Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366
DOI 10.1007/s00170-011-3502-4
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Analysis and optimisation of a network of closed-loop
automobile assembly line using simulation
Luis Pinto Ferreira & Enrique Ares Gómez &
Gustavo C. Peláez Lourido & José Diéguez Quintas &
Benny Tjahjono
Received: 14 March 2011 / Accepted: 26 June 2011 / Published online: 12 July 2011
# Springer-Verlag London Limited 2011
Abstract The work presented in this paper describes the
development of a decision support system based on a
discrete event simulation model. The model is aimed at a
specific class of production lines with a four closed-loop
network configuration of automobile assembly and
preassembly lines connected by conveyors. The total
number of pallets on the conveyors (which also act as
intermediate buffers) remains constant, except for the
fourth loop, which depends on the four-door car ratio
implemented between the door disassembly and assembly
stations of the car body. Some governing equations of the
four closed loops are incompatible with the capacities of
several intermediate buffers for certain values of the four-
door car ratio. The simulation model can be used to
assess the impact of variation in the length of the
conveyors (hence, the size of the intermediate buffers)
on the performance of the line. In addition, this paper
also presents a proposal for the alteration of the length of
the intermediate buffers that can maximise the perfor-
mance of the production line and improve the availability
L. P. Ferreira
Escola Superior de Estudos Industriais e de Gestão,
Instituto Politécnico do Porto,
Porto, Portugal
E. A. Gómez : G. C. P. Lourido : J. D. Quintas
Área Ingeniería de los Procesos de Fabricación,
Universidad de Vigo,
Vigo, Spain
B. Tjahjono (*)
Manufacturing Department, School of Applied Sciences,
Cranfield University,
Cranfield,
Bedford MK43 0AL, UK
e-mail: b.tjahjono@cranfield.ac.uk
of the manufacturing system for any value of four-door
car ratio.
Keywords Assembly lines . Closed loops . Conveyors .
Automobile industry
1 Introduction
Simulation is one of the most worthwhile techniques
that enable prediction of dynamic performance of a
complex system by reproducing interactions between
its sub-systems in a computer model [1]. Simulation
modelling can be considered as the construction process
of a model representing a real system and the experi-
mentation using the model with the purpose of better
understanding its behaviour and evaluating the impact of
alternative operational strategies [2–5]. Many of the
advantages ensuing from the use of simulation can be
found in pertinent literature, some of which can be stated
as follows:
& In manufacturing and production systems particularly,
simulation allows production engineers to test new
configurations in the production process without the
need to compromise resources, the costs of which
would be high [1, 6].
& Simulation can be used to explore new resource grading
policies, operational procedures, decision-making rules,
organisation structures and information flow, without
having to interrupt the normal functioning of the system
[3, 7].
& Simulation allows the identification of the bottleneck in
the production line and to test various options with a
view to optimising their performance, thus identifying
352
the causes for delays in the flow of materials,
information and other processes [3, 6, 8].
& Simulation can be used to test explanatory hypotheses
as to how and why a specific phenomenon occurs in the
system [4].
& Simulation allows investigation of a system, which
encompasses a wide time-span in a compressed period
of time, or alternatively, it allows a detailed study of the
system’s performance over an extended time period [9].
& Simulation can be used to better understand the system
and to identify which variables influence its perfor-
mance, thus acting as a support for an improved
understanding of reality so as to explain and describe
it, or as a support in the decision making [10–12].
& It also enables users to test the system’s behaviour when
confronted with new and unexpected situations [3, 12],
as well as constituting a support for decision making
regarding investment in new technologies and equip-
ment, improving production capacity and the manage-
ment of material and human resources [13].
Despite all the benefits, simulation also has a number of
drawbacks, the most significant ones being:
& Simulation does not provide optimal solutions for case-
study problems—it does, however, allow one to
evaluate the system’s behaviour in accordance with
specific scenarios, which are created by the analyst for
the purposes intended [3, 4].
& If the model does not constitute a valid representation of
the system being studied, the simulation results will not
produce much useful information about the real system
[9, 12].
This paper describes the development of a decision
support system that can be used to analyse and optimise the
multistage multiproduct production line supported by
discrete event simulation models. The production line
under study is part of the Volkswagen automobile plant
located in Navarra S.A, Pamplona, Spain, that has been
mathematically modelled by Resano [14]. The simulation
model is implemented in Arena®, a commercial off the
shelf discrete-event simulation tool, and is aimed at a rather
specific class of production lines with a network configu-
ration of four closed loops. This configuration is very
common in the automobile sector.
The work described in this paper aims to extend the work
of Resano [14] who formulated an analytical model for an
assembly line in the automobile sector with a network
configuration consisting of four closed-loop machines
connected by intermediate buffers. The buffers are formed
by conveyors, which at a determined speed, transport
assembly pallets that are not univocally interrelated. Both
in the analytical model and in the simulation model
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366
presented here, the blocking and starvation phenomena of
machines on a complex production line can be analysed. The
proportion of four-door cars between the door disassembly
and assembly stations is also considered.
Using simulation, this work extends the analysis of
networks machines connected by conveyors in a closed
loop configurations, in which the pallets that are not
univocally related to each other. In the existing literature,
e.g. Li et al. [15], Gershwin et al. [16], Matta et al. [17],
Soma et al. [18] and Maggio et al. [19], the total number of
pallets, which exist in the intermediate buffers, remain
constant at any time in each loop. In this work, the
population of one loop depends on an external variable
defined by the proportion of four-door cars. As a conse-
quence of this, the blocking and starvation conditions
depend on this variable.
This paper is structured as follows. Section 2 presents a
review of literature in order to gain understanding the
extent to which the work has been covered ion the body of
knowledge. Section 3 describes the research methodology
adopted followed by a discussion related to the phenomena
of blockage and starvation in Section 4. Sections 5 and 6
present, respectively, the production line under study and
the simulation model developed. Section 7 discusses the
results obtained and covers the validation of the simulation
model. The conclusions and some future work are
presented in Section 8.
2 Literature review
Literature review was carried out to gain understanding the
extent to which the work has been covered in the body of
knowledge. The outcomes of the review have been used as
a starting point in this research and some of the outcomes of
this review are presented in this section.
With the exception of Ladbrook et al. [20] who
presented a simulation study of the camshaft machining
line at Ford Valencia, there appears to be limited evidence
in the literature, especially the academic journals, dealing
with the study of a real closed loop production lines using
discrete-event simulation. There is, however, a wider range
of bibliography and standard textbooks whenever the
purpose of the study presupposes the development of
analytical models for these types of configurations.
Suri and Leung [21] developed a simulation model based
on the Siman language, with the purpose of maximising the
production line rate, with a closed-loop configuration,
through the optimisation of time distribution over the entire
cycle, in all the different work stations. Kouikoglou [22]
developed a model for a network configuration to be used
on a production line, comprising various machines, where
assembly and disassembly operations are undertaken. This
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366
model is based on the first simulator for continuous flow,
introduced by D’Angelo [23], where the discrete traffic of
components is akin to a continuous flow. This study,
however, does not consider the phenomena of blockage
transmission and starvation in a network of various closed
loops.
Douard and Baynat [24] proposed an analytical model to
estimate the performance parameters of a closed-loop
production line, characterised by limited capacity buffers
and failure-prone machines. Soma et al. [18] resorted to the
‘Quest’ language in order to develop a simulation model for
a production line with a closed-loop configuration. The
purpose here was to optimise its functions through a better
production flow balancing. In fact, various rules and
conditions were evaluated so as to ensure a more effective
planning and control of the entire production system.
Nonetheless, for this study, the authors did not take into
account the phenomena of machine blockage and starva-
tion. Neither did they consider an external variable (x).
These factors were included in the simulation model
developed in this study. Zhang [25] created a tool to be
used in the analysis of production lines with a network
configuration of various closed loops. He developed a
graphical user interface and induction model in order to
efficiently analyse the phenomena of blockage and starva-
tion. Nevertheless, for the construction of the model, the
external variable (x), which is represented by the four-door
car body proportion in the simulation model developed
within the framework of this study, was not introduced.
Resano [14] elaborated the first analytical model for an
automobile assembly line with a network configuration of
four closed loops of machines and intermediate buffers
linked by conveyors. This study analyses the influence of
machine operation regimes, which can run on a stationary
or transitory regime. It also analyses the influence of an
external variable (x), which is represented by the four-door
car body proportion, to the propagation of the machine
blockage and starvation phenomena. Ferreira et al. [26]
conducted a comparative analysis between the analytical
model and the discrete-event simulation model applied to
an automobile closed loops assembly line. The line layout
is a network of closed loops system, which is one of the
most common configurations in the automobile assembly
and preassembly lines connected by conveyors. Both the
simulation and analytical models are proven to be powerful,
allowing the study of complicated interactions and uncer-
tainties in both manufacturing and assembly shop-floor
control systems to be carried out. Both also allow the
stakeholders of the model to make effective decisions in
order to be proactive in determining the most appropriate
strategies. Both modelling tools seem to be useful in the
evaluation of the performance of alternative system config-
urations and/or alternative operating procedures. Li et al.
353
[15] developed an analytical model to evaluate and
optimise the performance of an assembly line of semi-
conductors, characterised by a two closed-loop configura-
tion. Their study aimed to evaluate the impact of several
parameters on the performance of the system, such as the
number of circulating pallets and machine processing times,
amongst others.
Ferreira et al. [27] assessed the influence of the variation
of velocity of the first three closed loops on the perfor-
mance of a production line, with a network configuration of
four closed loops of machines and intermediate buffers
consisting of conveyors. The most relevant conclusion
reached by this study lies in the fact that the velocity of the
intermediate buffers consisting of conveyors on the first
three closed loops can be reduced without jeopardising the
performance of the production line. This possibility is
proven to be crucial since it may allow for the reduction of
energy costs associated with the operation of the conveyor
system. Ferreira et al. [28] also evaluated the influence of
the variation in the number of pallets on the first three
closed loops to the performance of the production line with
a network configuration of four closed loops of machines
and intermediate buffers linked by conveyors. This study
highlighted the fact that the number of pallets circulating on
the first three closed loops can be reduced without
significantly affecting the performance of the production
line. This is proven to be useful, since it will reduce costs of
pallets circulating in the loops, hence lowered work in
progress.
3 Methodology
The research methodology adopted to analyse and optimise
the working limits in an automobile assembly line is based
on a set of interrelated sequential steps:
1. Extensive bibliographical revision on production lines
with a closed-loop configuration
2. Modelling of the production line with a four closed-
loop network configuration of machines and buffers
consisting of conveyors
3. Development of a decision support system based on a
discrete-event simulation model, structured in accordance
with the previous modelling procedure undertaken
4. Validation of a simulation model, so as to demonstrate
that it corresponds to an exact representation of reality
5. Evaluation of the impact of the length of the buffers inside
the loops and of the proportion of four-door car bodies to
the operation performance of the assembly line
6. Comparison of the results accomplished by Resano
[14] using analytical methods, with those obtained
using the simulation model developed
354
Fig. 1 Main automobile
assembly line and preassembly
lines [14]
M1 B1,2
7. Proposal for the alteration of the length of buffers
which allows for the optimisation of production line
performance to be translated into the number of cars
produced per hour regardless of the proportion value of
the four-door car bodies
4 The phenomena of blockage and starvation
In a production line, the phenomenon of blockage tends to
propagate to the preceding workstations located upstream.
Similarly, when a blockage occurs, downstream work-
stations may become idle due to a failure in the workflow
of machines. This phenomenon is known as starvation. It is
important to note that starvation tends to propagate to the
subsequent workstations located downstream on the pro-
duction line [29]. Thus, on a production line, the state of a
Fig. 2 Parameters of the auto-
mobile assembly line
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366
M5 B5,6 M6
M7
B2,5 B6,4
B3,7 B7,3
M2 B2,3 M3 B3,4 M4
B4,2
B4,1
machine affects the rest of the system since the phenomena
of blockage or starvation may occur both upstream as well
as downstream of the point where flow was interrupted [17].
The selection of an appropriate capacity for the
workstation buffers constitutes an important factor,
since it can contribute to a reduction in the occurrence
of the blockage and starvation phenomena on the line.
According to Bulgak and Sanders [30, 31], in this
instance, it is important to consider the random fluctua-
tions of the production rates in each of the workstations,
as well as that of delays in the materials handling system
between each station. If the buffer size is too large, the
materials will take longer to go through; if the buffer size
is too small, there is a risk that the short delays in the
processing of parts at a given workstation may fill up the
buffer and, consequently, blocking the upstream work-
stations. In this way, if the number of pallets on the
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366 355

system is constant, the optimum number of pallets could
be determined in such as way that the effect of machine
blockage and starvation can be minimised (and thus the
production rate is maximised).
An example of the optimisation of buffer sizes on a
production line can be found in Altiparmak et al. [32],
where the authors developed simulation models with the
same purpose in mind. According to Roser et al. [33], one
of the sensible ways to increase the performance of a
production line is by adjusting the size of the buffers. The
reason for this is that the initial cost of this alteration is
usually trivial in comparison adding workstations or

Fig. 3 Flexibility map for the X=0.3: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 1,2
production line in operation: the
length of intermediate buffer
1
B1,2, the proportion of

Number of Cars / Hour

four-door car bodies (X=0.3; 0,8
X=0.36; X=0.37; X=0.38;
X=0.7; X=0.97) and the 0,6
number of cars per hour
0,4

0,2

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Length of Conveyor B 1,2 (m)

X=0.36: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 1,2

1
Number of Cars / Hour

0,8

0,6

0,4

0,2

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Length of Conveyor B 1,2 (m)

X=0.37: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 1,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Length of Conveyor B 1,2 (m)

X=0.38: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 1,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Length of Conveyor B 1,2 (m)
356
Fig. 3 (continued)
60,00
Number of Cars / Hour
50,00
40,00
30,00
20,00
10,00
0,00
0,00
60
Number of Cars / Hour
50
40
30
20
10
0
0 200
redesigning the layout. The buffers serve two purposes: to
reduce machine starvation time by ensuring the supply of
parts to the machines whilst the machine is starved from the
upstream machines and to reduce machine blockage,
through the extension of the space available for the
allocation of parts. It is thus possible to increase the pace
of the production system. With this in mind, Roser et al.
[33] developed a simulation model to estimate the effect,
which the alteration of buffer capacity could produce on the
performance of the production line studied. Furthermore,
Matta et al. [17] proceeded with the analysis of machine
buffer sharing, where the parts were sent to a common
buffer to prevent machine blockage.
5 Model of the assembly line
Figure 1 shows the main automobile line, as well as the
door and front axle preassembly lines, as a network of
four closed loops of machines (M). Intermediate buffers
(B) formed by the conveyors connect one machine to
another. For the purpose of initial analysis, the cycle time
for each machine is intentionally fixed and deterministic.
Each of the intermediate buffers has a limited capacity
depending on the number of pallets it can contain: B1,2 =
80 pallets, B2,3 =37 pallets, B3,4 =30 pallets, B4,1 = 123
pallets, B2,5 = 330 pallets, B 5,6 = 39 pallets, B6,4 = 161
pallets, B4,2 = 124 pallets, B3,7 = 157 pallets, B7,3 = 135
pallets. On the first three loops, the speed (V) of each of
the conveyors are as follows: V1,2 = 16 m/min, V2,3 =16 m/
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366
X=0.7: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 1,2
100,00 200,00 300,00 400,00 500,00 600,00 700,00
Length of Conveyor B 1,2 (m)
X=0.97: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 1,2
400 600 800 1000 1200
Length of Conveyor B 1,2 (m)
min, V3,4 = 16 m/min, V4,1 = 16 m/min, V2,5 =25 m/min,
V5,6 =25 m/min, V6,4 =25 m/min, V4,2 =25 m/min, V3,7 =
45 m/min, V7,3 =45 m/min.
The first closed loop comprises machine M1, which
represents the car body sequencing store, machine M2,
which represents the first branch of the main assembly line,
machine M3, which represents the chassis assembly line,
machine M4, which represents the second and final branch
of the main assembly line and the intermediate buffers B1,2,
B2,3, B3,4 and B4,1, which decouple machines M1, M2, M3
and M4, respectively [14, 34–36].
The second closed loop consists of the door disassembly
stations, located in the first branch of the main assembly line,
which is represented by machine M2, the door preassembly
line, which is represented by machine M5, the door
inspection line, which is represented by machine M6, the
door assembly stations, located in the second branch of the
main assembly line, which is represented by machine M4 and
the intermediate buffers B2,5, B5,6, B6,4 and B4,2, which
decouple machines M2, M5, M6 and M4, respectively.
The third closed loop constitutes the chassis assembly
line, which is represented by machine M3, the front axle
preassembly line, which is represented by M7, and the
intermediate buffers B3,7 and B7,3 which decouple machines
M3 and M7, respectively.
The total number of the car bodies, door and front axle
assembly pallets stored in each of the intermediate buffers
of the three first closed loops remain constant at any time
and are defined by Eqs. 1–3. This fact, as well as other
analyses undertaken to evaluate the influence of different
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366 357

variables, which interfere in the performance of the between the door disassembly stations, located at M2, and
automobile assembly line being studied, has been previ- the door assembly stations, located at M4. This variable can
ously analysed in [14, 34–36]. take on values of between 0 and 1.
n25 þ n56 þ n64 þ n5 þ n6 ¼ ðn2 þ n3 þ n4 þ n23 þ n34 Þ  ð1 þ xÞ
n12 þ n23 þ n34 þ n41 ¼ 237 ð1Þ
ð4Þ
n25 þ n56 þ n64 þ n42 ¼ 450 ð2Þ
Where n5 and n6 are the numbers of stations M5 and M6;
n2 is the number of stations at M2, for the door disassembly
n37 þ n73 ¼ 138 ð3Þ stations; n3 is the number of stations at M3 and n4 is the
number of stations at M4 for the door assembly stations.
The fourth closed loop defines the relationship between The values of n2, n3, n4, n5 and n6 remain constant. By
the number of pallets with car doors in different preassem- replacing the sum of their values in Eq. 4, the following is
bly states and the number of pallets of cars with obtained [14]:
disassembled doors via an external variable (x), according
n25 þ n56 þ n64 þ 60 ¼ ð216 þ n23 þ n34 Þ  ð1 þ xÞ ð5Þ
to Eq. 4. This variable represents the four-door car ratio

Fig. 4 Flexibility map for the X=0.98: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 1,2
production line in operation: the 60
Number of Cars / Hour

length of intermediate buffer 50

B1,2, the proportion of four-door
40
car bodies (X=0.98; X=0.99;
X=1) and the number of cars 30
per hour 20
10

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Length of Conveyor B 1,2 (m)

X=0.99: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 1,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Length of Conveyor B 1,2 (m)

Critical Point (maximisation of production line performance): B12 = 405.86m – X=1

X=1: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B1,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Length of Conveyor B1,2 (m)
358 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366

The simulation model presented in this paper is based on 6 Model building

Eqs. 1–5 in order to determine the number of pallets which
must circulate on each of the four closed loops on the The simulation model was built using Arena®, a discrete-
automobile assembly line analysed. event simulation tool [37, 38] with the objective of

Fig. 5 Flexibility map for the Critical Point (maximisation of production line performance):
production line in operation: the
length of intermediate buffer (B4,2 = 421.8 m) – X=0
B4,2, the proportion of four-door X=0: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2
60
car bodies (X=0; X=0.1;

Number of Cars / Hour

X=0.2; X=0.3; X=0.36; 50
X=0.37; X=0.4) and the 40
number of cars
per hour 30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.1: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.2: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.3: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366 359

Fig. 5 (continued) X=0.36: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60

Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.37: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60

Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.4: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

allowing the users to evaluate the performance of the
automobile assembly line being studied, through the
variation of different parameters, thus contributing to a
better definition of the most efficient planning and control
system. With this purpose in mind, a decision support
system was developed, which enables automatic generation
of different simulation models. This feature also allows the
users, at any stage of the simulation run, to interact with the
system to be developed through the introduction of various
parameters, such as:
& The proportion of four-door car bodies (x)
& The processing time for each machine
& The production sequence based on the type of car (two- or
four-door)
& The speed and length of the conveyors (intermediate
buffers)
& Simulation time
& The number of pallets circulating on the first three loops
Figure 2 illustrates the graphical user interface, which
allows the user to set the abovementioned parameters.
Furthermore, in the model developed, the reliability of
machines was parameterised according to the values
specified in Resano [14], which include mean time between
failure and mean time to repair.
Since it is impossible to know, a priori, what is the best
strategy to follow in order to optimise the entire production
process, a decision support system is required. The system
is an information system implemented on a computer and is
used for support the decision making process. The system
will also supply the information that will aid users of this
tool to test the system under different operation conditions.
The aim of using simulation as a decision support tool is
to evaluate the performance of a given system during a
specific period of time. Most simulation models start off
with an initial condition (empty system and with free
resources) [39]. For example, a production line usually
begins without any parts, be they on the waiting line or on
360 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366

the machines. Thus, since there is no congestion at the start
of simulation, the parts can enter this empty system swiftly
compared to a real situation where the system may be
congested as resources are being occupied [37, 38]. In fact,
the observation gathered during the initial period of
simulation will affect the accuracy of the model’s perfor-
mance measures, leading to the formulation of erroneous
conclusions regarding its performance. It is, therefore,
important to exclude this initial (transitory) period so that
the observations gathered do not affect these measures [40–
42]. In accordance with this, a warm-up period of 56 h
(3,360 min) was chosen, during which the data collected
were not considered for statistical purposes. The duration of
this time period resulted from the analysis of the behaviour
of the simulation model developed, since it was then
possible to eliminate any ‘noise’ that might have interfered
in the performance measures obtained.
In Resano [14] and Resano and Luis [35], the incompat-
ibility between Eqs. 2 and 5 was demonstrated (see Section 5).
These define the total number of pallets on the intermediate

Fig. 6 Flexibility map for the X=0.7: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2
production line in operation: the 60

Number of Cars / Hour

length of intermediate buffer
50
B4,2, the proportion of four-door
car bodies (X=0.7; X=0.8; 40
X=0.89; X=0.9; X=0.91; 30
X=0.94; X=0.95; X=0.96)
and the number of cars 20
per hour 10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.8: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.89: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.9: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366 361

Fig. 6 (continued) X=0.91: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60

Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.94: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60

Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.95: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.96: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

buffers in the second and fourth loops, with some of the
maximum and minimum capacities of the corresponding
intermediate buffers for the specific values of variable x. This
incompatibility reveals that practically the assembly line
cannot operate for x<0.37, in both the stationary and
transitory regimes, and for x>0.97, in the stationary regime.
Through the simulation model developed in this study
and in the automobile production line being analysed, it can
be verified that the system did not function for the values of
x<0.37 and x>0.97, due to blockage and starvation which
occurred on the line.
7 Validation and experimentation
As with any simulation projects, validation is an important
phase to ensure that the model is a true representation of
reality and can then be used in the decision making. In the
context of this work, the validation of the model was based
on two propositions. Firstly, as previously referred in
Section 6, the results obtained through the simulation
model are identical to those obtained by Resano [14] and
Resano and Luis [34, 36]. These demonstrated that the
automobile assembly line cannot operate for values of x<
362 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366

0.37 and x>0.97, due to the incompatibility between Eqs. 2
and 5 (see Section 5).
Based on this fact, and bearing in mind that simulation
models and analytical models are frequently used to
validate each other [43–45], the simulation model is
considered valid and is a true representation of reality. This
is supported by the fact that the results from both the
simulation model and the analytical model are within 5% to
10% accuracy [46]. Through the simulation model pro-
posed in this study, it can also be observed that once the
minimum buffer capacity specified in Resano [14] and
Resano and Luis [35] was reached, a continuous supply of
transport and assembly pallets to machines was maintained
[26].
The abovementioned facts reinforce the credibility of
the simulation model in the context of this study.
Therefore, it is an adequate representation of reality and
can thus be used as a support tool in formulating

Fig. 7 Flexibility map for the X=0.97: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2
production line in operation: the 40

Number of Cars / Hour

length of intermediate buffer 35
B4,2, the proportion of four-door 30
car bodies (X=0.97; X=0.98; 25
X=0.99; X=1) and the 20
number of cars 15
per hour 10
5
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.98: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=0.99: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

60
Number of Cars / Hour

50
40

30
20

10
0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)

X=1: Number of Cars / Hour vs Length of Conveyor B 4,2

1
Number of Cars / Hour

0,8

0,6

0,4

0,2

0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Length of Conveyor B 4,2 (m)
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366
decisions that will contribute to an improvement in the
performance of the multistage multiproduct production
line being studied.
In Resano and Luis [34], different options were analysed
with the purpose of widening the possible range of values
for the external variable (x), which do not cause the
blockage of the production line. By carrying out a number
of simulation runs, it can be observed that:
& Low values of the external variable x resulted in a lower
number of door pallets on the intermediate buffers B2,5,
B5,6 and B6,4. Thus, since the number of pallets on loop
2 is constant and equal to 450, the length of
intermediate buffer B4,2 must be extended to prevent
the blockage of machine M4 and, consequently, the
blockage of the entire production line
& High values of the external variable x resulted in a
higher number of door pallets on intermediate buffers
B2,5, B5,6 and B6,4. There will therefore be a lower
number of door pallets on intermediate buffer B4,2.
Bearing this in mind, a significant accumulation of car-
body transport and assembly pallets on intermediate
buffers B1,2 and B4,1 can be expected, since there is a
lower number of door pallets on B4,2, which will cause
starvation on Machine M2. Therefore, due to the
accumulation of pallets on B1,2 and B4,1, a blockage is
expected in machines M1 and M4, and consequently, the
entire production line.
As a solution strategy for the aforementioned issues, the
impact to the system’s operation whenever the length of
intermediate buffers B1,2 and B4,2 was altered should be
investigated. In the real model, the reference values for B1,2
and B4,2 are 357 and 230 m, respectively.
Figures 3 and 4 show the results for different scenarios
which were simulated by varying the length of intermediate
buffer B1,2 as well as the proportion of four-door car bodies.
By analysing these, it can be concluded that the production
line can operate for values above 0.97 if intermediate buffer
B1,2 is extended. An example of this is the result obtained
for a scenario assessing the impact of length variation on
the intermediate buffer B1,2, for a four-door car body
proportion equals 1. Here, it can be observed that for a B1,2
length that is higher than or equals 370.18 m (83 pallets),
the production line operates smoothly and the number of
cars produced per hour is approximately that of 9.5 cars on
average. On the other hand, for a B1,2 that is longer than or
equals 405.86 m (91 pallets), the performance on the
production line can be maximised and the number of cars
produced per hour is approximately 48.
Figures 5, 6 and 7 show the results obtained after the
variation in length of intermediate buffer B4,2 as well as that
of the proportion of four-door car bodies. It can then be
363
concluded that the line can operate on x values below 0.3 if
the intermediate buffer B4,2 is extended. An observation of
this fact is that of the result obtained and reached when the
impact of length variation on intermediate buffer B4,2, with
a four-door car proportion equal to 0 is evaluated. Here, it
can be seen that for a B4,2 length equals or higher than
421.8 m (228 pallets), the production line can smoothly
operate and the number of cars produced per hour is
55.625.
From previous analysis where results of the various
scenarios tested are presented in Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, it
can be concluded that it is viable to increase the interval
between the possible values of external variable x, with
which the automobile production line can operate. Con-
sidering the data presented in these figures, Table 1
presents a comparative analysis of the results presented
by Resano [14], through analytical models, and those
obtained by the use of the simulation model proposed in
this study. From this analysis, it can be concluded that the
results are similar and can therefore be considered
accurate.
Considering the results presented in Figs. 3, 4, 5, 6 and
7, Table 2 proposes the limit values (in accordance with the
critical points mentioned previously) for the length of
buffers B1,2 and B4,2, which allow for the maximisation of
performance on the production line, regardless the propor-
tion value for four-door car bodies. This fact is presented in
Fig. 8 where the content of which represents the four-door
car body proportion (x), based on the number of cars per
hour, when the new values proposed are used for the length
of intermediate buffers B1,2 and B4,2.
8 Discussion and conclusions
In this paper, an automobile assembly line and different
preassembly lines were modelled as a network of four
closed-loop machines and intermediate buffers represented
by a conveyor system. The closed loop configuration is
Table 1 Capacity of B1,2 and B4,2 based on the value interval for
external variable x, with which the production line is able to operate
Buffer Buffer capacity Buffer capacity Value interval for
(results— (results—analytical external variable x,
simulation model) by with which the
model) Resano [14] production line is
able to operate
B1,2 83 pallets 84 pallets 0.37≤x≤1
B4,2 228 pallets 227 pallets 0≤x≤0.97
Comparative analysis—simulation model vs analytical model
364 Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366

Table 2 The length of intermediate buffers B1,2 and B4,2 based on the & The tool constitutes the first simulation model devel-
value intervals of external variable x, which allow for the max-
oped for a production line with a four closed-loop
imisation of production line performance
network configuration, which allows for the analysis of
Length of the Buffer Value intervals of the phenomena of machine blockage and starvation on a
intermediate capacity the external variable
buffer x, with which the complex production line, where the external variable is
production line considered. This represents the proportion of four-door
can operate car bodies at the car-body door assembly and disassem-
Real model B1,2 357 m 80 pallets 0.37≤x≤0.97
bly stations.
B4,2 230 m 124 pallets
The most significant relevant conclusion contributed in
Alteration B1,2 405.86 m 91 pallets 0≤x≤1
proposal B4,2 421.8 m 228 pallets this study which has not been presented in literature of the
speciality until now lies in the fact that the values for the
length of buffers (B1,2 and B4,2) are presented. These
maximise the performance of the production line, translated
into the number of cars produced per hour, regardless the
widely used in automotive assembly lines. Using a discrete- proportion value for four-door car bodies. In addition to
event simulation tool, a representative model of this line better understanding of the performance of the production
was built with the purpose of providing the production line being studied, the simulation model includes the
engineers with a better understanding and assessment of the conditions required to improve the competitive advantages
line performance. of the companies.
This paper contributes to the body of knowledge in the This study has also emphasised the relevance of
following manner: computer simulation within the virtual design environments
that can reproduce the behaviour of many real systems.
& It compares the results of the analytical models Although simulation does not give optimal solutions for the
presented by Resano [14], with those obtained by problems under study, it does, however, enable evaluation
resorting to the simulation model developed. of the system’s behaviour using ‘what-if’ scenarios created
& It presents the performance of a production line with a by the analyst for specific contexts.
four closed-loop configuration based on the length of For future work, further research will be undertaken in
the two intermediate buffers consisting of conveyors order to expand on the following aspects:
(B1,2 and B4,2).
& It proposes the alteration of the length of the intermediate & The behaviour of the production line when a new car
buffers (B1,2 and B4,2), which maximises the performance type is introduced
of the production line and improves the availability of & The study and optimisation of the behaviour of a
the manufacturing system for any value of x. closed-loop production line when there is a variation in
& It presents a decision support tool based on a discrete- the processing times for each of the machines
event simulation model. This will allow for the & The analysis of the energy consumption of an opera-
automatic and flexible generation of the different tional closed-loop production line, the speed and length
simulation models for an automobile assembly line. of the intermediate buffers consisting of conveyors, as
Once the data are introduced, no other intervention by well as the number of pallets circulating on the first
the user is required in the construction of the models. three closed loops

Fig. 8 The proportion of four- B4,2 = 421.8 m & B1,2 = 405.86 m

door car bodies (x) based on the 60
number of cars per hour
Number of Cars / Hour

50

40

30

20

10

0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Four-Car Ratio (x)
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366
References
1. Benedettini O, Tjahjono B (2009) Towards an improved tool to
facilitate simulation modelling of complex manufacturing sys-
tems. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 43:191–199, Springer
2. Villa A, Ares Gómez JE (1987) A methodology to analize
workshop lines by discrete event dynamic models. In: Mital A
(ed) 9th International Conference on Production Research, vol I.
ICPR, Cincinnati, pp 2072–2078
3. Shannon RE (1998) Introduction to the Art and Science of
Simulation. In: Medeiros DJ, Watson EF, Carson JS, Manivannan
MS (eds) Proceedings of 1998 Winter Simulation Conference.
IEEE, Baltimore
4. Ingalls RG (2001) Introduction to Simulation. In: Peters BA,
Smith JS, Medeiros DJ, Rohrer MW (eds) Proceedings of the
2001 Winter Simulation Conference. IEEE, Baltimore
5. Andersson M, Olsson G (1998) A Simulation based decision
support approach for operational capacity planning in a customer
order driven assembly line. In: Medeiros DJ, Watson EF, Carson
JS, Manivannan MS (eds) Proceedings of the 1998 Winter
Simulation Conference. IEEE, Baltimore
6. Banks J (2000) Introduction to Simulation. In: Joines JA, Barton
RR, Kang K, Fishwick PA (eds) Proceedings of 2000 Winter
Simulation Conference. IEEE, Baltimore
7. Ares E, Peláez G (1997) Integración de línea y célula flexibles en
un modelo jerárquico para la planificación y programación de la
producción. XII Congreso Nacional de Ingeniería Mecánica,
Anales de Ingeniería Mecánica, Revista de la Asociación
Española de Ingeniería Mecánica
8. Villa A, Fiorio G, Ares Gomez EJ (1987) Production planning
and control in multi-stage multi-product systems. In: Kusiak A
(ed) Modern Production Management Systems. Elsevier,
Amsterdam
9. Guimarães R, de Carvalho V (1984) CAPS—ECSL, Experiência
de modelagem e simulação aplicada a um sistema de elevadores.
Universidade do Minho, Braga
10. Pinto Ferreira JJ (1995) Suporte do Ciclo de Vida dos Sistemas
Integrados de Fabrico através de Modelos Executáveis sobre
Infra-estruturas de Integração. Doctorate Thesis, Faculty of
Engineering at Universidade do Porto
11. Law AM, Kelton DW (1991) Simulation Modeling & Analysis,
2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
12. Rubinstein RY, Melamed B (1998) Modern Simulation and
Modeling. Wiley, Hoboken
13. Mclean C, Leong S (2001) The expanding Role of Simulation in
Future Manufacturing. In: Proceedings of 2001 Winter Simulation
Conference
14. Resano Lázaro A (2007) Análisis Funcional y Optimización de la
Distribuición en Planta de una Línea de Ensamblaje de Automó-
viles. PhD Thesis, Departamento de Ingeniería Mecánica, Ener-
gética y de Materiales, Universidad Pública de Navarra
15. Li N, Zheng L, Li Q-L (2009) Performance Analysis of Two-Loop
Closed Production Systems. Comput Oper Res 36:119–134
16. Gershwin S, Loren M, Werner (2007) An approximate analytical
method for evaluating the performance of closed-loop flow
systems with unreliable machines and finite buffers. Int J Prod
Res 45(14):3085–3111
17. Matta A, Runchina M, Tolio T (2005) “Automated flow lines with
shared buffer”, Springer-Verlag. OR Spectr 27:265–286. doi:10.1007/
s00291-005-0197-7
18. Soma M, Kondoh S, Umeda Y (2003) Simulation of Closed-loop
Manufacturing Systems focused on Material Balances. In:
Proceedings of EcoDesign2003: Third International Symposium
on Environmentally Conscious Design and Inverse Manufactur-
ing, Tokyo, Japan, December, 8–11
365
19. Maggio N, Matta A, Gershwin S, Tolio T (2003) An
approximate analytical method for evaluating the performance
of closed-loop flow systems with unreliable machines and
finite buffers—Part I: Small Loops. Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Cambridge
20. Ladbrook J, Tjahjono B, Oakes E, de Sanabria Sales RR, Garcia
de Rueda A, Lizarazu U, and Temple C (2011) Simulation Study
for Investment Decision of the EcoBoost Camshaft Machining
Line. J Eng Manuf, in press
21. Suri R, Leung YT (1987) Single Run Optimization of a Siman
Model for Closed Loop Flexible Assembly Systems. In: Thesen
A, Grant H, Kelton WD (eds) Proceedings of the 1987 Winter
Simulation Conference. IEEE, Baltimore
22. Kouikoglou VS (2002) “An Efficient discrete event model of
assembly/disassembly production networks”. Int J Prod Res 40
(17):4485–4503
23. D’Angelo H, Caramanis M, Finger S, Mavretic A, Phillis YA,
Ramsden E (1988) Event-driven model of unreliable production
lines with storage. Int J Prod Res 26(7):1173–1182
24. Douard D, Baynat B (2002) Improving Efficiency of Decompo-
sition Methods for Closed-Loop Continuous-Flow Production
Models. ACS’02—SCM Conference, Poland, October 23–25
25. Zhang Z (2006) Analysis and design of manufacturing systems
with multiple-loop structures. PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute
of Technology
26. Ferreira LP, Gómez AE, Peláez Lourido GC, Resano Lázaro A,
Luis Pérez CJ (2008) Comparative Analysis between analytical
and Arena simulation models applied to an Automobile closed-
loop assembly line, modelled as a network of closed loops. In:
Proceedings of 25th International Manufacturing Conference:
Manufacturing and Design—The Next Generation (IMC2008),
Ireland, 3rd-5th September
27. Ferreira L, Ares EG, Peláez LGC, Salgado M (2010) Analysis of
the Influence of Conveyor Speed on the Behaviour of an
Automobile Assembly Line, Chapter 41. In: Katalinic B (ed)
DAAAM International Scientific Book. DAAAM International,
Vienna, pp 463–470
28. Ferreira LP, Gómez EA, Lourido GP, Salgado M, Quintas JD
(2011) Analysis on the Influence of the Number of Pallets
Circulating on an Automobile Closed-Loop Assembly Line.
International Journal of Advanced Engineering Sciences and
Technologies (IJAEST) 2(2):119–123
29. Amin M, Altiok T (1997) Control policies for multi-product
multi-stage manufacturing systems: an experimental approach. Int
J Prod Res 35(1):201–223, Taylor & Francis Ltd
30. Bulgak AA, Sanders JL (1988) Integrating a modified simulated
annealing algorithm with the simulation of a manufacturing
system to optimize buffer sizes in automatic assembly systems.
In: Abrams M, Haigh P, Comfort J (eds) Proceedings of the 1988
Winter Simulation Conference. IEEE, Baltimore
31. Bulgak AA, Sanders JL (1991) Modeling and Design Optimiza-
tion of Asynchronous Flexible Assembly Systems with Statistical
Process Control and Repair. Int J Flex Manuf Syst 3:251–274
32. Altiparmak F, Dengiz B, Bulgak AA (2002) Optimization of
Buffer Sizes in Assembly Systems Using Intelligent Techniques.
In: Yucesan E, Chen C-H, Snowdon JL, Charnes JM (eds)
Proceedings of the 2002 Winter Simulation Conference. IEEE,
Baltimore
33. Roser C, Nakano M, Tanaka M (2003) Buffer Allocation Model
Based on a Single Simulation. In: Chick S, Sánchez PJ, Ferrin D,
Morrice DJ (eds) Proceedings of the 2003 Winter Simulation
Conference. IEEE, Baltimore
34. Resano Lázaro A, Luis Pérez CJ (2007) Analysis and enhance-
ment of the four-door cars proportion limits in a real automobile
assembly line working in transitory regime. Second Manufactur-
ing Engineering Society International Conference, Madrid, Spain
366
35. Resano Lázaro A, Luis Pérez CJ (2008) Analysis of an automobile
assembly line as a network of closed loops working in both,
stationary and transitory regimes. Int J Prod Res 46(17):4803–
4825
36. Resano Lázaro A, Luis Pérez CJ (2009) Dynamic analysis of an
automobile assembly line considering starving and blocking.
Robot Comput Integ Manuf 25:2
37. Kelton DW, Sadowski RP, Sadowski DA (2002) Simulation With
ARENA, 2nd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
38. Kelton DW, Sadowski RP, Sturrock DT (2007) Simulation with
Arena, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, New York
39. Mahajan PS, Ingalls RG (2004) Evaluation of Methods Used to
Detect Warm-Up Period in Steady State Simulation. In: Ingalls
RG, Rossetti MD, Smith JS, Peters BA (eds) Proceedings of the
2004 Winter Simulation Conference. IEEE, Baltimore
40. de Freitas Filho PJ (2001) Introdução à Modelagem e Simulação
de Sistemas—Com Aplicações em Arena. Visual Books Editora,
Florianópolis
41. Rossetti MD, Li Z, Qu P (2005) Exploring Exponentially
Weighted Moving Average Control Charts to Determine the
Int J Adv Manuf Technol (2012) 59:351–366
Warm-Up Period. In: Kuhl ME, Steiger NM, Armstrong FB,
Joines JA (eds) Proceedings of the 2005 Winter Simulation
Conference. IEEE, Baltimore
42. Hoad K, Robinson S, Davies R (2008) Automating Warm-Up
Length Estimation. In: Mason SJ, Hill RR, Mönch L, Rose O,
Jefferson T, Fowler JW (eds) Proceedings of the 2008 Winter
Simulation Conference. IEEE, Baltimore
43. Bulgak AA, Jerry Sanders L (1990) An Analytical Performance
Model for Assembly Systems With Automatic Inspection Stations
and Repair Loops. Comput Ind Eng 18(3):373–380, Elsevier Ltd
44. Bulgak AA, Jerry Sanders L (1991) “Approximate Analytical
Performance Models for Automatic Assembly Systems With
Statistical Process Control and Automated Inspection”. J Manuf
Syst 10(2):121–133, Elsevier Science Ltd
45. Narahari Y, Khan LM (1996) Performance Analysis of Scheduling
Policies in Re-Entrant Manufacturing Systems. Computers Ops
Res 23(1):37–51, Elsevier Science, Ltd
46. Hewitt ST (2002) Comparing Analytical and Discrete-Event
Simulation Models of Manufacturing Systems. Master of Science,
Institute for Systems Research, University of Maryland