Having problems with message search?
(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)
(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+) S.M.I.L.E(sm)
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+) Setup Minimization Improves Line Efficiency
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+) The Lean Changeover e-letter
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+) Published monthly by Changeover.com
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+) Written by John R Henry, CPP
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+)
(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)
(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)+(+)
###############################
###############################
###
### AUGUST 2005
###
###############################
###############################
============================================================
This newsletter is a free service of Changeover.com. Visit our website at
http://www.changeover.com or contact us at
john@...
Please feel free to forward this newsletter to anyone you think might be
interested
To subscribe send a blank e-mail to: quickchangeover-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To unsubscribe send a blank e-mail to:
quickchangeover-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Past issues are indexed and archived at www.changeover.com/newsletter.htm
=============================================================
I am now a blogger. Packaging World Magazine www.packworld.com has begun a packaging metablog. That is, it is a single website with several people blogging on packaging related issues. I will be posting regularly on issues related to changeover, line operations and general operational efficiency. Comments are activated in the blog so it will be easy to have discussions.
Check it out at www.packnation.com to find any of the blogs, including mine, click on the box at the left side of the page labeled “Blogs” then click on “John Henry on Changeover”
Also, its still not too late to sign up. Don’t forget that I will be speaking on changeover costs at PackExpo in Las Vegas. Visit
http://pelv2005.packexpo.com/content/solutions.html for full details
SOME THOUGHTS ON...
MUSIC AND MACHINERY
I’m not a musician though I am able to fool my granddaughter from time to time. In other words, the following is based on observations but rather limited knowledge. The real musicians reading this newsletter should feel free to correct me on anything I have wrong here.
I seem to recall reading somewhere that all music is comprised of 500-1,000 notes and/or sounds. Maybe not even that many. These can be combined together in an infinite variety of ways to produce everything from the classical sounds of Bach, to the jazz of Luis Prima, the rock of Pink Floyd, Tuvan throat singing and all the other music around the world. In other words, the infinite variety of music we have available to us is the result of combining certain basic elements in interesting (and some not so interesting) rhythms, combinations, layers and whatnot.
Something similar applies to machinery. If we were to break mechanical actions, for example a cartoning machine or a stamping press, into their constituent parts, we would probably find no more than 500 different actions. Again, this is based on observation and estimates, not study. If someone here has better info, I will be happy to stand corrected.
The same concept, of a limited number of possible motions combined in infinite ways can also be applied to hand labor. Frank and Lillian Gilbreth, early pioneers of time and motion study in the early 1900's did just that. By careful study, they found that there were only a very few (less than 20) motions. These included “reach”, “grasp”, “position” and so on. They determined that each motion had a certain time associated with it, which they called “Therbligs”. The number of Therbligs required for any particular motion is, or should be, the same from job to job and person to person.
Some of you may, like me, find this concept of a limited number of building blocks used to construct complex structures interesting. But is it useful?
More importantly, given the focus of this newsletter, is it useful when it comes to changeover?
My answer is yes.
One of the problems in analyzing changeover is that it can seem very daunting. Usually, there are multiple machines involved of differing types and levels of complexity. But machines are only part of it. There are the people performing the work, product design, the impact for good or ill of other departments and a host of other factors that must be addressed in order to achieve lean changeover. One of the problems I often find is that people feel so overwhelmed that they don’t know where to begin.
The same concept of music, machines, manual work being built up from a relatively few basic building blocks applies to changeover as well. When I started working seriously to reduce changeover times, I focused on packaging since I felt that this was where my expertise lay. It was not long before an automotive parts producer asked me to help them with their process changeover. I was a bit hesitant at first and explained that I did not know their process. We agreed that I would present my basic, packaging oriented, workshop. Part of their thinking was that they already knew how to produce their product, they wanted to learn some new ideas and thought I would provide value. I was amazed to find that, although the process was very different from typical packagingprocesses, my techniques worked wonderfully for them. Even more amazing was that many of the practical ideas for machine modification were directly and indirectly usable as well. I have since completed projects of various types in a variety of different, non-packaging, industries with similar results. This is in addition to much work in various packaging industries.
My basic technique for finding changeover improvement opportunities is to break the changeover down into it’s most elemental tasks. That is, instead of describing a task as “Remove and replace guide plate” I break it down into a number of steps such as fastener removal, where it is stored, where the replacement guide plate comes from and when and so forth. When this is done, it becomes apparent that there are a relatively few actually unique operations. Since the elemental tasks are no longer unique, the solutions are not unique either.
The real difference between changeover improvement and music is that music is built up by combining elemental sounds, one on top of the other in certain order to get the complex end result. In changeover reduction, the process is the opposite. The complex end result, the changeover as a whole, is broken down into simple tasks. The tasks can then be looked at to discover opportunities for elimination, externalization or simplification.
Years ago, I spent many a long night watch in a ship’s engine room. Sometimes I thought I could hear the machinery singing to me.
Perhaps it was.
TIP OF THE MONTH...
CONSTANT SIZE BOLTS
As readers here know, I believe that tools should be eliminated from changeover. Nuts and bolts, for example, should be replaced with handknobs and handlevers or ratchet handles. This is usually not hard to do but there will always be cases where for one reason or another it is not possible.
I have long thought it would be nice to be able to standardize all nuts and bolts touched in changeover, regardless of shank diameter, with a single common size head. This would not eliminate tool usage but would reduce it to a single wrench. I had looked but was unable to find a source of fasteners that met this requirement.
Randy Goulder of Kellogg (Yes, the good folks who bring you Rice Crispies, Frosted Flakes and other cereals) recently came up with what I call a “whack of the head” solution. ie; a solution so simple and obvious that you whack the side of you head for not having thought of it before. We were brainstorming the need to reduce the amount of wrenching required on a particular machine. Due to the nature of the machine, handlevers/knobs were not feasible. His idea was to weld sockets to each of the nuts and bolts in question. The socket would be the appropriate size (½ to 3/4" in this case) but would have a standard 3/8" drive. The tech performing the changeover would then need only a 3/8 drive ratchet handle for all adjustments. This also had the advantage, compared to the box wrench then being used, of giving a ratcheting action making the removal/replacement process easier.
As I mentioned, Randy had suggested welding the socket to the bolt. In thinking about this a bit further, I think that using epoxy to “glue” the socket to the bolt would work equally well. The force would not be on the epoxy but on the normal socket point/hex interface. All the epoxy does is hold the two parts together.
Another great idea from the field.
John R Henry CPP
Send Email