Master Planning Capacity Evaluation

Confidential Client Location: Western, USA
The client wanted a capacity evaluation as part of their master planning effort of a multi-product facility at their West Coast site. Demand in the facility was expected to double. This facility included several core and support functions. It also interacted with and supported other buildings on the site. The goal of this project was to determine the current capabilities and constraints of each function, understand space issues, and plan for the future so that this facility is capable of meeting future demand projections over the next five years. Operating strategies, inventory locations, labor and structure itself were considered in the evaluation. CRB also looked at the adequacies of the storage condition to see if they will have enough storage in freezer and coolers.

Block Flow Diagrams (BFD) and Discrete Event Simulation (DES) models clearly defining current capabilities and conditions were developed. The model was then used to run different 'what-if' scenarios until the forecast demand was met. Several bottlenecks and operational wastes were identified in various areas of the facility and improvement opportunities were recommended. Cost and schedule estimates for each of these improvement options were provided.

Client Challenge: Meet future demand projections. Projected demand over the next five (5) years must be met for building core and support operations.

CRB's Role:
Determined current operating conditions, recommended improvement opportunities, and provided cost estimates for improvement options.

How we helped:
  • Understanding system interactions and strategies through observations and interviews with the SME
  • Developed a DES model for all operations in the facility to understand the impact of multiple scenarios.
  • Proposed strategies, calculated staging & staffing requirements to meet demand over the next 5 year planning horizon.
  • Identified operational wastes and recommended operational improvement opportunities to minimize capital investment and staffing expenditures.
  • Prioritized improvement opportunities to determine the best projects for the investment.
Results:
  • Selected Opportunities resulted in a cost avoidance of $7.4MM
  • Major modifications to the facility were not required.
  • Staffing expenditures are expected to decrease.
back to top