See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/318712478

Effective layout designs for the Shojinka control problem for a TFT-LCD
module assembly line

Article  in  Journal of Manufacturing Systems · July 2017

DOI: 10.1016/j.jmsy.2017.07.004

CITATIONS READS

3 527

3 authors, including:

Taho Yang
National Cheng Kung University
87 PUBLICATIONS   3,228 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Scheduling problems in Semiconductor Manufacturing View project

quality design with Bayesian analysis View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Taho Yang on 31 October 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 (This is a sample cover image for this issue. The actual cover is not yet available at this time.)

This article appeared in a journal published by Elsevier. The attached

copy is furnished to the author for internal non-commercial research
and education use, including for instruction at the author's
institution and sharing with colleagues.

Other uses, including reproduction and distribution, or selling or

licensing copies, or posting to personal, institutional or third party
websites are prohibited.

In most cases authors are permitted to post their version of the

article (e.g. in Word or Tex form) to their personal website or
institutional repository. Authors requiring further information
regarding Elsevier's archiving and manuscript policies are
encouraged to visit:

http://www.elsevier.com/authorsrights
 Author's Personal Copy
Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Manufacturing Systems

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jmansys

Full Length Article

Effective layout designs for the Shojinka control problem for a

TFT-LCD module assembly line
Peng-Sen Wang a , Taho Yang b,∗ , Min-Chih Chang b
a
Department of Industrial Management and Information, Southern Taiwan University of Science and Technology, Tainan 710, Taiwan
b
Institute of Manufacturing Information and Systems, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan 701, Taiwan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Attaining flexibility in the number of workers in a workshop to adapt to demand changes is termed
Received 3 February 2017 Shojinka, and this is often combined with cellular layout design configuration. The machine layout for
Received in revised form 24 June 2017 Shojinka must be appropriately designed to enable workers to walk easily between machines within a cell.
Accepted 10 July 2017
This paper analyzes a problem of how to attain Shojinka under the limitations of a process where operators
have restricted movement within a cell. The study is motivated by a practical flow shop problem with
Keywords:
different machine rates among workstations. We first consider the decision of Shojinka to develop the
Cellular layout
cellular layout design under the limitations of a process. Next, we propose a mixed integer programming
Shojinka
Mixed integer programming
formulation to minimize the total number of operators. Taguchi’s signal-to-noise (SN) ratios are used
Toyota production system to compare the robustness of different layouts when the demand changes. The present study uses a
TFT-LCD thin-film-transistor liquid-crystal display (TFT-LCD) module assembly line as a case study to illustrate
the effectiveness of the proposed approaches. The results show that the proposed layout can decrease
manpower and labor idle time ratio by 15.02% and 12.48% on average, respectively.
© 2017 The Society of Manufacturing Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Fluctuations in demand are inevitable in a volatile market and
the strategy to accommodate this by developing flexibility in the
number of workers in a workshop to adapt to changes in demand is
referred to as Shojinka. That and Shoninka are two similar Japanese
words, but they have different meanings. Shojinka, as used in the
Toyota Production System (TPS), refers to changing the number of
workers when production demand increases or decreases, which
can be attained through multi-skilled workers performing multiple
operations. Toyota trains workers to become multi-skilled through
job rotation. The other term, Shoninka, indicates simply reducing
the number of workers.
Cellular layout refers to a type of layout where various machines
are grouped in a cell. A cell is typically a replica version of a flow
shop. The cells contain machines and tools needed to process fam-
ilies of parts with similar processing requirements. In TPS, each
U-shaped process is a cell in which the products flow one at a time
through each workstation. Shojinka requires that workers be able
to respond to changes within a cycle time and an operation rou-
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: tyang@mail.ncku.edu.tw (T. Yang).
tine. When an improvement has been made, manpower cost can
be reduced by adjusting the number of operators.
For a given cycle time, the demand for products often requires a
fractional number of workers on a U-shaped line, such as 7.5 people.
In this case, eight workers must be assigned to the line. As a result,
the extra manpower will cause idle time or excess production. In
order to eliminate waste, Toyota combines several U-shaped lines
into one integrated line to overcome the problem of fractional man-
power and achieve Shojinka. Under this layout, the range of jobs
for which each worker is responsible can be easily be expanded or
reduced [1].
The following example adapted from Monden [1] will illustrate
how the concept is used to achieve Shojinka. Fig. 1 refers to a layout
with five cells in which each digit represents a machine and each
cell is manufacturing a different part. According to the customer
demand for products, the cycle time of this layout is one minute
per unit. Under this circumstance, seven people are working in the
layout and each of their walking routes follows the arrow line.
If customer demand decreases, resulting in the increase of cycle
time to 1.2 min per unit, all operations in the layout will be redis-
tributed and each worker will have more tasks than before. For
example, in Fig. 2, worker 1’s walking route is enlarged since he
has to do some additional jobs which originally belonged to worker
2. Similarly, worker 2 is reallocated to be responsible for parts of
worker 3’s jobs. Consequently, expanding the walking route will

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jmsy.2017.07.004
0278-6125/© 2017 The Society of Manufacturing Engineers. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 Author's Personal Copy
256 P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269
Fig. 1. Allocation of operations among workers (cycle time = 1 min per unit).
Fig. 2. Allocation of operations among workers (cycle time = 1.2 min per unit).
eliminate workers 6 and 7 from the layout, and the fractional man-
power that might have occurred in a U-shaped line is thus absorbed
in various cells under this layout.
However, the Shojinka decision is not always straightforward.
A thin-film-transistor liquid-crystal display (TFT-LCD) module
assembly line, for example, is limited by its manufacturing charac-
teristics (e.g., cleanliness). As a result, the operators are restricted
when walking between machines in a cell, so under such a con-
straint, it is more difficult to achieve Shojinka. Consequently, the
objective of this study is to minimize the total number of workers
through effective layout designs to achieve Shojinka, considering
the specific process limitations arising from the TFT-LCD module
assembly line.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2
reviews the pertinent literature. Section 3 provides details of the
proposed methodology. Empirical illustrations are discussed in Sec-
tion 4. Conclusions are presented in the final section.
2. Literature review
Shojinka is sometimes referred to as “flexible manpower line”
or “labor linearity.” A flexible manpower line forms an individual
cell within a linked-cell manufacturing system. Cells are designed
so that throughput rates can be quickly and efficiently adjusted [2].
Typically, cells are manual since manual lines are far better suited to
continual improvement than automatic lines [3]. Shojinka includes
several fundamental characteristics: U-shaped line, walk-routine
design, multi-skilled workers, no barriers to operator movement,
operator scheduled to takt time, one-piece production, and contin-
uous improvements of the process. Walk-routine design for flexible
manpower lines were studied by Stockton et al. [2,4]. When a com-
pany does not adopt the U-shaped line layout to attain Shojinka,
but rather employs a multiple straight assembly line, then there
are different parameters, as discussed by Gökçen et al. [5].
The cellular manufacturing system tries to combine the flexibil-
ity of a job shop with the productivity of a flow shop; and thereby be
able to respond quickly to new market requirements. The cellular
manufacturing system includes both cell formation and a specific
layout design [6]. The process of determining component families
and machine groups is referred to as the cell formation problem,
and there have been several studies relating to this problem in
the last decade [7,8]. These have suggested a number of solutions
and approaches, such as mathematical programming, heuristic
and metaheuristic methodologies, and artificial intelligence strate-
gies. The layout design includes arranging cells on the shop floor
(inter-cell layout) and arranging the facilities in the cells (intra-
cell layout). A well-designed layout can reduce material handling
cost, lead time and throughput time [9]. Although the importance
of layout design is apparent in the cellular manufacturing system,
it has not attracted much attention in comparison to cell formation
[10,11]. In addition to the two technical issues, the benefit of peo-
 Author's Personal Copy
P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269
Fig. 3. (a) A typical linear layout. (b) Conceptual schema for the existing layout of the case problem.
ple issues is often neglected [12]. This paper focuses on achieving
Shojinka through appropriate layout design.
Song et al. [13] noted that although there has been much
research on the issue of assembly line-balancing, few studies con-
sider the role of operators of the assembly lines. Most of the line
balancing research addresses how to assign tasks to workstations
to obtain an optimal solution [14]. For example, in designing paral-
lel assembly lines, Gökçen et al. [15] suggested that in a production
facility, two or more straight assembly lines can be located in paral-
lel so they can be balanced simultaneously. Akpinar and Baykasoglu
[16] developed a method of mixed-integer linear mathematical
programming (MILP) for mixed-model assembly line balancing
problems with setups. Other relevant research on the multiple or
parallel assemble line balancing problems is described in Lusa [17].
In the current paper, a TFT-LCD module assembly line is used
to exemplify a typical flow shop problem with a linear layout.
This specific application has process limitations due to the spe-
cific clean-room requirements, which are often found in electronics
manufacturing, and for this example, an operator is not allowed
to move between workstations that have different clean-room
classes. This type of problem is important in practice, but we are
not aware of any existing literature that addresses a similar prob-
lem. The present study develops a cellular design using parallel
station layouts arranged to overcome the limitations of process
constraints.
3. Proposed methodology
In a typical linear layout, facilities are arranged in sequence
based on manufacturing operation requirements, so products can
flow smoothly through the system. Operator tasks consist of the
loading and unloading of parts at machines and inspections at
certain production stages. Workers must be able to walk easily
between machines to finish tasks (Fig. 3a). One problem associated
with this system is that when machines are arranged in a linear
configuration, each line is independent from other lines. In this
situation, the allocation of operations among workers to react to
demand change for products often requires a fractional number of
workers. A typical TPS approach combines U-shaped lines to solve
this problem.
Limited by the process considered, the case study has not
adopted a U-shaped layout. The current layout is a linear layout and
its conceptual schema is shown in Fig. 3b. Due to process limita-
tions, it is not possible for operators to move between station 3 and
station 4, nor between station 4 and station 5. In this situation, the
company has more manpower problems (or slack manpower) than
a typical linear layout in which operators can move freely between
the different workstations.
An operator balance chart (OBC) uses vertical bars to repre-
sent the work load for each operator. The vertical bar is developed
257
Fig. 4. OBC of the case problem.
by stacking small bars representing individual work elements.
When customer demand changes, manpower can be reduced by
redistributing workloads among operators based on the takt time
requirement. Takt time is calculated as:
Takt time = (Planned production time)/(Customer demand)
If a longer takt time is desired when customer demand
decreases, it is likely that fewer operators will be required, so excess
operators can be assigned to other production lines. Conversely,
with a shorter takt time, more operators will be required. Using
OBC can redistribute work elements among operators by making
the amount of work for each operator very close to the takt time.
The OBC provides the management of an area so that expedient
staffing decisions can be made [18].
The OBC of the case study is shown in Fig. 4, and is used as an
illustration to describe Fig. 3b. Each station has one worker. When
the takt time is equal to 250 s, this results in idle time. Ideally, the
use of multi-skilled workers can achieve Shojinka benefits through
the re-distribution of work elements among the workers. However,
workers are not allowed to move between stations 3, 4 and 5 due to
the differing clean-room requirements of those stations. If workers
are unable to move between stations, we cannot obtain the bene-
fit of Shojinka by adjusting work elements of operators to react to
short-term changes in customer demand. In other words, the pro-
duction line cannot run with more or fewer operators to approach
a specific takt time.
A three-phase methodology is here proposed to solve the pro-
posed Shojinka problem: (a) redesigning new cellular layouts, (b)
determining manpower level, and (c) evaluating and decision-
making. The details are described as follows:
3.1. Redesigning new cellular layouts
A workstation is a collection of one or more machines or manual
stations that perform identical functions [19]. Two assembly lines
can be combined by connecting them with one or more common
 Author's Personal Copy
258 P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269

Fig. 5. Cellular layout with P1 :P2 :P3 :P4 :P5 = 2:1:2:2:1.

Table 1 ing decisions [20,21]. The mathematical formulation for integer

Normalized workstation number ratio is rounded up to its nearest integer.
programming is a linear programming model with the additional
Workstation number 1 2 3 4 5 restriction that the variables must have integer values. If only some
Process time (s/piece) 190 99 195 225 121 of the variables are required to have integer values, this model is
Normalized stationnumber ratio 2 1 2 2 1
called mixed integer programming (MIP). We can construct the
mixed integer programming formulation to minimize the num-
ber of operators in the proposed cellular manufacturing layout.
workstations. Workers can work in two or more different assembly
The assembly lines operate 21 h per day excluding breaks. Suppose
lines at the same time. These connections may provide an oppor-
there are U cells in the assembly factory. For a given cell: cell j,
tunity to reduce the manpower requirement of the system [5]. This
j = 1, 2, ..., U. In each cell, there is at least one block where operators
case study needs to revise its current layout to increase its flexibil-
can walk between stations, and one block where operators cannot.
ity and reduce its manpower. In this phase, the proposed layout is
Given a set S = {1, 2, ..., s} of s blocks where the operators can move
based on the least integer ratio of processing time for each work-
between stations in a cell, the notations are defined before the MIP
station.
formulation as follows:
We let P k be the processing time of process k,k = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Parameters:
Di = total demand for product i (pcs)
N = number of different products
and P 1 :P 2 :P 3 :P 4 :P 5 = a:b:c:d:e
U = total number of cells in the factory
where the greatest (a, b, c, d, e) = 1, and a, b, c, d, e ∈ positive integer A = available operation time (in seconds)
The above approach can rationalize the workstation require- Mbj = number of stations in block b of cell j
ments prior to the adjusting the required number of operators in Wbj = number of processes in block b of cell j
order to properly balance the throughput capacity among the work- Lij = bottleneck operation time of cell j producing product i (in
stations. Table 1 is an illustrative example for tool requirements in a seconds)
linear layout. The normalized workstation number ratio is rounded Cj = 1, if cell j is utilized; otherwise, Cj = 0
up to its nearest integer. If the normalized workstation-number Pik = processing time for process k producing product i (in sec-
ratio in a factory is 2:1:2:2:1, the cellular layout can be designed as onds)
Fig. 5. Decision variables:
In Fig. 5, the cellular layout is further divided into two blocks Tij = takt time of cell j producing product i (in seconds)
(block 1 and block 2) due to cleanliness limitations according to tij = required production time of cell j producing product i (in
the proposed TFT-LCD assembly line considerations. Block 1 con- seconds)
tains five stations, where workers can walk between the stations, Obj = number of operators in block b of cell j
so the number of workers can be adjusted. Block 2 is a cleanroom Then, the cellular manufacturing manpower problem can be for-
and contains two workstations with three machines. Each machine mulated as the objective function (1), the constraints (2)–(7) and
requires a dedicated operator in attendance due to the considera- the sign restriction (8).
tion of work balance. For instance, if there is only one operator for U B
the two machines of workstation 4, the throughput rate of work- MinZ = Obj × Cj (1)
j=1 b=1
station 4 will be much less than the throughput of workstation 5.
In addition, the limitations on the shifting of manpower between Subject to
workstations 4 and 5 are quite restrictive for the layout. Balancing
the stations in blocks 1 and 2 and then adjusting the number of Tij ≥ Lij for i = 1, 2, ..., N; j = 1, 2, ..., U (2)
operators in block 1 help to achieve the Shojinka benefit which is N
the target of the present study. Fig. 5, which shows the layout con- t
i=1 ij
≤A for j = 1, 2, ...., U (3)
figuration, is used as an example to develop a generic model in the  
next phase to illustrate and analyze the total manpower level. U 1
j=1
× tij × A ≥ Di for i = 1, 2, ..., N (4)
Tij
3.2. Determining manpower level  N
1, if t
i=1 ij
>0
Mathematical programming can be used to develop cellular Cj = for j = 1, 2, ..., U (5)
manufacturing models that integrate such aspects of manufactur- 0, otherwise
 Author's Personal Copy
P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269
Wbj
Obj × Tij − P
k=1 ik
≥0 for i = 1, 2, ..., N; j = 1, 2, ..., U; b ∈ S (6)
⎧
⎪ 0, if Cj = 0

⎨ 1 2
Obj = Mbj , if b ∈
/S for j = 1, 2, ..., U
⎪
⎩
1, 2, ..., Mbj , if b ∈ S
and
Tij , tij ≥ 0 for i = 1, 2, ..., N; j = 1, 2, ..., U
The objective function (1) is used to minimize the total num-
ber of operators. The value of B is equal to 2 for the present study.
Constraint (2) indicates the takt time is greater than or equal to the
bottleneck operation time. Constraint (3) indicates that the sum of
production time cannot exceed the available operation time. Con-
straint (4) ensures that total outputs are greater than or equal to
demand. In the case study, A = (21 working hours per day × 3600 s
per h)=75,600 s per day. Constraint (5) indicates whether the cell j
is used or not. When the production time in a cell is greater than
zero, it is used for production. In other words, when its production
time is zero, it is idle. Constraint (6) indicates the idle time is greater
than or equal to zero for each block when the blocks belong to S. It is
calculated by multiplying the number of operators by the takt time
and subtracting the total processing time because one operator may
be in charge of several workstations. Constraint (7) indicates that
when a cell is idle, the number of operators is zero in the cell. And
the number of operators equals the number of stations when the
blocks do not belong to S. In contrast, when the blocks belong to S,
the number of operators is at least one, and at most equal to the
number of stations (see Fig. 5). Restriction (8) is the nonnegativity
constraint.
3.3. Evaluating and decision-making
The previous phase has determined the manpower level for var-
ious cell configurations. In this phase, we use two performance
indicators, the total number of operators and the labor idle time
ratio, to evaluate the performance of cells. The former indicator
can be formulated in the objective function (1), and the latter can
be formulated in Eq. (9).
 W
259
“smaller the better” case which is used the present study, suppose
there are n quality characteristics, so the SN ratio is defined as:
n
(7) SN = −10log10 yi (10)
n
i=1
where yi represents the response value of the i-th quality char-
acteristic. In yi refers to the i-th value of observation for the two
performance indicators mentioned above.
(8) Stochastic programming is mathematical programming deal-
ing with optimization problems that involve uncertain parameters
[24]. Uncertainty is usually characterized by a probability distribu-
tion of the parameters. Stochastic programming can solve customer
stochastic demand; for example, Lin et al. [25] used a stochastic
dynamic programming for multi-site capacity planning in TFT-
LCD manufacturing under demand uncertainty. When some of the
parameters are random, then solutions and the optimal objective
value to the optimization problem are themselves random. A dis-
tribution of optimal decisions generally cannot be implemented.
This study mainly stresses comparing robustness between four
proposed layout designs, rather than finding the best solution. In
addition, complex mathematical modeling is much more difficult
to implement because it requires more time and effort for firms
to absorb that complex knowledge. Empirically, the current study
uses the SN ratio to evaluate the robustness of layouts.
4. Empirical illustrations
TFT-LCD applications encompass a variety of consumer elec-
tronics, including personal digital assistants (PDA), cellular phones,
digital cameras, computers, notebook computers, flat panel tele-
visions, and others. There are three main production sequences
for TFT-LCD: the TFT array process, the cell process, and module
assembly [26]. The TFT fabrication process sequence is a series of
deposition and etching sequences, as in integrated circuit fabrica-
tion. Both the thin-film-transistor plate and color-filter plate are
joined together in what is called a cell assembly process. The final
step is module assembly, integrating the drive integrated circuit
(IC) onto the substrate to drive the display and attach the backlight
(BL) to the module. The display then undergoes a final test to com-
plete the operation. Some relevant research solutions have been

bj
Bb=1 Obj × Tij − k=1 Pik /Tij
Labor idle time ratio =
Bb=1 Obj
To find the most robust cellular layouts, it is necessary to make
performance measurements to evaluate the functional stability of
the system. Taguchi’s signal-to-noise (SN) ratios were proposed for
evaluating this sort of robustness. The SN ratio is a measure used in
science and engineering that compares the level of a desired signal
to the level of background noise [22,23]. Taguchi suggests choos-
ing an appropriate SN to analyze the variation. These SN ratios are
derived from the quadratic loss function. Three of them, nominal
the best, larger the better and smaller the better, are widely appli-
cable. “Nominal the best” is chosen if the objective is to decrease
variability around a specific target. If the system is optimized when
the response is as large as possible, “larger the better” is used; and
conversely, “smaller the better” is used when the response should
be as small as possible. Factor levels that maximize the appropriate
SN ratio are optimal.
In this problem, we use “smaller the better” because the objec-
tive is to minimize the total number of operators and the labor
idle time ratio. SN ratios are expressed on a decibel scale. For this
widely used in TFT-LCD manufacturing to enhance the production
efficiency and reduce production cost [27,28].
(9) To illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed approaches, a case
study was adopted from a TFT-LCD module manufacturing firm in
Tainan, Taiwan. For this case study, detailed module processes and
their characteristics are shown in Table 2. In Table 2, most of the
module processes are manpower operations, and only the aging
test is an automated operation. Automation is much less flexible
than manual lines and it is difficult to change. Therefore, the aging
test and all its following tasks cannot be integrated into the cellular
design. The back bezel cleaning has a very short processing time.
In addition, both the lamp test and the PCB (print circuit board)
soldering have a long task time. These three are also not suitable
for assignment to the cellular design.
Based on the results above, the cellular design includes five pro-
cesses: lamp assembly, cable assembly, inspection, BL assembly,
and LCM (liquid crystal display module) assembly. Two of these,
BL and LCM assemblies, cannot allow labor from other stations to
enter due to the requirement for cleanliness.
The existing company-case layout is illustrated as Fig. 6. The cel-
lular design consists of the five processes mentioned above, and an
operator is assigned to exactly one process. In this situation, the cur-
rent layout needs to be improved to reduce manpower and wastage
 Author's Personal Copy
260 P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269

Table 2
Production data for the case problem.

Fig. 6. Existing layout.

due to idle time. The proposed 3-phase approach is adopted to solve Table 3
Normalized workstation number ratio for the manufacturing of product 1.
the problems.
Product 1 Lamp Cable & inspection BL LCM

4.1. Redesigning cellular layouts for the case problem Process time (s) 99 163 + 60 225 121
The least integer ratio∼
= 1 2 2 1

In Fig. 6, the inspection process has a short processing time. If we

combine the cable assembly process and the inspection process into
a single process, the resulting cellular design will be as described
in Fig. 7, where the parallel station layouts are divided into two
sides, producing the same or similar parts according to customer
demand. The process contains 12 identical cells and each cell has
four workstations. The ratio of each station within a cell is 1:1:1:1.
Due to the requirement of high cleanliness both in the BL and LCM
assembly stations, operators from other stations are not permitted
to enter these stations. In this situation, work elements cannot be
redistributed among operators to adjust workloads according to
the takt time when customer demand changes.
To overcome shortcomings of the current cellular layout, differ-
ent types of cell configurations can be established according to the
normalized workstation number ratios for the production of the
different product types. The company produces three main prod-
ucts, and the resulting normalized workstation number ratios are
shown in Tables 3–5.
 Author's Personal Copy
P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269 261

Fig. 7. Current cellular layout design.

Fig. 8. Proposed cellular layout design for the production of product 1.

Table 4 Table 6
Normalized workstation number ratio for the manufacturing of product 2. Processing time of the different layout configurations for product 1 (seconds).

Product 2 Lamp Cable & inspection BL LCM Layouts Lamp Cable & inspection BL LCM

Process time (s) 89 132 + 58 195 162 1:1:1:1 99 223 225 121
The least integer ratio∼
= 1 2 2 2 1:2:2:1 99 112 113 121
1:2:2:2 99 112 113 61
2:3:3:2 50a 75 75 61
a
99/250.
Table 5
Normalized workstation number ratio for the manufacturing of product 3.
4.2. Determining manpower levels for the case problem
Product 3 Lamp Cable & inspection BL LCM

Process time (s) 134 152 + 58 220 153 Let Qij be the quantity of product i inside cell j. In the proposed
The least integer ratio∼
= 2 3 3 2 layouts, the processing time of parallel stations for each process,
the maximum output and the utilization for each cell is:
Pik
Processing time = (11)
Number of parallel stations

Considering the size of the company building, we organize the A

Max Qij = (12)
cellular design for the production of products 1, 2 and 3 according Lij
to the normalized workstation number ratios to achieve a balanced
Qij
system. The resulting layout designs are illustrated in Figs. 8–10. Utilization = (13)
Max Qij
In Fig. 8, the proposed layout for product 1 has 6 cells and each
cell has 6 stations, each including one lamp station, two cable and Using Eq. (11), the processing time of parallel stations in each
inspection stations, two BL stations, and one LCM station, in that cell for product 1, product 2, and product 3 is summarized in
sequence. In other words, the ratio of parallel stations is 1:2:2:1 in Tables 6, 7, and 8, respectively.
a cell. In Fig. 9, the proposed layout for product 2 has 6 cells and each The company works 21 h a day. Assuming the workers are multi-
cell has 7 stations. The ratio of parallel stations is 1:2:2:2. Finally, skilled, using Eq. (12), the maximum output of each cell for each
in Fig. 10, the proposed layout for product 3 has 4 cells and each product is tabulated in Table 9. The maximum output of each layout
cell has 10 stations. The ratio of parallel stations is 2:3:3:2. for each product is tabulated in Table 10.
 Author's Personal Copy
262 P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269

Fig. 9. Proposed cellular layout design for the production of product 2.

Fig. 10. Proposed cellular layout design for the production of product 3.

Table 7 Table 10
Processing time of the different layout configurations for product 2 (seconds). Maximum daily throughput for each layout configuration (pieces).

Layouts Lamp Cable & inspection BL LCM Layouts Product 1 Product 2 Product 3

1:1:1:1 89 190 195 162 1:1:1:1 4032 4644 4116

1:2:2:1 89 95 98 162 1:2:2:1 3744 2796 2964
1:2:2:2 89 95 98 81 1:2:2:2 4014 4626 4122
2:3:3:2 45 64 65 81 2:3:3:2 4032a 3732 3924
a
1008 × 4 = 4032.

Table 8
Processing time of the different layout configurations for product 3 (seconds).

Layouts Lamp Cable & inspection BL LCM

1:1:1:1 134 210 220 153 are performed using Microsoft Excel since it is readily available on
1:2:2:1 134 105 110 153 the shop-floor of the case company. In Figs. 11 and 12, we used
1:2:2:2 134 105 110 77
a scenario based on a ratio of 1:1:1:1 layout and the demands of
2:3:3:2 67 70 74 77
1190, 1155, and 1320 pieces for products 1, 2, and 3, respectively
to illustrate the performance in Excel. Fig. 11 indicates the objective
These results can be used to determine specific values for the function and constraints formulated by Excel. Fig. 12 is an outcome
mixed integer programming parameters. The proposed approaches output by Excel, including six parts, as follows:

Table 9
Maximum output per day in each cell for each product (pieces).

Layouts Product 1 Product 2 Product 3 Number of cell

1:1:1:1 336 387 343 12

1:2:2:1 624 466 494 6
1:2:2:2 669 771 687 6
2:3:3:2 1008a 933 981 4
a
(21 × 60 × 60)/75 = 1008.
 Author's Personal Copy
P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269 263

Fig. 11. Objective function and constraints formulated by Excel.

 Author's Personal Copy
264 P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269

Fig. 12. Cell production information and operator balance chart.

 Author's Personal Copy
P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269 265

Table 11
Different demand levels for the different product types (pieces). 48
Demand level Product 1 Product 2 Product 3 46
44
High 3500 3500 4000
Medium 2750 2500 3000 42
Low 2000 1500 2500 40
38
36
1) Cell production information calculating interface: an interface 34
for calculating cell production information. 32
2) Operator balance chart drawing interface: an interface for 30
calculating information about OBC and then completing the Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7
drawing. Using Excel Visual Basic for Applications (VBA) to con-
nect interfaces and by “recording Macros” or writing VBA
Fig. 13. Trend chart for staffing level analysis at the high demand level.
Programming. Parts of the programming codes are shown as
follows:

30

25

20

15

10

0
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7

3) Cell production information diagram: The results of cell produc- Fig. 14. Trend chart for labor idle time ratio analysis at the high demand level.

tion information calculating, including the number of cells used

in a layout, the number of operators in each cell, the total num- Table 12
Different demand rates for the different product types (%).
ber of operators, idle time, labor idle time ratio, takt time, and
others, provide managers with detailed production information. Level Product 1 Product 2 Product 3
4) Cell allocations: A chart showing the types of cell allocation, with 1 30 10 60
the current display of a ratio of 1:1:1:1 layout design. 2 10 30 60
5) Operator balance chart information calculation for product 2: 3 34 33 33
Calculation results include takt time, process time, idle time, 4 60 10 30
5 10 60 30
labor idle time ratio, and others to provide managers with the 6 60 30 10
production situations for each operator. 7 30 60 10
6) Operator balance chart for product 2: The results of OBC infor-
mation calculation form an operator balance chart.
Table 13
Structured experimental design (pieces).
4.3. Evaluating and decision-making for the case problem
Customer demand level

Layout decisions are important since they require substantial Demand rate High Medium Low
investment, involve long-term commitments, and have a signifi- Level 1 (1050:350:2400) (825:250:1800) (600:150:1500)
cant impact on the cost and efficiency of short-term operations. Level 2 (350:1050:2400) (275:750:1800) (250:450:1500)
In order to determine a robust layout design, customer demand Level 3 (1190:1155:1320) (935:825:990) (680:495:825)
levels are classified as high, medium and low for products 1, 2 and Level 4 (2100:350:1200) (1650:250:900) (1200:150:750)
Level 5 (350:2100:1200) (275:1500:900) (200:900:750)
3 in the case company, based on the historical sales data as shown
Level 6 (2100:1050:400) (1650:750:300) (1200:450:250)
in Table 11. Level 7 (1050:2100:400) (825:1500:300) (600:900:250)
Consider each of the three product types with three levels (high,
Note: (product 1:product 2:product 3).
medium, and low). The different product-mix scenarios are found
to construct a structured experimental design with seven replica-
tions: (30, 10, 60), (10, 30, 60), (34, 33, 33), (60, 10, 30), (10, 60, 30) demand changes can be computed, as shown in Tables 14–20 and
(60, 30, 10), (30, 60, 10) as shown in Table 12 which can represent Figs. 13–19. We discuss the respective managerial insights for the
boundary conditions for the possible product-mix scenarios. The three demand levels as follows:
center point is (34, 33, 33).
Table 13 is the multiplication of Tables 11 and 12. For exam- 4.3.1. At the high level
ple, the multiplication of high demands from Table 11, row 1 and In Tables 14 and 15, the cellular layout with a 2:3:3:2 ratio is
Table 12, row 1 is: (3500 × 30%, 3500 × 10%, 4000 × 60%) = (1050, the most robust because it has a maximum SN ratio, which means
350, 2400) which is shown as Table 13, row 1, column 1. the least variance, for the total number of operators and the labor
Using Eqs. (1)–(13) and Table 13, the total number of operators idle time ratio. In contrast, the ratio 1:2:2:1 cannot meet customer
and the labor idle time ratio at the high, medium and low levels demand. Compared with the current layout using a 1:1:1:1 ratio,
for evaluating the manpower performance and the robustness of the proposed layout with a ratio of 2:3:3:2 reduces 6.72 workers on
 Author's Personal Copy
266 P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269

Fig. 15. Detailed workers’ assignments for the example problem.

Table 14
Staffing level analysis at the high demand level (persons).
30
The current and proposed layouts
25
Demand rate 1:1:1:1 1:2:2:1 1:2:2:2 2:3:3:2
20
Level 1 48 – 41 38
Level 2 44 – 41 39 15
Level 3 44a – 40 37b
Level 4 44 – 41 36 10
Level 5 40 – 35 36
Level 6 44 – 39 35 5
Level 7 40 – 35 36
0
Average (persons) 43.43 – 38.86 36.71
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7
SN ratio −32.77 – −31.81 −31.30
a
Refer to Fig. 12.
b
Refer to Table 16. Fig. 17. Trend chart for labor idle time ratio analysis at the medium demand level.

Table 15
Labor idle time ratio analysis at the high demand level (%).
28
The current and proposed layouts
26
Demand rate 1:1:1:1 1:2:2:1 1:2:2:2 2:3:3:2
24
Level 1 27 – 15 8
Level 2 21 – 16 11 22
Level 3 26a – 18 12b
Level 4 25 – 18 9 20
Level 5 20 – 11 11
Level 6 29 – 20 11 18
Level 7 23 – 12 15
Average (%) 24.43 – 15.71 11.00 16
SN ratio −27.82 – −24.09 −20.98 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7
a
Refer to Fig. 12.
b
Refer to Table 16. Fig. 18. Trend chart for staffing analysis at the low demand level.

38
30
36
25
34
32 20
30 15
28
10
26
5
24
22 0
Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7 Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5 Level 6 Level 7

Fig. 16. Trend chart for staffing level analysis at the medium demand level. Fig. 19. Trend chart for labor idle time ratio analysis at the low demand level.
 Author's Personal Copy
P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269 267

Table 17

People
Staffing level analysis at the medium demand level (persons).

1.59

4.28
0.69
0.91

1.09
The current and proposed layouts

Product 3

Utilization Idle Time

Demand rate 1:1:1:1 1:2:2:1 1:2:2:2 2:3:3:2

ratio (%)
1320
Level 1 36 32 33 29

10b

11

12
20
Level 2 36 32 33 29

7
Level 3 32 31 28 28
Product 2

Level 4 36 31 33 28
Level 5 32 30 28 27
1155
Total

100

100
95a
Level 6 32 29 28 27
(%)

82

94
Level 7 32 30 27 26
Average (persons) 33.71 30.71 30.00 27.71
Product 1

Production Idle Time

ratio (%)

SN ratio −30.57 −29.75 −29.58 −28.86

54.12

27.44
40.84
1190

6.88
7.92

Table 18
demand

Labor idle time ratio analysis at the medium demand level (%).
Time

1.38
0.38
1.00

0.00
0.00

The current and proposed layouts

Demand rate 1:1:1:1 1:2:2:1 1:2:2:2 2:3:3:2

Level 1 26 17 20 9
Time
Takt

195
121

Level 2 28 19 22 11
77
86

Level 3 23 20 12 12
Product 3

Level 4 30 19 24 10
Output

1320

Level 5 26 13 13 13
981
339

Level 6 26 14 15 12
0
0

Level 7 29 17 16 13
Production Idle Time

Average (%) 26.86 17.00 17.43 11.43

ratio (%)

SN ratio −28.61 −24.70 −25.08 −21.22

21.48
12.76
19.91
21.48

18.91

Table 19
Staffing level analysis at the low demand level (persons).
Time
12 %

1.42
0.42
1.00
0.00

0.00

The current and proposed layouts

4.28 people

Demand level 1:1:1:1 1:2:2:1 1:2:2:2 2:3:3:2

Level 1 27 26 26 25
Time
Takt

Level 2 28 26 26 25
81
81
99
81

Level 3 24 22 21 24
Product 2
Labor idle time ratio for the layout

Level 4 28 22 26 25
Output

Level 5 22 21 20 19
1155
394
761

Level 6 24 21 21 19
0

Level 7 20 20 20 18
Note: Due to rounding, some totals may not correspond with the sum of the separate figures.

Average (persons) 24.71 22.57 22.86 22.14

Production Idle Time
Total idle manpower

ratio (%)

SN ratio −27.92 −27.11 −27.24 −26.99

48.14

26.89
10.93
40.03
8.44

Table 20
Labor idle time ratio analysis at the low demand level (%).
Time

1.19
0.19

1.00
0.00

0.00

The current and proposed layouts

Required staffing and production information for the example problem.

Demand level 1:1:1:1 1:2:2:1 1:2:2:2 2:3:3:2

Level 1 23 19 20 17
Time
Takt

111

161

Level 2 29 13 24 21
37

81

75

Level 3 25 15 14 25
Product 1

Level 4 32 11 27 24
Output

1190
1008

Level 5 25 20 18 13
182

Level 6 30 18 20 12
0

0.19 × 8.44 + 0.42 × 12.76 + 0.38 × 7.92 = 10.

Level 7 24 18 24 16
Average (%) 26.86 16.29 21.00 18.29
Block 2

SN ratio −28.64 −24.39 −26.60 −25.53

182/1008 + 394/933 + 339/981 = 95.
20
5
5
5
5
Total number of operators

Block 1

average, which means the required manpower is reduced by 15.47%

and the labor idle time ratio is decreased by 13.43% on average.
17
5
4
3
5

Similarly, comparing the proposed layout with a ratio of 1:2:2:2 to

the current layout, the manpower is reduced by 4.57 workers or
People

10.52%, and the labor idle time ratio is reduced by 8.72%.

/Cell

37
10

10

Figs. 13 and 14 show that the proposed layout designs (except

9
8

the one with the ratio of 1:2:2:1) consistently generate superior

Table 16

cell 1
cell 2
cell 3
cell 4
Total
Avg.

improvements in reducing the total number of operators and the

a

labor idle time ratio to the current layout.

 Author's Personal Copy
268 P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269
Table 21
Summary of improvements by the proposed methodology.
The proposed layouts
Demand level 1:1:1:1
High 43.43a , 24.43%b
Medium 33.71, 26.86%
Low 24.71, 26.86%
Average 33.95, 26.05%
Improvement – –
a
Total number of operators.
b
Labor idle time ratio.
To illustrate the detailed calculation of the required staffing level
and production information, the example of level 3 demand rate,
high demand level and 2:3:3:2 is adopted. For this example, the
demands for products 1, 2 and 3 are 1190, 1155 and 1320 pieces,
respectively. Then the required numbers of workers are determined
by the proposed methodology, with the following results.
Cell 1 has 10 workers (5 are in the adjustable zone; 5 are in the
fixed zone), and at a takt time of 77 s the output of product 3 is 981
pieces per day. The labor idle time ratio in cell 1 is 7%. Cell 2 has 9
workers (4 are in the adjustable zone; 5 are in the fixed zone). At a
takt time of 81 s for product 1, its output is 182 pieces in 0.19 day.
Next, at a takt time of 81 s for product 2, its output is 394 pieces
in 0.42 day. Finally, at a takt time of 86 s, the output of product 3 is
339 pieces in 0.38 day. In total, the labor idle time ratio in cell 2 is
10%. Cell 3 has 8 workers (3 are in the adjustable zone; 5 are in the
fixed zone), and at a takt time of 99 s the output of product 2 is 761
pieces per day. The labor idle time ratio in cell 3 is 20%. Cell 4 has 10
workers (5 are in the adjustable zone; 5 are in the fixed zone), and
at a takt time of 75 s the output of product 1 is 1008 pieces per day.
The labor idle time ratio is 11% in cell 4. In sum, the total number
of workers in this layout is 37. Its labor idle time ratio is 12% (about
4.28 people) and the utilization is about 94%. The results are shown
in Excel form in Table 16, and Fig. 15 shows the detailed worker
assignments.
4.3.2. At the medium level
In Tables 17 and 18, a smaller average has a larger SN ratio in
various layouts. The most robust cellular layout is 2:3:3:2 because
it has a maximum SN ratio for the total number of operators and
the labor idle time ratio. At the medium level, we still make respec-
tive comparisons of the total number of operators and the labor idle
time ratio between the current and proposed layouts. The proposed
layout with a ratio of 2:3:3:2 reduces the manpower by 6 work-
ers or 17.79% and the labor idle time ratio is reduced by 15.43%
on average. Likewise, the other two with the ratios of 1:2:2:1 and
1:2:2:2 both reduce manpower by 3 and 3.7 workers, respectively,
indicating the improvements in manpower requirements of 8.89%
and 11.01%. Their labor idle time ratios are decreased by 9.86% and
9.43%, respectively.
Figs. 16 and 17 show that the proposed layout with the ratio
of 2:3:3:2 consistently generates superior improvements in reduc-
ing the total number of operators and the labor idle time ratio in
comparison to other layouts.
4.3.3. At the low level
In Tables 19 and 20, 2:3:3:2 is still the most robust layout for
the total number of operators as it is at the high and medium lev-
els. Moreover, it is also the most robust for the labor idle time ratio
at the two levels. However, at the low level, 1:2:2:1 becomes the
most robust layout. Compared with the current layout, the pro-
posed layout with the ratio of 2:3:3:2 reduces 2.57 workers on
average, for a reduction in manpower by 10.4% and a decrease of
8.57% in the labor idle time ratio. Similarly, comparing the pro-
1:2:2:1 1:2:2:2 2:3:3:2
– 38.86, 15.71% 36.71, 11.00%
30.71, 17.00% 30.00, 17.43% 27.71, 11.43%
22.57, 16.29% 22.86, 21.00% 22.14, 18.29%
– 30.57, 18.05% 28.85, 13.57%
3.38, 8.00% 5.10, 12.48%
posed layouts with ratios of 1:2:2:1 and 1:2:2:2 to the current one,
there are reductions in manpower of 2.14 and 1.85 workers, respec-
tively, which means the required manpower is reduced by 8.66%
and 7.49%. The labor idle time ratios are reduced by 10.57% and
5.86%, respectively.
Figs. 18 and 19 show that the proposed layouts design con-
sistently generates superior improvements in decreasing the total
number of operators and the labor idle time ratio to the current
layout.
Table 21 is a summary comparing the current and proposed lay-
outs according to the total number of operators and the labor idle
time ratio at the high, medium and low levels.
Since the layout with the ratio of 1:2:2:1 fails to meet customer
demand at the high level, it is not a suitable layout design for the
case company. Compared with the current layout, the proposed lay-
out with the ratio of 2:3:3:2 reduces 5.1 workers on average, which
means manpower need is reduced by 15.02% and the labor idle time
ratio is reduced by 12.48%. Similarly, comparing the proposed lay-
out with the ratio of 1:2:2:2 to the current one, the proposed layout
reduces manpower by 3.38 workers or 9.96%. The labor idle time
ratio is reduced by 8%. Since it is usually difficult to redesign a set-
tled layout to accommodate the demand fluctuations, it is essential
to select a robust design. If the case company allows only one lay-
out, the proposed layout designs with the ratio of 2:3:3:2 will be
the preferred choice.
5. Conclusions
The benefit of Shojinka is well recognized and has been effec-
tively implemented in the automobile industry. However, we are
not aware of any literature that demonstrating the successful appli-
cation of Shojinka in the TFT-LCD industry, which represents a
cost-intensive industry. The present study proposes a MIP formula-
tion to solve a Shojinka problem. A TFT-LCD module manufacturing
is adopted for the empirical study to illustrate the effectiveness and
efficiency of the proposed methodology. The results are promising.
The empirical results show that, given a variety of demand scenar-
ios, this method can reduce the average manpower and the average
labor idle time ratio by 15.02% and 12.48%, respectively. The result-
ing layout design is easily implemented and is thus appropriate for
practical applications.
Since the present study assumes that only one layout design
is selected as the final design, this constraint may be relaxed to
include more than one design as the final layout design, such as a
cell with 1:1:1:1 configuration and others with 1:2:2:1 or 1:2:2:2
together. In addition, block 2 includes the last two workstations
(BL and LCM) that require a dedicated operator to attend each sta-
tion for the present study. If this constraint can be relaxed due
to future technology advancements, floating manpower between
workstations 4 and 5 may be possible, which can further improve
the benefit of the proposed Shojinka strategy. The present study
further assumes that an operator is able to finish his/her own task
independently; however, due to the growing work complexity; an
 Author's Personal Copy
P.-S. Wang et al. / Journal of Manufacturing Systems 44 (2017) 255–269 269

operator may need to collaborate with the other operators to fulfill [13] Song BL, Wong WK, Chan SF. A recursive operator allocation approach for
his/her jobs. These become future research opportunities for the assembly line-balancing optimization problem with the consideration of
operator efficiency. Comput Ind Eng 2006;51(4):585–608.
present study. [14] Kumar N, Mahto D. Assembly line balancing: a review of developments and
trends in approach to industrial application. Glob J Res Eng 2013;13(2):29–50.
Acknowledgement [15] Gökçen H, Ağpak K, Benzer R. Balancing of parallel assembly lines. Int J Prod
Econ 2006;103(2):600–9.
[16] Akpinar S, Baykasoglu A. Modeling and solving mixed-model assembly line
This work was supported, in part, by the Ministry of Science balancing problem with setups. Part I: a mixed integer linear programming
and Technology, Taiwan, under grant MOST-104-2221-E-006-103- model. J Manuf Syst 2014;33(1):177–87.
[17] Lusa A. A survey of the literature on the multiple or parallel assembly line
MY3. balancing problem. Eur J Ind Eng 2008;2(1):50–72.
[18] Harris C, Harris R. Lean decision making: use an operator balance chart to
References make informed manpower decisions. Manuf Eng 2009;143(3):83–9.
[19] Hopp JP, Spearman ML. Factory physics. 3rd edition New York: McGraw Hill;
2008.
[1] Monden Y. Toyota production system: an integrated approach to just-in-time.
[20] Slomp J, Chowdary BV, Suresh NC. Design of virtual manufacturing cells: a
4th edition Boca Raton: CRC Press; 2011.
mathematical programming approach. Robot Comput–Integr Manuf
[2] Stockton DJ, Ardon-Finch J, Khalil R. Design of flexible manpower line walk
2005;21(3):273–88.
cycles for a fixed number of operators. Int J Prod Res 2005;43(3):583–96.
[21] Brown JR. A capacity constrained mathematical programming model for
[3] Balle F, Balle M. Feel the force of flexible manpower. Manuf Eng 2006;84:20–5.
cellular manufacturing with exceptional elements. J Manuf Syst
[4] Stockton DJ, Ardon-Finch J, Khalil R. Walk cycle design for flexible manpower
2015;37:227–32.
lines using genetic algorithms. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 2005;18(1):15–26.
[22] Taguchi G, Chowdhury S, Wu Y. Taguchi’s quality engineering handbook.
[5] Gökçen H, Kara Y, Atasagun Y. Integrated line balancing to attain Shojinka in a
Wiley; 2004.
multiple straight line facility. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 2010;23(5):402–11.
[23] Wu CFG, Hamada M. Experiments: planning, analysis, and optimization. 2nd
[6] Houshyar AN, Leman Z, Moghadam HP, Sulaiman R. Review on cellular
edition Wiley; 2009.
manufacturing system and its components. Int J Eng Adv Technol
[24] Birge JR, Louveaux F. Introduction to stochastic programming. 2nd edition
2014;3(6):52–7.
Springer; 2011.
[7] Papaioannou G, Wilson JM. The evolution of cell formation problem
[25] Lin JT, Chen TL, Chu HC. A stochastic dynamic programming approach for
methodologies based on recent studies (1997–2008): review and directions
multi-site capacity planning in TFT-LCD manufacturing under demand
for future research. Eur J Oper Res 2010;206(3):509–21.
uncertainty. Int J Prod Econ 2014;148:21–36.
[8] Merchichi S, Boulif M. Constraint-driven exact algorithm for the
[26] O’Mara WC. Liquid crystal flat panel displays: Manufacturing Science &
manufacturing cell formation problem. Eur J Ind Eng 2015;9(6):717–43.
Technology. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold; 1993.
[9] Tompkins JA, White JA, Bozer YA, Tanchoco JMA. Facilities planning. 4th
[27] Su CT, Wang PS, Hsu CC. Effective approaches for low temperature poly silicon
edition New York: Wiley and Sons; 2010.
TFT LCD post-mapping yield control problem. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng
[10] Ariafar S, Ismail N. An improved algorithm for layout design in cellular
2005;2(2):198–206.
manufacturing systems. J Manuf Syst 2009;28(4):132–9.
[28] Yang T, Hsieh CH, Cheng BY. Lean-pull strategy in a re-entrant manufacturing
[11] Javadi B, Jolai F, Slomp J, Rabbani M, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R. An integrated
environment: a pilot study for TFT-LCD array manufacturing. Int J Prod Res
approach for the cell formation and layout design in cellular manufacturing
2011;49(6):1511–29.
systems. Int J Prod Res 2013;51(20):6017–44.
[12] Bidanda B, Ariyawongrat P, Needy KL, Norman BA, Tharmmaphornphilas W.
Human related issues in manufacturing cell design, implementation, and
operation: a review and survey. Comput Ind Eng 2005;48(3):507–23.

View publication stats