Abstract
To address the problem of how to build quantitative evaluation index models that reflect the essential characteristics of reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS) and rank alternative reconfiguration schemes, which possess both advantages and disadvantages, an evaluation method based on the preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE) is proposed. Based on a consideration of the reconfiguration of the reconfigurable machine components and manufacturing cells, quantitative models of the key characteristics of an RMS (scalability, convertibility, diagnosability, modularity, integrability, and customization) are established, after which the quantitative models are used as the basis for constructing an RMS evaluation index system. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is used to assign the weights for these indices. During the evaluation process, PROMETHEE I is first applied to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative scheme. Then, PROMETHEE II is adopted to analyze the net advantages of the schemes. Finally, all of the alternative configurations are ranked according to the analysis results above. The workshop of an institute that has both research and production capabilities was used as an example to validate the effectiveness and practicability of the proposed method. The example contains 10 alternative reconfiguration schemes, and each scheme consists of six evaluation indices. The computation result shows that quantitative models of six key RMS characteristics are equipped with the ability of quantitative description of the RMS reconfiguration scheme, which gives intuitive decision-making information combined with PROMETHEE, including advantage and disadvantage between alternative schemes, for a decision-maker to select the satisfactory configuration. In addition, only a 7.2 % data loss during the evaluation data processing means the rationality of the selected evaluation index and evaluation algorithm.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Reference
Koren Y, Heisel U, Jovan F, Moriwaki T, Pritschow G, Ulsoy G, Van Brussel H (1999) Reconfigurable manufacturing systems. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 48(2):527–540
Koren Y, Ulsoy AG (1997) Reconfigurable manufacturing systems, Engineering Research Center for Reconfigurable Machining Systems (ERC/RMS) Report #1. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor
Koren Y (2013) The rapid responsiveness of RMS. Int J Prod Res 51(23-24):6817–6827
Rösiö C, Säfsten K (2013) Reconfigurable production system design—theoretical and practical challenges. J Manuf Technol Manag 24(7):998–1018
Hasan F, Jain PK, Kumar D (2014) Optimum configuration selection in Reconfigurable Manufacturing System involving multiple part families. Opsearch 51(2):297–311
Gumasta K (2011) Developing a reconfigurability index using multi-attribute utility theory. Int J Prod Res 49(6):1669–1683
Wu Z, Ning R, Wang A (2007) Grey fuzzy synthetically evaluation method for RMS layout planning. China Mech Eng 18(19):2313–2318
Dou J, Dai X, Meng Z (2007) Configuration selection of reconfigurable manufacturing system based on hybrid analytical hierarchy process. Comput Integr Manuf Syst 13(7):1360–1366
Rehman AU, Subash BA (2009) Evaluation of reconfigured manufacturing systems: an AHP framework. Int J Prod Qual Manag 4(2):228–246
Goyal KK, Jain PK, Jain M (2012) Optimal configuration selection for reconfigurable manufacturing system using NSGA II and TOPSIS. Int J Prod Res 50(15):4175–4191
Saxena KL, Jain PK (2012) A model and optimization approach for reconfigurable manufacturing system configuration design. Int J Prod Res 50(12):3359–3381
Yuan MH, Li DB, Yu MJ, Zhou KJ (2007) Research on evaluation system for reconfigurable manufacturing systems. China Mech Eng 18(17):2050–2054
Guan S, Wang X (2009) Fuzzy comprehensive evaluation for reconfigurable manufacturing systems. Industr Control Comput 22(2):57–60
Abdi MR, Labib AW (2003) A design strategy for reconfigurable manufacturing systems (RMSs) using analytical hierarchical process (AHP): a case study. Int J Prod Res 41(10):2273–2299
Abdi MR (2009) Fuzzy multi-criteria decision model for evaluating reconfigurable machines. Int J Prod Econ 117(1):1–15
Singh RK, Khilwani N, Tiwari MK (2007) Justification for the selection of a reconfigurable manufacturing system: a fuzzy analytical hierarchy based approach. Int J Prod Res 45(14):3165–3190
Mousavi SM, Tavakkoli-moghaddam R, Heydar M, Ebrahimnejad S (2013) Multi-criteria decision making for plant location selection: an integrated Delphi–AHP–PROMETHEE methodology. Arab J Sci Eng 38(5):1255–1268
Lateef-Ur-Rehman AUR (2013) Manufacturing configuration selection using multicriteria decision tool. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 65(5-8):625–639
Monitto M, Pappalardo P, Tolio T (2002) A new fuzzy AHP method for the evaluation of automated manufacturing systems. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 51(1):395–398
Brans JP, Vincke P (1985) A preference ranking organization method. Manag Sci 31(6):647–656
Macharis C, Springaelb J, Bruckerc KD, Verbeke A (2004) PROMETHEE and AHP: the design of operational synergies in multi-criteria analysis. Strengthening PROMETHEE with ideas of AHP. Eur J Oper Res 153(2):307–317
Dağdeviren M (2008) Decision making in equipment selection: an integrated approach with AHP and PROMETHEE. J Intell Manuf 19(4):397–406
Behzadian M, Kazemzadeh RB, Albadvi A, Aghdasi M (2010) PROMETHEE: a comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. Eur J Oper Res 200(1):198–215
Roodposhti MS, Rahimi S, Beglou MJ (2014) PROMETHEE II and fuzzy AHP: an enhanced GIS-based landslide susceptibility mapping. Nat Hazards 73(1):77–95
Deif AM, Eimaraghy WH (2006) A control approach to explore the dynamics of capacity scalability in reconfigurable manufacturing systems. J Manuf Syst 25(1):12–24
Wang WC, Koren Y (2012) Scalability planning for reconfigurable manufacturing systems. J Manuf Syst 31(2):83–91
Maier-Speredelozzi V, Koren Y, Hu SJ (2003) Convertibility measures for manufacturing systems. CIRP Ann 52(1):367–370
Liu JP, Luo ZB, Chu LK, Chen YL (2004) Manufacturing system design with optimal diagnosability. Int J Prod Res 42(9):1695–1714
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits use, duplication, adaptation, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
About this article
Cite this article
Wang, G.X., Huang, S.H., Yan, Y. et al. Reconfiguration schemes evaluation based on preference ranking of key characteristics of reconfigurable manufacturing systems. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 89, 2231–2249 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9243-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-016-9243-7