Confrontation between techniques of time measurement

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present a precise comparison between a pre-determined time rules and the evaluation performed with the help of a manual chronometer using data from a line assembly in an automotive industry besieged in the state of Paraná, Brazil. Nowadays, it is possible to verify several tools of measurement of task times, some taking less time and causing less wear of the evaluator than others, but not being in accordance with the real conditions of the workers of a certain industry. Design/methodology/approach The developed paper has its methodology based on two methods of time analysis, one of them being an adaptation of the MODular Arrangement of Predeterminated Time Standard (MODAPTS) method – called MODAPTS 2. This method is used by the industry in analyzed in this work and the other through the use of simple manual timing, through the digital timer, of the stages developed in a workstation. Findings The study shows that for each operation analyzed, thus presenting a situation of minimum waste, it becomes possible to judge which reasons exist for the operator during manual timekeeping not to reach the optimum times generated by the system of pre-determined times and movements (PMTSs) questioned. Research limitations/implications This study is conducted on an automotive enterprise in a period of confidentiality, which means that only a single workstation is able to be studied. This means that the comparison obtained between the time measurements methods used, and the evaluation of the MODAPTS is carried out with the best possible movements and gestures, disregarding then that the wastes can still be postulated to the whole assembly line. Originality/value With the automation in industry, where assemble tasks are usually developed manually, it is believed possible to discard the option of measuring task times in its classic and manual form, using a timer, yet during this process, there will be variables that may not be considered by pre-determined measurements methodologies. The work developed by this paper presents different variables that are not examined by the methods of PMTS, not frequently seen in the literature, as well as the difference that occurs between the measurement of times with stopwatch and the use of PMTS, which, in its original form, disregards the wastes that the operator has in their movements.

Scoping Review of the Work Measurement for Improving Processes and Simulation of Standards

“…In these investigations, the methodology is applied in real case studies, seeking the objective of continuous improvement. Another example of analysis is evidenced in the article [ 3 ], this study analyzes the estimated times in a real case by using MODAPTS and direct observation. In the investigation the correct application of each of the methodologies is observed, it is vital to take into account that for the execution any type of system must have prior knowledge of the process to be studied in order not to estimate or consider operations that do not add value.…”

“…Most of the articles that use the combination of methodologies have obtained good results, but it must be considered that the predetermined systems focus on estimating the time of manual operations, and the implemented system may not fully adapt to the analyzed process. This is how F. Assef [ 3 ] in his research combines the MODAPTS technique, direct observation, and simulation of processes in an automotive assembly industry. The work concludes that predetermined time systems are an excellent tool when the product is in the phase of design.…”

Analysis of the Working Time of Assembly Railway Pantograph

“…This gives the possibility of, for example, creating a procedure, a manual, and a dictionary, as done in the automotive industry [15]. It can be also compared different methods and to choose the most favourable for a given company [16].…”

Lean performance measurement system for an Indian automotive supply chain

“…In this study, authors intend to adopt the integrated performance measurement framework for lean organizations by Sangwa and Sangwan (2018a). The major reasons for the selection IJQRM 40,5 of this framework are: it is the latest framework in the literature, it is well supported by the extensive literature review and most importantly it provides vast coverage in terms of the functional areas, performance dimensions and KPIs (Assef et al, 2018;Tav car et al, 2018). The selected framework is hierarchical and has three levels which cover the whole spectrum of an organizations' activities by including resources, supplier, lean transformation and customer.…”