Developing a Layout
from
Lean Perspective
For small batch large variety production
Date: 27-05-2009
Author: Martin Ottens
Company: Eaton Electric Hengelo
Supervisor Eaton: Han Busschers
Supervisor RUG: prof. dr. ir. J. Slomp
Preface
I did this research as a master thesis for the study technology management which I studied at the “Rijks Universiteit Groningen”. This research is conducted under LORC, which stands for Lean Operations Research Center, of the “Rijks Universiteit Groningen”. Prof. dr. ir. J. Slomp is the director of LORC and introduced me to Eaton and Han Busschers, my supervisor of Eaton.
Eaton is a manufacturing company which produces components and systems in the low- and middle voltage segments for electrical distribution. This research is conducted at PMC2 which is part of EEGS, Eaton Electric General Supply, which is an internal supplier of Eaton Holec Hengelo. I made a redesign of the layout of PMC2 to gain higher transparency and manageability and to lower throughput times. This was done from lean perspective which means that the layout implements lean principles, which is consistent with the Eaton Lean System and objectives.
I had a great time at Eaton and learned a lot from all people inside Eaton. Therefore I would like to thank Han Busschers, logistics manager of EEGS, Ernst van Raalte, manager of EEGS, Jan Kempers, process engineer of PMC2, Jan Tuller, supervisor of PMC2, Hans Groot Ulen, planner of PMC2 and Bonne van der Walle, Engineer of PMC2. I also want to thank the Operators of PMC2 and Tom Vleerbos, Opex manager of Eaton, with which I had some interesting discussions about lean production and the Eaton Lean System.
From the “Rijks Universiteit Groningen” I would like to thank my supervisors, prof. dr. ir. J. Slomp and dr. J.A.C. Bokhorst, for their guidance and ideas for my research and introducing me to Eaton because I had a great time. Also thanks for letting me join the lean workshop, I learned a lot of that.
At last I want to thank my parents, my sister and my fiancée for their support during this research and my study technology management. They played a significant role in my life and their support means a lot to me.
Martin Ottens
Abstract
Since the 1980’s Lean Production is becoming more and more popular, also within western organisations. Since then more and more companies are adopting lean principles to change their production environment. This is also the case for Eaton who developed their own Lean system, called ELS which stands for Eaton Lean System. This research is about a layout redesign of PMC2, a production department within Eaton Holec Hengelo, to reduce throughput time, gain higher transparency and to improve manageability of the production process. This layout redesign is done from the perspective of lean production and the ELS system.
The new layout is based on the principles of flow production, first 19 product families are identified with use of sequence based clustering. These 19 product families are classified into 5 major product flows, this classification is done by clustering the 19 product families around the same use of machines. A layout concept is created with the following aspects; 1) central supply and delivery, 2) situating machines in such a way that flow will be created, 3) situating the machines in a U form for better communication and interchangeability between operators and 4) integrating a place for future supermarket plans. The next step was to create different layout alternatives from the layout concept with use of the identified product flows. These layout alternatives are assessed with use of multi criteria decision making and finally the definitive layout is chosen. Also the implications for planning and control are examined and from this analyses it became clear that the layout redesign only affects the control part of planning and control. The ability to control has improved due to the suggested redesign of PMC2, because transparency and manageability have both been improved. This study ended with an implementation plan for the short, middle and long run which is linked with the needed effort and investments to implement parts of the redesign.
Glossary and List of Abbriviations
JIT Just in Time
Kanban A pull production method
Lean Production Production system invented by Toyota to remove waste
MRP Material Requirements Planning
Push schedules a release for production
Pull authorizes a release for production, customer driven
PMC Product Market Combination
EEGS Eaton Electric General Supplies
MVS Medium Voltage Systems
LVS Low Voltage Systems
List of Figures, Graphs and Tables
Fig. 1 Energy Distribution Network... 11
Fig. 2 Turning Machine at PMC2 ... 12
Fig. 3 Picture of part of PMC2 ... 13
Table 1 Overview of Machines at PMC2... 14
Fig. 4 Relations of PMC2... 15
Fig. 5 Research Outline ... 16
Fig. 6 General Model of Operations Management (Slack, 1998) ... 20
Fig. 7 Conceptual Model ... 21
Fig. 8 Detailed Research Process ... 25
Fig. 9 Layout Decision Process (Slack, 1998) ... 27
Fig. 10 Relationship between process types and basic layout types (Slack, 1998)... 30
Fig. 11 Volume and variety must effect selected process (Heizer & Reinder, 2004) ... 31
Fig. 12 Ways of doing work by quantity of output and size of process (Nicholas, 1998) ... 32
Fig. 13 Fuzzy Art / Merge Method (Park and Suresh, 2003)... 43
Fig. 14 Right form and example of production data for the Factory+Layout program ... 44
Fig. 15 Effect of choice parameter ... 45
Fig. 16 Effect of learning factor ... 46
Fig. 17 Effect of Vigilance factor... 46
Fig. 18 Effect of merge parameter ... 47
Fig. 19 All product families combined to 5 major product flows ... 50
Table 2 overview of product flows and product families... 51
Fig. 20 Product flow 1... 53
Fig. 21 Product flow 2 and 3 ... 54
Fig. 22 Product flow 4... 55
Table 3 From to Matrix ... 56
Table 4 Classification of movements between machines... 57
Fig. 23 Schematic diagram of current layout including product flows ... 59
Fig. 24 Concept layout ... 61
Fig. 25 Layout alternative 1 ... 64
Fig. 26 Layout alternative 2 ... 65
Fig. 27 layout alternative 3... 67
Table 6 performance objectives an aspects for decision making including scores ... 71
Fig. 28 Graphical representation of scores on performance objectives ... 72
Fig. 29 Layout in Autocad... 74
Fig. 30 Comparison of MRP and Kanban ... 77
Fig. 31 crossings in old layout ... 81
Table 7 Distance between machines in old layout ... 82
Table 8 Total amount of transport, old layout... 82
Fig. 32 Crossings in new layout ... 83
Table 9 Distance between machines in new layout... 84
Index
Preface ... 2
Abstract ... 3
Glossary and List of Abbriviations ... 4
List of Figures, Graphs and Tables ... 5
Index... 7 Index... 7 1. Introduction ... 10 1.1 Introduction ... 10 1.2 Eaton... 10 1.3 Eaton Electric ... 10
1.4 Eaton Holec Hengelo ... 11
1.4.1 Introduction ... 11
1.4.2 Departments and activities ... 11
1.5 EEGS ... 12 1.5.1 Introduction ... 12 1.6 PMC2 and PMC4 ... 13 1.6.1 Introduction ... 13 1.6.2 Activities ... 13 1.6.3 Machines ... 14 1.6.4 External Relations ... 14 1.7 Structure ... 15 2. Research Design ... 17
2.1 Introduction to Research Problem... 17
2.5.3 Operationalisation of Conceptual model... 22
2.6 Methodology ... 24
2.6.1 Methodology ... 24
2.6.2 Detailed Research Process ... 24
2.7 Sub Questions... 26
2.7.1 Introduction ... 26
2.7.2 Sub Question 1 Analyse PMC2 / PMC4 ... 26
2.7.3 Sub Question 2 Layout Concept... 26
2.7.4 Sub Question 3 Layout ... 28
2.7.5 Sub Question 4 Planning & Control... 28
2.7.6 Sub Question 5 Performance... 28
2.7.7 Sub Question 6 Implementation ... 29
3. Production at PMC2 ... 30
3.1 Products, Volume and Variety at PMC2 ... 30
3.2 Classification of Production ... 32
3.3 Important outcomes of workshops ... 34
4. Lean Production ... 38
4.1 Introduction ... 38
4.2 Flow Production ... 39
4.3 Eaton Lean System... 40
4.4 PMC2 and Lean Production ... 41
5. Analyse customer demand... 42
5.1 Introduction ... 42
5.2 Flow production and Sequence Based Clustering... 42
5.2.1 Introduction ... 42
5.2.2 Sequence based clustering... 42
5.2.3 Input Data ... 44
5.2.4 Change of input data ... 44
5.2.5 Input Parameters Sequence Based Clustering ... 44
5.2.6 Classification and cleanup of families ... 48
5.2.7 Undefined families ... 49
5.2.8 Product Families and Product Flows... 50
5.2.9 Alternative Product Flows... 52
5.4 Conclusion... 57
6. Concept Layout ... 59
6.1 Introduction ... 59
6.2 Link between theory and practice ... 60
6.3 Concept... 61
7. Layout... 63
7.1 Introduction ... 63
7.2 Different layout alternatives... 63
7.3 Choosing the best alternative ... 68
7.4 Final layout... 72
7.5 Alternative ideal layout without prerequisites... 75
8. Planning and control... 76
8.1 Introduction ... 76
8.2 Changes in control of PMC2... 77
9. Performance ... 78
9.1 Introduction ... 78
9.2 Quantification of Performance Indicators ... 78
9.3 Performance of old layout ... 80
9.3.1 Transparency ... 80
9.3.2 Transport time ... 81
9.4 Performance of new layout ... 83
9.4.1 Transparency ... 83 9.4.2 Transport time ... 84 9.5 Improvement ... 85 10. Implementation... 86 11. Conclusion / Advise ... 88 12. Further Research ... 89 Appendix ... 90
Appendix 1: Example of a from to matrix per family... 90
Appendix 2 Articles per Product Family... 91
1. Introduction
1.1 Introduction
This chapter is an introduction to Eaton Holec Hengelo and helps to gain a better understanding of this research. This chapter introduces the company, the different departments and at the end the specific department, PMC2, where this research is conducted. The objective of this research was to improve the performance of PMC2 by redesigning the layout of PMC2, a department which produces parts which are used in the assembly process to form an end product.
1.2 Eaton
Eaton Corporation is a diversified industrial manufacturer with sales of $13.0 billion per year. Eaton is a global leader in electrical systems and components for power quality, distribution and control; hydraulics components, systems and services for industrial and mobile equipment; hydraulics, fuel and pneumatic systems for commercial and military aircraft; intelligent truck drivetrain systems for safety and fuel economy and automotive engine air management systems, powertrain solutions and specialty controls for performance, fuel economy and safety. Eaton has 79,000 employees and sells products to customers in more than 150 countries. Eaton's businesses comprise five distinct segments: Automotive, Aerospace, Electrical, Hydraulics and Truck (Website Eaton).
1.3 Eaton Electric
1.4 Eaton Holec Hengelo
1.4.1 Introduction
The Holec brand, under the legal entity name of Eaton Electric B.V. is part of Eaton Corporation, a global industrial manufacturer with a wide product range. Already for a century Eaton Electric B.V. develops, produces and sells products for switching, distributing and protecting electrical energy on low and medium voltage level. Under the brand name Holec, Eaton Electric B.V. is a partner for utilities, electrical contractors and light and heavy industry.
Fig. 1 Energy Distribution Network
1.4.2 Departments and activities
Eaton Holec Hengelo consists of different departments which serve different activities. In basis it consists of assembly departments and production departments who supply the assembly departments. The two assembly departments can be classified in two main departments:
Parts needed by these assemply department are bought from external suppliers or supplied by the inhouse suppliers/producers. The production departments can be divided in two departments, these are:
• EEGS, Eaton electric general supply • Cast Resin
This research was conducted at a department of Eaton electric general supply therefore the next paragraph will discuss EEGS.
1.5 EEGS
1.5.1 Introduction
Eaton Electrical General Supply (EEGS) produces and delivers products to product lines such as medium voltage systems (MVS) and low voltage systems (LVS). The Vision of EEGS is:
“to be the fastest and most reliable supplier of parts for Eaton Holec”
EEGS has 4 product lines:
• PMC*-1 Sheet metal
• PMC*-2 Turning and milling • PMC*-3 Copper bar
• PMC*-4 Punching
* PMC = Product/Market combination
Fig. 2 Turning Machine at PMC2
1.6 PMC2 and PMC4
1.6.1 Introduction
This paragraph gives a brief introduction to the activities performed at PMC2 and PMC4. With outsourcing of almost every activity of PMC4, left over activities of this department will be combined with PMC2. From now on PMC2 and PMC4 will be combined to PMC2 and further called in this thesis as PMC2. As mentioned above together with PMC1 and PMC3, PMC2 delivers products to the assembly departments of Eaton Holec Hengelo. There are also products that have to change between the PMC’s to gain all activities for completion of the product.
1.6.2 Activities
PMC2 is responsible for the following activities:
• Turning • Milling • Drilling • Tapping • Degreasing • Drum grinding • Soldering
Fig. 3 Picture of part of PMC2
With these activities PMC2 produces different products, some products require different activities and some require just one of these activities. Products produced by PMC2 can be classified in four groups (Kauw & Loon, 2008):
• Round
• “Hoofdstroomgeleiders”, this is a product family with dedicated machines • Round with ancillary operations
1.6.3 Machines
PMC2 uses different machines to perform the activities presented above, combined with three departments namely: 1) Degreasing department, 2) Drum grinding department and 3) Soldering department. Machines used by PMC2 are:
Task: Machine: Number: Task: Machine: Number:
6401 CAZANEUVE 1 6442 SAWING EISELE 5
6402 LC 10 1 6443 SAWING ALTEND 8 6403 LEADWELL 1 6451 BOREN 4 6404 TT 1500 SY 1 2 6471 VEENEX 9 6407 TT 1500 SY 2 2 6502 DECKEL 100 3 6408 LC 20 1 6525 MX 50 3 6409 TNM 42 6 6552 TAPPEN 4 6410 PUMA 240 2 6807 PONSTAPSTR. 6411 TT 1800 SY 1 2 6840 SOLD.VLAM 11 6421 HURON 7 6841 SOLD.MACH. 11 6426 DECKEL 50 3 6890 DEGREASING 12
6441 SAWING KASTO 5 6892 GRINDING 13
Table 1 Overview of Machines at PMC2
1.6.4 External Relations
Fig. 4 Relations of PMC2
1.7 Structure
presented and chapter 10 presents an implementation plan for the redesign. This report ends with a conclusion and possibilities for further research. These will be presented in chapter 11 and 12. At the end the reader can find the appendix and references belonging to the report.
2. Research Design
2.1 Introduction to Research Problem
Operations Management is a field that studies how organizations produce goods and services, in other words operations management is the organization of all activities to transform inputs to outputs. More concrete, operations management is about the tasks, issues and decisions that have to be made during the process of transformation from inputs to outputs (Slack et, 1998). Heizer and Render (2004) define operations management as; “the set of activities that create value in the form of goods and services by transforming inputs into outputs”. Both Authors acknowledge the transforming of inputs to outputs and the use of activities needed for this transformation. Difference is in the fact that Heizer en Render implement the value creation concept. The concept of value creation for the customer is very important, this is also stressed by the lean philosophy. The basis of lean production is removing waste, in other words removing all activities and actions which do not create value for the customer (Raukema, 2006. Nicholas, 1998). This sounds very obvious but in practice we’ll see a lot of waste creation in organizations. For instance transportation of goods, a subject bringing us nearer to the subject of this research. This research is about the optimalization of the layout and planning & control of PMC2. These two concepts: 1) layout and 2) planning & control are important concepts that belong to operations management.
An important factor in the ELS system, also confirmed by the ELS/Opex manager, Tom Vleerbos, and the manager of PMC2, Han Busschers, is to create flow production. To create flow production it’s important that product families are identified and machines responsible for these product families are placed near each other.
These three developments, 1) Outsourcing of PMC4, 2) Need for space by other departments and 3) Score on ELS system, supplemented with other natural changes over the years in customer demand have lead to a process at PMC2 which is not optimal anymore and transparency and manageability is lost because of all these changes. These factors explain the need for a redesign of the production processes of PMC2 and to develop a layout from lean perspective by integrating flow production.
2.2 Scope of Research
As mentioned above this study is done in the field of operations management and studies two concepts that are part of operations management namely layout and planning & control. This study is about a redesign of those two concepts for the department PMC2 of EEGS. The objective was to optimise this department with use of lean production principles in line with the “Eaton Lean System”. The main focus is on the layout of PMC2 but from literature it is clear that there is a strong relation between the layout and planning & control and especially between layout and control (Slack, 2001). Therefore the implications for planning & control will also become part of this research.
2.3 Prerequisites
analysis. These two factors including the costs of relocating these machines leads to the preference to keep the same location for these machines.
2.4 Research problem
2.4.1 Research Question
From above it is clear that the layout of PMC2 isn’t optimal anymore and redesign is needed. The objective of this research is to come up with a new layout design for PMC2 including changes in planning & control. During this redesign lean principles will be used, this results in the following research question:
How can the layout and planning & control of PMC2 be redesigned to optimise the performance of PMC2 and which lean principles can be used in this design?
In paragraph 2.5.3 there will be given an operationalization of the concepts and terms used in the research question above, to make clear what is and what is not integrated in this research and to clarify the use of these terms for this research.
2.4.2 Research Objective
Just answering a research question isn’t useful, a research question needs a research objective to further structure the research and to complete the research problem (de Leeuw, 2003). The objective of this research is to:
• Optimise the transparency and manageability • Lowering throughput time.
• Higher delivery reliability
2.5 Conceptual Model
2.5.1 Introduction
This paragraph discusses the conceptual model which serves as a foundation for this research. A conceptual model is a subjective personalized view on the research subject and is used to indicate what is included and excluded in the system and in this way setting the boundaries of this research (Bokhorst & Slomp, 2006). It also identifies the concepts which are important to solve the research question, in other words it identifies the elements or aspects of importance. At last a conceptual model also gives a good quick view on the conducted research and may help as a tool to explain the research to other people. Paragraph 2.5.2 explains the conceptual model and paragraph 2.5.3 gives an operationalization of the concepts used in the conceptual model.
2.5.2 Conceptual Model
Two major concepts of this research are the “layout type” and “planning & control”, as mentioned in paragraph 2.1 these are general concepts of operations management and are important concepts in the transformation process from input to output (Slack, 1998). For illustration purpose the general model of operations management is shown below.
In this model Slack (1998) refers with design to the design of the product and the design of the production layout. In this research only the design of the production layout will be taken into account. This leaves us with the first two concepts for the conceptual model, namely 1) layout type and 2) planning & control. These two concepts will influence each other, changes in the layout may cause changes in planning and control and vice versa. The design of the product is out of scope of this research but the products to produce and the volume and variety of these products will definitely influence the design of the layout (Nicholas, 1998. Slack, 1998). For this reason a third concept will be introduced in the conceptual model, namely 3) customer demand. This concept will influence the design and also influences planning and control. In paragraph 2.4.3 the objective of this research was set, it’s important to measure if the objectives are met and therefore a fourth concept will be integrated in the conceptual model, namely 4) performance. The performance will strongly relate to the choices made in the layout design and planning and control. Therefore the performance can be seen as a product of these two concepts. With integrating the concept performance in later chapters of this research the old layout can be compared to the new layout and also layout alternatives can be compared with each other in quantitive manner. At last a fifth concept will be introduced in the conceptual model, this is the concept 5) lean production. As illustrated in paragraph 2.4 part of the research objective is to integrate lean production in the redesign. Lean production techniques and philosophy will influence choices that are made for the layout and planning & control (Raukema, 2006. Nicholas and Soni, 2006). Below in figure 7 the conceptual model is shown and in the next paragraph an operationalization will be given for the different concepts.
2.5.3 Operationalisation of Conceptual model
By operationalisation of the different concepts the scope of this research will be further specified. It is important for the researcher but also for the reader to understand the meaning of the concepts because different interpretations can destroy a research (Cooper and Schindler, 2006). Below the five concepts identified in the previous paragraph will be further specified.
Customer Demand:
This concept refers to the variety and volume demanded by the customer but is also referring to less concrete customer demands like: quick delivery of high quality products.
Layout Type:
For layout type the definition of Slack (2004) will be used, this definition is as follows:
“The layout of an operation or process means how it’s transforming resources are positioned relative to each other and how it’s various tasks are allocated to these transforming resources. Together these two decisions will dictate the pattern of flow for transformed resources as they
progress through the operation or process”.
In this research this definition will be broaden by implementing the transport paths and the location of stocks between the different machines. In summary with layout type the positioning of 1) machines and processes 2) transport paths and 3) in between stocks are meant.
Planning & Control:
Performance:
The operationalization of performance in this research is strongly related to the research objective discussed in paragraph 2.4.3. And is supplemented with the basic performance indicators used to measure a production facility. Basic performance objectives to measure a layout design are: 1) Quality, 2) Speed, 3) Dependability, 4) Flexibility and 5) Cost. Two of the objectives defined in paragraph 2.4.3 match with these performance objectives, namely lowering throughput time (Speed) and higher delivery reliability (dependability). This leaves us with the following performance objectives used in this research:
• Optimise the transparency and manageability • Lowering throughput time.
• Higher delivery reliability • Flexibility
• Cost • Quality
From lean perspective not all performance objectives have the same weight and or not even important for measuring the performance of the layout. All performance indicators presented above will be taken into account but from lean perspective it is likely that throughput time and transparency are more important than cost. The classification of these performance indicators will be done from the perspective of the seven wastes of lean production and performance indicators more influencing the seven wastes will become more important in the redesign process. This will be broadly discussed in paragraph 7.3 within multi criteria decision making.
Lean Production Techniques/Philosophy:
techniques from lean production may be used during this research if these contribute to achieve the objectives of this research.
2.6 Methodology
2.6.1 Methodology
The basis methodology of this research is, 1) Diagnosis, 2) Design and 3) Change from “de Leeuw” (2003). In the first part diagnosis the production characteristics and customer demand will be discussed. The second part, Design will combine the outcomes of analysis, prerequisites and theory to form a concept layout and this will end up in a detailed design namely the layout. After design implementation will occur which is part of the methodological part change. This part, change is not subject of this research although this research will end with an implementation plan which can be seen as a part of change. The next paragraph will discuss a more detailed researched process.
2.6.2 Detailed Research Process
Fig. 8 Detailed Research Process
2.7 Sub Questions
2.7.1 Introduction
To answer the main research question of this research, sub questions are needed to study the different concepts which underlie the main research question. Sub question 1 examines customer demand and the relation with the concepts layout type and planning & control. Sub question 2 examines the layout concept which is a product of analysis of PMC2, theory about lean production and the outcomes of sub question 1 about customer demand. Sub question 3 transforms the outcomes of sub question 2 to a more concrete layout and sub question 4 examines the effects on planning & control resulting from a change in layout. At last sub question 5 and 6 discuss the change in performance resulting from the new layout and how the new layout should be implemented, the change part.
2.7.2 Sub Question 1 Analyse PMC2 / PMC4
The first sub question tries to explain the customer demand of PMC2 regarding the layout. As discussed in paragraph 2.5 customer demand affects the layout and planning and control. Sub question 1 will be as follow:
How does customer demand of PMC2 looks like and what implications have this customer demand on the layout and planning and control?
To answer this question we need a further operationalization of customer demand. For this research it refers to the variety and volume demanded by the customer but is also referring to less concrete customer demands like: quick delivery of high quality products. The objective of this paper was to create a design with as much as possible flow in production. Which is an important objective of the production manager because he wants to higher transparency and manageability of PMC2. Integrating flow production to higher transparency and manageability is also confirmed by lean production (Aukema, 2003. Nicholas and Soni, 2006). To integrate flow production it’s important to define product families which make use of the same machines/activities. Sub question 1 will be discussed in chapter 5.
2.7.3 Sub Question 2 Layout Concept
PMC2. Following Slack (2004) the layout procedure consists of three decisions to be made, these decisions are: 1) decision of process type, 2) decision of basic layout type and 3) decisions about the detailed design of the layout, figure 9 below illustrates this layout decision process.
Fig. 9 Layout Decision Process (Slack, 1998)
Sub question two of this research deals with the second decision but is wider used in this research then defined by Slack (2004). Below sub question 2 is shown and will be discussed in chapter 6.
2.7.4 Sub Question 3 Layout
Sub question 3 deals with the third decision of the layout decision process namely, the detailed design of the layout. This section will deal with the concrete allocation of machines, transport paths and between stocks. In other words this section will deal with the concrete completion of the more abstract layout concept. This results in the following research question which will be discussed in chapter 7:
How to locate the machines, transport paths and between stocks in the layout concept?
2.7.5 Sub Question 4 Planning & Control
Changing the layout could have implications for planning & control of PMC2, as described in paragraph 2.5. Therefore it’s important to give insight in (possible) changes that may emerge from the design. Also redesigning planning & control can be seen as an opportunity to reach the objectives of this research. The strong relation between layout and planning & control supplemented with possible redesign of planning & control imply the need to integrate this as a major concept in this research. This results in the following research question which will be discussed in chapter 8:
Is it necessary to redesign planning & control to cope with the new layout and what are redesign opportunities to higher the performance of PMC2?
2.7.6 Sub Question 5 Performance
It’s important that the new layout and layout alternatives can be examined across each other and in contrast to the old layout. Especially for decision making it is useful to measure the improvements of the new layout as much as possible in quantitive terms. Also for gaining budget to actually implement this layout redesign management wants to now the performance improvement through this design. This results in the following sub question which will be discussed in chapter 9:
2.7.7 Sub Question 6 Implementation
The logistics manager, Han Busschers, wants to implement the redesign in three fases namely, short term, middle long term and long term. This is because some proposed changes to PMC2 can be immediately implemented but other changes need budgets which need to be proposed and are more for the middle long and long term. Therefore there is a need for an implementation plan which results in the following research question which will be discussed in chapter 10:
3. Production at PMC2
3.1 Products, Volume and Variety at PMC2
The volume-variety characteristics are an important factor in the design of a layout, this becomes clear when we take a look at Slack (2004) his layout decision framework. This framework describes the layout process as a 3 stage (decision) process. Stage one deals with the decision about process type, which is strongly related to volume-variety (Heizer and Render, 2004. Slack, 1998). Stage two deals with the decision about the basic layout type and stage three deals with the detailed design layout. The choice of process type has also influence on the choice of the basic layout type and the basic layout type at his turn influences the detailed design of the layout, which is illustrated above in figure 9. Slack (1998) defines eight possible process types: 1) Project Process, 2) Jobbing Process, 3) Batch Process, 4) Mass Process, 5) Continues Process, 6) Professional Services, 7) Service Shops and 8) Mass services. The relationship between the process types and basic layout types is illustrated below in figure 10.
Fig. 10 Relationship between process types and basic layout types (Slack, 1998)
variety otherwise it will result in a poor strategy with both high fixed and variable costs, which is illustrated below in figure 11.
Fig. 11 Volume and variety must effect selected process (Heizer & Reinder, 2004)
Fig. 12 Ways of doing work by quantity of output and size of process (Nicholas, 1998)
It is clear that volume and variety affect the type of process that has to be choosen and therefore we take a look at the volume and variety of PMC2. Between September 2007 and September 2008 PMC processed 8898 orders divided over 1744 different articles. This means that in average every order will be 5 times ordered a year. The total amount of operations/activities performed at PMC2 are; 18778 operations. This means an average of 2,1 activities per order. The total amount of products produced are 4.388.827 pieces, this means an average of 493 (4.388.827 / 8898) pieces per order and an average of 2516 pieces per article. There can be concluded that PMC2 deals with a high variety and low volume which implies a process strategy related to Batch Processes or Jobbing Processes.
3.2 Classification of Production
This paragraph deals with decision two, the choice of basic layout type, in other words the classification of production at PMC2. There are four Basic Layout types namely:
• Fixed Position Layout
• Functional Layout, formerly named as process layout * • Cell layout
* Confusingly, functional layout is also referred to as process layout but this term is being superseded.
The arrangement of activities to transform the input to the output can be classified in four basic layout types. The choice for this basic layout type is related to the strategic performance objectives and to the process type, which is explained above. But a process type doesn’t necessary imply the need for one right basic layout type. We start with a short explanation of the different basic layout types and this paragraph will end with a classification of PMC2.
Fixed Position Layout
In this layout form the transformed resources do not move between the transformation processes (stay in a stationary position) but the processes move along the product that must be processed. The reason for this is for instance that the transformed resources are too large to be moved (Slack, 2004. Nicholas, 1998).
Functional layout
In a functional layout similar activities are located together and products flow through the different activities according to their routing sequence. The flow pattern resulting from this type of layout could become very complex. There is much stop-and-go work and material movement over long distances and functional layouts require much attention for tracking of jobs (Slack, 2004. Nicholas, 1998).
Cell Layout
In a cell layout all transforming activities are located in one cell to meet part or complete processing needs of a product. A cell layout can exist of different cells and a product will move between these cells. The big different with the functional layout is that some activities are grouped together in one cell which will create more order in the production process and will lower the complexity of the flows through the factory (Slack, 2004).
Product Layout
Classification of production at PMC2
PMC2 itself is part of a Cell layout, together with PMC1 and PMC3 they form the Cell layout of EEGS. The cell itself can be rearranged in his own basic layout type, for instance a product or functional layout. The objective of this research is to redesign the layout in such a way that more flow will be created to make the production process of PMC2 more feasible and manageable and more consistent with the lean production philosophy of flow production. Therefore the current functional layout will be redesigned to a more product layout where all necessary operations for transforming the input to a output will be arranged in a sequence, in other words in a line (Nicholas, 1998). This can be done by grouping all different articles into product families which require the same or almost the same routing (arrangement of transforming processes). By categorizing the different articles in product families the variety will be lowered and volume will become higher. This will be further examined and explained in chapter five. The new layout will have a design based on the functional and the product layout.
3.3 Important outcomes of workshops
1) Workshop, 26-09-2008, Introduction of Research:
The intention of this workshop was to introduce myself and the research plans to the project team. This was done by introducing the objectives, presenting the gained knowledge about PMC2, presentation of conceptual model, introducing the research problem and discussing the planning. An important outcome of this workshop was that there’s no budget for new machines.
2) Workshop, 17-10-2008, Second Workshop with project team:
Important outcomes of this workshop were that I should implement my final layout outcomes in an Autocad file. An other outcome was that we should create space in the new layout for a supermarket. We also agreed on the fact that we should create a central place for supply and delivery in the new layout. Communication and interchangeability between operators must be easy.
3) Workshop, 23-10-2008, Introduction to and discussion with operators:
During this workshop I introduced myself officially to the operators of PMC2 followed by a discussion about the layout of PMC2. Most important outcome was that the operators like to be integrated in this research project and that they were all especially concerned about the placing of their “own” machines. This resulted in me walking daily around PMC2, having conversations and discussions with the operators to gain legitimacy for this research. There was also discussion about outsourcing of PMC4 and it’s made clear to the operators that almost all machines of PMC4 will be outsourced during the end of 2008 and beginning of 2009.
4) Workshop, 17-11-2008, Discussion and introduction of layout concept:
5) Workshop, 27-11-2008, Discussion about supply/delivery and supermarket:
We all agreed on placing the supply and delivery at the left in the middle of PMC2 and situating the supermarket at the right because of future plans of situating an assembly department right to PMC2. LC10 and LC20 will be replaced by a Doosan and therefore should be placed near the other CNC turning machinery. We all agreed on the fact that degreasing is very important in the production process of PMC2 but also the prerequisite is made to keep degreasing at the same place and degreasing shouldn’t be decentralized.
6) Workshop, 02-12-2008, Discussion about the ELS system with Tom Vleerbos:
During this workshop Tom Vleerbos introduced me to the ELS system and we discussed possibilities of integrating ELS in the new layout of PMC2. We both agreed on the fact that identifying product families and placing machines according to this product families would enlarge the possibilities for flow production and thus helps to gain a good score on the ELS system.
7) Workshop, 08-12-2008, General workshop:
There was again a discussion about degreasing and grinding and decided is that they should remain at the same place. There’s also decided that it’s no problem if new foundation is needed. There was also discussion about placing of the CNC milling machines, on top, beside or under the paternoster. I should come up with different alternatives during the next workshop. Also placing of the TNM42 was discussed again, decided was to remain the same place for the TNM42.
8) Workshop, 11-12-2008, Introduction of first layout alternatives:
During this workshop different layout alternatives are discussed and decided is to come up with new layout alternatives during the next workshop including the outcomes of this discussion. Also “bankwerken” should be situated central in the new layout.
9) Workshop, 13-01-2008, General workshop:
10) Workshop, 29-01-2009, General workshop:
During this workshop we had discussion about the quantification of the performance indicators and the relative importance of these performance indicators for Eaton Holec. The outcomes of this discussion have resulted in the quantification of performance indicators used in this research. We also agreed on the final layout alternatives, the ones presented in this thesis, which were input for multi criteria decision making.
11) Workshop, 03-02-2009 Presentation of Layout to the operators:
During this workshop the layout is presented to the operators which was followed by a discussion about the layout. In general the operators agreed on the new layout plans, the only discussion point was the placing of the control place of the CNC turning machinery. The decision was made to place the controls of the machines as much as possible near each other for better operator interchangeability.
12) Workshop, 10-02-2009, Last discussion about layout alternatives:
In this workshop we choose alternative 3 as the final layout. Most discussion was about the placing of sawing and supply/delivery across each other. Decided is to situate sawing as close as possible to the storage department because sawing will mostly be delivered with 4 meter lengths of material.
13) Workshop, 16-02-2009, Presentation of layout to Operations of Eaton:
4. Lean Production
4.1 Introduction
This chapter shortly describes lean production and especially flow production which we try to accomplish with this research. Lean production is a philosophy or combination of methods and concepts with one important objective namely, only perform these activities which add value for the customer. In other words lean is a way of thinking which looks at the value chain of an organisation and thinks about how activities can be structured so that the organisation does nothing else than adding value (Poppendieck, 2002). But how can an organisation gain this objective, only perform activities that add value to the customer? More concrete lean production is about removing waste, when waste is removed only the value adding activities will remain. This becomes clear by the definition of waste which is; all activities which do not add value for the customer are waste (Hines & Rich, 1997). There are seven commonly accepted wastes classified in lean production, these are:
• Overproduction • Waiting • Transport • Inappropriate processing • Unnecessary inventory • Unnecessary motion • defects
and will lower transparency in the production department and therefore is a serious form of waste. Unnecessary motion is instead of the waste transport related to the individual working place and involve the ergonomics of the operators working place. A good ergonomic working place will improve employee satisfaction and will lower throughput times and higher the efficiency. And last, defects are a serious waste and result in direct cost, doing things right the first time is important. Wastes can occur and from lean perspective defects should be seen as a trigger for improvement programs (Aukema, 2006. Poppendieck, 2002. Hines & Rich, 1997). Now we have discussed the origins and thinking of lean and classified the seven forms of waste but lean also consists of a wide variation of methods and principles to gain the objective of removing waste and only perform these activities that add value for the customer, some of these methods and principles are:
• Flow production • Standardisation
• Pull instead of Push, Kanban • 5S
• Visual Management • Etc.
All these methods/principles have in common the objective to reduce waste. Methods and principles used during this research are visual management, flow production and 5S. Visual management and 5S will be discussed during this research and the next paragraph will discuss flow production.
4.2 Flow Production
back to a smaller amount of families and these families can all be seen as different flow lines with the same routing for products in one family.
4.3 Eaton Lean System
Like a lot other companies, for instance Porsche, Aldel and Nefit, who implemented lean production, Eaton also created their own lean system. This lean system is a personalized view/form on lean production. This personalized view includes the methods and tools which the company uses to integrate lean production into their organisational processes. The Eaton Lean System consists of eight tools namely:
• Value Stream Mapping • 5S
• Standardized Work
• Total Productive Maintenance • Error Proofing
• Setup Reduction • Flow Production • Pull System (Kanban) • Takt
4.4 PMC2 and Lean Production
5. Analyse customer demand
5.1 Introduction
This chapter discusses the concept customer demand which can be seen as an input for all further decisions made in the concept layout and planning & control. As mentioned in earlier chapters it’s important for an organization to create value for customers. The importance of the customer and customer demand for layout design is also reflected in the following quote of slack (2004):
“At the most strategic level, process design means designing the supply network of operations that deliver products and services to customers”
This chapter discusses the customer demand of PMC2, the objective is to develop a layout based on the lean principles of flow production and therefore it’s important to classify the customer demand in different product families.
5.2 Flow production and Sequence Based Clustering
5.2.1 Introduction
To realize flow production it’s important to identify product families, these use a common set of machines in a common routing (Raukema, 2006. Nicholas and Soni, 2006). In general the first step in identifying product families are the technological steps used by a product and to identify these product families sequence based clustering is used. This paragraph discusses sequence based clustering, the input data, the choices made during sequence based clustering and how the product families are identified. This paragraph will end with a summary of the defined product families and product flows.
5.2.2 Sequence based clustering
“Rijks Universiteit Groningen”, called “Factory+Layout”. The output of this software was a textfile with all defined product families and their from to matrices. Below is an illustration of the sequence based clustering algorithm developed by Park and Suresh (2003). The algorithm can be seen as a loop which continuously analyzes the input data, examines this data against the 5 input parameters and looks for similarities in sequence and use of machines between these articles and so product families are identified.
5.2.3 Input Data
The input data is gathered from the “Baan” system of Eaton. This system records all production orders and their parameters like setup time, production time, date etc. I used a data set from September 2007 till September 2008 because this research started in September 2008 and I wanted a complete production year for analysis because most articles are only ordered a few times a year.
5.2.4 Change of input data
Production data of PMC2 from sept 2007 till sept 2008 is used to identify the product families but this data wasn’t in the right form to directly perform the analysis. “Baan” stores more information then required by the software, these information is deleted and the data is relocated in the right order. There were also incomplete records which had to be removed otherwise the factory+layout program will not complete the analysis. In conclusion the data must be transformed in the right form. The right form for the factory+layout program is:
Fig. 14 Right form and example of production data for the Factory+Layout program
To transform the Baan data into the right form, Microsoft Access and Excel are used and columns were given the right names and empty fields were deleted.
5.2.5 Input Parameters Sequence Based Clustering
made. Starting point for the analysis are the default parameters of the factory layout program, these are: • Choice Parameter: 0,1 • Learning Factor: 0,2 • Vigilance Parameter: 0,7 • Merge Parameter: 0,7 • Level of Similarity: 99 % Choice Parameter:
The choice parameter seems to have no affect in our case on the number of families created. Therefore we should leave the choice parameter at his default value of 0,1
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 Fa m ili e s Choice
Fig. 15 Effect of choice parameter
Learning Factor:
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1 Fa m ili e s Learning Factor
Fig. 16 Effect of learning factor
Vigilance Parameter:
With a higher value for the vigilance parameter the amount of families also increases. This can be explained by figure 13. Here can be seen that the degree of similarity is verified with the vigilance parameter. Chosen is to set the vigilance parameter at 0,6 to gain a workable amount of product families and enough consistency inside the product family.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 Fa m ili e s Vigilance Factor
Merge Parameter:
The merge parameter influences most strongly the number of groups identified by the factory and layout program. The merge parameter combines families according to the parameter entered. With merge parameter 0,0 only one family is created with all articles in the same family. When the merge parameter is set at 1 there is no combining between product families. It’s important to have a workable amount of families and at the other hand you want clear product families. The decision is made to set the merge parameter at 0,7 which delivers an amount of 57 Families. This decision is based on figure 18 where you can see that the amount of families is normally increasing but at the end increasing very fast which is not workable.
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1 Fa m ili e s Merge Parameter
Fig. 18 Effect of merge parameter
Summary:
After the above analysis the following parameters are choosen: • Choice Parameter: 0,1
• Learning Factor: 0,2 • Vigilance Parameter: 0,5 • Merge Parameter: 0,7 • Level of Similarity: 99 %
5.2.6 Classification and cleanup of families
The information presented by the program isn’t directly usable for creating the layout. Some choices and further research is needed to make the information presented by the program usable. Also the families are sorted at production size. This paragraph discusses this subject.
Some families have too much difference in one family, so you can’t really speak of a family or a family is very small, for instance they appear only three times a year. These families will be deleted from the gathered 51 families. These deleted families are: 9, 11, 22, 25, 29, 30, 31 35, 36, 38, 39, 41 t/m 46, 49, 50 and 51. There are also families which represent a location change, this means a change between location 6, location 7 and Galvano. These location changes don’t influence the layout of PMC2, for this reason these families are also deleted. These deleted families are: 7, 15, 16 and 37. Finally there are some families which represent a relation between soldering, degreasing and grinding. Because the placing of these 3 activities to each other will not change based on the prerequisites of this research , these families can also be deleted because they don’t provide information. These families are: 3, 5, 27, 28, 40 and 48. This leaves us with the following 21 families, sorted and illustrated with their share in total amount of relations (movements):
• Family 1, (7%): Turning (2) -> Degreasing (12) • Family 23, (1%): Turning (2) -> Conv. Milling (7) • Family 18, (1%): Turning (2) -> CNC Milling (3) • Family 12, (1%): Turning (2) -> Grinding (13)
• Family 2, (9%): Turning (6) -> Degreasing (12) -> Punching (10) -> Grinding (13) • Family 19, (3%): Sawing (5) -> Turning (2)
• Family 47, (1%): Sawing (5) -> Turning (2) -> Conv. Milling (7) • Family 24, (1%): Sawing (5) -> Turning (2) -> Degreasing (12)
• Family 26 (4%): Sawing (5) -> Conv. Milling (7) -> Tapping/Drilling (4) • Family 20 (3%): Sawing (5) -> Conv. Milling (7)
• Family 6 (9%): Sawing (5) -> Turning (1) -> Degreasing (12) • Family 13 (4%): Sawing (5) -> Turning (1) -> CNC Milling (3)
• Family 14 (9%): Sawing (5) -> Turning (1) -> Conv. Milling (7)
• Family 34 (4%): Sawing (5) -> Turning (1) -> Galvano (16)
• Family 4 (14%): Sawing (5) -> CNC Milling (3) -> Degreasing (12) • Family 17 (10%): Sawing (5) -> CNC Milling (3) -> Galvano (16)
• Family 32 (2%): Sawing (5) -> CNC Milling (3) -> Tapping/Drilling (4) -> Degreasing (12)
• Family 10 (3%): Sawing (5) -> Bending (9) -> CNC Milling (3) -> Galvano (16) • Family 21 (2%): Sawing (8) -> Conv. Milling (7)
Degreasing and grinding are activities which can be added to all family’s presented above, also a prerequisite is that degreasing and grinding remain to their current position. Therefore it’s better to gain a better understanding of different families without introducing unnecessary complexities to implement degreasing and grinding as an optional activity for all families. An exception is family 2, “hoofdstroomgeleiders”, which is a dedicated family which always makes use of degreasing and grinding and in this family the flow direction is clear. There can also be a lesson learned from this decision, classifying degreasing and grinding as an optional activity. With the prerequisite to remain these departments to their current position transport to and from degreasing and grinding isn’t that ideal as possible. Therefore my advise is to do future research for repositioning possibilities and maybe decentralization of degreasing and grinding. But what are the consequences of this decision, making grinding and degreasing an optional activity instead including this activity in product families? Family 1 and family 12 can be combined and will be further named as; Family 1. Also family 19 and family 24 can be combined to one family, further named as family 19.
5.2.7 Undefined families
5.2.8 Product Families and Product Flows
This paragraph discussesthe 19 identified product families and the classification of these product families in four major product flows. PMC2 consists of only 20 machines and each product family uses between 2 and 4 machines to complete a product, also different product families use the same machines. From this perspective it was clear that not each product family can use dedicated machines for that family to complete the whole product, with one exception namely product family 2. Therefore, chosen is to cluster different product families in a smaller amount of product flows with dedicated machines for each product flow. In this way clear flows will appear in PMC2 which was one of the most important objectives of this paper.
The first step in clustering product families in product flows is done by clustering to the same use of manufacturing techniques. This can be seen in figure 19 where different machines/activities are clustered as much as possible near each other. This is also consistent with the flow production philosophy of the Eaton Lean System, defining product flows by same use of technique (ELS Documentation). From the figure above it is clear that product family 1, 23, 18, 19 and 47 are strongly related to the CNC turning machines (2) and these families are the only families using the CNC turning machinery. Product family 21 is the only product family using the sawing (8) machine in combination with conventional milling (7). Families 20, 26, 33, 6, 34, 14, 8, 13, 17, 4, 32 and 10 use a combination of sawing (5), conventional turning (1), conventional milling (7), CNC milling (3), bending (9) and drilling and tapping (4). An other product flow which can be identified is the soldering process. Soldering was seen as a successive activity in the production process of an article but this research will treat soldering as a separated product flow. This is because soldering (11) is a decoupled process which receives his articles from storage department 69A and for this reason disrupts the flow. From the analysis above we classified 5 product flows with dedicated machines. The only machines which are not dedicated are the CNC milling (3) and conventional milling (7) machines, these machines are used by different product flows. The 5 product flows consist of the following product families:
Flow 1: Flow 2: Flow 3: Flow 4: Flow 5:
Family 1 Family 2 Family 21 Family 4 Soldering
Family 18 Family 6 Family 19 Family 8 Family 23 Family 10 Family 47 Family 13 Family 14 Family 17 Family 20 Family 26 Family 32 Family 33 Family 34
Except clustering the machines, figure 19 also clarifies the sequence of the product flow which is used in the layout for placing the machines in the right order in the design. This is less important for product flow 1, 2, 3 and 5 but even more important for product flow 4. Product flow 4 consists of a lot of different families which all use the same set of machines but not always use all machines from this set of machines to finish the article. For this group placing the machines in the right order is important to still create a flow although not all product families use the same and same amount of machines.
5.2.9 Alternative Product Flows
5.2.10 Description of product flows
Flow 1:
Flow 1 consists of product families 1, 25, 18, 19 and 47 and is dedicated to the CNC turning machines (2). Mostly these machines are supplied with round core of 4 meter length but in some cases (family 19 and 47) will be supplied from sawing (5). Flow 1 has some possible extra activities namely, 1) conventional milling and 2) CNC milling. The maximum number of activities in this flow is 3 but most products will follow the route directly from CNC turning to the degreasing department.
Flow 2 and 3:
These are more dedicated flows, especially in contrast to flow 4. Flow 2 is a dedicated product family with dedicated machines, namely the TNM42, CNC turning machine (6) and the punching machine (10). Round core material is supplied to the TNM42, after turning the product needs degreasing and after degreasing the product will be operated at the punching machine. At last the product will be brought back to the degreasing and grinding department for grinding. Flow 2 only involves two steps, namely sawing (8) and conventional milling (7) and is devoted to product family 21.
Flow 4:
Fig. 22 Product flow 4
5.3 From to Matrix
With the same data as used with sequence based clustering a from to matrix is created which gives more insight in the number of relations between machines. The from to matrix is also needed to perform a performance analysis which will be discussed in chapter 9. This paragraph discusses the from to matrix. All amount of relations below 20 are deleted and all amount of relations above 100 are highlighted. The numbers above and at the left correspondent with the 16 activities/machines.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 1 66 38 210 116 94 229 2 31 24 48 218 46 294 3 39 135 205 4 69 90 5 607 128 353 260 128 42 95 128 6 116 7 31 115 63 40 104 8 54 9 52 35 82 86 10 78 11 455 12 26 22 78 1278 219 122 13 86 36 164 40 14 15 26 16 1791 698
Table 3 From to Matrix
Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 20-50 movements 50-150 movements 150-300 movements 300-2000 Movements
From To From To From To From To
1 4 1 3 1 7 5 1 2 3 1 9 1 16 5 3 2 4 1 12 2 12 11 16 2 7 3 12 2 16 12 11 2 13 4 12 3 16 16 14 3 4 4 16 5 7 16 15 5 12 5 2 13 12 7 3 5 9 7 12 5 13 7 13 5 16 9 4 6 12 12 3 7 4 12 4 7 16 13 7 8 7 13 16 9 3 15 6 9 7 9 12 10 13 12 10 12 13 13 3
Table 4 Classification of movements between machines
From the table aboven it is clear that sawing (5) must be placed central to all activities because of it’s relations with a lot of other activities. Also turning (1) and conventional milling (7) need to be placed near to each other. Last, the table above also gives insight in the large amount of transport between soldering (11) and the delivery locations (14,15 and 16) and between degreasing (12) and the delivery locations (14,15 and 16).
5.4 Conclusion
6. Concept Layout
6.1 Introduction
Before making the layout explicit I choose to implement an extra step between the analysis and the layout section called “concept layout”. After the analysis and declaring of the objectives there are different ways and possibilities to reach your goals through different methods of production. From my perspective it’s important to choose the production method (layout) which is most effective and fits in the strategy of the organization. To structure this production method it’s important to develop a model of concepts which should be included in the physical layout. This method, creating a concept layout matches decision 2 of the layout decision process defined by Slack (2004). In this chapter we will describe the concept layout but first we take a look at the current layout of PMC2, see figure 23.
In the above schematic diagram, the four flows are identified and colour marked to give insight in the flows of PMC2. The first thing what can be noticed are the large amount of flows crossing each other and second the spreading of product flows through the PMC2 Department. Also the transport paths are very long between the different activities and there are no specified routings for this transport. The next paragraph will discuss the link between theory and practice and implements the results from analysis of chapter 3, 4 and 5. Paragraph 6.3 will show and explain the concept layout.
6.2 Link between theory and practice
Earlier paragraphs identified concepts which should be integrated in the concept layout. These come from theory, analysis from the characteristics of PMC2 and from the conducted workshops with the project team and the operators. These concepts can be seen as a sort of prerequisites which combined with the original prerequisites defined in paragraph 2.3 form the basic layout form as defined by Slack (2004), Concepts identified are:
• Create clear flow lines for the identified product families in chapter 5 • Create a combination between a functional and a product layout • Locate machines of PMC2 in a U Shape
• Locate machine controls to each other • Define clear spots for between stock • Define clear predetermined product flows • Centralized supply and delivery of material
same operator. The last three concepts come from the standardization philosophy and visual management concepts of lean production, creating standardized and clear spots for stock and supply and create clear flows improves transparency and manageability (Nicholas & Soni, 2006). The next paragraph shows a graphical illustration of the layout concept and will further explain this concept.
