Dresser-Rand Gasket Cell Relocation

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Dresser-Rand Gasket Cell RelocationDresser-Rand Gasket Cell Relocation

[Revision: Feb 2011]

Team Members: Cody Willmart, Aaron Marcotte, Jacky Li, Daniel Swol, Tyler Borden

Mentor: John Kaemmerlen

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

2

Meeting PurposeMeeting Purpose

PurposePurpose – Interactive discussion of the project

with stakeholders. Provide recommendation for the

future state of the Gasket Cell.

GoalGoal – Gain feedback to determine the direction

for the rest of the project.

PLEASE PLEASE – Comment or ask questions at any time– Comment or ask questions at any time

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

AgendaAgenda

1. Introductions

2. Project Summary

3. Customer Needs and Engineering Specs

4. Review Current System

5. Concept Feasibility

6. Upgraded Technology Options

7. Layout Options

8. Visual Management

9. Cost Analysis

10. Project Schedule and Next Steps

3

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

4

Project BackgroundProject Background

DR Painted Post relocating and consolidating

processes to reduce plant footprint

Gasket and Sheet Metal Cells are on the “Wrong side

of the wall”

Primary focus is the Gasket Cell Relocation and

Improvement

Timeline: 22 week project

Started: 12/3/2010 End: 5/13/2011

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Expected Project BenefitsExpected Project Benefits

An updated, efficient, and safe gasket cell in an

operating area of Dresser-Rand’s Painted Post

facility

A model project for process innovation and the

implementation of lean principles for both

Dresser-Rand and RIT

5

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

6

Work Work Breakdown Breakdown StructureStructure

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

7

Customer NeedsCustomer Needs

Summary CN#Operational Excellence Customer Need Importance

1 Cost Footprint Reduction (Improved Layout) 92 Delivery Relocation to Point of Use 33 Cost Make Cell Adaptable to many locations in plant 14 Delivery Die & Pattern Organization and Standardization 95 Delivery Match Inventory of dies/patterns with their current use 36 Cost Inventory Management (Raw & Finished Goods) 37 Delivery Tool Storage & Organization 38 Whole Star Upgrade Technology 39 Whole Star Digital Technology Option 310 Delivery Movement toward lean - one piece flow 911 Quality Process Standardization 312 Delivery More Effi cient Cell 913 Delivery Fast Response Time 914 Safety Safety is the highest priority 9

Reduce the space required for the cell and determine a feasible location for the

cell in a new area of the plant

Develop a new inventory management system for raw materials, finished goods,

dies and patterns, and tools

Develop an effi cient process for producing gaskets with the new

equipment

Research and recommend modern technology options

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

8

Engineering SpecificationsEngineering SpecificationsES# Importance

Operational Excellence Specification (description)

Unit of Measure

Current Value Marginal Value

1 9 Cost Square footage of gasket cell sq. ft. 5900 > 50% Reduction2 3 Delivery Travel time to direct customers min. 10 > 50% Reduction3 3 Cost Cost to move equipment $4 1 Cost Requirement for OE manufacture to move equipment Binary5 3 Delivery Search time for dies and patterns min. <5 2 min6 3 Delivery Store only actively used dies and patterns Binary No Yes7 3 Delivery Search time for raw material min. 5-10 2 min8 9 Delivery Search time for finished goods/kitting min. 209 3 Delivery Search time for tools min. <5 2 min

10 3 Delivery Average batch size # 20% Increase11 9 Delivery Process cycle time min. 35-40 20% Decrease12 3 Cost Scrap sq. ft. 20% Decrease13 9 Delivery Setup time min. <5 20% Decrease14 1 Quality Standard Work Available Binary No Creation15 3 Delivery Work in Process (WIP) # orders 2 As Needed16 9 Cost Return on Investment (ROI) rate 11% Hurdle17 9 Cost Payback period years 1 Year18 9 Cost Operation and maintenance costs $ Minimized19 9 Delivery Throughput #20 3 Delivery Machine Time sec 20% Reduction21 9 Cost Cost of Labor $ 35/hr/person22 3 Cost Tool life days Maximized

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

9

Current LayoutCurrent Layout

Red = Machine Yellow = Table Blue = Storage

Total Footprint: 6000 sq. ft.Total Footprint: 6000 sq. ft.

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Current State Value Stream MapCurrent State Value Stream Map

Please see attached 11x17 document in review packet

10

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Three Main OptionsThree Main Options

1. Relocate current process into new area of the plant

2. Update die cutting equipment with a single press

and move process into new area

3. Invest in completely new technology, eliminate the

need for dies, patterns, and the hand cut area.

Significant footprint reduction

11

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Options 1 & 2 - Concept Feasibility?Options 1 & 2 - Concept Feasibility?

12

Current Area = 6,000 sq.ft.Improved Area = 5260 sq.ft.

Footprint Reduction of 710 sq.ft. (12%)

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Purchase a laser, blade, or waterjet cutting machine

Dies and patterns are no longer required with a digital

interface

Goal is to replace all die cutting and hand cutting with a

single machine

A significant footprint reduction can be achieved

Develop an entirely new process around the new

equipment

Incorporate lean principles into design (visual

management, 5S, standard work, flow, etc.)

13

3) Higher Cost, Highest Risk, Maximum Benefit3) Higher Cost, Highest Risk, Maximum Benefit

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

WaterjetWaterjetSafety:Spray shields and cutting head guards.

Emergency shut off valves.

Electronic perimeter shut off system.

Quality: Meets tolerance requirements.

Gasket materials can soak up moisture from

waterjet, which may cause slight

discoloration.

Delivery:Can complete jobs fast and efficient and

should be able to meet any delivery

deadline.

Cost:Most expensive machine at $165,000.

Most expensive annual operating cost.

Consumables: $2/machine hour

Utilities: $6/machine hour

Abrasives: $20/machine hour (operation can be run without abrasives)

People:Operation can be run with 2-3 people instead of 7.

Limitations:Excess water spray

Might be too powerful for gasket application.

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

LaserLaserSafety:Fully enclosed cutting area.

All doors and covers have redundant safety

interlocks that, when doors are opened, turn

off power to the laser and place a shutter over

the laser beam path.

Crash sensor and break away nozzle to

reduce the risk of damage due to set up

errors.


Gasket materials can get scorched by the

laser.

Delivery:Can complete jobs fast and efficient and

should be able to meet any delivery deadline.

Cost:Machine costs $100,000.

Operating costs $1/machine hour.

The cost of running a compressor (air assist)

Consumables $500 per year (mainly replacing

table every 6 months)

Installation of fume hood and stack

People:Operation can be run with 2-3 people instead of 7

Limitations:Needs fume extraction.

Government approval for fume stack required

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

CNC Blade CuttingCNC Blade CuttingSafety:Fully enclosed cutting head

Only exposed to blade tools when changing head for depth or tool type

Emergency stops on each end of table and gantry

Stop machine if runs into obstacle by yellow disks, can resume cutting from stop


Pen tool can mark parts

Delivery:Can complete jobs fast and efficient and should be able to meet any delivery deadline.

Cost:Machine costs $86,000.

Annual operating cost: $3,000-$4,000.

People:Operation can be run with 2-3 people instead of 7.

Limitations:Tools required for different depths with depth limiters to extend table life

Replace table recommended each year and blades as they wear

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

17

Pugh Chart – Revised after further Pugh Chart – Revised after further researchresearch

Concepts A B C D E Current Hydraulic Press Blade Laser WaterjetSelection Criteria Footprint Reduction

Datum (Mix of Hand Cut and Die Cut)

0 + + +Efficient Cell 0 + + +Fast Response Time 0 + + +Movement toward lean principles + + + +Safety + + + +Maintenance and Operation Cost + + + -Labor 0 + + +Capital Investment - - - --Acceptable material size 0 + + +Quality of Product 0 + - -

Range of material type 0 + - -Sum + 's 3 10 8 7Sum 0's 7 0 0 0

Sum -'s 1 1 3 4

Net Score 2 9 5 3Rank 4 1 2 3

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

18

Machine SpecsMachine SpecsCut speed Head Speed Tolerance Cutting size

in/min in/sec

Blade Cutting 2000 60 0.015" 6’ x 12’

Laser Cutting 1000 16 0.002" 6'x6'

Water Jet Cutting (1) 400 8 0.003" 5.5x6.5

Water Jet Cutting (2) 1500 25 0.004" 6.5'x13'

Setup Time Machine Time Tolerance Cutting size

Required 1min 1min 0.015" 5'x5'

Blade Cutting 1min 1min 0.015" 6’ x 12'

Laser Cutting 1min 2min 0.002" 6'x6'

Water Jet Cutting 3min 2min 0.003" 5.5x6.5

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Current RecommendationCurrent Recommendation

Eastman CNC Blade Cutting Table

19

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

20

5M’s5M’s

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Future State VSMFuture State VSM

Please see 11x17 handout

21

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Layout OptionsLayout Options

22

Possible Relocation Area

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Visual Management IdeasVisual Management Ideas

26

252321191715131197531

0.0640

0.0635

0.0630

0.0625

0.0620

Sample

Sam

ple

Mean

__X=0.062952

UCL=0.063893

LCL=0.062011

252321191715131197531

0.0024

0.0018

0.0012

0.0006

0.0000

Sample

Sam

ple

Range

_R=0.00092

UCL=0.002368

LCL=0

1

1

Xbar-R Chart of Thickness 5-4

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Heijunka BoxHeijunka Box

Eliminates the need

to search through a

pile of orders to see

what gaskets need

to be produced for

the day

27

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Next Steps – Machine TestingNext Steps – Machine Testing

Test Heavy Duty Head

¼ inch holes, blade or punch?

Test pen on different materials

Waiting on final quote

30

© C

opyr

ight

201

0

Next Steps and Action ItemsNext Steps and Action Items

31

Capital Acquisition Requirements

Kaizen opportunity?

Analyze feasibility of new process

Implementation plan

Test waterjet?

Dresser-Rand Gasket Cell Relocation

Documents

Transcript of Dresser-Rand Gasket Cell Relocation