time (#3) (b) Capacity = 1 / 90 sec = 40 units per hour (c) Direct labor cost = Labor cost per hour / flow rate = 9*$15/h / 40 trucks per hour = $3.38/truck (d) Direct labor cost in work cell= (75+85+90+65+70+55+80+65+80) sec/truck * $15/hr = $2.77/truck (e) Utilization = flow rate / capacity 85 sec / 90 sec = 94.4% (f) (g) Capacity = 1 / 145 units/second = 24.83 toy--‐trucks per hour Q4.4. 12 tasks to 4 workers (a) (a) Capacity = 1 / 85 sec = 42.35 units per hour (b) Direct labor content = (70+55+85+60)
Premium Hour Time Bottleneck
GAZ Group Russia: the Gazelle light commercial truck 1. What were the major challenges facing Bo Andersson when he assumed the CEO role at GAZ Group Russia? When Bo Andersson assumed the CEO role at GAZ in 2009 the company was not in a good situation:
Premium
opinion-based or well-informed decisions. As we move into analysis‚ we are looking to draw from various other sources and ask “questions about the assumptions underlying our interpretations” (Boss‚ p. 33). Example Experience: I hate this Ford truck
Premium Management Strategic management UCI race classifications
Comprehensive Volume/Solutions to Appendix E © 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned‚ copied or duplicated‚ or posted to a publicly accessible website‚ in whole or in part. David R. and Sheri N. Johnson—Individual Income Tax Return E-3 © 2014 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be scanned‚ copied or duplicated‚ or posted to a publicly accessible website‚ in whole or in part. E-4 SWFT 2014: Comprehensive Volume/Solutions to Appendix E © 2014
Premium Stockholm Metro Madrid Metro Taxation
ISyE 6201: Manufacturing Systems Instructor: Spyros Reveliotis Solutions to Homework 1 A. Chapter 2‚ Problem 4. (a) D = 60 units/wk × 52 wk/yr = 3120 units/yr h = ic = 0.25/yr ×$0.02 = $0.005/ yr A = $12 2AD 2 × 12 × 3120 Q∗ = = = 3869.88 ≈ 3870 h 0.005 The time between orders is given by 3870 Q∗ = = 1.24 yr = 14.88 mo T∗ = D 3120 (b) D 3120 units/yr = $12 = $9.67/yr Q 3870 units Q 3870 units Holding cost is h = × $0.005/yr = $9.675/yr. 2 2 The costs are essentially
Premium Economic order quantity Inventory Cost
MAN Bus & Coach have faced to achieve the increased volume demand whilst maintaining the highest level of quality. Whilst the simplest solution would be to purchase a new and more modern paint shop facility‚ this is not possible due to the rigid budgetary constraints facing the company at present. Therefore other options have been investigated and the best solution implemented within these budgetary constraints. Paint Shop – historical background MAN Bus & Coach South Africa purchased the current
Premium Quality control Management Quality assurance
Case Name: Boston Creamery‚ Inc. Short Cycle Process: Who: Frank Roberts‚ VP Sales & Marketing‚ Boston Creamery‚ Inc. When: December 31‚ 1973 Where: Case facts not given Issues: 1. The current variance analysis used for the 1973 fiscal years shows an overall favorable net variance of $71‚700. This is an aggregate net figure based upon the favorable variance due to sales and the unfavorable variance due to operations. This net variance figure fails to highlight areas of deficiency to help identify
Premium Budget Variance Contribution margin
special equipment is a sunk cost and is not relevant to the decision. The common costs are allocated and will continue regardless of whether or not the racing bikes are discontinued; thus‚ they are not relevant to the decision. Alternative Solution: |
Premium Variable cost Cost Costs
CAT 2007 Solutions Section I 1. Note that the price of Darjeeling tea remains constant after the 100th day (n=100). If the prices of the two varieties of tea become equal before n = 100‚ then 100 + 0.1n = 89 + 0.15n ∴ n = 220‚ which is not possible. (Since n has been assumed to be less than 100) ∴ The prices of the two varieties will be equal after n = 100‚ i.e.‚ when the price of Darjeeling tea = 100 + 0.1 × 100 = 110 ∴ 89 + 0.15n = 110 ∴ n = 140 2007 is not a leap year. Number of days till 30th
Premium Variable cost Total cost Fixed cost
Motivation and Team’s Case Study In the first case study‚ Two Men and a Truck‚ the theories’ relevant to this case were Maslow’s Need’s Hierarchy theory and the Expectancy theory. As to the second case study‚ Siemens’s unit that produce’s X-ray machines and other diagnostic equipment‚ the theories relevant to this case were the Job - Enrichment theory and the Goal – Setting theory. An example of Maslow’s Need’s Hierarchy theory in relation to the first case study would be when Ms. Sheets follow’s
Premium Maslow's hierarchy of needs Motivation Scientific method