Revamping warehouse operations won't seem half as risky if you try it with imaginary staff picking tiny items from hypothetical racking on a theoretical work schedule. Think The Sims meet the DC.
If all the world's a stage, then one of the more intricate dramas being played upon it is cargo distribution. Warehousing used to play a dull, if significant, role. But recent changes in supply chain strategies have thrust it center stage. The warehouse's transformation to a distribution center means that, to play its part well, it could probably benefit from a dress rehearsal. In supply chain technology terms, that means simulation software.
Simulation software has been used to improve manufacturing operations since the '70s. It traditionally allows a manufacturer to play out what-if scenarios in a purely theoretical environment, experimenting with changes in production schedules, product mix and staffing levels without having to try it out on the production floor. But there are plenty of reasons for logistics managers to consider simulation as a tool in warehousing and distribution, or even as part of overall supply chain management.
Why take the time and trouble to learn about yet another kind of software? The simple answer is: because warehousing and distribution facilities are becoming as tricky to run as manufacturing plants. Warehouse management systems (WMS) help, but they concentrate on facilitating a plan that's already in existence. Simulation software, on the other hand,can help figure out in advance whether a change in that plan would improve operations,without your having to shut anything down or rebuild a conveyor system. "In today's world, your real limits are in figuring out where products are going to go. You have to have appropriate spacing in the warehouse, you're increasingly mixing shipments and so on," says Malcolm Beaverstock, manager of business simulation at General Mills in Minneapolis, Minn., who's been using simulation software for 20 years, three of those years in warehousing. "Ten years ago, the bottlenecks in manufacturing were physically within production itself; now it's about scheduling, sequencing, size of orders. These all add complexity."
AMR Research analyst Matt Bilodeau says warehouse and distribution facility operators need simulation now because their businesses have to juggle more roles than a sketch comedy performer to meet their customers' demands. Warehouses have to adjust to changing product lines and seasonal promotions or even perform some light assembly.
"Warehouses are taking on processes that they were not traditionally asked to do," says Bilodeau. "Supply chains are becoming more demand driven, so if you can postpone final assembly until as late as possible, you can customize as close to the customer as possible. That's the big trend now. And I would like a simulator if I was running that kind of warehouse."
Take it for a test drive
Simulation in the distribution center is already catching on. A survey published in April by the Warehousing Education and Research Council (WERC), showed that 18 percent of warehouse managers said they regularly performed simulation. Bilodeau says simulation initially found favor in the warehousing world as a tool for planning the design and construction of large warehouses being built from scratch. "When you're building a new facility, you want to be able to take it for a test drive before you've even poured the concrete," he says.
UPS, for example, used simulation from Brooks Automation's AutoMod language to help in designing the expansion of its Louisville, Ky., distribution hub (the project was completed in August 2002). The company, which handles 2 million express or next-day packages in the United States every day, was able to theorize about what would happen if it changed such variables as package and container volume, aircraft parking positions, container destination lineups and the aircraft arrival schedules. UPS says these scenarios helped determine the best aircraft, container and hub setup for each likely cargo-handling scenario. The company also ran simulations to see how the breakdown of one piece of equipment would affect the overall performance of the facility, in order to arrive at a better design.
Many simulation software vendors get a foothold with new customers at this "green field" level by partnering with the companies that sell material handling systems such as conveyor belts for new facilities. But now simulation is being used more and more for ongoing operations. "It makes a lot of sense," Bilodeau says, noting that warehouse operations change so often, you need a simulation program to stay one step ahead in day-to-day operations. "The way we did business 10 years ago, one person could pretty much understand it himself," adds General Mills' Beaverstock, who uses several software systems, including one from Flexsim Software (formerly F&H Simulations), in Orem, Utah. "That's now getting harder and harder."
Greg Gossler, sales and product manager in charge of CACI Products Co.'s SIMPROCESS software, agrees there's been a shift."In the past, it was really used for analysis and after thought or some kind of forecasting," Gossler says. "We're now trying to move it into operational use, to answer the question: 'What are we going to do today?'"
Roger Hullinger, vice president at Flexsim Software, confirms that usage patterns are undergoing change: "Previously, the customer would identify one big problem. For example, at the end of every day they were 10 percent behind on filling orders. They'd find out how to improve that and walk away, but that's not happening now," he says."Customers are using it more on an ongoing basis."
Simulation is also being adopted in general logistics management scenarios, says Jeffrey Herrmann, associate professor of mechanical engineering at the University of Maryland's Institute for Systems Research in College Park, Md. Herrmann cites applications that model a transportation network, or even an entire supply chain. But warehouses are particularly well suited to simulation, he notes, because with operations literally under one roof, data can be gathered relatively easily. Supply chains are almost never under the control of a single company or management team, Herrmann points out. Gone are the days when Ford Motor Co. owned everything from the mines to the auto dealerships—a setup that would have made data collection a matter of simply insisting different departments submitted reports. Now supply chain information has to come from parts suppliers, freight forwarders, carriers, third party logistics firms, retail outlets and so on. In terms of supply chain simulation,"the main obstacle is getting information about your suppliers and downstream customers that you can use," says Herrmann. In warehouses, where you have what is known as a closed system, that's less of a problem.
Getting real
Another reason to investigate simulation is that the systems are becoming more compatible with other business management software such as warehouse and transportation management systems. In other words, even though you may not be able to simulate an entire supply chain, simulation can feed from other technologies involved in overall supply chain management, as well as feed information back up the line.
Matt Rohrer, director of simulation products and services with Brooks Automation of Orem, Utah, says the company's AutoMod simulation software can download hard historical data from a WMS in order to closely mimic a new scenario before it happens—for example,a change in product lines, promotional packaging, work shifts or delivery schedules. In the simulation business, performing a dress rehearsal like this in tandem with operations management data is called "emulation." Vendors admit that this kind of integration is still rare, but they predict an increase in demand soon. Using simulation in this way facilitates more risk-taking and radical rethinks, says Rohrer, since the scenarios can be tested with real historical data, making predicted outcomes more accurate.
AMR's Bilodeau says the really interesting crunch will come when WMS vendors begin to integrate simulation with their products, either developing the software themselves or buying simulation vendors. He predicts that in 12 to 18 months, simulation may well be a competitive advantage in WMS and that consumers will regard it as a factor in choosing one WMS vendor over another. Professor James J. Swain of the University of Alabama, Huntsville, published a survey in 2001 showing that simulation software was "fairly well established and international." He adds that he sees simulation software increasingly linked to other "decision software," such as production scheduling programs.
Something else is changing—the systems are becoming easier to use, typically employing colorful three-dimensional graphics and animation to show the results of a "what-if " scenario. You can actually watch the script unfold,as boxes move through a hypothetical conveyor system, or imaginary staff move around in a theoretical stacking and picking schedule. Rohrer says the ease of use means the systems can be used by logistics and warehouse managers rather than by techies who don't necessarily understand the day-to-day practicalities of running a facility.
Beaverstock says this capacity to preview changes visually has greatly increased his company's use of simulation since 1995, when animation became available. General Mills bought Pillsbury in 2001, making it one of the largest food manufacturers in the world. The newly enlarged corporation decided to consolidate warehouses, reducing the number from more than 200 to around 50. Beaverstock says simulation's been crucial in helping make that happen."It's an intrinsic part of our business now," Beaverstock says. "Simulation is not quite in the same position as logistics and distribution, but it's getting there."
Starting small
Simulation is not necessarily attractive for every warehouse operation, even in relatively large facilities, however. Brad Friedman, vice president of information services at Burlington Coat Factory Warehouse of Burlington, N.J., says he won't be using simulation for the new warehouse management system the company is building with software vendor Compliance Network. "I think the people in our distribution [operations] have a good feel for it and they don't need anything else," says Friedman. "We're not including any 'what-if ' capabilities in this new WMS."
If you decide to investigate the advantages of simulation software, the experts' advice is to move cautiously. A report compiled for Automation Associates Inc. by Jerry Banks and Randall Gibson suggests that potential customers ask a software vendor to solve a small version of a problem first. However, Brooks Automation's Rohrer says it's important that customers see simulation as something more than a quick fix for some niggling problem in warehouse operations. "It should become part of the decision-making process," he says. Typically, a customer will use simulation to automate one facility or one particular set of operations and then move out from there.
Rohrer also warns that there may be initial difficulty in selling the system inside a company. Often the investment peaks before the improvements in efficiency really start to show, making internal management buy-in slow. But he says this all changes when the benefits of simulation really start to kick in.
Banks and Gibson advise buyers to look for references from customers who've already used the software for sometime. It's also a good idea, they say, to seek the opinions of consultants who use several products from different vendors. And although price will necessarily be a consideration, it should not be the main criterion for choosing a system, says Banks and Gibson. "Productivity is more important."
Productivity and, of course, accuracy. Yet even the best software will deliver inaccurate results if it's fed the wrong data. Carefully gathering information is essential, Herrmann emphasizes, to avoid "garbage in, garbage out." A dress rehearsal of "King Lear" may bring down the house, but it won't mean much if you're staging "Chicago."
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."