Analisis Upaya Penurunan Welding Rejection Rate pada PT XYZ dengan Menggunakan Pendekatan Six Sigma (Studi Kasus: Proyek MP021– Jembatan Rangka B60)
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Perusahaan dikatakan berkualitas apabila memiliki sistem produksi yang baik dengan proses yang terkendali. Kualitas suatu produk salah satunya ditentukan oleh tingkat mutu proses pengelasan, karena pengelasan merupakan salah satu tolok ukur untuk mengukur kekuatan suatu produk. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menurunkan tingkat kegagalan pada proses pengelasan melalui pendekatan six sigma dengan metode DMAIC ( define, measure, analysis, improve, dan control ). Pada penelitian ini difokuskan terhadap jenis cacat undersized welding yang memiliki DPMO ( defect per million opportunities ) tertinggi yaitu 4.423 dan nilai sigma terendah yaitu 4,12. Kemudian penyebab undersized welding dianalisis dengan menggunakan analisis 5 why’s, analisis cause and effect diagram, dan FMEA ( failure mode effect analysis ). Dari hasil analisis FMEA diambil penyebab utama dengan lima nilai RPN tertinggi berdasarkan prioritas yang terdiri atas kurangnya penerapan disiplin pada welder , welder kurang merasa termotivasi, ampere atau tegangan logam terlalu tinggi, welder terburu–buru pada saat mengelas, dan temperatur yang digunakan terlalu rendah. Kemudian hasil analisis FMEA dijadikan landasan dalam membuat action plan for failure mode yang terdiri atas melakukan pengecekan standar sebelum pengelasan dimulai dan melakukan peningkatan kualitas pada pelatihan berkala pada welder . Kata kunci: Pengendalian Kualitas, Six Sigma, CTQ, DMAIC, FMEA. Abstract A good quality company should fulfill the requirement of good production system with controlled process. The quality of a product is determined by the level of quality from its welding process, due to the weld quality which required to measure the strenthness of its product. This study aims to reduce the welding rejection rate through six sigma approach by using DMAIC (define, measure, analyze, improve, control) method. The analysis for this study focus on undersized welding defects which has the highest DPMO (defect per million opportunities) and lowest sigma level which is 4.12 among the other defects type. The root causes of undersized welding are being analyzed by 5 why’s analysis, analysis of cause and effect diagram, and FMEA (failure mode effect analysis). From the analysis of FMEA, the study conclude the root causes by taking the five highest RPN value based on the priorities which consist of lack of discipline, lack of motivation, the unstable speed of welding process, the temperature which are too low, too high amperage or voltage. These results of analysis are used as a basis to create the action plan for failure mode which consist of doing the rechecking before welding start based on welding specification and improving on regular training system for welder . Keywords: Quality Control, Six Sigma, CTQ, DMAIC, FMEA. Daftar Pustaka American Welding Society. (2008). Bridge Welding Code. Miami: American Welding Society. Anggono, J., & Kusuma, L. H. (1999). Studi Pengaruh Magnetic Arc Blow Pada Hasil Las TIG Baja AISI 1021. Jurnal Teknik Mesin, Fakultas Teknologi Industri, Universitas Kristen Petra , 63 - 73. Anggraini, D. A., & Putra, N. P. (2012). Implementasi Six Sigma untuk Mengurangi Cacar Las Jenis Porosity Pada Pengelasan Pipa Steam di Project NND Area 12 PT. CPI Duri Riau. Jurnal Teknik Industri Universitas Bung Hatta Vol. 1 No.1 , 13-24. Bass, I. (2007). Six Sigma Statistics with Excel and Minitab. New York: McGraw-Hill. Besterfield, D. (1994). Quality Control. United States of America: Prentice Hall. Furchan, A. (2004). Pengantar Penelitian dan Pendidikan. Yogyakarta: Pustaka Pelajar Offset. Gaspersz, V. (2007). Lean Six Sigma. Gramedia Pustaka. General Electric. (2004). What Is Six Sigma? The Roadmap to Customer Impact. Retrieved Juni 23, 2015, from General Electric: http://www.ge.com/sixsigma/SixSigma.pdf Gultom, S., Sinaga, T. S., & Sinulingga, S. (2013). Studi Pengendalian Mutu dengan Menggunakan Pendekatan Lean Six Sigma pada PT. XYZ. e-Jurnal Teknik Industri FT USU Vol.3, No. 2 , 22-30. Hartono. (2009). Penanggulangan Cacat Hasil Pengelasan Pada Konstruksi Kapal. Kapal , 88-93. Hidayatno, A., & Afriansyah, B. (2004). Peningkatan Kualitas Potong Mesin Eye Tracer di PT. United Tractors Pandu Engineering dengan Metode Six Sigma. Jurnal Teknologi , 1-11. Huntington Ingalls Industries. (2013). Welder's Visual Inspection Handbook. Washington: Newport News Shipbuilding Division of Huntington Ingalls Industries. Kita-Shinagawa, & Shinagawa-Ku. (2011). Weld Imperfections and Preventive Measures, Fourth Edition. Tokyo: Kobe Steel, LTD. Kustituanto, B. (1998). Statistika Untuk Ekonomi dan Bisnis. Jakarta: Penerbit Gunadarma. Laricha, L., Rosehan, & Cynthia. (2013). Usulan Perbaikan Kualitas dengan Penerapan Metode Six Sigma dan FMEA (Failure Mode and Effect Analysis) Pada Proses Produksi Roller Conveyor MBC di PT XYZ. Jurnal Ilmiah Teknik Industri, Vol 1 No.2 , 86-94. Nugroho, Y. (2012). Analisis Kegagalan Las dan Rekomendasi Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) pada Pengelasan Kondensor PT. Siemens Indonesia. Semarang: Fakultas Teknik, Jurusan Teknik Mesin, Universitas Diponegoro. Pyzdek, T. (2003). The Six Sigma Handbook : A Complete Guide For Greenbelt, Blackbelts, and Managers at All Levels. New York: Mc Graw Hill. Skalle, H., & Hahn, B. (2013). Applying Lean, Six Sigma, BPM and SOA to Drive Business Results. United States: IBM Redbooks. Sondalini, M. (2014). Tutorials Lean Management Methos. Retrieved Agustus 10, 2015, from Lifetime Reliability: http://www.lifetime-reliability.com/tutorials/lean-management-methods/How_to_Use_the_5-Whys_for_Root_Cause_Analysis.pdf Sower, V. E. (2011). Esentials of Quality. United States of America: Wiley. Umar, H. (2005). Metode Penelitian Untuk Skripsi dan Tesis Bisnis. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada. Wahyuni, W., Chobir, A., & Rahmanto, D. D. (2013). Penerapan Metode Six Sigma dengan Konsep DMAIC Sebagai Alat Pengendali Kualitas. Jurnal Institut Teknologi Adhi Tama Surabaya , 1-13. Webber, L., & Wallace, M. (2007). Quality Control for Dummies. Canada: Wiley Publishing, Inc. Zaenuddin, A., & Soemartono, Y. (2006). Analisis Pengaruh Penerapan ISO 9001:2000 Terhadap Peningkatan Kualitas Manajemen Perusahaan jasa Konstruksi. Semarang: Teknik Sipil Fakultas Teknik Universitas Diponegoro.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it