Design of Cellular Manufacturing Systems with Labor and Tools Consideration

Abdulrahman AI-Ahmari, and Khaled Alharbi

Industrial Engineering Department, College of Engineering, King Saud University, Saudi Arabia,
(alahmari@ksu.edu.sa)

ABSTRACT
This paper proposes a new mathematical model to design cellular manufacturing systems (CMS) with the presence of
alternate process plans. The model not only selects machine cells and part families but also selects tools and workers
required for every manufacturing cell. The objective of the developed model is to minimize the total costs of machine
installation, operations, tools and workers with a number of identified practical constraints. The resulting model is
solved using LINGO software and validated using different sizes of CMS problems. Numerical examples are presented
to test and demonstrate the suggested model.

Keywords: Cellular Manufacturing, Machine Cells, Part families, Mathematical Programming, Cell Design

1. INTRODUCTION different factors. Most of CMS solution methods are

Manufacturing industries are under intense pressure
from the rapid increase of competitive global
marketplace. Shorter product life-cycles, time-to-market,
and diverse customer needs have challenged
manufacturers to improve the efficiency and
productivity of their production activities.
Manufacturing systems must be able to output products
with low production costs and high quality as quickly as
possible in order to deliver the products to customers on
time. In addition, the systems should be able to adjust or
respond quickly to changes in product design and
product demand without major investment. Traditional
manufacturing systems, such as job shops and flow lines,
are not capable of satisfying such requirements.
Therefore, As a result, cellular manufacturing has
emerged as a promising manufacturing system
alternative.
Cellular manufacturing system (CMS) is an application
of group technology in manufacturing in which all or a
portion of machines in a manufacturing system is
grouped into cells. In each cell, a cluster of machines
are located in close proximity and dedicated to the
manufacturing of a family of components. Cellular
manufacturing provides a strategy for obtaining
economic advantages in an environment of high-variety
low-volume production [1].
In the design of CMS, many production factors should
be involved when the cells are created such as machine
requirement, machine set-up times, workload,
alternative routings, machine capacities, operation
sequences, set-up cost and cell layout. It is impossible to
consider all the manufacturing factors in one method
due to the complexity of the cell formation problem.
Few approaches have been developed to incorporate
more devoted for grouping of machines into cells and
parts into part families, without consideration of tools
and labor assignments.
In this paper, a new mathematical programming model
is suggested to design cellular manufacturing systems
with the presence of alternative process routings. The
developed model determines machine cells, part
families, tool groups, and worker assignment
simultaneously. The rest of the paper is organized as
follows: Section 2 presents review of the previous work.
Section 3 describes the suggested mathematical model
for solving CMS problems. Numerical examples are
given in Section 4. Finally, Section 5 is devoted for
concoctions and recommendations for future research.
2. LITERATURE SURVEY
Over the last two decades, many researchers studied the
problem of CM (designing machine cells and part
families) and developed various solution methods.
Comprehensive reviews of these methods have been
published (Singh [1]; Heragu [2]; Boctor [3]; Shanker R.
and Vart [4]; Suresh et al. [5]; Mansouri et al. [6];
Dimopoulos and Mort [7]; AI-Ahmari [8]). According to
these reviews, the existing CM design methods in the
CMS can be classified into the following categories:
part coding analysis, cluster techniques, similarity
coefficient, graph partitioning, mathematical
programming, heuristic search, and AI-based
approaches.
Rajamani et al [9] considered a generalized group
technology problem of manufacturing a group of parts
in which each part can have alternative process plans
and each operation can be performed on alternative
machines. Rajamani et al [10] also considered the
selection of parts and machines for cellular

978-1-4244-4136-5/09/$25.00 ©2009 IEEE

678
manufacturing using a mathematical programming 3. THE PROPOSED MODEL
approach. They provided solution schemes based on
column generation technique. Logendran et al [11] The aim of this project is to develop a model for
studied the cell formation problem using two phases. designing CMS taking into account the routing
The first phase is concerned with determining the flexibility, labor and tools grouping when part demands
number of machines of each type and a unique process and machine capacities are known. The objective is to
plan for each part. The second phase deals with the minimize total cost of production, tools, labor and
assignment of parts and machines to each system configuration. To achieve this, the following
manufacturing cell. They suggested two higher-level model is suggested.
heuristic algorithms based upon a tabu search method to
solve the models. Rajamani et al [12] developed a Notation
mixed integer program for the design of cellular Indexing sets:
manufacturing systems with alternate process plans. k=1,2, ,Kpart type k
They considered investment, processing and material m=1,2, ,M machine type m
handling costs in the objective function. A column pk=I,2, ,Pkprocess plan for part type, k.
generation was proposed to solve the relaxed linear n=I,2, ,Nmachinecelln.
program efficiently. Sarker and Li [13] presented a w=I,2, ,Wworker skill level w
mixed integer program to simultaneously select part h=I,2, ,Htool type t.
routings and form machine cells in the presence of S= 1,2, S operation type.
alternate process plans when minimizing the total cost
of operating and intercell material handling. Heragu and Parameters:
Chen [14] suggested a mathematical model for CMS Cmskphw= operating cost on machine m to perform
deign which incorporates resource utilization, operation s for (kphw) combinations.
alternative routings and some practical constraints such tmskphw= time of machine m to perform operation s for
as cell size and number of cells. They use Benders' (kphw) combinations.
decomposition approach to solve the resulting model. M n= maximum number of machines allowed in machine
Taboun et al [15] developed a mixed integer cell n.
mathematical model for simultaneous machine-part Wn= maximum number of workers allowed in machine
grouping and assignment when part-mix and demand cell n.
changes across multiple periods. H n= maximum number of tools allowed in machine cell
n.
Very few studies considered the labor issue in CMS. Tm= time available on machine type m.
Suresh and Slomp [16] suggested a methodology in a Tw= time available for a worker with skill level w.
hierarchical and interactive design procedure for labor Th= tool life oftool type h.
assignment and grouping in cell formation problem. D k= demand of part k.
This methodology is implemented in three phases. Min L; = cost of machine type m.
and Shin [17] presented a mixed integer goal Lh= cost of tool type h.
programming formulation for forming machine and Rw= cost of worker w.
human cells. Also, Askin and Huang [18] focused on the
reallocation of labor into cells and training needed for Decision variables:
effective CM. I, if part type k is produced using
Recently, AI-Ahmari [19] presented two integrated ~p = process plan P,
models for CMS with alternate process plans and
{
0, otherwise
machining economics. Chen [20] developed a cell
formation approach based on association rule reduction I, if part type k is produced by cell n
to fmd the effect configuration for CMS. AI-Ahmari [21] Pkn = {
0, otherwise
applied a fuzzy approach to fmd part families and
machine cells based on the required group technology. 1,if machine type m is used to perform

Although a large number of design methods for CMS's

are proposed over years there still a need for integrated
solution for the different CMS problems. It is concluded
from this review that the four suggested problems are
not solved in an integrated way. Therefore, there is a
need to develop a mathematical model that integrates
the four important issues (part grouping, machine cells,
tool selection, and labor assignment) in CMS with
alternative process plans.
operation s for P, using tool h with
Xmskphw =
workerw.
0, otherwise
Zmn= number of machines of type m in cell n.
Vhn= number of tools of type h in cell n.
Uwn= number of workers of skill w in cell n.
The total cost that needs to be considered by this model
comprises installing cost of machines, processing cost,
tool cost and worker cost, as follows:

679
 4. NUMERICAL EXAMPLES

N M
LLLLLLL
S K Pk H W {Z
mn m
I +D
k
ex}
mskphw mskphw
Two examples are presented here with different problem
sizes to illustrate the developed model. Data of the first
n=l m=l s=l k=l p=l h=l w=l + Lh~n + RwUwn examples are shown in Tables 1 (at the end of paper). In
(1) this example, there are three machine types and four
Subject to: different part types, as shown in the table. The demand
Pk for these four parts together with their alternative
LYkp = 1, 'v'k process plans are given. The three machines with their
known capacities are also given in the table. The same
p=l (2)
operation can be done on different machine types. There
M H W
are six tools and three workers with different skills are
L L L Xmskphw -Ykp = 0, Vs,k,p required to carry out operations. The time and cost
m=l h=l w=l (3) required for each operation on a machine may be
K Pk S different due to part, plan, tool, and worker
LLLXmskPhwfmSkphwDk :::; TmZmn, 'v'm,n combinations. These time and cost figures are illustrated
k=l p=l s=l in Table 1. The cost of machine installations for mi, m-;
(4) and m, are $100, $250, $300 respectively. The worker
K Pk S cost depends on their skill levels. Three different skills
LLLXmskPhwfmskPhwDk :::; TwU wn' 'v'w,n are available from the three workers with three different
k=l p=l s=l costs. The cost of these three workers (WI, W2, and
(5) w3)are $120, $110, and $100, respectively. The available
K r, S tools are six tools (hI through h6) with costs of$30, $23,
LLLXmskPhwfmSkphwDk :::; Th~n' 'v'h,n $32, $20, $40, and $45. In this example two machine
k=l p=l s=l cells are to be formed and the maximum allowable
(6) number machines in every cell is 3 machines. This
M example is solved using LINGO 10. The optimal results
LZmn = u; 'v'n of this example are illustrated in Tables 2.
m=l (7)
H Table 2. The optimal selection of machines, plans,
L~n = n., 'v'n CD
operations, tools and workers for example 1.
~ Part1 Part2 Part3 Part4
h=l (8) ~ ~ ~ ~ P1 P2 P2 P2 Numberof Number Numberof
W u ~ I- ~ 51 52 51 52 51 52 51 52 tools of workers machines

LUwn = Wn , 'v'n n1 m3 ~~ W3 2,5 25 ~

w=l (9) n2 m2 ~~ W2 3,4 3,7 2,10 ~ 2
m3 h1 W3 29 29 68 4
Demand 10 10 10 10

(10) One of machine type 3, one of tool type 1 and 5, and

The first term in the objective function is the total
installation cost of machines, the second term is the total
processing cost, the third term is the total tool cost, and
the forth term is the total labor cost. Constraint set (2)
guarantees that only one process plan is to be selected
for one every part type. Constraint set (3) is to ensure
that all the operations in the selected plan are performed
on one of the available machines. Constraint set (4)
guarantees that the capacity of each machine type is not
violated. Constraint set (5) ensures that the time
available to workers is not exceeded. Constraint set (6)
ensures that the tool life of selected tool is not violated.
Constraint sets (7), (8) and (9) guarantee that maximum
numbers of machines, tools and workers in each cell are
not exceeded, respectively. Constraint set (10) ensures
that each part type is assigned only to one machine cell.
The developed model is integer linear model which can
be solved using any linear programming solver such
LINGO 10 (LINDO Systems Inc. 2006).
one worker with skill level 3 are selected in cell 1 to
process part type 1 only. Two of machine type 2, one of
machine type 3, four of tool types 1, three of tool types
2, one of tool type 5, and two workers with skill levels 2
and 3 are selected in cell 2 to process part types 2, 3,
and 4. The optimal value of the objective functions is
$2029. This is the total of machine installation cost
($850), operation cost ($570), tool cost ($299), and
worker cost ($310).
In the second example, there are six machines and eight
parts to be converted into a CMS (the data of this
example is not illustrated in this paper due to the
restriction about number of pages). Solution of the
second example is given in Table 3. Two manufacturing
cells are formed as follows:
The first cells includes one machine of type 2, one
machine of type 3, 13 tools of type 1, 6 tools of type 2,
4 tools of type 5, and two workers ( one with skill level
2 and one of skill level 3) to produce the parts 1, 2, 3,
and 4.

680
 Table 3. Solution of example 2.
U)
Q) f!? Part1 Part2 Part3 Part4 Part5 Part6 Part? Part8
sa c::
:2
U)
15
Q)
~
Q) P1 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P2 P1 Number Number of Number of
~
0 0
U <0 ~
~ 51 52 51 52 51 52 51 52 51 52 51 52 51 52 51 52 of tools workers machines
h1 6,3 4,4 13
m2 h2 W2 2,12 3,4 3,7 5,11 6
n1 h5 9,5 8,11 2,10 2,10 4
m3 h1 W3 2,5 2,9 6,8
h5 25 11,9
4,12 5,6 11,8 3,5
h1 8
9,4 3,9
m4 h5 W3 2 2
4,6 7,7 6
n2 h6 6,4 9,10 3,7 3,9 8
h2 10,12 11,9 2,6 8,5 5
m6 h5 W2 2,11 6,3 6,8 3,11
h6 8,11 3,4
Demand 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40

The second cell includes two machines of type 4, one and Cybernetics, Vol. 24, pp.203-215, 1994.
machine of type 5, 8 tools of type 1, 5 tools of type 2, 6 [3] Boctor, F. "The minimum cost machine-part cell
tools of type 5, 8 tools of type 6, one worker with skill formation problem" International Journal of
level 2, and 2 workers with skill level 3 to produce the Production Research, Vol. 34, pp. 1045-1063, 1996.
parts 5, 6, 7, and 8. [4] Shanker R. and Vart P. "Some design issues in
The total cost is $7553 which is the sum of machine cellular manufacturing using the fuzzy programming
cost ($1250), operation cost ($4120), tool cost ($1643) approach" International Journal of Production
and worker cost (540). Research, Vol. 37, pp. 2545-2563, 1999.
[5] Suresh , N. C., Slomp, J, and Kaparthi , S.
5. CONCLUSIONS "Sequence-dependent clustering of parts and
machines: A fuzzy ART neural network approach"
The successful implantation of CMS is depending on
International Journal of Production Research, Vol.
solving several interrelated problems of this type of
37,pp.2793-2816, 1999.
manufacturing systems. These problems include
formation of machine cells, part families, selection of [6] Mansouri, S., Moattar, S., Husseini, S. M, and
workers, and selection tools in the presence of alternate Newman, S. "A review of the modem approaches of
process plans. This paper proposed a mathematical multi-criteria cell design" International Journal of
model to solve the prementioned problems of CMS Production Research, Vol. 38, pp.1201-1218, 2000.
simultaneously. The resulting model is non-linear [7] Dimopoulos, C., and Mort, N., "A hierarchical
mathematical model with integers that is minimizing the clustering methodology based on genetic
total cost of machine installation, operations, tools and programming for the solution of simple
workers. It is concluded from the computational cell-formation problems" International Journal of
experience of this model that it is somewhat difficult to Production Research, Vol. 39, pp. 1-19,2001.
be implemented for large problems. Therefore, it is [8] AI-Ahmari A. M. A. "A fuzzy analysis approach for
necessary to suggest heuristic or approximate methods part-machine grouping in cellular manufacturing
to resolve this difficulty. The future work for this systems" Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 13,
research is to suggest an efficient heuristic approach for No.7, pp. 489 - 497, 2002.
CM problems to reduce the computational time. [9] Rajamani, D., Singh, N., and Anega, Y. "Integrated
design of cellular manufacturing systems in the
ACKNOWLEDGMENT presence of alternative process plans" International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 28, pp.
The Author would like to thank Fatima Alnijris's 1541-1554, 1990.
Research Chair for Advanced Manufacturing [10] Rajamani, D., Singh, N., and Anega, Y "Selection
Technology for their support of this research. of parts and machines for cellularization: a
mathematical programming approach" European
REFERENCES Journal ofOperational Research, Vol. 62, pp. 47-54,
[1] Singh N., "Design of cellular manufacturing systems: 1992.
an invited review" European Journal ofOperational [11] Logendran, R., Ramakrishna, P., and
Research, Vol. 26, pp. 284-291, 1993 Sriskandarajah, C. "Tabu-search based heuristic for
[2] Heragu, S., "Group technology and cellular cellular manufacturing systems in the presence of
manufacturing" IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, alternative process plans" International Journal of

681
 Production Research, Vol. 32, pp.273-297, 1994.
[12] Rajamani, D., Singh, N., and Anega, Y. "Design of
cellular manufacturing systems" International
Journal of Production Research, Vol. 34, pp.
1917-1928, 1996.
[13] Sarker, B., and Li, K., "Simultaneous route
selection and cell formation: a mixed integer
programming time-cost model" Integrated
Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 8, pp. 374-377, 1997.
[14] Heragu , S. and Chen, J. "Optimal solution of
cellular manufacturing system design: Benders
decomposition" European Journal of Operational
Research, Vol. 107, pp.175-192, 1998.
[15] Taboun, S. , Merchawi , N. , and Ulger, T "A two
stage model for cost effective part family and
machine cell formation" Computers and Industrial
Engineering, Vol. 34, pp.759-776, 1998.
[16] Surech , N. and Slomp , J "a multi-objective
procedure for labor assignments and grouping in
capacitated cell formation problems" International
Journal ofProduction Research, Vol. 39,4103-4131,
2001.
[17] Min, H. and Shin, D. "Simultaneous formation of
machine and human cells in group technology: A
multible objective approach" International Journal
of Production Research, Vol. 31, pp.2307-2318,
1993.
[18] Askin , R. and Huang , Y. "Forming effective
worker teams for cellular manufacturing"
International Journal of Production Research, Vol.
39, pp. 2431-2451,2001.
[19] AI-Ahmari A.M.A. "Designing Cellular
Manufacturing Systems with Variable Production
Costs and Times" Journal ofKing Saud University -
Engineering Sciences(J), Vol. 15, pp.95-111, 2003.
[20] Chen M. "Configuration of cellular
manufacturing systems using association rule
reduction" International Journal of Production
Research, 41,381-395,2003.
[21] AI-Ahmari A.M.A "Part feature selection and
family design in group technology using a fuzzy
approach" International Journal of Computer
Applications in Technology, vol. 21, No.3, pp.
129-136, 2004.

682
 Table 1. Data for example 1.
(/) f!! Parts Part1 Part2 Part3 Part4
Q)
<5 ~ Plans P1 P2 P3 P1 P2 P3 P1 P2 P3 P1 P2 P3
0 Worker Worker Tool Tool Machine Machine
~
~ Operations 51 52 53 51 52 53 51 52 53 51 52 53 51 52 53 51 52 53 51 52 53 51 52 53 51 52 53 51 52 53 51 52 53 51 52 53 capacity cost life cost capacity cost
W1 8,11* 3,6 3,10 3,4 8,11 3,11 100 150
h1 W2 100 ~ 25 30
W3 100 100
W1 4,12 7,11 6,8 100 150
h2 W2 100 120 20 32
W3 100 100
W1 10,6 2,11 4,6 100 150
h3 W2 100 120 30 32
W3 100 100
m1 100 100
W1 10,12 6,10 5,3 100 150
h4 W2 100 120 35 20
W3 100 100
W1 10,3 2,6 6,11 100 150
h5 W2 100 120 20 40
W3 100 100
W1 2,7 5,11 3,9 9,4 8,5 10,7 100 150
h6 W2 100 120 30 45
W3 100 100
W1 100 150
h1 W2 2,8 6,3 4,4 100 120 25 30
W3 100 100
W1 100 150
h2 W2 2,12 3,3 3,9 3,4 6,3 3,7 4,5 6,4 5,11 100 120 20 32
W3 100 100
W1 100 150
h3 W2 6,7 9,10 7,7 100 120 30 32
W3 100 100
m2 100 250
W1 100 150
h4 W2 4,11 11,12 10,3 100 120 35 20
W3 100 100
W1 100 150
h5 W2 9,5 3,5 10,5 8,11 11,8 2,10 4,12 11,12 2,10 100 120 20 40
W3 100 100
W1 100 150
h6 W2 11,9 3,10 4,9 100 120 30 45
W3 100 100
W1 100 150
h1 W2 100 120 25 30
W3 2,5 6,11 3,7 2,9 4,6 2,9 5,7 11,6 6,8 100 100
W1 100 150
h2 W2 100 120 20 32
W3 7,4 6,12 4,11 10,4 6,7 3,10 100 100
W1 100 150
h3 W2 100 120 30 32
W3 100 100
m3 100 300
W1 100 150
h4 W2 100 120 35 20
W3 100 100
W1 100 150
h5 W2 100 120 20 40
W3 2,5 8,11 6,5 11,11 9,8 11,9 100 100
W1 100 150
h6 W2 100 120 30 45
W3 5.3 11.4 5.6 3.9 11.11 7.3 7.10 5.8 9.4 100 100
Demand 10 10 10 10
* The first figure(8) indicates to operation time, and the second figure (11) indicates to operation cost.

683