13 replies to this topic

[Franco]

Hi folks,

here's my daily rant, but I prefer to post it into QIT Forum.

Please see the enclosed photo.

The neck of the bottle is off spec, hence the cap isn't in the right position. and stops production, increase risk of machine breakdown and so on ...

Packaging supplier is ISO certified with a huge certificate hanging on the wall and lots of paper stuff all around the plant.

Detailed CAR are issued and completed and sent to customer every time this problem occurs.

Should I still keep trying hard ?
Auditing both system and product every time they manufacture the bottles for us ?
Hammering on the head of the Big Boss of the packaging company ?
Is there a tool to improve ? Any clues from glass producers ?

Attached Files

•  P1050002.JPG   561KB   141 downloads

[Simon]

Ciao Franco,

Here's my daily rant, but I prefer to post it into QIT Forum.

Thanks for the interesting case study Franco.

Firstly I think it might be useful to clarify whether this is an intermittent problem like 1/100,000 bottles that occurs totally out of the blue? Or is it usually a batch problem?

Packaging supplier is ISO certified with a huge certificate hanging on the wall and lots of paper stuff all around the plant.

I think this could be your problem - no only joking.

Detailed CAR are issued and completed and sent to customer every time this problem occurs.

What are their previous responses / corrective actions?

Should I still keep trying hard ?

Depends on the price and availability of alternate supplier. No seriously, if in general you have a good relationship with the supplier of course you should work together to try to resolve the issue. A couple of ideas that spring to mind are - 1. Charge them for all costs associated with out of specification bottles, including machine downtime, engineering time, administration costs, the whole caboodle. 2. Invite the supplier to your factory (not just the Quality Manager but also the people who make the bottles), show them your production line and explain or better still show them the problems that are caused by out of specification bottles.

I've little technical knowledge of the bottle making process so cannot be more detailed, hopefully other members can. However, I've attached a tool that you may find helpful.

 Hammer.gif   12.1KB   89 downloads

Regards,
Simon

[Franco]

It might be useful to clarify whether this is an intermittent problem like 1/100,000 bottles that occurs totally out of the blue?  Or is it usually a batch problem?

It's a heavy problem. It is concentrated in few pallets, but some 20% of the bottles in those pallets. Traceability data of pallets have been sent to supplier.
Incoming inspection acording to MIL STD tables was shown to be uneffective.

What are their previous responses / corrective actions?

We buy cylidrical and non-cylindrical shaped bottles.
The case study involves cylindrical bottles and these bottles are supposed to be 100% inspected with a special equipment, supposed to be capable. No further problems were expected on cylindrical bottles after implementing CA.

1. Charge them for all costs associated with out of specification bottles, including machine downtime, engineering time, administration costs, the whole caboodle. 
2. Invite the supplier to your factory (not just the Quality Manager but also the people who make the bottles), show them your production line and explain or better still show them the problems that are caused by out of specification bottles.

Great suggestions mate. Both already done though. We suggested to repeat the factory tour with people involved in the mistake. I'll keep Saferpakers informed, mate.
Thanks again. Regards. Franco

[yorkshire]

Dear Franco,

I'm afraid I do not have previous experience of bottles but have had several problems with plastic drums and lids.

The lids sometimes slipped around or would not fit on the drum. This was eventually found to be a specification issue - when the drum and lid were on the limits of their specs then we had problems.

Another time we had problems with the drums themselves which was a supplier problem. The supplier was an ISO registered multinational company and various Non conformances had not seen an improvement. We then decided to hit the supplier in the pocket and rejected any delivery of drums which exceed a 50ppm failure rate. I don't know what they did but they soon sorted it out. ( A note of warning - this company tried to deliver back in rejected packaging by removing our rejected labels and re-shrinkwrapping them - make sure you also mark rejected items in a more subtle way than just big rejection labels, in the end it can save you alot of work.)

[Franco]

A note of warning - this company tried to deliver back in rejected packaging by removing our rejected labels and re-shrinkwrapping them - make sure you also mark rejected items in a more subtle way than just big rejection labels, in the end it can save you alot of work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks Yorky,
we had the same experience with another glass supplier. Currently we keep the non conforming stuff and selection or rework must be done either within our factory or a colleague of us must go to the glass plant and see what they do.
Waste goes directly from us to the waste plant.
No way to get out of it, they try to mix the KO with the OK stuff and hope no one realize. What's partnership ???

[Simon]

Any bottle makers out there?

[Franco]

I'll keep Saferpakers informed, mate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Saferpakers, here's some news from the supplier. A mail has been sent to us and summarized hereafter.

1. sampled warehouse stock of all purchased items, regardless whether they are involved in the complaint or not. Result: OK. No further action ;

2. checked quality records and found out that there were off spec bottles but the clerk thought they were within the uncertainty of the 100% inspection gauge - supposed to be 0,05 mm - and did nothing at all !!!

3. changing the inspection gauge with a new one with lower uncertainty, setting new KO gauge calibration samples, repeated training of clerks (pass-fail check and segregation of KO bottles from OK and related activities);

4. review of production documentation to ensure that it comprises the aforementioned information and possible training of clerks in our bottling plant, to make them aware of the possible consequences of the off spec bottles being processed;

5. root cause analysis of KO from our complaint samples and consequent CA planned on the forming moulds. Will it be implemented before next production ? ;

6. no PA seems to be done nor planned so far. I would like a PA extended to other customers too !!! It could be that in other circumstances we would possibly get benefits from the PA suggested by another customer and so on ...

Folks, what's you opinon ?

Regards. Franco

Edited by Franco, 25 January 2005 - 07:49 AM.

[Simon]

6. no PA seems to be done nor planned so far. I would like a PA extended to other customers too !!! It could be that in other circumstances we would possibly get benefits from the PA suggested by another customer and so on ...

Folks, what's you opinon ?

It seems that some ‘more' lessons have been learned and action has been taken to prevent the problem from occurring again. But will it? Yes you can ‘mistake proof' to a certain extent, and a well designed system based on customer requirements and managed by rigorous standards, control procedures, testing equipment and employee training will minimise the risk of failure.

Deming said most problems come from the system not an individual, but as we know humans are nowhere near perfect.

Do you think you will get further bad product Franco? What failure level would you accept?

Regards,
Simon

[Franco]

Do you think you will get further bad product Franco?  What failure level would you accept?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I told the supplier I would accept even a higher failure level than that, just to let them understand what I mean, but never ever as a "surprise".

In other words there should be awareness of both parties that a problem has occurred and that something has to be done BEFORE production to minimize the effect.

JIT production requires adequate process capability.

It is absolutely unacceptable that those bottles suddenly appears in one pallet after let's say 1000 pallets with no problems at all and no one knows and no one acts !

[Simon]

Spot on Franco.

I understand your production line is the last place you want to discover the problem. I've just read back on the thread and I can't see the root cause of the problem mentioned. Has the supplier identified this? We know even with 100% inspection if you manufacture the product incorrectly in the first place it's inevitable that some bad product will get through. I think the 1/1000 fault ratio will compound this and at some point in the future you will be looking at another complaint caused by human error.

Regards,
Simon

[Franco]

I've just read back on the thread and I can't see the root cause of the problem mentioned.  Has the supplier identified this?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Yes, according to their mail they will change the mold configuration according to the results of their RCA. I'm not a glass technician and I'm not in their plant to see what these words actually mean, hence I'm skeptical.
Ideally I would like to see an Ishikawa diagram, a Team work report, few main technical details and so on but maybe I'm too stringent

[Simon]

Yes, according to their mail they will change the mold configuration according to the results of their RCA.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Oh yeah sorry Franco I missed it On the upside it has proved my point about people.

Regards,
Simon

[Franco]

I've just read back on the thread and I can't see the root cause of the problem mentioned.

That's the point Simon, the RCA ! Sounds easy, but we all know it's tough.

Doyle reports a win-win approach with glass suppliers of Fetzer Wineyards:

Doyle - Managing glass quality

I very much appreciate their efforts. I think they're on the right way.

Regards. Franco

Edited by Franco, 14 July 2005 - 06:53 AM.

[Simon]

That's the point Simon, the RCA ! Sounds easy, but we all know it's tough.

Doyle reports a win-win approach with glass suppliers of Fetzer Wineyards:

Doyle - Managing glass quality

I very much appreciate their efforts. I think they're on the right way.

Regards. Franco

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Thanks for that Franco, it really is very good. Doyle seem to have a great method for helping their partners to improve. Specific, measurable targets (AQL's) that are agreed, communicated, discussed and reviewed regularly. Everyone knows where they stand - no knee jerk reactions or surprises. Very tough...firm but fair. And I'm making lot's of cliches so I'll shut up now.

Have a nice day my friend.

Regards,
Simon