Abstract

We aim at maximizing the comfort of operators in mixed-model assembly lines. To achieve this goal, we evaluate two assembly line balancing models: the first that minimizes the maximum ergonomic risk and the second one that minimizes the average absolute deviations of ergonomic risk. Through a case study we compare the results of the two models by two different resolution procedures: the Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP) and Greedy Randomized Adaptive Search Procedures (GRASP). Although linear programming offers best solution, the results given by GRASPs are competitive.

Highlights

  • Today, it is very common to think that many of the works that we perform are moderate and harmless in regard with our energy consumption

  • We use two Greedy Randomized Adaptive Search Procedures (GRASP) procedures: the GRASP-1, which was presented in Ref.[12] and whose objective is to minimize the ergonomic risk of the station of the line with greatest risk; and the GRASP-2, which is a new procedure focused on minimizing the average absolute deviation (AAD) of the ergonomic risk of the assembly line

  • If we focus on the ergonomic risk range, Mixed Integer Linear Programming (MILP)-2 is the best procedure, followed by GRASP-2, GRASP-1 and MILP-1

Read more

Summary

Introduction

It is very common to think that many of the works that we perform are moderate and harmless in regard with our energy consumption. In line with the previous works[7,8,9,10,11], this research seeks to maximize the comfort of an assembly line, considering the area and the time limitations This assembly line comfort supposes: (1) minimizing, as far as possible, the maximum ergonomic risk of the line; and (2) minimizing the range or the difference between the worst and the best workstation in regard with their ergonomic risk values. We use the model proposed by Ref.[7] that minimizes the maximum ergonomic risk of the line This model is evaluated, in this paper and unlike Ref.[7], considering the impact of the available area limitation, such as was made in Ref.[12].

Incorporating Ergonomics into the TSALBP
Incorporation of Ergonomics and problem description
Nomenclature
Minimization of Average Absolute Deviations of Ergonomic Risk
Resolution procedures
Linear Programming procedures
GRASP Algorithms
Greedy Procedure
Finalization test
Local Improvement Phase
Computational Experience
Conclusions
Findings
G2 G2 M2 M2 M2 M2 M2
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call