Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “lean six sigma”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

Performance Excellence Lean Six Sigma

Lean Six Sigma (LSS) organization at Y-12 sponsors the deployment of Performance Enterprise System (PES) and provides continuous improvement facilitation and training for the Y-12 site. Six- Question Survey was issued to 100 Y-12 employees at random, with the option to report one’s organization. Goals included: To gain an insight of Y-12 employees knowledge of PES & the Lean Six Sigma group • Generate employee desire to take PES class • Generate employee desire to perform continuous improvement.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Y-12 Lean Six Sigma Marketing Plan 2018

The Lean Six Sigma (LSS) organization at Y-12 sponsors the deployment of Performance Enterprise System (PES) and provides continuous improvement facilitation and training for the Y-12 site. The Lean Six Sigma organization is comprised of Subject Matter Experts (SME) who are passionate about continuous improvement and helping organizations improve their processes. The LSS group includes Support Leads, who perform various PES deployment activities, and Black Belts who use Lean, Six Sigma, and other leadership and project management tools to scope, analyze, and expertly facilitate teams on multifaceted improvement projects to meet safety, security, quality, timeliness, and/or cost savings goals. LSS is a group of change agents who help initiate continuous improvement throughout the Y-12 site. The ultimate goal of this marketing plan is to build a consistent, positive, and influential brand throughout Y-12. This brand will provide employees with information about the Lean Six Sigma organization, generate desire for employees to take the Performance Enterprise System training course, and to improve continuously.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

Development of a Technical, Economic, and Risk Assessment Tool for the Evaluation of Work Reduction Opportunities

Efficient and cost-effective operation of a nuclear power plant (NPP) is essential to ensuring long-term economical and safe operation. Multiple cost saving opportunities exist, referred to here as work reduction opportunities (WRO). These WROs reduce plant operating costs by employing various cost-effective strategies (e.g., implementation of modern technologies). Identifying and objectively screening WROs is an essential task to help reduce overall costs. However, there is no comprehensive framework for assessing WROs in the nuclear industry and evaluating their impact on plant operations. This report presents a novel framework for systematically evaluating WROs from a technical, economic, and risk perspective. As NPPs continue to add new technology and implement modernization strategies into their current processes, potential WROs are commonly identified. Although most WROs have the potential to reduce costs, not all opportunities will result in significant cost savings due to unforeseen risks, large implementation costs, or benefits that fall short of expectations. Examples of this can be the result of a technology that is not fully developed, uncertainty in the amount of cost reduction, or difficulties introducing a new process into an organization. These uncertainties can manifest several ways and can result in a WRO with limited cost savings or even a loss of investment. The framework developed emphasizes the importance of effectively screening the WROs from a holistic perspective to objectively identify inefficiencies and ensure a positive impact to the organization. This report presents the Technical, Economic, and Risk Assessment (TERA) as a key methodology for the screening and evaluation of potential WROs. The TERA framework begins with a screening phase where the process is examined through a hybrid combination of Lean Six Sigma and Integrated Operations for Nuclear (ION) guiding principles. This framework examines the current processes using the Lean Six Sigma SIPOC (Suppliers, Inputs, Process, Outputs, Consumers) methodology but retains the ION key elements of People, Technology, Process, and Governance as important factors to the nuclear decision-making process. By combining the principles of Lean Six Sigma and ION, the developed screening process is specific to the nuclear industry in that it systematically evaluates WROs in order to implement new technology that is comprehensively evaluated. The TERA begins by mapping current processes as they relate to WROs and examining the inefficiencies. Furthermore, the created process map can be used to identify and evaluate potential solutions. Using key performance indicators (KPIs), the TERA evaluates each area—technology, economics, and risk—for uncertainties and to perform cost-benefit analysis. The results of the TERA are important KPIs that allow for an evaluation of different processes and technology implementations. This assessment enables decision-makers to compare various WROs based on metrics and then make informed decisions for which opportunity to implement first. This research includes not only the creation of the TERA framework, but also the evaluation of its performance. A case study for screening potential WROs at Southern Nuclear Company is presented that utilizes the TERA methodology. Through the use of TERA, various WROs were screened, and the solutions evaluated for cost-benefit expectations. The report concludes by summarizing the overall effort and implications for utility modernization. The performance of the screening and TERA are discussed as well as the impact on the nuclear industry. The TERA process enables utilities to evaluate and inform investment decisions for WROs and mitigate any potential risks. Through this research, we provide utilities with a valuable framework to optimize operations, reduce costs, and drive continuous process improvement.

22 GENERAL STUDIES OF NUCLEAR REACTORS↗

MO-B-BRB-00: Optimizing the Treatment Planning Process

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

MO-B-BRB-01: Optimize Treatment Planning Process in Clinical Environment

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

MO-B-BRB-02: Maintain the Quality of Treatment Planning for Time-Constraint Cases

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

MO-B-BRB-03: Systems Engineering Tools for Treatment Planning Process Optimization in Radiation Medicine

The radiotherapy treatment planning process has evolved over the years with innovations in treatment planning, treatment delivery and imaging systems. Treatment modality and simulation technologies are also rapidly improving and affecting the planning process. For example, Image-guided-radiation-therapy has been widely adopted for patient setup, leading to margin reduction and isocenter repositioning after simulation. Stereotactic Body radiation therapy (SBRT) and Radiosurgery (SRS) have gradually become the standard of care for many treatment sites, which demand a higher throughput for the treatment plans even if the number of treatments per day remains the same. Finally, simulation, planning and treatment are traditionally sequential events. However, with emerging adaptive radiotherapy, they are becoming more tightly intertwined, leading to iterative processes. Enhanced efficiency of planning is therefore becoming more critical and poses serious challenge to the treatment planning process; Lean Six Sigma approaches are being utilized increasingly to balance the competing needs for speed and quality. In this symposium we will discuss the treatment planning process and illustrate effective techniques for managing workflow. Topics will include: Planning techniques: (a) beam placement, (b) dose optimization, (c) plan evaluation (d) export to RVS. Planning workflow: (a) import images, (b) Image fusion, (c) contouring, (d) plan approval (e) plan check (f) chart check, (g) sequential and iterative process Influence of upstream and downstream operations: (a) simulation, (b) immobilization, (c) motion management, (d) QA, (e) IGRT, (f) Treatment delivery, (g) SBRT/SRS (h) adaptive planning Reduction of delay between planning steps with Lean systems due to (a) communication, (b) limited resource, (b) contour, (c) plan approval, (d) treatment. Optimizing planning processes: (a) contour validation (b) consistent planning protocol, (c) protocol/template sharing, (d) semi-automatic plan evaluation, (e) quality checklist for error prevention, (f) iterative process, (g) balance of speed and quality Learning Objectives: Gain familiarity with the workflow of modern treatment planning process. Understand the scope and challenges of managing modern treatment planning processes. Gain familiarity with Lean Six Sigma approaches and their implementation in the treatment planning workflow.

60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES↗

TH-C-9A-01: Lean Tools and Methods

Lean thinking has revolutionized the manufacturing industry. Toyota has pioneered and leveraged this aspect of Lean thinking. Application of Lean thinking and Lean Six Sigma techniques into Healthcare and in particular in Radiation Oncology has its merits and challenges. To improve quality, safety and patient satisfaction with available resources or reducing cost in terms of time, staff and resources is demands of today's healthcare. Radiation oncology treatment involves many processes and steps, identifying and removing the non-value added steps in a process can significantly improve the efficiency. Real projects undertaken in radiation oncology department in cutting down the procedure time for MRI guided brachytherapy to 40% less using lean thinking will be narrated. Simple Lean tools and techniques such as Gemba walk, visual control, daily huddles, standard work, value stream mapping, error-proofing, etc. can be applied with existing resources and how that improved the operation in a Radiation Oncology department's two year experience will be discussed. Lean thinking focuses on identifying and solving the root-cause of a problem by asking “Why” and not “Who” and this requires a culture change of no blame. Role of leadership in building lean culture, employee empowerment and trains and develops lean thinkers will be presented. Why Lean initiatives fail and how to implement lean successfully in your clinic will be discussed. Learning Objectives: Concepts of lean management or lean thinking. Lean tools and techniques applied in Radiation Oncology. Implement no blame culture and focus on system and processes. Leadership role in implementing lean culture. Challenges for Lean thinking in healthcare.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Weapon Systems Risk-Assessment Tool Review

To anticipate, and potentially mitigate, future problems in aging weapon systems, four unique riskassessment techniques were analyzed, including root-cause analysis tools, six-sigma problemsolving approaches, and lean six-sigma tools. Identifying the most efficient process, or tool, is crucial for successful application to current and future weapon systems, subsystems, and components. The following processes were reviewed: Fault Tree Analysis, Failure Modes and Effects Analysis, Bow-Tie Analysis, and Hazard and Operability Study. A systematic assessment was performed to determine the most desirable method, and included investigating qualitative versus quantitative characteristics, scope, process durations, advantages, and limitations. Presented results will outline the study findings and further illustrate a capacity to identify future issues and/or concerns, and ultimately, reduce risk.

45 MILITARY TECHNOLOGY, WEAPONRY, AND NATIONAL DEF↗

Investigation of injury data at a detonator facility

This paper focuses on the collection of injury data; incorporation of this information into a visual format that DET management uses to make decisions to improving operations. Results from this 1 study include of the following: chemical exposure cases have declined because the Hazard Assessment of each DET operation has been formally reviewed; Slip/Trip/Fall factors have decreased due to Slip Simulator training; and work station evaluations have led to fewer injuries with Lift/Push/Pull factors. Rotation of employees, ergonomically friendly balances, automatic powder dispensers, and other equipment procurements will lower ergonomic injuries.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗

Investigation of criticality safety control infraction data at a nuclear facility

Chemical and metallurgical operations involving plutonium and other nuclear materials account for most activities performed at the LANL's Plutonium Facility (PF-4). Here, the presence of large quantities of fissile materials in numerous forms at PF-4 makes it necessary to maintain an active criticality safety program. The LANL Nuclear Criticality Safety (NCS) Program provides guidance to enable efficient operations while ensuring prevention of criticality accidents in the handling, storing, processing and transportation of fissionable material at PF-4. In order to achieve and sustain lower criticality safety control infraction (CSCI) rates, PF-4 operations are continuously improved, through the use of Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma (LSS) business practices. Employing LSS, statistically significant variations (trends) can be identified in PF-4 CSCI reports. In this study, trends have been identified in the NCS Program using the NCS Database. An output metric has been developed that measures ADPSM Management progress toward meeting its NCS objectives and goals. Using a Pareto Chart, the primary CSCI attributes have been determined in order of those requiring the most management support. Data generated from analysis of CSCI data help identify and reduce number of corresponding attributes. In-field monitoring of CSCI's contribute to an organization's scientific and technological excellence by providing information that can be used to improve criticality safety operation safety. This increases technical knowledge and augments operational safety.

38 RADIATION CHEMISTRY, RADIOCHEMISTRY, AND NUCLEA↗

Addressing as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) issues: investigation of worker collective external and extremity dose data

Plutonium emits both neutrons and photons and when it is stored or handled inside a glovebox, both photons and neutrons are significant external radiation hazards. Doses to the extremities are usually dominated by gamma radiation in typical plutonium glovebox operations. Excess external dose can generates stochastic effects consisting of cancer and benign tumors in some organs. Direct doses from radiation sources external to the body are measured by thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) placed on the glovebox worker between the neck and waist. Wrist dosimeters are used to assess externally penetrating radiation including neutrons and provide an estimate of neutron radiation exposure to the extremities. Both TLDs and wrist dosimeters are processed monthly for most glovebox workers. Here, worker collective extremity and external dose data have been analyzed to prevent and mitigate external radiation events through the use of Lean Manufacturing and Six Sigma business practices (LSS). Employing LSS, statistically significant variations (trends) are identified in worker collective extremity and external dose data. Finally, the research results presented in this paper are pivotal to the ultimate focus of this program, which is to minimize external radiation events.

61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY↗

PSIP For HDF5 Pilot Project (Final Report)

Productivity and Sustainability Improvement Planning (PSIP) is a lightweight, incremental and iterative approach (much in the same spirit as Agile methodologies) for making routine software process improvements in software projects. It is designed to be easily applied in existing development workflows. Quoting from a November 2019 workshop paper describing PSIP. PSIP breaks from classic software process improvement approaches such as CMM(I), SPICE, ISO 9000 or Six Sigma, in that it trades comprehensive standards and certification-driven assessment for self-defined, internally driven goals. It does, however, carry forward such ideas as having staged models of improvement (like CMM(I)) in the form of progress tracking cards. Additionally, PSIP is more aligned with lean and agile methods; it adopts their emphasis on iterative improvement and continuous learning. At its core, PSIP is an instantiation of the Plan-Do-Check-Act management cycle (PDCA, also known as Plan-Do-Study-Adjust) which provides the foundation for much of the modern software process improvement literature. This situates PSIP within a constellation of bottom-up, inductive software process improvement methods. PSIP is designed around the notion that already overburdened teams can define and carry out a series of small, incremental steps of progression towards improvement goals without significant (there will be some, but the goal is to avoid significant) disruption to ongoing development activities. A key enabling tool in PSIP is the use of Progress Tracking Cards (PTCs) which define the steps of progression towards a given improvement goal. This is the theory of PSIP. The PSIP for HDF5 project was aimed at putting PSIP into practice with the purpose of evaluating its effectiveness in planning and facilitating quality and process improvements in a scientific software project as well as its associated artifacts. The HDF5 project was chosen as a use case to evaluate PSIP for several reasons. First, NNSA labs and LLNL in particular have a keen interest in how HDF5 quality impacts its uptake and sustainability as a community adopted and supported code. Next, HDF5 is a foundational library, a key substrate in the HPC/CSE software stack, and any improvements there realized through this contract will have benefits to many DOE applications depending on it. HDF5 also represents an older, legacy code with technical debts to pay down. These characteristics are similar to many NNSA and even some ECP code projects. But, because HDF5 is an I/O library, it represents a simpler use case within which to study PSIP than a full-fledged and significantly more complex PDE simulation code. We believe these attributes make HDF5 an ideal use case for evaluating PSIP.

97 MATHEMATICS AND COMPUTING↗