Questions for Creating Continuous Flow GETTING STARTED DDR cu oun 2.What is the takt time? PEA ela ed ERO N Oa St ROR aa tad CeO Re ie a Rg ed LUN aa Uo eco] Eee a Caer ORO Ae hee can make one piece as efficiently as possible? DISuc UU una oaid CR Re Sd CRC a Rn RU ccd oN eu enh ee eM Ee PACU Ueno ake OAM Oe Ree Dee Ue oe oe ecCreating Continuous Flow An Action Guide for Managers, Engineers and Production Associates By Mike Rother and Rick Harris Foreword by Jim Womack, Dan Jones and John Shook A Lean Toolkit Mathod and Warkbook THE LEAN ENTERPRISE INSTITUTE Brookline, Massachusetts, USA www.lean.org Version 1.0 June 2001The Shop Floor is a Reflection of Management With gratitude to our editors Jim Womack and John Shook, OMPiste Design, our frends at ‘many manufacturing companies, and Dave Logozzo, who coined the ap phrase, “Byes for Flow, Byes for Waste™FOREWORD ‘When we launched Learning to See (LTS) in the summer of 1998, as the firse publication of the Lean Enterprise Institute, we urged readers o identify their major product families and to deavy ‘maps showing the low of information and products as it curtently exists. We painted out that mapping ‘can be done at many levels — from a single process within # manufacturing facility to che complete path from raw material to customer — and suggested that the best place co statis with the flow of informacion and produce within the walls ofa single plant. ‘We then urged readers co envision a furure state for each product family’s value stream in which information flows smoothly back from the customer and the product flows smoothly — indeed continuously — toward the customer. Finally, we suggested an implementation plan for achieving, future seates quickly. We have been delighted with the response to Learning to See, which has now sold more than 50,000 copies in English and has been translated inco Chinese, French, German, Japanese, Portuguese, Spanish, Swedish, and Turkish. However, we have also been struck by the difficuley many readers have hd in actually achieving continuous flow within chet facilities, A sight we frequently encounter when touting plants is processing steps relocated from departments (process villages’) co product-family cells (as recommended in LTS), but with only intermittent and erratic low through the cell. Output gyrates from hour to hour between each operation. When we see this patter, we know immediately that half or more of the benefits of cellularization is being lost In addition, ifthe cell is located upstream from the pacemaker ind small piles of inventory accumulate process lending directly to the customer, none of the benefit may ever reach the customer due to seagnation aid instability in dowustuiea activities. So how can you create truly continuous flow the benefits reaching the customer and sustained over time? ‘The methods are not mysterious. Indeed, Toyota and its affliated companies perfected ‘them years ago, However, we've found that ro actually apply them most managers, engineers, and prodluction associates need a friendly sensei (veacher) to walk them through a step-by-step process that focuses their vision and targets their actions, BAA ARR R AR ARR RRA RRR RRR RR RRRTo fll ehis need we decided to publish this sequel volume to Mike Rother and John Shook’s Learning to See. n it we move from the plane tothe process level as Mike and Rick Harts take your hand and lead the way in introducing and sustaining continuous flow to the maximum extent possible, beginning with the pacemalker process, cy You slready know Mike from Learning to See, but Rick Harris may be a new name. After fifteen years at General Motors, starting on the shop floor in Anderson, Indiana, Rick got his lean edueation av Toyota where he was a manager in assembly atthe Georgetown, Kentueky plant, Rick and Mike ‘now continue their lean learning by working with companies on lean implementation. ‘Those of you who have already read Learning to See and accurately drawn your curent and future state ‘maps will find the help you need in the pages ahead to achieve truly continuous flow and its many benefits. Other readers — who are just encountering lean thinking or who are process improvement vererans and chink they need only a few tips on improving their existing cells — will benefit from studying the first section of this workbook to correctly identily product families and pacemaker processes. These readers will then discover many shorteuts on the path co truly continuous flow in the remainder of this workbook. Bur a word of warning; Drawing maps and envisioning future staes is invigorating and fun. Afterall, anyone can draw an attractive future state on paper. In Creating Continuous Flow you will be tackling the real issues of implementation, and success is only possible through intense collaboration between ‘managers, engineers, and production associates. [v's hard work and you will make mistakes. But the benefits are enormous and all the knowledge you will need is summarized here. Given the nature of your challenge we are particularly anxious to hear about your successes and your Uilficulties andl to connect you with the lean community at wwwlean.org. We also need to hear your suggestions for improving Creating Continuous Flow at eef@lean.org, this Action Guide carefully, referring back to Learning to See as necessary. Then seize the opportunity ‘0 implement a So please take the time to study sustain continuous flow. And rll us about your experiences so we ean share thei withthe entire lean network. Jim Womack, Dan Jones, and John Shook Brookline, MA, USA; Ross-on-Wye, Hereford, UK; Ann Arbor, MI, USA, = wwwileanorg “~~CONTENTS Foreword Introduce! Part |: Getting Started What is the Work? Part Ill: Machines, Material and Layout for Flow Part IV: Distributing the Work Part V: Connecting to the Customer and Regulating the Flow Part VI: Implementing, Sustaining & Improving Conclusion About the Authors Appendices A: A Continuous Flow Refresher B: The Standardized Work Combination TableINTRODUCTION cinuous flow is the ultimate objective of lean production, and creating continuous low has been the goal of countless kaizen projects. We work at a wide range of manufacturing failties and see many commendable elforts to ereate flow: Unfortunately, we see very litle of ic acualy achieved. For example, it seems chat many of us have concentrated on making U-shaped process layouts instead ‘of on the more important part: Creating and maincaining an effi sn enntinnni Raw Almost any _1ouping of machines that performs pracessing steps in a sequence is called a ‘cell, but iti rare to find real continuous Now which is whae actually makes a cella eel dally; product would flow continuously all the way through your value streams, from raw material to the customer. But that is to0 much eo tackle at frst, You need a place to focus. That place is the ‘pacemaker’ process or segment ofthe value stream, where products take theit final form for your ‘external customer. This is usually the most important segment of any value stream, since how the Pacemaker operates affects both how well you serve your customer and what demand is like for your "upstream processes. A steady production shythm, level mix, and consistent continuous flow of material at the pacemaker process places regular and consistent demands on your value steam, Yet a closer look at many pacemaker processes shows erratic and intermittent flow of product, uctuating inventory accumulations between steps, excessive batching, output varying from hour ro hour, and poor use of human effort due to the anchoring of operators to individual machines, Performance bias cereainly been improved over the old process village layouts, where equipment was grouped by type of machine, but much better performance and much leaner value streams ace possible. ‘The objective of this book isco sharpen your eyesight and equip you with skill to achieve and maintain tly efficient continuous flow of mater Well concentrate on operator-based cells because this type of processing is so widespread and — in a world of geographically scattered customers and short Product life eycles — it is often important to be able to design and manage simple, inexpensive, flexible and reliable operator-based processes, We'll use methods and thinking based on practices pioneered within Toyota and aflliaced companies, which you can utilize nearly anywhere you ‘would like to ereate a continuous flow. ‘Tools and techniques can be useful, buc the most significant thing you and your team can gain from studying this workbook is a better abiliy to see and feel flow. As you apply the methods desctibed here you should automatically start to focus less on layout and more on flaw. But the most imporeant ‘thing to do i to select one of your pacemaker processes and get sarted right away —coday — because how much we learn depends on our action orientation and persistence in implementation. Don’t waic! Mike Rother and Rick Harris Ann Arbor, Michigan and Stamping Ground, Kentucky Jone 2001Continuous Flow “This book focuses on creating continuous flow in pacemaker processes. But the concept ‘of continuous flaw goes beyond just pacemaker processes, extending everywhere to any production process, Similarly che tools described in this book can be used in a vatiety of applications. This lise shows the applicability ofthis book for various eypes of process Type of Process Completely manual production XxX Operator driven cells and lines XXX incorporating automated equipment Conveyorized production lines x Partially automated transfer lines XX (with operator work stations) Fully automated transfer lines. (operators as line attendants) Highly multifunctional automated machines Definition of a Cell cell isan arrangement of people, machines, materials, and methods with the processing. seeps placed right next to each other in sequential order, through which parts are processed ina continuous flow (or in some eases in a consistent, small batch size that is maintained through the sequence of processing steps), The most well-known physical cell layout isa “U" shape, but many shapes are possible. Continuous flow processing is also possible in scraight production lines. Many companies use che terms “cell” and “line” interchangeably, 4s we do inthis book.Team Involvement Please note that you will need a team effort co ereate continuous flow. Lean systems rely heavily on production associates, espectally for ily continuous improvement efforts, bbuc they also depend on the daily involvement of management and engineering to set up systems, show the way, respond to problems, andl manage the processes. Your team efforts to develop continuous flow will involve several people in your organization, including: Value Stream Manager (see Learning to See): Draws and keeps fine tuning the future state value stream map, which shows the pacemaker process and where continuous flaw is possible. ‘Area Manager: Leads the effort to create continuous flow and ensures daily that the flows are maintained and continuously improved. Industrial Engineers and Manufacturing Engi yore: Design the incl layouts and staffing levels of continuous flow cells using data they personaly collect on the facility {oot ‘They asist closely wth implementation and debugging, Engineers also design, specify, and build the small, simple machines that are necessary to support continuous ow Production Tea make the flow work, maintaining it, and finding ways to improve it on a regu The operators, ceam leader, and supervisor are essential for helping basis Maintenance: De-bugs the new cell until ie works as intended (with the Industrial and Manufacturing Engineers) and is then on a fist-tesponse call for problems. Lean Specialists: Assse all ofthese people. TANMAAAAAAAHANAAAARAAAAAAAANRANAAeWelcome to Apex Tube Apex Tbe Company isa typical diserete parts illustrate the process of creating continuous flow. Apex produces 2 variety of tubular $ ag0 yufacturer that we will use co products for automotive, truck, and heavy-equipment applications. ‘Two ali and more rapid response co changing demand by taking Apex responded to pressure from its customers for lower prices, higher « more frequent deliveries, a hard look at its manufacturing operations. For many years the company had organized its fabrication and assembly processes by department with each product visiting each department as necessary. The resulting maze of spaghett-like product movements was hard to manage and even harder to improve, Apex managers therefore took the first step recommended in Learning to See and conducted an analysis of theie products to find product families that could be managed individually. Apes managers drew up a product family matrix thar grouped products by similae sequence of final processing (pacemaker) steps and machines, Apex’s Product Family Mat Pea Ty aes I Aaa end P 2. | feat £03, | wierce | raze | bond [nc8@aiy] andi] crime | teat 1X MaKe IX X X x X X wi] X X X a xix 1x LX X X ><) PRODUCTS heavy truck PX wom |X 1X 1X ><|>< PART I GETTING STARTED‘The light-truck product family made the greatest revenue contribution to Apex and was under the heaviest price pressure. Apex appointed a Value Stream Manager for this product family, who drew a current state value stream map. This product family is shipped to the State § eet assembly plant in three vatis Es: a short-hose assembly (8) for the short wheelbase truck, long-hose (L) for the long wheelbase model, and an alternative-fuel (ethanol) assembly (A) offered as an option on this vehicle. 20S PeopucTION —] CONTROL AAAARARAARe pir Westy rae Weekly Schedules = Tiss Thurs. i z= = oo aa Ty aero jor jot J ‘3726 et _ or sansWith their bacch and queue production system based on a process village layout, Apex: ‘managers were not too surprised to learn that actual processing time was less chan 0.01% of lead time and chat much of the floor area devoted to this product was either for storing, inventory or to provide access between process steps. In short, nothing flowed and it was very difficule for Apex co respond to changing customer requirements even with very large in-process inventories. Stave Street Dally ‘Assembly Onder 50% Bax 50 peo Apex Truck Fuel Lines aan Original State Map a \_ an a Daily Ship only Schedule a a a > loco wae me — oS ta = ise oe 1 co et a = a fetestemete (T= 20 sons (rratosenss a a a odin 25 days 2aays Baye Lettie ent | taseconds 20 seconde 19 seconds ras ‘ihe = 18sec a a a PARTI: GETTING STARTED 3Apex managers quickly decided to create a continuous flow cell for the five final fuel line processing steps. (Before doing this they made sure, of course, that enough ma still available in the process villages to sustain production for the other products in the plant.) Shortly afterward they also developed supermarket pull systems between the new cell and the two upstream fabrication steps that would continue co operate in a batch mode shared Forecast Production Control Michigan Stee! Co, 2x Weally Bdays 3 days le <4 Oi = tasecondo ‘/0=10 minstes Llasennene ‘Tseconds 12 seconds SARAARAAR ARAN AAA AoAacross several product famili implement the future state shown here. Future State Map Daily Ship Schedule Forecast State Street ‘Assembly Daly = Orde werd Bon 30 peo Apex Truck Fuel Lines — si] ame] Gls = mas > @ A a Lead Time = 1 days 159 seconds These pull systems replaced the schedules previously used to regulate these processes. ‘Through hard work and by suspending traditional rules of thumb on how quickly change could happen, Apex was able to design and PART I: GETTING STARTED sApex started its fuel line value stream improvement at the right place: the ‘pacemaker’ process. The pacemaker involves production steps that are dedicated to a particular famity of products and responds to orders from external customers. A well run pacemaker sends smooth demand signals upstream co the pull loops of the remaining batch fabrication processes, which respond to requirements from internal customers. nu Apex managers and engineers made another good decision by minimizing their initial invesement and keeping the cell simple. For example, they could have created a more extended continuous flow by incorporating an end-forming press into the fuel line cell. But such a press would have requited substantial capital investment, (In the future Apex ‘may decide to apply some of the cost savings from its improvements to purchase and add 8 press to the cell.) They decided to install a simple, inexpensive, flexible operator-based cell designed for State Street Assembly's needs. This is more likely to be highly reliable and well-suited to sending smooth signals up the value stream, Apex managers chose a classic U-shaped layout for their new operator-based cel, illustrated on the next page. In only a few days they were able to move machines and configure the new cell to achieve striking reductions a this process in lead time and floor space required, while dramatically increasing the number of pieces produced per production associate. Original Current State State Fon No No Corkinaoe Flow rrocusten |n603/” |no2 (actual/target) 690 ‘690 Space] 1130 580 (sq. feet) Assembly | tidays | 37min Lead Time (WIP x Takt) Number of Operators] © - Productivity | 13.5 20 (pieces/associate/hr) Funetions: Effectively as | NO ne Pacemaker TANMAARAANAAARAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AARP AAsA Closer Look — With Eyes for Flow Apex managers, engineers, and production associates were excited about their new fuel line cell. After all, they quickly increased productivity by 50% while halving space requirements and dramatically slashing lead times. Yet when you look at the Apex cell with “eyes for flow” you should actually be disappointed, A walk through the fuel line cell will show why, Apex’s fuel line cell — current state ‘Assembly Tube Bender \ Te (automate) (automatic) lde5 tte Hourly Production @ eer es Plan | Actual 20 20 /N 7 | 80 ——packout 30 psicontalnee ‘felted aoa) 4 2 3 4 5 6 7 a PART GETTING STARTED 7‘The firse step when we visita facility is typically co go see the current situation with ‘our own eyes and ask, “What is the problem?” At Apex, the first thing we notice is the production output chart at the enttance/exit of the cell showing planned and actual production. Looking at the output figures we wonder, “Why is there so much variation, and why does total production fall short of planned production?” More specifically, “Why is the cell achieving only two-thirds of planned ourpuc during many hours of the shift?” Is the problem incapable machines that make bad parts? Is it machines that won't run? Is @ supplier shipping, bad parts, or are parts missing? And who reacts when these problems occur? Whatever the cause, the variation in output is clear evidence that cell performance ‘can be greatly improved. We are even more certain ofthis when we note that in two hous out of eight the cell actually produced more than the plan, which is just as bad as being under the target. Four production associates were assigned to the cell the entire shift, so a change in staffing can'e explain the variations. Unless this was achieved by hurrying, unacceptably risking stress injuries and bad quality there must be waste in the process. We begin to see a source of variation and waste when we closely examine the first wo steps in the production sequence: the tube bender and the frst assembly operation. ‘The first production associate has to leave her regular work area every 25 pieces, or about every 16 minutes if che cell is producing to take time (as explained below in Question 2). This requires three minutes and means that either the material flow stops or the tube bender and the frst two assembly steps are all decoupled from one another. This means no continuous flow, As we continue o walk around we notice that there are various quantities of inventory between every operation and that the production associates are each anchored to their machine, which often means they have to wait while the machines eycle Variable inventory buffers between workstations are an inefficient way to balance uneven workloads, When a buffer gets too full, the supplying operation often takes an unofficial break — perhaps to get materials or do other out-ofecycle work — while the downstream station eatches up. Operations are decoupled, allowing each to produce batches instead of one piece at a time. TAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHRANAAAAAAAANAAeDecoupled operations, which we call ‘islands’, bake the waste of Rian) overproduction and the waste of waiting into a cell, causing them to be repeated many times every shift, day, week, month, and year. CO ey Oreo Tiny wastes often don’t seem significant to managers just visiting the process (and apparently are not visible to Apex managers), but think about them as they add up more than 600 times per shit! 8 ' " . Dee Dee au ad the hourly production Decoupled operations also make it difficult to notice produetion problems as they happen. When a problem occurs the rest of the stations keep on working, By the end of a shift the unnoticed Ttarvet?: problems add up and the production volume falls short of the target eee Pacemaker processes, in particular, need to be manageable. Problems pee) or abnormalities need to be spocted as they occur and support Eo eer personnel must respond to them quickly. Production associates cee there are problems and prince eed cannot react to and fix significant production problems, find and climinate the causes of those problems, and at the same time still achieve full production! . Pa nd Finally, as we complete our tour we note that the Apex cell is laid eres out in a very wide “U*, This defeats one of the main objectives of Rae Rano a. U-shaped cell layout: Permitting flexible deployment of operators tee by moving work areas into close proximity. Both the first and last Tensei production associates are moving back and forth over considerable ered distances to handle materials. Flow stops every time they leave a station to backtrack, Eee Ceo eed Our conclusion, at the end of our walk through Apex’s cell, is that epee] there is actually no continuous flow anywhere. Instead we see only eee erratic and intermittent flow — as indicated by the small piles of eens inventory between each machine and the fluctuating output from Sec Se ey na elt adding work step (work Co oe hour to hour. Indeed, this cell is really just a ‘module’ of adjacent machin and operators producing at best ‘fake flow’ that misleads the unteained eye,10 Targets for Apex’s Fuel Current Stato coninuous | ip . ta Production perm |? 62 (actual/target) ‘690 691 Space sqrtecn | 150 560 Assambly Lead Time | tldays 37 min) (we Tok) IMaRSer of Operators: 6 4 Productiv ipiecesfonsocionstes 156 20 effectively os | NO No Becamaker While Apex’s new cell performance is much better than the original process village layout, 4 carefl effort achieve true continuous flow through proper process design and operation ‘ean double labor productivity, halve the needed space, reduce lead time by a further 90%, and dramatically improve hath quality and responsiveness to customer requirements. Realistic targets for this cell, which we will show you how to achieve in the pages ahead, ate shown in the right hand column of the table above Well get started by posing the frst of eleven questions you should go through as you strive to develop true continuous flow in your own eells and lines. The questions require eareful ‘work and attention by your entre team, but you will discover thatthe answers are invaluable once they are incorporated in your business. AAA AAA AR AFA RAR AR AA RAAAARAARAARAANNHAATQuestion 1: Do You Have the Right End Items? Apex has already determined their product families and assigned three end items to its fuel line cell. However, as you consider your own situation, you may have co think carefully about the right products to assign to your pacemaker process. Here are some guidelines we've found help 1) Fle Sometimes demand is high enough to allow you to dedicate individual products to dicit ow cells vt lines ike this Product A Product B \ oak \ a However, if demand gyrates between products and you can keep changeover times short, ‘you are often better off sharing products between mixed-model cells like this: Products AaB Products AaB X o ~~ 7 ‘The total capacity isthe same in both eases but the ability of each process to accommodate shifts in demand between the two products is much greater in the second case. ‘The demand for one product within a family may vary, while the demand for a whole product family is often more stable. PART: GETTING STARTED 142 2) Variation in Total Work Content. ‘The total work content — that is the operator time required to process one piece from start 0 finish — should not vary by more than about 30% between the different end items processed in the cell, especially when a moving conveyor is used. When the work content varies too much ic becomes dificu co maincain flow and productivity. In such cases you may want co split the cell or assign some rare oF low-volume end items to other cells, (Some facilites even creare a separate line or cell co handle low-volume end items, until product engineers can reduce the content differences between the items via design changes.) 3) Similarity of Processing Stops and Equipment. When che steps required to build different products within the cell vary too much (.e., when some products skip some processing steps) operators will have to “shift gears” every time they change to assembling «variant of the product. This reduces productivity and increases the chance of quality problems. Again, sometimes it is better to produce variants with markedly different processing steps in different cells. 4) Takt Time (Production Pace). ‘Takt time is the rate at which customers require finished units. It is determined by dividing che total available production time per shift by the customer demand rate per shift (see the equation at right). As a general guideline, when take time fora cell falls below ten seconds the operators’ jobs may become highly repetitive and! stressful. When high demand calls for very short cake times you should consider using multiple footprints of the cell, possibly side-by-side, instead of a single high-speed cell. "This is particularly appropriate if the capital requirements of additional cells ean be kept ow through utilization of simple equipment. Conversely, when takt time slows to more than about 120 seconds, the number of work: elements sometimes gets so high that work motions can be difficult to standardize. In such cases consider adding additional but similar end items to the cell to bring down the takt time, OF course, with some products it will simply be impossible to set takt times below 120 seconds because volume requirements are inherently low, even when several different end items are run through the same cell or line. (With long takt times it can get difficul to have all parts ac the line forthe operators for the different produet variations. Sometimes you have to increase the parts delivery frequency or detiver certain parts in the assembly sequence.) 5) Customer Location. When customers fora product are widely dispersed geographically, ic may make sense to split up the work into multiple lines, each located near a different customer. This makes sense particularly when shipping costs and duties for finished units are high, when there are potential exchange-rate losses, when lead times for components are Jong, or when local infrastructure (supervision, buildings, etc.) is available at reasonable cost TAAAAAAAAAAANAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANAAeQuestion 2: What is the Takt Time? Having decided what products to produce in the pacemaker, the next task for Apex managers as to determine the take rime. ("Take’ is a German word fora pace or beat, often likened to a conductor’ baton.) Take time isa reference number that is used to help match the rate of production in a pacemaker process to the rate of sales takt time Used to help synchronize pace of production with the pace of sales your customer demand per shift 27,600 seconds example: ——————. = 40 seconds 690 pieces this means: The customer is buying this product at a rate of one every 40 seconds. Sales are usually calculated on a daily or weekly basis but most pacemaker processes are actually up and running only some fraction of each day or week. Since the point of take time is to pace actual production, the most sensible thing to do is to divide the number of products demanded daily or weekly into the number of shifts operated in that time period to determine demand per production shift. For example, the customer demand for Apex’s light truck fuel lines is currently 6900 units per week and Apex operates its fuel line cell ten equal shifts per week. Thus the demand per shifc is 690 units. Once demand per shift is known the final step in che calculation of take time is to divide this number into the ‘effective working time’ per shift. ‘This is start-to-stop shife time ‘minus any scheduled operator breaks, meetings, cleanups, etc, Be represent the actual customer demand rate do mot subtract time for unplanned machine downtime, changeovers, or other internal problems. use take time must PART GETTING STARTED 43.1“ Apex operates two 8-hour shifts Monday through Friday, 6:00 AM to 2:30 PM, and 3:30 PM to Midnight. There are two 10-minute breaks each shift but no scheduled downtime For maintenance. This means Apex has 27,600 seconds of effective working time in each 490 min. (@ hours) ~ 20 min. of breaks = 460 min. x 60 cee /min. = 77,600 saconds By dividing 690 units into 27,600 available seconds we determine the takt time: 40 seconds. 27600 seconds = 40 seconds per unit (690 units ‘This is the rate of customer demand, the all important ‘beat’ of the market. Notice that take time is expressed in 'seconds-per-unit’ because it is easier for everyone to understand and use than decimals of minutes. Similarly, we use 'seconds-per-unit’ rather chan ‘pieces per-hour’ to describe actual production rates, or ‘eycle time’. Comparing takt time and cycle time is the easiest way ro answer the simple but eritieal questions: “How frequently does the eiseomer need dha pidoat™ and “Hnw feqoeadly do we tcoully wake bas pest bc our pacemaker process?” “There is one additional poine that may be very important in your own take time calculations, the amount of variation in customer orders. In Apex’s case the 6900 unit per week demand was relatively easy to determine because Apex is supplying a massive automotive assembly plant whose own take time does not change frequently, But what if long-term average demand and day-to-day actual demand are different? ‘We suggest that you check the range of daily customer demand variation by reviewing actual shipments (not orders) over the past ewelve months. Your cell must be able to handle sustained demand. For occasional spikes in demand it is generally better to operate at @ steady take time (based on average long-term demand) and either hold a buffer stock of finished goods or run some daily overtime to ensure your ability to serve the customer, Changing take time from day to day is inefficient, distupts the work pace, and increases the potential for quality problems. be difficule to make accurate Lastly, regarding future demand for new products, it ca forecasts far in advance. When future demand is uncertain it may be wiser to add capacity in steps, as increased demand actually material now for a peak demand that may not appear. s, rather than designing your pacemaker TAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAALCycle Time Cycle tim cell, We often find processes that are operated at cycle times faster than take time, For is how frequently a finished unic actually comes off the end of your pacemaker example, if you are running your facility three fall shifts (perhaps to achieve high machine utilization) you will probably always need cycle times slightly below take time because there is never any time available to catch up if your equipment or materials system fails And to some degree these sorts of problems will always occur in manufacturing! However, keep in mind that when you chronically eye! much faster than take time you increase the chances of overproducing and may be using extra operators. (As the diagram below shows.) Much worse, you conceal your production problems and reduce the incentive to find and eliminate their causes. Ic is importanc co maintain a certain tautness at the pacemaker to ensure that problems get noticed quickly and receive fast response by support staf. Cycling much faster than takt may require more people take time = extra operator Note: The inevitability of problems in manufacturing is one of the reasons why many production facilities in the Toyota group of companies run their pacemaker processes for two shifts with a one to four hour gap between shifts. Then there is time to make up production losses with a little overtime at the end of each shift. PART i GETTING STARTED16 Setting the Pace As you go through the calculations to determine your own pacemaker take time we need to explain one final point: It is seldom the case that there is only one correct takt time! Remember that take time is customer demand (which you can’t change) divided into available production time (which you ean change.) Specifically, you can adjust: 1) The available production time — the number or length of shifts. 2) The number of end items produced in a cell. 3) The number of cells making a particular end item, “The pace of production is one of the most critical considerations for the design of your processes. Here you will often have some choices to make. For example: A cell chat has a takt time of 40 seconds over ewo shifts could also be run at 20-second take in only one shife, In some cascs ic is easier and less costly #0 manage only one shift particularly if running a second shift means extra support structure and paying night premiums. An added bonus js thatthe waste of waiting time is easier to see and eliminace when take time is shorter. © The size, weight, and complexity of a product can influence what is a reasonable cycle time and che number of motions for each operator. Producing a light, low-complexity product with only a few work elements per operator to a ten-second takt time may be fine. Bue when operators are working on larger, heavier or more complex products it can be better to work to @ longer takt rime and assign more work elements to each operator, ‘© When new produets are introduced, substantial savings in capital investment can be achieved by adding them to existing cells rather than building additional cells. This will decrease the takt time for those cells. ‘+ As you launch your new cell itis often much better to utilize a temporary and separately held ‘safety stock’ of specific finished goods to protect your customer and to set your cycle time only slightly faster than take time. ‘The tension this produces forces you and your staff co address the causes of production interruptions. With experience you will gradually lear whae's best for you. ‘The key point for the moment is thae you must know what the take time is and how it was determined. AAA AAAAAAAAAARAAHAHRAHAAKRHAANAAAALeee ta RB cdWhat is the Work? We've now examined and answered the first two questions confronting your team as you strive to create continuous flow. We've specified the products appropriate to the pacemaker and determined the take time. Although you may be addressing some of these issues for the first rime, Apex managers had in fact already answered them quite well. Yet the performance of the cell they created falls far shore of what is possible, ‘This therefore brings us to the more detailed aspects of cell design, which fewer managers have mastered: Zeroing in on the actual work elements, timing each one of them, and immediately climinating obvious waste in the work. At this step in continuous flow design you should forget about physical layouts or the number of operators and simply ‘concentrate on the work content that needs to be done by people. Question 3: What Are the Work Elements for Making One Piece? ‘When we look more closely at the fucl line assembly process we can see that ‘each operator performs a series of discrete steps, or ‘work elements’, that are required to complete one cycle at each station. By collecting all the work clements at each workstation, we have the toral operator work content of the cell, Understanding these work elements is a key ingredient for erearing and ‘maintaining continuous flow. ‘A work element can be defined as “the smallest increment of work that could be moved to another person”, Thus “get one hose and place it in the fixture” is a work element while “get one hose” would not be. In the Process Study Form re written down the work elements for the shown on the next 1wo pages we h Assembly I and Assembly II steps in the creation of a fuel line at Apex. Note: Always break work into elements. This helps you identify and eliminate ‘waste that is otherwise buried within the total operator cycle, PART IL WHAT ISTHEWORK? 17Process Steps Process Study Process: SLA Fuel Lines OPERATOR Work Element Observed Assembly | Get bent tube & press into fixture Get: connector, place & clamp Get hose & place to fixture Start cycle Unclamp & remove Attach convolute Get tube & place to fixture Get hose & RH ferrule, assemble Place to fixture & clamp Get LH ferrule, assemble to hose Place to fixture & clamp Get valve & place to fixture Start cycle Unclamp & remove TAA AAA AAA AA AA AAAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AAObserver: Date/Time: Mary Smith Feb. 10,2000 3PM MACHINE Times | newest, | Cvele Time Notes Operator has to hammer to fit Operator stacks own hoses (parts) Parts far away; Lots of walking Quality check needed? PART I: WHAT ISTHEWORK? 18You can only complete a Process Study Form by carefully and repeatedly observing actual work. Do not rely on file data. As you observe the work you will probably find that operators perform it in a slightly different way from cycle to cycle. You will need to think about the best way to do the job and try to record the elements as done this way. Use the “notes” area of the form to jot down problems, questions, and ideas. Its best to use a pencil for recording work elements. We find that we always have 0 correct the list several times before we are satisfied that we have understood and eaptured the process. Then when you think you've gor i right, review the list with the operators who ed. Then re-write the list again! will show you what you've Shop Floor Courtesy Carefully observing a process means that you will be spending time at the process you are trying to improve, You will be @ guest in the “office” of the people who work there, Please use the same courtesy you would when entering anyone's office: + Introduce yourself - Explain what you are doing ~ Don't take notes in front of production associates without showing them what you have written + Say “thank you" tmay be best to do this through the team leader or supervisor so you don’t interrupt the operators and affect their safety, quality, and productivity. Always keep in mind that you are not watching people or evaluating their performance, You are watching the process or how the product is made. You are figuring out what are the steps and then the times required to make the product. Although we say these things when we gather observations on the shop floor, we know it takes time for this sort of thinking to sink into the culture of a company. When people are observed while they are working it is a natural reaction to think that they are being critiqued. And sometimes we tend to blame people for problems rather than working to understand the details of a process. Always remember that the question is not, “How is that person doing?" but rather, “What is the work?” This is the objective question that people should focus on — ut on the shop floor — in a non-judgmental way.Paper Kaizen {As you observe and record he work elements there is something else you should begin 10s while machines eycle. Operators leaving cheit work atea co perform our-of-eycle tasks. None of these actions adds value from the standpoint of the customer. All Waste! Operators walking considerable distances to get parts or waiting disrupt the flow and all are waste. Here is an importane step in completing your Process Study Form: Do not include any obvious wastes as work elements! They are not part of the work that needs to be done and an objective of the design process isto eliminate them. We call this approach of immediately leaving out wasteful steps “paper kaizen’ because you are climinating some waste on paper before the process is put in place. Of course, many improvements, like fine tuning parts presentation, will have to be done when the new cell is set-up and running. But there is usually a lot of waste you ean eliminate in the paper kaizen stage. Here are some paper kaizen guidelines: 1. Do not include any walking as a work element. Because the actual amount Cf walking in your new process design is unknown and will be minimized, you should ignore it a dis poi 2. Do not include out-of-cycle work for operators as work elements. This is a guideline you should never forget! Out-of-cycle work — like the first operator in the Apex cell stopping to feed the tube bender every 25 pieces — destroys continuous flow and makes it impossible to maintain efficient and consistent production to takt time, Other examples include periodically getting bins of parts, making a quality check, oF moving a container of finished pars ‘These tasks may need doing but should be given to support-staff, like team leaders and material handlers, who work outside of the takt-based continuous flow. If you are ziving out-of-eycle work t0 operators as a sort of break, then schedule an official break ‘of practice jab rotation instead of burying such flow-killing waste in the work. Some out-of-cycle tasks can be converted co in-cyele tasks, For example, with only ‘minor changes the tube bender in Apex’s cell can be loaded with a single wotk piece ‘each time the operator eyeles through his or her work elements. ‘This allows continuous flow and is easily achieved because the tube bender already has automation that can be adapted to process and eject finished pieces. PART IS WHAT ISTHE WORK? 2422 3. Do not include operators waiting for machines to cycle us a work element. ‘Waiting for a machine to eycle is pure waste and must be eliminated. Always separate machine work from people's work. Itis OK to have machines finish cycling and sit idle until the operator returns on the next takt eyele, but an ‘operator should never wait for a machine. You should develop your eels in a way that allows operators to load a machine, start it, and move on to the next workstation while the machi ie eycles, 4. Do not include time for removing finished parts from machines wherever you believe automatic eject could reasonably be introduced. When an ‘operator returns to a machine on the next take cycle, he or she should ideally find an open and empty fixture (an ‘empty nest’) into which the next part co bbe processed can be loaded. Stopping to remove parts before another part can be loaded adds extra handling and waste. Thy « configure cells and equipment to avoid this waste, Work Elements for the Apex Cell Using the guidelines for paper kaizen, let’s take another look at Apex’s fuel line cell. We've listed the fuel line work elements beneath the cell layout, Notice thar the current operator activities that paper kaizen eliminated are shown crossed out.Apex’s fuel line cell — work elements material flow. eo = Bess oe a fa @L_ BY pine conte ata pace so fuze ead sto feeder Remove hose cap attaches ace fhcure Ast ect Pace fatsre® Stateele ‘amp Get etre Pace clamp Alter Katzen ‘Atach conolte Get 96 tbe Gervabe a place Plleonle breton Aside totus owcergs pe Stareyele Aside a Oxo (wat) Unctap remove oie PART ILWHAT ISTHEWORK? 2324 Question 4: What Is the Actual Time Required for Each Work Element? Wich all of che waiting on machines and manual removal of parts characterizing Apex’s current situation left out, we are now ready to time the work elements that are still necessary for making the fuel lines. ‘To collect accurate times for each work element you and your team need to go to the workplace and use stop watches. Avoid the temptation to use standard time data or time-and-motion tables because they do not capture the current reality of the shop floor. Likewise, avoid retiance on time-study data on file in the engineering office. Collecting the information yourself on site will help you tunderstand the real situation and see waste that will otherwise remain hidden, Note: Itis OK to begin with times from time-and-motion tables or data from past time studies when you ere designing a completely new process and ‘observing actual elements is not possible. However. as soon as the new process is operational you need to gather the real data as described here. Be sure to time each work element separately, not the total time required by an operator co perform a sequence of work elements. This is because the total time fora sequence will include wasted time — in particular waiting — between work elements that should not be counted as work. (However, if several work elements in succession are only one second long you may find it impractical co measure cach one. Ic is OK to group such very short elements.) Once you have timed the individual elements then time the operator's complete work eyele from start 10 finish. This time will almost invariably be higher than the sum of the work elements. The difference isthe wasted waiting time between the elements ‘You will need to ume every work element several times to get meaningful data Indeed, if you are unfamiliar with this task we suggest that you time each element ten times. This is a lor of work, but practice isthe only way eo become proficient. As you do this be prepared for the reali consuming, even if you are highly experience. ‘hat timing is labor intensive and time BAAR AFA AF AAA AA AR AA AARAAARARARARAR AAA AAPSometimes as you record the time for one element, the operator will already be on to the next element before you can reset your stopwatch. ‘So you will have to wait for another cycle to time thae element. Similarly, i a work element is interrupted while you are timing you must discard that time and wait for the next eyce. Just remember that chere is no substitute for patience because the work element and timing data are the bedrock for everything else. ‘You should time an experienced operator who is fully qualified to perform the job, but pick a typical operator if possible, not the fastest or slowest. ‘Then, after you have timed many cycles of each work element, select the lowest consistently repeatable time for each element. Do not use the average time since the lowest repeatable time is more indicative of ‘what is realistically possible, Finally, and critically important, don't forget shop floor courtesy. Make clear to everyone that you are timing the work, not the operator AAs you record the times for each work element on the Process Study Form be careful to always separate operator work time from machine cycle time, For example, if an operator loads a machine for five seconds, takes one second to star the machine, and then the machine cycles for ten seconds, the operator work time will equal six seconds, not 16 seconds. While you are timing operator work elements go ahead and time the machine cycles as well and record them separately on the process study form as shown on the next page. Note: ‘Some experienced people we have worked with don’t use a stopwatch! Instead they count operator “motions,’ valuing them at 0.6 second each. Perhaps you will feel comfortable doing this yourself some day. However, ‘we suggest you start with the method described above. TimingTips *CCollect real times pce See ones eee the operator Pee Ss element separately een Srey een eae operator who Prick) Pec Oe ind Saree) machine tim Seeeegetend Peete nc Secs Saad Ceoaetacens26 Process: Process Study $,L,A Fuel Lines Process Steps OPERATOR Work Element Observed Assembly | Get bent tube & press into fixture 6/5|5] 4) Get connector, place & clamp Get hose & place to fixture Start cycle Unclamp & remove Attach convolute Assembly | Get tube & place to fixture Get hose & RH ferrule, assemble Place to fixture & clamp Get LH ferrule, assemble to hose Place to fixture & clamp Get valve & place to fixture Start cycle Unclamp & remove AAATAAANAOAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAASObserver: Mary Smith MACHINE Date/Time: Feb.10,2000 3PM Times | pgeatest,, [Cycle Time Notes 5 5 Operator has to hammer to fit 4 4 Operator stacks own hoses (parts) 1 4 2 6 5 4 Parts far away; Lots of walking Quality check needed? PART Is WHAT ISTHE WORK? 228 Work Element Times for the Apex Cell ‘When we look atthe list ofall of Apex’s element times and machine eyele times an important finding, jumps out. The operators at Assembly I, Assembly Il, the Crimper, and the ‘Tester wai ac their machines for a total of 21 seconds each time a fuel lin is produced. 21 seconds may not seem like much wasted time on casual observation, but 21 seconds times 690 pieces per shift totals four hours of operator time spent watching machines eyele. No customer would think this cteates value and it is completely avoidable because each machine only needs co eyele once every 40 seconds (takt time). There is nothing gained by the operator staying at the machine and reloading it as soon as it has finished its cycle. Instead, the operator can perform other value-ereating in-cycle work and recuen to the machine for reloading some time afver it has finished cycling. Note: In reviewing the times in the list, we have estimated the time required to load the tube bender in a one-pioce-at-a-time fashion because the work is not currently done this way. All “get & placo” times at the other machines were measured at five seconds, so we will use that figure for the tube bender now. This estimate will be replaced with real data once the new cell isin operation. ZBRAARAAMRAAMRAARAARHRARHHTATAARARHHhAnnnnnoeApex’s fuel line cell — work element times Work Elements material flow ‘Assembly ee ~ A ‘ ope) ‘rior kae Loa so fener Ode wo ect erate Get $6 abe & pace obender ade nwo sect Geto pace Get teenhose Boheme Soci fol Pace o fuse & osrg Get et fore Pace Belang Get vaio pace tofu yee at) Uncamp remove Getasaantiya placeso fare Remon hose cap [sateachnoso vo ecure Startle pe Renatach cap pect Pace stpeng Machine cle = 200 PART I: WHAT ISTHE WORK? 29The Results of Paper Kaizen Now chat times are known for all of the work elements, let’s see the benefits of our paper kaizen, We can show this by stacking up the times ofall the work elements as the operators have been performing them, ‘Then we ean draw a second stack on the right showing the total work content after waste was eliminated by: ‘# Introducing auto-eject at Assembly I, Assembly I, the Crimper, and the ‘Tester. (This eliminates operator time to unclamp, remove, and set aside parts.) + Eliminating the waiting while machines cycle. * Converting the outof-cycle work of loading the bender with a batch of 25 pieces into in-cycle work with the operator loading one piece every cycle. You can easily see thar the paper kaizen has removed substantial operator effort from the Apex fuel line assembly process. Total work content to make one piece has fallen bby 30 seconds, from 118 to 88. This improvement is actually more dramatic because the redesigned work elements have added the step of loading the bender every eycle instead of every 25 eyeles. (This conversion of work from out-of-eyele to in-cycle will make the assembly process much mote predictable and easier to manage against take time and produetion requirements.) Because the amount of value ereating work isthe same in both the left and right stacks, i follows chat in che future operators can devote a greater percentage of their time to actually ereating value without working any harder. Apex’s first Operator Balance Chart With the work elements and times in hand, Apex’s managers can now ereate a critically useful tool, the Operator Balance Chart. ‘The OBC is picture of the distribution of| ‘work among operators in relation to takt time, based on real data that you personally observe end record. It is quantitative, simple, visual, and takes the guesswork out of designing and operating efficient operator-based cells. It enables engineers, managers, and produetion associates to work together using facts. This tool has been very helpful for developing our own “eyes for flow”. Whenever people start working with an OBC ‘we always note how effective the tool isin helping them to understand, ereate, ‘manage, and improve continuous flow. TARA ANANDA ANARAAOAOAAnnnnnnnnnnnePaper kaizen for Apex fuel line work content improved current 125) TOTAL TIME= ‘18 seconds 120| Place vo cantainer 15{-| = Trapece 110 = Remove ef ——* Elminata, Use auto eect 105|-| vele a stermevas . aeeorees 100} Remove cap& avvach hose | 95 |] Get ascembiy& ace to future — oot = Allconolie re crip race tocontaner bea inepeat crimp oe ioe i | TrSpETETOE et —* Fimiata Usemtoehc, gg saad Ge $= saminate Operator moves =| Remove cap & atzachhose 75| Ens mathe cee 18 Tied. dap Litas Face to tester ature 70 70 Capaceene apa 2. ee —— lminaze = = Unclamparemove el —* Elina, Use auto gject | [te pc npc cp 60| oo = E ae ace & clamp Lietde ee = cminate Operator moves 55) bnaemachhe aides 85|—] Ger frished piece place }— : oa eile Scie 80 || Gecvalve& place tofieare -— 50} =m OT Gaxvaved pace to ftare : Pace & clamp Me Paceacanp f= Teme a" Site Get i amo see ohne OT Pace to iare camp as) lace to fixture clamp 35 | —[ certo 8 tarde ascent 35 — Gesose 8 RA ferua acente 30] Gertubedpiace = 30 . Pace to Assembly litre re ate in 25 Es 25) Attach conolite Gt fished pce Ezttaenconlcte 20 URCARPATEROE —et—« Etminate, Use autoclect. 20 ye + =. Gethose & place 15| is Etmacmegcen 18 a 2 Gotcomacton laces amp 10} = 10|-} (Gat bent abe & place to Get connector pace & clap) - ‘Recah soe =StandardWorkin-rogress— g| man ocsto Werkec tasin machi, et 55 we place to derIn the OBC each horizontal line equals one second, with Apex’s fuel line takt time drawn in at the 40 second level. The work elements for each operator are stacked one on top of another (which is why the OBC is sometimes called a ‘stack chart’). The height of each box in the stack represents the time for that element, Note that operator load and unload are included bue not machine eyele times, because the OBC is summarizing human work and not machine work. Apex’s managers thought they understood cell design, but looking at the fuel fine OBC should give everyone at Apex a shock! Bach operator has consicerably less work content then the 40-second takt. In two cases the operator work elements total less than half of takt time. We have already seen that material is not flowing through the cell and that output is highly unstable. Now it i fuel lines. This adds cost to the product and threatens everyone's job. But please remember that we are analyzing the process and not operator performance. In fact, the waste we've found has its roots in the design and management ofthis process. Fortunately, the OBG cean help Apex find a better way, as we will explain in the pages ahead. apparent that Apex is also using too many operators to produce Apex’s Operator Balance Chart - current situation takt time 35 - 30 ~ ———| ie ae ae =< ae shops EY coctrsnatnece [=| Gervtwapecstoncre || Aateachcomeute | = 20 mmr —t] | Pacckcmp + Fl Gnteote El amepeemen o|denlecedee S| Ame 6H eet — 4 rid E FH] Geccogcio pice | {= —aermrereasere | mncaphaccin - ‘ecking FE] Pace coficsres camp |=] “inepeccenhips ti Geter be place ae — ome Gectontiirinsemte|—| rity tase || Ranne cap tacose 7 : Garssuiepace || macetpascentiyt a ted | ee mary place Onde i atare Peco tester tase o 8 © © 32 SRR AR AAA AAA AA AAARATAARAAAAHAAAAANNANesthat CTT TIT TOC CCMachines, Material and Layout for Flow. Production processes of any type requite the coordination of Man, Machines, Materials, and Method (commonly called “The Four Ms’). In the previous part of Creating Continuous Flow we talked about Man (or more accurately, People) in terms of work elements. Now that the work clements have been identified and timed, we can pu these aside fora moment and turn aur attention co arranging machines and workstations (Machines), and the materials management system and apparatus (Materials), in a way that permits continuous flow, Question 5: Gan Your Equipment Meet Takt Time? Once Apex managers determined the products to make in their first cell (light ‘ruck fuel lines in three variants) and calculated the takt time (40 seconds), they needed to ask whether the machines they were moving together to create a cell could actually meet the takt time. To do this each machine must be able to complete its eyele on each part within takt time. In fact, as we will see in a moment, the ‘effective eyele time’ of each machine should be considerably less than take time if continuous flow is to be achieved. [As Apex managers and engineers examined the five machines they had moved into the cell, they summarized their operations as follows: 41) Tube Bender. Stainless steel cubes from the previous process are bent to final shape in a tube bending machine, which cycles and ejects automatically as long as is feed hopper contains raw tubes. Because the hopper holds 25 pieces it would need to be refilled about every 16 minutes if the cell operates with a 40-second eyele time, 2) Assembly I. Ac this machine @ connector and rubber hose are assembled to the tube. An operator loads and unloads this machine, which performs an insertion and crimping operation, 3) Assembly Il. At this machine a Teflon hose, ferrules (metal ings for connecting tubes to hoses), and a valve are assembled to the tube. An operator loads and unloads the machine, which automatically performs the insertion and crimping, operations, This machine is changed over to nun the «wo different lengths of PART Il: MACHINES, MATERIAL, LAYOUT ahose required by the product variants going through the cell. This involves the operator Lunpinning and sliding a clamp fixture to another position and repining it there. The short- hose/long-hose changeover takes about 20 seconds, or half of take time. 4) Crimper. This machine crimps the left-hand and right-hand sides of the fuel line assembly. Itis loaded and unloaded by an operator. 5) Pressure tester. The finished fuel line assembly is tested in an automated test fixture, which is loaded and unloaded by an operator. Apex’s managers then prepared the following table to summarize the eycle time characterisis, or effective cycle times of cach machine. By ‘effective machine eyele time’ we mean: machine eyele time per piece + load and unload time (during which the machine cannot cycle) + changeover time divided by number of pieces between changeovers As the Apex team looked at these data they noted that the basic eycle time of each machine ‘was well below take time, the longest case being only 16 seconds, However, when they Effective Cycle Times of machines in Apex’s Load, Start Effective Machine & Unload. c/o Time/ Machine Machine Cycle. Time Batch Size Gycle Ty Bender | 16sec | Sec ° 21sec Assemby! | 45ec | 16sec ° 20 sec Assenby!| 7sec | 28sec rt 36 sec cimper | Ssec | 12sec ° 17 sec Tester | Ssec | 12sec o 17 sec “Time is actualy 0.67 second with a minimum batch size of 20, based on packaging the customer requires as explained later. With a 20-second changeover time, the hangeovers on this machine consume just under one second per eyele when averaged over the smallest run, a4 TAARAAAAAAR AAR AAAAAAA AAA AAA AAA AAreviewed the effective machine cycle times they realized that the Assembly II ‘machine raises a problem. If demand were co inetease (meaning takt time fell) or if the ‘machines were not completely capable (that is, able to make a good part on every cycle), or completely available (that is, able to cycle every time they are instructed to) then Assembly II could easily become a bottleneck. Apex may need to consider improving the operator load and unload! times at chis step. Ac the other machines there are no bottlenecks that will inhibie continuous flow. In fact, we would expect these machines to be idle for several seconds during each 40-sevond cake interval In our experience, in a world where machines are not completely capable ot available and demand does change, itis best to target effective cycle times for every machine in the cell at no more than 80% of the fastest (highest-volume) takt time. This ‘ensures that operators will not have to wait for machines to finish cycling the next time they come around to go through the work elements. It also provides a bit of extra capacity co accommodate some demand increases without the need to add capital equipment or pay large amounts of overtime. What if some of your machines can't meet the cakt rime with a 209% margin? You have a number of options: # Kaizen the load, start, and unload process. * Eliminate waste in the machine cycle itself to reduce time. For example, shorten che travel distance and time of moving machine part. * Splic apart some of the tasks a bottleneck machine performs and use more than one machine to perform them, Use simpler or single-task machines, running simultaneously at shorter eycle times. ‘= Install ewo machines of the same type at the bottleneck point in the cell, and alternate between them on each eycle, + Create two cells instead of one. This may be particularly appropriate when there are advantages to locating separate pacemaker cells near different customers. Finally, if all else fails: + Remove the bottleneck equipment from the cell and operate it decoupled from the pacemaker in a batch mode. Normally this will require establishing a supermarket pull system to regulate the production of the decoupled equipment. PART il: MACHINES, MATERIAL, LAYOUT 35What About New Machinery? — Increments of Capacity In the Apex example, the company already has the machines it needs and wants to move ahead with its cell quickly to cut cost and improve responsiveness. However, you may be in a different situation. Some pieces of equipment are so anti-flaw that replacing them now is the best option. Or, in the extreme case, you may have a cellular layout in mind for an entirely new product and process requiring all new machines. What are useful guidelines for designing the needed machines in order to achieve continuous flow? The first question is, “How should the materials be processed to achieve a quality part?” if there is a clear choice in technologies for making the part, then the design of the new process and its equipment should begin there. ‘The next question is, “What is the desired process capacity?" The answer to this question is related to machine cycle times. The issue is whether you chose to design in the direction of ‘one or a few complex ‘super machines’ that perform many activities with relatively long total cycle times, or you opt for @ series of simple machines that each perform only one or a few of the processing steps with short cycle times. Because the cycle time of a multi- function machine will be longer, its capacity will be lower than a series of single-function ‘machines that each cycle more quickly. Demand rates and product portfolios can change frequently, even in stable industries. For this reason itis often to your advantage to buy or build a number of simple machines that cycle quickly. These types of machines provide each cell with more flexibility to reapond to change. (This advantage holds if you kuep operator load tImes per machine from getting too long.) For example, if the cycle times of two multi-function machines in a process are near takt ‘time when installed (as shown in the machine balance chart below! there is not much potential to handle additional demand or additional products without buying another machine. Capacity increases in this example must be made by additional machines in increments of 30 seconds of cycle time, because the longest machine cycle time in & process determines the overall increment in which capacity can be added. ited flexibility of multifunction machin: takt time 40 seconds Ability to handle increased demand and more products, machine cycle time 30 seconds machine TAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARAAARAAAAAAA AAAIf this same process instead uses a series of simple machines that each cycle in ten seconds (as shown below) the cell or line has the ability to handle demand increases and additional products without buying more equipment. And capacity can now be added in increments of ‘only ten seconds. Single-function machines also tend to be more reliable and less expensive than larger multifunction machines. Also, procurement lead time is shorter. In fact, you might be able to design and build such simple machines yourself! Greater flexibility of simple machines tal time. 40 seconds = Greater ability to handle increased demand and more products 10s. 10s. <— machine cycle time 10 seconds Maximize the Utilization of Machines or People? Many of us have been taught that efficiency is achieved by maximizing machine utilization. ‘As we analyze equipment capacity we need to reconsider this flawed maxim. The physical elements of production are people, machines, and material. There are tradeoffs between these elements when you design a process. If you try to maximize the utilization of one element, the utilization of the other two tends to decline. For example, if you try to maximize the utilization of machines — running them constantly and as fast as possible — you will need extra people to run machines all the time. You will also need extra in-process material between processes to cover problems and keep the ‘machines running. Likewise, if you seek to maximize your utilization of material — having virtually no inventory on hand — you'll need extra people and equipment to handle demand fluctuations and breakdowns. Interestingly, trying to maximize the utilization of people fs unique haeausa humans are flexible. If the item that a machine makes is not yet needed by the next processing step then it is OK for that machine to sit idle and not yet cycle. (This is particularly true with simple equipment.] But an operator can move to a different machine to make something that is needed now. The machine is not very flexible, the operator ‘This means that in pacemaker cells and lines you should design operator work content not 10 simply maximize equipment utilization, but for the best operator utilization. At times this ‘may appear to underutiize the equipment, which sits idle for some time during each takt interval, but producing faster than takt is overproduction — the worst waste of all PART Il: MACHINES, MATERIAL LAYOUT 37.38 LEVEL Question 6: How Much Automation? Let's take a closer look at how automation can be used to make an efficient continuous flow You can utilize automation ro help you achieve an efficient and flexible continuous flow of material, But designed or used the wrong way, aucomation can also inhibit flow. To avoid this you must consider how the material flow and the operator flow will interact with one another, As a guide to thought, we often use a simple chart highlighting what we call ‘the ‘great divide’ in automation (see below). To allow operators to move on and add value while a machine works you will need! at least Level 2 Automation in your cell. This permits machines co automatically complete theit cycle once they're started without the need for further human attention. Wich Level 2 Automation operators ean work in a sequence like this: Remove a finished workpiece from Machine 1 Place a new workpiece in Machine 1. | Start Machine 1 (which chen eyeles unattended) | Carry the finished workpiece to Machine 2 (the next processing step), 1 Repeat the sequence at Machine 2. Levels of automation er eee Machine DCs 1, e [er Dee cars 2 | | awe | A 3 e Auto Auto e The Great Divide 4 Auto Auto Auto e 5 Auto Auto Auto ‘Auto SAA AAA AAA RRA ARAAAATANAAAAAAnNHAAAAAEThis work progression allows operators to handle multiple processes within the take time, as shown in the diagram below. While the machine eyeles, the ‘operator moves on to the next processing step. The operator never waits for the machine. We think of ic his way: When the operator waits ata machine ‘while it eycles the operator is working for the machine. When the operator moves on to perform subsequent work elements while a machine cycles the ‘machine 1s working for the operator. Sometimes we still see operators staying at machines to monitor them. Again, the operator is working for the machine. ‘This is pure waste. In these cases, engineers need to develop sensors that detect problems, alert someone, and if necessary even automatically stop the machine, Then people come to the ‘machine only when they ate really needed. The cost of simple sensors to detect problems is almost always far below che cost of keeping an operator ata machine, And human inspection is never 100% effective anyway: Multi-process handling instead of w: fi G (one piece) 3c 72 Unload Machine & Load Cycle PART ilk MACHINES, MATERIAL LAYOUT 38,Cee Cire eect Poet Dee ans Pore eee em) eon ey Co at Eue Caney CRs’ CoCaLo ead Cee Cr tg ce COR Goat Erma kur oe ny Cees Rory Cree? Having a machine cycle unattended while the operator moves the finished piece to the next machine means that one pieve of ‘standard ‘work-in-process’ inventory is left behind in the machine. Parts are being processed one piece at a time, but the one piece of ‘standard WIP" frees the operators from the machines. (During daily operation of the cell the supervisor or team leader will need to regularly ensure that chese pieces of standard WIP are in place or the efficient flow will break down.) Note: Proper machine guarding needs to be in place when machines are able to cycle without the operator's hands remaining on the switch. Look for ways to configure safety devices so they do not interfere with the operator's smooth motion. Level 2 Automation May Not Be Enough Level 2 Automation works well when parts can be unloaded and loaded with one hand. However, there is a problem when the parts being, processed require both hands to unload and load, Then the operator has to work in this sequence: Set the new workpiece aside, Remove the finished workpiece from the machine, Set the finished workpiece aside. | Pick up the new workpiece. Place the new workpiece in the machine. | ‘Start che machine, which then eycles unattended. Pick up the finished workpiece. | Bring the finished piece to the next machine, and repeat chese steps. TAAAAAARAAAAAAAAAATAAAAAAANAnANnne[As you can see, waste oceurs because the operator must double-handle both the finished workpiece and the new piece. Th both hands are needed to handle the long fuel lines, and i is one ofthe reasons that Apex's operators each stay at one machine is the situation in Apex’s cell, where Instead of having operators handle each fuel line ewice as they walk through Apex’s cell, it appears more efficient to have them stay in one position and simply remove a finished part, hang i onto a rack for the next operator, and then ger and load a new part, In fact, the parts are still double-handled, but the waste is obscured because it is spread over two operators. Apex managers also felt that by keeping the operators at the machines the operators could reload the machines as soon as they are open again, which results in high machine utilization and feels efficient. But of course, this completely ignores takt time, causes waste, and destroys flow, Double-handling means that many pacemaker processes need Level 3 Automation to achieve an efficient continuous flow. Level 3 Automation means that the finished workpiece is automatically ejected from the machine at the end of the cycle, As a each time the operator returns with a result, the machine presents an ‘empty nes new part. A new part can be loaded without having to double-handle both parts Because great precision is generally not required co eject a part, Level 3 Automation is usually quite inexpensive. A workpiece can often be ejected by utilizing energy from the final cyclical movements of the machine, for example via a part eject arm (or kicker’) connected to a moving ram. (We urge you to avoid steadily blowing, compressed air to eject parts. This creates a noisy workplace and high energy bills.) More Than Level 3 Automation May Be Too Much ‘An interesting point in the table of automation levels is chat when you go beyond Level 3 Automation co Level 4 or Level § Automation capital costs and technical complexity increase dramatically. Properly loading parts is easy for humans buc can require delicate technologies to automate. Similarly, transferring parts automatically ‘may require robots or transfer lines. This may seem attractive on paper, but the complexity often reduces process reliability to below 70%. In addition, what ean you do with an expensive, highly automated line when customer demand changes? When demand falls off you are stuck with an underutilized piece of high-dlepreciation equipment. When demand rises above capacity you need to buy another expensive automated line, PART Il: MACHINES, MATERIAL, LAYOUTIn our experience, Level 3 Automation achieves many of the benefits of full auto- mation but without the expense, procurement lead time, maintenance requirements, downtime, and volume inflexibility. We call the decision to pursue Level 4 and 5 Automation ‘crossing the great divide’. In some cases you may need to do i yan should Inok very hate ar the alternatives first. but Question 7: How can the physical process be laid out so one person can make one piece as efficiently as possible? Here is an elegant tate for cell design. Arrange the machines, workstations, and material presentation devices as if only one operator makes the product from beginning to end, even if you will never run the cell ehis way. When you design a process so one person can move through it and efficiently perform all of the work clements, you automatically design a process that avoids isolated islands of activity, ‘minimizes inventory accumulation between processes, eliminates excessive walking, removes obstacles in walking paths, and brings the people-driven, value-creating steps as close 40 one another as possible. ‘This i certain to be the most efficient layout, even though the correct number of ‘operators has yet co be decermined (and will vary anyway when take time changes significantly). On the following pages are two simple checklists for organizing machines and workstations so that operators can perform their work elements as efficiently as possible. Among these guidelines is that machines and workstations should be close together and thatthe inside width of a cell should be kept to about five feet if possible. With thi in mind, many cells naturally end up in a narrow U-shape. The more workstations or machines in the cell, the longer the U. OF course there are often product, machine, or part presentation issues that affect cell design and thus many different cell shapes are possible. Note: There is a school of thought that material should flow through cel 2a right-to-left direction relative to the operator, because more people are right handed and it is more efficient and natural to work from right to left. However, many efficient processes flow to the left and many flow to the right. Simply evaluate on a case-by-case basis whether a particular direction makes more sense. TAA AAAAAAAAARAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAEGuidelines for Cell Layout Place machines and workstations close together to minimize walking distance, Remove obstacles from the efficient operator walking path. Try to keep the inside width of a cell at around five feet to allow flexibility in reallocating work elements among team members, With @ width of no more than five feet, team members can easily walk across the inside of the cell during their work cycle. Eliminate spaces and surfaces where work-in-process inventory can accumulate. jintain consistent heights for work surfaces and points of use. Locate the leadoff and final processes near one another. ‘This minimizes return walking for the next cycle and ellows one operator to easily handle both the leadoff and final process. ‘When this is possible it greatly aids line pacing, ‘Avoid up-and-down and front-to-back transfers of the works If possible, keep the sides of the machines open to allow horizontal transfers on the shortest path between them, Use gravity to assist operators in placing parts and moving ‘materials whenever possible. Install flexible utility drops from the ceiling to make layout adjustments easier. Keep hand tools as close as possible to the point of use and orient ‘tham in the dienetion that thay are used hy oparatars. Use dedicated hand tools instead of tools that require bit changes, and combine two or more tools wherever possible. PARTI: MACHINES, MATERIAL, LAYOUT aaGuidelines for Cell Layout 1 Absolutely ensure safety and good ergonomics. A lean process is designed to support the operator and value-added working. Poor ergonomics is undesirable from a human standpoint and contributes to waste, Keep manual, operatorbased work steps close together to allow flexible work element distribution and value-added operator work. ‘Segregate Level 5 automation and continuous-eycle operations (like ovens} from manual operators or operator based work flow, ‘as shown in the diagram below, Note that an automated segment incorporated into @ cell in this manner must be highly reliable. If reliability is poor and hard to improve, begin by placing the automated segment in a separate area and regulate its production with a pull loop. Incorporating automated segments into cells j<— Automated segment Manual area (operators work here} material flow BAAR RAAAARAAAR AR AA AAARAAAAAAAAAAAAAeUse small equipment doi jingle task rather than large, multi-task equipment. Introduce auto-eject (Level 3 Automation) whenever operators ‘must use both hands to handle the part. Install one-touch automation where possible. One-touch automation means that an operator can place a part in a machine, initiate the machine cycle, and move on. Avold batching. Ideally, machines should be able to process ‘one-piece-at-a-time in less than takt time. Incorporate sensors to signal abnormal conditions and even ‘automatically stop machines if necessary, so operators don’t need to watch machines during their cycle. Design in m: ry This moans machine designs that are easily accessible for maintenance and repairs, and can be fixed quickly At the pacemaker process, strive to devise machine changeovers, between different end items that take less than one takt time cycl Guidelines for Materi: The essential companion to these guidelines for lay is Management ucand machines are guidelines for material handling. As Apex’s team works on the physical design of the fuel line cell it also needs to take a look at its system for getting the required parts and materials to their ‘point of use’ in the cell. When you use the following materials management guidelines it will help your cell and line operators perform their work elements as efficiently as possible. PART lt MACHINES, MATERIAL, LAYOUT 45Guidelines for Materials Management C2 Present parts as close as possible to the point of use, but not in the walk- ing path of the operator. Present parts so operators can use both hands simultaneously. ‘Try to keep all part variations at the operators’ fingertips at all times to eliminate changeover time. * Use fail-safe storage mechanisms when different parts look almost the same to prevent the wrong parts being assembled. *When you cannot keep all part variations near the point of use because they are too bulky or numerous, increase the delivery frequency for those parts or sequence their delivery to match the end-item assembly mix running through the pacemaker. For example, deliver sequenced parts ‘every ‘pitch’ of work. (Pitch is discussed under Question 10.) Do not have operators get or restock their own parts. With the possible exception of refilling screw pouches inside the workstation, use a material handler on a regularly scheduled, standardized route (iypivally every hour) to deliver parts and take away finished goods. Keep no more than two hours of materials at the point of use. lf the material handler fails to deliver on schedule, the cell or line will soon stop, forcing managers to address erratic material flow. Do not put additional parts storage in or near the process because this makes the operation of the cell or line harder to understand and ‘encourages operators to get their own parts. This can reintroduce the evil of out-of-cycle work. Utilize kanban to regulate parts replenishment. The material handler ‘comes regularly but will only bring those parts that have actually been used as indicated by kanban. No kanban, no parts. Size parts containers for the convenience of the operators or as @ multiple of finished-goods packout quantity, not for the convenience of the material handler or the supplying process. The operators are the ones creating the value. Everyone else is at best incidental work! continued —> PTAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAATAAAAAAAAAAAAALTGuidelines for Materials Management Q_ Do not interrupt operator work cycles to replenish parts. Parts should be replenished in small containers from outside the cell and wherever possible should slide to the point of use by gravity-feed racks or chutes, Design these so an empty container taken off the flow rack causes the next full container to slide into position. The operator then slides the emply container down a return chute to exit the cell or line, boxes opened for Flow rack with return operator (one kanban / ‘on each box) containers material handle: operator Overhead view of flow rack delivery i. =——— rack machine ——/ aching oO Flow racks can also flow over benches and through machines, not just between them. PART I: MACHINES, MATERIAL, LAYOUT 47Applying the guidelines to the Apex c: When we examine the eurrent Apex cell through the lens of our guidelines we see the following: * Too much walking distance from beginning to end. © The inside of the cell is tae wide: The leadoff and final operations are far apart, with the consequence thata single ‘operator will have to walk along way to get to the beginning of the next cycle. * There is ample space for work-in-process accumulation between every machine, * The tube bender needs modification to load one piece every cycle, * The “out” tray for the bender obscructs the operator walking path, Current Apex fuel line module layout 580 square feet, 56 pieces in process 29 feet As tae |S 20 fect S cms (anomsti) covonati AN ‘toned goo) Before applying guidelines TAA AA AAAAAAAAAAAATAA AAA AAA AA AAAsReorganizing the cell in accordance with the guidelines produces a very different configuration as shown in the diagram below. This layout will be fine-tuned when deployed on the shop floor. However, we have now improved the physical layout to 1 point that we need to ask how to integrate the work elements and the operators in the newly configured cell, Example layout for efficient one-operator, one-piece flow 252 square feet, 5 pieces in process 18 foot 14 feet “abe Bender (aetonie} [== ed —— (eae Assy Il angled to keep cell inside ee width about § f. hy parts & materials presented on ae GE Slow racks from outside cell Be sae poate orien ee ht in machine as operator moves on cinger ro obstructions in walking path ‘no space for WIP accumulation SN <——tester angled to bring call start Canieion and end together en” EN ‘shale After applying guid PART Il: MACHINES, MATERIAL, LAYOUT 48Dealing with Batch-Oriented Equipment Apex was able to ernate thair call layout hecause their existing pacemaker equipment was designed to process one piece at a time, but some of your current pacemaker equipment may be configured to rapidly process batches instead of operating in a continuous flow. We call this sort of batch-oriented equipment ‘monuments’ and they often involve processes like painting, heat treating, and plating. In the future you may be able to replace your monuments with simpler, single-piece-flow equipment. But what can you do today? +*You can separate a batch-oriented process from your continuous flow with a supermarket pull system or FIFO buffer. ‘* Heating, cooling, curing, and similar processes can sometimes be kept within a continuous flow when they are moving-conveyor processes, as, long as operators can drop off a single uncured piece and pick up a single ‘cured piece once within each tekt time. Walk distances should be minimized, * Sometimes you can ignore the batch capability of equipment and use it ina single-piece mode. However, the equipment’s effective cycle time for processing only one piece must stil fit under the takt time, * Sometimes, with a little creativity, a batch-oriented machine can be replaced by an inexpensive, single-piece processing method right away. For example, manual spray guns placed in-line can sometimes do the work of a batch- oriented, conveyorized paint line.CoC CO (CO CEC CBDISTRIBUTING THE WORK Wich the physical proce ‘most efficient manner, itis time to bring the operators and the customer back now rearranged so that work ean be performed in the into the cell design process. Question 8: How Many Operators Are Needed to Meet Takt Time? ‘The total operator work time to make one fuel line after Apex’ paper kai 88 seconds. If this were equal to or less than takt time, the cell could meet the ’s need with one operator. However, the customer currently requires ‘one finished fue! line every 40 seconds, so more than one operator will be needed, ccuscome ‘The appropriate number of operators should not be determined by estimate or by negotiation between the different members of the team. Instead you should begin the process of determining the operator need with this equation: Total Work Content (after paper keizen) Number of Operators TaktTime In the Apex example this works out as follows: £88-seconds work content | a Operas ‘40-second takt time ‘There being no s three operators will be needed if Apex is to meet c further improvement in operating methods. While this is already one fewer operator than Apex is currently using, ewo-tenths is not far above two, which ich thing as two-tenths (0.2) of an operator, this means that omer demand with no _means using three operators would resule in low productivity. This cell can be run with two operators if the entire ream is willing to set this as a goal PART IV: DISTRIBUTINGTHEWORK 5162 The table below provides a guidetine to evaluate the initial ‘number of operators’ calculation. This table assumes that operator loading will be in the 90 10 95% range, That is, 90 to 95% of each take incerval will be filled with work and operators will not need to watch machines or wait for parts. The table also assumes that your cell or line will be introduced and managed as described in this book, Note: If you intend to use a cycle time more than 10% below takt time be sure to ‘make your first number-of-operators calculation based on takt time. We think you should have the potential productivity of your cell or line clearly in mind. Then you can redo the calculation using your planned cycle time as the denominator, instead of the takt time, keeping in mind the serious problems associated with cycling too much faster than takt time. We have found that in each facility or company the commitment to ereate continuous flow should be accompanied by a consensus on how fully jobs will be loaded against take time. This discussion shouldn't reoccur e ery time a new cel is designed and ic certainly should never become a game where management is always trying to inerease loadings and production teams are trying to reduce them. Fortunately, the Up Balance Chart makes the actual loading process quite precise so the whole team can, discuss the issue with facts, Guidelines for determining the number of operators in a cell Remainder in of operators Do not add an extra operator yet. After two weeks of cell operation & kaizen, carefully evaluate if enough waste & incidental work can be taken out, ‘Add an extra operator if necessary and keep reducing ‘waste & incidental work to eventually eliminate the need for that operator in the cellHow can Apex reach the 2-operator goal? By committing their whole team of managers, engineers, and production associates to 2 ~ 4 week troubleshooting and debugging process at the cell ‘When you start co run che cell with ewo operators you may only reach 65% of target production and be tempted Co add another operator. This will be a critical moment of decision because if you do add a third operator now the pressure to kaizen out more waste is likely to disappear. Instead, we urge you to run the cell with ewo operators for extra time at che end of the shift or on the weekend to make the necessary output target while you continue to kaizen. In our experience, a team willing to commit to intense kaizen in pursuit of target number of operators based on our guidelines can usually reach 80% of the required output within a week of startup and 90% within two weeks. The final 10% is che hard part and will require all elements of production and support to come together. However, as you reach this goal — and we absolutely know that you can — you will have created an operation that can run for months at low cost n more important, this will set a new standard for with true continuous flow. E your entire organization. Operator Loading Options When you are in the upper range of our operator guideline (with an initially calculated need over 0.5 additional operator per cell) you will face a choice of how co distribute a less-than-full work content among the operators as you begin to operate your cell. ‘The traditional approach is called “balancing the Tine’ (see Option A on the following page). The work contenc is divided evenly between the operators, pethaps from a desire to be fair. But traditional line balancing bakes the waste ‘of waiting into che process by spreading it evenly across all operators. The cycle time of each operator is indeed balanced, but each operator is only partially loaded. This practice not only makes ic harder co eliminate waste later but aso creates the potential for overproduction. For lean producers this is just a bad as failing to meet demand PART DISTRIBUTINGTHE WORK 5354 After a few days of running, the operators in a traditionally balanced cell usually begin to function as isolaced islands. Small batches of inventory start to pile up between operators and continuous flow falls apart, Managers may try to overcome this problem by placing ‘kanban squares’ between each operator. These anly hold one piece of work and operators are not allowed to make another piece until the downstream kanban square is emptied by the next downstream operitor. This technique can rec tablish a single-piece-flow of material, but at the price of permanently incorporating the waste of waiting time in the process. It is a band-aid that doesn’t address the root cause. A better solution isto redistribute the work elements and fill every operator but ‘one with work elements consuming almost the entire takt interval (Option B below). This is the lean option. By loading most of the waste of waiting on one ‘operator, the opportunity for kaizen is brought to the surface. Then, once the cell is able to operate with one less production associate, the organization true cost savings. balancing the Ii vs. the lean option OF mF FO Fm A B Option &: ‘Balancing the line’ by dividing work evenly between the workers in the cell tonds to bake the waste of waiting into the cell by spreading it evenly across all the operators. Operators are “balanced” but not fully loaded. Option B:This approach redistributes work to fully load every operator but one. This exposes the waste and makes it easier to improve. PTAAAAA AAA AAA AAA RAR AA ARR A AAA RRAQuestion 9: How Will You Distribute the Work Among the Operators? Apex’s team has decided to operate the cell with two operators, each loaded with work content shat equals about 95% af rar rime Apex naw needs ro decide which work elements to give which operator. Work element allocation in a cell can be done in many ways. Managers and engineers need to be aware of the range of possibilities, both for our Apex cell example and for different types of cells they may construct in the future. Here are some approaches to consider: 4. Split the Work among the operators so each performs one take time worth of the total work concent, often moving between several machines. 2. The Circuit, where one operacor performs all the work elements to make a complete circuit of the cell in the direction of material flow. A second ‘operator follows a few stations behind, 3. Reverse Flow, in which the operators make a circuit in the reverse direction of the material flow. 4. Combinations of splitting the work and a circuit or reverse flow, 5. One-Operator-perStation, in which each operator stays at one workstation. 6. The Ratchet, in which each operator works two machines and “ratchets” the ‘work piece ahead each time the operator moves co a downstream machine, Let's look at each of these approaches in more detail. PART I DISTRIBUTINGTHEWORK 65.1. Split the Work Because the machines in Apex’s cell are now arranged in a narrow U-shape, operators can easily cross from one side of the cell to the other during their work ele. This means that a number of split-the-work combinations are possible. It also means that the sequence of work elements the operator performs can be different from the processing sequence required to make the product. fe across-thé The ability to er I work combinations is particularly helpful in finding new combinations of work elements that stack up to takt time when work elements need to be redistributed after a kaizen or due co.a change in ‘customer demand, ‘The variety of combinations made possible by keeping manual workstations close together is another reason to isolate fully automated segments of production from the operatordriven portion ofa cell In splitting up the work itis a good idea to assign the same operator the first and last work elements in the material flow because this creates an automatic pacing effect for the whole cel. Splitting the work Splitting the work means that each operator is given one portion of the total work content. {70 O) 0-0 G00 OG * oo | A t ©. . ; f “o—o0—-0 0—+0 0-0 finished product BRA RA ARF RFRA RRA RR AA RRANAAKH AH An AANA2. The Circuit Assigning all work elements to every operator and having the next operator follow the first with a gap of a few stations provides a number of advantages. It provides a natural pacing effect. It is easy to implement. It can reduce walking distances since operators have a short return path to start che next eycle at the completion of the circuit. And it automatically rotates jobs and makes the work ‘more interesting. However, circuits also have limitations: * They are generally limited to two operators because it is quite difficult to coordinate more. Ir's better to try another approach if the total work content requires more than two operators, Circuits will generally not work if more than 40% of the total operator work content occurs ata single workstation, because the operators will jam up at the high-content station. If simple, quick-loading, single-purpose machines ‘can be substituted for a complex, high-cycle time machine you may be able to spread the work over more stations and make a circuit feasible, + They require skilled operators because cach operator uiust be quilified to perform every element, while operating all che equipment and making all necessary quality checks. Circuit work distribution Each operator performs all the work elements. oT) A <— return walking distance PART IV: DISTRIBUTINGTHE WORK 573. Reverse flow Reversing the direction of operators in a circuit where parts require both handl is @ 00d choice when the machines do not yet have auto-eject (Level 3 Automation) The long-term solution is to modify the machines with automatic par ejection, but this can take time and may even have co wait until the launch of a new product Because we want to maintain an action tation and intraduce continuous flow right away, reverse flow can be a good incerim step. Reverse flow, once you try it, ereates a more natural working/valking sequence in this situation, With reverse flow che operators move in the opposite direction from the workpieces progressing through the cell. Operators star atthe finished goods container and work upstream to the leadoff point in the cell, Reverse flow does require that one additional piece of in-process product be kept in a holding position between each operation, but the advantages outweigh this drawback. ‘The diagram illustrates how reverse flow works in a three-machine cell (which we have used for ease of presentation): + Standing at Machine 3, the operacor unloads a finished part and puts it into the packout container. The operator then reaches tothe holding position between Machines 3 and 2, akes the waiting part, places i in Machine 3, and starts the machine cycle * The operator walks to Machine 2 empty-handed, © At Machine 2 che operator unloads the finished part and places ic in the holding position between Machines 2 and 3, the position just emptied to load Machine 3. ‘Then the operator reaches between Machine I and 2, takes the part from the holding position, loads ic into Machine 2, and starts the machine. © The operator walks to Machine 1 empty-handed. # At Machine 1 the operator repeats the sequence by removing the completed part and placing it in the empty holding station between Machines 1 and 2. He then takes a piece out of the raw-material container, puts it in Machine 1, and starts the eycle. © The operator walks back to Machine 3 empty-handed to complete the reverse circuit PTAA AAAAAAAR AR AAA AATAAAAAAAnAAnnnoneReverse flow Operators move in the opposite direction of the material flow. finished product] | Machine S ia, Machine material 1 4 part holding 4 positions Machine 2 material flow ——> operator flow You have probably noted that each workpiece is still double-handled in reverse flow. This is undesirable and can only be eliminated by introducing auto-eject. However, while the machines are being modified we suggest using reverse flow. PART IV: DISTRIBUTINGTHEWORK 5960 4. A Combination In many cells a combination of splitting che work and a circuit or reverse flow will make the ‘most sense. For example, some operators will work at specific stations or combination of, stations, while one or more pairs of operators work in circuits or reverse flows in other parts of the cell. This can achieve many of the benefits of circuits in cells requiring more than two ‘operators. In addition, when a pair of operators inelude both the leadoff and the final work clements in their circuits, it provides an excellent pacing mechanism for the whole cell, Combination work. ution finishes product 5. One-Operator-per-Station Some processes involve only manual work with no automated equipment. In th the number of workstations can be the same as the number of operators, or there can be tone operator on each side of a workstation, Each operator performs all of his or her work: elements at the single workstation and then passes the work on co the next station, situation ‘The assignment of work elements is easy, but it may be harder to evenly balance work and fully load the operators because of the limited ability to devise flexible work combinations. A moving conveyor to transfer the workpiece is often a good idea for maintaining continuous flow with this type of work distribution, because without it there can be a tendency for regression to batching. One-Operator-per-Station Empty station for volume increase material flow BAA AAAAAA RAR AA AAA A AAA AR AAAAAAANY6. The Ratchet In this arrangement the number of workstations is one greater than the number of operators. Each operator works at two workstations and moves back and forth between stations every takt inerement. Except for the leadoff and final workstations, ‘ovo operators will work in each station, one after the other. When operators move to the downstream workstation they carry the workpiece along, Moving upstream is done empty-handed. Thus the work ‘tatchets’ forward with each cycle of the operators “The work content for each operator must be divided between the «wo workstations such that each operator divides the take time in the same ratio between the two stations, For example, if after 50% of the takt time one operator moves downstream to complete his or her eyele atthe second workstation, all operators must move after 50% of the take time. Because all operators move at the same time, the ratchet provides a strong pacing. mechanism and is excellent for day-to-day kaizen because line imbalances are immediately visibl .. However, ratchers are only practical when work elements ean be evenly divided within takt time at every work station. ‘This generally implies mostly load-and-start machines, short machine cycle times, and light machines that ean be moved easily to even up the work elements. A good example is sewing. complex articles in the garment industry. The Ratchet Example: 4 operators 8 5 workstations ‘Workstation responsibilty in the Ratchet Operator 1: workstations A+B Operator 3: workstations C+D Operator 2: workstations B+ C Operator 4: workstations D +E PARTIV:DISTRIGUTINGTHEWORK 61Selecting a Work Distribution for Apex With these basic approaches in mind, we may now ask what the best work distribution will be for Apex. In looking at the situation it is apparent that @ ratchet approach is not appropriate because it would be very hard to divide up the eyete time on each machine into, say, half of takt time, ‘The one-operator per-station distribution is not suited co this application because all of the machines ate to some extent automated, permitting operators to move on and. perform other work elements while the machines eyele. In addition, we note that this isa small cell with a target of two operacors, so there is no need fora combination of splitting up che work and circuits or reverse flow. ‘This leaves the first three choices on our list — split operations, a circuit, and reverse flow. We prefer the idea of the (wo uperauurs moving all Ure way Uurvugh the cell each takt interval, which makes it easier to maineain continuous flow, provides a pacing mechanism, and adds variety to the work. Because it will take alittle time for Apex to design and install the auto-eje cfficient circu distribution in this case, we will begin with a reverse flow and ‘move as quickly as possible toa i ‘work content due to the double-handling of parts, so there will be a need for a litle overtime each shift. This should create pressure to eliminate more waste and introduce auto-eject as soon as possible. devices essential for an sit, Reverse flow does involve a litele more BAA AA AAAA RRA AA AA AR AAA AAA ANAAAAANSConnecting to the Customer and Regulating the Flow We have now integrated Man (People), Materials, Machines, and Methods to design ‘c1ue, efficient continuous flow Buc we still need wo dexermine how co schedule the cell and how to react when there are changes in customer demand Question 10: How Will You Schedule the Pacemaker? “To this point we have been working on the flow of products through the cell and the flow of materials and operators to support the product flow. We now need to design a suitable information flow from the customer. It's not realistic to expect customer demand to be completely smooth. However, if ‘we try to adjust the output of the cell to respond from hour to hour to every twitch in demand it will be very hard to sustain any type of flow. Costs will go up and quality will fll, Similar, it is not realistic to expect the mix of product types demanded to be constant. Yet if we try to change over from one product type to another, as each item ges duougl dhe cell we may eneuunter material handling and produesivity problenns ‘The altemative of producing lage batches of one product type between changeovers reduces these problems, but atthe price of slowing response to customer requirements for different types, and sending large waves of component orders upstream. This will require holding substantial inventories of finished goods downstream from the cell — in the hope that we will have on hand what the customer wants — and of the necessary parts and components upstream of the cell. Both of these inventories increase the lead time through your value stream. ‘To achieve and maintain continuous flow and a lean value stream we need to schedule and operate a cell, particularly when it is a pacemaker process as in the Apex case, with as litle volume fluctuation as possible. We call eis ‘leveling the volume” of ‘work, Similarly, we need to decide on the most appropriate batch sizes to run before changing over to another produet type. We call this leveling the product mix’. Both ‘volume leveling and mix leveling must be part of your cell design process. PARTY: CONNECTINGTOTHE CUSTOMER64 Leveling the Volume If ehe customers schedule to a pacemaker process fluctuates widely over extended periods, you will need capacity (people, machines, macesal) well above average long-run demand in order to always meet customer necds. But, forthe more typical peaks and valleys in demand, when long-term average demand is fairly stable, establishing a supermarket of finished goods between the pacemaker process and the eustomer ean allow you to level production requirements in the cell while still satisfying the customer. The cost ofthe supermarket — linked to the cell by pull signal maintaining extra cap. —is often much ess than Life would be simpler if customers were the only cause of demand fluctuations. But in most processes internal variations in performance also create waves of «demand variation, For example, the pacemaker process may at times experience machine problems, quality defects, or missing materials that cause its output and ‘material requirements to vary. You have the choice of either responding very quickly to these problems to maintain level output, or adding more inventory of finished goods downstream and parts upstream from the cell, ing the volume of work more level production i 1 i } day-to-day AA PAA AAAAAAAAAARAAAAAAAAAAAAARapid response to problems is the better choice. To respond rapidly you need to become aware of problems as soon as they occur. Speed of awareness is related to how much production you release to the pacemaker at one time. For example, if production control releases a daily schedule to the pacemaker process, managers and production associates will cend to find out how they are doing only toward the end of the day. At that point it may be hard to catch up and the whole discipline of working to take time will have been lost. ‘What you need is « much smaller ‘management time frame’, by which we mean the amount of work you release to your pacemaker and the amount of finished ‘goods you take away. By reducing your management time frame and responding quickly to problems, it should become possible over time to produce a consistent volume without needing to hold extra finished goods inventory “just in case”. Ideally, Apex’s production control would release one takt worth of production (one fuel line) to the pacemaker cell every 40 seconds. At the same time, material handling would take away one finished fuel line, ‘This would be true continuous flow. Apex would be able to discover any production problems “instantly” within single takt time, What is your management time frame? ‘*What increment of work are you releasing? * How often do you know your performance to customer demand? 1Week 1Day 1 Shift Hour 1Pitch C] PART: CONNECTINGTO THE CUSTOMER‘The problem, of course, is that releasing and taking away one take at a time at cach of your pacemaker processes would require an army of material handlers. Apex will need to employ a more practical approach based on the concept of ‘pitch’. Pitch is the take time multiplied by some number of pieces that gives a practical time inerement for releasing and taking away work at the cell. An. often-used muleiplier is the finished goods packenr quantiey. At Apex the packout quantity for the cell is 30 pieces per container. We get fiom Apex’s packout quantity to a pitch with the following formula 30 pieces per container Pitch = x 40 seconds per piece (takt time) 1200 seconds or 20 minutes 20 minutes would be the basic scheduling increment, or “heartbeat”, for Apex’s pacemaker cell, Based on this pitch, Apex can establish « material handler route through the plant. Every 20 minutes he or she will bring the next 20 minutes of schedule for the cell and simultancously take away 20 minutes of production — one container of 30 pieces. This technique of ‘paced withdrawal’ will allow Apex’s managers to always know within 20 minutes if they have a problem. If.a fast problem-response mechanism is in place it should be possible to correct problems and get production back on track without the need for large amounts of overtime, Apex managers can truly manage thei cell by pitch if they 1) Know the target (30 pieces every 20 minutes). 2) Check progress regularly to spot abnormalities (every 20 minutes) 3) Quickly respond co abnormalities. Remember that the operators will be working very nearly to the full take time. ‘They cannot solve the problem and stay on pitch. Instead the team leader will usually need to step into the cell to address the problem, or switch places with an operator who can rework defective pars ZARA AFA AA AAR AAR AA AAR AA AAR AAAAA AAA AREManaging. a cell by pitch is most feasible when changeover times are very short Ideally the changeover time will be less than takt time. ‘This goal should be addressed by engineers who design the machines for the cell. Fortunately, this is the case for the Apex cell where the longest changeover time is 20 seconds. Whenever you encounter changeover times that are significantly greater chan take time you will need to assign changeavers ro specific pitch increments and skip one or more pitches each time there is a changeover. ‘There are many possible pitch intervals, and you need to find pitch times that make sense for your own situation. We sometimes begin with longer pitches and move to shorter ones as the capability of the pacemaker process is improved Note: Pitch and paced withdrawal are used to detect problems in a pacemaker process, not to make operators work harder or faster. Leveling the Mix Producing large batches of one product family variant in the cell makes it hard to supply the customer with a variety of product types in a short lead time with- out holding extra finished goods. Batching also tends to send surges of demand for particular components up your value stream. ‘This forces upstream processes to hold more inventory to handle the surges. To minimize batching, surges, and upstream inventory, you need to level the product mix of your cell You ean measure the degree of batching in any process by looking at is which means “every-part ‘can produce each of the high-running product types it makes. For example, if 4 process ean produce all of its high-running end items every day, then EPE becomes “every-part-every-day” fery-interval”. EPE indicates how often a process ‘An appropriate EPE for pacemaker processes is “every-part-every-ship-window” or “every-part-every-day", whichever is smaller. Apex makes wo shipments of fuel lines per eight hour shift (with all chree product family vatiants potentially included in each shipment). The goal for Apex’s cell should be an EPE of cevery-part-every-four-hours, Apex’s managers will need 0 calculate changeover frequencies accordingly (with six changeovers per shift). PART: CONNECTINGTOTHE CUSTOMER 67The Load Leveling Box ‘One good tool for leveling production volume and production mix at the pacemaker is a load leveling box. This simple device has a column of slots to hold the kanban for each pitch interval and a row of slots for the kanban for each type of end item running through the cell. In Apex's load leveling box the columns would represent 20-minute increments (the pitch). It would contain three rows of slots for the S, L, and A fuel line variants. On each box of finished fuel lines in the cell’s finished goods supermarket there would be one kanban card indicating the following: # Type of fuel line (8, Lor A) * Quantity in the box (30 pieces) * Supermarket address © Cell address As production control pulls a customer order from the finished goods supermarket to stage it for shipping, the kanban cards are removed from the boxes and placed into the load leveling box for the pacemaker cell in a level mix for each ship window (four hours). The material handler serving the cell then withdraws kanban from the box at the pitch inerement (20 minutes) and delivers them to the cell to initiate production, Apex’s load leveling box TAAAAR AA AA AAAAAA AAA AAA AAA AAA AH AAEKaizen the Ship Frequency Many manufacturers are required to make daily (or even more frequent) shipments to their customers, ‘This isa blessing because it establishes a rapid ‘clock speed? for your pacemaker process, within which it must be able to produce all ofits high- running part numbers. If you get to the point where the EPE. forall of your processes (both pacemakers and upstream fabrication) equals the ship frequency, then your centire value stream will low. Your facility will be a ‘money pump’ that converts raw ‘materials into final produets that can garner cash before the materials bills come due. However, if your customers require only infrequent shipments or fail to steadily reduce the ship interval chere will belittle pressure on your pacemaker and upstream processes to improve. Steadily increasing ship frequencies is therefore ‘highly worthy kaizen project for you and your customers Leveling Production in a Make-to-Order Environment Make-to-order processes, such as production of custom items, stock picking in warehouses, and even administrative processes, are often mistakenly considered unsuitable for continuous flow processing and workload leveling, since the work content involved in each customer order varies too much, Infact, you can approximate continuous flow and achieve many of its benefits in make-to-order processes by maintaining a FIFO (firstin, first-out) flow ‘through the processing steps and carefully regulating the quantity of work you consistently release to that FIFO chain of steps. Instead of releasing work in increments of customer ordering, release work based on a standard, consistent time increment or ‘pitch’ Do this by finding the bottleneck operation in your FIFO chain of make-to-order processes. Then break down orders not by customer, but into equal time increments based on the bottleneck’s capacity. The bottleneck process then becomes the ‘pitch setter’ for the FIFO chain. ‘The result is @ much more consistent work flow that quickly highlights flow interrupting abnormalities. Just like continuous flow processing. ‘PART: CONNECTING TOTHE CUSTOMER70 in 11: How Will the Pacemaker React to Changes in Customer Demand? ‘We have now given lengthy attention to the Apex fuel line cell in order to integrate Man, Machine Materials, and Methods, After all this work it would be great to finish kaizening the process during implementation (as explained in Part VI) and then ran itas designed forever! Unforen ely, this will he impossible for two teasons. First, kaizen is never finished and second, customer demand always changes. In particul at, changing volume requirements are something that anyone who is designing a pacemaker process needs to consider from the b ginning of operations so chat they can be ready ¢o respond Responding to Change in Customer Demand Many facilities are only subject to small day-to-day fluctuations in demand. A ye: history of shipments will often show that demand is stable for pei ‘customer takes a little more today, a ltele less tomorrow, and over time it balances out. ‘Smaller day-to-day demand fluctuations are best handled by use of a finished goods supermarket. The supermarket allows managers to set the takt time and the number of operators and makes it possible to manage continuous flow for extended periods But eventually the average customer volume requirement will change and the pace- maker process will need cv tespoud. If voluine drops and you keep the same number of operators, prod ity will fall and the potential for overproduction will inerease. If volume increases then the takt time for the cell will decrease (the takt time bar moves down the OBC). You will need to add people and perhaps machine capacity to continue producing to take. Responding to an increase in demand TAA AA AAA AAA AAR AAPAA AAA AA AA AAA AAAi i 2 2 ‘The periodic need to increase or reduce the number of operators is one of the main reasons for utilizing cells and arranging them in a narrow U-shape. The great variety of walking patterns offered by the U ereates many options for redistributing the work elements over a different number of operators When designing « cel, engineers should prepare ‘one up" and ‘one-down’ scenarios for responding, to changes in volume requirements. They do this by drawing OBCs for the current number of operators and for work distributions ‘with one less and one more operator. We call these different positions “toggles? because they ate like the different positions on a toggle switch, You can alter the ourpur ofa cell by ‘toggling’ the number of operators up oF down in response to changing customer demand. Over the next 18 months of operating the fuel line cell at Apex, the customer demand, number of operators, and output per operator (labor productivity) may Took as follows. Apex’s customer demand/shift “httar Aprons shyt OntDee Jawan Apne PART V: CONNECTING TO THE CUSTOMER72 Apex's number of operators amount of overtime monger shift ler prone JaySot OxtD8e Jantar Ape itor Apex’s hourly output per opt inereases due to a ongoing kaizen Talia Apes avSeptOaDee nar Apnane Not The hourly output per operator (labor productivity) remains canstant (with a bit of improvement toward the end from continuing kaizen} despite changes in customer demand and the number of operators. This is quite an achievement and, in combination with true continuous flow, is a hallmark of a lean pacemaker process. We call this achievement ‘labor linearity’, meaning that at each toggle position — with different numbers of operators in the cell — the work content for every operator stays very close to takt time. BAA AA AA AAR AAA AA ARR A AAR AAA RA RAAAEApex has three options for reacting to changes in customer demand, listed in increasing, order of volume change: * Absorb day-to-day customer fluctuations with a finished goods supermarket. * Run a liedle overtime each shift (which can only be done if there isa time gap between shifts, making this difficult in chree shift operations). [tis better co run a little overtime than to stop production a little early because operator productivity stays high. yggle che number of operacors “This list of options also corresponds to the frequency with which you should resore to them. Ie’s better to try to deal with demand variation through overtime and the use of a finished goods store, These two options can be used daily. But in our experience the minimum time frame for maintaining a toggle (at a particular takt time and staffing level) isa week, and we strongly recommend two weeks to a month. And when you are starting up & new or redesigned cell, as Apex will shortly, you should try co maintain takt time even longer, say three months, to give yourself time co kaizen the process and develop your process management routines. Note: Trving to chanae the takt time as you toaale is difficult because you must also change work distribution and redeploy people. For this reason, lean facilities try to ‘maintain their takt times for some period of time. Toyota, for example, currently recalculates takt times in its vehicle assembly plants monthly. Increments of Capacity Increasing output above current process capacity will require not only more operators but ‘more machines. Fortunately, lean cells typically use small, simple, inexpensive equipment that permits flexibility in responding to changing customer requirements. In many eases you can increase capacity incrementally by adding a machine to the cell. We call this ‘increments cof machine capacity’. even more capacity is needed you can choose to make some of the product in an existing adjacent cell, adding some machinery there if necessary. Finally, if large inereases in output are needed it may be appropriate to add another cell. We call this adding ‘increments of cell eapacity’. These options require redeployment of people, plus capital spending and significant lead times. You want to make sure that you have achieved the full benefits okaizen in your cells and have high machine reliability before you consider spending major sums on more capacity. PARTY: CONNECTINGTOTHE CUSTOMER 7cs Moving Assembly Lines Are a Little Different ‘The term ‘cell’ implies that the material being processed is moved by the ‘operators (although cells can have segments of moving conveyor). Alternatively, many pacemaker processes are built around a moving conveyor that advances the material, Moving lines are typically used to handle large products or in situations where a stronger method of pacing is necessary. The product is broughe to the operator by the moving line and che workstations are usually all che same size. Sometimes operators are located on only one side of a moving line, which then makes the line even more similar to a cell. ‘The operator balance chart and many of the concepts in this workbook can be used for designing, maintaining, and improving continuous flows on moving lines. A difference with moving lines relates to changing the number of operators in response to a change in customer demand. A great advantage of cells is their flexibility to adjust ourput volume, You can also achieve output flexibility with moving lines. For example, you may be able to halve the output of some moving lines by shifting from one operator per station to one operator every other station and slowing the conveyor to 1/2 speed, or by having each operator work through two stations instead of just one. Alternatively, you can insert empty workstations periodically along the line and add operators at those positions when the ‘customer demand increases. Line output then increases, but of course you have to redistribute the work elements over the higher number of operators. ZRF AFAAAAAAAAAAAARARAAAAAAAA ANNAImplementing, Sustaining, Improving Using the Apex example as our guide, we have now worked our way through eleven {questions to introduce continuous flow in a pacemaker process. For Apex’s new cell ‘we have a target of operating with two production associates. However, you should have noticed that the total work content for each operator is still more than take time. ‘This is normal at this point because not all waste can be eliminated during paper kaizen. To do this you will need to work on the actual process on the shop floor. Working out the waste on the shop floor scaled ‘debugging’ In this last part of Creating Continuous Flow we will implement our improvements to the fuel line cell and then “debug” ie with intensive kaizen of such items as fixtures and pants presentation, and the reduction of something called ‘incidental work’. These efforts will conclude the process design effort and transition us to the daily operation of the cel. No design can be made perfect on paper. As you implement your continuous flow on the shop floor you will uncover details that you missed and more waste to be eliminated. ‘This presents the opportunity to get greater input from everyone in your continuous flow implementation effort. The question for your team now is, “OK, what do we all need to do to make this work?” ‘One word of warning: The first continuous flow cell in a facility is often the most difficule to introduce, but is also che most important. Once people sce a conerete example of true continuous flow, one that defies all the reasons why it wouldn't work, then they can begin to think of new ways to improve and spread continuous flow in yout facility. For this reason it is a good idea to work very hard with one cell to ensure its success, and then spread this success to other processes. Implementation Planning Before you start implementing a new process you should quickly drafe an implementation plan. This will help you check if you are actually achieving, your ages oF if sone work is necessary: The implementation plan should contain the reason for improving the process, 4 summary of the current and target conditions, an implementation schedule, and a place to record quantitative targets and results PARTI IMPLEMENTING, SUSTAINING, IMPROVING 78APEX TUBE COMPANY — Continuous Flow Project =~ ‘Truck Fuel Line Pacemaker Cell 1) Background/Business Case <— Be sure to link your plan to business objectives Product ~ S/L/A Fuel Lines Location - Anytown Noods: + Customer requires 6% cost reduction + Improve productivity 2) Initial condition + No continuous material flow + No people flow (operators stay at one machine) + Unstable output *Too much overtime *Not working to takt time *Too many operators for demand rate 29 feet 580 square feet 56 pisces in process poem AS aS = es ion AY ® tears [YD ss i — “aap | @ | mono conse) ae AN Trahan)3) Target Condition 1a foot Assy I angled to keep cell inside width about 5 f. parts & materials presented on 4 ow racks from outside cell io single piece of in-process stock left jn machine as operator moves on Cray no obstructions in walking paths ant = Se tester angled to bring cell start and end together 4) Implementation Task eee ae Ireroduetion Trning Mock Ups (Aaa Auto Elect Reconfigure call ‘td. Work Traling “Tran MataralHanelors Cel Debugging Fished Goode Supermarkat Production Kanban Frequent Withdrawal Helunka Box (© Proposed Start ‘A Proposed Gomplotion © OnTerget © Actual Start ‘A Actual Completion A Behind Target © Review (Planning/Tracking) (Evaluation) 5) Indicators j Be sure t indtude Curent 20_| sp | soon | 4027 ee Goal wo | ape | ese | ara | svatuatoe PART Vi: IMPLEMENTING, SUSTAINING, IMPROVING ”‘The goal of implementation planning is not to ereate lengthy, intricate documents, but to develop a workable plan that anyone can understand and then to get to work. We suggest your overall cell implementation plan should fic on a single sheet of 11" x 17° (AS) pape And we strongly recommend that you draw up these plans yourself, by hand, and in pencil his will ensure that you understand the plan and know if it makes sense, Contrary to common thinking, the most important pare of implementation planning is not creating the plan itself, but rater using dhe plan w regularly review progress and address problems. You can only cell where a project needs help when you have a plan against which to compare progress. Once again, itis imperative that management 1) Know the target or goals (ie implementation project targets and milestones), 2) Review the process regularly to spot problems that affect achieving the goals (for our Apex example: progress review every 30 days) 3) Respond quickly to those problems to get back on track, With your plan in hand you can review your implementation progress at intervals just like the pitch of a paced withdrawal. For example, if implementation milestones occur monthly then review progress against the plan ever Once you have an implementation plan it’s time to get to work. ‘Typically, continuous flow implementation is started by a team of managers, engineers, and the production team. But ‘once an initial design is in place the degree of operator involvement rapidly increases. Implementation stages Kaizen & —» Mock — Debugging —+ Sustaining Initial Process Up (2-4 weeks) Design PAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAATAA AAA nhAnnn aneStage 1. Initial Process Design ‘The initial design of a continuous flow is primarily the responsibility of management and cengincers. Continuous flow design is not a bottom-up, self-directed team process. Generally a small group of people should first come up with an initial design. Why? Because getting any large group of people together and asking, “How should we run this process?” almost always results in chaos, A small team of managers, engineers, and someone from the production team should create the initial flow design, based on real daca and times that they collect on the shop floor, using the detailed design process presented in this workbook. The new process design must be based on shop floor realities. If you tend to design cells primarily in an office using CAD systems and standard time data you will be headed for problems. Why would the production team be willing to let a small team make the initial cell design? Because they should know that after the derailed, real-data based design process, they will have ample opportunity during the mock-up and 2 ~ 4 week debugging period to fine tune, improve, and even alter the cell design. Stage 2. Mock-Up ‘The initial process design and operator balance chart represent theoretical ideas for creating 2 continuous flow. Now it is time to bring in the experts — the production team, Explain the initial continuous flow design to them, try out the new process, and start getting more of cheir input. A good place to begin is o show the operators the layout diagram and operator balance chart, and to discuss the goals ofthe project. In many cases you may also decide to ‘un a non-production mock-up of the new process. AA process mock-up includes not only the physical process, bue also a Standard Work Chart (SWC) for each operator or workstation. These SWC forms vary in appearance from company to company, but like the implementation plan we recommend using an 11” x 17” sheet of paper. A typical SWC includes the major sequential steps at each workstation, the time needed for each step, and key points, such as quality checks or crtial adjustments. For example, a key point on an Apex SWC would be that ater placing the fuel line in the fixture, rotate it 20 degrees ro get a good fit. A sample SWC for the Apex fuel line cell is shown on the following pages. PART VE IMPLEMENTING, SUSTAINING, IMPROVING 79Assembly e 30 & APEX Standard in ion TUBE CO. | Work Chart Truck Fuel Line mibly | AAA AA AAR AAA AAA AA AAPA AAT AAAA AAATakt Time 40 seconds Workstation ‘Assombly1 JOB ELEMENTS [ No] Job Element Time ‘Comments 1_| Get bent tube N6 2 Press into fixture 3 | Get connector 4 | Place & clamp >4 5 | Gethose Sa : 6 | Place to fixture Rotate 20° TJ Start cycle 1 8 | Get finished part, attach convolute 6 Total Time | 20 ‘Shift Chook IMPROVEMENT IDEA 2[2 ‘Team Leader ‘Supervisor WORKSHEET: product changes Operator | PART Vi: IMPLEMENTING, SUSTAINING, IMPROVING 81SWOs are used to explain the work to the operators, to check how the work is being done, and to form a basis for developing and capturing improvement ideas. ‘The SWC should also include an area to note improvement needs, a sketch of the workstation layout, and operator movements, SWCs should be prepared by hand and in pencil. Never laminate them, Computer printed or laminated SWCs imply ‘hat someone has already decided exactly how the cell will run ‘The goal of the mock-up is to introduce operators to the process desi improvement opportunities before the actual process is deployed on the shop floor. Ac this stage avoid making the various part presentation devices and workstations permanent. That makes you less willing to undertake further adjustments! As much, as possible ery co make improvements immediately during the mock-up. Encourage 1 quick and practical approach. For example, if a parts presentation device is too low have someone temporarily hold it higher or put some bricks under it to find a better position and to find Stage 3. Debugging ‘The mock-up phase for an existing process should take one day, slightly longer for a totally new process. Once improvement iddeas from the mock-up have been incneparaced into che process you are ready to et up the cell and get into the 2= 4 week period we call ‘debugging Debugging is without a doubr che most imporcant phase of implementing an efficient continuous flow: This isthe time when the process begins operating and is improved to the point where it can make production as designed. During debugging the hourly customer requirements are introduced. The cell will run with the correct number of operators and be watched closely every shift by supervisors, maintenance, and engineers for kaizen opportunities. Debugging is also the time to start using the systems you have developed for supporting and managing the cell With the equipment in place on the shop floor it’s time to start up. No matter what staffing is called for on the OBG first start running the cell with one operator handling all the work elements from start co finish for about ewo hours. Ask the operator to make suggestivus as lie ut she goes through the cell, ‘Take notes right on the SWC. This single-operator approach allows you to see the actual process flow and discover ‘ways to improve it right away. If you begin with all required operators in the cell the process flow will be harder to recognize. PAA RA AAAAAAAAAAARARAAAAAAAAA AAASAfter running the cell with one operator, switch to two operators running the cel in a circuit walking pattern, Finally, ran the cell with the staffing level and work distribution called for in the OBC. Make sure each operacor who will work in the cell has the opportunity to try it out, Don't worry about achieving the takt time just yet. As operators run the cell embers should stand close by to look for more ways the supervisors and cell design team n to improve the cell and record those ideas on the standard work charts, Encourage operators to recommend ways to improve the cell. Then make the improvements that night and update the standard work chars. [As you observe a process in operation, watch operator work motions carefully. You will see id waste. Waste should three categories of work motions — value adding, incidental wor be eliminated, ‘The work-motion category ‘incidental work’ involves motions that operators ‘must do to be able to produce the product, but that don'e actually add value for the customer — like getting parts and tools, or chreading nuts onto bolts. Incidental work is necessary, but it should be minimized. Make the bolt as short as possible, so only minimum threading is involved in tightening the nut, Present parts and tools as close as possible to their point of use to minimize reaching. Categories of Work Motion Examples: Weld flange onto part + Bolt part to product Examples: ‘*Walking to get parts Examples: + Pull down toot * Unclamp & clamp Incidental Work PART Vi: IMPLEMENTING, SUSTAINING, IMPROVING — 83Here are some points to keep in mind for the debugging period: * Keep the elapsed time between communicating about a new process and actually starting it up as short as possible. It is better to judge a change from real experience rather than from hearsay. Once a change is begun people can turn their attention to the reality of making it work. * The engineers and maintenance staff need to work with the new process until it Hunctions as designed. The debugging period ends when the cell or line functions consistently as designed, * Because the debugging phase usually lasts from 2 ~ 4 weeks you will need to begin carly enough to get up to the customer demand rate. If you are converting an existing module, you should plan ahead and build up a stock of finished goods to ensure that customer demand will be mee during the transition. * Do not change the take time during the debugging period, and for as long as possible afterward, It cakes time to develop the critical routines for running and managing a new cell, * Achieving 60 ~ 65% of target production on the first day is not bad! 80% is often reachable in about a week, and 90% within owo weeks. * The cell's success is everyone's responsibility. Ifthe cell is not moving closer ta its goals, the entire team of operators, managers, and engineers must work to solve the problem, ‘+ Implement improvement ideas quickly, overnight if possible, * The operator balance chart and standard work charts must be kept up to date. They should now begin to be updated by the team leader and supervisor, * People have attachments to ways of doing things, so when a new cell is introduced there will be a transition period, On average, it takes three weeks for people to become avcus- tomed to a change. As normal resistance to change arises, remember thac continuous flow is not optional. There is no going back ro fake flow. However, how to achieve continuous flow is optional and the place for many creative ideas from all participants * Mark milestones that prove you're making progress. Making the hourly target for the firse time, making it ewo hours back-to-back, or the first time you make the daily target are good occasions to congratulate yourselves, ‘+ Near the end of the debugging period the work elements should be carefully relisted and retimed. ‘This is done by the team leader and supervisor under guidance of the engineers who designed the cell. Do not skip this! PTAA RAAAAA AAR AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAeA Debugging Checklist During the debugging period, the cell design team and supervisors need to watch the new process frequently and closely on every shift. Here is a checklist of the types of things chey should be looking for Cis there one-picce flow? Can the operator “make one, move one” without waiting? Aste yourself, how would the par ld isl do operators perform the work a specified in the operator balance chart and standaed work chart? If not, why? Has a better method been found? Whats the right way t doit? Do the team leader and supervisor understand their job responsibilities? Does the information flow? Do the operators, team leader, and supervisor know: What is the take time? - What co make? = How many to make? = How many are actually made? = What problems are occurring? = If changeovers are occurring, at the correct time? - If changeavers are taking too much time? Ate parts and materials delivered in the proper quantities? Is the size of flow racks and containers correct? Are there too many parts? Are there part shortages? Are material presentation devices corrector do the operators reach coo far? How are the parts posiioned when presented? How do the operators pick them up? Does che cell use the minimum amount of equipment and inventory? Are the correct levels of standard work-in-process inventory being maintained? Is inventory accumulating between machines? (Exception: Where two operators have « hand-off there should be one unic of standard work-in-process stock to account for minor fluctuation in operator cycles.) Is any excess material sitting on the floor? QAre you using the minimum amount of equipment required to make the product? Is the travel distance of moving machine parts minimized? Ifa table in the cell is used for just ‘one end item in the product family why walk past it all the other times? If the actual work surface of a machine is only 12 inches wide, why is the machine 3 feet wide? Can the cell change over between different end items in less than takt time? Qi Does the cell reduce lead time? Compare before and after results. PART Vi: IMPLEMENTING, SUSTAINING, IMPROVINGDuring debugging you should start tracking production results against customer demand. You can use a problem awareness board for this. Before the start of every shift the supervisor writes on the board an hour-by-hour list of what parts are to be made and the quantities required to meet customer demand, ‘The purpose of the board is not co schedule, buco highlight production problems and trigger response. If goals are not being met, the team leader should review the normal condition until the root problems, use tempo n be addressed, and then take steps to address the causes to prevent the condition from occurring again. The supervisor should also be checking the board and signing-off on the production numbers every hour Fy measites tn stop the One by one, the problems preventing the cell from me ing takt time should be identified and their causes eliminated. ‘The key during this phase of implementation is to make constant improvement. Be aware, however, that problem awareness board and the team leader need a support system hat helps to eliminate the causes of production gaps. Otherwise the team leader will end up writing the same things on the board every day and the tool becomes meaningless. Example problem awareness board a = RES coo veep meas onenter» eA ae brseke 8.9% | 90/90 210 / 268 eet ese ee spaces fae — feet ge [eae i ox | 1 Zn | 6007600 | fonimten apa aN t f hourly cumulative BAA AAAAAARAARAARARARHRAAAAARARAANNAATApex's Debugging Results Apex's debugging goal is to reduce the operator need from 2.2 to 2, with operator loading at 95% of takt time. This means reducing the current total work content of 88 seconds to about 76 seconds. In observing the cell during the debugging period the team was able to spot a variety of incidental work items where time could be reduced. The loading chute for the bender was relocated closer co the Assembly IT process, and the parts flow rack for raw stainless steel tubes was placed right next to the bender’s load chute. This took two seconds off the load time. © The auto-cject chute on the tube bender was moved so that finished tubes automaticaly slide coward the Assembly I workstation, which is the next processing step. This also eliminated two seconds. © With auto-eject added, Apex engineers were able to go ahead with their plan to go from reverse flow to circuit. This meant thar the standardized work charts and operator balance charts had to be redone, and the appropriate debugging executed, to achieve smooth natural movement and rhythm by the operators. * ‘The Assembly IT operation involves the most parts, so the team paid particular attention to part presentation and handling here, ‘© The Assembly IT fixture was improved to reduce load time by one second for ‘ovo of the four items loaded into this fixture, ‘Total reduction: two seconds. + By assembling the LH ferrule to the hose first, the operator could then grab the RH ferrule with her right hand and the valve with her left hand simultaneously. ‘The valve is simply dropped into a spor in the fixture, This took out two seconds. ‘© Acthe packout operation, the finished goods box was raised and angled toward the operator, reducing pack time by one second. "The total time reduction for these changes was nine seconds, a fine achievement. However, the team retimed the work elements and discovered that total walk time in the new cell layout, with the tube bender chute position already improved is six seconds. The total work content is 88 + 6 = 94 seconds, and the debugging target is 76 seconds. The nine second time reduction brought the total work time down to 85 seconds, but i is still nine seconds too much. PARTVE: IMPLEMENTING, SUSTAINING, IMPROVING 8785 80 75 70 65 55 50 45 35 30 25 20 15 after paper kaizen CO TOTAL TIME= 86 seconds after first debugging Pace to container Inspect se Remove cap &attach hose Place to tester fixture Fullconvlute over crimps Ge triesipce repack cmp = - ace &clamp LH ede ‘Ge rished piece place Rise Sele Get valve & place to fixture Place &.clamp [Get Utero assem tahoe Place to fixture 6 clamp Gechose & RH ferie assenbie Place to Assembly I fixture Get fished piece attach confolute te = Get hose & place Gexconnacton place and clamp Get bent bbe & place to ‘Aesenbiy cer 65 tube & pace to bender 75 70 65 50 25 20 15 Place to contaner Inspect = Remove cap & attach hose | — Place to tester fixture Pullcormolite ovr crimp Ge riche Bepack cps Place &clamp LH side Get irished pleco place Riside to iecare _—————| Get valve & place to xture Place & damp (Ges ero asso thos Pace to facie & clamp Got hose LH fore, ose Face to Assembtyifecure Get riche attach confoite Govhose & place ‘Get comector pace and clamp Geo be paca ta Reconiy| Get 56 tbe & place to bender BAA AARAA AAR ARR AA AAA AAAAR AHA AAR AANEAfter carefully watching the flow in the cel fora Jong time the Apex team made an interesting discovery. At the crimper, the operator requires five seconds to press the nearly completed fuel line into the fixture for a simple and quick crimping cycle. Then, at the very next processing step, the operator takes five seconds to press the finished assembly into the test Fiatane for simple and quick pressure-test cycle (another five seconds). ‘With these significant load times and fast machine eycles, the team decided to combine the test process into the crimping operation, utilizing one fixture instead of two, This eliminated one loading step and five more seconds of operator time, This also eliminated one second of walk time, because there is one less ‘machine in the cell, Apex’s eam made a quick check to ensure that this change 4d not increase the operator work content at this station to 40% or more of the total, and that the effective machine eycle time would stil fic under take time. ‘Total debugging time reduction is now 15 seconds, with a resulting total work ‘content of 79 seconds. Apex will have each of the two cell operators perform all of these work elements in a circuit work distribution, ‘The team has reduced the work content to one second below the take time, which works at Apex because the one hour time gap between shifts allows for alittle overtime cach shift. However, a paced withdrawal functions best when ‘operator eycle time is a few seconds under takt time, This leaves room for minor eycle variation, hiccups, and swife changeovers without upsetting the paced withdrawal at the pitch increment. ‘The Apex team will continue to work to remove at least an additional three seconds and get operator eycle time to the target of 95% of rakt time, Some ideas they have are to automate part clamping into the machine ¢ Assembly Il and to use a parts dispenser that automatically drops two ferrules into the operator's hand. Both are technical changes that will take a couple of weeks to realize cle at ‘The team also considered taking the task of pulling the convolute over the cximps (five seconds) out of the cell and moving it to the operator at the customer's assembly plant who installs the fuel line into the vehicle. But they decided instead to keep the value adding work at Apex and figure out how to do it better. PART Vi: IMPLEMENTING, SUSTAINING, IMPROVING90 Stage 4. Sustaining the Flow Once your continuous flow cell functions as designed — once it consistently ‘makes production — y Unfortunately this is the time when we often see engineers and managers walk away from the new process, thinking that the operators will now be able to take 11 move from che debugging phase into daily operation. care of things. [es critical to understand that there is very little slack in a lean system and processes, especially pacemaker processes, will need to be managed. All the elements of lean production are interdependent. Production cells must start ‘on time and function according to standardized work. ‘Team leaders and supervisors ‘must monitor their lines and respond immediately. Material handlers must deliver their quantities on standardized routes at set times. Maintenance must conduct its activities on schedule and respond to line problems very quickly. Ina Jean production system both production and support functions are in effect linked to cakt time, which means that all are working toward serving the customer. Because the production operators in a lean setting have in-cycle work that is near takt time, they are going to need reliable support systems to handle any significant problems that occur. When production problems occur — and they do, even in the best plants — you will not be able to meet demand if the operators are also your primary problem-response system. A reliable support system means developing standardized work for team leaders, supervisors, and maintenance — just as there is standardized work for produetion ‘operators. Among their responsibilities are rapidly detecting and responding to produetion abnormalities, and eliminating their causes, Standard work for support functions should list their daily tasks and responsibilities, and the times for performing them. Here are three important things to keep in mind as you develop standard work for your support staff Rapid response to problems As you know from our discussion of paced withdrawal in Part V of this book, the spced at which you discover problems at a pacemaker process is related to how much schedule you regularly release to it and how much finished goods you take ava. ‘When a new process matures and its production stabilizes, instead of releasing a schedule you can begin to manage it with a paced withdrawal ata pitch increment. This helps to expose problems quickly, fast enough to respond and recover without the need for weekend overtime, BRA AAA AAA AAR AAA AATAAAAAARANAAAAARE‘The purpose of a paced withdrawal is to quickly detect problems, not to make ‘operators work harder or to get more production out of the process. You have already determined the work content per operator in the previous design steps. ‘The paced withdrawal becomes the “heartbeat” of the continuous flow. When @ pacemaker misses a pitch, the team leader or supervisor should react immediately. The goal should be to correct the problem within the pitch increment, and restore the heartbeat. A team leader has several options for reacting to problems and ‘maintaining piteh: * If the pitch quantity was missed because some parts need to be reworked, the team leader can take the problematic parts and rework them while the cell operators go on to make their next pitch. Alternatively, che team leader can step into the workstation where the defect occurred, and that station's operator can do the rework. * Fora production shortfall, the ceam leader can step into the cell as an extra operator until the cell is caught up and on pitch again. ‘If there is an equipment problem, the team leader determines whether or not the problem can be fixed immediately, or if maintenance should be called. ‘When maintenance is called for a missed pitch the target for their response time should be two minutes or less. Audits A good way to keep improvement going, and to prevent backsliding, is to establish routine of daily, weekly, and monthly audies conducted by overlapping levels of ‘management. In this overlapping system, team leaders audit the work of operators, supervisors audie team leaders, area managers audit supervisors, and the plant manager audits the plant, ‘This may sound like a lot of auditing, but it usually takes less time than you might think. Team leaders and supervisors may spend about 10 ~ 30 minutes a day auditing, ‘Area managers may spend about 20 minutes to an hour. And the plane manger may only spend one day a month on a formal plant audit in a mature lean operation, PART Vi: IMPLEMENTING, SUSTAINING, IMPROVING 91“These audits should be part of management's standardized work. Everyone from operator to plane manager has a responsibility to sustain continuous flow. ‘And each member of the management team is expected to serve as a coach, teaching the audit process co people at the next level Here is an example audit timetable, including who is responsible for what: Production Operators: Each day operators should verily that they are doing their jobs correctly by checking the standard work charts. Before the start of the shift, operators go through a Preventive Maintenance (PM) check sheet. ‘This isa list of equipment checks to perform, such as checking lubrication levels, the condition of filters, or the tightness of nuts and bolts. This PM routine is just like che checks that pilots go through before takeoff It ensures that equipment is able to perform as required and catches potential problems before they cause breakdowns or stoppages. Team Leaders: Each day team leaders should use a standard work audit sheet to check every process done by their team members. (See our example on aye 94.) Typically the leader will check such items as: do the operators start and stop work on time; do they call the team leader or supervisor if they fall behind takt time or discover a chronic problem; do they pull che Kanban card ‘with the first part used; do they initiate the machine cycle on time; do they perform all the quality checks; do they perform the PM check? Items on the checklist will vary depending upon the industry, but the leader should check ‘each team member for several cycles. Supervisors: Each day supervisors should check that the team leaders in their sroups have done their standard work audits. They also perform a standard ‘work audit on one operator in each of their teams on a daily basis. Once a week they also perform a housekeeping audit of their teams, to check that there is a place for everything and everything isin its place. ‘Area Managers: Each day area managers should make sure that their supervisors have checked che team leaders and performed a standard work audit of one ‘operator in each cell. They should also perform a daily standard work audit of one ‘operator in their area, Things they check include: are supervisors checking the take time board every hour and signing-off on it; is paced withdrawal occurring as BAA AAAAAARA AAA AAA AAA AAA AANAAAAAETypical chain of responsibility e e cee * eee eG ee ? \ 7 operators @ae tesire — Area Manager Plant Manager Supervisor is 7 designed; is production control auditing the kanban cards to make sure the right amount of parts are in the pull system; are any cards missing; is production control doing, daily check of the part levels? (A typical goal isto have two hours worch of parts lineside ifthe replenishment cycle is hourly) Plant Manager: Once a month (or more frequently if required, which is often the case early on in transitions) the plant manager should conduct a housekeeping audic of the encite plant, At chis time the plant manager should also conduct a standard work audit of one operator together with the operator’ supervisor. PART: IMPLEMENTING, SUSTAINING, IMPROVINGPUUHNUUUUUHUUEUUHEUUP HUE eee! SOM PezIpIEpURIS =MIS ‘uonsas squeWLUGD Byf UI asneD But oX,, U2 20210 "MLS BuIMO}IO} LON 5! pauipne uossa’ 3pojg pareuBisep ou 's|ueWuOD ‘yeam yovs go! ax UO Uosied 1ueLayID SUD (2 osinredns at Aq Yylus aip jo pus aun wea) 12d Aap ad gol 2u0 »ps4p ‘10399 uae 2q pINoYs UONDE axNs1109 OU X0G e UI PEdEIC SI , x, UE JOABUAUAN ‘ALON aunpsaoig pny ¢Sp1eoq Buzsod>s uoponposd ayp Gupipne BW s} {paiepdn Bureq pieog Gumodas uonanposd ayy 6) {ued paisod auf OF paiepan sye6ie) uonanpord oun ay 2 pean

You might also like

• Mike Rother - Learning To See Version 1

  

  100% (50)

  Mike Rother - Learning To See Version 1

  122 pages
• Building A Lean Fulfillment Stream

  

  100% (3)

  Building A Lean Fulfillment Stream

  112 pages
• Making Materials Flow

  

  100% (15)

  Making Materials Flow

  108 pages
• Everything I Know About Lean I Learned in First Grade

  

  80% (5)

  Everything I Know About Lean I Learned in First Grade

  90 pages
• 5S For Operators

  

  100% (19)

  5S For Operators

  70 pages
• Hoshin Kanri For The Lean Enterprise Developing Competitive Capabilities and Managing Profit-Thomas L Jackson

  

  100% (5)

  Hoshin Kanri For The Lean Enterprise Developing Competitive Capabilities and Managing Profit-Thomas L Jackson

  224 pages
• Lean Lexicon: A Graphical Glossary For Lean Thinkers

  

  100% (2)

  Lean Lexicon: A Graphical Glossary For Lean Thinkers

  140 pages
• 2 Creating Continuous Flow PDF

  

  100% (4)

  2 Creating Continuous Flow PDF

  120 pages
• Making Material Flow

  

  100% (2)

  Making Material Flow

  108 pages
• (Shopfloor Series) Productivity Development Team-Cellular Manufacturing - One Piece Flow For Workteams-Productivity Press - Routledge (2018) PDF

  

  100% (6)

  (Shopfloor Series) Productivity Development Team-Cellular Manufacturing - One Piece Flow For Workteams-Productivity Press - Routledge (2018) PDF

  87 pages
• Shingo Shingeo - A Study of The Toyota Production System From An Industrial Engineering Viewpoint

  

  100% (1)

  Shingo Shingeo - A Study of The Toyota Production System From An Industrial Engineering Viewpoint

  153 pages
• Hoshin Kanri

  

  100% (9)

  Hoshin Kanri

  309 pages
• OEE For Operators PDF

  

  95% (20)

  OEE For Operators PDF

  92 pages
• Creating Continuous Flow

  

  100% (3)

  Creating Continuous Flow

  104 pages
• 3 - Creating Level Pull

  

  100% (3)

  3 - Creating Level Pull

  120 pages
• Taiichi Ohno

  

  100% (4)

  Taiichi Ohno

  168 pages
• Chris Harris, Rick Harris - Lean Connections - Making Information Flow Efficiently and Effectively-Productivity Press (2008) PDF

  

  100% (1)

  Chris Harris, Rick Harris - Lean Connections - Making Information Flow Efficiently and Effectively-Productivity Press (2008) PDF

  166 pages
• Kaizen Express - John Shook PDF

  

  100% (2)

  Kaizen Express - John Shook PDF

  134 pages
• Day 1 - 01. Lean 2.0 Strategic (English Ver.) PDF

  

  100% (1)

  Day 1 - 01. Lean 2.0 Strategic (English Ver.) PDF

  50 pages
• 精益办公 Lean office

  

  100% (2)

  精益办公 Lean office

  90 pages
• 01-03-01 Duggan Creating Mixed-Model Value Streams

  

  0% (1)

  01-03-01 Duggan Creating Mixed-Model Value Streams

  53 pages
• Standard Work Implementation

  

  100% (3)

  Standard Work Implementation

  98 pages
• Standardized Work For Noncyclical Processes Compress

  

  100% (1)

  Standardized Work For Noncyclical Processes Compress

  99 pages
• LEI - 4 - Creating Level Pull

  

  100% (1)

  LEI - 4 - Creating Level Pull

  120 pages
• 4.0 Creating Level Pull PDF

  

  75% (4)

  4.0 Creating Level Pull PDF

  120 pages
• LEI - 5 - See The Whole - Mapping The Extend Value Stream

  

  No ratings yet

  LEI - 5 - See The Whole - Mapping The Extend Value Stream

  115 pages
• Manufactura

  

  No ratings yet

  Manufactura

  87 pages
• The Ilustrated Lean & Lean VSM Mapping The Extended Value Stream PDF

  

  100% (4)

  The Ilustrated Lean & Lean VSM Mapping The Extended Value Stream PDF

  222 pages
• Value Stream Mapping

  

  100% (10)

  Value Stream Mapping

  47 pages
• Theory of Every Part Every Interval - EPEI - Leveling - Heijunka

  

  No ratings yet

  Theory of Every Part Every Interval - EPEI - Leveling - Heijunka

  10 pages
• Creating Continuous Flow

  

  No ratings yet

  Creating Continuous Flow

  66 pages
• Creating Continuous Flow An Action Guide For Managers Engineers and Production Associates

  

  No ratings yet

  Creating Continuous Flow An Action Guide For Managers Engineers and Production Associates

  4 pages
• Materials Flow

  

  100% (7)

  Materials Flow

  99 pages
• Creating Continuous Flow

  

  No ratings yet

  Creating Continuous Flow

  126 pages
• Whole VSM Womack

  

  No ratings yet

  Whole VSM Womack

  32 pages
• Toyota Kata Presentation From Keith Deibert

  

  100% (3)

  Toyota Kata Presentation From Keith Deibert

  44 pages
• (Hiroyuki Hirano) 5 Pillars of The Visual Workplac (B-Ok - Xyz)

  

  100% (3)

  (Hiroyuki Hirano) 5 Pillars of The Visual Workplac (B-Ok - Xyz)

  398 pages
• The Standardized Work Field Guide Compress

  

  100% (7)

  The Standardized Work Field Guide Compress

  176 pages
• Toyota Kata Overview

  

  100% (3)

  Toyota Kata Overview

  61 pages
• (Patchong, Alain) Implementing Standardized Work PDF

  

  100% (2)

  (Patchong, Alain) Implementing Standardized Work PDF

  93 pages
• VSM For Manufacturing by LEI - Keddy

  

  No ratings yet

  VSM For Manufacturing by LEI - Keddy

  43 pages
• 12 Gemba Walks

  

  100% (5)

  12 Gemba Walks

  270 pages
• Jim Womack Keynote Slides

  

  100% (3)

  Jim Womack Keynote Slides

  20 pages
• The Lean Lego Game: Francisco Trindade Danilo Sato

  

  100% (1)

  The Lean Lego Game: Francisco Trindade Danilo Sato

  53 pages
• Lean Leadership and Culture by John Shook

  

  No ratings yet

  Lean Leadership and Culture by John Shook

  60 pages
• Standard Work For The Shopfloor 2002

  

  No ratings yet

  Standard Work For The Shopfloor 2002

  56 pages
• VSM

  

  100% (6)

  VSM

  296 pages
• Lean Lego Game SOP

  

  90% (10)

  Lean Lego Game SOP

  19 pages
• Quick Changeover

  

  No ratings yet

  Quick Changeover

  96 pages
• Lean Conversion of An Assmbly Line - A Case Study

  

  100% (3)

  Lean Conversion of An Assmbly Line - A Case Study

  115 pages
• Making Materials Flow

  

  100% (1)

  Making Materials Flow

  114 pages
• Standardized Work Ebook Final

  

  100% (1)

  Standardized Work Ebook Final

  21 pages
• ApplicationGuidelines Shingo

  

  No ratings yet

  ApplicationGuidelines Shingo

  34 pages
• Ebook Understanding Lean Thinking Final

  

  100% (1)

  Ebook Understanding Lean Thinking Final

  22 pages
• Making Materials Flow Foreword

  

  No ratings yet

  Making Materials Flow Foreword

  6 pages
• Introduction of Flow Management in Manufacturing - ADDVALUE - Nilesh Arora

  

  No ratings yet

  Introduction of Flow Management in Manufacturing - ADDVALUE - Nilesh Arora

  34 pages
• Lecture5_Book1Part3_VSM

  

  No ratings yet

  Lecture5_Book1Part3_VSM

  66 pages
• Notes On Lean Thinking

  

  100% (1)

  Notes On Lean Thinking

  8 pages
• Lean Manufacturing Lec 5.1

  

  No ratings yet

  Lean Manufacturing Lec 5.1

  41 pages
• Ten Reasons Why One Piece Flow Will Not Work

  

  No ratings yet

  Ten Reasons Why One Piece Flow Will Not Work

  20 pages