Kitting as an information source in manual assembly

Abstract

In manual assembly, a strategy to meet the goal of efficient production is the increased use of kitting as a material supply principle. Even though kitting is already implemented in industry, there are still uncertainties regarding the effects of introducing kits, particularly from a human factors perspective. This paper presents initial steps in the development of a method to be used for the evaluation of kitting. This from an information source point of view and for studying effects related to productivity and quality. The methodology is projected to act as a f oundation for how to carry out a subsequent comprehensive case study. The purpose of the case study is to explore how kitting affects the cognitive workload compared to the ordinary material rack combined with part numbers used in the current manufacturing industry. This is done by measuring productivity; time spent on assembling a product, and quality; number of assembly errors. One step in the methodology development process, which is described in this paper, was to conduct a pilot study, primarily to test the methodology related to the selection of measurement parameters, as well as for getting experiences from running the methodology with real test subjects.

Experimental study of cognitive aspects affecting human performance in manual assembly

“…From previous studies (Brolin, Bäckstrand, Thorvald, Högberg, & Case, 2012;Hanson & Brolin, 2013), areas concerning manufacturing and human performance were considered more interesting, compared to other investigated research areas included in the abovementioned studies, e.g. logistics.…”

“…A lot of information is usually also displayed in a small area, making it difficult for the reader to quickly distinguish, extract and interpret specific information which often is the case in the automotive industry. A previous investigation (Brolin et al, 2012) showed that the most common information the assembler is in need of concerns the type of product variant, and thus what components to pick and assemble.…”

“…In the experimental study it was therefore of interest to investigate if different forms of instructions had an effect on the assembler. Based on previous research (Brolin, Bäckstrand, Högberg, & Case, 2011;Brolin et al, 2012;Hanson & Brolin, 2013), the suggestion was to use text & number instructions as they still are a common way to present information in manual assembly, as well as using photograph instructions, to test a more visual alternative. Therefore these presentation alternatives were chosen to constitute the different levels within the information presentation factor.…”

“…It has been noted in earlier studies that component variation is a factor that potentially could affect the assembly operator (Brolin et al, 2011(Brolin et al, , 2012Hanson & Brolin, 2013), as well as greatly increase complexity of work . Therefore this factor was also included in the experimental study, as the third factor, Component variant:…”

Challenges of handling assembly information in global manufacturing companies

“…Such situations lead to varying quality in the instructions. Despite the vast amount of publications about information presentation, see Brolin et al (2012), Fässberg et al (2012, Ganier (2004), Ganier and de Vries (2016), Mattsson, Fast-Berglund and Li (2016) Schuh, Franzkoch, Prote, Luckert, Sauermann and Basse (2017, Syberfeldt et al (2016), Thorvald et al (2010) and Watson et al (2010), the designs and presentations of the assembly work instructions do not only vary among the case companies, but also within one company. In previous case studies ( Johansson, Delin, Jansson, Moestam and Fast-Berglund, 2016;Johansson et al, 2017), both paper-based assembly work instructions and digital instructions are used in different parts of the global production network whose assembly information originates from different IS.…”