Coolant
Post by Mike Gugger
In 1999 a study showed the total cost of handling, use and disposal of metal working fluids (coolant) was an eleven times multiplier of the purchase price. Think of it this way – if you purchase $10,000 a year of fluids for your shop, the total cost to use and dispose of that fluid is $110,000!
Given this, do you think you should take a closer look at the use and maintenance of your fluids? I have a couple of suggestions…
First off, don’t allow the coolant sales person to come in and offer, for free usually, to clean out a sump, fill it with his fluid and allow you to compare it to what you are using now. If you cleaned out any sump and filled it with a fresh charge of what you are using now, I am willing to bet the cleaned sump would perform better. So this is not really proving anything.
Secondly, there are ways to determine which fluid is better for use in your shop. Note that this does not mean that there is one fluid that will work for operation in your shop or that one fluid will work in every shop, you need to determine what is best for you. One of the key issues is the quality of the water that you use. Consider this – if you have a 7% solution of fluid in your sumps that means that 93% of what’s in there is water. Hard water in particular can harm your fluid and diminish its effective life escalating that 11x multiplier.
And lastly, does your fluid smell? Maintenance is the key to good fluid life. Do you skim the tramp oil off the top of the fluid in every sump? Do you maintain the recommended concentration for the type of machining you are doing? Do you check the pH of the sump on a regular basis? If you are not doing these things habitually, it is an indication of poor maintenance.
Check out the “Pollution Prevention Guide to Metal Working Fluids.” This is a cradle to grave guide on how to select, use, maintain and dispose of the fluids in your shop. If you are not doing these things, it is costing you money.
MG
Lean Off the Shop Floor
post by Matin Karbassioon
Last Thursday, I facilitated a session on applying Lean principles and practices to administrative processes. The session quickly “sold out” which was exciting as typically the term Lean is married to manufacturing, but given that so much waste lives in administrative or office processes, regardless of the type of business, I was happy to see manufacturers and non manufacturers attending the session.
Our discussion focused on three main areas -
Lean definition and principles – we discussed how neither the definition nor the five Lean Principles mentioned the office or the factory. Lean focuses on the elimination of waste regardless of where the waste resides.
The 8 wastes as they apply to the office – we reviewed the 8 wastes known as DOWNTIME: defects, overproduction, waiting, non-utilized people, transportation, inventory, motion and excess processing. Following the examples, participants shared similar examples from their own organizations and
Value Stream Mapping – VSM is the tool to help Lean practitioners identify wastes within their organizations and ensure that their process improvement initiatives have real impact on the overall performance of their enterprise.
I presented case studies from companies that have applied Lean tools and techniques in the administrative process showcasing examples of standard work, workplace organization and standardization and Kanban.
Before the end of the session, we dove into the importance of quantifying the problem as well as establishing SMART goals, because we all know, we can’t manage what we don’t measure. The attendees shared some great opportunities for Lean implementation in the administrative/office processes – where and how have you used Lean tools to eliminate waste within your organization? Please share.
MK
Continuing on Kanban…
Post by Bill Kirchherr
Last week I lead a webinar on Pull Kanban and while we were able to cover a lot of ground in 30 minutes, the subject is nothing if not complex, so I wanted to take this opportunity to follow-up.
One of the questions posed was in regards to whether a pull Kanban system was an inventory control system… My answer is no because more importantly, it is a scheduling system, allowing immediate acknowledgement to demand requiring a quick response. The key is to produce only quality parts, produced only when needed, and to the exact quantity withdrawn by the production process. When done properly, it is a level loaded synchronized flow, balanced to the customer demand. This produces simplified scheduling, shorter lead times, reduced work in process and an optimized usage of space.
However, the pull system must be easy to understand and convenient to use. As discussed during the webinar, the positioning of the supermarket is critical. When we can’t flow, we strategically position supermarkets to buffer the inconsistencies in the process or demand. This could be due to a variety of issues such as long lead times, machine reliability, quality issues or constraints.
Due to the short time of the webinar, I was not able to address the critical aspect of monitoring the system once it is implemented. A successful system should have requirements being met with low levels of inventory, replenishing with small lot sizes with the ability to react quickly. If you are on the verge of not meeting customer demand or unable to maintain supermarkets, either there is a change in demand or performance, or the original data was incorrect. It is important to get to the root cause. It may be as simple as the customer not processing the kanban at the desired rate.
In addition to the obvious benefits of reduced lead time and reduction in work in process, is an increase in employee involvement. The employee is an integral part of the Kanban system. Employee ownership in decision making, scheduling and workplace organization should optimize flow and improve communication. Inventory management also becomes an easier task; instead of managing pieces or counting pieces, you just have to manage the number of signals.
The end result of any improvement activity should be that the desired outcome has been achieved. A pull system tells us what to produce, when to produce it and how much to produce based on actual customer need or consumption.
Please share your success stories on implementing and maintaining a pull/kanban system – I am always looking for examples of successful systems. CONNSTEP uses Kanban Made Simple in our training programs – we recommend this book.
Every Second Counts
Post by Mike Gugger
I have the pleasure of working with companies across the state and across industries… It is the fun part of my job, working with many skilled and knowledgeable people, helping out and learning new ideas and solutions every day.
A company I was recently engaged with had to learn the lesson I call “every second counts.” Here’s the situation:
The company made a strategic decision to take a job knowing full well that they would not make much if any money with the price they used to secure the bid. They won the bid, but are now struggling both with cost of production, but more importantly, with making delivery per customer demand.
Why are they struggling? Not because the job is a loss leader, but because there is just too much non-value added time in the process to make it a success for the company. Every second counts. When you are already operating on the slimmest of margins, don’t make it worse with waste in your processes.
As an example, the programmer has put in a standard retract plane into the CAM software – every tool comes to the same point above the part. This is done for safety purposes and is commendable. However, there are some tools that retract as much as 3 inches from the cut zone! They then reposition and then go back down to the feed plain. It’s not a big deal if it happens once or twice but this is with every feature, over sixty of them!
Example number two… there are a number of tightly held bores on the part. Rather than evaluating the machining results of the finish bore and tracking them with SPC, the operator sees fit to check every third bored hole, regardless of the history of the feature. Again, his diligence is insuring quality features – but at what cost? If he were to track the measurements he is already taking, he could use that information to determine when to adjust. The operator could go well beyond stopping the machine after three holes and still be certain that no scrap is being produced.
Example number three… the bore tool (or any other tool for that matter) needs a new insert; the machine is stopped while the operator walks to the tool room to use the pre-setter. There is a tool probe system on the machine! How much time would that save through the entire project if it were simply programmed into use? Again the operator is diligently changing out the tool and insuring that it is set properly but again at what cost?
Every second counts. Take the time to evaluate the non-value added as well as the value added activities in a process. Don’t think that because the process is inside a CNC there is no waste. Use the technology and the process controls to remove the waste from inside the machine.
I do this with my clients all the time using a process I call “machining kaizen.” Akin to a standard Lean kaizen used to eliminate waste from a value stream, the “machining kaizen” is focused on removing waste from the processes inside the machine.
In God We Trust. All Others Must Bring Data.
Post by Mike Gugger
There is an issue with a process – you can’t hold tolerance or the surface finish is less than desirable. Someone – usually the machine operator – decides that he/she will change the speed to correct the problem, but the results have either no effect, a negative effect or a small, but inconsistent, positive effect. So then he/she tries a feed change, a new tool or maybe a coolant change. Still only producing a marginal effect, and not necessarily positive.
Next, the machine operator calls in the “go to” guy. You know who I am talking about – that person that has been at your company for years, seen it all, tries this, changes that and adjusts something else. But still no significant impact! Meanwhile, all this time, part after part has been made that either does not meet spec, needing secondary processing of some kind, or is outright scrap. All the adjustments and changes made haven’t been documented and things are so far off from the initial situation that no one really knows what is going on any more.
In God We Trust. All Others Must Bring Data.
From operators to set-up to supervision to manufacturing engineering – everyone’s decisions have to be based on data and facts. To work “seat of the pants”, or to try “what has worked before” without the data and facts to back it up is simply shooting in the dark. You might hit something, but it won’t be a full solution and you won’t know why it worked.
Recall your high school science class discussion on the scientific method. Can you remember? The scientific method states that you should hypothesize, gather data, test and evaluate. Now take a large leap forward to the work of Dr. W. Edwards Deming. Deming’s improvement cycle – PDCA: Plan, Do, Check, Act. Sound familiar? The scientific method and the PDCA cycle are, essentially, the same thing.
Use your deductive tools to evaluate what is going on. First step is to ask why… why is that surface finish so poor? Why is that feature bouncing in and out of tolerance? Why is…
Then form a hypothesis, “I think the speed feed, tool geometry combination can’t give me the surface finish required.” Calculate the theoretical surface finish (ask me if you’re not quite sure how to calculate) and then determine if it is even possible to get to the required finish. Then, and only then, after a strong evaluation of the data and the facts, should you attempt to verify your hypothesis.
Verifying your hypothesis is the D or “do” stage in Deming’s PDCA cycle. Make the change you have information on, and do so in a manner that you believe will provide the most effective results; not just some helter-skelter decision, but one based on knowledge and understanding. If it works great! If it moves the needle in the right direction, good! But what else? If it doesn’t work, or makes things worse, change things back to the original state and develop another course of action.
Sadly, I see it all the time… a scatter shot approach to machining issues. Don’t do it! First evaluate the data and facts then work through the process. “Oh we don’t have time for that!” Really?! But you have time to try six or seven different things in a hap hazard manner?!
Do it right the first time. Scrap and time will be saved and this new problem solving method will become the standard approach.
Measuring 5S Success
Post by Tom S
outhworth
reposted courtesy of his blog
I was asked recently on a webcast about 5s (6s) & Visual Management about how one measures success. The webcast was only 30 minutes long, which left very little time for a more thorough answer to the question, so here’s a follow up.
The short answer on how to measure success using 5s and / or Visual Management is the same for any other Lean or CI tool: did your action have the desired effect? You would apply the “C” in the PDCA cycle: “check” to see if your countermeasure – 5s or visual controls or both – has corrected the problem. If so, it was successful. If not, apply the “A” in PDCA and “act” on the current problem again and “adjust” your countermeasures.
Here’s an example. We spoke about the fact that 5s is not a housekeeping exercise but rather a tool to identify waste so that it can be eliminated. We showed a photograph of a press with spots of oil on an absorbent pad, something you’d see in almost any print shop. We also mentioned the word genjitsu, which roughly translates to “the actual situation.” Remember the 3G’s – genba, genbutsu, genjistu: go and see, get the facts, grasp the situation.
Go and see for yourself what’s happening. If you’re using the 5s tool properly then that absorbent pillow is sticking out like a sore thumb. Good, because it’s supposed to be painfully obvious that something isn’t right.
Get the facts. Why is it leaking? Where is it leaking? What is causing the leak? How much is leaking? When does the leak occur?
Grasp the situation. This doesn’t mean clean up the leak! This means grasp what is going on and what it means in terms of safety, quality and equipment reliability. Is a motor overheating? Do you have trouble with registration? Is the press running at a slower speed and, therefore, lower productivity?
Then, FIX THE LEAK! Stop it from occurring. Don’t just clean it up and make it look nice. Remember what we said, clean doesn’t equal functional. “Aisle” clean or “aisle” Lean doesn’t mean everything is in proper running condition.
Once corrected, how do you measure success? Not simply if the leak has stopped, but has the speed improved? Has the registration improved? Has the temperature of the motor dropped?
You measure success with 5s, visual management, or with any other Lean tool if it has the desired effect and corrects the problem that you’re trying to correct.
Beyond a “Seat of the Pants” Response
Post by Mike Gugger
Machining is a complex interaction within a system. The key to success is to know the variables that you have at your disposal and manipulate them in such a way as to take the greatest advantage. Simple right?
I am certain that as you read that statement you cringe at not only the number of variables in play but that they interact within the system. Machining systems are not simple things. Taking greatest advantage of them is well beyond a “seat of the pants” response. You need a clear and consistent methodology to insure that you are taking as great an advantage as possible under the constraints put before you.
Some processes allow you to modify or adjust the chemistry of the material for better machinability, while other projects require a certain material, designated in the specifications, so you cannot deviate.
Certainly you can choose the machines within your organization for optimum machining capabilities, right? But what if the optimum machine is overloaded, but you can still meet delivery if you wait for it to be available? Tooling choices are certainly within your realm. The question is are you willing to risk production to test out a new tool with very high potential or are you going to go with what is tried and true? Fixturing, coolant, process parameters, tool geometry, coatings and on and on – the variables are significant.
The key to success is to have systems in place that take these issues into account. Do you have an “off production” method to evaluate cutting tools and coatings? No I don’t mean putting the tool salesman’s recommendation into the current process and seeing if tool life improves. That gives you only half the story. Shouldn’t you also be testing productivity improvements as well? Is it not possible to improve the speed, feed depth of cut choices to increase material removal rate? Are you going to risk that in production? Are you going to do the tool salesman’s research for him?
Bottom line – you have to find a way to improve your processes to remain competitive. You need to understand that you are operating a machining system. You need to understand what the variables are in that system, which ones are available to you to change, how you might change them, how you might evaluate that change, what unintended consequences there might be and how you are going to implement any changes. You can’t “seat of the pants” that!
