2 e 7 F

Improving Productivity and Quality of a Transformer Production Line by Applying Lean
Manufacturing Principles
By
Robert Johnson
April, 2015
Director of Thesis: Dr. Kanchan Das
Major Department: Department of Technology
Abstract:
The objective of this research is to study a production line and apply Lean principles and
tools to resolve quality problems and improve productivity. The production line selected
for the study is the medium voltage line in ABB Group’s Medium Voltage Products facility
located in Pinetops, North Carolina. The production line was unable to achieve the desired
production rate due to several reasons, including flow, work methods, constraints, rework,
scrap, inventory, and storage arrangement.
One of the major improvements made during the project was to study the production flow
data and balance the assembly process. After balancing the assembly line, single-piece flow
was implemented to increase efficiency. Other major improvements made were to the
Hydrophobic Cycloaliphatic Epoxy casting process and the winding process by reducing
changeover times, and reducing worker idle times. Some of the Lean techniques that were
used during the project were: value stream mapping, process flow diagrams, standardizing
work procedures, 5 S, and visual management. These techniques were used to reduce and
eliminate all waste surrounding the process. A key aspect of the study was to document all
phases of the project and challenges faced during the implementation. This was done so
that other companies with similar operations will benefit from the data and knowledge
gained throughout the life of the project.
There is a supplement file that contains an enlarged version of the following diagrams:
Current State Map, Current State Map with Kaizen Improvements, Future State Map, and
Brainstorming Cloud.
A Thesis
Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Technology Systems
East Carolina University
In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree
Masters of Science in Technology Systems
By
Robert Johnson
April, 2015
© Robert Johnson, 2015
By
Robert Johnson
APPROVED BY:
DIRECTOR OF
THESIS: _______________________________________________________________________________________________
Dr. Kanchan Das, Ph.D.
COMMITTEE MEMBER: _____________________________________________________________________________

Dr. Merwan Mehta, Ph.D.
COMMITTEE MEMBER: _____________________________________________________________________________

Dr. Hamid Fonooni, Ph.D.
CHAIR OF THE DEPARTMENT

OF DEPARTMENT OF TECHNOLOGY SYSTEMS: __________________________________________________
Dr. Tijjani Mohammed, Ph.D.
DEAN OF THE
GRADUATE SCHOOL: ________________________________________________________________________________
Paul J. Gemperline, Ph.D.
Acknowledgements
I would like to like to express my deepest appreciation to my committee chair and
mentor, Professor Kanchan Das, who is one of the most knowledgeable and sincere
professors I have had the privilege of working with. He has always shown limitless
enthusiasm and excitement with respect to education and research. Without his guidance
and persistent help, this thesis would not have been possible.
I would like to thank my committee member, Professor Merwan Mehta, who has
always shown consideration and concern toward me in regards to my education. I enjoyed
your laid back approach to teaching; it provided a comical and fun way to learn new
information.
In addition, I would like to thank Mr. Tom Rassau for giving me the opportunity to
work alongside a very talented group of individuals and conduct my research at ABB
Group’s Medium Voltage facility located in Pinetops, North Carolina.
Table of Contents
PAGE
Title Page……………………………………………………………………………………………..…………….….i
Copyright Page …………………………………………………………………………………………..…………ii
Signature Page……………………………………………………………………………………………..……....iii
Acknowledgments ……………………………………………………………………………..……….………..iv
Table of Contents………………………………………………………………………………..…….…..……….v
List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………………………..…….………ix
List of Figures………………………………………………………………………………………....……………..x
List of Equations………………………………………………………………………………………….………xii
CHAPTER
CHAPTER 1: Introduction…………….………………………………………………………………………..1
1.1Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………….1
1.2 Statement of the Problem…......................................................................................................2
1.3 Motivation for the Study…………………………………………………………………………….3
1.4 Research Objective……….…….……………………………………………………………………...4
1.5 Research Questions……………………………………………………………………………………5
CHAPTER 2: Review of the Literature……………………………………………………………..…….6
2.1 Defining Lean………………………..……….……………………………………………………...…..6
2.2 History of Lean Manufacturing……………………………………………………………….....6
2.2.1 Henry Ford’s Mass Production System………………………………………….7
2.2.2 Beginning of the Toyota Production System……………………………….…9
2.2.3 The Lean Movement in the United States………………………………….….12
2.3 Lean Principles Manufacturing……………….………………………………………………...12

2.3.1 Quality………………………………………………………………………………………..13
2.3.2 Simplification……………………………………………………………………………..14
2.3.3 Cleanliness and Organization……………………………………………………...15
2.3.4 Visibility…………………………………………………………………………………….16
2.3.5 Cycle Timing………………………………………………………………………………16
2.3.6 Flexibility…………………………………………………………………………………..17
2.3.7 Measurement…………………………………………………………………………….18
2.3.8 Variation Reduction…………………………………………………………………...18
2.4 Waste in a Lean Environment……………………………………………………………….….20
2.5 Continuous Improvement…………………………………………………………………….….22
2.5.1 Fundamentals of Continuous Improvement…………………………...…....23
2.6 Value Stream Mapping…………………………………………………………………………..…24
2.7 Five S, Workplace Organization…………………………………………………………..….…25
2.8 Single-Piece-Flow and Small Lot Sizes……………………………………………………....27
2.9 Setup-Time Reduction……………………………………………………………………………...28
2.10 Kanban Systems……………………………………………………………………………………..29
2.11 Poka-Yoke……………………………………………………………………………………….……..33
2.12 Lean Tools for Problem Solving and Improvements……………….………………..33
2.12.1 Check Sheet……………………………………………………………………………....34
2.12.2 Histogram………………………………………………………………………..….……35
2.12.3 Pareto Analysis…………………………………………………………………………35
2.12.4 Process Flow Diagram……………………………………………………………….35
2.12.5 Cause-and-Effect Analysis………………………………………………………….36
CHAPTER 3: Current Process Overview and Improvements Implementations……37
3.1 Current Process Overview for Medium Voltage…..….……………….…..…….………37

3.1.1 Annealing Process……………………………………………………..……………….38
3.1.2 Winding Process………………………………………………………………….…….39
3.1.3 Assembly Process………………………………………………………………………40
3.1.4 HCEP Casting Operation………………………………………………………….….42
3.1.5 Other Manufacturing Processes………………………………………………….44
3.2 Current Stream Mapping…….……….………..………………………………………………….44
3.2.1 Identify the Bottleneck……………………………………………………………..…………..46
3.3 Current Stream Mapping with Kaizen Improvements……………………………..…47
3.4 Single-Piece Flow……………………………………………………………………….……..……..50
3.5 Quality…….…………………………………………………………………………………...………….54
3.5.1 Urethane and HCEP Shared Operations………………………………….……55
3.5.2 HCEP Operations………………………………………………………………….…….59
3.6 Kanban Systems…………………………………………………………………………...….………65
3.7 Cell Layout…………………………………………………………………………………..………….66
3.8 Setup Time Reduction…………………………………………………………..………..…..…….68
3.9 Organizing Workplace by Implementing 5 S………………………………….…………..70
3.10 Other HCEP Production Line Improvements……………………..…………….………72
Chapter 4: Conclusion and Recommendations…………………………………………...……….76
4.1 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………76
4.2 Recommendations…………………………………………………………………………....……..80
References…………………………………………………………………………………………………….…….82
Appendix A…………………………………………………………………………………………………….……85
Appendix B…………………………………………………………………………………………………….……86
Appendix C………………………………………………………………………………………………….……...87
Appendix D…………………………………………………………………………………………………...……88
Appendix E…………………………………………………………………………………………………...…….90
Appendix F……………………………………………………………………………………………………..…..91
List of Tables
Page
2.1 Urethane and HCEP Shared Operations Defect Rates……………………………………………55
4.1 Current State Compared to Future State…………………………………………………………..…..80

List of Figures
Page
2.1 Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle………………………………………………………………………….………....24
3.1 Process Flow Diagram of the Annealing Process……………………………………….……….…39
3.2 Process Flow Diagram of the Winding Process………………………………………………….…40
3.3 Process Flow Diagram of the Urethane Assembly Process………………………….……..….41
3.4 Process Flow Diagram of the HCEP Assembly Process……………………………….…….…...42
3.5 Process Flow Diagram of the HCEP Casting Operation……………………………………….…43
3.6 Current State Map of the Medium Voltage Product Family’s Manufacturing System.45
3.7 Current State Map with Recommended Kaizen Improvements………………………..…….48
3.8 Brainstorming Cloud Illustrating Improvement Suggestions...........................................…..51
3.9 Single-Piece Flow Assembly Processes Breakdown and Average Cycle Times…….….52
3.10 Histogram Illustrates the Progress of HCEP Assembly Process…………………………....53
3.11 Pareto Chart Illustrates Defects in Shared Operations………………………………………...56
3.12 Pareto Chart Illustrates Defects in High Winding Operation…………………………….….57
3.13 Image of New Winder with Rotating Fixture and Standardized Setup Blocks…….....58
3.14 Pareto Chart Illustrates Defects in HCEP Casting Operations……………………..….….….59
3.15 Pareto Chart Illustrates Defects in HCEP High Winding Operation………………..……...60
3.16 Image of Poka-yoke Device Being Used in the Assembly Process……………………….…61
3.17 Pareto Chart Illustrates Defects in HCEP Casting Operation……………………………...….62
3.18 Cause and Effect Diagram……………………………………………………………………………….…..63
3.19 Original Layout Design of Base-plating/ Patch Areas………………………………………..….67

3.20 Redesigned Layout of Base-plating/ Patch Areas…………………………………..………….68
3.21 Image of Shadow Board……………………………………………………………………..………...…..71
3.22 Image of Mobile Parts Container………………………………………………………..……….…….71
3.23 Image of Visual Control Device…………………………………………………………………....……72
3.24 Image of Visual Management Boards…………………………………………………………....…..72
3.25 Process Flow Diagram of Improved HCEP Casting Operation……………………….…....74
4.1 Future State Map of the Medium Voltage Product Family’s Production System……..77
List of Equations
Page
2.1 Cycle Time Formula………………………………………………………………………………………….….17
2.2 Output Rate Formula…………………………………………………………………………………….……..17
2.3 Reorder Point Formula…………………………………………………………………………………..……30
2.4 Kanban Containers Formula..................................................................................................................31
2.5 Kanban Containers with Safety Formula………………………………………………………………32
2.6 Production Kanban Formula…………………………………………………………………………..……32

Chapter 1
Introduction
1.1 Introduction
A revolution is taking place in all segments of the power industry. All across the
globe, countries and corporations are feeling pressure from world leaders to produce and
manage power with greater efficiency. This has led to an increase in demand for products
related to the power industry. According to IBISWorld Industry Report on Electrical
Equipment Manufacturing in the US, since 2009, there has been an annual growth of 0.8
percent in electrical equipment manufacturing, and it is forecasted to grow by 2.8 percent
annually from 2014 to 2019 (Kahn, 2014). The industry must position itself correctly to be
able to take full advantage of this growth in demand.
In today’s world it has become increasingly important for companies to be able to
compete on a global competitive market. Companies are no longer just competing for
business within their own local markets, but with companies that reach far across the
globe. Sarah Kahn (2014) states that in the electrical equipment industry, “Globalization
has increased in this industry due largely to the following: increased international trade;
foreign takeovers of companies and joint ventures; growing global demand for industry
products, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region; the offshoring of manufacturing operations
to low-wage cost countries by industry firms; and the outsourcing of production to third
parties in low-wage cost countries.” Customers are constantly looking for manufacturers
that can produce high quality products at an affordable price, faster, and meet all of their
requirements. For companies to be able to compete on this level they must strive to
produce their products more effectively and more efficiently than ever before. Lean
methodology has been becoming increasingly popular, because it offers organizations a
proven sensible path to long-term success (Sayer & Williams, 2007).
In 2014, the total revenue for the US electrical manufacturing industry is expected
to reach 41.2 billion dollars and transformers accounted for generating 15.2 percent of the
value of industry revenue (Kahn, 2014). IBISWorld estimates that the relatively strong
growth in this segment in the past five years was due in part to growth in demand arising
from transmission network modernization (Kahn, 2014). ABB Ltd. accounts for 7 percent
of the market share in the industry (Kahn, 2014). The transformer segment is expected to
grow faster than other segments and will account for a larger share of the industry revenue
in the future because transformers are heavy in weight and that makes them expensive to
transport from offshore and outsourced transformer manufacturing facilities abroad, and
will account for a larger share of the industry revenue (Kahn, 2014).
1.2 Statement of the Problem
ABB Group’s Medium Voltage Products facility located in Pinetops, North Carolina
manufactures instrument transformers. The facility cannot meet the demand for its
medium voltage product family. The medium voltage product family is divided into two
groups, Urethane and Hydrophobic Cycloaliphatic Epoxy (HCEP). The current demand for
the products in the medium voltage product family is approximately 1000 units per week,
600 Urethane units and 400 HCEP units. In 2013, the average number of units produced in
2
the medium voltage product family was 721 units per week, 522 Urethane units and 199
HCEP units.
The Medium Voltage product facility is a make-to-order facility. This means the
facility only starts to manufacture the desired product once the customer has placed the
order. According to the ABB’s Instrument Transformer Reference guide book, the medium
voltage production line produces 67 different varieties of products. Each one of the 67
different types of instrument transformers can be made to whatever ratio the customer
desires as long as it does not interfere with functionality and design of the product. Due to
long setup and changeover times, products are often produced in batches. Producing
products in batches should be avoided whenever possible because it increases inventory
carrying cost, increases work-in-progress inventory, and increases quality problems.
Producing in batches is also undesirable because the facility only has a certain number of
molds for the casting process and it leaves factory workers and casting machinery sitting
idle while waiting for the molds to cycle through the casting operations. Throughout the
medium voltage production floor there are other wastes such as: wasted motion, producing
defects, overproduction, waiting, material handling, and idle machine time.
1.3 Motivation for the Research
The motivation of this research is to apply Lean methods and tools to address
problems associated with processes used in a manufacturing setting. The research allows
the use of multiple methods and tools to make improvements in processes that will have
the greatest impact on increasing efficiency and the quality of the products being produced.
3
The research allowed for several processes to be studied and to get a greater
understanding of how these processes interact with and impact each other. Another
motivation for the research is that it can help the company’s management in the future to
solve similar operational problems in other areas.
1.4 Research Objective
The objective of the research was to study the production and quality related problems of
a production line and the application of Lean techniques and tools to resolve the problems and
improve productivity. The objective of the research was to study Lean thinking and apply
the solution that management thought would work best in its production facility. The
research will demonstrate applicability and benefits of the applied tools and approaches
used to obtain the desired outcome of increasing productivity and decreasing quality
defects. The research will work as an example to other similar facilities to benefit from the
lessons learned and the methods used in this study.
The main objectives for this study have been to:
1. Identify areas in the Medium Voltage Production that can reduce or
eliminate waste by implementing Lean Manufacturing principles.
2. Use Lean Manufacturing principles and tools to establish solutions to problems
on the manufacturing floor associated with capacity and wastes.
4
3. Document the effects of the implementation of Lean Manufacturing principles
and methodologies in processes involved with the manufacturing of the Medium
Voltage Product family.
1.5 Research Questions
The stated objectives are answered by addressing the following research questions:
1. How can the Medium Voltage production line benefit from implementing Lean
into their operations?
2. Where are the major bottlenecks in the Medium Voltage production line, and how
can implementing Lean techniques and methodologies help to reduce or
eliminate these bottlenecks?
5
Chapter 2
Review of Literature
2.1 Defining Lean
Lean is a philosophy that can be applied throughout the entire business process.
Lean is a strategy that affects every aspect of the organization. Although, Lean practices
started in manufacturing, the methodology can be applied in every aspect in an
organization (Sayer, & Williams, 2007). Lean based methodology focuses on eliminating
non value-added activities and streamlining operations by coordinating all of the activities
(Stevenson, 2009). Non-value added activities are all activities that do not directly increase
the value of a product or service (Cost & Daly, 2003). The primary objective of Lean
manufacturing is to improve manufacturing operations, increase productivity, reduce lead
time to deliver product to customers, and improve quality of the products (Sanchez &
Perez, 2001). A Lean operation is a flexible system that uses considerably less resources,
inventory, people, and floor space than a traditional operation. These improvements are
accomplished by eliminating non-value added activities, shortening manufacturing lead
times, improving product flow, and establishing a process of continuous improvement
(Labow, 1999).
2.2 The History of Lean Manufacturing
The gathering of practices and principles currently known as Lean happened in the
late 1980’s, but the origins of lean are much older than that (Sayer & Williams, 2007).
Natalie Sayer and Bruce Williams (2007), authors of “Lean for Dummies” stated that,
“Historians cite King Henry III of France in 1574 watching the Venice Arsenal build
complete galley ships in less than an hour using continuous-flow processes (p.19).” In the
18th century, there were many ideas and activities that contributed to the development of
what is known as Lean today. Benjamin Franklin established principles regarding waste
and excess inventory in manufacturing operations (Sayer & Williams, 2007). In 1776,
Adam Smith wrote “The Wealth of Nations” and in it he explained the principles of dividing
the tasks among more than one craftsman that could dramatically increase production in
large-volume production operations (Nicholas, 2011). In the middle of the 18th century, a
French gunsmith, Honore’ Le Blanc developed a system for using interchangeable parts to
manufacture muskets (Evens & Lindsay, 2005). In the 19th century, Frank and Lillian
Gilbreth paved the way to the modern-day acceptance of motion efficiency as it related to
assembly processes (Sayer & Williams, 2007). In the 20th century, the father of scientific
management, Fredrick Taylor introduced the idea of improving manufacturing operations
by studying the operation and then simplifying it (Nicholas, 2011). He introduced the
notion of standardized work and best-practices.
2.2.1 Henry Ford’s Mass Production System
A major contributor to lean methodologies and practices was Henry Ford. In 1903,
Henry Ford started the Ford Motor Company and began producing the Model A. At the
time each car was produced on a fixed assembly stand. A single craftsman would assemble
the majority of the car. The worker would retrieve all of his own parts. Often these parts
would not fit perfectly as intended. The craftsman would then have to pound, file, and
7
manipulate the part until it fit the assembly (Nicholas, 2011). In the next 5 years, Ford
made two major achievements that laid the groundwork for mass production. The first
achievement was the use of interchangeable part, and the second achievement was that he
designed a car that was made for manufacturing (Womack, Jones, & Roos, 1990). The next
major improvement that Ford implemented into his production process was that the parts
were then brought to the assemblers. This allowed the assemblers to stay at their work
station and work uninterrupted, all day (Nicholas, 2011).
In 1908, once Ford had achieved part interchangeability, he applied another
adjustment that would have the assemblers perform a single task (Womack, Jones, & Roos,
1990). Instead of having one assembler perform a majority of the tasks he had numerous
assemblers perform a single task and had them move from automobile to automobile
around the production facility. Womack, Jones, and Roos (1990) stated that, “By August
1913, just before the moving assembly line was introduced, the task cycle time for the
average Ford assembler had been reduced from 514 to 2.3 minutes.” He later improved on
this idea in 1913 when he introduced the moving assemble line. The moving assembly line
which brought the car past the stationary worker reduced the cycle time from 2.3 to 1.19
minutes (Womack, Jones, & Roos 1990). The moving automobiles eliminated time wasted
by the assemblers moving from workstation to workstation.
By 1931, Ford had established a completely vertically integrated company. The
Ford Motor Company not only made all of its own parts to produce the automobile, but it
also controlled the procurement and processing of the materials needed for production.
Ford did this to lower costs, tighten schedules, and so that he could produce parts with less
variation than his suppliers could produce (Nicholas, 2011).
8
According to Nicholas (2011), by 1926 Henry Ford was the world’s leading
automobile manufacture; he produced half of all the automobiles. To keep the prices of
parts down, machines were needed that could produce parts in high volume with little
downtime for changeovers. Ford was able to reduce his setup time by dedicating machines
to perform only one task at a time. He had his engineers develop fixtures and jigs for
holding the work piece in the machines. The worker could place the material in the
machine and push a button; this allowed the machine to be loaded and unloaded with five
minutes of training (Womack, Jones, & Roos, 1990). Ford avoided producing new products
because it was costly and difficult to modify products using dedicated machines. From
1908 until 1927 Ford only produce one automobile, the Model T (Nicholas, 2011). Since
Ford only produced one product, he was able to place his machines in sequence from one
manufacturing step to the next. The main downside to this system was that it was
extremely inflexible. In 1923 during the peak of the Model T production, The Ford Motor
Company produced 2.1 million automobiles (Womack, Jones, & Roos, 1990).
2.2.2 Toyota Production System
The Toyoda family got its start in the textile business in the 1800’s. Sakichi Toyoda
a leader in driving Japan’s industrial revolution was an engineer who made dramatic
improvements to the textile loom. According to Sayer and Williams (2007), The Toyoda
Automatic Loom Works was founded in 1926. Sakichi invented a mechanism that would
stop the loom automatically as soon as a thread broke. Since the looms stopped when the
thread broke no defects were made. This is where the term Jidoka comes from. Liker and
Ogden (2011) stated that, “This and other innovations were so ground breaking that the
9
Platt Brothers of England, the world’s most loom maker, eventually bought the right to one
of Toyoda’s most popular looms.” The money made from this sale was used to start-up the
Toyota Motor Corporation. In 1929, Kiichiro the son of Sakichi started traveling to Britain
and America to study the automobile manufacturing industry. Liker and Ogden (2011)
stated that, “It was Kiichioro Toyoda who, in a key document in the late 1930’s laying out
Toyota’s operating philosophy, first penned the words “just-in-time,” describing a
continuous flow of materials from raw materials to the customer.” In 1933, Kiichiro had
set up the automobile division at Toyoda Loom Works and it started producing cars in
1935. At the time the company specialized in making military trucks using craft methods.
At the end of 1949, Toyota nearly went bankrupt and was forced to lay off one-quarter of
its workforce.
In 1950, Ejji Toyoda an engineer and the nephew of Sakichi, visited the Ford Motor
Company’s Rouge manufacturing facility in Dearborn Michigan (Sayer, & Williams 2007).
At the time the facility was said to be the largest and most efficient automobile factory in
the world. At the time, the Rouge facility was producing nearly 7,000 automobiles a day
compared to the 2,685 that the Toyota Motor Company had produced in the entire 13 years
up to 1950 (Womack, Jones, & Rees, 1990). While studying Ford’s manufacturing plant Ejji
soon realized that the traditional mass production method used in America would not work
in Japan for a number of reasons. American manufacturing facilities only produced one
type of automobile at a plant. There were only a few automobile factories in Japan. At the
time, Japan did not have all the resources to dedicate to a facility that could only produce
one type of automobile. Plus, Toyota was not financially able to invest deeply in modern
10
technology and equipment. Ejji wanted his facility to be able to produce a variety of
different vehicles to meet the demand of the Japanese auto market.
Another reason the traditional mass production system would not work was
because of the strong labor unions in Japan. In 1946, the Japanese government
strengthened the rights of the unions. This greatly limited the ability of the company
owners to lay-off employees. In turn, this meant that the company could not hire and fire
workers like the American organizations could. When Toyota laid-off a quarter of its
workforce, the remaining workforce was given two guarantees. The first guarantee was
that the remaining members had lifetime employment, and the other was for pay, that
wages will be steeply graded by seniority (Womack, Jones, & Rees, 1990). In return, the
employees agreed to be flexible in their work assignments and actively initiate
improvements for the wellbeing of the organization.
After returning to Japan, Ejji consulted with his chief production engineer Taiichi
Ohno for the development of an improved system. The system they planned and developed
became less wasteful, had greater flexibility, and could be more efficient than the
traditional system of mass production (Nicholas, 2011). The system would have to
promote a culture to remove waste from within the organization. The system that they
developed at Toyota is called the Toyota Production System. The Toyota Production
System is the model for Lean production and just-in-time manufacturing (Sayer & Williams,
2007). From World War II until the 1970’s, these new techniques allowed Toyota and
other Japanese manufactures to make great strides in their manufacturing productivity
(Keyes, 2013). Japan had increases in productivity at a rate 400 percent higher than the
United States over the postwar years (Ouchi, 1981).
11
2.2.3 The Lean Movement
The Lean movement started in the United States mainly after the book “The Machine
That Changed the World” was published in 1990. The book was written by James Womack,
Daniel Jones, and Daniel Roos. It was written after a five year independent study. The
study was spent exploring the differences between mass production and Lean production
in the automobile industry (Womack, Jones, & Roos, 1990). The book goes into detail
about the techniques that Toyota used to eliminate waste and improve efficacies in the
organization that made it into the world class leader, that it is known today. By the time
the Lean movement hit the United States, the Japanese had already been using these
methods and tools for over forty years.
Another major contributor to the Lean movement in the United States was the
translation of the book “JIT Implementation Manual: The Complete Guide to Just-in-Time
Manufacturing”, written by Hiroyuki Hirano and published in 1989. The book was later
translated into English in 1990. The book explains in detail a structured approach to the
implementation of many of the concepts in Lean manufacturing. The book discusses
identification of waste, Five S, standard work, Kanban, visual management, cellular
manufacturing, Poka-yoke, production leveling, Jidoka, and quick changeover.
2.3 Lean Principles
Lean principles address matters about what an organization should do in terms of
product and process improvements. These principles include ideas and assumptions that
drive operational decisions and actions about products and processes (Nicholas, 2011).
12
The Lean principles that will be discussed in this study are: quality, organization of
workplace and cleanliness, visibility, simplification, reduction of variation, and cycle-time.
2.3.1 Quality
Quality is meeting or exceeding customer expectations. The customer is the one
who makes the decision if a product is considered to be a quality product or not. It is the
responsibility of an organization to be able to meet all of the customers’ requirements in
the most efficient way possible. If the company cannot meet all of the customer’s
requirements, the customer will most likely find another supplier who can meet the
requirements, or they will not continue to purchase products in the future. According to
James Evans and William Lindsey (2005), the authors of “An Introduction to Six Sigma and
Process Improvement,” Dr. Edwards Deming advised Japanese industrialists in the 1950’s
that continuous improvement of both products and production processes through better
understanding of customer requirements was the key to capturing world markets.
Once the organization has determined that the product design does fully satisfy
customer requirements, it then becomes the responsibility of the manufacturing
department to be able to produce the product so that it meets the specifications of the
product design. The term quality of conformance is used to describe that the manufactured
product consistently upholds the specifications in product design (Nicholas 2011).
Defect detection uses inspection, testing, and analysis to determine the existence of
defects. This information is then used to draw conclusions on the quality of the overall
process. Sayer and Williams (2007) stated that, “Inspection is deemed necessary when the
risk of the product or service advancing beyond the stage of the value stream will put the
13
customer at risk or have a great financial impact; it could be a point of no return for
repairs.” Defect inspection helps ensure that the faulty products do not reach the hands of
the customer. The problem with defect detection is that it does not improve the quality of
the product nor does it help reduce the amount of waste associated with rework and scrap.
In a Lean environment, the idea is to create a quality product at each step of the
value stream. It requires every production worker to inspect the product supplied by the
vendor or the immediately preceding production worker. If a defect is detected, the
production line worker would pass the product back upstream for correction (Rees, 1988).
If a product is complicated or too big to be returned to the previous worker, the worker
that possesses the product would push his or her Andon button or chord. This button
causes the production line to stop and visual lights to shine to draw attention to the
workstation or the machinery. Workers in the vicinity would immediately stop and assist
to fix the part or production machinery. Since every assembly worker is a quality
inspector, the need for inspectors is eliminated. A. J. Electronics an electronics
manufacturing company was able to reassign 22 full-time inspectors, whose
responsibilities were taken over by the 158 line workers (Rees, 1998). Techniques like this
not only free up workers for additional tasks, but they stop defective products from piling
up downstream at an inspection station. This method draws immediate attention to the
areas where defects occur.
2.3.2 Simplification
Lean manufacturing practices encourages organizations to make small continuous
improvements. It is easier and more cost effective to create and implement simple
14
solutions rather than complex and intricate solutions. John Nicholas (2011) stated that,
“Simplification means accomplishing the same ends but in less complex, more basic way or
with fewer inputs.” In a manufacturing environment any action to simplify a process or
operation usually results in the elimination of waste. Unless it is absolutely necessary, it is
better to go with the simpler solution. According to Sayer and Williams (2009), “Increased
complexity increases the risk of failure and lowers reliability.” In implementing Lean
techniques a good acronym to follow is “KIS,” it stands for “Keep it simple.”
In some cases operators or assemblers will need to learn procedures that take a
long time to master or involve special skills. These difficulties can be minimized by
simplifying work procedures so that anyone can easily understand how to perform them
(Hirano, 2009, Vol.3). Simplification and standardization aid in making multiple skills for
multi-process operations easier to learn.
2.3.3 Cleanliness and Organization
Many manufacturing facilities are disorganized, cluttered, and dirty. Disorganized
and dirty facilities makes work more difficult, often results in poor quality work, and can
create an unsafe work environment. John Nicolas (2011) stated that, “Time is wasted
looking for misplaced or lost materials; equipment problems are camouflaged by grime and
clutter; movement from one place to another is difficult; obsolete and discontinued
materials are mixed up with current, needed materials; tools are bent or broken; and
gauges and equipment are damaged and out of calibration.” An unorganized and cluttered
facility suggests a lack of discipline and many other kinds of waste throughout the
organization (Nicholas, 2009). Some of the reasons to maintain a clean and organized
15
facility include: higher productivity; turn out fewer defective products, more on-time
deliveries; and safer places to work (Hirano, 1999, Vol. 3 & Hirano, 1996). For the reasons
listed above, for organizations implementing Lean production methods it makes sense for
them to start by organizing and cleaning their facilities.
2.3.4 Visibility
In a traditional manufacturing setting, information is normally given to a privileged
few individuals. The majority of frontline workers are given little information. The
employees are only given information that has been approved by management. Much
needed important and useful information never gets to the frontline worker where it is
needed the most. John Nicholas (2009) states that, “The essence of visibility is to redirect
information so it is visible to workers on the frontline, and immediately so, whenever they
need it.” Visual controls are a means of turning specialist-knowledge known only to
management into plain and transparent information for everyone (Hirano, 2009, Vol.3).
There are many visual control methods, each suited to tackle a different type of problem.
Some visual control methods bring latent problems to the surface while others help to
identify waste (Hirano, 2009, Vol.3).
2.3.5 Cycle Time
The cycle time is the time standard set by joining work components together into
jobs (Meyers & Stephans, 2005). It is the total amount of elapsed time from the time a
process or task is started until it is complete. The cycle time establishes the output rate of
the production line. In manufacturing, the concept of cycle timing suggests a regularity of
16
timing or rhythm. It is beneficial because it reduces production uncertainty and permits
workers and managers to better anticipate and prepare for the future (Nicholas, 2011).
Manufacturing regularity guarantees that products are produced at a steady rate. This
benefits practically every activity in manufacturing. The production rate should be
determined by the desired output rate. If the desired output rate does not fall between the
maximum and minimum bounds, the desired output rate needs to be revised (Stevenson,
2009). The formula to calculate cycle time is shown below in Equation 2.1, and the formula
to calculate output rate is shown in Equation 2.2.
Operating time per day

Cycle time =
Desired output rate
Equation 2.1 Cycle Time Formula.
Operating time per day

Output rate =
Cycle time
Equation 2.2 Output Rate Formula.
2.3.6 Flexibility
Manufacturing flexibility refers to the ability of a process to adjust to changes in
products or demand. The changes might relate to alterations in design features of a
product, or to the volume demanded by the customer, or the mix of products offered by an
organization (Stevenson, 2009). An organization that is highly flexible will have a
competitive advantage over an organization that is not flexibly in a changeable
17
environment. An organization that is highly flexible will have the ability to economically
switch back and forth among products, produce any of them in almost any quantity, and do
so quickly in response to unplanned changes in demand (Nicholas, 2009).
2.3.7 Measurement
Measurement is absolutely necessary in applying Lean techniques to an
organization. Measurement is used to figure out the current process capabilities, past
process capabilities, and to determine the desired process outcome. Any area for which an
improvement is desired, must first be measured to establish an initial baseline. The
baseline will then be used to gauge the progress of the improvement and to determine if
further action is needed. After the project is completed, measurement is still needed to
ensure that the progress is maintained and to inspire future projects (Nicholas, 2011).
2.3.8 Variation Reduction
Variation refers to the amount from which something is different from some
nominal value (Nicholas, 2009). In a manufacturing process, variation can cause waste and
poor quality. A production process contains many sources of variation. Physical and
emotional stress affects operators’ consistency, and operators do not place parts in the
fixtures consistently. Materials being used vary in strength, thickness, or moisture content
(Evens & Lindsay, 2008). Machine cutting tools vary in strength and composition. In the
manufacturing process, tools experience wear, electrical fluctuations cause variations in
power, and vibrations may cause inconsistency in machine performance (Evens & Lindsay,
2008). To add to the factors listed above, human inspection and measurement gauges may
18
not be uniform. Even when using the same measuring instrument on several items which
are all the same, there is lack precision in the measuring instrument; extremely precise
instruments always reveal slight differences (Evens & Lindsay, 2008). The complex
interaction of variations in operators, machines, tools, materials, and the environment are
referred to as common causes of variation. James Evans and William Lindsay (2008) stated
that:
Common causes are a result of the design of the product and production
system and generally account for about 80 to 95 percent of the observed
variation in the output of a production process. Therefore, common cause
variation can only be reduced if the product is redesigned, or if better
technology or training is provided for the production process.
Variation also has an effect on production lead times and cost. Hopp and Spearman
(1996) denotes it as the “corrupting influence” of variation on system performance. They
note that in a steady-state-system, variation increases average cycle times and WIP levels,
and that variation at an early stage of a process has a greater influence on cycle times and
WIP levels than variation at later stages in the process.
In a thorough designed product or process where specified values have been set to
provide customer satisfaction and to optimize system performance, any amount of
deviation from specified values will result in less than optimal performance (Nicholas,
2011). Quality expert Dr. Genichi Taguchi, articulated this less-than-optimal result as a
“loss” to the customer and the manufacturer (Ross, 1995). The closer a product or process
comes to meeting its specified values, the better the overall performance of the system and
19
lower the cost experienced by the customer and the manufacturer. In Lean manufacturing,
reducing variation can be done by enforcing the methods such as preventive maintenance,
standardized work procedures, machine setup, and by using leveled production schedules
(Nicholas, 2011).
Variation can create some of the following problems in a manufacturing operation (Melnyk,
& Christensen, 2002):
1.) Variation makes it difficult to detect potential problems early
2.) Variation makes it difficult to find root causes
3.) Variation increases unpredictability
4.) Variation contributes to the “bullwhip” effect
5.) Variation reduces capacity utilization
2.4 Waste in a Lean Environment
In applying Lean philosophy, the main objective is to eliminate waste or to reduce
the amount of waste as much as possible. In Lean, waste equals unproductive resources.
By eliminating the waste it frees up resources and optimizes production. There are seven
types of waste in Lean manufacturing identified by Toyota and first described by Taiichi
Ohno (Ohno, 1978). These wastes are universal and found in almost every organization.
The Seven Wastes in Lean Manufacturing
1.) Defect waste- Any product or process that fails to meet specifications
20
2.) Transportation waste- Transportation of products and materials between
processes. The more the product or material is moved, the greater the opportunity
for it to get damaged.
3.) Waiting time waste- Waiting of any kind is considered a waste. Any time an
operator is sitting idle is waste. It can arise from waiting on orders, materials, parts,
equipment repairs, materials from preceding processes, or operators waiting for
machines to complete automated processes.
4.) Inventory or storage waste- Inventory found anywhere in the value stream is
considered to be non-value added and is a waste. Inventory ties up financial
resources, requires storage space, and requires other resources to track and
manage. Plus inventory runs the risk of being damaged, becoming obsolete, and
containing quality issues. Toyota labeled inventory as the root of all evil (Iman,
1993). Inventory is considered evil because it covers up additional waste.
5.) Over production waste - Producing more than demanded by the customer is
considered to be waste. It causes inventory carrying costs to increase, and if
products are not immediately sold, they can be damaged, and have to be sold at a
reduced price, or become obsolete and have to be discarded.
6.) Excess motion waste- Motion or movement that is not necessary to do the work
is consider non-value added and is a waste.
7.) Over processing waste- Any processing to the product that is unnecessary, or
that does not add value is considered to be waste. This can also be the result of
outdated technology.
21
Muda is the Japanese word for waste and inefficiency. The seven different types of
waste are further divided into two classifications.
Type-1 Muda- includes actions that are non-value-added, but deemed necessary by
the organization. This type of waste usually cannot be eliminated.
Type-2 Muda- includes actions that are non-value added, but deemed not necessary
by the organization. This type of waste is usually targeted for elimination first
during improvement projects.
2.5 Continuous Improvement
In Lean production, management focuses the organization on continuously
identifying and removing sources of waste. The Japanese concept of Kaizen is the idea that
great improvement eventually comes from a series of small incremental improvements
(Nicholas, 2011). It is not a one-time fix or short term solution to a problem, but a
continuous evolutionary process of change and adaption. It is a culture instilled into the
organization to strive for perfection.
Kaizen involves everyone in the organization, at all levels, and is not regulated to an
isolated function or specialty (Sayer & Bruce, 2007). Senior management is responsible for
creating a Kaizen based culture and setting goals. They provide the resources required for
implementation. Middle management is responsible for ensuring that the workforce has
the materials, tools and skills to perform Kaizen (Sayer & Bruce, 2007). They ensure that
implementation is occurring and that goals are being achieved. Supervisors are
responsible for ensuring that Kaizen is occurring on an individual and group level (Sayer &
22
Bruce, 2007). They ensure that standardized operating procedures are being followed.
They also train the employees. Everyone is expected to make improvement suggestions.
2.5.1 Continuous Improvement Fundamentals
A common approach to continuous improvement is to conduct a project or a blitz.
These are team based events that usually last two to three days. The event is facilitated by
a person experienced in lean manufacturing and team facilitation and led by a supervisor
or manager who oversees the project (Nicolas, 2011). The purpose of these events is not
only to tackle problems and wastes, but also to demonstrate and teach lean methods and
principles.
Shigeo Shingo, a Lean manufacturing expert, has stated that improvement requires a
continuous cycle of perceiving and thinking (Robinson, 1990). A commonly used approach
in lean is the Plan-Do-Check-Act (PDCA) cycle. It was developed by Walter Shewhart, and is
known as the Deming cycle, after W. Edwards Deming, who brought its recognition in Japan
(Walton, 1986). The Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle is illustrated in Figure 2.1.
23
Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle
Plan Do
Act Check
Figure 2.1 Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle.
2.6 Value Stream Mapping
Value stream mapping is a visual technique used in Lean manufacturing to describe
how an organization currently operates (Chaneski, 2002). The value stream is the
sequence of both value added and non-value added activities in the production of a product
or service starting from order received from a customer until product or service is
delivered to the customer . Value stream mapping is a valuable tool to manufacturers
because it is simple to use while accurately depicting the relationship between value added
time and process waste (Chaneski, 2004). Value stream mapping techniques uses standard
icons and diagramming principles to visually display the steps in a process, and the
material and information flowing through it, from start to finish (Nicholas, 2011).
Value stream mapping techniques uses around two-dozen standard icons. The icons
and mechanics used in value stream mapping are fully described in the book “Learning to
See,” written by Mike Rother and Johns Shook (Rother & Shook, 1999). The icons represent
24
features of the process such as inventory, process steps, material transfer, operators,
Kanbans, schedules, shipments, truck shipments, and information flows. Information on
each process step is also included on the map. Information on the process steps may
include cycle time, up time, batch size, number of operators, changeover time, and
defect/scrap rate (Nicholas, 2011).
Jim Womack stated that, “Value-stream maps of the current state are the most useful
tool for evaluating the state of any process (Womack, 2006, p.6).” Information to make the
current state map is collected directly from the shop floor so that it may aid in stimulating
ideas for future improvements. Once the current state is properly analyzed and wastes are
uncovered, a future state map is made to depict the process after the wastes have been
removed and improvements made.
In this research, process flow diagrams were used to describe the processes
involved in manufacturing instrument transformers, and then a current state map detailed
the current operating states of the manufacturing system. The current state map helped
identify the sources of waste. After the waste had been identified, other lean tools such as,
single-piece flow, setup time reduction, 5 S, Poka-yoke, and Kanban systems were utilized
to reduce or eliminate the waste. Value stream mapping was used as the foundation stone
to employ all of the Lean principles and waste reduction tools. A future state map was then
generated to show the production system after the Lean tools had been applied.
2.7 5 S, Workplace Organization
5 S is a management technique that helps organize a workplace by making it more
visual, safer, and free of clutter (Casey, 2013). Cleanliness and organization are important
25
because it makes it easier to spot and remove waste in the workplace. The methodology
was developed in Japan in the 1980’s as one of the techniques that enabled Just-in-Time
Manufacturing. 5 S is a workplace organization method that was created by Hiroyuki
Hirano. The 5 S organizational method is named after a list of five Japanese words that
start with S. The Five S’s are: seiri (sort), seiton (set in order), seiso (shine), seiketsu
(standardize), and shitsuke (sustain).
A brief disruption of each of the Five S’s are listed below:
1.) Seiri (Sort): Sort everything in the workplace. Place items not used in a red-tag
holding area. If no one claims items in the red-tag area, throw the items away.
2.) Seition (Set in Order): Specify a logical place for everything, and put everything
in its place. Everything should be organized or straightened. Items can be
organized by number or color-coded.
3.) Seiso (Shine): Everything should be washed, cleaned, or painted. This will allow
new dirt and grime to be obvious so that corrective action can be taken. This step
should be integrated through daily activities.
4.) Seiketsu (Standardize): Create principles or procedures for maintaining the first
three S’s. Standardize is the condition that exists after the Shine has been practiced
for a while (Hirano, 1996).
5.) Shitsuke (Sustain): Sustaining and maintaining the cleanliness and organization.
Cleanliness and organization is maintained through workforce discipline and
frequent inspection of the work area.
26
2.8 Single-Piece Flow
In Lean manufacturing, the ideal number of products to produce is one unit at a
time. Producing one unit at a time is called single-piece flow. Single-piece flow allows
operators to stop the production line when a defect occurs. This allows the item to be fixed
immediately if possible so that corrective action can be taken to eliminate the cause of the
defect. Each operator is also expected to inspect each item so that if a defect occurs it will
not continue to be processed downstream.
Producing one unit at a time is not always realistic owing to practical considerations
requiring minimum lot sizes (Stevenson, 2009). Certain machines such as heat-treating
equipment and casting equipment processes multiple units at a time, making it infeasible to
process one unit at a time. Nonetheless, the goal is to reduce the lot sizes as much as
possible. Producing units in small lot sizes has a number of advantages; such as, small lot
sizes moving through the production system reduces the amount of in-process inventory.
This reduces carrying costs, enables materials to flow better, reduces space requirements,
and reduces clutter in the work space. Secondly, it reduces scrap and rework if quality
problems occur because there are fewer units in a lot (Stevenson, 2009). Defect reduction
also decreases the amount of raw material, energy, and waste associated with fixing
defective products that must be reworked (Witt, 2006). Third and last, small lot sizes
permit greater flexibility in scheduling, which in turn reduces lead times if a variety of units
are demanded.
In traditional manufacturing the normal practice was to produce products in large
batch sizes. This practice was justified by management to offset high setup cost, long
changeover times, and also by the high capital cost of high-speed dedicated machinery
27
(Nicholas, 2011). Although high-speed dedicated machines are very efficient, they are also
very expensive to purchase. Managers often produced products in massive quantities to
justify the expense regardless of the product demand. Producing products in large batches
often results in increased inventory levels due to overproduction. The more inventory is
lying around, the higher the chances are for it to become damaged. High inventory levels
leads to higher carrying cost, loss of valuable space on the production floor, and congestion
of material flow in the facility. Large batch product is also associated with longer lead
times because it ties up machines longer and reduces scheduling flexibility (Nicholas,
2011). Large batch production also tends to negatively affect the quality of products.
Production problems and defects resulting from incorrect setups of the machinery often
affect the entire batch of products rather than a single product. It is also difficult to identify
and respond to defects until the entire batch is processed or multiple pieces are produced
(Witt, 2006).
2.9 Setup Time Reduction
In the past, long and elaborate setups were one of the reasons to justify large batch
production. In today’s market, organizations are trying to maintain a competitive edge by
being more responsive to customer demand by reducing lead times, improving quality, and
offering them a variety of different products. A strategy to achieve this is to produce
products in small lot sizes allowing the company to reduce lead times and become more
flexible (Bikram & Khanduja, 2010). According to Pannesi (1995), this can only be
achieved if setups become foolproof, quick, and efficient. Small lot sizes and changing
product mixes requires frequent setups. Since setups are a collection of sequence
28
dependent changeover activities which are performed before the production of any item,
machine productive time can be increased by reducing its setup times (Bikram & Khanduja,
2010). All setup are considered waste because they add no value to the product, and they
tie up equipment and labor (Nicholas, 2011).
Shigeo Shingo a Japanese industrial engineer, made a significant contribution to
Lean operations with the development of the technique called the single-minute-exchange
of die (SMED). SMED is a system for reducing changeover time. The benefits of the system
were illustrated at a Toyota facility in 1982, when the setup time of a machine was
drastically reduced from 100 minutes to 3 minutes (Stevenson, 2009). The system involves
categorizing the activities as either “external” or “internal”. External activities are activities
that can be carried out without stopping the machine. Internal activities are activities that
need the machine to be stopped to be performed. The idea is to convert as many internal
activities into external activities and then streamline the remaining activities (Stevenson,
2009).
2.10 Kanban Systems
The Japanese word for “signal” or “visible record” is Kanban. Kanban is a scheduling system
for Lean manufacturing and just-in-time production. In a Kanban pull system, when
a worker needs work or materials from the preceding station, the operator uses a
Kanban card (Stevenson, 2009). The Kanban card gives the operator authorization
to transport or work on parts. Parts are not allowed to be transported or worked on
without a Kanban card. According to Hirano (2009), in a Kanban pull production
system there are six rules that need to be followed:
29
1.) Downstream processes withdraw items from upstream processes.
2.) Upstream processes produce only what is withdrawn.
3.) Only defect free products are sent to the next process.
4.) Establish level production; demand variation is smoothed by adjusting the
number of Kanban cards.
5.) Kanban should move with the items to ensure visual control.
6.) Use Kanban to discover new areas for improvement. As Kanban are gradually
reduced, new areas for improvement will be uncovered.
The Kanban pull system is a variation of the reorder-point system according to
Nicholas (2011). The reorder point system replenishes inventory whenever the inventory
level drops to a critical level. The reorder point (ROP), is based upon the amount of
inventory used between the time when the order is placed and when the order is received
(Nicholas, 2011). The formula to calculate the reorder point is shown in Equation 2.3.
Reorder point = Demand (Leadtime) + Safety stock
Equation 2.3 Reorder Point Formula.
In a Kanban pull production system, standard-sized containers are used to transport
and place items. Each container holds a predetermined quantity of parts. The equation to
calculate the amount of Kanban containers is a variation of the ROP formula. Lead time is
30
broken up into two separate categories, production time and conveyance time. Production
time is the total time to produce the quantity ordered, including the setup time, processing
time, and planned waiting time (Nicholas, 2011). Conveyance time is the time to convey
the order to the upstream operation (Nicholas, 2011). The formula to calculate the
number of completely full containers is shown in Equation 2.4.
Demand(Production time + Conveynance time)

Containers =
Container capacity
Equation 2.4 Kanban Container Formula.
A safety factor is often included when determining the amount of containers to use.
A safety factor is used to accommodate for minor fluctuations in demand. The more level
the demand, the less there is a need for a safety factor. The more the demand fluctuates
and problems arise in the production process, the safety factor should be increased. The
safety factor acts as a buffer to smooth out the production process. According to Nicholas
(2011), as a general rule, a 10% safety factor should be used to start with and try to
decrease it to whatever practical experience allow. X is used to represent the safety factor.
Lead time can be production time, conveyance time, or the sum of both. The formula to
calculate the amount of containers with a safety factor is shown in Equation 2.5.
Demand(Leadtime)(1 + X)
Containers =
Container quantity
31
Equation 2.5 Kanban Containers with Safety Factor Formula.
A brief description of the two types of Kanban systems used in the study is listed below.
1.) A production Kanban or P-Kanban is used to authorize the production of
assemblies or parts. No parts or assemblies are authorized to be produced without
a P-Kanban card. P-Kanban gives instructions on processes that do not require any
changeover times (Hirano, Vol. 3, 2009). The formula to calculate P-Kanban is
shown in Equation 2.6.
Demand(Production time)
P − Kanban =
Container quantity
Equation 2.6 Production Kanban formula.
2.) A two-bin system is a system that uses only two containers. When materials are
needed to satisfy demand; materials are removed from only one of the bins. When
the bin becomes empty, authorization is sent to produce or order more material. In
the meantime, material needed to satisfy demand is removed from the second bin.
The amount held in each bin is specified by the reorder point quantity (enough to
meet demand until a full bin arrives) (Nicholas, 2011).
32
2.11 Poka-yoke
Poka-yoke is a Japanese term that means “mistake proofing”. Shiego Shingo is
credited with first applying the concept of Poka-yoke when he worked at Toyota as an
industrial engineer. Shingo’s ideas of mistake-proofing are used to eliminate product
defects by preventing, correcting, or drawing attention to human errors as they occur
(Robinson, 1997). In Lean manufacturing, Poka-yoke is a process improvement designed
to prevent a specific defect from occurring (Maivannan, 2006). Poka-yoke is any
mechanism or system that prevents defects from occurring (Nicholas, 2011).
According to Hiroyuki Hirano (Vol. 4, 2009), Poka-yoke devices can be divided into
three main categories. The first category is “stop devices.” Stop devices can detect defects
or certain abnormalities that lead to defects. The device stops the machine’s current
operation immediately if it detects a defect or an abnormality that could lead to a defect.
The second category is “control devices.” Control devices prevent operators from drifting
from standard operations or they can keep defective goods from continuing to the next
process. The third category is “warning devices.” Warning devices uses lights and/or
buzzers to notify operators that a defect has occurred, or an abnormality has occurred that
could lead to defects. The most effective Poka-yoke devices will ensure that the proper
condition exists before proceeding to the next process step so that the defect never occurs
(Manivannan, 2009).
2.12 Lean Tools for Problem Solving
In Lean manufacturing, there are multiple tools that aid in solving different types of
problems. Most of the tools used are primarily graphical in nature. Natalie Sayer and
33
Bruce Williams (2009) stated that, “Graphical representations communicate more
information than raw data and present the data in a form that often enables problems to be
more obvious.” The tools used are simple tools so that anyone can use and understand
them.
2.12.1 Checklist and Check Sheets
Check lists are used to standardize procedures such as setups or assembly. They
provide step by step instructions on how a procedure should be done. The checklist should
not only give step by step instructions, but also list the tools, fixtures, requirements,
materials, and parts needed to perform the task. A checklist will ensure that no steps, tools,
parts, or requirements are over looked in the procedure. Checklist should be posted at the
machine or workstation if possible. Without a checklist, the procedure performed would
vary from operator to operator. They aid in reducing defects by providing standardization
and not relying on the operators’ memorization of how a procedure should be performed.
Checklists can also reduce setup times because operators can review procedures and stage
materials prior to performing internal setup steps.
A check sheet also called a tally sheet is just a standard way to collect and view data.
The data on the sheet is collected and recorded through observations. The design of a check
sheet will vary depending on the particular purpose and the data being recorded. John
Nicholas (2011) stated that, “The Check sheet and its method of usage must be designed to
minimize inter-observer subjectivity, meaning that the results of observations recorded on
the sheet would be the same, no matter who is filling in the sheet.”
34
2.12.2 Histograms
A histogram is a type of bar chart that graphically shows how frequently something
occurs. Each bar is of equal width and represents a fixed range of measurement (Sayer &
William, 2007). Histograms do not normally show the cause of variations or problems.
2.12.3 Pareto Analysis
A Pareto analysis is a special type of chart used for separating the vital few from the
trivial many. The chart is similar to a bar chart. Values are arranged in descending order,
with the largest value listed first. The chart is named after the Italian economist Vilfredo
Pareto, who discovered the “80-20 rule,” also known as the Pareto Principle (Sayer &
Williams, 2007). The chart shows both the absolute number and the percentage of
contribution.
2.12.4 Process Flow Diagrams
Process flow diagrams visually show the steps in a process and the sequence the
steps occur in. Process flow diagrams are a useful tool to critically examine the overall
sequence of an operation by focusing on the flow of materials (Stevenson, 2009). The
diagrams aid in identifying areas in a process that are needed to be completed. Different
shapes are used as icons to represent different activities such as: start of a process,
inspection, transportation, storage, a decision, delay, and end of a process. Process flow
diagrams are also useful tools to aid in the development of a value stream map.
35
2.12.5 Cause-and-Effect Analysis
Cause-and-effect analysis is a method used to identify all possible contributions
(causes) to an outcome (effect). It is also known as a fishbone diagram because it looks like
a fish skeleton. The method was introduced by the Japanese quality expert Kaoru Ishikawa.
The method uses brainstorming techniques with a team to generate as many ideas as
possible to figure out a specific problem. The contributors are normally divided into six
categories. The six usual categories are: manpower, environment, people, methods,
equipment, and measurement. The tool is used to figure out possible root causes of a
problem.
36
Chapter 3
Current Process Overview and Improvement Implementations
3.1 Current Process Overview for Medium Voltage
ABB Group’s Medium Voltage Product facility manufactures instrument
transformers. The medium voltage instrument transformer product family is divided into
two groups, Urethane and Hydrophobic Cycloaliphatic Epoxy (HCEP). In 2013, the average
number of units produced in the product family was 721 units per week, 522 Urethane
units and 199 HCEP units. The current demand for the products in the medium voltage
product family is approximately 1000 units per week, 600 Urethane units and 400 HCEP
units.
During the study, popular selling models of medium voltage transformers were
tracked throughout the manufacturing process. In addition to Voltage Transformers, ABB
also manufacturers Current Transformers, but they were not included in this study.
Process flow diagrams were used to identify the sequence of activities and the flow of
information and materials in the process. Process flow diagrams facilitate better
understanding of the process based on the picture of the steps needed to accomplish a task
(Evens & Lindsay, 2008). This study conducted a process flow study before going for Value
Stream based analysis.

3.1.1 Annealing Process
The manufacturing process for instrument transformers starts with manufacturing
the cores. A winder called the Tranco, is used to wind cores with electrical steel (silicon
steel). After the core is wound, a brick is placed in the center of the core. The core is then
pressed to achieve the desired shape. The cores are then loaded onto a tray and placed into
a storage area.
The cores are then taken from storage trays and loaded into an annealing furnace
basket. The basket is loaded with 3600 lbs. of assorted cores and placed into the annealing
furnace. The cores used in this study weigh approximately thirty pounds per piece. There
are three furnaces used to anneal multiple products manufactured in the facility. The
basket is loaded into the annealing furnaces. The furnace requires a fourteen hour run
cycle for the cores used in the study. After the furnace has completed its cycle, the lid is
opened and the basket is removed. Once the cores are cool enough to handle, the annealing
basket is unloaded, the bricks are removed, and the cores are placed into carts. The carts
are then placed into a storage area. A process flow diagram of the annealing process is
illustrated in Figure 3.1.
38
Figure 3.1 Process Flow Diagram of the Annealing Process.
3.1.2 Winding Process
The winding process is done in parallel with the annealing process. The Low
voltage part of the winding is wound on a tube using a Low Winder. There is one Low
Winder operator for both Urethane and HCEP. After the Low voltage part is wound, the
unit is placed into a storage area. The unit is retrieved from the storage area and the High
voltage part of winding is wound. The unit is then placed into a storage area. There are six
High winder operators for both Urethane and HCEP. The Highs voltage parts are wound
two units at a time. A process flow diagram of the winding operation is illustrated in
Figure 3.2.
39
Figure 3.2 Process Flow Diagram of the Winding Process.
3.1.3 Assembly Process
The assembly process is performed at individual work stations. Urethane has six
assemblers and HCEP (also called APG) has five assemblers. The core is inserted into the
unit and is then assembled. The entire unit is assembled by one assembler. Urethane units
get tested after the assembly of the unit. HCEP units get tested after the cores have been
inserted because the assembly process is more labor intensive and time consuming. After
the units are assembled and tested they are placed in a storage area. Assemblers often
assemble multiple units at a time and leave unfinished units for the next shift to complete.
Process flow diagrams of the assembly process for Urethane and HCEP units are illustrated
in Figure 3.3 and Figure 3.4.
40
Figure 3.3 Process Flow Diagram of the Urethane Assembly Process.
41
Figure 3.4 Process Flow Diagram of the HCEP Assembly Process.
3.1.4 HCEP Casting Operation
The HCEP units are cast two units at a time. The HCEP units are preheated in an
oven for two hours to remove moisture before being cast. The units are built up on mold-
bases that sit on the carriage attached to the casting press. The build-up process involves
attaching the units to the mold-bases with fasteners, attaching terminal leads to the
terminal block, attaching a partial discharge screen, crimping and soldering the high
voltage bar, and attaching the high voltage bar to the bar holder. After the units have been
built up, they are cast in the casting press. Once the casting process is complete, the casting
press is opened and the units are broken down on the mold-bases that sit on the carriage
attached to the machine. After the units have been removed from the machine, the units
42
are placed into the post cure oven and the mold is quickly cleaned. The post cure oven is
fed by a continuous conveyor and is a shared process used by HCEP and Urethane. The
remainder of the manufacturing operations is fed by a shared conveyor system. After the
post cure oven, the units go through a five hour cooling process and then proceed to the
base-plate/patch area. The following process flow diagram in Figure 3.5 illustrates the
HCEP casting process.
Figure 3.5 Process Flow Diagram of the HECP Casting Operation.
43
3.1.5 Other Manufacturing Processes
After leaving the patch area, all medium voltage instrument transformers go to pre-
assembly before going to testing. Once testing is complete, the units go to final assembly
and then to packaging.
3.2 Current State Map
Value stream based analysis was used to study the overall manufacturing process to
reduce waste by identifying reasons of waste and plan overall improvement. Value stream
analysis is a major productivity improvement and waste reduction tool that an
organization can employ to evaluate its processes (Meyers & Stephens, 2005). Value stream
analysis starts with the development of a current state map. The current state map shows
all of the steps in the process for manufacturing medium volt transformers. Data collection
for the material flow started downstream at the shipping department and worked
upstream to the annealing process. During the study, a small team walked the value stream
and collected data. The data collected included: cycle times, inventory levels before each
process, number of shifts, material flows, defect rates per process, hours per shift, number
of operators, and setup times. Information regarding the amount of raw materials was
generated by the purchasing department. The cycle times, setup times, and loading times
was determined by actual data gathered on the production floor. After collecting all of the
information, a current state map was constructed. A current state map illustrating the
44
manufacturing process is shown in Figure 3.6. Refer to Appendix A for a larger image of
Figure 3.6. The current stream map shown below is base off of a primed production
processes. According to Dr. Merwan Mehta, a professor at East Carolina University and a
Lean consultant, “Repetitive processes that are constantly being carried out can be
considered primed processes (Mehta, n.d.)”. If a process can stay primed, the efficiency of
the process will be higher than a process that is infrequently done (Mehta, n.d.).
Figure 3.6 Current State Map of the Medium Voltage Product Family’s Manufacturing
System.
45
The timeline has three components. The lead time for loading units is for a single
unit, the rest of the lead time is based off of actual observed inventory levels. The first
component is production lead time in days. The total observed lead times values for the
current state map are:
For the Urethane line: 31.8 days
For the HCEP line: 34.91 days
The second element of the timeline is the processing time in seconds. The
processing times in the timeline are for a single unit. The processing time used in the rest
of the map is dependent on the lot size listed in the information boxes. The total observed
processing times for the current state map are:
For the Urethane line: 4,699 seconds
For the HCEP line: 6,885 seconds
The third element of the timeline is the acceptable quality percentage (AQP). The
AQP for the study is calculated by using the process defect rate (1-rejected percentage).
The overall acceptable quality percentage for the current state map is:
For the Urethane line: 85.2%
For the HCEP line: 82.3%
3.2.1 Identify the Bottleneck
46
According to William Stevenson (2010), “A bottleneck operation is an operation in a
sequence of operations whose capacity is lower than the capacities of other operations in
the sequence.” The capacity of the bottleneck operation restricts the manufacturing
system, and therefore the manufacturing system is limited to the capacity of the bottleneck
operation (Stevenson, 2010). In the Urethane and HCEP production lines, the bottle neck
operation is the assembly process with an average cycle time of 870 seconds for the
Urethane line and 3,164 seconds for HCEP line. The only way to increase the capacity of
the production lines is to reduce the cycle times of the assembly processes.
3.3 Current State Map with Recommended Kaizen Improvements
After constructing the current state map, various recommendations were made to
eliminate or reduce waste in the manufacturing process. The recommended improvements
made by the improvement team were prioritized and approved by management. Figure 3.7
shows the current state map with kaizen bursts and quality points as recommended
improvements. Refer to Appendix B for a larger image of Figure 3.7.
47
Figure 3.7 Current State Map with Recommended Kaizen Improvements.
The improvements are prioritized in the Kaizen bursts and quality points by
numbers inside the symbols. The improvement recommendations are listed below:
Improvements Recommendations:
1.) Replace batch annealing furnaces with continuous flow annealing furnace with an
automated conveyor system.
48
2.) HCEP product line will have a dedicated line (post-cure oven, conveyor system, base
plate/patch area, pre-assembly, testing equipment, and final assembly).
3.) Single-piece-flow for Urethane assembly process with a 30% increase in production.
4.) Single-piece-flow for HCEP assembly process with a 60% increase in production.
5.) Replace High winders with semi-automated winders that are programmable logic
controller (PLC) operated. Design and implement rotating fixture to support winder arbor
and to aid in setups for replacement winders. Design and implement standardized setup
blocks for replacement winders. Add one extra winder to the process.
6.) Design and implement build-up tables and fixtures for the HCEP casting operation.
7.) Install timers on the preheat ovens in the HCEP casting area.
8.) Redesign Urethane base-plate/patch area layout.
9.) Redesign HCEP base-plate/patch area layout.
10.) Implement 5 S methodology for the Urethane assembly area, the HCEP assembly area,
and the HCEP casting area.
11.) Design and implement HCEP nozzle cleaning devise.
12.) Setup time reduction for mold changeovers for HCEP casting process.
13.) Implement production Kanban systems for cores and wound units held in storage
areas.
49
14.) Design and implement a mold pre-heater for the HCEP casting operation to reduce
mold changeover times.
15.) Implement a two-bin Kanban system for all assembly, pre-assembly, and final
assembly areas.
16.) Replace core winding equipment.
3.4 Single-Piece Flow
An assembly line is a standardize layout arranged to a fixed sequence of assembly
tasks (Stevenson, 2009). Each assembler will only conduct a couple of the steps required to
assemble the entire unit. The unit will be passed from one station to the next until the
process is complete. Single-piece flow enhances product quality because each assembler
inspects the work conducted at the previous station. If a defect is detected, the unit is
passed back to the previous station so the defect can be corrected. Single-piece flow also
reduces inventory because items are pulled through the assembly work cell since each
station produces only enough units to replenish those withdrawn by the previous
workstation (Nicholas, 2011).
A brainstorming session was conducted to obtain improvement ideas from the
employees, production leads, supervisor, and the manufacturing engineer associated with
the assembly process. A list of improvement suggestions obtained in the session is shown
in Figure 3.8.
50
Figure 3.8 Brainstorming Cloud Illustrating Improvement Suggestions.
To implement single-piece flow in the assembly area, time studies were conducted
for all assembly steps. All of the steps required to assemble the instrument transformer
and the cycle times to complete those steps were recorded. Average time for all assemblers
was used to ensure accuracy of the cycle time. Individual steps were grouped together to
equalize the workload among the assemblers. The process was then reevaluated to ensure
that certain steps would be performed in the correct sequence. A diagram illustrating the
grouping of steps and their average cycle times for implementing single-piece flow for the
Urethane assembly process is shown in Figure 3.9.
51
Figure 3.9 Single-Piece Flow Assembly Processes Breakdown and Average Cycle Times.
The average cycle time to produce a unit in the Urethane assembly process was 14.5
minutes. The assemblers produced an average of 40 units per shift in a ten hour work day.
The goal was to improve the productivity by 30%, and decrease the work day by two hours.
The second week after implementing single-piece flow, the assemblers produced 51 units
in an eight hour shift. The average cycle time was reduced to 9 minutes per unit. The
assemblers have produced 68 units in an eight hour shift, a 68% increase in production.
However, this increase in production was not sustainable. The assemblers were able to
consistently able to produce 51 units per shift.
The average cycle time to produce a unit in the HCEP assembly process was 52.7
minutes. The assemblers produced an average of 11 units per shift in a ten hour work day.
The goal was to improve the productivity by 60%, and decrease the work day by two hours.
Seven weeks after the implementation of single-piece flow, the assemblers produced 25
units in an eight hour shift. The average cycle time was reduced to 18.4 minutes per unit.
52
The assemblers have produced 34 units in an eight hour shift, a 127% increase in
production. However, this increase in production was not sustainable. The assemblers
were able to consistently produce 25 units per shift. A histogram in Figure 3.10 illustrates
the progress of the HCEP assembly process after the implementation of single-piece flow.
APG Assembly Units / Hr

Goal = 3.26
3.45
3.32
3.12
2.90
2.63 2.76
2.44
2.30
WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 5 WEEK 6 WEEK 7 WEEK 8
Figure 3.10 Histogram Illustrates the Progress of HCEP Assembly Process.
Before the implementation of single-piece flow, the assemblers would assemble the
entire unit at their assembly workstation. This meant that each workstation contained all
of the tools and parts required to assemble a unit. After the implementation of single-piece
flow, only the tools and parts required for performing the specified tasks were allowed to
remain at the workstation. The Urethane assembly reduced the number of tools needed by
83%, and reduced parts inventories from 11 days to 6 days. HCEP assembly reduced the
53
number of tools needed by 80%, and reduced parts inventories from 10 days to 6 days.
The reduction in tools and parts greatly reduced the amount of clutter, therefore freeing up
space at the work stations.
Check sheets were used before and after the implementation to record the amount
of units assembled, and the amount of units that passed testing. The Urethane and HCEP
assembly line each had five assemblers. The sixth assembler was shared as a tester since
the average testing cycle time was 1:36 minutes. The sixth assembler also worked as a
water-spider to collect materials for the other assemblers so that they would not have to
leave their workstations to collect materials. A water-spider is a person that is allowed to
move about freely to obtain goods for other workers or to assist them in any task if needed.
3.5 Quality
During the study, seven months of defect records were obtained from the quality
department. After the defect records were categorized and filtered, a senior quality expert
at the facility reviewed the material to explain the defect types and where they most likely
occurred in the manufacturing process. The data was used to determine where quality
problems were occurring and to assign the defect rates used in the value-stream maps.
3.5.1 Urethane and HCEP Shared Operations
Table 3.1 lists the defect rates for operations shared by the Urethane and HCEP
product lines. It may be noted that, the annealing operation defect rate is different than
54
what is listed on the current state map. The information gathered on defects was gathered
after the new annealing furnace was implemented. The defect rate of 0.33% will be used in
the future state map for the annealing process. It may also be noted that, the defect rate for
the core winder operation is not shown. Data was not collected on the scrap rate for the
core winder by the quality department. The defect rate in the current state map for the
core winding operation was obtained through observation.
Urethane and HCEP Shared Operation

Operation Defects Defect Percentage
Mishandling 16 0.07%
Testing 330 1.43%
Preassembly 38 0.16%
High Winding 1290 5.60%
Low Winding 101 0.44%
**Annealing 75 0.33%
Total Defective 1850 8.03%
Units Packed 22189 96.26%
Total Produced 23051 100.00%
Table 3.1 Urethane and HCEP Shared Operations Defect Rates.
The total defects for operations shared by the Urethane and HCEP product lines is
1,850 out of 23,051 units produced. A Pareto chart in Figure 3.11 is used to illustrate
where the majority of the defects occurred.
55
Urethane & HCEP Shared
Operations
1400 100.0
1200
80.0
1000
Percentage
Defects
800 60.0
600 40.0
400
20.0
200
0 0.0
Figure 3.11 Pareto Chart Illustrates Defects in Shared Operations.
The High winding operation accounted for 1,290 out the 1,850 total defects, as
shown above. The High winding operation was further analyzed to discover what type of
defects had occurred. Out of the 1,290 defects that occurred in the winding operation,
1002 defects were caused by incorrect ratio turns, 217 were caused by high-to-low-to-
ground, and 71 defects were caused by overpot. Figure 3.12 illustrates the types of defects
that occurred in the winding operation.
56
High Winding Operation
1200 100
1000 80
Percentage
800
Defects 60
600
40
400
200 20
0 0
Ratio Turns HLIC Overpot
Figure 3.12 Pareto Chart Illustrates Defects in the HIGH Winding Operation.
The quality department and the manufacturing engineers at the facility agreed the
main reason found for higher defect rate in High winding machines were manual operation
of the winding, manual set-up, and using of worn out mechanical turn counters. The
corrective action was to replace the High winders with new semi-automated winders that
are PLC operated. The new winders count the amount of turns automatically, and pauses
the process when an action needs to be taken. The machines also automatically setup the
margins, greatly reducing the amount of variation compare to setting the margins
manually. A test-run was performed on one of the new winders before all of the new
winders were implemented. The new winder had only 3 defects out of 250 units, which is a
defect rate of 1.2%. The new winder also reduced setup time from an average of 25
minutes to 4 minutes.
The new winders were also accessorized with standardized setup blocks and a
rotating fixture to support the arbor. Three standardized setup blocks replaced entire
57
cabinet full of setup blocks used for the old equipment. A rotating fixture was used to aid
the operators in rotating the heavy units attached to the arbor. A new winder with rotating
fixture and standardized setup blocks used for testing is shown in Figure 3.13
Figure 3.13 Image of New Winder with Rotating Fixture and Standardized Setup Blocks.
The core winding operation has the highest defect rate in the manufacturing
process. The Tranco, the equipment used to wind the cores has an observed scrap rate of
7.7%. Out of the sixty-five cores produced, five units were defective. Although the
equipment did not get replaced during the course of this study, management has said that
the equipment will be replaced in the future. According to the manufacturing engineer
overseeing the operation, a new winder will bring the defect rate below one percent.
58
3.5.2 HCEP Operations
The total defects for HCEP product lines was 1,091 out of 7,441 units produced. A
Pareto chart in Figure 3.14 is used to illustrate where the majority of the defects occurred.
HCEP Operations
500 100
400 80
Percentage
Defects
300 60
200 40
100 20
0 0
Figure 3.14 Pareto Chart Illustrates Defects in HCEP Operations.
The High winding accounted for 447 out of the 1,091 defects that occurred. The
High winding operations for the HCEP product line was analyzed further to discover what
types of defects occurred in the process. Figure 3.15 illustrates the types of defects that
occurred in the High winding process for the HCEP product line.
59
HCEP High Winding Operation
300 100
250 80
200
Percentage
60
Defects
150
40
100
50 20
0 0
Ratio Turns HLIC Overpot
Figure 3.15 Pareto Chart Illustrates Defects in HCEP High Winding Operation.
Data showed that, out of the 447 defects that occurred in the High winding
operation, 280 defects were caused by incorrect ratio turns, 153 defects were caused by
high-to-low-to-ground, and 14 defects were the results of overpot.
The quality department and the manufacturing engineers at the facility agreed the
main reason found for higher defect rate in the High winding machines were worn out
mechanical counters, manual operation of the winding, and manual setups. The corrective
action to reduce the amount of incorrect ratio turns was to replace the High winders.
Replacing the High winders will also greatly reduce the amount of defects caused by high-
to-low-to-ground (HLIC) by automatically setting the margins. According to the quality
department, another cause of high-to-low-to-ground is caused by the unit not being
completely centered inside the core. To correct this action a Poka-yoke device was
designed and implemented into the assembly process for certain types of units. The Poka-
yoke device is a jig that ensured the unit is centered inside the core during the assembly of
60
the unit. An image of the Poka-yoke device being used in the assembly process is shown in
Figure 3.16.
Figure 3.16 Image of Poka-yoke Device Being Used in the Assembly Process.
The next highest cause of defects in the HCEP product line was the casting
operation. The casting operation accounted for 443 defects out of the 1,091. The casting
operation was analyzed further to discover what types of defects occurred in the process.
Figure 3.17 illustrates the types of defects that occurred in the casting operation.
61
HCEP Casting Operation
200 100
180 90
160 80
Percentage
140 70
Defects
120 60
100 50
80 40
60 30
40 20
20 10
0 0
Figure 3.17 Pareto Chart Illustrates Defects in HCEP Casting Operation.
Out of the 443 defects that occurred in the casting operation, 186 defects were
caused by external voids, 63 defects were caused by machine malfunctions, 42 defects from
external cosmetic problems, and 42 defects were the results of mold leaks. A senior
engineer that oversees the casting process stated that, external voids, mold leaks, and
external cosmetics were all closely related problems. A cause and effect diagram shown in
Figure 3.18 was constructed to find the root causes for the related defects.
62
Figure 3.18 Cause and Effect Diagram.
After analyzing the information in the cause and effect diagram, the following causes
were determined to be the root causes for the problems.
1.) External cosmetics problems caused casting with a dirty mold.
2.) External voids are caused by air entering through a dirty or damaged nozzle, or casting
with a leaking mold.
3.) A leaking mold is caused by an improper changeover, hardened epoxy on the O-
rings/seals, or damaged O-rings/seals.
63
The following actions have been taken or recommended to solve the quality issues
related to the HCEP casting operation.
1.) A counter attached to the machine to allow operators to know how many units have
been cast in the mold.
2.) A visual reference card attached to each casting press so that the operators can
compare the units to the card. The reference card has images illustrating what the surface
of the unit will look like if the mold is clean, dirty, or very dirty. The card has three
references (good, clean within three turns, and clean immediately). The surface of the unit
is a direct result of the cleanliness condition of the mold.
3.) A nozzle cleaning device using a chemical cleaning agent was designed and
implemented into the process. The device allows four nozzles to be cleaned at the same
time. A new set of nozzles was purchased so that the nozzles could be cleaned without
interrupting the casting process. The nozzles will be cleaned twice each shift.
4.) A redesign of the nozzle cleaning area with the proper tools so that the nozzles will not
get damaged in the process of being rebuilt.
5.) A check list procedure for mold changeovers.
6.) A Poka-yoke device that ensures the casting mold is closed within specifications. If the
mold is not closed within specifications an alarm will sound and the casting process will
not start.
Due to the time constraints of the study, the defect rate of the HCEP casting operation after
the implementation of the improvement steps were not analyzed.

64
3.6 Kanban Systems
A production Kanban system in the form of a signal board was implemented for
supplying cores to the storage area. A Kanban signal board is a simple form of
communication that tells the operator when to produce the quantity withdrawn from the
earlier process (Meyers & Stephens, 2005). When a container of cores is withdrawn, the
operator will detach the card located on the container and place the card on the Kanban
board. The card has written information such as the part number and the point of delivery.
The amount of inventory would be reduced from 12.5 days to 3 days. Three days’ worth of
inventory was chosen to accommodate for fluctuations in productivity and unplanned
downtime in the case of mechanical breakdowns for the annealing furnace and the core
winder.
A two bin Kanban system is to be implemented for supplying the accessory parts
containers used in the assembly, pre-assembly and final assembly areas. Each bin would
hold half a day’s worth of inventory. The total amount of inventory held in each area would
be one day’s worth of inventory. The assemblers would draw materials from only one of
the containers. When the container is empty, it would signal the need for replenishment
from the parts held in the storage area. Only when the first container is empty, will the
assemblers draw materials from the second container. A water-spider would be used to
refill containers in these areas to keep the assemblers from having to leave their work
stations to refill the needed parts.
65
3.7 Cell Layout
The layout of the base-plating/ patch areas needed to be redesigned to reduce the
amount of waiting time and reduce motions performed by the workers. People in
manufacturing often confuse being in motion with working (Nicholas, 2011). By
definition, work is considered a particular kind of motion that either adds value or is
necessary to add value, and therefore unnecessary motion is considered waste (Nicholas,
2011).
The base-plating/ patch areas for HCEP and Urethane shared a floor mounted jib
crane. The workers would have to take turns using the crane to pick up the heavy units off
of the conveyor belt and place them onto their workbenches. The jib crane was obstructed
at one end and had to swing the long way around to get back in the desired location. The
worker not only had to wait until the other worker was finished using the crane, but then
had to reposition the crane into their own work area. Last year the average number of
HCEP units produced was 199 units per week. It takes approximately 15 seconds to
reposition the jib crane from one workstation to the next. The amount of time wasted
comes to 50 minutes per week. This time does not even include the amount of time wasted
on waiting for the other worker to finish his task at hand. See Figure 3.19 for the design of
the old base-plating/ patch area.
66
6ft. 6ft.
8ft.
8ft.
Figure 3.19 Original Layout Design of Base-plating/ Patch Areas.
The redesigned area included an overhead bridge crane that contained two chain-
hoists; one chain-hoist for each workstation. The bridge crane was salvaged from a storage
area and re-erected. Shelving units containing base-plates were repositioned closer to the
work benches. A moveable tool cabinet was purchased for both work areas. See Figure
3.20 for the redesign of the base-plate/ patch areas.
67
8 ft.
4ft.
4ft. 1ft.
3ft
.
Figure 3.20 Redesign Layout of Base-plating/ Patch Areas.
3.8 Setup Reduction
According to Gung and Studel (1990), the authors of “A Work Load Balancing Model
for Determining Set-up Time and Batch Reduction,” the reduction of setup times of a
machine is a cost -effective contribution to flexible and lean manufacturing. In the
beginning of the study, the HCEP casting press mold changeover was approximately five
hours and fifteen minutes. The actual mold change over took approximately one hour and
fifteen minutes, the other four hours of the time was used to heat the mold to the desired
casting temperature. The setup time needed to be reduced to make the production system
more flexible, reduce lead time, enhance productivity, and reduce manufacturing costs.
The process of the changeover was observed to anaylize the process. After
anaylizing the process, the setup activities were divided between external and internal
68
activities. External activities can be carried out during the casting process. Internal
activities processes needed to be carried out while the casting process is shut down. Once
the processes are divided, the setup down time is constrained to the time needed to
conduct the internal activities (Bikram & Khandura, 2010). According to Shingo (2000),
dividing the activities can typically yield a setup time reduction from 30 to 50 percent of
the previous setup. The second step in the process was to establish standardized
procedures for the setups because every operator had a tendency to do setups in his own
way. The third step was piecing together a special tool bag containing all of the tools and
materials required to perform a changeover. Valuable time was lost because operators
were searching for tools and materials needed to perform the setup. The forth step was to
move the mold storage area closer to the casting machines. The final step was to design
one fixture to accommodate the base-plates to reduce the amount of adjustments needed.
Before the fixture was designed, there were multiple fixtures that needed to be aligned.
One of the major factors contributing to long setup times was that once the mold
was changed over, the mold needed to be heated to the proper temperature before the
casting process could start again. The casting press has three to four heating elements
(depending on the type of mold) that heats zones of the mold to the desired temperatures.
The heating of the mold would take approximately four hours. To reduce the amount of
time needed to reach the proper temperature the mold was placed into a preheat oven.
This greatly reduced the time from four hours to around one hour. The manufacturing
engineers are designing a mold pre-heater to allow all of the zones to be heated to the
desired temperatures before a changeover. A mold pre-heater would allow the operators
to start casting as soon as the setup was complete.
69
During the study, the casting press setup time was reduced from five hours and
fifteen minutes to one hour and sixteen minutes. Once the mold pre-heater is implemented
into the casting press setup process, the setup time will be further reduced to sixteen
minutes.
3.9 Organizing Workplace by Implementing 5 S
Implementation of 5 S is the starting point in the development of improvement
activities to ensure any company’s survival (Hirano, 1996). During the course of the study,
5 S method was reintroduced to the facility. The methodology had been introduced in the
past but had failed to be sustained in certain areas of the facility. The benefits a company
receives from implementing 5 S include higher quality products, increased customer
satisfaction, corporate growth, lower costs, a more pleasant work environment, and a safer
work place (Hirano, 1996).
5 S methods were reintroduced in the medium voltage HCEP casting area, assembly
areas, and the winding area. All items in work area that were not in use were removed
from the area. Excess tools were removed by the manufacturing engineers to be given out
later to replace damaged or worn items. Broken or damaged tools were thrown away.
Items that remained in the work area were sorted and given a home. All part containers
were labeled. A tool shadow board on the back of a mobile parts container used in the
HCEP casting area is shown in Figures 3.21 and 3.22.
70
Figure 3.21 Image of Shadow Board. Figure 3.22 Image of Mobile Parts Container.
Workstations with damaged tops were replaced. The areas were then cleaned. To
maintain the cleanliness of the areas, the assemblers and machine operators would conduct
a five-minute shine exercise twice a day. A five-minute shine exercise is a short duration of
time dedicated for cleaning on a regular basis (Hirano, 1995). Stainless steel was used to
cover the floors and the bottom of the machines in the HCEP casting area to allow for easy
cleaning. Dried epoxy on the floor was almost impossible to clean before stainless steel
was added to the flooring. Production management boards were hung in the work areas to
track and display daily production requirements and the number of defective units.
Production management boards are used to keep the work shop leaders, equipment
operators, and other employees informed of current conditions and conscious of problems
(Hirano, 2009, Vol.3). In the work areas, visual counters were hung high up to display
productivity rates to the entire facility. Visual controls were added in the assembly areas
and casting area. A visual control is any device used to communicate how work should be
71
done at a glance (Hirano, 1995). Visual control devices are shown in Figure 3.23 and visual
management boards is shown in Figure 3.24.
Figure 3.23 Image of Visual Control Devices. Figure 3.24 Image of Visual Management
Boards.
3.10 Other HCEP Production Line Improvements
In the HCEP casting process improvements were implemented that increased the
available time, decreased the loading time, and reduced over processing. The HCEP casting
operation increased its available time by two hours with the addition of automatic timers
on the preheating ovens. The operators would place the units in the oven at the beginning
of the shift and have to wait before production could begin. After the implementation of
the automatic timers, the operators could start production as soon as their shift started.
Another improvement that increased available time was the implementation of the
nozzle cleaning device and purchase of an extra set of nozzles. At the end of the shift the
72
operators had to stop production approximately forty minutes before the end of the shift to
clean the nozzles. If the nozzles were not cleaned the epoxy would harden inside the
nozzles rendering them useless. Before the implementation of the cleaning device, cleaning
the nozzles required them to be completely broken apart. The cleaning device allowed the
operators to just drop the nozzles in the device and turn it on without having to break them
down. A chemical agent is pumped through the nozzles cleaning them from the inside. The
nozzles stayed in the device until half way through the next shift.
Loading time was reduced by implanting a buildup table. Before the buildup table,
units were built up on the casting machine and it took an average of thirty-one minutes to
remove the units that were previously caste and to build up the units about to be cast. The
buildup table reduced the loading time to six minutes. The time will be reduced further to
three minutes once the casting press carriages are rebuilt. Each casting press has two
loading carriages; one of them is meant for loading and the other is meant for unloading the
machine. The facility currently only uses one carriage per machine; the unused loading
carriages were damaged from a buildup of hardened epoxy over the years.
An improvement was made to the HCEP casting operation to reduce the amount of
processing time. After the unit was cast, the unit went to the post-cure oven, from the post
cure oven the unit had a cooling down period of five hours. After the cool down period, the
unit would by-pass urethane base-plating/ patch area and proceed to the HCEP base-plate/
patch area. After the unit got patched, the unit would have to go back through the following
processes: post-cure oven, cool down period, by-pass Urethane base-plate/ patch area. To
eliminate over processing the HCEP units would be patched as soon as they were broken
73
down. This would alleviate nine hours of extra processing. A process diagram of the
improved HCEP casting operation is shown in Figure 3.25.
Figure 3.25 Process Flow Diagram of Improved HCEP Casting Operation.
At the beginning of the study, HCEP products shared multiple processes after being
cast with Urethane products, such as: post-cure oven, a conveyor, pre-assembly, testing,
final assembly. Since that time a dedicated line has been put in place for HCEP products for
those processes. Urethane products must undergo a five hour cool down period after
coming out of the post cure oven to allow the units to shrink before a base-plate is attached.
74
The HCEP products do not require a cool down period before the base-plate is attached.
This process step was eliminated from the HCEP manufacturing process, therefore,
reducing the amount of processing time by five hours.
75
Chapter 4
Conclusion and Recommendations
4.1 Conclusion
With an increase in global demand for products related to the power industry,
organizations need to take advantage of this situation by producing their products more
effectively and more efficiently than ever before. ABB Group’s Medium Voltage facility in
North Carolina is using Lean principles and tools to produce their products in an effective
way. Implementing Lean principles benefited the medium voltage product family’s
production line by increasing the capacity of the system, increasing system flexibility, and
increasing the system’s overall quality. The production line also benefited from a decrease
in work-in-process inventories, a decrease in lead time, and a decrease in manufacturing
associated waste. Types of waste that were reduced or eliminated include: inventory,
excess motion, waiting time, defects, over processing, and over production.
Value stream mapping was used as the basic tool to employ Lean principles for
overall performance improvement by reducing/eliminating waste. The current state map
helped to identify the sources of waste. After the waste had been identified, other Lean
tools such as, 5S, single-piece flow, setup time reduction, Poka-yoke, and Kanban systems
were utilized to reduce or eliminate waste. A future state map was then generated to show
the production system after Lean tools had been applied. A future state map illustrating
the production process is shown in Figure 4.1. Refer to Appendix C for a larger image of
Figure 4.1. The map shown below is based on a primed production line. Refer to Section
3.2 “Current Stream Mapping” for clarification of primed processes.

With the implementation of the recommended improvements decided by the
improvement team, the Urethane production line’s processing time was reduced from
4,699 seconds to 3,653 seconds, and the HCEP production line’s processing time was
reduced from 6,885 seconds to 4,104 seconds. In the proposed future state map, the lead
time based on inventory levels and loading times is reduced from 31.8 days to 18.9 days for
the Urethane production line, and the lead time for Epoxy production line was reduced
from 34.9 days to 19.2 days.
Figure 4.1 Future State Map of the Medium Voltage Family’s Production System.
In the future state map, work-in-process inventory levels in the manufacturing
system were able to be greatly reduced with the use of Kanban systems and the
77
implementation of single-piece flow in the assembly area. Work-in-process inventory levels
were reduced by 40.6 percent in Urethane production line and 45 percent in the HCEP
production line. Production Kanban systems were used to supply cores and wound units to
the assembly process. The Kanban systems used to supply the cores to the annealing
furnace and the assembly areas reduced inventory levels by 75.4 percent and the Kanban
systems used to supply the wound units to the High winders and the assembly areas
reduced inventory levels by 73.4 percent. Two-bin Kanban systems were used to supply
assembly parts to the assembly processes. The Kanban systems used to supply assembly
parts to the assembly areas reduced inventory levels by 90.9 percent. The reduction in
inventory would reduce carrying cost and free up valuable production floor space.
The capacity of the system was increased by the reduction of the cycle times at the
bottle-neck operations. The capacity of the assembly process restricted the manufacturing
system, and therefore, the manufacturing system was limited to the capacity of the
assembly process. After the implementation of single-piece flow in the assembly processes,
the Urethane production line capacity increased by 61.9 percent, and the HCEP production
line capacity increased by 186.4 percent. The increase in capacity will allow the
organization to reduce the time needed to fulfill customer orders.
The flexibility of the system was increased by reducing the setup times in the HCEP
casting operation and the winding process. The HCEP casting operation setup time was
reduced from approximately five hours and fifteen minutes to one hour and sixteen
minutes with the aid of setup reduction methods and standardized procedures. The setup
time will be further reduced to sixteen minutes once the mold pre-heater is implemented
into the operation. The setup time in the High winding process was reduced from twenty-
78
five to four minutes by replacing the old manual winders with semi-automated winders
that are PLC operated and outfitted with standardized setup blocks. The reduction of setup
time increased flexibility because the system has the needed time to switch back and forth
among products, produce them in increased quantity, and can accommodate unplanned
changes in demand.
The manufacturing systems’ overall acceptable quality percentage (AQP, 1-rejected
percentage) was increased in the Urethane production line from 85.2 percent to 88.3
percent and the HCEP production line increased from 82.3 percent to 88.5 percent. When
all of the recommended improvements have been made to the system the overall AQP for
the Urethane production line would be increased to 93.2 percent and the HCEP production
line would be increased to 93.4 percent. The High winding process was able to reduce the
amount of defective units produced with the replacement of the winders, standardized
setup blocks, and the implementation of a Poka-yoke device. The combination of these
actions reduced the amount of variation from one unit to the next. The AQP for the High
winding operation increased from 94.4 percent to 98.8 percent. In the HCEP casting
operation Lean tools such as, Pareto analysis, cause and effect analysis, and check lists were
used to address quality issues. The goal was to reduce the amount of defective units caused
by specific problems by 95 percent. Refer to section 3.5.2 “HCEP Operations” about actions
taken to improve quality in the HCEP casting operations. These practices and actions aided
in producing higher quality products being processed downstream. Table 4.1 compares the
current state operation to the proposed future state operation.
79
Current State Compared to Future State
Production Lead Time Current State Future State Reduced by:
Urethane Line 31.8 days 18.9 days 40.6%
HCEP Line 34.9 days 19.2 days 45.0%
Processing Time Current State Future State Reduced by:
Urethane Line 4,699 sec. 3,653 sec. 22.30%
HCEP Line 6,885 sec. 4,104 sec 40.40%
Acceptable Quality Percentage Current State Future State Increased by:
Urethane Line 85.2% 93.20% 8%
HCEP Line 82.1% 93.40% 10.90%
Table 4.1Current State Compared to Future State
In today’s global competitive market, organizations need to produce higher quality
products at a more competitive price and be able to deliver the product faster than ever
before. In order to compete, the organizations need to become more efficient in their
operating practices or they are vulnerable in losing their share of the market segment.
Lean methodology provides organizations a way to be able to increase productivity, reduce
waste, and deliver a higher quality product to customers within a shorter lead time at their
expected price.
4.2 Recommendations
The following recommendations are made to sustain improvement efforts, improve
productivity of the system, reduce equipment downtime, and to reduce the amount of
variation in units being processed.
80
Implement standardized procedures in all of the process improvements made to the
medium voltage manufacturing system. Standardized procedures will aid in sustaining the
desired results achieved by implementing the changes.
The implementation of total productive maintenance (TPM) practices into the
system. TPM is a Lean tool used to reduce the amount of downtime caused by mechanical
breakdowns and to reduce variability in equipment performance. TPM requires the joint
collaboration of the following departments: production, maintenance, and engineering.
The ultimate goal of TPM is to get the equipment functioning at performance level higher
than when it was new and to tailor the equipment to suit the manufacturing process. The
operator is placed in charge of cleaning, performing preventive maintenance, accuracy
inspections, and basic repairs. It is also the responsibility of the operator to monitor the
equipment. If the equipment is not performing at optimal levels they report the issue to the
maintenances department so that it can be fixed before it becomes a major problem. The
maintenance department is responsible for properly initially training the operators and
other than basic repairs. The improvement team is given the task of redesigning and
reconfiguring the equipment to make it more reliable, better performing, and easier to
maintain (Nicholas, 2011).
81
References
Bikram, J. S., & Khanduja, D. (2010). SMED: For quick changeovers in foundry SMEs.
International Journal of Productivity and Performance Management, Vol. 59 No.1,
pp. 98-116.
Cost, Frank. J., & Daley, Brett J. (2003). Digital integration and lean manufacturing practices
of U.S. printing firms. Rochester, NY: RIT Printing Industry Center.
Casey, John (2013, October). 5S shakeup: Three secrets for sustaining 5S success. Quality
Progress, Vol. 46 No.10, pp. 18
Chaneski, Wayne. S. (2002, October). Mapping a path to lean manufacturing. Modern

Machine Shop, pp. 46
Chaneski, Wayne. S. (2004, April). Companies are learning from the value stream. Modern
Machine Shop, pp. 44
Evans, James. R., & Lindsay, William. M. (2005). An introduction to six sigma and process
improvement. Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western
Evans, James. R., & Lindsay, William. M. (2008). Managing for quality and performance. (7th
ed.). Mason, OH: Thomson South-Western
Gung, D. and Strudel, F. (1990), A work load balancing model for determining set-up time
and batch size reduction in G.T. flow line work cells. International Journal of
Production Research, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 92-255.
Robinson, Harry (1997). Using poke-yoke techniques for early defect detection.
Hirano, Hiroyuki (2009). JIT Implementation Manual: The complete guide to Just-in-Time
Manufacturing. Volume 3: Flow Manufacturing-Multi-Process Operations and
Kanban. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Productivity Press.
Hirano, Hiroyuki (2009). JIT Implementation Manual: The complete guide to Just-in-Time
Manufacturing. Volume 2: Waste and the 5S’s. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Productivity
Press.
Hirano, Hiroyuki (1996). 5S for Operators: 5 pillars of the visual workplace. New York, NY:
Productivity Press.
Hopp, W., & Spearman, M. (1996). Factory physics. Chicago, IL: Richard D. Irwin. 282-288
Iman, R. A. (1978). Inventory is the flower of all evil, Journal of Inventory Management,
Journal 34 No. 4, pp. 41-45
Keyes, J. (2013). The need for lean training. Journal of Management Policy and Practice,
Vol. 14 No. 3, pp. 78-83.
Labow, L. (1999). The last word: On lean manufacturing. IIE Solutions, Vol. 31 No. 9, pp. 42-
46.
Liker, Jeffrey. K., & Ogden, Timothy, N. (2011). Toyota under fire: Lessons for turning crisis
into opportunity. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill
Kahn, Sarah (2014). Electrical equipment manufacturing in the US. IBIS World Industry
Report 33531. IBISWorld Inc.
Manivannan, S. (2006). Error-proofing enhances quality. Manufacturing Engineering,

Vol. 137 No. 5, pp. 99-104
Mehta, Merwan. (n.d.). Lean principles and tools. NC: East Carolina University
Melnyk, Steven. A., & Christensen, R. T. (2002, June). Variance is evil. APICS The
Performance Advantage, pp. 19.
Meyers, Fred. E., & Stephens, Matthew. P. (2005). Manufacturing facilities design and
material handling. (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall
Ohno, T. (1978). Toyota production system: Beyond management of large scale

production. Tokyo, Japan: Diamond Publishing
Ouchi, W. (1981). Theory Z. Addison-Wesley
Pannesi, R. T. (1995), Lead time competitiveness in make-to-order manufacturing firm.

International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 3 No.6, pp. 150-63.
Rees, D. (1988). Industry picks up a new accent: Worldclass manufacturing methods catch
on in L.A. Los Angeles Business Journal, Vol. 10 No. 42, pp. 1.
Robinson, A. (1990). Modern approaches to manufacturing: The Shingo system.

Cambridge, MA: Productivity Press. pp. 88.Rother, M., & Shook, J. (1999). Learning to
see: Value stream mapping to add value and eliminate muda. Brookline, MA: Lean
Enterprise Institute
83
Ross, P. J. (1995). Taguchi techniques for quality engineering. (2nd ed.). New York, NY:
McGraw-Hill
Sanchez, A. M., & Perez, M. P. (2001). Lean indicators and manufacturing strategies.
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 11),
pp. 1433-1452.
Sayer, Natalie. J., & Williams, Bruce (2007). Lean for dummies. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley
Publishing. Inc.
Shingo, S. (2000). A revolution in manufacturing: the SMED system. Productivity Journal,

Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 241-50
Stevenson, William. J. (2010). Operations management. (10th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-
Hill Irwin.
Nicholas, John (2011). Lean production for competitive advantage: a comprehensive guide
to lean methodologies and management practices. New York, NY: Productivity Press.
Walton, M. (1986). The Deming management method. New York, NY: Perigee
Witt, Clyde. E. (2006, December). One-Piece Flow. Material Handling Management, pp. 59.
Womack, J. P. (2006, August/September). A measure of lean. IET Manufacturing

Engineering, pp. 6.
Womack, J. P., Jones, D. T., Roos, D., & Massachusetts Institute of Technology. (1990). The
machine that changed the world: Based on the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology 5-million dollar 5-year study on the future of the automobile. New York:
Rawson Associate
84
Appendix A: Current State Map
Appendix B: Current State Map with Recommended Improvements
Appendix C: Future State Map
Appendix D: Checklist
Standardized Procedure for HCEP Casting Mold Changeovers

Note: Operators should review changeover procedures prior to changing casting mold. Mold change
over requires at least two operators.
Tools Required: Air Hammer (1/2 Drive), Air Ratchet (3/8 Drive), Ball Pin Hammer, Chain-hoist, Electric
Palletizer, Feeler Gage, Carpenter Knife, O-ring Puller, and Allen Sockets Set
Materials Required: O-ring Cord Stock, Vacuum Grease, Nozzle O-rings, Card-board Strips, and Mold-
base Fixture
Procedures:
1.) Retrieve mold clean mold from preheat oven with palletizer and place in a standby position.
2.) Remove casting nozzle and vacuum line
3.) Clean casting mold
4.) Remove jig from machine carriage
5.) Detach the heating element and thermometer leads
6.) Unbolt vacuum chamber first and mold second
7.) Open vacuum chamber
8.) Close casting press and attach casting mold arm
9.) Attach chain-hoist to mold arm, and remove mold using hoist
10.) Remove chain-hoist from casting mold arm
11.) Check rollers to see if they need replacing (If yes, replace rollers)
12.) Attach chain-hoist to clean preheated casting mold by casting mold arm
13.) Install casting mold by using chain hoist and remove chain-hoist from casting mold arm
14.) Tighten four corn bolts around casting mold and remove mold arm
15.) Open casting press and close vacuum chamber
16.) Attach vacuum chamber
17.) Tighten remaining bolts securing the casting mold

18.) Attach the heating element and the thermometer leads
19.) Attach vacuum line and casting nozzle
21.) Attach and adjust mold-base fixture to machine carriage
22.) Perform vacuum check to ensure there are no leaks. Use feeler gauge to ensure proper seal (If
leaks are present apply vacuum grease. If vacuum chamber is still leaking it may require changing the O-
ring around the vacuum chamber, viewing ports, and the casting nozzle.)
23.) Attach chain-hoist to removed casting mold by mold arm and raise the bottom of the mold knee
high. Place metal pallet under the mold and lower the mold onto pallet. Return the mold to proper
storage area using electric palletizer.
89
Appendix E: Check Sheet
Medium Voltage Instrument Transformer Urethane Assembly

Check Sheet for Single-Piece-Flow Analysis
__________________________________________________________________
Date: Shift: Number of Assemblers:
__________________________________________________________
Units Assembled: Units Passed Testing:
__________________________________________________________
Total Units Assembled: Total Units Passed Testing:
__________________________________________________________
Name of Tester
Appendix F: Urethane and Epoxy Defect Records for Seven Months:
Description Prob. code text Created on Qty

KOR-15C 50/100:5/150KV/25KV - TP Ext Voids 08/01/2014 2
VOG-11 60:1 Flashing 08/01/2014 6
VOG-11 60:1 Flashing 08/01/2014 3
VOY-95 3.2:1 HLIC 08/01/2014 1
VIY-95 104.17:1/95KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 08/01/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Manual Test Rework 08/01/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 08/01/2014 1
VIZ-12 175:1 LT Ratio Turns 08/01/2014 4
VIZ-20 300:1 (SF6) Ratio Turns 08/01/2014 1
VOY-11 70:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 08/01/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1 Ratio Turns 08/01/2014 1
KON-11 5:5 HLIC 07/31/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 HLIC 07/31/2014 2
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV HLIC 07/31/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 07/31/2014 2
VIZ-15G 110.18:1 1 FUSE LIC 07/31/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Manual Test Rework 07/31/2014 1
VIZ-11 110:1 Manual Test Rework 07/31/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Manual Test Rework 07/31/2014 1
VIZ-12 110:1 - TP LT Ratio Turns 07/31/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G Reverse Polarity 07/31/2014 1
VOY-20G 175:1/200KV/34.5KV Ext Voids 07/30/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL External Cosmetics 07/30/2014 1
VOY-15G 120:1/150KV/25KV External Cosmetics 07/30/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 07/30/2014 1
VIY-95 104.17:1/95KV/15KV HLIC 07/30/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 50 HZ Manual Test Rework 07/30/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Mold build error 07/30/2014 1
KOR-20ER 200:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP Mold Leaked 07/30/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Overpot 07/30/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ratio Iron Loss 07/30/2014 1
VOY-15G 110:1/150KV/25KV Ratio Turns 07/30/2014 1
VIZ-15G 110.18:1 1 FUSE Ratio Turns 07/30/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV Ratio Turns 07/30/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Cracked Unit 07/29/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 Ext Voids 07/29/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Ext Voids 07/29/2014 1
VIZ-11 110:1 110KV 15KV L-TO-L LIC 07/29/2014 1
KOR-15CER 200:5/150KV/25KV Manual Test Rework 07/29/2014 1
VIY-95 104.17:1/95KV/15KV Wire Showing 07/29/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP HLIC 07/28/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 07/28/2014 1
VOY-15 100:1/150KV/25KV HLIC 07/28/2014 1
VOY-20 173.2/300 & 173.2/300:1 HLIC 07/28/2014 1
KOR-15CER 200:5/150KV/25KV HLIC 07/28/2014 1
VIY-60, 2400-120V, 20:1, L-to-L Manual Test Rework 07/28/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G Manual Test Rework 07/28/2014 1
VIZ-11 70:1/110KV/15KV (SF6) L-TO-L Manual Test Rework 07/28/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 07/28/2014 1
VOZZ-20 300:1 - TP Manual Test Rework 07/28/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Open Primary 07/28/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Overpot 07/28/2014 1
VIZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G Overpot 07/28/2014 1
VIZ-15 207.83:1 Ratio Turns 07/28/2014 2
VIZ-20G 208.33:1 Ratio Turns 07/28/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 DUAL HV Ratio Turns 07/28/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 07/28/2014 2
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 07/28/2014 1
KIR-75 40:5 Wrong Hardware 07/28/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Broken Shed 07/25/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ext Voids 07/25/2014 2
KOR-11 10:1 50HZ - TP LIC 07/25/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Manual Test Rework 07/25/2014 1
VIZ-11 63.5:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Overpot 07/25/2014 1
VIZ-11 7200/110KV/15KV Overpot 07/25/2014 1
VOY-11 120:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ratio Turns 07/25/2014 2
VOZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV - TP Ratio Turns 07/25/2014 1
92
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP HLIC 07/24/2014 2
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G HLIC 07/24/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Machine Malfunction 07/24/2014 2
VIZ-11 7200/110KV/15KV Overpot 07/24/2014 2
VIZ-12G 158.33:1 Ratio Turns 07/24/2014 1
VOZZ-20 300:1 - TP Ratio Turns 07/24/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP Ext Voids 07/23/2014 3
VOY-60 20:1 External Cosmetics 07/23/2014 1
KON-11 10:5 HLIC 07/23/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Machine Malfunction 07/23/2014 1
VOY-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Machine Malfunction 07/23/2014 1
KOR-11 600/1200:5 - TP Ratio Turns 07/23/2014 1
VIL-12S 100:1 (48 Hr Test) Ratio Turns 07/23/2014 2
VIY-95 104.17:1/95KV/15KV Ratio Turns 07/23/2014 1
VOY-11 3.2 & 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 07/23/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Damaged terminal 07/22/2014 1
KOR-20 150/300:5/200KV/34.5KV External Cosmetics 07/22/2014 1
VOY-20 173.2/300 & 173.2/300:1 External Cosmetics 07/22/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP External Cosmetics 07/22/2014 3
VOY-20G 175:1/200KV/34.5KV External Cosmetics 07/22/2014 4
KOR-20ER 200:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP HLIC 07/22/2014 1
VOY-20 173.2/300 & 173.2/300:1 HLIC 07/22/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 HLIC 07/22/2014 1
VOY-60 35:1 HLIC 07/22/2014 1
KIR-11 200:5 LIC 07/22/2014 1
KOR-15C 800:5/150KV/25KV - TP Mold Leaked 07/22/2014 1
KOR-20ER 200:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP Mold Leaked 07/22/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 50 HZ Overpot 07/22/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Overpot 07/22/2014 1
VOY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 07/22/2014 1
VOY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 07/22/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 07/22/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1 50 HZ 110KV/15KV Wire Showing 07/22/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 HLIC 07/21/2014 1
93
VOG-11 60:1 HLIC 07/21/2014 2
VIZ-11, 7200-120V, 60:1, L-to-G HLIC 07/21/2014 3
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 07/21/2014 1
VIZ-11, 7200-120V, 60:1, L-to-G Overpot 07/21/2014 1
VIZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G Ratio Turns 07/21/2014 1
VIZ-11 7200 (SF6)/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 07/21/2014 2
VIZ-12G 158.33:1 Ratio Turns 07/21/2014 1
VOY-20G 167.7:1 Ratio Turns 07/21/2014 6
VOY-95 5:1 Ratio Turns 07/21/2014 1
VOZZ-20 175/300 & 175/300:1 Ratio Turns 07/21/2014 1
VIZ-75 35:1/75KV/8.7KV Wrong Hardware 07/18/2014 1
VOY-95 5:1 Damaged De-Molding 07/17/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Dropped unit 07/17/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Ratio Turns 07/17/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 07/17/2014 2
VIZ-15G 166:1 Ratio Turns 07/17/2014 3
VIZ-20 300:1 - TP Ratio Turns 07/17/2014 1
VOZ-11M 60:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 07/17/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 50 HZ Wire Showing 07/17/2014 1
VIZ-11 60:1 7200/110KV/15KV Overpot 07/16/2014 1
VIZ-12G 120:1 1 FUSE - TP LT Overpot 07/16/2014 1
PTD-15 120 & 120:1 1 FUSE (SF6) - TP Ratio Turns 07/16/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 07/16/2014 1
KON-11 25:5 HLIC 07/15/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 HLIC 07/15/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 HLIC 07/15/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1 50 HZ 110KV/15KV HLIC 07/15/2014 1
VOY-11 3.2 & 3.2:1 LIC 07/15/2014 1
VIL-12S 100:1 (48 Hr Test) Mold build error 07/15/2014 2
PTD-15 120 & 120:1 1 FUSE (SF6) - TP Ratio Turns 07/15/2014 1
VIZ-11 60:1 7200/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 07/15/2014 1
VIZ-12G 120:1 1 FUSE - TP LT Ratio Turns 07/15/2014 1
VIZ-20G 166:1 Ratio Turns 07/15/2014 1
94
VIZ-20G 175/300:1 W/ PIMARY LEADS Ratio Turns 07/15/2014 2
VIZZ-15 150:1 Ratio Turns 07/15/2014 1
VIZZ-15 200 & 200:1 Ratio Turns 07/15/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G Ratio Turns 07/14/2014 1
VIZ-20 287.5:1 W/ PRIMARY LEADS - TP Defective Mold 07/11/2014 3
KON-11 25:5 HLIC 07/11/2014 1
VIZ-15G 60/120:1 (SF6) Ratio Turns 07/11/2014 1
KON-11 200:5 Broken Shed 07/10/2014 1
KOR-11 600:5 Broken Shed 07/10/2014 1
KON-11 25:5 Ext Voids 07/10/2014 1
KON-11 25:5 Ext Voids 07/10/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 - TP Ext Voids 07/10/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 - TP Ext Voids 07/10/2014 1
VOY-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV External Cosmetics 07/10/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 HLIC 07/10/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 07/10/2014 1
KON-11 200:5 Machine Malfunction 07/10/2014 1
VOY-20G 175:1/200KV/34.5KV Machine Malfunction 07/10/2014 1
VIZ-20 287.5:1 W/ PRIMARY LEADS - TP Mold build error 07/10/2014 1
VOY-95 100:1(APG) Mold Leaked 07/10/2014 2
VIZ-11 60:1 7200/110KV/15KV Overpot 07/10/2014 1
VOY-95 100:1(APG) Ratio Iron Loss 07/10/2014 1
VOZ-11E 60:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ratio Turns 07/10/2014 2
KOR-11 600/1200:5 - TP Ext Voids 07/09/2014 1
KOR-11 600/1200:5 - TP Ext Voids 07/09/2014 1
KOR-12 150/300:5 Ext Voids 07/09/2014 1
KOR-12 150/300:5 Ext Voids 07/09/2014 1
VOY-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 07/09/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Ratio Turns 07/09/2014 1
VIZ-15G 140:1 1 FUSE (SF6) Ratio Turns 07/09/2014 1
VIZ-20G 300:1 - TP Ratio Turns 07/09/2014 2
VOY-11 3.2 & 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 07/09/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 50 HZ Wire Showing 07/09/2014 1
VOY-95 100:1(APG) Ratio Turns 07/08/2014 1
95
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 07/08/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 UNION ELEC Ratio Turns 07/07/2014 1
VOZ-11E 60:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ratio Turns 07/07/2014 2
VIY-60 35:1 50 HZ Damaged Leads 07/02/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1UNION ELEC/110KV/15KV Defective Mold 07/02/2014 1
KOR-20 50/100:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ext Voids 07/02/2014 3
VOY-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Ext Voids 07/02/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP External Cosmetics 07/02/2014 1
VOZZ-20 300:1 - TP Manual Test Rework 07/02/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 Mold Leaked 07/02/2014 1
KOR-11 300/600:5 - TP Mold Leaked 07/02/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 50 HZ Open Primary 07/02/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY Ratio Turns 07/02/2014 1
VOY-20G 139/249&139/249:1 Ratio Turns 07/02/2014 1
VOZ-20 300/175:1/200KV Ratio Turns 07/02/2014 1
VOZ-20 300:1 Ratio Turns 07/02/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 50 HZ Ratio Turns 07/02/2014 1
VOZ-15 104.55:1/150KV/25KV Ratio Turns 07/02/2014 1
VOY-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 07/02/2014 1
VOY-95 5:1 Surface Irregularities 07/02/2014 1
VOZ-15 104.55:1/150KV/25KV Surface Irregularities 07/02/2014 1
KOR-11 600/1200:5 - TP Wire Showing 07/02/2014 1
KOR-11 600/1200:5 - TP Wire Showing 07/02/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 - TP HLIC 07/01/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 - TP HLIC 07/01/2014 1
VOY-11 60:1/110KV/15KV HLIC 07/01/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 Broken Shed 06/30/2014 1
KON-11 15:5 HLIC 06/30/2014 1
VIZ-11 35:1 110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 06/30/2014 1
VIZ-20 207.5:1 - TP Manual Test Rework 06/30/2014 2
96
VIZ-20G 175:1 - TP Manual Test Rework 06/30/2014 1
VOG-12 100:1 - TP Manual Test Rework 06/30/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Open Secondary 06/30/2014 1
VIZ-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G Overpot 06/30/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY Ratio Turns 06/30/2014 1
VOY-20G 175/300&75/300:1 Reverse Polarity 06/30/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Ext Voids 06/27/2014 1
VOY-15 200:1/150KV/25KV - TP External Cosmetics 06/27/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 06/27/2014 1
VOY-11 60:1/110KV/15KV LIC 06/27/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Machine Malfunction 06/27/2014 1
VOY-95 100:1(APG) Machine Malfunction 06/27/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP Mold Leaked 06/27/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP Mold Leaked 06/27/2014 1
VOY-20G
Ratio Turns 06/27/2014 1
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
VOY-20G 175/300&75/300:1/200KV/34.5 -
TP
VOZZ-20G 175/300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ratio Turns 06/27/2014 1
VOY-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 06/27/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 DUAL HV Surface Irregularities 06/27/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Wire Showing 06/27/2014 1
KOR-15CE 50:5 Cracked Unit 06/26/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 - TP Ext Voids 06/26/2014 1
KON-11ER 400:5 Ext Voids 06/26/2014 6
KOR-11 200/400:5 Ext Voids 06/26/2014 3
KOR-15CER 200:5/150KV/25KV Ext Voids 06/26/2014 1
VIL-12S 136.17/100:1 LT Ext Voids 06/26/2014 1
VOG-12 100:1 - TP Ext Voids 06/26/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1 /110KV/15KV/50HZ Flashing 06/26/2014 1
97
VOG-11 70:1 Flashing 06/26/2014 1
KOR-20 150/300:5/200KV/34.5KV HLIC 06/26/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV HLIC 06/26/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 06/26/2014 2
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 06/26/2014 1
VOY-11 120:1/110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 06/26/2014 1
VIZ-20G 275:1 Overpot 06/26/2014 1
KOR-11 200/400:5 Ratio Iron Loss 06/26/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Ratio Iron Loss 06/26/2014 1
VIZ-11 20 & 20:1 Ratio Turns 06/26/2014 2
VIZ-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G Ratio Turns 06/26/2014 2
VIZ-11, 7200-120V, 60:1, L-to-G Ratio Turns 06/26/2014 2
VIZ-75 57.5:1 Ratio Turns 06/26/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Surface Irregularities 06/26/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Surface Irregularities 06/26/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV Surface Irregularities 06/26/2014 1
VIL-12S 100:1 (48 Hr Test) Ext Voids 06/25/2014 2
VOY-95 5:1 Ext Voids 06/25/2014 2
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV External Cosmetics 06/25/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Flashing 06/25/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 - TP HLIC 06/25/2014 1
KOR-11 300:5 HLIC 06/25/2014 1
KOR-11 600/1200:5 - TP HLIC 06/25/2014 1
KON-11 25:5 Mold Leaked 06/25/2014 1
KON-11 25:5 Mold Leaked 06/25/2014 1
KOR-20 400:5 Ratio Iron Loss 06/25/2014 1
VIZ-20G 301.82 & 301.82:1 Ratio Turns 06/25/2014 1
VIZ-75 57.5:1 Ratio Turns 06/25/2014 1
98
VOY-95 2:1 Ratio Turns 06/25/2014 1
VOY-95 2:1 Ratio Turns 06/25/2014 1
VOY-95 2:1 Ratio Turns 06/25/2014 2
VOY-95 5:1 Ratio Turns 06/25/2014 1
VOY-95 5:1 Ratio Turns 06/25/2014 1
VOZ-11 3.2:1 (SF6)/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 06/25/2014 1
VOZZ-20G 175/300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ratio Turns 06/25/2014 1
KOR-11 600:5 Wire Showing 06/25/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Wires Showing 06/25/2014 1
KOR-11 300:5 Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
KOR-11 600/1200:5 - TP Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
KOR-11 30:5 - TP Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
KOR-11 300:5 - TP Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
KOR-11 50:5 Ext Voids 06/24/2014 2
KOR-11 50:5 Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
VIL-12S 100:1 (48 Hr Test) Ext Voids 06/24/2014 3
VIL-12S 136.17/100:1 LT Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1 Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ext Voids 06/24/2014 1
VIZ-11, 7200-120V, 60:1, L-to-G Flashing 06/24/2014 1
VOY-95 100:1(APG) HLIC 06/24/2014 1
KOTD-200 3200:5//5 MR HLIC 06/24/2014 2
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Loose Hardware 06/24/2014 1
VOY-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV Machine Malfunction 06/24/2014 1
VOZ-11M 20/60:1 Machine Malfunction 06/24/2014 1
KIR-11 200:5 Manual Test Rework 06/24/2014 1
KOR-15CER 200:5/150KV/25KV Manual Test Rework 06/24/2014 1
VIZ-11, 7200-120V, 60:1, L-to-G Manual Test Rework 06/24/2014 1
VOY-20 175/300:1/200KV/34.5KV Manual Test Rework 06/24/2014 1
KOR-20 150/300:5/200KV/34.5KV Mold Leaked 06/24/2014 1
VOY-20 33000/33000Y VT Mold Leaked 06/24/2014 1
99
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Mold Leaked 06/24/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-L Ratio Turns 06/24/2014 1
VOG-11 70:1 Ratio Turns 06/24/2014 1
VOY-95 2:1 Ratio Turns 06/24/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/24/2014 1
KOR-11E 25:5 Surface Irregularities 06/24/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Cracked Unit 06/23/2014 1
KIR-11ES 1200:5 Mold build error 06/23/2014 1
KON-11 10:5 Ratio Iron Loss 06/23/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 06/23/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 06/23/2014 1
VIZ-20G 275:1 Ratio Turns 06/23/2014 1
VIL-12S 100:1 (48 Hr Test) Wire Showing 06/23/2014 1
VOY-15 200:1/150KV/25KV - TP Cracked Unit 06/20/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 - TP Ext Voids 06/20/2014 1
KOR-11 600/1200:5 - TP Ext Voids 06/20/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ext Voids 06/20/2014 1
VOY-60 35:1 Ext Voids 06/20/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 - TP HLIC 06/20/2014 1
KON-12 25:5 HLIC 06/20/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-L HLIC 06/20/2014 1
VOZ-20 300:1 LIC 06/20/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Ratio Turns 06/20/2014 1
VOZ-11M 63.5:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 06/20/2014 1
VIL-12S 100:1 (48 Hr Test) Ratio Turns 06/20/2014 1
VIL-95S 34.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/20/2014 1
VIZ-20G 275:1 Ratio Turns 06/20/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 06/20/2014 1
VOY-95 2:1 Ratio Turns 06/20/2014 5
VOY-95 2:1 Ratio Turns 06/20/2014 1
Terminal inserted
VOY-95 100:1(APG) 06/20/2014 1
incorrectly
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-L Wire Showing 06/20/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Cracked Unit 06/19/2014 1
100
VOZ-20 300/175:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Cracked Unit 06/19/2014 1
VOZ-20 300:1 Cracked Unit 06/19/2014 1
KON-12ER 200:5 Ext Voids 06/19/2014 1
VOZ-20 300:1 HLIC 06/19/2014 2
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 06/19/2014 1
KOR-15C 200/400:5/150KV/25KV - TP Ratio Iron Loss 06/19/2014 1
KOR-15C 10:5/150KV/25KV Ratio Iron Loss 06/19/2014 1
VOY-20G 175/300&75/300:1/200KV/34.5 -
TP
PT-15 60:1 2 FUSE 0.5E (SF6) Ratio Turns 06/19/2014 2
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-L Ratio Turns 06/19/2014 1
VIZ-20G 140:1 Ratio Turns 06/19/2014 1
VIZ-20G 275:1 Ratio Turns 06/19/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1 Ratio Turns 06/19/2014 3
VOY-20G 175/300&175/300:1/200KV/34. -
Ratio Turns 06/19/2014
TP 1
VOY-95 2:1 Ratio Turns 06/19/2014 4
VOZ-11 3.2:1 (SF6)/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 06/19/2014 2
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/19/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Wire Showing 06/19/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1,7620/13200GY,110KV BIL Ext Voids 06/18/2014 1
VOY-20G
Ext Voids 06/18/2014 1
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV HLIC 06/18/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Mold Leaked 06/18/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Ratio Iron Loss 06/18/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 06/18/2014 1
PT-15 60:1 2 FUSE 0.5E (SF6) Ratio Turns 06/18/2014 1
VIZ-20G 166:1 Ratio Turns 06/18/2014 1
VOY-95 2:1 Ratio Turns 06/18/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/18/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Wire Showing 06/18/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Wires Showing 06/18/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-L Wires Showing 06/18/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 Ext Voids 06/17/2014 1
KIR-11 600:5 HLIC 06/17/2014 1
KOTD-200 3200:5//5 MR HLIC 06/17/2014 1
101
VOZ-20 300:1 HLIC 06/17/2014 1
VIZ-20G 166:1 Ratio Turns 06/17/2014 2
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/17/2014 1
VOY-20G 175:1/200KV/34.5KV Reverse Polarity 06/17/2014 1
VOZ-20 300/175:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP HLIC 06/16/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 06/16/2014 3
VIZ-20G 166:1 Ratio Turns 06/16/2014 1
VIZ-20G 174.74:1 Ratio Turns 06/16/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 06/16/2014 2
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/16/2014 1
KTH-15 200:5 (SF6) Damaged De-Molding 06/13/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 110KV/15KV L-TO-L Defective Mold 06/13/2014 1
KIR-11 600:5 Ext Voids 06/13/2014 1
KOR-20 10:5/200KV/34.5KV Ext Voids 06/13/2014 1
KOTD-200 3200:5//5 MR Ext Voids 06/13/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ext Voids 06/13/2014 1
VIZ-11, 4200-120V, 35 & 35:1, L-to-G Ext Voids 06/13/2014 1
KIR-11 600:5 Flashing 06/13/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 HLIC 06/13/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 DUAL HV HLIC 06/13/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 DUAL HV HLIC 06/13/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Open Secondary 06/13/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Open Secondary 06/13/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/13/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/13/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Wire Showing 06/13/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Wire Showing 06/13/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Wire Showing 06/13/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Wire Showing 06/13/2014 1
VOY-20G 175&175:1/200KV/34.5KV Ext Voids 06/12/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ext Voids 06/12/2014 1
KOR-11 150/300:5 - TP Ext Voids 06/12/2014 2
KOR-15C 25:5/150KV/25KV - TP Ext Voids 06/12/2014 2
KOR-15C 50:5/150KV/25K - TP Ext Voids 06/12/2014 1
102
KOR-60 600:5 - TP Ext Voids 06/12/2014 1
VIZ-11 100/120:1 Ext Voids 06/12/2014 2
VIZ-11 100:1 /110KV/15KV/50HZ Ext Voids 06/12/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1 Ext Voids 06/12/2014 4
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 DUAL HV Ext Voids 06/12/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ext Voids 06/12/2014 1
VOZ-11 70/120:1 LIC 06/12/2014 1
VOZ-15 200:1/150KV/25KV - TP LIC 06/12/2014 1
VOZ-15 200:1/150KV/25KV - TP LIC 06/12/2014 1
VIZ-11 100/120:1 Manual Test Rework 06/12/2014 1
VIZ-12G 120 & 200:1 Manual Test Rework 06/12/2014 1
VOY-20 240:1/200KV/34.5KV Manual Test Rework 06/12/2014 2
VOG-11 63.5:1,7620/13200GY,110KV BIL Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 1
VOZ-11 70/120:1 Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 3
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 1
VOZ-20 300/175:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 1
VOZ-11 100:1 N0 BADGES/110KV Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 1
VOZ-11 100:1 N0 BADGES/110KV Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/12/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Reverse Polarity 06/12/2014 1
KON-11 600:5 Terminal Damaged 06/12/2014 1
KON-11 600:5 Terminal Damaged 06/12/2014 1
103
VOY-20G
Wire Showing 06/12/2014 1
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
VOY-15G 120:1/150KV/25KV Wires Showing 06/12/2014 1
VOY-15G 120:1/150KV/25KV Wires Showing 06/12/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV Wires Showing 06/12/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Broken Shed 06/11/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 HLIC 06/11/2014 1
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV HLIC 06/11/2014 1
VIZ-11 100/120:1 HLIC 06/11/2014 1
VIZ-11 100/120:1 HLIC 06/11/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 06/11/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1 LIC 06/11/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1 LIC 06/11/2014 1
KOR-15C 25:5/150KV/25KV - TP Manual Test Rework 06/11/2014 1
VIZ-11 70:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G Manual Test Rework 06/11/2014 1
VIZ-12G 120 & 200:1 Manual Test Rework 06/11/2014 1
KON-11 5:5 Mold build error 06/11/2014 1
KON-11 5:5 Mold build error 06/11/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Wire Showing 06/11/2014 1
KOR-15C 75:5/150KV/25KV - TP Damage at De-molding 06/10/2014 1
KOR-15C 75:5/150KV/25KV - TP Damage at De-molding 06/10/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Damaged terminal 06/10/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ext Voids 06/10/2014 1
VOY-20G
Ext Voids 06/10/2014 1
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
VOY-15G 120:1/150KV/25KV Ext Voids 06/10/2014 1
VOY-20 175:1/200KV/34.5KV Ext Voids 06/10/2014 1
KOR-15C 25:5/150KV/25KV - TP HLIC 06/10/2014 1
KOR-15C 25:5/150KV/25KV - TP HLIC 06/10/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 06/10/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 - TP Manual Test Rework 06/10/2014 1
VOZ-15 150:1/150KV/25KV - TP Manual Test Rework 06/10/2014 1
KOR-15C 25:5/150KV/25KV - TP Overpot 06/10/2014 1
KOR-15C 25:5/150KV/25KV - TP Overpot 06/10/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Overpot 06/10/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Overpot 06/10/2014 1
104
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Ratio Iron Loss 06/10/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 06/10/2014 1
VIZ-12G 127:1 Ratio Turns 06/10/2014 2
VIZ-12G 127:1 Ratio Turns 06/10/2014 2
VOZ-11 40/66.4:1 Ratio Turns 06/10/2014 3
VOZ-11 40/66.4:1 Ratio Turns 06/10/2014 3
VOZ-15 200:1/150KV/25KV - TP Ratio Turns 06/10/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/10/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/10/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP HLIC 06/09/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 HLIC 06/09/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 HLIC 06/09/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL LIC 06/09/2014 1
VIZ-11 70:1/110KV/15KV - TP Manual Test Rework 06/09/2014 1
VIL-12S 136.17/100:1 LT Ratio Turns 06/09/2014 1
VIL-12S 136.17/100:1 LT Ratio Turns 06/09/2014 1
VIZ-12G 127:1 Ratio Turns 06/09/2014 1
VIZ-12G 127:1 Ratio Turns 06/09/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/09/2014 1
VOZZ-20 216.67 & 216.67:1 Ratio Turns 06/09/2014 1
KOR-15C 25:5/150KV/25KV Ext Voids 06/06/2014 1
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV Ext Voids 06/06/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Loose Hardware 06/06/2014 1
VIY-95 40:1 Ratio Turns 06/06/2014 2
VOY-20 175:1/200KV/34.5KV Terminal Damage 06/06/2014 1
VOY-20G
Cracked Unit 06/05/2014 1
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
VOY-20G 175/300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Cracked Unit 06/05/2014 1
KON-11 15:5 HLIC 06/05/2014 1
KON-11 25:5 HLIC 06/05/2014 1
105
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP HLIC 06/05/2014 1
VOY-20G 175&175:1/200KV/34.5KV Machine Malfunction 06/05/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1,7620/13200GY,110KV BIL Mold build error 06/05/2014 1
KON-11 15:5 Overpot 06/05/2014 1
VOY-20G
Overpot 06/05/2014 1
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
KOR-15C 400/800:5/150KV/25KV Wire Showing 06/05/2014 1
VOY-20G 175 & 300:1 Ext Voids 06/04/2014 1
KOR-12 30:5 HLIC 06/04/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 06/04/2014 1
VIZ-11 100 & 100:1 Reverse Polarity 06/04/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Cracked Unit 06/03/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV HLIC 06/03/2014 1
KON-12ER 200:5 LIC 06/03/2014 2
VOZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV - TP Loose Hardware 06/03/2014 2
VIZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV - TP Ratio Turns 06/03/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 06/03/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 06/03/2014 2
VOY-15G 120:1/150KV/25KV Reverse Polarity 06/03/2014 1
KOR-12 30:5 Ext Voids 06/02/2014 1
KOR-12 300/600:5 Ext Voids 06/02/2014 1
KOR-15C 400/800:5/150KV/25KV HLIC 06/02/2014 1
VOY-20 175/300:1/200KV/34.5KV HLIC 06/02/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP HLIC 06/02/2014 1
106
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV HLIC 06/02/2014 1
VIL-95 100:1 - TP HLIC 06/02/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL LIC 06/02/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Machine Malfunction 06/02/2014 2
KOR-15C 25:5/150KV/25KV Overpot 06/02/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 06/02/2014 1
VOZ-11M 120:1 Ratio Turns 06/02/2014 2
VIZ-11 100:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ratio Turns 06/02/2014 1
VIZ-15 200:1 Ratio Turns 06/02/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 06/02/2014 2
VIY-95 104.17:1/95KV/15KV Terminal Damage 06/02/2014 1
Terminal inserted
KOR-15C 400/800:5/150KV/25KV 06/02/2014 1
incorrectly
VOY-11 109.11/110KV/15KV Wrong Hardware 06/02/2014 1
VIZ-11 100 & 100:1 Wrong hardware 05/30/2014 2
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP Cracked Unit 05/30/2014 1
VOZ-11M 63.5:1 & 63.51 Ext Voids 05/30/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1,7620/13200GY,110KV BIL HLIC 05/30/2014 1
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV Mold Leaked 05/30/2014 1
VOY-20G
Overpot 05/30/2014 1
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
VOZ-11M 120:1 Ratio Iron Loss 05/30/2014 1
VOZ-11M 60:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ext Voids 05/29/2014 1
KOR-12 25:5 LIC 05/29/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Loose Hardware 05/29/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 05/29/2014 1
107
VIL-95 100:1 - TP Ratio Turns 05/29/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 05/29/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ratio Turns 05/29/2014 1
VIZ-11 103.9:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Ratio Turns 05/29/2014 5
VOY-11 60:1 50 HZ/110KV/15KV Damaged De-Molding 05/28/2014 1
VOZ-11 100:1 N0 BADGES/110KV/15KV Damaged De-Molding 05/28/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Damaged De-Molding 05/28/2014 1
VOZ-11M 60:1/110KV/15KV - TP Damaged De-Molding 05/28/2014 1
VOY-20G 175/300&75/300:1/200KV/34.5 -
Ext Voids 05/28/2014 1
TP
VOZ-11M 120:1 Ext Voids 05/28/2014 2
VOZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV - TP LIC 05/28/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 DUAL HV LIC 05/28/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 05/28/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP Ratio Turns 05/28/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ratio Turns 05/28/2014 6
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 05/28/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ratio Turns 05/28/2014 3
VIY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 05/28/2014 1
VIZ-75 35:1 SF6/75KV/8.7KV - TP Ratio Turns 05/28/2014 1
Terminal inserted
KOR-12 300/600:5 05/28/2014 1
incorrectly
KOR-12 30:5 Wire Showing 05/28/2014 1
VOZ-11 100:1 N0 BADGES/110KV/15KV Wires Showing 05/28/2014 1
VOY-20G
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 05/27/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 05/27/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 05/27/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 05/27/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 05/27/2014 5
108
KOR-11 50:5 - TP Machine Malfunction 05/27/2014 1
KOR-12 300/600:5 Machine Malfunction 05/27/2014 1
KOR-11 50:5 - TP Mold Leaked 05/27/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Open Primary 05/27/2014 1
VOZ-11M 120:1 Ratio Iron Loss 05/27/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Reverse Polarity 05/27/2014 1
VOY-20G
Reverse Polarity 05/27/2014 1
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV Wrong hardware 05/27/2014 2
VOY-20G 175:1/200KV/34.5KV Ratio Turns 05/23/2014 1
VIZ-12 66.39:1 Ratio Turns 05/23/2014 1
VOY-11 60:1 50 HZ/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 05/23/2014 2
VOY-95 5:1 Ratio Turns 05/23/2014 3
VOZZ-20 175/300 & 175/300:1 Ratio Turns 05/23/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 DUAL HV Wires Showing 05/23/2014 1
VOY-11 3.2 & 3.2:1 Wrong Hardware 05/23/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Bad Connection 05/22/2014 1
VOY-15G 120/200:1 Cracked Unit 05/22/2014 1
VIZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV - TP Damaged De-Molding 05/22/2014 1
VIZ-11 110:1 110KV 15KV L-TO-L Dropped unit 05/22/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 05/22/2014 3
VOY-11 3.2 & 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 05/22/2014 2
KON-11 50:5 Surface Irregularities 05/22/2014 1
109
KON-11 50:5 Surface Irregularities 05/22/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Surface Irregularities 05/22/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Surface Irregularities 05/22/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 05/22/2014 2
VIZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 05/22/2014 2
PTL-5L 20/10:1 2 FUSE REV Wires Showing 05/22/2014 1
PTL-5L 20/10:1 2 FUSE REV Wires Showing 05/22/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Bad Connection 05/21/2014 1
KOR-12 300/600:5 Cracked Unit 05/21/2014 1
VIZ-75 35 & 35:1 (SF6)/75KV/8.7KV Defective Mold 05/21/2014 1
VIZ-75 35 & 35:1 (SF6)/75KV/8.7KV Defective Mold 05/21/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 05/21/2014 2
VIZ-11, 14400-120V, 120:1, L-to-G HLIC 05/21/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Mold build error 05/21/2014 1
VOG-11 66.42:1 - TP Mold build error 05/21/2014 1
VOY-15G 110:1/150KV/25KV Mold build error 05/21/2014 1
VOY-20G
Mold build error 05/21/2014 1
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
KON-11HA 25:5 Mold Leaked 05/21/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 05/21/2014 1
VIZ-20 183.3:1 Ratio Turns 05/21/2014 1
VOY-11 3.2 & 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 05/21/2014 12
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 05/21/2014 6
KOR-20 5/10:5/200KV/34.5KV Surface Irregularities 05/21/2014 1
KOR-20 5/10:5/200KV/34.5KV Surface Irregularities 05/21/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Wire Showing 05/21/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Wire Showing 05/21/2014 1
KIR-60 300:5 - TP Damaged De-Molding 05/20/2014 1
KOR-11 50:5 - TP Ext Voids 05/20/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ext Voids 05/20/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 HLIC 05/20/2014 1
110
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 05/20/2014 1
KIR-60 300:5 - TP LIC 05/20/2014 1
VOY-20G 166/287.53&166/287.53:1 LIC 05/20/2014 1
VIZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G Surface Irregularities 05/20/2014 1
KOR-11 25:5 HLIC 05/19/2014 1
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV HLIC 05/19/2014 1
VIZ-12 175:1 LT HLIC 05/19/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV HLIC 05/19/2014 1
VOY-12 100:1/125KV/25KV Loose Hardware 05/19/2014 1
VOY-12 100:1/125KV/25KV Loose Hardware 05/19/2014 1
VOZ-11M 60:1/110KV/15KV Loose Hardware 05/19/2014 1
VOZ-11M 60:1/110KV/15KV Loose Hardware 05/19/2014 1
VOG-11 66.42:1 - TP Ratio Turns 05/19/2014 1
VIZ-11 120 & 120:1/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 05/19/2014 2
VIZ-11 120 & 120:1/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 05/19/2014 2
VIZ-11 110:1 110KV 15KV L-TO-L Damaged De-Molding 05/16/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 HLIC 05/16/2014 1
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV HLIC 05/16/2014 1
KIR-11 300:5 LIC 05/16/2014 1
KOR-11 25:5 Machine Malfunction 05/16/2014 2
VOG-11 60:1 Wires Showing 05/16/2014 1
VOZZ-20 175/300 & 175/300:1 Dropped unit 05/15/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 HLIC 05/15/2014 1
VOY-11 60:1/110KV/15KV HLIC 05/15/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP HLIC 05/15/2014 1
VIZ-11 35:1 110KV/15KV HLIC 05/15/2014 1
VOZ-11M 60:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Iron Loss 05/15/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 05/15/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 05/15/2014 1
VIZ-11, 14400-120V, 120:1, L-to-L Ratio Turns 05/15/2014 2
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 05/15/2014 1
VIZ-11 35:1 110KV/15KV Wire Showing 05/15/2014 1
KON-11 25:5 Broken Shed 05/14/2014 1
KOR-11 50:5 - TP HLIC 05/14/2014 1
VOZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV - TP HLIC 05/14/2014 1
111
VIZ-11 63.5:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Machine Malfunction 05/14/2014 1
VIZ-11 35:1 110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 05/14/2014 5
VIZ-12G 120:1 UNFUSED LT Ratio Turns 05/14/2014 1
VOZZ-20G 175/300:1/200KV/34.5KV (SF6) Ratio Turns 05/14/2014 1
VIZ-11, 14400-120V, 120:1, L-to-G Surface Irregularities 05/14/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Surface Irregularities 05/14/2014 3
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV Wire Showing 05/14/2014 1
VOZ-11 70:1/110KV/15KV Defective Mold 05/13/2014 1
KON-11ER 100:5 Ext Voids 05/13/2014 2
KON-12ER 200:5 Ext Voids 05/13/2014 2
VOZ-11 70:1/110KV/15KV HLIC 05/13/2014 1
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV HLIC 05/13/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G HLIC 05/13/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 05/13/2014 1
KOR-15C 200:5/150KV/25KV - TP Ratio Iron Loss 05/13/2014 1
VOG-11 70:1 Ratio Turns 05/13/2014 1
VOG-11 70:1 Ratio Turns 05/13/2014 1
VIZ-11 35:1 110KV/15KV Defective Mold 05/12/2014 1
KOR-11 50:5 - TP LIC 05/12/2014 1
VIZ-11 60:1 7200/110KV/15KV Overpot 05/12/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Overpot 05/12/2014 1
VIZ-11 35:1 110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 05/12/2014 9
KON-11 100:5 HLIC 05/09/2014 1
KOR-11 50:5 - TP HLIC 05/09/2014 2
VOZ-11 70:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Iron Loss 05/09/2014 3
KOR-11 50:5 - TP Wire Showing 05/09/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Broken Shed 05/08/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Ext Voids 05/08/2014 1
112
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 05/08/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 LIC 05/08/2014 1
VOZ-11 70:1/110KV/15KV Machine Malfunction 05/08/2014 1
VOZ-20 300/175:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ext Voids 05/07/2014 1
KON-11ER 100:5 LIC 05/07/2014 2
KOR-11 300/600:5 - TP Cracked Unit 05/06/2014 1
VOY-15G 60/102.86&60/102.86:1 Ext Voids 05/06/2014 1
KON-11 15:5 - TP HLIC 05/06/2014 1
KOR-11 400/800:5 - TP HLIC 05/06/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 05/06/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 05/06/2014 2
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 05/06/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1 - TP Open Primary 05/06/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 05/06/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ratio Iron Loss 05/05/2014 1
VOZ-20 300/175:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ratio Turns 05/05/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 Ext Voids 05/02/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 HLIC 05/02/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 HLIC 05/02/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 05/02/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 05/02/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 05/02/2014 4
VOZZ-20 300 & 300:1 - TP Ratio Turns 05/02/2014 1
VOZ-11M 60:1/110KV/15KV Wrong Hardware 05/02/2014 1
KOR-15C 50:5/150KV/25KV - TP Damaged Terminal 05/01/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Ext Voids 05/01/2014 1
VOZ-20 300/175:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP HLIC 05/01/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 LIC 05/01/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Ratio Iron Loss 05/01/2014 2
113
Terminal not Seated
KON-11 5:5 05/01/2014
Properly 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 External Cosmetics 04/30/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 External Cosmetics 04/30/2014 2
VOY-11 60:1/110KV/15KV External Cosmetics 04/30/2014 1
VOY-20G 139/249&139/249:134.5CSA External Cosmetics 04/30/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP External Cosmetics 04/30/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 04/30/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1/110KV/15KV - TP LIC 04/30/2014 1
KOR-20 100/200:5/200KV/34.5KV Machine Malfunction 04/30/2014 1
KOR-20ER 1000:5/200KV/34.5KV Mold build error 04/30/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1 Mold Release BU 04/30/2014 1
VOY-20G 165.83&165.83:1/34.5 - TP Ratio Turns 04/30/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 04/30/2014 2
VOG-11 60:1 Open Primary 04/29/2014 1
VIZ-11 120 & 120:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 04/29/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1 Ratio Turns 04/29/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 04/29/2014 15
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 04/29/2014 4
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 04/29/2014 1
Terminal not Seated
VOY-95 3.2:1 04/29/2014
Properly 1
KOR-11 400/800:5 - TP HLIC 04/28/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 04/28/2014 1
KON-12ER 200:5 LIC 04/28/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV LIC 04/28/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Overpot 04/28/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Overpot 04/28/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 04/28/2014 2
VOY-20G 275:1 Ratio Turns 04/28/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 04/28/2014 4
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 04/28/2014 7
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 04/28/2014 1
114
VIL-12S 100:1 (48 Hr Test) Wrong Hardware 04/28/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP Cracked Unit 04/25/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Ext Voids 04/25/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1/110KV/15KV - TP External Cosmetics 04/25/2014 1
KOR-15C 100/200:5/150KV/25KV HLIC 04/25/2014 1
VOY-12 120:1/125KV/25KV HLIC 04/25/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 04/25/2014 3
KON-12ER 200:5 LIC 04/25/2014 1
VOZ-20 300/175:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP LIC 04/25/2014 1
VOY-20G 165.83&165.83:1/200KV/34.5 - TP Overpot 04/25/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Overpot 04/25/2014 1
KOR-15C 100/200:5/150KV/25KV Ratio Iron Loss 04/25/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 04/25/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1,7620/13200GY,110KV BIL Reverse Polarity 04/25/2014 2
KOR-15C 5:5/150KV/25KV - TP Surface Irregularities 04/25/2014 3
VIY-95G 20:1 /95 kV/15 kV - TP Wire Showing 04/25/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Ext Voids 04/24/2014 2
VIZ-12G 150:1 1 FUSE - TP LT HLIC 04/24/2014 1
KOR-15C 50:5/150KV/25KV - TP Machine Malfunction 04/24/2014 1
VIL-12S 100:1 (48 Hr Test) Reverse Polarity 04/24/2014 2
KOR-15C 25:5/150KV/25KV - TP Surface Irregularities 04/24/2014 1
KOR-15E 600:5 Surface Irregularities 04/24/2014 1
KOR-20 100/200:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP Surface Irregularities 04/24/2014 2
VOG-11 63.5:1,7620/13200GY,110KV BIL Wire Showing 04/24/2014 1
VOY-20 175:1/200KV/34.5KV HLIC 04/23/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 04/23/2014 1
VOY-20G 275:1 Mold build error 04/23/2014 1
115
KOR-15C 100/200:5/150KV/25KV Mold Leaked 04/23/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Iron Loss 04/23/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 04/23/2014 1
VOY-20G 275:1 Ratio Turns 04/23/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 04/23/2014 1
VOY-20G 175/300:1 200KV BIL Ratio Turns 04/23/2014 1
VIL-12S 100:1 (48 Hr Test) Reverse Polarity 04/23/2014 4
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 04/22/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 04/22/2014 1
KOR-15C 100/200:5/150KV/25KV Machine Malfunction 04/22/2014 1
KOR-15CER 1000:5/150KV/25KV Mold Leaked 04/22/2014 1
VOY-20G 275:1 Ratio Turns 04/22/2014 1
VIY-95 20:1/95KV/15KV - TP Ratio Turns 04/22/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1 SF6/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 04/22/2014 1
VIZ-20 287.5:1 W/ PRIMARY LEADS - TP Ratio Turns 04/22/2014 1
VIZ-75 20:1 Ratio Turns 04/22/2014 1
KOR-11 400/800:5 - TP HLIC 04/21/2014 1
KON-12ER 200:5 LIC 04/21/2014 3
VOZZ-20G175/300&175/300:1/200KV/34. -
Open Secondary 04/21/2014
TP 1
VOY-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV Incorrect Leads 04/17/2014 1
VIZ-11 35:1 Ratio Turns 04/17/2014 2
VIZ-11 60:1 7200/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 04/17/2014 1
VIZ-12G 120:1 1 FUSE - TP LT Surface Irregularities 04/17/2014 1
VIZ-15 220:1 Ratio Turns 04/16/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 04/16/2014 1
VIY-95 104.17:1/95KV/15KV HLIC 04/15/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV SF-6 Ratio Turns 04/15/2014 3
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 04/15/2014 1
VOY-95 5:1 Ratio Turns 04/15/2014 3
116
VOY-20 275:1 HLIC 04/11/2014 2
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Open Secondary 04/11/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Overpot 04/11/2014 3
KON-12ER 200:5 Ratio Iron Loss 04/11/2014 1
VOZ-11 70 & 70:1 Reverse Polarity 04/11/2014 1
KOR-20 400:5 Ext Voids 04/10/2014 1
VIL-95 63.5:1 - TP Ext Voids 04/10/2014 2
VIZ-11 120:1 SF6/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Ext Voids 04/10/2014 1
VIZ-11, 7200-120V, 60:1, L-to-G Ext Voids 04/10/2014 1
VIZ-20 300:1 (SF6) Ext Voids 04/10/2014 6
VOG-11 60:1 Ext Voids 04/10/2014 9
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 04/10/2014 5
VOY-60 40:1 - TP Ext Voids 04/10/2014 1
VOZ-11M 60:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ext Voids 04/10/2014 1
KOR-11 1200:5 - TP Flashing 04/10/2014 2
KOR-11 600:5 Flashing 04/10/2014 3
KOR-11 600:5 Flashing 04/10/2014 1
KON-12ER 200:5 LIC 04/10/2014 3
VOG-12 120:1 Overpot 04/10/2014 4
VOZ-11M 60:1/110KV/15KV - TP Overpot 04/10/2014 1
VOZ-11 20:1 Ratio Turns 04/10/2014 3
Terminal not Seated
KOR-15C 25/50:5/150KV/25KV 04/10/2014
Properly 1
VIZ-12 220:1 LT Wire Showing 04/09/2014 1
KOR-11E 200:5 Ext Voids 04/08/2014 1
KOR-15C 25/50:5/150KV/25KV Ext Voids 04/08/2014 1
KOR-20 150:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ext Voids 04/08/2014 1
KOTD-110 400:1SR, W/ 3"BAR Ext Voids 04/08/2014 6
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G Ext Voids 04/08/2014 1
VIZ-11 63.5:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Ext Voids 04/08/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1 Ext Voids 04/08/2014 2
VOY-60 40:1 - TP Ext Voids 04/08/2014 1
KOR-20ER 1000:5/200KV/34.5KV External Cosmetics 04/08/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Flashing 04/08/2014 1
VOY-20 275:1 HLIC 04/08/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G HLIC 04/08/2014 1
117
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 Mold build error 04/08/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Iron Loss 04/08/2014 1
VOZ-11M 63.5:1 & 63.51 Ratio Turns 04/08/2014 1
VIZ-11 60:1 7200/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 04/08/2014 1
Terminal not Seated
VIY-60 40:1 - TP 04/08/2014
Properly 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ext Voids 04/07/2014 2
VIZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV Ext Voids 04/07/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1 Ext Voids 04/07/2014 1
VOZ-11E 110:1/110KV/15KV Flashing 04/07/2014 1
KOR-20 25/50:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP HLIC 04/07/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 04/07/2014 1
VOY-20 175/300 & 175/300:1 HLIC 04/07/2014 1
VOY-60 34.67:1 HLIC 04/07/2014 1
VIZ-15 220:1 HLIC 04/07/2014 1
KON-12ER 200:5 LIC 04/07/2014 5
VIZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV LIC 04/07/2014 1
KOR-15C 200:5/150KV/25KV - TP Loose Hardware 04/07/2014 1
VOY-60 34.67:1 Machine Malfunction 04/07/2014 1
VIZ-12 220:1 LT Mold build error 04/07/2014 1
KOR-20ER 50:5 Ratio Iron Loss 04/07/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Iron Loss 04/07/2014 1
VOY-60 34.67:1 Ratio Iron Loss 04/07/2014 2
Terminal not Seated
VOZ-15 100:1/150KV/25KV 04/07/2014
Properly 1
KON-11HA 25:5 HLIC 04/04/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 LIC 04/04/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Overpot 04/04/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Ext Voids 04/03/2014 1
VIL-12S 136.17/100:1 LT Ext Voids 04/03/2014 8
118
VIZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV LIC 04/03/2014 1
KON-11 15:5 Ext Voids 04/02/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Ext Voids 04/02/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1,7620/13200GY,110KV BIL Ext Voids 04/02/2014 1
KOR-15C 200:5 - TP Ext Voids 04/02/2014 2
KOTD-110 1800:1SR, W/ 3"BARS Ext Voids 04/02/2014 3
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 04/02/2014 1
KOR-20 25/50:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP Machine Malfunction 04/02/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 Machine Malfunction 04/02/2014 1
VIZ-20 300:1 (SF6) Overpot 04/02/2014 1
KOR-20 400:5 Ratio Turns 04/02/2014 14
VOY-95 5:1 Ratio Turns 04/02/2014 2
KOR-15C 800:5/150KV/25KV - TP HLIC 04/01/2014 1
KOR-20ER 1000:5/200KV/34.5KV HLIC 04/01/2014 1
VOY-20 175:1/200KV/34.5KV HLIC 04/01/2014 1
KOR-15C 50/100:5/150KV/25KV - TP HLIC 04/01/2014 1
KIR-11 200:5 Mold build error 04/01/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 Mold Leaked 04/01/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Mold Leaked 03/31/2014 1
VOY-20G 62.5 &62.5:1 166 & 166:1 Ratio Turns 03/31/2014 1
VOY-20G 62.5 &62.5:1 166 & 166:1 Ratio Turns 03/31/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 03/31/2014 1
VIZ-15G 120:1 1 FUSE (SF6) - TP LT Ratio Turns 03/28/2014 1
VOY-20G 175:1/200KV/34.5KV Reverse Polarity 03/28/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Terminal damage 03/28/2014 1
119
VOY-20 175/300 & 175/300:1 HLIC 03/27/2014 1
KOR-11 100:5 - TP HLIC 03/27/2014 1
KOR-20ER 1000:5/200KV/34.5KV Machine Malfunction 03/27/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1,7620/13200GY,110KV BIL Open Primary 03/27/2014 1
VIZ-15G 183:1 Wire Showing 03/27/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 03/26/2014 1
KOR-20ER 1000:5/200KV/34.5KV External Cosmetics 03/26/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 External Cosmetics 03/26/2014 1
VOZ-11M 63.5:1/110KV/15KV - TP HLIC 03/26/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1,7620/13200GY,110KV BIL Open Primary 03/26/2014 1
VOZ-11 34.67:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 03/26/2014 1
VIZ-11 115:1/110KV/15KV SF6 Ratio Turns 03/26/2014 1
VIZ-15 207.83:1 Ratio Turns 03/26/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 03/26/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV Terminal damage 03/26/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 Ext Voids 03/25/2014 1
KOR-20ER 1000:5/200KV/34.5KV Ext Voids 03/25/2014 1
KOR-20ER 1000:5/200KV/34.5KV Ext Voids 03/25/2014 1
KIR-11ES 75:5 HLIC 03/25/2014 1
VOY-95 5:1 HLIC 03/25/2014 1
KOR-11 400:5 - TP Machine Malfunction 03/25/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 03/25/2014 1
VIZ-11E 60:1 Ratio Turns 03/25/2014 3
VIZ-11E 60:1 Ratio Turns 03/25/2014 3
VOG-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 03/25/2014 1
VOG-11 70:1 Ratio Turns 03/25/2014 3
VOY-95 5:1 Ratio Turns 03/25/2014 1
VOY-95 5:1 Ratio Turns 03/25/2014 1
VIZ-15G 183:1 Terminal damage 03/25/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 HLIC 03/24/2014 1
KOR-20ER 1000:5/200KV/34.5KV Machine Malfunction 03/24/2014 1
KOR-20ER 50:5 Machine Malfunction 03/24/2014 1
120
KOR-20ER 200:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP Damaged Leads 03/21/2014 1
KOR-20ER 50:5 Ext Voids 03/21/2014 3
VOY-20G 175/300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ext Voids 03/21/2014 1
KOR-15C 600:5 Ext Voids 03/21/2014 1
KOTD-200 2000/4000:5 Ext Voids 03/21/2014 2
VIZ-20 220:1 (SF6) Ext Voids 03/21/2014 1
KOR-11 100:5 - TP Flashing 03/21/2014 1
VOY-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Flashing 03/21/2014 1
VOY-11 60:1/110KV/15KV LIC 03/21/2014 1
KOR-15C 200:5/150KV/25KV Manual Test Rework 03/21/2014 1
KOR-15C 600:5 Manual Test Rework 03/21/2014 1
VIL-95 115:1 Manual Test Rework 03/21/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 2 BUSH/FUSE - TP Manual Test Rework 03/21/2014 2
VIZ-11 110:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Manual Test Rework 03/21/2014 1
VIZ-11 70:1/120:1/110KV/15KV - TP Manual Test Rework 03/21/2014 1
VIZ-12 175:1 LT Manual Test Rework 03/21/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 03/21/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 03/21/2014 1
Terminal not Seated
PT-.7 360:120 03/21/2014
Properly 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP Wrong hardware 03/20/2014 3
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 Cracked Unit 03/20/2014 1
121
VOY-20 300:1 TESCO VT-FB Cracked Unit 03/20/2014 1
KOR-20ER 50:5 External Cosmetics 03/20/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP HLIC 03/20/2014 2
KOR-11 1200:5 HLIC 03/20/2014 1
KON-11HA 25:5 Manual Test Rework 03/20/2014 5
KON-12ER 100:5 Manual Test Rework 03/20/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 03/20/2014 1
VIZ-11 63.5:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Manual Test Rework 03/20/2014 3
VIZ-11 66.33:1/110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 03/20/2014 1
VOZ-11M 66.4:1/110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 03/20/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1 TESCO VT-FB Ratio Turns 03/20/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1 TESCO VT-FB Ratio Turns 03/20/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 03/20/2014 7
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP Wrong hardware 03/20/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 03/19/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 03/18/2014 1
VOY-20 175/300 & 175/300:1 HLIC 03/18/2014 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 Mold build error 03/18/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 03/18/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 03/18/2014 1
KOR-20ER 50:5 Ratio Iron Loss 03/18/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 03/17/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 03/17/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 03/17/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 03/17/2014 3
122
VOY-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP Cracked Unit 03/14/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 03/14/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 Ext Voids 03/14/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP Ext Voids 03/14/2014 2
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV HLIC 03/14/2014 1
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV HLIC 03/14/2014 1
VIZ-75 58.62 & 58.62:1 Mold build error 03/14/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP Broken Shed 03/13/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 03/13/2014 1
VOZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV Ratio Turns 03/13/2014 1
KOR-20ER 50:5 Ext Voids 03/12/2014 1
VOY-20 175/300 & 175/300:1 Ext Voids 03/12/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 03/12/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 03/12/2014 1
VOZ-11M 60:1/110KV/15KV Mold build error 03/12/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Overpot 03/12/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 Ratio Turns 03/12/2014 1
VIZ-12 192:1 Ratio Turns 03/12/2014 2
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 03/11/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 03/11/2014 1
123
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 03/11/2014 1
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV HLIC 03/11/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 HLIC 03/11/2014 1
VIZ-12 175:1 LT LIC 03/11/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Mold build error 03/11/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 03/11/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 03/11/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 03/11/2014 1
VIZ-15G 120:1 1 FUSE (SF6) - TP LT Ratio Turns 03/11/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 03/10/2014 1
KON-12ER 100:5 HLIC 03/10/2014 1
KOR-15C 100/200:5/150KV/25KV HLIC 03/10/2014 1
KOR-11 100:5 Lead Location 03/10/2014 1
KOR-11 30:5 - TP Lead Location 03/10/2014 1
KOR-11 30:5 - TP Lead Location 03/10/2014 1
KON-11 50:5 LIC 03/10/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 03/10/2014 3
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 03/10/2014 1
KON-11 15:5 HLIC 03/07/2014 1
KOR-15CER 200:5/150KV/25KV Machine Malfunction 03/07/2014 1
KON-12ER 100:5 Mold build error 03/07/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Mold build error 03/07/2014 1
124
VOG-11 20:1 Wire Showing 03/07/2014 1
VOY-20G
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
KON-11 100:5 Ext Voids 03/06/2014 2
KOR-60 400:5 Ext Voids 03/06/2014 1
VOZ-15 7200/14400:120/150KV/25KV HLIC 03/06/2014 2
VIY-60 35:1 HLIC 03/06/2014 1
VIZ-11, 14400-120V, 120:1, L-to-G HLIC 03/06/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 03/06/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Iron Loss 03/06/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 03/06/2014 1
VOY-20G
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
VOY-20G 175/300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ratio Turns 03/06/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 03/06/2014 1
KON-11 15:5 Ext Voids 03/05/2014 4
KOR-11 1000:5 - TP Ext Voids 03/05/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 03/05/2014 3
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 03/05/2014 1
KOR-11E 200:5 HLIC 03/05/2014 1
KOR-11 50:5 HLIC 03/05/2014 1
VOY-20 175/300 & 175/300:1 Mold build error 03/05/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Mold build error 03/05/2014 1
KON-11 100:5 Mold Leaked 03/05/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP Mold Leaked 03/05/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 03/05/2014 1
VIL-95 60:1 - TP Open Secondary 03/05/2014 1
VOG-12 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 03/05/2014 1
VOZ-11M 63.5:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ratio Turns 03/05/2014 1
125
VOG-11 20:1 Ratio Turns 03/05/2014 1
VOY-20G 175:1/200KV/34.5KV Wrong hardware 03/05/2014 1
KON-11 1200:5 - TP Machine Malfunction 03/04/2014 1
KOR-11E 200:5 Mold Leaked 03/04/2014 1
KOR-60 400:5 Mold Leaked 03/04/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 03/04/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 External Cosmetics 03/03/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP HLIC 03/03/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Overpot 03/03/2014 1
VOY-20G
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
VIZ-20 220:1 Ratio Turns 03/03/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV VU Ratio Turns 03/03/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1,7620/13200GY,110KV BIL External Cosmetics 02/28/2014 1
KOR-15C 400:5/150KV/25KV HLIC 02/28/2014 3
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 02/28/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 02/28/2014 1
VOZ-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP Machine Malfunction 02/28/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 SF6/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Manual Test Rework 02/28/2014 1
VOZZ-15G 120/200&120/200:1 Ratio Turns 02/28/2014 1
VOZZ-15G 120/200&120/200:1 Ratio Turns 02/28/2014 1
KON-11 100:5 LIC 02/27/2014 1
126
VIY-60 40:1 - TP Ratio Turns 02/27/2014 1
VOZ-11M 66.4:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 02/27/2014 1
VOY-20 175/300 & 175/300:1 Cracked Unit 02/26/2014 1
VOY-20G
139/249&139/249:1/200KV/34.5CSA
KIR-11 200:5 LIC 02/26/2014 1
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 02/26/2014 2
VOY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 02/26/2014 7
KOR-11 200/400:5 Ext Voids 02/25/2014 1
KOR-11E 400:5 Ext Voids 02/25/2014 3
KIR-11 600:5 LIC 02/25/2014 1
VIZ-11 115:1/110KV/15KV SF6 Machine Malfunction 02/25/2014 1
VIY-95 115:1/95KV/15KV - TP Overpot 02/25/2014 1
KOR-11 1000:5 - TP Ratio Iron Loss 02/25/2014 1
VOY-60 40:1 - TP Ext Voids 02/24/2014 1
VIZ-11 115:1/110KV/15KV SF6 Manual Test Rework 02/24/2014 1
VIY-95 115:1/95KV/15KV - TP Wires Showing 02/24/2014 2
VIY-95 115:1/95KV/15KV - TP Wires Showing 02/24/2014 2
VOY-60 35:1 Ext Voids 02/21/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 02/21/2014 1
VOY-15G 120:1/150KV/25KV Machine Malfunction 02/21/2014 1
VOZZ-20G175/300&175/300:1/200KV/34. -
Ratio Turns 02/21/2014
TP 1
KON-11ER 1000:5 LIC 02/20/2014 1
127
VIZ-20 300:1 W/ PRIMARY LEADS - TP Ratio Turns 02/20/2014 1
VOY-15G 110:1/150KV/25KV Cracked Unit 02/19/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 Cracked Unit 02/19/2014 1
VOY-20 275:1/200KV/34.5KV Damaged Terminal 02/19/2014 1
KON-11 300:5 - TP HLIC 02/19/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 02/19/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 02/19/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1 - TP LIC 02/19/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 02/19/2014 1
VOY-20G 175/300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Overpot 02/19/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 02/19/2014 1
KOR-15CER 200:5/150KV/25KV HLIC 02/18/2014 1
VIZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV SF-6 Mold Release BU 02/18/2014 1
VOY-15G 120:1/150KV/25KV Overpot 02/18/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 02/18/2014 2
VOY-15G 103.9:1/150KV/25KV Ratio Turns 02/18/2014 2
VOY-60 35:1 - TP Ratio Turns 02/18/2014 1
VOZ-11E 63.5:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 02/18/2014 3
VIZ-11 120:1 SF6/110KV/15KV L-TO-L HLIC 02/17/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G HLIC 02/14/2014 1
KOR-20 100/200:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP LIC 02/14/2014 1
VIZ-11 115:1 /110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 02/14/2014 1
KOR-11 50:5 HLIC 02/11/2014 1
128
VIZ-11 120:1 SF6/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Ratio Turns 02/11/2014 2
VIZ-15 240:1 SF6 Ratio Turns 02/11/2014 1
VOZ-11E 63.5:1/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 02/11/2014 1
VIZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV SF-6 Wrong Hardware 02/11/2014 3
VOG-11 60:1 HLIC 02/10/2014 1
VIZ-20 300:1 - TP Ratio Turns 02/10/2014 2
KON-11ER 1000:5 Ext Voids 02/07/2014 2
VIZ-11 7200/110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 02/07/2014 1
VIZ-12G 127:1 Manual Test Rework 02/07/2014 1
VIZ-75, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-L Manual Test Rework 02/07/2014 1
VOY-15G 120:1/150KV/25KV Manual Test Rework 02/07/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP Overpot 02/07/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Ext Voids 02/06/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 02/06/2014 1
VOY-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV Ext Voids 02/06/2014 1
KOR-15CER 1000:5/150KV/25KV HLIC 02/06/2014 1
VIZ-11 115:1 /110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 02/06/2014 2
VIZ-75 35:1 SF6/75KV/8.7KV - TP Manual Test Rework 02/06/2014 4
129
VOZ-11 60:1 Manual Test Rework 02/06/2014 1
VIZ-15G 300 & 519.63:1 Overpot 02/06/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP Ratio Iron Loss 02/06/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 02/06/2014 1
VIZ-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ratio Turns 02/06/2014 1
VIZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV Ratio Turns 02/06/2014 2
VIZ-11 100:1/110KV Manual Test Rework 02/05/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1/110KV Manual Test Rework 02/05/2014 1
VIZ-15G 60/120:1 (SF6) Manual Test Rework 02/05/2014 2
VOY-20G 175/300:1 200KV BIL Manual Test Rework 02/05/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Manual Test Rework 02/05/2014 1
VOZ-11E 63.5:1 Ratio Iron Loss 02/05/2014 1
KOTD-110 400:1SR, W/ 3"BAR Ratio Iron Loss 02/05/2014 1
VOG-12 60:1 Ratio Turns 02/05/2014 1
VOG-12 63.5:1 Reverse Polarity 02/05/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Wire Showing 02/05/2014 1
VIZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G Wire Showing 02/05/2014 1
KON-11 600:5 HLIC 02/04/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL HLIC 02/04/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 02/04/2014 1
KOR-15E 400:5 HLIC 02/04/2014 1
PT-25 24940GY/14400:120&120SF6 Manual Test Rework 02/04/2014 1
130
VIZ-15G 140:1 1 FUSE (SF6) Manual Test Rework 02/04/2014 1
VIZ-20G 140:1 Manual Test Rework 02/04/2014 2
VOY-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV Mold build error 02/04/2014 1
VIZ-11 63.5:1/110KV/15KV - TP Ratio Turns 02/04/2014 1
VIZ-15G 300 & 519.63:1 Ratio Turns 02/04/2014 1
VIZ-75 35:1/75KV/8.7KV Ratio Turns 02/04/2014 2
VIZZ-15 150:1 Ratio Turns 02/04/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 HLIC 02/03/2014 1
VOY-12 120:1/125KV/25KV HLIC 02/03/2014 1
KOR-11 100:5 Manual Test Rework 02/03/2014 1
KOR-11 100:5 Manual Test Rework 02/03/2014 1
VOY-12 120:1/125KV/25KV Open Secondary 02/03/2014 1
VOG-12 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 02/03/2014 1
VOZ-11 70/120:1 Ratio Turns 02/03/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 02/03/2014 1
KON-11 50:5 HLIC 01/31/2014 1
VIL-12S 136.17/100:1 LT HLIC 01/31/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Machine Malfunction 01/31/2014 1
VOY-12 120:1/125KV/25KV Open Primary 01/31/2014 1
VOZ-11 70/120:1 Ratio Turns 01/31/2014 1
VOZ-11 70/120:1 Ratio Turns 01/31/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/31/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/31/2014 1
131
VOG-11 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/31/2014 1
VOY-20G 175/300:1 200KV BIL Ratio Turns 01/31/2014 1
VOG-12 63.5:1 HLIC 01/30/2014 1
KOR-15CER 200:5/150KV/25KV Ratio Iron Loss 01/30/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 01/30/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 01/30/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/30/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/30/2014 1
VIY-60 35:1 Ratio Turns 01/30/2014 1
VOZ-11E 63.5:1 Dropped unit 01/28/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 01/28/2014 1
VOY-15G 66.42:1 HLIC 01/28/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 01/28/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 Mold Leaked 01/28/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 01/28/2014 1
VOG-11 66.42:1 - TP Ratio Turns 01/28/2014 1
VOZ-11 70/120:1 Ratio Turns 01/28/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/28/2014 2
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 01/28/2014 5
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 01/28/2014 20
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 01/27/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ext Voids 01/27/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 01/27/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP HLIC 01/27/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 HLIC 01/27/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1 HLIC 01/27/2014 1
KON-11 400:5 LIC 01/27/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1 W/ 1E FUSES Manual Test Rework 01/27/2014 1
VIZ-11 60:1 7200/110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 01/27/2014 1
VIZZ-15G 200:1 - TP Manual Test Rework 01/27/2014 1
132
VOG-11 63.5:1 Manual Test Rework 01/27/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1 Manual Test Rework 01/27/2014 1
VOY-15 120:1/150KV/25KV - TP Overpot 01/27/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1 Overtrim 01/27/2014 2
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 01/24/2014 3
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 01/24/2014 3
KIR-11 600:5 Ext Voids 01/24/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G Ext Voids 01/24/2014 2
VIZ-20G 167.7 & 291.7:1 W/ PRIMARY LEAD Ext Voids 01/24/2014 1
VIZZ-15G 200:1 - TP Ext Voids 01/24/2014 1
VOY-20 287.5:1/200KV/34.5KV HLIC 01/24/2014 1
VOY-20 287.5:1/200KV/34.5KV HLIC 01/24/2014 1
VOZ-11 100:1 N0 BADGES/110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 01/24/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 01/24/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 01/24/2014 1
VOZ-11E 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/24/2014 1
VOZ-11E 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/24/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/24/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/24/2014 1
PT-25 24940GY/14400:120&120SF6 Ratio Turns 01/24/2014 1
VIZ-11 137.5:1/110KV/15KV/1.5E FUSE L-L Reverse Polarity 01/24/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 01/23/2014 4
133
VOG-12 120:1 Ext Voids 01/23/2014 4
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Flashing 01/23/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV Flashing 01/23/2014 1
VOY-11 60:1/110KV/15KV Flashing 01/23/2014 1
VOZ-11 100:1 N0 BADGES/110KV/15KV Flashing 01/23/2014 1
VIZ-11 35:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G HLIC 01/23/2014 1
KOR-20 200:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP Manual Test Rework 01/23/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ratio Iron Loss 01/23/2014 2
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ratio Iron Loss 01/23/2014 2
VOG-12 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/23/2014 1
VOG-12 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/23/2014 1
VOZ-11E 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/23/2014 5
VOZ-11E 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/23/2014 5
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 01/23/2014 1
KOR-20 200:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP Surface Irregularities 01/23/2014 1
KIR-11 200:5 Flashing 01/22/2014 4
KIR-11 600:5 Flashing 01/22/2014 1
VOY-20 150:1/200KV/34.5KV/50HZ HLIC 01/22/2014 1
VOY-20 150:1/200KV/34.5KV/50HZ HLIC 01/22/2014 1
VOZ-20 175 & 175:1 HLIC 01/22/2014 1
VOZ-20 175 & 175:1 HLIC 01/22/2014 1
KOR-11 400/800:5 HLIC 01/22/2014 1
VOY-20 150:1/200KV/34.5KV/50HZ LIC 01/22/2014 1
VOY-20 150:1/200KV/34.5KV/50HZ LIC 01/22/2014 1
VOZ-11E 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/22/2014 1
VOZ-11E 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/22/2014 1
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/22/2014 3
VOZ-11E 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/22/2014 3
VOG-11 63.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/22/2014 1
134
KIR-75 1200:5 Damaged De-Molding 01/21/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ext Voids 01/21/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ext Voids 01/21/2014 1
KOR-11 400/800:5 Ext Voids 01/21/2014 1
KOR-20 200:5/200KV/34.5KV - TP Ext Voids 01/21/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Ext Voids 01/21/2014 1
VIZ-11 35:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G Ext Voids 01/21/2014 2
VIZ-15G 60/120:1 Ext Voids 01/21/2014 2
VIZ-20G 167.7 & 291.7:1 W/ PRIMARY LEAD Ext Voids 01/21/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1 Ext Voids 01/21/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1 Ext Voids 01/21/2014 3
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ext Voids 01/21/2014 1
VOY-95 5:1 Ext Voids 01/21/2014 2
VIZ-11 120 & 120:1 /110KV/15KV Flashing 01/21/2014 1
VIZ-11 60:1 7200/110KV/15KV Flashing 01/21/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-L HLIC 01/21/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 01/21/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 01/21/2014 1
VIZ-11 120 & 120:1 /110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 01/21/2014 1
VIZ-11 120 & 120:1 /110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 01/21/2014 1
VIZ-75 35:1/75KV/8.7KV Manual Test Rework 01/21/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/21/2014 4
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/21/2014 4
VOZ-11 70:1/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 01/21/2014 1
Terminal not Seated
VIY-60 20:1 01/21/2014
Properly 1
Terminal not Seated
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G 01/21/2014
Properly 1
VIZ-20G 175:1 W/ PRIMARY LEAD Defective Mold 01/20/2014 5
KON-11 400:5 - TP Ext Voids 01/20/2014 1
KTH-15 300:5 (SF6) Ext Voids 01/20/2014 1
VOZZ-15 120:1 Ext Voids 01/20/2014 3
135
KON-11 400:5 - TP External Cosmetics 01/20/2014 1
KIR-11 200:5 Flashing 01/20/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G Flashing 01/20/2014 1
VOZ-20 175 & 175:1 HLIC 01/20/2014 1
VOZ-20 175 & 175:1 HLIC 01/20/2014 1
KON-12ER 200:5 LIC 01/20/2014 1
KON-12ER 200:5 LIC 01/20/2014 1
KIR-11 100/200:5 Manual Test Rework 01/20/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 SF6/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Manual Test Rework 01/20/2014 1
VIZ-75 35:1 SF6/75KV/8.7KV - TP Manual Test Rework 01/20/2014 1
KON-11ER 800:5 Overpot 01/20/2014 1
KON-11ER 800:5 Overpot 01/20/2014 1
VIZ-11 7200/110KV/15KV Overpot 01/20/2014 2
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/20/2014 7
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/20/2014 7
Terminal not Seated
VIZ-11 35:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G 01/20/2014
Properly 1
Terminal not Seated
VOZ-15 175:1/150KV/25KV 01/20/2014
Properly 1
KOR-15C 10:5 Terminal Pulled off 01/20/2014 1
KOR-15C 10:5 Terminal Pulled off 01/20/2014 1
VOY-15G 63.5/120:1 Ext Voids 01/17/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP HLIC 01/17/2014 2
VIZ-11 103.9:1 SF6/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Manual Test Rework 01/17/2014 1
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/17/2014 4
VOZ-11M 70:1 & 70:1 Ratio Turns 01/17/2014 4
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 01/17/2014 3
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 01/17/2014 2
KON-12ER 200:5 HLIC 01/16/2014 1
KON-11ER 200:5 - TP LIC 01/16/2014 1
KOR-15CER 200:5/150KV/25KV Ratio Iron Loss 01/16/2014 1
136
VOY-20G 175/300&75/300:1/200KV/34.5 -
TP
VOY-20G 175/300&75/300:1/200KV/34.5 -
TP
KON-12ER 200:5 Ext Voids 01/15/2014 1
KOR-11 1200:5 - TP LIC 01/15/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 01/15/2014 1
VOY-15G 110:1/150KV/25KV Overpot 01/15/2014 1
KOR-60 400:5 Ratio Turns 01/15/2014 3
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 01/15/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 01/15/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 01/15/2014 4
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 01/15/2014 3
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 01/15/2014 1
KOR-11 100:5 - TP Manual Test Rework 01/14/2014 1
VIY-60, 4200-120V, 35:1, L-to-G Manual Test Rework 01/14/2014 2
VIZ-11 103.9:1 SF6/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Manual Test Rework 01/14/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1/110KV/15KV Manual Test Rework 01/14/2014 3
VIZ-11 120 & 120:1/110KV/15KV Overpot 01/14/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 01/14/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 01/14/2014 1
VOY-15G 60/120:1 Ratio Turns 01/14/2014 1
VOZ-20 175 & 175:1 Ratio Turns 01/14/2014 1
VIL-95 63.5:1 - TP Ratio Turns 01/14/2014 2
KON-12ER 200:5 Ext Voids 01/13/2014 1
VOG-11 63.5:1 - TP Ext Voids 01/13/2014 1
KOR-11 100:5 - TP LIC 01/13/2014 1
KOR-15C 50:5/150KV/25KV Manual Test Rework 01/13/2014 1
137
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 01/13/2014 1
VIY-60 20:1 Ratio Turns 01/13/2014 1
VIZ-11 103.9:1 SF6/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Ratio Turns 01/13/2014 1
VIZ-11 7200/110KV/15KV Ratio Turns 01/13/2014 3
VIZ-15G 120:1 1 FUSE - TP LT Damaged De-Molding 01/10/2014 2
VIZ-11 7200/12470Y Defective Mold 01/10/2014 1
VIZ-20 287.5:1 Defective Mold 01/10/2014 1
KON-11 100:5 Dropped unit 01/10/2014 1
VOG-11 60:1,7200/12470GY,110KV BIL Dropped unit 01/10/2014 1
KON-11 400:5 - TP Ext Voids 01/10/2014 1
KOR-11 1200:5 Ext Voids 01/10/2014 1
KOR-11 100:5 - TP Ext Voids 01/10/2014 2
VIZ-11 100:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Ext Voids 01/10/2014 1
VIZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV/SF6 GAS Ext Voids 01/10/2014 1
KIR-11 100/200:5 Flashing 01/10/2014 2
VOY-20 300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP HLIC 01/10/2014 1
KOR-12 20:5 LIC 01/10/2014 1
KOR-11 100:5 - TP Manual Test Rework 01/10/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 01/10/2014 1
VIZ-20 287.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/10/2014 1
KOR-15C 50:5/150KV/25KV Surface Irregularities 01/10/2014 1
VIL-95 60:1 - TP Surface Irregularities 01/10/2014 1
VOZ-11 100:1 N0 BADGES/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 01/10/2014 3
KON-11 400:5 - TP Ext Voids 01/09/2014 1
138
VIZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV/SF6 GAS Ext Voids 01/09/2014 2
VOY-20G 175/300:1 200KV BIL Ext Voids 01/09/2014 2
KIR-11E 150:5 Flashing 01/09/2014 3
KON-11 15:5 - TP HLIC 01/09/2014 1
KON-11 5:5 - TP HLIC 01/09/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 HLIC 01/09/2014 1
VOY-20 300:1/200KV/34.5KV - TP HLIC 01/09/2014 2
KOR-11 400/800:5 - TP LIC 01/09/2014 1
KOR-15C 10:5 Ratio Iron Loss 01/09/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-L Ratio Turns 01/09/2014 2
VIZ-11 7200/12470Y Ratio Turns 01/09/2014 3
KIR-11E 300:5 - TP Surface Irregularities 01/09/2014 2
VIZ-12G 120:1 1 FUSE - TP LT Surface Irregularities 01/09/2014 2
VOZ-11 100:1 N0 BADGES/110KV/15KV Surface Irregularities 01/09/2014 2
VIZ-11 60:1/110KV/15KV L-TO-G Bad Connection 01/08/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 01/08/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Turns 01/08/2014 1
VOZ-11 120:1 Ratio Turns 01/08/2014 1
VOZ-20 175:1 Dropped unit 01/07/2014 1
139
KON-11 300:5 - TP Ext Voids 01/07/2014 1
KON-11 400:5 - TP Ext Voids 01/07/2014 1
KON-11 15:5 Flashing 01/07/2014 1
VIZ-11 120:1 /110KV/15KV L-TO-G Flashing 01/07/2014 2
KON-11 300:5 - TP HLIC 01/07/2014 1
KOR-11 200/400:5 HLIC 01/07/2014 1
KON-11 15:5 Manual Test Rework 01/07/2014 1
VIY-95G 35:1 /95 kV/15 kV - TP Manual Test Rework 01/07/2014 1
VIZ-12G 120:1 1 FUSE - TP LT Manual Test Rework 01/07/2014 1
VIZ-75 20:1/75KV/8.7KV - TP Manual Test Rework 01/07/2014 1
VIZ-15G 120:1 1 FUSE - TP LT Mold Leaked 01/07/2014 1
KON-11 400:5 - TP Ratio Iron Loss 01/07/2014 1
VOY-95 3.2:1 Ratio Turns 01/07/2014 1
VOZ-11 60:1 Ratio Turns 01/07/2014 2
Terminal not Seated
VIY-60 20:1 01/07/2014
Properly 1
KIR-60 25:5 - TP LIC 01/06/2014 1
KON-11 100:5 HLIC 01/03/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Open Primary 01/03/2014 1
KOR-11 400/800:5 - TP Ratio Iron Loss 01/03/2014 1
VOG-12 120:1 Ratio Iron Loss 01/03/2014 1
VIZ-20 287.5:1 Ratio Turns 01/03/2014 1
VIZ-11 100:1/110KV/15KV - TP Surface Irregularities 01/03/2014 6
VOY-95 3.2:1 Surface Irregularities 01/03/2014 1
140
141

2 e 7 F

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2 e 7 F

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2 e 7 F

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Improving Productivity and Quality of a Transformer Production Line by Applying Lean

Director of Thesis: Dr. Kanchan Das

Major Department: Department of Technology

scrap, inventory, and storage arrangement.

gained throughout the life of the project.

Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Technology Systems

East Carolina University

In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

Masters of Science in Technology Systems

COMMITTEE MEMBER: _____________________________________________________________________________

COMMITTEE MEMBER: _____________________________________________________________________________

CHAIR OF THE DEPARTMENT

Copyright Page …………………………………………………………………………………………..…………ii

1.2 Statement of the Problem…......................................................................................................2

1.3 Motivation for the Study…………………………………………………………………………….3

1.4 Research Objective……….…….……………………………………………………………………...4

1.5 Research Questions……………………………………………………………………………………5

CHAPTER 2: Review of the Literature……………………………………………………………..…….6

2.1 Defining Lean………………………..……….……………………………………………………...…..6

2.2 History of Lean Manufacturing……………………………………………………………….....6

2.2.1 Henry Ford’s Mass Production System………………………………………….7

2.2.2 Beginning of the Toyota Production System……………………………….…9

2.2.3 The Lean Movement in the United States………………………………….….12

2.3 Lean Principles Manufacturing……………….………………………………………………...12

2.3.3 Cleanliness and Organization……………………………………………………...15

2.3.5 Cycle Timing………………………………………………………………………………16

2.3.8 Variation Reduction…………………………………………………………………...18

2.4 Waste in a Lean Environment……………………………………………………………….….20

2.5 Continuous Improvement…………………………………………………………………….….22

2.5.1 Fundamentals of Continuous Improvement…………………………...…....23

2.6 Value Stream Mapping…………………………………………………………………………..…24

2.7 Five S, Workplace Organization…………………………………………………………..….…25

2.8 Single-Piece-Flow and Small Lot Sizes……………………………………………………....27

2.9 Setup-Time Reduction……………………………………………………………………………...28

2.10 Kanban Systems……………………………………………………………………………………..29

2.12 Lean Tools for Problem Solving and Improvements……………….………………..33

2.12.1 Check Sheet……………………………………………………………………………....34

2.12.3 Pareto Analysis…………………………………………………………………………35

2.12.4 Process Flow Diagram……………………………………………………………….35

2.12.5 Cause-and-Effect Analysis………………………………………………………….36

CHAPTER 3: Current Process Overview and Improvements Implementations……37

3.1 Current Process Overview for Medium Voltage…..….……………….…..…….………37

3.1.2 Winding Process………………………………………………………………….…….39

3.1.3 Assembly Process………………………………………………………………………40

3.1.4 HCEP Casting Operation………………………………………………………….….42

3.1.5 Other Manufacturing Processes………………………………………………….44

3.2 Current Stream Mapping…….……….………..………………………………………………….44

3.2.1 Identify the Bottleneck……………………………………………………………..…………..46

3.3 Current Stream Mapping with Kaizen Improvements……………………………..…47

3.4 Single-Piece Flow……………………………………………………………………….……..……..50

3.5.1 Urethane and HCEP Shared Operations………………………………….……55

3.5.2 HCEP Operations………………………………………………………………….…….59

3.6 Kanban Systems…………………………………………………………………………...….………65

3.7 Cell Layout…………………………………………………………………………………..………….66

3.8 Setup Time Reduction…………………………………………………………..………..…..…….68

3.9 Organizing Workplace by Implementing 5 S………………………………….…………..70

3.10 Other HCEP Production Line Improvements……………………..…………….………72

Chapter 4: Conclusion and Recommendations…………………………………………...……….76

2.1 Urethane and HCEP Shared Operations Defect Rates……………………………………………55