Background: Automotive safety-component suppliers often must add capacity at short notice, and automation is common. This study quantifies the capacity, equipment-effectiveness, process-capability and nonconformity effects of integrating an automated screw-fastening machine (OP8) into an assembly line. Methods: An Action-Research DMAIC study combined 2024 monthly capacity, OEE and nonconformity records with ordered 100-part series of fastening torque and nut height from the original equipment (OP6/OP7) and OP8 for two product variants, analyzed with I-MR charts, resolution-aware Anderson-Darling tests, normal and Weibull capability indices with confidence intervals, and Brown-Forsythe, Hodges-Lehmann, Cliff’s delta and Welch tests. Results: Rated capacity rose from 117 to 153 parts/h (+30.8%), of which 8 parts/h (22% of the gain) is attributable to OP8; OEE remained at 88.0–91.7%. Torque standard deviation on OP8 was 2.3–3.0 times that on OP6 (Brown-Forsythe p < 0.001), whereas nut-height spread was 11–23% lower. Poor screw-fastening reached 0.66% of OP8 output in June, July and September, about 21 times the OP6 rate, although no logged reading was out of specification. Conclusions: Capacity increased, but capability indices computed from machine-logged, apparently screened data neither explained nor predicted the attribute defect rate, and the defect reduction cannot yet be credited to the improvement actions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Teixeira et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: