Apparel Online Bangladesh Magazine February Issue 2019 | Page 51

Figure 1: Mock Pitch Time in different sewing sections
True pitch time is total
SMV divided by number
of operators available
to do the job. The
number of operators
available may be more
or less than total
number of operations,
depending upon the
target to achieve. True
pitch is calculated for
operator allocation and
balancing the line.
the small part section while nearly
half the assembly section. Therefore,
if we run the sewing section of
StitchWorld shirt as one complete
line of 42 operations, the balance
efficiency will be very low. However,
if the StitchWorld shirt line is
segregated as three separate lines of
large part, small part and assembly,
and then every section is separately
balanced, and we can have higher
balance efficiency individually.
Similarly, if we compare domestic
and export shirt, the overall mock
pitch time is same, but the sectional
mock pitch time varies a lot. It is
equally interesting to note that the
assembly mock pitch time for all four
shirt variations is one-and-a-half
times to two times higher than small
parts or large parts section (Figure
1). This re-emphasises that even if
any organisation decides to combine
the small parts and large parts
sewing section into one line, the
assembly section should preferably
be kept as separate line to increase
balance efficiency.
The effect of
De-Standardisation
(on automation)
Any process standardisation
leads to probable automation.
With Industry 4.0 beckoning the
garment manufacturing process,
it is imperative that some
standardisation takes place for
the overall benefit of the industry.
During the peak of dominance of
quality assurance (QA) in early
2000, one of the large retailers was
asked to inspect the garment from
the customer’s point of view and
not from QA’s point of view. The
message was clear, “Don’t find fault
for the sake of finding a fault, ask
yourself whether a customer will
be able to spot the fault if he/she
buys the merchandise? Or, is the
fault going to affect any aesthetics
or performance value of the
garment?” The same logic holds true
for design USP; just for the sake
of differentiation from the rest (of
brands), often design differentiation
was created in the merchandise
without any useful impact on
the end customer. The designers
need to ask themselves: “Will
the customer be able to spot the
difference and pay for the same?”
The construction process of
standardisation is to be integrated
with predominantly influential
design function to pave the way
for automation. Moreover, the
aesthetic differentiation should
not compromise the technical
and aesthetic performance of the
garment during both pre- and post-
purchase.
www.apparelresources.com | FEBRUARY 2019 | Apparel Online Bangladesh
51