1
Distribution Capacity Distribution Capacity AnalysisAnalysis
P09721P09721MSD II Final PresentationMSD II Final Presentation
Distribution Capacity Distribution Capacity AnalysisAnalysis
P09721P09721MSD II Final PresentationMSD II Final Presentation
Aaron Heyman – Aaron Heyman – LeadLead
Jose RodriguezJose RodriguezAdam CookAdam Cook
Abraham TalebAbraham Taleb
2
Project DescriptionProject DescriptionProject DescriptionProject Description
Problem Statement: What is the maximum # Problem Statement: What is the maximum # of orders/lines/units this facility can process in of orders/lines/units this facility can process in a given time period based on the current a given time period based on the current equipment/software?equipment/software?Processes In Scope:Processes In Scope: Receiving > Put Away Receiving > Put Away > Replenishment > > Replenishment > PickingPicking > > PackingPacking > > ShippingShippingPick and pack will likely be the first areas of Pick and pack will likely be the first areas of focus. Others can and will be added given the focus. Others can and will be added given the team’s ability to handle a broader scopeteam’s ability to handle a broader scope
3
Customer Need #
Importance Description Comments/Status
CN1 5 The time required to train users is minimal. Met
CN2 5 The computer tool is user friendly. Met
CN3 3The computer tool is able to be upgraded and/or modified in the future.
Met
CN4 5 The computer tool represents the real world. Met
CN5 3 The computer tool identifies invalid data inputs. Met
CN6 1 The computer tool executes commands quickly. Met
CN7 3The computer tool alerts the user when a given demand input is not realizable given actual capacity.
Met
CN8 3The computer tool allows the user to visualize all the information on a single screen.
Met
CN9 3The computer tool provides the option to print a report of the output.
Met
Customer NeedsCustomer Needs
Importance Scale: 5= Must Have 3= Nice To Have 1= Preferential
4
Metrics & SpecificationsMetrics & SpecificationsEngineering Specifications Metrics
1The training time is less than 30 minutes. Training Time2The computer tool is user friendly. Ease of use3The computer tool is able to be upgraded and/or modified in the future. Flexibility 4The system represents the real world. Validity Test5The system identifies invalid data inputs. Ease of use6The system executes a command in no more than 0.25 minutes. Execution Time
7The system alerts the user when a given demand input is not realizable given actual capacity. Validity Test
8The computer tool allows the user to visualize all the information on a single screen. Validity Test
9The computer tool provides the option to print a report of the output. Validity TestTable 1.1 Relationship of customer needs to metrics Target Specifications
Metrics Need Nos. Importance Units Ideal Value Marginal value1 Training Time 1 5 Minutes <30 <60
2 Ease of use 2,5 5Subjectiv
e 5 33 Flexibility 3 3 Binary Yes Yes4 Validity Test 4,7,8,9 1 Binary Pass Pass5 Execution Time 6 1 Minutes 0.05 0.25
Table 1.2 Target Specifications
Importance Scale: 5= Must Have 3= Nice To Have 1= PreferentialBinary: Pass or Fail.
5
Goals for MSD IIGoals for MSD IIGoals for MSD IIGoals for MSD II Add Pack area to computer toolAdd Pack area to computer tool
Validate computer tool through historical data Validate computer tool through historical data and on floor trialsand on floor trials
Turn computer tool over to customer for Turn computer tool over to customer for implementationimplementation
Identify process improvement opportunities and Identify process improvement opportunities and present to customerpresent to customer
Implement desired process improvement Implement desired process improvement projects projects
6
MSD II Project MSD II Project Description Description
MSD II Project MSD II Project Description Description
Capacity Analysis/Computer Tool Capacity Analysis/Computer Tool (Aaron and Adam)(Aaron and Adam)
Process Improvements (Abe and Jose)Process Improvements (Abe and Jose)
7
Tool DescriptionTool DescriptionTool DescriptionTool Description Focuses on labor needed for given Focuses on labor needed for given demanddemand
Modifiable to accommodate future Modifiable to accommodate future changeschanges
Has the ability to calculate various input Has the ability to calculate various input structuresstructures
Has capacity analysis portion where user Has capacity analysis portion where user can experiment with different scenarioscan experiment with different scenarios
8
Updates to ToolUpdates to Tool
•Pack addedPack added
•Picking validatedPicking validated
•Pack validatedPack validated
•Capacity Analysis of Pick and PackCapacity Analysis of Pick and Pack
•Added Printable SheetAdded Printable Sheet
9
User InterfaceUser InterfaceUser InterfaceUser Interface
10
Data ValidationData Validation
PickPick ADMADM PTLPTL VoiceVoice CarouselCarousel TotalTotal
CalculateCalculatedd
6.256.25 110.49110.49 106.75106.75 18.5418.54 241.7241.744
ActualActual 5.65.6 108.09108.09 104.95104.95 21.5521.55 240.1240.199
Labor hours per area over 25 day time periodLabor hours per area over 25 day time period
-0.64%-0.64%
11
PackPack
Second sheet in Excel Workbook Contains Pack DataSecond sheet in Excel Workbook Contains Pack Data
12
Packing ExplanationPacking Explanation
•The team chose to use Orders for pack The team chose to use Orders for pack calculations instead of lines.calculations instead of lines.
•This was chosen due to the high variability in This was chosen due to the high variability in the size of lines being packed.the size of lines being packed.
13
Packing ValidationPacking Validation
PackPack Week 1Week 1 Week 2Week 2 Week 3Week 3
CalculatedCalculated 380.07380.07 394.15394.15 378.62378.62
ActualActual 420.12420.12 408.99408.99 386.73386.73
DifferenceDifference 40.0540.05 14.8414.84 8.118.11
14
Overall Capacity ViewOverall Capacity View
Third sheet in Excel Workbook Contains Overall Third sheet in Excel Workbook Contains Overall Capacity ViewCapacity View
Based on Demand %, the Max Total Demand Supported is
15
Maximum Outputs for Maximum Outputs for Pack AreasPack Areas
Fourth sheet in Excel Workbook Contains Detailed Fourth sheet in Excel Workbook Contains Detailed Pack CapacityPack Capacity
ADM Kaizen • Initial meeting
–April 17, 2009 9:00 am
–People present• Inventory control
•Replenishment personnel
•ADM operators
•Pick Supervisors
•RIT Students
•Meeting was very productive, everyone contributed with good suggestions and critiques.
Ideas Discussed
• Ideas discussed–Single label with color coding, and barcode included
–Two labels: one with barcode and another with three digits and colors
Ideas Discussed–Re-slotting carton flow racks
–Incorporate a flag system
v.s.
Meeting Conclusions
•Single label with barcode
•Re-slotting carton flow racks, not agreed–The benefits obtained from this are not so large when compared to the effort to be invested
•Flags are to be incorporated only for the high movers as having 500 flags will drive operators crazy
Final Label Design
• Two sizes, one for ADM and one for carton flow racks
• If white background is allowed next to barcode, number of colors can increase
Cost/Benefit Analysis
•Assumptions–Define a defect as replenishing a slot in the ADM with wrong product. Considered only locations with <95% accuracy
–Sample cycle counted is representative of the state of whole system
–Labor costs $10/hr
–Assume 920 slots currently being used
Cycle Count ADM - Results
# of locations <95% accurate # of Locations <95%
Nov.08 920 16% 147.2
Dec.08 920 17% 156.4
Jan.09 920 20% 184
Feb.09 920 33% 303.6
Total defects 791.2
Costs - ResultsNumber of defects (1) 792Number of hours per defect (2) 0.4
Cost of labor hour (3) $
10.00
Total cost of defects (1x2 x3) $
3,168.00
Time spent on a single defect Time
(mins)2 Packing defect recognition3 Packing notifies the search and rescue team
12 Fill out form and travel to and from ADM to pick the right product2 Repack the order5 Check the slot that contained the wrong product potentially remove
items that are not supposed to be there.TOTAL minutes per
defect 24
Cost of labels $ 1,200.00
Cost of defects $ 3,168.00
Payback period (months) 4.55
Cost/Benefit Analysis
Implementation Plan
• If approval is not obtained within timeframe, transition document will be developed.
• If approval is obtained in time and product is received before Thursday may 14th, the implementation will be executed.
–To minimize potential errors, no two stickers will be removed at the same time.
ADM Replenishment FlagsSolution that all parties want but difficult to implement
Other Solutions involved showing the current levels of all channels
Idea for spring activated flag was generated but mechanics are difficult
Advantage would be flag would only show when current channel needed product.
Refilling channels before they become empty would increase productivity
Current Prototype
Shipping Conveyor Kaizen Event
The Shipping Conveyor Kaizen was attended by representatives from packing, shipping and engineering.
Quick decision was made to add Spring-loaded bottoms to re-sort bins, especially in light of the recent injuries.
Discussion of mechanical solution lead to mostly dead ends. Most solutions have been tried before (Adding chutes instead of rollers, speeding up/down conveyors).
Shipping Conveyor Kaizen Event
The final discussion focused on boxes being placed on the conveyor incorrectly
Lisa defended that it is difficult to place the box correctly every time with the expectation to ship so many orders per hour
Solution was generated to remind packers at weekly meetings to place boxes label side up and vertically oriented
Shipping Conveyor TodaySpring bottoms have arrived and installed in the re-sort bins
UPS blue bins will be switched out of those locations and replaced with either red or green bin
Labeling has also been designed for bin stating “DO NOT REMOVE”
Movement of MTO to a spot on the shipping conveyor will go a long way to reduce the number of packed boxes that need resorted.
30
QuestionsQuestions
????