CHAPTER -4 PROBLEM DESCRIPTION

4.1 Motivation to Present Work In the preliminary investigation, it was observed that most of the machines are idle. The reasons for the most of the machines to remain idle have been investigated through the work sampling approach. Pilot study with 95% confidence level and ±5% margin of error is considered. Initial random observations for pilot study is taken as 100 to get percentage of working (q) and idle times (p). Using the values obtained from pilot study i.e. percentage of working and idle times and margin of error, actual no. of. observations required for random study is computed for the central job shop, to get the existing performance of the job shop and was observed that the maximum machine utilization for most of the machines is less than 45%. It was found that the allotment of jobs on the machines is not proper in most of the cases. The jobs are being loaded randomly as and when they arrive without taking into consideration the better scheduling rules for given conditions. Due to this most of the jobs are delayed at the same time most of the machines also remain idle. The present project makes an attempt to provide better scheduling rule by making use of inter-arrival time patterns, processing times, due date settings data observed in the job shop while conducting work sampling study. The inter-arrival times, processing times, pilot study and random study are shown in the following tables.

15

OBSERVATIONS

TABLE-1 ARRIVAL TIMES OF JOBS BETWEEN 9:00AM TO 5:00 PM
S.NO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 WORK ORDER NO. BF-333 BF-1041 BF-1079 BF-1080 BF-1091 MMSM-109 MMSM-475 CCCD-904 CRMP-280 EMD-183 ENMD-299 ENMD-300 ENMD-175 ESF-149 ESF-300 LMMM-195 LMMM-737 RMHP-1003 RMHP-1004 RMHP-1005 DESCRIPTION Flange coupling of Auxiliary Hoist Coupling for M-41 Fan Worm Shaft (POS-7) Worm Shaft (POS-6) KA-1 Through G/Box input pinion shaft Driving Axle for D710 Wheel Turbine Shaft Repair Repair of conveyer pulleys Modified extended Tongue (Left) DN600 Sliphon Flange Motor side coupling Pump side coupling Shaft for Impeller Fan DE-11.1 Hammer Pallets Machining Machining of Power Hack saw Drive Wheel Hub For U Shaft of BV5 Liner for Modified Base Frame Machining of Bore for Body Structure Manufacturing Sleeve for Bogie Manufacturing Distance piece for Bogie DATE OF ARRIVAL 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 02-02-2006 03-02-2006 03-02-2006 03-02-2006 03-02-2006 03-02-2006 TIME OF ARRIVAL 9:33AM 10;02 AM 10:35 AM 11:06 AM 11:36 AM 12:O7 AM 12:39 AM 01:11 PM 01:41 PM 02:12 PM 02:43 PM 03:15 PM 03:47 PM 04:18 PM 04:48 PM 9:32 AM 10:04 AM 10:36 AM 11:07 AM 11:37 AM TOTAL 31.1 min ARRIVAL PATTERN (MIN) 33 29 33 31 30 31 32 30 30 31 31 32 32 31 30 32 32 31 31 30 622

MEAN

16

TABLE-2 PROCESSING TIMES OF JOBS

S.NO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

WORK ORDER NO. BF-333 BF-1041 BF-1079 BF-1080 BF-1091 MMSM-109 MMSM-475 CCCD-904 CRMP-280 EMD-183 ENMD-299 ENMD-300 ENMD-175 ESF-149 ESF-300 LMMM-195 LMMM-737 RMHP-1003 RMHP-1004 RMHP-1005

DESCRIPTION Flange coupling of Auxiliary Hoist Coupling for M-41 Fan Worm Shaft (POS-7) Worm Shaft (POS-6) KA-1 Through G/Box input pinion shaft Driving Axle for D710 Wheel Turbine Shaft Repair Repair of conveyer pulleys Modified extended Tongue (Left) DN600 Sliphon Flange Motor side coupling Pump side coupling Shaft for Impeller Fan DE-11.1 Hammer Pallets Machining Machining of Power Hack saw Drive Wheel Hub For U Shaft of BV5 Liner for Modified Base Frame Machining of Bore for Body Structure Manufacturing Sleeve for Bogie Manufacturing Distance piece for Bogie

PROCESSING TIMES (MIN) 22 24 23 19 18 21 23 20 15 17 18 20 21 15 20 17 19 17 18 26

TOTAL 393 MEAN 19.65MIN

17

TABLE-3 PILOT STUDY ON GENERAL SHIFT MACHINES Taking Initial Random Observations as 100

Machine No. 38A 22A 14A 14B 14D 28A 28B 33B 33C 46 16I 16J 16K 16P 16R 16O 23A 22E

Bay

Machine description

% of working time (q) 45 12 30 35 43 33 40 35 26 79 21 31 21 25 34 23 42 30

% of idle time (p) 55 88 70 65 57 67 60 65 74 21 79 69 79 75 66 77 58 70

AB AB BC BC BC BC BC BC BC BC CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD

Plano milling machine, Table size 4000*1600 Sqmm. Radial Drilling Machine Medium Duty Lathes, Swing 1000mm*admit 3000 mm Medium Duty Lathes, Swing 1000mm*admit 3000 mm Medium Duty Lathes, Swing 1000mm*admit 3000 mm Plano milling machine, Table size 1000*3000 Sqmm. Plano milling machine, Table size 1000*3000 Sqmm. Universal Milling machine Universal Milling machine Gear Hobbing machine Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Column Drill Radial Drill

No. Of observations (n) required for random study for ±5% margin of error 396 169 336 364 393 354 384 364 308 266 266 343 266 300 359 284 390 336

18

TABLE-4 RANDOM STUDY ON GENERAL SHIFT MACHINES

Machine No. 38A 22A 14A 14B 14D 28A 28B 33B 33C 46 16I 16J 16K 16P 16R 16O 23A 22E

Bay AB AB BC BC BC BC BC BC BC BC CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD

Machine description Plano milling machine, Table size 4000*1600 Sqmm. Radial Drilling Machine Medium Duty Lathes, Swing 1000mm*admit 3000 mm Medium Duty Lathes, Swing 1000mm*admit 3000 mm Medium Duty Lathes, Swing 1000mm*admit 3000 mm Plano milling machine, Table size 1000*3000 Sqmm. Plano milling machine, Table size 1000*3000 Sqmm. Universal Milling machine Universal Milling machine Gear Hobbing machine Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Light Duty Lathes, Swing 500mm*admit 1500 mm Column Drill Radial Drill

No. Of observations (n) obtained from pilot study for ±5% margin of error 396 169 336 364 393 354 384 364 308 266 266 343 266 300 359 284 390 336

% of working time (Q) 42 15 30 35 47 33 40 38 26 83 21 35 21 30 37 23 40 30

% of idle time (P) 58 85 70 65 53 67 60 62 74 17 79 65 79 70 63 77 60 70

19

4.2 Scope of Present Work In a dynamic job shop (chosen job shop), jobs for processing arrive at the system at different points of times with certain specified inter-arrival time distributions such as exponential distribution. The jobs may require a certain number of operations to be performed in a particular sequence on specified machines. A job proceeds to the machine for the first operation, if the machine is free, then the processing of that job starts. Otherwise, i.e., if the machine is busy, the job joins in the queue in front of the machine. In this manner the jobs may form queues in front of the machines. Whenever a machine becomes free, a job from the machine’s queue is taken up for processing based up on a scheduling rule. The scheduling rule makes use of the attributes of the job such as operation times, due date, number of the operations etc. In order to select the scheduling rule for optimizing a given performance measure, detailed simulation experimentation is often required. The present project makes an attempt in this direction. In the present work, the scheduling problem in a general job shop production system is considered. A comparative analysis of the relative performance of the different sets of scheduling rules has been made. More specifically, the present work involves the following.  Understand the various aspects of job shop scheduling problem.  Determine the experimental conditions such as inter-arrival time of jobs, due date settings etc.  Identify scheduling rules and performance measures. Totally, 8 scheduling rules and the performance measures such as mean flow time, mean tardiness and percentage of tardy jobs have been considered.  Develop a simulation model using the general purpose programming language Visual C++.  Conduct the experiments for the various settings of experimental conditions and using different scheduling rules.  Perform analysis of the results obtained.

20