Lnea de Ensamble para una Mezcla de Productos.

A) Descripcin de la Tarea. El caso que se anexa describe y ejemplifica un procedimiento para balancear una lnea de ensamble que produce una mezcla de tres productos de una misma familia. Para este ejercicio tomaremos el resultado del balanceo que viene desarrollado en el ejemplo, en el cual resulta un balanceo con 5 estaciones. Consideraciones. 1) Cada una de las estaciones estar a cargo de un operario, el operario ser asignado como un recurso para las operaciones que le corresponden a su estacin. 2) Corrers 30 rplicas de 40 horas cada una. 3) El sistema ser completamente push. Para modelarlo generars solamente 1 arrival de 1 sola entidad, pero al terminar la primera operacin duplicars la entidad que se proces con el bloque separate y la opcin duplicate original. La entidad original sigue su ruta de proceso, la entidad duplicada se introducir de regreso a la primera operacin, simulando as una nueva llegada de insumo de manera constante. 4) Antes de ingresar a la primera operacin ser necesario asignar de manera aleatoria el tipo de producto de que se trata, de acuerdo a la proporcin de productos en la demanda. 5) Como se muestra en el texto, los tiempos reales de proceso dependen del tipo de producto que se est ensamblando. Debes familiarizarte con algunos bloques, por ejemplo el bloque assign para poder modelar esta situacin. Elige libremente la lgica de modelacin que te funcione. Lo importante es que los tiempos de las operaciones se modifiquen de manera dinmica de acuerdo al tipo de producto de que se trate. 6) Los tiempos de operacin son constantes en todas las operaciones, es decir, una vez que se sabe el tipo de producto, el tiempo de ejecucin de cada una de las operaciones se considerar constante. La nica variabilidad que se est introduciendo es la causada por la mezcla aleatoria de productos. 7) Analiza la capacidad productiva del sistema y otras variables que consideres relevantes. Compara con el desempeo esperado del sistema.

B)

Efecto de la variabilidad en los tiempos de operacin.

En este ejercicio utilizars el modelo del ejercicio A pero hacindolo ms realista al introducir variabilidad moderada en los tiempos de las operaciones. Todos los tiempos aleatorios se modelarn como variables aleatorias uniformes, continuas, con media igual a los tiempos que vienen originalmente en el caso, pero variando aleatoriamente en los rangos que se especifican en la siguiente tabla.
Operacin A B C D E F G H I J Rango (seg.) 3 0 2 2 2 4 2 2 1 4

Por ejemplo, para el producto Basic el tiempo para la operacin A ser uniforme en el rango de 9 a 15 segundos, mientras que para el producto Luxury dicho tiempo ser uniformemente distribuido en el rango de 12 a 18 segundos. Cuando una operacin no es requerida para un producto, el tiempo ser 0 fijo, sin considerar los rangos.

Realiza 30 corridas de 40 horas de operacin cada una. Analiza el rendimiento de la lnea comparndolo con el rendimiento de la lnea en el caso A. Sugiere al menos 2 estrategias para mejorar el desempeo de sta lnea.

Assembly Line Balancing: Mixed- and multi-model lines

Background You will have previously studied methods of balancing assembly lines where only a single model is produced. The strength of such a line is that the work elements can be assigned to stations in such a way as to maximize efficiency, which peaks at a particular rate of output. The weaknesses of a single-model line are that it becomes inefficient when demand falls or rises, and that it is only efficient when producing the model for which it was designed. If market demand changes so that other products are required, other products need to be produced.This can be done by installing separate, dedicated lines for other products, but this is only economic when the additional lines themselves are running efficiently in fulfillment of greater demand. Its not a solution for flat overall demand with varying product mix. Two solutions to this problem of fluctuating demand have been used in the past:multimodel lines and mixed-model lines.Each has its own strengths and weaknesses. Multi-model lines This approach treats the assembly line as a reconfigurable resource, which produces different models in batches one after the other.Before producing a batch, the lines equipment (people, tools, material supply) is set up to suit the model or variant required.This process takes time.The batch of products is then produced according to schedule. The benefit of a multi-model line is that once set up for a particular model it is as efficient as a conventional line.The drawback is that setting-up takes time, which means lost production and inefficiency. The problems for the planner of a multi-model line are: 1. How to balance the line for each product separately?This is straightforward enough, since its a function of technological feasibility followed by application of a standard balancing method (see Helgeson & Birnie[1] or Moodie & Young[2]). 2. How to sequence the batches to minimize changeover losses? It is often the case that changeovers from one to another will take less time than the reverse change. This second problem is not discussed further here: it is a standard sequencing problem which the reader will find dealt with in most texts on Operations Management. Mixed-model lines

The mixed-model approach is a more realistic one in the modern world, given the rise of software-configurable flexible manufacturing equipment.The basic premise is that multiple products are handled by each workstation without stops to change over between them.This permits a random launch sequence so that products can be made in the order and mix that the market demands. Although this sounds like a salesmans dream, one difficulty is that the work content at each workstation may differ from model to model.Another, which follows from this, is that the idle time at each station varies from time to time depending on the sequence of models along the line. The problems for the planner of a multi-model lines are again twofold: 1. How to balance the line when different products have different work content? 2. How to determine the optimum launch sequence which minimizes losses? The second problem is an Operations Management issue which, again, the keen student can research from OM texts.What well deal with here is the DESIGN (Balancing) of a mixed-model line. Balancing a Mixed-Model line Although the problem may appear daunting, the solution method is quite straightforward.Theres just one overriding caveat: it must be technologically feasible to produce the different models on the same line.Thus, its reasonable to try to mix production of, say, 10 different models of video recorder, or 15 different TVs on the same line, but its not realistic to make tractors and aircraft on the same line! Really, we should talk about different VARIANTS of the same product, rather than completely different PRODUCTS. There are several ways of going about this, but heres and adaptation of Helgeson and Birnies procedure that is conceptually simple and easy to apply.The outline procedure for solving the problem is this: 1. Get together the process and technological data for the range of product, i.e. operation times and precedences (what must follow what if the product is to go together) 2. Get demand data on what volume of each product is required and at what rate. This may be available as absolute variant volumes, or may be as aggregate volume plus product mix data. 3. Use this information to produce a table of composite process times.The table should contain, for each operation, a process time weighted by the proportion of products using that operation.Thus, an operation taking 10 minutes that occurs on only 35% of the total demand becomes 3 minutes. 4. Calculate the cycle time and minimum number of stations required.

5. Construct a precedence diagram for the composite product, showing which operations depend on others, taking account of all the variants to be produced. 6.Determine the positional weight (PW) of each operation, as you would for a normal balancing exercise.Use the weighted times for determining PWs. 7.Assign operations to stations, having regard to PWs, precedence and remaining time at the workstation.Depending on the objectives and constraints, you may have to repeat this final step several times, seeking to minimise the number of workstations, maximise throughput or to maximise efficiency. As you can see, it all comes down to creating a fictitious composite product which doesnt really exist but which has the characteristics of all of the range, then applying the standard LB technique. Lets do an example. Thanks go to Vonderembse & White[3] for their inspiration.

Example Background information A flexible assembly line is to be set up to package a range of hospital medical kits.All the kits use the same basic elements, but there is variation.The standard product contains one set of components, the basic kit has a smaller set, while the luxury version contains the same items as the standard kit but in greater quantity plus a couple of additional items. The operational and product mix data for the three variants is given in Table 1.

Time (seconds) Standard Op Description (50% sales) A B C Unfold & place box Insert water bottle Insert drinking glasses Insert bedpan Insert divider(s) Fold dressing F gown & insert in box G H I J Insert tissues Insert plasters Place lid Shrink-wrap box Total times 6 7 10 21 107 0 7 10 21 88 9 10 10 28 131 E (not Basic) E F, G, H I 18 18 24 E 15 9 7 Basic (30% sales) 12 9 4 Luxury (20% sales) 15 9 10 Preceding Task(s) A A A (not Basic) B, C, D

D E

7 7

0 7

7 9

Table 1 Operational and product mix data for the three products
An aggregate output of 6,000 units is required from an effective working week of 40 hours.

Solution First, lets determine the process times for the composite product, multiplying the actual process time for each element by the proportion of demand for that element. Table 2 on the next page shows the result.Each of the first three columns shows the basic operation time, and in bold the result when this is multiplied by the demand proportion.The final column shows the sum of these weighted times the composite operation time which is the effective time for this operation. In this model, operation times are in seconds and working sessions are in hours and weeks.You need to be sure you are consistent in your use of units, using multipliers as appropriate.

Basic Time (seconds)

Op

Composite Standard (50% sales) Basic (30% sales) 12 3.6 9 2.7 4 1.2 0 7 2.1 18 5.4 0 7 2.1 10 3.0 21 6.3 8826.4 Luxury (20% sales) 15 3.0 9 1.8 10 2.0 7 1.4 9 1.8 24 4.8 9 1.8 10 2.0 10 2.0 28 5.6 13126.2 time (Sum of weighted op times) 14.1 9.0 6.7 4.9 7.4 19.2 4.8 7.6 10.0 22.4 106.1

A B C D E F G H I J

15 7.5 9 4.5 7 3.5 7 3.5 7 3.5 18 9.0 6 3.0 7 3.5 10 5.0 21 10.5 10753.5

Table 2 - Composite operation times

Next, lets determine the minimum number of workstations needed. Target cycle time = (Available hours/wk x 3600) / (Wkly output)= 40 x 3600 / 6000 = 24 seconds Ideal number of workstations= Composite work content / Cycle time = 106.1 / 24 = 4.42 We cant have 0.42 of a station, so the minimum number of stations is 5 (five).

Next, lets draw a precedence diagram.

Figure 1 - Precedence diagram for assembly of the Medical Kit Note that in this case there are no operations unique to a single variant.If there were, they would be handled just like any other op.The diagram is consistent with the final column of Table 1.
Now, lets determine the positional weights of each operation.The PW of an operation is the sum of the process times for ALL the operations which depend on it, plus its own process time.In Figure 1, all operations depend on Operation A.In the case of a mixed-model line, the PWs are calculated from the composite times established earlier.The PW of Op A here is thus 106.1.Table 3 shows the PWs for all the other ops, ranked in descending order.Note how the PW changes when parallel operations (B, C, D and F, G, H), are involved.

PW rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Operation

Positional Weight

Comment First op all others depend on it B, C, D are independent E & later ops depend on each Sum of all following op times F, G, H are independent I & Jdepend on each F, G and H must all precede I Last op, soPW = Op time

A B D C E F H G I J

106.1 80.4 76.3 78.1 71.4 51.6 40.0 37.2 32.4 22.4

Table 3 - Ranked Positional Weights of Operations

Now we can assign operations to stations in the normal manner.The heuristic procedure is: 1.At Station I, consider all eligible operations (i.e. those for which there are no precedent operations).If there is more than one, select that with the highest PW. 2.Continue attempting to assign operations to Station I until no more eligible operations exist or will fit into the remaining time.Record idle time, if any. 3.Move to Station II.Repeat the attempts to assign eligible operations, in descending order of PW, until there is no eligible operation that will fit.Note that eligibility/precedence always comes before PW; PW is used to break ties. 4.Repeat until all operations have been assigned, even if it means creating more than the theoretical minimum number of stations. 5.Finally, calculate the Balance Delay Ratio (= 100-efficiency) from the available working time and the total idle time.

Table 4 shows the procedure step-by-step, while Table 5 shows the results.

Eligible

Selected

Composite Operation Time (sec) 14.1 9.0 4.9 6.7 7.4 19.2 4.8

Assigned to Station I I II II II III III

Cumulative Assigned Time (sec) 14.1 23.1 4.9 11.6 19.0 19.2 24.0

Idle Time (sec) 0.9

operation(s) operation(s) A B, C, D C, D C E F, G, H G, H G (H wont fit) H I J H I J A B D C E F (largest PW)

5.0

7.6 10.0 22.4

IV IV V

7.6 17.6 22.4

6.4

1.6

Table 4 Step-by-step application of the heuristic to determine work assignments

Station I II III IV V

Assigned Operations A, B D, C, E F, G H, I J Total Idle Time

Idle Time 0.9 5.0 0 6.4 1.6 13.9

Table 5 Summary of Station Assignments

To calculate the Balance Delay Ratio, recall that the cycle time was 24 seconds.Thus: Total available working time on line= Cycle time x Number of stations = 24 x 5 = 120 seconds Balance Delay Ratio=Total Idle Time x 100 Available time on line =1390 120 =11.6% Conclusion We have determined a balance for the desired product mix at the target level of output. The remaining problem is one of sales - only if the product mix is close to 50:30:20 will efficiency be maintained. Should sales of luxury kits rise, the line will not cope, while if sales of basic kits rise, idle time will increase.

[1]

W B Helgeson & D P Birnie, Assembly Line Balancing using the Ranked Positional Weight Technique, Journal of Moodie and Young, cited in W Bolton, Production Planning and Control, Longman, 1994. M A Vonderembse & G P White, Operations Management Concepts, Methods and Strategies, West 1996

Industrial Engineering, Vol 12, No 6, Nov-Dec 1961

[2] [3]