, it tells us what we have to do, what we need to find and what we need to concern (such as potential failure, potential effects, potential causes, severity levels, and recommended actions. However, FTA is not provided any standard table for us to do. It encourages us to draw a tree chart from our understanding. Honestly, during the excercise about engine and leak pipe, I was very confused and it was hard to complete the chart. But I think if I could understand in engineering terms, I believe I could complete it. Also, I think it is also as useful as FMEA due to it could provide the potential failures and effects.
On Monday class, I learnt about the voice of customer from a guess speaker, Elliot Hirst, and how the VOC is important and relate to the design process of products, or service. From my bachelor degree, marketing, I took many marketing courses. it always put the voc as the center of marketing field. To achieve in a business, it is really crucial for the organization to concern on what customer want and need. Due to if the organization listen to customer, it can know how to fulfill and serve their needs. And if they satisfied and happy with the products or service, it will contribute them to come back and have repurchase.
For the afternoon session, Jane also gave another useful lecture about Design for X and let us watched the video about unflyable plane. In each occurance of failure, it is necessary to find and investigate causes of the failure, even the failure is small and not big problem. This is because if we just ignore the failure, problems will still maintain and happen again. In my opinion, I think most of failure usually occur from human errors, which including not have training of staffs or employees. From the human, it consequently causes many other problems such as problems in system design, quality control, maintainance, and reliability towards the organization's products and service. Therefore, in order to prevent the faults, any organization can make used of the design for X, such as design for reliability, design for maintainability and design for serviceability. I believe that if the people concern more on these, it could help to reduce failure and could achieve more customer satisfaction.
January 08, 2014
Happy new year, begin with the new course "Product Excellence using Six Sigma" (PEUSS), at first I think the course is quite similar to the PIUSS previous course. However, after the introductory class on Monday, I realized that the content of the cours is very different.
The PEUSS seems to focus on Design for Six Sigma (DFSS) which is the methodology that be used for applying in creating new products, processes, or even service. The DFSS is using the concept of DMADV (define, measure, analyze, design, and verify), while the classic six sigma using the concept of DMAIC (define, measure, analyse, improve, and control). The different between the DFSS and the classic six sigma is that the DFSS is used for applying in the new things, while the classic six sigma is using for an improvement in existing products, processes, and service. However, from my research, it is significant to know that DFSS also can be used to apply in the existing product, and process too.
Moreover, for the yesterday class with Paul about QFD or the Quality function deployment, I think it was an interesting workshop. it is a necessary tool for DFSS. As the DFSS methodology tends to focus customer needs and wants, the QFD is created to be the tool to help the company with new products, processes, and service be able to meet the customer requirements. However, in the real- world business, it seems like most of companies are not using the QFD. WHY?? it is because doing the QFD is very time consuming and also expensive. Due to in order to get the voice of customers, the companines have to do researches (such as creating focus groups, and interviews). Nevertheless, in my opinion, i think it is better for the company to spend their large amount of time and money on doing the QFD because I think it would be better than their new products, processes, or services failed. This is because if the companies not decide to pay at the first glance for the QFD, they also have to pay later for doing the classic six sigma for improving and solving their issues on the products.
In addition, another problem for doing the DFSS (or even the QFD) is communication problem. It is nearly impossible for one person to transmit a sentence to another ten to twenty people and come up with the exact words and sentence. This is because each person listen and interpret differently. It is same as a process in a company. When the company makes a research or listen to the voice of customers, each department understand differently and convey in the different way/ information. Therefore, it is quite hard for the design team/ company to come up with a new product, process, or service to come up with the exact outcome that meet all customer requirements.