Reduction and Simplification of Material Flows in a Factory: The
Essential Foundation for JobshopLean
Flow is “the progressive movement of product/s through a facility from the receiving of raw material/s to the shipping of the finished product/s without stoppages at any point in time due to backflows, machine breakdowns, scrap, or other production delays”
What is “Flow”?
Source: Suzaki, K. (1987). The new manufacturing challenge: Techniques for continuousimprovement. New York, NY: Free Press.
Role of Flow at Toyota+
+ Ohno, T. 1988. Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Portland, OR: Productivity, Inc. ISBN 0-915299-14-3.
• (Page 11) “…I was manager of the machine shop at the Koromo plant. As an experiment, I arranged the various machines in the sequence of machining processes …”
• (Page 33) “…We realized that the (kanban) system would not work unless we set up a production flow that could handle the kanban system going back process by process …”
• (Page 39)“…It is undeniable that leveling becomes more difficult as diversification develops …”
Role of Flow at Toyota+
+ Ohno, T. 1988. Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Portland, OR: Productivity, Inc. ISBN 0-915299-14-3.
• (Page 54) “…Toyota’s main plant provides an example of a smooth production flow accomplished by rearranging the conventional machines after a thorough study of the work sequence …”
• (Page 54) “…It is crucial for the production plant to design a layout in which worker activities harmonize with rather than impede the production flow …”
• (Page 100)“…By setting up a flow connecting not only the final assembly line but all the processes, one reduces production lead time …”
Role of Flow at Toyota+
+ Ohno, T. 1988. Toyota Production System: Beyond Large-Scale Production. Portland, OR: Productivity, Inc. ISBN 0-915299-14-3.
• (Page 123) “…When work flow is properly laid out, small isolated islands do not form …”
• (Page 125) “…For the worker on the production line, this means shifting from being single-skilled to becoming multi-skilled …”
• (Page xxx)“…The first aspect of the TPS…means putting a flow into the manufacturing process…Now, we place a lathe, a mill and a drill in the actual sequence of the manufacturing processing …”
Are these ≈500 Forgings “Flow”ing?
Is this One Forging “Flow”ing?
Building 1
Building 2 Building
3
Value Stream Analysis for the Forging
Value Added Ratio = Value-Added Time/Flow Time = 17.88%
C/T= 1 day/ht #
C/O=
S/U=
951
C/T= 20/hr
C/O= 10 min
S/U= 15 min
760C/T= 10min/cycle
C/O= 0
S/U= 10min
510C/T= 1/hr
C/O= 1.5 hr
S/U= 1.5 hr
310C/T= 15min/cycle
C/O= 0
S/U= 10 min
510C/T= 15min /20pcs
C/O=
S/U=
570C/T= 6-8hrs/batch
C/O= 2 hr
S/U=
666
C/T= 20/hr
C/O=
S/U=
820
C/T= 48/hr
C/O=
S/U=
958C/T= 5days/45 pcs
C/O=
S/U=
962 & 974C/T= 36/hr
C/O= 1 hr
S/U= 1 hr
80C/T= 4hrs/batch
C/O= 1hr
S/U=
673C/T= 45/hr
C/O= 0
S/U= 15 min
810
C/T=
C/O=
S/U=
952
C/T= 1.5hr/pc
C/O=
S/U=
310C/T= 63/hr
C/O=
S/U=
800Number of shift: 1
ABRASIVE SAW
11
Number of shift: 1
BLAST-ROTO
12
Number of shift: 1
COAT-DIP
11
Number of shift: 1
20000 HAMMER
62
Number of shift:1
BLAST-ROTO
12
Number of shift: 3
CNC MACHINE
12
Number of shift: 3
SOLUTION TREAT
1
Number of shift: 3
PRECIP HEAT
11
Number of shift: 1
INSPECT
11
Number of shift:
SONIC TEST
11
Number of shift: 1
ETCHING
11
Number of shift:
TEST FORGE
1Setup time:
1
Number of shift:
INSPECT & STAMP
1Setup time:
1
Number of shift:
TEST STOCK
11
680 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
Number of shift: 3
CNC MACHINE
12
Number of shift: 1
NDT MICRO
11
C/T=20min/24 pcs
C/O=
S/U=
520Number of shift: 1
TABLE-BLAST
11
Outside Process
N/ADistance
N/ALine of Sight
N/ADistance
N/ALine of Sight
325 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
690 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
255 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
3 ftDistance
GoodLine of Sight
750 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
690ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
440 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
315 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
180 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
350 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
I
5 hours
I
4 hours
I10-20 hours
I8 – 24 hours
350 ftDistance
PoorLine of SightI
1 – 8 Days
I48-120 hours
I24 - 48 hours
I
0 hour
I
4 hours
I96-120 hours
I
8 hours
I
??
I
8 hours
I
8 hours
I
8 hours
1
140 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
PRODUCTION SCHEDULER
MRP SYSTEM
Computer
Computer
Computer
Computer
ComputerComputer
ComputerComputer
Computer ComputerComputer
Computer
Computer
Computer
Computer
595 ftDistance
PoorLine of Sight
Cool down delay = 2hrs
2.25 hrs
5 hrs
0.167 hr
4 hrs
1.065 hrs
20 hrs
1.34 hrs
24 hrs
0.25 hr
120 hrs
24 hours
48 hrs 2 hrs
4 hrs 8 hrs 0.67 hr
4 hrs
36 hrs
120 hrs 8 hrs
0.75 hr
?? hrs
?? hrs
8 hrs
0.75 hr
8 hrs
1 hr 2.25 hrs
8 hrs
VALUE ADDED TIME : 82.492 hrsTotal time : 379 hrs + 82.492 hrs = 461.492 hrs
VALUE ADDED RATIO : 17.88%
2 Way radio is used with all the department supervisor
Pass?
Yes
NO
Name of Supplier
Total Quantity
Order Frequency
Used by Part #Products Order
Lead TimeTransport Method
6-4 TI all 10,000 lb 2 times/yr 6 months
Waste ↑ NVA Time ↑ Flow Time
Typesof
Waste
CORRECTION
WAITING
PROCESSING
MOTION
INVENTORYCONVEYANCE
OVERPRODUCTION
Repair orRework Any wasted motion
to pick up parts, stack parts, walking to get parts, etc.
Wasted effort to transportmaterials, parts, or finished goods into or out of storage, or between processes.
Producing morethan is needed before it is needed
Maintaining excessinventory of raw materials,parts in process, orfinished goods.
Doing more work thanis necessary
Any non-work timewaiting for tools, supplies, parts, etc.
TOTAL TIME ON MACHINES5%
TOTAL TIME IN MOVING AND WAITING95%
TOTAL TIMEIN THE FACILITY
IN CUT30%
POSITIONING, GAGING, ETC.70%
TOTAL TIMEON MACHINES
Dominant Wastes that ↑ Flow Time
WIP ($) = Throughput ($/day) * Flow Time (days)
Little’s Law+
Therefore, a common sense strategy to eliminate waste, lower costs and
increase order fulfillment on a daily basis should be to:
Reduce average flow time per order
+ Little, J.D.C. 1961. A Proof for the Queuing Formula: L=λW. Operations Research, 9, 383-387.
Impact of Facility Layout
Given a poorly-designed facility layout, the Average Travel Distance per order ↑ therefore Transportation Waste ↑ therefore WIP Waste ↑ therefore Waiting Waste ↑ therefore Flow Time ↑, Throughput ↓ and Cost ↑
How to reduce the Dominant Wastes
Design For Flow (DFF)
Maximize Directed Flow Paths
• Eliminate backtracking• Eliminate crossflows and intersections among paths
Minimize Flows
• Eliminate operations• Combine operations• Minimize multiple flows
Minimize Cost of Flows
• Eliminate handling• Minimize handling costs
• Minimize queuing delays • Minimize Pick-Up/Drop-Off delays• Minimize in-process storage• Minimize transport delays
Adapted from: Tompkins, J.A., et al. (1996). Facilities planning. New York, NY: John Wiley.
Strategies to Minimize Flow
• Modify product designs to eliminate non-functional features
• Adopt new multi-function manufacturing technology to replace conventional machines
• Deliver materials to points of use which will minimize warehouse storage space
• Modularize the facility into flowlines, cells and focused factories
Strategies to Minimize Flow
• Process parts or subassemblies in parallel • Combine several transfer batches into unit loads• Select process plans with minimum number of
operations• Eliminate “outlier” routings by rationalization of the
product mix• Prevent proliferation of new routings - Use variant
process planning to generate new routings
Types of Directed Flow Paths
Forward and in-sequenceflows in one aisle are best
Forward flows between parallel and adjacent lines of machines separated by a single aisle are okay
Cross flows across multiple aisles are NOT okay
Backtrack flows to an immediately previous machine are okay
Cross flows across a single aisle are okay
• Duplicate machines of the same type at multiple locations
• Use hybrid flowshop layouts
• Cascade flowlines in parallel
How to Maximize Directed Flow Paths
• Bend flowlines into U,W or S shapes
• Develop the layout based on the complete assembly operations process (flow) chart
How to Maximize Directed Flow Paths
How to Minimize Cost of Flows• Design all material flow paths using or
(linear) contours• Design layouts to minimize travel distances for heavy/large unit
loads• Utilize relevant principles of material handling
– Unit load– Utilization of cubic space– Standardization of equipment and methods– Mechanization of processes (if possible, automation of
processes)– Flexibility of equipment and methods– Simplification of methods and equipment– Integration of material, people and information flows– Computerization of material, people and information flows– Utilize gravity to move materials
• Minimize all buffer/storage spaces at machines
• Balance consecutive operations - Use buffers (safety stock) strategically
• Maximize use of small transfer batches - Use “roving” forklifts to serve “zones” on the shopfloor on a First Come First Served (FCFS) basis
• Release materials in controlled quantities - Rely on kanbans (visual scheduling), production rate of bottleneck machines only, firm orders not production forecasts, etc.
How to Minimize Cost of Flows
Guidelines for Design For Flow
Source: Apple, J. M. (1977). Plant layout and material handling. New York, NY: John Wiley.
1. Optimum material flow2. Continuous flow from receiving to
shipping3. Straight-line flow (as practicable)4. Minimum flow between related
activities5. Proper consideration of process vs.
product vs. group vs. alternative layouts6. Minimum material handling distances
between operations and activities7. Heavy material to move least distance8. Optimum flow of personnel –
a. Number of personsb. Frequency of travelc. Space required
9. Minimum backtracking10. Line production (as practicable)11. Operations combined to eliminate or
minimize handling between them12. Minimum re-handling of materials
13. Processing combined with handling14. Minimum of material in work area15. Material delivered to point of use16. Material disposed by one operator in
convenient location for next operator topick up
17. Minimum walking distances betweenoperators
18. Compatible with building (present orproposed)a. Configuration (shape)b. Restrictions (strength, dimensions,
column location and spacing, etc.)19. Potential aisles
a. Straightb. From receiving towards shippingc. Minimum numberd. Optimum width
20. Related activities in proper proximity toeach other
Guidelines for Design For Flow21. Provisions for expected
a. In-process material storageb. Scrap storage and transport
22. Flexibility in regard toa. Increased or decreased
productionb. New productsc. New processesd. Added departments
23. Amenable to expansion in pre-planned directions
24. Proper relationship to sitea. Orientationb. Topographyc. Expansion (plant, parking,
auxiliary structures, etc.)25. Receiving and shipping in proper
relation toa. Internal flowb. External transportation
facilities (existing andproposed)
26. Activities with specific locationrequirements situated in properspotsa. Production operationsb. Production servicesc. Personnel servicesd. Administration services
27. Supervisory requirements givenproper considerationa. Size of departmentsb. Shapec. Location
28. Production control goals easilyattainable
29. Quality control goals easilyattainable
30. Consideration given to multi-floorpossibilities (existing andproposed)
31. No apparent violations of health orsafety requirements
Source: Apple, J. M. (1977). Plant layout and material handling. New York, NY: John Wiley.
Strategies from DFMA Practices
• “Inside-Out”: In high mix environments, keep standard modules and components on the inside and “bolt on” the special features and options on the outside; keep the product variation as far to the end of the line as possible
• “Monument Avoidance”: Avoid component designs that require a new and unique process that has to serve multiple product lines
• “Batch Early”: If processes that necessitate batching (plating, painting, heat treat, ovens, drying/aging) are absolutely necessary, try to design products where these “batch” processes can be used as early as possible (Nothing is worse than requiring an oven/drying cycle in the middle of the Final Assembly Process)
• “Standardize Modules,not necessarily Products”: Offering a broad product mix is a competitive advantage, so reducing product SKU’s may not be a good idea. However, reducing module and component SKU’s should be a core strategy
– Courtesy of Ray Keefe, VP-Manufacturing, Emerson Electric Co.
Strategies from DFMA Practices• “Don’t Hide Quality Risks”: Design the product so that the potential
quality risks remain “hidden” during the sub-assembly and assembly process until they are visually checked ex. a design that needs to “trap” a ball and spring with a cover before the ball and spring are checked for accurate orientation is not good
• “Design for Poke-Yoke”: Not only avoid symmetry but design parts and assemblies with Poke-Yoke in mind
• “Challenge every tolerance”: Nothing is worse than holding tolerances that are not necessary - Tolerances should be analyzed and accepted based on conventional standards
• “Touch 100 times”: Think material handling and orientation while designing. If the product is heavy, are there quick and secure grab points? Can one orientation be used through all processes? Do we need to have special carriers? Remember, the product is designed ONCE, but each unit produced might be touched a 100 times!
– Courtesy of Ray Keefe, VP-Manufacturing, Emerson Electric Co.
Production Flow Analysis
Production Flow AnalysisProduction Flow Analysis (PFA) is a technique for machine grouping, part family formation, cell layout and overall factory layout that was developed by J. L. Burbidge. When used for factory design, PFA consists of four stages, each stage progressively achieving Flow in a smaller portion of the factory.
What is Production Flow Analysis?
Factory Flow Analysis (FFA): Develops a unidirectional flow system joining the various departments in a factory; each department completes all the parts it makes.
Group Analysis (GA): Studies the flows in each of the shops identified by FFA; the operation sequences of parts are analyzed to design manufacturing cells.
Line Analysis (LA): Analyzes the flows corresponding to the operation frequencies and sequences of parts in each of the cells formed by GA; develops a cell configuration that ensures efficient transport inside the cell.
Tooling Analysis (TA): Studies the bottleneck machine in a cell in order to find “tooling families” of parts; families of parts are sequenced consecutively on the machine to minimize lost capacity due to setup changes.
Additional StageShop Layout Analysis (SLA): Develops a shop layout that will minimize intercell flow delays when multiple interdependent cells share “monuments” and common expensive resources.
Stages in PFA Methodology
MATERIAL
1
2
3
4
5
6
9
1
1
3
3
2
84
126
151
53
15
28
161
3
1
1
3
1
1
45
12
8
1 26
27
FINISHEDPRODUCT
324
1
27
DEPARTM ENTS1 = BLANKS2 = SHEET M ETAL W ORK3 = FORGE4 = W ELDING DEPT5 = M ACHINE SHOP6 = ASSEM BLY9 = OUTSIDE FIRM S
1
6
2345
M ATERIALS
FINISHEDPRODUCT
1
6
23 & 45
M ATERIALS
FINISHEDPRODUCT
Factory Flow Analysis
Shop Flow Analysis
Before PFAST Analysis
After PFAST Analysis
K48251A
L48388
L48267B
M44276E
M47693F
L48388M
M48195C
M44276D
E41795
E48596
E34267
E12204
E12288
K47697
E47782
E48586
K34596
E33494
M48265D
K44276C
M45691D
M45691B
M48386H
K34098A
E7392
E46364
E33295
K45199
K43590
M61592
E18694
DMT(3) X X XXX X X XX XDM(3) XX X X X XXX X XXXXPG X X XXXXDXY(3) XXX X X XXXP&GR XPGR X XPGH
PGG XX XP&G XXXXXX XX XXXXXRP XPGB X XX XX XW&P X X X XX
MACHINE/WORKSTATIONWG3 X
COMPONENT – MACHINE CHART. INITIAL RECORD. FORGE.
PART/PRODUCTL48267B
K34596
M48265D
E33494
K44276C
L48388M
E7392
K34098A
K45199
K43590
M61592
M48195C
M44276D
E34267
E12204
E18694
E41795
E48596
M48386H
K48251A
L48388
M45691D
M45691B
M44276E
K47697
E47782
E46364
E12288
E33295
E48586
M47693F
PG XXXXXXDM 3/1 XXXXDXY 3/1 XXRP X GRO
UP-1
FAMILY - 1
P&G XXXXXXXXXXXX ONE “EXCEPTION” XDMT 3/2 XXX X X XDM 3/2 XXXX X XDXY 3/2 XXXX XXW&P XXX X XWG3 X
GROUP-
2FAMILY - 2
PGG XX XPGB XXXXX XPGR XXDMT 3/3 XXX XDM 3/3 XX XP&GR X
GROUP-
3
MACHINE/WORKSTATION
FAMILY –3COMPONENT – MACHINE CHART. AFTER FINDING FAMILIES AND
GROUPS
Potential Cells in this Machine Shop
MATERIAL
1HS4
2HS
3MO
4DS
5MV
8SA
65 17
611
1
2
3
111
3 2 4
41 2 5 4 4 16 2
2
GROUP FLOW NETW ORK DIAGRAM - GROUP 2
SIMPLIFIED GROUP FLOW NETW ORK - GROUP 2
8SA
4DH
6MH
7DS
5MV
MATERIALS
1HS4
72
42
72
17
15 85
2
2
1
1
4 3
1
6
7DH
6MH
Cell Flow Analysis
Turret Pos. Tool Description1 Face and Rgt. Turn (use as stop)2 Center3 Drill4 Boring5 Finish Turn6 Free7 Free8 Part Off
Notes – Additional tools should be placed in a free position where possible thus preserving the
basic settings
Tool Flow Analysis – Type I
Digit 1 Digit 2 Digit 3 Digit 4 Digit 5 Digit 6 Digit 7 Digit 8Dimension Matching with
3 Jaw chuckMethod ofholding Bore
dia. Overall
Dw L Specialattachments Boring tool carrier Quadruple single point
tool holderMaterial Surface
accuracy
03 Jawchuckouter
< 40 L/Dw<0.1 w/o w/o w/o GG-formedroughturned 0
13 Jawchuckinner
42 160 41……100 L/Dw<0.5 Axial copying
Boring, counter-sinking, reaming,tapping.
Uniform cutting, w/oaccuracy. ST-formed
fine turned 1
2 4 Jawchuck 60 250 101…
200
L/Dw up tolimit ofchuck
Face copying Only outer turning.Uniform cut, or staggeredcut, with accuracy,simple boring up to 48 .
NE-formed outer fit 2
3 Springcollet 80 315 301…
400 Shafts<500 2 Axis copying 1 with 2Outer shaping,chamfering, inserting withform tool, not copying.
GG-cut off inner fit (+outer) 3
4 Mandrel orarbor 80 400 401…
500Shafts500…1000
Conical Surfacetapering12
Shaping, etc. withform tool; with 3; notcopying.
3 with 4 ST-cut off positionalaccuracy 4
5 Jig orfixture 125 500 501…
1000Shafts1m…2m Steep cone
Inner shapinginserting chamfering;with 3; copying.
Shaping, insertingchamfering with formtool; copying.
NE-cut off polishing 5
6 Betweencenters > 1000 Shafts
2m…5mShort threadmilling
Inner & outer at thesame time 5 with 2 & 1 or 3 GG-bar knurling,
etc. 6
7 Chuck-center
Shafts >5m
Threading withlead screw 6 with back tool holder ST-bar 7
8 Steadies Thread withcopying NE-bar 8
9Eccentric(faceplate)
Unroundcopying
Automatic cycle with 4th &5th digits non-metal 9
Tool Flow Analysis – Type II
Role of PFA in the Lean Enterprise
F a c to ryF a c to r y
F a c to ry /S ite
S h o p
C ell
M a c h in eF a c to ry
F a c to r y
F a c to r y
E n terp r ise
S u p p lier N e tw o rk s
Production Flow Analysis and Simplification Toolkit
M4 M1 M3
2
3 1
2 1
M2
P-Q Analysis P-Q-$ Analysis
P-R Analysis Type IVFrom-To Chart
Flow Diagram
Inter-Module Flow Diagram
P-R Analysis Type II
P-R Analysis Type IIIP-R Analysis Type I
Product Mix Rationalization
Evaluation of Current and Proposed Layouts
Waste Assessment in the Current State
Product Mix Segmentation
Feasibility Analysis for Cellular Manufacturing
Cell Layout
Design of Hybrid Cellular Layouts
Revision of Manufacturing Routings
Value Network Mapping
Initial Menu of Lean Advisory Tools powered
by PFAST
Lean Advisory Tools using PFAST
Success Stories
Before After
Before After % ReductionLead Time 7 weeks 3 1/2 weeks 50 %Cycle Time 8 hours 6 hours 25 %Part Travel (ft.) 2,450 ft 1,578 ft 36%Walking (ft.) 3,150 ft 1,578 ft 50%WIP 360 pcs. 200 pcs. 44%
Factory Flow Analysis
Forge Shop
< 10001000-20002000-30003000-4000>4000
M4
M1
M2
M5
M7
M6
M3
External
Machine Shop
33
12
41
1
17 39
40 21 22
10
16 9
11
56
2
63
7
12
8
28
29
2627
50 4
4825
52
55 54 53 57
WE
LDIN
G F
IXTU
RE
S
W ELDINGFIXTURES
INC
OM
ING
KIT
RA
CK
IN SPEC TION TABLE
MISC ELLANEOU S BEN CH
LATHE
MILL
SAWDR ILLDR ILL
BE
AD
M/C
EXPANDER
CH
EC
K &
STR
AIG
HTE
N
W E LDBO O TH #2
W E LDBO O TH #1
BE
NC
H
W E LDBO O T H #3
W E LDBO O T H #4
GR
IND
ER
INC OMING C HECK &STR AIGH T RAC K
OP O U TG OING R ACK
SHOP AIDSTOR AG E
Co-located machines, equipment, tooling and processes to minimize part transportation and waiting
Emphasis placed on FlowEliminate wasteful steps that impede the speed at which the parts can flow through the assembly process
Create a visual workplace that is self-explaining, self-regulating and self-improving.
Waste Has No Place to Hide
Welding Cell
Flexible Machining Cell
7
6
5
1
4
23
9 8
10
12
11
7
6
5
1
4
23
9 8
10
12
11
Finish Machining of Castings
Pipe Fabrication Jobshop
201
862
816
801
859 908960
810
812 813 814 817
835
815 811
866
853
915
885
825
834
837
860176
840
845843
839
830 198
179175
839 839 839
841
842
955
2500
2550958
2620 2610 2640
838
2650 2615
2670
177 178 820 880
949 948 818940
881922
889 856
907
Module 2
Module 1
Cell 1 Cell 2
Raw
Material
Raw
Material
S
S
Assembly of Industrial Scales
811ASM
770W
HLB
R
771H
CFI
N/
771T
EXTR
761POLSH
761SPWLD
761ASY
761DBURR
761TWELD
761HSTUD/761PEM
761FORM
761PUNCH
763SHR16
763IRONW
763PRBRK
763DRLPR
764PSMA
771VIKIN
764/763 WELDM
763BDSAW
763ACRO
Acknowledgements
The PRO-FAST Program is enabled by the dedicated team of professionals representing the Defense Logistics Agency, Department of Defense and industry. These team mates are determined to ensure the Nation’s forging industry is positioned for the challenges of the 21st Century. Key team members include: R&D Enterprise Team (DLA J339), Logistics Research and Development Branch (DLA – DSCP), and the Forging Industry Association (FIA).
Acknowledgements
Project Champion: Craig KaminskiProject Engineer: Haydn Garrett
Project Champion: Andrew UlvenProject Engineer: Jim Huiras
Project Champion: Joe KracheckProject Engineer: John Lucas
Project Champion: John WilburProject Engineers: Thomas Slauta
WWWEBER METALS, INC.ALUMINUM AND TITANIUM FORGINGS
Project Champion: Thomas StysProject Engineer: Jorge Alvarez
Project Champion: Kevin ShawProject Engineer: Greg Muniak
Project Champion: Dick JohnstonProject Engineer: Todd Sheppard
PFAST Development TeamDr. Rajiv RamnathDr. Rajiv Shivpuri
Dan Gearing
Jon TirpakRussell BeardVicky McKenzie
Top Related