Change Over - Setting Time Reduction - Program Results Falling

[Andrews]

We had tried our best to reduce the setting time (changeover time) from X hrs to Y hrs and had been successful for 6 months but it has started to deteriorate from the 7th month onwards.The setters who do the setting are skilled in their job and constant training is being given . One observation was that setting time have been less whenever the supervisor is beside the operator for the complete setting . But we are not able to ask the supervisor to followup the setting because he is held up in other machines ?
What can the forum users suggest to improve this performance? What do you find is lacking?

[Kevin Mader]

Andrews,

It is necessary to fully understand the inputs and outputs of a process and determine if the process is already in statistical control. For instance, what are Xbar and UCL/LCL for the changeover process for a given product/tool? Are only Common Causes present, or do you have some special causes at play?

It is difficult half a world away to know for sure, but I’ll hazard a guess that the naturally established changeover time was probably in statistical control suggesting that only Common Causes were in play. When you introduced a Special Cause (increased supervision), the outcome met your arbitrarily established lower changeover time. Once the Special Cause left, then the process returned to its former state and your gains were lost. The Supervisor is a Special Cause in this instance.

To make lasting change, you must establish a statistically controlled process (no Special Causes) and understand the Common Causes of variation. Next, establish a goal within the process limits (higher or lower depending on what it is you are trying to do). Then, you set to work to improve on the Common Causes. When these improve, the process becomes more robust and the process mean improves.

Regards,

Kevin

[Atul Khandekar]

How was standard time Y decided? Did you try to establish the 'work elements' and the time required for these? Did you use techniques such as 'MOST'?

[Claes Gefvenberg]

Hi Andrews,

I may be totally wrong here, but I'll assume that you mean setting up, like in tool change and things like that? If not, please disregard this.

Anyway, If you do: Have you considered rebuilding the equipment for faster and easier setup instead of fine tuning the existing methods? A lot can be achieved that way.

/Claes

[M Greenaway]

Took the exact words out of my mouth Kevin. I had typed a very similar response but had to quit before I posted it.

I wouldnt try however to reduce the natural variance of the existing process. I think you need to look for a step change to the process, i.e. re-design of the tools themselves probably, for example reducing the number of fixing bolts.

[Chris May]

Andrew,

When the supervisor is present is he actually helping in some small way with the setup ??...maybe he is.

Break the setup down into very small elements including all movement, travelling etc;

You may find that something has moved or been relocated or just broken.

Have you got access to the original time study??

If yes compare notes..if not then do it again using an average rated worker (not your best one).

Regards,

Chris

[Claes Gefvenberg]

M Greenaway said:

Took the exact words out of my mouth Kevin. I had typed a very similar response but had to quit before I posted it.

I wouldnt try however to reduce the natural variance of the existing process. I think you need to look for a step change to the process, i.e. re-design of the tools themselves probably, for example reducing the number of fixing bolts.

Exactly... That's what I was on about too.

/Claes

[Andrews]

Setting time reduction:
Hi Kevin,
Thank you very much for your reply.Even though you are half a world away ,you have hit the nail in the head.The problem we face is that the operators tend to slow down the setting when the supervisor's head is turned.We are unable to change the operators attitude.
What do the forum users feel is the solution to the problem? How can one improve the attitude of operators?Are there any training programmes that may help improve their attitude?
Sometimes we find that the operators commit the same mistakes despite training them on numerous occasions.
For your information I would like to state that reducing the setting time to Y hrs can be easily achieved because we have been in the manufacture of these parts for atleast 20 yrs and the tooling has bee stabilised.

Hi Atul,
Thanks for your input but I was not able to understand what the "MOST" technique means? Can you please elaborate?

Hi Claes,
Rebuilding the equipment is a very good suggestion but it seems to cost a lot which we are not able to achieve.Moreover the reduction we are planning seems to require dedication from the operators.

May,
Work study is something we have not done till now. After your suggestion, we shall try to conduct work study as soon as possible.This might help us gain some knowledge on where we are losing time.