msc - thesis presentation
TRANSCRIPT
Tony Ponsonby MSc Manufacturing with Management
Final Project Viva Voce
Business Process Simulation of a Hoist Production Line
at Street Crane Ltd
Structure of Work
Model LogicData Collection
Model Building
Verification
ValidationExperimentation
Optimisation
Project Proposal
Project Definition
Project Report
• Purpose– Extend the life of the existing production line
• Aim– Determine how production can be increased in appropriate
stages of investment• Company / Product Characteristics
– Make-to-Order– Wide product range – Manual assembly– Cycle-times vary / out of balance– Slow throughput / Large product size
Project Definition
Rate x ArrivalLeadtime WIP
Time ingManufactur TotalTime AddedValue-Non Efficiency Throughput
Demand CustomerTime Available TaktTime
Time TaktTime Cycle Cell / ons Workstatiof Number
Project Key Concepts
Data Collection
ZX8 Frame Assembly Time - 6/8 Fall Variants
Histogram Burr
Cycle time (hrs)141210864
f(x)
0.280.260.240.22
0.20.180.160.140.12
0.10.080.060.040.02
0
Hoist Model
Qty in 2012
Iuniform from (>)
Iuniform to (<=) % Split
ZX10 60 0 60 3.77ZX6 863 60 923 54.28ZX8 667 923 1590 41.95Total 1590
Frequency Voltage CountIuniform from (>)
Iuniform to (<=) % Split Cumulative
50 380 82 0 82 2.10 2.1050 400 2963 82 3045 75.94 78.0460 230 1 3045 3046 0.03 78.0660 380 83 3046 3129 2.13 80.1960 440 1 3129 3130 0.03 80.2260 460 446 3130 3576 11.43 91.6560 575 326 3576 3902 8.35 100.00
Hoist Type
Cell 1Barrel Assembly
Cell 3 Frame Assembly
Cell 4 Trolley
Assembly 1&2
Cell 6 Cable Routing
Cell 7 Load Test& Rope Up
Cell 8 CRB / FMAssembly
Cell 9 End-of-Line
Test
Cell 10 Packing
Cell 11.1Mechanical Assembly
Cell 11.3 Cable Route &Test
Hoist Type
All ZX10 HoistsAll ZX10 Hoists
All ZX8 HoistsAll ZX8 Hoists
ZX86 , 88 OR 10ZX86 , 88 OR 10
Hoist TypeAny 2or4 Fall CRB Hoist
Any 2or4 Fall CRB Hoist
LHR & FMHoistsLHR & FMHoists
Any 2 or 4 FallZX6 or 8 LHR
Hoist Model
Any 2 or 4 FallZX6 or 8 LHR
Hoist Model
Cell 11.4Crab
Assembly
OutOut
Any 2 or 4 FallZX6/8 FM / CRB Hoist Model
Any 2 or 4 FallZX6/8 FM / CRB Hoist Model
Cell 8 Fit Crab Frame to Hoist
Any 6or8Fall CRB Hoist
Any 6or8Fall CRB Hoist
Order In
In If Hoistis a ZX8Model
In If Hoistis a ZX8Model
BuildFrameFrom Store
InIn
BuildFrameFrom Store
OutOut BuildFrameTo Store
Despatch Hoist
InIn
Generator usedif hoist is a Non-UK
mains supply
Generator usedif hoist is a Non-UK
mains supply
Model Logic
• Hoist type – Size– Build time– Routing
• Labour / Shift Pattern
• Resource Requirement– Workstations– Generator– Build-frames
• Entity feeding
• Buffer size
• Simulation Data Input
• Key Performance Indicators– Throughput Efficiency– Quantity Dispatched– Lead-time– WIP
Model Building Considerations
Warm-Up Period
73.5 - Avg72.1 - Min
74.9 - Max
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
168
336
504
672
840
1008
1176
1344
1512
1680
1848
2016
2184
2352
2520
2688
2856
3024
3192
3360
3528
3696
3864
4032
4200
4368
4536
4704
4872
Labo
ur U
tilisa
tion
%
Time (Hours)
Warm-Up Period (Without Starting Conditions)
Labour Utilisation
Average Labour Utilisation
Minimum Labour Utilisation
Maximum Labour Utilisation
Transient Steady State
75.1 - Avg72.5 - Min
78.85 - Max
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
0
168
336
504
672
840
1008
1176
1344
1512
1680
1848
2016
2184
2352
2520
2688
2856
3024
3192
3360
3528
3696
3864
4032
4200
4368
4536
4704
4872
Labo
ur U
tilisa
tion
%
Time (Hours)
Warm-Up Period (With Starting Conditions)
Labour Utilisation
Average Labour Utilisation
Minimum Labour Utilisation
Maximum Labour Utilisation
Transient Steady State
Model Building Considerations
Model Building & Verification
Validation
Model HistoricalZX6 CRB 2 TO 4 14.52 14.66 -0.94%ZX6 FM 2 TO 4 11.81 11.98 -1.34%ZX6 LHR 2 TO 4 13.76 13.91 -1.05%ZX8 CRB 2 TO 4 23.29 23.44 -0.66%ZX8 FM 2 TO 4 19.78 20.24 -2.27%ZX8 LHR 2 TO 4 19.63 19.99 -1.81%ZX8 CRB 6 TO 8 35.91 35.00 2.59%ZX8 FM 6 TO 8 29.87 30.09 -0.72%ZX8 LHR 6 TO 8 35.99 35.24 2.12%
ZX10 DD ALL 42.93 41.77 2.79%ZX10 ST OR SS ALL 32.05 31.93 0.40%
Hoist Model
Average Processing Time (hrs)
Error %
Hoist Type
Number of Falls
Part 1 – Comparison of actual to simulated average production hours
Validation
Model
Number of Hoists Produced
Product Split (%)
Average Number of Hoists Produced
Product Split (%)
ZX10 60 3.77% 47.56 2.98%ZX6 863 54.28% 885.4 55.52%ZX8 667 41.95% 661.72 41.49%Total 1590 1594.78
Validation Model2012 Hoist Production
Model
Actual Average Throughput Efficiency in
2012 (%)
Simulation Average
Throughput Efficiency (%)
% Error From Actual
ZX10 6.4 6.222 -2.8408%ZX6 5.1 5.004 -2.0135%ZX8 5.5 5.269 -4.7702%
2012 Actual Simulation Difference Error (%)Labour Hours Recorded 26113.6 29001.261 2887.6 11.06%Calculated Time Not Recorded 3013.2 - - -Total Labour Hours 29126.8 29001.261 -125.6 -0.43%
Product Split
Throughput Efficiency
Total Production Hours
Validation 2 – Comparison of 2012 KPI’s to simulation
Capacity of Existing System
2nd Optimisation
Capacity of 1st optimised system without capital
investment
Capacity of 1st optimised system
with capital investment
1 - Determine the maximum capacity at current and theoretical TE
1st Optimisation Without capital
investment
Capacity of 2nd optimised system
Experimentation & Optimisation
3.0
3.5
4.0
4.5
5.0
5.5
6.0
6.5
7.0
7.5
8.0
1500
1750
2000
2250
2500
2750
3000
3250
3500
3750
4000
Existing System
Exp 1 -Max
Output
Exp 1 -Max
Output
Exp 2 - 1st Opt Conf
Exp 2 - 1st Opt Conf
Exp 3 -Investment
Exp 3 -Investment
Exp 4 - 2nd Opt Conf
Delayed Delayed No Delay Delayed No Delay Delayed No Delay No Delay
Hoi
sts D
ispa
tche
d / m
²
Hoi
sts D
ispa
tche
d / Y
ear
ExperimentScenario
Experiment Comparison (Dispatch Quantity Vs Space Utilisation)QTY Dispatched
Hoists / m² of building
50.0
55.0
60.0
65.0
70.0
75.0
80.0
85.0
90.0
95.0
100.0
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Existing System
Exp 1 -Max
Output
Exp 1 -Max
Output
Exp 2 -1st Opt Conf
Exp 2 -1st Opt Conf
Exp 3 -Investment
Exp 3 -Investment
Exp 4 -2nd Opt Conf
Delayed Delayed No Delay Delayed No Delay Delayed No Delay No Delay
WIP
Lead-
Tim
e (D
ays)
ExperimentScenario
Experiment Comparison (Lead-time Vs WIP)Lead-Time (days)
WIP Quantity
Experimentation & Optimisation
Existing System Delay
Existing System
No Delay
Optimised System No
Delay
Optimised System Delay
Optimised System Delay +
Investment
Optimised System No
Delay + Investment
2nd Optimised
systemNumber of Hoists Shipped / Year 1718 1801.8 1978.8 1915.4 2293 3425 3890.2Date Oct-2013 Apr-2014 Dec-2014 Mar-2015 Oct-2016 Feb-2021 May-2022
1 - Determine the maximum capacity at current and theoretical TE
20122013
20142015
2016
2017
2019
2020
2021
2022
0
250
500
750
1000
1250
1500
1750
2000
2250
2500
2750
3000
3250
3500
3750
4000
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Num
ber o
f Hoi
sts
Ship
ped
% Generator Requirement
Output vs Generator Requirement
Future Generator Requirement8 Generators
7 Generators
6 Generators
5 Generators
4 Generators
3 Generators
2 Generators
1 Generator
Experimentation & Optimisation2 - Determine the number of generators to sustain production
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
0.2
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
4% 5% 6% 7% 8% 9% 10% 11% 12%
Hoist
s / h
r
WIP
Qua
ntity
Ho
urs
Avg Throughput Efficiency (%)
Effect of Throughput Efficiency on Littles Law Avg Wip
Avg Leadtime (hrs)
Avg Wasted Time (hrs)
Arrival Rate (Hoists/hr)
Experimentation & Optimisation3 - Determine the maximum capacity of an externally constrained system
Questions
86
27 2213 10 7 6
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Wai
ting
in
Que
ues
Wai
ting
for I
n-
Hous
e Pa
rts
Inco
rrec
t Pl
anni
ng
Wai
ting
for
Boug
ht-In
Part
s
Wai
ting
for
Peop
le
Wai
ting
for
Equi
pmen
t
Wai
ting
for
Info
rmati
on
Num
ber o
f D
elay
s O
bser
ved
Delay Category
Instances of Delay
Delay Occurances
Cummulative Percentage