Reduction of Hazardous Oil wastage at Pantnagar Plant, Ashok Leyland · 2019-09-23 · 1 Reduction...

1

Reduction of Hazardous Oil wastage at Pantnagar Plant, Ashok Leyland

Plant: Pantnagar, India

ASQ South Asia Team Excellence Awards, 2018

2

• A 70-year old pedigree. Founded in 1948 as Ashok Motors, became ‘Ashok Leyland’ in 1955 with equity participation from Leyland Motors, UK.

• One of India’s largest commercial vehicle manufacturers. • A comprehensive product portfolio spanning 2.4 to 49 Tonne GVW.

• 7 Manufacturing facilities strategically located pan-India, 1 plant in RAK, Dubai, 1 plant in

Bangladesh. • History of Firsts.. To name a few..

– 2012 - World’s first front engine fully flat floor bus; – 2010 - CNG Hybrid Plug-in bus

• 70 million passengers travel on our buses every day, nearly 70,000 Stallion trucks in service, we

are the largest supplier of logistics vehicles to the Indian Army, 700000 of our vehicles keep the wheels of economies turning.

• Revenue for FY 17-18: 262 Billion, with a track record of unbroken profitability since inception.

Ashok Leyland (AL) - In the business of moving people & goods for over seven decades - Profile

0.00

2

3

Ashok Leyland (AL) – Business footprint across the Globe apart from India

0.00

3

Commonwealth of

Independent

States

ASEAN

South America

Africa

Added since 2009

Present for over 5 years

Not present

Middle-East

• Bus assembly facility

at Ras-Al-Khaimah

• Channel partners in

multiple GCC nations

• Selling substantial

number of buses

• Importer company

established in Chile

• Sales commenced in

Peru

• Bus body building

partners in the

Ukraine

• Avia Russia office

in place, sales

commenced

• Limited direct sales

• Partners selection

underway

4

Ashok Leyland (AL) – Manufacturing footprint 0.00

Alwar Plant

Bhandara Plant

Ennore Plant

Hosur 1 Plant

Hosur 2 Plant

N UAE: Bus

manufacturing in

partnership with

RAKIA

UK: Optare bus

manufacturing

facility

India: Six

manufacturing

facilities

Pantnagar Plant(PNR)

(1948

)

(2010

)

3

5

Pantnagar(PNR) plant products 0.00

*- Gross Vehicle weight is the maximum operating weight of a vehicle the vehicle's chassis, body, engine, engine fluids, fuel, accessories, driver, passengers and cargo

1 Tonne = 1000 kilograms

Chassis Truck

(FES - Front End Structure)

Gross Vehicle Weight - 16 Tonne to 49 Tonne

Chassis Bus

Seating capacity – 40 seat to 52 seat

U Truck

Gross Vehicle Weight - 25 Tonne to 49

Tonne

BOSS Truck

Gross Vehicle Weight - 9

Tonne to 12 Tonne

CAPTAIN Truck

Gross Vehicle Weight - 25 Tonne to 49

Tonne

- Haulage – 6 Nos

- Tipper – 3 Nos

- Tractor – 2 Nos

- Bus -3 Nos

- Haulage- 2 No

- Tractor -2 Nos

- Tipper – 2 Nos

- Haulage- 2 Nos

- BOSS LX- 1No

- BOSS LHD- 1No

- Tipper- 2 Nos

- Tractor- 2 Nos

106 Variants

33 Variants 96 Variants 158 Variants

42 Variants

Variants

M

odels

Pla

tform

s

6

Deployment of Lean Six Sigma culture in the organization 0.00

104

311

548

802 932

1068

1223

1549

2010-11 11-12 12-13 13-14 14-15 15-16 16-17 17-18

No

’s

Green Belt Trg. (Cum)

44 100 200 428

602 674

995

1788

No’s

Projects Completed (Cum)

0 82.3 204.2

687 769 915

1044

1534

Rs.

Mill

ion

Financial Savings in Million (Cum)

MD Launch & Senior leadership drive

• Kick-off by MD in 2010 with the Objective of “Establishing LSS as the Standard Problem Solving methodology leading to Cultural Change”.

• Emphasis on Problem Solving in all Quarterly MD communications;

• Periodic reviews by Senior leadership.

External recognitions & Culture building

• CII-First prize (National) in year 2012 & 2016. Runner up - 2014 & 2015;

• SCMHRD National Runner-up in 2012 & 2013, NIQR Gold winners in 2015 & 2016;

• Visible involvement of Employees at all levels in Lean Six Sigma journey to enable Cultural Change.

4

7

Excess Axle oil

Consumption Reduction in Chassis Shop

Section 1: Project

Background & Purpose

Section 2: Project

Framework

Section 3: Project

Stakeholders and the

Project Team

Section 4: Project

Overview

Section 5: Project

Walkthrough

1.00

Project Background & Purpose

Organizational Approach to

1.01: Project Planning

•1.02: Project Identification

•1.03: Project Selection

1.04: Project Selection (Specific)

1.05: Project Goals & Benefits

1.06: Success Measures/Criteria Identified

8

Organizational Approach to Project Planning, Identification & Selection

1.01–1.03

Issue

List

Top Down Goals/

Strategic Plans Current Year

External Environment/ Benchmarking

Management Process Evaluation(PM/DM

Diagnosis, Internal/External

Diagnosis & Fresh Issue)

Customer Demand

/Requirement

Vision & Long Term Business Objectives – Pantnagar plant

Issue 3 - n

Issue 2

Issue 1

Policy Selection Process

Affinity Diagram

Focused Items

Policy Item Prioritization

Policy identification / Deployment

Direction Setting

Goals & Means setting

Projects identification

Project evaluation & prioritization (as per defined criteria)

Project Leader selection

Project Sponsor

5

9

Issue List

Top Down Goals/

Strategic Plans Current Year

External Environment/ Benchmarking

Management Process Evaluation(PM/DM

Diagnosis, Internal/External Diagnosis & Fresh

Issue)

Customer Demand /Requirement

Project Selection (Specific) What data led to this project prioritized over other potential projects in the organization; What are the drivers for this project?

1.04

Issue 3 - n

Issue 2

Issue 1

2184 issues identified

Input to Affinity Diagram

10

1.04

• Hazardous Waste Generation Reduction • Poor Shop Floor 5S near Oil Filling Station • Cleaning Personnel Unavailability • Unsafe Work Area (Oil Filling Stage)

• Wood Consumption • High Paper Consumption

Make Green Plant

Affinity Diagram (FY 18 Annual Planning Cycle) 11.1

0

5

10

15

Before

Ltr.

5.229

2.1 1.6 1.3 0.5 0.4

47 66

80 92 96 100

020406080100

02468

10

ChassisShop

EngineShop

CabPaintShop

FSMShop

CabWeldShop

GearBox

Shop

%

Ltr.

/Ve

hic

le

Pareto Chart for Waste Generation Shop wise

Current Level : Hazardous Waste Generation (Per Vehicle) Data Period Jan’17-Mar’17

Project Scope: Chassis Shop Excess Consumable Consumption Reduction

Pareto Diagram- Hazardous Waste Generation-Shopwise

Data period Jan’17 – Mar’17


6

11

1.04

Project Score

S. No. Criteria Criteria Weightage

Ch

assi

s Sh

op

C

on

sum

able

W

asta

ge R

ed

uct

ion

Load

Bo

dy

Cap

acit

y En

han

cem

en

t

0 M

IS D

efe

ct

Re

du

ctio

n

Big

Dat

a C

olle

ctio

n

Stra

igh

t P

ass

Imp

rove

me

nt

1 Impact on Company Policy 10 7 8 6 3 6 2 Sustainable development 10 10 2 2 3 3 3 Financial Impact 9 6 9 5 4 8 4 Reliability improvement 9 3 4 7 7 4 5 Working Capital 8 3 6 2 2 2 6 Productivity enhancement 8 3 10 4 2 8 7 Quality improvement 8 4 3 10 5 10

8 Relationship with other improvement

7 4 4 5 7 7

9 Urgency 7 8 6 3 3 4 10 Resources 6 6 2 4 2 6 11 Project Complexity 6 7 2 4 2 5 Total Score (Sum of Product of criteria weightage &

Project Score) 493 463 420 325 501

Final Rating 2 3 4 5 1

Project Prioritization Project evaluation

501 493 463

420

325

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Straight PassImprovement

Chassis ShopConsumable

oilConsumption

Reduction

Load BodyCapacity

Enhancement

0 MIS DefectReduction

EngineParameter

Big DataAnalysis

Pro

ject

Sco

re

Project Scope: Chassis Shop Excess Consumable Consumption Reduction

Project Leader: Chassis Shop Green Belt


12

Project Goals & Benefits What are expected project goals and benefits?

• Wastage Reduction : 159 million INR • Cotton Consumption Reduction : 40 L • Axle Oil Inventory Reduction : 2

Barrel/Day • Shop Floor 5S Score • Cleaning Personnel Manpower

Reduction

• Improved knowledge on advanced problem solving tools / techniques.

• Planning, delegation & Coordination skills.

• Presentation & Communication skills • Safe Working Environment • Operator Satisfaction • Internal Customer Satisfaction

Tangible Benefits

Intangible Benefits

1.05

Pareto Diagram-Chassis shop Consumables


2.632

0.5

0

2

4

Before Target

Exce

ss O

il C

on

sum

pti

on

(L)

Excess Axle oil Consumption (Per Vehicle)

Project Prioritization

Project Goal : Actual vs Target

Excess Axle Oil Consumption Target

Better

501 493 463 420 325

0

200

400

600

Straight Pass

Improvement

Chassis Shop

ConsumableConsumption

Reduction

Load Body

CapacityEnhancement

0 MIS Defect

Reduction

Engine

Parameter BigData Analysis

Pro

ject

Sco

re

7

13

5.2 3.1

2.1

2.1

1.6

1.6

1.3

1.3 0.5

0.5

0.4 0.4

0

5

10

15

Before Target

Ltr.

Hazardous Waste Generation (Per Vehicle)

Success Measures/ Criteria Identified What are project-specific goals and success measures?

Counter Metric :

Axle Oil Level Related Defects (Data Source : Pre Delivery Inspection Shop)

5.2

3.068

0

5

10

Before Target

Ltr.

Excess Direct consumable consumption at Chassis shop

(Per Vehicle)

Project Metric Strategy Plant Objective

2.632

0.5

0

1

2

3

Before Target

Ltr.


1.06

Better Better Better

11.129 8.997

0.32 0.28 0.29 0.30

0.2

0.3

0.4

Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Average

DP

V

Pre Delivery Inspection Shop Axle oil Related DPV

Better

14

2.00

Excess Axle oil


Section 1: Project


Section 2: Project

Framework

Section 3: Project


Project Team

Section 4: Project

Overview

Section 5: Project

Walkthrough

Project Framework

2.01: A formal Project statement

2.02: Type of Project

2.03: Scope Statement

2.04: Assumptions & Expectations

2.05: Project Schedule

2.06: Budget (Financial or Resource)

2.07: Risk Management

8

15

Template 2.00

16

Template 2.00

9

17

Concise Project Statement What is the current state, desired state, and the gap that the project closes?

Axle Oil is the Top contributor in excess consumed consumable items in Chassis

Shop Leading to hazardous waste generation of 2.67 L per Vehicle. This project is

driven by strategic plan (Hazardous waste free plant).The Project aims to reduce

hazardous waste generation by 20% at plant level by reducing excess axle oil

consumption from 2.67 L to .5 L per Vehicle, i.e. design tolerance for oil filling

process

2.01

18

Type of Project What type of project was done?

Advance Problem Solving

Reducing Mean and Variation

Design New Product/Process

Project Work

Reducing Excess Axle oil Consumption in Chassis Shop

Project Requirement

Reduction in • Mean of Excess Axle oil Consumption • Variation of Excess Axle oil

Consumption

D

M

A

I

C

Define

Measure

Analyze

Improve

Control

D

M

A

D

V

C

Define

Measure

Analyse

Design

Validate

Conclude

2.02

Identify Problem Solving Method

10

19

Scope Statement What is the scope of the project?

In Scope Out of Scope

2.03

•Pant Nagar Plant Geographical

•Manufacturing-Chassis Assembly Division

•Consumable Store

•Pre Delivery Inspection

•Maintenance Department

Departments

•Axle Oil Filling Process

•Oil Kitchen Process Process

•Axle Oil Filling Machine

•Oil Kitchen Dispensing Machine Machines

•Axle Oil Supplier Supplier

•Other Plants

•Division Other than Chassis Assembly

•Other Oil Filling Process

•Shop Floor Oil Cleaning Process

•Hazardous Waste Scraping Process

•Other Oil Filling Machines like Gear Box oil filling etc.

•Other Supplier

•Other Departments

Project Work : Excess Axle oil Consumption Reduction

20

Assumptions/ Expectations What is the team counting on being in place or being done by someone else ?

2.04

Assumptions

Define

Measure

Analyze

Improve

Control

• Availability of Past Data • Communication from sponsor

regarding project need • Team Building exercise

• Measuring Instrument availability • Regular Production • No Strike

• Minitab access availability in departmental computer

• Purchase Request clearance within 7 working day by process Engineering Department

• Availability of Axle Oil level related defects capturing at Pre Delivery Inspection Shop

• All the standard documents are readily available

Responsibility

• Steering committee • Sponsor • Steering committee

• Consumable Store (Team Member) • Material Planning Department • HR Department

• Ashok Leyland IT Department

• Process Engineering Department (Team Member)

• Pre Delivery Inspection Department (Team Member)

• Process Quality Department (Team Member)

Expectations

• Training Support from Process Excellence Team

• Team Members Participation in Review Meetings

• Project members task performance within timeline.

• Team Members Participation in Review Meetings

• LSS Tool knowledge support from process excellence team

• Support from Process Engineering Department in case of need arise

• Timely Participation of team members

• Timely Feedback from oil filling process user

• Timely Feedback from Pre Delivery Inspection shop for axle oil level related defects

• Black Belt • Team Members

• Team Members

• Black Belt

• Process Engineering Department (Team Member)

• Production Manager (Team Member)

• Pre Delivery Inspection Department (Team Member)

Responsibility

11

21

Project Gantt Chart Timelines

2017 Apr W4 May W1 May W2 May W3 May W4 Jun W1 Jun W2 Jun W3 Jun W4 Jul W1 Jul W2 Jul W3 Jul W4 Aug W1 Aug W2 Aug W3 Aug W4 Sep W1

/ Phase Apr W3

Define P

A

Measure P

A

Analyze P

A

Improve P

A

Control P

A Revision History:

Revision No. Revision Date Revision History

1.0 12 July 2018 Due to Late Induction Motor Delivery, Improve phase extended for 1 more week.

Project Schedule How much time does the team have to complete their work and what Success Measures are due when?

2.05

Legend

Plan Activity not started yet.

Activity started, but not completed yet (Under progress)

Activity completed

Toll Gate Review 1 Toll Gate Review 2

Toll Gate Review 3

Toll Gate Review 4

Toll Gate Review 5

Project Closure review

22

2.05 Project Schedule How much time does the team have to complete their work and what Success Measures are due when?

12

23

Budget (Financial) What are the financial or other resources constraints placed on the team?

2.06

Yes

No

• Revisit Scope • Apply for capital

Budget • Special Approval

24

Budget (Financial) How Organization Monitored Budget?

2.06

13

25

Risk Management What stakeholder resistance was expected? Were there other foreseen problems? How were these monitored?

2.07

• Lack of Resources to manage Daily routine Jobs • Inadequate problem solving skills • Since project is related to hazardous waste

reduction, there is chance that project might affect the consumable quantity in vehicle, which might impact vehicle reliability

• Working time of the project team is agreed and fixed. • Capsule training sessions by black belt to retain learnings. • Counter Metrix is prepared for any consumable related

defects in the pre-delivery inspection shop. Data monitoring started from the start of the project.

Risk Mitigation Approach

Define

Measure

Analyze

Improve

Control

Identification Stage

Project Start

• Fear of failure as project target is not met • Sponsor and champion deliberate trust on the

project team to improve further.

• Scanner System added in the Oil filling

Machine

• Part Code Generated for the scanner • Spare handover to maintenance department

26

3.00

Excess Axle oil


Section 1: Project


Section 2: Project

Framework

Section 3: Project


Project Team

Section 4: Project

Overview

Section 5: Project

Walkthrough

Project Stakeholders and the Project Team

3.01: Stakeholders and How Identified

3.02:Project Champion

3.03: Project Team Selection

3.04: Team Preparation

3.05: Team Routines

14

27

Stakeholders and How Identified Who were the stakeholders? How Were they identified?

3.01

• Master Black Belt + Team • Black Belt +Team • Sponsor-MFG Head PNR

Initial Working Team

Team Analyzed

• Project Opportunities • Area Involved in the Process • Department affected by the Project • Positive and Negative Impact on the

other activities • Possible conflict of interest

By using Tools

SIPOC

PFD

Potential Stakeholders

Steering Committee

Quality

Maintenance

Consumable Store

Production

Scrap Committee

Inte

rnal

No External Stakeholder

Identification Tools

SIPOC

Brainstorming + PFD

SIPOC

SIPOC + PFD

SIPOC + PFD

SIPOC

Based on this information, The Group layout was established: • Green Belts • Support Team • Experts Team

28

Stakeholders and How Identified What is their relative importance?

3.01

Stakeholder Group

S P C Positive Impact Negative Impact Power Interest Attitude Strategy

Steering Committee

• Indicator Improvement

• No Resistance High High Positive Key Player – update weekly & incorporate feedback

Maintenance deptt.

• Efficient Resource utilization

• Fear of Increased Rework • Resistance to New

Procedure

Moderate/ Low

High Neutral Update Weekly

Production deptt.

• Increase in Productivity

• Production Disturbance • Resistance to New

Procedure

Moderate/ Low

High Neutral Update Weekly

Quality deptt. • Reduction in

Spillage related defects

• Check Point Increase in Check Sheet

• Resistance to inter-departmental collaboration

High Low Neutral Discussion before any experiment and solution implementation

Store deptt. Inventory Reduction • No Resistance Low Low Neutral No effort required

Scrap Committee

Less Waste to handle • No Resistance High High Positive

Key Player – update weekly & incorporate feedback Selected as Champion

3.01

15

29

3.01

Po

we

r

High Keep Satisfied Quality Deptt.

Key Players – Keep informed and satisfied

Steering Committee

Scrap Committee

Low Minimal Effort

Store Deptt.

Keep Informed Maintenance Deptt.

Production Deptt.

Low High

Level of Interest

3.01 Stakeholders and How Identified What is their relative importance?

Stake Holder Group

Steering Committee

Sponsor

Champion

Black Belt

Project Leader

Project Team • Functional Expert • Key Supplier and Customers

30

Stakeholders and How Identified What is their relative importance?

3.01

Stake Holder Group Who

Steering Committee

Sponsor

Champion

Black Belt

Project Leader

Project Team

SVP - Mfg. & PP SVP – Quality

Mfg. Head Pantnagar Unit

Scrap & Wastage Committee Head – Pantnagar Unit

Black Belt – Pantnagar Unit

Chassis Stage 6 to 10 In charge – Green Belt

Key Customers & Suppliers • Consumable Store Manager • Scrap Yard Manager

Functional Process Expert : • Oil filling Stage Manager • Quality Manager • Maintenance Manager

VP – Mfg Pantnagar Unit Master Black Belt

16

31

Project Champion Who was the sponsor or key stakeholder? Why do they care about the project? What type, Level, and frequency of information do they desire?

3.02

• Importance of the project to achieve organizational objectives.

• Deliberated trust on the team. • Motivational speech on qualities of a

winning team.

Communication from Project Sponsor and Project Champion

• Agree upon ground rules • Agree upon roles & responsibilities • Agree upon major milestone

timelines • Agree upon review schedules

Communication by Sponsor & Champion

Sponsor Decision making, Influential, Communication, Motivating skills, Conflict resolution skills

Champion Analytical skills

Stakeholder group Knowledge / Skill set

Sponsor

Champion

Stakeholder group Agenda Periodicity Medium/Venue Timings

• Status update • Support on barriers • Adherence to Project

Progress timelines

Fortnightly (or) on need basis

Oral / Email / Plant Head office

1st or 16th of every month (or) on need basis

Monday 10 AM Oral / Email / Plant Head office

Weekly Technical analysis & support

Sponsor and Champion communication Plan

Sponsor and Champion Role in the project

32

Project Team Selection Do the Stakeholders Have the required Subject Matter Expertise?

3.03

Steering Committee

Stakeholder group Knowledge / Skill set

Decision making, Innovative skills

Sponsor Decision making, Influential, Communication, Motivating skills, Conflict resolution skills

Champion Analytical skills

Blackbelt Advance statistical knowledge, Analytical skills

Project Team • Basic Problem solving skills • Advanced Problem Solving Skills • Process / Product knowledge

• Technical knowledge • Change management (Challenge status-quo)

Project leader Planning, delegation, coordination, communication skills

17

33


3.03

Interested party

Project Team

Project leader

Blackbelt

Champion

Sponsor

SteeringCommittee

Skill set possessed

Inference: Project leader & Project team are not having the required knowledge / skill.

Additional Knowledge / Skills provided to Project leader & Project Team

Major Topics

Advanced Problem Solving Skills

• Graphical tools • Statistical tools • Idea Generation tools • Hypothesis building & verification • Solution development & finalization

Project Management Skills

• Project Defining tools • Team Management • Project Reporting & Communication • Cost Benefit analysis & ROI • Stakeholders Management & Risk Management

Process / Product knowledge • Process layout • Various Types of Models being assembled.

Technical knowledge

• Axle Oil filling Machine Working • Temperature Effect on Oil Viscosity • Calculation of Friction loss in system due to viscosity

increase

34


3.03

Project Management Training by Sponsor

Problem Solving Training Process / Product knowledge training

Technical knowledge

18

35

Team Preparation How was the team prepared to perform as a team?

Team Building Training

• Team Introduction • Collaboration and Cohesion • Initial resistance elimination

3.04

Team Introduction Off-Site Meeting

Team building exercise for an Effective team

• Know each other; Establishing relationships.

• Importance of working as a team

• One team – One Goal

36

Team Review What team routines were established before the start of the project?

3.05

# Routine / Communication plan

Agenda Periodicity Medium / Venue Timings

1 Steering committee review • Status update • Support on barriers

Monthly (or) on need basis

Oral / Email / Skype 6th of every month

2 Sponsor review

• Status update • Support on barriers • Adherence to Project Progress

timelines

Fortnightly (or) on need basis

Oral / Email / Plant Head office

1st or 16th of every month (or) on need basis

3 Champion review • Technical analysis & support Weekly Oral / Email /Onsite / HOD office

Monday 10 AM

4 Blackbelt review • Analyzing data / information &

application of tools. • Capsule trainings

Twice Weekly Oral / Email / Onsite / PEX office

Tuesday & Friday 3 PM

5 Team internal meetings • Update on action items Twice Weekly Oral / Email / Onsite / office Monday & Thursday 9 AM

19

37

4.00

Excess Axle oil


Section 1: Project


Section 2: Project

Framework

Section 3: Project


Project Team

Section 4: Project

Overview

Section 5: Project

Walkthrough

Project Overview

4.01: Project Approach

4.02: Tools used to complete the project

4.03: Tool Output Needed for Decisions

4.04: Team Preparation for Tool Usage

4.05: Dealing With Project Risk

4.06: Resistance as a Type of Risk

4.07: Stakeholder Involvement in the Project

38

Project Approach How was the project work organized?

4.01

TYPE OF PROJECT: Advanced Problem Solving(APS) Type project – DMAIC approach

DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROACH:

As the complexity of the project is high and impact is also significant to the organization; the APS approach will be used. Under APS approach the project goes through 5 steps of problem solving namely Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control.

Define Phase

Objective – • Establishing the scope

of the project

• Identifying Stakeholders, analyzing them and selecting team

Measure Phase

Objective – • Current Situation

Analysis

• Possible root causes identification

Analyze Phase

Objective – • Validating all possible

root causes

• Identification of root cause

Improve Phase

Objective – • Possible solution

identification

• Final Solution selection

Control Phase

Objective – • Means creation to

sustain the results

4.01

20

39

Project Approach What tools were used in which project phases and why?

4.01


DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROACH: As the complexity of the project is high and impact is also significant to the organization; the APS approach will be used. Under APS approach the project goes through 5 steps of problem solving namely Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control.

Define Phase

• Dimensional

Analysis & Pareto Analysis in Order to fully

capture project scope

• SIPOC, PFD &

Brainstorming to capture process interactions and stakeholders

• Stakeholder Analysis to Prioritize stakeholders

Measure Phase

SIPOC, PFD to understand Key inputs and process working Process Mapping to understand Key input and output variables Spaghetti to understand operator motion Gemba Observation to check current shop floor condition Control chart to check process Trend 1 Way ANOVA to check model mix change Regression analysis to establish relationship between 2 variables Good Bad Analysis for Red and Pink Family Identification Process Capability to find out the oil filling machine capability Brainstorming and cause and effect diagram to generate probable causes

Analyze Phase

• Hypothesis Testing for

Probable cause Validation

• 1 Way ANOVA for Probable Cause Validation

• Ordinal Logistic Regression for Root Cause Validation

• Binomial Logistic Regression for Root Cause Validation

• Multiple Regression for Root cause Validation

Improve Phase

• Brainstorming for

Idea generation (Solution)

• Solution Selection Matrix for Solution selection

• Pilot Run to justify the selected solution

• Before and After Process Capability Study to check the improvement

Control Phase

Control Chart Document Updation

4.02

40

Tool Output at Different stages of projects What type of information was expected to be obtained from the tools?

4.01


DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROACH: As the complexity of the project is high and impact is also significant to the organization; the APS approach will be used. Under APS approach the project goes through 5 steps of problem solving namely Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve and Control.

Define Phase

• Dimensional

Analysis & Pareto Analysis Project Scope & Constraints

• SIPOC, PFD & Brainstorming Stakeholders & Interactions

• Stakeholder Analysis : Strategy & Importance

Measure Phase

SIPOC, PFD: Key I/P, O/P & Process interactions Process Mapping: Detail Key I/P & O/P Variables Spaghetti: Operator Motion Detail Gemba Observation: current shop floor condition Control chart: process Trend 1 Way ANOVA: Model Mix change Relation with Process Trend Regression analysis: Model Mix Impact on Excess Oil Consumption Good Bad Analysis: Red X Family Item Process Capability Oil Filling Machine Cp Value Brainstorming and cause and effect diagram: probable causes

Analyze Phase

• Hypothesis Testing:

Probable Cause Validation for mean comparison

• 1 Way ANOVA: Probable Cause Validation for mean comparison

• Ordinal Logistic Regression: Root Cause Validation

• Binomial Logistic Regression: Root Cause Validation

• Multiple Regression: Root cause Validation

Improve Phase

• Brainstorming: Ideas

(Solution)

• Solution Selection Matrix : Solution

• Pilot Run: Justification

• Before and After Process Capability Study : Improved Process Capability

Control Phase

Control Chart: Improved Process Updated Documents

4.03

21

41

4.02-4.03

Pareto Chart

Dimensional Analysis

SIPOC

PFD + Brainstorming

Stakeholder Analysis

Define Phase

Tools Snips Purpose Tools Results

Scope Identification

Key Supplier, Customer Identification and for understanding process interaction

Stakeholder prioritization

Pareto Analysis Dimensional Analysis

SIPOC PFD


Project In Scope and Out of Scope

Stakeholder and Interactions

Strategy and Importance

Tools Used Throughout the Project & its outcome (Define Phase)

42

4.02-4.03

Tools Used Throughout the Project & its outcome (Measure Phase)

Measure Phase (Analyzing Present Situation)

Purpose Results

SIPOC and PFD

Process Mapping

Gemba Observation Spaghetti Diagram

Control Chart • 1 way Anova • Regression Analysis • Good Bad Analysis

Brainstorming and Cause and effect Diagram

Tools Snips Tools

Process Capability Study Understanding Axle Oil filling machines ability to meet customer demand

Identifying process Variability and Trends

Understanding all the interactions of the process

Identifying Process Input and Output

Current Shop Floor condition

Probable Cause Identification and grouping

0-2-4-6-8-10-12

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

S 1.15146R-Sq 52.7%R-Sq(adj) 47.4%

2516

Excess

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n

Fitted Line PlotExcess Consumption = 0.8536 - 0.2515 2516

Poor Machine Performance Observation : Air mix in Axle oil

Shift in consumption Pattern Change in model mix Model dependency of consumption Axle tilt resulting in oil spillage

Rework and Skill-dependent Process

Complex Process

Machine Breakdown Leakage from Machine High Operator movement

Total 35 Probable Causes Identified (17 Main Causes & 18 Sub Causes Identified)

SIPOC PFD

Process Mapping

Gemba Observation Spaghetti

Control Chart 1-Way Anova Regression Good Bad Analysis

Process Capability Study

Cause and Effect Diagram

22

43

4.02-4.03

Tools Used Throughout the Project & its outcome (Analyze Phase)

Analyze Phase (Identification and Validation of root cause)

Purpose Results

Check Sheet and Lab Reports

1-Way ANOVA

1 Sample T Test

Multiple Regression

Tools Snips Tools

Used to Validate 4 Probable Root Cause • Low Light • Overvoltage • Loose Joint in Machine & Oil Circuit

Used to validate 23 Discrete Probable Causes

Used to Validate 1 Probable Cause (Conveyer Height Mismatch @ Different locations)

Used to Validate 3 Probable Cause • Temperature Variation • Axle Oil Level Variation • Pressure Variation

Invalid Cause

7 Valid Causes

Invalid Cause

2 Valid Cause • Low Temperature • Low Oil Level

Multiple Regression

1 Sample T Test

1 Way ANOVA

Check Sheet

Used to Validate Axle Oil Density Drop due to Air Mix Issue

1-Way ANOVA Valid Cause 1 Way ANOVA

44

4.02-4.03

Tools Used Throughout the Project & its outcome (Analyze Phase)

Analyze Phase (Identification and Validation of root cause)

Purpose Results

Why-Why Analysis

Ordinal Logistic Regression

Binomial Logistic Regression

Tools Snips Tools

1 Root Cause Validation (Front and Rear Skid Height Difference impact on Oil Spillage)

For Root Cause Identification ( 5 Probable Cause)

1 Root Cause Validation (Temperature Variation impact on Machine Breakdown)

1 Root Cause (Axle Tilt Causing Oil Spillage)

2 Common Root Causes • Difficulty in Reading Oil

Filling Matrix • Only 4 Entry Slots in

HMI

1 Root Cause (Motor Spec < System Requirement)

2520151050

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

Temp.

FIT

S_1

No

Yes

LoadOverMotor

Scatterplot of FITS_1 vs Temp.


Why-Why Analysis

Event Probability Plot


2 Sample T Test Used to Validate 1 Probable Cause (Significant Front & Rear Skid Height Difference)

1 Valid Cause Front and Rear Skid Height Difference causing Axle Tilt

2 Sample T Test

23

45

4.02-4.03

Tools Used Throughout the Project & its outcome (Improve Phase)

Improve Phase (Solution Selection and Implementation)

Purpose Results

Brainstorming

Solution Selection Matrix

Pilot Run • Scatter Plot for 2

Solutions • 1 Sample T Test &

Before-After Process Capability for 1 solutions

• Multiple Regression for 1 Solution

Tools Snips Tools

Solution Generation and Selection

Solution Validation and Justification

6 Action Identified

Total 4 Actions Items Selected

SIPOC SIPOC

Scatter Plot 1

Before-After Process Capability Multiple Regression

46

4.02-4.03

Tools Used Throughout the Project & its outcome (Control Phase)

Control Phase (Result Sustenance)

Purpose Results

Control Chart • IMR Chart

Voice of Customer

Tools Snips Tools

Customer Feedback

To check Process stability and for result sustenance

Positive Feedback

• Stable Process • Sustained Result

Control Charts

Voice of Customers

24

47

How team was prepared to use the tools how did the team learned how to use the tools?

4.04

Phase Tools used Responsibility Current

Level Action

required

Define Dimension analysis, Pareto analysis

SIPOC, PFD, brainstorming

Power to Interest matrix

Project Leader

Project Team

Green Belt

Practitioner BB to assist

Measure

SIPOC, PFD, Process Mapping, Spaghetti

diagram, Gemba observation, Control chart,

Process Capability

Brainstorming & C&E diagram

Project Leader

Project Team

Green Belt


Analyze Hypothesis Testing, One way ANNOVA,

Ordinal Logistic Regression, Multiple

Regression

Project Leader

Project Team

Green Belt


Improve

Brainstorming, Solution Selection Matrix

Pilot run, Process Capability,

2 sample % defective

Project Leader

Project Team

Green Belt


Control Control Chart

Document updation

Project Leader

Project Team

Green Belt


4.04

Problem Solving Capsule Sessions

48

Dealing With Project Risk how did the team deal with risk (Other than resistance) that was encountered?

4.04 4.05

• Lack of Resources to manage Daily routine Jobs • Inadequate problem solving skills • Since project is related to hazardous waste

reduction, there is chance that project might affect the consumable quantity in vehicle, which might impact vehicle reliability

• Working time of the project team is agreed and fixed. • Capsule training sessions by black belt to retain learnings. • Counter Metrix is prepared for any consumable related

defects in the pre-delivery inspection shop. Data monitoring started from the start of the project.

Risk Mitigation Approach

Define

Analyse

Improve

Control

Identification Stage

Project Start

• Fear of failure as project target is not met • Sponsor and champion deliberate trust on the

project team to improve further.

• Resistance from the affected stakeholder for

process change.

• A meeting was organized to brief all interested parties and those who gets affected by the implementation.

• Address resistance of stakeholder through 1 to 1 interaction.

• Scanner System added in the Oil filling

Machine

• Part Code Generated for the scanner • Spare handover to maintenance department

25

49

Encountering and Handling Resistance as a Risk What resistance was identified and addressed throughout the project?

4.04 4.06

Project Phase Encountering and Handling Resistance

Resistance Description Addressed Through

Define - -

Measure - -

Analysis

Clash of opinions between UP & Maintenance on non-conformance of machine to the required standards Resistance from production for axle oil density measurement (High Efforts Job) – Required for checking the impact of Skid Height Difference on Axle Oil Spillage

GEMBA observation & detailed data based decision. Team selected alternate approach with the help of Black Belt for validating Skid Height Impact on Oil Spillage. Team converted output in ordinal scale & Used Ordinal Logistic Regression to validate the impact. (Less Effort Job)

Improve Reluctance for changed process of oil filling (Production team)

All the changes done through Process Change Requisition Request (PCRA).

Control Maintenance ownership issues for newly deployed machined (Maintenance)

Resolved through One-One Interaction

50

Stakeholder Involvement in Project How were stakeholder involved in the various phases of project?

4.04 4.07

Stakeholder Group Stakeholder Involvement

Define Measure Analysis Improve Control

Steering Committee Sponsor

Stakeholder Identification Project Leader Identification

Multiple Status updates on Observations

Multiple Status updates on validation of possible root causes & identification of final root cause.

Multiple Status updates on solution development.

Received regular feedback / development on implementation. Communication to Team member for project completion

Champion Actively involved in the process flow diagram

Directly involved in Process Capacity Study od axle oil filling machine

Directly involved during validation of possible root causes & identification of final root cause.

Directly involved during physical validation of Bar Code Scanning System Solution development.

Organized regular review meetings to understand the progress of implementation.

Black Belt Involve in Dimensional Analysis for Scope Identification

involved in Process Capacity Study od axle oil filling machine

Involved during validation of possible root causes & identification of final root cause.

Involved during solution validation & development.

Involve in establishing control for scanning mechanism

Project Leader Team Member

Involve in Dimensional Analysis for Scope Identification

Involve in Data Collection

Involve in Probable cause Validation and Root Cause Identification

Directly involved during physical validation of Bar Code Scanning System Solution

development.

Directly involve in control phase

26

51

5.00

Excess Axle oil


Section 1: Project


Section 2: Project

Framework

Section 3: Project


Project Team

Section 4: Project

Overview

Section 5: Project

Walkthrough

Project Walkthrough

5.01: Data Driven Project Flow

5.02: Solution Validation

5.03: Solution Justification

5.04: Results

5.05: Maintaining the Gains

5.06: Project Communication

52

Walkthrough-Specific Tool Output

Def

ine Scope

Identification


5.00

Purpose

Scope Identification

Key Supplier, Customer Identification and for understanding process interaction

Stakeholder prioritization

Tool Used

Pareto Chart

Dimensional Analysis

SIPOC

PFD + Brainstorming


Input

Chassis Assemblies Oil Wastage

Team Input

Team Input

Team Input

Team Input

Define Phase

Project In Scope and Out of Scope

Stakeholder and Interactions

Strategy and Importance

Output

27

53

Define – Scope Identification

In Scope Out of Scope

•Pant Nagar Plant Geographical

•Manufacturing-Chassis Assembly

Division

•Consumable Store

•Pre Delivery Inspection

•Maintenance Department

Departments

•Axle Oil Filling Process

•Oil Kitchen Process Process

•Axle Oil Filling Machine

•Oil Kitchen Dispensing Machine

Machines

•Axle Oil Supplier Supplier

•Other Plants

•Division Other than Chassis Assembly

•Other Oil Filling Process

•Shop Floor Oil Cleaning Process

•Hazardous Waste Scraping Process

•Other Oil Filling Machines like Gear Box oil filling etc.

•Other Supplier

•Other Departments

Project Work : Excess Axle oil Consumption Reduction

Pareto Diagram-Chassis shop Direct Consumables


Axle Oil is the Top Contributor in Excess Oil Consumption in Chassis Shop contributing to 50 % in the Excess oil Consumption

Output : In Scope and Out-scope Items

54

Define – Stakeholder Identification Identification

Oil Kitchen

Tank

Line 1 Tank

Line 2 Tank

Quantity Selection Based

on model

Oil filling in Vehicle

Oil Transfer through Suction Pump

Transfer through Pneumatic Pump

Operator : Open filler plug from axle

& Select the quantity Operator : Fill Oil & close the filler plug

SUPPLIER INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT CUSTOMER

Steering Committee

Direct Consumable

filling

Vehicle filled with

consumable

Scrap Committee

Quality

Steering

Committee

Store Direct

Consumable

Maintenance Pump

availability

Production Manpower

HR Training to manpower

Potential Stakeholders

Steering Committee

Quality

Maintenance

Consumable Store

Production

Scrap Committee

Inte

rnal

No External Stakeholder

Identification Tools

SIPOC

Brainstorming + PFD

SIPOC

SIPOC + PFD

SIPOC + PFD

SIPOC

SIPOC (Axle Oil Filling Process)

PFD

Output : Stakeholder and Their interactions

28

55

Define – Stakeholder Prioritization

Stakeholder Group Who

Steering Committee SVP - Mfg. & PP, SVP – Quality,

VP – Mfg Pantnagar Unit, Master Black Belt

Sponsor Mfg. Head Pantnagar Unit

Champion Scrap & Wastage Committee Head – Pantnagar

Unit

Black Belt Black Belt – Pantnagar Unit

Project Leader Project Leader

Project Team Maintenance Manager, Production Manager,

Quality Manager, Store Manager, Scrap Committee member

Stakeholder Group S P C Power Interest Attitude Strategy

Steering Committee High High Positive Key Player – update weekly & incorporate feedback

Maintenance deptt. Moderate/

Low High Neutral Update Weekly

Production deptt. Moderate/

Low High Neutral Update Weekly

Quality deptt. High Low Neutral Discussion before any experiment and solution implementation

Store deptt. Low Low Neutral No effort required

Scrap Committee High High Positive Key Player – update weekly & incorporate feedback Selected as Champion

Po

we

r

High Keep Satisfied Quality Deptt.

Key Players Steering Committee

Scrap Committee

Low Minimal Effort

Store Deptt.

Keep Informed Maintenance Deptt. Production Deptt.

Low High

Level of Interest

Output : Strategy and Importance

56

Walkthrough-Specific Tool Output 5.00

Mea

sure

Present Situation

Probable Cause Identification

Purpose

SIPOC and PFD

Process Mapping

Gemba Observation Spaghetti Diagram

Control Chart • 1 way Anova • Regression Analysis • Good Bad Analysis

Brainstorming and Cause and effect Diagram

Tools

Process Capability Study Understanding Axle Oil filling machines ability to meet customer demand

Identifying process Variability and Trends

Understanding all the interactions of the process

Identifying Process Input and Output

Current Shop Floor condition

Probable Cause Identification and grouping

Output

Poor Machine Performance Observation : Air mix in Axle oil

Shift in consumption Pattern Change in model mix Model dependency of consumption Axle tilt resulting in oil spillage

Rework and Skill-dependent Process

Complex Process

Machine Breakdown Leakage from Machine High Operator movement


Measure Phase (Analyzing Present Situation)

Input

Team Input

Team Input

Team Input

Team Input

Input from production

Team Input

29

57

Measure : Present Data Analysis

Present Situation Analysis

SIPOC

PFD

Process Mapping

Spaghetti Diagram

Gemba Observation

Control Chart

Machine Process Capability Study

4 Input in the Process

Process Understanding

Step KPIVs (Xs) C/U Process KPOVs (Ys)

1

x1 Manpower Skill C

Oil Quantity selection

Oil Selection based on requirement

y1

x2 HMI Condition C y2

x3 No. of Quantity Selection C y3

2

x1 Vehicle from Stage 10 C

Oil Filling in Axle Differential

Axle oil filling as per required quantity y1 x2 Axle Condition U

Oil Filling Within Tact time y2 x3 Nozzle Condition C

x4 Dispensed Axle oil Quantity C

x5 Axle Oil Specific Density U

x6 Air Pressure U

x7 Temperature U

x8 Oil Selection based on requirement C x9 Viscosity U

Inference : 7 Controlled KPIV Identified & 4 Uncontrolled KPIVs identified.

5.01

58


SIPOC

PFD

Process Mapping

Spaghetti Diagram

Gemba Observation

Control Chart


Stage 10

Axle oil Machine nozzle

Home Position

1

2

3

4 5

6

7

9

5

2

5

0

5

10

Process Selection Movement

No

s

Activity Frequency Details of Oil filling Operation

Inference : 42% of the Operator activity are movement Related

Measure : Present Data Analysis 5.01

30

59


SIPOC

PFD

Process Mapping

Spaghetti Diagram

Gemba Observation

Control Chart


Manual Axle Oil Filling in case of axle oil filling machine Breakdown

Manual Axle Oil Filling resulting in Oil Spillage

Axle Oil accumulation Axle oil filling machine tray

Axle Oil on shop floor during manual oil filling

Repetitive Cleaning for axle oil on shop floor

Measure : Present Data Analysis 5.01

60

May/17Apr/17Mar/17Feb/17Jan/17Dec/16

6.0

4.5

3.0

1.5

0.0

Month

Ind

ivid

ual V

alu

e

_X=1.95

UCL=5.780

LB=0


4.8

3.6

2.4

1.2

0.0

Month

Mo

vin

g R

an

ge

__MR=1.44

UCL=4.705

LB=0

1

I-MR Chart of Excess Oil Consumption/Vehicle by Stages



SIPOC

PFD

Process Mapping

Spaghetti Diagram

Gemba Observation

Control Chart


Inference: Control Chart showing shift in the excess consumption Pattern of Axle Oil

In FY 18

BS4

Bs4 Migration

1

2

3

Bs3 to Bs4 Conversion

Model Mix Change

April 17 month have low wastage

Conversion Process Having Separate Cost Centre

Daily model volume % Change from Dec’16 Month

5.01

31

61



SIPOC

PFD

Process Mapping

Spaghetti Diagram

Gemba Observation

Control Chart


Inference : Significant change in the % volume of models 3118, 3518,

2516,4019,1616, 3718LA and 4923 observed

Inference : % model Volume change after April Month

5.01


6.0

4.5

3.0

1.5

0.0

Month

Ind

ivid

ual V

alu

e

_X=1.95

UCL=5.780

LB=0


4.8

3.6

2.4

1.2

0.0

Month

Mo

vin

g R

an

ge

__MR=1.44

UCL=4.705

LB=0

1

I-MR Chart of Excess Oil Consumption/Vehicle by Stages

62



SIPOC

PFD

Process Mapping

Spaghetti Diagram

Gemba Observation

Control Chart


% model volume change impact on excess axle oil Consumption

0-2-4-6-8-10-12

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

S 1.15146R-Sq 52.7%R-Sq(adj) 47.4%

2516

Excess

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n


50-5-10

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

S 1.22256R-Sq 46.7%R-Sq(adj) 40.7%

3118

Excess

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n


1614121086420

6

5

4

3

2

1

0

S 1.10661R-Sq 56.3%R-Sq(adj) 51.4%

4019

Excess

Co

nsu

mp

tio

n

Fitted Line PlotExcess Consumption = 0.5718 + 0.2791 4019

Model 2516

Conclusion : Negative Co-relation Gemba Observation : No Problem observed During Axle oil Filling, No Spillage observed during filling process

Model 3118 Conclusion : Negative Co-relation Gemba Observation : No Problem During Axle oil Filling, No Spillage observed during filling process

Model 4923 Conclusion : Positive Co-relation Gemba Observation : 1st Rear Live Axle : Overfilling 2nd Rear Live Axle : Heavy spillage during oil filling. Refilling in some vehicle after OT.

5.01

32

63



SIPOC

PFD

Process Mapping

Spaghetti Diagram

Gemba Observation

Control Chart


Good Model

Bad Model

Paired Comparison

Inference: Axle Tilt in Vehicle resulting in oil spillage on conveyer.

5.01

Tilt

64



SIPOC

PFD

Process Mapping

Spaghetti Diagram

Gemba Observation

Control Chart


Pp=.21 (Per 20 L selected , 2 L extra Dispensed by Line 1 Machine.)

5.01

33

65

Measure : Potential cause identification

1. Present Situation Analysis

2. Potential Root Cause

Identification

Standards

PFD

Process Mapping

High Operator Movement

Gemba Observation

Model Having Axle tilt on Conveyer

Poor Machine Capability

Brainstorming

Brainstorming

Brainstorming

Brainstorming

Brainstorming

Brainstorming

Brainstorming

Inference: 8 Potential Causes Identified

Inference: 5 Potential Causes Identified

Inference: 2 Potential Cause Identified




Total 35 Probable Causes Identified

5.01

66

Measure : Cause and Effect Diagram

1. Present Situation Analysis

2. Potential Root Cause

Identification

Excess Axle oil Consumption

MAN

MACHINE

METHOD

MATERIAL MEASUREMENT

ENVIRONMENT

Oil Filling Matrix Not available

Overfilling in Axle by Operator – running multiple cycles

Leakage from filling Nozzle

Machine not dispensing oil as per input qty. in HMI

Incorrect qty. selection in HMI by operator

Low Skill

WIS Not Available

Low Light

Oily Shop Floor

High Movement

Flow Meter Not OK

Process Completion Check Not OK

Difficulty in Reading oil Filling Matrix

Quantity Selection Not available

Wrong Filling Gun Selection

Wrong Selection of Quantity

Air Pressure Variation

Temperature Variation

Oil Tank Level Variation

Axle Tilt Causing Oil Spillage

Oil Filling Machine Breakdown


5.01

34

67


Purpose

Check Sheet and Lab Reports

1-Way ANOVA

1 Sample T Test

Multiple Regression

Tools

Used to Validate 4 Probable Root Cause • Low Light • Overvoltage • Loose Joint in Machine & Oil Circuit

Used to validate 23 Discrete Probable Causes

Used to Validate 1 Probable Cause (Conveyer Height Mismatch @ Different locations)

Used to Validate 3 Probable Cause • Temperature Variation • Axle Oil Level Variation • Pressure Variation

Used to Validate Axle Oil Density Drop due to Air Mix Issue 1-Way ANOVA

Results

Invalid Cause

7 Valid Causes

Invalid Cause

2 Root Cause Valid Cause • Low Temperature • Low Oil Level

Valid Cause

Input

Past Records from Maintenance, Consumable Store and Production Departments

Input : Attribute more than 2 Output : Variable Type Data Provided by Production Department

Input : Current Value (Variable) Target : Standard Value (Variable) Data Provided by Maintenance & Quality Department

Input : Step Time (Attribute) Target : Axle Oil Density (Variable) Data Provided by Maintenance & Production Department

Input : Current Varying Values Output: Density Change (Air Mix)

Analyze Phase

68

Purpose Results

Why-Why Analysis



Tools

1 Root Cause Validation (Front and Rear Skid Height Difference impact on Oil Spillage)

For Root Cause Identification ( 7 Probable Cause)

1 Root Cause Validation (Temperature Variation impact on Machine Breakdown)

1 Root Cause (Axle Tilt Causing Oil Spillage)

2 Common Root Causes • Difficulty in Reading Oil

Filling Matrix • Only 4 Entry Slots in

HMI

1 Root Cause (Motor Spec < System Requirement)

2 Sample T Test

Used to Validate 1 Probable Cause (Significant Front & Rear Skid Height Difference)

1 Valid Cause Front and Rear Skid Height Difference causing Axle Tilt

Analyze Phase


Input

Input : Valid Potential Cause from Check Sheet Team Input

Input : Variable Output : Binomial Type Data Provided by Production Department

Input : Variable Type Output : Variable Type Data Provided by Production Department

Input : Variable Type Output : Ordinal Type Data Provided by Production & Consumable Store Department

35

69

Analysis : Probable Root Cause Validation

Why

•More than 1 Quantity of oil listed for a single model

Why

•Oil Filling Matrix formed Based on Model Description

Difficulty in Reading Oil Filling Matrix Verification Done Through Check Sheets and Lab Reports (23 Causes)

• Skid Mounting is done at wrong Location

• Wrong model Skid used by User • Oil Filling matrix not available • Overfilling done by operator • Low Skill Operator Deployment • Machine Leakage • Process Completion check Not OK Valid

Valid

Valid P=<.001

Conveyer Height Mismatch at Oil Filling Station

Not Valid (P Value .94)

No difference in conveyer height found in stage at different location

1 T Sample Test (4 Causes)

Not Valid (P =.78

Axle Oil Density Drop due to Air Mix in axle Oil

Quantity Not available for Selection

5.01

70

Analysis : Updated Cause and Effect Diagram


MAN

MACHINE

METHOD


ENVIRONMENT


Oily Shop Floor

High Movement Quantity Selection Not available







4 Valid Cause 5 More Require Data Validation

5.01

36

71

Analysis : Temperature Impact on Oil Filling Machine Breakdown

Binomial Logistic Regression: I/P Quantity : Temperature Output: Oil Filling Machine Breakdown.

Regression Coefficient are not 0 Temperature Causing Motor Overload

Modal Fits the Data

2520151050

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

Temp.

FIT

S_1

No

Yes

LoadOverMotor

Scatterplot of FITS_1 vs Temp.

Valid : High Probability of motor to get overload at temperature below 15◦ C

Motor Working Condition Event Probability

Why •Motor Overload at Low Temperature

What is the

Change

•Viscosity of Axle Oil is Getting Very High

Impact of change

•Friction loss in oil filling system is very high at low temperature

Impact on Motor

•Motor Overload

Why •Motor Spec Not meeting Our requirement

Inference : Motor Spec not meeting our requirement below 15◦ C

16.34

6.03 5.66

1.19

6 6 6 6

0

20

at 1◦C at 15◦C at 16◦C at 45◦C

Kg/

cm2

(P

ress

ure

)

Pressure with 1 HP motor @ different Temperature

Required

Installed

Installed motor spec not meeting system requirement at low temperature

Valid

5.01

72


MAN

MACHINE

METHOD


ENVIRONMENT


Oily Shop Floor









Analysis : Updated Cause and Effect Diagram 5.01

37

73

Analysis : Front and Rear Skid Height Difference on Excess Oil Consumption

Significant difference between front & rear axle skid height difference

Ordinal Logistic Regression: I/P Quantity : 1) Rear & Front Skid Height Difference 2) Model Type (Mono Rear or Multi Rear Axle ) Output: Oil Spillage (High, Low or Zero)

Regression coefficients are

not 0.

Positive Change in height will

move spillage to lower side

Higher value suggests that change from multi

axle model will have 19.46 times impact on

Spillage Reduction

P Value > .05 Accept that Model

fits that data

High Spillage Low Spillage

Fh Rh Height Difference = Rh-Fh

Ordinal Model is OK, Significant impact of skid height difference and model change on spillage on conveyer

5.01

74

Analysis : Front and Rear Skid Height Difference on Excess Oil Consumption

Front Height Difference = Rh-Fh

Regression coefficients is 0 for Front & Rear Skid Difference.

Regression coefficients is not 0 for Rear Live Axle skid Height

Difference. Odds Ratio indicates that height change will have practical effect

on spillage

Positive Change in height will move spillage to lower side

P Value > .05 Accept Null Hypothesis that Model fits that data

Rh Fh

R1 R2

Rear Live Skid Height Difference = R2-R1

Valid

Ordinal Logistic Regression: I/P Quantity : 1) Rear & Front Skid Height Difference 2) Rear Skids Height Difference (R2-R1) Output: Oil Spillage (High, Low or Zero)

Inference: For Multi Live Axle model, Rear Live Axle skid height difference have practical effect on Axle oil Spillage.

5.01

38

75


MAN

MACHINE

METHOD


ENVIRONMENT


Oily Shop Floor








(Motor Spec not meeting system Requirement)


Analysis : Updated Cause and Effect Diagram 5.01

76

Analysis : Impact of Temperature, Oil Level and Machine Air pressure on sub-cause axle oil density

Den

sity

(K

g/m

3)

Inference: Air and Axle oil mix up happening at low temperature and Oil Level

Valid

5.01

39

77


MAN

MACHINE

METHOD


ENVIRONMENT


Oily Shop Floor







Total 8 Root Cause Identified

(Motor Spec not meeting system Requirement)

Analysis : Updated Cause and Effect Diagram

S. No. Root Causes

Analyze Phase

Oil Filling Matrix Based on Vehicle Model Description not on Axle Description

Only 4 Slots available for Quantity Selection

Oily Shop floor and High Operator Movement

Front & Rear Skid Height Variation

Motor Spec Not Meeting System Requirement

Temperature and Axle oil Level Variation inside Axle oil Tank

1

2

3

4

5

6

5.01

78

Improve Phase (Solution Selection and Implementation)

Purpose Results

Brainstorming

Solution Selection Matrix

Pilot Run • Scatter Plot for 2

Solutions • 1 Sample T Test &

Before-After Process Capability for 1 solutions

• Multiple Regression for 1 Solution

Tools

Solution Generation and Selection

Solution Validation and Justification

6 Action Identified

Total 4 Actions Items Selected


Input

Input : Root Causes Output : Solutions Project Team Involved

Input : Action Items Output : Action Item Project Team Involved

Input : Action Items Output : Justification Project Team Involved

40

79

Solution Validation was this project effort a valid response to initial issue?

S. No. Probable Cause Root Cause

1 Quantity Not Available for selection Only 4 Entry Slot in HMI

2 Wrong Selection of Quantity Oil Filling matrix Based on model description

3 Oily Shop Floor and High Operator Movement

Oily Shop Floor and High Operator Movement

4 Axle Tilt

Front and Rear Skid Height Difference Variation

5 Axle Oil Density Variation Temperature and Oil Level Variation

6 Temperature Variation

Motor Spec Not meeting system requirement

S. No Parameter Shift Oil Filling operation to

Axle sub assembly area

Introduce Scanning Mechanism For Quantity

Selection

Increase Quantity through PLC Programming Change

1 Time to Implement 6 (2 Months) 5 (1 Month) 2 (3 Day)

2 Cost to implement 8 (1.2 Million Rs) 3 (.15 Million Rs) 1 (0)

3 Complexity involved in Implementation 6 (Medium) 3 (Low) 2 (Low)

Solution Prioritization Number 20 11 5

Shift Oil Filling operation to Axle sub assembly

area


Selection

Increase Quantity through PLC

Programming Change

5.02

80







4 Axle Tilt





S. No Parameter Axle number based oil filling

matrix


Selection Auto Oil Filling system

1 Time to Implement 2 (10 Days) 5 (1 Month) 8 (6 Month)

2 Cost to implement 1 (0) 3 (.15 Million Rs) 9 (4 Million Rs)

3 Complexity involved in Implementation 4 (Medium) 3 (Low) 7 (High)


Auto Oil Filling system


Selection

Axle Number based oil filling matrix

5.02

41

81







4 Axle Tilt





S. No Parameter Deploy Permanent Manpower

for oil cleaning


Selection

Move Oil filling Process to Sub Assembly Area

1 Time to Implement 3 (15 Days) 5 (1 Month) 6 (2 Months)

2 Cost to implement 5 (.3 Million Rs) 3 (.15 Million Rs) 8 (1.2 Million Rs)

3 Complexity involved in Implementation 4 (Medium) 3 (Low) 6 (Medium)


Move Oil filling Process to Sub Assembly Area


Selection

Deploy Permanent Manpower for oil

cleaning

5.02

82

S. No Parameter Optimization of

Skid Height Oil Filling in S/A

Oil filling in Axle Assembly Shop

Prefill in line Complete fill after OT

1 Time to Implement 5 (1 Month) 6 (2 Months) 7 (3 Months) 7 (3 Month)

2 Cost to implement 6 (.62 Million Rs) 8 (1.2 Million Rs) 9 (2.2 Million Rs) 7 (.9 Million Rs)

3 Complexity involved in Implementation 3 (Low) 6 (Medium) 6 (Medium) 4 (Medium)

Solution Prioritization Number 14 20 22 18







4 Axle Tilt





Adjusting Skid Height Oil Filling in S/A

Oil Filling in Axle Assembly Shop

Pre fill in line, Complete fill

after OT

5.02

42

83

S. No Parameter Change Ref.

sensor Position Install new

Machine Operate with oil kitchen machine

Use Heater Use Manual feeding with Quantity

control at low Temp.

1 Time to Implement 5 (1 Month) 7 (3 Months) 7 (3 Months) 6 (2 Months) 5 (1 Month)

2 Cost to implement 1 (0) 8 (1.3 Million Rs) 9 (4 Million Rs) 5 (.4 Million Rs) 5 (.3 Million Rs)

3 Complexity involved in Implementation

3 (Low) 6 (Medium) 6 (Medium) 4 (Medium) 5 (Medium)

Solution Prioritization Number 9 21 22 15 15







4 Axle Tilt





Install New Machine Operate with Oil Kitchen

Machine

Use Heater

Change Ref. Sensor Position

Use Manual Feeding with Quantity at

Low Temperature

5.02

84

S. No Parameter Upgrade Motor Install High new

Machine Operate with oil kitchen

machine Use Heater

1 Time to Implement 5 (1 Month) 7 (3 Month) 7 (3 Month) 6 (2 Month)

2 Cost to implement 6 (.58 Million Rs) 8 (1.3 Million Rs) 9 (4 Million Rs) 5 (.4 Million Rs)

3 Complexity involved in Implementation

3 (Low) 6 (Medium) 6 (Medium) 4 (Medium)

Solution Prioritization Number 14 21 22 15







4 Axle Tilt





Adjusting Skid Height Oil Filling in S/A

Oil Filling in Axle Assembly Shop

Pre fill in line, Complete fill

after OT

5.02

43

85

Solution Validation & Justification: Scanning Mechanism Introduction was this project effort a valid response to initial issue?

5.02-5.03

S. No. Probable Cause Root Cause Identified Solution



2 Wrong Selection of Quantity Oil Filling matrix Based on model description Axle number based oil filling matrix 3 Oily Shop Floor and High Operator Movement Oily Shop Floor and High Operator Movement Introduce scanning System

4 Axle Tilt


Optimise skids height for zero oil spillage


Shift Ref. Sensor Position inside machine

6 Temperature Variation Motor Spec Not meeting system requirement Upgrade Motor Power

Introduce Bar Code Scanner for Axle Oil Quantity selection

0 Wastage Generation

No Excess Consumption

No Spillage on conveyer and

shop floor

Correct Quantity Selection

Introducing Bar Code Scanning System

Quantity Not available for Selection

Wrong Quantity Selection


Quantity selection done through scanning Rear Axle Bar Code

Quantity selection done through scanning Rear Axle Bar Code

Bar Code Scanning will Reduce operator motion and efforts

Cost : 22500 Rs. ROI : 20.7 Hours Implemented

5.02-03

86

Solution Validation: Axle oil Density Variation was this project effort a valid response to initial issue?

Shift Reference Sensor Position inside Machine to increase minimum oil level inside oil Tank

Inference: 3 c.m. of Reference sensor position selected as a Solution

780

800

820

840

860

880

900

920

0 1 2 3 4

De

nsi

ty (

Kg

/m3

)

Sensor Position in (C.m.)

Sensor Position vs Axle oil density plot

Ok Density

Low Density

Cost : 0 Rs Support Required from Maintenance Department. ROI : -

Trial Planned with 25 Readings in different shift covering a wide temperature variation





4 Axle Tilt



5 Axle Oil Density Variation Temperature and Oil Level Variation Shift Ref. Sensor Position 6 Temperature Variation Motor Spec Not meeting system requirement Upgrade Motor Power

Oil Density

will Improve

Process Capability

will Improve

Exact Axle oil Volume dispensing

0 Excess Consumption

0 Waste Generation

5.02

44

87

Inference: Axle Oil Density is not significantly different from Spec i.e 896kg/m3 Inference: Process Capability Improved. 100% Out of Spec Reduction.

Before After

Solution Justification : Axle oil Density Variation Was the proposed and Valid solution justified?

1- Sample T test for Density comparison with the Spec Before After Process Capability Comparison

5.03

88

Axle Level Low Cases Reduced (Reported from Subsequent Shop)

0.3

0.05

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

Before 25 VehicleSample

DP

V

VTS Shop Axle Oil Related DPV

Full Scale Implementation started

Inference: Average DPV Reduced from .3 to .05 .

Solution implementation done by introducing spacer between sensor mounting with Line side oil tank.

Improved Density

Improved Oil Filling Machine

Capability


5.03

45

89


5.03

Valve 1 Valve 2

Mechanical Pump

Axle Oil Level Indicator Axle Oil Bypass Line

Axle Oil Main Line Breather Hose

Hot Axle Oil

Cold Axle Oil

3 C.m.

Pressure Regulator

Valve

Valve 1 Valve 2

Mechanical Pump

Axle Oil Level Indicator

Ref. Position Sensor

Axle Oil Bypass Line

Axle Oil Main Line Breather Hose

Cold Axle Oil

Air Mix

Hot Axle Oil Pressure Regulator

Valve

Before After

90

Solution Validation: Upgrade Motor HP was this project effort a valid response to initial issue?

Upgrade Motor HP

System Requirement: Head (Kg/cm2) : 16.34 Required Capacity (LPM) : 41 Horse Power = ?

Inference: Available performance Data from Supplier used to generate the Regression Equation.





4 Axle Tilt






0 Wastage Generation

No Excess Consumption

No Spillage on conveyer and

shop floor

No Manual Filling

No Axle Oil Machine

Breakdown

5.03

46

91

Solution Justification : Upgrade Motor HP was the propose and Valid Solution Justified?

Required Horse Power = 1.4

Cost : 6417 Rs. ROI : 5.92 Hours

240

5 0.5 0

100

200

300

Motor Overload Machine supplyincoming supply issue

Oil Filling machinenozzle jam

Bre

akd

ow

n H

r Axle Oil Machine Breakdown Analysis (Oct

2016 to March 2017)

Opportunity of reducing breakdown to 0 50 more vehicle could be made

Solution Iimplemented

Implementation Done

5.03

Upgrade Motor HP

System Requirement: Head (Kg/cm2) : 16.34 Required Capacity (LPM) : 41 Horse Power = ?

Motor of 1.5 HP was selected for replacement to meet requirement of 1.4 HP

92

0

500

1000

0 5 10 15Spill

ed O

il in

ml

Skid Height Difference

Mono Live Axle Model Scatter Plot

Solution Validation: Skid Height Optimization was this project effort a valid response to initial issue?





4 Axle Tilt






Optimise Skid Height for zero oil spillage

Inference: 10 c.m. of skid Height difference selected as a Solution for axle tilt

Zero Spillage Oil Spillage

Cost : Welding Rod = 1100 Rs/Skid MS Plate = 140 Rs/Skid Total Cost = 1240 Rs/Skid Total cost for 25 Vehicle = 50*1240 = 62000 Rs ROI : 2.38 Days

Trial Planned with 25 vehicles mono Live Axle Model

25

0 0

102030

No Spillage SpillageObserved

Spillage observed in 25 Sample Vehicle

0 Spillage

0 Excess Consumption

0 Waste Generation

5.03

47

93

Solution Justification : Skid Height Optimization Was the proposed and Valid solution justified?

Trial Planned with 25 vehicles mono Live Axle Model

25

0 0

10

20

30

No Spillage SpillageObserved

Spillage observed in 25 Sample Vehicle

No Vehicle Reported for Axle oil Low Cases from VTS

Full Implementation : All Models

Before

After

• Cleaning Frequency reduced on Conveyer

• Cleaning personnel reduced to 1 from 3

• Cotton consumption Reduced

• Axle oil Filling Machine Breakdown eliminated

Additional Benefits

5.03

94

Results : Excess Axle oil Consumption Line 1 What were the results and in-process adjustments?

Line 1 Excess Axle Oil Consumption Control Chart

2.22

1.857

1.39

0.942

0.352 0.5

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

L/V

eh

icle

Line 1 Excess Axle oil Consumption

Inference: Average Excess Axle oil consumption on Line 1 reduced from 2.22 L/Vehicle to .352L/Vehicle against the target of .5L/Vehicle

Scanning Mechanism introduced for axle oil Quantity Selection

Reference Sensor position changed to improve axel oil density

Motor upgraded to eliminate temperature impact on oil filling system

Skid Height Optimized to eliminate axle oil spillage on conveyer

5.04

48

95

Results : Excess axle oil consumption after horizontal deployment on Line 2 and Gear box Oil filling Process What were the results and in-process adjustments?

5.2 3.068

2.1

0

5

10

Before Target Actual

Ltr.

Excess Direct consumable consumption at Chassis shop

(Per Vehicle)

11.129 8.997

6.2

0

10

20


Ltr.

Hazardous Waste Generation

(Per Vehicle)

Project Metric Strategy Plant Objective

2.632

0.5 0.39

0

2

4


Exce

ss O

il C

on

sum

pti

on

(L)


Counter Metric

87 % Improvement Achieved 59.6 % Improvement Achieved 44.4 % Improvement Achieved Defect Elimination

Data Period (Sept 2017 Mar 2018)

Inference: Average Excess Axle oil consumption reduced from 2.632 L/Vehicle to .39L/Vehicle against the target of .5L/Vehicle

5.04

0.32

0.28 0.29 0.23 0.22

0.19

0.12

0.00 0.00

0

0.2

0.4

Jan-17 Feb-17 Mar-17 Apr-17 May-17 Jun-17 Jul-17 Aug-17 Sep-17

DP

V

Pre Delivery Inspection Shop Axle oil Related DPV

Before

After

Interim

Finance Validation

96

Maintaining the Gains : Changes Monitoring What was done to assure that the changes remain in place and that the improvement/Gains are maintained ?

Imp

rove

men

t D

on

e

Bar Code Scanning System Introduced for Axle Oil Quantity Selection

Reference Sensor position changed to eliminate axle oil

low density issue

Axle Oil filling Machine motor upgraded

Skid Heights optimized to eliminate axle oil spillage issue

during oil filling process

• Axle Oil filling process standard changed. (Work Instruction Sheet, Control Plan & PFMEA)

• Sensor Position change updated in Job card,

• Point added in Preventive Maintenance check sheet

• Machine Drawing Updated • Machine Job Card Updated

• Skid Drawing Updated

• Axle oil Machine Uptime monitoring by Maintenance Department

Auditing of new process at the end of 6 months by internal auditors.

Part of Internal and External Audit

Part of Internal and External Audit

Monitoring Through

* Done Through Change Management System

5.05

49

97

Maintaining the Gains : Result Monitoring What was done to assure that the changes remain in place and that the improvement/Gains are maintained ?

Improved Excess Axle oil Consumption is Stable. Improvement is stable for last 6 Month

Sustenance Monitoring of project Metric

Keeping in view of going for hazardous waste free plant, Chassis Assembly Consumable cost KPI is added for the department. Monitoring started for the same

Tree Diagram

5.05

Sustenance monitoring of projects is an organizational policy at Ashok Leyland.

Every project will be monitored for sustenance for 12 months from the month of closure of the project.

All closed projects undergoes internal & external audit.

98

Project Communication How were the result communicated?

Stakeholder Group Communication

Steering Committee Sponsor Champion

Black Belt Project Leader Team Member

Interested Party

• Status update on project results, horizontal deployment, control / standardization measures taken, validation of financial benefits by Finance dept.

• Project team thanked the management for providing opportunity to work on such business critical project.

• Management appreciated the team efforts for fantastic results.

Team congratulated each other for their active involvement in the project.

Project results & benefits shared through Email & Communication boards.

5.06

50

99

Project Communication How were the result communicated?

Communication from plant head to all Ashok Leyland

user

5.06

Stakeholder Communication

Thank you!

Reduction of Hazardous Oil wastage at Pantnagar Plant, Ashok Leyland · 2019-09-23 · 1 Reduction...

Documents

Transcript of Reduction of Hazardous Oil wastage at Pantnagar Plant, Ashok Leyland · 2019-09-23 · 1 Reduction...