Study on Implementation of Lean Manufacturing Tools and Techniques

International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 5 (2016) pp 3289-3293 Study on Implementation of Lean Manufacturing Tools and Techniques M Yogesh, Research Scholar, Karpagam University, Karpagam Academy of Higher Education, Coimbatore, India Dr S Prabagaran, Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Karpagam University, Karpagam Academy of Higher Education, Coimbatore, India Abstract Lean technology is a strategy applied to increase effectiveness and efficiency across all areas of an industrial concern. Lean is about doing what is right. It starts from the point of knowing what customer wants and works to find the best quality levels at the best possible delivery times. A study on the effectiveness of lean implementation is made in the light of a survey conducted with the help of Connector manufacturing industry in India. In the survey, we examined how far the workers are aware of Lean Technology and how much is their impact on implementation of Lean tools. Key Words: Lean, TEEP, OEE, quality, productivity, India INTRODUCTION Lean technology has a profound effect on the working of the industry. It increases the productivity. Quality factor of the product is improved. The products are made as per the needs of the customer. Waste in the manufacture is minimized. Implementation of lean strategy is effective only if the workers including those in the management cadre are aware of lean tools. We study the awareness of lean tools among the workers of the firm. We also explore the impact on implementation of lean technology. We derived the relevant data from the organizational study conducted in a connector manufacturing unit. A survey on the effectiveness of implementation of lean tools and techniques in the manufacturing department and quality improvement sectors are made. The company has five departments 1) manufacturing 2) quality assurance and quality 3) supply chain 4) purchasing 5) finance sector. Our study was restricted to department 1 and 2.The manufacturing department comprises of 1) Stamping division with high speed stamping press 2) Molding division with injection molding machine 3) Plating division with line-lay out electroplating 4) Assembly division with fully and semi automatic special purpose machines. In the manufacturing department, we focused on the operational excellence. For that, we have selected the following Key Performance Indicators 1) Direct Labor(DL) Productivity and Direct Labor(DL) Efficiency 2) Rate of accidents 3) Total Effective Equipment Productivity(TEEP) 4) Overall Equipment Efficiency(OEE). The Direct Labor productivity is defined as the ratio of COGS (cost of goods sold) for the month to the total direct labor hours. DL Efficiency is the ratio of earned hours of the plant (sum of DL hours and equivalent labor hours of Molding, Stamping and Plating) to the HR paid hours of direct labor. TEEP (Total Effective Equipment Productivity) is the theoretical hours of production of good parts of all M/Cs in the month to the total absolute open hours of all M/Cs in the process of the month. Over all Equipment Efficiency (OEE) is the ratio of theoretical hours of production (earned hours) of good parts for all M/Cs in the month to total open hours (shift duration) of all the processes for all M/Cs in the month. Here all calculations are taken on monthly basis. In the quality improvement sector, the key performance indicators are (1) Absence of customer complaint about quality (2) QAPP (Quality at Process Part per Million). I. SURVEY REGARDING THE AWARENESS OF LEAN CONCEPT AND THEIR IMPACT ON IMPLEMENTATION OF LEAN TECHNOLOGY First survey was conducted in the year 2012 among the employees of the manufacturing unit. We made a study to find how far the employees are aware of lean manufacturing philosophy. Questionnaire survey research design had been applied in this study and data have been recorded, investigated and analyzed. Survey was one to one interaction from supervisory level to the direct work force. Employees have been classified into: 1) Grade 1 employees with 1-2 years of experience. 2) Grade 2 those with 2-5 years of experience. 3) Grade 3 those with 5-8 years of experience. 4) Grade 4 above 8 years of experience. For the survey we used fifteen types of questions and the study rating is made. We categorize them into four types: 1) Little awareness of lean management, they were given marks 0.25. 2) Partial awareness, they were given marks 0.5. 3) Average awareness, they were given marks 0.75 and 4) Full awareness, they were given marks 1.Sample of 100 were employees chosen from all the categories. A graphical representation of; a) Survey on employees in 2009 before implementation of LM. b) Graphical representation of survey on employees after implementation and training of LM in 2013 and 2014. The questionnaire survey among the employees has shown that in Grade 4 category 89% were aware of LM and in Grade 3 category 70% were aware of LM, in Grade 2 category 40% were aware of LM and in Grade 1 category 21% were only aware of LM. As a remedial measure, training and workshops were given for Grade 1 and Grade 2. Quality complaints QAP PPM, it is defined as the bad parts not confirming to the specifications in the month of all sections*10,00,000 to the total assembly production in the month of all sections. Remedial actions implemented for the improvement of DL productivity by hoshin workshops in all department. As a measurement of improvement, preventive action for TEEP and OEE, TPM workshops, SMEDs (Single Minute Exchange of Die) and Kaizen were conducted. As a remedial measure for quality complaints, QRQC (Quick Response to Quality Control) is implemented. Analysis of the key performance indicator of LM after the implementation. 3289

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec International Journal of Applied Engineering Research ISSN 0973-4562 Volume 11, Number 5 (2016) pp 3289-3293 1. DL Productivity 2014 4. D L Efficiency 2015 10 8 6 4 2 0 90% 85% 80% 75% Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Month of the year 2014 along x axis, D L productivity along y axis Fig:1.1 The graph shows D L Productivity for the year 2014 after impementation of Lean Technology. The values of DL productivity from January 2014 to December 2014(month wise) is 5.49, 6.48, 6.49, 6.5, 6.47, 6.7, 6.69, 6.35, 9.35, 7.76, 8.13 and 8.49. It is seen that D L productivity in general increases and shows an abrupt rise in September 2014. 2. D L Productivity 2015 Month of the year 2015 along x axis, D L Efficiency along y axis Fig:4.1 The graph shows DL efficiency of the year 2015. One year after the implementation of Lean Technology. For the month January, February DL efficiency increases, then during March it decreases and then it increases and during May, June DL efficiency attains a steady value. The values from January 2015 to July 2015 is 85, 86.1, 83, 88.9, 89.5, 88.9 and 86.1% respectively which shows a considerable increase when compared to the year 2014. 5. Accidents- 2014 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Month of the year 2015 along x axis, D L Productivity along y axis Fig:2.1 The graph shows D L Productivity for the year 2015 after implementation of Lean Technology. The values of DL productivity from the month January 2015 to July 2015 is 7.96, 8.6, 9.2, 10.1, 9.3, 9.8, 8.6 respectively which shows the upward growth of the labour productivity. Month of the year 2014 along x axis, number of accidents along y axis Fig: 5.1 The graph shows the number of accidents during the months of year 2014 just after the lean implementation. The rate of accident is negligible and during the month of July, one accident is reported. 6. Accidents- 2015 3. D L Efficiency 2014 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Month of the year 2015 along x axis, number of accidents along y axis Fig: 6.1 The graph shows the number of accidents for the year 2015.That is one year after the implementation of Lean Technology. The number of accidents is almost nil except in the month of April, where the number of accident is only one. 7. TEEP (Assembly, Molding, Plating and Stamping)-2014 Month of the year 2014 along x axis, D L efficiency percentage in y axis Fig:3.1 The graph shows D L efficiency for the year 2014 just after implementation of Lean Technology. During the earlier period of 2014, DL efficiency decreases upto the month of June and there after it increases and shows maximum efficiency for the month of November. The values of DL efficiency from January 2014 to December 2014 is 71, 65, 67, 65, 62, 59, 56, 69.7, 64.4, 68.1, 75 and 63%. 3290 Month of the year 2014 along x axis, TEEP along y axis

Fig: 7.1 The graph shows TEEP (Assembly, Molding, Plating and Stamping) for the year 2014 just after the implementation. On the whole TEEP shows a small improvement except for assembly. 8. TEEP (Assembly, Molding, Plating and Stamping)-2015 10.OEE (Assembly, Molding, Plating and Stamping)-2015 Month of the year 2015 along x axis, TEEP along y axis Fig: 8.1 The graph shows TEEP (Assembly, Molding, Plating and stamping) for the year 2015. TEEP shows a slight increase and even for assembly there is a small rise for TEEP. Month of the year 2014 along x axis, OEE along y axis Fig: 10.1 The graph shows OEE (assembly, molding, plating and stamping) for the year 2015, one year after the implementation of lean technology. On the whole there is an increase of TEEP by the implementation of lean technology. 11. Quality Complaints 2014 9. OEE (Assembly, Molding, Plating and Stamping)-2014 Month of the year 2014 along x axis and OEE along y axis Fig: 9.1 The graph shows OEE for the year 2014 after the implementation of Lean Technology. OEE shows a slight rise towards the end of the year. 3291 Month of the year 2014 along x axis and number of complaints along y axis

Fig: 11.1 The graph shows the number of complaints during months of the year 2014 just after the implementation of lean technology. It is found the number of complaints is relatively large during the month of February and July, there after the number of complaint decreases to one per month showing quality improvement. 12. Quality Complaints 2015 CONCLUSION Our Research sets up a frame work for performance measurement. A financial cost of waste measure is developed from the data on current performance level. The planning frame work develops a lean score board that establishes the gap between current performance and desired performance target. A new philosophy is developed which asserts that Price Profit = Cost. A close link between the customer needs, manufacturing, supply chain and purchase sector improves the overall efficiency of the performance. Continual improvement should be planned as a part of lean technology so as to get 100% efficiency in the implementation of Lean Tools. ACKNOWLEGEMENT We wish to thank Karpagam Academy of Higher Education and the Connector manufacturing company for giving us facilities for doing this work. REFERENCES [1] Kumar, Mike, Antony, James & Singh, Richard Implementing the Lean Six Sigma Framework in an Indian SME- A Case Study Production, Planning & Control 17(4), 2006 407-423. Month of the year 2015 along x axis and number of complaints along y axis Fig: 12.1 The graph shows the number of complaints during the months of 2015, one year after the implementation of lean technology. Although the number of complaints during month of 2014 is more than six per month, during the month of 2015, it is decreased to two per year. It shows that quality is much improved by implementation of lean technology. [2] Wong Yu, Wong Kuan & Ali Anwar A Study on Lean Manufacturing Implementation in the Malaysian Electrical & Electronics Industry, European Journal of Scientific Research 38(4), 2009,521-535. [3] N R Rajham, S.B.Patil, Preethi Kulkarni Mathematical Model for Calculating Inventory carrying cost, Industrial Engineering Journal, 2015, pp 12-14. [4] Rajendra Kumar, Vikas Kumar, Sultan Singh Establishing the relationship among principles of Lean Manufacturing in an Indian Environment, Industrial Engineering Journal, 2015, pp 25-31. [5] Y P Rao Productivity Improvement through Lean Manufacturing, Industrial Engineering Journal 2015, pp 14-18. [6] Rakesh Kumar and Vikas Kumar Lean Manufacturing in Indian Context : A Survey Management Science Letter, 2015, pp 321-330. II. RESULT AND DISCUSSION As a result of the survey regarding the awareness of Lean conducted in 2012 among the employees of manufacturing unit, it was perceived that majority of the employees were not aware of lean management. So as a remedial measure, employees were given trainings and workshops in lean management. Similar survey done in 2014 showed appreciable improvement of lean awareness by the employees. After implementation of lean tools, we analyzed the key performance indicators of LM, especially DL Productivity, DL Efficiency and Quality. For further analysis of quality measurement we noted the accident rate, TEEP, OEE etc. The analysis resulted in doing the workshops like Kaizen, SMED, Line balancing and Hoshins which made a drastic improvement in the labor productivity, equipment productivity and quality. [7] Parthipan R, Anto Jenith J, Nirmal Kannan V, Reliability of Lean Tools, International Journal of Innovative Research in Science, Engineering & Technology, 2015, pp 91-94. [8] Dr. Sehba Husain, 360 Degree EI Implementation Business Model- Tool to achieve Competitive Advantage for Small, Medium & New Enterprises, International Journal of Management, pp 38-47. [9] M Yogesh, Dr.G.Chandramohan & Gilroy Thomas Measuring Manufacturing Capability In Sme Segment Using Lean Manufacturing - A Case Study On Electronics And Electrical Manufacturing Industry in International J. Of Math. Sci. & Engg. 3292

Appls. (IJMSEA) ISSN 0973-9424, Vol. 6 No. IV (July, 2012), pp. 43-51. [10] M Yogesh, Dr.G.Chandramohan & Rajesh Arrakal - Application Of Lean In A Small And Medium Enterprise (Sme) Segment- A Case Study Of Electronics And Electrical Manufacturing Industry In India in International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research(IJSER) Volume 3, Issue 8, August-2012 1 ISSN 2229-5518. [11] M Yogesh, Dr.G.Chandramohan- Lean Manufacturing in Small and Medium Enterprises in International Journal of Mechanical Engineering & Technology(IJMET), Volume 4, Issue 6, Nov-Dec 2013 pp 64-68. [12] M Yogesh, Dr. G Chandramohan, Gilroy Thomas- Lean Manufacturing in Electronics & Electrical Manufacturing Industry in India in International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Volume 5, Issue 12, December- 2014 101 ISSN 2229-5518 IJSER 2014 http://www.ijser.org. [13] M Yogesh, Dr. G Chandramohan, P R Vishruth Innovations in Manufacturing Systems and Technologies for Global Competitiveness: A Context of Lean Manufacturing in International Journal of Management, Information Technology & Engineering (IJMITE) Volume 3, Issue 10, October-2015 ISSN(P) 2348-0513 PP 43-52, Best Journals. [14] M.Yogesh, Dr. G. Chandramohan-"Effect of Lean Technology on Connector Industry in India" in International Journal of Engineering Trends and Technology (IJETT), V28 (2), 65-68 October 2015. ISSN: 2231-5381. www.ijettjournal.org. Published by Seventh Sense Research Group. 3293