Accendo Reliability

Your Reliability Engineering Professional Development Site

  • Home
  • About
    • Contributors
  • Reliability.fm
    • Speaking Of Reliability
    • Rooted in Reliability: The Plant Performance Podcast
    • Quality during Design
    • Critical Talks
    • Dare to Know
    • Maintenance Disrupted
    • Metal Conversations
    • The Leadership Connection
    • Practical Reliability Podcast
    • Reliability Matters
    • Reliability it Matters
    • Maintenance Mavericks Podcast
    • Women in Maintenance
    • Accendo Reliability Webinar Series
    • Asset Reliability @ Work
  • Articles
    • CRE Preparation Notes
    • on Leadership & Career
      • Advanced Engineering Culture
      • Engineering Leadership
      • Managing in the 2000s
      • Product Development and Process Improvement
    • on Maintenance Reliability
      • Aasan Asset Management
      • CMMS and Reliability
      • Conscious Asset
      • EAM & CMMS
      • Everyday RCM
      • History of Maintenance Management
      • Life Cycle Asset Management
      • Maintenance and Reliability
      • Maintenance Management
      • Plant Maintenance
      • Process Plant Reliability Engineering
      • ReliabilityXperience
      • RCM Blitz®
      • Rob’s Reliability Project
      • The Intelligent Transformer Blog
    • on Product Reliability
      • Accelerated Reliability
      • Achieving the Benefits of Reliability
      • Apex Ridge
      • Metals Engineering and Product Reliability
      • Musings on Reliability and Maintenance Topics
      • Product Validation
      • Reliability Engineering Insights
      • Reliability in Emerging Technology
    • on Risk & Safety
      • CERM® Risk Insights
      • Equipment Risk and Reliability in Downhole Applications
      • Operational Risk Process Safety
    • on Systems Thinking
      • Communicating with FINESSE
      • The RCA
    • on Tools & Techniques
      • Big Data & Analytics
      • Experimental Design for NPD
      • Innovative Thinking in Reliability and Durability
      • Inside and Beyond HALT
      • Inside FMEA
      • Integral Concepts
      • Learning from Failures
      • Progress in Field Reliability?
      • Reliability Engineering Using Python
      • Reliability Reflections
      • Testing 1 2 3
      • The Manufacturing Academy
  • eBooks
  • Resources
    • Accendo Authors
    • FMEA Resources
    • Feed Forward Publications
    • Openings
    • Books
    • Webinars
    • Journals
    • Higher Education
    • Podcasts
  • Courses
    • 14 Ways to Acquire Reliability Engineering Knowledge
    • Reliability Analysis Methods online course
    • Measurement System Assessment
    • SPC-Process Capability Course
    • Design of Experiments
    • Foundations of RCM online course
    • Quality during Design Journey
    • Reliability Engineering Statistics
    • Quality Engineering Statistics
    • An Introduction to Reliability Engineering
    • An Introduction to Quality Engineering
    • Process Capability Analysis course
    • Root Cause Analysis and the 8D Corrective Action Process course
    • Return on Investment online course
    • CRE Preparation Online Course
    • Quondam Courses
  • Webinars
    • Upcoming Live Events
  • Calendar
    • Call for Papers Listing
    • Upcoming Webinars
    • Webinar Calendar
  • Login
    • Member Home

by Dianna Deeney Leave a Comment

QDD 028 Design Tolerances Based on Economics (Using the Taguchi Loss Function)

Design Tolerances Based on Economics (Using the Taguchi Loss Function)

Defining tolerances for our quality characteristics is sometimes not an easy task. If we set tight tolerances, it could be costly to make with a lot of rejects and rework in the future. If we’re too sloppy with our tolerances, then it can affect the functionality of our product, leading to unhappy customers, and also possible rework and scrap. There’s economics involved in setting-up tolerances.

Genichi Taguchi related his measure of quality (variation from the target spec) with economics, called the Taguchi Loss Function. It’s used to calculate the cost (in money) of a certain deviation from a target value. It assumes that the farther our quality characteristic is from our target value, the more costly it is to us.

We talk about how we can use the Taguchi Loss Functions as a way for us to set tolerances for our designs. Scroll lower to get an interactive tool and the equations.

 

View the Episode Transcript

We should be communicating targets, or nominal dimensions, for our quality characteristics when possible. Keep design for manufacturability in mind, and realize that there’s increasing costs with product that drifts from the target, even if it’s within our tolerance window. We can keep the Taguchi Loss Function in mind as a tool to figure out what that design spec should be; linking our tolerances to economics is a viable and realistic thing to do.

Citations

See this interactive tool showing Taguchi Loss Function. Original source of this tool is www.geogebra.org/m/qVkwvB8a.

Abelardo, Randolph. “Taguchi Loss Function vs. Traditional Goal Post.” Geogebra, 27-Mar-2014,  www.geogebra.org/m/qVkwvB8a, accessed 6 Sep. 2021.

Episode Transcript

We’re getting into tolerancing our specifications today. Specifically, we’re adding tolerance windows to the dimensions of our product, setting specs for our quality characteristics (those are the features that we want to measure). There’s a lot to consider. There’s a tolerance stack up analysis we should do with interfacing parts. Maybe there’s a purchased component with a wide spec that we need to be able to mate with one of our in-house design products. There is manufacturing capability, too. A plastic injection molded part with a tolerance of plus or minus three thousands of an inch is going to be harder and more costly to maintain than one with a larger, more reasonable tolerance. If we set tight tolerances, it could be costly to make with a lot of rejects and rework in the future. If we’re too sloppy with their tolerances, then it can affect the functionality of our product, leading to unhappy customers and also possible rework and scrap. There’s economics involved in setting up tolerances. Is there another technique that we can use to set tolerances? I want to talk today about the Taguchi Loss Function. More about this after the brief introduction.

Hello and welcome to quality during design the place to use quality thinking to create products others love, for less. My name is Dianna. I’m a senior level quality professional and engineer with over 20 years of experience in manufacturing and design. Listen in and then join the conversation at QualityDuringDesign.com.

Typical specs have a nominal, or a target, value with a tolerance window. When manufacturing product and inspecting its quality characteristics, if the part is measured within the spec window then it’s considered acceptable and is released. It moves along down the production stream or out the door. For example, the target diameter of our round part is 1-1/8th of an inch. The tolerance is plus or minus an eighth of an inch. If the part measures anywhere between one inch to 1-1/4 inches in diameter, it’s within the spec window and gets released. This can lead to trouble down the production line or in the hands of the customer, especially so if we have a complex design with a lot of intersecting parts. When we get a stack up of parts that are supposed to work together and they’re manufactured at the edges of our tolerance windows, there is a possibility that they won’t work together as they should. I’ve seen it and I’ve read of other cases too.

There’s a different philosophy about tolerances. Genichi Taguchi was a Japanese engineer whose work started in the 1950s. His philosophy was that quality deteriorates as our quality characteristic moves away from its target. It’s different than ‘anything produced within the tolerance is high quality’. It’s that ‘the target value is high quality, and it gets worse the farther we get from the target.’ So, Taguchi’s measure of quality was the variation from the target value of a spec.

In the introduction of this episode, we talked about how setting specs involved a lot of economics with scrap, rework, and failures adding to costs and relating to tolerances. Taguchi related his measure of quality (or variation from the target spec) with economics. It’s called the Taguchi Loss Function. It’s used to calculate the cost (in money) of a certain deviation from a target value. It assumes that the farther the quality characteristic is from our target value, the more costly it is. There is a version of the Taguchi Loss Function for two-sided tolerances, and there are different versions of this function for one-sided tolerances. I’ll post all the equations on the podcast blog and I’ll also include a link from Geogebra to an interactive plot of the Taguchi Loss Function.

The Taguchi Loss Function can be used to compare manufacturing production lines. If one has to be shut down, which one should it be? Maybe it’s not the line that produces the most product that’s within spec. Maybe it’s the line that produces product that is closest to the target spec most consistently. We may make a different decision based on the economics of the situation. It can also be used to set tolerances for quality characteristics. To do this we use it in that economics-evaluation way, where we calculate the loss with each variance from the target. We’ll have a break even point where we’ll see that a value of our quality characteristic is associated with the cost.

Let’s talk through an example of how we can use the Taguchi loss function to set some tolerances. We have a product with a quality characteristic that we can adjust in the factory during manufacturing. We can also make that adjustment as a repair service. It costs us $3 to make that factory adjustment to our device before it leaves our shipping dock. However, if a customer will return a device under warranty, that could cost us at least $15 to adjust our product considering shipping and handling and distributor repair costs. There’s also the hidden cost of damage to our reputation in the eyes of the customer, so the actual cost is higher. If we know, or can estimate, at what level of our quality characteristic the customer is likely to notice and return the product to get it fixed, then we can calculate the Taguchi Loss Function constant in dollars. Given that, we can then calculate the loss function at different values of our quality characteristic. We can end up with a two column matrix with our target quality characteristic in one column and the loss in dollars in the other. At the target value of our quality characteristic, the loss function is zero. Then it steadily increases the farther we get from that target. We can find out where the loss function equals our internal repair costs of $3. We can choose to set our tolerance window to match that value so that we adjust that quality characteristic in-house and avoid the repair and warranty costs. We can even take it a step further: we can multiply our loss function by a weight to get a weighted loss. That way it could be the probability of a process producing a part within that spec.

You can see how the Taguchi Loss Function can be used to help drive continuous improvement after initial specs are set because will have real life data and experiences to use in its calculation. But if we’re designing something similar to a product that’s already in the market, then we may have good estimates for our new design. That’s a case where we can easily use the loss function to determine tolerances of our new product in its earlier design phases. Or we can estimate its inputs as a way to figure out a spec instead of just relying on our engineering gut or compensating from not really knowing by making really tight tolerances.

What’s today’s insight to action? Check out this podcast blog for the formulas and an interactive plot of the Taguchi loss function. Understand that we should be communicating targets or nominal dimensions for our quality characteristics when possible. Keep design for manufacturability in mind and realize that there’s increasing costs to product that drifts from the target, even if it’s within our tolerance window. And we can keep the Taguchi loss function in mind as a tool to figure out what that design spec should be. Linking our tolerances to economics is viable and a realistic thing to do.

Please visit this podcast blog and others at qualityduringdesign.com. Subscribe to the weekly newsletter to keep in touch. If you like this podcast or have a suggestion for an upcoming episode, let me know. You can find me at qualityduringdesign.com, on LinkedIn, or you could leave me a voicemail at 484-341-0238. This has been a production of Denney Enterprises. Thanks for listening!

Filed Under: Quality during Design, The Reliability FM network

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Quality during Design podcast logo

Tips for using quality tools and methods to help you design products others love, for less.


by Dianna Deeney
Quality during Design,
Hosted on Buzzsprout.com
Subscribe and enjoy every episode
Google
Apple
Spotify

Recent Episodes

QDD 102 Get Design Inputs with Flowcharts

QDD 101 Quality Tools are Legos of Development (and Their 7 Uses)

QDD 100 Lessons Learned from Coffee Pod Stories

QDD 099 Crucial Conversations in Engineering, with Shere Tuckey (A Chat with Cross-Functional Experts)

QDD 098 Challenges Getting Team Input in Concept Development

QDD 097 Brainstorming within Design Sprints

QDD 096 After the ‘Storm: Compare and Prioritize Ideas

QDD 095 After the ‘Storm: Pareto Voting and Screening Methods

QDD 094 After the ‘Storm: Group and Explore Ideas

QDD 093 Product Design with Brainstorming, with Emily Haidemenos (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 092 Ways to Gather Ideas with a Team

QDD 091 The Spirits of Technical Writing Past, Present, and Future

QDD 090 The Gifts Others Bring

QDD 089 Next Steps after Surprising Test Results

QDD 088 Choose Reliability Goals for Modules

QDD 087 Start a System Architecture Diagram Early

QDD 086 Why Yield Quality in the Front-End of Product Development

QDD 085 Book Cast

QDD 084 Engineering in the Color Economy

QDD 083 Getting to Great Designs

QDD 082 Get Clarity on Goals with a Continuum

QDD 081 Variable Relationships: Correlation and Causation

QDD 080 Use Meetings to Add Productivity

QDD 079 Ways to Partner with Test Engineers

QDD 078 What do We do with FMEA Early in Design Concept?

QDD 077 A Severity Scale based on Quality Dimensions

QDD 076 Use Force Field Analysis to Understand Nuances

QDD 075 Getting Use Information without a Prototype

QDD 074 Finite Element Analysis (FEA) Supplements Test

QDD 073 2 Lessons about Remote Work for Design Engineers

QDD 072 Always Plot the Data

QDD 071 Supplier Control Plans and Design Specs

QDD 070 Use FMEA to Design for In-Process Testing

QDD 069 Use FMEA to Choose Critical Design Features

QDD 068 Get Unstuck: Expand and Contract Our Problem

QDD 067 Get Unstuck: Reframe our Problem

QDD 066 5 Options to Manage Risks during Product Engineering

QDD 065 Prioritizing Technical Requirements with a House of Quality

QDD 064 Gemba for Product Design Engineering

QDD 063 Product Design from a Data Professional Viewpoint, with Gabor Szabo (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 062 How Does Reliability Engineering Affect (Not Just Assess) Design?

QDD 061 How to use FMEA for Complaint Investigation

QDD 060 3 Tips for Planning Design Reviews

QDD 059 Product Design from a Marketing Viewpoint, with Laura Krick (A Chat with Cross Functional Experts)

QDD 058 UFMEA vs. DFMEA

QDD 057 Design Input & Specs vs. Test & Measure Capability

QDD 056 ALT vs. HALT

QDD 055 Quality as a Strategic Asset vs. Quality as a Control

QDD 054 Design Specs vs. Process Control, Capability, and SPC

QDD 053 Internal Customers vs. External Customers

QDD 052 Discrete Data vs. Continuous Data

QDD 051 Prevention Controls vs. Detection Controls

QDD 050 Try this Method to Help with Complex Decisions (DMRCS)

QDD 049 Overlapping Ideas: Quality, Reliability, and Safety

QDD 048 Using SIPOC to Get Started

QDD 047 Risk Barriers as Swiss Cheese?

QDD 046 Environmental Stress Testing for Robust Designs

QDD 045 Choosing a Confidence Level for Test using FMEA

QDD 044 Getting Started with FMEA – It All Begins with a Plan

QDD 043 How can 8D help Solve my Recurring Problem?

QDD 042 Mistake-Proofing – The Poka-Yoke of Usability

QDD 041 Getting Comfortable with using Reliability Results

QDD 040 How to Self-Advocate for More Customer Face Time (and why it’s important)

QDD 039 Choosing Quality Tools (Mind Map vs. Flowchart vs. Spaghetti Diagram)

QDD 038 The DFE Part of DFX (Design For Environment and eXcellence)

QDD 037 Results-Driven Decisions, Faster: Accelerated Stress Testing as a Reliability Life Test

QDD 036 When to use DOE (Design of Experiments)?

QDD 035 Design for User Tasks using an Urgent/Important Matrix

QDD 034 Statistical vs. Practical Significance

QDD 033 How Many Do We Need To Test?

QDD 032 Life Cycle Costing for Product Design Choices

QDD 031 5 Aspects of Good Reliability Goals and Requirements

QDD 030 Using Failure Rate Functions to Drive Early Design Decisions

QDD 029 Types of Design Analyses possible with User Process Flowcharts

QDD 028 Design Tolerances Based on Economics (Using the Taguchi Loss Function)

QDD 027 How Many Controls do we Need to Reduce Risk?

QDD 026 Solving Symptoms Instead of Causes?

QDD 025 Do you have SMART ACORN objectives?

QDD 024 Why Look to Standards

QDD 023 Getting the Voice of the Customer

QDD 022 The Way We Test Matters

QDD 021 Designing Specs for QA

QDD 020 Every Failure is a Gift

QDD 019 Understanding the Purposes behind Kaizen

QDD 018 Fishbone Diagram: A Supertool to Understand Problems, Potential Solutions, and Goals

QDD 017 What is ‘Production Equivalent’ and Why Does it Matter?

QDD 016 About Visual Quality Standards

QDD 015 Using the Pareto Principle and Avoiding Common Pitfalls

QDD 014 The Who’s Who of your Quality Team

QDD 013 When it’s Not Normal: How to Choose from a Library of Distributions

QDD 012 What are TQM, QFD, Six Sigma, and Lean?

QDD 011 The Designer’s Important Influence on Monitoring After Launch

QDD 010 How to Handle Competing Failure Modes

QDD 009 About Using Slide Decks for Technical Design Reviews

QDD 008 Remaking Risk-Based Decisions: Allowing Ourselves to Change our Minds.

QDD 007 Need to innovate? Stop brainstorming and try a systematic approach.

QDD 006 HALT! Watch out for that weakest link

QDD 005 The Designer’s Risk Analysis affects Business, Projects, and Suppliers

QDD 004 A big failure and too many causes? Try this analysis.

QDD 003 Why Your Design Inputs Need to Include Quality & Reliability

QDD 002 My product works. Why don’t they want it?

QDD 001 How to Choose the Right Improvement Model

© 2023 FMS Reliability · Privacy Policy · Terms of Service · Cookies Policy

This site uses cookies to give you a better experience, analyze site traffic, and gain insight to products or offers that may interest you. By continuing, you consent to the use of cookies. Learn how we use cookies, how they work, and how to set your browser preferences by reading our Cookies Policy.