Traditional Approaches to Facility Layout

Chapter 4

Source for some slides: John S. Usher class notes

Applications

• Manufacturing • Healthcare• Service

– Restaurants– Banks– Airports– Entertainment

• Logistics and Distribution– Ports/Terminals– Distribution Centers

Types of Projects

• New Facility

• General Re-layout (retrofit)– Expansion due to new product(s)– Expansion due to sales growth in existing products– Re-organization of work areas (evolutionary design)– Outsourcing of logistics capability– Addition of automation technology– Problem elimination– Cost reduction– Product discontinuation

Significance of Facilities Planning

• 20-50% of all manufacturing costs are related to material handling

• FP can reduce MH costs by 10-30%• Therefore…

– 2-15% reductions in overall manufacturing costs could be achieved by effective facilities planning.

– Annual productivity would increase 3x more than it has in the past 15 years.

– Hard to make similar projections to other areas of our economy

– FP continues to be one of the most promising fields

Objectives• Minimize material handling costs• Utilize space efficiently• Utilize labor efficiently• Eliminate bottlenecks• Facilitate communication and interaction

between workers, between workers and their supervisors, or between workers and customers

• Reduce manufacturing cycle time or customer service time

Objectives (continued)• Eliminate waste or redundant movement• Facilitate the entry, exit, and placement of

material, products, or people• Incorporate safety and security measures• Promote product and service quality• Encourage proper maintenance activities• Provide a visual control of operations or

activities• Provide flexibility to adapt to changing

conditions• Increase capacity

The Nature of FP Objectives

• As you can see, there are MANY!

• They are conflicting. How?

• There are constraints. Can you list some?

The Facility Planning Problem

• It is a constrained multi-objective optimization problem with many non-quantifiable costs and benefits.

• There is NO OPTIMAL SOLUTION!• The best we can hope for is a “GOOD” solution.• Effective designs must consider all stakeholders

– Owners– Customers– Suppliers– Employees– Neighbors

Layout Problems

• Design or Optimization?

Facility Design Process

• Combination of art and engineering

• Many techniques available– Muther’s SLP Approach (1973)– Optimization based approaches

• We will focus on the latter

Systematic Layout Planning

• Phase I - Determination of the location of the area where departments are to be laid out

• Phase II - Establishing the general overall layout

• Phase III - Establishing detailed layout plans

• Phase IV - Installing the selected layout

Systematic Layout PlanningInput Data and Activities

1. Flow of materials 2. Activity Relationships

6. Space Relationship Diagram

5. Space Available4. Space Requirements

3. Relationship Chart

8. Practical Limitations7. Modifying Considerations

9. Develop Layout Alternatives

10. Evaluation

ANALYZE

ANALYZE

SEARCH

SEARCH

SELECT

SELECT

Source: John S. Usher class notes

Systematic Layout Planning

• P Product: Types of products to be produced• Q Quantity: Volume of each part type• R Routing: Operation sequence for each part

type• S Services: Support services, locker rooms,

inspection stations, and so on• T Timing: When are the part types to be

produced ? What machines will be used during this time period?

Sample relationship diagram

1 2

4

3

5

SLP

SLP

Special Considerations in Office Layout

• Minimizing distance traveled by employees

• Permitting flexibility so that the current layout can be changed, expanded or downsized easily

• Providing a safe and pleasant atmosphere for people to work in

• Minimizing capital and operational costs of the facility

Operations Review

• Is the company outgrowing available space?• Is the available space too expensive?• Is the current building not in the proper location?• How will a new office layout affect the

organization?• Are office operations too centralized or

decentralized?• Does the office structure support the strategic

plan?• Is the office layout in tune with the company's

image?

Aesthetics

Aesthetics

Aesthetics

Aesthetics

Aesthetics

Aesthetics

Aesthetics

Aesthetics

Aesthetics

Cubicles layout

Cubicles layout

Iowa State DOT layout

Albany International Airport layout

Operations Review for MortAmerica, Inc.

• Is there a significant increase in mortgage lending operations of MortAmerica, Inc.?

• Are the costs of leasing and refurbishing interior space too high?

• Is there a problem with the current location? For example:– There is not enough space for expansion– Major attorneys’ offices, other related financial institutions and

restaurants, are not located within a reasonable distance of MortAmerica, Inc.

– Adequate parking space is not available– Traffic is too congested

• Will a change in office location improve business?

SLP for MortAmerica, Inc.

• Evaluation

• Planning

• Site selection

• Design and layout

SLP for MortAmerica, Inc.

• Review current space utilization

• Determine space projections

• Determine level of interaction between departments

• Identifying special consideration

Current and Future Space Requirements

Categories of Employees and Number in Each Category Department Name Current/Future

Requirements Senior Executive

Senior Staff

Staff Clerical/Secretary Net Space

Required

Gross Space, 150% of Net Space

Current space/employee 150 100 75 Number of employees 1 4 1 Current total space/category

150 400 75 625 938

Future space/employee 120 75 Number of employees 6 1

Customer Service (CS)

Future space/category 720 75 795 1,193 Current space/employee 200 100 75 Number of employees 2 10 2 Current total space/category

400 1,000 150 1,550 2,325

Future space/employee 250 200 100 75 Number of employees 1 1 15 1

Mortgage processing/marketing (MP/M)

Future space/category 250 200 1,500 75 2,025 3,038 Current space/employee 100 75 Number of employees 10 1 Current total space/category

1,000 75 1,075 1,613

Future space/employee 80 Number of employees 5

Credit check (CC)

Future space/category 400 400 600 Current space/employee 200 100 90 75 Number of employees 2 4 15 5 Current total space/category

400 400 1,350 375 2,525 3,788

Future space/employee 250 100 100 75 Number of employees 3 4 20 2

Operations Audit (O/A)

Future space/category 750 400 2,000 150 3,300 4,950 Current space/employee 250 200 100 Number of employees 5 2 5

Top management (TM)

Current total space/category

1,250 400 500 2,150 3,225

Future space/employee 250 200 100

Current and Future Space Requirements

Support service areaCurrent net

spaceCurrent gross space150% of

net spaceFuture net space

Future gross space 150% of net space

Copying/Printing Area (C/P) 300 450 465 700

File Storage Room (FS) 300 450 80 120

Customer Waiting Lounge (CW) 300 450 800 1200

Conference Rooms (CR) 500 750 1000 1500

Employee Break Room (EBR) 200 300 850 1275

Rest Rooms (RR) 200 300 500 750

Total 1800 2700 3695 5545

Relationship diagram for MortAmerica, Inc.

Customer service (CS)

Mortgage processing (MP)

Credit check (CC)

Closing/underwriting (C/U)

Top Management (TM)

E

E

I

I

O

I

E

OI

Operations/audit (O/A)

Copying/printing (C/P)

Files storage (FS)

Customer waiting (CW)

Conference room (CR)

I

A

U

U

A

A

O

U

I

Employee break room (EBR)

Rest rooms (RR)

O

X

I

I

U

X

X

I

I

O

U

A

O

E

U

U

O

I

X

UU

U

U

O

I

I

U

I

I

X

X

U

U

I

I

U

U

U

A

U

U

I

A

U

O

O

OA

Activity relationship diagram for MortAmerica, Inc.

MP

CS

CR

RR

CC

C/U

TM

CW

O/A

FS

C/P EBR

Space relationship diagram for MortAmerica, Inc.

MP

CS

CR

RR

CC

C/U

TM

CW

O/A

FS

C/P EBR

Pre-architectural layout for MortAmerica, Inc.

TM

MP

CC

C/U

CW

RRM

RRW

CS

CR

C/P

FS

EBR

O/A

Engineering design approach

8. Continuously review after implementation

1. Identify the problem

2. Gather the required data

3. Formulate a model for the problem

4. Develop an algorithm for the model and solve it

5. Generate alternative solutions, evaluate, and select

7. Implement the solution

OSHA, ADA and Local Codes

OSHA, ADA and Local Codes

OSHAADAand

LocalCodes

Service and Manufacturing Facilities

Organization Showers Lavatories Water Closets Water Fountain

Others

Restaurants - 1 per 200 1 per 75 1 per 500 1service sink

Arenas (capacity more than 3000)

- 1 per 200 (male); 1 per 150 (female)

1 per 120 (male); 1 per 60 (female)

1 per 1000 1 service sink

Churches - 1 per 200 1 per 150 (male); 1 per 75 (female)

1 per 1000 1 service sink

Schools - 1 per 50 1 per 50 1 per 100 1 service sink

Airports - 1 per 750 1 per 500 1 per 1000 1 service sink

Factories Section 411

1 per 100 1 per 100 1 per 1000 1 service sink

Hospitals 1 per 15 1 per room 1 per room 1 per 100 1 service sink

Prisons 1 per 15 1 per cell 1 per cell 1 per 100 1 service sink

Hotels 1 per room

1 per room 1 per room - 1 service sink

Dormitories 1 per 8 1 per 10 1 per 10 1 per 100 1 service sink

Service and Manufacturing Facilities

Organization Parking spaces

Restaurants (with drive- through facilities)

One space per 75 square feet of floor area or 1.5 persons (whichever is greater)

Theaters, Arenas, and Assembly areas

One space per 8 feet of bench length or 4 seats (whichever is greater)

Secondary schools and Colleges

One space per 8 students, one-and-a-half spaces per classroom, and number of spaces for gymnasium/assembly hall seating

Factories One space per 1000 square feet of area plus number of spaces for offices

Hospitals Two spaces per bed

Churches One space per three persons

Hotels One space per guest room plus number of spaces for accessory uses

Warehouses One space per 2000 square feet of floor area

Table 4.5 Minimum dimensions for parking stalls

Parking Angle Aisle-width (two-way)

Aisle-width (one-way)

Stall width Stall length

76-90o 25 feet 15 feet 9 feet 20 feet

30-75o 25 feet 12 feet 9 feet 22 feet

0-29o 18 feet 12 feet 9 feet 25 feet

Table 4.3 Accessible spaces for persons with disability

Total spaces in parking lot

1-25 26-50 51-75 76-100 101-150

151-200

201-300

301-400

401-500

501-1000

Minimum Accessible spaces

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 2%