Framework for Facilities Design - M 4,” II | l lll lllll...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–6. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 6
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: M 4,” II | l lll lllll llll Ill l » l ll l l! ll 1 twirllllllltr ll 9.- "(1i llllll, n l l l be complete design of a facility requires work from many disciplines within an organization: sales and marketing, purchasing, human resources, accounting, and more. More visible is the work of architects, structural engineers, process engineers, and management. Architects and struc- tural engineers check soil conditions, building codes, and infrastructure, detailing the structure, appearance, and inter- nals of the building and site. Process engineers may plan the production procedures. To guide and coordinate all of these ‘ efforts, management sets strategic policies. lndustrial engineers also play key roles. They often man- : age the overall project and report to top management, and they trial; perfoer somegqr all of the above tasks. Most importantly; they plan the use oE-spaces'l'l‘tese space plans, at var'rioii'sldet’ail lesiefls, become the centerpiece flor coOrdi- hating the entire project? “‘ ’ ’ t i * ' 9 Layout, or space planning, is the central focus ohfacilities design and dominates the thoughts of most managers. But factory or office la yout is only one detail level. ideally, a facility design proceeds from the general to the particular— from global site location to workstation. Larger strategic issues are decided first. It is useful to think of space planning in five levels, as Ill l l A ‘ ¢ l . Mllllll All—m...— _———n——_ —-———-—.—. -—-———__ .-—n———........—A ——---~——-———__. -———~—-——.—.-__.__ -———-o-n-—_.____ ———————-——__..____ .l I ll l l l l illustrated in Figure I. These levels range from the global maps of site location to engineering drawings of tools and workstations. Level 1: Global site location During global location, the site location level, the firm decides where to locate facilities and determines their mis- sions. A facility mission statement is a concise summary of products, processes, and key manufacturing tasks. A facility rarely can perform more than two or three key manufactur- ing tasks well. rl‘he mission statement is therefore an impor- tant guide for facilities planners and others as they consider various design tradeoffs. “ Other outputs at this level usually include a report to management. For multiple sites, maps showing site loca- ' “ dons and customer activity are common, as illustrated in Figure 2". ‘ The ecst of space plann-ipg at 1 is small. Global location usually involves a few top executives and one or two industrial engineers or consultants. Each level below requires more'and more people, analysis, and detailed engi‘ neering. Yet, the corporate budget process frequently demands that all significant planning be delayed until after Activity Typical SPU Environment Output Site Location a. Selection She Buildings WW visits“. Building Cells 0r Layout Departments Emlding Deparlmanl Workstations Or Call Or Cell Layout Features Calls Gr Departments Workstation Tool Design Locations wn'kS'a'io“ Figure I a decision is made to proceed with site acquisition. Those levels with the most strategic impact and the lowest plan- ning cost receive the least attention. Consequently, the deci- sions with the most strategic impact are sometimes made with the least reliable knowledge. Overall business Strategy is most important at the global level. Determining the number and location of sites requires far more than simply searching for the lowest labor rates and largest tax breaks. Available labor skills and attitudes toward work, supporting services such as tool production and material supply, politics, and sometimes geopolitics, must also be major considerations. For example, if a plant is located in the wrong country, it may become a geopolitical pawn. Technological prewess then could shift to other regions. it there is political instability locally, it can destroy a firm’s ability to produce. Important raw materials might be depleted OI replaced. Such problems are not easy to correct. Appropriate planning results in facilities optimized for the markets and located near the most important resources—resources that increasingly involve knowledge, skills, and infrastructure, rather than raw materials. Level 2: Suprasspace plan At the supra-space plan level, site planning takes place. This includes number, size, and location of buildings, as well as infrastructure such as roads, water, gas, and rail. Propane“ South American l'lani 5m 5m“ llimlinn cunrcnu Mlfilnn LO Mission Statement 2.0 6mm Midwest Plant Requlmwanrs 3.0 mm Features & Warehouse Mission an numl. “n in Tramp umum 5.0 Ullliun-s Statement Brussels Warehouse 711 lem an Community Mission Statement no Supple” 10.0 Environmenlll Shenandoah Plant We. Shenandoah .' 'Fncilfly Wlil ‘. mnnulucrure the Ellie inflame cuslnmm in We Easier” Llilllnd . Manufacturing -} Distribution a; Proposed be in: primary mm:in rm nut Industry raring}:- quality om mmrui Figure 2 This plan should look ahead to plant expansions and even- tual site saturation. The documents from a site plaru'iing project almost always include a site drawing [Figure 3). Frequently, they involve a series of drawings showing past, present, and future configurations (thee may be several options for these). A major site study also might include narratives on site history and descriptions of the considerations and ratio- nale for the site plans. At this level, planning still has long-term and far—readi— ing consequences. A well-designed infrastructure supports future expansion or conversion to new products. Proper location and building design prtwide for logical expansion in suitable increments. Level 3: Macro-space plan At the macro-space plan level, a macro-layout {Figure 4) plans each building, strucrure, or other sub-unit of the site. Usually this is the most important level of planning, for it sets the focus, or basic organization, of the factory. The designers define and locate operating departments and determine overall material flow. Macro-space plan decisions may result in new—product flexibility, lower costs, high quality, or a flexible labor. Fundamental macro-space plan decisions usually are easier to correct than site-level decisions. Still, a poorly planned facility can bring high handling costs, confusion, and inflex- ibility. These problems, in turn, can cause difficulty in launching new products, erratic deliveries, and too much inventory. Correcting such problems may require a com- plete rearrangement with major investments in process equipment and infrastructure. Level 4: Micro-space plan The location of specific equipment and furniture is deter- mined in the micro-space plan. The emphasis shifts from gross material flow to personal space and communication. Socio-technical considerat ons dominate. lf production tea ms are an important element of the operations strategy, the work at this level may inhibit or discourage teamwork. Figure 5 shows a space plan for an operating department. Level 5: Sub-micro-space plan Individual workstations and workers are the concern of the fifth level. Here, workstations are designed for efficiency, effectiveness, and safety. Ideally, the industrial engineer plans for the correct tools in the most appropriate places, using fixtures that properly hold the work piece. Materials are introduced at optimal locations and large items are pro— vided with appropriate material handling aids. Some typi- cal outputs are illustrated m Figure 6. Levels 4 and 5 are the more detailed levels of space plan— ning; therefore, equipment and issues are more localized. When changes are necessa ry, there is usually less danger of major production interruptions. The phasing of space design Ideally, design progresses from the global level to the sub- micro level in distinct, sequential phases. At the end of each phase, the design is “frozen” by consensus. This settles the more global issues first and allows smooth progress without continually revisiting unresolved issues. It also prevents L661 83801.30 0 SNOIJJTlOS all IIE SOLUTIONS 9 OCTOBER 3997 a P's! U" mlifli' - rm: m- seine «- Imp" "mm" mm -' {mu-.- |fiéjaufw m film, .. _. mummy. ‘ Slum-1:1 "w l”*"r' .. ‘ . Figure 3 details from overwhelming the project. Figure 7(A) illus- trates this logical progression and shows the strategic impact of the work in each phase. Strategic impact affects the long-term ability of the firm to compete and profit. Industrial engineers rarely have the opportunity to design a facility in accordance with the normal phasing shown in Figure 7(A). There are several reasons for this. Sites and buildings that have evolved over many years out- live technologies and their original purpose, and therefore must be rearranged. Another reason may be management‘s belief that the existing space plan is simply not optimal. In both cases, planning begins at the macro-space plan level, Electron Engineering Corp. Macro-Layout Option A Macro-Layout thion B Macro-Layout Option C Figure 4 as illustrated in Figure 7(3). The phasing demonstrated in this figure also occurs when management makes global and site—level decisions without the benefit of advice and coun- sel from their facilities planneds). The size and organizational structure of cells in a macro- space plan may be indeterminable when processes and strategies are untried. This often happens when firms make .1— / , / Ens; .j‘f ,. mm rm 1 It Lo, om ‘ an . . ‘7‘: ‘ I n' l f-_ i rmlwimnu 7' I at and ' I. *- M :Ilnrnmllv'r'i'auflmnn I. ‘ _ ; A F: 31—.— ‘ 45m \‘x._ .. : _ . ‘:-..> . r~ _ ‘i‘ ' .... rum-ir- ill / " ""‘W- TW‘" ' \Tx 1 a, i I . .- - .-‘ “ . : «mo mm .3C-‘_1‘_I.wa \ x L . . ‘ l _ . . . . u _ J_ r _‘ . [a]: nmrun IE . — ma» rum." m... x \ .. E; u, _ Bum m. . g r* r ,I. w .———— cream MIIDN , uni , _ e ’ _ _ I ; l “a” ‘ r/ W - 'mm ‘ mu! Itllwl \- r i . [7 I fl'uun | ’7 z "ii-1mm l “' L L a“: K 1.3 C j £3 '1" w l‘ ’ “mm IOOL lmm . ‘- 1 WWW n: 4W” mm mm Mun emean i at “' mam um "\ mum / \ run unmbcn um \l - :—-r / err—E— : % Eli-Earlqu I) ‘ r ‘ j E Z Li \ * WIT W IPWI’I IGIKJI {5) ON 1 OJ! ' "Dalian L“Ilium: IIENINI! ‘5 “ uni-unwise: I mm“ “I run noun :- n. . I {momma rig vii —: t? w r; ’ —.E. / i nor-tn loo-mm " LOGIIEII Figure 5 —.u- ii a transition from functional to cellular manufacturing. Pilot cells must then be developed to prove the concept or tech- nology, as illustrated in Figure 7(C). A cell or micro-space plan (Level 4) then becomes the first phase. Upon comple— tion of this pilot, people can agree on the general approach. Then the d esigner can shift back to Level 3 and prepare a macro-space plan. The details of remaining cells are defined in their optimal sequence. The phasing demonstrated in Figure 7(D) is common for large office layout projects. First, the details of workstation layout are established. This may come from standardizing space and equipment based on each person’s position in a hierarchy. Secretaries, for example, may get a 175-square- foot workstation with filing space and word processing equipment, while a Grade I engineer gets a 110-squate-foot cubicle, and a supervisor gets a 150-square-foot cubicle. From the organizational charts and staffing forecasts, the space for each department and the arrangement between depa rtmer ts can then be developed. At this point, the pro- ject moves upward in detail to the global or, more com- monly, macro level. Separating the work into phases and levels is the ideal approach. Nevertheless. there may be some overlap. For example, the space plan of a particular work cell may not fit the boundaries previously decided in the macro phase. This may then require minor changes to the previously designed and agreed upon macro-space plan. For these and other rea- sons, phasing should be flexible. Proper phasing should be considered in the earliest stages of the project, perhaps after the initial discussions and certainly before any significant work effort begins. Here are some guidelines: ‘ Work from the most general to the most specific level (highest to lowest) unless special conditions dictate otherwise; 0 Clearly communicate the phasing plan to all participants; 0 Resist the temptation to jump ahead before a particular phase is complete; 0 Obtain agreement on the plan for each phase before moving on to the next phase; and o Recognize that there may be some overlap between phases. The space plan elements Every space plan at each level has four fundamental ele- ments and two derived elements. The fundamental elements are: space planning units [SPUs], affinities, space, and con— straints. When developing a space plan, the designers first define and identify SPUs. They then evaluate affinities. Using the affinities, they join SPUs to form one or more affinity dia- grams. The affinity, or configuration, diagram is the first of the derived elements. Space added to the configuration dia- gram produces a space plan primitive, the second derived element. Constraints applied to the space plan primitive pro- duce the space plan. Figure 8 shows this progression. The concept of fundamental and derived elements is valid at all levels. However, it is most useful and direct at the macro- and site levels. ' Space planning units—SPUS are the entities arranged by space plan designers. At the macro-level, they are referred to as cells. The systematic layout planning (SLP) system used the term "activity area." A cell might be a work department, a storage space, a building feature, or a fixed item. Each cell initially is represented by a symbol and identifier. Tire University of Michigan College of Engineering Interdisciplinary Program in Manufacturing Is now offering two degree programs Masters of Engineering in Manufacturing - Completed in 12 months - Requires 8.8. in an engineering field - Requires two years of relevant industrial experience - Manufacturing courses across engineering - Manufacturing courses in management & business 1, - Team project experience in industry N *$*=t=*=tut=**=t= ‘ Doctor of Engineering in Manufactu ring - requires a‘relevant master's degree and at least encodegrce (BS or MS) in engineering - Requires two years of relevant industrial experience ‘\_ I - Requires GRE scores (general portion) - Manufacturingkcourses across engineering - Manufacturing courses in management & business - I ndustrially-rclcvant dissertation thesis - Students may participate through the U-M Dearbom campus fi=*fi******* 0 Joint M. Eng. in Mfg/MBA also available X Fall 1998 applications Ist be received by July 1,19 8. To be considered for financial aid, applications must be received by February 1, 1998. For application materials, and further information, please contact: Ms. Henia Kamil, Administrative Associate Program in Manufacturing 2219 (LG. Brown Building The University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2125 Tel: (313) 764-3312 Fax: (313) 647-0079 email: pim@engin.umich.cdu internet: http:f/wvthngin.umich.edu/pim/prog Circle 113 on Reader Service Card LGEil HBHOLDO SNDILH1OS Elll OCTOBER 1957 0 IIE SOLUTIONS .-\.\i.mI Inn 'lL-tlirutal Ilium .Hu-n Jl'lit‘tf ie th recognitio _ “we nominate thu 1e ot the [IE homirs—TL‘H)AYl Has someone used IF. lecitltitgllcs at: better PCI 1p c‘s lives.1 Is then- soiuel me who is an up and corner! “IHIIIL'HI'IL' been |l‘l|tu\‘:ttt\'t‘ With an IE It't.I't!ttt|l1L‘. iluw ah: tlll swim-one \t'I‘u - has published .il't islilsrantlil'it: :u'l II. Ici' .""\ntnli'c \Utl know .I territn «.‘tlucnlniz' I.L‘|.I :i u outfit“; to iinprm'td lirntlocl l\‘l| ‘,'.' (swim- on! Take it IiInI. . .. I'IaoL 33. I.tlIlillI t IIII‘ILII] o It‘IIii‘.\.‘1.t.\..II'LI Irwin-trial{Menu-Iron ml Ill: *‘mnnl i-nr [3.x 'llc'luc m llama-LII»- \I: tIII‘-r"t -'\u.II-.I I‘m. Itll‘t'II‘i Imp . an I'mlt ' tilin- III-lilitillli‘lll'iI ‘m'n n. Anal-l I'm] t. lutatmnlun.‘ f‘tLIm \i'lm‘li ..,.‘liu.ttt iIIli~IitlIIIITI‘ ‘ItHiin; Iii-.lnslrlal linuuiur Mtnd ."\lI‘\.‘ll' t: I II'I..IIIilIt lll IlkIIP-I I IIII I7 l ILIIIH'CI ll IL' III‘-I Il I!.fl|I‘-IICLI I:I.II.I| JII II ‘\i‘-\'i|I‘-I l'ruskei It: I ‘IN‘wI'tJI It III t‘llil~l:n'ullln' III} I'iiI'IIaJTIIHI '.IhI HI I"‘\'\ elk-m - lIi'. Ittttll llll."ll.‘Itt'I"- ' Inn l‘t‘IllIi‘ll'I't- Ll'n'-l'[iL|.'lIIi.‘l'II It. i, it- I 1t III: iiuima iitJtt'i " [11. a Itllll' step ]-t’HL‘L‘~mI IL‘“. it? (it .III IIIL' awards there Ril't‘I Tl'icn, Ll u. i 1‘ 1.. At T .he Ill‘f Member Cs t fusiumcr *‘ervicc Comer at T t 44‘P'til4t'il or EGO-494 (10-. to ect a llDlIlIH-Iiluti toilu III'ItI inttu'malinn. around at the ll'f‘s you know, *I. Hit It». the |'lii][iIl\;lIl1'Iti harm and ‘wl-Ntt tl It-Jl i"]1|illllt;ilii|tliIt‘t‘II'IL' II)’~IIIIII|_".‘I II'IcII.!-1rlill Istiuinecih‘ IIHI‘IHI‘: b1 II.I‘1IA‘E l‘J‘J-‘a ur- one. I‘m-n t'pH-I. N'Illllliilittlll“ tu-I mm! :u.n.|1'iIsI|ni-.i In pm—Ium :uI I" '.‘tl!l‘i(.‘[' I T. I5")? n» he Lon ‘l-Iiflt'L‘iI. Nuinll'uiu In- for lI‘u.‘ that” l .mral l'liswiiumn ml .unl II“; III ii Ulnlttt-Hh “m.- ' I-- Inw- I"'t slit-mined I“; I."’|.'I|II“LI' I3. I .i’w lI'iIstinII-.\'.Ilia-41mm- [‘IL‘II II|I Ill’JIIII'lu'IIIIIIB Il‘ (AIR ‘ it the Indir‘lrial Fri 1-H ‘l" . - “‘ I 't-luerenu- .II'ILI I'xpu m Haul-I. l-.t-.I;l Io Mat: i':""5a Workcall Operllions lam-i Prodwnnn haul-5| (.7 mnmnr 0.9!“ —.I _ “ . \. i_t , “mum-14w 1 ix ;./\ 7.1.. . L." win mumm- 7. _. . . ' n. 1.1 an. I m, -tL-Ellxmt'cv —\ WHTP Figure 6 Most ol‘ these symbols are taken from ANSI Y1 5.3M- ILJ'N, the American National Standards Institute standard for process charts, which show the type of activity that acts on a product. For space planning, the symbol that best rap- rescnts the space's dominant activity is used. Figure 8 shows the symbols, their meanings, and color codes. The standard symbols represent operation, transport, inspection. delay, and storage. For space planning, two additional symholsii'iandlineJ and product cells—arc added. The handling symbol designates areas used for repackaging, transfers, or other elements that a re partly transport and pa rtly operation. The product cell desig- nates space used for multiple activities on a single product or small group of products. The definition of SPUs is one of the most strategic tasks in facility planning. This defini- tion decides the basic organization of the factory. - fifi‘inities—Attinities represent various Factors that demand closeness between any two cells in a space plan. For example. communication or personal interaction between workers might give rise to an affinity. Affinities are rated using a six—level scale, with numerical values ranging from +4 to -1. The scale has four positive levels that mean SPUs should be close. Such high—value affinities may result from frequent material movement between the cells. Negative ratings mean that the SI‘Us should be apart. There also is a neutral rating, 0. A vowel scale, A—E—I—O—U-X, may also be used For rating Figure 1 affinities. This scale was first popularized by Richard Muther. Here, "A" represents the highest affinity rating, "U" represents a neutral affinity, and "X" is a negative affinity. This scale has a mnemonic advantage. SPUs combine with affinities to form an affinity dia‘ gram—the first of the derived elements. This diagram is an idealized spatial arrangement that eventually becomes a space plan. in the diagram, symbols represent SPUs and lines represent affinities between them. A single line is the lowest value affinity and a four-part line is the highest. Squiggly lines represent negative affinities. Using an iterative process, the designer manipulates the diagram to create an optimal or near-optimal arrangement. A near-optimal arrangement has very Short high value affinities at the expense of lower value affinities. it mini- mizes the crossing of affinity lines - Spare—Each SPU has a unique space requirement. Some Space Planning Units 0. Bun: Wave Ins-mun Solida- Maid” in humbly Scuba” Configuration Diagram Spaceplan SPUs may require only a few square feet, while others may require tens or hundreds of thousands of square feet. The nature of space and the required calculations change With each planning level. At the higher levels, space is "elastic," and the calculations may not need to be as accu- rate. At the lower levels, space can be more rigid but also less definite. For example, a particular machine or desk requires a certain amount of space, and the designer cannot make it fit in less space. In other instances, a piece of equip- ment may require a certain type of space because it has a peculiar shape, such as a U. But, under certain conditions, other items may also fit in that U shape. When space is added to the affinity diagram, it distorts the diagram into the space plan primitive. It is an idealized representation and does not include design constraints. ' Constraints—Design constraints are those conditions that limit an ideal space plan. Such constraints might be building size and shape, columns, floor loading, utility con- figurations, external failures, and many others. The fusion of a space plan primitive and constraints pro- duces a space plan. Several viable space plans should emerge. A set of cells, affiru' ties, and constraints may give rise to several equally valid configuration diagrams and primi~ tives. Each of these primitives may result in multiple macro- space plans. The nature of the design problem precludes an optimal space plan, excep: in the simplest situations. The designer’s experience is a key factor, for it helps him decide which configurations have the most potential. it helps scale the myriad of possible space plans down to a reasonable number. The design project The elements of facility space plans are simple; execution of the tasks required to develop them is not. Rarely do the tasks neatly correspond to the development as described above. At each level of design, the approach changes to accommodate the amOLUT: of detail, available information, and the dominant issues. At each level, an approach that fits a wide range of pro- jects and situations can be developed. These are called model projects. With minor variations, the model project for a macro-space plan, for example, applies to almost any macro-space plan regardless of complexity, or industry. Similarly, the model projects for cell design and site plan- ning apply to almost any cell design or site-planning project. The scope, resources, methods, formality, and time required vary according to size anc complexity. The sequence, proce— du res, and deliver-ables are essentially constant. IE Quarterman Lee is president of Strategos, a consulting firm based in Kansas City, Missouri. He is a senior member of 1113. This article is excerpted from the book Facilities and Workplace Design: An illustrated Guide, by Quarterman Lee. To order, call [IE Member and Customer Service at 800-494-0460. 0 Feedback Using the Reader Service Card please rate the preceding article. Excellent—Circle 316 Good—Circle 317 Fain—Circle 318 Poor-Circle 319 Please write your suggestions in the "Comments" section. Thank you! LGGI HHGOLDO 0 SNOIJJ'I'IOS an ...
View Full Document

Page1 / 6

Framework for Facilities Design - M 4,” II | l lll lllll...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 6. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online