Production Loss Reporting
Asset Utilization Improvement at Hercules Incorporated, David
E. Brown,
Asset Utilization and Production Loss Accounting
has become a core manufacturing improvement driver throughout
Hercules. This presentation describes the keys to success in
implementation and achieving results: defining the approach
to Asset Utilization, gaining management support, and describing
issues that need to be considered when implementing Asset Utilization
and associated improvement processes.
Overview of Asset Utilization at Hercules
Asset Utilization, a measure of production performance, has
become a key manufacturing improvement tool in Hercules. It
was adopted as the primary measure for the Corporate Reliability
Team, in December of 1997, after learning of it in a benchmarking
session with Rohm & Haas. Today, Hercules' system is actively
used at 29 manufacturing sites worldwide. It provides data
for eliminating production losses at each site, thus increasing
capacity with negligible capital investment. The measurement
system is also an effective reporting tool and is used corporately
to define manufacturing improvement objectives.
Asset Utilization is defined as Actual Production divided
by Ideal Production, for any given period of time. The difference
between the two constitutes production losses, which incidentally
are inherent in any manufacturing operation. Hercules accounts
for Asset Utilization in hours, which negates the impact of
product mix. An ideal rate is defined for each product. Production
is converted to "Ideal Hours" by dividing the production quantity
by the ideal rate. Asset Utilization is calculated by dividing
the "Ideal Hours" by the actual hours for the time period.
Hercules considers it important to measure all production losses.
This is done by identifying the "real" ideal rate for each
product, and by accounting for every hour in the year. Losses
associated with planned downtime are accounted for by capturing
the data in an appropriate loss category, so we recognize the
downtime as a loss that was taken in a planned fashion. Many
gains can come from measuring and managing the "acceptable" losses:
the planned downtime and the small losses that are not recognized
as significant.
Operational Asset Utilization (OAU) is identical to Asset
Utilization, except that it excludes Demand related losses.
Demand related losses are either plant shutdowns or production
rate limits that are planned for the purpose of inventory control.
OAU is a better measure of plant performance, and its increase
can be directly tied to an increase in plant capacity. The
difference between Asset Utilization and Operational Asset
Utilization represents available additional capacity for meeting
increases in market demand.
Benefits
The objective of increasing plant capacity is to realize
additional profits through the sale of additional production.
This is by far the largest direct financial benefit of improving
Operational Asset Utilization, as Gross Profit increases by
sales price minus variable cost (mainly materials and part
of the energy cost). Hercules selected six manufacturing processes
for extra attention in 2000. OAU increases at these six sites
allowed actual production averaging 13% above 1999 capacity.
In overall results, all production processes in one division
increased OAU an average of 4% for the year.
There are many other benefits of improving OAU, even in a
plant that is not operating at capacity. As production (and
maintenance) problems are eliminated, plant costs decrease.
There are fewer abnormal situations that can lead to safety
or environmental incidents. The plant gains the ability to
respond to unexpected sales orders, increasing confidence in
production promises and affording the opportunity to gain market
share. Plant morale increases as operators and mechanics recognize
real progress in eliminating recurring problems.
Asset Utilization Database
Hercules developed a database to capture production and loss
data for Asset Utilization. Use of the database prompts the
operator to account for production losses. The loss information
is categorized at several levels of detail, and over time affords
Pareto style reports identifying the largest cause of losses.
The database also allows losses to be tied to a piece of equipment,
the cause to be identified, and written comments to be recorded.
See figures 1 and 2 for example reports on Asset Utilization
losses.
Gaining Support
The most effective tool in gaining management support is
to point out the incremental gross profit associated with a
potential increase in production for a process that is (forecast
to be) at capacity. I used a 5% capacity increase, to evaluate
the potential gross profit increase for various plant sites.
Capacity increases of 10 to 15% are commonly possible through
Asset Utilization improvement, with very little capital required.
At Hercules, we were fortunate that the decision to implement
Asset Utilization was made by the Vice President of Manufacturing.
Quarterly meetings with his staff were essential to raise the
visibility of the effort. In those meetings we reported progress
and discussed the path forward. Site specific progress reports
by plant managers proved to be a very effective motivator for
other groups.
The plant manager's support is needed when implementing at
a manufacturing site. I found that even very well intentioned
plant people focus mainly on those items about which the plant
manager is asking questions. I also look for the plant to devote
a full week to the task of implementing our database and data
collection processes. This has proven much more effective than
an approach where training is provided but the plant tries
to implement in a less focused fashion. Performing a system
level "Failure Modes and Effects Analysis" is a useful tool
for defining meaningful loss categories and for gaining understanding
and consistency in loss accounting.
Implementation Considerations
I consider it essential to provide the plants with the ability
to customize the database setup to their preferences. Hercules'
database allows the user to define date format (American /
Military / European) and production measurement units. We standardize
on the top level of loss categories, but the plants can setup
unique sub and detail categories. Our database can also be
used for either batch or continuous processes, just by tailoring
the end time of each record to either the end of the shift
or the end of the batch. The begin-time is always the end-time
for the previous record. Each plant can also decide whether
to enter production and loss information every batch, shift,
day, or other interval. The flexibility afforded by these setup
and use considerations has enabled the same database to be
used effectively by almost any process.
Proper setting of ideal rates is another important consideration.
Production personnel frequently consider nameplate or design
capacity to be the goal. But these capacities include assumptions
for downtime and less than optimal rates. Our practice has
been to allow production to set the ideal rates (best historical
batch time or shift rate for each product), and then to increase
them when some production records exceed the ideal rates. It
is essential that production comes to view the ideal rates
as a measuring stick for identifying all losses, and not as
capacity that management will demand in the future. It is also
essential for management to understand that lower Asset Utilization
figures mean that a plant has set the standards high and is
using the system as an improvement tool.
Asset Utilization is a measure of production losses. It is
not a measure of downtime for each piece of equipment. At Hercules,
we account for the production losses in hours, using the following
equation:
Asset Utilization Loss Hours may not be equal to the downtime
for a particular piece of equipment. Sometimes surge capacity
(or parallel equipment) allows the process bottleneck to operate
during part of the equipment downtime, or at a reduced rate.
In the case of batch processes, the equipment may not be needed
during part of the batch process. Therefore, the operator will
need direction on properly accounting for production losses.
When the operator enters a record into Hercules' Asset Utilization
database, the database calculates total loss hours. The operator
then can review the problems of the shift in light of the total
loss hours, when accounting for the losses during the shift.
For meaningful data, records should be entered every shift
by an operator or supervisor. If data is entered before a shift
leaves, the person entering the data has first hand knowledge
of the events during the shift. This bridges the communication
gap between shift and daylight. However, training and follow-up
are required to ensure that each shift accounts for losses
in the same manner, for data consistency purposes. Production
entry by a day supervisor does have the advantage of making
it easier to be consistent in how losses are categorized. Most
Hercules plants start out using a day supervisor to enter Asset
Utilization records. The supervisor gains experience in loss
accounting, before delegating the duty to the shifts. While
some plants choose to keep data entry at the daylight supervisor
level, other plants are very successful using shift supervisors
or operators for that duty.
There are several pitfalls related to accounting for "No
Demand" losses (downtime or reduced production rates, taken
to prevent excessive inventory when sales are below plant capacity).
For "No Demand" rate limits, we consider the difference between
production at the ideal rate and production at the "No Demand" rate
as a "No Demand" loss, which does not reduce the Operating
Asset Utilization (OAU). However, when plants have production
problems they are inclined to speed up above their rate limit
to make up for any problems encountered, which makes it look
like there were no other losses on the shift. This is cheating
and not allowed! Seriously, we ask the plants to limit their
production to that rate, or if necessary to meet production
requirements to remove the "No Demand" rate limit.
Another pitfall occurs when downtime is scheduled due to "No
Demand". Production schedules necessary repairs to take place
during this scheduled downtime, because that is the right thing
to do. They do not want this repair work to count as an "Availability" (Maintenance
related) loss, because they were scheduled down anyway. But
it does make sense to back the downtime for necessary repairs
out of the "No Demand" category and account for them as "Availability".
This ensures a proper accounting of plant capacity and available
production. Our goal is to increase OAU, then push to sell
the additional capacity. However, we don't want to sell out
our ability to perform necessary maintenance!
In some plants that operate with only two or three shifts,
there is a tendency to enter the loss hours that the operator
is aware of, then enter the remaining losses as No Demand.
This limits the usefulness of the data, because the operator
is never prompted to look for losses they didn't notice. Frequently,
the "normal" losses are very significant and can be reduced.
It is very important to accurately account for the No Demand
downtime, to calculate the remaining production loss hours,
then to look for the cause. This, in effect, is a benchmarking
of every record against the best possible production, which
highlights where there are opportunities for improvement. Benchmarking
against yourself: what a concept!
Improvement Processes
Gathering data is an important endeavor, for benchmarking
and measuring progress. Just paying attention to data entry,
problems encountered, and posting results, spontaneously leads
to improvement. There are also some powerful continuous improvement
processes that should be implemented. One is what I will call
a behavior based improvement process. Improvements come from
focusing attention on the item to be improved. Central to this
process is holding daily meetings to review losses, where day
to day issues are resolved. The daily meetings should be centered
on the operator and mechanic, who are encouraged to deal directly
with any issues within their ability. But the big issues that
require more resources must be resolved, not only for the direct
benefit but also for morale considerations. These big issues
can be addressed in a weekly meeting of the resource managers,
where they prioritize, assign resources, and monitor progress.
The plant manager should actively monitor progress, ask questions,
and remove barriers.
Another important improvement process involves a tactical
approach to loss elimination. Operations, Maintenance, and
Engineering should meet for a full day every quarter to analyze
loss information, and develop action plans to address the largest
opportunities. Task teams are sponsored to validate the problems
and implement solutions. This group should continue to meet
every two weeks to monitor progress and results.
There are many important factors for driving improvement
through Asset Utilization. Success requires management support,
commitment of resources, useful tools, and focused improvement
processes. The benefits are well worth the effort and cost,
as success provides substantial financial and work environment
benefits.
|