LSS Systems LLC.

Project Name: Battery Charging issue (Team-7)Project Members: Swapneel Shah, Avinash Raju, Venkatesh

Srinivasan, Japan Shah, Kalyan Sirivaram

DefineMeasureAnalyse ImproveControl

Project Problem and Goal Statement

Problem Statement: In the last 3 months,25 % of the customer base of LSS systems, LLC have reported problems related to the battery of the cell phone, which represents the 15% of the overall cost of the operating cash flow of the company. The problems are listed below.

➢ Cell phone Battery Discharges too fast. ➢ Average Battery life is much lesser than anticipated.➢ Too many requests for battery replacement.➢ Functionality of the device is being affected by quick discharging of battery➢ Device is heating up.➢ Battery not getting charged.

Goal Statement: Make all battery related compliance to the specific requirement defined by the company regarding the charge hold-back period.

Project Champion or Sponsor: Swapneel Shah

Project Team Leader or Black Belt: Venkatesh Srinivasan

Project Team Members: Avinash Raju

Ad Hoc Members or SMEs: Kalyan Sirivaram

Roles and Team Membership

Project Plan24-Sep 1-Oct 8-Oct 15-Oct 22-Oct 29-Oct 5-Nov 24-Nov

Define   

Measure   

Analyse   

Improve  

Control  

DefineMeasureAnalyse ImproveControl

High level process map (SIPOC)

Final Inspection

Dismantling and re installing wiring

•CustomerWith complaint

.

SUPPLIERSUPPLIER INPUTINPUT PROCESSPROCESS OUTPUTOUTPUT CUSTOMERCUSTOMERCTQ

CRITICAL TO QUALITYCTQ

CRITICAL TO QUALITY

•Complaint fromcustomer

• Feedback

•Technical experts

• CORRECTED BATTERY

•PerformanceMatching expectation

• Customer • Repaired product Matches customerprofile

•

•

•initial Test

•

•Software update

•

PARETO CHART OF ISSUES

FMEAFunction

Potential Failure mode

Severity Potential effects of failure Potential causes of failure

Occurrence Current Process Control

Battery not charging properlycharger not plugged

properly 6 Battery life Carelessness of user 34 NA

charger wire issue 2battery and personal damage

possbile Poor quality of charger 33 Better wire selection

power adaptability issue 5 Power conversion factors Impact battery life 61 Manufacture adpators

improper sealing of battery 7 Poor design/manufacturing Poor quality of phone manufacturing 47

quality manufacturing process

Battery charge disspating fasterBattery not charged

properly 6 Battery life Carelessness of user 34 NA

battery not fully charged 4 Battery life Carelessness of user 46 NA

Impoper seating of battery 4 Poor design/manufacturing Poor quality of phone manufacturing 53quality manufacturing

process  Internal wire problems 9 Poor battery life Improper manufacturing process 83 Quality check

hardware design problems 3Poor design and qulaity of

phone Poor quality of phone manufacturing 55quality product design

process

 software occupying more

battery 9 Poor battery lifeimproper verification and validation of

software 81 Software testing process

Process Capability for current Situation

DATA COLLECTION● Directly from the customers from feedback● Data from Quality testing and control team who initially inspected

faulty products.● Technical evaluation and R&D team.● Product Development team● Past products experience●  Software developers● Online sources, forums, journals and also from reverse

engineering of competitors products.● From the benchmarking process

DATA COLLECTION SOURCES● For feedback call centre/customer service person will call the

customer and ask about whether product is working according to their requirements.

● From the online sources, we find surveys as well as get surveys related to battery issues, also from the reviews of experts and consumers around the globe, we get data.

DefineMeasureAnalyse ImproveControl

Cause and Effect of Battery charge dissipating

Root cause Analysis

Value Stream Map of process Before and After Improvement

 

 

 

Initial Inspection 

+ve activity 

Disassembling the faulty product 

-ve activity 

Installation of the new wire system 

-ve activity 

Software Update 

+ve activity 

Final Inspection and dispatch 

+ve activity 

Initial Inspection 

+ve activity 

Disassembling and assembling the product 

+ve activity 

Software Update 

+ve activity 

Final Inspection and dispatch 

+ve activity 

Analysis

● Initial Overview of the process identifies 5 key processes which constitute the overall activity from the receipt of the defective product to its delivery after repair

● Disassembling the faulty product/removal of the faulty wiring and assembling the product after installing the new wire system were two separate processes which were not adding any value, hence were termed “ – ve”

● These processes were combined together to reduce the overall time frame, and the combined process was found to be adding value. Hence was termed as a + ve activity

DefineMeasureAnalyseImproveControl

OPTIMAL SOLUTION AND IMPLEMENTATION

● Basically there are 2 main causes which were figured out form different analysis.

● Internal wire problem and software is consuming more battery.● Among these 2 software is having weightage of 40% and 60 % is

for internal wire problem. We will send an update of a software. For the internal wire problem we will take back the from customers, we will do recall or free part replacement service.

Process Capability After Implementation

PILOT TESTING● Beta test- Customer walkthroughs and expert reviews, involving

stakeholders.● After the problem is fixed, the newly produced phone are pilot

tested .● A random sample is taken from the manufacturing lot and beta

testing for full functionality is made.● By this method, the compliance of the produced products can be

found before it reached the customer.

DefineMeasureAnalyse ImproveControl

STANDARDIZATIONBenchmarking● Understand Industry standards by studying similar products available in the

market.● Conducting Reverse Engineering of those particular products which have the

highest quality characteristics among its class● Comparison of technology and processes of the Reverse engineered product

to our own product to identify potential areas that are to be improved● Implementation of the corrected technology and processes

Control Chart For implementing solution(Before)service centre

Number inspected

Number Nonconfirming

proportion nonconfirming

1 150 37 0.2466666672 150 35 0.2333333333 150 38 0.2533333334 150 36 0.245 150 34 0.2266666676 150 32 0.2133333337 150 40 0.2666666678 150 42 0.289 150 35 0.23333333310 150 38 0.25333333311 150 45 0.312 150 36 0.2413 150 37 0.24666666714 150 37 0.24666666715 150 40 0.26666666716 150 36 0.2417 150 37 0.24666666718 150 38 0.25333333319 150 40 0.26666666720 150 41 0.27333333321 150 32 0.21333333322 150 38 0.253333333

Control Chart For implementing solution(After)

service centreNumber

inspectedNumber

Nonconfirmingproportion

nonconfirming1 150 0 02 150 0 03 150 0 04 150 0 05 150 1 0.0066666676 150 0 07 150 0 08 150 0 09 150 0 010 150 2 0.01333333311 150 0 012 150 2 0.01333333313 150 0 014 150 0 015 150 0 016 150 0 017 150 0 018 150 0 019 150 0 020 150 0 021 150 1 0.006666667

PLAN DO

STUDYACT

LSS Systems LLC.

Project Name: Service repair Problem (Team-7)Project Members: Swapneel Shah, Avinash Raju, Venkatesh

Srinivasan, Japan Shah, Kalyan Sirivaram

PLAN DO

STUDYACT

Background● 80% of the total problems which LSS systems faced were related

to quick discharging batteries.● The resolution of these problems took an unusually long period of

time approximating 1 month.● The service department of the company handles fixing of these

issues.

Aim● Our aim is to bring down the process time from a month to 10

days which will take effect from this quarter.● We aim to improve and standardize the processes in the service

department and identify and remove non value added activities.

Specific questions to address in this cycle

● What are the value and non value added activities in the process?

● Which process is consuming most of the time?● Identify the bottlenecks

Predictions/Hypotheses● Ho= service time will remain to 30 days● H1= Service time will be less than 30 days.

Plan for change/test/intervention

● Who (target population): Service process, equipment and operators, quality & test engineers

● What (change/test): Service lead time, Quality of service● When (dates of test): From upcoming Quarter● Where (location): Service Center● How (description of plan): Using Quality tools to analyze the

process and come up with optimal solution.

Measure● We will measure time of each individual process in the servicing

of the defective phone. We aim to reduce unnecessary utilization of resources using lean principles.

Plan for data collection

● Who (will collect): Quality team● What (measures):Time Study● When (time period): From the receipt to the delivery of the

product● Where (location):Service Center● How (method): Time study analysis and Value stream Mapping

PLAN DO

STUDYACT

What We Plan to Do?● As service repair consists of several processes and different

timelines, we see that value stream mapping would be a good tool to analyze the process.

Customer

Service Center

Quality Control Supervisor

Quality Department

Phone Return

Main Service Plant(Receiving)

10 Days

I

10 DaysInspecting the Faulty phone

C/T = 1 Day

Initial Inspection

Disassemble the Faulty partC/T = 1 Day

DisassemblyAdding the needed hardware and assembling the phone

C/T = 1 Day

AssemblySoftware Upgradation for the 

phoneC/T = 1 Day

Updation

Inspecting the Serviced phoneC/T = 2 Days

Final InspectionI I I II

10 Days

Main Service Plant(Shipping)

10 Days

Service Center

Customer

Delivery

1 Day

10 Days

1 Day

1 Day

1 Day

1 Day

1 Day

1 Day

2 Day

1 Day 10 Days Total Lead Time = 24 Days

Value Added Time = 6 Days

Current Value Stream Map

Inference from VSM● From the previous slide we can infer the following.● Customer centers sent phones to the service centers periodically every 10 days. ● For e.g. they used to send phones every 10 days periodically, but if the phone

arrives on the 1st or 2nd day then it has to wait till 10th day of the periodic cycle.● Disassembly and assembly are carried as 2 different process.● The lead time between these two processes is 4 days.

Proposed Value Stream MapCustomer

Service Center

Quality Control Supervisor

Quality Department

Phone Return

Main Service Plant(Receiving)

Daily

 Sch

edule

I

1 DayInspecting the Faulty phone

C/T = 1 Day

Initial Inspection

Fix the Faulty part with a new part

C/T = 1 Day

Disassembly & Assembly Software Upgradation for the 

phoneC/T = 1 Day

Updation

Inspecting the Serviced phoneC/T = 2 Days

Final InspectionI I II

1 Day

Main Service Plant(Shipping)

Daily

 Sch

edule

Service Center

Customer

Delivery

1 Day

1 Day

1 Day

½ Day

1 Day

½ Day

1 Day

½ Day 1 Day Total Lead Time = 3½ Days

Value Added Time = 4 Days

Value Stream Mapping Analysis

● From the proposed VSM we could see that, ● The transportation cycle is changed to 1 day, thereby reducing 18 days of idle

time. ● Disassembly and assembly are combined into single work station thereby reducing

2 days and labor.● The total lead time and value added time got reduced from 24 days and 6 days to

3.5 days and 4 days respectively.● It is clearly visible that the major chunk of the time is consumed by the idle

waiting of the product to be delivered to the service plant.● The non-value adding processes were minimized and an ideal state map is

developed and the process time went down by 75% from around a month to nearly a week

PLAN DO

STUDYACT

Time Reduction Implementation

Transp

ortati

on

Initia

l Insp

ectio

n

Disass

embly

& A

ssem

bly

Software

Upd

ation

Final In

spec

tion

Inven

tory

01020

20

1 2 1 2 42 1 1 1 1 1.5

Time Reduction on Implementing PDSA

Before Implementing PDSA After Implementing PDSA

Process

Tim

e Ta

ken

(Day

s)

Summary● From the VSM and bar chart analysis, transportation is found to

be the bottleneck● By eliminating the bottleneck, the process time has reduced from

a month to a week.● Work in Process Inventory was reduced form one day to half a

day.

Hypothesis● We could see that the process time has been reduced to one

week from 30 days● Hence we reject the null hypothesis, Ho=service time will remain

to 30 days

PLAN DO

STUDYACT

Documenting the Data● Non value adding activities were identified and measures were

taken to eliminate them.● The objective to reduce the process time to a week was

achieved.● The process has been standardized and documented for the

further references.

Next Steps● Continuously monitor the process for the deviations in the

process.● Implement individual control chart for process to achieve better

performance.● Incentives can be provided to employees with high performance

index to motivate them.