Announcement

• ICE #7 due tomorrow today

• Exam 3 grade will be posted by Jun
By21.
• Hw 3 release today! Due next Mon, Jun 27
-

• Work on your Group project!

1
Cherbaka 2020
 Facility Layout 1
Qualitative

Tompkins Chapter 6

Cherbaka 2020
 -

Where are - - -

TTP
today’s
topics?

Figure 1 from
“Classification of facility
layout problems: a
review study” - -

Hosseini-Nasab et al

3
Cherbaka 2020 -
 =
Figure 1 continued
from
“Classification of facility
layout problems: a

=
review study”
Hosseini-Nasab et al

¥7

4
Cherbaka 2020
The result of many Facility Layout algorithms is a
block layout →
→
→

1¥
•
-

.
.

2 3
Show the general
placement,
1 dimensions and
relative position of
5 =
departments
4
4b

Block Layout
-
5
Cherbaka 2020
 “Facility Layout Problem” (FLP) Definition
Find the most efficient non-overlapping
arrangement of departments with unequal 2 3
area requirements, subject to all location 1
5
constraints, within a facility. 4
4b

What is an “efficient arrangement”?

Flow, Material Handling, depends on the objective ←⇐☒⇐±
6
Cherbaka 2020
The big picture of layout design. 1
Collect
3
Flow and
Generate or Relationship
Improve Data
Layout
2 4

Evaluate
Layout
5

Select
Layout

7
Cherbaka 2020
Layout evaluation (or objective function)
Layout Evaluation

Qualitative Quantitative

Flow pattern analysis Adjacency-based

Distance-based

8
Cherbaka 2020
Effective Flow is supported by maximizing directed
flow paths
A directed flow path is an uninterrupted flow path progressing
directly from origin to destination:

Uninterrupted flow paths

Interrupted flow paths

9
Cherbaka 2020
Qualitative: Flow pattern analysis
Graphically super-impose the flow data from flow chart on to the layout
'

Conclude if the resulting flow pattern is ‘efficient’ or ‘inefficient’

E-
-

Characteristics:
• Easy to conduct
• Provides a visual aid
• May require significant trial-and-error to yield a ‘good’ layout, and not
necessarily an ‘optimal’ layout .

10
Cherbaka 2020
Flow pattern analysis: ‘efficient’ or ‘inefficient’

:
¥
2
1
6

7
4
8

9
5
3

11
Cherbaka 2020
Example flow chart to produce 200 units
Number on arrow =
unit load size

÷
Unit load does not
necessary = batch size

12
Cherbaka 2020
Super-impose the flow chart data on this layout

*
1 4 7 10

'

2 5 8 11

3 6 9 12

.
13
Cherbaka 2020
 ↓
One improved solution …-
¥=

Ér
12 2 8 3

i§•
7

10
1

11
5

9
4

6
±
7

+ '

↑ 4¥ 14
Cherbaka 2020
 Facility Layout
Quantitative
-
Tompkins Chapter 6

Cherbaka 2020
Layout evaluation (or objective function)

Layout Evaluation

Qualitative Quantitative

Flow pattern analysis Adjacency-based ⇐

% Distance-based

16
Cherbaka 2020
Quantitative: Adjacency-based to
Ai B be ajencent )
VA ☒ = 2) A ,
B I want

ᵈ%±:;:aFI
A-based score A-based efficiency
""
we -7

-0¥
.
OBJECTIVE: rij xij
rij xij to be
Maximize proximity i j
i j 100%
between departments rij
i j

rij is the reward for placing departments i and j adjacent to each other
(known parameter) and the only variable is
1, if i and j are adjacent Note: Adjacent
xij =
-

-
departments share a
0, otherwise

HI-¥ ¥
-
border, not corners

17
Cherbaka 2020
Burgs Inc. has hired you to develop a layout for
their new facility in BurgCity, VA
The company just bought a 300’-by-300’ square plot and plans
to set up four departments with the following dimensions:
Dept 1: 100’ x 300’
Dept 2: 100’ x 200’
Dept 3: 100’ x 200’
Dept 4: 100’ x 200’

So what are some feasible layouts?

18
Cherbaka 2020
 Dept 1: 100’ x 300’
Dept 2: 100’ x 200’
Feasible layouts Dept 3: 100’ x 200’
Dept 4: 100’ x 200’

2 1

1 300 x 300 3
300 x 300
3 4 4
2

How can you generate layouts? Layout Algorithms

19
Cherbaka 2020
Step 1. Relationship (REL) chart accommodates
relative qualitative factors
REL 1 2 3 4

1 - A U E Rating Definition
A Absolutely Necessary
2 - - U O E Essential
I Important
3 - - - I O Ordinary
U Unimportant
4 - - - - X Undesirable

More details are often included. See figure 3.43 in Tompkins

20
Cherbaka 2020
Step 2. Convert REL chart to Reward Power of 2 Scale
A = 2^3
matrix E = 2^2 6
A = 8
"
I = 2^1
E = 4 O = 2^0
REL chart I = 2 Reward Matrix rij
* U = 0

-0
O = 1
REL 1 2 3 4 X = -2^3
U = 0 Rij 1 2 3 4
1 - A U E (X = -8)
1 - 8 0 4
2 - - U O
2 - - 0 1
←
3 - - - I
3 - - - 2
4 - - - -
4 - - - -

Scale is not always power of 2. It is an input and adjustable

as needed. Often found through trial and error. 21
Cherbaka 2020
 Step 3. Find the Adjacency-Based score
rij xij
A − score = rij xij Efficiency =
i j
100%
i j rij
i j

xij = 1 if the departments are adjacent

= 0 if the departments are not adjacent
↑ it's only applied for
the Rel chart that
does have
:X
'
not
.

22
Cherbaka 2020
 2 100 rij xij
FEW i j Layout 1
^

1 ✗ 12 1- V13 ✗
1- 814×14 1- K } ✗ A-score1 =

②④
13

±?-
23

3 4 200 8 (1) 0 Ll )
rij4 ◦ IN 8(1)+0(1)+4(0)+0(1)+1(1)+2(1) =11
+ µ, ×,
,
REL 1 2 3 4
100 100 100 1 "
-7
- -

Layout 1 1- 834×54 1 - 8 0 4
= -
-
-

2 (1)
↓I 2 - - 0 1
y
-
-
=

1 3 - - - 2

F•3
-
.

4 - - - -

!
Layout 2
2 •
.
What’s the max A- A-score2 =
4 score that can be
achieved? &
8(1)+0(1)+4(0)+0(1)+1(1)+2(1) =11

Layout 2 Sum of all rewards = 15

23
Cherbaka 2020
 Find the A-score efficiency for both layouts

A-score1
A-efficiency1 = m m
x 100% = 11/15 = 73%
rij xij
i =1 j =1
rij = 8-10-10 -14-111-2=-15
i j .

A − efficiency = 100%

rij
i j
A-score2
A-efficiency2 = m m
x 100% = 11/15= 73%

I
rij
i =1 j =1

Cherbaka 2020
0 1. Identical A-score and efficiency ⇏ identical layouts
2. Identical A-score and efficiency ⇏ identical travel distances
24
 Find the A-score and A-efficiency of …
REL 1 2 3 4 1-

1 - 8 0 4
1 2
2 - - 0 1

3 - - - 2 3 1 4
4
4 - - - -
2 3

"
Layout 3 An optimal layout

÷
8(0)+0(1)+4(1)+0(0)+1(1)+2(1) =7 8(1)+0(1)+4(1)+0(0)+1(1)+2(1) =15
A-Efficiency 46.67% A-Efficiency = 100%

25
Cherbaka 2020
Handling ‘X’ relationship
A = 8
E = 4
I = 2
O = 1
REL 1 2 3 4 REL 1 2 3 4
U = 0
1 - A U E (X = -8) 1 - 8 0 4

2 - - X O 2 - - -8 1

3 - - - I 3 - - - 2

4 - - - - 4 - - - -

rij

26
Cherbaka 2020
 REL 1 2 3 4

Evaluate this layout … 1 - 8 0 4

2 - - -8 1

A − score = rij xij = 8(0) + 4(1) -8(1)+1(1)+2(1)= 3 - - - 2

1 -1
i j 4 - - - -

3 rij xij
4
i j
2 A − efficiency = 100% = -1/7 = -14.28%
rij
i j

We can’t have a negative efficiency!

DO NOT DO THIS!!
27
Cherbaka 2020
A-score and A-efficiency with X’s
¢-8 R = set of positive flows
A − score = rij xij + rij (1 −xij )
R = set of negative flows
i, j R
I i, j R -7-7 / rii
/ riis <

of
frig / ri;reward
} for not placing departments i and
≥o

j
adjacent to each other

rij xij + rij (1 −xij-7×1

)
'
Ii
REL 1 2 3 4
i, j R i, j R
A − efficiency = 100%

①①
1 - 8 0 4
rij + rij
2 - - -8 1
i, j R i, j R
→

3 - - - 2
"
4 -91 4 - - - -

§ -10+4-11+2 28
Cherbaka 2020
 Evaluate this layout with revised formula

,z+KsXi3tn4€3tk4✗utk¢X}¢
/

1 A − score = rij xij + rij (1 −xij )

i, j R i, j R
3
Kix
4 OLD 1- 447 MT V13 -1
1-8111
geo) -1 + 2( f)
-

2 8 (0) +0(1)+ 4(1) + 1(1) + 2(1) + |-8|(0) = 7 =)

Sum of rewards = 8+0+4+8+1+2 =23
-

REL 1 2 3 4
(7/23) * 100% = 30.43%
1 - 8 0 4

÷
-

2 - - -8 1
rij xij + rij (1 −xij )
3 - - - 2
i, j R i, j R
4 - - - - A − efficiency = 100%
rij + rij
i, j R i, j R
29
Cherbaka 2020
How about this layout? A − score = rij xij + rij (1 −xij )
→

i, j R i, j R
2 ✗ 237-1%24%4 -17479¢
✗ 8,2*12+43×13 -144×14-1 lbs / ( I
-

1 4 & " " + ° ""

" " > + "" " "
° " " " " ""

-13
8(1) + 0(1)+ 4(1) + 1 (1)+ 2(1) + |-8|(1-0) = 23
3

(23/23) * 100 = 100%

REL 1 2 3 4 -

.
1 - 8 0 4
2 - - -8
,
1
- ,

3 - - - 2
- - rij xij + rij (1 −xij )
4 - - - -
i, j R i, j R
A − efficiency = 100%
rij + rij
Cherbaka 2020
i, j R i, j R 30
Layout evaluation (or objective function)
Layout Evaluation

Qualitative Quantitative

Flow pattern analysis

T
Adjacency-based
Distance-based

31
Cherbaka 2020
Quantitative: Distance-based
Reward matrix, rij
Minimize the sum of the -
From layout
=cost of movements
between departments min : fij cij dij
i j

From flow chart,

From cost matrix

÷
from-to matrix, or
flow-between matrix

fij is the flow from dept i to j

cij is the cost of moving the load (movement, not MH Equipment)
dij is the distance from dept i to j
Cherbaka 2020
Step 1: Find the flow data

÷
Gather flow data from production Convert the flow data into
processes on the floor of Burg, Inc. trips between departments
"
20 units Flow 1 2 3 4

I
1 All MH
Unit Load = 1 - 8 0 2

÷:
10 units/trip

!
80 10 2 - - 0 1
1 2 4
3 - - - 4

4 - - - -
40
3
fij

Cherbaka 2020
Step 2: Cost matrix
Cost matrix is the per trip Cost 1 2 3 4
cost between two
1 - 1 1 1
departments
2 - - 1 1
This might depend on the material 3 - - - 1
handling equipment used, but it is 4 - - - -
not the cost of the equipment, just
the cost of the movement – cij
dependent on unit load

cij = Cost per unit flow per unit distance

Often cij =1 if no discernable difference in cost of
movements 34
Cherbaka 2020
Step 3: Distance matrix

Distance matrix tells Dist 1 2 3 4

the distance between 1 - ? ? ?
two departments
2 - - ? ?

This depends on the 3 - - - ?

layout of aisle and 4 - - - -
entry & exit points
dij
So how do we calculate distances?

35
Cherbaka 2020
 Distance calculation
Types of distance metrics

y2 y2
dy dy
dx
y1 y1
dx

x1 x2 x1 x2

Euclidean Rectilinear

36
Cherbaka 2020
 Distance calculation
Types of distance metrics
d
X Facility 3
y2
dy Facility 2
y1 Facility 1 c
dx
a
x1 x2 b
Manhattan, Aisle-distance
Taxicab-geometry,
or Rectilinear

37
Cherbaka 2020
Formula for each distance metric
Euclidean
(d x )2 + (d y )2 = (x2 − x1 )2 + ( y2 − y1 )2
Rectilinear or Manhattan,

dx + d y (= x2 − x1 + y2 − y1 ) ←

chebychev

max d x , d y (= max x2 − x1 , y2 − y1 )
38
Cherbaka 2020
Step 3 (contd.) : Distances (rectilinear) between depts.
d " / 200-54+1250 is

/
,
-

'

2 100
1501-100=25-0
=

:[
" 1 2 3 4
d 1 21
3 4
x 50 200 150 250
"

1 - 250 150 250

/ 1 200 ex
y 150 250 100 100
-

to 2 - - 200 200
3 4
3 - - - 100

7.
.ir
÷100 100 100 4 - - - -
Centroids to centroids distance! Rectilinear
Distances
2 100
1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
d2
1 4 100 x 50 200 200 200 1 - 250 250 150

y 150 250 50 150

2 - - 200 100

3 100 3 - - - 100
-
4 - - - -
100 200

39
Cherbaka 2020
 Step 4: Find the Distance (D) score
D-score = fij cij dij
d1 1 2 3 4 Flow 1 2 3 4
i j -

1 - 250 150 250 1 - 8 0 2

ii. =1
'

2 - - 200 200 2 - - 0 D-score1 = 3100

tncizdiztfizcisdi }tfÑ4di4
-

3 - - - 100 3 - - - 4
-

4 - - - - 4 - - - - 1- f- 23023dL
-15-2444%+1-344,ud}y
0
}
Dist matrix -changes
with layout
fij given
=
parameters 8471250) -10117050) -124 )c25o)
=
d2 1 2 3 4
Cost 1 2 3 4

ocixz.it/C9)(2oo)t4CD(1oo)=3-oo
+
1 - 250 250 150
1 - 1 1 1
2 - - 200 100
→ 3 - - - 100
2 - - 1 1
3 - - - 1 D-score2 = 2800
4 - - - - _

4 - - - -
0
dij cij %
0
>

40
Cherbaka 2020
Centroid calculation for complex shapes
40
✗= :÷%
A1 x1 + A2 x2 =
36.67
→ x= 2 3
A1 + A2 y=÷:÷:
1 20
A1 y1 + A2 y2 =
8.33
y= 4A
5
A1 + A2 10
_ -

¥ 4B
=
-

is
1- 0 20 30 40 50 60

of
.

A = Area
4(x) = [ (20*20)30 + (20*10)50] / (20*20 + 20*10) = 36.67 /
4A
4(y) = [ (20*20)10 + (20*10)5] / (20*20 + 20*10) = 8.33 A2 : area of
A / = 20×20=400
-

✗ 1--30
413
✗ 2=50 A 2=10×20--200 .

41
Cherbaka 2020 91--10,92--5
Summary of Notes
-

✓ Layout evaluation
✓ Flow patternanalysis
✓ Adjacency-based scoring
✓ REL Chart & reward matrix
✓ Adjacency-score and –efficiency
✓ Adjacency-score with X’s
✓ Distance-based scoring
✓ Centroid to centroid rectilinear
✓ Complex-shaped centroids

42
Cherbaka 2020