statements.

The bank has a policy that customers should not wait tor
more than five minutes in the majority of cases (generally interpreted as
99 per cent).

Develop a conceptual model tor this problem outlining the objectives,

model outputs and inputs, model scope and level of detail, and assump­
tions and simplifications.

E6.2 Take a typical operations system, preferably one that can be observed
(c.g. a supermarket or airport), and identify in broad terms at least three
conceptual models that could be developed of the system. For each
model identity the objectives and model content.
E6.3 Obtain and read some simulation case studies (sec Exercise E l.3 in
Chapter 1 tor potential sources). Identify the objectives of the simula­
tion study, the model outputs and inputs, and any assumptions and sim­
plifications that were made. As far as possible try to identity the scope
and level of detail modelled. Can you identify any means for improving
upon the simulation model that was developed (c.g. more or less detail,
different assumptions)?
E6.4 For each of the following situations identity a methexi of simplification
that could be employed in a simulation model o f the system:
a) A factory that produces a range of products: 80 per cent of orders
are for two product types, 18 per cent for five prcxluct types and the
remaining 2 per cent for 17 product types.
b) A bottling plant that tills, caps and labels bottles at a rate o f five bot­
tles a second.
c) An automotive final assembly line that is experiencing problems with
the supply of seven key components (out of hundreds that are sup­
plied to the line). The company wishes to investigate the inventory
polio' for these components.
d ) Modelling weather conditions at a port.
e) A supply chain for the manufacture, warehousing, distribution and
retailing of wooden doors.
f) A model representing the splitting of trains as they arrive at a rail
yard and the forming of trains ready for departure.
g) A ceramics factory in which crockery is processed by pallet loads
through the glazing and firing processes.
E6.5 Design a conceptual model for the simple queue model case described
in Appendix 1 (Section A 1.2.1). Identify' the m(xklling objectives,
mtxlel inputs and outputs, model content and any assumptions and
simplifications.
E6.6 Design a conceptual model for the Wardeon Cinema case described
in Appendix 2 (Section A2.2.1). Identify the imxlelling objectives,
model inputs and outputs, model content and any assumptions and
simplifications.
simplifications and it may be useful to seek advice from such people before
employing a particular simplification.
The second approach is to test the simplification in the computer model; a
form of prototyping. The modeller develops two computer models, one with
and one without the simplification. It is then possible to compare the results
from the two models to see the effect on accuracy. This, o f course, provides
much greater certainty over the appropriateness of a simplification, but the
advantage of faster model development is lost.
Apart from maintaining a sufficient level o f accuracy (validity), a good sim­
plification should not compromise credibility either. Although the aim of sim­
plification is to improve the transparency of the model, over simplification can
make a model less transparent, reducing its credibility. Take, tor example, the
use of black-box modelling. Although a black-box may provide a sufficiently
accurate representation of part of an operations system, the details of the
representation arc not transparent. For some clients this may be satisfactory,
but for others it may be necessary to provide a more detailed representation
to give the model credibility. It is sometimes necessary to include a greater
scope and level of detail than is required to assure the accuracy of the model,
in order to assure the model's credibility. A poor simplification is one that
causes a client to lose confidence in a model. Indeed, there are occasions when
it is necessary to reverse the concept of simplification and actually increase
the complexity (scope and level of detail) of the model, simply to satisfy the
requirement for credibility.

6.4 Summary
The issue of how to develop a conceptual model is discussed from two stand­
points. The first, by presenting a framework for conceptual modelling, enabling a
modeller to design a conceptual model from scratch. The second, by describing
a number of methods for simplifying an existing conceptual model. The frame­
work is illustrated with reference to an example of a fast-food restaurant. The
framework is further illustrated by the mini case studies at the end of the book, a
simple queue model (Appendix 1, Section A 1.2), Wardeon Cinema (Appendix 2,
Section A2.2) and Panorama Televisions (Appendix 3, Section A3.2).
A final issue that has not been discussed is the validation of the conceptual
model. This is covered in Section 12.4.1 as part of a more general discussion
on the verification and validation of simulation models.

Exercises
E6.1 A bank is planning its requirements for ATMs (automated teller machines)
in a new branch. There are spaces for up to six ATMs, not all o f which
have to be used. Three types of ATM can be purchased: general ATMs
(giving cash, balances, mini statements and PIN change facilities), ATMs
for paving money into accounts and ATMs that provide full account
 | Model A [

Figure 6.3 Splitting models

one run of a combined model, because of reduced processing ar the C-phase;

assuming the three-phase method is being employed (Section 2.2.2). This is
a result of there being fewer conditional events in each sub model. In a com­
bined model, even' C-event would need to be checked whenever an event
occurs somewhere in the model, leading to a lot of redundant processing.
Another advantage of splitting models is that it is possible to speed develop­
ment time by having separate modellers develop each model in parallel.
Where splitting models is not so successful is when there is feedback
between the models. For instance, if model B cannot receive entities, because
the first buffer is lull, then it is not possible to stop model A outputting that
entity, although in practice this is what would happen. It is best, therefore, to
split models at a point where there is minimal feedback, for instance, there is a
large buffer.
There is much interest in running simulations in parallel on separate com­
puters, with the aim of gaining run-speed advantages. If split models are run in
parallel, then it should be possible to model feedback effects and so overcome
the difficulty described above. At present, however, there are a number of
obstacles to the use of parallel computing for simulation, not least developing
efficient mechanisms for synchronising the models as they run. For a practical
example see Mustafee et al. (2009).

6.3.7 What is a Good Simplification ?

Although model simplifications are beneficial, a poor choice of simplification,
or over-simplifying a model, may seriously affect the accuracy of the simu­
lation. A good simplification is one that brings the benefits of faster model
development and run-speed (feasibility and utility), while maintaining a suffi­
cient level of accuracy (validity) and credibility. How can a modeller determine
whether a simplification is good or not? There are two broad approaches.
The first is to use judgement in deciding whether a simplification is likely
to have a significant impact on model accuracy. This should be determined
by discussion between the modeller, client and other members of the simula­
tion project team. The project specification and conceptual model representa­
tion (Section 5.6), especially a list of simplifications, is a useful mechanism for
explaining and discussing the efficacy of proposed simplifications. Of course,
this approach provides no certainty over whether a simplification is appropriate
or not. An expert modeller is likely to have much experience in applying model