Title: Comparative analysis of procedural approaches for facility layout design using AHP approach

Authors: Parveen Sharma; Sandeep Singhal

Addresses: Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra, Kurukshetra-136119, Haryana, India ' Department of Mechanical Engineering, National Institute of Technology Kurukshetra, Kurukshetra-136119, Haryana, India

Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to apply multiple attribute decision-making (MADM) approach (analytic hierarchy process - AHP) for ranking the procedural approaches available for solving the facility layout design problems (FLPs). Analytic hierarchy process is applied to rank the approaches, whereas the weight to a factor is assigned using modified digital logic (MDL) method. On the basis of assigned weight the matrix is generated, and the factors considered for analysis are as: initial data required (IDR), use of charts (UC), use of graphs and diagrams (UG), future expansion considered (FE), constraints considered (CC), procedure implementation (PI), and material handling equipment selection considered (MH). The approaches which have been compared are as: Nadler's procedure (NP), Immer's procedure (IP), Muther's procedure (MP), Apple's procedure (AP), and Reed's procedure (RP). The results of the present study demonstrate that MP gets highest rank among the compared procedures. The output ranks along with their overall priority from the present study are as: MP (0.355) > AP (0.232) > RP (0.228) > NP (0.098) > IP (0.088). The factors which are used in this study are weighted in the order as: UC (0.22) > UG (0.195) > MH (0.171) > PI (0.146) > CC (0.098) = IDR (0.098) > FE (0.073).

Keywords: multiattribute decision making; MADM; analytical hierarchy process; AHP; procedural approaches; facility layout; layout design; initial data requirements; charts; graphs; diagrams; future expansion; constraints; procedure implementation; materials handling; equipment selection.

DOI: 10.1504/IJMTM.2016.078910

International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management, 2016 Vol.30 No.5, pp.279 - 288

Received: 26 Dec 2014
Accepted: 23 Jun 2015
Published online: 05 Sep 2016 *

Full-text access for editors Full-text access for subscribers Purchase this article Comment on this article