Ensuring the reliability and reduction of quality control costs by minimizing process variability

• Autorzy: Rogalewicz Michał , Kujawińska Agnieszka , Feledziak Adrianna

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.17531/ein/162626

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

This paper presents a method for planning the range of quality control while ensuring its reliability and minimizing costs. The method is dedicated to destructive inspection, in which the cost of performing the measurement is significant in relation to the cost of manufacturing a part or product. The methodology was divided into four main stages: (1) selection of the measurement system and definition of the inspection scope and sample size, (2) process control, (3) redefining the scope of control and (4) verification of control cost and reliability after sample size change. The article presents the results of applying the author's procedure to the process of evaluating seat belts in automotive industry. Belts are used in the process of controlling the final product, which is a seat belt anchor plate. This approach allowed to reduce the number of destroyed parts during control while maintaining the credibility of the decision based on the assessment. As a result of double-decreasing the sample size, the costs of seat belt quality control were reduced. Assuming an average of 40 seat belt deliveries per year, the material cost was reduced by 50%. Limiting the sample size to 15 pieces per delivery would reduce the cost of testing from by 45%. It was achieved maintaining the appropriate level of credibility of decisions made greater than 0.8.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

quality inspection; reliability; quality cost; sampling inspection

• Wydawca: Polskie Naukowo-Techniczne Towarzystwo Eksploatacyjne
• Czasopismo: Eksploatacja i Niezawodność
• Rocznik: 2023
• Tom: Vol. 25, no. 2
• Strony: art. no. 162626
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 41 poz., rys., tab., wykr.

Twórcy

autor

Rogalewicz Michał

• Poznan University of Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9029-9629

autor

Kujawińska Agnieszka

• Poznan University of Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Poland

• https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3615-3837

autor

Feledziak Adrianna

• Poznan University of Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Poland

Bibliografia

• 1. Alfawaer Z, Halimi M T. Design of an intelligent support system for fabric quality inspection. Periodicals of Engineering and Natural Sciences 2022. doi:10. 31. 10.21533/pen.v10i3.3009, https://doi.org/10.31.10.21533/pen.v10i3.3009.
• 2. Anily S, Grosfeld-Nir A. An optimal lot-sizing and offline inspection policy in the case of nonrigid demand. 2006. doi:10.1287/opre.1050.0258, https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.1050.0258.
• 3. Arcúrio M S F, de Arruda F. Risk management of human factors in airports screening process. Journal of Risk Research 2022. doi:10.1080/13669877.2022.2108119, https://doi.org/10.1080/13669877.2022.2108119.
• 4. Aust J, Pons D. Comparative Analysis of Human Operators and Advanced Technologies in the Visual Inspection of Aero Engine Blades. Applied Sciences 2022. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/app12042250, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/app12042250.
• 5. Azamfirei V, Granlund A, Lagrosen Y. Multi-Layer Quality Inspection System Framework for Industry 4.0. International Journal of Automation Technology 2021; 15: 641–650, https://doi.org/10.20965/ijat.2021.p0641.
• 6. Balamurali S, Jun C H. A new system of skip-lot sampling plans having a provision for reducing normal inspection. Applied Stochastic Models in Business and Industry 2011; 27(3): 348–363, https://doi.org/10.1002/asmb.844.
• 7. Bozek M, Kujawińska A, Rogalewicz M et al. Improvement of catheter quality inspection process. MATEC Web of Conferences 2017; 121: 1–8, https://doi.org/10.1051/matecconf/201712105002.
• 8. Clark H J, Tannock J D T. The development and implementation of a simulation tool for the assessment of quality economics within a cell-based manufacturing company. International Journal of Production Research 1999; 37(5): 979–995, https://doi.org/10.1080/002075499191364.
• 9. Duffuaa S O, Khan M. Impact of inspection errors on the performance measures of a general repeat inspection plan. International Journal of Production Research 2005; 43(23): 4945–4967, https://doi.org/10.1080/00207540412331325413.
• 10. Fallah Nezhad M S, Hosseini Nasab H. A new Bayesian acceptance sampling plan considering inspection errors. Scientia Iranica 2012; 19(6): 1865–1869, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scient.2012.09.009.
• 11. Farooq M A, Kirchain R, Novoa H, Araujo A. Cost of quality: Evaluating cost-quality trade-offs for inspection strategies of manufacturing processes. International Journal of Production Economics 2017; 188: 156–166, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2017.03.019.
• 12. Fernández A J. Economic lot sampling inspection from defect counts with minimum conditional value-at-risk. European Journal of Operational Research 2017; 258(2): 573–580, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.10.042.
• 13. Filz M-A, Bosse J, Herrmann C. Systematic Planning of Quality Inspection Strategies in Manufacturing Systems. Procedia CIRP 2021; 104: 1101–1106, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2021.11.185.
• 14. Gruszka S, Gašpar Š. Effect of Human Factor on Product Quality in Manufacturing Activities. Multidisciplinary Aspects of Production Engineering 2018. doi:1.851-856.10.2478/mape-2018-0107, https://doi.org/1.851-856.10.2478/mape-2018-0107.
• 15. Hamrol A, Kujawińska A, Bożek M. Quality inspection planning within a multistage manufacturing process based on the added value criterion. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 2020; 108(5–6): 1399–1412, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-020-05453-0.
• 16. Hanbali A, Saleh H, Alsawafy O et al. Spare Parts Supply with Incoming Quality Control and Inspection Errors in Condition Based Maintenance. Computers & Industrial Engineering 2022. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2022.108534, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2022.108534.
• 17. Ho J W. Quality inspection plan for imperfect production system with assembly configuration. Processes 2020; 8(12): 1–14, https://doi.org/10.3390/pr8121545.
• 18. Jasiulewicz-Kaczmarek M, Saniuk A. How to make maintenance processes more efficient using lean tools? In Goossens RH. (ed): Advances in Social & Occupational Ergonomics: Proceedings of the AHFE 2017 International Conference on Social & Occupational Ergonomics, 2017, Los Angeles, California, USA, Springer: 2017: 9–20, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-60828-0.
• 19. Kujawińska A, Diering M, Rogalewicz M et al. Soft Modelling-Based Methodology of Raw Material Waste Estimation. In Burduk A, Mazurkiewicz D (eds): INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS IN PRODUCTION ENGINEERING AND MAINTENANCE (ISPEM 2017), SPRINGER INTERNATIONAL PUBLISHING AG: 2018. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-64465-3_39, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64465-3_39.
• 20. Kujawinska A, Vogt K, Diering M et al. Organization of visual inspection and its impact on the effectiveness of inspection. Lecture Notes in Mechanical Engineering 2018; (201519): 899–909, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68619-6_87.
• 21. Li J, Mao Y, Zhang J. Maintenance and Quality Control of Medical Equipment Based on Information Fusion Technology. Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience 2022. doi:10.1155/2022/9333328, https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/9333328.
• 22. Li K, Yang J, Huang S. A Review on Reliability Modeling of Manufacturing Systems Considering the Production Quality and Equipment Reliability. , Recent Patents on Engineering 2021. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1872212114999200407105025, https://doi.org/https://dx.doi.org/10.2174/1872212114999200407105025.
• 23. Montgomery D C. Introduction to statistical process control. 6th edition. John Wiley & Sons,: 2009.
• 24. Novaković B, Radovanović L, Zuber N et al. Analysis of the influence of hydraulic fluid quality on external gear pump performance. Eksploatacja i Niezawodnosc – Maintenance and Reliability 2022; 24(2): 260–268, https://doi.org/http://doi.org/10.17531/ein.2022.2.7.
• 25. Oliveira da Silva F M, Silvério K S, Castanheira M I et al. Construction of Control Charts to Help in the Stability and Reliability of Results in an Accredited Water Quality Control Laboratory. Sustainability 2022. doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su142215392, https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3390/su142215392.
• 26. Parveen M, Rao T V V L N. Optimal batch sizing, quality improvement and rework for an imperfect production system with inspection and restoration. European Journal of Industrial Engineering 2009; 3(3): 305–335, https://doi.org/10.1504/EJIE.2009.025050.
• 27. Pereira J C, Souza J. Prevention of Human Errors in the Visual Inspection during Overhaul of Aeroengines – A Case Study. IJCIEOM – International Joint Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management. Project: Safety and Operational Excellence, 2022.
• 28. Porteus E L. Optimal Lot Sizing, Process Quality Improvement and Setup Cost Reduction. Operations Research 1986; 34(1): 137–144. https://doi.org/10.1287/opre.34.1.137
• 29. Rogalewicz M, Piłacińska M, Kujawińska A. Selection of data mining method for multidimensional evaluation of the manufacturing process state. Management and Production Engineering Review 2012; 3(2): 27–35,
• 30. Rosenblatt M J, Lee H L. Economic production cycles with imperfect production processes. IIE Transactions (Institute of Industrial Engineers) 1986; 18(1): 48–55, https://doi.org/10.1080/07408178608975329.
• 31. Shin B C, Byun J H, Chang W L et al. Small-sample inspection plans for the new product quality level evaluation of finite population: Focused on guided weapons in development stage. Journal of Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers 2015; 41(5): 481–488, https://doi.org/10.7232/JKIIE.2015.41.5.481.
• 32. Son Y-K, Ryu Y-H. Sensitivity analysis of reliability estimation methods for attribute data to sample size and sampling points of time. Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial Cooperation Society 2011; 12(2): 581–588, https://doi.org/10.5762/KAIS.2011.12.2.581.
• 33. Tambe P, Kulkarni M. A reliability based integrated model of maintenance planning with quality control and production decision for improving operational performance. Reliability Engineering and System Safety 2022. doi:10.1016/j.ress.2022.108681, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ress.2022.108681.
• 34. Timischl W. Qualitatssicherung: Statistische Methoden. 4th edition. Munchen, Hanser: 2012.
• 35. Toteva P, Vasileva D. Tasks in planning of quality inspection. Proceedings in Manufacturing Systems, 2013; (Volume 8, Issue 3): 183–188.
• 36. Vaghefi A, Sarhangian V. Contribution of simulation to the optimization of inspection plans for multi-stage manufacturing systems. Computers and Industrial Engineering 2009; 57(4): 1226–1234, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2009.06.001.
• 37. Verna E, Genta G, Galetto M, Franceschini F. Economic impact of quality inspection in manufacturing: A proposal for a novel cost modeling. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 2022. doi:10.1177/09544054221078090, https://doi.org/10.1177/09544054221078090.
• 38. Wang C H, Meng F C. Optimal lot size and offline inspection policy. Computers and Mathematics with Applications 2009; 58(10): 1921–1929, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.camwa.2009.07.089.
• 39. Wei D, Li D, Zheng Y et al. Online quality inspection of resistance spot welding for automotive production lines. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 2022; 63: 354–369, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2022.04.008.
• 40. Yun W Y, Han Y J, Kim H W. Simulation-based inspection policies for a one-shot system in storage over a finite time span. Communications in Statistics: Simulation and Computation 2014; 43(8): 1979–2003, https://doi.org/10.1080/03610918.2013.815772.
• 41. Yun W Y, Liu L, Han Y J. Metaheuristic-based inspection policy for a one-shot system with two types of units. Journal of Mechanical Science and Technology 2014; 28(10): 3947–3955, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12206-014-0905-9.