PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT OF
GEAR HOUSING BY REDUCTION OF
LEAD TIME
Goutham R
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
ABSTRACT:
Machining industry is playing a crucial role in
current manufacturing scenario. G-plast pvt ltd
is a company which manufactures various
mechanical components by using casting
process. Its service also includes machining of
the cast components produced by the casting in
there. At present the situation the company
produces various components one among which
is gear housing PQ25, which doesn’t meet the
customer demand due to high lead time and in-
process inventory is maintained at a high level.
The main objective of the project is to improve
the productivity of the component by reducing
the lead time.
INTRODUCTION :
Casting is one of the best methods for production
of mechanical components due to it provides good
strength and reliability of components. There are
various casting processes by which the production
of metallic components is done. The various
processes are such as Induction casting, Die
casting, Investment die casting (wax pattern),
centrifugal casting, permanent mould casting, sand
casting, etc. Out of them investment die casting is
the best method for produces components. There
are different casting industries which produces
metallic components by casting processes. There
are generally two casting processes existing in
casting companies. There are die casting &
induction casting. Die casting is specially use for
aluminium parts and induction casting is use for all
types of metallic components. The company is
basically a casting industry where production of
mechanical components by casting process as well
as balancing of rotating parts and machining work
is also done. The company always want to improve
their productivity continually by solving the highly
occurred problem which directly affect to the
productivity. So company want to produce more
output by effectively utilizing the available
resources and company’s owner want to same.
Biggest problem which are associated such as
ineffective layout, back flow of material,
ergonomics, etc. so applying knowledge of
engineering and trying to solve the problem as far
as possible and improving productivity.
LITERATURE REVIEW :
According to Prof. DR S.M. sane, promod p.
shewale, Manmath S. shete,[1] they are working on
“Improvement in plant layout using systematic
layout planning for increased productivity”.
According to them the research is to study about
plant layout of compressor manufacturing based
company on the systematic layout planning pattern
theory (SLP) for increased productivity. The basic
industrial layout planning is applied to systematic
layout planning (SLP) method in which showed
step-by-step of plant design from input data and
activities to evaluation of plant layout. This method
provides the new plant layout that improves the
process flow through the plant, and help to increase
space in industries, and effective utilization of
resources for improving productivity.
According to Mayank[2] et al (2013), they were
working on overall productivity improvement in
casting and fastening industry. The purpose of this
research is to improve productivity of small and
medium scale casting industries which produce
various mechanical components by casting
processes. They make changes in plant layout, flow
of material movement for better utilization of plant
area to improve the productivity and identify
problems in the casting and fastening process and
improved it in terms of reduction in production
time, number of manual process and back flow of
materials by proposing an efficient plant layout and
design of components used for loading of material
used in fastening process. They conclude that by
using semi-automatic moulding machine, time
reduces to 5-6 minutes per mould and marking &
adjustment of the cope & drag part can avoid. By
changing plant layout storage problem, material
handling problem, space for investment casting and
material movement can be reduce.
McIntosh, Culley, Gest, Mileham, Owen(1995)
illustrated about importance of activity
categorisation before implementing the SMED.
This process provides information’s about product,
machine, tools, fixtures, fasteners, housekeeping
and etc to prioritise activities and take up
implementation in a rigorous fashion, with full
commitment at all levels without any hurdles [3].
Patel, Shaw, Dale(2001) illustrated that how
smaller organisations are approaching the set-up
time reduction and mistake proofing. The paper
mainly talks about the barriers of implementing
these techniques such as lack of financial support,
resistance to change, lack of strategic planning and
lack of knowledge and training. In smaller
company always management hesitates to
change[4] .
METHODOLOGY:
Study the Industry
Literature Review
Problem Identification
Data Collection
Reduction of Setup Time
Process Capability Improvement
Calculation of EOQ
Results & Implementation
Recommendations
Fig 1. Methodology
ABOUT THE INDUSTRY :
The company based in India with more than three
decades of experience and expertise in Tool and
Die Making, Injection Molding and Die Casting. Its
a part of the UMS Group. Well known for its
achievements in Electronics, Precision Machine
Tools and Transport. G Plast (P) Ltd comprises of
five functional departments: Design Center,
Tooling, Moulding, Die Casting and Precision
Machining. Complex Die Cast Components for
engineering applications are mass-produced and
supplied in Ready-to-assemble condition. Equipped
with 9 Machines ranging from 60T to 350T for
Aluminium (Including Frech 350T),supported with
VIBRO finish and Shot Blasting Machines.
Precision Machine Shop takes over the secondary
machining to finish the parts.
VISION:
To aim at achieving highest competancy in
manufacturing to meet global customer
expectation.
1. Problem Identification :
The project is carried out in G-plast Pvt Ltd,Unit -
2, Coimbatore. The component selected for
productivity improvement is Gear Housing PQ 25.
There are 3 divisions in the industry, they are
 DCD – Die Casting Division
 PMD – Precision Machining division
 LOGISTICS
The problems identified in this product are,
 Improper production planning
 High setup time
 Unnecessary inspection of components
 High in-process inventory
1.1 OBJECTIVES
 To increase the productivity of the
component
 To reduce the machining time & setup
time for gear housing.
 To reduce the inventory.
 2.3 LEAD TIME DATA :

From Casting to machining – 2 Days

From Machining to packing – 2 days
Demand Data – 1250/day
Safety stock – 4000 pieces

The setup time data of gear housing PQ25 is being

tabulated below which gives a clear map of the
process used in machining process. Machining
process used in the component are turning &
boring. A 2 spindle CNC machine is used to
machine the cast components.
Fig 2. GEAR HOUSING PQ 25

1.2 Die casting process : Activity Time Taken

• Machines – 180T,200T,250T. (Secs)

• Gear housing PQ 265 – Cavity 1,2,3,4. Picking the Casting From the bin 5
• Demand /Day - 1250(approx.)
Cleaning the fixture in first spindle 5
• Production Output/Day – 600/Machine with air
2.DATA COLLECTION
Clamping the casting in the fixture 12

2.1 Cycle Time : Cleaning the job removed from the first 5
spindle
S.no Setup Machining Production
Time Time output Unclamping the job from second 12
1 58 1.39 172 spindle
2 61 1.42 175
Cleaning the the fixture in the second 4
3 59 1.44 163 spindle with air
4 55 1.50 181
Clamping the job from the first spindle 12
5 60 1.51 177 in the second spindle

Cleaning the finished job with air 5

Table 1. Cycle Time Data

2.2 Time Allocated for Machining:

Table 2. Setup Time
 Machining time – 1.5 mins
 Handling time – 0.5 mins.
 Shift /day – 3
 No.of. Working days – 6
 Shift time – 8 hrs
 Break time – 40 mins
 Demand / operator – 225/Shift@100%
Efficiency.
 Chart Title
3. PROCESS CAPABILITY:
16
14
12 A process is a unique combination of tools,
Time (Secs)

10 materials, methods, and people engaged in

8 producing a measurable output; for example a
6 manufacturing line for machine parts. All processes
4 have inherent statistical variability which can be
2
0 evaluated by statistical methods.

The process capability is a measurable property of

a process to the specification, expressed as a
process capability index (e.g., Cpk or Cpm) or as a
process performance index (e.g., P pk or Ppm). The
output of this measurement is usually illustrated by
a histogram and calculations that predict how many
Axis Title parts will be produced out of specification.

Series 1 Series 2 Series 3 Table 3. REJECTION DATA

S.No Causes of rejection Quantity

Fig 3. Setup time vs time
1 NOGO 672
2 Poor finish 85
3 cracks 20
4 Inaccuracies in 50
Machining

 The main causes for rejection is

dimensional variation which occurs in
the job due to uneven clamping of the
work in the fixture.
 Even a skilled labour cannot
consistently do the clamping for the
correct position. It varies from
operator to operator.

Pareto Chart of C1
Fig 4. Cause & Effect Diagram 900
100
800
Reasons for Low Productivity:
700
80
• Time taken for air gauge & height gauge 600
Percent

inspection is approximately around 4.3 500 60

C2

mins. 400
40
300
• Handling time for machining is around 55-
200
60 secs. 20
100
• The supply of castings is not standardized. 0 0
C1 NOGO Poor finish Inaccuracies in Machining Other
C2 672 85 50 20
• The main cause for high handling time is Percent 81.3 10.3 6.0 2.4
Cum % 81.3 91.5 97.6 100.0
clamping & Unclamping the job from the
chuck.

• It also causes dimensional variation in the

component. Fig 4. Pareto Chart
 D = Demand of customer / day

Process Capability of C1  Shift /day – 3

LSL USL
 Shift time – 8 hrs

Process Data Within
LSL 30.87 Overall Break time – 80 mins
Target *
USL
Sample Mean 31.024
31.13 Potential (Within) C apability
Cp 0.54  Demand / operator – 225/Shift@100%
C PL 0.63
Sample N 5
StDev (Within) 0.0808803
C PU 0.44
C pk 0.44
Efficiency.
StDev (O v erall) 0.0760263
O v erall C apability
Pp
PPL
0.57
0.68 Net available time/day(Tₐ) = total time/shift –
PPU 0.46
Ppk
C pm
0.46
*
break time

Tₐ = 480 – 50
30.88 30.96 31.04 31.12 31.20
O bserv ed Performance
PPM < LSL 0.00
Exp.
PPM
Within Performance
< LSL 28451.93
Exp. O v erall Performance
PPM < LSL 21402.15
Tₐ = 400 mins.
PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 95000.05 PPM > USL 81620.44
PPM Total 0.00 PPM Total 123451.98 PPM Total 103022.59
D = 225 pieces

T = 400/675
Fig 5. Process capability
T = 0.59 mins
Improvements:
Actual Cycle time – 2.34 mins
• Setup time can be reduced by reducing the
time taken for clamping & unclamping of SWIP = Cycle time / takt time
the casting from the work fixture.
SWIP = 2.34/0.59
• A new hydraulic clamping device is
SWIP = 4
attached to the work fixture which is
operated by a button. 3.2 SAFETY STOCK CALCULATION:
• Reducing in-process inspection from 5 Month Demand
pieces to 10 pieces. June ‘14 23476
July’14 25433
August ‘14 25650
September ‘14 25864
October ’14 26247
November ‘14 21435
December ‘14 25512
January ‘15 22539

x n

Fig 6. work holding fixture The average of consumption per month = x n 1

3.1 TAKT TIME CALCULATION: N=8

Takt time is defined as the average unit production The average consumption /month = 23270
time required to meet the customer demand of a
product.
 x 
N

T = Tₐ/D n x
Standard deviation =  dm  n 1

Where, N
T = Takt time

Tₐ = Net available time/day

Standard Deviation = 2860

Chart Title
The desired service level is kept as 85%
6
The lead time factor with normal distribution 5
according service level is – 1.04 4
3
Safety Stock = SS  z * dm 2
1
0

SS = 1854

CURRENT SETUP TIME DATA:

Series 1 Series 2 Series 3

Activity Time Fig 7. Reduced Set up time after implementation

Taken
(Secs)

Picking the Casting From the bin 4

Cleaning the fixture in first 5

spindle with air
Process Capability of C1

Clamping the casting in the 4 LSL USL

Process Data Within
fixture LSL 30.87 Overall
Target *
USL 31.13 Potential (Within) C apability
Sample Mean 31.006 C p 1.78
C PL 1.86
Cleaning the job removed from 4 Sample N 5
StDev (Within) 0.0243794
C PU 1.70
C pk 1.70
the first spindle StDev (O v erall) 0.0230217
O v erall C apability
Pp 1.88
PPL 1.97
PPU 1.80
Unclamping the job from second 4 Ppk 1.80
C pm *
spindle

30.88 30.92 30.96 31.00 31.04 31.08 31.12

Cleaning the the fixture in the 4
O bserv ed Performance Exp. Within Performance Exp. O v erall Performance
second spindle with air PPM < LSL 0.00 PPM < LSL 0.01 PPM < LSL 0.00
PPM > USL 0.00 PPM > USL 0.18 PPM > USL 0.04
PPM Total 0.00 PPM Total 0.19 PPM Total 0.04

Clamping the job from the first 4 Fig 8. Process capability after implementation
spindle in the second spindle

Cleaning the finished job with air 5


RESULTS & DISCUSSIONS:
The gear housing PQ25 component used in
production line of the company now has increased
its production. The productivity of the component
by reducing the lead time and the safety stock is
reduced from the current scenario.
 A new hydraulic clamping fixture is
introduced into the CNC machine which
automatically holds the work piece.
 The set up time taken for machining
operation is reduced from 60 secs to 33
secs
 The process capability of the process is
increased to 1.78.
 The standard work in process inventory is
reduced to 4 from 25.
 The safety stock to be maintained in the
process is reduced to 1854.
REFERENCES :
1)Prof. DR S.M. sane, promod p. shewale,
Manmath S. shete, “Improvement in plant layout
using systematic layoutplanning (SLP) for
increased productivity”, International Journal of
Advanced Engineering Research and Studies,
Eissn2249- 8974, IJAERS/VOL.I/Issue III/April-
June,2012 /259-261
2) http://www.stevepavlina.com/2007/05/33-rules-
to-boostyour-productivity, (Access on; 14/07/2012)
3)http://www.ecoefficiency.com.au/portals/56/facts
hets/foundry/ecofndry_process.pdf (over view of
casting processes)(Access on; 29/07/2012)
4)Vivekanand S. Gogi, Rohith D., Shashi Kiran K.,
Suhail M. Shaikh, 2014, “Efficiency improvement
of a plant layout”, International Journal of
Innovative Research in Science, Engineering and
Technology (IJAERS), Vol. 3(4), pp. 11203-11209.
5) Pramod P. Shewale, Manmath S. Shete, Prof.
DR. S. M. Sane, 2012, “Improvement in plant
layout using systematic layout planning (SLP) for
increased productivity”, International Journal of
Advanced Engineering Research and Studies
(IJAERS), Vol. 1(3), pp. 259-261.
6). Mayank Dev Singh, Raval Apurv J, Patel
Dhaval G, Parth Varmora J, 2013, “Overall
productivity improvement in casting and fastening
industry”, International Journal of Mechanical and
Production Engineering (IJMPE), Vol. 1(1), pp. 43-
7). Arash Ghodrati, Norzima Zulkifli, 2013, “The
impact of 5s implementation on industrial
organizations performance”, International Journal
of Business and Management Invention, Vol. 2(3),
pp. 43-49.