MSD Total Supplier Performance and Inventory Control Detailed Design Review Keleigh Bicknell, William Darlington, Alex Resnick, Brian Woodard
Overview Overall Project Status ● Current State vs. Project Plan ● Updated Risk Assessment ● Updates to Prototypes since last review ● MSD II Plans - Week 1-5 ● Appendix ●
Overall Project Status TIMELINE Continually completing tasks on schedule or ahead of schedule BUDGET Currently have spent ~14% of our budget. We will be purchasing a label maker prior to MSDII. SCOPE Primarily MSD 4th floor. Hope to do more with the ME machine shop, EE lab, and basement surplus in MSDII.
Project Plan vs. Current State Original Plan Current State Paperless Purchase Form Paperless Purchase Form ★ ● Integrated Order Tracking Tool Database ○ ● Team and Guide email notifications ○ Surplus Database ● Tool Database ★ Streamlined Loan Out Procedure ● SKUs ○ Categorized Tools ○ Streamlined Loan Out Procedure ★ Paperless ○ Usage reports ○ Automated return reminders ○ Budget Management Tool ★ Testing Prototypes ★
Updated Risk Assessment ● Adjusted Likelihood Score ○ Card Swipe doesn’t work ■ Reduced from 1 to 0: Can use RIT Student ID # ○ MSD Employees do not like new system ■ Reduced from 2 to 1: Continual communication through design process ● Added two Risks ○ Students block emails from website ■ Reduced from 2 to 0: Provide email preference setting ○ Guide is out of office ■ Likelihood of 1: Assign a backup guide to approve after 48 hours
Prototype Changes & Revisions Changes Since Last Review Plans for Next Semester Purchasing Purchasing ● ● Email functionality for each milestone Surplus/Tool inventory list ○ ○ Email preferences User testing & Revisions ○ ○ Tool Loan Out Reporting functionality ○ ● List of Vendors ○ Import the actual tool list ○ Tool Loan Out ● Import the active student list ○ Added search for tool by keyword User testing & Revisions ○ ○ Added email functionality to Tools Out Report ○ Developed the Tool History Report ○
Overall Plans for MSD II Usability Testing ● Students ○ Employees ○ Tool Database ● Barcode and 5S MSD Tools ● Surplus Database ● 5S Surplus ● Training and Maintenance Documentation ● Beta Testing ● Full Implementation ●
MSD II Weeks 1-5 Preliminary Outline
MSD II Prototype Testing Plan
MSD II Prototype Training Plan
Questions?
A summary of the work completed for the Preliminary Appendix Design Review, Systems Design Review, Sub System Design Review, and Preliminary Design Review. Spanning Weeks 1 - 15 of MSDI.
Team Roles From Left: Alex Resnick, Brian Woodard, William Darlington, Keleigh Bicknell
Project Background - Current State Over 300 students participate in Senior Design every year ● Students design, build & test their solution to a design problem ● Each team has a budget that can be used to purchase materials ● Paper process - requires guide’s signature and MSD office sign off ○ The MSD office has tools available for students to borrow ● Paper process - challenging to keep students accountable and track tool wear ○ The machine shop offers tools and machines for students to use ● No schedule for the machines so students often have to wait ○ Over the last 5 years - have ordered over 200 tape measures (no accountability) ○ Lots of resources available that student’s don’t know exist so they purchase duplicates ○
Problem Statement Break Down
Customer Requirements
Engineering Requirements
Engineering & Customer Requirements Matrix
Top Level Functions Purchasing Functional Decomposition
Inventory Functional Decomposition
Purchasing Functional Decomposition
System Architecture
Benchmarking
Morphological Chart
Concept Development Five design concepts were generated through use of the morphological chart. The concept development matrix highlights the primary functions of the system and the design option for each concept displayed on the left.
Concept Selection
Purchasing Process Map
Tool Loan Out Process Map
Prototype Testing Plan
Stakeholder Testing Discussed prototypes with 5 RIT MSDI students and received feedback: Requested all team members receive purchasing update emails ● State that tools are available but loaned out and quantity usually available ● Could we implement a tool dropbox for returning tools when office is ● busy? Implement a “Search” feature so it’s easy to find exactly which tool you are ● looking for Send Budget sheet after orders are placed/received ●
Survey Results Comments and Concerns ● Communicate discounts and shipping cost. ● Tracking and order confirmation ● Cost summary sheets Time to Approve (days) <1 1-2 2-5 >5 Email 0 5 1 1 Signature 6 3 1 2
Current State Analysis Tool Loan Out
Process Expert Feedback Industrial Engineers Industry Specialists Alec Jarvie MSC Suggested additional functionality to update the class list Opportunity to utilize a tool vending machine or carousel if in the prototypes directly from Oracle. In addition, RIT commits to an annual sales amount with the company. suggested performing spot audits weekly to eliminate one Received information from MSC pertaining to RIT sales large audit at the end of each semester. history to determine whether the contract would be in the department's best interest. Tim Gallman Grainger Requested the tool loan out prototype includes a visual confirmation that the tool was loaned out / returned Met with two representatives from Grainger to discuss successfully. Also suggested creating non-admin type their vending machine opportunities. Similar to MSC, queries so students can search what tools they have out however the annual sales commitment is less.Emailed the as an individual as well as a team as a whole. Rochester representative to see if it would be possible to benchmark their facility from an inventory management Robin Borkholder perspective. Have not received an email back. Pushed the team to consider how the program could be backed up. What will happen if we lose a day of data. Also Supply Point suggested a cage area for damaged tools. Potentially could Requested a slightly damaged machine to test to avoid benchmark a R&D company for surplus storage. signing a contract with MSC. Supply Point will not work with us, and instead directed us back to MSC.
Recommend
More recommend
