4 ms·

My opinion has shifted over the last few years working in plants, and I've now settled on the idea that the fan solution probably needed the eight million dolla

My opinion has shifted over the last few years working in plants, and I've now settled on the idea that the fan solution probably needed the eight million dollar project. Without the project, the operator would not have been inconvenienced, nor would they have achieved their goals as soon. Also remember that the project was worth it - it was returning on the investment. Ideally the simple solution would have been found first for a massive windfall of savings, but industry runs on constant, small, incremental changes over many years. And it takes a very special mindset to invent awesome hacks like the fan trick! The operator should instead be applauded for making it so no other plant needs to buy such an expensive system! Edit: also, never underestimate the utility of inconveniencing operators. They will find the most brilliant, clever, and cheap hacks to solve problems. Watching operators is the best diagnostic tool available. When you see a c-clamp or duct tape on the machine, you know exactly what needs workin' on next!

VLM 13y ago
"The operator should instead be applauded for making it so no other plant needs to buy such an expensive system!" File a business method patent and charge $7.999M. Or worse get busted by someone else's fan patent and have to pay a $10M fine. (Categorize this as sarcastic commentary, not my personal business plan or endorsement) "When you see a c-clamp or duct tape on the machine, you know exactly what needs workin' on next!" Insert bad joke about OSHA fines because they found a way to defeat the safety interlocks again. Just watching punch operators used to make me scared.
- HCIdivision17 13y ago
  To be fair, punch machines are _terrifying_, and the stories about why anti-tie-down circuits exist just make me cringe thinking about it. Again, operators are immensely clever, and, well, many consider safeties an inconvenience. And then they bring their cleverness to bear on it and someone loses a $BODY_PART$. As for your patent, I'll raise you a "but the patent doesn't cover a _five_ blade fan pointed at a _fifteen_ degree declination at the conveyor", with this leading to a new patent. Technically, that's what patents are all about, but it sure seems silly written out like that. But you're right, that's what happens.
MaysonL 13y ago
Of course, the fan could have been implemented at the git-go if they had bothered consulting the operator in the first place.
- HCIdivision17 13y ago
  In my experience, most operators wouldn't have mentioned it. The first thing I'll do is interview them about any problem I'm investigating, and while they are masters of hindsight, they'll not always be masters of foresight. My coworkers and I have spent a lot of time talking about this sort of thing, and we're often flabbergasted that they don't point out these obvious things sooner. As in, your typical person just gets used to broken things, or they just never think about it. Literally, they'll never think "there's got to be a better way". But the operators who do have that foresight, they are just living gold (though not quite as rare). Mind, I've had my share of "why not get a 100 foot tape measure" instead of attempting to use laser measurements, but they're in the minority. I emphasize them in practice because people need to feel like they're smart enough to see the simple solutions (because they _are_), but often I have to work to merge their solutions into something workable. TL;DR: operators should be consulted first, last, and during the development. But engineering is still hard to keep simple.
antjanus 13y ago
One thing that people forget is that the $8 million system works as constant quality assurance. The $20 fan is all good but what if the weight of the boxes increases due to extra packaging? What about if the fan slowly dies over time? The back up system will always make sure that only the correct boxes pass. I think people should realize that.
- enraged_camel 13y ago
  The point is not that the $8 million system did not work. The point is that it was overly expensive for what it accomplished, and it slowed down the production line significantly enough that some worker went out of his way to implement his own solution. Without his solution, product quality may still have gone up, but production numbers would have gone down since the production line would stop every time there was an empty box on the belt. In contrast, the fan not only increased product quality, but it also had no impact on number of units produced and it cost $20 to boot. Sure, it's not a perfect solution, but in this case it's "perfect enough." (And making it more perfect would still have been several orders of magnitude cheaper than the $8 million system.)
npsimons 13y ago
Never tell people how to do things. Tell them WHAT to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity. -- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.

VLM 13y ago

"The operator should instead be applauded for making it so no other plant needs to buy such an expensive system!" File a business method patent and charge $7.999M. Or worse get busted by someone else's fan patent and have to pay a $10M fine. (Categorize this as sarcastic commentary, not my personal business plan or endorsement) "When you see a c-clamp or duct tape on the machine, you know exactly what needs workin' on next!" Insert bad joke about OSHA fines because they found a way to defeat the safety interlocks again. Just watching punch operators used to make me scared.

HCIdivision17 13y ago
To be fair, punch machines are _terrifying_, and the stories about why anti-tie-down circuits exist just make me cringe thinking about it. Again, operators are immensely clever, and, well, many consider safeties an inconvenience. And then they bring their cleverness to bear on it and someone loses a $BODY_PART$. As for your patent, I'll raise you a "but the patent doesn't cover a _five_ blade fan pointed at a _fifteen_ degree declination at the conveyor", with this leading to a new patent. Technically, that's what patents are all about, but it sure seems silly written out like that. But you're right, that's what happens.

MaysonL 13y ago

Of course, the fan could have been implemented at the git-go if they had bothered consulting the operator in the first place.

HCIdivision17 13y ago
In my experience, most operators wouldn't have mentioned it. The first thing I'll do is interview them about any problem I'm investigating, and while they are masters of hindsight, they'll not always be masters of foresight. My coworkers and I have spent a lot of time talking about this sort of thing, and we're often flabbergasted that they don't point out these obvious things sooner. As in, your typical person just gets used to broken things, or they just never think about it. Literally, they'll never think "there's got to be a better way". But the operators who do have that foresight, they are just living gold (though not quite as rare). Mind, I've had my share of "why not get a 100 foot tape measure" instead of attempting to use laser measurements, but they're in the minority. I emphasize them in practice because people need to feel like they're smart enough to see the simple solutions (because they _are_), but often I have to work to merge their solutions into something workable. TL;DR: operators should be consulted first, last, and during the development. But engineering is still hard to keep simple.

antjanus 13y ago

One thing that people forget is that the $8 million system works as constant quality assurance. The $20 fan is all good but what if the weight of the boxes increases due to extra packaging? What about if the fan slowly dies over time? The back up system will always make sure that only the correct boxes pass. I think people should realize that.

enraged_camel 13y ago
The point is not that the $8 million system did not work. The point is that it was overly expensive for what it accomplished, and it slowed down the production line significantly enough that some worker went out of his way to implement his own solution. Without his solution, product quality may still have gone up, but production numbers would have gone down since the production line would stop every time there was an empty box on the belt. In contrast, the fan not only increased product quality, but it also had no impact on number of units produced and it cost $20 to boot. Sure, it's not a perfect solution, but in this case it's "perfect enough." (And making it more perfect would still have been several orders of magnitude cheaper than the $8 million system.)

npsimons 13y ago

Never tell people how to do things. Tell them WHAT to do and they will surprise you with their ingenuity. -- Gen. George S. Patton, Jr.