Each time a new unit is introduced at Toshiba, management attempts to improve the assembling process in terms of raising productivity and decreasing costs. Attentiveness can be directed towards reducing the number of components and simplifying production and assemblage. Manufacturing anatomist manager Toshihiro Nakamura presented a model assembly piece concerning the fresh notebook unit. The following precedence graph looks at the process sheet. Task figures: 1-17; task time in mere seconds (in brackets).
The assembly series consists out of 6 workstations. Labour time (in seconds) for each workstation is usually indicated in brackets.
Workstation 1, process 1 (75). Workstation two, tasks 2 and 3 (85). Workstation 3, duties 4, a few and six (97). Workstation 4, jobs 7, 8 and on the lookout for (105). Workstation 5, jobs 10-15 (101). (Workstations 6th, 7 and 8 will be operating the software load). A final workstation on the lookout for handles responsibilities 16 and 17 (120). The quantity of job time therefore equals 583 seconds. The assembly line is created assuming that a single notebook will be assembled every 2 moments by half a dozen workers. Therefore , daily potential of the assembly line would be 240 units (450 minutes operating time per day), let’s assume that on each one of many six workstations a computer is positioned at the beginning of the morning.
Primary production intended for the new style is a hundred and fifty units per day, increasing to 250 the subsequent week and finally up to 300 units, depending on process achievement.
The logjam in this assembly line is located among workstation some and 5. Workstation four completes their tasks (7, 8, and 9) within just 105 seconds whereas workstation 5 completes after information seconds. This kind of results in a slack of 4 mere seconds per unit at workstation 5. A potential solution to this problem might be assigning higher skilled personnel to workstation 4 in order to push on assembly time. More detailed recommendations will follow. This bottleneck constitutes the major issue within this development process and you will be examined in more detail inside the following.
Analysing the major concerns concerns calculating potential slack times in workstation a few regarding diverse amounts of products being created. With the first production of 150 models per day, a slack of 600 just a few seconds (10 minutes) at workstation 5 would seem per day. It will require 3 minutes to complete one device, assuming that one hundred and fifty units are produced per day with a great operating time of 7. 5 hours. Generating 250 devices per day implies that one unit is thought to be completed after 1 ) 8 moments or 108 seconds. The moment production raises up to 300 units every day, operating period per unit would be 1 . 5 minutes or perhaps 90 mere seconds. Hence, elevating production ends in increased slack times in workstation five.
With a production of 250 units daily, slack period would be one thousand seconds or perhaps 16. 67 minutes. Within those 18. 7 minutes of slack time, being unfaithful. 3 models could have been produced. With a creation of three hundred units per day, slack period would even boost up to 20 minutes through which 13. three or more units might have been produced. These kinds of calculations clearly illustrate ineffectiveness at workstation 4 resulting in major costs due to comparatively high nonproductive times. Extrapolating these amounts up to a working week, let’s assume that 5 times á 7. 5 hours the assembly collection is in procedure, significantly high slack times and therefore unneeded costs occur. Assuming a production of 250 devices per day, slack time in station your five per week can be 83. 5 mins in which yet another 46 devices could have been created.
Efficiency in the assembly line will probably be calculated in the following with regard on diverse amounts of devices being developed. Eventually the optimal number of products to reach a productivity of 100% will be calculated. With 250 units developed per day, a cycle moments of 108 mere seconds per product results. Hence, using the formula for establishing the line´s efficiency, (sum of process times = 583 seconds/6 workstations times 108 seconds cycle time) results in a productivity rate of m89. 97% (~ 90%). Running by a optimum capacity of 300 devices per day (583/6×90), line efficiency would be 107. 96% that is not close to reality. Relative to it is use of work, an efficiency of ~ 108% producing by maximum capacity is certainly not achievable. More workers will be needed and staff would need to work on a single task at the same time. An efficiency of 100% can be reached with a daily production of 277 models per day assuming that the assembly collection maintains the initial set up of 6 workstations while using same work time. Using the efficiency charge (with 277 units created per day) constitutes 99. 66% which is the maximum that could be reached.
In order to dispense the previously discussed issue of inefficiency for workstation four, several tips will be pointed out. Firstly, the best solution in relation to not changing the assembly set up would be to give more experienced workers to station four in order to improve the assembling process. Going hand in hand with this presumption is that the supporter might help personnel at workstation 4. The web though, that the supporter´s process certainly is always to help out the assembly workers where help is required but his or her task is not to stay in one location at all times. Moreover, redesigning the assembly set up might benefit workstation 4.
The redesign is concerned with the ideal placement of personnel. In the case of Toshiba´s assembly line it may be helpful to increase the section of workstation some in order to place one or two further workers. Another possible answer might be to position additional staff not just on a single side from the conveyer belt but one the other side of the coin one too. Especially in the portion of workstation 4 additional help from around might be an answer. The assembly range has space for a total of doze positions. Not every are being used. One more potential willpower might be to split up workstation 4 into two make the new one out of a free location.
Regarding the computations of slack times and efficiency with different amounts of units being produced, one can consider that Toshiba´s assembly line is actually efficient but has space to improve. Workstation 4 presents the main problem of this case but a lot of potential alternatives were offered. Overall efficiency of this assembly line is quite high and appropriate.
(All measurements were made without taking into account any break times)
1
