1 / 26

IENG 471 - Lecture 15

IENG 471 - Lecture 15. Layout Planning – Systematic Layout Planning & Intro to Mathematical Layout Improvement. Warehousing Terms - Review. SKU – Stock Keeping Unit Product in (packaged) form for warehouse operations. Value-Added A modification to the product to obtain business

schlegel
Download Presentation

IENG 471 - Lecture 15

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. IENG 471 - Lecture 15 Layout Planning – Systematic Layout Planning & Intro to Mathematical Layout Improvement IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  2. Warehousing Terms - Review • SKU – Stock Keeping Unit • Product in (packaged) form for warehouse operations. • Value-Added • A modification to the product to obtain business (a product enhancementfrom the customer’s perspective or an enhancement to the customer’s experience in getting the item). • Cross-Docking • Transforming incoming product to outgoing product without moving the product to production or storage. • Slotting • Selecting the location of SKUs in the storage zones. Goal is to optimize (reduce) pick times across all SKUs within a zone. • Forward Pick Area • An area housing fast-moving/frequently-picked items between the shipping and storage areas for quick order fulfillment. IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  3. Layout Alternatives - Strategies • Fixed Position Layout • (Difficult-to-move Products) • Process Layout • (Job Shop) • Product Layout • (Mass Production Line) • Group Technology Layout • (Product Family) IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  4. Layout Alternatives: Fixed Pos. IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  5. Layout Alternatives: Process IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  6. Layout Alternatives: Product IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  7. Layout Alternatives: GT / Family IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  8. Product, Process & Schedule Data: BOM Routing/Assembly Chrt Operations Process Chart Precedence Diagram Scrap/Reject Rates Equipment Fractions Material Handling Unit Loads Storage Systems Efficiencies Transportation Systems Flow, Activity & Space Data: Group Technology From – To Chart Relationship Chart Dept Footprint & Aisle Space Personnel Space Parking Lot Restroom/Locker room Food Prep/Cafeteria ADA Compliance Order Data Profile Multiple Analysis Profiles How to get from data to design? IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  9. Muther: Systematic Layout Plan • SLP • Benefit is methodical consideration of issues • Can work the process manually or with computer aides • “Roadmap” for the process is good for communication • Adds the following stages: • Analysis • Search • Evaluation • Engineering Design Process! IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  10. Relationship Chart - Qualitative IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  11. Converting Closeness to Affinity IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  12. From – To Chart Example IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  13. From – To Chart to Flow • Review: flow volume in chart • Above diagonal is forward flow • Below diagonal is back-track flow • Combine both flows to represent volume of interactions, then Pareto! • Qualitative Flow • Quantitative Flow IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  14. Converting Quantitative Flow to Affinity ~5% ~10% ~15% ~20% IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  15. Converting Both to Final Affinity IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  16. Review: Conversion Steps • Convert Flows to Affinities • Qualitative converts directly to A E I O U X • Quantitative converts to A E I O U X via Pareto analysis of flow volume • Combine Flow Affinities Numerically • A = 4, E = 3, I = 2, O = 1, U = 0, X = negative value • Quantitative flow may be multiplied by a weighting factor • Sum Quantitative & Qualitative • Convert to Final Affinities • Pareto analysis of numeric affinities to get A E I O U X • Add: Check Final Affinities for Political Correctness • Communication feedback to involved parties IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  17. Converting Flow to Affinity • Strength of relationship is shown graphically • Number of lines similar to rubber bands holding depts together • Spring symbol to push X relations apart IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  18. Converting Flow to Affinity IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  19. Converting Flow to Affinity Lay the Affinity Diagram over a site plan to get better idea of layout IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  20. Improvement: Size of Departments • Some experts suggest modification: • Use circles instead of flow symbols • Scale circles to equate with the estimated size of the departments • Use rectangular, sized blocks instead of circles – improves input to computer layout methods • Computer packages are still being developed … IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  21. Layout Models – Mathematical Objective Functions • Mathematical models can be constructed to measure a design, and help to quantify when it has been improved • Like many mathematical models of physical systems, part of the “art” is knowing what assumptions are made in a model, and when these assumptions are “reasonably met” • The “best” models are not always the most complex – in fact many “comprehensive” mathematical models become intractable or take too long for computation when scaled up to a “realistically–sized” problem • Frequently, meeting the data collection (and verification) requirements for many mathematical problems is very difficult • However, as the cost of automated data collection and storage drops, and has computational power increases (hardware speeds and parallel programming techniques improve), both mathematical models and simulations become more attractive – more tools for the toolbox! IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  22. Layout Models – Mathematical Objective Functions • Assume we have these variables defined for n departments: • iis an index to the “FROM” department in a pair of departments • j is an index to the “TO” department in a related pair • Thusiand j could be the row/column indices for a From/To Chart • fij is the unit load FLOW from the i thto the j thdepartment • Thus fijis the cell entry in the From/To Chart (matrix) • cij is the COST to transport a unit load from the i thto the j thdept • dij is the travel DISTANCE from the i thto the j thdepartment • aij is the ADJACENCY of the i thand j thdepartment pair, which is defined to be: • 1 if the i thand j thdepartments share a common edge (border) – or • 0 if the departments have no common edge or only touch at a point IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  23. Layout Models – Mathematical Objective Functions • Minimize the transportation cost: • Maximize the flow-weighted adjacency of departments: • Evaluate flow weighted layout efficiency (relative measure): IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  24. Example – Mathematical Objective Function • Assume the From/To matrix (below) • … and the department layout(s) (below): • then the Flow-Weighted Adjacency score(s) would be: 200(1)+250(1)+300(1)+500(1)–20(1)+350(0)+10(1)+175(1)+100(0) = 1415 200(1)+250(1)+300(1)+500(1)–20(0)+350(0)+10(1)+175(1)+100(0) = 1435 200(1)+250(0)+300(1)+500(1)–20(0)+350(1)+10(0)+175(1)+100(1) = 1625 IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  25. Criticisms and Resources • Frequently, improvements in the simpler mathematical objective functions result in long, “snake-y” department shapes • Not always physically possible • Adjusting the objective function to penalize snake-y results in more complex objective functions • Data representations become more complex, too – and can increase computation time disproportionately • The simple, transportation cost function assumes we move from/to the center “point” of the departments • Isn’t really accurate for real departments (especially large sized) • Becomes even less true when the departments get more snake-y • Text Chapter 10 presents more mathematical models–try some! • The software tends to be research prototypes, but can be fun to try! IENG 471 Facilities Planning

  26. Questions & Issues • HW 8 & 9 are related • Keep same two person teams for both • Turn in both on EP paper on 07 NOV. • Class time is for project (after Exam II) • Review & HW solutions 07 - 09 NOV. • Exam II scheduled for 14 NOV. IENG 471 Facilities Planning

More Related