【正文】 em, anization, procedures, etc. ? Incentive system for idea generation and implementation ? Actions required BS/020313/SHMISC(2020) 20 TOP APPROACH FOR MAINTENANCE WITH FOCUS ON LINE 3 Costs Quality Time/service ? Higher reliability of the equipment (less downtime/repairs) ? Maintenance strategies tailored to the individual equipment (balance planned/unplanned) ? Breakdown/repair rootcause analysis Equipment strategy/technical improvements ? Balance between centralized and decentralized functions ? Interface with production Organizational structure ? Planning and scheduling ? System support (MLS) ? Inventory management Organizational procedures ? Reduced direct maintenance cost ? Increased uptime/higher productivity of the equipment ? Better product quality ? Less yield loss/ scrap produced/rework Levers Objectives Source: McKinsey analysis BS/020313/SHMISC(2020) 21 SUMMARY OF MAINTENANCE CONTRIBUTION TO CLOSING THE GAP IN LINE 3 Won Billions LINE 3 Source: Interview。Key messages and summary of improvement potential 182。 McKinsey analysis BS/020313/SHMISC(2020) 13 BENCHMARKING WORK IN PROCESS AND FINISHED PRODUCTS INVENTORY LINE 3 Work in process Percent Company A Average player Benchmark Interest cost savings* on less required capital by closing 50% of the gap Impact Finished products Percent Company A Average player Benchmark Interest cost savings* on less required capital by closing 50% of the gap `97 `98 34% 80% 14% +100% ? Better forecasting system ? Realtime scheduling adjustment ? Interchangeable bloom and beamblank specifications Improvement ideas Closing the gap between the pany and worldclass practice by reducing the WIP and finished goods inventory level can significantly reduce the capital cost. * Assuming 15% capital cost Source: McKinsey analysis BS/020313/SHMISC(2020) 14 BENCHMARKING OVERALL EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY – STEELMAKING, 1998 Percent * Calendar time holidays market driven stops Source: McKinsey analysis Company A World class Savings potential Fixed cost savings at a 3% reduction of production related downtime (100% of the gap) LINE 3 Plant opening time* Available operating time Production time Maintenance External waiting Production related stoppage ? Tundish changes ? Tapping hole clogging TIME/SERVICE Operationrelated downtime has led to 7% less production time pared with worldclass practice in steelmaking (4% related to maintenance, 3% related to production). Closing the gap will result in fixed cost reductions, provided that plant opening time is reduced and capacity utilization is increased. BS/020313/SHMISC(2020) 15 OVERALL EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY OF STEELMAKING Hours, 1998 Planned Unplanned LINE 3 Calendar year Holiday shutdown Marketdriven shutdown Plant opening time Maintenance Mechanical maintenance Electri cal mainte nance Available operating time Mold change Tundish change Electrode change Other changes Operations related stoppage Production time Downtime for “external” reasons Downtime for “internal” reasons Unplanned maintenance and operational stoppage accounted for 35% of the downtime and have major improvement opportunities. Eliminating operationsrelated stoppage can reduce the internal downtime by 53% Source: McKinsey analysis BS/020313/SHMISC(2020) 16 CAUSES FOR OPERATIONSRELATED STOPPAGES IN STEELMAKING Hours, 1998 LINE 3 Tapping hole clogging Charging delay Electrode break Roof shooter clogging Other* LF/VD stoppage CCM bottleneck Ladle gas bubbling clogging Tundish nozzle clogging Other* Total operations related stops EAF CCM * Equipment malfunction related Source: McKinsey analysis ? Use new gate opening system ? Periodic check of tapping hole size ? Increase the speed of casting train ? Optimize metal casting temperature Debottlenecking of CCM and improving EAF tapping system can largely eliminate operational related stoppage in steelmaking. BS/020313/SHMISC(2020) 17 Plant opening time* Available operating time Production time BENCHMARKING OVERALL EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY – HEAVYSECTION MILL Percent, 1998 * Calendar time holidays market driven stops Source: McKinsey analysis Company A World class Maintenance External waiting LINE 3 Production driven stops ? Changeovers ? Mill adjustment Savings potential Fixed cost savings and variable cost savings at 9% reductions of production related downtime (50% of the gap) Item Improvement ideas ? Operational error ? Roll change ? Roll break ? Operator training program on beam handling for the intermediate stand ? Review roll change procedures and optimize the time required ? Establish roll quality monitoring systems Excessive operationrelated downtime in HSM has caused a production time much lower than worldclass practice (20%). Significant cost savings can be captured by reducing the downtime. BS/020313/SHMISC(2020) 18 COST SAVINGS POTENTIAL THROUGH QUALITY IMPROVEMENT Yield loss 1998 Reduced rework Reduced amount of scrapped product Target yield loss Improvement ideas ? Equipment reliability ? Operation training for more accurate adjustment ? Better operating procedures ? Reduce rework rate through better process control system Item ? Cobble caused scrap ? Head amp。Next steps ? Proposed approach for next phases of the project – TOP waves and breakthrough – Institutionalization: KPI system, anization, procedures, etc. ? Incentive system for idea generation and implemen