SIMULATION OF JOB SHOP USING ARENA

Mini Project Report

Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for

the award of the degree of
Master of Technology
in
Industrial Engineering and Management

by
KAILAS SREE CHANDRAN

(Roll No.:M100447ME)

Department of Mechanical Engineering

NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
CALICUT
April 2011

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that the report entitled SIMULATION OF JOB SHOP USING
ARENA is a bonafide record of the Mini Project done by KAILAS SREE
CHANDRAN (Roll No.: M100447ME), in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
award of the degree of Master of Technology in Industrial Engineering and
Technology from National Institute of Technology Calicut.

Dr. R. Sridharan
Faculty-in-Charge
(ME6194 Mini Project)
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Place : NIT Calicut

Date : 02/05/2011

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am deeply indebted to my guide Dr. R. Sridharan, Professor, Department
of Mechanical Engineering, for his invaluable guidance, consistent encouragement
and suggestions throughout the course of the work.
I wish to express my sincere thanks to Dr. S. Jayaraj, Professor and Head,
Department of Mechanical Engineering, for providing the necessary facilities to
carry out this work.
Last but not the least, I extend hearty thanks to all our teachers and
classmates whose constant support and encouragement helped me to complete this
mini-project on time.

KAILAS SREE CHANDRAN

ABSTRACT
A Job Shop includes jobs which have different sequence of operations. Here a Gear
manufacturing Job Shop which produces three types of gears was modeled in ARENA
Simulation software to study the Gear flow times (by type), Gear delays at operations
locations, Machine utilizations etc. While modeling the system, the sequence of operations
for different types of gears, plant layout, distance between different facilities, processing time
of each operation, transportation of jobs through the factory, speed of transporter etc. were
considered. The model is run for 1 year with three 8 hour shifts per day. The results were
analyzed and a suggestion was also made to improve the system.

CONTENTS
List of Tables
1

3.

Introduction

01

1.1

Job Shop Production

01

1.2

Characteristics of Job Shop Production

01

1.3

Importance of Job Shop Production

02

Problem Environment

04

2.1

Problem Statement

04

2.2

Assumptions

05

2.3

Objectives of the Project

06

ARENA Model

07

3.1

Modeling the System

07

3.1.1

Gear Job Arrivals

08

3.1.2

Gear Transportation

09

3.1.3

Gear Processing

12

3.1.4

Gear Departure

15

3.2

Simulating the Model

18

4.

Results

20

5.

Improving the System

23

5.1

Suggestion for Improvement

24

5.2

Comparison of Results

24

6.

Conclusion

Reference

25
26

LIST OF TABLES
2.1

Distances among Job Shop locations

04

2.2

Operation Plan for gears by type

05

5.1

Comparing Gear Delays at Operation Locations

24

5.2

Comparing Resource Utilization

24

5.3

Comparing Gear Flow Time

24

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 JOB SHOP PRODUCTION
Job Shop production is characterized by the manufacture of one or few numbers of a single
product designed and manufactured strictly to customers specifications, within, the given
period and wit/tin the price fixed prior to tile contract. Some typical examples of industries
engaged in Job Shop production are: general repair shops; special purpose machine tool
manufacturers; workshops to manufacture jigs and fixtures for other units; building
contractors; tailoring shops manufacturing made-to-measure suite of clothes; manufacturers
of ships, cranes, furnaces, turbo-generators, pressure vessels; and others manufacturing
articles made to customers orders.
1.2 CHARACTERISTICS OF JOB SHOP PRODUCTION
1.2.1 Disproportionate Manufacturing Cycle Time
A considerable amount of pre-planning and organization is necessary in such a venture.
Relatively long delays occur at the assembly as well as at the materials processing stages due
to lack of materials or components, imbalanced work flow, design changes, design errors
detected during manufacture, inaccurate work measurements, etc. which tend to lengthen the
manufacturing cycle time. At times, tile time needed to design the product exceeds its
manufacturing time.
1.2.2 Large Work-In-Progress
The work-in-progress inventory in a Job Shop production is generally very large as detailed
scheduling and progress control in this type of production is economically infeasible. For
various reasons, jobs get delayed causing temporary work shortages. To overcome work
shortages and keep men and machines busy, more work is released to the shop which in turn
increases work-in-progress.
1.2.3 Limited Functions Of Production Planning And Control
The success of Job Shop production mainly depends on the ability of the engineer in-charge
of the contract.

1.3 IMPORTANCE OF JOB PRODUCTION

1.3.1 Small Production Runs
Job Shop production is characterized by the manufacture of one or few pieces of a product at
a time under a separate contract; the production is made strictly to customers specifications.
1.3.2 Discontinuous Flow of Materials
The flow of materials and components between different stages of manufacture is highly
discontinuous due to imbalance in operation wise work content.
1.3.3 General Purpose Machines and Process Layout
Plant and equipment is designed or procured and arranged to obtain maximum flexibility.
General purpose machines and handling equipments capable of performing variety of
operations with minimum set-tip times are installed in lie of variety in products. Tile
machines are arranged to give process layout - layout by function. Similar machines, capable
of doing similar type of operations, are grouped together. Presses, for example are kept at one
place; milling machines are placed at another place; drilling machines are kept at third place;
and so on and so forth. Each group of machines is usually designated as a work centre or a
section or a shop.
The grouping of machines gives a lot of flexibility in loading and scheduling. Temporary
machine breakdowns and operators absenteeism can be taken care of by shifting jobs to
another machine or shifting operators from less important jobs to important jobs.
1.3.4 Highly Skilled Labor
The labor force is usually highly skilled-highly qualified trade apprentices who are expected
to work from minimum instructions. Instructions regarding what to make are issued in the
form of specifications while instructions as to how to manufacture are usually oral. The
workmen being highly skilled are expected to work independently and display a great deal of
initiative and judgment. They are required to set up their own machines and prepare their OW
special tools or production aids in order to further the manufacture of a part or a assembly.
1.3.5 Highly Competent Knowledgeable Supervision
Highly competent general engineers are engaged as foreman in the base workshop and a
group of site engineers, practical men, with thorough training, capable of taking independent
charge of each contract are employed to work at site. Therefore, these engineers (supervisors)

in a Job Shop production are the reservoir of job knowledge. The supervisor besides being
able administrator is expected to improvise and determine best work methods, determine tool
requirements, select the best process and provide management with reliable estimates of labor
and materials for specific orders. The span of control - the number of workmen to be
supervised by a supervisor - is kept low because of technical nature of the job.
1.3.6 Simple Mechanism
Tools control function is simple. Standard tools are stocked while special tools are either
made on the shop floor by the operators or purchased on request from supervisor.
1.3.7 Decentralized Process
The scheduling activity is more or less decentralized. A schedule is prepared to show the start
and completion date of each major component of the product. Job tickets giving completion
date of each component are raised and given to the shop. The activity of day to day
scheduling is left to the individual shop supervisor.

CHAPTER 2
PROBLEM ENVIRONMENT
2.1 PROBLEM STATEMENT
Consider a Job Shop producing three types of gears, G1, G2, and G3, for a ship. The job shop
is spread out geographically on the factory floor and its layout consists of the following
locations:

An arrival dock

A milling workstations with four milling machines

A drilling workstations with three drilling machines

A paint shop with two spray booths

A polishing area with a single worker

A shop exit

The distances among locations are given in Table 2.1

Table 2.1 Distances among Job Shop locations
Arrival
Dock

Milling
Station

Drilling
Station

Paint
Shop

Polishing
Area

Shop Exit

100

100

250

250

550

300

400

150

300

150

400

500

300

400

Arrival
Dock
Milling
Station
Drilling
Station

100
100

300

Paint Shop

250

400

150

Polishing
Area

250

150

400

300

Shop Exit

550

300

500

400

200
200

Gear jobs arrive in batches of 10 units and their inter-arrival times are uniformly distributed
between 400 and 600 minutes. Of arriving batches, 50% are of type G1, 30% are of type G2,
and 20% are of type G3. A gear job arrives at the arrival dock and from there is dispatched to
its specific (type-dependent) sequence of manufacturing operations. A sequence consists of a
subset of milling, drilling, painting, and polishing operations. Table 2.2 displays the
operations plan showing the sequence of operations and the associated processing times for

each gear type. The layout of the job shop and operation sequences of gear types are depicted
in Figure 2.1.
Table 2.2 Operation Plan for gears by type
GEAR TYPE

OPERATION
SEQUENCES

PROCESSING
TIME(Minutes)

Milling

35

Drilling

20

Painting

55

Polishing

15

Milling

25

Painting

35

Polishing

15

Drilling

18

Painting

35

Polishing

15

G1

G2

G3

Gears are transported among locations by two trucks running at a constant speed of 100
feet/minute. Each truck can carry only one gear at a time. When a job is complete at a
location, the gear is placed into an output buffer, a transport request is made for a truck, and
the gear waits for the truck to arrive. Once a gear is transported to the next location, it is
placed in a FIFO input buffer. Finally, when the polishing operation is completed, the
finished gear departs from the job shop via the shop exit.
To analyze the performance of the job shop, plan to run a simulation over 1 year of operation.
2.2 ASSUMPTIONS
These assumptions were made during modeling the system.
a. Transporter (Truck) speed is same for both loaded and empty.
b. The freed transporter stays at the destination station until requested by another
station.
c. The Job Shop works for 24 hours a day in 3 shifts at 8 hours each.

Milling
Workstation

Painting Shop

Arrival Dock

Shop Exit

G1
Drilling
Workstation

G2

Polishing
Area

G3
Figure 2.1 Layout of the Job Shop and Operation Sequences by Gear type.
2.3 OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT
The following statistics are of interest:

Gear flow times (by type)

Gear delays at operations locations

Machine utilizations

The objective of the project is to model the Gear Manufacturing Job Shop in ARENA
Simulation Software and find;
i. Gear Flow Time (by Type)
ii. Gear Delays at operation locations
iii. Utilization of Resources
iv. Suggest an improvement

CHAPTER 3
ARENA MODEL
3.1 MODELING THE SYSTEM
The given system is modeled in ARENA Simulation software. Figure 3.1 depicts the Arena
model for the gear shop, consisting of three main segments:
1. Gear Job Arrivals
2. Gear Transportation
3. Gear Processing
4. Gear Departure
A segment-by-segment walkthrough of the model follows next.

Figure 3.1 Arena Model for the Gear Manufacturing Job Shop

3.1.1 Gear Job Arrivals

This part includes the arrival section of Gear Jobs. The segment is shown in Figure 3.2.

Figure 3.2 Gear Job Arrivals Segment

Gear entities are created in the Create module, called Create Jobs, whose dialog box is
displayed in Figure 3.3. The Entities per Arrival field indicates that gear jobs arrive in
batches of 10, and the Time Between Arrivals section specifies batch inter-arrival times to be
uniformly distributed between 400 and 600 minutes. Following arrival, each incoming gear
entity proceeds as a separate entity.

Figure 3.3 Dialog box of the Create module Create Jobs

An arriving gear entity next enters the Assign module, called Assign Job Type and Sequence,
whose dialog box is displayed in Figure 3.4. Here, a gear entity is assigned a type by
sampling it from a discrete distribution, and saving the type code (1, 2, or 3) in its Type
attribute. In addition, the ArrTime attribute is assigned the value of the simulation clock,
Tnow, for later use in computing the gear entitys flow time. Finally, the Arena attribute

Entity.Sequence is assigned the value of the Type attribute. This attribute acts as an index that
associates a gear type with the corresponding operations sequence.

Figure 3.4 Dialog box of the Assign module Assign Job Type and Sequence.
The operations sequences for gear types are specified in the Sequence module from the
Advanced Transfer template panel, whose dialog spreadsheet is displayed at the bottom of
Figure 3.5. Three sequences (row entries) are defined here, one for each gear type. Each
sequence consists of a sequence name (Name column) and a series of steps (Steps column),
listed in the order of processing.
To specify steps, the modeler clicks the button under the Steps column and pops up the Steps
dialog spreadsheet. The five steps of type G1 gears processing are displayed in the middle
spreadsheet of Figure 3.5. Each step is a row entry specifying the location name and
associated values (under the Assignments column). Clicking the corresponding button pops
up the associated Assignments dialog spreadsheet. The assignment of time for the milling
time operation is exemplified in the top spreadsheet of Figure 3.5.
3.1.2 Gear Transportation
Gear Transportation segment includes jobs arriving to Arrive Dock, Requesting the truck and
transporting the jobs to job shop. The segment is shown in Figure 3.6.

Figure 3.5 Dialog spreadsheet of the Sequence module (bottom), the Steps dialog spreadsheet
for specifying operations steps of type G1 gears (middle), and the Steps Assignment
spreadsheet for specifying milling time assignment of type G1 gears (top).
Job shop locations are modeled as Station modules. Accordingly, every gear entity proceeds
to the Station module, called Arrive_Dock, to model its physical arrival at the job shops
arrival dock. From here, gear entities will be transported to the job shop floor to start the first
step in their operations sequence.

Figure 3.6 Gear Transportation Segment

To this end, a gear entity enters the Request module (from the Advanced Transfer template
panel), called Request a Truck, whose dialog box is displayed in Figure 3.7. The Transporter
Name field indicates a request for a Fork Truck transporter. If multiple transporters are
available, the modeler can specify how to select one in the Selection Rule field. Such
selections may be cyclical, random, preferred order (as listed in the Transporter module),
smallest distance, largest distance, or a specific transporter. Here the selection rule requests
the transporter nearest to the arrival dock. Furthermore, the Save Attribute field specifies that
the ID of the selected transporter be saved in the Truck_ID attribute of the requesting gear

10

entity. The saved ID will be used in due time to free that particular truck. Since requesting
transporters from multiple locations is a form of contention for resources, the Priority field
allows the modeler to assign a priority to requests issued at multiple Request modules (here a
high priority is assigned in order to clear the arrival dock as soon as possible). The Entity
Location field indicates the location of the requesting entity, and the Velocity field specifies
the transporters velocity, which is 100 feet/minute in our case. Finally, gear entities
requesting transportation at the same Request module are instructed in the Queue Name field
to wait in the queue, called a Truck.Queue, until a transporter becomes available.

Figure 3.7 Dialog box of the Request module Request a Truck

As soon as a gear entity grabs a truck, it proceeds to the Transport module, called Transport
to Shop Floor, whose dialog box is displayed in Figure 3.8. The Transporter Name and Unit
Number fields specify the type and ID of the selected transporter, which here is the truck
whose ID is kept in the Truck_ID attribute of the requesting gear entity. The transporter/gear
destination is specified in the Entity Destination Type field as the By Sequence option,
indicating that the destination is determined by the gear entitys sequence number. This field
may also specify a Station module name, using the Station option. It can also specify an

11

attribute or expression. The gear entity and the transporter move as a grouped entity at a
velocity of 100 feet/minute as specified in the Velocity field. Note that the velocity may
depend on trip type, so that an empty truck and a loaded one can be made to move at different
velocities.

Figure 3.8 Dialog box of the Transport module Transport to Shop Floor
Next, the distances between different facilities are specified. Figure 3.9 displays the dialog
spreadsheet of the Distance module (left), as well as a corresponding Stations dialog
spreadsheet (right), which pops up on clicking a button under the formers Stations column.
3.1.3 Gear Processing
This segment includes the actual processing of gears. The gear processing segment
encompasses sets of Station modules, each modeling an operation in the sequence, from
milling to polishing. Since all sets have the same structure (except for names), only the
milling operation logic is explained here. The segment is shown in Figure 3.10.
When a gear entity is transported to the milling operation, it enters the Station module, called
Milling Station. It then proceeds to the Free module, called Free Truck at Mill, whose dialog
box is displayed in Figure 3.11. Here, the Transporter Name and Unit Number fields specify
the truck to be freed for use by other gear entities, using the Truck_ID attribute of the freeing
gear entity.

12

Figure 3.9 Dialog spreadsheet of the Distance module (left) and the Stations dialog
spreadsheet (right).

Figure 3.10 Gear Processing Segment

13

Figure 3.11 Dialog box of the Free module Free Truck at Mill
In this case, it enters the Process module, called Milling, whose dialog box is displayed in
Figure 3.12. The Seize Delay Release option in the Action field is used to model gear delays
at this process. The resource seized is Milling Machine and the processing time is kept in the
Milling Time attribute specified in the Sequence module of Figure 3.5. Furthermore, to model
four milling machines at the milling workstation, resource Milling Machine has to be
declared as having a capacity of four in the spreadsheet view of the Resource module. The
capacity of other machine groups is similarly declared. Figure 3.13 shows it.

Figure 3.13 Dialog spreadsheet of Resource module

On completing the milling operation, the gear entity proceeds to the Request module, called
Request Truck at Milling, whose dialog box is displayed in Figure 3.14. In this module, the
gear entity requests transportation to the next operation, similarly to the first request from the
arrival dock to the job shop floor (Figure 3.7). Here, it may have to wait in the queue, called
Request Truck at Milling.Queue, which serves as the output buffer for the milling process.
The transport operation takes place when a truck arrives and both gear and transporter enter
the Transport module called Transport From Milling.

14

Figure 3.12 Dialog box of the Process module Milling

Gear entities move from one operation to another according to their specified sequences. It
should be pointed out that Arena handles all sequencing details at runtime. The internal
Arena attribute IS keeps track of each gear entitys step number in its sequence. Whenever a
sequential transport is requested, Arena increments the IS attribute and indexes into the
appropriate Steps module spreadsheet to determine the destination location and travel time.
The IS attribute may also be modified by the modeler.
3.1.4 Gear Departure
This segment includes the transport of finished gears from job shop to outside. The segment
is shown in Figure 3.15.
Eventually the gear entity arrives at the Station module, called Shop Exit, which is always the
last location in each operations sequence.

15

Figure 3.14 Dialog box of the Request module Request Truck at Milling
Next, the transporting truck is freed in the Free module, called Free Truck at Exit, and the
finished gear entity is ready to record some statistics and then depart from the model at a
Dispose module.

Figure 3.15 Gear Departure Segment

Figure 3.16 displays the dialog box of the Record module, called Tally Flow Time. Here, flow
times are tallied with the aid of the ArrTime attribute of each finished gear entity. Note that
these flow times are tallied by gear type, using the tally set mechanism. The Tally Set Name
field indicates that tallies are to be entered in the Flow Times set. Each gear entity indexes
into this set using its Type attribute, specified in the Set Index field. The Flow Times set is

16

specified in the Set module spreadsheet from the Basic Process template panel. Figure 3.17
displays the Set spreadsheet and the members of the Flow Times set.

Figure 3.16 Dialog box of the Record module Tally Flow Time

Figure 3.17 Dialog spreadsheet of the Set module (bottom) and the Members dialog
spreadsheet of the Flow Times set (top)
Arena computes travel times of transporters among Station modules based on their distances
and transporter speeds. Figure 3.18 introduces Fork Truck transporters into the model and
specifies their parameters in the Transporter module spreadsheet. These include columns for
a Name field to specify the transporter set, a capacity field (Number of Units), a Distance Set
field for specifying the name of a Distance module allowing the user to specify distances
between pairs of Station modules, a Velocity and Units fields that specify the transporter
speed (in our case, in feet per minute), and an Initial Position Status column of buttons,
which pop up the Initial Position Status dialog spreadsheet. The latter is used to specify the
location at which a transporter resides initially (at simulation time 0). Note that the
transporter speed is the default speed. Arena allows the modeler to override this value and to

17

further distinguish between the speed of an empty transporter (specified in a Request module)
and a loaded transporter (specified in a Transport module).

Figure 3.18 Dialog spreadsheet of Transporter module

Finally, the collection of fork truck utilization (a Time-Persistent statistic) and flow-time
statistics (Tally statistics) is specified in the Statistic spreadsheet module, as shown in Figure
3.19. Observe that the Arena variable nt(transporter_name) is used to collect transporter
utilization, in our case, nt(Fork Truck).

Figure 3.19 Dialog spreadsheet of the Statistic module for collecting fork truck utilization and
flow-time tallies.
3.2 SIMULATING THE MODEL
The ARENA job shop model was simulated for 1 year. Parameters like Replication Length
and Hours Per Day etc. are given in Run Setup. The Figure 3.20 shows it. While simulation,
we can see the movement of entities (gears) through different facilities, waiting for
processing, transfer between machines etc.
We are assuming that the plant works for 24 hours. i.e. Three shifts with eight hours each.
After completing the simulation, report will be generated automatically. From the generated
report, we can find Gear flow times (by type), Gear delays at operations locations, Machine
utilizations etc.

18

Figure 3.20 Dialog box of Run Setup

Figure 3.21 Screen Shot of ARENA Model

19

CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
The resulting output report is displayed in Figure 4.1. The Time per Entity section lists the
statistics of gear waiting times for each operation. As expected, the average waiting time at
the paint shop is very large as compared to the other operation locations, since spray times
are quite long. The results are displayed in graphical forms in Figure 4.2, 4.3 and 4.4.

Gear Delays At Operation Locations

50
44.8111

45
Waiting Time(Minutes)

40
35
30
25
20

14.6109

15
10
5

3.0743

0.6656

0
Drilling

Milling

Painting

Polishing

Figure 4.2 Gear Delays at Operation Locations

Resource Utilization
50
44.8

45

37.63

40
Utilization, %

35
29.88

30
25
20
15
10

12.48
8.98

5
0
Drilling M/C

Milling M/C

Paint Booth

Polishing Worker

Figure 4.3 Resource Utilization

20

Fork Truck

Figure 4.1 Simulation results for the gear manufacturing job shop model

The Usage section displays resource utilizations at individual operation locations. For
instance, the utilization of a drilling machine is about 0.0898. The User Specified section
displays fork truck utilization statistics and flow-time statistics by gear type. The fact that the
average flow times are much larger than the total processing time bears witness to excessive
delays in resource queues.

21

Gear Flow Time (by Type)

300

Flow Time, Minutes

250

240.46

200
153.2
150
105.16
100
50
0
G1

G2

Figure 4.3 Gear Flow Time

22

G3

CHAPTER 5
IMPROVING THE SYSTEM
5.1 SUGGESTION FOR IMPROVEMENT
In Figure 4.2, its visible that Paint shop is having more waiting time compared to other
stations. To reduce the wait at the paint booth, we modify the job shop model by increasing
the number of paint booth from two to three. The impact of this modification on gear delays
and flow times is indicated in the simulation results of Figure 5.1. Clearly, the addition of a
paint booth has significantly reduced the delay at the paint shop but slightly increased the
delay at the polishing area, because speeding up an operation increases congestion
downstream. The overall effect on gear flow times, however, is a slight reduction.

Figure 5.1 Simulation results for the Modified Gear Manufacturing Job Shop Model
5.2 COMPARISON OF RESULTS
In the Table 5.1, its visible that Painting operation after modification has a delay of just 16
minutes compared to 44 minutes initially. This improvement is not visible in Resource
23

Utilization, see Table 5.2. Initially Resource Utilization of Paint Booth was 44% but after
improvement, it came down to 29% because the number of Paint Booth has increased by one.
But the improvement caused to reduce to Gear Flow time of all types of Gears, Table 5.3.
GEAR DELAYS AT OPERATION LOCATIONS
Initial

Suggestion

Drilling

0.6656

0.6556

Milling

14.6109

14.619

Painting

44.8111

16.082

Polishing

3.0743

8.945

Table 5.1 Comparing Gear Delays at Operation Locations

RESOURCE UTILIZATION
Initial

Suggestion

Drilling M/C

8.98

8.98

Milling M/C

12.48

12.48

Paint Booth

44.8

29.86

Polishing Worker

29.88

29.86

Fork Truck

37.63

37.42

Table 5.2 Comparing Resource Utilization

GEAR FLOW TIME
Initial

Suggestion

G1

240.46

203.02

G2

153.2

141.93

G3

105.16

103.93

Table 5.3 Comparing Gear Flow Time

24

CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION
The given Job Shop System was modeled in Arena Simulation software and the results were
generated. After analyzing the results, it was noticed that the waiting time in paint shop was
more compared to other stations. So a suggestion was made to increase the number of paint
booth by one. The results before and after improvement were compared. And it was found
that the waiting time in paint shop is increasing but the utilization of that station is
decreasing. The acceptance or rejection of this suggestion depends on the organization
policies. If they are ok with sacrificing the utilization of a machine compared to waiting time,
they can go ahead with this suggestion. They have to consider the cost of machine operation
and loss due to huge waiting time in a station. The trade-off lies there.
Again lot of suggestions can be made in this system, by removing some machines in a station
which has less utilization so that we can increase the utilization and we can save money in
operating the machine. We can also consider changes in the assumptions a and b.

25

REFERENCE
[1]. David Kelton W., Randall P. Sadowski, Deborah A. Sadowski. 2001. Simulation with
Arena (2nd ed.), McGraw Hill.
[2]. R. Tavakkoli, M., Daneshmand Mehr. 2005. A Computer Simulation Model for Job Shop
Scheduling Problems Minimizing Makespan, Computers & Industrial Engineering, 48,
811823.
[3]. Rahime Sancar E. & Arslan O. 2009. Simulation Analysis of Lot Streaming in Job Shops
with Transportation Queue Disciplines, Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory,
17,442453.
[4]. Tayfur Altiok & Benjamin Melamed. 2007. Simulation Modeling and Analysis with
Arena (2nd ed.), Elsevier Inc.

26