Qatar University © 2012

Facility Planning & Layout

PROF. MOHAMED HAOUARI

Part II

Line Balancing
Line Balancing

• The line balancing problem is typically posed as

selection of tasks to be completed at each workstation

along a production line

 Designing Product Layouts
• Objective
• Balance the assembly line
• Line balancing
• tries to equalize the amount of work at each
workstation
• Precedence requirements
• physical restrictions on the order in which operations
are performed
• Cycle time
• maximum amount of time a product is allowed to
spend at each workstation
Cycle Time Example
production time available
Cd = desired units of output

(8 hours x 60 minutes / hour)

Cd = (120 units)
480
Cd = 120
= 4 minutes
 Flow Time vs Cycle Time
• Cycle time = max time spent at any station
• Flow time = time to complete all stations

1 2 3
4 minutes 4 minutes 4 minutes

Flow time = 4 + 4 + 4 = 12 minutes

Cycle time = max (4, 4, 4) = 4 minutes
Example

6
Example
Workstation Workstation Workstation Workstation
1 2 3 4

Tasks A B, C D, E F

Time 60 120 90 90

7
Calculating Production Rate From
Cycle Time

1
Production rate 
cycle time
 1 
  3,600 sec./hr.
 120 sec./unit 
 30 units/hr.

8
Calculating Idle Time

The sum of the idle times at

each station is the idle time in
the system.

9
Calculating Unit Labor Cost
The total labor cost for eight hours is
(8 hours/shift) (4 workers/shift) ($20/hour),
or $640/shift.

The total number of units produced is

(30 units/hour) (8 hours/shift),
or 240 units/shift.

The unit cost is

($640/shift) (240 units/shift),
or $2.67/unit.
10
A Balanced Assembly Line
Workstation Workstation Workstation Workstation
1 2 3 4
Tasks A, B C D, E F
Time 90 90 90 90

Unbalanced Line Balanced Line

Total task time 360 seconds 360 seconds
Cycle time 120 seconds 90 seconds
Production rate 30 units/hr. 40 units/hr.
Idle time 120 seconds/unit 0
Unit cost $2.67/unit $2.00/unit

11
Line Balancing Procedure
1. Draw and label a precedence diagram
2. Calculate desired cycle time required for line
3. Calculate theoretical minimum number of workstations
4. Group elements into workstations, recognizing cycle
time and precedence constraints
5. Calculate efficiency of line
6. Determine if theoretical minimum number of
workstations or an acceptable efficiency level has been
reached. If not, go back to step 4.
Number of Workstations

• The number of work stations “M” is a variable to be determined

in the solution of the line balancing problem.

Note: The minimum number of workstations is

N
M  1 / C  ti
i 1

[where there are N tasks in the production process]

Utilization
• Station efficiency

SEk  1 / C  ti 100 %, K  1,2,........, M

iK
• Line efficiency

n
LE  1 / MC  ti (100)%
i 1

• Balance delay = 100 - LE [in %]

An illustrative Example
• Consider the following assembly process with precedence
relationships shown below:

4
5 3 2
2 5
1 1 7 8
2
4
3 4
3 6
Desired production rate = 12/hour

Cycle time = 1/12 hour = 5 min

Line Balancing Algorithms
• Algorithms are heuristics that make assignments of tasks to

workstations, filling one workstation up to cycle time, then

beginning to fill the next workstation.

• Will examine three algorithms that differ in the way tasks are

given priority order for workstation assignment.

A General Algorithm
• Identify tasks whose predecessors have been assigned
to a workstation (available tasks).
• Determine from available tasks, those that fit, i.e.,
those whose tasks times time remaining to be filled at
this work station.
• Choose a task that fits by some decision rule

• Continue steps 1 to 3 until no task fits, then go on to

next workstation.
• Continue steps 1 to 4 until all tasks are assigned.

17
Ranked Positional Weight
• Tasks are ordered for assignment in terms of decreasing ranked

positional weight.

• The positional weight for each task is the sum of the task

completion times for the task in question and all tasks that follow

the task in precedence relationships.

Example
Consider the assembly process presented previously

Completion Positional Completion Positional

Task Time Weight Task Time Weight

8 2 2 4 1 6

7 3 5 3 3 13

6 4 4 2 5 15

5 4 9 1 2 24
Example
Algorithm proceeds by assignment of tasks in order of descending

positional weight (obeying precedence and other restrictions)

Completion Ranked Completion Ranked

Task Time Pos. Wt. Task Time Pos. Wt.

1 2 24 4 1 6

2 5 15 7 3 5

3 3 13 6 4 4

5 4 9 8 2 2
Example
Assign tasks to workstations using the following format:

Cumulative Cumulative

Station Task Time Cumul. Time Station Task Time Cumul. Time
1 1 2 2 4 7 3 3
3 3 5 8 2 5
2 2 5 5 5 6 4 4
3 5 4 4
4 1 5
Example

• Station Efficiencies: SE1 = 5/5 = 100%, SE2 = 5/5 = 100%,

SE3 = 5/5 = 100%, SE4 = 5/5 = 100%, SE5 = 4/5 = 80%

• Line Efficiency: LE = 24/5(5) = 24/25 = 96%

• Balance Delay: 100 - 96 = 4%

Region Approach
• Tasks are assigned to precedence regions and ranked within

region in order of decreasing completion times .

• Tasks are then assigned to workstations in precedence region-

completion time order.

• Make assignments working from left to right assigning all tasks to

latest region possible.

Region Approach - Example
• Consider example assembly process
Region Approach - Example
Within each region, tasks are ranked in terms of decreasing
completion times

Ranked Ranked

Region Tasks Region Tasks

1 1 4 7

2 2, 3 5 6, 8

3 5, 4
Region Approach - Example
• As station is “closed out,” alternative assignments (still feasible
with respect to assignment restrictions) are evaluated to improve
station efficiency.

Cumulative Cumulative

Station Task Time Time Station Task Time Time

1 1 2 2 4 7 3 3

3 3 5 8 2 5

2 2 5 5 5 6 4 4

3 5 4 4

4 1 5
Region Approach - Example

• Station Efficiencies: SE1 = 5/5 = 100%, SE2 = 5/5 = 100%,

SE3 = 5/5 = 100%, SE4 = 5/5 = 100%, SE5 = 4/5 = 80%

• Line Efficiency: LE = 24/5(5) = 24/25 = 96%

• Balance Delay: 100 - 96 = 4%

Another Example Assembly Process
Consider another assembly process with precedence diagram

Desired production rate = 10/hr

Cycle time = 6 minutes

Ranked Positional Weight
Ranked Cumulative
Task Pos. Wt. Station Task Time Time SE
1 18 1 1 2 2 100%
3 8 3 4 6
2 5 2 2 5 5 83.3%
4 4 3 4 3 3 100%
5 3 5 3 6
6 1 4 6 1 1 16.6%

LE = 18/4(6) = 75 Balance Delay = 100 - 75 = 25%

Region Approach - Example
Cumulative
Station Task Time Time SE
1 1 2 2 100%
3 4 6
2 4 3 3 100%
5 3 6
3 2 5 5 100%
6 1 6
LE = 18/3(6) = 100%
Balance Delay = 100 - 100 = 0%
LOT Approach‐ Golf Club
• Customer demand requires production volume of 24 finished clubs
in an 8 hour shift

task task description operation must

time (min) follow
A inspection 5 -
B trim the shaft to length 4 A
C weight the head 13 A
D finish the shaft 9 B
E gel coat the head 7 C
F assemble the head to the shaft 6 D, E
total work content 44
 Example problem ‐ Golf Club
• How often does a club need to come off the line
in order to meet the customer demand required?
• Exclude initial start‐up
• Cycle time = (480 min/shift)/(24 clubs/shift) = 20
min/club
• Theoretical minimum number of workstations for this
operation
• Total work content/cycle time
• 44 min/20 min per workstation = 2.2 workstations → 3 workstations
LOT Approach
• LOT – longest operation time heuristic
• Construct precedence diagram
• Arrange tasks in order of longest to shortest
• Take care of longest operations first (easier to
fit in shorter operations later), while
maintaining precedence and not exceeding
cycle time
Apply LOT to Golf Club
• Precedence diagram
• Tasks in order of longest to shortest
C – 13 min
D – 9 min
E – 7 min
F – 6 min
A – 5 min
B – 4 min
Apply LOT to Golf Club
mfg/assy firm (cont.)
stations 1 2 3
tasks A, C E, B, D F
time per club 18 min 20 min 6 min
time available per unit 20 min 20 min 20 min
idle time 2 min 0 min 14 min

• Efficiency of the line

= (total work content)/(# of workstations x cycle time)
= (44 min)/(3 workstations x 20 min/workstation) = 0.733 (73.3%)
Evaluate investment options
for Golf Club
• Investment options
• Invest in equipment that will automate weighting process (task C)
resulting in a savings of 4 min/club
• Invest in fixturing for the shaft that will result in a savings of 2
min each for trimming (task B) and finishing (task D)
• Apply LOT rule to each option and see if there is any
improvement in efficiency possible
Balancing another
manufacturing line
• For a manufacturing line, the data below on the task precedence
relationships exist
task performance must
time (min) follow
A 3 -
B 6 A
C 7 A
D 2 A
E 2 A
F 4 C, B
G 5 C
H 5 D, E, F, G
Balancing another
manufacturing line (cont.)
• Construct the precedence diagram for the tasks.
• What is the theoretical minimum cycle time?
• To balance the line to the cycle time determined
above, what is the minimum number of work
stations?
Balancing another
manufacturing line (cont.)
• Use the "longest‐operation‐time" rule to
balance the line to the theoretical
minimum cycle time determined above.
• Calculate the efficiency of the balanced
line.
Medical Kit Example

40
Example

The facility manager has been directed to balance this

single-line operation with one forty-hour shift. The line should
produce 6,000 kits per week.

41
Example ‐‐ Continued
cacity
PR 
H
6,000 units/wk.

40 hrs./wk.
 150 units/hr.
1
C 
PR
1

150 units/hr.
 1 
   3,600 sec./hr.
 150 units/hr. 
 24 sec./unit
n

 ti
N  i1

C
107 sec.

24 sec./stati on
 4.46 or 5.0 stations 42
 Balanced Line for the
Medical Kit Problem
Time remaining
Task Available Task Assigned at the Station
to be Scheduled Selected to Station (Seconds)
A A 1
B,C,D B 1 0

C,D D 2
C C 2
E E 2 3

F,G,H F 3
G,H G 3 0

H H 4 43
I I 4 7
 Example
idle time
Balance delay (percent idle time)  (100)
time available in the line
n
(m)(C )   t i
 i 1
(100)
(m)(C )
(5 stations)(24 sec./stations)  107 sec.
 (100)
(5 stations)(24 sec./station)
 10.8%

44
 ©
Thank you for your attention… 2012