4 ms·
I know then tent is getting a lot of criticism from the public but it is a smart move. The tent gives extra space to add more individual steps to the assembly l
by pg_bot 8y ago
I know then tent is getting a lot of criticism from the public but it is a smart move. The tent gives extra space to add more individual steps to the assembly line and humans are best suited for tasks that are rapidly changing.
I think someone finally realized that you can have as many steps in the assembly line as you want so long as no single step exceeds your quota divided by the time per day. (i.e. need to make 1000 cars per day, no single step in your production process can last longer than 86.4 seconds; but you can have as many steps as you want) In order to make 5,000 cars a week you need to keep your slowest step in your manufacturing process to around 2 minutes. This should be doable.
- maxerickson 8y agoShouldn't they have been standing there with a stop watch right from the start? It's not exactly a subtle point that throughput is limited by, what's the cliché, the bottlenecks.
- std_throwaway 8y agoThey probably made 1000 bets on how to do things and won 99% of them - the remaining 10 steps turned out to be manufacturing nightmares. If they knew beforehand what wouldn't work (and you never know that beforehand but afterwards it's easy to point out) they would have designed their manufacturing line differently. Now they lose a lot of time, need more space and workforce but probably will get there anyways if money doesn't run out in the meantime.
- 0xcafecafe 8y agoAka the throughput vs latency discussion
- taway0623 8y ago1. Longer steps can be run in parallel. One step of 24 hours with 1000 in parallel allows 1000 cars per day. 2. If no parallel allowed, 86.4 seconds is the average not the maximum. Longer steps balanced by shorter steps.