3-setup analysis and reduction

7/23/2019 3-Setup Analysis and Reduction

1/81

1Prepared by Dr. Sule Itir Satoglu


2/81

D .

B

B C

MED A

C I

M M



3/81

, , , .

,



4/81

(: )



5/81

= + M .

( )

.



6/81

&

(, 2006)

Minimizing

production

costs

Setup Time=0C

L

Maximizingcapacity

utilization

Minimizing

inventory

costs

Maximizing

deliveryperformance

!



7/81

?

:



8/81

?

, ; ,

, , !

.

, !



9/81

D .H !

!

D !I .

I .



10/81

I I A : .I C/.

I M C.H C.

I M F .



11/81

http://www.strategosinc.com/setup_reduction.htm11Prepared by Dr. Sule Itir Satoglu


12/81

1stProcess

2nd

Process3rd

Process

Machines

Process

TimeLead time of the BatchBatch Size =100 parts

Small batch sizes (achieved by low setup times) aremanufactured in less time: lower lead time.

One-piece flow is the most extreme case!



13/81

, .

E ,

.



14/81

, .



15/81

(1) .F , ,

,

, ,I ,

& .

M 30% .



16/81

(2) . ,

,

.

.

M 5% .



17/81

(3) , .

I

.

15% .



18/81

(4) A.I

.

M : 50% .



19/81

(4) A. .

.

, .



20/81

: A, , , .

: , .

.



21/81

: .A

I , .



22/81

F : 0: I

.

2: C I E

3: I A A



23/81

0

I : .F ,

.B, .

J .

, .



24/81

0

.

I .

: .



25/81

1

I & E MED.

D , , , .

D , : .: !



26/81

1

I & E .

D .

.: .

A

A .



27/81


28/81

2:

C D D ,

.

( .:, ) . .



29/81

2:

F DA .

.

: 320 , : 270 .

I 50 B, .

,

.



30/81



31/81

(, 1993) Ex.: Die heightsof a punch press

can bestandardizedusing a liner!

So, ad ustment

unnecessary! Internal setup

time reduced!



32/81

Prepared by Dr. Sule Itir Satoglu 32


33/81

2: ( 2001)

Console: (In Turkish) kadran



34/81

A

Table shows how the original changeover could be modified: separate existing

tasks, convert into external time. 34Prepared by Dr. Sule Itir Satoglu


35/81

A


Mc Intosh et al., 2000.


36/81

3



37/81

(, 1993)



38/81


(Arcan Ergr, TEKLAS Kauuk A.S.)


39/81

3 A I:

1 M: , . ,

.

2 M: .

I , , !



40/81

Quick Die Change.mp4



41/81

(. , 1996)

1. F , .

2. (.., ).

3.C , , , !

4.C .



42/81

(. , 1996)

5. I ( ).

1. (5)

2. .

3. .4. .

5. .

6. () .

7. .



43/81

(. , 1996)

6. I .1. A .

2. .

. .

4. (5) .7. D

().

8. E .9. .



44/81

1. I

2. D I



45/81

, .

E .



46/81

1. .

C , .

. F .: H ,

.



47/81

2. C M

(McIntosh et al., 2001)



48/81

2. C M

A

E .

C .



49/81

3. B I

.

.

B . .



50/81

3. B I :

L



51/81

4.

.

.



52/81

5. D I AC

.

.

A .

, .



53/81

6. I, A

E , .

.

.



54/81

7.

8. C .

9.

10. E .

11. E .



55/81

1. ( )

() , .

. M

.

C .



56/81

2. A

M

B , .

.

H .

:

.



57/81

4. ( )

F

,

.



58/81

5. A

F .

( , , ).



59/81

(, 1993)

External

Setup

Setup

Time

SMED: Single Minute Exchange of Die

OTED: One-Touch Exchange of Die.

Internal

Setup

Operations

ImprovementEquipment

Improvement

Challenge

of Zero

Setup Time



60/81

DEMAD

.

HA, HE & H MCH

. E

M.

, .



61/81

.

? I ?

() ?

H ?



62/81



63/81



64/81

64

Denso, 2006.


65/81

A M

65

Denso, 2006.

A


66/81

A

1. C

/2. E

5. C

6. I

3. E

4. D

7.



67/81



68/81



69/81

A

M.

K K

I , ,

(.., 5 )

A , .



70/81

.

M .

C .

M .



71/81

M

(C ., 2006).



72/81

, ,

(M ., 2009).

.



73/81

,

.

I () ().



74/81

(EE)!

, !

:

E

, .

: D .

L: D , , .



75/81

75

Nakajima, 1988.


76/81

OEE: Overall Equipment Effectiveness.OEE= Availability * Performance Efficiency

ua y a e



77/81

A = G

: (

A = D L:



78/81

M ()

( ).

.

. = /



79/81

E

.

/



80/81

()

= A*. *



81/81


3-setup analysis and reduction

Documents