facility layout design using systematc …valve and metal parts production has been contemplated....

International Journal of Technical Innovation in Modern

Engineering & Science (IJTIMES) Impact Factor: 5.22 (SJIF-2017), e-ISSN: 2455-2585

Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2018

IJTIMES-2018@All rights reserved 919

FACILITY LAYOUT DESIGN USING SYSTEMATC LAYOUT

PLANNING IN MAX POWER ENGINER WORKS, RAJKOT, GUJRAT

Padariya Ketulkumar Prafulchandra1, Dr.N.M.Suri

2, Rohan

3

1Production and Industrial Engineering, Punjab engineering college

2Professor,Production and Industrial Engineering, Punjab engineering college

3Production and Industrial Engineering, Punjab engineering college

Abstract- The objective of this thesis is to improve the production floor layout of the MAX PWER PRESS

ENGINER WORKS and to evaluate the proposed alternative layouts using systematic layout planning. This

project is conducted atB-12, Pipaliya Industrial Hub, O. The major problem faced by the company is high

cross-over frequency for inspection department, assembly department and manufacturing zone. Rework of

products between three zones occur. There is high flow intensity between departments which have high

interrelationship. This leads to high travelling time and high travelling cost. Two alternative layouts are

proposed using the 11 steps in Systematic Layout Planning, which is a systematic way of generating layout.

The proposed alternative layout involves transferring the departments which have high interrelationship

close to each other. The best alternative is chosen based on the performance measures which have the most

significant improvement, which are total travel distance, total travel time, total travel cost, number of cross-

over, output, average resource utilization, total average WIP level, total average waiting time and total time

spent in the system. The best alternative does not need extra space for re-layout. Total travel distance for

power press is decrease.

Keywords— Systematic layout planning, Facility layout design, Flow intensity, Rework, Total travel distance

1 Introduction

With fast increasing of demand in production, industrial processing plants need to increase their possibilities in

production and adequacy to contend with their market rivals. In the meantime, the production procedure should

be outfitted with the capacity to have brought down cost with higher viability. Consequently, the best approach

to tackle the issue about the production is essential. There are numerous ways i.e. quality control (QC), add up

to quality administration (TQM), standard time, plant format to tackle the issues concerning efficiency. For

instance, a contextual investigations from the light industry [1]. The discovered issue was that the staff did not

work in a methodical way, resulting in disarray and no standard time nor facilitating device. The staff invested

excessively energy at work. The best approach to take care of these issues was to enhance the means in working

and the region where they worked through perception and hands-on work and additionally proposing

apparatuses to encourage the work to set adjust and find the institutionalized time.

In additional Yookkasemwong et al. [2] examined the production procedure for the Cable box to shape metal.

The issue was that the work couldn't be finished within 8 hours. The issue was then concentrated from

information accumulation, the actual time stack, ill-advised plant design, and the term of the procedure. The

principle of ECRS was adjusted to diminish the waste and organize the rehashed steps, resulting in changes in

plant design and staff workload. The effect of inappropriate plant format on the manufacturing procedure for

valve and metal parts production has been contemplated. The plant design was changed to consent to the

international gauges through SLP method [3].

Sucharitkul et al. contemplated the likelihood of plant design and installing aluminium foundry [4]. Concerning

the format of plant, it was done in agreement with the means in methodical plant format outline. Yujie et al.

considered the general plane of long yards using SLP which the best design demonstrated the great work process

and practical noteworthiness [5]. According to the inquires about said above, plant design is one approach to

decrease the cost of manufacturing and increase the efficiency. Also increases great work process in production

course. This examination depicts original plant design, material stream analysis, which includes zone and

separation between task A and B, through such a steel pole processing plant, to the point that was contextual

investigation.

International Journal of Technical Innovation in Modern Engineering & Science (IJTIMES)

Volume 4, Issue 7, July-2018, e-ISSN: 2455-2585,Impact Factor: 5.22 (SJIF-2017)


From the involvement in steel pole plant, it was discovered that there was sat idle or deferral in manufacturing,

in other words, the development of the material in long line and interrupted stream and in addition futile zone of

the plant. According to these issues, the analysts might want to analyse the best approach to tackle such issues

and find the best approach to enhance the plant design. The fundamental industrial format planning is connected

to precise format planning (SLP) method in which demonstrated well-ordered of plant outline from input

information and exercises to evaluation of plant design. This method gives the new plant format that enhances

the procedure course through the plant, and help to increase space in industries.

2 PROCEDURE FOR PLANT LAYOUT PLANTING

Many different methods are used to design or re‐design the facility layout of a manufacturing process.

Each of these methods is based on specific Idea and goal.Each method gives layout that is different from other

layout so performance measurement tool is needed to find optimal layout. Comparison of layout is done through

score like a total closeness rating index or a simulation analysis that highlight production process parameters

like time, throughput rate, cost and work in process inventory or the line availability.

2.1 Input data

The first step of Systematic Layout Planning requires gathering and analysing data required for the case study.

This must occur before any planning of relationships, space or adjustments. The input variables for every SLP

are P, Q, R, S and T. Product (P) is the material that will be processed. For this case study, the products are

MECHANICAL POWER PRESS. The general usage and process flow of these product have been discussed.

Quantity (Q) is the volume of each part of product to be processed. The volume in this case study refers to the

output of each process and flow of material. It relies on the total time used to build a unit of product. Routing

(R) is the path a product travels to be processed. The routing (R) in this case study is obtained from the company

s process specific document (PSD). Time (T) refers to the overall time required to complete processing. Data

collection of the cycle time for each process is done by time studies.

2.2Time study

Standard gives data basic to the effective activity of an association. Standard time is the time required by a

regular administrator, working at a typical pace, to perform indicated errand utilizing a recommended strategy,

with time for personal, fatigue and delay permitted. Time examines is the investigation of an offered activity to

decide the components of work required to perform it, the request in which these components happen and the

times which are required to perform them viably. Time contemplate is best to develop standards for very

repetitive tasks which have generally short process durations. The standard must be changed in accordance with

the mirror the faculty, fatigue, and delays that are a piece of each activity. The personal fatigue and delay (PFD)

remittance is normally communicated as a level of the standard time and added to the time permitted to finish

the specific undertaking being examined.

Standard Time Determination

The observed time (OT) of the given component is dictated by taking the mean of 10 perceptions. The example

estimate, n, is then ascertained to demonstrate its adequacy.

Normal Time = Observed Time*Average Rating

The rating used here is 85% = 0.85

Standard Time = Normal Time/ ( 1- Allowances)

Allowances for this project are

Personal needs 5%

Unavoidable delay 1%

Basic Fatigue 4 %

Total = 10%




Tables 1 and 2 show the process analysis for manufacturing process of power press.

In table1 all manufacturing process normal and standard time is shown and also transport 1 to 10 is shown.

Transport 1 is material transportation time between material inspection and shearing machine. Transport 2 is

material transportation time between shearing machine to material cutting zone. Transport 3 is material

transportation time between material cutting zone to lath machine. Transport 4 is material transportation time

between lath machines to drill machine. Transport 5 is material transportation time between drill machine to

welding zone. Transport 6 is material transportation time between welding zone to drill machine.Transport 7 is

material transportation time between drill machine to boring machine. Transport 8 is material transportation

time between boring machines to assembly section. Transport 9 is material transportation time between

Assembly section to inspection and painting zone. Transport 10 is material transportation time between

inspection and painting zone to storage section.

MFG. PROCESS NORMAL TIME IN MIN. ALLOWANCE STANDARD

TIME IN MIN.

MATERIALINSPECTION 250.23 10% 278.04

TRANSPORT 1 62.42 10% 69.35

SHEARING 210.49 10% 233.88

TRANSPORT 2 39.67 10% 44.07

MATERIAL GAS CUTTING 384.36 10% 427.07

TRANSPORT 3 109.75 10% 121.94

LATHE MACHINE 313.25 10% 348.06

TRANSPORT 4 117.92 10% 131.02

DRILLING 364.05 10% 404.50

TRANSPORT 5 126.58 10% 140.65

WELDING 433.95 10% 482.17

TRANSPORT 6 51.92 10% 57.69

DRILLING 318.25 10% 353.61

TRANSPORT 7 58.00 10% 64.44

BORING 235.65 10% 261.83

TRANSPORT 8 45.92 10% 51.02

ASSEMBLY 721.54 10% 801.71

TRANSPORT 9 56.08 10% 62.31

INSPECTION 420.32 10% 467.02

TRANSPORT 10 35.83 10% 39.81

TABLE 1: TRAVELLING AND OPERATION TIME OF OLD LAYOUT




From the data of table 1 calculate the total time of production of layout 10 ton max power press and then

calculate time per unit in min. total available working min per month is 63360min. throughput unit is 65. Total

travelling time of material is 782.31 min . Total travel time per unit is 156.41 min per unit.

2.4 Flow of Materials

The flow of material involves in determining the most effective sequence of work and material. An

effective flow means that the material moves progressively through the process and should always advance

forward without excessive detours and cross-overs. In traditional manufacturing applications, the flow is

determined from either the product or the process. In this case study, process flow was used to establish flow.

There are altogether 9 departments involved in processing this product. Material cutting, leath machine,

shearing, drilling, boring, welding, Assembly, inspection and painting. As each function was defined and added

to the flow chart, it has been apparent that the flow of materials was never formally planned. This can be seen by

the extensive cross-over between both Manufacturing and storage. The flow of each product is shown in Figure

2 and Figure 3.

This paper refers to a production line with a throughput time of about 30 days for every batch. The

production process is described in what follows. The raw material is goes into serval process to convert it into

the final product. The first processing phase is “metal cutting”, in which oxy acetylene cutting is used to cut the

material. Then the material is goes to the shearing machines to bend the material for appropriate shape .at this

time some part is goes into the lathe machine to cut dimension of material. Now parts are goes to drilling

section to make holes in parts. Next step is metal joining step, in this step, the parts are welded by MIG welding.

Now structure of press machine is ready. Structure goes to the assembly section. In assembly section, assembly

of Ram, motor, bed is done. After assembly is done then machine goes into the inspection room. Here machine

is run for 1 day. After one day run, if machine is perfect then it’s going to the paint shop otherwise goes to

manufacturing section according to defect detect. In the paint shop, the painting of machine is done in around

45 min then it takes one all day to dry up.

To summarize, there are 9 activities to be accomplished and 4 workstations needed in the line:

Oxy acetylene cutting ; Shearing: Cutting in Lathe machine; Drilling; Boring; welding; Assembly; Testing;

Painting.

2 FIGURE: FLOW OF PROCESS




3 FIGURE: MATERIAL FLOW DIAGRAM

However, a linear configuration of workstations is normally difficult in real cases. 2 process is usually made on

a unique machine and the same is so for testing; since these operations occur twice so the flow of

material is not linear but becomes interlaced .Usually made on a unique machine and the same is so

for testing; since these operations occur twice so the flow of material is not linear but becomes

interlaced .

2.5 Activity Relationship Chart

In this stage, the identification of the relationships between resources is discussed. The resources are the various

processes involved in the manufacturing of the product. The information regarding where a product is received

from and the destination of the product upon completion is gathered. The results are tabulated in Rework flow

below.

In Power press manufacturing Process, the activity relationship chart is shown in figure. The relationship chart

displays which entities are related to others and it also rates the importance of the closeness between them. This

makes the chart the most effective tool for layout planning and is the best way of planning the arrangement of a

plant layout having little flow of materials. It is a good record keeping tool to organize data into a usable form.

With this, Activity Relationship Diagram is generated where proximity and relationships are visually evident.

Figure 4 below shows the diagram.

Figure 4: Activity Relationship Diagram

A- Absolutely Necessary, E- Especially Important, I – Important, O- Ordinary, U- Unimportant, X- Undesirable.




2.6 Relationship Diagram

The activity relationship diagram is a visual display of the activity relationship chart. Each entity on the chart is

translated to a symbol to be placed on the diagram and then lines are connected to show the value of the

relationship. Figure 3.5 shows the relationship diagram for this case study. Different coloured lines are used to

distinguish the importance between each process.

FIGURE: 5 REALATIONSHIP DIAGRAM

Absolutely necessary relationship occurs between drilling and boring. Locating them close together is absolutely

necessary as all the products share these 2 processes .Especially important relationship occurs among Assembly

process-Boring, Welding-Drilling, Material Inspection-Shearing and Shearing-Gas Metal Cutting as these

processes occur back to back and are also shared between products. After Material inspection, material goes to

shearing machine .After shearing material Gas cutting done. After Gas Cutting some part of power press goes to

shearing machine for surface levelling purpose. Important relations, occur between the material cutting chamber

and lathe machine shop, Metal Gas Cutting-Drilling Machine as these processes involve. Relationships rated as

ordinary closeness involve metal cutting zone –welding and lath-drill current position is satisfactory.

Through the analysis of the Activity Relationship Diagram, a better understanding of the processing

functions for both the products has been achieved. This can be applied to the layout of the physical building in a

space relationship diagram.

2.7 Space requirements

The actual production area is a unique, huge space, where there were also packaging areas, office, raw materials

and final product inventory. Therefore, the separation of the production activities from all the other auxiliary

ones was the first requirement expressed for the new layout. Referring to the actual state represented in

Figure 4, the manufacturing activities from the initial gas cutting to the painting (H) are represented by the

“production” area, which is about 470 m2, while the Inspection and painting activity is performed together in

a area of 140 m2. The “production” and “finishing” operations are the areas that need a redesign and to which

a new building of about 1100m2 will be assigned. In particular, the production workstations will be reorganized

according to certain factory requirements (see below). The other activities will be re‐arrange. Figure 4 highlights

the original configuration on the left side and the desired one on the right.




FIGURE 5 DEPARTMENTS OF FIRM

The re‐design study presented in this thesis is only concerned with the new building in Figure 5,

which comprises two different areas, that’s shown in Figure 6.

FIGURE 6 LAYOUT OF NEW FIRM

2.8 Space Available

Zone 4 is a shared building between Inspection, painting and storage for all the product of company. IN the

Current scenario is that there occurs frequent travelling between manufacturing section and storage section of

operator between .Thus, the idea of improvement is to consolidate the processes which are currently sprawled

across 2 zones nearer. Manufacturing zone is chosen as the lathe machine, Drill machine, shearing machine and

boring machine are all located in zone 2 , these are also centralized processes which are shared between material

cutting process and welding process. There are 2 scenarios. First is there would be extra space provided to

manufacturing and metal cutting area as shown in Figure 5. The size is now 650m2 of new layout. This happens

if some stations are transferred back to zone 2.

By rearranging the location of assembly zone we get some extra space for manufacturing. This extra space is

now transfer to our new facility layout design.




ZONE 1 MATERIAL INSPECTION +WELDING+CUTTING

ZONE 2 SHEARING

ZONE 2 LATHE MACHINE

ZONE 2 DRILLING

ZONE 2 BORING

ZONE 3 ASSEMBLY

ZONE 4 INSPECTION

ZONE 4 STORAGE

TABLE 4 DIVISION OF FIRM

Zone 1 is shared between the material inspection, metal cutting and metal joining process and zone 2 is shared

between the lathe machine, shear machine, drill machine and boring machine. Zone 4 is shared between

Inspection, painting and storage for all the product of company.

2.9 Space Relationship Diagram

The space requirements discussed in above. They are combined to a space relationship diagram. The purpose of

the space relationship diagram is to combine established spatial constraints with the activity relationship

diagram. There are develop with extra space provided. In this layout process is divided into zones and the zone

is in sequence. The relationship between workstation is shown in below.

FIGURE 7 PROCESS RELAIONSHIP DIAGRAM

2.10 Modifying Constraints

There are a few constraints in this case study. First, the material cutting, material inspection and material

welding process is done in same area. This process is performed in a controlled environment. Apart from that

Painting, Inspection and final product storage is also done in one zone .they share area.




2.11 Practical Limitations

Systematic Layout Planning is best employed when creating a new facility starting from scratch and the design

is not yet finalized. In the case of this case study, the existing facilities were established and there was limited

ability to expand the area for extra space.

Other than that, some negotiations is needed between departments if the layout with extra space is more

productive as compared to the improvement without extra space.

2.12 Develop Layout

In the first design, Figure 8, the material inspection, material gas cutting, material welding, lathe machine and

drill machine are placed in a straight line. This requires extra space beside the existing production line. The

Inspection, painting and storage at the same location. There will be a major re-layout between lath machines and

as well since it involves their stations. However the scope of this project is only limited to power press

department

Figure 8: Layout Alternative

M= Material inspection Zone, C= cutting Zone, W = welding zone, L = lathe m/c, D= Drill m/c, B= Boring m/c.

III Result and Conclusions

In the result and conclusion , the SLP is used as a tool for defining, analysing and synthesizing to generate two

different layout alternatives. These alternatives will be evaluated. Figure 3.10 shows material diagram of new

layout. Figure 2.11 describes material space relationship diagram shown in figure.




FIGURE 9 : New layout Material Flow Diagram

FIGURE 10: New layout Space relationship Diagram

Now compare the old layout with new layout with respect to travelling time and output of products. From below

table found, in new layout 5 power press is more produced. This is due to decrease in total travelling time. Due

to new layout, efficiency increase is fourteen percentage.

OLD LAYOUT NEW LAYOUT

Total travelling time in min 782.3 532.53

Total travel time in min per unit 156.46 106.51

Total Processing Time in min 4057.89 4057.89

Processing time in min /unit 811.58 811.58

Total time in min 4840.20 4590.42

Time per unit 968.04 918.08

working min. /month 63360.00 63360.00

Output 65 70

Table 5 Feasibility Analysis of Old Layout and New Layout




The experimentation for layout design has been discussed. Based on the results generated the alternative which

has the most significant improvement in performance measures is selected. New Layout design is proposed to

management because besides saving lesser travelling time and having more output, it does not require additional

floor space.

III Conclusions

This case study is conducted in Max power engineer in located in Rajkot, Gujrat. The objectives of this

study are to improve the production floor layout at Max power engineer department and to suggest improvement

alternatives using Systematic Layout Planning.

The opportunity for improvement is high cross-over found between 4 zone and zone 3 because of rework.

This is due to the processes which have high interdependency are located at different departments. The

travelling distance and travelling cost are high as well. It has been identified that the layout of the production

floor is the main cause of the high cross-over, long travelling time and high travelling cost. Layout

improvement alternatives have been proposed using Systematic Layout Planning (SLP). There are altogether 11

steps which have been discussed. Layout alternative are generated.

The max power engineer facility layout design is a difficult and complex work. Compared with the

traditional facility layout design approaches, the proposed SLP has the following advantages:

The new layout provides 14 percentage increases in efficiency.

Total output decrease total travelling time per unit by 49.95 minutes.

The new layout decrease total travelling time of batch by 249.77 minutes.

The new layout increases total output by is 7.7 percentage increased.

REFRENCES

[1]. Kelton, W.D., Sadowski, R.P., and Sturrock, D.T. (2008). Simulation with ARENA. (4th ed.). New

York: McGrawHill International Edition.

[2]. Heizer, J., and Render, B. (2006). Operations Management (8th ed.). New Jersey: Pearson

International Edition.

[3]. Tompkins, J.A. (1996). Facilities Planning (2nd ed). New York: John Willey Yang, T., Chao-Tan Su

and Yuan-Ru Hsu (2000).Systematic Layout Planning: a study on semiconductor wafer fabrication

facilities. International Journal of Operations Production Management Vol,20 No.11,2000,pp 1359-

1371

[4]. Chien, T. (2004).An empirical Study of facility layout using a modified SLP procedure. Journal of

Manufacturing Technology Management Vol 15 Number 6,pp 455-465.

[5]. Gopalakrishnan, B., Weng, L., and Gupta, D.P. ( 2003). Facilities design using a split Departmental

layout configuration. Facilities Vol 21.Number ¾,pp 66-73

[6]. Chui, W.C. , and Chu, L. K.( 1994-95). Facility Planning for a Gas Manufacturing Plant. Annual Issue

of IIE(HK)

[7]. Wrenall, W. (1999). Facilities design for an integrated structure. Emerald, Work Study Volume 48.

Number 4,pp 123-129.

[8]. Pinto WilstenJ.Shayan E.(2007).Layout Design of a Furniture Production Line Using Formal Methods.

Journal of Industrial and System Engineering. Vol 1,No.1, pp 81-96.

[9]. Canen, A.G., and Williamson, G.H. (1996) Facility Layout overview: towards Competitive advantage.

Emerald, Facilities. Vol 16.Number 7/8.July/August 1998.pp 198-203.

[10]. Gopalakrishnan, B. ,Turuvekere, R., and D.P. Gupta. (2004). Computer Integrated Facilities planning

and design. Emerald, Facilities. Vol 22.Number 7/8, pp199-209.

[11]. Kerns, F.(1999).Strategic facility planning (SFP). Emerald, Work Study.Vol 48. Number 5.pp 176-181

[12]. Huertas, J.I. ,Ramirez,J.D., and Salazar, F.T. (2007) Layout evaluation of large capacity warehouses.

Emerald, Facilities Vol 25. No.7/8, pp 259-270.

[13]. Carson, J.S. II (2005).Introduction to Modelling and Simulation. Proceedings of the 2005 Winter

Simulation Conference U.S .Page 16-23.

[14]. Sargent, R.G.(2005).Verification and Validation of Simulation Models Proceedings of the 2005

Winter Simulation Conference U.S .Page 130-143.

facility layout design using systematc …valve and metal parts production has been contemplated....

Documents