International Journal of Research and Innovations in Science and Technology

♦ Call for Papers   No Publication Charges Join IJRIST in Linkdin

Selection of a Facilities Layout Design under Utopian Environment

Author(s) : Dr. G.Shashikumar, Bijan Sarkar, S.K.Sanyal

Volume & Issue : VOLUME 3 / 2016 , ISSUE 2

Page(s) : 1-5
ISSN (Online): 2394-3858
ISSN (Print) : 2394-3866


This paper establishes a method to evaluate a set Facilities Layout (FL)s with six varying parameters (5 subjective and 1 objective factors) to select the best and most suited one for a particular type of production system. With ever growing competition in the manufacturing sector for cheap production with high quality and reliability there is a pressing need to bring down the manufacturing cost. One of the surest ways of accomplishing this task is by way of choosing a right kind of layout. In the present methodology weighted normalized decision variables are used to neutralise the effect of varying units of the influencing factors. Pairwise comparison matrix gives the subjective assessment of experts from different departments. Finally, the cost-benefit ratio and incremental analysis zero in on the most suitable FL.


Incremental Analysis, Cost-Benefit ratio, Incremental FL Index.


  1. A.Bhattacharya, B.Sarkar and S.K.Mukherjee – ‘ Selection of Welding Processes -A “Multiple Criteria Decision Making”Approach’, Proc.of National Symposium on Manufacturing Engg. in 21st Century, I.I.T., Kanpur, March 2-3, 2001.
  2. Tompkins, White, Bozer, Tonchoco, ‘ Facilities Planning’.
  3. Francis, McGinnis, White, ‘Facility Layout and Location’.
  4. Hwang, C.L. & Yoon, K., 1981, Multiple Attribute Decision Making – Springer – Verlag, Berlin.
  5. Hwang,.C.L and Yoon.K Multiple Attribute Decision Making – a state of art survey. Lecture notes in Economics and Mathematics, 1982, Berlin, Springer – Verlag.
  6. E.S.Buffa, ‘Modern Production/Operation Management’, Wiley Eastern Limited, New Delhi, 1993.
  7. Hsu-Shih Shih, 2007, Incremental Analysis for MCDM with an application to group TOPSIS, European Journal of Operaitonal Research, xxx-xxx.
  8. Janos Fulop, 2004, Laboratory of Operations Research and Decision Systems, Computer and Automation Institute, Hungarian Academy of Sciences.
  9. Munda, G., 1996, Cost Benefit Analysis in integrated environmental assessments: Some methodological issues, Ecological Economics, 19, 157-168.
  10. Muther, R., ‘Systematic Layout Planning’, Industrial Education Institute, Boston, 1961.
  11. Newnan, D.G., Lavelle, J.P., Eschenbach, T.G., 2002, Essentials of Engineering Economic Analysis, Second Ed., Oxford, NY.
  12. Rapesak, T., 2004, Multi-Attribute Decision Making, Lecture notes, Department of Decisions in Economics, Corvinus University, Budapest, Hungary.
  13. Shih, H.S., Wang, C.H. & Lee, E.S., 2004, A multi-attribute GDSS for aiding problem solving. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 39 (11-12), 1397-1412.
  14. Shih, H.S., Shyur, H.J. & Lee, E.S., 2007, Extension of TOPSIS for group decision making . Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 45 (7-8), 801-813.
  15. T.L.Saaty, 1980, Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw Hill.
  16. T.L.Saaty, J.W.France and K.R.Valentine, 1999, ‘Modelling the Graduate Business School Admissions Process’, Socio-economic Planning Sciences, Vol.25, No.2, pp 155-162.