perancangan tata letak fasilitas - universitas...
TRANSCRIPT
16/03/2015
1
Perancangan Tata Letak Fasilitas
www.aeunike.ub.ac.id
Layout Problems
• Design or Optimization?
Aesthetics Aesthetics
Aesthetics Aesthetics
16/03/2015
2
Aesthetics Aesthetics
Aesthetics Aesthetics
Aesthetics Facility Layout Process
• Combination of art and engineering
• Many techniques available
– Muther’s SLP Approach (1973)
– Optimization based approaches
16/03/2015
3
Systematic Layout Planning
• Phase I - Determination of the location of the area where departments are to be laid out
• Phase II - Establishing the general overall layout
• Phase III - Establishing detailed layout plans
• Phase IV - Installing the selected layout
Systematic Layout Planning Input Data and Activities
1. Flow of materials 2. Activity Relationships
6. Space Relationship
Diagram
5. Space Available 4. Space Requirements
3. Relationship Chart
8. Practical Limitations 7. Modifying Considerations
9. Develop Layout
Alternatives
10. Evaluation
AN
ALY
ZE
SEA
RC
H
SELE
CT
Source: John S. Usher class notes
Systematic Layout Planning
• P Product: Types of products to be produced
• Q Quantity: Volume of each part type
• R Routing: Operation sequence for each part type
• S Services: Support services, locker rooms, inspection stations, and so on
• T Timing: When are the part types to be produced? What machines will be used during this time period?
SLP
16/03/2015
4
SLP
COPYRIGHT 2005. RICHARD MUTHER & ASSOCIATES – SLP OVERVIEW
Sample relationship diagram
1 2
4
3
5
COPYRIGHT 2005. RICHARD MUTHER & ASSOCIATES – SLP OVERVIEW
PLANT
KANTOR
Level 0 (Overall Layout)
DIRECTOR ROOM
MEETING ROOM
INSPECTIONSTAFF & OPERATOR OF PRODUCTION ENGINEER, OPERATOR AND
STAFF OF MAINTENANCE’S
6
SECRETARY
RE
CE
PT
ION
IST
down
PRIA
MARKETING
MANAGER
PRODUCTION
MANAGERR & D MANAGER
HRD
MANAGER
ADMINISTRATION
AND FINANCE
MANAGER
LOGISTICS
WANITA
MUSHOLLA
TEMPAT
WUDHU
ST
AF
MA
RK
ET
ING
ST
AF
OF
AD
MIN
IST
RA
TIO
N
AN
D
FIN
AN
CE
TEMPAT
WUDHU
KM
( PRIA)
KM
( WANITA)
5
6
1
67
5 1 8 6 4
46
11
4 4 5 4
3
954
2,5
3
1
Lantai 2 : Office Room
Jalan
Office
Office
Office
Cuttin
g m
achin
e
xy
xy
xy
xy
xy
xy
xy
xy
xy
Injection moldingGrinding machine
Rolling machine
Welding machine
Form
ing m
achin
e
2
Power Entry
2
2 Tool CabinetR
a
k
Rak
PUNCH 25 TON
MQC
Packaging
Ruang Assembly
MQC
P P P
PP P
Press machine
Ruang Supply Mesin
Ruang Perkakas
MQC
Raw Material Storage
Warehouse
Up Elevator
FP FPFP
FPFPFP
Ruang
Kesehatan
Ruang Ganti Wanita
Ruang Ganti Pria
LP
Toilet Pria Toilet Wanita
T. Wudhu PriaT. Wudhu Wanita
Mushollah Pria Mushollah Wanita
1.0e-2 m. x
1.0e-2 m.
1.0e-2 m. x
1.0e-2 m.1.0e-2 m. x
1.0e-2 m.
Kantin
Ruang Receptionist
Pos Satpam
Jalan
Jalan
1.0e-2 m. x
1.0e-2 m.
Parkir Mobil
Parkir Sepeda
Motor
B
B
A D D A A
RE
ST
AR
EA
Jalan Raya Rungkut Industri
18 m
24 m
4 m Receiving Area
Delivering Area14 m
3 m 3 m 4 m 4 m
3 m 3 m 3 m 2.5 m 2.5 m 2 m 6 m 2 m
4 m
3 m
2 m
4.5 m
4.5 m
6 m
8 m
6 m
Daerah Penerimaan
Daerah Pengiriman
PARKIR
DIRECTOR ROOM
MEETING ROOM
INSPECTIONSTAFF & OPERATOR OF PRODUCTION ENGINEER, OPERATOR AND
STAFF OF MAINTENANCE’S
6
SECRETARY
RE
CE
PT
IO
NIS
T
down
PRIA
MARKETING
MANAGER
PRODUCTION
MANAGERR & D MANAGER
HRD
MANAGER
ADMINISTRATION
AND FINANCE
MANAGER
LOGISTICS
WANITA
MUSHOLLA
TEMPAT
WUDHU
ST
AF
M
AR
KE
TIN
G
ST
AF
O
F A
DM
IN
IS
TR
AT
IO
N
AN
D
FIN
AN
CE
TEMPAT
WUDHU
KM
( PRIA)
KM
( WANITA)
5
6
1
67
5 1 8 6 4
46
11
4 4 5 4
3
954
2,5
3
1
Lantai 2 : Office Room
Level 1 Detail Layout
16/03/2015
5
Jalan
Office
Office
Office
Cuttin
g m
achin
e
xy
xy
xy
xy
xy
xy
xy
xy
xy
Injection moldingGrinding machine
Rolling machine
Welding machine
Form
ing m
achin
e
2
Power Entry
2
2 Tool CabinetR
a
k
Rak
PUNCH 25 TON
MQC
Packaging
Ruang Assembly
MQC
P P P
PP P
Press machine
Ruang Supply Mesin
Ruang Perkakas
MQC
Raw Material Storage
Warehouse
Up Elevator
FP FPFP
FPFPFP
Ruang
Kesehatan
Ruang Ganti Wanita
Ruang Ganti Pria
LP
Toilet Pria Toilet Wanita
T. Wudhu PriaT. Wudhu Wanita
Mushollah Pria Mushollah Wanita
1.0e-2 m. x
1.0e-2 m.
1.0e-2 m. x
1.0e-2 m.1.0e-2 m. x
1.0e-2 m.
Kantin
Ruang Receptionist
Pos Satpam
Jalan
Jalan
1.0e-2 m. x
1.0e-2 m.
Parkir Mobil
Parkir Sepeda
Motor
B
B
A D D A A
R
ES
T
AR
EA
Jalan Raya Rungkut Industri
18 m
24 m
4 m Receiving Area
Delivering Area14 m
3 m 3 m 4 m 4 m
3 m 3 m 3 m 2.5 m 2.5 m 2 m 6 m 2 m
4 m
3 m
2 m
4.5 m
4.5 m
6 m
8 m
6 m
Daerah Penerimaan
Daerah Pengiriman
Level 1 Detail Layout
Level 2 Detail Layout
STA
F O
F A
DM
INIS
TRA
TIO
N
AN
D
FIN
AN
CE
7
ST
AF
MA
RK
ET
ING
6
5
Level 2 Detail Layout
RE
CE
PT
ION
IST
5
6
1
EN
GIN
EE
R, O
PE
RA
TOR
AN
D
STA
FF O
F M
AIN
TEN
AN
CE
’S
6
4
Level 2 Detail Layout
TEMPAT
WUDHU
TEMPAT
WUDHU
4
4
KM PRIA KM WANITA
PRIA WANITA
MUSHOLLA
5
4
MEETING ROOM
6
4
0,52
ST
AF
F &
OP
ER
AT
OR
OF
PR
OD
UC
TIO
N
6
6
Special Considerations in Office Layout
• Minimizing distance traveled by employees
• Permitting flexibility so that the current layout can be changed, expanded or downsized easily
• Providing a safe and pleasant atmosphere for people to work in
• Minimizing capital and operational costs of the facility
Operations Review
• Is the company outgrowing available space? • Is the available space too expensive? • Is the current building not in the proper location? • How will a new office layout affect the organization? • Are office operations too centralized or
decentralized? • Does the office structure support the strategic plan? • Is the office layout in tune with the company's
image?
16/03/2015
6
Cubicles layout Albany International Airport layout
Operations Review for MortAmerica, Inc.
• Is there a significant increase in mortgage lending operations of MortAmerica, Inc.?
• Are the costs of leasing and refurbishing interior space too high?
• Is there a problem with the current location? For example: – There is not enough space for expansion
– Major attorneys’ offices, other related financial institutions and restaurants, are not located within a reasonable distance of MortAmerica, Inc.
– Adequate parking space is not available
– Traffic is too congested
• Will a change in office location improve business?
SLP for MortAmerica, Inc.
• Evaluation
• Planning
• Site selection
• Design and layout
SLP for MortAmerica, Inc.
• Review current space utilization
• Determine space projections
• Determine level of interaction between departments
• Identifying special consideration
Current and Future Space Requirements
Categories of Employees and Number in Each Category Department Name Current/Future
Requirements Senior
Executive
Senior
Staff
Staff Clerical/Secretary Net
Space
Required
Gross
Space,
150%
of Net
Space
Current space/employee 150 100 75
Number of employees 1 4 1
Current total
space/category
150 400 75 625 938
Future space/employee 120 75
Number of employees 6 1
Customer Service (CS)
Future space/category 720 75 795 1,193
Current space/employee 200 100 75
Number of employees 2 10 2
Current total
space/category
400 1,000 150 1,550 2,325
Future space/employee 250 200 100 75
Number of employees 1 1 15 1
Mortgage processing/marketing
(MP/M)
Future space/category 250 200 1,500 75 2,025 3,038
Current space/employee 100 75
Number of employees 10 1
Current total
space/category
1,000 75 1,075 1,613
Future space/employee 80
Number of employees 5
Credit check (CC)
Future space/category 400 400 600
Current space/employee 200 100 90 75
Number of employees 2 4 15 5
Current total
space/category
400 400 1,350 375 2,525 3,788
Future space/employee 250 100 100 75
Number of employees 3 4 20 2
Operations Audit (O/A)
Future space/category 750 400 2,000 150 3,300 4,950
Current space/employee 250 200 100
Number of employees 5 2 5 Top management (TM)
Current total
space/category
1,250 400 500 2,150 3,225
Future space/employee 250 200 100
16/03/2015
7
Current and Future Space Requirements
Support service area Current net
space
Current gross space150% of
net space Future net space
Future gross space 150% of
net space
Copying/Printing Area (C/P) 300 450 465 700
File Storage Room (FS) 300 450 80 120
Customer Waiting Lounge (CW) 300 450 800 1200
Conference Rooms (CR) 500 750 1000 1500
Employee Break Room (EBR) 200 300 850 1275
Rest Rooms (RR) 200 300 500 750
Total 1800 2700 3695 5545
Relationship diagram for MortAmerica, Inc.
Customer service (CS)
Mortgage processing (MP)
Credit check (CC)
Closing/underwriting (C/U)
Top Management (TM)
E
E
I
I
O
I
E
OI
Operations/audit (O/A)
Copying/printing (C/P)
Files storage (FS)
Customer waiting (CW)
Conference room (CR)
I
A
U
U
A
A
O
U
I
Employee break room (EBR)
Rest rooms (RR)
O
X
I
I
U
X
X
I
I
O
U
A
O
E
U
U
O
I
X
UU
U
U
O
I
I
U
I
I
X
X
U
U
I
I
U
U
U
A
U
U
I
A
U
O
O
O
A
Activity relationship diagram for MortAmerica, Inc.
MP
CS
CR
RR
CC
C/U
TM
CW
O/A
FS
C/P EBR
Space relationship diagram for MortAmerica, Inc.
MP
CS
CR
RR
CC
C/U
TM
CW
O/A
FS
C/P EBR
Pre-architectural layout for MortAmerica, Inc.
TM
MP
CC
C/U
CW
RR
M
RR
W
CS
CR
C/P
FS
EBR
O/A
Engineering design approach
8. Continuously review after implementation
1. Identify the problem
2. Gather the required data
3. Formulate a model for the problem
4. Develop an algorithm for the model and solve it
5. Generate alternative solutions, evaluate, and select
7. Implement the solution
16/03/2015
8
OSHA, ADA and Local Codes OSHA, ADA and Local Codes
Service and Manufacturing Facilities
Organization Showers Lavatories Water Closets Water
Fountain
Others
Restaurants - 1 per 200 1 per 75 1 per 500 1service
sink
Arenas (capacity
more than 3000)
- 1 per 200
(male); 1
per 150
(female)
1 per 120 (male); 1
per 60 (female)
1 per 1000 1 service
sink
Churches - 1 per 200 1 per 150 (male); 1
per 75 (female)
1 per 1000 1 service
sink
Schools - 1 per 50 1 per 50 1 per 100 1 service
sink
Airports - 1 per 750 1 per 500 1 per 1000 1 service
sink
Factories Section
411
1 per 100 1 per 100 1 per 1000 1 service
sink
Hospitals 1 per 15 1 per room 1 per room 1 per 100 1 service
sink
Prisons 1 per 15 1 per cell 1 per cell 1 per 100 1 service
sink
Hotels 1 per
room
1 per room 1 per room - 1 service
sink
Dormitories 1 per 8 1 per 10 1 per 10 1 per 100 1 service
sink
Basic Algorithms for The Layout Problem
Introduction (1) • A model by itself does not provide a solution to a
problem, however, algorithms or solution techniques
have to be developed to solve model
• An algorithm is a step-by-step procedure that finds a
solution to a model, and hence to the problem, in a finite
number of steps
• A number of algorithm have been proposed and these
may be classified as: (a) Optimal algoritms and (b)
Heuristic algorithms
• All optimal algorithms developed for the layout problem
require extremly high memory and computational time,
and they increase exponentially as the problem size
increases.
Introduction (2) • The heuristic algorithms are devided into tree classes:
1. Construction algorithms: starting with an empty layout, they add one department (or a set of departments) after another until all the departments are included in the layout
2. Improvement algorithms; systematically modify the starting solution and evaluate the resulting modified solution. If it is better, the modification is made permanent. If not, the systematic modification is continued until it is n longer possible to produce better solutions
3. Hybrid (composite) algorithms; algorithms that use two or more types of solution techniques
16/03/2015
9
Algorithmic Approaches
Layout algorithms can be classified according to:
Type of input data; qualitative flow data – quantitative flow data
Objective functions; minimizing of the sum of flows time distance – maximizing an adjacency score
Format they use for layout representation; discrete – continuous representation
Their primary function; layout improvement – layout construction
Construction Algorithms • Construction algorithms generate a facility layout from scratch.
• Starting with an empty layout, they add one department (or a set a departments) after another until all the departments are included in the layout
• Tha main difference among the various construction algorithms relate to the criteria used to determine the:
– First department to enter the layout
– Subsequent department or departments added to the layout
– Location of the first and subsequent departments in the layout
• Example: Modified Spanning Tree Algorithm for Single-row Layout Problem, Graph Theoritic Approach
Modified Spanning Tree (MST) Step 1: Given the flow matrix [fij], clearance matrix [dij] and machine
lengths li, compute an adjacency weight matrix [f’ij] where f’ij = (fij) (dij+0.5(li+lj))
Step 2: Find the largest element in [f’ ij], and the corresponding i, j. Denote this pair of i, j, as i*, j*. Connect machines i*, j*. Set f’i*j* = -
Step 3: Find the largest element f’ i*k, f’j*l in row i*, j* of matrix [f’ ij]. If f’i*k ≥ f’j*l, connect k to i*, remove row i*, column i* from matrix [fij] and set i*=k. otherwise, connect l to j*, remove row j*, column j* from matrix [f’ij] and set j*=l. Set f’i*j* = f’j*i* = -
Step 4: Repeat step 3 until all machine are connected. The sequence of machines obtained determines the arragement of machines
Modified Spanning Tree (MST)
Modified Spanning Tree (MST) 2-Opt Algorithm • Consider multirow layout problem in which the
departments are all squeres with equal area.
• Assume that the number of departments in every row
and column is equal to m and n
• The number of location in which the departments will be located is also equl to mn and is known
• 2-Opt algorithm is used to solve the same model (QAP or ABSModel 2) heuristically
. . . mn
. . . .
m+1 m+2 . .
1 2 … m
16/03/2015
10
2-Opt Algorithm Step 1: Let S be the initial solution provided by the user and
z its OFV. Set i=1; j=i+1=2
Step 2: Consider the exchange between the position of
department i and j in the solution S. If the exchange results in a solution S’ that has an OFV z’<z, set
z=z’ and S=S’. If j<mn, set j=j+1; otherwise, set i=i+1, j=i+1. If i<mn, repeat step 2; otherwise, go to step 3
Step 3: If set S=S*, z=z*, i=1, j=i+1=2 and go to step 2.
Otherwise, return S* as the best solution to the user. Stop
2-Opt Algorithm
2(1) 1(2) 1(2)
3-Opt Algorithm • The 3-Opt algorithm is similar to the 2-Opt algorithm
except that is considers exchanging the position of three departments at a time.
• If the layout problem with mn departments, 2-Opt consider mn(mn-1)/2 pairwise exchange for each layout
and 3-Opt considers (mn)!/[(mn-3)!3!] exchange.
• Because we are searching and evaluating more layouts in 3-Opt than in 2-Opt, 3-Opt should yield better results, but it also takes significantly more computation time
3-Opt Algorithm Step 1: Let S be the initial solution provided by the user and
z its OFV. Set S*=S, z*=z, i=1; j=i+1; k=j+1
Step 2: Consider changing the position of department i to
that of j, j to that of k, and k to that of i, simultaneously. If the resulting solution S’ has OFV
z’<z, set z*=z’ and S*=S’.
Step 3: If k<mn, set k=k+1, and repeat step 2. Otherwise, set j=j+1 and check if j<mn-1.
If j<mn-1, set k=j+1, and repeat step 2. Otherwise, set i=i+1, j=i+1, k=j+1, and check if i<mn-2.
If i<mn-2, repeat step 2. Otherwise, go to step 4
Step 4: If set S=S*, z=z*, i=1, j=i+k, k=j+1 and go to step 2. Otherwise, return S* as the best solution to the
user. Stop
Modified Penalty Algorithm • MP algorithm involve transforming the contrained
ABSModels into an unconstrained one using the penalty
method.
• The square of each constraint is multiplied by a penalty
parameter and placed in the objective function
0,,,
Subject to
32221
33332323131
22222222121
11112121111
3312121111
n
nn
nn
nn
nn
xxx
bxaxaxa
bxaxaxa
bxaxaxa
xcxcxcMinimize
Modified Penalty Algorithm • The constrained model is transformed into an
unconstrained model using penalty parameters 1, 2
dan 3
2322222221213
2
222222221212
111212111111
3312121111
,0max
,0max
,0max
bxaxaxa
bxaxaxa
xaxaxab
xcxcxcMinimize
nn
nn
nn
nn
16/03/2015
11
Modified Penalty Algorithm Step 0: Obtain values for from the user. Set S=initial
solution vector and z=corresponding OFV
Step 1: Transform the constrained model into an unconstrained one
Step 2: Solve the unconstrained minimization model using the Powel algorithm. If the OFV of the resulting
solution is less than or equal to z, set S*=new solution vector and z*=OFV corresponding to S*
Step 3: Modify solution vector S* so that a feasible
solution obained
Step 4: Improve the solution using greedy 2-Opt. Stop
Pairwise Exchange Method (1)
It is an improvement-type layout algorithm Its implementation with unequal-area
departments will be shown later via CRAFT, MULTIPLE
Example: Consider 4 department of equal size. The existing layout is shown
1 2 3 4
Pairwise Exchange Method (2)
To From
1 2 3 4
1 10 15 20
2 10 5
3 5
4
The objective function value for the existing layout:
TC1234=10(1) + 15(2) + 20(3) + 10(1) + 5(2) + 5(1) = 125
Pairwise Exchange Method (3)
Since all departments areas are assumed to be of equal size, the feasible exchanges of iteration 1 are 1-2, 1-3, 1-4, 2-3, 2-4, and 3-4
Select the pair 1-3 and perform the exchange in the layout
TC2134=10(1) + 15(1) + 20(2) + 10(2) + 5(3) + 5(1) = 105
TC3214=10(1) + 15(2) + 20(1) + 10(1) + 5(2) + 5(3) = 95
TC4231=10(2) + 15(1) + 20(3) + 10(1) + 5(1) + 5(2) = 120
TC1324=10(2) + 15(1) + 20(3) + 10(1) + 5(1) + 5(2) = 120
TC1432=10(3) + 15(2) + 20(2) + 10(1) + 5(2) + 5(1) = 105
TC1243=10(1) + 15(3) + 20(2) + 10(2) + 5(1) + 5(1) = 125
Pairwise Exchange Method (4)
For the next iteration, we consider all feasible exchange which consist of the same set as in iteration 1
The pair 2-3 is selected with a total cost value of 90. Continuing on, the third iteration
TC3124=10(1) + 15(1) + 20(2) + 10(1) + 5(1) + 5(3) = 95
TC1234=10(1) + 15(2) + 20(3) + 10(1) + 5(2) + 5(1) = 125
TC3241=10(2) + 15(1) + 20(3) + 10(1) + 5(1) + 5(2) = 120
TC1324=10(2) + 15(3) + 20(1) + 10(1) + 5(1) + 5(2) = 110
TC2314=10(2) + 15(1) + 20(1) + 10(1) + 5(3) + 5(2) = 90
TC3412=10(1) + 15(2) + 20(1) + 10(3) + 5(2) + 5(2) = 105
TC4213=10(1) + 15(1) + 20(1) + 10(2) + 5(1) + 5(2) = 105
Pairwise Exchange Method (5)
Since the lowest total cost is 95, which worse than the total cost value of 90 in the second iteration, the procedure terminated. The final layout arrangement is 2-3-1-4
TC3214=10(1) + 15(2) + 20(1) + 10(1) + 5(2) + 5(3) = 95
TC1324=10(2) + 15(1) + 20(3) + 10(1) + 5(1) + 5(2) = 120
TC3421=10(1) + 15(3) + 20(2) + 10(2) + 5(1) + 5(1) = 125
TC2134=10(1) + 15(1) + 20(2) + 10(2) + 5(3) + 5(1) = 105
TC3142=10(2) + 15(1) + 20(1) + 10(3) + 5(1) + 5(2) = 100
TC4123=10(1) + 15(2) + 20(1) + 10(1) + 5(2) + 5(3) = 95
2 3 1 4
16/03/2015
12
Pairwise Exchange Method (6)
The pairwise exchange procedure is not guaranted to yield the optimal layout solution because the final outcome is dependent on the initial layout, that is, a different initial layout can result in another solution (local optimality)
It may have observed that it is possible to cycle back to one of the alternative layout arrangements from a previous iteration
It can be easily accomplished only if the pair of departments considered are of equal size
Graph-based Method (1)
The graph-based method is a construction-type layout algorithm (its root graph theory)
It is often used with an adjacency-based objective
To find a maximally weighted block layout is equivalent to obtaining an adjacency graph with the maximum sum of arc weights
Graph-based Method (2) Graph-based Method (3)
Procedure Step 1 : Select department pair with the largest weight.
Ties, if any, are broken arbitrarily Step 2 : Select the third department to enter. The third
department is selected based on the sum of the weights with respect to selected departments in Step 1
Step 3 : Pick the fourth department to enter by evaluating the value of adding one of the unassigned departments represented by a node on a face of the graph. A face of a graph is a bounded region of a graph
Graph-based Method (4)
Step 4 : The remaining task is to determine on which face to insert the remaining department. The optimal solution can be found with a minimum total sum of arch weights
Step 5 : Having determined an adjacency graph, the final step is to construct a corresponding block layout. A block layout based on the final adjacency graph is made. The manner by which we constructed the block layout is analogous to the SLP method. We should note that in constructing the block layout, the original department shapes had to be altered significantly in order to satisfy the requirements of the adjacency graph
Graph-based Method (5)
16/03/2015
13
Graph-based
Method (6)
Graph-based Method (7)
CRAFT
Computerized Relative Allocation of Facilities Technique (Armour, Buffa, and Vollman, 1963)
Input data : from – to chart An improvement-type layout algorithm Departments represented in a discrete fashion It begins by determining the centroids of the
departments in the initial layout, then calculates the rectilinear distance between pairs of department centroids and stores values in a distance matrix
CRAFT next considers all-possible two-way (pairwise) or three-way department exchanges and identifies the best exchange ( maximal reduction in layout cost)
CRAFT
The next iteration starts with CRAFT once again identifying the best exchange by considering all-possible two-way or three-way exchanges in the (update) layout.
The process continuous until no further reduction in layout cost can be obtained
The final layout obtained in such a manner is also known as a two-opt (three-opt) layout
CRAFT
Initial CRAFT Layout
(z = 2974 x 20 = 59,480 units)
Intermidiate CRAFT Layout
(z = 2953 x 20 = 59,060 units)
Final CRAFT Layout
(z = 2833.50 x 20 = 56,670 units) Final “massaged” layout obtained
with CRAFT
16/03/2015
14
BLOCPLAN Departments arranged in bands which the number
of bands is determined by the program and limited to two or three bands
All the departments are rectangular in shape Input data: a relationship chart anda a from-to
chart, the two charts can be used only one at a time when evaluating a layout
Layout cost can be measured either by the distance-based objective or the adjacency-based objective
BLOCPLAN uses the continuous representation BLOCPLAN may be used both as a construction
algorithm and an improvement algorithm
LOGIC
Layout Optimization with Guillotine Induced Cuts (Tam, 1991)
Input data: a from-to chart
The layout is represented in a continuous fashion
A construction and improvement algorithm
LOGIC is based on dividing the building into smaller and smaller portions by executing successive “guillotine” cuts (straight lines that run from one end of the building to the other). Each cut is either a vertical cut or a horizontal cut
LOGIC
LOGIC LOGIC
16/03/2015
15
MULTIPLE
MULTI-floor Plant Layout Evaluation (Bozer, Meller, and Erlebacher, 1994) is similar to CRAFT
Input data: a from-to chart
It was originally develop for multiple-floor facilities (It can also be used in single-floor facilities)
The layout is represented in a discrete fashion
An improvement-type layout algorithm
MULTIPLE’s use of “spacefilling curves” (SFC) for exchange any two departments whether they are adjacent or not
MULTIPLE
Suppose the following area values are
given for six departments: A1=16,
A2=8, A3=4, A4=16, A5=8, and A6=12
REFERENCES
• Heragu, S. (2008). Facilities Design (3rd Ed.). CRC Press.
• Tompkins, White, Bozer and Tanchoco. (2010). Facilities Planning (4th Ed.). New York: Wiley.