Process analysis, layout and location
Process analysis, layout and location
Name:
Instructor:
Institution:
Date:
2a. The flowcharts.
1-represents the making of component 1 of the gadget
2-represents the making of component 2 of the gadget
3-the process after integration of components 1 and 2
23431501625601b
1b
762002101851
1
2.5buffer 2.7
5791200203203c
3c
4629150203203b
3b
3533775869953a
3a
18859501638302b
2b
10953751638302a
2a
762001638302
2
2.3 3.2 2.6
1.8 1.7 2.5 buffer
B. The assumptions.
Attachment of extras to component 2 occurs only on request by a customer. This shows that the time needed to make these specialized gadgets solely lies on the process of making component two of the gadget. By use of the time used to process component of the gadget, the time needed to finish one gadget is 14.1 minutes.
C. Cycle time.
The cycle time is determined by checking the time it takes to finish the longest step in the gadget making process. This is the time taken to test the final gadget which is made after integration of components 1 and 2.
The Cycle time=3.2 minutes
D. Throughput time
Throughput time is dependent on the cycle time throughput the process of gadget making. The process moves forward after every 3.2 minutes which includes the gadgets moving through the 10 storage buffers. The process of gadget making is finalized by packaging of the gadget and handling it to the customer which takes 2.6 minutes.
Throughput time= 3.2+5(3.2) +3.2+5(3.2) +3.2 + 2.6 = 44.2 minutes.
The best arrival rates for the customers can be determined by determining the process velocity. This velocity gives the operational speed of the gadget making process and therefore shows the rates at which the services are delivered to each and every customer.
The process velocity is calculated by; throughput time/ value-added time.
The value added time for gadget making = 1.8+1.7+2.5+2.3+3.2+2.6=14.1 minutes
Therefore the process velocity=44.2/14.1= 3.13475
E. The amount of Work in Process Inventory
This is determined by use of Little’s Formula WIP Inventory = Throughput time/ Cycle time.
Therefore WIP Inventory = 44.2/3.2 = 13.8125
F.
The reduction of throughput time and thus reducing the process velocity time per customer ; the customers had been complaining about the longer periods which they had to wait before getting their gadgets and therefore reducing the process velocity per customer will enable customers move faster as they get their gadgets made faster too. The buffer storage time can be reduced to zero and this leads to least times used to process and deliver a gadget to a customer.
By reducing the buffer storage time to zero,
The new throughput time=3.2 +3.2 +3.2 + 2.6 = 12.2minutes.
The new process velocity=12.2/14.1=0.86525
G. Aspects and issues that should be investigated.
The issues to be investigated are those steps which take long time and therefore contribute to the delay in the delivery of finished gadgets to the customers. Component 2 of the gadget is seen as the determining factor on the amount of time it will take to process the whole gadget. The management should therefore work on modalities that would enable faster packaging of the gadget as well as a speedy way of testing the final gadget. It should find a way in which the gadget can be tested at once instead of testing the components separately and then testing the final gadget. The double testing seems to be consuming a lot of time.
Question 3
Construction of block plans.
A – Shows the need to have the two departments. (Absolutely necessary), E-Especially Important, I-Important, O-Ordinary Closeness, U-Unimportant, X-Undesirable.
From the above ratings, the departments which are absolutely necessary to be put close to one another are Police and jail A&B, courtroom and judges’ chamber C&D, public works and sanitation and engineering I&J, mayor’s office and town councils chambers L&M.
The departments which are especially necessary to be put close to one another are; FE, FG, GH and HI
The departments which are important to be close to one another are AC, AL, CM, KG,KH,KI,KJ and IF
Departments which have Ordinary Closeness are AD and AE
1800225506095M
M
133350506095L
L
From the above data on the closeness of one department to another, the designing of the department layouts can therefore be constructed in terms of The Relationship Chart Data.
3657600501650G
G
1905000606425E
E
23717252625725H
H
34671001654175J
J
21240751816100K
K
12192001816100I
I
2781300596900F
F
-857251368425D
D
10858501035050C
C
1085850158750B
B
123825415925A
A
The assumptions made while developing the plans included:
All units of materials were of a standard size and therefore one unit from a department is equivalent to one unit from another department.
Total department areas include enough space for the provision of corridors between the thirteen departments.
Movements between the different departments can only be rectilinear.
The cost of full movement across the various departments (horizontally or vertically) one squire unit is equal to $1
The departments are rectangular in shape as they are 12 by 8 square feet.
(ii) Heuristic approach used and the steps.
Determined that department 1 needed to be on outside of the block plan for practicability.
Used from-to chart to calculate the total flow measures of each department.
Used the results from TFM calculations to determine which departments should be in close proximity to each other.
Used from-to-chart to implement Greedy method to determine which department should be in close proximity to each other.
(iii) Calculation of the TCR (Total Closeness Rating) values for each of the departments which gives the sum of numerical values of the relationship each department has with the other departments. The first department was the one with the highest value of TCR. The table below shows how the TCR for the 13 departments were calculated.
Depts. Departments Summary TCR Order
A B C D E F G H I J K L M A E I O U X A A I O O U U U U U U I X 1 0 2 2 6 1 12 (8)
B U X U X U U U U U X U 0 0 0 0 8 3 -375 (13)
C A U U U U U U U U I 1 0 1 0 8 0 130 (2)
D U U U U U U U U U 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 (11)
E E U U U U U U U 0 1 0 0 7 0 25 (7)
F E U I U U U U 0 1 1 0 5 0 30 (6)
G E U E I U U 0 2 1 0 3 0 55 (4)
H E U I U U 0 1 1 0 3 0 30 (5)
I A I U U 1 0 1 0 2 0 130 (1)
J I U U 0 0 1 0 2 0 5 (9)
K U U 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 (10)
L A 1 0 0 0 0 0 125 (3)
M From the CV values
A-125,E-25, I-5, O-1, U-0 and X- -125, the TCR are calculated for each of the departments and then they are ordered as shown above
(v) moving the treasurer’s office closer to the mayor’s office would be a good improvement since through this there would be limited movements to and from the mayor’s office due to the need for consultation between the two offices.
Comparison of relationship chart data and Interdepartmental Personnel flow data
The relationship chart data provides the need to put related departments together. For example, the police and the jail needed to be together due to the necessity in contact between the police officers and the inmates. At the same time, there was a need for closeness between the courtrooms and the judges so as to fasten service delivery. The courtrooms are the work places for the judges and the nearer they are close to one another the easier it will be for the judges to go to the courtrooms and thus save on a lot of time. There was also need for the police and the jail to be close to the courtrooms due to the link that exists between them. The police takes the accused to the court and the near the police to the courtrooms the faster will be the process and thus a lot of time is saved. On the other hand, the interdepartmental data flow only explains how the personnel in different department contact one another and the frequency of the contact too. This is also catered for in the relationship data chat which is even more elaborate. Implementation of the relationship data chart would therefore be the best option between the two.
