MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399398625 · doi:10.46254/an14.20240587

Downtime Analysis of a Mayo Bottling Line During the Ramp-Up Period: A Case Study

2024· article· en· W4399398625 on OpenAlexaff
Dima Jawad, Peter El Khoury

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicManufacturing Process and Optimization
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBottling lineDowntimePeriod (music)Line (geometry)Computer scienceEngineeringBottleOperating systemMathematicsMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Manufacturing companies face many challenges when trying to meet the market and their clients’ demands. Building and operating highly automated lines is not a straightforward task, especially when the bottle format is unique, and the line is being built from the ground up to accommodate the new format. In this study, downtime data and Overall Equipment Efficiency (OEE) analysis was used to determine the effectiveness of a newly built mayonnaise bottling line during the ramp-up period and the main reasons behind low OEE, a lengthy ramp-up period, and high downtime. Two pieces of machinery were the most significant contributors to downtime, a newly bought labeler, whose factory acceptance test (FAT) was never performed, and an old, repurposed drop packer, that was previously being used for a much larger packaging format. It was found that the two machines had the same MTTF (mean time to failure) value. A model was built to predict the likelihood of attainment loss using a Monte Carlo simulation after performing a goodness of fit analysis on the time-to-failure (TTF) and time-to-repair (TTR) data available. From this model, the availability of the line was determined, and the effect of the two equipment was shown to be strong on the overall performance of the line.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.482

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicManufacturing Process and OptimizationFrench-language works237,207