MGMT 580 FINAL PROJECT: S. BATCHELDER
WP INC: SPRAY NOZZLE BLUES
What’s the problem?
 Spray nozzle on the parts washer is clogging
 Integral part of the manufacturing process
 Each part manufactured goes through washer
 Creates time delays
 Only alternative for cleaning parts to maintain
quality system
The causes could be…
 Nozzle installed incorrectly
 Debris in water causing clog
 From water in tank
 From water fed through line
 Buildup from hard water
 Debris from parts
 Soap interaction
 Malfunction in nozzle
 Mineral deposit
The Fishbone: Cause & Effect.
MACHINE PROBLEMS
No filter
system
Malfunction
Operator Error
WATER PROBLEMS
Water in
tank not
optimal
temperature
Evaporation
causes level
variation
Residue in tank
Soap/water
Mixture
Flakes
SOAP PROBLEMS
CLOGGED
WATER
NOZZLE
Mitigate the causes.
 Machine problems
 Operator training
 Investigate adding filtration
system
 Audit of parts and performance
Mitigate the causes.
 Soap and water problems
 Operator training
 Revise operational processes
 Explore alternative brands of
cleaning solution
 Temperature control system
 Supply fill water to counter
evaporation
Force Field Analysis 1.
DRIVING FORCES
RESTRAINING FORCES
Simple
process
adjustments
Low cost
solution
Higher
Morale
Motivation
Operator
Training
Inconsistent
Time to
implement
Force Field Analysis 1.
DRIVING FORCES
RESTRAINING FORCES
Better
technology
(filter, temp
control)
Process
better,
more
reliable
Spend
money to
save
money
Expensive
Overhaul
Machinery/
New
Equipment
Compatibility
Learning
curve
Force Field Analysis 1.
DRIVING FORCES
RESTRAINING FORCES
Added steps
to process
Could be
lower cost
Opportunity
for new
partnership
Fill water/
New brand of
cleaning
solution
Availability
Additional
cost to
implement
Follow up the Force Field.
 The low cost option is to correct the
temperature control issue
 OR explore alternatives to cleaning
solution that may dissolve at lower temp
 Both would involve an element of
incorporating clean fill water to alleviate
evaporation
 Last resort is new equipment or
modifying existing equipment for cost
reasons
Corrective actions could be…
 Incorporate a fill water
system AND…
 Operator training
 Maintain temperature
 Use water only to fill after
evaporation
 Investigate alternate brand of
cleaning solution or adding a
filtration option for existing
machine
Corrective Action Plan
ISSUE
SOLUTION
Water temp.
not optimal
Solution
used to fill
tank when
evaporation
occurs
TIMEFRAME
SUCCESS
EVALUATION
Train ops to 2 weeks to
monitor
reach all
and adjust operators
as needed
Consistent
results in
temp
samples
If success
Ops
fixes
Supervisors
problem,
/Manager
completed.
Implement
clean fillwater
solution
Soap
deposits
reduced in
tank
If success
Above plus
fixes
facilities.
problem,
completed.
After
results of
item 1
determined
No filtering Explore
After
Filtering
system
options to results of
system
add system items 1 and installed
2
determined
If success
fixes
problem,
completed.
PERSON
RESPONSIBLE
Operations
supervisor,
purchasing,
controller
Implementing the CAP…
 Each action is determined by
success or failure of previous
action
 Action 1 (training):
 Document what process is for
achieving and maintaining
correct temp range and
acceptable variations.
 Establish training schedule for
all operators to educate
 Two weeks should cover all
shifts/employees
Implementing the CAP…
 Action 2 (clean fill water)
 Evaluation and testing of water
supply to ensure no negative
reaction with cleaning solution
 Determine water delivery
system and storage methods
 Establish guidelines and
process on when and how to
use the clean fill water
 Any additional process changes
to include this step in washing
parts
Implementing the CAP…
 Action 3 (install filter)
 Determine if existing machine
can be fitted with filter
 If so, find cost, installation
procedure and downtime
expected for machine
 Additional training, process
steps may be needed
 If unable to modify existing
machine, explore purchasing
new machine
Follow up.
 Action 1 (training):
 Sample water temp regularly
 Compare with instances of
nozzle clogging before
implementation of action
 If action remedies problem,
further analysis could be done
to determine the exact temp at
which the nozzle starts to
experience clogging
Follow up.
 Action 2 (clean fill water):
 Sample water in tank regularly
to determine presence of
particulate matter
 Gather data to further evaluate
effects of fill water temp and
volume on cleaning solution
 Evolve process for water
storage and delivery as needed
to increase efficiency in process
Follow up.
 Action 3 (install filter):
 Determine best option for
modifying or purchasing new
equipment, contact
manufacturer of machine
 Evaluate efficiency and any
changes in initial costs as well
as total cost of ownership of
this action after
implementation
Conclusion
 Action 1 is very low cost, low impact solution to
try that has seems to have a high probability of
working.
 Temp affects both the functionality of the
machine as well as the soap used in the solution.
 The build up of non-dissolved soap is prime
suspect
 Training the operators and making small
adjustments to operational process could be
solution.
Conclusion
 The fill water option is still lower cost, but
involves a lot of testing for compatibility and
best practices for introducing a new variable
to the process.
 This solution would also add to the
operational process, but could easily be
implemented with the proper instruction.
 The next step up would be to modify the
machine, or take it a step further and replace
it.
Conclusion
 Adding a filter could be expensive, so could
replacing the machine. Additionally, the time
lost and any additional training with new
equipment could be taxing. In the long run, it
could result in a more efficient process.
 A quick search shows that the machine type
described could retail for around $8,000. A
considerable chunk of money, but not usually a
back-breaker.
 With a three-tiered action plan, there is no
pressure to spend a lot of money right away, the
first two options are the easier ones.
References

“Cause & Effect Diagram.” (2014). Retrieved from
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/templates/cause-and-effect-diagramTC006082737.aspx

“Force Field Analysis.” (2014). Retrieved from
http://www.mindtools.com/pages/article/newTED_06.htm

“Spray aqueous parts washers.” Retrieved from http://www.safetykleen.com/products-services/parts-cleaning-technologies/aqueous-partswasher/spray

Summers, D. (2010). Quality/5e. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

“Writing an effective corrective action plan.” (2014). Northwestern
University Research [online]. Retrieved from
http://irb.northwestern.edu/policies/compliance/corrective-action-plan