A NEW MODEL PROPOSAL FOR ERGONOMIC ASSEMBLY LINE BALANCING

Öz

Assembly line balancing is a problem where tasks assign to stations in compliance with precedence constraints and as far as possible to balance delays. Assembly lines which is not designed properly in an ergonomic way cause not only productivity loss but also work-related muscoloskeletal disorders on workers. To prevent such problems, it should be aimed to catch acceptable level for each workstation’s risk score and assign ergonomic risks equivalently among workers. In this study, for assembly line balancing problem, a new model approach is tackled, which constitute stations by consider ergonomic risk scores in addition to cycle time and precedence constraints. In order to compare proposed model with a classical assembly line balancing technique, a performance criterion which is combination of cycle time and ergonomic risk score were defined. The developed model was applied in a factory’s oven assembly line. In the assembly line, task times were measured, precedence diagram was constructed and ergonomic risk levels were evaulated by using REBA method. When balancing lines with using Longest Operation Times technique, performance score was %25.61 but when it comes to balance with developed model performance score was obtained %18.25. It has been detected that developed model provides 7.41% improvement in line’s total performance.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Assembly Line Balancing,Ergonomic Risk Evaulation,REBA

ERGONOMİK MONTAJ HATTI DENGELEME İÇİN YENİ BİR MODEL ÖNERİSİ

Öz

Montaj hattı dengeleme probleminde yapılacak işlemler, hattın belirlenen hızda devam etmesi amacıyla ve öncelik ilişkilerini dikkate alarak dengeli bir şekilde istasyonlara atanır. Montaj hattı ve istasyonların tasarımında ergonomik düzenlemeler göz ardı edildiğinde, çalışanlarda kas iskelet sistemi hastalıklarına ve devamında verimlilik kayıplarına da yol açabilir. Çalışan sağlığını ve üretimin verimliliğini korumak için montaj hattı dengelemede her bir istasyonun ergonomik risk düzeyinin kabul edilebilir seviyeye çekilmesi ve zorlanma düzeyinin işçiler arasında dengeli dağıtılması da amaçlanmalıdır. Bu çalışmada, montaj hattı dengelemede, öncelik ilişkileri ile çevrim süresi kısıtına ilaveten, ergonomik risk düzeyini de dikkate alan yeni bir model geliştirilmesi amaçlanmıştır. Ayrıca, önerilen modelin klasik montaj hattı dengeleme modeli ile karşılaştırılması amacıyla, süre ve ergonomik risk düzeyinin bileşkesinden oluşan performans ölçütü tanımlanmıştır. Geliştirilen model, bir işletmenin fırın montaj hattı için uygulanmıştır. Her iki montaj hattında işlem süreleri ölçülmüş, öncelik ilişkileri çıkarılmış ve REBA yöntemi ile ergonomik risk düzeyleri hesaplanmıştır. En Büyük Aday yöntemi kullanılarak yapılan klasik montaj dengelemede, performans skoru %25.61 olurken, geliştirilen model için %18.25 elde edilmiştir. Geliştirilen modelin, toplam performansda %7.41 iyileştirme sağladığı tespit edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Montaj Hattı Dengeleme,Ergonomik Risk Değerlendirme,REBA

Kaynakça

1. Akyol, S. D., Baykasoglu, A. 2016. ErgoALWABP: A multiple-rule based constructive randomized search algorithm for solving assembly line worker assignment and balancing problem under ergonomic risk factors. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10845-016-1246-6
2. Al-Zuheri, A., Xing, K., Luong, L. 2013. Mathematical modelling for process design of walking worker assembly line in productivity and ergonomics perspectives. International Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering, 14(1), 104-137.
3. Bao, S., Winkel, J., Shahnavaz, H. 2000. Prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders at workplaces in the People’s Republic of China. International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 6, 557–574.
4. Battini, D., Faccio, M., Persona, A., Sgarbossa, F. 2011. New methodological framework to improve productivity and ergonomics in assembly system design. International Journal Industrial Ergonomics, 41(1), 30-42.
5. Battini, D., Delorme, X., Dolgui, A., Sgarbossa, F. 2015. Assembly line balancing with ergonomics paradigms: Two alternative methods. IFACPapersOnLine, 48(3), 586-591.
6. Battini, D., Delorme, X., Dolgui, A., Persona, A., Sgarbossa, F. 2016. Ergonomics in assembly line balancing based on energy expenditure: A multiobjective model. International Journal of Production Research, 54(3), 824-845.
7. Bautista, J., Alfaro-Pozo, R., Batalla-García, C. 2016a. Maximizing comfort in Assembly Lines with temporal, spatial and ergonomic attributes. International Journal of Computational Intelligence Systems, 9(4), 788-799.
8. Bautista, J,, Batalla-García, C., Alfaro-Pozo, R. 2016b. Models for assembly line balancing by temporal, spatial and ergonomic risk attributes. European Journal of Operational Research, 251(3), 814-729.

9. Baykasoglu, A,, Tasan, S.O., Tasan, A.S., Akyol, S.D. 2017. Modeling and solving assembly line design problems by considering human factors with a real-life application. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing & Service Industries, 27(2), 96-115.
10. Baykasoglu, A., Akyol, S. D. 2014. Ergonomic assembly line balancing. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 29(4), 785–792.
11. Bernard, B. P. 1997. Musculoskeletal disorders and workplace factors. A critical review of epidemiologic evidence for work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the neck, upper extremity, and low back. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Cincinnati, OH.
12. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2009, November 24). Nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses requiring days away from work, 2008. Economic news release.
13. Carnahan, B., Norman, B., Redfern, M. 2001. Incorporating Physical Demand Criteria into Assembly Line Balancing. IIE Trans, 33(10), 875-87.
14. Chiasson, M. E., Imbeau, D., Major, J., Aubry, K., Delisle, A. 2012. Comparing The Results of Eight Methods Used to Evaluate Risk Factors Associated with Musculoskeletal Disorders. International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics, 42, 478-488.
15. Choi, G. 2009. A goal programming mixed-model line balancing for processing time and physical workload. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 57, 395–400.
16. David, G.C. 2005. Ergonomic methods for assessing exposure to risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders. Occupational Medicine, 55, 190–199
17. Deng, Q., Lin, J. 2012. Task Difficulty Balancing Analysis in Assembly Line Balancing. Advanced Science Letters, 5(2), 745-748.
18. Di Benedetto, R. Fanti, M. 2012. An integrated tool to support engineers for WMSDs risk assessment during the assembly line balancing. Work, 41(Suppl. 1), 2329-2333.
19. Eklund, J.A.E. 1995. Relationships between ergonomics and quality in assembly works. Applied Ergonomics, 26 (1), 15-20.
20. Fallentin N, Viikari-Juntura E, Wærsted M, Kilbom Å. 2001. Evaluation of physical workload standards and guidelines from a Nordic perspective. Scand J Work Environ Health, 27, suppl 2:1–52.
21. Güner, B., Hasgül, S. 2012. U-Type Assembly Line Balancing With Ergonomic Factors For Balance Stability. Journal of the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture of Gazi University, 27(2), 407-415.
22. Hignett, S., Mc Atamney, L. 2000. Rapid entire body assessment (REBA). Applied Ergonomics, 31, 201–205.
23. Kahya, E., Şahin, B.N., Daşdelen, E.,Doğru, S., (2018). Ergonomik Risk Kısıtları Altında Yeni Bir Montaj Hattı Dengeleme Modeli Geliştirilmesi, Journal of Engineering Sciences and Design, 6(OS: Ergonomi2017), 49–57.
24. Kara, Y., Atasagun, Y., Gökçen, H., Hezer, S., Demirel, N. 2014. An integrated model to incorporate ergonomics and resource restrictions into assembly line balancing. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 27, 997–1007.
25. Madani, D.A. and Dababneh, A. 2016. Rapid Entire Body Assessment: A Literature Review. American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 9 (1), 107-118.
26. Mutlu, Ö., Özgörmüş, E. 2012. A fuzzy assembly line balancing problem with physical workload constraints. International Journal of Production Research, 50(18), 5281-5291.
27. Nunes, I. L. 2009. FAST ERGO_X – a tool for ergonomic auditing and work-related musculoskeletal disorders prevention. Work: A Journal of Prevention, Assessment, & Rehabilitation, 34, 133–148.
28. Otto, A,, Battaïa, O. 2017. Reducing physical ergonomic risks at assembly lines by line balancing and job rotation: A survey. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 111(Suppl. C): 467-480.
29. Otto, A., Scholl, A. 2011. Incorporating ergonomic risks into assembly line balancing. European Journal of Operational Research, 212, 277–285.
30. Polat, O., Mutlu, Ö., Özgormus, E. 2018. A Mathematical Model For Assembly Line Balancing Problem Type 2 Under Ergonomic Workload Constraint. The Ergonomics Open Journal, 11, 1-10.
31. Pulkurte, R., Masilamani, R., Sonpatki, S,, Dhake, R. 2014. Cycle time reduction in assembly line through layout improvement, ergonomics analysis and lean principles. International Journal of Applied Sciences and Engineering Research, 3(2), 455-463.
32. Pullopdissakul, S., Ekpanyaskul, C., Taptagaporn, S., Bundhukul, A., Thepchatri, A. 2013. Upper extremities musculoskeletal disorders: Prevalence and associated ergonomic factors in an electronic assembly factory. International Journal of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, 26, 751–761.
33. Rajabalipour Cheshmehgaz, H., Haron, H., Kazemipour, F., Desa, MI. 2012. Accumulated risk of body postures in assembly line balancing problem and modeling through a multi-criteria fuzzy-genetic algorithm. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 63(2), 503-512.
34. Santé Canada, 2002. Economic Burden of Illness in Canada 1998. Health Canada, Ottawa, ON. http://www.phac-aspc.gc.ca/ebic-femc/index-eng.php
35. Scholl, A., Klein, R. 1997. SALOME: A bidirectional branch and bound procedure for assembly line balancing. INFORMS Journal on Computing, 9, 319–334.
36. Scholl, A., Klein, R. 1999. Balancing assembly lines effectively – a computational comparison. European Journal of Operational Research, 114, 50–58.
37. Schneider, E., Irastorza, X. 2010. European Risk Observatory Report. OSH in figures: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders in the EU – Facts and figures. Publications Office of the European Union: Luxembourg.
38. Şahin, B.N., Kahya, E. (2018). Hedef Programlama Modeli İle Ergonomik Kısıtlar Altında Montaj Hattı Dengelemesi, Journal of Engineering Sciences and Design, 6(OS: Ergonomi2017), 188 – 196
39. Tiacci, L., Mimmi, M. 2018. Integrating ergonomic risks evaluation through OCRA index and balancing/sequencing decisions for mixed model stochastic asynchronous assembly lines. Omega, 78, 112-138.
40. Yeow, P.H.P., Nath Sen, R. 2006. Productivity and quality improvements, revenue increment, and rejection cost reduction in the manual component insertion lines through the application of ergonomics. International Journal Industrial Ergonomics, 36(4), 367-377.
41. Xu, Z., Ko, J., Cochran, D. J., Jung, M. 2012. Design of assembly lines with the concurrent consideration of productivity and upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders using linear models. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 62, 431–441.
42. WHO Scientific Group, 2003. The Burden of Musculoskeletal Conditions at the Start of the New Millennium. World Health Organization, Geneva.