Axle Line Capacity up-gradation by Process Planning

Axle Line Capacity up-gradation by Process Planning

Kamlesh Kumar Singp, Rajendra Kumar2, Rajat Upadhyaya3

1Associate Professor and Head, Department of Foundry Technology, National Institute of Foundry and Forge Technology, Ranchi, India

2,3Was M.Tech Student, National Institute of Foundry and Forge Technology,

Ranchi, India

Abstract: The demand of automobile components is increasing at a faster rate due to heavy demand of vehicles. Thus the capacity up-gradation is the basic need of manufacturing and assembly units of automobile components. The axle is the most important part of the vehicle. To increase the capacity of axle assembly, first the capacity assessment of the existing equipments was done. It was needed to introduce some more equipment either in the existing assembly line (extension line) or may be put parallel to the existing line (parallel line). These two lines are compared in terms of investment cost, number of manpower, flexibility, ease of implementation etc. and the parallel line layout is recommended. The planning was also made for assembly of 100 axles/shift for multi models LCV, MCV and HCV.

Keywords: Axle; Extension line; parallel line; process planning; capacity up-gradation; process layout; line balancing; Light Commercial Vehicle

LCV;MediumCommercialVehicleMCV;HeavyCommercialVehic leHCV.

1. INTRODUCTION

   The capacity up-gradation is the basic need of each and every industry. This can be achieved by process planning, either by new set up or by implementing the different techniques and sorting out the bottlenecks of the existing set-up in the company. The capacity up-gradation planning is done for the fulfillment of the forecasted market demand. Planning helps in identifying the resource problem and minimizes redundancies of effort [1-11]. The major problem being faced by almost all automobile industries is the line balancing of the multi-model [12-14]. An efficient line balancing technique seeks to generate a balanced workload at multiple stations, while simultaneously reducing equipment and labors requirement [11]. Line balance helps to reduce the bottlenecks, quick identifying the constraints, reduce work overload, improve workflow etc.

   This study is being carried out for the up-gradation of Axle Line of an automobile company. This company manufactures multi Axles for Heavy Commercial Vehicle (HCV), Medium Commercial Vehicle (MCV) & Light Commercial Vehicle (LCV). Its working hour is 450 min/shift. Existing capacity of the plant was 60/shift i.e. the vehicle can be produced after every 7.5 min. Thus the cycle

   time for 60/shift is 7.5 min. and for 100/shift will be 4.5 min. Such a large increment from existing 60/shift to

   100/shift of axle assembly requires in depth study of the existing set-up. First of all, the capacity assessment of all the existing equipment was done. With this, the bottleneck for 100/shift have been identified. If the cycle time is less or equal to 4.5 minutes, the equipment will be able to produce 100 /shift. For that some additional facilities may be required e.g. machine equipments, material handling, jigs/fixture, assembly tools, line side storage & supply. Any assembly automobile company is being divided into following sub groups-

   1. Axle Line

   2. Transmission line

   3. Engine Line

   4. Cabin Line

   5. Chassis Line

   In this study emphasis is given on the capacity up- gradation of Axle line from 40/shift to 100/shift.

2. AXLE AND AXLE LINE ASSEMBLY

   Axle is the most important component of the vehicle. It is considered as its legs and it carries complete weight of the vehicle. The weight carrying portions of the axles, whether it may be front or rear, is considered as beam supported at the ends, loaded at two intermediate points and subjected to the following loads [15-16]:

   • The vertical load at the spring centers due to the weight of the vehicle.

   • A fore and aft load at the wheel center due to driving or braking effort.

   • The torque reactions due to drive or brakes.

   • A side thrust at the radius of the tier due to centrifugal force when rounding a curve.

   The multi axle consists of three axles – Front axle, Rear Axle and Tag Axle (Dummy axle). The axle line is divided in five-sub groups-

   1. Washing Station 2)Slat conveyor 3)Hub line 4)Differential Line 5)Painting Line

      Slat conveyor is the main line of the Axle line Assembly [17-22]. Higher Axle Loads and Higher Speeds are contrary to each other. The problems that industry faces include not only multi-period

      problems, but also managing the assortment for multiple generations of products. It is futile to attempt both (High Speeds and High Axle Loads) on existing mixed traffic network. In order to determine the direction of the organization, it is necessary to understand its current position and the possible avenues through which it can pursue a particular course of action. Strategies to create additional capacity and increasing average speeds by optimum use of existing network and selectively constructing new conventional lines [23-26]. For capacity up gradation, two options will arise either the new conveyor will be set up parallel or it is to be extended after modification. By considering these two options of slat conveyor line, cost/axle was calculated.

3. CAPACITY ASSESSMENT OF THE EXISTING EQUIPMENT

Capacity assessment of the existing equipments was done for the requirement of the additional facilities. For the calculation of output per shift the required data were noted from the company and calculation were made. A typical calculation for 62 vehicle is shown for different equipment. The process of calculation for different equipments is described:

1. Capacity assessment of the Slat Conveyor

   1. Based on Manpower

      Throughput time of Slat Conveyor for 62 model = 107 min.

      Pitch of the fixture=0.25 meter

      Distance between the Station = 2.5 meter Length of the conveyor=17.5 meter

      No. of the effective Station = {(17.5/2.5)-1} = (7-1) = 6 Therefore, the maximum number of manpower = 62=12 (two persons at each station).

      Utilization of the manpower /vehicle=Throughput time/No. of Manpower=107/12=8.9

      Output /shift=Total working time per shift/Utilization of manpower per vehicle

      =450/8.9= 50.56

      ii Based on Speed Speed of the Conveyor= 1m/min.

      Number of the axle for 62 model =3

      Pitch between the vehicles= No. of axle pitch between fixtures = 32.5 meter =7.5 meter

      Length of the effective station = 2.5 meter

      Therefore time for assembly of one vehicle =7.5 minutes

      Table 1: Capacity Assessment of the Slat conveyor

      Parameters\ model	10: 59	10:70	10:90	MCV	HCV	6X2
      THROUGHPUT TIME (In mins.)	36	35	37	54	78	107
      Pitch of the conveyor (m)	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25	0.25
      Pitch of the Fixture (m)	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5	2.5
      No. of the Effective Station	6	6	6	6		6
      MANNING
      Max No. of Manpower	12	12	12	12	12	12
      Utilization of Manpower/ Vehicle (mins.)	3.0	2.9	3.1	4.5	6.5	8.9
      Out Put / Shift	150	155	145	100	69	51
      SPEED
      Max. Speed (m/min.)	1	1	1	1	1	1
      Pitch of one vehicle	5	5	5	5	5	7.5
      Time for one Vehicle	5	5	5	5	5	7.5
      Max. Out Put / Shift	90	90	90	90	90	60

      Maximum output per shift = Total working time per shift/time taken to assemble one

      Vehicle = 450/7.5 = 60

      Similarly, for other types of models, calculations were made and the results were included in Table 1.

2. Capacity of the washing machine

There are two washing machines

i Main Washing machine for Slat conveyor ii Washing machine for Hub and Drum Line i Main Washing Machine

No. of trays used for washing one 6 2 vehicle = 5

Cycle time for one tray= 1.5 min. (As per specification of the washing machine)

Time taken to start the washing machine= 0.14 min.

Total Time involved for washing machine= 1.5

5+0.14=7.64 min.

Maximum capacity of the washing machine = Time per shift /total time for the machine

=450/7.64=58.9

Similarly, the calculation is done for different models of main washing machine and Hub-Drum Washing machine and the results are shown in Table 2(a) and Table 2 (b) respectively.

Table 2(a): Capacity Assessment of the Main Washing Machine

Table 2(b): Capacity Assessment of the Hub Drum Washing Machine

The capacity assessments for the other equipments were also done. A summary sheet for the different models is prepared and is shown in Table 3. From Table 3, it is observed that the capacity of unloading Gantry for Hub- Drum Washing machine was approaching for 100/shift, but the capacity of other equipments was much below the required 100/shift.

Table 3: Summary Sheet of Capacity of the equipments

Therefore, it can be concluded that from the existing equipments, it was impossible to upgrade for 100/shift. For achieving the required goal, it is utmost important to include some additional equipments. Due to the addition of the equipment, there will be change in axle layout. The equipments may be either added in the existing line, making it as an extension or may be put parallel to the existing line and it may be called as a parallel line. Then there is a need for estimation of cost for these two lines.

1. EXTENSION LINE VS. PARALLEL LINE

   The existing Axle Assembly line can be sub divided in two groups:

   1. Main Line

      Capacity of Press for Diff. Line

      Sl.No.	Parameters\ model	10:59	10:70	10:90	MCV	HCV	6X2
      1	Capacity Assessment of the Slat Conveyor — Man- Power	150	155	145	100	69	51
      	Speed	90	90	90	90	90	60
      2	Capacity of Washing Machine
      	Main Washing Machine	73	73	73	73	73	59
      	Hub- Drum Washing Machine	75	75	75	75	75	50
      3	369	369	223	223	75	75
      4	Capacity of Press for Integrated Hub Line(HCV as Base Model)	398	395	388	157	86	53
      5	Fixture for Shim Selection	0	0	381	0	54	36

   2. Sub Assembly Line Main Line can be further divided into three groups:

      1. Main Washing machine

      2. Slat conveyor

      3. Painting There are two sub assembly lines:

         1. Hub Drum Line

         2. Differential Line

         At the time of change of Axle Line Layout, the length of the Slat conveyor can be increased and this option may be called as an extension line. If another Slat conveyor is set up parallel to the existing slat conveyor then this option may be called as parallel line.

2. Estimation of the cost

   The calculation of the cost is done for above two proposed assembly line (extension line and parallel line). The cost comprises:

   1. Cost of plant and machinery

   2. Cost of power consumption

   3. Cost of manpower

   4. Cost of consumables

1. Cost of Plant and Machinery

   The cost of Plant and Machinery consists of:

   1. Land & Building Costs

   2. Equipment Costs

   3. Assembly costs

   4. Material Handling Cost

   5. Jigs and Fixture Cost

   6. Cost for Quality control facilities

   7. Line Side Storage

   8. Stores Investment etc.

   Since the cost of the existing equipment is much higher than the price at the time of purchase. Therefore, for the calculation of the cost of plant and machinery a multiplying factor of 1.5 is taken.

2. Cost of power consumption

   For the calculation of cost of power consumption the connected load/unit is known from the specification of the equipment.

   Working hour per day = 16 Load Factor=0.3

   Quantity of the equipment=y (say)

   Rise of units per day=Connected load per unit × Load Factor × Working hours per

   day × Quantity of the equipment Cost of power per day = Rise of units per day ×cost per unit.

   Cost of power per shift = Cost of power per day/2

   The calculation of the cost of power consumption was made.

3. Cost of Manpower

   Manpower consists of two types

   1. Permanent

   2. Temporary (casuals, apprentice, etc.)

   Let X is the total manpower involved in assembly. Let the permanent member is Y and the temporary member is

   Z.

   Cost of manpower is calculated as no. of manpower × Rate per annum in Lacs.

   Cost of manpower per day = Total cost of manpower per annum / 365

   Cost of manpower per shift = Cost of manpower per day / 2 The calculation of the cost of manpower was made.

4. Cost of Consumables

   Cost of consumables is the variable cost and it varies with the number of vehicles produced. The cost of consumables per vehicle will remain unchanged either for parallel or extension line assembly.

   For the above calculation, the following assumptions were taken: Depreciation rate for building is taken as 3.34%.

   Depreciation rate for plant and machinery is taken as 7.24%.

   Interest on total investment is taken as 10.0%. Rate of maintenance cost for buildings = 1%.

   Rate of maintenance cost for plant and machinery = 5%. Rate of insurance cost on investment = 0.14%

   The summary sheets of the above cost calculation are shown in Table 4.

1. Calculation of the Manpower

   Apart from the calculation of the cost, number of manpower also plays a critical role in making decision for the type of the axle line layout. The number of manpower calculation was done separately as follows:

   Throughput time on Slat conveyor for 6 2 model=107 min.

   Output of the slat conveyor=40/shift Working hour per shift = 450 min.

   Cycle Time = Working hour per shift / Output per shift

   =107/40=11.25

   Similarly for the calculation of manpower on different station are shown in Table 5.

   In parallel conveyor, one line is set for the production of 60/shift LCV/MCV and other for 40/shift HCV/6X2 models. The manpower was allocated as per maximum throughput time. The 6 2 vehicle have three axles and thus, 40 number of 6 2 vehicles is equivalent to 60 vehicles having two axles. The highest throughput time for vehicle, which has two axles, is HCV (20:16) model. For extension the manpower for same production will be according to 120/shift HCV (20:16 model).

   Table 4: Axle Aggregate Cost Summary

   Sl. No	Catego ry	Uni t	Existi ng	Para llel	Exten sion
   	Peak Volum es		16000	6000 0	60000
   	Cost Head		Total Per Annu m	Per Axle	Total Per Annu m	Pe r A xl e	Tota l Per Ann um	Pe r A xl e
   	Invest ment
   1.	Land Cost	Rs.			0.0		0.0
   2.	Buildin g	Rs.	98080 00		15952 000		1146 0000
   3.	Plant & Machin ery	Rs.	25051 038		38475 096		3971 1540
   	Total Invest ment		34859 038		54427 096		5117 1540
   A	Deprec iation
   A.1	Deprec iation for Buildin g	%	3.34 %		3.34%		3.34 %
   		Rs.	32758 7.0	20.47	53279 6.8	8. 8	3827 64	6. 38
   A.2	Deprec iation for Plant & Machin ery	%	7.24 %		7.24%		7.24 %
   		Rs.	18136	113.3	27855	46	2875	47

   			95.2	6	97	.4	11.	.9
   	Total Deprec iation	Rs.	21412 82.4	133.8 3	33183 93.8	55 .3	3257 879	54 .3
   B	Interest
   B1.	Interest on Total Invest ment	%	10%		10%		10%
   		Rs.	34859 03.8	217.8 7	54427 09.6	90 .7	5117 154	85 .2
   	Fixed Cost	Rs.	56271 86.2	351.7 0	87611 03.4	14 6	8375 033	13 9
   C	Power Per Annum	Rs.	23086 80	144.2 9	40871 95	68 .1	3309 293	55 .1
   D	Manpo wer Per Annum	Rs.	71186 53.3	444.9 2	79507 38.2	13 2	8974 766	14 9
   E	Indirec t Consu mable Per Annum	Rs.	59690 3.1	37.31	22383 86.5	37 .3	2238 386.	37 .3
   F	Mainte nance Cost Per Annum	Bld g. %	1%		1%		1%
   		P & M %	5%		5%		5%
   		Rs.	13506 31.9	84.41	20832 74.8	34 .7	2100 177	35
   G	Insuran ce Cost on Invest ment	%	0.14 %		0.14%		0.14 %
   		Rs.	45804 .9	2.86	71552. 2	1. 19	6707 9.1	1. 12
   	Variabl e Cost	Rs.	11421 928	713.8 7	16433 071	27 3	1669 170	27 8
   	Total Annual Cost	Rs.	28469 787.	1779. 4	41625 321.1	69 3	4175 644	69 5
   	Cost / Axle Set (2 Nos.)	Rs.	890		347		348

   Merits of the Parallel Conveyor:-

   1. Saving of the Manpower (Table 5)

   2. Production will not stop while implementation.

   3. Speed to the Pitch ratio in parallel is less while working, therefore ease of working on the Conveyor.

   4. Incase Front, Rear and Tag Axle are offloaded then assets can be fully utilized.

   Demerits of the Parallel Conveyor:

   • Larger area as compared to the Extension line. Demerits of the Extension:

   1. More manpower is required.

   2. Production stopped while implementation.

   3. Speed to pitch ratio is high therefore difficulties may take place while assembly

   4. Drainage modification may be required.

   5. Further, in extension, additional Paint booth as well as Washing machine was needed. It will increase the problem of material handling.

   The above-mentioned points discussed are given a weighted score. Rating was given to each point according to the easiness, pros and cons of implementation. The type, which has scored more, has been taken into consideration. As per basis of KT matrix (Table 6) parallel conveyor was proposed.

   	Existing	Option 1 (Parallel)		Option 2 (Extension)
   		MCV	6×2	Total	Tot al (HC V)
   Capacity	60	60	40		120
   Cycle Time / Vehicle (in Mins.)	7.50	7.50	11.25		3.75
   Throughput Time (in Mins.)
   	Main Washing Machine	8.91	8.82	12.25
   	Slat Conveyor	78.08	56.53	115.09
   	Painting	9.36	7.86	14.41
   	Differenti al Washing	7.12	6.17	8.12
   	Differenti al Line	35.89	15.05	33.71
   	Hub & Drum Washing	7.02	6.48	10.71
   	Hub Line	34.15	16.67	55.21
   	Knuckle Assly	8.12
   	Shock Abs. Bkt. Welding	5.47	5.47
   TOTAL TPT	194	123	250		194
   Manpower on 2 Shift Basis

   Table-5: Calculation of the manpower

2. Comparison between Extension and Parallel Line

For the comparison between the parallel and extension, following parameters were taken:

1. Aggregate cost per axle.

2. Number of manpower.

3. Investment

4. Incase front, rear or tag Axle off loaded in future.

5. Flow of Aggregates

6. Stoppage of current production Line The merits and demerits of both options are discussed below:

   Rating Basis : 1~3 Poor, 4~6 just below requirement , 7~8 Meets Need, 9~10 Exceeds Need
   Sl . N o.	Parame ter	Context	Wei ght age	Option 1 (parallel conveyor)		Option 2 (Extension of Conveyor)
   				Rating	Sc ore	Rating	Sc ore
   1	Aggreg ate Cost/ Vehicle (Base Front and Rear Axle of 20.16)	compreh ensive cost which includes Capital Cost (Interest & Depreciat ion), Manpow er, Power, Consuma bles etc.	9	8	72	8	72
   				347		348
   2	No. Manpo wer	No. of Manpow er required for 60/shift – MCV & 40/Shift 6X2	9	8	72	5	45
   				80		103
   				Less manpowe r required		More manpowe r required
   3.	Investm ent	Total Investme nt required (Includin g Plant & Machiner y & Bldg.)	8	6	48	7	56
   				Rs. 544 Lacs		Rs. 512 Lacs
   				Parallel conveyor can be commissi oned without stopping productio n		Drain Modific ation is required
   4	Incase front and Tag Axle off loading in Future	Utilizatio n of Assets	8	6	48	4	32
   				New conveyor , Washing M/c, Paint Booth & Presses		Extende d conveyo r can not be given to vendor

   (Per Day)
   	Main Washing Machine	6	2.4	2.2	4.6
   	Slat Conveyor	22	15	20.5	35.5
   	Painting	4	2	3	5.0
   	Differenti al Washing		1.6	1.4	3.0
   	Differenti al Line	10	4	6	10.0
   	Hub & Drum Washing	2	1.7	1.9	3.6
   	Hub Line	10	4.4	9.8	14.2
   	Knuckle Assly	2
   	Shock Abs. Bkt. Welding	2	2	2	4.0
   Total		58	33	47	80

   Table 6: KT Matrix

   In parallel layout, there may be two options existing

   1. Hub drum line and differential line are in between both conveyors.

   2. Hub drum line and differential line are aside of both conveyors.

With the hub drum line and differential line aside of both conveyor, the distance from the slat conveyor may increase. Due to this, there may be material handling problem. Therefore, for the parallel line layout the option in which Hub drum line and differential line are in between both conveyors were taken into consideration. For this option there can be two possibilities:

1. When the Hub drums line and differential line are also parallel to each other.

2. When the Hub drum line and differential line are face to face.

For the option, when hub drum line and differential line are parallel to each other, then there may be criss-crossing of material handling and overhead supply. The best option of layout is when hub-drum line and differential lines are face to face and in between both the slat conveyor. The parts are to be continuously supplied to the line as per its utilization. The deciding factor for the supply is the types of parts and the number of parts used per vehicle. The line side storage also depends on the ratio of the different model to be assembled on that particular day.

output of the vehicle = N/shift, and suppose the demands for the 10:50, 10:70 and 11:10 model are in the ratio of x: y: z. Let the number of parts used for 10:50, 10:70 and 11:10 models are p, q and r respectively.

Then the number of parts supplied per shift

S= x / (x+y+z) ×N × p+ y / (x+y+z) × N × q + z / (x+y+z)

× N × r

=N/(x+y+z) ×{p×x+q×y+z×r}

Let the capacity of the Bin or Trolley=w, then the supply frequency per shift = S/w

If the S/w value is very less, then the frequency can be set for few days or even for a week. If the value of S/w is more than it can be set for number of times per shift according to need.By using above formulation, the line side storage & Frequency of supply/shift for different models were calculated.In process layout, how the work was done and how much work will be done at a particular station is mentioned. The line balancing helps in maximum utilization of the manpower. The time taken to do a particular work was taken from the company, which is determined with the help of MDAT software (MOST Data

Acquisition Tool). This software is based on MOST (Maynard Operation Sequence Technique). Since there are number of sub-operation, the time allocated to the worker may not be equal to the cycle time. In this study, the process layout with line balancing for MCV 60/shift & 6

2- 40/shifts was prepared. The Line Layout prepared is summarized as follows:

There are two parallel lines for HCV model:

1. Main Line

   1. Main Washing Machine

   2. Slat Conveyor

   3. Painting

2. Sub Assembly Line

   1. Hub Drum Line

   2. Differential Line Hub Drum line may be sub divided in two ways

1. Hub-Drum Washing Machine

2. Hub-Drum Assembly

Differential Line may be sub divided in two ways

1. Differential Washing Machine

2. Differential Assembly

   Similarly, the assembly of MCV Line can be sub divided. Process layout chart are prepared. The components for assembly on slat conveyor are washed on the main Washing Machine and one operator is involved for the loading the component and other for unloading the component. At the Slat conveyor Knuckle Assembly, Brake Assembly, Torquing, Dust cover fitment, Tie rod fitment, Differential fitment, Shaft Fitment, Hub Drum Fitment etc. are done. The operators are involved for assembly. Workers are doing the assembly at both side of the conveyor and are denoted as Left Hand Side Worker (LH) and the Right hand side worker (RH). The Final assembly will go for painting. Here two workers are allocated to do the job. At Hub Drum line, the Bearing race fitment, Bearing Fitment, Oil Seal Presing, Bolt Pressing Shim Selection and Greasing application were done. At Differential Line, the differential Case Assembly, Retainer Assembly, Carrier Retainer assembly and Final differential assembly were done. There were two equipments, which are common to HCV and LCV Line. These are

   1. Hub Drum Washing Machine

   2. Differential Washing Machine

At Hub Drum Washing Machine, the Hub and Drum are washed and supplied to the different line. At Differential Washing Machine, the different components used for Differential Assembly are washed and are supplied to the Differential Line. The summary sheet of the process chart for HCV 40/shift and LCV/MCV 60/shift are shown in Table 7 & Table 8 respectively. From these summary Tables one may be able to know how the work is done and how much work will be done at a particular station.

CONCLUSIONS

The capacity up gradation is the basic need of all automobile manufacturing and assembly units of automobile components. The axle is the most important part of the vehicle. To increase the capacity of axle assembly from existing 60/shift to 100/shift of an assembly unit, the equipments either added in the existing assembly line (extension line) or may be put parallel to the existing line (parallel line) and also the capacities of the individual equipments are calculated and from that additional required quantity of equipments are proposed.

REFERENCES:

1. John P. Tanner & Associates, Manufacturing engineering, an introduction to the basic function, Orlan, Florida, 1991.

2. www.atlantic.cc.wm/timesheet-benefits.htm/

3. K.R.Phaneesh, Production and Operation Management, Sudha Publications, 2002.

4. Edward J. Phillips, Manufacturing Plant Layout, Fundamentals and fine points of Optimum facility design, P.E. Society of Manufacturing Engineers One SME Drive Michigan,1997.

5. Richard Muther, Practical plant layout, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1955.

1. Arthur C. Ansley, Manufacturing Methods and Processes, Chilton Book Company,

2. Maynard, H.B., Stegemerten G.J. & Schwab, Methods-time Measurement New York: McGraw-Hill, 1948.

3. Bryan B. Christopher son, www.managers.net.com.

4. Dirk J Rauglas, www.propalanner.net.

5. Tanner, T.P., Planning To Minimize Manufacturing Corpn. Production Engineering, June 1986.

6. Ravi Shanker, Industrial Engineering and Management, Golgotha Publication Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi 1971

7. Harold T. Amrine, John A. Ritchey, Oliver S, Hulley, Manufacturing Organization and Management Second Edition, Prentice Hall of India Private Limited, New Delhi, 1971.

8. Vijay S, Seth, Facilities Planning and Material Handling, Methods and Requirements, Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, 1995.

9. Kirpal Singh, Automobile Engineering, Vol-1, Standard Publishers Distributers, 2001.

10. Jay Kopycinsk, www.minitruckinweb.wm, A Premedia Publication.

11. Sadhu Singh, Machine Design Khanna Publishers, Third Edition, Delhi, 1999.

12. Hicks, Philip E, Introduction to Industrial Engineering and Management Science, Mc Graw Hill, NewYork, 1977.

13. Ed. T.J.Bently, The Management Service Handbook, Institute of management Services.

14. Dennis A Whitmore, Work Measurement, Institute of Management Services

15. Krick, E.V., Methods Engineering Design and Measurement of Work Methods, Wiley, New York, 1962.

16. Maynard, H.B. Industrial Engineering Handbook, Third Edition, Mc Graw Hill, New York, 1971.

17. Herbert Meyr, Supply chain planning in the German automotive industry, Institute of Transport Economics and Logistics, 2004.

18. A. Gürhan Kök Fuqua, School of Business Duke University, Marshall

    L. Fisher, The Wharton School University of Pennsylvania, Ramnath Vaidyanathan, The Wharton School, Assortment Planning:

    Review of Literature and Industry Practice, 2006.

19. Patrick J. Montana and Bruce H. Charnov, Barron's Management book fourth edition

20. M. Lorenzen, "Strategic Pla nning for Academic Library Instructional Programming." In: Illinois Libraries 86, Page no. 2, 200.6