The Experts below are selected from a list of 309 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Richard Mcintosh - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
A formal design for Changeover methodology. Part 1: Theory and background
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 2006Co-Authors: M P Reik, Stephen Culley, Richard Mcintosh, A R Mileham, Geraint W OwenAbstract:AbstractA rapid Changeover capability is central to today's thinking in respect of responsive, small batch manufacturing. Mass customization and other modern manufacturing paradigms have prompted companies to adapt swiftly to market turbulence and at the same time avoid the traditionally high unit costs associated with custom-made or small-volume products. Historically, an operation-focused approach has been adopted in reducing Changeover times; however, it is argued that there is a significant benefit if there is a focus on equipment design.There is a considerable challenge to design and build cost-effective Changeover-capable equipment. This challenge would be greatly assisted by the availability of a coherent design for Changeover (DFC) methodology.The authors have been researching the Changeover area for many years and present their latest thinking in two parts. In the first part of this paper the basic concepts for a formal DFC methodology are introduced. Drawing lessons from various existing DFX met...
-
Design for Changeover (DFC): Enabling the design of highly flexible, highly responsive manufacturing processes
2006Co-Authors: M P Reik, Antony R Mileham, Geraint W Owen, Richard Mcintosh, Stephen CulleyAbstract:A rapid Changeover capability is central for today's thinking concerning responsive, small batch manufacturing. The customer-driven mass customization paradigm places emphasis on satisfying market demands, particularly in terms of product individualization and ready delivery. Changeover capability is prominent in such a time-based manufacturing environment, where successful companies have to be able to adapt swiftly to market turbulence and at the same time avoid the traditionally high unit costs associated with custom made or small volume products. Existing tools to improve Changeover performance primarily address retrospective improvement, which can be achieved with an emphasis either on refining the activity of those conducting the Changeover or changing the hardware that is worked upon. Although there is a choice as to where emphasis might be directed it has been found that retrospective programs are in practice very often led with a strong emphasis on low expenditure and organizational change. Equipment modification opportunities can be significantly undervalued. Beyond retrospective improvement an excellent Changeover capability can also be provided at the outset as an element of overall process equipment capability. The OEM's challenge to build and market Changeover-capable equipment is potentially greatly assisted by the availability of a coherent design for Changeover (DFC) methodology. Drawing lessons from the development of various DFX methodologies, including design for assembly and design for variety, this chapter discusses the early development of a design for Changeover methodology to assist OEMs and other groups responsible for the design and adaptation of process hardware.
-
The Development of a Systematic Design for Changeover Methodology
2005Co-Authors: M P Reik, Antony R Mileham, Geraint W Owen, Richard Mcintosh, Stephen CulleyAbstract:Flexibility and responsiveness are watchwords of modern manufacturing, driven by a desire to reduce non-value-added activity and better respond to customer demands. Rapid Changeover between products is paramount if genuine manufacturing flexibility and efficiency are to be achieved. Changeover improvement has been in sharp focus as the limitations of the massmanufacturing paradigm have become increasingly recognised. Shigeo Shingo's SMED (Single Minute Exchange of Die) methodology has come to dominate retrospective improvement practice and his defining work has been interpreted and developed into a variety of training and implementation strategies. Particularly when interpreted by training organisations the methodology is often seen to retain a core objective of translating Changeover tasks into external time. In doing so, where improvement by revising work procedures is predominantly emphasised, the methodology can undervalue opportunities to modify process equipment. Even though a large number of case studies and examples of good design practice can be found from the literature there is no existing formal design for Changeover (DFC) methodology. Without comprehensive guidance as to how genuine rapid Changeover performance may be incorporated at the design stage those engaged in the design process have no option but to develop equipment Changeover capability on an ad hoc basis. Although a comprehensive DFC methodology is not available, a number of design for Changeover rules have previously been proposed. These simpler design rules can be used more generally to direct equipment design. However, these rules do not provide full guidance since they fail to provide means to assess what new equipment's Changeover capabilities will be once in service. Equally the rules are unranked, where some rules will be liable to have a far greater impact. Together they do not match the coherence and structure of commercially successful DFX packages, particularly those in the DFA area. This paper shows how a systematic design for Changeover methodology can provide strong guidance for equipment designers, and identifies essential characteristics of such a methodology. The proposed DFC methodology has been informed by a review of other DFX methodologies coupled with extensive active industrial research.
-
Sustaining Changeover improvement
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 2003Co-Authors: Stephen Culley, Geraint W Owen, Antony R Mileham, Richard McintoshAbstract:AbstractThe role of rapid Changeover in today's manufacturing environment is widely acknowledged. Tools to improve Changeovers—typically Shingo's ‘SMED’ methodology—are well known. However, little work has been done to establish whether Changeover gains have been sustained in differing industrial environments once initial improvement has been achieved. This paper investigates sustaining Changeover improvement, investigating factors that contribute to this outcome.
-
Changeover improvement: A maintenance perspective
International Journal of Production Economics, 2001Co-Authors: Richard Mcintosh, Stephen Culley, Antony R Mileham, Geraint W OwenAbstract:Abstract The current paper assesses on-machine maintenance in the context of recent work to improve Changeover performance. It is argued that techniques employed to improve Changeovers equally might be applied in maintenance situations. With brief reference to case studies from the authors’ research, it is further argued that focused maintenance activity can also directly influence Changeover performance, particularly by ensuring that items involved during a Changeover (change parts, product, fixed machine components and consumables) are in satisfactory condition. The role of design to improve either Changeover or maintenance performance is also discussed. Design rules that might be employed are introduced.
Geraint W Owen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The impact of run-up in ensuring Rapid Changeover
CIRP Annals, 2007Co-Authors: Antony R Mileham, Stephen Culley, Geraint W Owen, Linda Newnes, Matt Giess, Alan N BramleyAbstract:Rapid Changeover is a key pre-requisite for responsive manufacture. A Changeover is typically composed of three phases, run-down, set-up and run-up. Other research has focused almost exclusively on set-up with little being done to address the run-up phase, although it has been shown that doing a set-up fast can often result in a disproportionate increase in run-up. This paper investigates run-up within processing lines for which a rich database of Changeover information was collected from several companies. Data mining techniques were then used to identify the factors that had a direct influence on the extent of run-up for a particular line.
-
A formal design for Changeover methodology. Part 1: Theory and background
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 2006Co-Authors: M P Reik, Stephen Culley, Richard Mcintosh, A R Mileham, Geraint W OwenAbstract:AbstractA rapid Changeover capability is central to today's thinking in respect of responsive, small batch manufacturing. Mass customization and other modern manufacturing paradigms have prompted companies to adapt swiftly to market turbulence and at the same time avoid the traditionally high unit costs associated with custom-made or small-volume products. Historically, an operation-focused approach has been adopted in reducing Changeover times; however, it is argued that there is a significant benefit if there is a focus on equipment design.There is a considerable challenge to design and build cost-effective Changeover-capable equipment. This challenge would be greatly assisted by the availability of a coherent design for Changeover (DFC) methodology.The authors have been researching the Changeover area for many years and present their latest thinking in two parts. In the first part of this paper the basic concepts for a formal DFC methodology are introduced. Drawing lessons from various existing DFX met...
-
Design for Changeover (DFC): Enabling the design of highly flexible, highly responsive manufacturing processes
2006Co-Authors: M P Reik, Antony R Mileham, Geraint W Owen, Richard Mcintosh, Stephen CulleyAbstract:A rapid Changeover capability is central for today's thinking concerning responsive, small batch manufacturing. The customer-driven mass customization paradigm places emphasis on satisfying market demands, particularly in terms of product individualization and ready delivery. Changeover capability is prominent in such a time-based manufacturing environment, where successful companies have to be able to adapt swiftly to market turbulence and at the same time avoid the traditionally high unit costs associated with custom made or small volume products. Existing tools to improve Changeover performance primarily address retrospective improvement, which can be achieved with an emphasis either on refining the activity of those conducting the Changeover or changing the hardware that is worked upon. Although there is a choice as to where emphasis might be directed it has been found that retrospective programs are in practice very often led with a strong emphasis on low expenditure and organizational change. Equipment modification opportunities can be significantly undervalued. Beyond retrospective improvement an excellent Changeover capability can also be provided at the outset as an element of overall process equipment capability. The OEM's challenge to build and market Changeover-capable equipment is potentially greatly assisted by the availability of a coherent design for Changeover (DFC) methodology. Drawing lessons from the development of various DFX methodologies, including design for assembly and design for variety, this chapter discusses the early development of a design for Changeover methodology to assist OEMs and other groups responsible for the design and adaptation of process hardware.
-
The Development of a Systematic Design for Changeover Methodology
2005Co-Authors: M P Reik, Antony R Mileham, Geraint W Owen, Richard Mcintosh, Stephen CulleyAbstract:Flexibility and responsiveness are watchwords of modern manufacturing, driven by a desire to reduce non-value-added activity and better respond to customer demands. Rapid Changeover between products is paramount if genuine manufacturing flexibility and efficiency are to be achieved. Changeover improvement has been in sharp focus as the limitations of the massmanufacturing paradigm have become increasingly recognised. Shigeo Shingo's SMED (Single Minute Exchange of Die) methodology has come to dominate retrospective improvement practice and his defining work has been interpreted and developed into a variety of training and implementation strategies. Particularly when interpreted by training organisations the methodology is often seen to retain a core objective of translating Changeover tasks into external time. In doing so, where improvement by revising work procedures is predominantly emphasised, the methodology can undervalue opportunities to modify process equipment. Even though a large number of case studies and examples of good design practice can be found from the literature there is no existing formal design for Changeover (DFC) methodology. Without comprehensive guidance as to how genuine rapid Changeover performance may be incorporated at the design stage those engaged in the design process have no option but to develop equipment Changeover capability on an ad hoc basis. Although a comprehensive DFC methodology is not available, a number of design for Changeover rules have previously been proposed. These simpler design rules can be used more generally to direct equipment design. However, these rules do not provide full guidance since they fail to provide means to assess what new equipment's Changeover capabilities will be once in service. Equally the rules are unranked, where some rules will be liable to have a far greater impact. Together they do not match the coherence and structure of commercially successful DFX packages, particularly those in the DFA area. This paper shows how a systematic design for Changeover methodology can provide strong guidance for equipment designers, and identifies essential characteristics of such a methodology. The proposed DFC methodology has been informed by a review of other DFX methodologies coupled with extensive active industrial research.
-
Sustaining Changeover improvement
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 2003Co-Authors: Stephen Culley, Geraint W Owen, Antony R Mileham, Richard McintoshAbstract:AbstractThe role of rapid Changeover in today's manufacturing environment is widely acknowledged. Tools to improve Changeovers—typically Shingo's ‘SMED’ methodology—are well known. However, little work has been done to establish whether Changeover gains have been sustained in differing industrial environments once initial improvement has been achieved. This paper investigates sustaining Changeover improvement, investigating factors that contribute to this outcome.
Antony R Mileham - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The impact of run-up in ensuring Rapid Changeover
CIRP Annals, 2007Co-Authors: Antony R Mileham, Stephen Culley, Geraint W Owen, Linda Newnes, Matt Giess, Alan N BramleyAbstract:Rapid Changeover is a key pre-requisite for responsive manufacture. A Changeover is typically composed of three phases, run-down, set-up and run-up. Other research has focused almost exclusively on set-up with little being done to address the run-up phase, although it has been shown that doing a set-up fast can often result in a disproportionate increase in run-up. This paper investigates run-up within processing lines for which a rich database of Changeover information was collected from several companies. Data mining techniques were then used to identify the factors that had a direct influence on the extent of run-up for a particular line.
-
Design for Changeover (DFC): Enabling the design of highly flexible, highly responsive manufacturing processes
2006Co-Authors: M P Reik, Antony R Mileham, Geraint W Owen, Richard Mcintosh, Stephen CulleyAbstract:A rapid Changeover capability is central for today's thinking concerning responsive, small batch manufacturing. The customer-driven mass customization paradigm places emphasis on satisfying market demands, particularly in terms of product individualization and ready delivery. Changeover capability is prominent in such a time-based manufacturing environment, where successful companies have to be able to adapt swiftly to market turbulence and at the same time avoid the traditionally high unit costs associated with custom made or small volume products. Existing tools to improve Changeover performance primarily address retrospective improvement, which can be achieved with an emphasis either on refining the activity of those conducting the Changeover or changing the hardware that is worked upon. Although there is a choice as to where emphasis might be directed it has been found that retrospective programs are in practice very often led with a strong emphasis on low expenditure and organizational change. Equipment modification opportunities can be significantly undervalued. Beyond retrospective improvement an excellent Changeover capability can also be provided at the outset as an element of overall process equipment capability. The OEM's challenge to build and market Changeover-capable equipment is potentially greatly assisted by the availability of a coherent design for Changeover (DFC) methodology. Drawing lessons from the development of various DFX methodologies, including design for assembly and design for variety, this chapter discusses the early development of a design for Changeover methodology to assist OEMs and other groups responsible for the design and adaptation of process hardware.
-
The Development of a Systematic Design for Changeover Methodology
2005Co-Authors: M P Reik, Antony R Mileham, Geraint W Owen, Richard Mcintosh, Stephen CulleyAbstract:Flexibility and responsiveness are watchwords of modern manufacturing, driven by a desire to reduce non-value-added activity and better respond to customer demands. Rapid Changeover between products is paramount if genuine manufacturing flexibility and efficiency are to be achieved. Changeover improvement has been in sharp focus as the limitations of the massmanufacturing paradigm have become increasingly recognised. Shigeo Shingo's SMED (Single Minute Exchange of Die) methodology has come to dominate retrospective improvement practice and his defining work has been interpreted and developed into a variety of training and implementation strategies. Particularly when interpreted by training organisations the methodology is often seen to retain a core objective of translating Changeover tasks into external time. In doing so, where improvement by revising work procedures is predominantly emphasised, the methodology can undervalue opportunities to modify process equipment. Even though a large number of case studies and examples of good design practice can be found from the literature there is no existing formal design for Changeover (DFC) methodology. Without comprehensive guidance as to how genuine rapid Changeover performance may be incorporated at the design stage those engaged in the design process have no option but to develop equipment Changeover capability on an ad hoc basis. Although a comprehensive DFC methodology is not available, a number of design for Changeover rules have previously been proposed. These simpler design rules can be used more generally to direct equipment design. However, these rules do not provide full guidance since they fail to provide means to assess what new equipment's Changeover capabilities will be once in service. Equally the rules are unranked, where some rules will be liable to have a far greater impact. Together they do not match the coherence and structure of commercially successful DFX packages, particularly those in the DFA area. This paper shows how a systematic design for Changeover methodology can provide strong guidance for equipment designers, and identifies essential characteristics of such a methodology. The proposed DFC methodology has been informed by a review of other DFX methodologies coupled with extensive active industrial research.
-
Sustaining Changeover improvement
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 2003Co-Authors: Stephen Culley, Geraint W Owen, Antony R Mileham, Richard McintoshAbstract:AbstractThe role of rapid Changeover in today's manufacturing environment is widely acknowledged. Tools to improve Changeovers—typically Shingo's ‘SMED’ methodology—are well known. However, little work has been done to establish whether Changeover gains have been sustained in differing industrial environments once initial improvement has been achieved. This paper investigates sustaining Changeover improvement, investigating factors that contribute to this outcome.
-
Changeover improvement: A maintenance perspective
International Journal of Production Economics, 2001Co-Authors: Richard Mcintosh, Stephen Culley, Antony R Mileham, Geraint W OwenAbstract:Abstract The current paper assesses on-machine maintenance in the context of recent work to improve Changeover performance. It is argued that techniques employed to improve Changeovers equally might be applied in maintenance situations. With brief reference to case studies from the authors’ research, it is further argued that focused maintenance activity can also directly influence Changeover performance, particularly by ensuring that items involved during a Changeover (change parts, product, fixed machine components and consumables) are in satisfactory condition. The role of design to improve either Changeover or maintenance performance is also discussed. Design rules that might be employed are introduced.
Stephen Culley - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
The impact of run-up in ensuring Rapid Changeover
CIRP Annals, 2007Co-Authors: Antony R Mileham, Stephen Culley, Geraint W Owen, Linda Newnes, Matt Giess, Alan N BramleyAbstract:Rapid Changeover is a key pre-requisite for responsive manufacture. A Changeover is typically composed of three phases, run-down, set-up and run-up. Other research has focused almost exclusively on set-up with little being done to address the run-up phase, although it has been shown that doing a set-up fast can often result in a disproportionate increase in run-up. This paper investigates run-up within processing lines for which a rich database of Changeover information was collected from several companies. Data mining techniques were then used to identify the factors that had a direct influence on the extent of run-up for a particular line.
-
A formal design for Changeover methodology. Part 1: Theory and background
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 2006Co-Authors: M P Reik, Stephen Culley, Richard Mcintosh, A R Mileham, Geraint W OwenAbstract:AbstractA rapid Changeover capability is central to today's thinking in respect of responsive, small batch manufacturing. Mass customization and other modern manufacturing paradigms have prompted companies to adapt swiftly to market turbulence and at the same time avoid the traditionally high unit costs associated with custom-made or small-volume products. Historically, an operation-focused approach has been adopted in reducing Changeover times; however, it is argued that there is a significant benefit if there is a focus on equipment design.There is a considerable challenge to design and build cost-effective Changeover-capable equipment. This challenge would be greatly assisted by the availability of a coherent design for Changeover (DFC) methodology.The authors have been researching the Changeover area for many years and present their latest thinking in two parts. In the first part of this paper the basic concepts for a formal DFC methodology are introduced. Drawing lessons from various existing DFX met...
-
Design for Changeover (DFC): Enabling the design of highly flexible, highly responsive manufacturing processes
2006Co-Authors: M P Reik, Antony R Mileham, Geraint W Owen, Richard Mcintosh, Stephen CulleyAbstract:A rapid Changeover capability is central for today's thinking concerning responsive, small batch manufacturing. The customer-driven mass customization paradigm places emphasis on satisfying market demands, particularly in terms of product individualization and ready delivery. Changeover capability is prominent in such a time-based manufacturing environment, where successful companies have to be able to adapt swiftly to market turbulence and at the same time avoid the traditionally high unit costs associated with custom made or small volume products. Existing tools to improve Changeover performance primarily address retrospective improvement, which can be achieved with an emphasis either on refining the activity of those conducting the Changeover or changing the hardware that is worked upon. Although there is a choice as to where emphasis might be directed it has been found that retrospective programs are in practice very often led with a strong emphasis on low expenditure and organizational change. Equipment modification opportunities can be significantly undervalued. Beyond retrospective improvement an excellent Changeover capability can also be provided at the outset as an element of overall process equipment capability. The OEM's challenge to build and market Changeover-capable equipment is potentially greatly assisted by the availability of a coherent design for Changeover (DFC) methodology. Drawing lessons from the development of various DFX methodologies, including design for assembly and design for variety, this chapter discusses the early development of a design for Changeover methodology to assist OEMs and other groups responsible for the design and adaptation of process hardware.
-
The Development of a Systematic Design for Changeover Methodology
2005Co-Authors: M P Reik, Antony R Mileham, Geraint W Owen, Richard Mcintosh, Stephen CulleyAbstract:Flexibility and responsiveness are watchwords of modern manufacturing, driven by a desire to reduce non-value-added activity and better respond to customer demands. Rapid Changeover between products is paramount if genuine manufacturing flexibility and efficiency are to be achieved. Changeover improvement has been in sharp focus as the limitations of the massmanufacturing paradigm have become increasingly recognised. Shigeo Shingo's SMED (Single Minute Exchange of Die) methodology has come to dominate retrospective improvement practice and his defining work has been interpreted and developed into a variety of training and implementation strategies. Particularly when interpreted by training organisations the methodology is often seen to retain a core objective of translating Changeover tasks into external time. In doing so, where improvement by revising work procedures is predominantly emphasised, the methodology can undervalue opportunities to modify process equipment. Even though a large number of case studies and examples of good design practice can be found from the literature there is no existing formal design for Changeover (DFC) methodology. Without comprehensive guidance as to how genuine rapid Changeover performance may be incorporated at the design stage those engaged in the design process have no option but to develop equipment Changeover capability on an ad hoc basis. Although a comprehensive DFC methodology is not available, a number of design for Changeover rules have previously been proposed. These simpler design rules can be used more generally to direct equipment design. However, these rules do not provide full guidance since they fail to provide means to assess what new equipment's Changeover capabilities will be once in service. Equally the rules are unranked, where some rules will be liable to have a far greater impact. Together they do not match the coherence and structure of commercially successful DFX packages, particularly those in the DFA area. This paper shows how a systematic design for Changeover methodology can provide strong guidance for equipment designers, and identifies essential characteristics of such a methodology. The proposed DFC methodology has been informed by a review of other DFX methodologies coupled with extensive active industrial research.
-
Sustaining Changeover improvement
Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 2003Co-Authors: Stephen Culley, Geraint W Owen, Antony R Mileham, Richard McintoshAbstract:AbstractThe role of rapid Changeover in today's manufacturing environment is widely acknowledged. Tools to improve Changeovers—typically Shingo's ‘SMED’ methodology—are well known. However, little work has been done to establish whether Changeover gains have been sustained in differing industrial environments once initial improvement has been achieved. This paper investigates sustaining Changeover improvement, investigating factors that contribute to this outcome.
John Thøgersen - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
Effects of the Euro Changeover on Consumer Behaviour: Introduction to the Special Issue
Journal of Consumer Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Tommy Gärling, John ThøgersenAbstract:This paper introduces the special issue “Effects of the euro Changeover on consumer behaviour” by briefly reviewing the contents of the included papers. The introduction follows the organization of the papers in three sections each focusing on a common set of issues. In the first section, research revealing the perceived and actual problems consumers face after the euro Changeover is described. Research illuminating learning and adaptation to the euro Changeover is the focus of the second section. A special problem is the misperception of inflation after the euro Changeover. Research on this problem is addressed in the third section. In a final section, the main findings and their policy implications are summarized.
-
Effects of the Euro Changeover on Consumer Behaviour: Introduction to the Special Issue
Journal of Consumer Policy, 2007Co-Authors: Tommy Gärling, John ThøgersenAbstract:This paper introduces the special issue “Effects of the euro Changeover on consumer behaviour” by briefly reviewing the contents of the included papers. The introduction follows the organization of the papers in three sections each focusing on a common set of issues. In the first section, research revealing the perceived and actual problems consumers face after the euro Changeover is described. Research illuminating learning and adaptation to the euro Changeover is the focus of the second section. A special problem is the misperception of inflation after the euro Changeover. Research on this problem is addressed in the third section. In a final section, the main findings and their policy implications are summarized.