See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/259500992

Production Concepts Complexity

Conference Paper · April 2013

CITATIONS READS

0 1,323

1 author:

Ionel Botef
University of the Witwatersrand
43 PUBLICATIONS   111 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Education and Culture View project

Aging aircraft: concerns and possible solutions View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ionel Botef on 02 January 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Recent Advances in Mathematical Methods and Computational Techniques in Modern Science

Production Concepts Complexity

IONEL BOTEF
School of Mechanical, Industrial, and Aeronautical Engineering
University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg
1 Jan Smuts Avenue, Johannesburg
SOUTH AFRICA
ionel.botef@wits.ac.za http://web.wits.ac.za/academic/ebe/mecheng/

Abstract: - Studies show that the manufacturing enterprise aims to use a number of concepts in order to
efficiently conduct their operations. However, due to the complexity of these concepts, there are many
shortcomings that affect their implementation. Therefore, the purpose of this paper is to explore why
manufacturing and production concepts didn’t succeed to lead to a more efficient engineering enterprise. Based
on the paper's qualitative findings supported by authorities, evidence, or logic, essentially, it is argued that the
various manufacturing concepts are interdependent and so, should not be viewed in isolation, but that they
should be viewed as components of a broad framework that unite them and that finally leads to a more efficient
manufacturing enterprise.

Key-Words: - Manufacturing, Production, Concepts, Unity, Integration.

1 Introduction However, due to its complexity and in spite of

Problems that are difficult to solve are often hard to
understand because the causes and effects are not
obviously related. Consequently, a new field of
science called complex systems emerged which
studies how parts of a system give rise to the
collective behaviours of the system, and how the
system interacts with its environment [1].
The field of complex systems is not limited to
social systems, the brain, or weather, but it cuts
across all traditional disciplines of science, as well as
engineering, management, and medicine, and is
considered as the ultimate of interdisciplinary fields
[1]. Therefore, in order to avoid examples of failed
engineering projects, many efforts have been directed
to solve manufacturing’s complex problems.
Consequently, in order to understand and manage
the complexity of a manufacturing and production
enterprise, and so braking down the barriers between
various disciplines and approaches, researchers and
practitioners developed and used of number of
concepts. In Latin 'concipere' means to conceive. So,
a concept is considered a general notion or idea
derived from specific instances or occurrences that
bring diverse elements into basic relationship. Also, a
concept is a statement of an idea expressing how
something might be done or accomplished that may
lead to an accepted procedure [2]. Furthermore,
talking about concepts, Einstein said he had always
believed that the invention of scientific concepts and
the building of theories upon them was one of the
great creative properties of the human mind [3].
intense research, there are still many shortcomings in
implementing the concepts within manufacturing
enterprise.
Subsequently, section 2 formulates the problem,
research gaps, and constructs the research question.
Section 3 presents the methodology. Then, in section
4, a number of manufacturing concepts are reviewed
and, based on the existing body of knowledge, the
paper answers to the research question. Finally,
section 5 draws conclusions about the hypotheses and
highlights its theoretical and practical implications.
2 Problem Formulation
When the nature of the different manufacturing
processes is examined, one is faced with many issues
such as inherent instability of the process, mixture of
continuous and batch operations, incomplete and/or
excessive data, changed processes, or temporal
problems [4]. In addition, historically, manufacturing
systems architectures were characterised as
inflexible, centralised, monolithic, and at least with
partly proprietary systems [5].
Furthermore, the manufacturing industry has been
considered to be based on the customer-centred
policy strategy [6] and in a paradigm shift that
indicates the move from:
 mass to a customised production [7],
 from local competitiveness to
international competitiveness, and from

ISBN: 978-1-61804-178-4 53
 Recent Advances in Mathematical Methods and Computational Techniques in Modern Science

 an economy of scale to an economy of collaboration, commitment, communication,

information, flexibility, and intelligent
manufacturing [8].
However, despite more complex manufacturing
processes and use of various concepts in production
strategies, production companies have been
incapable of rapidly responding to change and
perform less than required [5]. Consequently, the
following
compromise, consensus, continuous improvement,
and coordination [8] (Fig. 1), and an activity that
requires key aspects such as talents, tasks, teams,
techniques, technology, time and tools [8] (Fig. 2) for
the design and implementation of subsystems that
reason about a common product model [10] [12].
Consequently, if the above aspects are not
achieved, CE is not expected to lead to a more
efficient engineering enterprise.

Research Question: Why manufacturing and

production concepts didn’t succeed to lead to a more
efficient engineering enterprise?

3 Methodology
The scientific method starts when you ask a question
about a problem that you observed and ends with a
solution to the problem, so it forms a cycle.
In order for the scientific method to answer the
research question, it must be about something that
you can measure, preferably with a number.
However, because of the manufacturing's research
lack of mathematical models, this paper answers
hypotheses and research question using support from
authorities (research literature published by reputable
international journals), evidence, or logic. Fig.1 CE 7Cs

4 Problem Solution
This section divides the main problem into two
sub-problems of the utmost importance, such as
concurrent engineering, group technology, and
flexibility. Please, note that due to space constraints,
every effort was directed towards minimising the
critical review dedicated to each concept.

4.1 Concurrent engineering

Concurrent Engineering (CE) concept was initially
proposed as a potential means to minimize the
product design development and delivery time [8],
increase industrial competitiveness by improving
quality and decreasing costs [9], and replace the
traditional sequential 'over the wall' approach to
design and manufacture with parallel processes.
However, today, in addition to the initial view, CE Fig.2 CE 7Ts
is regarded as: a parallel approach to the 'total job' [8]
that implies that company's activities overlap in time, 4.2 Group technology
but also implies that organizational boundaries are Group Technology (GT) has been an approach to the
blurred [10]; a very difficult task for reasons such as batch production of parts in medium quantities that
lack of sufficient computer-based tools capable of had production disadvantages such as downtime for
supporting cooperative decision making activities changeovers and high inventory carrying costs. GT
[11]; a cooperative problem solving that includes

ISBN: 978-1-61804-178-4 54
 Recent Advances in Mathematical Methods and Computational Techniques in Modern Science
minimized the above disadvantages by recognizing
that although the parts are different, there are families
of parts that possess similarities in design and
production.
GT takes advantages of the inherent economics of
the flow-production methods with: reduced setup
times, lower work in progress (WIP) and lower
inventory due to reduced lead-time, better and
simplified scheduling, standardized tools and their
improved control, and use of standard process plans.
GT could be implemented using two techniques:
1. manual techniques - in which case the system
is called cellular manufacturing, and
2. automated techniques - in which case the
system is called a Flexible Manufacturing
System (FMS).
FMS are highly automated GT machine cells,
consisting of a group of processing stations (usually
CNC machines), interconnected by an automated
material handling and storage system and controlled
by an integrated computer system that coordinates
the activities so as to achieve a smooth overall
operation of the system. However, because an FMS
relies on the principles of GT, and no manufacturing
system can produce an unlimited range of products,
an FMS is capable of producing a single part family
or a limited range of part families.
Consequently, the GT and FMS approaches will
not always lead to a more efficient engineering
enterprise.
4.3 Modularity
The modularity concept has been a strategic approach
which enhances design and manufacturing solutions,
and a powerful framework for identifying, building
and using organization's knowledge assets [13] by:
 providing a responsive manufacturing
through flexibility/agility within product and
process [14],
 managing variety and reducing application
complexity in an efficient manner [14],
 lowering application development and
maintenance costs [8], and a
 rationalised introduction of new technology.
Modularity ultimately provides a means to address
and meet efficiently a broad range of customer
requirements. Successfully adopted in a number of
specific industries, such as computer technology and
software development, the modularity concept was
considered that works not only with physical
ISBN: 978-1-61804-178-4
components, but also could be used to create more
flexible, configurable processes, and in general all
types and delivering services, therefore becoming a
central concept of the contemporary management
thinking [3].
Also, there is a modular design and a modular
architecture that defines the interaction between
modules [15]. Modularity is also related to the 'centre
of process gravity', where a centre of gravity is a
central focus about which all other activities revolve
[16].
The modular concept could effectively be
implemented by breaking a complex structure into
smaller, manageable modules characterized by
independent, self-contained, and co-operative
subsystems that form a product, manufacturing
system, or business [13][14]. However, the
modularity concept cannot be performed in isolation
at a discrete point in the development process.
Instead, it must have a perspective of a total view of
the whole process including requirements and their
physical implementation [17].
Consequently, if the above aspects are not
achieved, the modularity approach will not always
lead to a more efficient engineering enterprise.
4.4 Flexibility
Manufacturing flexibility was defined as the ability
of a manufacturing system to cope with changing
circumstances [18].
Regarded as a multi-dimensional concept,
flexibility must include, as a rational way [14], a
modular product realisation process, with
modular-based working practices and manufacturing
processes, therefore making, for example, process
planning a promising candidate for enhancing the
adaptability and flexibility of manufacturing systems
[19].
Past research on manufacturing flexibility tended
to focus on advanced technology as a means for
achieving flexibility. For example, Flexible
Manufacturing Systems (FMS) have been
characterized by a high degree of flexibility, but also
an increased complexity [20], with many of the
operations stochastic in nature, and which made
scheduling a difficult task [21].
Therefore, as technology represents just one
method of delivery flexibility, researchers have
recently begun to look beyond advanced
manufacturing systems to alternative methods of
delivering flexibility. Today, flexibility is considered
a multi-dimensional concept that, apart from
advanced technology, includes also: equipment
flexibility, material flexibility, material-handling
flexibility, process flexibility, and routing flexibility
55
 Recent Advances in Mathematical Methods and Computational Techniques in Modern Science
[18], and options such as to make, buy, or out-source
solutions [8].
In addition, the form of hard-flexibility must be
complemented by soft-flexibility, a technically
demanding task [22], but as soft-flexibility increases,
the complexity of the software system will also
increase, therefore there is the need to select the right
technology and infrastructure for an information
system [23].
Consequently, if the above aspects are not
achieved, the desired flexibility will not always be
achieved and will not lead to a more efficient
engineering enterprise.
Fig.3 Flexibility concept
4.5 Just-In-Time
Just-In-Time (JIT) manufacturing concept was
intended to eliminate the waste in all business
activities, and an objective of producing the right part
in the right place at the right time (in other words,
'just in time'). Waste results from any activity that
adds cost without adding value, such as the
unnecessary moving of materials, the accumulation
of excess inventory, or the use of faulty production
methods that create products requiring subsequent
rework.
The general idea is to establish flow processes
(even when the facility uses a jobbing or batch
process layout) by linking work centres so that there
is an even, balanced flow of materials throughout the
entire production process, similar to that found in an
assembly line.
ISBN: 978-1-61804-178-4
JIT is typically implemented using various
techniques. These include key elements such as: (1)
meeting demand fluctuations through end item
inventory rather than through fluctuations in
production level, (2) reducing lead times in
manufacturing and purchasing by applying group
technology and cellular manufacturing concepts, (3)
reducing the number of jobs waiting to be processed
at a given machine, (4) improving the coordination
and cooperation between successive processes, (5)
reducing delivery lead times through close
cooperation with suppliers, and (6) implementing
supplier quality assurance and zero defects quality
programs.
4.6 Lean manufacturing
Lean Manufacturing (LM) also emphasised the
elimination of complexity [24] and waste, with waste
defined as anything other than the minimum amount
of equipment, materials, parts, space, labour, energy,
defects, and time that are essential to add value to the
product [25].
LM combines the best features of both mass
production and craft production, but the use of a
single tool to solve all of the problems led to concept
misapplication and reduced employee confidence in
the lean philosophy [24]. Consequently, LM
approach will not always lead to a more efficient
engineering enterprise.
However, lean implied high productivity and
quality but it did not necessarily imply being
responsive [26], hence the need for an organisation to
be more flexible and responsive to customers, which
led to the concept of agile manufacturing as a
differentiation from the lean organization.
4.7 Agility
Agility is a natural development from LM to a new:
 philosophy of manufacturing cooperation
[27],
 way of running companies in order to
improve their competitiveness [25],
 concept that has a direct bearing on the lead
time [21] and on the speed of response to
new market opportunities [25],
 business concept that integrated
organizations, people and technologies into a
meaningful highly responsive unit [26], and
so, leveraging people and information [25].
However, agility requires flexibility as its first
necessity [23], therefore, if this is not achieved, the
56
 Recent Advances in Mathematical Methods and Computational Techniques in Modern Science
desired agility will not always be achieved and will
not lead to a more efficient engineering enterprise.
4.8 Virtual manufacturing
Virtual Manufacturing (VM) is the extended
enterprise or the networked firm consisting of a
temporary consortium of companies that come
together to share costs, core skills, and jointly serve
one or more markets [28].
VM is an extension of the concurrent engineering
strategy that used a distributed model, a client-server
network, and a virtual central database accessible by
multiple partners [27], and which required a robust
information infrastructure for products, processes
and production systems [29].
However, if the requirements of CE are not
achieved, the desired virtual manufacturing approach
will not always be achieved and will not lead to a
more efficient engineering enterprise.
5 Conclusion and Implications
This paper showed that it is both theoretically and
practically possible to find solutions to the problem
concerning manufacturing concepts.
Based on the paper's qualitative findings, the
research problem of why manufacturing and
production concepts didn’t succeed to lead to a more
efficient engineering enterprise can now receive a
concise answer.
Essentially, it is argued that the various
manufacturing concepts are interdependent and so,
they should not be viewed in isolation. For example,
lack of modularity leads to lack of flexibility, which
will lead to lack of agility, and so less lean
manufacturing operations.
Also, it could be highlighted that, in daily life one
can get along well without thinking of concepts. But,
if you want to generate new ideas, design ways
forward, or understand complex situations, then you
need to develop concepts [30].
Finally, it could be concluded that a unitary
framework view of manufacturing concepts could
lead to a more efficient manufacturing enterprise.
References:
[1] Bar-Yam, Y., The Dynamics of Complex Systems,
Westview Press, 2003.
[2] US Military, Dictionary of military and
associated terms, US Department of Defence,
2005.
ISBN: 978-1-61804-178-4
[3] Barnhart, C. L. and Barnhart, R. K., The World
Book Dictionary, World Book, Inc., Chicago,
1989.
[4] Rodd, M. G, Verbruggen, H. B, and Krijgsman,
A. J., Artificial intelligence in real-time control,
Engineering Applications of Artificial
Intelligence, Vol.5, No.5, 1992, pp.385-399.
[5] OMG, Object Management Group,
Manufacturing Special Interest Group,
Manufacturing Enterprise Systems, Report
MFG/96-01-02, 1996.
[6] Moreno L., Aguilar R. M., Martin C.A., Pineiro
J.D., Estevez J. I., Sigut J. F., Sanchez J. L.,
Patient-centred simulation to aid
decision-making in hospital management,
Simulation J., Vol. 74, No. 5, 2000, pp. 290-304.
[7] Meziane, F., Vadera, S., Kobbacy, K. and
Proudlove N., Intelligent systems in
manufacturing: current developments and future
prospects, Integrated Manufacturing Systems,
Vol.11, No. 4,2000, pp.218-238.
[8] Prasad, B., Converting computer-integrated
manufacturing into an intelligent information
system by combining CIM with concurrent
engineering and knowledge management,
Industrial Management and Data Systems,
Vol.100, No.7, 2000, pp.301-316.
[9] Pham, D. T. and Ji, C. (1999), A concurrent
design system for machined parts, Proc. Instn.
Mech. Engrs, Part B, Journal of Engineering
Manufacture, vol.213, 1999, pp.841-846.
[10] OMG, Object Management Group,
Manufacturing Special Interest Group,
Manufacturing Enterprise Systems, Report
MFG/96-01-02, 1996.
[11] Abdalla, H. S. and Knight, J., An expert system
for concurrent product and process design of
mechanical parts, Proc Instn Mech Engrs, Part B,
Journal of Engineering Manufacture, vol.208,
1994, pp.167-172.
[12] Han, J. H. and Requicha, A. A. G.,
Modeller-independent feature recognition in a
distributed environment, Computer Aided
Design, Vol.30, No.6, 1998, pp.453-463.
[13] Sanchez, R., Fitting together a modular
approach, Manufacturing Engineering, October,
2002, pp.216-218.
[14] Marshall, R. and Leaney, P. G., A systems
engineering approach to product modularity,
IMechE, Proc Instn Mech. Engrs, Part B,
Journal of Engineering Manufacture, Vol.213,
1999, pp. 847-851.
[15] DRM Associates, www.npd-solutions.com,
downloaded August 2004.
57
 Recent Advances in Mathematical Methods and Computational Techniques in Modern Science
[16] Cusack, M., Automation and robotics – The
interdependence of design and construction
systems, Industrial Robot, vol.21, no.4, 1994,
pp.10-14.
[17] Botef, I. and Dwolatzky, B., A Novel
Interdisciplinary and Collaborative CAPP for
Discrete Manufacturing, WSEAS Transactions on
Computers, Vol.4, No.6, 2005, pp.521-528.
[18] Narasimhan, R and Das, A., An empirical
examination of sourcing role in developing
manufacturing flexibility, I. J. of Production
Research, Vol.38, No.4, 2000, pp.875-893.
[19] Joo, J., Park, S., and Cho, H., Adaptive and
dynamic process planning using neural networks,
I. J. of Production Research, Vol.39, No.13,
2001, pp.2923-2946.
[20] Ndiaye, D., Bigand, M., Corbeel, D., and
Bourey, J. P. (2002), Information system for
production engineering: contribution to
maintaining consistency of composite data using
an object-oriented approach, I. J. of Computer
Integrated Manufacturing, vol.15, no.3, 2002,
pp.233-241.
[21] Shukla, C. S. and Chen, F. F., An efficient part
launching heuristic for intelligent control of
flexible manufacturing systems, Transactions of
NAMRI/SME, Vol.25, 1997, pp.269-274.
[22] Bullinger, H. J., Faehnrich, K. P., and
Linsenmaier, T., A conceptual approach for an
architecture of distributed objects for the
integration of heterogeneous data processing
systems in manufacturing companies, I Journal
of Production Research, vol.36, no.11, 1998,
pp.2997-3011.
ISBN: 978-1-61804-178-4
View publication stats
[23] Ünver, Ö. H. and Anlagan, O., Design and
implementation of an agent-based shop floor
control system using Windows-DNA, Int. J. of
Computer Integrated Manufacturing, vol.15,
no.5, 2002, pp.427-439.
[24] Pavnaskar, S. J., Gershenson, J. K. and
Jambekar, A. B., Classification scheme for lean
manufacturing tools, Int. J. Prod. Res., Vol.41,
No.13, 2003, pp.3075-3090.
[25] Gunasekaran, A. and Kobu, B., Modelling and
analysis of business process reengineering, I. J. of
Production Research, Vol.40, No.11, 2002,
pp.2521-2546.
[26] Gupta, Y, Gupta, M, Kumar, A, Sundaram, C.
(1996), A genetic algorithm-based approach to
cell composition and layout design problems, I. J.
of Production Research, vol.34, no.2, 1996,
pp.447-482.
[27] Song, L. and Nagi, R., Design and
implementation of a virtual information system
for agile manufacturing, IIE Transactions,
Vol.29, No.10, 1997, pp.839-857.
[28] Akkermans, H. A. and Horst, H., Managing IT
infrastructure standardisation in the networked
manufacturing firm, Int. J. Production
Economics, vol.75, 2002, pp.213-228.
[29] Meziane, F., Vadera, S., Kobbacy, K. and
Proudlove N., Intelligent systems in
manufacturing: current developments and future
prospects, Integrated Manufacturing Systems,
Vol.11, No.4, 2000, pp.218-238.
[30] De Bono, E., How to have a Beautiful Mind,
Vermilion, London, 2004.
58