Overall equipment effectiveness [1] (OEE) is a measure of how well a manufacturing equipment is utilized compared to its full potential, during the periods when it is scheduled to run. It identifies the percentage of manufacturing time that is truly productive as well as the time it is losing effectiveness. An OEE of 100% means that only good parts are produced (100% quality), at the maximum speed (100% performance), and without interruption (100% availability).
Measuring OEE is a manufacturing best practice. By measuring OEE and the underlying losses, important insights can be gained on how to systematically improve the manufacturing process.
Technically, OEE is an effective metric for identifying and visualizing losses, and steering the improvement of the effectiveness of manufacturing equipment by eliminating 'waste'.
Socially, OEE can provide a common language for groups speaking in different 'languages' such as shop floor (units), managers (money) or planners (time).
The term OEE was first mentioned in Seiichi Nakajima's book 'TPM Tenkai' in 1982. OEE was described as a central part of the Total Productive Maintenance methodology. [2] It is based on the Harrington Emerson way of thinking[ citation needed ] regarding labor efficiency.[ citation needed ]
100% OEE is considered to be a theoretical reference point where a machine would be permanenty running, at its theoretical maximal speed, producing only good products. Anything hindering this is considered to be a 'loss'. To gain insight into which losses occur on the equipment and to target the areas that should be improved to increase the value-creating conversion (effectiveness), three questions are asked: [3]
The first question leads to the 'availabilty rate' of the equipment, the second one to the 'performance rate' and the third one to the 'quality rate'.
in this way, a cascade of effectiveness and effectiveness losses arises.
The quality rate refers to a PART of the performance (the part that there was 'speed', the other part is lost in the performance rate). The Performance rate refers to part of the availability (the time there was output - the other part is lost in the availability rate)
The OEE can now be calculated as the product of the three separate components: [4]
Each of the three components of the OEE points to an aspect of the process that can be targeted for improvement. OEE may be applied to any individual equipment or line. This tool also allows for drilling down for very specific analysis, such as a particular Time frame, Shift, Team or any of several other parameters.
Although the performance of a particular product can be determined from OEE data, OEE cannot be calculated for that product because this would require that all downtime (availability losses) should be correlated to specific products.
OEE focusses on the 'if not' in the equations: Where did potential effectiveness got lost? These 'losses' of effectiveness are being subdivided further into what is known as the 'Six Big Losses' [5] to OEE. In order to make this more universally applicable and also to better reflect the financial impact of the losses, the original six big losses were later adjusted slightly. [6]
Availability | Performance | Quality |
---|---|---|
Waiting | Minor Stops | Scrap |
Breakdowns | Reduced Speed | Rework |
The reason for identifying the losses in these categories is so that specific countermeasures can be applied to reduce the loss and improve the overall OEE.
Multiplying the three undeluing grades AxPxQ results in a percentage value that indicates the proportion of the scheduled machine running time during which production actually met the quality criteria. This value is always well below 100%, as 100% is a theoretical value. Even if a system runs continuously at maximum speed without causing a single defect, it will for example still need to be serviced at some point.
OEE is calculated with the formula:
Example: (Availability= 86.6%)*(Performance=93%)*(Quality=91.3%)= (OEE=73.6%)
Alternatively, the OEE as a number could be calculated by dividing the minimum time needed to produce the parts under optimal conditions by the actual time needed to produce the parts.
However, in this way the losses are no longer known, meaning the most important part of OEE is missing.
The value range for OEE is between 0% and 100%. If an effectiveness level of more than 100% is displayed, this indicates an error in the definition.
100% time for OEE is the time when the machine is scheduled to be in operation: This is usually the “shift time.”
The Availability portion of the OEE Metric represents the percentage of scheduled time (also referred to as 'loading time') that the equipment is available to operate.
A given machine is scheduled to run for an 8-hour (480-minute) shift with a 30-minute break, during which the machine is being stopped, and there is a breakdown of 60 minutes.
During the scheduled operating time of 480 minutes, the machine was waiting 30 min. because of the break and 60 minutes because it broke down.
It was actually operating 480 - 30 - 60 = 390 Minutes
Method 1:
Example: Availability = 390 minutes / 480 minutes = 81.25%
Method 2:
Example: Availability = (480 – 90 minutes) / 480 minutes = 81.25%
The performance rate represents the ratio between the theoretical maximum speed of the machine and its actual speed. Performance can only be calculated when there is output; thus during actual running time.
While the actual performance can be measured, it is often difficult in operational practice to obtain the theoretical maximum speed as a reference value. [7] The technical data provided by the machine manufacturer does not usually correspond to the theoretically possible maximum values, e.g. to avoid complaints or for other reasons.
Defining a too low maximum speed will become visible when the performance goes above 100%, which is undesirable. Ultimately, the goal of OEE is to reveal all potential.
It is a good practice to calculate the maximum value based on physical limits, e.g., a calculation of heat transfer, the power of a motor, or the fall speed of a product. If that fails, the concept of “best demonstrated cycle time” has proven itself. This involves determining the production speeds of products from the past and increasing the highest production speed by a margin of 20%. Defining this as 100% performance may lead to a structurally too low OEE, however it will visualize any potential loss on the performance.
The factor 1 (100%) now represents a peak value that is never exceeded, even for a short time. For systems that only manufacture one or a few products, calculating the performance factor is simple. If a large number of different products with different maximum speeds are run on one system (multi-product companies), the effort required to determine the maximum speed can be high and the performance should be calculated correctly using a weighted average.
The Performance is calculated with formula: [8]
A given equipment is scheduled to run for an 8-hour (480-minute) and has 90 min downtime.
Operating Time = 480 Min – 90 Min Downtime = 390 Minutes
The Standard Rate for the part being produced is 40 Units/Hour or 1.5 Minutes/Unit
The equipment produces 242 Total Units during the shift. Note: The basis is Total Units, not Good Units. The Performance metric does not penalizes for Quality.
Time to Produce Parts = 242 Units * 1.5 Minutes/Unit = 363 Minutes
Performance = 363 Minutes / 390 Minutes = 93.1%
The Quality portion of the OEE Metric represents the Good Units produced as a percentage of the Total Units produced. The Quality Metric is a pure measurement of Process Yield that is designed to exclude the effects of Availability and Performance. The losses due to defects and rework are called quality losses.
Calculation: The Quality is calculated with the formula: [9]
Example:
242 Units are produced. 21 are defective.
(242 units produced - 21 defective units) = 221 units
221 good units / 242 total units produced = 91.32%
The calculations of OEE may not seem to be particularly complicated, but care must be taken as to standards that are used as the basis. In order to visualize all losses, it is crucial to use the right 'configuration' of the metric.
Definitions — for parts — of the OEE can be found in ISO 22400-2:2014. [10] and VDI 3423:2011-08 (2011) [11] These definitions are not standardized for all industries and are individually tailored to the respective company in its application.
This to OEE dedicated standard aims for the visualisation of all effectiveness losses on any manufacturing equipment, being unabigiously clear to production personnel. The standard uses the same logic and uniform terminology for any type of equipment. [12]
In order to calculate OEE, operational data needs to be acquired from the production process. [13] This needs to reflect 'what happened' on one hand, and 'what did not happen' (the losses) on the other hand. When this data is not present to the level required to make a meaningful OEE calculation, roughly two strategies can be followed:
Depending on the systems or products, it can be difficult to collect the basic data required to determine the key figure. Many companies therefore rely on special software for data collection.
Although manual recording by the operator can be considered to be time-consuming and inaccurate, it has some significant advantages
The goal of TPM (Total Productive Maintenance) as set out by Seiichi Nakajima, is "The continuous improvement of OEE by engaging all those that impact on it in small group activities". To achieve this, the TPM toolbox sets out a Focused improvement tactic to reduce each of the six types of OEE loss. For example, the Focused improvement tactic to systematically reduce breakdown risk sets out how to improve asset condition and standardise working methods to reduce human error and accelerated wear. Zero Failure Management [14] provides a profound structure to achieve this.
Combining OEE with Focused improvement converts OEE from a lagging to a leading indicator. [15] [16]
The first Focused improvement stage of OEE improvement is to achieve a stable OEE. One which varies at around 5% from the mean for a representative production sample. The asset is stable and not impacted by variability in equipment wear rates and working methods.
The second stage of OEE improvement (optimisation) can be carried out to remove chronic losses. Combining OEE and TPM Focused improvement tactics creates a leading indicator that can be used to guide performance management priorities.
As the TPM process delivers these gains through small cross functional improvement teams, the process of OEE improvement raises front line team engagement/problem ownership, collaboration and skill levels.
It is this combination of OEE as a KPI, TPM Focused improvement tactics and front line team engagement that locks in the gains and delivers the TPM goal of year on year improvement in OEE.
Zero Failure Management [17] offers a profound structure to achieve this.
OEE measurement is also commonly used as a key performance indicator (KPI) in conjunction with lean manufacturing efforts. To achieve te main goal of Lean, creating flow, individual pieces of equipment need to be fully reliable and in tune.
Total effective equipment performance(TEEP) is a closely to OEE related measure. TEEP quantifies OEE against calendar hours rather than only against scheduled operating hours. A TEEP of 100% means that the operations have run with an OEE of 100% 24 hours a day and 365 days a year (100% loading). [18]
TEEP, therefore, reports the 'bottom line' effectiveness of manufacturing equipment.
To calculate the Total Effective Equipment Performance(TEEP), the OEE is multiplied by a fourth component: Loading.
The Loading rate of the TEEP Metric represents the percentage of time that the equipment is scheduled to operate compared to the total Calendar Time that is available. The Loading Metric is a pure measurement of Schedule effectiveness and is designed to exclude the effects how well that equipment may perform.
Example:
A given equipment is scheduled to run 5 Days per Week, 24 Hours per Day.
For a given week, the Total Calendar Time is 7 Days at 24 Hours.
Loading = (5 days x 24 hours) / (7 days x 24 hours) = 71.4%
Where TEEP includes ALL time (so also time the machine was never scheduled to run), OOE includes time that initially had been scheduled, but where the equipment was un-scheduled later on; usually for reasons outside the span of control of the shop floor team:
Where in OEE availabilty is calculated based on the scheduled (shift) time, in OOE the availability is calculated based on the scheduled PLUS the un-sheduled time (not to be confused with the NOT scheduled time as in TEEP)
Availability in OOE:
The advantage of OEE lies in the transparency of the value added share and the associated losses of the equipment.
The term "Overall Equipment Efficiency” is often wrongly used as a synonym for "Overall Equipment Effectiveness”. Measures that increase production output but incur disproportionately high costs may well be effective, but at the same time they may be inefficient and therefore economically unviable and thus unproductive.
To assume that 85% OEE is a “world Class” target value is in many cases incorrect:
Often, insufficient quality is not detected at the equipment that caused it. In this case, it has proven effective to apply the “discovery principle,”[ citation needed ] i.e., to apply an OEE reduction to the equipment where the error was discovered. This removes the OEE from being purely equipment-related and turns it into a process indicator.
However, the OEE of a piece of equipment can of course also be optimized by making improvements to other equipment. The OEE should also be a key figure that is as up-to-date as possible. In this respect, the OK quantity should be determined at the latest at the end of the shift and the OEE calculated.
From the perspective of Process Control, the question rises how an operator can be responsible for manufacturing correct products if he cannot see whether the products are correct. To highlight this problem, it is worth considering blocked products as a quality issue: after all, they were not right the first time around.
Valuable activities such as setup or maintenance will also reduce overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) at the beginning. If setup activities reduce overall equipment effectiveness, there is an incentive to reduce setup times using SMED (Single Minute Exchange of Die). On the other hand, this also means that OEE can be increased by reducing the number of changeovers, i.e. by increasing batch sizes. This would contradict the principles of lean production. This highlights the importance of a clear explanation of OEE: the goal is not to be as high as possible, but to identify obstacles and then eliminate them.
A convention must be agreed within the company to define when downtime occurs. Recording and justifying every second of equipment downtime is too time-consuming for most companies. In practice, a recording limit of 1 to 5 minutes of equipment downtime has proven to be a pragmatic approach. All downtimes of less than one minute are therefore included in the performance rate.
The collected data must be processed in order to obtain meaningful information. This information is aimed at various target groups, such as.
Meaningful analyses prove to be the key to good decisions. Theoretically, this is only possible with very precise figures. In practice, it has been shown that correctly selected data has a greater effect in this respect than high precision.
Although tempting, OEE (as a number) is NOT suitable for comparing machines or benchmarking.
Consider this situation:
Are they the same?
For similar reasons, OEE may not be applied to aggregate to Department or Plant levels.
Where multiple machines are linked together, each individual piece of equipment will display the waiting categories “No Input” (Starved) and “No output” (Blocked) in addition to the standard standstill reasons. This allows upstream or downstream faults in production equipment to be identified.
Without profound knowledge of manufacturing environments and certainly while lacking insight and understanding of the underlying data that lead to a specific OEE number, the number as such is of little to no value.
OEE cannot be used to measure employee performance. It is used to identify and measure equipment losses, which can then be eliminated through appropriate root cause analysis and measures.
Using OEE as a heuristic is not recommended.