Aerospace
Challenge: Small Tier 1 Aerospace supplier is requested to increase their productivity on a component part from the current state of 30 units per month to new expectations of 150 units per month within 60 days (per ramp-up plan). Due to community size and skillsets required and union requirements, adding personnel would be too time-consuming
and difficult.
​
Solution: Complete 2P and Kaikaku events to identify productivity improvements. Establish proper flow and identify if there are technology improvements that can be made to reduce leadtime.
Results
This was a Kaikaku event and a 2P event where we redesigned the manufacturing process and completed the majority and the most critical actions within a 2 week time frame. There were changes that shocked both shop floor employees AND management, for instance management assumed that since I was a Lean Manufacturing consultant, WIP inventory would decrease…but I showed through simple simulations that we were not necessarily focusing on inventory reduction, we were focusing on RIGHT-SIZING the inventory needed. As a result, we went from and “uncontrolled WIP inventory” of 20
(Department management noted that this quantity was much lower than normal) to Standard Work in Process of 23. Standard WIP is the minimal amount of inventory needed for all employees to continue work on demand and to meet takt time which will satisfy customer requirements. This quantity was verified by management at the end of each day. Note that this was a one shift operation.
Expected Improvements after Production Preparation Kaikaku
-
Improved Product Flow
-
Reduction of Material and Operator Travel Distance
-
Easily Managed Main Lube Work Cell
-
Line Capable of 1 Unit / Hr Takt Time (150 / Month)
-
Visual Management Established On-Line
-
Right-Sizing Resources (Personnel) to Achieve Results
​We completed material flow and operator flow spaghetti diagrams and joked that the part traveled more during production that it did when it was installed on the aircraft.
We proceeded to utilize 2P tools to design the proper cell. The team established cell evaluation metrics (lean principles) and was required to design at least 7 different layout alternatives with each member establishing the cell they thought would be successful. Those were posted on the wall and together we completed the evaluation establishing the positives and negatives of each layout. Taking all of this into consideration, the team now designed one last layout incorporating the best of previous layouts and
eliminating potential issues.
Part of what was to be incorporated in the cell was some of the assembly modifications we designed and built during the event. For instance, some of the longest cycle times included drying processes. Initially, we started using an alcohol-based cleaner rather than a water base to reduce drying time. I another application we eliminated a liquid “leak test” and designed and built a gas leak test station that reduced set-up time and eliminated dry time.
This was a big team-building event and EVERYONE was engaged. An example of another improvement was that we incorporated Welding into the cell. In order to do that, we needed very good enclosed welding booths. We looked at purchasing prefab buildings...but the cost was $5000 each for a total of $15,000. We decided to build our own at a cost of $2100 TOTAL.
I always like to make a slide of “Lessons Learned” for one of the slides in the end of event presentations. That way you get an understanding of how much was truly learned and how much buy-in you have which is important for sustainment of improvements. Below is the Lessons Learned slide.
