Continuous improvement for roll forming - Part II

thefabricator.com/article/rollforming/continuous-improvement-for-roll-forming---part-ii

Continuous improvement and statistical process control are useful,time-tested

techniques—they have been used since the 1950s—but their use must be tailored
to specific applications. For example, atypical manufacturing metric is parts per
minute, but many roll formers should measure feet per minute. This and other tips
can help roll formers accurately evaluate their productivity and measure the
impact of process improvements.

Editor's Note: This article is the second in a two-part series.

After you have selected a continuous improvement method (such as the Deming cycle, DMAIC
process, or FADE) and familiarized yourself with ways to measure productivity, the next step is to
select a specific way to analyze your process. Several methods can help you decide where to
focus improvement efforts.

The Five Why Method. The five why technique is a useful way to determine the root cause of a
particular problem. It is a matter of asking why an event happened. Rather than stop at the first
cause of a defect or problem, you ask the same question—Why"—repeatedly until you discover
the root cause.

For example, a roll former with a post cut shear crashes and causes the material to buckle. Why
did the material buckle? Because it jammed in the shear die during the cut. Why did the
material jam in the shear die? Because the die was dull. Why was the die dull? Because it wasn't
removed for sharpening during the last maintenance rotation. Why did it miss the rotation?
Because of poor record keeping.

Despite the process's name, it doesn't rely on asking why exactly five times. The process
continues for as many whys as necessary to get to the root cause.
Cause-and-Effect Diagram. When investigating production problems, it is important to analyze
the various causes responsible for a particular effect. Fishbone diagrams can help to identify the
various causes and contributing issues (see Figure 1). While these diagrams do not necessarily
indicate the relative magnitude of each cause, they do help limit the scope of subsequent data-
collection efforts.

Fishbone diagrams are best developed in a brainstorming setting with people directly involved
in the process. Each branch off the main problem line represents a potential cause leading to
the problem. Additional contributing factors are also shown for each branch.

Pareto Analysis. Named after its inventor—Italian sociologist, economist, and philosopher
Vilfredo Pareto—a Pareto chart is a histogram of items sorted by descending frequency. It often
shows that a high percentage of problems (downtime, slowdowns, and defects) are caused by
only a few issues. For example, Figure 2 shows downtime reasons for a single machine over a
month of production. Approximately 75 percent of the downtime resulted from profile or coil
changes.

Pareto charts may be used in a progressive fashion to drill down through more levels of detail.
In the example given, the next step may be to create a Pareto chart for coil change delays by
operator, material, or product.

SPC Tools. Although a full discussion of statistical process control (SPC) falls outside the scope
of this article, it may be useful to consider two aspects of SPC when dealing with defect rates in
a process. It is important to determine whether the process is in control and if the equipment
can reliably manufacture products within the required tolerance.

The first step in SPC is to measure a characteristic (such as length) of five consecutive parts at
regular intervals. The second step is to analyze the data to determine the average measurement
and the range of measurements. The third step is to plot these measurements on corresponding
graphs (see Figure 3). The average and range values are based on the amount of error (the
difference between nominal and measured values). Control limits (upper and lower for average
values and upper for range values) help to determine whether the process is in control.

The following are guidelines for determining control:

• No points are outside the control limits.

• The number of points above and below the center line is about the same.
• The points seem to fall randomly above and below the centerline.
• Most points, but not all, are near the centerline, and only a few are close to the control
limits.1

The next step is to find out if the equipment is capable of reliably producing to within the
required tolerance. To do this, run a sample of 25 to 100 parts with a competent operator
running typical material. Measure each part with sufficient precision. From this data you can do
some calculations that provide a few key metrics of process capability. The first of these is the
process capability index, or CP. This reveals natural variation of the process to the specified
tolerance range. The other commonly used capability index is CPk, which shows how well the
data is centered. CPkis equal to CPif the data is perfectly centered about the nominal value.
Performing capability studies before starting an improvement project provides a baseline. Using
control charts on a regular basis (daily, if possible) monitors the process to ensure that it
remains in statistical control.

Improvement Techniques
After you identify problem areas, the next step is to address them. While processes such as
kaizen blitz help with general problem-solving, you can use other techniques that specifically
target downtime (SMED) and quality (ZQC).

Single Minute Exchange of Die (SMED). SMED, an automotive industry initiative, was
designed to reduce die changeovers from several hours to less than 10 minutes.

The following are the three major stages of the SMED system:

• 1. Determine exactly which steps can be performed while the machine is running (external
steps) and which can be performed only when the machine is stopped (internal steps).
• 2. Find ways to convert internal activities to external activities.
• 3. Streamline all activities to reduce the changeover time.

For a roll former with a single-mandrel uncoiler, a few activities can be done in the first stage of
SMED, such as moving the new coil to the uncoiler. An upgrade to a double-mandrel uncoiler
shifts the loading and unloading of the coil to be external steps. This reduces the internal steps
to just two: rotating the uncoiler and threading the new coil. Adding a coil accumulator
eliminates all internal steps because every new coil is loaded and butt-welded to the previous
coil while the machine is still running.

Zero Quality Control (ZQC). Rather than catching defects or mistakes after they've occurred,
ZQC works to prevent problems. This involves 100 percent part inspection at every step
(automated if possible), immediate feedback if problems occur, and the use of poka-yoke
(mistakeproofing) systems wherever appropriate.

The poka-yoke approach typically involves the use of simple sensors or jigs to either let the
operator know immediately if something has been forgotten or improperly installed or to
prevent mistakes to begin with. A simple example is an electrical connector that is asymmetric
and therefore can be plugged in one way only.

Capturing the Gain

OEE and associated analysis tools can help you optimize processes without capital expenditures.

In some cases, this may mean upgrades of uncoilers, mills, or press systems to improve areas
that are restricting productivity. In other cases, it may still be necessary to purchase new
machines, but these purchases can be made with the knowledge of which features really aid in
effective production.

Efficiency improvements can result in lower labor costs for the same output. In situations where
the sales volume is fixed, reductions can be made in the number of shifts or overtime hours
required. The newly created free time also can be spent improving machine reliability through
autonomous maintenance or on other improvement projects.
In Overall Equipment Effectiveness, Robert Hansen describes various scenarios involving the
financial impact of increased OEE.2In the case of fixed sales, Hansen demonstrates how a 10
percent increase in OEE could lead to a 21 percent increase in operating income and a 21
percent increase in return on assets (ROA). Obviously, the magnitude of improvement varies
from operation to operation. These calculations were based on labor savings at normal rates; in
many cases, much of the labor savings would be at overtime rates.

In cases where the sales volume can be increased to meet the new capacity, dramatic financial
gains are possible. Using the same scenario, but with the factory running at full capacity because
of expanded sales, Hansen shows the same 10 percent OEE increase led to a 62 percent increase
in operating income and a 54 percent increase in ROA.

How difficult is a 10 percent improvement in OEE? In the example OEE calculation, reducing the
average coil change time from 7.88 minutes to 5 minutes and reducing the average profile
change from 66 to 55 minutes would result in a 10 percent increase. In contrast, to achieve the
same OEE increase by simply running faster would require the mill to run an average speed of
633 FPM, which is 20 percent higher than the rated speed. This illustrates that good information
is key to making effective improvements.

The state of competition dictates that if you are involved in manufacturing or engineering, you
must use reliable strategies for continuously improving productivity, quality, and reliability. The
financial benefits of continuous improvement can be considerable, while not pursuing
improvements means you are probably losing ground to your competitors.

Andy Allman is president of AMS Controls Inc., 12180 Prichard Farm Road, Maryland Heights,
MO 63043, 800-334-5213, info@amscontrols.com, www.amscontrols.com.

Notes

• 1. James R. Evans and William M. Lindsay, The Management and Control of Quality, 6th
Edition (Mason, Ohio: Thomson South-Western, 2004), p. 697.
• 2. Robert C. Hansen, Overall Equipment Effectiveness (New York, N.Y.: Industrial Press,
2002), p. 48-66.

You May Also Like

Continuous improvement for roll forming - Part I

Improving roll forming productivity of roofing components

Roll forming continues to cut weight, cost for automotive applications

Measure it, graph it, control it

Andy Allman

AMS Controls Inc.

12180 Prichard Farm Road
Maryland Heights, MO 63043
Phone: 800-334-5213
http://www.amscontrols.com
Contact via email

More Content by Andy Allman

Published In...

The Tube & Pipe Journal

The Tube & Pipe Journal became the first magazine dedicated to serving the
metal tube and pipe industry in 1990. Today, it remains the only North
American publication devoted to this industry and it has become the most
trusted source of information for tube and pipe professionals.

Preview the Digital Edition

Subscribe to The Tube & Pipe Journal

Read more from this issue

Related Companies
AMS Controls