line balancing

Assembly line balancing in a mixed-model sequencing environment with synchronous transfers

Selçuk Karabatı and Serpil Sayın,

College of Administrative Sciences and Economics, Koç University, Rumeli Feneri Yolu, Sarıyer, stanbul 80910, Turkey


Available online 24 January 2003.




References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.


Abstract
We consider the assembly line balancing problem in a mixed-model line which is operated under a cyclic sequencing approach. We specifically study the problem in an assembly line environment with synchronous transfer of parts between the stations. We formulate the assembly line balancing problem with the objective of minimizing total cycle time by incorporating the cyclic sequencing information. We show that the solution of a mathematical model that combines multiple models into a single one by adding up operation times constitutes a lower bound for this formulation. As an approximate solution to the original problem, we propose an alternative formulation that suggests to minimize the maximum subcycle time. We also develop a simple heuristic approach for this alternative problem. We provide computational results that compare the various approaches we discuss.

Author Keywords: Mixed-model assembly lines; Cyclic scheduling; Assembly line balancing

Article Outline
1. Introduction
2. The mixed-model assembly line balancing problem
2.1. Problem formulation
2.2. A special case
2.3. Using total processing times as a lower bounding approach
3. Minimizing the maximum subcycle time as an approximate solution procedure
3.1. Formulation
3.2. A heuristic approach
4. Computational experiments
5. Conclusion
References





Fig. 1. Precedence relationship diagrams.


View Within Article




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Table 1. Processing times for sequence σ



View Within Article


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Table 2. Summary of notation used in reporting computational results



View Within Article


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Table 3. Computational results for Buxey (P1, 7 stations, 29 operations), Gunther (P2, 6 stations, 35 operations) and Lutz 1 (P3, 8 stations, 32 operations) data sets



View Within Article


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Table 4. Computational results for Arcus 1 (P1, 12 stations, 83 operations), Warnecke (P2, 6 stations, 58 operations), Lutz 3 (P3, 6 stations, 89 operations), Hahn (P4, 6 stations, 53 operations) and Bartholdi (P5, 9 stations, 148 operations) data sets



View Within Article


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Table 5. CPU times (seconds) for Buxey (P1, 7 stations, 29 operations), Gunther (P2, 6 stations, 35 operations) and Lutz 1 (P3, 8 stations, 32 operations) data sets



View Within Article