PRODUCTIVITY IMPROVEMENT OF A FLOW LINE

LAYOUT USING HEURISTIC LINE BALANCING

TECHNIQUES
Md Ashraf uddin, Naime hussain
Department of Industrial and Production Engineering, Shahjalal University of Science and Technology, Sylhet, Bangladesh
Ashraf0168@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Assembly flow Line production is one of the widely used production systems. The problem of Assembly Line Balancing deals with the distribution of
activities among the workstations which lead to the maximum utilization of human resources and facilities without disturbing the work sequence. This thesis
paper addresses the performance analysis of and productivity improvement of a flow line layout of a selected sewing line by applying line balancing
techniques. The core idea behind the thesis work was to analyze the line performance and reducing the number of workstations by line balancing techniques as
well as reducing idle time in order to improve productivity of a flow line. . During the investigation attention had been concentrated on what impact the idle
time of the existing line has on the daily production rate and the productivity. If workstation can be reduced, idle time of each workstation can be reduced to a
remarkable label. The theme of this research is to find out the way to reduce number of workstations to balance the line and reducing idle time to increase line
efficiency. Finally line balancing technique is proposed to the management that will be used for productivity improvement of the existing flow line as well as
increase of daily output of the sewing section. The existing line was analyzed and improvement has been done by line balancing techniques.
[Keywords: Assembly line balancing (ALB), balancing techniques, idle time, line efficiency, labor productivity, Cycle time]

1. INTRODUCTION continuously. Flow line layout is used in such industries

Flow line layout refers to a production system where the
work stations and equipment are located along the line of
production, as with assembly lines. Usually, work units are
moved along a line (not necessarily a geometric line, but a
set of interconnected work stations) by a conveyor
Productivity measures enhance an organization’s strategic
planning .Not only does it provide a gauge for ascertaining
whether strategic objectives have been achieved or not
(and to what extend) but it also relates these measure to
productivity performance. As a diagnostic took, the
behavior of productivity ratios over a period of time will
reveal problematic areas that require immediate attention
and will focus on these high priority areas for
improvement. The concept of productivity analysis in
garment sectors may give misleading results, if not used
carefully. Productivity analysis refers to the process of
differentiating the actual data over the estimated data of
output and input measurement and presentation.
Productivity Analysis is conducted to identify areas for
potential productivity improvement projects based on
statistical data collected during the analysis. The analysis
also pinpoints areas of delays and interruptions that cause
loss of productivity. The first step in any productivity
improvement initiative is to understand the current state of
the operation. Productivity analysis provides baseline
indicators that will also yield data which will be used to
determine possible productivity improvement objectives
and potential cost savings. Productivity improvement
means that workers are putting out products more quickly
or completing services at a more rapid rate than before. In
most businesses, the more products that workers produce
or services they complete, the more money comes in to the
business, priority of improving productivity is high for
many business owners. In a flow-line the workstations are
arranged in a liner path. Flow line layout is used to
manufacture high volumes of products with high
production rates and low costs. Separate dedicated flow
line is created for each product. Dedicated machines are
used to manufacture the products at high production rates.
These machines are generally expensive. A large volume
of the products must be produced in order to justify the
cost of such expensive machines. Flow line layout is most
suitable to manufacture high volumes of products
where raw materials are fed at one end and finished
products are produced continuously at the other end. Thus
flow line layout is utilized in mass production industries. A
flow-line may have a better flow by balancing it. Line
balancing techniques can be used to make a better flow of
a flow-line. Line Balancing means balancing the
production line, or any assembly line. The main objective
of line balancing is to distribute the task evenly over the
work station so that idle time of man and machine can be
minimized. Line balancing aims at grouping the facilities
or workers in an efficient pattern in order to obtain an
optimum or most efficient balance of the capacities and
flows of the production or assembly processes. Assembly
Line Balancing (ALB) is the term commonly used to refer
to the decision process of assigning tasks to workstations
in a serial production system. The task consists of
elemental operations required to convert raw material in to
finished goods.
2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction: Productivity is essentially the efficiency
in which a company or economy can transform resources
into goods, potentially creating more from less. The gains
in productivity are one of the major weapons to achieve
cost and quality advantages for competition.
2.2 Literature related to line balancing: the literature
related to line balancing are as follows:
1. Precedence constraint: Products cannot move to other
stations if it does not fulfill required task at that station. It
should not skip stations because certain tasks need to be
done before others according to the set sequence.
2. Cycle time restriction: Cycle time is maximum time
for products spend in every workstation. Different
workstation has different cycle time.
3. Heuristic Approach: A heuristic technique ("find" or
"discover"), often called simply a heuristic, is any
approach to problem solving, learning, or discovery that
employs a practical method not guaranteed to be optimal
or perfect, but sufficient for the immediate goals. Where
finding an optimal solution is impossible or impractical,
heuristic methods can be used to speed up the process of
finding a satisfactory solution. Heuristics can be mental
shortcuts that ease the cognitive load of making a decision.
4. Line balancing tools: There are several line balancing 8. Normal Time = Average work element Cycle Time *
tools for line balancing .Some line balancing tools are: Performance Rating
i. Production sheet. 9. Standard Minute Value, SMV = Normal Time +
ii. Daily production report (Normal Time × Allowance)
iii. Production boards 10. Workstation Idle Time = Process cycle Time – Total
iv. Time study SMV in workstation
2.3 Basic definition and terminologies: The terminology 11. Labor Productivity = Actual Production per day /No.
of assembly line are as follows: of workers
1. Work Element: The process is divided into its 12. Machine Productivity= Actual Production per day /No.
component tasks so that the work may be spread along the of machines
line. Work element is a part of the total process content in
the line. Shoulder joining is a work element of t-shirt 3. METHOD USED
manufacturing process. The following methods are used in this research work.
2. Process: Consists of work elements that produce a 1. Largest candidate rule (LCR)
product. T-shirt manufacturing is a process which consists 2. Killbridge and wester method (KWR)
of several work elements. 3. Ranked positional Method (RPW)
3. Standard minute value (SMV): Standard minute value 4. Least predecessor rule (LCR)
is the time required for a qualified worker working at
standard performance to perform a given task. The SMV 4. DATA ANALYSIS
includes additional allowances for rest and relaxation, The collected data of the selected sewing line are given
machine delay and anticipated contingencies below in table 1
4. Average Work Element Cycle Time: It is the Table 1 collected data for a selected sewing line
measured average time to complete the work of a work
element. It does not include rating factor and allowances.
5. Process Cycle Time: Process cycle time is time
between two successive assemblies coming out from the
line. It is calculated as the maximum time allowed at any
workstation.
6. Normal Time: It is work element cycle time that takes
into account performance rating factor.
7. Work Stations: It is a location on the line where a
combination of few work elements is performed.
8. Delay or Idle time at Station: This is the difference
between the process cycle time of the line and total time in
a work station.
9. Precedence Diagram: This is a diagram in which the
work elements are shown as per their sequence relations.
Any job cannot be performed unless its predecessor is
completed. A graphical representation, containing arrows
from predecessor to predecessor have the successor work
element. Every node in the diagram represents a work
element.
10. Balance Delay or Balancing Loss: This is a measure
of line-inefficiency. Therefore, the efficient balancing is
done to minimize the balance delay. Due to imperfect
allocation of work along various stations, there is idle time
to station.
2.4 necessary equations of line balancing: The equation
needed to solve line balancing problems are as follows:
1. Line Efficiency = Total SMV /Process Cycle Time *
no. of workstation * 100% The table shows the work elements which are represented
2. Balance Delay = (100-Line Efficiency) % by number 1 to 14.A precedence diagram is illustrated
3. Balance Efficiency = Theoretical minimum no. of
workers /Actual no. of workers
4. Theoretical Minimum no. of worker = Total Time in
all workstations /Process Cycle Time
5. Theoretical Minimum no. of workstation = Total
SMV" /"Process Cycle Time
6. Daily Output = (No. of workers * working hours per
day * 60 * line efficiency %) /Total SMV
7. Productivity = Actual Line Output /Line Capacity ×
100%
below

Figure 1: Precedence diagram for the assembly line

The time study was conducted on the sewing line and detailed time study is given below:
Table 2: Time study sheet for the flow line

Existing allocation of workstation

4. Labor productivity = = =

37 units per worker

Applying LCR method
The steps involved in LCR method are:

Step 1: List all elements in descending order of work

As work element 12 has the largest operation time 0.794, it

is the bottleneck operation. So cycle time calculated as
0.794 seconds. So the daily output will be (60*10/0.794) =
755 units per day.
Step 2: Assignment of workstation
Theoretical calculation
1. Total allocated time = productive time + idle time
= 5.005 + 7.314 = 12.319 minutes per cycle

2. Line Efficiency =

100% = % = 40.625%

3. Balance Delay = (100-line efficiency) % = (100-

40.625) % = 59.375%
Step 3: Calculation
1. Actual no of workstation = 10

2. Line Efficiency = ×100%

= 100% = 63.035%

3. Balance Delay = (100-line efficiency)% = (100-

63.035) % = 36.965%
4. Daily output = (10*60/0.794) = 755 units

5. Labor productivity = = =

75 .5 75 units per worker

Applying KWR Method
The steps involved in KWR method are:
Step 1: assigning work elements into column

Step 4: Calculation
1. Actual no of workstation = 8

2. Line Efficiency = ×100%

Step 2: arranging work elements according to their = 100% = 78.79%

column value
3. Balance Delay = (100-line efficiency)%
= (100-78.79) % = 21.21%

4. Labor productivity =

= 94.33 94 units per worker

Applying RPW method
The RPW method has following steps:
Step 1: Drawing the precedence diagram with SMV

Step 3: Assignment of workstation

Step 2: Work elements arranging according to their
RPW Value
Step 3: Assignment of workstation
Step 4: Calculation
1. Actual no of workstation = 7

2. Line Efficiency = ×100%

= 100% = 78.79%

3. Balance Delay = (100-line efficiency)% = (100-

78.79) % = 21.21%

4. Labor productivity = = =

94.375 94 units per worker

Applying LCR method
To apply the following LCR method following steps are
taken:
Step 1: Drawing precedence diagram

Step 4: Calculation
1. Actual no of workstation = 9

2. Line Efficiency = ×100%

= 100% = 70.04%

3. Balance Delay = (100-line efficiency)% = (100-

Step 2: arranging work elements according to the 70.04) % = 29.96%
number of predecessor
4. Labor productivity = = =

83.33 83 units per worker

All the four methods of line balancing are applied in the
flow line are based on heuristic approach. The result of
all the methods are not optimum but closed to the
optimum. The calculation of all the methods are
compared to each other and the best one is suggested to
the production manager of the flow line. The following
table shows the comparison and summary of the
calculation of the line balancing methods.
Table 3: Comparison of the methods

Step 3: Assignment of workstation

If the cycle time is calculated from the demand of the

existing line the result will be different. As the weekly
demand is 4088 units of the existing line and there are 6
working days in a week, the daily output is calculated as
4088/6 = 681.333 units per day .
The target cycle time in minute per unit can be calculated
as

Cycle time in minute = =

= 0.88 minutes per unit

After applying all the methods using the new cycle time
0.88 minutes the summary of calculation are given below:
The data analysis has been done for two different cycle
times. One cycle time is calculated to meet the daily
demand from the line and another cycle time is calculated
to increase the actual daily output of the line. For the target
output the cycle time is calculated as 0.88 minutes and
other cycle time is calculated as 0.794 minutes. for the
cycle time 0.794 minutes the best result has come out from
the kilbridge and wester method and for the cycle time
0.88 minutes the best result has been come out from the
ranked positional weight method. The reason for choosing
methods and cycle time is given below:
Reason for choosing cycle time 0.794 minutes and
kilbridge wester method: higher actual daily output
Reason for choosing cycle time 0.88 minutes and
ranked positional weight method: higher line efficiency
and productivity.
CONCLUSION
The main purpose of the research paper is to represent the
improvement of a flow line layout using heuristic line
balancing techniques. Among all the methods the Ranked
positional weight (RPW) methods has better line
efficiency and labor productivity than other methods used
in this research. In RPW method the no of workstation is
reduced to 7 from 14. As a result the labor productivity is
increased. Because of reducing idle time the line efficiency
is also increased. So it is recommended to the production
manager of the flow line to implement line selected
methods for the selected sewing line.
References
1. Dr. Allison, W. Pearson,principles of management
and production retrieved (23 december 2016) from
2. Engineering, Universidade Federal do Paraná, Cel.
Francisco Heráclito dos Santos, 210, Curitiba, Paraná,
Brazil).
3. Groover, M. k. P. (Work Systems and the Methods,
Measurement, and Management of Work
4. Irny, S.I. and Rose, A.A. (2005) “Designing a
Strategic Information Systems Planning Methodology
for Malaysian Institutes of Higher Learning (isp- ipta),
Issues in Information System, Volume VI, No. 1,
2005
5. Islam N. and Ripon R. (August 2006) “Productivity
improvement through line balancing of a garments
industry”.
6. Khan M. and Islam S. (January 2010) “Productivity
improvement through line balancing of a garments
industry”.
7. Khan M. and Islam S. (January 2010) “Productivity
improvement through line balancing of a garments
industry”.
8. Lewis-beck and micheal S. (1995). Data analysis: An
Introduction, Sage Publications Inc
9. Mahmud M. (March 2007) “Line efficiency: A case
study of a garments factory”
10. Md. Rezaul Hasan Shumon, K. A.-U.-Z. A. R. (2010).
Productivity Improvement through Line Balancing in
Apparel Industries. Khulna University of Engineering
and Technology, Khulna, International Conference of
Industrial Engineering & Operations Management
11. Mika Hannula et al, (1997), Obstacles to Productivity
Improvement in Small and Medium Sized Industries:
Institute of Industrial Management, Tampere
University of Technology,
12. Milas, Gene H.( May 1990 ) “Assembly Line
Balancing …..Let’s Remove the Mystery.” Industrial
Engineering, pp.31-36.
13. Mottaleb Khondoker A. and Sonobe T. The National
Graduate Institute For Policy Studies (GRIPS),Tokyo,
Japan Human Capital and Industrial Development:
Evidence from the Machinery Industry in Bangladesh.
14. Offiong, O. E. G. D. A. (2013). Productivity
Improvement in Breweries through Line Balancing
Using Heuristic Method. University of Uyo, Uyo,
Nigeria. International Journal of Engineering Science
and technology (IJEST).
15. Panneerselvam, (2007), R. Production and Operations
Management; Work Study, p-191.
16. Rahman M. and Alauddin Md, (April 2005)
“Productivity analysis with respect to time study in a
selected industry”.Sen A. and Hossain R. (April 2005)
“Evaluation of productivity and improvement
strategies for an Agro-Machineries production unit”.
17. Richards, L. (2009). An Introduction to Performance
Rating. Factors affecting performance rating in an
automobile industry.
18. Ruth Taylor,Department of Management, Monash
University, SERVICE PRODUCTIVITY AND
STAKEHOLDER THEORY.
19. S. Mat, Z. M., and C. Law (2002). Work Improvement
at a Car Manufacturing Company,” Jurnal Teknology,
(36A), 55-63.
20. Shimizu, Masayoshi, Wainai, Kiyoshi & Avedillo-
Cruz, Elena, (1997) , Value Added Productivity
Measurement and Its Practical Applications- with
linkage between productivity and profitability, Japan
Productivity Center for Socio-Economic
Development, Page-7-10.
21. Timo Hildebrandt,Paul Sullivan,Alice Wang, Systems
Thinking and the Theory of Constraints.
22. Yookkasemwong, S. Pitchaya-anankul, S. and
Bussarakamwadee, A. (2005) ‘Process Improvement
for increasing efficiency of cable box process’, a
project for bachelor’s degree in Industrial
Engineering, School of Engineering, King Mongkut’s
University of Technology thonburi.
23. http://misweb.cbi.msstate.edu/~COBI/faculty/users/
srl102/files/autoweb/MGT3114/
LayoutOperationssmanagement_1.pdf
24. Paul K. (1994). Defining and measuring productivity.
From
http://www.oecd.org/std/productivity-stats/40526851.
pdf
25. Sarkar, P. Retrieved 25 May, 2014, from
http://www.onlineclothingstudy.com