Standardization*

There are few matters of such importance for efficiency and economics as that of standardization; and it should apply not only to tools and product but also to the operations of the workmen. The motion-study expert has proved conclusively that everybody wastes a certain portion of his time and energy in all of his operations; hence it would be economic to make a study of all workmen's motions and indicate to them what they should do in order to correct at least the most glaring of such faults. This has already been tried; and the good results effected have been surprising. Probably the motion-study expert who secures the best results is the foreman who sees that the men learn how to do their work without loss of motion, and then treats them in such a manner as will make them wish to stay where they are.

Stock Materials

The amount of stock material that is kept on hand is one of the determining factors in the size of space required. It is influenced by the character of the work done, and is dependent upon whether a warehouse supply of material is promptly available. If quick shipments are to be made and high prices obtained for them, a considerable amount of stock material will have to be kept on hand; and it should be stored under shelter so as to be protected from rusting. A day is coming, and it may not be far distant, when the purchaser of a bridge will insist that the structure shall be manufactured of metal which has never been attacked seriously by rust or has

* Concerning this clause and the next succeeding one, Mr. Earle has commented by letter as follows:

I wish to comment somewhat on what you say tinder the above heading, in connection with what you say under the heading of Stock Materials. The question of Standardization as relating to economy of shopwork is, of course, the smaller portion of the economy of Standardization; for, so long as each engineer wishes his bridges built to his own specification and design, it would be uneconomical for the Shop to store steel under cover. It is, to my mind, absolutely undefensible for standard bridges of standard lengths to be built in accordance with the various specifications, as is now being done. Deck plate-girder spans, through plate-girder spans, and truss spans of two or three types can be built to standard specifications and standard loading and will give absolutely as good service on the New York Central R.R. as they will on the Pennsylvania R.R. or on the Chicago & Northwestern R.R., or any other railroad; and, as far as we can tell at the present time, the life of a bridge under one good specification is the same as the life of a similar bridge under another good specification. If all such bridges were built in accordance with a standard design and specification, it might then be economical for the Bridge Shop to keep material for such structures under cover. The manufacturers would then know that it would be safe to do this; for, if they did not sell to one customer, they could sell to another. Incidentally, this would be a great advantage to customers; because, if they should want a bridge in a great hurry on account of a flood or other accident, it could undoubtedly be secured without delay from a shop having such a bridge in process of manufacture.