Cluster Computing

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10586-018-2873-9 (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().,-volV)

Optimal dimensions for multi-deep storage systems under class-based

storage policies
Xianhao Xu1 • Xiaozhen Zhao1 • Bipan Zou2 • Mingze Li3

Received: 31 May 2018 / Revised: 16 October 2018 / Accepted: 23 November 2018

 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
Multi-deep automated storage and retrieval systems (AS/RSs) have seen many implementations in warehouses due to their
high floor space utilization. However, the rack size, which will fundamentally affect the operating efficiency of the storage and
retrieval machine in the system, should be optimized analytically. While extensive studies have been made to analyze the
system performance and optimize operating policies for single-deep and double-deep AS/RSs by travel-time models. No
analytical models are available for multi-deep AS/RSs. To fill this gap, we develop travel-time models for this system,
considering the random storage policy and two class-based storage policies in a multi-deep AS/RS: the one that zoning only on
picking face and the one that zoning on both picking face and the depth direction. Based on the travel-time models, we derive
the formulation of the optimal system size, to minimize the expected travel time of S/R machine. Simulation models are built to
validate the analytical models and the results show that the maximum relative error between analytical result and simulation
result is 4.3%. Numerical experiments are conducted to find the optimal size of a multi-deep AS/RS and compare the
performance of these storage policies. The results show that class-based storage policy always outperform the random storage
policy in terms of expected travel time, and the class-based storage policy that zoning on both picking face and the depth
direction may not be better than that only zoning on the picking face, while it may be harder to handle in the system.

Keywords AS/RS  Travel-time model  Class-based storage  Warehouse

1 Introduction retrieval (S/R) machine equipped in the aisle to serve two

With the rapid development of e-commerce business and
logistics technologies, the requirement for automated stor-
age and retrieval systems (AS/RSs) with compact storage
area, high throughput capacity and flexible system structure,
has increased a lot [1]. Traditional single-deep warehouses
store goods in single-deep rack and use an storage and
Prof Xianhao Xu gives the idea of this study, Xiaozhen Zhao
and Bipan Zou build the models and write the manuscript.
Mingze Li is capable of improving the manuscript.
& Bipan Zou
zbp0307@126.com
Mingze Li
mingze@whut.edu.cn
1 Before the implementation of an innovative material-
School of Management, Huazhong University of Science and
Technology, Wuhan 430074, China
2 many factors should be investigated by analytical or sim-
School of Business Administration, Zhongnan University of
Economics and Law, Wuhan 430073, China
racks. Such a system has high storage and retrieval efficiency
but wastes too much floor space occupied by aisles. Many
innovative automated storage and retrieval systems that are
introduced in recent decades overcome this disadvantage, by
offering higher floor utilization, flexible throughput capacity
and cheaper investment, such as double-deep and multi-deep
AS/RS systems [2–6], autonomous vehicle storage and
retrieval system (AVS/RS) [7–10], puzzle-based storage and
retrieval system (PBSS) [11, 12] and so on. Compared with
traditional single-deep warehousing system, these new
material handling systems generally adopt compact storage
structure, such as three-dimensional storage rack [2] and
multi-tier storage racks [13, 14]. Moreover, these systems
almost use multiple material handlers for storage and
retrieval transactions, which guarantees high flexible
throughput capacity.
handling system that may generally cost millions dollar,
ulation models, which can be categorized into two

123

categories: system structure and operating policies. The
system structure corresponds to the the size of the storage
rack and the equipment of material handlers, such as S/R
machine, shuttles, robots and so on. The operating policies
have elements, including the dwell point policy of material
handler, the command cycle policy (i.e., how many trans-
actions are handled in one command cycle) and so and so
on. As a well researched stream, single-deep and double-
deep AS/RSs have been well studied in both system and
operating policies. We refer the readers to [15] for the
details. Among these studies, travel time models are widely
used for performance estimation and operating policies
optimization [16–19]. Different from single-deep and and
double-deep AS/RSs that use an S/R machine, a multi-deep
AS/RS stores goods in multi-deep racks and uses multiple
handlers for storage and retrieval transactions. Various
queueing networks have been built to estimate the system
performance and optimize operating policies for multi-
deep systems [10, 14, 20–22]. However, as our best
knowledge, no study has investigated the optimal system
size and class-based storage policy in a multi-deep AS/RS
comprehensively and analytically.
To fill this gap, this study considers a general multi-deep
AS/RS that uses an S/R machine as the material handler
(Fig. 1). In this system, goods are stored in the storage rack
with depth nd and be retrieved by the S/R machine from the
picking face. Reshuffling may happen if the target good is
not at the picking face. While a high floor space utilization
Fig. 1 Multi-deep automated
storage and retrieval system
123
Cluster Computing
can be achieved in this system, it is more critical to design
the system size and select the storage policy, which may
significantly affect the system performance.
Based on this motivation, we develop travel time models
for this system, considering random and class-based stor-
age policies. Specifically, we consider class-based storage
policy on picking face and class-based storage policy on
both picking face and depth direction. Travel time models
are built under both random and class-based storage poli-
cies. Simulation models are built to validate the effec-
tiveness and accuracy of our analytical models. Based on
our travel time models, we derive the optimal system size
for both random and class-based storage policies, to min-
imize the expected retrieval time. Moreover, we conduct
numerical experiments to compare the performance of
these storage policies. The results show that class-based
storage policies always outperform the random storage
policy in terms of expected retrieval time, the class-based
storage policy on both picking face and depth direction
may not outperform the class-based storage policy only on
picking face, while it is harder to manage.
This paper makes the following contributions: We study
a general multi-deep AS/RS that has not been well
researched before. We build accurate and effective travel
time models for this system under both random and class-
based storage policies. Our results show that more zoning
in the rack may not be better in the multi-deep AS/RS,
which may be not consistent with studies on AS/RS.
Cluster Computing
This paper is organized as follows: Sect. 2 presents the
literature review about storage policy. The notations and
assumptions used in this paper are listed in Sect. 3. Sec-
tion 4 illustrates the formulation of travel-time models
based on three storage policies, and numerical experiments
are presented in Sect. 5. Finally, conclusions and discus-
sion are drawn in Sect. 6.
2 Literature review
Extensive studies that build travel-time models to analyze
operating policies of AS/RSs can be found, such as the
shape of the rack (SIT or NSIT rack), storage and retrieval
policies (random, turnover-based and class-based storage
policies), the operating strategies of the S/R machine
(single-command and dual-command) and so on. In this
paper, we focus on storage policy and rack structure.
2.1 Storage policy
Random storage policy is the most widely used policy in an
AS/RS for its operating convenience. Under this policy, all
unit loads are randomly stored in the rack and will be
retrieved with the same possibility. [17]. They have con-
sidered ABC curve and EOQ model in a square-in-time
(SIT) rack, and take the random policy as a benchmark of
other storage policies such as class-based storage policy
and full turnover-based storage policy. [23] has investi-
gated a non-square-in-time (NSIT) storage system under
single command and dual command operating policies.
Under random storage policy, they have demonstrated that
SIT is the optimal structure in a single-deep AS/RS.
[24, 25] have both formulated S/R machine travel-time
models under the random storage policy.
Full turnover-based storage policy is also a widely used
storage policy in AS/RSs, under which goods with high
turnover will be stored in positions that are closer to the
output point. [17] is the first to derive single-command
travel-time model for full turnover-based storage policy in
an AS/RS. Then, [26] has derived the travel-time model for
dual-command operations under the turnover-based storage
policy. They demonstrated that the turnover-based storage
policy outperforms the random storage policy in terms of
expected S/R machine travel time, and minimum travel
time time can be obtained by the full turnover-based stor-
age policy. Despite the outstanding performance of turn-
over-based storage policy, it is hard to manage in a real
system. Class-based storage policy is a trade-off between
random storage policy and turnover-based storage policy
[17] is the first to study class-based storage policy in a SIT
AS/RS, in which the rack is divided into two and three
areas, high turnover products will be allocated closer to I/O
point than low turnover products. Significant improvement
of expected travel time can be obtained based on random
storage policy. [24, 27] has studied two-class-based and
multi-class-based storage policy in an AS/RS. [28] has
investigated a three-dimensional compact AS/RS system
where gravity circle conveyor is utilized, travel time
models of S/R machine are derived under class-based
storage policy. Optimal zone boundaries of the rack are
given under this storage policy.
2.2 Storage rack structure
As a main factor determining the operating efficiency of
S/R machine, storage rack structure has also drawn lots of
attentions. Travel-time models are widely used to optimize
the system structure of an AS/RS, either for single-deep or
double-deep system. In a single-deep AS/RS, [17] built
travel-time models for both random and turnover-based
storage policies under the single-command operating
strategy. They proved that the SIT structure is optimal for
the expected travel time. [16] have derived travel time
models for various combinations of different storage
assignment rules and scheduling policies. They also
demonstrated the optimality of SIT structure.Under the
single and dual-command operating strategies, NSIT racks
has been studied by [23]. In recent decades, double-deep,
multi-deep and 3D compact AS/RSs have drawn many
attentions, [18] studied a double-deep rack under single and
dual command cycles. In this system, the blocked pallets
will be moved to a closet empty space instead of buffering
on shuttles. [29] studied a 3D flow rack where storage and
retrieval operations are done in different sides of the multi-
deep rack, slope conveyors are installed in the depth
direction to make the unit loads flow from input side to
retrieval side. They have built closed-form travel-time
model to estimate the performance of other AS/RSs and
compare techniques used to improve system performance.
[2] was the first to examine a 3D compact AS/RS system
in which gravity-driven conveyor is equipped. They have
built travel-time models models for random and full turn-
over-based storage policies to optimize the zone bound-
aries of the rack. Moreover, they demonstrated that SIT
rack combined with the length of the conveyor being the
longest is the optimal scenario. Sequentially, [3] have
investigated two-class-based storage policy in 3D compact
AS/RSs, to optimize the rack size. [30] explored the opti-
mal storage rack dimensions, considering the acceleration
and deceleration of the S/R machine. [31] studied a 3D AS/
RS with I/O point at the lower mid-point of the storage rack
and optimized the system dimensions. They found that the
lower mid-point I/O point outperforms the lower left-cor-
ner I/O point in terms of expected travel time of the S/R
machine. [11] studied the storage of fresh product in a 3D
123

AS/RS where the horizontal load movement is performed
by satellites, instead of conveyors. They considered both
dedicated and shared storage policies, and proposed a
heuristic to minimize the total retrieval time with orders.
The results show that the shared storage policy performs
better for most practical cases.
Different from a 3D AS/RS, a puzzle-based storage
system (PBSS) uses load-captive shuttles to transport loads
horizontally, and lifts to transport loads vertically. Multiple
moving shuttles can form a virtual aisle to transport the
requested load rapidly. [32] was the first to study the PBSS.
They focused on a single-tier PBSS and derived the closed-
form expression of the expected retrieval time (expressed
in number of movements) for systems with one empty
location located near the I/O point. Heuristics were pro-
posed for systems with multiple empty locations located
near the I/O point. [33] considered a single-tier PBSS with
randomly located empty locations. They derived a closed-
form expression of the expected retrieval time for systems
with one or two empty locations, and proposed heuristics
with worst case bounds for systems with more than two
empty locations. [12] studied a multi-tier PBSS with many
empty locations and derived closed-form formulas for the
expected retrieval time for any system configuration.
Moreover, they obtained the optimal system dimensions to
minimize the system response time.
Above analysis show that random, class-based and
turnover-based storage policies have all been well studied
in single-deep, double-deep AS/RS and 3D AS/RS that
uses lifts and conveyors for transportation of goods, while
no papers focus on the combination of automatic vehicles
and lifts in multi-deep AS/RS. Based on this consideration,
this paper investigates a multi-deep racks whose S/R
machine is constructed by a lift and multiple automatic
vehicles, considering both random storage policy and class-
based storage policy. We build travel-time models to
estimate the system performance and derive the optimal
system size under these storage policies.
3 Notations and assumptions
We make the following assumptions for modeling:
• The rack has a rectangular picking face and the Input/
Output (I/O) points are both located at the lower-left
corner of the picking face.
• The rack is equipped with an S/R machine that has a lift
carrying an automatic vehicle. The lift moves on both
horizontal and vertical directions simultaneously to
reach the target bin, the vehicle moves in depth
direction (in the rack) to retrieve the target load. The
123
Cluster Computing
dwell point of the S/R machine is the I/O point, i.e., the
S/R machine will park at I/O point once it is idle.
• The service of both storage and retrieval transactions
follows the first-come-first-service (FCFS) rule, and the
retrieval transactions are given higher priority than
storage transactions. So, we take the expected retrieval
time as the performance measure of the system.
• Time needed to pick up or deposit an unit load is
ignored for that they are constant which will not affect
the optimization of the system size and the storage
policy.
• We only consider single-command cycle, which means
the S/R machine will return to the I/O point after
finishing a storage or retrieval transaction.
• Returning to the I/O point reshuffling strategy is used,
i.e., the blocked loads (the loads blocking the target
load) will be moved to a buffer nearby the I/O point at
first and then returned to previous storage positions
after finishing the retrieval transaction.
• Thee acceleration and deceleration of the S/R machine
is ignored [18].
Notations used in this paper, along with their illustrations
are presented in Table 1.
4 Travel-time models
The retrieval process of the system can be divided into
three parts. First, the lift transports the automatic vehicle
that dwells at the I/O point of the system to the bin where
target pallet is stored. Then, the automatic vehicle picks up
the blocked unit-loads and transports them to the I/O point
of the system with the help of the lift. Last, the automatic
vehicle gets the target unit-load and the lift transports it to
the I/O point. Therefore, travel time of the S/R machine
consists of the following parts:
1. Time for the S/R machine to transport the automatic
vehicle to the bin where the target pallet locates, it is
E½T1  ¼ T  maxðx; yÞ, where (x, y) is the coordinate of
the bin on the picking face.
2. Reshuffling time, i.e., the time for the automatic
vehicle to transport the blocking loads to the I/O point.
To get the ith bin that is blocked by i  1 unit loads, the
automatic vehicle will travel on the picking face by
ði  1Þ  T  maxðx; yÞ. On the depth direction, the
Pi1 2
automatic vehicle will travel by 2aT ind  j¼1 j . So, the
total time to move blocking loads to the I/O point can
be calculated by
Cluster Computing

Table 1 Main notations

Notation Description Notation Description

l, h, d The length, height and depth of a storage position (m) nh ; nv ; nd The number of storage positions on horizontal, vertical and
depth direction
L, H, D The length, height and depth of the multi-deep rack (m), we n Storage capacity of the system, we have n ¼ nh  nv  nd
have L ¼ nh  l; H ¼ nv  h; D ¼ nd  d
vh ; vv ; vd Velocity of the S/R machine on horizontal, vertical and t h ; tv ; td Time for the S/R machine to reach the farthest point on
depth direction (m/s) horizontal, vertical and depth direction, we have th ¼
nh l
v h ; tv ¼ nvvh
v
; td ¼ ndvd
d
(s)
T The maximum size of the rack in time, i.e., maxfth ; tv ; td g, a, b The ratios of td and tv to T, we have a ¼ TvDd ¼ k2 n2d and
we assume that the S/R machine moves slowest on the v vh d
b ¼ TvHv ¼ k3 nd , in which we take both k2 ¼ nnlv and
horizontal direction (following [2, 3]), so we have n2v hvh
d

T ¼ nvhhl ¼ nv vnlh nd , in which we take k1 ¼ nvnlvh as a function k3 ¼ nlvc as a function of nd

of nd
x, y, z The coordinate of a SKU on horizontal, vertical and depth cp1 Two-class-based storage policy considering only picking-
direction, we have x 2 ð0; 1Þ; y 2 ð0; bÞ; z 2 ð0; aÞ face
cp2 Two-class-based storage policy considering both picking- ER ½T Expected travel time of the S/R machine under random
face and depth direction storage policy (s)
EC1 ½T Expected travel time of the S/R machine under cp1 storage EC2 ½T Expected travel time of the S/R machine under cp2 storage
policy (s) policy (s)

(l
2aT X i1
; 0  l  b;
E½T2  ¼ ði  1Þ  T  maxðx; yÞ þ  j2 Pðx  lÞ ¼ l; Pðy  lÞ ¼ b ð5Þ
ind j¼1 1; b  l  1:
aT 2i  1
¼ ði  1Þ  T  maxðx; yÞ þ  : ð1Þ Then, the expectation of max(x, y) can be calculated by
nd 3
Z 1
3. Time for the automatic vehicle to transport the ith unit- b2 þ 3
E½maxðx; yÞ ¼ lgðlÞdl ¼ : ð6Þ
load to the I/O point, which can be calculated by 0 6
2iaT Substituting Eq. (6), T ¼ nk1d ; a ¼ k2 n2d and b ¼ k3 nd into
E½T3  ¼ T  maxðx; yÞ þ ð2Þ
nd Eq. (3), we can get the expected retrieval time under the
random storage policy, which is a function of the system
Considering that the target unit load i varies from 1 to nd depth nd
with the probability n1d , the expected retrieval time can be ER ½Tr ðnd Þ
calculated by  2 
3k3 þ 8k2 2 3k32 þ 10k2 9 þ 34k2 3
nd þ 3 ¼ k1  nd þ  nd þ þ :
E½Tr  ¼ T   E½maxðx; yÞ 36 12 36 4nd
2
k2 ð4nd þ 15n2d þ 17nd Þ
3 ð7Þ
þ : ð3Þ
18 The first and second derivation of ER ½Tr ðnd Þ over nd are
4.1 Travel-time model for random storage policy  2 
dER ½Tr ðnd Þ 3k3 þ 8k2 3k32 þ 10k2 3
¼ k1  nd þ  2 ;
dnd 18 12 4nd
Under the random storage policy, every load will be stored 2
 2 
and retrieved with the same possibility in a block. There- d ER ½Tr ðnd Þ 3k3 þ 8k2 3
¼ k1 þ 3 [ 0:
fore, the expected retrieval time can be calculated by dn2d 18 2nd
Eq. (3). To calculate the expectation of max(x, y), we can ð8Þ
first derive its distribution function [23] by the following
Then, we have limnd !þ1 dER ½T
¼ þ1. Thereby,
dnd
r ðnd Þ

equation
there must exists an optimal nd , denoted by nd0 , that makes
GðlÞ ¼ Pðmaxðx; yÞ  lÞ ¼ Pðx  lÞ  Pðy  lÞ ð4Þ dER ½Tr ðnd Þ
dnd ¼ 0. Since the feasibility region of nd0 is integer
Since x is uniformly distributed in [0, 1] and y is uni- values in ð1; þ1Þ, we will round nd0 to its neighboring
formly distributed in [0, b], we have integer that minimizes the expected retrieval time

123
 Cluster Computing

ER ½Tr ðnd Þ. We will investigate nd0 numerically in Sect. 6, In Eq. (12), yðR1 Þ is the expected retrieval time of the
the results show that the optimal rack depth is generally S/R machine in zone A and yðR2 Þ is that in zone B. As
larger than two. So, the optimal depth of the system nd can Fig. 2a shows, the whole storage area is divided into a
be obtained by smaller rectangle area that is closer to the I/O point and
min

ER ½Tr ðnd Þ ¼ minfER ½Tr ðbnd0 cÞ; ER ½Tr ðdnd0 eÞg; ð9Þ used for class A, and a L shape area that is used for class B.
nd
We let the percentage of the products stored in class A to
where bc means rounding down, de means rounding up. the whole products be p. Then, we have r 2 ¼ pb ¼ pk3 nd .
Since r  b and b  p, we have nd  kp3 .
4.2 Travel-time model for class-based storage Based on the expected retrieval time under the random
policy on picking face storage policy, we can obtain the expected retrieval time in
the zone A under the class-based storage policy on the
Under the class-based storage policy, products are divided picking face as Eq. (13)
into several classes based on the turnover of stored goods
yðR1 Þ
and the storage positions are zoned into several areas. The   
products with high turnover are assigned to storage zone 1 nd ðnd þ 3Þ k2 ð4n4d þ 15n3d þ 17n2d Þ
¼E maxðx;yÞ þ :
that is closer to the I/O point and the others are located nd 2 A 18
farther to the I/O point. In the same storage area, all the ð13Þ
goods are randomly stored. Two factors should be taken 2r
into account under the class-based storage policy: Substituting E½maxA  ¼ 3 into Eq. (13), we have
Eq. (14)
1. How many classes should the system use.
2r  ðnd þ 3Þ k2 ð4n4d þ 15n3d þ 17n2d Þ
2. The size of each storage area, in fact, we should yðR1 Þ ¼ þ : ð14Þ
6 18
determine the capacity of all classified areas.
The difference between yðR1 Þ and yðR2 Þ is the expec-
This paper divides all goods into class A and class B,
tation of the maximum time for the S/R machine to move
which corresponds to high and low turnover goods,
simultaneously on horizontal and vertical directions. For
respectively. The classification and the turnover of prod- 3
3b4r 3
yðR2 Þ, that is E½maxB ðx; yÞ ¼ b 6ðbr 2 Þ , so we have
ucts are the same as [17]. We divide the whole storage rack
into two zones: A and B. Zone A is a rectangular area with 1 3 1
nd þ 3 k32 n2d  4k32 p2 n3d þ 3
size r  r  a. The remaining area is zone B. We assume yðR2 Þ ¼ 
2 6ð1  pÞ
that the demands of product follow an ABC curve, the
k2 ð4n4d þ 15n3d þ 17n2d Þ
system replenishes by the EOQ rule. Then, we have the þ : ð15Þ
18
turnover formulation of products as follows
Substituting the expressions of yðR1 Þ and yðR2 Þ into the
ki ¼ ð2s=KÞ1=2  iðs1Þ=ðsþ1Þ ; 0\s\1; ð10Þ expected retrieval time under the class-based storage policy
where K is the ratio of ordering cost to holding cost, we on the picking face, we can obtain Eq. (16)
assume that K is a constant and the same for all products. s 8k1 k2 ð1  pÞ þ 3k1 k32 ð1  p1þs Þ 2
is the parameter of the ABC curve which is presented as the EC1 ½Tr ðnd Þ ¼ nd
36ð1  pÞ
function Eq. (11) 10k1 k2 ð1  pÞ þ 3k1 k32 ð1  p1þs Þ
þ nd
GðiÞ ¼ is ; 0\s  1: ð11Þ 12ð1  pÞ
1 1

G(i) is the demand percentage of the first ith percentage k1 k32 p2 ðp1þs  pÞ 12
þ nd
of products. For instance, if A class products satisfy 80% 3ð1  pÞ
demands and occupy 20% storage capacity, then 34k1 k2 ð1  pÞ þ 9k1 ð1  p1þs Þ
þ
i ¼ 0:2; GðiÞ ¼ 0:8; s ¼ 0:139. Sorting all the products 36ð1  pÞ
1 1
decreasing monotonically by turnover frequency, we have k1 k32 p2 ðp1þs  pÞ 12 3k1 ð1  p1þs Þ 1
þ nd þ nd :
ki  kiþ1 . Furthermore, the expected travel time of S/R 1p 4ð1  pÞ
machine under the two class-based storage policy can be ð16Þ
written as:
R R Since the depth of a bin in the block should satisfy
i2R1 ki yðR1 Þdi þ i2R2 ki yðR2 Þdi nd  kp3 , we can reformulate the expression of EC1 ½Tr 
EC1 ½Tr ðnd Þ ¼ T  R1 : ð12Þ
0 ki di

123
Cluster Computing

(a) (b)
Fig. 2 Class-based storage policy in the multi-deep automatic storage and retrieval system

1
1 4.3 Travel-time model for class-based storage
ðnd Þ as EC1 ½Tr ðnd Þ ¼ Ap n2d þ Bp nd þ Cp n2d þ Dp þ Ep nd 2 þ
Fp n1
policy on both picking face and depth
d .
Since 0\p  1 and l [ 0, we could get that
direction
Ap [ 0; Bp [ 0; Cp \0; Dp [ 0; Ep \0; Fp [ 0.
Under the class-based storage policy, high turnover goods
To analyze the optimal number of nd , we derive the first
should be stored closer to the I/O point. Considering the
and second derivations of the function EC1 ½Tr ðnd Þ by
accessibility of every storage position in a storage bin
considering nd as a continuous variable.
(Fig. 1), it is easier to get the ith unit load than the ði þ 1Þth
dEC1 ½Tr ðnd Þ one. Based on this consideration, we consider the classifi-
dnd cation on both picking face and depth direction. Under this
 
1 12 1 32 2 class-based storage policy, the whole storage rack is divi-
¼ k1 2Ap nd þ Bp þ Cp nd  Ep nd  Fp nd
2 2 ded into three zones (Fig. 2b): A, B1 and B2 . Zone A is a
2
  rectangular area with size r  r  m, B and B are the
d EC1 ½Tr ðnd Þ 1  3 3  5 1 2
¼ k1 2Ap  Cp nd 2 þ Ep nd 2 þ 2Fp n3 d remaining part of the storage area.
dn2d 4 4
  Under the class-based storage policy on both picking
1 32 9 3
¼ k1 2Ap þ Cp nd ð  1Þ þ 2Fp nd face and depth direction, we define the percentage of class
4 nd pk n2
A products as p. Then, we have r 2 ¼ ndmpb ¼ m3 d . Since
ð17Þ
r  b, we have m  kp3 ; nd  m.
Based on the second derivation of EC1 ½Tr ðnd Þ over nd , To derive the expression of the expected travel time of
d 2 E ½T ðn Þ
we can only say that nd  9; C1dn2r d [ 0. For nd \9, the the S/R machine, we first need to derive the expressions of
d
d 2 EC1 ½Tr ðnd Þ the expected travel time in zone A and B, i.e., yðR1 Þ and
value of dnd 2 depends on the system size and the yðR2 Þ. Based on the expression of the expected travel time
parameters of the system. Thereby, we can hardly get the in zone A under the class-based storage policy on picking
closed-form expression of the optimal nd for any given p face, we have
and s. To deal with this problem, we analyze the numerical mþ3 k2 nd ð4m2 þ 15m þ 17Þ
value of nd0 in large-scale numerical experiments in yðR1 Þ ¼ E½maxðx; yÞ þ ;

2 A 18
Sect. 6, the results show that we can find an optimal nd0
ð19Þ
which is generally larger than two.
If the optimal rack depth nd0 is an integer, the optimal where E½maxA ðx; yÞ ¼ 2r3 is expected travel time of the S/R
 machine on the picking face of zone A.
retrieval time is EC1 ½Tr ðnd0 Þ, otherwise, we have
  For zone B, two sub-areas (B1 and B2 ) are distinguished
min½EC1 ½Tr ðnd Þ ¼ min½EC1 ½Tr ðbnd0 cÞ; EC1 ½Tr ðdnd0 eÞ;
as shown in Fig. 2b. In one zone, all pallets are stored and
ð18Þ retrieved randomly. thereby, the probability that an unit
p ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
The optimal boundary of zone I is r ¼ pk3 nd0 .   load at the i; i ¼ 1; 2; . . .,mth storage position in a bin in
zone B1 being retrieved is nmn dp
d ð1pÞ
. For the other unit loads in
nd m
zone B2 , the probability of being retrieved is nd ð1pÞ.

123
 Cluster Computing

Substituting these probabilities into the expected travel EC2 ðnd ; mÞ ¼ k1 ½Ad n2d þ Bd nd þ Cd þ Dd n1
d þ Ed m
2

time of the S/R machine, we have 1

þ Fd m þ Gd m2 þ Hd m 2  1


m  nd p 1 mðm þ 3Þ ð24Þ
yðR2 Þ ¼   E½maxðx; yÞ
nd mð1  pÞ m 2 B1
 nd and m are two dependent variables of function
k2 nd ð4m3 þ 15m2 þ 17mÞ
þ EC2 ðnd ; mÞ and they are independent. Thereby, we can find
18
(  the optimal value of EC2 ðnd ; mÞ by deriving at nd and m,
nd  m 1 nd ðnd þ 3Þ respectively. First, we have
þ  E½maxðx; yÞ 
nd ð1  pÞ nd  m B2 2
 dEC2 ðnd ; mÞ d2 EC2 ðnd ; mÞ
mðm þ 3Þ k 2 nd ¼ k1 ð2Ad nd þ Bd  Dd n2
d Þ
 þ ½4n3d þ 15n2d þ 17nd  4m3 dnd dn2d
2 18 3
) ¼ k1 ð2Ad þ 2Dd nd Þ [ 0
ð25Þ
 15m2  17m ;
We can easily get that Ad [ 0 and Dd [ 0, so, we can
ð20Þ dE ðn ;mÞ
find an optimal rack depth nd0 that makes C2dndd ¼ 0,
where maxB1 ðx; yÞ is the expected travel time of the S/R where the expected travel time EC2 ðnd ; mÞ takes its optimal
machine on the picking face of area B1 and maxB2 ðx; yÞ is value. This value can be found numerically for any given p
the expected travel time of the S/R machine on the picking and ABC curve parameter. Note that the feasibility region
face of area B2 . We can get their expressions by the fol- of nd0 is integer values in ð1; þ1Þ, we will round nd0 to a
lowing equation neighboring integer that minimizes EC2 ðnd ; mÞ if nd0 is not
3 1 1
an integer. Numerical experiments on the optimal nd0 are
k2 n2 m þ 3m  4p2 k32 n2d m2 conducted in Sect. 6, the results show that the optimal rack
E½maxðx; yÞ ¼ 3 d E½maxðx; yÞ
B1 6ðm  pnd Þ B2 depth is generally larger than two.
k32 n2d þ 3 For the depth of zone A, we have
¼ :
6  
dEC2 ðnd ; mÞ 1 12 1 32
ð21Þ ¼ k1 2Ed m þ Fd þ Gd  m  Hd  m
dm 2 2
Substituting the expressions of E½maxB1 ðx; yÞ and ð26Þ
E½maxB2 ðx; yÞ into Eq. (20), we obtain
Substituting corresponding parameters into Eq. (26), we
yðR2 Þ
 2  get
1 3k3 þ 8k2 3 9k32 þ 30k2 2 34k2 þ 9 3
¼  nd þ  nd þ  nd þ dEC2 ðnd ; mÞ p1þs  p
1p 36 36 36 4 ¼ k1 
dm " 1p
1
3 1
k2 pnd ð4m2 þ 15m þ 17Þ p2 k32 nd ðm2 þ 3m2 Þ
1
1 1
#
  4k2 5k2 p2 k32 32
18ð1  pÞ 3ð1  pÞ  mþ þ  m  ðm  3Þ
9 6 6
ð22Þ
ð27Þ
Then, EC2 ðnd ; mÞ can be written as Eq. (23)
p1þs p
Since l\0 and 0\p  1, we have 1p [ 0. There-
EC2 ðnd ; mÞ ¼ k1 dEC2 ðnd ;mÞ
 fore, when m  3, [ 0. This means that
ð1  p1þs Þð3k32 þ 8k2 Þ 2 ð1  p1þs Þð3k32 þ 10k2 Þ dm
 nd þ  nd EC2 ðM; mÞ increases with m. Moreover, since m is limited
36ð1  pÞ 12ð1  pÞ
to m  p=k3 and m ¼ 1 is meaningless, we should only
ð1  p1þs Þð9 þ 34k2 Þ 3ð1  p1þs Þ 1 consider m ¼ 2 when p=k3  2.
þ þ  nd
36ð1  pÞ 4ð1  pÞ Based on above analysis, we can quantitatively get the
2k2 ðp1þs  pÞ 2 5k2 ðp1þs  pÞ optimal value of m0 , and then get the optimal boundary of
þ m þ m qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
9ð1  pÞ 6ð1  pÞ zone a by r  ¼ pk3 ðnd0 Þ2 =m0 . In practice, variables nd
1 1 1 1
#
p2 k32 ðp1þs  pÞ 1 p2 k32 ðp1þs  pÞ 1 and m are both an integer. So, for the depth of zone A, i.e.,
þ  m2 þ m 2
3ð1  pÞ 1p m, if p=k3 is an integer, the optimal m0 ¼ p=k3 , otherwise,
ð23Þ we have m0 ¼ bp=k3 þ 1c.

For the convenience of analyze, we redefine the

expression of EC2 ðnd ; mÞ as follows

123
Cluster Computing

For nd , we find its optimal value by rounding to
neighboring integer that minimizes EC2 ðnd ; mÞ. Namely,
the following equation
EC 2 ¼ min½EC2 ðbnd0 c; bm0 cÞ; EC2 ðbnd0 þ 1c; bm0 cÞ:
Next, we validate the effectiveness and accuracy of our
analytical models by simulation and conduct numerical
experiments to compare the performance of these storage
policies and analyze the optimal system size.
5 Data availability
All data generated or analysed during this study are
included in this published article (and its Supplementary
Information files).
6 Results
6.1 Simulation validation
We build the simulation model in Arena (version 14.7) to
validate our analytical models (see ‘‘Appendix’’ for simu-
lation model details). The storage capacity of the examined
system takes two scenarios: C ¼ 3000; 5000. For each
scenario, the system size has two cases. For C ¼ 3000, we
have nh  nv  nd ¼ 30  20  5 and nh  nv  nd ¼
40  15  5. For C ¼ 5000, we have nh  nv  nd ¼ 40 
25  5 and nh  nv  nd ¼ 25  25  8. For the class-
based storage policy considering both the picking face and
the depth direction, we take m ¼ 3 for nd ¼ 5 and m ¼ 5
for nd ¼ 8. Thereby, we have four scenarios in total. The
other parameters of the examined system (the size of
storage position and the velocity of the S/R machine follow
[31]) is presented in Table 2.
In the simulation model, we model the multi-deep AS/
RS as a service system that serves retrieval transactions
with an arrival rate kr that makes the utilization of S/R
ð28Þ machine larger than 90%.
For each scenario, 100 replications are run with a warm-
up period of 100 h and a running time of 1000 h per
replication, leading to a 95% confidence interval where the
half-width is within 2% of the average. We collected two
performance measures, including the throughput time of
retrieval transactions THr and the waiting time of trans-
actions for S/R machine Wr . Then we can get the travel
time of S/R machine by T ¼ THr  Wr . The accuracy of
the analytical models is measured by the absolute relative
errors of analytical results to simulation results, denoted by
d,
jA  Sj
d¼  100%; ð29Þ
S
where A and S are the analytical and average simulation
results, respectively.
The simulation validation results are presented in
Table 3. The results show that the average relative error of
analytical results to simulation results is about 2.7%, and
the maximum relative error is 4.3%. These results support
that our analytical models can estimate the expected travel
time of the S/R machine in the multi-deep AS/RS with
accuracy and effectiveness.
6.2 Optimal system size under the random
storage policy
In this section, we explore the optimal system size of a
multi-deep AS/RS under the random storage policy, using
our analytical model formulated in Sect. 4. The system
parameters come from Table 2. In order to analyze the
effect of the system storage capacity on its performance,

Table 2 System parameters for

Parameter l (m) w (m) h (m) vh (m/s) vv (m/s) vd (m/s) s p
simulation validation
Value 1.2 1.2 2.0 2.5 0.8 0.8 0.317 30%

Table 3 Simulation validation results

System size Random storage policy CB1 CB2
nh  nv  nd A (s) S (s) d (%) d^ (%) A (s) S (s) d (%) d^ (%) A (s) S (s) d (%) d^ (%)

30  20  5 115.9 118.1 1.9 2.0 116.1 119.2 2.7 3.1 117.9 121.3 2.9 3.3
40  15  5 91.6 95.1 3.8 4.1 89.9 92.2 2.6 2.9 86.7 89.9 3.7 3.9
40  25  5 140.2 144.0 2.6 3.3 139.2 142.5 2.4 2.8 141.3 145.3 2.8 3.1
25  25  8 259.2 268.3 3.4 4.3 276.5 280.9 1.6 2.5 279.8 286.4 2.4 3.9

d is the mean value of relative errors, d^ is the maximum value of relative error, CB1 is the class-based storage policy on picking face, CB2 is the
class-based storage policy on both picking face and depth direction

123
 Cluster Computing

Table 4 Optimal system size and expected travel-time of S/R scenarios. Therefore, we will have 16 scenarios in total (see
machine under the random storage policy Table 4), such as ðnv ; nh  nd Þ ¼
n nv nh  nd nd nh ER (s) ð5; 30Þ; ð10; 150Þ; ð15; 100Þ; ð20; 75Þ for n ¼ 1500. For
each scenario, we vary the depth of the rack, i.e., nd , as the
1500 5 300 5 60 90.89 dependent variable, to minimize the expected travel time of
10 150 3 50 63.58 the S/R machine.
15 100 2 50 62.28 We present the optimal system size and the expected
20 75 1 75 66.52 travel time of the S/R machine under each system scenario
2000 5 400 6 67 113.85 in Table 4. Moreover, we present the curves of the
10 200 3 67 75.98 expected travel time under four storage capacity scenarios
15 134 2 67 69.90 in Fig. 3. The results show that we can find an optimal
20 100 1 100 76.89 system size to minimize the expected retrieval time of the
2500 5 500 6 84 135.76 system. Generally, the optimal depth nd is larger than 2,
10 250 4 63 87.10 which meets the requirement of the multi-deep AS/RS
15 167 3 56 79.26 examined in this paper. We can also find that the optimal
20 125 2 63 79.90 system depth nd and the expected travel-time ERCr
3000 5 600 7 86 157.60 increases with the capacity of the rack. For the same
10 300 4 75 98.60 storage capacity, the expected travel-time of the S/R
15 200 3 67 85.74 machine increases with the system depth. In other word,
20 150 2 75 84.65 the performance of the S/R machine decreases with the
number of storage positions in each storage bin. This can
we plan to examine four capacity scenarios be explained as that the increased time to retrieve an unit
n ¼ 1500; 2000; 2500; 3000. The height of the rack is load in depth direction by the automatic vehicle can not be
normally limited by the warehouse, thus, we set the height balanced by the saving of traveling time on picking face.
of the rack as nv ¼ 5; 10; 15; 20 for above four capacity However, due to the limitation on the height and the floor

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 3 Expected travel time of the S/R machine under the random storage policy

123
Cluster Computing

Table 5 Optimal system size and expected travel-time under the policy considering picking face, we set p ¼ 0:3 and
class-based storage policy considering picking face s ¼ 0:569; 0:317. Then, we can get the optimal system size
s n nv nd nh r EC 1 (s) Impð%Þ of the multi-deep AS/RS and compare the optimal expected
travel time with that of the random storage policy. We
0.569 1500 5 4 75 0.29 85.71 5.70 present the results in Tables 5 and 6. Moreover, we present
10 2 75 0.41 56.43 11.26 some curves of the expected travel time of the S/R machine
15 1 100 0.43 54.48 12.53 in Fig. 4.
20 1 75 0.58 55.12 17.14 We have the following observations from the results:
2000 5 5 80 0.28 108.72 4.50
10 3 67 0.43 67.44 11.24
• The class-based storage policy considering the picking
face outperforms the random storage policy, in terms of
15 2 67 0.53 60.53 13.40
expected travel time of the S/R machine. The expected
20 1 100 0.50 60.71 21.05
improvement of the expected travel time under the
2500 5 5 100 0.25 131.72 2.97
class-based storage policy considering the picking face
10 3 84 0.39 78.97 9.33
over that of the random storage policy is 11.90%.
15 2 84 0.47 67.35 15.02
• More skew the ABC curve is, i.e., smaller s, more
20 1 125 0.45 68.68 14.05
improvement of expected travel time can be obtained.
3000 5 6 100 0.25 154.03 2.27
Specifically, the expected improvement is 13.02%
10 4 75 0.41 90.41 8.31
under s ¼ 0:317 compared with 10.78% under
15 2 100 0.43 75.44 12.01
s ¼ 0:569. This can be explained as that more skew
20 2 75 0.58 74.78 11.66
the ABC curve is, more storage positions are occupied
0.317 1500 5 4 75 0.29 82.96 8.73
by high turnover products, that reduces the expected
10 2 75 0.41 55.13 13.30 travel time of the S/R machine on picking face.
15 1 100 0.43 53.41 14.24 • The optimal system depth nd increases with the system
20 1 75 0.58 54.01 18.80 capacity n. The parameter of the ABC curve can hardly
2000 5 5 80 0.28 105.13 7.66 affect the optimal system size, but significantly affect
10 3 67 0.43 65.88 13.29 the system performance.
15 2 67 0.53 59.28 15.20 • The optimal system size of the multi-deep AS/RS under
20 1 100 0.50 59.59 22.50 the class-based storage policy considering the picking
2500 5 5 100 0.25 126.94 6.50 face is relatively insensitive to p and s, thereby, the
10 3 84 0.39 76.94 11.66 optimal depth nd is the same for both s ¼ 0:569 and
15 2 84 0.47 65.93 16.82 s ¼ 0:317.
20 1 125 0.45 67.35 15.71
3000 5 6 100 0.25 148.47 5.80
10 4 75 0.41 88.15 10.60
15 2 100 0.43 73.75 13.99
6.4 Optimal system size under the class-based
storage policy considering the picking face
20 2 75 0.58 73.13 13.61
and depth direction

space of the warehouse, an optimal system depth is
required to minimize the expected retrieval time.
6.3 Optimal system size under the class-based
storage policy considering the picking face
Under the class-based storage policy considering picking
face, the rack is divided into two zones: zone A for prod-
ucts with high turnover and zone B for the others. Com-
pared with the random storage policy, two additional
variables should be considered to optimize the system size:
the percentage of products stored in zone A (denoted by p)
and the ABC curve parameter (denoted by s). To investi-
gate the optimal system size under the class-based storage
In this section, we explore the optimal system size and the
expected travel time of the S/R machine under the class-
based storage policy considering both picking face and
depth direction. Be different from the class-based storage
policy that only considers the picking face, the depth of
zone A for products with high turnover will not equal to the
depth of the rack. Thereby, we have another additional
variable to be considered to optimize the system size: the
depth of zone A (denoted by m). We also consider the
system scenarios examined in last section, i.e., p ¼ 30%
and s ¼ 0:569; 0:317. We use the analytical model to
optimize the system size and the size of zone A. We present
the results in Tables 7 and 8.
We have the following observations from the results:

123
 Cluster Computing

• The class-based storage policy considering both the improvement is 10.83% under s ¼ 0:317 compared
picking face and the depth direction outperforms the with 6.30% under s ¼ 0:569. The explanation is given
random storage policy, in terms of expected travel time in last section.
of the S/R machine. The expected improvement of the
expected travel time under the class-based storage
policy considering the picking face over that of the
7 Discussion
random storage policy is 8.56%. This result reveals that
more zoning may not be always better for a storage and
To improve the utilization of warehouse floor space and the
retrieval system [34]. In the multi-deep AS/RS, zoning
throughput capacity, many high-density AS/RS systems
on the depth direction may decrease the travel time of
have been used as an alternative of traditional material-
the automatic vehicle on depth direction, but increase
handling systems in warehouse. In this paper, we consider
the travel time of the lift on the picking face that may
a multi-deep AS/RS that stores unit loads in a multi-deep
dominate the former.
rack and uses an S/R machine with an automatic vehicle to
• Coincident with the class-based storage policy consid-
transport loads. To analyze the system performance before
ering only the picking face, more skew the ABC curve
the real implementation, we built travel time models of the
is, i.e., smaller s, more improvement of expected travel
S/R machine, considering the random storage policy, the
time can be obtained. Specifically, the expected

Table 6 Optimal dimensions of

n 1500 2000 2500 3000
zone A for high-turnover
products nv 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20

nh  r  22 31 44 44 23 30 36 50 25 33 40 56 25 31 44 44
nv  r  2 5 7 12 2 5 8 10 2 4 8 9 2 5 7 12

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

Fig. 4 Expected travel time of the S/R machine under the class-storage policy considering picking face (s ¼ 0:569)

123
Cluster Computing

Table 7 optimal system size and expected travel-time of the S/R deep AS/RS under both random and class-based storage
machine under the class-based storage policy considering both policies with accuracy and effectiveness.
retrieval face and depth direction
Then, we conduct lots of numerical experiments to
s n nv nd nh r EC 2 (s) Impð%Þ explore the optimal system size under both random and
two-class-based storage policies. The results show that we
0.569 1500 5 4 75 0.33 84.04 7.54
can generally find an optimal system size under which the
10 2 75 0.58 56.48 11.17
optimal depth is usually larger than two. The comparison
15 2 50 0.87 57.99 6.89
between the performance of the random storage policy and
20 2 38 1.00 82.87 - 24.58
that of the class-based storage policy show that class-based
2000 5 5 80 0.31 106.30 6.63
storage policy outperforms random storage policy, in terms
10 3 67 0.53 67.73 10.86 of expected retrieval travel time. This supports that
15 2 67 0.75 61.89 11.46 advantage of class-based storage policy in the multi-deep
20 2 50 1.00 76.13 0.99 AS/RS. However, we also find that the class-based storage
2500 5 5 100 0.28 128.31 5.48 policy considering both the picking face and the depth
10 3 84 0.47 78.61 9.74 direction does not outperform the class-based storage pol-
15 2 84 0.67 68.19 13.97 icy considering only the picking face, which means more
20 2 63 0.89 75.03 6.10 zoning may not improve the system performance further in
3000 5 6 100 0.27 149.90 4.89 a multi-deep AS/RS.
10 4 75 0.47 90.09 8.64 This study contributes by considering both random and
15 2 100 0.61 75.70 11.71 class-based storage policies in a multi-deep AS/RS and
20 2 75 0.82 76.77 9.31 building travel time models of the S/R machine to optimize
0.317 1500 5 4 75 0.33 80.34 11.61 the system size and select storage policy. The results
10 2 75 0.58 53.62 15.67 support that zoning products with high turnover closer to
15 2 50 0.87 55.03 11.64 the I/O point is a better choice, but zoning more may not be
20 2 38 1.00 78.34 - 17.77 always better.
2000 5 5 80 0.31 101.93 10.46 For future work, alternative I/O point policy and the
10 3 67 0.53 64.69 14.85 dual command cycle policy can be investigated. The I/O
15 2 67 0.75 58.77 15.92 point policy determines the starting point of the S/R
20 2 50 1.00 72.11 6.22 machine in the implementation of a transaction, which will
2500 5 5 100 0.28 122.70 9.62 significantly affect the traveling time. Specifically, the I/O
10 3 84 0.47 75.00 13.89 point located in the middle of the picking face, the I/O
15 2 84 0.67 64.75 18.31 point located separately at the corner of the picking face
20 2 63 0.89 71.16 10.94 can be both examined. Under a dual command cycle pol-
3000 5 5 120 0.26 143.67 8.84 icy, the S/R machine will serve a retrieval transaction after
10 3 100 0.43 85.92 12.86 it finishes a storage transaction. It will shorter the unloaded
15 2 100 0.61 71.85 16.20 travelling path of the S/R machine, thereby, decrease the
20 2 75 0.82 72.85 13.93 expected cycle time of transactions. However, the imple-
mentation of dual command cycle policy depends on the
waiting transactions in the system queue. Only when both
class-based storage policy on picking face and the class- storage and retrieval transactions are available, dual com-
based storage policy on both the picking face and the depth mand cycle policy is applicable.
direction. We demonstrate the optimality of the system size
using our analytical models and develop simulation models Acknowledgements Funding was provided by Hubei Provincial
to for validation. The results show that our analytical Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 2018CFB160) and
models can estimate the system performance of the multi-

Table 8 Optimal dimensions of

n 1500 2000 2500 3000
zone A for high-turnover
products nv 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20 5 10 15 20

nh  r  25 44 44 38 25 36 51 50 28 40 57 57 28 36 62 62

nv  r 2 6 13 20 2 6 12 20 2 5 11 18 2 5 10 17
m 3 1 1 1 4 2 1 1 4 2 1 1 5 3 1 1

123

National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 71801225,
71131004, 71471071, 71531009, 71821001).
Author contributions Prof XX gives the idea of this study, XZ and
BZ build the models andwrite the manuscript. ML is capable of
improving the manscript
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest There is no conflict of interest.
Appendix: Simulation model
Figure 5 depicts the simulation processes for the multi-
deep AS/RS under the random and class-based storage
policies. We first assign a variable for each storage position
Fig. 5 Simulation model flowchart
123
Cluster Computing
to capture its storage status, i.e., empty or occupied (by
which product), depending on the storage policy applied.
Then, the retrieval transactions arrive with an arrival rate kr
that make the utilization of the S/R machine qSR [ 95%.
The service process is as the figure shows.
References
1. Cardin, O., Castagna, P., Sari, Z., Meghelli, N.: Performance
evaluation of in-deep class storage for flow-rack AS/RS. Int.
J. Prod. Res. 50, 6775–6791 (2012)
2. Yu, Y., Koster, R.D.: Optimal zone boundaries for two-class-
based compact three-dimensional automated storage and retrieval
systems. IIE Trans. 41, 194–208 (2009)
3. Yu, Y., Koster, R.D.: Designing an optimal turnover-based
storage rack for a 3D compact automated storage and retrieval
system. Int. J. Prod. Res. 47, 1551–1571 (2009)
4. Yu, Y., Koster, R.D.: Sequencing heuristics for storing and
retrieving unit loads in 3D compact automated warehousing
systems. IIE Trans. 44, 69–87 (2012)
5. Cinar, D., Oliveira, J.A., Topcu, Y., Pardalos, P.M.: Scheduling
the truckload operations in automated warehouses with alterna-
tive aisles for pallets. Appl. Soft Comput. 52, 566–574 (2017)
6. Oliveira, J.A.: Scheduling the truckload operations in automatic
warehouses. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 179, 723–735 (2007)
7. Malmborg, C.J.: Conceptualizing tools for autonomous vehicle
storage and retrieval systems. Int. J. Prod. Res. 40, 1807–1822
(2002)
8. Fukunari, M., Malmborg, C.J.: An efficient cycle time model for
autonomous vehicle storage and retieval systems. Int. J. Prod.
Res. 46, 3167–3184 (2008)
9. Ekren, B.Y., Heragu, S.S.: Simulation-based regression analysis
for the rack configuration of an autonomous vehicle storage and
retrieval system. Int. J. Prod. Res. 48, 6257–6274 (2010)
10. Zou, B., Xu, X., Gong, Y., De Koster, R.: Modeling parallel
movement of lifts and vehicles in tier-captive vehicle-based
warehousing systems. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 254, 51–67 (2016)
11. Zaerpour, N., Yu, Y., Koster, R.D.: Storing fresh produce for fast
retrieval in an automated compact cross-dock system. Prod. Oper.
Manag. 24, 1266–1284 (2015)
12. Zaerpour, N., Yu, Y., Koster, R.D.: Small is beautiful: A
framework for evaluating and optimizing live-cube compact
storage systems. Transp. Sci. 51, 34–51 (2015)
13. Gue, K.R.: Very high density storage systems. IIE Trans. 38,
79–90 (2006)
14. Cai, X., Heragu, S.S., Liu, Y.: Modeling and evaluating the AVS/
RS with tier-to-tier vehicles using a semi-open queueing network.
IIE Trans. 46, 905–927 (2014)
15. De Koster, R., Le-Duc, T., Roodbergen, K.J.: Design and control
of warehouse order picking: a literature review. Eur. J. Oper. Res.
182, 481–501 (2007)
16. Graves, S.C., Hausman, W.H., Schwarz, L.B.: Storage-retrieval
interleaving in automatic warehousing systems. Manag. Sci. 23,
935–945 (1977)
17. Hausman, W.H., Schwarz, L.B., Graves, S.C.: Optimal storage
assignment in automatic warehousing systems. Manag. Sci. 22,
629–638 (1976)
18. Lerher, T., Potrč, I., Šraml, M., Tollazzi, T.: Travel time models
for automated warehouses with aisle transferring storage and
retrieval machine. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 205, 571–583 (2010)
19. Shojafar, M., Abawajy, J.H., DelkhahAli, Z., Pooranian, A.,
Abraham, A.: An efficient and distributed file search in
Cluster Computing

unstructured peer-to-peer networks. Peer Peer Netw. Appl. 8, Xiaozhen Zhao is a Ph.D. can-
120–136 (2015) didate working on Management
20. Roy, D., Krishnamurthy, A., Heragu, S.S., Malmborg, C.J.: Per- Science and Engineering in the
formance analysis and design trade-offs in warehouses with School of Management in
autonomous vehicle technology. IIE Trans. 44, 1045–1060 (2012) Huazhong University of Science
21. Ekren, B.Y., Heragu, S.S., Krishnamurthy, A., Malmborg, C.J.: and Technology, China. His
Matrix-geometric solution for semi-open queuing network model research interests include logis-
of autonomous vehicle storage and retrieval system. Comput. Ind. tics, warehouse, automated
Eng. 68, 78–86 (2014) storage and retrieval system.
22. Zou, B., Gong, Y., Xu, X., Zhe, Y.: Assignment rules in robotic
mobile fulfilment systems for online retailers. Int. J. Prod. Res.
55, 6175–6192 (2017)
23. Bozer, Y.A., White, J.A.: Travel-time models for automated
storage/retrieval systems. IIE Trans. 16, 329–338 (1984)
24. Eynan, A., Rosenblatt, M.J.: Establishing zones in single-com-
mand class-based rectangular AS/RS. IIE Trans. 26, 38–46
(1994) Bipan Zou is a lectureship
25. De Koster, R.B., Le-Duc, T., Yugang, Y.: Optimal storage rack working on Management Sci-
design for a 3-dimensional compact AS/RS. Int. J. Prod. Res. 46, ence and Engineering in the
1495–1514 (2008) School of Business Administra-
26. Chun Park, B., Foley, R.D., White, J.A., Frazelle, E.H.: Dual tion in Zhongnan University of
command travel times and miniload system throughput with Economics and Law, China. His
turnover-based storage. IIE Trans. 35, 343–355 (2003) research interests include logis-
27. Chun Park, B.: Performance of automated storage/retrieval sys- tics, warehouse, robot-based
tems with non-square-in-time racks and two-class storage. Int. compact storage system.
J. Prod. Res. 44, 1107–1123 (2006)
28. Yu, Y., De Koster, R.B.: Optimal zone boundaries for two-class-
based compact three-dimensional automated storage and retrieval
systems. IIE Trans. 41, 194–208 (2009)
29. Sari, Z., Saygin, C., Ghouali, N.: Travel-time models for flow-
rack automated storage and retrieval systems. Int. J. Adv. Manuf.
Technol. 25, 979–987 (2005)
30. Yang, P., Miao, L., Xue, Z., Qin, L.: Optimal storage rack design Mingze Li is an Assistant Pro-
for a multi-deep compact AS/RS considering the acceleration/ fessor in school of manage-
deceleration of the storage and retrieval machine. Int. J. Prod. ment,Wuhan university of
Res. 53, 929–943 (2015) technology. His research centers
31. Hao, J., Yu, Y., Zhang, L.L.: Optimal design of a 3D compact upon organizational manage-
storage system with the i/o port at the lower mid-point of the ment, targeting at improving
storage rack. Int. J. Prod. Res. 53, 5153–5173 (2015) organizational effectiveness.
32. Gue, K.R., Kim, B.S.: Puzzle-based storage systems. Naval Res.
Logist. 54, 556–567 (2007)
33. Kota, V., Taylor, D., Gue, K.: Retrieval time performance in
puzzle-based storage systems. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 26,
582–602 (2015)
34. Yu, Y., Koster, R.D., Guo, X.: Class-based storage with a finite
number of items: using more classes is not always better. Prod.
Oper. Manag. 24, 1235–1247 (2015)

Xianhao Xu is a professor
working on Management Sci-
ence and Engineering in the
School of Management in
Huazhong University of Science
and Technology, China. His
research interests include
Logistics decision and opti-
mization, warehouse, compact
storage system, online retailer.

123