In relation to the model, this sample focuses on the drawing and bunching working stations that have defectiveness set to 5%, the same cycle times and no other efficiency losses. The quality control has been changed simulating case 2 and 3. The results of simulation for the two cases are shown in Table 3.9 in which the proposal method has compared with the traditional one. The proposal method allowed to identify the correct efficiency, for example to dimension the drawing station, because it considers time wasted to manufacture products rejected in bunching station. The difference between values of Q2 and OTE is explained by the value of P2=0,95 that is due to the propagation of quality losses for the upstream station in performance losses for the downstream station. Moreover about positioning of quality control the case 2 has to be prefer because the simulation shows a positive effect on the OTE if the bunching station is the system bottleneck (as it happens in the real system).
|
|
Proposal method |
Traditional method |
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
Q1 |
Q2 |
OTE |
Q1 |
Q2 |
OTE |
|
Case 2) |
0,952 |
0,95 |
0,952 |
0,95 |
0,95 |
0,952 |
|
Case 3) |
0,952 |
0,952 |
0,952 |
-- |
0,952 |
0,952 |
- 1580 reads
