Coining QCC R1.pptx

of 21
Page 1 of 65
Rane Brake Lining Limited Hyderabad
Unit 1 - CVL
Rail Block
Sintered facility
Unit 2 - CVL
PCL

of 21
Page 2 of 65
Rane Brake Lining Ltd Hyderabad
CASE STUDY PRESENTED BY
Project:
Productivity Improvement in SFM

of 21
Page 3 of 65
3
All plants certified for ISO-9001, ISO/TS16949, ISO-14001 & OHSAS-18001 by TUV-Nord
Plant 2, Hyderabad ; 580 Km from HO.
Established : 1991 ; 173 employees.
Plant 3, Puducherry ; 155 Km from HO.
Plant 4, Trichy ; 321 Km from HO.
Head Office (HO) at
Chennai
Plant 1, Chennai and H O.
Plant locations :
RBL Plant Location…

of 21
Page 4 of 65
DELIVERY
COST
QUALITY
RANE BRAKE LINING LTD
Small improvements make big impact
Quality Control Circle Presentation
Rane Brake Lining Ltd Hyderabad

of 21
Page 5 of 65
Product segments & Customers
CVL PCL Rail Block Sintered Clutch Button
P r o d u c t S e g m e n t s
O E M C u s t o m e r s
T i e r 1 C u s t o m e r s

of 21
Page 6 of 65
Milestones of the Plant
2000
2002
2003
2006
2007
2008
2010
2012
2013
2015
2017
2020
MSIL GREEN Category
2019

of 21
Page 7 of 65
QCC structure
• We Participate with enthusiasm in
QC circles for Self and Mutual
Development.
• We use QC tools to solve the
problems and achieve results.
• We are very much proud to work in
QC circles, Which will enhances
our morale and ability.
Self
Development
Mutual
Development
Organizational
Development
Plant head
Steering committee
members
Plant coordinator
Quality control circle
Teams
Facilitator & members
100% Participation
& any point of time
30 QC circles
are active
Our QCC policy

of 21
Page 8 of 65
Our QCC Team Introduction
He is PLC programmer
and designing electrical
control circuit
specialized in LCA design
Production operator
Specialized in electrical ,
Hydraulic and pneumatic
machine controls
Production operator
Specialized in electrical ,
Hydraulic and pneumatic
machine controls

of 21
Page 9 of 65
Innovation QCC team history & project meeting schedule
Meeting time
Project schedule
Team history
No of meetings conducted:12
2 to 3 PM every
Wednesday
Attendance:96%
Started this project:01 June 2020
End of the project :28 Aug 2020
Team born on :5th DEC 2009
No. of projects completed :18
Team History
ICQCC Gold award won year 2012
RBL Convension 3rd prize won year
2014
QCFI Gold award won year 2012

of 21
Page 10 of 65
Steps For Problem Solving
Step-1 : Identification of problem
Step-2 : Selection of problem
Step-3 : Problem Definition
Step-4 : Analysis of the problem
Step-5 : Identification of causes
Step-6 : Find out the Root Cause
Step-7 :Data Analysis
Step-8 : Developing Solutions
Step-9 : Foreseeing Probable Resistance
Step-10 : Trail Implementation & Check Results
Step-11 : Regular Implementation
Step-12 : Follow up Review

of 21
Page 11 of 65
Problem Identification
Step-1

of 21
Page 12 of 65
Problem Identification…
Following problems were taken from Department Problem Bank identified by
Department Quality Control Circles
Sl No PROBLEM CLASS RELATED Sl No PROBLEM CLASS RELATED
1 701 prefprm m/c Oil leakage from main ram C Q 24 1312 rack problem A Q
2 752 repeated oil leakage from pressure line A C 25 1311 repeated pressure line failure B P
3 1152 repeated temperature problems B Q 26 809 oil leakage from push up cylinder C P
4 1151 repeated breathing failure B C 27 Block deburring m/c in auto mode in M1&M2 A C
5 1152-Auto Ejection after curring in CFM A P 28 302-Auto unloading for preblend mix in Mixing Area A C
6 701 main ram movement slow B P 29 803 repeated ejector cam breakage A P
7 Low out put in compaction process A P 30 1304 push up cylinder leakage A C
8 2205 repeated oil leakage C C 31 2008-spindle malfuncation eliminated in AFM C C
9 Auto loading for j-40 drilling machine in CFM A P 32 1051 main ram oil leakage C C
10 2205 repeated gauge tight problem B Q 33 1306 main ram oil leakage B C
11 2201 Repeated failure of cutter head spindles B Q 34 1803 chamfering machine oil leakge B C
12 2103 Gtinding m/c adjustment screw rod problem B P 35 1501 gang saw belt slipping A S
13 2103 Grinding m/c wheel locking problem A S 36 1903 wear mark spindle vibration B Q
14 752 m/c mould stopper problem A S 37 1704 OD auto loading problem A P
15 752 m/c heater guard not sufficient C S 38 1805 chamfering machine vibration B P
16 652 m/c main ram approach slow A P 39 Eliminate manual holding fevistic bonding in SFM A P
17 2006 msdm spindle struck A C 40 754-output improvement in coining machine A P
18 2205 MSDMoil leakage from powerpack B C 41 1716 ID stoppers breakage problem A P
19 1702-Auto loading for OD grinding in M1 A P 42 Frequent worn out of toggle bushes in BKPM B C
20 953 m/C power pack oil leakage A C 43 816 preform machine oil leakages B C
21 657 main ram seal leakage. B Q 44 1316 M/C float opening problem B Q
22 657 main ram studs breakage A C 45 1807 chamfering m/c vibration problem B Q
23 1451 oven temp problem C Q 46 1906 wear mark cycle problem A P

of 21
Page 13 of 65
Step - 2
Selection of Problem

of 21
Page 14 of 65
Selection of Problem
2. These 46 problems are grouped into three categories
viz., “A”, “B” and “C” analysis.
“A” category : problems can be solved by Self (team)
“B” category : problems require help of others (experts / others)
“C” category : problems require involvement of Management
“A” category : 21 problems
“B” category : 16 problems
“C” category : 09 problems
We have selected class-A type Problem
Sélection of the Problem through Ranking Criteria..
2
7
12
17
22
No. of Problems
A
B
C

of 21
Page 15 of 65
Selection of Problem…
‘A’ Category Problems
Sl.No Problems
1 1152-Auto Ejection after curing in CFM
2 701 main ram movement slow
3 Auto loading for printing in CFM
4 Auto loading for j-40 drilling machine in CFM
5 2103 Grinding m/c adjustment screw rod problem
6 1810-Trimming and Chamfering provided in AFM
7 652 m/c main ram approach slow
8 2006 msdm spindle struck
9 1702-Auto loading for OD grinding in M1
10 1311 repeated pressure line failure
Sl.No Problems
11 806 cycle slow problem
12 805 cycle slow problem
13 302-Auto unloading for Preblend mix in Mixing Area
14 803 repeated ejector cam breakage
15 1505 gang saw heavy noise
16 1502 gang saw heavy noise
17 Low Productivity
18 1805 chamfering machine vibration
19 Eliminate manual holding feviqic bonding in SFM
20 1704 OD auto loading problem
21 1716 ID stoppers breakage problem
21 ‘A’ Category problems

of 21
Page 16 of 65
Sl No PROBLEM Quality Cost Delivery Safety Total
1 1152-Auto Ejection after curring in CFM 2 4 3 7 16
2 701 main ram movement slow 2 2 3 6 13
3 Auto loading for printing in CFM 7 6 6 7 26
4 Auto loading for j-40 drilling machine in CFM 6 7 6 8 27
5 2103 Grinding m/c adjustment screw rod problem 4 6 7 6 23
6 1810-Trimming and Chamfering provided in AFM 6 5 4 7 22
7 652 m/c main ram approach slow 4 5 7 4 20
8 2006 msdm spindle struck 5 7 8 4 24
9 1702-Auto loading for OD grinding in M1 6 3 9 6 24
10 1311 repeated pressure line failure 4 7 4 4 19
11 806 cycle slow problem 3 4 6 5 18
12 805 cycle slow problem 4 4 6 5 19
13 302-Auto unloading for preblend mix in Mixing Area 5 5 6 4 20
14 803 repeated ejector cam breakage 3 6 5 4 18
15 1505 gang saw heavy noise 4 5 3 6 18
16 1502 gang saw heavy noise 5 3 6 5 19
17 Low out put in compaction process 6 8 9 8 31
18 1805 chamfering machine vibration 4 5 6 5 20
19 Eliminate manual holding fevistic bonding in SFM 7 6 8 6 27
20 1704 OD auto loading problem 6 7 6 5 24
21 1716 ID stoppers breakage problem 5 3 4 7 19
Out of 21 ‘A’ Category Problems Members Selected 9 Main Problems Based on PQDCS
Ranking done on the basis of Quality, Cost, Delivery and Safety on 1 to 10 scale

of 21
Page 17 of 65
17
IMPORTANCE
HIGH – 10, LOW - 1
URGENCY
HIGH – 10; LOW - 1
FEASIBILITY
HIGH – 10; LOW - 1
S no Problem Important Urgency Feasibility
Total
Score
1 Auto Loading for printing in CFM 10 9 7 26
2 Low Productivity 8 15 8 31
3
Eliminate Manual Holding fevistic bonding in
SFM
8 10 9 27
4 1704 OD Auto Loading Problem 6 9 9 24
5
2103 grinding M/C Adjustment screw rod
Problem
8 8 7 23
6
1810 trimming and chamfering provided in
AFM
8 6 8 22
7 2006 MSDM spindle stuck 10 8 6 24
8 Auto Loading for J-40 Drilling M/C in CFM 8 10 9 27
9 1702 Auto loading for OD Grinding in M1 8 7 9 24

of 21
Page 18 of 65
18
Quality Circle Name
Innovation
Department Facilitator Leader
SFM
Team Members
Project Productivity Improvement In AK Kit Assembly
Project No. 04
Meeting Day -
Time – 60 Minutes (2:00 PM – 3:00PM)
Date of Beginning :22nd June’20
Date of Completion :06th Oct’20
Sl. No. ACTIVITY WEEK 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 TARGET ACTUAL
1 Define the problem 1 Week
2 Analyse the problem 1 Week
3 Identification of causes 1 Week
4 Finding out the Root Cause 1 Week
5 Data analysis 1 Week
6 Developing solution 2 Weeks
7 Foreseeing probable resistance 1 Week
8 Trial implementation 2 Weeks
9 Regular implementation 1 Week
10 Follow up/ Review 1 Week
Mile stone Chart

of 21
Page 19 of 65
Definition
of
Problem
Step - 3

of 21
Page 20 of 65
Process flow –SFM
1.Mixing 2.Compaction 3.Back Plate
Assembly
4.Stacking
8.Inspection 7.Coining 6.Un-stacking 5.Pressure Sintering

of 21
Page 21 of 65
Problem statement :
Eliminate Manual Operations & setups in SFM
Problem Definition….
Our Team is from SFM ,We are getting Low Productivity. Productivity is
both our Plant and department Target. Hence our team took up this
problem for Solution.
Theme :
75,000 pieces/month
Target : 1,00,000 pieces / month
When : By Feb’2020
Present :

of 21
Page 22 of 65
22
WHAT IS LOW PRODUCTIVITY
Productivity is a measure used to evaluate the overall output of an
organization. It is a ratio which can be used to compare units of work.
Productivity /Standard hour Efficiency =
No of Units Produced
Manpower Used
Define the Problem

of 21
Page 23 of 65
Analysis of
problem
Step - 4

of 21
Page 24 of 65
24
Operation wise manpower deployment
Operation
No of
operation
No. of
machines
Manpower
Operator
utilizatio
n
Remarks
Weighing and Mixing 2 2 1
Compaction Green
compact Mounting
2 3 3
LCA
implemented in
2018-19
Coating& Stacking 2 1 1
Sintering & Unstacking 2 2 1
Coining 1 2 2 65
Visual Inspection& final
inspection
2 - 1
Analysis of problem
 Low utilization in coining operation I,e 65%
Observation
 We are deploying one manpower each at mixing , stacking , compaction
and inspection areas where as 2 manpower at coining operations
 Data collected on operator utilization for all the processes
 We have two coining presses that is 754 ,755

of 21
Page 25 of 65
Process flow –SFM
1.Mixing 2.Compaction 3.Back Plate
Assembly
4.Stacking
8.Inspection 7.Coining 6.Un-stacking 5.Pressure Sintering

of 21
Page 26 of 65
26
THROUGH “4 W & 1 H”
WHERE
IS THE PROBLEM ?
WHAT
IS THE PROBLEM ?
WHO
IS AFFECTED BY THE PROBLEM ?
HOW
TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM?
By analyzing the causes and Developing solution
WHEN
PROBLEM OCCURS ?
Our Organization
While doing the Coining Process
production
Low Productivity SFM

of 21
Page 27 of 65
Identification of causes
Step - 5

of 21
Page 28 of 65
S.No Brain storming Points
1 Piece Ejection time more
2 Main ram approach time is more
3 Material handling difficult
4 Unskilled operator
5 Machine cycle time more
6 Ejection block pushing down by hand
7
Fatigue to operator while doing compaction & Back
plate assembly
8
Back plate assembly operator piece hold on hand up
to 7sec.

of 21
Page 29 of 65
29
Cause and Effect diagram level 1
Man Machine
Method Material
Fatigue to operator
while doing compacting
& Back plate assembly
Material-handling difficult
Piece Ejection time more
Machine cycle time more
Low Output
In Coining
Main ram approach time is more
Unskilled operator Back plate assembly operator
piece hold on hand up to 7sec
Ejection block pushing
down by hand

of 21
Page 30 of 65
Finding out
Root cause
Step - 6

of 21
Page 31 of 65
Man
Possible Cause Validation Result
Significant Cause
Yes  No X
Man
Trail taken with Raju(LEVEL1) &with
Kishore babu(LEVEL4) both are producing
320 pieces per shift.
OK

(InSignificant)
Trail taken with LEVEL1 to LEVEL4
operators every one is taking 4.79sec
NOT OK

(Significant)
Verified Back plate assembly time with
L1 TO L4 operator found time is more
(eg.7-9sec)
NOT OK

(Significant)
Back plate assembly operator
piece hold on hand up to 7sec
Unskilled operator
down by hand
Unskilled operator
down by hand (4.79sec)
Back plate assembly
operator piece hold on
hand up
to 7sec
Root cause analysis
Low Out put
in Coining

of 21
Page 32 of 65
Machine
Significant Cause
Yes  No X
Machine
Machine cycle time is
more
Checked machine cycle time in January
first week found 28.08 sec
NOT OK

(Significant)
Main ram approach
time is more
Verified main ram approach time and
found more compared to other presses
(ie.7.81sec)
OK

(InSignificant)
Piece ejection time
more
Verified and found piece ejection time
taking is 5.42sec and stroke length is
250mm
NOT OK

(Significant)
Piece ejection time more
Machine cycle time more
Main ram approach time is more
Root cause analysis
Low Out put
in Coining

of 21
Page 33 of 65
method
Significant Cause
Yes  No X
Method
Verified at gemba & no abnormal
movements observed. No fatigue
observed
OK

(InSignificant)
Fatigue to operator while
doing compacting
Fatigue to operator while
doing compacting
Root cause analysis
Low Out put
in Coining

of 21
Page 34 of 65
Material
Significant Cause
Yes  No X
Material
Verified and found there is no difficuilt
while taking powder from mixing to
compaction operation
OK

(InSignificant)
Material-handling difficult
Material-handling
difficult
Root cause analysis
Low Out put
in Coining

of 21
Page 35 of 65
8-Possible causes
e cycle time is more
ate assembly time taking more
block pushing time more
rod stroke length more
Root cause analysis
Investigation and
data collection at shop
floor
4-Probable causes

of 21
Page 36 of 65
Man Machine
Method Material
Machine cycle time is more
Ejection cylinder stroke
length is more
Time taking more while
ejector block pushing
Back plate assembly time
taking more
Root cause analysis
Cause and Effect diagram level 2
Low Out put
in Coining

of 21
Page 37 of 65
Data analysis
Step - 7

of 21
Page 38 of 65
38
Probable cause Verification through 3W & 1H
Sl.No What How Who When Remarks
1
Time taking more
while
ejector block
pushing
Team has verified that
all the Ejector Block
Pushing
Team
22nd
June’20
This cause is
eliminated.
2
Uneven Load
Distribution in
Operations
The Team has decided to
study the line balancing
Team
8th
Sep’20
This cause is
eliminated.
3
Machine cycle
time is more
The Team has decided to
study the line balancing Team
8th
Sep’20
Further Analysis
4
Ejection cylinder
stroke
length is more
Study to be conducted
for the movement of
Cylinder
Team
28th
Sep’20
This cause is
eliminated.

of 21
Page 39 of 65
customer schedule
Month on month schedule 100000 pieces
Available time
Customer demand
Takt time : (For 1Lac Pieces)
= 21,06,000 / 100000
= 21.06 sec
=
Mixing Compaction
Back Plate
Assembly
Coining Sintering
Cycle time 12.26 28.08 28.08 6.18 12.16
Takt time 21.06 21.06 21.06 21.06 21.06
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0
10
20
30
Time
in
seconds
Cycle time Vs. Takt time - Finishing line process wise
Takt time = 21.06 sec
Identified Coining is bottle neck operation
Ejection
block
positioning
time is high
5.14
7.81
9.80
15.00
1.00
5.12
5.42
4.79
0.005.00
10.00
15.00
20.00
25.00
30.00
Feeder travelling…
Ram down time
Pressure raising…
Dwell time
Decompression
Ram up time
Ejection time
Ejector block…
Seconds
Activities
in
Cycle
Coining - Activity wise time
Feeder box
travel time is
high
Data collected on activity wise at
compaction operation
Product
parameters not
distrubed
Analysis of problem

of 21
Page 40 of 65
Counter Measure To provide auto ejection & weighing system
Cause : Machine cycle time is more
Data analysis…
Why1
Why2
Why3
Why4
Why5
Operator delay for every piece loading and unloading manually
Operator waiting for unloading the product
Piece Ejection time more
Ejection block pushed manually by hand for every cycle
Machine designed for semi-auto mode

of 21
Page 41 of 65
Stroke 840
Stroke
length100
Idle moving150
(Action-1)
High
stroke
length
Action 2
(Action-3)
Avoid Idle
moves
All dimensions are in mm
(Action 2)
Avoid
hand
using
unsafe
Weighing
scale
(Action-4)
Avoid
manual
weighing
(Action-5)
Manual Back Plate fixing
Holding by hands 7sec
Back plate
Guide pins
Before M/C Cycle Time 54.08
Machine On Machine Off
1 Compaction Operator
1 Back plate fix Operator
Data analysis…

of 21
Page 42 of 65
Analysis of solutions options to improve productivity
Option 1:
we approached M/s Energetic Automations and received quotation for Rs : 7.2
lakhs for the modification, which is not meeting our payback calculation, hence it
is dropped
Option 2:
Another Vendor M/s: Universal engineering tried to prove auto coining working in
755 press as demo, where the vendor is unable to prove the concept, hence it is
dropped
Option 3:
Finally with the support of CMFD team and plant team came up with innovative
solution from bottom ejection up concept to gravity force usage concept –
conducted trials -
Take up this project in house
Data analysis…

of 21
Page 43 of 65
Low cost
automation
Low
Internal
maintenance
Type of
automation
Cost
wise
Involvement
of suppliers
Robotic Pick and
placement
mechanism
High
External
suppliers
Hoo …Idea is good we will implement.
We are selecting Suitable LOW COST
AUTOMATION
Idea generation for automation system selection
Hence it is imperative to focus on output increase through L.C.A
Suitable
automation
system
Robotic - pick and
placement
mechanism
Low cost automation
Data analysis…

of 21
Page 44 of 65
Type of system
Suitable for
the project
Hydraulics
Not Suitable due
to more leakages
Screw feeder mechanism
Not Suitable due
to more settings
Pneumatics Suitable
Rack and pinion mechanism
Not Suitable due
to criticality of
settings
Hoo … Idea is good we will implement.
Idea generation for suitable system for low cost automation
Low cost
automation
system
We are selecting pneumatics
Rack and pinion
mechanism
Pneumatics Screw feeder
mechanism
Hydraulics
Data analysis…

of 21
Page 45 of 65
Developing solution
Step - 8

of 21
Page 46 of 65
S. No WHAT WHO WHEN HOW
1
Machine cycle time is
more in Coining Press TEAM FEB’20
Auto piece loading but piece
lifting through screw mechanism
Action ( 3W 1H )
Developing solution…

of 21
Page 47 of 65
Stroke length 15
Spacer
length 85
Stroke
435
All dimensions are in mm
Auto
Weighing
scale
(Action 6)
Capacity of
container
50 pieces
After M/C Cycle Time 42.17
(Action-1)
(Action-3)
(Action 2)
(Action-4)
(Action 5)
Machine On up to 20cycles Machine Off
Developing solution…
 Piece stacking box modified to
accommodate 35 pieces – Gravity
power usage
 Implemented in two coining
presses
 Provided gravity unloading of
pieces with simple modification in
the die to eliminate the manual
unloading of the piece
 To fill the stacking box once in 15
cycles – modified PLC program –
alert to operator (auto cycle ON)
Action 1
Action- 2
Action- 3

of 21
Page 48 of 65
Foreseeing the Probable
Resistance
Step - 9

of 21
Page 49 of 65
49
All Members felt this solution is acceptable
 We have received process acceptance from our production HOD for above changes
 Developed solution has discussed with cross functional departments . All are accepted
for the changes in SFM .
 Explained the improvements to all operators working in SFM Line and they felt very
happy for New Changes
LINE
SHOP INCHARGE

of 21
Page 50 of 65
Operator feedback

of 21
Page 51 of 65
Trial implementation &
check performance
Step - 10

of 21
Page 52 of 65
Process wise cycle time Vs. Takt time ( SFM ) :
Mixing Compaction
Back Plate
Assembly
Coining Sintering
Cycle time 12.26 28.08 28.08 6.18 12.16
Takt time 21.06 21.06 21.06 21.06 21.06
0
10
20
30
Time
in
seconds
Mixing Compaction
Back Plate
Assembly
Coining Sintering
Cycle time 12.26 19.14 19.14 6.18 12.16
Takt time 21.06 21.06 21.06 21.06 21.06
0
10
20
30
Time
in
seconds
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
90000
100000
110000
In
No's
Sep-17 Oct-17 Nov-17 Dec-17 Jan-18 Feb-18 Mar-18 Apr-18 May-18 Jun-18 Jul-18 Aug-18
Series1 100000 85000 78000 98000 75000 74000 98480 100000 100000 100000 100000 100000
Series2 100000 75900 73680 74336 74458 72000 73304 100000 100000 100000 100000 100000
SFM Clutch button Marketing requirement Vs Actual delivered
Capacity enhancement in SFM After:
BEFORE AFTER
Trail implementation and check performance

of 21
Page 53 of 65
Cycle time break-up compare
2.64
7.81
9.80
15.00
1.00
5.12
0.00
0.00
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Seconds
Activities
in
Cycle
Compaction - Activity wise time
5.14
7.81
9.80
15.00
1.00
5.12
5.42
4.79
0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00 30.00
Feeder travelling
time
Ram down time
Pressure raising
time
Dwell time
Decompression
Ram up time
Ejection time
Ejector block
positioning time
Seconds
Activities
in
Cycle
Compaction - Activity wise time
Before M/C Cycle Time 54.08 After M/C Cycle Time 42.17
Shift
Working
hrs
Before
output
After
output
A 7.5 320 427
B 7.5 320 427
C 7.5 320 427
Before After
Production 320 427
320
427
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
Production
no’s
Shift Production
Compaction Production

of 21
Page 54 of 65
Gum pasting Compaction
Coining
Unstacking
Sintering / Coating
Stacking
Weighing Mixing
1
1 2
13 Man power
per shift
Final Inspection
3
3
1
1
Green Compaction
Assembly
1
Gum pasting Compaction
Coining
Unstacking
Sintering / Coating
Stacking
Weighing Mixing
1
1 2
11 Man power
per shift
Final Inspection
4
1
1
Green Compaction
Assembly
1
Compaction +
Gum Pasting +
Green Compaction
Assembly
39 Man power
per day
33 Man power
per day
Note: 6 Operators engaged to another module

of 21
Page 55 of 65
Regular implementation
Step - 11

of 21
Page 56 of 65
Regular implementation…
Action (5W 1H)
S.No WHAT WHO WHEN WHERE WHY HOW
1
Automation in Coining
Press
TEAM FEB’20
Coining
operation
To avoid
operator fatigue,
and improve
productivity and
safety
Provided
gravity
unloading of
pieces with
simple
modification in
the die to
eliminate the
manual
unloading of
the piece

of 21
Page 57 of 65
57
Before improvement –
One operator at each
press
After improvement –
One operator for two machine
Regular implementation…
After Implementation of Clubbing the Operations

of 21
Page 58 of 65
58
Follow up / Review
Step - 12

of 21
Page 59 of 65
Follow-up / Review
Action (5W 1H)
S.No WHAT WHO WHEN WHERE WHY HOW
1 Communication
Shop
Floor
Team
4th
Oct’20
Better
Understandi
ng
Shop Floor
Meeting
2 Monitor Results
Shop
Floor
Team Daily
Monitor
Breakage
Trend
Through
Graph

of 21
Page 60 of 65
MANAGEMENT WILLINGNESS
 Providing time to discuss Problems
 Providing Resources
 Encouraging the teams through Convention
Follow up and review…

of 21
Page 61 of 65
61
Before After
Results:
1
Coining
press-755
1
1
Green
compact
assembly
Green
compact
assembly
Coining
press - 754
1
1
Green
compact
assembly
1
Coining press-
754
1
1
Green
compact
assembly
Green
compact
assembly
1
Green
compact
assembly
Coining press-
754
Results Before & After

of 21
Page 62 of 65
TANGIBLE BENEFITS
SAVED ELECTRICAL ENERGY TIME & MONEY SAVED
PRODUCTIVITY INCREASED IMPROVED PRODUCT QUALITY
IMPROVED MACHINE OUTPUT
EFFECTIVE MAN POWER UTILISATION
62
Tangible Benefits

of 21
Page 63 of 65
1
Man power cost saved per annum
7,12,800
Manpower salary Number of persons per day Months
9900 6 12
2
Energy cost saved per annum
12,36,000
Output /Month Energy cost per piece Months
100000 1.03 12
Total of the above 19,48,800
3 Cost incurred in this project (one time investment) 34,914
Savings per Annum - ₹ 19,13,886
Tangible Benefits

of 21
Page 64 of 65

of 21
Page 65 of 65
EACH QTY EACH QTY
890 3 620 3
EACH QTY EACH QTY
890 3 890 3
EACH QTY EACH QTY
90 6 1518 6
EACH QTY EACH QTY
3564 3 72 6
EACH QTY EACH QTY
100 12 512 6
34914
2670
1.EAPL A1D1 TIMER 1860
2.Omron Proximity
sensor 8mm
5.Studs 6 no’s
2670
540
6.Festo cylinder s
roke 150mm
3.M.S Round &
square plate
2670 4.M.S Sockets 1/2'
9.PU fittingsAll
fitting cost
1200
10.Double solenoid
valves
7.Festo cylinders
Stroke-430mm
8.PU Pipe
10692
Total cost
Electronic
components
3072
Electrical
Mechanical
components
9108
432
₹ 34914 /-
Cost incurred
this project:

of 21
Page 66 of 65
INTANGIBLE BENEFITS
IMPROVED SAFETY
BUILD TEAM WORK
IMPROVED SELF
CONFIDENCE
MANAGEMENT RECOGNIATION
IMPROVED CUSTOMER
SATISFICATION
IMPROVED PROBLEM SOLVING SKILLS

of 21
Page 67 of 65
Plan Action
Milestone chart
Project Started : June’20
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
P
A
DO
CHECK
ACT
12
6
Followup review
8
9
10
11
Developing solution
Foreseeing probable resistance
Trial implementation/checking
the results
Regular implementation
Finding out the root causes
7 Data analyis
4 Analysis of the problem
5 Identification of the causes
Feb'18
PLAN
1 Identification of problem
2 Selection of problem
Dec'17 Jan'18
3 Define the problem
Sl No. ACTIVITY STATUS

of 21
Page 68 of 65
68
Problem:
• Low Productivity
Root cause :
• Low utilization in coining operation
Solutions :
• Innovative solution from bottom ejection up concept to gravity
force usage concept – conducted trials
Results :
• Productivity improved from 68% to 85% in line.
Summary of the Project

of 21
Page 69 of 65
KEY LEARNINGS
1. QC TOOLS
2. KNOWLEDGE SHARING
3. SELF CONFIDENCE
4. JOB SATISFACTION
5. SELF AND ORGANIZATION GROWTH
6. INNOVATIVE THINKING
7. PLC PROGRAMMING
8. KNOWLEDGE ABOUT PNEUMATICS

of 21
Page 70 of 65
 Brainstorming
 Cause & effect diagram
 Why , Why Analysis
 3W 1H & 5W 1H Analysis
 Bar graph
Tools & Techniques used
S.No WHAT WHERE WHO WHEN WHY HOW
1
Spindle shaft locknuts
tightening
In All MSDMS Team 14/02/2009
Arresting
bearings
failures
Special spanner designed & manufauctured
for tightening the locknuts in critical areas
2
Shaft material hardness
increasing
Increasing the
life of the
spindle shaft
Discussed with vender & Shaft material
grade changed from EN9 to EN359
3
Shaft floating bush hardness
decreasing
Increasing the
life of the
spindle shaft
Discussed with vender & Shaft floating bush
hardness decreased from 45-55 to 35-45
HRC
4 Shaft key way width increasing In All MSDMS Team 26/02/2009
Increasing the
life of the
spindle shaft
Discussed with vender & Shaft keyway width
increased from 4 mm to 5 mm
Standardisation ( 5W , 1H )
2
7
12
17
22
No. of Problems
A
B
C

of 21
Page 71 of 65
Future Project
To reduce hydraulic lock nut failure in gang saw
 Present 3 Failures per month our target is Zero
 Present this project is in Data analysis

of 21
Page 72 of 65
We express sincere thanks to our management and employees for
whole hearted support and cooperation for successful
implementation of this project.
Last but not the least our sincere thanks to the QCFI Judges
for giving us a kind and patient hearing & encouragement.
Acknowledgement
INNOVATION TEAM

of 21
Page 74 of 65
74

of 21
Page 76 of 65
Our team members discuss about machine improvements and work
related problems on every Wednesday .
Identified and discussed problems are noted on Module problem bank .
Problem Identification…

of 21
Page 77 of 65
77
Our Team is from SFM Line .We are getting Low Productivity from Coining process, It
is highly critical due to we are not meeting the customer requirement because of out
put is low

of 21
Page 78 of 65
S.no Process Production criticality
1 Mixing Non critical
2 compaction Highly critical
3 Back plate assembly Highly critical
4 staking critical
5 Pressure sintering critical
6 Unstacking critical
7 Coining critical
8 Inspection Non critical
Coining process is highly critical due to we are not meeting the customer
requirement because of out put is low
Define the Problem

Coining QCC R1.pptx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Coining QCC R1.pptx

Similar to Coining QCC R1.pptx (13)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (19)

Coining QCC R1.pptx