1. Project and Production Management Module 7 Facility Location and Layout Prof Arun Kanda & Prof S.G. Deshmukh, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology, Delhi module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit continueexitcontinue

2. MODULE 7: Facility Location and Layout 1. Issues in Location of FacilitiesIssues in Location of Facilities 2. Mathematical Models for Facility LocationMathematical Models for Facility Location 3. Layout PlanningLayout Planning 4. Computerised Layout PlanningComputerised Layout Planning 5. Product LayoutsProduct Layouts 6. Illustrative ExamplesIllustrative Examples 7. Self Evaluation QuizSelf Evaluation Quiz 8. Problems for Practice 9. Further explorationFurther exploration module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exitexit

3. 1. Issues in location of Facilities module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

4. A Case Study A Decision Model for a Multiple Objective Plant Location Problem Prem Vrat And Arun Kanda INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT, July 1976, Page 27-33 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

5. OBJECTIVE OF LOCATION To set up a straw board plant (Packaging material) from industrial waste Plant Sources of Industrial waste Industries needing packaging material module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

6. RELEVANT FACTORS FOR PLANT LOCATION module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

7. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

8. TRIANGULAR MATRIX module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

9. APPLYING PARETO PRINCIPLE module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

10. SUMMARY module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

11. DECISION MATRIX FOR ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

12. NORMAILZATION I 80 P 20 Points Capital Cost LCH module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

13. NORMALIZATION II 80 20 Points Capital Cost LL’H DA B C1C1 C2C2 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

14. NORMALIZATION III 80 20 Points Labour Attitudes | Restive | Satisfactory Cooperative | 60 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

15. NORMALIZATION IV On...On... O2O2 O1O1 Points X1X1 X 2 - - - - - -XnXn module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

16. 2. Mathematical Models for Facility Location module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

17. SINGLE FACILITY LOCATION New lathe in a job shop Tool crib in a factory New warehouse Hospital, fire station, police station New classroom building on a college campus New airfield for a number of bases Component in an electrical network New appliance in a kitchen Copying machine in a library New component on a control panel module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

18. PROBLEM STATEMENT m existing facilities at locations P 1 (a 1,b 1 ), P 2 (a 2,b 2 ) … P m (a m,b m ) New facility is to be located at point X (x,y) d(X,P i ) = appropriately defined distance between X and P i Euclidean, Rectilinear, Squared Euclidean Generalized distance, Network The objective is to determine the location X so as to minimize transportation related costs Sum (i=1,n) w i d(X,P i ), where w i is the weight associated with the ith existing facility (product of Cost/distance & the expected number of annual trips between X and P i ) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

19. SINGLE FACILITY LOCATION P 1 (w 1 ) P 2 (w 2 ) P 3 (w 3 ) P n-1 (w n-1 ) P n (w n ) X d(X,P 1 ) d(X,P 2 ) d(X,P 3 ) d(X,P n-1 ) d(X,P n ) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

20. COMMONLY USED DISTANCES Rectilinear: | (x-ai) | +| (y-bi)| Euclidean : [ (x-ai) 2 + (y-bi) 2 ] 1/2 Squared Euclidean: [(x-ai) 2 +(y-ai) 2 ] Other, Network X (x,y) Pi (ai,bi) X (x,y) Pi (ai,bi) X (x,y) Pi(ai,bi) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

21. RECTILINEAR DISTANCES Z = Total cost = Sum (i =1,n) [ wi | (x-ai) + (y-bi)|] = Sum (i=1,n) [wi |(x-ai)| + wi |(y-bi)| ] = Sum (i=1,n) wi |(x-ai)| + Sum (i=1,n) wi |(y-bi)| = f 1 (x) + f 2 (y) Thus to minimize Z we need to minimize f 1 (x) and f 2 (y) independently. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

22. EXAMPLE 1 (RECTILINEAR DISTANCE CASE) A service facility to serve five offices located at (0,0), (3,16),(18,2) (8,18) and (20,2) is to be set up. The number of cars transported per day between the new service facility and the offices equal 5, 22, 41, 60 and 34 respectively. What location for the service facility will minimize the distance cars are transported per day? module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

23. SOLUTION (X- COORDINATE) x* = 8 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

24. SOLUTION (Y- COORDINATE) y* = 16 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

25. EXAMPLE 2 SQUARED EUCLIDEAN CASE CENTROID LOCATION x* = Σ wi ai /Σ wi =( 0 x5 + 3x22 + 18x41 + 8x60 + 20x34)/162 = 12.12 y* = Σ wibi/Σ wi = (0x5 + 16x22 + 2x41 + 18x60 + 2x34)/162 = 9.77 (Compare with the median location of (8,16) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

26. R2R2 R1R1 RmRm M1M1 M2M2 MnMn 11 22 mm  m+1  m+2  m+n P Solution to the euclidean distance location problem module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

27. MINIMAX PROBLEMS * For the location of emergency facilities our objective would be to minimize the maximum distance module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

28. COST CONTOURS Increasing Cost Cost Contours help identify alternative feasible locations module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

29. SUMMARY Decision Matrix approach to handle multiple objectives in Plant Location (problem of choosing the best from options) Single Facility Location Models Rectilinear distance Squared Euclidean Euclidean distance (to generate the best from infinite options) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

30. SUMAARY(CONTD) Notion of Minisum and Minimax problem (Objective depending on the context) Use of Cost Contours to accommodate practical constraints (Moving from ideal to a feasible solution) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

31. Location decisions are STRATEGIC LIABLE TO AFFECT THE ENTIRE ORGANIZATION OPERATIVE OVER LONG TIME SPANS DIFFICULT TO REVERSE CAPITAL INTENSIVE module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

32. HIERARCHY OF LOCATION PROBLEMS Location of ‘Plant’ Plant Layout ( Location of ‘Depts’) Physical Arrangements of M/cs Work Place Layout ( Location of ‘tools’ or ‘raw materials’) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

33. The term ‘FACILITY LOCATION’ emphasizes the generalized approach that handles the variety of above mentioned problems. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

34. LOCATION DECISIONS ARE DYNAMIC Owing to changing technology, competition, change of consumer tastes, decisions like NEW PLANTS EXPANSION DECENTRALIZATION PLANT SHUTDOWN ARE CONSTANTLY UNDER REVIEW module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

35. IMPORTANT FACTORS IN LOCATION MARKET RAW MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION POWER CLIMATE AND FUEL LABOUR AND WAGES LAWS AND TAXATION COMMUNITY SERVICES WATER AND WASTE GOVT. INCENTIVES module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

36. ANNUAL OPERATION EXPENSES CONSIST OF  MATERIALS  TRANSPORTATION  REAL ESTATE TAXES  FUEL COSTS  SUNDRY STATE TAXES  ELECTRIC POWER  WATER module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

37. FIXED & VARIABLE COST Annual Cost Volume of Production Location B Location A module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

38. MECHANICAL ANALOGUE FOR FINDING BEST LOCATION OF A MANUFACTURING PLANT (ALSO KNOWN AS VARIGNON’S FRAME AFTER INVENTOR) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

39. R2R2 R1R1 RmRm M1M1 M2M2 MnMn 11 22 mm  m+1  m+2  m+n P module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

40. In the absence of friction, the common knot P of (m+n) strings comes to equilibrium at least Cost location [Here we draw an analogy between Min. Potential Energy & Min. Travel Cost ] Assumptions:  R 1, R 2, ……R m Locations of Raw Material Sources  M 1,M 2 …Mn location of markets  Euclidean (Straight tine travel)  Each weight (there are m+n in all  Wi= No. of annual trips between P and that pt X (Cost per unit distance) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

41. MULTI-OBJECTIVE CONSIDERATIONS IN LOCATION DECISIONS FACTORS AFFECTING LOCATION ARE : SUBJECTIVE /OBJECTIVE (labour attitudes) (eg. Costs) INTANGIBLE /TANGIBLE INCOMMENSURATE UNITS module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

42. A Decision Matrix approach with proper evaluation of weights of factors, Normalization of scores can help in ranking alternative locations. (THIS IS DEMONSTRATED THROUGH A CASE STUDY) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

43. MULTI PLANT OPERATION - AN EXAMPLE OF PLANT ADDITION A P1P1 P2P2 B C Y X Z E D P 1 Existing plant P 2 Existing plant A,B,C,D,EWarehouses X,Y,ZPossible Locations for new plant module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

44. Owing to increase of weekly demand to 72,000 there is a capacity deficit of 25,000/wk and it is felt that a plant of capacity 25000 could be set up X,Y or Z. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

45. Problem Data module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

46. OPTIMUM PRODUCTION - DISTRIBUTION SOLUTIONS Product Cost = 192,500 Distn. Cost= 026,450 Total= 218,950 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

47. OPTIMUM PRODUCTION - DISTRIBUTION SOLUTIONS (Cont.) Product Cost = 193,750 Distn. Cost= 026,960 Total= 220,710 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

48. OPTIMUM PRODUCTION -DISTRIBUTION SOLUTIONS (Cont.) Product Cost = 192,000 Distn. Cost= 026,400 Total= 218,400* (* MINIMUM) (Demand and Capacity in thousands) hence choose plant at size Z module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

49. LOCATIONAL DYNAMICS  Suppose third plant is set up at site Z.  After some time demand drops from, 72,000 to 56,000 per week  Which plant to shut down ? Which to run at partial capacity ? (These are again location decisions) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

50. Alternatives for investigation : 1.Run all plants at partial capacity 2.SHUT DOWN P1, Use Overtime in others 3. SHUT DOWN P2, Use Overtime in others 4. SHUT DOWN Z, Use Overtime in others module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

51. Warehouse demands (A- 9000), (B-13000), (C-11,000), (D-15,000), (E-8,000) DATA module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

52. EVALUATING SHUT DOWN OPTIONS 1 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

53. EVALUATING SHUT DOWN OPTIONS(contd..) 2 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

54. EVALUATING SHUT DOWN OPTIONS (contd...) 3 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

55. EVALUATING SHUT DOWN OPTIONS (contd..) 4 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

56. EVALUATING SHUT DOWN OPTIONS (contd..) 1234 * Min Cost for Alternative 3 Hence Shut Down Plant 2 * module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

57. SUMMARY The strategic importance of location decisions Hierarchy of Location decisions Analogue model for Facility location Important factors in plant location A case study on new plant location and shut down under dynamic conditions. Multi-objective plant location case to be studied in the next lecture along with facility location models module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

58. 3. Layout Planning module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

59. OBJECTIVES IN PLANT LAYOUT 1.Minimize investment in equipment. 2.Minimize overall production time. 3.Utilize existing space most effectively. 4.Provide for employee convenience, safety and comfort. 5.Maintain flexibility of arrangement 6.Minimize Material handling cost. 7.Minimize variation in types of material handling equipment. 8.Facilitate the manufacturing process. 9.Facilitate the organizational structure module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

60. LAYOUT TYPES PRODUCT PROCESS CELLULAR (Group Technology) MIXED ADEBCFADEBCF LAYOUT BY FIXED POSITION - Ship building - Special Structures module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

61. LINKS AMONG PRODUCT, PROCESS, SCHEDULE AND LAYOUT DESIGN PRODUCT DESIGN LAYOUT DESIGN SCHEDULE DESIGN PROCESS DESIGN module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

62. PRODUCT LAYOUT 1.Smooth and logical flow lines 2.Small in process inventories. 3.Total production time/unit short. 4.Reduced material handling 5.Little operator skill, training simple 6.Simple production planning & control 7.Less space for work in transit and temporary 123n INPUTFINAL OUTPUT module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

63. PROCESS LAYOUT ADVANTAGES : A BCD F E 1. Better utilization of machines, hence fewer m/cs needed. 2. High degree of FLEXIBILITY with regard to equipment or manpower allocation for specific tasks 3. Comparatively low investment in machines required. 4. Grater job satisfaction for operator. 5. Specialized supervision is possible. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

64. PROCESS LAYOUT LIMITATIONS : A B C D E F G H 1. Since longer flow lines usually result, material handling is more expensive. 2. Production planning and control systems are more involved. 3. Total production time usually longer. 4. Large in process inventories. 5. Space and capital tied up by work in processes. 6. Because of the diversity of jobs in specialized departments, higher grades of skill are required. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

65. P - Q CHART Product Layout Combinatio n Layout Process Layout Q Quantity to be Made P (No. of Products or “VARIETY” module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

66. INPUT DATA & ACTIVITES 1. Flow of Materials2. Activity Relationship 3. Relationship Diagram 4. Space Reqd.5. Space Available 6. Space Relationship Diagram 7. Modifying Consideratio ns 9. Development Layout Alternatives 10. Evaluation SYSTEMATIC LAYOUT PLANNING (MUTHER 1961) 8. Practical Limitation Analysis Searc h Selection Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

67. Fig. 1(a) Product Layout module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

68. Operation Inspection Storage module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

69. 5 Raw mtl. 3 1 11 Sa w LatheDrillMill 7 11 9 Fin. goodsPackingInspection 6 4 2 6 10 15 2 3 4 54 121314 2 8 1 3 Fig 1(b) Process Layout module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

70. Table 1: EXAMPLE PROCESSING SEQUENCES FOR 3 PRODUCTS module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

71. Table 2: FLOW RATES FOR PRODUCTS CONSIDERED IN TABLE1 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

72. As such, the construction of a from-to chart is a convenient means of reducing a large volume of data into a workable from. By inspecting the data displayed in the from-to chart, the layout analyst can identify the departments having large volumes. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

73. Fig 2 From-to chart showing number of materials handling trips per day between departments. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

74. Normally, the from-to chart is used to analyze the flow in process layouts. The item movement that occurs over some specified period of time is totaled for all products and entered in the from-to chart. Figure 3 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

75. Fig 3 From-to chart showing distance between Centers of departments. As given in Figure 1(b) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

76. Fig 4 From-to chart showing distance traveled per day using the process layout as given in Fig 1(b) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

77. O 4 UUU 1 2 UU 1 2 U 1 2 U I 5 O U E 3 UUU U 1 4 A 1 UU E 3 A 1 E 5 O 4 U U U U U O 4 U U E 3 3 1 2 U U U U 1 1 1 2 U O 2 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

78. Code 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Reason Flow of materials Ease of supervision Common personnel Contact necessary Convenience RatingDefinition AEIOUXAEIOUX Absolutely Especially Important Important Ordinary closeness OK Unimportant Undesirable Fig.:5 Activity relationship chart module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

79. 587 1096 423 1 Legend A Rating E Rating I Rating O Rating U Rating X Rating Fig 6 Activity relationship diagram module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

80. Table 3: PRODUCTION SPACE REQUIREMENTS Cont….. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

81. Cont….. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

82. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

83. Table 4:Non-production activity space requirements module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

84. To the 5,503 square feet of floor for production, we must add the 1,448 square feet shown in Table 4 to give an estimate of 6,951 square feet of floor space required in total. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

85. 5 (500) 8 (200) 10 (1,750) 7 (575) 9 (500) 6 (75) 4 (350) 2 (125) 3 (125) 1 (1,0) Designing the Layout Fig 5 Space relationship diagram Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

86. 10 6 2 3 9 785 1 4 80’ 65’ The Plant Layout Problem Fig. 6 Block plan module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

87. SUMMARY Objectives in different kinds of Layout Process, Product, Mixed Systematic Layout Planning for Process Layouts From to charts to measure material handling effort Step by Step procedure for a sample layout A precursor to Computerized Layout Planning module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

88. 4. Computerised Layout Planning module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

89. CONSTRUCTION PROGRAMS CORELAP ALDEP PLANET, LSP, LAYOPT, RMA Comp I IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS CRAFT RUGR (based on graph theory) LAYOUT PLANNING PACKAGES module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

90. ALDEP Automated Layout DEsign Program Development within IBM Seehof, J.M and W.O. Evans “Automated Layout Design Program:, The Journal of Industrial Engineering, Vol 18, No. 12, 1967, pp 690 - 695. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

91. ALDEP based on closeness Ratings A4 3 =64 E4 3 =16 I4 1 =4 O4 0 =1 U0=0 X-4 5 =-1,024 Can handle 63 departments on 3 floors module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

92. SCORING PATTERN OF ALDEP 5 0 8 24 1 76 3 For a Cell (0) the scores of all eight neighbours are added together (as per REL chart) Then the cell (0) is deleted so that it is not counted again. We then proceed to the next cell till all cells are exhausted. The final cumulative score is the Layout Score module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

93. INPUT REQUIREMENTS FOR ALDEP Length, Width and area requirements for each floor. Scale of layout printout (max 30x50) No. of depts. in the layout No. of layouts to be generated Minimum allowable score for an acceptable layout. Minimum dept. preference (A or E) REL chart for the depts. Location and size of restricted area for each floor. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

94. Vertical Scanning Pattern for placing depts. in ALDEP module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

95. Mechanism of ALDEP : (a)1st dept placed randomly. (b)Scan the REL chart for a dept with A,E rating (min dept preference) continue this step till no such dept exists (c)Pick up the next dept. in a random fashion and again proceed by scanning the REL chart [step (b)]. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

96. AN EXAMPLE OF ALDEP module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

97. The Available Space module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

98. B Placement of 1st Department module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

99. Placement of 2nd Department B D D module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

100. Placement of 3rd Department D B D A module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

101. Placement of 4th Department C B D D A C C module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

102. Final Layout B D D A C C C module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

103. FEATURES OF CORELAP Retain the rectangular shape of each department The layout is built around a central department Placement and choice based on the total and current placement ratio The final layout may end up with irregular boundaries module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

104. CRAFT Computerized Relative Allocation of Facilities Technique module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

105. Armour, G.C. and E.S.Buffa, “A Heuristic Algorithm and Simulation Approach to Relative Location of Facilities” Management Science, Vol 9, No. 1, 1963, pp 294-309 Buffa, E.S, G.C. Armour and T.E. Vollman “Allocating Facilities with CRAFT” Harvard Business Review, Vol 42, No.2, 1964, pp 136 - 159. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

106. AN EXAMPLE OF CRAFT module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

107. Product, Process & Schedule Data module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

108. INITIAL LAYOUT A D B C Distance Matrix for initial layout (Assuming Rectilinear Distances) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

109. LOAD MATRIX module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

110. UNIT COST MATRIX module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

111. LOAD x UNIT COST MATRIX (Flow Matrix) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

112. INITIAL LAYOUT (Distance Matrix) A D B C module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

113. MATERIAL HANDLING EFFORT FOR INITIAL LAYOUT module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

114. 265 Material Handling Effort module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

115. ALTERNATIVE 1 (Distance Matrix) B D A C Material Handling Effort = Flow x Distance Matrix = 220 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

116. ALERNATIVE 2 (Distance Matrix) C D B A Material Handling Effort = Flow x Distance Matrix = 265 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

117. ALTERNATIVE 3 (Distance Matrix) D A B C Material Handling Effort = Flow x Distance Matrix = 215 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

118. ALTERNATIVE 4 (Distance Matrix) A D C B Material Handling Effort = Flow x Distance Matrix = 215 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

119. ALTERNATIVE 5 (Distance Matrix) A B D C Material Handling Effort = Flow x Distance Matrix = 265 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

120. ALTERNATIVE 6 (Distance Matrix) A C B D Material Handling Effort = Flow x Distance Matrix = 220 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

121. 265 220 265 215* 215* 265 220 Material Handling Effort module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

122. LIMITATIONS OF CRAFT CRAFT yields a good heuristic solution that does not guarantee optimality This is because not all (n!) combinations are evaluated, but only ( n C 2 ) pair-wise exchange options are considered. In case departments are on unequal size, their centroids are exchanged which can result in irregular shapes of departments module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

123. Factorial Growth module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

124. 20! = 2.4329 X 10 1820 C 2 = 190 30! = 2.65252 X 10 3230 C 2 = 435 40! = 8.15915 X 10 4740 C 2 = 780 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

125. SUMMARY OF THE CRAFT PROCEDURE This example demonstrates one iteration of the basic CRAFT procedure The best layout so produced is compared with the starting layout. If it is inferior to the starting layout, the starting layout is declared optimal and the search stops Otherwise a new iteration with the discovered layout as the starting node is initiated module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

126. CONCLUSIONS Computer packages for layout planning Construction programs (ALDEP, CORELAP) Improvement programs (CRAFT) Based on SLP procedure Activity relationships Material Handling Effort Good for generation of alternative layouts Limitations of irregular shapes, ignoring realistic constraints module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

127. An Example of ALDEP module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

128. The Available Space module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

129. B Placement of 1st Department module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

130. Placement of 2nd Department B D D module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

131. Placement of 3rd Department B D D A module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

132. Placement of 4th Department B D D A C C C module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

133. Final Layout B D D A C C C module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

134. 5. Product Layouts module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

135. KINDS OF PRODUCTION SYSTEMS Flow Shop The same set of operations performed in sequence repetitively. Job Shop Facilities capable of producing many different jobs in small batches Project A major one time job requiring sequencing and coordination among interrelated tasks. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

136. INPUTS AND OUTPUTS OF A PRODUCTION SYSTEM PRODUCTION SYSTEM DESIRABLE GOODS/ SERVICES UNDESIRABLE OUTPUTS Pollution Noise Scrap Men M/cs Materials Money Energy Information …... FEED BACK module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

137. NATURAL DOMAINS OF THE FLOW SHOP, JOB SHOP & PROJECTS Projects & Job Shops Job Shop Flow Shop HIGH VARIETYVARIETY LOW SMALL QUANTITY LARGE module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

138. UNDERLYING IDEAS IN MASS MANUFACTURE Logical breakdown of work Division of work into work stations. Adam Smith Henry Ford Interchangeable and replaceable parts E.Whitney module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

139. WS 1 WSn WS 2 Final Assembly Input Material module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

140. ADVANTAGES OF FLOW-LINE PRODUCTION 1.Smooth flow of material from one work station to next module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

141. 2.Since work fed from one station to next, small inprocess inventories. 3.Total production time/unit short. 4.Reduced material handling. 5.Little skill required by operators. Hence training simple, short and inexpensive. 6.Simple production planning and control systems. 7.Less space occupied by work in tranit for temporary storage. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

142. DISADVANTAGES OF FLOW-LINE PRODUCTION 1.A breakdown of one m/c may lead to a complete stoppage of following m/cs. Hence maintenance is a challenging job. 2.Inflexible with regard to changes in product design. 3.Pace determined by “bottleneck” machine. Line balancing is thus a major problem in design. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

143. 4.Supervision is general rather than specialized, as the supervision of a line is looking after diverse machines on a line. 5.Generally high investments are required owing to the specialized nature of the machines and their possible duplication in the line. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

144. WHEN TO GO FOR MASS PRODUCTION? 10.0/PC 5.00/PC 2.50/PC 10,000 20,000 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

145. DESIGN OF AN ASSEMBLY LINE The Objective Minimize the total idle time or the no. of workstations for a given assembly line speed. Division of Work Into Parts The Precedence Diagram module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

146. Grouping of Tasks Into Work Stations The feasible range of cycle times Line balancing methods Helgeson & Birnie (RPW) Kilbridge & Wester (No. of predecessors) Arcus COMSOAL (Generation of alternatives by simulation) Choice of the best design module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

147. PRECEDENCE DIAGRAM 2 1 3 6 45 78 12 1011 9 5 3426 71 44 5 63 Element No. Duration j module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

148. No. of work elements = N = 12 T max  Cycle Time   T i 7  Cycle Time  (5+3+4……+7) 50 N i=1 Let desired cycle time be 10 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

149. Then the objective is to group the work elements into stations so that no stations time exceeds 10 units module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

150. 2 1 3 6 45 78 12 1011 9 5 3 426 71 4 4 5 63 WS- 1 (8) WS- 2 (9) WS- 3 (9) WS- 4 (6) WS- 5 (10) WS- 6 (8) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

151. Line efficiency = N i=1 K X CT X 100%  ST i = (50 / 6 X 10) X 100 = 83.3% Balance delay = (1 - LE) = 16.7% Smoothness index =  N i=1  (S Tmax - Sti) 2 =  4+1 + 1+ 16+ 4 =  26 = 5.09 (Closer to zero the better ) module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

152. Ranked Positional Weights The positional weight on a work element is its own processing time plus the processing times of all the following work elements At each work station a list of eligible jobs is prepared for placement In RPW, the work element with the highest positional weight is selected and assigned to the current work station module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

153. PRECEDENCE DIAGRAM 2 1 3 6 45 78 12 1011 9 5 3426 71 44 5 63 Element No. Duration j 7 11 15 8 1315 24 28 30 31 33 50 Positional Weight module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

154. PRECEDENCE DIAGRAM 2 1 3 6 45 78 12 1011 9 5 3426 71 44 5 63 7 15 8 1315 24 28 30 31 33 50 1,4 2,5 3,6 10, 7,9 8,11 12 89 9710 7 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

155. EVALUATION OF DESIGN (RPW) Balance Delay = [(10 x 6) - 50] / (10 x 6) = 10/60 = 16.7 % Line Efficiency = 1- BD = 83.3 % Smoothness Index = = sq root ( 4+1+1+9+0+9) = 4.9 module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

156. RESONS FOR HIGH BALANCY DELAY 1.Wide range of work element times. 2.A large amount of inflexible line mechanization 3.Indiscriminate choice of cycle times. module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

157. PROBLEMS AND PROSPECTS OF MASS PRODUCTION Variable work element times Breakdown at work station Multi product lines Modular Production & group Technology Automation and Robotics FMS & CIM Buffers module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

158. SUMMARY Advantages and disadvantages of Assembly Lines (product layouts) Basic principles of assembly lines Division of Labour Interchangeability of Parts Precedence diagram and market requirements of design module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents

159. SUMMARY (contd) Grouping of elements in a product layout RPW, COMSOAL, Kilbridge & Wester, Other heuristic procedures Measures of efficiency Balance delay /Line efficiencry Smoothness index Emerging concepts Multi product lines, buffer, automation,worker empowerment module 7: Facility Location and Layout Back to main indexBack to main index exit Back to module contentsexitBack to module contents