Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
a r t i c l e in fo
abstract
Article history:
Received 25 October 2006
Accepted 11 December 2008
On-line el 19 January 2009
The concept of heijunkacontrolling the variability of the job arrival sequence to permit
higher capacity utilizationplays an integral role in lean production theory. In
situations where the customer denes the delivery sequence, however, scheduling
production to maximize utilization becomes more challenging and requires a
subsequent reordering. The cost of the extra work and space required by this reordering
needs to be traded off against the value of the higher utilization. We present the results
of a stylized simulation-based model of the two approaches inspired by a BMW engine
plant.
& 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Just in sequence
Heijunka
Lean production
Simulation
Scheduling
0. Introduction
Production systems must always balance inventory,
capacity utilization, and system variability according to
the laws of Factory Physics (Hopp and Spearman, 1996).
de Treville and Antonakis (2006) took the concept a step
further, proposing to dene lean production according to
its Factory Physics. Lean production thus dened calls for
high capacity utilization combined with relatively low
inventories, requiring that system variability (concerning
both arrival and service rates) be minimized. Many lean
production practices serve to either control inventory
buildup (kanban) or to reduce system variability (through
defects, unplanned downtime, exposure to worker absenteeism, etc.). The lean production practice that protects
the producer from variability in the sequence of jobs to be
processed is heijunka, in which production is scheduled
such that the production line produces the same sequence
of products throughout a given time period, with that
sequence alternating between demanding and less demanding products. The assumption underlying heijunka is
ARTICLE IN PRESS
502
1. Heijunka
The objective of heijunka is to avoid peaks and valleys
in the production schedule. Consider, for example, a
workstation that produces two products, A and B, with A
requiring 1.5 min, and B requiring 1 min of processing,
respectively. Suppose that the company receives an order
for 100 units of both A and B. A nave schedule would
be to produce 100 units of one product and then 100
units of the other, resulting in a situation in which the
demand faced by the workstation would vary considerably. Transport this workstation to a production line with
a cycle time of 1.4 min, and the workstation is overloaded
(and a bottleneck for the entire line) for 100 cycles and
underloaded for another 100 cycles. Accommodating this
schedule requires increasing the cycle time for the entire
line, at least during the period when A is being produced.
On many production lines it is not realistic to change the
cycle time to accommodate such workload uctuations
(this would not be possible at the BMW engine plant
described in this paper, for example), hence this workstation might well be obliged to operate at relatively low
average capacity utilization.
Heijunka calls for distributing the jobs requiring more
labor input throughout the production schedule to permit
higher average utilization assuming that the cycle time is
held constant over time. In our simple example, products
A and B would be alternated, so that the workstation
could either work in lots of one unit of A and one unit
of B, with cycle time determined based on the combined
work content of 1.5+1.0 2.5 min, or allowing the workstation to get a bit behind during the cycle when A is
produced, catching up during the cycle when B is
produced. Monden (1983) suggested a simple algorithm
for heijunka scheduling that has been used in practice.
Heijunka (also referred to as production smoothing or
leveling the production schedule) has played an integral
role in just-in-time and lean production since its inception
(Schonberger, 1982; Hall, 1983; Monden, 1983; Womack et
al., 1990; Chase, 1993; Hopp and Spearman, 1996;
Fujimoto, 1999). Abdulmalek and Rajgopal (2007), for
example, described use of heijunka (implemented using
Mondens algorithm) as one of several lean production
practices implemented on the cold end of an integrated
steel mill.
Teece et al. (1997) referred to heijunka as an example
of a dynamic manufacturing capability or routine that
ARTICLE IN PRESS
ttmeir et al. / Int. J. Production Economics 118 (2009) 501507
A. Hu
3. BMW
Along the lines discussed in the previous two sections,
BMW faced a choice between heijunka and JIS production
in one of their European engine factories in 2003. The
engine plant had historically been organized around the
concept of heijunka, permitting extremely stable production and a high utilization (ranging between 95% and
99%). The smoothing of the production schedule was
carried out by the advanced planner and optimizer (APO)
module of the SAP/R3 system. Engines were delivered to
the customer (the assembly plants) approximately in the
order in which they were produced.
503
ARTICLE IN PRESS
504
ARTICLE IN PRESS
ttmeir et al. / Int. J. Production Economics 118 (2009) 501507
A. Hu
505
80
WIP [engines]
70
60
50
JIS: 50 sec
40
30
Heijunka: 50 sec
20
10
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
800
700
80
50 sec
WIP [engines]
70
60
50
40
51 sec
30
53 sec
20
10
WIP [engines]
450
400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
100
200
400
600
300
500
Time [in thousands of seconds]
700
800
50 sec
51 sec
100
200
300
500
400
600
Time [in thousands of seconds]
700
800
Fig. 2. WIP for different scenarios of JIS, heijunka and partial heijunka: (a) JIS versus heijunka with a cycle time of 50 s, (b) JIS with cycle times of 50, 51
and 53 s, and (c) partial heijunka with cycle times of 50, 51 and 53 s.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
ttmeir et al. / Int. J. Production Economics 118 (2009) 501507
A. Hu
506
450
400
WIP [engines]
350
300
JIS: 50 sec
250
Heijunka: 50 sec
200
150
100
Heijunka: 52 sec
JIS: 52 sec
50
0
100
200
300
400
500
Time [in thousandsof seconds]
600
700
800
Fig. 3. The impact of rework on WIP for different scenarios of JIS and heijunka. Rework causes WIP to explode for both the JIS and heijunka scenarios.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
ttmeir et al. / Int. J. Production Economics 118 (2009) 501507
A. Hu
507
Pietsch, D., 2002. Das neue Vertriebs- und Produktionssystem der BMW
Group-Kundenorientierter Vertriebs- und Produktionsproze (KOVP).
ZfAW (BMW), 4551.
Prenninger, J., 2001. Neue Anforderungen an eine Werksubergreifende
LogistikInnovationen im Bereich der Logistikkette Motor bei.
Gabler Verlag, BMW.
Prince, J., Kay, J., 2003. Combining lean and agile characteristics: creation
of virtual groups by enhanced production ow analysis. International
Journal of Production Economics 85, 305318.
Rinehart, J., 1997. After lean production: evolving employment practices in
the world auto industry. American Journal of Sociology, 12121214.
Sayer, A., 1986. New developments in manufacturing: the just-in-time
system. Capital & Class 10, 4371.
Schonberger, R.J., 1982. Japanese Manufacturing Techniques: Nine
Hidden Lessons in Simplicity. Free Press, New York.
Selto, F.H., Renner, C.J., Young, S.M., 1995. Assessing the organizational t
of a just-in-time manufacturing system: testing selection, interaction, and systems models of contingency theory. Accounting,
Organizations & Society 20 (7/8), 665684.
Shah, R., Ward, P.T., 2003. Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles,
and performance. Journal of Operations Management 21, 129149.
Suri, R., 2003. QRM and POLCA: a winning combination for manufacturing enterprises in the 21st century. Technical Report, QRM Center,
University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI.
Suri, R., de Treville, S., 1986. Getting from just-in-case to just-in-time:
insights from a simple model. Journal of Operations Management 6
(3), 295304.
Teece, D.J., Pisano, G., Shuen, A., 1997. Dynamic capabilities and strategic
management. Strategic Management Journal 18 (7), 509533.
Trebilcock, B., 2006. Building a new supply chain. Modern Materials
Handling 61 (1), 32.
Van Hoek, R.I., 2001. The rediscovery of postponement: a literature
review and directions for research. Journal of Operations Management 19 (2), 161184.
Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., Roos, D., 1990. The Machine that Changed the
World. Harper Collins Publishers, New York.
Yao, A.C., Carlson, J.G.H., 2003. Agility and mixed-model furniture
production. International Journal of Production Economics 8182,
95102.