Improvement of Assembly Line Efficiency by Using Lean Manufacturing Tools and Line Balancing Techniques
			
	
 
More details
Hide details
	
	
									
				1
				Mohammedia School of Engineers, University Mohammed V-Agdal, Av. Ibn Sina, Rabat, Morocco
				 
			 
						
				2
				Higher National School of Mines, Rabat, Morocco
				 
			 
										
				
				
		
		 
			
			
		
		
		
		
		
		
	
							
					    		
    			 
    			
    				    					Corresponding author
    					    				    				
    					Anass  Mortada   
    					Mohammedia School of Engineers, University Mohammed V-Agdal, Av. Ibn Sina, Rabat, Morocco
    				
 
    			
				 
    			 
    		 		
			
												 
		
	 
		
 
 
Adv. Sci. Technol. Res. J. 2023; 17(4):89-109
		
 
 
KEYWORDS
TOPICS
ABSTRACT
This paper presents a solid methodology for improving the efficiency and productivity of assembly lines using Lean Manufacturing tools, in particular the Define, Measure, Analyze, Improve, and Control approach (DMAIC) and line balancing techniques, followed by a concrete application in a case study of a wiring industry assembly line. The first phase of the approach ensured a clear definition of the problem using the who, what, where, when, why, and how tool (5W1H) and a description of the manufacturing process. The measurement phase allowed the calculation of the Takt time (TT) and the timing of the cycle times of the 17 stations of the line with the use of data collected on the standardized work combination table (SWCT) documents. This facilitated the analysis phase by first establishing a Yamazumi chart showing the distribution of the load between the line's stations and allowing the identification of bottleneck stations, and then analyzing the situation through the 5-Why tools and the Ishikawa diagram. Thanks to the innovation phase and the ideal balancing conditions developed in this paper, it was possible to balance the line's stations using an action plan whose effectiveness was monitored during the control phase, improving efficiency from 78% to 95% with a saving in manpower by reducing the number of operators from 17 to 14.