LAYOUTS

Objectives of Facility Layout

• Minimize material-handling costs
• Utilize space efficiently
• Utilize labor efficiently
• Eliminate bottlenecks
• Facilitate communication and interaction
• Reduce manufacturing cycle time
• Reduce customer service time
• Eliminate wasted or redundant movement
 Basic Production Layout Formats

• Process Layout (also called job-shop or

functional layout)

• Product Layout (also called flow-shop layout)

• Group Technology (Cellular) Layout

• Fixed-Position Layout
 Process Layout: Interdepartmental Flow

• Given
– The flow (number of moves) to and from all
departments
– The cost of moving from one department to
another
– The existing or planned physical layout of the
plant
• Determine
– The “best” locations for each department, where
best means maximizing flow, which minimizing
costs
 Computerized Layout Solutions
• CRAFT
– Computerized Relative Allocation of Facilities Technique
• CORELAP
– Computerized Relationship Layout Planning
• PROMODEL and EXTEND
– visual feedback
– allow user to quickly test a variety of scenarios
• Three-D modeling and CAD
– integrated layout analysis
– available in VisFactory and similar software
 Process Layout: CRAFT Approach
• It is a heuristic program; it uses a simple rule of
thumb in making evaluations:
– "Compare two departments at a time and
exchange them if it reduces the total cost of the
layout."

• It does not guarantee an optimal solution

• CRAFT assumes the existence of variable path

material handling equipment such as forklift
trucks
 Process Layout: Systematic Layout Planning
• Numerical flow of items between departments
– Can be impractical to obtain
– Does not account for the qualitative factors that
may be crucial to the placement decision
• Systematic Layout Planning
– Accounts for the importance of having each
department located next to every other
department
– Is also guided by trial and error
• Switching departments then checking the results of the
“closeness” score
 Designing Process Layouts
• Goal: minimize material handling costs
• Block Diagramming
– minimize nonadjacent loads
– use when quantitative data is available
• Relationship Diagramming
– based on location preference between areas
– use when quantitative data is not available
Collecting information in functional layout
 Block Diagramming
• Unit load • Steps
• quantity in which • create load summary chart
material is normally • calculate composite (two way)
moved movements
• Nonadjacent load • develop trial layouts minimizing
• distance farther than number of nonadjacent loads
the next block
 Block Diagramming: Example
Load Summary Chart
FROM/TO DEPARTMENT
1 2 3
Department 1 2 3 4 5
1 — 100 50
2 — 200 50
4 5 3 60 — 40 50
4 100 — 60
5 50 —
 Block Diagramming: Example
Nonadjacent Loads 110+40=150
2 3 200 loads
2 4 150 loads
1 3 110 loads
1 2 100 loads 110
4 5 60 loads
3 5 50 loads
2 5 50 loads 100 200
1 2 3
3 4 40 loads
1 4 0 loads 150 50 50
1 5 0 loads
60
4 5
40
Grid 1
 Block Diagramming: Example
Nonadjacent Loads: 0
2 3 200 loads
2 4 150 loads
1 3 110 loads
1 2 100 loads
4 5 60 loads
3 5 50 loads 100 150
2 5 50 loads 1 2 4
3 4 40 loads 200 50 40 60
1 4 0 loads 110
1 5 0 loads 50
3 5

Grid 2

7-13
 Block Diagramming: Example
• Block Diagram
– type of schematic layout diagram; includes space requirements
(a) Initial block diagram (b) Final block diagram

1 4
1 2 4 2

3 5 3 5
Example of Systematic Layout Planning:
Reasons for Closeness

Code Reason

1 Type of customer

2 Ease of supervision

3 Common personnel

4 Contact necessary

5 Share same price

6 Psychology
Example of Systematic Layout Planning:
Importance of Closeness
Line Numerical
Value Closeness
code weights
A Absolutely necessary 16

E Especially important 8

I Important 4

O Ordinary closeness OK 2

U Unimportant 0

X Undesirable 80
 Relationship Diagramming

• Schematic diagram that uses

weighted lines to denote
location preference
• Muther’s grid
format for displaying manager
preferences for department
locations
 Muther’s Grid
A Absolutely necessary
E Especially important
I Important
Production
O O Okay
A U Unimportant
Offices
U I X Undesirable
Stockroom O E
A X A
Shipping and U U
receiving
U O
Locker room O
O
Toolroom
 Relationship Diagramming
(a) Relationship diagram of original layout

Offices Locker Shipping

room and
receiving

Key: A
E
I
Stockroom Toolroom Production
O
U
X

7-19
 Relationship Diagramming
(b) Relationship diagram of revised layout

Stockroom

Offices Shipping
and
receiving

Toolroom Production Locker Key: A

room E
I
O
U
X
Types of Store Layouts

7-21
 Designing Service Layouts
• Must be both attractive and functional
• Free flow layouts
– encourage browsing, increase impulse purchasing, are flexible
and visually appealing
• Grid layouts
– encourage customer familiarity, are low cost, easy to clean and
secure, and good for repeat customers
• Loop and Spine layouts
– both increase customer sightlines and exposure to products,
while encouraging customer to circulate through the entire
store
 Designing Product Layouts
• Objective
– Balance the assembly line
• Line balancing
– tries to equalize the amount of work at each workstation
• Precedence requirements
– physical restrictions on the order in which operations are
performed
• Cycle time
– maximum amount of time a product is allowed to spend at
each workstation

7-23
 Cycle Time Example

production time available

Cd = desired units of output

(8 hours x 60 minutes / hour)

Cd = (120 units)

480
Cd = 120 = 4 minutes
 Flow Time vs Cycle Time
• Cycle time = max time spent at any station
• Flow time = time to complete all stations

1 2 3

4 minutes 4 minutes 4 minutes

Flow time = 4 + 4 + 4 = 12 minutes

Cycle time = max (4, 4, 4) = 4 minutes
Efficiency of Line and Balance Delay
Efficiency Min# of workstations
j j

 ti
 ti

E= i=1
nCa N= i=1
Cd

where
ti = completion time for element i
j = number of work elements
n = actual number of workstations
Ca = actual cycle time
Cd = desired cycle time
Balance delay j
total idle time of line = nCa -
 ti

i=1
How to make a car
 Line Balancing
• Assembly Line Balancing is nothing but the Simple Line Balancing is the
calculation of assigning works to workstation alongside an Assembly Line and
that operation will be optimal in sense.
– Singe-Model Assembly Line: in early times assembly lines were used in high level
production of a single product. But now the products will attract customers without
any difference and allows the profitable utilization of Assembly Lines. An advanced
technology of production which enables the automated setup of operations and it is
negotiated time and money. Once the product is assembled in the same line and it
won’t variant the setup or significant setup and it’s time that is used, this assembly
system is called as Single Model Line.
– Mixed Model Assembly Line: in this model the setup time between the models
would be decreased sufficiently and enough to be ignored. So this internal mixed
model determines the assembled on the same line. And the type of assembly line in
which workers work in different models of a product in the same assembly line is
called Mixed Assembly Line.
– Multi-Model Assembly Line: in this model the uniformity of the assembled products
and the production system is not that much sufficient to accept the enabling of the
product and the production levels. To reduce the time and money this assembly is
arranged in batches, and this allows the short term lot-sizing issues which made in
groups of the models to batches and the result will be on the assembly levels.
 Assembly Line balancing
• Each workstation can complete its assigned
set of tasks within the desired cycle time
• Precedence constraints among the tasks are
satisfied
• The number of workstations is minimized
 Assembly Line Balancing
• Specify sequential rel. among tasks using precedence dig
• Determine reqd. work station cycle time:
– C= Available Time/required output rate
• Determine theoretical min no. of work stations(WS)
– Nt = Tot task times/ CT
• Select a primary rule for Task- WS assignment rule and
secondary rule for tie breaking ( Max no. of followers, Cycle time &
Precedence rel etc.)
• Assign tasks one at a time
• Evaluate efficiency:
– = Sum of task times/ Na * CT
Na: Actual no. of work stations
Line Balancing

Green Grass, Inc.

Big Broadcaster
Line Balancing Big Broadcaster

Work Time Immediate

Element Description (sec) Predecessor(s)
A Bolt leg frame to hopper 40 None
B Insert impeller shaft 30 A
C Attach axle 50 A
D Attach agitator 40 B
E Attach drive wheel 6 B
F Attach free wheel 25 C
G Mount lower post 15 C
H Attach controls 20 D, E
I Mount nameplate 18 F, G
Total 244
Line Balancing Big Broadcaster

c = 60 seconds/unit
TM = 5 stations D
Efficiency = 81.3% H
B 40
20
S1 30 E
S3 6
A S2 Cumm Idle
F Station Candidate Choice Time Time
40 C 25 S1 A A 40 20
50 S2 B,C CI 50 10
S3 B,F,G B 30 30
E,F,G 18
F 55 5
G
15
Line Balancing Big Broadcaster

c = 60 seconds/unit
TM = 5 stations D
Efficiency = 81.3% H
B 40
20
S1 30 E
S3 6
A S2 F
40 C 25
50 I
18
G
15
Line Balancing Big Broadcaster

c = 60 seconds/unit
TM = 5 stations D
Efficiency = 81.3% H
B 40
20
S1 30 E
S3 6
A S4
S2 F S5
40 C 25
50 I
18
G
15
EXAMPLE-1
 EXAMPLE-2
In the following slide the work allocations in a four-stage
line are illustrated. The total amount of time invested in
producing each product or service is four times the cycle
time because, for every unit produced, all four stages
have been working for the cycle time. When the work is
equally allocated between the stages, the total time
invested in each product or service produced is 4x2.5 =
10 minutes. However, when work is unequally allocated,
as illustrated, the time invested is 3.0 x 4 = 12 minutes,
i.e. 2.0 minutes of time, 16.67 per cent of the total, is
wasted.
Solution to example2
 Hybrid Layouts
• Cellular layouts
– group dissimilar machines into work centers (called cells) that process
families of parts with similar shapes or processing requirements
• Production flow analysis (PFA)
– reorders part routing matrices to identify families of parts with similar
processing requirements
• Flexible manufacturing system
– automated machining and material handling systems which can produce
an enormous variety of items
• Mixed-model assembly line
– processes more than one product model in one line

7-40
 Cellular Layouts
1. Identify families of parts with similar flow paths
2. Group machines into cells based on part families
3. Arrange cells so material movement is minimized
4. Locate large shared machines at point of use
 Parts Families

A family of A family of related

similar parts grocery items
Original Process Layout
Assembly

4 6 7 9

5 8

2 10 12

1 3 11

A B C Raw materials

7-43
 Part Routing Matrix
Machines
Parts 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
A x x x x x
B x x x x
C x x x
D x x x x x
E x x x
F x x x
G x x x x
H x x x
 Reordered Routing Matrix
Machines
Parts 1 2 4 8 10 3 6 9 5 7 11 12
A x x x x x
D x x x x x
F x x x
C x x x
G x x x x
B x x x x
H x x x
E x x x

7-45
Revised Cellular Layout
Assembly

8 10 9 12

11
4 Cell 1 Cell 2 6 Cell 3
7

2 1 3 5

A B C
Raw materials
7-47
A Cell Layout
Types of cell
Group Technology
One Worker, Multiple Machines Machine
2
Machine
Machine 3
1

Materials in

Finished
goods out

Machine
Machine 4
5
Group Technology
Lathing Milling Drilling

L L M M D D

D D
L L M M

Grinding

L L M M
G G

L L Assembly
G G
A A

Receiving and A A G G
shipping

(a) Jumbled flows in a job shop without GT cells

Group Technology

L L M D G Assembly
area
Cell 1 Cell 2 A A

Receiving L M G G

Cell 3

L M D
Shipping

(b) Line flows in a job shop with three GT cells

 Cellular Layouts
• Advantages • Disadvantages
• Reduced material handling • Inadequate part families
and transit time • Poorly balanced cells
• Reduced setup time • Expanded training and
• Reduced work-in- process scheduling of workers
inventory • Increased capital investment
• Better use of human
resources
• Easier to control
• Easier to automate
Automated Manufacturing Cell
Flexible Manufacturing Systems (FMS)
• Consists of
– programmable machine tools
– automated tool changing
– automated material handling system
– controlled by computer network
• Combines flexibility with efficiency
• Layouts differ based on
– variety of parts the system can process
– size of parts processed
– average processing time required for part completion
Fully-Implemented FMS
 Mixed Model Assembly Lines
• Produce multiple models in any order on one
assembly line
• Factors in mixed model lines
– Line balancing
– U-shaped lines
– Flexible workforce
– Model sequencing
 Mixed Model Line –cyclic plan

Chase & jacobs

 Balancing U-Shaped Lines
Precedence diagram: A B C
Cycle time = 12 min

D E

(a) Balanced for a straight line (b) Balanced for a U-shaped line

A,B C,D E
A,B
9 min 12 min 3 min
24 24
Efficiency = = = .6666 = 66.7 % C,D
3(12) 36

24 24 12 min 12 min
Efficiency = = = 100 %
2(12) 24
 Process Throughput Time Reduction

• Perform activities in parallel

• Change the sequence of activities

• Reduce interruptions