3P Process: Background and notes……..

Production Preparation Process (3P)

Introduction

Lean experts typically view 3P as one of the most powerful and transformative advanced
manufacturing tools, and it is typically only used by organizations that have experience
implementing other lean methods. Whereas kaizen and other lean methods take a production
process as a given and seek to make improvements, the Production Preparation Process
(3P) focuses on eliminating waste through product and process design.

3P seeks to meet customer requirements by starting with a clean product development slate
to rapidly create and test potential product and process designs that require the least time,
material, and capital resources. This method typically involves a diverse group of individuals
in a multi-day creative process to identify several alternative ways to meet the customer's
needs using different product or process designs. 3P typically results in products that are less
complex, easier to manufacture (often referred to as "design for manufacturability"), and
easier to use and maintain. 3P can also design production processes that eliminate multiple
process steps and that utilize homemade, right-sized equipment that better meet production
needs.

Ultimately, 3P methods represent a dramatic shift from the continuous, incremental

improvement of existing processes sought with kaizen events. Instead, 3P offers potential to
make "quantum leap" design improvements that can improve performance and eliminate
waste to a level beyond that which can be achieved through the continual improvement of
existing processes.

Method and Implementation Approach

With 3P, the teams spend several days (with singular focus on the 3P event) working to
develop multiple alternatives for each process step and evaluating each alternative against
manufacturing criteria (e.g., designated takt time) and a preferred cost. The goal is typically to
develop a process or product design that meets customer requirements best in the "least
waste way". The typical steps in a 3P event are described below.

 Define Product or Process Design Objectives/Needs: The team seeks to understand

the core customer needs that need to be met. If a product or product prototype is
available, the project team breaks it down into component parts and raw materials to
assess the function that each plays.
 Diagraming: A fishbone diagram or other type of illustration is created to demonstrate
the flow from raw material to finish product. The project team then analyzes each
branch of the diagram (or each illustration) and brainstorms key words (e.g., roll,
rotate, form, bend) to describe the change (or "transformation") made at each
branch.
  Find and Analyze Examples in Nature: The project team then tries to find examples of
each process keyword in the natural world. For example, forming can be found in
nature when a heavy animal such as an elephant walks on mud, or when water
pressure shapes rocks in a river. Similar examples are grouped and examples that
best exemplify the process key word researched to better understand how the
examples occur in nature. Here, team members place heavy emphasis on how
nature works in the example and why. Once the unique qualities of the natural
process are dissected, team members then discuss how the natural process can be
applied to the given manufacturing process step.
 Sketch and Evaluate the Process: Sub-teams are formed and each sub-tea member
is required to draw different ways to accomplish the process in question. Each of the
sketches is evaluated and the best is chosen (along with any good features from the
sketches that are not chosen) for a mock-up.
 Build, Present, and Select Process Prototypes: The team prototypes and then
evaluates the chosen process, spending several days (if necessary) working with
different variations of the mock-up to ensure it will meet criteria.
 Hold Design Review: Once a concept has been selected for additional refinement, it
is presented to a larger group (including the original product designers) for feedback.
 Develop Project Implementation plan: If the project is selected to proceed, the team
selects a project implementation leader who helps determine the schedule, process,
resource requirements, and distribution of responsibilities for completion.

Implications for Environmental Performance

Potential Benefits:
3P has many similarities to Design for Environment methods, in that both focus on
eliminating waste at the product and process design stage. These techniques can
have a profound impact of environmental quality by avoiding design approaches that
produce detrimental environmental impacts. 3P looks to nature for design models,
where processes are inherently waste free.
3P often results in right-sized equipment that lowers the material and energy
requirements for production. Right-sized equipment also takes up less space,
reducing the environmental impacts associated with that space (e.g., heating, cooling,
lighting, cleaning and maintenance materials, building materials, land use).
3P's focus on reducing the complexity of the production process ("design for
manufacturability") can eliminate process steps or substitute one process step or
another that requires less time, materials, or capital. In many cases, environmentally
sensitive processes are targeted for elimination, since they are often time consuming,
resource intensive, and capital intensive. Examples include:
1. elimination of painting steps by reducing product flaws or using alternative
processes such as colored injection molding, and
2. substituting hot melt, gun-applied adhesives or mechanical fasteners for
spray adhesives that produce air emissions and hazardous waste.

3P encourages product designs that are less complex. This often translates into using
fewer parts and fewer types of materials. Such designs are typically improve the ease
of disassembly and recycling for products, characteristics that are encouraged by
public environmental agencies.
Potential Shortcoming:
Failure to consider risk and pollution associated with process or product design can
result in options that have larger environmental impacts than could otherwise have
been achieved.
Failure to incorporate environmental considerations and goals into a 3P process can
potentially result in the disregard of valuable pollution prevention and sustainability
options.
Superfactory - 3P Production Preparation Process - Summary and Resources

Lean experts typically view 3P as one of the most powerful and transformative advanced
manufacturing tools, and it is typically only used by organizations that have experience
implementing other lean methods. Whereas kaizen and other lean methods take a production
process as a given and seek to make improvements, the Production Preparation Process
(3P) focuses on eliminating waste through product and process design.

3P seeks to meet customer requirements by starting with a clean product development slate
to rapidly create and test potential product and process designs that require the least time,
material, and capital resources. This method typically involves a diverse group of individuals
in a multi-day creative process to identify several alternative ways to meet the customer's
needs using different product or process designs. 3P typically results in products that are less
complex, easier to manufacture (often referred to as "design for manufacturability"), and
easier to use and maintain. 3P can also design production processes that eliminate multiple
process steps and that utilize homemade, right-sized equipment that better meet production
needs.

Ultimately, 3P methods represent a dramatic shift from the continuous, incremental

improvement of existing processes sought with kaizen events. Instead, 3P offers potential to
make "quantum leap" design improvements that can improve performance and eliminate
waste to a level beyond that which can be achieved through the continual improvement of
existing processes.

With 3P, the teams spend several days (with singular focus on the 3P event) working to
develop multiple alternatives for each process step and evaluating each alternative against
manufacturing criteria (e.g., designated takt time) and a preferred cost. The goal is typically to
develop a process or product design that meets customer requirements best in the "least
waste way". The typical steps in a 3P event are described below.

* Define Product or Process Design Objectives/Needs: The team seeks to understand the
core customer needs that need to be met. If a product or product prototype is available, the
project team breaks it down into component parts and raw materials to assess the function
that each plays.

* Diagraming: A fishbone diagram or other type of illustration is created to demonstrate the

flow from raw material to finish product. The project team then analyzes each branch of the
diagram (or each illustration) and brainstorms key words (e.g., roll, rotate, form, bend) to
describe the change (or "transformation") made at each branch.

* Find and Analyze Examples in Nature: The project team then tries to find examples of each
process keyword in the natural world. For example, forming can be found in nature when a
heavy animal such as an elephant walks on mud, or when water pressure shapes rocks in a
river. Similar examples are grouped and examples that best exemplify the process key word
researched to better understand how the examples occur in nature.

Here, team members place heavy emphasis on how nature works in the example and why.
Once the unique qualities of the natural process are dissected, team members then discuss
how the natural process can be applied to the given manufacturing process step.

* Sketch and Evaluate the Process: Sub-teams are formed and each sub-tea member is
required to draw different ways to accomplish the process in question. Each of the sketches is
evaluated and the best is chosen (along with any good features from the sketches that are not
chosen) for a mock-up.
* Build, Present, and Select Process Prototypes: The team prototypes and then evaluates the
chosen process, spending several days (if necessary) working with different variations of the
mock-up to ensure it will meet criteria.

* Hold Design Review: Once a concept has been selected for additional refinement, it is
presented to a larger group (including the original product designers) for feedback.

* Develop Project Implementation plan: If the project is selected to proceed, the team selects
a project implementation leader who helps determine the schedule, process, resource
requirements, and distribution of responsibilities for completion.
3P Process Helps Engineers Design Better Parts - 2004-03-15 00:00:00 | Design News

Robert Spiegel -- Design News, March 14, 2004

Engineers at Leupold and Stevens (http://rbi.ims.ca/3846-511), a company that produces

scopes and binoculars in Beaverton, OR, needed to find a way to slip a lens into a housing
quickly without risking misalignment. With the help of management consulting firm, Emerge
Business Strategies (http://rbi.ims.ca/3846-512) of Gig Harbor, WA, the engineers used 3P
principles to find a lens that fit quickly and accurately into the housing.

Emerge engineers worked with Leupold and Stevens manufacturing managers in order to
design the part they needed. "We designed a lens that could be built fast without mistakes,"
explains Larry Godt, a consultant with Emerge Business Strategies. The design engineers
created an asymmetrical lens that could only go into the housing in one way, thus reducing
the risk of mistakes. The part was designed by engineers working in tandem with
manufacturing, a team approach that's a hallmark of 3P.

The three Ps stand for production, preparation and process. They're related to product
engineering and manufacturing process design. In 3P these elements of product development
are merged. Design engineers within a manufacturing team employ a lean product
development process.

The roots of 3P go back to the Toyota production system of the mid-1980s. "3P was
developed by Sensei Nakao, who worked for the consulting company Shingijutsu in Japan,"
explains Godt. Shingijutsu designed Toyota's groundbreaking production system which
became the quality standard in the automotive industry. "3P uses the principles of lean
manufacturing. It can be used when there is design change, a new product launch, or a
significant change in the production rate," says Godt.

But even before Toyota gained recognition for its high-quality production, the principles of 3P
were apparent in the Japanese kaikaku experience of teamwork and quality control. This
developed after World War II, when Japanese design and manufacturing professionals
rejected Ford's classic linear product design and development in favor of cross-discipline
teams.

The Japanese admired Ford's war-based system of producing "a bomber an hour," but they
wanted a system that tied product design and manufacturing together in a manner more
compatible with Japanese culture.

They also viewed Ford's organizational hierarchy as demeaning. Oddly, though, there was an
Iowan behind the Japanese teamwork twist on Ford's production. Edwards Deming, who
assisted post-war Japan's industrial development, pushed the quality control ideals that are
associated with the 3P teamwork concept.

3P reaches the U.S.

Although Toyota's production was admired in the U.S., the 3P principles behind it have only
slowly emerged in U.S. design and manufacturing. 3P has mostly appeared in industries other
than automotive. "I learned it by using it to design new products in the aeronautics and
electronics industry," adds Godt. He notes that 3P diverges from traditional design and
manufacturing in that individuals from the disciplines involved in creating and manufacturing a
product work together as a team.

"3P is different in that it's a team environment," says Godt. "People from manufacturing,
engineering, and maintenance all participate, rather than just the engineer by himself." Godt
notes that in the past the disciplines did their work independently. "Traditional design is
sequential. We get the design right, and then throw it over the fence to someone who has to
figure out how to make it," notes Godt.

As well as gathering different professionals together as a team, 3P is also associated with

lean manufacturing. U.S. companies have turned to the 3P teamwork structure mostly to cut
down on the costs of creating and producing products. "In 3P, you work with the product and
the process, and you bring in lean principles right from the beginning," says Godt. He notes
that the increasing emphasis on lean manufacturing is driving the adoption of 3P. "It's a trend.
The market is driving for higher success rates," notes Godt. "Traditional methods are falling
short."

Brad Trago, director of engineering for Danaher Motion (http://rbi.ims.ca/3846-513), agrees

that 3P has become associated with cost savings, as well as faster product development. "3P
is a disciplined, methodical procedure that facilitates the rapid evaluation of ideas for product
design and manufacturing processes," he says. Danaher recently adopted the 3P process to
design and manufacture its new line of AKM high-performance servo motors.

Design by prototype

Part of the 3P team process of designing the product while also developing the manufacturing
process involves hands-on experimentation with prototypes, a method called "trystorming,"
The trystorming aspect of 3P involves using trial designs to see how well they solve product
and process challenges.

"Trystorming," like it sounds, is a hands-on extension of traditional brainstorming.

"Trystorming takes brainstorming one step further in that an idea is mocked-up quickly so that
it can be evaluated physically," says Danaher's Trago.

Trystorming also differs from traditional brainstorming in that it includes a cross-discipline

team that works out design flaws and experiments with the prototype from both design and
manufacturing points of view. "3P actually allows you to try a solution out rather than just
throwing up a drawing," explains Dave Sonsteng, manufacturing engineering manager at
Leupold Stevens. "We say, 'Let's make it. Let's see what it would look like in boxes. Let's
mimic a drill or holding device.'"

Godt notes that the growing adoption of 3P has prompted some expected resistance from
engineers and managers accustomed to traditional engineering methods. "Invariably there is
resistance from some team members, but that all gets worked out," says Godt.

He notes that first adopters tend to be small companies. "I learned 3P while working with
small companies," says Godt. "They adopt it almost by default, since they don't have large
departments with big budgets and lots of time."

3p principles

 Voice of the customer establishes product design and quality requirements

 Quality is built into the process
 Production system designed to meet demand, lead-time, and cost targets
 Principles of the Toyota production system are the foundation
 Simultaneous product/process development
How to Use 3P to Work Out Process Design Alternatives
By Jon Miller - October 25, 2006 10:18 PM
Apoorva from India asks, "Generally how many alternatives are worked out in 3P?"
Production Preparation Process, or 3P as it is known, is the name used to describe the
American consulting market's understanding of the Shingijutsu consulting company's
understanding of the Toyota Motor Corporation's approach to process development and
production preparation. In a previous post we discussed the 16 catch phrases of 3P which are
an embedded thought process for this type of production preparation.

The 3P approach involves identifying "alternatives" or options for performing each

transformational step in a process. It requires thinking of a process such as high speed drilling
as "make hole" so that the essential function performed is the objective, not the current
technology used to make the hole (CNC drill). This is not dissimilar to how VA/VE looks at
processes.
When you are designing equipment, or a production line that is built from a series of
processes and connected equipment, you need to identify alternatives for each step. This can
be tedious. Most engineers who are first faced with 3P balk at this exercise when there is a
catalog full of solutions. Generating seven alternatives can be like pulling teeth. Plenty of
"stupid ideas" are needed. A cross functional team is definitely recommended.

The short answer to Apoorva's question is that you need to come up with seven
alternatives, mock up the top three, and then build the top one selected from evaluation
criteria. Why seven? Because that's what the great Nakao sensei, co-founder and head of
Shingijutsu tells us. Six is too few, eight is too many, perhaps.

After creating a charter for a 3P project to define the scope and desired outcome, a properly
trained production preparation team would use the Process At A Glance to develop seven
alternatives, evaluate the seven alternatives to select top three, sketch out model operations
on Process At A Glance, simulate the three alternatives as and then select top process
design.
The simulation can involve building 3D (three dimensional) mock ups using cardboard, wood,
duct tape, etc. to get as close to the concept as possible, quickly. Once the size, shape and
functions performed are defined actual functioning models can be built and tested. The more
simulation you can do, the closer your models will be to the final item.
The main reasons to start "inside out" from value added transformation or feature creation
("make hole") to the fixture, the controls, the box instead of "outside in" by selecting a
machine out of a catalog is that it helps avoid buying or building machines with lots of
unnecessary accessories.
The idea of 3P is to build bare bones machine with human wisdom and designed for quick
changeovers, pokayoke and one piece flow. This requires thinking through several
alternatives and then asking the questions which direct your thinking towards kaizen. The
following guidelines can be used for evaluating and ranking the alternatives:
Q-1 Pokayoke is built into the process
Q-2 Go/nogo gauging for in-process checks
Q-3 Fewer than 0.03% defects
Q-4 Auto-stop for abnormality (jidoka)
C-1 Low motion waste
C-2 Low capital investment
C-3 Minimal space required
C-4 Known process technology
C-5 Minimal development time required
C-6 Simpler than existing process methods
C-7 Easy autonomous maintenance, or maintenance free
C-8 High ratio of value added time in the process
C-9 Low tooling cost
D-1 Easily scalable up by 400% or down to 25%
D-2 In-house development
D-3 Off-the shelf equipment or components
S-1 Proper guarding and safety devices in place
S-2 Dust, chips, slag, etc. collected by equipment
S-3 High ergonomics evaluation score
S-4 Meets environmental, fire, and health regulations
L-1 Creates one-piece flow
L-2 Meets Takt Time
L-3 Creates a pull system
L-4 Quick changeover
L-5 Operator input
L-6 Chaku-chaku (load load)
L-7 Hanedashi (auto unload)
L-8 Mobile & flexible, on wheels, not roots or vines

That's how to use 3P to work out process design alternatives. Thanks for the question
Production Preparation Process (3P)

3P is about rapidly designing product and production processes to ensure capability, built-in
quality, productivity, and Flow-Takt-Pull. The Production Preparation Process minimizes
resources needed such as capital, tooling, space, inventory, and time. Rather than tweaking
an existing shop floor process, we start with a clean sheet of paper. The 3P process is used
to develop a product line specific production system in the shortest time to satisfy design and
quality requirements, concept to market time goals,production requirements, and cost
requirements.

3P simulates the actual components, product and production line of a new product during the
early stages of the design process to learn about manufacturing or delivery requirements
before making commitments to a floor plan or process flow. The goal is to produce a product
that meets customer demand with perfect quality and at the desired cost. From beginning to
end, 3P is an exercise in project management and waste elimination. 3P is a valuable tool
because the cost of eliminating waste in the earliest stages of product development is less
than during the final stages. The tool is useful and effective when you need to develop a
method to meet customer requirements, plan production capacity for new or changing
demand, transition new products, set a target date for delivering to market or prove the
business-case target cost.  

The 3P cross-functional team should include designers, engineers (i.e., manufacturing, quality
and process), operators, operations experts and anyone else instrumental in bringing the
product to market. Using lean principles, the cross-functional team creates a mock-up of the
product and walks through how the product will flow through the factory. Mock-ups may be
made from cardboard, plastic foam, wood or any other material that makes sense. Multiple 3P
events are usually required throughout the design and development phases of a new product.

Here are the basic steps for 3P:

Process, Product and People: 3P Approach to Quality     
Quality management should be a holistic approach. Process, product and people are the
three key elements of a company’s quality system and all of them need to be focused on for
an overall improvement in performance.
By K. Sundararajan
Quality management should be a holistic approach. Process, product andpeople are the three
key elements of a company’s quality system and all of them need to be focused on for an
overall improvement in performance.
Process
Process audits and statistical process control are two important tools that practitioners can
use for process monitoring. Audits are good tools for monitoring a system and following up
with corrective actions in deficient areas. The ISO 9000 quality management audit and the
ISO 22000 food safety audits are beneficial tools; however, these audits are broad based and
may not provide the required depth of sampling for close process monitoring.
A process audit that focuses on the actual company process and covers all areas of a
company’s operations is a better diagnostic tool to assess the health of the company’s
processes. Figure 1 shows a process audit sample from a company that has a large presence
in an emerging market.
Figure 1: Sample of Process Quality Audit Checklist
Ite
Check Sample Remarks
m
Raw materials
Certificate of analysis
  10 Report findings
from the suppliers
30 based on the 5
  Special testing atypical testing  
categories
Raw material rejections Target less than 3
  Monthly data
percentage vs. receipts percent
Packing material
Certificate of analysis
  10 Report findings
from the suppliers
Less than 5
  Testing  
percent deviation
Corrective actions on
     
complaints
Finished goods
  Testing 30 strategic customers Report findings
Less than 5
  Shelf-life issues In compliance
percent deviation
  Customer specifications    
Microtesting
  Methods    
  Equipment validation 5  
  Reagent validity    
  Laboratory validity    
Sensory
Global procedure
  All Compliance
adhereance
Sensory evaluation of
     
room conditions
  Training of new persons    
 By doing audits on a periodic basis, any gaps in the process will be uncovered and
successfully closed to improve the process.
Statistical process control is another useful tool to monitor the performance of a process. With
this method, practitioners plot and study the average values (X) or range (R) values. Stable
processes vary within control limits, which are based on past performance, in a set pattern.
Process variation with respect to the product or service specification is monitored through two
process capability indices, Cp and Cpk.
Cp gives the process variation with respect to the specification limits, which represent the
area of acceptable performance, based on the formula,

For a stable process, Cp is greater than or equal to 2.

Cpk indicates the process variation with respect to control limits as well as the target value,
and is denoted by the formula,

For a stable process, Cpk is greater than or equal to 1.33.

Figures 2 and 3 show the average and range charts with Cp and Cpk values for the salt
content in a product manufactured by the company. The values for both Cp and Cpk are
lower than the target (Table 1), indicating the process needs to be further improved.

Figure 2: Average of Powder Flavor X

Figure 3: Range of Powder Flavor X

Table 1: Process Capability

LSL in theory 12.00
LSL in theory 15.00
Cp 1.40
Cpk 1.24
Product
Of course, monitoring product quality is important, especially when the product is consumed.
A robust system should have product inspection mechanisms to address the following
requirements:
1. The evaluation is completed based on customer and international standards.
2. The customer requirements are constantly monitored and product quality is updated
based on feedback.
3. Customer complaints and nonconformance are addressed in a systematic manner
using Six Sigma to identify root causes and corrective actions.
Companies should engage in revising product specifications on a continual basis based on
customer and market requirements.
Design of experiments (DOE) is a particularly useful tool in improving product quality. The
following example is an illustration of the application of the tool.
Situation: Product A is a food colorant and an additive that the company manufactured by
the controlled heating of a raw food material in the presence of a catalyst. The color of the
product was the key quality parameter and needed to be maintained within a specification
range.
Problem: The main issue was found to be reproduction of the color value. The specification
was 20 to 21 color units. About 20 percent of the batches had either less or more than this
specification. Another batch was made and the two batches were mixed to meet the
specification. This led to delays in production as well as quality costs due to rejections.
Objective of DOE: To vary the two critical input parameters – catalyst quantity and time of
reaction – to arrive at the optimum conditions.
DOE Study: This was a two-factorial experiment with catalyst quantity and time at two levels,
high and low. Four experiments were performed and practitioners studied the output – color
value (Table 2). Practitioners found the product met the target when the catalyst and time
were at the lower levels.
Table 2: Factorial Experiments
Reaction Time Quantity of Catalyst Used Color Value
46 5 kgs 25.7
36 5 kgs 19.4
36 6 kgs 18.9
46 6 kgs 20
People
People are an important part of the quality system. They need to be assessed and trained on
the latest requirements of process and product quality as required by the customers and
market. People alignment and development for job efficiency can be done in a systematic way
through evaluating workers’ skills, training to fill the identified gaps and empowering
employees.
Skills Matrix
Identify the skills required for a job. The skills need to be categorized as technical and
managerial. A matrix can be developed as shown in Figure 4.
Figure 4: Skills Matrix
Employee 1 Employee 1 Employee 2 Employee 2
Competency
Requirement Status Requirement Status
Technical
Basic food
Medium Medium Medium Low
chemistry
Citrix system High Medium High Medium
SAP High Medium High High
Customer
High High Medium Medium
complaints
Micro-testing Medium Medium High High
Analytical
High High High High
testing
ISO system Medium Low Medium Low
HACCP
Medium  Low  Medium Low
principles

Sensory training High High High Medium

Using statistics Medium Low Medium Low

 Allergens Medium Low Medium Medium
Managerial
Time
High High High Medium
management
Subordinate
High Medium N/A N/A
development

Problem solving Medium Medium High Medium

Decision making Medium Medium High High

*Red indicates areas that are in need of improvement

Competency Training
Using the matrix, it is possible to determine what competency training needs to be organized.
It can be done internally or externally and should be a time-bound program. Assessment of
skills should be done on a periodic basis to measure improvement and see if any retraining is
required.
Empowerment
It is important that the people assigned to a job are fully empowered – they must have the
authority to carry out the assigned responsibility.
Using the 3P Approach Successfully
One large manufacturing plant that utilized these principles between 2006 and 2007 was able
to reduce customer rejection rates by more than 40 percent and implement an employee
succession planning process in the quality department.
When properly used, this approach for focusing on the three key areas of quality
management – process, product and people – will help companies move toward Six Sigma
quality with fewer defects and more satisfied customers.
Designing Processes to Fit Lean Manufacturing with the 16 Catch Phrases of 3P
By Jon Miller - May 2, 2006 05:38 PM
My apologies for introducing a new term with out explaining it yesterday. Thanks for asking
Ben. The 16 Catch Phrases of 3P are used as guidelines for designing processes according
to Lean manufacturing principles of JIT (Takt, Flow, Pull) and Jidoka. As a result of a
successful 3P workshop following the 16 Catch Phrases the equipment and production
process you design should take you closer to TPS.
The 16 Catch Phrases are:
1. Production preparation should be lightning fast. Avoid over planning, use what you
have, act now.
2. Build & layout equipment for smooth material flow. Flow like a river, not like a dam.
3. Use additive equipment. Buy many speedboats instead of one tanker.
4. Build equipment that is easy to set up. Design in the separation of internal and external
tasks.
5. Make equipment easy to move. No roots, no vines, no pits. Put wheels on everything.
6. Use multi-purpose equipment. Simple, "just fast enough" machines that perform one
function well.
7. Make operator work stations narrow. Town houses, not ranch houses.
8. Layout equipment for ease of operator movement. Remove obstruction to smooth
human motion.
9. Eliminate wasted machine cycle time. Design out 'air cutting' and minimize machine
movements.
10. Build equipment for small, swift flow lines. Enable Standard Work (Takt, Work
Sequence, SWIP).
11. Use short, vertical flow lines. Vertical = advancing process flow, horizontal = functional.
12. Build equipment for one-piece pull. Machine level. This is probably the most critical
one.
13. Build in quick changeover. Design in SMED at the machine level.
14. Link machines for smooth loading and unloading. Line stops when WIP on the line is
"full work".
15. Use multiple lines & rectified flows. 'Rectified' is an odd term, electrical engineers will
get it.
16. Spiral upwards to jidoka. There are 5 steps to jidoka, which should be pursued a step at
a time.
I may have gotten the sequence wrong. Looking over them again more carefully, I think there
is a more logical sequence for teaching these concepts. Each one of these simple Catch
Phrases is not meant to be self explanatory, but a one-liner to remind you of other fuller Lean
manufacturing disciplines such as SMED and jidoka. This is how you design processes to fit
Lean manufacturing with 3P.
These are a hodgepodge of machine or process-level guidelines and flow or process-level
guidelines. I have seen them written down as 14, 15 or 20 catch phrases. I learned these 16
and they seem to capture the essence of 3P Lean equipment design. If you have found more
elegant ways to phrase these in English, if you disagree with my explanation or numbering,
post a comment orlet me know