1.

Process Improvement in ABC Ltd

2. Implementation of 5S in Ware-house
GROUP
1. 035 Yogeshwar Kulkarni
2. 055 Amit Sethia
3. 018 Ajitsingh Dubal
4. 062 Shashank Singh
5. 042 Amit S Pandey
6. 058 Parvez Shaikh

Mentor: Dr P. N. Mukherjee
Managing Business Operations
2
Group-Spanner
Assembly of Pinion to the High Speed Motor
Application of Motor
3
Group-Spanner
1.Process Over View
4
Group-Spanner
Process Overview-Current Scenario and Improvement Desired
Current Scenario
Station cycle time was 18 seconds (including Inspection)
100% inspection as height is critical to quality.-Non Value Add
First Pass Yield below 70%- High Rejection/Rework Rate
Returned Motor Analysis (100nos /1000 dispatched quantity) had shown assemblies deviated upto
1mm in height.- Operator Dependability & Customer Dissatisfaction
Improvement Desired-Reduction of Wastages (MUDA)
To imbibe in the people the need to improve the current system.
To reduce inventory by reducing the factor of rejection in the motor assembly.
Reduction of Cycle Time( processing Time) per Assembly.
Reduction of paper work by doing sampling inspection in place of 100% inspection
Reduction of Inspection cycle. To move from QC to QA-Non Value Add
Reduction of wastages. High Rejection/Rework Rate
Reduction in Customer Rejection level which is 10% at the moment.- Operator Dependability &
Customer Dissatisfaction
5
Group-Spanner
Process Improvement- Need
Problem Identification,
Root Cause Analysis
Process Review.
Implementation on a
pilot scale
SPC study
Implement the
change,
Horizontal
Deployment
6
Group-Spanner
PLAN Problem Identification
Process Improvement- Use Fish Bone Analysis tool
Construct Cause & Effect Diagram
Agree on a problem statement (Effect). Write it at the center right of the flipchart or
whiteboard. Draw a box around it and draw a horizontal arrow running to it.
Brainstorm the major categories of causes of the problem which are listed as below :
Methods
Machines (equipment)
People (manpower)
Materials
Measurement
Environment
Write the categories of causes as branches from the main arrow.
Brainstorm all the possible causes of the problem. Ask: Why does this happen? As
each idea is given, the facilitator writes it as a branch from the appropriate category.
Causes can be written in several places if they relate to several categories.
Again ask why does this happen? about each cause. Write subcauses branching off
the causes. Continue to ask Why? and generate deeper levels of causes. Layers of
branches indicate causal relationships.
When the group runs out of ideas, focus attention to places on the chart where ideas
are few.
7
Group-Spanner
Plan- Root Cause Analysis
Fish-Bone Diagram
Height Out of
Spec
Man
Machine
Material Method Environment
Operator doesnt
know operation
Unable to Measure
Inconsistent while
operating
Bought out -Pinion
Height out of Spec
Bought out Cup
Plate Out of Spec
Motor Assembly Out
Spec from previous
operation
Process
Inconsistency
8
Group-Spanner
Plan- Process Review
Outcomes of Fish Bone analysis
Material Within Tolerance
Machine- No Inconsistency
Man- Skill require to measure the component during entire production lot. May lead to
inspection error. Reactive Measures
Method- Assembly process creating variation in the readings . Error Originator
Conclusion: Change the method of Assembly of Pinion to the motor.

9
Group-Spanner
Do-Old Process of Assembly
10
Group-Spanner
Do-New Process of Assembly
11
Group-Spanner
Check- New Process Capability Study
12
Group-Spanner
Act- After verification of Results of New Process
Results
As Pp & Ppk values are almost = 2; only 3.4 Parts per Million are expected to be
defective. Hence process yield has improved from 70 % to 99.99966%.
This has reduced rework cost.
No 100% measurement. Only set-up approval measurement (first 5 pieces before start
of production)
No Operator dependability.
Increased Customer Confidence Level.
Horizontal Deployment
ACT: Implement the new process of Assembly of Pinion to the motor.



13
Group-Spanner
Implementation of 5S in the Warehouse of XXX Ltd
14
Group-Spanner
2. WareHouse-Old (Before Implementation of 5S)


Seiri-Orderliness Kitting Time = 140 Minutes/ Motor Model
Seiso- Clarity Quantity Mismatch (ERP Vs Actual)= 48%
Inventory Measurement Cycle = 7 days
No. operator for kitting = 5
Seiton-Tidiness Damaged due to improper storage = 20%
Seiketsu-Cleaniness Warehouse was quite disaarayed and lacked
cleaniness.
Shitsuke-Sustain No discipline at warehouse.
15
Group-Spanner
Ware House- After Implementing 5s



Seiri-Orderliness
Kitting Time reduced to 30 Minutes/ Motor Model
Seiso- Clarity
Quantity Mismatch reduced to 4% only
Inventory Measurement Cycle reduced to 3 from 7 days
No. operator for kitting reduced to 2 from 5
Seiton-Tidiness
Material Damaged Cost reduced to 0% almost
Seiketsu-Cleaniness Warehouse looks clean and organised with the same
allocation of resources to clean.
Shitsuke-Sustain Strict discipline in the ware house
16
Group-Spanner
Ware House- After Implementing 5s
Advantages Particulars
Traceability Increased substantially which has resulted in
decrease in manhours and thus savings for the
company.
Clarity Mismatch in reporting has reduced which has
helped the organisation to reduce inventory pile up
because of false reporting of inventory.
Inventory Damage
There is no damage of Inventory as each ite is
located in a organised manner and as per the logic.
Labour Hours
Saving
As there is no confusion in the warehouse operations
there is less need of manhours to maintain the
warehouse. The cost of labour has reduced by 60%.
Productivity
There is substantial increase in productivity of the
warehouse department. The Inventory physical
verification has reduced to 3 days which was 7 days
earlier.
17
Group-Spanner