NivaarExam PrepOfficial exam papers ↗

23-Ind-A3 Facilities Planning · December 2019

Question 6 of 7: Material Handling System Design, Shipping/Receiving, and Handling Equipment Characteristics

Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)

Notes on this paper

Reference texts: Tompkins, White, Bozer & Tanchoco, Facilities Planning (4th ed., Wiley) — facilities planning hierarchy and process, plant site selection, material flow planning, activity relationships, product/line layout, assembly-line balancing models, production-quantity/scrap-allowance planning, computerized layout (CRAFT/CORELAP), Systematic Layout Planning (SLP), material handling system design and equipment, shipping/receiving, and tool-crib centralization; Niebel & Freivalds, Niebel’s Methods, Standards, and Work Design (13th ed.) — assembly-line balancing (Ranked Positional Weight technique), balance delay, buffer design, and production/scrap-allowance planning.

Question 6: Material Handling System Design, Shipping/Receiving, and Handling Equipment Characteristics (20 marks: i–6, ii–6, iii–8)

Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.

Internal cross-references have been retargeted to this paper's own question numbering.

(i) Steps in Designing a Material Handling System

Material handling system design follows a structured, materials-and-move-driven procedure: (1) define the objective and scope — what material handling must accomplish (throughput, service level, cost target) and over what part of the facility; (2) analyze the material — physical/chemical characteristics, unit-load potential, quantity and value; (3) analyze the move — the from–to flow pattern, frequency, distance and any timing constraints, typically captured on a from–to chart; (4) analyze the method — generate alternative handling methods/equipment consistent with the unit-load principle, then screen them against the material and move analysis; (5) identify feasible alternatives that satisfy the technical requirements; (6) evaluate the alternatives against cost (capital and operating), flexibility, and the layout constraints established in Question 1(ii); (7) select the preferred handling method/equipment; and (8) implement, and audit performance against the original objective, feeding back into the next planning cycle since material handling requirements evolve as product/volume changes. This sequence mirrors, and is deliberately integrated with, the overall facilities-planning and layout process, because handling and layout decisions are interdependent, not separable.

(ii) Desirable Attributes of Shipping and Receiving Facilities Plans

A well-designed shipping/receiving plan should provide: (1) sufficient dock capacity and door count sized to the peak (not just average) truck/rail arrival rate, avoiding vehicle queuing that wastes carrier and dock time; (2) adequate maneuvering and staging area both outside (truck apron/turning radius) and inside (staging lanes for incoming/outgoing unit loads) so vehicles and material handling equipment are not congested; (3) a clear, one-directional flow from receiving through inspection/staging to storage (and the mirror-image path from storage through staging to shipping), avoiding crossing traffic between inbound and outbound material; (4) separation of receiving and shipping where volume justifies it (separate docks/areas), reducing the chance of receiving and shipping traffic interfering with each other, though a combined dock can be appropriate at lower volumes; (5) appropriate dock equipment — levelers, seals/shelters, and dock configuration (straight-in, sawtooth/finger docks) matched to the vehicle types served; (6) space and process for verification activities — receiving inspection, counting, and put-away staging on the inbound side; order verification, packing and load-building staging on the outbound side; (7) flexibility to accommodate different vehicle sizes, seasonal volume peaks, and changing carrier mix without reconfiguring the dock; and (8) integration with the internal material handling and storage system, so travel distance from dock to storage (and storage to dock) is minimized — shipping/receiving is not a standalone function but the two end-points of the overall facility flow pattern the handling system (part i) must serve.

(iii)(a) Powered Roller Conveyors

Powered (live) roller conveyors move unit loads (cartons, pallets, totes) along a fixed path on a series of motor-driven rollers, providing continuous or accumulating (zero-pressure) transport without requiring the load to be self-propelled or manually pushed. Characteristics: fixed path (low routing flexibility once installed); high, consistent throughput for standardized unit loads travelling a repetitive route; capable of accumulation (loads can queue on the conveyor itself); relatively high fixed capital cost and floor-space commitment, but low incremental operating cost per unit moved once installed; well suited to point-to-point transport between fixed stations (as in an assembly or process line) rather than to variable, on-demand moves.

(iii)(b) Bridge Cranes

A bridge (overhead travelling) crane spans an area on rails mounted high on the building structure or on dedicated runway columns, with a hoist/trolley that travels along the bridge, giving three-axis (bridge travel, trolley travel, hoist lift) coverage of the entire area beneath the crane without consuming any floor space for its own travel path. Characteristics: very high lifting capacity, suited to heavy, bulky loads that floor-level equipment cannot handle economically; covers a large rectangular service area with a single piece of equipment; does not obstruct floor-level traffic or storage since it operates entirely overhead; requires significant building structural capacity (runway beams/columns sized for the crane and maximum load) that must be planned into the building design from the outset, not retrofitted cheaply; and, being a single shared resource over its service area, can become a bottleneck if multiple work areas beneath it compete for crane time simultaneously.

(iii)(c) Industrial Robots

An industrial robot is a reprogrammable, multi-axis manipulator used to perform handling, assembly, welding, painting or other repetitive tasks under program control rather than fixed mechanical linkage. Characteristics: highly flexible/reprogrammable — the same physical robot can be re-tasked for a different product or operation sequence by changing its program and end-effector (tooling), unlike single-purpose fixed automation; capable of high precision and repeatability, and of working continuously (including in hazardous, high-heat, or otherwise unsafe-for-humans environments); higher capital cost and more sophisticated integration/programming/maintenance requirement than either powered conveyors or manual handling; economically justified primarily where volume is high enough and/or the task is hazardous/precision-critical enough to offset the capital and integration cost; commonly used within manufacturing cells for load/unload, assembly and welding operations where its flexibility across the cell’s part family is a direct advantage over single-purpose fixed automation.