IMPROVEMENT OF RING FRAME SPINDLE UTILIZATION IN

SHORT STAPLE SPINNING: A CASE STUDY OF A COTTON

SPINNING MILL

JOSEPH KIVUVA MUSYOKI

A Thesis Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Award of the
Degree of Master of Science in Industrial Engineering and Management in the
School of Engineering Dedan Kimathi University of Technology (DeKUT)

MARCH 2019

0
 DECLARATION

This thesis is my original work and has not been presented for a degree award in any
other university/institution.

Signature: _________________________ Date _____________________

Joseph Kivuva Musyoki

Supervisors’ declaration:

We confirm that the candidate carried out the work reported in this thesis under our

supervision as the university supervisors.

Signature: _________________________ Date _____________________

Prof. Peter Muchiri

School of Engineering

Dedan Kimathi University of Technology (DeKUT)

Signature: _________________________ Date _____________________

Prof. James Keraita

School of Engineering

Dedan Kimathi University of Technology (DeKUT)

i
 DEDICATION

I dedicate this thesis to my spouse Ann and my daughters Patience and Precious for their
support, encouragement and understanding throughout my studies.

ii
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

My cordial and sincere gratitude goes to my supervisors Prof. Peter Muchiri and Prof.
James Keraita for their guidance, direction in clarifying issues along the way and
ensuring that the quality of this thesis is to the required standard.

I thank my family for their invaluable encouragement and support. I appreciate the
cooperation I received from Sunflag Textile Mill Limited (Kenya) and in particular
Morris Ngumbau for having found time to assist me in collecting data. I also appreciate
all persons who in one way or another contributed and extended their valuable assistance
in the preparation of this research thesis.

Above all, I thank God for His love, protection and provision of wisdom and good health
all the time.

iii
 ABSTRACT

Spinning mills in Kenya are operated by eight integrated textile industries to produce
cotton yarns for internal use by their knitting and weaving departments and for sale to the
local market. Fabric requirement estimated at 225 million square meters cannot be
supplied by local domestic production and the gap is met through importation of fabrics
and finished garments. Spinning mills play a very significant role in backward integration
of the textile value chain by converting fibres into yarn for fabric production. Ring
spinning is the most widely used cotton short staple spinning system to produce yarn
from cotton fibers and is used by 7 of the 8 spinning mills. In Kenya, spinning mills have
been operating at spindle utilisation between 67 to 80% which is below the recommended
standard norm of 98%. The mills have been experiencing yarn production loss occurring
from frequent stoppages of the ring frame and increase in the number of spindles running
without producing yarn reducing the ring frame spindle hours used for yarn production.
The overall objective of this study was to improve ring frame spindle utilisation in terms
of spindle hours utilized for yarn production in cotton short staple spinning, a case study
of Sunflag Textile and Knitwear Ltd. The specific objectives were to analyze ring
spinning process production parameters, evaluate the factors affecting ring frame spindle
utilisation and formulate a productivity improvement method for the mill.

The Research design adopted by this study was a descriptive and quantitative case study.
Pareto analysis was used to classify ring frame production losses based on Overall
Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) classification of major losses and Ishikawa diagram used
to carry out Root Cause Analysis of main causes of production loss. Failure Mode and
Effects Analysis (FMEA) technique was used to map the failures which occurred within
the process that contributed to production loss which were ranked using their Risk
Priority Numbers (RPN). A questionnaire based on Grunberg Performance Improvement
Method (PIM) was used to analyse and evaluate mill production and management
practices. A production improvement method was recommended using 7 evaluation
criteria of the PIM. Pareto analysis revealed that Idling and minor stoppages accounted
for 63% losses while breakdown accounted for 22.8% of losses. Root Cause Analysis
(RCA) identified Manual doffing, lack of time awareness, and delay in replacement of
empty bobbins as significant factors that affected ring frame doffing stoppage loss. It was
recommended that a standardized procedure Single Minute Exchange of a Die (SMED)
technique for the doffing procedure would yield the highest results in minimizing ring
frame stoppage. A key finding from the study showed that utilisation of equipment for
production in manufacturing was not just the overall time the machine was running, but
about standardization of the entire process of production to maximize utilization of the
machine for output. Through this study, spinning mills in Kenya can apply the
recommendations to improve ring frame productivity in order to reduce the cost of
production and improve their competitiveness.

iv
Table of Contents
DECLARATION .............................................................................................................................. i

DEDICATION ................................................................................................................................. ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................................. iii

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................................... x

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................ xi

ABBREVIATION AND ACRONYMS ........................................................................................ xii

CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1

1.1 Background of the study ............................................................................................................ 1

1.1.1 Performance of the Textile Industry in Kenya ............................................................. 2

1.1.2 Cotton Production ............................................................................................................... 5

1.1.3 Spinning Industry in Kenya ................................................................................................ 6

1.1.4 Sunflag Textile & Knitwear Mills (Supra Spinning Mill) .................................................. 8

1.2 Problem Environment .......................................................................................................... 9

1.3 Problem Statement ................................................................................................................... 11

1.4 Objectives of the Study ............................................................................................................ 11

1.4.1 Main Objective.................................................................................................................. 11

1.4.2 Specific Objectives ........................................................................................................... 11

1.5 Significance of the Study ......................................................................................................... 12

1.6 Scope of the Study ................................................................................................................... 12

1.7 Research Limitations ............................................................................................................... 12

CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................................ 13

2.1 Development of Textile Spinning ............................................................................................ 13

2.2 Yarn Spinning Systems ............................................................................................................ 13

2.2.1 Ring Spinning Systems ..................................................................................................... 15

2.2.2 Open End Spinning Systems ........................................................................................... 15

v
2.3 Ring Spinning Process Flow and Equipment ........................................................................... 16

2.3.1 Blow Room ....................................................................................................................... 16

2.3.2 Carding Machine............................................................................................................... 17

2.3.3 Drawing Frame ................................................................................................................. 17

2.3.4 Comber.............................................................................................................................. 17

2.3.5 Speed Frame...................................................................................................................... 17

2.3.6 Ring Spinning Frame ........................................................................................................ 17

2.4 Operating Principle of the Ring Frame .................................................................................... 18

2.5 Productivity Limitations of the Ring Frame ............................................................................ 19

2.6 Productivity Improvement Measurement................................................................................. 22

2.6.1 Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) .............................................................................. 22

2.6.2 Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) .......................................................................... 22

2.6.3 Modelling of OEE for Analysis of Spindle Utilization in Ring Frame............................ 23

2.6.3.1 Six Big Losses............................................................................................................ 23

2.6.4 Seven Basic Tools of Quality Control .............................................................................. 26

2.6.5 Root Cause Analysis ......................................................................................................... 26

2.6.6 Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) .................................................................... 27

2.7 Ring Spinning Process Parameters and Production ................................................................. 27

2.8 Production Improvement Techniques ...................................................................................... 27

2.8.1 Single Minute exchange of a Die (SMED ........................................................................ 27

2.8.2 Five (5) Ss ......................................................................................................................... 28

2.8.3 Continuous Improvement (CI) .......................................................................................... 28

2.9 Review of Evaluation of Performance Improvement Techniques ........................................... 28

2.9.1 Ljungsrom Evaluation of Improvement Methods ............................................................. 29

2.9.2 The Performance Improvement Method ........................................................................... 29

2.10 Factors Affecting Spindle Utilization in Ring Spinning of Fine Cotton Yarns ..................... 30

vi
 2.10.1 End breakages ................................................................................................................. 30

2.10.2 Other Causes of Idle Spindles ........................................................................................ 31

2.10.3 Spindle Breakdowns ....................................................................................................... 31

2.10.4 Doffing Frame stoppages ................................................................................................ 31

2.11 Deduction from Literature ..................................................................................................... 31

CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ................................................................ 33

3.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 33

3.1 Ring Frame Process Analysis and Production ......................................................................... 34

3.1.1 Analysis of Ring Frame Process Parameters .................................................................... 34

3.1.2 Ring Frame Analysis Running and Stoppages Cycles ...................................................... 34

3.1.3 Study of Idle Spindles and End Breakages ....................................................................... 35

3.1.4 Pareto Analysis ................................................................................................................. 35

3.2 Evaluation of factor affecting Ring Frame Spindle Utilization ............................................... 35

3.2.1 Root Cause Analysis ......................................................................................................... 35

3.2.2 Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) .................................................................... 36

3.3 Performance Improvement Design and Evaluation .......................................................... 36

3.3.1 Sampling Procedure ................................................................................................... 36

3.3.2 Questionnaire Survey ........................................................................................................ 37

3.3.3 Data collection .................................................................................................................. 37

3.3.4 Respondents Response Rate ............................................................................................. 37

3.3.5 Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 37

3.3.6 Validity and Reliability ..................................................................................................... 38

3.4. Performance Improvement Evaluation ................................................................................... 38

CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ............................................. 40

4.2 Impact of Frame Spinning Process Parameters and Production Performance on Spindle
Utilisation....................................................................................................................................... 40

vii
 4.2.1 Ring Frame Process Parameters and Production ............................................................ 40

4.2.2 Ring Frame Spinning and Doffing Cycles times .............................................................. 41

4.2.3 Analysis of Mass of Yarn Produced per Cycle of Ring Frame ......................................... 43

4.2.4 Analysis of Mass of Yarn Bobbins Produced by the Ring Frame .................................... 43

4.2.5 Ring Frame Stoppages ...................................................................................................... 44

4.2.6 Investigation of spindle production loss due to idle spindles and end breakage............... 45

4.2.7 Pareto Analysis of Major Losses in Production ................................................................ 46

4.3 Evaluation of factor affecting Ring Frame Spindle Utilization ............................................... 47

4.3.1 Root Cause Analysis ......................................................................................................... 47

4.3.2 Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) ....................................................... 50

4.4 Performance Improvement Evaluation using Descriptive Statistics ........................................ 54

4.4.1 Performance Improvement Specialist Independence of the Mill ...................................... 54

4.4.2 Competency Supportive effects on Ring Frame Productivity........................................... 55

4.4.3 Implementation Supportive of Mill Production Management Practices ........................... 55

4.4.4 Performance Measurement and Monitoring Effects on Ring Frame Productivity............ 56

4.4.5 Production Management Supportiveness to Ring Spinning Processes ............................ 57

4.4.6 Organizational Arragement Supportiveness to Ring Frame Productivity........................ 57

4.5 Overall PIM Evaluation of Performance Improvement of Ring Frame Spindle Utilisation
Performance ................................................................................................................................... 58

4.5.1 Performance Improvement Technique Selection .............................................................. 59

CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................... 61

5.1 Review of Research Objectives ............................................................................................... 61

5.2 Key Findings ............................................................................................................................ 61

5.3 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................. 62

5.4 Recommendations .................................................................................................................... 63

5.5 Research Contribution ............................................................................................................. 63

viii
5.6 Recommendations for Further Research ................................................................................. 64

CHAPTER SIX: REFERENCES ................................................................................................... 65

CHAPTER SEVEN: APPENDIXES ............................................................................................. 70

Appendix 1: Questionnaire ............................................................................................................ 70

Appendix 2: Ljungstrom Evaluation of Some Improvement Methods ........................................ 73

Appendix 3: The PIM (Grunberg Methods To Support Performance Improvement In Industrial

Oprerations..................................................................................................................................... 73

Appendix 4: FMEA RPN Scoring Criteria .................................................................................. 74

Appendix 5: SAS System Glimmix Procedure for Least square means errror analysis ................ 74

Appendix 5: Response to causes of Ring frame doffing (Discussion with mill staff on RCA) ..... 82

Appendix 6: Response to questionnaire ......................................................................................... 84

ix
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1.1: Integrated Textile Industries in Kenya with operational spinning MillS………………..7

Table 2.1: Summary comparison of yarn spinning methods and technology…………………..….21

Table 3.1: Sample size of employees working directly on the ring frame compared to total
employee of the mill……………………………………………………………………….………36

Table 3.2: Response Rate of the Respondents..…………………………………………………...36

Table 3.3: The PIM Method to Support Performance Improvement in Industrial operations (source
Grunberg
2007)……………………………………………………………………………………………….38

Table 4.1: Ring Frame Settings and Process Parameters………………………………………….40

Table 4.2: Two Shift Ring frame stoppages………………………………………………………43

Table 4.3: Two Ring Frame spindle production loss due to various idle spindles identification....44

Table 4.4: End Breakage Rate Yield Loss on 100 Spindle Hour of the Ring Frame…………..….45

Table 4.5: Analysis of major production losses in ring spinning…….……………………………45

Table 4.6: Ring Spinning Doffing process FMEA………………………………………………...50

Table 4.7: Potential failure causes and effects with highest RPN FMEA……………..………….52

Table 4.8: Overall PIM Performance Improvement Evaluation..…………………………………58

Table 4.9: Evaluation of Performance Improvement methods based on PIM………………...…..59

x
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: Imports of SHC to Kenya growth in Millions, Ksh (2001-2015)………………….…..3

Figure 1.2: Integrated Textile Industry Value Chain in Kenya…………………………………….4

Figure 1.3: Trend in Kenya Cotton Production by year (1980 – 2016)….........................................6

Figure 1.4: EAC Yarn Output (Kenya, Uganda & Tanzania) (in 000 MT)………………..………8

Figure 2.1: Cotton Spinning process flow in Ring frame and O.E spinning…….………………..14

Figure 2.2: Ring Spinning Process Flow (Researcher, 2017)...………………………………….16

Figure 2.3: Side view and operating parts of the Ring Frame ………...…………………………..19

Figure 2.4: OEE measurement tool and the perspectives of performance integrated in the tool
(Muchiri & Pintelon,2008)……..…………………………………………………………………..24

Figure 3.1: Methodology of the study………………….………………..…………………………32

Figure 4.1: Ring Frame spinning cycle time……………….………………………………………41

Figure 4.2: Ring Frame Doffing Cycle time…………………………...…………………….…….41

Figure 4.3: Variation in yarn weight per production of cycle ring frame……………………..…..42

Figure 4.4: Average weight of ring frame yarn bobbin in grams from 6 different ring frames
spinning 20s Ne………..………………………….……………………………………………….43

Figure 4.5: Distribution of Ring Frame Stoppages………………………………………………...44

Figure 4.6: Analysis of loss in ring frame spindle hours due to idle spindles in spindle-Mins……45

Figure 4.7: Pareto Analysis of major losses in ring spinning……………………………….……..46

Figure 4.8: Root Cause Analysis of ring frame doffing process time loss………….……………..48

Figure 4.9: Specialist Independence score for the mill on performance improvement …………..53

Figure 4.10: Employee Competency Supportiveness effects on ring spinning productivity………54

Figure 4.11: Management Implementation Supportiveness to mill productivity…………….……55

Figure 4.12: Mill score on criteria measurement based approach to productivity………………...55

Figure 4.13: Analysis of object supportiveness to choice of ring frame as the production
improvement object………………………………………………………………………………..56

Figure 4.14: Organizational Supportiveness of the Mill…………………………………………..57

Figure 4.15: Overall PIM Performance Evaluation of the mill based on PIM…………………….57

xi
ABBREVIATION AND ACRONYMS

ACTIF - African Cotton and Textile Industries Federation

AGOA - African Growth and Opportunity Act
ANOVA - Analysis of Variance
BPR - Business Process Reengineering
CI - Continuous Improvement
DFT - Digital Signal Processing
EAC - East African Community
EPZ - Export Processing Zone
EPZA - Export Processing Zone Authority
FMEA - Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
GDP - Gross Domestic Product
ITC - International Trade Centre
ITMF - International Textile Manufacturers Association
JIPM - Japan Institute of Plant Maintenance
JIT - Just in Time
KAM - Kenya Association of Manufacturers
KIPRA - Kenya Institute of Public Policy Research and Analysis
KNBS - Kenya Bureau of Statistics
LCD - Liquid Crystal Display
Ls - Least Square Means
Ne - English Count

OEE - Overall Equipment Effectiveness

OES - Open End Spinning
PDCA - Plan Do Check and Act
PIM - Performance Improvement Method
PPT - Planned Production Time
QC - Quality Control
RCA - Root Cause Analysis

xii
RFS - Ring Frame spinning
RPA - Robotic Process Automation
RPM - Revolutions per Minute
RPN - Risk Priority Number
SAS - statistical Analysis Software
SEZ - Special Economic Zone
SHC - Second Hand clothes
SITRA - South India Textile Research Association
SMED - Single Minute Exchange of a Die
SoPs - Standards Operating Procedure
SSA - Sub-Saharan Africa
SU - Spindle Utilization
TPM - Total Productive Maintenance
TQM - Total Quality Management
UK - United Kingdom
US$ - United States of America Dollar
USA - United States of America
5S - Five S

xiii
 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the study

Improvement of production performance is an important aspect in the manufacturing

sector, industries that maintain high utilisation of manufacturing equipment are able to
improve on production and reduce production costs. Production performance
management in modern manufacturing plays a central and strategic role in improving
productivity and competitiveness of manufacturing industries.

In Kenya, the textile sub-sector is an important segment of the manufacturing sector

which accounts for 24% of the manufacturing contribution to the Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) and 50% of the country’s export earnings (EPZA, 2005). In 2015,
Kenya exported to the United States of America clothing worth $380 million under
the AGOA preferential U.S. trade deal with African countries (Gebre, 2016). The
textile sub-sector has the greatest potential for increasing the much needed
employment opportunities for the fast growing young population, eradicate poverty,
decentralize development to rural areas and increase incomes generation in arid and
semi-arid areas of the country. The sub-sector has the greatest potential to strengthen
the role of industrialization in accelerating economic development in the country and
has therefore been classified as a core industry by the Government in deepening the
country’s movement into middle-income status (KIPRA, 2013). The Government of
Kenya identified textile production as one of the primary industry to benefit from the
setting of Special Economic Zones (SEZ) that will be established to help boost
industrial manufacturing by minimizing regulatory hurdles and lowering of tax levels.
The boost in manufacturing is expected to create 1.5 million jobs within a year and 10
million jobs in the next 30 years (Deloitte, 2016).

In textile manufacturing, spinning mills play a significant role of transforming cotton

fibers into a continuous strand of yarn to be used for weaving and knitting of fabrics.
Ring spinning is the most widely used spinning system with over 140,000 spindles
installed in Kenya. This is due to its superior yarn quality compared to other modern
spinning systems that offer higher yarn production rates. The ring spinning process
consists of blowroom, carding, drawing, combing speed frame and ring frame
machines. In textile spinning, utilization of the Ring frame plays an important role

1
and it is used to determine the productivity and competitiveness of the entire mill.
Availability of sufficient quality supply of fiber roving material for the ring frame, the
condition of the ring frames and management of the production process influences the
efficiency of utilisation of the ring frames for yarn production. The process of yarn
production at the ring frame is prone to stoppages due to cyclic stoppages for doffing
of filled up yarn bobbins, frequent change overs, setting adjustments and under
utilisation of individual spindles of the ring frame due to idle spindles and end
breakages of the yarn during the production process. This reduces the spindle
utilization of the ring frame affecting the production levels and raising the cost of
production. Therefore, spindle utilization of the ring frame has direct influence on the
productivity and competitiveness of spinning mills, which determine the long-term
sustainability of the textile industry.

1.1.1 Performance of the Textile Industry in Kenya

The six (6) major segments in the textile value chain are; (i) the cotton farming, (ii)
ginning to extract fiber cotton lint, (iii) yarn production by spinning mills, (iv) fabric
formation by weaving or knitting factories (v) garmenting and apparel making and
finally (vi) retailing and marketing of the textile products. The success of the textile
industry depends on how well all the six segments in the value chain are integrated
together.

The textile industry dominated the manufacturing sector in size and employment
creation in Kenya before its decline in 1980s. The industry had 52 operational textile
mills for yarn and fabric production with an installed capacity of 115 million square
meters of fabric (Rates, 2014). Economic policy changes effected in early 1990s for
liberalization the country’s economy exposed the local textile industries to stiff
competition that led to decline of the domestic spinning and weaving capacities to
only 8 integrated textile mills that are in operation today. Prior to the economic
liberalization, the local textile industry was highly protected through quantitative and
tariff restrictions, the manufacturers concentrated on the domestic market and took
little consideration on productivity, quality and pricing. The economic liberalization
opened the market for imported, affordable low priced textile materials, which have
dominated the domestic market thus reducing the market share for the locally made
textiles. Most of new fabrics and garments are sourced from China and Asia.

2
Cheap imported second hand clothes (SHC) locally known as “Mtumba” further
weakened the market share of locally manufactured garments. SHC are usually
considered cheaper and of superior quality than the new clothing available on the
market, hence the demand for SHC has increased (Katende, 2017). USA, UK, Canada
and China are the largest exporters of SHC into Kenya. A Study by Garth (2008)
showed a negative relationship between recipient countries of SHCs and growth of
textile manufacturing and textiles imports; an increase of 1% in importation of SHC
resulted in a 0.61% reduction in apparel production performance. According to
KNBS, importation of SHC has been on the increase in the last 10 years, Kenya
imported 100,000 Metric tons of SHC estimated to be worth $100 million in 2015 as
shown in Figure 1.1.

Figure 1.1: Imports of SHC to Kenya growth in Millions, Ksh (2001-2015)

Source: The Kenya National Bureau of Statistic (KNBS)

It is therefore apparent that for the local mills producing textiles in the country to
survive, they must improve their productivity, lower the cost of production and
improve the quality of textiles they produce in order to be competitive in both local
and international markets. The current textile fabric demand in Kenya is estimated at
225 million square meters per annum, and with the sharp decline in the number of
operational textile industries in the country, drastic reduction in cotton production,
local fabric demand greatly outstrips domestic production. This creates opportunity
for more gains, in terms of employment and income generation, which may be
derived from reviving the textile industry in the country. A study by the Ministry of
Industry, Trade and Cooperatives estimated that the sector has the capacity to employ
over 1 million people directly or indirectly, however, it currently operates at less than

3
10% of the potential capacity (KAM, 2014). Moreover, the garment sector has been
recording improved performance under the African Growth and Opportunity Act
(AGOA) provision which allows apparels made in Kenya to be exported to the US.
The supply of fabric is through inclusion of the 3rd country fabric provision that
allowed utilization of imported fabric which has seen Kenya grow to the largest
apparel exporter to US market under AGOA in Sub Saharan Africa (SSA) with a
market share of 31.6% (KAM, 2014).

However, the success of the apparel industry segment to a large extent has had no
direct effect on the backward integration and expansion of existing textile mills in
Kenya. It is estimated that Kenya could save Ksh. 12.5 billion in foreign exchange
used by EPZs for importation of fabrics (ACTIF, 2013) if the fabric was sourced
locally. There is no correlation in growth of local textile industries to that of EPZs, the
main reason being the supply of fabric to the garment factories that export to USA
under AGOA is sourced from 3rd party countries. Without sourcing of fabric from
local industries for export apparel production, the entire textile value chain would
remain broken-down and disjointed; Figure 1.2 depicts the current integrated textile
manufacturing sub-sector value chain in Kenya.

Figure 1.2: Integrated Textile Industry Value Chain in Kenya

Source: Researcher, 2019

4
1.1.2 Cotton Production

Cotton is the most important raw material for spinning mills; it is a natural fiber that is
grown in areas with adequate moisture and heat for formation of mature cotton bolls
to produce quality fibers. It can also be grown under irrigation in dry, arid and semi-
arid parts of Kenya. Temperatures of over 21°C are required for cellulose formation
which make up cotton fibres. The length of fibers determines the quality of cotton and
is referred to as the staple length, the longer the length of the fibres the higher the
quality in grading the cotton. In best practice cotton quality and prices is graded based
on the staple length as; short (0.95cm to 2.4cm), medium (2.54cm to 2.86cm), or long
(3cm to 6.35cm) and in some cases extra-long. Cotton plants produce bolls, which
contain cotton fibres attached to the seed. A cotton boll has six or seven seeds with up
to 20,000 fibers attached to each seed. Harvested cotton is taken to ginneries which
separate the lint of fibers from the cotton seed. The seeds are used for making oil and
protein rich animal feeds. Cotton lint is compressed into bales packs of 220kgs for
transportation to spinning mills.

The highest quality cotton is extra-long and long staple cotton, which is used for
spinning strong and fine cotton yarns. Fine cotton yarns have fewer fibers in a given
section of yarn as longer fibers provide more contact points for twisting together of
fibres during the spinning process. These fine yarns can be woven in to fabrics of high
quality which are strong, soft, smooth and of excellent lustrous. In Africa, long staple
cotton is grown in Egypt and Sudan which fall in the same ecological zone with
Kenya. Cotton for spinning mills in Kenya is sourced from East Africa member
countries (EAC), due to decline in local production and low quality of the cotton.
Man-made fibres such as polyester, acrylic and viscose which are usually mixed with
cotton to produce cotton blend are imported from Asian countries. The mills rely on
cotton fibres imported from Uganda and Tanzania, which is often mixed with the low
quality short staple cotton mill for spinning.

The statistics on decline of cotton production are shown on Figure 1.3 which indicate
that Kenya produced up to 7000T (30,000 bales) of cotton in 2016 against an
estimated demand of 140,000 bales.

5
Figure 1.3: Trend in Kenya Cotton Production by year (1980 – 2016)

Source: United States Department of Agriculture

1.1.3 Spinning Industry in Kenya

Spinning mills are the first stage of textile manufacturing that converts the staple
fibers into a long continuous and cohesive thread like structure referred as yarn which
is suitable to be woven or knitted to produce fabrics or for direct application in sewing
or rope making. According to Paropate & Sambhe (2013), the process of spinning
involves cleaning and attenuation of cotton fibres by different machines to form a
yarn. Kenya has 8 spinning mills that are operated by integrated textile industries to
produce yarn for their internal fabric production through knitting or weaving. The
industries final products are usually for segments of the local markets in which mills
do not face stiff competition as demand is not usually met through imported clothes
such as school uniforms, kanga, African-women dress material, blankets, knitting
yarn, kitenges, baby shawls and clothes. The integrated textile industries with
operational spinning mills, orientation to fabric formation and the final products are
shown in Table 1.1.

6
Table 1.1: Integrated Textile Industries in Kenya with operational spinning Mills

No. Name Fabric Production Products

Orientation
1. Spinners & Blanket Production Blankets, yarn and fabric for maasai
Spinners Spinning, knitting, clothes.
dyeing & finishing
2. Midco EA Semi integrated Polyester circular knitted furnishings
(oriented towards fabrics, sport wear, cotton knitted
knitting) Spinning- fabrics, warp knitted mosquito nets,
Knitting- Dying- fishing nets, t-shirts.
finishing
3. Fine spinners Semi integrated Knitting yarn, sweaters, baby shawls
(oriented towards Kikoys & Wraps, Blankets, Maasai
knitting) shukas.
4. Rivatex Semi integrated Polyester/cotton blend, 100% cotton
(oriented towards products, khanga, kitenge bed sheets,
weaving): Spinning- dress material, military camouflage,
weaving - Dying- school shirting material.
finishing
5. Thika cloth Semi integrated 100% cotton Polyester/cotton and
mills (oriented towards polyester viscose blends, School
weaving) uniform fabrics, promotional textiles,
household furnishings, corporate
uniforms, khangas, kitenges curtains
and canvas materials.
6. TSS Semi integrated Cotton products, thread candle leads,
(oriented towards bed sheets, canvas and curtains.
weaving)
7. United Semi integrated Woven textile products.
Textile (oriented towards
Industry weaving)
8. Sunflag Semi integrated (knitting Spun yarn, circular knitted fabric,
Textile & and weaving) warp knitted fabric, woven suiting
Knitwear fabric, industrial fabrics and
Mills ltd Spinning- knitting and garments.
weaving-Dying-
finishing
Source: Field Data, 2019
Ring frame machine has remained the most widely applied system for yarn production
amongst the spinning mills and accounts for approximately 85% of the yarn produced
all over the world (Lord, 2003). Initially invented in America by Throp in 1828s, its
dominance has survived emergence of higher production open end spinning
technologies due to the superior yarn quality. Ring frame spinning is also the most
versatile spinning technology capable of producing yarns with wide ranges of counts
and twist from a great variety of fiber materials.

7
The yarn formation process in the ring frame involves roving being fed into a drafting
zone, insertion of twist during the ballooning effect, winding of the spun yarn strand
on the bobbin by set up of a traveler that drags on a ring mounted on the spindle. The
traveler clip holds the yarn as it rotates freely on the ring and plays a key role in twist
insertion and winding of the yarn on the bobbin mounted on the spindle. The rotating
yarn being wound on the bobbin drags the traveler around the ring, creating a
ballooning effect, which concurrently inserts twist and winds the yarn on the bobbin
(Klein, 2012).

Yarn produced by Kenya spinning mills is cotton and cotton blend yarns. Kenya has
an installed capacity of 140,000 short staple ring spindles of which only 120,000 are
utilized and 900 Open End (OE) Rotors of which only 840 are utilized with an
estimated spinning capacity of 58,872 MT (IMTF, 2012). In the East African
Community (EAC) Region, Kenya is ranked second after Tanzania in yarn production
as indicated in Figure 1.4.

Figure 1.4: EAC Yarn Output (Kenya, Uganda & Tanzania) (in 000 MT)

Source: International Textile Manufactures Federation (ITMF) 2015

1.1.4 Sunflag Textile & Knitwear Mills (Supra Spinning Mill)

Sunflag Group of companies is a multinational group of companies operating textile
mills in six countries namely; Canada, India, Thailand, Nigeria, Tanzania and Kenya.
The group established the first textile plant in Kenya in 1930s to supply East Africa

8
with quality garments and textiles. The operations included knitting, dyeing, finishing
and garment making. The company has since embarked on vertical integration adding
spinning and weaving to its operations, which extended the value chain to include
yarn spinning and fabric formation. Currently Sun flag Textile and Knitwear limited
(Kenya) has four major departments namely spinning, weaving, fabric finishing and
garment making. Each department is located on a different site within Nairobi,
Industrial Area.

The spinning mill is a standalone plant located along Lunga Lunga Road Industrial
Area. The plant operates 24 hours from Monday to Saturday on two shifts, eleven (11)
hours’ day shift and a thirteen (13) hours’ night shift. Cotton fibers, the main raw
material for the plant is sourced from the neighboring Uganda and Tanzania in bales
of 200 kg duty free under the EAC regional economic integration due to decline in
production and low quality of locally produced cotton. The mills specialize in
spinning 100% cotton yarn as well as blending with polyester for fabric formation by
its weaving and knitting departments located in Nairobi industrial area along Pate
Road and Kitui Road respectively or for sale to the local market.

1.2 Problem Environment

Sunflag Textile and Knitwear Ltd spinning mill produce yarn of varying counts using
two yarn spinning systems; the Ring Frame Spinning (R.F.S) and the Rotor Open End
spinning system (O.E.S) and has an installed capacity of 15,072 ring frame spindles
and 432 rotor spindles. The yarn produced is would into cones for sale as cones of
yarn to external customers or transported to weaving or knitting department for fabric
formation. The company has wide local and regional markets for its products, which
include woven, knitted fabric and wide spectrum of garments from basic t-shirts to
fashion garments, and it is looking forward to maximize its production to meet the
demand of its market segment.

The Ring Frames automatically stop for doffing when the bobbins get filled up with
yarn. The operator must remove the full bobbins and fit the empty ones on the
spindle, piece broken ends and restart the frame to begin the production cycle again.
The frame is also occasionally stopped for cleaning and maintenance.

9
Idle spindles occur during the running cycle of the machine when any of the
individual 960 spindles within a ring frame continues to run without being utilized for
yarn production. End breakages may cause yarn producing spindles to be idle further
increasing the number of spindles running without producing yarn. The roving feed
material is sucked through the pneumafil system as waste fibers. The mill assigns
operators to patrol the spinning shed to identify pieces of the broken ends.

Ring frame spindle utilization at the Sunflag spinning mill was estimated at 80% by
ITC, 13% higher than the country average of 67% (ITC, 2015). However, this was
still below the South India recommended Norm of ring frame spindle utilization of
98%. Ring frame utilization is the single most important benchmark for measuring
performance and productivity of the entire spinning plant as it consumes 60% of the
production cost of yarn production (Rieter, 2014). Ring frame has also high influence
on the quality of yarn produced.

The low spindle utilization below the standard norm can be attributed to several
factors such as stoppage of the entire ring frame for doffing full bobbins, idle spindles
within the ring frame during running of the ring frame, end breakages and occasional
stoppage of the ring frame for cleaning and maintenance of the ring frame. The
company operates modern ring frames manufactured by Laxmi Limited and Laxmi
Rieter which automatically records all the stoppages of the ring frame and the
duration. The information on each stoppage of the ring frame can be retrieved from
the LCD display of the machines. In addition, the company technicians and engineers
monitor the number of idle spindles in ring frame to minimize loss of production
through idle spindles and ensure the ring frame is running optimally.

Higher spindle utilization has therefore direct influence on yarn production and
provides great advantage to the mill by reducing the cost per unit leading to marginal
profits for the firm while improving the quality of yarn produced. According to
research conducted by South India Textile Research Association (SITRA) in India, an
increase of 1% in spindle utilization would lead to saving upto Ksh. 750,000 per
annum for the 15,000 spindles. It is projected that such savings in the Kenyan industry
would be higher given that the cost drivers of production are higher compared to India
(Shanmuganandam, 2010).

10
1.3 Problem Statement

The production management practices at Sunflag Textile Mills & Knitwear mill had
not improved the performance and utilization of the ring frame for yarn production
contributing to low spindle utilisation of the mill. Loss in production time occurred
due to frequent stoppages of ring frames and increased number of spindles running
without producing yarn within individual frames. The Ring Frames automatically
stopped for doffing every time the bobbins were filled with yarn, other causes of
frame stoppages were cleaning, count change, power blackouts and breakdown.
Further loss in production time occurred when spindles ran without producing yarn
within the ring frame due to idle spindles and end breakages. The low spindle
utilization had led to reduced yarn production, increased cost of production affecting
the competitiveness and profitability of the mill. The mill did not have a production
management system to monitor and evaluate production practices of the ring frame
for improvement of spindle utilisation. The mill spindle utilisation of 80% is below
the standard recommended norm of 98% affecting the productivity of the mill.

1.4 Objectives of the Study

1.4.1 Main Objective

The main objective of this thesis was to develop a plan to improve Ring Frame
Spindle utilization of short staple cotton spinning.

1.4.2 Specific Objectives

The study seeks to achieve the following specific objectives:
1. To analyze the ring spinning process, parameters and production per spindle in
short staple cotton spinning.
2. To determine the factors affecting spindle utilization in short staple cotton ring
frame spinning.
3. To formulate a productive improvement system to reduce losses incurred in
ring spinning spindle utilization and productivity of the ring frame.

11
1.5 Significance of the Study
The findings of the study were expected to be useful to the textile industry in Kenya
and specifically the spinning subsector by studying spindle utilization effects on low
productivity in ring spinning.
In particular, the research was also expected to be useful to spinning mills managers
by providing information on the factors affecting spindle utilization in ring spinning
and the impact they have on yarn production.
It was expected that the research findings would make recommendations on the
optimization of spindle utilization with a view of improving ring spinning
productivity and efficiency.
Furthermore, the research would also lay ground for future research on the salient
factors affecting spindle utilization in ring spinning to improve yarn and fabric quality
by reducing defects and minimizing yarn piecing resulting from end breakages.

1.6 Scope of the Study

The study sought to determine the factors effecting ring frame spindle utilization in
textile spinning mills in Kenya. However, due to limited time and resources the study
was carried out at Sun flag Kenya and focused on fifteen (15) Ring Frames spinning
fine, middle and course count yarns. The study focuses on utilisation of ring frames
machines which were the Key Performance Indicators that determined productivity
and competiveness of spinning mills. Analysis of production loss, factors and mill
management practices affecting production was carried out for the mill.

1.7 Research Limitations

Data for the study was collected from Sunflag Kenya spinning mill. This research is
limited since the case study did not provide data and statistics on the other eight
operational spinning mills in Kenya.

12
 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Development of Textile Spinning
Until the early middle ages the process of spinning was slow and tedious. Spinning
half a kilogram of cotton fibres into what is now a course yarn for fabric formation by
weaving and knitting would take a couple of weeks to complete. Spinners twisted
fibres directly using their finger and thumb until spindle and whorl was invented as a
universal tool for spinning. This was followed by development of a wheel driven
spindle and the simple spindle, which had a disadvantage of being discontinuous. In
1519, Leonardo da Vinci invented the spindle and flyer mechanism device, which
enabled continuous spinning and marked a breakthrough in combining twisting of
fibres and winding of the spun yarn to proceed simultaneously.

The Saxony wheel principle was invented in 1555 as the most efficient way of
spinning coarse woolen yarns, which were in high demand at the time in Northern
Europe. Richard Arkwright succeeded in establishing the first successful commercial
mills in the 1760’s that featured automatic continuous spinning machines referred to
as water frames. The third step, which completed the first mechanization phase of
spinning, was the invention of the mule by Samuel Crompton in 1779. The mule was
a hybrid of roller drafting of the water frame for the purpose of achieving fineness and
the inherently stable system of drafting against running twist of the Jenny. The mule
was the first commercially successful machine to spin fine yarns. Richard Roberts
eventually automated it in 1827.

In 1828 John Thorp patented the ring frame which was further improved a year later
by introduction of the ring-and-traveler by Addison and Steven. The concept which
was established as the spinning device of choice in the 20th century has remained the
dominant spinning system to date accounting for 85% of yarn produced worldwide
(Lord, 2003). Ring spinning technology has experienced considerable modification
but the fundamental concept remains the same.

2.2 Yarn Spinning Systems

In modern spinning mills two spinning systems, the ring spinning and open end
spinning systems, are used to produce spun yarns with a wide range of values of
characteristics and use at commercial scale. The systems convert ginned cotton fibres

13
into a yarn and involve various systems, which have a sequence of processes that
clean, open, straighten, parallelize, remove short fibres, align fibres and ultimately
spin the yarn. The choice of the spinning system and the set-up of preparation
machinery depend on the end use and the desired quality of yarn. Ring spinning is the
conventional spinning system; open-end spinning involves modern faster spinning
technologies such as the Rotor, Voltex, Friction and Air-jet spinning. The process
flow of the two spinning systems used in Kenya is as indicated in Figure 2.1.

Cotton mixing

Blow room

Drawing Carding

Combing Drawing Open End

Roving
Roving

Ring Frame Ring frame

Winding Winding
Open End Yarn

Combed yarn Carded Yarn

Figure 2.1: Cotton Spinning Process flow in Ring Frame and O.E spinning.

14
2.2.1 Ring Spinning Systems
Ring spinning has over 213 million ring spindles installed world-wide; its prominence
reflects versatility in terms of product variety, wider range of yarn counts that can be
produced and adaptability to spin different fibre types and their blends. Ring spun
yarns are of superior strength and characteristic in terms of fabric handle and comfort
(Ratnam 2005). Most of the spinning mills in Kenya and the East African region
produce yarn using the ring spinning system.

2.2.2 Open End Spinning Systems

Open end spinning system is composed of technologies, which form yarn without
using the spindle. The Rotor, air-jet spinning, friction and vortex spinning compose
open end spinning technologies that have been utilized at commercial scale. In rotor
spinning, the fibres sliver is separated into single fibres and brought by an air stream
to a collecting rotor where they are drawn off and twisted. Yarn production using
rotor has been increasing due to its high production speed, which is 4-6 times higher
than that of the ring frame. The system has over 9 million rotor positions installed
world-wide accounting for 30% total short staple yarn production (Rieter, 2006).

Air-jet spinning technology, which was initially developed by the Murata Company of
Japan, became successful at commercial scale in the early 1980’s. The technology
was originally designed for fiber blends rich in long staple polyester but has been
adopted to spin 100% cotton fibres. Their current installed capacity is estimated at
500,000 air-jet spinning positions world-wide.

The rotor and air-jet spinning have an advantage of higher yarn production of 4-6
times compared to the ring spinning and are mainly used for production of medium to
coarse count yarns. In both methods, the feed material is the fiber sliver from the draw
frame machine unlike the ring frame that uses a roving bobbin that requires more
stages to prepare. In addition, both are able to wind a yarn package that can be used
directly for fabric manufacturing by weaving and knitting, therefore the two have an
advantage of eliminating the roving formation and winding processes, which are
required in ring spinning.

15
However, these spinning systems have inherent restrictions to production of narrow
range, medium and course yarn count and twist levels. Ring spinning offers the
highest flexibility in variety of material that can be spun and quality of spinning.

2.3 Ring Spinning Process Flow and Equipment

The process of spinning short staple fibers such as cotton using the ring frame
involves a layout of multiple equipment that systematically transform bales of cotton
fibers into a suitable feed material for the ring frame called a roving. The process
involved includes cotton mixing, blow room line, the card, drawing, comber, simplex,
ring spinning and autoconer-winding. The process flow and layout of equipment in
cotton ring spinning is shown in Figure 2.2.

Figure 2.2: Ring Spinning Process Flow

Source: Researcher, 2019

2.3.1 Blow Room

Blow room is the first machinery for opening and cleaning cotton and comprises of
set of lattices with spikes and perforations which open cotton into tufts and cleans it
using air flow. It is also used in the cleaning and transfer of material during the
process with the tuft size of cotton becoming smaller and smaller.

16
2.3.2 Carding Machine
The Carding machine opens the cotton tuft of fibres from blow room into a single
fiber, which aids further removal of impurities and neps. Carding is referred as the
heart of spinning mill due to importance of the role the carding process plays in yarn
spinning. Air flow chute feed system is used to feed carding machines at Sunflag
spinning mill to ensure even and uniform supply of fibres materials.

2.3.3 Drawing Frame

The fiber slivers produced in carding are taken to the draw frame in sliver cans. The
draw frame drafts the sliver using sets of pairs of rollers running at different speed to
blend, double and level the fiber slivers thus systematically reducing the size of sliver
to a size suitable of being fed to the speed frame. In order to improve fiber control
auto levelers are fitted on the draw frame to automatically adjust and improve the
linear density of the sliver.

2.3.4 Comber
The comber is an optional machine, which is only used when high quality fine yarn is
to be produced. Slivers from the draw frame are passed through the combing process
where short fibers are removed and further cleaning is done to remove dirt from the
sliver lap. Closely spaced-out sharp wires are combed into fibers projecting from
holding jaws to remove shorter fibers. Yarn from combed sliver is stronger, more
uniform and is referred as combed yarn. The material from the comber is passed
through the draw frame again to produce a sliver.

2.3.5 Speed Frame

This is an intermediate process to prepare a package suitable for final spinning on the
ring frame. Cans with fibers sliver from draw frame are transformed into lea with low
twist referred to as the roving. A small compact package called bobbins with roving
sliver with reduced linear density and minimal twist suitable for the Ring Frame is
prepared.

2.3.6 Ring Spinning Frame

The Ring Spinning Frame is the final machine used in conventional spinning system
to transform the roving from the speed frame into spun yarn. Ring Frame is the most
widely used machine for spinning short staple fibres due to significant advantages it

17
has compared to other modern spinning technologies. Ring spinning is the system of
choice for spinning cotton, wool and flax fibres into a yarn. Roving, the feed stock of
the ring frame is drafted by use of drawing rollers, then spun and wound around a
bobbin mounted on a rotating spindle.
The three main activities of ring spinning are:
(i) drafting the roving to required fineness,
(ii) imparting strength to fiber strand by twisting it to form the yarn and
(iii) winding-up the spun yarn into a suitable package for further
processing.

2.4 Operating Principle of the Ring Frame

The feed material in form of roving bobbins is inserted in holders on the creel, the
roving is threaded through the guide bars into the drafting system which draws the
roving to the required count. A thin layer of uniformly set fibers emerges from the
front roller and the high speed rotation of the spindle insert’s twist on the fibres to
provide strength to the yarn. As the traveler rotates around, the spinning ring twists is
inserted on the yarn. The ring traveler also takes up the yarn onto the bobbin mounted
on the rotating spindle. The traveler is moved around the ring by dragging of the yarn
threaded through it. The rotation of the traveler around the ring lags behind that of the
spindle due to the relatively high friction of the ring traveler on the ring and
atmospheric resistance of the traveler and the thread balloon between yarn guide
eyelet and traveler.

The rotating speed difference between the spindle and the traveler results to winding
of the yarn on the bobbin. The yarn winding is from the top to the bottom of the
cylindrical bobbin by up and down movement of the ring achieved by raising and
lowering a continuous ring rail on which the rings are mounted. The ring rail is
slightly shifted traverse after each layer of yarn to achieve systematic reduction in
layers of yarn along the height of winding height of the bobbin. The side view and
line diagram showing the arrangement of the operating parts of a ring frame is shown
in Figure 2.3.

18
Figure 2.3: Side view and operating parts of the Ring Frame

Source: Researcher, 2019

2.5 Productivity Limitations of the Ring Frame

According to Ishtiaque (2004), ring frame constitutes a major proportion of cost of
yarn production and productivity of the ring frame has considerable importance in the
effort to maximize production, increasing ring spindle speed while maintaining the
required yarn quality and running performance of the ring frame is the cherished goal
consistently sought by spinning mills for minimizing the cost of yarn. The process of
converting fibres to yarn at the ring frame is limited by the size of yarn package that
can be built inside the ring size.

Limitations at the twisting zone of the ring frame is attributed to the traveler. The
friction surface between the ring and the traveler generates high pressure of up to
35N/mm2 during winding. The pressure generates heat which cannot be dissipated by
the low mass traveler in short time resulting to limitation of the maximum possible
operating speeds for the traveler. If the spindle speed is too high traveler temperatures
reach 400 to 500 degrees Celsius which exceeds the thermal stress limit of the traveler
leading to a drastic change in wear behavior of the ring and the traveler (Nilesh,
2011).

19
Comprehensive research and development has been carried out to improve the design
feature of the ring–traveler featuring development of traveler from materials such as
alloys and ceramics and use of surface coating to improve heat dissipation properties
of the traveler and increase the speed of the traveler. Traveler speeds are limited to 40
meters per minute restricting the maximum rotational speeds of the spindle speeds and
the production rates of the ring frame. Further limitation in the size of the bobbin
which can be mount on the spindle while operating at the high spindle speeds
increases the labor required for doffing and contributes to unwanted machine down-
time during doffing stoppage reducing the machine productivity. Modern ring frame
machines feature very advanced engineering improvements geared towards
overcoming these drawbacks, such as automation of the doffing process and
integration of a link to winding.

The productivity of the ring frame has increased by 40% since the late 1970s but the
ring spinning technology used for yarn production has remained largely unchanged
(Ishitiaque, 2004). The following refinements were significant to the survival of the
ring frame:
i. Extension of the ring frame made them longer reducing the relative costs
associated with automatic doffing.
ii. Integrating winding into the ring frame spinning process further enhanced the
adoption of automation.
iii. Advancement of the ring frame to include automatic doffing mechanism
minimized doffing stoppage time and reduced the effects of small ring and
bobbin sizes.
iv. The use of autoconer with splicing mechanism in subsequent winding process
eliminated the negative quality impacts of yarn knotting and improved the
potential to use smaller bobbin package.
v. The use of smaller rings meant that higher rotational spindle speeds would be
achieved within the limited traveler surface speed of 40m/s, which in turn
increased the twisting rates.

The combinations of these factors improved maximum potential speed of the ring
frame from about 15,000 to 25,000 rpm. There have also been other several proposed

20
improvements in research, which can be developed to achieve further improvement of
rings and travelers and use of automated take-off devices. For example, reducing the
diameter of the ring allows increase of rotational speed of the spindle without change
in traveler speed, cost savings equivalent to 7 Ksh./kg in yarn production cost can be
achieved by use of a 42 mm ring instead of a 48 mm ring, despite a slight decline in
efficiency. However, reductions in ring diameter assume the use of automatic doffers
on the ring spinning machine, except in countries where wages are very low, and use
of autoconer with piercers in winding otherwise the slub-free length is then of little
importance (Reiter, 2014). Summarized comparison of yarn spinning methods based
on existing literature has been tabulated in Table 2.1

Table 2.1: Summary comparison of yarn spinning methods and technology

Spinning method/ technique

Convectional Open end
Ring frame Rotor Friction Voltex Air jet
Fiber feed material All Short All Medium Long synthetic
used long
Production speeds 20-30 200 300 400 120-300
(m/min)
Count range (Ne) 2s -200s 1s -60s 1s -20s 10s -120s 40s -60s

No. of preparation 6- carded 3 5 5 5

stages 7- combed

No. of post spinning 1 - - - -

stages
Twist insertion Ring and Turning Rotation of Use of air Rotating vortex of
mode traveler of rotor drum jets high pressured air
Limitation of Yes Yes No yes No
process due to twist
insertion
Limitation of Yes Partly Yes yes Yes
process due doffing
and transport
mechanism
End product All products Coarse Heavy count Woven Woven outwear
application woven technical outwear and beddings
fabric core and
wrapped beddings
yarn

Source Literature Review, 2019

21
2.6 Productivity Improvement Measurement

2.6.1 Total Productive Maintenance (TPM)

Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) is defined by Japan Institute of Plant
Maintenance (JIPM) as a broad strategy to increase effectiveness of any
manufacturing production through methods of increasing equipment effectiveness
(Amasaka, 2009). The concept was adopted by the Japanese from the USA in 1951.
TPM ensures production machines are kept in good working condition through
systematic maintenance so that they fail less frequently and the production process
continues without interruption. TPM integrates maintenance into manufacturing
production as an essential and vitally important part of the industry. Maintenance is
considered as an important factor that influences profitability of a mill, down time for
maintenance is scheduled as a part of the manufacturing day to today activities. The
goal of the TPM is to significantly increase production and at the same time improve
employee morale and job satisfaction. Implementation of TPM is supported by
implantation of well-defined steps for both production and maintenance (Ljungberg,
2000).

2.6.2 Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE)

Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) is an integral part of total productive
performance (TPM) concept launched by Seiichi Nakajima in the 1980s’. OEE is
regarded as a measurement tool under TPM designed to identify production
losses related to a machine used in production (Williamson, 2006). The
quantitative measurement is used to determine the metric measure of productivity
for an individual production equipment in an industry. OEE has become one of
the most popular tool used to reveal and measure hidden or irrelevant costs
related to a production machine (Nakajima, 1988).

According to Huang (2003), OEE concept has become increasingly popular and has
been used as a quantitative tool to measure productivity in semiconductors
manufacturing industries. In the textile Industry, OEE was applied in production
department weaving tire cord in Indonesia. Factors influencing the low effectiveness
of weaving were determined and corrective action to implement autonomous
maintenance in accordance with TPM suggested (Akhmed 2015). OEE returns a

22
percentage measure of how well a production equipment is utilized over a certain time
period. An OEE rating of 100% means that the machine did not breakdown, did not
run slower than the target time and no defective parts were produced. Although this is
the goal of OEE, equipment used in manufacturing are not perfect, having a way to
measure the performance of an equipment provides the opportunity to identify the
most beneficial changes for improving its performance. Dal (2000) refers to OEE as a
measure that attempts to reveal hidden costs.

OEE assigns a numerical value to improvement opportunity. It factors in the

availability, performance and quality of output of a given piece of equipment. It is
best suited for environments of high volume based production where capacity
utilization is one of the higher priority and stoppages are costly in terms of lost
capacity (Dal et al, 2000). Therefore, OEE is best suited to analyze spindle utilization
in ring frame short staple spinning according to Nakajima (1988).

OEE was applied in this research to identify losses that restricts ring frame from
achieving recommended optimum spindle utilization of 98% and rank the various
aspects of the machine/equipment for improvement of productivity.

2.6.3 Modelling of OEE for Analysis of Spindle Utilization in Ring Frame

2.6.3.1 Six Big Losses

Under OEE, it is essential to understand and quantify the disturbance and
manufacturing processes that lead to stoppages of machines and loss in capacity. The
six big loses are shown in Figure 2.4:

a) Down time losses – used to calculate availability of the machine

The two big losses under down time losses and used to calculate availability
of a machine are:
(i) Machine failure: production time and quantity is lost when the ring
frame breaks down. Broken down ring frame which is not used to
produce yarn can lead to downtime leading to production loss and
further contributing to low spindle utilization.

23
 (ii) Set-up and adjustments: production loss occurs during change overs
for one item to another. In the ring frame losses occur at the end of
cycle when the machine is stopped to doff full bobbins manually and
replace them with empty RF bobbins, in case of count change the
process parameters of the ring frame has to be adjusted.
b) Speed losses – used to determine the performance efficiency of the machine
i. Idling and minor stoppages includes temporary interruption of
production. In the case of ring frame end breakage where a spindle
does not produce yarn until the operator pieces the broken end,
creeling loss also occurs when the supply material is used up and the
operator has to remove the used roving bobbin and replace it with a
full one then piece it with the yarn for production to resume.
ii. Reduced speed: these are losses due to difference between machine
design speed and the actual operating speed. At the ring frame
different yarn specifications (count and twist) require different process
parameters including speed adjustment and cycle time from the initial
doff to the final doff
c) Quality losses used to evaluate the production of defects by the machine
i. Defectives/rework losses: when an end-breakage occurs the feed
material for the roving bobbin continues to be sacked as pneumafil
waste, hence wastage.
ii. Reduced yield; there is reduced yarn production due to inefficiencies in
piecing when an end breaks or when the roving bobbin gets used up,
the operator has to patrol the entire ring frame to identify and piece
broken ends.

24
Figure 2.4: OEE measurement tool and the perspectives of performance integrated in
the tool

Source: Muchiri & Pintelon, 2008

The OEE tool was modified in the perspective of the ring frame to identify losses that
contribute to spindle utilization in ring spinning. The modified OEE provided a tool to
evaluate all the loss factors in the utilization of the Ring Frame.

OEE components calculation procedures

OEE formulation is a function of the availability, performance rate and quality as
formulated:

Eq. 1
Eq. 2

Where: Planned production time (PPT) = Total duration of the shift

Operatizing time = total duration of the shift – doffing time –idle spindles*
* Idle spindles refer to Spindle tape and apron breakages and
other spindle related breakdown that do not produce yarn from
initial doff to full doff

Eq. 3

Eq. 4

25
2.6.4 Seven Basic Tools of Quality Control
The Seven Basic Tools for Quality Control (7 QC) were first proposed by Dr. Kaoru
Ishikawa in 1968 for management of quality through techniques and practices for
Japanese industries. The tools were designed for application in conducting self-
studies, training of employees by supervisors or for use by quality control reading
groups in Japan (Omachonu & Ross, 2004). According to Ishikawa these 7 tools can
be used to solve 95% of all problems and have been the foundation of Japan's strong
post world war industrial resurgence.

The seven basic quality control tools are tally sheets, graphs, histograms, pareto
charts, cause-and-effect diagrams, scatter diagrams and control charts. Application of
the tools and the relationships among the seven tools can be utilized for the
identification and analysis of improvement of quality (Kerzner, 2009). The 7 QC
tools are important tools used widely in manufacturing to monitor the overall
operation and continuous process improvement by finding out root causes and
eliminating them, also modes of defects on production lines are investigated
through direct observation on the production line and statistical tools (Varsha,
2014).

2.6.5 Root Cause Analysis

Root Cause Analysis (RCA) is a systematic process for identifying “root causes” of
problems or events and an approach for responding to them (Latino, 2011). Ishikawa
Diagram is one of the tools, processes, and philosophies of accomplishing RCA.

Ishikawa Diagram was derived from the quality management process. It is an

analytical tool under RCA that provides a systematic way of looking at effects and the
causes that create or contribute to those effects. A diagram is drawn for each problem,
with arrows showing the possible causes in each category. The causes and effects in a
RCA are usually categorized according to six elements; man, materials, machine,
measurement, method and environment. Potential causes are indicated by arrows that
point to the main cause arrow (Neyestani, 2017).

26
2.6.6 Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) was developed for application in the
naval aircraft control system by the Grumman Aircraft Cooperation in 1950 and
1960’s (Kumar, 2011). FMEA is a systematic, proactive technique used to evaluate a
process with a view of identifying where and how it might fail and also provide
assessment of the effect of the of different failures, the technique is applied in
identification and prioritization of the process parts with the highest need of change.

The starting point in FMEA is construction of a process map in order to come up with
the activities and sub-activities of the process, potential failure modes are then
identified and given the Risk Priority Number (RPN). Oldenholf (2011) explored the
consistency of FMEA in the validation of analytic procedures by using different teams
to carry out analysis.

2.7 Ring Spinning Process Parameters and Production

Production per spindle in a ring frame is influenced by the operating speed, fibre
material, spinning process parameters and the number of idle spindles. Generally, the
higher the yarn count, the lower the production per spindle, and the higher the twist
per inch, the lower the production per spindle. Operational deficiencies such as poor
machinery condition, bad housekeeping, improper material handling and inefficient
labour may also affect productivity. Yarn production ring spinning is influenced by
the spindle utilization of the ring frame.

2.8 Production Improvement Techniques

2.8.1 Single Minute exchange of a Die (SMED)
SMED technique is used to reduce a machine setup time. Machine set up time can be
classified as either internal or external. Internal setup activities are those that are
carried out when a production equipment has stopped, while external setup activities
are those that are performed while the equipment is still running. SMED is an
important lean tool used to reduce time wastage and improve flexibility in
manufacturing production. The tool has been used in improving production by
reducing losses related to lot size losses and improvement of manufacturing process

27
flow. SMED reduces the non-productive time by streamlining and standardizing the
operations for exchange tools, using simple techniques and easy applications (Ana
Sofia Alves et.al, 2009).

2.8.2 Five (5) Ss

‘5S’ is one of the Japanese techniques which was introduced by Takashi Osada in the
early 1980s. Five Ss is an abbreviation for the Japanese, which translates to mean:
sorting, straighten, shine, standardize and sustain. It is basically a workplace
management approach that helps to achieve a structured clean and orderly work place
by fixing a location for everything, therefore improving working environment, human
capabilities and thereby enhancing productivity by minimizing the loss of time and
unnecessary movements as well (Mohd Nizam, 2010).

2.8.3 Continuous Improvement (CI)

Continuous improvement was adopted by Deming and Juran from a Japanese word
Kaizen, which originated from Japanese work method of continuous improvement of
work. The Demning concept of Plan Do Check and Act (PDCA) cycle was referred as
a Shewhart cycle and consisted of four phases; the activities involved were Plan, Do,
Check and Act.
In recent years, Kaizen has become more and more prevailing and extended to
broader areas with new methodologies, advanced techniques and significant successes
in many industries, such as steel, aerospace, furniture, as well as product design and
human resource management, and many others (Morton et al. 2006; Kumarand
Wellbrock, 2009).

2.9 Review of Evaluation of Performance Improvement Techniques

None of the production improvement methods or tools is better than the other,
different methods and tools have both positive and negative aspects and the situation
and where it is used affects the applicability. Some methods and tools are more
suitable in particular industries than others. Their application also depends on the
needs to be accomplished with a specific method, adoption of a method is therefore
based on dominant conditions in a particular industry.

28
2.9.1 Ljungsrom Evaluation of Improvement Methods
The Ljungsrom evaluation of improvement methods uses the criteria of number of
structural change, easy to understand, usable directly in daily work, fast results,
possibility to evaluate economic results and involvement of all personnel to evaluate
the performance improvement technique’s attributes of 5s, TPM, Six Sigma and CI
(Ljungsrom, 2004). The techniques were scored as strong, medium or weak; weak
score did not imply that the technique was bad for the criteria, it meant it was more
difficult to use in that particular criteria.

2.9.2 The Performance Improvement Method

The Performance Improvement Method (PIM) evaluation of methods was developed
by Grunberg (2007) as an improvement of Ljungsrom evaluation criteria to promote
structured production performance, improvement in manufacturing and easiness of
use at operative level.

The PIM scoring criteria was designed for the manufacturing sector to assist in
formulation and selection of the most suitable improvement technique to support
improvement of implementation where the methods are applicable. The PIM
compared 16 methods of Performance improvement among them Five S, SMED and
CI, the evaluation criteria for PIM was based on the following:

(i) Ease of use by non-specialists

(ii) Competence enhancing
(iii) Implementation supportive
(iv) Performance measurements
(v) Supportive regarding choice of improvement object and that
(vi) Would not act against organizational resistance

The advantage of PIM approach was that the problem owner was involved in
selection and supporting the implementation of performance improvement. PIM also
proved to meet more criteria than other methods, especially on the important criterion
of specialist independency. PIM is an organized and sustainable productivity
improvement program and was used as a guideline to develop a method that supports
productivity improvement in textile manufacturing firms in Ethiopia.

29
2.10 Factors Affecting Spindle Utilization in Ring Spinning of Fine Cotton Yarns
According to Rengasamy (2004), performance of the ring frame is determined by
productivity, end breakage and quality of yarn produced. Spindle utilization is
influenced by various factors, which may be categorized into two; idle running
spindles and frame stoppages. Controlling ends down and stoppages of the ring frame
can increase production per spindle to a great extent and also has an impact on yarn
quality which is improved under the same conditions of cost and labor charges.

2.10.1 End breakages

One of the limitations of the modern ring frame is end breakage, decreasing end
breakage of ring frame in consideration of running performance minimizes the cost of
yarn. End breakage rate is directly related to the percentage of pneumafil wastages
and cost of yarn production (Khan, 2015). End breaks occur when the yarn has less
strength compared to the speed of the spindle. End breaks cause a loss in production
because the spindle produces no yarn after an end-break until it is repaired. An
operator usually serves up to a thousand spindles in a spinning mill and in some
occasions an end break may remain unpieced for a couple of minutes. When an end
breaks the feed material, the fibers in form of a roving, keep flowing and is sucked
away by pneumafil system as waste fibers.

The operator manually repairs the breakage by retrieving the end from the bobbin and
threading it through the traveler and the pigtail guide before inserting it into the nip of
the front drafting roll. An experienced operator may take just a second to do the
piecing but much of the time is spent patrolling to find the end-break. If an end break
would occur on every spindle the production efficiency would be low resulting to
significant loss in production.

End-break should be minimized in order to achieve high optimal production

efficiencies. Attempts to automate piecing of end breaks and installation of roving
stop systems to prevent fibre wastage have been hampered by the capital cost
involved, most mills prefer to operate a conventional ring frame but it involves the
expense of dealing with about a 2% fiber loss (Lord, 2002). Over all, when ends break
there is a significant rise in the amount of fibers wasted at the ring frame leading to
deterioration of the overall mill performance and the quality of the yarn spun.

30
2.10.2 Other Causes of Idle Spindles
Fiber material is supplied to the ring spinning machine in the form of roving bobbin,
when the roving is exhausted, the operator removes the empty roving bobbin by
replacing it with a new full roving bobbin, this process is referred to as creeling.
Creeling time should be as short as possible to minimize productivity loss. Mills
should have a standard procedure designed on the concept (SMED).

2.10.3 Spindle Breakdowns

Broken spindle tapes and drafting roller aprons results to idle spindles in addition to
contributing to loss of roving material in form of soft waste. Ideally, broken spindles
and aprons should be repaired immediately. The missing parts further increases idle
spindles resulting to poor yarn realization and energy loss. Broken and missing
machine parts should be replaced immediately. The best practice is implementation of
TPM within spinning mills.

2.10.4 Doffing Frame stoppages

Doffing is the process of removing the filled up bobbin packages from the spindle of
the ring frame and replacing with the empty ones. When the bobbin gets filled up with
yarn, the entire ring frame machine automatically stops. Doffing is carried out by
skilled operators referred as doffers. The count number of the yarn being spun
determines the time the machine takes before doffing. For coarse yarn counts of 7s,
and 10s the doff time is less and for finer counts of 30s, to 40s the time is significantly
higher. Yarn counts of 20s takes 90-110 min for a complete doff. The process of
doffing should be carried out in the shortest time possible time.

2.11 Deduction from Literature

Ring spinning has been the most used but the least productive spinning system, the
major limitation is occasioned by the traveler which generates high amount of heat at
high speed running, it is extremely difficult to conduct this heat away in the short time
available. The spindle speed has thus been limited to 25,000 Rpm. A study by Reiter
(2015) revealed that the Ring Frame machine as the major cost factor in spinning
mills accounting for 60% of the total cost of converting fibers to yarn.

31
SITRA publication “Norms for Productivity in Spinning” gives ring spinning spindle
utilization standard norm of 98% to form medium counts of yarn. Higher production
per spindle is a great advantage to the mill as it reduces costs per unit production
leading to increase in marginal profits of the firm. Research conducted in India by
SITRA, indicate that a 1% increase in production per spindle would lead to a saving
of US$ 15,000 per annum for a 30000 spindle mill (Shanmuganandan, 2010).

ITC 2015 estimates the average spindle utilization at 67% for the eight operational
spinning mills in Kenya. Sunflag had the highest spindle utilization in Kenya of
approximately 85% based on the weight of the yarn produced, previous surveys on
spinning mills in Kenya focused on the yarn realization.

No study has been undertaken on a spinning mill in Kenya to determine and analyze
the factors affecting the low spindle utilization and therefore this study seeks to fill
the existing knowledge gap.

32
 CHAPTER THREE: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.0 Introduction

This Chapter covers the research design that was followed in conducting the study. A
mix of descriptive, qualitative and quantitative techniques were applied to address the
objectives of the study. A systematic research methodology was designed to study
ring spinning process, parameters and production with a view of identifying
production losses. Production losses were categorized and detailed study on the
causes of production loss and their impact on productivity of the ring frame
undertaken. Moreover, a study of the mill production and management practices was
conducted to evaluate performance improvement techniques for the mill. The
summary of the methodology applied in the study is shown in Figure 3.1.
The summary of the methodology applied in the study is shown in Figure 9.

-Tables: Process Parameters, Production cycles,

stoppages of ring framer
Analysis of Ring Spinning Production -Tally sheets: Idle Spindles, End Breakages
& Process Parameters -Pareto Analysis of major losses in
production
- Pie Chart

-Root Cause analysis (RCA)

Evaluation of Factors affecting spindle
utilization -Failure Mode and Effects Analysis
(FMEA)

-Questionnaire administration
-Data Collection
Performance Improvement and
Evaluation -Data Analysis
-Selection of performance improvement
method using Grunberg PIM Evaluation

Performance improvement measures

(Recommended)

Figure 3.1: Methodology of the study

33
3.1 Ring Frame Process Analysis and Production

The study used quantitative and qualitative research techniques to investigate process
parameters, machine settings and yarn production in cotton short staple ring spinning.
Ring frame spinning process in place was analysed and detailed analytics of
production carried out using applicable basic tools of Quality Control (7 QC tools)
methodology to identify and create opportunities for mapping out process
inefficiencies. The tools are widely used in manufacturing to monitor the overall
operation for continuous improvement and can be used to solve 95% of all the
problems. The seven QC tools include; stratification, histogram, tally sheets, cause
and effect diagram, pareto chart and control charts. The tools were applied to carry
out study of machine operating settings, analysis of machine running cycles, product
being proceed and study of production levels.

3.1.1 Analysis of Ring Frame Process Parameters

A preliminary study of the ring frame settings and process parameter that had
influence on production was carried out for the ring frames of the spinning mill. Basic
data collection tables as proposed by basic 7 QC tools was used to collect data related
to the ring frame and spindles spinning medium to fine count cotton yarns. Analysis
of the table was used to analyse the feed materials, yarn counts being produced, the
machine settings and production levels of the mill.

3.1.2 Ring Frame Analysis Running and Stoppages Cycles

Data on stoppage durations automatically recorded on the Ring frame machine
memory was retrieved and recorded using tally sheet against the cause of each of the
stoppage for two ring frames for two weeks to analyze the various causes of ring
frame stoppage and determine the spinning and doffing cycles. The spinning and
doffing cycle times for the shifts was found to be stable and predictable. The spinning
cycle was timed from the start of the running of the ring frame when yarn starts
building up on the bobbin up to the time when the bobbins get filled with the yarn and
the frame automatically stops. Spinning cycles of the two ring frames was timed from
the start to the full doffing time, in a week of 5 days with 8 working hours.

34
3.1.3 Study of Idle Spindles and End Breakages

A snap study was carried out of all ring frames by using tally sheets, which were used
to investigate causes of idle spindles. Data on the number of spindles per frame not
making yarn at various intervals of the machine spinning cycle was collected. The
numbers of end breakages in two ring frames were studied by observing the number
of end breaks/100 spindle/hour. The number of breaks at the start of the study,
number of ends pieced during the study and number of breaks at the end of the study
were recorded and used to determine the end breakage rate of the Ring frame.

3.1.4 Pareto Analysis

Pareto analysis time loss due to stoppages was conducted and used to determine
production loss based on six major productions on OEE. Pareto analysis is the most
widely used to identify, sort and display causes of a particular problem. It graphically
illustrates all the factors that influence a given outcome thus identifying the possible
root causes. Pareto analysis was used to identify and classify the reasons that are
responsible for production loss contributing to low spindle utilisation in ring frame
spinning.

3.2 Evaluation of factor affecting Ring Frame Spindle Utilization

The study used descriptive and qualitative techniques to understand the factors that
influenced ring frame spindle utilization in ring spinning. Analysis of the impact of
various factors was carried out to prioritize the factors.

3.2.1 Root Cause Analysis

Ishikawa diagram was used to conduct a Root Cause Analysis through focused group
discussions to identify production losses in the ring spinning doffing process. RCA is
a structured approach used in identifying causes of production with techniques
designed to provide focus for identifying and resolving problems. Causes of
production loss, which were considered to have high effect on production, were
classified on the level of their significance. The loss factors were fed on Ishikawa
diagram on the basis of man, machine, materials, environment and management.

35
3.2.2 Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)
FMEA was carried out to detect the possible failure modes related to the ring spinning
process and prioritize them. It is an effective method and tool for analyzing a
procedure and risk assessing with capability of offering critical assistance to analysis
and improvement in manufacturing process such as ring frame spinning. A team of
operators was used to develop a process map for the ring spinning process. The main
processes of spinning, doffing and set-up were discussed to come up with all the
detailed sub-activities of the spinning process. The failure modes under each sub
activity were discussed and given the Risk Priority Number (RPN) using the FMEA
Criteria (Appendix 3).
Potential failure causes with the highest RPN were identified in order to prioritize
performance improvement measures in ring spinning.

3.3 Performance Improvement Design and Evaluation

The study used quantitative and qualitative approach to collect data through
questionnaire and interviews related to productivity improvement and to understand
the operational structure of the mill for identification and selection of a performance
improvement technique.

3.3.1 Sampling Procedure

The researcher used purposeful sampling to identify eighteen (18) responded
composed of the engineer, technician, operators and other staff working directly on
the Ring Frame. According to Blair (2015), purposeful sampling technique is used in
quantitative research to ensure representativeness in identification and selection of the
respondents well versed in the subject of the study for the most effective use of
limited resources. Purposeful sampling involves identifying and selecting individuals
or group of individuals that are especially knowledgeable about or experienced with a
phenomenon of interest (Cresswell & Plano Clark, 2011). The mill had one engineer,
one technician, thirteen operators and three support staff working directly on the ring
frames who were selected for the study. The study therefore employed stratified
purposeful sampling where employees working directly on the Ring Frames at various
levels were selected as respondents as shown in Table 3.1.

36
Table 3.1: sample size of employees working directly on the ring frame compared to
total employee of the mill

Employee Level Mill employees Sample Size

(Employees working on Ring Frames)
Engineers 4 1
Technicians/artisans 10 1
Operators 136 13
Others 30 3
Total 180 18
Source: Field Data, 2019

3.3.2 Questionnaire Survey

A detailed questionnaire was structured based on the Grunberg (2007) method to

support performance improvement in industrial operations (PIM) and sent to the
various categories of the mill workforce. The PIM based questionnaire was designed
on Grunberg criteria of specialist independence, competence supportive,
implementation supportive, measurement based, objective supportive and
organizational supportive. The questionnaire was used to collect unique information
related to performance improvement in ring spinning. The six level criteria were
scored at four levels indicating the extent to which the responded agreed with the
statements given, the questionnaire is attached in appendix 1.

3.3.3 Data collection

3.3.4 Respondents Response Rate

The researcher issued 18 questionnaires representing 10% of the target population of
180 employees of the Sunflag Textile mills spinning plant located along Lunga Lunga
road, Industrial area, Nairobi. The response rate of the respondents is shown in Table
3.2
Table 3.2: Response Rate of the Respondents

Responses Frequency Percentage (%)

Completed usable questionnaires 16 88.8
Unreturned and disqualified questionnaires 2 11.2
Total 18 100
Source: Field Data, 2019

37
3.3.5 Data Analysis
Data collected was analyzed by using excel statistical tools and modeled to
descriptive statistic using industrial engineering overall equipment effectiveness
(OEE) and Performance Improvement Method (PIM) model along with inferential
statistics. Various factors which directly affect the ring frame productivity such as end
breakage rate, idle spindles, doffing loss and pneumafill waste were analysed and
their effects on overall spindle utilization evaluated.

3.3.6 Validity and Reliability

The validity of a test is a measure of how well a test measures what it is supposed to
measure (Kombo & Tromp, 2006). According to Mugenda and Mugenda (2003),
validity is the accuracy and meaningfulness of inferences which are based on the
research results. It’s the degree to which the results obtained from the analysis of data
actually represent the variables under study. Mugenda (2008) points out that validity
is used to estimate how accurately the data obtained in the study represents a given
variable or construct in the study. Content validity through expert and supervisor
opinion was used.
According to Mugenda (2008) reliability is a measure of the degree to which a
research instrument yields consistent results or data after repeated trials. Reliability in
research is influenced by random error, as the error increases; reliability decreases
(Mugenda & Mugenda, 2003). Random error is the deviation from a true
measurement due to factors that have not effectively been addressed by the
researcher. Statistical Analysis System, known as SAS statistical software, is one of
the most widely used, flexible data processing tools. SAS software version 9.4 was
used to carry out analysis of variance (ANOVA), the means were compared by least
square means (Ls-means) at alpha = 0.05. A significant level of 0.05 had a 5% risk of
concluding that there was a difference when there was none. P values were considered
significant or insignificant at confidence levels of 95%. A small P values of 0.05 or
less indicated there was statistical difference. Large P values of more than 0.05
indicated there no statistical difference in the values.

3.4. Performance Improvement Evaluation

The PIM Tool developed by Grunberg (2007) shown in Table 3.3 was used to come
up with improvement measures for the potential failure causes. It is used to come up

38
with organised and sustainable productivity improvement, which is flexible to apply
at the operational level of the mill. The mill performance measures were graded on 6
level criteria based on specialist independence, competence supportive,
implementation supportive, measurement based, objective supportive and
organizational supportive. The supporting scale had 5 levels namely 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5.
The total score which indicated the overall support for the improvement measures was
used to come up with the strongest improvement measure.

Table 3.3: The PIM Method to Support Performance Improvement in Industrial operations
(source Grunberg 2007)

Specialist Competence Implementation Measurement Object Organisational

Independent Supportive Supportive Based Supportive Supportive
TPM 1 1 3 3 3 1
JIT 1 1 1 1 2 1
TQM 1 1 2 3 1 2
Lean 1 1 1 1 1 1
BPR,BPI 1 1 2 3 1 2
6 Sigma 1 3 3 3 1 2
DFT 1 1 1 1 1 1
SCM 1 1 1 1 1 1
TOC 1 1 3 1 3 2
RPA 1 1 N/A 2 N/A N/A
Simulation 1 1 N/A 3 1 1
Mapping 2 1 N/A 2 1 1
SMED 2 1 1 2 3 2
Five S 2 1 3 1 1 2
CI 2 1 1 2 1 2
Decision 2 1 N/A 2 N/A N/A

Source: Field Data, 2019

39
 CHAPTER FOUR: RESULTS, FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
4.1 Introduction

In this chapter analysis was done to establish the impact of production management
practices on the ring frame spindle utilisation. A detailed study on production loss was
conducted and an evaluation of production management practices for the mill carried
out. The data was analysed using statistical tools and interpretations made on
responses received and available literature.

4.2 Impact of Frame Spinning Process Parameters and Production Performance

on Spindle Utilisation
The mill operated 16 ring frame machines to produce short staple cotton yarns; 4
Laxmi LR6, 4 Rieter and 8 Rieter Laxmi G51 models of ring frames. The mill
operated 24 hours daily on a day and night shift of 11 hours and 13 hours
respectively. The study was conducted on the 16 ring frames producing yarn count of
20, 24, 30 and 38 Ne to analyze the process parameters, ring frame production per
shift. Bobbin yarn content weight in a production cycle of a ring frame was also
evaluated. The trends of production cycles of the ring frame, the mass of yarns
produced and all the stoppages of the ring frame were investigated using data
collection tools developed.

4.2.1 Ring Frame Process Parameters and Production

This section sought to determine the process parameters that the mill used on the 16
ring frames. Table 4.1 was used to study the process parameters and production of the
ring frames. All the ring frames were producing cotton yarns and applied a break draft
of 1.21 to attenuate the supply roving material. The mill was spinning coarse to
medium count yarns of 20, 24, 30 and 38, higher counts of yarn required higher twist
per metre (TPM) to impart strength on the yarn, TPM was also influenced by end use
of the yarn. Yarns, which were, used for high strength applications such warp yarns
required more TPM compared to hosiery yarn. The operating spindle speed of the ring
frame were moderate and ranged from 10 rpm, 500 rpm to 13,000 rpm, higher spindle
speed had influence on end breakage rate of the yarn which affected productivity of
the ring frame and the quality of the yarn. Thirteen of the ring frames had 960
spindles and three had 864 which amounted to installed capacity of 15,072 ring frame

40
spindles, the daily production was 6800 Kgs daily which translated to 0.451kgs per
spindle compared to daily rotor production of 6.94 kg per rotor which spun an average
count of 8 Ne. This was in line with the study conducted by Klein (2012) which
estimated the yarn production of rotor at 4-6 times compared to the ring frame. Table
6 presents data on ring spinning process parameters of the mill.

Table 4.1: Ring Frame Settings and Process Parameters

RF/ Model Max. No. of Process Parameters

Mc No. Spindle spindles
Speed in Yarn TPM Operating
(Rpm) Count Spindle speed
(Rpm)
1. Laxmi LR6 20000 960 24 670 13000
2. LaxmiLR6 20000 960 24 670 13000
3. LaxmiLR6 20000 960 30 776 13800
4. Laxmi Rieter G51 15000 960 38 925 12000
5. Laxmi Rieter G51 15000 960 38 925 12000
6. Laxmi Rieter G51 15000 960 30 774 11500
7. Laxmi Rieter G51 15000 960 30 774 11500
8. Laxmi Rieter G51 15000 960 30 774 11500
9. Rieter 16000 960 20 625 12000
10. Rieter 16000 960 20 625 10500
11. Rieter 16000 960 20 625 12000
12. Rieter 16000 960 20 625 12000
13. Laxmi LR6 16000 960 20 625 12000
14. Laxmi Rieter G51 16000 864 20 625 10500
15. Laxmi Rieter G51 16000 864 20 625 10500
16. Laxmi Rieter G51 16000 864 24 801 12000
Source: Field Data, 2019

4.2.2 Ring Frame Spinning and Doffing Cycles times

The study also collected information on the production cycles of the ring frame. The
machine automatically records the cycle process parameters such as spinning and
doffing cycles times which were retrieved, recorded and analyzed. The spinning and
doffing cycle times for the shifts were found to be stable and predictable. The
spinning cycle was timed from the start of the running of the ring frame and yarn
starts building up on the bobbin to the time when ring frame automatically stops due

41
to bobbins being filled up with yarn. The spinning cycles of the ring frame was timed
from the start to the full doffing time in the 11 hours’ day shift. Six (6) spinning and
doffing cycles were completed for each of the six ring frames.

The spinning cycle mean time was 125.0533 minutes, analysis of variance was done
using SAS software and the means were compared by least square means (Ls-means)
at alpha = 0.05, the results of the SAS Glimmix procedure are indicated in Appendix
5 of this report. The P value for the spinning cycle time was found to be 0.5420, there
were no significant differences were found between the mean time at the different
cycles (Figure 10). The doffing cycle mean time was 12.1867 minutes, analysis of
variance was done and the means were compared by least square means (Ls-means) at
alpha = 0.05. The P value for the doffing cycle time was found to be 0.9245, there
were no significant differences were found between the mean time at the different
doffing cycles. The spinning and doffing cycles are presented in Figure 4.1 and Figure
4.2 respectively.
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
SC1 SC2 SC3 SC4 SC5 SC6

Figure 4.1: Ring Frame spinning cycle time

20

15

10

0
DC1 DC2 DC3 DC4 DC5 DC6

Figure 4.2: Ring Frame Doffing Cycle time

42
4.2.3 Analysis of Mass of Yarn Produced per Cycle of Ring Frame
A study of the mass of yarn produced by the ring frames at full doff per cycle of a
ring frame in a shift was carried out. Analysis was undertaken to determine
production loss resulting from difference in mass of yarn produced by the ring frames.
Weight variations at full doff resulted from end breakages, idle spindles, exhaustion
of roving bobbin and subsequent piecing delay by machine operators which lead to
difference in the weight of yarn produced. The mean mass of yarn produced by the
ring frames was found to have a mean of 49.7 kgs. Analysis of variance was done
using SAS software and the means were compared by least square means (Ls-means)
at alpha = 0.05, the results of the SAS Glimmix procedure are indicated in Appendix
5 of this report. The P value for the mass of yarn produced by the Ring Frames in a
doff was found to be 0.5152, there were no significant significant differences were
found between the mean mass of yarn produced by different ring frame machines.
Figure 4.3 shows the weight of yarn produced by ring frames spinning 20s Ne count
yarn.

Figure 4.3: Variation in yarn weight per production of cycle ring frame

4.2.4 Analysis of Mass of Yarn Bobbins Produced by the Ring Frame

The ring frames had 960 spindles which were fitted with empty bobbins on which the
spun yarn was wound. A further study to determine weight of the bobbins produced
by the spindles within a ring frame was carried out. Ten (10) bobbins were randomly
selected from six (6) ring frames spinning 20s and weighed to determine the
production loss occurring due to under filling of yarn on the bobbins from the spindles
of the ring frame. Lower weight of bobbins meant less yarn content on the doffed ring
bobbins, the maximum bobbin weight recorded from the ring frames during the study
was 64.3 grams. The mean mass of yarn bobbins at full doff was found to have a

43
mean of 56.71525 grams representing a loss of 7.5847 grams per bobbin, analysis of
variance was done using SAS software (Appendix 5) and the means were compared
by least square means (Ls-means) at alpha = 0.05. No significant differences were
found between the mean mass of bobbins produced by different ring frame machines
in different cycles. The average weight of the bobbins produced by the ring frames is
shown in Figure 4.4.

70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
RF 9 RF 10 RF 11 RF 12 RF 13 RF 14

Figure 4.4: Average weight of ring frame yarn bobbin in grams from 6 different ring
frames spinning 20s Ne

4.2.5 Ring Frame Stoppages

This section sought to investigate the causes and frequency of ring frame stoppages
during the production shift of the mill, tables were used to collect data related to
stoppages of the ring frame. Stoppages of the ring frame in two shifts were recorded
in the order in which they occurred giving the reasons for stoppage. The causes of the
stoppage were classified into production losses of OEE as they occurred in Table 4.2.
Doffing was the highest cause of ring frame stoppages accounting for 64% of time
loss in ring frame stoppages as shown in Figure 4.5.
Table 4.2: Two Shift Ring frame stoppages

Stoppage Reason for the Loss classification Time loss in Mins

No. stoppage
1. Doffing Idling and minor stoppages 15
2. Doffing Idling and minor stoppages 13
3. Count Change Set up and adjustments 20
4. Doffing Idling and minor stoppages 18
5. Doffing Idling and minor Stoppages 21
6. Power Failure Breakdown 35
7. Doffing Idling and minor Stoppages 15
8. Doffing Idling and minor Stoppages 15
Total time loss 137
Source: Field Data, 2019

44
Figure 4.5: Distribution of Ring Frame Stoppages

Percentage distribution of ring Frame

stoppage

Power Failure
23%

Doffing
64%
Count Change
13%

4.2.6 Investigation of spindle production loss due to idle spindles and end
breakage
A further study was carried out to investigate the production loss which occurred
within the spindles during the running time of the machine due to idle spindles and
end breakage. Production loss of 727 spindle minutes was lost due to idle spindle
which was attributed to missing spindle drive tapes, broken bottom apron, roving
exhaust and delay in creeling of roving bobbin by the ring frame operators as shown
in Table 4.3. End-breaks in 100 spindles observed over a period of hour was 5.62 as
shown in Table 4.4, standard mill operating procedure was that an end break would be
pieced within 5 minutes of breakage. The loss in ring frame spindle hours arising
from idle spindles and end breakage was computed based on the mill standard
operating procedure and was found to be 863.68 spindle minutes of ring frame
stoppage in two shifts. Analysis of the causes of spindle loss during the spinning cycle
are shown in Figure 4.6.
Table 4.3: Two Ring Frame spindle production loss due to various idle spindles
identification

Cause of Idle spindle Loss Rate of loss Spindle minutes Time

Stoppage Classification (mins) loss
(mins)
Missing Spindle tapes Reduced speed 4 spindles per 139 556
cycle
Roving exhaust and Yield loss 2 Roving 15 30
delay in creeling of bobbin
roving bobbin exhausts
Bottom apron break Yield loss 1 spindle per 139 139
cycle

45
Table 4.4: End Breakage Rate Yield Loss on 100 Spindle Hour of the Ring Frame

End breaks at Ends Break at end Total breaks No of breaks

start pieced per 100
spindle Hour
12 56 10 54 5.62

Source: Field Data, 2019

Roving exhaus t

Broken bottom apron

Type of spindle loss

Mis sing spi ndle Series1

End Break ages

0 200 400 600 800 1000

Spindle time in Mins

Figure 4.6: Analysis of loss in ring frame spindle hrs due to idle spindles in spindle-Mins

4.2.7 Pareto Analysis of Major Losses in Production

Analysis of production loss at the ring frame level and within the individual spindles
of the ring frame was carried out using Pareto analysis to identify significant causes of
production loss in ring spinning. All the ring frame stoppage losses and idle spindles
were categorized into OEE five major classes of production loss as shown in Table
4.5 and analyzed using pareto analysis in Figure 4.7. Idling and minor stoppages
losses accounted for 63.2 % and break down loses 22.8 %. The results were in line
with the Pareto principle, which states that 20% of the causes are responsible for 80%
of the production loss.
Table 4.5: Analysis of major production losses in ring spinning

Cumulative
Classification of Loss Category Frequency Percentage
Percentage
Idling and minor stoppages A 97 63.2 63.2
Breakdown B 35 22.8 86
Set-up and adjustments E 20 0.6 86.6
Yield loss C 0.93 0.4 87
Reduce speed D 0.57 13 100
Source: Field Data, 2019

46
Figure 4.7: Pareto Analysis of major losses in ring spinning
120 100.0%

90.0%
100
80.0%

70.0%
80
60.0%
Frequency (%)

60 50.0%
Frequency
40.0% Cumulative Percentage

40
30.0%

20.0%
20
10.0%

0 0.0%
A B E C D
Loss Category

4.3 Evaluation of factor affecting Ring Frame Spindle Utilization

4.3.1 Root Cause Analysis

Ishikawa Diagram was applied to find problems related to the Ring Frame doffing
process through discussions with the mill management and engineers on the causes of
production loss. The main question used for Root Cause Analysis (RCA) was; what
factors of the ring frame doffing process contributes to low spindle utilization in ring
spinning? Ishikawa diagram was constructed considering the influence of five
categories; man, material, management, environment and measurement. All the
factors identified were analyzed on the basis of level of significance to the ring frame
doffing process. The analysis of the ring frame doffing time loss factors is shown in
Figure 4.8.
The significant factors identified to the ring frame doffing were due to:

(i) The manual doffing procedure of the ring frame which was found to be
significantly slow.

47
(ii) Lack of time awareness - the Ring frames automatically stopped when bobbin
get filled up with yarn and operators took time to start the process of doffing
mainly due to lack of time awareness among the doffers.

(iii) Poor process of removal of empty bobbins and simultaneously replacing them
with empty coded bobbins

(iv) Delay in completion of the preparation of empty codded bobbins for the ring
frame delayed the process of starting replacement of the of the filled up
bobbins as the bobbins were not ready due to delay in completion of
preparation of bobbins,

(v) Shortage of bobbins or mix up of bobbins for counts, lots and codes.

(vi) Inspection of the ring frame after replacement of empty bobbins and close
monitoring of the stoppages of the ring frames were also major contributors
of doffing loss.

These causes were chosen as the inputs to the Ring Frame Doffing FMEA process
after being identified as the significant causes of ring frame doffing loss.

48
Figure 4.8: Root Cause Analysis of ring frame doffing process time loss

Man Material Management

Low skills of RF Empty bobbins not Poor supervision of

- Operators are of qualification - Shortage of same color bobbins - No proper coordination of teams
- operators not retrained - Empty bobbins not ready on supply container - doffers left to work on their own
Few RF operators Empty bobbin mix up Lack of standard
- Low number of inspection & patrol team - No order of keeping bobbin - No doffing procedure
- Lower number of doffers - Order not followed - procedure not followed
Lack of SoPs for Lack of empty bobbins Lack of monitoring of
- No SoP on allocation of operators - Delay in winding off yarn at the autoconer - Stoppages not recorded
- SoP not adhered to - Damage of bobbins - Stoppages not monitored
Lack of time awareness
- Delay in removal of full bobbins
- Delay in removal of full bobbins
Poor work attitude
- low motivation of operators
- poor teamwork
Ring Frame
Automatic stoppage of Doffing Loss
- Bobbin get filled up to the target yarn production
- the ring frame automatically turns off

Speed adjustment Failure of Manual doffing of the

- High RH - Slow process of the manual doffing
- Rise in end breakage - manual re-inspection of spindles
Count change for new Uncondusive work Replacement of
- Excessive fibre fly waste - Replacement of broken spindle drive tapes
- Lack of concentration due to prolonged exposure to - Ring traveller and draft roller apron replacemt
high noise level
Measuremen
Enviroment
t

49
4.3.2 Process Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA)

Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) for ring frame doffing process was
carried out to find out the possible failure modes and rank them in order of priority.
The process map from when the ring frame automatically stops was outlined and each
sub activity which was to be undertaken for each process was identified. Each failure
modes, cause and effect of these doffing processes, activities and sub-activities were
tabulated and assigned the Risk Priority Numbers (PRN).
The Ring Frame Doffing operation processes with the RPN is tabulated in Table 4.6.

50
Table 4.6: Ring Spinning Doffing process FMEA

No. Operation in Ring frame Potential Failure Potential Failure Cause Potential Failure Effect Occurrence Severity Detectability Risk
spinning Doffing Mode (s) Priority
Number
(O)*(S)*(D
1 Empty bobbin cop Mix in bobbin size, Lack of segregation of Mix up in yarn counts and 6 7 3 126
identification for next doff color and code cops lots
2 Cleaning of empty bobbin Empty bobbin with Poor cleaning of empty Contamination of yarn 3 5 3 45
cops yarn remnant cops
3 Inspection of empty cops Use of damaged Bobbin cannot be fit on Fitting not held in place 3 4 5 60
to ensure they are in good bobbin cops the spindle
working condition
4 Poor buildup of yarn Damaged during 1 2 2 4
bobbin installation or
transportation
5 Loading of the right Lack of enough Fewer number of Delay in replacement of 8 7 7 392
numbers empty cops in the bobbins for the ring bobbins cops full bobbins
bobbin tray frame
6 Arrangement of cops on Unorderly Longer retrieval time for 8 2 3 48
bobbin tray arrangement of bobbin cops
bobbin cops
7 Transportation of empty Lack of empty Delay in moving and Time loss 8 8 5 320
bobbin tray to the ring bobbins to start arranging empty bobbin
frame where doffing doffing tray
activity is to be undertaken
8 Operation of overhead Damaged overhead cannot blow fly fibers Damaged during operation 3 5 2 30
blower blower
9 Raising of lappet rail to interference with lappet rail not raised Increased doffing time 4 3 3 36
upward position removal and
loading of bobbins
10 Proper material handling of Deformation of Damaged yarn cops Increase in rejected yarn 5 7 7 245
empty cops and full cops cops cops

51
No. Operation in Ring frame Potential Potential Potential Occurrence Severity Detectability Risk Priority
spinning Doffing Failure Mode (s) Failure Cause Failure Effect Number
(O)*(S)*(D
11 Replacement of full cops Breakage of yarn Poor handling Increased start 8 7 6 336
with empty cops during bobbin by doffers end breakage
change
12 Arrangement and full cops not Damaged yarn Loss in yarn 4 3 4 48
transportation of full cops placed in the cop cops during at bobbin cops
trolley full bobbin cop
trolley
13 Covering of the doffed ring Exposure yarn Contamination Rejection of the 3 3 3 27
cops bobbins to batch
contamination
14 Gaiting for all the spindles Gaiting done Mix match Mix-up of 6 6 7 252
in a proper manner with yarn which gaiting of yarn different lots and
is not running counts of yarn
15 Roving bobbin change for Mix up of speed Count change Fabric defect in 8 5 8 320
filling, filling activities and frame lots Filling and Lot weaving and
piecing in the event of a filling activities change dyeing
count change and piecing in the
event
16 Traveler change traveler as Unchanged Count change Formation of 2 4 5 40
instructed by superiors traveler defective yarn
during count change
17 Inspection of the machine machine not Poor bobbin Extended 3 4 3 36
is ready to start ready to start change stoppage of entire
ring frame.
18 Lowering of lappet rail are lappet rail not Uncontrolled Increased end 3 3 2 18
lowered to its position lowered balloon breakages
properly formation
19 Patrol of the entire ring Extended high unpierced/ Lost production 3 2 4 24
frame end breakage broken ends due to idle
during doffing spindles

52
Table 4.7: Potential failure causes and effects with highest RPN from Ring Frame
Process FMEA

Potential failure cause Potential failure effect O S D RPN

Lack of enough bobbins for the ring Delay in replacement of full 8 7 7 392
frame bobbins
Breakage of yarn during bobbin Increased start end breakage 8 7 6 336
change
Lack of empty bobbins to start Time loss due to delay in 8 8 5 320
doffing moving and arranging empty
bobbin tray
Mix up of speed frame lots and Rejection due to yarn/fabric 8 8 5 320
counts during filling activities and defect in weaving and dyeing
piecing in the event
Gaiting done with yarn which is not Mix-up of different lots and 6 6 7 252
running counts of yarn
Deformation of cops Damaged yarn cops, increase 5 7 7 245
in rejected yarn cops
Mix in bobbin size, color and code Mix up in yarn counts and 6 7 3 126
lots
Source: Field Data, 2019

Table 4.7 shows potential failure causes and effects with highest RPN. Short and frequent
production cycles in ring frame spinning, frequent lot of change overs to be done even
when the same yarn count and lot is being processed contributed to high time loss
during doffing stoppages. If external preparation activities for these change over were
not completed before the ring frame stopped doffing period extended resulting to loss
in production time. Though the procedure for the doffing was known, it was not
standardized and sequenced to minimize the time for doffing. Different fibres, counts
and lots were processed on the same spinning ring frames which not only further
increased the change over time but also increased the possibility of contamination at
weaving and dyeing stage.

53
4.4 Performance Improvement Evaluation using Descriptive Statistics

Data on mill management and production practices collected using a PIM based
questionnaire and was analysed using excel. The findings of descriptive analysis are
presented and discussed below. The analysis was based on the criteria proposed in the
PIM method to support performance improvement in industrial operations (Grunberg,
2007). The responses for the four questions in the six level criteria were on a scale of
1 – 5 where: 1= Strongly Disagree, 2 = Disagree, 3 = Neutral, 4 = Agree and 5 =
Strongly Agree.

4.4.1 Performance Improvement Specialist Independence of the Mill

This section sought to find out how production management and improvement was
carried out within the mill and ascertain whether the mill had capacity to implement
performance improvement.

The responded strongly disagreed with the statements that productivity specialist or
consultant was a priority of the mill and recognition for performance improvement
staffing. The respondents disagreed that the mill had prioritized production
management and improvement. Overall, the respondents rated the mill specialist
independence for performance improvement low as indicated in Figure 4.9.
Therefore, for a performance improvement method to be successfully implemented
and sustained at the mill it would have to be easy to use by non-specialists.

Mill Score
0 1 2 3 4 5

Productivity
specialist

Training in
productivity

Productivity
management

Staffing

Average

Figure 4.9: Specialist Independence score for the mill on performance improvement

54
4.4.2 Competency Supportive effects on Ring Frame Productivity
This section sought to determine the competencies that enhanced productivity in ring
spinning production in relation to the practices of the mill. The respondents strongly
agreed that employees had the right competencies (M = 4.9, SD = 2.6) required in
operation and management of mills using ring frames which included being in
possession of the job specific skills, job experience, team work and interpersonal
skills as indicated in Figure 4.10.

Mill Score
4.4 4.6 4.8 5

Specific Job
Skills

Experience

Team work

Interpersonal
skills

Average

Figure 4.10: Employee Competency Supportiveness effects on ring spinning productivity

4.4.3 Implementation Supportive of Mill Production Management Practices

This section sought to find out the level of management supportiveness and
engagement to promote productivity and improve production at the mill. The
respondents were neutral on provision of the necessary resources (M=3.9) to support
production performance improvement. The respondents agreed that the tasks
information required was available, the mill demonstrated high level of safety and
indicated that they were generally satisfied with the work environment as indicated in
Figure 4.11.

55
Figure 4.11: Management Implementation Supportiveness to mill productivity

Mill Score
0 1 2 3 4 5

Resources

Information

Safety

Job Satisfaction

Average

4.4.4 Performance Measurement and Monitoring Effects on Ring Frame

Productivity
This section sought to determine the level of tracking and monitoring of production in
ring spinning and to promote productivity and performance. The respondents
disagreed that the mill had a monitoring system to truck production performance and
productivity, the respondents strongly disagreed that the mill had clear and visible
system for monitoring production. Production targets were also not cascaded to all
levels of the mill staff establishment to promote accountability. Most of the
respondents however agreed that the mill undertook snap studies and end breakage
rate analysis to keep the unproductive spindles at the minimum. The results of how
the mill supported the criteria of measurement are as indicated in Figure 4.12.

Mill Score
0 1 2 3 4 5

Monitoring

Visibility

Accountability

Spindle
utilisation

Average

Figure 4.12: Mill score on criteria measurement based approach to productivity

56
4.4.5 Production Management Supportiveness to Ring Spinning Processes
This section sought to know the effects of the ring spinning process parameters on
productivity of the ring frame. The respondents disagreed that the mill was using
modern and up-to-date technology and equipment in yarn production but strongly
agreed that the roving material supply to the ring frame was adequate and of good
quality. The responded also strongly agreed that the humidification system for
maintaining the ambient temperature and humidity was stable. However, the
respondents were neutral that the assignment of duties to ring spinning operators was
supported by a work study. Overall, the respondents rated the supportiveness
regarding choice of ring frame as the production improvement object at mean of 3.4.
The analysis on production management supportiveness to ring frame spinning
process is shown in Figure 4.13.

Mill Score
0 1 2 3 4 5

Equipment &
technology

Material

Environmental
conditions

Ring frame
operators

Average

Figure 4.13: Analysis of object supportiveness to choice of ring frame as the production
improvement object.

4.4.6 Organizational Arragement Supportiveness to Ring Frame Productivity

This section sought to establish the supportiveness of performance improvement by
the spinning mill by finding out the availability of resources and information for
performance improvement which was rated at 3.9 and 4.3 respectively. The evaluation
also considered employees’ safety and satisfaction, which were rated high with a
mean score of 4.9 and 4.6 respectively as shown in Figure 4.14.

-+

57
Figure 4.14: Organizational Supportiveness of the Mill

4.5 Overall PIM Evaluation of Performance Improvement of Ring Frame

Spindle Utilisation Performance
Comparison of all the six PIM criteria of performance improvement evaluation was
made with competence, implementation and organizational supportiveness giving the
highest importance rating score for the spinning mill as shown in Figure 4.15.

5.0

4.0

3.0
Average score

2.0

1.0

0.0
Specialist independent Competence supportive Implementation Measurement Based Object supportive Organisational
supportive supportive
PIM evalution criteria for Performance improvement

Figure 4.15: Overall PIM Performance Evaluation of the mill based on PIM

Specialist independence had the least score which indicated that a performance
improvement for the mill should be usable by non-specialist, must be easy to
understand, easy to use and supportive regarding communication of goals and results.

58
According to Grunberg PIM criteria (2007) the methods which partially fulfill this are
Process mapping, SMED, Five S, CI and decision support.

The second least score was in measurement supportiveness which indicated that it was
not easy to measure, track and monitor performance which would form a basis for
further improvement. To increase support for measurements, the PIM premade forms
and instructions to be used to promote further understanding when promoting the
system. The average scores for overall PIM performance evaluation is shown in Table
4.8.

Table 4.8: Overall PIM Performance Improvement Evaluation

Overall PIM Performance Improvement

Average Score
Evaluation
Specialist independent 1.3
Competence supportive 4.8
Implementation supportive 4.4
Measurement Based 4.6
Object supportive 3.4
Organizational supportive
4.4
3.8
Source: Field Data, 2019

4.5.1 Performance Improvement Technique Selection

In this research five methods/ techniques for performance improvement were
identified based on the results of PIM evaluation of Sunflag Spinning Mill Ltd. These
techniques were Process mapping, SMED, Five S, CI and decision support

In order to select a suitable performance improvement technique for the spinning mill,
comparison was done using the Grunberg (2007) PIM’s criteria to support
improvement methods which allocated applicable numeric values to the method on
the basis of; 1= weak or low support, 2= partly supportive, strong support and N/A
and as shown in Appendix III: The results of the evaluation (Table 4.9) recommended
five performance improvement techniques/ method for the mill. Decision Support was
not competence supportive to the unique object supportiveness of the ring spinning
process and was not supported by organizational set-up of the mill.

59
Table 4.9: Evaluation of Performance Improvement methods based on PIM

Process SMED Five S CI Decision

mapping Support
Specialist Independent 2 2 2 2 2
Competency supportive 1 1 1 1 1
Implementation supportive N/A 3 3 1 N/A
Measurement based 2 2 1 2 2
Object supportive 1 3 1 1 N/A
organizational supportive 2 2 2 2 N/A

Process
Mapping SMED Five S CI Decision Support
8 13 10 9 5
Source: Field Data, 2019

Process Mapping was not applicable to implementation supportiveness, it is important

that a proposed performance improvement technique has support amongst the
management and employees of the mill as much of the improvement work would be
performed by employees of the mill. SMED had the strongest support with an overall
score of 13, the score was highest in implementation and object supportiveness and
had a score of 2 for specialist independent, measurement base and organizational
supportiveness. SMED could be applied for improvement production by converting
internal set-up time to external set up time Five S had a score of 10 whereas
Continuous improvement (CI) scored 9.

60
 CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Review of Research Objectives
The objective of this research was to improve spindle utilization of the Ring Frame in
cotton short staple ring spinning in Kenya, a case study of Sun flag Textile Mills,
Kenya. A performance improvement method for mill has been recommended. The
methods used to analyse ring spinning production, ring frame spindle utilization and
to formulate a performance improvement method were based on literature review and
the case study. The study was guided by three specific objectives.
The first objective was to analyse the ring spinning process, parameters and
production per spindle in short staple cotton spinning. Data on production loss due to
the ring frame stoppage and underutilization of the 960 spinning spindles within a
ring frame was analysed using the six major stoppages used to calculate OEE and
Pareto analysis of major losses in ring spinning production was conducted.

The second objective was to determine the factors affecting spindle utilisation in short
staple cotton ring frame spinning. This was achieved through Failure Mode and
Effects Analysis (FMEA) of the ring frame doffing process which was used find out
the possible failure modes and rank them in order of priority. The analysis ranked
seven (7) failure modes that had Risk Priority Numbers (RPN) in order of their
priority.

The third objective was to formulate a production improvement method to be adopted

for improving ring frame spindle utilisation which was achieved by evaluating the
mill production practices using a PIM based questionnaire. The identified mill
performance improvement techniques were compared using the PIM Criteria where
SMED was selected as best method for the mill.

5.2 Key Findings

As per the first objective, a pareto analysis of major losses in production revealed that
Idling and minor stoppages losses accounted for 63.2% and breakdown losses 22.8%.
Doffing loss was highest cause of ring frame stoppages in the category accounting for
64% of ring frame stoppages of the ring frame. 5.62 end breaks were observed per
100 spindles per hour, which was the highest cause of production loss within the
spindles of the ring frame.

61
For the second objective, manual doffing procedure, process of removal and
replacement of bobbins on the spindle, lack of time awareness by doffers, delay in
preparation of empty bobbins was identified as the main cause of doffing loss using
Ishikawa Diagram. FMEA of the ring frame doffing process was used to find out the
possible failure modes and rank them in order of priority. Top seven (7) failure modes
that had the highest Risk Priority Numbers (RPN) were ranked in order of their
priority. These include; lack of enough bobbins for the ring frame, breakage of yarn
during bobbin change, lack of empty bobbins to start doffing, mix up of speed frame
lots and counts during filling activities and piecing in the event, gaiting done with
yarn which is not running, deformation of cops and mix in bobbin size, color and
code.

As per the third objective, questionnaire was used to collect data on mill performance
management and improvement using Grunberg (2007) PIM Criteria. The mill had a
low score of 1.3 in mill independence to implement performance improvement
techniques, which required support of specialists. Performance improvement
technique would be supported in the mill if it was to be undertaken by non-specialists,
was easy to understand and communicate to employees. The mill product monitoring
and trucking for the ring frame was found to have negative effect on productivity of
the mill. The mill also scored low in object supportiveness reflecting that the
production process management had not taken into account the unique aspects of the
ring frame doffing process. The Process mapping, SMED, Five S, CI and decision
support methods were proposed for the mill, evaluation using the PIM criteria
recommend SMED, which had the highest score of 13 for performance improvement
of the mill.

5.3 Conclusions
Based on the results, the researcher therefore concludes that significant improvement
of Ring Frame spindle utilisation would be achieved by minimizing machine stoppage
and improving utilization of the spindles during the running cycle of the machine.
Minimizing of ring frame stoppage time for doffing would yield the highest result.

The choice of SMED as a performance improvement technique for the mill was
supported by the elaborate process required for set-up during change over which

62
occurred frequent in ring spinning process. SMED was an easy to use tool for large
improvement attempts and can be supported within the mill practices and procedures
for improvement of spindle utilisation of the ring frame.

5.4 Recommendations
A doffing process SMED procedure was recommended for highest performance
improvement ring frames spindle utilisation at the mill. Important aspect of SMED of
separating external activities was recommended to be modified for the ring frame
doffing to include 3 separation activities involving the pre-set up external, internal
and post external activities. The ring frame doffing pre-set up external activities
where to be completed before the stoppage of the machine without any loss in the ring
frame operating time and included identification, preparation, coding and packaging
of bobbins in trolleys. The Trolleys were to be kept near the ring frame ready for
doffing. The external process was to be enhanced to include identification idle and
defective spindle numbers and the cause.

Secondly, improvement in the internal resetting process of ring frame which could
only be done when the machine had stopped were achieved by recommendation of
using doffing trolleys with separation for empty bobbins and ejected filled up
bobbins. Two doffers to be assigned to doff the frame from left to right at the same
time. Doffers were to detach full cops from the spindle while simultaneously
replacing it with empty bobbin cop from the tray. The maintenance team was to be
incorporated in the internal set-up team to carry out spindle repairs such as drafting
system replacement, spindle drive tape replacement to minimize running idle spindles
and production of defective bobbin in the next spinning cycle. Post external activities
where to be undertaken when the machine had been restarted, internal activities of
replacement of exhaust roving, handling transportation and storage of full bobbins
were converted into external activities. Improvement in spindle utilisation would be
achieved by doffing internal set-up time into external set-up time.

5.5 Research Contribution

The Research has contributed to theory through development of a systematic
methodology to prioritise the factors affecting efficiency and productivity of spinning
mills using ring spinning at the frame and spindle levels, which can be used as a basis

63
for formulating metric for ring frame spindle utilisation determination. The research
also developed criteria for ranking and evaluating causes of production loss and
production practices of the mill as a tool for identifying areas of performance
improvement.

As contribution to practice, a methodology was developed for spinning mill using ring
spinning system to use to evaluate ring frame spindle utilisation loss factors, evaluate
them to improve their production management practices and select production
improvement technique for optimal productivity and efficiency of the ring frame.

5.6 Recommendations for Further Research

Experimental research to determine the effect of the quality of the feed material on the
spinning process need to be done to further improve the work already carried out on
this thesis. This would include analysis of quality of cotton fibres and study of the
preparation operations of the blow room, carding, drawing, combing and speed frame.
Lastly, more research should be conducted to determine further loss of productivity at
winding and weaving related to breakages at the ring frame.

64
 CHAPTER SIX: REFERENCES

1. Akhmed, F. and Gimbal, D., (2015). Efforts in Improving Ovarall Equipment

Effectiveness (OEE) of weaving machine in Tire Cord division of tire
manufacturing company in Indonesia. MBU- International Journal of
Science and research.
2. Aliaga, M. and Gunderson B., (2000). Interactive statistics. Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall.
3. Amasaka, K., (2009). New JIT – New Management Technology Principal.
Taylor and Francis: CRC Press, New Suite 300, United States.
4. Babbie, E.R., (2010). The Practice of Social Research. Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth Cengage, 12th Edition.
5. Blair, E.R., (2015). Applied Survey sampling. Second Sage Publications,
Thousand oaks, CA.
6. Chemengich, M.K., (2013). The Impact of AGOA on the Textile and apparel
industry in Kenya. African Cotton and textile Industries Federation,
ACTIF, Nairobi, Kenya.
7. Chummar, A., Kuriakose, S., and Mathew, G., (2011). Study on Improving
production rate of Rapier Looms in Textile Industry. International
Journal of Engineering and Innovative Technology, Vol.2.
8. Cresswell, J.W., and Planoclark, V.L., (2011). Designing and conducting
mixed method research. Second Sage Publications, Thousand oaks,
CA.
9. Dal, B., Tugwell, P., and Greatbanks, R., (2000). Overall equipment
Effectiveness as a measure of operational improvement. International
Journal of operations and production management, Vol.20.
10. Das, A. S., and Gopinadhan P.V., (2016). Productivity Improvement Using
Industrial Engineering tools: A case study of typical spinning mill.
International Journal of Development and Research, Vol. 20.
11. Deloitte, (2016). Kenya Economic Outlook. The Story Behind the Numbers,
Deloitte & Touche. Nairobi, Kenya.
12. Eric, O., (1987). Spun Yarn Technology, Butterworths.

65
13. Garth, F., (2008). Used Clothing Donation and Apparel Production in Africa.
The Economic Journal, Vol.118.
14. Government of Kenya, (2007)., Kenya Vision 2030; A globally Competitive
and Prosperous Kenya. Government press Republic of Kenya.
15. Government of Kenya, (2008)., Kenya Vision 2030: Fist Medium term Plan.
Government press Republic of Kenya.
16. Grunberg, T., (2007). Performance Improvement; A method to support
performance improvement in Industrial Operations. The Royal Institute
of Technology, Stockholm, ISSN 1650-1888.
17. Huang, X. C., Grosberg, P., and Oxenham, W., (1994). Predicting End
Breakages in worsted spinning: A new model for end breakage
prediction. Textile Research Journal, Vol. 64.
18. Huangs, X. C., (2002). Manufacturing System modeling for productivity
improvement, Journal of Manufacturing system, Vol. 1.
19. ITMF., (2015). Tanzania Textiles and Garment Situational Analysis and
Development Strategy. International Textile Manufacturers
Federation.
20. Ishikawa, K., (1976). Guide to Quality Control. Asian Productivity
Organisation, ISBN 92-833-1036-5.
21. Ishikawa, K., (1985). What is total quality control, the Japanese way.
Eaglewood cliffs, Prentice Hall.
22. Ishtiaque, S.M., Rangesamy, R.S., and Ghosh, A., (2004). Optimization of
ring spinning process parameters for better yarn quality and
production, Journal of Fiber and Textile Research New Delhi, India,
Vol. 29.
23. Juran, M., and Godfrey, A., (1998). Juran’s quality handbook. Washington,
DC: McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., 5th Edition.
24. KAM., (2014). KAM Textiles and Apparels Sector Report. Kenya Association
of Manufacturers, Nairobi.
25. KIPRA., (2013). Kenya Economic Report. Kenya Institute of Public Policy
Research and Analysis.
26. Kerzner, H., (2009). Project Management: A Systems Approach to Planning,
Scheduling and Controlling. Project Management Institute, Wiley, 11th
Edition.

66
27. Khan, M. K. R., and Hossain, M. B., (2015). An Experimental Investigation of
the effects of some process condition son ring yarn breakage. IOSR
Journal of Polymer and Textile Engineering, Vol 2.
28. Kirkham, L., Garza-Reyes J. A., Kumar V., and Antony.J., (2014).
Prioritization of Operations Improvement Projects in the European
Manufacturing Industry. International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 52.
29. Klein W., (2000). A Practical Guide to Ring Spinning, Manual of Textile
Technology. The Textile Institute: Manchester England, ISBN
1870372298.
30. Klein, W. (2012). The Technology of Short Staple Spinning. The Textile
Institute Manchester England.
31. Kumar, W. A., and Poonia, M.P., (2011). FMEA Methodology, design and
implementation. International journal of engineering science and
technology. Vol. 3.
32. Kumar, S., and Wellbrock, J., (2009). Improved New Product Development
through Enhanced Design Architecture for Engineers. International
Journal of Production.
33. Lawrence, C. A., (2003). Fundamentals of Spun Yarn Technology. CRC
Publications, Boca Raton.
34. Ljunberg, A., and Larson, E., (2000). Production Development, design and
operations of production systems. Springer.
35. Lord, P.R., (2003). Hand Book of Yarn Production: Science, Technology and
Economics Tailor and Francis, Boca Raton:
36. Lord, R. L., (2002). Traditional motivation theories and old engineers.
Engineering Management Journal, Vol. 14.
37. Mahto D., and Kumar A., (2008). Application of Root Cause analysis in
Improvement of product quality and productivity. Journal of
Industrial Engineering and Management, Vol. 1.
38. McLeod, M., Turner, T.J., and Bititci, U.S., (2003), Using Overall Equipment
Effectiveness to Improve Performance of a Fast Moving Food
Company, University of Strathclyde, DMEM.

67
39. Mirko, S., Jelena, J., Zdravko K., and Aleksandar, V., (2009). Basic Quality
Tools in Continuous Improvement. Journal of Mechanical
Engineering, Vol. 55.
40. Mohd, N., and Rahman A. B., (2010). Implementation of 5S practices in The
Manufacturing Companies: A case study. American Journal of Applied
Science, Vol. 7.
41. Montgomery, D. C., (2009). Introduction to Statistical Quality Control. John
Wiley & Sons, Inc Danvers, MA, 6th edition.
42. Morton, S. C., Dainty A. R. J., Burns N. D., Brookes N. J., and Backhouse, C.
J., (2006). Managing Relationships to Improve Performance: A Case
Study in the Global Aerospace Industry. International Journal of
Production.
43. Muchiri P., and Pintelon L., (2008). Performance Measurement using overall
equipment effectiveness (OEE): Literature review and practical
application discussion. International Journal of production Research,
Vol 46.
44. Mugenda, A.G., (2008). Social Science Research: Theory and Principles,
Kijabe Printing Press, Nairobi.
45. Mugenda, O. and Mugenda, A., (2003). Research Methods, Quantitative and
Qualitative Approaches. Acts Press, Nairobi
46. Neyestani, B., (2017). Seven Basic Tools of Quality Control: The Appropriate
Quality Techniques for Solving Quality Problems in the Organizations.
New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc, Hoboken, 10th ed.
47. Nilesh, P. P., Raichurkar, P. P., Arun, K., Anjane, M.S., and Parsi, R.D.,
(2011). Improving productivity of ring frames, The Indian Textile
Journal
48. Paropate R., and Sambhe R., (2013.) The implementation and evaluation of
TPM – A case study of mid sized Indian enterprises. International
Journal of Application or Innovation in Engineering and Management,
Vol 2.
49. Patton M.Q., (2002). Qualitative Research and Evalutaion Methods. 3rd Sage
Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA.

68
50. Prajapati D.R., (2012). Implementation of failure mode and effect analysis: a
literature review. International journal of management, IT and
Engineering, Vol. 2.
51. Rangasamy R. S., Istiaque S.M., Gosh A, Patanaik A., and Bharati M., (2004).
Analysis of spinning tension in ring spinning, The Indian Journal of
Fiber and Textile Research.
52. Shanmuganangam D., Ravinchandran N., Sreenivasa J.,Ngarajan N.K., and
Kumar S. R., (2010). How to Assess Spinning Mill Productivity: Sitra
Norm South India Textile Research Association: SITRA, Coimbatore,
South India.
53. Varsha M. Magar and Vilas B. S., (2014). Application of 7 Quality Control
(7QC) Tools for Continuous Improvement of Manufacturing Processes,
International Journal of Engineering Research and General Science
Vol. 2.
54. Williamson R.M., (2006). Using Ovarall Equipment effectiveness;The metrics
and measures. Strategic Work Systems Inc, Colombus.

69
 CHAPTER SEVEN: APPENDIXES
Appendix 1: Questionnaire
Questionnaire on Improved Ring Frame Spindle Utilization in Short Staple Cotton
spinning Using OEE: A Case study of Sunflag Textile Mills, Nairobi, Kenya

PART A: COMPANY BACKGROUND INFORMATION

(Please Indicate as Appropriate)
1. Spinning Yarn Production Capacity in Kgs per day:

Ring Spun Rotor Spun

2. Total number of Employees in the spinning Mill

Assigned to Ring Frame

3. What is the number of Employees under the following Categories of specialization?

Engineers Technicians/Lab Technologist

Craftsmen/Artisan Operators
Others

4. How many years have you worked in Sunflag Textile Mills?

1 - 5 years 6 - 10 years

11 – 15 years 16 – 20 years

Over 21 years

5. How did you acquire skills?

Attended Training On the Job Training

Part B: Dependence of performance improvement on Usability by Non- specialist in

performance Improvement
(This section seeks to ascertain how performance improvement specialist/staff independence
affects successes of production improvement in spinning. Kindly indicate the extent to which
you agree with the following statements by ticking the appropriate box)

Key: 1 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree 5 = Not applicable

(DA) (A) (N) (N/A)

Performance improvement specialist DA A N N/A

Having a performance specialist/consultant is the

Priority of the Mill
Training in Production Improvement \techniques
is a core of the annual training plan
Performance Management Staff is recognized
within the mills staffing Structure
Production are Periodically taken though
performance improvement

70
Part C: Employee Competency and Productivity in Ring spinning

(This section seeks to determine the relationship between employee competency and
productivity of the ring frame. Kindly indicate the extent to which you agree with the
following statements by ticking the appropriate box)

Key: 1 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree 5 = Not applicable

(DA) (A) (N) (N/A)

Competence Supportive DA A N N/A

Operators posted at the ring frame must attained

a certain levy of competence in the skills
required
Higher level of experience has effects on the
performance of doffers
Team work is important for performance
improvement
Good communication interactive skill is required
for increased production

Part D: Evaluation of Management Implementation Supportiveness to Production

Improvement.
(This section seeks to establish the relationship between management implementation
supportiveness and production in spinning mills. Kindly indicate the extent to which you
agree with the following statements by ticking the appropriate box)

Key: 1 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree 5 = Not applicable

(DA) (A) (N) (N/A)

Implementation Supportive DA A N N/A

Job satisfaction among workers leads to

improved production
Efficient supervision of employees leads
improved productivity in yarn production
Well structured Standard Operating procedures
promotes productivity in spinning
Formation of working teams improves the
overall spindle utilization

Part E: Production Measurement and Productivity in Ring spinning

(This section seeks to assess the relationship performance measurements and the production
in ring spinning. Kindly indicate the extent to which you agree with the following statements
by ticking the appropriate box)

Key: 1 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree 5 = Not applicable

(DA) (A) (N) (N/A)

71
 Staff Attitude SD D N A SA

Monitoring of the yarn production improves

overall spindle utilization of the Mill
Snap study to control the number idle spindles
undertaken to minimum production loss
The mill monitors the number of end breaks to
keep them at the minimal level.
Production is analysed against targets per ring
frame/ shift

Part F: Comparative Advantage to Trends in Ring Spinning Ring Spinning

(This section seeks to establish effect of the operating conditions of the spinning mill staff in
relation to production improvement in ring spinning at sunflag textile mills. Kindly indicate
the extent to which you agree with the following statements by ticking the appropriate box)

Key: Key: 1 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree 5 = Not applicable

(DA) (A) (N) (N/A)

Implementation object specialization SD D N A SA

Up-to date equipment

- Sunflag uses up –to -date ring frames ng
(Fall within recommended retooling of 10-12yrs)
Material
- The roving material supplied by the roving
is the right quality for the ring frame
Ambient Conditions
- The humidification system for the
maintaining ambient RH and temperature is
maintained at good working conditions
Motivation
- employees are motivated to do their job

Part D: Evaluation of Organizational Supportiveness to Production Improvement.

(This section seeks to establish the relationship between organizational supportiveness to
performance improvement and production in spinning mills. Kindly indicate the extent to
which you agree with the following statements by ticking the appropriate box)

Key: 1 = Disagree 2 = Agree 4 = Strongly Agree 5 = Not applicable

(DA) (A) (N) (N/A)

Implementation Supportive DA A N N/A

The mills has room to make suggestions for

production improvement.
The mill attaches high value Improvements in
production.
The mill has a policy for continuous
improvement based on productivity.
Lesson learnt are incorporated in production
practices of the mill

72
 Appendix 2: Ljungstrom Evaluation of Some Improvement
Methods

Appendix 3: The PIM (Grunberg Methods To Support Performance

Improvement In Industrial Oprerations
Specialist Competence Implementation Measurement Object Organizational
Independent Supportive Supportive Based Supportive Supportive
TPM 1 1 3 3 3 1
JIT 1 1 1 1 2 1
TQM 1 1 2 3 1 2
Lean 1 1 1 1 1 1
BPR,BPI 1 1 2 3 1 2
6 Sigma 1 3 3 3 1 2
DFT 1 1 1 1 1 1
SCM 1 1 1 1 1 1
TOC 1 1 3 1 3 2
RPA 1 1 N/A 2 N/A N/A
Simulation 1 1 N/A 3 1 1

Mapping 2 1 N/A 2 1 2
SMED 2 1 3 2 3 2
Five S 2 1 3 1 1 2
CI 2 1 1 2 1 2
Decision 2 1 N/A 2 N/A N/A

73
Appendix 4: FMEA RPN Scoring Criteria

Occurrence Ranking Index

(Frequency ): Severity Ranking Index (problem?) Detection Ranking Index (See Defect?)
Ra Ran Ra
nk Criteria k Criteria nk Criteria
Undetectable effect on Almost certain detection of failure
1 Remote chance for failure 1 system 1 mode
Low severity impact Very high likelihood of detecting
2 Low failure rate based on 2 because failure 2 failure mode
previous designs with will cause slight customer High likelihood of detecting failure
3 low failures 3 annoyance 3 mode
Moderate failure rates Moderate severity with Moderately high likelihood of
4 based on similar 4 some customer 4 detecting failure mode
designs which have dissatisfaction and with Moderate likelihood of detecting
5 some occasional 5 performance 5 failure mode
failures but not in loss which is noticable Low likelihood of detecting
6 major proportions 6 by customer 6 failure mode
High failure rates based High severity with high degree Very low likelihood of detecting
7 on similar 7 of customer 7 failure mode
designs which have been Remote likelihood of detecting
8 troublesome. 8 dissatisfaction 8 failure mode
Very high failure rates and Very severe problem involving Very remote likelihood of detecting
9 the failures 9 potential 9 failure mode
will be major safety problem or major non-
10 occurrences. 10 conformity 10 Can not detect failure mode

Appendix 5: SAS System Glimmix Procedure for Least square means

errror analysis
Model Information
Response Variable Spinning Cycle
Response Distribution Gaussian
Link Function Identity
Variance Function Default
Variance Matrix Diagonal
Estimation Technique Restricted Maximum
Likelihood
Degrees of Freedom Method Residual

Class Level Information

Class Levels Values
Cycle 6 SC1 SC2 SC3 SC4 SC5 SC6

Number of Observations Read 30

Number of Observations Used 30

Dimensions
Covariance Parameters 1
Columns in X 7
Columns in Z 0

74
 Dimensions
Subjects (Blocks in V) 1
Max Obs per Subject 30

Optimization Information
Optimization Technique None
Parameters 7
Lower Boundaries 1
Upper Boundaries 0
Fixed Effects Not
Profiled

Fit Statistics
-2 Res Log Likelihood 161.82
AIC (smaller is better) 175.82
AICC (smaller is better) 182.82
BIC (smaller is better) 184.07
CAIC (smaller is better) 191.07
HQIC (smaller is better) 178.01
Pearson Chi-Square 796.70
Pearson Chi-Square / DF 33.20

Type III Tests of Fixed Effects

Num Den
Effect DF DF F Value Pr > F
Cycle 5 24 0.83 0.5420

Cycle Least Squares Means

Standard Pr >
Cycle Estimate Error DF t Value |t|
SC1 127.06 2.5767 24 49.31 <.0001
SC2 125.88 2.5767 24 48.85 <.0001
SC3 124.48 2.5767 24 48.31 <.0001
SC4 128.02 2.5767 24 49.68 <.0001
SC5 122.48 2.5767 24 47.53 <.0001
SC6 122.40 2.5767 24 47.50 <.0001

Differences of Cycle Least Squares Means

Standard Pr >
Cycle _Cycle Estimate Error DF t Value |t|
SC1 SC2 1.1800 3.6440 24 0.32 0.7489
SC1 SC3 2.5800 3.6440 24 0.71 0.4858
SC1 SC4 -0.9600 3.6440 24 -0.26 0.7945
SC1 SC5 4.5800 3.6440 24 1.26 0.2209
SC1 SC6 4.6600 3.6440 24 1.28 0.2132

75
 Differences of Cycle Least Squares Means
Standard Pr >
Cycle _Cycle Estimate Error DF t Value |t|
SC2 SC3 1.4000 3.6440 24 0.38 0.7042
SC2 SC4 -2.1400 3.6440 24 -0.59 0.5625
SC2 SC5 3.4000 3.6440 24 0.93 0.3601
SC2 SC6 3.4800 3.6440 24 0.96 0.3491
SC3 SC4 -3.5400 3.6440 24 -0.97 0.3410
SC3 SC5 2.0000 3.6440 24 0.55 0.5882
SC3 SC6 2.0800 3.6440 24 0.57 0.5734
SC4 SC5 5.5400 3.6440 24 1.52 0.1415
SC4 SC6 5.6200 3.6440 24 1.54 0.1361
SC5 SC6 0.08000 3.6440 24 0.02 0.9827

T Grouping for Cycle

Least Squares Means
(Alpha=0.05)
LS-means with the
same letter are not
significantly different.
Cycle Estimate
SC4 128.02 A
A
SC1 127.06 A
A
SC2 125.88 A
A
SC3 124.48 A
A
SC5 122.48 A
A
SC6 122.40 A

Model Information
Response Variable Doffing Cycle
Response Distribution Gaussian
Link Function Identity
Variance Function Default
Variance Matrix Diagonal
Estimation Technique Restricted Maximum
Likelihood
Degrees of Freedom Method Residual

76
 Class Level Information
Class Levels Values
Cycle 6 DC1 DC2 DC3 DC4 DC5 DC6

Number of Observations Read 3

0
Number of Observations Used 3
0

Dimensions
Covariance Parameters 1
Columns in X 7
Columns in Z 0
Subjects (Blocks in V) 1
Max Obs per Subject 30

Optimization Information
Optimization Technique None
Parameters 7
Lower Boundaries 1
Upper Boundaries 0
Fixed Effects Not
Profiled

Fit Statistics
-2 Res Log Likelihood 156.2
0
AIC (smaller is better) 170.2
0
AICC (smaller is better) 177.2
0
BIC (smaller is better) 178.4
5
CAIC (smaller is better) 185.4
5
HQIC (smaller is better) 172.3
9
Pearson Chi-Square 630.3
8
Pearson Chi-Square / DF 26.27

77
 Type III Tests of Fixed Effects
Num Den
Effect DF DF F Value Pr > F
Cycle 5 24 0.27 0.9245

Cycle Least Squares Means

Standard Pr >
Cycle Estimate Error DF t Value |t|
DC1 11.6100 2.2920 24 5.07 <.0001
DC2 11.7780 2.2920 24 5.14 <.0001
DC3 11.4420 2.2920 24 4.99 <.0001
DC4 11.0000 2.2920 24 4.80 <.0001
DC5 13.1960 2.2920 24 5.76 <.0001
DC6 14.0940 2.2920 24 6.15 <.0001

Differences of Cycle Least Squares Means

Standard Pr >
Cycle _Cycle Estimate Error DF t Value |t|
DC1 DC2 -0.1680 3.2414 24 -0.05 0.9591
DC1 DC3 0.1680 3.2414 24 0.05 0.9591
DC1 DC4 0.6100 3.2414 24 0.19 0.8523
DC1 DC5 -1.5860 3.2414 24 -0.49 0.6291
DC1 DC6 -2.4840 3.2414 24 -0.77 0.4509
DC2 DC3 0.3360 3.2414 24 0.10 0.9183
DC2 DC4 0.7780 3.2414 24 0.24 0.8124
DC2 DC5 -1.4180 3.2414 24 -0.44 0.6657
DC2 DC6 -2.3160 3.2414 24 -0.71 0.4818
DC3 DC4 0.4420 3.2414 24 0.14 0.8927
DC3 DC5 -1.7540 3.2414 24 -0.54 0.5934
DC3 DC6 -2.6520 3.2414 24 -0.82 0.4213
DC4 DC5 -2.1960 3.2414 24 -0.68 0.5046
DC4 DC6 -3.0940 3.2414 24 -0.95 0.3493
DC5 DC6 -0.8980 3.2414 24 -0.28 0.7841

T Grouping for Cycle

Least Squares Means
(Alpha=0.05)
LS-means with the
same letter are not
significantly different.
Cycle Estimate
DC6 14.0940 A
A
DC5 13.1960 A
A
DC2 11.7780 A
A

78
 T Grouping for Cycle
Least Squares Means
(Alpha=0.05)
LS-means with the
same letter are not
significantly different.
Cycle Estimate
DC1 11.6100 A
A
DC3 11.4420 A
A
DC4 11.0000 A

Model Information
Response Variable Ring Frame Production Mass
Response Distribution Gaussian
Link Function Identity
Variance Function Default
Variance Matrix Diagonal
Estimation Technique Restricted Maximum
Likelihood
Degrees of Freedom Method Residual

Class Level Information

Class Levels Values
Ring 6 RFP1 RFP2 RFP3 RFP4 RFP5 RFP6

Number of Observations Read 3

0
Number of Observations Used 3
0

Dimensions
Covariance Parameters 1
Columns in X 7
Columns in Z 0
Subjects (Blocks in V) 1
Max Obs per Subject 30

Optimization Information
Optimization Technique None
Parameters 7
Lower Boundaries 1

79
 Optimization Information
Upper Boundaries 0
Fixed Effects Not
Profiled

Fit Statistics
-2 Res Log Likelihood 120.8
2
AIC (smaller is better) 134.8
2
AICC (smaller is better) 141.8
2
BIC (smaller is better) 143.0
7
CAIC (smaller is better) 150.0
7
HQIC (smaller is better) 137.0
1
Pearson Chi-Square 144.3
4
Pearson Chi-Square / DF 6.01

Type III Tests of Fixed Effects

Num Den
Effect DF DF F Value Pr > F
Ring 5 24 0.87 0.5152

Ring Least Squares Means

Standard Pr >
Ring Estimate Error DF t Value |t|
RFP1 51.2400 1.0967 24 46.72 <.0001
RFP2 50.6600 1.0967 24 46.19 <.0001
RFP3 49.4200 1.0967 24 45.06 <.0001
RFP4 49.3400 1.0967 24 44.99 <.0001
RFP5 48.8200 1.0967 24 44.51 <.0001
RFP6 48.7200 1.0967 24 44.42 <.0001

Differences of Ring Least Squares Means

Standard Pr >
Ring _Ring Estimate Error DF t Value |t|
RFP1 RFP2 0.5800 1.5510 24 0.37 0.7117
RFP1 RFP3 1.8200 1.5510 24 1.17 0.2521
RFP1 RFP4 1.9000 1.5510 24 1.22 0.2325
RFP1 RFP5 2.4200 1.5510 24 1.56 0.1318
RFP1 RFP6 2.5200 1.5510 24 1.62 0.1173
RFP2 RFP3 1.2400 1.5510 24 0.80 0.4319

80
 Differences of Ring Least Squares Means
Standard Pr >
Ring _Ring Estimate Error DF t Value |t|
RFP2 RFP4 1.3200 1.5510 24 0.85 0.4032
RFP2 RFP5 1.8400 1.5510 24 1.19 0.2471
RFP2 RFP6 1.9400 1.5510 24 1.25 0.2231
RFP3 RFP4 0.08000 1.5510 24 0.05 0.9593
RFP3 RFP5 0.6000 1.5510 24 0.39 0.7023
RFP3 RFP6 0.7000 1.5510 24 0.45 0.6558
RFP4 RFP5 0.5200 1.5510 24 0.34 0.7403
RFP4 RFP6 0.6200 1.5510 24 0.40 0.6929
RFP5 RFP6 0.1000 1.5510 24 0.06 0.9491

T Grouping for Ring

Least Squares Means
(Alpha=0.05)
LS-means with the
same letter are not
significantly
different.
Ring Estimate
RFP1 51.2400 A
A
RFP2 50.6600 A
A
RFP3 49.4200 A
A
RFP4 49.3400 A
A
RFP5 48.8200 A
A
RFP6 48.7200 A

81
Appendix 5: Response to causes of Ring frame doffing (Discussion
with mill staff on RCA)

5) 7)
6) Specific Causes - 3rd
Cause Categories 4) Causes - 2nd Level Significant Significant
level
Factor? Factor?

Operators are of
Man Low skills of RF operators N
qualification
operators not retrained
Low number of inspection &
Few RF operators N
patrol team
Lower number of doffers
No SoP on allocation of
Lack of SoPs for operators Y
operators
SoP not adhered to
Lack of time awareness by Delay in removal of full
Y
operators bobbins
Delay in removal of full
bobbins
Poor work attitude N low motivation of operators
poor teamwork
Shortage of same color
Material Empty bobbins not ready Y
bobbins
Empty bobbins not ready on
supply container
Empty bobbin mix up Y No order of keeping bobbin

Order not followed

Delay in winding off yarn at

Lack of empty bobbins N
the autoconer
Damage of bobbins
No proper coordination of
Management Poor supervision of doffers N
teams
doffers left to work on their
own
Lack of standard doffing
Y No doffing procedure
procedure
procedure not followed
Lack of monitoring of
Y Stoppages not recorded
stoppages
Stoppages not monitored
Count change for new order
Measurement N
done within doffing stoppage

Speed adjustment done within

N
doffing stoppage

Uncondusive work
Enviroment 82 N Excessive fibre fly waste
environment
Lack of concentration due to
prolonged exposure to high
noise level
 Failure of Humidification
N High RH
Plant
Rise in end breakage
Automatic stoppage of RF at Bobbin get filled up to the
Machine Y Y
full doff target yarn production
the ring frame automatically
Y
turns off
Replacement of broken
Replacement of machine parts N N
spindle drive tapes
Ring traveller and draft
N
roller apron replacemt
Manual doffing of the Ring Slow process of the manual
Y Y
Frame doffing
manual re-inspection of
spindles

83
 Appendix 6: Response to questionnaire

Part C Part D Part E Part F Part G

Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4 Q1 Q2 Q3 Q4
1 5.0 5.0 4 5 4.0 5.0 5 5 5.0 5.0 5 4 1.0 5.0 5 4 1.0 4.0 5 4
2 5.0 5.0 5 4 5.0 4.0 5 4 5.0 5.0 5 4 1.0 5.0 5 1 4.0 4.0 5 4
3 5.0 5.0 5 5 5.0 4.0 5 5 4.0 5.0 5 5 1.0 4.0 5 4 4.0 5.0 4 4
4 5.0 5.0 5 5 2.0 4.0 5 5 5.0 5.0 5 3 1.0 5.0 5 1 4.0 4.0 5 5
5 5.0 5.0 4 4 4.0 5.0 4 4 5.0 5.0 4 4 2.0 4.0 4 3 3.0 4.0 5 5
6 5.0 5.0 5 4 4.0 4.0 5 4 4.0 4.0 5 4 1.0 4.0 5 4 4.0 4.0 5 3
7 4.0 5.0 5 5 4.0 4.0 5 5 5.0 5.0 5 5 1.0 5.0 5 2 3.0 3.0 5 5
8 5.0 5.0 5 5 5.0 4.0 5 5 5.0 5.0 5 4 1.0 4.0 5 3 4.0 4.0 4 5
9 5.0 5.0 4 5 5.0 5.0 5 5 5.0 5.0 5 4 1.0 4.0 5 1 4.0 4.0 5 5
10 5.0 5.0 5 4 3.0 5.0 5 4 3.0 5.0 5 4 1.0 5.0 5 4 4.0 5.0 5 4
11 4.0 4.0 5 5 2.0 4.0 5 5 5.0 5.0 5 3 1.0 4.0 5 3 4.0 4.0 3 3
12 5.0 5.0 5 5 4.0 5.0 5 4 5.0 5.0 5 4 1.0 5.0 5 4 4.0 5.0 5 4
13 5.0 5.0 4 5 4.0 4.0 4 5 5.0 4.0 5 3 1.0 4.0 5 3 2.0 3.0 5 3
14 5.0 5.0 5 4 2.0 3.0 5 5 4.0 5.0 5 5 3.0 4.0 5 4 3.0 4.0 5 4
15 5.0 5.0 5 4 5.0 4.0 5 4 5.0 5.0 5 4 2.0 5.0 5 2 4.0 5.0 4 3
N 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15
Mean 4.9 4.9 4.7 4.6 3.9 4.3 4.9 4.6 4.7 4.9 4.9 4.0 1.3 4.5 4.9 2.9 3.5 4.1 4.7 4.1
Variance 0.12 0.07 0.21 0.26 1.27 0.35 0.12 0.26 0.38 0.12 0.07 0.43 0.35 0.27 0.07 1.41 0.84 0.41 0.38 0.64
SD 0.35 0.26 0.46 0.51 1.13 0.59 0.35 0.51 0.62 0.35 0.26 0.65 0.59 0.52 0.26 1.19 0.92 0.64 0.62 0.80
SEM
(standard
error of the
mean) 0.09 0.07 0.12 0.13 0.29 0.15 0.09 0.13 0.16 0.09 0.07 0.17 0.15 0.13 0.07 0.31 0.24 0.17 0.16 0.21

84
85
86