CHICAGO — An extra step here and there might not feel like an expense when it comes to a drycleaning plant’s workflow, but every unnecessary motion a worker is forced to take compounds over time. This wastes both energy and time, and can have a detrimental effect on that plant’s productivity.
In Part 1 of this series, we looked at the compound effect small inefficiencies can have on overall plant productivity, and today we’ll continue by examining how attention to detail can streamline a plant’s workflow.
The Ideal Path
The best workflows follow clear, logical patterns without backtracking or crossing.
Bill Stork, owner of Dry Clean Design and recently retired plant layout consultant, describes two primary approaches: straight-line flow or U-shaped flow through the plant. In either case, the key principle is minimizing handling and maintaining forward motion. Items in wheeled buggies have flexibility to cross under conveyors or overhead rails, but items on hangers need unobstructed paths.
Drycleaning consultant Liz Davies describes what she calls “the circle” — the complete path from detailing through pre-inspection, cleaning, post-inspection, spotting, pressing, final inspection, scanning and bagging. “If your circle has broken up so many times with steps or bottlenecks, your flow is not going to be there,” she says.
Stork’s preferred method was what he calls “through-the-unit” design for pressing stations. “A garment would come off of one rail, go through a pressing station to the next pressing station, perhaps, and back onto a rail that goes out of the unit,” he says.
This approach creates easy flow and minimizes handling with the goal of allowing operators to work with quarter turns rather than multiple steps between equipment.
Attention to Details
The distance between pressing equipment might seem like a minor detail, but it can have a major impact on productivity.
“A pants presser should be able to pick up a garment and load it onto the first machine without taking steps,” Stork says. “In other words, a quarter turn, pick up the garment, load the machine, another quarter turn to put it on to the next operation.”
If presses are spaced 6 feet apart instead of positioned for quarter-turn access, the presser takes three or four steps per garment. Stork describes a typical pants-pressing operation: one machine for the top, another for the legs, possibly a third puff iron for touch-ups. If an operator has to take two or three steps between each of those operations, he says, “You’ve lost a lot of money. Not on that pair of pants, but on the thousands that you’re going to do down the road.”
Davies emphasizes that ideal spacing is “a half step to a step, literally. Because again, it’s production.”
And equipment placement matters beyond distance. Davies sees plants that “marry up the wrong pieces of equipment for the type of station it’s meant to be.” This could be placing equipment designed for one type of garment in a station meant for another, or placing shirt-finishing equipment far from the washers instead of adjacent to them.
Modern Challenges
The core principles of plant layout may be timeless, but the industry continues evolving in ways that challenge existing layouts.
The biggest recent disruption, according to Davies, has been the introduction of modern steam tunnels. These machines can send 40-50% of cleaned garments directly to quality control, bypassing traditional pressing entirely, which is a significant efficiency gain. The problem? Many plants installed the equipment without redesigning their workflow to accommodate the new technology.
“A lot of my clients have said, ‘Just figure it out, get it in and we’ll deal with the workflow after the fact,’” Davies says. “Right now, we’re stumbling on our workflow — how do 40% of the clothes go in the steam tunnel and then go directly to quality control?”
The shift from over-the-front-counter business to home delivery routes has also changed layout requirements.
“The majority of us have 70% of our work as home deliveries,” Davies says. This means plants need more space for route lines and must figure out methods to efficiently load multiple trucks.
Davies recently worked with a client whose eight drivers all showed up at the same time to load from one door, which meant seven were left standing around. The solution was simple, but required someone from outside to point it out: stagger their start times. “We’re going to save 15 minutes a day times seven other people,” she says.
Stork saw similar issues with installation shortcuts during his career. Distributors would design layouts, then hire third-party installers that would move equipment slightly to save installation costs — creating workflow problems that would cost operators far more over time.
“He might be saving $100 on installation,” Stork says. “But over time, where somebody had to take an extra few steps to get around his mistake, it’s costing the operator much more money than he saved.”
Recognizing the Problem
The consultants emphasize that plant owners often don’t recognize workflow problems because they themselves are not in the production area regularly.
“For a lot of these owners, they believe everything is working,” Davies says, “but they’re not in the trenches. They’re upstairs in the office.”
Stork agrees with Davies on this owner mindset: “The owner may say, ‘I’ve done it this way for years and I’ve done all right.’ Well, how much better could you do if you did it really right?”
Without exposure to other plants and better workflows, owners assume their setup is acceptable, if not perhaps optimal. Davies encourages owners to visit operations with superior layouts to break out of this mindset.
“I’ve got a handful that are just perfectly set up,” she says. “Just go visit and see how things flow.”
Come back Tuesday for the conclusion of this series, where we will examine some creative solutions to space constraints and ask questions owners should consider when it comes to plant layout. For Part 1 of this series, click HERE.
Have a question or comment? E-mail our editor Dave Davis at [email protected].
