Journal of Materials Processing Technology 171 (2006) 27–34

Simulation studies of process flow with in-line part

inspection in machining cells
M. Siemiatkowski ∗ , W. Przybylski
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Gdansk University of Technology, 11/12 G. Narutowicza Str., PL-80-952 Gdansk, Poland

Received 15 April 2004; received in revised form 2 May 2004; accepted 15 June 2005

Abstract

The paper highlights the issues of process flow planning within a machining cell with a coordinate measuring machine (CMM) integrated
into it. The use of such equipment in FMS structures involves definite implications to decision making on proper allocation and sequencing
inspection operations with regard to the incurred costs of quality assurance and the requirements of efficient system operation. An integrated
simulation based approach to the study of interactions between part inspection heuristics and scheduling policies was adopted, using a real
case of a robot served cell and data from industrial practice. The selection of inspection plans has been found to have a significant impact
on the assessed cell performance measures. The investigation shows that job sequencing strategies heavily relied on the inspection plan
to be introduced in the cell. Results of the work indicate the practical usability of developed simulation modelling and analysis scheme
for the selection of process alternatives in discrete part manufacturing. The investigated, alternative process flow strategies can be directly
implemented to real time shop floor control using currently available software and standardised interfaces, accordingly with the CIM-OSA
concept.
© 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: FMS; Scheduling; Inspection sequencing; Coordinate measuring machine (CMM); Process flow; Discrete-event simulation

1. Introduction its application has a positive impact on overall productivity

The ability to design and operate a manufacturing facil-
ity that is capable of coping effectively with variability and
changes in product mix and in lot size has become in recent
years a matter of great importance. Timely response to chang-
ing technological and market requirements with greater prod-
uct variety and customisation, shorter manufacturing lead
times and on time deliveries, including the possibility for
offering higher quality products at lower cost has become the
competitive advantage [1–3]. This in turn involves the need
for effective implementation of CIM concepts supported by
relevant software and standardised interfaces as well as flex-
ible automation solutions in manufacturing industry due to a
number of potential benefits these can offer to a conventional
manufacturing model [4,5]. Flexible manufacturing system
(FMS) technology rapidly advances and as widely reported
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +48 58 3471182; fax: +48 58 3471450.
E-mail address: msiemiat@pg.gda.pl (M. Siemiatkowski).
and the improvement of product quality [6–8].
As indicated in some papers dealing with real case studies
yet, the effect of FMS investment on quality improvement is
not explicitly captured and the relationships are documented
to insufficient extent [8,9].
Automated inspection of parts produced in an FMS facil-
ity might be carried out as an activity in machining centres
using measuring probes, and depending on the application,
fitted to the cutting spindle or tool head of the CNC machine.
A promising alternative for in-process part inspection, espe-
cially with small batch manufacturing, is the utilisation of
CMMs as in-line measuring machines which formerly have
been routinely isolated in dedicated measuring rooms and
mostly used merely for end-control tasks [6,10]. The technol-
ogy of integrating a CMM, along with sophisticated software,
into the process performed within an FMS structure, orig-
inated in early 1980s, is apparently supported by current
industrial practice [11,12]. Thus, relevant probing cycles are
concurrently generated for the machine; likewise CNC part

0924-0136/$ – see front matter © 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.jmatprotec.2005.06.051
28 M. Siemiatkowski, W. Przybylski / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 171 (2006) 27–34
programs that enable the user to timely maintain the process
and products within given specifications. This is in partic-
ular the case in regard to complex high-precision products
and parts of high processing requirements [9,11]. Quality
assurance by the in-line inspection activities in multi-stage,
small batch part manufacturing is employed for high qual-
ity products, monitoring the status of machines, preventive
maintenance, etc. [6,10].
Existing literature provides a number of models for opti-
mal allocation of inspection activities in manufacturing pro-
cess and methods applied are chiefly based on operations
research (OR) and less often simulation approaches. The
models developed so far yet are mostly adequate for conven-
tional serial (linear) multi-stage systems [8,13]. Numerous
examples of past research in assigning operations to machines
and job sequencing in FMSs show at the same time that
models and strategies performing well with traditional job
shops or production (transfer) lines do not prevail at flexible
manufacturing environment [7,8]. This is conceivable since
the association of such sophisticated inspection equipment,
as CMMs with routing and scheduling flexibility inherently
possessed by an FMS has involved rather intricate issues per-
tinent to inspection planning and sequencing. These issues
further attract research attention [4,7,8] and still remain to be
fully explored and solved.
Network structure and highly automated nature of even
a standard FMS lead to complex interactions between the
individual manufacturing processes and part inspection oper-
ations [4,6]. Therefore, the effects of process capability on
overall manufacturing costs and production lead times turn
out to be difficult to explicitly estimate [9,12].
Considering the dynamics of an operating FMS, the use of
purely mathematical/analytical models seem to be impracti-
cal to detailed system analysis [3,8].
Hence, applying an object oriented approach to process
specification, combined with discrete-event, visual simula-
tion seems to be a most appropriate means. This enables in
particular more effective modelling the manufacturing pro-
cesses with measuring function included, extensive investi-
gation of dynamic process behaviour in a series of simulation
runs by assumed scenarios and consequently its quantitative
evaluation [2,7,14].
2. Problem statement and research framework
Incorporating CMMs into FMS structures creates new
prospects for discrete part manufacturing. At the same time
however it imposes the necessity of decision-making at which
process stage(s) should part inspection(s) be performed in
order to minimize the overall expenditure associated with
quality assurance along with ensuring a required level of sys-
tem performance under all possible production scenarios.
This paper expands the work on inspection location prob-
lem in an integrative manner with reference to a robot served
flexible machining cell (FMCell) including a separate gaug-
ing station (a CMM) integrated into it. Such a facility, oper-
ating as a relatively autonomous dynamic job shop type
production system, is designated to manufacturing a definite
spectrum of part types in small batches. Hence, jobs can arrive
in the cell in presumed time periods, with a different part
sequence and equal probabilities and follow a definite route
through it, as predefined in corresponding process plans.
A real case of a multi-station machining cell installed in the
FMS Lab of the Mechanical Engineering Faculty at Gdansk
University of Technology is chosen for the empirical studies
of process flow planning and control issues and in particular
the performance of selective inspection sequencing rules [3].
This is meant mainly due to its generic representation of a
typical FMS structure.
The system, shown in Fig. 1, consists of two Fanuc CNC
work centres: a chuck turret lathe of the Cyclone® series
(called further as L) and a 2.5-axis vertical type milling centre
of Triac ATC® series (MC) with a 8 station tool magazine
and an automatic tool changer, both of Denford Ltd. [15]
and an automated bridge-type coordinate measuring machine
Vista® (CMM) of Carl Zeiss [16]. It includes also a set of
task-oriented computers operating in a network to control
all the operations within the cell, with interfacing individual
manufacturing functions.
The machines are equipped with relevant sets of tools and
fixtures required to perform assigned operations of all parts
manufactured in the specific cell. At the same time, relevant
Zeiss software (i.e. Umess UX® and Calypso® ), provided
with the CMM for computer aided inspection (CAI), ensure
the accomplishment of assigned part measuring tasks and the
analysis of the measurement results in a proper manner [16].
The load/unload area of a palletised conveyor provides
P IN and P OUT stations with pallet changers for in-process
inventory queues. Rail-guided 5-axis industrial robot IRp-
6 (IR) of ABB, positioned on a linear slide, enables the
bi-directional transportation of parts among individual sta-
tions. Thus, parts can be moved in and out of each machine
according to a definite process sequence. Buffering parts at
the processing machines included in the cell structure is not
considered throughout this research.
The cell layout outlined above is mapped within a simu-
lation project carried out further in the frame of this paper.
Fig. 1. Flexible machining cell layout mapped in simulation investigations.
 M. Siemiatkowski, W. Przybylski / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 171 (2006) 27–34
2.1. Production activity control scheme for a machining
cell
Respective planning and operational issues of the specific
FMCell are solved based on an integrated hierarchical scheme
of distributed shop floor control, termed further as produc-
tion activity control (PAC) system and presented in Fig. 2. A
relevant work list (master production schedule) for a deter-
mined time period is formed in off-line mode by MRP-type
planning system, provided that jobs can arrive intermittently
in the dynamic shop. This list normally includes part types,
lot sizes and associated due dates. Thus, jobs included in it
are processed within an individual production cycle under
control, that can be also repeated many times, according to
the assumed generic model of MTO (make to order) policy
[1].
The upper level of the outlined scheme is intended to
sequence jobs, considering part measuring function based
on the manufacturing data, according to assumed objective
function (a set of performance measures) as well as to anal-
yse and evaluate generated workflows, using commercially
available simulation means. Basically, the off-line (predic-
tive) scheduling approach is followed; hence the short-term
schedule produced for a forthcoming time period remains
unchanged during it [7,17].
The selected schedule (process plan) is then implemented
by the remaining modules, i.e. the dispatcher and monitor
of the lower level of the PAC scheme, over a specified time
period. The dispatcher takes the generated plan and issues
appropriate commands to machines/stations and the devices
of material handling system (MHS), located within a cell.
The real time monitor is responsible for process flow tracking
with graphic status monitoring and notifying the dispatcher
Fig. 2. Simplified production activity control (PAC) architecture for a flexible machining cell; L: lathe, MC: milling centre, CMM: coordinate measuring
machine, IR: industrial robot, MHS: material handling system.
29
of any disturbances, e.g. machine breakdowns or noncon-
forming part units revealed in the system. The implemented
process plan may then be updated considering any changes in
the manufacturing environment. The corresponding tasks at
the lower level of PAC system, associated with real process
control, can be effectively performed using Denford CIM
Control Software® [15]. The building modules named above
interact through the communication interface/protocol pro-
vided with the implemented software.
The approach suggested is also consistent with reference
data models and object oriented methods applied in the frame-
work of the defined shop floor control architecture [5] or
CIM-OSA (Computer Integrated Manufacturing Open Sys-
tem Architecture) that is summarised in e.g. [18].
2.2. Research objectives and a case study
The research study deals with an exemplary case of
manufacturing nine different part types, selected in simi-
lar dimension range and with small production volumes,
considering specifics of the cell under study. Both axially
symmetric and prismatic parts, therein cam and eccentric
components are considered in the assumed part spectrum
(Fig. 3). These are derived from a database of a medium-
sized company and a representative sample is formed of 22
parts totally.
Processing requirements related to given part types are
specified by the process plans, developed at the initial stage of
modelling. Part processing starts at the input station and trav-
els subsequently to proper workstations for sets of machin-
ing/measuring operations. A part arrives in the system imme-
diately before commencing the first operation corresponding
with it.
30 M. Siemiatkowski, W. Przybylski / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 171 (2006) 27–34
Fig. 3. Representative part types spectrum manufactured in the cell under
study.
Table 1 presents processing sequences for parts with
entries indicating the operation number in the relevant part
routing and the machining operation time. The machining
operation times are considered deterministic all over the
research since the NC part programs dictate in full the actual
cutting time.
The travel time of IR down the rail track is also determin-
istic and amounts to 0.3 min, same as the part handling time
at individual machines/stations.
As indicated in the related literature [10,12] measurements
performed by a CMM should not place the reliance on indi-
vidual tolerances based on features such as: arc, circle, cone,
cylinder, plane, sphere, etc., but their relationships and func-
tions with other features must be considered instead. Hence,
relevant measurement plans and inspection procedures at
CMM have been established with respect to geometric tol-
erances, interpreted by respective part feature relationships.
Consequently, depending on an individual part of the spec-
trum these are concerned with the appropriate evaluation of
form errors (e.g., flatness, circularity, and cylindricity) or
position, profile and orientation tolerances, such as paral-
lelism, perpendicularity, coaxiality, etc.
The assigned measuring operation(s) can be performed
after any of the machining operations depending on the
inspection sequencing rule chosen.
With the rail-guided IR providing flexible material han-
dling functions to the cell, part inspection now becomes
sequencing rather than a location problem as the transport
mean enables parts to be moved between machining stations
and the CMM at any sequence. Given the inspection alloca-
tion heuristics developed for practical use with multi-station
Table 1
Processing sequence and machining operation time data (min) for a part sample
Work centre Parts spectrum
A1–A5 B1–B2 C1–C3
L 1/4 1/5
L 2/3 2/4
MC 3/5 1/10
production systems and reported in adequate references, as
e.g., in [8,13], it be of value to identify the most efficient
inspection strategies at the FMS layout.
Since the process scheduling algorithms in the FMS envi-
ronment set in fact the priorities for an idle machine to select
its subsequent operation from those tasks available, perfor-
mance of inspection sequencing rules may be affected by the
part scheduling policies selected. Furthermore, such variable
system parameters, as e.g., measuring times or part defective
rate may also have the influence on the performance of the
inspection planning rules.
3. Inspection planning rules and job sequencing
Parts in process in an FMCell can be routed to the CMM for
an inspection operation after specific machining operations
or before leaving the system. As in general the number of
possible inspection plans might increase exponentially with
the number of part types/jobs n and machining operations m
and amount to (n!)m it is obvious that evaluating all of them
is infeasible, even in case of such a small system with limited
number and capacity of available resources.
For this reason, the use of heuristic inspection rules based
on 100% screening is taken into account, deciding at which
process stage(s) to inspect in order to minimise total qual-
ity associated costs. Some of them, which are considered as
appropriate for the FMS environment, are shortly outlined
below according to [8,9]
• ANO: sequencing the measuring operation after the
machining operation with the highest probability of gen-
erating nonconforming parts to avoid further work on the
scrapped units.
• BCO: sequencing the measuring operation before the most
costly machining operation, not to cover high cost of
the machining operations on parts that are already non-
conforming.
• AFO: sequencing the measuring operation after the com-
pletion of final machining operation, that does not interrupt
the normal processing activities and can enable the con-
siderable reduction in the transportation time between the
CMM and the workstations.
• CFO: sequencing measuring operations before the most
costly machining operation and after the final machining
operation as the combination of the BCO and AFO rules.
• AEO: sequencing inspection operations after every
machining operation; the approach equivalent to the
‘inspect all’ policy.
D1–D2 E1–E1 F1–F2 G1–G2 H1–H2 I1–I2
1/4 1/3 1/3 1/3 1/2 1/3
2/4 2/2 2/2 2/2
3/8 3/7 2/6 3/4 3/4 2/3
 M. Siemiatkowski, W. Przybylski / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 171 (2006) 27–34
From the above mentioned, the AFO and AEO strategies
for part inspection sequencing have been investigated in detail
in the frame of this research, while the latter one was con-
sequently considered as a benchmark. Furthermore in the
extreme, the two strategies seem to determine the expected
lower and upper limits for values of operational cell perfor-
mance as measured by e.g. production flow time (a make
span).
It is also assumed that all defective part units revealed
in the cell at the gauging station (the CMM) are scrapped
without recycling back into the manufacturing process.
The mean measuring operation times on parts are assumed
to be in the proportion to the sum of all previously un-
inspected operation times and as often suggested in the related
literature, exponentially distributed [8,19], unlike determin-
istically set machining operation times. Thus within simu-
lation, mean values of the times have been set within the
range from 20 to 45% of the related machining operation
times depending on a part type, based on authors’ experi-
ence with the use of the Vista machine at similar measuring
tasks. However, in regard to the case of a cell operating by
the AEO inspection sequencing strategy the overall part mea-
suring times are assumed slightly longer. This is because of
repeated (double) part positioning at the CMM.
Obviously, the times related to the preparation of appro-
priate measuring programs for parts are not counted in the
respective measuring operation times as those programs have
been created in the off-line mode by means of available CMM
software, using imported CAD data [6,10].
Part scheduling rules define the priority which allows an
idle machine to select the next part to be processed from those
available in the cell input pallet station or from an another
machine awaiting the unload (with part processing finished),
using the transport mean (IR). At the shop floor level machine
loading decisions are normally made on a real time basis
[7,8].
As the scheduling problem in an FMS belongs to the
NP-hard class the use of mathematical/analytical models is
inadequate also here. Therefore, at the stage of modelling
(predictive scheduling) the utilisation of well-known heuris-
tics is justifiable, in the sort of FCFS: first come first served;
SPT (LPT): shortest (longest) processing time; TOT: total
processing time; SRPT (LRPT): shortest (longest) remain-
ing processing time; SQL: shortest queue length, etc. [2,7].
Apart from those, also advanced planning and scheduling
(APS) rules, implemented in the Preactor® software package
[20] are considered. The generated deadlock-free workflow
structures are amply tested in the environment of this soft-
ware under push and pull paradigms and ‘what if’ scenarios
with respect to assumed performance criteria, while consid-
ering the selected part inspection strategies and following the
demand from individual machines. The performance criteria
(measures) included after all the make span lengths, machine
utilisation, average lead times and cell production rates. As
a result of the comparative analysis the schedule solutions
produced under push paradigm and characterised by min-
31
imum work-in-process inventories (WIP) and the shortest
make span have been identified as the most appropriate. This
is found to be valid both for an FMCell operating with the
AFO and with the AEO part inspection plans. Hence, these
schedule solutions are consequently utilised further within
the extended simulation project.
4. Simulation studies of discrete manufacturing
process
In order to explore operational system characteristics of a
definite layout simulation models were built using witness® ,
the visual interactive simulation software [7,14,19]. The pro-
grammable models are developed in progression with sub-
sequent verification and validation stages so as to gain the
sufficient accuracy in real process mapping and to achieve
the project’s objectives.
The cell structure is simulated for given manufacturing
data sets and schedule solutions, derived from the previous
stage of investigation. Such additional input parameters as
the part inter-arrival times are set deterministically within the
proper simulation runs, according to the prototyped schedules
with the AFO and AEO inspection rules.
Probability of part nonconforming is considered as a fac-
tor that might affect the performance of the schedules under
study. Based on our experience with the practical use of the
system, the probability of non-conforming (P) is assumed
arbitrary within the 2–5% range, depending on the complex-
ity of a part, and programmed into related models. In the
simulation, each time a part is measured, a random number
(R) in a value between 0 and 1 is generated. If it is less than P,
the part is recognised as a non-conforming one. Such a part
is due to exit the cell immediately through its output station
as a consequence of the assumption that part types assigned
in the order list for the analysed production period remain
unchanged during it (no further work is done on scrapped
part units).
Thus, the simulation investigation carried out in the frame
of this research is partially based on a stochastic modelling
framework including the estimated probability of part non-
conformity and the defined distribution of part measuring
times.
As it could be noticed with the respective studies yet, at
the assumed level of the non-conforming probability and the
relatively small part sample (22 part units), with 10 replica-
tions of a simulated production cycle it has had a negligible
effect on the analysed cell performance measures.
5. Experimental results and discussion
Various data are collected from the experiments as per-
formance measures of the cell operating under different
inspection sequencing policies. The most substantial results
concerning the discrete process flow, studied within the range
32 M. Siemiatkowski, W. Przybylski / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 171 (2006) 27–34
of individual production cycles, are presented and discussed
in this section.
Production cycle lengths (make spans) determined for the
two developed models operating with the implemented AFO
and AEO inspection strategies are 186.37 and 259.44 min,
respectively. Both analysed cases involve equal number of
machining operations performed in the cell whilst the number
of inspection operations amount to 22 for the former case and
39 for the latter one, respectively.
Experimental results regarding individual machine utilisa-
tion, produced by the related baseline simulation models for
a definite cell, are shown in Fig. 4. As seen, higher values of
respective machine utilisation are gained with the application
of AFO inspection strategy, with the same number of machin-
ing operations and in spite of suitably reduced number of
inspection operations performed in the cell. Apparently, this
is mainly due to shorter production flow time (make span)
corresponding with that case.
With reference to both analysed cases the cellular manu-
facturing process is realised with properly balanced workload
of machine tools.
As noticed however, apart from the cases under study,
every time the machine utilisation levels as well as the work-
load balance between them in operating cell system was
highly decided by the assumed production programme.
The selected statistics associated with IR utilisation in the
cell by total simulation time and related to both analysed
cases are further shown in Fig. 5. While the robot is utilised
to a better extent in process with the AFO inspection plan, as
indicated above yet, the number of its loads in this process
is considerably smaller. However, the IR travel distance is
slightly longer for that case. This is because of a cell layout
configuration (the location of machines around the rail track)
and given part processing requirements.
Additionally, the system utilisation rate (SU) for the cell
can be computed by averaging the utilisation rates of indi-
vidual machines, according to the formula given below
M
1

SU = U(i) (1)
M
i=1
Fig. 4. Machine utilisation statistics in (%) in a definite cell by total simu-
lation time with AFO and AEO part inspection strategies.
Fig. 5. Selected industrial robot (IR) statistics by total simulation time with
comparative inspection strategies.
where U(i) is the utilisation rate of i-th machine and M the
number of machines in the cell system (including IR and
CMM).
Thus, the calculated values of SU operating with AFO
and AEO inspection strategies amount to 48.64 and 37.61%,
respectively.
Calculated on the same basis, an average flow time for
parts in the cell is 16.89 min (with the AFO inspection plan)
and 17.91 min (with the compared AEO plan).
Part flow times reflect upon the WIP level that is in general
the measure of importance since the specific cell, operating
as a typical FMS, provides limited WIP storage space. The
WIP is a time dependant variable denoted by W and defined
over the total simulation time T corresponding with a single
production cycle, as follows:

1 T
W= W(t) dt (2)
T 0
where W(t) represents the units of WIP at time t.
Hence calculated in this manner the average units of WIP
in the cell are equal to 2.01 (with AFO rule) and 1.53 (with
AEO rule).
Process efficiency in a definite cell operating with different
inspection strategies can be also valued in a rather simple
and alternative manner by Z measure of mean proportion of
processing times to flow times for n part types machined in
Fig. 6. Calculated values of Z measure (%) and average WIP rates (number
of units) for the specific cell operating under selected part inspection plans.
 M. Siemiatkowski, W. Przybylski / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 171 (2006) 27–34
Fig. 7. Time series of WIP rates for an FMCell operating with AFO (a) and AEO (b) inspection strategies.
the cell, and defined in the following form:
n for the compared case based on the AEO plan (Fig. 7b)
1
(tMok + tIok )
Z=
n FTk
k=1
where tMok is the total machining time for k-th part type; tIok
the total inspection operation time for k-th part type; FTk the
average flow (throughput) time for k-th part type (including its
transportation, set-up ad queuing times) and n means number
of part types in the spectrum machined in the cell (equivalent
to the number of processed jobs).
For the need of calculations, average flow times for indi-
vidual part types are determined as a result of performed
simulation runs. Clearly, the best strategies are those that
maximise the value of Z and at the same time ensure the
acceptable level of nonconforming parts manufactured in the
system.
Calculated values of Z measure along with average WIP
rates related to both compared process flows are presented
graphically in Fig. 6. Irrespective of applied inspection plan-
ning rule relatively high values of Z are obtained as a con-
sequence of assumed job sequencing strategies with entering
parts into the cell immediately before commencing their
machining process, as indicated above yet.
More importantly, the significant increase in average WIP
levels observed with regard to the process realised with
AFO inspection rule, correspondingly with higher value of Z,
implies the increased possibility for parallel processing parts
in individual cell stations. Thus, despite missing facilities in
the cell for buffering semi-finished parts, applying this rule
for in-line part inspection is of value since it results in the
reduction in machine downtimes that in turn yields signifi-
cantly shorter production cycles.
This regularity can be explicitly perceived in relevant time
series concerning work-in-process (WIP) rates within the
cell, recorded at the successive points of time and obtained
in the experiments, that are presented in Fig. 7.
As it can be seen in the time series of WIP shown by the
overall production cycle at least two different parts could be
simultaneously in operation over greater part of time with
33
regard to case with AFO inspection rule (Fig. 7a), whereas
the respective number of in process parts was at the most
(3)
two.
This is because of the increased number of sequenced mea-
suring operations for the latter case, occurred at the CMM.
The gauging station is identified here as a bottleneck that
affects directly the queuing time for parts at machining sta-
tions and in the material handling system.
6. Conclusions
This paper extends an inspection-planning problem with
a multi-stage robot served FMS-type system, involving the
use of a CMM. An integrated simulation based approach
was adopted to study interactions between part inspection
strategies and part scheduling policies. The investigation has
shown that the selection of a job sequencing policy heav-
ily relied on the inspection plan to be introduced and every
time the CMM was found as a bottleneck station, causing the
increase in part queuing times and machine down times in
the cell.
Selection of inspection plans has been found to have a
significant impact on the assessed cell performance measures.
The analysis carried out is confined to process alternatives
with the AFO and AEO inspection plans, for the imple-
mentation of other inspection heuristics would require the
identification of critical manufacturing operations such as:
the most costly ones and/or the most likely to generate non-
conforming part units.
The applicability of the approach is shown in experiments,
based on a real case of a machining cell, and generated pro-
cess plans with inspection operations can be directly imple-
mented within production control activities, and performed
on a real time basis.
Further research work aims at the development of mod-
elling capabilities, including stochastic factors of system
operation under dynamic conditions, along with the analy-
sis of process variance.
34 M. Siemiatkowski, W. Przybylski / Journal of Materials Processing Technology 171 (2006) 27–34
References
[1] Ch. McMahon, J. Browne, CADCAM. From principles to practice,
Addison-Wesley, Wokingham, UK, 1994.
[2] S.G. Ponnambalam, P. Aravindan, K. Raghu Rami Reddy, Analysis
of group-scheduling heuristics in a manufacturing cell, Int. J. Adv.
Manuf. Technol. 15 (1999) 914–932.
[3] M. Siemiatkowski, W. Przybylski, Simulation based methodical sup-
port to design and operation of flexible machining cell for rotational
parts, in: Annals DAAAM for 2000 and Proceedings of the 11th
International DAAAM Symposium, Opatija, Croatia, October, 2000,
pp. 435–436.
[4] B.J. Davies, CIM software and interfaces, Comput. Ind. 33 (1997)
91–99.
[5] R. Maglica, Improving the PAC shop-floor control architecture to
better support implementation, Comput. Ind. 33 (1997) 317–322.
[6] M. Innala, S. Torvinen, Integrating computer aided quality assurance
in flexible engineering and production processes, Int. J. Prod. Econ.
41 (1995) 179–184.
[7] W.H. Ip, R. Fung, K.W. Keung, An investigation of stochastic analy-
sis of flexible manufacturing systems simulation, Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 15 (1999) 244–250.
[8] J. Lee, F.F. Chen, Inspection sequencing and part scheduling for flex-
ible manufacturing systems, Eur. J. Operat. Res. 95 (1996) 344–355.
[9] M. Mayer, M. Nusswald, Improving manufacturing costs and lead
times with quality-oriented operating curves, J. Mater. Process. Tech-
nol. 119 (2001) 83–89.
[10] S. Kim, S. Chang, The development of the off-line measurement
planning system for inspection automation, Comput. Ind. Eng. 30
(3) (1996) 531–542.
[11] J.A. Bosch (Ed.), Coordinate Measuring Machines and Systems,
Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 1995.
[12] G. Moroni, W. Polini, Q. Semeraro, Knowledge based method for
touch probe configuration in an automated inspection system, J.
Mater. Process. Technol. 76 (1998) 153–160.
[13] T. Raz, A survey of models for allocating inspection effort in multi-
stage production systems, J. Quality Technol. 18 (4) (1986) 239–247.
[14] J.F. O’Kane, J.R. Spenceley, R. Taylor, Simulation as an essential
tool for advanced manufacturing technology problems, J. Mater. Pro-
cess. Technol. 107 (2000) 412–424.
[15] Denford Company Ltd., Computerised Machines and Systems,
http://www.denford.com, accessed on 22-02-2004.
[16] Carl Zeiss Company, Industrial Metrology, Products and Software,
http://www.zeiss.com, accessed on 22-02-2004.
[17] C. Saygin, S.E. Kilic, Integrating flexible process plans with schedul-
ing in flexible manufacturing systems, Intl. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol.
15 (1999) 268–280.
[18] X. Liu, W.J. Zhang, Issues on the architecture of an integrated
general-purpose shop floor control software system, J. Mater. Pro-
cess. Technol. 76 (1998) 261–269.
[19] Witness® 2001, Visual interactive simulation software, User manual,
Lanner Group Ltd., UK, Redditch, Worcs, 2000–2001.
[20] Preactor® , Finite capacity scheduler, Preactor® International Ltd.,
UK, Chippenham, Wiltshire 2000–2001.