MINITAB & Six Sigma

Hong Kong Society for Quality

March 1, 2004

Minitab Inc., 2000

Presented By
Kristina T. Konrath
Minitab Inc.
Customer Services Manager
tkonrath@minitab.com

Minitab Inc., 2000

Local Representative
Buxway Consultants Ltd.
Iza Ng
Business Development Manager
(852) 2783 9299
iza@buxway.com

Minitab Inc., 2000

Agenda

Introduction to Six Sigma

Minitab History and Products

DMAIC Methodology

MINITAB and MQC Tools

Tutorials (time permitting)

Questions

Minitab Inc., 2000

Statistics & Six Sigma

Six Sigma is a methodology that aims to remove
variation from any process. It is a data driven
program that is focused on financial return.
Successful Six Sigma practitioners must have strong
communication and quantitative skills. They must
have excellent process knowledge and need to
apply to appropriate tools. Statistics is one of the
key tools used in Six Sigma.

Minitab Inc., 2000

Statistics & Six Sigma

Good statistical software is essential tool for a
successful Six Sigma initiative
Takes away hand calculations - reduces the
chances for error
Must be intuitive practitioners are not usually
statisticians
Allow for exploration must offer a well-rounded
suite of tools
Clear and consistent presentation of results

Minitab Inc., 2000

Why MINITAB?
MINITAB has been the standard for global Six
Sigma operations since the mid 1990s
Developed in 1972 to teach introductory statistics,
designed for non-statisticians
Began developing for quality in the late 80s
Strong customer focus and support
Developing translated product
Developing companion products

Minitab Inc., 2000

Minitab Products
MINITAB Release 14
Statistical software
Minitab Quality Companion
Process Improved Soft Tools
Minitab Quality Trainer
Multimedia training tool available in 2005

Minitab Inc., 2000

DMAIC Model
Define
Where are your current problems and opportunities?
What do your customers require & want?
Measure
Where is your process currently?
Analyze
What are the sources or variation?
Improve
What can make the process better?
Control
How do you ensure your improvements last?
9

Minitab Inc., 2000

Define

Determine the process to be improved

Identify your customers

Identify your problems and scope

Measure

Determine the extent of problem

Identify your inputs & outputs (Xs & Ys)

Measure it

10

Minitab Inc., 2000

MQC
Project Charter
C&E Matrix
Critical To Matrix
FMEA
Brainstorming
Process Mapping
Data Collection Plan
MINITAB
Pareto
Gage R&R
Control Charts
Capability Analysis
Graphics

Analyze

Screen potential causes

Identify sources or root causes of problem

Draw Conclusions

MINITAB
Gage R&R
Hypothesis Tests
ANOVA
Correlation

11

Minitab Inc., 2000

Regression
Capability Analysis
Graphics
DOE

Improve

Identify what improvements to implement

Determine optimal settings

Confirm results
MINITAB
Gage R&R
Hypothesis Tests
ANOVA
Regression

12

Minitab Inc., 2000

Graphics
Capability Analysis
Response Optimizer
DOE

Sustain the gains

Permanent change

Sample Mean

603

UC L = 6 0 2 .4

602
601

M e an=6 0 0 .2

600
599

L C L = 5 9 8 .1

598
S ub g ro up

Sample Range

Control

X bar/R C h art for T ech S u pport

10

20

9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0

UC L = 7 .8 6 6

R =3 .7 2

LC L=0

P r o c e s s C a p a b ilit y A n a ly s is fo r S a le s

MINITAB
Control Charts
Capability Analysis

US L
T a rg e t
LSL
M ean

P ro c e s s D a ta
6 0 5 .0 0 0
*
5 9 5 .0 0 0
5 9 9 .5 4 8

S a m p le N
S tD e v (W i th i n )
S tD e v (O v e ra ll)

Minitab Inc., 2000

USL
W it h in
O v e r a ll

100
0 .5 7 6 4 2 9
0 .6 2 0 8 6 5

P o te n ti a l (W i th i n ) C a p a b i li ty
2 .8 9
Cp
3 .1 5
CPU
CPL
C pk

2 .6 3
2 .6 3

C pm

*
O v e ra ll C a p a b i li ty

13

LSL

Pp
PPU
PPL

2 .6 8
2 .9 3
2 .4 4

Ppk

2 .4 4

595

597

O b s e rv e d P e r fo rm a n c e
0 .0 0
PPM < LSL
0 .0 0
PPM > USL
0 .0 0
P P M T o ta l

599

601

E x p . " W i th i n " P e rfo r m a n c e

0 .0 0
PPM < LSL
0 .0 0
PPM > USL
0 .0 0
P P M T o ta l

603

605
E x p . " O v e ra ll" P e rfo r m a n c e
0 .0 0
PPM < LSL
0 .0 0
PPM > USL
0 .0 0
P P M T o ta l

Tutorials
Download Meet MINITAB for free from
www.minitab.com/downloads/
Data is included in MINITAB SHIPPINGDATA.MTW
Emphasis on Analyze, Improve, Control phases of Six
Sigma

14

Minitab Inc., 2000

Questions?
Our technical support staff is also available to
help you whether you have purchased or are
considering buying MINITAB. Please contact
them at http://customer.minitab.com.

15

Minitab Inc., 2000

Thank you!

16

Minitab Inc., 2000

Linked Pages

17

Minitab Inc., 2000

MINITAB Release 14 Pareto Chart

Identify Potential Root Causes

Pareto Chart of Defects

100

400

80
Count

60
200

40

100

Defects

g
in
si s
M
Count
Percent
Cum %

18

Minitab Inc., 2000

20

re
Sc

274
64.8
64.8

g
in
si s
M

s
lip
y
ak
Le

59
13.9
78.7

et
sk
a
G

i
us
Ho

rt
Pa

e
e
et
pl
ti v
c
m
fe
co
De
In
43
19
10
10.2
4.5
2.4
88.9
93.4
95.7

r
he
t
O

18
4.3
100.0

Percent

300

MINITAB Release 14 Gage R&R

Measurement Systems Analysis

Gage R&R (ANOVA) for Response

G age name:
Date of study :

Reported by : S hift #2
Tolerance:
M isc:

Line #2
10/20/2003

Response by Part

Components of Variation
100

% Contribution

1.00

Percent

% Study Var

0.75

50

0.50
0

Gage R&R

Repeat

Reprod

Part-to-Part

Sample Range

0.10

10

1.00
0.75

0.05

_
R=0.0383

0.00

LCL=0

0.50
1

2
Operator

0.75
0.50

_
UCL=0.8796
_
X=0.8075
LCL=0.7354

1.00

Operator

0.75

2
3

0.50
1

Minitab Inc., 2000

Operator * Part Interaction

1.00
Average

Sample Mean

Response by Operator
UCL=0.1252

Xbar Chart by Operator

19

5
Part

R Chart by Operator
1

5
6
Part

10

MINITAB Release 14 Attribute Gage Study for

Acceptances
Measurement Systems Analysis

Attribute Gage Study (Analytic Method) for Acceptances

Reported by :
Tolerance:
M isc:

G age name:
Date of study :

Bias:
P re-adjusted Repeatability :
Repeatability :

99

0.0097955
0.0494705
0.0458060

95

80

A IA G Test of Bias = 0 v s not = 0

T DF
P -V alue
6.70123 19 0.0000021

50

20

20

Minitab Inc., 2000

-0.05

-0.04
-0.03
-0.02
Reference Value of Measured Part

-0.01

Probability of Acceptance

Percent of Acceptance

F itted Line: 3.10279 + 104.136 * Reference

R - sq for F itted Line:
0.969376

L Limit
1.0

0.5

0.0
-0.050
-0.025
0.000
Reference Value of Measured Part

MINITAB Release 14 Attribute Agreement Analysis

Measurement Systems Analysis of Appraisers
Date of study :
Reported by :
Name of product:
Misc:

Assessment Agreement

Appraiser vs Standard
100

95.0% C I
P ercent

Percent

80

60

40

20

0
Duncan

21

Minitab Inc., 2000

Hayes

Holmes
Appraiser

Montgomery

Simpson

MINITAB Release 14 Graphing Techniques

Descriptive Statistics
Summary for Pulse1
A nderson-D arling N ormality Test

50

60

70

80

90

A -S quared
P -V alue

0.98
0.013

M ean
S tDev
V ariance
S kew ness
Kurtosis
N

72.870
11.009
121.192
0.397389
-0.442443
92

M inimum
1st Q uartile
M edian
3rd Q uartile
M aximum

100

48.000
64.000
71.000
80.000
100.000

95% C onfidence Interv al for M ean

70.590

75.149

95% C onfidence Interv al for M edian

68.000

95% Confidence Intervals

9.615
Mean
Median
68

22

Minitab Inc., 2000

70

72

74.000

95% C onfidence Interv al for S tD ev

74

76

12.878

MINITAB Release 14 Control Charts

Is your process in control?
Xbar-R Chart of Supp2
1

Sample M ean

U C L=602.474
602
_
_
X=600.23

600

598

LC L=597.986
2

10
Sample

12

14

16

18

20

U C L=8.225

Sample Range

8
6

_
R=3.890

4
2
0

LC L=0
2

23

Minitab Inc., 2000

10
Sample

12

14

16

18

20

MINITAB Release 14 Capability Analysis (Sixpack)

How Capable is your process?
Process Capability Sixpack of Supp1
C apability H istogr am

Xbar C har t
Sample Mean

UCL=600.321
600.0
_
_
X=599.548

599.5
599.0

LCL=598.775
2

10

12

14

16

18

20

598.0

598.5

Sample Range

R C har t
3.0

UCL=2.835

1.5

_
R=1.341

0.0

599.0

10

12

14

16

18

20

601.0

598

600

Within
S tDev 0.57643
Cp
1.16
C pk
0.90
C C pk
1.16

598.5

Within

Overall

Specs

10
Sample

602

C apability P lot

600.0

Minitab Inc., 2000

600.5

Nor mal P r ob P lot

A D : 0.844, P : 0.029

Last 2 0 Subgr oups

601.5

24

600.0

LCL=0
2

Values

599.5

15

20

O v erall
S tD ev 0.62086
Pp
1.07
P pk
0.83
C pm
0.87

Project Charter (Form Tool)

25

Minitab Inc., 2000

Cause and Effect Diagram

26

Minitab Inc., 2000

FMEA (Form Tool)

27

Minitab Inc., 2000

Process Mapping Tool

28

Minitab Inc., 2000

MINITAB Release 14 Gage R&R

Measurement Systems Analysis

Gage R&R (ANOVA) for Response

G age name:
Date of study :

Reported by : S hift #2
Tolerance:
M isc:

Line #2
10/20/2003

Response by Part

Components of Variation
100

% Contribution

1.00

Percent

% Study Var

0.75

50

0.50
0

Gage R&R

Repeat

Reprod

Part-to-Part

Sample Range

0.10

10

1.00
0.75

0.05

_
R=0.0383

0.00

LCL=0

0.50
1

2
Operator

0.75
0.50

_
UCL=0.8796
_
X=0.8075
LCL=0.7354

1.00

Operator

0.75

2
3

0.50
1

Minitab Inc., 2000

Operator * Part Interaction

1.00
Average

Sample Mean

Response by Operator
UCL=0.1252

Xbar Chart by Operator

29

5
Part

R Chart by Operator
1

5
6
Part

10

MINITAB Release 14 Hypothesis Testing & Graphics

Graphical and Statistical Analysis of Data

Two-Sample T-Test and CI: BTU.In, Damper

Boxplot

Two-sample T for BTU.In

N
40
50

Mean
9.91
10.14

StDev
3.02
2.77

SE Mean
0.48
0.39

Difference = mu (1) - mu (2)

Estimate for difference: -0.235250
95% CI for difference: (-1.450131, 0.979631)
T-Test of difference = 0 (vs not =): T-Value = -0.38
Value = 0.701 DF = 88
Both use Pooled StDev = 2.8818

15

P-

BTU.In

Damper
1
2

20

10

Test and CI for Two Proportions

Sample
1
2

X
537
778

N
1000
1000

Sample p
0.537000
0.778000

Difference = p (1) - p (2)

Estimate for difference: -0.241
95% CI for difference: (-0.281232, -0.200768)
Test for difference = 0 (vs not = 0): Z = -11.74
= 0.000

30

Minitab Inc., 2000

1
P-Value

2
Damper

MINITAB Release 14 ANOVA & Graphics

Graphical and Statistical Analysis of Data

Boxplotof DurabilitybyCarpet
One-way ANOVA: Durability versus Carpet
DF
3
12
15

S = 3.691

Level
1
2
3
4

N
4
4
4
4

SS
146.4
163.5
309.9

MS
48.8
13.6

F
3.58

20.0
17.5

R-Sq = 47.24%

Mean
14.483
9.735
12.808
18.115

P
0.047

StDev
3.157
3.566
1.506
5.435

R-Sq(adj) = 34.05%

Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on

Pooled StDev
---------+---------+---------+---------+
(-------*-------)
(-------*--------)
(-------*-------)
(-------*-------)
---------+---------+---------+---------+
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0

Pooled StDev = 3.691

Durability

Source
Carpet
Error
Total

22.5

15.0
12.5
10.0
7.5
5.0
1

3
Carpet

31

Minitab Inc., 2000

MINITAB Release 14 Regression & Correlation

Determining Significant Factors

Regression Analysis: Score1 versus Score2

FittedLine Plot

The regression equation is

Score1 = - 4.667 + 4.397 Score2
S = 0.572711

R-Sq = 95.7%

Score1 = - 4.667 +4.397 Score2

12

R-Sq(adj) = 95.1%

10

Analysis of Variance
DF
1
7
8

SS
51.3529
2.2960
53.6489

MS
51.3529
0.3280

Correlations: Verbal, Math, GPA

Math

Verbal
0.275
0.000

Math

0.322
0.000

0.194
0.006

F
156.56

P
0.000

S
R-Sq
R-Sq(adj)

8
Score1

Source
Regression
Error
Total

Regression
95%CI
95%PI

6
4
2
0

GPA

Cell Contents: Pearson

correlation
P-Value

32

Minitab Inc., 2000

1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25 2.50
Score2

2.75

3.00

3.25

0.572711
95.7%
95.1%

MINITAB Release 14 Design of Experiments (DOE)

Determining Significant Factors

Factorial Fit: Yield versus Block, Time, Temp, Catalyst

Normal Probability Plot of the StandardizedEffects

(response is Yield, Alpha = .05)

Estimated Effects and Coefficients for Yield (coded units)

S = 0.381847

2.9594
2.7632
0.1618
0.8624
0.0744
-0.0867
0.0230

Coef
45.5592
-0.0484
1.4797
1.3816
0.0809
0.4312
0.0372
-0.0434
0.0115

R-Sq = 98.54%

SE Coef
0.09546
0.09546
0.09546
0.09546
0.09546
0.09546
0.09546
0.09546
0.09546

T
477.25
-0.51
15.50
14.47
0.85
4.52
0.39
-0.45
0.12

P
0.000
0.628
0.000
0.000
0.425
0.003
0.708
0.663
0.907

33

DF
1
3
3
1
7
15

Minitab Inc., 2000

Adj SS
0.0374
65.6780
3.0273
0.0021
1.0206

Adj MS
0.0374
21.8927
1.0091
0.0021
0.1458

Factor Name
A
Time

AB

50

B
C

Temp
Catalyst

10
1

-5

5
Standardized Effect

10

15

Pareto Chart of the StandardizedEffects

(response is Yield, Alpha = .05)

R-Sq(adj) = 96.87%

Seq SS
0.0374
65.6780
3.0273
0.0021
1.0206
69.7656

Effect Type
Not Significant
Significant

2.36
A
B

Analysis of Variance for Yield (coded units)

Source
Blocks
Main Effects
2-Way Interactions
3-Way Interactions
Residual Error
Total

P er cent

Effect

90

F
0.26
150.15
6.92
0.01

P
0.628
0.000
0.017
0.907

T er m

Term
Constant
Block
Time
Temp
Catalyst
Time*Temp
Time*Catalyst
Temp*Catalyst
Time*Temp*Catalyst

99

AB
C
BC
AC
ABC
0

8
10
Standardized Effect

12

14

16

Factor

Name

A
B
C

Time
Temp
Catalyst

MINITAB Release 14 Hypothesis Testing & Graphics

Confirming Improvements

Two-Sample T-Test and CI: BTU.In, Damper

Boxplot

Two-sample T for BTU.In

N
40
50

Mean
9.91
10.14

StDev
3.02
2.77

SE Mean
0.48
0.39

Difference = mu (1) - mu (2)

Estimate for difference: -0.235250
95% CI for difference: (-1.450131, 0.979631)
T-Test of difference = 0 (vs not =): T-Value = -0.38
Value = 0.701 DF = 88
Both use Pooled StDev = 2.8818

15

P-

BTU.In

Damper
1
2

20

10

Test and CI for Two Proportions

Sample
1
2

X
537
778

N
1000
1000

Sample p
0.537000
0.778000

Difference = p (1) - p (2)

Estimate for difference: -0.241
95% CI for difference: (-0.281232, -0.200768)
Test for difference = 0 (vs not = 0): Z = -11.74
= 0.000

34

Minitab Inc., 2000

1
P-Value

2
Damper

MINITAB Release 14 ANOVA & Graphics

Confirming Improvements

Boxplotof DurabilitybyCarpet
One-way ANOVA: Durability versus Carpet
DF
3
12
15

S = 3.691

Level
1
2
3
4

N
4
4
4
4

SS
146.4
163.5
309.9

MS
48.8
13.6

F
3.58

20.0
17.5

R-Sq = 47.24%

Mean
14.483
9.735
12.808
18.115

P
0.047

StDev
3.157
3.566
1.506
5.435

R-Sq(adj) = 34.05%

Individual 95% CIs For Mean Based on

Pooled StDev
---------+---------+---------+---------+
(-------*-------)
(-------*--------)
(-------*-------)
(-------*-------)
---------+---------+---------+---------+
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0

Pooled StDev = 3.691

Durability

Source
Carpet
Error
Total

22.5

15.0
12.5
10.0
7.5
5.0
1

3
Carpet

35

Minitab Inc., 2000

MINITAB Release 14 Regression

Prediction Methods

Regression Analysis: Score1 versus Score2

The regression equation is
Score1 = - 4.67 + 4.40 Score2
Predictor
Constant
Score2

Coef
-4.6674
4.3975

S = 0.572711

SE Coef
0.8572
0.3514

R-Sq = 95.7%

FittedLine Plot
Score1 = - 4.667 +4.397 Score2

T
-5.44
12.51

P
0.001
0.000

12
10
8

SS
51.353
2.296
53.649

MS
51.353
0.328

F
156.56

P
0.000

Score1

DF
1
7
8

S
R-Sq
R-Sq(adj)

R-Sq(adj) = 95.1%

Analysis of Variance
Source
Regression
Residual Error
Total

Regression
95%CI
95%PI

6
4

Predicted Values for New Observations

2
New
Obs
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9

Fit
4.567
1.929
2.808
6.326
8.525
4.567
9.405
7.646
6.326

36

SE Fit
0.214
0.363
0.305
0.196
0.290
0.214
0.346
0.242
0.196

95% CI
(4.060, 5.074)
(1.071, 2.787)
(2.087, 3.530)
(5.864, 6.789)
(7.839, 9.212)
(4.060, 5.074)
(8.586, 10.224)
(7.074, 8.217)
(5.864, 6.789)

Minitab Inc., 2000

95% PI
(3.121, 6.013)
(0.326, 3.532)
(1.274, 4.343)
(4.895, 7.757)
(7.007, 10.043)
(3.121, 6.013)
(7.822, 10.987)
(6.176, 9.116)
(4.895, 7.757)

0
1.50

1.75

2.00

2.25 2.50
Score2

2.75

3.00

3.25

0.572711
95.7%
95.1%

MINITAB Release 14 DOE & Response Optimizer

Determine Optimal Settings

Response Surface Regression: BeanYield vs Nitrogen, PhosAcid, Potash

Estimated Regression Coefficients for BeanYield

S = 0.9960

Coef
10.4623
-0.5738
0.1834
0.4555
-0.6764
0.5628
-0.2734
-0.6775
1.1825
0.2325

R-Sq = 78.6%

SE Coef
0.4062
0.2695
0.2695
0.2695
0.2624
0.2624
0.2624
0.3521
0.3521
0.3521

T
25.756
-2.129
0.680
1.690
-2.578
2.145
-1.042
-1.924
3.358
0.660

P
0.000
0.059
0.512
0.122
0.027
0.058
0.322
0.083
0.007
0.524

BeanYield
< 8
8- 9
9 - 10
10 - 11
11 - 12
12 - 13
> 13

2.5
PhosAcid

Term
Constant
Nitrogen
PhosAcid
Potash
Nitrogen*Nitrogen
PhosAcid*PhosAcid
Potash*Potash
Nitrogen*PhosAcid
Nitrogen*Potash
PhosAcid*Potash

Contour Plot of BeanYieldvs PhosAcid, Nitrogen

2.0
1.5

Hold Values
Potash 2.42

1.0

3
4
Nitrogen

Surface Plot of BeanYieldvs PhosAcid, Nitrogen

R-Sq(adj) = 59.4%

Hold Values
Potash 2.42

Analysis of Variance for BeanYield

Source
Regression
Linear
Square
Interaction
Residual Error
Lack-of-Fit
Pure Error
Total

37

DF
9
3
3
3
10
5
5
19

Seq SS
36.465
7.789
13.386
15.291
9.920
7.380
2.540
46.385

Minitab Inc., 2000

Adj SS
36.465
7.789
13.386
15.291
9.920
7.380
2.540

Adj MS
4.0517
2.5962
4.4619
5.0970
0.9920
1.4760
0.5079

F
4.08
2.62
4.50
5.14

P
0.019
0.109
0.030
0.021

8
10
BeanYield
12

2
14

2.91

0.133

4
3
2
1

PhosAcid

Nitrogen