2015

XLRI, PGDBM 2014 -17

Group 5
ALOK KUMAR, MP 14005
CHETAN KUMAR M A, MP 14024
RANDHIR KUMAR, MP 14045

ASSEMBLY LINE BALANCING OF CHASSIS ASSEMBLY LINE

@ TATA MOTORS LIMITED, JAMSHEDPUR

Operation Management I

Project Scope & objective

Tata Motors has 3 chassis assembly lines with the capability of assembling the medium & heavy trucks
ranging from 16 toners to 48 toners with the number of assemblies varying from 150 fitments to 245
fitments on the moving assembly line. The challenge is to balance the line for multi model line
considering the various process, facility & layout constraints.
As a member of Industrial engineering team (Productivity services), our scope was to balance the line for
multi-model scenario & allocate manpower to achieve the optimum line balancing efficiency & increase
the labour productivity by optimizing the manpower.
Maximize Assembly Line utilization
Equal distribution of work
Maximize labor utilization hence minimize labor cost
Minimize idle time

System support
We used Delmia Process Engineer platform for creating station wise BOM consumption,
precedence chart & Balancing iterations & reports.

Steps followed
Collection of Inputs from Assembly Line -2
List of Processes with time
Process precedence relationship
Process break-up
Current allocation of processes to stations
Number of operators on each stations
Process & time verification in DPE
Process graph Creation in DPE using precedence relationship
Assembly Line balancing using DPE
Mapping of Existing line in DPE for comparison
Manual improvements in DPE
Reports & recommendations

Model Selection
Model considered is LPT 3118 (A truck version with lift axle, with tonnage capacity of 31
Ton & 180 HP engine)
Takt Time (min): 7.33
No. of stations: 30
No. of processes: 112
Operation Time (min): 581.4

Assumptions
Worker utilization taken up to 100%
Thirty stations taken for balancing
Feasibility of operation allocation to stations need to be checked.
Sub-assemblies not considered
Sub assembly technicians are not considered
Downtime not considered
Following fitments are considered as fixed on their stations
Trolley Adjustment
Chassis Number Punching
Inversion
Cowl Fitment
Spare Wheel Fitment
Clutch Bleeding
Diesel, Oil and Coolant Filling
Axle Fitments
Axle Tightening

Engine Dropping
Tyre Fitments
Tyre Tightening
Vehicle Rollout

Output Report
Step-1

Process mapping in DPE with time &

station constraints

Step-2

Process Graph based on precedence

relationship of processes

Line Balancing using DPE

Step-3

Step-4

Creation on 30 stations &

technicians in DPE

Set Line Balancing Parameters &

Choose algorithm to start line
balancing

Line Balancing using DPE

Step-5: Line Balancing Results

Results Summary

Station Wise distribution of operations to worker is shown in DPE Balancing View

Utilization, Work Content & number of workers are shown as results

Line Balancing using DPE

Step-6: Results of balancing shown in
Bar Chart View

Distribution of operations to workers on stations are shown in Bar Chart view as

result of DPE Line Balancing
The results can be further improved by manual drag- drop of Processes

Results, Comparison & Analysis

Utilization of line achieved is 82.62%
Allocation of processes to stations is more uniform
More uniform distribution of work to technicians

Comparison between Existing & DPE line balancing

Work content distribution on stations

Stations
Distribution of work content to processes is more uniform in DPE results as
compared to existing
13

Comparison between Existing & DPE line balancing

Average utilization of technicians on stations

Stations
Average utilization of technicians for each station in better for DPE
balancing results

10

Comparison between Existing & DPE line balancing

Total Number of technicians on each stations

Stations
More uniform distribution of number of technicians on each station
achieved

11

Comparison between Existing & DPE line balancing

Total Process & idle time on each station

Time (mins)

Current Line
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
Idle Time

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
60 30 18 1 5 38 16 21 21 3 23 30 2 8 32 26 7 11 21 39 24 17 6 4 5 3 8 11 8 2

Process Time 72 44 19 21 9 43 28 23 8 4 21 21 5 14 34 33 8 18 30 19 20 5 24 3 10 4 6 11 6 6
70
60

Proposed Line

Time (mins)

50
40
30
20
10
0
Idle Time

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
3 2 3 1 3 15 6 7 6 16 8 4 12 11 11 3 5 1 1 0 1 1 4 3 1 4 1 2 3 2

Process Time 19 28 26 29 26 43 23 30 31 28 14 18 17 18 11 19 24 28 6 7 7 14 40 11 7 18 6 13 5 6

Stations
Idle time on each station is reduced in DPE Line balancing results

12

Recommendations & Further scope of improvement

In order to improve overall line utilization results of DPE ALB can be implemented by
checking feasibility of processes on stations & also process/resource constraints.
DPE Line Balancing results suggest more uniform distribution of work content on
stations.
Uniform distributions of technicians on stations can also be achieved
For further improvements idle time can be minimized by further break-up of
processes & re-balancing.