LEDS-Level track · step 4 of 4. This model is the converter topology with three inline buffers added.
At a glance
| Experiment | Multi Run |
| Duration | 90 days |
| System efficiency | 54.3% |
| Production | 70,361 pallets |
| Output unit | pallets |
What this model is
LEDS track, Buffer-Options model — same buffer additions as Buffer-Options CT. Teaching point: OEE is unchanged vs Converter LEDS (both 54.3%). Buffers can absorb short interrupts, but the Capper's Upper Plow Area is a long interrupt on the Constraint itself — no buffer can fill that. Fix the machine, not the flow.
The line
| Node | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|
| Bulk Storage | Buffer | ∞ supply |
| Filler | Converter | 100/min |
| Capper | Constraint | 100/min · 1 interrupt |
| Buffer 1 | Buffer | inline |
| Labeler | Constraint | 100/min · 1 interrupt |
| Buffer 2 | Buffer | inline |
| Case Packer | Converter | 10/min |
| Buffer 3 | Buffer | inline |
| Palletizer | Converter | 1/min |
| Warehouse | Buffer | ∞ capacity |
Converter LEDS + inline buffers · OEE 54.3% unchanged (buffers don't help a Constraint-level bottleneck) · 70,361 pallets
Experiments this model carries
- Buffer Tradeoff — sweeps buffer capacity and plots efficiency against it — see Buffer Trade-off Results
- Interrupt Loss/Gain — ranks failure modes by the production they cost — see Interrupt Loss/Gain Results
Questions it answers
- Ask why buffers helped some places and not others, or about the Upper Plow Area failure mode.
The same topology on the other track
Adding Inline Buffers Between Stages runs this structure against constraint-level interrupt data. It reports 54.1% efficiency against 54.3% here — the throughput prediction barely moves. What changes is what the model can tell you about the cause.
Open it
This model ships with ReliaSim and runs in the browser sandbox — no install required. Open + Buffer Options in the sandbox.
Every figure on this page is the published result for the model as it ships. Open it and re-run to reproduce.