FORMULATION OF A COQ MODEL AND MINIMIZATION OF

REWORKS IN A TOOL AND DIE MANUFACTURING COMPANY

MASTER THESIS REPORT

Submitted to
MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY
KOTTAYAM
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of
MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT
Submitted by
ANU.J
( Reg. No: 207214 )

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

RAJIV GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY,
GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM
2016

RAJIV GANDHI INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

(GOVERNMENT ENGINEERING COLLEGE, KOTTAYAM)

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the thesis titled FORMULATION OF A COQ MODEL AND
MINIMIZATION OF REWORKS IN A TOOL AND DIE MANUFACTURING
COMPANY is a bonafide record of the work done by Anu.J, Fourth Semester, Register
Number 207214, towards the partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the
Degree of Master of Technology in Industrial Engineering and Management under
Mahatma Gandhi University, Kottayam.

Prof. (Dr.) Ciby Thomas

Associate Professor & PG Co-ordinator
Department of Mechanical Engineering

Prof. Pradeep Kumar P

Associate Professor & Guide,
Department of Mechanical Engineering

Prof. (Dr.) Biju Augustine

Professor & Head,
Department of Mechanical Engineering

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, praises and thanks to the God, the Almighty, for His showers of blessings
throughout my research work to complete the research successfully.
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my thesis guide, Prof. Pradeep Kumar P,
Associate Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering for his guidance and support.
His extreme energy, creativity and paramount guidance have always been a constant source
of motivation for me. The perfection that he brings to each and every piece of work that he
does always inspired me to do things right at rst time. I extend my sincere thanks to Prof.
(Dr). P. Biju Augustine, Head, Department of Mechanical Engineering and Prof. (Dr.) Ciby
Thomas, P.G coordinator, Prof. (Dr.) M.S. Jayamohan, PG Dean, Prof. R. Rajesh for their
continuous support.
I would also like to thank the authorities of KELTRAC, Aroor for devoting their time in
discussing ideas with me and giving their invaluable feedback.
I also thank the support provided by the entire faculty community of RIT who spared their
valuable time to participate in my thesis work. I gratefully acknowledge the support of
Pradeejakumari P.K and Vishnulal N.R and rest of my classmates at M.Tech Industrial
Engineering & Management 2014-16 batch, in providing inestimable thoughts regarding my
research work.
Last but not least I sincerely thank my parents, who stood by me at every point of life and
supported me in every possible way during the course of this study.

ANU.J

ABSTRACT

The tool and die making industry largely contributes to the economic performance of major
economies .. In an environment with highly rising competition and as new competitors
charging low cost, it is facing new challenges . Confronted with these new competitors, tool
and die manufacturers have an even higher need to lower the costs. A huge share of the costs
in the tool and die industry is caused by mistakes. For eg : Scrap and rework costs. Scrap and
rework costs are caused by many thingswhen the wrong parts are ordered, when
engineering changes arent effectively communicated or when designs arent properly
executed on the manufacturing line. No matter why scrap and rework occurs, its impact on
an organization is always the samewasted time and money.These expenses add up quickly
and negatively impact the bottom line. Although it is near-impossible to eliminate scrap and
rework completely, we can reduce the amount of scrap and rework in your organization
usimg a better the quality policy. The main objective of the thesis work is to apply multidisciplinary concepts; tools and technique to solve organizational problems and to evolve
innovative theoretical frame work. In this thesis work, the Quality policy of the industry is
improved by implementing a CoQ model in the industry, thus calculating the total cost
associated with the industry. The work aims to propose a better quality policy for the industry
which reduces the rate of reworks and the total cost. FMECA analysis and Ishikawa diagram
is used to reduce reworks. Current risks are identified, current controls are evaluated and
rework reducing actions are defined in advance. Some measures are suggested to avoid
reworks in future.
Keywords: Cost of Quality, Costing, FMEA, Quality, Reworks

CONTENTS

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1. Cost of Quality

1.2. Failure Mode Effect Analysis

1.3. Objectives of study

1.4. Scope of study

1.5 Problem Description

1.6 Methodology

Chapter 2: Company Profile

2.1. Organisation Structure

2.2. Objectives of KELTRAC

2.3. Vision of KELTRAC

2.4 Quality Ploicy of KELTRAC

2.5 Facilities of KELTRAC

2.6 Major customers of KELTRAC

10

2.7 Product Profile

11

2.8 Functional Departments

12

Chapter 3: Literature Review

19

Chapter 4: Problem Definition

29

Chapter 5: Data Analysis and Research Methodology

35

5.1. Quality Cost elements identified

35

5.2. Total Quality Cost calculated

35
5

5.3. Data Analysis

38

Chapter 6: Results and Interpretation

42

Chapter 7: Conclusion

44

7.1. Limitations of the Study

44

References

45

Publications/Conferences

49

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. No.

Title

Page
No.

2.1

Organizational Structure of KELTRAC

2.2

High precision components manufactured at KELTRAC

11

2.3

Planning Department

12

2.4

Production Department

13

2.5

Marketing Department

14

2.6

QA & QC Department

15

2.7

Finance Department

16

2.8

Purchase Department

16

2.9

Stores Department

17

2.10

Maintenance Department

18

4.1

Turnover of the firm

29

4.2
4.3

Number of Projects handled

29

Fish bone diagram for decrease in turnover

30

4.4

Fish bone diagram for delay

31

4.5

Root Area vs. Frequency of Occurrence

34

5.1

Bar graph

38

5.2

Severity Ranking

39

5.3

Occurrence Ranking

39

5.4

Detection Ranking

40

5.5

Generated output of RAM Commander

40

LIST OF TABLES

Table
No

Title

Page
No

2.1

Calibration facility of KELTRAC.10

4.1

Problem & Root Area

33

4.2

Root area & frequency of occurrence

33

5.1

Quality Costs identified

35

6.1

Potential failure causes

42

6.2

Actions recommended

42

6.3

Comparison of strategies

43