Cleaner Engineering and Technology 12 (2023) 100592

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Cleaner Engineering and Technology

journal homepage: www.sciencedirect.com/journal/cleaner-engineering-and-technology

Single Minute Exchange Die (SMED): A sustainable and well-timed

approach for Bangladeshi garments industry
Gazi Farhan Ishraque Toki a, Taosif Ahmed a, b, *, Md Elias Hossain c, Rezaul Karim Khan Alave a,
Md. Omar Faruk d, Rony Mia a, **, Syed Rashedul Islam e
a
Department of Textile Engineering, National Institute of Textile Engineering and Research, University of Dhaka, Dhaka, 1000, Bangladesh
b
Faculty of Wood Engineering and Creative Industries, University of Sopron, Sopron, 9400, Hungary
c
School of Energy and Environmental Engineering, University of Science and Technology Beijing, Beijing, 100083, China
d
Department of Textile Engineering, Sonargaon University, Dhaka, 1212, Bangladesh
e
Apparel Manufacture and Technology, Department of Textile Engineering, BGMEA University of Fashion and Technology, Dhaka, 1230, Bangladesh

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Bangladesh is the second largest Ready-Made Garments (RMG) exporting country after China. The cost of cotton
Single Minute Exchange Die (SMED) and other raw materials, labor cost, and subsidiary cost increased much in post COVID-19 with the comparison of
Quick changeover (QCO) pre-Covid-19 times, but from the prospect of buyer’s price is not increasing that much. In this context, our study
Sustainability
focused on the RMG’s very first time extensive Quick Changeover (QCO) process to minimize cost reduction as
Garments industry
Waste/cost-minimizing
well as wastage and time using Single Minute Exchange Die (SMED). Initially, concentrated on the learning
period to make acknowledge the changing phase of one style to another. At the same time, tried to figure out the
overall weekly performance before and after implementing QCO on the floors, efficiency, before and after
implementing QCO hit rate and time consumption, and wastages. According to the case study, floor one had the
best average weekly performance, action achieved percentage, and efficiency performance of 57%, 48%, and
46%, respectively, among the five, analyzed floors. From the investigated five floors, the third one had the lowest
weekly performance, percentage of actions completed, and efficiency, at 52%, 40%, and 34%, respectively. In the
case of hit styles, floor two and floor five both achieved 83% after QCO apply in the floors. During the QCO, the
highest production loss on floor one was the alarming sign which was 21,940 pieces and on floor three loss
production was the lowest 2605 pieces after QCO implementation.

1. Introduction expectations. A lot of research has been done on how to improve the
efficiency of our ready-made garment industry by using things like line
People are compelled to seek a high standard of living and improve balance, time study, lean manufacturing systems, etc. (Md. Monirul and
services, especially as the global population rises, by the enduring Adnan, 2016).
commitment to new technologies and the rapid growth of technology Cycle time reduction, lower manufacturing costs, and less inventory
supported by this commitment. Therefore, organizations must be able to are the fundamental needs that each manufacturing company must meet
adapt, differentiate, and thrive in a competitive and saturated market to realize its potential as a world-class organization (Sk et al., 2022). To
(Silva et al., 2020). When the product to be produced changes, one of the maintain a competitive edge in today’s increasingly digitized and
most crucial aspects of the industry is the setup change, as these are fast-paced world, it is essential to have a production method that is both
activities that do not add value to the product but are necessary for its lean and agile. The elimination of monotonous, low-valued operations in
products due to the need for equipment adjustments, tool changes, and the manufacturing cycle is at the core of the lean manufacturing phi­
raw material preparation for the new product (Islam, M.R. et al., 2022b). losophy, which places value creation at the forefront (Ahmed et al.,
Bangladesh is the second largest exporter of ready-made garments in the 2022). During all stages of development, agile manufacturing encour­
world. However, in terms of productivity, its performance falls short of ages process improvements such as optimization, standardization, and

* Corresponding author. Faculty of Wood Engineering and Creative Industries, University of Sopron, Sopron, 9400, Hungary.
** Corresponding author. Department of Textile Engineering, National Institute of Textile Engineering and Research, University of Dhaka, Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh.
E-mail addresses: taosif.ahmed@outlook.com, taosif.ahmed@phd.uni-sopron.hu (T. Ahmed), mroni_mia@yahoo.com (R. Mia).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2022.100592
Received 20 October 2022; Received in revised form 24 November 2022; Accepted 28 November 2022
Available online 30 November 2022
2666-7908/© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-
nc-nd/4.0/).
G.F.I. Toki et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 12 (2023) 100592

automation (Hemalatha et al., 2021). In today’s world, the concepts, and the development of an atmosphere of involvement,
manufacturing business is becoming more industrialized and competi­ commitment, and motivation. Therefore, this study provided sugges­
tive. Customers place a high level of importance on the quality of the tions for eliminating waste and making their processes more effective
product, as well as its cost, its variety, and the punctuality with which and leaner. In this way, our research contribution displays and empha­
they receive it (Islam, M.D. et al., 2022a). As a result, for businesses to sizes these unique distinctions to improve productivity and efficiency
better satisfy, they need to locate solutions that will make their processes from other studies. It is time for the Bangladeshi apparel industry to
more adaptable and efficient. Getting rid of waste so that it can spend as completely embrace the lean concept and pursue continuous
much time as possible on activities that add value often lead to less time improvement.
that equipment needs to be out of service in modern manufacturing
environments (Mia et al., 2021). In addition, enterprises must optimize 2. Experimental details
their equipment setup processes to generate various essential references
as a result of product diversification and lower orders (Wan et al., 2022). 2.1. Materials and machinery
The goal of reducing machine downtime by speeding up setups are
achieved by reducing non-value-adding procedures at the same time. This whole study was done in a reputed garments industry in
One way to achieve the reduction of setup changeover time is through Bangladesh. It produces garments for various renowned fashion retailers
Single Minute Exchange of Die (SMED) (Godina et al., 2018). such as H&M, Zara, Walmart, C&A, VF Asia, Next, Target, S. Oliver, etc.
Reaching global markets is a huge problem for developing countries All their buyers are large enterprises, and they have many distributing
like Bangladesh. As a small business owner, you must be aware of what it showrooms in Asia, Europe, and America. In this industry, our study
takes to compete globally. New ways of making things, like lean took place on 5 different production floors to enhance productivity and
manufacturing, must be used to get the most money out of limited time, performance. On every production floor, there are several production
increase productivity, and cut down on waste (Garcia-Garcia et al., lines. Each line produces different garments. It mostly varies as per the
2022). To remain in today’s competitive marketplace, producers must required production for each buyer before the shipment deadline. In
meet customer demand in a shorter period with the finest quality and every garment amount of operation may vary as per the requirement of
lowest cost (Adeel et al., 2022). This can be done by reducing production the garments and buyers. It also may vary from season to season, size to
costs by removing waste operations in a manufacturing system. Machine size. There are several sections in the garments. Each section contains
adjustment processes are activities that do not create value and SMED, a many operators, helpers, ironmen, quality inspectors, quality control­
lean manufacturing tool, has been developed to reduce these activities lers, production officers, industrial engineers, etc. It may vary from
(Zhang et al., 2019). SMED technology has been conducted in various section to section or department to department of the production floors.
industries to minimize costs by eliminating waste in an organization. These sections are the storehouse, cutting, pre-assembly section, front
Sahin et al. reported on reducing the machine setup time on the turning section, back section, main assembly section, setting linings, and fin­
line using the SMED in a bearing manufacturing company (ŞAHİN and ishing. Several types of machinery are used in the sewing section
Aycan, 2021). Sousa et al. describe a technique for reducing the mentioned in Table 1.
changeover time by applying SMED methodology in cork stoppers pro­
duction (Sousa et al., 2018). Kordoghli et al. documented the Influence 2.2. Methodology
of Waste on changeover time in the Tunisian garment industry (Kor­
doghli and Moussa, 2013). Monteiro et al. demonstrated the utilizing Throughout the overall SMED study, we observed layout change
SMED lean tool to effect positive change in the metalworking industry’s through external and internal management, machine availability, crit­
machining process (Monteiro et al., 2019). Vieira et al. presented a study ical machine presence, quick change over (QCO) activities and checklist
to propose a project that aims to use the SMED approach in the cold preparation, standardized man, machine, efficiency set up, feeding time
profiling process, using a population of five distinct profiling equipment analysis, feeding loss time capture, key performance indicator (KPI)
(Vieira et al., 2019). Umap et al. (2016) depicted the SMED technique measurement, work in progress (WPI) follow-up, hourly production
that was applied to a company that manufactures auto accessory prod­ status, failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) meeting template, and
ucts, specifically shock absorbers, the primary aim was to cut down on 5pcs review meeting accordingly stepwise. The main objectives of the
waste, more specifically, time wasted. Few studies have looked into SMED allow for the reduction of time through changeover, tuning, and
training about lean tools, but none have been implemented in the setup for every new startup over new production. After changeover and
workplace during setup. Additionally, very few studies have tracked the
activities of manufactured parts during setup throughout the day.
Table 1
Recently a study following the SMED setup through the standardized The list of sewing machines used in the sewing section.
work (SW) is advised during production and enquire of the setup time
Sl. Machine Name Sl. Machine Name
target has been obtained. Additionally, the setup time must be docu­
mented, and the overall equipment efficiency (OEE) must be calculated 1 Single Needle Lock Stitch machine 16 Two Needle Vertical machine
and compared to the target (Junior et al., 2022). Another recent study (Plain machine)
2 Double-needle lockstitch machine 17 Single needle Chain stitch
concentrated details on how to apply lean instruments and principles to machine
the Industry 4.0 context as well as two Lean tools/methods are used to 3 Three threads Over Lock Machine 18 Two-needle chain stitch machine
highlight the difference between a pure digital translation of a Lean tool 4 Four threads overlock machine 19 Kansai machine
(Visual Management Boards) and a hypothetical “new” Lean method 5 Five threads overlock machine 20 The feed of the arm
6 Six threads Over Lock Machine 21 Saddle stitch binding sewing
(SMED) enabled by its digitization. The analysis in this study demon­
machine
strates it is feasible to enhance and automate established Lean tools and 7 Flatlock machine 22 Bar tack machine
processes, boosting their efficiency and effectiveness, and giving some of 8 Velcro attach machine 23 Buttonhole machine
them additional features and scope, creating not only an improvement 9 Velcro automatic cutting machine 24 Button stitch machine
but a transformation (Peças et al., 2022). 10 Eyelet hole machine 25 Snap buttons attach machine
11 Blind stitch machine 26 Label cutter machine
From the above literature, it is evident that there has been no attempt 12 Zigzag machine 27 APW sewing machine
to conduct a study on the Bangladeshi garment industry to develop a 13 Rectangular Sewing machines 28 Embroidery machine
method that is both sustainable and efficient through the utilization of 14 Round hole machine 29 Automatic 2-needle Belt-loop
SMED. In response, the SMED framework that has been proposed urges a Attaching Machine
15 Cover stitch machine 30 Decorative Stitch Machine
reduction in setup time, training of the work team in fundamental

2
G.F.I. Toki et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 12 (2023) 100592

proper setup, observation in feeding time analysis, feeding loss time floor.
capture, key performance indicator (KPI) measurement, work in prog­
ress (WPI) follow-up, and hourly production status is the key factor to 3. Results and discussion
find out the best optimization performance. Finally, a failure mode and
effects analysis (FMEA) meeting is conducted to identify whether the 3.1. Learning period
lackings and improvements are needed or not upon ongoing products.
The production control point starts from the buyer’s estimated date to It is only applicable for change over a period once the changeover is
deliver the goods, and, in these circumstances, the production team complete and will go for the as-usual production procedure. This will
urges the fabrics from the supplier to produce two months before. Su­ run on daily production achieved percentage based on industrial engi­
pervision of production is controlled daily in every stage of production neering operation bulletin target for every individual line. The target
before and after starting any new styles of production. After completing will be set based on the line working hours and the types of styles of the
production and quality inspection of the garments, the finished products garments (Jiang et al., 2022). The quality controller (QC) passed output
are supplied to warehouse the garments. The whole process is illustrated finished garments will be considered as a line output. This production
in the following flowchart depicted in Fig. 1. must acknowledge and signed by the QC head on daily basis. From the
Moreover, this study for resolution and reformation focuses on the learning curve, the line must hit at least 3 days for basic, 4 days for
production procedure, input of raw materials and output of the finished semi-critical and 5 days for critical styles, for eligible line must hit the
products, control and maintaining the machine on the production floor, minimum of 75% on the last day of the learning curve, the same will be
following up the production procedure, maintaining the prepared applicable for repeat or similar style. To make every style hit the in­
standard, finding out the faults during the production, familiar with the dustrial engineering department provides proper training about the
respective workers to maintain the standard of the study. Additionally, a change as well as adapt to make every style production fruitful as
properly trained team always deals with each day’s production; con­ standard.
tinues to analyze as per the prepared standard, and try to focus on Table 2 illustrates among the five days evaluated a minimum of three
further improvements, and discusses the implementations for more ef­ days of production have to reach up to a pre-determined standard to
ficiency and effectiveness. From the improvement purpose of the pro­ become hit style while target production was 2000 pieces. For basic style
duction, productivity along with efficiency SMED is allowed in the day one, the intended achievement percentage was 40%, while the
garments industry through the mentioned four phages in the production production would be 800 pieces. Similarly, for days two, three, four, and

Fig. 1. Flowchart of the SMED on Quick Changeover Process (QCO) in the production floor.

3
G.F.I. Toki et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 12 (2023) 100592

Table 2 Table 4
Basic style target per single line during the learning period. Critical style target per single line during the learning period.
Basic Style Critical Style

Target 2000 Pcs Target 900 Pcs

Day Intended Intended Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Day Incentive Incentive Case 1 Case 2 Case 3
achieve % Required (Pcs) (Pcs) (Pcs) achieves % Required (Pcs) (Pcs) (Pcs)
Production Production

1 40% 800 600 600 600 1 30% 270 200 200 200
2 50% 1000 1000 1000 1000 2 35% 315 315 315 315
3 60% 1200 1200 1200 1200 3 45% 405 405 405 405
4 70% 1400 1400 1300 1400 4 55% 495 495 495 495
5 80% 1600 1500 1500 1450 5 65% 585 585 585 585
Performance Status Eligible Not Not 6 75% 675 675 600 675
Eligible Eligible 7 80% 720 675 675 650
Incentive Status Eligible Not Not
* Pcs indicates Pieces of garments. Eligible Eligible

* Pcs indicates Pieces of garments.

five predetermined achievement percent were 50, 60, 70, and 80%,
when the production target was 1000, 1200, 1400, and 1600 pieces.
From the table for case 1, three days of production were 1000, 1200, and least 75% on day six to become eligible for hit style like case 1. That’s
1400; whereas for cases 2 and 3, two days and three days of production why only case one was eligible for becoming hit here in between the
were 1000, 1200 and 1000, 1200, and 1400 reached up to the mark three studied cases.
respectively. Although in case 3, production should have to reach at
least 75% on day five to become eligible for hit style like case 1. That’s 3.2. Average weekly performance evaluation before and after QCO
why only case one was eligible for becoming hit here in between the
three studied cases. After a quick change-over implementation weekly average perfor­
Among six days, an evaluated minimum of four days of production mance varies on every floor. The average plan achievement percentage
have to reach up to a pre-determined standard to become hit style as depends on the amount of the execution of the action achieve percentage
shown in Table 3. For semi-critical style day one, the intended and it does reflect on the action efficiency as well. Before QCO imple­
achievement percentage was 35%, while the production would be 490 mentation, average plan achievement, action achievement, and action
pieces. Similarly, for days two, three, four, five, and six predetermined efficiency were 22%, 21%, and 20% respectively. On the contrary, after
achievement percent was 45, 55, 65, 75, and 80%, when the production QCO implementation, on floor one average plan achievement, action
target was 630, 770, 910, 1050, and 1120 pieces. From the table for case achievement, and action efficiency were 57%, 48%, and 46% respec­
1, four days production were 630, 770, 910, 1050; whereas for cases 2 tively. In comparison with before and after QCO implementation, floor
and 3, three- and four-days production were 630, 770, 910, and 630, one was the maximum among all five floors. Moreover, before QCO
770, 910, 1050 reached up to the mark respectively. In case 3, pro­ implementation, on floor three average plan achievement, action
duction should have to reach at least 75% on day six to become eligible achievement, and action efficiency were 18%, 15%, and 14% respec­
for hit style like case 1. That’s why only case one was eligible for tively. And after QCO implementation, on floor three average plan
becoming hit here in between the three studied cases. achievement, action achievement, and action efficiency were 52%, 40%,
Table 4 illustrates that among seven days, an evaluation minimum of and 34% respectively, which was the lowest average weekly perfor­
five days of production have to reach up to a pre-determined standard to mance among the five floors in Fig. 2.
become a hit style. For critical style day one, the intended achievement
percentage was 30%, while the production would be 270 pieces. Simi­ 3.3. QCO action achieve percentage on the production floor
larly, for days two, three, four, five, six, and seven predetermined
achievement percent was 35, 45, 55, 65, 75, and 80%, when the pro­ Daily performance evaluation is one of the most important param­
duction target was 315, 405, 495, 585, 675, and 720 pieces. The table eters of sustainability of the QCO. After starting one style for production,
noted that for case 1, five days of production were 315, 405, 495, 585, it is essential to check the achievement ratio as per our standardization.
675; whereas for cases 2 and 3, four days and five days of production On this basis, we measured our hit percentage of any style. In Fig. 3,
were 315, 405, 495, 585 and 315, 405, 495, 585, 675 reached up to the from day one to day three action achievement percentage was increased
mark respectively. Here in case 3, production should have to reach at gradually on all floors. From day four, achieve the percentage of floor
four started to decrease whereas the other four floor’s action achieve­
ment percentage was decreased from day six. In case, the action achieves
Table 3
Semi-critical style target per single line during the learning period.
a percentage was zero from day five to seven on the fourth floor. That
means production is over. The highest amount of action achieve per­
Semi-Critical Style
centage was on floor five of 82% on day five. In comparison with floor
Target 1400 Pcs five, floor four has the lowest amount of increment of 51% which was on
Day Intended Intended Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 day three.
achieve % Required (Pcs) (Pcs) (Pcs)
Production
3.4. QCO efficiency performance
1 35% 490 400 400 400
2 45% 630 630 630 630 In the case of, efficiency performance of the production floors is
3 55% 770 770 770 770
4 65% 910 910 910 910
dependent on the percentage of plan achievement and action achieve­
5 75% 1050 1050 989 1050 ment percentage for the styles. Styles to styles, floor to floor, and type of
6 80% 1120 1050 1050 1000 styles are also the catalyst to affect the action efficiency percentage. As
Performance Status Eligible Not Not like action achieve, action efficiency was increased on most of the floors
Eligible Eligible
till day five except on floor four. In case, the action efficiency percentage
* Pcs indicates Pieces of garments. was zero from day five to seven on the fourth floor. The highest amount

4
G.F.I. Toki et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 12 (2023) 100592

Fig. 2. Average performance of the production floors before and after implementing QCO after one week.

Fig. 3. Daily QCO achievement performance comparison.

of action efficiency was 79% found on floor five whereas 52% was found
Table 6
on floor four (Table 5).
Before and after QCO implementation time consumption.

3.5. Time consumption after QCO implementation Floor Before time consumption After time consumption Saving time
(hours) (hours) (hours)

Table 6 illustrates the QCO implementation time before and after the Floor 13 11.6 1.4
application of SMED in the studied production floors. Among five floors, 1
Floor 13.5 12 1.5
before applying QCO time consumption was 13, 13.5, 14, 14.4, and 14.8 2
h respectively. After implementing QCO time consumption was reduced Floor 14 12.4 1.6
by 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.8, and 1.7. The main reason for lowering style 3
changeover time is that the teams ensured preparation layout seven days Floor 14.4 12.6 1.8
4
before changeover day and confirmed fabrics, trims, accessories, and
Floor 14.8 13.1 1.7
patterns remained in-house. 5

Table 5
QCO action efficiency performance of the production floors.
Floor Day - 1 Day - 2 Day - 3 Day - 4 Day - 5 Day - 6 Day - 7 AVERAGE

Action Efficiency Action Efficiency Action Efficiency Action Efficiency Action Efficiency Action Efficiency Action Efficiency Action Efficiency

Floor 1 11% 45% 52% 58% 63% 58% 66% 46%

Floor 2 18% 36% 47% 54% 61% 55% 48% 42%
Floor 3 14% 24% 37% 46% 56% 55% 34% 34%
Floor 4 31% 44% 52% 40% 0% 0% 0% 43%
Floor 5 14% 42% 60% 68% 79% 67% 0% 46%

5
G.F.I. Toki et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 12 (2023) 100592

3.6. Hit percentage among the ran styles 3.8. Floor-wise performance

Hit percentage defines as per the QCO implementation in the pro­ After implementing QCO, for a while plan achievement percentage,
duction floor. It varies from the type of garment as well as its style. As achievement percentage, and efficiency percentage are interrelated with
the styles can be basic, semi-critical, and critical. It is measured by the each other. From Table 9, it was noticeable that the initial plan
successful attempt of producing the number of styles divided by the total achievement percentage is not that high. With the increases of plan
amount of styles that ran into the production. From Table 7, it was found achievement percentage, achieved percentage and efficiency increase
that initially among ran 31 styles, 14 styles became a hit which was gradually day by day. It varies from floor to floor, types of styles, and
below 50% of average hit styles. On the contrary, among five floors both implantation different criteria. And Fig. 5 illustrated the details of daily
floors two and five achieved the highest amount of hit percentage of performance comparison as per the plan achieves versus achieve the
83% whereas floor four achieved zero. Although both floor two and five percentage of the production floor.
has a difference in the number of styles run there. Most importantly the From Fig. 5(a), the plan achievement percentage was 37% and at that
hit style percentage increased by more than 20% after QCO point, the achievement percentage was 12% on day one. Gradually
implementation. increased day by day. Plan achievement percentage was 46%, 56%,
66%, 76%, 79%, and 67% respectively on days two, three, four, five, six,
3.7. Quick Changeover (QCO) loss production and seven. Whereas achievement percentage was 46%, 54%, 61%, 66%,
60%, and 67% respectively on days two, three, four, five, six, and seven.
Loss of production occurs due to failure of implementation mainte­ From the overall prospect, floor one performance is the best among all
nance, marketing, technical, and industrial engineering, production, the floors. Fig. 5(b) shown the plan achievement percentage was 36%
and quality stages. Floor to floor above-mentioned failures are varied. and at that point, the achievement percentage was 20% on day one. Plan
Mostly maintenance, production, and quality are the most concern areas achievement percentage was 44%, 54%, 64%, 74%, 78%, and 80%
here. From Table 8 before QCO implementation, floors one and three respectively on days two, three, four, five, six, and seven. Whereas
had the maximum and the minimum number of production losses achievement percentage was 40%, 52%, 63%, 69%, 63%, and 57%
25,121 and 4086 pieces, respectively. In the case of after QCO imple­ respectively on days two, three, four, five, six, and seven. Fig. 5(c)
mentation, floor one had the highest amount of loss of production pieces illustrated, the plan achievement percentage was 36% and at that point,
about 21,940 pieces while floor three had the lowest amount of loss of the achievement percentage was 17% on day one. Plan achievement
production about 2605 pieces. From the overall study, before and after percentage was 46%, 56%, 66%, 76%, 80%, and 80% respectively on
QCO implementation, the total production loss was 54,581 and 45,416 days two, three, four, five, six, and seven. Whereas achievement per­
pieces, which showed a reduction of 9165 pieces. In the case of indi­ centage was 28%, 44%, 53%, 65%, 64%, and 39% respectively on days
vidual departments, production/quality contained the highest amount two, three, four, five, six, and seven. In comparison with all five floors,
of production loss after implementing QCO while due to technical de­ the overall performance of floor three is the lowest. From Fig. 5(d), the
faults contained the lowest (Fig. 4). plan achievement percentage was 40% and at that point, the achieve­
Fig. 4(a) reflected that on floor one after applying QCO, due to the ment percentage was 28% on day one. Plans achieve percentage was
production and quality loss percentage was 75%, whereas maintenance 50%, 60%, 70%, 0%, 0%, and 0% respectively on days two, three, four,
and technical departments shown 15% and 8% respectively. On the five, six, and seven. Whereas achievement percentage was 42%, 51%,
other hand, marketing, and industrial engineering cause zero percent 38%, 0%, 0%, and 0% respectively on days two, three, four, five, six, and
loss. Similarly, Fig. 4(b) shown that on floor two, due to the production seven. From Fig. 5(e), the plan achievement percentage was 39% and at
and quality loss percentage was 56%, whereas maintenance de­ that point, the achievement percentage was 14% on day one. The plan
partments shown 44% production loss. On the other hand, marketing, achieve percentages were 50%, 60%, 70%, 79%, 80%, and 0% respec­
technical and industrial engineering caused zero percent loss respec­ tively on days two, three, four, five, six, and seven. Whereas achieve­
tively. Then in Fig. 4(c), it reflected that on floor three, due to the ment percentage was 41%, 62%, 70%, 82%, 81%, and 0% respectively
production and quality loss percentage was 34%, whereas maintenance on days two, three, four, five, six, and seven. From the overall perfor­
departments shown 66% production loss. On the other hand, marketing, mance, floor five had the second highest production after floor one.
technical and industrial engineering causes zero percent loss respec­
tively. Additionally, Fig. 4(d) reflected that on floor four, due to the 4. Conclusion
production and quality loss percentage was 100%, whereas mainte­
nance, marketing, technical, and industrial engineering cause zero SMED plays a vital role in the process of QCO in our study to enhance
percent loss respectively. Furthermore, Fig. 4(e), it reflected that on efficiency and less time consumption. At the same time, it was observed
floor five, due to the production and quality loss percentage was 36%, that through this approach we enable to reduce the amount of time
whereas maintenance and technical departments shown 58% and 6% consumed and trained the operators as compared to previous studies. An
respectively. On the other hand, marketing, and industrial engineering arrangement of proper training for different styles of the respective
cause zero percent loss. maintenance officers, executives, and workers of the production has to
be acknowledged with it. From the weekly average performance point of
view, the plan achieves, action achieves, and action efficiency a per­
centage of floor one being the best and floor three being the lowest
Table 7 among all five floors in comparison before and after QCO implementa­
Before and after QCO implementation number of styles, amount of hit styles, and tion. For average action achievement percentage, floor one and five has
hit percentage of the month. the best performance, on the contrary floors, three and four have the
Floor No. of Styles Hit Style Number After QCO Hit % lowest performance. In the case of average action efficiency floor, one
Before After Before After and five has the highest amount of performance, on the contrary, floor
three has the lowest performance. In the case of before and after QCO
Floor-01 5 8 2 4 50%
Floor-02 10 18 6 15 83% time consumption, floor four and floor one consume 1.8 h and 1.4 h,
Floor-03 12 15 5 9 60% respectively, which was the most and less among the five floors. From
Floor-04 0 1 0 0 0% the hit styles perspective, floors two and five have the most numbers of
Floor-05 4 6 1 5 83% hit styles production and 20% more increment of hit styles after QCO
Grand Total 31 48 14 33 (Average) 69%
apply. Whereas floor one concedes most amount loss pieces and floor

6
G.F.I. Toki et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 12 (2023) 100592

Table 8
Production loss (in pieces) before and after QCO implementation in the various stages of the production floors.
Department QCO Loss Production Pcs

Floor 01 Floor 02 Floor 03 Floor 04 Floor 05 Grand Total

Maintenance Before − 4100 − 6856 − 2216 − 500 − 2428 − 16,100

After − 3619 − 6338 − 1730 0 − 2198 − 13,885
Marketing Before 0 0 0 0 0 0
After 0 0 0 0 0 0
Technical Before − 2100 − 300 − 120 − 232 − 430 − 3182
After − 1794 0 0 0 − 230 − 2024
IE Before − 600 − 520 − 410 0 − 100 − 1630
After 0 0 0 0 0 0
Production/Quality Before − 18,321 − 8543 − 1340 − 3587 − 1878 − 33,669
After − 16,527 − 7936 − 875 − 2800 − 1369 − 29,507
Grand Total Before − 25,121 − 16,219 − 4086 − 4319 − 4836 − 54,581
After − 21,940 − 14,274 − 2605 − 2800 − 3797 − 45,416

Fig. 4. After implementing QCO production losses of the production (a) floor one; (b) floor two; (c) floor three; (d) floor four; (e) floor five respectively.

Table 9
Daily performance evaluation of the production floors.
Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Average

Floor 1 Plan Ach % 37% 46% 56% 66% 76% 79% 67% 57%
Achieved % 12% 46% 54% 61% 66% 60% 67% 48%
Efficiency % 11% 45% 52% 58% 63% 58% 66% 46%
Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Average
Floor 2 Plan Ach % 36% 44% 54% 64% 74% 78% 80% 55%
Achieved % 20% 40% 52% 63% 69% 63% 57% 47%
Efficiency % 18% 36% 47% 54% 61% 55% 48% 42%
Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Average
Floor 3 Plan Ach % 36% 46% 56% 66% 76% 80% 80% 52%
Achieved % 17% 28% 44% 53% 65% 64% 39% 40%
Efficiency % 14% 24% 37% 46% 56% 55% 34% 34%
Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Average
Floor 4 Plan Ach % 40% 50% 60% 70% 0% 0% 0% 55%
Achieved % 28% 42% 51% 38% 0% 0% 0% 40%
Efficiency % 31% 44% 52% 40% 0% 0% 0% 43%
Day 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Average
Floor 5 Plan Ach % 39% 50% 60% 70% 79% 80% 0% 56%
Achieved % 14% 41% 62% 70% 82% 81% 0% 47%
Efficiency % 14% 42% 60% 68% 79% 67% 0% 46%

three has a smaller number of losses of production pieces in comparison continuous process, so there are a few scopes to make this approach
before and after QCO implementation. From the overall study, we can more effective like Visual Stream Mapping (VSM) before and after the
say that floor one is the most highly effective in sense of plan achieve­ production of every style to find the lacking during the process and
ment, action achievement, and action efficiency of SMED. As it is a minimize the wastage. In addition, the scheme of incentive plan during

7
G.F.I. Toki et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 12 (2023) 100592

Fig. 5. Daily performance comparison as per plan achieves verses achieve a percentage of the production is the (a) floor one; (b) floor two; (c) floor three; (d) floor
four; (e) floor five respectively.

sewing is a breakthrough approach for encouraging the workers, line Garcia-Garcia, G., Singh, Y., Jagtap, S., 2022. Optimising changeover through lean-
manufacturing principles: a case study in a food factory. Sustainability 14 (14).
staff, and fellow officers which would be a value-added addition to
https://doi.org/10.3390/su14148279.
improve it. Godina, R., Pimentel, C., Silva, F.J.G., Matias, J.C.O., 2018. A structural literature review
of the single minute exchange of die: the latest trends. Procedia Manuf. 17, 783–790.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.10.129.
Author statement Hemalatha, C., Sankaranarayanasamy, K., Durairaaj, N., 2021. Lean and agile
manufacturing for work-in-process (WIP) control. Mater. Today Proc. 46,
We confirm that the manuscript has been read and approved by all 10334–10338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.12.473.
Islam, M.D., Nurunnabi, M., Mridula, F.R., Mia, R., Belal, S.A., 2022a. A cost-effective
named authors and that there are no other persons who satisfied the
approach after implementation of timing belt drive in the cotton ring-spinning
criteria for authorship but are not listed. We further confirm that the frame. Clean. Eng. Technol. 9, 100536 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2022.100536.
order of authors listed in the manuscript has been approved by all of us. Islam, M.R., Mia, R., Habib, M.A.B., Lotif, M.A., 2022b. A comparative analysis for the
cleaner production of vortex spun yarn based on the nozzle position. Heliyon 8 (10),
e10963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e10963.
Declaration of competing interest Jiang, H., Guo, R., Mia, R., Zhang, H., Lü, S., Yang, F., Liu, H., 2022. Eco-friendly dyeing
and finishing of organic cotton fabric using natural dye (gardenia yellow) reduced-
stabilized nanosilver: full factorial design. Cellulose 29 (4), 2663–2679. https://doi.
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial org/10.1007/s10570-021-04401-9.
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence Junior, R.G.P., Inácio, R.H., da Silva, I.B., Hassui, A., Barbosa, G.F., 2022. A novel
framework for single-minute exchange of die (SMED) assisted by lean tools. Int. J.
the work reported in this paper. Adv. Manuf. Technol. 119 (9), 6469–6487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-021-
08534-w.
Data availability Kordoghli, B., Moussa, A., 2013. Effect of wastes on changeover time in garment
industry. In: Paper Presented at the 2013 5th International Conference on Modeling,
Simulation and Applied Optimization (ICMSAO).
Data will be made available on request. Md Monirul, I., Adnan, A.T.M., 2016. Improving ready-made garment productivity by
changing worker attitude. Europ. Scient. J., ESJ 12 (4). https://doi.org/10.19044/
esj.2016.v12n4p436.
References Mia, R., Sk, M.S., Sayed Oli, Z.B., Ahmed, T., Kabir, S., Waqar, M.A., 2021.
Functionalizing cotton fabrics through herbally synthesized nanosilver. Clean. Eng.
Adeel, S., Liaqat, S., Hussaan, M., Mia, R., Ahmed, B., Wafa, H., 2022. Environmental Technol. 4, 100227 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clet.2021.100227.
friendly bio-dyeing of silk using Alkanna tinctoria based Alkannin natural dye. Ind. Monteiro, C., Ferreira, L.P., Fernandes, N.O., Sá, J.C., Ribeiro, M.T., Silva, F.J.G., 2019.
Crop. Prod. 186, 115301 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indcrop.2022.115301. Improving the machining process of the metalworking industry using the lean tool
Ahmed, T., Toki, G.F.I., Mia, R., Li, J., Islam, S.R., Rishad, M.M.A., 2022. Implementation SMED. Procedia Manuf. 41, 555–562. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
of the six sigma methodology for reducing fabric defects on the knitting production promfg.2019.09.043.
floor: a sustainable approach for knitting industry. Textile & Leather Review 5,
223–239. https://doi.org/10.31881/TLR.2022.29.

8
G.F.I. Toki et al. Cleaner Engineering and Technology 12 (2023) 100592

Peças, P., Faustino, M., Lopes, J., Amaral, A., 2022. Lean methods digitization towards Umap, A., Dhekane, A., Survase, A., Shelke, A., Nigole, S., Gambhire, 2016. Set up time
lean 4.0: a case study of e-VMB and e-SMED. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 16 (4), reduction by using SMED and Kaizen approach. G. In: Paper Presented at the DR BR
1397–1415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12008-022-00975-1. Ambedkar NatıonaL Instıtute of Technology Jalandhar-144011, India Department of
ŞAHİN, R., Aycan, K., 2021. A case study on reducing setup time using SMED on a Industrıal and Productıon Engıneerıng Ivth Internatıonal Conference on Productıon
turning line. Gazi Uni. J. Sci. 35 (1), 60–71. https://doi.org/10.35378/gujs.735969. and Industrıal Engineerıng. CPIE-2016.
Silva, A., Sá, J., Santos, G., Silva, F., Ferreira, L., Pereira, M., 2020. Implementation of Vieira, T., Sá, J.C., Lopes, M.P., Santos, G., Félix, M.J., Ferreira, L.P., Pereira, M.T., 2019.
SMED in a cutting line. Procedia Manuf. 51, 1355–1362. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. Optimization of the cold profiling process through SMED. Procedia Manuf. 38,
promfg.2020.10.189. 892–899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2020.01.171.
Sk, M.S., Mia, R., Hoque, E., Ahmed, B., Amin, M.J.I., Kabir, S.M.M., Mahmud, S., 2022. Wan, H., Huang, Q., Mia, R., Tao, X., Mahmud, S., Liu, H., 2022. Bioreduction and
Antimicrobial performance of silver–copper–zeolite microparticle-treated organic stabilization of nanosilver using Chrysanthemum phytochemicals for antibacterial
cotton fabric using versatile methods. Surface Innovations 40 (XXXX), 1–8. https:// and wastewater treatment. ChemistrySelect 7 (29), e202200649. https://doi.org/
doi.org/10.1680/jsuin.22.00023. 10.1002/slct.202200649.
Sousa, E., Silva, F.J.G., Ferreira, L.P., Pereira, M.T., Gouveia, R., Silva, R.P., 2018. Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Xu, B., 2019. Simulation on cooperative changeover of production
Applying SMED methodology in cork stoppers production. Procedia Manuf. 17, team using hybrid modeling method. Algorithms 12 (10). https://doi.org/10.3390/
611–622. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.promfg.2018.10.103. a12100204.