Decision AidingA hierarchical AHP/DEA methodology for the facilities layout design problem
Introduction
Layout design has a significant impact on the performance of a manufacturing or service industry system (Apple, 1997) and has been an active research area for many decades (Meller and Gau, 1996). Most literature for a layout design problem falls into two major categories, algorithmic and procedural approaches.
Algorithmic approaches usually simplify both design constraints and objectives in order to reach a surrogate objective function, the solution of which can then be obtained. The majority of the existing literature reports on algorithmic approaches (Heragu, 1997). Algorithmic approaches can generate layout alternatives efficiently, particularly, when commercial software is available, e.g., Spiral® (Goetschalckx, 1992) and LayOPT® (Bozer et al., 1994). However, the resulting quantitative results often do not capture all of the design objectives.
Procedural approaches can incorporate both qualitative and quantitative objectives in the design process (Muther, 1973). For these approaches, the design process is divided into several steps that are solved sequentially. The success of a procedural approach implementation is dependent on the generation of quality design alternatives, often provided by an experienced designer. Thus, such an approach may be subjective and may generate an inferior solution due to a lack of a sound scientific foundation. Accordingly, both possible subjectivity and inefficiency hinder the adoption of a procedural approach to solve a layout design problem.
Layout generation and evaluation is often challenging and time consuming due to its inherent multiple objective nature and its data collection process (Lin and Sharp, 1999a, Lin and Sharp, 1999b). Past and emerging research has been aimed at developing a solution methodology to meet these needs. However, algorithmic approaches have focused mainly on minimizing flow distance in order to minimize material handling costs. On the other hand, procedural approaches have relied heavily on experts’ experience. Neither an algorithmic nor a procedural layout design methodology is necessarily effective in solving practical design problems (Yang et al., 2000).
This paper proposes a hierarchical analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and data envelopment analysis (DEA) methodology to solve plant layout design problems. A computer-aided layout planning tool is adopted to facilitate the layout alternative generation process as well as to collect quantitative performance data such as flow distance (or material handling cost), adjacency score, and shape ratio. AHP is then applied to collect qualitative performance data. Finally, DEA is used to solve the layout design problem by simultaneously considering both the quantitative and qualitative performance data leading to the identification of performance frontiers.
The proposed methodology features both the merits of the algorithmic and procedural layout design approaches. It innovatively solves a layout design problem by utilizing both AHP and DEA procedures. A practical case study illustrates its efficiency and effectiveness.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 reviews the background pertinent to this research. The details of the proposed methodology are presented in Section 3. It is followed by the empirical illustration in Section 4. Conclusions are then given in Section 5.
Section snippets
Background review
AHP (Saaty, 1980) was designed to solve complex problems involving multiple criteria. It allows decision-makers to specify their preferences using a verbal scale. This verbal scale can be very useful in helping a group or an individual to make a fuzzy decision (Finan and Hurley, 1999).
Foulds and Partovi (1998) applied AHP to evaluate a closeness relationship among planning departments for a layout problem. Their goal was to generate a block plan based on the resulting closeness relationship.
Proposed methodology
The proposed methodology solves the layout design problem in a hierarchical framework, as illustrated in Fig. 1.
Empirical illustrations
In this section, we used a practical case study to illustrate the efficiency and effectiveness of the proposed methodology. An anonymous leading IC packaging company (A-company) located in Kaohsiung, Taiwan provides IC packaging services to worldwide customers. Due to fast expansion, A-company would like to assure their future plant layout is efficient in supporting production activities. To illustrate the proposed procedure, one of their existing production lines was used for this study. If
Conclusions
This paper proposed a hierarchical AHP/DEA approach to solve a layout design problem. A computer-aided, layout-planning tool was adopted to generate layout alternatives as well as to compute quantitative DMU outputs. Qualitative DMU outputs were evaluated by AHP. A modified DEA model was developed to identify the performance frontiers leading to the final candidate layout alternatives. The proposed methodology simultaneously considered both quantitative and qualitative objectives. Large number
Acknowledgments
This work is supported by the National Science Council of Taiwan under grant no. NSC89-2213-E006-142. We are also grateful to two anonymous referees for helpful suggestions that improved the presentation of this paper. We thank Richard Johnson for proofreading the writing style.
References (29)
Plant Layout and Material Handling
(1997)- et al.
Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis
Management Science
(1984) - et al.
An improved-type layout algorithm for single and multiple-floor facilities
Management Science
(1994) Evaluating the efficiency of US air force real-property maintenance activities
Journal of Operational Research Society
(1987)- et al.
Layout design using the analytic hierarchy process
Computers and Industrial Engineering
(1991) - et al.
A Monte Carlo investigation of incomplete pairwise comparison matrices in AHP
European Journal of Operational Research
(1997) - et al.
Measuring the efficiency of decision making units
European Journal of Operational Research
(1978) - Donaghey, C.E., Pire, V.F., 1990. Solving the facility layout problem with BLOCPLAN Industrial Engineering Department....
- et al.
A note on Saaty’s random indexes
Mathematical and Computer Modelling
(1991) - et al.
Transitive calibration of the AHP verbal Scale
European Journal of Operational Research
(1999)
Integrating the analytic hierarchy process and graph theory to model facilitates layout
Annals of Operations Research
An interactive layout heuristic based on hexagonal adjacency graphs
European Journal of Operational Research
Incomplete pairwise comparisons in the analytic hierarchy process
Mathematical Modeling
Cited by (294)
Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis and production theory for performance evaluation: Framework and review
2022, European Journal of Operational ResearchLogical efficiency decomposition for general two-stage systems in view of cross efficiency
2021, European Journal of Operational ResearchDiverse three-dimensional printing capacity planning for manufacturers
2021, Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing