Let's see if the order takes up the stove first.

The addition of a second stove will make it possible to reduce queuing of stoves only if they can be supported by a combination of personnel, supplies and rotations. It may also assume back-up maintenance or identified new business requirements, and therefore not be able to determine the build-up with a single moment of congestion. A comparison of single- and double-scrambling should be made by retaining the same set of orders, drawing out the task occupancy, and then judging what limitations are being addressed in the second stove.

Separate the customer's order from the one that can start cooking.

An order may have entered the system, but the raw materials have not yet been matched and the cook is in the process of disposing of other dishes or the pots have not yet been cleaned. The customers were waiting, but not necessarily waiting. The recording of all orders as waiting items would make it appear that the additional equipment will solve all problems.

A representative segment, such as 90 minutes, could be selected to record the order, the ready, the stove opening, the setting and the completion point. Ninety minutes is an example of an observation window and is not a uniform criterion for the volume of judgement. If the order peak is formed within half an hour, the window will also cover pre-peak ongoing tasks and post-peak backlog digestion and will not be able to capture only the best-looking part.

At times, the clearing continues to take place in the original stoves and at times in independent washing positions. The two scenarios have different meanings for the release of stoves and should be mapped according to the actual process. The pot cannot be removed from the surface of the stove as all the resources are free, nor can the washing machine that occurs in another location be added to the use of the stove.

Four hypothetical orders draw two schedules.

The following is a demonstration algorithm, not an equipment capacity test. It is assumed that four separate missions, A, B, C and D, will be ready in zero, one, two, and six minutes, respectively; each one will cover five minutes of cooking, four minutes of cooking and one minute of clearing. There is a need for the continuous involvement of one operator during the cooking period and two available personnel; the two sets of work can be completed independently of the necessary equipment. Food processes are not reduced by modelling.

Single stove occupation chart: A [0-5] 5-10) I'm sorry.

Two cookstoves occupation chart: First (0-5) →C-5-10; 2nd stove (1-6) I'm sorry. The end of each sector includes the end of the field, not the time when the food comes out.

Task	We're ready for a minute.	Start with one stove and wait	Two stoves begin and wait.
A	CC BY-NC-ND 2.0	Start zero, wait zero.	Start zero, wait zero.
B	1	Start five, wait four.	Start one, wait for zero.
C	2	Start ten, wait eight.	Start five, wait three.
Ding	6	Start 15. Wait nine.	Start six, wait zero.

Waiting here is equal to starting to take over the stove, less ready. The one-to-one-to-one can wait twenty-one minutes, and the two can wait three minutes, 18 minutes. This was an increase in the waiting time for four missions, not an 18-minute reduction in the whole meal; the last release time for the stove was changed from 20 minutes to 11 minutes, and the end was nine minutes short. The two indicators cannot be used intermingled.

The figure does not remove the order, nor does it shorten each task. The change was to increase the number of parallel stoves and to explicitly retain two operators and the conditions for independent turnaround. If there is actually only one person, and the task requires continuous operation, he cannot take care of the two pots at the same time and the two stoves cannot be executed. An empty paper slot is not a real capacity.

If further comparisons are to be made between the time of receipt of the meal by the customer, there will also be the loading, preparation and delivery stages. In the example, the last dish comes out at the nineteenth minute and the second cooker comes out at the tenth hour; however, the actual improvement of the customer may not be the same if the cookout is still waiting at the same table. It should therefore be clear whether the target is the release of stoves, the production of products or the delivery of customers, and then the margin.

Similarly, the absence of task blanks in the second stove does not necessarily mean waste, and it may be waiting for the next wave of orders, or may take on the agreed backup. Conversely, the fact that both stoves are busy does not automatically represent a reasonable configuration, as busy may come from unnecessary duplicate processing. The figure should show the operational rationale for the mission, rather than the goal of optimizing each cell.

Write back the resource conflict to the same image

When the example is applied to a real section, the preparation, operator, stove and cleaning should be used separately. It is possible to re-examine the first order that is waiting for the longest time: which resource was not released when it became available. If the ingredients are not completed until the eighth minute, the entire waiting period for the second section cannot still be attributed to the stoves; if the two competed for a saucer or water points at the same time, the conflict should also be put into the twin stoves programme.

The easiest thing to miss is common action. The two units have a stand-alone heating position, but may share a narrow tunnel, a tap or a pot bearing. Additional simultaneous outings may increase waiting if they result in cross-handling. Checks should be made back and forth between the plane position and the time chart, and the order cannot be divided into two columns on average only in the form.

For preparatory work that is allowed to be completed in advance, time points may be adjusted without changing food safety requirements. Steps that have to be process-based cannot be made too early for good scheduling. Cleaning, disinfection, necessary refrigeration or safety operations are removed and are obtained at an unenforceable speed rather than at an equipment capacity.

Two open models need to see configuration by item

The XC-400DC-G-15T page is listed as a single-fried, single-tailed cabinet with 400 mm in diameter, a rated voltage of 380 volts, 50 hertz and a full machine of 100 by 90 by 120 cm. [1] The XC-400SC-G-15T page is shown as a double-fried, single-tailed cabinet with 150 x 90 x 120 cm, with 400 mm dents plus 40030 mm plane and two sets of eight sets of magnetic controls. [2]

Thus, double-fried is not a simple reproduction of two identical 400 mm dent positions. The pots and process adaptations of the two missions should be confirmed separately, and no order should be assigned to any of them at random. The two stoves above are only set up when both can perform the assigned tasks; if one of them is used, it will still have to line up.

Both pages have a rated power field of 15,000 kilowatts, but the public field does not provide sufficient information on the power distribution of the two cookstoves, the simultaneous running restrictions and the input details of the whole machine. It will not be multiplied by two, nor will it be written separately as 15 kilowatts. Formal electrical information, delivery configuration and on-site distribution confirmation should address these issues before modelling can be turned into an operational program.

The increase of 50 cm in the outer width is a geometric difference and not all of it is installed. It also takes into account operational, cleaning, ventilation and retrofitting conditions to check the original route and entry routes. The fact that the equipment could be put in and worked safely with the two personnel at the same time is two different conclusions.

There may still be a need for a day without congestion.

Scheduling primarily helps to judge the resource constraints of conventional orders and is not a substitute for all business decisions. Additional capacity may be supported by the availability of alternative routes for critical site maintenance and the confirmation of new menus or fixed feeding tasks. However, the words “may be busy in the future” should not be disguised as identified needs, and it is expected that tasks should be separated from existing orders.

The multiday observation should retain the respective order structure and not just average the total number of copies. Both meals are made in 100 copies, one of which is scattered and the other is concentrated in multiple packages that must be completed at the same time, which may require different levels of parallelity. It is also important to keep the days free from congestion, otherwise only the busiest one would exaggerate the long-term use of the equipment.

Henny Penny's cooker selection source highlights the relationship between food type, demand and equipment configuration. [3] This gives a direction for the questions that need to be asked and does not demonstrate the actual parallel capacity of the electromagnetic double-fried. Whether singles are sufficient and doubles are less waiting is ultimately answered by their own orders, posts and matching machine conditions.

The results of the comparison are best divided into regular scheduling, failure backup and confirmed incremental requirements. When the conventional schedule is smooth, it does not have to be expanded at an imaginary speed; the backup or new tasks are necessary and should not be directly denied because of the current low utilization of the second stove. Such a decision would explain both the need for a second stove and the conditions under which it could work.

References

• IQ: XC-400DC-G-15T products Page
• Zhidar: XC-400SC-G-15T product Page
• Jenny: Choosing the Right Open Fryer, 2022-11-18