Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364 www.elsevier.

com/locate/simpra

Automated data collection for simulation?

N. Robertson, T. Perera
*
Systems Modelling and Integration Research Group, Enterprise and Systems Engineering, School of Engineering, Sheeld Hallam University, Sheeld, S1 1WB, UK Received 23 March 2001; received in revised form 1 October 2001

Abstract It is argued that the data collection process is the most crucial stage in the model building process. This is primarily due to the inuence that data has in providing accurate simulation results. Data collection is an extremely time consuming process predominantly because the task is manually orientated. Hence, automating this process of data collection would be extremely advantageous. This paper presents how simulation could utilise the Corporate Business Systems as the simulation data source. Subsequently a unique interface could be implemented to provide these data directly to the simulation tool. Such an interface would prove to be an invaluable tool for users of simulation. 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Simulation data; Data collection; Integration; Interface; Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP)

1. Introduction Simulation is rapidly becoming a mainstream modelling tool in both manufacturing and service industries. Since the 1970s, the use of simulation has been led by those industries able to support, develop and foster this technology, such as the Automotive and Aerospace sectors. Simulation is essentially a dynamic modelling software tool, that when used in the correct manner can yield immense and diverse benets to the user [4,19]. The primary benets are said to be decision management and visualisation. According to an inuential body [5] no other technology oers more potential than Modelling and Simulation for improving products, perfecting

Corresponding author. Tel.: +44-114-225-3413; fax: +44-114-225-3433. E-mail address: t.d.perera@shu.ac.uk (T. Perera).

0928-4869/02/$ - see front matter 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved. PII: S 0 9 2 8 - 4 8 6 9 ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 5 5 - 6

350

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

processes, reducing design-to-manufacture cycle time, and reducing product realisation costs. Simulation tools have been developed over the years in order to be used over a spectrum of applications. Simulation tools now oer the highest ever levels of accuracy, functionality, exibility and visualisation to their respective users and in turn the intended application. Yet, authors such as Davis [3] further prognosticates that there will continue to be major advancements in simulation technologies in the future. This paper will discuss the issues of data collection for simulation model building within the aerospace and automotive manufacturing industry. It is aimed at an audience with a specic interest in Discrete Event Simulation, although the points raised can equally be applied to most other types of simulation [13]. This paper presents the way in which simulation is used within these industries and then how simulation models develop over their life cycle. A strong emphasis is placed on the data collection issues and the possible solutions that can improve data collection. The paper then identies the Corporate Business System as a potential key data source to accelerate the data collection process. A Corporate Business System is a software system, or more commonly an arrangement of multiple software systems, that collect and manage data within and throughout the entire organisation, from order placement through to delivery and beyond. Alternative methodologies and mechanisms to automatically interface the Corporate Business System to the simulation model are described. The potential of these methodologies and mechanisms are discussed, together with some rare examples of these methodologies in practice. The authors conclude that the way forward for the simulation industry is in the integration of the simulation tools and the Corporate Business System, with a particular focus on the data requirements of the simulation tool and the simulation data available in the Corporate Business System.

2. Simulation modelling 2.1. Purpose of simulation modelling Generally, simulation models are built for one of the three dierent applications, System Design, System Management or Training [3]. Modelling of new systems or changes to existing systems can both be classied as System Design; such as the application of Discrete Event Simulation. System Management has applications at an on-line level, which are used for scheduling and real time system changes of the production network. Finally Training specically refers to operation or task training, additionally it can be utilised for visual work instructions. This paper is particularly concerned with the application of System Design. In this context, simulation tools are depended upon to provide decision support in order to model a new system or existing system. A strong emphasis is placed upon capturing the reality of a complex system, at the level of detail and accuracy required. As simulation models can only be as good as the data used and the assumptions made, both of which require great understanding. Hence, conducting a simulation study is a

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

351

demanding task, because multidisciplinary knowledge, experience and skills are needed [11]. 2.2. The simulation process When undertaking a simulation project there are a series of processes that should be adhered to in order to build a model that meets the project requirements. There are various models stated in the literature [9,16,17]. Fig. 1 shows a methodology that was recently developed in collaboration with experienced modellers [21]. 2.3. Importance of simulation data It is strongly argued that the most crucial stage in the above simulation processes is Data Collection, based on the simple GIGO or Garbage In, Garbage Out theory [8,10,15,18]. This abbreviation essentially implies that the model can only be as good, in terms of accuracy, as the quality of data provided to the model. This is a good rule of thumb for providing accurate and valid simulation models. Although obtaining awless data is not in itself enough to simply guarantee that an accurate model will be built, as other elements can also have devastating inuence, such as the validity of the assumptions on which the model is based. Additionally, the time allotted for data gathering and validation uctuates across dierent projects, companies and industries. Although, numerous authors [12,15, 18,20] indicate that the data collection process should consume approximately

Fig. 1. Key stages of the model building process [21].

352

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

20% of the total model building life cycle, in reality this gure can be seen to rise to 50% [10,20] of the total time. This is primarily due to the inherent data collection difculties [8], as discussed later. Easing the data collection eorts and thereby the time burden on model building is a necessity. This could be achieved by automating the data collection process.

3. Data collection Data collection has a key role within simulation, as the data must truly emulate the realities of the system to the levels of accuracy and detail required. Failure to obtain the required data to this level of accuracy and detail implies that the model will not accurately emulate the physical system, thereby producing invalid results/recommendations. 3.1. Data issues Data collection is a process that is fraught with many inherent diculties, which are briey described below and further documented in the literature [7,10]. Data accuracy, Reliability and Validity are the responsibility of the model builder to suciently query the data obtained as to the level of accuracy, reliability and validity required. Data sources; of which there are many, are widely distributed across the organisation. These can be categorised into four vital data sources that represent the natural environment of the data. These are the Project Team, the Model Builder, the Corporate Business System and the External Reference Systems, these are further detailed in Section 4.1. The selection of the most appropriate source requires great care, knowledge and experience. Data systems are the mechanisms that can be used to enable the capture of data. These have also been categorised into three systems. These are a Computer Based System such as a database or a spreadsheet application, a Paper Based System like a production maintenance logbook, and nally a People Based System that may be via interviewing relevant individuals. Data duplication is apparent, as there can be several dierent sources for the same data item. Again the burden is on the model builder to select the best source for the data item, ensuring the preferred source has high levels of reliability, accuracy and integrity. Timeliness of data is an issue because data are required that is inevitably located in many dierent sources. This diverse range of data typically implies that the data is not available at the same time, hence there may be long periods where data cannot be obtained in order to continue model building. Therefore data collection process becomes iterative as the model builder is forced to adjourn several times, as data is not available. This situation is further detailed in Section 4.2 and illustrated in Fig. 3.

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364 Table 1 Simulation survey issues and responses Issue Structured approach to data collection? Encountered data duplication Model use after project requirements are satised Response    68% have a structured method for data collection, such as data collection templates that are completed by the Project Team

353

69% of simulation practitioners have encountered data duplication On average the respondents only discard 31% of models, although these models would probably have been used for System Design as opposed to System Management. 27% of the respondents reuse the model for a dierent purpose, leaving 42% who keep the model updated Some companies discard up to 70% of the models, others keep them all updated 62% of practitioners do not consider simulation to be embedded into their business process 60% of respondents indicated that they manually input the data to the model The remainder principally have a direct link to an external system i.e. a spreadsheet Some companies rely 100% on the manual method, whereas others rely 100% on a link to an external system

  Is simulation part of the business process? How is the data supplied to the model?     Methods used to ensure data accuracy, reliability and validity

The respondents indicated many dierent methods to tackle this issue, these are:  Model validation runs  Interviewing area experts  Model (virtual) and plant (real) comparisons  Basic sanity checks  Personal experience  The customers responsibility The respondents indicated many dierent methods to tackle this issue, these are:  Most recent data  Most reliable data  Most local to the source/origin  Obtain team knowledge  Based on personal experience  Most respondents indicated that it is the users responsibility to update the model, others stated that they used version or conguration control on the model Although a few addition respondents indicated that they have developed external links to automatically modify the model Most used a variety of the three data systems to varying degrees, but this is dependant on the type of systems available Some companies rely 95100% on Computer based systems Conversely some had a strong dependency on paper-based systems (continued on next page)

Methods used to choose between duplicate data sources

Models develop and evolve how is data validity maintained?

 Methods used to source data, i.e.  Computer Based System  Paper Based System   

354

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

Table 1 (Continued) Issue  People Based System Where is the majority of data held?  The majority of respondents indicated that most of their data is held in local systems such as a spreadsheet  One case indicated that they have direct links to the corporate database for the bulk of their data Response

3.2. Simulation survey The authors have recently conducted a survey on a broad range of simulation issues including those of data collection. This survey was conducted on 25 vetted simulation practitioners who completed a questionnaire designed by the authors. This survey was performed at the major annual gathering of the simulation community at the Winter Simulation Conference in Phoenix, Arizona in December 1999. Some of the ndings are detailed in Table 1. The authors analysed the results of the simulation survey and identied the problems and diculties intrinsic to the data collection process. The key points identied are that data collection is predominately a manual process, unstructured, and there are many approaches to tackle common problem issues, such as data accuracy and duplication. The survey has also highlighted that simulation is not considered to be part of the business process and with only one exception there was no interface established between the tools and the business systems (See Section 4.3(d)). The results contained in Table 1 indicate that an automated data collection system would prove to be an invaluable tool for simulation users. 4. Solutions to assist automated data collection There are three key factors that signicantly inuence data collection, the data source, the data timeliness and the data input methodologies. Thus these factors have a high inuence on a potential solution to automate data collection eorts. These factors are expanded upon below. 4.1. Data sources The authors have identied various plausible data sources that may be used to construct a simulation model. Fig. 2 illustrates a generic set of these plausible data sources based on the four vital data sources mentioned previously in Section 3.1. The project team consists of a multidisciplinary team, who are the problem owners and need to utilise simulation. In some circumstances the Model Builder can also be part of this team. This team approach provides a greater collective knowledge base, as opposed to individuals. The Model Builder provides specialist simulation knowledge in the form of explicit and tacit knowledge. The Corporate Business Sys-

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

355

Fig. 2. Key data sources for model building.

tem comprises a multitude of software components, which are dependent on the particular organisation. These are the likes of enterprise resource planning (ERP), material requirements planning (MRPII), and product data management (PDM). Finally the External Reference Systems are information sources such as brochures for new or intended plant specications, industrial standards, and industry domain experts, who know the problem area. It is the responsibility of the model builder to capture and validate all the required data from the above sources. 4.2. Data timeliness The development of simulation models is primarily dependent on the acquisition and interpretation of both system logic and data. To overcome the problems of data availability an iterative process of model building is often used, especially for modelling System Design. Hence, as the model level of detail and accuracy increase throughout the model life cycle the quantity and quality of the data required would also intensify. This situation is shown in Fig. 3.

356

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

Fig. 3. The iterative model building process as the data available increases (for System Design).

Due to this iterative fashion of model building it is considered to be a good practice to embed the rst version or iteration of the model with exibility. As it is acknowledged that the model will subsequently be modied in terms of model/logic accuracy and data accuracy. If this rst iteration of the model is designed to accommodate such predicted developments, the model will require less time and eort later in the model development life cycle, for the 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or even 5th iteration. The consequences of not embedding this exibility initially are that the 2nd iteration will require greater time and eort to be modied, as will the 3rd iteration, and so on. The model undergoes multiple changes over its construction period in order to progressively represent the real world. A modelling method that is able to address this issue are Data Driven Template models. These are formed from two dierent approaches of modelling, which are Data Driven Models and Template Models. Data Driven models read data from external data input les and then use this data in the simulation model logic, without the need to modify or amend any of the simulation coding. Whereas, Template models, as the name suggests, utilise model templates to create numerous similar models with similar data in a short space of time [7]. These two separate approaches are initially very time consuming but inevitably they provide good pay back terms if used under the right conditions. Building such models is a very demanding task, which requires great skill/experience and attention in detail. These approaches are slowly becoming evident in the industry [6]. 4.3. Data input methodologies During an industrial analysis of the data collection process, the authors identied four dierent methods to input the required data to the model. These are detailed

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

357

below and also illustrated in Fig. 4. These methodologies were derived by the authors through observations made on various research exercises including follow-up interviews to the simulation survey and subsequent case studies, previously mentioned [14]. The aim of which was to identify the current and emergent methods used to supply data to the model within the industry. In Fig. 4 methodologies a and b are currently used extensively within the industry, whereas methodologies c and d are only just emerging and as such, there is merely one isolated case evident for each methodology within the industry. It is prognosticated that these two methods of integration oer great advancements with respect to data collection in the future, although it is dependent on their intended application type. Details of these cases are also provided below. (a) The model builder manually collects the required data via various mechanisms such as data templates completed by the project team, by using information spreadsheets or by interviewing individual domain experts. The data is then manually entered into the model as and when required. This is a simplistic method, especially in the larger manufacturing organisations who should be leading the way. The benets are that it is a simple method to follow for model building, and all the data are veried by the modeller as it is entered into the coding. It has inherent drawbacks, principally due to its manual nature. These are namely the extended time, eort and errors. In addition the data are stored within the modelling tool and it is therefore a very inexible system, as the coding will need to be changed if any of the data is modied. (b) As in the previous methodology, similar mechanisms are used to collect data, but this data is then amalgamated from the various sources onto a formatted master spreadsheet. This spreadsheet contains the majority of the required data for the model. Once the model is built, the data is automatically imported from the spreadsheet to the model. Hence, the data are stored externally in the model, which enables exibility of the data and the model. The in/exporting of the data required by the model is a signicant advantage on the previous method, but it takes time and eort to amalgamate and format all the data. This methodology is becoming an increasingly popular method within the industry. (c) The model utilises an Intermediary Simulation Database that automatically retrieves and stores the required data from the sources within the Corporate Business Systems. The model reads the required data from the integrated database to run the model. Again the data are stored externally to the model, thereby introducing exibility. In addition, as the data becomes available from the Corporate Business System, the intermediary database gathers and manages the model data. Thus time, eort and errors can be dramatically reduced if the intermediary database automatically refers to the data in the Corporate Business System. Except for one specic case detailed below, this method is not apparent within the industry. This methodology is currently being tackled and developed by a major US car manufacturer, who need this level of integration. Although the intermediary database shown in Fig. 5 will in fact be a spreadsheet that is populated by the corporate business system. It is unclear how eective this case may prove as it is still under development.

358

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

Fig. 4. Possible data collection methods for model building.

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

359

Fig. 5. Example of data group referral for methodology c in Fig. 4.

360

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

(d) In this methodology the model automatically collects data from the Corporate Business Systems via an interface as and when required in order to run the model. Essentially the model is referred to an external location to read the data directly from the Corporate Data Systems. Again the data are stored externally to the model, thereby inducing exibility. In addition, as the model is built it is referred to sources within the Corporate Business System. The automated referral system dramatically reduces time, eort and errors. There is a major drawback due to the complexity and size of this methodology, as there are so many dierent sources there will inevitably be an alternative source for the same data item. This data duplication may cause a problem in terms of data accuracy, reliability and validity. A further hindrance is that in some situations the data that is referred to in the model may not be available at the source when the model refers to it. This methodology is extremely complex to set up and it is apparent only in one isolated case within the industry where it is used for System Management as opposed to System Design. This methodology is being accomplished by a major US aerospace company, who has developed an interface that relates directly to the business system and the model. It is used for System Management as it used for routine modelling of the production line on a day to day basis. It rapidly modies the production line when circumstances change, such as amendments to the schedule provided by the corporate business system. It then recommends actions to be taken in order to meet the amended requirements. This set-up is for System Management rather than System Design, as the possible congurations of the system are already known, simplifying the modelling process for System Management.

5. Integration is the future for simulation It is apparent that the methodologies (c & d) in Fig. 4 to integrate the simulation model to the Corporate Business Systems could be the solution for the data collection process, as it would increase the data accuracy and reliability whilst also minimising data collection eorts. This solution has been seen and acted upon by each case example provided for the two methodologies, and it is hypothesised that other organisations will follow this path. This integration is extremely dicult to establish, but the long term benets such as easier data collection, increased data accuracy, reliability and validity, decreased data duplication, and being able to obtain the data as soon as it becomes available are all lucrative advantages. It is evident that these types of integration mentioned are particularly suited to System Management for applications in production planning, as the application of integration to System Design is more complex. The Corporate Business Systems mentioned have over recent years evolved to be incorporated to a single extended information management system known as ERP. ERP systems are now being used to manage a huge amount of the information within an enterprise. They evolved out of MRP and MRPII and then crossed over into the elds of Finance, Sales and Human Resources. Hence, these interoperable systems can be divided into, Sales and Distribution, Human Resource, Finance and

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

361

Manufacturing [1]. ERP systems are particularly advanced in the larger industries, where such systems are very complex but highly benecial, such as the aerospace and automotive industries. Due to the complexity and level of detail required for model building, it is acknowledged that not all of the required information will be available through the ERP medium. Hence, other software tools such as CAD, CAM, PDM and some additional specialist tools are commonly used to support ERP systems, in order to complete the corporate business system. The remainder of the information will be from the other three sources mentioned in Fig. 2, the model builder, the project team, and the external reference systems. But still it must be acknowledged that the ERP system is a prime source for the model data as it contains information required by the tool.

6. Solution It is recognised that the manufacturing industry has recently adopted these extensive ERP systems in order to manage data across their enterprise. Hence, a logical solution to reduce data collection eorts during model building is to integrate the simulation data required by the simulation model with the data available in the ERP system. Such an automated solution, once established, would minimise the efforts for data collection and validation by the model builder, thus permitting the concentration of eort on other stages in the simulation process (Fig. 1). This solution is currently being addressed by the authors under a European research grant. This work programme involves three related aspects: the simulation tools used, the business system and the interface between the two. The research methodology used by the authors has so far resulted in the following: Identied the data requirements for each simulation tool through levels of decomposition, Identied the data stored within ERP systems, Proposed methodologies and mechanisms to enable integration (Fig. 4). This research is to be supplemented by the implementation of a physical test case within the industry. This will aim to provide the integration through the methodologies proposed, using a single simulation tool (DES) and a fully operational ERP system. It is hypothesised by the authors that methodology c in Fig. 4 will be tackled due to the inherent exibility provided by the database structure. It is also envisaged that the database will form a point of reference for other data sources external to the ERP system, such as the Project Team, the Model Builder and the External Reference Systems. An example of methodology c is provided in Fig. 5 below. It illustrates how the intermediary database would automatically extract and then store the simulation data contained within the ERP system. The intermediary database is updated through regular data extraction cycles, to mirror the ERP system. The simulation

362

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

model then refers to the intermediary database when it is run. Hence the coding that underpins the model requests the data from the database and subsequently receives the data. Enabling the model to run with real data and provide results. This test case will be initiated by the development of a data map representing the actual data storage locations within a physical ERP system. Such an interface to an ERP system will inevitably raise some problems that will be addressed. These obstacles are envisaged to be those described below and they may explain why these two types of integration are not evident within the industry. For System Design the data availability from an ERP system may be slow/intermittent, due to its iterative nature (Fig. 3). There is no industry standard ERP structure. ERP systems have a variety of unique structures to address the specic needs of an organisation. Writing interfaces to compute and provide the data required by the models is a major eort [6]. Additional data that ERP systems do not contain may also be required, such as policies, procedures, etc. ERP systems have a stronger emphasis on deterministic data as opposed to the stochastic data that is also required by simulation models [8]. Hence, diculties may be encountered if some stochastic data is not available or cannot be derived from historical data held on ERP systems. The authors research will aim to establish whether these obstacles can be overcome. The vendors of ERP systems have recognised the need for external applications to be able to access the data ERP systems contain, hence they have developed adapters or ports that enable the communication between the ERP system and dierent external or foreign applications. The adapter enables a multitude of dierent programming languages to talk to the ERP system, thus the external application can read information through the portal provided by the vendor. This level of communication has the potential to take a step further, as it is recognised that ERP vendors could in fact embed the functionality of simulation into its ERP application set. This may become apparent in the future if ERP vendors start collaborating with or acquiring simulation companies.

7. Conclusion Numerous issues that directly inuence the data collection process on the part of the model builder have been highlighted and discussed. Potential solutions to these problems have been identied. Two methodologies have been proposed to achieve such a solution and two leading industrial examples have been outlined. Both of these methodologies aim to reduce data collection eorts for model building by developing an automated interface between the simulation tools and the organisations corporate business systems, specically the ERP system. The perceived benets of such integration for data gathering are a vast reduction in terms of time and eort,

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

363

unsurpassed levels of data accuracy, reliability and validity, a signicant decline in data duplication and nally immediate availability of data as it is released into the business. The concept of automatic data collection through an interface between the simulation model and Corporate Business Systems is still in the distant future. The pressure is on practitioners, researchers and vendors, to address these issues within the simulation industry. The initiative should be taken by the simulation vendors to develop interfaces with major ERP vendors; additionally this would also prove to be a natural way to move simulation into the business mainstream [2]. The onus on the part of the researchers is that attempts and test cases for this interface must be made in order for the potential to be realised and then disseminate it to industry.

References
[1] M.B. Algeo, Enterprise resource planning systems for manufacturing, in: Information Technology for Engineering and Manufacturing by National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Gaithersburg, Maryland, September 910, 1998. [2] J. Banks, What does industry need from simulation vendors in Y2K and after? A panel discussion, in: Proceedings of the 1999 Winter Simulation Conference, Arizona, USA, December 1999. [3] W.J. Davis, Simulation: technologies in the new millennium, in: Proceedings of the 1999 Winter Simulation Conference, Arizona, USA, December, 1999. [4] M. Hitchcock, A. Baker, J. Brink, The role of hybrid systems theory in virtual manufacturing, in: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference, 1994, pp. 345350. [5] IMTR, Modelling and Simulation, Integrated Manufacturing Technology Roadmapping Project (IMTR), Tennessee, USA, December, 1999. [6] S. Jain, Simulation in the next millennium, in: Proceedings of the 1999 Winter Simulation Conference, Arizona, USA, December, 1999. [7] T. Johnson, Building data-driven template models, in: AutoSimulations Symposium 1999 Driving the Golden Spike, June 711, 1999. [8] W.D. Kelton, R.P. Sadowski, D.A. Sadowski, in: Simulation with Arena, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1998, pp. 131132. [9] A.M. Law, D.W. Kelton, Simulation Modelling and Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York, 2000. [10] K. Liyanage, Methodology for input data modelling in the simulation of manufacturing systems, Ph.D. Thesis, Sheeld Hallam University, UK, 1999. [11] S.R.E. Luker, H.H. Adelberger, Intelligent simulation environments, in: Intelligent Simulation Environment, San Diego, 1986, pp. 150156. [12] A.W. Lung, Develop a consistent front-end approach to aid manufacturing simulation modelling, in: 3rd International Conference on Manufacturing Technology, 1995, pp. 445459. [13] C. Murphy, S. Murphy, T. Perera, N. Robertson, Simulation in aerospace industry: applications, software and integration, in: Conference on Achieving Excellence in Aircraft and Aviation, Atlanta, Georgia, October 1617, 2000. [14] S. Murphy, T. Perera, Successes and Failures in UK/US Development of Simulation, Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 333348. [15] L.A. Oakshott, Business Modelling and Simulation, Pitman Publishers, London, UK, 1997. [16] M. Pidd, Five simple principals of modelling, in: Proceedings of the 1996 Winter Simulation Conference, USA, December, 1996. [17] S. Robinson, Successful Simulation A Practical Approach to Simulation Projects, McGraw-Hill, UK, 1994. [18] S. Robinson, V. Bhatia, Secrets of Successful Simulation Projects, in: Proceedings of the 1995 Winter Simulation Conference, Arlington, USA, 1995, pp. 6167.

364

N. Robertson, T. Perera / Simulation Practice and Theory 9 (2002) 349364

[19] C. Shukla, M. Vazquez, F. Chen, Virtual manufacturing: An overview, in: International Conference on Computers and Industrial Engineering, vol. 31, No. 1/2, 1996, pp. 7982. [20] W.J. Tryrula, Building simulation models without data, in: Proceedings of the IEEE Conference of Systems, Man and Cybernetics, USA, 1994, pp. 109111. [21] B. Tye, T. Perera, Simulation Model Design Handbook, Sheeld Hallam University, UK, 1997, Unpublished.