SchedulingSequencingDue dates
Pick a rule—FCFS, SPT/SOT, EDD, STR, or CR—and watch the Gantt chart, total/avg flow time, and avg lateness react. Then switch to Manual and see if you can beat the algorithms.
- Compare classic priority rules
- See how choices change flow time & lateness
- Build intuition by trying to beat the rules
Flow shopMakespanIdle time
You’ll drag jobs into an order for M1→M2 and watch M2’s idle time and total makespan change. Hit the Coach to see Johnson’s rule logic step‑by‑step.
- Apply Johnson’s rule by sight
- Minimize makespan on 2 machines
- See how bad orders create M2 idleness
TOCRelease controlBuffers
Set the bottleneck drumbeat, size the buffer, and pace release with the rope. You’ll see WIP, throughput, and missed demand shift in real time.
- The bottleneck sets the pace
- Buffers protect the constraint
- Release just enough—don’t flood the system
TOCInvestmentROI
Make a big local improvement—then check the Mirage Index. If throughput barely moves, it’s not the bottleneck.
- Find multi‑bottlenecks
- Compute payback (cost vs. value)
- Prioritize real system gains
SchedulingSTRCR
Two scenarios appear: minimize flow time or hit due dates. You’ll choose STR or CR and get instant feedback—when does each rule win?
- Build intuition for STR vs. CR
- Balance lateness vs. flow time
- Pick the right rule for the goal
FlowTransfer batchEconomics
Bonus lab: keep product batch the same, shrink the transfer batch. Watch M2 start sooner and lead time drop. Includes a cost model and profit/hr.
- Balance M1↔M2 rates
- Use SMED + small transfers
- Tune for profit, not just speed
WIPLead timeI/O control
You’ll set the input valve against a fixed output drain. If input > output, the WIP “bathtub” and lead time rise fast—great intuition for release control.
- See why over‑release backfires
- Link WIP ↔ Lead via Little’s Law
- Find the stable operating point