Design for reliability

Building Reliability Into Your Designs

Maintenance Excellence Roundtable 10 September 2001Global Equipment Reliability ExcellenceEastman Kodak Company

Level 3 Training Gates 3-6 Introduction

WC&PR Equipment Reliability Training©2000 Eastman Kodak Company

Colorado

Australia

Brazil

Mexico UK

China

France

Rochester

Intro


3

WC&PR VISION “World Leader in Value adding Manufacturing Solutions”

WORLDWIDE CAPITAL & PROCESS RELIABILITY DIVISION

Intro

WC&PR MISSION To work with our client partners to provide our worldwide manufacturing sites with solutions that provide real competitive business advantage. Our global team of highly skilled people bring a wide variety of capabilities to the integration of process knowledge and know how with technology to deliver these solutionsGERE KEY RESULT AREA Consistently set and attain operability requirements for new capital assets by implementation of a DFR VIP strategy



The Business Case for Reliability

1. Asset GrowthDoing more with less

$

2. OperabilitySetting & attaining operating requirementsTime to nameplate capacity

3. Life Cycle CostingThe “Rights of Reliability”



$Asset Growth-The Value Web

Value Creation1

While increases in returns or in growth alone can create shareholder value, it is the combination of high returns and high growth that makes for major appreciation in stock price.

However, the more successful a company is at increasing it’s share price, the steeper the slope the company must climb to push that price even higher. In fact few companies are able to beat the tendency to “fade” to average market returns.

Growth is a great accelerator of shareholder value when returns are high. But if returns plummet, continuing high growth can cause a company to plunge down into the lower right hand corner of the web. In such a situation, growth can actually destroy value.

1“Asset Productivity: The Next Wave” BCG white paper



Operability

2Independent Project Analysis, Inc. “IBC 2000”

Operability improvements have the same impact on IRR as cost Improvements2

$



OperabilityReducing startup times improves capital effectiveness2

2Independent Project Analysis, Inc. “IBC 2000”

For a $25M project a 2 week reduction in startup time results in 0.3% IRR improvement, or $350,000 NPV improvement.

$


8

$LIFE CYCLE COST - LIFE CYCLE COST - “Iceberg” Model“Iceberg” Model

OPERATING COST

MAINTENANCE COST

TECHNICAL DATA COST

INVENTORY COST

TRAINING COST

Project Cost VisibilityDevelop, Design, Purchase, Fabricate, Install and Commission



Life Cycle CostingYou determine the LCC long before the asset is operating3

3”Life Cycle Cost and Good Practices” H. Paul Barringer, P.E.

$



Life Cycle Costing

5-6% Increase in reliability

$10K

Cos

t sav

ings

$

Here’s the results of two project team’s efforts4

4”Life Cycle Cost & Reliability for Process Equipment” H. Paul Barringer, P.E.



$EK’s Measure of Manufacturing Effectiveness

OEE (Overall Equipment Effectiveness) = E/B TEEP (Total Effective Equipment Performance) = E/A

A

• Weekends/Holidays• Shifts Not Worked• No Schedule• Breaks/Lunches• Meetings/Tours• Training• General Cleaning• PM’s• Capital Improvement• Development

(Total Time)

Planned Losses

• Set-ups/Change-Overs• Insufficient Personnel• Insufficient Material• Equipment Breakdown• Jams and Minor Stoppages• Support System Failures

B (Scheduled Time)

Operational Losses

• Reduction From Expected Speed

C (Uptime)

Speed Losses

D

• Product that is not released because it did not meet customer specifications.

Includes the following: - Defects/Waste/Scrap - Machine Rejects - Quality Samples - Rework

Quality Losses

• Product that meets customer specifications(fit to be sold).

EGood

Production



Can We Affect Manufacturing Effectiveness (Asset Growth, Operability and LCC)?

Category Ability To Impact? Weekends, Holidays Shifts Not Worked No Schedule Breaks, Lunches Meetings, Tours Training General Cleaning PM’s Capital Improvements

Plan

ned

Los

ses

Development Setups, Change-overs Insufficient Personnel Insufficient Material Equipment Breakdown Jams and Minor Stoppages O

pera

tiona

l L

osse

s

Support System Failures

Spee

d L

osse

s Reduction from expected speed

Product that is not released because it did not meet customer specifications

Defects, Waste, Scrap Machine Rejects Quality Samples

Qua

lity

Los

ses

Rework

Goo

d Pr

oduc

tion Product that meets customer specifications

$

NoNoNoNoNoYes

NoNo

YesYes

YesYesYes

Yes

YesYesYesYes

YesYesYesYesYes



Objective 1- Use Our Work Process

The Capital Project Process Describes Worldwide Capital and Process Reliability's (WC&PR) process for the application of resources to an opportunity or problem solution in a way that delivers high value assets to the sponsoring organization and to the Eastman Kodak Company.

Objectives



DFR in the Capital Project Process

DFR in the Capital Project Process Gates 1-2

DFR in the Capital Project Process Gates 3-6

Current OEE

PredictedOEE

Requirements

Reliability Program Plan

Asset Strategy

Final FundingApproval

Class R Class S Class 2 Execution & Commissioning Utilization End of

Useful Life

Gate 1 Gate 2

Class 1

Gate 3 Gate 4

DetailDesign

Gate 5 Gate 6

First FundingApproval

IMM Capital Investment Review Meeting

Objectives


15

Objective 2: Manage All System Losses

Control/manage the three major elements of unreliability in order to minimize Life Cycle Costs and maximize “inherent” reliability

1. Equipment (Machines)

2. Process (Machines, Materials and Measurement)

3. People (Manpower, Methods and Man/Machine Interaction)

Objectives


16

Objective 3 : Balance Cost, Schedule and Reliability

CostScheduleOperability

FunctionalityQualitySafetyMaintainabilityPerformance

} RELIABIITY

Objectives



StrategiesStart With a WW Assessment of Common Equipment

• OEE/TEEP of critical equipment within a flow with major losses identified

Responsible: Flow Asset Manager working w/Business, Capital & Local Flow Asset Manager

Include Reliability Elements…

• Costing of OEE losses

• 3 - 5 Year estimated WW production volumes • Optimized equipment strategy to meet W W demand based upon volumes and losses



• Value Engineering/Life Cycle Costing of Alternatives

StrategiesContinue With a Robust Project Strategic Phase

Choose the best alternative solution using…

•OEE goal •Standard Designs•OEE Prediction •Gap analysis


19

Follow the Process (Phases and Gates)Reliability Issues in Capital Investment Review Meeting…

Requirements

• How does this project fit into the ASSET STRATEGY?• What is the OEE/TEEP of the existing asset base before the project?• What is the OEE/TEEP of the asset after the project?

• What Standard Designs are being used?• What are the major technical risks and concerns?

• What is the flow’s ASSET STRATEGY?



Reliability Requirements Philosophy

Requirements

Control all 3 sources of unreliability. These three sources need to be identified & quantified the requirements.

MTBF (Mean Time Between Failure)MTTR (Mean Time To Restore)Changeover TimeFunctionality RequirementsSoftware Reliability

Equipment(Machine)

For

Specify:Process Capability (Cpk, PCI)Defects Per MillionQuality YieldProcess Downtime (OEE Losses)

Process(Machine, Material& Measurement)

For

Specify:O&M training requirementsFailure reporting & corrective actionMaintenance strategySpare part strategyMistake proof/failsafeErgonomic Guidelines

People(Manpower, Methods & Machine)

For

Specify:


21

A plan that identifies the reliability tools and methodologies that will be applied during the Capital Project Process to deliver an asset which meets the reliability criteria detailed in the Requirements Document.

• Identifies costs of reliability effort• Reliability Program Plan schedule is aligned with project gates • Plan is tailored to each situation based on degree of reliability “Challenge” and program constraints of Cost, Schedule and Resources

RPPThe Reliability Program Plan (RPP)



Customer Needs

System/Equipment Reliability Requirements

Is a Kodak

STANDARDDESIGN

available?

Is therereliability data on

Kodak STANDARDDESIGN?

Are there complex

integration issuesthat need to be

resolved?

Define Reliability Program Planfor

Standard Design

Yes

No

Create anew or

modifieddesign

No

ImplementCommissioning

Strategy

Does this project requireconcurrent processdevelopment work in

MSTD?

MSTDFirst of a

Kind ProcessYes

Doesthis project require

concurrent processdevelopment work in

MREO?

RTDPRobust

TechnologyDevelopment

Process

Yes

RELIABILITY PROGRAM PLAN (RPP) BEST PRACTICES DECISION FLOWCHART

RequiredExample:Advantix Finishing Factory

Example:Solution Delivery SystemAlpha Site

Do we know the

reliability potential ofthe proposed

system?

No

No

No

Evaluate system reliabilityŸ Data Collection & AnalysisŸ Reliability Block DiagramŸ OEE AnalysisŸ Parameter "P" DiagramŸ Reliability AllocationŸ Voice of the Customer --Baseline or Benchmark

Suppliers Equipment (internal and external data)Ÿ Reliability Prediction and ModelingŸ Reliability Simulation

Are thegaps due to high

changeover/setuptime?

Reduce Setup/Changeover lossesŸ Setup Changeover ReductionŸ Mistakeproof and FailsafeŸ Detailed Training Strategy for Operations

and Maintenance (Commissioning Plans)

Yes

Are thegaps due to excessive

equipment breakdowns?(Low MTBF)

No

Evaluate and Challenge DesignŸ Concept, Technology and Component

SelectionŸ Root Cause AnalysisŸ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Diagnostic Technologies

Yes

No

Arethere new

technologies orprocesses (to Kodak)being proposed with

unknownreliabilities?

Determine Reliability of NewTechnologies or ProcessesŸ Reliability Testing (prototype, proof of

principle, demonstration, functionalitycapability,etc)

Ÿ Design of Experiments/Robust DesignŸ Failure Modes, Effects & Criticality

Analysis(FMECA)Ÿ Parameter DiagramŸ Potential Problem Analysis

Yes

No

Equipment

Reliability

Are the gaps caused by dominant

failure modes?

Eliminate or Reduce Effects of FailureŸ Root Cause AnalysisŸ Fault Tree AnalysisŸ Diagnositic Technologies

Yes

No

No

ProcessReliabilit

y

Doesprocess need to befully characterized?

(Cpk, PCI)

Determine Capability of ProcessŸ Reliability Testing (process capability,

prototype, proof of principle testing)Ÿ Design of Experiments/Robust DesignŸ Measurement Capability TestingŸ Modified QFD Diagramming of Process

Yes

Couldgaps be

caused by dominantquality failure

modes?(Low yield, high

defectlevels)

Eliminate or Reduce Effect ofFailureŸ Root Cause AnalysisŸ Reliability Testing (process capability)Ÿ Design of Experiments/Robust DesignŸ Failure Modes, Effects & Criticality

Analysis for the processŸ Quality ToolsŸ Diagnostic Technologies

Yes

No

Could process go out of control

and cause defects?(Process downtime,

low yield)

Develop Robust ProcessŸ Functional Analysis Based Process

Verifcation(FAB- PV)Ÿ Design of Experiments/Robust DesignŸ Mistake Proof & Failsafe AnalysesŸ Root Cause AnalysisŸ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Failure Modes, Effects & Criticality

Analysis for the processŸ Potential Problem Analysis

Yes

No

Is the gapcaused by

equipment failure dueto inadequatemaintenance?

Determine Optimum MaintenanceStrategyŸ Reliability Centered Maintenance AnalysisŸ Diagnostic Technologies

Yes

No

PeopleReliabilit

y

Is therepotential for OEELosses due tohuman-machine

interaction?

Eliminate or Reduce Consequences of Human-Machine Interaction IssuesŸ Ergonomic GuildelinesŸ Mistake Proof & Failsafe AnalysesŸ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Potential Problem Analysis

Yes

Is there

potential for failurefor not following

correctprocedures?

Provide Appropriate Operational,Quality and Maintenance Trainingand ProceduresŸ Detailed Training Strategy for Operations and

Maintenance (Commissioning Plans)Ÿ Mistake Proof & Failsafe MethodologyŸ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Potential Problem Analysis

Yes

Utilize Potential Problem Analysis TechniquesŸ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Failure Modes, Effects & Criticality AnalysisŸ Fault Tree AnalysisŸ Mistake Proof & Failsafe MethodologyŸ Engineering Best PracticesŸ Potential Problem Analsysis

No

PRE-COMMISSIONING

Couldany reliability issues

be caused by improperfabrication orinstallation?

Ÿ "Fab it right" verification checklistsŸ "Install it right" verification checklistsŸ Vibration spec TS029-04Ÿ Noise Spec TS021-04Ÿ Software test requirements - I/S Phases

and Gates deliverables

Yes

Develop Commissioning PlanŸ Establish a Failure Reporting, Analysis & Corrective

Action SystemŸ Detailed Training Strategy for Operations and

Maintenance (Commissioning Plans)Ÿ Develop Plans for Startup, Debug, Certification and

Acceptance (Commissioning Plans)Ÿ Reliability Testing (demonstration test)Ÿ Reliability Growth MonitoringŸ Diagnostic Technologies for baselining equipmentŸ Establish a process to ensure warranty needs are metŸ Software requirements - I/S Phases and Gates

deliverables, Develop recovery plan for software

Does STANDARD DESIGNand system reliability

meet all reliabilityrequirements?

Yes

Analyze Performance of Standard DesignŸ Data Collection & AnalysisŸ Standard Design/Standard Design Reliability

No


New or Modified Design

Are there potential material

interactionissues?

Investigate Material SelectionIssuesŸ Material Selection -Tribology, Metallurgy,

Plastics,Ceramics

Yes

Is the gapcaused by high Mean

Time to Repair/Restore(MTTR)?

Reduce Repair TimeŸ Design for Reliability, Modularity,

Maintainability, Accessibility GuidelinesŸ Reliability Prediction & /ModelingŸ Concept, Component & Technology

Selection

Yes

Yes

COMMISSIONING

No

Is this a supplier "turn-

key"system?

No

Yes

Compare predictedreliability to requirements --

Identify "Gaps"

Yes

Directions

1. Start at "Customer Needs"

2. Continue to "Implement Commissioning Strategy"

3. Recommended tools for Equipment, Process andPeople Reliability and Purchase for Reliability are not inany chronological order. These tools would need to beused at the appropriate time during Class 1 & 2Engineering or during Execution phase of the project Purchase for Reliability

Purchasefor

Reliability

Select the Best Supplier(s)Ÿ Supplier Selection MatrixŸ Supplier Quality AssessmentŸ Voice of the Customer --baseline or benchmark

suppliers equipment (internal and external data)

Couldequipment from a

supplier fail to performat specified reliability

levels?

Managing Reliability of Equipment from a SupplierŸ Reliability Testing (demonstration testing)Ÿ Supplier Warranty AgreementsŸ Voice of the Customer --Baseline or Benchmark Suppliers

EquipmentŸ Design for Modularity, Maintainability, Accessibility GuidlelinesŸ Vibration spec TS029-04Ÿ Noise Spec TS021-04Ÿ Software requirements - I/S Phases and Gates deliverables

Important to understand how supplier ismanaging reliability

Alternate Route for Supplier DesignRev iews

Hold Design Review #1(During Class 1 Engineering)Ÿ Requirements Verification MatrixŸ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Software requirements - I/S Phases


Yes

No

1

1

Coulda supplier be

selected whichcannot meet reliability

requirments?

Yes

Is therea need to

communicatereliability req'ts to

a supplier?

Request for Quotes w/ReliabilityCriteria per PAB-3

YesNo

Yes

No

Is anoptimum

maintenancestrategy

available?

Review and Enhance Maintenance StrategyŸ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Review of existing strategy on standard

designŸ Diagnostic Technologies

No

Is anoptimum sparepart strategy

available?

Develop Consequence-based SparePart Strategy

Ÿ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Spare part decision matrix

No

Yes

Yes

Hold Design Review #2(During Class 2 Engineering)Ÿ Requirements Verification MatrixŸ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Software requirements - I/S Phases


Ongoingreliability

Review and Enhance Maintenance StrategyŸ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Supplier Maintenance ContractŸ Diagnostic Technologies

Develop Consequence-based Spare Part StrategyŸ Reliability Centered MaintenanceŸ Spare Part Decision Matrix

Does systemrequire spare

parts

Doessystem require

ongoingmaintenance?

Yes

Yes

No

No

No

Do weknow the reliabili ty of

the fully integratedsystem?

Evaluate System Reliability w/Std DesignŸ Reliability Block DiagramŸ OEE AnalysisŸ Reliability AllocationŸ Reliability Prediction/ModelingŸ Reliability Simulation

Yes

No


Supplier "Turn-Key" System

RPP



RPP



Start

Proj ect Size>$1M?

Ability topositiv ely

impactNPV?

Criticality andfailure

impact toKodak?

Reliabilityresourcesav ailable?

OtherIssues?

End

Larger proj ects with high returns may offergreater potential returns on DFR activ ities.

Identifing Global Manufacturing Projects for Targeted Reliability Resources and Results

Yes

No

High

Lowe r

Factors include:Ÿ Proj ect status (Class S?)Ÿ Standard design replicationŸ Client asset structure knowledgeŸ KOS Lean v alue stream mappingŸ Asset productiv ity opportunity focusŸ Stable demand product (high fixed-

asset utilization)

High

No

Lowe r

Yes

Factors include:Ÿ Proj ect complexityŸ Stategic business thrustŸ Startup challengesŸ Time to nameplate risksŸ Proprietary technologyŸ Stategic advantage- process knowledgeŸ IMM Critical EquipmentŸ Value stream deconstructingŸ Highly Irregular Demand (excess

capacity or higher inv entories)

Consider:Ÿ RAE Support in client area?Ÿ DFR Subject Manner Expert Support

av ailable?Ÿ Team Skill Lev el- coaching required?

Consider:Ÿ Inclusiv eness of team- resource

acceptanceŸ Seek projects with a solid business

case- minimize churnŸ Client Support Probabl

eSucces

s

OpenIssues

For Team

Proj ect teamsets and attains

operabilitygoals using DFR

best practicetools, and work

processes.DFR supportobtained as

needed.

Proj ect DFRresourcesidentifiedincluding

expectations,activ ity basedtraining, and

results analysis

Rollout

1Focus the

effort



Awareness Learning Practitioner

Project Team Member

Equipment Reliability

Level 1 Awareness


Level 2 Novice


Level 3 Practitioner

Gates 1-2


Level 3 Practitioner

Gates 3-6

Level 3 Optional


Study Tracks1 Project Manager MT MT M M S Engineering Manager MT MT M M S Client Sponsor O O S S S Project Controls MT O O O S Materials Manager MT O S S S Fab Manager MT O S S S Construction Manager MT O S S S Commissioning Manager MT MT S S S Client Rep (Operations, Quality & Maintenance)

MT MT S S S

Engineers MT MT S S S Designers MT MT S S S Others: Managers MT O O O S Execution MT O O O S Suppliers S S S S S Contractors S S S S S SMEs S S S S S

Key MT = Mandated unless test out S = Determined by Supv/TA NA = Not Applicable M = Mandated O = Optional

1Specific Equipment Reliability Study Tracks Level 3 Diagnostic Technologies Level 3 Basics of Machine Performance Data Analysis Setup Reduction Total Productive Manufacturing (TPM)

Root Cause Analysis Reliability Centered Maintenance Life Cycle Costing

Other Equipment Reliability Study Tracks AAS Degree in Applied Arts & Science Proposed by RIT Program Template RIT Certificate in Reliability RIT Diploma in Reliability

Comprehensive DFR courses & mandated training delivered on a project-by-project basis including the creation of project specific deliverables.

Rollout

2Train



Rollout3

MeasureThe

process



DFR Project Status/Summary Sheet Project Title Descripition Bi# Total Project Cost

Reliability Milestones Scheduled

DateActual Date Team Members: Reliability Costs

Verify Asset Strategy Available PM OEE EvaluatOEE Evaluation/Simple Prediction EM

CIRM Reliability Checklist Client RepReliability Requirements Op RepSupplier Specs/Selection Maint RepRPP Training/Development CommissionRPP Mapped into Integrated Project Plan DFR FacilitatorPost Mortem

Reliability Requirements and Major Reliability Hurdles

Reliability Accomplishments Reliability Barriers

Post Mortem Summary (success factors, barriers, accomplishments)

Rollout

4Measure

Theresults



RolloutDESIGN FOR RELIABILITY ACTIVITIES ON CAPITAL PROJECTS

GOAL: Train and coach project team members in the following activities enabling them to consistently set and attain operability requirements of new capital assets

STEP 1: ESTABLISH OEE GOAL FOR THE NEW CAPITAL ASSET AND IDENTIFY RELIABILITY GAPS

1

During Class S (Strategic Phase) of the Capital Project Process, it is important to set realistic reliability expectations for the new or modified manufacturing system and to identify the major reliability hurdles.

2

Set OEE/TEEP goals for the new or modified manufacturing system based upon customer needs, business case (life cycle costing), technical feasibility and competitive benchmarking

3

Evaluate baseline OEE/TEEP of the existing manufacturing system, if this system is being modified or leveraged

4

Predict OEE/TEEP impact of the proposed solution for the new or modified manufacturing system. This is a high-level reliability prediction. If a STANDARD DESIGN is the proposed solution, a reliability assessment of this STANDARD DESIGN is required for this analysis

5

Determine gaps between predicted reliability and reliability goal6

Summarize this information in the Capital Investment Review Reliability Impact Checklist STEP 2: ESTABLISH REALISTIC RELIABILITY REQUIREMENTS Beginning in Class S and completed during Class R (Requirements Phase) of the Capital Project Process, identify parameters critical to the performance of the asset. The capability to measure and monitor these critical parameters should be available. Parameters should be driven by the OEE identified losses and gap analysis. Allocate OEE downtime losses to the equipment subsystems. Specify Equipment, Process and People Reliability.

7

Equipment Reliability (Machine) 8 Mean Time Between Failure (MTBF) 9 Mean Time to Repair (MTTR) 10 Changeover time 11 Availability Software reliability Functionality requirements (max demonstrated rate, etc.) Process Reliability (Machine, Materials and Measurement Interaction) Process capability (Cpk, PCI) Process stability and robustness (SPC) Defect measures (DPM, DPMO, DPU, etc.) Quality yield Process downtime (OEE losses) People Reliability (Manpower, Methods and Manpower/Machine Interface) Maintenance strategy (reactive, preventive, predictive, proactive) Spare part strategy Manpower skill levels required Training requirements for maintenance, quality and operations

5Lead



What Do We Need To Do?1) Follow the Capital Project Process2) Consistently set operability requirements for new capital assets (Gates 1-2).

Existing asset productivity (OEE)Required asset productivity (OEE)Operability requirements

3) Consistently attain operability requirements of new capital assets (Gates 3-6).

Reliability Program Plan to attain the operability requirements

4) Challenge and improve the process

Summary



What’s In It For Us?Drive out variability

Not following the capital project process has resulted in: -failure to set operability goals -failure to attain operability goals

The process worksThe process enables project teams to effectively manage cost, schedule and operability goals

Enabler for KOS Lean ManufacturingThe objective is the delivery of high quality products, on a timely basis, for consumption by the downstream “customer”

Improved shareholders returnsThis is our strategic advantage

Summary



Some Closing Thoughts...Three powerful trends are driving asset productivity1

1) Price competition is intense. Margins are ratcheting downward. As companies hit the limits of cost cutting, they must increase asset efficiency to boost returns.2) Balance sheets have suffered while focusing on growth. Continued growth with above average returns requires cash for new opportunities. Improving asset productivity can increase profitability (cash).3) Integrated value chains are deconstructing- breaking into an array of discrete businesses. Extensive asset ownership may not be a competitive requirement. Poor asset performance cannot be subsidized within an integrated value chain.

1“Asset Productivity: The Next Wave” BCG white paper

Summary