bid final presentation creastmead v2.6 crews

© 2003 Lauras International. All rights reserved

CRESTMEAD

Breakthrough Improvement

Demonstration


Agenda

• Introduction

• De-Bottlenecking Method

• Summary of what was achieved

• Question and Answer time


DBM

The De-Bottlenecking Method

Rob Tilley


1. Find the throughput bottleneck.2. Ensure the throughput bottleneck is running at its current

optimum speed.3. Optimise the accumulation to protect the throughput

bottleneck.4. Solve and eliminate speed restricting problems on the

throughput bottleneck.5. Solve and eliminate downtime problems on the

throughput bottleneck.6. Repeat steps 1 to 5 until the throughput bottleneck is the

capacity bottleneck and it is running at its absolute maximum speed

7. Improve the availability of the non-bottleneck processes to minimise their impact on the bottleneck.

De-Bottlenecking Method (DBM)


Using DBM in the Factory

• The team was introduced to DBM as the fastest way to determine how to improve performance for each Line/product combination run.

Lets Take a look at what they did!


DBM Step 1

“Determining the throughput bottleneck”

Rob Tilley


Maximum Speed on Winder #2 Re-winder 2 Ply 400 Sheet Product

The bottleneck was found to be the Re-Winder/Log Saw

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

Equipment catagory

Ro

lls P

er m

inu

te r

ate

Capacity 305 264 254 180 384 400

Speed 160 130 130 140 140 400

Throughput 97.6 126.1 114.4 91 124.6 400

Rew inder Tail Sealer Log Saw Wrapper Case packer Palletiser


DBM Step 2

“Ensure the Bottleneck is running at its current optimum speed”

Glen


Transfer Process


What did we achieve?• The Geibler folder was being run at 45,000 napkins

per hour on the two occasions the group observed.

• A speed trial was undertaken on the Geibler where the unit speed was increased under controlled conditions to 59,000 napkins per hour

• At this speed, the operator could not comfortably keep up with the product being supplied

• The speed of the Geibler was reduced to 50,000 where the operator could comfortably handle throughput

A POTENTIAL INCREASE IN THROUGHPUT OF 11%

FROM FREE SPEED!


DBM Step 3

“Optimising the state of the accumulation”

Sal & MAX


How does optimising accumulation work?

• The purpose of accumulation is to protect the throughput bottleneck from downtime on other areas of the line.

• Accumulation should be kept full upstream of the throughput bottleneck and empty downstream of the throughput bottleneck.


How does optimising accumulation work on the Perini Line now?

• The Accumulator was ¾ - Full on most visits out to the Perini Line.

• The Downstream processes were not draining the Accumulator quick enough to protect the throughput bottleneck.

• The Re-winder would stop frequently as the Accumulator reached its capacity.

• The packer and Log saw speed would “bounce” back and fourth as the line control would stop the units.

Max


What did we do?

• Automated Line control is being progressed along the Entire Perini line

• This will allow all equipment to communicate with each other and maintain optimum speeds without the need for operator input.


DBM Step 4 – Winder #2

“Solve and eliminate speed restricting problems on the throughput bottleneck”

Wesley Peirce


What did we find?

• The maximum speed (Capacity) for winder #2 was stated as 610m/min on 1000 sheet product but it was always running below this.

• The operators on the line were running to pre-determined set points and procedures and were still unable to obtain optimum speed.


– The timing mechanism (Gemco) controlling the cut off point of the Log was found to be incorrectly set on each occasion experienced at the Re-winder.

– This was only allowing a throughput rate of 319m/min.

– The Gemco, when set correctly by an experienced operator resulted in a speed increase to 509m/min.

AN INCREASE IN OUTPUT OF 59% FROM THE WINDER

What did we find out


• Set up of the Re-winder required a high degree of training and was not instinctive to the operators.

• Set points on the Gemco unit were not stable at each change over

What we found.


• New procedures have been put in place to ensure the expected run speeds are achieved with support from shift leaders

• Operator training across all shifts will commence to communicate new procedures and expectations.

• Installation of PLC control on the Re-winder to simplify the set up process.

What have we done about it?


DBM Step 5

Solve and eliminate significant downtime problems on the throughput bottleneck.

Martin


Solving a downtime problemWinder #2 “Cookie Monster”

Max (Paul)

During Week 3 of the BID, the team moved onto Winder #2.


What did we find?

• Less than 20% of all cookies were being removed from the process and rolls were turning over.

• This caused jam ups and downtime on the line.

• A full time casual was put in place to manage this problem.


What did we do?• The team took a closer look at the cookie

monster problem using PCS and came up with the following results:

– Took conveyor system back to original specification.

– Moved the belts further into the Log saw

– Attached brushes to the Log saw as per original spec

– Set Guide rails to correct height


What did we achieve?

• 100% of all Cookies which fall into acceptable cookie specification are eliminated from the system.

• All rolls are positioned on their side

• All cookies are dropped onto their bums and eliminated from the path of travel.


How do make sure this keeps happening?

• Jig manufactured to ensure repeatability in setup of cookie monster and associated guide railing.

• Operating procedure outlined and put onto machine


DBM Step 7

Solve and eliminate significant downtime problems on the non bottleneck processes to support the Capacity/Throughput bottleneck.

Peter


The Mud Press


The Mud Press

• It was discovered that a high percentage of waste in this process was water.

• Merino currently pay for Mud to be taken away at a standard cost per bin + a tonnage fee.


What did we find?

• The presses were not running at optimal pressure and as such the optimal amount of water was not being removed from the mud.

• The screen wash was leaking a large volume of water directly into the pressed mud and being dumped.

• The mud bins were exposed to the elements and each time it rained, the rain water was being absorbed by the mud


What did we do?• The group has increased the pressure of the press to

optimise the amount of water being removed from the mud.

• The screen shower has been relocated upstream of the mud press, eliminating all water re entering the pressed mud from the process

• The group is in the process of obtaining quotes for a permanent shelter to cover the bins and protecting them from rain.

• Identified and reintroduced the operational procedure for the cleaning of the mud press showers.

• The group is looking into markets for this mud.


What did we achieve?

• The initial testing done on the mud 100% recycled showed a moisture content of 68%.

• After the completion of all actions on the mud press, the moisture content now stands at 54%.

• This equates to 2.1 tonnes less water per day leaving the site or $22,000 per year.

A 26% reduction in moisture content.


Questions and Discussion.

bid final presentation creastmead v2.6 crews

Documents

capacity bottleneck

unit speed

speed trial

free speed

maximum speed capacity

nonbottleneck processes

absolute maximum speed

dbm step