Six Sigma Simulation
Data Definitions
and
Worksheet Descriptions
Overview

The purpose of this presentation is to:



8/6/2004
Define the purpose and data contained on each
Excel SixSigma-2 worksheets
Define the inter-relationships between the
worksheets
Briefly describe the simulation output for a Design
of Experiments (DOE)
Six Sigma Data Definitions
2
Worksheets
The simulation output is contained on the following 8 worksheets:

Data - cycle time and quality (defect and defective) data for each of the
three operations








8/6/2004
Automatic Component Insertion (ACI)
Manual Assembly (MA)
Solder
Analysis – aggregate data and basic cost statistics
Hidden Cost – various yield measurements and hidden cost information
Defect – summarized data for type & frequency of defects and number
of defective units
Chart1, Chart2, Chart3 – I-MR & P-charts for each operation
CumData – similar information to the Data worksheet plus subgroup
totals
Six Sigma Data Definitions
3
Six Sigma Simulation Screenshot
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
4
Defect Definitions
Automatic Component
Insertion
Y1: Epoxy Contamination
Y2: Tuner Misalignment
Y3: Missing/Wrong Parts
Y4: Lead Length
Y5: Bad Assembly
Y6: Chip Skew
8/6/2004
Manual Assembly
Y1: Reversed Parts
Y2: Wrong Parts
Y3: Leg-Outs
Y4: Shortened Leads
Y5: Incorrect Rework
Y6: Missing Parts
Six Sigma Data Definitions
Solder
Y1: Missing Solder
Y2: Glue Contamination
Y3: Solder Bridge
Y4: Insufficient Solder
Y5: Solder Composition
Y6: Others
5
Data Worksheet Overview

This worksheet presents quality results for each
processed unit (PCB) at each of the three operations





Start and End Time
Total Index – The overall quality rating for the PCB
Component Measure – The number of defects for each of
the six defect types
Component Index – A quality rating for each of the defect
types. The PCB design allows for a predetermined number
of defects before a board is either reworked or scrapped
The data on this worksheet is volatile – i.e., it is
cleared prior to the subsequent simulation run.
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
6
Data Worksheet Screenshot
The Data worksheet contains similar sections for the remaining two operations – Manual Assembly
(MA) and Solder.
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
7
Material Flow Process
Pull material
from queue
No
Start
Parts at
queue?
Yes
Parts at mfg
station
(new or rework)?
Yes
Manufacture
next PCB
PCB
acceptable?
Yes
Send PCB to
next operation
or ship
finished product
No
No
Pull parts
from raw material
PCB
scrap?
Yes
Scrap part
No
Send PCB back
to mfg process
for rework
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
8
Raw Material Shipment Example
Data Worksheet
• A RM kit is shipped at time = 0 to start
the process. The first unit processed
requires rework (Total Index = 2).
• Since there is no material in the queue
prior to the next process operation, a RM
kit is pulled into the queue to await
processing (shipped at t = 4.22).
• The second RM kit shipped sits in the
queue until the unit being reworked is
either completed or scrapped.
• The first unit completes rework and is
accepted at t = 8.41.
• The RM in the queue (second RM
shipped) moves into the ACI process at
t = 8.41.
• At t = 12.61 the second unit is completed
and the third RM kit is shipped directly to
the queue and into the ACI process.
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
9
Cycle Time
Data Worksheet
CumData Worksheet
Cycle Time for each processed unit can be determined from the start and end times on the
Data worksheet for each operation by subtracting the start time from the end time for each
RM unit (there may be some rounding discrepancies).
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
10
Data Worksheet - Quality Index
There are three main, identical sections for each operation containing
information on process quality:
1. Total Index – The “final” inspection result for the processed PCB. A
good PCB is denoted by “1”, a PCB requiring rework is denoted by “2”,
and a scrapped PCB is denoted by “3”.
2. Component Measure – Quantitative results for process quality broken
down by defect type (Y1 – Y6). These columns, with the exception of
ACI defect type Y2, contain the count for the number of defects
introduced for each unit processed. (ACI defect type Y2 data is the
distance the tuner is off its target).
3. Component Index – A qualitative quality measurement. The six
columns provide the results for each of the defect types.
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
11
Data Worksheet - Interpretation
Total Index Results:
Component Measure Results:
Component Index Results:
The PCB must be
reworked (Index = 2).
The Tuner Misalignment (Y2) was 8.98 mm
(acceptable at ≤ 20) and there was one
Missing / Wrong Part (Y3) which required the
PCB to be reworked.
The quality was “Good”
(index = 1) for all defect
types except Y3 (index = 2).
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
12
Data Worksheet - Interpretation
Material Flow Example:
1. On its first pass, the highlighted board fails quality inspection due to a Y4 (length of leads)
defect type and is sent back for rework.
2. On the second pass through the process, it fails a second time due to a Y4 defect, but also
due to a newly introduced Y3 (missing / wrong parts) defect type.
3. On the third pass through the process, these defects are corrected, however, a Y5 (bad
assembly) defect type is caught at inspection.
4. Finally, on the fourth pass through the system, the PCB passed quality inspection.
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
13
Data Worksheet - Interpretation
In this case the system was set up
to produce (a lot of) bad parts.
• The system did not produce a
single non-defective PCB (all
Total Index results are “2”)
• There were a total of 200 “Y6”
defect types. This total is
captured in the Defect
worksheet, but can be
calculated from the Data
worksheet as shown.
Data Worksheet
=COUNTIF(entire Y6 column,2)
=SUM(entire Y6 column)
Defect Worksheet
ACI
Quality
Defectives
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Good
10
9
10
9
10
0
Rework
0
1
0
1
0
10
Scrap
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
0
200
Defects
Y1: Epoxy Contamination
Y2: Tuner Misalignment
Y3: Missing/Wrong Parts
Y4: Length of Leads
Y5: Bad Assembly
Y6: Chip Skew
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
• The number of reworked
PCB’s, also captured on the
Defect worksheet, can be
calculated from the Data
worksheet as shown.
• The Tuner Misalignment (Y2)
distance ranged from 14.82 to
20.11. A PCB requires rework
if this distance exceeds 20.
This fact is captured in the
Component Index section for
the 9th PCB processed.
14
Analysis Worksheet
This worksheet is divided into two sections, Input and Results
Input


Collects totals from the Data worksheet for number of units processed,
plus scrap and rework
Details amount and location of WIP in the system at the end of the
production run
Results



8/6/2004
Calculates yields, process costs, and cycle times for each operation
Determines overall raw material, process, and scrap costs per good unit
Presents the cycle time per good unit and its standard deviation
Six Sigma Data Definitions
15
Analysis Worksheet – Input Section
RM shipped prior to completing
order (in this case 200)
PCB’s requiring no rework
Total number of PCB’s
processed by ACI, including
good PCB’s, and those
reworked (possibly more
than once), and scrapped.
This is the final entry in the
“Process Unit” column on
the “Data” worksheet.
8/6/2004
Input Algebra (Solder):
289
PCB’s processed
- 200
Total good PCB’s
89
# of PCB’s needing rework
- 60
Recycled PCB’s
29
PCB’s reworked more than once
Six Sigma Data Definitions
The Solder operation
was able to process all
200 units produced by
the MA process, even
while reworking 89
units, due to its shorter
CT.
16
Analysis Worksheet – Input Section
Interpreting the Output: Why are the capacity utilizations at 100% for ACI and MA and
not Solder?
• ACI: With its shorter CT (relative to the MA operation) the ACI process continues to push
all of its completed units to the buffer/queue in front of the MA operation.
• MA: In this instance the MA operation is the bottleneck.
• Solder: Must wait for units from the MA operation due to MA’s greater CT
Data pulled from simulation
The cost parameters are fixed
Time required to
complete entire
order
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
17
Analysis Worksheet – Results Section
RESULTS
Material Yield
54.05%
By Process
ACI
MA
Solder
RTY
Yield
68.46%
71.94%
69.20%
34.08%
ProcessCost/Good Unit
$65.73
$75.06
$59.25
CycleTime/Good Unit
6.15
11.31
7.34
Overall
Raw Materials
Process
Scrap*
Total
Cost/Good Unit
$240.50
$255.58
$2.55
$498.63
CycleTime/Good Unit
11.35
Standard Deviation**
6.75
* WIP's in the end are considered as Scrap.
** Std Dev of End Time Differences between Two Consecutive Good Units.
Calculations for each of the above metrics are covered on following slides
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
18
Results Calculations - Yields
Material Yield 
ACI Yield 
total units produced
200

 54 .05 %
Raw Material (RM) used 370
total good units produced by ACI 369

 68 .5%
total units processed by ACI
539
Similar calculations will determine MA and Solder yields
Rolled Throughput Yield (RTY)  ACI Yield * MA Yield * Solder Yield
 68.5% * 71.9% * 69.2%  34.1%
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
19
Results Calculations - Process
Process Cost tot units processed* cost/unit 539 * $45 .00


 $65 .73
Good Unit
total good units
369
For
ACI
Process
Cycle Time total CT * cap. utilizatio n 2270 .4 *100 %


 6.15
Good Unit
total good units
369
CT / Good Unit 
8/6/2004
Total CT
2270 .4

 11 .35
Good units in Solder (fin. goods)
200
Six Sigma Data Definitions
20
Results Calculations - Overall Costs
RM cost / good unit 
RM Used * RM cost/unit
370 * $130 .00

 $240 .50
Good units in solder (fin. goods)
200
each proc
 units processed* process cost
Process Cost/good unit  i  1
total good units in solder
(539 * $45  278 * $54  289 * $41)

 $255 .58
200
each proc
 units scrap.  WIP * scrap cost
Scrap Cost/good unit  i  1
total good units in solder
(0  1) * $3  (0  169 ) * $3  (0  0) * $3  $2.55

200
Total Cost / Good Unit  $240 .50  $255 .58  $2.55  $498 .63
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
21
Hidden Cost Worksheet - Yields
VARIOUS YIELDS
ACI
MA
Solder
1st Quality/Input
100%
54%
100%
1st Quality 1st Time/Input
69%
38%
70%
1st Quality/Thruput
68%
72%
69%
1st Quality 1st Time/Thruput
47%
51%
48%
Yield Definitions:
1.
1st Quality / Input: How many good units were made by the process given the amount of raw
material or good units supplied by the prior process?
2.
1st Quality – 1st Time / Input: How many good units were processed on their first pass through the
operation?
3.
1st Quality / Throughput: Accounts for the impact of reworked units by looking at the total number of
units processed by the operation – versus the quantity of raw material or units delivered to the
process.
4.
1st Quality – 1st Time / Throughput: Of the total number of units processed by the operation, what
percentage were produced defect-free on their first pass through the operation?
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
22
Hidden Costs – Yield Calculations
INPUT
Raw Materials (RM) Used
370
Production Records
ACI
Units Processed
539
Good Units
Total
369
First
256
Recycled
113
Units Recycled
170
Units Scrapped
0
Work In Process (WIP)
1
Capacity Utilization
100%
Cost Parameters
ACI
Cost/Unit
RM
$130.00
Process
$45.00
Scrap
$3.00
Total Cycle Time
Analysis Worksheet
8/6/2004
2270.40
1st quality
total good units made by process

Input
(RM used) or (good units from last process)
369

 99 .73 % (rounded to 100%)
370
For the MA and Solder
operations, the denominator
is the total good units
processed from the prior step
– in this case, MA would use
“369” from the ACI column.
Hidden Cost Worksheet
VARIOUS YIELDS
ACI
MA
Solder
1st Quality/Input
100%
54%
100%
1st Quality 1st Time/Input
69%
38%
70%
1st Quality/Thruput
68%
72%
69%
1st Quality 1st Time/Thruput
47%
51%
48%
Six Sigma Data Definitions
23
Hidden Costs – Yield Calculations
INPUT
Raw Materials (RM) Used
370
Production Records
ACI
Units Processed
539
Good Units
Total
369
First
256
Recycled
113
Units Recycled
170
Units Scrapped
0
Work In Process (WIP)
1
Capacity Utilization
100%
Cost Parameters
ACI
Cost/Unit
RM
$130.00
Process
$45.00
Scrap
$3.00
Total Cycle Time
8/6/2004
2270.40
1st quality - 1st time
1st run good units made by operation

Input
(RM used) or (good units from last process)
256

 69 .2%
370
VARIOUS YIELDS
ACI
MA
Solder
1st Quality/Input
100%
54%
100%
1st Quality 1st Time/Input
69%
38%
70%
1st Quality/Thruput
68%
72%
69%
1st Quality 1st Time/Thruput
47%
51%
48%
Six Sigma Data Definitions
24
Hidden Costs – Yield Calculations
INPUT
Raw Materials (RM) Used
370
Production Records
ACI
Units Processed
539
Good Units
Total
369
First
256
Recycled
113
Units Recycled
170
Units Scrapped
0
Work In Process (WIP)
1
Capacity Utilization
100%
Cost Parameters
ACI
Cost/Unit
RM
$130.00
Process
$45.00
Scrap
$3.00
Total Cycle Time
8/6/2004
2270.40
1st quality
total good units made by operation

Throughput
total units processed
369

 68 .4%
539
VARIOUS YIELDS
ACI
MA
Solder
1st Quality/Input
100%
54%
100%
1st Quality 1st Time/Input
69%
38%
70%
1st Quality/Thruput
68%
72%
69%
1st Quality 1st Time/Thruput
47%
51%
48%
Six Sigma Data Definitions
25
Hidden Costs – Yield Calculations
INPUT
Raw Materials (RM) Used
370
Production Records
ACI
Units Processed
539
Good Units
Total
369
First
256
Recycled
113
Units Recycled
170
Units Scrapped
0
Work In Process (WIP)
1
Capacity Utilization
100%
Cost Parameters
ACI
Cost/Unit
RM
$130.00
Process
$45.00
Scrap
$3.00
Total Cycle Time
8/6/2004
2270.40
1st quality - 1st time 1st run good units made by operation

Throughput
total units processed
256

 47 .5%
539
VARIOUS YIELDS
ACI
MA
Solder
1st Quality/Input
100%
54%
100%
1st Quality 1st Time/Input
69%
38%
70%
1st Quality/Thruput
68%
72%
69%
1st Quality 1st Time/Thruput
47%
51%
48%
Six Sigma Data Definitions
26
Hidden Costs – Factory Calculations
HIDDEN FACTORY COSTS
In order to produce 1 unit
that has no defect
With defects
Without defects
Difference
(Hidden factory cost)
% Reduction
Units
1.66
1
0.66
0.40
Cost
498.63
300.53
198.10
0.40
Cycle time
11.35
6.84
4.51
0.40
units  1  defect rate
 1  (1 - RTY)
 1  (1 - 0.3408)  1.6592
From earlier
calculations
cost w/out defect
cost w/ defects
# of units to produce no defect unit
$498.63

 $300 .52
1.66

CT w/out defects
CT w/ defects
# of units to produce no defect unit
11.35

 6.84
1.66

8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
27
Defect Worksheet
The Defect worksheet presents the final
results by defect-type for the latest
simulation run.
TYPE of DEFECTS and FREQUENCIES
ACI
Quality
Defectives
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Good
511
539
486
484
491
539
Rework
28
0
53
55
48
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
29
0
53
57
52
0
Scrap
Defects
Y1: Epoxy Contamination
Y2: Tuner Misalignment
Y3: Missing/Wrong Parts
Y4: Length of Leads
Y5: Bad Assembly
Y6: Chip Skew
Defectives
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Good
251
278
251
278
263
261
Rework
27
0
27
0
15
17
Scrap
0
0
0
0
0
0
31
0
28
0
15
17
Defects
Y1: Reversed Parts
Y2: Wrong Parts
Y3: Leg-Outs
Y4: Shortened Leads
Y5: Incorrect Rework
Y6: Missing Parts
Solder
Quality
Defectives
Y1
Y2
Y3
Y4
Y5
Y6
Good
261
275
257
289
283
262
Rework
28
14
32
0
6
27
Scrap
0
0
0
0
0
0
29
14
32
0
6
29
Defects
Y1: Missing Solder
Y3: Solder Bridge
Y5:8/6/2004
Solder Composition
Y2: Glue Contamination
Y4: Insufficient Solder
Six Sigma Data Definitions
Y6: Others
In this case:
• The ACI operation processed 539
PCB’s. (This total will agree with the
“Units Processed” field on the Analysis
worksheet)
MA
Quality
NOTE: A defective PCB may have more
than one type of defect. Furthermore, a
defective PCB may also have more than
one occurrence of the same defect type.
• For the ACI operation, 511 units were
“good” or non-defective with respect to
defect type “Y1”. The remaining 28 units
had a total of 29 Y1 defects (i.e., one
PCB had two Y1 defects).
• Similarly, of the 278 units processed by
the MA operation, there were 27
defective PCB’s that required rework
due to defect type Y1 (note there were
31 total type Y1 defects)
28
Chart Worksheets
ACI Control Charts
Individual Chart: Cycle Time
5.20
Hours
5.00
4.80
4.60
4.40
4.20
4.00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Process Unit
The following control charts are presented for completeness in covering the Excel simulation data file.
Discussion on the use and application of control charts is beyond the scope of this presentation. There are
many excellent sources of information on this subject; “Statistical Quality Control, Strategies and Tools for
Continual Improvement” by Johannes Ledolter and Claude W. Burrill is recommended, as is “Statistical
Quality Control” by Eugene L. Grant and Richard S. Leavenworth.
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
29
Chart Worksheets
Moving Range Chart: Cycle Time
0.60
0.50
Hours
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
Process Unit
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
30
Chart Worksheets
Defective Rate(P)
0.80
0.70
0.60
P
0.50
0.40
0.30
0.20
0.10
0.00
0
8/6/2004
1
2
3
4
Six Sigma Data Definitions
5
6
7
8
31
CumData Worksheet

This worksheet presents the same basic information as the Data
worksheet, but with a few significant differences:




The data on this worksheet is maintained, unless otherwise intentionally
cleared, during multiple simulation runs. This allows data to be captured
and saved during a series of DOE simulation runs.
This worksheet contains subgroup data. The subgroup size defaults to 10
units and can be manually changed in the Extend simulation.
The cycle time for each processed unit is reported – versus the start and
stop times in the Data worksheet
The data contained in the component measure
(ACI-CM-Y#) and component index (ACI-CI-Y#) columns are
identical to the Data worksheet.
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
32
CumData Worksheet Sections
The data on this worksheet is presented in a similar format to that on the
Data worksheet…
… A section containing the number of defects by defect type for each operation…
… A section indicating the quality index (need for rework or scrap) by each defect type…
… And a section containing the number of defective units per defined subgroup
size due to each defect type .
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
33
CumData Worksheet - Subgroups
An inspection of columns “B” through “O” will show
the data is identical to that on the Data worksheet.
The subgroup size, which is defined in the Extend
simulation, was left at the default size of 10.
The subgroup data (columns “Q” through “W”) for the
final subgroup will not be completed any time the
simulation run is either:



a)
b)
8/6/2004
Stopped prior to producing a complete subgroup or,
The defined number of units are some fraction of the
subgroup (e.g., a run size of 78 with a subgroup size of 10)
Six Sigma Data Definitions
34
CumData Worksheet - Subgroups
• NOD = Number of Defectives
• The sum of the number of defective units for the subgroup (column “C”) is shown in
column “Q” (ACI-TQ-NOD)
• Likewise, the totals for the number of defective units per defect type are shown in columns
“R” through “W”
• As on the Data worksheet, multiple defect types on a single unit may contribute to the unit
being identified as defective (e.g., second unit in the subgroup, Row 13)
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
35
Design of Experiments (DOE)
The CumData worksheet contains all of the
data needed to analyze the results of a DOE
 To conduct a DOE you will need to set the
“Number of Units to Produce” button to “1”


Do not click the “Send Command” button –
this will erase all CumData worksheet
information for the prior runs
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
36
DOE – ACI Output
This screenshot shows the results of ten consecutive runs. Each simulation run is set to
terminate after processing one unit, regardless of whether the unit was good, required
reworked, or was scrapped. Each simulation run, as in a DOE, had different factor settings.
• The “run number” is captured in column “A” – this number will correspond with the run
order assigned to the DOE in Minitab.
• In performing a DOE, each simulation run processes a “new” unit. Thus, one cannot
deduce how many process cycles it took to produce a good unit by examining the ACITQI data.
• Columns A through W should be copied into Minitab to analyze the DOE results (Similar
steps will be taken to analyze the Manual Assembly and Solder processes).
8/6/2004
Six Sigma Data Definitions
37