Redesign of the AutoStore order processing line

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

•

26,24 26,49 30,87 29,87 30,49 30,75 31,84 31,72 31,69 36,28

27,07 27,44 31,23 31,20 30,83 32,76 31,90 31,90 35,96 36,59

27,45 28,06 29,31 31,66 31,54 33,05 31,60 31,93 36,27 36,51

22,93 22,79 29,75 29,58 30,35 33,8 32,53 36,1 37,08

20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

BASE LAYOUT BASE LAYOUT + BALANCING BASE LAYOUT + BALANCING + AUTOMATED PACKING DISTANCE MINIMIZATION LAYOUT DISTANCE MINIMIZATION LAYOUT + BALANCING DISTANCE MINIMIZATION LAYOUT + ONLINE BALANCING CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT + BALANCING CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT + ONLINE BALANCING CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT + ONLINE BALANCING + AUTOMATED PACKING

Productivity (orders/manhour) ^100% ^125% ^150% ^200%

(8)

(9)

(10)

(11)

(12)

(13)

(14)

(15)

(16)

(17)

(18)

(19)

(20)

•

(21)

•

(22)

(23)

Phase 1 Identification of the problem

Phase 2 Formulation of

problem approach

Phase 3 Analysis of the

problem

Phase 4 Generation of

alternative solutions Phase 5

Choice of the best alternative Phase 6

Implementation of the chosen

solution Phase 7 Evaluation of

process and outcome

(24)

Effects for storage allocation/operations

Creating an implementation model that determines which orders should be processed by the autostore, in which sequence and using which machines or processing paths

Selection of the best solution

Weighing of different KPIs and adressing pros and cons of the alternatives Layout evaluation

Simulation study Productivity evaluation for all alternatives

New layout design

Elaborated versions of the alternatives generated in the previous phase Generation of alternatives

Using internal and external ideas for new layout designs Current situation analysis

Requirements for product families

Requirements for the processing

line Customer requirements Expected growth and

innovations

(25)

2

• Literature research - Which relevant theory can be found in literature?

1

• Current situation analysis - What does the current system look like in detail?

• Model design - How can we model the AutoStore order processing line?

3 • Generated alternatives - Which promising alternatives should be investigated?

4, 5 • Evaluation of alternatives - What will be the effects of the various new layouts?

• Conclusion, recommendations and further research

(26)

(27)

•

(28)

✅ ✅

✅ ✅ ✅

✅ ✅

✅

✅ ✅

(29)

✅ ✅

✅ ✅ ✅ ✅

✅ ✅

(30)

(31)

𝑚𝑖𝑛 ∑ ∑(𝑐_𝑖𝑗^𝐻𝑑_𝑖𝑗^𝐻+ 𝑐_𝑖𝑗^𝑉𝑑_𝑖𝑗^𝑉)𝑓𝑖𝑗 𝑁

𝑗=1 𝑁

𝑖=1

𝑐_𝑖𝑗^𝐻 𝑑_𝑖𝑗^𝐻

𝑐_𝑖𝑗^𝑉 𝑑_𝑖𝑗^𝑉 𝑓_𝑖𝑗

(32)

(33)

(34)

𝑎𝑖𝑗 = 1 𝑖𝑓 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑑𝑢𝑐𝑡 𝑖 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑛 𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑎𝑡 𝑚𝑎𝑐ℎ𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑗 , 0 𝑜𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑤𝑖𝑠𝑒

𝑆_𝑖𝑗^𝑚= ^∑ ^𝑎^𝑖𝑘^𝑎^𝑗𝑘

𝑝 𝑘=1

∑^𝑝_𝑘=1(𝑎_𝑖𝑘+𝑎_𝑗𝑘−𝑎_𝑖𝑘𝑎_𝑗𝑘)

𝑆_𝑖𝑗^𝑚 𝑎𝑖𝑘

𝑆_𝑖𝑗^𝑝 = ^∑ ^𝑎^𝑘𝑖^𝑎^𝑘𝑗

𝑚𝑘=1

∑^𝑚_𝑘=1(𝑎_𝑘𝑖+𝑎_𝑘𝑗−𝑎_𝑘𝑖𝑎_𝑘𝑗)

(35)

𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑖𝑧𝑒 ∑ ∑ 𝑆_𝑖𝑗^𝑝𝑥𝑖𝑗 𝑝

𝑗=1 𝑝

𝑖=1

𝑠𝑢𝑏𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡 𝑡𝑜:

∑ 𝑥𝑖𝑗 = 1,

𝑝

𝑗=1

𝑖 = 1,2, … , 𝑝

∑ 𝑥_𝑗𝑗= 𝑛

𝑝

𝑗=1

,

𝑥_𝑖𝑗 ≤ 𝑥_𝑗𝑗, 𝑖, 𝑗 = 1,2, … , 𝑝, 𝑥𝑖𝑗 ∈ {0,1}, 𝑖, 𝑗 = 1,2, … , 𝑝,

𝑆_𝑖𝑗^𝑝 𝑥_𝑖𝑗

𝑥_𝑖𝑗 = 1 𝑥_𝑖𝑗 = 0 𝑛

(36)

𝑊𝑜𝑟𝑘 𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛𝑠 𝑘 = 1, … , 𝑚 𝑇𝑎𝑠𝑘 𝑠𝑒𝑡 𝑉 = {1 … 𝑛}

𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑙𝑜𝑎𝑑 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑚𝑏𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑜𝑛𝑒 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑝𝑖𝑒𝑐𝑒 = 𝑡_𝑠𝑢𝑚 𝑆𝑒𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑎𝑠𝑘𝑠 𝑎𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑔𝑛𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑘𝑠𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑘 = 𝑆𝑘 (𝑘 = 1, … , 𝑚)

𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑡𝑖𝑚𝑒 = 𝑇(𝑆𝑘) = ∑ 𝑡𝑗 𝑗𝜖𝑆_𝑘

(37)

𝑀𝑖𝑛 ∑ ∑ |𝑇(𝑆_𝑥) − 𝑇(𝑆_𝑦)|

𝑦 𝑥

𝑇(𝑆𝑥) = ∑𝑗𝜖𝑆_𝑥𝑡𝑗

𝑇(𝑆_𝑦) = ∑_𝑗𝜖𝑆_𝑦𝑡_𝑗

(38)

•

(39)

(40)

(41)

(42)

(43)

(44)

(45)

(46)

(47)

39% 36%

67% 77% 75% 75%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Utilization PP1 Utilization PP2 Utilization PP3 Utilization OC1 Utilization OC2 Utilization OC3

(48)

•

(49)

(50)

Order

Orderline (T-shirt)

Item Item Item

Orderline (Socks) Item Item

Orderline (Glasses)

Item

(51)

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday Sunday

Orders

0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

00:00 - 01:59

02:00 - 03:59

04:00 - 05:59

06:00 - 07:59

08:00 - 09:59

10:00 - 11:59

12:00 - 13:59

14:00 - 15:59

16:00 - 17:59

18:00 - 19:59

20:00 - 21:59

22:00 - 23:59

Order inflow per hour

Timeframe

Average amount of orders Cumulative

(52)

𝐸𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑦 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟𝑠 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑐𝑒𝑠𝑠𝑒𝑑 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 𝑑𝑒𝑝𝑙𝑜𝑦𝑒𝑑

(53)

•

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

ma di wo do vr za zo

Productivity

(54)

(55)

(56)

(57)

•

(58)

(59)

(60)

•

β

•

(61)

•

(62)

(63)

•

(64)

•

(65)

(66)

(67)

(68)

𝛼 = (^𝜇

𝑠)² 𝛽 = ^𝑠²

𝜇

𝜇 𝑠 𝑠²

0 0,01 0,02 0,03 0,04 0,05 0,06 0,07 0,08 0,09

1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35 37 39

Gamma distribution fit

Actual data Gamma distribution(8,095, 1.305)

(69)

219 220=

λ

𝐴𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦 = ^{𝑀𝑇𝑇𝐹}

𝑀𝑇𝑇𝐹+𝑀𝑇𝑇𝑅

(70)

(71)

(72)

(73)

(74)

(75)

•

(76)

(77)

(78)

(79)

𝑚𝑖𝑛 ∑ ∑(𝑐𝑖𝑗𝐻𝑑𝑖𝑗𝐻+ 𝑐_𝑖𝑗^𝑉𝑑_𝑖𝑗^𝑉)𝑓𝑖𝑗 𝑁

𝑗=1 𝑁

𝑖=1

𝑚𝑖𝑛 ∑ ∑(𝑐𝑖𝑗𝑑𝑖𝑗)𝑓𝑖𝑗 𝑁

𝑗=1 𝑁

𝑖=1

𝑓𝑖𝑗 𝑐𝑖𝑗

𝑑_𝑖𝑗

𝑐𝑖𝑗 𝑓𝑖𝑗

𝑑_𝑖𝑗

(80)

(81)

(82)

(83)

𝑆_𝑖𝑗^𝑚= ^∑ ^𝑎^𝑖𝑘^𝑎^𝑗𝑘

𝑝 𝑘=1

∑^𝑝_𝑘=1(𝑎_𝑖𝑘+𝑎_𝑗𝑘−𝑎_𝑖𝑘𝑎_𝑗𝑘)

𝑆_𝑖𝑗^𝑚 𝑖 𝑗 𝑝 𝑎𝑖𝑘

(84)

(85)

(86)

(87)

(88)

(89)

(90)

(91)

(92)

(93)

(94)

α ϒ

(95)

(96)

(97)

(98)

26,24 29,87 31,84

27,07 31,20 31,90

27,45 31,66 31,60

22,93 29,58

20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34

B A S E L A Y O U T D I S T A N C E M I N I M I Z A T I O N L A Y O U T

C E L L U L A R M A N U F A C T U R I N G

L A Y O U T

Productivity

100% 125% 150% 200%

(99)

26,24 26,49 30,87

27,07 27,44 31,23

27,45 28,06 29,31

22,93 22,79 29,75

20 22 24 26 28 30 32

B A S E L A Y O U T B A S E L A Y O U T B A L A N C E D B A S E L A Y O U T B A L A N C E D A U T O M A T E D P A C K I N G

Productivity

100% 125% 150% 200%

(100)

29,87 30,49 30,7531,20 30,83 32,76

31,66 31,54 33,05

29,58 30,35 33,8

27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35

D I S T A N C E M I N I M I Z A T I O N L A Y O U T

D I S T A N C E M I N I M I Z A T I O N L A Y O U T B A L A N C E D

D I S T A N C E M I N I M I Z A T I O N L A Y O U T B A L A N C E D O N L I N E

PRODUCTIVITY

100% 125% 150% 200%

(101)

31,84 31,72 31,69 36,28

31,90 31,90 35,96 36,59

31,60 31,93 36,27 36,51

32,53 36,1 37,08

30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38

C E L L U L A R M A N U F A C T U R I N G

L A Y O U T

C E L L U L A R M A N U F A C T U R I N G L A Y O U T B A L A N C E D

O N L I N E

C E L L U L A R M A N U F A C T U R I N G L A Y O U T B A L A N C E D O N L I N E A U T O M A T E D

P A C K I N G

Productivity

100% 125% 150% 200%

(102)

(103)

€0,00

€0,20

€0,40

€0,60

€0,80

€1,00

€1,20

€1,40

20 25 30 35 40

Labour costs per order (€)

Productivity

(104)

€- €2.974,95 €47.278,83 €38.308,38 €43.939,37 €46.233,18 €55.441,80 €54.459,01 €54.212,15 €87.234,60

BASE LAYOUT BASE LAYOUT BALANCED BASE LAYOUT BALANCED AUTOMATED PACKING DISTANCE MINIMIZATION LAYOUT DISTANCE MINIMIZATION LAYOUT BALANCED DISTANCE MINIMIZATION LAYOUT BALANCED ONLINE CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT BALANCED CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT BALANCED ONLINE CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT BALANCED ONLINE AUTOMATED PACKING

(105)

€- €- €165.390,10 €162.194,30 €176.383,24 €232.019,75 €- €212.911,58 €263.202,90 €275.314,33

BASE LAYOUT BASE LAYOUT BALANCED BASE LAYOUT BALANCED AUTOMATED PACKING DISTANCE MINIMIZATION LAYOUT DISTANCE MINIMIZATION LAYOUT BALANCED DISTANCE MINIMIZATION LAYOUT BALANCED ONLINE CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT BALANCED CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT BALANCED ONLINE CELLULAR MANUFACTURING LAYOUT BALANCED ONLINE AUTOMATED PACKING

(106)

(107)

(108)

(109)

•

(110)

•

(111)

•

(112)

(113)

(114)

26,24 26,49 30,87 29,87 30,49 30,75 31,84 31,72 31,69 36,28

27,07 27,44 31,23 31,20 30,83 32,76 31,90 31,90 35,96 36,59

27,45 28,06 29,31 31,66 31,54 33,05 31,60 31,93 36,27 36,51

22,93 22,79 29,75 29,58 30,35 33,8 32,53 36,1 37,08

20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Productivity

100% 125% 150% 200%

(115)

(116)

(117)

Base Layout

Base Layout + Balancing

Base Layout + Balancing + Automated Packing Distance Minimization Layout

Distance Minimization Layout + Balancing Distance Minimization Layout + Online Balancing Cellular Manufacturing Layout

Cellular Manufacturing Layout + Balancing Cellular Manufacturing Layout + Online Balancing

Cellular Manufacturing Layout + Online Balancing + Automated Packing

26,24 26,49 30,87 29,87 30,49 30,75 31,84 31,72 31,69 36,28

27,07 27,44 31,23 31,20 30,83 32,76 31,90 31,90 35,96 36,59

27,45 28,06 29,31 31,66 31,54 33,05 31,60 31,93 36,27 36,51

22,93 22,79 29,75 29,58 30,35 33,8 32,53 36,1 37,08

20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36 38

Productivity

100% 125% 150% 200%

(118)

(119)

(120)

(121)

(122)

(123)

(124)

Final amount of entries : 17 amount of entries : 322

Exclude (-305) Filtering based on title and abstract and removing overlap

amount of entries: 1055

Exclude (- 733 ) Articles with < 10 citations

Refine (-73) Only articles in the "Business, management and accounting" and the

"Engineering"catagory

(125)

Final amount of entries : 4 amount of entries : 45

Exclusion (-41) Inspection of title and thereafter the abstract

Refine (-12) Subject area: Business AND Engineering

Refine (-101) Only articles that contain "Manufacturing"

(126)

Final amount of entries : 12 amount of entries :152

Exclude (-140) Inspection of title and thereafter the abstract amount of entries: 594

Exclude (-442) Only article with > 10 citations amount of entries: 807

Refine (-343) Only articles that are related to Engineering

(127)

(128)

(129)

(130)

(131)

(132)

(133)

(134)

(135)

(136)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50

Frequency

Bin

Frequency Expected

(137)

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Theoretical quartiles

Sample quartiles

0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9 1

0 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1

Expected cumulative probability

Observed cumulative probability

(138)

(139)

(140)

(141)

(142)