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 AlternativesBy Jon Miller - October 25, 2006 10:18 PMApoorva 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 processQ-2 Go/nogo gauging for in-process checksQ-3 Fewer than 0.03% defectsQ-4 Auto-stop for abnormality (jidoka)C-1 Low motion wasteC-2 Low capital investmentC-3 Minimal space requiredC-4 Known process technologyC-5 Minimal development time requiredC-6 Simpler than existing process methodsC-7 Easy autonomous maintenance, or maintenance freeC-8 High ratio of value added time in the processC-9 Low tooling costD-1 Easily scalable up by 400% or down to 25%D-2 In-house developmentD-3 Off-the shelf equipment or componentsS-1 Proper guarding and safety devices in placeS-2 Dust, chips, slag, etc. collected by equipmentS-3 High ergonomics evaluation scoreS-4 Meets environmental, fire, and health regulationsL-1 Creates one-piece flowL-2 Meets Takt TimeL-3 Creates a pull systemL-4 Quick changeoverL-5 Operator inputL-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. SundararajanQuality 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.ProcessProcess 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

Item

Check Sample Remarks

Raw materials

 Certificate of analysis from the suppliers

10 Report findings

  Special testing30 based on the 5 atypical testing categories

 

 Raw material rejections percentage vs. receipts

Monthly dataTarget less than 3 percent

Packing material

 Certificate of analysis from the suppliers

10 Report findings

  Testing  Less than 5 percent deviation

 Corrective actions on complaints

   

Finished goods

  Testing 30 strategic customers Report findings

  Shelf-life issues In complianceLess than 5 percent deviation

  Customer specifications    

Microtesting

  Methods    

  Equipment validation 5  

  Reagent validity    

  Laboratory validity    

Sensory

 Global procedure adhereance

All Compliance

 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

ProductOf 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

PeoplePeople 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

CompetencyEmployee 1 Requirement

Employee 1 Status

Employee 2 Requirement

Employee 2 Status

Technical

Basic food chemistry

Medium Medium Medium Low

Citrix system High Medium High Medium

SAP High Medium High High

Customer complaints

High High Medium Medium

Micro-testing Medium Medium High High

Analytical testing

High High High High

ISO system Medium Low Medium Low

HACCP principles

Medium  Low  Medium Low

Sensory training High High High Medium

Using statistics Medium Low Medium Low

Allergens Medium Low Medium Medium

Managerial

Time management

High High High Medium

Subordinate development

High Medium N/A N/A

Problem solving Medium Medium High Medium

Decision making Medium Medium High High

*Red indicates areas that are in need of improvementCompetency 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 3PBy Jon Miller - May 2, 2006 05:38 PMMy 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