Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by irjustin 112 days ago
At scale, use weight and supply 1 or 2 extra.

This is how pretty much every IKEA, LEGO, etc works with very small, cheap parts.

End users benefit because it's easy to drop/lose/break one.

3 comments

So that explains why the smallest parts often have spares in ikea and lego builds. Is this done because of the error in weighing the smallest parts, so they have a margin for error by allowing for an extra 1 or 2?
> Is this done because of the error in weighing the smallest parts, so they have a margin for error by allowing for an extra 1 or 2?

This is a secondary benefit, the primary benefit is if the end user loses/breaks one. That part very well could be show stopper (Ikea 110630 anyone?). Now the end user is stuck - has to call, you have to ship, do you charge? do you give for free? they have to wait. they're annoyed, you're annoyed.

No one is happy.

The supply chain headaches for giving exact number of tiny parts is terribly expensive, relatively speaking. So you give spares because in the long run it's way cheaper.

Just in case anyone is unaware: Lego does in fact ship single pieces for free, if you lose one.
IKEA does too. You can request smaller part you're missing on their website[1]. And if they don't have them available online you can check in with their support, once they shipped one part from two countries away, free of charge (and even thrown an extra one). For bigger parts they sometimes have them in stock at local stores.

[1]https://www.ikea.com/us/en/customer-service/spare-parts/

I was very pleasantly surprised when they sent me free replacement hardware to reassemble an old ikea twin bed model that had been discontinued a number of years ago. I assume they use the same hardware in other models they still sell.
I tried that the other day when when my kid rebuilt a 3 in 1 set. I couldn't justify 7€ shipping for a 10c part so that the baby orca could have it's dorsal fin. My kid didn't care. I was disappointed.
Hmmm, so if I wanted to assemble the lovely Cloud City, all I would need is 697 of my best friends to call in and report that they had lost a different piece...
Lego might be banking on the idea that folks wanting to steal the 697 piece cloud city kit the hard way don't also have ~697~ 696 friends
Just tacking on to mention the smallest parts are most likely to be lost, they’re the ones that - if dropped - seem to bounce and roll under a refrigerator or into the ether. They don’t give extras on the larger parts because they’re not likely to be lost. Frequently enough all it takes is a violent/careless bag opening to send the small pieces flying.
Being aware of this, I am waiting for a solution to what to do with the leftovers besides chuck them into a landfill. The problem, of course, is scale. No one is mailing 3 screws and an Allen wrench anywhere. Maybe once you hit 5 pounds of spare Lego . . .
If you have an IKEA store they do have a place for spares, and you can return them there. Assuming you go back from time to time.

For stuff bought online, e.g. Amazon, not much you can do.

I've often thought about this when assembling Ikea furniture. I have never been shorted. There's got to be someone at Ikea with the job of calculating the target acceptable ratio of over/under supplying small hardware pieces. I figure they can probably give out thousands if not tens of thousands of extra little screws/dowels/plastic bits before it exceeds the cost of missing just one. Between the cost of a support call, maintaining a supply of spare parts, labor and shipping to send out replacements... not to mention the less tangible to calculate loss of reputation to the brand. Quite interesting to think about at scale.
How does this work without dispensing onto the scale one by one? Just shaking them out of a hopper?
You're weighing the bag. Dispense a load in and divide the total weight by the unit weight and you know how many you've put in.

Easier with heavy objects, and needs the variation on weight to be low for the number of items you're dispensing.

Sure, but how do the parts get into the bag?
You grab a "rough amount" and by using weight all you need to do is diff 2,3,4? Ideally 5 and under.

it's very easy to count <=5 visually, but if your package requires 12 nuts, repeatedly counting up to 12 is so stressful the poster built an entire counting machine.

Yes, the question is how exactly you grab a "rough amount"? If you need 4 parts in each bag, is it really much easier to construct a system that can dispense 4-6 parts, than one that can dispense exactly 4?
Sorry i completely missed this. If you don't see it, it's okay - I probalby miss any replys going forward.

Being upfront, I have no idea what I'm talking about. Just some arm chair engineer.

The poster needed 6 parts which is JUST into annoying. My personal thoughts are what they need isn't dispensing but alignment. Thinking deeper I can agree that weight might not the most efficient here.

They're building the aligning and dispensing tool but I argue that's over engineering the problem. If it's aligned it's VERY easy to count 6 via a mark along the track and just push it to the end against your finger and based on the mark you know you have exactly 6.

To me the hardest part to make "just work" is the dispensing, but if you remove that it becomes a much easier problem. There's enough sales volume, you can make a vertical fixture that is a stack of fixed aligning tracks. Your fingers become the dispenser. Sweep and move to the next track.

Just random thoughts.

Or a vibrating seperator which can give perfect counts if needed.