MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS

Session 4

ASSEMBLY LINES
February 2001

ASSEMBLY LINE
‡ SET OF SEQUENTIAL WORKSTATIONS ‡ CONNECTED BY A CONTINUOUS MATERIALS HANDLING SYSTEM ‡ INPUT: RAW MATERIALS ‡ OUTPUT: FINISHED PRODUCT

WORK ELEMENTS
SMALLEST UNITS OF PRODUCTIVE (i.e. VALUEADDING) WORK

BACKBONES OF ASSEMBLY LINES
‡ PRINCIPLE OF INTERCHANGEABILITY ‡ DIVISION OF LABOR

ASSEMBLY LINE TYPES ‡ SINGLE PRODUCT ‡ MULTIPLE PRODUCT ‡ MIXED LINES .

MULTIPLE PARALLEL LINES ‡ ADVANTAGES ‡ easy work load balancing ‡ increasing scheduling flexibility ‡ job enrichment ‡ higher line availability ‡ more accountability ‡ DISSADVANTAGES ‡ higher setup costs ‡ higher equipment costs ‡ higher skill requirements ‡ slower learning ‡ complex supervision .

WORKSTATION CYCLE TIME ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ PACED LINES UNPACED LINES (ASYNCHRONOUS) ROLE OF BUFFERS PARALLEL WORKSTATIONS IN SERIAL SYSTEMS .

BASIC LINE BALANCING PROBLEM TO ASSIGN WORK ELEMENTS TO WORKSTATIONS SUCH THAT ASSEMBLY COST IS MINIMIZED .

TOTAL ASSEMBLY COST ‡ LABOR COST (WHILE PERFORMING TASKS) ‡ IDLE TIME COST ‡ FOCUS: MINIMIZE IDLE TIME ‡ LIMITS: PRODUCTION CONSTRAINTS .

PROBLEM FORMULATION ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ PRODUCTION RATE P (UNITS/TIME) NUMBER OF PARALLEL LINES m TO MEET DEMAND: CYCLE TIME m/P TIME TO PERFORM TASK i : ti NO WORKER MUST BE ASSIGNED A SET OF TASKS OF DURATION LONGER THAN m/P = C ! .

SOME FEATURES OF TASKS ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ORDER PARTIALLY DETERMINED ASSEMBLY ORDER CONSTRAINTS IP ZONING RESTRICTIONS TASK PAIRS TO SAME STATION ZS TASK PAIRS NOT PERFORMED IN SAME WORKSTATION ZD .

DECISION VARIABLES ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ TASK i ASSIGNED TO STATION k ? Xik = {1.0} TOTAL NUMBER OF STATIONS K COST COEFFICIENTS cik TOTAL NUMBER OF TASKS N .

v) in IP 7 (Xuk Xvk)=1 (all k) & (u.v) in ZD .v) in ZS Xuh+Xvh < 1 (all k) & (u.PROBLEM FORMULATION ‡ MINIMIZE 77 (cik Xik) ‡ SUBJECT TO: 7 ti Xik < C (all stations k) 7 Xik = 1 (all tasks i) Xvh <7 Xuj (all k) & (u.

OBJECTIVE FUNCTION FEATURES ‡ LOWERED NUMBER STATIONS FILL UP FIRST ‡ ONLY STATIONS WITH AT LEAST ONE TASK ARE CONSTRUCTED ‡ BECHMARKING GAGE: PROPORTION OF IDLE TIME ‡ IDLE TIME = (PAID -PRODUCTIVE) .

7 ti)/(K* C) = idle time/paid time where K* is the number of stations required by the solution .BALANCE DELAY (measures proportion of idle time) D = (K* C .

COMMMENTS ‡ D IS IDLE TIME OVER PAID TIME ‡ OBJECTIVE DOES NOT ALLOCATE IDLE TIME EQUALLY AMONG STNS ‡ BEST SOLUTIONS: GOOD WORK LOAD BALANCING ‡ TOTAL TASK TIME T = 7 ti ‡ MINIMUM STATIONS (LOWER BOUND) Ko = | T/C | .

LINE BALANCING APPROACHES ‡ COMSOAL ‡ RPWH ‡ OPTIMAL SOLUTIONS ± TREE GENERATION & EXPLORATION ± PROBLEM STRUCTURE RULES ± FATHOMING RULES .

LINE BALANCING APPROACHES (contd) ‡ Required cycle time. sequencing restrictions and tasks times are all known. .

COMSOAL ‡ Computer Method for Sequencing Operations for Assembly Lines ‡ Simple record keeping to allow examination of many possible sequences ‡ Sequences are generated by random picking a task and constructing subsequent tasks ‡ New stations are opened when needed .

COMSOAL (contd) ‡ Sequences that exceed the best solution are discarded ‡ Better sequences become upper bounds .

COMSOAL (contd) ‡ Array of number of Immediate Predecesors for each task i NIP(i) ‡ Array of for which other tasks is i an immediate predecesor WIP(i) ‡ Array of N tasks TK .

COMSOAL (contd) ‡ List of unassigned tasks A ‡ List of tasks from A with all immediate predecesors assigned B ‡ List of tasks from B with tasks times not exceeding remaining cycle time in the current workstation F .

COMSOAL ALGORITHM For generating X trial solutions 1.START NEW SEQUENCE: ± SET x=x+1. UB=inf.SET x=0. A=TK..PRECEDENCE FEASIBILITY ± FOR i IN A. ADD i TO B . NIPW(i) = NIP(i) 3. IF NIPW(i) = 0 ... c=C 2.

OPEN NEW STATION ± IDLE=IDLE + c . c = C ± If IDLE > UB .TIME FEASIBILITY ± FOR i IN B. IF ti < c ADD i TO F . ± If F empty .COMSOAL ALGORITHM (contd) 4.. 5 .. otherwise 3 . 2. otherwise 6 5.

B. NIPW=NIPW-1 ± IF A EMPTY --> 7..COMSOAL 6.ti ± FOR ALL i in WIP(i*).F ± c = c .SELECT TASK: SET m = card{F} ± RANDOM GENERATE RN in U(0. OTHERWISE --> 3 .1) ± LET i* = [m*RN]th TASK from F ± REMOVE i* from A.

STOP.SCHEDULE COMPLETION ± IDLE = IDLE + c ± IF IDLE < UB .COMSOAL 7. OTHERWISE --> 2 .. UB = IDLE --> STORE SCHEDULE ± IF x = X .

17 minutes/unit ~ 70 s .1 (pp.Example 2.2 and Fig. 40-42) ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ Assembly of a spring-activated toy car Two 4-hr shifts w/ two 10 min breaks Four days a week Planned production rate 1500 units/week Tasks.5 ‡ No zoning constraints ‡ Cycle time C = 1. 2. times and precedence constraints are shown in Table 2.

See Table 2. e. or f) ‡ Generate a random number R (=0.Example 2.3 by doing your own random number generation. .34) ‡ Continue until schedule is completed.3 ‡ Exercise: Develop a Table like Table 2. d.1 (contd) ‡ Four potential first tasks (a.

RPWH ‡ Ranked Positional Weight Heuristic ‡ A single sequence is constructed ‡ A task is prioritized by cummulative assembly time associated with itself and its succesors ‡ Tasks are then assigned to the lowest numbered feasible workstation .

RPWH (contd) ‡ S(i) succesor tasks to task i ‡ PW(i) = ti + 7 tj . j in S(i) .

TASK ASSIGNMENT ± FOR RANKED TASKS i .. ASSIGN TASK i TO FIRST FEASIBLE WORKSTATION ..RPWH (contd) 1.TASK ORDERING ± FOR ALL TASKS i . COMPUTE THE POSITIONAL WEIGHT PW(i) ± RANK TASKS BY NONINCREASING PW 2.

4 Iteratively assign tasks to first feasible station ‡ See sequence in Table on p. 44 .2 (pp.Example 2. 43-44) ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ ‡ RPWH applied to Example 2.1 Starting at last task compute PW(l) Compute backwards PW(k) = tk + PW(l) See values in Table 2.

p. p. 47) ± Flowchart (Fig. 49) ‡ TREE EXPLORATION ‡ PROBLEM STRUCTURE RULES ‡ FATHOMING RULES . p. 2. 2. 2.7.9.8.OPTIMAL SOLUTIONS ‡ TREE GENERATION ± Tree (Fig. 46) ± Backtracking (Fig.

FATHOMING RULES 1.SOLUTION DOMINANCE 4..EXCESIVE IDLE TIME ..STATION DOMINANCE 3..TASK DOMINANCE 2..BOUND VIOLATION 5..

1 . 52-54) ‡ Same as Example 2.Example 2.3 (pp.1 but using Optimal Solutions ‡ Exercise: Work out Example 2.

PRACTICAL ISSUES ‡ Models are abstractions ‡ Hard problem of stations with small number of tasks each (Parallel lines? Grouping?) ‡ Is C cast in stone? ‡ How about randomness? ‡ Independence of task times? ‡ Alternate ³optimum´? .

. CREATE LIST B OF ALL PRODUCT TYPES ASSIGNABLE WITHOUT VIOLATING CONSTRAINTS ± FROM LIST B SELECT PRODUCT WHICH MINIMIZES THE FUNCTION ..SEQUENCING MIXED MODELS 1.ASSIGN A PRODUCT ± FOR n from A.INITIALIZATION: CREATE LIST OF ALL PRODUCTS TO BE ASSIGNED (A) 2.

j .n Ck ± ADD PRODUCT TYPE j* TO THE nth POSITION ± REMOVE A PRODUCT TYPE j* FROM A IF n < N ± GO TO 1 .MIXED MODELS sum n sum i ti.

58-59) ‡ Multiple toy car models.6) ‡ Exercise: Work out Example 2.4 .4 (pp. ‡ Estimated sales by model (Table 2.Example 2.

UNPACED LINES ‡ Paced line with K stations and cycle time C ± Each time spends KC in system ± Production rate is 1/C ‡ In a deterministic unpaced line ± Production rate is 1/C ± Time in system is maybe not KC ‡ WIP is smaller for unpaced lines .

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful