CHEESECAKE DEPANNING

Zach Alsheimer

Garth Sinclair

Matt Gundrum

Casey Bauman

OVERVIEW

What we Have Tried

What we Know

Options Going Forward

Timeline

WHAT WE HAVE TRIED

Thermocouples were borrowed from campus and affixed to the pizza oven

The temperature on the oven was set to 600 F and planned to decrease form there

Based on thermocouple and oven thermometer readings, the oven never reached over 300F

Cheesecakes were run through and the depanning was timed – the cheesecake temperatures were tested

Because of the missing coils, the temperature could not increase above 300F and was often less than that

The cheesecakes did not show any decrease in depanning time as they could not get any warmer than normal

PIZZA OVEN MANIPULATION

WHAT WE HAVE TRIED

Stainless Steel Inserts created using RIT machine shop

Inserts meshed well with cheesecake crumb and spinner head

Grease formed under insert instead of laying on top

Crust stuck to inserts and therefore could not be easily removed

INSERT TEST

WHAT WE HAVE TRIED Tested idea using

buckets filled with warm water, placing pans in water at times increasing by 10 seconds

Difficult to get quantitative data about depanning times during initial testing

Testing occurred separately from regular line; cheesecakes were not being depanned at that time

Operators were helpful in giving their thoughts/opinions during initial testing

Best times & temperatures seemed to be 30-40 seconds and 100F based on number of bangs and operators reactions

If this is pursued, the water bath would be an option to replace the pizza oven

WATER BATH

WHAT WE KNOW

Pizza Oven

Heat transfer experiments aren’t an

option due to pizza oven restrictions

Inserts

Stainless steel is unlikely to work as an

insert due to low thermal conductivity

SS has a lower coefficient of friction - grease might slide to outsides when crumb

is spun

WHAT WE KNOW

Water Bath

Operators gave positive feedback about

cheesecake quality and level of ease of the

depanning

Scheduling

Running low on ‘no cost’ options, may need to consider greater cost-

intensive ideas

One week behind where we wanted to be starting

MSDII, pushed presentation back one week to test inserts &

water bath

OPTION A: WATER BATH

1. Run larger scale experiment

2. Gather data that

can be used for

comparison to current

process

3. Examine possible

ergonomic effects

4. Make changes

and improvements to the

design

5. Develop an

implementation plan to be used

by Wegmans

6. Train employees

on new process

OPTION A: WATER BATH

The early results were promising

Would replace pizza oven

Won’t be very cost-intensive to implement

AdvantagesVariables are tougher to control

Hard to compare to current process

Disadvantages How to scale it up to meet production needs?

Challenges

OPTION B: COST INTENSIVEIdeas to Test:• Bakeable Insert - Cake Rings• Handled Cake Remover System • Table Conveyor • Key Lime Pie Tin System

OPTION B: COST INTENSIVE

1. Brainstorm

a list of possible solutions

2. Use Pugh evaluation

to determine

which ideas are

viable

3. Design, order

materials and build

4. Run experiment

s to test the builds

5. Make changes

and improvements to the

design

6. Develop an

implementation plan to be used

by Wegmans

OPTION B: COST INTENSIVE

Higher potential to improve ergonomics

All new ideas that haven’t be tested or implemented previously

Advantages Limited time to complete full process in MSD 2

Will require some up front investment

Disadvantages What is the budget for ROI for any cost intensive ideas?

What designs will be manageable for integration?

Challenges

OPTION C: METAL INSERTS

1. Identify the root causes of the problems that occurred during testing

2. Find solutions to

those problems

3. Test to make sure problems have been eliminated

4. Run large metal insert experiment

5. Develop a plan to

integrate inserts to current process

OPTION C: METAL INSERTS

The early results were promising

The team has a some idea of what caused problems

Won’t be very cost-intensive to implement

AdvantagesMore time consuming route to take

Uncertainties exist

DisadvantagesWhat material should be tested as an alternative?

What were the actual root causes of the problems that occurred?

Challenges

GOING FORWARD

Current Date: Week

6 (March 3rd)

Project Handoff

Date: Week 14 (May 7th)

The team has 9

Weeks remaining

- Decide what direction(s) to go in- Set a defined end goal for end of MSDII- Develop a schedule to follow to guide us toward achieving our end goal

Short-term Plan:

SUMMARY

What we Have Tried

What we Know

Options Going Forward

Timeline

QUESTIONS