Comments on: Transportation Muda

By: Rick Ehrsam

Rick Ehrsam — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:08:57 +0000

As I was reading this thread, I was wondering, hey Boeing doesn’t generally ship in airframe parts on trucks. It’s usually train. Then I looked back at the picture. Dang, those “are” wind turbine blades. I’ve seen them many times on their way to a wind farm near the Columbia River off I-90 in Washington state.

I had thought about the great idea of manufacturing these in Moses Lake, WA where there is an ample pool of labor, cheap electricity and inexpensive land for manufacturing plants. Produce the product close to its final installation point.

Perhaps there is less muda in producing the blades close to the material source. Another thing, the blades are probably too long to ship by train.

my two bits

By: Bill Farren

Bill Farren — Mon, 16 Jun 2008 18:22:21 +0000

It’s a windmill blade. Notice it has no control surfaces. LOL It would be absurd to build these at their final point of use since they are used all over, in static locations. They need to be shipped. Of course, building them efficiently and having as little transport as needed is important.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:07:01 +0000

Here’s a thought about waste=something customer not asking for and willing to pay. I’d say it depends. There’s a balance between global vs local optima.

Cost to build the wing in Everett = 10
Transportation to assembly plant = 0
Total cost = 10

Cost to build the wing in XYZ = 7
Transportation to assembly plant = 2
Total cost = 9

What would the customer be willing to pay for the transportation in the latter case?

If you ask the customer: It will cost 10x (x being some constant multiple), to build the wing in Everett, WA, or 7x to build the wing

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:57:04 +0000

It’s a windmill blade, they are made in the Dakotas, and they are not going very far.

By: Rick

Rick — Thu, 04 Oct 2007 20:35:57 +0000

Windmill blade it is. Saw many of them heading off to be installed in South Dakota and Minnesota on our 2400 mile round trip drive from Illinois to Montana.

By: Ron Pereira

Ron Pereira — Sun, 19 Aug 2007 00:38:55 +0000

Hmmm… well I can’t rule anything out but it did look line an airplane wing to me.

What are your thoughts as to whether that would change the waste?

By: Matt

Matt — Sat, 18 Aug 2007 22:14:24 +0000

Sorry for being late to the party.

1) Are you sure that that object is not a windmill blade? I’ve seen a number of those on that exact type of trailer going from the Gulf Coast (around Lake Jackson) headed out to west Texas, where hundreds are being installed. I think they’re all made in northern Europe.

2) Does that change the waste?

By: Curious Cat Management Improvement Blog » Management Improvement Carnival #17

Thu, 16 Aug 2007 12:49:24 +0000

[...] Transportation Muda by Ron Pereira – “am not sure where this wing was headed as we were about 60 miles from Fargo… but rest assured no value was being added to this airplane wing or the airplane it was going to be attached to.” [...]

By: Ron Pereira

Ron Pereira — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 23:49:24 +0000

I have heard essential used for things like Sarbanes Oxley. One could argue no “value” is being added to your product or service by following SOX guidelines (according to the 3 criteria I offered in the post) but if you don’t follow SOX (and are publicly traded) your officers could be in big trouble.

I think we are really saying the same thing here with required and essential.

We could always revert to type 1 and type 2 muda if people get too worked up about the terms used.

By: Mark Graban

Mark Graban — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 22:52:25 +0000

Minimizing it as much as possible, sure.

Where does this “essential” phrase come from? I don’t agree with that terminology or view at all. “Required” is much different than “essential.” “Required” shouldn’t be an excuse to not investigate or tackle the waste. But, it’s often used that way. “Required waste” is not “excused waste” or “rationalized waste.”