Scribd
Upload
99 views4 pages

Line Balancing Approach

The document discusses two approaches to line balancing: 1. The line balancing approach aims to evenly distribute workload among workstations to minimize the number of workers needed while maintaining production rate. 2. The region approach improves on previous methods by assigning tasks based on precedence and time requirements. It divides tasks into precedence regions and prioritizes larger, less dependent tasks first within each region. Tasks are assigned to stations to maximize station efficiency. The approach guarantees optimal balancing.

Uploaded by

MadhuShakthi
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
99 views4 pages

Line Balancing Approach

The document discusses two approaches to line balancing: 1. The line balancing approach aims to evenly distribute workload among workstations to minimize the number of workers needed while maintaining production rate. 2. The region approach improves on previous methods by assigning tasks based on precedence and time requirements. It divides tasks into precedence regions and prioritizes larger, less dependent tasks first within each region. Tasks are assigned to stations to maximize station efficiency. The approach guarantees optimal balancing.

Uploaded by

MadhuShakthi
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 4

The Line Balancing Approach: The line balancing problem, historically evolved from the mass production assembly

line, where tasks required in the assembly process had to be apportioned to workers in such a fashion that worker effort was somewhat equalized and the number of workers minimized while a specified production rate was maintained. This process of balancing the workload among all workstations equally is called line balancing. Region Approach: An improvement on the Helgeson-Birnie approach that will guarantee optimality was suggested by Mansoor. This approach involves interchanging tasks after an initial balance has been realized. Because the approach guarantees optimality, the combination of tasks that qualify for interchange can become extremely cumbersome and thus infeasible for large networks. The procedure entails following philosophy: 1. Operations that have heavy precedence responsibility should be scheduled early. 2. In line with proposition 1, a fallacy of the Helgeson-Birnie approach is that an operation with a large associated time might take precedence over one with a heavy dependence responsibilities if several of the dependent operations have small associated times. Steps involved in Region approach: 1. Develop the precedence network in normal manner. 2. Assign precedence regions from left to right. Redraw the network, assigning all tasks to the latest precedence region possible; this will ensure that tasks with few dependencies will atleast be considered for assignment late in the schedule. 3. Within each precedence region rank tasks from maximum to minimum duration times. This will ensure that largest task will be considered first, giving the chance for a better combination of smaller tasks later. Assigning most of the small tasks early is one problem with some Helgeson-Birnie solution. 4. Assign tasks by the following sequence, conforming to process zone restrictions. a) Leftmost region first. b) Within a region, largest task first. 5. At the end of each station assignment, decide if the time utilization is acceptable. If not, check all tasks whose predecessor relations have been satisfied. Determine if utilization will increase if any assigned tasks are changed for any task(s) within the station whose predecessor region(s) are equal to or earlier than the tasks being considered for entry into the station. If yes, make the change. This station assignment is now final.

Explanation with example: Step 1: Develop the network


4

7
21

2
1 5 3 4 3 13 3

10

11 6
7 5 1

15

16

17

20

5
9
8

8 7

12
13 7 5 2 3 14 19 18

Step 2: Redraw the network


4

2 10
3 4 1 5 3 13 3

21

11 6
7 5 1

15

16

17

20

5
9
8

8 7

12
13 7 5 2 3 19 18

II

III

IV

VI

VII

VIII

IX

XI

14

XII

Step 3: Task priorities, according to decreasing task times within regions as given;

Region I II III IV V VI VII VIII IX X XI XII

Tasks 1 3 4 5 7,6 8 9 11,10,12 15 13,16 17,18,14,2 21,20,19

Step 4: Assignment of tasks to stations as given: Station 1 2 3 Tasks 1,3,4,2 5,7,6 8,9,11,10,12,14,13 Comments Station time=21 Station time=21 12 and 14 originally assigned for a station time of 20. Task 13 has predecessor assigned(9) and so was interchanged with 12 and 14 to give a Station time of 21 Original assignment did not include 21(Station time=19); 21 was interchanged with 14 and 19 to give a station time of 21 Station time=21

12,15,16,18,14,19,21

17,14,20,19

Conclusion: This solution has to be optimum, because all stations now have a 100 percent station efficiency. The advantage of attempting to improve only the last station balance according to some acceptable utilization factor lies with the fact that each station should have only a few operations within it, and relatively few tasks should be eligible for switching into the station. Thus, possible improvements should be readily apparent, as in the example. A disadvantage in attempting to optimize each stations as the balances are made stems from the fact that the good combinations of large and small tasks might be used early in the balance, forcing possible bad balances later in the line.

You might also like