Shop OBEX P1 Docs P2 Docs Learn Events
Too good not to share: For Engineers — Parallax Forums

Too good not to share: For Engineers

Oldbitcollector (Jeff)Oldbitcollector (Jeff) Posts: 8,091
edited 2011-08-02 07:32 in General Discussion
Found this out on the net today. I don't usually re-post/forward anything, but this was simply too good not to share. Enjoy -OBC


A toothpaste factory had a problem: they sometimes shipped empty boxes, without the tube inside. This was due to the way the production line was set up, and people with experience in designing production lines will tell you how difficult it is to have everything happen with timings so precise that every single unit coming out of it is perfect 100% of the time. Small variations in the environment (which can’t be controlled in a cost-effective fashion) mean you must have quality assurance checks smartly distributed across the line so that customers all the way down the supermarket don’t get ticked off and buy someone else’s product instead.

Understanding how important that was, the CEO of the toothpaste factory got the top people in the company together and they decided to start a new project, in which they would hire an external engineering company to solve their empty boxes problem, as their engineering department was already too stretched to take on any extra effort.

The project followed the usual process: budget and project sponsor allocated, RFP, third-parties selected, and six months (and $8 million) later they had a fantastic solution — on time, on budget, high quality and everyone in the project had a great time. They solved the problem by using some high-tech precision scales that would sound a bell and flash lights whenever a toothpaste box weighing less than it should. The line would stop, and someone had to walk over and yank the defective box out of it, pressing another button when done.

A while later, the CEO decides to have a look at the ROI of the project: amazing results! No empty boxes ever shipped out of the factory after the scales were put in place. Very few customer complaints, and they were gaining market share. “That’s some money well spent!” – he says, before looking closely at the other statistics in the report.
It turns out, the number of defects picked up by the scales was 0 after three weeks of production use. It should’ve been picking up at least a dozen a day, so maybe there was something wrong with the report. He filed a bug against it, and after some investigation, the engineers come back saying the report was actually correct. The scales really weren'’t picking up any defects, because all boxes that got to that point in the conveyor belt were good.

Puzzled, the CEO travels down to the factory, and walks up to the part of the line where the precision scales were installed. A few feet before it, there was a $20 desk fan, blowing the empty boxes out of the belt and into a bin. “Oh, that — one of the guys put it there ’cause he was tired of walking over every time the bell rang”, says one of the workers.

Comments

  • doggiedocdoggiedoc Posts: 2,245
    edited 2011-07-28 19:48
    Copied to my FB page! Good one Jeff.

    EDIT:

    It's just too long.... :(
  • kwinnkwinn Posts: 8,697
    edited 2011-07-28 20:30
    Thanks Jeff, that was far better than merely good. It is the perfect illustration of a far too common attitude in most companies. Rarely if ever does anyone ask the people actually doing the work for input on a problem, proposed changes or any other matter that affects them.

    I have seen that attitude result in a general office for 6 people end up with one electrical outlet, a production facility that receives over 3000 cu. ft. of raw material and ships an equal amount of finished product daily end up with a 120 square foot receiving area and no storage space, an automated wash area with no sink and pipes going through the floor to an office below that allow water to run down through the holes.
  • RavenkallenRavenkallen Posts: 1,057
    edited 2011-07-28 20:42
    HAHAHA... Nice. They could have used a cheap solution like that the whole time. It just proves that you don't need a huge budget to make something work:)
  • ercoerco Posts: 20,259
    edited 2011-07-29 08:43
  • MicrocontrolledMicrocontrolled Posts: 2,461
    edited 2011-07-30 15:38
    LOL this needs to get passed around.... Great find OBC!!
  • Mark_TMark_T Posts: 1,981
    edited 2011-07-30 16:33
    That story's too good to be true! But it passes the Snopes test...

    One example of failed production-line quality control that I know of is of chocolate bars called "Wispa" here in the UK. They are normally bubble-filled milk chocolate bars, but just occasionally one finds one that is solid chocolate, or nearly all solid. A case of quality checks failing that no-one complains about ;)
  • TubularTubular Posts: 4,717
    edited 2011-07-31 02:46
    Mark_T

    In the 90's I built a machine to find exactly that scenario... chocolates missing their sugary liquid fill, because customers do complain. The chocolate is much more expensive than the fill, so little do the customers know they're actually on a winner :)

    There is a scene in the film "Ginger Meggs" where a customer complains about a bit of fish on the newspaper he just bought. Quick as a flash the paperboy responds - "Sir, I should charge you extra, what with the price of fish these days..."
  • piguy101piguy101 Posts: 248
    edited 2011-07-31 11:28
    That was a great story, now only if that was true.
  • localrogerlocalroger Posts: 3,452
    edited 2011-08-01 08:37
    Checkweighers capable of solving the toothpaste tube problem are a standard item. You can get one installed turnkey next week for around USD$10,000 give or take, depending on features.
  • CannibalRoboticsCannibalRobotics Posts: 535
    edited 2011-08-01 08:43
    To funny, thanks for the laughs.
  • Bobb FwedBobb Fwed Posts: 1,119
    edited 2011-08-01 14:48
    Very good. Thanks!
  • wjsteelewjsteele Posts: 697
    edited 2011-08-02 07:32
    We had an interesting and similar problem years ago at an automated warehouse for a shoe company I worked at. The system was almost 100% automated and it kept sticking the wrong shoes in the boxes, even though the programmers "knew" it was working perfectly. The company was mostly known for women's shoes... which always worked flawlessly. However, when we went to investigate, we found out that kid's shoes always went in the packing chute before the intended shipment and men's shoes always went in the one after. It turns out that when the shoes were being sent down the chutes to each packing station... there was a different amount of friction depending on the weight of the shoes. A simple timing change and all was well... but the company that designed the conveyor system went bankrupt before the project was fully tested and we had to take over and figure out these "little issues" throughout the system.
Sign In or Register to comment.