Flexibility analysis of a surface mount technology electronic assembly plant: An integrated model using simulation

This paper focuses on developing an integrated model using simulation to evaluate the effect of several independent variables on the performance of a surface mount technology (SMT) production line. Real data and an existing SMT line from a high product mix/low volume electronics manufacturer are used to conduct the analysis. The independent variables used are set-up formation policies (group technology based family grouping methods), machine feeder types, similarity factor in set-up formation, parts reduction at design step of products, and inter-families and intra-family scheduling rules. In addition, a new method of grouping products is proposed. The measures of performance evaluated by the model are average lead time, average work-in-process (WIP) inventory and average set-up time. Data analysis shows that the proposed method of grouping products will reduce set-up time and lead time while slightly increasing WIP. The proposed simulation model helps assess the effects of some of the independent variables on line performance. Recommendations are made in order to help the user choose the best alternative to improve production line productivity and flexibility.

[1]  Brett A. Peters,et al.  Analysis of partial setup strategies for solving the operational planning problem in parallel machine electronic assembly systems , 1996 .

[2]  Yahya Fathi,et al.  A mathematical model for loading the sequencers in a printed circuit pack manufacturing environment , 1989 .

[3]  Gregory V. Frazier.  An evaluation of group scheduling heuristics in a flow-line manufacturing cell , 1996 .

[4]  T. T. Narendran,et al.  Grouping PCBs for set-up reduction: a maximum spanning tree approach , 1996 .

[5]  T. T. Narendran,et al.  Heuristics and sequence-dependent set-up jobs in flow line cells , 2003 .

[6]  Sabah U. Randhawa,et al.  An integer programming application to solve sequencer mix problems in printed circuit board production , 1985 .

[7]  Tien-Chien Chang,et al.  PCB assembly setup reduction using group technology , 1991 .

[8]  N. Raman,et al.  FMS planning decisions, operating flexibilities, and system performance , 1995 .

[9]  R. A. Dudek,et al.  Effect of maintenance policies on the just-in-time production system , 1995 .

[10]  Avraham Shtub,et al.  Grouping methods for printed circuit board assembly , 1991 .

[11]  Oded Maimon,et al.  Set-up saving schemes for printed circuit boards assembly , 1993 .

[12]  Thomas L. Landers,et al.  A heuristic algorithm for minimizing total production time for a sequence of jobs on a surface mount placement machine , 1993 .

[13]  Marco Perona,et al.  Cell formation in PCB assembly based on production quantitative data , 1993 .

[14]  Jocelyn Drolet,et al.  The cellular manufacturing evolution , 1996 .

[15]  Oded Maimon,et al.  Group set-up for printed circuit board assembly , 1989 .

[16]  Mika Johnsson,et al.  Grouping PCBs with Minimum Feeder Changes , 2003 .

[17]  Leon F. McGinnis,et al.  AUTOMATED PROCESS PLANNING FOR PRINTED CIRCUIT CARD ASSEMBLY , 1992 .

[18]  Dileep R. Sule.  A heuristic procedure for component scheduling in printed circuit pack sequencers , 1992 .

[19]  R. Rajagopalan,et al.  Design of cellular production systems A graph-theoretic approach , 1975 .

[20]  Brett A. Peters,et al.  A comparison of setup strategies for printed circuit board assembly , 1998 .

[21]  Surendra M. Gupta,et al.  SIMULTANEOUS COMPONENT SEQUENCING AND FEEDER ASSIGNMENT FOR HIGH SPEED CHIP SHOOTER MACHINES , 1996 .

[22]  Alon Barnea,et al.  Set-up reduction in PCB automated assembly , 1993 .

[23]  Avraham Shtub,et al.  Role of similarity measures in PCB grouping procedures , 1992 .

[24]  D. Gerwin,et al.  Do's and Dont's of Computerized Manufacturing , 1982 .