Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 23

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and

Material Handling

10/9/2004

108

Computerized Layout Planning


Focus on how computers can aid the facility layout
process.
Designer must interact with multiple design databases
and provide the integration between them to translate
information and ensure consistency.
We will concentrate on decision aids for block layout
planning.
Information required
Common elements
Classical layout programs
Craft, Corelap, Aldep, and Planet

Newer layout programs


M-Craft, LayOpt, FactoryPlan

Texas A&M

INEN 416

109

Computerized Layout Planning


Information in layout planning
Numeric information
Space required for an activity
Total flow between two activities

Logic information
Preferences of the designer, i.e., activity relationship
chart

Graphical information
Drawing of the block plan

Key element of computerized layout planning


is the representation and manipulation of
these three types of information.
Graphical representation is most challenging. A
method suitable for display is not suitable for
manipulation and vice-versa.

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

110

Computerized Layout Planning


Graphical Representation
Points and lines representation is not convenient
for analysis

Texas A&M

INEN 416

111

Computerized Layout Planning


Graphical Representation (cont.)
Most procedures employ a unit area square
representation as an approximation
Space available and space required for each activity
are expressed as an integer multiple of the unit area.

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

112

Computerized Layout Planning


Graphical Representation (cont.)
Unit Square Area approximation can also be
represented by a two dimensional array or matrix of
numbers
Easy to manipulate (e.g., determine adjacency) but
difficult to visually interpret
1

Texas A&M

INEN 416

113

Computerized Layout Planning


Layout Evaluation
Algorithm needs to distinguish between good
layouts and bad ones
Develop scoring model, s = g(X)
Adjacency-based scoring
Based on on the relationship chart and diagram

s=

wi Xi
i =1

Aldep uses A=64, E=16, I=4, O=1, U=0, and X=-1024


Scoring model has intuitive appeal; the ranking of
layouts is sensitive to the weight values. Layout B
may be preferred to C with certain weights but not
with others.
Therefore, correct specification of the weights is very
important -- but how do you do that?
Texas A&M
INEN 416

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

114

Computerized Layout Planning


Layout Evaluation (cont.)
Distance-based scoring
Approximate the cost of flow between activities
Requires explicit evaluation of the flow volumes and costs

s=

m 1 m

cij Dij
i =1 j = i + 1

cij covers both the i to j and the j to i material flows


Dij can be determined with any appropriate distance metric
Often the rectilinear distance between department centroids

Assumes that the material flow system has already been


specified
Assumes that the variable flow cost is proportional to
distance
Distance often depends on the aisle layout and material
handling equipment
Texas A&M
INEN 416

115

Computerized Layout Planning


Layout Evaluation -- Distance-based scoring Example
Initial Layout

Flow Data
From/To A B C
A
2 4
B
1
1
C
2
1
D
4
1 0

D
4
3
2
-

Distance Data
From/To A B C D
A
- 40 25 55
B
40 - 65 25
C
25 65 - 40
D
55 25 40 Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

From/To
A
B
C
D
Total

Total Cost
A B C
- 80 100
40 - 65
50 65 220 25 0
310 170 165

D
220
75
80
375

Total
400
180
195
245
1020

INEN 416

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

116

Computerized Layout Planning


Layout Evaluation (cont.)
Distance-based scoring
Impact of aisle layout and direction of travel

Texas A&M

INEN 416

117

Computerized Layout Planning


Layout Evaluation (cont.)
Distance-Weighted Adjacency-Based Scoring
s=

w ij X ij
i =1 j =1

A smaller score is better


As before, the scoring model is sensitive to the
adjacency class weights, wij

More Complex Scoring Methods


Could employ simulation to determine material
handling equipment utilization, etc.
Would probably better reflect the preferences of the
layout planner
Certainly more difficult to compute and could effect
the number of alternatives considered
Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

118

Computerized Layout Planning


Layout Generation
Construction Algorithms
Start with basic SLP data and build a block layout by
iteratively adding activities to a partial layout until all
activities have been placed.

Improvement Algorithms
Require an initial block layout which they then
attempt to improve.

Texas A&M

INEN 416

119

Computerized Layout Planning


Construction Algorithms
For i = 1 to n
SELECT an activity to be placed
PLACE the selected activity in the layout
End For
Selection rules
Choose the next activity having the largest number of
A (E, I, etc.) relationships with the activities
already in the layout. Break ties randomly.
Supplement above procedure with TCR for choosing
first department and breaking ties.
Consider flow cost chart and user specified
placement priorities.

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

120

Computerized Layout Planning


Construction Algorithms
Placement Rules
Contiguity Rule
If an activity is represented by more than one unit area
square, every unit area square representing the activity
must share at least one edge with at least one other unit
area square representing the activity.

Connectedness Rule
The perimeter of an activity must be a single closed
loop that is always in contact with some edge of some
unit area square representing the activity.

The following are infeasible shapes for activities.

Texas A&M

INEN 416

121

Computerized Layout Planning


Construction Algorithms (cont.)
Placement Rules (cont.)
Five basic shapes for an activity represented by 4
unit area squares.

Determining possible shapes becomes nontrivial for


activities with more than 5 unit area squares, and
some of the shapes have bizarre configurations.

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

122

Computerized Layout Planning


Construction Algorithms (cont.)
Placement Rules (cont.)
Therefore, additional rules are often used.
Enclosed Voids Rule
No activity shape shall contain an enclosed void.

Shape Ratio Rule


The ratio of a feasible shapes greatest length to its
greatest width shall be constrained to lie between
specified limits.

Corner Count Rule


The number of corners for a feasible shape may not
exceed a specified maximum.

Given an activitys shape there are a large number of


alternative placements for it in a layout, including
different locations and mirror images and rotations.

Texas A&M

INEN 416

123

Computerized Layout Planning


Construction Algorithms (cont.)
Bounded placement procedures
Accept a specified facility configuration and fit the
activities into the facility.
May not be able to enforce all of the activity shape
rules.
E.g., ALDEP

Free placement procedures


Create a layout without regard to the resulting facility
configuration.
May produce layouts requiring considerable
adjustment to conform to conventional building
configurations.
E.g., CORELAP

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

124

Computerized Layout Planning


Improvement Algorithms
Moves activities around within the block plan,
much like a jigsaw puzzle except that the shapes of
the pieces are not fixed.
Too many degrees of freedom to devise a good
method for modifying the block plan.
Most all improvement algorithms limit the kinds of
changes that are permitted.
Basic procedure
CHOOSE a pair (or triple) of activities
ESTIMATE the effect of exchanging them
EXCHANGE if the effect is to reduce the total cost
CHECK to be sure the new layout is better
Repeat Until no more improvements are possible.

Texas A&M

INEN 416

125

Computerized Layout Planning


Improvement Algorithms (cont.)
To CHOOSE a pair of activities
Activities that have the same area, or
Activities that share a common boundary.

There are many possibilities for EXCHANGE when


the areas are not equal.
Generally, the shape ratio and corner count rules are
violated, therefore, manual adjustment is sometimes
required.

ESTIMATE the value of the exchange by comparing


the cost if the two centroids are switched.
However, this estimate will not necessarily be correct
for unequal area activities.

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

126

Computer-Aided Layout
Computer-aided layout techniques are
classified by
Method of recording flows between departments
Quantitatively in a from-to chart
Qualitatively in a relationship chart

Method of generating layouts


Construction
of a layout
Improvement of an existing layout

Texas A&M

INEN 416

127

Computer-Aided Layout
Techniques
Construction Routine Improvement Routine
Quantitative Input

PLANET

CRAFT
COFAD

CORELAP
Qualitative Input

ALDEP
PLANET

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

10

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

128

CRAFT
Attempts to minimize transportation cost,
where
Transportation cost = flow * distance * unit cost

Requires the assumptions that:


Move costs are independent of the equipment
utilization.
Move costs are linearly related to the length of the
move.

Distance metric used is the rectilinear


distance between department centroids.

Texas A&M

INEN 416

129

CRAFT
Procedure
1.
2.
3.
4.

Determine department centroids.


Calculate rectilinear distance between centroids.
Calculate transportation cost for the layout.
Consider department exchanges of either equal
area departments or departments sharing a
common border.
5. Determine transportation cost of each
departmental interchange.
6. Select and implement the departmental
interchange that offers the greatest reduction in
transportation cost.
7. Repeat the procedure for the new layout until no
interchange is able to reduce the transportation
cost.
Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

11

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

130

CRAFT
CRAFT is a path-oriented method so the final
layout is dependent on the initial layout.
Therefore, a number of different initial layouts
should be used as input to the CRAFT
procedure.
CRAFT allows the use of dummy departments
to represent fixed areas in the layout.

Texas A&M

INEN 416

131

CRAFT Example
Initial Layout

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

1
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
D
D
D

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
A A A A A A A A A
A
A A A A A A A A A
B B B B C C C C C
B C
C
B C C C C C
B B B B D D D D F
D D D D D
D F
D F
D D D D D D D H H

11
G
G
G
E
E
E
F

12 13 14 15 16 17 18
G G G G G G G
G
G G
G
E G G G G G G
E E E E E E E
E E E E E E E
F F F F F E E
F F
F F F F
F
H H H F F F F F

Shipping
Department

Dummy Department

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

12

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

132

CRAFT Example
Distance Matrix
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H

A B C D E F G H
6 5 6 13 16
6 11 14
7 10
6
12
3 4
14
3
7

Cost Matrix
A
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H

B
C
D
E
F
G
270 75 150 130 80
180 275 210
35 100
120
420
195 140
70
75
455

Total
705
665
135
540
335
600
0
0
2980

Texas A&M

INEN 416

133

CRAFT Example
Trial Distance Matrix
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H

A B C D E F G H
6 5 6 16 13
6 14 11
10 7
6
9
3 7
11
3
4

Trial Cost Matrix


A
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

B
C
D
E
F
G
270 75 150 160 65
180 350 165
50 70
120
315
195 245
55
75
260

Total
720
695
120
435
440
390
0
0
2800

INEN 416

13

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

134

CRAFT Example
New Layout

Final Layout

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

1
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
D
D
D

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
A A A A A A A A A G
A G
A A A A A A A A A G
B B B B C C C C C F
B C
C F
B C C C C C F
B B B B D D D D E E
D D D D D
D E
D E E
D D D D D D D H H H

12 13 14 15 16 17 18
G G G G G G G
G
G G
G
F G G G G G G
F F F F F F F
F F F F F
F
E E E E F
F
E F
F
E E E E F
F
H H E E F F F

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10

1
A
A
A
C
C
C
C
D
D
D

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
A A A A A A A A A G
A G
A A A A A A A A A G
C C B B B B B B B F
C C B
B F
C B B B B B B F
C C C B D D D D E E
D D D D D
D E
D E E
D D D D D D D H H H

12 13 14 15 16 17 18
G G G G G G G
G
G G
G
F G G G G G G
F F F F F F F
F F F F F
F
E E E E F
F
E F
F
E E E E F
F
H H E E F F F

Texas A&M

INEN 416

135

COFAD
A modification of CRAFT to allow for a variety
of material handling equipment alternatives.
It attempts to select both the layout and the
material handling system.
A special version, COFAD-F, allows the
evaluation of varying the product volumes
and mixes to analyze the flexibility of the
design.

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

14

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

136

PLANET
PLANET is a construction routine with the
same basic input requirements as CRAFT.
Material Flow Input Methods
Specify a route or production sequence for each
part.
From-to Chart.
Penalty Matrix -- quantitative representation of a
relationship chart.

Construction Algorithm Selection Methods


Choose based on individual flow-between costs.
Choose based on the sum of the flow-between
costs with previously placed departments.
Choose based on the sum of the flow-between
costs with all other departments.
Texas A&M

INEN 416

137

CORELAP
Constructs a layout for a facility by calculating the
total closeness rating (TCR) for each department.
The total closeness rating is the sum of numerical
values assigned to the closeness relationships
from the relationship chart.
A = 6, E = 5, I = 4, O = 3, U = 2, X = 1

Procedure (similar to one of the procedures for


relationship diagramming)
Place department with the highest TCR in the center of
the layout.
Scan the relationship chart for a department with an A (if
none, then E, I, and so on) relationship with the selected
department. Highest TCR is tie-breaker.
Continue until all departments are in the layout.
Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

15

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

138

ALDEP
Same basic input requirements and objectives as
CORELAP.
Selection Procedure
Randomly select first department in the layout.
Scan the relationship chart for an A (then E, etc.)
relationship with the selected department. Break ties
randomly.
Repeat procedure until all departments are selected.

Placement Procedure
Place first department in upper left corner and extend it
downward. Width of the extension is determined by the
sweep width.
Next department begins where the previous department
ended and follows the serpentine sweep pattern.
Texas A&M

INEN 416

139

ALDEP
Sweep Pattern

Can accommodate a variety of building shapes and


irregularities.

Scoring Mechanism: Adjacency Score


ALDEP rates the layouts by determining an
adjacency score by assigning values to the
relationships among adjacent departments.
A = 64, E = 16, I = 4, O = 1, U = 0, X = -1024
Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

16

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

140

ALDEP Example
Layout Construction
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4

2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4

2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1

2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

2
2
2
2
2

6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

2
2
2
2
2

6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6
6

5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6

5
5
5
5
5
6
6
6
6
6

5
5
5
5
5
7
7
7
7
7

5
5
5
5
5
7
7
7
7
7

4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4

7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

Texas A&M

2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4

7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7
7

2
2
2
2
2
4
4
4
4
4

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0

2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1

2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1

3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0
0
0

INEN 416

141

ALDEP Example
Scoring Procedure
Adjacent
Departments
4-2 and 2-4
4-1 and 1-4
2-1 and 1-2
1-6 and 6-1
6-5 and 5-6
6-7 and 7-6
5-7 and 7-5
7-3 and 3-7

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

Relationship
E
I
E
U
A
E
I
U

Value
16
4
16
0
64
16
4
0
Total

Rating
32
8
32
0
128
32
8
0
240

INEN 416

17

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

142

Spiral
Graph based algorithm which attempts to create
a structured adjacency graph.
The objective is to maximize the adjacency score.
The selection and location decisions are made
simultaneously, using a greedy approach on a
hexagonal grid.

Procedure

Convert the flow matrix to a symmetric matrix.


Sort the pairwise relationships by decreasing value.
Place the first two departments in the layout.
Add the departments by order in the list from step 2,
such that the adjacency with already placed
departments is maximized. Use a random tie breaker.

Texas A&M

INEN 416

143

Spiral Example
Input Data
Asymmetrical Flow Matrix
Dept
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

1
-

2
3
4
5
6
7
45 15 25 10 5
30 25 15
5 10
20
- 35
- 65 35
5
25
- 65
-

Symmetrical Flow Matrix


Dept
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

1
-

2
3
4
5
6
7
45 15 25 10 5
50 25 20
5 10
- 35
- 90 35
- 65
-

INEN 416

18

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

144

Spiral Example
Sorted Flow List
Dept
5
6
2
1
4
5
1
2
2
1
1
3
1
3

Dept
6
7
4
2
5
7
4
5
6
3
5
6
6
5

Texas A&M

Flow
90
65
50
45
35
35
25
25
20
15
10
10
5
5

INEN 416

145

Spiral Example
Graph Construction
2
5

6
4

7
1
5

6
4

7
1
4

6
3

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

6
INEN 416

19

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

146

Spiral Example
Graph Evaluation
Adjacency Matrix * Symmetrical Flow Matrix
Dept
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

1
-

2
1
-

3
1
0
-

4
1
1
1
-

5
0
1
0
1
-

6
0
0
0
0
1
-

7
0
1
0
0
1
1
-

Dept
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

1
-

2
3
4
5
6
7
45 15 25 10 5
50 25 20
5 10
- 35
- 90 35
- 65
-

Score is 385
Maximum score is 435
Efficiency is 385/435 = 88%
Texas A&M

INEN 416

147

Spiral Example
Alternative Adjacency Graph
7
5
4

6
2

Score is 405
Efficiency is 93%

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

20

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

148

Spiral
Creating a Layout
Can use a sweep pattern similar to ALDEP to sweep
through the adjacency graph and create a block
layout
7
5
4

6
2

Texas A&M

INEN 416

149

Excel Layout Tool


Uses CRAFT-type flow*distance objective
Layout is specified by a department sequence
User-specified and random sequences can be used

ALDEP placement procedure based on a vertical


sweep pattern is used to place departments in layout
Sweep width parameter can be changed
Grid size and facility shape can also be adjusted

Pairwise exchange is performed on the sequence


position of departments
Not restricted to adjacent or equal size departments
Due to using the sweep method to create a layout

Additional add-ins to generate and improve sequences


are available
Software also solves traditional CRAFT

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

21

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

150

M-Craft
Layout is specified by a sequence of
departments
Horizontal sweep patterns are used to place
departments in layout
Number of bays controls sweep width

Pairwise exchange is performed on the


sequence position of departments
Not restricted to adjacent or equal size departments
Due to using the sweep method to create a layout

Texas A&M

INEN 416

151

MULTIPLE / LayOpt
Layout is specified by a sequence of
departments
Sweep patterns are used to place
departments in layout
Sweep pattern is based on space filling curve (SFC)
concept
Many alternative SFCs can be created

Pairwise exchange is performed on the


sequence position of departments
Not restricted to adjacent or equal size departments
Due to using the sweep method to create a layout

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

22

INEN 416 Facility Location, Layout, and


Material Handling

10/9/2004

152

Factory CAD/Flow/Plan
AutoCAD based add-on
Has multiple applications
CAD: drawing templates
FLOW: evaluation of material flow; manual SLPtype manipulation
PLAN: layout alternative generation

FactoryPLAN
Uses Spiral-type algorithm to generate alternative
layout options

Texas A&M

INEN 416

153

Computerized Layout Planning


Conclusion
Does not provide an absolute best model for
finding the optimal layout.
Does provide algorithms for evaluating a
large number of alternative layouts.
It is important to understand the underlying
assumptions and scoring models of each
procedure in order to correctly interpret the
results.

Texas A&M

Texas A&M Industrial Engineering

INEN 416

23