OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT

Session 9: Facility Layout – Assembly line

Assembly line
• Progressive assembly linked by some material handling device.

• Usual assumption is that some form of pacing is present and the

allowable processing time is equivalent for all stations.
Why are assembly lines productive?
• Specialization of labor (division of labor)
– Learning curve (a large job is divided into small tasks and each
worker becomes a specialist in performing the single task)
• Interchangeable parts
– Components made to close tolerances
• Line pacing
– Workers must complete their tasks within the cycle time of the line
(which paces the line to maintain a specified production rate)
• Work flow principle
– Products are brought to the workers (traveling the minimum
distance between stations)
 Assembly line design
• Cycle time: the time between successive units coming off the end of
an assembly line.

• Tasks: the work performed at each work station.

• The total work at a work station is equal to the sum of the tasks
assigned to that work station.

• Assembly line balancing problem is one of assigning all tasks to a

series of workstations so that required cycle time is met and idle time
is minimized.
Steps in line balancing
• Specify the sequential relationships among tasks using a precedence diagram.
• Diagram consists of circles and arrows
• Circle represent individual tasks, arrows indicate the order of task
performance.

• Determine the required workstation cycle time (C), using

 Steps in line balancing
• Determine the theoretical minimum number of workstations (TM) required to
satisfy the cycle time (rounded up to the next highest integer)

• Select a primary rule by which tasks are to be assigned to the workstations

and secondary rule to break ties.
• Assign tasks, one at a time until the sum of the task times is equal to
workstation times
• Evaluate efficiency
Calculating cycle time, TM, and efficiency
Green Grass’s plant manager just received marketing’s latest forecasts of Big
Broadcaster sales for the next year. She wants its production line to be designed
to make 2,400 spreaders per week for at least the next 3 months. The plant will
operate 40 hours per week.

1. What should be the line’s cycle time?

2. What is the smallest number of workstations that she could hope for in
designing the line for this cycle time if total activity time is 244 seconds?

3. Suppose that she finds a solution that requires only five stations. What
would be the line’s efficiency?
Calculating cycle time, TM, and efficiency
a. First convert the desired output rate (2,400 units per week) to an hourly
rate by dividing the weekly output rate by 40 hours per week to get units
per hour. Then the cycle time is:

Required output per day = 2400 units/ 40 hours = 60 unit/hour

Calculating cycle time, TM, and efficiency
Now calculate the theoretical minimum for the number of stations by dividing
the total time, by the cycle time,

= = 4.067 = 5 stations

Calculate the efficiency of a five-station solution

= 81.3%
Finding a solution
• The goal is to cluster the work elements into workstations so that
• The number of workstations required is minimized
• The precedence and cycle-time requirements are not violated

• The work content for each station is equal (or nearly so, but less than)
the cycle time for the line

• Trial-and-error can be used but commercial software packages are

also available
Minor exercise – Electrical appliance
No. Element Description Te (min.) Precedence
1 Place frame on work holder and clamp 0.2 ---
2 Assemble plug, grommet to power cord 0.4 --- 
3 Assemble brackets to frame 0.7 1
4 Wire power cord to motor 0.1 1,2
5 Wire power cord to switch 0.3 2
6 Assemble mechanism plate to bracket 0.11 3
7 Assemble blade to bracket 0.32 3
8 Assemble motor to bracket 0.6 3,4
9 Align blade and attach to motor 0.27 6,7,8
10 Assemble switch to motor bracket 0.38 5,8
11 Attach cover, inspect, and test 0.5 9,10
12 Place in tote pan for packing 0.12 11
 Precedence diagram No. Tej (min) Predecessor
1 0.2 --
2 0.4 --
3 0.7 1
4 0.1 1,2
5 0.3 2
6 0.11 3
0.11 7 0.32 3

0.7
6 8 0.6 3,4

3 0.32
9 0.27 6,7,8
0.2 7 10 0.38 5,8
1 0.27
11 0.5 9,10
0.1
9 12 0.12 11
4 0.6
0.4
8
2 0.38 0.5 0.12

0.3
10 11 12
5
 Largest candidate rule
No. Tej (min) Predecessor List all elements in descending order of Te value, largest
3 0.70 1 Te at the top of the list.
8 0.60 3,4
To assign elements to the first workstation, start at the
11 0.50 9,10 top of the list and work done, selecting the first
2 0.40 -- feasible element for placement at the station.
10 0.38 5,8 A feasible element is one that satisfies the precedence
requirements and does not cause the sum of the Tej
7 0.32 3
value at station to exceed the cycle time Tc.
5 0.30 2
9 0.27 6,7,8
Repeat step 2. 0

1 0.20 --
.
1
6
1
0
.
12 0.12 11 7
3 0
.
3
0
7
2

6 0.11 3
.
0
12 .
0 2
. 9
7

4 0.10 1,2 0
1
4
0
.
. 6
8
24 0 0 0
.
. . 1
0 1
138 5 1
2
. 1 2
0
3
5
 Largest candidate rule
No. Tej (min) Predecessor Station No. Tej Cumulative Te
(min)
3 0.70 1
1 2 0.40 0.4
8 0.60 3,4
5 0.30 0.7
11 0.50 9,10
1 0.20 0.9
2 0.40 --
4 0.10 1.0
10 0.38 5,8
0.

7 0.32 3 0
11

6
.
5 0.30 2 7
3 0.
32
0
9 0.27 6,7,8 .
2
7
1 0.
27
0
1 0.20 -- .
0
9
1
0
4 .
12 0.12 11 . 6
8
4 0
2 0.
6 0.11 3 .
0.
12
0 38
1
5 1
. 1
3 0 1 2
4 0.10 1,2 5
 Largest candidate rule
No. Tej (min) Predecessor Station No. Tej Cumulative Te
(min)
3 0.70 1
1 2 0.40 0.40
8 0.60 3,4
5 0.30 0.70
11 0.50 9,10
1 0.20 0.90
10 0.38 5,8 4 0.10 1.00
7 0.32 3 2 3 0.70 0.70
6 0.11 0.81
0.
11

9 0.27 6,7,8 0 6
.
7
3 0.
32
0
. 7
2
12 0.12 11 1
0
0.
27

. 9
6 0.11 3 0
1
4
0
.
. 6
8
4 0
2 0.
0. . 12
0 38
1
5 1
. 1
3 0 1 2
5
Largest candidate rule
Station No. Tej Cumulative Te
(min)
1 2 0.40 0.40
5 0.30 0.70
1 0.20 0.90
4 0.10 1.00
2 3 0.70 0.70
6 0.11 0.81
3 8 0.60 0.60
10 0.38 0.98
4 7 0.32 0.32
9 0.27 0.59
5 11 0.50 0.50
12 0.12 0.62
 Largest candidate rule
0.11
0.7 W/s 2

6
3
0.32

0.2 W/s 4
7
0.27
1
0.1
9
0.6
0.4 4
8 W/s 3
0.5 0.12
2 0.38 W/s 5
0.3
10 11 12
W/s 1 5
 Ranked Position Weights

• *Introduced by Helgeson and Birnie in 1961.

Step 1. Calculate the RPW for each element by summing the elements Te
together with the Te values for all the elements that follow it in the arrow
chain of the precedence diagram.

Step 2 List the elements in the order of their RPW, largest RPW at the top of
the list. For convenience, include the Te value and immediate predecessors
for each element.

Step 3. Assign elements to stations according to RPW, avoiding precedence

constraint and time cycle violations.
 Ranked Position Weights
No. Tej (min) Predecessor
1 0.2 --
2 0.4 -- RPW2 = 0.4 +0.1+0.3+0.6+0.27+0.38+0.5+0.12
3 0.7 1
4 0.1 1,2 RPW2 = 2.67
5 0.3 2
0.1

6 0.11 3 6
1

0.
7 0.32 3 7
3 0.
32

8 0.6 3,4 0.
2
7
1 0.

9 0.27 6,7,8 0.
27

9
1
4 0.
10 0.38 5,8 0. 6
4 8
2
11 0.5 9,10 0.
38
0.
5
0.
12
0. 1 1 1
3 1 2
12 0.12 11 5
0
 Ranked Position Weights
RPW Predecessor No. Tej (min) Station No. Tej Tej (min)
(min)
3.30 -- 1 0.20
1 1 0.20 0.20
3.00 1 3 0.70
3 0.70 0.90
2.67 -- 2 0.40
2 2 0.40 0.40
1.97 1,2 4 0.10
4 0.10 0.50
1.87 3,4 8 0.60
5 0.30 0.80
1.3 2 5 0.30
6 0.11 0.91
1.21 3 7 0.32
3 8 0.60 0.60
1.0 3 6 0.11
7 0.32 0.92
1.0 5,8 10 0.38
4 10 0.38 0.38
0.89 6,7,8 9 0.27
9 0.27 0.65
0.62 9,10 11 0.50
5 11 0.50 0.50
0.12 11 12 0.12
12 0.12 0.62
Ranked Position Weights
• *In the RPW line balance, the number of stations required is five, but
the max. station process time is 0.92 minute, at number 1.

• According the line could be operated at a cycle time of Tc = 0.92

rather than 1.0 minute.
Comparing the methods
• The RPW solution represents a more efficient assignment of work
elements to station than the other preceding solutions.

• None of the methods guarantee an optimal solution, but they are

likely to result in good solutions which approach the true
optimum