HAL, Inc.

CARIO. FERRER. KWAN

October 14, 2017

IE 231
 Monthly Order and Forecast

Supplier

Treater Process Lamination-Core Machining Internal Circuitize

Common for Small and Large
PCBs (had ample capacity)

No. of Tools: 3 No. of Tools: 1 No. of Tools: 2

Lot Size: 300 Lot Size: 60 Lot Size: 120

Efficiency: 80% Efficiency: 98% Efficiency:

Select shape95%
and type text.

Availability: 95% Availability: 96% Availability:

Yellow handle 99.2%
adjusts line

Process Time per Lot: 1.33 Process Time per Lot: 0.07 spacing.Time
Process Time:per
3.61Lot: 0.67

Set-up: 0.5 Set-up: 0.25 Set-up: 0.75

Non-bottleneck: 0 Non-bottleneck: 0.16 Non-bottleneck: 1.5

3 Shifts 3 shifts 3 shifts

 Production Control

MRP

Manufacturing Engineering

Optical Test and Lamination- External Circuitize Optical Test and Drilling
Repair-Internal Composites Repair-External

No. of Tools: 2 No. of Tools: 2 No. of Tools: 3 No. of Tools: 2 No. of Tools: 31

Lot Size: 60 Lot Size: 120 Lot Size: 120 Lot Size: 60 Lot Size: 60

Efficiency:
Select shape95%
and type Efficiency:
Select shape80%
and type text. Efficiency:
Select shape90%
and type text. Efficiency:
Select shape95%
and type text. Efficiency:
Select shape81%
and type text.

text. Yellow 100%

Availability: handle Availability:
Yellow handle 95%
adjusts line Availability:
Yellow handle 99.2%
adjusts line Availability:
Yellow handle 100%
adjusts line Availability:
Yellow handle 96%
adjusts line

adjusts
Eff.
Process
Rate:
line
Time
150.5
spacing.
per Lot: 0.30 spacing.Time
Process Time:per
2.01Lot: 0.48 spacing.Time
Process Time:per
4.25Lot: 0.63 spacing.Time
Process Time:per
0.96Lot: 0.30 spacing.Time
Process Time:per
10.17
Lot: 0.29

Set-up: 0.2 Set-up: 0.5 Set-up: 0.33 Set-up: 0.2 Set-up: 0.6

Non-bottleneck: 0.16 Non-bottleneck: 0.5 Non-bottleneck: 2 Non-bottleneck: 0.16 Non-bottleneck: 0.16

3 shifts 3 shifts 3 shifts 3 shifts 3 shifts

 Monthly Order and Forecast

Customer

Copper Plate Pro-Coat Sizing End-of-Line-Test

No. of Tools: 2 No. of Tools: 4 No. of Tools: 2 No. of Tools: 1

Lot Size: 60 Lot Size: 60 Lot Size: 60 Lot Size: 60

Efficiency:
Select shape90%
and type text. Efficiency:
Select shape90%
and type text. Efficiency:
Select shape85%
and type text. Efficiency:
Select shape98%
and type text.

Availability:
Yellow handle 84.2%
adjusts line Availability:
Yellow handle 90.9%
adjusts line Availability:
Yellow handle 100%
adjusts line Availability:
Yellow handle 99.2%
adjusts line

spacing.Time
Process Time:per
1.04Lot: 0.37 spacing.Time
Process Time:per
4.15Lot: 0.39 spacing.Time
Process Time:per
1.11Lot: 0.22 spacing.Time
Process Time:per
0.51Lot: 0.25

Set-up: 0 Set-up: 0.33 Set-up: 0.5 Set-up: 0.1

Non-bottleneck: 0.16 Non-bottleneck: 2.1 Non-bottleneck: 0.16 Non-bottleneck: 0.16

3 shifts 3 shifts 3 shifts 3 shifts

High and Sharing of Machine Evolving
unverified processes breakdown products
capacity
estimate
Process not
stabilized

Slow (~34 days)

and delayed Understaffing
Pressure High
Poor quality production
from high yield
management
targets loss Underutilization
of machines

Poor High Customer

Targets set
scheduling targets service at
are too high
of orders not met 50%

High WIP
stock
Shortage Risk of
Changes in costs (lost dissatisfied
schedule (re- income) customers
prioritizing)

Uneven HR management issues:

20-day demand Attitude towards proposed solutions (e.g.
frozen cynicism about JIT)
zone policy Poor Lack of accountability (finger-pointing)
forecasting Management vs. staff tension
 PROBLEMS
HIGH YIELD LOSS OR REJECT RATE
[] requires rework [] should have been caught earlier in the process [] When we lost
a finished multi-layer board, were throwing away [] $200. It would have been [...] $2 if
wed caught it at the core blank level, or $20 if [] at the first pass through Circuitize

HIGH AND UNVERIFIED CAPACITY ESTIMATE

By 1990, [] estimated to be more than 2,000 panels per day [] typical daily output was
[] 1,400 [] actual amount of processing time required [] was less than two days, []
manufacturing cycle times [] were averaging close to 34 days [] new plant manager []
increased the target capacity [] to 3,000 [] [Manufacturing personnel] argued [that it]
must be wrong since this rate had never been achieved

POOR SCHEDULING OF ORDERS

[] merely using customer orders and the approved MRP system to generate releases
and due dates [] the plant maintained a 20-day frozen zone but cycle times were 34
days [] releases had to be made to forecasts. But because forecasting was often poor,
the wrong products were often released
 PROBLEMS
HIGH YIELD LOSS OR REJECT RATE
The high yield loss or reject rate results is costly as resources (e.g. materials,
labor, time) will be put to waste. In addition, a large volume of rejects imply the
need for a substantial amount of additional (and probably expedited) work to
still be able to produce the required order quantities. This practice of rework
further overwhelms the already underperforming production process.

HIGH AND UNVERIFIED CAPACITY ESTIMATE

The high capacity estimate determines the daily, weekly, monthly, or annual
ceiling of production output, which becomes the basis for accepting orders,
staff and equipment allocation, etc. However, the capacity estimate remains
unverified, which forces the plant to operate at possibly unsustainable levels.

POOR SCHEDULING OF ORDERS

Certain policies (e.g. 20-day frozen period) are not responsive of the current
challenges being experienced by the plant. The current solutions (relying on
forecasts for releases and work re-prioritization) are not effective because they
are often done poorly or they do not address the underlying problems (i.e.
they only present short-term and stop-gap answers).