2. Implementation of 5S in Ware-house GROUP 1. 035 Yogeshwar Kulkarni 2. 055 Amit Sethia 3. 018 Ajitsingh Dubal 4. 062 Shashank Singh 5. 042 Amit S Pandey 6. 058 Parvez Shaikh
Mentor: Dr P. N. Mukherjee Managing Business Operations 2 Group-Spanner Assembly of Pinion to the High Speed Motor Application of Motor 3 Group-Spanner 1.Process Over View 4 Group-Spanner Process Overview-Current Scenario and Improvement Desired Current Scenario Station cycle time was 18 seconds (including Inspection) 100% inspection as height is critical to quality.-Non Value Add First Pass Yield below 70%- High Rejection/Rework Rate Returned Motor Analysis (100nos /1000 dispatched quantity) had shown assemblies deviated upto 1mm in height.- Operator Dependability & Customer Dissatisfaction Improvement Desired-Reduction of Wastages (MUDA) To imbibe in the people the need to improve the current system. To reduce inventory by reducing the factor of rejection in the motor assembly. Reduction of Cycle Time( processing Time) per Assembly. Reduction of paper work by doing sampling inspection in place of 100% inspection Reduction of Inspection cycle. To move from QC to QA-Non Value Add Reduction of wastages. High Rejection/Rework Rate Reduction in Customer Rejection level which is 10% at the moment.- Operator Dependability & Customer Dissatisfaction 5 Group-Spanner Process Improvement- Need Problem Identification, Root Cause Analysis Process Review. Implementation on a pilot scale SPC study Implement the change, Horizontal Deployment 6 Group-Spanner PLAN Problem Identification Process Improvement- Use Fish Bone Analysis tool Construct Cause & Effect Diagram Agree on a problem statement (Effect). Write it at the center right of the flipchart or whiteboard. Draw a box around it and draw a horizontal arrow running to it. Brainstorm the major categories of causes of the problem which are listed as below : Methods Machines (equipment) People (manpower) Materials Measurement Environment Write the categories of causes as branches from the main arrow. Brainstorm all the possible causes of the problem. Ask: Why does this happen? As each idea is given, the facilitator writes it as a branch from the appropriate category. Causes can be written in several places if they relate to several categories. Again ask why does this happen? about each cause. Write subcauses branching off the causes. Continue to ask Why? and generate deeper levels of causes. Layers of branches indicate causal relationships. When the group runs out of ideas, focus attention to places on the chart where ideas are few. 7 Group-Spanner Plan- Root Cause Analysis Fish-Bone Diagram Height Out of Spec Man Machine Material Method Environment Operator doesnt know operation Unable to Measure Inconsistent while operating Bought out -Pinion Height out of Spec Bought out Cup Plate Out of Spec Motor Assembly Out Spec from previous operation Process Inconsistency 8 Group-Spanner Plan- Process Review Outcomes of Fish Bone analysis Material Within Tolerance Machine- No Inconsistency Man- Skill require to measure the component during entire production lot. May lead to inspection error. Reactive Measures Method- Assembly process creating variation in the readings . Error Originator Conclusion: Change the method of Assembly of Pinion to the motor.
9 Group-Spanner Do-Old Process of Assembly 10 Group-Spanner Do-New Process of Assembly 11 Group-Spanner Check- New Process Capability Study 12 Group-Spanner Act- After verification of Results of New Process Results As Pp & Ppk values are almost = 2; only 3.4 Parts per Million are expected to be defective. Hence process yield has improved from 70 % to 99.99966%. This has reduced rework cost. No 100% measurement. Only set-up approval measurement (first 5 pieces before start of production) No Operator dependability. Increased Customer Confidence Level. Horizontal Deployment ACT: Implement the new process of Assembly of Pinion to the motor.
13 Group-Spanner Implementation of 5S in the Warehouse of XXX Ltd 14 Group-Spanner 2. WareHouse-Old (Before Implementation of 5S)
Seiri-Orderliness Kitting Time = 140 Minutes/ Motor Model Seiso- Clarity Quantity Mismatch (ERP Vs Actual)= 48% Inventory Measurement Cycle = 7 days No. operator for kitting = 5 Seiton-Tidiness Damaged due to improper storage = 20% Seiketsu-Cleaniness Warehouse was quite disaarayed and lacked cleaniness. Shitsuke-Sustain No discipline at warehouse. 15 Group-Spanner Ware House- After Implementing 5s
Seiri-Orderliness Kitting Time reduced to 30 Minutes/ Motor Model Seiso- Clarity Quantity Mismatch reduced to 4% only Inventory Measurement Cycle reduced to 3 from 7 days No. operator for kitting reduced to 2 from 5 Seiton-Tidiness Material Damaged Cost reduced to 0% almost Seiketsu-Cleaniness Warehouse looks clean and organised with the same allocation of resources to clean. Shitsuke-Sustain Strict discipline in the ware house 16 Group-Spanner Ware House- After Implementing 5s Advantages Particulars Traceability Increased substantially which has resulted in decrease in manhours and thus savings for the company. Clarity Mismatch in reporting has reduced which has helped the organisation to reduce inventory pile up because of false reporting of inventory. Inventory Damage There is no damage of Inventory as each ite is located in a organised manner and as per the logic. Labour Hours Saving As there is no confusion in the warehouse operations there is less need of manhours to maintain the warehouse. The cost of labour has reduced by 60%. Productivity There is substantial increase in productivity of the warehouse department. The Inventory physical verification has reduced to 3 days which was 7 days earlier. 17 Group-Spanner
Barry Hindess, Paul Hirst (Auth.) - Mode of Production and Social Formation - An Auto-Critique of Pre-Capitalist Modes of Production (1977, Palgrave Macmillan UK)