Talk:Kanban/Archives/2011

KanBan in Retail industry
I believe Kanban method of ordering mechanism can help retail industry a lot. Since in retail, when the stocks move fast, there has to be focus on the ordering. Kanban acts like a trigger, or red alarm that stocks are are not there for customers.These might be built as Key performance indicators to ensure accountability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.200.43.190 (talk • contribs) 11:15, 14 May 2005 (UTC)

Increments
Underlying a Kanban system is the need to predetermine how many increments are needed to satisfy the total demand. Also there may be a logical sequence to the order by which parts are maufactured. This schedule is released to the shop floor and the number are tickets are published and ordered. It is a mistake to believe that a Kanban system has no planning under it.

The system also works in a push environment where a limited raw material supply is available. The scheduler determines how to allocate the supply and again creates a schedule for production. Then the number of Kanban tickets are issued to reflect the number of increments for production and the order of parts made.

Martin Mirsky, CFPIM —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.215.100.17 (talk • contribs) 05:02, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Do you think TwinBin dispensers should be added?
Dear all, I am writing this discussion to ask whether you feel that the kanban dispensing system TwinBin (twinbin.com for more details) should be added to this page. Millions of dollars have been saved using this unique system, particularly in the aerospace sector. Based on the KanBan system, the TwinBin dispenser has two compartments, a "in-use" chamber and a "reserve stock" chamber. When the "in use" fasteners, rivets or small parts have been used up, the user simply pulls the separting slider which drops down the next batch of parts from the reserve chamber. You therefore do no run out of stock. I appreciate the fact that wikipedia.org do not wished to be used merely as an advertising tool but I believe that the TwinBin itself, being a unique and patented product, having saved companies (Airbus, Lufthansa, BAE Systems etc) millions of pounds should have a mention not only in KanBan, but Just-In-Time, MRP and lean manufacturing. I look forward to hearing your comments. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.135.164.114 (talk) 09:41, 12 February 2007 (UTC).


 * You may want to read WP:SPAM, WP:COI, WP:N, and WP:V to get some idea how others will answer. --Ronz 17:15, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

The twin bin idea, certainly has merit as the system will crash if stock runs out. Consideration should also be given to items that require time to manufacture and thus cannot be replenished immediately. 208.201.196.157 16:08, 9 April 2007 (UTC)instructor@deanzacnc.com

Thanks for your reply, just wondering then whether we can have a short mention within the article? The fact that the TwinBin dispenser can save the aerospace, manufacturing and NHS sectors millions of pounds though the KanBan philsophy, we really should have a link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.162.82 (talk • contribs) 08:52, 30 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Agree with Ronz. I think that if we allow proprietary products onto the page in any form we will get into deep water fast, hence the reasoning for his references. However, if you believe that there is a new fundamental principle at work here then the principle may be appropriate content. No matter how much money something may save that does not make its explicit reference appropriate. Specifically there are lots of devices/ideas that might/could/ought save someone money, can you imagine what the encyclopedia would look like if they were allowed 'short mentions' ? Facius 18:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Fair point Facius, I understand what you are saying. Perhaps a link at the bottom of the page may suffice? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.135.162.82 (talk • contribs) 07:59, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Simple 3-bin example could be clarified
Perhaps it is an English version difference (US vs. UK, etc.), but the explanation of the 3-bin kanban system is very confusing because the terms are not well defined to me. The example starts out talking about 1) a factory floor 2) a factory store, and 3) a supplier's store. Then the process starts with an undefined term, "shop," and I am confused at which of the three elements this is referring to. After drawing out a chart of the process, I understand now that the term "store" connotes the idea of a warehouse, and that the term "shop" is referring to the factory floor. In US English the terms "store" and "shop" are usually used to mean the idea of a retail storefront. Also, the idea of "factory" can be confusing since the example states that there is no manufacturing being done there. When I think of a factory, I think of manufacturing. I propose that the text be changed as follows:

"A simple example of the kanban system implementation might be a "three-bin system" for the supplied parts to make a toy truck at an assembly plant (where there is no in-house parts manufacturing). There is one bin on the assembly plant floor, one bin in the assembly plant's warehouse, and one bin at the parts supplier's warehouse. The bins usually have a removable card that contains the product details and other relevant information — the kanban card. When the bin on the assembly plant floor is empty (meaning the parts in the bin have been made into toy trucks), the empty bin and kanban card are returned to the assembly plant's warehouse. The assembly plant's warehouse then replaces the bin on the assembly plant floor with a full bin, which also contains a kanban card. The assembly plant's warehouse then contacts the parts supplier and returns the now-empty bin with its kanban card to the supplier. The supplier then delivers a new, full bin of parts with its kanban card to the assembly plant's warehouse, completing the final step to the system. Thus the process will never run out of product and could be described as a loop, providing the exact amount required, with only one spare so there will never be an issue of over-supply. This 'spare' full bin allows for the uncertainty in supply, use and transport that are inherent in the system. The secret to a good kanban system is to calculate how many kanban cards are required for each product. Most factories using kanban use the coloured board system (Heijunka Box). This consists of a board created especially for holding the kanban cards."

Do I understand correctly that the "spare" bin mentioned is the spare bin located at the supplier's warehouse? Is it the one in the assembly plant's warehouse? That is not very clear to me.

I also propose that a simple graphic be created to illustrate the process. If nobody has a problem with my proposed change in text, I can create the graphic and upload it for consideration. --TimIngalls (talk) 17:13, 12 March 2008 (UTC)


 * The "spare" bin mentioned is the spare bin located in the assembly plant's warehouse. Its primary function is to ensure that the assembly plant always has some parts on hand. Running completely out of parts must be avoided, otherwise production on the assembly line is stopped. Also, the total stock of parts on hand should be kept to a minimum, to reduce the cost of inventory. Therefore, a Kanban system should be contantly monitored and adjusted.


 * As I am a fan of diagrams, I would like to see the graphic you propose to help illustrate the Kanban example. Logicman1966 (talk) 08:10, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

E-Kanban Systems
Hello, I thought adding a new section about digital kanban systems, or E-Kanban Systems, would be beneficial to this entry. The reasoning behind this is the increasing integration of Kanban and ERP systems in industry. I believe it should be a brief section, given that this isn't an entry about ERP systems or supply chain collaboration.

I did not find any sources regarding this, but is there any controversy regarding the over dependence on E-Kanban systems? I know the Toyota Production System emphasizes simple processes, visual controls, and thoroughly tested technology used only to support production. If anybody has anything to add related to this it is welcome. --Nickeitel (talk) 02:28, 14 April 2008 (UTC) Nick Eitel CSCA

Kanban in a software development environment?
This article doesn't seem to cover this at all; although I've found a lot of references to it elsewhere. Is this actually a different type of system with the same name? It seems rather different; as it's to do with only working on a few items at once, having a clear process to move the work items from one pot to another (outstanding -> in progress -> done). 195.228.146.194 (talk) 14:54, 28 July 2010 (UTC)