CHAPTER-1

INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION ABOUT THE STUDY

Assembly line balancing can be loosely defined as the process of optimizing an

assembly line with regard to certain factors. Configuring an assembly line is a
complicated process, and optimizing that system is an important part of many
manufacturing business models. Maintaining and operating one is often quite costly,
as well. The main focus of balancing is usually to optimize existing or planned
assembly lines to minimize costs and maximize gains.

Assembly lines are one of the most widely used production systems. Productivity of
a manufacturing system can be defined as the amount of work that can be
accomplished per unit time using the available resources. Pritchard(1995) defines
assembly line productivity as how well a production system uses its resources to
achieve production goals at optimal costs.The conventional productivity metrics,
namely throughput and utilization rate gives a substantial measure of the
performance of an assembly line.

These two metrics alone are not adequate to completely represent the behavior of a
production system Huang et al (2003). A set of other measures such as assembly
line capacity, production lead time, number of value added (VA) and non-value
added (NVA) activities, work-in-process, material handling, operator motion
distances, line configuration and others, along with the throughput and utilization rate,
completely characterize the performance of a production system. An assembly line
yields optimal performance by an optimal setting of all these factors.

Flexibility and agility are the key factors in developing efficient and competitive
production systems. For products manufacturing and assembly, this level of flexibility
can be easily achieved through the use of manual assembly systems. Manual
assembly lines are most common and conventional and still provide an attractive and
sufficient means production for products that require fewer production steps and
simple assembly processes. Global competition is forcing firms to lower production
costs and at the same time improve quality with lower production lead times.

To optimize very specific operations, balancing an assembly line might require

different methods, some of which include equations and algorithms concerning
specific aspects of the manufacturing process. Complex manufacturing processes,
such as making automobiles in large quantities, can be broken down into smaller
parts, such as individual task times or the resource demands for each machine. This
might be especially helpful in manufacturing processes that require the consideration
of many variables, such as customized vehicles. Assembly line balancing can also
guide decision-making based on the multitude of variables that can affect the
manufacturing process.

Many times, this process might be used as support in decision making by offering
many different models and types of data. With the introduction of Lean
Manufacturing, this systematically and continuously identifies and eliminates waste
 at all levels of a production system, many improvement opportunities which
substantially increase the assembly line productivity can be successfully
implemented.

1.2 INDUSTRY PROFILE:

A drilling rig is a machine that ​creates holes ​in the earth's subsurface. Drilling rigs
can be massive structures housing equipment used to drill water wells, oil wells, or
natural gas extraction wells, or they can be small enough to be moved manually by
one person and such are called ​augers​. Drilling rigs can sample subsurface mineral
deposits, test rock, soil and groundwater physical properties, and also can be used
to install sub-surface fabrications, such as underground utilities, instrumentation,
tunnels or wells. Drilling rigs can be mobile equipment mounted on trucks, tracks or
trailers, or more permanent land or marine-based structures (such as ​oil platforms​,
commonly called 'offshore oil rigs' even if they don't contain a drilling rig). The term
"rig" therefore generally refers to the complex equipment that is used to penetrate
the surface of the Earth's ​crust​.

Small to medium-sized drilling rigs are mobile, such as those used in mineral
exploration drilling, blast-hole, water wells and environmental investigations. Larger
rigs are capable of drilling through thousands of metres of the ​Earth'​s crust, using
large "​mud pumps​" to circulate ​drilling mud ​(slurry) through the ​drill bit ​and up the
casing ​annulus​, for cooling and removing the "cuttings" while a well is drilled. Hoists
in the rig can lift hundreds of​tons​of ​pipe​. Other equipment can force ​acid ​or sand into
reservoirs to facilitate extraction of the oil or natural gas; and in remote locations
there can be permanent living accommodation and catering for crews (which may be
more than a hundred). Marine rigs may operate thousands of miles distant from the
supply base with infrequent crew rotation or cycle.

There are many types and designs of drilling rigs, with many drilling rigs capable of
switching or combining different drilling technologies as needed. Drilling rigs can be
described using any of the following attributes:

By power used

● Mechanical — the rig uses torque converters, clutches, and transmissions

powered by its own engines, often diesel

● Electric — the major items of machinery are driven by electric motors, usually
with power generated on-site using internal combustion engines
 ● Hydraulic — the rig primarily uses hydraulic power

● Pneumatic — the rig is primarily powered by pressurized air

● Steam — the rig uses steam-powered engines and pumps (obsolete after
middle of 20th Century.)

By pipe used

● Cable — a cable is used to raise and drop the drill bit

● Conventional — uses metal or plastic drill pipe of varying types

● Coil tubing ​— uses a giant coil of tube and a downhole drilling motor

By height

● Single — can pull only single drill pipes. The presence or absence of vertical
pipe racking "fingers" varies from rig to rig.

● Double — can hold a stand of pipe in the derrick consisting of two connected
drill pipes, called a "double stand".

● Triple — can hold a stand of pipe in the derrick consisting of three connected
drill pipes, called a "triple stand".

● Quadri — can store stand of pipe in the derrick composed of four connected
drill pipes, called a "quadri stand".

By method of rotation or drilling method

● No-rotation includes direct push rigs and most service rigs

● Rotary table ​— rotation is achieved by turning a square or hexagonal pipe

(the "Kelly") at drill floor level.

● Top drive ​— rotation and circulation is done at the top of the drill string, on a
motor that moves in a track along the derrick.

● Sonic — uses primarily vibratory energy to advance the drill string

● Hammer — uses rotation and percussive force.

By position of derrick

● Conventional —​derrick​is vertical

● Slant — ​derrick ​is slanted at a 45 degree angle to facilitate horizontal drilling.

1.3 COMPANY PROFILE

PRD RIGS Founded in 1972, under the leadership of Mr. T. P. Thangaraj,

Chairman of PRD groups, is a leading manufacturer of drilling and Exploration Rigs.
PRD expanded their export division, Paranthaman Exporters and have exported over
350 rigs to various countries worldwide. They have been awarded with Regional
Export Awards , from the Government of INDIA, for outstanding export performance
consecutively from the year 2005 to 2014. Since the demand for its rigs in the
African continent has grown considerably and spread in 30 countries.
PRD RIGS have established our Sales & Service in Kenya, South Africa &
Ghana and these outlets are besides our dealership network in Ethiopia, Nigeria,
Australia, Malaysia, Brazil, Mexico, Srilanka, Jordan, Dubai, Oman and network will
continue. Today, as the market demand is growing for the mining and construction
equipment, The company has began to diversify its efforts by developing and
manufacturing a wide range of drilling machinery for the mineral exploration and
geotechnical markets. Applications - Water Well drilling rig, Pilling rig, Geotechnical
rig, Blast Hole Rig, Core Drilling Rig, Reverse Circulation rig and other Customized
rigs.
They are a successful and well proven design complete with full dual derrick
enhancements to ensure optimal operational efficiency. Special consideration has
been given to creating a safe working environment. All units are environment friendly,
designed for zero discharge systems and low emissions. The DP Class 3 dynamic
positioning system has proven its station-keeping abilities under extreme conditions
in harsh environment.
Their products cover 12 series with over 200 kinds, including truck-mounted
drilling rigs, skid-mounted drilling rigs, trailer-mounted drilling rigs, work over rigs,
logging equipments, etc. Especially, PRD RIGS firstly proposed an idea for portable
drilling equipments with characteristic of quick-carrying and operation automation in
China, and put it into the development of portable drilling equipments. PRD RIGS
developed the first 3000m truck-mounted drilling rig in China and was awarded the
state-level second-class award of advance science and technology, awarded the
national recognition with the Shenzhou V Spacecraft, and the award is the highest
science and technology award in the petroleum equipments industry till now.
 4000m truck-mounted drilling rig and 4000m trailer-mounted drilling rig developed
by PRD RIGS is the largest self-propelled drilling equipment in the worldwide, with
high-competitive in the international market, providing the advanced drilling
equipment for factory drilling.
Vision
"PRD RIGS aims to be a world class player in the drilling equipment
business."
Mission Statement
"To fulfill our vision of becoming a world class player in the Drilling industry, it
is our mission to be 100% customer driven, thus becoming a preferred partner &
supplier to discerning customers worldwide"
Quality Policy
PRD RIGS aims to be a preferred supplier in all geographical arenas by
providing customized products in drilling and capturing the emerging trend in related
fields including mining and exploration to fulfill customer satisfaction.
It is committed to satisfy and meet / exceed our customers' expectations by
providing high quality drilling products and reliable solutions on time, every time and
"ready-to-go" for its drilling needs.It believes in maintaining strong and healthy
business relationships with its customers by offering optimum quality range of
products at industry leading prices. With 3 decades of experience to bank upon, it
constantly upgrades its existing products to attain complete customer satisfaction. It
has been able to leave a mark on its domestic as well as international markets of
Africa, Middle East, Australia and Asia due to our all round excellence and ethical
business practices
PRD RIGS is committed to providing its customers with products and services
of the highest quality and always viewed continuous improvement of company
processes and complete satisfaction of customers’ needs as essential factors for
standing out on the highly complex, competitive oil and gas market.It strives to
systematically improve our processes, products and services in order to surpass the
ever increasing expectations of value and quality. Customer focus, work process
improvement measurement and a supportive work environment form the basic
elements of its continuous improvement process.
Corporate Policies:
It runs its business in accordance with the principles of strong corporate governance,
safety for its personnel, the environment and our assets, a clear system of
management accountability, and a set of values and policies which guide its ethical
behavior.
 CHAPTER-2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Sabatini, H., Sharanya, V.,Sakthivel Anand, G. and Deepak Lawrence, K. (2010):

‘Productivity enhancement in the assembly line of a horn manufacturing company’, ​In
this paper, machine layout, operator idleness, operator fatigue and time loss in an
assembly line of a horn manufacturing industry are investigated using the concepts
of time study, method study and work design. This paper demonstrates a practical
approach to applying work-study principles in assembly line-based manufacturing
firms.
Journal: Int. J. Management Practice, Vol. 4, No. 2, pp.200–215.

Olcay Polat, Can B. Kalayci, Özcan Mutlu and Surendra M. Gupta (2015): ​‘A two-
phase variable neighborhood search algorithm for assembly line worker assignment
and balancing problem type-II’. I​ n this study, a two-phase VNS algorithm was
proposed to solve the assembly line worker assignment and balancing problem
(ALWABP-2). The results of this case study showed that the gain from assigning
workers according to operation execution times considering skills and experiences of
workers should be more than performing work study analyses in industrial
applications. Solving ALWABP is more important for systems which have non-
identical workers in terms of their skills and operation times.

Journal: International Journal of Production Research.

Mustapha Sali, EvrenSahin (2016): ​‘Line feeding optimization for Just in Time
assembly lines: An application to the automotive industry’. ​This paper proposes an
optimization model that assigns each individual component to the most efficient line
feeding mode among three alternatives which are line stocking, kitting and
sequencing modes. The developed mixed integer program is applied to a first tier
supplier plant in the automotive sector. Based on this model, insight is gained on the
trade-off to be considered when deciding the more appropriate line feeding mode for
each individual component and how system parameters impact this trade-off.
Results show that these factors, which are the kit container capacity and the allowed
BoL space, have significant impact on the cost, especially in con- strained production
environments.

Journal: Int. J.Production Economics 174 (2016) 54–67.

Nils Boysen Malte Fliedner (2008):​’​A versatile algorithm for assembly line
balancing’. ​In this paper, a versatile assembly line balancing algorithm was
discussed, which is able to solve instances of SALBP as well as several GALBP
extensions alike. For this purpose, the original problem is decomposed into two
stages which can be solved independently. In the first stage, the precedence
network is utilized in order to construct a valid sequence of tasks. This sequence is
hence processed in the second stage as the tasks are assigned to work stations by
solving a shortest-path problem.
Journal: European Journal of Operational Research 184 (2008) 39–56.

Jayashankar M. Swaminathan Thomas R.Nitch (2007):​’Managing product variety

in automobile assembly: The importance of the sequencing point’. T ​ his paper
proposes an globalization of markets and increased consumer sophistication have
led to an increase in the variety of products that customers demand and a
consequent increase in the number of variants of any given product line that
manufacture must supply. It explains about the concepts of a sequencing point in
automotive industry which defines the component variants are placed in the
sequence that final assembly requires.

Journal: Int. J.Production Economics 158 (2013) 50–67.

Evgeny Gurevsky Olga Battaïa Alexandre Dolgui (2012):​’ Balancing of simple

assembly lines under variations of task processing times’. ​In this paper, Simple
Assembly Line Balancing Problem of type E (SALBP-E) was studied under variations
of task processing times. The tasks’ uncertainty was modeled using general
concepts of stability analysis, i.e. by small perturbations of their processing time.
Conditions of stability, the formula, upper and lower bounds of stability radius for
feasible, quasi-feasible, and optimal balances were investigated. The computational
complexity of these problems was discussed as well. Polynomial time algorithm
computing the stability radius of feasible balances was suggested. The concept of
Pareto optimality was used to find a compromise between the objective function to
minimize (expressing the efficiency of a feasible balance) and the corresponding
stability radius to maximize (reflecting its robustness). Two approaches to find non-
dominated balances in terms of Pareto optimality were suggested.

Journal: Ann Oper Res (2012) 201:265–286.

Kaneesa Kanaganayagam, Shanthi Muthuswamy, Purushothaman Damodaran

(2015):’​Lean methodologies to improve assembly line efficiency: an industrial
application’. ​This paper focuses on using lean tools such as time and motion study,
kaizen events and spaghetti map to reduce waste in a LEME assembly line. For this
research, five zones (or work areas) of assembly were studied and using the lean
tools the cycle time was reduced to achieve a 15% reduction in takt time. There were
four phases to this research effort: data collection, construction of the process flow
map, creation of the spaghetti map, and the implementation of kaizen events. The
results from this research demonstrate that waste in an assembly can be identified
and removed by studying the process and utilizing simple yet powerful lean tools.

Journal: Int. J. Industrial and Systems Engineering, Vol. 20, No. 1, 2015.

Hesam Soroush, Seyed Mojtaba Sajjadi, S. Mohammad Arabzad (2014):

‘​Efficiency analysis and optimization of a Multi-product assembly line using
simulation’.​ In this article, the studied assembly line is simulated using Arena
software to investigate the system functionality and its weaknesses. The
implementation of the proposed solutions shows that the AATPs A, B, C and D
shrink by 15, 12, 11 and 19% and work -in-process products (AWIPs) diminishes by
74%. In addition, production (APN) is also increased by 6%.In order to optimize the
system in this study, Opt Quest is used to evaluate various solutions, and with
respect to the constraints, select the best one, which is the minimum value of the
goal function.

Journal: Int. J. Productivity and Quality Management, Vol. 13, No. 1, 2014.

Yılmaz Delice, Emel Kızılkaya Aydoğan & Uğur Özcan (2016):​’ Stochastic two-
sided U-type assembly line balancing: a genetic algorithm approach’. ​A novel
stochastic two-sided U-type assembly line balancing (STUALB) procedure, an
algorithm based on the genetic algorithm and a heuristic priority rule-based
procedure to solve STUALB problem are proposed. The proposed approach aims to
minimize the number of positions (i.e. the U-type assembly line length) as the
primary objective and to minimize the number of stations (i.e. the number of
operators) as a secondary objective for a given cycle time. In this paper, a new GA
approach to solve the STUALB problem with the objectives of minimizing the NP and
the NS for a given cycle time is presented.

Journal: International Journal of Production Research, 2016.

Jordi Pereira, Eduardo Alvarez-Miranda (2017):​’ An exact approach for the robust
assembly line balancing problem’. I​ n this work a Bertsimas-Sim, B&S, robust version
of the type-1 SALBP, denoted by rSALBP-1, is introduced and studied. A
mathematical formulation, several lower bounds, a heuristic, and an exact solution
method based on the branch, bound and remember enumeration technique are
presented. A relevant open area of research on robust assembly line balancing
corresponds to the study of how to properly model the uncertainty on the operation
times and the robustness requirements.

Journal: International journal of management science (2017).

Yahui Zhang, Xiaofeng Hu & Chuanxun Wu (2017):​’ A modified multi-objective

genetic algorithm for two-sided assembly line re-balancing problem of a
Shovel loader’.​ This article deals with a real-life multi-objective two-sided assembly
line rebalancing problem (MTALRBP) with modifications of production demand, line’s
structure and production process in a Chinese construction machinery manufacturing
firm. A modified non a real-life multi-objective two-sided assembly line rebalancing
problem with modifications of production demand, structure of AL and production
process. Dominated sorting genetic algorithm II (MNSGA-II) is proposed to solve this
problem. A real-life multi-objective two-sided assembly line rebalancing problem with
modifications of production demand, structure of AL and production process was
explained.

Journal: International Journal of Production Research (2017).

Seyed-Esmaeil Moussavi, Morad Mahdjoub & Olivier Grunder (2017):

‘Productivity improvement through a sequencing generalized assignment in an
assembly line system’.​ This paper considers the assignment of heterogeneous
workers to workstations of an assembly line in order to minimize the total production
time. The model is solved by an exact algorithm using Gurobi solver. Two
matheuristic approaches based on the disaggregated formulation of GAP are
proposed. The first approach solves the problem through two sub-problems as the
transportation formulation and assignment formulation. The second approach solves
the problem by decomposition of the problem into several classical GAPs. The task
executing time is considered as the basis of the worker assignment to the
workstations. Two matheuristic approaches have been completely analyzed by
different factors and sizes of the instances.

Journal: International Journal of Production Research (2017).

 CHAPTER-3
STATEMENT OF PROBLEM

3.1 RESEARCH GAP

Research gap is a research question or problem which has not been answered
appropriately or at all in a given field of study.

Here, identifying the minimum number of workstations and cycle time for a product
becoming a research gap for this organization.

3.2 PROBLEM DESCRIPTION

In this company the cycle time for assembling a product is decreased due to
improper supply of materials in the production line. This leads to failure of products
delivery on time. The level of production becomes low and the idle time also
increased. Therefore the percentage efficiency in production is less. To increase the
efficiency of production there is a need to improve the supply chain of materials.

The problem here I identified is to use employees effectively and to reduce the cycle
time in order to increase the efficiency of production.

3.3 OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

3.3.1 PRIMARY OBJECTIVE:

To produce a product without rework within an effective cycle time.Quality of the

product is established based on the customer needs in the market.Produce right
quantity of products in the right number in order to manage the demand and also
reduce the inventory level. Timeliness of delivery of the product to the consumer or
wholesaler.Provide machines to the customer with right manufacturing cost.

3.3.2 SECONDARY OBJECTIVE:

To reduce idle time.Improving the efficiency of the supply chain to achieve its cost
quality. Increase flexibility to meet a wider range of market requirements and
improve competitive advantage.Offer products at competitive prices and make a
profit.

3.4 SCOPE OF THE STUDY:

● A new improvement in priority rule is discussed which shows that production

cost is the result of both production time and cost rates.

● The study concentrates on the understanding of the theory and concept of

assembly line balancing.

● Continuous improvement activities will be conducted in order to improve the

workstation layout.
 CHAPTER-4

RESEARCH METHODS:

4.1 RESEARCH DESIGN:

Research design is defined as a framework of methods and techniques chosen by a

researcher to combine various components of research in a reasonably logical
manner so that the research problem is efficiently handled. It provides insights about
“how” to conduct research using a particular methodology.

Observational research methodology is used for this study. Cross-sectional method

is used for observe workers over a long period of time.

4.2 SOURCES OF DATA

There are two types of data: ​primary ​and ​secondary​.

Primary data

As the name suggests, are first-hand information collected by the surveyor. The data
so collected are pure and original and collected for a specific purpose. They have
never undergone any statistical treatment before. The collected data may be
published as well. The Census is an example of primary data.

Secondary data

Secondary data are opposite to primary data. They are collected and published
already (by some organization, for instance). They can be used as a source of data
and used by surveyors to collect data from and conduct the analysis. Secondary
data are impure in the sense that they have undergone statistical treatment at least
once.

For this project both primary and secondary data are used.

Here flow of assembly line process information is gathered from the company's
production data file.

Cycle time for each assembly process is gathered as primary data.

4.3 LIMITATION:
● For collecting data for single process in assembly line it takes much time.
● It is difficult to note timings when workers where busy.
● When simultaneous process takes place it became chanceless to collect both
processing time.
● Company is located at the interior area there is no bus facilities to reach
company soon.
 CHAPTER-5

5.1 ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION

WORK DETAILS TIME
(in
hrs)
A TG ASSEMBLY 3
B BASE ASSEMBLY 5.30
C Z-FRAME ASSEMBLY 1
D FRONT DUMMY 1
ASSEMBLY
K PILLAR ASSEMBLY 2
H FRONT JACKY 1
ASSEMBLY
L PILLAR PLATE 2
ASSEMBLY
E FRONT POST ASSEMBLY 0.30
I FRONT RODBOX 1
ASSEMBLY
N BACK JACKY ASSEMBLY 1
J BACK RODBOX & 2
CANOPY
Q CONTROL BOX POST 0.30
ASSEMBLY
S CONTROL BOX 1
ASSEMBLY
U DRILLING STAND 1
ASSEMBLY
G COOLER ASSEMBLY 0.30
O BREAKOUT ASSEMBLY 0.30
F TOOLS BOX ASSEMBLY 0.30
M MAST ASSEMBLY 5
P BOTTOM BED 3
ASSEMBLY
SNC SELF LOCK NUT 2
CHANGE
R PIPELINE ASSEMBLY 4
T HOSE ASSEMBLY 4.30
LBF LIGHT BRACKET FIXING 0.30
T HYDRAULIC WORK 7.30
V PAINTING PROCESS 28
W ELECTRICAL WORK 4
Table 1: Work details
 PRD RIGS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

ASSEMBLY CHECK LIST

ASSEMBLY PROCESS STANDARD

TIME
(in mins)
TRANSFER GEAR BOX ASSEMBLY
● Levelling 22
● L-Plate fixing 30
● Channel fixing with gear box 5
● Transfer gear box with L-plate 30
● Bolt tighten 10
● Level checking 25
● Channel welding 25
BASE BOX ASSEMBLY
● Tractor side alteration 45
● Material grinding 20
● Mudguard gas cutting 20
● Side plates,front channel fixing 25
● Base box grinding and fixing 20
● Mudguard fixing 10
● Measurement checking,Levelling & Base bolt checking 60
Z’FRAME ASSEMBLY
● Grinding 10
● Base flange fixing 15
● Z’frame fixing 20
● Front extension cutting &Gusset setting 15
FRONT BOX ASSEMBLY
● Grinding 15
● Front flange plate setting 30
● Front box fixing 10
PILLAR ASSEMBLY
● Pillar marking and cutting 35
● Grinding 10
● Pillar Fixing,Pillar Gap Marking,Level 45
Checking,Grinding,Setting
FRONT JACK ASSEMBLY
● Grinding 10
● Flange plate fixing 25
 ● Front jack setting 20
OIL TANK ‘L’ASSEMBLY
● Grinding 10
 ● Oil tank’L’ assembly 20
● Bottom oil tank mount bracket fixing 10
● Oil tank ‘L’cutting 5
● Front patta fixing 10
FRONT POST ASSEMBLY
● Frontpost base plate fixing & welding 15
● Front post setting 15
COOLER ASSSEMBLY
● Cooler bracket grinding 5
● Cooler bracket taping 10
● Cooler mounting on bracket and setting 15
BACK RODBOX ASSEMBLY
● Grinding &Flange channel fixing 20
● Front rod box setting with stay 30
● Canopy setting 35
● Canopy welding 15
● Canopy setting &drilling 15
CONTROL PANEL ASSEMBLY
● Control panel post fixing 30
● Control box post bracket 25
● Control panel lock 15
● Control box plate side bar assy.. 15
● Pressure gauge fixing 10
● Valve:1DVS20/3-Commercial 10
● Adaptor fixing 15
● VALVE 2:HC M45/6 BANK 10
● VALVE 3:HC M45/1 BANK DETENT 10
● Check valves fixing 15
● Flow control valve fixing 5
● Hold back valvee fixing 5
● Control box cover fixing 5
● Driling stand fixing 20
● Grinding 5
● Drilling stand lock fixing 20
● Welding process 15
TOOLS BOX ASSEMBLY
● Tools angle fixing 10
● Tools box setting and holes marking 10
● Tools box fixing 5
● Welding process and grinding 10
BREAKOUT ASSEMBLY
● Top bracket fixing 10
● Bottombracket fixing 5
● Breakout cylinder fixing 5
● Breakout roller &pin fixing 5
● Canopy fixing 10
 ● Bolt tighten,Welding process &grinding 10
MAST RAISING ASSEMBLY
● MRC bracket fixing in square box with grinding 20
● MRC bracket welding 15
● MRC fixing 15
MAST ASSEMBLY
● ‘U’ bracket assembly 15
● Pulley assembly 15
● Turning plate assembly 30
● Dumping bracket & cylinder assembly 15
● Plummer assembly 10
● Center sliding assembly 20
● Feed cylinder assembly 15
● Rope assembly 30
● H plate assembly 20
● RG assembly 15
● Plummer block fixing 5
● Mast fixing with pillar 15
● Mast lock bolt welding 10
● Mast stopper fixing 15
● Pile center fixing 15
PIPELINE ASSEMBLY
● Barclamps & welding visual 60
● Pump lines fit up &welding visual 30
● Return lines fit up& welding visual 30
● Pillar lines fit up & welding visual 30
● Jack lines fit up & welding visual 30
● Mast pipe lines fit up &welding visual 15
● Front jacky line 15
● Breakout cine 15
● Grinding work 15
REAR LIGHT STAND ASSEMBLY
● Left side light stand fixing & welding 15
● Right side light stand fixing & welding 15
● Grinding 5
OIL TANK ASSEMBLY
● Oil stainer assembly 15
● Packing assembly 10
● Filter assembly 15
● Breather fixing 10
● Gate valve fixing 20
HOSE ASSEMBLY FIXING
● Pillar line hose 30
● Mast hose 20
● Pump 1 assembly 15
● Pump 2 assembly 15
 ● Valve hose connection 60
● Pumping hose fixing 15
● Cooler hose 15
● Filter hose 15
● Return to tank hose 15
● Jacky line hose 20
● Suction line hose 20
● Return line hose 20
● Rotation motor hose 20
● Feed cylinder line 15
● MRC cylinder lines 10
HYDRAULIC SECTION
● Oil filling up 45
● Oil pump pressure check up 30
● Fuel checking 30
● Leakage checking 30
● Tighting hose 30
TINKERING SECTION
● Control panel meter cover fixing 10
● Control panel cover fixing 10
● Spirit level fixing 15
● Grindiing 10
ELECTRICAL SECTION
● Tractor electric wiring connection 120
● Lighting check up 30
● Battery changing & Fixing 15
● All meter check up 15
● Bottom wiring fixing 30
● Hose tag work 30
Table 2: Assembly check list.
5.2 CALCULATION OF STANDARD TIME BY USING TRIAL AND
ERROR METHOD:

TRANSFER GEAR BOX ASSEMBLY:

1. Leveling:

CYCLE TIME FREQUENCY

18 1
19 2
20 3
21 4
Table 3: Leveling

CYCLE TIME:

= CYCLE TIME

*FREQUENCY​ SUM OF

FREQUENCIES

= 18*1+19*2+20*3+21*4

1+2+3+4

= 18+38+60+84

10

= 20mins.

NORMAL TIME:

= CYCLE TIME*PERFORMANCE RATING

Assume performance rating is 100%

= 20*100/100

= 20 mins.

STANDARD TIME:

= NORMAL TIME

1-%ALLOWANCE

Allowance = 10%

= 20/1-0.10
= 20/0.9

= 22.2 mins
2. L-PLATE FIXING

CYCLE TIME FREQUENCY

27 1
28 2
29 3
30 4
Table 4: L-plate fixing.

CYCLE TIME:

= CYCLE TIME

*FREQUENCY​ SUM OF

FREQUENCIES

27*1+28*2+29*

3+30*4​ 10

= 27+56+87+120/10

= 29 mins.

NORMAL TIME:

= CYCLE TIME*PERFORMANCE RATING

Assume performance rating is 100%

= 29*100/100

= 29 mins.

STANDARD TIME:

= NORMAL TIME

1-%ALLOWANCE

Allowance = 10%

= 29/0.9

= 30 mins.
3. CHANNEL FIXING WITH GEARBOX:
 CYCLE TIME FREQUENCY
2 1
3 2
4 3
5 4
Table 5: Channel fixing with gearbox.

CYCLE TIME:

= CYCLE TIME

*FREQUENCY​ SUM OF

FREQUENCIES

2*1+3*2+4

*3+5*4​ 10

= 4 mins.

NORMAL TIME:

= CYCLE TIME*PERFORMANCE RATING

Assume performance rating is 100%

= 4*100/100

= 4

mins STANDARD TIME:

= NORMAL TIME

1-%ALLOWANCE

Allowance = 10%

= 4/0.9

= 4.5 mins
4. TRANSFER GEAR BOX FIXING WITH L-PLATE

CYCLE TIME FREQUENCY

28 1
31 2
30 3
29 4
Table 6: TG box fixing with L-plate.

CYCLE TIME:

= CYCLE TIME

*FREQUENCY​ SUM OF

FREQUENCIES

28*1+31*2+30*

3+29*4​ 10

= 28+62+90+116/10

= 29.6 mins.

NORMAL TIME:

= CYCLE TIME*PERFORMANCE RATING

Assume performance rating is 100%

= 29.6*100/100

= 29.6 mins.

STANDARD TIME:

= NORMAL TIME

1-%ALLOWANCE

Allowance = 10%

= 29.6/0.9

= 32mins.
5. BOLT TIGHTEN:

CYCLE TIME FREQUENCY

10 1
7 2
9 3
8 4
Table 7: Bolt tightens.

CYCLE TIME:

= CYCLE TIME

*FREQUENCY​ SUM OF

FREQUENCIES

10*1+7*2+9*3+8*

4​ 10

8.3mins NORMAL TIME:

= CYCLE TIME*PERFORMANCE RATING

Assume performance rating is 100%

= 8.3*100/100

= 8.3mins..

STANDARD TIME:

= NORMAL TIME

1-%ALLOWANCE

Allowance = 10%

= 8.3/0.9

= 9.5 mins
6. LEVEL CHECKING:

CYCLE TIME FREQUENCY

25 1
23 2
24 3
22 4
Table 8: Level checking

CYCLE TIME:

= CYCLE TIME

*FREQUENCY​ SUM OF

FREQUENCIES

25*1+23*2+24*

3+22*4​ 10

= 25+46+72+88/10

= 23.1mins

NORMAL TIME:

= CYCLE TIME*PERFORMANCE RATING

Assume performance rating is 100%

= 23.1*100/100

= 23.1 mins.

STANDARD TIME:

= NORMAL TIME

1-%ALLOWANCE

Allowance = 10%

= 23.1/0.9
= 25.6 mins
7. CHANNEL WELDING:

CYCLE TIME FREQUENCY

25 1
22 2
24 3
23 4
Table 9: Channel welding.

CYCLE TIME:

= CYCLE TIME

*FREQUENCY​ SUM OF

FREQUENCIES

25*1+22*2+24*

3+23*4​ 10

= 25+44+72+92/10

= 23.3mins.

NORMAL TIME:

= CYCLE TIME*PERFORMANCE RATING

Assume performance rating is 100%

= 23.3*100/100

= 23.3mins

STANDARD TIME:

= NORMAL TIME

1-%ALLOWANCE

Allowance = 10%

= 23.3/0.9

= 25mins.
5.3 CALCULATION OF CYCLE TIME:

Total task time = 82hrs.

Working hours per day = 6hrs30mins.

Working days per month = 24 days.

Desired output per month = 2.5 units.

Cycle time = ​working hrs per day* no.of working days

Desired output rate

= ​6.30*24

2.5

= 60.48 hrs.

5.4 CALCULATION OF WORKSTATION:

Minimum number of workstations =​ sum of task time

Cycle time

= ​82

60.48

= 1.355

Approximately = 2 workstations.
5.5 ALLOCATION OF WORKSTATION

ST.NO WORK DETAILS ACT UACT IDLE

(60.48hrs) TIME
1 A TG 3 57.48 -
ASSEMBLY
B BASE 5.30 52.18 -
ASSEMBLY
C Z-FRAME 1 51.18 -
ASSEMBLY
D FRONT 1 50.18 -
DUMMY
ASSEMBLY
K PILLAR 2 48.18 -
ASSEMBLY
H FRONT 1 47.18 -
JACKY
ASSEMBLY
L PILLAR 2 45.18 -
PLATE
ASSEMBLY
E FRONT 0.30 44.88 -
POST
ASSEMBLY
I FRONT 1 43.88 -
RODBOX
ASSEMBLY
N BACK 1 42.88 -
JACKY
ASSEMBLY
J BACK 2 40.88 -
RODBOX &
CANOPY
Q CONTROL 0.30 40.58 -
BOX POST
ASSEMBLY
S CONTROL 1 39.58 -
BOX
ASSEMBLY
U DRILLING 1 38.58 -
STAND
ASSEMBLY
G COOLER 0.30 38.28 -
ASSEMBLY
O BREAKOUT 0.30 37.98 -
ASSEMBLY
F TOOLS BOX 0.30 37.68 -
ASSEMBLY
 M MAST 5 32.68 -
ASSEMBLY
P BOTTOM 3 29.68 -
BED
ASSEMBLY
SNC SELF LOCK 2 27.68 -
NUT
CHANGE
R PIPELINE 4 23.68 -
ASSEMBLY
T HOSE 4.30 19.38 -
ASSEMBLY
LBF LIGHT 0.30 19.08 -
BRACKET
FIXING
T HYDRAULIC 7.30 11.78 11.78
WORK
2 V PAINTING 28 32.48 -
PROCESS
W ELECTRICAL 4 28.48 28.48
WORK

Table 10: Allocation of workstation.

5.6 CALCULATION OF IDLE TIME AND EFFICIENCY

Percent of idle time = ​idle time per cycle​*100

no.of workstations*cycle time

= 40.26*100/2*60.48

= 33.28%

Efficiency = 100%-percent idle time

= 100-33.28

= 66.72%
 5.7 INTERPRETATION

Idle time per cycle is 40.26hrs and cycle time for each workstation is 60.48hrs.Based
on this calculation percent of idle time is observed as 33.28.

Efficiency of production leads to 66.72.Efficiency can be calculated as subtract

percent of idle time with 100%.

Before implementing workstation:

Before calculation of cycle time.There is no timings for each assembling process.

Work to be done without preplanning. They fix their targets approximately as 14
days.Based on this target flow of production takes place.Due to lack of planning the
materials required for the flow of production becomes less.This leads to make the
workers as idle.So the efficiency of production also leads to poor.Parallel work
possiblities are less in this original method.

After implementation:

After calculating cycle time for each assembly process workstation has to be
calculated.This helps the supervisors for planning the uniform flow of production in
each assembly line process and also finds the possiblity of parallel works.This helps
the supervisors to maintain the inventory as well.There is no disturbance in the flow
of production and this will increase the efficiency of production and reduce the idle
time as much.Now the time taken to complete for a product is 10 days.
 CHAPTER-6

6.1 FINDINGS:

● There is no standard methodlogies are used.

● Delay in material handling leads to increasing idle time.

● Improper flow of production.

● Employee skills are differ from each other.

● Large absenteesem of workers.

● No cab facilities provided for employees to reach the factory from bus stop.

● Less possiblities of considering parallel work.

6.2 SUGGESTIONS:

● Following proper assembly line methodologies leads to improve the

product delivery time.

● Materials should be provide in Just-in-time method.

● Skilled employees should be used for main process and employees should
be properly trained and knowledged.

● Arrangement of cab facilities for workers from bus stop to factory makes them
comfortable.

● Identifying possiblities in parallel work can help tp increase the efficiency.

6.3 CONCLUSION

The improved assembly line has the efficiency of 66.72% increase the assemblyline
productivity from the original method. Also, with this Single Stage Parallel Line, the
floor space usage is reduced by half compared to original method. The material
handling requirements as well as the input and output buffer sizes are also
determined for this new assembly line. When having an assembly line with multiple
stations, the impact of having station imbalances on the individual operator
performance is also recognized.
REFERENCES

1. Sabatini, H., Sharanya, V. Sakthivel Anand, G. and Deepak Lawrence, K.

(2010): ​‘Productivity enhancement in the assembly line of a horn
manufacturing company’. Journal: Int. J. Management Practice, Vol. 4, No. 2,
pp.200–215.

2. Olcay Polat, Can B. Kalayci, Özcan Mutlu and Surendra M. Gupta (2015):
‘A two-phase variable neighborhood search algorithm for assembly line
worker assignment and balancing problem type-II’. Journal: International
Journal of Production Research.

3. Mustapha Sali, EvrenSahin (2016): ​‘Line feeding optimization for Just in

Time assembly lines: An application to the automotive industry’. Journal: Int.
J.Production Economics 174 (2016) 54–67.

4. Nils Boysen Malte Fliedner (2008):​’​A versatile algorithm for assembly line
balancing’. Journal: European Journal of Operational Research 184 (2008)
39–56.

5. Jayashankar M. Swaminathan Thomas R.Nitch (2007):​’Managing product

variety in automobile assembly: The importance of the sequencing point’.
Journal: Int. J.Production Economics 158 (2013) 50–67.

6. Evgeny Gurevsky Olga Battaïa Alexandre Dolgui (2012):​’ Balancing of

simple assembly lines under variations of task processing times’. Journal: Ann
Oper Res (2012) 201:265–286.

7. Kaneesa Kanaganayagam, Shanthi Muthuswamy, Purushothaman

Damodaran (2015):’​Lean methodologies to improve assembly line efficiency:
an industrial application’. Journal: Int. J. Industrial and Systems Engineering,
Vol. 20, No. 1, 2015.

8. Hesam Soroush, Seyed Mojtaba Sajjadi, S. Mohammad Arabzad (2014):

‘​Efficiency analysis and optimization of a Multi-product assembly line using
simulation’.​ ​Journal: Int. J. Productivity and Quality Management, Vol. 13, No.
1, 2014.

9. Yılmaz Delice, Emel Kızılkaya Aydoğan & Uğur Özcan (2016):​’ Stochastic
two-sided U-type assembly line balancing: a genetic algorithm approach’.
Journal: International Journal of Production Research, 2016.

10. Jordi Pereira, Eduardo Alvarez-Miranda (2017):​’ An exact approach for the
robust assembly line balancing problem’. Journal: International journal of
management science (2017).
11. Yahui Zhang, Xiaofeng Hu & Chuanxun Wu (2017):​’ A modified multi-
objective genetic algorithm for two-sided assembly line re-balancing problem
of a Shovel loader’​. ​Journal: International Journal of Production Research
(2017).

12. Seyed-Esmaeil Moussavi, Morad Mahdjoub & Olivier Grunder(2017):

‘Productivity improvement through a sequencing generalized assignment in
an assembly line system’​. ​Journal: International Journal of Production
Research (2017).