The Analysis of Performances of an Assembly Line in Synchronous Supply Managed with Kanban and Conwip Methods

Abstract:

The present paper is part of a larger study of the authors, which consists in the analysis of performances of several production systems. The researches presented in this paper analyze the influence of the method of production flow management, the method of launching in production and the size of demand from the client on several performance indicators of a multiproduct assembly line supplied on stock. The assembly line is multiproduct type (are assembled 2 types of products that resemble as configuration and technology) and it has 5 workstations with mainly manual activities, that are supplied with parts using a synchronous method. The performance indicators considered were: average work in process, cost per unit, systems reactivity to client demand and throughput, their values being obtained by simulating the functioning of the assembly line in different experimental conditions, determined by the variation of the above mentioned parameters, using ARENA software. The synthesis of the results and their interpretation allow the process managers to take adequate decisions depending on targeted objectives.

• Periodical: Applied Mechanics and Materials (Volume 657)
• Pages: 966-970
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.657.966
• Online since: October 2014
• Authors: Alin Gavriluţă, Eduard Laurentiu Nitu*, Ana Rotaru
• Keywords: ARENA, Assembly Line, CONWIP, IDEF0, Kanban, Synchronous Supply

References

[1] C. Wänström, L. Medbo, The impact of materials feeding design on assembly process performance, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management. 20-1 (2009) 30-51.

DOI: 10.1108/17410380910925398

[2] C. Duri, Y. Frein, M. D. Mascolo, Comparison among three pull control policies: Kanban, base stock, and generalized Kanban, Annals of Operations Research. 93 (2000) 41-46.

[3] D. Cao, M. Chen, A mixed integer programming model for a two line CONWIP-based production and assembly system, International Journal of Production Economics. Vol. 95 (2005) 317-326.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2004.01.002

[4] Y. Khojasteh-Ghamari, A performance comparison between Kanban and CONWIP controlled assembly systems, Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. Vol. 20 (2009) 751-760.

DOI: 10.1007/s10845-008-0174-5

[5] J. A. Pettersen, A. Segerstedt, Restricted work-in-process: A study of differences between Kanban and CONWIP, International Journal of Production Economics. 118-1 (2009) 199-207.

DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2008.08.043

[6] J. Banks, J. S. Carson, B. L. Nelson, Discrete-Event Simulation, Upper Saddle River, Prentice Hall, New Jersey, (1999).

[7] E. Niţu, A. Rotaru, A. Gavriluţă, Performance Analysis of a Layout of an Assembly Line Supplied Based on Stock or Synchronous, Applied Mechanics and Materials. 371 (2013) 42-47.

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.371.42