AN OVERVIEW OF

SIMULATION , MODELLING
AND ANALYSIS OF
MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS

Dr. C S P Rao
NIT Warangal.
1
 Simulation
• Is the process of building a
mathematical or logical model of
a system or a decision problem,
and
• experimenting with the model to
obtain insight into the system’s
behavior or to assist in solving
the decision problem.

2
 Simulation
• Recent survey of management
science practitioners:
simulation and statistics have the
highest rate of application over all
other tools by over a 2:1 margin!

3
 Simulation
• Usually, a simulation model is a computer
model that imitates a real-life situation.
• It is like other mathematical models, but it
explicitly incorporates uncertainty in one
or more input quantities
• When we run simulation, we allow these
random quantities to take various values,
and we keep track of any resulting output
quantities of interest
• In this way, we are able to see how the
outputs vary as a function of the varying
inputs 4
 Simulation
• Is able do deal with problems
exhibiting significant uncertainty
• Shows the whole distribution of
results, not just best guesses
• Is useful for determining how
sensitive system is to changes in
operating conditions
• Enables us to experiment with a
system without actually building /
changing the physical system! 5
 Models

Prescriptive vs. Descriptive

Deterministic vs. Probabilistic

Discrete vs. Continuous

6
 Descriptive Models

Inputs: Outputs:
Simulation Measures of
Decision and Model
Uncontrollable Performance or
Variables Behavior: Output
variables

7
 Simulation Process
• Develop a conceptual model of the
system or problem under study
• Build the simulation model
• Verify and validate the model
• Design experiments using the
model
• Perform the experiment and
analyze the results
8
 Simulation Models
• Monte Carlo Simulation
• Distribution of an outcome variable
that depends on several
probabilistic variables
• Risk analysis
• System Simulation
• Models sequences of events that
occur over time

9
 Benefits and Limitations
• Does not require • Building models and
simplifying simulating is time-
assumptions consuming for complex
• Can deal with systems
problems not possible • Simulation results /
to solve analytically simulated systems are
• Provides an always approximations
experimental of the real ones
laboratory: possible to • Does not guarantee an
evaluate optimal solution - lack of
decisions/systems precise answers
without implementing • Should not be used
them indiscriminately in place
• Generally easier to of sound analytical 10

understand than models.

 Simulation modeling
• Simulation modeling on spreadsheets
is quite similar to other MgmtSci
modeling approaches
• Main difference:
• Simulation uses Random Numbers to
drive the whole process

11
 Simulation Modelling
• Simulation is a modelling and analysis tool
used for the purpose of designing planning
and control of manufacturing systems.
• Simulation may be defined as a concise
framework for the analysis and
understanding of a system.
• It is an abstract framework of a system
that facilitates imitating the behavior of
the system over a period of time.
• In contrast to mathematical models,
simulation models do not need explicit
mathematical functions to relate variables

12
• Therefore ,they are suitable for
representing complex systems to get a
feeling of real system.
• One of the greatest advantage of a
simulation models is that it can compress
or expand time.
• Simulation models can also be used to
observe a phenomenon that cannot be
observed at very small intervals of time.
• Simulation can also stops continuity of the
experiment.

13
• Simulation modelling techniques are
powerful for manipulation of time system
inputs, and logic.
• They are cost effective for modelling a
complex system, and with visual animation
capabilities they provide an effective
means of learning, experimenting, and
analyzing real-life complex systems such
as FMS.
• Simulation are capable of taking care of
stochastic variable without much
complexity.
• They enable the behavior of the system as
a whole to be predicted.
14
 WHEN SIMULATION IS
APPROPRIATE?
• Simulation enables the study of, and
experimentation with, the internal
interactions of a complex system, or of a
subsystem within a complex system.
• Informational, organizational, and
environmental changes can be simulated,
and the effect of these alterations on the
model’s behavior can be observed.

15
• The knowledge gained in designing a
simulation model may be of great value
toward suggesting improvement in the
system under investigation.
• By changing simulation inputs and
observing the resulting outputs, valuable
insight may be obtained into which
variables are most important and how
variables interact

16
• Simulation can be used as a pedagogical device
to reinforce analytic solution methodologies.
• Simulation can be used to experiment with new
designs or policies prior to implementation, so as
to prepare for what may happen.
• Simulation can be used to verify analytic
solutions.
• By simulating different capabilities for a machine,
requirements can be determined.
• Simulation models designed for training allow
learning without the cost and disruption of on-
the-job learning.
• Animation shows a system in simulated operation
so that he plan can be visualized.
17
 WHEN SIMULATION IS NOT APPROPRIATE?

• The Problem is solved by common sense.

• The Problem is solved by analytical means.
• It is easier to perform direct experimentation
• The resources are not available
• The cost exceeds savings
• The time is not available
• No enough time and personal are not available
• Un-reasonable expectations
• The behavior of the system is too complex to
define

18
THE ELEMENTS OF DISCRETE SIMULATION

1. Entity: Building blocks of mfg. sys. (M/Cs, AGVs)

2. Activities: Function performed by entites.They
are just like verbs in simulation language.
Duration is assumed as fixed. Activity start end
times are known
3. Events :Points on time scale at which some
changes takes places in the model.they
represent the beginning or end of one or more
activities. events are classified as endogenous
(internal), exogenous (external).

19
Queues:formed when an entity is waiting in the
system for some activity.
Attributes: These are adjectives of simulation
language, qualifying nouns.
States:defines the condition of various elements
and the model as the whole.
Activity cycle diagram (ACD): This is used in
defining the logic of simulation model.

20
 environment

Arrival Waiting in queue dispatch

machine

idle

Activity cycle diagram 21

 CONVERSION FOR DRAWING ACDS ARE AS
FOLLOWS.

Each type of entity has an activity cycle.

• The cycle consists of activities and queues
• Activities and queues alternate in the cycle.
• The cycle is closed
• Activities are depicted by rectangles and queues
by circles or ellipses.

22
Table – 1 : Use of Simulation in Manufacturing
Manufacturing Environments
New equipment and buildings
are required (called “green
fields”).
New equipment is required in an
old building.
A new product will be produced
in all or part of an existing
building.
Upgrading of existing equipment
or its operation.
Concerned with producing the
same product more efficiently.
Changes may be in the
equipment (e.g., introduction of
a robot) or in operational
procedures (e.g., scheduling rule
employed).
Manufacturing Issues
Number and type of machines for
a particular objective.
Location and size of inventory
buffers.
Evaluation of a change in product
mix (impact of new products).
Evaluation of the effect of a new
piece of equipment on an
existing manufacturing line.
Evaluation of capital investments.
Manpower requirements
planning.
Throughput analysis.
Makespan analysis.
Bottleneck analysis.
Evaluation of operational
procedures.
Evaluation of policies for
component part or raw material
inventory levels.
Evaluation of control strategies
Performance Measurement
of Manufacturing System
Throughput (number of jobs
produced per unit of time).
Time in system for jobs
(makespan).
Times jobs spend in queues.
Time that jobs spend being
transported.
Sizes of in-process inventories
(WIP or queue sizes).
Utilization of equipment and
personnel (i.e., proportion of
time busy).
Proportion of time that a
machine is under fadum,
blocked until and starved.
Proportion of jobs produced
which must be reworked or
scrapped.
Return on investment for a new
or modified manufacturing
system.
23
 Problem Definition
Statement of Objectives

Model Formulation ,
Planning

Data Collection Model Development

Steps in Continues Development

simulation Verified?
study
Validated?

Experimentation

Results Analysis

More Runs?

Documentation &
Presentation
24
Implementation
Procedure for Conducting a
Simulation Study

Plan Study

Define System

Build Model

Run Experiments

Analyze Output

Report Results
25
 SIMULATION SOFTWARE
1st Category 2nd Category 3rd Category Webbased
simulation
Channel Simulation Simulation
purpose language Packages
language
FORTRANC, C + GPSS ARENA JAVASIMWEB-
+VB, VB+ + . . (1965)SIMSCRIPT (1993)AutoMOD BASED
............ (1963)SIMULA QUEST EXTEND SIMULATION. . .
. . . . . . . .. . . . GASP PROMODEL . . . . . . . .. . . .
. . . . . . .. . . . . (1961)ALGOL TaylorED . . . . . . .. . . . .
. . . . . .many SLAM WITNESS. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .
(1979)SIMAN
other oriented . . . . . .and .....
GPSS/4
languages (1977)SLAM –
many more
IIAWESIM
(1995)GEMS

Table – 2 : Commercial Simulation Language 26

Simulation Software

Ref: Law & Kelton, Chapter

27 3
 Modelling Approach
• Event Scheduling
– System modelled via characteristic events
– Events have subroutines which update state
variables.
• Process Orientation
– Time oriented sequence of inter-related events
that describes the experience of an entity as it
flows through a system.
– Overlay to an event scheduling system.
– Approach adopted in most current software.

28
 Common Features
1. Generating random numbers (i.e. ~U(0,1))
2. Generating random variates from a specified
probability distribution.
3. Advancing the simulation clock.
4. Determining the next event on the list event
and passing control of to the appropriate piece
of code.
5. Adding and deleting records from a list.
6. Collecting output statistics and reporting the
results of the simulation run.
7. Trapping error conditions.

29
 Simulation Languages
• General in nature
• Can model almost any type of system.
• Frequently include specific modelling
constructs (such as material handling
systems).
• Steep learning curve.
• Significant modelling and programming
expertise is necessary.
• Long(ish) development cycles.

30
 Simulators
• Facilitates the development of
models related to a specific class of
problems.
• Short development cycles.
• Rapid model prototypes.
• Gentle learning curve.
• Lack flexibility to model outside of class.
• Do not handle “unusual” situations.
• Built in assumptions can be problematic.

31
A Brief History of Simulation
• Simulation has been around for some time.
• Early simulations were event-driven (see
SimscriptMODSIM) and frequently military
applications.
• In the 1960’s Geoffrey Gordon developed the
transaction (process) based orientation that we
are now familiar with.
• Gordon’s software was called General Purpose
Simulation System (GPSS).
• GPSS was originally intended for analyzing time
sharing options on mainframe computers.
• The software was included as a standard library
on IBM 360s and its use was quite widespread.
32
 GPSS Code
• Assume an * Simulation of M/M/1 system
SIMULATE
M/M/1system. GENERATE
QUEUE
RVEXPO(1, 2.0)
SERVQ
• Interarrival time = SEIZE
ADVANCE
SERVER
RVEXPO(2, 1.0)
2.0 minutes RELEASE SERVER

(exponential) *
TERMINATE 1

• Service time = 1.0 *

*
CONTROL STATEMENTS

minutes START
END
1000

(exponential).
• Assume an infinite
queue.
33
 SLAM
• IBM stopped support and development of GPSS
about 1972.
• A market developed for alternative software that
could run on newer machines (VAX & UNIX).
• In 1979, Alan Pritsker and David Pegden create
SLAM (Simulation Language for Alternative
Modeling).
• In the early 80s Pritsker and Pegden develop
SLAMII, which ran on engineering workstations.
– A feature of this new language is a graphical model
builder.
– Users enter their model as a network diagram. When
complete, the network is translated into SLAM code.
34
 SLAM-II Code
• Originally one of the 1 RESOURCE,,SERVER,1,{1};

slowest components of a 2
3
CREATE,EXPON(2,1),0.0,,INF,1;
ACTIVITY;
SLAM model was 4 AWAIT,1,{{SERVER,1}},ALL,,NONE,1;
compiling. 5 ACTIVITY,1,EXPON(1,1);
6 FREE,{{SERVER,1}},1;
• Compiling really translates 7 ACTIVITY;
the model into a set of 8 TERMINATE,INF;
FORTRAN subroutines. ;
1 GEN;
• To speed up compiles, 2 LIMITS;
“controls” were separated 3 INITIALIZE,0.0,1000,YES,,NO;
from the main body of the 4 NET;
model. 5 FIN;

• Controls were designed to

be short and changeable,
while models were to be
big and relatively fixed.

35
 SIMAN
• About 1983 or so, BEGIN;
CREATE,,EX(2,1);
Dennis Pegden QUEUE, 1;

develops his own SEIZE: SERVER;

DELAY: EX(1,1);
simulation language. RELEASE:SERVER:DISPOSE;
END;
• SIMAN (SIMulation
ANalysis). BEGIN;
DISCRETE, 1000, 1, 1;
• The language was RESOURCES: 1, SERVER;

designed to run on a END;

REPLICATE,1;

PC.
• It is remarkably
similar in look, feel,
content and style to
SLAM.
• A lawsuit entailed. 36
 SIMAN AND SLAM
• SIMAN is tailored for the PC market.
• SLAM remains focused on workstations.
• SIMAN introduces an animation package
(CINEMA) about 1985 or so.
• The animation is an add on unit for the model.
• Originally it required specialized (& expensive)
hardware.
• SLAM responds with a PC version of SLAM
in the late 1980s (which also has
animation).
• Both firms develop software to integrate
factory scheduling into simulation runs. 37
 Early PC Versions
• By the mid-80s the PC market is
dominant.
• Mainframes are expensive.
• Cycles are expensive.
• Central IS groups are expensive.
• Engineers become computer experts.
• A lot of IE’s end up writing simulations.
• There are a number of issues:
• User development cycles are very long.
• Total memory (model, entities, etc) limited to about
32k by FORTRAN/C and early versions of DOS.
• Simulation language development tends to lag OS
development. 38
 SIMULATORS
• Advent of Windows 3.0/3.1.
• Mass penetration of PCs.
• Powerful hardware and software (especially OOC)
becomes available.
• We start to see the creation of a variety of
simulators.
• The simulators are usually graphically oriented
(drag & drop model development),have
integrated animation, and low purchase cost.
• Huge number of simulators come onto the
market.
• These often lack statistical rigour.
39
 Today’s Market
• There has been something of a rationalization in
terms of the number of simulation
languages/simulators available.
• See the May 1999 edition of IIE Solutions.
• The large simulation companies have all been
bought or sold at least a couple of times in the
past two – three years.
• SLAM  Frontstep Systems (a logistics software
supplier). Not in active development (last release
’99).
• SIMAN  Rockwell Software (logistics &
controls).
40
 Trends
• Virtual reality animations.
• Advanced statistical functions
• Curve fitting for input data.
• Automatic detection of warm up
• Output analysis modules (including
replication).
• Bolt on “Optimizers” – Tools to
search for optimal settings of
parameters.
41
 Witness (Lanner Inc)
• Simple building block
design
• Interactive
• Full range of logic and
control options
• Elements for discrete
manufacture, process
industries, BPR, e-
commerce, call centers,
health, finance and
government
• Statistical input and
reports
• Link system to other
software easily
$13,000-$17,000 ($US)
(CAD/Excel)
42
• Optional 3D/VR views
 ARENA
• Process hierarchy.
• Integrates with Microsoft desktop tools
• Spreadsheet interface
• Crystal reports
• Free runtime software.
• Fully graphical environment. No programming required.
• VBA embedded.
• Optimization with OptQuest for Arena.
• Builds reusable modules.
• $1,000 - $17,000 ($US). Various add-in modules available.

43
 ARENA
• Arena can be used for simulating
discrete and continuous systems
• Arena employs an object based
design for entirely graphical model
development.
• Modules are organized into
collections called templates.

44
 GPSS/H
• Successor to the “orginal”
simulation language
(GPSS).
– Was freeware on IBM
360’s
• Makes use of common
program blocks.
• Proven, reliable software.
• Extremely flexible.
• Extensive error checking
routines.
• Post-process animations
(Proof) can be built.
• ~$5,000 ($US)

45
 Automod
• Combines Virtual
Reality (VR) graphics
with a discrete and
continuous simulation
environment.
– Manufacturing operations
– Material handling systems
– Tanks and pipe networks
– IC Manufacturing
– Transportation and
logistics systems
• $15,000 - $100,000 ($US)

46
 AutoMod

• It includes the AutoMod simulation

package, AutoStat for
experimentation and analysis, and
Auto View for making AVI movies of
the built-in 3-D animation.
• The main focus of the AutoMod
simulation product is manufacturing
and material handling systems.

47
 QUEST
• QUEST if offered by Deneb Robotics
• QUEST models are based on 3-D CAD
geometry.
• A QUEST model consists of elements from
a number of element classes. Built-in
element classes include AGV and
transporters, buffer, conveyor, labour,
machine, parts and process.
• Each element has associated geometric
data and parameters that define its
behaviour

48
 ProModel
• ProModel is offered by ProModel
Corporation
• It is a simulation and animation tool
designed to model manufacturing
systems.
• ProModel offers 2-D animation with
an optional 3-D like perspective
view.
49
 WITNESS
• WITNESS is offered by the Lanner Group.
• WITNESS is strongly machine oriented
and contains many elements for discrete-
part manufacturing.
• WITNESS models are based on template
elements. Elements may be combined into
a designer element module to be reused

50
 METHODOLOGY FOR SELECTION OF
SIMULATION SOFTWARE
Need for purchasing simulation
Stage 1
software

Stage 2
Initial software survey
Stage 3
Evaluation

Stage 4
Software selection
Stage 5
Software contract negotiation

Stage 6
Software purchase

Figure – 3 : Stages of simulation software selection methodology 51

 Need for
purchasing
simulation
software

Purpose Constrai Models Model

of nts to be develope
simulatio simulate rs
n d

“Quick D/C – Previous

Combi Individ exper. in
Educati and ind or Time Discret Contin
ned ual simulation
on dry” - researc e uo. prefere
disc/co
ind h nt nce

Initial
software
survey

52
Continued in the next slide
 Short list of software
for evaluation

Initial
Initial software Initial software Initial software Initial software
software
survey survey survey survey
survey

Initial software
survey

Results of Evaluation

Software
selection

Selection of software

Legend:

Software Stages
contract
negotiation

Contract acceptable
Intermediate
Results

Software
purchase Elements
53
 Promodel
• State-of-the-art
simulation engine
• Graphical user interface
• Distribution-fitting.
• Output analysis module
• Optional optimizer.
• Modules designed for:
– Manufacturing
– Healthcare
– Services
• $17,000 ($US)

54
 Case study
Table – 1 : Machine Area Information

Machine Area (m2)

M1 20 x 20
M2 20 x 20
M3 20 x 20
M4 20 x 20
M5 20 x 20
M6 20 x 20
M7 20 x 20
M8 20 x 20
M9 20 x 20
M10 20 x 20 55
Table – 2 : Part Job Sequence and Quantity Information

Part Type Job Sequence Quantity

P1 8-6-8-10-4 160
P2 7-9-2 310
P3 6-5 280
P4 3-1-3 265
P5 5-6-7-10 80
P6 7-9-7-8 125
P7 7-9 360
P8 3-4-1-6 240
P9 2-7 175
P10 2-7-9-5 95
P11 10-8-5 100
P12 1-3-10 230
P13 8-10-5-6 285
P14 9-2-7 315
P15 6-8-10 50
P16 4-3 275
P17 6-5 260
P18 4-3-1 150

56
Table – 3 : Processing Time Information (in minutes)

Machines
Part Type
M1 M2 M3 M4 M5 M6 M7 M8 M9 M10

P1 0 0 0 2 0 3 0 2+ 0 4
1
P2 0 6 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 0
P3 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 0
P4 2 0 2+ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
5
P5 0 0 0 0 4 2 1 0 0 5
P6 0 0 0 0 0 0 2+ 2 4 0
1
P7 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 0
P8 3 0 4 2 0 2 0 0 0 0
P9 0 3 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0
P10 0 5 0 0 1 0 3 0 1 0
P11 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 0 1
P12 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
P13 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 3
P14 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 0
P15 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 2
P16 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
P17 0 0 0 0 5 3 0 0 0 0
P18 4 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0

57
Here the initial solution for the above case study is
obtained using genetic algorithm as below

Cell Formation
Cell 1 = 3 1 10 4
Cell 2 = 8 6
Cell 3 = 2 9 7 5

58
(Run Hours 231.57)
59
 from above table average process time in percentage of total scheduled
hours =
(39.62+14.97+20.04+11.88+11.16+21.7+16.99+22.89+23.89+20.51)/18
= 11.31%=0.1131

average process time = 0.1131*231.57*60=1572.05

60
average material handling time per part type = (85.70*231.57*60)/(100*18) = 661.52 min.

61
Run hours 352 The solution for the above case study using heuristic method is as follows

Step 1 : Arrange all machines randomly according to the given dimensions of machines. Here
machine to machine clearance of 1 m is also considered.

(.85)
62
 Step 2 : From job sequence of parts, check the minimum sequence (2 machines)
common for all parts e.g. M7 – M9, M5 – M6, M4 – M3, M8 – M6, M8 – M10 and bring
those 2 machines closer or nearer to each other.

(Run Hours 229.37) 63

 Step 3 : From job sequence, calculate number of times, all parts uses the same
machines.

M1-4
M2-4
M3-6
M4-4
M5-6
M6-7
M7-8
M8-6
M9-5
M10-6

64
 The least utilized machines are M1,M2 and M4. these machines are kept away from remaining
machines or at periphery so that they will not obstruct other more utilized machines.( e.g. 3-1-3, 1-
3-10, 3-4-1-6 i.e. 3 must be closer to 1 and 2-7, 2-7-9-5, 9-2-7, i.e. 2 must be closer to 7 & 9). In
this step, since the row distance is high, it will take more time for the vehicle to move from one
machine to another machine. So the row distance is reduced from 5 machines to 3 and 4
machines.

(Run hours 223.24) 65

 Step 4: from above we can see that most utilized machine is M7.
checking the position of this machine in the job sequence and
corresponding parts to be processed.
1st –3, 310+125+360=795
2nd – 2, 175+95=270
3rd –3, 80+125+315=520
from above 1st position is higher. It must be placed at corner position so
that processing starts from that position only.( eg. 4, 8 also.)

Run hours 220

66
Step 5: Here M5 is accompanied M6, M7 is accompanied by
M9, M3 is accompanied by M4. These machines are kept at
minimum possible distance.

Step 6: now considering maximum number of parts to be

processed and their job sequence.
P7=360, 7-9
P2=310, 7-9-2,
P14=315, 9-2-7
So these machines are at minimum distance in straight line
manner (7-9-2)
In next iteration next lower maximum parts are considered.

67
(Run hours 213)

68
 Step 7: place remaining machines closer to respective machines according
to job sequence.

average process time(%) per part =

(42.98+16.24+21.75+12.88+12.10+23.54+18.43+24.83+25.92+2
2.25)/18 = 12.273%=0.1273
average process time per part type =0.1273*213.45*60 =
1571.84 min.
69
average material handling time per part type = (82.26*213.45*60) / (100*18)
= 585.27 min average process time(%) per part =
(42.98+16.24+21.75+12.88+12.10+23.54+18.43+24.83+25.92+22.25)/18 =
12.273%=0.1273
average process time per part type =0.1273*213.45*60 = 1571.84 min.
70
ELL FORMATION

ell 1 – 2 9 7
71

ell 2 - 10 5 6
 .3 EFFECT OF NUMBER OF VEHICLES ON CYCLE TIME PER JOB
TYPE

he effect of number of vehicles used for material handling purpose on

the cycle time is shown below in the tables for case study both for GA
and heuristic layout. It is seen that as the number of vehicles are
increased, cycle time( average material handling time) is getting
Case study 2(GA)
reduced. From this we can find out optimum number of vehicles needed
for given throughput
No. of
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
vehicles

Total
Time(hrs.) 457.35 231.57 160.29 123.55 100.79 91.75 91.75 91.75

Material
Handling 1322.9
time(min.) 661.52 440.95 330.74 264.57 220.5 189 165.36
6

Process
Time(min. 1572.2 1572.2 1572.2 1572.2 1572.2
) 1572.22 1572.22 1572.22
2 2 2 2 2
72
 Cycle
Time(min 2895. 2233. 2013. 1902. 1836. 1792.7 1761.2 1737.5
.) 18 74 17 96 79 2 2 8

Case study 2 (heuristic)

No. of 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
vehicles 1

Total 422.3 213.4 144.0 109.7 91.78 91.78 91.78 91.78

Time(hrs. 9 5 9 3
)

Material
Handling 1170. 585.2 390.1 292.6 234.1 195.0 167.2 146.3
time(min. 58 7 9 1 0 1 2 2
)

Process 1571. 1571. 1571. 1571. 1571. 1571. 1571. 1571.

Time(min 95 95 95 95 95 95 95 95
.)

Cycle
2742. 2157. 1962. 1864. 1806. 1766. 1739. 1718.
Time(min
53 22 14 56 05 96 17 27
.)

73
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

) Summarized Table of grouping efficiency, total throughput time and

total material handling time for two case studies.

Initial solution by Improved solution by

Percentage improvement
GA heuristic

Mt Mt Mt
GE Tt GE Tt GE Tt
(min.) (min.) (min.)
(%) (hrs.) (%) (hrs.) (%) (hrs.)

Case 661.5 213.4 585.2

76 231.57 81 6.57 7.82 11.52
study 2 2 5 7

GE : Group Efficiency
Tt : Total Throughput Time
Mt : Total material Handling Time
74
Summarized Table of machine utilization for the case study

Machine Initial solution Improved solution Percentage

by GA ( % ) by heuristic ( % ) improvement

M1 14.97 16.24 8.48

M2 21.7 23.54 8.47

M3 39.62 42.98 8.48

M4 11.88 12.88 8.41

M5 23.89 25.92 8.5

M6 20.51 22.25 8.48

M7 22.89 24.83 8.47

M8 11.16 12.1 8.42

M9 16.99 18.43 8.35

M10 20.04 21.75 8.53

75
The bar charts of machine utilization for 2 case studies are shown below.
Case study 2(GA)

76
Case study 2(HEURISTIC METHOD)

77
1)    Summarized Table of resource utilization for two case studies

Resource Initial solution Improved solution Percentage

by GA ( % ) by heuristic ( % ) improvement

Case study 1 Run hours 40.68 37.59 7.6

forklift 1 31.67 27.33 20.25

forklift 2 30 25.3 22.07

Case study 2 Run hours 231.57 213.45 7.82

forklift 1 99.83 99.92 7.74

forklift 2 99.83 99.93 7.73

78
 Resource utilization bar charts for 2 case studies
Case Study 2 (GA)

Case Study 2 (Heuristic Method)

79
Resource states graphs of 2 case studies

Case Study 2 (Heuristic Method)

80
Graphs of cycle time verses number of vehicles for two
case studies

Graph - 2 : Case Study - 2

2900

2700

2500
Cycle Time

2300 GA
Heuristic
2100

1900

1700

1500
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Number of Vehicles

81
 CONCLUSIONS
• the application for simulation to address
manufacturing problems.
• Developments in the area of simulation –
existing softwares for discrete event simulation
and conduction of simulation studies were
reviewed.
• The necessity and importance of simulation for
modeling and analyzing the various classes of
manufacturing problems was focused in this
paper;
• we hope this paper may encourage the extensive
use of simulation in manufacturing and
development of simulation technology for
addressing the problems which need serious
attention.
82
 Journals
• ACM Transactions on Modelling and Computer Simulat
• Computer Simulation Modeling and Analysis
• European Journal of Operations Research
• IEEE Journal of Systems, Man and Cybernetics
• IIE Transactions on IE Research
• International Journal in Computer Simulation
• Management Science
• ORSA Journal on Computing
• Simulation
• System Dynamics Review
• Journal of the Operational Research Society

83
 References
• Averill M. Law, W. David, Kelton,2000 “Simulation Modeling
and Analysis”, McGraw-Hill
• Charles Harrell, et al., 2000, “Simulation Using ProModel”,
McGraw-Hill
• Ramsey Suliman, et al.,2000 “Tools and Techniques for
Social Science Simulation”, Physica Verlag
• Michael Pidd, 1998, “Computer Simulation in Management
Science”, John Wiley & Sons
• Michael Prietula, et al., 1998, “Simulating Organizations:
Computational Models of Institutions and Groups”, Mit.
Press
• David Profozich,1997, “Managing Change with Business
Process Simulation”, Pearson Ptr.
• Paul A. Fishwick, Richard B. Modjeski, 1991, “Knowledge-
Based Simulation”,Springer-Verlag
• Klaus G. Troitzsch, et al., 1996, “Social Science
Microsimulation”, Springer Verlag
• Harry A. Pappo, 1998, “Simulations for Skills Training”,
Educational Technology Publications
84
 Thank you
Contact information

Dr.C.S.P. Rao
Manufacturing Simulation Lab.
Department of Mech. Engg.
Regional Engineering College - Warangal –
506 004
E-mail : cspr@recw.ernet.in (or)
csp_rao@rediffmail.com

85