IJRIT International Journal of Research in Information Technology, Volume 1, Issue 7, June 2013, Pg. 203-211
International Journal of Research in Information Technology (IJRIT)
Understanding and Implementation of Some Aspects of Total Productive Maintenance in a Manufacturing Industry. 1
Ravinder Kundu 2 Dr.Vineet Kumar
M.Tech, Research Scholar, U.I.E.T., MDU,Rohtak
Professor, Mechanical Engg. U.I.ET.MDU, Rohtak 1
In today global economy, the survival of companies depends on their ability to rapidly innovate and improve. As a result, an increasing search is on for the methods and processes that drive improvements in quality, costs and productivity. The manufacturing industry has experienced in unprecedented degree of change in the last three decades. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate the contributions of Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) is a complex, long term process which must be sold to the workforce as a legitimate improvement methodology. For TPM to succeed in any industry, both management and the workforce must address issues strategically while operating in an environment of trust and organization.
Key words:-TPM, OEE, TQM, Quality Management.
1. Introduction TPM is a unique Japanese philosophy, which has been developed based on the productive maintenance concepts and methodologies. This concept was first introduced by M/s Nippon Denso Co. Ltd. of Japan, a supplier of M/s Toyota Motor Company, Japan in the year 1971. Total productive maintenance is an innovative approach to maintenance that optimizes equipment effectiveness, eliminates breakdowns and promotes autonomous maintenance by operators through day-to-day activities involving total workforce (Bhadury, 2000). The manufacturing industry has experienced an unprecedented degree of change in the last three decades, involving drastic changes in management approaches, product and process technologies, customer expectations, supplier attitudes as well as
Ravinder Kundu, IJRIT
competitive behavior (Ahuja et al., 2006). In today’s fast - changing marketplace, slow, steady improvements in manufacturing operations do not guarantee sustained profitability or survival of an organization (Oke, 2005).Thus the organizations need to improve at a faster rate than their competitors, if they are to become or remain leaders in the industry. Analyzing TPM into its three words , we have: Total = All-encompassing by maintenance and production individual working together. Productive = Production of goods and services that meet or exceed customers’ expectation. Maintenance = Keeping equipment and plant in as good as or better than the original condition at all times. The overall goals of TPM are: 1.
Maintaining and improving equipment capacity.
Maintaining equipment for life.
Using support from all areas of the operation.
Encouraging input from all employees.
Using teams for continuous improvement.
2. Correlation of TPM with Other Standards Successful implementation of TPM in a company will lead to achieve different payback and others standard such as ISO 9001, ISO 14001 etc. which are shown in the figure1 below:
Ravinder Kundu, IJRIT
Total Quality Improvemen t
Safety Standards(Im proved Safety)
Skills Improvemen t
ISO 140001(iMP ROVED ENVIRONME NT)
ISO 9001(Total Quality)
Figure 1: Correlation Of TPM With Other Standards. The goal of TPM is to increase the productivity of plant and equipment. To maximize output, the most efficient way is by the effort of minimizing input-specifically, by improving and maintaining equipment at optimum levels to reduce its life cycle cost. Cost effectiveness is a result of an organization’s ability to eliminate the causes of the ‘six big losses’ that reduce equipment effectiveness: • •
Reduced yield (from start up to stable production) Process defects
Idling and minor stoppages
Set-up and adjustment
3. Importance of TPM (Total Productive Maintenance) Liberalization
tough competition in global market and for the
sustainability in market for any product or service, the optimization of resources and costs in all sorts is required. .The global competition is based on the innovation of advanced products processes etc. and technology support is the essential requirement for any advancement in product or process. The advancement in technology
Ravinder Kundu, IJRIT
had led to the industrial revolution and higher level competition for survival. For sustainability in the market, the factors like product quality, availability, costs etc. are the some of the basic parameters considered. Technological advancements resulted sophisticated, automated equipment’s by which the operations can be performed by even semi- skilled or unskilled operators. Also the liberalization of economy supports the industries for the availability of high quality raw materials with competitive prize. In today’s situation, the importance of the upkeep of equipment has its own importance since the condition and performance of the equipment have large role in the quality and availability of the products.
4. Evolution Of TPM TPM descends from Japan and came into existence in the seventies. After Dr W Edward Deming made an impact in Japan through his teaching of quality, Japanese organization felt a need for autonomous maintenance and small group activities to support the quality movement. Today thousands of organizations all over the world are implementing TPM and about 100organisations are now doing it in India. Total productive maintenance (TPM) is a proven strategy for medium to large industries to get superior business results and develop people skills to take on future business Challenges. Unlike ISO certification process, in TPM, focus is on maintaining the equipment and process in perfect condition- to get best quality products and involve all employees in Collectively carrying out loss elimination, using analytical problem solving tools. The fundamental belief is that if the equipment is maintained well and setting is done by a conscious, skilled operator, once can get the best quality product. The whole concept of TPM is built around this belief and hence the name total productive maintenance. However, this concept can be applied to places other than plant and equipment and instead we could name Total productive Management rather than just maintenance. TPM is an innovative Japanese concept. The origin of TPM can be traced back to 1951 when preventive maintenance was introduced in Japan. However the concept of preventive maintenance was taken from the USA. Nippondenso was the first company to introduce plant wide preventive maintenance in 1960 . Preventive maintenance is the concept wherein, operators produced goods using machines and the maintenance group was dedicated with work of maintaining those machines, however with the automation of Nippondenso, maintenance became a problem as more maintenance personnel were required . So the management decided that the routine maintenance of equipment would be carried out by the operators. This is Autonomous Maintenance, one of the features of TPM . Thus Nippondenso which already followed preventive maintenance also added Autonomous Maintenance done by production operators. The maintenance crew was released of their routine maintenance task and they carried out equipment modification for improving reliability and maintainability.
Ravinder Kundu, IJRIT
5. Objectives of TPM TPM was introduced to achieve the following objectives: •
Avoid waste in a quickly changing economic environment.
Producing goods without reducing product quality.
Produce a low batch quantity at the earliest possible time.
Goods sent to the customers must be non-defective.
6. Contributions of TPM towards Improving Manufacturing Performance Manufacturing is considered to be an important element in a firm’s endeavour to improve firm Performance (Skinner, 1982; Hayes & Wheelwright, 1984). Superior manufacturing performance leads to competitiveness (Leachman et al., 2005). TPM is a highly structured approach, which uses a number of tools and techniques to achieve highly effective plants and machinery. With competition in manufacturing industries rising relentlessly, TPM has proved to be the maintenance improvement philosophy preventing the failure of an organization (Eti et al., 2006). Today, an effective TPM strategy and programs are needed, which can cope with the dynamic needs and discover the hidden but unused or underutilized resources (human brainpower, man-hours, machine-hours). TPM methodology has the potential to meet the current demands. A well-conceived TPM implementation program not only improve the equipment efficiency and effectiveness but also brings appreciable improvements in other areas of the manufacturing enterprise. Kutucuoglu et al. (2001) have stated that equipment is the major contributor to the performance and profitability of manufacturing systems. Seth & Tripathi (2005) have investigated the strategic implications of TQM and TPM in an Indian manufacturing set-up. Thun (2006) has described the dynamic implications of TPM by working out interrelations between various pillars of TPM to analyze the fundamental structures and identifies the most appropriate strategy for the implementation of TPM considering the interplay of different pillars of this maintenance approach. Ahuja & Khamba (2008a) have investigated the significant contributions of TPM implementation success factors like top management leadership and involvement, traditional maintenance practices and holistic TPM implementation initiatives, towards affecting improvements in manufacturing performance in the Indian industry.
Ravinder Kundu, IJRIT
7. TPM Implementation Stages 7.1 Stage a-Preparatory Stage Step 1-Announcement by management to all about TPM introduction in the organization: Proper understanding, commitment and active involvement of the top management in needed for this step. Senior management should have awareness programs, after which announcement is made. Decision the implement TPM is published in the in house magazine, displayed on the notice boards and a letter informing the same is send to suppliers and customers. Step 2-Initial education and propaganda for TPM: Training is to be done based on the need. Some need intensive training and some just awareness training based on the knowledge of employees in maintenance. Step 3-Setting up TPM and departmental committees: TPM includes improvement, autonomous maintenance, quality maintenance etc., as part of it. When committees are set up it should take care of all those needs. Step 4-Establishing the TPM working system and target: Each area/work station is benchmarked and target is fixed up for achievement. Step 5-A master plan for institutionalizing: Next step is implementation leading to institutionalizing wherein TPM becomes an organizational culture. Achieving PM award is the proof of reaching a satisfactory level. 7.2 Stage B-Introduction Stage A small get-together, which includes our suppliers and customer’s participation, is conducted. Suppliers as they should know that we want quality supply from them. People from related companies and affiliated companies who can be our customers, sisters concerns etc. are also invited. 7.3 Stage C-TPM Implementation In this stage eight activities are carried which are called eight pillars in the development of TPM activity. Of these four activities are for establishing the system for production efficiency, one for initial control system of new products and equipment, one for improving the efficiency of administration and are for control of safety, sanitation as working environment. 7.4 Stage D-Institutionalizing Stage By now the TPM implementation activities would have reached maturity stage. Now is the time to apply for preventive maintenance award. 7.5 Holding The Gains The new TPM practices are incorporated into the organization’s standard operating procedures. These new methods and data collection activities should be integrated with the other elements of the production system to avoid
Ravinder Kundu, IJRIT
redundant or conflicting requirements. The new equipment management methods should also be continuously improved to simplify the tasks and minimize the effort required to sustain the TPM program.
8. Overall Equipment Effectiveness TPM initiatives in production help in streamlining the manufacturing and other business functions, and garnering sustained profits (Ahuja & Khamba, 2007). The strategic outcome of TPM implementations is the reduced occurrence of unexpected machine breakdowns that disrupt production and lead to losses, which can exceed millions of dollars annually (Gosavi, 2006). OEE methodology incorporates metrics from all equipment manufacturing states guidelines into a measurement system that helps manufacturing and operations teams improve equipment performance and, therefore, reduce equipment cost of ownership (COO). TPM initiatives are focused upon addressing major losses, and wastes associated with the production systems by affecting continuous and systematic evaluations of production system, thereby affecting significant improvements in production facilities (Ravishankar et al., 1992; Gupta et al., 2001,Juric et al., 2006). TPM employs OEE as a quantitative metric for measuring the performance of a productive system. OEE is the core metric for measuring the success of TPM implementation program (Jeong & Phillips, 2001). The overall goal of TPM is to raise the overall equipment effectiveness (Shirose, 1989; Huang et al., 2002; Juric et al., 2006). OEE is calculated by obtaining the product of availability of the equipment, performance efficiency of the process and rate of quality products (Ljungberg, 1998; Dal et al., 2000): OEE=Availability (A) ×Performance efficiency (P) ×Rate of quality (Q); where: Availability (A)=[(Loading time-Downtime) ÷ Loading time] ×100, Performance efficiency (P)=[Processed amount ÷ (Operating time ÷ Theoretical cycle time)] ×100, Rate of quality (Q)=[(Processed amount-Defect amount) ÷ Processed amount] ×100 This metric has become widely accepted as a quantitative tool essential for measurement of productivity in manufacturing operations (Samuel et al., 2002). The OEE measure is central to the formulation and execution of a TPM improvement strategy (Ljungberg, 1998). TPM has the standards of 90 percent availability, 95 percent performance efficiency and 99 percent rate of quality (Levitt, 1996). An overall 85 percent benchmark OEE is considered as world-class performance (McKone et al., 1999). OEE measure provides a strong impetus for introducing a pilot and subsequently companywide TPM program. A comparison between the expected and current OEE measures can provide the much-needed impetus for the manufacturing organizations to improve the maintenance policy and affect continuous improvements in the manufacturing systems. OEE offers a measurement tool to evaluate equipment corrective action methods and ensure permanent productivity improvement. OEE is a productivity improvement process that starts with management awareness of total productive manufacturing and their commitment to focus the factory work force on training in teamwork and cross-functional equipment problem solving.
9. References 1. 2. 3.
Cross, J. (1988). Raising the value of maintenance in the corporate environment. Management Research News, 11(3), 8-11. Dunn, R. (1988), “Maintenance update–88. Plant Engineering”, 42(8), 60-62. Nakajima S.(1988), “Introduction to TPM(Total Productive Maintenance), Productivity Press”,
Ravinder Kundu, IJRIT
6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15.
16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24.
Annual Conference of the Production and Operations Man- agement Society, Orland, FL; 2001. 1-8 (CDROM). Ireland F. and Dale B.G.(2001), “A Study of Total Productive Maintenance Implementation” Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering 7(3):183-191. McKone, Kathleen E.; Schroeder, Roger G.; and Cua, Kristy O. (2001). The impact of total productive maintenance practices on manufacturing performance. Journal of Operations Management, 19(1), 39–58. Silveria,G.Da(2001), “Mass customization: Literature review and research directions”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol.72,Iss.1,pp.1-13. Ahuja, I.P.S., Singh, T.P., Sushil, M. and Wadood, A. (2004), “Total productive maintenance implementation at Tata Steel for achieving core competitiveness”, Productivity, Vol. 45 No. 3, pp. 422-6. Liu Chengyuan (2004), ‘’The Activity of New TPM’’, Haitian Publications, pp.61-9,72-5, 198-208 Ahmed, S.,Hassan, M.H. & Taha, Z. (2005). TPM can go beyond maintenance: excerpt from a case 31 implementation. Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, 11(1), 19-42. Kennedy, R.(2005), “Examining the Process of RCM & TPM,” The Plant Resource Center, Australia, pp.913. Oke, S.A. (2005). An analytical model for the optimization of maintenance profitability. International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, 54(2), 113-36. Ahuja I.P.S. et al.(2006), “Improved organizational behavior through strategic total productive maintenance implementation”, Proceeding of 2006 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress and Exposition(IMECE), at Chicago, Illinois(U.S.A.), pp.1-8.(Paper No. IMECE2006-15783). Deshmukh, S.G.,& Garg A,(2006), “Maintenance Management: literature review and directions” Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol.12,Iss.3,pp.205-238. Gosavi, Abhijit (2006). A risk-sensitive approach to total productive maintenance. Automatica (Journal of IFAC), 42(8), 1321–1330. Ahuja I.P.S., Khamba J.S.,(2007) ‘’An evalutation of TPM implementation initiatives in an Indian )
Cambridge, MA. Pp.1-121. Nakajima, S. (1989). TPM development program: Implementing total productive maintenance. Productivity Press, Portland, OR. Yoshida, K., Hongo, E., Kimura, Y.,Ueno, Y., Kaneda, M. & Morimoto, T. (1990). In: NachiFujikoshi Corporation and JIPM (Eds.), Training for TPM: A manufacturing success story, Productivity Press, Portland, OR. Hartmann, E.H.( 1992), “Successfully Installing TPM in a Non- Japanese Plant”, TPM Press, Allison Park, PA. Tajiri, M. and Gotoh, F. (1992), TPM Implementation: A Japanese Approach, McGraw-Hill Inc., New York, NY. Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G., Sakakibara, S.(1994), “A framework for quality management research and an associated measure- ment instrument”, Journal of Operations Management 11-4.,339–366. Ames and V.A.( 1996) “Implementing the Complete TPM Process.” SEMATECH TPM/OEE Case Study Workshop, Tempe , AZ, SEMATECH 1996. Ljungberg, O. (1998). Measurement of Overall Equipment effectiveness as a basis for TPM activities. International Journal of Operations and production management, 18(5), 495-507. Wireman T.(1998), “Developing performance indicators for managing maintenance”,New York, 1st Ed. Schroeder, R.G., Cua, K.O., and Kathleen,E.M.(1999), “Total Productive Maintenance: a contextual view,” Journal of Operations Management, Vol.17, Iss.2, pp.123-144. Amasaka, K. 2000. New JIT: a new management technology principle at Toyota. International Journal of Production Economics. 80, 135-44. Bhadury, B. (2000). Management of productivity through TPM. Productivity, 41(2), 240-51. Amasaka, K. (2001). A study of flyer advertising affect when TMS-S at Toyota. Proceedings of the 12th
Ravinder Kundu, IJRIT
manufacturing enterprise’’, Journal of quality in Maintence Engineering,vol,13 Iss;4,pp.338.352. 28. Ahuja I.P.S.and Khamba J.S.,(2008) ‘’Assessment of contributions of successful TPM initiatives towards competitive manufacturing ‘’, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol.14 Iss:4,pp.356-374. 29. Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S.(2008). “Investigation of manufacturing performance achievements through strategic total productive maintenance initiatives”, International Journal of Productivity and Quality Management (IJPQM), Vol.4, No.2 pp.129-152. 30. Ahuja, I.P.S. and Khamba, J.S. (2008b), “An assessment of maintenance management initiatives in Indian manufacturing industry”, International Journal of Technology, Policy, Management, Vol. 8 No. 3, pp. 250-78. 31. Ahuja I.P.S.,Khamba J.S.,(2009) ‘’A case study of total productive maintenance implementation at precision tube mills’’, Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering ,Vol.14 Iss:3,pp.241.258. 32. Sharma A et al.(2012). “Manufacturing performance and evaluation of TPM” International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology, vol.4 No.03 March 2012.
Ravinder Kundu, IJRIT