Skip to content

Practical guide · TPM and maintenance

OEE calculation: the formula, three worked examples and the mistakes to avoid

Short answer

OEE is availability times performance times quality. Availability is run time divided by planned production time, performance is ideal cycle time times total count divided by run time, and quality is good count divided by total count. A shortcut gives the same answer in one step: good count times ideal cycle time, divided by planned production time. You need six numbers from a shift: its length, the planned stops, the unplanned downtime, the ideal cycle time, the total count and the rejects. The three worked examples below use made-up numbers, and each is checked both ways.

Last updated:

The OEE formula in one line

Overall equipment effectiveness (OEE) is the share of planned production time that was truly productive: the machine running, running at its ideal speed and making good parts. It is the product of three factors.

The three factors and the shortcut
MeasureFormulaThe loss it exposes
AvailabilityRun time ÷ planned production timeTime the machine should have run and did not
PerformanceIdeal cycle time × total count ÷ run timeRunning slower than the ideal rate, including short stops
QualityGood count ÷ total countParts that were scrapped or needed rework
OEEAvailability × performance × qualityAll three, as one share of planned time
ShortcutGood count × ideal cycle time ÷ planned production timeThe same OEE, without working out the factors

Planned production time is the shift minus planned stops. Run time is planned production time minus unplanned downtime.

The shortcut works because the three factors cancel: run time and total count drop out, leaving the time it should have taken to make the good parts divided by the time you planned to run. Use the factors when you want to know where the loss is, and the shortcut as a check on your arithmetic. The OEE calculator does both from the same six numbers.

What you need before you calculate

Six numbers from one machine or line over one period are enough. Most wrong OEE figures come from one of the six being taken from the wrong place.

The six numbers
NumberWhere it comes fromThe usual error
Shift lengthThe schedule, in minutesUsing paid hours when the machine was only staffed for part of them
Planned stopsBreaks, meetings, scheduled maintenance, time with no orderLeaving them in, which makes every machine look worse than it ran
Unplanned downtimeA stop log with a reason for each stopMissing the stops nobody wrote down, so availability looks too good
Ideal cycle timeThe fastest the machine can make one unit, from the design rate or a best runUsing the usual speed instead of the fastest, which hides lost speed
Total countThe machine's counter or the packed total, good and bad togetherCounting only the good parts, which makes performance look low
RejectsScrap and rework, from the quality checkTreating reworked parts as good

Keep the units the same throughout. If cycle time is in seconds and run time is in minutes, convert one of them before dividing. The OEE tracking sheet has one row per shift for a week and works out the factors for you; the downtime reason codes template gives you a starter list for the stop log.

Availability, performance and quality, one at a time

Availability asks how much of the planned time the machine actually ran. Breakdowns, changeovers and waiting for material all take it down. Performance asks how fast it ran while it was running, so slow cycles and the many short stops that never reach a stop log both land here. Quality asks how many of the parts made were good the first time.

That split is why OEE is useful beyond the single number. The six big losses sort the same way: equipment failures and setup and adjustment are availability losses, small stops and reduced speed are performance losses, and start-up rejects and production rejects are quality losses. A line at 70% OEE with availability as the weak factor needs a different team from one with performance as the weak factor. The six big losses worksheet puts each loss under its factor.

Example 1: one machine, one shift

This example is illustrative, and it is the same one worked on the OEE calculator page, so the numbers match. A shift is 450 minutes long with 50 minutes of planned stops (breaks). The machine had 40 minutes of unplanned downtime. Its ideal cycle time is 36 seconds. It made 540 units and 54 were rejected.

Example 1, step by step (illustrative)
StepWorkingResult
Planned production time450 − 50400 min
Run time400 − 40360 min
Availability360 ÷ 40090%
Performance(36 s × 540) ÷ (360 × 60 s) = 19,440 ÷ 21,60090%
Quality(540 − 54) ÷ 540 = 486 ÷ 54090%
OEE0.90 × 0.90 × 0.9072.9%
Check with the shortcut486 × 36 s ÷ (400 × 60 s) = 17,496 ÷ 24,00072.9%

Each factor looks respectable at 90%, and together they leave more than a quarter of the planned time unproductive. That is the point of multiplying: losses compound, so no single factor looks alarming.

Example 2: a fast line measured in units per minute

Fast lines are usually rated in units per minute, not seconds per unit, so convert first. This example is illustrative. A filling line has an ideal rate of 120 units a minute, which is an ideal cycle time of 0.5 seconds. The shift is 480 minutes with 45 minutes of planned stops. Unplanned downtime was 52 minutes: a 17-minute breakdown, a 25-minute changeover and 10 minutes waiting for empty containers. The line counted 39,100 units and 780 failed the quality check.

Example 2, step by step (illustrative)
StepWorkingResult
Planned production time480 − 45435 min
Run time435 − 52383 min
Availability383 ÷ 43588.0%
Most the line could have made in the run time383 min × 120 units a minute45,960 units
Performance39,100 ÷ 45,96085.1%
Good count39,100 − 78038,320
Quality38,320 ÷ 39,10098.0%
OEE0.880 × 0.851 × 0.98073.4%
Check with the shortcut38,320 units ÷ 120 per minute = 319.3 min of good output, ÷ 435 min73.4%

The weak factor is performance, not availability. In a real plant the first question would be what slowed the line down while it ran: short stops that never made the stop log are the usual answer, which is what the micro-stops page is about.

Example 3: two products on one machine

When a machine makes more than one product, the ideal cycle time is different for each, and you cannot use one averaged cycle time for the shift. This example is illustrative. A machine runs a 450-minute planned production time with 50 minutes of unplanned downtime, so run time is 400 minutes (24,000 seconds). Product A has an ideal cycle time of 20 seconds and Product B has 40 seconds. The machine made 700 units of A (14 rejected) and 150 units of B (6 rejected).

The wrong way: one average cycle time

Take the simple average of the two ideal cycle times, 30 seconds, and apply it to all 850 units. The ideal time is 850 × 30 = 25,500 seconds, which is more than the 24,000 seconds the machine ran. Performance comes out at 25,500 ÷ 24,000 = 106.3%. A machine cannot run faster than its ideal rate, so the number is telling you the method is wrong: this mix is mostly the fast product, and the average assumed half of it was the slow one.

The right way: product by product

Example 3, product by product (illustrative)
StepWorkingResult
Ideal time for everything made(700 × 20 s) + (150 × 40 s) = 14,000 + 6,00020,000 s
Availability400 ÷ 45088.9%
Performance20,000 ÷ 24,00083.3%
Ideal time for the good units(686 × 20 s) + (144 × 40 s) = 13,720 + 5,76019,480 s
Quality, weighted by ideal time19,480 ÷ 20,00097.4%
OEE0.889 × 0.833 × 0.97472.1%
Check with the shortcut19,480 s ÷ (450 × 60 s) = 19,480 ÷ 27,00072.1%

Quality here is weighted by ideal time because a rejected unit of the slow product costs twice the machine time of a rejected unit of the fast one. Counting units instead (830 good out of 850, 97.6%) gives a slightly different figure, which is another reason to prefer the shortcut when products are mixed: add up the ideal time of the good units and divide by planned production time.

OEE for a line or a plant

To get OEE for several machines, a line or a plant, do not average their percentages. Weight each machine's OEE by its planned production time, or add up the ideal time of all the good output and divide by all the planned time. The two methods give the same answer.

An illustrative contrast: Machine 1 was planned for 8 hours and reached 80% OEE. Machine 2 was planned for only 2 hours that day and reached 50%. The simple average of the two percentages is 65%. Weighted by planned time it is (8 × 0.80 + 2 × 0.50) ÷ 10 = 74%. The machine that ran most of the day should count for most of the result, and the average gives the short run the same say as the long one.

The same trap catches dashboards. A plant figure that is typed in separately, or averaged from line figures, will drift from one built from its inputs. Roll up from the underlying times and counts and keep the definitions the same on every line; the KPI dashboards page makes the same point about ratio KPIs such as OEE, which should roll up from their inputs and never as an average of percentages.

Cycle time: the number behind performance

Performance is only as good as the ideal cycle time you give it. Ideal cycle time is the fastest the machine can make one unit under good conditions. Actual cycle time is what it did. The gap between them is the performance loss, so if you use the actual or usual time as the ideal, performance will read near 100% whatever is happening.

To convert, units a minute is 60 divided by the cycle time in seconds, and units an hour is 3,600 divided by it. A 36-second cycle is 100 units an hour. Take the ideal from the equipment's design rate or from the best sustained run you have recorded, write it down, and change it only on purpose, because every OEE figure after that is measured against it. The cycle time calculator works out units per hour and capacity per shift, and the takt time calculator sets it beside the pace customers need. The difference between cycle time and lead time is covered in cycle time vs lead time.

Eight calculation mistakes

Mistakes that move the number, and what to do instead
MistakeWhat it does to OEEDo this instead
Counting planned stops as downtimeLowers availability for time the machine was never meant to runTake planned stops out of the shift first, then measure against planned production time
Counting reworked parts as goodRaises quality and hides the reworkCount only parts that were good the first time; reworked parts are rejects
Using the usual cycle time as the idealRaises performance and hides lost speedUse the fastest the machine can run, and keep it fixed
Letting performance go above 100%Signals a wrong cycle time, count or run timeTreat it as an error to find, not a result to report
Adding OEE figures across machinesGives a number with no meaning, often above 100%Weight by planned production time or sum the ideal time of good output
Leaving changeovers out of the stop logRaises availabilityLog them as their own reason and take them out of run time
Mixing time basesCompares machines measured against different clocksUse the same planned-time rule for every line, and write it down
Not recording short stopsRaises availability or hides a performance lossLog every stop over a set length and look at what is left as lost speed

Most of these make OEE look better than the floor feels, which is a useful test: if the number is high and the team says the machine is always stopping, check the stop log and the ideal cycle time first. For short stops, the micro-stops page explains why they are usually the missing loss.

OEE, TEEP and OLE: when each fits

OEE measures against planned production time, so a machine that is not scheduled for a shift does not lose OEE for it. Total effective equipment performance (TEEP) measures against all calendar time: it is OEE multiplied by utilization, where utilization is planned production time divided by calendar time. Use OEE to judge how well scheduled time is used and TEEP to see how much capacity sits in shifts nobody scheduled. The TEEP calculator does the second sum.

Overall labor effectiveness (OLE) applies the same three-factor idea to paid hours of a crew instead of machine time. It has no single standard definition, so write down how you count idle time before you compare periods. The OLE calculator shows one way to do it.

A reference point for OEE: the 85% figure often called world-class is usually attributed to Seiichi Nakajima's work on total productive maintenance (Introduction to TPM, Productivity Press, 1988), built from 90% availability, 95% performance and 99% quality. It is a reference, not a target for every process. The comparison that shows whether you are improving is your own line's OEE, measured the same way, week after week.

From number to action

The OEE figure tells you how big the gap is. The three factors tell you which kind of loss to look for, and the stop log tells you which cause to start with.

  • Availability is the lowest factor: sort the stop log by minutes, by number of stops and by cost, and look at changeovers separately from breakdowns. Reducing machine downtime works a month of stops through that method.
  • Performance is the lowest factor: start with short stops and slow cycles. The micro-stops page describes logging each one in one tap and adding them up by cause with a cost.
  • Quality is the lowest factor: look at what is being rejected and where it is found. The loss and cost management page shows how LeanSuite puts a cost on each loss so the biggest is fixed first.
  • A fix that needs an owner and a date belongs in an issue list, not in the OEE report; daily issue management is where LeanSuite keeps those.

A plain statement of scope: LeanSuite does not read OEE from machines. The figure comes from counts and times that people record, and the KPI dashboards track OEE next to downtime by reason and output against plan. If you want OEE captured automatically from machine signals, that is machine-monitoring software, which LeanSuite is not; the compare page is a starting point for tools that work that way.

Calculate yours now

Put your own six numbers into the OEE calculator; it shows availability, performance, quality and OEE, and the worked example on that page is Example 1 above. To keep a week of shifts and chart them, download the OEE tracking sheet, which is an Excel file that works out the three factors and OEE from one row per shift.

Definitions and sources

  • OEE as availability × performance × quality, and the shortcut of good count × ideal cycle time ÷ planned production time: as on the OEE calculator page. Planned production time is the shift minus planned stops; run time is planned production time minus unplanned downtime (OEE.com (Vorne), "Calculating OEE").
  • Six big losses: from Seiichi Nakajima's TPM work (Introduction to TPM, Productivity Press, 1988), read through OEE.com (Vorne), "Six Big Losses". Equipment failures and setup and adjustment are availability losses; small stops and reduced speed are performance losses; start-up rejects and production rejects are quality losses.
  • The 85% world-class OEE (90% × 95% × 99%) is attributed to Nakajima, Introduction to TPM, and is quoted on OEE.com (Vorne), "World-Class OEE".
  • TEEP is OEE × utilization, with utilization planned production time ÷ calendar time, as on the TEEP calculator page. OLE has no single standard, as noted on the OLE calculator page.
  • All numbers in the three worked examples and the roll-up are made up for illustration. They are not from a real plant.

FAQ

Questions about oEE calculation

  1. Multiply availability by performance by quality. Availability is run time divided by planned production time, performance is ideal cycle time times total count divided by run time, and quality is good count divided by total count. A shortcut gives the same result: good count times ideal cycle time, divided by planned production time. In the first worked example, 486 good units at 36 seconds each over 400 planned minutes gives 72.9%.

  2. The 85% figure often called world-class is usually attributed to Seiichi Nakajima's work on total productive maintenance, and is built from 90% availability, 95% performance and 99% quality. Treat it as a reference point, not a target for every process. The most useful comparison is your own line's OEE over time, measured the same way each week.

  3. More units were counted than the ideal cycle time allows in the run time. Usually the ideal cycle time was set too slow, the count or run time is wrong, or one averaged cycle time was used on a line that makes several products. Set the ideal to the fastest the machine can run, and work out mixed products one product at a time.

  4. Do not average the percentages. Weight each machine's OEE by its planned production time, or add up the ideal time of all the good output and divide by all the planned time. For example, 80% over 8 hours and 50% over 2 hours gives 74% when weighted, not the 65% a simple average suggests.

  5. No. OEE is measured against planned production time. Total effective equipment performance (TEEP) is OEE multiplied by utilization, so it is measured against all calendar time and shows the capacity left in shifts nobody scheduled. Utilization on its own only compares planned time with calendar time and says nothing about speed or quality.

  6. Not in the usual calculation. Breaks, meetings and time with no order are taken out of the shift to give planned production time, and OEE is measured against what is left. Unplanned stops, and changeovers that sit inside planned production time, lower availability. Write down your rule once so every line and every month is measured the same way.

Rather see it on your own problem?

Bring the problem you are stuck on, and we will show you on a call how LeanSuite handles it.

Pass it on

We want LeanSuite to be the best place on the internet for lean help. If this was useful, send it to someone on your team or in your network who needs it.