Enhancing Total Productive Maintenance Strategy for Improved Productivity and Performance

Abstract

This study aims to enhance total productive maintenance (TPM) in the pipe industry, specifically within a factory in the Amhara region. The objective is to improve productivity and address challenges faced during TPM implementation. Through identifying obstacles, analyzing factors, and exploring strategies, this research provides insights and recommendations for optimizing maintenance practices. Findings emphasize the need for improved productivity and maintenance strategies, highlighting the importance of a team-based approach. The factory mainly focuses on breakdown and preventive maintenance, lacking a comprehensive TPM approach. The computed overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) stands at 38%, below the standard of 85%. To improve efficiency and reduce downtime, losses limiting equipment effectiveness have been addressed. A total productivity model has been developed, emphasizing the study’s significance in enhancing operational performance. Suggested solutions include implementing TPM pillars such as 6S, Autonomous Maintenance, Planned Maintenance, Focused Improvement, Training & Education, Quality Maintenance, Office TPM, and Safety, Health, and Environment, involving management, workers, and maintenance staff. Proposed solutions include training, empowering operators, improving maintenance strategies, and developing a comprehensive TPM implementation plan. Implementing these recommendations will eliminate breakdowns, increase productivity, and improve factory performance.

1. Introduction

In today’s rapidly evolving and fiercely competitive business environment, organizations across industries are constantly striving to achieve optimal productivity and performance. They understand that in order to maintain a competitive edge, it is crucial to ensure the efficient operation of their equipment and machinery while minimizing downtime and maximizing overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) [1, 2]. Total productive maintenance (TPM) has emerged as a comprehensive strategy that aims to achieve these goals by involving all levels of the organization in maintenance activities. However, despite the recognized benefits of TPM, many companies encounter challenges in its successful implementation and fail to realize its full potential [3].

TPM is a holistic approach to maintenance that originated in Japan in the early 1970s as a response to the limitations of traditional reactive maintenance approaches. Such approaches often resulted in unexpected breakdowns, high maintenance costs, and reduced productivity [4]. TPM promotes proactive and preventive maintenance practices, involving all employees in the continuous improvement of equipment and processes. It aims to maximize equipment effectiveness, eliminate losses, and create a culture of ownership and responsibility for maintenance activities [5].

TPM is built on the foundation of eight pillars: autonomous maintenance, planned maintenance, focused improvement, education and training, early equipment management, quality maintenance, office TPM, and safety, health, and environment [6]. These pillars provide a framework for organizations to systematically improve their maintenance practices and drive overall operational excellence [7]. Therefore, enhancing the total productive maintenance (TPM) strategy is of significant importance for organizations aiming to optimize their maintenance practices and achieve improved productivity and performance.

Despite the evident benefits of TPM, its successful implementation remains a challenge for many organizations. The complexities lie in various aspects, such as organizational culture, resistance to change, lack of employee involvement, inadequate training, and ineffective measurement systems. Overcoming these challenges requires a deep understanding of the underlying issues and the development of tailored strategies and approaches [8, 9]. Identifying and addressing these challenges is crucial for organizations seeking to leverage TPM effectively.

To address this problem, a comprehensive examination of the factors influencing TPM implementation is necessary. This research aims to identify the common challenges faced by organizations when implementing TPM and explore effective strategies to overcome these obstacles. By gaining insights into the underlying issues and solutions, organizations can enhance their TPM practices, optimize maintenance activities, and achieve higher levels of productivity and performance.

By addressing the challenges hindering TPM implementation, organizations can enhance equipment effectiveness, reduce downtime, and eliminate losses. This, in turn, will lead to improved productivity and operational performance.

The primary objective of this research is to enhance the total productive maintenance (TPM) strategy for improved productivity and performance by addressing the challenges faced during its implementation. The specific objectives are as follows:

1. Identify the key challenges and obstacles faced by organizations in implementing TPM.

2. Analyze the factors influencing the successful implementation of TPM.

3. Explore best practices and strategies for overcoming the identified challenges.

4. Develop guidelines and recommendations for organizations to enhance their TPM practices.

5. Assess the impact of enhanced TPM implementation on productivity and performance indicators.

By achieving these objectives, this research aims to provide valuable insights and practical recommendations for organizations seeking to optimize their maintenance practices through the effective implementation of TPM. It is anticipated that the findings of this study will contribute to improving productivity, reducing downtime, and enhancing overall performance in various industrial sectors.

2. Literature review

2.1 Definition and principles of TPM

TPM was developed in Japan in the early 1970s and has gained recognition worldwide as an effective approach to maintenance management. Total productive maintenance (TPM) is a comprehensive maintenance strategy that aims to maximize equipment effectiveness, reduce downtime, and empower employees to take ownership of maintenance activities [10].

Cost Savings: Effective TPM implementation can result in cost savings by reducing maintenance expenses, minimizing breakdowns, and optimizing resources. The research will highlight cost-effective strategies and best practices that organizations can adopt to achieve these savings.

Employee Engagement and Ownership: TPM promotes a culture of employee involvement and ownership in maintenance activities. By addressing the challenges impacting employee engagement, organizations can create a motivated and empowered workforce, leading to increased productivity and improved overall performance.

Competitive Advantage: Successful implementation of TPM can provide organizations with a competitive advantage by improving operational efficiency, reducing costs, and enhancing customer satisfaction. The research findings will help organizations gain a competitive edge in their respective industries [11].

2.2 Challenges in TPM implementation

Despite the recognized benefits of TPM, organizations often encounter challenges in its implementation. Several studies have identified common obstacles, including resistance to change, lack of employee involvement, inadequate training, organizational culture, and ineffective measurement systems [12].

2.3 Employee involvement and ownership

Employee involvement is a key principle of TPM, aiming to engage all employees in maintenance activities and foster a culture of ownership. Multiple studies have emphasized the importance of employee involvement for successful TPM implementation. For example, Ranteshwar Singh et al. found that employee involvement positively influenced maintenance practices and overall equipment effectiveness. They highlighted the need for training and empowerment to foster employee engagement and ownership [7].

2.4 Best practices in TPM implementation

Numerous case studies and research articles have highlighted best practices for successful TPM implementation. These practices include the establishment of cross-functional teams, clear communication of goals and objectives, effective training programs, and the use of visual management techniques. For example, the importance of visual controls and standardized work procedures in TPM implementation enables clarity, consistency, and continuous improvement [13, 14].

2.5 Measurement and performance indicators

An essential aspect of TPM implementation is the measurement of performance indicators to assess its effectiveness. Several studies have proposed various performance indicators, such as overall equipment effectiveness (OEE), mean time between failures (MTBF), and mean time to repair (MTTR). TPM is positively and significantly correlated with low costs (as indicated by higher inventory turns), high quality (as indicated by higher levels of specification compliance), and strong delivery performance (as indicated by a higher percentage of on-time deliveries and faster delivery speeds) [15]. Another study emphasized the significance of OEE as a comprehensive measure of equipment performance and highlighted its use in assessing the impact of TPM implementation.

Additionally, other researchers mentioned that the performance indicators are not defined in isolation but should be the result of a careful analysis of the interaction of the maintenance function with other organizational functions [16]. Therefore, in their study, the performance indicators categorized as measure of equipment performance and cost performance. Under equipment performance, there is failure, breakdown, and overall equipment effectiveness. Under maintenance cost, there are direct maintenance costs, indirect maintenance costs, percent of maintenance cost, and so on [17].

2.6 Integration of TPM with other management systems

TPM can be integrated with other management systems to enhance performance. Integration with Lean Manufacturing principles, often referred to as Lean TPM, combines the waste reduction and continuous improvement aspects of Lean with the equipment-focused approach of TPM. This integration has been shown to improve overall performance and efficiency in various studies [18]. Similarly, the integration of TPM with Six Sigma, another business process strategy, has been employed by companies to enhance manufacturing performance [19, 20].

2.7 Technology enablers for TPM

Advancements in technology have provided new opportunities for TPM implementation. Technologies such as the Internet of Things (IoT), data analytics, and predictive maintenance have been explored to enhance TPM effectiveness. IoT-enabled condition monitoring and real-time data analytics can help predict equipment failures and optimize maintenance activities. For example, Lai et al. discussed the potential of IoT-enabled condition monitoring and real-time data analytics in predicting equipment failures and optimizing maintenance activities [21].

2.8 Case studies of successful TPM implementation

Numerous case studies have demonstrated the successful implementation of TPM in various industries. These case studies provide valuable insights into the challenges faced, strategies employed, and outcomes achieved. For instance, a case study by Almeanazel highlighted the successful implementation of TPM in a manufacturing company, resulting in significant improvements in OEE, reduced downtime, and enhanced employee engagement [22].

2.9 Productivity and maintenance

The main task of production is to manufacture goods/products. However, an efficient maintenance policy significantly influences the production capacity of the machines used for producing these products. Maintenance, therefore, can be considered as an organizational function that operates in parallel with production. While emphasizing that production creates the actual products, the authors also argue that maintenance generates the capacity for production. Total productivity maintenance has a positive impact on the organization’s productivity [23, 24].

Measurement of Productivity:

Productivity can be measured either on an aggregate basis or an individual basis. On an aggregate basis, output is compared with the sum of all inputs. This is known as total productivity. On an individual basis, output is compared with one specific input factor, which is referred to as partial productivity or factor productivity:

$$\text{Total productivity index}=\frac{\text{total output}}{\text{total input}}$$E1

Total production of goods = Labor + Material + Capital + Energy.

2.9.1 Labor productivity

An important aspect of any production setup is achieving the planned quantity of work within a specific time period. Labor productivity depends on how labor is utilized. Factors such as workload availability, materials, working tools, power availability, work efficiency, motivation level, training level, and working conditions (comfortable or poor) can influence labor productivity. Labor can be measured in terms of hours or money:

$$\text{Labor productivity}=\frac{\text{total output}}{\text{labor input}}$$E2

Labor Productivity (in terms of hours) = Total Quantity Produced/Actual Man-Hours Required.

Labor Productivity (in terms of money) = Total Cost (or Sales Value) of Output Produced/Amount in Rupees Spent on Workers.

2.9.2 Material productivity

In a production system, raw materials are converted into finished products through mechanical or chemical processes. Material productivity plays a crucial role in production costs. It depends on how effectively materials are utilized in the conversion process, considering factors such as rejection percentage, scrap creation, spoilage level, obsolescence, and work wastage:

$$\text{Material productivity}=\frac{\text{total output}}{\text{material input}}$$E3

2.9.3 Machine productivity

Production systems convert raw materials into finished products using machines and equipment in mechanical or chemical processes. Machine productivity depends on factors such as raw material availability, power availability, workers’ skills, and machine layout:

$$\text{Material productivity}=\frac{\text{total output}}{\text{machine input}}$$E4

2.9.4 Capital productivity

Any production setup requires machines, tools, land, and other assets owned by the organization. Capital is needed for acquiring and maintaining these assets. As a significant amount of capital is invested in these assets, their effective utilization is crucial. Decisions regarding the replacement of fixed assets need to be made. Delaying the replacement of fixed assets may improve the production-to-capital expenditure ratio, but it also increases maintenance costs. Therefore, finding the right balance is necessary. Besides direct expenditures, such as direct material, direct wages, land, buildings, and equipment, a production system incurs indirect expenditures, such as salaries of manpower employed in planning, storekeeping, record keeping, and inspection. Indirect labor is also involved in material movement, good housekeeping, cleaning, etc. Additionally, indirect expenditures are incurred on items such as tools, oils, and lubricants:

$$\text{Capital productivity}=\frac{\text{total output}}{\text{capital input}}$$E5

3. Research methodology

To achieve the stated objectives, this research will adopt a mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative and quantitative research methods. The research will involve the following steps:

Literature Review: A comprehensive review of existing literature on TPM implementation challenges, best practices, and strategies will be conducted. This will provide a theoretical foundation for the research and help identify research gaps.

3.1 Data collection

3.1.1 Primary data collection

Primary data has been collected through surveys, interviews, and on-site observations. Surveys are being administered to organizations currently implementing TPM, while interviews will be conducted with maintenance managers, employees, and TPM experts. On-site observations will provide a firsthand understanding of the challenges and practices involved in TPM implementation.

3.1.2 Secondary data collection

Additionally, secondary data such as downtime records and information on types of machinery and equipment have been gathered from the case company.

3.2 Data analysis

The collected data will be analyzed using qualitative and quantitative analysis techniques. The qualitative data from interviews and observations will be analyzed thematically to identify recurring patterns and themes. The quantitative data from surveys will be analyzed using statistical tools to determine the significance of factors influencing TPM implementation.

Findings and Recommendations: The research findings will be presented and discussed, highlighting the key challenges faced by organizations in implementing TPM and providing recommendations and strategies for overcoming these challenges. The recommendations will be based on the analysis of best practices and successful case studies.

Below the table to shows that planned and unplanned down time data collection in the factory with reasons for down time. This data used to analysis machine availability to identify running and down time machine for 7 months and to improve overall equipment effectiveness. Let us take some reason for machine failure, shortage of raw material, meeting, break, holyday, tool change, etc. Tables 1 and 2 illustrate the downtime and machines availability time. Table 3 presents the machine performance, while Table 4 displays the monthly production and rejection rate.

	July		August		September		October		November		December		January
Reasons	Planned downtime	Unplanned downtime	Planned downtime	Unplanned downtime	Planned downtime	Unplanned downtime	Planned downtime	Unplanned downtime	Planned downtime	Unplanned downtime	Planned downtime	Unplanned downtime	Planned downtime	Unplanned downtime
Machine down/fault	21	40		20		9		22		18		12		16
Unplanned maintenance		30		18				40		24		30		40
Setup/change over		12		35		17		30		10		10.5		30
Waiting of material		7		30				24		8		20		26
Waiting on quality check		4		15		6				6		5		29
Meetings	10		10				45
Breaks	45		45			14	45	45					45
Process warm-up		120		26		20		60		32		31		45
Equipment failures		30		20		8		90		26		60		20
Availability of operator		7		40				10				25		40
Excess capacity	23					288								20
Lack of order		48		7				37		48		24
Holidays					48		24						24
Tool damage		52		27		22		59		72		49		34
Total	99	350	55	238	48	384	114	417	0	244	0	266.5	69	300

Table 1.

Down time (planned and unplanned).

Months	Total operating time	Planning downtime (hrs./month)	Net operating time (hrs./month)	Downtime (hrs.)/month	Running time (hrs./month)
July	720	72	570	351	219
August	720	72	593	237	356
September	720	72	555	399	156
October	720	72	579	372	207
November	720	14	661	212	449
December	720	72	603	267.5	335.5
January	720	72	579	300	279
Total	5040	446	4140	2138.5	2001.5

Table 2.

Machines availability time.

Months	Target amount of product	Total actual amount of product	Performance rate (%)
July	281.3	122.7	0.43
August	63359.56	25197.9	0.4
September	226,485	291,036	0.88
October	220,771	220,050	0.9
November	14,950	9095	0.6
December	29,300	20,029	0.68
January	219,025	210,096	0.5
Total	774171.86	775626.6	4.39

Table 3.

Machine performance.

Months	Total input in (m)	Reject/defect in (m)	Output (m)
July	15,203	1570	13,633
August	14,785	1580	13,205
September	15,106	1548	13,558
October	15,798	1917	13,881
November	8211	1427	6784
December	16,054	2017	14,037
January	9209	1560	7649
Total	94,366	11,619	82,747

Table 4.

Monthly production and rejection rate during July to January.

3.3 Overall equipment effectiveness

In this section, the overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) has been calculated for Amhara pipe factory based on the data collected by researcher. The OEE analysis considers machine availability, performance rate, and quality rate to measure maintenance and productivity. By identifying the root causes of inefficiencies, the factory can prioritize problem areas and develop a robust maintenance strategy to improve OEE.

3.3.1 Machine availability

Machine availability accounts for downtime losses, including events that halt planned production for a significant amount of time and equipment downtime. Planned downtime, such as holidays or lack of orders, is subtracted from the total operating time to calculate the net operating time:

Net operating time = Total operating time - Planned downtime.

Actual running time is obtained by subtracting downtime losses from the net operating time:

Actual running time = Net operating time - Downtime.

The availability rate is calculated as follows:

$$\text{Availability rate}=\left(\frac{\text{running time}}{\mathrm{net}\text{operating time}}\right)\ast 100$$

Availability rate = (2101.5/4140) * 100 = 50% = (2101.5/4140) *100 = 0.50 = 50%.

3.3.2 Performance rate

Performance rate considers speed loss and minor stoppage loss, which occur when the process operates at less than maximum possible speed. The target output of the machine during running time is compared to the actual output, reflecting speed losses and minor stoppages:

$$\text{Pr}=\left(\frac{\text{Total actual}\text{amount of product}}{\text{Target amount of product}}\right)\ast 100\%$$

PR = (685626.6/774171.86) ∗ 100% = 0.88 = 88%.

Performance losses contribute to the remaining 12% and include minor stoppages and speed loss, such as delays from the production line due to raw material shortages and unnecessary production delays.

3.3.3 Quality rate

Quality rate accounts for quality losses, including produced pieces that do not meet quality standards, require rework or scrap, or have in-process damage. It is calculated by comparing the number of good parts produced to the total number of parts made:

$$\text{Quality ratio}\left(\%\right)=\left(\frac{\text{total output}-\text{defect}}{\text{total output}}\right)\ast 100.$$

QR = [(94366−11619)/94366)] ∗ 100% = 0.87 = 87%.

The quality losses amount to 13% and include defects, measurements, and adjustments. These losses occur during in-progress production and warm-up rejects:

$$\mathrm{OEE}=\left(\mathrm{MAR}\ast \mathrm{PR}\ast \mathrm{QR}\right)\ast 100\%=0.5\ast 0.88\ast 0.87=0.38=38\%.$$

The calculated OEE value for the Amhara pipe factory is 38%, which is significantly lower than the world-class OEE. This indicates the presence of various inefficiencies and highlights the need for a robust maintenance strategy. By addressing the six big losses, including breakdowns, setup and adjustment time, idling and minor stoppages, reduced speed, defects and rework, and startup losses, the factory can improve its overall equipment effectiveness and strive toward achieving world-class OEE.

Figure 1 illustrates the comparison between the calculated OEE value for the company and the benchmark for world-class OEE. The existing OEE value for the company is significantly lower, measuring at 38%, while the world-class OEE stands at 85%. This stark difference indicates that the company’s equipment efficiency is considerably below the desired standard.

Figure 1.

Comparison of existing OEE with world-class OEE.

To address this challenge, it is crucial for the company to implement a robust maintenance strategy. A strong maintenance strategy can help identify and mitigate the root causes of inefficiencies, such as breakdowns, setup and adjustment time, idle periods, reduced speed, defects and rework, and startup losses. By focusing on these areas, the company can improve its overall equipment effectiveness and work toward achieving higher OEE values comparable to the world-class standard.

Implementing preventive maintenance measures, optimizing production processes, investing in employee training, and adopting modern technologies are some potential approaches that can be part of the maintenance strategy. Continuous monitoring and analysis of OEE metrics will also enable the company to identify areas for improvement and track progress over time.

By prioritizing maintenance efforts and striving for continuous improvement, the company can enhance its equipment availability, performance, and quality rates, thereby increasing its overall OEE and moving closer to achieving world-class standards.

4. Result and discussion

Figure 2 represents a fishbone diagram illustrating the root causes of reduced OEE in the company. It identifies the most significant time-wasting factors contributing to the reduced OEE. Among these factors, the two primary causes are downtime due to machine failure and unexpected machine downtime.

Figure 2.

Cause and effect diagram of reduced OEE value.

One notable observation is that when such downtime events occur, they are not documented or noted, even though they are the primary reasons for time loss. This lack of documentation hinders the company’s ability to analyze and address these issues effectively.

Another key finding from the analysis is that the maintenance staff members are not adequately trained or equipped to address the six big losses that impact OEE. Insufficient knowledge and awareness of the importance of identifying and mitigating these losses can further contribute to reduced OEE.

Data from the interwire revealed that in the Amhara pipe factory, 80% of the operators have not received training on TPM, while the remaining 20% have undergone the training. In terms of TPM awareness, 75% of the operators are unaware of TPM, while the remaining 25% have knowledge about it. Furthermore, 77% of the operators in the factory do not work in teams, while the remaining 23% do engage in teamwork. The TPM strategy, as perceived by shift leaders, is also weak. This is because 80% of shift leaders lack awareness and knowledge of the TPM strategy, while the remaining 20% are familiar with it (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Percentage distribution of TPM adoptions factory.

Figure 4 depicts the root cause analysis conducted to examine the reasons behind the lack of TPM teamwork in the Amhara pipe factory. The analysis revealed several contributing factors. Firstly, one of the main causes identified is the lack of interest and willingness from the management to prioritize TPM teamwork initiatives. This suggests a lack of commitment and support from the management level.

Figure 4.

Cause and effect diagram of lack of TPM teamwork.

Additionally, unplanned maintenance was identified as a key factor. The absence of proper planning and scheduling for maintenance activities can hinder effective teamwork and collaboration among the operators.

Another significant factor is the lack of training and education in TPM principles and practices. When operators are not adequately trained, it impedes their ability to work together efficiently as a team.

The attitude of workers also emerged as a contributing factor. Negative attitudes or resistance toward TPM principles and teamwork can undermine cooperative efforts among the operators.

Furthermore, the analysis highlighted the importance of following appropriate procedures and instructions. Failure to adhere to established procedures and guidelines for TPM teamwork can disrupt the smooth functioning of collaborative efforts.

Lastly, following improper instructions was identified as a factor that hinders TPM teamwork. When operators receive inaccurate or unclear instructions, it can lead to misunderstandings and hinder effective collaboration.

Understanding these root causes is crucial for addressing the lack of TPM teamwork in the Amhara pipe factory. By focusing on these factors, the organization can develop targeted strategies and interventions to foster a collaborative and productive work environment.

To overcome those challenges mentioned above, the following important steps has been has to be followed by the case company.

1. Top Management Commitment: The top management should demonstrate their commitment to TPM by communicating its importance, benefits, and long-term goals to all employees. They should emphasize the need for teamwork and the active involvement of operators and mechanics in maintenance activities.

2. Training and Education: Provide comprehensive training programs on TPM principles, methodologies, and tools for all employees. This training should include autonomous maintenance, which enables operators to perform routine maintenance tasks and identify early signs of problems.

3. Autonomous Maintenance: Encourage operators to take ownership of the machines by conducting regular inspections, cleaning, lubrication, and basic maintenance tasks. Provide them with the necessary tools, checklists, and guidelines to perform these activities effectively.

4. Planned Maintenance: Establish a structured schedule for planned maintenance activities, including preventive maintenance tasks, equipment inspections, and calibration. Ensure that the maintenance staff and operators work together to plan and execute these activities efficiently.

5. Continuous Improvement: Implement a system for capturing and analyzing data related to equipment performance, breakdowns, and maintenance activities. Encourage employees to identify improvement opportunities and participate in problem-solving activities using techniques such as root cause analysis (RCA).

6. TPM Committees: Form cross-functional teams or TPM committees consisting of representatives from different departments to drive TPM implementation, monitor progress, and address any challenges.

7. Visual Management and Communication: Implement visual management tools, such as visual boards and displays, to share maintenance schedules, equipment status, and performance indicators. Encourage regular communication and feedback between operators, mechanics, and management.

8. Recognition and Rewards: Establish a system to recognize and reward individuals and teams who actively contribute to the successful implementation of TPM and demonstrate improvement in machine reliability and productivity.

By adopting TPM and following these steps, the Amhara pipe factory can create a culture of proactive maintenance, teamwork, and continuous improvement. This approach will help eliminate machine failures, reduce downtime, improve productivity, and effectively address the six big losses, ultimately leading to improved overall equipment effectiveness and organizational success.

4.1 TPM implementation strategy/plan

The implementation of total productive maintenance (TPM) requires a well-defined strategy or plan to ensure its successful adoption and integration into the organization’s processes. Based on the Japanese Institute of Plant Maintenance (JIPM) TPM implementation process, along with the eight pillars method, the following steps can be considered for developing a TPM implementation strategy (Table 5).

Type	Phase 1	Phase 2	Phase 3	Phase 4
Education and training	Conduct basic training on cleaning practices to create awareness and understanding among employees.	Provide team training to enhance collaboration and teamwork among employees involved in TPM implementation.	Focus on training for operation and maintenance, ensuring that employees have the necessary skills and knowledge to perform their tasks effectively.	Analyze and evaluate the training programs to identify areas for improvement and make necessary adjustments.
Preventive maintenance	Reduce the variability of machine lifespan and restore neglected equipment through appropriate maintenance practices	Implement measures to keep the length of machine lifespan and address design weaknesses to prevent unexpected breakdowns.	Develop a schedule for machine lifespan repair and identify the causes of deterioration to proactively address them.	Utilize diagnostic techniques and conduct technical analysis/studies to predict the lifespan of machines and identify potential major breakdowns.
Autonomous maintenance	Basic training, address sources of problem, set cleaning & lubrication	Conduct general inspections on equipment to ensure their proper functioning.	Shift toward autonomous inspection, where operators take responsibility for inspecting and maintaining their equipment.	Establish an organized order line and promote autonomous activities within the organization to ensure equipment reliability and maintenance effectiveness.

Table 5.

Major function involved the development of TPM strategy.

It is important to note that this is a generalized framework, and the specific activities and timeline may vary based on the needs and characteristics of the Amhara pipe factory. The implementation strategy should be tailored to fit the factory’s requirements and should involve iterative processes, frequent evaluation, and teamwork to ensure the successful implementation of TPM.

4.2 Total productivity maintenance model

The proposed total productive maintenance (TPM) model consists of four major phases, with each phase having specific activities and responsibilities. The model emphasizes the active involvement of top-level managers in driving TPM implementation. Here is a breakdown of the four phases:

Phase 1 (1–2 months):

• Establish TPM strategy: Develop a strategic plan outlining the objectives, targets, and timelines for TPM implementation.

• Assess equipment and necessary materials: Evaluate the condition and performance of equipment and identify any deficiencies or requirements.

• Report findings to top-level managers: Present the assessment results to the management team, highlighting areas that need improvement or attention.

• Develop improvement strategy: Formulate a detailed plan for addressing the identified issues and improving equipment reliability and performance.

• Incorporate maintenance policy: Review and update the maintenance policy to align with TPM principles and objectives.

Phase 2 (3 months):

• Survey employee baseline: Conduct a survey to assess the current knowledge, skills, and attitudes of employees regarding maintenance practices and TPM.

• Establish planned maintenance: Develop a structured system for planned maintenance activities, including preventive maintenance tasks and scheduled inspections.

• Restore targeted equipment: Address the maintenance needs of specific equipment identified in the previous phases.

• Develop material planning feedback: Establish a feedback mechanism for material planning, ensuring timely availability of required resources for maintenance activities.

• Include maintenance improvement feedback: Create a system to capture feedback and suggestions for improving maintenance processes and procedures.

Phase 3 (3–5 months):

• Restore all target equipment: Complete the restoration and maintenance activities for all identified target equipment.

• Roll out maintenance improvement system: Implement an improved maintenance system based on TPM principles, including standardized procedures and workflows.

• Conduct gap analysis: Analyze the gaps between current maintenance practices and TPM objectives, and develop plans to bridge those gaps.

• Reduce the six losses: Address the six major losses in manufacturing processes, which include breakdowns, speed losses, startup and adjustment issues, idling and minor stoppages, quality defects and rework, and startup yield.

• Install planned maintenance: Ensure that the planned maintenance system is fully operational and integrated into daily maintenance activities.

Phase 4 (2–3 months):

• Meticulously identify and reduce big losses: Continuously monitor and identify areas of significant losses and implement strategies to minimize or eliminate them.

• Establish a continuous maintenance system: Create a culture of ongoing maintenance and improvement, with regular inspections, monitoring, and adjustments.

• Integrate maintenance with productivity: Foster a close relationship between maintenance activities and overall productivity goals of the factory.

• Conduct frequent follow-up: Regularly review progress, address any challenges, and provide necessary support to ensure the sustainability of TPM practices.

• Conduct training and education: Provide comprehensive training and education programs for employees to enhance their knowledge and skills in TPM and maintenance practices.

• Establish TPM activities: Formalize the TPM practices and activities within the factory, making them an integral part of daily operations.

• Achieve TPM success: Through the completion of the previous phases’ activities, reach a state where TPM practices are fully implemented and contribute to improved productivity and equipment reliability.

By following this proposed TPM model, Amhara pipe factory can implement TPM effectively, improve maintenance practices, reduce losses, and integrate maintenance activities with overall productivity goals. However, it is important to adapt and customize the model to suit the specific needs and circumstances of the factory (Figure 5).

Figure 5.

Proposed TPM model.

5. Conclusion

In conclusion, this research focuses on enhancing the Total Productive Maintenance (TPM) strategy in the pipe industry in the Amhara region, specifically for the pipe factory. The objective is to improve productivity and performance by addressing the challenges faced during TPM implementation. By identifying key obstacles, analyzing influencing factors, and exploring effective strategies, this research provides valuable insights and practical recommendations for organizations aiming to optimize their maintenance practices.

The findings highlight the need for improved productivity and maintenance strategies, as well as a shift toward a team-based approach in the factory. The total productive maintenance strategy should encompass sufficient resources to ensure the effective availability of machines, leading to increased productivity. The research reveals that the maintenance activities in the factory are primarily focused on breakdown and preventive maintenance rather than a comprehensive Total Productive Maintenance approach.

The computed overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) for the case company is 38%, with a machine availability rate of 50%, performance rate of 88%, and quality rate of 87%. These figures indicate that the factory falls significantly below the world-class standard OEE of 85%. To improve machine breakdowns and reduce downtime, it is crucial to identify the causes of loss that limit overall equipment efficiency.

The research suggests implementing the pillars of TPM, including 6S, Autonomous Maintenance, Planned Maintenance, Focused Improvement, Training & Education, Quality Maintenance, Office TPM, and Safety, Health, and Environment. These pillars should be embraced by top managers, shop floor workers, and maintenance staff in the factory to effectively implement Total Productive Maintenance.

Proposed solutions for the factory include providing adequate training for all employees, including maintenance workers and machine operators, empowering operators to carry out small maintenance activities, improving standardized maintenance strategies, and developing a comprehensive TPM implementation plan.

By implementing these recommendations, the factory can eliminate machine breakdowns, increase productivity, and extend the lifespan of their machines. The adoption of a Total Productive Maintenance approach will lead to improved overall equipment effectiveness and reduced downtime, ultimately enhancing the factory’s performance and productivity levels.