Facilities Management Techniques

Only available on StudyMode
  • Download(s) : 86
  • Published : December 2, 2012
Open Document
Text Preview
Casey Adam, B00550 592
Couch John,
Croteau Elizabeth
Foster Travis

Facilities Design Case Study1
Executive Summary1
Problem Statement1
Group Layout1
Machine Requirements1
Cell Layouts2
Dock Requirements3
Office Layout3
Material Handling Requirements4
Manual Handling4
Forklift Handling4
Employee Requirements5
Additional Facility Requirements6
Changing room6
Parking Requirements6
Land and Construction6
Personnel Costs7

Facilities Design Case Study
Executive Summary
It is recommended that OKKO purchase xxx amount of land in Burnside for their new facility. This land will consist of xxx developed and the rest will be for green space and for a parking lot. The layout was decided to be a group layout for improved material flow throughout the workspace and more cohesiveness in the work place. The layout was developed using the following techniques: * ROC

* Material Scrap Rate
* Machine Fraction Calculations
* Material Handling Techniques
* Warehouse Operation Techniques
The diagram below highlights each of the required sections and the aisle spacing as requested. This type of layout was possible because of the clearly defined values of the parts allowing the design to clearly identify A B and C items. The total distance travelled by both the manual and forklift operators is estimated at xxx km/ day.

The total Costs were calculated based on wages and using finance techniques to determine the annual rates of the purchased equipment and the land. It is estimated that the total building costs will be xxx.

Group Layout
It was determined to design a group layout for its benefits of better flow and intra cell movement. It also provides a positive team based environment which was assumed highly desirable by this new Facility located in Burnside Nova Scotia. Initially to determine machine clusters of the different cells in the plant layout, the Rank Ordering Cluster (ROC) technique was applied. This method did not provide clear divisions and some logic and data manipulation was required to determine what machines would be included in each cell. The initial results provided two clear cells and some outliers the following table summarizes the initial results.

For the parts that did not belong exclusively to either cluster, two solutions were examined either duplicating the required machines (G and D) or allowing inter cell movement. Since each product only required one transfer between the two cells the cross over method was preferred. To accommodate both cells dependency on machines E and F it was decided that these machines would be duplicated and placed in both cells one and two. The full ROC technique can be viewed in appendix 1. Machine Requirements

In order to determine the total number of machine each cell was examined and the amount of parts required. To do this individual flow charts were created for each of the cells and then examined the number of units to be produced. In order to do this the machine scrap rate was calculated and the machine fraction calculations examined this at each step of the processes. The machine scrap rates were based on a 3 sigma quality design. These calculations are shown below in table 2.

It was determined that 61 machines were needed, it should be noted that if the process was reduced to 2 sigma control that there would be an increase in the amount of the machines required to maintain production rates. The following table summarizes these calculations  | Cell 1| Cell 2|

A| 9| 0|
B| 0| 6|
C| 3| 0|
D| 6| 0|
E| 5| 3|
F| 3| 2|
G| 13| 0|
H| 0| 5|
I| 0| 3|
J| 0| 3|
Total| 39| 22|

Cell Layouts
Each of the cells layouts was determined using the CRAFT...
tracking img