Kanban concern
Six Sigma – iSixSigma › Forums › Old Forums › General › Kanban concern
- This topic has 14 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 6 months ago by
Peppe.
-
AuthorPosts
-
February 9, 2005 at 9:13 am #38358
Dear colleague’s,
Common in industry is a service level of 2 when you set the size of the Safety Stock. So, there is 98% chance that the parts are available.What is the change that all parts are available if there are, for example, 40 parts involved in a final assembly?
Is it just as with TPY, 0.98 x 0.98 x 0.98 x………….. = 45!!!!???
Hope some of you can help me.
Bernard
0February 9, 2005 at 9:29 am #114662Do you mean 0.45?
Notwithstanding the calculation, I would advise a safety stock according to the historical availability performance of the component. You can use an np chart to work out the process performance.
As I’m sure you are aware, the usual practice is to use small ‘economic runs’ so the key issue is how quickly you can pull parts from a supplier, if necessary. Now that many suppliers are in China, this is going to become more of a potential problem.
Regards,
Andy0February 9, 2005 at 10:45 am #114664Hi Andy,
Safety stock is calculated as follow:
Sdtdev (historcal orders) * service level * (manuf. cycle time)^0.7
So, a service level of 2 wil give an availability of 98%But what happens when I have 40 parts in my assembly?
45% chance that I can assemble my finished good??
Best regards,Bernard
0February 9, 2005 at 11:16 am #114665Hi Bernard,
Agreed …
What metric do you use for the stdev? Is it based on ‘on-time delivery,’ or losses.
(By losses I mean you expected to receive 10 only got 9, and out of the 9 only 8 were usable, etc.) This is what I implied by plotting the number of losses on an np chart, and working out the process performance. Of course this all assumes that a process has long term stability.
For complex processes such as vacuum braizing that have to have a cosmetic finish and seal fluids, the availability performance might be quite different to that predicted by the process performance. In other words, it could suddenly become unstable and unpredictable.
Regards,
Andy0February 9, 2005 at 11:22 am #114667It could means that you are able to produce, at least, 98% of order on time, based on calculated historical order and lead time.
The bins, of course must be full.
The parts you have isn’t important, because it is kanban re-order, based on bins numbers, to give you always material available.
Rgs, Peppe0February 9, 2005 at 12:01 pm #114668Peppe,
Thanks for the clarification ..
I became confused between the ‘availability’ and the ‘stocking level.
If instead of the ‘stocking level’ one calculated the availability performance of each component based on a historical availability performance then isn’t here cause for concern because it only take one missing component to bring the line to a grinding halt?
Cheers,
Andy0February 9, 2005 at 1:55 pm #114669Could someone please define “service level”??
0February 9, 2005 at 2:42 pm #114672Hi Andy,
stddev is related to the part usage in the end assemblies over the last year .
For examp:
week 10February 9, 2005 at 2:42 pm #114673Hi Andy,
stddev is related to the part usage in the end assemblies over the last year .
For examp:
week 10February 9, 2005 at 2:53 pm #114674Hi Andy,
stddev is related to the part usage in the end assemblies over the last year.For examp.:
week 1 45 partsweek 2 200 partsweek 3 20 partsect.stddev = 98assume MCT = 2 weeksSafety stock = 98 x 2 x 2^0.7 = 318With this 318 parts safety stock you make sure that for 98% (+/- 2 sdtdev under the normal curve) parts are available.
The factor 0.7 is an empirical value and has to do with the reliability of the supplier (0.7 = standard, = wors) an thus indirect with the yield you mentioned.
With best regards,
Bernard
0February 9, 2005 at 3:13 pm #114675Thanks Bernard … I believe Peppe’s answer is correct. I was just confused this morning!
0February 10, 2005 at 7:33 am #114690Hi Andy and Peppe,
Thanx for your replies.
Maybe I have to formulate things in an other way:
300 types end assemblies .Each type end assembly consist of a different combination of 40 parts out of a pool of 500 part numbers.Per part number is the chance that it is available 98%.So, what is the chance that I can assemble a random chosen end assembly.
Thanx again,
Bernard
0February 10, 2005 at 10:07 am #114692Based on your data, it is always 98%.
But this is not a Kanban concern.
Rgs, Peppe0February 10, 2005 at 2:33 pm #114706Hi Pepe,
Thank you for responding.When it’s indeed 98% we can live with that.Has it to do with paralel or serial flows, just as with currency?
Is it possible to explain to me why the chance to make an end assembly is 98% and not less?I will be grateful when you could explain it to me.
Best regards,
Bernard
0February 11, 2005 at 8:11 am #114742Bernard, maybe we are misunderstanding about terms or definitions.
If you talk about the product of probability, it is correct that 0.98*0.98.. ~0.45, but I think it isn’t the case. I think the basic question is about Kanban sizing, tipically based on 2 bins. From your data seems be that over 500 single parts, have been selected 318 of them most used, based on your historical data, lead time, etc.., so that if the orders will follow the data considered and the calculation is correct, you’ll be always able to assembly 98% of 300 different end assembly, of 40 parts, on time.
If my understanding is wrong, please advise, so that I can correct it.
Rgs, Peppe
0 -
AuthorPosts
The forum ‘General’ is closed to new topics and replies.