Redesign the Layout of a Forging Unit Using Discrete Event Simulation

(1)

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

Website: www.ijetae.com (ISSN 2250-2459,ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal, Volume 3, Issue 8, August 2013)

148

Redesign the Layout of a Forging Unit Using Discrete Event

Simulation

Aju Pius Thottungal

1

, Sijo.M.T

2 1

PG scholar, 2Assistant professor, S. C .M. S. School of Engineering and Technology

Abstract—This paper presents a project work that done in

an forging industry situated in southern India. It is to find the best alternative layout for the existing plant by using ARENA software and heuristic method ALDEP (automated layout design program). For a continuous production best form of layout is the product layout. Here first the utilization of the machineries in the existing layout is analysed by ARENA software. Then the best alternative layout is computed using the ALDEP. At last the utilization of the machineries in the suggested layout that computed by simulating the layout again using the ARENA.

Keywords—facility layout, ALDEP, ARENA, redesign

layout, redesign facility layout.

I. INTRODUCTION

The aim of this project is to assist forging industry that situated in southern India in their process of manufacturing connecting rod in the factory by optimizing the facility layout through simulation, and the heuristic method ALDEP. Arena is an easy-to-use, powerful modeling and simulation software tool that allows the user to construct a simulation model and run experiments on the model. The software generates several reports as a result of a simulation run. ALDEP is a construction type algorithm. The algorithm uses basic data on facilities and builds a design by successively placing departments in the layout. After placing the departments in the layout, a score is computed. This is nothing but the sum of the closeness rating values of different neighboring departments in the layout. This algorithm is repeated for a pre-specified number of times and the best layout is selected based on the maximum layout score.

II. PLANT LAYOUT

[image:1.612.326.579.221.554.2]

The optimal layout strategy for the company is a combination of product line layout and process layout. The flow of the product being manufactured is indicative of a production line layout.

Fig 1: The current layout of the industry and the work flow of the connecting rod.

This is because the materials and partly completed equipment flows from one workstation to the next. The workstations are not located in such a manner as to facilitate straight line flow throughout the facility.

(2)

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

149

There may be workstations that is planned in such a manner as to facilitate the completion of a certain part of the manufacturing process within the one station due to the size of the equipment being produced. This is another reason for the need to combine the different layouts.

III. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE

Facility layout and design is an important component of a business's overall operations, both in terms of maximizing the effectiveness of the production process and meeting the needs of employees. The basic objective of layout is to ensure a smooth flow of work, material, and information through a system. The basic meaning of facility is the space in which a business's activities take place. The layout and design of that space impact greatly how the work is done the flow of work, materials, and information through the system. The key to good facility layout and design is the integration of the needs of people (personnel and customers), materials (raw, finishes, and in process), and machinery in such a way that they create a

single, well-functioning system. Flexible manufacturing

systems most often are highly automated facilities having intermediate-volume production of a variety of products. Their goal is to minimize changeover or setup times for producing the different products while still achieving close to assembly line (single-product) production rates. The facility design should reflect recognition of the importance of smooth process flow.

IV. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Simulation Using Arena

The current layout of the forging industry is studied and analyzed, and it is found that the layout is of a combination of both the process and product layout.

[image:2.612.318.570.220.446.2]

Each and every machine is noted and the time required for the machining process in each machines is collected. The current layout of the industry is created in ARENA and utilization of existing machines is calculated.

Table 1

The machining time and inter arrival time for the component in each machine

Machines Machining time mean Interarrival time Total time Horizontal band saw

16 mints 34 secs

5 mints 59 secs

22 mins 33 secs

Furnace 46mins 11secs 3 mints 23 secs

49 mins 34 secs

Shot Blasting 1 hour 4 mins 17 mints 36 secs

1 hour 21 mints

Heat treatment 7 hours 8 mins 20 mins 37 secs

7 hours 28 mins

Grinding 17 mins 02 secs

1 mints 59 secs

19 mins 1 secs

Forging 6 mins 37 secs 1 mins 38 secs

8 mins 14 secs

(3)

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

[image:3.612.47.299.125.464.2]

150

[image:3.612.325.588.332.596.2]

Fig 2: The layout that created using the arena software and its simulation

Fig 3: The utilization of the machines in existing layout

Computation of Alternative Layout Using Aldep

The first department is selected to enter the layout from the department having the lowest Total Closeness Rating (TCR). The second department is selected from the department having strongest relationship with the first selected department to be a victor. Then, select the next department from the department that has the highest important relationship (A or E) with the victor. If no departments have the important relationship with the victor, the next department to enter the layout will be selected by consideration the highest sum of relationship between the department and all the selected departments. This process continues until all departments have been selected to enter the layout.

Table 2

The relationship table shows the relationship values between various departments

[image:3.612.50.297.443.685.2]

(4)

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

151 1st layout by aldep

1 1 3 3 3 3 0

1 1 3 3 3 3 4

1 1 3 3 7 7 4

2 2 3 3 7 7 4

2 2 3 3 7 7 6

2 2 3 3 5 5 6

2 2 3 3 6 6 6

Fig 4: The first layout computed by aldep

As a result, the layout is generated by Adjacency based Heuristic, which is displayed in the figure 3. The ordinal selected departments are 1-2-3-7-5-6-4. As shown in the figure 4. After that a table is formulated by taking the neighboring pairs. Calculating the total score of the layout as shown in the table. Remember the sweep width we are giving to construct the layout is two.

Neighbouring pair of departments

REL Grade REL value

1-3 U 0

1-2 E 16

2-3 E 16

3-7 E 16

3-5 I 4

3-6 I 4

3-4 E 16

7-4 I 4

7-6 U 0

7-5 E 16

5-6 E 16

6-4 I 4

total 112

And the sweep width is two, so the total score of this layout is 2*112=224

2nd layout by aldep

3 3 1 1 1 1 0

3 3 1 1 1 1 4

3 3 1 1 7 7 4

3 3 2 2 7 7 4

3 3 2 2 7 7 6

3 3 2 2 5 5 6

3 3 3 3 5 5 6

[image:4.612.48.291.139.432.2]

3 3 3 3 6 6 6

[image:4.612.321.568.359.683.2]

(5)

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

152

[image:5.612.321.567.113.697.2]

After that again a table is formulated by taking the neighboring pairs. Calculating the total score of the layout as shown in the table 3.

Table 3

The relationship table shows the relationship values between neighboring departments.

The sweep width is two, so the total score of this layout is 2*76=152

3rd layout by aldep

[image:5.612.53.287.205.417.2]

Another layout is generated by Adjacency based Heuristic, which is displayed in the figure 6. After that again a table is formulated by taking the neighboring pairs. Calculating the total score of the layout as shown in the table 4.

The total score of this layout is 2*92=184

2 2 7 7 7 7 0

2 2 7 7 7 7 1

2 2 3 3 7 7 1

2 2 3 3 5 5 1

2 2 3 3 6 6 1

3 3 3 3 6 6 1

3 3 3 3 6 6 4

3 3 3 3 4 4 4

Fig 6: The third layout computed by aldep

[image:5.612.52.286.206.423.2]

(6)

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

153

The 1st layout that computed by the aldep has the best score. So that layout is recommended has the best layout. Next step is to calculate the utilization of machineries in the suggested layout.

[image:6.612.321.576.129.395.2]

The suggested layout is shown in the figure 7.

Fig 7: The suggested layout having highest score

Simulation Of Suggested Layout Using Arena

[image:6.612.50.292.194.441.2]

The suggested layout of the industry that computed by ALDEP is created in ARENA and utilization of existing machines is calculated. The figure 8 shows the layout that created in ARENA.

Fig 8: The suggested layout that created using the arena software and its simulation

The figure: 9 show the utilization of the machines in the suggested layout.

[image:6.612.326.579.462.688.2]

(7)

International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering

154

[image:7.612.47.300.179.391.2]

V. RESULTS

Table 5

utilization of machines in existing and suggested layout

VI. CONCLUSION

For the effective production of the components in an industry , its needed to be an good layout for reducing the material handling time, cost, lead time etc. For that in this project a simulation of the existing layout of the plant is done , then later found the best alternative layout by the ALDEP, which is an heuristic method. And found the best alternative layout. Again the current best layout that got by the ALDEP is created in arena software and utilization of all the machineries is analyzed. Aim of designing a facility from the ground up or redesign an existing facility is to ensure the company has a competitive advantage. Although this is the most important goal.

REFERENCES

[1] Adjacency – Based Heuristic for Facilities Design” Ornurai Sangsawang and Sunarin Chanta in International Conference on Computer and Industrial Management, ICIM, October 29-30, 2005, Bangkok, Thailand.