Nama : Emad Abdulrhman

NIM : 21522379
Kelas Tutorial : ip
Nama Kelompok : type A
1. Based on the teaching video provided, state and explain the process of assembling
Work In the instructional video, we see four stations with the following steps for
putting together job components:

Work Element 1 and Work Element 2 at WS 1: At this stage, the operator at workstation
1 assembles the two separate parts. Element 1 of the sculpture is the foundational piece,
while Element 2 is a more diminutive piece that is fastened to Element 1. The two
pieces are securely attached by means of a hand tool used by the operator.

Workstation 2 (WS 2): The operator at WS 2 is responsible for combining the first and
third work items. Element 1 is the foundation, while element 3 is the main structure
built atop it. The two pieces are securely attached by means of a hand tool used by the
operator.

The operator at WS 3 is responsible for reassembling work elements 1 and 2 from

earlier in the process. Element 1 of the work is the foundation, and Element 2 is a more
diminutive sub-element that is fastened to it. The two pieces are securely attached by
means of a hand tool used by the operator. This is the same procedure as at the initial
station.

At this stage, the product is inspected for quality assurance using WS 4's inspection
function. The fourth station's worker verifies the product's integrity and proper
assembly by inspecting it for problems. If problems are found, the item is returned back
to be fixed before moving on to the next phase of production

.What is the meaning of Cycle Time?

Cycle time is the amount of time it takes to complete a process or activity, from start to
finish, including any necessary pauses or delays between the steps of the process. In
manufacturing, cycle time is typically used to monitor the efficiency of production
processes, while in service sectors, it can be used to track the time it takes to execute a
customer request or service.

2. What is a bottleneck and how to overcome it?

 A bottleneck is a point in a system or process where the flow of materials, information,
or resources is restricted or slowed down, resulting in delays, inefficiency, and
decreased productivity. It can arise when the capacity of a resource, such as a machine
or a person, is limited, resulting in the accumulation of work-in-progress (WIP)
inventory prior to and after the bottleneck.
To overcome a bottleneck, several approaches can be considered:
• Increase capacity
• Prioritize the bottleneck
• Improve efficiency
• Redistribute workload

3. Perform calculations with 3 iterations using the Kilbridge-Wester Heuristic method based
on the following input data!
Predecesor Work Element i Ti (minute)
- 1 4
1 2 3
1,2 3 4
- 4 4
4 5 3
4,5 6 3
- 7 3
7 8 2
7,8 9 4
- 10 3
10 11 3
1,2,3,4,5,6 12 7
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,12 13 7
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 14 4
1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14 15 3

T = Working hours per day 480 minute

D = Number of products in production/day 20
Cycle Time Iteration 1 Ti max
Cycle Time Iteration 2 Middle Value CT
Cycle Time Iteration 3 T/D
a. Predecessor diagram

b. Calculation of Cycle Time Limits and Number of Classes

Cycle Time Limitation

TI MAX ≤ CT ≤ T/D
7 ≤ CT ≤ 24

Iteration Cycle Time (CT)

1 TI Max 7
2 Middle Value 15,5
3 T/D 24

c. Table of Assignment of Work Elements and Maximum Time Reduction

Table of Assignment Work Elements and Reduction of Maximum Iteration Time 1
 Table of Assignment Work Elements and Reduction of Maximum Iteration Time 2

Table of Assignment Work Elements and Reduction of Maximum Iteration Time 3

d. Parameter Calculation Results

- Iteration Parameter Calculation Results 1

- Iteration Parameter Calculation Results 2

- Iteration Parameter Calculation Results 3

5. Based on the results of the 3 iteration calculations, analyze the performance of the assembly
line using four parameters, namely Line Efficiency (LE), Smoothness Index (SI), Idle Time
(IT), and Balance Delay (BD)!
- Analysis of Iteration Calculation Results 1
First-round numerical findings allow for the following assessment of assembly line
efficiency: With a line efficiency of 90% and a smoothness score of 3, it appears that
there is some dispersion in processing time or workload among the many workstations.
There is room to increase productivity and decrease downtime, as seen by the 6-minute
idle time. If there are discrepancies of 10% in processing time or workload across
various workstations, then delays will occur. While the assembly line is already
functioning at a relatively high level of efficiency, there may be room for further
optimization by improving the flow and distribution of work.

- Analysis of Iteration Calculation Results 2

Second-round computation findings allow for the following assessment of assembly line
efficiency: There was a modest drop in efficiency from the first iteration to the second, as
indicated by the line efficiency of 89%. The 2.236067977 smoothness index is lower than
the initial 1.0 value, indicating that there is more variation in processing time or workload
between the several workstations. An improvement in work flow and decreased downtime
is reflected in an idle time of 3, which is lower than the first iteration. There appears to be
some inequity in the processing time or workload across different workstations, as
evidenced by the 11% balancing delay, which is slightly greater than the initial version.
Overall, the results imply that while progress has been achieved in decreasing downtime,
there is room for further refinement in the flow and distribution of tasks to further boost
productivity and cut down on waste and delays.
 - Analysis of Iteration Calculation Results 3
The efficiency of the production line can be assessed in the following ways, according to
the findings of the third iteration calculation: The line efficiency is 79%, which is far lower
than the 95% and 98% seen in the first two iterations. When compared to the first two
iterations, the smoothness index of 11.18033989 indicates a great deal of variation in
processing time or workload across the various workstations. The 15-second lull in activity
is a marked rise from the lulls seen in the preceding two editions. The 21% delay in
balancing the load is also higher than the first two repetitions, suggesting even greater
inequalities in processing time or workload between various workstations. The data points
to a poor performance of the assembly line as a whole, with major inefficiencies and
imbalances in processing time and workload across different workstations. Significant
changes are required to enhance productivity, decrease downtime, and enhance the
assembly line's overall performance.

6. Based on this analysis, determine the best Iteration as well and provide a diagram of
its predecessor and how to increase Line Efficiency (LE) on the assembly line to make
it more optimal?
Based on the analysis of the three iterations, the best iteration is the first one, where the line
efficiency is the highest at 90%, and the other parameters are also relatively better than the
second and third iterations.

To increase line efficiency (LE) and make the assembly line more optimal, there are several
strategies that can be employed, including:
Balancing the workload: One of the primary causes of inefficiencies in the assembly line
is imbalances in the workload across different workstations. By balancing the workload, it
is possible to reduce the idle time and improve the overall efficiency of the assembly line.

Reducing variability: Variability in the processing time or workload across different

workstations can also contribute to inefficiencies in the assembly line. By reducing
variability, it is possible to make the assembly line more predictable and efficient.

Improving the flow of work: Delays and bottlenecks can also reduce the efficiency of the
assembly line. By improving the flow of work and reducing downtime, it is possible to
increase efficiency and optimize the performance of the assembly line.