On-Time Delivery Enhancement of Housing

by

Process Re-Engineering

UCAM Pvt LtdPioneers in India for Rotary Table manufacturing

• Increase in demand by 37.5%

• Required better quality

• Imported Rotary Tables started to compete

• Decrease in profit margins

Driven by: Rise in Demand for Rotary Tables

Higher demand for

Rotary Tables

- Housings manufactured in-house, need the most time

Higher numbers of housings needed

1 more VTL and 1 more HMC

Trigger:

5 cr. investment and

4 more operators

Trigger: Increase in Requirement per Month

2016-2017 2017-2018

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

XXXX MMMM DDDD ZZZZ RRRR

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Qu

an

tity

in

No

s.

Rotary Table Model

Requirement per Month - 2017-18

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

90.0

100.0

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

XXXX MMMM DDDD ZZZZ RRRR

Pe

rce

nta

ge

Qu

an

tity

in

No

s.

Rotary Table Model

Requirement per Month - 2016-17

Average increase in demand: 42%

Increase in demand for XXXX Rotary Tables: 37.5%

Brainstorming and Probable Causes for Delays:

CFT in action

Sl. NoPotential Causes for High Machining

TimeCategories

1 High machining stock in RM Material

2 Machining of unwanted areas Method

3 Optimization of program Method

4 Clamping system Method

5 Inspection time Measurement

6 No of setups Method

7 Low parameter tools Method

8 Machine accuracy & repeatability Machine

9 Chip conveyor cleaning Machine

10 Power shutdown Machine

11 Program error Method

12 Material characteristics Material

13 Design issues Method

14 Unskilled Operator Man

15 Non standardization process Method

16 Lossen and tIghtening of Clamps Man

17 Alignment of casting Method

18 Tool Breakage Material

19 Introduction of sister tools Method

20 Poor instrument handling Man

Brainstorming Points

Gemba Analysis for XXXX Housing:

Gemba In-Progress Gemba Report

SL. No. Tool Name Operation S F Ap Time

45 Ø 6 Ball Nose End Mill Corner Radius Finishing 3000 200 5

46 Ø 10 Ball Nose End Mill Corner Radius Finishing 3000 200 3

5 Major Causes for Higher Cycle Time

Number of

Setups

Clamping

method

Tool path &

cutting strategy

Raw Material

Tooling

Cycle

Time

Number of

Setups

Clamping

method

Tool path &

cutting strategy

Raw Material

Tooling Reduce Number

of setups and

work stations

Shift to Pull

down clamping

Optimization of

tool path and

cutting strategy

Stock Reduction &

Value Engineering

Upgrade

Tooling

Solutions

Cycle

Time

5 Major Causes for Higher Cycle Time

Results for XXXX Housing…

Cycle time per part

reduced by

63%

Cost per part

reduced by

36.3%

40

100115 125

80

460 mins

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

VTL - T1 VTL - T2 VTL - T3 HMC - M1 HMC - M2 Total Cycle time

Tim

e in

min

pe

r h

ou

sin

g

Operations

XXXX Housing Cycle Time - 2016-17

Process Study of Cycle Time for XXXX Housing:

Value Engineering…

Implementation: Design

Before After

Aluminum PatternWooden Pattern

Castings with

heavy

machining

stock

Castings

with

optimized

machining

stock

Implementation: Design

Before After

1. Reduction in machining stock 2. Improved casting surface finish 3. Better repeatability across

batches of casting

Benefits:

Reduction in Machining of Raw Material Stock…

Hard jawsSoft jaws

Implementation: Manufacturing

VTL SETUP 3VTL SETUP 1 VTL SETUP 2 VTL SETUP 3

1. Cycle time reduced by 300 mins; 2.Setup time was reduced; 3. Product quality improved

Benefit:

VTL setups 1

and 2 were

eliminated and

the operations

were moved to

HMC2

Before After

Reduction in Number of Setups..

Top clamping with height block Pull down clamping

Work Holding for HMC side ..

1. Cycle time was reduced 2. Clamping rigidity improved 3. Quality and repeatability of

geometrical parameters improved

Benefits:

Before After

Implementation: Manufacturing

Optimization of Tool Movement and Cutting Strategy…

Reduction of zig-zag movement

Elimination of air passes

Increased cutting parameters

Reduction in internal and

external process

S F Ap S F Ap

1 Ø 25 SC End Mill 900 400 3 1200 600 5

2 Ø 16 SC End Mill 1200 300 2 1200 400 3

3 Ø 63 Cutter 1100 1100 5

4 Ø 20 SC End Mill 900 600 3 1000 1000 5

5 Ø 20 Ball Nose Cutter 1500 2000 1 4000 5000

6 Ø 12 SC End Mill 1200 400 2

7 Ø 10 SC End Mill 1500 500 1 3000 1000 1

8 Ø 4 SC End Mill 2000 2000 0.25 2000 2000 0.5

9 Ø 6 Ball Nose End Mill 300 200 1

10 Ø 10 Ball Nose End Mill 3000 200 1

11 Ø 16x R5 Radius Tool 1500 800 1

12 Ø 16x R3 Radius Tool 1500 800 1

13 Ø 210 H7 Finish Boring Bar 227 34 1

14 Ø 195.7 Rough Boring Bar 245 40 1

15 Ø 209.7 Rough Boring Bar 230 34 1

16 Ø 100x 85 x Ø 54.5 Combination Tool 500 100 1

17 Ø 32 x Ø 24.5 Combination Tool 900 100 1

NA

NA

NA

NA

Comparison of Old and New Cutting Parameters

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

NA

Old NewTool Name Sl. No.

NA

Implementation: Manufacturing

Combination

tools and

digital anti

vibration

boring tools

End mills

and boring

tools with

solid

extension

used before

improveme

nt

Tooling…

Before After

Implementation: Manufacturing

VTL SETUP 1 VTL SETUP 2 VTL SETUP 3 HMC SETUP 1 HMC SETUP 2

Process Flow Comparison:

VTL SETUP 1 HMC SETUP 1 HMC SETUP 2

Before

After

Value Creation: Reduction in Cycle Time and Costs

Cost saved per year Rs. 27,64,800 for

XXXX housings (36.3%)

Total cycle time reduced from 460 mins to

170 mins (63%)

2320

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

2016-2017 2017-2018 Yearly Savings

Cyc

le T

ime

in

Hrs

Cycle Time Saved per annum (in Hrs)

28

0

10

20

30

40

50

2016-2017 2017-2018 Yearly Savings

Co

st

in I

NR

La

kh

s

Cost Saved per Year (in Lakhs)

460

170

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

VTL - T1 VTL - T2 VTL - T3 HMC - M1 HMC - M2 TotalCycle time

Tim

e i

n m

in

Setups

XXXX Housing Cycle Time Comparison:2016-17 to 2017-18

Cycle time in 16-17 Cycle time in 17-18

71.16%80%

91.08%

0.00%

10.00%

20.00%

30.00%

40.00%

50.00%

60.00%

70.00%

80.00%

90.00%

100.00%P

erc

en

tag

e

Year

OTD Trend

2016-17 2017-18 2018-19

Value Creation: Improvement in OTD

Flatness SymmetryPerpendicularity

Value Creation (added benefit): Improvement in Quality

Before

After

460491

586 565

314

589

170 160190 180

97

273

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

XXXX MMMM DDDD ZZZZ KKKK RRRR

Tim

e in

min

pe

r h

ou

sin

g

Housing Size

Cycle Time after horizontal deployment of other housings

Cycle time in 16-17 Cycle time in 17-18

Overall cost savings after horizontal deployment is 103 LPA

Value Creation: Horizontal Deployment

158

103

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

XXXX MMMM DDDD ZZZZ KKKK RRRR Totalsavings

INR

In

La

kh

s p

er

an

nu

m

Housing Size

Cost saving per annum after horizontal deployment

Cost in 2016-17 Cost in 2017-18 Cost saved per Year

55

Overall cycle time saving was on an average is 64%

Overall Cost Invested After Horizontal Deployment :

0.56

5

1.6

7.16

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Fixture cost Tooling cost Pattern cost Total Investment

Inve

stm

en

t in

La

kh

s

Investments

Investments

Additional Benefits:

2.48136

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Electricity Coolant Lubrication Total

Co

st

sa

ve

d i

n IN

R L

ak

hs

Resource

Cost Saved per Annum

Summary

Trigger Solution

Benefits Next Steps

42% avg rise in

demand for Rotary Tables

5 major causes found

Solutions determined

5 cr. investment

avoided

Cycle time

reduced by 64%

Better quality

Reduced

carbon footprint

• Complete elimination of VTL

• Further reduction in cycle time

• Continuous improvement in quality and delivery

Improved OTD

Saved 103 lakhs pa

Q & A