Upload
antonio-j-baptista
View
859
Download
3
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Page 1
AUTOMOBILE AND TRANSPORT
AERONAUTICS, SPACE AND
DEFENCE
22nd – 24th May 2016
Organized by: In cooperation with: Sponsored by:
Using Multi-layer Stream Mapping to assess the overall efficiency and waste of a production system: A case study from the plywood industry
E.J. Lourenço, J.P. Pereira, R. Barbosa, A. J. Baptista
António J Baptista
Page 2
1. Introduction
2. MSM: Its origin and development since LCE 2013
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
4. Case study definition and results
5. Conclusions and remarks
AGENDA
Page 3
1. Introduction
Main productivity issues of production systems:
Productivity (output/h)
Energy consumption
Raw material and resource consumption
Other variables, as quality, flow
IMPROVE THE PERFORMANCE OF
PRODUCTION SYSTEMS
“If you can't measure it, you can't manage it”. (Peter Drucker)
The challenge: How to measure the overall efficiency / performance of a system ?
Page 4
1. Introduction
Base aims of the Multi-Layer Stream Mapping methodology (LCE 2013)
Page 5
1. Introduction
Base aims of the Multi-Layer Stream Mapping methodology (LCE 2013)
Develop a multi-variable combined use of the Value Stream Mapping (VSM) Lean Tooland demonstrate its suitability to assess environmental and energy efficiency of unitprocesses and production systems in a flexible manner;
Demonstrate the importance of presenting environmental issues and efficiency in asimple manner through visual management maps and layouts for decision making andoverall awareness;
Create an approach that is able to asses productivity, the efficiency and eco-efficiency ofa production system, since the tools and methods are not always directly applicable toevery product and/or production system, and often addressed as “isolated stageanalysis”;
Create a very easily understandable assessment (for all level collaborators) based in fastvisual management attributes in most methods and tools used for eco-efficiencyassessments.
Page 6
2. MSM: Its origin and development since LCE 2013
Aim’s towards sustainable Value maximization and global waste reduction
Relates directly EFFICIENCY (%) << >> WASTE REDUCTION
Wide spectrum of users utilization by its simplified analysis
Useful for analysis from the top management to the more operational worker
Integrated / disaggregated view of information (strong and systematic data integration)
MSM Dashboards for easy to interpret information and results
Fast identification of inefficiencies in critical or limiting process steps
Facilitated assessment of inefficient processes steps and their impact on the overall efficiency
To relate (in)efficiency with process costs (that add value or just create waste)
Facilitated analysis of costs per process step / variable
List of characteristics of the MSM framework (1|2)
Page 7
2. MSM: Its origin and development since LCE 2013
Capacity to easily model and to assess efficiency and cost improvement scenarios
Generation of improvement scenarios, cost reductions quantification / simple payback analysis
Intrinsic focus on efficiency continuous improvement and its sustainability over time
Intrinsic motivation towards efficiency and continuous improvement (“lean thinking”)
Simplified lexicon and fast visual information assessment by MSM Scorecards
Adoption of visual management, with common colours, simple units (% or €, $, etc.)
Three types of analysis: AD INITIO >> Greenfield designs
IN LOCO >> Static analysis of existing production systems
IN CONTINUUM >> Online monitoring of production systems
Ability to be easily integrated into IT Management Systems and process large amount of data
Robust base algorithm to process large amount of data into information for decision support
List of characteristics of the MSM framework (2|2)
Page 8
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Value Stream Mapping (VSM) with application of Lean Principles
Pillar 1: Assess Value Addition versus not adding value
Page 9
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Pillar 1: Assess Value Addition versus not adding value
A value stream mapping consists in the collection of all actions (that add value andactions that do not add value) that are required to bring a product through themain production flow, starting from the customer and ending at the raw-material(upstream).
The primary goal of this tool is to identify all types of waste in the value stream inorder to take actions for the waste elimination and towards value increase
Example of a common VSM of a Metalworking Industry
Transport
WTS
(input)
Cleaning
WTS
Coating bolt
holes
(manually)
Mixing paint
(pneumatic
mixer)
Applying
primer coat
Drying
primary
coat
Coating
Inspection
2 2 2 2 2 2 2
VA 0,75 h 0,50 h 0,50 h 1,50 h 3,00 h 0,50 h PT 6,75 h
NVA LT 7,89 h
0,38 h 0,03 h 0,20 h 0,15 h 0,15 h 0,06 h WT 1,14 h
𝜑 86%0,70 h0,53 h1,13 h0,17 h
- 66% 94% 71% 89%
Production
Time (hours)
0,56 h3,15 h1,65 h
0,17 h
91% 95%
Page 10
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Pillar 1: Assess value addition versus not adding value
The VSM root transforms, in the MSM concept, the understanding of efficiencyassessment into something easily quantifiable, simpler, concise and directlyapplicable to any production system, in a process sequence or even incompartmented units
The combined use of Value Stream Layers of a Value Stream Map emerges in orderto “see beyond” the global environmental and financial performance of aproduction system in a simpler manner
Enables the understanding of the overall efficiency assessment, and at the sametime simplify the identification and quantification of specific inefficiency situations
Combines the assessment of resource efficiency with other type of variables, suchas control variables (operations control), enabling the connection of bothefficiency assessment and effectiveness assessment.
Page 11
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Evaluating variables (KPI) via efficiency ratios
Pillar 2: Systematically evaluate variables (and KPIs)
through efficiency ratios
Value Stream Mapping (VSM) with application of Lean Principles
Pillar 1: Assess Value Addition versus not adding value
Page 12
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Pillar 2: Systematically evaluate variables (and KPIs) through efficiency ratios
Identify all the variables that influence the stages of the value chain
Create Key Performance Indicators (KPI) for the variables in the form of ratios
Values of the ratios should be always within the range [0-100%]
KPI always created in order to be always maximized
Basic form for the KPI formula
Φ“Value added” fraction
“Value added” fraction + “Non-value added” fraction
Page 13
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Pillar 2: Systematically evaluate variables (and KPIs) through efficiency ratios
The MSM consists in replicating part of the approach used for Value StreamMapping, but allowing the addition of multiple layers (for each process or stagevariable)
VSM
MSM
ØTPi=
PTPi
LTPi
[%]
ØEPi=
PEPi
TEPi
[%]
ØCPi=
PCPi
TCPi
[%]
ØXPi=
PXPi
TXPi
[%]
Page 14
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Pillar 2: Systematically evaluate variables (and KPIs) through efficiency ratios
The values in the lower line segments are those which do not add value to the product, i.e.representing the waste /misuses of time, resources, costs, etc.
The values on the upper line segments are those that add value to the product, thus representingthe “useful consumption” within the stream or system.
ØTP1ØTPi
ØTP2
ØEP1ØEPi
ØEP2
ØCP1ØCPi
ØCP2
ØXP1ØXPi
ØXP2
Page 15
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Visual Management
Pillar 3: Apply simple methodologies of Visual Management
Evaluating variables (KPI) via efficiency ratios
Pillar 2: Systematically evaluate variables (and KPIs)
through efficiency ratios
Value Stream Mapping (VSM) with application of Lean Principles
Pillar 1: Assess Value Addition versus not adding value
Page 16
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Pillar 3: Apply simple methodologies of Visual Management
Process Efficiency 100 - 90%
Process Efficiency 89 - 70%
Process Efficiency 69 - 40%
Process Efficiency <40%
Relate the level of efficiency with 4-color type of systems analysis (red, orange, yellow,green) in the direction of increased efficiency [0-100%]
Process Stream Analysis
Mu
lti-Layer S
tream
Map
pin
g
Page 17
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Calculate overall efficiency of processes/systems (bottom-up analysis)
4th Pillar: Aggregate efficiency of unit processes (columns) and the variables (lines)
Visual Management
Pillar 3: Apply simple methodologies of Visual Management
Evaluating variables (KPI) via efficiency ratios
Pillar 2: Systematically evaluate variables (and KPIs)
through efficiency ratios
Value Stream Mapping (VSM) with application of Lean Principles
Pillar 1: Assess Value Addition versus not adding value
Page 18
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
4th Pillar: Aggregate efficiency of unit processes (columns) and the variables (lines)
Efficiency Process Stream Analysis
Cleaning
WPTS
Coating
bolt holes
Mixing
paint
Applying
primer Drying Inspection
2 2 2 2 2 2
Unit Process Efficiency
Process Efficiency 100 - 90% Process Efficiency 69 - 40%
Process Efficiency 89 - 70% Process Efficiency <40%
79% 83% 70% 69% 85% 90% 79%
Production Time (hours) 67% 94% 70% 90%
MSM
(reso
urce
efficie
ncy)
90% 80% 82%
Electrical Energy Consumption 69% 65% 70% 65% 80% 95% 74%
85% - 85%Diesel Consumption (kg) - - - 85%
Paint & Curing agent & Diluent
Consumption (kg)- 90% - 35% - - 63%
Auxiliary Material Consumption (kg) 100% - - -
Proper Waste Disposal (kg) - - - -
- - 100%
- 95% 95%
Key
Global efficiencyMSM® efficiency card
Page 19
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
4th Pillar: Aggregate efficiency of unit processes (columns) and the variables (lines)
P3
60%
P2
60%
P1
90%
P4
75%
Company
71%
L1 L2
L3
61% 62%
57%
Lines
Plant
Page 20
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
Desegregated Cost Analysis by monetizing the MSM KPI values
Added value costs vs. non added value costs
Labour
(k€)
Energy costs
(k€)
Water costs
(k€)
Diesel costs
(k€)
Packaging costs
(k€)
Non-value addedValue added
Costs
(E
uro
s)
due to confidentiality reasons the values are uncharacterized
Page 21
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
PDCA
5 SDMAIC
5 why
SMEDTPM
7 Wastes
VSM
Performance Assessment
ContinuousImprovement
MSM’s position regarding other Lean Tools
Page 22
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
MSM Strengths – Vision of the MSM with online monitoring (sensors IoT)
Aligned with the Industry 4.0 new challenges
Page 23
3. Multi-Layer Stream Mapping description
MSM Strengths – Versatile Analysis by “Efficiency Cards”
Efficiency Fingerprint
Summary analysis
Other KPI
OEE
bottlenecks
ResultsInputs
Inventory
Value added and non value added Customized
ContinuousImprovement
MSM Scorecard RESOURCES
MSM Scorecard OPERATIONS
MSM Scorecard FLOW
MSM Scorecard DOMAIN X
Energy Efficiency Materials
Page 24
4. Case study definition and results
Unit Process (Stages) Description
Feeding table Supply the conveyer with boards (automatically)
CalibratingConsist in calibrating the board's thickness using coarse and
medium sand paper
SandingConsist in sanding the MDF boards to obtain a smooth finish and
guarantee the specification thickness
Cutting
The cutting process consists of two steps, vertical cutting and
longitudinal cutting, during these steps the MDF boards are also
calibrated in terms of width and length
StackingDuring this unit process the MDF boards, already cut, are stacked,
and the protection board is placed on the top
PackingThis unit process is carried out by placing cardboard and the base
studs, finally the strapping PET tape placed
Plywood boards finishing line description
Page 25
4. Case study definition and results
Plywood boards finishing line description
Resource and
energy variables
Time (h)
Electrical energy (kWh)
Diesel (l)
Appropriate referral of waste (kg)Linear meters sanded per sandpaper (m)
Sandpaper utilization (m2)
Operational
variables
Quality (units)
Length (mm)
Width (mm)
Thickness (mm)
Planned down time (min)
Planned production time (min)
Unplanned down time (min)
Analysed variables: KPI for Operational Variables
• Adopt statistical control technics,applying control bands to set theboundary limits (“area tend toadd value”)
• Penalize function that accountsfor the waste areas (“tend tocreate waste”)
• Assessment of effectiveness,rather than efficiency
Counts (N)
Variablevalue
Page 26
4. Case study definition and results
Resource efficiency assessment
Process Efficiency 100 - 90% Process Efficiency 69 - 40%
Process Efficiency 89 - 70% Process Efficiency <40%
- 100%
93%- 100% 80% - - -
- 100% 100% - -
- 100% 100% - -
- - 95% - 95%
18% 62%
Sandpaper utilization (m2)
Linear meters sanded per
sandpaper (m)
Appropriate referral of waste
(kg)
Diesel (l)
Electrical energy (kWh) 65% 71% 76% 75% 70%
100% 100%
95%-
56% 71%
Time (h) 78% 50% 67% 9% 70% 12% 36%
Resource overall efficiency 71% 84% 85% 60% 70%
Packing
0,42 0,42 0,42 0,58 0,58 0,58
StackingUnit processes
Feeding table Calibrating Sanding Cutting
Product : Plywood board Functional Unit: m3Period of analysis: 1 year
Page 27
4. Case study definition and results
Operation efficiency assessment
Process Efficiency 100 - 90% Process Efficiency 69 - 40%
Process Efficiency 89 - 70% Process Efficiency <40%
- 100% -
99% 98% 99% - -
- 100%
Thickness (mm)
Width (mm)
Length (mm) - - - - 100%
- 99%
100%- - -
100% 98%Quality (units)
67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67% 67%Speed Loss (min)
100% 100% 86% 100% 100%
77% 80%
Availability (min) 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62% 62%
Operation overall efficiency 82% 82% 79% 77% 86%
Packing
0,42 0,42 0,42 0,58 0,58 0,58
StackingUnit processes
Feeding table Calibrating Sanding Cutting
Product : Plywood board Functional Unit: m3Period of analysis: 1 year
Page 28
4. Case study definition and results
Product : Plywood board Functional Unit: m3Period of analysis: 1 year
Overall dashboard
(Operation & resource efficiency)
Process Efficiency 100 - 90% Process Efficiency 69 - 40%
Process Efficiency 89 - 70% Process Efficiency <40%
INFORMATIVE VARIABLES
59% 23% 51%
42% 41%42%
Bottleneck 100% 41% 50% 31%
OEE 42% 42% 36% 42%
56% 71%
Overall Operation efficiency
(%) 82% 82% 79% 77% 86% 77% 80%
Overall resource efficiency (%) 71% 84% 85% 60% 70%
Overall production system
Performance (%)59% 69% 67% 46%
Unit processesFeeding table Calibrating Sanding Cutting
43% 57%
Packing
0,42 0,42 0,42 0,58 0,58 0,58
Stacking
60%
due to confidentiality reasons the values are uncharacterized
Page 29
4. Case study definition and results
Disaggregated Cost Analysis (€ / m3)
due to confidentiality reasons the values are uncharacterized
- €
1,0 €
2,0 €
3,0 €
4,0 €
5,0 €
6,0 €
7,0 €
8,0 €
9,0 €
Packingmaterials
ElectricalEnergy
Labour Sandpaper Diesel
Value added Non value added
14,31 €81%
€3,29 19%
Page 30
5. Conclusions and remarks
MSM approach brings a new perspective to assess Overall Performance of a System, since resultscan be quantified by a discreet method for a process sequence or a individual system
It integrates strong visual management attributes and is mathematically simple (very easy to use for all kind of stakeholders)
The Multi-layer Stream Mapping enables to calculate the aggregation efficiency of different aspects of management of a system, by the integration of different “MSM EFFICIENCY CARDS”
Very versatile and wide range concept that can be applied for multi-variable and multiple-domain activities (project management, logistics, economics, services, health care, etc.)
Other potential characteristics
Simple warning programming (Alarmistic) to assist in maintenance
Support the simplified identification of root causes of problems
Simplified ROI for improvement actions analysis (payback)
Easy tracking of indicators on the production line
Great alignment with Industry 4.0 (“sensing enterprise”, “Internet of Things”, etc.)
Inductor culture of continuous improvement and focus on reducing waste
Page 31
5. Conclusions and remarks
Other MSM applications Wine Vineyard Farm (ongoing project)
Other past or ongoing projects:
Textil Industry
Process Industry – SPIRE H2020
MAESTRI Project - ongoing
Aeronautics – CLEAN SKY H2020
PÁSSARO (with Airbus Spain) - ongoing
Bed 2
Bed 3
Bed 1
Page 32
Thank you for your attention
Using Multi-layer Stream Mapping to assess the overall efficiency and waste of a production system: A case study from the plywood industry
António J Baptista ([email protected])