Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983 www.materialstoday.com/proceedings

IConAMMA_2017

Modelling and simulation of discrete manufacturing industry

Neeraj R Ra, Pranav Nithin Ra, Niranjhan Pa, A Sumeshb, Thenarasu Mb*
a
B.Tech Mechanical Engineering Student, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amrita School of Engineering, Coimbatore, India, 641112.
b
Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Amrita School of Engineering, Coimbatore, India,641112.

Abstract

This paper focuses on discrete event simulation of a manufacturing unit using ARENA software. The simulation was carried out
with an objective to study the flow of aluminium brake brackets in the factory and find out the bottlenecks and also to calculate
the productivity and workforce requirements in the unit. The process flow chart of the aluminium bracket was drawn and
processing time of each process was calculated using ARENA input analyzer tool and then fed into the software and simulated.
For optimization of the results the other tools available in arena like Process Analyzer (PAN) and Opt Quest were used. The
bottlenecks were found and a better model was suggested in order to overcome them. In the new (suggested) model, the
productivity was found to have increased by 6% and the workforce requirements decreased by 8.33% when compared with the
existing (actual) factory model. The method followed in this paper can be used to design process as well as factory layouts for
better efficiency of workforces, to achieve optimal productivity and better use of resources.
© 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of International Conference on Advances in Materials and Manufacturing Applications
[IConAMMA 2017].

Keywords: Simulation; ARENA; Optimization; Instantaneous Utilization; Process Analyzer; OptQuest

1. Introduction

Die casting is a metal casting process that is characterized by forcing molten metal under high pressure into
a mold cavity. This process is especially used for producing sharply defined, accurately dimensioned, smooth or
textured-surface metal parts. It is also very easy to produce geometrically complex metal parts through reusable

* A Sumesh. Tel.: +91 (422) 2685 000; fax: +91 (422) 2686 274.
E-mail address: a_sumesh@cb.amrita.edu (A Sumesh), neerajraghu95@gmail.com (Neeraj R R), pranav.nithin@gmail.com
(Pranav Nithin R), m_thenarasu@cb.amrita.edu (Thenarasu M).

2214-7853 © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Selection and/or Peer-review under responsibility of International Conference on Advances in Materials and Manufacturing Applications
[IConAMMA 2017].
24972 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983

molds, called dies. These die or mold cavities are created with hardened steel that have been precisely machined to
the required shape and size of the die cast parts. The advantage of this type of casting is that it allows products to be
made with greater degree of accuracy and repeatability, hence it is one of the best suitable choice for large scale
production. The two main types of die casting methods are hot chamber (for alloys having low melting temperatures,
e.g. zinc) and cold chamber machine die casting (for alloys having high melting temperatures, e.g. aluminium). The
main difference between hot chamber machine and cold chamber machine is that the injection mechanism is
immersed in molten metal in a furnace attached to the machine in the former one, whereas the molten metal is
poured into the chamber than is needed to fill the die cavity in the latter case, this helps sustain sufficient pressure to
pack the cavity solidly with casting alloy.
The production companies prefer casting over other methods because the equipment and the metal dies used in
other methods require having large capital costs and this tends to limit the process to high volume production but
whereas manufacturers using die casting primarily finds it relatively simple which involves only four important
steps, thus keeping the incremental cost per item low. This is especially suited for companies that produce small to
medium-sized castings in large quantities, which is why die casting produces more castings than any other casting
process. Hot chamber machines are rapid in operation. The cycle time of parts vary from few milliseconds for small
components that weigh only few grams, to thirty seconds for a casting of several hundred grams. The dies are filled
quickly (normally between five and forty milliseconds) and metal is injected at high pressures of 1,0500 to over
4,500 psi.
The behaviour of a system under a given set of conditions can be studied in two ways – Experiment using the
actual system and Experiment using the model of the system. The former is normally not preferred as it is time
consuming and expensive. Experiment using the model of the system can be performed by using a schematic model,
physical model or a mathematical model of the system. The mathematical model can be studied using analytical
approach or by simulation. Simulation is the imitation of the operation of a real world process or a system over time.
The advantage of going for simulation is that it is cheaper, faster and the level of details that is obtained from
simulation cannot be measured experimentally with our current level of technology.
Simulation is one of the most appropriate methods to handle system analysis and performance evaluation for
many real-world problems, as it has a large number of variables in management and optimization, as they are very
complex and mathematically intractable. Some factors are even inter-dependent; therefore, computer simulation
requires developing a program that accurately captures or encodes the behaviour of a system as it evolves over time
and records each and every change taking place in the system performance [1]. Simulation plays a vital role in
various sectors, especially in manufacturing services. As a matter of fact, simulation has the advantage of being
applicable almost anywhere, irrespective of complexity of the system. Despite this, simulation analysis is rarely used
in companies in the underdeveloped countries. Simulation can help us in various fields such as design, management,
decision making and production system, as it can simulate and model any kind of company process, be it physical,
informational or decisional. Simulation models can even be built on all hierarchical order (i.e. operational, tactical,
and strategic) and levels (i.e. machine, cell, shop, etc.) [2]. If used effectively, the life of whole manufacturing
system or production company can be modelled and simulated as it has the ability to accommodate stochastic
variation, analyze discrete or continuous variables, or both, and provide visualization via animation.
The main goals of any business, production or manufacturing company is to achieve and to detain its concurrent
abilities on the global market. This is possible only when continuous optimization of the working parameters and
their internal organization for their production systems are carried out with the aim to simultaneously increase
capacity, decrease costs of production and keep the quality of products unaltered and uncompromised. Some of the
main factors that have a very significant effect on production companies is transportation and manipulation of
mineral raw material, as they play a huge role in determining the cost of the product [3]. Optimization of transport
resources in the production system can provide increased productivity of the entire production system in all stages of
manufacturing.
To be on par with the current global supply and demand, various new business approaches has been devised and
one of which is the supply chain. With ever increasing complexity in decision structures, fluctuating demand and the
constant need for analyzing wide range of alternatives within this frame, simulation and optimization is a promising
tool for effective decision making [4]. Nowadays, customers demand for quality products, supplied in any quantity
within a short period of time. Thus time, quality and cost are basic, but important parameters against the price paid.
 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983 24973

This paper briefly explains the use of arena to make large statistical calculations and managing production, and
elucidates that such software may be integrated towards a supply chain simulator to increase the efficiency and
effectiveness of production. In this paper, a warehouse has been modelled in ARENA and its various functionalities
like lorry residence time, loading and unloading of parts [5]. Performance analysis of an industry is essential as it
reveals the bottle neck process, its productivity and places of improvement in a manufacturing unit and helps us to
make better production plans [6]. In any manufacturing unit, the phenomenon of bottle necking is unavoidable due to
inherent entropy in each process like machines not working at maximum efficiency, jobs are not being directed
properly to various machines, etc., and identifying them is crucial to our analysis [7]. This can be overcome by
employing lean principles in the process flow model. In our case, we will be using Process Analyzer (PAN) and
OptQuest in ARENA to remove the bottle neck process and come out with a better model [8,18,19]. These concepts
can be applied to various fields like hospital management where improving the dispatching response time is very
essential. The response time of an ambulance determines the quality of service of the institute as it is directly
dependent on the survival of the patient. Here, ARENA proves to be a very important tool to analyze and optimize
various such parameters in order to make proper decisions based on the results obtained [9,10,11]. In batch
manufacturing systems, the flow of products can be monitored and optimized to propose a better layout design and
work distribution using simulation models [12]. Overlong waiting time in emergency services is an important matter
which has negative influence on healthcare quality [13]. It was found that the simulation was able to achieve this
because of its ability to both store attribute values and to show queuing levels at an individual product level [14]. All
the information gathered from running the simulations, assisted further the understanding and improvement of the
proposed system, particularly in certain issues, such as determination of the exact transportation facilities and of the
optimal number of parallel-processing machines in the specified manufacturing system [15].
Rockwell ARENA is a simulation and automation software from Rockwell Automation Inc. The simulation
language used is SIMAN (Simulation Analysis) language which is a general-purpose language and the current
version used is version 15.0 [16,17]. In ARENA, a simulation model can be created by incorporating predefined
modules, which represent various processes. Connector lines are used in order to connect various modules such that
the flow of the parts through the processes are defined. In ARENA, various data such as statistical process time,
transfer time and waiting time are recorded and stored automatically as reports for every simulation run and for a
particular time interval. ARENA has been widely used in simulating business processes and various kinds of discrete
event operations. It is widely being used in large firms such as GM, UPS, IBM, Nike, XEROX, Lufthansa, Ford,
Lucent and Sony. It is also used in harbours and ports to model the events and processes that are taking place like
ship arrival and departure, loading and unloading of goods, etc., and simulate them.

2. Process Layout

The sequence of the processes involved in the manufacturing an aluminium brake bracket in the manufacturing
unit of the company X is given below in Fig 1.
Once the work flow of the part has been identified, we can model the plant layout in ARENA in the sequential
order and simulate it. The processing time for each process performed on the aluminium bracket is observed and the
processing time for one such process is tabulated below in Table 1. The processing time obtained for various parts
for each process, is then fit into a mathematical distribution model using the Input Analyzer tool which is available
in ARENA simulation software package.

2.1. Casting

The following graph was obtained for the above-mentioned process when it was analysed using Input analyzer in
ARENA (Fig. 2 & 3).
24974 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983

Fig. 1. Process flow chart of aluminium brake bracket.

Table 1. Processing time observed for casting process.

Process Waiting time (in seconds) Mathamtical distribution
(best fit)
Casting process 47.2, 49.5, 47.3, 46.3, 46.4, 50.0, 46.8, 46.8, 47.7, TRIA(45.4, 47, 50)
48.3, 45.9, 46.8, 48.3, 47.3, 47.1, 46.7, 48.4, 48.8,
49.7, 47.6, 49.7, 47.5, 48.5, 48.0, 46.0, 47.9, 48.9,
48.0, 46.5, 48.9, 46.8, 48.8, 47.3, 49.5, 48.2, 46.3,
47.3, 45.9, 47.0, 48.1, 46.5, 45.8, 47.1, 47.1, 46.8,
47.4, 48.2, 48.4, 46.8, 47.2, 48.9, 48.1

Fig. 2. Distribution graph of casting process – Triangular distribution.

 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983 24975

Fig. 3. Statistical details of casting process – (a) Distribution summary; (b) Data summary.

Similarly, the processing time for other processes were carried out and they are listed in Table 2 below.

Table 2. Mathematical distribution of process time for various processes (actual model).
Process Probability distribution Mathematical expression (Time in seconds)
Casting - 45
Fettling 1 Normal NORM(16, 4.01)
Fettling 2 Normal NORM(6.4, 1.8)
Fettling 3 Erlang 4 + ERLA(1.06, 4)
Packing Uniform UNIF(57, 60)
Hole punching 1 Beta 5.36 + 1.64 * BETA(1.12, 1.45)
Vice filing Beta 53 + 29 * BETA(1.06, 1.14)
Hole punching 2 Weibull 17 + WEIB(7.51, 2.08)
Final filing Beta 10 + 7.8 * BETA(1.76, 3.54)
Loading Lognormal 82.1 + LOGN(2.14, 1.43)
Shot blasting Triangular TRIA(208, 209, 212)
Unloading Beta 88 + 4 * BETA(1.26, 1.21)
Visual inspection Beta 8 + 14 * BETA(0.855, 1.46)
Final inspection Uniform UNIF(40, 55)

An ARENA model was created (Fig 4.) using the processing time mentioned above in Table 2 and the
sequence was followed as depicted in the flow chart. In the model, the transportation time was also included and
then simulated. The transportation time is the approximate time taken to shift the casted parts from shed I (storing
area) to shed II (shed 2). The die casting process is carried out in a semi-automatic machine and coolant water must
be sprayed by an external source after each part is casted out in order to bring down the temperature of the die and
thus avoiding any casting defects in the bracket. Assuming the plant works for 20.5 hours a day and 30 days a
month, the simulation has been carried out and the results are tabulated below.
24976 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983

Fig. 4. Simulation of flow of aluminium brake bracket using ARENA (actual model).

3. Results & Discussion

The simulation parameters to run the simulation for the stipulated amount of time are given below. The
replication length was given to be 30 days with 20.5 hours per day and the number of replication that was fed into
the software is 5. The results are tabulated below (Table 3.).

3.1. Process Analyzer

It is used to evaluate various alternatives presented by simulating different simulation model scenarios in
ARENA. It is used for post-model development comparison of ARENA models where it compares the output of the
model based on various set of inputs given to the model.
The following figure (Fig. 5 & 6) shows the various scenarios that were created using process analyzer (PAN).
This process aims in reducing the total time, time taken for vice filling and final inspection and the number waiting
associated with it. These processes are dependent on the controls person 2_1, person 2_2, person 2_3, person 2_4,
person 5_1, person 5_2 and the resources corresponding to the process are Total time, Vice filling time, Vice filling
number waiting, Final inspection time, Final inspection number out. The unit of time used here is seconds.
The first scenario shows the original model and the control values are all set to 1. The values obtained for
resources are total time - 281.640 s, waiting time in Vice filling is 50.330 s, number waiting for vice filling is
63.288, waiting time in Final inspection is 23.857 s, number waiting in final inspection - 30.013.
The second scenario changes the controls person 2_1, person 2_2, person 2_3, person 2_4 from 1 to 3, this
implies that instead of 1 resource that is currently available now 3 resources are introduced, because of this
introduction of resource, the change in resources are found. The simulation was done and there was a change in
value for Total time, Vice filling time, Vice filling number waiting, Final inspection time, Final inspection number
out. It can be seen that the value has reduced drastically for Total time, Vice filling time, Vice filling number
waiting but there has been an increase in Final inspection time, Final inspection number out. The values obtained for
resources are total time is 276.536 s, waiting time in Vice filling is 13.134 s, number waiting for vice filling is
16.515, waiting time in Final inspection is 34.882 s, number waiting in final inspection is 43.871.
 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983 24977

Table 3. Instantaneous utilization of manpower for various processes (actual model).

Process Man Power Instantaneous Utilization (%)
Casting Person 1 -
Runner Breakage (fettling) Person 2 0.3085
Overflow Pad Breakage and Person 3 0.3986
Packing
Transportation Person 4 -
Fettling Person 5 0.5726
Person 6 0.5725
Person 7 0.5726
Person 8 0.5725
Shot Blasting - Loading and Person 9 0.0706
Unloading
Person 10 0.0754
Visual Inspection Person 11 0.2775
Final Inspection Person 12 0.9952

The third scenario changes the controls person 2_1, person 2_2, person 2_3, person 2_4 from 1 to 2, this implies
that instead of 1 resource that is currently available now 2 resources are introduced, because of the introduction of
resource, the change in resources are found. The simulation was done and there was a change in value for Total
time, Vice filling time, Vice filling number waiting, Final inspection time, Final inspection number out. It can be
seen that the value has reduced drastically for Total time, Vice filling time, Vice filling number waiting but there has
been an increase in Final inspection time, Final inspection number out. The values obtained for resources are total
time is 278.787 s, waiting time in Vice filling is 22.392 s, number waiting for vice filling is 28.157, waiting time in
Final inspection is 34.805 s, number waiting in final inspection is 43.779.
The fourth scenario changes the controls person 2_1, person 2_2, person 2_3 and person 2_4 as 2 and person 5_1
and person 5_2 as 2, this implies that instead of 1 resource that is currently available, now 2 resources are
introduced, because of this introduction of resource, the change in resources are found. The simulation was done and
there was a change in value for Total time, Vice filling time, Vice filling number waiting, Final inspection time,
Final inspection number out. It can be seen that the value has reduced drastically for Total time, Vice filling time,
Vice filling number waiting, Final inspection time and Final inspection number out. The values obtained for
resources are total time is 242.632 s, waiting time in Vice filling is 22.399 s, number waiting for vice filling is
28.166, waiting time in Final inspection is 0.042 s, number waiting in final inspection is 0.053.
The fifth scenario changes the controls person 2_1, person 2_2, person 2_3 and person 2_4 as 3 and person 5_1
and person 5_2 remains the same, this implies that instead of 1 resource that is currently available now 3 resources
are introduced, because of this introduction of resource, the change in resources are found. The simulation was done
and there was a change in value for Total time, Vice filling time, Vice filling number waiting, Final inspection time,
Final inspection number out. It can be seen that the value has reduced drastically for Total time, Vice filling time,
Vice filling number waiting, Final inspection time and Final inspection number out. The values obtained for
24978 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983

resources are total time is 241.628 s, waiting time in Vice filling is 13.137 s, number waiting for vice filling is
16.519, waiting time in Final inspection is 0.044 s, number waiting in final inspection is 0.055.

Fig. 5. Process analyzer model - (a) Process Scenario properties; (b) Responses (Time in seconds).

Fig. 6. Graph obtained for various process scenarios in Process Analyser (Time in seconds).

3.2. OptQuest

It is an optimization tool which is in-built in ARENA, which facilitates the enhancement of analysis capabilities
in order to obtain the optimal solution within the simulation models. It helps us to define various system inputs
based on our required output and simulates various scenarios for each set of inputs to achieve the desired output. In
OptQuest, first the controls which constitute for the bottle necking are added and it is shown in Fig. 7.

Fig. 7. Controls in OptQuest.

An expression is created using the control and the validity of the expression is checked using the validity checker
provided by Opt Quest. Next, the objective function for the model is created. The aim of the model is to minimize
the total working time and individual waiting time in the area of bottle necking (Fig. 8).
 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983 24979

Fig. 8. Objective function.

The model is then simulated and the number of replications is 3. Several iterations are done so that the
value finally converges to a minimum possible value. A graph is obtained as shown below in Fig. 9(a) & 10.

Fig. 9. (a) Parameters; (b) Best solutions (All time in seconds).

Fig. 10. Objective values – Graph: Y axis – Time (s), X axis – No. of iterations.

It can be seen that the value minimizes drastically and finally forms a straight line showing that it is the
obtained minimum value, that is 156.25. Once the solution is completed the best solutions for the number of
iterations that was performed can be viewed as shown in Fig. 9(b).
24980 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983

3.3. Suggested model

After analyzing the actual model in ARENA, a better model was suggested wherein two main changes were
made. The first modification was to make the casting time constant where the spraying of coolant water can be
automatized and the second one is to avoid the transportation time by bringing all the processes under a single
production line. For the modified processing time chart, refer Table 4., and the modified ARENA model (Fig. 12)
and results (Table 5.) are shown below.

Table 4. Mathematical distribution of process time for various processes (suggested model).
Process Probability distribution Mathematical expression (Time
in seconds)
Casting - 45
Fettling 1 Normal NORM(16, 4.01)
Fettling 2 Normal NORM(6.4, 1.8)
Fettling 3 Erlang 4 + ERLA(1.06, 4)
Packing Uniform UNIF(57, 60)
Hole punching 1 Beta 5.36 + 1.64 * BETA(1.12, 1.45)
Vice filing Beta 53 + 29 * BETA(1.06, 1.14)
Hole punching 2 Weibull 17 + WEIB(7.51, 2.08)
Final filing Beta 10 + 7.8 * BETA(1.76, 3.54)
Loading Lognormal 82.1 + LOGN(2.14, 1.43)
Shot blasting Triangular TRIA(208, 209, 212)
Unloading Beta 88 + 4 * BETA(1.26, 1.21)
Visual inspection Beta 8 + 14 * BETA(0.855, 1.46)
Final inspection Uniform UNIF(40, 55)

When comparing the two models, it was found that the newer model had greater output and the
productivity was found to have increased by 6 % from the older one as shown in Fig. 11. The actual model produced
46,398 finished parts whereas the suggested model had an output of 49,150 parts.

Fig. 11. Productivity chart – Actual versus Suggested

 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983 24981

Fig. 12. Simulation of flow of aluminium brake bracket using ARENA (suggested model).

Table 5. Instantaneous utilization of manpower for various processes (suggested model).

Process Man Power Instantaneous Utilization(%)

Casting Person 1 -
Runner Breakage (fettling) Person 2 0.3254
Overflow Pad Breakage and Person 3 0.4202
Packing
Transportation Person 4 -
Fettling Person 5 0.8131
Person 6 0.8081
Person 7 0.8064
Shot Blasting - Loading and Person 8 0.2662
Unloading
Visual Inspection Person 9 0.2944
Final Inspection Person 10 0.5268
Person 11 0.5274

3.4. Workforce Requirements

The workforce requirements for the two cases - actual and suggested model is shown below in Fig. 13., and the
latter was found to have decreased the workforce requirements by 8.33 % when compared to the former one.
24982 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983

Fig. 13. Work requirements of each process – Actual versus Suggested

4. Conclusion

On optimizing the existing model using various tools available in Arena like OptQuest and Process
Analyzer (PAN) it can be found that the current process without any major changes but just by changing the
resources available. It can be seen that the total time taken for the process to end and the waiting time for all the
processes have reduced to a greater extent. The automatization of various machines can also bring down the cycle
time drastically and improve the productivity and in turn reduce the workforce requirements. The automatization of
the casting and spraying process has increased the productivity by 6% and reduced the workforce by 8.33% and thus
increasing the profit to the company. The process layout must be altered such that all the processes take place under
a single manufacturing unit and thus avoiding the transportation time and the manpower required. We can see that
the workforce utilization is not uniform and must be optimized further to achieve maximum utilization. The plant
layout must be optimized so that material handling time, machine idle time, wait time, transportation time between
machines and non-value-added time can be reduced considerably.

References

[1]. John, B., & Jenson Joseph, E. (2013). Analysis and Simulation of Factory Layout Using ARENA. International
Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 1(3).
[2]. Ravi, B. (2010). Casting simulation-best practices. Transactions of 58th of IFC, 10.
[3]. Taktak, S., Hachicha, W., & Masmoudi, F. (2012). A Computer-assisted Performance Analysis and
Optimization (CPAO) of Manufacturing Systems based on ARENA Software. Int. J. Adv. Sc. & Tech., 39, 93-106.
[4]. Bekker, J., & Guittet-Remaud, S. (2000). Simulation in Supply Chains: An Arena basis. The South African
Journal of Industrial Engineering, 11(2).
[5]. Liong, C. Y., & Loo, C. S. (2009). A simulation study of warehouse loading and unloading systems using
Arena. Journal of Quality Measurement and Analysis, 5(2)
[6]. Mathew Thomas (2013). The Performance Analysis of a Fettling Shop Using Simulation. IOSR-JCME. Volume
9(2), PP 10-14.
 Neeraj R R et al./ Materials Today: Proceedings 5 (2018) 24971–24983 24983

[7]. Krishnaraj, C., Mohanasundram, K. M., & Navaneethasanthakumar, S. (2012). Implementation Study Analysis
of Ftfmea Model in Indian Foundry Industry. Journal of Applied Sciences Research, 8(2), 1009-1017.
[8]. Kumar, V. S., Anbuudayasankar, S. P., & Thennarasu, M. (2006). Design and development of simulation based
model to rank job flow strategies.
[9]. Chetouane, F., Barker K., & Oropeza, A.S.V. (2012). Sensitivity analysis for simulation-based decision making:
Application to a hospital emergency service design. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 20(1), 99-111.
[10]. Zarkeshzadeh, M., Zare, H., Heshmati, Z., & Teimouri, M. (2016). A novel hybrid method for improving
ambulance dispatching response time through a simulation study. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory, 60,
170-184.
[11]. RAHMAN, C. M., & SABUJ, S. U. (2015). Process flow improvement proposal of a batch manufacturing
system using arena simulation modelling. Review of General Management, 21(1).
[12]. Aboueljinane, L., Jemai, Z., & Sahin, E. (2012, December). Reducing ambulance response time using
simulation: The case of Val-de-Marne department Emergency Medical Service. In Simulation Conference (WSC),
Proceedings of the 2012 Winter (pp. 1-12). IEEE.
[13]. Wang, T., Guinet, A., Belaidi, A., & Besombes, B. (2009). Modelling and simulation of emergency services
with ARIS and Arena. Case study: the emergency department of Saint Joseph and Saint Luc Hospital. Production
Planning and Control, 20(6), 484-495.
[14]. Greasley, A. (2008). Using simulation for facility design: A case study. Simulation Modelling Practice and
Theory, 16(6), 670-677.
[15]. Adam, G.K., "Modelling and simulation with Arena of a mechatronics system for hydraulic tubes
construction", In Book: Computational Methods in Circuits and Systems Applications, Electrical and Computer
Engineering Series, N.•. Mastorakis, I.A. Stathopulos, C. Manikopoulos, G.E. Antoniou, V.M. Mladenov, I.F.
Gonos (eds), WSEAS Press, ISBN: 960-8052-88-2, pp.105-108, 2003.Modelling and simulation with Arena of a
mechatronics system for hydraulic tubes construction.
[16]. ArenaSimulation. 2009. Arena - Forward visibility for your business. Rockwell Automation, Inc.
http://www.arenasimulation.com (2 April 2009).
[17]. Davis, D. A. & Pegden, C. D. Introduction to SIMAN. Proceedings of the 19th conference on Winter
simulation - WSC 87 (1987). doi:10.1145/318371.318393.
[18]. K.Rameshkumar, Ciby Austin V T, P. Krishnaumar and A. Sumesh. “Productivity improvement of a
Manufacturing Enterprise using lean tools: A case study in Discrete Manufacturing sector”, Idore Management
journal, 2011 vol 3(2), pp: 34- 49.
[19]. K.Rameshkumar, K. M. mohanasundaram, P. Krishnakumar and A. sumesh. “Simulation optimization in a
Kanban controlled Flow shop”, int. conference proceedings, ORSI, 2008.