Check out this pdf file. It gives the basics. In part it is courtesy of Motorola.

http://Elsmar.com/pdf_files/ - Look for TPM.pdf - TPM Basics

Thanks Marc.

In part, I'm surprised no one has commented on this. I've seen TPM and it's impressive.

I suspect you have heard so little about TPM because companies seem to stumble on it only after starting some type of lean production effort.

Not many companies implement lean manufacturing correctly, so not many run into equipment issues that can (must?) be solved with TPM techniques.

I was working with Motorola in Guadalajara. They were silmultaneously going through a TPM implementation and a QS9000 implementation. What they were doing with old equipment with TPM impressed the hell out of me. They took it to the extreme of altering equipment in ways where I sat back and thought "Why didn't the equipment manufacturer think of that???" I was, and am, impressed. But then it's base is close to my heart. Preventive maintenance and improvement. There are so many companies which run equipment to death. The sad thing is it's the old story. Wait till it dies and survive the downtime costs. It's like keeping a balance on a credit card. Every year - more interest costs.

I really thought there would be more interest in a TPM forum, but it was obviously my personal excitement.

Marc!

Any chance you can give a more specific example of what Motorola was doing with the equipment related to this topic?

Thanks in advance
joe

-------------------------
Joseph Lucas

Equipment was all on a list with a 'schedule'. Each piece of equipment went thru 'phases' of evaluation and action. At one point you would walk up to a machine and post-it notes with a name and date were everywhere. Operators would make up these notes as well as engineers and such. What they did - well, there were many things. One machine had a guard on a pully system which to get to before you had to remove several bolts and such to inspect and/or change. They put a hinge and quick fasten tie-down mechanism on it and even cut a hole in the guard (solid metal) and put in a plexaglass 'window' so you could immediately see the belt condition and pully position.

They took all the post-it notes, listed them and discussed the suggestions. None were overlooked. The operators were immediately involved in all discussions and decisions. The maintenance schedule for several months were posted on the machine.

The whole thing was a great exercise in understanding the equipment.

Did you review the pdf file?

Just a brief word from Motorola. I can't speak officially on behalf of Motorola, and I suppose it would not be appropriate for me to mention specific details.

I recently visited some manufacturing facilities in the Asia region which had recently implemented TPM. This was my first exposure. I was quite impressed, as it was a very "common sense" method to empower people at all levels to take ownership of the whole manufacturing process, proactively. Where stereotypically, one might imagine a major piece of production equipment developing a problem that stops production. Under previous circumstances, the operator might consider it an opportunity for down time, under TPM, not only is the operator to be proactive in assessment of the problem, but details that the operator is involved in within TPM framework may well have prevented the major production tool from going down in the first place.

Needless to say, I was quite positively impressed.

Motorola - Guadalajara is where I 'was exposed' to TPM. I remain impressed.

TPM is impressive,however it is but a small part of the whole, which is the "Toyota Production System".
Arvin Industries ,Inc. in Dexter ,MO implements their version of TPS/TPM which they define as ATQPS "Arvin Total Quality Production System"
What impressed me the most? No warehousing system, no MRP. Material comes in receiving and goes directly to the appropriate processing cell. Maximum amount of material on hand at any given time is =/<4 day supply.
Value added continuous improvement at its best.

I must add that although I was impressed with TPM, it is VERY important to remember that it is NOT a quality system. It is a MAINTENANCE philosophy (somebody correct me, as I am not a TPM expert). So we absolutely can not compare it with any quality system or standard. It is a method to reduce manufacturing cost, increase manufacturing tool up time, improve general reliability of manufacturing processes (I think in some cases there may be some improved Cpk levels).

I think it certainly is a continuous improvement tool. I have not yet witnessed it in non-production areas, so I can't speak to shipping/receiving and/or other support functions.

That's how I understand TPM, Jerry. I liked it because I'm a maintenance idiot - do the maintenance and eliminate down time, abnormal wear, extend useful life of equipment and such.

No - TPM is definitly not a quality system. It is a tool.

Marc,

Correctly stated: TPM is a tool.

Something from one of your earlier posts:

"In part, I'm surprised no one has commented on this. I've seen TPM and it's impressive"

I have a sneaking suspicion that most folks aren't talking about this because this tool is quite foriegn to them. Most folks here in the States are working in a results based organizations, with very little in the way of process controls of any type. Everyone looking for things at the end of the line or after a piece of equipment breaks. Corrective action vs. Preventive action. TPM ranks up there with SPC or SQC. I think folks hear the acronym, know little about it, and fear the statistics involved with problem solving. Solution: don't use it! A real shame. I believe from what I read that TPM is a very impressive process. Sadly, I have not seen it in action.

The focus of Western Management is in the output of a process. This is why we are a reactive culture. Almost always when it is too late. Eastern Management will use the TPM tool to support their Kaizen drive for a true TQM organization. Their focus is on the process. They care about the inputs and the process. These things considered; the output should be ancillary. Quality and Productivity constantly improved. In the TPM vs. TQM thread, the topic is definately misleading, in that one (TPM) is part of the whole (TQM). As you stated, neither needs the other. However, the distinction I spoke of earlier shows the considerable difference in management theory between East and West. Other posts from folks with practical experience here and abroad, convince me that TPM should be a major consideration by senior management. TPM should also go beyond the bounds of traditional manufacturing practices and enter other areas in the organization. Involvement has to be total, as is with a Kaizen approach. Everyone has to take a role and be involved. In a society of "That's not my job!", the opposite of a TQM environment, deployment of a tool like TPM will meet with failure. An organizational transformation must take place.

Well, I hadn't responded to this forum yet, but I am interested to find out how folks out there perceive the TPM activity.

Regards,

Kevin

I agree that TPM is but one tool. Well put, Kevin.

Marc,

Could you give some examples of things you saw at Motorola? Specifically, you mentioned that those folks did things that you thought the manufacturers of equipment should have thought of. My reason for asking is this. To reduce liability, many manufactures specify 'overkill' in preventive maintenance, which is nonvalue added. I was also wondering if Motorola modified equipment to improve productivity but did so in consideration with the manufacturers warranty (violations).

Kevin

Most of what I saw addressed was equipment far out of warranty. I didn't see any new equipment being addressed.

I'll try to think of some specifics to post later, but I'm about to pack for a meeting in Tampa and so I'm real short on time.

For the benefit of the person above who asked what had been seen at Motorola, I'll try to give some response...

I am not a TPM guru. But in the course of my work, I have visited a factory in Malaysia that had a TPM program.

I'm wracking my brain to remember the important things in TPM --- I think they were DIFFICULT, DANGEROUS, DIRTY, and others.

The operators were trained to to a thorough cleaning on a regular basis on every production tool. As they cleaned, they took note of any dirty things they found. For example, if they found shavings, they looked at them to figure out exactly what kind of shavings they were. On a leadframe (the outer frame that transported multiple semiconductor packages) if they noticed shavings near where the leadframe was transported through production tooling, they analyzed to figure out why the shavings were produced, and made adjustments as needed.

The one where they actually changed design of a manufacturer's tool (a large piece of production equipment) was when they had to open large equipment cover doors to look for oil leakage or other dirty things inside a tool. They found that it took them a lot of time to do this, so it either tended to get pencil-whipped, just didn't get done, or it interfered with production efficiency. So an operator (now empowere through TPM) came up with the idea of cutting a window in some of the applicable equipment cover doors, and installing a plexiglas protective window in the hole. By doing this, it made it very easy to quickly inspect under the tool to determine if it needed cleaning. Now the check is on their regular checklist, and the tool only has the cover doors removed to perform the cleaning underneath when it is actually dirty (now that they can look through the window very quickly).

That is the one example I can think of. If I think of any further, I will post them. I only had a brief exposure to TPM, so I do not have a large assortment of experiences yet to share.

------------------

Here's one:

Once I observed an organization who got tired of replacing the spray heads in a paint-line washer. They would routinely inspect the nozzles, remove the ones that were corroded, and put in the spare parts. This continued for some time. Finally, someone suggested during a QC Circle that the tool room should create the same nozzles out of plastic (I believe ST Nylon). They did and replaced all of the nozzles, only having to occasionally remove the nozzles for cleaning. Maintenance time was reduced, spare parts cost went way down, reliability in the equipment increased which nearly eliminated any production down-time. It got to the point where the line workers would perform the cleanout operation, leaving the mechanics to do more urgent duties.

As I look at washer systems today, PVC is everywhere.

Kevin

This is an oldie, but I was looking through some sites and was reading about TPM.

Kevin hasn't been around much - I think his little one is taking up his real life...

But as I thought back, some of the things Motorola did was look at old equipment and modify it. For example, there was a piece of equipment where there was a belt whch had to be tensioned. It was a pain to remove a big cover and do the maintenance. They took the cover, put in a plexaglass window (so workers could instantly tell the condition of the belt and watch it run) and a 'hatch' where they could put in an allen type driver and tighten or loosen the belt. This general maintenance was then made part of the operator's duties when running the machine.

Does anyone else have any good TPM (Total Productive Manufacturing / Total Productive Maintenance) instances you can recall?

We are well on our way to implementing an Equipment Improvement Program (EIP) at our location. Slowly, we are developing "points of inspection" for each piece of equipment and machines. These are areas for the operators to routinely clean and inspect and grease, as necessary.

The Key Equipment Improvement Program (KEIP) then leaves the bigger maintenance jobs available for our maintenance people to do (rather than contract out).

The EIP was implemented concurrently with our 5S program as they complement each other.

In our South American locations, the EIP is called Autonomous Maintenace. We have be trained on the seven steps of a successful EIP - probably a level 3 for us right now, almost ready to go to level 4.

The EIP will be part of how we achieve Integrated Maintenance. This is an improvement process whereby Education/Training, Planned Maintenance, Autonomous Maintenance and Data Management/Analysis are combined to improve the overall state of equipment/process and employee morale.

Sounds like TPM by another name.

Sounds like TPM by another name.

I kinda figured that, but the folks down in South America want it to be their system, so we call it by their name...then, because of the union environment we're in, changed it so that no one got overly upset.....a rose by any other name, I guess.

Marc,

I was recently in a TPM facility and was completely blown away. It was the Nissan Dechard Engine Plant. The Tool Crib/Rework Manager gave me a tour of the facility. They are getting something rediculus like 96% OEE, with scheduled downtime! They did a lot of things to notice worn out machine parts like you've mentioned above and the associates were mostly responsible for their own machines. I say mostly because when they had a problem machine everyone goes out to look at it. EVERYONE! Then they decide how to quickly repair the problem. Once it can be quickly brought back to working order they try different ideas to eliminate the problem. After taking the tour with my mouth wide open the manager really threw me for a loop. With a smile he said, "You know...you didn't see a machine today that is newer than twenty years."

Proper TPM is truely a sight to behold.

The company that I work for doesn't have "turn key" machines that look that clean or run that well out of the box. I would be suprised if we achive 60% OEE on what we consider a good running machine.

We have a so called TPM program, but it is basically an excuse to let machines run longer before the "scheduled maintenance".

At a nameless auto manufacturer:
Every 15-20 minutes, associates spent 5 minutes climbing into the automated welding lines (2 lines/128 robots each line) and filing the welding tips back to 8mm with a hand file. (Cycle time produced ~1 car per minute).

This was followed by 3-5 minutes of chaos every 3rd or 4th stop. Current density is defined by the amount of current passed through the area of the weld tip. Too high, the weld "blows out". Or rough cut the tip and it sticks to the part, pulling the tip, spraying water everywhere, machine shutdown, new tip, etc. (this will be important in a minute).

Said mfg. spent over $2 million US on the following:
Automatic tip "dresser" (installed) for all 256 robots.
Additional robot movement program to find the dresser.
New weld timer with step-up (programmable) current for 256 robots.
New programming for 32 different Programmable Logic Controllers for the robots (count the cycles, step up the current every 5 cycles to adjust for tips flattening out as they wear, every 15 cycles make the robots clean their tips, reset the weld current back to the beginning).
Testing each system as it was installed for safety/performance/interference/etc.

Savings (conservatively based on an estimated downtime cost of $10K per minute)
15 minutes per hour x 8 hours per shift x 2 shifts per day x 250 days per year x that $10K per minute = $40 million (and that's only one line).

Results varied, but, worst case was an additional 80 welded bodies per shift per line per day. That's another 320 bodies a day! Without adding personnel, work time, or plant space.

hi my name is alan moss . i am just starting up atpm programe at my firm i woul be very greatful if any one can send me some templets of tpm schudles and counter measure shhet so i can get some ideas pleaes

many thanks in advance

alan moss