February 2021 Volume 3

AUTOMATION

had to be hired or trained. Maintenance needs certainly increased with the introduction of automation. The introduction of teachable robots has greatly reduced the need for highly skilled programmers. I remember encountering my first teachable robot around 1999. The application was part measurement and inspection. In place of a programmer writing code dictating the specific movements of the measurement device, the inspector manually operated the device while the program was being created in the background for future use. When I first observed this, I distinctly remember thinking how a formidable challenge (and cost) to automation has been effectively overcome. So, an organization has to perform a proper cost-benefit analysis. Mr. Trizzino from Adaptec Solutions says, “automating certain processes like tending a trimpress can result in a very quick return on investment (ROI) due to the labor savings of alleviating an operator. Other processes like billet loading may not completely displace an operator, but can increase throughput, safety, and ergonomics for the operator working alongside the robot. However, the need for maintenance staff knowledgeable and skilled in the various technologies utilized by automation still remains. Automation has certainly improved in the area of self-diagnostics over the years. But the fact remains, someone has to be available and capable to maintain and repair the equipment when required. I have seen my share of organizations that have not adequately invested in their maintenance capability, resulting in excessive downtime, much of which could be avoided through proper preventive and predictive maintenance techniques. I always find this ironic and sad. After all, the organization made a significant investment in the automation at some point. They just didn’t make the additional investment to keep it running. It is akin to organizations purchasing a new business system but cutting corners on the training in using the new system, another scenario I have seen and continue to see far too often. This subject came up duringmy discussions with Terry Chilson, a forging industry consultant. Mr. Chilson says, “technical training is one of the best things we can do even as the equipment is being built, and it must be in all aspects involved. This can include grippers, sensors, etc.” Lean’s Take on Automation So, what is Lean’s take on automation? Lean folks tend to be simple folks, always seeking simpler solutions to problems. We have a mantra in the community that states, “creativity before capital”. Besides the obvious economic benefit of simpler solutions, there is another important reason for this general approach to process improvement. Our go-to improvement methodology is W.E. Deming’s Plan-Do-Check-Act or PDCA. The ‘Act’ really means ‘Act toMake Standard’ – to fully deploy and sustain a proven process change over time. Experience has shown that complex solutions tend to be more difficult to sustain over time. The increased maintenance challenges previously discussed are an example of this. In Lean we want to ‘right size’ equipment and facilities, even automation. In my article titled “Get Out of Your Box!” in the November 2020 issue of FIA Magazine, I introduced a concept of

3P wherein we suggest to ‘right size’ equipment and technology to the need more in the short term. ‘4 – ¼ - 4x’ is a concept that we use. Perhaps it is better to plan on smaller machines or cells, and then purchase additional ones (up to 4), if and when increased demand occurs. The investment in smaller machines will be a fraction of that for larger, more complex equipment (¼ or less the cost). Contrary to traditional thought, productivity tends to improve dramatically (up to 4 times) with this approach. Simpler equipment, easier to operate, more uptime. Mike Gill of LASCO Umformtechnik GMBH, headquartered outside of Munich Germany, told me, “don’t automate the entire line at once, but start somewhere.” LASCO is a manufacturer of machines tool and automation technology. He suggests, to begin where “heartache” exists, which can be where quality or other problems are being experienced. Automation can help address those issues. He also suggests, to start in an area that represents an “easy” application that can provide a fast return. Importantly, Mr. Gill says, “learn from the early experience to determine other applications.” Good advice, indeed. With Lean, safety always comes first. In forging operations, moving materials in and out of equipment represents some of the most dangerous activities, and thus suited for automation. It is also aligned with the ‘right sizing’ approach of Lean. Automating these activities tend to be easier to do and less costly, particularly on the input side where the configurations of stock tend to be less varying. Perhaps there is no need to engineer a fully automated system, just aspects of loading and unloading of the equipment currently being used. This can often be possible with existing equipment and can be accomplished during periodic overhaul that is often required with forging equipment. Beyond the obvious safety benefits, productivity benefits can also be expected. Lean is first and foremost a human based system. It seeks to maximize the contributions team members make to their organizations, and society as a whole. It recognizes that associates can contribute beyond their physical labors, for example, with their ideas for improvement. It is with this perspective that we view automation. During my conversation with Mr. Trizzino, he mentioned the benefits of automation on “morale”. “Staffing is more and more difficult for forgers. People don’t necessarily find the work environment in forging to be attractive. However, the opportunity to work with robots may be of interest to potential new hires, and even existing employees.” In Lean there is a term ‘autonomation’ which means automation with human intelligence. Toyota refers to this as ‘jidoka’. It means given equipment the ability to distinguish between good part from bad autonomously, without being monitored by an operator. The concept originated in the early 1900s when Sakichi Toyoda, founder of the Toyota Group invented a textile loom that stopped automatically when any thread broke. Previously, multiple operators had to closely monitor the loom to recognize when a thread broke, before piles of defective product was generated. Autonomation eliminates the need for ‘machine watching’, and it has expanded beyond its original quality assurance purpose. Making equipment

FIA MAGAZINE | FEBRUARY 2021 39