TVS Motor company An Introduction - ASQ · 2019-09-23 · 3 5 TVS Motor Company Ltd....
Transcript of TVS Motor company An Introduction - ASQ · 2019-09-23 · 3 5 TVS Motor Company Ltd....
1
1 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
TVS Motor Company Limited, Hosur, Tamil Nadu, India
Material Cost Reduction Through Painting Process Optimization
2 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
TVS Motor company
An Introduction
2
3 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
TVS Motor Company
TVS Motor is the flagship Company
of Sundaram Clayton group
Brakes & Die
casting division
TVS Motor
Company
Sundaram
Clayton
TVS Group
Sundaram Auto
components
Sundaram Clayton
Group companies
Shri Venu Srinivasan
Chairman
4 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Offer a two wheeler to carry a family
of lower middle class
at an affordable price (ie @ Rs 5000) ……….
Dream...
The Dream
3
5 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Sundaram-Clayton Limited (SCL) started Moped Division at
Hosur to manufacture TVS 50 mopeds, indigenously designed
and developed.
1979
The Reality
TVS Motor…
“Championing progress through Mobility”
34 Years and Beyond…..
6 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Sa
les v
olu
me
in
La
kh
s
1997 - Mysore Plant
2006 – Himachal Plant
2007 – Indonesia Plant
Sales 3.4 million vehicles with
Turnover of USD 2.3 billion
Leading to growth…
1979 – Hosur Plant
TVS Motor, The Journey…
2006 - 3 Wheeler Plant
4
7 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Product Portfolio
Mopeds Scooters
Motor cycles - Premium Motor cycles - Economy
Three Wheelers Bebek (Indonesia)
8 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Our organization achievement
ISO, TS & TPM Certificates
Deming Award (2002)
2016
TPM Certification
2017
OSHAS 18001 ISO/IEC 27001
2016
ISO/TS 16949
2015
J.D.Power award (2018)
TVS Motor Company won Deming award,
1st two wheeler company to get this award
5
9 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
TEI
TEI (Total Employee Involvement ) forms the core of all initiative
In TEI QCC & suggestion are the foundation
TEI Pyramid
SENIOR
MANAGERS
EXECUTIVES &
MANAGERS
WORKMEN & STAFF
TASK
FORCE
CFT & SIT
QCC, JUNIOR QCC &
TEIAN
SENIOR
MANAGERS
MANAGERS &
EXECUTIVES
WORKMEN & STAFF
Cross functional teams (CFT)
&Supervisory
Improvement teams (SIT)
Suggestion & QCC
Task Force(TF)
Quality concepts at TVS Motor company
10 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Global presence
Collaborate to Produce Premium Motorcycles in the Global ...
6
11 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Section 1: Project Background & Purpose
12 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Customer Expectations
Competition Actions
Economical factors
Previous Year non-
achievements
Gaps of Long Range plans
Mentor’s feedback
External environmental
analysis
Internal Factors
Environmental Scan
Annual Goals
Company Annual Policy
Departmental Policy
Implementation & review
Mission
Vision
Long Range plans
Policy 1: Improve Customer
Satisfaction
Policy 2: Improve Turnover
Policy 3: Improve EBIDTA
278 Critical projects
identified towards
achieving the Company
Annual Policy
1.01 Organizational approach to project planning
Major Measure Execution
through:
• Taskforces
• Cross functional Teams (CFTs)
• Supervisory Improvements
Team (SITs)
7
13 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
1.01 Organizational approach to project planning
Project Approval Committee (BPL & TQC Dept.)
Sponsor (Head – QAD)
Project Steering Committee (HODs of relevant functions)
Annual goals (KPI) through • Environment scan • Internal factors
Policy guidelines from • Diagnosis of Last year
gaps • System level root causes
• Taskforces • Cross functional Teams (CFTs) • Supervisory Improvements Team
(SITs)
• Target (What) Image (How) Plan ( Major measure) • Interfacing chart (Catch ball)
Top down targets
Bottom-up targets
Project Leader
Policy Targets (What) Means (How)
Deployment of Goals through:
Project Bank execution through: Business Planning & Total Quality Control, HOD, Planners
Section Heads Planners
Responsibility : PDCA on KPIs during the
year
Long Range Plan (LRP) – Rolling plan on 3 years
Quarterly PDCA
14 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
1.02 Project identification process
Project identification – Company wide approach
4
6
8
10
12
Year 1 Year 2
EBIDTA Core CFT Leader (Leader of Major
Measure)
Member 1 (Responsible for
Means 1 – Facilitator for Sub CFT)
Sub CFT 1
Sub CFT 2
Sub CFT 3
Member 2 (Responsible for
Means 2 – Facilitator for Sub CFT)
Sub CFT 1
Sub CFT 2
Sub CFT 3
Member 3 (Responsible for
Means 3 – Facilitator for Sub CFT)
Sub CFT 1
Sub CFT 2
Sub CFT 3
Business
KMI
4
6
8
10
12
Year 1 Year 2
Material Cost
Department
KMI (Major
Measure)
4
6
8
10
12
Year 1 Year 2
Paint cost
Department
KPI (Sub
Measure)
KMI – Key Management Indices; KPI – Key Performance Indices
UOM - %
UOM – Rs/Vehicle
8
15 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Target setting
Management reviews
Quarterly diagnosis
Process
Yearly
Monthly
Quarterly
Frequency
Project bank (Taskforces, CFTs, SITs)
Root cause analysis, corrective actions preventive actions & standardization
Updation of project bank
(Revisit Taskforces, CFTs
& SITs)
Stage outcome Policy deployment stage
Establishment and
deployment
Implementation &
review and control
1.03 Project selection process
16 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
1.03 Project selection process
4
6
8
10
12
Year 1 Year 2
EBIDTA
Business KMI
4
6
8
10
12
Year 1 Year 2
Material Cost
Department KMI (Major Measure)
Company X - Matrix 2W Business HOD - Operations
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.1
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
10.0
800.
0
16.5
31.7 2.7
60 /
198
36 /
173
60 58 875
872
873
62*
To To
0 40
7.9
375.
0
14.2
25.0
67 /
42 /
100
70 854
861
862
56
From
From
0 0 22
%
Rs.
Cr %
Lac
Lac
Scor
e
UO
M
UO
M
Ove
rall
EBIT
DA
FCF
Ret
ail M
arke
t sha
re –
2W
Sale
s Vo
lum
e –
2W
NPI
Sal
es: N
251,
U24
2, U
286,
N28
9
(Incl
uded
in s
ales
pla
n)
Cus
tom
er r
eten
tion:
LT T
GW
Apa
che1
60 (3
M /
12M
)
Jupi
ter
(3M
/ 12
M)
Apa
che
200
(3M
)
XL10
0 (3
M)
TGR
Jupi
ter
Apa
che
160
Apa
che
180/
200
Serv
ice
NPS
PA
RE
TO
AC
TIO
N P
LAN
(3W
1H)
No
of p
robl
ems
stag
e 80
clo
sed
with
M3
actio
ns w
ithin
10
days Apa
che
Jupi
ter
XL10
0M
ater
ial h
andl
ing
audi
t sco
re
(from
sto
res
to P
OC
)
Qua
lity
syst
em ra
ting
of M
IW c
ells
Early involvement in NPD & adhere to MPT / stage gate process
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
Implement TVS Production system
Use taskforce approach & GB/BB for critical projects
Leverage IT to improve DWM & Productivity levels
Ensure timely completion of waste elimination projects through product cost loss
approach
Improve skill & will in identified areas
Implement and adhere to levelled production; Establish pull system in entire supply
chain
Rai
sed
vs
Clo
sed
No
of
stor
es
scor
e>=7
.5
No
of c
ells
scor
e >=
7.5
43
Def
/100
APE
AL
Scor
e
Implement technology projects for recurrence prevention complaints in IB
Establish strong sustenance mechanism towards surprise in Q issue/ shortage
Functional Guidelines
l Leverage TVS PS - pull system for optimizing end to end inventory
l
l Leverage suppliers capability and support for material cost reduction
Adopt cost loss tree across all business processes to eliminate waste
l Rationalize roles to contain overall head count
Cost driver based budgeting in new product design and developmentl
GUIDELINES
OB
JEC
TIV
ES
PRESIDENT & CEO
2W Business
HOD operations
Department X - Matrix 2W Business HOD - Operations
4.9
4.8
4.7
4.6
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.2
4.1
3.5
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1
10.0
800.
0
16.5
31.7 2.7
60 /
198
36 /
173
60 58 875
872
873
62*
To To
0 40
7.9
375.
0
14.2
25.0
67 /
42 /
100
70 854
861
862
56
From
From
0 0 22
%
Rs.
Cr %
Lac
Lac
Scor
e
UO
M
UO
M
Ove
rall
EBIT
DA
FCF
Ret
ail M
arke
t sha
re –
2W
Sale
s Vo
lum
e –
2W
NPI
Sal
es: N
251,
U24
2, U
286,
N28
9
(Incl
uded
in s
ales
pla
n)
Cus
tom
er r
eten
tion:
LT T
GW
Apa
che1
60 (3
M /
12M
)
Jupi
ter
(3M
/ 12
M)
Apa
che
200
(3M
)
XL10
0 (3
M)
TGR
Jupi
ter
Apa
che
160
Apa
che
180/
200
Serv
ice
NPS
PA
RE
TO
AC
TIO
N P
LAN
(3W
1H)
No
of p
robl
ems
stag
e 80
clo
sed
with
M3
actio
ns w
ithin
10
days Apa
che
Jupi
ter
XL10
0M
ater
ial h
andl
ing
audi
t sco
re
(from
sto
res
to P
OC
)
Qua
lity
syst
em ra
ting
of M
IW c
ells
Early involvement in NPD & adhere to MPT / stage gate process
l
l
l
l
l
l
l
Implement TVS Production system
Use taskforce approach & GB/BB for critical projects
Leverage IT to improve DWM & Productivity levels
Ensure timely completion of waste elimination projects through product cost loss
approach
Improve skill & will in identified areas
Implement and adhere to levelled production; Establish pull system in entire supply
chain
Rai
sed
vs
Clo
sed
No
of
stor
es
scor
e>=7
.5
No
of c
ells
scor
e >=
7.5
43
Def
/100
APE
AL
Scor
e
Implement technology projects for recurrence prevention complaints in IB
Establish strong sustenance mechanism towards surprise in Q issue/ shortage
Functional Guidelines
l Leverage TVS PS - pull system for optimizing end to end inventory
l
l Leverage suppliers capability and support for material cost reduction
Adopt cost loss tree across all business processes to eliminate waste
l Rationalize roles to contain overall head count
Cost driver based budgeting in new product design and developmentl
GUIDELINES
OB
JEC
TIV
ES
PRESIDENT & CEO
2W Business
HOD operations
Guidelines for Target Achievement
Objective of TPM Cost loss approach
To identify the loss cost in the 6M & 4P.
6M : Man, Machine, Method, Material,
Measurement, Material handling,
4P : People, Plant/ Policy ,Product,
Process
Company Annual Policy
Departmental Policy
Implementation & review
UOM - % UOM – Rs/ vehicle
9
17 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Inference: Cost loss identification for the product done using cost loss
tree. Then, product cost loss is grouped under 3 categories. Our project
scope of paint cost loss reduction is falling under the category of bought
out material cost reduction.
TPM Cost loss Tree - Jupiter
1.03 Project selection process
18 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Cost loss stratification Yield loss stratification
MANAGING POINTS & CHECK POINTS : 2017-18
Department: Operations NAME
Ref MANAGING POINT UOM VCS REF Ref CHECK POINT UOM VCS REF RESP. FOR CP
B11 Conversion cost Stores & Tools cost (XL 100 / Scooter) Rs/Veh71.8 /
177.4
61.1/
151NUK
XL 100 Rs/Veh 651 570 B11 Power & Fuel cost (XL 100 / Scooter) Rs/veh158.5/
195
134.7 /
166NVP
Scooter 1059 921 B11 Scrap cost Rs. In Cr 1.60 0.82 NUK
Overall % to TO 2.9 2.52 B11 Overtime cost Rs. In Cr 4.65 1.9 All UMs
Paint cost saving Rs in Cr 0 2.5 GVR
B12 Employee cost B12.1 Conveyor utilisation
XL 100 - Vehicle 77 90 B12.1 AR
Direct & Indirect % to TO 1.35 1.14 B12 Scooter - Vehicle 70 90 B12.1 AR
XL 100 - Engine 78 90 B12.1 SB
B12 Scooter - Engine 72 90 B12.1 SB
Nos 93 86 B12 B12.2 Head count Nos 1780 1950 B12.2 All UMs
Employee Productivity B12 B12.3 Nos 0 / 0 47 / 115 B12.3 All UMs
Eq.V/MY 521 614 B12
C11 Weekly domestic colour model service level C11.1 Line stopper due to Bought out parts by
Stock accuracy % 1.3 0.7 C11.1
Truck TAT due to unloading delay % of veh 3 1 C11.1
XL 100 % 91 95 C11
C11.2 Line stopper due to MIW Parts (Q&D)
Jupiter % 87 95 C11 XL 100 % 6.5 1 C11.2
Jupiter % 5.2 1 C11.2
C11.3 OEE of paint shop - Top coat Plant
C11 Production as per policy plan 9.24 10.59 C11 OEE % 78 85 C11.3Availability %
69 60
C11.6 OEE of frame welding cell % 82 90 C11.6 KCS
Accountability K.Dhanapal DESIGNATION : GM - Operations
Target
From To
Target
From To
VSR
SB/GVR/
RNK/KCS/NU
K/NVP
GVR
C11.5 NVP
Nos in
Lakhs
Freq
C11.5 Breakdown Hours Hrs 26 21
No. of Re-engineering projects Vs Head count saved
C11.4 Breakdown frequencyC11.4
NVP
BProfit and
Profitability
%
Employee Productivity E&M (For base
volume Mar-'17)
Business
Growth C
B11.1 B11.1
Departmental KMI- KPI
1.04 Project selection process (Specific)
TVS Motor Company Limited
Accountability S No Managing Point Measure Check Point Measure
B11.1 Reduce paint cost
Scooter Rs/Veh 421 358 B11.11 Implement identified projects to reduce paint costNo of
projects0
B11.2Reduce conversion
cost
Scooter Rs/Veh 215 195 B11.21 Paint shop Extra operating hours % 170 130
B11.22 Reduce specific power consumption Units/Veh
B11.23 Reduce specific fuel consumption Kg/Veh
B11.24 Scrap cost Rs in lakhs 0 18
B11.25 Tools & Consumable Cost Rs per veh
B11.26 Reduce Over time Rs in lakhs
B11.27 Paint cost Saving Rs in crores 0 3
B12.1Improve Employee
productivityV/M/D 8.5 12 B12.11
No of projects implemented to improve employee
productivity
No of
projects 0 5
Name : GVR DESIGNATION :Unit Manager
6
DEPT/SECTION : OPNS/painting1
MANAGING POINTS & CHECK POINTS : 2017-18
Target
From To
Target
From To
Profit &
Profitability
B
Section KPI - KAI
UOM : Rs/Veh
UOM : Rs/Veh
UOM : %
44%
10
19 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Base coat FOZ
Base coat manual painting
Base coat robot
painting
Primer FOZ
Conductive primer painting
Tag rag wiping
Sanding Loading Receive
parts
Top coat robot
painting
Top coat manual painting
Top coat FOZ
Baking Inspection
Unloading
1.04 Project selection process (Specific)
Brief overview of Spray painting process
Total conveyor length – 420 m Speed – 5 m/min Pitch 1.2 m Operating patter – 3 shifts Models – Jupiter and Wego Application method – Robotic Electrostatic spray painting No. of parts – 10 varieties
20 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
1.04 Project selection process (Specific)
Material
Paint Cost Per liter
(Rs/Litre)
Process
Transfer efficiency
(%)
Rework (%)
Flushing loss(%)
Dry film thickness
(micron)
Volume Solids (%)
Surface area
(Sq.m)
Drivers for Paint
yield improvement
EFFORT
BE
NE
FIT
Low High
Lo
w
Hig
h
Transfer efficiency
Dry film thickness
Rework reduction
Volume solids
Paint cost/litre
Flushing loss
EFFORT vs BENEFIT
1
2
1
2
Inference: 7 Cost drivers identified for paint yield
improvement .By using Effort Vs benefit analysis
Transfer efficiency improvement & Dry film
thickness optimization taken for improvement
502
153
196
99 38 16
0
150
300
450
600
Consumption Paint over sprayto Jig/Water
(Transfer efficiency loss)
Excess DFT Rework Flushing loss Paint Depositedon Component
(Recommended)
Transfer efficiency – Ratio of paint deposited on the part to the paint discharged from the gun DFT – Dry film thickness is the thickness of the paint film on the part
11
21 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
1.05 Project goals and benefits
To achieve paint cost saving of 2.4 Cr/ Annum by reducing cost / Vehicle from
421 to 358 Rs/Veh
Paint
consumption
reduction
Sludge
generation /
VOC
reduction
Transfer
efficiency
improvement
DFT
optimization
Rework
reduction Inventory
reduction
Goal
Statement
Primary Benefits Tertiary Benefits
Business
Benefits Paint cost saving of 2.4 Cr/annum
Department KPI
Material cost reduction by 0.7%
Department KMI
EBITDA improvement by 0.7%
Business KMI
22 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
1.06 Success measure / Criteria identified
KPI 1.1 - Improve Transfer efficiency
KPI 1.2 - Optimise DFT
KPI 1.3 - Reduce rework
KAI - Implement projects for transfer efficiency
improvement
KAI - Implement projects for DFT optimisation
KAI - Implement projects for rework reduction
Success measures
Target
Image
Do Check
Act
Plan 1. Setting objectives and goals (T) 2. Preparing plan of activities (I) 3. Assigning responsibilities (I) 4. Completing milestones (D) 5. Checking effectiveness (C) 6. C-A-P-Do analysis on the gap (A) 7. Consolidation of activities (A) 8. Presentation (A)
Business KMI - Improve EBITDA
Departmental KPI 1 - Reduce Paint cost
Department KMI - Reduce Material cost
12
23 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Section 2: Project Framework
24 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
2.01 Concise project statement
PROJECT STATEMENT
PROJECT TYPE
ASSUMPTIONS/EXPECTATIONS PROJECT SCOPE
J Baskaran Project Champion
BUDGET (Financial and/or Resource Constraints)
Out of scope
-Paint price increase
-Surface area increase due to new variant
-Paint wastage while internal logistics
Project deliverables
-Paint cost reduction
-Transfer efficiency improvement
-Rework reduction
Financial:
Budget requirement for capturing robot spray pattern using high definition
slow speed camera – Rs 1 lakhs
Resource:
Exclusive team member is required from each stakeholderProject Acceptance criteria
The project will be accepted when it meets
the deliverables without affecting the quality
parameters
Constraints Time & Resource availability
Material Cost Reduction through Painting Process Optimization
The project uses a Six Sigma DMAIC approach (D-Define M-Measure A-Analyse I-Improve C-Control)
Assumptions:
1. No rapid increase in demand from market
2. No increase in paint cost
3. Financial support will be obtained if ROI is justified
Expectations:
1. No compromise on Quality
2. On time completion of project
3. CFT members contribution without affecting daily routines
4. Knowledge management portal & FMEA is used for capture past
problems of similar projects
5. Risk assessment & mitigation plans are arrived
Project Name Paint cost reduction
Project Sponser K Dhanapal
Scope description
In scope
-Rework
-Dry Film Thickness
-Flushing loss
-Transfer efficiency
13
25 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
2.01 Concise project statement
Improve the painting process to reduce the paint cost through yield loss reduction
421 390 358
Recoverable
loss
Opportunity
loss
114
Theoretical
loss
257
Ideal loss
ROTI
Approach
Methodology for
improvement Waste elimination
Process optimization
Efficiency
improvement
Technological
improvement Process innovation
Paint Consumption UOM: Rs/Veh
Current state Desired
future state
Gap – Rs.63/Veh
Gap between standard
and actual
Gap between standard
and best in class
conditions
Gap between standard
and theoretical
conditions
Gap between standard
and zero loss
conditions
Inference: Yield loss is the difference between current condition and ideal condition.
26 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
2.02 Type of project
Improve
bottom
line
Improve
top line
Cash flow ( Speed of money )
Margin
( Quality of money )
Revenue ( Quantum of money )
More output
Less resource
More output
Same resource
More output
More resource
Need
of
pro
ject
Natu
re o
f p
roje
ct
Process
intensive
Data
intensive
Idea
intensive DFSS
( DMADV )
Lean six sigma
DMAIC
Type of project
What is the problem
High paint yield loss of 72%
(with respect to ideal condition - ZERO LOSS approach)
Where is the problem
Plant 1 paint shop
When is the problem
March to May
Who Identifies the problem
Engineering Executive
How much
14
27 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
2.03 Scope statement
Project Name
Project Sponser J Baskaran Project Manager K Dhanapal
Project deliverables
Project Acceptance
criteria
Constraints
Project Scope Statement
-Paint cost reduction
-Transfer efficiency improvement
-Rework reduction
The project will be accepted when it meets the deliverables
without affecting the quality parameters
Time & Resource availability
In scope
-Rework
-Dry Film Thickness
-Flushing loss
-Transfer efficiency
Out of scope
-Paint price increase
-Surface area increase due to new variant
-Paint wastage during internal logistics
-Paint wastage during testing
Scope description
Paint cost reduction
28 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
2.04 Assumptions / Expectations
FMEA Kaizen Management System
Assumptions and expectations are arrived using FMEA, Kaizen Management system, Failure mode directory of solved problems, expert opinions and domain knowledge
15
29 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Expectations:
• The Quality status is maintained
• On time completion of project
• CFT members contribution without affecting daily routines
• Knowledge management portal & FMEA is used for capture past problems of similar
projects
• Risk assessment & mitigation plans are arrived
Assumptions:
• Demand expected to be stable during the course of the projects
• Paint cost expected to be stable
• Financial support will be obtained if ROI is justified
2.04 Assumptions / Expectations
30 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
2.05 Project schedule
Sl no Type of project Category Stage TGW / TGR Failure / Success Learning Updated by date
1 Lean Dealay Analysis TGW More time took for anlysis Member from reliability competency not available 3381 24-Oct-18
2 DMAIC Project delete Observation TGR
3 DFSS Scope not met Analysis TGW
4 Lean Resource Action
5 DMAIC Budget Check
6 DFSS Standardisation
7
8
Learning from Projects
Learning from database
19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
Plan
Actual
Plan
Actual
Plan
Actual
Plan
Actual
Plan
Actual
Measure
Analyse
Improve
Control
1
2
3
4
5
Week No.S.No Activity P/A
Define
16
31 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
TVS MOTOR COMPANY LIMITED
REVEX : 2018-19
Department: OPERATIONS
Cost
centreGL Code Unit 2017-18 Activity description
Budget required
2018-19
2018-19
Requirement
Type of requirement
(Regular/New)
Priority
(Vital/Essential
/ Desirable)
Sodexo technical service for
paint shop maintenance40,25,208 Regular Vital
Ion exchange limited for DM
plant maintenance9,26,640 Regular Vital
Bhuvan enterprises for
sludge pit maintenance11,86,289 Regular Vital
Electro static manual gun
spares 22,45,715 Regular Vital
Robot bell 25,60,000 Regular Vital
Process lab chemicals 90,960 Regular Essential
Equipment calibration
charges2,61,000 Regular Vital
Process lab apparatus and
equipments2,69,600 Regular Essential
PMR filters, ED filters, and ED
spares39,79,480
New requirement - ED
spray nozzles, moped
mask for ACED&top coat
Essential
Primer guns 1,60,000 Regular Vital
Sanding guns 4,21,600 Regular Vital
1220 545000R & M TOOLS, JIGS &
GAUGES - GENERAL3,68,650.00 Jigs materials 3,68,650 3,68,650 Regular Essential
1,64,95,142 1,64,95,142
1220 542009
R & M PLANT AND
MACHINERY - SERVICE
CONT
50,00,000 61,38,137
1220 542010
R & M PLANT AND
MACHINERY -
MACHINERY SP
29,00,000 48,05,715
1220 542014
R & M PLANT AND
MACHINERY -
MEASURING IN
1,99,998.01 6,21,560
1220 542013
R & M PLANT AND
MACHINERY -
METHODS IMPR
10,00,000.01 45,61,080
Total
2.06 Budget
1. Financial Budget requirement for capturing robot spray pattern
using high definition slow speed camera – Rs 1 lakhs
2. Resource (People) Exclusive team members from various functions on
full time basis for the entire duration of the project
Budget Planning Budget Provision
Capex/Revex System Budget/Resource requirement - Project
32 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
2.07 Risk management
External Internal External Internal
Increase in paint film
thickess
1. It may lead to customer complaint
related to paint defect
2. Line stopper due to defective parts
delivery
1. Paint peel off / Chip off
2.Inter coat adhesion failure
P M 6
1. Inspection gate at Paintshop
unloading and inspection area
2. Traceability of RT parts and
special focus while inspection
1. Feedback to supplier for improving part
quality at incoming stage
2. Training to loading operators for all the
occurred phenomenon through OPL
3. Identify and implement projects for
supplier and in-house defects elimination
4. Implement projects in paintshop to reduce
dry film thickess (N = 6 projects)
1.Improve DPR , reduce line rework
2.Improve Shift output
3.Reduction in scrap cost
4.Reduction in paint consumption
GVR/GEP
Increase in rework
1. It may lead to customer complaint
related to paint defect
2. Line stopper due to defective parts
delivery
1. Accumulation of RT Parts
2. Increase in scrap value P M 6
1. Inspection Gate at Paintshop
Unloading area.
1. Training to loading operators for all the
occurred phenomenon through OPL
2. Implement projects in paintshop to reduce
rework (N = 10 projects)
1.Improve DPR , reduce line rework
2.Improve Shift output
3.Reduction in scrap cost
4. Reduction in paint consumption
GVR/GEP
Increase in paint
consumption
1. It may lead to customer dissatisfaction
due to short supply of vehicles (colour)
due to shortage of raw materials at
supplier end
1. Intercoat adhesion failure due
to high DFT
2. Mottling & colour mismatch
issue
P M 61. Inspection gate at Paintshop
unloading and inspection area
1. Training to unloading operators for all the
occurred phenomenon through OPL
2. Promix weekly calibration
3. Weekly stock correction
1.Improve DPR , reduce line rework
2.Improve Shift output
3.Reduction in scrap cost
4. Reduction in paint consumption
GVR/GEP
Increase in high
voltage
1. It may lead to customer complaint
related to paint defect
2. Variation in Finish value lead to Line
stopper
1. Increase in minor line
stoppage
2. Non uniform DFT build up on
components
3. Variation in paint finish
R H 51. Inspection Gate at Paintshop
Unloading area.
1. Training to unloading operators for all the
occurred phenomenon through OPL
2. Training of plant operators
1.Improve DPR , reduce line rework
2.Improve Shift output
3.Reduction in scrap cost
4. Reduction in paint consumption
GVR/GEP
Risk Assessments for paint cost reduction
Impact of the risk Mitigation Plan
Risk item Likelihood SeverityTotal
RiskOpportunity Responsibility
Using risk assessment 1 high risk and 3 medium risks were identified. Mitigation plans were arrived considering internal and external impact. Eg. Increase in high voltage is considered as High risk leading to product and process output deviations. The risk was mitigated through additional checks for product and process parameters were planned during trials
17
33 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Section 3: Project Stakeholders and the
project team
34 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
SIPOC
Project charter
Stake
holders
Stake
holders Unaware Resistant Neutral Supportive Leading
A C D
B C D
C C,D
C : Current, D: Destination
Keep satisfied Manage closely
Monitor Keep informed
Low High
Lo
w
Hig
h
Interest
Po
we
r
A C
B
3.01 Stakeholders and How Identified
18
35 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
3.01 Stakeholders and How Identified
Base coat FOZ Base coat manual
painting
Base coat robot painting
Primer FOZ Conductive primer
painting Tag rag wiping Sanding Loading Receive parts
Top coat robot painting
Top coat manual painting
Top coat FOZ Baking Inspection
Unloading
36 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
3.01 Stakeholders and How Identified
19
37 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
3.02 Project champion
Core CFT Role
Leader/
Champion
Deliver the major measure targets
Standardize the learning from sub CFT and recurrence prevention at
system level
Member Deliver the means which he is responsible (TIP of the major measure)
against the major measure target
Identify & facilitate sub CFTs required for achieving the means
Facilitator PDCA on the major measure progress
Identify further CFTs/Activities to achieve Major measure targets
Identify a project’s strategic objectives.
Prioritize the project in phased manner
Communicate the project vision to the team &
translate into the requirements and solution
design.
Critically analyze and motivate the team to
benchmark best practices
Train the team to identify &eliminate the
obstacles
Conduct frequent reviews on team progress
Resource allocation
Roles of Project Champion
38 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Organization – Project
Team Selection Criteria
3.03 Project Team Selection
Team introduction
Operation – Production
Production Engineering
Operation – Quality Assurance &
Online Engineering
Project stakeholders
20
39 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Project Team &
Stake Holders
Functional Competency
Training
Required?
Problem solving competency
Product Process
Required
Available Required Available Required Available
K Dhanapal Expert Expert Expert Expert No Level - 3 Level - 3
P Vivekaandan Expert Expert Expert Expert No Level - 2 Level - 2
K Sanakarapamanaban Expert Expert Expert Expert No Level - 2 Level - 2
R Kamalrajan Expert Expert Expert Expert No Level - 2 Level - 3
GVR Naidu Expert Expert Expert Expert No Level - 2 Level - 2
G Eswaraperumal Practitioner Practitioner Practitioner Practitioner No Level - 1 Level - 1
R Manikandan Practitioner Practitioner Practitioner Practitioner No Level - 1 Level - 1
3.04 Team preparation
Project Scope
Interpersonal • Team building workshops
• Sensitizing the team through
monthly address
• Teaser mails to Dealer personnel
Problem Solving • DMAIC process for new members
• Refresher for existing Brown belts (QC
Tools)
• Multi voting, Segmentation, & Solution
Selection Matrix – Workshop Session
Project-specific engagement • Project Kick off sessions – Stakeholder
meeting
• CSI Process – Interaction by Subject
Matter Expert
• On-job training - Gemba visits
40 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Gemba Walk 4 hours Used by the project team to see the process on the floor
Team Building, Alignment & Result Technique - 3 hours
Used by the project team to discuss the desired result, existing strengths of members, & alignment of work accordingly with team building exercise
`
.
.
.
Forming
Project kick off meeting with team building activities was initiated by Project Lead
Storming
Resistances, Risk management, Conflict Management, Coaching and Clarity of purpose were brought in
Norming
Agreement and consensus, Clear roles and responsibilities And Facilitation
Performing
Clear vision and purpose, Focus on goal achievement, Delegation
3.04 Team preparation
21
41 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Knowledge and skills were brought in to make the project successful :-
Project
Scope
Problem Solving • DMAIC process for new
members
• Refresher for 7 QC Tools
• Green belt training
• Black belt training
• Statistical Quality Control
(SQC)
Project-specific engagement • Project Kick off sessions –
Stakeholder meeting
• Integrated FMEA with subject
Matter Experts & Suppliers
• On the job training - Gemba visits
Interpersonal • Team building workshops
• Sensitizing the team through
monthly address
3.04 Team preparation
42 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
3.05 Team Routines
Core
CFT Role
Review
frequency Reviewer
Leader Deliver the major measure targets
Standardize the learning from sub CFT and recurrence
prevention at system level
Fortnightly
Monthly
Quarterly
Facilitator
Cluster HODs
P&CEO
Member Deliver the means which he is responsible (TIP of the
major measure) against the major measure target
Identify & facilitate sub CFTs required for achieving the
means
Facilitato
r
PDCA on the major measure progress
Identify further CFTs/Activities to achieve Major
measure targets
Sub CFT Role Review
frequency Reviewer
Leader Deliver the CFT deliverable On time completion of the project
Weekly Monthly
Facilitator Core CFT
Member Support the project leader to Deliver the CFT deliverable And on time completion of the project
Facilitator PDCA on sub CFT progress Identify further Sub CFTs/Activities to achieve Major measure targets
Co
re C
FT
S
ub
CF
T
Online system to monitor project status
Feedback by reviewer
Submit
Team routines, communication to be team :-
Communication
PlanFrequency Attendees/Target Chairperson
Daily sunrise
meetingDaily
Project team
membersProject Leader
Project status update WeeklyProject team
membersFacilitator
Progress Review
MeetingFortnightly
Project team
membersProject Champion
Tollgate ReviewBased on Charter
Milestone
Project team
members
Sponsor / Steering
committee
Routine activities and review schedules were prepared and adhered as per the project milestone
22
43 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Section 4: Project overview
44 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
4.01 Project approach
TYPE OF PROJECT: Material Cost Reduction through Painting Process Optimization
SIPOC to capture process,
interactions, & stakeholders
Outlier test to identify the variation in
the measurement FMEA to update the learnings
Stakeholder Analysis to prioritize
stakeholders
QCPC to update and
standardise the revised
parameters
Stakeholder Prioritization
In Scope/Out of Scope in order to
fully understand the Scope.
Gage R&R to identify the variation
between the operators
Taguchi DOE to identify the best
operating conditions
Validation of quality
requirements as per
company standard TSES 355
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT APPROACH: DMAIC
ROTI approach to identify the gap
between current condition & ideal
condition
Stratification to identify high yield
loss paint
Stability to identify whether the
process is stable without any
clusters, mixtures,
trends,&oscillations
Normality test to check whether the
process follows normal distribution
The project used a typical DMAIC process: Define, Measure/Analyze, Improve, Control
DEFINE MEASURE/ANALYZE IMPROVE CONTROL
Brainstorming & Cause&effect
diagram to identify the causes
contributed to this problem and
validate the causes
Hypothesis test to identify the
relationshiop between the factors
Response surface method to explore
the relationship between the response
and the factors affecting response
Regression analysis to identify the
relationship between the independent
and dependent variables
Research papers to idenfity the
contributing factos
23
45 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
4.01 Project approach
Define the Customer, their Critical to Quality (CTQ) issues, and the Core
Business Process involved.
Measure the performance of the Core Business Process involved.
Improve the target process by designing creative solutions to fix and
prevent problems.
Analyze the data collected and process map to determine root causes
of defects and opportunities for improvement.
Control the improvements to keep the process on the new course.
46 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Cost loss Identification methodology
To identify the cost connected to each loss in
the plant and functions
Prioritize the cost with respect to financial
indicators
Identify and implement projects to eliminate
the cost loss
Tool – Product cost loss tree
4.02 Tools used throughout project
Objective
Legend – Only for reference
24
47 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Tool – Product cost loss tree
4.02 Tools used throughout project
48 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Multiple Regression
• Method for studying the relationship between a dependent variable and
two or more independent variables.
• Purposes:
– Prediction
– Explanation
– Theory building
Design of Experiment
• To investigate how different parameters affect the mean
and variance of a process performance characteristic.
• The Taguchi method is best used when there are an
intermediate number of variables (3 to 50), few interactions
between variables, and when only a few variables
contribute significantly.
4.02 Tools used throughout project
25
49 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Response Surface Method
Response surface method is used to identify and optimize the operating range of control factors to meet
the desired results
4.02 Tools used throughout project
50 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
4.02 Tools used throughout project
Stages of project Tools
Deliverable of tools in project stages
D M A I C Define Measure Analyse Improve Control
Cost loss tree To identify various losses in terms of monetary values
To Quantify and prioritise the losses
ANOVA To compare the differences between causes
Test of Hypothesis
To compare the differences between causes and standards
To statistically validate the effectiveness of improvement
Probability plot
To validate the distribution type of data
Regression Analysis
To understand relationships between Xs' and Ys'
Design of Experiment
To understand the main effects
To identify target value for critical X towards improvement in Y
Response surface method
To optimise identified Xs' towards achievement of Ys'
Control Plan To standardise the revised process conditions
FMEA
To understand the effect of revised process conditions in terms of product and process deliverables
26
51 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Ra
w
ma
teria
l
cost
Fu
el
cost
Po
we
r
cost
We
ar
&
Te
ar
cost
Dire
ct
lab
ou
r
cost
Ind
irect
lab
ou
r
cost
Die
co
st
R &
M
Co
st
Ad
min
cost
De
pric
ia
tion
cost
Inte
rest
cost
To
tal
loss
Rs/Vehicle
Planned shutdown 47964 47964 0.48 0.08 0.4
Equipment Failure 99632 136189 225205 247000 1809015 2517040 25.17 4.26 22.6
Set up & adjustment (or) colour change 170398 191249 146381 508028 5.08 0.86 4.6
Tool change loss 0 35018 37978 72995 0.73 0.12 0.7
Start up 2144 4398 8762 15304 0.15 0.03 0.1
0.0
Minor stoppage 179586 212263 232820 624668 6.25 1.06 5.6
Speed loss 0 0.00 0.00 0.0
Idle running 0 0.00 0.00 0.0
0.0
Rejection 965280 965280 9.65 1.63 8.7
Rework 54611 143098 740904 938612 9.39 1.59 8.4
0.0
Management loss 113949 255671 2899398 3269018 32.69 5.53 29.4
Operating motion loss 32847 32847 0.33 0.06 0.3
Line organisation loss 1332500 1332500 13.33 2.26 12.0
Logistics loss 84735 1602976 1687711 16.88 2.86 15.2
Measurement & adj loss 2006 559000 561006 5.61 0.95 5.0
0.0
Inventory 14435665 14435665 144.36 24.43 129.8
Energy loss 0 4000000 4000000 40.00 6.77 36.0
Die tool & jig loss 4820362.0 4820362 48.20 8.16 43.3
Yield loss 16254742 16254742 162.55 27.51 146.1
Admin loss 0 0 0.00 0.0
0.0
Durability loss 7000000 7000000 70.00 62.9
Others -1.1 0 0.00 0.0
Others cost 0 0 0 0.00 0.00
59083742 590.84
Rs in lakhs242.20 6.20 49.78 48.20 57.91 24.09 0.00 18.09 0.00 0.00 144.36 590.84 531
40.99 1.05 8.43 8.16 9.80 4.08 0.00 3.06 0.00 0.00 24.43
Ra
w
ma
teria
l
cost
Fu
el c
ost
Po
we
r
cost
We
ar
&
Te
ar
cost
Dire
ct
lab
ou
r
cost
Ind
irect
lab
ou
r
cost
Die
co
st
R &
M
Co
st
Ad
min
cost
De
pric
iati
on
co
st
Inte
rest
cost
Total
` Rs/Vehicle 217.8 5.6 44.8 43.3 52.1 21.7 0.0 16.3 0.0 0.0 129.8
Loss Cost
Ava
ilab
ilityP
erfo
rma
nceD
efe
ctsH
um
an
efficie
ncy
Efficie
ncy
of S
td u
nits
Wa
rr
en
ty
Material cost
Variable cost Fixed cost
Manufacturing Cost
Variable cost Fixed cost
Manufacturing Cost
Cost Loss - July'15
Material cost
Cost Structure
Loss Structure
Energy cost loss
698
Cost loss Matrix
Inference: Cost loss matrix is used to identify monetary value for each of the loss. Yield loss observed as
Rs.313/vehicle
4.03 Tools output at different stage of project
52 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Multiple Regression
Inference: Regression analysis is used to find out the type of relationship between paint consumption and
operating parameters
Eg. Linear or Curvilinear relationship
4.03 Tools output at different stage of project
27
53 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Inference: Design of experiments is used to identify the key factors causing impact in the response, i.e.
paint consumption
Design of Experiment
4.03 Tools output at different stage of project
54 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Inference: RSM is used to identify and optimise the operating range of control variables to minimise paint
consumption without affecting Quality and Safety
Response surface method Response optimizer
<0.5
<3
4.03 Tools output at different stage of project
28
55 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
4.04 How team was prepared to use the tools
Tools & Techniques
7Quality Tools
Understanding the
basic tools
DMAIC
Understand the DMAIC
framework and Tools
– Check Sheet
– Pareto Diagram
– Cause & Effect
– Graphs
– Histogram
– Scatter Diagram
– Stratification
– 6 Sigma Concept
S No Employee name Communication skills Presentation skills QC story Green belt Black belt
1 K Dhanapal
2 P Vivekanandhan
3 K Sanakarapadmanaban
4 R Kamalrajan
5 GVR Naidu
6 G Eswaraperumal
7 R Manikandan
`
56 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
4.05 Dealing with project risk
Category
(What
Process)
What Change / Creation? What Measure/check? Frequency of
Check
Top coat
painting
process
Increase in paint dry film
thickness
Separate batch provided in jig scheduling to monitor
trial results
Monitoring the dry film thickness for each trial
Daily
Increase in painting rework
Conduct trial with minimum batch quantity
Verification of jig scheduling every day
Recording of rework data in TAB and generate as daily
report through IT system
Daily
Increase in high voltage Interlock provided in robot to avoid deviation from the
maximum allowable value Weekly
Increase in paint consumption
Monitoring of paint consumption in robot and Promix
Weekly checking of paint stock
Weekly
Rework
process Increase in rework & scrap
Deployment of additional manpower for rework &
monitoring of deployment
Daily monitoring & clearance of scrap
Daily
29
57 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
4.06 Encountering and handling resistance as a risk
Stakeholders What Resistance? How Identified? How Resolved?
Supplier
• Supplier is not agreed to send
technical representative to
optimize paint consumption
• Supplier is not agreed to supply
volume solids at higher end
specification
• No exclusive manpower deployed
for plant 1 paint shop
• Review on inspection test report
• Explained the benefit to supplier &
initiated monitoring of supplier
performance report
Production
engineering &
maintenance
• Maintenance team was resisted to
increase the robot bell tip speed
• Engineering team was resisted to
go beyond specification limits
during trials
• Gemba observation during project
discussion
• Explained the importance of the
project and cross functional team
formed to implement the project
Customer –
Vehicle
assembly
• Customer was resisted this project
may lead to Increase in painting
defect which leads to vehicle loss
in vehicle assembly
• Daily vehicle rework review at
vehicle assembly
Created confidence by ensuring no
defective parts reaching to customer
Quality
Assurance Team • Aesthetic & durability parameters
may get affected
• During validation process
(Experimental Job Order)
All short term and long term
properties were verified before going
for implementation & created
confidence
58 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
4.07 Stakeholder Involvement in project
Project
Steering
Committee
Project Lead
Supplier
Production
Engineering
Maintenance
Quality
Assurance
Production
Customer
Stakeholders How were they involved in planning?
Approved the planning timetable & tasks with list of
resources proposed
Team member wise solution implementation
responsibility divided by project lead
Invited for initial discussion and shared the project
details and explained the support required
Formed a team & allocated the activities to each
team member
Formed a team & allocated the activities to each
team member
Prepared the master testing plan & sign off done
along with QAD team
Formed a team & allocated the activities to each
team member. Early planning done along with
production on painting sequence
Created confidence by ensuring no defective parts
reaching to customer
How were they involved in implementation?
Ensured resource availability on timely across the all
departments involved, timely supported with expert
guidance
Monitoring & reviewing the solution implementation
status against the scheduled plan
Monitoring & reviewing the inspection report and
activity plan
Regular meeting at gemba during trials and
monitoring of activities status as per Gantt chart
Regular meeting at gemba during trials and
monitoring of activities status as per Gantt chart
Trial parts are validated as per standard and
updated the testing plan during scheduled meeting
at gemba
Ensured the trial parts meets the requirement and
no line stoppage during trial
Shared the project status with customer at regular
intervals
30
59 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Section 5: Project walkthrough
60 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
D M A I C
31
61 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Improve the painting process to reduce the paint cost through
yield loss reduction Actual Norms Bench mark Ideal Theoretical
421 390 358
Recoverable
loss
Opportunity
loss
114
Theoretical
loss
257
Ideal loss
Transfer efficiency
- % 60 60 65 75 100
Dry film thickness -
microns 57 42 35 35 35
Flushing loss – % 10 10 7 5 0
Paint
consumption –
Rs. per vehicle
Methodology
for
improvement
Waste elimination
Process optimization
& Efficiency
improvement
Technological
improvement Process
innovation
Inference: Yield loss is the difference between current condition and ideal condition
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
62 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
39.9
28.0
20.0 16.3
11.9 11.8 11.7 10.9 9.7 9.3 6.9
3.5 2.7
10.9 9.1
34.7 30.2
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0Yield loss stratification – Paint wise UOM: Rs/veh
Inference: Since, Matt clear overall paint consumption is high, it has been taken for optimization.
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
32
63 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
D M A I C
64 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Norms Bench mark Ideal Theoretical
487 282 Opportunity
loss
153
Theoretical
loss
220
Ideal loss
Paint
consumption –
Matt clear
The gap between the current condition
to Ideal is because of
Dry film thickness
Rework
Flushing loss
Transfer efficiency
UOM: ml / Vehicle
502
UOM: ml / Vehicle
Gap analysis
502
196
16 38
99
153
0
150
300
450
600
Consumption Paint over sprayto Jig & water
Paint flushing loss Rework Paint depositedon component
(Excess)
Paint depositedon component
(Recommended)
Paint consumption ml/Veh % Paint dispersion ml/Veh %
Paint supplied from Robot / Gun 502 100Paint deposited on component
(Recommended)153 30
Paint deposited on component (Excess) 99 20
Rework 38 8
Paint flushing loss 16 3
Paint over spray to Jig & water (Transfer
efficiency loss)196 39
Total 502 100 502 100
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Recoverable
loss
(Transfer Efficiency loss)
33
65 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Substrate
Primer
Base coat
Top coat
12 - 18 µ (Actual 24 µ)
30 - 40 µ (Actual 52 µ)
20 - 24 µ
Phase 1
The gap between the current condition to Ideal is because of
Dry film thickness
Rework
Flushing loss
Transfer efficiency
5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow D M A I C
Inference : In phase 1 we focused on optimizing dry film thickness
to reduce paint consumption
66 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Training Module – Spraying Techniques
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Inference : To minimize the
variation between operators,
all operators have
undergone training which
covers both theoretical and
practical training
34
67 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Norms Bench mark IdealTheoretical
487 282Opportunity
loss
153
Theoretical
loss
220
Ideal loss
Paint
consumption –
Matt clear
UOM: ml / Vehicle
502
Recoverable
loss
498
68 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
SDCA # Date Shift Time Batch Paint consumption
1 6 1 3 22 89
2 6 2 10 22 87
3 7 1 5 22 86
4 7 3 19 22 89
5 8 1 1 23 86
6 8 1 5 23 87
7 9 2 9 22 85
8 9 2 13 22 87
9 9 3 20 23 86
10 10 1 1 23 87
11 10 1 6 23 86
12 10 2 10 24 85
13 11 1 1 23 87
14 11 2 11 23 86
15 11 3 19 22 88
16 13 1 2 22 87
17 13 2 11 23 86
18 13 2 14 23 85
19 14 1 3 22 86
20 14 2 10 24 84
21 14 3 17 25 86
22 15 1 2 25 84
23 15 2 9 23 86
24 16 2 13 24 85
25 16 3 18 24 83
26 17 1 3 24 85
27 17 2 10 24 87
28 17 2 14 25 88
29 18 2 11 25 85
30 18 3 19 24 83
Data Collection
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Inference : Since P>0.05, i.e. 0.145, Accept H0. There is no
difference in paint consumption between batches
Comparison between batches
H0 : No difference in consumption between batches Ha : Difference in consumption between batches
35
69 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Statistical quantification
Inference : Gauge R&R is at acceptable limit ( 6.7)
General
rules used to
determine
the
capability of
the system:
<10%:
acceptable
10% - 30%:
marginal
>30%:
unacceptabl
e
Gauge R&R Outlier Stability Normality
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
70 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Statistical quantification
Inference : P value >0.05, No outlier exists
Gauge R&R Outlier Stability Normality
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
36
71 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Inference : since P>0.05 for clustering, mixtures, trends & oscillations, Process is stable
Statistical quantification
Gauge R&R Outlier Stability Normality
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
72 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Inference : Since, p value > 0.05, Process follows normal distribution
Statistical quantification
Gauge R&R Outlier Stability Normality
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
37
73 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
D M A I C
74 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Brain storming
Why paint
consumption
more ?
Inference : Totally 22 causes identified for high paint consumption
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
High solids in paint x3
Low ER of paint x4
Low booth air velocity x13
High paint flow rate x14
Low bell RPM x15
Low shaping air x16r
Low Voltage x18
High paint viscosity x21
Low booth humidity x19 Fast evaporating solvent x5
Robot tip speed low x8
Robot gear pump worn-out x10
Non adherence of flow calibration x20
PMR pump running at high stroke x12
Un skilled robot operator x1
High dist. bell to part x17
Low Hiding power x6
High paint pressure x11
Low conveyor elect. Resistance x7
High booth temperature x22
Distance between gun to comp x2
Shroud blockage x9
38
75 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Setup Hypothesis
Effect : 502 Ml/Veh
Man Machine
Material Method
High solids in paint x3
Low ER of paint x4
Low booth air
velocity x13
High paint flow
rate x14
Low bell RPM x15
Low shaping air x16r
Low voltage x18
High paint
viscosity x21
Low booth
humidity x19
Fast
evaporating
solvent x5
High paint
consumption
Robot tip speed low x8
Robot gear pump
worn-out x10
Non adherence of flow calibration x20
PMR pump running at
high stroke x12
Possible causes (Level 1)
Un skilled robot
operator x1
High dist. bell to part x17
Low
Hiding
power x6
High paint pressure x11
Low conveyor
elect. Resistance x7
High booth temperature x22
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Distance between
gun to comp x2
Shroud blockage x9
76 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Gemba verification Cause verification
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
# Cause Spec InvestigationGemba
verification
x1 Un skilled robot operator CL3 CL3
x2 Distance between gun to comp 200-300 Cm 150
x3 High solids in paint 26-30% 29.2
x4 Low ER of paint 250-500 479
x5 Fast evaporating solvent T311 T311
x6 Low hiding power 16-18m 16m
x7 Jig elect. resistance <1 MΩ 0.9MΩ
x8 Robot tip speed low 1100 – 1400 mm/sec 1300
x10 Robot gear pump worn-out No backlash OK
x11 High paint pressure 5.5 – 8.0 bar 7.1 bar
x17 High dist. bell to part 250 - 300 mm 250 - 270 mm
x20 Non adherence of flow calibration Once in 15 days ok
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
# Cause Spec InvestigationGemba
verification
x1 Un skilled robot operator CL3 CL3
x2 Distance between gun to comp 200-300 Cm 150
x3 High solids in paint 26-30% 29.2
x4 Low ER of paint 250-500 479
x5 Fast evaporating solvent T311 T311
x6 Low hiding power 16-18m 16m
x7 Jig elect. resistance <1 MΩ 0.9MΩ
x8 Robot tip speed low 1100 – 1400 mm/sec 1300
x10 Robot gear pump worn-out No backlash OK
x11 High paint pressure 5.5 – 8.0 bar 7.1 bar
x17 High dist. bell to part 250 - 300 mm 250 - 270 mm
x20 Non adherence of flow calibration Once in 15 days ok
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
PInference : Genba analysis indicates all factors are within specification
39
77 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Man Machine
Material Method
Low booth air
velocity x13
High paint flow
rate x14
Low bell RPM x15
Low shaping air x16r High paint
viscosity x21
Low booth humidity x19
Probable causes (Level 2)
High paint
consumption
High booth temperature x22
Setup Hypothesis
Effect : 502 Ml/Veh
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Low voltage x18
78 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Matt Clear Paint consumption
# Air velocity Bell RPMPaint
flow rateVoltage
Shaping
air
Paint
viscosity
Booth
temp
Booth
humidity
Paint
ConsumptionMl/Veh
1 0.4 52000 525 40 300 27.2 23 76 89 524
2 0.4 52000 525 40 300 26.8 25 76 87 512
3 0.4 52000 525 40 300 25.4 22 76 86 506
4 0.4 52000 525 40 300 26.6 23 76 89 524
5 0.4 52000 525 40 300 27 24 73 86 506
6 0.4 53000 525 40 300 25.6 23 73 87 512
7 0.4 52000 495 40 300 26.8 25 73 85 500
8 0.4 52000 495 40 300 27.4 22 73 87 512
9 0.4 52000 495 40 300 26.6 23 73 86 506
10 0.4 52000 495 40 300 26.4 24 73 87 512
11 0.4 52000 495 40 300 27.6 23 73 86 506
12 0.4 52000 495 40 300 26.8 25 73 85 500
13 0.4 53000 495 40 300 26.4 22 73 87 512
14 0.41 52000 525 40 300 27.4 22 75 86 506
15 0.41 52000 525 40 300 26.7 23 75 88 518
16 0.41 54000 525 40 340 27.8 24 75 87 512
17 0.41 52000 525 40 340 26.9 23 75 86 506
18 0.41 52000 525 40 340 25.6 25 75 85 500
19 0.41 52000 525 40 340 26.7 22 75 86 506
20 0.39 52000 475 40 300 26.5 23 71 84 494
21 0.39 52000 475 45 300 26 25 71 86 506
22 0.39 52000 475 45 300 27.2 22 71 84 494
23 0.39 52000 475 45 300 28 23 71 86 506
24 0.39 52000 475 45 300 26.4 24 71 85 500
25 0.39 52000 475 45 320 25.8 23 71 83 488
26 0.39 54000 495 45 320 26.7 25 71 85 500
27 0.39 52000 495 45 320 26.9 22 71 87 512
28 0.39 52000 495 45 320 27.4 23 75 88 518
29 0.39 52000 495 45 320 25.9 24 75 85 500
30 0.39 52000 495 45 300 26.8 23 75 83 488
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Inference : 30 experiments conducted to capture the inputs and responses
40
79 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Regression analysis
Inference : As the relation ship in linear regression is low, we have taken the factors with P –
value closer to 0.05 for further analysis through Hypothesis testing
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
80 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
S no Cause Probable causes Data type
Effect (Y)
Data type
cause (x)
How to
validate
1 x14 High paint flow rate Continuous Discrete 2 sample T test
2 x16 Low shaping air Continuous Discrete 2 sample T test
3 x18 Low Voltage Continuous Discrete 2 sample T test
4 x21 High paint viscosity Continuous Discrete 2 sample T test
Plan for cause validation
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
41
81 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Ho: Paint consumption with high paint flow rate = Paint consumption with low paint flow rate Ha: Paint consumption with high paint flow rate ≠ Paint consumption with low paint flow rate
Cause 1: High
paint flow rate x14
Inference : Since P<0.05, Accept Ha. There is a strong relationship between paint flow rate and Paint
consumption
Hypothesis test
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
82 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Ho: Paint consumption with high shaping air = Paint consumption with low shaping air Ha: Paint consumption with high shaping air ≠ Paint consumption with low shaping air
Cause 2: Low shaping air
x16
Hypothesis test
Inference : Since P<0.05, Accept Ha. There is a strong relationship between shaping air and Paint
consumption
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
42
83 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Ho: Paint consumption with high HV = Paint consumption with low HV Ha: Paint consumption with high HV ≠ Paint consumption with low HV
Cause 3: Low Voltage x18
Inference : Since P<0.05, Accept Ha. There is a strong relationship between voltage and Paint
consumption
Hypothesis test
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
84 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Ho: Paint consumption with high paint viscosity = Paint consumption with low paint viscosity Ha: Paint consumption with high paint viscosity ≠ Paint consumption with low paint viscosity
Cause 4: High paint viscosity x21
Inference : Since P<0.05, Accept Ha. There is a strong relationship between paint viscosity and Paint
consumption
Hypothesis test
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
43
85 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Sl
no 4M’s/4P’s Cause
Specification
( if any ) P value
Relationshi
p*
1 Method Low booth air velocity x13 0.3 – 0.4m/sec 0.118
2 Method High paint flow rate x14 400 – 600 cc/min 0.000
3 Method Low bell RPM x15 50 K – 60K 0.486
4 Method Low shaping air x16 300 - 450 0.000
5 Method Low Voltage x18 Max 70 KV 0.000
6 Method Low booth humidity x19 50 - 80 % 0.114
7 Method High paint viscosity x21 26-29 Sec 0.000
8 Method Booth temperature x22 20 – 30 deg.C 0..838
Strong relation Weak / No relation
Cause validation
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
86 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Setup Hypothesis
Man Machine
Material Method
High paint flow
rate x14
High shaping air x16
High paint
viscosity x21
Vital causes (Level 3)
High paint
consumption
Effect : 502 Ml/Veh
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Low voltage x18
44
87 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Critical factors
1. Paint flow rate
2. Voltage
3. Shaping air
4. Paint viscosity
Critical Input Variables
22 Inputs
4
• Cause & Effect level 1
• Cause verification
Funneling Effect
8
• Cause & Effect level 3
• Hypothesis testing
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
88 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
D M A I C
45
89 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
487 502 488
388
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
Norms Before AfterRestoration
After DOE
UOM: ml/veh
Operating Levels for Identified factors
Part Name Paint flow Shaping air voltage Viscosity
Existing L1 L2 Existing L1 L2 Existing L1 L2 Existing L1 L2
Side panel L 475 425 550 325 300 350 40 35 45 26.1 24 27
Side panel R 475 425 550 325 300 350 40 35 45 26.1 24 27
Panel Top 525 425 550 325 300 350 55 50 60 26.1 24 27
Fender 550 500 600 325 300 350 40 35 45 26.1 24 27
Bottom 500 450 550 375 350 400 40 35 45 26.1 24 27
Matt Clear Paint consumption
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Inference : After DOE, paint consumption reduced to 388 ml/veh
90 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
• Design of experiment
2
Inference: High voltage is the most critical factor
followed by paint flow
Response
Surface Method
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Gap
46
91 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Experiment and Results
Inference: Rework and HV fault added as
two other responses in addition with paint
consumption
Response Surface Method
Part Name Paint flow High voltage
Existing L1 L2 Existing L1 L2
Side panel L 425 350 425 45 45 60
Side panel R 425 350 425 45 45 60
Analysis
Inference: R-sq = 97.2% indicates very strong
Regression between Paint flow and High voltage with the
identified responses
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
92 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Response optimizer
<0.5
<3
Finalized parameters after Response surface method
Part Name Paint flow High Voltage
Side panel L 375 50
Side panel R 375 50
Panel Top 375 65
Fender 450 50
Bottom 400 50
Matt Clear Paint consumption
UOM: ml/Veh
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
487 500 488
388 348
294
0
150
300
450
600
Norms Before Afterrestoration
After DOE After RSM-2comp
After RSM-All comp
47
93 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Phase 1
Phase 2 2.1 Transfer efficiency improvement 2.2 Dry film thickness optimization
Dry film thickness optimization
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
In phase 1 we focused on reducing paint wastage by optimizing the dry film thickness within
the component to reduce paint consumption
In Phase 2 We focused on Paint over spray reduction to improve transfer efficiency, This will increase dry film thickness beyond specification which is reduced by repeating experiment conducted in Phase 1.
94 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
The gap between the current condition to Ideal is because of
Dry film thickness (Completed in TPM Level 1)
Rework (QM)
Flushing loss (Best in class)
Transfer efficiency
Phase II
To improve transfer efficiency, paint deposition on the component to be
increased by reducing the paint overspray away from the component
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
48
95 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Factors contributing to transfer
efficiency
Shaping air
High voltage
Bell RPM
Air velocity
Paint ER
Air pressure
Paint pressure
Jig resistance
Air velocity Bell RPM Shaping air Paint ER Jig earthing resistance HV Paint pressure Air pressure Tansfer efficiency
0.3 30000 250 398 0.8 55 6 6.5 57.6
0.3 30000 250 312 0.7 60 6.5 6.5 59.5
0.3 30000 300 392 0.7 50 6 7 60.3
0.3 30000 350 353 0.8 60 5.5 7 63.9
0.3 30000 300 312 0.5 50 5.5 6.5 64.6
0.4 30000 275 450 0.8 50 7 6.5 58.6
0.4 30000 300 443 0.8 60 7 7 58.6
0.4 30000 275 301 0.6 50 7.5 7 60.3
0.4 30000 350 443 0.6 55 7.5 6.5 60.8
0.4 30000 300 353 0.5 55 6.5 7 62.0
0.3 45000 250 442 0.8 50 6.5 6.5 54.6
0.3 45000 250 398 0.5 60 6 6.5 58.6
0.3 45000 300 342 0.6 55 5.5 6.5 63.9
0.3 45000 300 353 0.7 55 6 7 65.4
0.3 45000 350 297 0.5 60 5.5 7 66.5
0.4 45000 275 412 0.8 55 7 6.5 59.3
0.4 45000 275 301 0.5 55 7.5 7 62.0
0.4 45000 300 342 0.6 60 6.5 7 63.1
0.4 45000 350 353 0.5 60 7.5 6.5 65.4
0.4 45000 300 312 0.5 60 7 7 67.8
0.3 60000 250 446 0.7 50 6 6.5 53.2
0.3 60000 300 460 0.8 55 6 7 55.6
0.3 60000 250 124 0.6 55 6.5 6.5 56.5
0.3 60000 300 352 0.7 60 5.5 6.5 57.2
0.3 60000 350 324 0.7 55 5.5 7 59.5
0.4 60000 275 454 0.8 50 7.5 7 54.3
0.4 60000 275 418 0.7 55 7 6.5 55.6
0.4 60000 300 440 0.6 50 6.5 7 56.1
0.4 60000 300 398 0.6 55 7 7 56.9
0.4 60000 350 301 0.6 50 7.5 6.5 57.8
Data Collection Stage 1 Define the objective of Experiment
Stage 2 Choose measures of performance
Stage 3 Identify factors (control variables)
Stage 4 Choose the experiment design
Stage 5 Conduct experiment & collect data
Stage 6 Analyze and interpret results Stage 1 Define the objective of
Experiment
• To identify the optimum operating
level of the identified factors to
improve transfer efficiency
Stage 2 Choose measures of
performance
• Transfer efficiency
Stage 3 Identify factors (control variables)
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
96 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Critical Input Variables
8 Inputs
5
• QM Matrix
• Screening
Funneling Effect
Critical factors
1. Bell RPM
2. Shaping air
3. Paint resistivity
4. Jig resistance
5. High voltage
Inference: In identified factors,
because of safety concerns high
voltage & jig resistance are not
taken forward for conducting
experiment
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
49
97 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Research papers on rotary bell painting
In order to improve transfer efficiency we referred research papers and
concluded to conduct simulation on identified parameter.
# Factor Standard Level 1 Level 2
1 Shapping air 300 250 350
2 Bell RPM 60000 60000 40000
3 Paint ER 500 500 300
4 Paint Flow 350 350 350
5 High Voltage 60 60 60
Simulation conducted and images are captured through high
speed camera to observe variation in paint spray when modifying
one factor and keeping other factors in nominal operating value.
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
98 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Simulation to improve transfer efficiency
Shaping air at minimum level
Shaping air at maximum
level
Bell RPM at minimum level
Bell RPM at maximum level
Paint ER at minimum level
Paint ER at maximum level
In minimum shaping air, The spray
cone tends to become more wider
and it leads to over spray.
In maximum Bell RPM, it is possible
to see the effect of larger centrifugal
force and leads to over spray. It also
creates a finer atomization.
In lesser paint resistivity, the over
spray is less when compared to
higher paint resistivity.
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
50
99 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
# Bell RPMPaint
flow rate
Shaping
air
Mixed paint
resistivity with
hardner
Paint
ConsumptionDFT
Tansfer
efficiency
1 60000 350 300 352 296 39 57.2
2 60000 350 350 324 292 40 59.5
3 60000 350 250 398 294 36 53.2
4 60000 350 300 460 289 37 55.6
5 60000 350 250 312 292 38 56.5
6 60000 350 300 440 294 38 56.1
7 60000 350 275 263 289 37 55.6
8 60000 350 300 398 290 38 56.9
9 60000 350 350 301 293 39 57.8
10 60000 350 275 454 288 36 54.3
11 45000 350 300 394 292 43 63.9
12 45000 350 350 297 294 45 66.5
13 45000 350 250 398 289 39 58.6
14 45000 350 300 353 292 44 65.4
15 45000 350 250 297 294 37 54.6
16 45000 350 300 442 289 42 63.1
17 45000 350 275 412 293 40 59.3
18 45000 350 300 312 288 45 67.8
19 45000 350 350 353 292 44 65.4
20 45000 350 275 301 294 42 62.0
21 30000 350 300 312 289 43 64.6
22 30000 350 350 353 292 43 63.9
23 30000 350 250 398 294 39 57.6
24 30000 350 300 392 288 40 60.3
25 30000 350 250 312 292 40 59.5
26 30000 350 300 353 294 42 62.0
27 30000 350 275 450 289 39 58.6
28 30000 350 300 443 289 39 58.6
29 30000 350 350 443 293 41 60.8
30 30000 350 275 301 288 40 60.3
Data Collection
Critical factors
1. Bell RPM
2. Shaping air
3. Paint resistivity
Critical Input Variables
14 Inputs
3
• QM Matrix
• Screening
Funneling Effect
Stage 3 Identify factors (control variables)
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
100 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Stage 4 Choose the experiment design
Inference : Since the Bell RPM and shaping air follows the curvilinear effect to transfer
efficiency, We decided to choose mixed taguchi design L18 experiment with 2 level 1 Factor
and 3 level 2 factors.
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
51
101 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Stage 5 Conduct experiment & collect data Step 6 Analyze and interpret results
Inference : During analysis we found that bell RPM and shaping air has significant
contribution to transfer efficiency.
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
102 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Stage 5 Conduct experiment & collect data
UOM: % UOM: micron
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
By completing DOE,
• Transfer efficiency improved from 59 to 71%
• Dry film thickness improved from 39 to 46 microns
which is more than the requirement
52
103 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Paint consumption
Inference : Even though transfer efficiency increased, There is no improvement in paint consumption due
to dry film thickness increase.
# UOM SpecBefore
improvement
After
improvement
Paint consumption ml/Veh 310 294 294
Dry film thickness Micron 35~40 39 47
Rework % 2 5 2
Flushing loss % 10 10 10
Transfer efficiency % 70 59 71
Part Name Shaping air Bell RPM Paint ER
Side panel L 300 45000 350
Side panel R 300 45000 350
Panel Top 350 45000 350
Fender 300 45000 350
Bottom 350 45000 350
Finalized parameters for shaping air , Bell
RPM & paint ER after mixed level DOE
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Phase 2 2.1 Transfer efficiency improvement
104 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Phase 2 2.1 Transfer efficiency
improvement 2.1 Dry film thickness optimization
Critical parameter identified to conduct
DOE for reducing the paint consumption
by optimizing the dry film thickness
Critical factors
1. Paint flow rate
2. High voltage
3. Paint viscosity
Critical Input Variables
14 Inputs
3
• QM Matrix
• Screening
Funneling Effect
Screening of parameters for DOE
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
53
105 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Operating Levels for Identified factors
Part Name
Paint flow High voltage Viscosity
Existing L1 L2 Existing L1 L2 Existing L1 L2
Side panel L 375 350 325 45 40 50 25 24 26
Side panel R 375 350 325 45 40 50 25 24 26
Panel Top 375 350 325 50 45 55 25 24 26
Fender 450 425 400 45 40 50 25 24 26
Bottom 400 375 350 45 40 50 25 24 26
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
Taguchi L8 DOE experiment conducted with 3 factors and 2 levels to identify the best
operating Levels for Identified factors.
106 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Norms Bench mark Ideal Theoretical
487 282 Opportunity
loss
153
Theoretical
loss
220
Ideal loss
Paint consumption – Matt clear
UOM: ml / Vehicle
502
294 218
D M A I C 5.01 Data-Driven Project Flow
54
107 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
D M A I C
108 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Validation of Quality Requirements
5.02 Solution Validation D M A I C
Financial Validation:
No Capex or Revex
requirement
LSL USL
1 Zero hour petrol rub resistance (5 double rub) No paint transfer to cloth/ No gloss reduction Visual Passes
2 Adhesion 100/100 should pass As per TSES 355 Passes
3 Hot water resistanceimmerse in hot water ( 70 deg c for 1 hour , recovery 1 hour ) no blister /
peel off , 5 x5 - 2mm checques As per TSES 355 Passes
4 Pencil hardness - F Scoring mark not allowed As per TSES 355 Passes
5 Acid (1N resistance) - 0.2ml of sulphuric acid - 24 hours Hrs 24 No blister /Peel off /Wrinkles /Softening /Cracks /changes of gloss As per TSES 355 Passes
6Alkali (1N resistance) - 0.2ml of sodium hydroxide - 24
hoursHrs 24 No blister /Peel off /Wrinkles /Softening /Cracks /changes of gloss As per TSES 355 Passes
7Impact resistance on panel - 500 gms /20 cm /12.7 mm
dia ball No crack and peel off As per TSES 355 Passes
8 Bend resistance on panel No crack and peel off As per TSES 355 Passes
9 Petrol resistance - 24 hours Hrs 24 No blister, peeling-off, crack, sharp change of luster, softening As per TSES 355 Passes
10 Oil resistance - 24 hours Hrs 24 No blister, peeling-off, crack, wrinkle, softening As per TSES 355 Passes
11 QUV resistance on panel - 500 hours Hrs 500 No Fading , no chalking, no cracking , Gloss reduction Shall not be more
than 10%with out polishing As per TSES 355 Passes
12 Condensation test on panel - 240 hours Hrs 240No blister , Peeling off , crack , Wrinkless , rust ,sharp change of luster ,
softening .As per TSES 355 Passes
13 Corrosion resistance on panel - 600 hours Hrs 600Rust formation, blister, peeling-off and softening shall not exceed 3mm
at each side along scratch mark.As per TSES 355 Passes
14 R Value - Min ( A Area) Unit 5 No dullness and Gloss absorption R Value Meter 5.8
15 DOI - Dark colours Unit 80 No dullness and Gloss absorption R Value Meter 92
16 DOI - Light colours Unit 70 No dullness and Gloss absorption R Value Meter 86
17 R Value - Min ( AB Area) Unit 4 No dullness and Gloss absorption R Value Meter 5
18 DOI - Dark colours Unit 70 No dullness and Gloss absorption R Value Meter 76
19 DOI - Light colours Unit 60 No dullness and Gloss absorption R Value Meter 72
20 Gloss @60° - Glossy shades Unit 90 No dullness and Gloss absorption Gloss meter 98
21 Gloss @60° - Matt shades Unit 3 15 No dullness and Gloss absorption Gloss meter 6
22 Shade Delta E Solid colours < 4, Metallic colours < 5, As per TSES 355 0.5
Status
Short term tests
Long term tests
Part Parameters
SpecAcceptance criteria Check methodS.NO Part parameters UOM
55
109 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
5.03 Solution justification D M A I C
No investment is required for this project. Hence, no payback period is applicable
Project declaration & Approval Additional benefits
1. VOC 2. Sludge generation
110 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
218
153
33
12 4 16
0
75
150
225
300
Consumption Paint over spray
to Jig/Water (Transfer Loss)
Excess DFT Rework Flushing loss Paint Deposited
on Component(Recommended)
294
153
97
16 12
16
0
75
150
225
300
Consumption Paint over spray
to Jig/Water (Transfer Loss)
Excess DFT Rework Flushing loss Paint Deposited
on Component(Recommended)
Evaluation of results
Before After UOM : ml/Veh
5.04 Results D M A I C
UOM : ml/Veh
Factors UOM Before Norms Ideal Possible (Based
on benchmark ) Actual
Transfer efficiency % 60 60 100 75 71
Rework % 3.4 3 0 2 2.9
Dry film thickness
(avg) microns 35~40 42 35 35 35~40
Flushing loss % 10 10 0 7 10
Consumption ml/veh 294 310 153 210 218
Paint consumption
56
111 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Matt Clear Paint consumption
UOM: Ml/veh UOM: Rs/Veh
Matt Clear – Yield loss
29% 27%
5.04 Results D M A I C
Norms Bench mark Ideal Theoretical
487 282 Opportunity
loss
153
Theoretical
loss
220
Ideal loss
Paint consumption – Matt clear
UOM: ml / Vehicle
502
294 218
294
220 218
100
150
200
250
300
Before Target Actual
28
21 19.9
0
10
20
30
40
Before Target Actual
112 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
5.04 Results D M A I C
Norms Bench mark IdealTheoretical
402 234Opportunity
loss
123
Theoretical
loss
182
Ideal loss
Paint consumption – MTP Clear coat
UOM: ml / Vehicle
434
283 202
Norms Bench mark IdealTheoretical
605 545Opportunity
loss
295
Theoretical
loss
367
Ideal loss
Paint consumption – Top coat White
UOM: ml / Vehicle
640
574 485
Horizontal Deployment to other colors
Norms Bench mark IdealTheoretical
312 245Opportunity
loss
134
Theoretical
loss
186
Ideal loss
Paint consumption – Base coat Titanium grey
UOM: ml / Vehicle
345
285 212
Norms Bench mark IdealTheoretical
321 278Opportunity
loss
176
Theoretical
loss
201
Ideal loss
Paint consumption – Base coat Stallion Brown
UOM: ml / Vehicle
367
296 234
Inference : Paint consumption reduced by 38% (Average of 4 colors)
22 projects completed as per plan
57
113 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
421
390 386
321
370 366
300
320
340
360
380
400
420
Before Target (Phase 1) Actual (Phase 1) Target (Phase 2) As of nowTarget (Phase 2)
As of nowActual (Phase 2)
Paint cost UOM: Rs/veh
Phase 1 Phase 2
5.04 Results
Cost saving certificate
Cost saving of Rs. 2.26 Cr / Annum
421 390 358
Recoverable
loss
Opportunity
loss
114
Theoretical
loss
257
Ideal loss
Paint
consumption –
Rs. per vehicle
366
114 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
421
366
300
350
400
450
500
Before After
Departmental KPI
Bett
er
UOM: Rs/veh
Bett
er
EBITDA %
6.8
7
7.2
7.4
7.6
7.8
8
8.2
Before After
Paint Cost
Bett
er
UOM: %
5.04 Results
1301
1236
1200
1220
1240
1260
1280
1300
1320
Before After
Departmental KMI UOM: Rs/veh
Material Cost
Material cost reduced by
0.7%
EBITDA improved by
0.7%
Business KMI
58
115 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
PCR/ ECR No & Date QCPC Reference
Process Sheet No/ Mod .note Dt Operations Standards
TDR No & Date M/c Service Change Ref
Tool Drawing No Date Training to the Doers
Machine Manual Change Ref VCS/ One point Display
SOP No & Date Checklist\JH checklist
IED Standards Cost Standards
OTHERS
PROCESS GENBA
OTHERS
Inference :All applicable standards updated
Updated
Updated
Displayed
Updated
Updated
Given
FMEA Updated
5.05 Maintaining the Gains
116 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
PFMEA
5.05 Maintaining the Gains
59
117 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Quality Control Process Chart
5.05 Maintaining the Gains
118 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
QCPC – Annexure description : Paint flow set value
5.05 Maintaining the Gains
60
119 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
QCPC – Annexure description : High voltage set value
5.05 Maintaining the Gains
120 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
5.05 Maintaining the Gains
The revised process parameters are being monitored
and maintained as derived specification limit
61
121 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Product Improvements :
Design Changes in the Product
Process Improvements :
Changes in the Process
Implemented in all applicable areas
Proposed in all areas, not implemented
Not applicable
Details of Implementation :-
Implemented for wego models at plant 1
Details of Proposal :-
For motorcycle painting
Horizontally Implemented in their work area
5.05 Maintaining the Gains
122 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
5.06 Project Communication
Online system to monitor project status
Projection completion status is being
monitored in each stage through online
system & completion communicated to all
stake holders.
Online project communication to stake holders
62
123 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
Project presentation to Senior Management
Reviewer Inputs
JMD Challenging the current condition statistically is good. Work towards technological
improvement to challenge the ideal conditions.
P& CEO Yield improvement case study in paint plant is good. To be horizontally deployed to all other
colors. Challenging the recoverable loss alone is not sufficient. We need to challenge the
opportunity loss also.
Board of Director Very good case study on paint consumption reduction.
Review by JMD Review by P & CEO Review by Board of director
5.06 Project Communication
124 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
QC tools Statistical tools
Pareto 2 sample t test
graph Regression analysis
Brain storming Normality test
Cause and effect diagram Stability test
Why why analysis Capability test
Taguchi design for DOE
Response surface method
Tools used for improvement
Learning's
1. Better understanding of statistical techniques
2. Yield loss is an important loss in paint shop, which will affect bottom line of the company.
Books / Material referred
1. Minitab user guide
2. World class quality by Keki R. Bhote
3. Automotive Rotary Bell spray painting
63
125 TVS Motor Company Ltd.
THANK YOU