IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/ijmtma/v30y2016i5p279-288.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

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

Author

Listed:
  • Parveen Sharma
  • Sandeep Singhal

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).

Suggested Citation

  • Parveen Sharma & Sandeep Singhal, 2016. "Comparative analysis of procedural approaches for facility layout design using AHP approach," International Journal of Manufacturing Technology and Management, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 30(5), pages 279-288.
    • Handle: RePEc:ids:ijmtma:v:30:y:2016:i:5:p:279-288
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=78910
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:ijmtma:v:30:y:2016:i:5:p:279-288. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=21 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.