SYSTEM STUDY FOR PROCESS DE-BOTTLENECKING OF A FULLY AUTOMATED FLY-ASH BRICK PLANT

INTERIM DISSERTATION SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AWARD OF DEGREE OF MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY IN INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING & MANAGEMENT

Submitted By: PHANIDHAR MILI Admission No 2011MT0173 M.Tech Industrial Engineering & Management Under the Guidance of Prof. J.K. Pattanayak

DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT STUDIES INDIAN SCHOOL OF MINES DHANBAD 826004

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I would like to express my gratitude to all the faculty members of Management Studies, especially my guide Prof. J.K. Pattanayak, Professor and Head of the Department of Management Studies at IndianSchool of Mines, Dhanbad, for guiding me and enriching my knowledge by sharing their enormous experience. I would also like to express my heartiest thanks to Mr. Dalbir Singh Rekhi (GM, HRD-IE; JSPL - Raigarh) for guiding me throughout with his great expertise and showing the right direction to complete the project. I also express my deep sense of obligation to the management of Jindal Steel & Power Limited, Raigarh for giving me an opportunity to carry out this live project in their esteemed organization and to the whole HR Department of Jindal Steel & Power Ltd. who provided great help with kind cooperation. I would also like to thank my classmates and my seniors for their kind co-operation & useful suggestions in completing this project. Above all, utmost appreciation to the Almighty God for the divine intervention in this academic endeavor.

PHANIDHAR MILI Adm. No. 2011MT0173

M.Tech Industrial Engineering & Management Indian School of Mines, Dhanbad

SYNOPSIS
Line Balancing (LB) is a classic, well-researched Operations Research (OR) optimization problem of significant industrial importance. This technique has found great importance in manufacturing industries. In this project, a line balancing problem model has been developed to increase the production rate of a fully automated fly-ash brick plant at Jindal Steel & Power Ltd. - Raigarh, which is under-performing with reference to its potential. The project report is organised as follows: The first chapter being the introductory chapter deals with the conceptual clarification of Line Balancing Process as a technique of Operations Research. In the second, chapter a brief description is made about the product and the manufacturing process. The third chapter outlines the objective of the project along with a detailed analysis of the processes at some critical stations after identifying them. The third chapter also shows a model of the existing practices which points out the root cause for below par production. In the fourth chapter two models have been developed in excel for improved operating procedure by means of Line Balancing. The first model is based on real time experimental data, while the second is theoretical in nature. Chapter five concludes the analysis and shows the outcome of adopting one of the suggested models.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1
1.1 1.2

TITLE SYSTEM STUDY Definition Line Balancing as a tool for de-bottlenecking THE PROCESS AND THE PRODUCT
2.1 2.2 2.3

Page No. 1 1

The Product - Fly-Ash Brick Plant Layout The Flow Process PROCESS STUDY

3 4 5

3
3.1 3.2 3.3

Objective of the Project Bottle Neck Determination Observations PROCESS DE-BOTTLENECKING USING

8 9 9

4
4.1 4.2 4.3

Existing Process at the Strapping Line Process Improvement Trial (Line Balancing) Process Improvement (Theoretical) CONCLUSION

12 12 13

5
5.1 5.2

Implementation Limitation and Future Scope REFERENCES ANNEXURE

15 16 17 18

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION
System Study is considered to be highly inevitable for any organisation, where some sort of mechanical activities are undertaken. This study includes an analysis of the existing system and the design of a new system which would put a positive impact on the whole operation. 1.1 Definition A detailed study to determine whether, to what extent, and how automatic data processing equipment should be used; it usually includes an analysis of the existing system and the design of the new system, including the development of the system specifications which provide a basis for selection of equipment. 1.1.1 Advantages i. ii. iii. It helps in finding bottleneck in existing system. It provides facilities of accessing the existing system. It gives scope of improvement to the existing system and also provides valuable suggestions for improving the existing system. 1.1.2 Limitations i. ii. iii. For every suggestion we have to consider Cost Constraints. We have to provide suggestion as per location. We have to provide suggestion after consideration of local factors also.

1.2 Line Balancing as a tool for de-bottlenecking As per the observations given in the book titled Operations Management Theory and Practice by B. Mahadevan (Second Edition), Line balancing is a method by which the tasks are optimally combined without violating precedence constraints and a certain number of workstations are designed to complete the tasks. If there are 3 workstations; A, B and C in which 7 tasks are performed in manufacturing system, then the workstation times are nothing but the summation of the task times assigned to each workstation. Let the workstation times be denoted as W A , W B and W C . Clearly a balanced design is one in which the workstation times do not vary widely. In such a situation, the resources will be uniformly utilized and the flow of material will be even. Further there will be a good rhythm in operations. The maximum of the three workstation times determines the interval between the productions of two successive components. 1|Page

If W A = 5 sec, W B = 3 sec and W C = 7 sec, one component will come out of the system every 7 seconds. This measure is known as Cycle Time. Cycle time would be considered as the reciprocal of production rate. If in a period of 20,000 seconds a shop produced 10,000 pieces of a component, then the production rate is per second. Conversely, the cycle time is 2 seconds. Cycle time could be actual or desired. If we compute on the basis of actual production, it represents the actual cycle time. On the other hand, if we compute the cycle time on the basis of what we desire the production to be, then it is desired cycle time. Maintaining the desired cycle time requires better management and work practices. The expression for cycle time is as follows:
Available Time Actual (desired) production

Actual (desired) cycle time

The problem of designing a balanced set of workstations suffers from the classical trade-off issues. If we combine more tasks into fewer workstations, we may require fewer workstations, but the cycle time will be high, leading to reduced production rate. At the other extreme, if the tasks are kept separate and as many workstations are designed, we may increase the production rate beyond what is required at the risk of deploying more resources and workers with poor utilization. Therefore, solving the line balancing problem calls for counterbalancing these opposing costs and striking the right trade-off between increased production and better utilization of resources. The production rate, cycle time and the number of workstations are interrelated. Moreover, the number of workstations has a bearing on the average resource utilization. Using these measures it is possible to design an appropriate number of workstations. These relationships are indicated in the following expressions:
Sum of all task times Cycle Time

Minimum number of workstations required

Average resource utilization

Sum of all task times Number of workstations X Cycle Time

2|Page

CHAPTER 2 THE PROCESS & THE PRODUCT

2.1 The Product - Fly-Ash Brick Fly-Ash Brick (FAB) is a building material, specifically masonry units, containing class-C fly ash and water. Compressed at 4,000 psi and cured for 24 hours in a 150 F (66 C) steam bath, then toughened with an air entrainment agent, the bricks last for more than 100 freeze-thaw cycles. Owing to the high concentration of calcium oxide in class-C fly ash, the brick is described as "self-cementing". The manufacturing method saves energy, reduces mercury pollution, and costs 20% less than traditional clay brick manufacturing. The raw materials for fly ash brick are: fly-ash, sand, stone dust, lime, gypsum and cement. Fly-ash bricks are manufactured using some or all these materials and are lighter than clay bricks. Fly-Ash Bricks have the following advantages: i. ii. iii. iv. Due to high strength, practically no breakage during transport and use. Due to uniform size of bricks mortar required for joints and plaster reduces almost by 50%. Due to lower water penetration seepage of water through bricks is considerably reduced. Gypsum plaster (plaster of Paris) can be directly applied on these bricks without a backing coat of lime plaster. v. These bricks do not require soaking in water for 24 hours. Sprinkling of water before use is enough. vi. Practically it is fire-proof as there is no carbon content in the fly-ash.

Its disadvantages are: i. ii. Mechanical bonding strength is weak. But this can be rectified by adding marble waste. Limitation of size. Only modular size can be produced. Large size will have more breakages.

In coal based thermal power plants it is a huge cost upon the management to dispose fly ash. It is the leftover of the coal burnt for the generation of power. As this material is considered unhealthy for the soil, government has some strict guidelines viz. cannot be used for land filling; ash-dykes can be built only up 3|Page

to certain heights etc. Moreover acquiring land and rehabilitating the project affected people is a huge corporate social responsibility cost. Jindal Steel & Power Ltd. Raigarh has started the trial production of its newly commissioned Fly-Ash Brick Plant since 1st of May 2012. The bricks produced in this plant have the following specifications: Composition: 50% ash + 25% sand + 15% cement + 10% stone dust Dimension: 228 mm X 85 mm X 75 mm; Weight of each brick: 3.2 Kg. 2.2 Plant Layout The fly-ash bricks are manufactured by a fully automated machine called FRIMA. It is of make FRIESISCHE MASCHINEBAU GMBH & CO.KG. GERMANY. Besides bricks it can also be used to manufacture tiles. But in the current time only bricks are being manufactured. The diagram below shows the plant layout.

Storage (CURING CHAMBER)

Silos

Cement

Fly ash

Fly ash

Finger Car

Wet Side
Elevator (Uperator) Rubbish Remover (Tilter)

Punch (Tamper)

Mould

Filler Hopper(Top & Base)

Base Mixer (Tiles)

Top Mixer (Bricks)

Control Room

Re-stacker for pallet

Lowerator

Gap Closer

Cuber Stone Dust

Dry Side

Cross Conveyor Strapping

Sand

Unused

Unused

Fig. 2.1 Plant Layout 4|Page

2.3 The Flow Process

5|Page

2.3.1 4Bin Hopper The 4 bin hopper consists of 4 containers to load the raw materials for brick making. Since at present only bricks are being manufactured, only two 2 bins are in use for sand and stone dust. The bins are funnel shaped and materials are fed into them by means of payloaders from the raw material stock yard. Below the bins is an aggregate weighing bucket with load cells that feed required amount of raw material into the Skip Hoist Trolley which delivers the raw materials in right proportion into the Planetary Mixer. 2.3.2 Planetary Mixer (Top and Base Mixer) Here mixing of materials namely sand, stone dust, cement and fly-ash with water is done by means of motor action. 2.3.3 Silos There are three large silos, two for fly-ash and one for cement. Cement and fly-ash are pumped into the mixer. Cement silo is of capacity 100 tonne, one fly-ash silo of 500 tonne and the another one of 400 tonne. 2.3.4 Filler Hopper (Unit 1 & 2) The materials after being mixed in the mixer are transported to the filler hopper (unit 1) by means of bucket conveyor and later on to the mould by means of lowering unit filler hopper (unit 2). 2.3.5 Mould The Mould contains 5x10 slots for giving shape to the bricks and the mixture is fed into the mould by means of lowering unit of filler hopper. 2.3.6 Punch or Tamper Force is applied from above upon the mould in order to give mechanical strength. The bricks that come out of the machine on pallets are then cleaned from the non-bonding dusts using a dust remover and those that do not bond properly are removed as rubbish by rubbish remover. The rubbish remover is tilted a bit and the unwanted bricks to slide down and are removed. 2.3.7 Uperator (Elevator) The good quality bricks are then moved through conveyor on pallets and fed into uperator. It is a multi shelf (24 shelves) container that collects the bricks on pallets. It can collect in a batch 24X50 bricks. 6|Page

2.3.8 Finger Cars The Finger Cars pulls out the bricks on pallets from the uperator and transports them to the curing chamber for drying. This car also transports the dry bricks out of the chamber for strapping. It can also collect 24X50 bricks in a batch. 2.3.9 Lowerator Lowerator has the reverse operation of elevator. It also has 24 shelves and the dry bricks are fed into it by the finger car. It lowers down the dry bricks into the dry-side slide way 2.3.10 Gap Closer and Cuber The dry bricks coming out of the lowerator on pallets are held together by the Gap Closer. Then the cuber holds together the 50 bricks in the shape of a cube from the pallet and lifts it across to the slat conveyor for strapping and dispatch. In the slat conveyor the bricks are packed in 5X10X8 numbers (400). 2.3.11 Strapping Line In the whole plant this is the only section, where the operation is carried out manually. Two persons are involved in this line on both sides of the pack of 400 bricks. The 1st person holding the strapping machine places the straps on the slots below the brick packets and the 2nd person holds it from the other side and tightens it to be strapped by the 1st person. 2.3.12 Dispatch The strapped bricks are transported to the stock yard by means of fork-lift 2.3.13 Cross Conveyor After the cuber places the bricks across the slat the conveyor, the empty pallets are transported back to the wet conveyor line to continue the process.

7|Page

CHAPTER 3 PROCESS STUDY

3.1 Objective of the Project The plant as per the manufacturers specifications has the potential to produce 1 to 2 lakh pieces of bricks per day if run on a 16 to 20 hours daily basis. The remaining working hours are meant for carrying out maintenance and cleaning activities. But as per the production data (shown below in Fig. 3.1) provided for the period starting from 12 September 2012 to 12 October 2012 it is relevant that the plant is not performing to its potential.

Sept - October (30 days)

DATE 12-09-2012 13-09-2012 14-09-2012 15-09-2012 16-09-2012 17-09-2012 18-09-2012 19-09-2012 20-09-2012 21-09-2012 22-09-2012 23-09-2012 24-09-2012 25-09-2012 26-09-2012 27-09-2012 28-09-2012 29-09-2012 01-10-2012 02-10-2012 03-10-2012 04-10-2012 05-10-2012 06-10-2012 07-10-2012 08-10-2012 09-10-2012 10-10-2012 11-10-2012 12-10-2012 Total Average PRODUCTION (nos. of bricks) 14,700

21,500 17,550 9,700 21,950 38,800 4,750 2,500 36,150 41,460 33,600 50,300 49,650 50,850 61,150 49,450 51,200 14,000 49,800 5,000 82,200 29,850 7,36,110 33,460

Fig. 3.1 Daily Production Data of Bricks 8|Page

Hence the objective of this project is to determine the root cause for below par production as is evident from the daily production data and to suggest improvements to boost production. 3.2 Bottle Neck Determination With a view to determine the cause for below par production, a detailed study was carried out on the fully automated processes. After detailed observation six critical stations were identified on the processes. The process at these stations seemed to be the bottleneck as the operation at the stations subsequent to these critical stations had to wait. Following were the critical stations: i. ii. Raw material feeding (Pay loader Operation) Brick Tampering

iii. Finger Car Operation iv. Dry side (Cross Shifting to strapping line) v. Strapping Line

vi. Dispatch (Fork Lift Operation) 3.3 Observations Starting from the raw material feeding operation, a detailed time study was carried out on all the activities of these critical stations. As per the existing set up and practices, the following observations were made: i. In each pallet at one time 50 bricks are punched, 8 layers of 50 bricks (400) are stacked for strapping and the finger car transports 1200 bricks in one cycle. Hence in order to calculate the cycle time at each station a benchmark of 50, 400 and 1200 bricks are taken. ii. At the raw material feeding section, the pay loader operation has a cycle time of 125 sec. Its bucket capacity is 1.25 tonne (1250 Kg.). Considering the weight of one brick i.e. 3.2Kg, from 1250 kg (from one pay loader trip) a total of 391 (approx.) bricks can be manufactured. From this we can say 391 bricks require 125 sec. of pay loader operation, hence 1200 bricks will require 384 sec. iii. At the brick tampering station, tampering (punching) of 50 bricks on each pallet took 15 sec. This implies 1200 bricks take 360 sec. iv. The finger car transports 1200 wet bricks at one go from the wet side to the curing chamber and while returning transports 1200 dry bricks to the dry side, thus completing one cycle in 360 sec.

9|Page

v.

The cuber cross-shifts 400 (8X50) bricks in one cycle to the slat conveyor for strapping in 160 sec. Hence 1200 bricks will be shifted in 480 sec.

vi.

In the strapping line, a pack of 400 bricks (8X50) are strapped in 295 sec. Hence 1200 bricks will be strapped in 885 sec.

vii.

Finally at the dispatch section a cycle of shifting 400 bricks by means of fork-lift to the stock yard takes 160 sec. Hence for 1200 bricks time taken is 480 sec.

The table in Fig. 3.2 shows the summary of processing 1200 bricks. This data clearly indicates that the time taken for processing of 1200 bricks is almost twice at the strapping line as compared to the other stations. Also as the processes at the other stations are fully automated, the cycle times are more or less synchronised, it is evident that the process at the strapping line is the bottle neck to the plant operation. Making exceptions for other minor differences in cycle times at other stations and considering real time operations, the highest potential for improvement seems to be at the strapping line. From the results of study conducted a model has been developed in excel for the existing practice and its summary are as shown below.
Wt. of each brick Total Available Time per day (In Hrs.) 3.2 kg 16 As per Existing Set - Up & Practices Payloader Cycle Operation Finger Car Cycle Time Brick Tamper Cycle Time (Complete Cycle) Cross Shifting Cycle time (Dry Side to Strapping Line) Strapping time (Considering 2 men 1 Strapping m/c) Fork Lifting Time (Cylcle time of shifting Strapped Bricks to Yard & Vice Versa)

No. of bricks Wt. of raw Avg. Time Manufactured material taken per Shifted per trip tamper per trip (In Tonnes) (in sec) (Nos.) 1.25 125 50 Time Taken for Processing 1200 bricks (In Sec) 384 360

Avg. Time No. of Avg. Time No. of bricks Avg. Time No. of bricks Avg. Time No. of bricks Avg. Time taken per bricks taken taken taken taken/ trip Shifted Straped Shifted tamper Shifted/ trip (in sec) 15 (Nos.) 1200 360 (in sec) 360 (Nos.) 400 480 (in sec) 160 (Nos.) 400 885 (in sec) 295 (Nos.) 400 480 (in sec) 160

Total Production of Bricks per day

78102

Fig. 3.2 Summary of Cycle Time at Critical Stations (Existing Practice) 10 | P a g e

As the cycle time time at the strapping line is maximum as compared to other stations the final daily production data will depend on this value. In 885 sec. (14.75 min) 1200 bricks are processed, i.e. in 1 min. 81.355935 bricks are processed. Hence in one hour 4881.3559 bricks are processed. Considering 16 hour operation in a day, at this rate the plant can produce a maximum of 78102 bricks, or in case the plant runs for 20 hours it can produce a maximum of 97627 bricks. On cross-verification with the production data as shown in fig. 3.1, it is seen that till date the highest production has been on 11/10/2012 which is 82200 bricks, which is approximately the same as the result of the study model.

11 | P a g e

CHAPTER 4 PROCESS DE-BOTTLENECKING USING LINE BALANCING METHOD

4.1 Existing Process at the Strapping Line With a view to improve the existing process, the process at the bottlenecking station was closely observed. The following observations were made: i. Two persons are deployed at this station on both sides of the stacked brick packet for strapping. There is one strapping machine and a pulley around which the straps are wound. The 1st person holding the strapping machine, places the plastic straps on the slots below the brick packet across to the other side. The 2nd person on the other side receives, holds the strap, tightens and assists in strapping and cutting the strap. This process is repeated 5 times vertically and one time horizontally.

ii.

iii.

iv.

Since the whole plant is fully automated and the cycle time at this station is highest, the process preceding this has to wait. 4.2 Process Improvement Trial (Line Balancing) In order to reduce the cycle time at this station an improved practice was suggested to balance the process line and a trial was taken. The salient features of this trial method are as follows: i. One additional manpower was provided for cutting the straps of required length and placing them on the slots beforehand, while the strapping of another packet of bricks goes on. The two persons on both sides of the packet now just needed to hold the straps, tighten it and strap it.

ii.

The result to this trial was that the cycle time of strapping a packet of 400 bricks reduced from 295 sec. to 190 sec., which is a difference of 105 sec. (1.75 min.). In 570 sec. (9.5 min.) 1200 bricks are processed, i.e. in 1 min. 126.31579 bricks are processed. Hence in one hour 7578.9474 bricks are processed. The summary of the cycle time for this improved model is shown in Fig. 4.1

12 | P a g e

This model has been developed in Microsoft excel considering the observed time as the input.
Wt. of each brick Total Available Time per day (In Hrs.) 3.2 kg 16

After providing 3 men in Strapping Line & Pre-placement of straps in slots (Alternative - I) - experimented Payloader Cycle Operation Finger Car Cycle Time Brick Tamper Cycle Time (Complete Cycle) Cross Shifting Cycle time (Dry Side to Strapping Line) Fork Lifting Time (Cylcle time of shifting Strapped Bricks to Yard & Vice Versa)

Strapping time

No. of bricks Wt. of raw Avg. Time No. of Avg. Time Manufactured Avg. Time No. of bricks Avg. Time No. of bricks Avg. Time No. of bricks Avg. Time material taken/ bricks taken per taken/ trip Shifted taken Straped taken Shifted taken Shifted tamper Shifted/ trip per trip tamper per trip (In Tonnes) (in sec) (Nos.) (in sec) (Nos.) (in sec) (Nos.) (in sec) (Nos.) (in sec) (Nos.) (in sec) 1.25 125 50 15 1200 360 400 160 400 190 400 160 Time Taken for Processing 1200 bricks (In Sec) 384 360 360 480 570 480

Total Production of Bricks per day

121263

Fig. 4.1 Summary of Cycle Time at Critical Stations (Improved Case-Trial)

Considering this improved rate (as shown in Fig. 4.1) in a 16 hour daily operation, a maximum of 121263.16 bricks can be produced. Similarly in a 20 hour daily operation a maximum of 151578.95 bricks can be produced. Hence this improved case was suggested for implementation on 20/10/2012. 4.3 Process Improvement (Theoretical) Another improvement method was suggested for line balancing. The salient features of this improved process are: i. ii. iii. Two additional menpower are provided. One additional strapping machine is provided. The two manpower gangs will carry out the strapping activity parallelly.

As seen from the summary for in Fig. 4.2, this improved method will process 800 bricks in 295 sec. as compared to 400 bricks in 295 sec. The daily production rate will now depend upon the dispatch rate or the fork-lift operation cycle time.

13 | P a g e

This model has been developed considering the fact that providing two parallel strapping stations will yield twice the production as in existing practice in the same cycle time.
Wt. of each brick Total Available Time per day (In Hrs.) 3.2 kg 16

After providing 4 men & 1 additional Strapping M/c in strapping line (Alternative - II) - Theoretical Payloader Cycle Operation Wt. of raw material Shifted ti (In Tonnes) 1.25 Time Taken for Processing 1200 bricks (In Sec) Cross Shifting Cycle time Finger Car Cycle Time Brick Tamper Cycle Time (Dry Side to Strapping (Complete Cycle) Line) Fork Lifting Time (Cylcle time of shifting Strapped Bricks to Yard & Vice Versa)

Strapping time

Avg. Time No. of bricks taken Manufactured per per trip t (in sec) (Nos.) 125 50 360

Avg. Time No. of Avg. Time No. of bricks Avg. Time No. of bricks Avg. Time No. of bricks Avg. Time taken/ bricks taken/ trip Shifted Straped taken Shifted taken taken tamper Shifted/ trip (in sec) 15 (Nos.) 1200 360 (in sec) 360 (Nos.) 400 480 (in sec) 160 (Nos.) 800 443 (in sec) 295 (Nos.) 400 480 (in sec) 160

384

Total Production of Bricks per day

144000

Fig. 4.2 Summary of Cycle Time at Critical Stations (Improved Case-Theoretical) Considering this rate, 400 bricks are dispatched in 160 sec. (2.6666667 min.), 1200 bricks are dispatched in 480 sec. (8 min.) i.e. in 1 min. 150 bricks are dispatched. Hence in one hour 9000 bricks are dispatched. Daily production on 16 hour operation will be 144000 bricks and 180000 bricks for 20 hour operation.

14 | P a g e

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSION
5.1 Implementation Two improved methodologies were suggested as described in chapter 4. However due to the unavailability of strapping machine, the 1st methodology has been implemented. The immediate effect of implementing this improved method was that the plant surpassed the previous highest production of 82200 bricks (see Fig. 3.1) on two occasions as shown below: i. ii. On 23/10/2012 95400 bricks On 25/10/2012 112500 bricks

Below is attached an image of the congratulations mail mentioning this landmark achievement.

15 | P a g e

5.2 Limitation and Future Scope Making fly-ash bricks is a new concept and also the Indian market is ignorant of this product. So far the management is making use of this bricks in its own expansion projects. Moreover the system is fully automated and first of its kind in India in the brick manufacturing sector. Hence the menpower deployed are not fully efficient yet to meet the challenges in this sector. However with time their learning curve will improve and run the plant more efficiently. The consumption of fly-ash will also save the organisation a lot of CSR cost, whose disposal otherwise is a huge cost. The present study is not considering the cost benefit aspect of the proposal in monetary terms. For each of the suggestion as identified by system, the cost of the additional arrangement should be evaluated and the benefit (in terms of money by virtue of additional production) should be matched with. At any given point of time, each of the proposals must at least be operating at break-even. The present study is not considering this aspect and it will be subsequently undertaken to evaluate each of the proposals and their ultimate absorption in the organisation.

16 | P a g e

REFERENCES 1. Becker C. and Scholl (2004); A survey on problems and methods in generalized assembly line balancing, European Journal of Operations Research. 2. Emanuel Falkenauer (2004); Line Balancing in the Real World, International Conference on Product Lifecycle Management. 3. B. Mahadevan; Design of Manufacturing Processes, Operation Management Theory and Practices, 2nd edition (2010), 102-149.

17 | P a g e

Annexure - IA
Wt. of each brick Total Available Time per day (In Hrs.) 3.2 Kg 16

As per Existing Set - Up & Practices

Payloader Cycle Operation
Wt. of raw material Shifted per trip (In Tonnes) Avg. Time taken per trip (in sec)

Brick Tamper Cycle Time

No. of bricks Manufactured/ tamper (Nos.) Avg. Time taken/ tamper (in sec)

Finger Car Cycle Time

(Complete Cycle) No. of bricks Shifted/ trip (Nos.) Avg. Time taken/ trip (in sec)

Cross Shifting Cycle time

(Dry Side to Strapping Line) No. of bricks Shifted (Nos.)

Strapping time (Considering 2 men 1 Strapping m/c)

No. of bricks Straped (Nos.) Avg. Time taken (in sec)

Fork Lifting Time (Cylcle time of shifting Strapped Bricks to

Yard & Vice Versa) No. of bricks Shifted (Nos.) Avg. Time taken (in sec)

Avg. Time taken (in sec)

1.25
Time Taken for Processing 1200 bricks (In Sec) ----------------->>>>

125 384

50 360

15

1200 360

360

400 480

160

400 885

295

400 480

160

Total Production of Bricks per day

78102

After providing 3 men in Strapping Line & Pre-placement of straps in slots (Alternative - I)
Payloader Cycle Operation
Wt. of raw material Shifted per trip (In Tonnes) Avg. Time taken per trip (in sec)

Brick Tamper Cycle Time

No. of bricks Manufactured/ tamper (Nos.) Avg. Time taken/ tamper (in sec)

Finger Car Cycle Time

(Complete Cycle) No. of bricks Shifted/ trip (Nos.) Avg. Time taken/ trip (in sec)

Cross Shifting Cycle time

(Dry Side to Strapping Line) No. of bricks Shifted (Nos.)

Strapping time
No. of bricks Straped (Nos.)

Fork Lifting Time (Cylcle time of shifting Strapped Bricks to

Yard & Vice Versa)

Avg. Time taken (in sec)

Avg. Time taken (in sec)

No. of bricks Shifted (Nos.)

Avg. Time taken (in sec)

1.25
Time Taken for Processing 1200 bricks (In Sec) ----------------->>>>

125 384

50 360

15

1200 360

360

400 480

160

400 570

190

400 480

160

Total Production of Bricks per day

121263 Fork Lifting Time (Cylcle time of shifting Strapped Bricks to

Yard & Vice Versa) No. of bricks Straped (Nos.) Avg. Time taken No. of bricks Shifted Avg. Time taken

After providing 4 men & 1 additional Strapping M/c in strapping line (Alternative - II)
Payloader Cycle Operation
Wt. of raw material Shifted per trip (In Tonnes) Avg. Time taken per trip (in sec)

Brick Tamper Cycle Time

No. of bricks Manufactured/ tamper (Nos.) Avg. Time taken/ tamper (in sec)

Finger Car Cycle Time

(Complete Cycle) No. of bricks Shifted/ trip (Nos.) Avg. Time taken/ trip (in sec)

Cross Shifting Cycle time

(Dry Side to Strapping Line) No. of bricks Shifted (Nos.)

Strapping time

Avg. Time taken

(in sec)

(in sec)

(Nos.)

(in sec)

1.25
Time Taken for Processing 1200 bricks (In Sec) ----------------->>>>

125 384

50 360

15

1200 360

360

400 480

160

800 443

295

400 480

160

Total Production of Bricks per day

144000