Live Demo
D0

D0 Emergency Response

Problem Description
Customer complaint received regarding cracking on connector housing Part #CH-4521 during vehicle assembly. 12 units reported defective out of batch #B2026-0187 (2,000 units shipped). Production line halted pending investigation.
Severity
HIGH
Occurrence Date
2026-02-28
Reporter
Li Wei, SQE
Problem Tracking Info
Lot Number
B2026-0187
Affected Quantity
12
Part Number
CH-4521
Customer Name
AutoTech Corp.
Emergency Actions
#ActionPurposeScopeOwnerTimeStatus
1Quarantine remaining stock of batch B2026-0187 at warehousePrevent defective parts from reaching assembly lineAll CH-4521 from batch B2026-0187 (1,988 units)Wang Jun, Warehouse Manager2026-02-28-
2Notify customer quality team and issue containment reportCustomer awareness and traceabilityAutoTech Corp. SQE departmentLi Wei, SQE2026-02-28-
D1

D1 Team Formation

NameRoleDepartmentContact
Li WeiTeam LeaderQuality Assurance-
Zhang MinProcess EngineerManufacturing Engineering-
Chen HaoMold TechnicianTooling-
Liu FangMaterial SpecialistMaterial Engineering-
Wang JunProduction SupervisorProduction-
D2

D2 Problem Description

ItemContent
WhoAssembly operators at AutoTech Corp. Line 3 reported issue. Affects end-customer vehicle harness assembly.
Problem (What)Connector housing (CH-4521) cracking at snap-fit latch area during assembly press-in operation
Location (Where)Cracks observed at the thin-wall section near snap-fit feature, right side latch (Position B)
Time (When)First reported on 2026-02-28 during vehicle assembly at customer plant. Parts from batch B2026-0187 produced on 2026-02-25.
Reason (Why)Parts crack under normal insertion force (50-60N) which is within specification. Root cause under investigation.
HowCrack initiates at gate vestige area and propagates along weld line to snap-fit base. Brittle fracture pattern observed under microscope.
Quantity (How Many)12 of 200 units inspected at customer site (6% defect rate). Internal re-inspection of quarantined stock found 45 of 1,988 units with micro-cracks (2.3%).
Frequency (How Often)First occurrence with this part number. No similar defects in previous 18 months of production.

Is / Is Not

DimensionISIS NOTDistinctionPossible Cause
whatCracking at snap-fit latch area (Position B) on connector housing CH-4521No cracking at Position A (left side latch) or other snap-fit featuresPosition B has thinner wall section (0.8mm vs 1.2mm at Position A) and weld line intersectionWeld line at thin-wall section creates stress concentration point
whereCracks found on parts produced by Mold #1 on Press #7No cracks on parts from Mold #2 or other pressesMold #1 has partially blocked cooling channel at Position B; Press #7 has pressure sensor driftCooling blockage + pressure variation specific to Mold #1/Press #7 combination
whenBatch B2026-0187 produced on 2026-02-25 (night shift)No defects in previous 18 months of production or day shift batchesCooling channel blockage accumulated gradually; pressure sensor drift occurred after last calibration (2026-01-15)Gradual degradation reached critical threshold during this production run
extent6% defect rate at customer site (12/200); 2.3% micro-crack rate in quarantined stock (45/1988)Not 100% defective — majority of parts pass functional testDefect rate correlates with position in mold cavity and injection cycle timingIntermittent nature suggests process variation rather than systematic design flaw
D3

D3 Interim Containment

#Interim ActionOwnerDeadlineVerificationStatus
1100% inspection of quarantined batch B2026-0187 using microscope at 20x magnificationQA Team2026-03-0145 additional units with micro-cracks identified and scrappedCompleted
2Switch to backup mold (Mold #2) for ongoing productionChen Hao2026-03-01First article inspection passed on backup mold outputCompleted
3Ship replacement parts from known-good batch B2026-0165 to customerWang Jun2026-03-02-Completed
D4

D4 Root Cause Analysis

Fishbone (Verified Factors)

machine
  • Injection pressure variation on press #7
  • Mold cooling channel blockage
material
  • New resin lot with different MFI
method
  • Gate location creates weld line at stress concentration area
measurement
  • Wall thickness measurement at Position B not in control plan

5-Why Analysis

Analysis #1
Why 1:Why did the connector housing crack at Position B?Ans:Residual stress at weld line exceeded material strength due to uneven cooling
Why 2:Why was cooling uneven at Position B?Ans:Cooling channel in Mold #1 was partially blocked, causing hot spot at thin-wall section
Why 3:Why was the cooling channel blocked?Ans:Mineral deposits accumulated over 8 months without preventive maintenance cleaning
Why 4:Why was there no preventive maintenance for cooling channels?Ans:TPM checklist did not include cooling channel flow rate monitoring or periodic flushing
Why 5:Why was cooling channel maintenance not in the TPM checklist?Ans:Original FMEA did not identify cooling degradation as a potential failure mode for this mold design
Conclusion: Root cause: Lack of cooling channel preventive maintenance due to incomplete FMEA — gradual blockage led to thermal stress concentration at weld line
Analysis #2
Why 1:Why did injection pressure fluctuate on Press #7?Ans:Pressure sensor RC-2 had calibration drift beyond ±3% tolerance
Why 2:Why did the pressure sensor drift?Ans:Sensor exceeded recommended calibration interval (6 months since last calibration vs. 3-month recommended cycle)
Why 3:Why was the calibration interval exceeded?Ans:No automated calibration tracking system — relies on manual scheduling which was missed
Conclusion: Root cause: Manual calibration scheduling without automated reminders led to sensor drift, causing inconsistent injection pressure

Root Causes

IDRoot Cause DescriptionTypeContributionVerification Method
1Cooling channel partial blockage in Mold #1 caused uneven cooling at Position B, leading to residual stress and reduced weld line strengthOccurrence
60%
Thermal imaging confirmed hot spot; cleaning restored normal temperature profile
2Injection pressure fluctuation on Press #7 exceeded tolerance, causing inconsistent packing at thin-wall sectionsOccurrence
30%
Pressure sensor calibration drift confirmed; recalibration resolved variance
3Control plan did not include wall thickness measurement at Position B (critical thin-wall area near weld line)Escape
10%
Control plan review confirmed missing checkpoint
D5

D5 Permanent Corrective Actions

#Corrective ActionOwnerCompletion DateStatus
1Clean and flush all cooling channels in Mold #1; implement quarterly preventive maintenance schedule for cooling systemChen Hao2026-03-05Completed
2Recalibrate pressure sensors on Press #7 and add real-time pressure monitoring alarm (SPC)Zhang Min2026-03-07Completed
3Update control plan to add wall thickness check at Position B (min 0.8mm, target 1.0mm)Li Wei2026-03-06Completed
D6

D6 Validation

#Validation ItemMethodResultTimeStatus
1Run 500-piece validation batch on Mold #1 after cooling channel cleaningCpk study on wall thickness at Position B, snap-fit insertion force testCpk = 1.67 (target > 1.33), 0 cracks in 500 units2026-03-08Completed
2Monitor Press #7 pressure SPC charts over 2 weeks of productionReal-time SPC monitoring with +/- 3% alarm limitsAll readings within control limits for 14 consecutive production days2026-03-21Completed
D7

D7 Preventive Actions

#Preventive ActionOwnerCompletion DateDoc UpdateStatus
1Add cooling channel flow rate monitoring to all injection molds as part of TPM checklistChen Hao2026-04-01TPM-SOP-012 Rev.CIn Progress
D8

D8 Team Congratulations

NameContributionRecognition Type
Chen HaoRoot cause identification through thermal imaging analysisTechnical Excellence
Zhang MinRapid implementation of SPC monitoring systemQuick Response
AI Audit

Completeness Tip
1 sections to improve

AI has completed deep analysis, but some sections are brief or missing. Adding more details is recommended for more accurate insights.

75
/ 100
Completeness
78
Logic Consistency
72
4
4

Deep Logic Analysis

D4D4 Root Cause Analysis
1 Issue
Serious Risk

Root cause RC-2 (pressure sensor drift on Press #7) was identified with 30% contribution, but the corrective action only addresses recalibration. No preventive action exists to prevent future sensor drift across other presses.

D7D7 Preventive Actions
1 Issue
Serious Risk

D7 preventive actions only address cooling channel monitoring but do not cover the other two verified root causes (pressure sensor drift and control plan gap). Preventive scope is incomplete.

D2D2 Problem Description
1 Issue
General Issue

D2 mentions "brittle fracture pattern" but D4 root cause analysis does not investigate material-related factors thoroughly. The "new resin lot with different MFI" (mat-2) is still marked as "potential" without resolution.

D6D6 Validation
1 Issue
Suggestion

Verification only covers Mold #1 and Press #7 but does not validate that control plan update (CA-3) is effective. No verification data for the new wall thickness checkpoint.

Ready to analyze your own reports?

Join quality engineers worldwide who use Smart 8D AI to write better reports.

Start Free View Pricing