Finding The Balance

"How much responsibility for quality should be held by the operator and how much should be held by the tool?"

Once you've answered this question you can get on to the issue of balancing assembly requirements and cost of the assembly system. Another way to think about it is that your assembly system IS the error proofing system.

Assembly (error proofing) systems can be simple to extremely complex. They can have very high levels of control to almost no level of control. Costs are reflected in the amount of control the system provides. Typically the greater control the greater the cost.

wireless assembly tools from Sturtevant RichmontFlexibility is another important aspect in any assembly/error proofing system. In most systems a greater level of control usually means sacrificing flexibility.

A robot with a DC nut runner gives you ultimate control. Asking that robot to do something outside its design scope and your already high costs exponentially sky rocket.

Whether you have high control over the assembly sequence and the quality, or you have no control over the same, you do have 100% accountability to get the job done right. 

We were there at the start of the torque error proofing industry. That was in 1924 when Walter P. Chrysler licensed Paul Sturtevant to manufacture and sell the deflecting beam torque wrench Chrysler had invented. Since then we have systematically approached error proofing in ways that no one else has done. Our systems let you determine how much control and flexibility you want over parameters, sequence, and process. We also ensure that there is always 100% accountability for the work.

Take a look a look at our unique, systematic approach to error proofing:

flattened case for error proofing by design Error Proofing By Design

 

Global 400 error proofing by behavior modification Error Proofing By Behavior Modification

error proofing by guidance Error Proofing By Guidance

Take a look at six error proofing scenarios and see where the balance between worker and/or tool have responsibility for the assembly and quality.  

Error Proofing From A Different Angle: Definition of error proofing and some observations by W. Edwards Deming.

Finding The Balance: In error proofing "one size fits no one."  To find what fits in your organization, start with the fundamental question of "How much responsibility for error proofing should be given to the tool and how much should be operator responsibility?" This section provides more on this concept.

Six Error Proofing Scenarios: Error proofing solutions all have trade offs. You can have control or you can have flexibility. Rarely do you get both. This page looks at error proofing extremes as well as the middle ground. 

How Much Are You Investing In Errors? If your current error proofing system or approach still leaves you with errors you are investing in errors, not error proofing. Error proofing is about quality and it is also very much about dollars and common sense. This pages digs into that.

Understanding The Common Centerline: Not having a common centerline is one invisible place where your error proofing approach can introduce errors instead of eliminating them. If you want to know how to calculate a common centerline and why it is important this page is for you.

There is more about error proofing in our tool pages

 Contact your Sturtevant Richmont Sales Professional.

 

  

Sturtevant Richmont tools are proudly made by highly capable union hands.