Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Facilitiesand Workplace
Design
An lllustratedGuide
by
QuartermanLee
with
Arild EngAmundsen
WilliamNelson
HerbertTuttle
6 5 4 3 2 r
02 01 00 99 98 97
CATALOGING-IN-PUBLICATION
DATA
Lee, Qrarterman.
Facilities and workplace design: an illustrated guide/by Qrarterman Lee;
with Arild Eng Amundsen, William Nelson, Herbert Tuttle.
cm. -- (Engineersin businessseries;3)
p.
Includes bibliographicalreferencesand index.
ISBN 0-89806-166-0
1. Plant lzyout. 2. Plant engineering. 3. Office layout. 4. Work
environment. I. Amundsen, Arild Eng. II. Nelson, William.
Herbert.
IV. Title.
TSI78.L44
III. Tuttle,
V. Series.
1996
658.2'3--dc20
96-22972
CIP
ISBN 0-89806-166-0
Engineering & Management Press
25 Technology Park
Norcross,GA 30092
Table of Contents
Preface
...............
v
A c k n o w r e o g r " n t r . . . : : . : . . . . : . . . . . . : . : : . . : . : . : . . . : . : : . . : . . . . . : . . . . . . :".i.i. . . . : . . . . . . . . .
Chapter 1 - Facilities in a Changing Environment...............1
Working facilitiesin modernhistory
...............
3
Facilitiesin a changingenvironment..................................
5
Approachesto facilitiesplanning
.....................
9
The industrial engineer'srole in facility planning .............t2
Chapter 2 - The Framework for Facilities Design.............13
The levelsof spatialdesign........
.....................
13
The phasingof spacedesign
.......2l
The spaceplan elements...............
.................
23
Spaceplan
................
27
The designproject........
...............
28
Chapter 3 - The Macro-Space-Plan
..................
29
Introducing CosmosProducts
.... 32
Planningthe project
....................
32
Informationacquisition
tasks..........
................33
Identifyingphysicalinfrastructure.....................................
50
The strategic
framework................
................
52
Key manufacturingtasksand focus opportunities.............54
Identi$'ingoperationsstrategy......
..................58
Designingthe spaceplan ...........
....................
65
Cosmoscell and processdefinition
................
69
The spaceplan primitive
.............88
Constraints
...............
88
Design of Experiments
Designing macro-space-plans
..... 91,
Identifyingkey materialhandlingissues.........
..................
94
Decidingon the bestspaceplan...........
..........95
Evaluatingthe Cosmosspaceplans
...............
99
Chapter 4 - Macro-Space-Planning
and WorkCellDesi9n................
Workcells...........
... 109
... 111
Interpretingterminologyand conventions............
..........772
The micro-leveltasks
................
114
Selectingthe products.................
The DiamondEquipmentCompany..............................
119
Gator SteelFoundry..............
....725
Designingthe process
................128
Planningcellinfrastructure
..........
.................136
Externalproductioncontrol
.......138
Designinga spaceplan...........
....I49
Selectingthe bestplan ...........
....157
Chapter5 - WorkstationDesign:
the Sub-Micro-Space-Plan
Allocationof functions
Motion economy
Ergonomics
The workstationspacepIan............
t67
...............162
.... 165
............
L66
..............
774
Chapter7 - OfficeSpacePlanning
Approachesto office planning
The officelayoutteam ..........
The layout project
ChapterS -A
Final Note
Gfossary
Bibliography
..................
fn d e x
Aboutthe authors
...................203
.. 204
.... 207
.. 207
..................215
...........277
........227
...............225
.......,.,.,.,.,.231
..232
Preface
Modern factorylayoutbeganmost notably at Highland Park, Michigan.
There, Henry Ford and CharlesSorensenfirst put large-scaleflow line
production into place.Layout, the arrangementof equipmentwithin
the building space,was the most striking featureof Ford production.
The layout of Ford factorieswas so noticeable,it disguisedrhe more
intangibleelementsof Ford and Sorensen's
highly integratedandwellthought-out manufacturingsystem.As a result,manyfactorymanagers,
businessexecutives,and engineersstill try to replicate eady Ford
layouts.Theseimitationsoften areill-suited to their businesspurposes.
Evenwhen managersdo not copyFord layouts,they continueto believe
that layoul is the heart of efficient production.
And so it is, but only as the culmination of a rational design
process:aprocessthat movesfrom globallocationto workstations,from
policy to operations.It is a processthat includesthe entire range of
tangibleand intangibleelements.The resultis a designthat integrates
products,service,people,information, and technology.
Our facilitiesplanning approachbuildson the pioneeringworkof
RichardMuther andKnut Haganas,both ofwhom delelopedsystematic
layoutplanning (SLP) and systematichandling analysis(SHA). These
conceptsremainvalid after almostthirty-five years.Our approachuses
contemporarylanguageand examples.Data acquisition is stressed.
Perhapsmost importantly, we integrate manufacturingstrategyand
manufacturingfocus,conceptsfirst put forth byWickham Skinnerand
first recognizedas connectedby William Wrennall.
This is more than a manufacturingbook, however.The concepts
originally developedfor industry now apply to services.Products and
FacilitiesPlanning
servicesmeld togetherin almosteveryviableenterprisein today'sworld.
"business
process"coversall productivehuman activity.
The conceptof
Government, education, the professions,and industry are simply
variationson a few centralideas.Therefore,the planning ofa government
facility or an idea fzctory follows the sameprinciples and approach as
the planning of an automotive factory.The planning of a hospital
follows the samecourseas the planning of a textile mill.
Under its
A facility projectoften is the catalystfor new strategies.
guise,managementmayopena strategicdebatethat bringstogetherthe
many disparatefunctionsand elementsof the enterprise.It canprovide
The projectthen translatesthe
the structurefor analysisand discussion.
resultsinto steeland concrete.In this way, facilityplanning becomesa
large-scalereengineeringproject rather than an exercisein template
shuffling.
Our purposein writing this book is to help practicingindustrial
engineersnew to facility planning. We intend it to be practicalwith
are
manyexamples,forms,diagrams,andvisualaids.Visualapproaches
is
usually
mind
human
The
planning.
for
facility
important
especially
more creativein avisualmode.Illustrations,graphs,andchartseffectively
that havemanylevelsof detail.
representcomplexspatialarrangements
Also, data is more significantfor most of us when we can seeit.
A plant layout is the product ofthousandsofdecisions,both past
andpresent.It is the physicalmanifestationofthe firm's manufacturing
strategy,whetherde factoor otherwise.Thesedecisionscoverthe entire
rangeof manufacturing-finance, personnel,process'product design,
and many, many other topics.We cannot possiblydo justice to all of
theseissues.We hope, however,to alert industrial engineersto their
existenceand importance.We hope to point the way to more rational
and strategicallyorientedfacility design.
Acknowledgments
t{e this_opportuniryto thank others who helped with this book.
[e
Margie and curtJennings producedmuch of the aitwork. sandraLee
helped with research,data entry and proofing. Maura Reeves,Ellen
snodgrass,Eric Torrey, Forslth Alex"nd.r, anJ the staffat the Institute
of Industrial Engineershavesupportedus and helped make this final
product readable.
Chapter 1
Facilitiesin a
ChangingEnvironment
"The
Abraham Lincoln
Working facilities are the land, buildings, and equipment that provide
the physical capability to add value. This book is about operational
facilities used for a wide range of business,government, institutional,
and charitable activities. It applies to offices, factories, and fast-food
restaurants.It appliesto anyfacilitythat housesvalue-addingoperations.
For convenience,terms such as"businessfacility" or"factory" are used,
although the changing nature of work has blured many of these
distinctions. The principles herein apply to a wide range of situations
the industrial engineercommonly encounters.
Facilities areboth durable and expensive,lasting for decadesand
sometimes even spanning centuries.A firm's facilities are among the
most expensiveof its possessions.
They representthe largestassetitem
on most balancesheets.
The durability of facilities, their cost, and their primary role in
adding value make them an important strategic element. Just as
gunpowder made the fortresses of medieval Europe indefensible,
changesin technology, culture, and politics can quickly render today's
industrial facilities obsolete. Conversely, facilities that adapt to the
nature of their competitive environment can be a continuing sourceof
advantagefor their owners.
FacilitiesPlanning
o)
o
t
+a)
U,
C)
EE^
o._E@
U)
r\
+f
e5
l-
o
o
TE
=
II
o
(E
s
G
Figurel.l - StrotegicRelotionships
FacilitiesIn A ChangingEnvironment
Figure 1.1 depicts the interaction of facilities, organization,
products,and processes.
The understanding,design,and development
of thesevariedelementsinto a functioning businesssystemarereferred
to in variousterms.Among theseare:manufacfuringstrategy,co{porate
reengineering,and businessarchitecture.
The importanceof facilitiesdoesnot lie solelyin their cost and
durability. They are also the most tangible element of the business
system,the element to which everyonein everyareaof the businesscan
relate.They can be a central,common referencefor the restrucfuring/
reengineering/strategic
debate.
Working facilities in modern history
Industrial facilities
shops that servedthe needsof individual artisanswere the industrial
facilitiesof the Middle Ages.Thesewere small and centeredaround a
singleskill suchasarmoryor saddlemaking.They had simpleand clear
arrangements.
Duringthe Industrial Revolution,powersourcesandthe movement
of raw materials determined faciliry design. Textile mills required
streamsfor water power, and cumbersomeshaftsand belts dominated
their arrangement.Eady iron andsteelmills werelocatedon waterways,
railroads,or mining siteslcoal,iron ore, and limestonetransportation
dominatedtheir design.
Early large-scaleproduction shopssuch as the pickering piano
Factory @g, 1.2) developedin the nineteenth century. These large
Figure 1.2 - The Pickering Piono Factory, Boston, Moss, Circo | 870
FacilitiesPlanning
buildings turned out high numbersof manufacruredproducts.At one
time, the Pickering factoryturned out 400 pianoseachday.
In the earlytwentiethcentury,the progressionofmass-production
technology required facilities that optimized material flow. The
micro-division of labor made skill less important than efficient
movementof product.
In the secondhalf of this century,information and knowledge
beganto dominate industrial production.The educationand skills of
As a result,
the worKorce in industrializedpartsofthe world increased.
industrial facilities must now optimize the coordination of people,
and products.
processes,
Government facilities
In the Middle Ages, the most important governmentfacilitieswere
town fortresses.Their primary mission was defenseagainst roving
bandsand neighboringciry-states.The fortified town of Rocroi,on the
northernplain of France,is an example.Still largelyintact,it is a lasting
of thesefortresses.
testimonyto the durability, cost,and obsolescence
With the adventofgunpowder,battletechnolory advanced.New
tactics evolvedand armiesbecamemore disciplined.These massive
works drained the treasuriesof many dukes and kings and became
fortresses
indefensibleand obsolete.By the time of the Renaissance,
had evolvedinto palaces.Their primary missionwas comfort for the
inhabitants, as well as the projection of power and prestige. The
buildersofmany governmentalbuildings wanted to intimidate potential
enemies,both foreign and domestic.
Governments no longer can surviveonly through warfare or the
threat of warfare.Their constituentsdemand addedvalue in a wide
range of human activity. Accordingly, many governmental facilities
now arebeing designedfor efficient operationsrather than projection
of power.
The United StatesPostalServiceprovidesan excellentexample.
Post offices built in the early part of this century were architectural
landmarks.Their mission was to display the power, stability, and
prestigeof the federalgovernment.Postalfacilitiesbuilt todayarenear
transportationcentersand optimize mail flow. Their primary mission
is the efficient distribution of mail.
Knowl e d g e - based fa ciI ities
Facilities in which knowledgeis the primary meansof work have
alwaysbeenmorevariedthan other types.The medievalmonastery,
for example)was a primary depository of knowledge in its time.
FacilitiesIn A ChangingEnvironment
The church used this knowledge to vie with governments for
power and influence.
During the Renaissance
and Industrial Revolution, knowledge
becamean important sourcefor commercialcompetitive advantage.
Individual professionalssuch as doctors,lawyers,and financierswere
primary keepersof knowledge.Other knowledgeresidedin libraries.
Factoriesimbeddedit in their facilitiesand processes.
PeterF. Drucker
was among the first to rccognizethe increasingvalueofwhat he termed
"knowledge
work." He put forth theseideasin his landmarkwork, The
Practiceof Management,in 1955. Knowledge work dependsprimarily
on brainpower rather than manual skills or strength. In today's
manufacturing environment, most work requiring pure strength of
musclehas long been automatedaway.Much of the work that once
required manual dexterity has been taken over by computerized
equipmentsuchasnumericallycontrolledmachinetools or coordinate
measuringmachines.Therefore,knowledgeandthe informationbehind
it now havebecomeprimary sourcesofvalue in their own right. Many
organizationsexist for the solepurposeof processinginformation and
distributing it. Their facilitiesshould reflect and enhancethis role.
Facilitiesin a changingenvironment
Facilitydesignershavealwaysworkedwith materials,products,processes,
information, andpeople.Theirtaskis to arrangeworkprocesses
on land
and in buildingsfor optimum performance.This hasnot changedand
will not change,but rapid shifts in technology, politics, and culture
require a more fundamental understandingand analysisfrom the
facility designer.It no longer is sufficient (if it everwas) to copy an
assemblyline just becauseit was successfulsomewhereelse.
In addition to the long-term trend toward increasedknowledgebasedwork, other trendsofa stretigicnatureareaffectingbusiness.
The
facility planner should catalyzeor lead an organization'sadaptation to
ever-changingsurroundings.
The environmental imperative
Harmony with the environmentis an increasinglyimportant business
concern that will not go away.Population growth is a principal factor
dictating this concern;the spreadof the suburbsthrough increased
mobility is another. Organizafionsthat surviveand prosper in coming
yearswill anticipateand lead with their environmentalpolicies.
Location requirement changes
Information is the raw material of the knowledge worker. With the
FacilitiesPlanning
FacilitiesIn A ChangingEnvironment
E
o
?t
a
(E
'6
o
E
o
+t
a
G
(E 'e
.9
tr
-c
o
d)
'6
a
FacilitiesPlanning
To be effective, the social and technical systemsmust integrate
and assistone another.Facilitiesplanning plays a major role in this
wherepeoplehaveisolatedworkstations,large
integration.Businesses
inventory buffers, and few sequential processeshave difficulty
implementing teamwork. A manufacturing work cell that requires
extensiveteamworkwill not producein an environmentof suspicion,
individual rewards,and command-control.
N on -h i e ra rchi caI org aniz ations
Hierarchical organizationswith functional divisions of work evolved
from the Roman Legions,the Catholic Church, and medievalguilds.
Such organizations are ill-suited for today's work, where the work
product requiresinput from many functional specialtiesand where
coordinationbetweenspecialtiesis a primary requirement'
While TqM emphasizescross-functional teamwork, more
fundamental reengineering emphasizeselimination of functional
structures in the organization This puts special demands on the
facilitiesplanner.Non-hierarchicalorganizationsmust constantlychange
to accommodatechangesin businessvolume and product life cycles.
In these organizationsthere is less division between traditional
managementand labor functions. Many engineersand others who
traditionally worked in office areas now have their desks in the
manufacturing plant. Many of today's high-tech manufacturing
operationsdemand more cleanlinessand order than the traditional
office. Therefore, facilities must be more open with few walls and
barriers.Theyrequire constantrearrangementto accommodatechanging
work cells and changing team structures.
Global business restructurtng reengineering, and facilities
Thanks in part to the changingnatureofwork, global economics,and
large-scalerestructuringis occurringin many
technologicaladvances,
many facilitiesthat areno longer contributing
As
a
result,
organizatrons.
to company missionswill close.Other facilitieswill be built. Many
reengineered.
more will haveproductsrealignedand processes
Facilitiesplanning is often a large-scalereengineeringproject.It
aswell as suPPortingelements.
is an opportunity to rethink processes
During a facilitiesplanningproject,the designerscanhelpmanagement
clarifr missionsand rationalizeproduct lines.
Layout is an integral part of reengineering and restructuring.
Meaningful restructuringrequirescorrespondingchangesin the layout.
Conversely,a layout redesigncanbe the catalystfor restructuring.
Many symptomsofinappropriate businessarchitectureappearaslayout
FacilitiesIn A ChangingEnvironment
or materialhandlingissues.Factorylayoutcandemonstratethe needfor
reengineeringto an organizationreluctantto tearitselfapart and rebuild.
Approaches to facility planning
Those who plan and build facilitiestake many approaches.Some are
highly organized;othersaread hoc. Examplesofapproaches(fig.7.4) are
experiential,masterbuilding, cloning,bottom-up,systematic,and strategic.
Experiential
In this approach,peopleplan their facilitiesbasedon past experience,
common sense,and instinct. In any organization,the experienceof
senior membersis valuablefor information on what has worked and
what has not worked in the past. Otganizations, aswell asindividuals,
need this experienceto function.
A faciliry designedfrom experiencetaps into the rich knowledge
of those who have gone beforel however,experience-based
facilities
planninghaslimitations.Experience,bydefinition, is basedon the past,
and new technologyand organizationstructurescan make it obsolete.
In addition,planningby experience
is usuallyunorganized.
It frequently
is the resultof the memoriesofonlyone or a fewindividuals,and others
mayhavehad additionalor contradictoryexperiences.
Suchhindrances,
aswell as forgotten details, haunt theseefforts.
In planning a major facility, experiencecannot be ignored but
must be gatheredfrom the widest field of experiencepossibleand
appliedwith judgment and discretion.
Master building
Master building focuseson consrruction and buildings. The final
product is often impressiveand sometimesa work of art, but it may not
fit the operationalneedsofthe enterprise.Master builderscanbe found
at many levels in both large and small organizations: a company
president building a new headquartersor a department manager
focusing on technologicalimpressiveness
rather than actual needs.
Using a building to displayfinancialstrength,technologicalprowess,or
artistic accomplishmentis a legitimateform of advertising.However,
this purposeshould be balancedwith other businessneeds.
Cloning
Cloning simply duplicates an existing facllity or portion of it. This
approachis fast.Ifthe existingfaciliryisprovenandifconditions arethe
same, this type works well. McDonald's uses cloning to build its
"factories"
hamburger
throughout theworld. For mostfacilities,however,
IO
FacilitiesPlanning
C'
G
E
o
o
o
ct)
.E
E
I
()
.9
C')
(lt
3
@
o
o
(E
Figure1.4- SpoceplonningApprooches
cloninghaslimited usebecause
sites,processes,
andpeoplearedifferent.
Cloning should be appliedonly when appropriate.
Bottom up
The bottom-up approachstartswith the details.How many desks?
How many and which machines?How many people?From them,
FacilitiesIn A ChangingEnvironment
11
12
Facilities
Planning
Chapter2
The Frameworkfor
FacilitiesDesign
The completedesignof a facility requireswork from many disciplines
within an organization: sales and marketing, purchasing, human
resource
s, accounting,and more.More visibleis the work of architects,
structuralengineers,processengineers,and management.Architects
and structural engineerscheck soil conditions, building codes,and
infrastructure,detailingthe structure,appearance,
and internalsof the
building andsite.Processengineers
mayplantheproductionprocedures.
To guide and coordinateall theseefforts, managementsetsstrategic
policies.
Industrial engineersalsoplay key roles.They often managerhe
overallproject and report to top management,and they may perform
someor all of the abovetasks.Most importantly, they plan the useof
space.Thesespaceplans,atvariousdetaillevels,becomethe centerpiece
for coordinatingthe entire project.
The levels of spatial design
Layout, or spaceplanning, is the centralfocusof facilitiesdesignand
dominatesthe thoughtsof most managers.But factoryor office layout
is only one detail level. Ideally, a facility design proceeds from the
generalto the particular-from global site location to workstation.
Larger strategicissuesare decidedfirst.
It is useful to think of spaceplanning in five levelsas shown in
figure 2.1. Figures2.2 through 2.6 show qpical ourputsat eachlevel.
These range from the global maps of site location to engineering
drawingsof tools and workstations.
FacilitiesPlanning
14
.l
CL
U'
o
o
ob
U)
o o
.nF
d)
o(E
CL
o
o
=
a
C)
6
o
c
c O
og
g'z
o =
o o
rr Q,.
c.=
= g ( U
d o,l
q)
g
#E a E
o'=
!a
G
ll
_ 9
(,
o,ql o
L
.=
.=
G'
o
.9
ul
U'
.9
d)(E
rr O-
=o
o9
.E
o
=
E C
o)
O)c f
E
g
'i(d
o
CL
U'
E*
Eo't
=E
,e(U
r- c)
E,q3
(I'o)
o o
i o
o=: v
>
:i: q
o
: U J
q ) -
(L
al,
: o
o
->=. 9
bo
,;g
r O
15
Proposed
South American Plant
Site Specification
Contents
1 .O Mission
2.0
General
Requirements
3.0
Land Features
4.O
Building
5.O
Transponation
6.0
l.ltilities
7,0
Labor
8.O
Communlty
9.0
SupplleG
1O.O Environmental
Mission
Statement
Midwest Plant
& Warehouse
Mission
Statement
Brussels
Warehouse
Mission
Statement
Shenandoah
Plant
O Manufacturing
I Distribution
-9u !
l! Proposed
The Shenandoah
Facilitywill
manufacture the Elite
product line for high
volume customers in
the Eastern United
States. lt will strive to
be the primary
supplier for our
industry for high
quality OEM material.
16
FacilitiesPlanning
ffi
onur" II
onur"III 56000sr
17
2azzssr
18
FacilitiesPlanning
O z e
Project
Report
ilacro.Layout
&
Om
Material
Handllng
El e ctro nE n g i n e e ri n gC o rp.
M a cro -L a yo uOp
t ti o n A
Macro-Layout
OptionB
Macro-Layout
OptionC
Figure 2.4 - Level 3, Mocro Loyout
Project Report Mocro-Loyout ond Moteriol Hondling
TheFramework
ForFacilities
Design
ili l .
!' ,g"
i
tA
d;
uil-ir
9l
tfll,!
-6. "
3 9 E
gE3
6 t |
F t k l t f si E I i
' | g ' - : /3 - - '
I
o i
"
, t El l L l / F 9 : l
_lI
i
!-
-i3' .,Y$-n
FL- n/ EL5'r
uJl-P
; ;
:
\/ \
: 6 l
its'F
EEE
19
FacilitiesPlanning
20
Workcell
Operstions
Plan
T
Eiliiiiu-;;-l
l h t u
I o o
Ei.ro.l
I Pg i;i.'"*'
I ''.*', Eee
r.t.il.l
'
"
'
y:lf.i'*
'
.a{eL
f-6driye*.-l
I r r*rrd
lPrnP
t-----5i;;ii6------1
";..".,-GF"."'l
II t rdb.hii
*:lr.:r;-"
lll l f,
o "d-..0'-"
Il ! !ft"r:! - - l
| ? s:T-*'
II
I
l -
TJ-.-^rryr-*B l
II
? qfl$
l 9 q 1 6 6
"
i--l
lf--Tirii-irFrtd-u
li
I conrol
ll
"
Produdlon
| |
l^_r.narrns
a36a,agw
|:
Lr:---------ll
Ert.'n.l
atnc
Q@tsEM
I P?::H'
| 3 r t*i#l
cont.ln.r.
di^
|vV
>taFo@
t
I
sirrrid
I Ert.rn.l
sraouoMn
I
I
l-
t
o
c{ndrcgd
c'.Fd-
l._3-e%*ltT"-j_jl'-":*-l
l " ' *
I
I
t
o
-l
,o,uq
'drtur r4fr
" - " 1
I
I
I
|
"*'/
rc
D i a p h n a g mP u m p A s s e m b l g
Wonksldlion # I
2'l
(A)
I
tl
ill
IV
V
Ol..!.a
(B)
ta--l
/\
ln*--l
-
lctll
snrorc rmnacf\lHiii-l
tl
ill lr.#:l
IV
l-6--l
V
lsfiiii,l
Time --|>
Time --*
(c)
I
tl
ill
'V
V
(D)
I
lEil-l
M
|;;i--l
lsr"rrii-l
Time -.|>
tl
ill
IV
IE.b"rI
lglt.
lr'fr--l
Er-l
V
Time -|>
22
FacilitiesPlanning
23
@,'"::',1."
@$n,
@l:::ffi
Configuralion
Pwarerrouo
SpaceplanPrimitive
FFT
space
ffi
24
Planning
Facilities
25
Absolute
Exceptional E
l m p orta n t
U
Unimportant
Apart
N/A
Red
O r d in a ry
Yellov
Gr een
Blue
(None)(None)( None)
Black
26
FacilitiesPlanning
50o/o
40o.h
20Yo
10o/o
0o/o
27
Thespaceplon primitive
When spaceis addedto the affinitydiagram,it distortsthe diagraminto
the spaceplan primitive. It is an idealizedrepresentationand doesnot
include designconstraints.
Constraints
Design constraintsarethoseconditionsthat limit an ideal spaceplan.
Such constraintsmight be building size and shape,columns, floor
loading, utility configurations,externalfeatures,and many others.
Space plan
The fusion of a spaceplan primitive and constraintsproducesa space
plan. Severalviablespaceplansshouldemerge.A setof cells,affiniiies,
and constraints may give rise to severalequally valid configuration
diagramsandprimitives.Eachoftheseprimitivesmayresultin multiple
macro-spaceplans. The nature of the design problem precludesan
optimal spaceplan, exceptin the simplestsituations.
The designer'sexperienceis a key factor, for it helps him or her
decidewhich configurationshavethe most potential.It helpsscalethe
myriad of possiblespaceplans down to a reasonablenumber.
Figure2.11illustratesthe completeprogressionfrom fundamental
28
FacilitiesPlanning
Chapter3
TheMacro-Space-Plan
The macro-space-planoften is the mosr important level of facility
planning. It sets the fundamental organization of the factory and
patterns of material flow with long-term effects. From personnel
turnoverto qualityto delivery,the macro-space-plan
influencesalmost
every measureof facility and organizationperformance.
Done well, it is a platform for reengineeringbusiness.It canforce
reexaminationof markets, products, and processes.It can achieve
quantum improvementsin productivity and profit. It can position a
firm for profitability and growth. Done superficially, it can leave real
issuesunquestioned.
This chapterexplainshow to designmacro-space-plans
using a
structured,step-by-stepapproachthat resultsin a near-optimalspace
plan andwide acceptance
ofthe results.This approachhasseveralparts:
conceptual
frametuork, modelprojectp/ans, taskprocedures,conventions,
and designtoolsand aids.
Chapter 2 introduced the conceptualframeworkwith its levelsof
detailthat narrowthe projectto a manageable
level.Thesefundamental
and derivedelementsshow how a spaceplan dwelops. Arranging the
levelsin phaseshelpsplan the project.In the pagesthat follow, macrospace-planning-one of the more important phases-is examined.
With a model project plan, tasks are arranged.Procedure diagrams
illustratehow to conducteachtask.The technicaltools and other aids
providethe meansto completeeachtask.Figure3.1is the modelproject
plan for a macro-layout.It showsthe requiredtasksand their sequence.
This model evolvedfrom the systematiclayoutplanning (SLP) approach
developedby RichardMuther almostthirtyyears ago.It hasbeenused
30
FacilitiesPlanning
for hundreds of projects and sufficesfor almost any size and type of
macro-space-plan.From project to project, the depth of analysis
changesalong with the methodsfor eachtask, the resources)and the
time. Occasionally,a projectrequiresa few additionaltasks.However,
the basicstructureand sequenceremain the same.
Each task has a two-part identification number.The two digits
beforethe decimalshowthetasklevel.The digits followingthe decimal
Task03.04,for example,
identifythe specifictask,roughlyin sequence.
macro-space-plan.
is the fourth task at Level 3, the
The tasksofthe modelprojectoccurin threedistinctgroups:data
acquisition,strategydevelopment,and layout planning.Thesegroups
are nearthe top of figure 3.1. Two tasks,03.01 and 03.27,areoutside
thesegroups.Task 03.01 startsthe project,with plans for activities,
Task03.21is the actualselectionofthe preferred
timing, andresources.
lavout option. It closesthe project and allowspreparationfor Level4,
the micro-space-plan.
A procedurediagram is provided for some tasks.For example,
figure 3.3 is the procedurediagram for Task 03.02. Such diagrams
illustratethe logic flow and sub-tasksrequired.These proceduresare
sometimesiterative.Most early layout models emphasizedthe third
task group, where geometricarrangementtakesplace.Of course,this
is important, but far more important is the determination of what
spacesto arrange.The definition of theselayout cells establishesthe
organizationof a faciliry'swork. Embodied in cell definition, it has far
more impact on facility performance.
Figure 3.1 alsoguidesdesignersthrough their first layoutsusing
the systemdescribedin this chapter.The designtask at hand should
always be the central focus and any temptations to jump ahead
prematurelyto other tasksshould be resisted.Completed tasftsalso
should not be revisited.Figure 3.1 helpsdesignersconcentrateon the
current task, its procedurediagram, and specificdiscussions.If each
the spaceplan will take shapeand the
task is done in proper sequence,
project objectivewill be reached.
It is vital to keepmanagersthroughout the organizationinformed
during the entire planning process,a responsibilitybest suited to the
designer. Many facility projects result in fundamental changes and
restructuring.Managersandothersneedtime to learnnewinformation
and form newviews.If they arenot kept informed and involvedin the
will not be
learning and reasoningprocess,agreementand consensus
achieved.This could resultin the rejectionof an excellentlayout.
There areseveralformal and informalways ofinvolving managers.
Formal methods include using a steeringcommittee to overseeand
The Macro-Space-Plan
31
=
o
(g
J
.49
vtg
tr
.9
(!
OH E
L
o
tr
32
FacilitiesPlanning
data acquisitiontasks.
A formal meeting is valuablefor developing operations strategy
builder. Agreementand commitment
andcanbe an important consensus
to the operationsstrategyarevital for later agreementon a faciliry plan.
Task 03.21, the evaluationand selectionof spaceplan options,is also
a good consensusbuilder. Extensive interviews and informal
with managersand othersthroughout the organization
conversations
are alsoimportant.
IntroducingCosmosProducts
Cosmos Productsis the companyused as a model in this chapterto
offacilitiesplanningat the macro-level.Cosmos
illustratethe processes
Products convertshigh-grade vinyl film into decorativematerial. The
markets,and
firm hastwo broadproductlineswith differentprocesses,
material
in many
distribution channels.Roll products-pin-striping
colors, patterns,widths, and combinations-sell in the automotive
that usethem
aftermarket.Custom sheetproductssellto manufacturers
boats,
of
campers'
Manufacturers
decoration.
logos,
and
labels,
for
Cosmos
customers.
are
typical
chain saws,and agriculturalequipment
often preparesthe artwork for thesecustomers.Custom productsare
flat sheetsof materialwith imprinting, adhesive
, anda paperbacking.
Cosmos Products started as a small operation about twenry-five
yearsago.The firm hasgrown significantly eachyear at ^n averagerate
of 22percent.To accommodatethis growth, therehavebeena number
of additions to the current faciliry. In recentyears'managementhas
experienceddifficulty that hasmanifesteditself in too much inventory'
shipping delays,and generalconfusion.
The company'scurrent project is reengineeringthe faciliry and
The obiectivesareto: reducematerialhandling costs;
relatedDrocesses.
reduce'operating .orrrl i-prove delivery performance; irip.or'.
teamwork, communication, and quality; allow for new products;
accommodate1998production;and deliverthe projectunder a budget
of $800,000.The steeringcommitteefor this projectconsistsof; O. W.
Holmes, presidentandchiefexecutiveoffi cer;J. Marshall, chieffinancial
officer; W. Burger, vice president,operations;and E. Warren, vice
president,salesand marketing.
Planningthe project
The Macro-Space-Plan
33
34
FacilitiesPlanning
--''[\
N
Nf
p-
I N
N s s
N__
N
---_-
----
R3
I
o
.6
o.
o
E E
o o. o
o o
.E
oo
:o
N
R .9
x
E
o-
q e
a
o
o
o
-a
.5
o o
o
c
c
Eq
F
o
Y
o
E
o
o
q
E
a
z
E
t
o
Io
r
o
5
o
o
d
z
I
6
6
d(
o
.:
o
E
o
=
o
-=
=o
N
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
I t
@
o
o
o
o
o
o
di
@
J
o
o
;
o
E
o
o
o
o
=
o
cl
o
I
o
o
o
Y
o
U
o
.!
The Macro-Space-Plan
35
meanstime andcommonunderstandings
that mustbeginearlyin order
to bear fruit at the end ofthe project.
Product-vol ume ana lysis
Product-volume (P-!) analysisexaminesthe current and future time
frames for the products and their volumes.This analysishelps the
designerunderstandthe relationshipsbetweenvariousproducts.Highvolume and low-volume products,for example,may require different
equipment and production modes.The analysisalso defines future
requirements,helps selectthe best planninghorizon, and allows for
changesbeyondthe immediatespaceplan.
The resultsof the P-V analysisprovideimportant input for many
later tasks,and, therefore,should be completedearly in the project.
Facility designersthat have been long-time employeessometimes
believethey know the products well enough to skip this task, but this
is not recommended.
The procedurediagramfor product-volumeanalysisis in figure 3.3.
Block 1 documentsthegatheringofinformation.This maybeaccomplished
in the following ways:visually examining a range of finished products;
reviewing salescatalogsand other information for an overview of the
product line; and interviewing salesand marketing people. It is also
important to obrain overallsalesvolume history (usually,five to ten years
is adequate).
Where marketsandtechnologiesarechangingrapidly,tvyoto
threeyearsmay be a more appropriatetime frame.
Salesforecastsfor the following five to ten years should also be
requested.An absenceof this information indicatesuncertainty.It may
requiremultiple contingenciesin the faciliryplan. Unfortunately,sales
peopleand other managersmay be unwilling to commit to a forecast.
In such a situation,high, low, and optimistic forecastscould be asked
for, with the explanation that they are needed for facility planning
purposesand extremeaccuracyis unnecessary.
A requestfor a salesforecastmay touch off a flurry of executive
activity becausethe requestedinformation may nor exist or may be
questionable.Generating the numberswill help build management
awareness.It is sometimesthe beginning of an important strategic
debatethat ultimatelyleadsto betterfacility plans.This debatealsocan
lead to important and profound changesin managementthinking.
In Block 2, the forecastdata is plotted on a line chart along with
saleshistories.If they areavailable,oprimisticand pessimisticforecasts
should alsobe added.After examiningthe chart,plotting a regression
line like that in figure 3.4 may be helpful. Where seasonalityis a
concern,a separatechart could be usedto show monthly salesfor the
36
FacilitiesPlanning
2
GroupedProdud ftofile
. Dollars
. Pi@es
. OtherLhib
The Macro-Space-Plan
37
Thousands
40
35
30
25
2A
15
10
5
0
8&g&'1!$3ra1q" -lrf*f+,1f.::rr::at-t:ii':t,:-rilir:a*ia
i::s.::::.":
trr:::ll:
rt:...r.:::r'.-i::'- :.
1 9 8 71 9 8 8 1 9 8 91 9 9 0 1 9 9 1 1 9 9 2 1 9 9 3 1 9 9 4 1 9 9 5 1 9 9 6 1 9 9 7
38
FacilitiesPlanning
: Product-volume
summary
CosmosProducts
The 22 percent growth rate is expectedto slow somewhat during the
next three years.The 1997 forecastvolume of 35,000 units will be the
first faciliry planning horizon. Cosmoshas about 10,000line items in
the product database.
Theseareinl92 groupsaccordingto significant
feafuressuch as basematerial, color, and width. Thirty-four groups
represent80 percentofsales.Ofthe 192 groups,63 generatelessthan
$200 per month of income.We may have significantopportunity to
ntionalize the product offering or modify our inventory policy.
Existing process analysis
"Existing
Analysis,"involvestrackingworkproduct
Task 03.03,
Process
activity,or the sequences
in which outsideentitiesacton anorganization's
work product. For manufacturingspaceplans, the work product is
usuallya physicalproduct.In other spaceplans,the work product may
be intangible such as an information packet.In a hospital, the work
product may be a patient.
Existing processanalysisdocumentsthe processcurrently in place.
However,ifthe product is new,suchaprocessmay not exist,and a similar
5i)@
a@
.E
q
630@
F
2W
I(re
ProduclGpup
The Macro-Space-Plan
39
40
FacilitiesPlanning
ProcessChart
The Macro-Space-Plan
41
42
FacilitiesPlanning
CosmosProducts:Existingprocesssummoty
The valueaddedindex (VAI) for roll productsis 13 percent'The VAI
for commercialproductsis 20 percent.Theseareboth quite low. There
area substantialnumberofopportunitiesto reducetransport'handling,
and storageelements.
In ro11products,the processesrequire specialequipment' This
equipmentis relativelysmall scale.Changeovertimes rangefrom five
to forty-five minutes.
For commercialproducts,processscaleis verysmallin the manual
Die-cutting operateson a medium scale.
operationsat pick-and-pee1.
Silk-screeninguseslarge-scalepresses.We may wish to investigate
for silk-screening.
smallerscaleprocesses
Slit-and-sheetoperationsall usea singleslitter that is quite fast.
Both commercialand roll productsusethe samematerial.Optimizing
the use of each roll savessignificant wastage.It seemsto dictate
continueduseof a common slit-and-sheet ^tea for all products.
The processcharts for Cosmos Products arc fairly simple. In
addition to the modified ANSI conventions,figure 3.7 showsthe process
for one of Cosmos'sroll products-a vinyl stock material for signs and
other decoration.Figure 3.8 chartsthe processfor a multi-color, die-cut
decal,atypicalproductfrom oneofCosmos'scommercialmarkets.These
decalsdecorateautomobilesand other outdoor equipment.This single
chart representsseveralthousanddistinct products.
it is often tempting to combine items,
With complexprocesses,
of the chart. Simplifying the chart,
the
complexity
reducing
thereby
however,is not the sameassimplifring the process.Much of the value
of a processchart is its accuraterepresentationof the full complexityof
a process.It is an important means of building consensusand
understandingfor a new spaceplan. A readablechart on large-scale
to conveythe full scopeand complexity
drafting papermaybe necessary
ofthe process.
lnventory analysis
"Inventory
Analysis,"is important for at leasttwo reasons.
Task 03.04,
First, inventory is usuallythe primary or secondarycapital consumer'
often vying with facilities for this dubious honor. Second,almost every
difficulty, problem,or defectin the businesssystemeventuallycomesto
rest in inventory. Inventory thus can be an indicator of the efficacy of
the businesssystem.
The Macro-Space-Plan
43
H i n1s l
TDaRil. srcrrge
A2A 6.
P Pdrrs srtraqe
Me.ge ch3.l
tho
lt6mc
ci.:
Ic
-l
06 12wks
.hL
I
FM Sto.e
0u6l1ru
sLr
03: h.
-l-
!^specr
m6.-o
To fachins
0r0
AEslra.c6
)o2s
ou."e p or
)agt2?hr
t. :lr'er
010h.
sro."q"
- Descrlolt.n
s
=\
Perrordte
6:0
hr
--
0pitonal InformaJlo.
Ac.osE Tabt6
oue! lln
* of ilachhes
* 0i Pe$le
050
S /f4
NB-e
0oe.atron
'dnsPo. l
Actlon
Examples
Value
f'1oves Some
Dlsiance
oprlron
I
Invenlofq Levl
. P'oddr
E6ch Plrh
tsandrhq Eqlrpnil
001 h.
g\a 6.
,l
Vl<
Check Fo.
^l
Tnq^o.1
Dlmenslon
.l
010 h.
I
I
Inspecl
WIPHold,oueue
Delag
1 2 4 0 4 s
Delag/Hold
Waaehouse, Tnack
qf^.:-a
I ^.:tad
HandLe
Ra
Traasfer
0. So.t
Parlaaa
>ra
Ilehs
l'-Elneni
0n Convegor
4".,. ^-Legend
Q op*.."
n - ue4
u
r-p-'
C,tr
Qr-ar"s
!
atoonc
Tnr
39l6 Wvandofe
Kdnsas Clr!, M0 6llll
C h a r ^ t l n gC o n v e n t l o n s
Inspeci
Psro'"0'
1Z/88/94
44
FacilitiesPlanning
9 . ;
F H
ctcr!gge
The Macro-Space-Plan
lnventory(Thousandsof Un ts)
InventoryTurns
30
30
"f
25
- - . - *
I
,t''
20
15
-:-.,r*r_,-
'2A
IndustryAverage
rurns
-/..
15
-7
10
10
+
lnv
llnitc
) Inv Turns
0
r98g
1990
199r
1992
1993
1994
1995
i996
1992
rgs"8
Average InventoryIn
EquivalentStorage
Units
PurchasedN,4atls
237 7y.
Work-ln-Process
628 18%
ProductronStage
45
46
FacilitiesPlanning
CosmosProducts:lnventorysummary
Inventory volume hasincreasedsignificantlyduring the past six years.
This increaseis higher than salesgrowth' resultingin a gradualerosion
of the rurn ratio. Managementanticipatesthat, asa resultofthe facility
reengineeringproject,the numberof turnswill increase,and inventory
levelswill come down.
The inventoryprofileffig. 3.10] showsthe portion ofinventory at
each production stage.This indicates significant opportunities for
reducingfinished goodsand purchasedvinyl.
SpaceAnalysis
The spaceanalysisrevealscurrent spaceuse. The spacediagrams
indicatewhether the existinglayout is primarily functional,productfocused,or a mixture, as well as which products use line or cellular
productionandwhich usefunctionallayoutmodes.This spaceanalysis
alsohelps define layout cellslater in the project and can be a basisfor
spacerequirementcalculationsfor the new facility.
The spaceprofile also revealsimbalancesin spaceuse. Value60 percentor moreoftotal spaceusage
addedspacegenerallyrepresents
in the bestspaceplans.When value-addedspacefallsbelow30 percent,
therearesignificantopportunitiesfor improvement.Large amountsof
storagespacecanindicatea needfor more ceilularand line production,
or it may show a need for schedulingsystemrevisions.Using large
amounts of spacefor inspection or repair may indicate significant
quality issues.
When operationsfocusis an issue,adding a product spaceclass
spaceby product.Eachproductgroup has
diagramis useful.It classifies
a pattern or color. Spaceusedfor operationsfor a singleproduct group
will haveonly one color,while functionalspaceusedfor operationsfor
many product groupswill havemany colors.A product-focusedlayout
"messy''functionalspace
"clean"
product spacediagram and a
has a
diagram.A processfocused(functional)layout has the opposite.The
sectionon oDerationsfocusexplorestheseissuesin more detail.
The Macro-Space-Plan
47
a
L
E
I
O
C
O
E
r
E
O
c)
a
(-)
)
C)
L
LL
UI
o
E
o
L
ll_
tt)
ro
o c)
a
O
o
=
g
;
E
:
D
;
d
V
E
o
c
I
o
O
O
o
;o
L
o
o
5
o
o_
a
D
.=
c
LN
48
FacilitiesPlanning
CosmosProducts:Existingspocesummory
I\{uch of our spaceappearsdisconnectedand scattered.The existing
spacediagram shows no clear,undedying plan. The proPortionsof
spaceuse are better than in many other industries, but could be
improved.Significantopporrunitiesmay existin reducingstorageand
traffic areas.Some parts of the plant have narrow aisles.Others have
overly wide aislesthat becomeWIP storageareas.
Organization analysis
"OrganizationAnalysis,"hasseveralpurposes.It can help
Task 03.06,
determinethe sizeof supportfacilitiessuchasrestroomsand cafeterias.
In office layouts,it may be essentialfor planning spacebasedon work
station requirements.It can help evaluatethe current and proposed
spaceplan. It can assistin formulating a manufacturingstrategyor in
betweenstrategyand practice.
identi4'ing inconsistencies
Organizationanalysisusuallybeginswith a completeand current
organizatronchartfrom the personneldepartment.It should include all
departments and employeesthat use the facility hdown to the lowest
levil. It alsomight includedepartmentsand peoplewho resideoutside
the facility but have a major impact on operations.An examplemight
be a corporate engineeringdepartment that designsprocessesand
oroducts but is in a remote location. Names and titles for each
productionworker arenot needed,but thereshouldbe an approximate
count for eachsupervisorand department.
Thesechartscanbecomequite largeand may haveto be plotted on
large-scaledrafting paper,but the chart should not be broken into small
sheets.This may be convenientfor the analystbut it disguisesthe true
nature of large, convoluted organizatrcns.Maximum impact is the aim.
Managersmust developand approvethe sftategicbasisof the spaceplan,
aswellasthe spaceplanitselfFigure3.12showshowto constructthechart.
After the organ\zationchart is complete, the current spaceplan
The Macro-Space-Plan
49
*
E
pQ I
: E6 E d
$ fts,*
ssgE
ON.E
sI
o-coO.
E8
ttr
AE
D O
=3
50
FacilitiesPlanning
howmanypeoplein the
A messydiagram(fig. 3.13)demonstrates
sameorganization units arescatteredthrough the facility. The diagram
by itself does not tell us whether the facility or the organization is
correct;it showsthat they are inconsistent.
ldentifying physical infrastructure
Physical infrastructure supports operations for all or most of the
product line but does not contribute directly to the process.For this
o
o)
d)
Figure3.13 - OrganizationalAnalysis
The Macro-Space-Plan
51
Human
Utllltlog
I
O
D
O
O
o
O
tr
D
a
Ouldmr Subshtion
lnd6r Bubtrtion3(s)
Switcho..r F6n
Molor Conkot C.nr.r
por.t
Udi.t.iruilibt.
1 1 5 v ,i . o h
2$v. l-;h
230v. 3-ih
.60v, 3-;n
16ot27rv , 3.gn
Intornal Tran3port
a P.r.onn.l I
lEmploym.nt Oflic
O Crcdii union
D Libfrry
a Tr.ininC Facilltils
O
a
I
O
'Jllili'r"-'o
a P.d.lrian
I P.ll.l Truct
a Fork TrucMncrol
t f,:f,3":,l::''
Cal.t.i.
v.ndino Ars
toungcTBrcat aoom
Etacutiv. Diniry F@
O Clnhl
H!.hh:
tr Erclrcis. Foom
O Jqging Trsck
O Nlturrl Lighi
OiEpalch
8ui[-ln Handtino:
O OY.rh.ed c;an.s
O F .ighl El.vetdr
O sc!|.
B Oth..:
trilai""r c"nt",
O
a
a
O
tr
a orinrDc wat.r
O C6li.C Tor.r
Ols$l.r Alrrn
Fi. Eqrass
sprintii' co.rot3
FL. 9r.tion
fo.nldolF.ttour Sh.[.t
Ptoductlon
a
O
O
D
a
o
Sl..m:
D Boibr B@m
D Oi.ribution sy3r.m
O
E
O
O
D
W.rhr@ms/Sho*ars
Sloreg.:
O Prck.elng Mil./lts
O lncid.;r.b
O Othor
D -
Extcrnal Transport
cont....c.
Foom.
Cu.tomd S.ilic!
Di.plry Rmm
Trainidc C.nt..
D
O
O
a
D
E
O
!
I
Fril Sidinc
f.il Dc*
Truck furnsr@nd
TrEr oet
Trwk Pr*ino
Ttu* Aal.
Truck Mii.t mno
Trrck Ae6./Es..!s
Ado AccslEoru..
lAdoPsdi4
U -
Siorrg.
O Arch
O S.cr
O Caiab0u./OiBptay
caia
E Micri
0 sury
surylur Furnitora & Equl!ilant
cuting c@hnl:
0 C.nt.l Finririon
O Chip S.pu.lion
D Chip Conv.yors
Utiliti.s:
o_-_-o-=--
Administratlon
a
tr
D
O
olhd
Hbiji[;:""iillL?,3'
a Edplry.. i.*ins
Fu.l Storag.
Fu.l O:r Phnr
Oil Tinks
Coal 9toreo.
oth.t
aSFc.
H.rtin!
O Intu..F.d H.ltinq O At Condiltontno
O ou.l cofl.crbt
O Loc.l Erhau.t
lO.n.r!l
V.ntilerion
Prducilon offic.g
Tool FooD
Toor Cdb
Cr!.n Roon
c.ntal Msinr.nidc.
oD_
|
I
I
I
I
o _
o---
ouality
a Ou:hryL.borlori.s
O Gio. Cllibr.lio.
O Fo'mulation
L!b.
D Dbc..p.nr Md.ilar
I E--_-
I
I
I
I
I
Development
I Product
I
I
o P,doryts shop
|I flo =5;::r:ir::,iri"
I
-|
lo_-.=--
52
FacilitiesPlanning
The strategicframework
An operationsstrateg'yis the dominant approachor philosophy that
guidesthe designof the manufacturingor businesssystem.Operations
and ultimate fate of an
strategiesoften determinethe competitiveness
organizatron Strategyleadsto structure,aswell asthe arrangementand
interconnectionof business
elements.Suchelementsmight bemachines,
information systems,people,or facilities.
Theyencompass
Strategiesextendoverlongperiods-years or decades.
permeatingeveryareaand aspectofthe
all the products and processes,
The Macro-Space-Plan
53
0
C
o
o
il
c
o
o
o
o
o
tn tr
(-/ !
-F
o
o
o
c
o
a
l
-o
o
o_
F
o
@
.o
E
o
c
o
o
o
o
0
tt)
E
(,
o
o
o
6
z
3
(J
o
c
o
o
O o P
c"r
O
tn
t-
0
c
.9
o
o
o
O
c
o
o
(D
l t /
E
l ?
ra
- t
l
0 ) l o
, u ( J 6
L
r r
- 5 =
= =
!
:
!
g
54
FacilitiesPlanning
The Macro-Space-Plan
55
56
FacilitiesPlanning
The Macro-Space-Plan
57
58
FacilitiesPlanning
The Macro-Space-Plan
59
TechTools
strategyandstructure
Keylssues
2.5 Qulity Capability
2.6 T$hnology Level
.1.2 Products
' 1.3 Maikets
. Volus
' Gaglaphy
1.4 Multi-Site Integration
1.5 Ky Mmufacturing Tmks
1.6 Extemal StrategicIssues
1.7 Political
1.8 Enviromental
I.9 Comunity Involvement
-ll
-t
2.0 Process
2.1 Production
Mode(s)
.Prcject
. Fuclional
.Cellula
. Toyota
. Line
. Continuou
2.2 Proess
Scale
Capacity
. tad
.Tnck
' lag
. R*de
^-N-IW7\
1]\ \All\Z
--
- Z1\
3.0 Infrastructure
3.1 QualityApproach
. Quality Poli@
. qdity
at Sou@
3.2
Persomel Policies
. Tshtril Skill Depth
. Tohniel Skill B@dth
. Ifferpmnal Skills
. Employmnt Sffily
. CompeNtion
. Tnidng
'PerfomeMffircnt
. Safety
. Erhi6
3.3 Organization
. Fwtional
. Producl
. Othq
. Dpth
Structure
3.4 Orgmiation
.Exploitiv
.B@rcntic
. Consultatiw
. Pdicipativ
Style
@
4.0 Facilities
4.1 Site Focus
. Prcduct
.Pffi
. I{arket
. Cpgnphic
. Other
4.2
Site Ircation
4.3 Tmsportation
& Size
Accss
60
FacilitiesPlanning
Mlsslon
Procass
will striv for a
Roll Ploducte Cffic
produd-f@sod opcdion with the dctprid of
prinBry slittDg *trich seruc both Roll and
Cmial
opcroim. we will h.w a mix of large
in G@p T@tmlo$/
ard $utl slc cquipM
@lls. Rapd stup i5 a importart prioity for
equipdd slti@ ald opBlio. We will attqnpt
60% atd
d avFage cquipMt utiliation bwq
85%. we will add pr(Bs eprcity 6-12 mths
ahad of daMnd. Pffis
should harc a M
gEduly to
gability iDdsx of L4. We wil ffi
puitbd they re
highr bh@logj/ p|ffi
@NisM wifi dr f{w ffitcgy, @st justified ad
haw ad.q@ spport.
Producte Cm6
will triw for
Co||ercid
ptodud-foq8 witlin thc limits st by plrc
and
requimts.
This my diclate
mviourroal
physical *pmio
bawo silkscming ad
subsequd opcdi@. Prinary slitring nd sbet
cunirg wiU |@in p|lss
f@used. Our prlss
scale will be a mix of largc aDdsnEll @cpordmg
to th ordcr mix. Rapil stup is d important
priority o the ruller *ale, lw volme pre.
We will attqnpt o arcnge utili*io
of 807e90%
priffi
m larg$scale silks|q
aDd50olc?0% d
dlFi equipMt. We will add snBll-scale equipmot
in advd@ of del@d dd brgFscale equipmd
wfio dqMnd is prc@. All cquipM
will haw a
midmm oapability index of 1.4. we will strive for
fte laK sd highd t4hDly
lwel on large{ca.le
silksHing.
Intraslructure
C('ffi
will triw for a produd.focue4
shallw, multatiw
ard infonna.l orgeiz*i@. We
will gradully move Mrds
a ptticipatire
ffi+aed
org&i4i@
ovc the M five yec.
Our Ming
s)ffi
shqld a@mmodat
aciivity-bded 6ting using @st &iveB for
overlsd allstio.
Wc will u* prcj* mirg for
c@ial
work ud p|1ss @sting for roll
products. We @ogniz the limitatioE of
omtiooal
mmtirg
systans for maagmt
dsisic.
Prcduaio ontrol will us MRP-ty?
produ* dd supplieN.
schcdrli4 for mcial
We *i[ u$ krnbd s]ffi
for inbrul schcduling
produd will b
of 6ll opediG.
Cfficial
sidly mkefrrder.
Roll prodrd will u$ strEll
6"i"hd goods st@ls for the highct volw
E0o/oof
lim itans. Tlrc mining
20% of lw-volme rcll
produc wiu b6 trEde ro or&r. Unusually large
or&rs ofrcll pJoduG will have c{mdd deliverid
ald be rade to or&r.
At Cffi
we will trirc br l@g-bm
reldidBhip! wilh rcliable $ppli6.
We will sld
supplicF @ lb b6is ofquality, dlirery rcliability
aDd @$ in tld order.
Facllltles
Sit fqs will folN @rpoftlwel
stErgis
d w siB develop. All sib, nw dd in dF fuhre
will haw a ruimm
of 200 fiplcyH.
Site #l
requic only limired capability for nw prcduc{s
and prms.
Significa*ly difrpr@t prws,
such a a esting openrioo" sbotrld hare a separate
sib.
The Macro-Space-Plan
61
. ftr
tu6
qndrys
.tu6n$9.P&
. ftdudlMnbryP*
. d9 chn
.@b6bb$b
' Rl
hndrq
$mmry
62
FacilitiesPlanning
m l
l
o
I
c
o
o
I
O
o
L
c
oi
o
o
3''
o
o
: i $
Otr>
A r
- E r
ooo
=
O
J
The Macro-Space-Plan
63
64
FacilitiesPlanning
Slngle Protucts \
th Adeou.te Volum
Process
Scale I
A.o
Thefe
'Slrlngs'0f
Slmila.
The Macro-Space-Plan
65
66
FacilitiesPlanning
@"r:il* @gi;l
@i:$*ii: Pf*treu*
The Macro-Space-Plan
67
Nots
Codes
R&D
o
a
Strategy
lntra
Org Chart
Proceas
o
o
rt
EXrStrng
rt!
o
L2
(l, tr,
N
ffil
flW,
ro]y
r{L
6
Y
(J, l-
gR
0tu
ud
UX dH
:
a
0l
<
0
lp
NP
=
+
al
!l
\
$HH
dxg$p
AU
- 2rfl
1
a.Y
z
o
o(
rfj sl
(lJ
!)
2^2
H&
-U
a
al
ttj
q
}Z
JN
t o
0t
U
(,
p!
\U
urS
1l\
oq
Up
F J
s\t!
l0
(,
2
o
rt)
0l
U
tD
L
u)
!D
(lJ
=!)
IrS
0t
!$
9o
!J
l-
J$.
vro
rfi
b
N
B FsFp
)l r{)
fis
JV
slL
Lf
Vrp
..1q,
xq)
T Bud
*I R
i
oE
FH
tso 2 i E
-i i s
dP6
V O J
6
H
UU
$
0l
!)
$R6p Iu)o
^ d S : sri
2$
E*$ d u
X*
dd
P
s
Ato
r+:i
*o
Fns
E$
F$$ EE
YP
$N
hg
(,(, ? G
qr l:
l- IJ
s
o
68
FacilitiesPlanning
The Macro-Space-Plan
69
70
FacilitiesPlanning
g6)
; 3
a
*
o
d
IE
l_a F
+
x
o
+
H
;
c
v
t
i
r
d
f!F
qi
rI
o!>
--
6oo....---
;
;
'
a
d
:.
"
! ] E F ' . E ] ; + F 5
'
:
P
o
i
l
5
3
P
f
n
s l
c o o
l
<^>lv
+ F
[[
a)
F
o
o
f)
The Macro-Space-Plan
71
72
FacilitiesPlanning
5
Oala Source
. ProcessChafrs
. P-V Oata
MRP Databaae
. RoutingOataba6e
. Obaervation
. Handlin0Records
. Work Sampling
. Schedul Estimates
. opinion
Extaol Data
The Macro-Space-Plan
73
0.6 EFU/Day
1 . 0E F U / D a y
Stacked Sheots
On Pallot
5.0 EFU/Day
8.0 EFU/Day
4 0 . 0E F U / D a y
Weldd Cabinets
60.0 EFU/Day
SusceotableTo
PaintDamage
3 0 . 0E F U D a y
3 0 . 0E F U / D a y
To Customer
74
FacilitiesPlanning
The Macro-Space-Plan
EFU=Equivalent
HandCarts
LogRolls 0.500
SlitRolls 0.071
RollPackages
0.004
Sheets
0.167
Packaged
Sheets 0.250
(A)
(B)
From
-To Unirs
01-02
01-04 SHTS
01-05 SHTS
01-08
Q1-12
01-13
01-14
01-15
02-11
03-04
O3-05 SLITS
03-06
03-08 PKGS
03-10 PMAT
03-12
03-13
03-14
03-15
04-09 SHTS
o4-11
04-12
04-'13
o4-14
04-15
05-06 SLITS
05-07 LOGS
05-09 LOGS
05-13
05-14
05-15
07-10 LOGS
07-12
08-09 PKGS
08-12
08-13
09-10
09-12
10-14
11-12
11-13
12-13
(C)
Fwd
Units
/Day
(D)
(E)
(F) (c) (H) fl)
(J) (K) (D (M)
Rev
Tot Flo Flo Flol N_F N_FTot Tot
Units EFU EFUsVow Num N-F Vow NumNumVow
lDay Fact /Day Rtg Rtg Ratio Rtg Rtg Scr Rtg
u0
t2
69.0
t2
u0
u0
u0
u0
u0
u0
u0
0.11
c.l
01
u0
0.01 19.2 A 4
7.3 o.25
1.8 o 'l
u0
uo
uo
u0
o.25 173 E 3
u0
u0
u0
u0
u0
46.0 46.0 0.11 10,1 t 2
23.4 0.50 11.7 l 2
0.2
0.50
0.1 0 1
u0
u0
u0
0.50
11.7 l 2
u0
2134.0
0.01 19.2 A 4
u0
u0
u0
u0
u0
u0
u0
u0
69.0
0]7
0.17
11.5
'11.5
TABLE 3.1
1.25 A
4 2.00 E
1.25 A
4 3.25 A
125 E
3 2.75 E
1.25 0
1 0.50 0
1.25 |
21.00 I
1.25 |
21.00 |
1.25 |
21.00
|25
|
21.00 |
1.25 E
31.50 |
1.25 A
4 2.00 E
125 E
3 2.13 E
1.25 0
10.50 0
1.25 |
2 3.50 A
1.25 U
0 0.63 |
1.25 0
10.50 0
1.25 |
2 i.00 |
1.25 0
1 0.50 0
1.25 0
1 0.50 0
1.25 E
3 3.38 A
1.25 |
21.00 |
1.25 0
10.50 0
1.250
1050 0
1.25 0
1 0.50 0
1.25 0
10.50 0
1.25 |
2 2.25 E
1.25 |
2 2.25 E
1.25 U
0 0.63 |
1.25 0
1 0.50 0
1.25 0
10.50 0
1.25 0
10.50 0
1.25 0
1 1.75 E
1.25 0
I0.50 0
1.25 |
2 3.50 A
1.25 0
1 0.50 0
1.25 0
10.50 0
1.25 0
10.50 0
1.25 0
10.50 0
1.25 E
31.50 |
1.25 |
21.00 I
1.25 0
10.50 0
1.25 0
10.50 0
75
76
FacilitiesPlanning
03>08 0B>09 04>09 05>07 07>10 01>04 01>05 05>06 03>05 03>r0
From-To SPUS
05>09
The Macro-Space-Plan
77
78
FacilitiesPlanning
The Macro-Space-Plan
79
quantitativeapproachandwereidentifiedby a consensus
or someother
non-quantitativeapproach.Thesemust nowbe mergedinto a singleset
of affinities (fig.3.28). This is Task 03.14.
A spreadsheet
createdby hand or computer is usuallythe most
straightforward method of merging. Table i.2 is an extension of the
spreadsheetin table 3.1. These columns are put in after columns
A through D.
Column E: Vowel Non-Flow Rating (Enter Manuallv)
Column F: Numeric Non-Flow Rati"g (Enter tr,t""u"ity;
Column G: FlodNon-Flow Ratio(Enter Manually)
Column H: Merged Score:Col. Ax Col. F + Col. p x (f - Col. F)
Column I: Merged Vowel Rating (Enter Manually)
Planners should add rows for all remaining combinations of
SPUs,sortthe rowsin themergedscorecolumn (col. u) in descending
order,andplot the mergedscoreson a rankedbar chart.From the chart.
EFU=Equivalent
HandCarts
LogRolls
0.500
SlitRolls
0.071
RollPackages
0.004
Sheets
u.lo/
Packaged
Sheets 0.250
(Bl
(ct
(Dl
From
-To
Units
Fwd
Units/
Day
Rev
Units/
Day
03-08
08-09
04-09
05-07
07-10
01-04
01-05
05-06
03-05
03_10
05-09
PKGS
PKGS
SHTS
LOGS
LOGS
SHTS
SHTS
SLITS
SLITS
PMAT
LOGS
(A)
2134.0
21234.0
69.0
zJ.4
23.4
69.0
Aqn
46.0
46.0
46.0
TABLE 3.2
(El
(Ft
Tot
EFU EFUs/
Fact Day
0.01
0.01
0.25
0.50
0.50
0.17
0.17
0.11
0.11
0.25
0.50
19.2
19.2
17.3
11.7
11.7
11.5
11.5
10.1
5.1
1.8
0.1
(ct tH)
Flo Flo
VowNum
Rtg Rtg
A
A
4
4
t r J
t
t
t
t
t
o
o
o
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
80
FacilitiesPlanning
3
D e t e r mi n e F l o w /
N o n - F l o wR a t i o
4
M e r g e U s i n OW e i g h t e d
AvergaeTechnique
Prepare Atfinity
D i s t r i b u t a o nB a r c h a i l
8
D e livera b le i
. Merged Affinity Chari
Or
. M e r g e dA f f i n i t yL i 6 t
The Macro-Space-Plan
81
FacilitiesPlanning
82
u,
o q)
'- q)
(ul
:
!
!
(U
or
CD
c
(E
(!
o
E
ru@
06
<E
oE
olc
(6iF
v
(L<
IiiT"--l!"i.!.i,
fti$$il
\:r:1ilr
Iiiitt
tiirit
lt:t
E
= e@o
\t-
c
(!
o'=
o
.E o
o)
/k
gE@
(!
o E,o
!
E
oUr
v-;
(Do-
/d
Fa
FaFigure3.29 - Affinity Diogram
The Macro-Space-Plan
B3
Space calculation
Spaceis the third fundamental element of a spaceplan. It is a limited
resource;there is only so much spaceunder a roof, on a site, or in a
department.Whether the spaceis land on a site or spacein a building,
it is usually expensive
Although spaceis three-dimensional, most spaceplans ignore
the vertical dimension. This is acceptablein all but a few situations.
Most layouts attempt to optimize the useof spaceaswell as its
arrangement.A complete spaceplan requiresnot only the location of
SPUs, but their size and shapeaswell. The spaceoccupiedby SPUs
usually prevents the designer from honoring all affinities
tr
o
H s F F = S . s : ! : F F p p ! E E . e
+? . C. o o o F\ 2 FI a a a a a -Eo i b 6 h9 a Eo
l Z f
=
o
c
;i
c(o C(o C (! c c c
cg o
c
o
F c o
o o ;r
9
@ E
l
^
r
6 o 9 ! { o o R P o o l * o o , ^
-E
..,
o o = F a t s f r i F F ; i t r } . , & . . F d - aI
o
s
- o
E , E E g F F E S E E F g SEE S F E
c!
R
H
_ ES
o oer .A
i- w
= . :0 (So .
, f ix bEboSP3 RR R
i *g o3 .R. b3
z
tE
He
oE**6Ei v"
r F{ EEr Es Hc g xEq l H
f ,! E ? V , ? F = 8 6 : E 8 H #
, " GE P E 6 E # f 5 E E E d S {
e 5 8 8 3 8 8 b 8 8 P = s p s p e
TABLE 3.3
84
FacilitiesPlanning
simultaneously.
Benveenthem,itforcescompromisesaboveandbeyond
thosearrivedat in the configurationdiagram.The spaceneedsof SPUs
may distort evena neadyperfectdiagram.
Task03.16 calculates
sizeofthe requiredspacefor eachSPU,usually
in squarefeetor squaremeters.Calculationofspacerequirementsusesone
or more of six methods.These methods are:elementalcalculation.visual
estima ting, transformation,space
standards,
proportioning,or ratioforecas
ting.
Table 3.3 shows Cosmos Products' spacerequirementsand how the
analystsusedseveralmethodsfor the calculation.
Elementol colculotion
This method, illustratedin figure 3.30, startsat the most detailedlevel.Each
pieceof fumiture or equipmentassignedto an SPU is measured.These
dimensionsarethen addedtogetherfor the total amount of space.Spacefor
aisles,miscellaneous
storage,
or otherneedsarealsoindudedin thesum.This
addedspaceoften is a percentage
of the basicequipmentspace.
Elementalcalculationis simpleandstraightforward.However,it has
its limitations. For one, it takesconsiderabletime and effort. Uncertain
forecastscan make it difficult to determine how much furniture or
equipmentwilloccupythespace.Elementalestimatingisprimarilya shortterm methodology.Most industriesuse it for one to three yearsin the
future.Beyondthat, other methodsareequallyandperhapsmore reliable.
DevelopEquipment
lnformation
Capacity/Process/
Saleslnformation
uollDurfls3 pns1l'atodg
n"rt_*,uaI
r"r"rle I
I
I
I
I
ocuouodx3
ebpelnouy
rrr
Ir
Ir
Ir
rrr
6uttotunsatDnslA
98
ueg6-acedg-orceW
aqf
The Macro-Space-Plan
Handling\Storage43
34"/o
SecondaryProcess 30
23o/o
PrimaryProcess24
19"/o
StandardProportions
Of ExistingFacility
New Facility
87
88
FacilitiesPlanning
Proportioning
Certain typesofspacecalculationuseproportions effectively.The space
for a given SPU comes from the calculation of another space.For
example,aislesmightbe apercentage
ofproductionspace,or conference
room spacemay be a portion of office space.Figure 3.34 illustrates.
Proportioning works well when the history to support it exists.It
usually applies to only a few types of space,however. Proportioning
requireslittle effort.
Ratio forecasting
Ratio forecastinguseshistoricaltrendsto forecastspace.In this method,
businessparametersand spaceare correlatedover time. Such ratios may
changegraduallyover the years.The analystthen projectsthe trend of this
ratio into future yearsand usesthat projection to calculatespace.
Ratio forecasting,which is based on historical data, is most
appropriatefor long-term site plans.It haslimited usefor short-term
spacecalculations.
Constraints
Many factorsthat affecta macro-layoutdo not fit the conceptsof SPUs,
space,and affinities.These are constraints.Someexamplesare:
. Column spacingof 32 feet restricts the placement of aisles
and someequipment.
' High electricalload restricts the placement of heat treat
ovensto certain areaswith adequateelectrical service.
. A cold climate dictates that dock doors should not have
The Macro-Space-Plan
F o
E
5
c')O
.cU@
oa)
> Q
.=(U
coECD
{ o
s
o(U
=o_
5"u
v
Figure3.35 - CosmosSpaceplan primitive
89
90
FacilitiesPlanning
northern exposure.
' zoning requirementsspecifythat docksnot facethe street;
' floor loading restrictsthe placementof certainequipment;
' explosion hazard dictates that ahazatdouschemical room
havean explosionvent on an outsidewall; and
' the companypresidentrequestsa window for his office'
A form for identif ing constraints(Task03.19)is shownin figure3.36.
The SPUsarelistedon the left and acrossthe toP' major categoriesare
0l
a
E
o
7N
zsNqs
z?)v6
t-
I
a
$.
u)
4
9?NI1 99?2,
s
r
o
I
i9?2)V
AgV:
$ l (
lurerlsuoc
(
: UN
2
s F
a a
ol s
K' U
o
a
q) !
rn l0l
WI
t
3 i sl
q)
3= u
q
q
8 l! i
$s
E
(
P !
0t $
E v
${
u
Ul'I U o
2 g
fit<
Ets6Rl It :
q)
L
u tl-
vr
t
2
i It
$lg
rl "
The Macro-Space-Plan
91
Designingmacro-space-plans
plan primitive now must fit into a building outline. The
]h9.space
building may exist or it maybe a proposedstrucrure.
Preparingspaceplan optionsbeginswith overlayingthe building
_
with a spaceplan primitive. The spaceblocksare shapedto fii
:":]tl.
building walls, columns,and other featur.r. Th" constraints,r.--ury
should be consultedduring the placementof eachSpU.
F or eachspaceplan primitive, thereprobablywill be severalviable
_
layouts.All variationsof the primitives, including mirror imagesand
rotations,should be examined.
I_tmay be difficult to match space,honor constraints,and design
an orderly arrangement.In general,designersshould strive for clean,
rectangularareas.spacerequirementsmay have to be compromised.
FacilitiesPlanning
92
c
o
o . ^
6 C
o
- a
S O
a
o
c)
.t
+
-TJ
-c)
4;<
o O
=
c
o
o
o
c
U
o
E
)
=_
f
--l
a
C
ft
O
o
o_
o
o
-a
c
o
o
a
so_
o
L
o
E
n o
- 6
.9
o
O
O
=3,(t
*o
N ^
6
o
=
6
t
-z
The Macro-Space-Plan
93
c
o
o
o
L
:a
N
a
6 q
'-m
o u
L O
c
E
!
=
3
O
o
o
a
o
o
6
o
E
o
C
O
a
o
E
U
o
c
'd
o
0 ?
o
o
o
O
o
a
=
;
o
o
o !0
c
a
a
o
o
't
6
C
o
a
o
E
0
0
.=
) :
= a) )
o
o
= !co
o
I
.=
.=
+Z
o
a
N
94
FacilitiesPlanning
Some Cosmos managershad reservationsabout the productfocused strategy adopted in Task 03.10. Therefore, an additional
approach
basedon continuing the process-focused
macro-space-plan
'n", pr.p"..d. The resultwasO ption2 (fig. 3.38),which mitigatedtheir
and disadvantages
.orri.rnr and demonstratedthe relativeadvantages
of processand product focus. It was preparedas a second,parallel
strategystatement
proJectstartingfrom Task03.10.The process-focused
produceda different set of sPUs, affinities,and spacerequirements.
Option 2 retainsthe aislesystemand many of the good features
of Ontion 1. Functional and semi-functionalareassuch as shipping,
They are
receiving,and artwork havemany of the samecharacteristics.
areas
storage
as
such
SPUs
often in the samelocation.Somefunctional
names,
need significantly more space.Processareas change their
characters,spacerequirements,and other characteristics.Option 2
needsabout 10 percent more spacethan option 1. This additional
spaceis in a building expansionon the eastside.
projects,therewill be threeto six
For most macro-space-planning
fundamentally different options and severalvariations. using the
existinglayout-or simply doing nothing*is alwaysan option' Even
when the existingspaceplan is no longerviable,it makesa convenient
baselineforgaugingimprovement.The Cosmosprojectteamdeveloped
severalother options,which are not includedin this book.
Aisles
Aisles present specialproblems.They should be straight and wide
.r,o.rgh fot two-way traffic. Usually, the best approachidentifies main
aislesas a separateSPU. Designersthen place them on the macrospace-plan.Departmental aisles,on the other hand, are within the
spacecalculationsfor each SPU. Aisles adjacentto walls are often
undesirablebecausethey serveonly one side.
An alternateapproachincludes all aislesas Part of the SPUs'
Designersthen place sPUs on the plan, recognizingthat those main
aislesgenerallywill follow the SPU boundaries.
ihe straightforwardCosmosspaceplansin figures3.37 and3'38
first method. Main aisleshavea separatecalculationand every
the
use
SPU is adjacentto a main aisle.A centralloop allowscontinuoustraffic
in both directions.A singledead-endaisleservesscreenprep and part
of the silk-screeningoperation.This aislesystemwill allow subsequent
layout changeswithout disturbing the basicflow pattern.
ldentifyingkey materialhandlingissues
Material handling and layout are intertwined. The best handling
The Macro-Space-Plan
95
96
FacilitiesPlanning
SpacePlanA
The Macro-Space-Plan
97
98
FacilitiesPlanning
The Macro-Space-Plan
99
should be selected.
Block 6 evaluatesall options with respect to the identified
qualifiers.Any option that fails to meet a qualiS'ing criterion drops
from consideration.
Block 7 evaluatesthe optionswith respectto the decidercriteria.
New or hybrid options go on the list of availableoptions.
After evaluation,one option is selectedfor development.A
decisionsummaryrecappingthe decisionprocessshouldbe prepared.
The summaryand decisionmake up Block 10.
Evaluating
the Cosmosspaceplans
The Cosmosdesignteam and steeringcommitteemet to evaluatethe
proposedspaceplans.They decidedthat both the steeringcommitree
and design team should participate in the evaluation. They first
reviewedthe original projectobjectives.Thesecamefrom Task 03.01,
"Plan
Project":
' reducematerialhandling cost;
. reduceoperatingcosts;
. deliverproject under budget of$800,000;
' improve deliveryperformancel
. improve teamwork,communication,and quality;
' allow for new products; and
' accommodate1998 production.
From the original objectives,they derivedthesedecisioncriteria:
D
Material flow
D
Direct operatingcost
qD
Initial cost
D
Delivery
D
Communication
D
Teamwork
D
Qrality
D
New product adaptability
Meets 1998 production requirement
a_
OSHA/EPA Compliance
a_
"Q
A
notation designatesthe qualifiers.OSHA,/EPA compliance
is necessary
for anyspaceplan.Thosethat fail to meetthis qualification
are no longer considered.Similarly,the 1998 production requirement
is a qualifier. Initial cost is both a deciderand qualifier. A spaceplan
must meet the $800,000budgetlimitation to be considered;this is the
qualification.Initial costbelow$800,000is abenefit;this is the decider.
All the other criteria are deciders,denotedby a "D."
100
FacilitiesPlanning
I
Oprlon# I
P r o d u c l r F o c u s e dS p a c e P l d n
Optlon #3
Existlng Lagoul
The Macro-Space-Plan
101
= HE
F=
o) (o
ro(f)
@
F
= fr'r
ro
(f)
F\ LO
l-- o)
OO)
st
OJ O)
l'-T.OOOlr)OC9$O)@N
o) t) g? c0 !9 9.f
r-. to
90
o)
@
N
CD
dSooer>dgocid
ETSEq F e q K E c S E r e
q)O@stOO(oOOCD$
@
Nct
$cv)
$
N
C
!
(./)
V)@
lDa
EE5E= 3 = 9 - 3 3 i . 8 9
a<o<no-N(osNOJo_
o
D
Fr=fl=Y?QPiE
.= =
> =
C)
.^.^
d) ::.!l'
i
s-?r-!
c.TcD
*o
x . = 6 _6 _X h : i > ' =
q>
q o)
d66666666666666666666666666666666666666666666
F
E
L
3 3 Ef
a--
ali.
*=zz
ciX.=.=.ESrn
(n@c'EE(JO_AA(nE_
s|r)ro@oo)(or'-o)oo)
==cbcbP+Li,6totrcb
TABLE 3.4
102
FacilitiesPlanning
The
work for Option 1. The other options havesimilar spreadsheets.
three options havetransportwork of 9,647,78,669,and 28,t31 EFUfeet per day respectively.
Another measure of material flow is the frequency count for
materialmoves.Option t has11 internal moves,Option 2has L4, and
Option 3has 2I. The total distancetraveledfor the two representative
productsis another measure.Options 1 through 3 have distancesof
L,026,7,723, and2,735feet,respectively.
The average
number of trips
per day is 119, 732, and !98.
This analysisassumesthat all trips use the EFU, an equivalent
handcart,asthe means.When implemented,the layoutactuallywilluse
severalmethods of handling. However, for estimating, the EF"[J
assumptionis a reasonableapproximation.
Figure3.41is agraphicdisplayoftheMFAresults. Basedon every
materialflow measure,Option f. is significantlybetter than Option 2.
Option 2 is significantlybetter than Option 3.
Financial analysis
Table 3.5 summarizesthe financialresultsfor the threeoptions.Option
3-the existinglayout-maintains the statusquo.For this reason,there
is no change in either savingsor costs.Option 3 thus provides the
baselinefor the financialanalysis.
2 5C0
7A
60
2.CC0
50
1 500
40
30
1,000
2A
500
10
0
IW(Fl EFU/Davr1000)
Ir ps/Dav
fulro
^nnua Cosl 1$)
FLI^ I UO
2n 131
,723
132
63 957
400
600
TheMacro-Space-Plan 103
The center building is the new constructionbetween the two
existingbuildings.The team estimatedthe costat $35 per squarefoot.
The eastextensionfor Option 2 will cost about $30 per squarefoot
becauseit doesnot haveloading docks.
Option 2 wlll need new equipment,valued at about $23,000,
which will cost $21,000 for installation. Option 3 requires more
equipment becauseof its cellular nature. Rearrangementcosts are
$45,000and $28,000,respectively,for Options 1 and 2.
The cellularapproachof Option l will requiresignificanttraining
and additionalconsultingfeeswhen comparedto Option 2. The team
alsoanticipateda more difficult start-up.
A contingencyof 15 percentthat allows for unplanned costsis
appliedto the implementationofboth newoprions.Either Option 1 or
Initial
CashOutflows
Description
Option 1
Amount
Option 2
Amount
Option 3
Amount
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
CenterBuilding
EastExtension
Equipment
Installation
Rearrangement
Training
Consulting
Startup
Contingencies
$161,000
$0
$176,000
$49,500
$45,000
$32,000
$43,500
$100,000
$91,050
$161,000
$307,800
$23,000
$7,800
$28,000
$0
$20,000
$45,000
$88,890
Total
$698,050
$681,490
AnnualInflows
Description
Option 1
Amount
Option 2
Amount
Increased
Sales
$750,000
Material
Handling
$22,885
DirectLabor
$132,000
Otherlndirect
$75,000
WorkingCapital
$140,000
Ouality
$230,000
Total
$1,349,885
InitialInflow
Inventory
Years-To-Payout
$750,000
qE FFA
$10,000
$37,500
$0
$20,000
$826,058
$1,750,000
0.23
TABLE 3.5
Option 3
Amount
$0
$0
$0
s0
$0
$0
$0
$0
$0
0.82
nla
104
FacilitiesPlanning
TheMacro-Space-Plan 105
factor had a weight betweenone and ten.
Operating cost, quality, and delivery receivedhigh weights (ten
and nine).Thesefactorshavethe most direct effectin the marketplace.
The group believedthey had the highest strategicimportance.
Material flow, communication,and teamwork receivedweights in
the sevento eightrange.Thesefactorsaresomewhatrelated.
Good material
PNlAnalysisSummary
Option 1
Positive
Option 2
Negative
BestMaterialHandling
Simplification
Neat & CleanGeometry
Less Inventory
Better Teamwork
FitsW/TOM
FasterThroughput
HighTrainingRequired
It MightNot Work
DifficultAdjustment
HigherRisk
Factar
Option 3
Interesting
Racnnnca
LessSpace
LessCost
FasterPayout
BestAnnualCost
Easier
Supervision
Employee
Involvement
NiceAisleSystem
UsesCurrentSoftware
w/Kanban
Production
Control
Option I
Positive
Reduced
Material
Handling
NiceAisleSystem
Neat& CleanGeometry
EasyPersonal
Adjustment
Lotsof Space
Option 3
Interesting
LowRisk
Allows Cellular
HighCost
TransitionLater
AllowsCellular
Procrastination
NoThroughput
lmprovement
MoreSpaceRequired
LowerPayout
HigherAnnualCost
I aqc Fmnlnrroo
Involvement
DoesNot Assit TOM
LessTeamwork
TABLE 3,6
106
FacilitiesPlanning
t'oj""t'
fAcitir^/ Re-euaiueeeiu'
Weighted
Factor
Analysis
to
Oplion t1
Factor
Oplion l2
Option 13
g,
f2
l0tlrluNicA.TioN
14
F3
TeAt'twoeK
A zt
F)
NEW "?ODUCTE
u
e
u
u
u
e
12
e s
F4 rNiTlrX- 167
r s >ieecT o?ee-c61
32 I
24
7
10
3o
20
i6
AU/XLiTY
36
1g
u
u
t7
>tMEV
lo
4o
10
Totals
*
I
1q4
s4
Option al
o
o
o
6
12
o
o
o
r(
Option Descriplion
CELLUIJAQ
2 FUNCTlON/lt
3 EKST1N6
ef rzlqt,
tl.ATEAJALFLOW
Fl
Ay:
AL
cost't6?eoDucrS
\it:
lEol
iltnAF,)
f.TAYLO?
H,FOAD
Oplion 15
The Macro-Space-Plan
1O7
Conclusion
This completesthe discussionof macro-space-planning.
Many of the
methods apply to other levels of spaceplan design. Material flow
analysis,for example,is an important tool for Level 2, "Site Planning."
Weighted factor analysisappliesat all levels.
For most facility planning, the macro-space-planis the most
important planning level. It is where strateg.yis defined and the first
stepstoward implementationare taken. It is the level that usuallyhas
the greatestimpact on a firm's competitiveposition. For thesereasons
it hasbeen the sublectof the most subsrantialdiscussionin this book.
Chapter4
Micro-Space-Planning
and
Work Cell Design
Micro-space-planning,Level 4, is the next level of design detail.
Micro-space-planningdeterminesthe locationofequipment,furniture,
andworkstationsfor eachdepartmentor SPU ofthe macro-space-plan.
Processchartsand operationplans define how peopleand equipment
will work within the space(fig. a.1). The output is usually a twodimensionallayout for eachdepartmentor SPU. It may be helpful to
combine the spaceplans for eachSPU on a large drawing that overlays
the macro-space-plan.
Soundmicro-levelspaceplanningensuresthatworkflows smoothly
in eachSPU, promoting teamwork.It affectssupervision,o rganizational
learning,costs,inventory,quality,delivery,flexibility,andcoordination,
as well as many aspectsof the firm's cost structure.It provides an
opportunity to reengineerthe processes.
During this activity,collaborationwith supervisorsandworkers in
eachdepartmentis vital. The success
of the spaceplan dependslargely
on their cooperationbecauseit is their spaceand their work that will
change.Upper managementusuallyparticipateslessat this level than
at higher levels.
Micro-space-planningsometimesoccursbefore the large-scale
macro-space-plan
is designed,particularlyif only one areaneedsa new
spaceplan. Or, a designerm y wish to developan experimentalwork
cell to gain experienceand try out new ideas.Ifso, he or she should
review the parts of Chapter 2 that discusslevelsand phasing.
The approachto micro-layoutsdiscussed
in this chapteris similar
to that for macro-layouts.It has five major tasks,eachof which has a
correspondingprocedurediagramthat tellsthe designeror designteam
r 1 0 FacilitiesPlanning
fundamentalelements-SPUs,
how to do it. The macro-space-plan's
affinities, space,and constraints-still apply,yet there are significant
differences.This chapterexplainsthe tasksand procedures.
The model projectplan helpsdesignersorganizethis work, while
allowing them to look aheadand behind. Focusingon a detailedtask
also means stepping back to view the entire work cell design.This
where each
differs significantlyfrom designinga macro-space-plan,
task can be approachedas a relatively independent piece of work.
D l a m o n dE q u l p m e n t
Uacro Spacoplan
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
11' |
Work cells
Macro-space-planSPUsareoftenwork cells.Work cellsaresmall,selfcontained work units with severalmachines or operations. Their
equipment and peopleare situatedtogether in a compact,sequential
arrangement.Work cellsusuallyhavetwo to ten people and two to ten
to produce
operations.They perform all or most operationsnecessary
Here aresome
their productsor completea majorproductionsequence.
examples:
A manufacturerofjet-engine turbine bladesdecidedto usework
cells to prepare the intricate and delicate wax patterns for precision
investmentcastings.A molding machineproducedwax components.A
team of t\,vo to five people then assembledthe components into
patterns. They manually cleanededges,filled voids, and inspected
completed patterns. Within a few days of cell startup, defects and
rework declined 30 percent while productivity rose significantly.
Throughput went from severalweeks to one day.
The samemanufacturerofturbine bladesalsochoseto usecellsfor
processingraw castings.In the post-castingcell,tvvoto sevenpeoplecut
gatesand risers.They shot-blastedthe blades,ground flash,de-burred,
x-rayed and inspected.Throughput time went from months to days.
Qrality increaseddramatically. Productivity improved.
A maker of industrial air cleanersdecidedto use cells for final
assembly.Productivity increasedby 20 percent. Responsetime for
specialorderswent from weeks to hours. Finished-goodsinventory
declinedby 96 percent.The samemanufacturerthen linked aweldment
cell for cabinetsto the final assemblycells.This further reducedWIP
inventory and improved quality. The air cleaner manufacturer then
placedsheetmetal fabricationin a linked cell.Internal-partsshortages
disappeared.
WIP declinedfurther.
A firm that manufacturesmechanicalcontrol cableschoseto use
cellsfor final assembly.That companyreducedthe amount of finished
goodsby90 percentandimprovedqualityby60 percent.Workers in the
cell consistentlyproduced at I20 percentof the former work standard.
In addition, workers in the cell performed many tasks that indirect
employeespreviouslyaccomplished.
A manufacturerof HVAC equipment machinesand assembles
large gearboxes.The firm installed a machining cell and a linked
assemblycellandreducedfinishedgoodsby 80 percentwhileimproving
quality and productivity significantly. Responsetime for specialorders
went from weeks to twenty-four hours.
Many other industriesuse work cells with similar results.These
indude thosespecializingin electronics,steelcasting,structuralfabrication,
112
FacilitiesPlanning
Interpretingterminologyand conventions
Most businessoperationsprovide a variety of products and services.
Someproductsare for externalcustomerswhile othersgo to internal
customers.Although servicesareintangible,theirprovisionfollowsthe
sameprinciplesas a manufacturedproduct. In this chapter,for space
plan purposes,the term product may alsobe interpretedas service.
Also, the sizesof lots and containersin work cells have different
interpretationsin different industries.For example,the term large
container meansone thing to a personwho works in an electronics
plant, but it hasquite a differentmeaningto someonewith a heavysteel
background.It may haveno meaningat all to someonein the insurance
industry. Conventionsareusedas approximate,but well-understood,
terms that crossindustry boundaries.
The conventionusedin the examplesin this book are basedon
designproduction volum e. Singlepiecerefersto one item or a singleunit
ofproduction. Smallisa quantityofproduct equivalentto lessthan one
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
113
o
o
o
o
o
(t)
o
o
U'
, e O
o o
ol<
9 o
d =
o
()
o
o
o
o
u,
o
(.)
o
o
. r p
(;)
o
O o .
o
o:
,()
o
IL
o
o
6 g
@ t
a
f
x o
lL
g,
U'
f
g
f
(?
o
o
o
o
LL
o
o
o
L
[L
o
o
(?
o
|
o
o
n
N
r
sassacordlo ,aqulnN
!
:,9
:s,i
- d
' t1 4
FacilitiesPlanning
The micro-leveltasks
The preferred approachto micro-layouts follows the pattern developed
in Chapter 3 for macro-layouts.Figure 4.3 is the model project.It has
five generally sequentialtasks:
' Task 04.01, "Analyze and SelectProducts";
'Task 04.02,"Design and Refine Process"l.
' Task 04.03, "SelectInfrastructureElements";
'Task 04.04,"Design Cell Layouts";and
. Task 04.05, "SelectCell Option."
Eachtaskhasa procedurediagramthat showsthe designstepsand their
Variousformsandaidshelpmakedesigndecisions.However,
sequences.
there are parts of eachtask that can have multiple options and many
04.o1
Analyze& Select Products
04.o2
Design& RefineProcess
c
.9
(E
(D
=
c
04.03
Select I nf rastructu re Elements
.s)
o
(l)
t__
04.o4
Design Cell Layouts
o4.o5
SelectOption
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
115
Selectingthe products
Product selectionis the first and most fundamentaltask for work cell
design.It must be decidedwhich productseachSPU will process.This
determinesthe focus for the cell. All other design decisionsflow from
this task. The deliverablefor this task is a list of products for each cell
and a designproduction volume for eachproduct.
Decisions are basedpartially on how the products are processed.
A functional cell might processevery product. In a predominantly
functional spaceplan, a product may travel through many SPUs.In a
product-focusedwork cell, the products may stay in one cell.
During the macro-space-planning,products may have been
1 16
FacilitiesPlanning
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
't't7
To 04.02
118
FacilitiesPlanning
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
119
120
FacilitiesPlanning
ap
g . Ee
***e=-$
Ei
65
t*
>
> "
E o =.=
^.1i66E' .=6X
;CEE6.agE3,F
gEBBRTNRTR
9-**
ll
s-\o
o
N
P-...-d
o
6
t;
;
u
9
@ -
\P
E :
)q
a
a
o
P-'E
3
o
o- 3
6 9 9
+
ii
=
6 - - ; 9
:
> 6 Y =
- : 9 I
EEIEEeES-g
Fl
g:E5!F#-#s
36$9S63333
_ A d
E *e
".=:E
ggiEgs
u o 5 0 0 0 @ a u @
6@ts@6
N N N N N N N N N N
cq
/ \
E
; o
5;es,
>l
Fl
c0
E
rl
q a
tsb=
3ii;e?.i5
i t c c ; - - ^ ^ 9 c
;;
E E E 3 :. E ' EE
o
a o
o r N o t 6 @ N @ o
4 N
6
-.;
E
N
O > H
< F f o
cd co
A T ] N
< @ H O
o 4
t
Fi
4
E
o G
s-
-Ets54
N F O
N N N
e8
EUEEE'=:$E;
*EiEFP:}
= E ; c * Z - " = E F
wrR
F
oE
'Fa
O @ F
@ @ @
3 E E - E z is E o ' , f3
W
,
!b,)
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
121
2500
2oo0
,{
o
= 1500
--/
c
f
9 1000
l-:listofy :
:Forecast :
500
0
-4
-3
-2
-1
122
FacilitiesPlanning
40%
o
o
o
c
.o
10v.
"st u9t -st $" $" n*t $" C "+" .+".dt .+" "d,t$" C dp"C C
Modol #
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
123
o
o
o
F
06
o
o
o
o z
o
o
!T
=
N
x
o
N
o
@
J
I
E
'c
o
o
x
U' a
c0
x
It
F
o
o
'
o
o
o
e
* dl =
o
o
o
=
:
N
o
.!
o
dl
o
z
o
o
5
|2-96478 Pin
124
FacilitiesPlanning
: ;
o
* Uo
o
.5
d!
o
I
-g
-5
o
z
o
*g>
.6
o
o
T
o
@
F
() =
o
N
o
N
o
o
z
a
o
h
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
125
126
FacilitiesPlanning
Heat Treatment
SmallestWindow Size
Length
ToleranceClass
Binder and Sand System
Molding Equipment
Flask Size
PiecesPer Mold
Number Of Cores
Core-Making Equipment
05
06
07
08
09
10
77
72
13
74
sEQ
T P A R T #
N A I { B
r"..Aa690 ciEvis
C A S T : N G G R O UP T E C H N O L O G Y
POSITI ON
0 o 0 0 0 o o 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
1 2 3 4 5 6 ' 7
3'2- i
f"o
ii ii ii o o at r"d
3 2 1 1 0 0 0
BRACKET
2 ^59427
3 A 8 7 6 5 5 C L E V r S 3 2 1 1 0 1 1
4 2 I 1 0 1 1
4 A71123 STOP
3 2 2 1 0 1 1
5 A83445 BEARTNG
2 2 L L O A 7
6 A19435 BEARING
4 2 2 | O L 7
1 Ar4982
BUSHTNG
4 2 2 L O L 7
8 A 1 9 4 0 0 P A W L
3 2 1 1 0 1 I
9 A30045 BRACKET
3 2 1 1 0 1 I
10 A52045 STOP
11 A6?112,ENp. .I'rTTIN.G42 1 I 0 1 1
"+
I 0 1"i
i.i
i)
tEt'etii"sRAcr(rr
5 2 22 r O Ll 22
13 A56719 LEVER
3 2 I L O L 2
14 A87235 LEVER
4 2 2 L O T 2
15 A14561 BEARING
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
O
O
o
0
O
O
O
0
0
O
0
o
0
O
0
0
o
0
Y...:....'-
O
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
A56112
CAP
3
3
3
3
1
1
0
0
0
r
.-
B 0 0 0 I 0
B O o o 1 o
B 0 0 0 1 0
B 0 o o 1 o
. q . . . q . . q . . 9 . . 11
c 3 4 5 r 1
C 3 4 5 1 2
,it .i1.1.3
. .1...t..1.,.+...$
i. t
3+_8.*T.-ci.qT,...
L8
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
r+
o o'iio:
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
n
-
0
O
0
0
0
0
0
0 HO:
0 H1:
o Hlj
0 H!
0 HI
0 Hll
0 Hl:
0 Hll
0 H1i
n g1r
.Yl1.r:a
o H2
o H2j
0 H2i
o H2l
0..r!.2
0 N2 :
0 N2i
N2
HO
A83a,l5 B.rrlno
A30(X5 Brlckot
h\
A't9435 Be.rin0
&
i1982 Burhlng
l
il
ffi',''
A19il00 Prwl
r:
5"W
.n#i .
v*
<-$}'
A1il56l Belrlnq
A12334 Rrtch.t
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
125
03
04
FinishedWeight
Material
FacilitiesPlanning
126
Heat Treatment
SmallestWindow Size
Lengh
ToleranceClass
Binder and Sand System
Molding Equipment
Flask Size
PiecesPer Mold
Number Of Cores
Core-Making Equipment
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
SEQ
PART#
'
'''''I
2
0 0
r 2
NAUE
At6tb
C.iEViS
A59427 BRAC(ET
3 A87655
4 A71123
5 A83445
6 A19435
7 A l 4 9 S
I A19400
9 A 3 0 0 4
10 A52045
1
5
1
6
; ) 1 i o it ii b o o it r"d o o iibi
3 2 L L O O O B O O 0 2 3 0 0 tloi
3 2
CLEVTS
4 2
STOP
3 2
BEARTNC
2 2
BEARTNG
2 B U S H I N G 4 2
4 2
PAWL
5 B R A C K E T 3
3 2
STOP
L
1
2
a
2
2
2
1
L O 1 1
1 0 1
| O 7
a O 1
a O \
L O 7
1 1 0 1
1 0 I
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
0
0
O
O
O
0
0
O
0
0
0
O
O
0
0
0
0
0
0
O
O
0
0
O
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
3
3
3
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
H1' ;
Hl
Hl
HX
H1i
H1
H1
Hlr
1 1 A 6 ? 1 1 2 E L r p. F r r T . r N . G A . . ? 1 1 0 1 1 . . B . . . 0 . . . 9 . . .1. q 1 0 . q . [ l
1 2.2 I O 1 2B 0 0 0 r 0 0 0 H2
i i A 9 7 5 - 4 5B R A C K E T
1 3 A 5 6 7 1 9 L E V E R
1 4 A 8 7 2 3 5 L E V E R
1 5 A 1 4 5 5 1 B E A R I N G
5 2 2 1 0 1 2 8 0
] . L O 1 2 B 0
3 2
1 2 B O
4 2 2 L O
0 0
0 0
O O
1 0 0 0 H 2 1
1 0 0 0 H 2 :
1 o O O H 2 :
.BI-T-S.y..E.T.,.........
...r..5-......4.1..?.1..1.4.
. .4a . 2
. r . ,3. r ,r, . I0, . . 1
0 . _2. f .8. , ro. : :0d : :0...1....1.9,,9...-_1.?:
:r:::4::::5::i:i:ir::O;i;di--ir.
. 17 A34s67 coNE
l8
A56112
HO
O 0
N 2 i
,: A52045Stop
&i,
.-4A
, $fa*
\sftt
//rillN)
\Z
Sga2?
f-
"
f^U
H1
fink=,
<}l43590 Cl.Yl!
CAP
. .'A83tt5 Bcaring
3.etd
-,::."'
..
'l{\'\
JP
&
.. A7ll23 Stoe
A14982 Buthlng
&
.Alil561 Borllrg
6r+j
A1233,1 Rrtch.l
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
127
15
SecondaryCore Equipment
76
Group TechnologyFamily Assignment
Initially, the analystcodedeachparr using only positions1 through 15.
Position 01 is the first characterof the codenumber.The number 3 in
that position representsan annualusageof201 up to 500 castings.4
representsannualusageof501 to 1,000 castings.
Position05 is for heattreatment.0representsn ormahzatrcnat1,600
to 7,675degrees.This is one of severalstandardheattreatmentsat Gator.
3 representsawater quenchfollowed by temperingat 800 degrees.
Position 10 showsthe tlpe of molding equipment.0is a Hunter
Matchplate molding machine with a24by 24 matchplate.4 represents
an OsborneJolt- Squeezemachinewith a 16 by 12 flask.
Other character positions described size, weight, and other
important characteristics.This information was vital for production
planning, scheduling,costing,and tooling design.
The analystthen checkedthe database
for obviousdiscrepancies.
For
example,certainmolding equipmentcolrespondsto ceftainsizeranges.A
retrievalon combinationsof charactersshowssuchinconsistencies.
Next, the analyst standardizedthe processes.Parts with similar
featuresnormally should haveuniform processes.
For example,highvolume parts should run on high-volume equipment. Any such
discrepancies
were corrected.
The analystthen beganto group parts around similar processes,
using characterposition 16 to identif,i eachfamily. He assignednine of
the parts in figure 4.77 to the H1 famlly.
This family haspartswith sufficientvolumefor aHunter automatic
molding machine.They use the sameflask size and have the same
material, allowing similar parts to run together and minimizing
changeovertime. FamiliesH0 and H3 alsorun on the Hunter equipment
but with alarger mold size.
The N2 famlly uses a no-bake binder system. The no-bake
processis more expensivethan greensandbut achievestightertolerances.
The toleranceclass,Position 08, is differenrfor castingsin family N2.
Only a small sample of parts has been shown. The complete
database,816 part numbers,fell into 14 families.The number of parts
in each family varied from 2 to 73.
In later steps,Gator Steeladdedprocesstime andother information
to their database.This allowed the staff to calculate^ver^geequipment
utilization and peoplerequirementsfor proposedwork cells.
All codenumbersin figure 4.l1are somewhatsimilar, and some
areevenidentical.This is becausethe castingsin the sampleardsimilar
in manyrespects.
Theyallhaveaboutthesamesizeandweight,andthey
128
FacilitiesPlanning
Designingthe process
Task 04.02 designsor redesignsthe cell's production process.This
often results in significant improvementsin productivity becauseit
ensuresthat the processsuitsthe work cell'spart family. It alsoforces
a critical review of the t1pe, size, and capacityof equipment and may
eliminate processelementsthat add no value.
This task is similar to some of the work in Task 03.11 at the
macro-levelbut with more detail.At the macro-level,the processwas
defined only asfar aswas necessaryto ensurea valid cell definition. All
equipment or processtimes may not have been identified, and the
designermay haverecognizedthat further refinementwas necessary.
Figure 4.12 showsthe task procedure.In Block 1, a preliminary
processand the equipmentrequiredfor it is selected.This often is an
to
existingprocess.For a completelynew product, it may be necessary
startwith a proposedprocess.This preliminaryselectionshould result
in a processchart and correspondingequipmentlist.
Block 2 refines the process.Non-value-added elements are
eliminated and other options for equipment scaleare explored.For
example,a preliminary processfor a steel fabrication cell needed a
sophisticatedcutoffsaw- alarge,high-volumepieceofequipment that
would servefive different cells.The processrefinement examined the
useoffive smaller bandsaws.Eachcellwould haveoneof the saws.This
eliminated five transport operations,reducedinventory and simplified
scheduling.Processscaleis a particularlyimportant issuewhen making
a transition from a functional to a cellular spaceplan.
Blocks 3 through 6 estimatesset-up, equipment, process,and
Traditional time
personneltimes.Figure4.13illustratesthe differences.
studyoften assumesthat personnel,process,and machinetimes arethe
same.This assumptioncomesfrom an underlyingsuppositionthat one
personoperatesa singlemachine,which often is invalid. Figure 4.13
showsthat, afteran initial setup, a personloadsthe machineand is then
idle while the machineoperates.That personthen unloadsthe machine
and inspectsthe part. The machineis idle during the inspection.The
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
129
130
FacilitiesPlanning
T i m i n gT e c h n i q u e s
-Stopwatch Study
-Predetermined Systems (MTM)
'Experiencd OPinion
-Historical Data
-Equipment Specifications
10
15
20
25
30
Figure4.13- WorkcellTirnes
2
88
420
PERUNIT
PERDAY
Sru
3.60
3.00
2.00
1,.75
2.00
0.00
2.00
1.00
Proc
Oper Mach
277.92 27t.92 27r.92
72I.44 121.44 121.44
77.44 77.44 77.44
1,92.72 1,92.7r 192.72
413.60 473.60 473.60
39.60 44.00 83.60
90.64 1320.007507.28
165.44 765.44 165.44
Sru
7.20
6.00
4.00
3.50
4.00
0.00
4.00
2.00
Station/Op
Head SubAssy
DiaphragmAssy
Body/Coil SubAs
Main Assy
ElectAssy
ElectTest
Flo/Press Test
Package
Totals
PeopleReqd: 3.34767
TABLE 4.1
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
131
132
FacilitiesPlanning
keepin mind:
1 . Most firms uselot sizesthat arcfar abovethe optimum. Designers
should not assumethat current lot sizesare realistic.
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
133
Unlt Cost
Sotup Cost
Item
Cost($)
Labor(Hours'Ratel...2.5*.1t.67= 4.85
Labor
(Hours'
e"tet...]5-1j.!..82
Material/Parts
Stup Scrap
4S.tG
llem
Overhead
Setup Materials
Olher:
Storage Cost
warehouse
Cost($)
Lease/capiral
charse................
....12.,.'l.gg.
:p.g
L a b o(fH o u r'sB a t e ) . . .. . . . . . . . 1 1 2 , O 2 O . O O
lnsurance................
6,o8,7.oo
ELS =
ELS= to4
Total unit cost
Piece
Setup
Storage
0.173
4_54.710
o.ot6
52L4-71o
7l_s4:71!_ o.osg
oo _54:zle_ o.o43
2l___54.71o o.o35
o.ozq
5!L42:o
7JL4.7_1_9_ o.ozs
54.
172z
$ st.ll
Tolal Cost/unil
Lot
Cost (g)
_9.o1o
o.o2o
oato
o.o4o
lnt g
o.ose
o.o69
Total
sq.(a3
s4.916
s4.7q7
54.7q3
53t_g_4
sq.7qt
54.8o4
Maintenance
16,5oo.oo
Tares.......,..............
3,4oo.Oo
13,154.OO
U t i l i r i e s....-.. . . . . . . . .
Obsofescence.........__
1,54O.OO
OTUQSubtota|..............
2,1oo.oo
% of Warehouse/Unit.
276.qO1.OO
O.OO37o
t.Zl
U h i ct o s l ' I n l e r n a l
A n n u a f W a r e h o u s e C o s t / U n i t . . . . _1. 5 . 3 2
54.
54.
125 15o
175
LotSize(Unils)
2oo
225
25o
275
134
FacilitiesPlanning
Items5A E 58
srk
Recelve
i Hrs
Slore
Wks
24
To Elecl
15 l'4ln
AssV
Cotl
Recelve
1 Hrs
Recelve
1 Nrs
Store
2-4 \lk.
Slore
To olaohoram
15Mh
To AssemblU
l5 MIn
Inbound oueue
l-3 DaUs
2-4 uks
Dlaph CutlAssm
6 . 1 6 x 1 0 4 - 6 1M
6 in
Outbound oueue
0.5 0ags
To l,4ech Assg
60 Min
Mech AssU-100 Unlts
6.16x146-616l'4ln
oulbound oueue
05 Oags
To Elect Ass!
60 l'4ln
Inbound oueue
05 Dags
L o t S i z e = 1 0 4U n l t s
Times Are Clock/Calendar Fon Lot
Elecl Assg
1 7 6 x l O A - 4 7 4M h
outbound oueue
05 Dsgs
To Test
l B 0 l x l 0 0 - 1 8 0 1M 1 n
Inbound oueue
05 Dags
Tesl E Repalr
I8.0lxI00- l80l
0utbound oueue
0.5 DBgs
To Pack 8 Ship
6.0 Mln
lnbound oueue
0.5 Dags
Pack E Shlp
1 . 8 8 x 1 0 0 - 1 8M8 l n
D^^
C r ^ l g i n a lI
L L]L U--
0urbound oueue
1.0 oaus
To Cuslomer
3.0 Oags
Qwrq
+ra+o^^c
Tn.
E'*'
h*,
Ve"F
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
135
3o
i sq g'o
(o
(rj
c-J
i ;'i@ P
- t
t ' ;
0 ,
a
a
o o
o o
L L
E
LI
C)
F
6
6 C
o o
, " o 0
: i o
C L L
+ < <
:
l
; , @ o
N : o o
" - F F
i
O I I
I
o
N(!
,'
Lr
C
(_
_C
E
O)
ro
L
G
t
O
C
c
0
(t
O
o
rc
L
L
ui
o
C)
Cf
oo
fN
O
E
f
L
O
O
@
c
C)
C)
al'
1\g
.
b
136
Planning
Facilities
Planningcell infrastructure
Task 4.03 selectsinfrastructureelements;the procedureis illustrated in
fi.gure4.77. Infrastructureelementssupport Processwithout directly
touchingor contributingto productcreation.Someinfrastructureelements
aretangibleand somearenot. The followinginfrastructure elementsmay
be consideredthe minimum for adequatework cell design:
'external containersl
'internal containers;
' externalmaterialhandling;
' internal materialhandling;
' externalproduction control;
' internal production controll
' internal lot size(transferbatch);
' equipmentbalancemethod;
' peoplebalancemethod;
' quality assurance;
'supervision;
' compensationsystem;and
' operatorassignmentsand skills.
Theseinfrastructureelementsarean essentialpart of the work cell
design.If a designteam or designerdoes not selectthem, operators
must do it ad hoc. Their selectionseldomrequiresextensiveanalysis;
however,it doesrequirecarefulthought and experience.Each element
must fit with the othersinto an integrated,well-functioning system.
The first stepofthe taskprocedureis the selectionofthe external
containersand the identification of the size and type of container.
Materials and products move to and from the cell in these external
containers.Containersbringing material to the cell can differ from
thoseremoving products.
Containerscanprotecttheir contents.They canimprovehandling
characteristicsand convert small units to larger handling units. They
can assistwith visualcontrol of materials.
The conventionsdescribedearlierin this chaptermay be usedto
classifycontainersas single-piece,small, medium, or large.
Containers should neverbe larger than the lot size.Thus, large or
medium containers should not be specified for a small lot size. This
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
137
138
FacilitiesPlanning
Externalproductioncontrol
Five basicm ethods-direct link, broadcast,
kanban,materialrequirements
p lanning (M RP), andreorderp oint (ROP)-are availablefor coordinating
production. This is Block 3 in figue 4.17.
Direct link
havea physicallink. Product movesfrom
With direct linkage, processes
the first to the secondprocesswithout queues,buffers,or delays.The
processes
start and stop together.They operatewith identicallot sizes,
usuallysingle-piece.There is no WIP betweenthem.
Direct link is only feasiblewhen processesare balancedand
require about the sametime per cycle.The processes
must be capable
of synchronization, have the sameproducts, and be co-located.
Broadcast
A broadcastsystemis slightly more flexible than direct link. In this
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
139
system, a scheduledictates the rate and product mix for the final
operation. The same schedule is applied to upstream operations,
which make their componentsin the sameorder (the line set order)
as the final operation.They deliver thesecomponentsjust aheadof
the scheduledassemblytime. Co-location is not necessary;
however,
the capability to make the samelot size-usually a single piece-is.
Broadcastsystemsoften are seenwhere subassemblyoperationsfeed
assemblylines.
Kanban
Kanbansystemsusea smallmixed stock.The stockpoint is often at the
producingwork center.This stockhasenoughofeachitem for afew hours
to a few daysofproduction. usersoftheseitemspull smallquantitiesfrom
the stock frequently.They signalthe producing work centerat the rime
theymakeeachwithdrawal.sometimesthis signaldeviceis a card,hence
the useof the word kanban,which is Japanese
for card.
At the producing work center,peopletrack the incoming cards
and observestock levels.They then scheduletheir production to
minimize changeovereffortswhile replenishingthe stocks.Kanban
systemssenseand respondto changingdemandvery quickly. They
operatewith very low inventoriesand need short set-upsand small
lot sizes.It is unnecessary
to coordinateproduction exactly.A work
center may feed and draw from many other work centers. The
system is simple and does not need computers or sophisticated
communicationsequipment. Kanban is often a good choice for
coordinatingwork cells.
Material reguirements planning (MRp)
MRP systemsusecomputersto scheduleand track production.They
alsocanplan capacity,collectcosts,and providemany other functions.
A basicMRP systemhasdatabaseswith
the followinginformation:bills
of materials,routings,inventoqf,and lead times for eachoperation.
The systemworksfrom a forecastofend-productdemandand the
above information. It produces a schedulefor each work center.
Feedbackupdatesthe systemasexecutiontakesplace.MRP systemsare
very flexibleand canschedulevirtually anyrypeof shopor operation.In
theory, a modern MRP systemis almost the ultimate in scheduling.
Practiceis somewhatdifferent. To work correctlv.bills of material
must be almostperfect.Routingsmust be current.Inventory accuracy
must be 99 percentor better. Lead times must be realistic.variation
from leadtimes must be minimal, and the forecastmust be reasonably
accurate.Such conditionsrarelyexist.
140
FacilitiesPlanning
) . reorderpoint.
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
14'l
142
FacilitiesPlanning
Micro-Space-Planning
andWorkCellDesign
't43
144
FacilitiesPlanning
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
145
146
FacilitiesPlanning
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
147
Individual incentives
base'allor part of a person'spay directly on
his or her task output. Such systemsreward output quantiry, but they
often inhibit teamwork and usually have a negativeimpact on quality.
They reward job knowledge only for the task at hand. Individual
incentive systemswork well only where narrow jobs require a single
worker. They require a processwith high intrinsic qualiry or a product
that is easilyinspectedfor quality.
Someofthe difficultieswith individual incentivesdisappearwith
a group incentivesystem,where membersof small teamsreceivethe
samepay basedon the team'soutput. This encouragesteamwork and
allowspeopleto expandtheirjob knowledgewithin the team. However,
group incentivesrarely help promote quality. In fact, they sometimes
encourageconspiratorialbehavior.
Where the work environment requires significant skills, a
palt-for-knowledgesystemmay be appropriate. In this system, people
receivehourly wagesor a salarybasedon the range and depth of their
skills andknowledge.This systemfits well in manycellularenvironments
where team efforts and cross-functionalskills are required.
Pay-for-knowledgesystemsare not easy to implement. Such
systemscan causeteamwork dysfunction as members vie for job
experiencethat will enhancetheir pay. Productivity and quality may
becomesecondaryconsiderations.
Somefirms may attempt to usehybrid systemsof compensation
with a baseline pay rate dependent on seniority or job position.
Superimposedon the basepay areincentivesfor productivity, quality,
and skills. Such systemsare complex, often generatingunintended
consequences.
Individuals may attempt to manipulatethe systemto
maximizetheir pay.
Space plan designers should understand the effects and
consequences
of compensationon the operationof their facility. For
example,a team-basedcellularstrucrureis unlikely to work well in an
individual incentive environment. Pay-for-knowledgesystemshave
little purposein a functional facility.
The work cell operations plan
As infrastructureelementsarechosen,designersmustbeginto visualize
a layout. All the infrastructureelementsconnectwith eachother aswell
asproduct selection,process,and spaceplan.
Figure 4.18 shows a work cell operationsplan. This form is a
convenient place to document infrastructuredecisions.It is also a
reminder of the fulI range of choicesfor eachelement.The'operator
assignmentand skill matrix area shows job assignmentsand skill
148
FacilitiesPlanning
In
O
O
DA
Exlernal P.oductlon
Control
Exlernal
Lot Slze
Our
O
SinglPiec
O- Small<1.5Hours
Itz
Msdium<4.0 Hou's
tr
Lars6
e,o6sn1, Pi6C
ln
D
1,,,"_l
tr
D
oul
Oll'
D
O
O
ryq: iMeLF
qFCe
P".pt"8"t""*
|I D? {rff'*'""""
Ercass
P6opr.
Control
Dioct Link
cncularion
xanoan
PushSchgdul
cncdilbn
I
|
I
I
Channel
T.rminal
singre eiece
Small <1.5 Hours
M.drum <..0 Hours
l o * " '
Quallty Assurance
II
B"r""*I f|
I_Eq"ifi""t
h'ffi'&h6
lp,io?KTQUCK
|
I
lJ J p
lrn
PIP
?
o
Etc*s capacily
tnspccra ne;ccr
_ Supervislon
F
o
I
I
fflfft",g'#,(cyb'noric)
|
commande conror
c..p-""tfi]
/
tr
o
xo,ayr s"r"ry
Individual
Incntiv.
Grc+hsdtro
I I
|
I
I
Matrix
ilclE|rlr
t' F
r-l lfi ul
iiiu F
ql: s U
t h t t h
II
9,
I|
I
I
I
I ? ;i:ffi'
Equipm.ni:
O
O
Hand Carry
O
O
Oih6t
Small
Modium
Larg.
R.OrdrPonl
Mak.-To-ordr
I
Orli'
O
Small
u*'u'
Lareo
P"ir""i"n:";,
D
D
O
D
O
Physical Link
Ot
External Matrial
Handllng
ln
0
ot
lnternal Contalnets
?
? ?:x"j"j"
O O
PushSch.dulo
ml
E"3 Lqi!'
Oul
D
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
149
for the assemblyof diaphragm pumps. Figure 4.18 is its work cell
operationsplan. The team has selecteda medium externallot size of
forty-four pieces.This is the lot sizefor finishedpumps, but the team
membersrealizedthat purchaseditemsanditemsfrom other departments
may come to the cell in largerlots. Figure 4.18 reflectsthis.
The team decidedto packagethe pumpsin cartons,which will be
placed on pallets, a single lot for each pallet. This is the outbound
container.It is a medium container,consistentwith the medium lot
size.Inbound materialalsocomeson pallets,most ofwhich will hold
partsfor more than four hoursofproduction. The inbound palletsare,
therefore,large.
For externalmaterial handling, the cell needsmedium and large
equipment correspondingto the containersize.The team decidedto use
forktrucks forboth inbound and outboundhandling.Becauseforktrucks
carry ^ full load (one pallet), the ream selecteda direct roure structure.
Other possibleroute structuresare shown in Figure 4.19.
The kanbanmethodwasselectedfor both inbound and outbound
externalproduction control. Occasionally,the cell will make special
orders.The teamdecidedto usethe kanbanand directlink methodsfor
internal production control.
The cell will balanceequipmentwith queuingand excesscapaciry.
The teamdecidednot to usecontainers
internallysincethe assemblies
and
componentsareeasyto handle,and the internallot sizeis singlepiece.
Peoplein the cell will balancetheir work load using queuingand
_
float systems.
is inherentin someoperations,although
Qralityassurance
the electricaland flow testsare inspect/reject.
The four peoplein the cellwill operateasacyberneticwork teamand
usekanbansignalsfor cell management.
Compensationis hourly/salary.
Designinga spaceplan
150
FacilitiesPlanning
tr
tr
(u
@.9
rlfi
@=4"="-(D
//
!9
,vs,
\\
Y-.
('
o
o
L
o
Figure4.19 - Moteriol HondlinsRoute Structure
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
15.1
152
FacilitiesPlanning
(fig. a.22). The work product moves from one end to the other in a
straightline. It passesor stopsat eachworkstation.When Henry Ford
and CharlesSorensenfirst devisedthis arrangement,theyweresolving
a material flowproblem. Manyparts went into a relativelysmallproduct
where a large number ofpeople worked at short-cycletasks.A straightline cell is still well suitedto suchsituations.
Straight-line arrangementsdo not allow easycommunication
betweenpeople.Balanceis difficult becausethe opportunity to float is
limited. Once balanceis achieved,it is difficult to maintain if the line
speedor product mix changes.Long, thin line arrangementsareoften
Reason
Matenlal Flow
<UwEDPeO?Le
C o n fi g u r a t i o n
Diagram
SpacePlan
ffilnrennol
Head Assemblg
K6nb6n Oue@s
_,._,._._._._.._.._.i lYain
S t o c k l n gA 1 s 1 e
Bodg/Coll Assemblu
N15 tU
Inbosd
Rolle.
ConveUof
Roller *
Convegor
Dlsph.sgm
Assmblg
Stoc ng Alsle
Elect.lcal
AssemblU
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
153
r
T
r
Features
MultlpleMaterialEntry Polnts
Good Materlal Flow
Short Distances
Dlffcult PeopleBalance
Poor Flexlbility
PoorCommunicatlon
Dlffcult Macro Layout
154
FacilitiesPlanning
|,ii{.i
Fetuns
SevaEl Enlrba
Good Mat rbl Flow
Short Dldancs
Whhln Zores
Eagy To Bll.nca
G@d FLxlHllty
Falr Communlcallon
Eaay Macro Lryout
Accommdales
Ma1ry Pr@esa
Itreqohr i.r*td,
Figure4.23 - SerpentineCells
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
Features
High PeopleFlexlblllty
EasyBalance/Rebalance
Good Communlcatlon
Good MaterialFlow
Short Dlstances
SingleMaterlalEntry Polnt
Good QualltyFeedback
Multi-skllledOperators
ffi*.ril
ffi ft ffi
ffi t l
ffil
lffi
ffi
ffi
Featules
Good Communlcatlon
Good Materla! Flow
Short Dlstances
Multlple Materla! Enlry Polnt
tffi
u
Figure4.25 - lnverseU-ShopedCells
155
156
FacilitiesPlanning
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
157
able to see each other and all operations.A clear view of the total
operation gives every member the meansfor controlling the overall
process.Partitions, walls, and large equipment interfere with both
teamwork and processcontrol.
Ongoing interactionis integral to teamwork.Members must be
ableto converseduring their work. This callsfor an areasmall enough
for effectiveconversation.It alsorequiresa reasonableambient noise
level. while hand signals and electronic communications are parttal
substitutes,face-to-faceconversationis far better.
Effective teams use bulletin boards for many purposes.Bulletin
boardshelp ateamcommunicatewith itse$ with oth.t ihiftr, andwith the
outsideworld. Prominent spacefor a bulletin board shouldbe provided.
The A-Teom designs o spoce plon
From the processchart in figure4.r4 and the work cell operationsplan
in figure 4.18, the team identified ten SPUs. These are on the
configuration diagram. Using judgment and consensus,the team
membersdevelopedthe appropriateaffinities,most of which resurted
from materialflow or sharediobs.
Following the procedure for Task 04.04, they developedthe
configurationdiagramrn figure4.2L
Finally, usingtemplatesfor the equipmentandworkbenches,the
team membersprepareda layout. They sizedconveyorsand queuing
areasastheywent, fitting theseflexibleelementsinto areasbefweenthe
mainworkstations.Theygraduallymovedand arrangedthe spus to fit
inside the area designatedon the micro-space-plan.They allowed
clearancefor movement of people.They positioned shelvingon the
perimeterto avoid blocking visualcommunication.
r58
FacilitiesPlanning
Micro-Space-Planning
and Work Cell Design
159
TheA-Teom'sfinol micro-spoce-plon
The spaceplan in figare 4.27 is not the only one the A Team
designed.There wereseveralother good options.Team membersused
weighted factor analysisto make their decision.
Team members discussedusing simulation but decided they
could build the actualwork cell fasterthan they could build a simulation
model.They alsoreasonedthat if the cell did not work asexpected,they
couldeasilychange
orredesignit. Theyknewthe experienceofthework
team would be invaluablein any suchredesign.
Betweenthe cell and the finished goodswarehouse,the kanban
systemis used.The cell operateswith an averageof two lots per day;
however, it can accommodate special lots at any time. As the team
works on improved setups, the cell may reducelot sizesor evenshift to
make-to-order. The team draws material and parts from upstream
suppliersand the machineshop using a kanbansystem.
Eachworker setsup his or her own area,changingfixtures,tools,
and the partson their benches.The work teamfor this work cell is made
up of four members,who havevarioustasks.
"Wilson"
subassembles
heads,bodies,and coils.He placesthese
subassemblieson a grav\tyroller conveyorthat takes them to Taylor's
main assemblystation. Wilson usesmarkings on the roller conveyorto
determinethe speedofhis work. Whenworkbuilds up on the conveyor,
he can switch to restocking or other activities.
'Taylor"
subassembles
diaphragmsoneat atime. He then assembles
eachdiaphragmwith abody/coil subassembly
andthe headsubassembly.
Taylor placeshis completedwork in the queuespacebetweenhis station
and Washington'selectricalassemblystation.When the queueis full,
T aylor assists"Washington. "
Washington hasthe longestseriesof tasks.He must perform all
160
FacilitiesPlanning
Conclusion
This chapterdemonstratedhowto plan spaceat the micro-level,Level
4. The discussion included important new develoPmentsin the
workplace-work cells,teams,and operationsfocus.
This chapteralsooffersthe tools (modelprojectplan, procedures,
techniques)to prepareviable micro-space-plans.In the beginning,
following these plans and proceduresexplicitly and pedantically will
a designteam
resultin the generationofgood designs.With experience,
less
formally.
may usethem
The next chapter covers the final level of space planning,
workstation design,including how to placetools and equipmenqhow
to optimize the individual'sefficiencyand effectivenessland how to
minimize CarpalTunnel Syndromeand similar occupationalhazatds.
Chapter5
WorkstationDesign:
Writtenby
The Sub-Micro-Space-Plan
WilliamNelson
162
FacilitiesPlanning
WorkstationDesign:The Sub-Micro-Space
Plan
163
164
FacilitiesPlanning
$
tl
\r
plan
WorkstationDesign:The Sub-Micro-Space
165
modesbecause
the equipmentmay fail at somelaterdate.Increased
complexity,common to automatedsystems,alsomay increasethe
training time.
4.
Systemdesignersseldom anticipateproblems createdby the automation. They havefocusedmainly on the benefitsof the new system.
Motion economy
Motion economy helps achieveproductivity and reduce CTD. It
shortensthe human time and effort requiredto accomplisha task.The
principlesof motion economy(fig. 5.2) list stepsand proceduresthat
simpli$, and improve manual work.
The fourth principle, bodysegmentclass,classifiesmovement with
bodyjoints. Each movementafter class1 involvesbody partsfrom the
previousclass(es),
and more of the bodyparticipatesin ihe motion. It
is desirableto accomplishtaskswith the lowestpossiblemotion class.
The best way to do ihis is to place everythingn.", the operator.In
addition, items should be close together, lightweight, and easily
positionedat the end of the motion.
To applythe principlesof motion economy,iteration or synthesis
may be used. Iteration involves examining an existing or prorog?e
workstation, analyzingrhemotions,identi$ringandimplementingimprovements, and reanalyzingthe work. Severalrepetitions may be necessary.
Synthesisuses predetermined time standard systemssuch as
methods-time-measuremenr
(MTM) and avoidsprotoryping. These
systemsrefer activities to a standard set of well-defined elemental
motions and associated
executiontimes.
The conceptof motion economyhas limitations. Both iterative
and synthetic methods assumeworkers are not fatigued. Performance
can abateovertime due to an activity'sdemands.Motion economyalso
does not accountfor physicallimitations or differencesin operators.
Moreover,a movementthat appearsineffectivefrom a motion economy
perspectiveactuallymay prevent fatigue and possibleinjury from static
postureloading.To overcometheselimitations, ergonomicprinciples
should be applied.
166
FacilitiesPlanning
1.0 us of HumanBodv
The trc hards shouH begin 6 rell 6
@mpbte their mtiore at th6 sare tim.
Th6 trc handssh@H ml be idb at the sam
tire x@pt durirE .est psrbds.
Motiore ol th6 arro shouu be madein opposite
and symretriEl dirctiore and shouH be made
simultffiously
Hand mtioN shouldbe @nfimd to the lore3t
clssification with which it is possibleto porfom
the rcrk salblactorily
Morentum shouh be mpbyed to sist the
rcrker wherever poasble, ard it shdld be
redred to a minimumil it must b ovemm
by mslil
efiort.
Sruth @ntiMus mtions ol the hards ar6
pf6rabb to zigzag mtioG or straight-lim
rctioN involvingsuddena.d shap chares in
direclion.
Ballistb mvemnts ilg faster.66ir. atd
mr6 ffirale thil BstrHd(fxation) or
'ontElld mvomnla.
Rhythmis esntid to ihs s|mih ard
iltomatic perbmam ol il oporatbn, ard the
rcrk should be dmngd to psmil6sy and
naturalrhythmwhoBvsr possblo.
Body S.gm.ni.
Sody Jolnt
$uckl
;inqd
Vrist
{and, Fingm
:tbw
ihould.r
Ergonomics
Ergonomics is the study ofwork asit relatesto the human body and its
limits. The usualgoalis maximizingoutputwithout physicallyharming
the operator. To achieve this goal, designers adapt tasks and the
and
workstation to individuals, not vice versa.Physiology,biomecbanics,
anthropometricsarethe areasof ergonomicsmost useful to the designer
of workstations.
Physiology
In somerespects,the body is analogousto an automobile.In the human
WorkstationDesign:The Sub-Micro-Space
Plan
167
168
FacilitiesPlanning
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Provile handles
DasignFor minimummslil
etfort
Porerwith mtots mre lhil with muscls
Berd ihs t6l ard mt the wrist
K@p the olioclive reight ol th t@l low
Alignthe t@l @nter ol gravity and th 6nler ol
the g.6Fing har|d
Ue pbtol grip6ryhenth tml ais i8 horizontal
Us straiShtSrip6whn ths t@l ab b vertical
Us tnggsr leveE nther than trigger hJtlore.
oesiqn sp6cialus tmb it mdd
06sign tmh for u$ by either hand
Us A Minimm handlelenqthOl 4'
Uss propersize griFEwhich mmmodate
diffoEnt size hands
Springbad plieG and sis
Us mn-porcus, rcn-slip, and rcn-@.ductivo
snps
T@ls shouHreigh les lhil 9 lbs
Suspendheavyor awkwardt@ls
6.0 Posltbn
Use a standing position when:
. Krc Cbilffi
ls Unavailable
. ThaOpoBlorLiftsMorethil 10 Pounds
o Thereare high, low, or 6rt6Idod reachs
. The OperatorExrtsDowNard tors
(wrappingand packing)
. Th6 OperatorNedsirobility
Use A svstand position when:
. Rspsliliveoporatbre have frequent rerches
beyondzoms 1
. The Operalorperlom both sining and
standingtasks
. The T8k RquiBs Pmbngd Static E fort
Use a sitting positbn when:
. lt6ro for a rcpetitivo,short cycle re in saled
rcft3p@.
. Handsrcrk ls$ than 6' abov6lhs surl@
. L4ge lo@ is mt required
; Hardlins reiSht b les tha 10 lbs
. Th t6k is fine asmbry orwriting
. Th opratorre6ds body stabilityand
eqlililxilm
. Th6 isk reqjiros prtrise f@t @nlrol
hs
extended tire
in a
Plan
WorkstationDesign:The Sub-Micro-Space
169
measurements.Staticdimensionsarethe measurements
betweenspecific
anatomical landmarks. Examples include stature, arm length, and
shoulderbreadth.Dynamic dimensionsrelateto functional movement.
Both measurementsare important. For example, static data might
represent a person's reach when his or her shoulders and trunk are
stationary.Dynamic measurementwouldadd the length ofthat person's
reach from extended shoulders and trunk. In many cases, static
dimensionsmaybeadaptedto a specificproblem.Dynamic dimensions,
on the other hand, arebetter representations
ofreality.
The basis of the data should always be kept in mind. Does it
include clothing and shoes?What specific population was included?
What aboutthosewith disabilities?Designersshoulduseintuition and
experienceaswell as raw data.
Classicaldesignconsidered
the averagemalethe standard.Today's
designersmay needto considereveryonefrom the smallestfemaleup to
the largestmale.Different ethnic populationsshouldalsobe included.
The rangeof anthropometricdata is great.Designersmust determine
which criteria apply to the problem at hand.
Dimensions for severalgroups of males and femalesare given in
table5.1. How theywere takenis shownin figure 5.4. Severalof these
data groups were basedon U.S. Air Force flying personnel;therefore,
very large and very small people probably are not represented.
There arefour constraintsofergonomic anthropometry: clearance,
reach,posture,and strength.Clearanceprovidgs adequateclearancefor
those in the workstation. This includesheadroom,elbow room, leg
room, and handle spaceon a hand tool.
Clearancesare designedfor the maximum. For example, if the
tallest person in a group has clearance,shorter peoplewill have it also.
Figure 5.5 shows severaltypical workplace clearances.In most of the
examples,three valuesin inches are given. The first is the minimum
normal clearance,the secondis the clearancewith normal clothing, and
the third is the clearancerequired with heavywinter clothing.
Reachingis a commonworkplaceactivity.Workers reachfor parts,
tools,andcontrols.Reachconsffaintsdeterminethe maximum acceptable
distanceof the item-an exampleof designingfor the minimum. If the
individual with the shortestreachcangrasp,thosewith longer reachcan
alsograsp.The distancesin figure 5.4 include static reaches.Figure 5.6
showsreachzones thatvary accordingto difficulty.
Postural constraints often are difficult to identify becausethey
dependon the sizeofthe person,his or her position,and the equipment
dimensions.The height of a work surface,for example,dependson the
height ofthe worker and the height ofthe worker's chair. With postural
17O
FacilitiesPlanning
=
.=
E
o
o
(D (J!
q)
(,
o?qo?
coo)o@
o +
@ N
N N
(O
C')$
r\N
T
c9
I \ - C \ -
(D (DE
E.
o
N
a?
N - @
ociN=
q\
\42
o)Lo
@o
@Nscr)
nc'!qc2
( \ - r e
o)
N
r j
(O$FNC\O)
O ) O O S O O @
di i o- c ' j o
N $ (o
( oN N ( o- ( o-
CY)
d
:
v
v
-
NdNoi++cct
(o (o (U (U!
P
+--
)
-
\
L
v
L
EER&=
U
h = ^
g
*^ -- i X . L \ l
o o.#
0) o=
Y':
(o_o (o (! (! (o_o
(g (U
( o y ; 6d \
:c
(4
(, .;i iu
- = P - - =
(o (o-O
^-
Lo
LO
c.ic.i+ro
(/)
> 0 ) i - :
x
o
P>ddii
( o @ C O @ -
l t * c D @
- ( O -
Y c c c o )
co
.9.9.(o.9
L > > > ! r
@ N N N
C ! N N N - S C ! N
@ c 9 -
o ? n c .q. qt \
aq
O) $ N
rl)-r
@ =
, / \ . \ . \ ,:
nqna?aaaq
oo)@c\|.'r
i;5tsi6d+
O-st--O
f
9 l l l l l
(9 o-o
$;=RbE33se68EESRsE
N o - o o o N - o o o - c i c i o - - o
aqqo?\a
-o)o?c!qaaq
O) t'- LO cD cD cD O st o) cD -@ cY) -@ \r
=
N
t\ co
oE
o)
c(o
(O cD O)
-O co c!
-
F
@
>
(D
i\
P ^
^ ^
!
8,9;,9
CL
6 s! KR+v 9)E9r*-o)
-ii55
;i 6 6 6 c)Q el< P tr l, Ft F.=;i'^
e===f
,9
(,
tt
e
e
-!a,
EC
- f ^ E EE s * s E ' F :
- --) v --: 2 Z a- O
l _ - C
= -
i.?
= Y
o o ! l J / ( o
CD LO LO LO Oi =
\t
O O) CD sf lr) @ N
N
TABLE 5.I
(O (O
51-
;: : , t= . r - 3 r- v., Xd
;; Q EU;v
; ( v F
E
A
(U-
; (/) =:-.
6.6;
237 ,5
Workstation
Design:
TheSub-Micro-Space
Plan
EE
Dimonsions ln Inch6s
Minimum/Rccommond6dHcavt
Ctothing
Adaoled Fromr Mccormick. 1064
't7
20
21
96
'17'l
172
FacilitiesPlanning
Z o n eH 1
445 si
HorizontalReachZones
WorkstationDesign:The Sub-Micro-Spaceplan
173
Specialtopics
severalspecifictopics ariserepeatedlyin the ergonomicsofworkstation
design. Among these are band tools,material ltandling, zuorkpositions,
and seating.In addition to the discussionbelow, figure 5.3 contains
principles that apply to theseareas.
Hand tool selection,design,and use are important elementsof
manyworkstationdesigns.The useofthe correcthandtools contributes
to productivity and quality and can prevent CTD and other injuries.
Almost everyworkplacerequiressomeform ofmaterial handling.
Injuries causedby maneuveringmaterialsmanually cost industrieswell
over $15 billion annuallyin direct expenses.
The indirect costs^re an
estimatedat $60 to fi75billion. Productivitylossesfrom poor handling
methods are probably even greater. Any tasks that require manual
material handling should be carefully reviewed.Refer to the National
Institute for Occupational Safety and Health's (NIOSH) Revised
Lifting Equation (1991).
Operatorsmay sit, stand,or both. Work positionsthat combine
sitting and standingpermit operatorsto shift their postures.This helps
reducemusclefatiguefromprolonged staticeffort. Figure5.7 summarizes
the relationship between severalworkplace variables and preferred
seatingpositions.
Heavy Load/Forces
lntermittent
Work
.A)
Extended
workEnvelop.
XQrc
VariableTasks
Variable Surface Height
RepetitiveMovement
X,
\ B
,c)
PSXI
lDxBxc/
/nVn\
/n\
Fine Manipulation
XO)
ru,
IE Position
A Sland
B Sil/Stand
D sil
174
FacilitiesPlanning
The workstationspaceplan
The tasksfor preparinga workstationareillustratedin figure 5.8. Task
05.01setsout aplanfor the designproject.The planincludesidentifying
A
participantsin the designprojectaswell astasksand their sequence.
level.
works
well
at
this
simple and informal plan usually
thesefundamentalspaceplanelements:
The modelprojectplanuses
SPUs,affinities,space,and constraints.SPUsincludeoperators,tools,
parts,and machineelements.Affinities evolvefrom the movementof
parts,movementof hands,and the necessityfor observation,and other
indirect factors.Each SPU requiresspace,but in aworkstation,vertical
spaceis more important than it is at other levels.Constraintshave a
different quality. They now include an operator's dimensional and
physiologicallimits and,possibly,regulatorylimits. Processconstraints
may play an important role.
information.
bring togetherthe necessary
In Task 05.02,designers
WorkstationDesign:The Sub-Micro-Space
Plan
175
o
G
o
o
o
C,
o
o-
tr
o
OilE
o
c
176
FacilitiesPlanning
o
E
c
E
- g : ; E ^
;:
= E
s r ; f i
E ' i
s: ii !
a
o
O
o
@
o
T
o
L
c
o
ui
o
o
i r !
I:
OD>
t:. i
! i - !
ooo
6
Ui: ii
5r
WorkstationDesign:The Sub-Micro-Space
Plan
177
r)
crj
$
trR-a*
1
06
-a
s a9 s $ (o (o \r
F o I (E)q
!?
!q !r sf <f s !9 !9 !9 (o @ @ I sr <
(r) !?
(f)(9
c)
c, ct (f) o)(t K) LO(r)ct 6 !?
c') O 6 b CDCDC"i
Ct Ct(f)rO l.c)K
<t
a{
o
I
- l
HEORRRgREERRERRRHEEERRRRRREES
N N N N N N N N
- - - r - e e N
IIII
-IIT
-III
.o<
$ $ $ (D ('CDCDe) CDC)(9CDCDNN
< C ON ( o ( o ( o @ $ = t s t r i t < t N O
>NNojciciNNNN6iciNNNN6j
z 6
$ooo
==E
O N r
- F =
oooo
st <i- <' r
oooo
>
CDCDC9
--I-
N N N NN
OO
oooo
(9(9
CDC9CD(f)
II--
rjj
NNNN
NN
T \- F
O@@@
+Fr
@ @@CO CO(ON N o
d+++
++_-+
r
oooo
oooo
(f) (9 Ct CD Ct N $ S $ -
o o oo
O O O C, (t (9 CD CD N O O C
=E<,t
gi ?t - g
oooNrroN
octcici
^ t * *
--<
^ l
T l
t
t
\J'
E
U
h
z
u t
<T (9
d d cicici
d 6i d cici
cicio
-O.^.^
ciooci
CD CD (f) N
ctcto
^
d c
@
o oo o@@
o o o o o ooo
Q @ @ c o c oc oc o6 @
c
( o ( o (@
o (@
o @
( o N N N N < ) < ) <c) oN
NNN
NN N N 6
*co co(o @(o(o(o
Laq<u? qqqLqqll]u?a
NC"i>N NN<iN rrNF-
r)r)r)|.c)n6roro
ar]Qu)ou)lo6
NNr..N dr..r..N Nr.-ns: s:n:Nn
rr
s
9 9 < q q a 9 q 9 g q q (qoa@
q $q q q q a q Q q q Q Q q q c
{ @$ $$ 9(o@@ S $ <fs sS@@(c
ScD>s $ $cDst
$@@oo
z
-<
(J
-rrr@NrF-o,^,^^N--..
ciciN
o
O
O
Qq< o ooooQooooooooooo
S p 2 < o < o c o o < o S S @ < c tS d c t d
e . { Q Q
$ e
RN
oooo
g: S dcocod
ooooc
<;d g! g 5
>::5
IIII
r r N N r N N N $ - r r N N N N N N - - e
z =z -zY z z z z z z z z z v z z z z z z z. z z z z z.
cocoocoo dl6com cococom
ococod
c o c oc o c o 6 c o o c o
. > e@
@ @ @ @ a @ a Q @ @ @ @ @( oo No N
ooco@@oooooooo
@@@ @@(o@ @@(o(o
N N @ ( o c oN N N N N N -
co
' i l
- l Fu
LIJ
<u *+
O
d
=rgE!*sEfi-3tEErt,"53
5
f,ur ZdS+df -* 5d=dgtZd; dtr;E >';=a
II
t.F
c
U
!,rqF==Ht#fiEqEE{'rE5=_b{=ntri!tr
g
x?oooqo" r q o -
a?2
sroro(9@o)N6@N$cDct
HvJ
# f - - (o o -q)!\r!)@N
F- tr\ (O CO(O (O <) F\ (O (O N f- (O (O N (O (O (o @ @ N @ (o r
<
=
F
I
DEF.H E i p p e p e i p p p e i + + + i P i e p i i i i e e
{basBsssssBsssEEEsBststsstssEEE
t=t r . . v
_ l oR R N - P = - o N r , c o S s o R N S - P - N 9 p N
- l
TABLE 5.2
(9
Ktr9R
z
>r.'TtEi
#H;+5P
178
FacilitiesPlanning
judgment,
Moreover, two sizesmakeup this volume.In the designer's
automationwasimpracticalat this volume.The onlymachineassignment
is the tightening of fittings. The operatorusesan air wrench to do this.
Tasls 05.05through 05.08addressaffinities.Most affinitiesarise
reaching,
grasping,and moving.The operatormayinteractin this
from
manner with parts, tools, or controls. A reach, followed by a grasp, is
one of the most common workplace activities.Operatorsreach and
grasp parts, tools and controls. Frequency, handling difficulty, and
weight affect the reach affinity.
Affinities also arisefrom other factors.The operatormay need to
see objectsor displays,sothey shouldbewithin the operator'svisualfield.
Someitems aremore important than others.For example,an emergency
cutoffcontrol is usedonly infrequentlybut is veryimportant. Developing
affinities alsoinvolves:the amount of accuraryrequired,duration ofuse,
safety,the amount of force required, and operatorpreferences.
The various tools, parts, displays, and controls compete for
locationscloseto the operatorandwithin his or her optimum visualand
reachzones.These zoneshavelimits.
Figure 5.6 shows the horizontal and vertical zones for a typical
"H"
"V'
or
for horizontal or
operator. These are designatedwith an
vertical.Designersthen canassignitems to both ahorizontd.andvertical
znne accordingto their relativeaffinity needsand the spaceavailable.
Horizontal affinity znne 1 (H1) is closestto the operator and can
be reachedcomfortablywhen elbowsareon the work surface.The zone
archis about 15 to 17 inchesfrom the surfaceedge.A line extending45
degreesfrom the shouldersbounds the zone laterally. This zone is the
most comfortable,offering the leaststressand quickestaccesstime. It
should be reservedfor the tasks and items with the highest priority.
Horiznntal affinity zone 2 (H2) is the area an operator can
comfortably reachby extendingan arm with his or her trunk stationary.
The zone arcis about27 inchesfrom the work surfaceedge.It endswhen
the arm is at 45 degreesabovethe horizontal plane. This zone requires
minimal accesstime. However, extensivetime in this position leadsto
rapid fatigue and upper musculoskeletalstress.Use this zone for light
objectsthat the operatorcan graspeasilybefore returning to zone H1.
Horizontal affinity zone 3 (H3) is reachedby extending an arm
with full trunk flexion. The arc is about 42 to 44 inches from the work
surface edge. It ends when the arm reaches45 degrees above the
horizontal plane.This zone has significantlygreateraccesstime and
correspondingreduction in efficiency, productivity, and effectiveness.
Operators must move their headsto seethe task, a movement that
interrupts concentration.This zone should be used for infrequent
WorkstationDesign:TheSub-Micro-SpacePlan17g
reacheswith low priority.
Horizo ntal affinity zone 4 (H 4) require s fu ll bo dy movem ent and,
possibly,one or two side steps.The operator expendsconsiderable
energ'yto reachthis zone.Accesstime is significantly greaterthan other
zones.It should only be used for taskswith the lowest priority.
Vertical affinity zone ! (V1) extends from the work surftce to
about 10 to 16 inchesabovethe seatpan. It is aboutheartlevel,hasthe
lowest accesstime, and is the most comfortable.It shouldbe usedfor
taskswith the highestprioriry.
Vertical affinity zone 2 (V2) begins where zone VI ends. It
extendsto the operator'sshoulders,about 16 to 24 inches abovethe
work surface.This zoneis usedfor items and tasksthat supportprimary
tasks.Accesstime is minimal, but extensivetime in this zone causes
early fatigue and musculoskeletalstress.
Vertical affinity zone3 (V3) extendsfrom the baseof znneY2 to
the maximum reachlevel.It may require upper trunk movement aswell
as head movement,which reducesconcentrationand increasesaccess
time. Using this zone interrupts vision and forces the operator to
refocus. It is the least efficient vertical affinity zone and should be
reservedfor taskswith the lowest priority.
The first task for affinity development concerns reaches and
frequency.From the initial information, designersshould compile a list
ofitems. In table5.2, this list is in column B. Next, designersshoulduse
P-V information, the processchart,and bills of materialsto determine
the number of times eachday an operatorreacheseachitem. In table
5.2, this is column I. The frequenciesderivefrom the quantity per unit
(column C) and the expecteddaily production (Column D).
Column J is an affinity rating that uses the 0 to 4 weighted
numeric scale.The rating is identified on a rankedbar graph,a process
similar to that used for rating material flow affinities discussedin
chapter 3. To construct this graph, the spreadsheeton column I is
sorted in descendingorder. Column I is plotted on the vertical axis
while the identifiing number, column A, is plotted on the horizontal
axis.The next stepinvolvesassigning0 to 4 or AEIOU to the affinities
and recordingthem in columnJ of the spreadsheet.
The weight of eachobject, if significant, addsto the difficulty of
a reach.Column K lists the weight carried for eachitem, which is then
rated by the coresponding affinities (column L). Difficulty of a reachgraspalsodependson the shape,size,and delicacyof eachitem. This
affinity is rated in column M. For the diaphragm pump, the valvesare
particularly small and delicate. Consequently, they carry a handling
affinity of 4. Small washers carrya 3 affinity.
180
FacilitiesPlanning
Workstation
Design:TheSub-Micro-Space
Plan
181
Figure5,10 - Worlstotion
182
FacilitiesPlanning
Summaly
A well-thought-out workstation optimizes productivity both within
itself and in the larger production system. It improves the work
experiencefor everyone.It ensurescontinuedhealth and safety.Such
workstations are an essentialpart of a wodd-class operationsstrateg'y.
A structuredand systematicapproachwill ensureconsistentand highquality workstation design.
Chapter6
Written by
Site Planning Arild
Eng
184
FacilitiesPlanning
SitePlanningand Location
0 1 .o l
Acquire Information
01.o2
DevelopStrategy
0 1 .o 3
Dimension Site
01.o4
Locate Site
ol.os
Prepare Site Specification
01.06
ldentify Site Gandidates
0 1 .o 7
EvaluateCandidates
0 1 .o 8
Acquire Site
185
186
FacilitiesPlanning
SitePlanningand Location
187
188
FacilitiesPlanning
' managerialstyle; and
'tract shape.
SitePlanningand Location
189
Transport
Gost Index
I
1 . 0 0- 1 . 2 5
1 . 2 6- 1 . 3 5
F i r . s o- r . s o
[---l r.sr- r.ze
f__-.]r.zs*
190
FacilitiesPlanning
02.o1
Refine/Gonfirm Information
02.o2
Refine/GonfirmStrategY
02.03
Dimension Site
02.o4
LayoutInitial Site
02.05
Layout Saturated Site
02.06
Layout Intermediate Sites
02.o7
Evaluate & Select
SitePlanningand Location
191
FacilitiesPlanning
192
Slte
/ / |
1,6
Figure6.4, 5.5 - Site Pfon Development
193
194
FacilitiesPlanning
-.9
E6
ots
F.t
o :
F d
o
o
?o
io)
d.E
- E
E 5
,t"7
oo
o
Y7--
o
9)
' c6o. =
c)E
o-=
?
o
e-o
- c F
.96
J O
a
iq
fl3
i
ad
-3
'( l6' = 9
,gE
SitePlanningand Location
Zone Plan
Areas are reservedfor
expansionfrom a center
core outwards.
Block Plan
Areas are blockedout by
functionor space type.
Each facilityexpandswithin
a d e s i g n a t e db l o c k .
l Z-l
l
i. D u p l i c a t eP l a n
,
lFTlf _..ii
i
i;tlf
"""""'i
; i
i:-m:i
i * - E r; i
i;E-ll
iF--l--l ;
i
i
StripePlan
Areasare reservedin stripes
acrossthe site.This is a
sp e ci aty
l peof zoneplan.
195
196
FacilitiesPlanning
Machining
E@
Assembly
F'"*l
F""*l
I r'*l
By Function
@
@
Storage
Production
service
Personnel
L,IItCe
servrce
Storage Production
Personnel
oilrce
@
@
By Product
Light
Heavy
Multi-Floor
SPecial
B y B u i l d i n gT y p e
SameUtilities
Same People
B y S p e c i a lR e q u i r e m e n t s
Figure5.9 - SPU GrouPing
't97
ti!
o
I
6
c
o
tl =:
lt ;r
;o
E
o
E E
;' Hs
EE
E E
o o
E* a
E
i=_E
3l
O
(t,I
:o
.9
f
@
="1
'_i
:)l
o-l
ol
a
I
o
x
U
E
o
; s
3 oo oo
o
I
o
=
o
F uc o
C
o
a
c
o
E
o
z z
l
"l
il
-o
t
E
z
o
i
E .g
o d
z
o
-l
@
N
=lj
'=l
6l
>l
O J
' ) l
o
@
.l
ol
.El >d ll
2 l 9 1 . a- ll
EI
FI;
9l pl
DI
at.
d l
.91
pt;
Figure5.10 - SPUSummary
198
FacilitiesPlanning
UTTING
z
L I G H TM A C H ( L M )
i 4
R e a s on
,IATR.FLOW
SERVICE
,/tBR-/ NOTSE
4
SUNNEL
o
IKATT
T R U C KT R A F F I C
SitePlanningand Location
199
HEAVY
MACHINING
RAW MATERIALS
STORAGE
TECHNICAL
SERVICE
z
UTTING
PARTS
STORAGE
FTNT.HED
)
/
I
/MAIN
PERSONNEL
PARKING
)FFIC
Today's Space
FutureExpansion
FacilitiesPlanning
BCD's spaceplan is shown in figure 6.74.Itconsists of an initial
space plan with a subsequentexpansion.The top portion_of the
illustraiion shows operating departments at stageI and stageII. The
lrTl-T]-lr,rovi
|.4
--
Move
SitePlanningand Location
199
HEAVY
MACHINING
TECHNICAL
SERVICE
RAW MATERIALS
STORAGE
f-
Today's Space
FutureExpansion
FacilitiesPlanning
2OO
ffi
Inexpensive
SitePlanningand Location
201
TTING
PARTS
Z
Z
\\
ffi
PERSONNEL
.!eay-Buirdins F
FTNT'HED
STORAGE
PARKTNG
:0.".+'
Q/
nor^^t
202
FacilitiesPlanning
Phasell
Phase I
-Petsoinel
Fa'llltles
=;;T7-Personnel
Facilitres
LIIIL_|__:J
er\
neavY
Machlnlng
L19ht
Machlnlng
cuttln9
Assembly
Raw
Matl
stge
Paats storage
mImItTITlTluTm
ilTmtr[fl]Tll
Building
Type
euttutne
ffir""uv
sr*ta
erlatne
ffi
$
rormatsutlatno
ffi
Mobility
Flnlshed
storage
ffi
EFTI]]+ETITITIFITT||n
FEffi
yeyg
1631pg1s1y6
frrrirn
ailyrmmovaDre
Essenfl
lfllllllll
Mo""
E
Ero"nrlu"
Figure5.14-SpocePlan
Conclusion
This chapter has set out the fundamentalsof site selectionand site
planning,demonstratinghow thesedetaillevelsfit into the total facility
planning cycle.Model projectplansoutline the stepsrequiredto select
andplan a small,single-buildingsite.When all the tasksarecompleted,
the resultis a plan that shouldpleasethoseindividualswho participated
in the process.
Chapter 7
Writtenby
OfficeSpacePlanningHerbert
Tuftle
204
FacilitiesPlanning
OfficeSpacePlanning
205
MKT. /SALE
ORGANTZATIONAL
CHART
MFG.
MFG.
CEO
SEC.
PURCH.
c .s .
MKT. /
C .S .
STAFF
ACC.
SUPV.
STAFF
C
S A L ES
STAFF
STAFF
206
FacilitiesPlanning
OfficeSpace Planning
207
208
FacilitiesPlanning
OfficeSpacePlanning
To:
From:
RE:
We need your help in designingan efficient new off ice layout.pleasecomplete this surveyand
submatto Jane Plow of your home department.Jane plow is the representative of your area on
the Office DesignTeam.We need your survey by February.pleaseadd any additionalcomments
What are the three departments(teams,areas)withwhich you have the most interaction?
1.
2. ln the Deparmtnets listed in Number 1above, what are the names of the peoole or tjtles of
the people with whom you have the most frequent contact?
A1--A2--=-A3_
Bi
C1
82
C2
DJ
c3
3.
_
_
_
_File
_Speakerphone
-Copy Machine
_Adding Machine
_ln Basket
_Conference Room
4.
_
_
_
_
_Adding Machine
_Conference Room
_Bookcase
5.
_
_
_
Checkwhatyouhavenow.
Off ice with lockingdoor
Of f ice with no door
Cubicle,mediumwalls (<5 feet)
6. What percentage of the work week do you spend in meetings in your work space
(office)?_
7. What percentage of the work week do you spend in meetings outside your work space
{office/cubicle)?
_
8. What percentageof the work week do you spend in meetingsaway f rom your work space
(office/cubicle)?
_
9. lf your work spacewere to be changed,what would you Iiketo see arrangeddifferently?
'11.
What do you like aboutthe presentoffice layoutor arrangement?
12. What is the most important aspect of off ice layout the Off ice Design Team should consider?
209
FacilitiesPlanning
210
o o o o o o
-T-T--r-
ol-l-lo
.....ffi
f--l--
o ll l o
t
t
l
o o Q o o o
A.
Two
confernce
"9$
Meeting
a"
conf igurations
OfficeSpacePlanning
211
212
FacilitiesPlanning
OFFICEFURNITURE
- ls there a desk or work spacefor eachpersonon the organizationchart?
- Do the type, style, andcolor match?
- Do utility runsmatch in cubiclewalls?
ADA REOUIREMENTS
- Canwheelchair-empoweredemployees,customers,andvendorstravel about
vour office lavout?
- How muchstrengthdoes it take to open the doors into the office?
- Are alarmsconfiguredwith flashingstrobes for hearing-impaired
employees?
- How will you communicatethe new layoutwith visuallyimpairedemployees?
- Do the restroomscomplywith the code andADA requirements?
MAINFRAMECOMPUTERFACILITIES
- Are the floor andceilingdesignedto accommodatethe additionalwires?
- ls temperaturecontroladequate?
- What type of fire sprinkleris available?
RECEPTIONOR LOBBYAREA
- ls there security?
- Does the areapresentthe properimage?
SOUNDCONTAINMENT
- Who is next to the lunchroom?
- Where are the printerandfax machineslocated?
- Who is next to the conferenceandtrainingrooms?
ERGONOMICDESIGN
- ls the workstationdesignedfor a personto spendat least eight hoursthere?
OfficeSpacePlanning
213
214
FacilitiesPlanning
Summary
This chapter has provided the basic elementsfor organizing a office
layoutteam,conductinga surveyofinternal customers'The relationship
betweenfacilitiesplanning and office spaceplanning is illuminating.
Using a macro-levelapproachto officespaceplanningmakesdesigning
officelayoutseasier.Checklistsand examplesassistwithan activitythat
mayonly occuroncein aprofessionalcareer.Thesetechniquesandtools
aredesignedto help createlayoutsthat arelogical,flexible,and meetthe
needsof internal customers.
Chapter8
A FinalNote
In this book we havetried to covera complexand ambiguoussubject.
andmethodsthat allowrelativelyinexperienced
We suggestapproaches
industrial engineersto designgood facility plans with efficiencyand
effectiveness.The methods of this book will also help experienced
faciliry planners.
Chapter 1 placedfacilitiesand the planning processin historical
It explainedwhy facilitiesare so important.
and businessperspectives.
It tracedsomegeneraltrendsin facility design.It looked to the future
ofworking facilities.
Chapter 2 establisheda framework for the planning process.It
definedlevelsofdetail that correspondto planningphases.It explained
the four fundamentalsof spaceplanning: units, affinities, spaceand
constraints.It defined conventionsusefulin all phasesofplanning.
Chapter 3 demonstratedhow to designa macro-layout.Macro
layoutssizeand locatedepartments,areasor other large-scalefeatures
within abuilding.This is the layoutphasethat is usuallymostimportant
for industrial engineers.We introduced the Model Project Plan to
guide designersthrough their tasks. We examined the important
essentialsof an operationsstrategy.We explainedhow to synthesize
information and strategyinto workable facility layouts.
Chapter 4 addressedthe details of equipment and furniture
location. It presenteda methodology and principles for designing
effective work cells.
In Chapter5, we examinedthe lowestdetail of spaceplanningthe workstation. Here we explained how to design the workspacefor
safetvand health.
efficiencv.effectiveness.
216
FacilitiesPlanning
Glossary
activity areas. (See spaceplanning units.)
affnities. Various factorsthat demand closenessbetweenany two cellsin a spaceplan. Forexample,
communication orpersonal interaction. Inworkstationdesign, aftinities evolvefrom the movement
ol-parts,movementofhands, and the necessityfor observition,and other indirect facrors.
aftinity diagram. An idealized spatial arrangement that evenrually becomes a spaceplan. Also
called a configuration diagram.
affinityzones. Locations in a workstation that arewithin an operatois optimum visual and reach zones.
allocation of functions. Divides work between people and machines and largely determines the
quality of the operaror'swork experience
anthropometry. The study of the dimensions, weights, and strengths of human body segments.
biomechanics. The stud.yof.mechanical forces in human movement, including the interaction
berween individuals and their physical environment.
block plan. In site planning, a developmentplan that beginswith blocks ofland desienatedfor
eachfunction or areawith long traveldistaniesbet*.en SPUr. Each building may thEn expand
within its block.
bottom-up. Facilities planning.that startswith the details. Deparrmenral units are designed first
and, evenrually, the overall faciliry plan is built.
broadcast. In this system for coordinating production, a schedule dictates the rate and product
mx lor the tlnal oDeratron,
business architecture. The design and development of facilities, organization, products, and
processesinto a functioning, interactive
business system. Also known as manufacturing strategy and corporate reengineering.
cells. (Seespaceplanning units.)
channel route structure. A fixed route with various stops along which equipment moves. At each
stop loadsoriginating at that point arepicked up and thbse desiined for that point aredropped off.
circulation. A material flow method that usesmobile operators to ceuryd product or transfer a
batch through separateoperatlons.
218
FacilitiesPlanning
Glossary
219
flow' The most important level of planning"it sets the focus, or basic organization,
of the factory.
manufacruring focus, The organization of products and processes.
manufacturing stratery. (See businessarchitecture)
masterbuilding. Facilities planning that focuseson construction and
buildings.
'he
material flow. f
movcment of Parts,products, and,/or servicesfrom work cell to work
cell and
rnrougnout the taclhry(s).
ma^terialflowanalysis. Using collected data to calculatematerial flow
befween eachcombination
oI Jru Darrs.
Using computer databasesto schedule and track production,
:f:.::*T1.^T^.itsp-lanning.
plan capaclry,coltectcosts,and provide many other functions.
1i;ro-space planning. Thespace-planlevelatwhich the location ofspecific equipment and furnirure
rs oetermlned l ne emphaslsshfts from grossmaterial flow to personal
spaceand communication.
model project plan. A framework of detail revelsthat translates into
planning phases.
motion economy. Steps and procedures that simplifi and improve manual
work.
non-flow affinities. Intangible factors that give rise to affinities (q.v.).
Suppons operations for all or mosr of a product rine but does not
j"t*rrlcrure..
l!:1P
contrlDute
dlrectlv to the Drocess.
*1*g;.I|:study
metabollc
byDroducts.
Usingbrainstormingtechniquestodevelopthe positive,negatrve,
f:t::,.--l:.C,1ll:11-elest1nS.
anc lnrerestlngpolnts to choosebetweenseveralspaceplan options.
process charts. Show the type ofactivity that acts on a product.
process focus. A manufacturing focus that allows each department
to specialize in their
particular process or craft.
product focus. A manufacturing processwhere operations are grouped
into departments that
focus on prodr.rcts'Each departm*enrmust have itt op"r"tionr ?quiiil;;rd
:kil,1",
o'ty
process a single product.
product-volurne a.nalysis.Examines the current and future time frames
for the products and
rnerr volumes so that the relationships between various products may be
understiod.
production flow.analysis. using spreadsheets,computer analysis,or manuar
methods to group
parts that have similar routings.
project cell. A work cell that produces a wide variety ofunrelated products using
multiple processes.
of six methods used for carcuratingspacerequirements.The spacefor a
l,l:^l"flglirg.one
glven
bl,U comesfrom the calculationofanother space.
;::::"?,"rH:::*'
220
FacilitiesPlanning
Bibliography
Adair,John. 1987.Effectiveteambuilding.London: Pan Books.
AiLg'"' T. H., sr. 1984.Matriats handtingpinciptes andpractice.New york van Nosftand
Reinhold.
ANSI/HFES 100-1988.1988.Human Factorsand ErgonomicsSociety.
Apple, J. M. 1,972.Materialsbandlingsystems
design.New York: Ronald press.
Baetz,Mary L. 1985: The ltuman imperatiae:Planningfor peoplein the erectroni ofice.
Toronto: Holt, Rinehart,and Winston.
Barnes,R. M. 1968.Motion and timestudl.NewYork Wiley.
Bolz, Harold A. and GeorgeE. Hagemann.7958.Mateials bandtingbandboai.New york:
RonaldPress.
Bastontecbnical
7994.4-o.
furniture applicationbandboo&..
Brandt, Peter B. 1,992.Ofice desrgz.New York: Watson-Guptil.
Buffa, Elwood s. 1984. Meeting the competitirechallenge.
Homewood, Ill.: DowJonesIrwin.
Bureauoflabor statistics.1993.
Doll' william J. and Mark A. vonderembse.1990. The evolution of manufacturing
systems:Towards the post-industrialenterprise.Proceedings
of the5th International
conference
oftheoperationsManagementAssociatioz.
warwick, England:universityof
Warwick Press.
Duf$', Francis,Andrew Laing, and Vic Crisp. The responsible
tsorhplace:Tberedesignof
toorkand offces.Oxford, England: Butterworth-Heinemann.
Durand,Jacques.T9T2.Anewmethodforconstructingscenarios.
Futures.325-330.
EastmanKodak co. 1986.Ergonomicdesign
for peopleat work. New York van Nostrand
Reinhold.
Eastman Kodak Co. 7983.Ergonomi designforpeopleat ztsork.t: I5-IZ.
Ford, Henry. 1926. Todayand tomorrozu.Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday.
Francis, Richard L. and John A. white. 7974.Facititl lalout and location:An anajtical
a??roach. Englewood Cliffs, N.Y. : Prentice-Hall.
Fraser,M. 7989. Thezaorkerat uork. New York: Taylor and Francis.
Frederickson,JackM. 1989.Designingtbecostefectiu ofice;A guideforfacititiesplanners
and managers.
New York: Qrorum Books.
Friedman,Arnold, John F. Pile, and Forrestwilson . !982. Interior design:An introduction
222
FacilitiesPlanning
Bibliography
223
tlile.
224
FacilitiesPlanning
and industrialfacilities
Wrennall, W. and Qrarterman Lee.1994. Handbookof commercial
t. New York McGraw-Hill.
,nanagemen
for
woodson, wesley E. and Donald w. conover. 1966. Human engineering_guide
2nd rev. edition. Berkeley:University of california Press.
equiprnentdesigners.
Index
A
A affinities 81
accelerator 163
accounting 203
acquisition 188
activity area. 24
administration 203
aerospace engineers 54
aesthetics 9l
affinities 23
affinity diagrams 23
airlines 138
aisles 85
all-salary systems 146
allocation 163
allocation of functions 162
American National Standards Institute
24.
Americans with Disabilities Act 174
anthropometric data 168
anthropometrics 166
architects l3
archives 210
artwork 32
assembly lines 139
B
backtracking 52
balance 142
bar chart 81
bills of material 139
biomechanics 166
block 193
block plan 194
body segment class 165
Boehm-Davis 163
bottom-up 9
brainstorming 98
broadcast 138
building outline 91
bulletin boards 157
C
CAD systems 25
carpal tunnel syndrome 162
casualovertime 211
Catholic Church 8
cell definition 69
cells 22
cellular 46
central system 138
channel route structure 138
channel structures 138
character positions 127
Charles Sorensen 152
checklists 214
circulation 141
city buses 138
classicaldesign 169
clearance 169
cloning 9
codingand classification 118
commandand control 145
communication 24
communicationssystems 208
companyculture 203
compatibility 115
compensationsystem 136
computer simulation 158
computers 210
conceptual framework 29
connectordevices 210
consensus78
226
FacilitiesPlanning
constraints 23, 27
containers 63
contracted projects 211
conventions 112
conventions 29, 74
coordination 56, 109
copy machines 210
Cosmos Products 32
cost control 56
cross-functional teamwork 8
cross-training 145
crossovers 52
cubicles 211
cumulative trauma disorder 162
cumulative traumas 162
Currl' 163
customer services 203
customers 55
cy'bernetic work team 146
cycle time 142
data acquisition 30
deciders 97
decision criterion 97
decision tree analysis 97
decision-makers 33
decor 208
dedicated cell 112
delay symbol 39
deliverables 28
derived elements 24
design iteration 157
design team 109
design tools and aids 29
design volume 133
designing for the extremes 1?2
development officials 188
Diamond Equipment Company 119
diaphragm pumps 119
direct labor 132
direct link 56, 138
direct route structure 138
dis-economies of scale 55
distributors 138
doors 210
duplicate 193
duplicate plan 194
dynamic 142
dynamic balance 142
d1'namic dimensions 169
d1'namic imbalance 142
d1'namic posture 167
facilitator 207
facilities 57
facility mission statement 15
FacPlan 2000 11
faxes 210
fear ofpunishment 146
Federal Express 138
frnancial analysis 97
finished-goodsinventory 111
fixed assignment 143
frxed route 138
flex-time 211
flexibility 109
flexible hours 211
float 143
Florida 125
flow calculations 71
flow calibration 77
flow complexity index 101
flow/non-flow ratio 81
E
E affrnities 81
economic lot size 134
economies of scale 55
Edward DeBono 98
tocus
b /
focus opportunities 54
focused factory 55
forecasts 22
fork trucks 138
fortresses 4
freedomof movement 156
functional cell 112
fundamental 24
furniture 208
G
Gantt chart 33
Gator Steel 125
geographic areas 55
geopolitics 16
global economics 8
Bibliography
go/no-gocriteria 97
grasprng 178
greenery 208
group incentive system 147
Group Technology(GT) Cell 112
group technology cells 63
groupedproduct profrle 37
inventoryreduction 104
inverted-U 153
item or SKU numbers 40
iterative improvement 26
iterative process 25
227
K
Kanban 56
kanban 138
key dimensions 54
key manufacturing tasks 54
knowledge 4
L
laboratories 210
Large 113
Layout 8
layout planning 30
lead times 139
"leapfrog"
143
legroom 169
lighting 208
line 68
line production 46
logic flow 30
long internal idle time 143
long moves 52
long-distancetruckers 138
lot size 131
low-costequipment 142
M
macro-layout 29
macro-spaceplan 16
Maintenance 65
management 13
manufacturers 203
manufacturing orientation 36
manufacturing support 203
marketing 36
markets 55
Maslow's Hierarchy 154
mass-productiontechnology 4
master building 9
material flow 52
material flow analysis 97
material flow charts 39
Material flow values 71
material requirementsplanning 138
material supply 16
McDonald's 9
medieval guilds 8
Medium 112
merged ratings 81
228
FacilitiesPlanning
o
O affinities 81
office layouts 86
office planning 204
office user survey 208
operation cycle 131
"strings"
operation
63
operation symbol 39
operational cells 69
operations strategies 11
operations strategy outline 58
operator assignments and skills 136
operator comfort 161
operator mobility 144
operator variety 161
organization analysis 48
organization chart 48
organization charts 22
organization-based approach 204
OSHA 97
outbound container 149
outputs 15
P
partitions 157
pay-for-knowledge system 147
payback 97
payout 104
people balance method 136
perations strategy summary 54
personnellocations 156
PERT chart 33
Peter F. Drucker 5
phases 21
physical infrastructure 50
physical infrastructure checklist 51
physics 98
physiology 166
Pickering Piano Factory 3
piececosts 131
pilot cells 22
plant expansions 16
plant-within-plant 63
politics 16
polycodesystem 125
positive-negative-interesting 97
posture 169
Practiceof Management 5
preliminary product segregation 122
primary task 143
problem-solvingteams 154
process 57
processcharts 39
processelements 57
processengineers 13
processtime 131
processes55
product mix 143
product profile 121
product selection 115
product-focused55
product-volume (P-V) analysis 35
production class profrle 44
productivity 161
products 55
project cell 112
proportioning 84
prototyping 165
psychologicalintegration 161
purchase 188
a
qualifiers 99
qualitative analysis 104
quality 65
quality assurance 736, 744
quality standards 144
queues 4l
R
random sampling 74
ranking 97
ratio forecasting. 84
reach 169
reaching 178
receptionareas 210
reengineering 3
Renaissance5
reorder point 138
Bibliography
repairs 41
resources 28
rest room 210
restructuring 3, 8
return on rnvestment 97
Revised Lifting Equation 1?3
Richard Muther 24
Robert McNamara 54
Rocroi 4
roll products 32
Roman Legions 8
S
safety 161
safety and security 208
salary 146
salary wages 146
sales volume 37
Salvendy 118
schematic flow diagram 72
scope 28
seating 173
secondary task 143
selfactualization 146
self-managed teams 145
serpentine 153
set downs 41
set-up costs 131
set-up times 129
set-ups 129
shared services 208
sheet products 32
short internal idle time 143
"Silicon
Valley" 6
simulation 158
simulation software 158
single piece 112
site boundaries 186
site drawing 16
site factors 186
site features 198
site plan 188
site saturation 16, 193
site specification document 186
srtes 183
small 112
social integration 161
social system 6
socio-technical systems 6
space 23
space flexibility 193
space plan primitive
23, 27
space planning units 23
space rationing approach 204
space standards 84
SPC/TQM 144
speedometer 163
spreadsheet 80
static 142
static dimensions 169
229
230
FacilitiesPlanning
v
value added index 41
value-adding elements 41
variable flow paths 56
vertical affinity zone 179
vertical integration 55
vertical space 180
video monitors 210
visual communications 156
visual control 156
visual estimating 84
w
warehouses 138
weighted factor analysis 97
weighted numeric scale 179
Wichita, Kansas 6
Wickham Skinner 54
Wiener 163
wires 210
work 4
work cells 111
work positions 173
rvork product 38
work product activity 38
work teams 156
work-in-process 44
workbenches 142
worker selection 162
workers 18
workforce 4
working hours 208
workload 142
workstations 13
writing surfaces 210
z
zone 193
zone plan 193
Aboutthe Authors
Qrarterman Lee is the presidentof Strategos,Inc., a consultingfirm.
He was an editor ofthe HandbookofCornrnercial
andIndustrial Facilities
Managernenland is the author oi numerous articles in the fields of
industrial managementand engineering.He hascreatedtraining courses
for the Institute of Industrial Engineers,the Societyof Manufacturing
Engineers and the U.S. Postal Service and assistedorganizations
worldwide with the application of innovative managementmethods.
Arild Amundsen is president of Plancraft, AS, and has an extensive
backgroundin mechanicalengineering,consulting,and management.
He residesin Oslo.William Nelson is presidentofHumatech, Inc., and
specializesin bio-socio-technicalsystems.He also designsproducts,
industrial equipment and workstations. Herbert Tuttle is an assistant
p;ofessorin the GraduateEngineeringManagementProgram at the
University of Kansas.He has over 15 yearsof experiencein industrial
engineeringand plant management.
AbOUtEMP
ENcrNcBruNc&MnNacEMENT Pnrss (EMP) is the book publishing
division of the Institute of industrial Engineers.EMP was founded in
1g81 asIndustrial Engineeringand ManagementPress(IE&MP). In
"reengineered"asENGINEERING
& MANAGEMENT
1995,IE&I\{P was
Pnpssby an entirely new staff.
As both IE&MP and EMP, the presshasahistory ofpublishing
successfultitles. Recent successesinclude: ToyotaProductionSystent,
2nd Edition; Beyond tbe Basics of Reengineering;BusinessPrzcess
andA??tications;andManaging Qulaity in
Reengineering:CurrentIssues
Most Admired Companies.
Am.ericas
EMP's newest titles are By Wbat Method?; SirnulationMade
Easy; andEssentialCareerSkitlsforEngineers,the first in the Engineers
in BusinessSeries,of which this book is a part.
For more information about EMP or to requesta free catalog
,.
of EMP's currenttitles,pleasecaltIIE Member &Customer Serviceat
800- 49 4-0460 or 770- 449-0 460.