Case Study 3:

Aylesbury Pressings
Case Studies,
Bsc Hons Quality Management and
Technology
Authors :Roddy McGuinn (s00093607) and Martin Toher(s00093928 )
12/10/2009
Using the Lean Principles as a framework, what improvements do you
consider that the management team at Aylesbury should be giving priority to,
and why?

Introduction
Aylesbury Pressings is a manufacturing company that produces
automotive metal components that supplies the automobile industry. The
business displays characteristics of a high volume high variety operation
as its’ products are considered runners or repeaters with batch ranges of
between 150-500 parts and a variety of 80 main products many of which
have several versions. This complex environment posses some difficult
challenges for the Aylesbury Pressings operation. Many of the difficulties
faced by Aylesbury Pressings can be alleviated by using some techniques
associated with lean manufacturing.

Suggested improvements
Quality:
The Lean philosophy identifies seven different forms of waste (muda),
these are over production, waiting time, transport, process, inventory,
motion and defectives. One obvious source of waste in the operation is in
the production of defectives in the pressing stage of operations. Many of
the dies used are old and difficult to adjust which results in defective
materials being produced. These dies should be replaced or upgraded
(subject to cost benefit analysis) as a matter of urgency and should be the
first priority of the management team. This is so because if the output of
this early stage of production is of a high quality and the process itself
controlled, it will make all subsequent stages of production much easier to
improve as the supply of materials to these stages will be more
predictable and of higher quality. Quality, right first time does not seem to
be a major priority for Aylesbury pressings as only 4 of the 280 staff are
actually employed doing quality work.
There has been a reduction in the defect rate from 40,000 parts per
million to 1600 parts per million; however this is after a 5% - 13% of
product has been reworked – this is Quality Control not Quality Assurance.
All rework is non value add and therefore a waste in lean terms. Apart
from the waste in resources it also adds uncertainty to scheduling and
encourages/condones keeping large volumes of WIP to compensate.
Rework reduction would be an ideal project for the new Black belt.

Involvement of all staff:

The level of suggestions for improvements coming from staff is very low
and few if any visual indictors of quality are being used. This is a strong
indicator that all staff are not being encouraged to participate in process
improvement. One more subtle area of concern is with the use of poka
yoke (Error proofing) systems. These were implemented by an outside
consultant but one of the key ideas behind pokayoke is that the
operations staff themselves are involved in coming up with error proofing
ideas rather than having ideas imposed without the involvement of all
staff. This lack of staff involvement is also reflected the manner in which
the Standard operating procedures (SOPs) were completed. The SOPs
used within the operation were completed by the Kaizen promotion office
but little consideration was given to the expertise of operations staff in
this process. A recent audit showed that the SOPs were in many cases not
being followed. This may be expected if the SOPs are impractical and did
not consider the capability of operators or machinery. It is therefore very
important that all staff be involved in the improvement process this is one
of the key themes in the lean manufacturing philosophy. This can be
viewed as adopting basic working practices which will operationalise the
involvement of all staff.

Reduction of set up and Change over times

A lot of time is wasted in Aylesbury pressings in setting up a run or
completing change over activities. Excess time spent completing these
tasks adds to the overall cost of the product and does not add value.
Some of the activities and times associated with these are as follows:
• Blanking process Change over time 15 minutes.
• Pressing process sampling time of 10 minutes and a 1% scrap rate
associated with each change over cycle.
• The case study also states that some Pressing changeovers take
between 30 and 60 minutes. Benchmarking has demonstrated that
this time is excessive with little value being added.
• Painting process takes around 90 minutes to complete. In that time
only 3 minutes is actually spent painting, the remainder of the time
is spent setting up for a run or removing painted parts once a run is
complete.
As the operation currently stands much of the work completed for set up
and change over activities are probably being completed while the
production machinery is idle. This is referred to as internal work in the
SMED approach. Time spent in this manner leaves less value added time
for production and is a form of waste called waiting time. These
inefficiencies can be addressed by using a single minute exchange of die
(SMED) approach. Where possible tasks for set up and change over should
be completed while the production machinery is still running, this is called
external work. Tasks which could be completed in this manner include pre
set tools instead of having to set tools when the process is stopped, the
use of standard fixtures and devices to speed changeover times. This can
also be aided by having the materials within easy reach when required
which is linked to layout.
In the paint process there is too much time spent handling parts to load
them onto racks; this is another waste. The parts should be stacked on
the racks in assembly prior to painting in order to remove this step. Some
minor holding features may need to be added but this could probably be
done with little expense.

Total Productive Maintenance

Some of the machinery in the pressing stage of the operation is running at
80% of their rated efficiency. Maintenance staff have currently a
downtime target of less than 5%. The introduction of total productive
maintenance will involve every staff member in finding ways to improve
the process. Many routine maintenance tasks can be completed by the
operators themselves with the more complex tasks being completed by
specialist engineers. These more specialised staff will then have more
time to dedicate to the overall improvement of the maintenance process.

Inventory Reduction
There are considerable levels of inventory being held within the operation,
after pressing, production materials are moved to a warehouse and
stored, buffer inventories are held before Assembly stage and each cell
within the assembly process has its own inventory. Inventory is kept at
every intermediate stage and the dispatch process holds additional
inventory ranging from 2 hours to 2 weeks.
The current set up is a push system where product is produced and
pushed to the next operation irrespective of requirement. Kanbans should
be introduced so that the supplier department only supplies when there is
a requirement i.e. a pull system.
The lean philosophy regards the holding of inventory as a form of waste.
This is true because inventory ties up capital, there is a cost to insure,
maintain and store inventory and there is the risk of inventory becoming
damaged or becoming obsolete. Inventory may be considered as a
blanket of obscurity that masks problems that exist within the operation
as a whole. Many of the problems with Aylesbury pressings are being
compensated for by holding excess inventory at every stage which will
ultimately fail in the long term. These problems include poor die quality,
excessively long change over times of between 30 and 60 minutes,
Standard operating procedures not being followed (Perhaps because they
were poorly written), insufficient flexibility and poor plant layout. The
inventory levels within the operation should be gradually reduced
overtime, this will have the effect of exposing the problems that exist and
a concerted effort can be undertaken to permanently resolve these issues.
Effectively the ‘fridge’ should be closed and replaced with Kanbans. This
may initially slow production but this will be more than compensated for in
the long run by having a much more efficient operation.

Levelled Scheduling, Mixed Modelling and Synchronisation

These ideas are best applied to operations whose products may be
described as runners and/or repeaters, these are products which are
produced daily or at very frequent intervals. As such the Aylesbury
pressings operation is ideally suited to levelled scheduling,
synchronisation and mixed modelling methodologies. The idea behind
levelled scheduling is to spread the production of a batch over a wider
period of time. For example if a batch size of 300 units was required for
part A , then a batch size of 100 could be run on day 1, a second batch
size of 100 on day 2 and a third batch size of 100 run on day 3. With
smaller batch sizes inventory can be reduced and the throughput time for
each smaller batch will also be reduced. This can have the added benefit
of making the production schedule much more stable as more of the same
products are produced each day and the in turn makes the process less
variable. With reduced variability the process is itself simplified, this
simplification combined with repetition and experience results in staff
which are much more competent at daily tasks which in turn improves
quality and reduces waste and costs.

Value Stream Mapping

At the most fundamental level any process in an organisation can be
regarded as either adding value or adding cost. End to end system
mapping (Value steam mapping) would allow Aylesbury pressings to
quantify how much time of a products throughput time is actually spent
adding value and how much is adding cost. The throughput time for some
products is likely to be very high with very little time spent adding value
as some materials are held between 1 day and 4 months between the
pressing and assembly operations. This is one of the 7 forms of waste
which is waiting time. Value stream mapping takes a holistic look at the
entire operation, firstly a process is selected for analysis, then the path of
material through the entire operation is physically mapped the flow of
information that allows that drives the process is also recorded. This stage
is called the current stage map and describes the operation in its present
state. Using this map a more detailed diagnosis of the problems within the
operation will occur and new opportunities for process optimisation can be
identified. A new ideal state map of the process is then completed and
improvements implemented.
A likely outcome of this process would be to change to a value stream
structure where manufacturing lines are set up that are entirely product
based and not department based. Supervisors would be responsible for
the entire VS from blank to shipping. This cell based approach will aid in
the introduction of a true pull system. Additionally the current situation of
the inward looking method of fine tuning production sequence by
supervisors in individual departments would be fundamentally changed.

Operation layout
The operation layout in its present state may not the most efficient. The
press shop and blanking cell are located in separate areas away from
assembly facilities. This was originally designed in this manner as these
there is a lot of noise associated with these activities. This should be
reviewed to see if all processes can be arranged closer together. It is not
clear that noise is an entirely justified reason for the present layout. The
process of assembly itself must generate considerable noise as it involves
drilling and punching steps. Excess noise may be addressed through the
use of personnel protective equipment and insulation materials. As the
different processes are presently arranged there is unnecessary motion in
the manufacturing process which is a form waste and there is the addition
risk of damage to inventory when the unnecessary motion occurs. Another
area which could be improved is within the pressing process, some types
manufacture involves the manual movement between different presses,
the possibility of automating this process should be considered. Simple
automation could be used to feed between the processes with sensors to
activate when the slowest process (the drum) required or had completed
product available.
A key technique in the lean philosophy is simplification, where possible
processes should be simplified and made more efficient. As the operation
is designed at present there is an assembly stage followed by a painting
stage and then a final assembly stage. The possibility of painting first and
then having a single assembly stage should be explored, however the
quality of the product must not be compromised in pursuing this change.
Any damage to painted parts would render this change counterproductive.

Discussion
The Aylesbury pressings operation is facing a difficult situation, not only
has it a high volume high variety operation but many of its customers are
trying to micro manage the internal processes which has resulted a highly
complex environment with many different strategies being pursued. It is
not clear that commitment from top management truly exists. It is clear
that they know they need to improve but have not shown any
commitment to long term improvements. If SOPs are not been followed
then the question has to be asked; why not? If they are not reflective of
the process then they should be amended. All this serves to do is condone
not doing the right things right all the time.
Some efforts at improvement have been made and have been partially
successful, for example there has been a reduction in the defect rate from
40,000 parts per million to 1600 parts per million, reduction in the number
of samples being taken through the use of statistical process control and
the supplier development programme. Another encouraging development
is the use of Kaizen events, these did involve a range of staff and resulted
initially at least in a 32% reduction in inventory levels and a reduction in
lead time.
However other efforts at improvement have been much less successful.
The completion of Standard operating procedures has had limited
success, and Aylesbury does seem to have difficulty in sustaining many of
the quality improvement projects introduced. This is evidenced by the fact
that many of the gains brought about by the Kaizen events have begun to
be lost. Another example is with the 5 S programme. The 5 S programme
is outlined as follows:
1. Sort (Seiri) remove what is not required
2. Straighten (Seiton) Arrange things so that they can be accessed
easily.
3. Shine (Seiso) Keep areas neat and clean
4. Standardise (Seiketsu) Perpetual neatness.
5. And lastly Sustain (Shitsuke) maintaining standards.
Initially this was quite successful but there has been little emphasise
placed on the sustain part of the 5 S programme. The operation has opted
to use “Rounds” of 5 S programmes which means in practice that things
improve for a while but will ultimately relapse in to older less optimal
patterns. The only way this can be corrected is though on ongoing
commitment to improve quality involving everyone in the operation with
clearly communicated goals and objectives which are measured on an
ongoing basis and not just at intermittent intervals. 5S audit scores should
be held in the same regard as a scrap report and seen as a key
performance indicator otherwise it is just flavour of the month. This will
help in sustaining quality improvements; if they are serious about it then
it should be driven. Audits without reports and actions are meaningless
and ultimately just a waste of time.
The operation is currently using an MRP II system to plan the production
requirements of the plant which is excellent at planning but relatively
poor at controlling the operation. MRP type systems are ideally suited to
push type production systems with fixed lead times and a master
production schedule. Just in time production is driven by actual orders
from customers and this a pull type system where materials are pulled
through each stage of production from a stage further along the process
in response to a customer order. It uses simple controls like kanbans
which the operation is using to some extent already. Ideally it would be
best to use the MRP II system to complete planning and use just in time
techniques for internal control.

Conclusion
The key goal for Aylesbury pressings is to reduce cost. This can be best
achieved by moving to a pull type production system with low inventory.
In order to facilitate this change product quality must be improved;
efficiency needs to be improved by reducing set up times and adopting a
Total productive maintenance system. Every staff member must be
included and valued in this process and management must demonstrate
an unwavering commitment towards supporting and sustaining
improvement.