This paper reports the main findings of a questionnaire survey on the use of failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) in the United Kingdom motor industry. Survey data were obtained from 78 organizations. Among the main findings are: the majority of suppliers only started to use FMEA because it was a contractual requirement of their customer; however, a number of them are now seeking to make more use of the technique to facilitate their process of quality improvement; FMEA is treated by the majority of organizations as a team activity; engineers still view FMEA as a hard slog; more use should be made of computerized aids to reduce the effort in preparing and updating the FMEA; and the main difficulties encountered in the use of FMEA are related to time constraints, poor organizational understanding of the importance of FMEA, inadequate training and lack of management commitment. It is also pointed out that organizations are not satisfied with the current training courses on FMEA.

No abstract

The paper reports a study into set-up time reduction and mistake proofing methods in a small company involved in the machining of precision components in small batches with high variety for the aerospace industry. The company has made some set-up reductions mainly using work study related methods and in one manufacturing cell by the use of the Single Minute Exchange of Die (SMED) methodology. Mistake proofing devices in the form of fouling pins and offset holes have been developed for the family of components manufactured in this cell. Until recently the set-up times were not measured and worse still were considered as productive hours. As a consequence, there was a lack of awareness and motivation amongst operational personnel to reduce set-up times and knowledge of SMED was limited to a small group of individuals. This, along with the lack of investment in mechanisms to aid set-up time reductions and prevent errors, has restricted the use of this type of methods and technology. However, there is evidence that the demands made by the company's major customer will lead to increased efforts to put into place these types of changes.

The purpose of the study reported in this paper was to examine how manufacturing organisations used set‐up time reduction and mistake proofing methods. The study was conducted in companies involved in manufacturing precision components. It was found that the companies were approaching the application of these concepts mainly through traditional work‐study type methods rather than using Shingo’s single minute exchange of die and poka‐yoke or mistake proofing methodologies. There was clear evidence that the four companies are reducing set‐up time through supporting mechanisms such as kaizen teams. The main poka‐yoke devices used were jigs, gauges, pegs, lights and buzzers. Total productive maintenance, suggestion schemes and quality management tools and techniques were also employed to reduce set‐up times and mistake proof processes. The main barriers to the application of these methods include traditional methods of working and resistance to change.

No abstract