Skip to main content
Log in

Optimization of P.E. area division and arrangement based on product mix

  • Original article
  • Published:
Journal of Marine Science and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The shipbuilding industry in recent times has witnessed a decline in the demand for commercial ships and a sharp increase in the demand for offshore plants. In response to this change in the industry, shipbuilding companies have sought an optimal product mix for producing commercial ships and offshore plants with minimal additional investment in facilities. This study was aimed at optimizing the pre-erection (P.E.) area partition for ship and offshore blocks based on the forecasted product mix of the planning horizon. The offshore P.E. area requires additional investment in facilities because the blocks are usually much heavier than those of ships. For given production schedules, and taking the flexibility of the forecasted change into consideration, we determined the optimal P.E. area partition ratio using the dynamic layout problem methodology. In this study, material handling cost, operating cost, rearrangement cost, and additional P.E. area construction cost were used to determine the optimal division. The optimal division of the P.E. area for offshore plants was then determined for a 10-year planning horizon. The results were applied to a shipyard to evaluate their business feasibility.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Koh S, Jang J, Choi D, Woo S (2011) Spatial scheduling for mega-block assembly yard in shipbuilding company. IE Interfaces 24(1):78–86

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Heragu SS (2008) Facilities design, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton, Florida, USA

  3. Balakrishnan J, Cheng CH (1998) Dynamic layout algorithms: a state-of-the-art survey. Omega Int J Manag Sci 26(4):507–521

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Amine D (2007) Facility layout problems: a survey. Annu Rev Control 31:255–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Balakrishnan J, Cheng CH, Wong KF (2003) FACOPT: a user friendly facility layout optimization system. Comput Oper Res 30(11):1625–1641

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Meller RD, Bozer YA (1996) A new simulated annealing algorithm for the facility lay-out problem. Int J Prod Res 34:1675–1692

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Bozera YA, Meller RD (1997) A reexamination of the distance-based facility layout problem. IIE Trans 29(7):549–560

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kouvelis P (1992) Algorithms for robust single and multiple period layout planning for manufacturing systems. Eur J Oper Res 63:287–303

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Moslemipour G, Lee TS, Rilling D (2011) A review of intelligent approaches for designing dynamic and robust layouts in flexible manufacturing systems. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 60:11–27

  10. Madhusudanan Pillai V (2011) Design of robust layout for dynamic plant layout problems. Comput Ind Eng J 61:813–823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Benjaafar S, Sheikhzadeh M (2000) Design of flexible layouts. IIE Trans 32:309–322

    Google Scholar 

  12. Meng G, Heragu SS, Zijm H (2004) Reconfigurable layout problem. Int J Prod Res 42(22):4709–4729

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Kulturel-Konak S (2004) Layout optimization considering production uncertainty and routing flexibility. Int J Prod Res 42(21):4475–4493

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Rosenblatt MJ (1986) The dynamics of plant layout. Manag Sci 32(1):76–86

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Rosenblatt MJ, Lee HL (1987) A robustness approach to facilities design. Int J Prod Res 25(4):479–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Balakrishnan J, Jacobs FR, Venkataramanan MA (1992) Solutions for the con-strained dynamic facility layout problem. Eur J Oper Res 57(2):280–286

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Urban TL (1998) Solution procedures for the dynamic facility layout problem. Ann Oper Res 76:323–342

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  18. RAO SS (2006) Engineering optimization: theory and practice, 4th edn. Wiley, Hoboken, New Jersey, USA, pp 267–271

  19. Delmia DS (2013). http://www.3ds.com/products/delmia/welcome/

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was partially supported by the World Class University WCU (World Class University) program through the National Research Foundation of Korea funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (R31-2008-000-10045-0) and the Human Resources Development program (No. 20134030200300) of the Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning (KETEP) grant funded by the Korea government Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hyun Chung.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, S., Chung, H. & Kim, M. Optimization of P.E. area division and arrangement based on product mix. J Mar Sci Technol 19, 351–359 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00773-014-0274-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00773-014-0274-1

Keywords

Navigation