Manish Engineering Works
-
Upload
lakeweekendresort -
Category
Business
-
view
153 -
download
6
Transcript of Manish Engineering Works
Manish Engineering Works
TPM REVIEW
17.07.2013
01
VEPL – PP3 5%
Organic Growth
VEPL – WP5 10%
YOKE - Pulsar YOKE – ø 48YOKE – Enfield
BSC - 834BSC - 384 Gears (All)
Drive Shaft Assy.M.Bkt.Assy.
VEPL – WP1 5%
NPD / In-Organic Growth
Gear - 742Gear - 735
VEPL – WP7 20 %
VEPL – PP3 50 %
YOKE - Suzuki
MANISH ENGINEERING WORKS
Company started in the year 1998-99 with press part manufacturing set up
Existing Set Up
Precise set up in one roof for manufacturing components like
1. Sheet Metal Press Components :- Press Capacity in the range of 10 – 60 MT
2. Turned Components :- 10 CNC + 2 VMC + Precise Premachining Set Up like Lathes ,Drilling , Milling, Traub Machines
3. Grinding & Sawing :- Cylindrical Grinding + Band Saw ( Dia 250 MM )
4. Welding & Brazing Assembly : - TIG / ARC / CO2 Welding + Brazing + Riveting
5. Surface Treatment :- Dedicated Set up of Surface Treatment like Powder Coating for Yoke
Product Information Max 2 Slides Category wise
02
Esteemed Customers
02
TPM PROGRESS EXECUTION
Parameter Activities Activities
TPM Policy A] TPM declaration with TPM policy. 29.11.11
B] Education to all employees. 1S- 2S Training Completed.
1S~2S A] No unwanted material. Done.
B] Prefix location, Prefix quantity. Done.
Material
Handling
A] Handling as per agreed norms in
container/Trolley
Plastic Bins
Plastic Bins with partition & Part
wise Qty.B] Elimination of quantity shortages
container should have visual countability.
Customer
Complaints
A] Study of fitment, Aesthetic & Functional
Parameters & implementation of perfect inspection
system for all parts.
All components fitment and
functional parameters known to all
section heads and resp.operators.
B] Cause side Kaizens & Poka-Yokes implementation
& sustenance.
Training given to all & examples
shown.
In-house
Defects
A] Defect stratification by ABC way. -
B] Implementation of countermeasures/Kaizens
following PM analysis way.
Activity in continuations
Delivery
Performance
A] No line stoppages at customer end. No line stoppages
B] Daily/Weekly/Monthly delivery adherence. Daily
TPM Progress Status
Methodology Followed for TPM Implementation
02
PQCDSM – Plant Targets
• 1S 2S Zone Mapping & Leaders
• 1S Top 3 Examples & Results
• 2S Top 3 Examples & Results
• Yoke Cell level Targets as explained by DTJ
• 2012 Tgt vs Act , 2013 Tgt Vs Act
• Yoke Cell Layout before & After ( Block Diagram or sketeches ) with movie of after stating lead time reduction
• Yoke Manufacturing Flow Stage & Photo
• P – Trend of P 1 , P2 , P3 , P4
• P – Approach OEE , Output / Man , Output / Man
• Kaizens P 1 , P2 , P3 , P4
• Q – Trend of Q1 , Q2
• Q – Approach
• Q – Kaizens of Q1 , Q2
• Same way for C , D , S , M
• Summary of Results PQCDSM 2013 Tgt vsMOM Act
• IPO of Yoke Cell for Sustenance of IHR Stage wise IPO sheets with hyperlink
• Linkage of IPO to JH , PM , TBM Sheets ( smallwindow of IPO & big window of JH , PM orTBM sheets
• Horizontal Deployment in other cells
• Plant level Results vs TPM Tgt PQCDSM
• Future Plan
• The Journey Continoues….
02
PQCDSM - Targets
OEE trend :
TPM Declaration
Assessment year 2012-13 Assessment year 2013-14
2012 2013 2013
Parameter UOM BMTRGETMar’13
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR % imprMar'14
(Trgt)Q1'13
(Apr-Jun)
Apr(act)
May(act)
Jun(Act.))
Jul(Proj)
OEE % 67 % 85 % 74 72 71 78 79 77 16% 85 85 72 79% 80% 87%
Output / Man Nos 2996 3500 3525 2526 2715 2879 3156 3442 15% 3800 3200 2975 3013 3224 3200
Output / Hr Nos 368 450 494 403 416 441 426 432 17% 500 450 419 434 464 450
Low Light of 2012-13
● 4% gap in OEE in 2013-13%
ACTION PLAN
Q2 (Jul-Sep)
●How to achieve 90 % OEE in Q2
On Next Slide
03
OEE trend : Cell Wise
OEE Calculation Availability Performance Quality
A P Q OEEPlannedTime Hrs
Actual Time Hrs
GAPProduction
as per Std cycle time
ActualProd
GAPTotal Prod
RejQty
Cell 1 81% 97% 99% 83% 2140 1791 349 93036 74678 18358 74678 97Cell 2 85% 96% 98% 81% 1615 1346 269 198281 160565 3716 160565 142Cell 3 79% 95% 96% 76% 2764 2126 638 163795 121862 41933 121862 134
A:Availability P:Performance , Q:Quality
04
LOSS Contributors :
A
● Line balancing not maintained
● Shot man power and new operators
●no Operator standardization.
P ● CTQ and CTP issues
Q
● Need base training to new operators
● Operator not fixed comp. wise
● tooling/insert adjustment
Cell-1 – BSC 384Cell-2 – Yoke pulsarCell-3 - Other
82%
81%78%
73%
83% 83%
76%
86%
80% 79%
84%81%
74% 75%73%
75%78% 78%
50%
75%
100%
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
Cell 1
Cell Wise OEE
OEE: GAP Analysis (2012-13)
What went wrong : Learning from 2012-13 Detailed Action plan for Each Issue Attached here
05
Issue / Problem/Cause Proposed Solution Who When
1
Problem: setting time
Machine fixed component wise2M/c required for fulfil the qty.
Mr. Gosavi/ Mr. Kishor
Aug.1st
WeekRoot Cause: Frequently job changed
2
Problem: Line balancing
Forging batch Qty. To be increased ( 735-742) Pre machining of 384 to be done 100%
Mr. Gosavi/Kishor/ Aamte
Jun.2nd
Week / July.1st
WeekRoot Cause: Less material stage wise
3
Problem : Operator performance not ok
Root cause : Review of training
Training and review frequently , Component wise operator f to be fixed .
Mr. Gosavi/Kishor/ Shaikh
At the time of Joining & Monthly
Target : ● Current OEE :80% 85%
OEE: Action Plan Q2 (Jun & Jul-Sep)
06
Details Proposed Solution Who When
1
Problem: shot man power. 1 Training and new appointments Mr. Gosavi JULY/AUG
Root Cause: absent operators.
2
Problem: running load problem –384/834
Line balancing to be done by 100% Pre-M/c of 384/834
Mr. Gosavi / Patil D.B.
July.1st
Week
Root Cause: stock of material not available
3
Problem: 742 and 735 shortage.Forging batch Qty will have to increase. Mr. D.B. Patil 735-July /
742-Aug.
Root Cause: Less receipt from vendor
OUTPUT/MAN
Low Light of 2012-13
●No consistency & sustenance in OUTPUT/MAN
ACTION PLAN Q2 (Jul-Sep)
●How to achieve 3.4 in next Qtr
On Next Slide
OUTPUT/Hr
Low Light of 2012-13
● Below Benchmark line
ACTION PLAN Q2 (Jul-Sep)
●How to achieve 500 in next Qtr
On Next Slide
Output /Man & Hrs 07
Output /Man & Hrs : GAP Analysis (2012-13)
What went wrong : Learning from 2012-13
08
Issue / Problem/Cause Proposed Solution Who When
1
Problem: Operator performance not ok
Training to be given about CTQ and CTP
Mr. Shaikh/ Mr. Gosavi
At the time of joining.
Root Cause: New operators
2
Problem: Setting time
Machine fixed component wise
Mr. Gosavi/Kishor/ Aamte
Monthly cell wise/M/C wise.Root Cause: Frequently job changed
3
Problem : No capacity for other component.
Root cause : M/c divided cell wise.
New machine installedMr. M.D.rawke
10/08/2013
● Output/Man : 3.22 k3.4 k ● Output/Hr : 464 500 nos./hr
Output /Man & Hrs : Action Plan Q2
09
Details Proposed Solution Who When
1
Problem: shot man power. 1 Training and new appointments2 Attendance Bonus to be increased
Mr. Gosavi / M.D.Rawke
JUN/JULY
Root Cause: absent operators.
2
Problem: running load problem –384/834
Line balancing done to be done by Pre-M/c of 384/834
Mr. Gosavi / Kishor
July
Root Cause: stock of material not available
3
Problem: 742 and 735 shortage.Forging batch Qty will have to increase. Mr. D.B. Patil
/ M.D.R.
DONE
Root Cause: Less receipt from vendor
TPM Declaration
Assessment year 2012-13 Assessment year 2013-142012 2013 2013
Parameter UOM BMTRGETMar’13
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR % imprMar'14
(Trgt)Q1'13
(Apr-Jun)
Apr(act)
May(act)
Jun(Act)
Jul(Prj)
C.C. Occ. No 6 0 1 1 2 1 1 1 83% 0 0 3 1 2 0
C.C. PPMPPM(k) 2978 0 116 606 576 2415 244 81 97% 0 0 300 291 147 0
C.C. Ph. Nos 5 0 5 1 3 2 1 1 80% 0 0 3 1 2 0
● C.C.PPM improvement ( 97%)
● C.C.Phimprovement(80 %)
● C.C.Occr.Improvement(83%)
Action planNext Slide
Observation
Customer Complaint PPM
10
C.C. PPM : Phenomenon/QTY : JUN
PhenomenonCategor
y(R/N)
JanFeb Mar Apr May June
1Gear-670 depth u/s New 0 0 21 0 0 0
2 Gear 561 OD burr REP. 0 0 0 21 49 0
3 Pinion Dia 15.005 + 0.012 u/s New 0 0 0 0 30 0
4 M.Bkt. - ID Bush U/s New 0 0 0 0 0 23
5 M. Bkt (Old)– CD Shift New 0 0 0 0 0 22
● R: Repetitive N: New
11
Details (Top 5) Proposed Solution Who When
1Problem: Gear 5 th pinion Depth u/s Strict inward inspection to be done and
forging parameters to be fixed for forging checking.
Mr. Shaikh Immediate
Root Cause: Forging defect and scaling issue
2Problem: Gear 561 burr placed on OD dia. Die Grinding frequency fixed by
supervisor ( after 2500 nos.) Close monitoring.
Mr. Bharmbe Immediate/Monitoring
Root Cause: Die wear out
3
Problem: Pinion Dia. 15.005+0.012 mm U/S newly development part OD grinding operation added ( 12 micron ) Air gauge ordered for pinion instead of digital micrometer.
Mr. shaikh 30 June
Root Cause: Checked by digital micrometer
4
Problem: M.Bkt – ID Bush U/S Bracket Bush Fitting Pin ø to be increased by 30 micron
Mr.Gosavi July -2nd Week / Under Montor.
Root Cause: Bush fitment Fixture Pin U/s
5
Problem: M. Bkt(Old) CD Shift - Spare Reaming operation introduced for answering PCD Guage
Mr.Patil / Giri Jun-Last Week / Under Montr.Root Cause: Reaming to be done
● C.C.PPM : 147 k0
C.C. PPM : Action Plan
Detailed Action plan for Each Issue Attached here In ● 6W2H format● Effectiveness & Sustenance format
12
TPM Declaration
Assessment year 2012-13 Assessment year 2013-142012 2013 2013
Parameter UOM BMTRGETMar’13
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR % imprMar'14
(Trgt)Q1'13
(Apr-Jun)
Apr(act)
May(act)
Jun(Act))
Jul(Prj)
In house Rej Occurrences
Nos 14 0 7 6 6 5 5 4 71% 0 0 7 10 9 0
In house Rej PPM
PPM(k)
4512 200 1188 1491 1598 1441 1169 1145 75% 200 0 1410 1152 1125 0
In house RejPhenomena
Nos 12 0 8 8 7 7 5 5 58% 0 0 3 4 4 0
● In House Rej PPM : 75% improvement in yr 2012-13
● How to ach. Q2 trgt 0 (zero)
Action planNext Slide
Observation
In house Rej PPM
13
In house Rej: Phenomenon / Qty: JUN
PhenomenonCategory
(R/N)Jan Feb Mar Apr May June
1 ID o/s – (LAY SHAFT / YOKE ) Repetitive 72 53 126 113 93 62
2 Parallelism – (BSC-384 ) Repetitive 32 22 26 18 19 15
3Total Length u/s – ( LAY SHAFT & YOKE )
Repetitive 42 31 35 38 30 27
4 Cutting u/s – ( YOKE ) Repetitive 48 72 58 60 56 37
● R: Repetitive N: New
14
Details (Top 5) Proposed Solution Who When
1
Problem: ID o/s ( Lay shaft / YOKE ) New tool under monitoring / Back boring Tool for ID M/c.
Mr. Gosavi UnderMonitoring
Root Cause: B type defect / Burr Revolving in ID
2
Problem: Parallelism moreBSC -384 Cutting blank given for facing and ID boring ( Pre machining )
Mr. D.B. Patil Started 15/06/2013 100% from July.Root Cause: Due to U drill force
3
Problem: Total length u/s ( Lay shaft and yoke)
Properly training given to operator about job resting and jaw cleaning..
Mr. Gosavi 1/06/2013
Root Cause: Resting not properly done
4
Problem: Cutting u/s (Yoke )Pipe cutting operators propertraining given to insure no burr at resting face.
Mr. Shaikh 2/06/2013
Root Cause: burr placed on resting face
● IHR .PPM : 1125 k0
In house Rej : Action Plan: Q2
18
Detailed Action plan for Each Issue Attached here In ● 6W2H format● Effectiveness & Sustenance format
Cost
19
Cost
20
TPM Assessment year 2012-13 Assessment year 2013-14
Declaration 2012 2013 2013
Parameter UOM BMTRGET
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR % imprMar'14 Q1'13 Apr May Jun Q2-13
Mar’13 (Trgt) (Apr-Jun) (act) (act) (act) (Trgt)
Power Cost Rs/unit 1.06 1.73 1.67 1.43 1.17 1.22 1.59 -50% 1.75 1.82 1.90 1.73 1.82 1.92
Rework Cost Rs/unit 0.3 0.29 0.25 0.25 0.24 0.24 0.24 20% 0.20 0.25 0.27 0.25 0.23 0.20
Consumable Rs/unit 2.08 2.98 2.91 2.24 2.69 2.65 3.65 -75% 4.00 4.08 4.87 3.83 3.53 3.50
cost
TPM Declaration
Assessment year 2012-13 Assessment year 2013-14
2012 2013 2013
Parameter UOM BMTRGETMar’13
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR % imprMar'14
(Trgt)Q1'13
(Apr-Jun)
Apr(act)
May(act)
Jun(Act)
Jul(Prj)
Delivery % 100z 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100
Major Accidents Nos 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
Minor Accidents Nos 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0 0 0
Green Bed Area % 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5% 1% 0 0 1% 0
kaizens Emp/mnth - 0.5 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.03 0.03 25% 0.5 0.05 0.2 0.14 0.2 0
Training Hr/emp 1.0 4.00 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 50% 4.0 1.50 1.5 1.5 1.5 2.0
SOB With Varroc % 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 100% 90% 98% 98% 95% 95% 95%
Act With Varroc % 96% 95% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% 100% 98% 98% 98% 98% 98% -
Product UnderDevelopment
Nos - 9 0 0 0 2 1 0 100% 100% 100% - - - 1
Samples Submitted In Time
Nos - 9 0 0 0 2 1 0 100% 100% 100% - - - 1
Sample Accepted First Time
Nos - 8 0 0 0 1 1 0 100% 100% 100% - - - 1
On Time Development % - 100 0 0 0 50 100 0 100% 100% 100% - - - -First Time Right % - 100 0 0 0 100 100 0 100% 100% 100% - - - -
DSM
21
Loss Analysis● TOTAL LOSS IN HRS :
● Total Loss till date (Jan-Jun) : 5235 hrs . (436Shift)
● Monetary Loss : 1650 Rs
● Opportunity Loss : 719813 lacs
*Note : Monetary loss : Operation cost + Manpower cost.Opportunity cost :- Could have produced component in lost time
● TOP 3 LOSSES
Time (Hrs)(Jan-Jun)
% cont
1. Set up & adjustment 2161 526
2. Due to operator 1567 261
3. Management loss 691 115
22
● LOSS TREND TOP 3
● LOSS IMACT :
856.90867.57
888.40
944.52
823.38
855.05
760.00
780.00
800.00
820.00
840.00
860.00
880.00
900.00
920.00
940.00
960.00
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
334.4
399.6 396.6374.5 360.93
295.22
17.6 9.731.4 42.8
120.4 123.7
252.0274.9 272.1 270.3
249.28 241.68
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
Managementloss
Due to operator
Loss Analysis: Detailed(Loss in Hrs)
23
334.4399.6 396.6 374.5 360.93
295.22
0.0
50.0
100.0
150.0
200.0
250.0
300.0
350.0
400.0
450.0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
Set up & Adjustment Due to operator 17.6 9.731.4
42.8
120.4 123.7
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
Mngmnt loss
67.1
42.5
24.0
37.028.70 26.97
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
Equipment Failure loss
15.4
43.840.8 39.2
32.55 32.55
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
35.0
40.0
45.0
50.0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
Tool Change Loss4.8
21.8
55.9
137.4
28.137.2
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
Other
149.8
47.1 46.9 43.3
3.5
93.5
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
Due to material
15.8
28.2
20.6
0.0 03.51
-5.0
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
Trial, inspection & Dev.
252.0
274.9 272.1 270.3
249.28
241.68
220.0
230.0
240.0
250.0
260.0
270.0
280.0
JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN
●Set up & Adjustment : 295hrs 0
Action Plan : Losses June
● Management loss : 123 hrs 0
Detailed Action plan forEach Issue Attached here
Causes / Problem Proposed Solution who when
1
Problem: No raw material planningLine balancing done to reduce set up change loss, raw material planning discussed with Mr Gajanan, Material Requirement planned .
Mr. Gosavi ImmediateRoot Cause: Material shortage
Setting change planned As per raw material availability , Training given to supervisor about setting problems and tool adjustment.
Mr. Gosavi Immediate
New sleeve boring bar purchased . Mr. Gosavi Immediate
Causes / Problem Proposed Solution who when
1
Problem: Material short (BSC-834 ) New vendor added for BSC-384 , Dia 83 20 MNCr5 raw material procured from MukundLtd. ( delivery time only 2 days )
Mr. D.B. Patil
20/07/2013
Root Cause: Delivery late
2
Problem: Material short (BSC-384 ) Forging batch Qty at Mahesh industry increased from 2200 to 4000, Ample Qty. Available at pre m/cning and CNC machining stage.
Mr. D.B. Patil
DONE
Root Cause: Material come from Ludhiyana
25
Causes / Problem Proposed Solution who when
1
Problem: Lack of man power Skilful and trained operators designated for machine shop , minimum 6 month experienced operators to be selected at the time joining.
Mr.Gosavi
Immediate
Root Cause: New operators
2
Problem: unclean job Clean job provided. machine wise operator fixed. stock material, Allen key and insert provided on the spot. And extra casual provided for job cleaning.
Mr. Patil Immediate
Root Cause: No man for job cleaning
● Due to operator : 241.0 hrs
Action Plan : Losses June
24
Detailed Action plan for Each Issue Attached here In ● 6W2H format● Effectiveness & Sustenance format
JH Status
● JH Plan
● JH as On Today ● JH: Scheduled Calendar
Apr (Bal)
MAY(Done)
JUN(Plan)
JUL(Plan)
Aug(Plan)
JH1 - - - - -
JH2 2 - - 2 -
JH3 2 - - 2 -
26
*JH ACTIVITY SCHEDULE *
12 12 12
1210 10
0
20
0
20
JH1 JH2 JH3
TTL M/C JH StatusJH STATUS :
CategoryName of
M/c JH 1 JH 2 JH 3 Remark
Status Month Status Month Status Month
Machining
CNC-1 Done 5 Feb. Done 8 Feb. Done 10 Feb.
CNC-2 Done 5 Feb. Done 8 Feb. Done 10 Feb.
CNC-3 Done 10-Feb Done 25-Jun Done 25-Jun
CNC-4 Done 10 APR. Done 5-Jul Done 5-Jul
CNC-5 Done 10 APR. pending 15-Jul Pending
CNC-6 Done 25 Apr. Done 30-Apr Done 2-May
CNC-7 Done 15-May Done 18-May Done 20-May
CNC-8 Done 22-May Done 25-May Done 30-May
CNC-9 Done 28-May pending 20-Jul Pending
CNC-10 Done 29-May Done Done Done 1-Jul
VMC-1 Done 15 Dec. Done 20 Dec. Done 22 Dec.
VMC-2 Done 25 Dec. Done 30 Dec. Done 2-Jan
Done 12 10 10
Pending 0 2 2
Total 12 12 12
Moral-Employee Involvement
TOP 2 Kaizen Of The month
2. Theme : To increased productivity KK
Benefit:
1 )Productivity increased by 45 nos.2 ) Cycle time reduced by 35 sec per job.3 ) Insert life increased4 ) Cost saved
27
1. Theme : To reduce IHRQM
Benefit:
1 ) Rework time saved by 30 min.2 ) IHR reduce by 13 nos.
3 ) Production increased by 51 nos.Category OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY June TTL % Contr
JH 1 1 1 2 2 3 10
KK 2 1 1 1 1 3 2 2 13
PM 1 1 1 2 1 1 7
QM 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 7
SHE 1 1 1 1 3
5S 1 1 3 5
OTHERS 3 2 3
Total 3 4 4 5 2 2 12 9 10 48
Nos of Emp 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 450
kaizen/Empl/Mnth 0.06 0.08 0.08 0.10 0.04 0.04 0.24 0.18 0.20 0.11
Kaizen Required 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 25 225
Kaizen Short fall -22 -21 -21 -20 -23 -23 -13 -16 -15 -177
3 4 4 5 2 2 12 9
0.06 0.08 0.08 0.100.04 0.04
0.240.18 0.20
0102030405060708090100
-0.50
-0.30
-0.10
0.10
0.30
0.50
0.70
3 4 4 5 2 2 12 9 10
OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUNE
Tgrt 0.5 kaizen/Emp/Month
Tgrt 25 kaizen/Month
Sawing
Pre-machining
VMC
CNC 4
CNC 1
CNC 2
CNC 3
CNC 5
VMC
Inspection
Dispatch
CNC 10
CNC 9
CNC 8
CNC 7
CNC 6
Entry
RM Storage
Traub 1
RM Storage
Traub 2
Press for Yoke Dimple
For Powder Coating on 2nd Floor
BEFOREPlant layout improvement BEFORE
BSC Yoke
Sawing
Pre-machining
CN
C 4
CNC 1
CN
C 2
CN
C 3
CNC 5
VM
C
InspTable
Dispatch
CN
C 2
CNC 9
CNC 8
CN
C 7
CN
C 6
RM Storage
Traub 1
RM Storage
Traub 2
Press for Yoke Dimple
Lift - For 2nd Floor for Powder Coating
VMC
Plant layout improvement AFTER
BSC Yoke
Business Plan & SOB
28
BUSINESS GROWTH PLAN
8.5514
Yr 2012-13 Yr 2013-14Growth Plan :
● New m/c added : 3 ( Mar’13)
● Expected : 3 Machines (Aug’13)
● CNC-4, VMC-1, Hy. Band s.-1
29
SOB & Turn Over
SOB (12-13) Year wise Performance
Turn Over Values In Cr
Yr 2013-14 Performance
30
5
7
10
14
4.726.64
8.55
2.880
4
8
12
16
20
0
4
8
12
16
Yr 10-11 Yr 11-12 Yr 12-13 Yr 13-14
3 3
4 4
2.88
0
2
4
6
0
2
4
6
Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Mar
Status :Yr 2013-14
Summary of Business Growth Plan
Gross Sale @
14.00 Crs
63 %
Customer Part NameQty Targeted
( In Lacs ) FY 13-14
Business Targeted ( In Crs ) FY 13-14
VEPL - PP3
YOKE - ( ø48 - Black ) -10 140 4.20 1.82
YOKE Enfield (RE)- 29 520 1.50 0.65YOKE Pulsar- 21 520 10.00 3.08YOKE - SUZUKI 1.50 0.44
VEPL - WP5BSC - VMC Profile -1043384 3.00 2.77
BSC - Cross Hole -1043834 0.50 0.67
OLC- WP-5 (Gears)
Adler Gear 0.50 0.06Gear - 1005 / 06 0.25 0.03Gear - DD 3.50 0.20Gear - 670 2.00 0.11Gear - 561 3.50 0.05
VEPL - WP7Gear - 735 1.00 1.21Gear - 742 0.70 1.20
VEPL - WP1
Drive Shaft Assy - 15 350 2.00 0.19
M.Bkt. Assy. Comp. - 15 340 2.00 0.86
D.Shaft Assy.(Old) - 15 150 0.13 0.01
M.Bkt. Assy. (old) - 15 350 0.12 0.05
Birla & Other B.H. - 521 / other 0.20 0.7036.60 14.10
New Initiatives – Employee Involvement
● Star performer award started for operatorsCategory :1- Attendance incentives , 2 - Productivity award3 - Best Kaizen award,
● Quality campaign carried out.1 - Gauges handling and setting2 - Product knowledge3- Defect wise monitoring
● Safety training campaign arranged.- Safety Aids- Both cell safety alarm provided and Training to all
operators ( mock drill )
31
New Initiatives
31
Best KAIZEN Award Best Productivity on Yoke Cell
GO GREEN ACTIVITY
Sr.No. ACTIVITY TARGET
1) Pre-Treated Water for Toilet & Garden Aug
2) No utilization of Poly Bags Aug
Summary
Journey Continue….
32