8D Problem solving

Concern: Leakage observed in steering Tank

Prepared by: Avinash Batra
Last Updated on : 11.4.2023

VTTL/C/MR/F/27
 8D Approach

1D – FORMATION OF TEAM

2D – DEFINE PROBLEM

3D – IMMEDIATE CONTAINMENT ACTION

4D – ROOT CAUSE IDENTIFICATION

5D – LIST DOWN & SELECTION OF PERMANENT CORRECTIVE ACTION

6D – IMPLEMENTING PERMANENT CORRECTIVE ACTION

7D – HORIZONTAL DEPLOYEMNET & PREVENT RE-

OCCURANCE

8D – CONGRATULATE THE TEAM

 1D . The Team
Plant Location Hosur Place the team photograph
Team Leader Mr. Akash Somkuwar here
Team Members Mr. Avinash (SQA)
Mr. Arivalgan (MQA)
Mr. Dhananjay (QA)
Mr. Sakthivel (Production)
Facilitator / Mentor Akash Somkuwar (Head – QA)

Project Plan
Month Month Month
Phase
W1 W2 W3 W4 W1 W2 W3 W4 W1 W2 W3 W4
1D
2D
3D
4D
5D
6D
7D
8D
 Define Problem

5 W 1H Leakage / Seepage issue observed in Steering reservior Plastic part M/s Purofil

Leakage was exactly from the outlet pipe, which is at the bottom side in
What Leakage in Plastic Steering oil reservior
reservior.

When Observed during the PDI Inspection, at final inspection area. Generated during moulding operation

Where did you see the phenomena ?

Where Where on the equipment or material did you see the phenomena ?
At Final Inspection Area.

Who does it effect ? Everyone ? Or is it less of a problem for some individuals

Who or teams ? End Customer
(If so what info can they offer ?) Is it skill related ?

Which trend or pattern does this phenomena more frequent on Monday

Which mornings? After a shift change ? Changeover? Or is it random in nature ? November month lot
Which direction does the phenomena happen in?

How is the state of equipment of changed from the optimal? How many times Observed in 4 parts ou of 10 Parts assembled.
How does the problem occur?
 Is / Is not Analysis
Description IS IS NOT NOTES
(Observation): (Observation):
 Leakage from the bottom inlet
What is the defect? pipe.    
 Generated at :-Injection Moulding
What processes? Bypassed from Leakage Testing at    
Supplier end.
Where in the process ?  Generated during the injection    
moulding process at M/s Purofil.

Who is affected?  End Customer, VST Tractor    

Dispatch, Production line

When did it happen?  March 2021 lot    

How frequently did it

 1st time    
happen?
 No, but recently material changed
Is there a pattern? to Nylon against the marks    
observed on Tank
How much is it costing? COPQ was approx. 7 lac since    
dispatch delayed

Note : Use to develop a problem statement and define the scope of a project.
 History of Problem

Trend Attribution

Qty. Rejected Qty. Rejected

160

140

120

100

80

60

40

20

0
2 2 2 2
02 02 02 02
ter2 t er2 t er2 ter2
a a a a
Qu Qu Qu Qu
1st 2n
d 3rd 4th 1st Quater 2022 2nd Quater 2022 3rd Quater 2022 4th Quater 2022
 2D. Problem Definition
Boundary Diagram /
Photo of Defect

Leakage from Steering oil Tractor dispatch stopped.

reservior Tank
Chances of customer
complaint.

Tractor rework after roll

off.
 Process Mapping Top Down Chart
Tank
Moulding Moulding Fitment of Welding of Bush, Filter Final
process Receipt of Raw of both baffle in both half by Leak Testing fitting / Cap inspection and
Material tank half bottom half hot plate assy dispatch
Verification of RM as Preheating of Soldering Overlapping Air Pressure Tank Temperatur Deflashing
per Material TC. RM temperature not material and
ok setting

Confimation of batch Moulding Excess Meting / Temperature of Holding time for Bush Direction / Visual Inspection
(Should not be older parameters Puncture should Hot Plate leakage test Tilting
Activity Listing

than six month) as per SOP be verfied

Proceed for Moulding Mould Time for heating Dipping Depth

Release during leakage
Agent Less / Tesr
More

Defect generation stage

Defect detection stage

 3D. Immediate / Containment Action

Immediate/Correction Status /
S.N. /Interim action Owner Target Date Remarks

• All Part of suspected lots being rejected

1. • Communication to supplier for necessary action and dispatching new QA / SQI / SCM Done
lot by air asap.

• Implementation of 100% leakage testing by submerging complete

2. part and marking for confirmation QA / SQI / SCM Immidiate Done
 4D. Root Cause Identification
Cause and Effect Diagram (Map All the Possible Causes captured during Brainstorming)

Measurement Materials Method

Mould temp. Material not as per
Preheating not done
controller not spec
SOP not followed
calibrated
Leakage testing Material mouisture Hopper Temp. not
not ok or content not ok ok Mould releasing agent
less / more
Recycle material Barrel temp. not
used ok Initial setup part
mixed in lot
Injection pressure
less
Problem Statement
Injection time less.

Leakage observed in
Steering reservior
Die clamping
Moisture content Non skilled pressure more or
high manpower less

Venting not ok in
die

Wall thickness not

ok in die.

Mould temperature
controlled not

Unspecified
machine used

Environment Manpower Machine

 Identification of Possible Causes
S No Possible Cause SOP / Spec. Actual Responsibility Target Date Verification Result
(Contributing / Not Contributing)

Must be Calibrated by
1 Mould Temperatur controlled not calibrated Found ok M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
NABL approved Lab
Only checked at Welding M/s Purofil
2 Leakage testing not ok or bypassed Must be checked all over 18.11.2022 Contributing
area.
3 Material not as per spec Nylon 6 Nylon 6 M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
4 Material less of more 600 Gms 600 Gms. M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
5 Recycle material used Not to be added Not added M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
Preheating shoule be Preheating was done for
6 Preheating not done M/s Purofil 18.11.2022 Contributing
done for 2 hrs. 3hrs.
Hopper Temperature
7 Hopper Temp. not ok Found ok M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
should be 120℃
8 Barrel temp. not ok 185℃ 250℃ M/s Purofil 18.11.2022 Contributing
9 Injection pressure less / more 60T, 50T, 30T, 20T 70T, 50T, 30T, 20T M/s Purofil 18.11.2022 Contributing
10 Injection time less / more 15 Sec 10 Sec M/s Purofil 18.11.2022 Contributing
SOP was not having
11 SOP not followed Should be Followed M/s Purofil 18.11.2022 Contributing
some details
12 Mould releasing agent less / more 20 Gms. per Stroke 220 Gms / Stroke M/s Purofil 18.11.2022 Contributing
13 Initial setup part mixed in lot Should keep Separate Not Mixed up M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
14 Non skilled manpower Should be skilled Skilled operator M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
15 Die clamping pressure more or less 10 Bar OK M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
16 Venting not ok in die Should be provided Venting is ok M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
17 Wall thickness not ok in die. 3mm Found 3 mm min. M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
18 Mould temperature controlled not provided in die. Compulsory for larger die Not necessary M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
19 Unspecified machine used 300 Ton 300 Ton M/s Purofil Done Non Contributing
 5D. Selection of Permanent Corrective Action
S.N. Potential Cause Dominance Why1 Why2 Why3 Why4 Why5

Supplier was
Leakage testing not ok Leakage testing Supplier was not checking / Not expected
1 or bypassed Measurment process was not dipping the tube expacting leakage leakge from
ok. are in water. from joint area moulding area.
only

Supplier applied Trial not done for

Preheating not done / Preheating was same parameter new material part.
2 parameter not ok Method done for 3 hours setting which was APQP and part
instead of 2 hours. for earlier material approval process
as well. by passed.

Trial not done for

Barrel Temp. Material changed new material part.
3 Barrel temp. not ok Method observed 250℃ not considered , APQP and part
instead of trialed out, older approval process
185℃ sop followed by passed.

Trial not done for

Material changed new material part.
Injection pressure less / Injection pressure not considered , APQP and part
4 more Method
observed more. trialed out, older approval process
sop followed by passed.
5D. Selection of Permanent Corrective Action

S.N. Potential Cause Dominance Why1 Why2 Why3 Why4 Why5

Trial not done for

new material
Material Injecting Material changed part. APQP and
not considered ,
5 Injection time less / more Method time observed trialed out, older part approval
less. sop followed process by
passed.

Some details, e.g.

Not considered
6 Method SOP was not up to Mould release during process
SOP not followed
the mark agent freqency
was not defined settlement.

It was not Heating gases was

The mould release
7 Mould releasing agent less /
Method agent uses was considered. Only not considerd
more
quite high. lubrication point during process
considered. establishment.
 6D. Implementing Permanent Corrective Action
S.N. Root Cause Action plan Ownership Date Status
/Remarks

1. The Leakage test should be Avinash Batra / M/s April 2022

Leakage testing not ok or conducted by dipping the full tank to Purofil
bypassed ensure leakage from any area.
Setup made, Mentioned in SOP.
Marking also introduced.
2 Preheating not done / Avinash Batra / M/s April 2022
Preheating to be done for 2 Hours Purofil
parameter not ok
for Nylon 6, Mentioned in SOP.

3 Avinash Batra / M/s April 2022

Barrel temp. not ok Barrel Temp. to be keep at 185℃, Purofil
Mentioned in SOP.

4 Injection pressure Changes to 60 T, Avinash Batra / M/s April 2022

50 T, 30 T, 20 T. Initial Pressure Purofil
Injection pressure less /
reduced to avoid any major defect
more
due to high pressure, Program
changed, Program locked for
operator to change
 6D. Implementing Permanent Corrective Action

S.N. Root Cause Action plan Ownership Date Status

/Remarks

5 Injection time increased to 15 Sec. Avinash Batra / M/s April 2022

Program made, SOP made. Purofil
Injection time less / more
Machine Locked for any changes by
operator
6 SOP Made and displayed, Avinash Batra / M/s April 2022
SOP not followed correction done as per new setup. Purofil

7 Mould release agent quantity Avinash Batra / M/s April 2022

Mould releasing agent less / reduced to 20 gms per stroke, SOP Purofil
more Made and displayed.
 Verification of Action

Lot Received after Action 13 Nos.

taken
Total Qty Received 517

GIR Rejection 0

PDO Rejection 4 (2 Nos. due to Cap

Damage, 2 Older Leaked
parts found)
 Effectiveness Monitoring
Before After

No Identification for Leakage Testing

Results Monitoring of effectiveness of actions Identification done for Leakage testing

and confirmation.
Chart Title
120 Action Imp.
100
80
60
40
20
0
May 22 Jun 22 Jul 22 Aug 22 Oct 22 Oct 22 Dec 22 Dec 22 Jan 23 Jan 23 Feb 23 Mar 23 Mar 23

Lot Received GRN Rejection PDO Rejection

SOP after the process Change
Leakage Testing method before & After

Before After
7D. Horizontal Deployment & Prevent Recurrence

Systemic Corrections / Documents Updated -

 Drawing Release
 PFD
 PFMEA
 √Control Plan
 √SOP / Work Instructions
 SPC Monitoring
 QA Check sheet
 CAR Release with cut off
 8D. Congratulate The Team

Thanks to all
For Support