Automation does not save as many people: a two-track time book

The equipment is automatically operational for 10 minutes and cannot be written directly as a 10-minute labour saving. A person may complete the material preparation, loading and process confirmation prior to the start-up of the equipment and must be cared for or recalled during the operation, after which he or she is released, moved, cleared and recorded. Middleby's original proposal is to be aware of current labour costs and believes that automation can be used to order, monitor energy and duplicate kitchen tasks [1]. This is the direction of the assessment and is not proof of time or cost for any local equipment.

Only one time benchmark, but not forcing the two tracks to start at once

The equipment track and the personnel track in the log are used for the same clock or the same video time code, with the aim of placing both on the same time line. The device tracks begin when it is actually occupied by the mission and end when it can be taken over from the next mission of the same kind; the personnel tracks begin from the pre-positioning specific to the mission until the end of the site, the recording and the resumption directly related to the mission. They can have different starting and ending points.

Identify the mission boundaries first. For example, if a vegetable match is the same for both manual and automated programmes, it can be a separate set of common links; if an automated programme requires separate quantities and basins, this will have to enter the human trajectory of the new programme. The manual cannot start from the start-up button, which systematically omits new actions before the device starts.

Assumptions of the axis of time: During the same period of time, equipment and people do different things.

The table below shows only the representation, all minutes and missions are hypothetical and do not represent G32DG, ZL-2K, PC-1200x600-FC or any on-site capability.

Unified Timecode	Device Track	A-man.	employee B	Manual classification
00:00-04:00	Unoccupied	Quantities, basins	Processing of other orders	Mission A forward, four minutes.
04:00-06:00	Load and confirm	Loading, selection procedures	Processing of other orders	Ace must be present. Two minutes.
06:00 - 14:00	Autorun	Completion of a verifiable transfer	Other orders	Do not double-count task transferer Time
14:00-16:00	Still occupied.	Release and move.	Assistance in inspection	2 person minutes each, 4 person minutes
16:00–20:00	Released when cleared.	Clear.	Back to another task.	A4 person minutes

In that scenario, 16 minutes were spent on the task of equipment and 14 person-minutes were related, which were neither equal nor should lead to savings. Another task performed by A at the time of the automatic operation of the equipment requires proof of completion, such as matching orders, post records or subsequent handover without return to work. If only for a short period of time has been recalled, the full eight minutes cannot be written as “usable manual”.

By people, they don't count in parallel.

A maximum of one manual occupancy per employee at the same time. If A completes the inventory count while waiting for the equipment, this period can be marked as a transfer in the mission time line, but the group total manual bill cannot be counted as both automatic and complete in the inventory task. If B assists in the release at the same time, the time of B must be recorded separately; this is two minutes, not just because the clock is only one minute away.

Care must be individually marked. People do not have touch equipment, but this period still diverts attention if it is necessary to look at the interface, hear the sound, prevent spills or be prepared to stop at any time. Different codes can be applied for waiting away, having to take care of them, for practical purposes and for other positions.

Failures do not enter the equivalent capacity, but must enter the cost

Old and new programmes can only compare the labour of each eligible output if the definition of the mandate is consistent with the qualified results. In the event of an ineligible or failed new programme, it should be discontinued as an equivalent output, but its preparation, operation, determination, segregation, return to work, abandonment, replenishment and delay cannot be removed from the account. The failure sample was part of the programme burden and could only not be used to claim the equivalent value of the production capacity.

The person, time point, standard and result of the quality determination should be linked to the time line. The average of the successful batch is not selected after the fact, nor are the batches rescued by the employee with additional manual actions classified as "fully completed " .

The availability of time, the completion of transfers and cash savings are three conclusions

The first is the conclusion as to how much of the time that would have been required to operate would have turned into time for departure; the second is whether other necessary tasks have actually been performed during that period; and the third is whether there has actually been a change in the schedule or overtime expenditure. Three cannot be replaced by a “saving hours of work”. While staff may be of operational value if they spend their free time on more complete cleaning or customer services, wage savings cannot be written if wages and shifts remain unchanged.

Sampling should cover the normal class and keep the bad class.

The “star group” formed on an ad hoc basis by equipment suppliers, skilled shop directors or project teams should not be allowed to function on a daily basis. Samples indicate the type of vegetables, order orders, classes, personnel proficiency and anomalies to be covered, and are then selected according to the rules and do not delete adverse samples after seeing the results. The order structure of a given shift is too different from the baseline to allow it to be excluded from the average cost-effectiveness, but it should remain in the operating burden and the unusual.

The mandates of old and new programmes should be frozen before sampling. The time difference cannot be attributed entirely to automation if the new programme simultaneously changes the recipe, volume, output standards or delivery range. Actions that are necessary in common between the two programmes can be presented as a common base, with a difference between new, disappeared, transferred and shortened actions.

"Why are you waiting?"

Waiting is not a single state. When the equipment is completed and is safe to leave, it is the time at which it may be used in other missions; when the equipment signals and must be present, it is a distraction; when the other post is delivered or released, the process is blocked; and when the lack of access, recipe or technical support is a constraint on information or management. Just remembering that “waiting for six minutes” does not guide improvements, and may mistaking time unusable as manual surplus.

Return costs after interruption are also recorded. If an employee leaves the equipment for a second assignment and is recalled in advance, he may need to reconfirm the progress of the second assignment, clean hands or tools, move back and forth and re-enter the state. These are the costs of parallel arrangements and cannot be counted as being fully utilized just as the second task begins.

The result sheet is to keep the molecule and the denominator.

The number of eligible copies, the number of failed copies, the number of incomplete copies, the total time and the terms of the order are reported at the same time as the number of eligible persons per 100 copies. Only one “minutes reduction per piece” would hide the question of whether the failed batch was excluded, whether support staff were included and whether the field was cleared for a shift. All aggregates should be able to recover specific personnel tracks, equipment tracks and quality records.

If the schedule remains unchanged at the end of the day, a report can be made on “the decline in the direct operating time of a given mission, of which the amount of time has been spent on other defined tasks”, which should not be replaced by “the number of persons saved”. In case of shift changes, sales volumes, hours of operation, salary systems and other change over a period of time would also have to be excluded in order to be careful in discussing cost factors and consequences.

Reviewer reverses from a summary to original time Line

Prior to the issuance of the conclusions, the difference in the selection of a person by a reviewer who did not participate in the coding was followed by a specific shift, staff, start-up of movement, state of equipment and satisfactory results. If the same time period of the retroactive process is double-counted, pre-commencement preparations are missing, support staff are not accounted for or failure batches are deleted, the conclusion is suspended and the entire sample affected is amended, not just by the line drawn.

The scope of application is to be retained retroactively after adoption. The time difference in the intensity of a particular dish, class and order does not automatically apply to other dishes, new employees, larger quantities or abnormalities. The conditions were checked and the range sample was supplemented prior to the extension.

The original records, coding rules and summary results are to be kept separately, with each revision indicating the version and the extent of the impact, and no new table is required to cover old evidence.

Unusuals only begin with a secure desktop situation, checking who has the right to stop, how to dispose of food, how to turn for help and when to recover. Do not proactively cause trouble to obtain data. When genuine anomalies occur, re-orbit people and equipment according to original logs, worksheets, schedules and handover records, and keep unrecognized time periods. Ultimately, there is a reviewable time book, not a pre-written automated return.

References

• Middleby: How to Reduce Resurant Labor Costas With Automation