Rodrigues da S ilva Engineer - Consultant - Trainer www.freewebs.com / leanemportugal jparsilva @sapo.pt Keywords: OEE, Equipment Overhaul Effectivess, Lean manufacturing, TPM, Total Pr oductive Maintenance, Lean maintenance, Total Productive Maintenance, Performanc e, Effectiveness, Efficiency, Availability, Quality, Efficiency, Availability, Q uality, TEEP Quotes from Lord Kelvin: "I Often When You Can Say That measure what you are spe aking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it, But When Yo u Can not express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meager and unsatisfactor y kind ... "" To measure is to know. " "If You Can not measure it, You Can not I mprove It." Summary It is of utmost importance to measure how the equipment and how they are conduct ed contribute to the performance of industrial enterprises, because these depend on several key aspects that ultimately determine their success or even survival . The performance of the equipment directly determines the productivity of produ ction processes, influences the efficiency of hand-work, contributes to the leve l of product quality and customer satisfaction. This article describes when and where the OEE was developed from the "Big Six Losses of equipment, how to calcul ate it and implement it, and focuses on the strategies and the main tools used t o improve the availability and efficiency of equipment and quality of the produc ts they produced. Using two spreadsheets model linked to the file of this articl e, the concepts and formulas can be easily understood and applied by readers who may also use them in their real cases. It also highlighted the need to measure the ability of equipment to generate revenue for businesses is being harnessed b y using other indicators to complement the more comprehensive EEO. In the Append ices, contained a complete glossary of terms, key references and some web sites related to EEO and a list of the best known computer programs. To enrich the kno wledge of readers about the topic, as provided text links to Web sites, includin g the free encyclopedia www. wikipedia.org. Introduction Management companies often resorts to a set of indicators, usually only economic and financial nature, on the market and its competitive position, forgetting re presentative indicators of productive activity and operations, when these activi ties are the source of the determinants competitiveness and economic performance . So it is a basic condition of good management have a set of representative ind icators of the performance of the plant and operations in general. Maximize oper ability and performance of equipment in terms of efficiency and quality should b e a permanent objective of the managers of the operations of industrial faciliti es, transportation, telecommunications and all firms whose production depends ma inly on the performance of the equipment. It is here that fit the various existi ng approaches to measure the performance of the equipment being recognized by ma ny authors and organizations, worldwide, that the best way to measure the effect iveness of the equipment during operation, is the indicator: OEE - Overhaul Equipment Effectiveness - Overall Equipment Effectiveness 1 / 15 OEE is an indicator that measures performance in a "three dimensional" (Fig. 1) it takes into consideration: Quality • how much time the equipment has to work / produce • the efficiency demonstrate d during operation, ie the ability to produce the nominal cadence • the quality

of the product obtained by the process in which the equipment is housed. Efficiency EEO Availability 1 - Tri-dimensonalidade OEE Other indicators of equipment performance are not abragência OEE, for example, w hen you focus only on efficiency or time available to produce. But we see in Fig ure 2, which happens every day in much of the equipment of industrial units: Boot Failure Meal Time Set product expected material change Clean Production Spe ed Reduction Tool Exchange 2 - The reality of the functioning of many devices A significant portion of time that the equipment should be operating, actually i s stopped or operating in conditions that do not allow to produce the ideal cade nce. The negative impact on productivity and costs are huge and often€is this si tuation that led to the lack of timeliness of delivery to Customer or in stock-o uts at the stores. Unfortunately, the traditional accounting mechanisms to contr ol costs do not reflect "reality" of the factories. If they did, surely the live s of those responsible for the operations would be much more complicated, becaus e the show "Hidden Factory" that exists in all plants, calling their attention t o the "True Cost of Stops" and a loss in general . Figure 3 shows the classical concept of cost accounting of production, where the cost of losses and wastage i s hidden in the various cost components. Since there are losses in all these cla ssics cost components, the actual situation is shown in Figure 4, with losses re aching values sometimes very high. P e r s of the Indirect Maint ention Energy Mat erials Indirect the Maint ention Ener gy Mat er ial Hand-work Hand-work 3 - Total cost of production with the losses "hidden" 4 - Costs of production losses evidenced 1 View Sites on the Internet [1] 2 / 15 The great losses responsible for this large share of costs of production (and pr oduct) has its origin in so-called "Seven Types of Waste" as defined by Taiichi Ohno: • • • • • • • Waiting periods Transport unnecessary Production excess (ove r what and when necessary) Inventories (stock) materials (over and when necessar y) Over-processing Unnecessary movement of people of quality defects 5 - Taiichi Ohno Focusing on the production equipment, Seiichi Nakajima defined, in a more object ive, the main losses caused by their equipment or the way they are operated, and created the so-called "Big Six Losses of equipment."

6 - Seiichi Nakajima The six big losses of equipment Before moving to the deeper explanation of OEE and how it is calculated, it shou ld retain the concepts of losses related to the equipment. Nakajima defined in h is book [3] [4] that the production losses due to problems with equipment 2 has three sources: • Losses caused by unplanned stops; • Losses for the equipment is not operating at the speed / cadence nominal; • Losses of product not meet spec ifications. From these three sources of losses, Nakajima defined the six big los ses of the main production equipment: • Failure / breakdown of equipment • Chang e (changeover) settings / adjustments (setup), and elsewhere; • Waits, stopping off due to other process steps (upstream or downstream) and work in a vacuum; • Reduce speed / cadence for the originally planned; • Defective product quality a nd rework; • Losses on startup and change of product (non-compliant product and waste materials). In table 1, we present some examples of events that cause the six types of losses and their consequences. Table 1 Loss Events • mechanical failure, electrical or other systems which cause the interruption o f production equipment • General failure • Wrap tools • unplanned stoppages for maintenance • Power failures / utilities • Change of product • Heating / cooling for changing tools • Replacement of worn tools • Stops • Lack of cleaning mater ials • Lack of operator Consequences Remarks The expression stops over 50-10 minutes, recorded by the operator or automatical ly 1 - Failure 2 - Change, adjust and elsewhere Reduce the time available to produce or operate the equipment Losses change are reduced or eliminated by the implementation of SMED techniques 2 We consider the binomial equipment-operator if the machine requires the operator to operate, ie, not fully automatic as well as the environment in which it is i nserted (process, organization, necessary utilities, etc.. 3 / 15 3 - Small stops 4 - Reduction of speed 5 - Defects and rework • Cleaning and minor adjustments • Obstruction in the flow upstream or downstrea m • Failure to supply materials • Replacement Tools • Verification by the operat or wear / adjustment parameters • Operating below the specified speed operation • Irregular • Failure by the operator to ensure the smooth operation • Scrap • P roduct off-specification product • Rework • Incorrect assembly • Bad • Component parts • Lack of Scrap Affect the efficiency of the equipment, not allowing it to operate in nominal cy cle time Stops less than 50-10 minutes and not requiring the intervention of maintenance personnel, usually not recorded by the operator All instances it impossible to p

roduce maximum speed specified for the product Product rejected during the norma l operation of equipment 6 - Loss of off-specification product • Boot • Rework product Reduce the amount of product that meets the specifications for first Product rejected during the startup or shutdown of equipment due to normal cause s (pre-heating) or errors of pitch In this concept of the Big Six Losses of equipment are not considered stops plan ned for equipment such as: • Time meal breaks and binding of the operator; • Tim e scheduled for separate maintenance by the operator (eg, 10 minutes at the begi nning of each shift ) • Time scheduled for planned maintenance (preventative ins pections, corrective) • Time for training of the operator; • Time for meetings ( provided in the plan of production) • Testing of production (Ex-New Products) • Lack of production program. Some authors choose to consider some of these times within the Big Six Losses and therefore covered by the EEO, including planned ma intenance work. The purpose of this option is not losing focus on this kind of s tops, to reduce its duration through studies of reliability and Maintainability and the development of preventive maintenance on a systematic basis for maintena nce based on condition. Origins and definition of OEE The OEE originated in TPM - Total Productive Maintenance, part of the TPS - Toyo ta Production System and its creator, Seiichi Nakajima, developed it as a means of quantifying not only the performance of equipment, but also as a metric for c ontinuous improvement of equipment and production processes. With the adoption o f the concepts of TPS for a number of Japanese companies and the development of Lean Manufacturing in the West, the OEE has become the global benchmark for meas uring the performance of the equipment of industrial enterprises. As already men tioned, the OEE is an indication "three dimensional" which reflects the main los ses related equipment. Quantifies how much the equipment is effective in adding value to the product in a production process. Just as production losses related equipment have three origins, the OEE is composed of three factors representativ e of these three sources: • Availability • Efficiency • Quality. A simple way to introduce the concept of OEE is through the definition of "Perfect Engine": If during a given period of time there are no losses of any kind, ie the quipamento was always able to produce when needed and has always produced products without defects to the first and the maximum speed set, then said to be operated with 1 00% overall efficiency. Figure 7 shows the relationship among the six big losses and the factors of OEE. 4 / 15 1 - Failure / malfunction 2 - Change / adjust 3 - Wait / small stops 4 - Reduce speed LOSS OF SPEED / CADENCE 5 - Defects / rework 6 - Losses boot Stops DEFECTS Reducing the time available to produce Reduction in equipment efficiency

Rework defective or rejected products and scrap AVAILABILITY EFFICIENCY QUALITY 7 - Relationship between the six major losses and the factors of OEE Besides being an indicator of performance, the OEE has utility for four addition al purposes: • Planning of capacity • Process Control, Process Improvement •, • Costs for production losses. OEE should not be used as a criterion for acceptanc e of equipment, since it involves factors external to the equipment. OEE is not a system rasteio of failures, but only one detection system losses. Therefore, t he variety of losses to be considered for equipment, should be limited (maximum 50-10) to allow an unambiguous and rapid identification by the operator but allo wing an assessment of the primary importance of each loss on a diagram Paretti. Calculation of OEE OEE is determined by multiplying the three representative numerical factors: • t he availability of equipment to produce, • efficiency demonstrated during produc tion • the quality of the product. EEO Availability Efficiency Quality OEE = Availability x Quality x Efficiency Figure 8 - The three factors of OEE A simple example: A production line produced 99% of good products at first and r an for 90% of the time schedule (10% of unplanned stops) at a rate averaging 95% of the programmed cadence, so€obtained an overall efficiency of 90 x 95 x 99 = 85%. None of the factors of OEE can be greater than 100%. Sometimes, we obtain e fficiency values exceeding 100%. This is a sign that the equipment could produce a cadence / speed rated higher than the value considered as standard (nominal c adence). Setting the pace rating (based on ideal cycle time) For purposes of cal culating the efficiency, requires some precautions, otherwise the efficiency val ues obtained may be misleading. For example, the nominal cadence set by the manu facturer for a production line is 10 units per minute (cycle time = 6 seconds or 0.1 minutes). In testing of the line and for various reasons, only been achieve d in a consistent manner, a rate of 8 units per minute. So this is the value to be nominal cadence as in the calculation of efficiency (cycle time = 7.5 seconds , or 0.125 minutes). If, for technological reasons, the cycle time of the equipm ent is changed (increased or decreased), the OEE will be based on a new reality, possibly not comparable with the previous one. You must take this into consider ation. Another situation that needs attention is when the equipment is the proce ss handle (pacemaker) in a flow value based on lean principles. This equipment w ill not work when the nominal maximum cadence 5 / 15 but according to the takt time this March and, probably, will vary over time, ac cording to the demand of the Customer. In this case, is the takt time to conside r how cycle time, to calculate the efficiency factor of OEE. To demonstrate the method of calculating OEE, we use two examples included in both ® Excel files li sted below. Example 1 Let's start with a simple example that just want to get th e values of three factors D, E, Q and OEE. The data were collected on the sheet of Registration of Operation of Equipment-Model A (see page 1 of 4 oee_calculato

r_model_A_pt.xls file during an 8 hour shift. In addition, the program provides not produce in the last hour of the shift and the equipment was stopped during a meal time for the operator. At the beginning of the shift, the operator has 15 minutes for maintenance tasks independently. The nominal cycle time is 15 second s and were recorded 50 minutes of unplanned stoppages. It was obtained a product ion of 825 units , of which 35 were rejected for scrap and rework the 50th compe lled to meet the specifications. With these data and formulas in the table on pa ge "2-OEE Calculator Model A", is automatically obtained the results shown in Fi gure 9. A quite informative way of presenting the OEE is through graphs. The thr ee examples presented in Figures 10, 11 and 12 are the more traditional forms of graphically representing the times of OEE and losses (see page 3 of the file). Formulas ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST abbrev. TT TTO NPT PP TPP PNP TBP EEO Appointment Time Total Time Total Time Not Planned Operation Time Stops Planned Planned Not Planned Stops Production Time Gross Production Value 480 60 420 75 345 50 295 Un it minutes minutes minutes minutes minutes% minutes% units units units units units minutes%% C = E = A-B C D E F G = H = G/Ex100 D T / CN Availability Factor Cycle Time Production Theoretical Nominal Real Real Time Production Total Produc tion Efficiency Losses 86 0.25 1180 825 206 89 KxI L = M = N = G-L L/Gx100 TRP PE E Efficiency Factor Rejected production (scrap) production reworked product (Recovered) Good Product ion (At first) Util Time Production Quality Losses 70 35 50,740,185 21 KOP Q = R = S = LR QxI T = U = R/Lx100 HxNxT/10000 TUP PQ Q Quality Factor 90 54 Data U = R/Ex100 OEE Overall Equipment Effectiveness E 70 Q 90 54 OEE D 86

X X = % Calculated values Figure 9 - Calculating the OEE of Example 1 April 3 Takt time = Search Product / Download time available to produce in www.scribd.co m. To download the files you need to register on the site. 6 / 15 Min 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 Time Gross Planned Time of Real-Time Produc tion Production Production Production Time Util 345 295 600 500 60 Time unplanned planned whiffs P P whiffs unplanned 400 min 206 185 75 50 P P ERDAS ERDAS efficiency of quality 300 200 100 0 Total Time Time Operation Planned Production 420 345 89 21 295 206 185 Real Time Gross Time Time Util of Production Production Production Figure 10 - Graph of Example 1 times Figure 11 - Chart of times and losses of Example 1 OEE - Times and Losses 480 420 345 295 206 185 0 100 21 200 300 400 500 600 Min 89 50 75 60 TT-TTO-Time Total Time Total Time Operation TNP-TPP-Time Not Planned Planned Pla nned Stops Production PP-TBP-Time Gross Production PNP-Stops Planned Not TRP-Rea l Time Production Efficiency Losses PE-TUP-time PQ-Production Losses quality Legend Fig.12 - Diagram of horizontal stroke and loss of Example 1 This example not allowing a deeper analysis of equipment performance because it

includes only one shift and has no repetition of anomalies. Also not available f or data on the costs of losses, we can only conclude that to improve OEE, we pri marily implement actions to: • reduce efficiency losses (most important), after analyzing its causes, reduce • time and / or quantity of the unplanned stops. Ex ample 2 Let us explore the potential of EEO through a more elaborate example (pr oduction of three products with different cycle times and also address the root cause analysis of stops to guide the priority measures to improve OEE. Apart fro m the data basic calculation of OEE (as in the previous example), were collected details about the operation of equipment, using the sheet of Registration of Op eration of Equipment - Model B (see page 1 of file oee_calculator_model_B_pt.xls 4) for a period of three 8 hour shifts. In the three rounds is planned to produ ce three products A, B and C, with nominal cycle times and amounts indicated bel ow: Product Mon T / CN min. Production plan Quantity min. A B C D E 15 20 30 0.25 0.33 0.50 0.00 0.00 1400 1000 1200 350.0 333.3 600.0 0.0 0.0 TOTALS 3600 1283.3 Leaf Registration of Operation of Equipment Model B-1, we can conclude that the equipment was stopped for 30 minutes for meal operators in each shift. At the be ginning of each shift, operators have 10 minutes for maintenance tasks independe ntly. 7 / 15 Were recorded 25 and 30 minutes for product changes, four failures of 9, 12, 8 a nd 13 minutes and a failure of compressed air for 10 minutes. There were problem s with tools that, by 12 times, caused a reduction of the rate and several other small stops or speed reduction. There have been 900 products A, 700 B and 890 C and were discarded for scrap 20 products A and 12 B, 45 C products have been re worked to meet specifications, as recorded in the leaf of the Registration of Op erations Model B-2, which automatically performs some youngest, as shown in the following table: Product Mon T / CN min. Actual production TRP Quantity (min.) Quality defects Scrap Rework PQ (min.) A B C D E 15 20 30 0 0 TOTAL 0.25 0.33 0.50 0.00 0.00 900 700 890

225 233 445 0 0 December 20 45 5.0 4.0 22.5 0.0 0.0 2490 903 32 45 32 These data are automatically entered on the "two-OEE Calculator Mod.B" and obtai ned the results shown in Figure 13. The graphics of this representative sample a re shown in Figures 14, 15 and 16. Formulas ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRST abbrev. TT TTO NPT PP TPP PNP TBP DT / CN EEO Appo intment Time Total Time Total Time Not Planned Operation Time Stops Planned Plan ned Not Planned Stops Production Time Gross Production Availability Factor Nomin al Cycle Time Plan Production Production Total Real Time Real Production Loss of Efficiency Production Efficiency Factor Rejected (Scrap) Production reworked pr oduct (Recovered) Good Production (At first) Util Time Production Losses Quality Factor Quality Overall Equipment Effectiveness E 74 Q 97 66 OEE C = A-B C-D E = G = E F-H = G/Ex100 Value 1440 0 1440 120 1320 107 1213 Unit minutes minutes minutes minutes minutes% minutes% units units units units units minutes%% 92 --- 3600 2490 903 310 L = Σ (KxI) M = N = G-L L/Gx100 TRP AND PE 74 32 45 2413 872 32 KOP Q = R = TUP PQ Q OEE 97 66 Data U = R/Ex100 D 92 X X


L = Σ ((O + P) xI) T = U = R/Lx100 HxNxT/10000

= % Calculated values Figure 13 - Calculating the OEE of Example 2 1400 1200 1000 Min 800 Min 903 872 1320 1213 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 1440 0 Time unplanned P whiffs planned P whiffs unplanned 120 107 310 P ERDA efficiency 32 P ERDA quality 600 400 200 0 Time to Planned Production Time Gross Real Time Production Product ion Production Time Util 1320 1213 903 872 0 Total Time Operating Time to Planned Production Time Real Time Gross Util Time o f Production Production Production Figure 14 - Graph of Example 2 times Figure 15 - Chart of times and losses in Example 2 8 / 15 OEE - Times and Losses 1440 1440 1320 1213 903 872 0 200 400 600 800 Min 32 1000 1200 1400 1600 107 310 0120 TT-TTO-Time Total Time Total Time Operation TNP-TPP-Time Not Planned Planned Pla nned tops Production PP-TBP-Time Gross Production PNP- tops Planned Not TRP-Rea l Time Production Efficiency Losses PE-TUP-time PQ-Production Losses quality Legend Figure 16 - Graph of horizontal stroke and loss of Example 2 This example allows a more detailed analysis on the performance of the equipment , the time period considered, in order to take appropriate actions. On the "four -Analysis-stop" file is presented a simple analysis on the frequency of the caus es of unplanned stops and how long they lasted (see Figures 17 and 18). It is ap




propriate to make these two tests because they may lead to different conclusions about the priority of improvements, assisting in the process of decision making . Only by observing the graphs it is concluded that the main actions to be under taken will include: • Reduce the time for change (about 50% of the time PNP; • I dentify the causes of mechanical malfunctions and resolve them. But, given the l arge negative impact on efficiency, it is necessary to solve certain problems wi th tools, which led, along with other small stops or reduction of cadence, effic iency losses of around 26% of TBP, equivalent to over five hours to 24 hours of work equipment. Obviously one day of analysis is not enough to make decisions. I t is necessary to monitor the performance of equipment for days or weeks to accu mulate a sufficient amount of data representative of the actual performance of t he equipment and the arrest occurred. 4 Number of stops 60 50 Time stops unplanned 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 3 min. 40 30 20 2 1 0 Failure mechanics Change product failed air supply failure 10 0 Change Product Mishap Time Electrical failure Failed air % Cumulative time Figure 17 - Diagram Paretti the number of stops Figure 18 - Diagram of the times of stops Paretti It is recommended that the causes of breakdowns and other events are coded so th at operators do not require much text. Codes should be self-illuminating for eas y storage and must be the same for all plant equipment. EEO and the costs of losses When calculating the OEE and monitor its progress only in their total value, not taking advantage of the full potential of the system. It is very important to p ay attention to the values and monitor the progress of individual factors and to quantify the economic impact of losses. By analyzing the OEE and its three fact ors D, E and Q, since only are based on the magnitude time, we may be obliged to take specific guidance on actions to implement. Moreover, if we are in possessi on of the costs of losses, we can arrive at different conclusions. Consider the following case. Two equal equipment, operating in a given period of time, showed the performance shown in the table below:

9 / 15 % Quality Efficiency Effectiveness OEE Availability The equipment 85% 95% 95% 80% Equipment B 95% 98% 89% 82.9% On those figures, we conclude that the equipment B has shown more effectiveness than the equipment A. However, the equipment B caused more quality defects that A. This represented a loss of quality value much higher cost than the equipment have been more down time and with an efficiency lower than B. It is therefore ne cessary to consider the value and evolution of the losses, not only in terms of time, but also in terms of cost. In this example, improvement actions should bec ome a priority for resolving the problems of quality of the equipment B, the neg ative impact they have on costs. There is a standard calculation method to calcu late the costs of losses. Using as a basis to Example 1 above presented, we can calculate the cost of losses from the following unit costs: MO Manufacturing Cost Cost Cost materials / pcs. Cost recovery / pcs. Unit costs 15 / 25 m / h 14 / piece 5 / piece Applying the formulas for calculating this model (see cells 10: 15 on page 2 o f file oee_calculator_model_A_pt.xls), we obtain the following costs of losses: Total Cost of Not tops Planned Total Cost of Losses Cost Efficiency of the prod uct materials rejected Cost Recovery Cost + OM Transformation of nonconforming p roduct Losses Total Cost of Quality Cost 13 59,490,250 14 754 One way to highlight the differences between costs, lost time and units to prese nt their absolute values: Cost of losses ( ) unplanned stops Efficiency Quality losses TOTAL Times (min) U nits lost 13 59,754,826 50 89 21 160 200 355 85 640 Now, the quality problems are responsible for the greatest loss in value, while that based on time, efficiency losses were the most important, as shown in Figur e 19. This example shows that the simple analysis of OEE and its factors based o n time, you may not give correct guidance about which areas to act to improve ef ficiency. It is essential that this analysis is accompanied by the calculating t he cost of the losses incurred.

Figure 19 - Comparison of percentage of the costs and time losses Analysis of OEE and other indicators OEE measures the effectiveness of personal equipment. It can also be used to com pare the performance of the equipment equal work under similar conditions. 10/15


Cost and Time of Loss 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% Cost Efficiency losses

tops Time Quality losses




As demonstrated, analyzing OEE only for their value and their factors, does not consider any measures to improve or calculate the potential cost savings from wa ste. To do this, have to be calculated the costs of losses. Let us now look what is happening at the level of performance of an industrial Even we calculate the average OEE of all equipment of a factory, this number tells us nothing about t he factory as a whole, is contributing to the business or even if she is making money or not. For the same factory, if during a certain time there are few order s and only part of the equipment to work, she may submit an EEO much higher than usual (eg 90% vs. 65%), but during this period, the plant has lost money due to profit does not cover all fixed charges. This is because the OEE does not consi der the stops planned or unplanned time. o to have a clearer view of the perfor mance (or a production line or a factory) and how they contribute to the company , it is necessary to supplement the OEE by other more global indicators for meas uring the degree of use of equipment, for the TTTempo total. For these indicator s is not necessary to collect more data than is already collected for the OEE. F igure 20 shows how to calculate the three indicators that measure the degree of utilization of equipment. TT TTO TPP TBP TRP TUP A B C D PQ PE PP NPT PNP OEE = A / B = TUP / TBP TEEP = A / D = TUP / TT TUB = B / D = TBP / TT TUC = C / U = TPP / TT Figure 20 - EEO and global indicators The TEEP-Total Effective Equipment Productivity - Productivity Total Effective E quipment, measures the percentage of time the equipment is to produce good produ cts at first, for the total time (TT). It is the most comprehensive indicator "r adical" and more used, together with the EEO. The TUB - Utilization Rate Gross a nd TUC - Rate of capacity utilization, are the other two global indicators can a lso be used. Each company must decide what the overall indicator of performance of the equipment that best suits the needs of analysis. For the second example a bove, the values of these indicators were: OEE TTEP TUB TUC 66% 61% 84% 92% Implementation of OEE The implementation of an OEE system requires a prior assessment of needs, defini tion of the objectives and the assembly of an implementation plan. hould be con sidered a business plan and not as "another fad" that will create more bureaucra cy on the factory floor. The methodology and resources to be used will depend on the size of the plant and its degree of automation. In factories with automatic lines connected to computer systems for monitoring the process should encararse investment in computer software dedicated to the EEO five or development of an EEO program in their own system for monitoring the process. The big advantages o f an integrated EEO program are: 5

ee References OEE programs on 11/15

• enable "real time" monitoring the effectiveness of individual equipment and pr ocess lines in which they are entered; • minimize the administrative work with t he EEO; • ensure the reliability of data; • to take corrective actions more quic kly, enabling • dissemination of results "on line" for various levels of the com pany. In plants with equipment operators and led by discrete cell manufacturing / assembly, it makes sense to implement a system based on manual records on pape




r, complete with classic tools for calculating and graphing are like spreadsheet s (M Excel ®, etc.).. In either case the disclosure of the results of OEE, its evolution and monitoring of corrective actions and improvements should be made b y visual systems,€placed with the equipment. A project OEE includes the followin g steps: 1. Identifying needs and setting goals 2. Conceptual definition 3. Plan the project in April. Acquisition or creation of the media 5. Education and tra ining of operators, supervisors and management 6. Pilot implementation in device (s) selected (s) 7. Implementation extended to all plant equipment 8. Continuou s improvement and continues the EEO. Phase 8 is included in the Deming PDCA conc ept and can be symbolized by Figure 17. Figure 17 - Continued improvement of OEE Improving OEE - trategies to eliminate the Big ix Losses The analysis of OEE allows you to: • decide on corrective actions and improvemen t based on facts and real data and not "reviews" • Prioritize actions that will bring bigger and faster results; • Monitor the effects of actions by the evoluti on Positive OEE and its factors. Improving OEE is an ongoing process that is usu ally framed in programs TPM - Total Productive Maintenance or implementation of Lean Manufacturing concepts in the management of production units. trategies to eliminate the " ix Big Losses" and, consequently, improve OEE, can be of two ty pes, depending on the desired objectives and deadlines for obtaining them. Table 2 lists the six losses on the type of strategies and indicate some features of TPM, Lean and Quality apply to every case. Table 2 Loss trategies for Eliminati on / reduction • Repair • quickly and effectively detect and correct the causes of breakdowns • • • • Prevention strategies Preventive maintenance Predictive maintenance Autonomous Maintenance RCM-Reliabi lity Centred Maintenance Applicable tools • 5 • FTA-Fault Tree Analysis • Analysis Diagram Ishikawa PM • • • MED Poka-Yo ke ystems • visual • ystems in place using a single theme • Lessons • tandard ized work 1 - Failure 2 - Change, adjust and elsewhere • Reduce the time for change • Design or modify equipment incorporating techniques to (no need to change) 12/15 3 - mall • Elimination of small stops stops • RCM-Reliability Centred Maintenance • Automation • Autonomation • Modify equip ment for continuous feeding 4 - Reduction of speed • Balancing of production lines • Engineering reliability 5 - Defects and • detect and correct the causes of quality problems, rework

MED • Equipment monoprodu












• Quality • Maintenance • Preventive actions Autonomation 6 - Losses • Detect and correct the causes of losses start • tudy and implement the ideal boot • Modify equipment and tools • 5 • FTA-Fault Tree Analysis • Analysis • Kaizen PM Ishikawa Diagram • • Train ing • Lessons and training of single theme • tandardized work • Diagram Paretti • 5 • FTA-Fault Tree Analysis • Kaizen • Zip-Control tatistical Process and P roduct Quality at source • • ix- igma • Poka-Yoke • tandardized work • Kaizen • MED • Training • Lessons and training of single theme • tandardized work • K aizen Conclusions OEE is not a solution to problems of productive systems. He just: • Allows you t o identify and quantify the problems detected in a standardized way; • Expresses effectiveness of the equipment through a single number; • Allows evaluate the e ffects of improvement actions designed to make equipment more efficient and thus generate more value for the company. Companies that apply the system of measuri ng OEE and effectively implement the necessary actions to improve the effectiven ess of the equipment, obtain a fast increase in OEE of the order of 50-20 percen tage points. Depending on the starting value of the OEE, the effort put into the improvement and consolidation, OEE can get to double within one year (eg passin g from 35 to 70%). The higher the value of OEE is more difficult to improve it. The "bar" of 85%, achieved consistently, is a reference to "world class". Howeve r, companies that have adopted the forefront of Lean as a management feature for your production line OEE values above 90%. OEE, its factors D, E and Q as well as global indicators TEEP, TUB TUC and are just indicators, nothing more. They j ust tell you if there are problems, what is the potential use of the equipment a nd if we are improving or getting worse. When there is a problem it has to be in vestigated by studying and implementing measures that resolve, eliminating a per manent form (s) cause (s) root,€properly consolidated (s) for standardized work. OEE is primarily a tool to support continuous improvement. If this concept is p resent in all the players in the system - operators, supervisors and management - then the environment will be created so that the system becomes an indicator o f management very helpful and never be tempted to "manipulate" the numbers. Fina lly, some recommendations, sometimes forgotten, to support / facilitate continuo us improvement: • Learn to identify and eliminate waste and losses of equipment; • olve problems in a simple and practical way; • tandardize work to reduce va riation and ensure quality; • Team work; • Valuing people and reward their dedic ation to continuous improvement. 13/15 APPENDICE Glossary OEE D - Availability (factor) - Availability rate - the percentage of planned produc tion time, during which the operation of the equipment is not affected by a malf unction, or other unplanned event, which resulted in his arrest. All equipment m ust be available when the production plan. Measures the reliability of the equip ment to produce according to the needs of the client. Effectiveness - Effectiven ess - Measures the degree of achievement of the productive capacity of a machine , or process, comparing the actual production of flawless products obtained at f irst, with the maximum output that this machine, or process instação can produce . Example: If we can produce more good products in part A than in part B, then t he former was more effective than the second. E - Efficiency (factor) - Performa nce rate - measures the degree of resource utilization device, for a given outpu t in a given period of time. It is the ratio between the real cadence and averag e cadence planned or the ratio between the actual production achieved, and total production planned for the TBP. Example: If the shift to use less resources to












produce the same amount of product which the B shift, then shift to work more ef ficiently. Equipment - Equipment - A standalone machine, an automatic station of a line, a workstation or a system / production line complete. It is important t hat the limits / boundaries of equipment are defined and are clear. PE - Loss of efficiency - peed losses - the equivalent time lost due to minor stoppages (no t registered) or the equipment does not produce the rated speed. It's a Big ix Losses. PNP - tops unplanned - Unplanned downtime - the time lost production du e to unplanned stoppages (registered). PP - tops Planned - Planned downtime - p lanned time to perform planned maintenance (preventive, curative), testing and p roduction experiences and autonomous maintenance (operator). Dependent on equipm ent operator to operate, consider also the intervals for meals, breaks and time for training and meetings. PQ - Loss of quality - Quality losses - Time lost to produce pieces that do not meet quality specifications. For the OEE, scrap, rewo rk or product of second choice are the same, ie, it is not good product at first , and therefore constitute loss of quality. Q - Quality (factor) - Quality rate - One of the three factors of OEE. It takes into account the losses of quality ( product does not meet the specification in first). Even if the product can be re processed in order to meet the specifications for the OEE, is defective. It is t he ratio between the amount of good product at first and the total quantity prod uced. eiichi Nakajima - Featured engineer at Toyota. Considered one of the "fat hers" of TP -Toyota Production ysytem, was the creator of the TPM-Total Product ive Maintenance and OEE. ix big losses of equipment - ix big losses of equipme nt - The six major equipment related losses, identified and defined by eiichi N akajima. MED - ingle minute exchange of dies - Methodology to reduce the time for change of equipment. The name of the methodology, developed by higeo hingo , the objective is to reduce the changing times of the tools (the press) to less than 10 minutes (only one digit). Takt time - Rate of production needed to keep pace with demand (the needs of customers) TBP - Time cadence nominal gross outp ut or not. Runing time - time in which the equipment is producing product, TEEP - Total Effective Equipment Productivity - Productivity effective overall e quipment - the percentage of time the equipment is to produce good products at f irst,€for the total time (TT) NPT - unplanned time - unscheduled time - time whe re there is no need for operating equipment. Example: holidays, weekends, holida ys, lack of work. TPP - Time planned production - Loading time - Total time that the equipment is planned to produce. It is the starting point for the calculati on of OEE. Also called theoretical production time 14/15 TRP - Real Time Production - Net production time - time in which the equipment i s producing the nominal cadence. This time is not measured by the operator but d etermined by multiplying the total amount of product produced (good and rejected ) by the nominal cadence. TT - Total time - Total (calendar) time - The time sch edule for a total period of analysis of OEE, considering 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and 52 weeks of the year. Represents the theoretical maximum amount of go od product that could produce a machine, it never stopped and ran to the nominal cadence. TTO - Total time of operation-time Total Operations - The total time t he equipment is at the disposal of operations (to produce or undergo maintenance work and Engineering) TUB - Rate of use brute - Asset utilization - the percent age of TT-Total time where the equipment is working. TUC - Rate of capacity util ization - Capacity utilization - the percentage of time a product is planned to produce, compared to TT-timing. hows the theoretical potential available to pla n production. TUP - Time span of production - Valuable production time - time in which the equipment produces good product at first, based on normal cadence. Th is time is not measured by the operator but determined by multiplying the total amount of product produced at a good pace for the first roll call. It's time tha t adds value to the product. T / C - Cycle Time - Cycle time - The time to produ ce a play. T / CN - nominal cycle time - Ideal cycle time - The minimum cycle ti me in a given period of time, giving assurance of quality product with speed / c















adence nominal - Ideal run rate - The speed / cadence ideal maximum an equipment to produce. We obtain the formula 1/T/CN. References [1] The Toyota Production ystem: Beyond Large- cale Production - Taiichi Ohno [ 2] A tudy of the Toyota Production ystem from an Industrial Engineering Viewpo int - higeo hingo [3] Introduction to TPM - eiichi Nakajima [4] TPM Developme nt Program - eiichi Nakajima [5] New Directions for TPM - Tokutaro uzuki [6] T he True Cost of downtime http://www.bin95.com/freeebook.htm [7] How to calculate OEE - Carlo codanibbio http://www.brainguide .ca/data/publications/PDF/pub1217 95.pdf [8] Practical TPM Implementation Manual - Enrique Mora http://tpmonline.c om/services/tpmenglist.htm [9] Training Course TPM - Author http://www .freewebs .com / leanemportugal / formaotpm.htm Web sites www.downtimecentral.com http://www.scodanibbio.com/ www.tpmonline.com http://www .strategosinc.com/ http://www.oee.com/ References on OEE programs OEE Toolkit Tree Frog Focus Live View Boost IT OEE Impact: www.oeetoolkit.com or www.blomconsultancy.nl View: ee www.tfslean.com or www.treefrogsoftware.co.uk www.abb.com View www.oeeimpact.com File attachments This article is complemented by file: oee_calculator_model_A_pt.xls oee_calculat or_model_B_pt.xls available in www.scribd.com 15/15