An unexpected error occurred: 
      

Tracking elusive OEE in pharmaceutical packaging

Pharmaceutical manufacturers lag behind food and other industries when it comes to overall equipment effectiveness on their packaging lines.

Pw 5301 Oee Chart1

Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) is a road map of sorts that can steer a company’s production processes (including packaging) to greater efficiency and profitability. Yet in most North American plants, OEE averages 40% to 50% (out of a possible 100%), with “pharmaceutical firms lucky to be half that, if measured properly.”

That was the opinion shared by Paul Zepf during his presentation, “How Pharmaceutical Packaging Lines Can Increase Profitability: The Importance of OEE,” at the third Pharmaceutical Packaging Forum (PPF, www.packworld.com/ppf) held in April in Philadelphia. Zepf, M. Eng., P. Eng., CPP at Zarpac, Inc. (www.zarpac.com), has more than 36 years of packaging production experience around the globe.

Zarpac is an Oakville, Ontario, Canada-based international production, engineering, and consulting firm that works on systems integration, line design and installation, and training, with considerable experience in pharmaceutical plants. Zepf, a co-founder of the company, teamed up with Summit, publishers of Packaging World and Healthcare Packaging magazines, to conduct a series of Packaging Line Performance Workshops around the U.S. in 2008.

He says production inconsistencies exist worldwide, and North America is not immune to them. “The concern,” he said, “is that we need to produce the highest-quality products at the lowest price when needed, but when I go into production facilities, I see we habitually produce questionable products of dubious quality at the highest price whenever we can get it done, and that’s unfortunate.”

Food and Drug Administration guidelines require that product manufacturers not only validate their production and packaging processes, but demonstrate control and consistency. Yet Zepf consistently sees inconsistencies in many facilities that not only reduce efficiency and productivity, but are not consistent with current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMPs).

Said Zepf, “You could probably go back 50 years and have said the same thing. The lack of understanding of how we make our profits is truer today than yesterday. Many people have no idea what’s happening in their production systems. The value and timing of information from the line’s performance three months ago, for example, may give you some historical perspective, but it’s no good in the sense that you don’t make money looking at data. You make money by making and selling products, and you need to follow cGMPs.”

Another problem identified by Zepf at the PPF: “The production personnel lack direction, support, discipline, authority, and accountability. And because a lot of us older guys are now retiring, there’s sort of a vacuum where everybody’s learning again by mistakes. So there is very little mentoring left and few skilled people to pass along the information. They lack the tools and skills to affect positive change and operations in a timely manner. There are lots of tools out there and many different ways of looking at production systems, yet most people don’t even know that they even exist, let alone how to use them.”

Determining OEE

Zepf explained that for the OEE “tool” to serve as the roadmap to “tell you how to achieve your goals, there needs to be a top-down cultural change; you need a holistic approach. In practice, if you don’t do that, it causes a lot of problems. That’s why there are a lot of failures in lean manufacturing or Six Sigma approaches.

“Nowadays, when I go into a plant, most people cannot explain their process. OEE sort of forces you into that holistic process,” he said.

Zepf related one instance where a plant employee told him the plant was operating at 148% efficiency. “As an engineer, you have to say well, wait a minute. It’s impossible to get more than 100 percent.”

Just determining OEE is a complex process. Zepf noted, “OEE is known, but is widely misunderstood and often used incorrectly. Most people base OEE on machine availability, but it’s also tied into the cost of quality. That phrase, cost of quality, goes back to the 1920s and was developed during World War II. Of course, after the war, we threw it all out. The United States sent it all to Japan, and now it’s come back to haunt you. So OEE is just an overall picture-window-view of the cost of quality.”

He says, “A Google search for OEE will give you a definition about availability times performance times quality, which is nice, but it doesn’t really help that much in packaging. OEE looks at anything to do with that operation, including sanitization, lunches, breaks, start-ups, and meetings, all of which are part of the operative mode of that system or line. When you do that, it presents a little bit different picture of your performance. It looks at actual speed versus what speed it could run at. You can determine quality output versus scrap and determine the cost of quality. OEE lets you break your process down mathematically.”

Factoring speed, scrap, and ramping rates

Speed and scrap are related in that the number of products produced per minute on each of the machines on the line varies. Scrap losses have to be added in, as well as buffers. Understanding the process will dictate whether buffers are required or not. Buffers, when applied and designed correctly, modulate the output of the line and maximize uptime by keeping machines running by covering the Mean Time To Repair (MTTR) of the critical machine(s). “In my workshops, I’m always recommending that companies first fix up and maximize existing lines before they invest in another line. That way, they can put all the good habits developed on their older lines and apply them to the new line to get what they want designed into that new line.”

        An unexpected error occurred: