-and why more of us should- yokoten · weld tables-horizontal stops submission date 3/8/2013 owner:...

A3Why We Use It

-And Why More Of Us Should-

yokoten

Where Do I Begin?

A3?

Determine the A3 format:

Problem Solving?

Project?

A3 Title:Submission Date Owner:

Approval Date Manager Approval:

Problem: Target Condition:

What problem are we trying to solve or analyze?Communicate WHY you are addressing this issue.What is the business case, how does this affect Steel King?

A target condition is a description of how we want the process to function, not of how to get there. It is not a solution, but a description of where we want to be.

Goal:

State the specific target in measurable or identifiable terms.

Current Condition: Activities

What is happening now?Use facts based on observations, not opinions.Use dates, what happened when.Go to the site in question, see the problem, do not rely on the observations of others.Include any relevant, measurable metrics.

What Who When

Metrics or Measures:

What is the business purpose?What do we plan to measure?

Title:Submission Date Owner:


Task: Activities

What Who When

Goal:


Current State: (current date) Future State:

Weld Tables-Horizontal StopsSubmission Date 3/8/2013 Owner: J Hill


Problem: Target Condition: 4/12/2013

Frames do not always have horizontals in the correct position. The stop will work on the left or right side of the tables and work with double front frames.

The stop will have an estimated minimum 3 year life expectancy under normal conditions.

A single 1/4-20 screw will locate the stop thru a clearance hole.

The stop will use existing shims for height adjustments.

Goal:

Horizontal locations will be repeatable, accurate, and secure on frame fixtures.

Stops can be adjusted in 30 sec. or less.

Current Condition: 3/25/2013 Activities

Horizontal locations may change during production welding. Locators are not secure and can move slightly.Indexing blocks do not work with double fronts.Height adjustments are ineffective.Adjustments take 30 sec to 3 minutes per stop

.

What Who When

Build prototype, discuss with welders J Hill 11-Mar

Review, modify, build pair of stops J Hill 18-Mar

Test from 18th thru 22nd J Hill 22-Mar

Determined prototype failure J Hill 21-Mar

Modify prototype, build set J Hill 28-Mar

Test new set of prototype, envision all situations J Hill 5-Apr

Determine quantity, material list, order material J Hill 8-Apr

Build stops Team 15-Apr

Deliver to production, provide instruction Team 16-Apr

Perform time study on setup adjustments Team 19-Apr

Metrics or Measures:Prototype unit will be tested on all available options as suggested by welders and weld leadmen.Ex: heavy horizontal with double front, double-double front,Production units will be monitored throughout April for any issues.Stop adjustment time studies:

Adjustment Range based on Time Studies3 min ----------------------------- Range based on individual time measured adjusting six1 min ----------------------------- horizontal stops. Times were taken at all weld tables.30 sec ----------------------------

0 ---Feb-----Mar----- Apr


Goal:


Who


What

Problem: Frames do not always have horizontals in the correct position or location.


Goal:


What Who When


Goal: Horizontal location will be consistently accurate on all frames.

Submission Date Owner:



Goal:


What Who When


Current Condition: Horizontal location

may change during welding. Parts move out of tolerance. Indexing blocks do not work with dbl. front frames. Height adjustments move ¼”. Adjustments take 30 to 180 seconds per stop.




Goal:


What Who When


Target Condition: Horizontal location will be accurate & secure. Accommodate dbl. front frames. Min. 3 year life expectancy. Mount with existing platform. Utilize current shims.




Goal:


What Who When


Activities: What Who WhenDesign proto, test JAH 3-11

Failed, Modify, test JAH 3-18

Pass, determine quantity JAH 3-28

Build units, coach, JAH 4-4

Time study, follow up JAH 5-4




Goal:


What Who When


Metrics or Measures: Time Study Data

March, 30 to 180 sec. per stop April, 30 to 60 sec. per stop

Rafter Mill Setup Time ReductionSubmission Date 10/8/2013 Owner: Butch

Approval Date 10/8/2013 Manager Approval: JAH

Task: Activities

Achieve a reduction on all changes on the Rafter mill by adding one TM during setups.Use current staff, no additional hires will be needed.

What Who When

Define Plan Butch 14-Oct

Plan staffing in advance of setups, monitor times Butch ongoing

Staffing adjustments in trial Butch 29-Oct

Oct. avg. beam size change = 1.6 hours Butch 4-Nov

Time thru 11-19 is 1.78

Seeing issues with team member out for short term Butch 10-Dec

Testing & measuring Butch 13-Jan

Dec time 1.74, Jan time 1.87 Jon 21-Feb

Goal:

Achieve a 30 minute time reduction in average changeover times. Metrics or Measures:

Documentation will continue as currently being done in Rafter Calender

Current State: 9/4/2013 Future State:

Year to date average changeover is 2.2 hours.4 team members changeover the machine.Time can range from 1 hour to over 3 hours.

August: 18 size changes totaling 40.85 hours. (163.4 team hours) 4 team members

A 30 minute reduction per change = 31.85 hours. (159.25 team hours) 5 team members

This results in a reduction of 4 team hours on setup and adds an additional 9 hours to run time for the month.

Average changeover time will be 1.7 hours.5 team members changeover the machine. This process will need to be established by Butch.Time will range from less than 1 hour to 2.5 hours.Measurable results should be established and standardized by Dec. 31.

Rafter Setup Comparison 2007-2013

Dates reflect approximate end of study period

TIME IN

HO

UR

S

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

8.00

2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 Mar'13 June'13 Sep'13 Dec'13 Jan-14 Feb-14

High

Low

Average

A3 Title: Bluegill Production VarianceSubmission Date 10/8/2013 Owner: Corey

Approval Date 10/8/2013 Manager Approval: JAH


Beam production on the bluegill varies by more than 100% Expected results to be measured at the end of each month:Oct. variance < 120% Both shifts overall 88.6% to date 10-29-13Nov. variance < 108% 90% Both shifts overall 118% to date Nov. 19Dec. variance <95% 85% Both shifts overall 105% at end of month.Jan. variance < 80% Both shifts overall at 102%.Feb. variance < 70% Both shifts overall at 104%.Mar. variance < 60%Apr. variance < 50%

Goal:

Beam production on the bluegill will vary by less than 50%


Current bluegill production variance is approximately 135%. What Who When

Observe & document facts to determine obstacles Corey 14-Oct

Track production variance Corey/Jon ongoing

Train Chris on tracking 2nd shift Corey 4-Nov

Setup observation & time study Corey/Jon 14-Nov

Clip pickup & maint. issues being attacked Team 19-Nov

Team continuing to resolve issues one by one Team 27-Dec

Rebuild weld head slides (start date) Team 25-Feb


Actual output will be compared to scheduled output. This will be measured daily and documented weekly.

February - Bluegill Production

3-Feb 4-Feb 5-Feb 6-Feb 10-Feb 11-Feb 12-Feb 13-Feb 14-Feb 17-Feb 18-Feb 19-Feb 24-Feb

Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual

5:00-6:00 75 50 54 29 50 28 0 100 100 100 150 125 70 55 29 100 104 50 58 0 0 4

6:00-7:00 100 75 43 43 150 112 100 57 130 140 130 230 150 210 43 43 130 82 64 71 125 25 100 60

7:00-8:00 100 61 28 28 150 151 130 130 130 141 150 128 28 28 130 88 100 127 150 102 100 35

8:00-9:00 48 84 33 33 100 76 100 120 100 126 125 192 33 33 150 151 100 94 125 161 100 100

9:00-10:00 72 56 25 27 150 146 130 130 130 48 150 205 25 27 150 145 100 150 212 100 100

10:00-11:00 50 26 100 110 150 144 130 150 100 196 150 72 100 110 150 139 100 150 187 100 91

11:30-12:30 50 21 75 76 150 233 130 107 45 106 150 203 75 76 150 126 100 150 161 100 100

12:30-1:30 24 24 68 68 150 155 130 215 36 135 150 157 68 68 150 155 100 150 120 100 25

1:30-2:30 4 100 36 100 85 100 76 80 69 125 153 100 36 100 107 100 125 100 74

2:30-3:30 20 24 117 117 150 206 130 11 28 108 150 118 117 117 150 130 100 150 54 100 71

Total 543 421 643 567 0 0 1300 1336 100 57 1210 1179 879 1309 1425 1508 644 567 1360 1227 914 350 1275 1022 900 660

Average 47 57 #DIV/0! 134 57 118 131 151 57 123 88 128 66

High 84 117 0 233 57 215 230 210 117 155 127 212 100

Plan per hr 54 64 #DIV/0! 130 50 121 88 143 64 136 91 128 90

Max per hr 84 117 0 233 57 215 230 210 117 155 127 212 100

Min per hr 21 27 0 28 57 11 48 70 27 82 58 25 4

Hi Variance 55% 82% #DIV/0! 79% 14% 78% 162% 47% 82% 14% 39% 66% 11%

Lo Variance 61% 58% #DIV/0! 78% 14% 91% 45% 51% 58% 40% 37% 80% 96%

Tot Variance 116% 140% #DIV/0! 158% 0% 169% 207% 98% 140% 54% 75% 147% 107%

Eff 0f 1500 -72% -62% -100% -11% -96% -21% -13% 1% -62% -18% -77% -32% -56%

Avg Variation

month to date

3-Feb 4-Feb 5-Feb 6-Feb 10-Feb 11-Feb 12-Feb 13-Feb 14-Feb 17-Feb 18-Feb 19-Feb 24-Feb

Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual Plan Actual

3:30-4:30 140 24 140 19 140 90 140 190 140 70 140 60 140 60 140 104 140 19 140 140 140 140 89 140 75

4:30-5:30 140 70 140 106 140 134 140 190 140 136 140 70 140 114 140 186 140 106 140 140 140 140 118 140 101

5:30-6:30 100 131 100 53 100 132 100 150 100 44 100 100 100 8 100 50 100 53 100 120 100 100 53 100 64

6:30-7:30 140 82 140 112 140 174 140 137 140 75 140 167 140 130 140 91 140 112 140 160 140 27 140 70 140 155

7:30-8:30 140 99 140 83 140 160 140 140 155 140 138 140 43 140 150 140 83 140 160 140 31 140 144 140 147

8:30-9:30 140 46 140 82 140 160 140 153 140 100 140 100 140 25 140 110 140 82 140 160 140 65 140 140 140 158

10:00-11:00 140 140 55 140 106 140 180 140 200 140 150 140 90 140 90 140 55 140 210 140 140 124 140 140

11:00-12:00 100 100 78 100 124 100 145 100 62 100 115 100 130 100 132 100 78 100 100 100 100 31 100 81

12:00-1:00 140 140 43 140 190 140 160 140 58 140 237 140 100 140 60 140 43 140 119 140 140 140 83

1:00-2:00 140 140 12 140 166 140 179 140 109 140 181 140 64 140 24 140 12 140 63 140 140 140 90

Total 1320 452 1320 643 1320 1436 1320 1484 1320 1009 1320 1318 1320 764 1320 997 1320 643 1320 1372 1320 123 1320 769 1320 1094

Average 75 64 144 165 101 132 76 100 64 137 41 96 109

High 131 112 190 190 200 237 130 186 112 210 65 144 158

Plan per hr 132 132 132 132 132 132 132 132 132 132 132 132 132

Max per hr 131 112 190 190 200 237 130 186 112 210 65 144 158

Min per hr 24 12 90 137 44 60 8 24 12 63 27 31 64

Hi Variance -1% -15% 44% 44% 52% 80% -2% 41% -15% 59% -51% 9% 20%

Lo Variance 82% 91% 32% 4% 67% 55% 94% 82% 91% 52% 80% 77% 52%

Tot Variance 81% 76% 76% 40% 118% 134% 92% 123% 76% 111% 29% 86% 71%

Eff 0f 1500 -70% -57% -4% -1% -33% -12% -49% -34% -57% -9% -92% -49% -27%

Avg Variation

FIR

ST S

HIF

TSE

CO

ND

SH

IFT

Yoder Coolant Reduction

Quentin Fravert

• Problem

– Horizontals are too wet to weld just-in-time.



• Current Condition:Voice of the Welder: Horizontals have too much mill scale

and moisture to perform efficient welding processes. Welders are cleaning off the end of the horizontals.

Observations:

1. Coolant captured inside tube

2. Coolant dispensed on and inside of tube while machine is in operation

3. Coolant getting trapped between faces of parts and not able to dry before weld operation

4. Safety concerns due to coolant on floor (dirty and slippery)


• Goal

– Welders receiving ready-to-weld horizontals just-in-time

Yoder Coolant Reduction• Target Condition:

– Deliver dry horizontals to the weld shop just-in-time.


• Activities Performed:

1. Build Outside Air Knife and Test

2. Build Inside Air Knife and Test

3. Modify Air Knives and Test

4. Automate Air Knives and Test

5. 30 Day Follow Up

Yoder Outside Air Knife• Zero $$ in materials

• 2 days build and test (2 variations)

• 1 day modifications

Yoder Inside ”Puck” Air Knife

• Zero $$ in materials

• 1 day to build

• 2 days of modification

and testing


• Metrics or Measures:

– The parts are welded just after the parts are cut on the Yoder Mill.


• Key Benefits Observed:

– Welders do not have to perform additional cleaning operations to the horizontals

– Safety concerns about the wet floor at the Yoder Mill have been almost completely eliminated

Yoder Outside Air Knife In ACTION!

Yoder Mill Scale Catch Pan (Project)

• This project was result of the changes necessary to meet the goals of the Yoder Coolant Reduction A3

• Task

– Build a catch pan for the removed outside mill scale and coolant from the horizontal material


• Goal

– Contain mill scale and coolant from horizontal material.


• Current Condition

– Created a collection point of all the mill scale “mud” being produced due to the outside air knife


• “We resolved a welder effectiveness issue, but created a new opportunity!”


• Activities– Observe how the mill scale “mud” is depositing

– Design, build, and test a catch pan

– Modify initial design

– 30 Day Follow Up


• Results– Meets the goal of containing mill scale “mud”.

Rafter Impeder Adjustments

Sean Koski

A3 Rafter Impeder Improvement

• What is an Impeder?


Goal:


Who


What

Problem: Operators need to adjust the impeder location on setups


Goal:


What Who When


Goal: Install the correct impeder at the correct location on all setups. Eliminate the need for adjusting.




Goal:


What Who When


Current Condition:Mounting brackets have several inches of vertical adjustment.Mounting brackets allow some horizontal adjustment.Bracket/Impeder assembly will work within size groups.Some impeders need some TLC.Brackets do not hold impeder horizontal.Not all impeders have their own bracket.We don't have a repair process insuring "no waiting."Not all sizes have a backup available.The brackets have been bending due to beams running into the narrow section


Gemba Walks• What are they?• Why are they important?• When should I perform a Gemba Walk?




Goal:


What Who When


Target Condition:Install every impeder in the correct location.Create a backup system.Build backup impeders.




Goal:


What Who When


Activities: What Who WhenResearch/Prototype SWK 1/20

Draw parts/Mech Draw SWK 1/24

Order Parts SWK 1/29

Build One Impeder SWK 2/7

Test First Impeder SWK 2/21


Wooden Mock up




Goal:


What Who When


Metrics or Measures:One-touch impeder install

Common Mistakes on the A3

• Too broad or too focused of a problem definition• Defining a solution as the target condition• Turning the A3 into a task list

What are the benefits of an A3?

Your TurnA full strut cart had the front casters lock up. The cart swung sideway and pinched the operator’s hand between the cart and a coil stack. An injury report was filed but there was no loss of production time.

What would you do?

Go see, examine the cart, the coil, the area, talk to the operators, gather the facts.The cart has old, chipped casters, the floor in the area is wet, slippery, & dirty, the operator states he was pushing the cart (approximately 40” square, 30” high, 300 lbs.) when the back end swung to the side into the coil stack because the casters locked up or hit something.

What problem are you trying to solve?The operator’s hand got caught between the cart and the coil.

You have the problem identified, what is your goal?Minimize the potential for another injury

What would you do next?

Document the current conditionCarts get pushed through a constricted area, the floor is dirty & wet, the casters are old but serviceable, the operator grabs the sides of the cart to move it, the cart is heavy and hard to manage or steer.

Define your target condition

Remove potential for injury, use existing cart & casters, maintain current floor layout

What is your countermeasure?

Build a handle to fit the carts, the handle will keep the operator’s hands out of potential injury zones.

“The formulation of a problem is often more essential than its solution.”

- Albert Einstein

-and why more of us should- yokoten · weld tables-horizontal stops submission date 3/8/2013 owner:...

Documents