Packaging Direct or Indirect

>
> No. How would that help?
>

Great idea Ami. The configurator can change the method of manufacturing based
on rules. You could create a rule with the quantities that will change the
number of boxes and the amount of time as needed.

Mark W.
There is some talk around here about adding an operation for
packaging onto all of the Jobs that go through here.

We might also look at treating boxes as a raw material.

There are some pro's and con's for doing each.

1 of the pro's is that we could more accurately track our costs. We
could also keep track of how shipping clerks are spending their
time. Some hope that it will help with scheduling, but since much of
our shipping is Kanban or JIT related it really won't help that much.

I'm just curious if anyone else is doing this or has contemplated
doing this.

Is it a good idea or not?

Thanks,

Brian Stenglein
Clow Stamping Co.
Hi Brian,

We have an operation for packaging as the last op on every job that will
need it. It doesn't really impact our schedule much b/c that is not a
resource limitation, but is more to track time/cost for different jobs
since some jobs can take 1/2 a day or more to package up for shipment.

We also use different size 'crates' which we stock and which get added
to the job as material when we know what size it will need. These are
rather large and expensive so it is necessary for us to issue them to
jobs to manage them.

-Sarah
Hi,
Generally, we use crates to pack our parts, and they are on the jobs as
materials. (they protect the parts during production and then are used for
transportation off site later, and final shipping) We have no problems with
this. there are also a few cardboard boxes inventoried for packaging for a
particular customer, also a material. We did this to be sure we had them on
hand when needed for shipping, and relieved from inventory when shipments
are made; a good plan, but then they evaporated into thin air. Not sure
what happened....

Also, we have a packaging operation on the jobs. I do not know if personnel
clock in to it to pack the shipments. but its easy enough to incorporate if
that is what management wants to happen.

It probably depends on how much time the shop personnel spend in shipping
various orders. It could be cumbersome, if there are many many jobs
continually at that stage. I do think it is a good tool.

Rhonda
Reeder & Kline



-----Original Message-----
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Brian Stenglein
Sent: Monday, August 28, 2006 3:44 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Packaging Direct or Indirect



There is some talk around here about adding an operation for
packaging onto all of the Jobs that go through here.

We might also look at treating boxes as a raw material.

There are some pro's and con's for doing each.

1 of the pro's is that we could more accurately track our costs. We
could also keep track of how shipping clerks are spending their
time. Some hope that it will help with scheduling, but since much of
our shipping is Kanban or JIT related it really won't help that much.

I'm just curious if anyone else is doing this or has contemplated
doing this.

Is it a good idea or not?

Thanks,

Brian Stenglein
Clow Stamping Co.






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
What we did seems to work well. We are a mixed mode company with
make-to-stock and make-to-order biz being split about 40/60. We put
packing operations on all make-to-stock jobs and any make-to-order jobs that
require specific packaging requirements. The remainder of our packing
crew's time is charged to indirect time. Processing UPS, making boxes, etc.
Normal cost of doing business.

Darren Mann
IT Manager
Miller Products Co.
1015 N. Main St.
Osceola, IA 50213
Ph. 641-342-2103
Fax 641-342-3222


_____



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
We are a make to order manufacturer and originally had pack and ship
operations on all of our jobs, primarily to give shipping special
instructions regarding some of the products. We eliminated these
operations primarily to reduce the operator data entry time and
added the special instructions as needed to comments on the last
actual production operation. This has worked well for us.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Stenglein" <bstenglein@...>
wrote:
>
> There is some talk around here about adding an operation for
> packaging onto all of the Jobs that go through here.
>
> We might also look at treating boxes as a raw material.
>
> There are some pro's and con's for doing each.
>
> 1 of the pro's is that we could more accurately track our costs.
We
> could also keep track of how shipping clerks are spending their
> time. Some hope that it will help with scheduling, but since much
of
> our shipping is Kanban or JIT related it really won't help that
much.
>
> I'm just curious if anyone else is doing this or has contemplated
> doing this.
>
> Is it a good idea or not?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian Stenglein
> Clow Stamping Co.
>
In three places, I have implemented packaging material (boxes,
inserts, labels) as controlled part numbers. For special inserts
(i.e., instapak molded foam made in custom molds), the instapak tool
and the mold/insert is a tool on the router as well.

- better cost info
- better packaging people time info
- capacity planning (very, very minor - maybe just interesting, but
not useful)
- design control of packaging
- where we've been smart (not all the time), a reduction in the
total inventory because we use more common boxes, and can see in
inventory when we're getting low

A risk - service orders will use boxes but if you (we) forget to put
them on the service order, your cycle counts will be way off.

Just my 2 cents.

Neil

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Stenglein" <bstenglein@...>
wrote:
>
> There is some talk around here about adding an operation for
> packaging onto all of the Jobs that go through here.
>
> We might also look at treating boxes as a raw material.
>
> There are some pro's and con's for doing each.
>
> 1 of the pro's is that we could more accurately track our costs.
We
> could also keep track of how shipping clerks are spending their
> time. Some hope that it will help with scheduling, but since much
of
> our shipping is Kanban or JIT related it really won't help that
much.
>
> I'm just curious if anyone else is doing this or has contemplated
> doing this.
>
> Is it a good idea or not?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian Stenglein
> Clow Stamping Co.
>
Thanks to those who have replied. I have a follow up question for
any of you. I think the big dilemma I see is that there is quite a
bit of variability in order qty's which will throw off production
stds and box sizes & qtys.

Example, a part gets ordered 1 time for 250 pcs, it takes 20 minutes
to "bulk pack" and uses 1 10X8X6 box, it weighs 24 pounds. The next
time the customer orders 500pcs. If left alone the job would say
that it should take 40 minutes and use 2 10X8X6 boxes, but in
actuality, since 500 pcs is under a 50 lbs weight limit that most of
our customers have, we could put all 500 in 1 bigger box. Since the
parts are bulk packed, there is no extra time involved in the larger
qty. If they were layer packed instead of bulk packed the extra time
would be needed.

This is a simple example but could happen on a larger scale also.
Any suggestions on how to deal with this kind of variability?

Thanks,

Brian Stenglein
Clow Stamping Co.




--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Neil Christie" <nchristie@...> wrote:
>
> In three places, I have implemented packaging material (boxes,
> inserts, labels) as controlled part numbers. For special inserts
> (i.e., instapak molded foam made in custom molds), the instapak
tool
> and the mold/insert is a tool on the router as well.
>
> - better cost info
> - better packaging people time info
> - capacity planning (very, very minor - maybe just interesting, but
> not useful)
> - design control of packaging
> - where we've been smart (not all the time), a reduction in the
> total inventory because we use more common boxes, and can see in
> inventory when we're getting low
>
> A risk - service orders will use boxes but if you (we) forget to
put
> them on the service order, your cycle counts will be way off.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Neil
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Stenglein" <bstenglein@>
> wrote:
> >
> > There is some talk around here about adding an operation for
> > packaging onto all of the Jobs that go through here.
> >
> > We might also look at treating boxes as a raw material.
> >
> > There are some pro's and con's for doing each.
> >
> > 1 of the pro's is that we could more accurately track our costs.
> We
> > could also keep track of how shipping clerks are spending their
> > time. Some hope that it will help with scheduling, but since
much
> of
> > our shipping is Kanban or JIT related it really won't help that
> much.
> >
> > I'm just curious if anyone else is doing this or has contemplated
> > doing this.
> >
> > Is it a good idea or not?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian Stenglein
> > Clow Stamping Co.
> >
>
Well, depends on your personnel. What I've done here is allow the shipping
people to enter their time on a time log sheet and approximate their time on
each job. Our problem was that they pack or product as it is plated and
multiple jobs are plated at the same time so it wasn't possible to clock-in
to one job and have it work. I then manually enter their packing time after
verifying all other labor entries for the day. We use the receive to
inventory option on all jobs so when we enter packing time it's important
that all details of that job are in order. Not sure that helps but it seems
to work well here.

Darren Mann
IT Manager
Miller Products Co.
1015 N. Main St.
Osceola, IA 50213
Ph. 641-342-2103
Fax 641-342-3222


_____

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
Brian Stenglein
Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2006 8:15 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: Packaging Direct or Indirect



Thanks to those who have replied. I have a follow up question for
any of you. I think the big dilemma I see is that there is quite a
bit of variability in order qty's which will throw off production
stds and box sizes & qtys.

Example, a part gets ordered 1 time for 250 pcs, it takes 20 minutes
to "bulk pack" and uses 1 10X8X6 box, it weighs 24 pounds. The next
time the customer orders 500pcs. If left alone the job would say
that it should take 40 minutes and use 2 10X8X6 boxes, but in
actuality, since 500 pcs is under a 50 lbs weight limit that most of
our customers have, we could put all 500 in 1 bigger box. Since the
parts are bulk packed, there is no extra time involved in the larger
qty. If they were layer packed instead of bulk packed the extra time
would be needed.

This is a simple example but could happen on a larger scale also.
Any suggestions on how to deal with this kind of variability?

Thanks,

Brian Stenglein
Clow Stamping Co.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com, "Neil
Christie" <nchristie@...> wrote:
>
> In three places, I have implemented packaging material (boxes,
> inserts, labels) as controlled part numbers. For special inserts
> (i.e., instapak molded foam made in custom molds), the instapak
tool
> and the mold/insert is a tool on the router as well.
>
> - better cost info
> - better packaging people time info
> - capacity planning (very, very minor - maybe just interesting, but
> not useful)
> - design control of packaging
> - where we've been smart (not all the time), a reduction in the
> total inventory because we use more common boxes, and can see in
> inventory when we're getting low
>
> A risk - service orders will use boxes but if you (we) forget to
put
> them on the service order, your cycle counts will be way off.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Neil
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> .com, "Brian
Stenglein" <bstenglein@>
> wrote:
> >
> > There is some talk around here about adding an operation for
> > packaging onto all of the Jobs that go through here.
> >
> > We might also look at treating boxes as a raw material.
> >
> > There are some pro's and con's for doing each.
> >
> > 1 of the pro's is that we could more accurately track our costs.
> We
> > could also keep track of how shipping clerks are spending their
> > time. Some hope that it will help with scheduling, but since
much
> of
> > our shipping is Kanban or JIT related it really won't help that
> much.
> >
> > I'm just curious if anyone else is doing this or has contemplated
> > doing this.
> >
> > Is it a good idea or not?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian Stenglein
> > Clow Stamping Co.
> >
>






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Brian,

Does Clow Stamping use a configurator?

Michael Randolph
Infinity Business Consulting
mrandolph@...

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Stenglein" <bstenglein@...>
wrote:
>
> Thanks to those who have replied. I have a follow up question for
> any of you. I think the big dilemma I see is that there is quite
a
> bit of variability in order qty's which will throw off production
> stds and box sizes & qtys.
>
> Example, a part gets ordered 1 time for 250 pcs, it takes 20
minutes
> to "bulk pack" and uses 1 10X8X6 box, it weighs 24 pounds. The
next
> time the customer orders 500pcs. If left alone the job would say
> that it should take 40 minutes and use 2 10X8X6 boxes, but in
> actuality, since 500 pcs is under a 50 lbs weight limit that most
of
> our customers have, we could put all 500 in 1 bigger box. Since
the
> parts are bulk packed, there is no extra time involved in the
larger
> qty. If they were layer packed instead of bulk packed the extra
time
> would be needed.
>
> This is a simple example but could happen on a larger scale also.
> Any suggestions on how to deal with this kind of variability?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Brian Stenglein
> Clow Stamping Co.
Neil - Just a thought.

Give Service their own bin in the system and a seperate stack of
boxes. When their stack is empty (or at a restocking point), they
would get another stack of boxes from production inventory and send a
note to do an adjustment. If Service is the only ones forgetting to
put them on a job (and of course they are), the cycle counts for the
production boxes will be correct.

Michael Randolph
Infinity Business Consulting
mrandolph@...


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Neil Christie" <nchristie@...> wrote:
>
> A risk - service orders will use boxes but if you (we) forget to put
> them on the service order, your cycle counts will be way off.
>
> Just my 2 cents.
>
> Neil
>
No. How would that help?

Brian

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "ami_miker" <mrandolph@...> wrote:
>
> Brian,
>
> Does Clow Stamping use a configurator?
>
> Michael Randolph
> Infinity Business Consulting
> mrandolph@...
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "Brian Stenglein" <bstenglein@>
> wrote:
> >
> > Thanks to those who have replied. I have a follow up question
for
> > any of you. I think the big dilemma I see is that there is quite
> a
> > bit of variability in order qty's which will throw off production
> > stds and box sizes & qtys.
> >
> > Example, a part gets ordered 1 time for 250 pcs, it takes 20
> minutes
> > to "bulk pack" and uses 1 10X8X6 box, it weighs 24 pounds. The
> next
> > time the customer orders 500pcs. If left alone the job would say
> > that it should take 40 minutes and use 2 10X8X6 boxes, but in
> > actuality, since 500 pcs is under a 50 lbs weight limit that most
> of
> > our customers have, we could put all 500 in 1 bigger box. Since
> the
> > parts are bulk packed, there is no extra time involved in the
> larger
> > qty. If they were layer packed instead of bulk packed the extra
> time
> > would be needed.
> >
> > This is a simple example but could happen on a larger scale
also.
> > Any suggestions on how to deal with this kind of variability?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Brian Stenglein
> > Clow Stamping Co.
>