A Model To Reduce Machine Changeover Time and Improve

sustainability
Article
A Model to Reduce Machine Changeover Time and Improve
Production Efficiency in an Automotive
Manufacturing Organisation
Mariusz Niekurzak 1, * , Wojciech Lewicki 2, * , Hasan Huseyin Coban 3 and Milena Bera 2
1 Faculty of Management, AGH University of Krakow, 30-059 Krakow, Poland

2 Faculty of Economics, West Pomeranian University of Technology Szczecin, 71-210 Szczecin, Poland
3 Department of Electrical Engineering, Ardahan University, 75002 Ardahan, Turkey
* Correspondence: niekurz@agh.edu.pl (M.N.); wojciech.lewicki@zut.edu.pl (W.L.)
Abstract: One of the key postulates of the modern automotive industry is the increase in production
efficiency while minimizing costs. In the opinion of experts from the automotive industry, meeting
this condition may be the first stage on the way to preventing waste generation and implementing a
circular economy model. The article presents a case study of issues related to the lean manufacturing
methodology in terms of the impact of shortening the changeover time of the assembly line on
the overall production efficiency. The presented considerations focus on the optimization of the
production process using the SMED (Single Minute Exchange of Die) technique of a selected spare
part. From the point of view of the Lean Manufacturing concept, the main goal of the SMED technique
is to increase the flexibility of responding to changing customer needs by shortening the changeover
times and faster responses to changing orders. The article describes the stages of implementing the
SMED method and its impact on the increase in the OEE (Overall Equipment Efficiency) index, which
allows for the percentage recognition of the degree of machine park utilization, which is one of the
key factors for assessing energy efficiency. In addition, the benefits that have been achieved by using
this method in terms of time and economy have been presented. The theoretical aspects related
Citation: Niekurzak, M.; Lewicki, W.; to the method used were supplemented with its practical implementation in order to improve the
Coban, H.H.; Bera, M. A Model to changeovers in a manufacturing company in the automotive industry. Based on the obtained test
Reduce Machine Changeover Time results, an analysis of the effectiveness of the measures taken to reduce the changeover time was
and Improve Production Efficiency in
carried out. The use of the SMED methodology contributed to a significant reduction in changeover
an Automotive Manufacturing
time—by as much as 291.4 s. The burden on operators was significantly reduced—the total time
Organisation. Sustainability 2023, 15,
and number of operations performed by them (both internal and external) was reduced. Operator
10558. https://doi.org/10.3390/
paths have also been shortened using simple procedures such as changing the layout of the lines
su151310558
and modifying the changeover tool trolleys and tool locking system at the stations. The presented
Academic Editors: Babek Erdebilli research may be helpful in answering the question whether the implementation of the SMED idea
(B.D Rouyendegh) and Erfan Babaee
may be the key to effective resource management and, at a later stage, to the implementation of the
Tirkolaee
circular economy model. In addition, the research results can find their practical application among
Received: 4 April 2023 both manufacturers of spare parts and the vehicles themselves, considering introducing process
Revised: 29 June 2023 changes on their production lines in order to increase production efficiency and implementing the
Accepted: 3 July 2023 idea of industrial sustainability.
Published: 4 July 2023
Keywords: automotive industry; resource efficiency; lean manufacturing; SMED—Single Minute

Exchange of Die; energy efficiency; circular economy
Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.

Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland.
This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and
1. Introduction
conditions of the Creative Commons The modern automotive industry is one of the most dynamically developing markets
Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// of the 21st century. The prevailing socio-economic situation and the processes of mutual
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ competition in this market require the introduction of new forms of organization of the pro-
4.0/). duction process, in line with current trends. For companies specializing in the production
Sustainability 2023, 15, 10558. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310558 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Sustainability 2023, 15, 10558 2 of 22
of spare parts to develop, they then must adapt to the dynamic changes taking place in
the environment, which are triggered by the progressing globalization. In order to stay in
such a competitive market, individual producers must use solutions that strengthen the
effectiveness of achieving strategic goals [1]. In the case of assembling the same component,
i.e., a given spare part for several manufacturers or vehicle models, it may be necessary to
change the production line. [2–4]. Changeovers should be designed in a thoughtful and an-
alytical way so that their times are as short as possible [5–7]. The work of operators and the
sequence of actions used by them should be standardized, and operators should be trained
and fully aware of their duties [8,9]. Therefore, the key to the success of manufacturing
companies in the automotive industry is the introduction of a systemic way of thinking
about production processes into their companies.
One of the methods of increasing production efficiency is the concept of lean manufac-
turing, which was developed in the automotive sector in Japan by Toyota Motor Company
after the end of World War II [10–12]. It is known under the English name of lean man-
agement. It consists of reducing production costs by constantly eliminating waste and
improving production processes. This concept was confirmed by its application in Japan
and then in the USA. It turned out that Toyota was much more efficient than other European
and American competitors [13–15]. The concept of lean manufacturing defines and catego-
rizes wastes with Muda, which comprises overproduction, stocks, waiting times, shortages,
unnecessary movements, and unnecessary transports [16]. The assumption is that reducing
waste increases competitiveness through savings in the production organization process,
thus being in line with the idea of a circular economy. However, the implementation of
innovative solutions is associated with incurring costs. Therefore, in the current difficult
market reality, at the first stage, most activities of entities from the automotive industry
focus on issues related to changes in the organization of production processes, the purposes
of which are to increase efficiencies while minimizing costs.
The novelty of the article is the development of an integrated model for the imple-
mentation of the SMED method in the example of an automotive company, taking into
account changes in the environment. The company should adapt to these changes by using
innovative structures for changing the machine park to the assumptions of the sustainable
circular economy. By proposing a model, the authors indicate the processes in the analyzed
enterprise that require improvement and indicate ready-made solutions, verified in real
conditions, as part of the innovative economy. There are no studies in the literature that
would refer to shortening the machine park changeover time in order to improve produc-
tion efficiency and organization of the production of spare parts in a vehicle’s production
process. Therefore, this article fills the research gap and is a concrete example of how to
modify the manufacturing process and machinery park with the use of SMED tools to in-
crease production efficiency in the automotive industry. As a result of these considerations,
a model of effective selection of the strategy for organizing the production processes of a
given spare part was created and adapted to the individual situational conditions of an
entity from the automotive industry, creating a new area for analyses on the effectiveness
of implementing solutions in the field of organizing the production processes of individual
spare parts. The article aims to analyze the implementation of the SMED method on an
assembly line of car headlights for the example of one of the leading manufacturers and to
indicate the savings in time and money. The main effect of the introduced changes is to
generate time savings that can be used to produce more products. Using the SMED method,
an analysis of the initial state was prepared, taking into account the activities performed
during the changeover, tools used in the changeover process, and layout of the assembly
line [17]. The analysis of the above-mentioned issues showed areas that should be modified.
The content of the article gives a fresh, innovative, and, at the same time, practical look
at the basic principles of minimizing time wastage in production plants and the resulting
financial benefits [18,19]. Unlike other studies available in the literature on the subject, in
this work, the authors analyzed the actual production process by implementing solutions
that were used in practice, more specifically in the automotive industry. In addition, the
minimizing time wastage in production plants and the resulting financial benefits [18,19].
Unlike other studies available in the literature on the subject, in this work, the authors
analyzed the actual production process by implementing solutions that were used in
practice, more specifically in the automotive industry. In addition, the article provides the
Sustainability 2023, 15, 10558
necessary knowledge on the use of Lean Manufacturing tools and the SMED method 3 of 22
in
the automotive industry to optimize production processes in the field of assembly of in-
dividual spare parts, which is the first step in achieving the company’s goal of increasing
assortment flexibility and the ability to compete with time.
article provides the necessary knowledge on the use of Lean Manufacturing tools and the
SMED Themethod
rest of in
thethe
article is as follows:
automotive industrySection 2 presents
to optimize a global
production and national
processes review
in the field of of
the literature on lean manufacturing and the use of SMED methodology in
assembly of individual spare parts, which is the first step in achieving the company’s goal optimizing
production
of increasing processes.
assortment Section 3 describes
flexibility the research
and the ability methodology
to compete with time. used for the Lean
Manufacturing
The rest ofanalysis.
the articleSection 4 describes
is as follows: Sectionthe2results and
presents discusses
a global and them.
nationalFinally,
reviewSec-
tion 5 describes
of the literature the conclusions
on lean of the research.
manufacturing and the use of SMED methodology in optimizing
production processes. Section 3 describes the research methodology used for the Lean Man-
2.ufacturing
Literatureanalysis.
ReviewSection 4 describes the results and discusses them. Finally, Section 5
describes the conclusions
The SMED of the research.
(Single Minute Exchange of Die) methodology is a set of techniques and
tools that enable shortening the changeover times of machines, devices, and production
2. Literature Review
processes. The main goal of the method, developed by the Japanese engineer Shigeo
The SMED (Single Minute Exchange of Die) methodology is a set of techniques and
Shingo, is to carry out each changeover in a unit number of minutes (up to 10 min) by
tools that enable shortening the changeover times of machines, devices, and production
dividing and simplifying the whole process so that the changeovers are made with the
processes. The main goal of the method, developed by the Japanese engineer Shigeo Shingo,
use
is toofcarry
as few
outtools
each as possible.in
changeover The basic
a unit assumption
number of the
of minutes (upSMED method
to 10 min) developed
by dividing and by
Shigeo Shingo in the 1950s and 1960s is the maximum reduction in
simplifying the whole process so that the changeovers are made with the use of as few tools machine changeover
time to a single-digit
as possible. value belowof10
The basic assumption themin
SMED andmethod
a cleardeveloped
separationbyofShigeo
internal and in
Shingo external
the
activities
1950s and[20–22].
1960s isThethe Japanese
maximumengineer
reductionShigeo Shingo
in machine (1909–1990)
changeover timeis to
considered one of
a single-digit
the greatest
value belowexperts
10 min in andthe field separation
a clear of production management;
of internal he is activities
and external known as[20–22].
the creator
The of
SMED
Japanese andengineer
the ToyotaShigeoproduction system [23].
Shingo (1909–1990) It was he who
is considered one of divided the activities
the greatest experts ininto
the fieldand
internal of production
external. Thismanagement;
method is he called
is known SMEDas the creator
and comes of SMED
from the andEnglish
the Toyotaname
production
Single Minute system [23]. of
Exchange It was he who divided
Die (single-digit mold thechangeover
activities into
time internal and in
expressed external.
minutes)
This method
[24–26]. is called
Retooling is a SMED
processandthatcomes from to
is related thethe
English name Single
preparation Minute Exchange
of a machine or a series of
of Die (single-digit mold changeover time expressed in minutes)
interconnected machines for the production of a new product [27]. It consists [24–26]. Retooling is a
of replacing
process that is related to the preparation of a machine or a series of interconnected
tools and preparing a new production process [28–30]. The enterprise does not gain any machines
for the production of a new product [27]. It consists of replacing tools and preparing a
added value during its lifetime. The changeover time is presented as follows in the
new production process [28–30]. The enterprise does not gain any added value during its
graphic in Figure 1. This is the time between the production of the last good product from
lifetime. The changeover time is presented as follows in the graphic in Figure 1. This is
the batch of the previous reference and the first good item from the next batch. Retooling
the time between the production of the last good product from the batch of the previous
isreference
the process
and ofthepreparing
first good the
itemproduction
from the next of batch.
a newRetooling
reference,isduring which
the process components
of preparing
for the new version of the product must be provided, and
the production of a new reference, during which components for the new version machines must be of
retooled
the
[31,32].
product must be provided, and machines must be retooled [31,32].
Figure 1. Visualization of changeover time. Source: own study.
The conversion of machines takes place on production lines. The production line is a
set of machines and stations arranged in accordance with the sequence of operations per-
formed in the technological process. The number of stations depends on the needs and the
manufactured details or assemblies [33,34]. The product passes through the workstations
in the so-called production process. The concept of line production is characterized by the
fact that machines are arranged to form lines [35]. Its arrangement is characterized by the
fact that the product passes through successive, adjacent production stations arranged in
a characteristic way [36,37]. An exemplary arrangement of stations on production lines
is shown in Figure 2. Production on the line can be partially or fully automated. When
performed in the technological process. The number of stations depends on the needs
and the manufactured details or assemblies [33,34]. The product passes through the
workstations in the so-called production process. The concept of line production is
characterized by the fact that machines are arranged to form lines [35]. Its arrangement is
characterized by the fact that the product passes through successive, adjacent production
stations arranged in a characteristic way [36,37]. An exemplary arrangement of stations
on production lines is shown in Figure 2. Production on the line can be partially or fully
automated. When designing the line, the SMED methodology should be taken into ac-
designing the line, the SMED methodology should be taken into account, which contributes
count, which contributes to shortening the changeover time of machines and devices and
to shortening the changeover time of machines and devices and increasing the efficiency of
increasing the efficiency of the line.
the line.
Figure 2. Anthe ample of positioning of workstations on production lines. Source: own study.
Figure 2. Anthe ample of positioning of workstations on production lines. Source: own study.
Quick tool change is important for the company because it is possible to adapt ma-
chinesQuick
to newtool
production tasks
change is and adapt
important forproduction
the company to customer
because requirements
it is possibleintoaadapt
short ma-
time [38,39]. Reducing the changeover time brings many benefits: shorter
chines to new production tasks and adapt production to customer requirements in a delivery times,
competitive advantages,
short time [38,39]. and increases
Reducing in production
the changeover timewithout
brings manyincreasing employment
benefits: shorter and
delivery
replacing machines. Reducing the changeover time brings tangible profits and
times, competitive advantages, and increases in production without increasing employ- may increase
the company’s
ment profitability
and replacing [40]. Reducing
machines. The funds the
obtained through
changeover the brings
time implementation of the and
tangible profits
SMED method can be used for new investments, training, and marketing. The creators of
may increase the company’s profitability [40]. The funds obtained through the imple-
the SMED method had specific goals in mind: reducing the cost of retooling, and the ability
mentation of the SMED method can be used for new investments, training, and market-
to offer customers a variety of products that meet individual needs and tastes [41]. This
ing. The creators of the SMED method had specific goals in mind: reducing the cost of
could not be achieved with mass production. The SMED method excludes defects resulting
retooling,
from and the ability
mass production. Using tothis
offer customers
method, a variety
one could of products
produce that meet
small batches individual
of products,
needs and
increase tastesreduce
flexibility, [41]. This couldspeed
inventory, not be
up achieved
lead times,with mass
increase production.
machine The SMED
and employee
productivity, and reduce downtime. The operations performed during the changeoverone
method excludes defects resulting from mass production. Using this method, timecould
produce small batches of products, increase flexibility,
reduction are divided into four stages, which consist of [42,43]: reduce inventory, speed up lead
-times, increaseand
Collection machine
controland employee
of tools productivity,
and machines so thatand
theyreduce downtime.
are in the The
right place andopera-
tionswork
performed
properly; during the changeover time reduction are divided into four stages,
-which consist of
Separation of[42,43]:
internal and external reinforcement;
-- Transforming
Collection and internal
controlprocesses into machines
of tools and external processes. During
so that they are inthis
the stage, a re- and
right place
analysis of the
work properly; changeover is performed. It is checked whether all internal activities
- have been properly
Separation qualified.
of internal Methods
and external are sought to transform internal operations
reinforcement;
- into external ones;
Transforming internal processes into external processes. During this stage, a
- Improvement of all aspects of changeover, including analysis of the assembly line
re-analysis of the changeover is performed. It is checked whether all internal activi-
layout, registration of all activities performed in the changeover process, and measure-
ties have been properly qualified. Methods are sought to transform internal opera-
ment of changeover time for the state after modernization.
tions into external ones;
In the initial phase of SMED, it is recommended to record the changeover process with
- Improvement of all aspects of changeover, including analysis of the assembly line
a camera. Recording should accompany the changeover process from beginning to end,
layout, registration of all activities performed in the changeover process, and meas-
and the cameraman should carefully follow every movement of employees. It is important
urement of changeover time for the state after modernization.
to analyze the collected material at the meeting of the SMED group and to invite engineers,
operators, and other employees who carried out the changeover to the discussion [44]. It is
important that the operators accurately name the activities and their durations. Designated
people can make Spaghetti diagrams that graphically show time wasted during machine
changeover. On the layout, you should draw all the roads it covers. Often, analysis of these
graphs shows that operators cover long distances during changeovers. The maximum
shortening of the operators’ paths brings measurable benefits. Based on the SMED analysis,
it is possible to analyze all external and internal activities that operators perform at specific
workstations. The task of the implementation group at this stage is to indicate which
activities can be performed before or after the changeover. The effect of such an analysis is
the transformation of some internal activities into external activities. Thus, SMED makes
it possible to implement a continuous flow of products, without loss of efficiency or long

waiting times. Such activities contribute to the improvement of quantitative and qualitative
indicators. The duration of changeover is an element that determines the flexibility of the
production process, and properly organized activities and designed flows at the workplace
allow for its shortening. A useful tool used to optimize the changeover process is the
checklist. The list eliminates time wasted searching for tools unnecessarily. The list should
include the necessary tools and materials needed for conversion [45]. From such a list, the
operator learns the materials, tools, and when they will be needed during changeover. The
list also includes recommendations for checking the technical condition of tools. During
the analysis, attention is paid to improving transport.
The use of the presented technique results in a reduction in the cost of unit production
of products, shortening the order fulfillment time, increasing the use of the working time
of operators and machines, and minimizing downtime on the production line [46]. Among
the additional benefits, the increase in the ergonomics of work on the line by enlarging the
working space and standardizing the tools used for changeover is worth mentioning, as
this was also confirmed by the authors in their research [47–50]
3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Case study—Initial State Analysis
In accordance with the SMED methodology, an analysis of the original condition of the
assembly line was carried out by observing the condition of the line during production and
changeover (Figure 3). The observation was aimed at searching for time losses. This was
performed by observing the changeover process, measuring the duration of all operator
activities. The work of the operators was examined by means of monitoring installed on
the line. The operators were not informed in advance about the upcoming observations
and measurements. The process of assembling vehicle lamps on the assembly line and
the retooling process of a leading manufacturer were analyzed. On the basis of the data
obtained during the observation, tabular lists of times allocated to individual operations
(operators’ activities) were prepared. During the observation, attention was also paid to
the organization of workstations in accordance with the safety rules and the availability
of tools for operators. Research has shown that the current work organization process
on assembly lines is not free from the Muda phenomenon in the areas of unnecessary
movement of operators, time loss, and prolongation of the production process. Table 1
presents a description of the work activities performed by individual operators at individual
workstations. The included description makes it possible to identify the performed tasks
defined by individual symbols.
3.2. Design and Implementation of a New Changeover Process

In order to shorten the path traveled by the operators during the changeover, a new
innovative layout of the production line was designed by the authors, shown in Figure 4.
The storage place for tools was marked and located in a way that facilitated the removal of
trolleys by operators, without disturbing or getting in each other’s way. When designating
new tool storage areas, sections for trolleys for individual workstations were precisely
marked. Trolleys for conversion were clearly and comprehensibly marked. The design of
the automatic station trolleys changed. The previous four carts, two for the lower tools
and two for the upper tools (Figure 5), were replaced by two merged carts (Figure 6). They
could operate the lower and upper stations simultaneously. Replacement of handcarts was
one of the stages of modernization of the production line. The trolleys were changed to
those that had comprehensive and fully automated tools and assembly accessories adapted
to the production cells. The trolleys were fully automated and of standardized dimensions
that fit into modern internal transport devices as part of tool management. Trolleys for
conversion to lower and upper tools were adapted to the dimensions of workstations, the
functionalities of which allowed for convenient and safe changeovers.
Sustainability 2023,15,
Sustainability2023, 15,10558
x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of2422
6 of
Figure3.3.The
Figure Theoriginal
originalcondition
conditionofofthe
theassembly
assemblyline
linebefore
beforeapplying
applying the
the reduction
reduction in in
thethe change-
changeover
over time of the headlamp assembly line using the SMED methodology. Source: own study.
time of the headlamp assembly line using the SMED methodology. Source: own study.
Table1.1.Description
Table Description of
of the
the symbols
symbols of
of workstations
workstations performed
performed by
by individual
individualoperators.
operators.
Workplace Symbol Job Description
Workplace Symbol Job Description
manual assembly station, consisting of one lower tool in the form
MO10 manual MO10
assembly station, consisting of one lower tool in the form of a support
of a support
automatic assembly station, consisting
automatic of two tools—the
assembly lower
station, one in theof
consisting form
twooftools—the
a support and
lowertheone
MO 20
upper one in the form of screwdrivers
MO 20 in the form of a support and the upper one in the form of screw-
MO30 manual assembly station, consisting
driversof one lower tool in the form of a support
an automatic assembly stationmanualconsisting of two tools—the
assembly lower one in
station, consisting ofthe
oneform of atool
lower support
in theand the
form
MO40
upper MO30
one in the form of screwdrivers and
of a support a camera
MO50 a cell
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW of robots in which the lamp is glued and
an automatic cooled station consisting of two tools—the
assembly lower
7 of 24
MO60 manual MO40
assembly station one in the form of a support and the upper one in the form of
MO70 an automatic station where thescrewdrivers and dimensions,
control of lighting, a camera and tightness of the product is carried out
MO50
management. Trolleys a cell of
for conversionrobots in
to of which
lower andthe lamptools
upper is glued
wereand cooled to the di-
adapted
MO80 station for final visual inspection and packing finished products
mensionsMO60 workstations,manual assembly station
Source:of
own study. the functionalities of which allowed for convenient and safe
changeovers. an automatic station where the control of lighting, dimensions, and
MO70
tightness of the product is carried out
MO80 station for final visual inspection and packing of finished products
Source: own study.
3.2. Design and Implementation of a New Changeover Process

In order to shorten the path traveled by the operators during the changeover, a new
innovative layout of the production line was designed by the authors, shown in Figure 4.
The storage place for tools was marked and located in a way that facilitated the removal
of trolleys by operators, without disturbing or getting in each other’s way. When desig-
nating new tool storage areas, sections for trolleys for individual workstations were pre-
cisely marked. Trolleys for conversion were clearly and comprehensibly marked. The
design of the automatic station trolleys changed. The previous four carts, two for the
lower tools and two for the upper tools (Figure 5), were replaced by two merged carts
(Figure 6). They could operate the lower and upper stations simultaneously. Replacement
of handcarts was one of the stages of modernization of the production line. The trolleys
were changed to those that had comprehensive and fully automated tools and assembly
accessories adapted to the production cells. The trolleys were fully automated and of
Figure 4. The4.state
Figure
standardized ofdimensions
theofassembly
The state line fit
the assembly
that after
line themodern
reduction
after
into in theinchangeover
the reduction
internal the time
changeover
transport of the
time
devices ofheadlamp
as the headlamp
part of tool
assembly line using
assembly the SMED
line using methodology.
the SMED Source:
methodology. own study.
Source: own study.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 10558 Figure 4. The state of the assembly line after the reduction in the changeover time of t
7 of 22
assembly line using the SMED methodology. Source: own study.

Figure 4. The state of the assembly line after the reduction in the changeover time of the headlam
assembly line using the SMED methodology. Source: own study.
(a)
(a) (b) (b)
Figure
Figure 5.Trolley
Trolley
Figure5.5.Trolley forforfor converting
converting
converting the
andlower
the lower
the lower and upper
and upper
upper tools: tools: tools:
(a)
(a) trolley (a)for
trolley trolley
for changing for the
changing
the lowerchanging th
lower too
tool,
(b)
(b) trolley
(b)trolley
trolley forchanging
forfor changing
changing the the the
upper upper
upper
tool. tool. tool. Source:
Source:
Source: own own study.
own study.
study.
(a) (b) (c)

Figure 6. Modified cart with latches for converting the lower and upper tools: (a) trolley for changing
(a) tools, (b) lower tool latch, (c)(b)
the lower and upper upper tool latch. Source: own study. (c)
4. Results and Discussion
4.1. Analysis of the Initial State before Implementation
There were five feeders with components on the line: MO05, MO15, MO25, MO35 and
MO65, which were fed by line feeders. The line feeder completed the missing components
and replaced them with the new components of the new product reference. Five operators
operated manual assembly stations, automatic stations, robotic cells (gluing cells), and
automatic and visual control stations. Their duties also included the control and packaging
of finished products and the retooling of machines. After the observations, it was found
that the production of lamps was in accordance with the standards. We were dealing with a
smooth flow of one piece (one-piece flow), and the manufactured lamps left the production
line in rhythmic, recurring intervals. The work on the tested line was balanced, which
meant that the time of the operators’ work sequence was equal. The line worked in a
takt of 42 s. The analysis of the changeover cycle for the initial state took into account
lamps left the production line in rhythmic, recurring intervals. The work on the teste
line was balanced, which meant that the time of the operators’ work sequence was equa
The line worked in a takt of 42 s. The analysis of the changeover cycle for the initial sta
Sustainability 2023, 15, 10558took into account all the activities of the operators in the specified period 8during of 22 the
duration. Internal retooling included the activities that must have been performed whe
the machine or device being retooled was switched off. On the other hand, extern
changeovers were all
all the activities of those activities
the operators in thethat couldperiod
specified be performed
during theirbefore
duration.stopping
Internal the ma
retooling included the activities that must have been performed
chine or after restarting the process converted to the production of a new type of when the machine orproduc
device being retooled was switched off. On the other hand, external changeovers were all
Such athose
division had far-reaching consequences because it was internal changeovers tha
activities that could be performed before stopping the machine or after restarting
causedthelosses inconverted
process machinetooperation
the production efficiency
of a new and
type ofdowntime,
product. Such which resulted
a division in extend
had far-
ing production series. It because
reaching consequences was from it wasthe internal
internal changeovers
changeovers thatlosses
that caused the in
analyses
machine and th
processoperation efficiencythe
of shortening andchangeovers
downtime, which mostresulted in extending
often began. production
Knowing series. of
the times It individ
was from the internal changeovers that the analyses and the process of shortening the
ual stages, one could start looking for system modernization. The times were measure
changeovers most often began. Knowing the times of individual stages, one could start
between the for
looking individual stages of the
system modernization. Theprocess,
times were and it wasbetween
measured on theirthebases thatstages
individual remedial a
tions were
of the taken
process,to modernize
and thebases
it was on their production processes.
that remedial According
actions were to the SMED
taken to modernize the meth
odology, activities were divided into internal and external. The total time of all operato
production processes. According to the SMED methodology, activities were divided into
internal
activities wasand external.
899.7 The total
s. During thistime of allinternal
time, operator activities
activities was 899.7performed
were s. During thisintime,
368.4 s an
internal activities were performed in 368.4 s and external activities in 531.3 s (Figure 7). In
external activities in 531.3 s (Figure 7). In total, 157 activities were performed, includin
total, 157 activities were performed, including 61 internal and 96 external related to the
61 internal and 96
changeover external
process related
(Figure 8). to the changeover process (Figure 8).
, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 24
gradual reduction in the duration of other internal activities. The analysis of changeo-
vers using the SMED method indicates activities whose durations significantly affect the
extension of the machining process, thus being the cause of waste. The duration of
changeover is an element determining the flexibility of the production process, and
properly organized activities and designed flows at the workplace allow for its reduc-
tion. In the case under analysis, the separation of external activities and their improve-
ments make it possible to shorten the time of setting up and calibrating the machine,
thus leading to an increase in operational efficiency and the production of a larger
number of production batches.
Figure Figure 7. Duration
7. Duration of internal
of internal andandexternal
external activities
activitiesduring changeover
during before before
changeover implementing the
implementing th
SMED SMED method.
method. Source:
Source: own own study.
study.
The SMED method is a team reduction in the machine changeover time, which a
lows for the division of the changeover activities into internal and external. SMED ena
bles one to implement a continuous flow of products without compromising perfo
mances or waiting times. Such activities improve the quantitative and qualitative ind
cators of customer service. A detailed analysis of times allows for the elimination of ex
ternal activities, the replacement of some internal activities with external ones, and th
Figure 8. The number of internal and external activities performed during the changeover before
Figure 8. The number of internalthe
implementing and external
SMED activities
method. performed
Source: own study. during the changeover before
implementing the SMED method. Source: own study.
The Gantt chart shows the sequence of changeovers carried out by operators (Figure
9). The beginning of the abscissa is our start of retooling. The operators start the proce-
dure simultaneously, when the last good piece of the old reference is packed. The total
changeover time is 489.7 h, including the production of the first piece in 42 s. The chart
The SMED method is a team reduction in the machine changeover time, which allows
for the division of the changeover activities into internal and external. SMED enables
one to implement a continuous flow of products without compromising performances
or waiting times. Such activities improve the quantitative and qualitative indicators of
customer service. A detailed analysis of times allows for the elimination of external
activities, the replacement of some internal activities with external ones, and the gradual
reduction in the duration of other internal activities. The analysis of changeovers using
the SMED method indicates activities whose durations significantly affect the extension
of the machining process, thus being the cause of waste. The duration of changeover is
an element determining the flexibility of the production process, and properly organized
activities and designed flows at the workplace allow for its reduction. In the case under
analysis, the separation of external activities and their improvements make it possible to
shorten the time of setting up and calibrating the machine, thus leading to an increase in
operational efficiency and the production of a larger number of production batches.
The Gantt chart shows the sequence of changeovers carried out by operators
(Figure 9). The beginning of the abscissa is our start of retooling. The operators start
the procedure simultaneously, when the last good piece of the old reference is packed. The
total changeover time is 489.7 h, including the production of the first piece in 42 s. The
chart shows especially long operator idle times between the first piece produced and the
next. This analysis makes it possible to determine the bottlenecks for individual operators
in most cases of redundancy, to optimize the idle times between the execution of the first
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 10 of 24
piece and the next one by an average of 230 s., and to optimize the idle time between the
execution of the first piece and the next one by an average of 230 s.
Figure 9. 9.Gantt
Figure Ganttchart
chartshowing
showing the sequenceofofchangeovers
the sequence changeovers performed
performed by operators
by operators beforebefore
the the
changeover time reduction. Source: own study.
changeover time reduction. Source: own study.
4.2.4.2. Design
Design andImplementation
and Implementation of
of aa New
NewChangeover
ChangeoverProcess
Process
Based on the observations, a detailed description of the activities performed by the
Based on the observations, a detailed description of the activities performed by the
operators along with their durations was developed, based on measurements during
operators along with their durations was developed, based on measurements during
three changeovers.
three changeovers.
Operator 1 worked at stations MO10 and MO20. The sequence of operator 1’s activities
Operator
included the1manual
workedassembly
at stations MO10
of lamp and MO20.
components at The sequence
the MO10 of operator
station and then 1’s
theactiv-
ities included the manual assembly of lamp components at the MO10 station and then the
transfer of the semi-finished product to the M020 station, where the automatic assembly
process took place (Figure 10).
Based on the observations, a detailed description of the activities per
operators along with their durations was developed, based on measure
three changeovers.
Sustainability 2023, 15, 10558
Operator 1 worked at stations MO10 and MO20. The sequence 10 of 22
of ope
ities included the manual assembly of lamp components at the MO10 statio
transfer of the semi-finished product to the M020 station, where the autom
transfer
process of the semi-finished
took product
place (Figure to the M020 station, where the automatic assembly
10).
process took place (Figure 10).
nability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW

Figure 10. Operator 1 and his workstations. Source: own study.
Operator 2 collected the semi-finished product after the MO20 work cycle was com-
Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW
pleted and continued2to collected
Operator work on MO30 theandsemi-finished
MO40. At the MO30 station, the
product semi-finished
after the MO20 w
product was manually retrofitted, and then automatic assembly with a glow test took place
completed and continued to work on MO30 and MO40. At the MO3
at the M040 station (Figure 11).
semi-finished product was manually retrofitted, and then automatic as
glow test took place at the M040 station (Figure 11).
Operator
Figure
Figure 3 collected
11. Operator
11. Operator thehissemi-finished
2 workstations.
2 and his and workstations. product
Source:
Source: own study. after
own the
study. MO40 work cy
inspected it, and continued to work at the MO50 station. This was the gluing
Operator 3 collected the semi-finished product after the MO40 work cycle, visually
12). inspectedOperator 3 collected
it, and continued the
to work at the semi-finished
MO50 station. Thisproduct after
was the gluing cellthe MO40
(Figure 12). work
inspected it, and continued to work at the MO50 station. This was the glu
12).
Figure 12.12.
Figure Operator
Operator 33and
andhis his workstations.
workstations. Source:
Source: own study. own study.
Figure 12. Operator

Operator 3 andthe
4 collected his semi-finished
workstations. Source: own after
product study.the work cycle o
station was completed, continued to work at the MO60 station, and added
Operator 4 collected the semi-finished product after the work cycl
semblies during manual assembly. After finishing work at the MO60 station
station was completed, continued to work at the MO60 station, and adde
Operator 4 collected the semi-finished product after the work cycle
station was completed, continued to work at the MO60 station, and adde
Operator 4 collected the semi-finished product after the work cycle of the MO50 station
semblies during manual assembly. After finishing work at the MO60 statio
was completed, continued to work at the MO60 station, and added more subassemblies
the finished
during product
manual assembly. atfinishing
After the MO70 station
work at the MO60 and started
station, its work
they placed cycle, whic
the finished
control
product at of
thethe lighting
MO70 and
station and geometrical
started features
its work cycle, of the lamp
which included (Figure
the control of the13).
lighting and geometrical features of the lamp (Figure 13).
Figure
Figure 13. 13. Operator
Operator 4 and
4 and his his workstations.
Source: own study. own study.
Operator 5 was an employee of an external company. They were responsible for
Operator
the visual inspection5 of
was an employee
the lamp; oftoan
their job was external
check whethercompany.
the productThey
met allwere
the resp
requirements containedof
visual inspection in the
the visual
lamp; inspection standards
their job was toand quality
check instructions.
whether theAll
product
compliant lamps were entered into the system by scanning the final label, which was stuck
quirements contained in the visual inspection standards and quality
on the lamps after a positively completed test on the MO70 machine. This person did not
in
compliant
participate lamps
in the were(Figure
changeover entered
14). into the system by scanning the final lab
stuck on the lamps after a positively completed test on the MO70 machin
did not participate in the changeover (Figure 14).
Figure14.
Figure 14.Operator
Operator55and
andhis
hisworkstations.
Source: own
own study.
study. The
The main
main defined
defined wastes of oper-
ators include:
operators include:
-- Human
Humanwainclude:
wainclude: of of
coordination
coordination of work, performing
of work, performingunnecessary tasks,tasks,
unnecessary waiting
waiting
employees, using the wrong method
employees, using the wrong method of work;of work;
-- Process
Processwaste:
waste: control thatthat
control does does
not give
notpermanent, long-term
give permanent, improvements,
long-term con-
improvements,
sequences of arbitrary decisions, waste resulting from the lack of standardization,
consequences of arbitrary decisions, waste resulting from the lack of
consequences of uneven (smooth) flows of materials and information between work-
standardization, consequences of uneven (smooth) flows of materials and
stations, waste related to the occurrence of errors and mistakes;
information between workstations, waste related to the occurrence of errors and
- Information waste: waste due to lack of information, creating unnecessary, irrele-
mistakes;
vant information;
-- Information
Waste waste:mismatch
of property: waste dueoftoresources
lack of information,
with the workcreating unnecessary,
schedule, irrelevant
unnecessary
information;
movement of resources and information, materials related to the implementation of
- Waste of property:
processes office mismatch
administration thatofwill
resources with
not be used or the workforschedule,
are kept too long; unnecessary
- Waste managerial: lack of proper organizational discipline, consequencesimplementation
movement of resources and information, materials related to the of employees of
processes
not office
identifying administration
with their tasks andthat will not be used or are kept for too long;
roles.
-AsWaste
part ofmanagerial:
the research, lack of proper
a detailed record oforganizational discipline,was
the operators’ workflow consequences
developed of
for theemployees
innovativenot identifying
developed modelwith their
of the tasks and process.
changeover roles. The analysis contained a
detailed description of the activities performed by the operators
As part of the research, a detailed record of the operators’ alongworkflow
with theirwas
durations,
developed
developed on the basis
for the innovative of measurements
developed model ofduring three performed
the changeover changeovers.
process. Measure-
The analysis contained a
detailed description of the activities performed by the operators along with their dura-
tions, developed on the basis of measurements during three performed changeovers.
Measurements were made using a stopwatch and included an accurate, real-time course
of activities. In this way, operators tested a new mechanism for introducing improve-
ments were made using a stopwatch and included an accurate, real-time course of activities.
In this way, operators tested a new mechanism for introducing improvements, on the basis
of which further modifications will be introduced. The analysis of the changeover process
after the changes took into account all the operators’ activities, specifying their durations.
According to the SMED methodology, activities were divided into internal and external.
The total times of the operators’ activities are presented in Table 2. During the changeover,
a total of 157 activities were performed—including 61 internal and 96 external. The path of
the operator’s movement is shown in the Spaghetti diagram in Figure 15.
Table 2. Analysis of the sequence of actions performed by operator 1 during the changeover of the
MO10 and MO20 assembly stations after the changes.
Activities
No. Action Execution Time, s Operator
Inside Outside
The operator’s approach to the place of storage of
1 tools and trolleys for changeover in order to pick up 1.5 X 1
the trolley
Retrieving an empty cart for retooling a manual
2 3.2 X 1
assembly station MO10
3 Bringing an empty trolley to the MO10 station 1.7 X 1
4 Unlocking the tool at the MO10 station 1.9 X 1
5 Transferring the tool to the changeover trolley 2.8 X 1
6 Tool jammed on the carriage 2 X 1
7 Putting the trolley with the tool to the storage place 1.9 X 1
8 Downloading the cart to the new one references 3.2 X 1
9 Bringing the trolley to the station manual assembly 1.7 X 1
10 Tool unlocking 1.8 X 1
11 Moving the tool to the MO10 station 2.8 X 1
12 Locking the tool on the MO10 station 1.4 X 1
13 Returning the empty cart 1.5 X 1
Retrieving an empty trolley to change the support
14 (bottom tool) and the upper tool in the MO20 3.4 X 1
automatic station
15 Bringing the trolley to the MO20 station 1.9 X 1
Selection of the machine operating mode in which it is
16 4 X 1
possible to change the station
17 Unlocking the lower (support) and upper tools 3.8 X 1
18 Transfer of tools to the changeover trolley 5.6 X 1
19 Locking tools on the cart 3.8 X 1
20 Returning the trolley with tools to the storage place 2.1 X 1
Fetch the carriage with the lower and upper tool for
21 3.3 X 1
the new reference
22 Bringing the trolley to the MO20 station 2.4 X 1
23 Unlocking tools 4.1 X 1
24 Transfer of tools to the MO20 station 5.4 X 1
25 Locking tools at the MO20 station 4 X 1
26 Returning the empty trolley to the storage place 2.2 X 1
27 Approach to the cabinet with test samples 3.2 X 1
Downloading a test sample for a new reference from
28 5 X 1
the cabinet with samples
29 Approach to the MO20 station 2.9 X 1
Carrying out a test during which the correct operation
30 30 X 1
of all is checked sensors
31 Reference of the sample to the cabinet after test 2.8 X 1
32 Putting the sample in the wardrobe 4.9 X 1
33 Back to the station 2.9 X 1
Sum: 125.1 s 73.4 s 51.7 s 1
Source: own study.
moves (choosing the shortest route), relocation of workstations (if the material is moved
back and forth), frequency of movements between individual workstations, elimination
of unnecessary activities (primarily bringing, packing unpacking, moving empty con-
tainers, etc.), batch sizes of production and transport batches, relief of the most frequently
used
Sustainability 2023, intersections and transport paths, and improving internal transport and MUDY
15, 10558 13 of 22
identifications.
Figure 15. Spaghetti

Figurediagram showing
15. Spaghetti how
diagram operator
showing how1operator
moves 1during the changeover
moves during of the
the changeover of MO10
the MO10
and MO20 stations
and before and after
MO20 stations theand
before implementation of the SMED
after the implementation of the method. Source:
SMED method. ownown
Source: study.
study.
The Spaghetti Analyses presented in Figures 15–18 show the path of individual op-
A similar analysis was also performed for the remaining four operators. For operator
erators 1–4 and the activities performed at their workplace, but it can also be helpful in
2, the summary analysis of the sequence of activities during the changeover of the MO30
identifying the flow of components and semi-finished products. On the basis of these charts,
and MO40 assembly stations
the following is: made:
can be execution time,of125.7
shortening s; internal
the paths activities,
along which 73.5 s;
the material and (choos-
moves ex-
ing the shortest route), relocation of workstations (if the material is moved back and forth),
frequency of movements between individual workstations, elimination of unnecessary
activities (primarily bringing, packing unpacking, moving empty containers, etc.), batch
sizes of production and transport batches, relief of the most frequently used intersections
and transport paths, and improving internal transport and MUDY identifications.
A similar analysis was also performed for the remaining four operators. For operator
2, the summary analysis of the sequence of activities during the changeover of the MO30
and MO40 assembly stations is: execution time, 125.7 s; internal activities, 73.5 s; and
external activities, 52.2 s. A Spaghetti chart showing the way operator 2 moves before the
implementation SMED methods are shown in Figure 16.
For operator 3, the summary analysis of the sequence of activities during the changeover
of the MO50 assembly station is: execution time, 66.3 s; internal activities, 30 s; and external
activities, 36.6 s, Figure 17.

ternal activities, 52.2 s. A Spaghetti chart showing the way operator 2 moves before the
implementation SMED methods are shown in Figure 16.
ty 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 24

Figure 16.
Figure 16. Spaghetti
Spaghetti diagram
diagram showing
showing howhow operator
operator 22 moves
moves during
during the
the changeover
changeover of
of the
the MO30
MO30
and MO40 stations before and after the implementation of the SMED method. Source: own
and MO40 stations before and after the implementation of the SMED method. Source: own study. study.
For operator 3, the summary analysis of the sequence of activities during the
changeover of the MO50 assembly station is: execution time, 66.3 s; internal activities, 30
s; and external activities, 36.6 s, Figure 17.
Figure 17. Spaghetti diagram showing how operator 3 moves during the changeover of the MO30
and MO40 stations before and after the implementation of the SMED method. Source: own study.
Figure 17. Spaghetti diagram showing how operator 3 moves during the changeover of the MO30
and MO40 stations before and after the implementation of the SMED method. Source: own study.
For operator 4, the summary analysis of the sequence of activities during the
changeover of the MO60 and MO70 assembly stations is: execution time, 156.3 s; internal
15, x FOR PEER REVIEW
Sustainability 2023, 15, 10558 17 of 24 15 of 22
Figure 18. SpaghettiFigure

diagram showingdiagram
18. Spaghetti how operator
showing4how moves during
operator the changeover
4 moves of the MO30
during the changeover of the MO30
and MO40 stations before andstations
and MO40 after the implementation
before of the SMEDof
and after the implementation method.
the SMEDSource:
method.own study.
Source: own study.
The analysis of the Forchangeover

operator 4, theprocess
summaryafteranalysis
theofchanges
the sequence of activities
took during all
into account the the
changeover
of the MO60 and MO70 assembly stations is: execution time, 156.3 s; internal activities, 72 s;
operators’ activities, specifying their durations. According to the SMED methodology,
and external activities, 84.3 s. Spaghetti diagram showing the way operator 4 moves before
activities were divided into internal
implementing the SMED and external.
method shown The total 18.
in Figure time of operators’ activities
after modernization amounted to 473.4
The analysis of the s, includingprocess
changeover internal activities
after performed
the changes took intoinaccount
248.9 all the
s and external activities in 224.5
operators’ s. During
activities, thetheir
specifying changeover,
durations.a According
total of 157 activities
to the were
SMED methodology,
performed—including activities were divided
61 internal andinto
96 internal
external. andTheexternal.
GanttThe total
chart time ofthe
shows operators’
new se- activities
after modernization amounted to 473.4 s, including internal
quence of changeovers performed by operators after applying SMED. Each of the oper- activities performed in 248.9 s
and external activities in 224.5 s. During the changeover, a total of 157 activities were
ators starts the changeover of the stations where they work when they finish production.
performed—including 61 internal and 96 external. The Gantt chart shows the new sequence
As a result of the changes made,performed
of changeovers this timeby was shortened
operators after to 198.3 s,
applying which
SMED. Eachmeans
of thethat the starts
operators
changeover time was shortened by 291.4 s (Figure 19).
the changeover of the stations where they work when they finish production. As a result of
the changes made, this time was shortened to 198.3 s, which means that the changeover
time was shortened by 291.4 s (Figure 19).
Sustainability
Sustainability2023,
2023,15,
15,x10558
FOR PEER REVIEW 18 16
ofof2422
Figure
Figure19.
19.Gantt
Ganttchart
chart showing
showing the
the sequence of changeovers
sequence of changeoversperformed
performedby
byoperators
operatorsafter
afterreduction
reduc-
tion in changeover time. Source: own
in changeover time. Source: own study. study.
The
Theanalysis
analysisofofthe thedata
datapresented
presentedininthe thediagram
diagramaboveaboveconcerns
concernsthe thetime
timeofoffourfour
operators
operatorsworking
workingindividually
individuallyon ontheir
theirtasks
tasksasaspart
partofofaajoint
jointproduction
productionoperation.
operation.On On
the
thebasis
basis of optimization
optimization activities
activitiesand andcalculated
calculated working
working times
times at individual
at individual stages,
stages, infor-
information is graphically
mation is graphically presented
presented for operator,
for each each operator,
and how andmuch
how time
much time
they they
have tohave
perform to
perform theirso
their tasks, tasks, so to
as not as not
delayto delay
the work the work
of theofnextthe next operator
operator whowho has own
has his his owntimetime slot.
slot.
These These activities
activities eliminate
eliminate time and
time losses losses and effective
ensure ensure effective
production production
processes. processes.
Additional
information is used to identify how the tasks of individual
Additional information is used to identify how the tasks of individual operators operators are connected to each
are
other andto
connected toeach
whom theyand
other areto assigned,
whom they allowing one to determine
are assigned, allowing the oneexact time of work
to determine the
in a given
exact time ofposition.
work in In the future,
a given position.the In
analysis of this
the future, thedata may lead
analysis of this to data
the improvement
may lead to
of human
the improvementresources management.
of human resources It should
management.be emphasized
It shouldthat there are stillthat
be emphasized transport
there
reserves
are in the subsystem
still transport reserves in forthecomplex
subsystem production capacity.
for complex When analyzing
production capacity. When the devicean-
status diagram, attention was paid to the occurring micro-downtimes
alyzing the device status diagram, attention was paid to the occurring micro-downtimes of the transport
ofdevices. They found
the transport devices.their
Theyreflection
found in several-minute
their downtimes of the
reflection in several-minute production
downtimes of unit,
the
the elimination of which would allow for the increase of production
production unit, the elimination of which would allow for the increase of production volume. This could be
performed
volume. This bycould
changing the stopping
be performed byplace
changingof thethe
trolleys transporting
stopping place of spare parts, without
the trolleys trans-
the need
porting to integrate
spare them into
parts, without thethe production
need to integrate technology.
them into Currently, the transport
the production trolleys
technology.
are waiting
Currently, theintransport
the tool roomtrolleys next
aretowaiting
the assembly line.room
in the tool When it istonecessary
next the assembly to change
line.
When it is necessary to change machines, e.g., due to unplanned downtime, theythe
machines, e.g., due to unplanned downtime, they must travel the entire length of mustpro-
travel the entire length of the production hall, collect the appropriate type and grade the
duction hall, collect the appropriate type and grade of the spare part, and deliver it to of
production
the spare part, line.andThis causes
deliver it several-minute
to the production breaks
line.inThis
the operation of the technological
causes several-minute breaksline. in
If they
the were moved
operation closer to the production
of the technological line. If they line assembly,
were moveditcloser
wouldtobethe much shorter travel
production line
time. A simulation
assembly, it would of bethe behavior
much shorter of the transport
travel time. system was carried
A simulation of the outbehavior
for the changed
of the
transport system was carried out for the changed location of the transport trolley 20.
location of the transport trolley station, the diagram of which is shown in Figure station,
As a result
the diagram of theis
of which simulation,
shown in it was found
Figure 20. that the load on the production unit was 97%.
The percentage occupancy also increased for trucks transporting spare parts. Comparing
the simulation values without taking into account the time for delivery of tools, one could
notice an improvement in the use of the effective working time of the production unit from
the initial 63.4% to 84.7%.
Figure 20. The degree of utilization of production and transport equipment of the finishing unit, %.
Figure 20. The degree of utilization of production and transport equipment of the finishing unit, %
system
system
system occupancy
system occupancy
occupancy
occupancy rate — no
raterate
rate —no blocking
blocking system.
system. Source:
Source: own study.
own study.
—no blocking system. Source: own study.
—noAs Based system.
on the Source:
obtained test results, an analysis of the effectiveness of the measures
a result
blocking of the simulation,
own study. it was found that the load on the production unit wa
taken Asto reduce
a result thesimulation,
of the changeover it wastime
foundwas thatcarried
the loadout.
on the The use of the
production unit SMED
was methodology
97%. The
contributed percentage
toofa the occupancy
significant reduction also increased for trucks transporting spare parts
97%.
AsThe percentage
a result occupancy
simulation, also it was in
increased foundchangeover
for trucks
that the time—by
transporting
load onspare theasproduction
much
parts. as 291.4
unit s.was
The
Comparing
Comparing
burden on the
the simulation
simulation
operators wasvalues values
without
significantly without
taking into
reduced—the taking
account the into
time
total account
for
time delivery
and the time
of
number of for delivery o
operations
97%. The
tools, one percentage
could notice anoccupancy
improvementalso in theincreased for trucks transporting spare parts.
tools, one
performed
Comparing could
the notice
by simulation
them (bothan internal
improvement anduse of the effective
in the
external) wasuse working
of thethe
reduced. time of the
effective
The forworking
paths taken byof time
the of the
production unit from the initial values
63.4% to without
84.7%. taking into account time delivery
operators
production
tools, one were
unit
Basedcould also
from
on thenotice shortened
the
obtainedan testinitial
improvementby simple
63.4%
results, an analysis to procedures,
in the 84.7%.
of theuse such as
of the effective
effectiveness changing the layout
working time of the
of the measures of the
lines
taken
Based
production and modifying
to reduce
on
unit the
the
from the
changeover
obtained
the tool
time
initial trolleys
test
63.4% toused
was results,
carried out.an
84.7%. foranalysis
The retooling
use of the SMEDand
of theeffectiveness
tool locking systems
methodology
the of the atmeasure
contributed
the stations. to a significant reduction in changeover time—by as much as 291.4 s. The
taken Based
to reduce
burden on the
on operators obtained
thewas changeover test results, an
time wastotal
significantly reduced—the analysis
carried of
time and the
out. effectiveness
numberTheof use of the measures
of the SMED methodology
operations
taken
contributedto
performedreduce to
by the
a
them
4.3. Economic Analysis changeover
significant
(both internal time
reduction
and was
external) carried
in
was out.
changeover
reduced. The
The use of
time—by
paths the
taken SMED
by as methodology
the much as 291.4 s. The
contributed
burden
operators were to
on modifying a significant
also
operators
shortened by reduction in
simple procedures, changeover time—by
such as changing as
the layout much
of theas 291.4 s. The
lines The
and use of the was SMED significantly
method reduced—the
eliminated andredundant total time
activities andat number
and shortened of the
operation
burden on operatorsthe wastoolsignificantly
trolleys used for retooling
reduced—the the tooltime
total lockingand systems
number of operations
performed
the stations.by
operation timethemand (both
the number internal and external)
of employee shifts towas two, reduced.
which resulted The in paths taken by the
significant
performed by them (both internal and external) was reduced. The paths taken by the
cash savings.
operators were Below is the calculation of the profits achievedsuch usingas thechanging
SMED methodology
operators were
4.3. Economic also shortened by simple procedures, such as changing the layout of layout
also
Analysis
shortened by simple procedures, the the of the
linesand the 375 basic assumptions used in it:
linesand The modifying
and modifying
use of the SMED thethetooltool
method trolleys
trolleys used
eliminated used foractivities
for retooling
redundant retooling
andandthe andtoolthe
shortened thetool systems
locking lockingatsystems a
the
thestations.
operation
stations. time and the number of employee shifts to two,
Z = (Tz· Lzr· Lp· L·C)/T [EUR]
which resulted in significant
(1)
cash savings. Below is the calculation of the profits achieved using the SMED method‐
ology and the 375 basic assumptions used in it:
4.3.
4.3. Economic Analysis
where
Economic Analysis Z = (Tz∙ Lzr∙ Lp∙ L∙C)/T [EUR] (1)
Z—profit,
The EUR;
use of the SMED method eliminated redundant activities and shortened the
TheTz—saving
where use of the SMED the method eliminated redundant activities and shortened the
operation time andtime
the using
number ofSMED methodology,
employee s;
shifts to two, which resulted in significant
operation time
Lzr—number
cash savings. and
Below ofthe number
is production of employee
shifts
the calculation ofworking shifts
on the
the profits to two, which
line during
achieved using the resulted
theyear;
SMED in significan
method‐
cash savings.
ology and Below
Lp—number
the 375 of is
basic the calculation
rearming during
assumptions ofit:the profits achieved using the SMED method
a shift;
used in
ology and the 375 basic assumptions used in it:
L—number of years of project duration;
T—line takt time, s; Z = (Tz∙ Lzr∙ Lp∙ L∙C)/T [EUR] (1)
where Z = (Tz·Lzr·Lp·L·C)/T [EUR] (1
where
Z—profit, EUR;
Tz—saving time using the SMED methodology, s;
C—price of one lamp, EUR;

Tz = 291.4 s;
Lzr = 1000;
Lp = 1;
L = 4;
T = 42 s;
C = 1000 EUR.
With idealized assumptions:
- changeover takes place under ideal conditions included in the standards;
- line working at full capacity;
- failure-free machines;
- all components compliant and available on time;
- fixed, maximum customer orders.
The plant can gain up to EUR 5,871,407.11 with the reorganization of the changeover
carried out in accordance with the SMED methodology. After the implementation of
corrective actions in the form of system modifications, changeover trolleys, elimination
of elements blocking tools requiring the use of keys and reorganization of the operators’
work order, it is possible to save 291.4 s during one changeover, during which six lamps
can be produced. The simulation of the savings obtained over 5 years by implementing
the described method is EUR 5,871,407.11 with maximum customer orders and the line
operating at full capacity. The funds saved can be used for new research and innovations
in the field of increasing the use of recycling, optimization of the life cycle, or the imple-
mentation of the closed loop and the principle of extended producer responsibility (EPR)
in relation to this category of products. A properly implemented SMED method increases
the availability of production equipment, which means that the OEE indicator shows an
increase in the production efficiency of the analyzed machine. The obtained results confirm
the legitimacy of the conducted research, being the basis for considering the introduction
of process changes in the field of other spare parts and components of vehicles.
5. Conclusions
The success of manufacturers in the automotive industry depends, to a large extent, on
whether the products offered are in line with current trends, requirements, and expectations
of customers. The best examples of this are ecological standards, which have become
increasingly important in recent years. The automotive industry must be prepared for the
long-term challenge of minimizing the impact of the automotive industry on the natural
environment [51]. At the first stage, it included a change in propulsion technologies, a
reduction in the consumption of individual raw materials, and lower greenhouse gas
emissions into the atmosphere. The next stage will be significant changes in the production
of vehicles and spare parts, e.g., in the process of their final assembly. The very idea of a
circular economy assumes maximizing the use of resources, materials, and products while
minimizing waste or preparing it for reuse. The first step towards the implementation of a
circular economy is the development of modern assembly lines that are effective—whether
in terms of materials or energy—to increase production efficiency while minimizing costs.
The conducted research allowed to draw the following conclusions:
1. The original design of the assembly line layout was non-functional, with flaws that
made work difficult and lost time. Noticeable disadvantages included narrow pas-
sages between stations and poorly located places for storing tools and trolleys for
changeovers. The trolleys were positioned on the left side of the production line, well
away from the operator stations. In the case of the operator in the first station, the
place for the tool trolleys was far behind the workstation. Employees interfered with
each other while collecting carts with tools for changeover, blocking the way of others
on the route leading to and from the station.
2. The design of the bogies was another important factor contributing to longer changeover
times. Some of them were used for retooling the lower tool and some for the upper tool.
There were no trolleys that would combine these two functions at the same time. Merged
carts shortened changeover times of automatic stations; operators could carry two tools
at the same time.
3. Screws were used to fasten the tools in the stations. Screwing in and out of the
screws required a few or a dozen or so turns of the key and was preceded by finding
and bringing appropriate keys from the tool cabinet. In order to reduce the time
spent going to the cabinet to collect keys and the time spent on unscrewing screws,
new latches were used, which were quick to use and did not require the use of any
auxiliary devices.
4. During the observations, it turned out that the first concept did not take into account
the changeover time and the operators starting the changeover simultaneously when
creating the layout, when the last good piece of the old reference was packed. Starting
the changeover of the station by each operator at the moment when they finished
their work at the station significantly reduced the changeover time.
5. In the original concept of organizing the changeover on the line, its time using the
SMED methodology was shortened to 198.3 s. This new changeover lasted 291.4 s
shorter. The time used should have been spent on production for a line operating
with a takt of 42 s; this was enough time to produce six full lamps. Implementation
of corrective actions resulted in a reduction in the total time used by operators for
changeover from 899.4 s to 473.4 s. The time of performing internal activities during
changeover was significantly reduced, which was 368.4 s before and 248.9 s after
the transformation. Furthermore, the times of external activities were from 531.3 s
to 224.5 s. Additional benefits resulting from the introduction of the SMED method
included the reduction in the number of external and internal activities. The number
of internal activities was reduced from 61 to 43 and external activities from 96 to 63.
6. The list of string charts (Spaghetti) accurately depicted how many operators passed
on the assembly line were eliminated and what time savings this brought. In total,
27 transitions were eliminated. The movement times of the operators on the line were
reduced: the first gained 8 s, the second 130.1 s, the third 8.6 s, and the fourth 80.1 s.
These results were achieved thanks to simple solutions: a new design of the assembly
line with a new, functional arrangement of stations and trolleys.
This article analyzed the retooling of the assembly line in relation to one selected spare
part. Certainly, much more extensive analyses will be needed in the near future, covering
a larger number of spare parts and vehicle components in particular. In addition, further
research on this topic should focus on aspects related to the analysis of changes in the field
of new technological and production solutions implemented in several key areas, such as
designing new vehicle models using the same components and spare parts in this process.
Another important element of further research in this matter will also be a cost analysis of
the implementation of technologies based on the ideas of life cycle optimization, closed
circuit, and the principle of extended producer responsibility (EPR), not only to selected
elements of the vehicle, as it has been thus far, i.e., e.g., battery drive units [40], but also
other spare parts or even complete subassemblies.
Summing up the presented considerations on the project of an innovative model
of reducing machine changeover times in order to improve production efficiency in the
automotive industry as a way to a circular economy, they certainly do not fully exhaust the
essence of the issue. They are only a fragment and, at the same time, an encouragement for
further research in this matter. Therefore, such analyses will be the subject of future work
aimed at defining and identifying key factors for the implementation of such an ambitious
plan for the automotive industry, in which environmental protection and rope production
are not mutually exclusive.
SMED is an approach that usually requires considerable time commitment from the
company’s employees, which is sometimes treated as a significant disadvantage of this
method. However, spending time on improvement activities is necessary to achieve signifi-
cant results, as evidenced by the countless examples of SMED implementations in various
industries. Therefore, models should be built using artificial intelligence methods. The use
of these methods would enable even better results and the development of more efficient
models. To this end, a hybrid approach should be taken into account, combining elements
of effective management tools and artificial intelligence based on expert knowledge models.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, M.N. and W.L.; methodology, M.N. and W.L.; software,
M.N. and W.L.; validation, M.N. and W.L.; formal analysis, M.N., W.L., H.H.C. and M.B.; inves-
tigation, M.N. and W.L.; resources, M.N., W.L., H.H.C. and M.B.; data curation, M.N. and W.L.;
writing—original draft preparation, M.N. and W.L.; writing—review and editing, M.N. and W.L.;
visualization, M.N.; supervision, W.L.; project administration, M.N. and W.L. funding acquisition,
M.N. and W.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement: Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement: Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement: Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.
References
1. Abinaya Ishwarya, G.K.; Rajkumar, D. Analysis of ergonomic risk factors in construction industry. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 37,
2415–2418. [CrossRef]
2. Santos, A.C.O.; da Silva, C.E.S.; Braga, R.A.D.S.; Corrêa, J.É.; de Almeida, F.A. Customer value in lean product development:
Conceptual model for incremental innovations. Syst. Eng. 2020, 23, 281–293. [CrossRef]
3. Afonso, T.; Alves, A.C.; Carneiro, P. Lean thinking, logistic and ergonomics: Synergetic triad to prepare shop floor work systems
to face pandemic situations. Int. J. Glob. Bus. Compet. 2021, 16, 62–76. [CrossRef]
4. Ohno, T.; Bodek, N. Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production; Productivity Press: New York, NY, USA, 2019.
5. AlManei, M.; Salonitis, K.; Xu, Y. Lean implementation frameworks: The challenges for SMEs. In Procedia CIRP, Manufacturing
Systems 4.0–Proceedings of the 50th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017; Volume
63, pp. 750–755. [CrossRef]
6. Danese, P.; Manfè, V.; Romano, P. A systematic literature review on recent lean research: State-of-the-art and future directions. Int.
J. Manag. Rev. 2018, 20, 579–605. [CrossRef]
7. Baysan, S.; Kabadurmus, O.; Cevikcan, E.; Satoglu, S.I.; Durmusoglu, M.B. A simulation-based methodology for the analysis of
the effect of lean tools on energy efficiency: An application in power distribution industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 211, 895–908.
[CrossRef]
8. Melin, M.; Barth, H. Lean in Swedish agriculture: Strategic and operational perspectives. Prod. Plan. Control 2018, 29, 845–855.
[CrossRef]
9. Boran, S.; Ekincioglu, C. A novel integrated SMED approach for reducing setup time. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2017, 92,
3941–3951. [CrossRef]
10. Doevendans, H.J.; Grigg, N.P.; Goodyer, J. Exploring Lean deployment in New Zealand apple pack-houses. Meas. Bus. Excell.
2015, 19, 46–60. [CrossRef]
11. Botti, L.; Mora, C.; Regattieri, A. Improving ergonomics in the meat industry: A case study of an Italian ham processing company.
IFAC-pap. In Proceedings of the 15th IFAC Symposium on Information Control Problems in Manufacturing, Ottawa, Canada,
11–13 May 2015; Volume 48, pp. 598–603. [CrossRef]
12. Aoki, R.; Katayama, H. Heijunka Operation Management of Agri-Products Manufacturing by Yield Improvement and Cropping
Policy. In International Conference on Management Science and Engineering Management; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany,
2017; pp. 1407–1416.
13. Brito, M.; Ramos, A.L.; Carneiro, P.; Gonçalves, M.A. Combining SMED methodology and ergonomics for reduction of setup in a
turning production area. In Proceedings of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017, MESIC 2017,
Vigo, Spain, 28–30 June 2017; Volume 13, pp. 1112–1119. [CrossRef]
14. Da Silva, I.B.; Godinho Filho, M. Single-minute exchange of die (SMED): A state-of-the-art literature review. Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 2019, 102, 4289–4307. [CrossRef]
15. Wurster, S. Creating a Circular Economy in the Automotive Industry: The Contribution of Combining Crowdsourcing and Delphi
Research. Sustainability 2021, 13, 6762. [CrossRef]
16. Brito, M.; Vale, M.; Leao, J.; Ferreira, L.P.; Silva, F.J.G.; Gonçalves, M.A. Lean and Ergonomics decision support tool assessment in
a plastic packaging company. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 51, 613–619. [CrossRef]
17. Shahin, M.; Chen, F.F.; Bouzary, H.; Krishnaiyer, K. Integration of Lean practices and Industry 4.0 technologies: Smart manufac-
turing for next-generation enterprises. Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 2020, 107, 2927–2936. [CrossRef]
18. Castellucci, H.I.; Viviani, C.; Hernandez, P.; Bravo, G.; Martínez, M.; Ibacache, J.; Bartsch, A. Developing countries and the use of
ISO standard 11228-3 for risk management of work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limbs (WRMSDs-ULs): The
case of Chile. Appl. Ergon. 2021, 96, 103483. [CrossRef]
19. Jamwal, A.; Agrawal, R.; Sharma, M.; Giallanza, A. Industry 4.0 technologies for manufacturing sustainability: A systematic
review and future research directions. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 5725. [CrossRef]
20. Pérez-Pucheta, C.E.; Olivares-Benitez, E.; Minor-Popocatl, H.; Pacheco-García, P.F.; Pérez-Pucheta, M.F. Implementation of Lean
Manufacturing to Reduce the Delivery Time of a Replacement Part to Dealers: A Case Study. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3932. [CrossRef]
21. Milios, L.; Matsumoto, M. . Consumer Perception of Remanufactured Automotive Parts and Policy Implications for Transitioning
to a Circular Economy in Sweden. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6264. [CrossRef]
22. Cirjaliu, B.; Draghici, A. Ergonomic issues in lean manufacturing. In Proceedings of the 13th International Symposium in
Management: Management During and After the Economic Crisis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 18–20 November 2016; Volume
221, pp. 105–110. [CrossRef]
23. Lermen, F.H.; Echeveste, M.E.; Peralta, C.B.; Sonego, M.; Marcon, A. A framework for selecting lean practices in sustainable
product development: The case study of a Brazilian agroindustry. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 191, 261–272. [CrossRef]
24. Crema, M.; Verbano, C. Identification and development of lean and safety projects. Saf. Sci. 2016, 89, 319–337. [CrossRef]
25. De Steur, H.; Wesana, J.; Dora, M.; Pearce, D.; Gellynck, X. Applying Value Stream Mapping to reduce food losses and wastes in
supply chains: A systematic review. Waste Manag. 2016, 58, 359–368. [CrossRef]
26. Dombrowski, U.; Wullbrandt, J.; Reimer, A. Lean stress sensitization in learning factories. In Proceedings of the 7th conference on
learning factories, CLF, Darmstadt, Germany, 4–5 April 2017; Volume 9, pp. 339–346. [CrossRef]
27. Satolo, E.G.; Hiraga, L.E.D.M.; Zoccal, L.F.; Goes, G.A.; Lourenzani, W.L.; Perozini, P.H. Techniques and tools of lean production:
Multiple case studies in brazilian agribusiness units. Gestão Produção 2020, 27, e3252. [CrossRef]
28. Garre, P.; Nikhil Bharadwaj, V.V.S.; Shiva Shashank, P.; Harish, M.; Sai Dheeraj, M. Applying lean in aerospace manufacturing.
Mater. Today Proc. 2017, 4, 8439–8446. [CrossRef]
29. Omair, M.; Alkahtani, M.; Ayaz, K.; Hussain, G.; Buhl, J. Supply Chain Modelling of the Automobile Multi-Stage Production
Considering Circular Economy by Waste Management Using Recycling and Reworking Operations. Sustainability 2022, 14, 15428.
[CrossRef]
30. Reis, L.V.; Kipper, L.M.; Velásquez, F.D.G.; Hofmann, N.; Frozza, R.; Ocampo, S.A.; Hernandez, C.A.T. A model for Lean and
Green integration and monitoring for the coffee sector. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2018, 150, 62–73. [CrossRef]
31. Karanikas, N.; Pazell, S.; Wright, A.; Crawford, E. The what, why and how of good work design: The perspective of the human
factors and ergonomics society of Australia. In Advances in Ergonomics in Design, Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems; Rebelo, F.,
Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2021; pp. 904–911. [CrossRef]
32. Dey, B.K.; Sarkar, B.; Seok, H. Cost-effective smart autonomation policy for a hybrid manufacturing-remanufacturing. Comput.
Ind. Eng. 2021, 162, 107758. [CrossRef]
33. Lazai, M.; Santos, L.C.P.; Grossi Chamie, N.R.; Pierezan, R.; Loures, E.R.; Santos, E.P.; Costa, S.E.G.; Lima, E.P. Automated system
gains in lean manufacturing improvement projects. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 51, 1340–1347. [CrossRef]
34. Dey, B.K.; Pareek, S.; Tayyab, M.; Sarkar, B. Autonomation policy to control work-in-process inventory in a smart production
system. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2021, 59, 1258–1280. [CrossRef]
35. Mathew Alexander, L.; Saleeshya, P.G. Qualitative analysis of different lean assessment methods: A comprehensive review of
applications. Mater. Today Proc. 2022, 58, 387–392. [CrossRef]
36. Bhamu, J.; Sangwan, K.S. Lean manufacturing: Literature review and research issues. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2014, 34, 876–940.
[CrossRef]
37. Thürer, M.; Tomašević, I.; Stevenson, M. On the meaning of ‘waste’: Review and definition. Prod. Plan. Control 2017, 28, 244–255.
[CrossRef]
38. Dave, Y.; Sohani, N. Single minute exchange of dies: Literature review. Int. J. Lean Think. 2012, 3, 27–37.
39. McIntosh, R.; Culley, S.; Mileham, A.R.; Owen, G. A critical evaluation of Shingo’s’ SMED’ (Single Minute Exchange of Die)
methodology. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2000, 38, 2377–2395. [CrossRef]
40. Modoi, O.-C.; Mihai, F.-C. E-Waste and End-of-Life Vehicles Management and Circular Economy Initiatives in Romania. Energies
2022, 15, 1120. [CrossRef]
41. Vinoth Kumar, H.; Annamalai, S.; Bagathsingh, N. Impact of lean implementation from the ergonomics view: A research article.
Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 46, 9610–9612. [CrossRef]
42. Yang, C.-M.; Chen, K.-S. An integrated contract manufacturer selection and product quality optimization methodology for the
mechanical manufacturing industry. Expert Syst. Appl. 2021, 18, 115336. [CrossRef]
43. Reklitis, P.; Sakas, D.P.; Trivellas, P.; Tsoulfas, G.T. Performance implications of aligning supply chain practices with competitive
advantage: Empirical evidence from the agri-food sector. Sustainability 2021, 13, 8734. [CrossRef]
44. Raicu, C.-C.; Seriţan, G.-C.; Enache, B.-A.; Stănculescu, M. Development Approach Model for Automotive Headlights with Mixed
Delivery Methodologies over APQP Backbone. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 10581. [CrossRef]
45. Parent-Lamarche, A.; Marchand, A.; Saade, S. How do work organization conditions affect job performance? The mediating role
of workers’ well-being. J. Workplace Behav. Health 2021, 36, 48–76. [CrossRef]
46. Shawcross, P.; Lyons, M.; Filingeri, V. The relationship between readiness to change pain-related exercise participation and
perceived work function: A cross-sectional study of factory workers. BMC Musculoskelet. Disord. 2021, 22, 1–10. [CrossRef]
47. Nallusamy, S.; Vijay, K.; Vivek, Y.; Kumar Prasad, U.; Suman, S.K. Implementation of total productive maintenance to enhance the
overall equipment effectiveness in medium scale industries. Int. J. Mech. Prod. Eng. Res. Dev. 2018, 8, 1027–1038.
48. Nallusamy, S.; Gautam, M. Enhancement of overall equipment effectiveness using total productive maintenance in a manufactur-
ing industry. Int. J. Perform. Eng. 2017, 13, 173–188. [CrossRef]
49. Rao, G.V.P.; Nallusamy, S.; Rajaram Narayanan, M. Augmentation of production level using different lean approaches in medium
scale manufacturing industries. Int. J. Mech. Eng. Technol. 2017, 8, 360–372.
50. Saravanan, V.; Nallusamy, S.; Balaji, K. Lead time reduction through execution of lean tool for productivity enhancement in small
scale industries. Int. J. Engg. Res. Afr. 2018, 34, 116–127. [CrossRef]
51. Mikosch, N.; Dettmer, T.; Plaga, B.; Gernuks, M.; Finkbeiner, M. Relevance of Impact Categories and Applicability of Life Cycle
Impact Assessment Methods from an Automotive Industry Perspective. Sustainability 2022, 14, 8837. [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual
author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to
people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright of Sustainability (2071-1050) is the property of MDPI and its content may not be
copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.

A Model To Reduce Machine Changeover Time and Improve

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

A Model To Reduce Machine Changeover Time and Improve

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

sustainability

1 Faculty of Management, AGH University of Krakow, 30-059 Krakow, Poland

Keywords: automotive industry; resource efficiency; lean manufacturing; SMED—Single Minute

Copyright: © 2023 by the authors.

Sustainability 2023, 15, 10558. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310558 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability

Figure 1. Visualization of changeover time. Source: own study.

it possible to implement a continuous flow of products, without loss of efficiency or long

3. Materials and Methods

3.2. Design and Implementation of a New Changeover Process

3.2. Design and Implementation of a New Changeover Process

assembly line using the SMED methodology. Source: own study.

(a) (b) (c)

, x FOR PEER REVIEW 9 of 24

nability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW

Figure 11. Operator 2 and his workstations. Source: own study.

Figure 12. Operator

Figure 15. Spaghetti

Sustainability 2023, 15, 10558 14 of 22

ty 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 24

Figure 18. SpaghettiFigure

The analysis of the Forchangeover

Sustainability 2023, 15, x FOR PEER REVIEW 19 of 24

C—price of one lamp, EUR;

You might also like