Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Procedia
Available Manufacturing
online 00 (2018) 893–899
atatwww.sciencedirect.com
Available
Procedia online www.sciencedirect.com
Manufacturing 00 (2018) 893–899 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect 
Procedia Manufacturing 22 (2018) 886–892
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering, INTER-ENG 2017, 5-6 October
11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering,
2017, Tirgu-Mures, Romania INTER-ENG 2017, 5-6 October
2017, Tirgu-Mures, Romania
The contribution of lean manufacturing tools to changeover time
The contribution
Manufacturing of Society
lean manufacturing tools to MESIC
changeover time
decreaseEngineering 2017,
International Conference
in the pharmaceutical
Vigo industry.
(Pontevedra), Spain
2017,
A SMED 2017, 28-30
project. June
decrease in the pharmaceutical industry. A SMED project.
a, b c d
Al-Akel Karam
Costing models a, *, Marian
for capacity Liviub, Veres Cristina
optimization in Industryc, Horea 4.0:Radu
Al-Akel Karam *, Marian Liviu , Veres Cristina , Horea RadudTrade-off
P P0F P P P P P

P P0F P P P P P

between used capacity andIorga operational efficiency

a,c,d
Technical University of Cluj-Napoca, Memorandumului street, no. 28, Cluj-Napoca, 400114, Romania
P P

a,c,d
T
PechnicalPUniversity
etru Maior b
of of
University
P
P
P
Cluj-Napoca,
Targu Memorandumului
Mures, Nicolae street,no.
street, no.1,28, Cluj-Napoca,
Targu Mures, 400114,
540088, Romania
Romania
b
P Petru Maior University of Targu Mures, Nicolae Iorga street, no. 1, Targu Mures, 540088, Romania
P

A. Santanaa, P. Afonsoa,*, A. Zaninb, R. Wernkeb

Abstract a
University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
Abstract b
Unochapecó, 89809-000 Chapecó, SC, Brazil
Every industry has a growing need to improve quality, output and voice of the customer satisfaction. The purpose of this paper is
Every industry
to exhibit has a growing
the achieved need
results to implementing
after improve quality, outputtools
SMED and voice of the customer
at a certain production satisfaction.
line in theThe purpose pharmaceutical
Romanian of this paper is
to exhibitCompleting
industry. the achieved results afterbetween
Changeovers implementing SMED
products on a tools
certainat packaging
a certain production
machine usingline Single
in the Minute
Romanian pharmaceutical
Exchange of Dies
industry.
Abstract Completingoffers
(SMED) technique Changeovers between
the possibility to products on amachine
shorten the certain downtime,
packaging machine
increasingusing Singleoutput.
the final MinuteImplementing
Exchange of Lean
Dies
(SMED) technique
Manufacturing offers the
philosophy, possibility
major Changeoverto shorten
time atthe
themachine
bottleneckdowntime, increasingby
process decreased the30%
finalin output. Implementing
12 months. Along withLean
the
Manufacturing
Under
economic philosophy,
thebenefits
concept major Changeover
fromofthe"Industry
SMED time process
4.0", production
implementation, at theprocesses
bottleneck process
will be decreased
pushed
quality, standardization by be
to 30%increasingly
and teamwork in 12 been
have months. Along with the
interconnected,
improved.
economic
© 2018 The
information benefits
basedfrom
Authors. the SMED
Published
on a real implementation,
by Elsevier
time process quality,
B.V. necessarily,
basis and, muchstandardization
more efficient.andInteamwork have been
this context, improved.
capacity optimization
© 2018
goes The
Peer-review
beyond Authors.
under
the Published
responsibility
traditional aimby Elsevier
ofof B.V.
thecapacity
scientificmaximization,
committee of the 11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in
© 2018 The Authors.
Peer-review Published by
under responsibility of Elsevier B.V. committee of the 11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in and value.
the scientific
contributing also for organization’s profitability
Engineering.
Indeed,
Peer-reviewlean management
under responsibility and
of thecontinuous improvement
scientific committee of the 11thapproaches
Internationalsuggest
Conference capacity optimization
Interdisciplinarity instead of
in Engineering.
Engineering.
maximization. The study of capacity optimization and costing models is an important research topic that deserves
Keywords: SMED; pharmaceutical industry; changeover time; lean manufacturing; Gemba walks.
contributions
Keywords: SMED; from both the practical
pharmaceutical and theoretical
industry; changeover time; leanperspectives.
manufacturing; This
Gembapaper
walks.presents and discusses a mathematical
model for capacity management based on different costing models (ABC and TDABC). A generic model has been
developed and it was used to analyze idle capacity and to design strategies towards the maximization of organization’s
1. Introduction
value. The trade-off capacity maximization vs operational efficiency is highlighted and it is shown that capacity
1. Introduction
optimization
Being ablemight hide operational
to evolve in industry at inefficiency.
different operating levels means not only the fact that every employee has to
© 2017 The Authors.
Being able each Published
to evolve by Elsevier B.V.
over-perform day; in industry
it also meansat different operating
that a stable levels means
and reliable workflownot has
onlytothe
be fact that every
established in employee has to
order to support
Peer-review
over-performunder responsibility
each day; it also of the scientific
means that acommittee
stable and of reliable
the Manufacturing
workflow Engineering
has to betoSociety International
established orderConference
inwaste to support
and
2017.
sustain performance. Lean Manufacturing offers the proper tools in order reduce the inside and
and sustain
between performance.
different processes,Lean
beingManufacturing
able to increaseoffersthe the
valueproper
of thetools in order
product. Leantoprinciples
reduce thesortwaste inside and
the activities for
between different processes, being able to increase the value of the product.
Keywords: Cost Models; ABC; TDABC; Capacity Management; Idle Capacity; Operational Efficiency
Lean principles sort the activities for

1. Introduction
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +40-740-196-220; fax: +40-264-763-173.
* E-mail
Corresponding
address:author. Tel.: +40-740-196-220; fax: +40-264-763-173.
karam.alakel@gmail.com
The cost
E-mail of idle
address: capacity is a fundamental information for companies and their management of extreme importance
karam.alakel@gmail.com
in modern©production
2351-9789 systems.
2018 The Authors. In general,
Published it isB.V.
by Elsevier defined as unused capacity or production potential and can be measured
in several©under
2351-9789
Peer-review ways: tons of production,
2018responsibility
The Authors. Published
of available
by Elsevier
the scientific B.V.hours
committee of manufacturing,
of the 11th etc. Interdisciplinarity
International Conference The management of the idle capacity
in Engineering.
Peer-review underTel.:
* Paulo Afonso. responsibility
+351 253of the761;
510 scientific committee
fax: +351 253 604of741
the 11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering.
E-mail address: psafonso@dps.uminho.pt

2351-9789 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017.
2351-9789 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 11th International Conference Interdisciplinarity in Engineering.
10.1016/j.promfg.2018.03.125
 Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 22 (2018) 886–892 887
894 Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 893–899

achieving a product into Value added (VA) and Non Value Added (NVA). The waste elimination principle is to
minimize the NVA and focus on the VA activities [1][2][3]. Obtaining fast results in the shortest period of time is
every company’s target, but which are the optimal methods in achieving this? Among other lean tools, the Single
Minute Exchange of Dies (SMED) may be a very efficient method for reducing inventory [4] and mainly CO times
in the production area between different batches, products or machine setups especially by converting internal steps
(while machine is stopped) into external ones (while machine is still running) and shortening the steps that remained
[5]. SMED assures a quick and efficient change from the currently running product to the next one.
The Changeover time is the amount of time spent between the last good piece of one product until the first good
piece of the next product. The paper aims to present the implementation sequence and level of importance regarding
Lean-SMED techniques at a pharmaceutical solids production site.
Nomenclature

SMED Single Minute Exchange of Dies

CO Changeover
VA Value added
NVA Non-Value added
OEE Overall Equipment Efficiency
KPI Key Process Indicator
FTE Full Time Equivalent
DMAIC Define Measure Analyse Improve Control
EMS Electronic Manufacturing Software
LM Lean Manufacturing

2. SMED background and benefits

Single Minute Exchange of Dies assures a quick and efficient change from the currently running product to the
next one. The Changeover time is the amount of time spent between the last good piece of one product until the first
good piece of the next product. This amount of time is spent on cleaning and changing the machine parts and setup
for next product. Appropriately implementing SMED improvement system may represent the key factor into a
rewarding batch size reduction objective, which would assure more flexibility and improved product flow in the
manufacturing area [5]. Single Minute Exchange of Dies described by Shingo [6] assumes that a Changeover should
take place in a single digit expressed time (under 10 minutes). Nowadays the techniques for achieving a single digit
Changeover time were acquired and implemented in the manufacturing areas in order to shorten and standardize the
downtime between two batches by implementing different tools and techniques [7]. By observing the current
methodology, separating the internal and external activities, streamlining the process of Changeover and
continuous training the major SMED steps will be achieved and implemented [5]. The expected results will return
an economic benefit reflected in an increased product output. Beyond the economic VA benefits, by decreasing the
Changeover time further NVA achievements such as better ergonomic conditions, standardization, teamwork and
workload are expected [8]. An integrated Overall Equipment Efficiency (OEE), a Key Process Indicator is expected
to be raised by decreasing the equipment downtime lost with Changeover [9], [10], [11].

3. Current needs analysis

The targeted company for applying the SMED project had a current need for shortening CO times at a certain
production line. At the bottle filling machine are working 2 FTEs and a number of 37 CO processes had to be
conducted each year with a mean CO time of 25,3 hours. The set target was reducing this time to 16 hours (37%
decrease) by implementing Lean Manufacturing – SMED tools in order to shorten CO time, stabilize and reduce the
standard deviation of the process [2][12][13][14].
The up mentioned steps being achieved the reliability of the process will increase, an important financial gain
will be obtained and production planning will increase in stability.
888 Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 22 (2018) 886–892
Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 893–899 895

The total savings will add up us soft ones with production equipment downtime loss and production labor by a
better Full Time Equivalent (FTE) distribution. The saving calculation result was expressed in financial figures
depending on cost/hour of FTEs and production equipment [15].

4. Implementation steps

Implementation steps followed the DMAIC structure in order to successfully implement the SMED methodology
[6], [16]. The Define phase being completed, a measuring upon the current process state had to be done in order to
reveal the current and real process status.

4.1. Measure and Analyze

The specific Changeover times and data until the project start were collected for the past year from an Electronic
Manufacturing Software (EMS). Current working method in the Changeover process was collected through Gemba
walks and by one-on-one discussions with all the members involved in the process. Storage of the collected data was
kept in Microsoft Excel/Microsoft Word software and processed in Minitab 17. The initial one on one discussions
were documented on paper base, being later transposed into the up mentioned electronic software’s for a better
traceability and storage.

a b

Fig. 1. (a) Capability analysis for CO Time; (b) I Chart of CO Time.

Through analysis of the collected data (Baseline capability) in Fig. 1. (a) a significant standard deviation (σ) of
the individual CO times from the process mean can be observed concerning upon a lack of process standardization.
Fig 1. (b) expresses the oscillations of individual CO times, instead of an aggregation. Through Gemba walks and
discussion with the directly implied personnel in the CO process the major root causes were identified.

Table 1. Root cause analysis

Root cause analysis
1 Lack of Visual Controls
2 Poor teamwork and communication
3 Absence of set targets
4 Shortage of appropriate tools used
5 No external steps used
6 Wasted time on useless steps
7 Deficit of workforce
 Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 22 (2018) 886–892 889
896 Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 893–899

A critical aspect in being able to bring an improvement to a certain process or a workplace is the ability of
correctly identifying the problems and deficits involved in achieving your goals and targets through the current
process state. In Table 1 we displayed the main root causes established after using the Gemba walk tool and
interviewing the implied personnel.
The most important element in conducting an improvement process is to correctly identify the root causes of your
wastes. Once root causes were identified the team proceeded in finding and implementing the optimal improvement
methods for the process.

4.2. Improvement

For each root cause a proper improvement has been found and implemented on the shop floor. Not only by
analyzing the data collected until this step, but also through Gemba walks, brainstorming and regular meetings
proper solutions were identified.

4.2.1. Externalized and simultaneous steps

In order to assure an efficient and standard process after numerating all the Changeover steps a proper order was
established and spare steps were removed [17][18][19][10]. The process steps were stored in Microsoft Excel
software and Gantt chart created in order to have a better overview of CO process steps. The limitation regarding
steps externalization (done while the machine is still running) was due to machine and process design: only the
packaging material removal from the last batch and transport table preparing could be externalized. Nevertheless,
FTE was redistributed and simultaneous steps were possible to implement: cleaning of machine, room and setup of
bottle filler machine.
In accordance with Sherali et al [20], for applying setup reduction time principles prior to production run some of
the activities will be eliminated, some of them will be externalized and a few of them will be reduced. Preparing in
advance was based upon the push-system where pallets with cleaning tools and detergents were provided at hand
shortly before the CO process began. The tools were assured by an operator from the shop floor, part of the team.

4.2.2. Visual Management

A major A3 Changeover scheme was created and implemented on the shop floor in the targeted production area
in order to assure and visually guide the team in performing a standardized CO. The scheme incorporated: tasks for
each person, targets, machine drawings and order of CO steps. In this way, each person from the production area is
capable of identifying their own dedicated tasks, and a shorter training is needed whenever a new operator joins the
team. Integrating the above elements under a single CO scheme highly increased the visibility and importance of an
efficient CO for everybody working on the shop floor. Changeover time reduction has an important decrease by this
means.
Other visual delimitations were created for an easier identification of different bottle filling process components
such as: primary packages and intermediary product in the storage area, assembly parts on shelves (reorganizing
and categorizing them – color criteria). Dedicated areas where the next packaged product and packaging materials
will be prepared will be visually separated.
Having the opportunity to visually identify all the above mentioned elements in a production area can represent
an important step forward for standardizing and Lean-transforming your organization, shop floor first. After visually
understanding the shifts and drifts of a process, along with all the personnel implied in it, you can further document
and try identifying loss electronically.

Table 2. Visual control – CO step time (min.).

Date and hour of Team Series A CO step 1 CO step 2 Series B Total CO time
start
01.01.1990 00:00 A 2 2 2 2
01.01.1990 00:01 B 4 4 4 4
01.01.1990 00:02 C 7 8 9 10
890 Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 22 (2018) 886–892
Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 893–899 897

a b c

Fig. 2. Visual management on the shop floor area for bottle filling machine: (a) tools cabinet; (b) product storage; (c) packaging materials.

Targets were set and controlled through visual boards displayed on the shop floor, visual boards were printed by
the project leader, problems being discussed after each CO and collected in an electronic database.
• FTE redistribution demand
The bottleneck process was represented by the CO in the primary packaging area, in order to assure a proper
work force additional 2 persons had to be assigned for helping in the process. Each person had exact tasks controlled
with the major CO scheme and CO step time, being possible to execute simultaneous steps.
As part of the project, the primary packaging storage was redesigned and moved closer to the bottle filling room
in order to shorten the travelled distance for bringing the needed materials by 100 meters. Travel time decreased
from an average of 4 minutes to 2 minutes.

5. Results and discussions

The involvement of operators is critical for the Changeover process, participating with ideas and implementing
the best ones is a key factor for the success of Lean Manufacturing shop floor implementation. The criteria’s that
have to be taken into consideration are regarding the limitations of the process and implementation area. Lean
Manufacturing tools have to be adapted to each work place in particular, taking into consideration its design and
needs. Finding the optimal tools and techniques to implement most effectively Lean Manufacturing on a shop floor
level is the responsibility of the project leader.
As a result of implementing Lean Manufacturing – SMED techniques on the production shop floor in the bottle
filling Changeover process the process mean changed significantly. From a mean CO time of 25,3 hours a
significant decrease was obtained down to 17,8 hours (30% decrease). From Fig. 3. (a) it is possible to distinguish
the fact that the after CO mean time and standard deviation from the mean have decreased. Fig. 3. (b) graphically
represents the decrease in time and variation of the CO after project implementation. In Figure 4 we have displayed
the results obtained under the Boxplot chart form for a clearer perspective. In this particular case a single digit
Changeover is extremely hard to achieve and a 30% improvement is considered an essential one. Nevertheless, the
control phase and further improvement of the Changeover process will continue until being able to maintain mean
process duration of 16 hours.
As a result the saved time by eliminating process wastes will facilitate the output increase of yearly packed
bottles returning financial benefits if the machine is stocked with orders. The indirect benefits of the SMED project
will display in increased process standardization, higher customer satisfaction reflected by improved flexibility of
Changeovers, finer teamwork and a better FTE distribution.
A need of better communication between operators and between operator-supervisor was identified in order to
implement a successful Lean Manufacturing technique. Communication, discipline and process control are the core
elements into succeeding in continuous improvement.
 Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 22 (2018) 886–892 891
898 Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 893–899

a b

Fig. 3. (a) Process performance capability report Before/After (b) Diagnostic capability report on CO Time Before/After.

Fig. 4. Before/After Boxplot Comparison of CO Time.

6. Conclusion

Taking into consideration the need to keep up with a global trend of product customization and cost reduction
requirements the most effective use of resources has to be assured in every working area. The flexibility from one
product to another is ensured by a Changeover process which has to be as efficient as possible to be able to meet the
customer demand and productivity targets. Single Minute Exchange of Dies involves a methodology, certain
techniques and tools in order to perform a more quick and efficient Changeover, positively influencing flexibility
and product output [21][22].
Single Minute Exchange of Dies methodology was adapted and used to improve the Changeover process at a
bottle filling line in the pharmaceutical industry. Being guided by the SMED methodology the desired result was
nearly achieved within an implementation period of six months. In the control phase further improvements are
expected and the main scope being the reduction of CO time to the initial target of 16 hours.
Properly adapting and using only the key tools from LM arsenal for the needed implementation area will count in
obtaining the most Value Added outcomes. Results obtained through SMED by externalizing steps, visual
management and FTE redistribution as major change categories led to standard and efficient Changeover process
with a 30% decreased completion time. The removed CO wastes and shortened completion time will assure a greater
product output/time unit bringing important financial savings to a targeted group. A clear improvement can be
brought by implementing Lean improvement tools in the manufacturing area; the key factor is choosing the right
ones to start with.
892 Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 22 (2018) 886–892
Al-Akel Karam et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 893–899 899

References

[1] A. Teran-Somohano, A.E. Smith, A setup reduction methodology from lean manufacturing for development of meta-heuristic algorithms,
Evolutionary Computation, 1 (2013) 3132-3139.
[2] A.C. Moreira, G.C.S Pais, Single Minute Exchange of Die: A case study Implementation, Journal of Technology Management and
Innovation, 6(1) (2011) 129-140.
[3] R. Sundara, A.N. Balajib, R.M.S. Kumar, A Review on Lean Manufacturing Implementation Techniques, Procedia Engineering, 97 (2014)
1875 – 1885.
[4] K. Demete, Zs. Matyusz, The impact of lean practices on inventory turnover, International Journal of Production Economics, 133(1) (2011)
154-163.
[5] D. Yash, S. Nagendra, Single Minute Exchange of Dies: Literature Review, International Journal of Lean Thinking, 3(2) (2012) 27-37.
[6] S. Shingo, A revolution in manufacturing: The SMED System, Productivity Press, Cambridge, 1985.
[7] R.I. McIntosh, S.J. Culley, A.R. Mileham, G.W. Owen, A critical evaluation of Shingo's 'SMED' (Single Minute Exchange of Die)
methodology, International Journal of Production Research, 38(11) (2014) 2377-2395.
[8] D. Ribeiroa, F. Bragaa, R. Sousab, S. Carmo-Silvab, An Application of the SMED Methodology in an Electric Power Controls Company,
Romanian Review Precision Mechanics, Optic and Mechatronics, 40 (2011) 115-122.
[9] M. Belbin, Management Teams: why they succeed or fail, Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, 2010 .
[10] M. Cakmakci, Process improvement: performance analysis of the setup time reduction SMED in the Automobile industry, International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 41 (2009) 168-179.
[11] R.J. Rahul, G.R. Naik, Application of SMED Methodology – A Case Study in Small Scale Industry, International Journal of Scientific and
Research Publication, 6(8) (2012) 1-4.
[12] M.A. Almomani, M. Aladeemy, A proposed approach for setup time reduction through integrating conventional SMED method with
multiple criteria decision-making techniques, Computers and Industrial Engineering, 66(2) (2013) 461-469.
[13] D.V. Goubergen, H.V. Landeghem, Rules for integrating fast changeover capabilities into new equipment design, Robotics and Computer
Integrated Manufacturing, 18 (2002) 205-214.
[14] R.M. Yashwant, K.H. Inamdar, Changeover Time Reduction Using SMED Technique of Lean Manufacturing, International Journal of
Engineering Research and Applications, 2(3) (2012) 2441-2445.
[15] A. Arun, K.N. Ganapathi, K. Motwani, Setup Time Reduction through SMED Technique in a Stamping Production Line , SASTECH
Journal, 11(2) (2012) 47-52.
[16] N. Roth, M. Franchetti, Process improvement for printing operations through the DMAIC Lean Six Sigma approach: A case study from
Northwest Ohio, USA, International Journal of Lean Six Sigma, 1(2) (2010) 119-133.
[17] B. Prasad, A structured methodology to implement judiciously the right JIT tactics, Production Planning Control, 6 (1995) 564-577.
[18] B. Ulutas, An application of SMED Methodology, Engineering and Technology International Journal of Mechanical, Aerospace, Industrial,
Mechatronic and Manufacturing Engineering, 5(7) (2011) 1194-1197.
[19] E. Costa, S. Bragança, Sousa R, A. Alves, Benefits from a SMED Application in a Punching Machine, Engineering and Technology
International Journal of Mechanical, Aerospace, Industrial, Mechatronic and Manufacturing Engineering, 7(5) (2013) 1-6.
[20] H.D. Sherali, D.V. Goubergen, H.V. Landeghem, A quantitative approach for scheduling activities to reduce set-up in multiple machine
lines, European Journal of Operational Research, 187 (2008) 1224-1237.
[21] J.B. Coates, Economics of multiple tool setting in presswork, Sheet Metal Ind., 1 (1974) 73-76.
[22] M.M. Tseng, F.T. Piller, The Customer Centric Enterprise Advances in Mass Customization and Personalization, Springer-Verlag, Berlin
2003.