Kobetsu Kaizen Losses Analysis to Enhance the Overall Plant Effectiveness in Steel Manufacturing Industry–A Case Study at JSPL, Raigarh

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395-0056
Volume: 04 Issue: 12 | Dec-2017 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2017, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 6.171 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 245
Kobetsu Kaizen Losses Analysis to Enhance the Overall Plant
Effectiveness in Steel Manufacturing Industry–A Case Study at JSPL,
Raigarh
Dr. Manish Raj1, Shubham Swaroop2, Saureng Kumar2, Raj Bhushan1, Vikalp Kumar1,
M G Borkar1
1 Department of TS-TQM, Jindal Steel & Power Ltd.,Raigarh, India
2 M.Tech Scholar, Department of Management Studies (Industrial Engg. & Management), Indian Institute of
Technology (I.S.M.), Dhanbad, India
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) is a tool
that increases the efficiency and effectiveness ofequipment. In
8 pillars of TPM, Kobetsu Kaizen play a vital role to sustain in
present market scenario for an organization. Kobetsu Kaizen
pillar is not a simply analysis and indicates the effectiveness
of an equipment. Rather, it is a tactical tool to increase
availability, performance rate and the quality rate, through
kaizen perform by the plants. Overall Plant Effectiveness
(OPE), a plant performanceevaluationormeasurementtool, is
introduced by analysis of 16 types of Kobetsu Kaizen losses. By
implementing TPM, companies may use it as a Panacea for
their continual improvement. In this study it is concluded and
emphasized that the why-why analysis and kaizen perform by
the plant reduce Kobetsu Kaizen losses and increase the trend
of OPE, which ultimately helps to create a profitableculturein
an organization.
Key Words: Total Productive Maintenance (TPM),
Overall Plant Effectiveness (OPE), Continual
Improvement, Why Why analysis, Kaizen, Kobetsu
Kaizen Losses.
1. INTRODUCTION
Total Productive maintenance (TPM) is a maintenance
concept which not only reduces various losses (like,
downtime, speed loss etc.) but also provides a healthy and
safe working conditions for employees. TPM is a
maintenance practice which aims atestablishinga corporate
culture to maximize production, system effectiveness and
reduces chronic losses to zero by involvement of all
employees and practicing Genba-Genbutsu. It suggests that
in order to truly understand a situation, one need to go to
Genba i.e., the Place, where work is being done, to prevent
losses and achieve such “Reduction-to-zero”targetsas“Zero
accidents”, “Zero defects” and “Zero breakdowns” in the
entire production system life-cycle through Kaizen.
Kaizen is a combination of two words as KAI (change) and
ZEN (for the better). However, the concept of Continuous
improvement needs to be updated with continual
improvement. Competition and never-ending demand of
customer’s requirement for satisfaction raised the bar for
manufacturing organizations. Continuous improvement
implies that organisations are in a consistent condition of
driving process upgrades. This includes an emphasis on
direct and incremental change inside existing procedures. A
continual improvement implies that organisations
experience process enhancements instagesandthesestages
are isolated by a timeframe. This timeframe may be
important to comprehend if the enhancements did really
help all that really matters! Now and again, the outcomes
may require a significant stretch of time to work out as
intended.
Overall Plant Effectiveness (OPE) is performance indicator
which can be used to analyse the progressoreffectiveness of
a Plant’s all equipments. The improvement of OPE can be
ensured by minimizing Sixteen Kobetsu Kaizen (KK) losses
which are directly or indirectly responsible for availability,
performance rate, as well as quality rate of equipments.
The JSPL, Raigarh plant, with up to 3.6 million tonnes per
annum (MTPA) steel production capacity, is the world’s
largest coal-based sponge iron manufacturing facility with
state-of-the-art machinery. The company is recognised as a
leader in manufacturing coal-based sponge iron in India.
First commissioned in 1991, JSPL leads the Indian market in
this sector and has the world’s largest coal-based sponge
iron plant, with a capacity of producing 1.32 MTPA DRI. It is
the only sponge iron manufacturer in the country with
captive raw material resourcesandpowergeneration.Direct
Reduced Iron (DRI) plant - 4 units of 0.72 MTPA capacity
producing 500 tonnes/day and 6 units of 0.6 MTPA capacity
producing 300 tonnes/day rotary kilns. At present most of
the departments of this organization which is under study
having already achieved the international standard
benchmark OPE of 85 %. TPM has a standard of 90%
availability, 95% performance rate and 99% of quality rate.
The Organization has about 34 different departments which
include both Service and manufacturing Departments. At
present, 32 departments have already implemented TPM
practices while implementation of TPM in other two
departments is in progress. Since, some departments of the
organization are present where TPM is not fully
implemented. Amongst them DRI Plant is selected for the
study and complete TPM implementation. Various tools of
TPM are used to analyse and monitor the progress of
implementation of maintenance practices.

2. LITERATURE REVIEW
According to Chaneski [1], TPM is a maintenance program
with the objective of eliminating equipment downtime.TPM
implementation is a major departure from the “you operate,
I maintain” philosophy to “I operate and maintain”
philosophy. TPM has been accepted as the most promising
strategy for improving maintenanceperformanceinorder to
succeed in a highly demanding market arena [2]. TPM is a
unique Japanese system of plant management, developed
from preventive maintenance concept. This approach
emphasizes the role of team work,small groupactivities,and
the participation of all employees to accomplish equipment
improvement objectives [3]. It challenges a sense of joint
responsibility between operatorsandmaintenanceworkers,
not only to keep the machines running smoothly, but also to
extend and optimize their overall performance [4] TPM is
intended to bring both functions (production and
maintenance) together by a combination of good working
practices, team working and continuous improvement [5].
Marquise and Gupta [6] have said that TPM can help the
maintenance department to improve its system by using
continuous improvement. According to Simoes et al. [7],
continuous improvement is playing a vital role to examine
the modern maintenance activities systematically. Many
organizations have used continuous improvement as a
driver to optimize maintenance performance and improve
competitive position [8]. Manufacturing organizations are
considering maintenance functions, as a strategic issue for a
reliable production system in this competitive environment
[9]. The author(Wakjira and Singh [10]) evaluate the
contributions of total productive maintenance (TPM) in the
process industry it is very much essential to maximize the
production effectiveness and the effectiveness of a
production depends on the effectiveness with which it uses
equipment, materials, people and methods. The wastes
generated due to the failure shutdown of facilities which
cause waste such as defective products should be absolutely
eliminated and reduce huge investment required for
maintenance. Focused improvement or Kobetsu Kaizen is
characterized by a drive for zero losses meaning continuous
improvement effort to eliminate losses [11]. TPM has a
standard of 90 per cent availability, 95percentperformance
efficiency and with 99 per cent rate of quality. An overall 85
per cent benchmark OEE is considered as world-class
performance [12]. The concept of Kaizen is always trying to
improve manufacturingprocesscontinuouslybyactivelyand
repeatedly participation.Shingeo[13]hasconcludedthat the
Kaizen for manufacturing process has become necessary to
satisfy both external and internal customers. Kaizen is
playing a vital role in this competitive era for achieving
manufacturing excellence[14].Manufacturingorganizations
are widely used Kaizen concept for improving quality,
reliability, reducing prices and lead time.
3. METHODOLOGY
For the case study purpose, DRI (Direct Reduced Iron), a
production plant is selected. The objectives of this study
were:
1. To reduce 16 Kobetsu Kaizen losses in the DRI
department
2. To find out the root cause of the above losses
3. To improve the OPE by eliminating above root causes, if
any
The above objectives of the plant need to be fulfilled. The
below flowchart Fig-1 shows the overall methodology
adopted for study.
Fig -1: Methodology
4. EIGHT TPM PILLARS
Through TPM plants adopta milieu which increases
reliability in safety, quality, cost, delivery, and creativity are
encouraged through the involvement of all employees. The
eight pillars of TPM are as follows:
Pillar-1: Jishu Hozen (Autonomous Maintenance)
The meaning of pillar is Maintenance by Operators.
Maintenance is not the job to be undertaken by personnel
not directly linked by those personnel who know maximum
about machines or equipments and without any doubtthese
personnel are not QualifiedEngineersorExperiencedFitters
but the Operators, who are with machines day in and day
out. The aim of this pillar is to avoid forced deterioration of
equipment just by maintaining basic conditions of
equipments i.e. Cleaning, Lubrication,Inspection,Tightening
(CLIT) & maintaining operating condition of equipments.
Pillar-2: Kobetsu Kaizen (Focused Improvement)
Japanese word for Focused Improvement i.e., prioritizing
most important losses and eliminate them. These are
individual improvement and focusesonLosses,Reduction of
quality defects, Cost, Inventory, Accident etc. The aim of this
pillar is to maximize overall plant effectiveness, process
improvement and plant by eliminating 16 types of Kobetsu
Kaizen losses.
Pillar-3: Planned Maintenance
Planned maintenance has to focus on preventive action to
eliminate equipment failure / breakdown in order to ensure
availability and reliability of equipment.Theobjectiveofthis

pillar is to increase equipment reliability and production up
time and minimizemaintenancecostbyreducingbreakdown
and development of efficient maintenance monitoring
method like MTBF, MTTR etc.
Pillar-4: Quality Maintenance
This pillar states need of making machine incapable of
producing defective product. The pillar necessitates putting
a control on all condition contributing in generation of
defect. Pillar provides guideline to identify those quality
components and control strategies. The aim of this pillar is
to achieve zero Defects.
Pillar-5: Initial flow Control
Concept of this Pillar is that equipment designing should be
reflected with problems or experiences on the same or
similar equipment installed in the plant to have an initial
control. At the same time concept of Life Cycle Costing (i.e.
L.C.C.) should be the base at the time of designing new
equipment instead of “Cheaper the better”. The aim of this
pillar is Maintenance, Prevention & Designing of equipment
which is easy to operate, easy to maintain, safe and of high
precision.
Pillar-6: Office TPM
The production Plant is required to accomplish a plant
constitution to produce product for the sales department
within delivery terms, in quality and cost scheduled by top
management. The aim of the pillar is to draw up what the
sector must be and start aiming at accomplishing it.
Pillar-7: Education and Training
An Education isn't the amount to retain or even the amount
to know. It's having the capacity to separate amongst
knowing and not knowing. Training implies getting to be
noticeably capable through specialised instructions and
drills. It likewise implies developing, in this way
accomplishing wanted objectives or results. It shows a
person to how to abstain from committing similar errors
that can without much of a stretch be made. It gives
particular skill expected to close the hole amongst present
and wanted capacities. The aim of this pillar is to bring up
personnel competency in equipment and office work
through TPM activities and to bring uppersonnel forspecific
purpose for workplace needs from a long-range view.
Pillar-8: Safety, Health & Environment
This Pillar is based on the belief that “Accidents can be
prevented, if and only if the same can be predicted”. Pillar
has a different definition of Accident and as per concept any
“Near Miss Case” is an accident and should be analysed as
per “Genba –Genbutsu” approach. The aim of this pillar is to
achieve Zero Accident, Zero PollutionandHealthyworkforce
The Pillar also gives guidelinesabouttheoccupational health
monitoring, Environmental parameter mapping ( e.g. dust ,
noise, heat ) to control the emissions.
5. OVERALL PLANT EFFECTIVENESS
The Overall Plant Effectiveness (OPE) is a performance
measurement tool for assessing the performance of Total
Productive Maintenance (TPM) practices in a plant, which
can be computed as the multiplication of Availability,
Performance rate and Qualityrate.TheincrementofOPE can
be assured by eliminating different factors which are
responsible for lower Availability, Performance rate, and
also Quality rate .The Availability factor reduces because of
Breakdowns, set-up and adjustment stoppages etc. The
Plant’s aggregate time of operation after any stoppage or
delay in planned activities that may have upset production,
for cases like scheduled and planned maintenance, official
Shut Downs of plant, process improvement activities or
testing and so on, is considered as Operating time in the
calculation of Availability. Then again, the second OPE
component named Performance rate measures the ratio of
the actual operating speed of the plant (e.g. the ideal speed
minus speed losses, minor stoppages and idling) to the
standard operating. The third component of OPE is quality
rate indicates the ratio of production which meets the
desired Quality to the total production volume. There is a
component to be coordinated with the three components of
OPE expressed above named Planning factor. It is a measure
for the use of the installation in the theoretical production
time or measure for the degree of not using the installation.
It can be calculated as Planningfactor=Availableproduction
rate/Theoretical Maximum production rate. The available
production rate is the production sum or loading of which
production is generally installeditout.Thetheoretical rateis
the most extreme achievable measureofa particularprocess
available in the given period and is a consistent throughout.
OPE tool give an exceptionally significant knowledge – a
precise picture of how viably you production process is
running. Also, it makes it simple to track changes in that
process after some time.
OPE = Availability X Performance Rate X Quality Rate.
6. KOBETSU KAIZEN LOSSES
There are total 16 categories of losses are identified under
the Kobetsu Kaizen Pillar. These 16 types of losses are:
•Breakdown loss – Losses which occurs due to failures of
equipments. Different types of failures include sporadic,
function-stopping failures,andfunction-reductionfailuresin
which the functions of equipment do not achieve normal
level of performance.
•Shutdown loss – These are planned stoppage of
equipments. Example: Preventive Maintenance.
•Set up and Adjustment loss – Stoppage lossesthatgowith
setup changeovers.

•Start up Loss – At the start of production process, the
losses that occurs until equipment start-up, running-in and
production process conditions stabilize.
•Minor Stop and Idle Loss – Losses that happen when the
machine briefly stops because of some small issues like
jamming etc.. The machine will work typically through basic
measures like removal of relevant obstacles.
•Management loss – In any work situationtherearewaiting
time which are treated as loss due to inability of
management for proper line balancingofequipment, waiting
of materials, tools, instructions repairs etc. These losses
increase if the proper communication fails within the
organization. This also results in increased production time
compared with normal cycle time. This affects OPE.
•Cutting Tool replacement loss – Losses occur due to
changing the cutting blade due to breakage. Changing of
blade requires time and results in speed loss which reduces
the capacity of the equipment and the production time
exceeds normal cycle time. This affects OPE.
•Rejection and Rework loss – Losses occur due to defects
and rework.
•Speed loss – Losses occur due to actual operation speed
falling below the standard speed of the equipment.
•Motion loss – When proper integration of three main
resources men, machine and materials are not in the best
possible way these losses may increase. Theselossesfurther
increase from differences in skills involved in setup and
adjustment work, cutting blade change work. This also
results in increased production time and reduces OPE.
•Internal Logistics loss – Theseman-hourslossareactually
due to mismanagement in supply chain such as delay in
transport of material, products, equipment, and delay at the
vendor end. These losses can be minimized by making an
attractive supply chain management with vendor and
supplier.
•Energy loss – Losses due to ineffective utilization of input
energy like electric, gas, fuel, oil etc. This will affect the
output of the plant and OPE.
•Yield loss – In any organization, several times, it is
observed that qualities of weightofthematerial aredifferent
than required. Some time it is found that size & shape of the
material received are not as per specification /requirement.
In such situation there is loss of time to replacingandgetting
new materials. Quantity loss is one of the metrics of OPE.
•Line organisation loss – This type of loss occurs due to
shortage of operators on the line and operators needs to
work on more equipment than the original plan.
• Measurement and Adjustment Loss – Losses occurs due
to frequent measurement and adjustment in order to
prevent the occurrence and outflow of quality defects in the
process.
• Tools, jigs and consumables loss – This types of loss
includes the total cost of the physical consumption of the
spare parts or maintenance of items that are used in the
production process.
6.1 Linkage of Losses with OPE Parameters:
Availability depends on:
 Shutdown loss
 Breakdown loss
 Cutting blade change loss
 Setup and Adjustment loss
 Startup loss
Performance rate depends on:
 Speed loss
 Minor stoppage / Idle loss
Quality rate depends on:
 Rejection and Rework loss
7. CASE STUDY
7.1 Introduction - DRI is a production Department. The
main function of Department DRI is to produce direct
reduced iron. DRI plant is having 4 units of 0.72 MTPA
capacity producing 500 tonnes/day and 6 units of 0.6 MTPA
capacity producing 300 tonnes/day rotary kilns. The
Department is having huge impact over the profitability of
the organization.
7.2 Data Collection - The data collection for the study is
started from May 2017. The data was collected for various
losses occurred during the period and OPE calculation. The
data includes 16 types of Kobetsu Kaizen losses in monetary
terms which are shown in Table 1. Also, data required to
calculate Overall plant effectiveness i.e., availability,
performance rate and quality rate is collected which is
shown in Table-2.
7.3 Data Analysis - After collecting the data from May 17 to
July 17, it was found that the most critical loss in monetary
terms is due to minor stop/ idling loss. Thistypeoflosscosts
on an average Rs.686.42 Lakhs per month which is shown in
Chart-1. It is about 19% of the total loss of the department
which is shown in Chart-2. So, it is the most critical loss and
necessary to find out the root cause of this problem.
Moreover, this loss directly affects the performance rate of
the department, so to improve OPE this type of Kobetsu
Kaizen loss must be reduced. It was fond that the average
availability during the starting three months of study was
81.57%. The average quality rate during this period was
89.92%. Also, the average performance rate during this
period was as low as 71.90%. These figures are so far from
achieving international standard. As a result the OPE was
52.73% which is shown in table-2. We used Why Why
analysis to find out the root cause of the problem.

Table -1: Kobetsu Kaizen losses (Rs in Lakhs)
Month
Shutd
own
loss
Breakd
own
loss
Setup
and
adjust
ment
loss
Cutting
tool
replace
ment
loss
Star
tup
loss
Rejectio
nand
Rework
Loss
Minor
stop/
idling
loss
Speed
loss
Line
organ
isatio
nloss
Manag
ement
loss
Motion
loss
Intern
al
logisti
cs
loss
Measu
rement
and
Adjust
ment
loss
Yield
loss
Energy
loss
Cons
umab
le
loss
May'17 534.1 418.08 11.42 325.75 0 84.75 878.08 236.83 24.5 238.92 255.16 23.17 9.83 436.08 417.58 0
June'17 432.2 282.16 22.35 325.38 0 104.56 532.35 365.08 54.15 311.83 85.16 18.65 8.56 389.17 248.38 0
July'17 388.9 511.67 18.67 318.52 0.1 124.98 648.83 312.63 48.15 255.08 187.23 35.83 10.49 501.35 196.55 0
Average 451.71 403.97 17.48 323.22 0.03 104.76 686.42 304.85 42.27 268.61 175.85 25.88 9.63 442.20 287.50 0.00
KobetsuKaizenLosses(RsinLakhs)
Table -2: OPE data
OPE Data before TPM implementation
Month Availability(%)
Performance
Rate(%)
Quality
Rate(%)
OPE(%)
May'17 79.65 72.61 89.21 51.59
June'17 81.54 74.16 92.59 55.99
July'17 83.51 68.92 87.95 50.61
Average 81.57 71.90 89.92 52.73
Chart -1: Kobetsu Kaizen losses (Rs in Lakhs)
7.4 Why-Why analysis - A why-why analysis is used to find
out the solutions for an issue that address it's root cause(s).
Why-Why analysis provide a safe approach to find out the
real solution of the issue in place of taking actions that are
merely Band-Aids. The table-3 & 4 shows the why why
analysis of the problem. The root cause of the problem is the
lack of control over the material flow through the discharge
chute. So, it’s come under the category of Design Weakness.
To eliminate the problem a kaizen is recommended which is
shown in table -4. The abovekaizenwasperformedinAugust
2017 to deal with the problem.
Chart -2: % Contribution of different types of losses
Table -3: Why-Why analysis of the problem
Table -4: Why wy analysis recommendations

7. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
After successful implementation of the recommended
solution in month of August 2017, all data are collected for
month of September 2017. It was found that the
performance rate of the department was increased to 87.16
% from 71.90% as a result the Overall plant effectiveness of
the department has increased shown in Table-6.Afterthis,It
was found that about Rs 530 lakhs per month is saved
because it is reduced to Rs 156.84 Lakhs. Now, it is clearthat
Breakdown loss is highest contributing loss about 19% of
total current loss shown in chart -4. The total loss due to
breakdown loss was Rs 522.64 Lakhs shown in Chart-3 and
Table-5. So again same cycle of steps can be followed to
reduce losses and to improve OPE.
Table -5: Kobetsu Kaizen losses (Rs in Lakhs)
Month
Shutd
own
loss
Breakd
own
loss
Setup
and
adjust
ment
loss
Cutting
tool
replace
ment
loss
Star
tup
loss
Rejectio
nand
Rework
Loss
Minor
stop/
idling
loss
Speed
loss
Line
organ
isatio
nloss
Manag
ement
loss
Motion
loss
Intern
al
logisti
csloss
Measur
ement
and
Adjust
ment
loss
Yield
loss
Energy
loss
Cons
umab
leloss
sep'17 387.2 522.64 19.24 298.76 0 95.35 156.84 378.15 14.62 308.15 115.23 28.95 8.97 378.25 108.15 0
KobetsuKaizenLosses(RsinLakhs)
Table -6: OPE Data after TPM implementation
OPE Data before TPM implementation
Month
Availability(
%)
Performanc
e Rate(%)
Quality
Rate(%
)
OPE(%
)
September 17 86.34 87.16 92.64 69.72
Chart -3: Kobetsu Kaizen losses (Rs in Lakhs)
Chart -4 : % Contribution of different types of losses
REFERENCES
[1] Chaneski, W.S., Total productive maintenance – an
effective technique, Modern Machine Shop, Vol. 75, No.
2, pp. 46-48, 2002..
[2] Nakajima, S., Introduction to Total Productive
Maintenance (TPM), Productivity Press, Portland,1988.
[3] Bulent Dal, Phil Tugwell, and Richard Greatbanks,
“Overall equipment effectiveness as a measure of
operational improvement A practical analysis”,
International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 2000, 20(12), 1488-1502.
[4] Debadyuti Das. “Total Productivemaintenance(TPM):A
comprehensive tool for achieving excellence in
operations system – A case study”, Industrial
Engineering Journal 2001, 30 (10), 15.
[5] Cooke, F. L., “Implementing TPM in plant maintenance:
some organizational barriers”, International Journal of
Quality and Reliability Management, 2000,17(9), 1003-
1016.
[6] Marqueza, A.C. and Gupta, J.N.D., Contemporary
maintenance management: process, framework and
supporting pillars, Omega, Vol. 34, No. 3, pp.313–326,
2006.
[7] Simoes, J.M., Gomes, C.F. and Yasin, M.M., A literature
review of maintenance performance measurement,
Journal of Quality in Maintenance Engineering, Vol. 17,
No. 2, pp.116–137, 2011.
[8] Saleeshya, P.G., Austin, D. and Vamsi, N., A model to
assess the lean capabilities of automotive industries,
International Journal of Productivity and Quality
Management, Vol. 11, No. 2, pp.195–211,2013.
[9] Ahuja, I.P.S., Exploring the impact of effectiveness of
total productive maintenance strategies in
manufacturing enterprises, International Journal of
Productivity and Quality Management, Vol. 9, No. 4,
pp.486–501, 2012.
[10] Wakjira, M.W. and Singh, A.P., Total Productive
Maintenance: A Case Study in Manufacturing Industry,
Global Journal of researches in engineering Industrial
engineering Vol., 12 No.01, 2012.
[11] Rajput, H.S. and Jayaswal, P., A Total Productive
Maintenance (TPM) Approach to Improve Overall
Equipment Efficiency, International Journal of Modern
Engineering Research, Vol. 02, No. 06, pp-4383-4386,
2012.
[12] Tsang, A.H.C. and Chan,P.K., TPM implementation in
China: a case study, International Journal of Quality &
Reliability Management, Vol. 17, No.2, 2000.
[13] Shingo S., A revolution in manufacturing: The SMED
System, Productivity Press, Andrew Oillon. 1980,
[14] Dean M, and Robinson A., America's most successful
export to Japan: Continuous improvement programs,
Sloan Manage. Rev., Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 67, 1991.

BIOGRAPHIES
Dr. Manish Raj has completedhisPhDin
Material Science. He has industrial
experience of more than 27 Years in the
field of TQM, TPM, Non-Destructive
Testing and Evaluation, Conditional
Monitoring, etc.
Mr. Shubham Swaroop is currently
pursuing hisM.TechdegreeinIndustrial
Engineering and Management and has
completed his B.Tech in Mechanical
Engineering. His area of interest
includes Industrial Engineering, TQM,
TPM, etc.
Mr. Saureng Kumar has completed his
M.Tech degree in Industrial Engineering
and Management. His area of interest
includes TQM, TPM, Industrial
Engineering, etc.
Mr. Raj Bhushan has completed his
M.Tech degree in Industrial Engineering
and Management. He has industrial
field of Industrial Engineering, TQM,
TPM, etc.
Mr. Vikalp Kumar completed his BCA
degree in 2004. He has industrial
field of TPM, TQM, etc.
Mr. M G Borkar has completed his B.E.
in Metallurgy. He has industrial
field of Quality Management.
Author
Photo

Kobetsu Kaizen Losses Analysis to Enhance the Overall Plant Effectiveness in Steel Manufacturing Industry–A Case Study at JSPL, Raigarh

More Related Content

What's hot (20)

Similar to Kobetsu Kaizen Losses Analysis to Enhance the Overall Plant Effectiveness in Steel Manufacturing Industry–A Case Study at JSPL, Raigarh (20)

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Kobetsu Kaizen Losses Analysis to Enhance the Overall Plant Effectiveness in Steel Manufacturing Industry–A Case Study at JSPL, Raigarh