The biggest mistake of all, is refusing to follow the organised handling sequence
of Trimloss and using the optimiser simply to cut the glass. Glass shop managers
who think this way, believe that as long as they use “mirror pairing”, or “repeat
pattern cutting”, using the same cutting diagram to cut both the clear and the Low
E glasses, then “all other problems” can be dealt with manually. “All other problems”
includes all the variations in glass types, spacer bar types, colours and thicknesses,
combined annealed and toughened units, in addition to toughened single, Georgian
units, leaded units and artwork units. When all these variations start appearing
together, advocates of the “mirror” pairing or “repeat pattern cutting” systems,
suddenly find that they cannot cope with their manual methods of shop floor organisation,
so they go crying back to the person deciding the make up of optimisation batches,
to tell them only to put like units in each batch. They also request numerous changes
to highlight different types of production on computer produced documents, especially
labels. This is done to try to avoid the organisational errors resulting from their
imposition of manual, instead of computer controlled production.
In the worst case scenario we have ever seen, a glass shop manager who was operating
this way, but with a good turnover of 3000 units per week, forced the batches down
to an average size which was to cut only one and a half stock sheets of each of the
main glass types per batch. This meant that 25% of all the glass was thrown away
even before considering the optimisation waste. We told this manager that it was
impossible for his company to continue in business, operating the way he did. Guess
what? We were right.
Sometimes, companies make this classic mistake, after a refusal to buy the appropriate
slot racks instead of “A” frames. (See - Purchasing Mistake 13 - Glass Racking Expert).(See also - Supporting Acts / Slot Racks). What these companies then sometimes
do, is to compound the problem by manually sorting glass by job number, instead of
the ideal racking slot number that could have been used with slot racks. One company
doing this, would aim only to cut all the glass on the day that a batch of orders
was started. They then waited until the next morning to see which customer screamed
the loudest, to decide which jobs first to make into units. The shop floor productivity
was therefore about the worst I had ever seen, a fact that could only be tolerated
by this customer’s fortunate location, miles away from any competition. Moorcroft
Computer Services will not help customers to operate in such an inefficient manner
when investment in the correct slot racks would give a pay back in only 3 months.
In two cases in our experience, these character types, were production managers whose
self confidence and self righteousness put them in serious conflict with their company
owners. In both cases this led to an inevitable parting of the ways.
This mistake is most often made by production managers rather than company managers.
They know how to do things the manual way, resenting any optimiser that does everything
for them. They therefore tend to choose inferior optimisation software which relies
on operator input, to help the optimiser avoid some of the worst results.
Because it has such a sophisticated and yet easy to use racking system at glass breakout,
Trimloss uses only the most efficient “random optimisation”, so there is no need
to put up with the higher waste imposed by the “mirror pairing”, or “repeat pattern
cutting” methods used by other optimisers.