Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Assembly line balancing problem: A comparative evaluation of heuristics and a computational assessment of objectives
Department of Production and Automation Engineering, University of Skövde, Skövde, Sweden.
Faculty of Economics, University of Porto, Porto, Portugal.
Jönköping University, School of Engineering, JTH, Industrial Engineering and Management. Division of Industrial Engineering and Management, Department of Engineering Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
2018 (English)In: Journal of Modelling in Management, ISSN 1746-5664, E-ISSN 1746-5672, Vol. 13, no 2, p. 455-474Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to first investigate the efficiency of the most commonly used performance measures for minimizing the number of workstations (NWs) in approaches addressing simple assembly line balancing problem (SALBP) for both straight and U-shaped line, and second to provide a comparative evaluation of 20 constructive heuristics to find solutions to the SALBP-1.

Design/methodology/approach

A total of 200 problems are solved by 20 different constructive heuristics for both straight and U-shaped assembly line. Moreover, several comparisons have been made to evaluate the performance of constructive heuristics.

Findings

Minimizing the smoothness index is not necessarily equivalent to minimizing the NWs; therefore, it should not be used as the fitness function in approaches addressing the SALBP-1. Line efficiency and the idle time are indeed reliable performance measures for minimizing the NWs. The most promising heuristics for straight and U-shaped line configurations for SALBP-1 are also ranked and introduced.

Practical implications

Results are expected to help scholars and industrial practitioners to better design effective solution methods for having the most balanced assembly line. This study will further help with choosing the most proper heuristic with regard to the problem specifications and line configuration.

Originality/value

There is limited research assessing the efficiency of the common objectives for SALBP-1. This study is among the first to prove that minimizing the workload smoothness is not equivalent to minimizing the NWs in SALBP-1 studies. This work is also one of the first attempts for evaluating the constructive heuristics for both straight and U-shaped line configurations.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Emerald Group Publishing Limited, 2018. Vol. 13, no 2, p. 455-474
Keywords [en]
Heuristics, Assembly line balancing, Number of workstations, SALBP-1, Workload smoothness
National Category
Business Administration
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:hj:diva-40715DOI: 10.1108/JM2-03-2017-0027ISI: 000434253300009Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85048139423Local ID: JTHIndustriellISOAI: oai:DiVA.org:hj-40715DiVA, id: diva2:1222572
Available from: 2018-06-21 Created: 2018-06-21 Last updated: 2018-06-21Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textScopus
By organisation
JTH, Industrial Engineering and Management
In the same journal
Journal of Modelling in Management
Business Administration

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 2 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf