Selecting Appropriate Tool
Inventory Control Systems for Manufacturing Laboratory Resources Management
By
Dr. Samuel C. Obi
Department of Aviation & Technology
Phone: (408) 924-3218
Email: sobi@email.sjsu.edu
Introduction
Laboratory
or shop activities constitute a major component of manufacturing systems
programs across the
The
traditional tool management system, which many programs are currently using,
has many drawbacks. For example, while it consists of a tool crib and
attendant(s), it has manual information entry. Consequently, it is too
laborious, prone to mistakes, wastes time, results in excessive inventory, and
causes unnecessary spending on tools (Hogan, 2000).
This
paper presents the attributes of modern tool inventory control systems, and
provides strategies for selecting and implementing an appropriate system for
manufacturing systems laboratories. A case study is employed to illustrate the
key steps required when implementing such a system.
Need
and Methodology
This study was undertaken in the
spring of 2003. The need emerged when professors of a western regional
university’s manufacturing program began to experience problems with their
traditional laboratory tool management system. Tools were often lost, broken or
misplaced by students without clear accountability. Faced with very limited
budget, the professors decided to implement an affordable but effective system
to help them control the situation.
The first step employed was determining a tool
tracking system which would be used to help keep track of all laboratory tools.
In the process of reviewing available systems, it was discovered that there
were hundreds of such systems on the market. As a result, the process of
reviewing the literature and narrowing them down to the 10 employed in this
study took most of spring of 2003. The literature review involved a review of
published company brochures on their systems, checking neighboring laboratories
with similar resources to see what they were using, researching the Internet
which provided easier access to most of the advertised systems, and comparing
their features and capabilities. When more information was needed, the
companies were contacted by phone.
Eventually, 10 systems which appeared to have more
potential to serve the need were selected and ranked using key criteria that
related to the need. An Excel spreadsheet was used to help determine the most
promising system relative to the established criteria.
Literature Review: Benefits of Modern Tool Inventory Control Systems
According to Webster’s Dictionary
(1993), the term “inventory” actually means a list of items with descriptions
and quantities of each. In manufacturing terms, in addition to manufacturing
tools, equipment, raw materials, hardware and measurement instruments which are
the focus in this article, inventories also include component parts, work-in-process
and finished product or goods (Rehg, 1994).
Addressing the utility of
manufacturing inventory systems in general,
Unlike a traditional tool management
system, modern tool inventory control (TIC) systems facilitate the management
of tools and integrate the database with other company or school systems.
According to Hogan (2000), such a system provides full information on tool
allocation, availability, usage, cost etc. Such a system also provides a
tracking capability and tool quality support efforts in quality standard
requirements. Virtually all the TIC systems investigated in this study have
full tracking capability.
TIC systems are specifically
designed for managing technical resources that are found in Manufacturing
Systems laboratories. According
to SY-CON Systems, Inc. (2002), the vendor of a popular TIC system called PC-TOOLCRIB, these tools are cheap, and are designed for small shops with employees of
250 or less, and where control of tooling, parts, MRO, and supply inventory is
a critical need. Another vendor, Data Enterprises of the Northwest, Inc.
(2003), claimed that their system (ATICTS) is not only the most widely-used bar
code driven tool and item tracking system in the world, but also is capable of
tracking items of all types whether in maintenance, manufacturing, energy
generation, or military applications. It appears from, all indications, that manufacturing systems programs will certainly benefit if
they implement TIC systems.
But the review of literature also
revealed that TIC systems differ in some aspects. For example, while systems
such as Cribmaster by IC Kardex (2003) and TOOLTRACK by Seltek Solutions (2003)
appeared to be easy to use especially to the novice, systems like ASAP System
by ASAP Systems (2003) and Quickpen International (2003) appeared to be a
little less user-friendly. And while systems such as Tracker 7 by Waterwheel
Software (2003) appeared to have efficient tool status report and barcode
options, ASAP System by ASAP Systems (2003) appeared to be somewhat limited in
those capabilities. Also, as already suggested, there is a wide range of price
differences among these systems. For example, a system such as Tool Tracking
that was advertised by Houndware Corp. (2003)
could be bought by as little as $1,200 with educational discount, ASAP Systems (2003) was marketing theirs for $6,650.
However, these differences are
little when compared to the benefits offered by the systems. Modern TIC systems
provide an easy solution to many manufacturing and laboratory challenges.
Because of their powerful features, these systems are increasingly being implemented
in major manufacturing companies. For example, students
and employees can be held accountable for missing tools because of the systems’
tracking capability. Since a typical TIC system monitors inventory in real time
and makes decisions based on up-to-date information, equipment and tools, which
need maintenance, can be tracked for proper and timely scheduled maintenance
and replenishment. Moreover, since “Inventory control implies that an accurate
on-hand balance of a part number is available in a timely manner” (Evans, 1998,
p.140), the available real time quantity of lab items can be determined at any
time.
The systems are also potential
cost-cutters over time. This is particularly true in situations where employees
or students spend a significant amount of their time looking for lost or
misplaced tools. For example, an employee who makes $30 per hour and spends 10
minutes searching for a missing tool has wasted some five dollars for his or
her employer. But a TIC system can help the employee to quickly track that tool
before looking for it. In this case, both money and time are saved for the
company.
Factors to be Considered in Selecting a Tool Inventory Control System: A
Case Study
Because of the different array of
TIC systems on the market today, and the fact that different users have
specific needs, it is important that users consider available systems’
different attributes and match them with their own needs before investing in a
system. While the price of a typical TIC system may appear insignificant to
many when judged by industry expenses, a similar expense can easily constitute
a major expenditure for an educational program or department. Moreover,
purchasing a TIC system without proper investigation of these critical factors
could render the user frustrated and unsatisfied because the program may not
match the intended need.
Some Potential Factors to
be Considered
Generally, one of the most important
factors which users consider before making a purchase is the cost. Although
price should not be the only determining factor when buying software, most
users still consider the affordability of a product before buying it,
especially in a time of limited resources, which many educational programs are
currently experiencing. As will be seen from materials presented in the next
sections, purchasing a typical TIC system can range anywhere from $1200 to well
over $6000. And within this range are dozens of systems with different
capabilities and prices. Therefore, it will be ideal to know before hand the
budget appropriated for a TIC system before and when planning to implement one.
Most software users today expect an
easy-to-use or a user-friendly system. Days are gone when software vendors
could easily sell intimidating computer systems to their customers. Today,
almost all users demand simple and easy-to-use systems to avoid spending extra
time and money in training themselves learning how to use a system. Therefore,
ease of use of a system should be considered when planning for a TIC system.
Since most laboratory tools are discrete items which need to be traced and located, the tracking capability of the system needs to be known before its purchase. Tool inventory control systems are designed for different applications. While some are designed to track discrete, non-perishable items like hand tools, others are designed to track expendable items such as screws and manufacturing materials. Even when they are designed exclusively for tracking discrete, non-perishable or perishable items, the user is still faced with the problem of determining the nature and characteristics of the items to be tracked. For example, while hand tools may not need to be calibrated before checkout, measurement instruments may need to be calibrated. Similarly, while most lab equipment may need a maintenance schedule, manufacturing materials, parts and supplies may not.
Therefore, potential systems should be studied to
determine exactly what each system is designed to do, and matching that
function with the user’s needs, before making the expenditure.
Related to the trackability feature is
whether the system has barcode compatibility. The barcode feature of a TIC
system makes it possible for items to be easily scanned during check-out and
check-in, without the use of manual data entry, which is slow, clumsy and prone
to mistakes. Very often, it is also ideal to have a portable scanning system.
The portability of the system makes it possible for operators to walk to remote
locations in the lab, factory or shop floor and scan items there without having
to do it at the crib. Also, when items to be scanned are too heavy to be moved
around, the barcode scanner can be taken to their location instead.
Most systems also are capable of
generating different reports on specific items, such as on tool status report
or available material quantity at any given time. These reports are
particularly useful when the attendant needs to send the information to remote
locations, or when it is necessary to inform a user of a missing item that it was
due and needed to be returned.
Some, if not all, users will like to
know when the quantity of an item has reached a certain point so that a new
order can be economically made to replenish it. For such users, the economic
order quantity (EOQ) option of the system is a necessity. This will allow the
TIC system to automatically sound an alarm whenever a preset point is reached.
Lastly, because many users like to keep their systems
upgraded to keep up with the latest version of the product, the possibility of
future upgrade should be mentioned. Purchasing a TIC system with future upgrade
in mind not only ensures its longevity but also will help users to keep up with
the future technological upgrade of the system at perhaps little or no cost to
them.
A Case Study
As
indicated earlier in the need and methodology section, the above factors were
recently employed in a regional western university to help determine the most
appropriate TIC system to be implemented in the school’s manufacturing systems
laboratories. Faced with a limited budget and tough challenges managing their
laboratory resources, the program’s professors were forced to implement a TIC
system employing the steps described in this section.
Their
first step was to determine the 10 most influential factors relative to their
situation and goal. The factors were then ranked in the order of their
importance to their program’s need by assigning a certain number of points to
each. A ranking of 10 means “most important”, 8 means “very important”, 6 means
“important”, while 4 means “somewhat important”. These factors and their
rankings are shown in Table 1.
Table 1
Influential Factors in Selecting a Tool Inventory
Control system
________________________________________________________________
Factor Ranking
Tracking capability 10
Cost 10
Ease of use 8
Barcode compatibility 8
Reports generation 8
Check-out/check-in 8
Tool status report 8
Portability 6
Economic order quantity
(EOQ) 6
Future upgrade 4
Total possible 76
________________________________________________________________
These numbers are arbitrary and are subject to change depending on how the user wants to manipulate them. But the results will always be the same for same user, irrespective of their size, because they are relative to the user’s need. By this is meant that the TIC system with the highest ranking (or the most promising system) will always be the same.
The next step was to determine the
available or identified tool inventory control systems to be analyzed. As
already indicated, there are dozens of commercial inventory systems available,
but it will be worth the time and effort for one to do a quick analysis of each
and then select the ones that are designed with laboratory or shop (factory)
environments or the user’s needs in mind. Each vendor usually provides a
comprehensive description of their system, including its capabilities and
options. Sometimes, system vendors will offer to send a trial version to users.
The number of the systems to be selected for analysis should be decided by the
user, but the more the number selected, the better the result.
For this study 10 TIC systems were so identified,
studied and selected. 
They
are: Cribmaster by IC Kardex (2003), Instrument
maintenance and Calibration System by Scientific Instrument Services, Inc.
(2003), Tracker 7 by Waterwheel Software (2003), TC Max by Soaring Software
Solutions (2003), Quickpen (aka Tool Manager 5.0.3) by Quickpen International
(2003), Predator by Predator Software, Inc. (2003), ASAP System by ASAP Systems
(2003), TOOLTRACK by Seltek Solutions (2003),
CheckMate Tool Tracking by CheckMate (2003) and Tool Tracking System by Houndware Corp. (2003).
The next phase was to analyze each system
using the rankings already established. To do this, an Excel spreadsheet was
employed, whereby the selected factors’ rankings (on the Y) axis were
superimposed against the TIC systems on the X-axis, as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: TIC System Analysis Tool
Implications for Manufacturing Systems Programs
Manufacturing Systems graduates are technical,
management-oriented personnel who have been exposed to the world of
manufacturing resources (such as tools, materials and instruments) throughout
their preparation at school. Therefore, providing a technical education that
also includes tool inventory control system is an important step in equipping
these graduates for responsible job performance when they graduate and work in
such environments. Since many, if not most, of them eventually graduate and
work in a factory setting, training them in proper laboratory resources
management techniques while at school is a good way to prepare them for their
expected position as middle-level technical line managers. In other words,
exposing students to TIC system environment helps to
prepare them for their expected positions.
Because TIC system can be a
useful part of technical instruction, it is strongly recommended that
lab management of students who do a significant portion of their academic work
in the lab be incorporated into their grade at the end of the semester. For
example, each student who takes a lab course could manage (check-out and
check-in) the lab’s resources using the TIC system for at least one day during
the semester. This practice, while helping them to learn the names of those
tools and instruments, ensures that all the resources are accounted for and
located after the day’s lab session. This will particularly help instructors to have updated information on all tools.
Finally, tool inventory control systems help tool managers (and manufacturing systems majors) to have updated information on all tools, a key factor in tasks like locating a missing tool, accounting for broken tools, knowing when to condition (sharpen) a tool, knowing when to purchase new tools, maintaining important files on tool calibration data and such like. Herko (1999) emphasized that tool management systems add value to manufacturing operations by supplying information about how tools are used, reused, reworked, and maintained. He also explained that they capture information about tool usage, consumption, and usage patterns as well as track tooling all of which will be beneficial to manufacturing systems programs. The list of the type of information to be stored in a tool inventory control system is endless. The systems are so broad that the needs of each user manufacturer or laboratory can be served adequately.
Conclusions
Laboratory resources are an important component of
manufacturing systems programs. Students who major in this important program
should be informed on current management of key resources employed in their
technical field of study, using modern systems and techniques such as TIC
systems.
This paper has presented the benefits and samples of commercial tool inventory control systems ideal for managing manufacturing resources. It employed a case example to illustrate, using an Excel analysis tool, how to analyze and select appropriate tool inventory control system for a manufacturing program.
The various commercial TIC systems appear to have
most of the key factors that users would like to have such as tracking, barcode, portability and EOQ options in
common. TIC analysis tool is helpful in making a decision on which system to
select. However, some key factors like price vary significantly. Therefore, the
user should make judgment on these when there are limited resources.
References
ASAP
Systems (2003). ASAP Systems Data Collection and
Management.
Retrieved
solutions.htm
CheckMate
(2003). CheckMate Tool Tracking. Retrieved
from http://www.abarcode.com/Tool.htm
Data
Enterprises of the Northwest, Inc., (2003). Automated tool Inventory Control
and Tracking system: Data Enterprises of the Northwest. Available from Data Enterprises of the Northwest, 12819
S.E. 38th Street, pmb 22, Bellevue, WA 98006.
Evans, R. J. (1998). Manufacturing
control and execution. In R. Biekert (Ed.), CIM
Technology: Fundamentals and Applications (pp
131-176).
Herko, F. (May, 1999). Adopting an
Hogan, B. J. (Editor)
(May, 2000) Tool Management System Pays Off. In
Manufacturing Engineering, 124(5), pp
157-160.
Houndware Corp. (2003). Tool tracking system. Retrieved
from http://www.houndware.com/website/index.html
10, 2003, from http://www.kardex.co.uk/Div%20and%20Prods/
Business%20Systems%20Division/software1_page2.htm
Predator Software, Inc.
(2003). Products
(Predator Tool Crib). Retrieved
Quickpen International (2003). Tool Manager 5.0.3.
Retrieved
from www.quickpen.com/news/releases/
Rehg,
J. A. (1994). Computer-Integrated manufacturing.
Hall.
Scientific
Instrument Services, Inc. (2003). Instrument
Maintenance & Calibration
System IMCS(tm) Pro 2000. Retrieved
http://www.sisweb.com/software/csw/maintain/maintain.htm
Seltek Solutions (2003). Tool-Track. Retrieved
Soaring Software Solutions (2003). TCMaxtm
Tool Control Software for Aviation,
Fire
Departments, and Industry That Talks!
Retrieved
SY-CON Systems, Inc. (2002). Tool Management Solutions. Retrieved
Vollman, T. E., Berry, W.
L., & Whybark, D. C. (1997). Manufacturing planning
and
control systems, 4th. ed.
Waterwheel
Software (2003). Manage
construction tools, equipment and
inventory
(Tracker 7). Retrieved
http://www.waterwheelsoftware.com/t7.htm
Webster’s
Dictionary (1993). Webster’s dictionary.