Chapter 17

Automated Assembly Systems

CHAPTER CONTENTS
17.1 Fundamentals of Automated Assembly Systems
17.1.1 System Configurations
17.1.2 Parts Delivery at Workstations
17.1.3 Applications
17.2 Analysis of Automated Assembly Systems
17.2.1 Parts Delivery System at Workstations
17.2.2 Multi-Station Assembly Machines
17.2.3 Single-Station Assembly Machines
17.2.4 Partial Automation
17.2.5 What the Equations Tell Us

The term automated assembly refers to mechanized and automated devices that perform
various assembly tasks in an assembly line or cell. Much progress has been made in the
technology of assembly automation in recent years. Some of this progress has been moti-
vated by advances in the field of robotics. Industrial robots are sometimes used as com-
ponents in automated assembly systems (Chapter 8). In this chapter, automated assembly
is discussed as a distinct field of automation. Although the manual assembly methods
described in Chapter 15 will be used for many years into the future, there are significant
opportunities for productivity gains in the use of automated methods.
Like the transfer lines discussed in the preceding chapter, automated assembly
­systems are usually included in the category of fixed automation. Most automated assem-
bly systems are designed to perform a fixed sequence of assembly steps on a specific

479
480 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

­ roduct. Automated assembly technology should be considered when the following con-
p
ditions exist:

• High product demand. Automated assembly systems should be considered for prod-
ucts made in millions of units (or close to this range).
• Stable product design. In general, any change in the product design means a change
in workstation tooling and possibly the sequence of assembly operations. Such
changes can be very costly.
• A limited number of components in the assembly. Riley [11] recommends a maxi-
mum of around a dozen parts.
• The product is designed for automated assembly. In Chapter 24, the product design
factors that allow for automated assembly are explored.

Automated assembly systems involve a significant capital expense. However, the

investments are generally less than for the automated transfer lines because (1) work units
produced on automated assembly systems are usually smaller than those made on trans-
fer lines and (2) assembly operations do not have the large mechanical force and power
requirements of processing operations such as machining. Accordingly, in comparing an
automated assembly system and a transfer line with the same number of stations, the assem-
bly system would tend to be physically smaller. This usually reduces the cost of the system.

17.1 FUNDAMENTALS OF AUTOMATED ASSEMBLY SYSTEMS

An automated assembly system performs a sequence of automated assembly operations to

combine multiple components into a single entity. The single entity can be a final product
or a subassembly in a larger product. In many cases, the assembled entity consists of a base
part to which other components are attached. The components are usually joined one at
a time, so the assembly is completed progressively.
A typical automated assembly system consists of the following subsystems: (1) one
or more workstations at which the assembly steps are accomplished, (2) parts feeding
devices that deliver the individual components to the workstation(s), and (3) a work han-
dling system for the assembled entity. In assembly systems with one workstation, the work
handling system moves the base part into and out of the station. In systems with multiple
stations, the handling system transfers the partially assembled base part between stations.
Control functions required in automated assembly machines are the same as in the
automated production lines of Chapter 16: (1) sequence control, (2) safety monitoring, and
(3) quality control. These functions are described in Section 16.1.3.

17.1.1 System Configurations

Automated assembly systems can be classified according to physical configuration. The prin-
cipal configurations, illustrated in Figure 17.1, are (a) in-line assembly machine, (b) dial-type
assembly machine, (c) carousel assembly system, and (d) single-station assembly machine.
The in-line assembly machine, Figure 17.1(a), is a series of automatic workstations
located along an in-line transfer system. It is the assembly version of the machining transfer
line. Synchronous and asynchronous transfer systems are the common means of transport-
ing base parts from station to station with the in-line configuration.
In the typical application of the dial-type machine, Figure 17.1(b), base parts are
loaded onto fixtures or nests attached to the circular dial. Components are added and/or
joined to the base part at the various workstations located around the periphery of the dial.
Sec. 17.1 / Fundamentals of Automated Assembly Systems 481

Components added at stations (6)

Components added at stations

Asby
y Aut
sb

A ut
A ut

sb
A
Asby Asby Asby Asby Asby Asby

y
Starting Completed Starting A
base parts Aut Aut Aut Aut Aut Aut assemblies base parts Asby
Aut
Sta Sta Sta Sta Sta Sta
1 2 3 n–2 n–1 n y
sb
(a) Asby A ut
A
Aut

Completed
assemblies
(b)
Components added at stations
Starting
base parts Components added at one station
Asby Asby Asby Asby Asby
A ut
Aut Aut Aut Aut Aut
sb
A
y

y
sb Asby
Asby Asby Asby Asby Asby A ut Starting Completed
Aut Aut Aut Aut Aut A base parts Aut assemblies
Completed
assemblies (d)
(c)

Figure 17.1 Types of automated assembly systems: (a) in-line, (b) dial-type, (c) carousel,
and (d) single station.

The dial-indexing machine operates with a synchronous or intermittent motion, in which

the cycle consists of the service time plus indexing time. Dial-type assembly machines are
sometimes designed to use a continuous rather than intermittent motion. This is common
in beverage bottling and canning plants, but not in mechanical and electronics assembly.
The operation of dial-type and in-line assembly systems is similar to the operation
of their counterparts for processing operations described in Section 16.1.1, except that
assembly operations are performed. For synchronous transfer of work between stations,
the ideal cycle time equals the operation time at the slowest station plus the transfer time
between stations. The production rate, at 100% uptime, is the reciprocal of the ideal cycle
time. Owing to part jams at the workstations and other malfunctions, the system will always
operate at less than 100% uptime.
As seen in Figure 17.1(c), the carousel assembly system represents a hybrid between
the circular work flow of the dial-type assembly machine and the straight work flow of the
in-line system. The carousel configuration can be operated with continuous, synchronous,
or asynchronous transfer mechanisms to move the work around the carousel. Carousels
with asynchronous transfer of work are often used in partially automated assembly systems
(Section 17.2.4).
In the single-station assembly machine, Figure 17.1(d), assembly operations are per-
formed on a base part at a single location. The typical operating cycle involves the place-
ment of the base part at a stationary position in the workstation, the addition of components
482 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

to the base, and finally the removal of the completed assembly from the station. An impor-
tant application of single-station assembly is the component placement machine, widely
used in the electronics industry to populate components onto printed circuit boards. For
mechanical assemblies, the single-station cell is sometimes selected as the configuration for
robotic assembly applications. Parts are fed into the single station, and the robot adds them
to the base part and performs the fastening operations. Compared with the other three
system types, the cycle time is longer in a single-station assembly system because all of the
assembly tasks are performed sequentially instead of simultaneously. Hence, production
rates are inherently slower. Single-station assembly systems are analyzed in Section 17.2.3.

17.1.2 Parts Delivery at Workstations

In each of the configurations described earlier, a workstation accomplishes one or both of

the following tasks: (1) a component is delivered to the assembly work head and added to
the existing base part in front of the work head (at the first station in the system, the base
part is often deposited onto a work carrier or pallet fixture), and (2) a fastening or joining
operation is performed at the station to permanently attach components to the existing
base part. In the case of a single-station assembly system, these tasks are carried out mul-
tiple times at the single station. Task (1) requires the parts to be delivered to the assembly
work head. The parts delivery system typically consists of the following hardware:

1. Hopper. This is the container into which the components are loaded at the worksta-
tion. A separate hopper is used for each component type. The components are usu-
ally loaded into the hopper in bulk. This means that the parts are randomly oriented
in the hopper.
2. Parts feeder. This is a mechanism that removes the components from the hopper one
at a time for delivery to the assembly work head. The hopper and parts feeder are
often combined into one operating mechanism. A vibratory bowl feeder, pictured in
Figure 17.2, is a very common example of the hopper-feeder combination.

Feed track

Outlet
Bowl

Bowl support frame

Suspension springs
Electromagnet

Base

Support feet

Figure 17.2 Vibratory bowl feeder.

Sec. 17.1 / Fundamentals of Automated Assembly Systems 483

Wiper blade (to wipe

upright or stacked parts
back into hopper)

Cutout (to drop

To feed cup-shaped parts facing
track down back into hopper)
Parts enter
from hopper
(a)

Rail (to reorient parts

To feed Parts enter
from flat orientation)
track from hopper
(b)

Figure 17.3 (a) Selector and (b) orientor devices used with
parts feeders in automated assembly systems.

3. Selector and/or orientor. These elements of the delivery system establish the proper
orientation of the components for the assembly work head. A selector is a device
that acts as a filter, permitting only parts in the correct orientation to pass through.
Incorrectly oriented parts are rejected back into the hopper. An orientor is a device
that allows properly oriented parts to pass through, and reorients parts that are not
properly oriented initially. Several selector and orientor schemes are illustrated in
Figure 17.3. Selector and orientor devices are often combined and incorporated into
one hopper-feeder system.
4. Feed track. The preceding elements of the delivery system are usually separated
from the assembly work head by a certain distance. A feed track moves the com-
ponents from the hopper and parts feeder to the location of the assembly work
head, maintaining proper orientation of the parts during the transfer. There are
two general categories of feed tracks: gravity and powered. Gravity feed tracks
are most common. In this type, the hopper and parts feeder are located at an
elevation above that of the work head. Gravity is used to deliver the components
to the work head. The powered feed track uses vibratory action, air pressure, or
other means to force the parts to travel along the feed track toward the assembly
work head.
5. Escapement and placement device. The escapement removes components from the
feed track at time intervals that are consistent with the cycle time of the assembly
work head. The placement device physically places the component in the correct
location at the workstation for the assembly operation. These elements are some-
times combined into a single operating mechanism. In other cases, they are two
separate devices. Several types of escapement and placement devices are pictured
in Figure 17.4.
484 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

Rotary indexing
table Stack of parts
Feed track
Feed track

Empty nest

Flow of
parts
Empty nest Rotary indexing
table
(a) (b)

Pick-and-place
device
Parts Feed
track

Work carriers

From
feeder
(c)
(d)
Work
carriers

From feeder

Work carriers

Pick-and-place
device
(e)

Figure 17.4 Various escapement and placement devices used in automated assembly sys-
tems: (a) and (b) horizontal and vertical devices for placement of parts onto dial-indexing
table; (c) escapement of rivet-shaped parts actuated by work carriers; (d) and (e) two types
of pick-and-place mechanisms that use suction cups to pick up parts.

The hardware elements of the parts delivery system are illustrated schematically in
Figure 17.5. A parts selector is illustrated in the diagram. Improperly oriented parts are
returned to the hopper. In the case of a parts orientor, improperly oriented parts are reori-
ented and proceed to the feed track. A more detailed description of the various elements
of the delivery system is provided in Boothroyd, Poli, and Murch [3].
Sec. 17.1 / Fundamentals of Automated Assembly Systems 485

Parts improperly
oriented fed
back into hopper
Selector
Hopper

Feed track Assembly

work head

Work carrier
Escapement
and
placement

Figure 17.5 Hardware elements of the parts delivery system at

an assembly workstation.

17.1.3 Applications

Automated assembly systems are used to produce a wide variety of products and subas-
semblies. Table 17.1 presents a list of typical products made by automated assembly.
Table 17.2 provides a representative list of assembly processes that are performed
on automated assembly machines. It should be noted that certain assembly processes are
more suitable for automation than others. For example, threaded fasteners (screws, bolts,
and nuts), although common in manual assembly, are a challenging assembly method to
automate. This issue is discussed in Chapter 24, which also provides some guidelines for
designing products for automated assembly.

TABLE 17.1 Typical Products Made by Automated Assembly

Alarm clocks Fuel injectors Printed circuit board assemblies

Ball bearings Gearboxes Pumps for household appliances
Ball point pens Lightbulbs Small electric motors
Cigarette lighters Locks Spark plugs
Electrical plugs and sockets Mechanical pens and pencils Wrist watches

TABLE 17.2 Typical Assembly Processes Used in Automated Assembly Systems

Automatic dispensing of adhesive Snap fitting

Insertion of components (electronic assembly) Soldering
Placement of components (electronic assembly) Spot welding
Riveting Stapling
Screw fastening (automatic screwdriver) Stitching
486 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

17.2 ANALYSIS OF AUTOMATED ASSEMBLY SYSTEMS

This section provides mathematical models to analyze the following topics in auto-
mated assembly: (1) parts delivery system at workstations, (2) multi-station auto-
mated assembly systems, (3) single-station automated assembly systems, and (4) partial
automation.

17.2.1 Parts Delivery System at Workstations

In the parts delivery system, Figure 17.5, the parts feeding mechanism is capable of
removing components from the hopper at a certain rate f. These components are
assumed to be randomly oriented initially, and must be presented to the selector or
orientor to establish the correct orientation. In the case of a selector, a certain propor-
tion of the components will be correctly oriented initially and these will be allowed to
pass through. The remaining components that are incorrectly oriented will be rejected
back into the hopper. In the case of an orientor, incorrectly oriented components will be
reoriented, resulting ideally in a 100% rate of components passing through the device.
In many delivery system designs, the functions of the selector and the orientor are com-
bined. Let u be the proportion of components that pass through the selector-orientor
process and are correctly oriented for delivery into the feed track. Hence the effective
rate of delivery of components from the hopper into the feed track is fu. The remaining
proportion, (1 - u), is recirculated back into the hopper. Obviously, the delivery rate
fu of components to the work head must be sufficient to keep up with the cycle rate of
the assembly machine.
Assuming the delivery rate of components fu is greater than the cycle rate Rc of the
assembly machine, the system needs to have a means of limiting the size of the queue in
the feed track. The usual solution is to place a sensor (e.g., limit switch or optical sensor)
near the top of the feed track to turn off the feeding mechanism when the feed track is full.
This sensor is referred to as the high-level sensor, and its location defines the active length
Lf2 of the feed track. If the length of a component in the feed track is Lc, then the number
of parts that can be held in the feed track is nf2 = Lf2/Lc. The length must be measured
from a point on a given component to the corresponding point on the next component
in the queue to allow for possible overlap of parts. The value of nf2 is the capacity of the
feed track.
Another sensor placed along the feed track at some distance from the first sensor is
used to restart the feeding mechanism. If the location of this low-level sensor is defined as
Lf1, then the number of components in the feed track at this point is nf1 = Lf1/Lc.
The rate at which parts in the feed track are reduced when the high-level sensor
is actuated (which turns off the feeder) = Rc, which is the cycle rate of the automated
assembly work head. On average, the rate at which the quantity of parts will increase
upon actuation of the low-level sensor (which turns on the feeder) is fu - Rc. This rate of
increase will not be uniform due to the random nature of the feeder-selector operation.
Accordingly, the value of nf1 must be large enough to virtually eliminate the possibility
of a stock out after the low-level sensor has turned on the feeder. The following example
illustrates how these rates of decrease and increase can be used to determine the depletion
and replenishment times in the feed track.
Sec. 17.2 / Analysis of Automated Assembly Systems 487

EXAMPLE 17.1 Parts Delivery System in Automatic Assembly

The cycle time for a given assembly work head = 6 sec. The parts feeder has
a feed rate of 50 components per min. The probability that a given component
fed by the feeder will pass through the selector is u = 0.25. The number of
parts in the feed track corresponding to the low-level sensor is nf1 = 6. The
capacity of the feed track is nf2 = 18 parts. Determine (a) how long it will take
for the supply of parts in the feed track to go from nf2 to nf1, and (b) how long
it will take on average for the supply of parts to go from nf1 to nf2.
Solution: (a) T
 c = 6 sec = 0.1 min. The rate of depletion of parts in the feed track start-
ing from nf2 will be Rc = 1/0.1 = 10 parts/min
18 - 6
Time to deplete feed track (time to go from nf2 to nf1) = Tde = = 1.2 min
10
(b) The rate of parts increase in the feed track when the low-level sensor is
reached is fu - Rc = (50)(0.25) - 10 = 12.5 - 10 = 2.5 parts/min
18 - 6
Time to replenish feed track (time go from nf1 to nf2) = Tre = = 4.8 min
2.5

17.2.2 Multi-Station Assembly Machines

In this section, the operation and performance of automated assembly machines that have
several workstations are analyzed. These include dial-indexing machines, many in-line
assembly systems, and certain carousel systems. Assumptions underlying the analysis are
similar to those in the analysis of transfer lines: (1) assembly operations at the stations
have constant element times, although the times are not necessarily equal at all stations;
(2) synchronous parts transfer is used; and (3) there is no internal storage.
The analysis of an automated assembly machine with multiple stations shares much
in common with the approach used for transfer lines in Section 16.3. Some modifications
in the analysis must be made to account for the fact that components are being added at
workstations in the assembly system, whereas no components are added in transfer lines.
The operations of multi-station assembly systems are depicted in Figures 17.1(a), (b), and
(c). The equations that describe these operations are based on the approach developed by
Boothroyd and Redford [2].
The typical operation at a workstation consists of a component being added and/or
joined in some fashion to an existing assembly. The existing assembly consists of a base
part plus the components assembled to it at previous stations. The base part is launched
onto the line either at or before the first workstation. The components added at each sta-
tion must be clean, uniform in size and shape, of high quality, and consistently oriented.
When the feed mechanism and assembly work head attempt to join a component that does
not satisfy these specifications, the station can jam. When a jam occurs, it results in the
shutdown of the entire system until the fault is corrected. Thus, in addition to the other
488 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

mechanical and electrical failures that interrupt the operation of an automated production
line, the problem of defective components is one that specifically plagues the operation of
an automatic assembly system.

The Assembly Machine as a Game of Chance. Defective parts occur in manufac-

turing with a certain fraction defect rate q (0 … q … 1.0). In the operation of an assembly
workstation, q is the probability that the component to be added during the current cycle
is defective. When an attempt is made to feed and assemble a defective component, the
defect might or might not cause the station to jam. Let m = probability that a defect
results in a jam at the station and consequential stoppage of the line. Since the values of
q and m may be different for different stations, these terms are subscripted as qi and mi,
where i = 1, 2, c n, and n is the number of workstations on the assembly machine.
At a particular workstation, say station i, there are three possible events that might
occur when the feed mechanism attempts to feed the next component and the assembly
device attempts to join it to the existing assembly at the station.

1. The component is defective and causes a station jam. The probability of this event
is the fraction defect rate of the parts at the station (qi) multiplied by the probability
that a defect will cause the station to jam (mi). This product is the same term pi as in
the previous analysis of transfer machines in Section 16.3. For an assembly machine,
pi = miqi. When the station jams, the component must be cleared and the next com-
ponent allowed to feed and be assembled. It is assumed that the probability of two
consecutive defects is very small, equal to q2i .
2. The component is defective but does not cause a station jam. This has a probability
(1 - mi)qi. With this outcome, a bad part is joined to the existing assembly, perhaps
rendering the entire assembly defective.
3. The component is not defective. This is the most desirable outcome and the most
likely by far (it is hoped). The probability that a part added at the station is not defec-
tive is equal to the proportion of good parts (1 - qi).

The probabilities of the three possible events must sum to unity for any workstation; that is,
miqi + (1 - mi)qi + (1 - qi) = 1 (17.1)
For the special case where mi = m and qi = q for all i, this equation reduces to the following:
mq + (1 - m)q + (1 - q) = 1 (17.2)
Although it is unlikely that all mi are equal and all qi are equal, the equation is nev-
ertheless useful for computation and approximation purposes.
To determine the complete distribution of possible outcomes that can occur on an
n-station assembly machine, the terms of Equation (17.1) are multiplied together for all
n stations:

q [miqi + (1 - mi)qi + (1 - qi)] = 1

n
(17.3)
i=1

In the special case where mi = m and qi = q for all i, this reduces to

[mq + (1 - m)q + (1 - q)]n = 1 (17.4)
Expansion of Equation (17.3) reveals the probabilities for all possible sequences of events
that can take place on the n-station assembly machine. Regrettably, the number of terms
Sec. 17.2 / Analysis of Automated Assembly Systems 489

in the expansion becomes very large for a machine with more than two or three stations.
The exact number of terms is equal to 3n, where n = number of stations. For example, for
an eight-station line, the number of terms = 38 = 6561, each term representing the prob-
ability of one of the 6,561 possible outcome sequences on the assembly machine.

Measures of Performance. Fortunately, it is not necessary to calculate every

term to use the description of assembly machine operation provided by Equation (17.3).
One of the performance characteristics of interest is the proportion of assemblies that
contain one or more defective components. Two of the three terms in Equation (17.3)
represent events in which a defective component is not added at the given station. The
first term is miqi, which indicates that a station jam has occurred, preventing a defective
component from being added to the existing assembly. The other term is (1 - qi), which
means that a good component has been added at the station. The sum of these two terms
represents the probability that a defective component is not added at station i. Multi-
plying these probabilities for all stations provides the proportion of acceptable product
coming off the line:

Pap = q (1 - qi + miqi)
n
(17.5)
i=1

where Pap can be thought of as the yield of good assemblies produced by the assembly
machine. If Pap = the proportion of good assemblies, then the proportion of assemblies
containing at least one defective component Pqp is given by

Pqp = 1 - Pap = 1 - q (1 - qi + miqi)

n
(17.6)
i=1

In the case of equal mi and equal qi, these two equations become, respectively,

Pap = (1 - q + mq)n (17.7)

Pqp = 1 - (1 - q + mq)n (17.8)

The yield Pap is an important performance metric of an assembly machine. To have a cer-
tain proportion of assemblies with one or more defective components in the final output
is a significant problem. These assemblies must be identified by inspection and sortation,
or they will be mixed in with the good assemblies, which could lead to undesirable conse-
quences when the assemblies are placed in service.
Other performance measures of interest are the machine’s production rate, the pro-
portion of uptime and downtime, and the average cost per unit produced. To calculate
production rate, the frequency of downtime occurrences per cycle F is first determined.
If each station jam results in a machine downtime occurrence, F is found by summing the
expected number of station jams per cycle:

F = a pi = a miqi
n n
(17.9)
i=1 i=1

In the case of a station performing only a joining or fastening operation and not adding a
part at the station, then the contribution to F made by that station is pi, the probability of
a station breakdown, where pi does not depend on mi and qi.
490 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

If mi = m and qi = q for all stations, i = 1, 2, c , n, then the above equation for

F reduces to the following:
F = nmq (17.10)
The average actual production time per assembly is given by

Tp = Tc + a miqiTd
n
(17.11)
i=1

where Tc = ideal cycle time of the assembly machine, which is the longest assembly task
time on the machine plus the indexing or transfer time, min; and Td = average downtime
per occurrence, min. For the case of equal mi and qi,
Tp = Tc + nmqTd (17.12)
The production rate is the reciprocal of average actual production time:
1
Rp = (17.13)
Tp
This is the same relationship as Equation (16.9) for transfer lines. However, the operation
of assembly machines is different from processing machines. In an assembly machine,
unless mi = 1.0 for all stations, the production output will include some assemblies with
one or more defective components. Accordingly, the production rate should be corrected
to give the rate of acceptable product, that is, those that contain no defects. This is simply
the yield Pap multiplied by the production rate

q (1 - qi + miqi)
n

Pap i=1
Rap = PapRp = = (17.14)
Tp Tp
where Rap = production rate of acceptable product, units/min. When all mi are equal and
all qi are equal, the corresponding equation is
Pap (1 - q + mq)n
Rap = PapRp = = (17.15)
Tp Tp
Equation (17.13) gives the production rate of all assemblies made on the system, including
those that contain one or more defective parts. Equations (17.14) and (17.15) give produc-
tion rates for good product only. The problem still remains that the defective products
are mixed in with the good units. This issue of inspection and sortation is considered in
Chapter 21.
Line efficiency is calculated as the ratio of ideal cycle time to average actual produc-
tion time. This is the same ratio as defined in Chapter 16, Equation (16.11),
Rp T
E = = c (17.16)
Rc Tp
where Tp is calculated from Equation (17.11) or Equation (17.12). The proportion down-
time D = 1 - E, as before. No attempt has been made to correct line efficiency E for the
yield of good assemblies. The efficiency of the assembly machine and the quality of units
produced by it are treated here as separate issues.
Sec. 17.2 / Analysis of Automated Assembly Systems 491

On the other hand, the cost per assembled product must take account of the output
quality. Therefore, the general cost formula given in Equation (16.14) in the previous
chapter must be corrected for yield, as
C m + C oTp + C t
C pc = (17.17)
Pap
where C pc = cost per good assembly, $/pc; C m = cost of materials, which includes the
cost of the base part plus components added to it, $/pc; C o = operating cost of the assem-
bly system, $/min; Tp = average actual production time, min/pc; C t = cost of disposable
tooling, $/pc; and Pap = yield from Equation (17.5). The effect of the denominator is to
increase the cost per assembly; as the quality of the individual components deteriorates,
the average cost per good quality assembly increases.
In addition to the traditional ways of indicating line performance (production rate,
line efficiency, cost per unit), there is the additional metric of yield. While the yield of good
product is an important issue in any automated production line, it can be explicitly included
in the formulas for assembly machine performance by means of q and m.

EXAMPLE 17.2 Multi-Station Automated Assembly System

A 10-station in-line assembly machine has an ideal cycle time = 6 sec. The
base part is automatically loaded prior to the first station, and components are
added at each of the stations. The fraction defect rate at each of the 10 stations
is q = 0.01, and the probability that a defect will jam is m = 0.5. When a jam
occurs, the average downtime is 2 min. Cost to operate the assembly machine
is $42.00/hr. Other costs are ignored. Determine (a) average production rate of
all assemblies, (b) yield of good assemblies, (c) average production rate of good
product, (d) uptime efficiency of the assembly machine, and (e) cost per unit.
Solution: (a) T
 c = 6 sec = 0.1 min. The average production cycle time is Tp = 0.1 +
(10)(0.5)(0.01)(2.0) = 0.2 min. The production rate is therefore
60
Rp = = 300 total assemblies/hr
0.2
(b) The yield is given by Equation (17.7):
Pap = {1 - .01 + 0.5(0.01)}10 = 0.9511
(c) Average actual production rate of good assemblies is determined by Equa-
tion (17.15):
Rap = 300(0.9511) = 285.3 good assemblies/hr
(d) The efficiency of the assembly machine is
E = 0.1/0.2 = 0.50 = 50%
(e) Cost to operate the assembly machine C o = $42/hr = $0.70/min
C pc = (0.70/min)(0.2 min/pc)/0.9511 = $0.147/pc
492 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

EXAMPLE 17.3 Effect of Variations in q and m on Assembly System Performance

This example shows how the performance measures in Example 17.2 are af-
fected by variations in q and m. First, for m = 0.5, determine the produc-
tion rate, yield, and efficiency for q = 0, q = 0.01, and q = 0.02. Second,
for q = 0.01, determine the production rate, yield, and efficiency for
m = 0, m = 0.5, and m = 1.0.
Solution: Computations similar to those in Example 17.2 provide the following results:

q m Rp (pc/hr) Yield Rap (pc/hr) E Cpc

0 0.5 600 1.0 600 100% $0.07
0.01 0.5 300 0.951 285 50% $0.15
0.02 0.5 200 0.904 181 33.3% $0.23
0.01 0 600 0.904 543 100% $0.08
0.01 0.5 300 0.951 285 50% $0.15
0.01 1.0 200 1.0 200 33.3% $0.21

The results of Example 17.3 show that as fraction defect rate q increases (meaning
that component quality gets worse) all five measures of performance suffer. Production
rate drops, yield of good product is reduced, proportion uptime decreases, and cost per
unit increases.
The effect of m (probability that a defect will jam the work head and cause the assem-
bly machine to stop) is less obvious. At low values of m (m = 0) for the same component
quality level (q = 0.01), production rate and machine efficiency are high, but yield of good
product is low. Instead of interrupting the assembly machine operation and causing down-
time, all defective components pass through the assembly process to become part of the
final product. At m = 1.0, all defective components are removed before they become part
of the product. Therefore, yield is 100%, but removing the defects takes time, adversely
affecting production rate, efficiency, and cost per unit.

17.2.3 Single-Station Assembly Machines

The single-station assembly system is depicted in Figure 17.1(d). It consists of a single work
head, with several components feeding into the station to be assembled to a base part. Let
ne = the number of distinct assembly elements that are performed on the machine. Each
element has an element time, Tej, where j = 1, 2, c , ne. The ideal cycle time for the
single-station assembly machine is the sum of the individual element times of the assembly
operations to be performed on the machine, plus the handling time to load the base part
into position and unload the completed assembly. The ideal cycle time can be expressed as

Tc = Th + a Tej
ne
(17.18)
j=1

where Th = handling time, min.

Many of the assembly elements involve the addition of a component to the existing
subassembly. As in the analysis of multi-station assembly, each component type has a
Sec. 17.2 / Analysis of Automated Assembly Systems 493

certain fraction defect rate, qj, and there is a certain probability that a defective component
will jam the workstation, mj. When a jam occurs, the assembly machine stops, and it takes
an average Td to clear the jam and restart the system. The inclusion of downtime resulting
from jams in the machine cycle time gives

Tp = Tc + a qjmjTd
ne
(17.19)
j=1

For elements that do not include the addition of a component, the value of qj = 0 and mj
is irrelevant. This might occur, for example, when a fastening operation is performed with
no part added during element j. In this type of operation, a term pjTd would be included in
the above expression to allow for a downtime during that element, where pj = the prob-
ability of a station failure during element j. For the special case of equal q and equal m
values for all components added, Equation (17.19) becomes
Tp = Tc + nmqTd (17.20)
Determining yield (proportion of assemblies that contain no defective components) for the
single-station assembly machine makes use of the same equations as for the multi-station
systems, Equation (17.5) or (17.7). Uptime efficiency is computed as E = Tc/Tp using the
values of Tc and Tp from Equations (17.18) and (17.19) or (17.20).

EXAMPLE 17.4 Single-Station Automatic Assembly System

A single-station assembly machine performs five work elements to assemble
four components to a base part. The elements are listed in the table below,
together with the fraction defect rate (q) and probability of a station jam (m)
for each of the components added (NA means not applicable).

Element Operation Time (sec) q m p

1 Add gear 4 0.02 1.0
2 Add spacer 3 0.01 0.6
3 Add gear 4 0.015 0.8
4 Add gear and mesh 7 0.02 1.0
5 Fasten 5 0 NA 0.012

Time to load the base part is 3 sec and time to unload the completed assembly
is 4 sec, giving a total load/unload time of Th = 7 sec. When a jam occurs, it
takes an average of 1.5 min to clear the jam and restart the machine. Determine
(a) production rate of all product, (b) yield of good product, (c) production
rate of good product, and (d) uptime efficiency of the assembly machine.
Solution: (a) The ideal cycle time of the assembly machine is
Tc = 7 + (4 + 3 + 4 + 7 + 5) = 30 sec = 0.5 min
Frequency of downtime occurrences is
F = 0.02(1.0) + 0.01(0.6) + 0.015(0.8) + 0.02(1.0) + 0.012 = 0.07
494 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

Adding the average downtime due to jams,

Tp = 0.5 + 0.07(1.5) = 0.5 + 0.105 = 0.605 min
Production rate is therefore Rp = 60/0.605 = 99.2 total assemblies/hr
(b) Yield of good product is the following, from Equation (17.5):
Pap = {1 - 0.02 + 1.0(0.02)}{1 - 0.01 + 0.6(0.01)}
{1 - 0.015 + 0.8(0.015)}{1 - 0.02 + 1.0(0.02)}
= (1.0)(0.996)(0.997)(1.0) = 0.993
(c) Production rate of only good assemblies is
Rap = 99.2(0.993) = 98.5 good assemblies/hr
(d) Uptime efficiency is
E = 0.5/0.605 = 0.8264 = 82.64%

As the analysis suggests, increasing the number of elements in the assembly machine
cycle results in a longer cycle time, decreasing the production rate of the machine. Accord-
ingly, applications of a single-station assembly machine are limited to lower volume, lower
production rate situations. For higher production rates, one of the multi-station assembly
systems is generally preferred.

17.2.4 Partial Automation

Many assembly lines in industry contain a combination of automated and manual work-
stations. These cases of partially automated production lines occur for two main reasons:

1. Automation is introduced gradually on an existing manual line. Suppose demand

for the product made on a manually operated line increases, so the company decides
to increase production and reduce labor costs by automating some or all of the
stations. The simpler operations are automated first, and the transition toward a
fully automated line is accomplished over a long period of time. Until then, the line
operates as a partially automated system. (See Automation Migration Strategy,
Section 1.4.3.)
2. Certain manual operations are too difficult or too costly to automate. Therefore,
when the sequence of workstations is planned for the line, certain stations are
designed to be automated while the others are designed as manual stations.

Examples of operations that might be too difficult to automate are assembly pro-
cedures or processing steps involving alignment, adjustment, or fine-tuning of the work
unit. These operations often require special human skills and/or senses to carry out. Many
inspection procedures also fall into this category. Defects in a product or part that can be
easily perceived by a human inspector are sometimes difficult for an automated inspection
device to detect. Another problem is that the automated inspection device can only check
for the defects for which it was designed, whereas a human inspector is capable of sensing
a variety of unanticipated imperfections and problems.
Sec. 17.2 / Analysis of Automated Assembly Systems 495

To analyze the performance of a partially automated production line, the following

assumptions are made: (1) workstations perform either processing or assembly opera-
tions, (2) processing and assembly times at automated stations are constant, though not
necessarily equal at all stations, (3) the system uses synchronous transfer of parts, (4) the
system has no internal buffer storage, and (5) station breakdowns occur only at automated
stations. Breakdowns do not occur at manual stations because the human workers are
flexible enough, it is assumed, to adapt to the kinds of disruptions and malfunctions that
would interrupt the operation of an automated workstation. For example, if a human
operator were to retrieve a defective part from the parts bin at the station, the worker
would immediately discard the part and select another without much lost time. Of course,
this assumption of human adaptability is not always correct, but the analysis is based on it.
The ideal cycle time Tc is determined by the slowest station on the line, which is
generally one of the manual stations. If the cycle time is determined by a manual station,
then Tc will exhibit variability, simply because there is random variation in any repetitive
human activity. However, it is assumed that the average Tc remains constant over time.
Given the assumption that breakdowns occur only at automated stations, let na = the
number of automated stations and Td = average downtime per occurrence. For the auto-
mated stations that perform processing operations, let pi = the probability (frequency) of
breakdowns per cycle, and for automated stations that perform assembly operations, let qi
and mi equal, respectively, the defect rate and probability that the defect will cause station
i to stop. The average actual production time can now be defined as:

Tp = Tc + a piTd (17.21)
i ∈ na

where the summation applies to the na automated stations only. For those automated sta-
tions that perform assembly operations in which a part is added,
pi = miqi
If all pi, mi, and qi are equal, respectively, to p, m, and q, then the preceding equations
reduce to
Tp = Tc + napTd (17.22)
and p = mq for those stations that perform assembly consisting of the addition of a part.
Given that na is the number of automated stations, then nw = the number of stations
operated by workers, and na + nw = n, where n = the total station count. Let C asi = cost
to operate automatic workstation i, $/min; C wi = cost to operate manual workstation i, $/
min; and C at = cost to operate the automatic transfer mechanism. Then the total cost to
operate the line is given by

C o = C at + a C asi + a C wi (17.23)
i ∈ na i ∈ nw

where C o = cost of operating the partially automated production system, $/min. For all
C asi = C as, and all C wi = C w, then
C o = C at + naC as + nwC w (17.24)
Now the total cost per unit produced on the line can be calculated as
C m + C oTp + C t
C pc = (17.25)
Pap
496 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

where C pc = cost per good assembly, $/pc; C m = cost of materials and components being
processed and assembled on the line, $/pc; C o = cost of operating the partially automated
production system by either of Equations (17.23) or (17.24), $/min; Tp = average actual
production time, min/pc; C t = any cost of disposable tooling, $/pc; and Pap = proportion
of good assemblies by Equation (17.5) or (17.7).

EXAMPLE 17.5 Partial Automation

The company is considering replacing one of the current manual worksta-
tions with an automatic work head on a 10-station production line. The cur-
rent line has six automatic stations and four manual stations. Current cycle
time is 30 sec. The limiting process time is at the manual station that is pro-
posed for replacement. Implementing the proposal would allow the cycle time
to be reduced to 24 sec. The new station would cost $0.20/min. Other cost
data: C w = $0.15/min, C as = $0.10/min, and C at = $0.12/min. Breakdowns
occur at each automated station with a probability p = 0.01. The new auto-
mated station is expected to have the same frequency of breakdowns. Average
downtime per occurrence Td = 3.0 min, which will be unaffected by the new
station. Material costs and tooling costs will be neglected in the analysis. It is
desired to compare the current line with the proposed change on the basis of
production rate and cost per piece. Assume a yield of 100% good product.
Solution: For the current line, Tc = 30 sec = 0.50 min

Tp = 0.50 + 6(0.01)(3.0) = 0.68 min and Rp = 1/0.68 = 1.47 pc/min = 88.2 pc/hr
C o = 0.12 + 4(0.15) + 6(0.10) = $1.32/min and C pc = 1.32(0.68) = $0.898/pc

For the proposed line, Tc = 24 sec = 0.4 min

Tp = 0.40 + 7(0.01)(3.0) = 0.61 min and Rp = 1/0.61 = 1.64 pc/min = 98.4 pc/hr
C o = 0.12 + 3(0.15) + 6(0.10) + 1(0.20) = $1.37/min and C pc = 1.37(0.61) = $0.836/pc

Even though the line would be more expensive to operate per unit time, the
proposed change would increase production rate and reduce piece cost.

17.2.5 What the Equations Tell Us

The equations derived in this section reveal several practical guidelines for the design and
operation of automated assembly systems and the products made on such systems.

• The parts delivery system at each station must be designed to deliver components
to the assembly operation at a net rate (parts feeder multiplied by pass-through
proportion of the selector/orientor) that is greater than or equal to the cycle rate of
the assembly work head. Otherwise, assembly system performance is limited by the
parts delivery system rather than the assembly process technology.
References 497

• The quality of components added in an automated assembly system has a significant

effect on system performance. Poor quality, as represented by the fraction defect
rate, can result in
1. Station jams that stop the entire assembly system, which has adverse effects on
production rate, uptime proportion, and cost per unit produced; and/or
2. Assembly of defective components in the product, which has adverse effects on
yield of good assemblies and product cost.
• As the number of workstations increases in an automated assembly system, uptime
efficiency and production rate tend to decrease due to parts quality and station reli-
ability effects. This reinforces the need to use only the highest quality components
on automated assembly systems.
• The cycle time of a multi-station assembly system is determined by the slowest sta-
tion (longest assembly task) in the system. The number of assembly tasks to be per-
formed is important only insofar as it affects the reliability of the assembly system.
By comparison, the cycle time of a single-station assembly system is determined by
the sum of the assembly element times rather than by the longest assembly element.
• Compared with a multi-station assembly machine, a single-station assembly system
with the same number of assembly tasks has a lower production rate but a higher
uptime efficiency.
• Multi-station assembly systems are appropriate for high production applications and
long production runs. In comparison, single-station assembly systems have a longer
cycle time and are more appropriate for mid-range quantities of product.
• An automated station should be substituted for a manual station only if it reduces
cycle time sufficiently to offset any negative effects of lower reliability.

REFERENCES

[1] Andreasen, M. M., S. Kahler, and T. Lund, Design for Assembly, IFS (Publications) Ltd.,
UK, and Springer-Verlag, Berlin, FRG, 1983.
[2] Boothroyd, G., and A. H. Redford, Mechanized Assembly, McGraw-Hill Publishing Com-
pany, Ltd., London, 1968.
[3] Boothroyd, G., C. Poli, and L. E. Murch, Automatic Assembly, Marcel Dekker, Inc., New
York, 1982.
[4] Boothroyd, G., P. Dewhurst, and W. Knight, Product Design for Manufacture and Assembly,
Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, 1994.
[5] Delchambre, A., Computer-Aided Assembly Planning, Chapman & Hall, London, UK, 1992.
[6] Gay, D. S., “Ways to Place and Transport Parts,” Automation, June 1973.
[7] Groover, M. P., M. Weiss, R. N. Nagel, and N. G. Odrey, Industrial Robotics: Technology,
Programming, and Applications, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York, 1986, Chapter 15.
[8] Groover, M. P., Fundamentals of Modern Manufacturing: Materials, Processes, and Systems,
5th ed., John Wiley & Sons, Inc., Hoboken, NJ, 2013.
[9] Murch, L. E., and G. Boothroyd, “On-off Control of Parts Feeding,” Automation, August
1970, pp. 32–34.
[10] Nof, S. Y., W. E. Wilhelm, and H.-J. Warnecke, Industrial Assembly, Chapman & Hall,
London, UK, 1997.
498 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

[11] Riley, F. J., Assembly Automation, Industrial Press Inc., New York, 1983.
[12] Schwartz, W. H., “Robots Called to Assembly,” Assembly Engineering, August 1985,
pp. 20–23.
[13] Warnecke, H. J., M. Schweizer, K. Tamaki, and S. Nof, “Assembly,” Handbook of ­Industrial
Engineering, Institute of Industrial Engineers, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 1992,
pp. 505–562.
[14] www.atsautomation.com
[15] www.autodev.com
[16] www.magnemotion.com
[17] www.setpointusa.com

REVIEW QUESTIONS

17.1 Name four conditions under which automated assembly technology should be considered.
17.2 What are the four automated assembly system configurations listed in the text?
17.3 Name the typical hardware components of a workstation parts delivery system.
17.4 Name six typical products that are made by automated assembly.
17.5 Considering the assembly machine as a game of chance, what are the three possible events
that might occur when the feed mechanism attempts to feed the next component to the
assembly work head at a given workstation in a multi-station system?
17.6 Name some of the important performance measures for an automated assembly system.
17.7 Why is the production rate inherently lower on a single-station assembly system than on a
multi-station assembly system?
17.8 What are two reasons for the existence of partially automated production lines?
17.9 What are two effects of poor quality parts, as represented by the fraction defect rate, on the
performance of an automated assembly system?

PROBLEMS

Answers to problems labeled (A) are listed in the appendix.

Parts Feeding

17.1 (A) The feeder-selector device at one of the workstations of an assembly machine has a
feed rate of 65 components/min and provides a throughput of one part in five. The ideal
cycle time of the assembly machine is 6 sec. The low-level sensor on the feed track is set at
8 components, and the high-level sensor is set at 30 components. (a) How long will it take for
the supply of components to be depleted from the high-level sensor to the low-level sensor
once the feeder-selector device is turned off? (b) How long will it take for the components
to be resupplied from the low-level sensor to the high-level sensor, on average, after the
feeder-selector device is turned on? (c) What are the time proportions that the feeder-
selector device is turned on and turned off?
17.2 Solve Problem 17.1 but use a feed rate of 55 parts/min. (d) How does the reduced feed rate
of the feeder-selector affect the operation of the assembly machine?
17.3 The ideal cycle time of an assembly machine is 4 sec. The parts feeder at one of the work-
stations has a feed rate of 90 components/min and the probability that the components
Problems 499

will pass through the selector is 25%. The active length of the feed track (where the
high-level sensor is located) is 400 mm. The low-level sensor on the feed track is located
100 mm from the station work head. The components have a length of 10 mm in the feed
track direction, and there is no overlapping of parts. (a) How long will it take for the sup-
ply of parts to be depleted from the high-level sensor to the low-level sensor once the
feeder-selector device is turned off? (b) How long will it take for the parts to be resupplied
from the low-level sensor to the high-level sensor, on average, after the feeder-selector
device is turned on? (c) What are the time proportions that the feeder-selector device is
turned on and turned off?
17.4 An assembly machine has eight stations and must produce at an average rate of 300 com-
pleted assemblies/hr. When a breakdown occurs, all subsystems (including the feeder) stop.
The frequency of breakdowns of the assembly machine is once every 80 parts. Average
downtime per breakdown is 2.0 min. One of the stations is an automatic assembly opera-
tion that uses a feeder-selector. Components fed into the selector have a 20% probability of
passing through. Parts rejected by the selector are fed back into the hopper. What minimum
rate must the feeder deliver components to the selector during system uptime in order to
keep up with the assembly machine?

Multi-Station Assembly Systems

17.5 A 10-station assembly machine has an ideal cycle time of 4 sec. The fraction defect rate at
each station is 0.005 and a defect always jams the affected station. When a breakdown occurs,
it takes 1.5 min, on average, for the system to be put back into operation. Determine (a) the
hourly production rate for the assembly machine, (b) yield of good product (final assemblies
containing no defective components), and (c) proportion uptime of the system.
17.6 Solve Problem 17.5 but assume that defects never jam the workstations. Other data are the
same.
17.7 Solve Problem 17.5 but assume that m = 0.5 for all stations. Other data are the same.
17.8 A six-station dial-indexing machine assembles components to a base part. The operations,
element times, q and m values for components added are given in the table below (NA
means q and m are not applicable to the operation). The indexing time is 2 sec. When a
jam occurs, it requires 1.5 min to release the jam and put the machine back in operation.
Determine (a) hourly production rate for the assembly machine, (b) yield of good product
(final assemblies containing no defective components), and (c) proportion uptime of the
system.

Station Operation Element Time q m

1 Add part A 4 sec 0.015 0.6
2 Fasten part A 3 sec NA NA
3 Assemble part B 5 sec 0.01 0.8
4 Add part C 4 sec 0.02 1.0
5 Fasten part C 3 sec NA NA
6 Assemble part D 6 sec 0.01 0.5

17.9 A six-station automatic assembly line runs 4,000 hr/yr and has an ideal cycle time of 10 sec.
Downtime occurs for two reasons. First, mechanical and electrical failures cause line stops
that occur with a frequency of once per 120 cycles. Average downtime for these causes is
3.0 min. Second, defective components also result in downtime. The fraction defect rate of
500 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

each of the six components added to the base part at the six stations is 1.0%, and the prob-
ability that a defective component will cause a station jam is 0.5 for all stations. Downtime
per occurrence for defective parts is 2.0 min. Determine (a) total number of assemblies
produced in one year, (b) number of assemblies with at least one defective component, and
(c) number of assemblies with all six defective components.
17.10 (A) An eight-station automatic assembly machine has an ideal cycle time of 6 sec. Downtime
is caused by defective parts jamming at the individual assembly stations. The average down-
time per occurrence is 2.5 min. Fraction defect rate is 0.2% and the probability that a defec-
tive part will jam at a given station is 0.6 for all stations. The cost to operate the assembly
machine is $95.00/hr and the cost of components being assembled is $0.73 per unit assembly.
Ignore other costs. Determine (a) yield of good assemblies, (b) average hourly production
rate of good assemblies, (c) proportion of assemblies with at least one defective component,
and (d) unit cost of the assembled product.
17.11 An automated assembly machine has four stations. The first station presents the base
part, and the other three stations add components to the base. The ideal cycle time for the
machine is 3 sec, and the average downtime when a jam results from a defective component
is 1.5 min. The fraction defective rates (q) and probabilities that a defective component will
jam the station (m) are given in the table below. Quantities of 100,000 for each of the bases,
brackets, pins, and retainers are used to stock the assembly line for operation. Determine
(a) proportion of good product to total product coming off the line, (b) hourly production
rate of good product coming off the line, (c) total number of final assemblies produced, given
the starting component quantities. Of the total, how many are good product, and how many
are products that contain at least one defective component? (d) Of the number of defective
assemblies determined in part (c), how many will have defective base parts? How many will
have defective brackets? How many will have defective pins? How many will have defective
retainers?

Station Part Identification q m

1 Base 0.01 1.0
2 Bracket 0.02 1.0
3 Pin 0.03 1.0
4 Retainer 0.04 0.5

17.12 A six-station automatic assembly machine has an ideal cycle time of 6 sec. At stations 2
through 6, parts feeders deliver components to be assembled to a base part that is added at
the first station. Each of stations 2 through 6 is identical and the five components are identi-
cal. That is, the completed product consists of the base part plus five identical components.
The base parts have zero defects, but the other components are defective at a rate q. When
an attempt is made to assemble a defective component to the base part, the machine stops
(m = 1.0). It takes an average of 2.0 min to make repairs and start the machine up after
each stoppage. Since all components are identical, they are purchased from a supplier who
can control the fraction defect rate very closely. However, the supplier charges a premium
for better quality. The cost per component is determined by the following equation: cost
per component = 0.1 + 0.0012/q, where q = fraction defect rate. Cost of the base part
is 20 cents. Accordingly, the total cost of the base part and the five components is: prod-
uct material cost = 0.70 + 0.006/q. The cost to operate the automatic assembly machine is
$150.00/hr. The problem facing the production manager is this: As the component quality
decreases (q increases), downtime increases which drives production costs up. As the qual-
ity improves (q decreases), material cost increases because of the price formula used by the
supplier. To minimize total cost, the optimum value of q must be determined. Determine
Problems 501

the value of q that minimizes the total cost per assembly. Also, determine the associated cost
per assembly and hourly production rate. (Ignore other costs.)
17.13 A six-station dial-indexing machine is designed to perform four assembly operations at
stations 2 through 5 after a base part has been manually loaded at station 1. Station 6 is
the unload station. Each assembly operation involves the attachment of a component to
the existing base. At each of the four assembly stations, a hopper-feeder is used to deliver
components to a selector device that separates components that are improperly oriented
and drops them back into the hopper. The system was designed with the operating param-
eters for stations 2 through 5 as given in the table below. It takes 2 sec to index the dial from
one station to the next. When a component jams, it takes an average of 2 min to release
the jam and restart the system. Line stops due to mechanical and electrical failures of the
assembly machine are not significant and can be neglected. The foreman says the system
was designed to produce at a certain hourly rate, which takes into account the jams result-
ing from defective components. However, the actual delivery of finished assemblies is far
below that designed production rate. Analyze the problem and determine the following:
(a) The designed average hourly production rate that the foreman alluded to. (b) What is the
proportion of assemblies coming off the system that contain one or more defective compo-
nents? (c) What seems to be the problem that limits the assembly system from achieving the
expected production rate? (d) What is the hourly production rate that the system is actually
achieving? State any assumptions that you make in determining your answer.

Station Assembly Time Feed Rate f Selector u q m

2 4 sec 32/min 0.25 0.01 1.0
3 7 sec 20/min 0.50 0.005 0.6
4 5 sec 20/min 0.20 0.02 1.0
5 3 sec 15/min 1.0 0.01 0.7

17.14 For Example 17.4, which deals with a single-station assembly system, suppose that the
sequence of assembly elements were to be accomplished on a seven-station assembly system
with synchronous parts transfer. Each element is performed at a separate station (stations 2
through 6) and the assembly time at each respective station is the same as the element time
given in the example. Assume that the handling time is divided evenly (3.5 sec each) between
a load station (station 1) and an unload station (station 7). The transfer time is 2 sec, and the
average downtime per downtime occurrence is 2.0 min. Determine (a) hourly production
rate of all completed units, (b) yield, (c) production rate of good quality completed units,
and (d) uptime efficiency.

Single-Station Assembly Systems

17.15 (A) A single-station assembly machine is to be considered as an alternative to the dial-index-

ing machine in Problem 17.8. Use the data given in that problem to determine (a) hourly
production rate, (b) yield of good product (final assemblies containing no defective com-
ponents), and (c) proportion uptime of the system. Handling time to load the base part
and unload the finished assembly is 7 sec and the downtime averages 1.5 min every time a
component jams. Why is the proportion uptime so much higher than in the case of the dial-
indexing machine in Problem 17.8?
17.16 A single-station robotic assembly system performs a series of five assembly elements, each of
which adds a different component to a base part. Each element takes 3.5 sec. In addition, the
handling time needed to move the base part into and out of position is 4.5 sec. The fraction
502 Chap. 17 / Automated Assembly Systems

defect rate is 0.003 for all components, and the probability of a jam by a defective component
is 0.7. Average downtime per occurrence is 2.5 min. Determine (a) hourly production rate,
(b) yield of good product in the output, and (c) uptime efficiency. (d) What proportion of
the output contains a defective component from the third of the five elements performed
in the work cycle?
17.17 A single-station assembly cell uses an industrial robot to perform a series of assembly opera-
tions. The base part and parts 2 and 3 are delivered by vibratory bowl feeders that use selec-
tors to insure that only properly oriented parts are delivered to the robot for assembly. The
robot cell performs the elements in the table below (also given are feeder rates, selector
proportion u, element times, fraction defect rate q, and probability of jam m, and, for the last
element, the frequency of downtime incidents p). In addition to the times given in the table,
the time required to unload the completed subassembly is 4 sec. When a line stop occurs, it
takes an average of 1.8 min to make repairs and restart the cell. Determine (a) yield of good
product, (b) average hourly production rate of good product, and (c) uptime efficiency for
the cell. State any assumptions you must make about the operation of the cell in order to
solve the problem.

Element Feed Rate f Selector u Element Time Te q m p

1 15 pc/min 0.30 Load base part 4 sec 0.01 0.6
2 12 pc/min 0.25 Add part 2 3 sec 0.02 0.3
3 25 pc/min 0.10 Add part 3 4 sec 0.03 0.8
4 Fasten 3 sec 0.02

Partial Automation

17.18 (A) A partially automated production line has three mechanized and three manual worksta-
tions, a total of six stations. The ideal cycle time is 57 sec, which includes a transfer time of
3 sec. Data on the six stations are listed in the table below. Cost of the transfer mechanism
is $0.10/min, cost to run each automated station is $0.12/min, and labor cost to operate each
manual station is $0.17/min. It has been proposed to substitute an automated station in
place of station 5. The cost of this new station is estimated at $0.25/min and its breakdown
rate = 0.02 per cycle, but its process time would be only 30 sec, thus reducing the overall
cycle time of the line from 57 sec to 36 sec. Average downtime per breakdown of the current
line, as well as for the proposed configuration, is 3.0 min. Determine the following for the
current line and the proposed line: (a) hourly production rate, (b) proportion uptime, and
(c) cost per unit. Assume that when an automated station stops, the whole line stops, includ-
ing the manual stations. Also, in computing costs, neglect material and tooling costs.

Station Type Process Time pi

1 Manual 36 sec 0
2 Automatic 15 sec 0.01
3 Automatic 20 sec 0.02
4 Automatic 25 sec 0.01
5 Manual 54 sec 0
6 Manual 33 sec 0
Problems 503

17.19 A manual assembly line has six stations. The service time at each manual station is 60 sec.
Parts are transferred by hand from one station to the next, and the lack of discipline in this
method adds 12 sec to the cycle time. Hence, the current cycle time is 72 sec. The following
two proposals have been made: (1) Install a mechanized transfer system to pace the line;
and (2) automate one or more of the manual stations using robots that would perform the
same tasks as humans only faster. The second proposal requires the mechanized transfer
system of the first proposal and would result in a partially or fully automated assembly
line. The transfer system would have a transfer time of 6 sec, thus reducing the cycle time
on the manual line to 66 sec. Regarding the second proposal, all six stations are candidates
for automation. Each automated station would have an assembly time of 30 sec. Thus if all
six stations were automated the cycle time for the line would be 36 sec. There are differ-
ences in the quality of parts added at the stations; these data are given in the table below
for each station (q = fraction defect rate, m = probability that a defect will jam the sta-
tion). Average downtime per station jam at the automated stations is 3.0 min. Assume that
the manual stations do not experience line stops due to defective components. Cost data:
C at = $0.10/min; C w = $0.20/min; and C as = $0.15/min. Determine if either or both of the
proposals should be accepted. If the second proposal is accepted, how many stations should
be automated and which ones? Use cost per piece as the criterion for your decision. Assume
for all cases considered that when an automated station stops, the whole line stops, including
the manual stations.

Station qi mi Station qi mi
1 0.005 1.0 4 0.020 1.0
2 0.010 1.0 5 0.025 1.0
3 0.015 1.0 6 0.030 1.0

17.20 Solve Problem 17.19, except that the probability that a defective part will jam the automated
station is m = 0.5 for all stations.