The client is a leading LED bulb manufacturer that is also a pioneer in the field. It carries out the manufacturing at a sprawling factory, complete with all the latest equipment. Product-specific operations include machining, die-cutting, PCB-boarding and diode manufacture among others. The company has zero tolerance for equipment downtime.
The tools and processes need to meet most stringent standards and thus need to be periodically serviced and/or replaced. It adopts two types of maintenance, namely, preventive and reactive. Preventive maintenance is where tools are serviced to a point where problems are prevented from occurring. Reactive maintenance is where problems are attended to once they occur. A best practice it follows is that if preventive maintenance is robust, then instances of the latter can be minimized. Thus it lays more emphasis on preventive maintenance.
It predominantly employs two scenarios, namely, run-time and time-based scenarios, as the basis for maintenance. In the former, tools are dismantled and serviced/replaced if they have performed operations for a pre-determined number of hours. In the latter, maintenance is undertaken when tools have performed operations a specific number of times, such as a blade having cut PCB boards a predetermined number of times. The company is very stringent about these parameters lest its productivity might be hugely impacted. Avoiding rework being at the forefront of its vision, its approach to maintenance assumes very great seriousness and diligence.
Software already deployed by the client notwithstanding, the maintenance schedules continued to be a pain point. It could not feed any tangible data to the stakeholders, thus making it impossible to craft an actionable maintenance schedule. As the tools often reside too deep and are far too many, no physical inspection is possible to make for the software’s inadequacy to keep a tab on. An immediate fall-out was that certain tools kept missing the maintenance schedule more frequently than others. It was by sheer chance that production was not impacted due to any mechanical failure.
As the existing software was beset with too many bugs, we decided to completely revamp it. We deployed a two-pronged strategy: to fix all bugs and to enable data exchange between the solution and the software. A preventive solution was incorporated that encompasses the lifecycle of the entire range of tools and reflects the types of maintenance. It monitors tools based either on the date of installation or on its useful service and accordingly determines the frequency or number of operations of tools.
The salient features of our solution include:
1.The software is proofed for obsolescence for the next 5 years, requiring no upgrades whatsoever and guaranteeing stability.
2.Feeds various checklists, such as weekly, monthly or bi-monthly, to the stakeholders concerned.
3.Generates maintenance schedule alerts depending on the periodicity or the lifetime of a tool.
- Because of the superlative monitoring capabilities of our solution, there is zero downtime aligning with the company’s philosophy.
- The company is better equipped to plan and allocate resources more efficiently.
- Production planning has never been more reliable and accurate.