case study 1: large western pine mill

Case Study 1:Large Western Pine Mill

75 MMBF annual production (log scale)Clears, Shop, Boards, DimensionUSFS timber valuation study

• Lumber size statistics• Headrig results

Case Study 1: Large Western Pine Sawmill

.025 in.Within-Board Variation (sw)

.036 in.Between-Board Variation (sb)

.044 in.Total Variation (st)

1.532 in.Average Measured Size (X)

Between-boardvariation is stable

Case Study 1: Large Western Pine Sawmill

Drift in process average

Between-boardvariation is stable

.023 in..025 in.Within-board variation

.011 in..036 in.Between-board variation

.026 in..044 in.Total variation

1.501 in.1.532 in.Average measured size

After corrective

action

Before corrective

action

Case Study 1: Large Western Pine SawmillStatistics Before & After Corrective Action

Case Study 1: Large Western Pine SawmillStatistics Before & After Corrective Action

Target Set ReductionTarget Set Reduction

Headrig—gradual lumber thickness increase throughout the 1st shift

During 1st shift—cold hydraulic oil expanded as it warmed up, causing drift in linear position setworks

Corrected within one week for less than $10K

Cut total variation over 40%

Recalculating target size—increased the mill’s overall recovery by 0.4%

Cast Study 1: Western Pine SawmillCast Study 1: Western Pine Sawmill

0.4% annual log savings =

75 MMBF x 0.4% = ____ MMBF savings

Translate this into real dollars

300 MBF x $____/MBF log cost

What’s the payback period

$10K / $150K x 250 days = ____ days

Cast Study 1: So What’s the Payback?What is a reasonable payback period?Cast Study 1: So What’s the Payback?What is a reasonable payback period?

Case Study 2:Medium-Size Softwood Dimension Mill


Day-to-Day Gang Edger Total Variation (st)

Week 1 Week 3Week 2



Sawfiling problem with gang edger

Reduced sawing variation & target sizes

Improved lumber recovery

Able to purchase logs

Mill was going to close

Saved 80 jobs!!!



Remember W. Edwards Deming?Remember W. Edwards Deming?

Improve process performance

Sawing machine centers– Identify & locate problems– Improve sawing accuracy

Increase lumber recovery

Case Study 3:Medium-Size Hardwood Sawmill


Circular saw headrig

Gang resaw(fixed saws)

Operator target size 1.125 in. 1.125 in.

Calculated target size 1.135 in. 1.080 in.

Ave. measured size 1.179 in. 1.130 in.

Total sawing var. 0.044 in. 0.010 in.

Between-piece var. 0.037 in. 0.004 in.

Within-piece var. 0.023 in. 0.009 in.

Size control study

Calculated Target Size(1.135 in.)

Critical Minimum Size(1.063 in.)

Average Measured Size(1.179 in.)

Headrig 4/4 Oak HistogramHeadrig 4/4 Oak Histogram

1.05 in. 1 o 1.06 1 o 1.07 1 o1.08 5 ooo1.09 1 o1.10 5 ooo1.11 9 ooooo1.12 24 oooooooooooo1.13 28 oooooooooooooo1.14 26 ooooooooooooo1.15 35 oooooooooooooooooo1.16 56 oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo1.17 56 oooooooooooooooooooooooooooo1.18 47 oooooooooooooooooooooooo1.19 45 ooooooooooooooooooooooo1.20 33 ooooooooooooooooo1.21 26 ooooooooooooo1.22 29 ooooooooooooooo1.23 10 ooooo1.24 12 oooooo1.25 7 oooo1.26 4 oo1.27 3 oo1.28 2 o1.29 2 o1.30 1 o 1.31 01.32 1 o1.33 1 o 1.34 4 oo1.35 3 o1.36 0 1.37 0 1.38 1 o 1.39 1 o

0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4----+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------

-----------A--------A----

---A------A-----A-------A-----------A-------A-----A--

---A------------A------------A---A-

---------A---------A------A--

--A------A--

---A------A---A-

-A-----A------

---A-------A---

--A-----A------A---

----+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

Headrig 4/4 Oak Variation Range GraphHeadrig 4/4 Oak Variation Range Graph

___ Average Measured Size

___ Calculated Target Size

___ Critical Minimum Size (CMS)

--- Piece Range

A Piece Average

0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----

--A---A---A-

---A----A--A---A---A----A--

-A---A---A--A--A----A-

---A-----A-----A -A--A-A--A--A--A -A-

--A---A -A---A--A-A-

--A-A-

---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+---------+----0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4

Gang Edger 4/4 Oak Variation Range GraphGang Edger 4/4 Oak Variation Range Graph

___ Average Measured Size

___ Calculated Target Size

___ Critical Minimum Size (CMS)

--- Piece Range

A Piece Average

1.2891.279 | | |

Upper 1.269 oControl = 1.2591 in. 1.259 ------------------------------Limit 1.249

1.239 o | | |1.229 1.219 o 1.209 o o1.199 | o o |

Average 1.189 oo o o oMeasured = 1.1785 in. 1.179 -o----------------o-o-----ooo-Size 1.169 o o o

1.159 oo o o | |1.149 o o1.139 o o o1.129 1.119 | | |

Lower 1.109 Control = 1.0979 in. 1.099 ------------------------------Limit 1.089

1.079 1.069

Headrig 4/4 Oak - Average Control ChartHeadrig 4/4 Oak - Average Control Chart

Pretty GoodStatistical Control

Pretty GoodStatistical Control

One Point Out of ControlOne Point Out of Control

0.200 0.190 | | |0.180 0.1700.160

Upper 0.150 | | |Control = 0.1401 in. 0.140 -------------------------------Limit 0.130

0.120 0.110 | | |0.100 o0.090 0.080 o o o0.070 o oo | | o o|

Average 0.060 o o oBetween 0.050 o oPiece = 0.0429 in. 0.040 --o---o------------o-----------Range 0.030 o | | oo |

0.020 o o oLower 0.010 o o oControl = 0.0000 in. 0.000 -o----------o---o------------o-Limit

Headrig 4/4 Oak - Between Piece Control ChartHeadrig 4/4 Oak - Between Piece Control Chart

Good Statistical ControlGood Statistical Control

Headrig 4/4 Oak Specification Chart1.2981.2901.2821.2741.266 | | | | | |1.258

Upper Tolerance 1.250 ---------------------------------------------------------------1.242 o o o o o o 1.234 o | | oo |o o o | o |1.226 oo o o oo oo o o o 1.218 o o o o o o o o oo o o oo 1.210 o o o o o o o o o 1.202 o oo o o| o oo| o o | o o o o o |ooo o |1.194 ooo o o oo oo o ooo o oo ooo ooo 1.186 o o o o ooo o o o oo o oo oo oo oo 1.178 ooo oo o o oo o oo o oo oo o oooo ooooo 1.170 oooo oo| oo o oo| o o oo| ooo oo o oooo o oo o o1.162 ooo oooo o ooo o o ooooo o o oo o o o 1.154 o o o o oo o o o ooooooo o ooo o ooo1.151 o o o o o o o ooooooo o o oo oo 1.143 o o o o | o o oo | | o ooo | o o | ooo1.135 o o o o o o o o o o o

Nominal Size 1.127 -------o-o-o--oo---o------o--o----o------o------oo----o---oo--1.119 o o o o oo o oo1.111 | o o | o | o | o o1.103 o o o o o 1.095 o1.087 o o 1.079 | o | o | | o | |1.071 o

Lower Tolerance 1.063 --------------------------------------------------------------1.0551.047 | | | | | |

Out of SpecificationOut of Specification

Gang Edger 4/4 Oak Specification ChartGang Edger 4/4 Oak Specification Chart

1.266 | | | 1.258

Upper Tolerance 1.250 ---------------------------------------1.242 1.234 | | | 1.226 1.218 1.210 1.202 | | | 1.194 1.186 1.178 1.170 | | | 1.162 o 1.154 o o o o 1.151 ooo oo o o o o 1.143 o oo o oo ooooo oo ooo ooo oo oo 1.135 ooo oo oo oooooooooooooo oooooooooo

Nominal Size 1.127 -oooooo-oooooooooooooooooooo-oo-ooooo--1.119 oooo ooooo oooooooooo oo o o oo1.111 o ooo o ooooo o| o 1.103 o oo o 1.095 o oo o 1.087 o 1.079 | | | 1.071

Lower Tolerance 1.063 ---------------------------------------1.055 1.047 | | |

In SpecificationIn Specification

Headrig– Good statistical control—however…– Does not accurately saw lumber– Setworks need to be replaced & tracks straightened– Adjust target size after repairs (improve recovery)

Gang edger– In good repair– Accurately saws lumber



Mill replaced headrig carriage & tracks– Able to secure financing for upgrading the mill– Improved lumber recovery– Accurately sawn lumber– Fewer customer complaints about thick & thin

lumber



Case Study ConclusionsWhat is the common ground for success?

Case Study ConclusionsWhat is the common ground for success?

Results-driven—no elaborate company-wide activity-focused quality program was necessary for achieving measurable bottomline resultsIn each case study– A problem was identified and a solution formulated– Appropriate corrective action was taken– Measurable results—the problem was solved!– Bottomline business performance improved

Positive results were captured quickly

Results Driven Approach to Improving Quality

& Productivity

Results Driven Approach Results Driven Approach to Improving Qualityto Improving Quality

& Productivity& Productivity

Too often quality programs center on activities rather than resultsQuality programs are easily derailed when the focus is activity-centeredEnds become confused with means—processes confused with outcomesKey to successful improvement is to focus on producing measurable results

—Harvard Business Review

OverviewOverview

Activity-Centered ProgramsActivity-Centered Programs

Many companies spend vast resources on a variety of activities with little improvement in quality, productivity, or business performance. Payoffs are meager at best. Eventually companies abandon potentially useful QC techniques because the focus is on activities, not producing bottomline results.


Results-driven efforts bypass lengthy preparations and aim at quick, measurable gains. Investment is less. Improvement goals are short term. Top management takes action because they lead directly toward improved results—not promises of someday hopeful gain.

Results-Driven EffortsResults-Driven Efforts


Key Benefits of a Results-Driven Approach to Improvement

Key Benefits of a ResultsKey Benefits of a Results--Driven Driven Approach to ImprovementApproach to Improvement

Quality improvement tools are introduced only when needed

Trial & error reveals what works

Frequent reinforcement energizes the improvement process

Management builds on previous successes

Start With One Project &Do Something!

Start With One Project &Start With One Project &Do Something!Do Something!

1. Get top management commitment to solve one quality problem

2. Form an improvement team to solve the problem—who?

3. Use problem-solving methodology4. Solve the problem—Do Something!5. Report results & acknowledge the team6. Disband the team7. Build on success—next problem

INSANITY—doing the same things the same way and expecting to see a difference.

—Roger Miliken

Final ThoughtsAn Important Definition

Final ThoughtsAn Important Definition

Final ThoughtsSawmilling is a Complex Business

Final ThoughtsSawmilling is a Complex Business

Sawmilling is all about doing the right thing most of the time—success is ALL in the details.

Of all the primary wood breakdown industries, sawmilling offers the greatest number of ways to convert logs into useable products

In other words—sawmilling offers the greatest number of way to screw up

It takes commitment, time, money, and lots of energy to convert the promise of potential into power of performance.

It is not a question of can you afford to improve quality, but can you afford not too!

Final ThoughtsQuality or Else

Final ThoughtsQuality or Elseor Else

Final ThoughtsDO SOMETHING!

Final ThoughtsDO SOMETHING!

Just remember there are three kinds of people...people who make things happen...people who watch things happen...people who wonder what happened

case study 1: large western pine mill

Documents