Group technology Group technology (GT) is based on the creation of part and machine families.

Different types of machines together produce a range of parts or products. GT has a wide range of operations both in terms of volume and product mix. GT is strongly related to cellular manufacturing. Advantages and disadvantages of flow lines Low WIP, low lead time, predictable, simple, visible Limited routing/process flexibility, limited buffers Advantages and disadvantages of job shops Flexible routing, flexible process, skills grouped, responsive Complex flow, high WIP, long lead time, complex control Disadvantages of both types of layout Not directly oriented to customer demands Concentration on high utilisation, not saleable throughput Planning, quality control, engineering support are centralised Advantages of cellular manufacturing Group technology/manufacturing cells combine the advantages of flow line layouts and job shop layouts. Cells are more customer-oriented and very easy to control. Main objectives of cell intorudction: On-time delivery Reduced WIP Improved quality Culture change Better utilisation Job satisfaction Manufacturing cell- a group of machines of different types that completely fabricates a range of parts / components or a group of work stations that completely assembles a range of products. Design of manufacturing cells Manufacturing cells combine all resources needed to completely produce a range of parts / components / products: Resources include operators, machines, tools, quality control equipment, maintenance equipment, etc. A cell must be obviously identifiable: A team of operators belongs to a cell (the operators own the cell) Input / output areas are defined Products have an obvious identity Clear physical boundaries help to highlight ownership of the cell Notice boards display cell information A balance has to be achieved in terms of the size of each cell and the total number of cells. Cell creation Cells can be created on the basis of a wide variety of common factors. This leads to a variety of possible configurations of cells Forming production families Objectives of Forming production families 1. To simplify the material flow system 2. Each part processed in one group of machines 3. Acceptable workloads on machines in group 4. Easily managed by one or few operators 5. To avoid unnecessary duplication of equipment Product design families Parts or products are grouped by design features and should have similar processing requirements Production families Parts or products are grouped by processing requirements, regardless of design General procedure for group formation 1. Collect data (samples, drawings, routings, etc.). 2. Identify characteristics. 3. Classify characteristics. 4. Group parts with similar characteristics: by eye - largely subjective by rule of thumb: rotational parts up to 50mm by classification and coding by operations sequence analysis Classification the arrangement of items into classes on the basis of their characteristics Coding assigning a numerical Or alphabetic value to item characteristics in order to facilitate classification Best known and most widely used: Opitz code Classification and coding , later widely used to form part families Has two sections geometric code supplementary code Supplementary codes 4 more digits were added to the coding scheme, in order to increase the manufacturing information: Dimensions (diameter or edge length) Material type Original shape of raw material Accuracy (clearance tolerances or surface quality) Coding can be used: To form the basis for cellular manufacturing design To help with design reuse To allocate new components to existing cells and easily plan process Material Flow Analysis Objectives: Reduction of flows (volumes, operations, ) Reduction of lead-times Reduction of inventories Reduction of capital frozen within inventories Reduction of disturbances and turbulences Simplification of management Reduction of costs (transportation costs, inventory handling costs, total costs) Increased productivity Levels (layers): Intra-company (supply chain level) Intra-plant (factory level) Intra-cell (plant level) Inter-workplaces (cell or line level) At workplace (workplace level)

Function: Simplification and reduction of flows Techniques: Routings similarity analysis Optimization of layout Optimization of flows (transportation) Production Flow Analysis Tools: Standardization of flows Change of layout (workplaces and stockrooms) Production Flow Analysis (PFA) is a three stage technique proposed and developed by Burbidge: Factory flow analysis: broad subdivision of plant into departments Only really necessary for large systems Group flow analysis Machine families based on routing regardless of sequence Can use Rank Order Clustering (ROC) Line analysis Flow between machines to pro vide sequence Flow may be obvious Can use To/From analysis Mechanisms for PFA After first stage, PFA results in a matrix of routing data. We need mechanisms to sort the information in the matrix. Key mechanisms are: Cluster analysis Cluster analysis is based on the idea of calculating similarity index and grouping accordingly. Rank Order Clustering (ROC) Easier to understand than cluster analysis Matrix manipulated directly by interchanging rows or columns Use binary numbers Code rows and columns into binary numbers Sort rows/columns in descending order Repeat until the matrix does not change Easily computerised in ROC software or spreadsheets Assumptions of ROC Procedure ignores machine loading. Procedure ignores operations sequence. Accuracy of results depends on accuracy of routing data. Procedure is backward looking: it ignores changes planned as a result of new designs. Exceptions prevent a perfect machine-part matrix: typical for real production systems. Need to use judgment, i.e.: To ignore certain operations / machines To split work centres, therefore machines To visually force solutions Material flow within a cell Grouping techniques only group machines or work centres together. At the next level of detail in techniques such as Production Flow Analysis (PFA) it is necessary to look at the flow rates and directions between resources in order to establish the best relative positioning of the machines. This can be done manually (by common sense) or using techniques such as To/From analysis. Ideal vs. actual cells It is unusual that real production systems meet all theoretical criteria. Some cells are not completely self contained: Can sub-contract work or permit inter-cell movement Sharing of staff should be avoided Loss of control must be avoided Duplication of resources: Duplication is a possibility Could duplicate (cheap) resources to avoid imperfect cells Exceptions are made in terms of products and processes: Accommodate parts / products which do not fit into groups Some production processes cannot be integrated in cells, e.g. heat treatment Fundamental concepts of GT / cellular manufacturing Clear product identity - May be parts or sub-assemblies rather than end product Clear physical boundaries around cells Cells are designed around key machines Balanced material flow achieved through flexible operators Promotion of teamwork and ownership of the cell Decentralised planning and management - Operators have a lot more responsibility for production management; it plays an important role One-piece flow Issues of cell size Size of machine group Less than 15 machines, less than 10 operators (per shift) Size of a cell comparable to size of a job-shop Also: cells must not be too small Not enough operators to form a balanced team There could be anywhere between 2 to 20 cells in a company Size restriction key to good performance Scope and activities can be understood easily by all operators Key decisions made by most knowledgeable operators Local objectives: operators see progress & improvements Materials Cell size allows easy material movement Control of material flow is easier Normally cells employ local material control -> kanban Prerequisites for cellular manufacture Cells require technological and organisational stability Reasonable quality levels Reasonable reliability levels Reasonable attitudes towards team-working Reasonable levels of attendance Note: The word reasonable is used because once cells have been formed these characteristics are normally targeted and improved. Applicable only where: there is a limited range of product variants

customer demand remains stable (demand does not change greatly once cells have been installed, there are no seasonal variations) Major direct methods of material flow improvements: Optimization of layout Optimization of flows (transportation) Simplification of flows Process re-engineering and integration (e.g. by CNC centers) Simplification of products Major indirect methods of material flow improvements: Standardization of products Modularization of products Elimination of intermediate inventories (buffers) Reduction of bottlenecks (buffering etc.) Load balancing Elimination of other obstacles to the smooth flow (SMED, TQM, TPM) Progressive methods of production planning & control (Kanban, FIFO ) Transportation and stockkeeping infrastructure and equipment Cellurar manufacturing A manufacturing system is a goal-oriented network of processes through which parts flow. Structure: Plant is made up of routings (lines), which in turn are made up of processes. Focus: Factory Dynamics is concerned with the network and flows at the routing (line) level. Descriptors of a Line: 1) Bottleneck Rate (rb): Rate (parts/unit time or jobs/unit time) of the process center having the highest long-term utilization. 2) Raw Process Time (t0): Sum of the long-term average process times of each station in the line. Relationship: Critical WIP (W0): WIP level in which a line having no congestion would achieve maximum throughput (i.e., rb) with minimum cycle time (i.e., T0). W0 = rb T0 Littles Law: TH = WIP/CT, so same throughput can be obtained with large WIP, long CT or small WIP, short CT. Variability: Any departure from uniformity Random versus controllable variation Variability is anything that causes the system to depart from regular, predictable behavior. Sources of Variability: setups workpace variation machine failures differential skill levels materials shortages engineering change orders yield loss customer orders rework product differentiation operator unavailability material handling te=mean process time of a job e=standard deviationof process time Ce=te/ e coefficient of variation Variability Classes in Factory Dynamics LV Low variability MV Moderate variability HV High variability Effective Process Times: actual process times are generally LV effective process times include setups, failure outages HV, LV, and MV are all possible in effective process times Relation to Performance Cases: For balanced systems MV Practical Worst Case LV between Best Case and Practical Worst Case HV between Practical Worst Case and Worst Case Natural Variability- variability without explicitly analyzed causa. Sources: operator pace material fluctuations product type (if not explicitly considered) product quality Natural process variability is usually in the LV category. Down Time Mean effects t0= base process time c0- base process time coefficient of variability r0= 1/t0 = base capa city (rate) mf = mean time to failure mr= mean time to rep air Cr= coefficient of variability of rep air Times (r/mr) Availability: fraction of time machine is up A=mf/(mf+mr) Effective Processing Time and Rate: re=Aro te=t0/A Failures inflate mean, variance, and CV of effective process time Mean (te) increases proportionally with 1/A SCV (ce2) increases proportionally with mr SCV (ce2) increases proportionally in cr2 For constant availability (A), long infrequent outages increase SCV more than short frequent ones Setups Mean and Variability Effects Ns = average no. Jobs between setups Ts = average setup duration s = std. Deviation of setup time Cs= s/ts Te= t0+ts/Ns e2 = 02+ s2/Ns+(Ns-1)/Ns2 x ts2 ce2= e2/te2

Setups increase mean and variance of processing times. Variability reduction is one benefit of flexible machines. However, the interaction is complex. Other Process Variability Inflators Sources: operator unavailability recycle batching material unavailability Effects: inflate te inflate ce Measuring Flow Variability ta = mean time between arrivals ra = 1/ta = arrival rate a = standard deviation of time between arrivals ca= a/ta = coefficient t of variation of interarrival Times Variability In Single Machine Station cd2= u2xc e2+(1-u2) ca2 Departure variability depends on arrival variability and process variabiity Variability Interactions Importance of Queueing: manufacturing plants are queueing networks queueing and waiting time comprise majority of cycle time System Characteristics: Arrival process Service process Number of servers Maximum queue size (blocking) Service discipline (FCFS, LCFS, etc.) Balking Routing Kendall's Classification A/B/C A: arrival process B: service process C: number of machines M: exponential (Markovian) distribution G: completely general distribution D: constant (deterministic) distribution.

Queueing Parameters ra = the rate of arrivals in customers (jobs) per unit time (ta= 1/ra = average time between arrivals) ca = CV of inter-arrival times. m = number of machines. re = rate of the station in jobs per unit time = m/te. ce = CV of effective process times. u = utilization of station = ra/re. Queueing Measures CTq = the expected waiting time spent in queue. CT = the expected time spent at the process center, i.e., queue time plus process time. WIP = the average WIP level (in jobs) at the station. WIPq = the expected WIP (in jobs) in queue. Relationships: CT = CTq + te WIP = ra CT WIPq = ra CTq Result: If we know CTq, we can compute WIP, WIPq, CT. Effects of Blocking VUT Equation: characterizes stations with infinite space for queueing useful for seeing what will happen to WIP, CT without restrictions But real world systems often constrain WIP: physical constraints (e.g., space or spoilage) logical constraints (e.g., kanbans) Blocking Models: estimate WIP and TH for given set of rates, buffer sizes much more complex than non-blocking (open) models, often require simulation to evaluate realistic systems Seeking Out Variability General Strategies: look for long queues (Little's law) look for blocking focus on high utilization resources consider both flow and process variability ask why five times Specific Targets: equipment failures setups rework operator pacing anything that prevents regular arrivals and process times Variability Pooling Basic Idea: the CV of a sum of independent random variables decreases with the number of random variables. t0=time to process single part 0= standard deviation of time to process single part c0= 0/t0=CV of time to process single part t0(batch)= nt0 02(batch) =n 02 c02(batch) = 02(batch)/ t02 (batch) -> c0(batch) = c0/pierw n Basic Variability Takeaways Variability Measures: CV of effective process times CV of interarrival times Components of Process Variability failures setups

many others - deflate capacity and inflate variability long infrequent disruptions worse than short frequent ones Consequences of Variability: variability causes congestion (i.e., WIP/CT inflation) variability propagates variability and utilization interact pooled variability less destructive than individual variability Performance of a Serial Line Measures: Throughput Inventory (RMI, WIP, FGI) Cycle Time Lead Time Customer Service Quality Variability Law: Increasing variability always degrades the performance of a production system. Examples: process time variability pushes best case toward worst case higher demand variability requires more safety stock for same level of customer service higher cycle time variability requires longer lead time quotes to attain same level of on-time delivery Variability Buffering Buffering Law: Systems with variability must be buffered by some combination of: 1. inventory 2. capacity 3. time. Interpretation: If you cannot pay to reduce variability, you will pay In terms of high WIP, under-utilized capacity, or reduced customer service (i.e., lost sales, long lead times, and/or late deliveries). Variability in Push Systems TH is set by release rate in a push system. Increasing capacity (rb) reduces need for WIP buffering. Reducing process variability reduces WIP for same TH, reduces CT for same TH, and reduces CT variability. Variability in Pull Systems Capping WIP without reducing variability reduces TH. WIP cap limits effect of process variability on WIP/CT. Reducing process variability increases TH, given same buffers. Adding buffer space at bottleneck increases TH. Magnitude of impact of adding buffers depends on variability. Buffering less helpful at non-bottlenecks. Reducing process variability reduces CT variability. Conclusion: consequences of variability are different in push and pull systems, but in either case the buffering law implies that you will pay for variability somehow. Buffer Flexibility Buffer Flexibility Corollary: Flexibility reduces the amount of variability buffering required in a production system. Examples: Flexible Capacity: cross-trained workers Flexible Inventory: generic stock (e.g., assemble to order) Flexible Time: variable lead time quotes Variability from Batching VUT Equation: CT depends on process variability and flow variability Batching: affects flow variability affects waiting inventory Conclusion: batching is an important determinant of performance Process Batch Versus Move Batch Dedicated Assembly Line: What should the batch size be? Process Batch: Related to length of setup. The longer the setup the larger the lot size required for the same capacity. Move (transfer) Batch: Why should it equal process batch? The smaller the move batch, the shorter the cycle time. The smaller the move batch, the more material handling. Lot Splitting: Move batch can be different from process batch. 1. Establish smallest economical move batch. 2. Group batches of like families together at bottleneck to avoid setups. 3. Implement using a backlog. Process Batching Effects Types of Process Batching: 1. Serial Batching: processes with sequence-dependent setups batch size is number of jobs between setups batching used to reduce loss of capacity from setups 2. Parallel Batching: true batch operations (e.g., heat treat) batch size is number of jobs run together batching used to increase effective rate of process Process Batching Law: In stations with batch operations or significant changeover times: 1. The minimum process batch size that yields a stable system may be greater than one. 2. As process batch size becomes large, cycle time grows proportionally with batch size. 3. Cycle time at the station will be minimized for some process batch size, which may be greater than one. Basic Batching Tradeoff: WIP versus capacity Serial Batching Parameters: k =serial batch size t= time to process a single part s= time to per form a setup ce=CV for batch ra= arrival rate for parts ca= CV of batch arrivals

Time to process batch: te = kt + s Arrival of batches: ra/k Utilization: u = (ra/k)(kt + s) = ra(t + s/k ) minimum batch size requiredfor stability of system: k>sra/1-tra Setup Time Reduction Where? Stations where capacity is expensive Excess capacity may sometimes be cheaper Steps: 1. Externalize portions of setup 2. Reduce adjustment time (guides, clamps, etc.) 3. Technological advancements (hoists, quick-release, etc.) Caveat: Dont count on capacity increase; more flexibility will require more setups. Parallel Batching Parameters: k =serial batch size t= time to process a single part ce=CV for batch ra= arrival rate for parts ca= CV of batch arrivals B= maximum batch size Time to form batch: W= (k-1)/2 x 1/ra Arrival of batches: ra/k Utilization: u = (ra/k)(t) For stability: u < 1 requires minimum batch size required for stability of system: k>Ra *t Average wait-for-batch time: WT=(k-1)/2 * 1/ra Total cycle time = CT+WT Move Batching Move Batching Law: Cycle times over a segment of a routing are roughly proportional to the transfer batch sizes used over that segment, provided there is no waiting for the conveyance device. Insights: Basic Batching Tradeoff: WIP vs. move frequency Queueing for conveyance device can offset CT reduction from reduced move batch size Move batching intimately related to material handling and layout decisions Move Batching Calculations insigt: Cycle time increases with k. Inflation term does not involve CVs Congestion from batching is more bad control than randomness. Assembly Operations Assembly Operations Law: The performance of an assembly stadion is degraded by increasing any of the following: 1. Number of components being assembled. 2. Variability of component arrivals. 3. Lack of coordination between component arrivals. Observations: This law can be viewed as special instance of variability law. Number of components affected by product/process design. Arrival variability affected by process variability and production control. Coordination affected by scheduling and shop floor control. Attacking Variability Objectives reduce cycle time increase throughput improve customer service Levers reduce variability directly buffer using inventory buffer using capacity buffer using time increase buffer flexibility Cycle Time Definition (Station Cycle Time): The average cycle timeat a station is made up of the following components: cycle time = move time + queue time + setup time +process time + wait-to-batch time +wait-in-batch time + wait-to-match time Definition (Line Cycle Time): The average cycle time in a line is equal to the sum of the cycle times at the individual stations less any time that overlaps two or more stations. Reducing Queue Delay CTq = V U t Reduce Variability failures setups uneven arrivals, etc. Reduce Utilization arrival rate (yield, rework, etc.) process rate (speed, time, availability, etc) Reducing Batching Delay CTbatch = delay at stations + delay between stations Reduce Process Batching Optimize batch sizes Reduce setups Stations where capacity is expensive Capacity vs. WIP/FT tradeoff Reduce Move Batching Move more frequently Layout to suport material handling (e.g., cells) Reducing Matching Delay CTbatch = delay due to lack of synchronization Reduce Variability High utilization fabrication lines Usual variability reduction methods Improve Coordination scheduling

pull mechanisms modular designs Reduce Number of Components product redesign kitting Increasing Throughput TH = P(bottleneck is busy) bottleneck rate Reduce Blocking/Starving buffer with inventory (near bottleneck) reduce system desire to queue Increase Capacity add equipment increase operating time (e.g. spell breaks) increase reliability reduce yield loss/rework Customer Service Elements of Customer Service: lead time fill rate (% of orders delivered on-time) quality Law (Lead Time): The manufacturing lead time for a routing that yields a given service level is an increasing function of both the mean and standard deviation of the cycle time of the routing. Improving Customer Service LT = CT + z CT Reduce CT Visible to Customer delayed differentiation assemble to order stock components Reduce Average CT queue time batch time match time Reduce CT Variability generally same as methods for reducing average CT: improve reliability improve maintainability reduce labor variability improve quality improve scheduling Corrupting Influence Takeaways Variance Degrades Performance: many sources of variability planned and unplanned Variability Must be Buffered: inventory capacity time Flexibility Reduces Need for Buffering: still need buffers, but smaller than before Variability and Utilization Interact: congestion effects multiply utilization effects are highly nonlinear importance of bottleneck management Batching is an Important Source of Variability: process and move batching serial and parallel batching wait-to-batch time in addition to variability effects Assembly Operations Magnify Impact of Variability: wait-to-match time caused by lack of synchronization Variability Propagates: flow variability is as disruptive as process variability non-bottlenecks can be major problems TOC steps: 1. Identyfy the constraint 2. decide how to explore the constraint 3. subordinate all action to above decision 4. elevate the constraint 5. come back to step 1