Why ERGO-MTM
Transcription
Why ERGO-MTM
www.pwc.com Integration of MTM and Ergonomics in Industrial Practice 1st International Conference on Ergonomic Assessment in Industrial Practice ERGO-MTM model ERGO-MTM is a Worl Class Manufacturing & Logistics tool PwC Advisory The new way to design efficient and safe processes Why ERGO-MTM Work measurement and task assignment require the use of predetermined time systems and the control of biomechanical load to design and implement efficient and safe working systems Industrial engineers have a huge responsibility when designing and optimizing technological systems We cannot afford to separate process efficiency from ergonomics: it would be too expensive Synergies make the cost of ergo analysis represent only a small percentage of the cost to take care of professional diseases caused by biomechanical overload (absenteeism, low performance, social costs, etc.) ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory 2.12.2011 Slide 3 What is Ergo-MTM Ergo-MTM is a best practice for the calculation of a fair standard time of a manual task It represents the joint application of the most advanced techniques in the fields of predetermined time systems and ergonomic workload calculation • Based on the most widespread work measurement technique (MTM) • Based on a holistic ergonomic assessment method (EAWS) • Integrates work content and ergonomic work load in an engineered way through the Ergo-MTM model for Rest Allowance Calculation • Focused on process design / redesign • Appreciated by the unions ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory 2.12.2011 Slide 4 Work Content and Work Load Definition Ergo-MTM procedure steps Work Content Calc. • Through MTM analysis of manual tasks MTM 1 Ergonomic Risk Def. • Through EAWS risk assessment for the Whole Body & Upper Limbs EAWS 2 Rest Factor Calculation • Through the application of the Ergo-MTM Model ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory Risk Score Ergo – MTM 3 Workload Calc. • For every process flow, calculation of assembly times with respect of ergonomics Basic Times Ergonomic Allowance Ergo – Balancing 4 Standard Times 2.12.2011 Slide 5 Ergo-MTM workflow 4 Standard Time/Takt + work organization Apply Ergo-UAS Model 3 Allowance Time ALLOWANCE FACTOR 60% Ergo Allowance % 55% 50% 52,0% 52,0% 52,0% 52,0% 52,0% 52,0% 52,0% 45,0% 45% 38,5% 40% 35% 32,5% 30% 27,0% 25% EAWS risk score 22,0% 20% 17,5% 13,5% 15% 10,0% 10% 7,0% 4,5% 5% 1,0% 2,5% 0% WP 2 WP 3 WP 4 Basic Time WP 1 1 WP 2 WP 3 MTM analysis of work content ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory WP 4 WORKING METHODS WP 1 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 115 0 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100 105 110 BIOMECHANICAL LOAD EAWS (Ergonomic Analysis Analysis)) 2 EAWS analysis of work load 2.12.2011 Slide 6 What is MTM Methods-Time Measurement MTM is a work design technique which assigns a manual task a normalized time based on a standard level of performance MTM is a set of techniques designed to measure manual work properly in different fields of application (from mass production to job shop) Design or observe the work process Identify the basic motions Determine the influencing factors Manual fastening Get and place screw, search for thread and execute 3 manual screwing motions. Distance < 50 cm Code TMU AF 2 65 ZA1 5 ZB1 10 X 2 TOT 90 Time is based on a norm performance (100 MTM) Basic Time Calculation ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory 2.12.2011 Slide 7 One MTM system for each field of application Method level Work org level Task Mass (MTM-1/MTM-2) Task Batch (UAS UAS) One-of-a-kind (MEK MEK) Task Hedge against method deviations ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory Operator’ s specialization level 2.12.2011 Slide 8 MTM system dissemination UAS is the most used MTM system for direct application Number of MTM certificates issued in the period 2005-2010 NMTMA UK MTM-1 MTM-2 SAM UAS MEK EAWS (fonte IMD Administration) EAWS 1% Total 8 52 0 98 0 0 158 Austria 164 2 0 112 102 0 380 France 257 791 0 190 0 0 1.238 4.223 102 0 3.276 970 32 8.603 Italy 54 51 15 399 30 92 641 South Africa 25 4 0 37 0 0 66 172 500 0 176 25 0 873 Germany Spain Nordic countries 4 2 650 5 0 0 661 17 0 0 71 11 0 99 USA 241 2 0 340 7 0 590 Brasil 200 1 0 270 36 0 507 Czech 349 28 0 241 23 0 641 Poland 310 9 0 175 44 0 538 Serbia 0 0 18 0 0 0 18 6.024 1.544 683 5.390 1.248 124 15.013 Switzerland Total MEK 8% * MTM-1 40% UAS 36% SAM 5% MTM-2 10% * MTM-1 is delivered mainly for training purpose and rarely for direct application • Official MTM systems are owned and controlled by the International MTM Directorate • MTM systems are spread and protected by the National MTM Associations • MTM qualifications and certifications are ruled by the IMD and by the national qualification procedures ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory 2.12.2011 Slide 9 Basic Time is based on a norm performance level The use of a predetermined time system like MTM (Methods-Time Measurement) makes the performance rating unnecessary, eliminating a large degree of subjectivity, since all the basic motions (e.g. reach, grasp, move, etc.) have been measured and are by definition built upon the normal level of performance (named MTM normal performance). From recent studies conducted to develop the ergonomic screening system ‘European Assembly Work-Sheet’ (EAWS), the MTM normal performance results to be in line with the most recent ergonomic standards related to the biomechanical load. ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory MTM BSI BEDAUX 95,2 100,0 105,7 120,5 150,6 79,0 83,0 87,7 100,0 125,0 63,2 66,4 70,2 80,0 100,0 British Standard BS3138 gives a comparison of the BSI scale with the Bedaux Scale which gives BSI = Bedaux x 1.25. Another often quoted figure for the BSI rating scale is that MTM 100 = 83 on the BSI scale. 2.12.2011 Slide 10 MTM norm performance (100) PERFORMANCE RATING Introduction movies for calibration of 100-% MTM performance Film no. 69 9-pictures movie with same operation but different performances 135 128 117 106 100 92 84 75 69 ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory 2.12.2011 Slide 11 Risk analysis Norm MTM performance UAS code: AA2 = 35 TMU = 1,26 s Frequency = 47,6 act/min Duration of rep. tasks = 7,2 hrs (430’) EAWS4 score = 7 ,0* 7,2 = 50 (UL) 0-25 points Green 26-50 points Yellow >50 points Red ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory First Time Right principle: design the work organization and measure the workload in the earliest stages of the process development 2.12.2011 Slide 12 What is EAWS EAWS Ergonomic Assessment Work-Sheet ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory EAWS is a 1st level risk assessment method for biomechanical load It offers compliance with the relevant CEN/ISO standards Structured to exploit at best the information available in the MTM analysis to support cycle description and risk evaluation It’s an holistic system (full coverage of all risk areas) It provides detailed results in 4 sections: • Body Postures • Action Forces • Manual Materials Handling • Upper Limbs 2.12.2011 Slide 13 EAWS and ERGO-MTM – Main European Users Company Tool name Status OPEL/GME Porsche Daimler Bosch Bosch Rexroth Audi Karman Smart MAN FGA IVECO FPT VW Denso T-S Lamborghini Beretta Armi Chrysler VM Motori SEAT NPW DesignCheck EAB BkB, EAWS EAWS APSA AAWS EAWS AAWS Cargo EAWS EAWS EAWS EAWS EAWS EAWS EAWS EAWS EAWS EAWS Implemented in 1997 Implemented in 1998 Implemented in 2000 Implemented in 2005 Implementation in progress (ITA) Implemented in 2006 Implemented in 2007 Implemented in 2008 Development in progress Implemented in 2008 Spain implemented in 2010-11 In progress Implementation in progress Implemented in 2008 Implemented in 2010 Implemented in 2010 Implementation in progress Implementation in progress Implementation in progress ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory ERGO-MTM N N N N N N N N N Y Y Y N N N Y Y Y N 2.12.2011 Slide 14 What is the Ergonomic Allowance Ergonomic Allowance Factor The allowances are thought to compensate for fatigue and delays at work. Industrial Engineering (IE) practice distinguishes between constant and variable allowances: Constant allowance • personal needs (e.g. time for the restroom) • basic fatigue Variable allowance • body postures • Forces • Loads • Repetitive movements of the upper limbs Fatigue allowances have not reached the state where their qualifications are completely based on sound, rational theories. Consequently, next to performance rating, the fatigue allowance is the least defensible and the most open to argument of all the factors making up a time standard. ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory 2.12.2011 Slide 15 ERGO-MTM model to quantify the ergonomic allowance Ergonomic Allowance Factor The Ergo-MTM Allowance is set to assign the proper recovery periods It’s calculated on the basic time It follows an exponential function driven by the Ergonomic Load (EAWS risk score) It’s sized with the objective to assign to red workplaces enough recovery time to exit from the red risk area It links analytically the ergonomic risk with production costs making ergonomic improvement investments easier to justify also from an economical point of view ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory 2.12.2011 Slide 16 ERGO-MTM advantages Link with relevant ISO/CEN standards in measuring the phisical load (mainly CEN 1005 and ISO 11226, 11228) Objective motion identification through the link with the MTM language (easy to identify and count actions) Normalized motion frequency calculation based on MTM basic times (action frequencies are not influenced by the operator actual performance) Data consistency granted by the link with work cycles (if a work method or a piece of equipment is modified, than the workload is automatically updated) Integration of two job profiles (method engineer and ergonomist) into one (ergo-engineer) with ensuing cost savings Focus on work method as a means to improve productivity and ergonomic conditions Easier to justify investems in ergonomic improvement projects, since product cost is linked with the phisical workload level (higher load results in higher fatigue allowance) ERGO-MTM MODEL – G. CARAGNANO PwC Advisory 2.12.2011 Slide 17 The application of ERGO-MTM requires a deep understanding and a structured delivery mode This publication has been prepared for general guidance on matters of interest only, and does not constitute professional advice. You should not act upon the information contained in this publication without obtaining specific professional advice. No representation or warranty (express or implied) is given as to the accuracy or completeness of the information contained in this publication, and, to the extent permitted by law, PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory SpA, its members, employees and agents do not accept or assume any liability, responsibility or duty of care for any consequences of you or anyone else acting, or refraining to act, in reliance on the information contained in this publication or for any decision based on it. © 2011 PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory SpA. All rights reserved. In this document, “PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory SpA which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each member firm of which is a separate legal entity. Gabriele Caragnano Associate Partner Mobile: +393482298333 [email protected] Ivan Lavatelli Director Mobile: +393482298332 [email protected] www.pwc.com/it © 2011 PricewaterhouseCoopers. All rights reserved. In this document, “PwC” refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers Advisory SpA, which is a member firm of PricewaterhouseCoopers International Limited, each member firm of which is a separate legal entity.