A 4M Approach for a Comprehensive Analysis and Improvement of Manual Assembly Lines

Abstract Design for Assembly (DfA) is a well-known technique that supports in the reduction of manufacturing costs. Traditional DfA methods are generally focused on the product design lacking of a holistic view. The proposed 4 M approach takes into account all the most important aspects involved in the manual assembly: Method, Machine, Man and Material. The final goal is to provide a means for the concurrent improvement of the product design, the workstation ergonomics, and the assembly tasks. Results obtained with the electric spindle motor case study confirmed the usefulness of the approach in optimizing the manual assembly.

[1]  P. Sivasankaran,et al.  Literature review of assembly line balancing problems , 2014 .

[2]  G. H. Tuinzaad,et al.  A participatory and integrative approach to improve productivity and ergonomics in assembly , 2003 .

[3]  Ann-Christine Falck,et al.  The impact of poor assembly ergonomics on product quality: A cost–benefit analysis in car manufacturing , 2010 .

[4]  Ann-Christine Falck,et al.  The impact of poor assembly ergonomics on product quality: A cost-benefit analysis in car manufacturing: Poor Assembly Ergonomics and Product Quality , 2010 .

[5]  Z. H. Che,et al.  A multi-objective optimization algorithm for solving the supplier selection problem with assembly sequence planning and assembly line balancing , 2017, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[6]  Maurizio Faccio,et al.  New methodological framework to improve productivity and ergonomics in assembly system design , 2011 .

[7]  K. Narayana Rao,et al.  Multi-objective optimization approach for cost management during product design at the conceptual phase , 2014 .

[8]  Michele Germani,et al.  Multi-objective conceptual design: an approach to make cost-efficient the design for manufacturing and assembly in the development of complex products , 2017 .

[9]  Ann-Christine Falck,et al.  Proactive assessment of basic complexity in manual assembly: development of a tool to predict and control operator-induced quality errors , 2017, Int. J. Prod. Res..

[10]  Toshijiro Ohashi,et al.  Assembly Reliability Evaluation Method (AREM) , 2003 .

[11]  Michele Germani,et al.  A method to optimize assemblability of industrial product in early design phase: from product architecture to assembly sequence , 2012 .

[12]  H. ElMaraghy,et al.  A model for measuring products assembly complexity , 2010, Int. J. Comput. Integr. Manuf..

[13]  Michele Germani,et al.  A Multi-objective Design Approach to Include Material, Manufacturing and Assembly Costs in the Early Design Phase , 2016 .

[14]  Minoru Iwata,et al.  Extended Assemblability Evaluation Method (AEM) , 2002 .

[15]  Naveen Kumar,et al.  Assembly Line Balancing: A Review of Developments and Trends in Approach to Industrial Application , 2013 .

[16]  Giovanni Mirabelli,et al.  Modelling and simulation and ergonomic standards as support tools for a workstation design in manufacturing system , 2008 .

[17]  K. L. Edwards,et al.  Towards more strategic product design for manufacture and assembly: priorities for concurrent engineering , 2002 .

[18]  Marcos Esterman,et al.  Design for Assembly Line Performance: The Link Between DFA Metrics and Assembly Line Performance Metrics , 2010 .