Q: Production systems: A product (line/flow) layout is most appropriate for which production type?

Introduction / Context: Facility layout decisions match the physical arrangement of resources with the production strategy. Product layout aligns machines in the sequence of operations and is the foundation of assembly lines and continuous processes. Given Data / Assumptions: High, stable demand for a standardized product. Well-defined, repetitive sequence of operations. Desire to minimize material handling and lead time. Concept / Approach: Product (line) layout suits mass production where each unit follows the same route. This enables line balancing, reduced WIP, shorter throughput time, and simpler scheduling compared with functional (process) layout used for job or batch work. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify production type and variability (volume vs. variety).Map routing consistency and operation sequence stability.Select product layout when flow is repetitive and volumes are high. Verification / Alternative check: Value-stream mapping and takt-time analysis typically show best performance for high-volume flows in a line arrangement. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Job/batch settings face varied routings and setups, favoring process/cellular layouts. “Any of the above” is incorrect because suitability is not equal across strategies. Common Pitfalls: Forcing a product layout onto highly variable, low-volume work; ignoring changeover times that can disrupt line balance. Final Answer: Mass production (high volume, standardized flow)

Q: Terminology: Product layout is also known by which alternative name in operations management?

Introduction / Context: Different textbooks use different names for the same layout concepts. Knowing synonyms avoids confusion during exams and in industry. Product layout, widely used in assembly lines, is often referred to as line or flow layout. Given Data / Assumptions: Product layout arranges resources in operation sequence. High-volume, standardized products with stable routing. Synonym recognition is required. Concept / Approach: The name “line layout” emphasizes the linear flow of parts; “flow layout” emphasizes the continuous flow. Both capture the same idea: equipment placed in the order of processing steps to minimize handling and delays. Step-by-Step Solution: Recall that product layout = line/flow layout.Contrast with process (functional) layout used in job shops.Note that “static product layout” refers to fixed-position, not product line. Verification / Alternative check: Observe automotive assembly lines as classic line/flow layouts; process industries (bottling, packaging) also exhibit flow lines. Why Other Options Are Wrong: “Analytical” and “job-shop” refer to different concepts. “Static product layout” confuses with fixed-position layout where the product stays stationary and resources move to it. Common Pitfalls: Mixing up fixed-position and product layouts; assuming “analytical” is a standard synonym (it is not). Final Answer: Line (flow) layout

Q: Fixed-position layout (project layout): Which of the following is generally true?

Introduction / Context: Fixed-position (project) layout is used when the product is bulky, heavy, or immovable (e.g., shipbuilding, large turbines, aircraft). Resources, tools, and workers move to the product instead of moving the product itself. Given Data / Assumptions: Large, complex products assembled in one location. Multiple trades and tools travel to the work site. Low to very low production volume, high variety. Concept / Approach: Since the product does not travel, material movement of the product is minimized. However, coordination costs are high, utilization of equipment can be low, and overall production cost is not necessarily minimal compared to line or cellular layouts for high volumes. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify product characteristics (size, immobility).Choose fixed-position to avoid transporting the product.Recognize increased logistics for tools, people, and components instead. Verification / Alternative check: Case studies from shipyards and construction projects show minimal product movement yet significant planning needs for material staging and trade scheduling. Why Other Options Are Wrong: It does not guarantee least production cost or minimum capital investment; often, costs are higher due to complexity and idle resources. “All of these” is thus incorrect; the product itself does not move between stations, so option (e) is wrong. Common Pitfalls: Assuming fixed-position is cheaper; underestimating the planning required for on-site logistics and safety constraints. Final Answer: Total material movement is comparatively less because the product stays in place.

Q: Time study terminology: The time taken by a trained worker at a steady (normal) pace to perform a defined task is called…

Introduction / Context: Accurate terminology in work measurement prevents errors in costing, planning, and incentives. Observed time, normal time, and standard time are related but distinct quantities. Given Data / Assumptions: Trained worker performs an established method. Steady, normal performance (rating 100%). Allowances (fatigue, personal, delays) are not yet added. Concept / Approach: Normal time is the time a qualified worker would take at a normal pace. Formally, Normal time = Observed time * Rating factor. When the pace is already “steady/normal,” rating factor ≈ 1.0, so normal time equals the carefully measured observed time for that condition. Standard time is then Normal time * (1 + allowances). Step-by-Step Solution: Measure observed time over several cycles; compute representative (average) time.Apply performance rating to get Normal time = Representative time * Rating.Convert to Standard time by adding allowances: Standard time = Normal time / (1 − allowance fraction). Verification / Alternative check: Check consistency across observers and days; if rating is near 100%, observed ≈ normal. Compare standard times to historical outputs for reasonableness. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Standard time includes allowances; representative time is raw averaged observation; “allowance time” is not the same as normal time. Common Pitfalls: Confusing normal with standard time; forgetting to apply allowances; using biased ratings that inflate/deflate standards. Final Answer: Normal time

Q: Product (line) layout: Which of the following is NOT true?

Introduction / Context: Product layouts are designed for flow and high utilization. Understanding what is and is not true helps avoid misapplication when demand or variety changes. Given Data / Assumptions: Stable, high-volume demand and repetitive routing. Stations arranged in operation sequence with line balancing. Goal: high throughput, low WIP, short lead time. Concept / Approach: In a well-balanced line, machines typically operate at or near design capacity, yielding high utilization. However, if volume falls or variety rises, the fixed sequence and specialization can cause underutilization and higher unit costs, reflecting a scale sensitivity of product layouts. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify core features: sequential flow, balance to takt, minimal routing variability.Assess utilization: with steady volume, station loading is high.Recognize sensitivity: with volume drops, cost per unit rises, and flexibility suffers. Verification / Alternative check: Line balance charts and OEE reports commonly show high utilization at design throughput; cost models reflect increased unit cost when demand shrinks. Why Other Options Are Wrong: (a), (c), (d), and (e) accurately describe product layouts. Statement (b) is the “NOT true” option because these layouts are specifically built to maximize utilization under design conditions. Common Pitfalls: Assuming product layouts are flexible; ignoring the impact of product mix changes on line balance and capacity utilization. Final Answer: Machines cannot be used to their maximum capacity in a product layout.

Q: Time study fact-check: “Normal time is the ratio of representative time to the rating factor.” Is this statement correct?

Introduction / Context: Normal time links observed performance to a standard pace. Getting the formula right is critical for calculating standard times and fair incentives. Given Data / Assumptions: Representative (observed) time = average measured cycle time. Rating factor R expresses performance relative to normal (e.g., 1.10 for 110%). Allowances are not part of normal time; they are added later. Concept / Approach: The correct relationship is: Normal time = Representative time * Rating factor. The statement claims a ratio (division), which is incorrect. Using division would penalize higher ratings by reducing normal time wrongly and misstate standards. Step-by-Step Solution: Compute representative time from multiple cycles.Apply rating: Normal time = Rep time * R.Compute standard time: Standard time = Normal time / (1 − allowance fraction). Verification / Alternative check: Example: Rep time 1.0 min, R = 1.2. Correct Normal time = 1.2 min. Dividing would give 0.833 min, which contradicts the idea that faster-than-normal performance implies more time at normal pace. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Qualifiers in (c), (d), and (e) do not fix the algebra; the relation is multiplication regardless of R or allowances. Common Pitfalls: Mixing up rating factor with performance percentage; forgetting to separate allowances from the normal time stage. Final Answer: False

Q: Network notation (AOA): On a traditional activity-on-arrow network diagram, an activity is represented by which symbol?

Introduction / Context: Project networks can be drawn using activity-on-arrow (AOA) or activity-on-node (AON) conventions. Exams often test recognition of which graphical element represents an activity under each convention. Given Data / Assumptions: AOA convention is assumed unless otherwise specified. Events (start/finish points) are shown as nodes (circles), activities as arrows. Logical precedence is represented by arrow direction. Concept / Approach: In AOA, the activity is the arrow and the event is the circle. In AON, the activity is the node (box), and precedence is the arrow connecting nodes. The question explicitly targets the AOA meaning of “activity.” Step-by-Step Solution: Identify diagram type (AOA).Map: activity → arrow; event → circle.Select the corresponding symbol for activity: the arrow. Verification / Alternative check: Any AOA example (e.g., CPM in early texts) shows activities on arrows, events as nodes labeled i and j. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Circle denotes event; diamond/rectangle are not standard AOA activity symbols; a line without an arrowhead loses directionality and is not the conventional representation. Common Pitfalls: Confusing AOA with AON; failing to notice arrowheads that indicate precedence. Final Answer: An arrow (directed line) between events

Q: Process (functional) layout is typically employed under which conditions?

Introduction / Context: Process layout (functional layout or job-shop layout) groups similar processes together—e.g., lathes in one area, mills in another. It is the opposite of product layout and suits high-variety, low-volume work. Given Data / Assumptions: Jobbing or batch environment with variable routings. Equipment arranged by function. Operators with broader skill sets; higher material handling and scheduling complexity. Concept / Approach: With diverse products, routing flexibility is more important than flow efficiency. Functional departments allow different parts to take different paths as required. This supports customization and engineering changes at the expense of longer lead times and higher WIP than line layouts. Step-by-Step Solution: Assess volume–variety mix: low volume, high mix → process layout.Arrange machines by function; create route sheets for each job.Plan scheduling/dispatching to manage queues and setups. Verification / Alternative check: KPIs typically show longer travel distances and queue times but greater flexibility than product layouts; this aligns with process layout characteristics. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (e) describes conditions for product (line) layout, not process layout. Common Pitfalls: Underestimating scheduling complexity; ignoring setup reduction opportunities; poor workplace layout causing excess movement. Final Answer: all of the above

Question 1

SLP (Muther): basic principles guiding the design of the “best” plant layout  According to Richard Muther’s Systematic Layout Planning, which principle(s) underpin a good layout?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Systematic Layout Planning (SLP) by Richard Muther is a structured method for arranging physical spaces—machines, departments, and services—to support safe, efficient production and material movement. Given Data / Assumptions: We aim to reduce cost of handling and improve throughput. Product, process, schedule, and support data are available. Multiple feasible layouts can be compared. Concept / Approach: Muther articulated several guiding principles: overall integration (the layout should bring together people, materials, and equipment in one coherent plan), flow (arrangements should promote smooth, direct, and minimal-backtracking movement), and flexibility (the layout should accommodate future changes in volume or mix). Step-by-Step Solution: Gather PQRST data (Product, Quantity/Route, Support, Timing).Develop activity relationships and space requirements.Generate alternatives that honor integration, good flow, and flexibility.Select the best compromise via criteria and from–to analyses. Verification / Alternative check: SLP’s relationship charts (A–E ratings), flow diagrams, and block layouts naturally embody these principles when done correctly. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Each individual principle (A, B, C) is valid, but the question asks for the set; (E) “randomization” contradicts SLP’s data-driven approach. Common Pitfalls: Over-optimizing for current flow at the expense of future flexibility; ignoring support areas (maintenance, stores, QC) in “overall integration”. Final Answer: all of these

Question 2

Halsey 50–50 plan (wage incentive): Given base hourly rate R, standard time S, and actual time T, what is the total wage for the job?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Halsey 50–50 plan is a classic time-based wage incentive system. It pays a guaranteed time wage for the actual time worked, and then shares the value of the time saved (relative to a pre-set standard) equally between the worker and the employer. Understanding the exact wage formula prevents confusion with similar plans like Rowan or straight piecework. Given Data / Assumptions: Base (time) rate = R currency units per hour. Standard time allowed for the job = S hours. Actual time taken by the worker = T hours. “50–50” means 50% sharing of time-saved value with the worker. Concept / Approach: Time saved equals S − T (if T < S). Under Halsey 50–50, the bonus equals 0.5 * (S − T) * R. Total wage is the time wage for actual hours plus the bonus. This is different from the Rowan plan, which scales the bonus as a fraction of standard time (proportional to T / S). Step-by-Step Solution: Time wage = R * T.Time saved = S − T.Bonus (Halsey 50–50) = 0.5 * (S − T) * R.Total wage = R * T + 0.5 * (S − T) * R. Verification / Alternative check: If T = S (no saving), bonus is zero and pay reduces to TR. If T is much smaller than S, the worker earns a greater bonus but still shares only half the saving value, aligning incentives and cost control. Why Other Options Are Wrong: TR: Ignores incentive; this is guaranteed pay only. TR + (S − T)R: Gives 100% of saving to the worker; not Halsey 50–50. TR * [1 + (S − T)/S]: This is the Rowan form, not Halsey. R * S: Pays for standard time regardless of actual effort; not this plan. Common Pitfalls: Confusing Halsey with Rowan; forgetting to multiply time saved by the base rate R; applying the formula when T ≥ S (then bonus should be zero). Final Answer: TR + 0.5 * (S - T) * R

Question 3

Production systems: A product (line/flow) layout is most appropriate for which production type?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Facility layout decisions match the physical arrangement of resources with the production strategy. Product layout aligns machines in the sequence of operations and is the foundation of assembly lines and continuous processes. Given Data / Assumptions: High, stable demand for a standardized product. Well-defined, repetitive sequence of operations. Desire to minimize material handling and lead time. Concept / Approach: Product (line) layout suits mass production where each unit follows the same route. This enables line balancing, reduced WIP, shorter throughput time, and simpler scheduling compared with functional (process) layout used for job or batch work. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify production type and variability (volume vs. variety).Map routing consistency and operation sequence stability.Select product layout when flow is repetitive and volumes are high. Verification / Alternative check: Value-stream mapping and takt-time analysis typically show best performance for high-volume flows in a line arrangement. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Job/batch settings face varied routings and setups, favoring process/cellular layouts. “Any of the above” is incorrect because suitability is not equal across strategies. Common Pitfalls: Forcing a product layout onto highly variable, low-volume work; ignoring changeover times that can disrupt line balance. Final Answer: Mass production (high volume, standardized flow)

Question 4

Terminology: Product layout is also known by which alternative name in operations management?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Different textbooks use different names for the same layout concepts. Knowing synonyms avoids confusion during exams and in industry. Product layout, widely used in assembly lines, is often referred to as line or flow layout. Given Data / Assumptions: Product layout arranges resources in operation sequence. High-volume, standardized products with stable routing. Synonym recognition is required. Concept / Approach: The name “line layout” emphasizes the linear flow of parts; “flow layout” emphasizes the continuous flow. Both capture the same idea: equipment placed in the order of processing steps to minimize handling and delays. Step-by-Step Solution: Recall that product layout = line/flow layout.Contrast with process (functional) layout used in job shops.Note that “static product layout” refers to fixed-position, not product line. Verification / Alternative check: Observe automotive assembly lines as classic line/flow layouts; process industries (bottling, packaging) also exhibit flow lines. Why Other Options Are Wrong: “Analytical” and “job-shop” refer to different concepts. “Static product layout” confuses with fixed-position layout where the product stays stationary and resources move to it. Common Pitfalls: Mixing up fixed-position and product layouts; assuming “analytical” is a standard synonym (it is not). Final Answer: Line (flow) layout

Question 5

Fixed-position layout (project layout): Which of the following is generally true?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Fixed-position (project) layout is used when the product is bulky, heavy, or immovable (e.g., shipbuilding, large turbines, aircraft). Resources, tools, and workers move to the product instead of moving the product itself. Given Data / Assumptions: Large, complex products assembled in one location. Multiple trades and tools travel to the work site. Low to very low production volume, high variety. Concept / Approach: Since the product does not travel, material movement of the product is minimized. However, coordination costs are high, utilization of equipment can be low, and overall production cost is not necessarily minimal compared to line or cellular layouts for high volumes. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify product characteristics (size, immobility).Choose fixed-position to avoid transporting the product.Recognize increased logistics for tools, people, and components instead. Verification / Alternative check: Case studies from shipyards and construction projects show minimal product movement yet significant planning needs for material staging and trade scheduling. Why Other Options Are Wrong: It does not guarantee least production cost or minimum capital investment; often, costs are higher due to complexity and idle resources. “All of these” is thus incorrect; the product itself does not move between stations, so option (e) is wrong. Common Pitfalls: Assuming fixed-position is cheaper; underestimating the planning required for on-site logistics and safety constraints. Final Answer: Total material movement is comparatively less because the product stays in place.

Question 6

Time study terminology: The time taken by a trained worker at a steady (normal) pace to perform a defined task is called…

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Accurate terminology in work measurement prevents errors in costing, planning, and incentives. Observed time, normal time, and standard time are related but distinct quantities. Given Data / Assumptions: Trained worker performs an established method. Steady, normal performance (rating 100%). Allowances (fatigue, personal, delays) are not yet added. Concept / Approach: Normal time is the time a qualified worker would take at a normal pace. Formally, Normal time = Observed time * Rating factor. When the pace is already “steady/normal,” rating factor ≈ 1.0, so normal time equals the carefully measured observed time for that condition. Standard time is then Normal time * (1 + allowances). Step-by-Step Solution: Measure observed time over several cycles; compute representative (average) time.Apply performance rating to get Normal time = Representative time * Rating.Convert to Standard time by adding allowances: Standard time = Normal time / (1 − allowance fraction). Verification / Alternative check: Check consistency across observers and days; if rating is near 100%, observed ≈ normal. Compare standard times to historical outputs for reasonableness. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Standard time includes allowances; representative time is raw averaged observation; “allowance time” is not the same as normal time. Common Pitfalls: Confusing normal with standard time; forgetting to apply allowances; using biased ratings that inflate/deflate standards. Final Answer: Normal time

Question 7

Product (line) layout: Which of the following is NOT true?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Product layouts are designed for flow and high utilization. Understanding what is and is not true helps avoid misapplication when demand or variety changes. Given Data / Assumptions: Stable, high-volume demand and repetitive routing. Stations arranged in operation sequence with line balancing. Goal: high throughput, low WIP, short lead time. Concept / Approach: In a well-balanced line, machines typically operate at or near design capacity, yielding high utilization. However, if volume falls or variety rises, the fixed sequence and specialization can cause underutilization and higher unit costs, reflecting a scale sensitivity of product layouts. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify core features: sequential flow, balance to takt, minimal routing variability.Assess utilization: with steady volume, station loading is high.Recognize sensitivity: with volume drops, cost per unit rises, and flexibility suffers. Verification / Alternative check: Line balance charts and OEE reports commonly show high utilization at design throughput; cost models reflect increased unit cost when demand shrinks. Why Other Options Are Wrong: (a), (c), (d), and (e) accurately describe product layouts. Statement (b) is the “NOT true” option because these layouts are specifically built to maximize utilization under design conditions. Common Pitfalls: Assuming product layouts are flexible; ignoring the impact of product mix changes on line balance and capacity utilization. Final Answer: Machines cannot be used to their maximum capacity in a product layout.

Question 8

Time study fact-check: “Normal time is the ratio of representative time to the rating factor.” Is this statement correct?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Normal time links observed performance to a standard pace. Getting the formula right is critical for calculating standard times and fair incentives. Given Data / Assumptions: Representative (observed) time = average measured cycle time. Rating factor R expresses performance relative to normal (e.g., 1.10 for 110%). Allowances are not part of normal time; they are added later. Concept / Approach: The correct relationship is: Normal time = Representative time * Rating factor. The statement claims a ratio (division), which is incorrect. Using division would penalize higher ratings by reducing normal time wrongly and misstate standards. Step-by-Step Solution: Compute representative time from multiple cycles.Apply rating: Normal time = Rep time * R.Compute standard time: Standard time = Normal time / (1 − allowance fraction). Verification / Alternative check: Example: Rep time 1.0 min, R = 1.2. Correct Normal time = 1.2 min. Dividing would give 0.833 min, which contradicts the idea that faster-than-normal performance implies more time at normal pace. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Qualifiers in (c), (d), and (e) do not fix the algebra; the relation is multiplication regardless of R or allowances. Common Pitfalls: Mixing up rating factor with performance percentage; forgetting to separate allowances from the normal time stage. Final Answer: False

Question 9

Network notation (AOA): On a traditional activity-on-arrow network diagram, an activity is represented by which symbol?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Project networks can be drawn using activity-on-arrow (AOA) or activity-on-node (AON) conventions. Exams often test recognition of which graphical element represents an activity under each convention. Given Data / Assumptions: AOA convention is assumed unless otherwise specified. Events (start/finish points) are shown as nodes (circles), activities as arrows. Logical precedence is represented by arrow direction. Concept / Approach: In AOA, the activity is the arrow and the event is the circle. In AON, the activity is the node (box), and precedence is the arrow connecting nodes. The question explicitly targets the AOA meaning of “activity.” Step-by-Step Solution: Identify diagram type (AOA).Map: activity → arrow; event → circle.Select the corresponding symbol for activity: the arrow. Verification / Alternative check: Any AOA example (e.g., CPM in early texts) shows activities on arrows, events as nodes labeled i and j. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Circle denotes event; diamond/rectangle are not standard AOA activity symbols; a line without an arrowhead loses directionality and is not the conventional representation. Common Pitfalls: Confusing AOA with AON; failing to notice arrowheads that indicate precedence. Final Answer: An arrow (directed line) between events

Question 10

Process (functional) layout is typically employed under which conditions?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Process layout (functional layout or job-shop layout) groups similar processes together—e.g., lathes in one area, mills in another. It is the opposite of product layout and suits high-variety, low-volume work. Given Data / Assumptions: Jobbing or batch environment with variable routings. Equipment arranged by function. Operators with broader skill sets; higher material handling and scheduling complexity. Concept / Approach: With diverse products, routing flexibility is more important than flow efficiency. Functional departments allow different parts to take different paths as required. This supports customization and engineering changes at the expense of longer lead times and higher WIP than line layouts. Step-by-Step Solution: Assess volume–variety mix: low volume, high mix → process layout.Arrange machines by function; create route sheets for each job.Plan scheduling/dispatching to manage queues and setups. Verification / Alternative check: KPIs typically show longer travel distances and queue times but greater flexibility than product layouts; this aligns with process layout characteristics. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Option (e) describes conditions for product (line) layout, not process layout. Common Pitfalls: Underestimating scheduling complexity; ignoring setup reduction opportunities; poor workplace layout causing excess movement. Final Answer: all of the above

Question 11

Halsey incentive plan: Which statement is correct about the Halsey system?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Halsey plan blends time wages with a shared-savings bonus. It seeks to motivate higher productivity while ensuring a guaranteed minimum earning equal to the time-rate wage for the actual hours worked. Given Data / Assumptions: Standard time S established via work measurement. Actual time T observed; base rate R per hour. Bonus equals a share (often 50%) of the time-saved value (S − T) * R. Concept / Approach: Key properties: (1) Guaranteed time-rate pay TR, (2) Bonus proportional to time saved, (3) Sharing of savings between firm and worker, (4) Useful across many operations but implementation policies vary by company. This differentiates it from piecework (per-unit pay) and Rowan (bonus scaled by T/S). Step-by-Step Solution: Compute time wage TR.Compute saving S − T (if any).Compute bonus share (e.g., 0.5 * (S − T) * R) and add to TR. Verification / Alternative check: When T ≥ S, bonus goes to zero but the worker still receives TR, proving the minimum-wage guarantee. When T < S, bonus rises with efficiency, aligning incentives. Why Other Options Are Wrong: (a) and (b) make blanket claims about applicability that depend on firm policy; (c) is incorrect because Halsey guarantees the time rate; (e) describes piecework, not Halsey. Common Pitfalls: Confusing Halsey with Rowan; forgetting the guarantee; applying the formula when standard times are not trustworthy. Final Answer: It is based upon the worker’s efficiency (time saved earns a bonus) while guaranteeing the time rate.

Question 12

Industrial engineering – Travel chart usage In facilities layout and material handling studies, what are travel charts primarily used to accomplish?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: A travel chart (also called a from-to chart) is a classic industrial engineering tool that summarizes the frequency or load of movements between locations. It is central to facilities layout and material handling design because it reveals high-traffic pairs and wasteful crisscross flows. Given Data / Assumptions: Departments or workstations are known (A, B, C, ...). From-to movements (trips per shift or load per day) can be measured or estimated. The goal is to reduce handling time, distance, and cost. Concept / Approach: Engineers tabulate moves from each source to each destination and often multiply by distance to compute a load-distance metric. High-intensity pairs should be placed close together or connected by efficient routes and handling equipment. Step-by-Step Solution: List all locations and collect move counts or tonnage between them.Create a square from-to matrix and enter the flows.Compute load-distance = flow * distance for each pair.Prioritize adjacencies for layout or choose routes and handling methods that minimize total load-distance.Iterate the layout or routing until a practical minimum cost plan is reached. Verification / Alternative check: Compare total handling cost or distance before and after redesign. A significant reduction validates the routing or placement decisions derived from the chart. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Inventory control difficulties (option b) are better addressed with ABC analysis, reorder point, and EOQ methods rather than a travel chart. Depreciation estimates (option e) are a finance/accounting task, not a travel-chart application. “Analyse material handling” (option a) is true but incomplete; the primary purpose is to use that analysis to plan efficient procedures and routes, making option (c) the most accurate specific answer. Common Pitfalls: Using outdated flow data, ignoring peak vs. average flows, and neglecting constraints like safety aisles or one-way traffic rules can lead to suboptimal layouts. Final Answer: Plan material handling procedures and select efficient routes/flows

Question 13

Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) formula If A = items consumed per year, P = procurement cost per order, and C = annual carrying cost per item, which expression gives the economic ordering quantity?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: The Economic Order Quantity (EOQ) model balances ordering cost and inventory carrying cost to find the lot size that minimizes total annual inventory cost for stable demand items. Given Data / Assumptions: A = annual demand (units per year). P = procurement (ordering) cost per order. C = annual carrying cost per unit. Demand and lead time are constant, shortages are not allowed. Concept / Approach: Total annual cost = ordering cost + carrying cost. Ordering cost decreases with larger lots, while carrying cost increases. The optimum occurs where the two are equal in magnitude. Step-by-Step Solution: Let Q be the order quantity.Ordering cost per year = (A / Q) * P.Average inventory = Q / 2 (no safety stock assumed).Carrying cost per year = (Q / 2) * C.Total cost TC = (A / Q) * P + (Q / 2) * C.Differentiate TC with respect to Q and set derivative = 0 for minimum.Solving gives Q = sqrt(2 * A * P / C). Verification / Alternative check: At EOQ, ordering cost equals carrying cost: (A / Q) * P = (Q / 2) * C which rearranges to Q = sqrt(2 * A * P / C). Why Other Options Are Wrong: Options (b), (d), and (e) invert terms incorrectly. Option (c) omits the square root and would not minimize TC. Common Pitfalls: Forgetting that C is per-unit per-year, ignoring quantity discounts, or applying EOQ where demand is highly erratic can lead to poor results. Final Answer: EOQ = sqrt(2 * A * P / C)

Question 14

Linear Programming (LP) – application domains LP techniques can be successfully applied to which of the following industries?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Linear Programming is a general optimization framework for maximizing or minimizing a linear objective subject to linear constraints. Its flexibility makes it applicable across many industries. Given Data / Assumptions: Objective functions and constraints are linear. Decision variables are non-negative and divisible. Resource limits, balances, and policy constraints can be expressed linearly. Concept / Approach: LP problems are formulated with decision variables, a linear objective, and sets of linear constraints. Solutions lie at extreme points of the feasible polytope and are computed efficiently via simplex or interior-point algorithms. Step-by-Step Solution: Define variables (e.g., product quantities, flows, workforce hours).Write the objective (e.g., maximize profit or minimize cost).Capture constraints (material balances, capacities, regulatory limits).Solve and interpret results, including sensitivity analysis. Verification / Alternative check: Back-testing model recommendations against historical data or pilot implementations often demonstrates improved profitability or service levels. Why Other Options Are Wrong: LP is not restricted to discrete manufacturing; it is widely used in chemicals, oil refining, logistics, finance, telecommunications, and services. Common Pitfalls: Forcing non-linear realities into linear form without caution; omitting key constraints; failing to validate data quality. Final Answer: All of the above

Question 15

Value engineering techniques – expert participation Which value engineering technique involves experts of similar rank assembling to generate ideas for product or process development?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Value engineering seeks higher value by improving function-to-cost ratio. Multiple ideation and evaluation techniques are used; knowing when to use each is vital. Given Data / Assumptions: Participants are peers of similar organizational rank. Goal is rapid idea generation without criticism. Recorder captures ideas for later evaluation. Concept / Approach: Brainstorming convenes a group to produce many ideas freely. Deferred judgment and building on others’ ideas are key rules. The homogeneity of rank often reduces inhibition and political friction, encouraging contributions. Step-by-Step Solution: Define the functional problem clearly.Gather a peer group and state ground rules (no criticism, quantity over quality at first).Generate ideas rapidly; a facilitator keeps momentum.Cluster and later evaluate ideas using cost–worth analysis. Verification / Alternative check: Post-session selection matrices or Pugh charts demonstrate which brainstormed ideas deliver the highest value-to-cost improvements. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Delphi uses anonymous questionnaires rather than a same-rank group meeting. Morphological analysis structures the solution space but is not centered on same-rank group ideation. Direct expert comparison ranks options pairwise, not broad ideation. Common Pitfalls: Allowing early criticism, insufficient facilitation, or poor documentation can limit creativity and practical outcomes. Final Answer: Brainstorming (face-to-face group ideation)

Question 16

PERT (Program Evaluation and Review Technique) – managerial benefits Which statements describe what PERT provides to project management?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: PERT is a probabilistic network technique that models uncertain activity durations using three-point estimates to forecast likely project completion times and identify schedule risks. Given Data / Assumptions: Activities have optimistic, most likely, and pessimistic time estimates. Dependencies among activities are known. Management wants early warning of schedule variance. Concept / Approach: PERT computes expected activity times and variances, performs forward/backward passes, and yields a distribution for project duration. Continuous re-estimation enables rolling-wave updates. Step-by-Step Solution: Collect three-point times for each activity.Compute expected time te = (to + 4 * tm + tp) / 6 and variance = ((tp − to) / 6)^2.Find expected project duration and identify critical path.Monitor progress; update estimates; assess variation impacts quickly. Verification / Alternative check: Comparing forecast distributions to actual progress helps gauge realism of estimates and highlights where corrective action is needed. Why Other Options Are Wrong: PERT provides schedule insight first; cost can be integrated but is not its sole focus, so option (e) is incorrect. Common Pitfalls: Overconfidence in three-point estimates, ignoring resource constraints, or failing to update the network undermines PERT’s value. Final Answer: All of the above

Question 17

Time study – determining allowances Which technique is most appropriate for determining realistic allowances (e.g., fatigue, delay) to apply to observed normal time?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Standard time = normal time * allowance factor. While performance rating converts observed time to normal time, realistic allowances must capture the proportion of time lost to fatigue, personal needs, and unavoidable delays. Given Data / Assumptions: Observations are taken over representative periods. Multiple categories of time use exist (productive, setup, idle, delays). Objective is to estimate allowance percentages credibly. Concept / Approach: Work sampling (random instantaneous observations) estimates the fraction of time spent in various categories using statistical inference. The estimated proportion of non-productive but unavoidable time becomes the allowance. Step-by-Step Solution: Define categories (e.g., working, setup, planned delay, personal, unavoidable idle).Plan random observations over days/shifts.Record the state seen at each observation.Estimate proportion p for each category; compute allowance = sum of relevant p's.Apply allowance factor to normal time to obtain standard time. Verification / Alternative check: Confidence intervals from binomial approximation validate precision; repeating samples on different weeks tests stability. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Performance rating adjusts effort, not allowances. Acceptance sampling and linear regression address quality and modeling, not allowance estimation. Earned value is a project control technique. Common Pitfalls: Non-random observations, too few samples, or misclassification of categories bias the allowance estimates. Final Answer: Work sampling

Question 18

CPM vs. PERT – time estimates In Critical Path Method (CPM), activity durations are typically treated using which type of time estimate?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Project network methods include CPM and PERT. Though both identify a critical path, their treatment of activity time is different, affecting how uncertainty is modeled. Given Data / Assumptions: CPM is commonly used where durations can be estimated reliably or controlled (e.g., construction, maintenance turnarounds). PERT is used where activity times are uncertain and variable (e.g., R&D). Concept / Approach: CPM assumes a single, deterministic duration for each activity and emphasizes time–cost trade-offs (crashing). PERT uses three-point estimates to compute expected time and variance. Step-by-Step Solution: Assign a single duration to each activity in CPM.Perform forward and backward passes to find ES, EF, LS, LF, and total float.Identify zero-float activities forming the critical path and the project duration.Optionally, analyze crashing by shortening durations at extra cost to meet a target deadline. Verification / Alternative check: Comparing CPM with PERT on the same project shows CPM's deterministic schedule versus PERT's probability-based completion dates. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Options (b), (c), and (e) reflect PERT-style probabilistic modeling. Option (d) is incorrect—time estimates are central to both CPM and PERT. Common Pitfalls: Using CPM without considering variability where it is significant; ignoring resource constraints may make the schedule unrealistic. Final Answer: Single time estimate (deterministic duration)

Question 19

Material handling in cement manufacture Which equipment is most widely used to handle bulk materials along distances in cement plants?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Cement manufacturing involves continuous movement of bulk solids such as limestone, clay, additives, clinker, and cement. Efficient handling reduces cost and dust and maintains throughput. Given Data / Assumptions: Large tonnages must be moved horizontally or on gentle inclines. Continuous, reliable transport is preferred. Dust control and energy efficiency are important. Concept / Approach: Belt conveyors carry bulk materials over long distances with steady flow, relatively low power per tonne-km, and good containment with covers. Bucket conveyors (bucket elevators) are used primarily for vertical lifts between levels, not for long horizontal runs. Step-by-Step Solution: Identify transport task (horizontal transfer of raw meal, clinker, or cement).Match to equipment capabilities: belts for distance; buckets for vertical elevation; trucks/forklifts for discrete palletized loads; cranes for heavy discrete lifts.Select belt conveyor as the primary solution for most interbuilding and in-plant horizontal movements. Verification / Alternative check: Throughput calculations and power estimates show belts achieve target flow with lower unit cost than intermittent vehicles. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Bucket conveyors suit vertical elevation; forklifts and overhead cranes handle discrete items, not continuous bulk flow; pallet jacks are manual aids for pallets only. Common Pitfalls: Undersizing belt width or speed, ignoring transfer point dust control, and poor idler alignment can increase spillage and energy use. Final Answer: Belt conveyor

Question 20

Choosing incentive plans for maintenance teams For an industrial maintenance section working in crews, which incentive plan is usually most suitable?

Accepted Answer

Introduction / Context: Maintenance work is often performed by teams (mechanical, electrical, instrumentation) where output is joint and interdependent. Incentives must therefore reflect team accomplishment to avoid unhealthy competition. Given Data / Assumptions: Jobs require coordination (e.g., shutdowns, overhauls). Individual output is hard to isolate fairly. Reliability, uptime, and response time are key performance indicators. Concept / Approach: Group incentive plans reward the crew for shared outcomes (e.g., mean time to repair, plant availability, schedule adherence). This aligns incentives with the collaborative nature of maintenance tasks. Step-by-Step Solution: Define measurable team metrics (uptime %, PM compliance, backlog reduction).Set targets and bonus formula tied to team performance.Track performance and distribute group incentives equitably among members. Verification / Alternative check: Compare downtime and backlog trends before and after implementing group incentives; improved KPIs indicate effectiveness. Why Other Options Are Wrong: Piece rate suits repetitive individual tasks, not variable maintenance work. Company-wide profit sharing dilutes line-of-sight. Method simplification improves productivity but is not an incentive plan. Claiming no incentives are suitable ignores proven maintenance programs. Common Pitfalls: Poorly chosen metrics that encourage shortcuts; failing to account for uncontrollable outages; inequitable distribution causing morale issues. Final Answer: Group incentive plan

Industrial Engineering and Production Management Questions