1 / 56

Impact of Cross Aisles in a Rectangular Warehouse: A Computational Study

Impact of Cross Aisles in a Rectangular Warehouse: A Computational Study. Gürdal Ertek Sabancı University, Istanbul, Turkey Bilge Küçük İncel Roketsan, Ankara, Turkey. Preview. Motivation Strategies for Eliminating Traveling Costs Definitions Earlier work Research Questions Model

eliora
Download Presentation

Impact of Cross Aisles in a Rectangular Warehouse: A Computational Study

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Impact of Cross Aisles in a Rectangular Warehouse: A Computational Study Gürdal Ertek Sabancı University, Istanbul, Turkey Bilge Küçük İncel Roketsan, Ankara, Turkey

  2. Preview • Motivation • Strategies for Eliminating Traveling Costs • Definitions • Earlier work • Research Questions • Model • Algorithms • Computational Results • Insights • Conclusions • Future Work

  3. Motivation

  4. Operational Cost Receiving Shipping 10% 20% Storage 15% 55% Order Picking

  5. Order Picking Time Documentation and Other activities 15% Extracting 15% 50% Traveling 20% Searching

  6. Strategies for Eliminating Traveling Costs* • Pick from storage • Goal: Achieve forward picking rates from a reserve storage area • Ford service parts distribution centers • Contents of incoming cages are distributed to tote pans • Conveyed to one of 54 carousels, which act as reserve storage area (no replenishment in the system) • Three carousels / operator • WMS interleaves the putaway and picking tasks, which are light-directed • Need for a sophisticated logistics information system • Random storage • Intelligent slotting • Activity balancing • Dynamic wave planning * Frazelle, E. H. (2001). World-Class Warehousing and Material Handling, McGraw-Hill.

  7. Strategies for Eliminating Traveling Costs* • Pick task simplification • Strategy: Eliminate and combine order picking tasks when possible * Frazelle, E. H. (2001). World-Class Warehousing and Material Handling, McGraw-Hill.

  8. Strategies for Eliminating Traveling Costs* • Pick task simplification • When work elements cannot be eliminated, they can be combined to improve order picking productivity. • Traveling & Extracting Items • Stock-to-picker systems (carousel, miniload, etc.) keep the order pickers extracting while a mechanical device travels, bringing pick locations to order picker • Traveling & Documenting • Person-aboard machine transports the order picker, and the order picker is free to document picking transactions, sort material or pack material while machine is moving * Frazelle, E. H. (2001). World-Class Warehousing and Material Handling, McGraw-Hill.

  9. Strategies for Eliminating Traveling Costs* • Order batching • Especially effective for small (<5 lines) orders. • Advantage: Reduction in travel time per line item • Disadvantages: • Time required to sort line items into customer orders • Potential for picking errors • Sorting • Seperate containers to sort on the carts • Combine orders and then do downstream sortation * Frazelle, E. H. (2001). World-Class Warehousing and Material Handling, McGraw-Hill.

  10. Strategies for Eliminating Traveling Costs* • Zone picking • A portion of an aisle, multiple aisles, or machines assigned to an operator for picking. • The operator is dedicated to a zone and no other operator works in that zone. • Advantages: • Reduced travel time • Minimal congestion • Product-location familiarity • Operator-zone accountability • Minimizing excessive socializing • Disadvantage: • Sorting is required * Frazelle, E. H. (2001). World-Class Warehousing and Material Handling, McGraw-Hill.

  11. Strategies for EliminatingTraveling Costs* • Slotting Optimization • For each item, we determine: • Appropriate storage mode • Appropriate allocation of space in its appropriate storage mode • Appropriate storage location in its apropriate storage mode • <15% of items in a typical warehouse are slotted correctly. • Pick Sequencing (Order Picker Routing) • Sequence pick location visits to reduce travel time. • Building a Warehouse with Cross Aisles * Frazelle, E. H. (2001). World-Class Warehousing and Material Handling, McGraw-Hill.

  12. Definitions • “Rectangular warehouse” • ...or... independent rectangular zones within a warehouse • Picker-to-part system • Storage blocks • Aisles between storage blocks • Cross aisles perpendicular to the main aisles

  13. Case 0: No cross aisles (N=0) Main Aisle 4 Main Aisle 5 Main Aisle 3 Main Aisle 1 Main Aisle 2 Finish Start

  14. When a cross aisle is added... Main Aisle 4 Main Aisle 5 Main Aisle 3 Main Aisle 1 Main Aisle 2 Cross aisle N Finish Start

  15. Cross Aisles: Pros and Cons • Cross aisles can bring significant savings in order picking costs, specifically due to decreased travel times. • Having too many cross aisles results in: • Lost floorspace with negligible marginal travel time benefits. • After a certain point, the additional space occupied by cross aisles even causes the travel times to increase, since the warehouse becomes larger.

  16. Case 1: Equally spaced cross-aisles B W Cross Aisle 0 Notation L M: no of main storage blocks A Cross Aisle 1 1) - N: no of interior cross aisles Main Aisle M Main Aisle 1 Main Aisle 2 Main Aisle 3 T: length of pick face on eachmain aisle Main Aisle (M L: length of each storage block L = T / (N+1) Cross Aisle N A: width of each cross aisle Cross Aisle N+1 B: width of each main aisle W: width of each storage block Start Finish

  17. Earlier Work: V&P • Vaughan, T.S. and Petersen, C.G. (1999) “The effect of warehouse cross-aisles on order picking efficiency”, International Journal of Production Research, vol. 37, no.4, p881-897 • Optimal aisle-by-aisle tour to pick items for Case 1 • Conditions under which cross aisles generate the greatest benefit

  18. Earlier Work: R&dK • Roodbergen, K.J. and De Koster, R. (2001) “Routing methods for warehouses with multiple cross aisles”, International Journal of Production Research, vol. 39, no.9, p1865-1883 • Routing algorithms for Case 1 • Two new heuristic algorithms developed • Comparison of six heuristics (four from literature, including aisle-by-aisle)

  19. Case 2: Unequally Spaced Cross Aisles NEW! Cross Aisle 0 L1 1 - M 2 M 3 A Cross Aisle 1 L2 Cross Aisle N LN+1 Cross Aisle N+1 Start Finish

  20. Research Questions • Should the cross aisles be equally spaced or not (Case 1 vs. Case 2)? In other words... Should the storage blocks have equal length or variable lengths? • How much savings do cross aisles bring? • How many cross aisles should there “ideally” be? NEW! NEW!

  21. Assumptions • Slower moving items (B&C items) • Uniformly distributed pick locations • Aisle-by-aisle picking policy • Order picker starts at the left bottom corner and ends at the right bottom corner.

  22. 1 Xm- B1m(i,j) L1 L1 i Entrance cross aisle 2 L2 L2 Cm(i,j) j 3 L3 B2m(i,j) L3 4 Xm+ L4 L4

  23. V&P Model • Xm(t): The location of an item t in main aisle m, 0 Xm(t)T, m = 1, 2, … , M,t = 1, 2, … , Km (undefined if Km = 0) • Xm+ : The location of the item with greatest (south-most) location in the main aisle m (undefined if Km = 0), Xm+ = maxt{Xm(t)} • Xm-: The location of the item with smallest (north-most) location in the main aisle m (undefined if Km = 0), Xm- = mint{Xm(t)}

  24. V&P Model • Cm(i,j) : The total vertical travel distance required to pick all the items in main aisle m, if main aisle m is entered at cross aisle i, and exited to main aisle m-1 at cross aisle j • Blockof(Xm-) : The index of storage block Li in main aisle m where Xm- is located, Li = 1, 2, … , N+1 • Blockof(Xm+) : The index of storage block Li in main aisle m where Xm+ is located, Li = 1, 2, … , N+1 NEW!

  25. Costs at Each Stage(V&P Modified)

  26. Dynamic Programming Equations for Each Stage (V&P) The desired shortest path-picking route is determined by evaluating:

  27. Algorithms NEW!  = {1,...., N+1}, O = {1,...., } GRID_SEARCH_ALGORITHM (warehouse, orders, noOfGrids) G = T/noOfGrids for eachgridsForL, /* s.t. gridsForL[i] noOfGrids, i */ sumOfGrids = gridsForL[i] if( sumOfGrids = = noOfGrids && ARRAY_CONTAINS_NOZERO(gridsForL)) L[i] = gridsForL[i] * G, i  warehouse.setL(L) orders[o].setWarehouse(warehouse), o  O simulationStatistics = CALCULATE_SIMULATION_STATISTICS(orders) travelDistance = simulationStatistics.getAverage() if (travelDistance < bestTravelDistance) bestL = L bestTravelDistance = travelDistance returnbestL

  28. CALCULATE_SIMULATION_STATISTICS (orders)travelDistance[o] = getOptimalTravelDistance( orders[o] ), o  O return statistics for travelDistance data

  29. N = 1 • = {1,2} T = 200 • noOfGrids = 8 • G = 200/8 = 25 1 1 G gridsForL[1] = 2 L[1] = 50 2 2 3 3 4 4 gridsForL[2] = 6 L[2] = 150 T 5 5 6 6 The performances of all feasible L vectors are evaluated and compared. The bestL is selected. 7 7 8 8

  30. Algorithms REFINED_GRID_SEARCH_ALGORITHM(warehouse, orders, noOfGrids, resolution)

  31. At the next step, the following L vectors are generated and compared. The bestL is selected. Then the algorithm advances to a finer resolution: 1 G 2 3 G 4 5 6 7 8

  32. NEW! Experimental Settings 396 scenarios

  33. 1 Computational Results - 1 • Should the cross aisles be equally spaced or not (Case 1 vs. Case 2)? In other words... Should the storage blocks have equal length or variable lengths? • How much savings do cross aisles bring? • How many cross aisles should there “ideally” be?

  34. 1 Computational Results – 1.1Savings in Case 2 against Case 1 % Space Saving % Travel Time Saving

  35. Color = Pick Density

  36. c b a d Color = T

  37. Color = M

  38. 1 Computational Results – 1.2Savings in Case 2 against Case 1 M T

  39. M a b T Color = % Travel Time Saving

  40. M T Color = % Space Saving

  41. 1 Insights - 1 • Should the cross aisles be equally spaced or not (Case 1 vs. Case 2)? • Having unequally spaced cross aisles does not bring significant savings in travel time, especially for larger warehouses. • However, it brings the most significant savings in warehouse space for larger warehouses. So if there is a priority of saving warehouse space using approximately the same labor, then Case 2 can be preferred. • How much savings do cross aisles bring? • How many cross aisles should there “ideally” be?

  42. 2 Computational Results - 2 • Should the cross aisles be equally spaced or not (Case 1 vs. Case 2)? • How much savings do cross aisles bring? • How many cross aisles should there “ideally” be?

  43. 2 Computational Results – 2% Travel Time Savings in Case 1 Pick Density T M

  44. Pick Density T M Color = % Savings in Travel Time, N=1

  45. Pick Density T M Color = % Savings in Travel Time, N=5

  46. 2 Insights - 2 • Should the cross aisles be equally spaced or not (Case 1 vs. Case 2)? • How much savings do cross aisles bring? • Depends on T, M and Pick Density. • Savings up to 36%. • How many cross aisles should there “ideally” be?

  47. 2 Computational Results - 3 • Should the cross aisles be equally spaced or not (Case 1 vs. Case 2)? • How much savings do cross aisles bring? • How many cross aisles should there “ideally” be?

  48. 3 Computational Results – 3.1“Best” No of Cross Aisles in Case 1 Pick Density T M

More Related