Introduction of Line Balancing

Line and work cell balancing is an effective tool to improve the throughput of
assembly lines and work cells while reducing manpower requirements and costs.
Assembly Line Balancing, or simply Line Balancing (LB), is the problem of assigning
operations to workstations along an assembly line, in such a way that the assignment be
optimal in some sense. Ever since Henry Ford’s introduction of assembly lines, LB has
been an optimization problem of significant industrial importance: the efficiency
difference between an optimal and a sub-optimal assignment can yield economies (or
waste) reaching millions of dollars per year.

LB is a classic Operations Research (OR) optimization problem, having been

tackled by OR over several decades. Many algorithms have been proposed for the
problem. Yet despite the practical importance of the problem, and the OR efforts that
have been made to tackle it, little commercially available software is available to help
industry in optimizing their lines. In fact, according to a recent survey by Becker and
Scholl (2004), there appear to be currently just two commercially available packages
featuring both a state of the art optimization algorithm and a user-friendly interface for
data management. Furthermore, one of those packages appears to handle only the “clean”
formulation of the problem (Simple Assembly Line Balancing Problem, or SALBP),
which leaves only one package available for industries such as automotive. This situation
appears to be paradoxical, or at least unexpected: given the huge economies LB can
generate, one would expect several software packages vying to grab a part of those
economies.

It appears that the gap between the available OR results and their dissemination in
today’s industry, is probably due to a misalignment between the academic LB problem
addressed by most of the OR approaches, and the actual problem being faced by the
industry. LB is a difficult optimization problem (even its simplest forms are NP-hard –
see Garey and Johnson, 1979), so the approach taken by OR has typically been to
simplify it, in order to bring it to a level of complexity amenable to OR tools. While this
is a perfectly valid approach in general, in the particular case of LB it led to some

1
definitions of the problem that ignore many aspects of the real-world problem.
Unfortunately, many of the aspects that have been left out in the OR approach are in fact
crucial to industries such as automotive, in the sense that any solution ignoring (violating)
those aspects becomes unusable in the industry.

In the sequel, we first briefly recall classic OR definitions of LB, and then review
how the actual line balancing problem faced by the industry differs from them, and why a
solution to the classic OR problem may be unusable in some industries. Thus, we used
line balancing technique to achieve:

1. the minimization of the number of workstations;

2. the minimization of cycle time;
3. the maximization of workload smoothness;
4. The maximization of work relatedness.

Related Theories

Why we used line balancing

All factories that have a line such as traditional assembly line and new assembly
line such as heuristic and U-type and also mixed model used a few technique such as
genetic algorithms and fuzzy logic and also simulation method to improve a few
parameter of line control in other hand manager like has a productivity and high yield in
their factory and for this goal get help from previous technique to locate a machine,
employer ,assign employer to machine to select best choose for control and work by
machine . In a few company one employer control 2 or more than 2 machines and this
result is out put of line balancing. In another word the company used line balancing for
grow up the rate of produce and decrease man power, idle time and buffer near machine,
also used line balancing for produced more than 2 products. One reason for this deficit
might originate from the fact that research papers often regard single or only just a few
extensions of ALB in an isolated manner. Real world assembly systems require a lot of

2
these extensions in many possible combinations. Thus, flexible ALB procedures are
required, which can deal with a lot of these extensions in a combined manner. Typically,
there is a trade-off between flexibility and efficiency of an optimization procedure.

Accordingly, by identifying typical combinations of extensions which often arise

jointly in real-world assembly systems, procedures can be developed which exactly fit
these requirements, while decreasing the required flexibility to a minimum. Moreover,
practitioners might be provided with valuable advices on how to use already existing
models and procedures for their special assembly system for that purpose this paper is
structured to show a kind of line balancing and also why the factory must be used line
balancing in the another word this article want to show how many model and method is
discovered in line balancing and each model when must be used and the benefit of line
balancing in the industry.

3
Some of shape of assembly line balancing

1. SALBP:

The simple assembly line balancing problem (SALBP) is relevant for straight
single product assembly lines where only precedence constraints between tasks are to be
considered. Type 1 of this basic problem (SALBP-1) consists of assigning tasks to work
stations such that the number of stations is minimized for a given production rate. Type 2
(SALBP-2) is to maximize the production rate, or equivalently, to minimize the sum of
idle times for a given number of stations. A more general type (SALBP-G) is obtained by
minimizing the sum of idle times subject to varying production rates and numbers of
stations.

4
2. UALBP:

The U-line balancing problem (UALBP) considers the case of U-shaped (single
product) assembly lines, where stations are arranged within a narrow U. As a
consequence, workers are allowed to work on either side of the U, i.e. on early and late
tasks in the production process simultaneously. Therefore, modified precedence
constraints have to be observed. By analogy with SALBP, different problem types can be
distinguished.

3. MALBP and MSP:

Mixed model assembly lines produce several models of a basic product in an

intermixed sequence. Besides the mixed model assembly balancing problem (MALBP),
which has to assign tasks to stations considering the different task times for the different
models, the mixed model sequencing problem (MSP) is relevant. MSP has to find a
sequence of all model units to be produced such that inefficiencies (work overload, line
stoppage, off-line repair etc.) are minimized.

4. GALBP:

In the literature, all problem types which generalize or remove some assumptions
of SALBP are called generalized assembly line balancing problems (GALBP). This class
of problems (including UALBP and MALBP) is very large and contains all problem
extensions that might be relevant in practice including equipment selection, processing
alternatives, assignment restrictions etc. Because the research field has grown in an
unsystematic manner and, thus, has produced many results which are neither relevant for
practice nor for improving the theory. In order to structure the field, to identify practice-
relevant research needs and to improve communication between researchers inside the
community and with practitioners it seems to be overdue to define a classification
scheme. Such a scheme with is based on the logic of the well-known classification
scheme for machine scheduling is presented by Boysen.

5
ALB in dependency of the number of models

In the briefly we can see all kind of assembly line balancing that related with
number of models in the figure 3 and we can see in the continue a summery of each part
of this table :

1. Single-model assembly lines

In its traditional form, assembly lines were used for high volume production of a
single commodity. Now a days, products without any variation can seldom attract
sufficient customers to allow for a profitable utilization of the assembly system.
Advanced production technologies enable automated setup operations at negligible setup
times and costs. If more than one product is assembled on the same line, but neither
setups nor significant variations in operating times occur, the assembly system can be
treated as a single model line, as is the case in the production of compact discs or
drinking cans for example. Single-model production is the standard assumption of SALB
and many generalized ALB problems and have been considered by a vast number of
publications. A recent literature overview is provided by Scholl and Becker as well as
Becker and Scholl.

6
2. Mixed-model assembly lines

In mixed-model production, setup times between models could be reduced

sufficiently enough to be ignored, so that intermixed model sequences can be assembled
on the same line. In spite of the tremendous efforts to make production systems more
versatile, this usually requires very homogeneous production processes. As a
consequence, it is typically assumed that all models are variations of the same base
product and only differ in specific customizable product attributes, also referred to as
options. The installation of varying options typically leads to variations in process times.
In automobile production, for instance, the installation of an electrical sun roof requires a
different amount of time than that of a manual one. Therefore, station times will depend
heavily on the specific model to be assembled. If several work intensive models follow
each other at the same station, the cycle time might be exceeded and an overload occurs,
which needs to be compensated by some kind of reaction. These overloads can be
avoided if a sequence of models is found where those models which cause high station
times alternate with less work-intensive ones at each station. This leads to a short term
sequencing problem. The balancing and the sequencing problem are heavily
interdependent. While the line balance decides on the assignment of tasks to stations and
thus determines the work content per station and model, the production sequence of a
given model mix is arranged on this basis with regard to minimum overloads. The
amount of overload by itself is a measure of efficiency for the achieved line balance. That
is why some authors have proposed a simultaneous consideration of both planning
problems.

3. Multi-model assembly lines

In multi-model production, the homogeneity of assembled products and their

production processes is not sufficient to allow for facultative production sequences. In
order to avoid setup times and/or costs the assembly is organized in batches. This leads to
a short term lot-sizing problem which groups models to batches and decides on their
assembly sequence. Especially if lot sizes are large, the line balance can in principle be

7
determined separately for each model, as the significance of setup times between batches
is comparatively small. However, also in multi-model production a certain degree of
similarity in production processes should be inherent. Typically, the different models are
manufactured by use of the same resources, e.g. machines or operators. If line balances
are determined separately, those resources which are shared by models might need to be
moved to other stations whenever the production system is setup for a new batch or have
to be installed multiple times. This increases setup times and/or costs. If this
interdependency is regarded in the line balance, the setup times might be reduced
considerably, which in turn allows for a formation of smaller lots with all associated
advantages.

Pre-requisites to line balancing

Calculate Takt Understand the “drumbeat” of the CUSTOMER

Achieve CONSISTENCY in
operations
Standardise Enabling us to achieve our
customers requirements by
‘managing our production
effectively’

Variation in our operations

demands more human intervention
which, increases the risk of
HUMAN ERROR

8
What is the Takt Time?

Takt time is the fundamental concept to do with the regular, uniform rate of
progression of products through all stages from raw material to customer. As such it is
important in planning, in cell balancing, and in facility design.

It should also be a consideration along a complete supply chain. "Sell daily? make
daily!" is the underlying idea. Takt time is the drumbeat cycle of the rate of flow of
products. It is the "metronome" (from the German origins of the word). Understanding
takt time is fundamental to analysis and mapping of Lean Operations.

Takt time is most simply the average rate at which customers buy products and
hence the rate at which products should be manufactured. It is expressed in time units:
one every so many minutes or so many minutes between completions. Takt time should
drive the whole thinking of the plant and the supply chain. In a plant it is the drumbeat.

Takt Time = Available Work Time

Customer Demand

Example:

Customer demand = 10 units / month

Total time available = 20 days

Takt time = 20
10
= 2

Drumbeat = 1 part every 2 days

Each process needs to complete one unit every 2 days

9
The benefits of the pre-requisites

Takt time maximises the productivity due to:

• Easily managed processes

• Output of each process matches customer demand

Standard Operations provide:

• Capable and repeatable processes
• Process control at source
• Improves accuracy of planning
• Better adherence to plans
• A platform from which continuous improvement can be made
• Reduced costs
• Improved quality
• Basis for training

10
Real world application

Line Balancing : Simple Example

11
Method - capture current state

Calculate TAKT

Customer demand = 19 units a month

Time available = 20 days a month

TAKT = Available time

Customer demand
TAKT = 20 days ( x 24 hrs in a day)
19 units

TAKT = 25 hrs

Time the process

Why video?
- Used to visually record activity
- Accurate method of recording
- Irrefutable and unambiguous
- Modern approach to establishing method

1. Capture a representative sample of the process

2. Review the video with the operators present
3. Break down the ‘elements’ of work and record a time for each one.
4. Identify which of the elements are Value-added and which are non-value added

Break down the work elements

The operators cycle is broken down into elements

These elements are put into three main categories, these being :
1. Working (man or machine)
2. Walking
3. Waiting

12
Draw current state Line Balance

Calculate total work

content (stacked time) : 15 + 30 + 17 = 62 hrs

• Lay all the ‘post its’ out in sequence so that all of the processes are visible
• Draw on the TAKT line (or use string)

13
Calculate target manpower

Target Manpower = Total Work Content

Takt time

Calculate LineBalance Ratio & Efficiency

Line balance ratio = Total work content

No. of stations x longest operation
Line balance Efficiency = Total work content
Target manpower x Takt

Takt (25 hrs)

14
Line Balance Ratio = 62 hrs X 100 = 69%
(3 x 30)

What could be achieved without

reducing waste and still meeting
TAKT – simply REBALANCING!!

15
1. Identify the elements of work that exceed TAK

2. Refer to Standard Work Combination table

3. Identify where work can be re-allocated

16
Use Line Balancing to Create Lean Operations

Timer Pro Professional supports your lean operation initiatives by allowing you to
quickly balance single and multi-model processes by number of operators, required
production or takt time.

The balancing module will instantly calculate the optimum utilization using the
fewest operators to achieve the result requested. You can vary the parameters as often as
you wish to run 'what-if' scenarios.

Results of the line balancing process are saved as a series of tasks. Each activity is
represented as a chip in each task. You can drag and drop the activity chips to further
refine your balance.

17
Discussion

For this discussion, the line balancing can improve the manufacturing for
accuracy of the planning. Line balancing can reduce the cost for the pay the worker and
material for using. It can saved the time for finishing the product very shortly. The
process can under the control and can improved the quality the product.

Conclusions

We have identified a number of aspects of the line balancing problem that are
vital in industries such as automotive, yet that have been either neglected in the OR work
on the problem, or handled separately from each other. According to our experience, a

18
line balancing tool applicable in those industries must be able to handle all of them
simultaneously. That gives rise to an extremely complex optimization problem.

References

1. www.optimaldesign.com/Download/OptiLine/FalkenauerPLM05.pdf
2. www.acsco.com/LineBalancing.htm
3. http://www.manufacturinginstitute.co.uk/text.asp?PageId=83
4. http://www.simcore.fr/Pages/en/en_soft_pplb.php?Langue=en&IndexMnu=6

19