Leaderboard

In favour of ‘ZD is achievable’ I would like to re-write the highlights of the article I had enclosed in my previous post. Called as Intelligent fault correction and self-optimizing manufacturing systems (IFACOM) and supported by the European Commission, the researchers are developing an advanced real-time process control system focused especially on high-precision, high-value and high-performance parts as well as custom-designed components. Combining artificial intelligence and innovative sensors, the system seeks to overcome the long-standing issue of production defects, which cost manufacturers millions of euros a year in waste, production reruns and part redesigns. Many of those suggesting ZD is not achievable have argued that even ‘slight variances in materials, components or production processes can cause an entire production run to be defective. While it does not affect the quality of the parts reaching end users, as strict quality checks are conducted on all batches after production’. The solution developed by IFACOM, termed as Real-time monitoring and defect detection; is a system designed to automatically monitor the entire factory-floor manufacturing process, from the quality of raw materials entering the production line to variances in tools and processes during each production run. As a closed-loop system, controllers are immediately alerted to any defects, and changes can be made on the fly to eliminate the source of the problem. The approach has the potential to eliminate scrap by detecting production errors instantly, eliminating the propagation of defects along the process stages. Idea is to check quality continuously during production, not only afterwards. The system also incorporates knowledge-based loops, providing information and feedback to other levels of the manufacturing chain, such as design and product development, to help minimize all failures by continuous optimization of the production process and the manufacturing system. To test the system, Italian machine tool manufacturer Alesamonti, the IFACOM technology has been implemented to detect faults in the production of parts for high-precision boring and milling machines. Hope all would agree that when we talk about ZD; we take into consideration the manufacturing process/activity involved and product, both of which should be defect free. Some of those who believe it is unrealistic have taken the debate beyond the realm of this definition. To say that a process cannot be defect free if it is detrimental to the environment or the competitor is able to produce with higher efficiency is unreasonable and unrelated. If we are manufacturing at zero defect and competitor does it too, how does it make ZD unachievable. There is conscious effort by Researchers to adopt Eco-friendly approach in all its latest developments. Also, I came across an argument which suggests “Sellers use the quote goods once sold will not be returned” because they do not trust their product. Now does that mean producer has little trust on its product?All will agree that this statement actually goes against the seller, yet he makes it, why? One has to consider the product in question for which statement is made…. perishable products with small shelf-life, delicate & fragile items are some of them. Amazon states that it takes back all its sold goods, but does that mean it should honour its statement even after one month of delivery or if broken by buyer’s mistake. If they don’t take back in these situations, should that mean ZD not achieved? For the links attached in support of ‘ZD is impractical’; I would say those are more of individualistic views and can be countered by many who believe it is achievable. It is more about one’s interpretation and acceptance of the feasibility of ZD. Major concern shown in the views against ZD is its desirability vs the cost-effectiveness/stress...whether it is prudent to go for ZD in all industries going by the costs and stress involved.It no way affirms that ZD is not achievable. After going through all the arguments in favour (to which I support) and against the possibility of achieving zero defects, I think we all believe that this is positive approach and should be pursued; the only difference is the interpretation and readiness to accept the idea of ZD. Our mindset currently does not accept the feasibility of zero defect stage but then 50 years back did we foresee a gadget like mobile phones. With latest technologies and structured systems, as professed by IFACOM and Lean Management programs “ZERO DEFECT IS ACHIEVABLE”.

Hello Rajesh I would like you to please go through all previous replies on the topic for clear understanding of the debate as well as topic. And I would like to say yes, ZD changes from situation to situation, it's the way that how we are doing interpretation of it. I already mentioned about this and lot many examples. About 85%efficiency that is defined by us, and if a machine can produces and designed for maximum production of 15 products per minute and there is no chance that anyone can demand even 16 products per minute because it is designed to get only 15and yes to achieve that 15 will be treated as ZD. You mentioned that a customer wants 95%defects free and you are giving 98%. He will be delighted that's great but I would like to say who will demand only 95% defect free. All will need 100% defect free. You are saying software, suppose that software is used in cars for display panel and your expectations is 95 but getting 98,you are saying you will accept 2 defective out of 100 and accept and Install this software in two cars and these will give definitely trouble to customer and I am sure you will not be agree to buy that car if that software not working car will not be able to start of doing anything. So sir, I would like to say customer will want always defect free products and yes it is achievable practically possible. I would request you to please go through previous replies of all the people for clear understanding rather than Internet urls.