skip to main content
10.1145/3564746.3587008acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication Pagesacm-seConference Proceedingsconference-collections
short-paper

A Comparison of Two Approaches to Support Methods Time Measurement in an Automotive Factory

Published:12 June 2023Publication History

ABSTRACT

In a manufacturing factory, eliminating seconds off a task that is repeated often can reduce the overall manufacturing time and improve the profitability of each unit produced. It is advantageous to understand the average amount of time required to complete each task. In order to scientifically determine the desired time required to complete a task, the individual subtasks also can be timed. This can be made more efficient by automating the process of recording the basic physical motions of factory workers that are involved in a task. Our paper shows how it is possible to use a machine learning based approach to classify the basic motions. This paper describes two approaches that we implemented in order to automate the process of motion classification. We contrast the two approaches and analyze the tradeoffs between each approach. The context for the application of our project is Mercedes-Benz US International, a large automotive manufacturing facility in the Southeastern United States. Additionally, we discuss the limitations of the two approaches and future work that can address these issues.

References

  1. Chengjun Chen, Tiannuo Wang, Dongnian Li, and Jun Hong. 2020. Repetitive Assembly Action Recognition Based on Object Detection and Pose Estimation. Advances in Ergonomics of Manufacturing: Managing the Enterprise of the Future 5 (2020), 325--333.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Kaiming He, Xiangyu Zhang, Shaoqing Ren, and Jian Sun. 2016. Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 770--780.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Mahbub Hussain, Jordan J. Bird, and Diego R. Faria. 2019. A Study on CNN Transfer Learning for Image Classification. In Advances in Computational Intelligence Systems Proceedings of 18th Annual UK Workshop on Computational Intelligence. 191--202.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. Harold Bright Maynard, Gustave James Stegemerten, and John L. Schwab. 1948. Methods Time Measurement. McGraw-Hill.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Chika Edith Mgbemena, John Oyekan, Ashutosh Tiwari, Yuchun Xu, Sarah Fletcher, Windo Hutabarat, and Vinayak Prabhu. 2016. Gesture Detection towards Real-Time Ergonomic Analysis for Intelligent Automation Assistance. Advances in Ergonomics of Manufacturing: Managing the Enterprise of the Future 490 (2016), 217--228.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Olga Russakovsky, Jia Deng, Hao Su, Jonathan Krause, Sanjeev Satheesh, Sean Ma, Zhiheng Huang, Andrej Karpathy, Aditya Khosla, Michael Bernstein, Alexander C. Berg, and Li Fei-Fei. 2015. ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge. International Journal of Computer Vision 115, 3 (2015), 211--252.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. Mark Sandler, Andrew Howard, Menglong Zhu, Andrey Zhmoginov, and Liang-Chieh Chen. 2018. MobileNetV2: Inverted Residuals and Linear Bottlenecks. In IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. 4510--4520.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref

Index Terms

  1. A Comparison of Two Approaches to Support Methods Time Measurement in an Automotive Factory

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        ACM SE '23: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM Southeast Conference
        April 2023
        216 pages
        ISBN:9781450399210
        DOI:10.1145/3564746

        Copyright © 2023 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 12 June 2023

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • short-paper

        Acceptance Rates

        ACM SE '23 Paper Acceptance Rate31of71submissions,44%Overall Acceptance Rate178of377submissions,47%
      • Article Metrics

        • Downloads (Last 12 months)38
        • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1

        Other Metrics

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader