Upload
paul-bullock
View
16
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Lean Six Sigma
Paper Furnish OptimizationBlack Belt Project
United States Gypsum Co.
Project Launched: 1/27/10
Define
2
• Value Stream Map for Deeper Understanding and Focus
• Identify Key Input, Process and Output Metrics
• Develop Operational Definitions• Develop Data Collection Plan• Validate Measurement System• Collect Baseline Data• Determine Process Capability• Complete Measure Gate
Improve
Lean Six SigmaDMAIC Improvement Process Road Map
• Project Charter• Voice of the Customer• SIPOC Map• RACI Chart• Communication Plan• Effective Meeting Tools• Inquiry and Advocacy Skills• Time Lines, Milestones,
and Gantt Charting
• Review Project Charter • Validate High-Level Value Stream Map and Scope• Validate Voice of the Customer
and Voice of the Business• Validate Problem Statement
and Goals• Validate Financial Benefits• Create Communication Plan• Select and Launch Team• Develop Project Schedule• Complete Define Gate
ToolsActivities
ControlMeasureDefine Analyze
Kaizen, 5S, NVA Analysis,Generic Pull Systems,
Four Step Rapid Setup Method
Identify and Implement Quick Improvements with Kaizen
Define
3
Project Charter
Problem: Optimization of furnish storage, blending, and processing has not been realized.Uncontrolled furnish blends lead to added costs for: using more expensive furnish when not necessary
Goal: Optimize furnish handling and processing to achieve a paper cost reduction of $xx,xxx (using expected furnish pries from Jul10-Dec10)
Furnish substitution in filler system
Problem/Goal Statement
Gate Review Schedule
Financial Impact
Team
Reduce paper cost $xx,xxxc versus 2010Furnish pricing using Jul10-Dec10Total potential savings of $xx,xxx
All $ at this point are Type I hard savings
Will address weight reduction opportunities in Project 2.
Core Team members (% of contribution) – 95%Supporting members – 5%Project sponsor – Plant managerLSS Deployment Champion – CorporateBlack Belt Master Black Belt coach
Tollgate Scheduled Revised CompleteDefine: 02/26/10 - 02/26/10
Measure: 03/26/10 04/01/10 04/01/10
Analyze: 04/23/10 06/18/10 06/18/10
Improve: 05/14/10 03/24/11 03/24/11
Control: 06/04/10 04/25/11 Scheduled
Define
Project Operational DefinitionsFurnish/wastepaper
Bales of recycled paper “scraps” that are used to make gypsum wallboard paper, which consist of layers, or “plies”.
Gypsum wallboardGeneric name for Sheetrock (USG Trademark product).
Liner/FillerLiner refers to the top several plies of paper, i.e. the “face” of the sheet.Filler refers to plies of the paper that lie underneath the liner plies.
PulperEquipment that mixes the wastepaper bales with water to form a stock or slurry of paper.
FeltContinuous pad that plies of paper are sprayed onto, provides support for sheet of paper until it is thick enough to travel through equipment.
4
Define
Project Operational Definitions (cont.)Filler Cobb/Liner Cobb
Quality test that determines how many grams of water the finished sheet of paper (filler side or liner side) will absorb in a given amount of time.
TensileThe strength of the paper when measured by how much force it takes to pull apart a strip of paper (in the MD or CD direction), another key quality test.
MD/CDMachine direction (parallel) or Cross direction (perpendicular), refers to the orientation of the paper fibers in the sheet.
Basis weightThe weight of the paper in a given amount produced, measured in lbs per thousand square feet (#/MSF).
5
Define
Project Operational Definitions (cont.)Furnish blend
Refers to the recipe used in the filler pulper. How many bales of OCC to how many bales of DLK.
OCCOld corrugated cartons, wastepaper typically from recycled cardboard boxes, much of this material comes from landfill sorting facilities.
DLKDouble-lined kraft, wastepaper typically from clippings on new cardboard boxes, shipped directly from box manufacturers to the plant.
SizeChemical added to help the paper (when dry) resist the tendency to absorb liquid.
Silo stackingProcess of stacking the paper rolls in an upright column or “silo”.
6
Define
Project Operational Definitions (cont.)Bale clamp truck
A forklift with a specially designed attachment to grab and lift rectangular bales of wastepaper.
Furnish bale tagsInformational labels printed out and applied to each wastepaper bale as it enters the plant.
WWPWastepaper Warehouse Plan, an internal document developed to contain all major procedures involved in the receipt, unloading, storing, and retrieval of furnish bales at the plant.
5sLean Six Sigma process/tool designed to help properly clean-up and organize any area to ensure efficient use of the space.
7
Define
Project Operational Definitions (cont.)Newsline
Grade of gypsum wallboard paper. Is the brown-colored sheet on the back of the gypsum wallboard, the side that is mounted to the wood/steel studs in building construction.
C/OChangeover. Refers to the process of changing from one product to another on the paper mill production line.
8
Define
Outdoor wastepaper storage area
9
Define
Wastepaper feeding into the pulper
10
Define
Filler pulper
11
Define
Paper stock being applied to the felt
12
Define
Large paper roll before being cut to width
13
Define
Finished roll of paper for gypsum wallboard
14
Define
15
Team EffectivenessFormal goals, agenda, meeting minutes, action item lists, and time schedule used for all meetings
Ground Rules set at Team Launch
Team Roles – assign timekeeper, note taker, and “engager” at each meeting
Team Meeting Frequency – Each Wednesday, 1-3pm
Tools used by Team – SIPOC, Voice of Customer analysis, Risk analysis, Communications plan, Project plan, RACI chart
Team has agreed to have an open mind and communicate thoroughly in order to avoid scheduling conflicts
DefineVoice of the Customer (VOC) – Paper Furnish
Optimization
CustomerVoice of the Customer
Key Customer Issue(s)
CriticalCustomer
RequirementWho is the Customer? What does the
customer want from us? What does the customer want from us? We need to identify the issue(s) that
prevent us from satisfying our customers.
We should summarize key issues and translate them into specific and
measurable requirements
Machine Tender (Paper Mill Wet End Operator)
Stock that meets all applicable specs
Freeness, consistency, tensile, stock flow, good recycled water quality, minimal wax/glue/trash
1. Freeness & consistency within established operating ranges
2. Tensile strength within bulletin range for paper grade
3. Continuous flow of stock4. Recycled water will pass
visual inspection of save-all pads
5. Minimize wax/glue/trash contamination
Wet End (Paper Machine)
Same as above Same as above Same as above
SIPOC – Paper Furnish Optimization
Risk Analysis – Paper Furnish Optimization• Cover most important risks (80/20 rule) – Top 3
Risk# Risk Description
ImpactType
Probability of
Occurrence Rating
ImpactRating
Priority Rating Risk Response
Owner1 - None 1 - None
(Probabilityx Impact)
Accept
Identify and DescribeRisk Response
Scope 2 - Low 2 - Little Avoid
Cost 3 - Medium 3 - Moderate Mitigate - Minimize Probability
Time 4 - High 4 - Heavy Mitigate - Minimize Rating
1*
Increased pulping time (pulper operators weigh every bale) C 4 4 16 Avoid
Be wary of this. Perform careful trials. Foreman
2*Bad quality finished paper (using
wet/degraded bales) C 3 4 12Mitigate – Minimize
Probability
Don’t rush to use all bad furnish at once
PMForemen
3*
Bad quality finished paper (changing bale blend % i.e. increasing OCC, etc.) C 3 4 12
Mitigate – Minimize Probability
Ensure scavenger & screening systems are functioning optimally
PMForemen
4
Increased furnish price ($/ton) by using local vendors to lower stock level C 3 3 9 Accept
Team must prove this cost would be offset by a quantifiable issue decrease Buyer
5Screening capacity to handle
“dirtier” furnish C 3 3 9 Mitigate – Minimize Probability
Ensure screening system are functioning optimally
PMForemen
6 Run out of waste paper furnish C 2 4 8 AvoidDon’t let stock levels fall
too low Buyer
19
Communication Plan – Paper Furnish Optimization Project
Project Sponsor
•Face to face meetings
•Gate review presentations
•Project progress updates•Go/No Go for project phases
•Updates and potential roadblocks•Phase review and validation
•Black Belt
•Project Team
•Weekly
•End of each phase per project plan
•Scheduled
•Define gate review scheduled
Process Owner
•Copy of team meeting minutes•Gate review presentations
•Monitor project progress•Major project updates
•Overall team progress
•Phase review and validation
•Black Belt
•Project Team
•Weekly
•End of each phase per project plan
•N/A
•Define gate review scheduled
Plant Employees
•Newsletter articles
•High level summary to keep all employees informed
•General “high-level” items to communicate project status
•Project Team (will rotate)
•One article generated per project Phase
Paper Mill production and supply chain employees
•Shift safety huddles•PM lunchroom monitor
•Stimulate employee buy-in and interest
•Project goals, benefits•Effects of furnish on paper machine
•Project Team (will rotate)•PM General Foreman
•Twice/monthly•Twice/monthly
Audience Media PurposeTopics of
Discussion/Key Messages
Owner Frequency Notes/Status
Measure
20
Measure Improve
Lean Six SigmaDMAIC Improvement Process Road Map
• Value Stream Map• Operational Definitions• Data Collection Plan• Statistical Sampling• Measurement System Analysis (MSA), Gage R&R• Control Charts• Process Capability, Cp & Cpk
• Identify Key Input, Process and Output Metrics
• Develop Operational Definitions
• Develop Data Collection Plan
• Validate Measurement System
• Collect Baseline Data
• Determine Process Performance/Capability
• Validate Business Opportunity
• Value Stream Map for deeper understanding & focus
• Quick Wins (Control Plans)
• Measure Gate Review
ToolsActivities
ControlDefine Analyze
Kaizen, 5S, NVA Analysis,Generic Pull Systems,
Four Step Rapid Setup Method
Identify and Implement Quick Improvements with Kaizen
Measure
Measure
21
Value Stream Map
Measure
22
Data Collection Plan – Page 1 of 3Performance
Measure Operational
Definition Data Source and
Location How Will Data Be
Collected Who Will Collect
Data When Will Data Be
Collected Sample Size Stratification
Factors How will data be
used?
Stock supply operator (bales
being used)
Stock supply – as bales are fed
PM S/C unloading
operator (bale age)
PM S/C – daily, next morning after (3) shifts worth of
production Stock supply operator (bales
being used)
Stock supply – as bales are fed
PM S/C unloading
operator (bale wgt)
PM S/C – daily, next morning after (3) shifts worth of
production
FreenessUnits unknown (plant personnel do not use units)
Flowmeter reading logged into local PM InSql Server
Logged when running by PLC PLC
PLC logs every 10 sec, will look at every min for
Minitab evaluation
1/1/10 - 3/22/10 Grade of paper
Used as a proactive
measure of sheet strength
Consistency
% of stock to water (3% = 3%
stock, 97% water)
Flowmeter reading logged into local PM InSql Server
Logged when running by PLC PLC
PLC logs every 10 sec, will look at every min for
Minitab evaluation
1/1/10 - 3/22/10 Grade of paper
Used to proactively
measure density of sheet
Tensile (Parallel)lbs of force (to tear sample)
Thwing Albert machine feeds
into MDIS system, in PM
Quality Lab
Samples of each set are prepped
and fed into Thwing Albert
PM Quality testers
As each set of paper is produced 1/1/10 - 3/22/10
Grade of paper, production shift
Used to quantify strength of sheet, minimum reject
limits
Data Collection Plan - Page 1
Grade of paper, Look at filler system only
Give idea on age of bales versus paper grade and
variability
Weight of bales being fed into
pulper Weight (lbs)
Unloading log, PM S/C
unloading office
Record number of bales being used (whse
section & row), then research unloading log.
Entire run (~ 8 to 9 days)
Grade of paper, Look at filler system only
Give idea on weight of bales versus paper
grade and variability
Age of bales being fed to
pulper Time (days)
Unloading log, PM S/C
unloading office
Record number of bales being used (whse
section & row), then research unloading log.
Entire run (~ 8 to 9 days)
Measure
Measurement System Analysis – Filler Cobb
23
Measure
Measurement System Analysis – Filler Cobb
24
%ContributionSource VarComp (of VarComp)Total Gage R&R 0.005823 4.05
Repeatability 0.005823 4.05Reproducibility 0.000000 0.00
Part-To-Part 0.137926 95.95Total Variation 0.143748 100.00
Study Var %Study VarSource StdDev (SD) (6 * SD) (%SV)Total Gage R&R 0.076307 0.45784 20.13
Repeatability 0.076307 0.45784 20.13Reproducibility 0.000000 0.00000 0.00
Part-To-Part 0.371383 2.22830 97.95Total Variation 0.379142 2.27485 100.00
Number of Distinct Categories = 6
Measure
Measurement System Analysis – Tensile
25
Analyze
26
Improve
Lean Six Sigma: AnalyzeImprovement Process Road Map
• Cause & Effect Analysis
• Hypothesis Tests/Conf. Intervals
• Simple & Multiple Regression
• ANOVA
• Identify Potential Root Causes
• Reduce List of Potential Root Causes
• Confirm Root Cause to Output Relationship
• Estimate Impact of Root Causes on Key Outputs
• Prioritize Root Causes
• Complete Analyze Gate
ToolsActivities
ControlMeasureDefine Analyze
Kaizen, 5S, NVA Analysis,Generic Pull Systems,
Four Step Rapid Setup Method
Identify and Implement Quick Improvements with Kaizen
Analyze
27
Current Process Performance –Newsline MD (Parallel) Tensile
Observed Special Causes:
Individual values look good, one special cause in the range chart that could not be tied back to an observable event
Five products made over observation window (~ 2 days)
Analyze
28
Current Process Performance –Newsline CD (Cross) Tensile
Observed Special Causes:
A minor issue on the individual values, but range chart ok
Five products made over observation window (~ 2 days)
Analyze
29
People
Potential Root-Cause Identification (sample)
Measurement Parts
Machines
Why Are Cycle Times >18 hours
Language barriers
Software Glitches
Unfamiliar Processes
Customer Delays
Lab Personnel
Lack of Experience
Approval required in some situations
Customer responsible for consumable ordering
Methodology
Operational Procedures
SAP System
Call not closed at time of Repair
Unavailable, system down
Parts Unavailability
Operations
Left open for testing
No access to system
Slow, Times Out
Deployment delay
Vendor Database
Missing Information
Erroneous Information
Parts Order ProcessingPart procurement process is substandard
Centralized Call Process not being followed
Constant Process Changes
Lilly Staff LevelCustomer unwilling to add another Tech to Contract
No Backfill for PTO
Order fulfillment Delays by the manufacturer
Corporate decision not to stock parts locally
Excessive Part ETA times
Part Numbers not in Database
Quality of Parts
Multiple DOA Parts
Recycled parts
Wrong part sent / Published part # incorrectLab Technician Off-site
Remote area of Plant
Tech too busy with callsLilly
Unknown escalation path
Inconsistent process application
Training issues
Manufacturers
Long hold times
Inept technical assistance
Analyze
30
Potential Root-Cause Prioritization20 inputsevaluated
8 outputsevaluatedfrom initialVoice ofCustomerAnalysis
Analyze
31
Pareto Chart (from C&E Matrix)
Key Findings:
No significant “front runners”
Numerical top 20% was 4, moved forward with top 8 (60%)
Analyze
32
Root Cause ValidationBasis weight is related to tensile (MD = 33.5%, CD = 40.2%)
Analyze
33
Root Cause Validation95% confident that 32.1% of the variation in Liner Cobb is due to filler furnish blend
Analyze
34
Summary of Critical x’sCritical X1 = Basis weight (to tensile)
Tool used = single regressionP-Value = 0.000
Critical X2 = furnish blend (to Liner Cobb)Tool used = single regressionP-Value = 0.000
Critical X3 = bale storage rotation planTool used = fishbone diagram, C&E matrixWill pilot changes while watching BW & tensile variation
Analyze
35
Other LSS Tools UsedNormality testing
Distribution identification of data set (more accurately depict process capability of some key outputs)
Sample Size Calculation (Using sample std dev. and power)
Correlation tools (single & multiple regression models)
Team Effectiveness Tools (Brainstorming)
Improve
36
Lean Six Sigma: ImproveImprovement Process Road Map
• Design of Experiments (DOE)
• Solution Selection Matrix
• Piloting and Simulation
• Develop Potential Solutions
• Evaluate, Select, and Optimize Best Solutions
• Develop and Implement Pilot Solution
• Confirm Attainment of Project Goals
• Complete Improve Gate
ToolsActivities
ControlMeasureDefine Analyze
Kaizen, 5S, NVA Analysis,Generic Pull Systems,
Four Step Rapid Setup Method
Identify and Implement Quick Improvements with Kaizen
Improve
Improve
37
Brainstorming, Solution Selection Matrix (Tribal Knowledge)Used fishbone & CE matrix to develop list of significant inputs
Warehouse organization & bale feed procedure consistencyCritical “foundation” organizational work done. Set a solid foundation for the team to build any repeatable and consistent practices on top of. Many benefits realized in the form of job efficiency, employee morale, consistency in procedures from shift-to-shift, etc.
Team felt getting organized (alone) would help improve MD tensile variation…….. it did NOT (see next slides)
Most other inputs did not show significant correlation to MD or CD tensile results
Potential Solution Identification
Improve
38
Significant Inputs Matrix ( Data driven)Used a weighted matrix to help filter out process “noise” and find the most repeatable and significant inputs
Seven newsline runs, two methods used to analyze, CD/MD, +/- signs
Potential Solution Identification - Continued
(As TF_CD or TF_MD increases, +1 means variable increased, ‐1 means variable decreased)Product Run Date(s) R‐Sq(adj) # Variables # Data Pts FP Lw FP %fines OCC% HPDT MC %fines MC Lw Outside % OCC In% Kraft In% Kraft Out%
TF_CD News 8/30 ‐ 9/1 71.5 2 11 1 1TF_CD News 9/10 ‐ 9/11 24.9 1 30 ‐1TF_CD News 9/16 ‐ 9/17 80.0 2 GLM ‐1 0.5TF_CD News 9/16 ‐ 9/17 26.4 1 59 ‐1TF_CD News 10/14 ‐ 10/15 18.1 1 GLM ‐1TF_CD News 10/14 ‐ 10/15 42.9 1 7 ‐1TF_CD News 10/14 ‐ 10/15 22.7 1 47 1TF_CD News 10/21 ‐ 10/22 51.9 1 6 1TF_CD News 10/21 ‐ 10/22 23.4 1 35 1TF_CD News 10/26 ‐ 10/28 26.1 3 GLM ‐1 1 0.5TF_CD News 10/26 ‐ 10/28 29.7 2 95 ‐1 1TF_CD NewsTF_CD NewsTF_MD News 8/30 ‐ 9/1 38.8 1 11 1TF_MD News 9/10 ‐ 9/11 17.6 1 30 1TF_MD News 9/16 ‐ 9/17 99.9 4 GLM 0.5 ‐1 1 ‐1TF_MD News 9/16 ‐ 9/17 21.5 1 52 ‐1TF_MD News 10/7 ‐ 10/8 15.3 1 48 ‐1TF_MD News 10/14 ‐ 10/15 21.7 1 GLM ‐1TF_MD News 10/14 ‐ 10/15 60.2 2 7 ‐1 1TF_MD News 10/14 ‐ 10/15 20.3 1 47 1TF_MD News 10/21 ‐ 10/22 92.0 3 6 1 1 1TF_MD News 10/21 ‐ 10/22 24.0 1 35 1TF_MD News 10/26 ‐ 10/28 29.0 2 GLM ‐1 ‐1TF_MD News 10/26 ‐ 10/28 18.4 1 16 1TF_MD News 10/26 ‐ 10/28 24.8 3 95 ‐1 1 1TF_MD News
# of times this variable used
71.5 71.5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 ‐24.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 ‐80 0 40 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 ‐26.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 ‐18.1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 ‐42.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 22.7 0 00 51.9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 23.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 ‐26.1 0 0 26.1 0 0 13.05 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 ‐29.7 0 29.7 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 38.8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 17.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 49.95 ‐99.9 0 0 99.9 ‐99.9 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 ‐21.5 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 ‐15.3 0 0 00 0 ‐21.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 ‐60.2 0 60.2 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20.3 0 00 92 0 0 92 92 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 ‐29 0 0 0 0 ‐29 0 0 0
18.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 ‐24.8 24.8 24.8 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Totals 89.9 201.05 ‐326.1 125.2 132 218 ‐121.4 ‐98.8 80.85 54.5 0Abs value 89.9 201.05 326.1 125.2 132 218 121.4 98.8 80.85 54.5 0
Multiply Occurance by R‐Sq(adj) and total by variable
Improve
39
Solution Selection (from matrix on prior slide)
Factors taken to DOE“Non-controllable” inputs
Improve
40
Pilot Plan
DOEPart I
• First part of a two-part DOE newsline trial.• Part I used “clean” OCC furnish from Interplast.
• Hold critical non-DOE factors stable
• Complete required set point combinations
• All members • Completed 1/26/11
DOEPart II
• Second part of a two-part DOE newsline trial.• Part II used “dirty” OCC furnish from Vista Fiber.
• Hold critical non-DOE factors stable
• Complete required set point combinations
• All members • Completed 2/24/11
DOECombining
• Had to first use statistical (mean/median) testing to ensure the (21) critical variables remained “the same” during both trials so results could be combined together into one DOE.
• All critical variables were the “same”, considering the practical aspect of the operation
• Black Belt • Completed 3/4/11
DOEAnalysis
• Complete DOE Analysis for MD and CD Tensile. • Statistically solid results after analysis is complete
• Black Belt • Completed 3/8/11
ScheduleTeamSuccess CriteriaDescriptionPilot Test
Improve
41
Verify Pilot ResultsThere is a difference!
176.4
161.0
15.4 points lower
Improve
42
Verify Pilot Results - Continued
Improve
43
Verify Pilot Results - Continued
There is a difference!
7.2 gpm
8.4 gpm
1.2 gpm higher
Improve
44
Quick Wins (6)Forklift backhaul procedure
Lower occurrence of empty backhauls
Paper bale use from warehouse
Ensure consistent shift-to-shift use strategy
Section A “silo” stacking
Received approval from FM Global, 48 roll capacity vs. 36
Paint striper
Good quality tool that allowed us to efficiently paint indoor/outdoor storage lines for wastepaper bales
Bale clamp trucks overheating
Developed OBC (operator basic care routine)
Furnish bale tags
Still in process but will yield powerful information
Improve
45
Current Status SummaryKey actions completed
5 of 6 identified Quick Wins completedImplemented key sections of WWPBegan tracking filler pulper furnish blendInstalled furnish blend board at pulperDesignated indoor storage for consistent use of outside furnishBuilt two “significant inputs” matrices after thorough analyzing of multiple production runsBegan labeling all incoming DLK & OCC balesCompleted DOE
Improve
46
Current Status Summary - ContinuedLean Six Sigma Tools used
5s in raw paper warehouse (storage for furnish bales)Solution selection matrixDOE (Design of Experiments)
Lessons learnedSome “Quick Wins” may not be so quick, but still important!Scope on this project is very largeSome results are not crystal clear, must sift through process “noise”Trials are difficult in low business environments (delayed project ~ three months)
Control
47
Lean Six Sigma: ImproveImprovement Process Road Map
• Mistake-Proofing/Zero Defects
• Standard Operating Procedures (SOP’s)
• Process Control Plans
• Visual Process Control Tools
• Solution Replication
• Project Transition
• Implement Mistake Proofing
• Develop SOP’s, Training Plan and Process Controls
• Implement Solution and Ongoing Process Measurements
• Identify Project Replication Opportunities
• Complete Control Gate
• Transition Project to Process Owner
ToolsActivities
MeasureDefine Analyze
Kaizen, 5S, NVA Analysis,Generic Pull Systems,
Four Step Rapid Setup Method
Identify and Implement Quick Improvements with Kaizen
Improve Control
Control
48
Current Process Performance
Control
49
Full-Scale Solution Implementation Plan
Control
50
The following SOP’s and/or Documents have been updated, tested, and implemented:
Throughout the project, (15) documents were created/revised. These were various standard operating procedures, visual work instructions, equipment operating manuals, etc.
Standard Operating Procedures (SOP’s) and Documentation
Control
51
Training Plan
A training plan was created for each item covered in the SOP anddocumentation section slides shown previously.
A list of training observations and “training lessons learned” wasalso created.
Control
52
Control Plan
Control
53
Replication Opportunities
A list of replication opportunities was developed. This mainly focusedaround other USG facilities that could benefit from the findings in thisproject.
Control
54
Process RACI Chart
Capt
ure/
Sust
ain
Proj
ect R
esul
ts
Revi
ew O
CC b
lend
eac
h ru
n
Revi
ew O
CC fo
rmul
a ea
ch ru
n
Use
scan
ner t
o re
cord
bal
es u
sed
Cont
inue
FIF
O W
P in
vent
ory
rota
tion
Use
c/o
time
boar
d, re
cord
exce
ptio
nsRe
view
c/o
tim
e pe
rform
ance
Mon
thly
OCC
% b
lend
dec
isio
n
Follo
w W
WP
proc
edur
es
Audi
t con
trol p
lan
Prov
ide
assi
stan
ce w
ith n
ew
issu
esEv
alua
te n
ew fu
rnis
h su
pplie
rs
Calc
ulat
e/re
port
mon
thly
pro
ject
savi
ngs
Process Owner R A A R R R A A R C C I
Process Operators R A A A A I
Project Sponsor A I I I
Black Belt C C C C A/R A/R C A/R
Paper Buyer A/R I
Control
55
Project Risk ManagementThree main risk areas were brainstormed and risks identified for each major category listed below.
Business Risk Management: Potential risks resulting from the planned solution and implementation plan on the business and its customers
Organizational Acceptance Risk Management: Risks related to lack of cultural buy-in for the proposed solution and implementation
Sustainment Risk Management: Risks related to sustaining the project gains over the long-term
Control
Barriers & Issues
56
Control
57
Lessons LearnedBased on learnings from this project:
What would you have done differently?Better use of technical resources (bale labeling/scanning)Possibly divided this project into pieces (very large scope)
What worked really well?Team selection/balance worked very wellEngaged employees through early buy-in of objectivesUse of visual controls (furnish board, signposts, c/o time board)
What will you do differently in future projects?If data results are variable, look to use weighted selection matrix sooner in project
Control
58
Lessons Learned (cont.)Based on learnings from this project:
What are some additional recommendations related to lessons learned?
ScheduleTough to meet initial schedule with large project scopeTrial scheduling was difficult (low news volume, production schedules)
Business ImpactWith decent pricing spreads between the various furnish grades there is money to be saved!
TeamworkTook the talents of the entire team to keep project movingDiscovered talents of other personnel in department as well
Control
59
Financial BenefitsConsidering furnish substitution
Charter proposed savings of $xx,xxx/yrActual 8 month savings = $xx,xxx ($x,xxx/mo, $xx,xxx annualized)Introducing new procedures (not yet optimized) earlier in project most likely led to reduced attainment of potential monthly savingsRemaining difference tied up in real blend increases seen
Charter goal proposed increasing type x furnish blend% by 25%Actual “end of month” increase achieved has only been 5%Lower newsline volume, short run cycles, and changeover ramp time has made it difficult to achieve the END OF MONTH blend goal of a 25% increaseActual blend % when running newsline products is a 50% increase!!
Mar11 savings = ~$x,xxx (17% type x furnish increase), C/O times being reduced
Control
60
MGPPMulti-Generation Project Plan (MGPP)
Generation 12010/2011
Generation 22011
Generation 32012/2013
Vision Use current LSS team to improve furnish handling process.
Optimize wet end chemistry in order to reduce shrinkage, improve drainage, and lower size usage.
Install (2) xxx formers to better control basis weight variation.
Process Generation
First major step to be completed. Will focus on operating procedures with minimal capital investments.
Second step after successful completion of furnish optimization project. Will include vendor on team and require minimal capital investments.
Third major step, will require approximately $1,000,000 in capital investments.
Platforms / Technology
Use current MDIS system and PLC data. Also uses manual documentation sheets.
Use current MDIS system and PLC data. Also uses manual documentation sheets. Vendor will likely need to supply data or additional instrumentation for critical variable monitoring.
Will use PLC and other similar technology. This forming technology is much better at producing a consistent and uniform sheet.