MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS Session 9 FACILITY LAYOUT E. Gutierrez-Miravete Spring 2001.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Social network partition Presenter: Xiaofei Cao Partick Berg.
Advertisements

Logistics Network Configuration
10-1 Chapter 10 Facilities Layout and Location McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2005 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
Support Vector Machines
Activity relationship analysis
8–1. 8–2 Chapter Eight Copyright © 2014 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Supply Chain Location Decisions Chapter 11 Copyright ©2013 Pearson Education, Inc. publishing as Prentice Hall
Coupling-Aware Length-Ratio- Matching Routing for Capacitor Arrays in Analog Integrated Circuits Kuan-Hsien Ho, Hung-Chih Ou, Yao-Wen Chang and Hui-Fang.
MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS Session 13 MATERIAL HANDLING SYSTEMS E. Gutierrez-Miravete Spring 2001.
Chapter 9 Graph algorithms. Sample Graph Problems Path problems. Connectedness problems. Spanning tree problems.
MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS Session 6 SCHEDULING E
MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS Session 14 WAREHOUSING E. Gutierrez-Miravete Spring 2001.
Randomized Planning for Short Inspection Paths Tim Danner Lydia E. Kavraki Department of Computer Science Rice University.
Utrecht, february 22, 2002 Applications of Tree Decompositions Stan van Hoesel KE-FdEWB Universiteit Maastricht
Facility Layout Facility Layout Facility Layout decisions translate the broader decisions about a firm’s strategy such as competitive priorities, process,
Tata Letak Fasilitas Manufaktur D0394 Perancangan Sistem Manufaktur Kuliah Ke XXI - XXII.
Facility Layout 1. General Observations Facility Planning includes planning for: (1) the number of facilities and general facility type, (2) facility.
COMPUTERIZED METHODS OF LAYOUT DESIGN
WINTER 2012IE 368. FACILITY DESIGN AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT 1 IE 368: FACILITY DESIGN AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT Lecture Notes #6 Computerized Methodologies.
Operations Management Layout Strategy
WINTER 2012IE 368. FACILITY DESIGN AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT 1 IE 368: FACILITY DESIGN AND OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT Lecture Notes #5 Introduction to Facilities.
VLSI Physical Design: From Graph Partitioning to Timing Closure Chapter 5: Global Routing © KLMH Lienig 1 FLUTE: Fast Lookup Table Based RSMT Algorithm.
Domain decomposition in parallel computing Ashok Srinivasan Florida State University COT 5410 – Spring 2004.
GROUP MEMBERS Ahsen Ali 11-IE-06 Mohsin Tariq 11-IE-22
Network Optimization Models
Facilities Layout and Location The three most important criteria in locating a factory: Location! Location! Location!
Introduction Basic Concepts and Definitions
IENG 471 Facilities Planning
ENCI 303 Lecture PS-19 Optimization 2
FACILITY LAYOUT PROBLEM
Chapter 13 Area Allocation. Objectives After reading the chapter and reviewing the materials presented the students will be able to: Understand the concept.
Facility Design-Week 8 BASIC ALGORITHMS FOR THE LAYOUT PROBLEM
Facility Layout 6 MULTIPLE, Other algorithms, Department Shapes.
MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS Session 12 MACHINE SETUP AND OPERATION SEQUENCING E. Gutierrez-Miravete Spring 2001.
INITIAL LAYOUT CONSTRUCTION Preliminaries –From-To Chart / Flow-Between Chart –REL Chart –Layout Scores Traditional Layout Construction Manual CORELAP.
Mba Facility Layout u Basic layouts u Some layout techniques u Assembly line balancing u Service Layout.
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Technical Note 5 Facility Layout.
Computerized Block Layout Algorithms: BLOCPLAN, MULTIPLE
McGraw-Hill/Irwin © 2006 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., All Rights Reserved. 1.
MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS Session 8 CELLULAR MANUFACTURING GROUP TECHNOLOGY E. Gutierrez-Miravete Spring 2001.
Review: Tree search Initialize the frontier using the starting state While the frontier is not empty – Choose a frontier node to expand according to search.
1 Network Models Transportation Problem (TP) Distributing any commodity from any group of supply centers, called sources, to any group of receiving.
Basic Algorithms and Software for the Layout Problem
© The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc., Technical Note 5 Facility Layout.
Facilities design. Main Topics Discrete vs. Continuous Flow and Repetitive Manufacturing Process vs. Product-focused designs and the other currently used.
Chapter 6 Facilities Layout.
Domain decomposition in parallel computing Ashok Srinivasan Florida State University.
Facility Layout 3 Non-computerized Block Layouts:
Chapter # 10 Quantitative Facilities Planning Models
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
FACILITIES LAYOUTS Facilities layout implies Layout design for equipment, machinery, & furnishings, production, support & personnel areas A layout is affected.
Facility Design Issues. Back to the course objectives... Forecasting Strategic Planning Aggregate Production Planning Disaggregation Production Scheduling.
Facility Layout Part b.
House of quality for design rule priority Lee, Gun Ho Dept. of Industrial/Information Systems, Soongsil University, Seoul Korea.
CORRELATION-REGULATION ANALYSIS Томский политехнический университет.
Part 3.
Manufacturing Processes
McGraw-Hill/Irwin ©2009 The McGraw-Hill Companies, All Rights Reserved
Design and Analysis of Algorithm
Haim Kaplan and Uri Zwick
Facility Layout McGraw-Hill/Irwin.
Facility Layout Chapter 6A.
FACILITY LAYOUT Facility layout means:
1.3 Modeling with exponentially many constr.
1 Operations Management Layout Strategy. 2 What is Facility Layout Location or arrangement of everything within & around buildings Determines long-run.
Chapter 6A Facility Layout 2.
1.3 Modeling with exponentially many constr.
Facilities Planning and Design Course code:
Fast Min-Register Retiming Through Binary Max-Flow
FLUTE: Fast Lookup Table Based RSMT Algorithm for VLSI Design
Presentation transcript:

MODELING AND ANALYSIS OF MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS Session 9 FACILITY LAYOUT E. Gutierrez-Miravete Spring 2001

FACILITY LAYOUT THE ARRANGEMENT OF MANUFACTURING RESOURCES IN A PLANT

COMMENTS WHICH RESOURCES SHOULD BE ADJACENT? GOALGOAL: TO PRODUCE A BLOCK PLAN SHOWING THE RELATIVE POSITIONING OF ALL DEPARTMENTS CAN CAD HELP?

CRITERIA FOR BLOCK PLAN EVALUATION MINIMIZATION OF MATERIAL HANDLING COST (FREQUENCY AND LENGTH OF MOVES) MINIMIZATION OF THROUGHPUT AND WIP SIMPLIFICATION OF MATERIAL CONTROL AND SCHEDULING REDUCTION IN AISLE SPACE

SOLVING THE FACILITY LAYOUT PROBLEM OFTEN VIA DETERMINISTIC MODELS DESIRABLE FEATURES OF SOLUTIONS FLEXIBILITY MODULARITY MAINTAINABILITY RELIABILITY EMPLOYEE MORALE

THE SPINE APPROACH TO FACILITY DESIGN SPINE: CENTRAL CORE OR PASSAGEWAY TO CONDUCT MATERIAL FLOW DEPARTMENTS EXPAND OUT FROM CENTRAL CORE UTILITIES: CARRIED OVERHEAD MATERIAL STORAGE: ALONG SPINE

FACILITY LAYOUT PROBLEM AND QUESTIONS HOW TO ASSIGN EACH DEPARTMENT TO A SPECIFIC LOCATION IN THE FACILITY? IS THERE A DOMINANT FLOW PATTERN IN THE PROCESS? HOW CAN FLOW DOMINANCE BE MEASURED?

FLOW DOMINANCE CONSIDER DEPARTMENTS i AND j OUT OF A SET M HANDLING SYSTEM COST h ij FLOW f ij

FLOW COST PARAMETER WEIGHTS FOR MATERIAL FLOW BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS i AND j (FLOW COST PARAMETER) w ij = f ij h ij

STATISTICS OF w ij AVERAGE OF COST FLOW PARAMETER w ave =  i  j w ij /M 2 STANDARD DEVIATION OF COST FLOW PARAMETER (FLOW DOMINANCE MEASURE)  = [  i  j (w ij 2 - M 2 w ave 2 )/(M 2 -1)] 1/2

FLOW DOMINANCE MEASURE f =  / w ave UPPER BOUND ( ONE w ij DOMINATES) LOWER BOUND (ALL w i j ARE EQUAL) See Eqns 7.3, Table 7.1 and Example 7.1

LAYOUT PROBLEMS VS LOCATION PROBLEMS LAYOUT: MACHINES OCCUPY SPACE LOCATION: MACHINES ARE POINTS

DISTANCE METRICS (Fig. 7.3) RECTILINEAR DISTANCE EUCLIDEAN DISTANCE l p NORM d ij = [ |x i - x j | p + |y i - y j | p ] 1/p ADJACENCY INDICATOR  ij

SYSTEMATIC LAYOUT PLANNING

STEPS IN SYSTEMATIC LAYOUT PLANNING (Fig 7.4) STEP 0: DATA COLLECTION STEP 1: FLOW ANALYSIS STEP 2: QUALITATIVE ASPECTS STEP3: RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM STEP 4: SPACE REQUIREMENTS STEP 5: SPACE AVAILABILITY STEP 6: SPACE RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM STEPS 7&8: MODIFYING CONSIDERATIONS & LIMITATIONS STEP 9: EVALUATION

STEP 0: DATA COLLECTION P RODUCT (WHAT) Q UANTITY (HOW MUCH) R OUTING (HOW) S UPPORT SERVICES (WITH WHAT) T IMING/TRANSPORT (WHEN)

S0: DATA COLLECTION PARETO CHARTS (Fig 7.5) WHAT PERCENT OF ITEMS CONSTITUTE THE BULK OF DEMAND? WHAT ARE OBJECTIVE ESTIMATES OF SPACE REQUIREMENTS?

STEP 1: FLOW ANALYSIS TO SPECIFY PHYSICAL WORKCENTERS WHICH WILL BE SPATIALLY ARRANGED DEPARTMENT DEFINITIONS BASED AROUND PRODUCTS, PROCESSES OR CELLS OF SIMILAR PARTS FLOW VOLUMES AND PATTERNS ESTABLISHED

S1: FLOW ANALYSIS OPERATION PROCESS CHARTS (Fig 7.6) –MAJOR OPERATIONS –INSPECTIONS –MOVES –STORAGES FLOW PROCESS CHARTS (Fig 7.7) FLOW PATTERNS BETWEEN DEPARTMENTS (Figs 7.8, 7.9, 7.10)

S1: FLOW ANALYSIS QUANTITATIVE FLOW DATA VIA FROM-TO CHARTS (See Table 7.2) HOW CAN THE TOTAL FLOW VOLUME BETWEEN WORKCENTERS BE OBTAINED? HOW CAN THE TOTAL COST BE OBTAINED?

S1: FLOW ANALYSIS COST OF MATERIAL MOVEMENT FROM WORKCENTER i TO j c ij = w ij d ij TOTAL COST C =  i  j c ij

S1: FLOW ANALYSIS. FROM-TO CHARTS (Table 7.2) FLOW VOLUMES MOVEMENT COST DISTANCE BETWEEN WORKCENTERS

S1: FLOW ANALYSIS. BASIC FLOW PATTERNS STRAIGHT-LINE U-SHAPED S-SHAPED W-SHAPED Fig 7.8

S1: FLOW ANALYSIS. FLOW PATTERNS PLANT STRAIGHT SPINE- DEPARTMENT U PATTERN (Fig 7.9) PLANT U SPINE - DEPARTMENT U ASSEMBLY FLOW PATTERNS (Fig 7.10) KEY: DESIGN A RATIONAL FLOW PATTERN THAT AVOIDS CONFUSION AND INTERFERENCE

STEP 2: QUALITATIVE CONSIDERATIONS OFTEN, IMPORTANT INFORMATION CAN NOT BE QUANTIFIED. –RECEIVING AND SHIPING NEEDING TO SHARE COMMON FACILITIES –PURCHASING AND ENGINEERING NEEDING TO COMMUNICATE –DELICATE TESTING NEEDING TO BE FAR FROM HEAVY VIBRATION

S2: QUALITATIVE DATA REL CHARTS (Fig 7.11; Table 7.2) RATE THE DEGREE OF DESIRABILITY OF LOCATING TWO DEPARTMENTS ADJACENT (A,E,I,O,U,X)

STEP 3: RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM A RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM COMBINES QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE INFORMATION TO INITIATE THE DETERMINATION OF RELATIVE LOCATION OF FACILITIES (Fig 7.12)

Fig S&R XT PS AT PC IC

S3: RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM 1.- DEPARTMENTS REPRESENTED BY SQUARE TEMPLATES 2.- TEMPLATES ARRANGED IN LOGICAL ORDER 3.- TEMPLATES CONNECTED BY LINES COMMUNICATING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DEPARTMENT PAIRS 4.- ITERATE

S3: RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM TWO BASIC STEPS IN HEURISTICS –CONSTRUCTION : DETERMINING THE INITIAL ARRANGEMENT OF TEMPLATES –IMPROVEMENT : SEARCH FOR BETTER ARRANGEMENTS THAN THE INITIAL CONSTRUCTION

S3: REL DIAGRAM. CLOSENESS RATING ADJACENCY FUNCTION V ij TOTAL CLOSENESS RATING ( TCR ) TCR i =  j V ij WHAT IS THE MEANING OF A LARGE VALUE OF TCR i ? WHERE SHOULD A DEPARTMENT WITH LARGE TCR i BE LOCATED?

S3: REL DIAGRAM. CONSTRUCTION 1.- CALCULATE TCRi FOR ALL DEPARTMENTS AND RANK FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST 2.- PLACE HIGHEST RANKED DEPARTMENT AT CENTER 3.- ADD DEPARTMENTS ITERATIVELY SUCH THAT THE ADJACENCY SCORE (OR DISTANCE) IS MAXIMAL/MINIMAL See Example 7.2 and Fig. 7.13

S3: REL DIAGRAM. IMPROVEMENT IS THE INITIAL CONSTRUCTION OPTIMAL? WHAT IS A k-OPT SOLUTION? CRAFT : COMPUTER BASED IMPROVEMENT PROCEDURE –STEEPEST DESCENT PAIRWISE EXCHANGE –PAIRS ARE SWITCHED WHICH LEAD TO THE LARGEST IMPROVEMENT

S3: REL DIAGRAM. IMPROVEMENT PROSPECTIVE DEPARTMENTS FORM A GRID OF EQUAL SIZED SQUARES A FEASIBLE SOLUTION TO THE LAYOUT PROBLEM IS THE ASSIGNMENT OF GRID SQUARES TO DEPARTMENTS (THE a VECTOR) a = (a1,a2,a3,...,aM)

S3: REL DIAGRAM. IMPROVEMENT NOW TRY EXCHANGING DEPARTMENTS u AND v. WHAT IS THE COST INVOLVED IN GOING FROM LAYOUT a TO a ’?  C uv ( a ) = C( a ) - C( a ’) WHAT IS THE CHANGE IN ADJACENCY MEASURE? (Example 7.3 and Fig. 7.14)

STEP 4: SPACE REQUIREMENTS USE OF INDUSTRIAL STANDARDS ROUGH SKETCHES + LOCAL STANDARDS USE OF CURRENT SPACE NEEDS USE OF X SQUARE FEET PER UNIT PRODUCED

STEP 5: SPACE AVAILABILITY EXISTING FACILITY NEW FACILITY GOAL: FIND THE MINIMUM SPACE REQUIRED

STEP 6: SPACE RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM DEPARTMENTS OFTEN HAVE DIFFERENT SIZES! A SPACE RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM REPLACES THE EQUAL SIZE TEMPLATES OF A RELATIONSHIP DIAGRAM WITH TEMPLATES OF SIZE PROPORTIONAL TO ACTUAL SPACE REQUIREMENTS (Fig 7.15; Table 7.3)

S 6: SWITCHES IN A SRD IF DEPARTMENTS ARE OF EQUAL SIZE, SWAP GRID SQUARES IF DEPARTMENTS ARE ADJACENT AND OF DIFFERENT SIZE, SELECT ENOUGH GRID SQUARES FROM LARGE DEPT FARTEST FROM SMALL ONE, THEN MOVE SMALL DEPT INTO SELECTED SQUARES (Fig 7.16)

STEPS 7 & 8: MODIFYING CONSIDERATIONS AND LIMITATIONS SITE-SPECIFIC AND OPERATION-SPECIFIC CONDITIONS MAY AFFECT THE LAYOUT EXAMPLES

STEP 9: EVALUATION AVAILABLE ALTERNATIVES MUST BE COMPARED –PICTORIAL DISPLAYS W/SUPERIMPOSED FLOWS –ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES –COSTS –QUALITATIVE FACTOR RATINGS

QUADRATIC ASSIGNMENT PROBLEM APPROACH

OBJECTIVE OF QAP FIND THE MINIMUM COST ASSIGNMENT OF M DEPARTMENTS TO M LOCATIONS WHERE THE COST TO ASSIGN DEPARTMENT i TO LOCATION k AND DEPARTMENT j TO LOCATION l IS c ijkl

OBJECTIVE min  i  j  k  l c ijkl x ik x jl with  i x ik = 1 for all locations and  k x ik = 1 for all depts. NOTE: PROBLEM IS HARD TO SOLVE. IT’S BETTER TO USE HEURISTICS (See Eqns 7.13, 7.14)

PAIRWISE EXCHANGE MEASURE OF IMPORTANCE: TOTAL FLOW START WITH A SOLUTION PROCEED TO SWITCH PAIRS OF DEPARTMENTS THAT IMPROVE TOTAL FLOW UNTIL NO IMPROVING SWITCHES EXIST Warning: No guarantees! (Fig. 7.17, Table 7.4)

VNZ HEURISTIC RANK DEPARTMENTS BY THEIR COST (INSTEAD OF THEIR CLOSENESS) SELECT THE TWO MOST IMPORTANT DEPARTMENTS CONSIDER SEQUENTIALLY ALL POSSIBLE EXCHANGES INVOLVING THE TWO DEPARTMENTS

VNZ HEURISTIC MAKE TWO PASSES THROUGH THE PAIRS OF DEPARTMENTS MAKING SWITCHES WHENEVER IMPROVEMENT IS ENCOUNTERED See Example 7.4

BRANCH AND BOUND Francis & White method Steps (see p. 230) See Example 7.5 and Fig. 7.18

GRAPH THEORETIC APPROACH BOTH QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DATA NEEDED HOW ABOUT MAXIMIZING THE ADJACENCY SCORE? PHYSICAL MAP OF DEPARTMENTS = PLANAR GRAPH G(N,A) PLANAR GRAPHS HAVE DUALS –NODES>REGIONS - ARCS>BOUNDARIES See Fig. 7.19

GRAPH PROPERTIES 1.- THE DUAL OF A PLANAR GRAPH IS PLANAR 2.- THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ARCS IN A PLANAR GRAPH IS 3M A MAXIMALLY PLANAR GRAPH HAS 2M-4 FACES AND EACH FACE IS TRIANGULAR

MAXIMALLY PLANAR WEIGHTED GRAPH A MAXIMALLY PLANAR WEIGHTED GRAPH (MPWG) IS A MPG WHOSE SUM OF ARC WEIGHTS IS AT LEAST AS LARGE AS THE SUM FOR ALL OTHER MPG’S MAXIMIZING THE ADJACENCY SCORE IS EQUIVALENT TO FINDING A MPWG

GRAPH THEORY APPROACH 1.- FIND A MPWG BASED ON REL CHART WEIGHTS. ADD A PSEUDO- DEPARTMENT VERTEX TO FORM THE BUILDING EXTERIOR. 2.- FIND THE DUAL OF THE MPWG 3.- CONVERT THE DUAL INTO A BLOCK PLAN

FINDING THE MPWG GOAL: FIND A MPWG IN WHICH NODES ARE DEPARTMENTS AND EDGE WEIGHTS ADJACENCY DESIRABILITY CONSTRUCTION (See Example 7.6 and Figs. 7.21, 7.22) EDGE REPLACEMENT (Fig. 7.23) VERTEX RELOCATION (Fig. 7.24)

WHAT TO DO WITH LARGE FACILITIES? Strategy: Decompose into nearly independent entities. FORMING SUBGROUPS OF DEPARTMENTS WITH HIGH INTERACTION GRAPHS AND SUBGRAPHS

NET AISLE AND DEPARTMENT LAYOUT ONCE BASIC FLOW PLAN IS FORMULATED, DETAILED FLOW PATTERNS MUST BE ESTABLISHED NEED TO DETERMINE AISLES AND I/O LOCATIONS TRAVEL RESTRICTED TO AISLES AND FROM OUTPUT(1) TO INPUT(2) FLOW WILL FOLLOW SHORTEST PATHS

MONTREUIL NET LAYOUT MODEL INPUTS: RELATIVE DEPT. LOCATIONS, ADJACENCIES, AISLE CORRIDORS, DEPT. DIMENSION BOUNDS OUTPUTS: AISLE WIDTHS, COORDINATES OF DEPT. BOUNDARIES AND I/O LOCATIONS Example 7.7; Tables 7.5, 7.6 and Fig 7.25

LOCATING NEW FACILITIES HOW ABOUT ADDING NEW ENTITIES TO AN EXISTING FACILITY? TWO POSSIBILITIES –SINGLE ENTITY ADDITION –MULTIPLE ENTITY ADDITION

SINGLE FACILITY LOCATION LOCATIONS OF EXISTING FACILITIES ARE KNOWN ( P i ) COST PARAMETERS ( w i ) FOR NEW MACHINE ARE KNOWN PROBLEM STATEMENT min f(x,y) =  i w i d(X,P i )

SINGLE FACILITY LOCATION IF LINEAR DISTANCE IS USED f(x,y) BECOMES SEPARABLE INTO f1(x) AND f2(y) IF THERE ARE NO CONSTRAINS, THE MEDIAN LOCATION SOLVES THE PROBLEM Example 7.8; Fig. 7.26

SINGLE FACILITY LOCATION WHAT TO DO WHEN THE MEDIAN LOCATION IS NOT FEASIBLE? USE OF ISOCOST (CONTOUR) LINES Example 7.9; Fig. 7.27

MULTIFACILITY LOCATION WHAT TO DO WHEN SEVERAL MACHINES ARE TO BE ADDED? See Sect