Revising a Workshop Layout
Page 50
Page 53
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
New Information Causes S.T.R. to Alter the Man for a Maintenance Shop and Calculations of Man hours Required to
Service a Fleet
IN a series of three articles which appeared in the issues of "The Commercial Motor" dated October 25, November 1 and November 8 of last year, I dealt with the problem of an operator who wished to provide, in a building 43 ft. by
30 ft., for the servicing of 40 lorries and 10 cars. The inquirer, in his original letter, stated that he proposed to employ one fitter and a mate, and he asked what work they would be able to carry out, what equipment they would need, and what would be the best layout for the workshop.
Later, it was hoped to be able to extend the staff and equipment so as to be able to deal with all repairs. In that case, I was asked, what further tools would be required, assuming that the same building could accommodate them?
Maintaining 50 Vehicles '
_ In the first of the three articles 1 made an estimate of the man-hours per week involved in the maintenance of these 50 vehicles on the assumption that the mileage covered averaged 20,000 per annum per vehicle. 1 came to the conclusion that the personnel required would comprise one foreman, five fitters and a couple of labourers, an electrical specialist, capable also of dealing with tyre repairs, a carpenter and joiner with experience in repairs to bodywork, and a painter. The fitter and his mate, I calculated, would be fully occupied with the routine maintenance as scheduled in the vehicle manufacturer's handbook and sundry " first-aid" work.
1 went into the matter of equipment in the second article, and prepared a schedule of tools and accessories, costing from £1,050 to £1,357, and a supplementary one bringing the total amount to between £2,100 and £2,607. Finally, in endeavouring to plan the repair shop, 1 came to the conclusion, as stated in the third article, that the space available was inadequate.
The inquirer was disappointed with my solution of his . problem, as in solving it I raised others of greater magnitude. He has written again and restated his case, supplying this time a good deal of information which alight well have been divulged in the first place.
I am now informed that the business is a two-fold one. One part is concerned with deliveries of goods, the products of a wholesale concern, and in that department six 5-tonners are regularly employed. A seventh vehicle is kept as a spare.
A.Scattered Fleet The fleet is scattered, there being 10 at headquarters, and the others in seven different groups. With one exception, the eight depots are within the limits of one county. This point is of some importance in relation to the preponderance of spare vehicles, which is eight out of a total of 38. It is possible thus to have a spare vehicle for each depot, which is a sound idea, and, in view of that provision, we may safely deduct the item " breakdown lorry" from the schedule of equipment quoted in the previous articles.
I shall leave the cars out of consideration.
The position, as clarified by my inquirer's correspondence, is that provision has to be made for the maintenance and repair of 30 vehicles, of which 24 are on local deliveries and six on wholesale deliveries. The gross mileage is 342,000 per annum, six vehicles covering 25,000 miles each and 24 8,000 miles each.
As regards the building, I am now told that it is impossible to arrange for an upper floor for use as offices and stores, as I suggested. It is also impracticable to have pits, as the building is on the banks of a river and the bottom of a pit would be below the water level. Finally, my correspondent stated that it is not proposed to spend anything like the amount I suggested on equipment. It is proposed to install a lift of the Laycock type, also there is a motor agent with premises nex,t door to the headquarters of the concern. There is a suggestion that the repair and maintenance work which involves the use of more expensive equipment may well be entrusted to this agent.
New Factors must now revise the recommendations made in the previous articles in the light of this new set of conditions—first, as regards the man-hours needed for the more limited series of maintenance operations. (Here it will be necessary for the reader to refer back to the article of October 25.) Schedule I will still have to be carried out on the premises:
it needs 12 man-hours per 10,000 miles. So also with Schedule 2, which calls for eight man-hours per 10,000 miles. as also Schedules 3 and 4. The grand total of these, as given in the above-mentioned article, was 27 man-hours per 10,000
These schedules refer to routine maintenance operations `—not repairs—which call for replacement of worn parts, etc. This type of work was specified in five schedules published in the article of October 25; they were quoted as A, B, C, D, and E. Of these, only A, B and C should, under this scheme, be carried out on the operator's premises. They are: (A) clutch examination; (B) decarbonization and a check of cylinder-bore wear; and (C) draining gearbox and rear axle and a check of the steering gear. The time allowance for operations A, B and C totals 36 hours.
The fourth and fifth opeptions (D and E) include provision for withdrawal of the gears and a major overhaul. This work should be turned over to the specialist motor repairer next door to my correspondent.
The total of man-hours is thus 27 plus 36, making 63 per 10,000 miles, so that, as the yearly mileage of the fleet is 342,000, the total man-hours per annum is 2,154. Add, as before, 25 per cent, to that figure fot inevitable delays, and the total becomes about 2,600 man-hours. That equals 50 'man-hours per week and is thus well within the capacity of the fitter and mate leaving them time to do first-aid day-toda; running repairs.
Essential Equipment Now to consider the equipment required. It has already been decided jpo install a lift. With that, in my opinion, should be coupled a lubrication battery, so as, to facilitate effective pressure-fed lubrication of all chassis parts. The two items will cost from £300 to £400.
An air compressor is necessary, not only to operate the lubricating equipment, but also for tyre inflation, etc. A suitable compressor will cost from £150 to £180. A couple of hydraulic jacks must be available, costing from £30 to £35.
The fact that decarbonizing and top overhaul comprise one of the operations scheduled to be carried out on the premises indicates the need for such equipment as engine service kit, £35-£40; valve-seat refacer, £20-£25; and a valve refacer, £45-160. A battery tester should be available, £5£10, and, of course, a battery charger, £80-£140.
There will inevitably be tyre retmirs to be effected, and for this work three more items must be included—a tyre changer, £30-138; small -vulcanizing plant, £15-£25; and air-line and hose attachments, £5-£10. For general work, a couple of portable electric drills should be acquired, £20-£25, and a small screw press, £15-£20.
Inview of the spares facilities available next door, only a small stores will be needed and expenditure on bins can probably be kept within £10. The total expenditure on equipment is thus from £758 to £1,010, equivalent to an annual expenditure on interest, depreciation and maintenance of about £150 to £200.
Incidentally, it is worth while bearing in mind that capital expenditure on machinery and plant is, under the Income Tax Act, 1945, subject to an allowance, as legitimate business expenditure, of one-fifth of the total, so that from £150 to £200 could be claimed in that respect, as being free from tax.
As for the layout of the premises, the plan as portrayed in the previous article does not need a great deal of modification, except as regards the provision of pits and an upper floor_ Unfortunate Features
It is unfortunate that the building has features which make it difficult to adapt for the purpose in view. The fact that there are windows in only one wail makes it necessary to have the workshop at that end of the building. It is thus impracticable to use one of the two doors already provided in the east wall, because, if the workshop is to be sufficiently roomy, its eastern end comes too close to the door to allow a vehicle to enter. I adhere to my previous suggesticn in the issue dated November 8, that that door be blocked up. A small door, giving access to the workshop, takes its place. The second door is then widened, as shown, to provide ease of access to any vehicle.
There is not much that I need specify as regards the layout and arrangement of the equipment. I suggest that Ihe lift and lubrication battery be placed together and as n.-rer the partitioned workshop as possible. That is merely fo -:^nvenience of access. The battery-charging plant shaald be as far away as possible from the rest of the equipment, so as to minimize interference and the risk of accidents. For the rest, experiment is the best way to decide their location.
S.T.R.