23-Ind-A2 Analysis and Design of Work · December 2018
Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)
National Exams — December 2018 — 17-Ind-A2 Analysis and Design of Work. Three-hour, closed-book exam (approved Casio/Sharp calculator only); any five of the seven questions constitute a complete paper and only the first five answered in the answer book are marked — all seven are solved below for completeness.
Reference texts: Niebel & Freivalds, Niebel’s Methods, Standards, and Work Design (13th ed.) — operations analysis and process charting, principles of motion economy, multiple-machine assignment, stopwatch time study, performance rating and allowances, predetermined time systems (MTM/MOST), work sampling, and job evaluation / wage-incentive systems.
Question text not reproduced: the examination questions are © Engineers and Geoscientists BC. Open the official past paper (linked at the top of this page) to read the question, then follow the worked solution below.
Basic purpose. Work sampling estimates the proportion of time spent by a worker or machine in defined categories of activity — working, idle, on personal allowance, waiting for material — from a large number of instantaneous, randomly timed observations, rather than by continuously timing a single cycle with a stopwatch. Because each observation is a brief, momentary glance rather than sustained attendance, one observer can cover far more ground, and the operator is not subjected to the continuous, visible timing that provokes “watch consciousness.”
Applications. (1) measuring machine and labour utilization — the percentage of time equipment or personnel are actually productive; (2) determining the size of delay, personal and fatigue allowances empirically (Question 3(ii)) by directly observing how much time is actually spent in each category, rather than assuming a traditional flat percentage; (3) establishing time standards on long-cycle, irregular, group, or indirect-labour work where a stopwatch cycle time is difficult to even define (as demonstrated numerically in part (ii)); (4) analyzing how a worker or department splits time across multiple job types in mixed, non-routine work; and (5) auditing existing time standards for continued accuracy over a long period, catching informal method drift without continuous observation.
Given.
| Quantity | Value |
|---|---|
| Total observations, $n$ | 150 |
| Observations, operator idle | 50 |
| Average performance rating | 150% |
| Total time worked per day | 480 min |
| Pieces produced per day | 250 pcs |
| Allowances | 5% personal + 5% delays + 5% fatigue = 15% |
Find. The standard time for the operation, in min./pc.
Approach. Convert the sampled idle percentage into the total time the operator was actually working, rate that working time to obtain a normal time per piece, then apply the total allowance.
| Quantity | Value |
|---|---|
| Percentage of time working | 66.67% |
| Total working time | 320 min |
| Normal time, $NT$ | 1.92 min/pc |
| Standard time, $ST$ | 2.208 min/pc |
Given. Day-2 sample: $n=300$ observations, operator idle in 75 of them; confidence level $=99\%$ ($z=2.576$).
Find. The absolute and relative accuracy of the estimated proportion of idle time.
Approach. Treat each observation as a Bernoulli trial (idle / not idle), so the sample proportion is binomially distributed and, for this sample size, well approximated by the normal distribution; compute the absolute accuracy from the standard confidence-interval half-width, then express it relative to the observed proportion.
| Quantity | Value |
|---|---|
| Sample proportion idle, $p$ | 0.25 (25%) |
| Absolute accuracy, $S_p$ | ±0.0644 (±6.44 pts) |
| Relative accuracy, $S_p/p$ | ±25.76% |