{
  "id": 23191,
  "title": "Station Utilization Question",
  "url": "/competitions/bosch-production-line-performance/discussion/23191",
  "author_name": "",
  "post_date": "2016-08-30T18:24:29.447Z",
  "votes": null,
  "comment_count": 5,
  "views": 917,
  "content": "<p>Given the dates and the number of records on a given station, can we assume that these are all, or at least a PROPORTIONAL selection, of the real volume on that station?</p>\n\n<p>That is, if station 1 has 100 records and station 2 has 1000, can I actually assume that station 2 is used in the line 10 times more than station 1?  Does the answer hold for lines, stations, and features?</p>\n\n<p>Just curious; I suspect this is actually unshared information, but I thought I'd ask.  Thanks.</p>",
  "messages": [
    {
      "id": "132990",
      "postDate": "08/30/2016 18:24:29",
      "content": "<p>Given the dates and the number of records on a given station, can we assume that these are all, or at least a PROPORTIONAL selection, of the real volume on that station?</p>\n\n<p>That is, if station 1 has 100 records and station 2 has 1000, can I actually assume that station 2 is used in the line 10 times more than station 1?  Does the answer hold for lines, stations, and features?</p>\n\n<p>Just curious; I suspect this is actually unshared information, but I thought I'd ask.  Thanks.</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "Given the dates and the number of records on a given station, can we assume that these are all, or at least a PROPORTIONAL selection, of the real volume on that station?\r\n\r\nThat is, if station 1 has 100 records and station 2 has 1000, can I actually assume that station 2 is used in the line 10 times more than station 1?  Does the answer hold for lines, stations, and features?\r\n\r\nJust curious; I suspect this is actually unshared information, but I thought I'd ask.  Thanks.",
      "votes": null
    },
    {
      "id": "133004",
      "postDate": "08/30/2016 19:42:39",
      "content": "<p>Are some stations used &quot;more&quot; than others? If you are comparing the proportion of parts touched by a given station or line, then yes, some are used more. If you are comparing the volume of parts, then also yes, because some machines are faster and can process two parts while two slower machines each process a single part.</p>\n\n<p>If you are comparing which stations have higher utilization, then I don't think you can make assumptions with our data. I'm assuming that Bosch Rexroth is like most high volume manufacturers of engineered parts in that they try to keep their machines highly utilized while balancing flow throughout the plant. It's likely that at any given point in time, most machines are busy, but they may be busy on parts that aren't included in this study. Our data is oriented on parts by Id# rather than a time window applied to all stations.</p>\n\n<p>That's how I'm thinking about it so far...</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "Are some stations used \"more\" than others? If you are comparing the proportion of parts touched by a given station or line, then yes, some are used more. If you are comparing the volume of parts, then also yes, because some machines are faster and can process two parts while two slower machines each process a single part.\r\n\r\nIf you are comparing which stations have higher utilization, then I don't think you can make assumptions with our data. I'm assuming that Bosch Rexroth is like most high volume manufacturers of engineered parts in that they try to keep their machines highly utilized while balancing flow throughout the plant. It's likely that at any given point in time, most machines are busy, but they may be busy on parts that aren't included in this study. Our data is oriented on parts by Id# rather than a time window applied to all stations.\r\n\r\nThat's how I'm thinking about it so far...",
      "votes": null
    },
    {
      "id": "133007",
      "postDate": "08/30/2016 20:54:29",
      "content": "<blockquote>\n  <p>&quot;...but they may be busy on parts that aren't included in this study.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Most of that sounds like what I expected, but this was the key line that means my I'm probably barking up a wrong tree.  But I'll keep an eye on it just in case.</p>\n\n<p>Thank you!</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "> \"...but they may be busy on parts that aren't included in this study.\r\n\r\nMost of that sounds like what I expected, but this was the key line that means my I'm probably barking up a wrong tree.  But I'll keep an eye on it just in case.\r\n\r\nThank you!",
      "votes": null
    },
    {
      "id": "133435",
      "postDate": "09/02/2016 07:08:35",
      "content": "<p>How can a given &quot;part&quot; touch multiple stations at the same time ?  For Eg: Features for Part ID 4 are taken from station L0_S0, L0_S1 and L0_S2 at 82.24. Does that mean that the date timestamp feature does not capture the level of granularity from station to station ?</p>\n\n<p>Is the station number articulating the flow in which the product gets processed?</p>\n\n<p>Thanks..</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "How can a given \"part\" touch multiple stations at the same time ?  For Eg: Features for Part ID 4 are taken from station L0_S0, L0_S1 and L0_S2 at 82.24. Does that mean that the date timestamp feature does not capture the level of granularity from station to station ?\r\n\r\nIs the station number articulating the flow in which the product gets processed?\r\n\r\nThanks..",
      "votes": null
    },
    {
      "id": "133580",
      "postDate": "09/02/2016 19:50:05",
      "content": "<p>[quote=mrxnew;133435]</p>\n\n<p>How can a given &quot;part&quot; touch multiple stations at the same time ?  For Eg: Features for Part ID 4 are taken from station L0_S0, L0_S1 and L0_S2 at 82.24. Does that mean that the date timestamp feature does not capture the level of granularity from station to station ?</p>\n\n<p>Is the station number articulating the flow in which the product gets processed?</p>\n\n<p>Thanks..</p>\n\n<p>[/quote]</p>\n\n<p>I think that it may be due to the lack of precision of the sensors. I am assuming that at least.</p>\n\n<p>What do you guys think of it?</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "[quote=mrxnew;133435]\r\n\r\nHow can a given \"part\" touch multiple stations at the same time ?  For Eg: Features for Part ID 4 are taken from station L0_S0, L0_S1 and L0_S2 at 82.24. Does that mean that the date timestamp feature does not capture the level of granularity from station to station ?\r\n\r\nIs the station number articulating the flow in which the product gets processed?\r\n\r\nThanks..\r\n\r\n\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\n I think that it may be due to the lack of precision of the sensors. I am assuming that at least.\r\n\r\nWhat do you guys think of it?",
      "votes": null
    },
    {
      "id": "135273",
      "postDate": "09/12/2016 18:16:36",
      "content": "<p>Could it mean the same time on different days? Also how exactly do you interpret 82.24 as a timestamp? Other values look like a time on a 24-hour clock, e.g. I would interpret 1618.7 as 4:18:07pm, as hr:min:sec. Am I interpreting this correctly?</p>",
      "rawMarkdown": "Could it mean the same time on different days? Also how exactly do you interpret 82.24 as a timestamp? Other values look like a time on a 24-hour clock, e.g. I would interpret 1618.7 as 4:18:07pm, as hr:min:sec. Am I interpreting this correctly?",
      "votes": null
    }
  ],
  "comments": [
    {
      "id": 133004,
      "author_name": "jpmiller",
      "author_url": "",
      "post_date": "08/30/2016 19:42:39",
      "content": "<p>Are some stations used &quot;more&quot; than others? If you are comparing the proportion of parts touched by a given station or line, then yes, some are used more. If you are comparing the volume of parts, then also yes, because some machines are faster and can process two parts while two slower machines each process a single part.</p>\n\n<p>If you are comparing which stations have higher utilization, then I don't think you can make assumptions with our data. I'm assuming that Bosch Rexroth is like most high volume manufacturers of engineered parts in that they try to keep their machines highly utilized while balancing flow throughout the plant. It's likely that at any given point in time, most machines are busy, but they may be busy on parts that aren't included in this study. Our data is oriented on parts by Id# rather than a time window applied to all stations.</p>\n\n<p>That's how I'm thinking about it so far...</p>",
      "votes": null,
      "replies": []
    },
    {
      "id": 133007,
      "author_name": "chipmonkey",
      "author_url": "",
      "post_date": "08/30/2016 20:54:29",
      "content": "<blockquote>\n  <p>&quot;...but they may be busy on parts that aren't included in this study.</p>\n</blockquote>\n\n<p>Most of that sounds like what I expected, but this was the key line that means my I'm probably barking up a wrong tree.  But I'll keep an eye on it just in case.</p>\n\n<p>Thank you!</p>",
      "votes": null,
      "replies": []
    },
    {
      "id": 133435,
      "author_name": "azacharia",
      "author_url": "",
      "post_date": "09/02/2016 07:08:35",
      "content": "<p>How can a given &quot;part&quot; touch multiple stations at the same time ?  For Eg: Features for Part ID 4 are taken from station L0_S0, L0_S1 and L0_S2 at 82.24. Does that mean that the date timestamp feature does not capture the level of granularity from station to station ?</p>\n\n<p>Is the station number articulating the flow in which the product gets processed?</p>\n\n<p>Thanks..</p>",
      "votes": null,
      "replies": []
    },
    {
      "id": 133580,
      "author_name": "raphaelrcampos",
      "author_url": "",
      "post_date": "09/02/2016 19:50:05",
      "content": "<p>[quote=mrxnew;133435]</p>\n\n<p>How can a given &quot;part&quot; touch multiple stations at the same time ?  For Eg: Features for Part ID 4 are taken from station L0_S0, L0_S1 and L0_S2 at 82.24. Does that mean that the date timestamp feature does not capture the level of granularity from station to station ?</p>\n\n<p>Is the station number articulating the flow in which the product gets processed?</p>\n\n<p>Thanks..</p>\n\n<p>[/quote]</p>\n\n<p>I think that it may be due to the lack of precision of the sensors. I am assuming that at least.</p>\n\n<p>What do you guys think of it?</p>",
      "votes": null,
      "replies": []
    },
    {
      "id": 135273,
      "author_name": "margaretdulat",
      "author_url": "",
      "post_date": "09/12/2016 18:16:36",
      "content": "<p>Could it mean the same time on different days? Also how exactly do you interpret 82.24 as a timestamp? Other values look like a time on a 24-hour clock, e.g. I would interpret 1618.7 as 4:18:07pm, as hr:min:sec. Am I interpreting this correctly?</p>",
      "votes": null,
      "replies": []
    }
  ],
  "raw_markdown_by_id": {
    "132990": "Given the dates and the number of records on a given station, can we assume that these are all, or at least a PROPORTIONAL selection, of the real volume on that station?\r\n\r\nThat is, if station 1 has 100 records and station 2 has 1000, can I actually assume that station 2 is used in the line 10 times more than station 1?  Does the answer hold for lines, stations, and features?\r\n\r\nJust curious; I suspect this is actually unshared information, but I thought I'd ask.  Thanks.",
    "133004": "Are some stations used \"more\" than others? If you are comparing the proportion of parts touched by a given station or line, then yes, some are used more. If you are comparing the volume of parts, then also yes, because some machines are faster and can process two parts while two slower machines each process a single part.\r\n\r\nIf you are comparing which stations have higher utilization, then I don't think you can make assumptions with our data. I'm assuming that Bosch Rexroth is like most high volume manufacturers of engineered parts in that they try to keep their machines highly utilized while balancing flow throughout the plant. It's likely that at any given point in time, most machines are busy, but they may be busy on parts that aren't included in this study. Our data is oriented on parts by Id# rather than a time window applied to all stations.\r\n\r\nThat's how I'm thinking about it so far...",
    "133007": "> \"...but they may be busy on parts that aren't included in this study.\r\n\r\nMost of that sounds like what I expected, but this was the key line that means my I'm probably barking up a wrong tree.  But I'll keep an eye on it just in case.\r\n\r\nThank you!",
    "133435": "How can a given \"part\" touch multiple stations at the same time ?  For Eg: Features for Part ID 4 are taken from station L0_S0, L0_S1 and L0_S2 at 82.24. Does that mean that the date timestamp feature does not capture the level of granularity from station to station ?\r\n\r\nIs the station number articulating the flow in which the product gets processed?\r\n\r\nThanks..",
    "133580": "[quote=mrxnew;133435]\r\n\r\nHow can a given \"part\" touch multiple stations at the same time ?  For Eg: Features for Part ID 4 are taken from station L0_S0, L0_S1 and L0_S2 at 82.24. Does that mean that the date timestamp feature does not capture the level of granularity from station to station ?\r\n\r\nIs the station number articulating the flow in which the product gets processed?\r\n\r\nThanks..\r\n\r\n\r\n[/quote]\r\n\r\n I think that it may be due to the lack of precision of the sensors. I am assuming that at least.\r\n\r\nWhat do you guys think of it?",
    "135273": "Could it mean the same time on different days? Also how exactly do you interpret 82.24 as a timestamp? Other values look like a time on a 24-hour clock, e.g. I would interpret 1618.7 as 4:18:07pm, as hr:min:sec. Am I interpreting this correctly?"
  },
  "source": "meta"
}