An analytic-hierarchy-process based simulation model for implementation and analysis of computer-aided systems

The many successful implementations of computer-aided systems (CAx) have created major advantages for most companies in the competitive world market. In particular, some companies have implemented these systems in order to keep up their competitive power, as computer applications in various fields of production systems are more widely used than before. Unfortunately, these companies have met some problems in their implementation processes, such as a lack of welleducated personnel, in sufficient management support, wrong implementation strategies and techniques, and so on. In order to overcome these problems, in this paper a systematic structure for the implementation and analysis of CAx systems is presented to eliminate--or at least reduce--these kinds of problems. In addition, some techniques, such as the analytic hierarchy process (AHP), benchmarking and simulation approach are used together to make the implementation and analysis studies more effective, easy and applicable for the companies. The objectives of the research are: first, to use the AHP technique for the evaluation of the hardware and software components for a targeted CAx system, secondly, to use a simulation generator integrated with the AHP in order to try the alternatives that are ranked by the AHP study, on a real-life product organization model of a company, until a model is found that provides the best performance values as determined by the company's management.

[1]  Robert M. O'Keefe,et al.  Data-driven generic simulators for flexible manufacturing systems , 1991 .

[2]  E. Cagno Competitive Bidding : A Multi-criteria Approach to Assess the Probability of Winning , 1997 .

[3]  Reuven R. Levary,et al.  An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment , 1999 .

[4]  A. S. Kiran,et al.  An integrated simulation approach to design of flexible manufacturing systems , 1989, Simul..

[5]  Martin Wunderli Multidatabase agents for CIM systems , 1996 .

[6]  Opher Etzion,et al.  A heuristic optimization model of coordination strategies for CIM databases , 1995 .

[7]  Ray J. Paul,et al.  Criteria for simulation software evaluation , 1998, 1998 Winter Simulation Conference. Proceedings (Cat. No.98CH36274).

[8]  Haldun Aytuḡ,et al.  A framework and a simulation generator for kanban-controlled manufacturing systems , 1998 .

[9]  Chris A. Vissers,et al.  A systems theoretic view of computer integrated manufacturing , 1991 .

[10]  Doug Love,et al.  Evaluation of design decisions through CIM and simulation , 1996 .

[11]  James M. Pruett,et al.  MOSES: Manufacturing Organization Simulation and Evaluation System , 1990, Simul..

[12]  Louis G. Birta,et al.  A knowledge-based approach for the validation of simulation models: the foundation , 1996, TOMC.

[13]  Pandu R. Tadikamalla,et al.  Output maximization of a CIM system: simulation and statistical approach , 1993 .