Detailed Design Review P10712 Wegmans Cheesecake Process ...
Andreana Crance Kevin Rodas Rob Santora Jeremy Smith Matt Syska DETAILED DESIGN REVIEW P10712 WEGMANS CHEESECAKE PROCESS IMPROVEMENT 1 DETAILED DESIGN REVIEW DISCUSSION AGENDA Meeting Agenda Time Design Review Goals 1:00-1:05 Review of Customer Needs 1:05-1:10 Review of Engineering Specs 1:10-1:15 Cheesecake Process Information 1:15-1:30 Proposals #1, #2, #3, #4 1:30-2:45 MSD II Preliminary Project Plan 2:45-2:50 Q&A 2:50-3:00 2 GOALS FOR DETAILED DESIGN REVIEW
Bring Wegmans up to date with process improvement findings Review proposals for process improvement Set the stage for MSD II and implementing changes 3 CUSTOMER NEEDS Comment Rank CN1 All solutions meet food safety needs. CN2 The dumping water task is efficient and safe for the employees. Will reduce cycle time and ergonomic issues associated with oven unload water spillage 2 CN3 Reduce variability throughout entire cheesecake line. Improve worker efficiency for new workers. Reduce safety and ergonomic issues associated with current process. 2 CN4 Minimize excess time spent on marble cheesecake. Will reduce cycle time for marble cheesecakes. 2 CN5
Efficient bread basket loading. Standard process for employees to follow will increase productiveness. 2 CN6 Reduce the distance to push/pull heavy material and carts. Reduce ergonomic concern for employee. 2 CN7 Labor at water pouring is minimized. Eliminate amount of labor needed at oven load. 2 CN8 Eliminate excess water throughout cheesecake tunnel oven. Reduce the need to spill water and end of oven. Reduce the possible safety issues associated with current process. 2 CN9 Effective use of labor at batter dropper. Will eliminate double handling of cheesecakes after batter is poured. 2 CN10 Organization at oven load due to baking sheets is efficient. Will eliminate clutter in area due to pans. 2
1 Safety Description Throughput / Process Time Customer Need 4 Comment Rank CN11 Reduce scrap issues associated with unloading cheesecakes from pans. Will reduce concern for possible scrap. Will reduce ergonomic concern. 3 CN12 The cheesecakes have a standard weight pre bake. Will ensure a standard product. 3 CN13 Safety standards at loading process' are insufficient. Will improve the ergonomic safety conditions for the mixing process. 4 CN14 Minimize physical stress on employees loading/unloading of cheesecake trays. Improve worker morale and health due to reducing the amount of lifting he/she must do.
4 CN15 Minimize physical stress on employees loading/unloading of bread baskets. Will improve safety of lifting from high location. 4 CN16 Batter scooping task is ergonomically safe for employee. CN17 Reduce variability in mixing to address ergonomic concerns. Will reduce and eliminate ergonomic concerns for employees. 4 CN18 Ensure safety conditions at oven load process. Will create a safer work environment at the oven load process. 4 CN19 Decrease amount of batter spilled at oven load. Will create a more standard final product as well as a safer work environment. 4 CN20 The oven sensor recognizes present activity without employee interference. Eliminates the possibility of possible hazards for oven load employees. 5
4 Ergonomics Description Misc Customer Need Scrap CUSTOMER NEEDS 5 ENGINEERING SPECS Metric No. Metric Importance Units Marginal Value Target Value Proposal(s) to Obtain Spec 1 2 Cheesecake per labor hour Risk of injuries 9 3 # of Cheesecake (benchmarking unit using NIOSH, etc) 45 25% reduction of benchmarking unit
50 75% reduction of benchmarking unit 1, 2, 3, 4 2, 3, 4 3 People travel distance 1 % travel distance reduction 10% 25% 1 4 Number of reworked products 3 Percentage rework 25% reduction of current rework rate 50% reduction of current rework rate 2, 3, 4 5 Throughput Rate 9 # of Cheesecake/hour 475 Small Cakes/Hr or 420 Large Cakes/Hr
560 Small Cakes/Hr or 470 Large Cakes/Hr 3, 4 6 Process improvement has full ROI for customer 9 Years 1 Year 0.5 Years 1, 2, 3, 4 7 Solutions meet Wegmans specific health code standards 9 Y/N Y Y 1, 2, 3, 4 8 Cheesecake retains homemade feel 9 Y/N Y Y 1, 2, 3, 4
9 Process changes can meet holiday demand 9 Y/N Y Y 1, 2, 3, 4 6 PROCESS STEPS AND 7 FORMS OF WASTE Process Steps & Categories of Waste Transportation Inventory Motion Waiting Over Processing Over Production Defects Set up for process Travel distance to mixing blades storage. Travel distance to cake dropper, 2nd dropper, yellow water buckets. Travel distance to raw ingredient storage (sugar, cream cheese) Get mixing bowls from storage location Raw material (sugar) Raw material (cream cheese) Filling buckets with extra sugar (11.4 lb) Mixing (through first cycle)
Travel distance to mixer guards Mixing (Adding ingredients) Travel distance to move mixing bowls to dropper queue Queue of ready mixing bowls in front of mixer Queue of ready mixing bowls in front of mixer Repetitive motion of cream cheese loading Scraping batter offsides of mixing bowl & blade Scraping batter offsides of mixing bowl & blade Move completed bowls to dropper queue Prepping yellow buckets with eggs, lemon juice and vanilla Wait for mixer to get up to speed Waiting for dropper set up Can opener process Waiting for mixer setup Raw material (sugar) pallet process only calls for 6-8 bags Entire mixing bowl scrapped due to faulty mixing blades 7 PROCESS STEPS AND 7 FORMS OF WASTE Process Steps & Categories of Waste Transportation Inventory Motion Waiting Dropping
Getti ng new pans from storage location Getti ng material needed for dropping Dropper to loading queue Loading and unloading of carts Wait for dropper setup Wait for first bowl of batter Marble Oven Load Travel distance Travel distance to refill water between bucket dropper and chocolate mixer Travel distance between choc. Mixer and table Travel dist. To return trays for load Queue of racks waiting for loading Repetitive motion of twirling Loading batter into choc. Dropper Loading and unloading trays Wait on cheesecakes Water pouring into pans Unloading carts Wait for oven intake
Oven Unload & Depanning Large cheesecakes into and out of freezer Queue of cheesecakes to be depanned Loading/Unloading carts Pouring water out of pan Repetitive motion of flipping cheesecakes out of pan Wait for large cheesecakes to freeze Queue between unload and depanning Wait for operator to change bread basket/reload trays 8 PROCESS STEPS AND 7 FORMS OF WASTE Process Steps & Categories of Waste Over Processing Over Production Defects Dropping Marble Oven Load Calibration of dropper setti ngs Too much water in pan Measuring water accuracy Incorrect weight of cake Not enough water in pan
Oven Unload & Depanning Cakes sticking to pans (in pans too long) Cakes too warm to depan 9 PRE & POST TUNNEL OVEN 10 PROPOSAL 1: MARBLE CHEESECAKE PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS Suggestion: -Relocate marble cheesecake table Current Location: Blue Proposed Location: Red 11 PROPOSAL 1: MARBLE CHEESECAKE PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS Implied Results: Reduced travel time: ~60 shorter distance round trip, 50% reduction Time saved when moving trays of batter, when operators travel from mixing area to assist in marble Operators can see whole process: Queue build up at marble is visible, operators can adjust to reduce queue More of a U-Shaped design than current
Reduced strain on operators 12 PROPOSAL 1: TEST PLAN Move the table for 1 shift Complete time studies Gather employee opinion If test successful: Analyze new process (time studies) Gather employee opinion for additional improvement Create standard work If test unsuccessful: Gather employee opinion Why unsuccessful? Can we design out the problems in a different way? Redesign concept 13 PROPOSAL 1: RISKS Probability of Severity of Risk (1/3/9) Risk (1/3/9) Overall Risk Contingency/ Prevention 9 27 Develop alternate methods of
reducing cycle time, reduce amount of equipment on floor 9 3 27 Work with management to develop a plan to make sure new process is followed. Create audit/metric plan. Risk ID Description of Risk Possible Causes Possible Consequences R5 Not enough floor space for design Additional equipment used Increased injury rate and increased cycle time 3 R6 improvement Improvements from Employees gradually revert Continuous procedures are not new process are not to old ways implemented correctly realized P1-R1 Physical strain caused by Table is heavy and must moving table during testing be moved
Injuries occur. Employees still do marble at current location 3 9 27 Ensure table is moved safely, put wheels on table, buy a table specifically for proposed area. P1-R2 Moving table causes conflict Employees do not move with other processes table back after use Other processes are slowed 1 3 3 Buy a table specifically for proposed area. 14 PROPOSAL 2: ASSISTED WATER POURING UNIT To reduce ergonomic strain of water pouring process and ensure consistent volumetric pouring with controlled and timed flow. Pneumatic Power Pros: Air leaks are not dangerous and will not contaminate food Easier to run air hose than electric line Air disconnects are easy to use Cons: Need to run air line to unit More parts to maintain, replace Only one Time State for given
setup, must be changed manually Electric Power Pros: Digital timer easy to program Possibility of programming different Time States for Large or Small cake pans Fewer parts to maintain Cons: Water and electricity dont mix Need to run power line to/from unit or Use batteries Have to store batteries Make replacement of batteries 15 easy PROPOSAL 2: ASSISTED WATER POURING UNIT Cycle Time Comparison between Current and Proposed with AWP Unit * Time to pour with AWP 250 Time (s) 200 2.08 min. left to work 2.68 min. left to work Unit is estimated as approximately the same time it takes to load the pans onto the oven belt 150 100 CT (Water) CT (Pans) CT (Mach) 93
Time saved=~36 sec. per row 57 50 0 57 57 Current Process w/AWPU ~ 35 rows/shift * 36 sec/row savings = 1260 sec = 21 min. saved at loading process 16 PROPOSAL 2: ASSISTED WATER POURING UNIT Mounted to side of oven for ease of use and accessibility. Trigger release to allow water flow to pans. Water and power source from adjacent wall is able to disconnect from unit. Unit is removable from mount to allow cleaning, maintenance and storage when not in use. Will eliminate ergonomic issues of bending into water bucket and time to refill and wheel over bucket. 17 Delay Unit PROPOSAL Inside AWPUnit Actuator/2- Way 2: ASSISTED Water WATER
Line POURING UNIT Flow Control Water Source Air Source Air Line From triggers To Triggers To Nozzle 18 PROPOSAL 2: HANDHELD UNIT Design will be dependant on Ease Of Use and Ergo concerns Will be developed during MSD 2 Shown is the basic concept as seen by the team 19 PROPOSAL 2: ASSISTED WATER POURING UNIT Schematic of Pneumatic and Hydraulic Lines 20 PROPOSAL 2: BILL OF MATERIAL Bill Of Materials Total Part Price Lead Tme 100.00 $0.00
5 Days 2 $8.97 $17.94 5 Days 2 $0.96 $1.92 5 Days 1 $6.90 $6.90 5 Days 1 $11.89 $11.89 5 Days 1 $6.37 $6.37 5 Days 1 $17.46 $17.46 5 Days 1
$5.20 $5.20 5 Days Product Number Vendor Product Desc. 1 Model 0S-6 Roessel (Fabco) Adjustable interval delay valve 1 2 MAV-3R Roessel (Clippard) 3-Way Air Valve 3 11916-1-BLK Roessel (Clippard) Push Button 11792-4-PKG Roessel Air hose fitting (10-32 (Clippard) - 1/8, 10 per pkg) MJV-2 Roessel (Clippard)
2-Way Valve (1/8 1/8) MPA-3P Roessel (Clippard) Air Pilot Actuator JFC-4K Roessel Adjustable flow valve (Clippard) (1/4) 11924-1-PKG Roessel Air hose fitting (1/8 (Clippard) 1/8, 10 per pkg) 4 5 6 7 8 9 URH1-0804-GNT-050 Roessel (Clippard) Air Hose (50 ft) Quantity List Price 1 $20.06 $20.06 5 Days 1 $4.30 $4.30 5 Days 10
11999-PKG Roessel Air Hose Coupling (10 (Clippard) per pkg) 11 5228K12 Push-on hose fitting Mcmaster (1/4 NPT (f) to 1/4 ID, 10 per pkg) 1 $7.45 $7.45 2 Days 12 53515K21 Push-on hose fitting Mcmaster (1/8 NPT (m) to 1/4 ID) 2 $14.14 $28.28 2 Days 13 6718K52 Quick Disconnect Mcmaster hose fitting (1/4 NPT (f) to 1/4 ID plug) 1 $4.63 $4.63
2 Days 14 91465K12 Push-on hose fitting Mcmaster (3/8 NPT to 1/4 ID, 5 per pkg) 1 $7.12 $7.12 2 Days 15 5288K115 Mcmaster Rubber hose 50 $0.98 $49.00 2 Days 1 $21.87 $21.87 2 Days 16 6718K87 Mcmaster Quick Disconnect hose fitting (1/4 socket to 1/4 ID)
17 9307K26 Mcmaster Grommets (1/2 ID, 50 per pkg 1 $8.68 $8.68 2 Days 18 7561K23 Mcmaster Mounting Box 1 $45.54 $40.43 2 Days #10-24 X .25 Sheet metal screws 4 Total $359.50 19 Approximate Total: $360.00 21 PROPOSAL 2 TEST/IMPLEMENTATION PLAN:
Calibrate and optimize in lab Implement into Wegmans facility under supervision MSD students will be present during test use at Wegmans Recalibrate/iterate if necessary 22 PROPOSAL 2: COST Total price for AWP-Unit: about $360.00 Price for Rail and Carriage to mount: $468.52 (quoted from igus) To avoid extra spending, the Unit will be statically mounted to the Side of the Tunnel Oven with a hose long enough to reach the far end ~15. To avoid problems with unruly hoses, a cable retractor may be used. For a hose roughly 15 long, cable retractors to reach $300-$400. To reach mid-hose (8 retractors) the price is $81. 23 Risk ID Description of Risk Possible Causes Possible Consequences Contingency/ Prevention Wrong parts are Completion of ordered, lead time on project on parts is long
jeopardy 3 3 9 Have orders expedited or order custom parts earlier. Call vendor to ensure correct parts are ordered. Completion of project on jeopardy 1 9 9 Have well documented designs so parts can be redesigned/made. Have an alternate plan. Increased scrap rate/ possible health concerns for consumers 1 9 9 Thurough testing in lab to troubleshoot and solve possible issues 9 Unit is optimized in lab to deliver correct amounts of water. Trial runs to determine minimum amount of water to be dispensed. 9 Work together with Maintenance
to have Unit installed in a convient place for operator (with operator help) and correctly integrated into buildings utilities. 9 Test Plan for developing a comfortable and functional handle from durable and safe material. 24 R12 Ordered parts do not arrive on time R13 Catastrophic failure of Inadequate testing design near end term analysis Contaminate food (water) Incorrect material specifications, leakages R18 Cheesecakes dry out during baking Insufficient analysis/testing of Increased scrap proper moisture decreased needed during baking rate/ sales process, not enough water in trays P2R1 Placed in an inconvenient location, Unit is not used by staff does not receive adequate supply of water or air
P2R2 Unit is awkward/difficult to use (P2)R17 Probability Severity Overall of Risk of Risk (1/3/9) (1/3/9) Risk Unit is not used, no metrics have been improved, money is wasted Handheld unit is Ergo issues, unit uncomfortable and not used awkward to hold/use 1 1 1 9 9 9 PROPOSAL 3: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH CURRENT OVEN CAPACITY) Depanning currently a bottleneck for small cheesecake. Oven currently the bottleneck for large cheesecake. Oven release rate: 4m 35s (4.58 min) 25
PROPOSAL 3: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH CURRENT OVEN CAPACITY) Depanning currently the bottleneck with small cheesecake. Oven currently the bottleneck with large cheesecake. Oven release rate: 4m 35s (4.58 min) -> 1 Small Cheesecake every 4.30 seconds (64 per row), 1 Large Cheesecake every 8.60 seconds (32 per row). Small Cheesecake 2.5 operators depan 64 cheesecake in 8.6 min. (2 depanning, 0.5 helping with bread baskets) -> 8.06 seconds per cheesecake. Large Cheesecake 3 operators depan 32 cheesecake in 3.6 min (2 depanning, 1 helping with bread baskets) -> 6.75 seconds per cheesecake. On a Typical Run (710 Small, 750 Large) Small cheesecake are run first, inventory builds up. Once large cheesecakes begin to come out of the oven, operators catch up from large cheesecake 20 minute freeze time and the large cheesecake shorter takt time. Do not catch up completely. -> Still ~30 minutes of depanning to be completed once all cheesecakes have left oven. 26 SUGGESTION 1: DEPANNING KAIZEN EVENT 27 PROPOSAL 3: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH CURRENT OVEN CAPACITY) - RISKS Risk ID Description of Risk employees R1 Bakery resist change Possible Causes Process is too complex. Cannot implement
Employees do not solutions like new process. Probability of Severity of Risk (1/3/9) Risk (1/3/9) Overall Risk Contingency/ Prevention 9 3 27 Make employees part of the process change to increase chances of success, gather input and concerns. Work w/ supervisors to involve employees in change process. Increased injury rate and increased cycle time 3 9 27 Develop alternate methods of reducing cycle time, reduce amount of equipment on floor Continuous improvement Improvements from procedures are not new process are not implemented realized correctly 9 3 27 Work with management to develop a plan to make sure new process is followed. Create audit/metric plan. enough floor space Additional R5 Not
for design equipment used gradually R6 Employees revert to old ways Possible Consequences reduced Improper analysis Production schedule R7 Throughput after plan implemented of new process not met 3 9 27 Perform calculations/simulation throughout project to ensure throughput is not decreased. If one step of process reduces throughput, find other places in process to increase throughput. of cheesecake Bad scrap rate/ R8 Quality implementation of Increased reduced decreased sales process changes. 3 9 27 Develop more strict quality checks to ensure high quality product. New process optimized New process not R15 for a limited flexible enough throughput 1 9
9 Ensure the process can handle fluctuation in demand 3 Keep running log to ensure process is improving upon metrics. Develop alternate methods throughout project and choose ideas that are beneficial and realistic. Process doesn't R20 improve upon any metrics Unable to meet increased customer demand During design, cancels engineering specs Wegman's project are not referenced 1 3 28 PROPOSAL 3 & SUGGESTION 1 TEST PLAN: Set up & run Kaizen event Implement changes Follow up on success Measure new process Continue to improve! 29 PROPOSAL 4: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH IMPROVED OVEN CAPACITY) 30
PROPOSAL 4: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH IMPROVED OVEN CAPACITY) Average Tunnel Oven Capacity Current rate: Small: 14.0 Cheesecakes/ min Large: 7.0 Cheesecakes/ min Small tray plan: Small: 21.0 Cheesecakes/ min (50% increase) Large: 7.0 Cheesecakes/ min (0% increase) Large tray plan: Small: 15.7 Cheesecakes/ min (12.5% increase) Large: 7.9 Cheesecakes/ min (12.5% increase) 31 PROPOSAL 4: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH IMPROVED OVEN CAPACITY) 16x 26x 1.5 Large Pan Design Fits both large and small cheesecakes. 32 PROPOSAL 4: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH IMPROVED OVEN CAPACITY) 12x 26x 1.5 Small Pan Design Fits small cheesecakes 33 PROPOSAL 4: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH IMPROVED OVEN CAPACITY) Pricing 12x 26 Small Cheesecake Pan 1 @ $ 453.23 ea. 12 @ $ 79.98 ea. 100 @ $ 46.79 ea. 300 @ $ 41.70 ea.
16x 26 Large Cheesecake Pan 1 @ $ 455.23 ea. 12 @ $ 81.98 ea. 100 @ $ 48.78 ea. 300 @ $ 43.70 ea. *Quotes via Universal Precision Corp. with an approximate lead time of 6 weeks. 34 PROPOSAL 4: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH IMPROVED OVEN CAPACITY) How can we make the new pan idea work? Increase the throughput rate of depanning using a kaizen event and possibly adding second depanning station (2 more employees for approximately 45 minutes). 35 PROPOSAL 4: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH IMPROVED OVEN CAPACITY) Current Depanning Method Small cheesecakes sit waiting for depan for up to 45 minutes Causes sticking to pan Total depan time is approximately 3.5 hours With Second Depan Station Small cheesecakes never sit waiting (current pans)
Small cheesecake pans sit waiting for maximum of 13 minutes (12x 26 pans) Sticking reduction Waste reduction Total depan time is approximately 2 hours Allows for mew tray idea (Frees up oven faster) 36 PROPOSAL 4 TEST/IMPLEMENTATION PLAN: Implement changes to depanning to ensure it will meet demands of new pans (throughput) Blanket order to ensure that design meets proper specifications (fit, volume, etc) 37 PROPOSAL 4: DEPANNING CYCLE TIME (WITH IMPROVED OVEN CAPACITY) Risk ID Description of Risk Possible Causes Possible Consequences
Probability of Risk (1/3/9) Severity of Risk (1/3/9) Overa ll Risk Contingency/ Prevention P4-R1 Pan design proposal gets turned down Not enough proof showing need This part of the design would be removed; Refocus on different area of project. 9 3 27 P4-R2 Sheet metal house has Delays Very busy company Pans may not come in on time in order to do proper testing 1 9 9 Keep in touch with hired company and get
constant status updates. P4-R3 Pans come in wrong Mistake by sheet metal house; calculation error Lost time waiting for new pans; lost time for testing 1 9 9 Double check all work; keep in touch with sheet metal house to ensure they know exactly what is wanted. P4-R4 Storage for pans becomes unavailable Not enough room for storage of pans Nowhere to store the pans; Disposal of pans Pans don't fit on racks Improper calculations; Pans not built to spec pans don't get used; pans are disposed of 1 Depanning can't keep up with process
More cheesecakes coming out of the oven at one time Damaged cakes; no gain in cake making efficiency Pans have problems with washing machine Washing machine doesn't support this size pan; lack of investigation on the issue Pans arent properly washed; pans don't get used P4-R5 P4-R6 P4-R7 Find enough data to prove the need. 9 Ensure that there is enough space for these pans to be stored in; Ensure that there will be a dedicated place for these pans. 9 9 Check and all dimensions on pans and racks before submitting the order; Do a blanket order so you can test a few pans, and make changes to the rest before they are made. 3 9 27
Make sure that everyone is on board in the process improvement plans for depanning. 1 9 9 Make sure that the washer can handle pans of this specific size. 1 9 38 SUGGESTION 2: 5S/SIMPLIFICATION PROCESS Use 5S/Simplification techniques to organize the area(s): Tape on floor Dedicated storage Standard work Workers assigned to clean 39 MSD II PRELIMINARY PROJECT PLAN 40
RIGGING fundamentals. Presented By: HENNEPIN TECHNICAL College . in partnership with Federal OSHA . Susan Harwood Grant . This material was produced under Grant # SH-19496-09-60-F-27 from the OSHA, U.S. Dept of Labor.
Student Satisfaction @ Shoreline Community College Results from the Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) Description Availability of companion employee survey (Institutional Priorities Survey--IPS) to compare student/employee perceptions Included 10 locally developed questions in the same importance/satisfaction measurement format Measures 12...
Digital Watermarking for Images Aarathi Raghu ... Hard to modify Free to distribute using internet Distribution net required JPEG images Photographs Digital Analog image DCT Transformation 8*8 DCT Quantization Entropy encoding Lossy compressed data Detection Original image Altered image *...
Matthias had already applied for cs-studio.sf.net Collaborators at BNL were most familiar with SF SF Wiki A shared location for our how-to-notes Plugin Parade CSS = Plugins that you combine into a Product for your site What's available?Who's using it?
How Can Grant Funding Be Utilized. ... Performance threshold(s) for each core capability that will guide our allocation of resources to support national preparedness. ... Presidential Policy Directive PPD/8 National Preparedness - Requirements and Approach to Implementation ...
WVU's Office of Information Technology • 175 person staff • $30M budget • Not a resource poor environment WVU's Office of Information Technology (cont.) Historically: • Numerous IT resources outside OIT • Politically stagnant • Lack of IT leadership/vision •...
CIFs will: Utilize skills and capabilities of MDBs to deliver financing at significant scale to unleash the potential of the public and private sectors to address climate change. Complement other multilateral financial mechanisms, such as GEF and Adaptation Fund.
Ready to download the document? Go ahead and hit continue!