Towards an improved tool to facilitate simulation modelling of complex manufacturing systems

  • Ornella Benedettini
  • Benny Tjahjono


Computer-based simulation is one of the most valuable aids for manufacturing systems design, yet its use remains limited. The main reason for this is that current manufacturing systems are extremely complex and the user-friendly capabilities provided even by the most advanced simulation tools are not sufficient to cope with such complexity. On this basis, the paper explores the development of an improved tool to ease and speed up simulation modelling of complex manufacturing systems. A simulation interface, created and currently used at a major automotive manufacturer, is considered and a rigorous assessment of the extent to which this interface can support the simulation modelling process is provided. The paper evaluates the viability to use the interface as a basis for a general purpose simulation modelling tool capable of coping with any complex manufacturing systems, analyses its potential values, and proposes developments that can support the uptake of simulation techniques within the manufacturing industry.


Manufacturing Simulation software Ease-of-use Model development 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Klingstam P, Gullander P (1999) Overview of simulation tools for computer-aided production engineering. Comput Ind 38(2):173–186 doi: 10.1016/S0166-3615(98)00117-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baines TS, Kay JM (2002) Human performance modelling as an aid in the process of manufacturing system design: a pilot study. Int J Prod Res 40(10):2321–2334 doi: 10.1080/00207540210128198 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Holst L, Bolmsjö G (2001) Simulation integration in manufacturing system development: a study of Japanese industry. Ind Manage Data Syst 101(7):339–356 doi: 10.1108/EUM0000000005822 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Banks J, Hugan JC, Lendermann P, McLean C, Page EH, Pedgen CD et al (2003) The future of the simulation industry. In: Chick S et al (ed) Proceedings of the 2003 Winter Simulation Conference. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp 2033–2043Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Robinson S (2005) Discrete-event simulation: from the pioneers to the present, what next? J Oper Res Soc 56(6):619–629 doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601864 zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Baines TS, Mason S, Siebers PO, Ladbrook J (2004) Humans: the missing link in manufacturing simulation. Simulation Modeling Practice and Theory 12(7–8):515–526 doi: 10.1016/S1569-190X(03)00094-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cunha P, Dionisio J, Henriques E (2003) An architecture to support the manufacturing system design and planning. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 16(7–8):605–612 doi: 10.1080/0951192031000115660 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Banks J (1999) Introduction to simulation. In: Farrington PA et al (ed) Proceedings of the 1999 Winter Simulation Conference. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp 7–13Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chung CA (2004) Simulation modelling handbook: a practical approach. CRC, Boca Raton, FL, USAGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carrie A (1998) Simulation of manufacturing systems. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Carson JS II (2005) Introduction to modeling and simulation. In: Kuhl ME et al (ed) Proceedings of the 2005 winter simulation conference. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp 16–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Banks J (2000) Introduction to simulation. In: Joines JA, Barton RR, Kang K, Fishwick PA (eds) Proceedings of the 2000 winter simulation conference. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp 9–16Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Law AM (2005) How to build valid and credible simulation models. In: Kuhl ME et al (ed) Proceedings of the 2005 winter simulation conference, Piscataway, NJ, pp 24–32Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pidd M, Carvalho A (2006) Simulation software: not the same yesterday, today or forever. J Simulat 1(1):7–20 doi: 10.1057/palgrave.jos.4250004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Robinson S (2004) Simulation: the practice of model development and use. Wiley, Chichester, UKGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hollocks BW (2004) Still simulating after all these years—reflections on 40 years in simulation. In: Brailsford SC, Oakshott L, Robinson S, Taylor SJE (eds) Proceedings of the 2004 operational research society simulation workshop. Operational Research Society, Birmingham, UK, pp 209–222Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Seila AF (2001) Spreadsheet simulation.. In: Peters BA, Smith JS, Medeiros DJ, Rohrer MW (eds) Proceedings of the 2001 winter simulation conference. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp 74–78Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hlupic V, Paul RJ (1999) Guidelines for selection of manufacturing simulation software. IIE Trans 31(1):21–29Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bovone M, De Ferrari V, Manuelli R (1989) How to choose useful simulation software. Proceedings of the 1989 European Simulation Multiconference—SCS Simulation Computer Society, San Diego, pp. 39–43Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ekere NN, Hannam RG (1989) An evaluation of approaches to modelling and simulating manufacturing systems. Int J Prod Res 27(4):599–611 doi: 10.1080/00207548908942571 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Holder K (1990) Selecting simulation software. OR Insight 3(4):19–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Davis L, Williams G (1994) Evaluating and selecting simulation software using the analytic hierarchy process. Integrated Manuf Syst 5(1):23–32 doi: 10.1108/09576069410050314 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    International Organization for Standardization/International Electrotechnical Commission (2001) ISO/IEC 9126-1, Software engineering—product quality, Part 1: Quality in use metrics. Author, GenevaGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    International Organization for Standardization (1998) ISO 9241-11, Ergonomic requirements for office work with visual display terminals (VDTs), Part 11: Guidance on usability. GenevaGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (1990) 610.12-1990, IEEE Standard glossary of software engineering terminology. Los Alamitos, CAGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kirakowski J, Corbett M (1993) SUMI: the Software measurement inventory. Br J Educ Technol 24(3):210–214 doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.1993.tb00076.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Lewis JR (1995) IBM computer usability satisfaction questionnaires: psychometric evaluation and instructions for use. Int J Hum Comput Interact 7(1):57–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Macleod M, Bowden R, Bevan N, Curson I (1997) The MUSiC performance measurement method. Behav Inf Technol 16(4–5):279–293 doi: 10.1080/014492997119842 Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Seffah A, Donyaee M, Kline RB (2006) Usability measurement and metrics: a consolidated model. Softw Qual J 14(2):159–178 doi: 10.1007/s11219-006-7600-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Abran A, Khelifi A, Suryn W (2003) Usability meanings and interpretations in ISO Standards. Softw Qual J 11(4):325–338 doi: 10.1023/A:1025869312943 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Holzinger A (2005) Usability engineering methods for software developers. Commun ACM 48(1):71–74 doi: 10.1145/1039539.1039541 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Zhang Z, Basili V, Shneiderman B (1999) Perspective-based usability inspection: an empirical validation of efficacy. Empir Softw Eng 4(1):43–69 doi: 10.1023/A:1009803214692 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Simeral EJ, Branghan RJ (1997) A comparative analysis of heuristic and usability evaluation methods. In: STC Proceedings 1997. Available online at
  34. 34.
    Hornbaek K (2006) Current practice in measuring usability: challenges to usability studies and research. Int J Hum Comput Stud 64(2):79–102 doi: 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2005.06.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Robson C (2002) Real world research: a resource for social scientists and practitioners, 2nd edn. Blackwell, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Management EngineeringPolitecnico di BariViale JapigiaBariItaly
  2. 2.Manufacturing Department, School of Applied SciencesCranfield UniversityCranfieldUK

Personalised recommendations