COMPASS MODEL

COMPETITIVENESS ASSESSMENT ( COMPASS)

USED FOR BENCH MARKING CAN ALSO BE USED FOR RANKING ALTERNATIVES

IN MOST OF THE THINGS

We may have an ideal level and a non ideal level performance

APPLICATION
EVALUATING VARIOUS RECONFIGURATIONS OF A MANUFACTURING SYSTEM (RMS) WHAT IS RMS ?

RMS
RMS
Enable Rapid change of System Components Rapid Addition of Application Modules.

RMS involves
Reconfiguring Existing System Manufacturing Modification Quick Integration of Technology Adding New Functions

FOR BECOMING MORE CUSTOMER RESPONSIVE

Aspects of Reconfiguration

THE STUDY CARRIED OUT

Identified a number of reconfiguration options for a manufacturing system Developed simulation models for the present system and the alternative configurations Simulated taking into account various job mix, job arrivals, due dates, batch size, scheduling rules etc. The results obtained using different performance measures were analysed

THE PERFORMANCE MEASURES

MACHINE UTILISATION ( MU) THROUGH PUT TIME ( TT) EARLINESS ( ET) TARDINESS ( LATENESS) ( LT) BLOCKING TIME ( BT)

Simulation results

Performance measure k Configurations a

MU (%) (LTB)

TT (Hrs) (STB)

ET (Hrs) (LTB)

LT (Hrs) (STB)

BT (Hrs) (STB)

Present System

Confign 1

85.52

837.22

165.01

470.81

1310.06

Confign 2

84.03 83.48 86.04 71.14

2210.05

68.89

1752.72

1865.84

Proposals

Confign3 Confign 4 Confign 5

541.84 1053.28 144.08

228.10 130.33 415.25

228.04 589.59 17.94

780.35 948.58 132.03

APPLICATION OF COMPASS

TWO TYPES OF MEASURES

1) How close is the performance of any candidate to the best performing candidate, The measurement of which is called Competitive Closeness Measure (CCM). 2) How far is the performance of any candidate from the best performing candidate The measurement of which is called Competitive Distance Measure (CDM).

WHERE
k = Performance indicator a = Alternative Cka = A measure of closeness of alternative a to the ideal alternative for the performance indicator k. Dka = A measure of distance of alternative a from the ideal alternative for the performance indicator k. Wk = Weightage of importance assigned to the performance indicator k. S = A scale factor to establish an easily interpreted range of values. p = 1, 5, 10, 50 or larger values to understand the impact of large variations in performance gaps.

PROCEDURE
At the outset Wk and p have been assumed to take appropriate values as decided by the analyst. In the model, the significance of p is to provide power of discrimination, whereas Wk reflects the relative importance of performance measures used to assess the competitiveness of the alternatives. The values of Wk are decided by the decision makers before start of the comparative analysis. To obtain the values of Cka and Dka, the objectives of performance measures are taken into consideration.

LTB OR STB ?
There are two types of objectives for the performance indicator k; It is to be maximized or minimized. In other words, the criterion may be in the category of larger the better (LTB) or smaller the better (STB). The values of Cka and Dka are obtained using different equations

LTB CASE
Let Xka is the score of the candidate a for performance measure k. If the objective of performance measure k is to maximize, the best score (Xka**) and the worst score (Xka*) for the performance measure k among all manufacturing configurations are: Xka** = MAXa {Xka} and Xka* = MINa {Xka}

STB CASE
If the objective of performance measure k is to be minimized, the best score (Xka**) and the worst score (Xka*) for the performance measure k among all manufacturing configurations are: Xka** = MINa {Xka} and Xka* = MAXa {Xka}

FIND Cka

&

Dka

Cka is a measure of closeness of configuration a to the ideal manufacturing configuration for the performance indicator k Dka is a measure of distance of configuration a from the ideal manufacturing configuration for the performance indicator k) HOW TO CALCULATE THESE VALUES

 Cka indicates how a configurations performance is away from that of the anti-ideal performer , ie closer to that of the ideal one, It serves to evaluate the competitiveness of the candidate manufacturing system configuration with a focus on its strong features. Dka indicates how a configurations performance is away from that of the ideal performer. It serves to evaluate the competitiveness of the candidate manufacturing system configuration, with an emphasis on its weaker features.

Cka MORE The BETTER whereas Dka LESS The BETTER

 CCM combines three features 1) actual performance rating of configuration a for the performance indicator k (Cka), 2) the relative weights of each performance indicators (Wk) and 3) the parameter p to consider the impact of larger variations in performance gaps. SIMILAR IS THE CASE OF CDM where instead of Cka , we will use D ka

 It is important to note that if a manufacturing system configuration a is the top performer in a specific performance indicator k then values of Cka is 1 and that of Dka is zero In other words summation of Cka and Dka is equal to one. Thus this model can be used to obtain values of CCM and CDM for variation in Wk and p values by keeping S as 100.

 The configurations are ranked based on the values of CCM and CDM. The consistency in the configurations ranking for variation in values of p based on the values of Wk helps to finalize the configuration as the final choice.

Simulation results

Performance measure k Configurations a

MU (%) (LTB)

TT (Hrs) (STB)

ET (Hrs) (LTB)

LT (Hrs) (STB)

BT (Hrs) (STB)

Present System

Confign 1

85.52

837.22

165.01

470.81

1310.06

Confign 2

84.03 83.48 86.04 71.14

2210.05

68.89

1752.72

1865.84

Proposals

Confign3 Confign 4 Confign 5

541.84 1053.28 144.08

228.10 130.33 415.25

228.04 589.59 17.94

780.35 948.58 132.03

The best and the worst scores for each performance measure
Objective of performance indicator k

Larger the best

Smaller the best

Performance indicator k

MU (%) 86.04 4 71.14 5 14.9 -

ET (Hrs) TT (Hrs) LT (Hrs) BT (Hrs)

The best score (Xka**) Which configuration The worst score (Xka*) Which configuration (Xka** - Xka* ) for larger the best (Xka* - Xka** ) for smaller the best

415.25 5 68.89 2 346.36 -

144.08 5

17.94 5

132.30 5 1865.84 2 -

2210.05 1752 2 2 -

2065.96 1734.78 1733.81

Values of Cka
Configurations Performance measure k MU Configuration 1 Configuration 2 Configuration 3 Configuration 4 Configuration 5 ET TT LT BT

0.97 0.28 0.66 0.74 0.32 0.87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.83 0.46 0.81 0.88 0.63 1.00 0.18 0.56 0.67 0.53 0.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00

Values of Dka

Configurations a Configuration 1 Configuration 2 Configuration 3 Configuration 4 Configuration 5

Performance measure k MU ET TT LT BT 0.03 0.72 0.34 0.26 0.68 0.13 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.17 0.54 0.19 0.12 0.37 0.00 0.82 0.44 0.33 0.47 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

 The values of Cka indicate how the configuration a (for given performance k) approaches that of an ideal configuration (for the same performance k). it can be inferred that the configuration 4 is the top performer in case of performance measure MU, while the worst performer is the configuration 5.

 Similarly, in case of other performance measures such as ET, TT, LT and BT, the configuration 5 is the top performer, while configuration 2 is the worst performer.

 Three sets of Wk have been considered to understand the effect of change in weightage of performance measures on the selection of the configuration.

DIFFERENT WEIGHTS USED Case 1 Case 2 Case 3 Wkfor MU = 0.2, ET = 0.2, TT = 0.2, LT = 0.2 and BT = 0.2 Wkfor MU = 0.1, ET = 0.5, TT = 0.1, LT = 0.2 and BT = 0.1 Wkfor MU = 0.5, ET = 0.2, TT = 0.1, LT = 0.1 and BT = 0.1

Five different cases for the 1, 5, 10, 50 and 100 value of p

Values of CCM with various values of p & Wk Configurations Wk for MU = 0.2, ET = 0.2, TT = 0.2, LT = 0.2 and BT = 0.2. 1 p Configuration 1 59.33 Configuration 2 17.30 Configuration 3 72.01 Configuration 4 58.74 Configuration 5 80.00 5 10 50 100

20.72 19.47 19.30 19.30 17.30 17.30 17.30 17.30 21.31 18.85 17.60 17.58 20.85 20.05 20.00 20.00 26.39 22.97 20.56 20.28

Values of CDM with various values of p & Wk Configurations Wk for MU = 0.2, ET = 0.2, TT = 0.2, LT = 0.2 and BT = 0.2. p 1 5 10 50 100 Configuration 1 40.67 Configuration 2 82.70 Configuration 3 27.99 Configuration 4 41.26 Configuration 5 20.00 16.19 15.09 14.46 14.45 26.39 22.97 20.56 20.28 11.15 10.83 10.81 10.81 16.82 16.46 16.45 16.45 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00

Ranks of configurations as per CCM values Configurations Wk for MU = 0.2, ET = 0.2, TT = 0.2, LT = 0.2 and BT = 0.2. p 1 5 10 50 100 Configuration 1 3 4 3 3 3 Configuration 2 Configuration 3 Configuration 4 Configuration 5 5 2 4 1 5 2 3 1 5 4 2 1 5 4 2 1 5 4 2 1

Ranks of configurations as per CDM values

Wk for MU = 0.2, ET = 0.2, TT = 0.2, Configurations LT = 0.2 and BT = 0.2. p 1 5 10 50 100 Configuration 1 Configuration 2 Configuration 3 Configuration 4 Configuration 5 3 1 4 2 5 4 1 5 3 2 4 1 5 3 2 4 1 5 3 2 4 1 5 3 2

DECISION
CASE 1: IF THE RANKS OBTAINED BY CPM AND CDM MATCH ? CASE 2: IF THE RANKS OBTAINED BY CPM AND CDM DO NOT MATCH ?