posted 01 September 1999 05:43 PM               

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

posted 03 September 1999 09:17 AM               

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
jcl@pobox.com
http://www.breinerco.com

posted 03 September 1999 02:46 PM               

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.

posted 13 December 1999 02:35 PM               

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.

posted 29 February 2000 08:15 AM               

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,

posted 01 March 2000 09:47 AM               

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).

posted 08 March 2000 09:37 PM               

To be honest is was about 3 or 4 years ago. I've been trying to think of specific things, but I really can't remember much specific. I remember they was all common sense. The operators were very, very involved.

posted 09 March 2000 02:20 PM               

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.

posted 09 March 2000 06:24 PM               

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.