23-Ind-A4 Production Management · December 2015
Nivaar worked solution (AI-drafted; not reviewed by a licensed engineer)
National Technical Examinations — December 2015 — 98-Ind-A4 Production Management. Three-hour, closed-book exam; Casio or Sharp approved calculators only. Format: seven questions, each worth 20 marks (sub-part weights as tabulated on the front page); only the first five questions appearing in the answer book are marked, so candidates effectively choose 5 of 7. All seven are solved below for completeness. The paper asks for point-form answers wherever possible; the solutions below use full working for clarity.
Reference texts: Nahmias & Olsen, Production and Operations Analysis (7th ed., Waveland/McGraw-Hill) — forecasting, inventory (EOQ) and aggregate planning; Sipper & Bulfin, Production: Planning, Control, and Integration — production-management systems; Hillier & Lieberman, Introduction to Operations Research (11th ed.) — LP formulation and project scheduling (CPM/PERT); Pinedo, Scheduling: Theory, Algorithms, and Systems (5th ed.) — parallel-machine scheduling, makespan and tardiness; Hopp & Spearman, Factory Physics (3rd ed.) — variability and production-system inefficiency; Niebel & Freivalds, Methods, Standards, and Work Design — division of labour and work-design history; ISO 9001:2015 and the Toyota Production System literature — quality management, 5S/lean and TPM.
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.
Consider a single machine feeding a downstream assembly station, where the machine's processing time is not constant but varies randomly around its average (due to tool wear, operator technique, or intermittent minor jams). Queueing theory shows that as this processing-time variability increases — holding average utilization fixed — the average queue of parts waiting in front of the downstream station grows sharply and nonlinearly (the Kingman/VUT relation: waiting time scales with a variability term times a utilization term that explodes as utilization approaches 100%). The productivity impact is direct: the downstream station experiences unplanned idle time whenever its input buffer empties between arrivals, so its actual output per hour falls below what its rated capacity could achieve, even though no equipment or labour was added or removed — the lost output is purely a consequence of unpredictable timing, not insufficient capacity. To protect against this, the plant is typically forced to carry either extra WIP buffer (tying up capital and space, since by Little's law $L=\lambda W$, buffering variability adds to flow time $W$ without adding to the useful throughput $\lambda$) or accept the periodic idle time and its lost output outright. A concrete way to reduce this variability is to implement statistical process control (SPC) on the upstream machine's cycle time and standardize its operating procedure (tooling, changeover method, preventive-maintenance schedule) — converting an erratic, operator-dependent process into one with a tight, predictable distribution of processing times, which directly raises the downstream station's achievable productivity without adding any capacity.
A useful, general set of principles (synthesizing the standard "factory physics" and lean perspectives) is: