Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 1 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Example – Rule 5 j123456789101112 tjtj 6945423731101 PV j (5) 42 25 31231620 181 11 12 15 Cycle.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Operations Scheduling
Advertisements

Algorithm Design Methods (I) Fall 2003 CSE, POSTECH.
Algorithm Design Methods Spring 2007 CSE, POSTECH.
Scheduling.
Process Selection and Facility Layout
1 IRWIN  a Times Mirror Higher Education Group, Inc. company, 1996 Facilities Layout.
Math443/543 Mathematical Modeling and Optimization
1 Methodological Basics. Layout and DesignKapitel 1 / 2 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl 1.1 Complexity  We solve problems in production and logistics by using:
3 Group Technology / Cellular Manufacturing
Dynamic lot sizing and tool management in automated manufacturing systems M. Selim Aktürk, Siraceddin Önen presented by Zümbül Bulut.
Chapter 5 Aggregate Planning Operations Analysis Using MS Excel.
An overview of design and operational issues of kanban systems M. S. AKTÜRK and F. ERHUN Presented by: Y. Levent KOÇAĞA.
Operations Management
6-1 McGraw-Hill/Irwin Operations Management, Seventh Edition, by William J. Stevenson Copyright © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
Lot sizing and scheduling
6-1 McGraw-Hill/Irwin Operations Management, Seventh Edition, by William J. Stevenson Copyright © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
Product layout Assembly-line balancing approach. 2 Facility layout Process terminology Cycle time: Average time between completions of successive units.
Assembly Line Balance Balance.
Operational Research & ManagementOperations Scheduling Flow Shop Scheduling 1.Flexible Flow Shop 2.Flexible Assembly Systems (unpaced) 3.Paced Assembly.
1 Chapter 5 Flow Lines Types Issues in Design and Operation Models of Asynchronous Lines –Infinite or Finite Buffers Models of Synchronous (Indexing) Lines.
Chapter 4 Process Design.
Operations Management
Sequencing Mixed Models & Unpaced Lines Active Learning Module 4 Dr. César O. Malavé Texas A&M University.
MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS Session 12 MACHINE SETUP AND OPERATION SEQUENCING E. Gutierrez-Miravete Spring 2001.
Line Balancing Problem
Exact methods for ALB ALB problem can be considered as a shortest path problem The complete graph need not be developed since one can stop as soon as in.
Topics To Be Covered 1. Tasks of a Shop Control Manager.
Hierarchy of Production Decisions
Assembly Lines – Reliable Serial Systems
Assembly Line Balancing
1 Short Term Scheduling. 2  Planning horizon is short  Multiple unique jobs (tasks) with varying processing times and due dates  Multiple unique jobs.
Resource Mapping and Scheduling for Heterogeneous Network Processor Systems Liang Yang, Tushar Gohad, Pavel Ghosh, Devesh Sinha, Arunabha Sen and Andrea.
Flow Rate and Capacity Analysis
Process Layout Chapter 7 July 20, 2005.
1 Network Models Transportation Problem (TP) Distributing any commodity from any group of supply centers, called sources, to any group of receiving.
Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 1 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Flow shop production Object-oriented Assignment is derived from the item´s work plans. Uniform.
Operations Fall 2015 Bruce Duggan Providence University College.
Operational Research & ManagementOperations Scheduling Economic Lot Scheduling 1.Summary Machine Scheduling 2.ELSP (one item, multiple items) 3.Arbitrary.
Slide 0 of 96 Manufacturing Facility Layout. Slide 1 of 96 Basic Layout Forms Process Product Cellular Fixed position Hybrid.
12-1Aggregate Planning William J. Stevenson Operations Management 8 th edition.
Parallel Machine Scheduling
Activity Scheduling and Control
Algorithm Design Methods 황승원 Fall 2011 CSE, POSTECH.
Flow Shop Production
Problems in Combinatorial Optimization. Linear Programming.
Facility Layout Objectives of Facility Layout Basic Types
1 Job Shop Scheduling. 2 Job shop environment: m machines, n jobs objective function Each job follows a predetermined route Routes are not necessarily.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2007 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. 8 Facility Layout.
Part 3.
Revision BUSI 2301 B. Averaging methods b). Moving average - sample problem Compute a three-period moving average forecast for period 6, given the demand.
6-1 McGraw-Hill/Irwin Operations Management, Seventh Edition, by William J. Stevenson Copyright © 2002 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
Manufacturing Processes
Cellular Layouts Cellular Production Group Technology
CHAPTER 8 Operations Scheduling
Operations Management
organizational structure
13 Aggregate Planning.
Flow shop production: assembly line balancing
FACILITY LAYOUT Facility layout means:
OST: Chapter 3 (Part 1) Tactical planning: Layout
Modeling Scheduling Problems
Dr Sh Salleh bin Sh Ahmad
Scheduling Scheduling is an important tool for manufacturing and service industries, where it can have a major impact on the productivity of a process.
Introduction to Scheduling Chapter 1
Constraint management
8 Job Sequencing & Operations Scheduling CHAPTER Arranged by
Flow shop production Object-oriented
Process Selection and Facility Layout Lecture 5. Forecasting Product and Service Design Technological Change Capacity Planning Process Selection Facilities.
Flexible Assembly Systems
Chapter 1. Formulations.
Presentation transcript:

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 1 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Example – Rule 5 j tjtj PV j (5) Cycle time c = 28 -> m = 3 stations BG =  t j / (3*28) = 0,655 S1 = {1,3,2,4,6} S2 = {7,8,5,9,10,11} S3 = {12}

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 2 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Example– Regel 7, 6 und 2 = 3 j PV j (7) PV j (6) PV j (2) Apply rule 7 (latest possible station) at first If this leads to equally prioritized operatios -> apply rule 6 (minimum number of stations for j and all predecessors) If this leads to equally prioritized operatios -> appyl rule 2 (decreasing processing times t j ) Solution: c = 28  m = 2; BG = 0,982 S1 = {1,3,2,4,5} ; S2 = {7,9,6,8,10,11,12}

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 3 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl More heuristic methods Stochastic elements for rules 2 to 7:  Random selection of the next operation (out of the set of operations ready to be applied)  Selection probabilities: proportional or reciprocally proportional to the priority value  Randomly chosen priority rule Enumerative heuristics:  Determination of the set of all feasible assignments for the first station  Choose the assignment leading to the minimum idle time  Proceed the same way with the next station, and so on (greedy)

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 4 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Further heuristic methods Heuristics for cutting&packing problems  Precedence conditions have to be considered as well  E.g.: generalization of first-fit-decreasing heuristic for the bin packing problem. Shortest-path-problem with exponential number of nodes Exchange methods:  Exchange of operations between stations  Objective: improvement in terms of the subordinate objective of equally utilized stations

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 5 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Worst-Case analysis of heuristics Solution characteristics for integer c and t j (j = 1,...,n) for alternative 2:  Total workload of 2 neigboured stations has to exceed the cycle time Worst-Case bounds for the deviation of a solution with m Stations from a solution with m* stations: m/m*  2 - 2/m* for even m and m/m*  2 - 1/m* for odd m m < c  m*/(c - tmax + 1) + 1

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 6 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Determination of cyle time c Given number of stations Cycle time unknown  Minimize cycle time (alternative 1) or  Optimize cycle time together with the number of stations trying to maximize the system´s efficiency (alternative 3).

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 7 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Iterative approach for determination of minimal cycle time 1.Calculate the theoretical minimal cycle time: (or c min = t max if this is larger) and c = c min 2.Find an optimal solution for c with minimum m(c) by applying methods presented for alternative 1 3.If m(c) is larger than the given number of stations: increase c by  (integer value) and repeat step 2.

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 8 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Iterative approach for determination of minimal cycle time Repeat until feasible solution with cycle time  c and number of stations  m is found If  > 1, an interval reduction can be applied: if for c a solution with number of stations  m has been found and for c-  not, one can try to find a solution for c-  /2 and so on…

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 9 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Example – rule 5 m = 5 stations Find: maximum production rate, i.e. minimum cycle time j tjtj PV j (5) c min =  t j /m = 55/5 = 11 (11 > t max = 10)

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 10 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Example – rule 5 Solution c = 11: {1,3}, {2,6}, {4,7,9}, {8,5}, {10,11}, {12} Needed: 6 > m = 5 stations  c = 12, assign operation 12 to station 5  S5 = {10,11,12} For larger problems: usually, c leading to an assignment for the given number of stations, is much larger than c min. Thus, stepwise increase of c by 1 would be too time consuming -> increase by  > 1 is recommended.

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 11 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Classification of complex line balancing problems Parameters: Number of products Assignment restrictions Parallel stations Equipment of stations Station boundaries Starting rate Connection between items and transportation system Different technologies Objectives

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 12 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Number of products Single-product-models:  1 homogenuous product on 1 assembly line  Mass production, serial production Multi-product models:  Combined manufacturing of several products on 1 (or more) lines. Mixed-model-assembly: Products are variations (models) of a basic product  they are processed in mixed sequence Lot-wise multiple-model-production: Set-up between production of different products is necessary  Production lots (the line is balanced for each product separately)  Lotsizing and scheduling of products  TSP

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 13 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Assignment restrictions Restricted utilities:  Stations have to be equipped with an adequate quantity of utilities  Given environmental conditions Positions:  Given positions of items within a station  some operation may not be performed then (e.g.: underfloor operations) Operations:  Minimum or maximum distances between 2 operations (concerning time or space)   2 operations may not be assigned to the same station Qualifications:  Combination of operations with similiar complexity

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 14 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Parallel stations Models without parallel stations:  Heterogenuous stations with different operations  serial line Models with parallel stations:  At least 2 stations performing the same operation  Alternating processing of 2 subsequent operations in parallel stations Hybridization: Parallelization of operations:  Assignment of an operation to 2 different stations of a serial line

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 15 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Equipment of stations 1-worker per station Multiple workers per station:  Different workloads between stations are possible  Short-term capacity adaptions by using „jumpers“ Fully automated stations:  Workers are used for inspection of processes  Workers are usually assigned to several stations

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 16 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Station boundaries Closed stations:  Expansion of station is limited  Workers are not allowed to leave the station during processing Open stations:  Workers my leave their station in („rechtsoffen“) or in reversed („linksoffen“) flow direction of the line  Short-term capacity adaption by under- and over-usage of cycle time.  E.g.: Manufacturing of variations of products

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 17 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Starting rate Models with fixed statrting rate:  Subsequent items enter the line after a fixed time span. Models with variable starting rate:  An item enters the line once the first station of the line is idle  Distances between items on the line may vary (in case of multiple- product-production)

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 18 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Connection between items and transportation systems Unmoveable items:  Items are attached to the transportation system and may not be removed  Maybe turning moves are possible Moveable items:  Removing items from the transportation system during processing is Post-production Intermediate inventories  Flow shop production without fixed time constraints for each station

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 19 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Different technologies Given production technologies  Schedules are given Different technologies  Production technology is to be chosen  Different alternative schedules are given (precedence graph) and/or  different processing times for 1 operation

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 20 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Objectives Time-oriented objectives  Minimization of total cycle time, total idle time, ratio of idle time, total waiting time  Maximization of capacity utilization (system`s efficieny) – most relevant for (single-product) problems  Equally utilized stations Further objectives  Minimization of number of stations in case of given cycle time  Minimization of cycle time in case of given number of stations  Minimization of sum of weighted cycle time and weighted number of stations

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 21 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Objectives Profit-oriented approaches:  Maximization of total marginal return  Minimization of total costs Machines- and utility costs (hourly wage rate of machines depends on the number of stations) Labour costs: often identical rates of labour costs for all workers in all stations) Material costs: defined by output quantity and cycle time Idle time costs: Opportunity costs – depend on cycle time and number of stations

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 22 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Multiple-product-problems Mixed model assembly: Several variants of a basic product are processed in mixed sequence on a production line. Processing times of operations may vary between the models Some operations may not be necessary for all of the variants  Determination of an optimal line balancing and of an optimal sequence of models.

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 23 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl multi-model Lot-wise mixed-model production With machine set-up Set-up from type „X“ to type „Y“ after 2 weeks

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 24 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl mixed-model Without set-up Balancing for a „theoretical average model“

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 25 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Balancing mixed-model assembly lines Similiar models:  Avoid set-ups and lot sizing  Consider all models simultaneously Generalization of the basic model  Production of p models of 1 basic model with up to n operations; production method is given  Given precedence conditions for operations in each model j = 1,...,n  aggregated precendence graph for all models  Each operation is assigned to exactly 1 station  Given processing times t jv for each operation j in each model v  Given demand b v for each model v  Given total time T of the working shifts in the planning horizon

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 26 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Balancing mixed-model assembly lines Total demand for all models in planning horizon Cumulated processing time of operation j over all models in planning horizon:

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 27 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl LP-Model Aggregated model:  Line is balanced according to total time T of working shifts in the planning horizon. Same LP as for the 1-product problem, but cycle time c is replaced by total time T

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 28 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl LP-Model Objective function: … number of the last station (job n) Constraints: for all j = 1,..., n... Each job in 1 station for all k = 1,...,... Total workload in station k for all... Precedence conditions for all j and k

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 29 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Example v = 1, b 1 = 4v = 2, b 2 = 2 v = 3, b 3 = 1aggregated model

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 30 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Example Applying exact method: given: T = 70 Assignment of jobs to stations with m = 7 stations: S1 = {1,3} S2 = {2} S3 = {4,6,7} S4 = {8,9} S5 = {5,10} S6 = {11} S7 = {12}

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 31 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Parameters...Workload of station k for model v in T...Average workload of m stations for model v in T Per unit:...Workload of station k for 1 unit of model v...Avg. workload of m stations for 1 unit of model v Aggregated over all models:...Total workload of station k in T

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 32 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Example – parameters per unit  ’ kv Station k Avg. Model v `v`v , , ,71 x 4 x 2 x 1

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 33 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Example - Parameters  kv Station k Avg. Model v vv , t(Sk)t(Sk) , ,71

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 34 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Conclusion Station 5 and 7 are not efficiently utilized Variation of workload  kv of stations k is higher for the models v as for the aggregated model t(S k ) Parameters per unit show a high degree of variation for the models. Model 3, for example, leads to an high utilization of stations 2, 3, and 4.  If we want to produce several units of model 3 subsequently, the average cycle time will be exceeded -> the line has to be stopped

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 35 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Avoiding unequally utilized stations Consider the following objectives  Out of a set of solutions leading to the same (minimal) number of stations m (1st objective), choose the one minimizing the following 2nd objective:...Sum of absolute deviation in utilization  Minimization by, e.g., applying the following greedy heuristic

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 36 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Thomopoulos heuristic Start: Deviation  = 0, k = 0 Iteration: until not-assigned jobs are available: increase k by 1 determine all feasible assignments S k for the next station k choose S k with the minimum sum of deviation  =  +  (S k )

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 37 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Thomopoulos example T = 70 m = 7 Solution: 9 stations (min. number of stations = 7): S1 = {1}, S2 = {3,6}, S3 = {4,7}, S4 = {8}, S5 = {2}, S6 = {5,9}, S7 = {10}, S8 = {11}, S9 = {12} Sum of deviation:  = 183,14

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 38 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Thomopoulos heuristic Consider only assignments S k where workload t(S k ) exceeds a value (i.e. avoid high idle times). Choose a value for :  small: well balanced workloads concerning the models Maybe too much stations  large: Stations are not so well balanced Rather minimum number of stations [very large  maybe no feasible assignment with t(S k )  ]

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 39 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Thomopoulos heuristic – Example = 49 Solution: 7 stations: S1 = {2}, S2 = {1,5}, S3 = {3,4}, S4 = {7,9,10}, S5 = {6,8}, S6 = {11}, S7 = {12} Sum of deviation:  = 134,57

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 40 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Exact solution 7 stations: S1 = {1,3}, S2 = {2}, S3 = {4,5}, S4 = {6,7,9 }, S5 = {8,10}, S6 = {11}, S7 = {12} Sum of deviation:  = 126  kv Station k Avg. Modelv vv , , ,71 t(Sk)t(Sk)

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 41 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Further objectives Line balancing depends on demand values b j Changes in demand  Balancing has to be reivsed and further machine set-ups have to be considered Workaround:  Objectives not depending on demand … sum of absolute deviations in utilization per unit

Layout and Design Kapitel 4 / 42 (c) Prof. Richard F. Hartl Further objectives Disadvantages of this objective:  Large deviations for a station (may lead to interruptions in production). They may be compensated by lower deviations in other stations ... Maximum deviation in utilization per unit