Reconfigurable layout problem

This paper addresses the reconfigurable layout problem, which differs from traditional, robust and dynamic layout problems mainly in two aspects: first, it assumes that production data are available only for the current and upcoming production period. Second, it considers queuing performance measures such as work in progress inventory and product lead time in the objective function of the layout problem. A process to solve the reconfigurable layout problem is proposed. A previously developed, open queuing network-based analytical model, called Manufacturing system Performance Analyser, is used to estimate the stochastic performance measures of a layout. These are combined with deterministic performance measures such as material handling cost to determine the layout for the next period. A case study is used to illustrate the process of solving the reconfigurable layout problem

Design and performance evaluation of Agile manufacturing systems

In this paper, we present a framework for determining the type of layout to use in a manufacturing environment characterized by constantly changing product volumes and mix. Much of the production equipment is assumed to be relatively light weight and therefore their location can be easily changed to suit the current production environment. The framework allows several alternate layouts to be developed and evaluated with respect to deterministic (material flow and machine relocation) criteria as well as stochastic (queuing) criteria

Simulation based performance comparison of AVS/RS and AS/RS

In this study, we compare performance of two material handling systems (MHSs) - autonomous vehicle storage and retrieval system (AVS/RS) and traditional, crane-based, automated storage and retrieval system (CBAS/RS) - based on their pre-defined performance measures. AVS/RS is a new technology for unit-load (UL) automated storage system. This new technology is implemented at scores of facilities in Europe. The alternative of this technology is CBAS/RS. First, the two MHSs are simulated using a commercial software - ARENA 12.0. Then, 28 types of experiments are completed on the two MHSs based on rack configurations of the warehouses and number of storage and retrieval (S/R) devices. Three performance measures are considered for comparison purposes which are average flow time, S/R device average utilization, and cost. An examination of the results, specifically the cost and utilization of the S/R devices, suggests that the AVS/RS performs better than the AS/RS. The data that is used in the study comes from a company utilizes that CBAVS/RS in France