Availability
Target 85%82%AMBER · 3 pts below target
Trend1D
—Now
Current organisation:Northstar Works
Sandbox / Demo ModeOperational dashboard
Production, quality and supplier health for the current shift.
Production system status
Shift A · 6 assets · illustrative valuesProductivity
Target 90%86%AMBER · 4 pts below target
Trend1D
—Now
OEE
Target 75%68%RED · 7 pts below target
Trend1D
—Now
Dial status uses the selected target: green at or above target, amber up to five percentage points below, red further below. Trends and values are fictional demo data.
Planned operation time480 min · shift allocation
Production 58%Setup 14%Idle 18%Alarm 10%
Machine status3 running · 1 setup · 1 idle · 1 alarm
OEE = availability × productivity × quality (96%).
In-process defects
07production findings this shift
02Contained / held
05Under review
Incoming & production defects
Counts by detection point; production is the same seven findings shown in WIP.
Supplier performance
92%On-time delivery
96%Incoming acceptance
Overall system RIO status
Risks · Issues · Opportunities
03Risks1 high priority
02Issues2 open
04Opportunities2 in review
suriyavaanSURIYAONE / PRODUCTION SYSTEM
SIMULATED · NORTHSTAR WORKS · SHIFT A
INDICATOR 01 / 03
Availability
Machine runtime as a share of planned production time.
TARGET 85%AMBER · 3 pts below target
82%
ILLUSTRATIVE TREND
Shift startNow · sample data
Next indicator in 15 s
Needs a decision
TRACE / NW-204
One sample unit
01 / INPUTRequirement NW-RQ-017
02 / WORKBuild record NW-204
03 / DECISIONRelease review
A record link shows where to inspect; it is not proof of conformity.
Follow the handover
REQUIREMENT→CONTROLLED WORK→OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE→DECISION
Process
Find a handover, inspect authority, and check objective evidence. Actual SOP methods are withheld.
No steps match. Clear the quick filter or select All Steps.
Evidence states respond to demo checkboxes in this browser session. They are not live verification results.
Controlled documents
Find the current identity and review state. Procedure text and signatures are masked.
Only document metadata is shown. Full SOP text, templates and approval signatures are not included.
Evidence trail
Unit NW-204 · fictional electromechanical assembly. Select a handover to inspect its record link.
UNITNW-204
LINKED EVENTS06
REVIEW STATEIllustrative
The sequence shows relationships only. Underlying records and acceptance criteria are withheld.
Actions & approvals
See the owner, next decision and retained evidence for each sample item.
01 / DRAFT→02 / REVIEW→03 / DECISION→04 / RETAIN
Signals for review
Illustrative measures point to records that need context. People validate the evidence and decide.
TREND / 06 MONTHS
Actions closed on time
REVIEW PROMPTS
Open the source
01 / SUPPLIERExceptions at receipt
Open the related disposition record before judging trend.
02 / CORRECTIVE ACTIONRecurrence after closure
Check effectiveness evidence and similar failures.
03 / DOCUMENT CONTROLReview dates approaching
Confirm the owner and current revision.
The chart and prompts use fictional values. They do not report any buyer's performance.
SURIYAONE / OPERATIONS INTELLIGENCE
Turn machine loss
into an owned decision.
Follow one representative shift from machine signal to reason, quality outcome and financial context. Test a response before assigning the work.
INDEPENDENT WORKED EXAMPLECNC-07
Northstar Works · Sample shift
08:00–16:00 · 23 Oct 2026
- 01 / OBSERVEWhat happened?Machine states and part counts
- 02 / EXPLAINWhere was capacity lost?Reasons, speed and scrap
- 03 / MODELWhat would change?One bounded improvement
- 04 / ASSIGNWho checks the result?Owner and evidence to retain
01 / OBSERVE + EXPLAIN
450 min planned productionThe shift, accounted for.
An eight-hour shift less a 30-minute planned break. The remaining time is divided into good output and three distinct losses.
OEE58.7%good ideal time / planned time
Availability80.0%run / planned
Performance80.0%ideal total / run
Quality91.7%good / total pieces
Where the 450 minutes wentTime-equivalent view
Good output 264 minStops 90 minSlow cycle 72 minScrap 24 min
Runtime360 min
Total pieces72
Good pieces66
Ideal cycle4 min
Reason evidence
Sample records · operator context needed09:40–10:25Spindle alarm E-10445 min stop
13:15–14:00Material not at cell45 min stop
Across runCycle slower than 4 min ideal72 min equivalent
At inspectionSix pieces rejected24 min equivalent
03 / MODEL + ASSIGN
Choose the loss to tackle.
Change one assumption at a time. The model holds the other shift factors constant so the comparison stays legible.
IF THE CHANGE HOLDS
≈5.5additional good pieces / shift
63.6%modelled OEE · from 58.7%
Recovering alarm time adds runtime. Current speed and yield are held constant.
OWNER + CHECKMaintenance lead
Verify the alarm code, root cause and restart record; compare stop minutes across the next five shifts.
FINANCIAL CONTEXT
What the shift carries.
A transparent cost basis links the quality and capacity result to a per-good-piece estimate. It is not a selling price.
Current cost / good piece—
Modelled cost / good piece—
Annual operating cost—
Scheduled production hours / year—
Edit the illustrative cost basis
METHOD + LIMITS
What this can support.
01 / OEE
Availability × performance × quality. The 450-minute time bar reconciles to 264 good, 90 stopped, 72 speed-loss and 24 scrap-equivalent minutes.
02 / COST
Purchase value divided by useful life assumes zero residual value. This, upkeep, space/tooling, staffed time and runtime energy are divided by modelled annual good pieces. A recovered stop can add energy use.
03 / DECISION
Assign a cause, action owner and follow-up measure. Confirm machine and quality records before treating a modelled change as real.
All machine events, counts and amounts are fictional. No telemetry, ERP, QMS, operator log or buyer record feeds this demo. The scenario is a capacity and unit-cost illustration, not realised savings or a forecast.