The Michael Ford Manufacturing Blog
The Michael Ford Manufacturing Blog RSSPedal Faster, We Need The Watts!
Energy is the current revolution. We have all become accustomed to the use of a lot of energy in our daily lives. I write this blog while sitting in my local BMW dealership, surrounded by nice new shiny cars that consume lots of gasoline. The technology in these cars today though is incredible, with new cars each year achieving much higher level of efficiencies than ever before. It is still however a matter of time. Most of the energy that we burn whether in cars or in our homes and daily lives comes from non-renewable sources, well, that is unless you want to wait a couple of million more years… My own BMW is about 8 years old, still going, and I don’t want to replace it. I want to see what alternatives there can be, both technology wise and market wise coming in the near future. The investment in another gas guzzler does not seem quite right, right now. Technology had better hurry up though, planet or no planet, I do not want to be stuck by the side of the road after being on a long-haul business trip!
Alternative energy sources are now growing, but, they all come with some restrictions. Solar power is great but only when the sun shines, wind power only when it is windy, tidal power four times a day, hydro-electricity only where it rains. The demand for electricity is not dependant of course on these same factors. Domestically, huge power demand surges happen during commercial breaks in popular TV soap operas. During the day, industry is the main user, a growing amount of which is air-conditioning, so variable with temperature. We still have not found a technology that we can use to store electricity on the scale needed with the response time required. We have to produce it according to demand. This severely restricts the ability for the alternative technologies to gain share.
We can see where this is going. For many years we have seen in many countries “night rates” of electricity which encourage us to run things like washers, dryers and water heaters over night at a cheaper rate. The drive for the introduction of alternatively sourced energy is strong in the Scandinavian countries. Here, already we are seeing electricity being charged as a “spot rate” – continuously variable rates for industry according to the supply and demands. To make this work practically needs the consumers of energy to take note of the price fluctuations and optimise their usage. In Japan following the recent earthquakes, power is at a premium, there is also now considerable motivation to optimise the power usage profile.
In manufacturing then, what can be done? Is there variation in the amount of energy that different products or processes need? Could planning of the shop-floor be altered so as to take account of the expected energy price fluctuations? Perhaps we should start measuring the amount of energy that is used per product, and, the amount of energy wasted through inefficiency. If lines are not running for any reason, can we put them into a stand-by mode to save power? The Valor MSS system is certainly poised to be able to do this, to understand what is being built on what processes at any time. It would take a very simple addition to make a report based on sensors of electricity usage.
Are there people out there who are thinking about this energy issue? Should we be building in the tools for energy and cost of energy analysis? Would manufacturing companies pay money to buy the hardware and software tools to do this? I want to know. Please comment about his blog. Let’s see how much we are really thinking about the future…………
Tags: Electricity, Energy, Japan, MSS, Planning, Solar, Valor
The Chinese Way?
The Nepcon show in Shenzhen, China is coming up. The question comes to mind as to what to show that will attract the interest of people investing their time to come to see Mentor at the show.
Moving PCB-A production geographically to any alternate location, whether in-house or to an out-sourcing provider is always a challenge. The working practices are different as well as the knowledge-base of the management, engineering and production operators. Priorities are different. The communication channels are there, but what barriers are there, such as language, time difference and perhaps just the reluctance to call thinking that perseverance will eventually solve the issue and avoid showing dependency. This scenario gets a whole lot more challenging when considering lower cost locations. The barriers become higher, the incumbent experience weaker. It seems the cold hard lessons learned by years of experience are doomed to be repeated. This has been the story in the industry now for many years. We coped though didn’t we?
So, what is new in China? For sure, the same barriers and re-growing pains are there. China is a long way from the target market of most products made, and there is a considerable language and cultural gap. We are still coping though, yes? Now we hear that rather than low cost volume manufacturing, China is moving very rapidly into the Automotive and other key sectors that require some very specific quality and safety standards. Are we still okay with this? Are we happy to drive around in a car where the critical safety systems for the engine management, brakes, steering, suspension etc. are made in lower cost locations? The answer appears to be growing in favour of “yes”. After all, with the correct management of these manufacturing and assembly operations, in theory, there should be no difference, correct? Wrong! We all know that there is a learning curve, it is not something special for China, we have seen it everywhere that assembly is moved. It is “statistically certain” that at some point serious issues will appear.
The automotive world has for many years been aware of these risks and has driven some hard-core conformance and assurance processes in all automotive manufacturing, which used to be “local” to most automotive final assembly plants. As the use of electronics continues to escalate in cars for critical systems, the focus on quality and responsibility increases for the PCB-A assembly houses, now also in China. Can we afford to go through the re-learning curves for automotive? Consider the costs of recalls the damage to brands that we have seen in the past. Think of the safety issues, the moral and financial liability should injuries occur as a failure of an automotive critical system at a critical time. The intention here is not to challenge the rise in Chinese automotive business, but rather find a way to avoid the need to go through the re-learning curves.
Going back to the Nepcon show then, will the key people from these automotive companies come along to see systems like our Valor MSS (Manufacturing Systems Solutions) suite , in which we have built in and applied the lessons learned from many years of our own and our customers’ experience? Using our MSS system would give plenty of companies in China an immediate head-start and a credibility to be able to demonstrate world-class operational and quality performance. The alternative is to risk being one of those companies that make up the learning curve, risking their business and reputation, whether they are a local company or part of a multi-national, in an area that perhaps should not be gambled on.
Tags: Automotive, China, Conformance, learning curve, Liability, MSS, Quality, risk, safety, Valor
Conducting The Manufacturing Orchestra…..
My sister, as a child, learned to play the Violin. At first, this was an awful noise where even the cat would bolt out of the house straight into a torrential rainstorm rather than being within earshot. It soon developed however into a nice balanced tone, at times. I wondered whether I could do the same and started learning to play the recorder. Not a good idea. We shall say no more. My sister however, went on to play in the school band. Each member of the band had gone through the same learning process with their particular “weapon” of choice. The task of the music teacher was to bring all of this together in time for an end of year recital. Even though I was not so cynical in those days, it seemed unlikely. Some weeks later, on the day of the recital, it was a transformation. There was music being played that I actually recognized. The timing of all of the instruments as melodies passed from instrument to instrument, the synchronised attack and decay of the sounds and the feelings created from the textures of combined sounds. What was the key factor here that made the difference, had the musicians suddenly made huge progress? Actually, in isolation, the band members, though clearly improved, sounded pretty much like they did before. The difference was the conductor. At a simple level the conductor makes sure that everything came together according to the written music. At a higher level, the conductor guides the minute timing and inflection, the precision and balance that allow the full depth and emotion of the music to be communicated.
I have noticed the exact same process in manufacturing. Individual production processes replace the musical instruments. The written music is the schedule made up of sequenced work-orders, being the link between all of the processes. Where is the conductor? Who is orchestrating this operation?
When putting together a series of webinars to describe the technologies behind the Valor MSS suite, I soon came to the realization that the way that work-orders are utilised is critical to the harmony of the operation. At a simple level, the work-orders define what has to be done in order to manufacture and assemble a product. In many operations, this is as far as it goes. If the aspiration of a PCB-A operation is only to continue to rely on people communicating perfectly spending plenty of effort to solve issues as they appear and get serious, then perhaps the simple use of work-orders is enough.
The advanced use of work-orders however provides substantial opportunities. The specific product – process definition of parameters, procedures, documentation are some examples that contribute to management for compliance and conformance. Assurance of correct operation, visibility of bottlenecks, management of required tasks and co-ordination of resource availability are all examples of how intelligence built into work-orders can be used. The work-order then, establishes the benchmark against which the manufacturing execution should be managed, driving tasks, enforcing compliance, enhancing productivity, quality and reducing costs.
We can go so far as to say that the perceived intelligence of an MES system is substantially proportional to the advanced capabilities built into the work-order infrastructure. Effective MES starts with work-order planning and scheduling to ensure that the whole shop-floor orchestra works together to deliver a world-class performance. Take a look at the Valor MSS suite, to see the breadth of technology that an integrated MES can deliver when running with advanced intelligent work-orders. The lead-in webinar takes place April 17th. Let’s get it started!
Tags: MES, MSS, Planning, Scheduling, Valor, Visibility, Work-Orders
Materialistically Speaking…..
MRP is king, reigning supreme since the 1970s. What seems to not need to be “rocket science” continues to attract vast sums of money justified by the continued dominance of costs of materials and supply chain elements of any manufacturing business.
Since the 1970s, pretty much everything about MRP has been improved. The sales forecasting is getting close to being “rocket science” as effects of things like promotions, market competition, fashion trends and even the weather is factored in. Companies can know really quite accurately now about what products manufacturing should make and when they are required.
Look also at manufacturing technology; the new generations of machines and processes that are flexible yet fast, far more capable now to make the demanded products when needed with a far shorter lead-time for change.
Thirdly, look at the logistics for raw materials procurement, all finely timed with excellent communication and supplier relations.
With such an “awesome” system in place, how is it that material issues continue to be the number one source of lost opportunity in electronics assembly manufacturing? Why are there such bloated inventories of materials in the warehouse and why is there such chaos on the shop-floor?
The irony is that since the 1970s, there is one missing piece of the supply chain which has not been able to keep pace with the other MRP improvements, in fact, it has been sliding backwards as materials grow more numerous and complex and speed of consumption increases. The key is inventory management, specifically the accuracy of the inventory levels.
Not convinced? Look at the chaos that happened recently with the earthquake in Japan. Companies struggled with key material suppliers; a lot of the damage to operations was actually caused by not knowing actually how many materials were already present in the manufacturing operations. Work-orders started had to cut-short, work-orders that could have run, were not.
The shop-floor continues for most to be the weakest link in the whole supply chain. A solution is out there and has been out there for some time. Read about this in my upcoming webinar on this subject; http://www.mentor.com/pcb-manufacturing-assembly/events/“
The benefits and savings improving the operation of MRP already experienced by users of this technology may blow your mind…….. Are you ready?
Tags: Agility, Inventory Accuracy, JIT, Lean, Material Turns, Materials Management, MES, MRP
It Just ‘Flu By!
Christmas was a month ago now. For many manufacturers, Christmas is like the turn of a page. Before Christmas, there was the seasonal rush, the fight to get as much of the right products out of the door and on to the shelves as fast possible. In spite of the doom and gloom stories about the economy the seasonal rush seemed more or less as strong as ever; still a large market to keep a share of, the same demand patterns, and the need for performance is still felt.
So, after Christmas, then what? The sales were on! Embarrassingly bloated inventories of those products which did not quite make it into shoppers’ hands, orphaned in the vast and complex distribution chains, now need to go! There are some real bargains to be had. With a combination of some very poor weather here in the UK just before Christmas plus a good dose of some seasonal sniffles, my own Christmas preparation was less than optimal. I then felt like a real “scrooge” going out after Christmas to take advantage buying up things I don’t need, at prices that make you wonder how their business can survive…. But it was fun!
Of course, this is quite a normal pattern for many people. It is a volatile time of year. Get it right, the numbers for the whole year are made, get it wrong and it can bring a company some serious issues. This process is hard on manufacturing. The ability to respond to “boom and bust” cycles stretches the abilities to maintain efficiency and quality as well as the on-time delivery.
Is this only however a problem of seasonality? No, actually this problem happens all the time, of course it is very noticeable when there are seasonal variations, but also when products come towards end of life. At product end of life, the regular distribution chain management systems really fall down. As demand for the product decreases, the value of each product falls, potentially rapidly, which causes the value of remaining stock in the distribution chain to fall. The sales forecasts become little more than prophesies, exhibiting repeating cycles of “boom” or “bust”, switching between the fear of significant stock write-off versus not enough product to fulfil the remaining customer demand.
So what? Now is time to think – about planning (or the lack of it!), efficiency, performance, what lessons have been learned, how to deal with the extreme fluctuations in demand and the balance of demand over different products. How to be agile, to respond to the market needs, but how to be also efficient, a lean operation with minimum waste?
It would be great to see the natural reduction of demand, which is in reality what is happening “at the tills”. What is preventing this visibility is the logic in the distribution chain systems that do not cope well in such cases, especially where the lead time from manufacturing to shelf has been continuously reduced in recent years in order to, ironically, increase agility and reduce stock in the distribution chain.
Time to think out of the box!
What can we do that is different? Back to the basics – “eliminate the unexpected”. We can always expect there to be fluctuations in product demand. What we don’t know is what the fluctuation is going to really be. Suggestion: improve the way in which the real demand pattern is communicated to manufacturing. Instead of sticking the numbers into a 1970s-logic-based distribution management system, give manufacturing direct visibility of the real demand pattern. This is beginning to sound familiar. Isn’t this the same “pull system” logic that we use in our Valor MSS Lean Materials Management solution? Let’s think about applying the same “Lean-Thinking” concept to real demand-based planning for manufacturing. Does anyone else out there see the potential in this?
Tags: Agility, End Of Life, JIT, Lean, MSS, Planning, Seasonality, Valor
Assembling The Light Fantastic!
Change is the enemy. Keep it the same day after day. Refine. This is what manufacturing likes. This is not what manufacturing gets. Changes happen on different levels. Changes in order quantities such that we have to adjust the work-orders and schedules. Variations in the bill of materials due to some engineering change, perhaps made to improve the product quality, reliability or perhaps just to reduce the cost. It causes disruption, but there are procedures to cope with that. The risk of making a mistake and the cost of implementing the change is as good as the procedure and the adherence to that procedure. These kinds of changes are normal and we can cope with them.
There are other kinds of changes however. A shortage of materials in the market, the purchasing division sources some alternatives. Different sizes, shapes, even a different supply form in some cases. These changes are more difficult and more costly to implement. For those of us with good material management systems, we can cope with this, we have a procedure, we reduce the risk and the cost. Cutting the alternative parts in and out, changing the machine programs, recording the change in the traceability files, changing the AOI programs and knowing which boards and which references have changed.
Then there are complex changes such as those related to “light classes”. This is not a simple alternative part scenario, this is a much more complex parts substitution problem – on the fly! Why? Well, go to the airport or anywhere that has those nice LED display panels. Look at any array of LED lights, now also popular as brake lights on cars. These LED panels are made up of tens, hundreds or even thousands of individual LEDs. Look more closely at the panel at the airport with its scrolling message. You start to see that a few of the LEDs are brighter than others. Some may be dimmer. Multi-coloured displays have the message changing tint as it flows across the display. Lack of uniformity an engineer may tell us. Uniformity is an important part of the quality of the display. Uniformity however is not a strong attribute in LED manufacture however. You really only know when you light it up with a known current how bright it is going to be. Of course, LED manufacturers are not going to let a thing like that prevent them from selling a quality product – they simply sort them into “classes”, each class has a range of brightness characteristic deemed acceptable at the desired quality level. All classes are as good as each other, but to get one class to shine at the same brightness as the other, different components or values in the support circuitry are needed. Back to manufacturing then, which class are we using? Design and engineering will have done their part, to set up sets of conditional substitutions. To put it simply, whenever one class is used, populate the parts with these values, but when another class, then use other parts with other values. This can happen at any time though, whenever the light class of the available parts changes. This is now true dynamic manufacturing, where risk and cost of change become a part of the process itself rather than a recovery procedure.
How many MES systems can handle this? It is just one of a number of advanced manufacturing requirements that are faced in SMT manufacturing that require special and individual attention. If it cannot be supported, we fall back on to a manual system with all the associated risk and cost. Having the support for these specialist requirements to ensure that risk and cost are avoided is a key differentiator in the choice of manufacturing systems. The Valor MSS suite is probably the one system available that has at its core the support for this kind of specialisation, out of the box and ready to go. It is the value point differentiation. This is all getting very interesting…..
Tags: Change Management, LED, Light Classes, Materials Management, MES, MSS, Valor
Extreme Design!
After spending my first few years in the manufacturing area, I had upset enough people that they wanted to move me somewhere else. They told me to go check out the design team, since that is “where all the problems come from”. I had studied electronics, albeit the science of electronics, so I was at least familiar with the concept. My experience of design though at the time was something more to do with bits of “Letraset” than anything using computers. What a chore that used to be – decals, lines and symbols to try to make up a circuit. A good motivation though for “do it right the first time” when remedial work was so difficult to do. The early example of extreme design.
So, next chapter, learn about design – on computers! It all looked very nice and colourful and having done the job manually, I really appreciated the ease of use. As normal however, I got carried away. My interest at the time was audio, so I thought the best way to train myself would be to design my own micro-processor controlled pre-amplifier. This was nineteen eighty something so such things were not readily available in the shops, at least not at a price that I could afford. With the entire design in my head, since I have never been able to read my own writing, I set out. A masterpiece, an art-form, everything nice and square, parallel, quite futuristic looking, double sided of course. Of course, no design rules in those days, just check and check again. Just design, review, repeat until will to live is all but lost.
My boss at the time was a very kindly person who, seeing my enthusiasm, said that perhaps we could have the PCB actually made up, to see if it actually worked. In those days, design was still done manually, then input to the CAD system. Designing straight into CAD was radical. No-one believed it would work, certainly not first time. In my case, they were not wrong.
I bought all of the components, almost all of which fitted. A couple had to have some “slight modification” to make them fit. If only we had Design for Assembly back then, I would not have had to have left it to my own impatience. I then soldered it all up, wrote some software, burned it into an e-prom, plugged it in, applied the power, and, well… it didn’t quite work. A few tracks had shorted, a couple of (few) design mistakes, and some solder bridges that would not go away until I had frazzled the board. A couple of scratched out tracks and addition of some new links and it was sorted. It had taken quite some time to find all the faults. Trying to troubleshoot things I couldn’t get to. No Design for Test for me. Once these were fixed, and a little bit of debug on the software, and hey presto, it appeared to work fine, at least on the bench. I was really pleased. I thought that I had proved my point. I of course fell into my usual trap, pride goes before a fall….
The next job was to fit it into the case and wire it up to everything. I wish I had thought more about that. Design for Assembly again. The connectors were not really in a good place, wiring up the relays and LEDs, potentiometers, analogue and video modules, it soon became like a giant rat’s nest. I could not even see my nicely laid out design any more, which also now was running quite warm….. Hmm.
Oh yes, and then it actually didn’t work after all. The microprocessor was running, the LEDs were blinking on and off, but even so, it seemed that “no-one was home”. No sound, no video. I had most of the transistors the wrong way around. All this PN P and NPN. Basic mistake. What a nightmare, and why were they right at the back where I could not reach? So, a complete disassembly….
Once it was up and running, I have enjoyed and continue to enjoy to this day many years of trouble-free operation, well, except that a few years ago, the reset circuit failed. Perhaps Design for Serviceability might have been an idea, there was no way with my design and construction that I was going near this, I could not even remember where the offending circuit was, never mind how it was supposed to work – so a new little switch for a manual reset on the front panel.
People with far more experience and know-how than I have learned so much in the design process over the years. A professional designer today would dismiss my efforts as child-play. Have we gone as far as we can now with design? Is there nothing more? Where is our modern extreme design opportunity.
Well, there is a barrier still to be broken, one I wish I had myself. “Design for Life”. This includes the current design rule checks, the design for assembly, fabrication, test and assembly etc., all the ones we know and rely on today already. What can be added though is design for quality, for repair, for longevity, for recycle, for the environment, for the customer experience, perhaps even to learn how the customers use the products, what conditions the products are subjected to in their life. Extreme design is when the design flow becomes a closed loop with the recycle of the final product retaining and re-using all of the information that we can. Closing the loop on this, design, engineering, manufacturing, service, and recycling, then design for a better product in a better future. I can’t wait, get me on that production line! Let’s go! The Valor division Valor MSS product suite plus the regular Mentor design products have given me inspiration on this. This is all getting very interesting…..
Laziness – Something I’m Good At!
My wife credits me with having laziness down to a fine art. I cannot argue. For years, I have spent my time looking for ways to avoid, as my wife would put it, the things that I don’t want to do, or as I would put it, things that don’t add value. It’s a natural process for me, I didn’t study, or get any training, to be honest it just comes naturally.
Now I have worked for a little time in the distant past as a manufacturing operator, yes, putting parts on boards, running SMT machines, running the ATE and even functional test. The way I normally tell the story is that “I was looking for experience”. While partly true, the reality was more to do with several very bright “fires” burning in the manufacturing area, it was all hands on deck.
Though the work was very repetitive, it was quite enjoyable, right up to the time things went wrong. Contributing to the making of a product is quite fulfilling, trying to track down materials that had run out, leaving me as the bottleneck in the line for a product needed to have been shipped yesterday, not quite so much.
Yes, I did learn the hard way. Though not my regular “day job” at the time which was manufacturing systems software development, populating boards was actually quite restful, it appealed to the lazy part of me. Just sit there, do the same thing all the time, get paid. How bad can it be? If only then to get rid of the problems, the disruptions, the fire-fighting.
So, the challenge was set, trying to avoid these problems in manufacturing rather than having to address them. If we can fix the causes of problems before they happen, how much better would that be. The later the problems are detected, the more costly and difficult to rectify. Detecting them before they happen, has to be free then, right? Examples are around us already. Preventative maintenance for example on your car. Nowadays, cars tell us when they need to be serviced, the brake pads changed, the oil replaced etc. They are measured and monitored so that lazy people like me are alerted to the service need in a timely way and do not break down any more. It works. Maintenance related problem prevention is one thing, but how about operational problem prevention?
It is all about visibility, turning it into opportunity to identify potential problems ahead of the time that they become actual problems. You don’t need to be psychic for example to know that if any part of the production process runs slower than expected, that there is going to be disruption to deliveries, knock-on effects to other lines and products. Using real-time data collection and dashboards, we can see the start of the trend as soon as just a few products are made, focus somebody immediately on the task to find out what is the problem and correct it. This is one of many solutions that the Valor MSS suite can provide, the benefits of which are enjoyed by many customers every day.
The less well recognized but specific example that I got caught up in at the time I was doing the manufacturing work was to do with SMT materials. They ran out. There was no new material. The machine stopped. I asked myself how that could happen, after all it was no secret what product we were making, the bill of materials, the manufacturing process was all out there in the open, everything was said to have been prepared. It is not rocket science, surely. I decided to ask the production manager about it. After receiving a 30 minute lecture in response, I realised that our production manager was firmly laying blame on the materials manager, who he claimed did not understand the nature or needs of manufacturing. The materials manager was sitting at this desk. I went and asked him the same question. I had no idea that not only manufacturing, but engineering were the ones responsible, that Engineering could not make their minds up which materials to use, and that production would steal materials whenever machine stopped, from anywhere, no matter what, and for that reason all the important stuff had to be locked up. I thought about talking to the engineering manager. Just as well I decided on a quick “bio-break” before asking him the question. At length, he put me straight on quite a few topics related to purchasing, scheduling, equipment breakdowns, unexpected spoilage. Ultimately, I realized this was complete chaos. Oh yes, and in all that time, still there were no materials found that my machine needed. This day felt way too much like hard work.
I made it my mission to find a way to break through this problem, as by far, it was the most major factor affecting manufacturing that I had seen, and it was making people upset. There had to be a better way.
It took some time, some effort, but finally we created a nice working solution. It is the realisation of the Japanese “Just In Time”, or as I prefer to put it “minimum commitment”, translated for electronics. The most difficult thing about this solution is for people to believe that it works. It does work though, spectacularly in all the cases that I have seen. Actually, the production manager, materials manager and engineering manager were all a bit embarrassed about how much difference it made. They had not realized the true cost of their chaotic old methods.
Well, I would not say that everyone in manufacturing is as lazy like me. Far from it. But the good work they do should always be adding value, contributing, and not fire-fighting or even problem solving. Maximum result for minimum effort, that is good enough for me.
Check out my “Improve Materials Management With Intelligent JIT” webinar on September 21st to hear the full story of how this solution works. This is all getting very interesting…..
Tags: JIT, Lean, Materials Management, MES, Valor, Visibility, webinar
No More Trade-Offs!
Way back in the years BC (before computers), the attitude in electronics manufacturing was quite different compared to today. There were continuous trade-offs between the three critical elements; Quality, Cost and Delivery. For example, it was accepted that at times of new model introduction, market defect rates would soar, these would even be predicted with plans and resources put into place to cope with the fall-out. It was also accepted that in order to achieve deliveries to meet customer schedules, every effort and means should be expended. Incredible amounts of expensive overtime (bought me a nice car back then!), emergency labour (yes, I did see day release inmates working on the lines) and resultant dubious quality. It was a continuous trade off, cycling between the three competing goals. It was thought at the time that there cannot be a perfect world where all three elements can be achieved at the same time.
Fast forward a few years into the 90s and onwards to the present day, the situation has changed significantly. Competition from developing countries has put severe pressure on “established” manufacturers to differentiate themselves in order to survive. A critical part of this was to provide “perfect” quality at a competitive price always with “on-time” delivery, the three elements together. This quickly became the “given” in the industry for success. Projects were created to analyse and improve the operations, MRP, ERP, MES, 6 Sigma, Lean, so many different approaches to achieve this ideal. Was it worth it? Absolutely! A huge difference today in terms performance and capabilities compared to the past. Is this the end of story? Sorry, no, not by a long way….
Enter the dragon. What many people see as the Chinese phenomenon in recent years, they see as being as a result of lower costs of manufacturing, which, to a reasonable extent, it is. This is nothing new however; after all, China was not the first place that this happened, how about Mexico, Thailand or Malaysia? There is a difference though in China, something new that was not seen in these other places. Something significant. As China quickly matures now to provide the ideals of quality and on-time delivery as well as being very competitive on cost, this new fourth element becomes more significant and perhaps more dominant.
This fourth element is agility. Agility is the capability to alter product flows and capacities directly in line with market need eliminating as much stock and investment in the retail supply chain as possible. The importance of agility is rapidly increasing now as a result of the new paradigm of how products are designed, manufactured and sold. “Hit products” are the result of this process working well, competitive products introduced to the market and sold extremely quickly. In many cases in the consumer market for example most of the profit is often made only during the first few weeks of sale until competitors catch up. Selling in the internet culture contributes to this; expectations are set for very frequent new products with new technologies following new fashions. It remains difficult to predict which products in which markets are going to do well. The supply chain from manufacturer to shelf has to be shorter than it has ever been. The response and speed of change has become critical. To the manufacturer, it all means rapidly changing demand, continuous new models of many new products all over the world all at the same time. Oh, yes, and all the products still have to actually work perfectly, brand reputations are on the line.
The Chinese are good at agility. They are used to competition and will do whatever it takes to win deals. It is in their DNA. In other manufacturing environments, there is not such flexibility. Ironically, the solutions described to achieve the three critical elements of Quality, Cost and Delivery often work against agility, in spite of best efforts. It is no longer viable to run a manufacturing operation on ERP clock-work calculations founded on logic from the 1970s. Even many of the adopters of “Lean” seemed to get carried away and took agility out of the system thinking it was a waste, that dedication instead was the answer to get the most cost effective processes. So, is this “game over” for “established” manufacturing?
No. No more trade-offs, even considering the need for now the four critical elements. Recognizing these new demands on manufacturing, understanding the way that manufacturing has to respond, and understanding the practical limitations of traditional ERP and MES systems, agility has been a key factor in the development of the latest manufacturing technologies available from Mentor Graphics. A series of webinars goes into some detail of realistic solutions for Agility, as well as assuring of course the three fundamentals of Quality, Cost and Delivery. These are available to sign up for now. The webinars work to show how the picture builds, step by step, to provide an understanding of the new Valor MSS solution from different perspectives. Enjoy! This is all getting very interesting…
Tags: Add new tag, Agility, MES, MSS, Valor
Sex & The Facility
OK, so is the “X word” in the title just a cheap ploy to get your attention? Not really, we are naturally attracted by things that are considered “sexy”. What could be less sexy than a PCB manufacturing assembly shop-floor I hear you think? Let’s put aside right now those childish innuendoes that many a young engineer like myself, once upon a time went through as a rite of passage, such-as, “make sure that you keep your tools in your hand at all times”, “focus on your mounting performance” and “make sure you parts are always clean”. These may have been funny, at least to manufacturing engineers (perhaps you had to be there), but these hardly qualify as sexy.
Sexy then, on the shop-floor, is what? Say I put myself into the various key roles on the shop-floor. For me, sexy is all about having the right tools. No, we’re not back to the childish innuendo. The “buzz” (I mean the job satisfaction), I feel comes from two areas; firstly knowing that the manufacturing operation is running as well as it possibly can be, exceeding the expectations placed upon it, and secondly, where a problem comes up, knowing that it can be dealt with such as to avoid any loss, which in my mind, is turning a problem into an opportunity, a potential for improvement. The “buzz kill” is when the unexpected happens; fire–fighting mode ensues with lost money seemingly dripping off the end of the line.
In the years BC (before computers) the tools were your eyes and ears, a keen sense of communication and a great deal of walking. Little tricks such as for example using your finger to check for dust on materials in the warehouse gave you a very physical feedback of speed of inventory turns. In the years following, AD, (Anything Digital), we saw the introduction of computers which came to replace the “old fashioned” industrial engineering and management styles. This brought us great ways to proportion responsibility, “ownership”, blame etc. just by continuously analysing the computer collected data, which gave us reports that increasingly illustrated problems that had happened, losses suffered and money that we could never get back. Is this an improvement on what we had before? We are paying good money for many systems simply for them to keep tell us what we have already lost. Not sexy!
I don’t care then for these kinds of computer systems. What I want as any member of the manufacturing team is a way that supports my daily “buzz”. I want to be in control of what I am responsible for, to see what is going on and avoid problems, to discover opportunities to improve ahead of time. And I’d rather not do all the walking, but what can you do?
As well as gathering all the data, making all the reports then, “it” is also necessary to continuously turn the data not only into accurate and timely information but also into value, in sync with all aspects of the shop-floor operation itself. “It” is then the new eyes and ears of manufacturing, guiding and managing critical user operations, managing lean material flows, managing and guiding supporting “human” tasks just as they are needed, looking ahead, predicting and recommending what actions to take and now to avoid problems later on.
What is “it” then? Enter Valor MSS suite, built on this proven dynamic industrial engineering and management technology like a form of DNA. Having this visibility, management and control, seeing opportunities rather than problems, the sheer value of continuous accurate input into the key management decision making processes, “Sexy”? This is all getting very interesting…..
Tags: Lean, MES, MSS, Valor, Visibility
About The Michael Ford Manufacturing Blog
A fresh look at the latest manufacturing systems technologies set against a backdrop of common-sense Industrial Engineering know-how. Michael takes us through the existing opportunities that are here today and coming up soon.
Latest Posts
- Pedal Faster, We Need The Watts!
- The Chinese Way?
- Conducting The Manufacturing Orchestra…..
- Materialistically Speaking…..
- It Just ‘Flu By!
- Assembling The Light Fantastic!