ZAINAL RASYID MAHAYUDDIN

NUR AFIQAH KHAIRUDDIN

Aim and objectives of the research

Research methodology

Stage I - Data collection

Stage II – Classification development

Stage III – Prototype development

Stage IV – Testing and Validation

CELLULAR MANUFACTURING - application of group technology in manufacturing

Processing collection of similar parts (part families) on dedicated clusters of machines or manufacturing processes (cells).

Source - Steve Ah kioon, 2009

Low production rate

Cellular manufacturing problem

Configuration of cells in layout

designing layout in production floor

Issues in solution of cellular manufacturing problems

require a lot experience/ knowledge

Time consuming

Costly activities

Tool available simulation and modeling

.

Aim : To investigate the cladistic technique approach to classify cellular manufacturing problems

1. To classify problems in cellular manufacturing using cladistics technique

2. Develop a prototype and validate cladistics using prototype

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Collecting data samples to thoroughly understand problems and causes of problems obtained.

The information are needed during classification phase

Productivity 7%

Performance 26%

Layout 10%

Cost 12%

Quality 2%

Other 43%

Problems

performance in cell 8%

Efficiency of cell layout 11%

efficiency of cell formation

65%

efficiency of utilization machine

4%

efficiency of workers

12%

Performance

EXAMPLE PROBLEMS

“Cladistics is a method for systematically organizing knowledge about a population of entities. It is a process for studying diversity and attempting to identify and understand laws and relationships that explain the evolution and existence of the variety of groups”

Source:Tsinopoulos and McCarthy (2000)

Selecting taxa

Identify characteristics of the cladogram

Determine the states of characteristics

Generating cladogram by software

FACTORS States Performance Measure

1 ecxessive scrap 0 Absence

1 Scrap rate

2 Rework 0 Absence

1 Rework cost

3 Lack of coordination 0 Absence

(labour) 1 Labor efficiency

4 Flexibility of worker 0 Absence

1 Workload

5 Efficiency training 0 Absence

for workers 1 Labor efficiency

6 Productivity low 0 Absence

1 Production volume

7 Lack of product 0 Absence

understanding 1 Production volume

8 Excessive inventories 0 Absence

1 WIP Inventory

9 High machine 0 Absence

breakdown 1 maintenance cost

10 Machine utilization 0 Absence

1 Machine efficiency

11 No. of machines 0 Absence

more than no of worker 1 Labor efficiency

12 High equipment cost 0 Absence

1 Total cost

13 High allocation of machine cost 0 Absence

1 Total cost

14 Setup time 0 Absence

1 Setup cost

15 Total delay time 0 Absence

1 Backorder cost (delay delivery parts)

16 Bottleneck/ total waiting 0 Absence

1 Delivery time performance

17 Lead time 0 Absence

1 Production volume/ produstion rate

18 high setup cost 0 Absence

1 Total cost

19 high operation cost 0 Absence

1 Total cost

20 high reconfiguration cost 0 Absence

1 Total cost

21 High intercellular movement distance 0 Absence

1 material handling cost

22 High intracellular movemnet distance 0 Absence

1 material handling cost

23 Space limitation 0 Absence

1 intra/inter cellular movement cost

24 Machine capacity 0 Absence

1 Machine efficiency

25 Operation time 0 Absence

1 Production volume/rate

PROBLEM FACTORS / CHARACTERS1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25

1 Low productivity 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

2 Poor quality 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

3 Poor performance in cell 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1

4 Poor efficiency in cell layout 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1

5 Poor efficiency of cell formation 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1

6 Low efficiency of utilization machine 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1

7 Low efficiency of workers 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

8 Total intercellular & intracellular movement distance increase 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0

9 excessice quantity of operators 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0

10 Total material handling cost increase 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0

11 High Holding inventory cost 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1

12 Backorder increase 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

13 High reconfiguration cost 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0

14 High investment cost 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

15 High machine setup cost 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0

16 High WIP 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1

17 Low performance of movement flow 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1

18 Poor scheduling system 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0

19 Unbalanced workload in cell 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

20 Irrelevant relation between routing flexibility and correspondent cost0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0

21 High space requirement 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0

22 Changes make-to-stock system to make-to-order system 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0

Figure 4. Problems Classification Cladogram

Figure 5. Evolution Trend

Problems in cellular manufacturing

Problems classification through cladistics

technique

Templates and Modules

Phase I I

Physical elements

Attributes and functions

Performance measure element

Simulation Panel

yes

Low fidelity prototype

User interface development using VBA

Proof of concept

User validation

no

Phase II Prototype development

Simulation Template

• Performance Measure : Lead Time

• Series Time Chart • Expression Function :

TAVG(Entity.TotalTime)

• Performance Measure: Waiting time/Bottleneck

• Histogram • Expression Function • TAVG(Entity1.WaitTime) • TAVG

(Buffer1.Queue.WaitingTime)

• Expression Function : EntitiesWIP(Entities)

• Series Time chart

• Expression Function: • EntitiesOut(Entity 1) • Series time chart

Model Building

Performance Measure

Two modes of exercises :

Do exercise manually using ARENA software

Do exercise using prototype

Objective : To compare model time building and to prove usefulness of prototype

Mode A : Building model manually

First Student Second Student Third Student Time Average (min)

Exercise 1 2.13 10.37 9.21 7.23 Exercise 2 i 10.27 15.47 11.21 12.31 Exercise 2 ii 6.58 Exercise 2 iii Exercise 3 i 3.19 5.55 6.02 4.9 Exercise 3 ii 4.26 Exercise 3 iii Scale Evaluation %

Exercise 1 4 3 2 3 60 Exercise 2 i 3 2 4 3 60 Exercise 2 ii 2 2 2 2 40 Exercise 2 iii 2 2 3 2.33 46.6 Exercise 3 i 4 3 3 2.33 67.6 Exercise 3 ii 3 2 2 2.33 46.6 Exercise 3 iii 3 2 2 2.33 46.6

Mode B : Building model using prototype

First Student Second Student

Third Student Time Average (min)

Exercise 1 1.30 4.03 1.50 2.27

Exercise 2 i 4.47 5.34 5.21 5.03 Exercise 2 ii 6.58 1.34 5.29 4.4 Exercise 2 iii 00.30 00.30 1.04 0.54 Exercise 3 i 1.47 2.12 2.54 2.04 Exercise 3 ii 2.18 1.45 2.04 1.9 Exercise 3 iii

3.16 2.31 3.18 2.9

Scale Evaluation %

Exercise 1 4 5 5 4.33 86.6 Exercise 2 i 3 2 4 3.33 66.6 Exercise 2 ii 3 4 3 3 60 Exercise 2 iii 4 4 4 4.33 86.6 Exercise 3 i 4 4 5 4.67 93.4 Exercise 3 ii 5 5 3 4.67 93.4 Exercise 3 iii 4 4 4 4 80

First student

Second student

Third student

Average Score

1)Duration involve in simulation and modeling Never 0-6 months

6-12 months More than 12 months 2)User Experience in ARENA Lesson in lecture

Group project Thesis project Other than above

3) Ease of use The prototype is easy to use

4 3 2 3

Guideline given is understandable

3 2 3 2.67

Score percentage 56.67% 4)Usefulness of prototype

The prototype is very useful in building the model

5 4 3 4

The prototype can reduce time model building

5 4 3 4

Physical element can be created easily

5 4 4 4.33

Performance measure can be create easily

4 4 4 4

Performance measure element is very useful for modeling simulation building

4 3 3 3.33

The prototype has a potential to increase simulation modeling building

3 3 4 3.33

Average score percentage

76.67%

Cladistic technique is used to classify the problems according to factors identified

Problems can be solved by using simulation tool based on classification made

Reducing time of model development