Page 84 - TPM A Route to World-Class Performance
P. 84

Techniques to deliver the TPM principles  65


             There are difficulties in implementing TPM in every country, including
           Japan. As this is the country with the most experience, the TPM implementation
           process is at its most mature in Japan. Naturally, this is an evolving situation
           as more non-Japanese companies  achieve 'world-class'  TPM  applications.
           The three-cycle TPM improvement plan was developed to deal with the need
           to:
                progressively build management commitment and consensus based on
                results;
             0  build on existing good working practices;
             0  produce rapid results;
                get buy-in to new ideas across international boundaries.

             Within  the  rigour  of  the  three-cycle, nine-step  process, it  provides  the
           flexibility to build on strengths and reduce weaknesses. In this way, it builds
           on the principles rather than diluting their undoubted synergy.
             Let us now take a closer look at each of the five Nakajima TPM principles,
           together with the measurement, condition and problem prevention  of  the
           TPM improvement plan (Figure 4.1).



           4.1  First principle: Continuous

                 improvement in OEE
           Figure 4.4 illustrates how the OEE links to the six losses. This demonstrates
           that central to the philosophy of  TPM is the identification of  reasons for the
           causes and effects of  the six losses, such that their elimination is bound to
           lead to an improvement in the OEE. An example from the offshore oil industry
           shown in Figure 4.5 illustrates that poor  asset care can lead to inadequate



                   Availability   x   Performance   x   Quality
                      rate            rate              rate











                    ,7  -/                        ---7




           Figure 4.4 Factors in overall equipment effectiveness
   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89