capstone project iee545 cjg

8/11/2019 Capstone Project IEE545 CJG

1/12

Team CJG

Capstone

ProjectI E E 5 4 5 - D r. To r r e s -G a r c i a

SM ELECTRONICSCOST SAVINGS THROUGH SIMULATION

ANALYSIS


2/12

Chris WeinkaufQuality Systems Plant ManagerB.S. 2012 Chemical EngineeringContact: [email protected]

J ohnathon WrightApplications EngineerB.S. 2012 Mechanical EngineeringContact: [email protected]

* G abriel SilvaSr. Software EngineerB.S. 2004 Computer ScienceContact: [email protected]

PROJECT TEAM


3/12

Project Introduction GabrielProblemProject PurposeAssumptions

Model ChrisKey PartsDesignInteractive video

Results/Conclusions JohnathonResultsRecommendationsSuggested future research

OUTLINE


4/12

ProblemFactory:

Key Issues:Single input conveyor with maximum capacity of 40 partsSingle input conveyor accepts random part typesFourth line requires significant setup/process/jam time

PROJECT INTRODUCTION


5/12

Project Purpose?Determine cost of lines A,B, and C shutting down

Analyze design and efficiency of theSingle input conveyorFourth and final line (cells 1-8)

Analyze alternatives to improve cost reductionAdd more pallets

$17K + $3K for each new palletBenefit: More parts to work in the fourth line

Add 3 additional buffer conveyors

$56KBenefit:

Additional space to store partsBatches of parts fed into fourth line reducing required setup time

Can consider both alternatives



6/12

AssumptionsNegligible transfer time from input conveyor to line 4Cell 8 will first take a new part even if cell 7 is ready to transfer to itLimitation on the number pallets is 48

Two year ROI to consider an alternative



7/12

Key PartsFour different models required for comparison

1. Current Process (no modifications)2. Extra Pallets

3. Buffer Lines for Parts A, B, and C4. Buffer Lines and Extra Pallets

Modules Types within the ModelPart Entry into the Holding ConveyorAutomatic CellsManual CellsCell 8Completed Part ExitLost Part Exit

ARENA MODEL


8/12

DesignCommon Modules

Cell 8Automatic Cells

Manual CellsCompleted Part ExitLost Part Exit

ARENA MODEL


9/12

Model DifferencesExtra Pallets do not change the model logic

Only difference is more pallets are available

Main difference between Normal Process and Buffer Lines Models is

the Entry Module

ARENA MODEL


10/12

ARENA MODEL


11/12

M1 is the model of current systemM2 is the model of adding additional pallets (resources).M3 is the model of adding buffer lines ($56k investment).M4 is the model of the production line with buffer lines andadditional pallets combined (M2+M3).

Objective: Maximize Profit.Comparing M1M2

Comparing M1M3

Comparing M1M4

RESULTS


12/12

RecommendationsBuffer Lines Meet 2YR ROI criteria and should be implemented.

$56K initial cost, approximately $75,000 (+25k) return after 2 years.

Additional pallets showed no effect on results and should NOT be

implemented ($17K initial investment, plus $3K per pallet).Suggested Future Research

Consider upgrading tools with faster loading and processing times.Analyze the buffer line system to find batch sizes that maximizeproduction.

Consider making individual production lines for each par t, or movingto a larger production facility to maximize profits.

CONCLUSION

capstone project iee545 cjg

Documents