Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 24 (2020) 1508–1517 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

IConAMMA 2018

Improvement in productivity through TPM Implementation

Rohan Thorata, Mahesha G Ta*
a
P G Student, Dept of Aeronautical and Automobile Engineering, MIT,MAHE, Manipal, Kanrantaka, India
a*
Dept of Aeronautical and Automobile Enguneering, MIT, MAHE, Mamipal, Karnataka, India

Abstract

The Plastic moulding injection industry has undergone substantial variations in the last few years. The struggle has increased
dramatically. Consumers concentrates on the product of quality, product cost and delivery time of the product. Because of that,
organization should introduce a system of quality to advance and upsurge both productivity and quality progressively. TPM is an
approach that targets to upsurge the accessibility of present instruments and therefore lowering the necessity for next capital
involvement. Investment in human assets shows better hardware consumption, better product quality and lesser labour costs.
Objective of the paper is to analyze the usefulness and application of the TPM plan for an automotive injection moulding parts
manufacturing company. By implementing TPM in an automotive injection moulding parts manufacturing company, the practical
characteristics inside and beyond basic TPM theory, problems in the acceptance of TPM and the problems faced during the
execution are discussed and analysed.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Advances in Materials and
Manufacturing Applications, IConAMMA 2018.

Keywords: Autonomous maintenance; continual improvement; Kaizen; 5s; Total productive maintenance; MTBF; MTTR

1. Introduction

In current era of agile manufacturing worldwide competition considered by both technology push and market pull
has enforced the organizations to achieve the world-class performance and quality through progressive improvement
in their processes and products. Today, different new ideas and management works such as total productive

* Corresponding author. Tel.:9480572702.

E-mail address: Mahesh.gt@manipal.edu

2214-7853 © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Conference on Advances in Materials and
Manufacturing Applications, IConAMMA 2018.
 R. Thorat and Mahesha G.T. / Materials Today: Proceedings 24 (2020) 1508–1517 1509

maintenance (TPM); business process reengineering (BPR); just in time (JIT)enterprise resource planning (ERP)
and, total quality management (TQM) etc. are getting popular among the organizations. [1]
Total Productive maintenance (TPM) is a Japanese concept for maintaining plant and equipment. It can be
reflected as a science of machines and plant health. TPM can be described as a production strategy consisting of the
stages as shown below:
• Increasing effectiveness of the equipment via optimization of availability of the equipment, efficiency, product
quality and performance
• Finding a preventive maintenance approach for the complete life cycle of equipment

2. Literature review
TPM is produced from TQM, which progressed by way of a straight outcome of Dr. W. Edwards Deming's impact on
Japanese companies. Being a statistician, Dr. Deming firstly started to explain the Japanese about the usage of statistics
analysis in production and also the usage of resulting information to govern the quality throughout the production.
• Ljungberg O, et al. (1998) [2] analyzed that in order to incorporate the Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) it
is important to decide the value of different types of manufacturing losses, so that we can command activities
and allocate the resources in a better and organized way.
• Jonsson P & Lesshammar M, et al. (1999) [3] wrote a paper which focused on four critical dimensions (what to
measure) and two characteristics (how to measure) of a total production measurement process.
• Ireland F & Dale B.G, et al. (2001) [4] concentrated on a research paper based on TPM execution in 3
companies, because of monetary problems in them. Senior management in every organizations had taken the
charge for TPM implementation by considering suitable company structures. Nakajima’s 7 steps of autonomous
maintenance was taken into consideration.
• McKone E Kathleen & Schroeder G Roger, et al. (1998) [5] projected a plan of Structural Equation Modelling
(SEM) by comparing TPM and manufacturing performance.
• Pomorski R Thomas, et al. (2004) [6] created a research whose only aim was ―perfect manufacturing. He
studied the elementary ideas of TPM and checked important literatures linked with implementation, design and
general maintenance of TPM programmes in production methods.
• Singh Ranteshwar, Gohil M. Ashish, Shah B. Dhaval, et al. (2013) [7] developed a paper on TPM employment
in a machine shop. They studied that for a world class manufacturing process, none but Total Productive
Maintenance (TPM) and Total Quality Management (TQM) are inevitable.
• Gupta K Amit & Garg R.K, et al. (2012) [8] established a paper on OEE increment with application of TPM,
seeing the fact of worldwide competition in manufacturing sector and satisfaction of customer.
• Ahuja I.P.S & Khamba J.S, et al. (2008) [9] projected a paper on the literature of TPM and to show a review of
the TPM processes carried out by various organizations. They systematically analyzed the different problems
like Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE), TPM implementation practices, TPM framework hurdles and
achievement factors.
• Poduval S Prasanth, Pramod V.R, et al. (2013) [10] proposed a paper on the obstacles in implementation of
TPM in industries. They also tried to analyze the problems confronted by the industries in improvising their
manufacturing processes by TPM.
• Bangar A, Sahu Hemlata, Batham Jagmohan et al. (2013) [11] did a research work for the escalation of OEE in
an Auto Industry by TPM execution through Pareto analysis and Kaizen methodology.

3. Problem definition
Some Indian companies are still facing many problems concerning maintenance activities of assets. Some
maintenance managers in company assume that by adding standby equipment or systems, the equipment availability
can be improved. On other situations, operate until failure is considered to be the most practical maintenance
strategy in many of the companies. But this situation can cause more spare parts, resource and manpower
requirements. Company is one of the leading supplier of injection moulded automotive parts companies in Chennai.
It is interested in developing its knowledge and services in TPM and maintenance management. The organization is
looking for new systematic model for its maintenance ideas and their execution. [12]
1510 R. Thorat and Mahesha G.T. / Materials Today: Proceedings 24 (2020) 1508–1517

OEE, MTBF and MTTR will be the KPI for the current project. Initially, the information regarding the factors were
collected of the model machine MP 120T and it has been found that company productivity is decreasing because of
the following factors given with the downtime for the month of December and January.

Fig. 1. Machine downtime (hours) for December and January

Here, we can see the Machine problem is one of the major problem in increasing the downtime of the machine MP
120T. So, the key factor for improvement was chosen as machine problem.
Also, the machine breakdown frequency has been collected for the month of December and January and reported as
follows:

Fig.2. Frequency of machine breakdowns

By observing the number of breakdowns per month, it can be clearly seen that machine availability is reducing
because of the breakdowns that machine is going through each month.
4. KPI (Key Performance Indicators)
4.1 MEAN TIME BETWEEN FAILURE (MTBF)
It’s a term used to show the amount of failures per million hours of a product. Also, it’s the most important data
about a product’s life, and is a requisite by the user for the process of decision making. MTBF is usually utilized by
organizations than by customers. Most customers are price driven and don’t consider MTBF. [13, 14]
MTBF = (Total up time) / (number of breakdowns)
4.2 MEAN TIME TO REPAIR (MTTR)
It’s important measure of the maintainability of re-usable items. It shows the average time required to repair a failed
component.
MTTR = (Total down time) / (number of breakdowns)
4.3 OEE
It is used to determine effectiveness of a machine. As the definition implies, OEE is a measure of a particular
machine, but it can also be used to detect the efficiency of product lines, sections of plant or even the entire plant. It
progressively focuses on the concept of zero waste. [15]
 R. Thorat and Mahesha G.T. / Materials Today: Proceedings 24 (2020) 1508–1517 1511

4.3.1. OEE Parameters

1) Availability (A): It takes into account Down Time loss, which includes all events that cease planned production
for a perceptible length of time (typically several minutes or longer). A = Operating Time/Planned Production Time
It can be also defined in terms of MTBF and MTTR as follows:
Availability = MTBF / (MTBF + MTTR)
2) Performance (P): It considers the speed loss, which includes all factors that produces the production process to
work at less than the maximum possible speed when running.
P = (Cycle Time*Processed number of parts)/Operating Time
3) Quality (Q): It considers the quality loss, which factors out manufactured parts that don’t meet quality standards
or waste parts, including parts that require rework.
Q = (Total parts-Defective parts)/Total parts
OEE = (Equipment availability*Performance efficiency*Rate of Quality products)

4.3.2. OEE Benchmark

OEE scores can be categorized as follows:
1) 100% OEE score reflects manufacturing of good product, perfect production.
2) 85% OEE denotes the world class for discrete manufacturers.
3) 60% OEE is typical for discrete manufacturers, but shows that there is still some scope for improvement.
4)40% OEE score is not unlikely for new manufacturing organizations that are just starting and improve their
performance. It is a low score and is to be readily improved. [16]

5. Methodology
The selected methodology influences the validity, reliability and generalizability of the study results. A literature
review is executed within the domain of this research work to investigate the general aspects within this work. The
step is tracked by collecting statistical data from the organization, field observations, case studies, and semi-
structured interviews. Following figure represents the methodology used in this research work:

Fig. 3. TPM methodology

5.1 Data Collection:

Both qualitative and quantitative research methods are utilized in project. Considering the Pareto analysis of TPM
model machine MP 120T, the average machine production loss is 21% (Fig.4)
1512 R. Thorat and Mahesha G.T. / Materials Today: Proceedings 24 (2020) 1508–1517

Fig.4. Production loss analysis

During the field work, statistical production and maintenance data was collected to evaluate the general performance
of the factories and to identify any current limitations or observations that could feed into future stages of the study.
The field work and statistical data helped in developing and investigating the initial concepts.

Fig. 5. (a) Breakdown details of MP120 T (December) Fig. 5. (b) Breakdown details of MP120 T (January)

Fig. 5. (c) Breakdown details of MP120 T (February)

Fig 6 data shows how it was affecting the production. Fig. 5(a), 5(b), 5(c) shows the breakdown frequency of the
machine during each month.
 R. Thorat and Mahesha G.T. / Materials Today: Proceedings 24 (2020) 1508–1517 1513

5.2 Factors affecting productivity:

Productivity has been affected by several factors explained in the Pareto chart below:

Factors affecting productivity

100 120%
80 100%
60 80%
60%
40 40%
20 20%
0 0%

hrs perc

Fig 6. Pareto graph of productivity affecting factors

In the above fig, as explained. Machine problem is one of the dominating factor. So, for further research, this factor
will be studied in depth. As it can be seen, 80% of the affecting factors can’t be controlled. But, if we follow the
scheduled maintenance and preventive maintenance, plus with the aid of TPM activities, that factor can be brought
down as low as possible and hence productivity of the machine can be increased through increased MTBF and OEE
5.3 Analysis for low productivity:
Causes of low productivity were listed. A systematic method to improve OEE to acceptable level was tried using
TPM and 5S techniques. Fig 7 provides the information about the analysis.

Fig.7. Fishbone analysis for low productivity

5.4 TPM Kickoff:

Initially, all the downtime factors and factors disturbing productivity were discussed with top level management and
a TPM model was proposed. Which was followed up by the training of all the members chosen up by the top
management. [17]
1514 R. Thorat and Mahesha G.T. / Materials Today: Proceedings 24 (2020) 1508–1517

The use of this program was to convert the environment that enlarged worker confidence and dedication. It was used
as a connection between initial stage and application stage. In conference, the TPM manager stated the ideas
developed and work that is completed during the initial phase, for example the TPM construction, the basic TPM
idea and goals, and the main plan for TPM growth.
Liability of the operator’s skill development was given to the TPM office. Though the maintenance and
improvement groups were separate in which they had their sole execution stages, that still needed to apply together
so as to obtain the target of ‘‘zero failure’’
5.4.1 Initial cleaning and abnormalities identification
After all the preparations, team associates had to check any flaws or abnormalities such as impurity sources,
unreachable places and causes of defects of quality. If any contaminants are found in the machine, they required to
gather it for additional study before cleaning. The irregularities were recorded in equipment flaw list with equivalent
type. Defect number, detector name, date of detection, classification and defect item were in the list. 8 types have
been analyzed in this study and they are namely, Major flaw, minor flaw, inaccessible places, unfulfilled basic
condition, contamination sources, defective sources, unnecessary and non-performing items, unsafe places. The
types were utilized to categorize the position of every priority of the defect. Also, the tag of abnormality was utilized
to determine every fault, as it has been detected. Tags could also show when the abnormality was found, who found
it, and the kind of abnormality.
After the TPM team had taken up the initiative for cleaning of the machine, the team had found around 29 problems
which were tagged and later resolved.
After doing 5S and Abnormalities detection, there was a TPM review meeting, in which, the factors affecting the
productivity and the abnormalities discussed and TPM goals were set.
After analyzing the OEE of the TPM model machine MP 120 T, for the last 2 months (as shown in fig. 8, OEE value
of 60% was decided to be the target value.

OEE of MP 120T
120

100

80
Percentage

60

40

20

0
DEC JAN FEB
AR 70.7 76.94 60.55
PR 76.27 75.11 77.34
QR 97.71 97.76 98.1
OEE 52.68805582 56.4951462 45.93961197

Fig. 8. OEE of TPM model machine

6. Results and conclusions

Assessment of TPM includes checking whether an organization have attained the plan and goals which were
established at the primer stage of TPM and realized the planned benefit. For perceptible benefits, quantitative
indexes were measured as below: MTBF, MTTR and OEE
 R. Thorat and Mahesha G.T. / Materials Today: Proceedings 24 (2020) 1508–1517 1515

• Considering fig. 9, it can be clearly seen that, there’s a difference between actual production and production
conferring to the standard cycle time. After execution of TPM in month of Feb on TPM model machine MP 120
T, it can be clearly seen that the production loss percentage has come down by 6%, which in fact shows the
increase in productivity of the machine.

Fig. 9. Productivity of model machine MP 120 T

• Meanwhile, considering the data acquired for number of machine breakdowns in model machine, as shown in
Fig. 10. There is decrease in the number of stoppages of the machine from the level of machine before TPM to
the current level.

Fig. 10. Number of machine breakdowns after TPM implementation

• This decrease is the key contributor for the development of MTBF for model machine. The overall MTBF and
MTTR for model machine is shown in Fig. 11 and Fig. 12. After TPM kickoff, all the data related to MTBF and
MTTR was collected and according to that, goals were set for the same. There is no denial to the fact of efforts
made by TPM team to restore and increase the machine effectiveness and efficiency is successful.

Fig. 11. Improvement in MTBF through TPM

1516 R. Thorat and Mahesha G.T. / Materials Today: Proceedings 24 (2020) 1508–1517

Fig. 12. Productivity enhancement through reduced MTTR

• After certain short time after execution of TPM, the model machine showed increased number of slowdowns,
decreased MTBF. This was because of different problems tackled before things were settled in the right path.
Considering slowdowns after the execution of TPM, a Pareto distribution of entire stoppages throughout TPM
execution is shown in Fig. 13.

Fig. 13. Machine stoppages after the implementation of TPM (Pareto Analysis)

• There were totally 10 types of stoppages out of which, machine problem was one of the major reason which
was indeed affecting the productivity of the machine. Hence, this type of stoppage was the main problem to
tackle.

Fig. 14. OEE goal Vs OEE actual

 R. Thorat and Mahesha G.T. / Materials Today: Proceedings 24 (2020) 1508–1517 1517

• Also, we can compute the success of TPM implementation on model machine MP 120 T with the help of OEE.
Fig. 14 illustrate the effect of TPM and 5 s activities on model machine MP 120 T
Acknowledgements

I, Rohan Thorat owe a thanks to a many people who supported and helped me in carrying out this
project and made it successful. I thanks to Mr. Mahesha G T, Associate Professor, the guide of this work for
guiding and correcting the documents of me with attention and care. Also, I’d like to thanks the people of the
organization without help of whom, this project wouldn’t be completed with success. I would also thank our
Institution for their consistent support in every manner. I also thanks to the family, friends and well-wishers
for their encouragement and support.
References
[1] Harsha G. Hegde, “Overall Equipment Effectiveness Improvement by TPM and 5S Techniques in a CNC
Machine Shop” SASTECH. Mag., vol. 8, issue. 2, September 2009
[2] Ljungberg, O.,―Measurement of overall equipment effectiveness as a basic for TPM activitiesǁ, International
Journal of Operations & Production Management, 18(5), 495- 507 (1998).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443579810206334.
[3] Jonsson, P., & Lesshammar, M, ―Evaluation and improvement of manufacturing performance measurement
systems – the role of OEEǁ, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 19(1), 55-78 (1999)
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01443579910244223.
[4] Ireland, F. & Dale B.G, ―A study of total productive maintenance implementationǁ, Journal of Quality in
Maintenance Engineering, Vol.7 No.3, (2001), pp. 183-191.
[5] McKone E. Kathleen & Schroeder G. Roger, ―Total Productive Maintenance: a contextual viewǁ, ELSEVEIR,
Journal of Operations Management 17(1999).
[6] Pomorski R. Thomas, ―Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) Concepts and Literature Reviewǁ, Principal
Consulting Engineer Brooks Automation, Inc., April 30, 2004.
[7] Singh Ranteshwar, Gohil M. Ashish, Shah B. Dhaval, ―Total Productive Maintenance implementation in a
machine shop: A Case Studyǁ, ELSEVEIR, Procedia Engineering 51(2013) 592-599.
[8] Gupta K. Amit & Garg R.K., ―OEE improvement by TPM implementation: A case studyǁ, International Journal
of IT, Engineering and Applied Sciences Research (IJIEASR), Volume 1, No. 1, October 2012.
[9] Ahuja I.P.S & Khamba J.S, ―Total Productive Maintenance: literature review and directionsǁ, International
Journal of Quality and Reliability Management, 2008, Vol.25 No. 7, pp.709-56.
[10] Poduval S. Prasanth, Pramod V.R., ―Barriers in TPM Implementation in Industriesǁ, International Journal of
Scientific and Technology Research, Vol 2, Issue 5, May 2013.
[11] Bangar A., Sahu Hemlata, Batham Jagmohan, ―Improving Overall equipment Effectiveness by Implementing
Total Productive Maintenance in Auto Industryǁ, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced
Engineering, ISSN 2250-2459, ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Vol 3,Issue 6, June 2013.
[12] Meet R Lalkiya,- Optimizing & analyzing overall equipment effectiveness through TPM approach: A case
study in cement industry, (IJAERD)/IJAERD2015V02I0534492, Volume 02, Issue 05, 2015
[13] I.P.S. Ahuja, J.S. Khamba,"An evaluation of TPM initiatives in Indian industry for enhanced manufacturing
performance", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 25 Iss: 2 pp. 147 – 172, 2008
[14] I.P.S. Ahuja, and J.S. Khamba,"Total productive maintenance: literature review and directions", International
Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 25 Issue: 7, pp.709-756, 2008,
https://doi.org/10.1108/02656710810890890
[15] Gosavi, A., “A risk-sensitive approach to total productive maintenance”, Automatica, Vol. 42 No. 8, pp. 1321-
30, 2006
[16] Shirose, K., Total Productive Maintenance: New Implementation Program in Fabrication and Assembly
Industries, Japan Institute of Plant Maintenance, Tokyo, 1996
[17] Sangameshwran, P. and Jagannathan, R., “HLL’s manufacturing renaissance”, Indian Management, November,
pp. 30-5, 2002