Srinivas.C et al.

/ International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

DETERMINATION OF BUFFER SIZE IN

SINGLE AND MULTI ROW FLEXIBLE
MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS
THROUGH SIMULATION
SRINIVAS.C
Assistant professor
RVR & JC College of Engineering,
Guntur - 522 019,
A.P., India

Dr.SATYANARAYANA B
Vice chancellor
Andhra University,
Visakhapatnam - 530 003, A. P., India

DR.RAMJI K
Professor
Andhra University,
Visakhapatnam - 530 003, A. P., India

Naveen Ravela,
Principal,
SCR Engineering College,
Guntur - 522 619, A.P., India
4

Abstract
This paper presents the determination of buffer size for machines in single and multi row
Flexible Manufacturing System (FMS) for the best layout obtained by genetic algorithm (GA) through
simulation. To maximize the operating performance of FMS, many parameters must be considered,
including the part types, sequencing, cost of transport between workstations, distance between machines
and buffer sizes. Of the various critical factors, following three are considered for analysis: (1)
minimizing the buffer size (2) minimizing the blocking and (3) maximizing the machine utilization.
Simulation enables more efficient planning of the whole FMS, easy modifications before implementation
on the real system. The software package FLEXSIM is used to develop the simulation model. A model of
a optimum layout FMS obtained by GA that may contain a number of machines, input and output
buffers, capturing part types flow quantities, part routes, from the database and AGVs used as a means
of transport, is built by FLEXSIM software. Analysis is done on the model to determine the optimum
buffer size for the machines. Thus by performing simulation on the model optimum buffer size in the
individual rows are established
Keywords: Modeling, Simulation, FMS, buffer size, Optimization.

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

3889

Srinivas.C et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

1. Introduction
The purpose of this paper is to investigate and determine the buffer size of machines at the strategic level in
rows. In particular, two commonly used row layouts single and multi rows are considered to assess the impact of
automation and evaluate the effect of the buffer size on the total make span. Layout of flexible manufacturing
system (FMS) involve distribution of different resources in a given FMS and achieving maximum efficiency of
the services offered[3] With this in mind FMSs are designed to optimize production flow from the first stage as
raw material to the finished product. The layout of the facilities has a direct impact on the production time and
cost, especially in the case of large FMS For example Chiang and Kouvelis report that 3070% of total
manufacturing costs may be attributed to the layout and material handling[10]. Therefore, in the early stage of
designing an FMS itself, it is necessary to have an idea of the layout of the machines and their buffer sizes.
Genetic Algorithms (GAs) are adaptive heuristic search algorithms premised on the evolutionary ideas
of natural selection and genetics [11]. Gelenbe and Guennouni (1991) described a simulation tool called
FLEXSIM for modeling FMS. FLEXSIM is designed to separate the specific FMS data from the simulation
model to enhance the portability of the modeling tool [9].
A model is built by FLEXSIM for best layout which is obtained by GA. FMS performance is evaluated
by measuring the make span for different buffer sizes for both the single and multi rows in order to determine
the optimum buffer size in an FMS .Make span is influenced by order load and plant layout.. Production
measures used for buffers evaluation include ([2,5]):

Make span
The average waiting time of ready parts which includes blocking.
Output queue length.
Work in progress (WIP).
Machine utilization

A
The simulation results demonstrate that substantial performance improvement can be achieved
by finding the optimum buffer size and that the buffer size has an effect on performance. Thus by simulation
optimum buffer size can be found out for optimum layout.
2. Problem of Arranging Work Stations into Rows
The manner of arranging of work stations largely depends on the type of production [3]. The work
stations served by transporters are usually placed in one or multiple rows. An example of such placing is shown
in Figure 1.

M3

M2

Transporter

M1

M4

M5

M6
Fig1. Placing of workstations in multiple rows served by a transporter

In case of bad layout of work stations more transporters are required but they are under-utilized. Also
the software for the control of transport is very complicated and it would be difficult to reach optimum states for
the transporters. Therefore, it is of key importance how the work stations should be arranged in order to ensure
optimum execution of transport of materials and work pieces. In principle, the work stations, fed by transporters,
are arranged in one or multiple rows due to limited availability of the size and space of shop floor. Even when
there are no space limitations, we need to know, into how many rows the work stations should be arranged so
that the total material handling cost is kept to a minimum.

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

3890

Srinivas.C et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

2. 1 Mathematical model of the machine layout problem

The objective of the machine layout problem is to minimise the total cost of transportation, incurred by
all types of material handling devices present in the material handling system, put together.
The following assumptions are made during the process of modelling the single row FMS layout

machines are arranged along a straight line

machines are oriented in only one direction
machines are rectangular with unequal sizes
clearance between each pair of machines is variable
distances between the machine are calculated with respect to their centroids

The machine layout problem can be formulated as follows:

C f L

Z = min

where fij is the frequency of transport between the machines i and j, cij are the variable transport costs for the unit
quantity which depends on the transport means used, must be known and Lij is the distance between the
machines i and j. The number of all machines is equal to n. The costs of transport between two machines can be
determined if their mutual distance Lij is known. During execution of the genetic algorithm, the values fij and cij
do not change, the value Lij changes with respect to the mutual position of machines and with respect to position
in the arrangement. In order to determine Lij we need also the dimensions of the machines, the minimum
available distances between the machines, the widths of the transport paths and coordinate of the points of
operating.
By using GA the optimum layout is obtained and the results are shown in table 2 and table 3 for single
and multi row
3. Modelling and Simulation
Simulation involves the development of descriptive models of a system and exercising those models to
predict the operational performance of the underlying system being modeled.
Discrete-event modelling and simulation is used for comparing alternatives in analysing, testing
and design of FMS. Flexibility of the modelling approach is important, especially for comparisons of various
policies.
The FMS studied is a layout with a bi-directional loop for the travel of the transporter. The FMS
consists of 6 machine centers and 12 types of parts. The distance matrix, frequency matrix and the cost matrix
are as shown below. The FMS system is shown in figure 3 for single row and figure 5 for multi row. The
dimensions of the machines are shown in table 1.

fij=

40

80

21

62

90

40

72

12

24

28

80

72

14

41

21

12

14

21

12

62

24

41

21

31

90

28

12

31

ISSN : 0975-5462

Cij=

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

dij=

3891

Srinivas.C et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Table 1 Dimensions of work stations

Workstation Number

Dimensions (length*breadth)

5.0*3.0

2.0*2.0

2.5*2.0

6.0*3.5

3.0*1.5

4.0*4.0

For the above problem the optimum and near optimum arrangement of machines obtained by
applying GA [8] are shown in table 2 for single row FMS and table 3 for multi row FMS.
TABLE 2: Total Cost for Single Row FMS

S.
No.

Sequence of
Work
Stations

Total Cost of
Material Handing
Obtained
from
GA

4-6-1-3-2-5

19859.5

4-6-1-2-3-5

19859.5

6-1-3-5-2-4

19531.0

TABLE 3 Total Cost for Multi-Row FMSTABLE 2

S. No.

Sequence of
Work Stations

Total
Cost
of
Material
Handing
Obtained from GA

2-6-5-1-4-3

38615.5

2-5-1-6-3-4

33390.5

1-6-3-2-5-4

32058.5

In order to model the above problem in FLEXSIM software, it is converted into a network model as
shown in figure 2. The numbered nodes indicate the work stations and the number on the directed arcs indicate
the flow of parts between them. Parts enter the system at work stations 1 and 2 and leave the system at work
stations 3, 4, 5 and 6. As per the data given in the network model, the complete part spectrum is divided into 12
part types, 7 of them entering at work station 1 and the remaining 5 entering the system at work station 2. The
details of the part types and their flow through the various work stations of the FMS are shown in tables 4 and 5.

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

3892

Srinivas.C et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

40

24

28

72

62

21
41

31

21

12

80

14

90

Fig. 2 Network model showing work stations and the flow of work parts

Table 4 Details of parts entering at work station 1

Part
Type

Flow through
work stations

No. of
Parts

1-2-4-6

12

1-2-6

28

1-6

90

1-4-5

21

1-3

80

1-5-6

31

1-5

31

Total

293

Table 5 Details of parts entering at work station 2

ISSN : 0975-5462

Part
Type

Flow through
work stations

No. of
Parts

2-3-4

14

2-3-6

09

10

2-3-5

41

11

2-3

08

12

2-5

24

Total

96

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

3893

Srinivas.C et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

3.1Study Assumptions:
Prior to solving the problem we set certain assumptions that will be taken into account. These
assumptions are:

They are two sources, 6 machine centers with input and output buffers, 12 item types, transporters, and
4 sinks.
All machines are of rectangular shapes,
The machines are operated at the center of that space,
All machines in the row look into the same direction as shown in Figure 1
Processing times are constant value of 100.
Loading and unloading times for the load are assumed to be 10 seconds each. These are commensurate
with industry standards.
Each job constitutes a unit load and mass is conserved during the network flow. This is a reasonable
assumption as in a factory layout,
The speed specifications of the AGVs are pre-determined. We assume 2 m //sec. It is possible to
change the speed using the operator controls.
There are 6 control points on the transporter route. The transporter can be stopped at any control point
and only at a control point. Most of these control points are designated pickup and delivery stations,.
The above study assumptions also cover our input data. These assumptions and data are based on prior
research that has been carried out in this field.
3.2. Building the Model
First the model of the layout is created using FLEX-SIM software [9]. The model is built taking
into consideration and incorporating the inputs and assumptions made, so that it represents the real problem
3.2.1.Single row:
The layout for single row is created as shown below and by clicking and dragging from the object
library the objects such as queue, sink, source, processor, operator, nodes etc. the model is created. After
building the whole layout make connections for each item type so that each item number follows its
respective routes.

Fig 3: Optimum layout model for single row by GA

After building the system, the factory layout we compile, reset and run we get the simulation as
follows

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

3894

Srinivas.C et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Fig 4: Optimum layout model for single row when simulation is performed

3.2.2. Multi-row:
For multi row, the maximum length of row (a), row height (r) and width of transport (w) are taken
into consideration. The layout for multi row is created as shown below and by clicking and dragging from the
object library the objects such as queue, sink, source, processor, operator, nodes etc. the model is created. After
building the whole layout, make connections for each item type so that Each item number follow its respective
routes.

Fig 5 Optimum layout model for multi row obtained by GA

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

3895

Srinivas.C et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Fig 6 Optimum layout model for multi row when simulation is performed

4. Results and Discussions

After identifying the optimal layout for the given input information both for the single and multi-row
by GA. Analysis is done on the optimum layout to find the optimum buffer size for the machines in the
optimum layout
For Single row optimum machine sequence obtained by GA: 6-1-3-5-2-4
Table6 : Effect of Buffer size on Make span, Machine utilization, Blocking and Idleness of machines

MACHINEIDLENESS

MACHINE
BLOCKING

S.NO

BUFFERSIZE

MAKESPAN

MACHINEUTILISATION

35142.5

44.86

34042.5

46.32

37.67

16.09

33742.0

46.72

37.65

15.63

33542.5

47.01

37.57

15.42

33242.5

47.43

40.54

12.03

10

29442.5

53.55

46.45

11

29442.5

53.55

46.45

12

29442.5

53.55

46.45

42.24

16.51

Fig3Variation of Make span with Buffer size for single row

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

3896

Srinivas.C et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Fig4 Variation of Make span with blocking for single row

Fig5 Variation of machine utiisation with Buffer size for single row

From the Table6, Fig3, Fig4 and Fig5 it can be easily observed that as the buffer size increases make span and
blocking decreases while the machine utilization increases. Hence the optimum buffer size for the layout is 10
and minimum make span for single row is obtained as 29442.5.
For multi row optimum machine sequence obtained by GA : 1-6-3-2-5-4
Table7 Effect of Buffer size on Make span, Machine utilization, Blocking and Idleness of machines for Multi-row

S.NO

BUFFERSIZE

MAKESPAN

MACHINEUTILISATION

MACHINEIDLENESS

MACHINE
BLOCKING

36135.0

43.65

42.82

13.53

35537.5

44.22

42.74

13.04

35045.0

44.99

42.4

12.61

34052.5

46.29

41.61

12.10

33760.0

50.94

39.52

9.54

33467.5

51.45

39.44

9.11

10

10

29957.5

52.63

47.37

11

11

29957.5

52.63

47.37

12

12

29957.5

52.63

47.37

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

3897

Srinivas.C et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

Fig5 Variation of Make span with Buffer size for muti-row

Fig6. Variation of Machine utilisation with Buffer size for multi row

Fig7 Variation of Blocking with Buffer size for multi-row

From the Table7, Fig5, Fig6 and Fig7 it can be easily observed that as the buffer size increases make span and
blocking decreases while the machine utilization increases. Hence the optimum buffer size for the layout is 10
and minimum make span for multi row is obtained as 29957.55

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

3898

Srinivas.C et al. / International Journal of Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST)

5 Conclusion
In summary, this paper involves developing the model, simulating the optimum layout in single or
multi rows in an FMS obtained by GA and an analysis is done on the layout to find out the optimum buffer size.
One of the most important point we have found from this simulation is that the modeling and simulation can be
used as a good tool for determination of optimum buffer size for machines in flexible manufacturing system.
Scope of future work:
After doing this project, we feel that the following points will be interesting topics for future study in this area:
In future, there is a scope to include in the model by incorporating other criteria such as e.g., relations between
the individual machines, shape of available area, I/O points, etc.
6. References
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
[6]
[7]
[8]

[9]
[10]
[11]

Balic, J., (2001), Flexible Manufacturing Systems, DAAAM International, Vienna.

Hamiani, A., Popescu, G.(1988): A knowledge-based expert system for site layout. In: Computing in Civil
Engineering: Microcomputers to Supercomputers, pp. 248256. ASCE, New York.
Kusiak, A. (1990), Intelligent Manufacturing Systems. Prentice-Hall, New Jersey
Goldberg, D.E. (1989) , Genetic algorithms. search, optimization and machine learning, Addison- Wesley
Banks, J., Carson ,J.S., Nelson, B.L. (1995). , Discrete-Event System Simulation, Prentice Hall Inc.
Pidd ,M. (1992). , Computer Simulation in Management Science, John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Pegden, C.D. , Shannon, R.E. , Sadowski ,R.P. (1990)., Introduction to Simulation Using SIMAN, Mc
Graw-Hill Inc..
A paper titled a genetic algorithm approach for the design of single and multi-row flexible
manufacturing systems published and presented at the 3rd international and 24th AIMTDR conference
held at Andhra university, vizag during Dec13-15,2010. pp483-489
Gelenbe, E. and Guennouni, H. (1991). FLEXSIM: a flexible manufacturing system
simulator.
European Journal of Operational Research (v53, n2), pp149-166.
Kouvelis, P., and Chiang,W (1992)., A simulated annealing procedure for single row layout problems in
Flexible manufacturing systems. International Journal of Production Research, 30 (4), 717- 732.
.Michalewicz M. (1992).,Genetic algorithm + data structure =evolution program. Springer, Berlin
Heidelberg New York.

ISSN : 0975-5462

Vol. 3 No. 5 May 2011

3899