Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect
Available
Availableonline
Procedia atatwww.sciencedirect.com
Manufacturing
online 00 (2018) 000–000
www.sciencedirect.com
Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

ScienceDirect
ScienceDirect 
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia

Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 647–654

Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2017) 000–000
www.elsevier.com/locate/procedia
28th International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing
28th International ConferenceJune
(FAIM2018), on Flexible Automation
11-14, 2018, and OH,
Columbus, Intelligent
USA Manufacturing
(FAIM2018), June 11-14, 2018, Columbus, OH, USA
A Practical Study of the Application of SMED to Electron-beam
A PracticalEngineering
Manufacturing Study ofSociety
the Application
International of SMED
Conference 2017, to Electron-beam
MESIC 2017, 28-30 June
Machining
2017,
in Automotive
Vigo (Pontevedra),
Industry
Spain
Machining in Automotive Industry
Marc Martinsa, Radu Godinab, Carina Pimentelc, F. J. G. Silvad, João C. O. Matiasc
Costing models
Marc Martinsa forGodina
, Radu capacity b optimization
, Carina Pimentelc, F. J. inG.Industry 4.0:
Silvad, João Trade-off
C. O. Matiasc
Coficab - Company Wires and Cables Ltd., Guarda, Portugal
a

between used capacity

CoficabC-MAST, University
- Company and
Wires and
a of Beira
b
operational
CablesInterior, Portugalefficiency
Portugal
Ltd., Guarda,
GOVCOPP,
bc
C-MAST, DEGEIT,
UniversityUniversity of Aveiro,
of Beira Interior, Portugal
Portugal
d
ISEP – School of Engineering, Polytechnic
c
GOVCOPP, of Porto, RuaUniversity
DEGEIT, Dr. António Bernardino
of Aveiro, de Almeida, 431,4200
bPortugal Porto, Portugal
d A. Santana , P. Afonso , A. Zanin , R. Wernke
a
ISEP – School of Engineering, PolytechnicDo not enter
of Porto,
a,*
Ruasecond affiliation
Dr. António yet
Bernardino
b
de Almeida, 431,4200 Porto, Portugal
Do not enter second affiliation yet
a
University of Minho, 4800-058 Guimarães, Portugal
b
Unochapecó, 89809-000 Chapecó, SC, Brazil
Abstract
Abstract
The Single Minute Exchange of Die (SMED) is a methodology that allows reducing the equipment’s setup times, enabling
Abstract
economical
The production
Single Minute in small
Exchange of batches.
Die (SMED) Its useis helps reduce leadthat
a methodology times, enabling
allows thethe
reducing management
equipment’s of setup
the industrial unit to
times, enabling
respond quickly
economical to market
production demand.
in small Another
batches. Its advantage
use helps is the economic
reduce production
lead times, enablingofthe small manufacturing
management of thelots, which usually
industrial unit to
Under the concept of "Industry 4.0", production processes will be pushed to be increasingly interconnected,
requires quickly
respond low investments
to marketindemand.
the production
Another process. In addition,
advantage SMED can
is the economic reduce the
production of occurrence of errors inlots,
small manufacturing the which
equipment.
usuallyIn
information
this paperlow
based on a real
an investments
analysis of the
time methodology
SMED
basis and, necessarily,
application
much more
is carried
efficient. an In electron
this context, capacity(EBM),
optimization
requires in the production process. In addition, SMED outcan regarding
reduce the occurrence beam machine
of errors sinceIn
in the equipment. it
goes
this beyond
can paper
be used theatraditional
an for wide
analysis range
of the aim
SMEDof of capacity maximization,
applications
methodology andapplication is contributing
services. The main out
carried alsowas
research
regarding foran
organization’s
undertaken as a profitability
electron beam case study
machine inand
(EBM), value.
a tier
since one
it
Indeed,
automotive
can lean
be used formanagement
supplier where
a wide range and continuous
the application of SMED
of applications andimprovement
allowed for
services. Thea approaches
setup
main time suggest
reduction
research capacity
in more
was undertaken than optimization
as50%.
a caseThe ininstead
application
study of
a tierof one
the
maximization.
SMED methodology
automotive The study of
also allowed
supplier where capacity optimization
to entirely
the application of eliminate
SMED allowed and costing
the scrap models
forgenerated is an
duereduction
a setup time important
to pre-determined research
actions.
in more than topic that deserves
50%. The application of the
contributions
SMED methodology from both the practical
also allowed andeliminate
to entirely theoreticalthe perspectives.
scrap generatedThis paper
due to presents and
pre-determined discusses a mathematical
actions.
model
© 2018for Thecapacity
Authors. management based on
Published by Elsevier B.V.different costing models (ABC and TDABC). A generic model has been
© 2018
2018 The Authors.
This is an
developed
© open
Theand it wasPublished
access
Authors. article
used to
Published by
by Elsevier
under the CC
analyze
Elsevier B.V.
idleBY-NC-ND
capacity and
B.V. license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
to design strategies towards the maximization of organization’s
This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/)
Peer-review
This
value.is an
The under
open responsibility
access
trade-off article
capacity of
under the scientific
CC BY-NC-ND
maximization committee
vs of the
license
operational 28th FlexibleisAutomation andand
Intelligent
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
efficiency highlighted Manufacturing
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th Flexible Automation andit Intelligent
is shown that capacity
Manufacturing
(FAIM2018)
Peer-review
optimization Conference.
(FAIM2018)under responsibility
might of the scientific
hide operational
Conference. committee of the 28th Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing
inefficiency.
(FAIM2018)
© Conference.
2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
Keywords: Lean Manufacturing; Setup; SMED; Electron beam machine
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference
Keywords: Lean Manufacturing; Setup; SMED; Electron beam machine
2017.

1. Introduction
Keywords: Cost Models; ABC; TDABC; Capacity Management; Idle Capacity; Operational Efficiency
1. Introduction
The Lean production practices and tools have been commonly used to reduce wastes, to meet the client’s
1.The Lean in
requirements
Introduction production
the desiredpractices
quantity and
and tools
at the have been commonly
right delivery usedtotogain
time, leading reduce wastes, advantages
competitive to meet theover
client’s
their
requirements in the desired quantity and at the right delivery time, leading to gain competitive advantages over their
The cost of idle capacity is a fundamental information for companies and their management of extreme importance
in modern production systems. In general, it is defined as unused capacity or production potential and can be measured
2351-9789 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
in
Thisseveral ways:
is an open accesstons
articleofunder
production, available
the CC BY-NC-ND hours
license of manufacturing, etc. The management of the idle capacity
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
2351-9789 © 2018 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V.
* Paulo
This is anAfonso.
Peer-review under
open Tel.: +351 253
responsibility
access article 510
of
under the761;
CC fax: +351
scientific 253license
604of741
committee
BY-NC-ND the 28th Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing (FAIM2018)
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)
E-mail
Conference.address: psafonso@dps.uminho.pt
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing (FAIM2018)
Conference.
2351-9789
2351-9789©©2017
2018TheTheAuthors.
Authors.Published by Elsevier
Published B.V. B.V.
by Elsevier
Peer-review underaccess
This is an open responsibility
article of the scientific
under committee oflicense
the CC BY-NC-ND the Manufacturing Engineering Society International Conference 2017.
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/)
Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the 28th Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing
(FAIM2018) Conference.
10.1016/j.promfg.2018.10.113
648 Marc Martins et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 647–654
2 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

direct competitors [1]. Since Lean Manufacturing environments are typically characterized by small batch sizes and
high product variation a new method had to be developed to help reducing the setup times [2].
Nowadays, the automotive manufacturing companies are living good times, with a clear worldwide rise in the
number of vehicles produced [3,4]. This inevitably induces a components production growth. Due to that, the
industrial unit where this case study was carried out concluded that an increment in its production was indispensable
to keep following their clients and reach new markets. The flexibility and agility which are essential for the
component production lines results from the customization and diversity of products required by the market, where
production in series is ever less frequent [5–7]. The industrial unit core business is the manufacture of electrical
wires and cables for the automotive industry, holding a leader position in that market. This paper describes the work
developed in the crosslinked wires production department of the industrial unit to achieve the desired level of
production.
Due to spool capacity, different in cross-section and diameter, the operators are obliged to load new spools many
times per shift. Since the number of new loads cannot be reduced, due to different kinds of limitations, the machine
setup-times are crucial [8]. SMED methodology is the most common tool used in those situations [2] and was tested
in two EBMs installed in the industrial unit. The description of the production process through EBM can be found in
[9]. The case study described in [10] was the research method chosen since it is the recommended methodology
when the research topic is complex and needs to be studied in its context and when it can also yield important
insights on ‘how’ and ‘why’ a phenomenon occurs, giving the basis for a more extensive study.
Methodologically, this paper describes a SMED implementation study and discusses the results achieved from an
analysis of a real situation in an industrial environment grounded on a literature review about Lean Manufacturing
and SMED methodologies. However, the focus of this paper is not to present a deep literature review about these
topics. A detailed revision of both methodologies can be found in [11]. Structurally, this research is based on a
SMED implementation methodology and the model presented in [12], which have been tested in different companies
by the authors, where all steps to implement and control SMED improvement are clearly defined.
In section 2 the framework and the SMED implementation program is presented. In order to understand the
surroundings and the importance of this work inside the industrial unit, section 3 presents the methodology
implementation. Finally, in section 4, some concluding remarks regarding the results are presented.

2. Study Framework

The industrial unit where this case study was developed owns three electron beam machines (EBM). Since each
machine has its own specificities, the electron beam machines supplier gave them different names. In order to easily

Fig. 1. Offline Electron beam machine (Cora).

 Marc Martins et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 647–654 649
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 3

distinguish them along the paper, the nomenclatures used by their supplier were also adopted, since they are located
in different Manufacturing Units that have their own irradiation area. The first machine, Tuna machine, is located in
Manufacturing Unit 1, the second one, Farrusco machine, in Manufacturing Unit 2 and, finally, the third machine,
Cora is located in Manufacturing Unit 3.
Tuna is considered an inline electron beam machine since the extrusion and irradiation are done in one production
line, in contrast with Farrusco and Cora (see Fig. 1) where the irradiation is considered as offline. In this case, the
extrusion is done before, in other production lines. Thus, a workgroup was created to study and carry out the
implementation of the SMED methodology into the industrial unit regarding the offline machines (Cora and
Farrusco). This multi-faceted group was formed by Production, Maintenance, Industrial performance, EHS
(Environment, Health and Safety), Corporate Process Engineer departments, along with by the industrial unit’s Plant
Manager. Thus, a total of six persons were involved in this study. The supplier of the electron beam machines gave
the necessary support when required.
After the first meeting of the team, a schedule and actions diagram was approved, which can be seen in Fig. 2.
During irradiation process, two main setup types need to be done, which can also be divided into different
subtypes. Reel loading with the same recipe means that the operator will load a new reel with the same reference of
the previous one. In contrast, the operator can have to load a new recipe to crosslink a new reference, which can
have, or not, a different diameter. The change in diameter has a massive impact in the setup effort as it will be
demonstrated later on this paper. The cables coiled in reels on extrusion are fed by a pay-off into the radiation field
undergoing several passes.
Threading EBM is normally performed when the wire breaks in the production line. In this particular case, there
is no need to switch the rolls inside the conveyor. There different rolls exist regarding the wire diameter to crosslink.
If the difference of the two product types is high enough, the operators may be obliged to load new rolls in the EBM.
A production instruction was created for the different rolls when the operators need to change them. Only Farrusco
machine uses different type of rolls.
During production, reel loading operation is the most common of all activities and it is done more often in
Farrusco machine than in Cora machine. This difference between Cora and Farrusco machines is due to the larger
variety of wires and cables that Farrusco machine can handle. Due to its higher capacity comparatively to Cora
machine, the Farrusco machine can handle battery cable. Since the diameter of the battery cable is higher than
standard wire, the length in the utilized spool is lower so the operators need to load more spools per shift.
Loading reels (independently of the wire diameter) represent a high percentage of the setup time in irradiation
process. Due to this massive impact, the SMED study was dedicated to reduce the time of loading reels. In parallel,
some improvements were suggested for further SMED studies.

3. SMED Implementation Program

3.1. Stage 0 (preliminary

Team formation Gathering data Diagnosis and SMED Results analysis

Fourth step
First step

Fifth step
Second step

Third step

about previous evaluation of methodology and discussion

setup's the setup with implementation
most impact

Fig. 2. Different steps applied in this project

650 Marc Martins et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 647–654
4 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

During April 2016, a diagnosis of the actual setup times was done by a Corporate Process Engineer member with
the support of the Industrial Performance Department. The results can be seen in Figs. 3 and 4. The average time
presented in this analysis includes the time from the last spool produced at production speed (Ramp down) until the
production speed is achieved again (Ramp up). From the analysis of Fig. 4 it can be concluded that the setup times
on Farrusco machine (independently of the wire diameter) were higher than in Cora machine.

Fig. 3. Setup before SMED Workshop.

Fig. 4. Setup time analysis during April 2016

Also, during this stage all different setup tasks were identified, as well as their duration and setup classes (Table
1). At this stage, the separation between internal and external activities was not performed, following the Kusar
model recommendations [13].

3.2. Stage 1 (separate internal and external setups)

Based on the data collected, it could be concluded that the equipment has an important impact in the setup tasks
independently of the setup type. However, as a first step the setup tasks performed by the operators (manual tasks)
were separated in internal/external setup and a thorough evaluation was performed in order to identify opportunities
of converting the internal setup tasks into external ones. In this case 41 internal and two external tasks were
identified. To finish accurately the manual setup tasks, the operators need to use different tools, such as scissors to
cut wire and duct tape, which are always available in the operators’ work clothes. Fig. 5 shows production losses
during the setup period for the four setup classes.
 Marc Martins et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 647–654 651
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 5

3.3. Stage 2 (convert internal setup tasks into external setup tasks)

This stage can be considered as a complement of the operators’ work, since by their own initiative they develop
methods and best practices to reach productivity requests and facilitate their own job. In that point, only the
actions/tasks considering actually the reel changes and/or recipe were considered.

Five internal setup tasks (stage 0) were converted in external tasks. Converting internal setups into external ones
did not have an important impact in the global setup, since it was reduced only by 35 seconds. In the operators’
perspective, it is clear that those modifications were beneficial to them and did not increased or added more work.
They saw this change as a way to use more wisely and efficiently their own time.

Table 1. Tasks in Stage 0

Setup
Operation New ref. (< New ref. (<
Actions New ref. (≥
time (s) Same ref. diam & same diam & new
diam)
rolls) rolls)
Preparing new spool
Taking out the reel of the pallet 10 X X X X
Rolling reel until pay-off area 5 X X X X
Striping both ends 10 X X X X
Putting duct-tape in the end of the spool 5 X X X X
Stopping machine
Reducing speed in the last spool 300 X X X X
Stopping EBM 50 X X X X
Threading
Drain out all wire inside EBM 300 X
Deconditioning EBM 60 X X X
Open EBM door 180 X X
Switching rolls 1200 X
Threading EBM 500 X X
Threading rest of production line 300 X X
Close EBM door 60 X X
Choosing recipe 10 X X X
Conditioning EBM 310 X X X
Taking out empty spool
Open pay-off door 5 X X X X
Unbrake spool 5 X X X X
Take out wire tension 2 X X X X
Put some wire on the door lock to avoid
unstringing of the pay-off 3 X X X X
Cutting wire 1 X X X X
Close door 2 X X X X
Platform up 5 X X X X
Unlock spool 3 X X X X
Platform down 5 X X X X
Spool take out 2 X X X X
Loading new spool
Putting spool in pay-off 5 X X X X
Platform goes up 5 X X X X
Lock spool 3 X X X X
Platform go down 5 X X X X
Node between spool 60 X X X X
Lock spool 1 X X X X
Taking out the wire put in task 3 5 X X X X
Put connection to ground 30 X X X X
Put duct tape in spool 10 X X X X
Put duct tape in node 2 X X X X
Put tension in the wire 3 X X X X
Close the door 2 X X X X
652 Marc Martins et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 647–654
6 Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000

Connect pay-off 1 X X X X
Starting machine
Start EBM (Ramp up) 300 X X X X

Fig. 5. Production losses during setups (Stage 1).

3.4. Stage 3 (streamline operations)

In this stage, the reengineering of the setup was emphasized, focusing in two main questions:
• Are the setup tasks performed currently really needed?
• Since the equipment has a big impact in the setup can they be modified to reduce the setup time?
Every actions and tasks were critically analysed to understand if they were really important to the setup function
or if they could be eliminated. For each of them, two questions were asked “Is this task really necessary?” and “Is it
possible to do the task quicker?” Several trials were done by the Industrial Performance and the Corporate Process
Engineer under supervision of Production and Health and Safety Departments. In table 2, the tasks done in the EBM
and in the pay-off were separated and analysed to determine their importance, which was evaluated considering the
operators and equipment safety, as well as if any detrimental impact is transferred to the product. Every tasks
considered as relevant were marked in Table 2 with an X mark.
Regarding the pay-off, almost 40% of the time can be considered as not mandatory and can be eliminated if the
equipment will be upgraded.
Until now, the reel can only be loaded or unloaded when the pay-off door is closed. If the door remains open, the
reel cannot be unlocked or any movement from the platform is allowed. A software upgrade could correct this
situation, and twenty-four seconds per setup independently of setup type could be released.
Grounding the reel (connecting to ground) is mandatory for this process, since the beam generated in the EBM
could reach the conductor of the wire. Due to the generated electricity, the reel becomes a massive capacitor, and the
electricity on it should be discharged to avoid quality problems. A special tool was created for this purpose.
Grounding the reel takes forty seconds, all this time was converted into external setup. Thus, the upgrades and new
tools applied in pay-off released sixty-four seconds in setup, more than 40% of the total setup time related with pay-
off.
Regarding the EBM itself, the operators were reducing the speed production in the last spool to avoid,
supposedly, breaks in the wire. Several trials were performed in Cora and Farrusco machines with different
diameters, cross-sections and at different production speeds, and in any case a break was verified. This change
reduced the setup in five minutes (± 1 minute depending on the wire diameter). Also, the ramping up of the EBM
was divided in two steps, when the speed changes. The operators were running in a lower speed the machine due to
the node between the two spools (the finished and new one), because the operators had as assumption that the node
could break. The SMED team could prove that, if done correctly, the node cannot break so they can ramp up the
machine from 0 m/min to full speed.
 Marc Martins et al. / Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 647–654 653
Author name / Procedia Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000 7

Due to the large amount of product type that the industrial unit produces and since the operators have to
deconditioning and conditioning the EBM each time that a new reference is produced, unloading and loading a new
recipe has a big impact in production. Those actions were avoided upgrading the EBM’s software. This upgrade
allowed for approximating loading a reel with the same reference and loading a reel with a higher diameter setups
in duration. This second type of setup decreased more than 55%.
Also, as explained before, the wire diameter has an important impact when the operators are loading new product
types. If the diameter of the new wire is lower than the prior wire in production, it will break inside the EBM due to
the stretch applied by several passages in the rolls. This stretch cannot be eliminated but can be absorbed by a more
elastic material. A standard elastic rope was added between the spools with excellent results since no more breaks
were verified. Due to this improvement, the action Node between spool, that is shown in table 2, increased into 120
seconds (± 10 seconds). However, since this added tool avoids the wire breaking inside the EBM threading EBM
and all complementary activities (Deconditioning EBM, preparing rope to thread it, open and threading, closing and
conditioning EBM) are not executed, more than 23 minutes were saved. Also, loading a reel with a lower diameter
was consuming forty-seven minutes before the SMED implementation. Now, it takes approximately 75% of the
previous time. Fig. 6 shows the matching between stage 1 and stage 3 in terms of productions losses.

Table 2. – Mandatory analysis per equipment

Duration (s) Pay-off EBM Importance
Stopping machine
Reducing speed in the last spool 300 X
Stopping EBM 50 X X
Threading
Deconditioning EBM 60 X
Open EBM door 180 X
Preparing rope to thread EBM 60 X
Threading EBM 440 X
Threading rest of production line 300 X
Close EBM door 60 X
Choosing recipe 10 X X
Conditioning EBM 310 X
Taking out empty spool
Open pay-off door 5 X X
Unbrake spool 5 X X
Take out wire tension 2 X X
Put some wire on the door lock to avoid unstringing of the pay-off 3 X X
Cutting wire 1 X X
Close door 2 X
Platform up 5 X
Unlock spool 3 X X
Platform down 5 X
Open pay-off door 5 X
Spool take out 2 X X
Loading new spool
Putting spool in pay-off 5 X X
Close door 2 X
Platform goes up 5 X X
Lock spool 3 X X
Platform go down 5 X X
Open pay-off door 5 X
Node between spool 60 X X
Lock spool 1 X X
Taking out the wire put in task 3 5 X X
Put connection to ground 30 X X
Put duct tape in node 2 X X
Put tension in the wire 3 X X
Close door 2 X X
Connect pay-off 1 X X
Starting machine
Start EBM (Ramp up) 300 X X
8654 Author name
Marc / Procedia
Martins et al. Manufacturing 00 (2018) 000–000
/ Procedia Manufacturing 17 (2018) 647–654

Fig. 6. Matching between stage 1 and 3 production losses.

4. Final Considerations
Since its creation SMED methodology has been providing consisting and positive results. In this particular case
study the conversion of internal setups into external setups did not had a big impact. However, the analysis carried
out led to changes in the equipment which produced a relevant impact, allowing for reducing by more than 50% the
setup time. In this sense, it was possible to verify that Shingo methodology is still in vogue by being an efficient tool
in reducing setup times, which is particularly relevant in highly competitive sectors such as the automotive industry.
Acknowledgements
This work was financially supported by the research unit on Governance, Competitiveness and Public Policy
(project POCI-01-0145-FEDER-006939), funded by FEDER funds through COMPETE2020 - POCI – and by national
funds through FCT. This work has also been supported by the project Centro-01-0145-FEDER-000017 - EMaDeS -
Energy, Materials and Sustainable Development, co-financed by the Portugal 2020 Program (PT 2020), within the
Regional Operational Program of the Centre (CENTRO 2020) through the European Regional Development Fund
(ERDF).
References
[1] B. G. Rüttimann, Lean Compendium: Introduction to Modern Manufacturing Theory. Springer International Publishing, 2018.
[2] A. P. Dillon and S. Shingo, A Revolution in Manufacturing: The SMED System. CRC Press, 1985.
[3] C. Rosa, F. J. G. Silva, L. P. Ferreira, and R. Campilho, “SMED methodology: The reduction of setup times for Steel Wire-Rope assembly
lines in the automotive industry,” Procedia Manuf., vol. 13, pp. 1034–1042, Jan. 2017.
[4] S. Wedeniwski, “Strategy, Business Model and Architecture in Today’s Automotive Industry,” in The Mobility Revolution in the
Automotive Industry, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2015, pp. 75–238.
[5] S. J. Hu et al., “Assembly system design and operations for product variety,” CIRP Ann. - Manuf. Technol., vol. 60, no. 2, pp. 715–733,
Jun. 2011.
[6] R. Roy, P. Souchoroukov, and E. Shehab, “Detailed cost estimating in the automotive industry: Data and information requirements,” Int. J.
Prod. Econ., vol. 133, no. 2, pp. 694–707, Oct. 2011.
[7] A. Mayyas, A. Qattawi, M. Omar, and D. Shan, “Design for sustainability in automotive industry: A comprehensive review,” Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev., vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 1845–1862, May 2012.
[8] P. Østbø, R. Cattermole, and M. Wetherill, Leading Beyond Lean: The Seven Drivers of Productivity. Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2016.
[9] S. Y. Liang and A. J. Shih, “Laser and Electron Beam Machining,” in Analysis of Machining and Machine Tools, Springer, Boston, MA,
2016, pp. 193–206.
[10] R. K. Yin, Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5 edition. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc, 2013.
[11] M. Robalo, “SMED implementation in electron beam machine applied in automotive industry.” UBI, 2016.
[12] A. Carrizo-Moreira, “Single Minute Exchange of Die and Organizational Innovation in Seven Small and Medium-Sized Firms,” in Lean
Manufacturing in the Developing World, Springer, Cham, 2014, pp. 483–499.
[13] J. Kusar, T. Berlec, F. Žefran, and M. Starbek, “Reduction of Machine Setup Time,” J. Mech. Eng., vol. 56, pp. 833–845, 2010.