MastersDegreeThesisFinalReport PDF

Assembly Line Balancing and Optimization Using SIEMENS
Tecnomatix Plant Simulation: A Case Study In An Electric Power

Steering Column Assembly Line
by
Zay Yar Myint
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

degree of Master of Engineering in
Industrial and Manufacturing Engineering
Examination Committee: Associate Prof. Erik L.J. Bohez (Co-Chairperson)

Dr. Huynh Trung Luong (Co-Chairperson)
Dr. Than Lin(Member)
Dr. Mongkol Ekpanyapong(Member)
Nationality: Myanmar
Previous Degree: B.S.E Industrial Engineering
Asian Institute of Technology
Thailand
Scholarship Donor: AIT Fellowship
Asian Institute of Technology

School of Engineering and Technology
Thailand
May, 2017
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to present special thanks to Associate Professor Ir. Erik L.J. Bohez, the chairman
of examination committee for his constant, expert guidance, encouragement and valuable
suggestions from the very beginning of the thesis. I would like to express special thanks to
the exam committee members, Dr. Huynh Trung Luong, Dr. Than Lin and Dr. Mongkol
Ekpanyapong for their suggestions and encouragements. I would like to express my special
gratitue to Mr. Daniel Reinle, Vice President of Siemens Limited, Thailand, who supported
me to use the Tecnomatix Plant Simulation Software and allowed me to have very
supportive technical discussions with specialists and host factory. Im also deeply indebted
to Mr. Ittipol P. (SLT), Miss Napa Hoonpanich(Premium PLM Co. Ltd) and Mr. Chaowat
Kruttin(Premium PLM Co. Ltd) for their kind helps and technical consultations. Moreover,
thanks to all my teachers and lab supervisors for their kind teaching, guidance and help
throughout my time in AIT. Finally, words are never enough to express my deep gratitude to
my family and friends whose love for their inspiration and encouragements to complete my
masters program.
ii
ABSTRACT
In order to survive in aggressively competing markets of current age, companies need to look
for the ways to improve their productivity continuously. It is also critical to ensure the
efficient use of resources such as, Man Power, Machine, Materials, Time and Money to
achieve the favourable outcomes. In order to reach the maximum production rate at minimal
cost, it is essential to have a balanced line configuration. Line balancing is about arranging a
production line so that there is an even flow of production from one work station to the next.
Line balancing also a successful tool to reduce bottleneck by balancing the task time of each
work station so that there is no delays and nobody is overburden with their task.
This thesis presents a case study on an assembly line optimisation problem in an existing
assembly section of a Power Stearing Column production line for Honda Fit. The rationale of
this project is to build the model of current system, to simulate the entire processes in
assembly line, improve the line efficiency and also to recommend improvement activities to
fulfil the fluctuating demand through the analysis done in the simulation model. The
simulation is done by using Tecnomatix Plant Simulation. All the data needed for the line
balancing analysis are collected. This data gathered is then simulated in Tecnomatix Plant
Simulation.
iii
Table of Contents
Chapter Title Page

Title Page i
Acknowledgement ii
Abstract iii
Table of Contents iv
List of Figures vi
List of Tables viii
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Background 1
1.2 Problem Statement 2
1.3 Objectives 2
1.4 Scope and Limitation 2
2 Literature Review 3
2.1 Assembly Line Balancing 3
2.2 Terminology Used in Assembly Line Balancing 3
2.3 Assembly Line Balancing Problems 4
2.4 Aspects of Line Balancing 5
2.5 Discrete Event Simulation 7
2.6 Modeling and Simulation 7
2.7 Tecnomatix Plant Simulation 11
3 Case Studies 17
3.1 Modelling, Simulation and Optimization of Process Planning 17
(Jovisevic, S., Jovisevic, V., &Jokanovic, S., 2009)
3.2 Kanban Simulation Model for Production Process 21
Optimization. (Golchev, R., et.al, 2015)
4 Description of System Under Study 25

4.1 Description of Product Under Study 25
4.1.1 Electrical Power Steering System 25
4.1.2 Bill of Materials included in the Final Assembly 26
4.2 Production Process and Stations 31
4.2.1 Electrical Power Steering Column Production 31
Line
4.2.2 Process Flow of Electrical Power Steering 31
Column Assembly line
iv
Chapter Title Page
4 4.2.3 Plant Layout of Electrical Power Steering Column 36

Assembly Line
4.2.4 Time Study of the System 37
4.2.5 Kanban System 39
4.2.6 Production Schedule 40
5 Model Development and Optimisation 41

5.1 Basic Model Development 42
5.2 Worker Operation and Transport Workpieces 43
5.3 Verification and Validation 47
5.4 Pull System Configuration 49
5.5 Implementation of Production Plan 52
5.6 Optimisation Using Genetic Algorithm Wizard 54
6 Conclusion and Recommendation 69
References 70
Appendix 71
v
List of Figures
Figure Title Page

2.1 An Example of Precedence Graph 4
2.2 Single Model Assembly Line 5
2.3 Mixed Model Assembly Line 5
2.4 Multi Model Assembly Line 5
2.5 Modeling of process planning in 2D environment 8
2.6 Modeling of process planning in 3D environment 9
3.1 Segment From Simulation Model Shown in 2D 18
3.2 Simulation Model Shown in 3D 18
3.3 Simulation Model Located in the Corresponding Production Plant 19
3.4 Efficiency of Machines Before Optimization 19
3.5 Efficiency of Machines After Optimization 20
3.6 Methodology for Kanban Implementation (Gross & McInnis, 22
2003)
3.7 Basic Concept of the Simulation Model 23
3.8 Experimental Results 24
4.1 Electric Power Steering System 26
4.2 Sensor Shaft Assembly E-Lock 26
4.3 Gear Box 27
4.4 Cover Assembly 27
4.5 Motor 28
4.6 Electrical Control Unit 28
4.7 Bracket Harness 29
4.8 Harness Assembly 29
4.9 Cover Connector 29
4.10 Electric Power Steering Column 29
4.11 Bill of Materials in Final E.P.S Assembly 30
4.12 Overview of the Electric Power Steering Column Production Line 31
4.13 Process Flow in Final Assembly Line 34
4.14 Plant Layout of EPS Column Assembly Line 35
4.15 Kanban System of EPS Column Assembly Section 39
4.16 Kanban Card in EPS Column Final Assembly Line 40
vi
List of Figures
Figure Title Page
5.1 Modelling Steps Flow Chart 41
5.2 Station Allocation 42
5.3 Processing Time Configuration Window 42
5.5 Resources Menu Bar 43
5.6 Layout After Workplaces and Footpaths are Added 43
5.7 Creation Table of Workers in Workerpool 44
5.8 Workplace Window 44
5.9 Supported Service Window 45
5.10 Importer Window 45

5.11 Exit Window 46
5.12 Shift Calendar Window 46
5.13 WorkerPool Window 47

5.14 The Correlation Inspection Approach(Law and Kelton) 47
5.15 Summary of One Day Simulation 48
5.16 Utilisation of Stations 48
5.17 Performance Chart of Workers 48
5.18 Kanban Buffer Window 49
5.19 Kanban SingleProc. Station Window 49
5.20 Stock Level Transitions in Kanban Buffer 50
5.21 Initial Method 53
5.22 Method for Delivery Control 54
5.23 Genetic Algorithm Wizard Window 54
5.24 Optimisation Parameter Table 55
5.25 Fitness Parameter Table 55
5.26 Optimised Results 56
5.27 Stock Level Graph After Optimisation 57
5.28 Inventory Level on Day1-Day3 58
5.38 Inventory Level on Day31 68
vii
List of Tables
Table Title Page

2.1 Verification vs. Validation 8
2.2 Tecnomatix Plant Simulation License Details 14
4.1 Shift Schedule 31
4.2 Description of the Stations 36
4.3 Time Study of the EPS Column Final Assembly Line 37
4.4 Time Study of the EPS Column Final Assembly Line(Cont.) 38
4.5 Monthly Production Plan of EPS Column 40
5.1 Production Plan Table 52
5.2 Delivery Summary Table Before Optimisation 53
5.3 Delivery Summary Table After Optimisation 56

viii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
In the contemporary, dynamic changing world, access to production data in real life is
necessary to properly plan, simulate and supervise production. Companies operating in
different sectors of the economy are more and more commonly using IT solutions to optimize
manufacturing systems by balancing workflows and process lines.
Technically, line balancing is one of the components of cellular manufacturing which
consist of major tenants in lean manufacturing. The concept of line balancing itself is
everyone is working together in a balance fashioned where everyone doing the same amount
of work, the variation is smoothened, no one is overburden, no one is waiting and the work is
done in a well single piece flow. Line balancing is also can be defined as the allocation of
sequential work activities into a line called work stations in order to achieve best utilization
of labor and equipment thus minimizing idle time. In addition, balancing may be achieved by
rearrangement of the work stations and by equalizing the workload among assemblers so that,
all operations take about the same amount of time. Furthermore, line balancing benefits an
assembly area in many ways, as it minimizes the amount of workers and work station which
can reduce cost and space for the assembly area. Line balancing also benefits in a way that it
can identify the process which causes bottleneck and standardization of work between the
operators can ease the bottleneck problem. Aside from identification of bottleneck, line
balancing equalized the workload among the workers so that there is no worker which is
overburden.
Finally, line balancing helps to assist the plant layout which will lead to the reduction
of production cost by the reduction of worker and the reduction of idle time. Assembly line
grouped in their respective workstations is represented manually in the form of a precedence
diagram.
Commonly, a traditional way of doing assembly line balancing is by using precedence
diagram. A precedence diagram specifies the order or sequence in which the activities must
be performed. Each circle is a node, and the number inside each circle identifies particular
operation. The number outside circle represents duration of operation or the cycle time.
Arrow represents directions of flow of operation. In contrary, simulation model is a new and
effective way to build the real life situation of the assembly process. There are many types of
simulation model that can help not only to identify and reduce bottleneck but also can build
the exact plant layout virtually. The more realistic the simulation model the more accurate and
effective the design for implementation on the assembly area.
Simulation technology is an important tool for planning, implementation, and
operating complex technical system. There are many simulation software created just to build
the virtual layout of the assembly area such as WITNESS and ARENA software.
1
However, the simulation used in this project is the Tecnomatix Plant Simulation
software created by SIEMENS. Tecnomatix Plant Simulation can increase profitability of a
facility by increasing throughput and utilization of resource and facility. Plant Simulation is
also able to decrease lead times, required resources and storage requirement provided that are
all accurate data inserted in the analysis. Furthermore, Plant Simulation is able to identify the
bottlenecks, reduce WIP, evaluate the effects of capital investments or changes in processes
and avoid planning errors as the simulation was done virtually without applying to the
facilities first.
1.2 Problem Statement
After visiting a Tier 1 automobile supplier factory, it was found out that the assembly
section producing Electric Power Steering Columns is working on the Kanban System(Pull
System) to fulfil the fluctuating demand which causes delivery shortages sometimes. At the
same time, types of products produced on it are also changing frequently. The company
would like to evaluate the line layout and settings of the assembly line for each product type
whether these are resulting the optimal outcomes before changing.
To achieve an optimal assembly line, it firstly needs to analyze it to know where are
the bottlenecks and drawbacks for the current line. And then try to find the alternative
configurations to achieve the favourable results. The company would like to find the optimum
assembly line model with optimal inventory setup that is efficient and able to fulfil the
fluctuating demands economically by using Tecnomatix Plant Simulation before they setup a
new line.
1.3 Objectives
The objectives for this project are to:
a) Simulate the existing pull system assembly line
b) Determine the optimal minimum stock level and maximum stock level at the
warehouse to avoid
Delivery Shortage and
Over Stock
1.4 Scope and Limitation
Scope
The study is based on understanding of the theory and concept of assembly line
balancing and optimisation. A case study is conducted at a Tier 1 automotive supplier factory.
The data of an existing assembly line, producing Electric Power Steering Column Assembly
is collected, modelled and simulated using Tecnomatix Plant Simulation software. The
research is done with the help of Premium PLM Co. Ltd. in Bangkok, Thailand.
Limitation
This study emphasizes only on the final assembly line section though the entire
manufacturing line contains Production, Sub-assembly, Assembly and Warehouse sections.
Though they have many different product types, this product only consider a single product,
EPSC(Electric Power Steering Column) for Honda Fit.
2
CHAPTER 2
Literature Review
2.1 Assembly Line Balancing
Line balancing is about arranging a production line so that there is an even flow of
production from one work station to the next. Line balancing also a successful tool to reduce
bottleneck by balancing the task time of each work station so that there is no delays and
nobody is overburden with their task.
According to Falkenauer (2000) 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. Furthermore, an assembly line can also be
defined as a system which is formed by arranging workstations along a line. At these
workstations, work pieces can be transferred by using labor force as well as equipment, and
tasks are assembled taking into consideration precedence constraints and cycle time. The
decision problem of optimally balancing the assembly work among the workstations is
pointed out by M.Baskak (2008) as the assembly line balancing problem.
2.2 Terminology Used in Assembly Line Balancing.

According to Pekin (2006), manufacturing a product on assembly lines requires
dividing the total work into a set of elementary operations. Terminologies used in assembly
line balancing can be defined as follow.
Task
A task is the smallest, indivisible work element of the total work content.
Task time
Task time or processing time is the necessary time to perform a task by any specific
equipment. The same or different equipment might be required to produce the tasks.
Workstation
The area within a workplace equipped with special operators and/or machines for
accomplishing tasks is called workstation.
Cycle time
Cycle time is the time between the completion times of two consecutive units. Since
the tasks are the smallest work elements, in a simple assembly line balancing problem the
cycle time cannot be smaller than the largest time of a task.
Work content
The work content of a station is the sum of the processing times of the tasks assigned
to a workstation.
Precedence constraints and Predecessors
The tasks are produced in an order due to the technological restrictions that are called
the precedence relations or precedence constraints. Processing of a task cannot start before
certain tasks are produced. These tasks are known as the predecessors of that task. The
successors of a task are the tasks that cannot be performed before the completion of this task.
3
The precedence relations can be represented graphically as illustrated in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1: An example of Precedence Graph

In the figure, the nodes represent the tasks and an arc between the nodes i and j exists
if task i is an immediate predecessor of task j. Accordingly, tasks 1, 2 and 3 are predecessors
of task 4 and task 3 is its immediate predecessor. Task 7 is successor of all tasks and an
immediate successor of tasks 4 and 6.
2.3 Assembly Line Balancing Problems

The classical assembly line balancing problem (ALBP) considers the assignment of
tasks to the workstations. Main concern of the assignment is the minimization of the total
assembly cost while satisfying the demands and some restrictions like precedence relations
among tasks and some system specific constraints (Pekin,2006)
2.3.1 Classifications of assembly line systems.

Assembly lines can be classified as single-model, mixed-model, and multi-model
systems according to the number of models that are present on the line.

Single-Model Assembly lines have been used in single type or model production only. There
are large quantities of the products, which have the same physical design on the line. Here,
operators who work at a workstation execute the same amount of work when a sequence of
products goes past them at a constant speed.

Mixed-Model Assembly lines are usually used to assemble two or more different models of
the same product simultaneously. On the line, the produced items keep changing from model
to model continuously.

Multi-Model Assembly lines. Several (similar) products are manufactured on one or several
assembly lines. Because of significant differences in the production processes,
rearrangements of the line equipment are required when product changes occur.
Consequently, the products are assembled in separate batches in order to minimize set-up
4
inefficiencies. While enlarging batch sizes reduces set-up costs, inventory costs are
increased. (Scholl 1998)
Figure 2.2: Single Model Assembly lines
Figure 2.3: Mixed-Model Assembly lines
Figure 2.4: Multi-Model Assembly lines
2.4 Aspects of Line Balancing

Nowadays assembly lines move towards cellular manufacturing in terms of variety of
production. As a result of this, usage of special equipment and/or professional workers, which
are able to perform more than one process, is increasing.
In order to benefit from continuous productions advantages, these equipment and
workers must be added to the line in a way by which high efficiency measures (maximum
usage, minimum number of stations) can be achieved (Agpak and Gokcen, 2005).
This theory is supported by Barbars (1986), he stated that while designing the line, the
list of task to be done, task times required to perform each task and the precedence relations
between them are analyzed. While tasks are being grouped into stations based on this
analysis, the following goals are regarded:
1. Minimization of the number of workstations for a given cycle time.
2. Minimization of cycle time for a given number of work stations.
Nicosia et.al (2002) studied the problem of assigning operations to an ordered
sequence of non-identical workstations, which also took precedence relationships and cycle
time restrictions into consideration. The aim of the study was to minimize the cost of
workstations. They used a dynamic programming algorithm, and introduced several
fathoming rules to reduce the number of states in the dynamic program.
5
Falkenauer (2000) listed a few of the difficulties that must be tackled in a line
balancing tool in order to be applicable in the industry. Those difficulties are:
I. Workstation cannot be eliminated. Since each workstations has their own
identities, it is obvious that the workstations cannot be eliminated unless the
workstations were in front or at the end of the line. The elimination of any
workstation at the middle will create a gap or holes in the assembly line.
II. The load needs to be equalized. A small increase in the maximum lead time may
yield a substantial reduction in load misbalanced. Takt time is normally set by the
companys marketing that sets production target. The cycle time must not exceed
the given Takt time. But, it is normally useless to reduce the lines cycle time
below that value. Minimizing the cycle time is only required as long as it exceeds
the Takt Time. Once, the objective is met, equalization of workload should be
pursued instead.
III. Multiple operators. Once a workstation features more than one operator, the
workstations lead time ceases to be a simple sum of durations of all operations
assigned to it. Firstly, the whole workstation need to have time equal to the
slowest operator to complete all operations assigned to the workstation. Since
different workstation has different workload, hence it is surely not equal to the
sum of durations divided by the number of operator. The precedence constraint
that nearly exists among the workstations may introduce idle(waiting) time
between operations. This idle time reduces efficiency of the workstation and must
be reduced as much as possible.
In assembly lines, where specific operation robots are used, the importance of simultaneously
balancing of the resources and the assembly line can be understood better (Agpak and
Gokcen, 2005)
2.4.1 Bottleneck
Line balancing problem is the bottleneck of flow production. According to theory of
constraints (TOC) by (Goldratt and Cox, 1986) the throughput of manufacturing systems is
constrained by the capacity of bottleneck machines. In most situations, the final throughput of
manufacturing systems could be notably improved if the bottleneck machines are well
scheduled and controlled. However, how to define the bottleneck and how to design an easily-
implemented bottleneck detection method are still problematic at present.
In intermittent manufacturing, it is almost impossible to balance the available capacity
of the various workstations with the demand for their capacity. As a result, some workstations
are overloaded and others are under-loaded. The overloaded workstations are called
bottlenecks. Throughput is the total volume of production passing through a facility.
6
Bottlenecks control the throughput of all products processed by them. If work centers
feeding bottlenecks produce more than the bottleneck can process, excess work-in process
inventory is built up. Work centers fed by bottlenecks have their throughput controlled by
bottleneck and their schedules should be determined by that of the bottleneck.
2.5 Discrete Event Simulation
Simulation is a simplified system representation, made and understood by a
specialist, who intends to identify its potentials improvements (TAKO, ROBINSON, 2010).
The simulation aims to obtain results that can be transferred into reality (VDI, 1993). With
the help of simulation there can be tested factories even before the equipment is purchased
this generating information about the number of machines needed, cost, space required and
the optimal location of equipment. Simulation and modeling was increasingly used as a
decision-helping tool; its most important feature, which awakes an interest for simulation, is
the prospect of working with complexes systems and the possibility of analysis of the
dynamics behavior (BANKS et al., 2010).
According to (Sandanayake et al., 2008) discrete event simulation allied with
production system analysis, aiming at performance improvement, became more relevant in
the last decades. Together with advancements on computers, discrete event simulation helps
specialists in visualizing, analyzing and optimizing complex production processes, in a
reasonable period of time and with a reasonable investment. For example, Hernandez and
Librantz (2013) used discrete event simulation to evaluate 12 scenarios behaviour of supply
chain process in sugar cane exportation. In the end, they chose the last scenario because it
provided a better productivity.
Simulation is a reality imported to a controlled environment, where its behaviour may
be studied under a sort of condition, without involving physical risks and/or costs (BANKS et
al., 2010). Those conditions can be studied aiming at productivity and quality improvement,
machine acquisition, changes in layout and process parameters. Simulation is one of the most
used research tools, mainly due to its versatility, flexibility and power of analysis (RYAN;
HEAVEY, 2006). So discrete event simulations are a powerful tool, which can be applied to
investigate any stochastic system (HILLIER; LIEBERMAN, 2010).
2.6 Modeling and Simulation
According to Hillier and Lieberman (2010) computational simulations should be used
to solve complex problems. According to Leal et al. (2011) a simulation model development
presents three steps:
Conception or Problem Formulation,
Implementation and
Results analysis.
In the conception phases, the researchers define the simulations main objectives such
as physical layout planning, maximizing the efficiency, defining the suitable buffer space, etc.
Then, a conceptual model is built after all required data such as: batch size, production
frequency for each product, setup time, downtime and time to machine be repaired are
7
collected. The researcher should plan the simulation experiments and then run them
iteratively to verify the model.
Once the conceptual model is verified, implementation phase can be initiated. In this
stage, the conceptual model is transformed in a computational model, by setting up all the
methods and configurations in detail according to all collected data. After that, the
computational model must be verified and statistically validated. Verification and validation
methodology (Sargent, 2012) is shown in figure 2.1. The main different points in verification
and validation of a model can be compared as follow.
Table 2.1: Verification vs. Validation
Verification Validation
Does model work right? Is it a right model?

Try to detect and remove un-intentional Try to detect discrepancies between model
errors and reality
Debugging Team work, group discussion
Restricted to model Involves real system
Involves only modeler Involves all in project
Develops personal confidence Convey confidence to others
Easy but time consuming Very difficult and subjective
Figure 2.5: Simplified Version of the Modeling Process

Finally, if the model is approved, the analysis phase can begin. Now, any change in
computational model represents the same modifications and results in the real system.
8
Simulation Performance and Uses
Functionally, simulation can:
Increase
Throughput
Resource Utilization
Facility Utilization
Determine
Optimal buffer sizes
Number of transporters and AGVs
Number o the workpiece carriers
Production schedules and sequences
Decrease
Throughput times
Required resources
Storage requirements.
Additionally, simulation can also
Validate the process design in the planning process
Identify the bottleneck
Reduce WIP
Evaluate the effects of capital investments or changes in processes
Optimize control strategies
Avoid planning errors
Protect investments
Simulation can be used to plan a new facility by performing the following tasks:
Determine and optimize the times and throughput
Determine the dimensioning
Determine the limits of performance
Investigate the influence of failures
9
Determine manpower requirements
Gain Knowledge about the behavior of the facility
Determine suitable control strategies
Evaluate different alternatives.
And it also can be used to optimize existing facility by
Optimizing control strategies
Optimizing the sequence of orders
Testing the daily proceedings.
Simulation is also useful to execute a management plan as it can
Provide a template for creating the control strategies
Test different scenarios during the warm-up phase of the facility
Train the operators of the machines in the different states of the facility
10
Definition of Problem and Target
Analyze System
Acquire Data
Create Model
Validate Model
Experiment and Analyze Model
Evaluate Results
Recommendation
Figure 2.6: Methodology Flow Chart for Simulation Study

2.7 Tecnomatix Plant Simulation
According to Jovisevic, S., Jovisevic, V., & Jokanovic, S. (2009, December),
Tecnomatix Plant Simulation is a software system which is designed for modeling, simulation
and optimization of manufacturing process planning. Optimization of manufacturing process
planning using this software system is based on time-oriented simulation and event-oriented
simulation.
Time-oriented simulation considers a wide range of different types of production time.
In reality, time elapses continually. When watching a part move along a conveyor system, you
will detect no leaps in time. The curve for the distance covered, and the time it takes to cover
it, is continuous, it is a straight line.
A discrete, event-controlled simulation program on the other hand only takes points in
time (events) into consideration that are of importance to the further course of the simulation.
Such events may, for example, be a part entering a station or leaving it or of it moving on to
another machine. Any movements in between are of little interest to the simulation as such. It
is only important that the entrance and the exit (Out) events are
11
displayed correctly.
When a part enters a material flow object, Plant Simulation calculates the time until it
exits that object and enters an exit event into the list of scheduled events of the
EventController for this point in time. Thus, the simulation time that the EventController
displays, leaps from event to event. This happens as soon as an event is processed.
Figure 2.7: Time-Oriented vs. Event-Oriented Simulation
2D and 3D Modeling Environments

Modeling of technological processes and the creation of simulation models of real production
processes by applying the system Tecnomatix Plan Simulation can be performed in 2D and
3D environments.
Figure 2.8: Modeling of process planning in 2D environment
Modeling in 2D environment, shown in Figure 2.3, is applied to complex optimization

problems, related primarily to time balancing in the technological process, i.e. analysis of the
production process from the point of time (production times, handling time cycles
production, etc.). Modeling in 3D, shown in Figure 2.4, is primarily used for monitoring the
distribution of technological systems and devices, which is necessary to spatially arrange in
the appropriate production system.
12
Figure 2.9: Modeling of process planning in 3D environment
Modeling in 2D and 3D environments is possible to connect, so when model in 3D
environment is created, model in the 2D environment is generated automatically. The course
of creating simulation models is carried out as follows:
Generation of the 2D or 3D models of appropriate technological systems(stations), devices,
methods of transport material, inputs, outputs, etc. from the database of mentioned
technological units. (Particularly customized items developed in CAD softwares such as
NX, Solid Works etc. in *.s3d format can also be loaded and used)
Development of spatial distribution of stations and their adjustment to the conditions related
to real production processes,
Connecting the appropriate stations in the production line. Thus defined product lines
represent the actual product flows, which occur in the appropriate production system,(eg.
conveyor between two stations or the worker will move workpieces from one station to
another)
Setting of parameters for each of the selected station, which is a part of appropriate
production flows. Data entered in this step should correspond as much as possible to the
values of the real production process,
Defining the appropriate objects, in the form of diagrams, tables, histogram, etc., which
have the function of monitoring and presenting the results of simulations of the production
process,
Modeling the production process and its setting in order to create conditions for the
process simulation, i.e. testing of the simulation model,
Capabilities of the system Tecnomatix Plant Simulation from the aspect of objects and
methods of simulation are reflected through the simulation and modeling of:
Process plan with a number of different strategies of production(Push, Pull, MTS,
MTO,ATO)
Production process using the process planning,
Condition: in malfunction, in work, in pause,
13
Workers in the work and tasks they perform,
Working shifts systems,
Transportation systems. The table below describes the features available for each license
type in detail:
Table 2.2: Tecnomatix Plant Simulation License Details
Feature Pro Std App Run.T Res Edu Stud
License is limited to this number of 4000 1000 80
objects:
Included in the Pricing List
Interface Package (ActiveX, C-
Programming, ODBC, OPC, Oracle SQL, O O O X X O -
Socket)
Gantt Charts (Gantt, Gantt Wizard) O O O X X O -
Process Designer Package (AMG,
O O O O X O -
Personnel)
SDX Package (SDX, FactoryCAD) O O O O X O -
3D Visualization (3D Viewer) O O X X X X X
Assembly Package (Assembly, Assembly
Line, FiniteStateMachine, Personnel, O O O X X O -
Transport)
Shop Library O O O X X O -
Basic Functionalities
Parameterize user-defined dialogs X X X X X X X
Open and edit lists and tables X X X X X X X
Interactively start and debug SimTalk-
X X X X X X X
controls and methods
Execute simulation runs X X X X X X X
Edit object icons and create, modify, and
view all kinds of animations in 2D X X X X X X X
simulation models
Open charts to visualize the simulation
X X X X X X X
results
Object-oriented modeling X X X X X X X
Inheritance X X X X X X X
Hierarchy X X X X X X X
Init (predefine and save the initial state of
X X X X X X X
a simulation model)
COM Interface X X X X X X X
DDE Interface X X X X X X X
SQLite Interface X X X X X X X
Load and write Excel files X X X X X X X
Sankey Chart X X X X X X X
Transporter finds shortest route to
X X X X X X X
destination (automatic routing)
View statistics report with the F6 key X X X X X X X
14
Pro Std App Run. Re Edu Stu
Feature T s d
Limited Functionalities
Build simulation models with any of the X X X(+) - X X X
built-in and with user-defined objects
Build simulation models with objects from X X X - X (X)* (X)*
libraries and any of the built-in material
flow objects (licenses for the libraries are
required)
Model with length-oriented objects X X X - X X X
Create and modify class objects, X X X - X X X
especially user-defined objects
Create and modify control codes X X - - X X X
employing the programming language
SimTalk
Create user-defined dialogs X - - - X X X
Create libraries X - - - X - X
Use the merge mechanism X - X X X X X
Import CAD files (DWG, DXF, DGN) as the X - X X X X X
background image of the Frame
Profiler X - X X X X X
Objects and functionalities which are not
available for all license types
Confidence analysis X - X X X X (X)*
DataFit X - X X X X (X)*
Experiment Manager X - X X X X (X)*
Factorial analysis X - X X X X (X)*
Neural Networks X - X X X X (X)*
Sequential Sampler X - X X X X (X)*
Statistical tools X - - - - - -
Attribute Explorer X - X X X X X
Card File X - X X X X X
Queue File X - X X X X X
Stack File X - X X X X X
Time Sequence X - X X X X X
Flow Control X - X X X X X
Optimization objects based on genetic
X - X X X X X
algorithms
Optimization Wizard X - X X X X (X)*
Generator X - X X X X X
HTML Wizard X - X X X X X
Layout Optimizer Wizard X - X X X X (X)*
Teamcenter Interface X - - - X - -
Trigger X - X X X X X
Variants Generator X - X X X X (X)*
XML Interface X - X X X X X
License Types:
Pro: Professional License
Std: Standard License
App: Application License
Run.T: Runtime License
Res: Research License
Edu: Education License
Stu: Student License
X Included
- Not available
(X)* The object can be loaded, the maximum number of objects might be exceeded if
you do so. In this case you can use the object, but you cannot save the model any
more.
O Optional product
(+) Except for the object Method
Objects Available in Each License Type

The following objects are available for each license type:
Built-in Materialflow objects: Connector, EventController, Frame, Interface, Source, Drain,

SingleProc, ParallelProc, Assembly, DismantleStation, PickAndPlace robot, Store,
PlaceBuffer, Buffer, Sorter, Line, AngularConverter, Converter, Turntable, Turnplate, Track,
TwoLaneTrack, and Cycle.
MaterialFlow objects, libraries, and modeled objects: EOM library; Conveyor library,
Cross-sliding Car library, High Bay Warehouse library, Kanban Objects library, Portal Crane/
Cranes library, and TransferStation.
Resource objects: Workplace, Footpath, WorkerPool, Worker, Exporter, Broker,

ShiftCalendar, and LockoutZone.
Information Flow objects: Method, Variable, TableFile, FileInterface, and FileLink.
User Interface objects: Comment, Display, Chart, Button, Checkbox, and Drop-Down List.
Mobile Units: Entity, Container, and Transporter.

Tools: Bottleneck Analyzer, LayoutOptimizer, SankeyDiagram, Worker Chart
16
Chapter 3
Case Studies
Objective of Case Studies
The objective of this case study is to enhance the knowledge of properties, features and
different application of Tecnomatix Plant Simulation for different purposes.
3.1 Modeling, Simulation and Optimization of Process Planning (Jovisevic, S., Jovisevic,
V., & Jokanovic, S., 2009),
3.1.1 Overview
This paper is focusing on modeling of the manufacturing and assembly planning for
crank shafts using Tecnomatix Plant Simulation in 2D and 3D environment and determining
optimal parameters of production.
3.1.2 Optimization Performance

This optimization process consists of several steps:
Developing the spatial model and generation of individual processes, which represent the
operations in the production process from the process plan,
Defining the distance between the individual station in order to effectuate the simulation
time which is lost during transportation of parts prior to the following operations,
Linking individual processes in the flows of materials processing according to designed
process plan,
Defining the required time for individual processes,
Defining the methods and rules of the transition work pieces during processing of materials,
Defining objects for monitoring and recording the results of simulations
Performing initial process simulation,
Analysis of the results of simulation,
Modification of simulation models and
Performing the final process simulation.
Simulation of manufacturing and assembly process plan for crankshafts by the system
Tecnomatix Plant Simulation in 2D environment is shown in Fig. 3.11
17
Figure 3.1: Segment From Simulation Model Shown in 2D
After designing satisfactory model of the manufacturing and assembly process plan
for crankshafts in the 2D environment, it is transformed into a model of process plan in 3D
environment. The purpose of transforming into 3D environment is primarily to determine the
spatial layout of machinery and equipment in the production plant.
Figure 3.2: Simulation model shown in 3D

By placing the machines and devices in precise defined locations in the production
plant in 3D environment, the precise distance between the machines that affect optimization
for earlier designed models is determined.
18
Figure 3.3: Simulation model located in the corresponding production plant
Simulation model and production plant of the manufacturing and assembly process plan for
crankshafts by the system Tecnomatix Plan Simulation in 3D is shown in Figure 3.12 and
Figure 3.13. This model is founded on the basis of previous information on the number,
layout and positions of the necessary technological systems and equipment.
3.1.3 Simulation results
Improving the simulation model is performed through initial process simulation and analysis
of simulation results. In the model after the analysis of results, bottlenecks of production are
identified and accumulation of work in process(WIPs) in each station of the process plan are
also observed. Efficiency of machines performing the initial process of simulation, i.e. before
performing the optimization process, is unsatisfactory as shown in Figure 3.14.
Figure 3.4 Efficiency of machines before optimization
19
After analysis of influential factors, optimization of process plan was performed,
where goal is set as a function of high efficiency machines and minimum time duration of
production cycle, while the limits were defined by the process plan. Resolving the above-
mentioned shortcomings, after introduction of buffer zones and increasing the number of
machines, it achieved a significantly shorter production cycle time. For example batch of 100
pieces of crankshafts, can save 40% of time in manufacturing process after the simulation.
After completion of design and simulation of process plan in the 3D environment, model
needs to determine the exact location of machines and devices in the spatial layout of
production facilities. Based on this information, manufacturing cycle is reduced by 5% as a
result of savings in time in transport parts between machines. Based on the layout and
location of machines and devices, it was designed a preliminary solution for production plant
with appropriate characteristics (departments, roads, entrances, exits, etc.). Results from
simulation of process plan provide cycle times generated for the appropriate batch size and
machine utilization of machines in the manufacturing process in percentage. According to
optimal designed simulation model, the utilization of machines for the batch size of 100
crankshafts is shown in Figure 3.15.
Figure 3.5 Efficiency of machine after the optimization

Modeling the process plan and simulation allow creating models that represent adequate
production processes that generates the following benefits:
Improving the productivity of existing production systems,
Reduce investment in planning new production facility and capacity,
Reduce inventory and flow time,
Optimization of production systems dimensions, including backup size,
Reducing investment risk through early proof of production concept,
Maximizes utilization of productive resources,
Improvement in design and layout of production line and machines.
In the example, final result of performing simulations showed data related to the duration of
the manufacturing cycle, utilization of resources, as well as the required dimensions of the
production plant that meet the set requirements from process plan.
20
3.2 Kanban Simulation Model for Production Process Optimization(Golchev, R., et.al.,
2015).
3.2.1 Overview
This article is based on a basic research for possibilities for KANBAN
implementation in one metal-working company. In that direction, the basic aim of the article
is to present benefits of combined implementation of KANBAN system and methodology for
Discrete Event Simulation (DES). After giving the brief theory on KANBAN and DES, the
article discusses the options for their integration. The case at the end is focused on one
production line in one metal-working company and experiments with the container capacity
which directly affects the number of KANBANs.
3.2.2 Implementation of Kanban System Methodology

One possible methodology for the purpose of systemized and easier implementation
of the KANBAN system is presented, consisting of seven fundamental phases as shown in
the flow chart in Figure 3.16.
This presented methodology seems fairly simple; however, its implementation is a
challenge, because in order to be certain that the KANBAN system is well-designed, a
variety of stochastic, not to mention expensive, calculations and iterations must be made,
(Mller et al., 2012).
There are number of possible tools in order to determine the best KANBAN system,
but also to experiment with it. One of them is the simulation and its advantage in
experimenting with and optimizing performance values. Since there are many variables to
experiment with, the simulation shortens the time needed to determine the possible outcomes
of the system in different situations, (Hao & Shen, 2008). For the most part, simulations are
more than useful in the first three steps of the methodology, especially in the third one,
during the actual design of the KANBAN system. This paper is focused on these three steps.
As it was stated before, the simulation was used in order to determine the capacity of the
container, or the number of KANBAN cards needed in order to achieve a more effective
production process.
The creation of the simulation model shown below is based on the methodology
according to (Banks et al., 2004) a methodology that offers a systemized approach. As a
result of the characteristics of the methodology and because its steps are not strictly
successive, it allows adjustments to different application.
21
Data Collection and
Analysis
Kanban Number
Calculation
No
Is Kanban
Designation of Kanban designed properly?
Yes
Training
Starting the Kanban

System
Maintenance and audit

of the System
Improvement of the
system
Figure 3.6: Methodology for Kanban Implementation (Gross & McInnis, 2003)
22
3.2.3 Kanban Simulation Model
This section presents the application of the KANBAN system in a simulation model
made with the software suite Technomatix Plant Simulation by Siemens. Using Bankss
methodology, each and every problem is defined during the first step. Then, goals are set and
a model is conceptualized according to the acquired information. After formulating the
model, experiments which in normal circumstances might last for days, months or even years
are created in just few minutes. If after the result analysis it is concluded that the experiment
data are sufficient and correct, records are prepared and the final step, implementing the
solution, can be made.
Purpose of the simulation model: Determining optimal KANBAN container capacity in

relation to the demand
The purpose of this simulation model is through simulation of a number of possible
production scenarios with previously determined settings, to get an optimal capacity of a
KANBAN container, in relation with the daily needed throughput. This is extremely
important because the containers are the ones that when empty, initialize the beginning of the
production, and when they are full they stop it. Furthermore, the storage units are an
additional burden when it comes to space usage. In order to avoid the main and the biggest
problem (to avoid overproduction) it is immensely important to design a precise KANBAN
system.
Figure 3.17 shows the basic concept of setting the elements in the simulation model,
(Robinson, 2004). The information moving direction, as well as the direction of the product
can be clearly noticed on the figure, starting with the raw materials and ending in the hands
of the customer.
Figure 3.7: Basic Concept of the Simulation Model

23
3.2.4 EXPERIMENT
After the simulation model has been developed, verified and validated, the next step
entails conducting experiments and analyzing its outcomes. In Figure 3.18, the results of
simulating 13 different cycles are presented. The ordinate lists the daily throughputs done in
3 shifts, 8 hours each, while the abscissa shows the values for which the KANBAN container
is limited.
First, it can be noticed that by decreasing the containers capacity, daily throughput
does not decrease proportionally. Instead, there are occasions when a container with different
capacity has identical daily throughputs. Thus, if the product demand is projected to 750
finished parts by the end of the day, there are two different possibilities for choosing the
container capacity. The first possibility
is to choose a container with capacity of 75 parts per container, and the other is 50 parts per
container. For this specific case, it is better to choose the second option because logically, this
type of container has higher number of daily cycles. The higher number of cycles reduces the
processing time per container. This makes the system more flexible and resistant to external
disruptions including change in demand, defects, change of the product etc. Most
importantly, with this type of container, whenever an error occurs, less number of parts will
be affected by it.
It is the same when the needed daily throughput is 720 finished parts per day.
Furthermore, this simulation model can be a perfect basis for future experiments. These can
include other important factors, such as: delays, defects, scrap percentage, product changes,
workers overload etc.
Figure 3.8: Experimental Results
24
Chapter 4
Description of System Under Study
Premium PLM Bangkok, a Tecnomatix Plant Simulation service provider company

which is SIEMENS Limited Thailands contracted partner for PLM software helped to get
contact with a Tire 1 automotive supplier company for automotive manufacturers in Thailand.
According to the customer protection policy, they requested not to mention the name of
company from which all the specific data are collected.
Among a large variety of automotive parts produced in the host company, Electric
Power Steering Column production line is focused in this study.
4.1 Description of Product Under Study

4.1.1 Electrical Power Steering System
Electric Power Steering for automobile is primarily an energy saving scheme. It is
expected to be in widespread use, just to cut down the energy usage in modern vehicles.
Further advantages may include enhanced flexibilities in the location of the steering system,
the turning of the steering system to cater to the need of the specific automobile or an
individual driver and the reliability. The Electrical Power Steering System involves replacing
the hydraulic system with an all electric system in which power is delivered to the rack and
pinion of the steering mechanism only when required. In this EPS, an electric motor drives the
rack and pinion arrangement to steer the vehicle using power from the battery.
Details of EPS designs differ amongst automotive manufacturers. However there are
certain components that are intrinsic. Such as:
1. Torque sensor
2. Electric motor
3. Rotational angle sensor
4. Controller
5. Vehicle speed sensor
6. Coupling between motor and steering mechanism
The torque sensor is perhaps the most important component. It measures the effort
being applied by the driver to steer the vehicle. The torque sensor output is then used to drive
a motor to reduce the effort, while achieving the desired steering. The motor may be located at
a number of locations to achieve this. The purpose of the motor controller is essentially to
control the torque delivered to the steering mechanism. The vehicle speed must be used to
adjust the sensitivity and the performance around the null position of the steering wheel.
The Electric Power Steering Column, the final product of the assembly line under
study is part of EPS.
25
Figure 4.1: Electric Power Steering System
4.1.2 Bill of Materials included in the Final Assembly

The finished product of the final assembly line which is the Electric Power Steering
Column composed of 5 major Sub-assembly groups,
- Sensor Shaft Assembly
- Column Assembly E-Lock (E-Lock means Electric controlled system)
- Bearing Assembly
- Bracket Assembly (Tilt)
- Cover and
- Other Components
Some of the components like O-Ring, C-Ring, Spacer Rubbers are directly supplied from
store while some other components like Gear Box are Produced according to the production
plan of their line. Some special sub-assemblies such as Sensor shaft are produced in sub-
assembly line via pull system. The stock level in the buffers on the final assembly line
triggers the Kanban system to produce more.
Sensor Shaft Assembly
Sensor Shaft Assembly is the assembled combination of Sensor Shaft with worm
wheel, Ball Bearing, Retention Ring and 2 Bushes. Sensor Shaft is supplied to the final
assembly line from the sub-assembly line by pull system while the other components were
produced according to their lines production plan.
Figure 4.2: Sensor Shaft Assembly E-Lock

26
Column Assembly E-Lock
Column Assembly is the main structure of the Electric Power Steering Column that
comprises:
- Gear Box
- Ball Bearing
- Worm
- 2 Spacer Rubbers
- C-Ring
- Bolt Flang
- Upper Housing
- Lower Housing
- Column Cover and
- Liner Slot.
Figure 4.3: Gear Box

Bearing Assembly
Bearing Assembly is composed of two bearing sets with two bushes.
Cover
Cover contains cover assembly which is produced in the sub-assembly line by pull
system and a retention ring.
Figure 4.4: Cover Assembly
27
Bracket Assembly Tilt
The bracket assembly is the section to attach the EPS Column to the rest of the system.
Bracket assembly contains:
- Lever Assembly Tilt
- Fixed Cam
- Washer
- Thrust Bearing
- Nylon Nut
- Bolt
- Bracket Assembly Tilt
- Bracket Assembly
- Spring and
- Retention Ring
Other Components
Items in other component group are the components that are assembled on the EPS
column other than the previous sub-assembly groups such as:
- Motor
- Electrical Control Unit
- Bracket Harness
- Harness Assembly
- Flang and
- Cover Connector
Figure 4.5: Motor
Figure 4.6: Electrical Control Unit
28
Figure 4.7: Bracket Harness
Figure 4.8: Harness Assembly
Figure 4.9: Cover Connector

Final Product of the assembly line is described in Figure 4.10. The complete product
breakdown structure including components and subassemblies in the final assembly are
described in the Figure 4.11.
Figure 4.10: Electric Power Steering Column
29
4.2 Production Process and Stations
4.2.1 Electrical Power Steering Column Production Line
Electric Power Steering Column production line contains 4 major sections:
1. Manufacturing Section
2. Sub-Assembly Section
3. Assembly Section and
4. Warehouse Section
Among these, only Manufacturing Section is run in Push system. All the other downstream
sections are run in Pull system.
Work Flow
Sub- Final
Manufacturing
Assembly Assembly Warehouse
Section
Section Section
Push System Pull System
Figure 4.12: Overview of the Electric Power Steering Column Production Line
4.2.2 Process Flow of Electrical Power Steering Column Assembly Line
This study will be emphasized on the Final Assembly Section in which all the
subassemblies and components are assembled as the final product. The line contains 25
processes ran by 17 human workers. According to the collected data in August 2016,
production capacity of the line is 721 finished goods per day. The production system is
running in 2 normal shifts(Day and Night) and 2 overtime shifts. Although the main flow of
the assembly line is sequenced to move the parts from a station to the downstream adjacent
station, some parallel stations(GA-4,GA-7,GA0-8,GA-15,FA-1) that are adding
supplementary components to the main assembly are configured to transport the processed
workpieces to next stations by human workers.
Table 4.1: Shift Schedule
Working time Day Night
Normal 6:00-14:00 22:00-6:00
Hr. 6hr.35mins 6hr.35mins
Overtime 14:20 - 17:00 17:50-21:40
Hr. 2hr.40mins 2hr.40mins
31
The process flow chart along with the detail description of the activities and added
components in each station is described in figure 4.13.The process flow with each process
performed by particular worker are described as follow.
Worker1
At the beginning of the final assembly process, the Worker1 assembles the Worm End
at the Worm End Assembly station (GA-1) with Worm, 2 spacer rubbers, C-Ring and Flang.
Then the workpiece is carried by the worker to the Worm End Assembly Fitting
station(GA-2) and assembled with Gear Box followed by ball bearing fitting at the Gear Box
Bearing Fitting station(GA-3).
Worker2
In parallel, the Worker2 caulks 2 sets of bush and ball bearings at the Bush Caulking
station(GA-04). The workpiece at station GA-3 is then taken to the Lower Bracket Assembly
station(GA-05) to combine with caulked bushes.
Worker3
The Worker3 attaches the sensor column to the workpiece at the Sensor Shaft
Assembly station(GA-7).
Worker5
At the same time, the Worker5 is preparing the Cover at Shaft Cover Assembly
station(CA-07) combining Cover Assembly and Retention ring and also prepare the worm
wheel assembly at the Worm Spacer Caulking station(GA-8) which are then fed to the Worm
Assembly station.
Worker4
Worker4 at the Worm Assembly station(GA-9) combines the cover and worm wheel
assemblies with the main assembly. Then the assembly is checked whether the fittings and
the gears are working properly at the Motoring station(GA-10)
Worker6
The sensor shaft is then calibrated to the neutral voltage at the Neutral Voltage Adjust
station (GA-11) by Worker6. Seal and No. Label are also attached to the assembly at this
station.
Worker7
Worker 7 prepares the housing assembly at the Housing Assembly satation(GA-13)
and tests the mechanical movement of the worm gear at Worm Movement Test
station(GA-12).
32
Worker8
The tilt-lever assembly is prepared and combined with the housing assembly from
GA-13 in Tilt-PreAssembly station(GA-15) by Worker8. The sub assembly is then carried to
Tilt Assembly station(GA-16) and combined with the main assembly by the Worker8.
Worker9
Worker9 tests the function of the main assembly at the Tilt&Telescopic Operation Test
Station(GA-17).
Worker11
Worker11 combines the Electrical Control Unit(ECU) and electric Motor at
ECU&Motor Assembly station(FA-1). The Worker11 also perform the torque test of the
main assembly at the Rotational Torque Test station(FA-3).
Worker10
Worker10 attaches the assembly of Motor and ECU to the main assembly at the Motor
Assembly station(FA-2).
Worker12
Worker12 also performs the ECU&Motor assembling function at FA-1 station and
performs the performance test at the Performance Test station(FA-04).
Worker13
Worker13 inspects the assembly at the Pre-Shipping Inspection station(FA-5) and
attaches the Cover Connector at Bunded Table(FA-5.5).
Worker14
Worker14 performs the shipping inspection at (FA-6) and also perform the cover
attaching function at FA-5.5.
Worker15
Worker15 performs the overall inspection at the Final Check station.
Worker16,17
Worker16 and Worker17 perform the packing at the Packing station.
33
4.2.3 Plant Layout of Electrical Power Steering Column Assembly Line
The plant plan of the EPS column final assembly line is described in Figure 4.14. As it
can be seen in the figure, all the stations are ran by human workers. And even some of the
transportation of the workpieces between stations are also done by human workers. As it was
illustrated in the figure, the line includes the inventory stalls for the dedicated items in
between the particular stations. To be easier to understand, the description of the station
names according to each stations number are listed in Table 4.2.
Table 4.2: Descriptions of the Stations

No. Station No. Station Description Done by Worker
1 GA-1 WORM END ASSEMBLY 1
WORM END ASSEMBLY
2 GA-2 1
FITTING
3 GA-3 GEARBOX BEARING FITTING 1
4 GA-4 BUSH CAULKING 2
5 GA-5 LOWER BRACKET ASSEMBLY 2
6 GA-7 SENSOR SHEFT ASSEMBLY 3
7 CA-7 SHAFT COVER ASSEMBLY 5
8 GA-8 WORM SPACER CAULKING 5
9 GA-9 WORM ASSEMBLY 4
10 GA-10 MOTORING 4
11 GA-11 NEUTRAL VOLTAGE ADJUST 6
12 GA-12 WORM MOVEMENT TEST 7
13 GA-13 HOUSING ASSEMBLY 7
14 GA-15 TILT-PRE ASSEMBLY 8
15 GA-16 TILT ASSEMBLY 8
TILT&TELESCOPIC OPERATION
16 GA-17 9
TEST
17 FA-1 ECU AND MOTOR ASSEMBLY 11/12
18 FA-2 MOTOR ASSEMBLY 10
19 FA-3 ROTATIONAL TORQUE TEST 11
20 FA-4 PERFORMANCE TEST 12
21 FA-5 PRE-SHIPPING INSPECTION 13
22 FA-5.5 BUNDED TABLE 13/14
23 FA-6 SHIPPING INSPECTION 14
24 QA FINAL CHECK 15
25 PACKING PACKING 16/17
36
4.2.4 Time Study of the System
As each and every assembly processes including transportation are done by human
workers, the time study of each station has 2 time studies:
- Machining Time
- Handling and Operation Time
Machining Time is the time period that the workpiece is machined while the Handling and
Operation Time is the combination of transportation, handling and assembling without
machining. Time study including the standard time and normal distribution of each station is
illustrated in Table 4.3 and 4.4.
Table 4.3: Time Study of the EPS Column Final Assembly Line
N Standard Standard Lower Upper Carried out
Station Time Study
o. time (s) Deviation Bound Bound By Worker
Machining
7 0.79 5.8 8.9
Time
1 GA-1 1
Handling &
12 0.56 11.4 13.1
Oper:Time
Machining
21 0.4767 20.7 22.3
Time
2 GA-2 1
Handling &
6 0.6 5.2 7.2
Oper:Time
Machining
8 0.57411 7.2 9.1
Time
3 GA-3 1
Handling &
10 0.49 9.4 11.1
Oper:Time
Machining
20 0.872 18.9 21.9
Time
4 GA-4 2
Handling &
24 0.42 23.6 25.2
Oper:Time
Machining
0 0 0 0
Time
5 GA-5 2
Handling &
43 0.35 42.4 43.8
Oper:Time
Machining
4 0.5 3.8 5.2
Time
6 GA-7 3
Handling &
29 0.64 28.3 30.4
Oper:Time
Machining
8 1.08 6.5 10.2
Time
7 CA-7 5
Handling &
35 0.79 33.8 36.9
Oper:Time
Machining
30 0.56 29.4 31.1
Time
8 GA-8 5
Handling &
19 0.47 18.7 20.3
Oper:Time
Machining
0 0 0 0
Time
9 GA-9 4
Handling &
22 0.88 21.2 23.7
Oper:Time
Machining
45 0.59 44.2 46.2
Time
10 GA-10 4
Handling &
10 0.87 8.9 11.9
Oper:Time
Machining
7 0.49 6.4 8.1
Time
11 GA-11 6
Handling &
46 0.5 45.8 47.2
Oper:Time
37
Table 4.4: Time Study of the EPS Column Final Assembly Line(Cont.)
Standard Standard Lower Upper Carried out

No. Station Time Study
time Deviation Bound Bound By
Machining
38 0.43 37.6 39.2
Time
12 GA-12 7
Handling &
16 1.08 16.5 20.2
Oper:Time
Machining
5 0.36 4.4 5.8
Time
13 GA-13 7
Handling &
32 0.48 31.3 32.9
Oper:Time
Machining
0 0 0 0
Time
14 GA-15 8
Handling &
44 0.5 43.1 44.9
Oper:Time
Machining
0 0 0 0
Time
15 GA-16 8
Handling &
46 0.64 45.4 47.5
Oper:Time
Machining
8 0.7 7 9.7
Time
16 GA-17 9
Handling &
26 1.11 24.9 28.4
Oper:Time
Machining
0 0 0 0
Time
17 FA-1 11/12
Handling &
24 0.37 23.2 24.8
Oper:Time
Machining
0 0 0 0
Time
18 FA-2 10
Handling &
46 0.42 45.4 46.9
Oper:Time
Machining
23 0.59 22.2 24.2
Time
19 FA-3 11
Handling &
17 0.43 16.3 17.9
Oper:Time
Machining
21 0.36 20.3 21.9
Time
20 FA-4 12
Handling &
22 0.51 21.5 23.2
Oper:Time
Machining
5 1.11 3.9 7.4
Time
21 FA-5 13
Handling &
55 1.13 53.4 57.2
Oper:Time
Machining
0 0 0 0
Time
22 FA-5.5 13/14
Handling &
15 0.69 14 16.7
Oper:Time
Machining
0 0 0 0
Time
23 FA-6 14
Handling &
32 0.48 31.3 32.9
Oper:Time
Machining
0 0 0 0
Time
24 QA 15
Handling &
51 0.64 49.6 51.9
Oper:Time
Machining
0 0 0 0
Time
25 PACKING 16/17
Handling &
48 0.57 47.2 49.1
Oper:Time
38
4.2.5 Kanban System
In order to limit accumulation of inventory in WIP and keep the efficient stock level in
the warehouse, final assembly line of Electrical Power Steering Column is running in pull
system. According to the stock level in the Ware House section after Assembly section, the
Kanban cards are circulated to assemble the required number of finished products to fulfil
the empty containers. A Kanban box contains 12 identical finished products. Here it can be
considered a box Kanban represents 12 identical Kanban cards. For the Electrical Power
Steering Column assembly, the product under study, the maximum stock level is 5 boxes(60
pcs) and the reorder stock level is 2 boxes(24 pcs). Once the stock level in the warehouse
falls under re-order level(2 boxes), the warehouse sends out the Kanban cards to produce
finished products and refill up to the maximum stock level.
Similarly, Kanban systems for the sub-assembly lines are also triggered by the stock
levels in the buffers on the final line, for example Sensor Shaft Assembly buffer on GA-07
station triggers the sub-assembly line for Sensor Shaft Assembly. But in this paper, these sub-
assembly lines are not considered and these buffers are assumed to avoid the shortage.
Detached Kanban Card
Maximum Stock Level>>> 5 Boxes
Re-order Stock Level>>> 2 Boxes
Final Assembly Line

Warehouse Parts Taken Out By Customer Order
Figure 4.15: Kanban System of EPS Column Assembly Section
39
Kanban card in the EPS Column Final Assembly Line describes the following
specifications of the product which will be produced.
1. Product Type
2. Product Picture
3. Production Line to be produced on
4. Product ID
5. Package Bar Code describing the package that the product belongs to
6. Kanban ID
7. ID of Sensor Shaft Assembly used in this product
8. ID of Electrical Control Unit used in this product
9. Quantity of products in this box
6.
1.
7.
2. 5.
8.
3. 4. 9.
Figure 4.16: Kanban Card in EPS Column Final Assembly Line
4.2.6 Production Schedule

From the warehouse, the finished goods are withdrawn to deliver to the customer
according to the monthly production plan described in table 4.5. In current condition,
according to the varying demand and current system configuration, there are some product
shortages on some days and surplus inventory on other days. That became the main issue to
be solved by tuning up the stock level.
Table 4.5: Monthly Production Plan of EPS Column
ITEM 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 3031TOTAL
PT22XX0264S Planned38 0 36 36 36 36 36 0 0 36 36 36 36 36 0 0 36 36 36 36 36 0 0 24 24 0 24 24 24 0 0 698
ACTUAL36 0 37 36 38 36 36 0 0 23 36 36 36 36 0 0 36 36 48 0 36 36 0 24 24 24 0 24 24 0 0 698
40
Chapter 5
Model Development and Optimisation
The simulation model of the current assembly line is developed according to the
collected data. At this point, in addition to the shop-floor data, background production
management practices and arrangements that are applied on the production system such as,
push or pull system of production, allocation of stores and buffers between the sections etc.,
will also need to be feed in. The model will be developed in following steps:
Basic Model
Development
Worker
Configuration
System Performance
Analysis
System Calibration
Verification and
Validation
Not Validated
Validated
Pull System
Configuration
Optimisation
Recommendation

Figure 5.1: Modelling Steps Flow Chart

41
5.1 Basic Model Development
Basic model development phase contains the development of the stations with
particular settings and material flow routes. First of all single-proc stations are placed
according to the plant plan. For the stations that have both operation time and machining
time, a pre-station is added in front of the machining station as a separate station to improve
the flexibility in modelling. Station allocation in the assembly line plan is shown in figure
5.2.
Figure 5.2: Station Allocation

After station allocation, the processing time of each station are entered in each of the
station specification. Double click the station to be setup and select Times tab in the station
spec window. As the processing time of the stations are in normal distribution, click the drop
down icon beside processing time and select Normal. Then key in the mean processing time,
standard deviation, lower bound and upper bound in the format shown above the text box.
Then click apply and ok buttons. Processing time configuration window of the station
GA01_Pre station is shown in figure 5.3. Configure the Operation time and Machining time
of all stations according to Table 4.3.
Figure 5.3: Processing Time Configuration Window

42
5.2 Worker Operation and Transport Workpieces
Conceptually, while the Worker works at the machine, he stays on a Workplace at
the associated machine. While the Worker is Waiting for a job, he stays in the WorkerPool,
which might be the lounge or the staff room of your plant. When the Worker has to perform
one or several jobs at a machine, the foreman (Broker ) tells him to do so. The Worker then
walks on a FootPath from the WorkerPool to the Workplace of the respective machine and
does his job. According to the concept, in order to use the human worker for machine
operations, workplace, worker pool, broker and foot path are required to include in the
model. These can be inserted from the tab, Resources as shown in figure 5.5.
Figure 5.5: Resources Menu Bar

Add the workstations and footpaths according to the existing plant plan. And then add
the worker pool and broker to run.
Figure 5.6: Layout After Workplaces and Footpaths are Added
To declare the number of workers who will be working in the model, configure the
workerpool. Open the creation table in Attribute tab. Key in the 17 workers as shown in
figure5.7.
43
Figure 5.7: Creation Table of Workers in Workerpool
In the object workplace on Attribute tab, the respective station is described and in the
supported service window, key in the StandardService to operate the station. Incase, if the
worker is supposed to perform the other services such as servicing, repairing etc. the service
has to be declared in this window.
Figure 5.8: Workplace Window
44
Figure 5.9: Supported Service Window
In order to declare the station that the operation at this station will be done by human
worker, in the tab of Importer, processing must be activated. Key in the name of Broker.
Priority of the station can be set if single worker is working for multiple stations. Importer
window of the process CA7-Pre is shown in figure 5.10 for example.
Figure 5.10: Importer Window

To setup the worker to transport the workpieces from one station to another, configure
on the Exit tab of the station configuration window of the from-station. Change the strategy
to Carry Part Away, select the Broker name. Then define the target station in the MU target
text box. Detail setting can be seen in figure 5.11. Repeat the configuration on all the stations
that need the workers to transport that are mentioned in section 4.2.2.
45
Figure 5.11: Exit Window
For applying the working shifts to the model, a Shift Calendar is added. Shift details
that are discussed in section 4.2.2 are added to the calendar. And then in the worker pool,
name of the shift calendar that the workers will work accordingly is added.
Figure 5.12: Shift Calendar Window
46
Figure 5.13: WorkerPool Window
5.3 Verification and Validation
Before the model is configured to the pull system as a part of verification and
validation, it is analysed to measure its performance in push system and approach of
Correlated Inspection(Law and Kelton, 1991) as shown in figure(5.14) is applied. The system
is run for a day and analysed the behaviour of the results. All the configurations such as:
- Shift Schedule(Shifts, Overtime, Breaks)
- Process Flow
- Workers Operation Time(Travelling, Handling, Machining)
- Workpiece Transportation, etc. are tuned up to get the closest representing model
compared to the real system.
After fine tuning, it was found out that the number of throughput is 724 per day while the
daily production rate of the real system is 721 per day.
Figure 5.14: The Correlation Inspection Approach(Law and Kelton)

Utilisation of the stations and the performance chart of each workers after verification
and validation are also recorded as shown in Figure 5.15 and Figure 5.16. Here in the worker
performance chart, it was described based on 24 hour basis. So that unplanned and paused
portions represents the break times of the workers.
47
Fgure 5.15: Summary of One Day Simulation
Figure 5.16: Utilisation of Stations
Figure 5.17: Performance Chart of Workers
48
5.4 Pull System Configuration
As it was discussed in section 4.2.5, the EPS Column final assembly line works as a
pull system. There is a warehouse after the packing station. In the model, after the finished
goods are packed into boxes(12 pcs/box) in packing station, these boxes are sent to the
kanban buffer. In Kanban buffer, minimum stock level, maximum stock level and initial
stock level are defined. Stocks from the Kanban buffer is withdrawn by the Kanban
singleproc. station in which the withdrawal rate, in another word, order arrival rate can be
defined.
Figure 5.18: Kanban Buffer Window
Figure 5.19: Kanban SingleProc. Station Window
49
Once the model is run, the Kanban buffer will have the initial stock and the Kanban
Singleproc will withdraw a box from Kanban buffer. Kanban buffer will withdraw one box in
each hour. Once the stock level in Kanban buffer gets to minimum stock level(2 boxes), the
Kanban source will produce a Kanban box that contains 12 Kanban cards. The assembly line
will start producing the finish goods and the packing station will collect 12 finished goods to
pack in a box. Afterwards, the box is forwarded to the Kanban buffer and the stock level will
raise. Transitions of the stock levels are shown in figure 5.19. When the stock level gets back
to maximum stock level(5 boxes), Kanban source will stop producing Kanban boxes and the
assembly line will stop producing finished goods.
50
Figure 5.20: Stock Level Transitions in Kanban Buffer
In this model, the initial stock level is set as 5 boxes.And the withdrawal rate is set as
1 hour constantly. So, In the first stage, once the model is run, a box from the buffer is
withdrawn. Therefore stock level at time zero show 4. After an hour as another box is
withdrawn again, the stock level drops down to 3. After another hour, as the stock level
reaches the minimum level (2 boxes), the Kanban source produces the Kanban boxes to start
the assembly operation. After producing a box of finished good, it is transferred to the
Kanban buffer and the stock level raised again to 3. The assembly line keeps producing the
finished goods till the stock level gets back to the maximum level(5 boxes). As the
withdrawal rate is set as 1 hour constant, at each hour, another box of stock will be taken
from the Kanban buffer. Here in this point, as the withdrawal rate in real system is working
on the production plan discussed in section 4.2.6, the model is modified to withdraw the
finished goods according to the production plan on next section.
51
5.5 Implementation of Production Plan
As the final assembly line is run according to the order plan, production plan table by
which the finished Electric Steering Columns from the warehouse will be withdrawn and
delivered to the customer is implemented in table file as shown in table 5.1. The production
plan table contains the planned orders(no. of finished goods) on each day of a month. The
finished goods withdrawal time is set to be at 3:00 pm (or) 15:00 for every day in the first
column of the delivery summary table as shown in table 5.2.
Table 5.1: Production Plan Table.
ITEM 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31TOTAL
PT22XX0264S 38 0 36 36 36 36 36 0 0 36 36 36 36 36 0 0 36 36 36 36 36 0 0 24 24 0 24 24 24 0 0 698
Once the model is initialized, the initial stock in the warehouse is created at the
maximum stock level, min and max values in the warehouse are defined and the piece count
in the delivery station is set as zero. First six columns of delivery summary table is created
for the planned orders. The delivery status is recorded in the delivery summary table
describing:
- Delivery Time
- Object Name in Model
- Number of Orders
- Product Name
- Attributes
- Order Quantity
- Delivered Quantity
- Delivery Shortage Check.
In order to control the delivery, a method is implemented in which the current stock in
the warehouse and delivery station are checked whether the order can be fulfilled or not.Till
in the warehouse, finished goods are counted in dozen packages. To deliver the finished
goods in piece count, the packages are unpacked into pieces in the delivery station after taken
out from the warehouse. The method checks the order and the stock level and if the stock is
enough for current order, the required number of boxes from the warehouse are requested and
unpacked and sum with the remaining quantity at the delivery station. The order is then
subtracted from the unpacked quantity. The remaining quantity is kept at the delivery station.
If the stock is enough to fulfil the requested order quantity, Delivery Shortage Check
is remarked as No meaning no delivery shortage in the delivery summary table. If the stock
is not enough to fulfil the requested order quantity, only the in hand stocks are delivered.
Delivery Shortage Check is remarked as Yes meaning there is a delivery shortage and the
value for Delivery shortage counter is counted up. When the stocks are available in
warehouse, a package is requested and unpacked to keep at the delivery station. Whenever
the stock level falls under Minimum Stock level, the assembly line starts production to
replenish the warehouse up to the maximum stock level.
52
The reorder quantity is defined as:
Reorder Quantity = Maximum Stock - Current Stock
When the model is ready to run, the event controller is set to run for a month(31 days). In the
early models, the minimum stock level is set to be 2 boxes and the maximum stock levels is
set to be 5. In this configuration, the model was observed to have many delivery shortages as
presented in table 5.2. The delivery status on each day of the month are described in the
Table 5.2: Delivery Summary Table Before Optimisation
delivery summary table as described. As it can be seen in the delivery summary table, 7
delivery shortages are observed in a month.
Figure 5.21: Initial Method
53
Figure 5.22: Method for Delivery Control
5.6 Optimisation Using Genetic Algorithm Wizard
In order to optimise the model to minimise the number of delivery shortages, genetic
algorithm wizard in Plan Simulation software is used. In the Genetic Algorithm Wizard, it
needs to describe the objective, Minimization or Maximization. And to define the number of
simulation runs, it needs to describe,
- Number of Generation
- Size of Generation and
- Observations per Generation
Figure 5.23: Genetic Algorithm Wizard Window

In the first generation, Plant Simulation evaluates the number of generations which
are entered as the Size of generation. In each of the following generations it has to evaluate
twice as many individuals. The number of simulation runs, which the GAWizard executes,
54
results from this formula:
Number of simulation runs = observations per individual * (generation size + 2 *
generation size * (number of generations - 1))
For the case, it is using 20 observations for evaluating an individual and create 5
generations with a frequently used Size of generation of 10, Plant Simulation has to execute
1800 simulation runs (20(10+2104)).
For the optimisation parameter, lower bound, upper bound and increment value of
the variables in the optimisation process are described as shown in figure 5.23.
Figure 5.24: Optimisation Parameter Table

For the fitness calculation, the names of the target values are described. When the
fitness value is determined by several target values, their weighting factors must be described
as well. Here in this case, though the main objective is to minimise the delivery shortages,
the levels of minimum and maximum stock levels are also required to keep as low as
possible. So, there are three target values in the fitness table with respective weighting factors
as shown in figure 5.24.
Figure 5.25: Fitness Parameter Table

For the statistical reliability, the number of observations is defined to be 20 for the
current case. After setting up all the required configurations for the optimisation, the GA
wizard is run. After some simulation time, the optimisation results are generated as shown in
figure 5.26. After the optimisation performance the optimum values for the minimum stock
level and maximum stock level are observed to be 3 boxes and 6 boxes. The number of
delivery shortage in a month is observed to be zero meaning no delivery shortage. The
withdrawal and replenishment statistics of the inventory in the warehouse for a month are
plotted in the graph as shown in figure 5.27.
55
Figure 5.26: Optimised Results
Table 5.3:Delivery Summary Table After Optimisation
56
Figure 5.27: Stock Level Graph After Optimisation
As the initial stock level is set at maximum stock level, at the beginning, the stock
level starts at 6 boxes of finished goods. On the first day, 48 pieces are withdrawn. To deliver
48 pieces, the warehouse needs to provide 4 boxes delivering 3 boxes and 2 pieces to the
customer and keeps the 10 rest pieces in the delivery station. As the inventory level fell down
to 2 boxes under minimum stock level(3boxes), the assembly line starts producing.
For the first day, reorder quantity is 4 boxes of finished goods. On the second day
there is no activity as there is no planned order for that day. On the third day, the planned
order, 3 boxes were withdrawn and the stock level fell down to the minimum stock level. The
warehouse was replenished again up to 6 boxes. The system goes on in similar behaviour for
the following days as it can be seen in figure 5.27. Day by day records of the inventory levels
in the warehouse are described in the following figures.
57
Figure 5.28: Inventory Level on Day1-Day3
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
Figure 5.38: Inventory Level on Day31
According to the delivery summary table and the daily stock level graphs, it can be
concluded that the model is optimised for no delivery shortage at the minimal inventory in
stock to minimise the inventory cost. Here the optimisation is considered based on monthly
basis. Even in case for the quarterly basis or batch by batch basis, the basic model can be
used to play with the desired scenario for optimising the most suitable inventory level.
68
Chapter 6
Conclusion And Recommendations
6.1 Conclusion
The purpose of this study is to analyse the performance measures of the assembly line
and find out the optimum inventory setting to minimise the Delivery Shortages. Over the
study during this project, it can be concluded as follow:
1. All the line information of the final assembly line under study are collected from a Tire 1
Power Steering Supplier Company including some historical data and observed data.
Samples of the observations were processed to have appropriate input data for simulation
model in chapter 4.
2. Tecnomatix Plant Simulation is used to model the assembly line based on the processed
data. Initially, it observes the performance of the final assembly line at full capacity
(modelled in Push System). In this phase, the model is calibrated to verify and validate with
the real system as discussed in section 5.3.
3. The line performance of the assembly line in pull system is observed using Plant
Simulation (modelled in Pull System) as described in section 5.4.
4. Real Scenario of production according to monthly delivery plan is implemented and
observed the weaknesses(Delivery Shortages) in section 5.5.
5. Optimisation of the model was performed and an optimised inventory setup to minimise
the Delivery Shortages is proposed in section 5.6.
6.2 Recommendation
Some possible future studies on assembly line analysis and improvement are
recommended as follow:
1. Sub-assembly lines for the sub assemblies supplied to the final assembly line can be
modelled and integrate with the existing final assembly line to observe more realistic
behaviour.
2. Warehouse with the inventory management model supplying the outsourced components
can be implement and integrate with the existing final assembly line to observe more realistic
behaviour.
69
REFERENCES
- Jovisevic, S., Jovisevic, V., & Jokanovic, S. (2009, December). Modeling, Simulation and
Optimization of Process Planning. Journal of Production Engineering, 12(1), 87-90.
- TAKO, A. A.; ROBINSON, S. Model development in discrete-event simulation and system
dinymics: an empirical study of experts modellers. European Journal of Operational
Research, v. 207, n. 2, p. 784-794, 2010.
- BANKS, J.; CARSON II, J. S.; NELSON, B. L.; NICOL, D. M. Discrete-event simulation.
5th New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 2010.
- SANDANAYAKE, Y. G.; ODUOZA, C. F.; PROVERBS, D. G. A systematic modeling and
simulation approach for JIT performance optimization. Robotics and Computer- Integrated
Manufacturing, v. 24, n. 6, p. 735-743, 2008.
- HERNANDEZ, M. A. G.; LIBRANTZ, A. F. H. Improvement of the supply chain for the
sugar cane exportation process employing discrete event simulation techniques. Acta
Scientiarum. Technology, v. 35, n. 4, p. 637-643, 2013.
- RYAN, J.; HEAVEY, C. Process modeling for simulation. Computers in Industry, v. 57, n.
5, p. 437-450, 2006.
- HILLIER, F. S.; LIEBERMAN, G. J. Introduction to operations research. 9th ed. New
York: McGraw-Hill, 2010.
- LEAL, F.; COSTA, R. F. S.; MONTEVECHI, J. A. B.; ALMEIDA, D. A.; MARINS, F. A.
S. A practical guide for operational validation of discrete event simulation models. Pesquisa
Operacional, v. 31, n. 1, p. 57-77, 2011.
- PEREIRA, T. F.; MOTEVECHI, J. A. B.; MIRANDA, R. C.; FRIEND, J. D. Integrating
soft systems methodology to aid simulation conceptual modeling. International
Transactions in Operational Research, v. 22, n. 2, p. 265-285, 2015.
- SARGENT, R. G. Verification and validation of simulation models. Journal of Simulation,
v. 7, n. 1, p. 12-24, 2012.
- LAW, A. M., KELTON, W. D., 1991, Simulation Modeling and Analysis. Mc. Graw - Hill.
Inc
70
Appendix A
Init Method
Var tb:table[string,integer,boolean,string,real,time,date,datetime,object,length,weight,speed]
Delivery_Order.Delete
KanbanBuffer.Init_Kanban := KanbanBuffer.Max_Kanban
Kanban_Chart.MyAnnotation["Value",1] := KanbanBuffer.Min_Kanban
Kanban_Chart.MyAnnotation["Value",2] := KanbanBuffer.Max_Kanban
Kanban_Chart.Annotations := Kanban_Chart.MyAnnotation
Kanban_Chart.YScaleMax := KanbanBuffer.Max_Kanban * 1.25
Kanban_Plotter.YScaleMax := KanbanBuffer.Max_Kanban * 1.25
Kanban_Plotter.XRange := EventController.End
for var i := 1 to KanbanBuffer.Init_Kanban
.SNSS_MU.Box_PT22XX0264S.Create(KanbanBuffer)
next
Packing.Flag := 0
Delivery.Part_Unbox := 0
EventController.Date := str_to_datetime(to_str(Order_Plan[2,1]) + "/" + Order_Plan[1,1] + "/
1" + " 00:00:00")
for var i := 3 to Order_Plan.XDim
for var j := 1 to Order_Plan.YDim
if Order_Plan[i,j] /= 0
Delivery_Order[6,Delivery_Order.YDim + 1] := Order_Plan[i,j]
Delivery_Order[4,Delivery_Order.YDim] := Order_Plan[0,j]
Delivery_Order[3,Delivery_Order.YDim] := 1
Delivery_Order[2,Delivery_Order.YDim] :=
str_to_obj(".SNSS_MU.Box_" + Order_Plan[0,j])
Delivery_Order[1,Delivery_Order.YDim] :=
str_to_datetime(to_str(Order_Plan[2,j]) + "/" + Order_Plan[1,j] + "/" + Order_Plan[i,0] + "
15:00:00")
tb.create
tb.ColumnWidth := 10
tb[1,1] := "No"
tb[2,1] := Delivery_Order.YDim
tb[1,2] := "QTY"
tb[2,2] := Order_Plan[i,j]
Delivery_Order[5,Delivery_Order.YDim] := tb
tb.forget
end
next
next
71
Delivery Control Method
if @.QTY <= (KanbanBuffer.numMu * 12) + Delivery.Part_Unbox

for var i := 1 to Ceil((@.QTY-Delivery.Part_Unbox)/12)
KanbanBuffer.Cont.Move
Delivery.Cont.Move
next
Delivery.Part_Unbox := Delivery.Part_Unbox + (Ceil((@.QTY-
Delivery.Part_Unbox)/12) * 12) - @.QTY
Delivery_Order["Delivered",@.No] := @.QTY
Delivery_Order["DeliveryShortest",@.No] := "No"
@.Move
if KanbanBuffer.NumMu <= KanbanBuffer.Min_Kanban
for var i := 1 to KanbanBuffer.Max_Kanban - KanbanBuffer.NumMu
.SNSS_MU.Box_PT22XX0264S.Create(KanbanSource)
next
end
else
Delivery_Order["Delivered",@.No] := (KanbanBuffer.numMu * 12) +
Delivery.Part_Unbox
for var i := 1 to KanbanBuffer.numMu
KanbanBuffer.Cont.Move
Delivery.Cont.Move
next
Delivery_Order["DeliveryShortest",@.No] := "Yes"
Delivery_Shortest := Delivery_Shortest + 1
@.Move
for var i := 1 to KanbanBuffer.Max_Kanban - KanbanBuffer.NumMu
.SNSS_MU.Box_PT22XX0264S.Create(KanbanSource)
next
end
72

MastersDegreeThesisFinalReport PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MastersDegreeThesisFinalReport PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assembly Line Balancing and Optimization Using SIEMENS

Tecnomatix Plant Simulation: A Case Study In An Electric Power

Zay Yar Myint

A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the

Examination Committee: Associate Prof. Erik L.J. Bohez (Co-Chairperson)

Scholarship Donor: AIT Fellowship

Asian Institute of Technology

Chapter Title Page

4 Description of System Under Study 25

4 4.2.3 Plant Layout of Electrical Power Steering Column 36

5 Model Development and Optimisation 41

6 Conclusion and Recommendation 69

Figure Title Page

5.10 Importer Window 45

5.13 WorkerPool Window 47

Table Title Page

2.2 Terminology Used in Assembly Line Balancing.

Figure 2.1: An example of Precedence Graph

2.3 Assembly Line Balancing Problems

2.3.1 Classifications of assembly line systems.

Figure 2.2: Single Model Assembly lines

Figure 2.3: Mixed-Model Assembly lines

Figure 2.4: Multi-Model Assembly lines

2.4 Aspects of Line Balancing

Does model work right? Is it a right model?

Figure 2.5: Simplified Version of the Modeling Process

Functionally, simulation can:

Optimal buffer sizes

Number of transporters and AGVs

Number o the workpiece carriers

Production schedules and sequences

Additionally, simulation can also

Validate the process design in the planning process

Identify the bottleneck

Evaluate the effects of capital investments or changes in processes

Optimize control strategies

Avoid planning errors

Determine and optimize the times and throughput

Determine the dimensioning

Determine the limits of performance

Investigate the influence of failures

Gain Knowledge about the behavior of the facility

Determine suitable control strategies

Evaluate different alternatives.

And it also can be used to optimize existing facility by

Optimizing control strategies

Optimizing the sequence of orders

Testing the daily proceedings.

Simulation is also useful to execute a management plan as it can

Provide a template for creating the control strategies

Test different scenarios during the warm-up phase of the facility

Experiment and Analyze Model

Figure 2.6: Methodology Flow Chart for Simulation Study

Figure 2.7: Time-Oriented vs. Event-Oriented Simulation

2D and 3D Modeling Environments

Figure 2.8: Modeling of process planning in 2D environment

Modeling in 2D environment, shown in Figure 2.3, is applied to complex optimization

Objects Available in Each License Type

Built-in Materialflow objects: Connector, EventController, Frame, Interface, Source, Drain,

Resource objects: Workplace, Footpath, WorkerPool, Worker, Exporter, Broker,

Information Flow objects: Method, Variable, TableFile, FileInterface, and FileLink.

Mobile Units: Entity, Container, and Transporter.