Anheuser Busch

©Anheuser-Busch InBev
Lid Manufacturing – The Lining Process
©Anheuser-Busch InBev 2
Lid Manufacturing – Cross Section
Compound
Bandwidth Cut edge
Lid Manufacturing – Compound Application
Lid Manufacturing – Seaming Cross Section
The completed
double seam is
Lid
made of 5 layers
12345
Can
Lid
Can
1Aa Describe the types of data and quality tools used to select the project, and why they were used. (1 of 2)
Tools &
Data Why Used
Methods
 Key
MCC Strategy Multi-  Subject matter
KPI Analysis Performance
• SWOT Disciplined expertise
Indicators
• Benchmarks • Corp. Targets Senior  Ensure all
 Input/targets
• Trends Management aspects are
from corporate
Team covered
functions
Brainstorming
 Analyze trends
 Key
and identify
Line Graphs Performance
gaps for each
Indicators
metric
 KPI data from  Identify

other plants potential
Benchmarking  Competitive opportunities
performance for significant
information improvement
3-Year
Operating  Listing of ideas
 Proven,
effective tool to
Plan Brainstorming
and thoughts
on ideas for
gather many
ideas and
improvement
suggestions
1Aa Describe the types of data and quality tools used to select the project, and why they were used. (2 of 2)
Link to Summary
LID PLANT - THREE-YEAR OPERATIONS PLAN
ACTUALS TARGET TARGET TARGET TARGET
BENCH PROCESS
METRIC / KPI 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 METHODS, PLANS, RESOURCES, & MILESTONES
MARK LEADER
Link to Summary LID PLANT- THREE-YEAR OPERATIONS PLAN

ACTUALS TARGET TARGET TARGET TARGET
BENCH PROCESS
METRIC 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 METHODS, PLANS, RESOURCES, & MILESTONES
MARK LEADER
Environmental Health & Safety

Promote safety culture program
OKC THREE YEAR PLAN PRIORITY OVERVIEW
Utilize safety teams
1. OSHA Injury Rate 11.20 7.50 5.75 2.90 3.00
RVS
0
LS/SR
Corporate safety audit
Compound Return to STAMP
Implement VPO safety practices Return to Priorities
Baseline Baseline Baseline
2. VPO Safety Pillar n/a Qualify LS VPO qualify in 2010 by Sept. 6
+5% +10% +15%
Quality & Customer Satisfaction EOY Compound
OSHA INJURY
Weight
RATE(mg) Reduce Compound Cost
10. A-BI Scorecard 9.54 9.70 9.75 9.80 9.83
RVS
MC
Continue to optimize opening performance 3
9.86 Investigation into bag length variability tolerances
Leader: Sean Ronayne / Curtis West / Louis Lackey
RVS Continue to optimize opening performance 2
28.0
11. Severity Points / 10MM 1.554 0.231 0.146 0.115 0.1 MC
0.03 Investigation into bag length variability tolerances
26.0 Metrics: Compound Cost per M Lids
Establish baseline from last audit and target 2
12. Pepsi Quality Audit (% compl.) No Audit >90% No Audit >90% No Audit MC
improvement opportunities Compound Film Weight
RVS Establish baseline from last audit and target
24.0
1
14. A-B Lid Plant Process Audit n/a 91% n/a 92% n/a MC Compound Placement
94% improvement opportunities 22.0
Baseline Baseline Baseline 1 Objective: Minimize compound usage w hile maintaining capability
15. VPO Quality Pillar n/a Qualify MC VPO qualify in 2010 by Sept. 6
+5% +10% +15% 20.0
Process Quality 0
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
Cross functional team to ensure capability with compound
16. Compound Film Weight Ppk 1.6 >1.33 >1.33 >1.33 >1.33 CW optimization efforts 3 Year 2009 Act. 2010 Bud. 2011 2012 2013
Maintain current capability thru daily management Goals: Comp w t 24.3 24.3 23.4 22.5 22.5
Cross functional team to ensure capability with compound
17. Compound Cut Edge Distance 1.65 >1.33 >1.33 >1.33 >1.33 CW optimization efforts EOY
Maintain current capability thru daily management
Beer 1.28 Achieve capability on beer metal: Wise to increase KSI,
18. Converted Buckle Strength Ppk Bev 1.79 >1.33 >1.33 >1.33 >1.33 CW OKC team address outliers on SP2
LOE 1.79 Daily management to achieve/maintain capability
Maintain current capability thru daily management
19. Tab Strength Ppk 2.25 >1.33 >1.33 >1.33 >1.33 CW
Target increased rivet diameter on .010" colored tab stock ACTION PLANS
Operations
OJT/proficiency certification
OKC
20. Volume (per Day) 39,719 38,257 38,784 39,010 39,236 43,454 SR
Plant maintenance - optimized overhauls, innovation Methods and Plans Who When
8 swings/year LOE/OLOF - apply VPO management tools
(2006)
Atluss/Tetrad CPIT teams a Plant CPIT team working on reduction SR/CW/LL Ongoing
OJT/proficiency certification
Plant maintenance - optimized overhauls, innovation a DOX for liner optimization SR/CW/LL 1st qtr
RVS
21. Asset Utilization 89.65% 87.81% 89.00% 89.50% 90.00% SR 8 swings/year LOE/OLOF - apply VPO management tools
92.81%
Atluss/Tetrad CPIT teams
2010 a Color pigment change CW/MC/EB 3rd qtr
Larger colored tab stock coil diameter
Perfect process on swings - apply VPO management tools
OKC SR/CW/ ePLM/eQUAL Pressco development
22. Spoilage (%) 0.76% 0.89% 0.87% 0.85% 0.83%
0.76% LL Conversion press vision systems Corporate PIC evaluation of seams
Spoilage teams
Support Needed Cross Functional team - Keller, Urbanowicz
OKC SAP/maintenance guidelines
23. Maint. Audit (% compl.) 97.8% >95% >95% >95% >95% LB
97.8% SME/operator training
Cost
Variable cost reductions in compound, manufacturing
Methods and Plans Who When
supplies & packaging supplies a Partner with beer company on reduced weight CW/MC 1st qtr
Semi-variable cost reductions in maintenance & utilities.
OKC
24. Cash Conversion Cost $1.990 $2.083 $2.025 $1.978 $1.922 TP/SR Labor cost increases, partially offset by staffing reductions. a Capital for gun angle and upper turret SR/LL 1st qtr
$1.990/M Fixed cost increases in salaries & fringes offset by staffing
reductions and increases in volume (or variable/semi- 2011
variable savings from shutdowns)
Cross-functional team with Keller, Urbanowicz and OKC
R&D money for application angle modification 2010
RVS CW/LL/
25. Primary Materials 24.3 24.3 23.4 22.5 22.5 DOX & color pigment change in 2010, capital in 2011
$0.163/M SR
Beer customer in 2011, soft drink customers in 2012 Corporate Corporate support team
Contingent on soft drink customer acceptance Support Needed Sales, Kellerman, Urbanowicz
RVS
26. Manufacturing Supplies $/M $0.019 $0.019 $0.018 $0.018 $0.017 MVH / MC Pursue opportunities with vendors for cost reductions
$0.012/M
27. Packaging Supplies $/M $0.127 $0.127 $0.123 $0.119 $0.115

OKC MVH/MC/ Explore bag printing Methods and Plans Who When
$0.127/M SR Pursue opportunities with vendors for cost reductions
Optimize staffing levels
a Partner with soft drink customers on reduced weight CW/MC 1st qtr
OKC
28. Overtime % 3.23% 3.69% 3.50% 3.50% 3.50% SR OJT/proficiency certification/SOP’s
3.23%
Utilize for innovation and process improvement teams
2012
OKC LL/ Experiment - plant temperature setpoint impact on process.
29. Utilities - Electricity (KWH/M) 1.403 1.483 1.400 1.372 1.332
1.403/MM Corp. Eng Reduced wattage process lighting experiment
Optimized overhauls
OKC/RVS Utilize Business Warehouse for cost champion team
30. Maintenance $/M $0.238 $0.268 $0.249 $0.237 $0.210
$0.238/M
LL/SR/EK
Apply VPO maintenance practices
Corporate Corporate support team
Team/innovation activities Support Needed Sales, Kellerman, Urbanowicz
Optimize staffing to accommodate projected
OKC attritions/retirements
31. Labor 153 151 148 145 142 SR
$0.636/M Evaluate staffing levels annually based on actual Methods and Plans Who When
attritions/retirements & O/T impact
OKC
Comprehensive review of all outside services a Maintain the gain CW Ongoing
32. Buildings & Grounds $0.016/M $0.019/M $0.018/M $0.018/M $0.017/M TP/EK/SR Research alternative landscaping methods
$0.016/M
Explore outside warehousing opportunities
OKC TP/EK/
Reduce T & E 2013
33. Administrative Expense $0.027/M $0.021/M $0.020/M $0.019/M $0.019/M Reduce office expense
$0.027/M CW
Reduce telephone expense
Corporate
Support Needed
1Ab Explain the reasons why the project was selected.
3Y Plan Priorities
Reduce Spoilage
Compound Weight
26
Reduce Metal
Usage
Lower Cash 24
Conversion Cost
Reduce
Compound
Weight 22
7.4%
OKC Actual
Reduction
OKC 3YP
Reduce Utility
Usage Benchmark
20
Reduce 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Maintenance
Expense
Lower Staffing
Expense
1Ac Describe the involvement of potential stakeholders in project selection.
Stakeholder
Interests / Needs Involvement
Group
 Process Understanding  Provide subject matter expertise

Operators
 Follow SOPs  Participate on improvement team
 Process Understanding  Provide subject matter expertise

Team Leaders
 Follow SOPs  Participate on improvement team
Internal
 Achieve cost targets

 Resource allocation
Superintendents  Ensure adequate resources are
 Attend planning meetings
available to support production
 Identifying a leader for the

 Achieve 3-Year Plan and annual
process improvement team
budget targets
Plant  Ensuring adequate resources are
 Team makes progress in closing
Management available to work on the project
the assigned gap
 Providing statistical support and
 No customer issues
resources to the team
 Following team progress during

 Plant meets all 3-Year Plan and
monthly updates
MCC Corporate budget targets
External
 Supporting potential qualifications

 No customer issues
at customer locations
 No negative impact on filling and

Customers seaming operations  None
 No consumer quality issues
1Ba Identify the affected organizational goals, performance measures, and/or strategies.
Project KPI Impacted KPIs MCC Mission
Provide Anheuser-Busch with a

competitive advantage in the
VOC Emissions
purchase and use of cans and lids
 Provide security of supply and a

window to the marketplace for
A-BI Supplier Anheuser-Busch
Scorecard
Compound  Conduct our business in a safe,
Weight secure, and environmentally
responsible manner
Process Capability
 Be the clear industry leader in
customer satisfaction and
quality
Primary Materials
 Remain the least-cost producer
Cost
 Meet the financial goals
required for our business
1Bb Identify the types of impact on each goal, performance measure, and/or strategy.
MCC Mission KPI Description Type of Impact
Compound  Average weight of compound  Reduced weight based

Weight used to manufacture lids on actions implemented
Remain the least-cost
producer
Primary  Cost of primary materials (i.e.,  Reduced cost due to
Materials compound) used to manufacture reduction in compound
Cost lids usage
 Index value weighted by the

A-BI Supplier number of defects, defect
Scorecard severity, and downtime per 10
Be the clear industry million lids  No negative effects
leader in customer caused by project
satisfaction and quality implementation
 Percentage of critical process
Process
characteristics that are
Capability
statistically capable (Ppk > 1.33)
Conduct our business in a

 Volatile organic compounds  Reduced VOCs due to
safe, secure, and VOC
(VOCs) emitted from the reduction in compound
environmentally Emissions
heptane based compound usage
responsible manner
1Bc Identify the types of impact on each goal, performance measure, and/or strategy.
MCC Degree of How

KPI Type of Impact
Mission Impact Determined
 Reduce weight from  Historical

Compound performance
actions implemented  Reduce 7.4%
Weight
by team  Benchmark data
Remain the
least-cost
producer Primary  Reduce cost from
 Reduce $180,000  Calculation based on
Materials actions implemented
annually weight reduction
Cost by team
 Have no negative
A-BI Supplier effects caused by  Based on project
 No Difference
Be the clear Scorecard project goals
industry leader implementation
in customer
satisfaction and  Have no negative
quality Process effects caused by  Based on project
 No Difference
Capability project goals
implementation
Conduct our
business in a ...  Reduce VOCs by  Direct correlation
VOC
environmentally reducing compound  Reduce 7.4% with film weight
Emissions
responsible usage reduction
manner
1Ca Identify potential internal and external stakeholders and explain how they were identified.
Stakeholder Classification
Stakeholder How
Group Identified
Technical Critical to Critical to Impacted
Expert Implement Sustain by Results
Operators     Brainstorming
Team Leaders     Brainstorming

Internal
Superintendents    Brainstorming
Plant
Management     Formed Team
MCC Corporate  Brainstorming

External
Customers  Brainstorming
1Cb Identify the types of potential impact on stakeholders and explain how these were determined.
Stakeholder Positive How

Negative Impact
Group Impact Determined
 Meet bonus  Revised operating procedures

Operators targets for  Maintenance procedure changes  Direct feedback
cost reduction  Revised troubleshooting guidelines
 Maintenance procedure changes

 Meet bonus
 Revised troubleshooting guidelines
Team Leaders targets for  Direct feedback
 Manage resources to work on
cost reduction
Internal
implementation
 Concerns about maintenance impact

 Meet bonus  Direct input
from process change
Superintendents targets for during team
 Manage resources to work on
cost reduction formation
implementation
 Resources required for process

 Meet bonus  Direct input
Plant development
targets for during team
Management  Potential customer concerns about
cost reduction formation
reduced compound
 Potential customer concerns about  Brainstorming

 Lower plant
MCC Corporate reduced compound  Feedback during
External
cost
 Product qualification support 3YP review
 Potential quality concerns about

Customers reduced compound  Brainstorming
 Qualification of new product
1Cc Identify the degree of potential impact on stakeholders and explain how this was determined.
Stakeholder Type of Potential Project Impact Frequency How

Degree
Group (Positive and Negative) of Impact Determined
 Revised operating procedures

Operators Daily High
 Meet bonus targets for cost reduction

Team Leaders Intermittent Medium
 Manage resources to work on implementation
Internal
 Meet bonus targets for cost reduction Brainstorming

and
 Concerns about maintenance impact from Consensus
process change
Superintendents Intermittent Medium
 Manage resources to work on implementation
 Resources required for process development

Plant  Potential customer concerns about reduced
Intermittent Medium
Management compound
 Potential customer concerns about reduced

compound During product Low to
MCC Corporate
External
 Product qualification support qualification Medium

 Lower plant cost Brainstorming
and
Consensus
 Potential quality concerns about reduced
During product Low to
Customers compound
qualification Medium
 Qualification of new product
2Aa Describe the methods and tools used to identify possible root causes/ improvement opportunities. (1 of 2)
CPIT Problem Solving Model Checklist

Team Name: Front End Improvement Team
Reason For Step Objectives / Key Activities

Organize the Team
ASQ Done?
Improvement
Continuous Process Improvement
Why Team Members, Leader, Facilitator chosen and how involved 5A
Team
Training Provided as Necessary for Team Members 5B
Information
Team groundrules established 5C
Method for storyboard construction determined 5B
Identify a Theme and Reason for Working on It
Data and Tools Used to Select Project (Plant Steering Comm) 1Aa
Team methodology (CPIT)
Reasons why Project Selected (Plant Steering Comm) 1Ab

Involvement of Stakeholders Selecting Project (Plant Steering Comm) 1Ac
Current Situation Reason
For
Theme(s) ties to plant's strategic business objectives
Theme selected and importance verified (with data)
1Ba
1Bb
Improvement How much improvement needed was determined 1Bc
Indicator to track theme was selected 1Bb,1Bc
Stakeholders (internal/external) identified 1Ca
Stakeholder impacts and degree of impact identified 1Cb,1Cc
Completion Date Established
Select a Specific Problem from the Theme and Set a Target for Improvement
Analysis Process in problem area flowcharted

Data were collected on all aspects of the theme
2Aa
2Aa
Current Theme was evaluated from various viewpoints 2Aa,2Ab
Specific problem selected from evaluation 2Ab
Situation
Performance gap has been identified 1Bc
Measurement to track specific problem selected 1Bb,1Bc
Clear problem statement has been written 2Ab
Identify and Verify the Root Cause(s) of the Problem
Possible causes were identified 2Ab
Countermeasures Analysis
Stakeholder involvement in identifying root cause(s)
"Five Why" method / Quality Tools used to find root cause(s)
2Ac
2Ba
Root cause determined from data analysis 2Bb
Root cause validated 2Bc
Plan and Implement Countermeasures that Correct the Root Cause(s) of the Problem
Potential countermeasures developed and evaluated 3A,3Ba,3Bb
Stakeholder involvement in Final Countermeasure(s) 3Bc
Steering Team presentation and approval 3Bc
Results
Countermeasures Final Countermeasures Established/Validated 3Ca, 3Cc
Tangible/Intangible Benefits Defined 3Cb
Stakeholder involvement in Implementation/Resistance/Buy-in 4A
Action plan developed 4Ba
Countermeasure(s) implemented 4Ba
Confirm that Countermeasure(s) are Effective and Targeted Improvement was Achieved
Check for improvement of tangible/intangible indicators 4Ca
Results compared to targets/organizational goals 4Cb
Results
Reasons for success / failure have been analyzed 4Ca,4Cb
Standardization Results shared with Stakeholders

Other countermeasures used if results unsatisfactory
4Cc
4Ba
Implement Standard Procedures to Prevent the Specific Problem from Returning
Effective countermeasure standardized 4Cc
Affected employees trained on SOPs 4Cc
Standardization Indicator/Systems developed/monitored to hold the gains 4Bb,4Bc
Replication of new SOP/systems considered for other areas 4Bb,4Bc
Document all steps and learnings/Systems 4Bc
Future Plans
Fill out summary and post to Sharepoint 4Bc
Plan Action for Remaining Problems and Evaluate the Effectiveness of the Team
Future
Conduct evaluation of team effectiveness 5C
Plans
The need for further action has been evaluated
ASQ ITEA Criteria

2Aa Describe the methods and tools used to identify possible root causes/ improvement opportunities. (2 of 2)

Step Objectives / Key Activities ASQ Done?
Organize the Team
Team
Information
Reason Theme(s) ties to plant's strategic business objectives 1Ba
For Theme selected and importance verified (with data) 1Bb
Improvement How much improvement needed was determined
Indicator to track theme was selected
1Bc
1Bb,1Bc Tool Used Description Why Used
Microscopic Observe the

Process in problem area flowcharted 2Aa
Data were collected on all aspects of the theme 2Aa
visual and impact of
Situation Specific problem selected from evaluation 2Ab
Cross Section
measurement compound on
Analysis
Possible causes were identified 2Ab of bisected the finished
double seams double seam
Stakeholder involvement in identifying root cause(s) 2Ac
Analysis
"Five Why" method / Quality Tools used to find root cause(s) 2Ba
Proven
Develop a list
method used
of possible
Brainstorming to gather
actions to
many ideas in
investigate
a short time
Results
Results shared with Stakeholders 4Cc
Other countermeasures used if results unsatisfactory 4Ba
Future
Plans
2Ab Describe the team’s analysis of data to identify possible root causes/improvement opportunities.
Excess compound Not a sealing surface

can cause "R-ing"
Lid
Can
Can Lid
Describe how or if any of the stakeholders were involved in identifying the possible root causes/improvement
2Ac opportunities.
Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder Roles

Group Disciplines and Involvement
 Liner operation
 Brainstorming
Operators  Quality assurance
 Consulted by team
 Liner maintenance
 Technical support  Brainstorming

Team Leaders
 Resource allocation  Consulted by team
Internal
 Technical support  Brainstorming

Superintendents
 Resource allocation  Consulted by team
 Experimental design and

Senior
 Statistical expertise statistical analysis
Management
 Customer support  Provided resources
Team
 Customer perspective
 Customer qualifications  Brainstorming

MCC Corporate  Customer seamer  Remote participation in meetings
maintenance  Customer perspective
External
 No direct participation
 Customer perspective provided
Customers  Seam lids
by corporate resources and senior
management team
2Ba Describe the methods and tools used to identify the final root cause/ improvement opportunity. (1 of 2)

Organize the Team
Team
Information
Why Team Members, Leader, Facilitator chosen and how involved
Training Provided as Necessary for Team Members
5A
5B
Tool Used Description Why Used
Identify the
Statistical
impact of
Experimental approach to test
variables and
Design multiple factors
optimize
and levels
Stakeholders (internal/external) identified
Stakeholder impacts and degree of impact identified
1Ca
1Cb,1Cc settings
Process in problem area flowcharted
Data were collected on all aspects of the theme
2Aa
2Aa Microscopic Observe the
visual and impact of
Cross Section
measurement of compound on
Analysis
Clear problem statement has been written
2Ab
bisected double the finished
Possible causes were identified
Stakeholder involvement in identifying root cause(s)
2Ab
2Ac seams double seam
Analysis "Five Why" method / Quality Tools used to find root cause(s) 2Ba
Proven method
Develop a list of
used to gather
Brainstorming possible actions
many ideas in a
to investigate
Tangible/Intangible Benefits Defined
Stakeholder involvement in Implementation/Resistance/Buy-in
3Cb
4A short time
Check for improvement of tangible/intangible indicators 4Ca Compare
Results
potential
Comparison
opportunities for
Benchmarking data from other
improvement
plants
against existing
methods
Future
Plans
2Ba Describe the methods and tools used to identify the final root cause/ improvement opportunity. (2 of 2)
2Bb Describe the team’s analysis of data to select the final root cause/improvement opportunity. (1 of 4)
Better
Control
Better
Control
Target
Better
Control
Statistically Different vs. Control per ANOVA

Identify the root cause/ improvement opportunity and explain how the team validated the final root
2Bc cause/improvement opportunity.
Final Improvement
Validation
Opportunity
 Collection and analysis of double seam

cross-sections, some with the "R-ing"
defect
Wide compound
bandwidth wastes
compound and  Designed experiments showed when
increases the risk of bandwidth was reduced, seaming
defects by placing dimensions were not adversely affected
compound in a non-
sealing area
 Cross sections of reduced bandwidth
samples revealed no signs of "R-ing" or
other seaming defects
3Aa Describe the methods and tools used to develop possible solutions/improvement actions.
Final Improvement Opportunity

Organize the Team
Team
Wide compound bandwidth wastes compound

Information
Data and Tools Used to Select Project (Plant Steering Comm) 1Aa and increases the risk of defects by placing
compound in a non-sealing area
Tool Used Description Why Used

Clear problem statement has been written
2Ab
Step 1 Proven method Develop a list
Brain- used to gather of possible
Analysis
Generate
storming many ideas in a solutions to
Root cause determined from data analysis 2Bb possible
short time test
Plan and Implement Countermeasures that Correct the Root Cause(s) of the Problem solutions
s

ure

as
Statistical
me
Final Countermeasures Established/Validated 3Ca, 3Cc
approach to find a
ter
Step 2
Determine the
un
small number of
Co
Use data most critical

Screening influential factors

to select Experiments variables and

Results
from among a
potential optimize
large number of
solutions settings
Effective countermeasure standardized 4Cc factors with
Standardization
Affected employees trained on SOPs
Indicator/Systems developed/monitored to hold the gains
4Cc
4Bb,4Bc negligible effects
Future
Plans
3Ab Describe the team’s analysis of data to develop possible solutions/improvement actions.
Improvement Possible Improvement

Evaluation
Opportunity Actions
Previously we had increased

chuck speed to help with
Increase chuck speed seaming characteristics, so
this was a low cost solution
that was worth evaluating.
Conducted screening
Wide compound
experiment that showed
bandwidth wastes promise. The side drilled tips
compound and Use side drilled nozzle tip
successfully reduced
increases the risk of compound bandwidth in
defects by placing trials.
compound in a non-
sealing area Redesign side drilled
Investigated with vendor and
nozzle tips with detents to
OKC’s tool and die makers.
maintain position
Redesign turret brackets The team converted one

placing nozzles at a better station to this set-up and had
angle (angled nozzle very good success in
bracket) redistributing the compound.
3Ac Indicate the criteria the team decided to use in selecting the final solution/improvement action.
Priority Matrix – Rating Description

Operational
Rating Impact Cost Feasibility
Risk
 Difficult to  Action not likely

 Results not
 No or little implement cause
Low likely to
capital required  Difficult to sustain operational
achieve goal
results issues
 Moderate difficulty
to implement  Potential risk;
 Moderate  Manageable
Medium impact funds required
 Sustainability issues must be
can be quickly monitored
resolved
 Capital funds  Action very

 Immediate
required or  Easy to implement likely to cause
High results
large expense  Sustainable operational
realized
item issues
No Adverse Affect on Quality
3Ba Describe the methods and tools used by the team to select the final solution/improvement action. (1 of 3)

Organize the Team
Team
Prioritization Matrix
Information
Data and Tools Used to Select Project (Plant Steering Comm)
Reasons why Project Selected (Plant Steering Comm)
1Aa
1Ab  Impact on reducing film weight
 Cost to implement
 Feasibility to implement
 Operational Risk
Experimentation
Analysis
Root cause determined from data analysis
Root cause validated
2Bb
2Bc  Prototype testing
 Designed experiments to identify

s

ure

as
critical factors and determine

me
Final Countermeasures Established/Validated 3Ca, 3Cc

ter
optimal settings
un

Co

Results
Effect on Quality
 Double seam analysis

Future
Plans
Possible
Improvement Operational
Improvement Impact Cost Feasibility
Opportunity Risk
Actions
Increase chuck
Low Low High High
speed
Use side drilled

Medium Low High High
nozzle tips
Reduce Redesign side

Compound drilled nozzle
tips with High Medium Low Unknown
Bandwidth detents to hold
position
Redesign turret
brackets
placing nozzles High High Medium Low
at a better
angle
Standard Nozzle Bracket Proto-type: Angled Nozzle Bracket
3Bb Describe the team’s analysis of data to select the final solution/improvement action. (1 of 5)
 Background
Through previous experiments the angled nozzle turret design has successfully maintained cut
edge while reducing bandwidth. This DOE is designed to find the appropriate compound weight
target and chuck speed that maintains cross sectional placement settings through the sealing
area and produces interchangeable seams with the control.
 Research Question
What levels of angle nozzle compound weight and chuck speed achieve seam dimensions that
are interchangeable with current turret settings (control)?
 Factors / Levels
 Target Weight (5) 1 2 3 4 5
 Turret Style (2) Std Angled
 Chuck Speed (3) 1 2 3
 Seamer Condition (2) Tight Loose
 Criterion Measures
 Compound
o Applied Weight
o Distance from Cut Edge
o Bandwidth
 Seam Dimensions
o Seam Thickness
o Seam Height
o Body Hook
o Cover Hook
o Overlap
One-way ANOVA: Overlap versus Weight

Source DF SS MS F P
Weight 4 17.1 4.3 0.37 0.830
Error 207 2392.6 11.6
Total 211 2409.7
Better
=
weight
0.0035“
0.0016"
0.0019"
0.0016"
Compound
Bandwidth
Compound
Bandwidth
3Bc Describe the involvement of stakeholders in the selection of the final solution/improvement action.
Stakeholder
Angled Nozzle Turrets Lower Compound Weight
Group
Operators  Represented on team  Represented on team
 Provided input for final  Provided input for final

Team Leaders
decision decision
Internal
 Provided input for final  Provided input for final

Superintendents
decision decision
 Reviewed and approved

Senior analysis by team
 Supported development of
Management
project for capital funding  Support qualifications at
Team
customer locations
 Provided seamer expertise

 Approval of capital for and testing
MCC Corporate
process changes
External
 Support qualifications at
customer locations
 Needs were considered as  Needs were considered as

Customers part of the evaluation of seam part of the evaluation of seam
performance performance
Describe the final solution/improvement action and explain how the team validated the final
3Ca solution/improvement action. (1 of 3)
Final Final
Improvement Improvement Validation
Opportunity Actions
Redesign turret  Punished CO2 loss

brackets placing comparison to standard
nozzles at a better
 10 pallet trial at four
angle (angled
Reduce breweries
nozzle bracket)
Compound  Filling process check for
Bandwidth any operational issues
Adjust settings to
deliver the reduced  Evaluate 1-800 consumer
compound weight complaint data for any
issues
General Linear Model: CO2 versus Product, Punish
Factor Type Levels Values

Product fixed 2 Angled, Control
Punish fixed 2 Post-Test, Pre-Test
Analysis of Variance for CO2, using Adjusted SS for Tests
Source
Product
DF
1
Seq SS
0.0003315
Adj SS
0.0001529
Adj MS
0.0001529
F
0.85
P
0.358 No statistically
Punish
Product*Punish
1
1
0.0000468
0.0002168
0.0000413
0.0002168
0.0000413
0.0002168
0.23
1.21
0.632
0.274
significant difference
Error 140 0.0251208 0.0251208 0.0001794
Total 143 0.0257160
Indicate the types of tangible and intangible benefits that are expected to be realized by implementing the
3Cb team’s solution/improvement action. (1 of 2)
Stakeholders Impacted
Expected
Customers
Operators
Corporate
Sr. Mgmt
Metric Tangible How Determined
Leaders
Supts
Team
Team
MCC
Benefits
 Reduced  Through process capability

Compound
Film Weight
compound
usage
data from designed
experiments
   
 Lower  Calculated from weight
Compound
Cost
compound
cost
measurements taken from
tests
    
Quality
Scorecard
 Maintain
performance
 Predicted process capability
from experimental results      
 Maintain
Process
Capability
process
capability
 Predicted process capability
from experimental results     
 Reduced
VOC
Reduction
VOC
emissions
 Reduced proportionally due to
lower compound usage     
Indicate the types of tangible and intangible benefits that are expected to be realized by implementing the
3Cb team’s solution/improvement action. (2 of 2)
Stakeholders Impacted
Expected
Customers
Operators
Corporate
Sr. Mgmt
Intangible Reasoning
Leaders
Supts
Team
Team
MCC
Benefits
 Significant portion of
 Improved
employee compensation is
employee
morale
tied to achieving cost and    
quality bonus targets
 Ability to positively impact
the product design
 Improved
 Ability to fundamentally
sense of
ownership
redesign the process    
 Ability to impact the work
environment
 Performance of new lid
 Confidence in design in the filling
the OKC lid
plant
operations  
 Double seam quality
3Cc Explain how the team used data to justify the implementation of the team’s solution/improvement action.
Cost to Est. Annual Return on

Final Improvement Actions
Implement Savings Investment
Convert all liners to angled nozzle

turrets and target 18 mgs of 88,420 630,000 —
compound
Totals $88,420 $630,000 713%
Final Improvement Actions Advantage
Convert all liners to angled nozzle 25%

turrets and target 18 mgs of reduction in
compound VOCs
4Aa Indicate the types of internal and external (if applicable) stakeholder involvement in implementation.
Type of Stakeholder Group

Involvement Operators
Team
Supt.
Senior MCC
Customers
Leaders Mgmt. Corporate
Communicate new lid design and
internal test results to customers   
Develop implementation plan      
Resource allocation   
Obtain parts for modifying the liners  
Develop new and revised SOPs  
Conduct SOP training 
Customer testing   
Results review / final approval   
Liner conversion   
Process capability analysis and
equipment qualification    
Customer qualification   
4Ab Describe how various types of resistance were identified and addressed.
Source of How Reason for

Communication Engagement
Resistance Identified Resistance
 Fear that the  Involved Sales &

 Our team change would  Communicated Marketing in our
knew there result in seam data analysis meetings via
would be defects and/or showing new Live Meeting
resistance consumer setup is more
from the complaints robust and
onset of the creates better
team seaming  Involved
formation  Fear that characteristics customer in
Customer differences
Acceptance designing and
between lid conducting line
designs would trials at their
result is filling locations
increased setup  Designed project
time around concerns
 Partnership about inter-
 Joint data
meetings changeability
collection and
 Pain of between lid
review from
qualifications designs
trials
4Ac Explain how stakeholder buy-in was ensured. (1 of 2)
Stakeholders How Addressed
Operators  Participation in data collection

 Providing input for proposed design changes
Team Leaders  Involved in planning and implementing process
Internal
changes
Superintendents  Communication of plans and results
 Involved in project selection

Plant Staff
 Allocated resources and removed roadblocks for team
MCC Corporate  Communication of results

External
 Ensured customer did not experience quality or

Customers supply issues
 Involved in final testing and qualification
4Ac Explain how stakeholder buy-in was ensured. (2 of 2)
Liner Continuous Improvement Team

Date: 04/19/11 MEETING MINUTES PRESENT
x Ken Nickels x Steve Robinson
GOAL: Optimize compound by targeting .100" vs .125" x Jesse Kettler Eddie Burks
bandwidth without density change for the remaining band x Bob Williams Koby Smith
MISSION STATEMENT: Optimize compound film weight in OKC x Don Roetker Ron Mitchell
to improve seam integrity, reduce waste and reduce our x Curtis West Louis Lackey
environmental footprint Tom Parma Sean Ronayne
Born On Date: 01/27/10 x Dennis Wyatt Tim Popp
TEAM NAME: Liner Continuous Improvement Team Brad Lanham x Ron Hamilton
NEXT MEETING DATE: 05/11/11 x Mark Karns
NEXT MEETING TIME: 3:45 pm
LOCATION: Conference Room
GUESTS PRESENT:
SharePoint Site: http://abpgshr/C11/LinerCPIT/default.aspx
CURRENT AGENDA
1 Review agenda 6 Training-SOPs
2 Select meeting facilitator/scribe/roster 7 Walk ons: liner 6, new nozzle brush relationship, old
3 Discussion items from previous meeting nozzles, mod 1 pm, liner 12
4 Previous Meeting action log 8 Set next meeting date/time
5 Testing and PMQ 9 Meeting evaluation
DISCUSSION ITEMS
1 Can start on new nozzle sops
2 reviewed videos of compound application - ground nozzles appear to be better -
3 brush may need to be powered - not cleaning the back of the nozzle
4 OLOF liner 6- testing variations slower with ground tips 1.5 turn raised pressure
5 LOE testing will start tomorrow
6 Slower chuck speed helps with the divot - too slow and we get .040" from the cutedge
7 May investigate variable speed drive to help with nailing chuck speed
8 Investigate issue with compound saving program - causing spoilage on liner 12? Reevalute for 18 mbs
9 Will do mod 1 pm this week
4Ba Describe the plan developed by the team to implement its solution/improvement action.
Expected
Final Improvement Actions Assigned To Completion
Date
 Communicate roll out plan to all customers Rashmi Markan (Corp.) Jul 2011
 Revise PMs for Angled Nozzle Turrets Dennis Wyatt Jul 2011
 Develop SOPs for Angled Nozzle Turrets Jesse Kettler Aug 2011
 Convert control charts, capability reports,

specification limits and control plans to the new Curtis West Aug 2011
limits
 Develop training package for Angled Nozzle Turret

Jesse Kettler, Dennis Wyatt Aug 2011
setup, operation and troubleshooting
 Train OKC liner operators on Angled Nozzle Turret

Jesse Kettler, Dennis Wyatt Aug 2011
setup, operation and troubleshooting
Jesse Kettler, Dennis Wyatt, Ron

 Convert liners on Module 4 to Angled Nozzle Turrets Aug 2011
Hamilton, Mark Karns
 Monitor quality data during rollout Curtis West Aug 2011
 Ensure video inspection systems are fully functional

Eddie Burks Aug 2011
during rollout
Describe the procedure, system, or other changes that were made to implement the solution/ improvement
4Bb action and to sustain the results. (1 of 3)
Final
Improvement Description of Change Sustainability Measures
Actions
 Converted all liners to angled

 Replaced turrets
nozzle turrets
Implement
equipment
changes  Revised equipment operation  Completed training for all liner
SOPs operators
 Revised preventive maintenance  Conduct Operational Work Diagnosis
SOPs audits
 Changed control charts, capability

 Revised quality systems
analysis, and automated alarms
Change
equipment
settings  Completed training for all liner
 Revised equipment set-up SOPs
operators
 Revised video inspection system
 Conduct Operational Work Diagnosis
settings
audits
4Bc Describe the creation and installation of a system for measuring and sustaining results. (1 of 2)
•Needs screen
prints and
details
4Bc Describe the creation and installation of a system for measuring and sustaining results. (2 of 2)
Ppk L1 L2 L3 L4 L5 L6
Weight 1.74 1.77 1.36 1.69 1.93 1.63
Cut Edge 1.92 2.33 1.13 3.42 2.53 1.72
L7 L8 L9 L10 L11 L12
Weight 1.74 1.82 2.31 1.80 2.09 2.36
Cut Edge 1.64 2.11 2.16 1.47 1.84 2.18
L13 L14 L15 L16 L17 L18
Weight 1.69 2.15 1.82 1.47 1.54 1.60
Cut Edge 1.75 2.16 2.15 2.06 2.15 2.16
L19 L20 L21 L22 L23 L24
Weight 1.74 2.39 2.10 1.85 2.50 1.80
Cut Edge 1.76 1.67 1.35 1.74 3.02 1.96
>1.33
1-1.33
<1.00
4Ca Indicate the types of tangible and intangible results that were realized. (1 of 4)
Compound Weight (mg)

26
24
22
20
OKC Actual
OKC 3YP
18
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
VOC Emissions (tons) Better
300
250
200
150
100
2009 2010 2011 2012 (PYE)
Good
Good
After OP Lid
Conversion
Results
Expected
Benefits
Actual Description
 $180,000 cost savings

$657,000 Savings  Directly related to weight reduction
in compound use
 > 9.80 for A-B Quality  No performance issues at fillers

Tangible
9.92
Scorecard  No consumer complaint issues
 100% > 1.33 Ppk  Distance from Cut Edge and Film Weight
100% > 1.33 Ppk
process capability exceed Ppk targets
 VOC emissions
146.5 tons (PYE)  Full year total
< 227.2 tons
 Improved employee Achieved cost and

 Positive feedback from employees
morale quality targets
Intangible
 Improved sense of Achieved product and  Positive feedback from employees either on
ownership process changes or supporting the team
 Confidence in the OKC Successful customer  Positive feedback from customers

lid plant qualifications  No 1-800 consumer complaint issues
4Cb Explain how the project’s results link with the organization’s goals, performance measures, and/or strategies.
MCC Mission OKC KPI 3YP Goal Actual
Compound 7.4% 25%

Film Weight Reduction Reduction
Remain the least-cost
producer
Compound $180,000 $657,000
Cost Savings Savings
Quality
> 9.80 9.92
Scorecard
Be the clear industry leader
in customer satisfaction and
quality
Process 100% with 100% with
Capability Ppk > 1.33 Ppk > 1.33
Conduct our business in a

safe, secure, and VOC < 297 Tons 146.5 Tons
environmentally responsible Reduction Annually Annually
manner
4Cc Explain how results were shared with stakeholders. (1 of 2)
Why Method Was

Stakeholders Communication
Chosen
 E-mail with meeting notes
Operators
 Pre-shift Update
 Pre-shift Update
Team Leaders
 Morning Meeting with KPI  Ensured multiple methods
Internal
graphs were used: written, verbal,

and visual
 Redundant methods to
 Pre-shift Update ensure 100% coverage
Superintendents
 Morning Meeting with KPI
graphs
Plant Staff  Morning Meeting with KPI
graphs
 Monthly team update with  Standard company method to

MCC Corporate
External
corporate and other plants share best practices
 Partnership Meetings  Customers were involved in

Customers
 E-mail updates qualification process
4Cc Explain how results were shared with stakeholders. (2 of 2)
5A Explain how the team members were selected and how they were involved throughout the project.
Reason for
Member Role Function Involvement
Selection
Team Technical expert  Led team process during meetings as well as

Ken Nickels Liner SME
Leader Leadership skills between meetings
 Helped design and conduct experiments

Team
Jesse Kettler Liner SME Technical expert  Invented, developed and debugged Angled Nozzle
Member
Turret
Team  Helped design and conduct experiments

Dennis Wyatt Liner SME Liner technical expert
Member  Helped develop and debug Angled Nozzle Turret
Team Liner SME Liner technical expert

Ron Hamilton  Assisted with installation, testing, and debug
Member Trainee development
Team Liner SME Liner technical expert

Mark Karns  Assisted with installation, testing, and debug
Member Trainee development
Team Pressco SME Pressco and electrical  Provided Pressco vision system expertise
Eddie Burks
Member Electrician expert  Provided PLC programming
Team
Koby Smith Machinist Machinist skills  Provided machining expertise
Member
Steve Team
Operator Liner operator experience  Provided input from operator perspective
Robinson Member
Don Roetker Facilitator Tooling SME Machinist skills  Provided machining and tooling expertise
SQC  Statistical expertise

Curtis West Coach Team process coach
Manager  Provided team process coaching
5B Explain how the team was prepared to work together in addressing the project.
 All LCIT team members previously had our 4-day Continuous Process
Improvement Team training
 Problem solving methodology
 Tools (e.g., Pareto charts, histograms)
 Team facilitation
 Group dynamics
 Developed team ground rules
 Defined team roles
 Leader
 Scribe
 Coach
 Established meeting times
 Tracked progress and participation through meeting minutes
 At the conclusion of each team meeting action items, owners, and
completion dates were clearly identified
5C Explain how the team managed its performance to ensure it was effective as a team.
Liner Continuous Improvement Team

 Monthly Date: 03/01/11 MEETING MINUTES PRESENT
x Ken Nickels
 Team Meetings GOAL: Optimize compound by targeting .100" vs .125"

bandwidth without density change for the remaining band
x
x
Jesse Kettler
Bob Williams
MISSION STATEMENT: Optimize compound film weight x Don Roetker
• Followed structured team in OKC to improve seam integrity, reduce waste and reduce x Curtis West
process checklist
our environmental footprint x Dennis Wyatt
Born On Date: 01/27/10 x Steve Robinson
TEAM NAME: Liner Continuous Improvement Team x Eddie Burks
• Established team ground NEXT MEETING DATE: 03/22/11 x Koby Smith
NEXT MEETING TIME: 3:45 pm x Ron Hamilton
rules LOCATION: Conference Room x Mark Karns
GUESTS PRESENT:
• Followed agenda in
meetings SharePoint Site: http://abpgshr/C11/LinerCPIT/default.aspx
• Published meeting 1
CURRENT AGENDA
Review agenda 6 Training-SOPs
minutes 2
3
Select meeting facilitator/scribe/roster
Discussion items from previous meeting
7 Walk ons- flowmeters, new gun set up, lower turrets, nozzle
position, brush brake, flow meter, current trial for stack test
4 Previous Meeting action log 8 Set next meeting date/time
 Monthly results posted on 5 Testing and PMQ 9 Meeting evaluation
shared drive and sent to 1

DISCUSSION ITEMS
Training - operator level is first priority, 2nd level SME training will be critical as well
stakeholders via e-mail 2
3
Need a video to train to as well as help from Chris Gunter to write SOPs
Get flow meter issue resolved before completing installation
4 Have no lower turrets built - need to resolve - have parts for one
 Team status reported to 5 Do not build a six head unless we have to
corporate at monthly MCRS 6

7
Need to set gauge to reference of the table top, not the lower chuck
Pressco works well with the OP
meetings 8
9
Increase frequency of brake engagement to every 30 seconds on L20 for this test
Need to revisit the pressure spike issue on the OP
©Anheuser-Busch InBev

Anheuser Busch

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Anheuser Busch

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

©Anheuser-Busch InBev

Lid Manufacturing – The Lining Process

Bandwidth Cut edge

 KPI data from  Identify

Link to Summary LID PLANT- THREE-YEAR OPERATIONS PLAN

Environmental Health & Safety

27. Packaging Supplies $/M $0.127 $0.127 $0.123 $0.119 $0.115

 Process Understanding  Provide subject matter expertise

 Process Understanding  Provide subject matter expertise

 Achieve cost targets

 Identifying a leader for the

 Following team progress during

 Supporting potential qualifications

 No negative impact on filling and

Project KPI Impacted KPIs MCC Mission

Provide Anheuser-Busch with a

 Provide security of supply and a

MCC Mission KPI Description Type of Impact

Compound  Average weight of compound  Reduced weight based

 Index value weighted by the

Conduct our business in a

MCC Degree of How

 Reduce weight from  Historical

Team Leaders     Brainstorming

MCC Corporate  Brainstorming

Stakeholder Positive How

 Meet bonus  Revised operating procedures

 Maintenance procedure changes

 Concerns about maintenance impact

 Resources required for process

 Potential customer concerns about  Brainstorming

 Potential quality concerns about

Stakeholder Type of Potential Project Impact Frequency How

 Revised operating procedures

 Maintenance procedure changes

 Meet bonus targets for cost reduction Brainstorming

 Resources required for process development

 Potential customer concerns about reduced

 Product qualification support qualification Medium

CPIT Problem Solving Model Checklist

Reason For Step Objectives / Key Activities

Reasons why Project Selected (Plant Steering Comm) 1Ab

Analysis Process in problem area flowcharted

Standardization Results shared with Stakeholders

ASQ ITEA Criteria

CPIT Problem Solving Model Checklist

Microscopic Observe the

Excess compound Not a sealing surface

Stakeholder Stakeholder Stakeholder Roles

 Technical support  Brainstorming

 Technical support  Brainstorming

 Experimental design and

 Customer qualifications  Brainstorming

CPIT Problem Solving Model Checklist

Statistically Different vs. Control per ANOVA

 Collection and analysis of double seam

CPIT Problem Solving Model Checklist

Final Improvement Opportunity

Wide compound bandwidth wastes compound

Tool Used Description Why Used

Potential countermeasures developed and evaluated 3A,3Ba,3Bb

Stakeholder involvement in Final Countermeasure(s) 3Bc

Final Countermeasures Established/Validated 3Ca, 3Cc