defect reduction in the cover timming manufacturing process by using … · 2014. 4. 22. · chakat...
TRANSCRIPT
. . 2556 16-18 2556
Defect reduction in the Cover timming manufacturing process
by using Kaizen.
1* 2 1,2
E-mail: [email protected]*
Chakat chueadee1* Kittin Ruengluecha2 1,2Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Architecture
Rajamangala University of Technology Isan
E-mail: [email protected]*
. . 2554
3,069 93.20 3,292
2
Abstract
This research aimed to reduce the waste in the Cover timing manufacturing process by using Kaizen
Techniques. The study was started by gathering and checking the Cover timing manufacturing data from August to October 2011. The data showed the several defects cause in the process of production, the
most one was focused on was the specimen buckling because of the amount of 3,069 of 3,292 pieces or 93.20 percent of the whole defects occurred. All specimen buckling have been reworked by striking them
on the base metal, knocking off the scrap metal, and control the metal water runner by manual which wasted much time and added man without any decrease of the defects. Kaizen Techniques was applied
to investigate the cause of the main problem and found that the injection of metal water into the mould is unable to be completely cut when the first process was finished. As for the solution was to use the
. . 2556 16-18 2556
reworking machine which able to completely cut the running of metal water during the process instead of manual. The result of changing into the machine showed that the new machine was not only able to
decrease the defects but also give up the rework stations together with 2 workers.
Keywords: Defect, Running of metal water, Specimen buckling, Cover timming
1.
(Cover Timing) 10,000
. .2554
32,589 3,292 3,069
93.2 164 5.0
164 1.8
(Kaizen)
2.
3.
30
4.
4.1
4.2
5.
5.1 (Kaizen)
(2550 : 27)
(Improvement)
(Continuous Improvement)
4
: (2550 : 27)
5.1.1
1.
(Quantum Jumps in Productivity)
2.
5.1.2
(System approach)
PDCA (Plan-Do-Check-Action)
. . 2556 16-18 2556
1.
2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7.
(PDCA) 1. P-Plan
(Key Metrics)
2. D-Do
3. C-Check
4. A-Act
E C R S
E = Eliminate
C = Combine
R = Rearrange
S = Simplify
5.1.3 (2550 : 42)
5W 1 H
What?
When?
Where?
Who?
How?
Why? 2
5.1.4
6.
6.1
3.1
5
5
6.1.1 (Die cast)
6
Go
No
#
. . 2556 16-18 2556
6
6.1.2 7
7
6.1.3
8
6.1.4
9
6.1.5 (Surface)
10
10
6.1.6
11
11
6.1.7
(Inspections)
5 7
5 12
12
6.1.8 (Packaging)
13
13
. . 2556 16-18 2556
6.2
1
. .2554 ( : )
1
14
14
6.3 7
6.3.1
15 16
15
15
5
16
16 2 5 7 5
5
6.3.2
10 6.3.3
2 Why?
Why ?
Why ?
Why ?
Why ?
2
6.3.4
6.3.5
6.3.6
17
10,857 1,007 48 18 1,073
10,784 903 61 25 989
10,948 1,159 55 16 1,230
32,589 3,069 164 59 3,292
(%) 93.20 5.00 1.80 100
. . 2556 16-18 2556
17
6.3.7
7.
7.1
18
18
1.
-
- -
2 ( A B)
2.
3
. . 2555 ( : )
3
7.2 4
. . -
. .54
. . -
. . 55
(
)
(
)
32,589 31,751
3,292 10.1 100 157 0.49 100
3,069 9.41 93.2 0 0 0
164 0.5 5 92 0.29 58.6
59 0.19 1.8 65 0.2 41.4
4
19
10,876 0 22 19 41
10,234 0 33 22 55
10,641 0 37 24 61
31,751 0 92 65 157
% 0 58.6 41.4 100
Go
No
. . 2556 16-18 2556
8.
8.1
1. 100
2.
3. 2 ( A B)
2 4.
700,000 200,000 /
2 28,000 /
8.2
1.
2.
(Robot) 2
-
[1] . 2550 . . :
.