
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
  <title>Lean</title> 
  <description></description> 
  <link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/index.cfm?forumid=1</link> 
  <generator>FuseTalk Educational Edition</generator> 

	<item>
		<title>Which SPC tools are appropriate?</title>
		<link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=56&amp;threadid=2078</link> 
		<pubDate>2006-06-02T22:54:08 -05.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>54772</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>1</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ If we are using Lean, which SPC tools are appropriate for collecting data. Right now, we are only worried about the cycle time of our "pacemaker". As long as the other processes are faster or the same we do not get concerned. There has to be more to collect? ]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Continuous flow in machines with long cycle times</title>
		<link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=56&amp;threadid=2100</link> 
		<pubDate>2006-05-18T12:25:49 -05.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>70381</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>3</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ Couple quick thoughts: 
- any opportunity to have them run more than just 2 EDM machines since they have time (if there are more than 2)?

- you've mentioned reducing the operator's NVA time, but it seems they are already limited by the machine cycle time... if there isn't a clear plan on what to do w/ them once more NVA is eliminated (give them more VA work) - it might not gain much to eliminate additional NVA time.  Otherwise, the net is just additional idle time.

- you've probably already done this, but focusing on SMED & quick load/unload will have a big impact when you have such long machine cycle times - especially if that process is a constraint to meeting customer demand.
 
 
Trevor ]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Dolly route delivery: Stand up tugger vs Sit down tugger</title>
		<link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=56&amp;threadid=2095</link> 
		<pubDate>2006-05-16T12:42:04 -05.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>67722</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>5</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ The main advantage to a stand-up tugger is that in most cases, we want the tugger driver to do work other than driving.  This could include: loading items onto the tugger, off loading items from the tugger, transfering carts ebing pulled by the tugger ...

By having the operator stand-up vs. sit-down you can facilitate getting on & off the tugger.  It also helps to break the sterotype of drivers having sit-down "cushy" jobs.

When looking at tuggers, I would recemmend one that has a cushioned back rest & knee pads in the front. ]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Continuous flow in machines with long cycle times</title>
		<link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=56&amp;threadid=2100</link> 
		<pubDate>2006-05-12T13:23:38 -05.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>70381</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>3</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ My thoughts:  

In these situations, you have to think of right size batches (since 1 piece flow is not practical).  If the Takt of the entire line is less than 20 minutes (2 minutes, for example) then have the right number of in-process kanbans before the 20 minute machine (10) so that upstream and downstream to the machine will still have a 2 minute pace.

You need to first look at reducing the process with the full shift (480 minutes) kanban size down to something as close to the 20 minute batch size as possible.

Operator NVA could be addressed by broadening their tasks downstream.  You can consider more machines if they are needed to improve the flow / meet Takt demand - but don't purchase for the sake of employee productivity. Or if the inspections are Required NVA, you may have to accept it and focus on maximizing product flow at the expense of personnel productivity.  Note that the technique of inspection could be changed that took less time, but investment in this is not necessary unless you have some true VA time to give them.

If you have more kanban transactions as a result of the bin size reduction, maybe they can specd some time managing them. ]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Continuous flow in machines with long cycle times</title>
		<link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=56&amp;threadid=2100</link> 
		<pubDate>2006-05-09T08:57:03 -05.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>70381</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>3</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ I am trying to figure out the best way to have continuous flow when some of the machines have 20 minute cycle times in the cell. Right now, the upstream machines are producing kanban containers of 1 shift for these EDM machines to pull from. Any suggestions to make it better? I also am concerned about reducing the amount of NVA time at the EDM machines. the operator runs 2 machines, and VA activities account for 8 minutes out of 20. The EDM operators are not trained to run the upstream swiss machines, and it is not possible to crosstrain. The EDM operators spend most of the time doing NVA quality checks. I am running out of ideas on how to reduce their NVA time. ]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Dolly route delivery: Stand up tugger vs Sit down tugger</title>
		<link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=56&amp;threadid=2095</link> 
		<pubDate>2006-05-05T09:00:52 -05.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>67722</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>5</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ I visited the Toyota plant in Cambridge Ontario and all theirs that I saw were stand up as well.
GM engine plant in Oshawa Ontario uses sit down. ]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Dolly route delivery: Stand up tugger vs Sit down tugger</title>
		<link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=56&amp;threadid=2095</link> 
		<pubDate>2006-05-04T17:09:36 -05.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>67722</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>5</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ For information about tugger routes, see the Success Story on this web site:
"Following Four Steps to a Lean Material-Handling System Leads to a Leap in Performance"

There is more detailed information and formulas for setting them up in the workbook or workshop on Making Materials Flow.

Sincerely,
Chet Marchwinski
LEI Moderator 
 ]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Dolly route delivery: Stand up tugger vs Sit down tugger</title>
		<link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=56&amp;threadid=2095</link> 
		<pubDate>2006-05-04T07:43:26 -05.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>67722</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>5</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ I do not have any data,but I visited the Toyota plant and all their tuggers are stand ups. ]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Dolly route delivery: Stand up tugger vs Sit down tugger</title>
		<link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=56&amp;threadid=2095</link> 
		<pubDate>2006-05-03T18:23:04 -05.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>67722</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>5</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ Hi Lean practitioners,

I'm looking for information about the benefit to use stand up tugger vs sit down to set up a dolly-route material for frequent deliveries.
If someone has an ergonomic study or information related to this topic will be greatly appreciated if can be shared.
 ]]></description>
	</item>

	<item>
		<title>Lean vs MRP Software</title>
		<link>http://www.lean.org/FuseTalk/forum/messageview.cfm?catid=56&amp;threadid=2077</link> 
		<pubDate>2006-04-21T16:24:35 -05.00</pubDate> 
		<dc:creator>54772</dc:creator>
   	    <slash:comments>3</slash:comments> 
		<description><![CDATA[ Suggest those interested in ERP supported kanban to take a serious look at QAD Mfg/Pro.  It isn't perfect, but it sure is getting close! ]]></description>
	</item>

</channel>
</rss>
