Application of MFCA in waste reduction: Case study on a small textile factory in Thailand

• Main Authors: Kasemset,C., Chernsupornchai,J., Pala-ud,W.
• Format: Article
• Published: Elsevier Limited 2015
• Subjects: Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering; Strategy and Management; Environmental Science (all); Renewable Energy, Sustainability and the Environment
• Online Access: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84908126864&origin=inward; http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/handle/6653943832/39063
• Institution: Chiang Mai University

© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. This research is aimed to present how Material Flow Cost Accounting (MFCA) plays a role in waste reduction. The study was carried out as a case study at a textile factory in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Following the procedure of MFCA, a specific type of shirt was selected to be studied. Cost of the positive and negative products of each process are identified, starting from cutting, sewing, quality checking, dyeing, buttonhole drilling, and packing processes. The results from the MFCA analysis showed that the costs of the positive and negative products were 84.26% and 15.74%, respectively. The greatest portion of the negative product cost resulted from material cost was 14.73% from the total of 15.74%. Focusing on the material cost of the negative product, the cutting and sewing process made up 80% of the material cost of the negative product, in comparison to other processes. Thereafter, the cause-effect diagram was used to identify the main source of the material cost of the negative product at both the cutting and sewing processes. Data collection and analysis indicated that three sources of the material cost of the negative product at both the processes, were from the cutting and trimming procedures. Three improvement solutions were proposed, as follows: (1) reducing the gap between the pieces of pattern, (2) reducing the edge width of each piece of pattern, and (3) employing a new cloth-cutting table. The results from the MFCA calculation showed that the costs of the negative product from these three solutions had reduced to 8.51%, 4.57%, and 3.06%, respectively. Moreover, it was found that when three solutions were combined and used at the same time, the cost of the negative product reduced to 11.27%. Practically, the first solution was the only way that could be promptly applied without any investment. However, when additional investments are available for process improvement, the combination of the three solutions was the most effective way that should be seriously considered.