Lean evaluation method of cutting process and related product

Abstract

The invention relates to the technical field of cutting procedures, in particular to a lean evaluation method of a cutting procedure and a related product. According to the method, the cutting procedures of the manufacturing department and the cutting spans are subjected to lean evaluation from the dimensions of multiple indexes, so that the evaluation is more comprehensive, the excellent cutting spans can be rewarded according to the evaluation, a forward incentive mechanism is formed, and the cutting efficiency and the product quality are promoted to be improved. Meanwhile, the evaluation of the cutting process is divided into two rounds, the first round firstly determines the two manufacturing departments before scoring, the second round determines the cutting span with the highest score in the two manufacturing departments before scoring, and the relative fairness of the two levels of scores of the manufacturing departments and the cutting span can be fully guaranteed.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention relates to the technical field of cutting processes, and in particular to a lean evaluation method for cutting processes and related products. Background Technology

[0002] The raw material for shipbuilding is typically steel. Shipyards purchase whole steel plates, but actual shipbuilding products are assembled from parts of different sizes and shapes welded together. Therefore, steel plates undergo pre-processing upon arrival at the shipyard, followed by cutting in the cutting area. There, the whole steel plates are cut into parts of different sizes and shapes, and then beveling is done according to welding requirements. Cutting is the first step in ship section manufacturing, and the quality of the parts produced during this process is fundamental to the overall quality of the ship section. The efficiency of the cutting process directly impacts the efficiency of section manufacturing.

[0003] Previously, the shipbuilding industry was an extensive industry with little lean management of the cutting process. In addition, the evaluation indicators for the cutting process were also quite subjective, with only single evaluations of material quantity, on-time performance, equipment failure rate, and staff attendance. There was a lack of consideration for other indicators of the cutting process and the influencing factors between the indicators, making it impossible to effectively control the cutting process comprehensively, resulting in low cutting efficiency and product quality. Summary of the Invention

[0004] In view of the shortcomings of the prior art described above, the purpose of this invention is to provide a lean evaluation method and related products for the cutting process. By conducting a lean evaluation of the cutting process, the evaluation becomes more comprehensive, and excellent cutting sections can be rewarded based on the evaluation, forming a positive incentive mechanism to promote the improvement of cutting efficiency and product quality.

[0005] To achieve the above and other related objectives, the present invention provides a lean evaluation method for a cutting process, the evaluation method comprising:

[0006] Establish a lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the manufacturing department, which includes scoring each manufacturing department based on three indicators: production, lean management, and quality.

[0007] Calculate the total score of each indicator for each manufacturing department and determine the top two manufacturing departments by score;

[0008] Establish a lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the cutting span, including scoring each process in the cutting span from key indicators, general positive indicators, and general negative indicators;

[0009] Calculate the total score of each indicator for each process in each cutting bay, and determine the highest-scoring cutting bay among the top two manufacturing departments.

[0010] Optionally, each manufacturing department can be scored based on production and manufacturing indicators, including scoring the monthly completed quantity indicator and the monthly on-time plan rate indicator separately, and summing them to obtain the production and manufacturing indicator score.

[0011] The weighting of the monthly completed work volume index and the monthly on-time performance index is the same.

[0012] Optionally, each manufacturing department can be scored based on lean management indicators, including the number of daily clearing meetings, the number of abnormal records, the improvement proposals and implementation indicators, the visual management board indicators, and the monthly theme work evaluation indicators, and the scores can be summed to obtain the lean management indicator scores.

[0013] The weight of each indicator in the score is determined based on the importance of indicators such as the number of daily clearing meetings, the number of abnormal records, the improvement proposals and their implementation, the visual dashboard indicators, and the monthly theme work evaluation indicators.

[0014] Optionally, each manufacturing department can be scored based on quality indicators, including scores for outgoing defect indicators and in-process defect indicators, and the scores can be summed to obtain the quality indicator scores.

[0015] The weighting of outflow defect indicators and self-process defect indicators is the same.

[0016] Optionally, the various processes involved in cutting the span include marking, numerical cutting, gate cutting, and beveling;

[0017] Key indicators include two parameters: quantity and availability. Generally positive indicators include two parameters: on-time performance and staff attendance. Generally negative indicators include three parameters: outflow defect index, self-process defect index, and equipment failure rate.

[0018] Among them, the beveling process has no moving rate and equipment failure rate, while the marking, CNC cutting and gate cutting processes have all parameters.

[0019] Optionally, a lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the cutting bay can be established, which also includes scoring each process in the cutting bay based on basic management indicators.

[0020] Optionally, the lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the manufacturing department and the lean evaluation system for the cutting process between cutting spans shall determine the weight of each indicator score according to the importance of each indicator.

[0021] In another aspect, the present invention provides a machine-readable storage medium having a machine-executable program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, implements the lean evaluation method for any of the cutting processes described above.

[0022] In another aspect, the present invention provides a computer device including a memory, a processor, and a machine-executable program stored in the memory and running on the processor, wherein the processor, when executing the machine-executable program, implements the lean evaluation method for any of the cutting processes described above.

[0023] In a lean evaluation method for cutting processes according to the present invention, the cutting processes of both the manufacturing department and the cutting bay are evaluated from multiple dimensions, making the evaluation more comprehensive. This allows for rewards to be given to outstanding cutting bays based on the evaluation, forming a positive incentive mechanism to promote improvements in cutting efficiency and product quality. Furthermore, the evaluation of the cutting processes is divided into two rounds. The first round identifies the top two manufacturing departments, and the second round identifies the highest-scoring cutting bay from among the top two manufacturing departments. This ensures relative fairness in the evaluation between the manufacturing department and the cutting bay levels. Attached Figure Description

[0024] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of a lean evaluation method for a cutting process according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0025] Figure 2 This is a schematic diagram of a machine-readable storage medium according to an embodiment of the present invention;

[0026] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of a computer device according to an embodiment of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0027] The following reference Figures 1 to 3 This invention describes a lean evaluation method for a cutting process and related products.

[0028] like Figure 1 As shown, this embodiment of the invention provides a lean evaluation method for a cutting process, the evaluation method including:

[0029] Step S1: Establish a lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the manufacturing department, which includes scoring each manufacturing department based on three indicators: production, lean management, and quality.

[0030] Step S2: Calculate the total score of each indicator for each manufacturing department and determine the top two manufacturing departments.

[0031] Step S3: Establish a lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the cutting span, including scoring each process in the cutting span based on key indicators, general positive indicators, and general negative indicators.

[0032] Step S4: Calculate the total score of each indicator for each process in each cutting bay, and determine the cutting bay with the highest score among the top two manufacturing departments.

[0033] By conducting lean evaluations of the cutting processes in both the manufacturing department and the cutting bay across multiple metrics, the evaluation becomes more comprehensive. This allows for rewarding outstanding cutting bays based on the evaluation results, creating a positive incentive mechanism to drive improvements in cutting efficiency and product quality. Furthermore, the evaluation of the cutting processes is conducted in two rounds. The first round identifies the top two manufacturing departments, and the second round selects the highest-scoring cutting bay from among those top two departments. This ensures relative fairness in the evaluation process at both the manufacturing department and cutting bay levels.

[0034] It should be noted that shipyards typically have multiple manufacturing departments, each with multiple cutting areas, and each cutting area is called a cutting bay.

[0035] Furthermore, the lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the manufacturing department determines the weight of each indicator's score based on the relative importance of each indicator. With a maximum score of 100, production and manufacturing indicators account for 20 points, lean management indicators account for 70 points, and quality evaluation indicators account for 10 points.

[0036] Furthermore, each manufacturing department is scored based on production and manufacturing indicators, including scores for the monthly completed material quantity indicator and the monthly on-time performance rate indicator, which are then summed to obtain the overall production and manufacturing indicator score. Since material quantity and planning are equally important, the scores for the monthly completed material quantity indicator and the monthly on-time performance rate indicator are weighted equally.

[0037] Specifically, the monthly completed work volume index and the monthly on-time performance index each account for half of the total production and manufacturing score of 20 points, which is 10 points.

[0038] Furthermore, scoring the monthly completed work volume indicator involves adding the following two values: (monthly completed work volume / monthly target work volume × 5) and (monthly completed work volume / previous month's completed work volume × 5) to obtain the score for the monthly completed work volume indicator. If the sum of the two scores exceeds 10 points, it is also calculated as 10 points. Similarly, scoring the monthly on-time performance rate indicator involves adding the following two values: (monthly on-time performance rate / monthly target × 5) and (monthly on-time performance rate / previous month's on-time performance rate × 5) to obtain the score for the monthly on-time performance rate indicator. Likewise, if the sum of the two scores exceeds 10 points, it is also calculated as 10 points.

[0039] Furthermore, lean management indicators were used to score each manufacturing department, including scores for the number of daily review meetings, the number of anomaly records, the number of improvement proposals and their implementation, visual management boards, and monthly thematic work evaluations. These scores were then summed to obtain the lean management indicator score. By consistently holding daily review meetings, daily work was effectively streamlined, and cutting operations were carried out in an orderly manner. Anomaly records enabled timely detection and resolution of anomalies, improving production efficiency. The implementation of company-wide improvement proposals significantly optimized process technology and improved product quality. By identifying outgoing defects and defects within the process itself, the causes of defects were identified, defective situations were improved, and the generation of defective products was avoided or reduced, thereby promoting product quality improvement and strengthening process technology innovation.

[0040] In addition, the weight of each indicator in the score should be determined based on the importance of indicators such as the number of daily clearing meetings, the number of abnormal records, the improvement proposals and implementation indicators, the visual dashboard indicators, and the monthly theme work evaluation indicators.

[0041] Specifically, when the total score for lean management indicators is 70 points, the number of daily clearing meetings accounts for 10 points, the number of abnormal records accounts for 10 points, the improvement proposals and implementation accounts for 25 points, the visual board indicator accounts for 5 points, and the monthly theme work evaluation indicator accounts for 20 points.

[0042] Furthermore, when scoring the daily clearing meeting frequency indicator, the 10 points are divided into 5 levels, each level worth 2 points. Scoring is based on the number of daily clearing meetings: 0-4 meetings = 2 points; 5-9 meetings = 4 points; 10-13 meetings = 6 points; 14-17 meetings = 8 points; 18 meetings and above = 10 points. Additionally, the number of working days per month is denoted as n. When the number of working days is ≥18, the scoring follows the same rules. When n < 18, n is subtracted from the number of meetings in each level.

[0043] The scoring method for the abnormal record frequency index is: number of records in the current month / (number of records in the previous month × 80%) × 10. If the score is greater than or equal to 10, it will be scored as 10 points.

[0044] The improvement proposal and implementation indicators consist of two parts: improvement proposals and improvement implementation. Improvement proposals account for 5 points, and improvement implementation accounts for 20 points. When scoring improvement proposals, considering the different number of cutting bays in each manufacturing department, a coefficient, denoted by the letter 'c', is added to ensure fairness. Taking three manufacturing departments as an example, if the number of cutting bays in Manufacturing Department 1 is n1, in Manufacturing Department 2 it is n2, and in Manufacturing Department 3 it is n3, where n1>n2>n3, then the coefficients for Manufacturing Department 1 are c1=n3 / n1, c2=n3 / n2, and c3=1. In this case, the score for an improvement proposal = number of proposals × coefficient c. Improvement implementation is evaluated based on the importance of the submitted improvement reports, generally 3 points per item, and 5 points per item for important items. In this case, the score for improvement implementation = improvement score × coefficient c, where coefficient c is the same as above.

[0045] Visual dashboard indicators are scored based on the frequency of weekly updates: 3 points for once a week, 4 points for twice a week, and 5 points for three times a week. The monthly score is the average of the weekly scores.

[0046] When scoring the monthly theme work evaluation indicators, the following scores apply: 3 points for the release of key work projects, 5 points for the release of work ideas, 7 points for the release of plans or schemes, 10 points for implementation and progress with some results, 14 points for completion but late completion, 18 points for on-time completion, and 20 points for outstanding performance. If the manufacturing department has no theme work for the month, the score for the monthly theme work evaluation indicators = average score of theme work in other manufacturing departments × lean management score rate of the manufacturing department - 2. Wherein, the lean management score rate of the manufacturing department = actual score of other lean management indicators of the manufacturing department / total score of all lean management indicators of the manufacturing department.

[0047] Taking three manufacturing departments as an example, if Manufacturing Department 1 has no themed work in a given month, then the score for the themed work evaluation indicators of Manufacturing Department 1 in that month is the average score of the themed work of Manufacturing Departments 2 and 3 × the lean management score rate of Manufacturing Department 1 - 2. The lean management score rate of Manufacturing Department 1 is the sum of the actual scores of the four indicators: the number of daily review meetings, the number of anomaly records, the improvement proposals and implementation, and the visual management board indicators, divided by the total score of all lean management indicators for Manufacturing Department 1, which is 70 points.

[0048] Furthermore, each manufacturing department is scored based on quality indicators, including scores for outgoing defect indicators and in-process defect indicators, and these scores are summed to obtain the overall quality indicator score. Since outgoing defect indicators and in-process defect indicators are equally important, they are given the same weight in the scoring, each accounting for half of the total quality score of 10 points, or 5 points.

[0049] Furthermore, the score for the outflow defect indicator = outflow defect target / outflow defect actual × 5, and the score for the self-process defect indicator = self-process defect target / self-process defect actual × 5. Here, the outflow defect target and outflow defect actual, as well as the self-process defect target and self-process defect actual, are all taken as the average of the cut-off spans.

[0050] Furthermore, establishing a lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the cutting bay also includes scoring each process in the cutting bay based on basic management indicators. These basic management indicators include one or more of the following: hygiene and quality management indicators, improvement proposal and implementation indicators, and visual management board indicators.

[0051] Furthermore, the various processes involved in cutting the span include marking, numerical cutting, gate cutting, and beveling. Key performance indicators (KPIs) include two parameters: quantity and availability. Let A, A1, and A2 represent the monthly target values ​​for KPIs, quantity, and availability, respectively, and let a, a1, and a2 represent the monthly actual values ​​for KPIs, quantity, and availability, respectively. General positive indicators include two parameters: on-time performance and attendance rate. Let B, B1, and B2 represent the monthly target values ​​for general positive indicators, on-time performance, and attendance rate, respectively, and let b, b1, and b2 represent the monthly actual values ​​for general positive indicators, on-time performance, and attendance rate, respectively. The general reverse indicators include three parameters: outflow defect index, self-process defect index, and equipment failure rate. C, C1, C2, and C3 represent the monthly target values ​​for these three indicators, respectively, while c, c1, c2, and c3 represent the monthly actual values ​​for the same indicators. Since the beveling process is semi-automatic, there are no automaticity rates or equipment failure rates for this process. All parameters are available for the marking, numerical cutting, and gate cutting processes.

[0052] Specifically, the maximum score for each process in the cutting span is 100 points. When scoring the marking, numerical cutting, and gate cutting processes, key indicator A accounts for 30 points, general positive indicator B accounts for 16 points, general negative indicator C accounts for 24 points, and basic management indicators account for 30 points. When scoring the beveling process, key indicator A accounts for 30 points, general positive indicator B accounts for 20 points, general negative indicator C accounts for 20 points, and basic management indicators account for 30 points.

[0053] Furthermore, the scoring method for the marking, numerical cutting, and gate cutting processes is (a1 / A1+a2 / A2)×15+(b1 / B1+b2 / B2)×8+(C1 / c1+C2 / c2+C3 / c3)×8+basic management score. The scoring method for the beveling process is (a1 / A1)×30+(b1 / B1+b2 / B2)×10+(C1 / c1+C2 / c2)×10+basic management score. Generally, the value of each fraction is less than 1; if it is greater than or equal to 1, it is also calculated as 1.

[0054] refer to Figure 2 The present invention also provides a machine-readable storage medium 400 on which a machine-executable program 410 is stored. When the machine-executable program 410 is executed by a processor, it implements the lean evaluation method for the cutting process in the above embodiments.

[0055] refer to Figure 3 The present invention also provides a computer device 500, including a memory 520, a processor 510, and a machine-executable program 410 stored in the memory and running on the processor. When the processor 510 executes the machine-executable program 410, it implements the lean evaluation method for the cutting process in the above embodiments.

[0056] For the purposes of this embodiment, the machine-readable storage medium 400 can be any means capable of containing, storing, communicating, propagating, or transmitting a program for use by or in conjunction with an instruction execution system, apparatus, or device. More specific examples (a non-exhaustive list) of the machine-readable storage medium 400 include: an electrical connection (electronic device) having one or more wires, a portable computer disk drive (magnetic device), random access memory (RAM), read-only memory (ROM), erasable and editable read-only memory (EPROM or flash memory), fiber optic devices, and portable optical disc read-only memory (CDROM). Furthermore, the machine-readable storage medium 400 can even be paper or other suitable media on which the program can be printed, since the program can be obtained electronically, for example, by optically scanning the paper or other medium, followed by editing, interpreting, or otherwise processing as necessary, and then stored in a computer memory.

[0057] It should be understood that various parts of the present invention can be implemented using hardware, software, firmware, or a combination thereof. In the above embodiments, multiple steps or methods can be implemented using software or firmware stored in memory and executed by a suitable instruction execution system.

[0058] Computer device 500 can be, for example, a server, desktop computer, laptop computer, tablet computer, or smartphone. In some examples, computer device 500 can be a cloud computing node. Computer device 500 can be described in the general context of computer system executable instructions (such as program modules) executed by a computer system. Typically, program modules can include routines, programs, object programs, components, logic, data structures, etc., that perform specific tasks or implement specific abstract data types. Computer device 500 can be implemented in a distributed cloud computing environment where tasks are performed by remote processing devices linked via a communication network. In a distributed cloud computing environment, program modules can reside on local or remote computing system storage media, including storage devices.

[0059] Computer device 500 may include a processor 510 adapted to execute stored instructions and a memory 520 that provides temporary storage space for the operation of said instructions during operation. The processor 510 may be a single-core processor, a multi-core processor, a computing cluster, or any other configuration. The memory 520 may include random access memory (RAM), read-only memory, flash memory, or any other suitable storage system.

[0060] The processor 510 can be connected via a system interconnect (e.g., PCI, PCI-Express, etc.) to an I / O interface (input / output interface) suitable for connecting the computer device 500 to one or more I / O devices (input / output devices). I / O devices may include, for example, a keyboard and indicating devices, where indicating devices may include a touchpad or touchscreen, etc. I / O devices may be built into the computer device 500 or may be external devices connected to the computing device.

[0061] The processor 510 can also be linked via a system interconnect to a display interface suitable for connecting the computer device 500 to a display device. The display device may include a display screen as a built-in component of the computer device 500. The display device may also include an external computer monitor, television, or projector connected to the computer device 500. Furthermore, a network interface controller (NIC) may be adapted to connect the computer device 500 to a network via a system interconnect. In some embodiments, the NIC may use any suitable interface or protocol (such as an Internet Minicomputer System Interface) to transmit data. The network may be a cellular network, a radio network, a wide area network (WAN), a local area network (LAN), or the Internet, etc. Remote devices can connect to the computing device via the network.

[0062] The above embodiments are merely illustrative of the principles and effects of the present invention and are not intended to limit the invention. Any person skilled in the art can modify or alter the above embodiments without departing from the spirit and scope of the present invention. Therefore, all equivalent modifications or alterations made by those skilled in the art without departing from the spirit and technical concept disclosed in the present invention should still be covered by the claims of the present invention.

Claims

1. A lean evaluation method for a cutting process, characterized in that, The evaluation methods include: Establish a lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the manufacturing department, which includes scoring each manufacturing department based on three indicators: production, lean management, and quality. Calculate the total score of each indicator for each manufacturing department and determine the top two manufacturing departments by score; Establish a lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the cutting span, including scoring each process in the cutting span from key indicators, general positive indicators, and general negative indicators; Calculate the total score of each indicator for each process in each cutting bay, and determine the highest-scoring cutting bay among the top two manufacturing departments.

2. The lean evaluation method for the cutting process according to claim 1, characterized in that, Each manufacturing department is scored based on its production and manufacturing indicators, including scoring the monthly completed material quantity indicator and the monthly on-time plan rate indicator, and then summing them to obtain the production and manufacturing indicator score. The weighting of the monthly completed work volume index and the monthly on-time performance index is the same.

3. The lean evaluation method for the cutting process according to claim 1, characterized in that, Each manufacturing department is scored using lean management indicators, including the number of daily clearing meetings, the number of anomaly records, the improvement proposals and their implementation, the visual management board indicators, and the monthly theme work evaluation indicators. The scores are then summed to obtain the lean management indicator scores. The weight of each indicator in the score is determined based on the importance of indicators such as the number of daily clearing meetings, the number of abnormal records, the improvement proposals and their implementation, the visual dashboard indicators, and the monthly theme work evaluation indicators.

4. The lean evaluation method for the cutting process according to claim 1, characterized in that, Each manufacturing department is scored based on quality indicators, including outgoing defect indicators and in-process defect indicators, and the scores are summed to obtain the quality indicator score. The weighting of outflow defect indicators and self-process defect indicators is the same.

5. The lean evaluation method for the cutting process according to claim 1, characterized in that, The various processes involved in cutting the span include marking, numerical cutting, gate cutting, and beveling; Key indicators include two parameters: quantity and availability. Generally positive indicators include two parameters: on-time performance and staff attendance. Generally negative indicators include three parameters: outflow defect index, self-process defect index, and equipment failure rate. Among them, the beveling process has no moving rate and equipment failure rate, while the marking, CNC cutting and gate cutting processes have all parameters.

6. The lean evaluation method for the cutting process according to claim 1, characterized in that, Establishing a lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the cutting bay also includes scoring each process in the cutting bay based on basic management indicators.

7. The lean evaluation method for the cutting process according to claim 6, characterized in that, The lean evaluation system for the cutting process in the manufacturing department and the lean evaluation system for the cutting process across the cutting span determine the weight of each indicator score according to the importance of their respective indicators.

8. A machine-readable storage medium, characterized in that, It stores a machine-executable program, which, when executed by a processor, implements the lean evaluation method for the cutting process as described in any one of claims 1-7.

9. A computer device, characterized in that, It includes a memory, a processor, and a machine-executable program stored on the memory and running on the processor, wherein the processor, when executing the machine-executable program, implements the lean evaluation method for the cutting process according to any one of claims 1-7.

Images