case study-inen3293

Republic of the PhilippinesPOLYTECHNIC UNIVERSITY OF THE PHILIPPINESSto. Tomas Branch

A CASE STUDY RELATIVE TO LOSS TIME AND MANPOWER REDUCTION

IN GLASS DELIVERY AT EPSON PRECISION (PHILIPPINES) INC.

by:

Alina, Jassfer D.


LOSS TIME AND MANPOWER REDUCTION IN GLASS DELIVERY

AT EPSON PRECISION (PHILIPPINES) INC.

I. PROBLEM BACKGROUND

The glass that will be used for RN10 models at IJ Production Scanner Sub-Assembly are

delivered at the Sub- Assembly Kitting Area to Scanner Sub- Assembly Area 5. Those glasses are

used to build a scanner assembly that is a sub component of a printer. The Warehouse

department stated that based on the audit they conducted, waiting time was observed and

currently happening, so they want to convert this loss time (waiting time) to productive time.

The processes involved for glass delivery to Scanner Sub- Assembly Area 5 production line

that can be used to address and solve the problem are as follows:

1. Get parts to the parts location.

2. Deliver the parts to the designated line.

3. Put parts in the buffer location.

4. Get empty jig in the buffer location

5. Go back to the parts location.

6. Waiting occurs.


Line Handled (3 lines)Loss Time 4.31 hourWorking time 2.94 hour

Cycle timeProd Dept. (Air blowers') 5.76 minutesWHSE Dept. (Glass Delivery) 1.843 minutes

While the production operators are preparing the glass, material handlers have to wait

before they can deliver the glass in the production lines.

Table 1.a Process cycle time

Table 1.b Loss Time and Working Time per Manpower

The Production department air blowers’ process time in table 1.a is inefficient than the

process time of glass delivery of Warehouse department.

In table 1.b, the loss time of material handlers per shift occur when they finish replenishing

the parts in every station. Due to the high contribution of loss time, it is possible to reduce

manpower in the process of glass delivery.

II. PROBLEM STATEMENT

There is an existing waiting time (loss time) in the process of glass delivery at

Warehouse Department – Inkjet Printer Section.

III. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

The objective of the study is to identify if there is a possibility to reduce manpower

from the glass delivery. This objective asserts the statement of the problem with the

general objectives and specific objectives which are the desired outcome of the research

process.

General Objective

The general objective of the study is to determine how to reduce manpower thru

loss time reduction in the said process.


Specific Objective

These are the following objectives that would like to achieve.

To check if Material Handlers in glass delivery can handle additional line in

Scanner Sub-Assembly

To improve the process of Material Handlers that can reduce loss time due to

waiting time

IV. ASSUMPTIONS AND AREAS OF CONSIDERATION

The basic assumptions that can be utilized in preparing the plan, provided by the

Warehouse Departments Inkjet Section are considered. It provides a contact person that

should be coordinated, or discontinuity responsible person for the area.

The Department of Warehouse Efficiency Group Section is the “team leader” in any

manpower budget incident. They should be notified in the event of reducing or adding of

manpower incident that occurs on the EPSON warehouse, or is reported from off- site

regarding an off-site incident. They are also the key vortex of information regarding

incidents.

The following conditions were considered during the study:

1. Cycle Time

The preparation time for glass preparation/air blow process in production

department. .

The glass delivery process time by the warehouse manpower to the Scanner

Sub-Assembly Area 5.

2. 2-box system

2-box system is a system that limits the buffer stock (Work in process) in

every station of the line in EPPI.

Implementation of 2-box system is extremely difficult to deal with,

regarding changing the line handled by the manpower.


StandardTime

AllowanceFactor

Work Hours/Shift

Cycle/ ShiftParts

DeliveryLine/s Target/ Line

LineRequirement

MPRequirement

0.04 hour 22.71% 7.25 hour 177.52 hour 40 3 2880 glass 72 glass 0.4056Simulation

3. Process

Currently, the WPS (Work Standard Procedure) for glass delivery contributes

to the high percentage of loss time in EPPI.

V. ALTERNATIVE COURSES OF ACTIONS

1. STICK WITH THE CURRENT SITUATION

For the current design process, the productive time for Material Handlers per shift

(7.25 hours) is 2.94 hours and the non-productive time (loss time) is 4.31 hours. In terms

on manpower count, currently there are 4 Material Handlers for day shift and 2 for night

shift. Each material handler handles 3 lines.

Table 2 Manpower requirement for Glass Delivery

2. ADDITIONAL LINE FOR MATERIAL HANDLERS (REDUCE MANPOWER)

Currently, the cycle time and manpower requirement for Material Handlers are shown in the table

below;

Table 3.1 Existing manpower simulation for glass delivery

TOTAL 5 Manpower 21.55 hours

Line MP Allocation Loss Time Line MP Allocation Loss Time

Line 01 Line 14Line 02 Line 15Line 03 Line 16Line 04 Line 17Line 05 Line 19Line 06 Line 18Line 07Line 12Line 13

4.31 hours

4.31 hours

Manpower Requirement

1 Manpower

1 Manpower

1 Manpower

1 Manpower

1 Manpower


4.31 hours

4.31 hours

4.31 hours


Before AfterMP Allocation MP Allocation

Line 01Line 02Line 03Line 04Line 05Line 06Line 07Line 12Line 13Line 14Line 15Line 16Line 17Line 19Line 18TOTAL 5MP 4MP

1MP

1MP

1MP

1MP

1MP

1MP


Line

1MP

1MP

1MP

In the proposed design process, the cycle time and manpower requirement for Material

Handlers are shown in the table below;

Table 3.2 Proposed manpower simulation for glass delivery

Table 3.3 Comparison between 3 lines handled vs 4 lines handled

From table 3.4, the current manpower allocation for the Glass Delivery is 5 Manpower for 15

lines in Scanner Sub-Assembly Area 5. After the study, we came up to a conclusion that the study

can reduce 1 Manpower for the said process. From the current manpower ratio 1 Manpower is to

3 Lines became 1 Manpower is to 4 lines.

Table 3.4 Manpower Allocation for Glass Delivery

TAKT TIMEALLOWANCE

FACTORWORK/HOURS

/ SHIFTCYCLE/SHIFT

PARTSDELIVERY

LINE/S TARGET/LINELINE

REQUIREMENTMP

REQUIREMENT

.05 hour 22.71% 7.25 149 40 4 3840 96 0.6454Simulation

BEFORE AFTERLoss Time (hours) 4.31 2.57

Working Time (hours) 2.94 4.68Idle converted to WT 1.74


The overall problem solving process is captured with five step problem solving technique. This

is the best starting place, giving you a problem-solving overview, and a structured process to

follow. The 5 why technique fits into the analysis stage of the process.

In table 3.5 you saw a Why Table of a personal complain by the material handlers for glass

delivery. It turned out that it was because of the plant layout in Scanner sub-assembly Area 5.

Though there are several possible answers listed in Why Table to address the top problem caused

by the poor plant layout.

Why table fixed the real root cause of the failure – glass delivery problem. The plant layout is

the latent cause. It remains there waiting to trigger more troubles in future. EPPI Company will

have many problems with this layout. This is the companies own worst enemy and by default.

As the researcher of this process, it is clearly that the plant layout of Area 5 is a huge risk.

Should you come up to relay out or put it in an easy way? The latent causes are the most critical

ones to find, but they are usually the hardest to deal with and often they are embarrassing for all

involved.

Finally we get into the region of latency where individual beliefs, values lack of vital knowledge

and personal opinions breach system protection. A failure event should be traced back to its latent

factors.

Table 3.5 5 Why’s Question Worksheet for Glass Delivery

Fit the trolley to the gapbetween the linesPlant re-layout

Go to the MES, and discuss theproblems

Solution

5 Why Question TableDate: May 12, 2014Team Members: OJT-Alina, SGL J. Federoso, SGL M. Nora

Problem Statement: Personal complain by the material handlers for glass deliveryRecommended Solution: Fit the trolley for glass delivery to the layout in Scanner Sub-Assembly Area 5Latent Issues: The plant layout of company can cause disturbances both people and machines

Why Questions 3W2H Answers(with what, when, where, how, how much)

Set standard weight for Jigs

Make a trolley for glassdelivery

Because the Glass and Jigs are heavy

Because the Material Handlers carry itmanually.Because the Trolley for Glass Delivery cannotpass/enter between the lines per stationBecause the layout in Scanner Sub-Assembly isto narrow.Because the Manufacturing EngineeringSection (MES) was responsible for that layout.

1. Why there is a personal complain?

2. Why did the glass and jigs are heavy?

3. Why did the MH carry it manually?

4. Why trolleys cannot enter/pass?

5. Why the layout to narrow?


Dayshift NightshiftAlternative 1 0.41 4 3 3 lines 4.31 hours 2.94 hoursAlternative 2 0.65 3 2 4 lines 2.57 hours 4.68 hours

ManpowerRequirement

Manpower Allocated LineHandle

Loss Time WorkingTime

VI. RECOMMENDATION

Upon the evaluation of the courses of action made, alternative 2 could help in providing

solution to the problem stated.

The following recommendations are offered to the warehouse department inkjet section in

the field of efficiency.

1. Given the changing line handled by the material handlers, the potential loss time or waiting

time can be converted to productive time will be 1.74 hours.

2. From Table 4, while the current manpower ratio of one (1) Manpower to three (3) lines, it

may be advantageous to change the manpower ratio to one (1) Manpower to four (4) lines.

3. From the table 3.5, glass trolley should be fitted to the gap between the lines in Scanner

Sub-assembly to easily pass the trolley.

4. Based on the results of this study, manpower reduction will have a great positive effect to

the weekly manpower budget of the warehouse department (efficiency group)

5. 2-box system should be eliminated, to maximize the manpower requirement in every

process inside the Epson Precision (Philippines) Inc.

The glass delivery current process should remain operational until the proposed design

process and structures are implemented. The concerned departments (Training, Efficiency, and

Production and MES departments) would be adversely affected by this study. Revised processes

and structural changes in line and manpower with the detailed recommendations are contained in

this study.

Table 4 Difference between 3 lines handled to 4 lines handled


Process: Glass DeliveryObjective: To check if Material Handlers in glass delivery can handle additional line in Scanner Sub-AssemblyPurpose: To reduce loss time due to waiting time

No. Implementation Plan 7-May 8-May 9-May 12-May 13-May 14-May 15-May 16-May 19-May 20-May 21-May 22-May 23-May

Remarks: On-going (8lines has not been materialized because of the 2-box system)Plan

ActualRemarks: On-going (4 lines)

PlanActual

Remarks: The project has been implemented. Material Handlers will handle 4 lines for Glass DeliveryPlan

Actual

PlanActual

Prepared by:

Jassfer Alina

Checked by:

Jason Federoso

Approved by:

WhSE MGR Louisa Silang

2

3

Checking and review of Effectiveness (GlassDelivery)

4

May, 2014

Executing the proposed trial. Material Handlers willhandle 8 lines

Executing the proposed trial. Material Handlers willhandle 4 lines

1Discussion with the concerned groups regarding the

proposed trial in Glass deliveryPlan

Actual

VII. IMPLEMENTATION PLAN

Table 5 Gantt chart for Implementation Plan

In the table 5 above, the material handlers will handle 8 lines schedule at May 8th. The

tasks are linked, so we have set a ‘Must Start On’ constraint. But because of the 2-box system, 1

Manpower is to 8 lines was not materialize. 1

So, we come up to a solution that material handlers will handle 4 lines instead of 8 lines

that will also consider the 2 box-systems. At May 9th, ‘Must Start On’ must set to start the trial for

6 days. May 19th, 1 week for checking and review of the effectiveness of Material handlers that

will handle 4 lines have been materializing.

1 2box system – Only 2 buffer/stocks of replenishment per process in EPPI.


As a result of the study,

1. Monthly manpower budget reduced (manpower cost)

2. Manpower count reduced

Before After

Dayshift Nightshift Dayshift Nightshift

Manpower Count 5 5 4 4

3. Loss time (Non-productive time) reduced

Before After

Loss Time 4.31 hours 2.57 hours

Working Time 2.94 hours 4.68 hours

Idle time converted to Working time 1.75 hours

4. The Glass delivery process maximized

5. Maximized manpower allocation