Reduction of Waste Time In a Processing Bags By Preventive ... · This research aims to study the use of principles preventive maintenance. To increase efficiency and reduce the time

. . 2556 16-18 2556

:

Reduction of Waste Time In a Processing Bags By Preventive Maintenance

A Case Study : Skk Manufacturing co.,ltd.

1* 2 3 4 1,2,3,4

E-mail: [email protected]*

Yuthanarong jongjun1* Nara buripun2 Sarun Hakpal 3 Ekapong Sangkanun4 1*,2,3,4 Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Thonburi University, Bangkok 10160

E-mail: [email protected]*

4 Cutting Machine Sewing Machine Pressing Machine Nearly

Machine Sewing Machine

5.86 .

14.01 . 58.17 31 14 54.83 87.54%

94.32% 7.30% 65.36% 81.85% 20.15% 10.93%

Abstract

This research aims to study the use of principles preventive maintenance. To increase efficiency and reduce the time of mechanical disruptions. The author studies the production line the pockets of the SKK

Manufacturing Co., Ltd., a study in the four types of the machine. Cutting Machine Sewing Machine Pressing Machine and Nearly Machine. The results of grading the severity of the problem with the QC tools control.

The machine in the Sewing Machine is a machine that have a loss caused by the disruptions. The researchers chose the first update using the cause and effect diagram. Analyze causes of problems for your

guidance in the preparation and maintenance plan according to the preventive maintenance and staff training. And implements planned. The results of the experiment found that Mean time between failures the improve

. . 2556 16-18 2556

with an average Up from 5.86 hours to 14.01 hours, Accounted for 58.17 percent before and after the update

Mean time to repair. Be the same. Frequency of the lower average of 31 times to 14 times, accounting for 54.83 percent. The availability of the machine, up from 87.54% to 94.32%, up 7.30%, the overall efficiency

effectiveness Up from 65.36% to 81.85%, up 20.15% and the rate of disruption of the machine breakdown

1.31%. Keywords: Mean time between failures, Mean time to repair, Overall Equipment Effectiveness

1.

1

1

(JIM THOMSON : JIM)

(Preventive Maintenance : PM)

� � (Breakdown)

(Target) 1.1

(Breakdown) (Preventive Maintenance)

(OEE)

1.2

(Mean

Time Between Failures : MTBF) (Mean Time To Repair : MTTR)

2.

2.1

� �

. . 2556 16-18 2556

2.1.1

[1] 2.1.2

2.1.3

2.1.4

2.2 7

7 (Check Sheet) (Pareto Diagram)

(Graph) (Cause & Effect Diagram) (Scatter Diagram)

(Control Chart) (Histogram) [2]

2.3 7

7

[3,4]

2.4

[5,6]

2.4.1 (MTBF)

MTBF =

2.4.2 (MTTR)

MTTR =

2.5 (OEE)

(Overall Equipment Effectiveness : OEE)

[7]

OEE = AR x PE x QR

AR =

PE = QR =

3.

3.1

M/C ( .)- ( ./ )

M/C ( )

( .)

( )

1

1

cutting

sawing

pressing

nearly

2

2

1

M/C

M/C

g M/C

M/C

2

CTM

SM

PM

NM

17

2

4

(

37

154

32

4

)

4

(MT

Ope

Net

C

C

(MTB

TR)

3

erating Rate

Operating R

(Mino

4

20.83

2.27

Cutting Machine Saw

2225

Cutting Machine Saw

16-1

BF)

MTBF

Net Oper Speed

Rate

or Stoppage)

2556

7.37

27

2.53

wing Machine Press

MTBF M

4075

wing Machine Press

18 2556

MTTR

rating Rate d Operating

)

. . 55

3 2555

7.4

67.1

2.31

sing Machine Nearly

MTTR

6000 6

sing Machine Nearly

. . 2556

3

. . 55

Speed

Rate

4

2555

8

2.15

y Machine

6000

y Machine

3.2

Machine 53.14

55.18%

(Brainsto

5

rm)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

(

2

(Down T

(Meeting)

53.14

SM

55.18%

5

(Pareto Diag

Sa

Time)

(Cause

20.51

CTM

gram)

awing

and

Effe

SMCTPMNM

Tot

(Cau

73.65%

ct Diagram)

2

( .)

M 53.14 M 20.51

M 16.20 M 6.45 tal 96.30

6

use and Effec

(Down T

(Preve

16.2

PM

90.47%

16-1

)

%

55.18 21.30 16.82 6.70 100

ct Diagram)

Sawing

Time)

entive Mainten

6.4

NM

%

4

18 2556

( .)

53.14 73.56 89.85 96.30

g Machine

nance : PM)

45

M

100%

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

1

. . 2556

6

%

55.18 73.65 90.47 100

0

0

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

00

. . 2556 16-18 2556

Breakdown

Sawing Machine

6 Sawing Machine

. . 2556 16-18 2556

Sawing Machine 3

3 Sawing

Machine

set up

set up

set up

set up set up

set up

set up

set up

3

4

4

. .55 36 24.34 208 5.10 0.68

. .55 31 21.04 208 6.03 0.68

. .55 33 31.43 208 5.35 0.95

. .55 24 27.56 208 7.51 1.15

31 26.09 208 5.86 0.84

4 (MTBF)

5.86 ./

(MTTR) 0.84 .

3.3

5

5

1

Sawing

Machine

2

1

3

4

/ /

5

(PM-Instruction)

3 6 12

PM 3 6 1

6

PM

4.

. . 2556 16-18 2556

6

6

. .55 15 16.40 208 12.77 1.09

. .55 12 8.27 208 16.64 0.70

. .55 19 12.49 208 10.29 0.65

. .56 11 10.04 208 17.70 1.21

14 11.80 208 14.01 0.84

6

(MTBF) (MTTR)

7

7 MTBF MTTR

MTBF MTTR

5.86 0.84

14.01 0.84

8.15 0

% 58.17 0

7

(MTBF) Sewing Machine 5.86 . 14.01 . 8.15 .

58.17% (MTTR)

(MTTR)

(Overall

Equipment Effectiveness : OEE)

Sewing Machine

8

8

(208-26.09)/208*100 87.45%

(208-11.80)/208*100 94.32%

8

(PM) 87.45% 94.32% 7.30

9

9

(176/208)*100 84.62%

(190/208)*100 91.35%

9

(PM)

84.62% 91.35% 7.36

10

10

(2650/3000)*100 88.33%

(2850/3000)*100 95.00%

10 (PM)

84.62% 95.00% 10.93

X 100

X 100

X 100

. . 2556 16-18 2556

11

11 OEE

AR PE QR X 100 OEE

0.8745 0.8462 0.8833 100 65.36

0.9432 0.9135 0.9500 100 81.85

11 ( Preventive

Maintenance: PM) 65.36% 81.85%

20.15

5.

5.1

1) (MTBF)

Sewing Machine 8.15 58.17

2) (MTTR) Sewing Machine

17 54.83

3) Sewing Machine 20.15%

4) Break Down Sewing Machine 10.93%

5.2

PM 2

[1] . 2549.

: .

.

. [2] ] , 2555.

7 (7 QC Tools). :

. [3] . 2548.

(Productivity Improvement). 5. : .

[4] , 7 (7 Wastes). :

, 2544. [5] . 2545. .

: . [6] . 2542.

. 4.

: . [7] . 2543. ,

. :

.