Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management

A framework for selection of material handling equipment in manufacturing and

logistics facilities
MohsenM.D. Hassan
Article information:
To cite this document:
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

MohsenM.D. Hassan, (2010),"A framework for selection of material handling equipment in manufacturing
and logistics facilities", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 21 Iss 2 pp. 246 - 268
Permanent link to this document:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/17410381011014396
Downloaded on: 05 February 2016, At: 01:04 (PT)
References: this document contains references to 34 other documents.
To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
The fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1958 times since 2010*
Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:
F.T.S. Chan, (2002),"Design of material handling equipment selection system: an integration of expert
system with analytic hierarchy process approach", Integrated Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 13 Iss 1 pp.
58-68 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/09576060210411512
Mohsen, Hassan, (2002),"A framework for the design of warehouse layout", Facilities, Vol. 20 Iss 13/14 pp.
432-440 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02632770210454377
Mohsen M.D. Hassan, (2014),"An evaluation of input and output of expert systems for selection of material
handling equipment", Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 25 Iss 7 pp. 1049-1067 http://
dx.doi.org/10.1108/JMTM-08-2012-0077

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by emerald-srm:272736 []
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.


JMTM
21,2
246
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)
Received January 2009
Revised August 2009
Accepted September 2009
Journal of Manufacturing Technology
Management
Vol. 21 No. 2, 2010
pp. 246-268
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1741-038X
DOI 10.1108/17410381011014396
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/1741-038X.htm
A framework for selection of
material handling equipment
in manufacturing and
logistics facilities
Mohsen M.D. Hassan
Department of Operations Management and Business Statistics,
Sultan Qaboos University, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to assist facility design practitioners, industrial managers,
and expert systems (ES) developers identify important issues to consider and actions to follow in the
selection of material handling (MH) equipment, overcome limitations of existing equipment selection
approaches, and design complete MH systems.
Design/methodology/approach – A framework that specifies the steps that have to be taken in the
selection of MH equipment is suggested. It identifies categories of equipment based on all
handling-related functions performed in a facility, which allows consideration of various categories of
equipment, and selects equipment classes and types from among candidates based on user
requirements and objectives.
Findings – The suggested framework is capable of producing a wide range of equipment that
performs various functions in a facility, and satisfies requirements and objectives without the need for
using large data bases. Applying it requires cooperation of facility managers and designers.
Research limitations/implications – Some of the steps of the suggested framework require
further investigation and research.
Practical implications – Facility design practitioners, industrial managers, and developers of ES
can make better selection among a large number of MH equipment and design complete systems by
relying on functions performed in a facility, requirements, and objectives.
Originality/value – A framework for selection of MH equipment is lacking in the literature. This
paper fills a gap by presenting design issues and organized steps that practitioners, managers, and
expert system developers working on selection of MH equipment have to address and follow in order
to design complete MH systems.
Keywords Materials handling equipment, Industrial design
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
Physical resources in facilities should be dealt with properly in order that they efficiently
support operations (Childe, 2003). An important aspect of dealing with physical
resources is their design. One of the physical resources in manufacturing and logistics
facilities that shoulds be well designed is their material handling (MH) systems. Without
a well-designed MH system, manufacturing operations could encounter delays,
production times could increase, products could get damaged or contaminated, and cost
of movement within a facility could increase thereby increasing operating cost.
A well-designed MH system would on the other hand help manufacturing and
logistics facilities improve their productivity, enhance quality of products, and reduce
 operating costs. An MH system is also a significant component of supply chains that Material
affect their operations (Hassan, 2006). handling
Designing an MH system is a step among several steps required in the design
of manufacturing and logistics facilities (see Chapter 2 in Tompkins et al., 2003). equipment
The complexity of designing such facilities forces designers to consider design steps one
by one with every step receiving information from preceding steps. Even related design
steps involving facility layout, MH system, and flow paths are also considered one by 247
one due to the complexity of considering them jointly (Chittratanawat and Noble, 1999;
Ioannou, 2007). Thus, designing an MH system is usually treated as a problem in its own
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

right. For example, it is considered one of the steps in procedures for designing
warehouses (Hassan, 2002; Baker and Canessa, 2009). Of paramount importance in the
design of MH systems is selection of MH equipment. That decision requires determining
the type and number of equipment and their specifications.
Selection of MH equipment has usually been made using analytical models
(Hassan et al., 1985; Le-Anh and de Koster, 2006; Vis, 2006; Roodbergen and Vis, 2009)
and expert systems (ES) (see recent examples in Cho and Egbelu, 2005; Kulak, 2005;
Mirhosseyni and Webb, 2009). However, these approaches have limitations as follows:
(1) They have limited the number of equipment classes they consider and focused on
transfer equipment (Table I). Thus, indispensable equipment in today’s facilities
needed for storage, identification, communication, information processing,
and control, as well as support equipment is ignored. This limitation is a
consequence of:
.
ignoring MH functions performed in a facility in the selection process; and
.
attempting to reduce computations and the size of data bases needed for
storing equipment attributes, which increase as the number of equipment
types considered increases.
(2) They consider one objective such as cost minimization whereas users of an MH
system usually have other important objectives that have to be accounted for in
the design such as safety, high throughput, and high-equipment utilization.
(3) They do not consider unique user requirements or issues important to
managers such as effect of the MH system on the environment and its life-cycle.

Besides, analytical models and ES, designers rely on experience, judgment, and
familiarity with particular equipment to select from but that approach carries within it
some bias toward certain equipment types (Matson et al., 1992). Designers may also
depend on rules of thumb and simple tools involving matrices, spread sheets, and
decision trees (Baker and Canessa, 2009). Further, the few frameworks available in the
literature for selection of MH equipment (Apple, 1977; Schultz, 1997; Tompkins et al.,
2003) lack details on identification and selection of equipment, and consideration of
requirements.
In retrospect, there is a need for an approach that assists facility design practitioners,
industrial managers, and developers of ES avoid the aforementioned limitations
of existing approaches for MH equipment selection, and design more complete MH
systems. Other researchers (Apple and McGinnis, 1987; Matson et al., 1992; Chan et al.,
2001) also pointed to the need for such an approach. This paper presents a framework
for the selection of indoors MH equipment needed for handling discrete loads
 Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

21,2

248

Table I.
JMTM

procedures (A)
equipment selected by
some ES and analytical
A summary of classes of
Class of equipment
Reference Type of approach Truck Conveyor Crane AGV Monorail Manual AS/RS Rack Robot Positioner

Hassan et al. (1985) A † † †

Fisher et al. (1988) ES † † † † † †
Matson et al. (1992) ES † † † † † † †
Welgama and Gibson (1995) ES þ A † † †
Park (1996) ES † † † † † † † †
Chittratanawat and Noble (1999) A † † †
Chan et al. (2001) ES † † † † † † †
Fonseca et al. (2004) ES †
Kulak (2005) ES † † † † † † †
Cho and Egbelu (2005) ES † † † † † † † †
Mirhosseyni and Webb (2009) ES þ A † † † † †
 in manufacturing and logistics settings. It identifies important issues to consider and Material
actions to take in the selection of MH equipment, and emphasizes the role of user
requirements, objectives, and functions in facilities in equipment selection. A new way
handling
of prioritizing requirements in the selection of equipment is also presented. The equipment
framework considers various classes of handling equipment without the need for using
large data bases to store equipment attributes. It is applied to a real life facility and
several examples from the literature. 249
The paper assumes some familiarity on the reader’s part with MH and proceeds as
follows. Factors that facility design practitioners, industrial managers, and developers
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

of ES have to account for in the selection of MH equipment and their implications are
discussed in the next section. Ordered steps of the suggested framework are then
presented and validated by a real life example of a pharmaceutical facility and examples
from the literature. Benefits of the framework to industrial managers, facility design
practitioners, and ES developers, and areas of research needed on some of the steps of the
framework are summarized in the conclusion of the paper.

2. Factors and issues in selection of MH equipment

Significant factors and issues in the selection of MH equipment and their implications
on the design are discussed below. Industrial managers and facility design practitioners
have to participate in formulating some of these issues and factors, and provide
information about them in order to design a complete and adequate MH system.
Complexity of designing an MH system
An MH system consists of hardware, software, human, and management sub-systems
that work together to perform all activities associated with handling. The largest
sub-system in an MH system is hardware and consists of various categories of
equipment such as transfer, unit loads, storage, identification, communication,
packaging, information processing, control, and support equipment. Further, some
elements of the hardware sub-system are systems in their own right such as an
automated sortation system and an automated guided vehicle (AGV) network. Each
category of equipment can be subdivided further into various classes. For example, the
transfer category includes classes of conveyors, trucks, and cranes. The conveyor class
in turn can be subdivided into various types such as belt, roller, etc. An MH system in a
facility is usually a mix of various types of equipment from the different sub-systems
and categories of equipment.
Designing an MH system is therefore a complex task since designers have to consider
various types of sub-systems, and select among a large number of categories, classes,
and types of equipment. In order to alleviate the complexity of equipment selection, the
design task should be decomposed into simpler sub-problems as Newbern and Nolte
(1999) suggested, and categories of equipment, classes, and types are identified in that
order. Further, there should be means for differentiating between and within categories
and classes of equipment in order to facilitate identification and selection of the right
equipment. MH functions, requirements, and objectives are suitable means for such
purpose, and thus have to be specified and used in the selection process.

Purpose and functions of an MH system

The purpose of an MH system is to support operations in a facility by delivering
the right material in the right quantities to the right location at the right time
 JMTM (Tompkins et al., 2003). The support is provided by performing various handling
21,2 functions by MH equipment such as moving, lifting, loading, unloading, etc. Therefore,
such functions have to be identified early in the design in order to determine equipment
that can perform them thereby enabling the system to achieve it purpose.

Life-cycle
250 An MH system goes through several phases in its life-cycle such as design, acquisition,
installation, operation, maintenance, retirement, and disposal. These phases have to be
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

considered in the design of an MH system in order that designers include in it necessary

components that support the phases. For example, accounting for the operation and
maintenance phases would motivate designers to include in the MH system equipment
such as battery chargers in order to ensure continuous operations of equipment such as
AGV. Similarly, an important issue to facility managers such as the effect of the MH
system on the environment would motivate selecting unit loads made of durable
material such as plastic instead of cardboard in order to reduce their disposal.

The environment of MH systems

An MH system exists in an environment that interacts with it, provides it with input, and
affects it. Thus, elements of the environment and their effect should be identified early in
equipment selection as constraints and requirements, and accounted for in the design.
Elements of the external environment to a facility include suppliers (e.g. type and size
of unit loads they use), customers (e.g. packaging requirements), and government
(e.g. regulations). As an example on the effect of the environment on the design of an MH
system, consider labor regulations; they would motivate using mechanization rather
than rely on human labor for handling heavy loads.
Characteristics of the facility where an MH system will be used (internal
environment) that impact selection of handling equipment include type of facility and
industry (different functions), type of production system (job shop and flow shop have
different types of movement paths), physical restrictions (existence of column and
multiple floors, ceiling height) and atmospheric conditions within a facility (humidity
and wet conditions).

Transactions
The transactions that flow within an MH system and/or are altered by it include
material, products, and documents, which would be handled as individual units or unit
loads. Their characteristics include type, shape, size, weight, and quantity. The type and
characteristics of transactions have to be identified and accounted for in equipment
selection in order to select the right equipment to handle them. Information is also an
example of transactions in an MH system and handling it would necessitate including
in an MH system equipment that can capture, communicate, and store data. Actions
performed on the transactions such as packaging should also be known in order to
include necessary equipment that can perform them.

Attributes of equipment
Each unit of an equipment type in an MH system has several attributes (e.g. carrying
capacity, speed, and lifting altitude of a truck). The attributes impact cost and efficiency
 of operations of an MH system, and thus an approach for selecting MH equipment Material
should determine appropriate values for them. handling
In summary, designing a complete MH system and selecting the right equipment
require that facility designers, industrial managers, and developers of ES use a equipment
methodology that:
.
decomposes the equipment selection problem into simpler sub-problems;
.
specifies objectives of the MH system and requirements derived from the
251
conditions that the MH system will operate under, and characteristics and input
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

from its environment;

.
identifies MH functions and relies on them in determining necessary equipment
thereby helping design a complete MH system that includes various equipment
categories;
.
addresses operations of the MH system as well as its maintenance, and
retirement; and
.
determines equipment attributes and evaluates the design.

The next section suggests a framework for selection of MH equipment that attempts
to consider the above issues jointly.

3. Framework for selection of MH equipment

The suggested framework draws on concepts from systems engineering (SE) where it
focuses on the role of functions, requirements, and objectives in equipment selection,
accounts for the environment of the MH system and its life-cycle, and requires joint
actions from facility managers and designers. It considers equipment selection in three
ordered phases as one of the frameworks for application of SE (Blanchard and Fabrycky,
1998) does. Each phase provides input to the succeeding phase and a succeeding phase
adds more details to the output of the preceding phase. The three phases are:
(1) Conceptual design where requirements, objectives, and functions of the MH
system are specified, and categories (e.g. transfer and storage) and classes of
equipment (e.g. conveyor, trucks, and racks) would be identified based on
functions and some of the requirements.
(2) Preliminary design where an equipment type within a class of equipment
(e.g. belt, roller conveyor) identified in conceptual design would be selected
based on requirements and objectives.
(3) Detailed design where attributes of equipment (e.g. dimensions of conveyor and
its shape) are prepared and the equipment would be ready to be acquired
commercially off-the shelf.

Steps of the suggested framework for the selection of indoors MH equipment used
in manufacturing and logistics facilities for handling individual products and unit
loads are summarized in Table II and discussed below in detail along with justification
for each step. Each step involves several actions. It is assumed herein that the layout
of the facility where the MH system will operate has already been designed, and is
considered part of its environment.
 JMTM
Design phase Step
21,2
Conceptual design 1. Specify and prioritize requirements
2. Set and decompose objectives
3. Establish performance measures
4. Functional decomposition
252 5. Determine candidate equipment classes
6. Design subsystems
Table II. Preliminary design 7. Select equipment type from a class
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

Steps of the suggested 8. Determine number of units of an equipment type

framework for selection Detailed design 9. Determine specifications of the selected equipment
of MH equipment 10. Evaluate the design

Step 1: specify and prioritize requirements

The actions involved in this step are as follows:
(1) Specify requirements that address preferred form of the system (manual,
mechanical, automated, or a combination), operations (e.g. utilization),
maintenance, characteristics of material and loads (e.g. size and
weight), moves, restrictions (e.g. multiple floors), desirable characteristics of the
MH system such as modularity and upgradeability, and other user requirements.
(2) Convert qualitative requirements into technical requirements using requirement
matrix that relates qualitative requirements to technical requirements that can
achieve them.
(3) Group requirements into three classes where each class is suitable for use in a
particular design phase and prioritize them.

Requirements represent conditions and rules under which the MH system will be
operating, and thus have to be known in order to select equipment that can satisfy them.
For example, if full automation is specified as one of the requirements, an AGV could be
selected instead of a truck. The Appendix presents a new classification and
prioritization of requirements on moves, loads, and operations, and application of the
suggested classification to problems from the literature.
Step 2: set and decompose objectives of the MH system
This step requires performing several actions as follows:
(1) Identify MH objectives related to objectives of the facility installing the MH
system (e.g. maximizing equipment utilization could be a MH objective in
response to a facility objective such as maximizing productivity), and to user’s
need for the MH system (e.g. maximizing throughput could be a MH objective if
the facility needs a system that supports high throughput).
(2) Specify design criteria (e.g. cost, flexibility, time, and safety) and derive suitable
objectives from them (e.g. objectives related to cost and safety would,
respectively, be minimizing handling cost and manual handling).
(3) Decompose the objectives of an MH system into sub-objectives that can achieve
them (e.g. improving safety could be realized by achieving a sub-objective such
as reducing manual handling).
(4) Organize all objectives and sub-objectives in an objectives tree.
 Objectives help designers identify some of the functions of the system (e.g. an objective Material
such as quick and accurate collection of data would be achieved by a function handling
such as scan). Further, they would be used in a subsequent design step (Step 7)
to help designers identify a suitable equipment type from among several alternatives equipment
within a class of equipment (e.g. a chute conveyor could be selected as the conveyor
type in the conveyor class if performing a move economically has been set as
an objective). 253
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

Step 3: establish performance measures

The actions of this step establish performance measures (needed to evaluate the
design) as follows:
(1) Specify requirements that have to be measured (e.g. utilization and throughput).
(2) Determine elements in the phases of the life-cycle of the MH system that have
to be measured (e.g. movement time and cost, throughput, and utilization for
the operational phase, repair time, number of break downs, and number
of regular maintenance operations for the maintenance phase).
(3) Determine cost elements for the phases in the life-cycle of the MH system
(i.e. purchasing, installation, operation, maintenance, and retirement costs).
(4) Establish formulas for calculating measures for the above elements as well
as for objectives and sub-objectives that can be quantified (see examples
of formulas on throughput, utilization, flexibility, congestion, and reliability
in Beamon (1998) and Devise and Pierreval (2000)).

Step 4: determine and decompose functions of the MH system

The actions of this step are as follows:
(1) Identify from a process chart major functions in a facility supported by MH
(e.g. put away in a warehouse is supported by MH functions such as loading,
moving, and unloading).
(2) Examine the objectives tree for functions needed to achieve some objectives.
(3) Examine maintenance requirements to identify functions related to
maintenance (e.g. requiring AGV to be working all the time gives rise to the
function provide energy).
(4) Decompose the functions into sub-functions that can achieve them in order to
determine MH functions. The functional decomposition could be accomplished
using a tree or block diagram.
(5) Determine the needed category of equipment to perform each MH function
(e.g. the transfer category would be needed to perform the move function).

This step is important in the framework since identifying MH functions helps determine
categories of equipment that can perform them. It also helps in designing complete
systems since various handling functions (e.g. move, store, identify, and communicate)
would be identified and consequently different categories of equipment would
be included in the MH system.
 JMTM Step 5: select major classes of equipment
21,2 Classes of equipment can be identified in this step based on MH functions as follows:
(1) Identify candidate classes of equipment within each category to accomplish
each sub-function (e.g. if move is a sub-function, conveyors, trucks, AGV, and
cranes, which are classes within the transfer category, would be identified as
alternatives to perform it).
254 (2) Select one of the candidate classes of equipment to perform the function based
on requirements.
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

Requirements on frequency of move and type of path can be used for selecting a class
of transfer equipment from among candidate classes, and requirements on size and
shape of load can be used for selecting a class of storage equipment. The Appendix
presents a prioritization of requirements for selection among classes of transfer and
storage equipment.

Step 6: design sub-systems

Some of the classes of MH equipment identified in Step 5 are systems in their own right
and include several MH components. They require additional actions to deal with them
as follows:
(1) Identify sub-systems such as automated sortation systems, automated
storage/retrieval systems (AS/RS), and AGV.
(2) Specify additional requirements on operations and maintenance of sub-systems
(e.g. requirements on traffic, failure, and battery have to be set for AGV (Vis,
2006)).
(3) Perform functional decomposition on sub-systems (as in Step 4).
(4) Determine the required classes of equipment (as in Step 5) for the sub-systems.
Step 7: identify an equipment type within a class
The following actions should be performed in this step:
(1) Use objectives and requirements specified earlier on loads (their weight, shape,
and size), throughput, and maintenance to select equipment types from within
the classes of equipment determined in Steps 5 and 6 (e.g. if a truck is identified
in Step 5 as the class of equipment to use then powered trucks would be selected
if the requirement is to move heavy loads).
(2) If more than one equipment type is suitable, ties could be resolved using
analytical models as in the next step, or based on user preference.
The Appendix suggests a prioritization scheme of requirements that can help in
selecting conveyor type, truck type, rack type, and stock-to-operator (STO) storage
equipment type.

Step 8: determine number of units of an equipment type

The actions of this step are as follows:
(1) Examine the objectives tree, performance measures, and requirements to
identify, respectively, objectives and constraints that can be included in an
analytical model.
 (2) Construct analytical model(s) to determine number of equipment types Material
(e.g. number of trucks, AGV, racks, and unit loads), design layout of the guide handling
path network for an AGV, and resolve ties among equipment types.
(3) Perform functional allocation after solving the model to ensure that equipment
equipment
of the same type identified more than once to perform similar or related (e.g. move
and unload) functions in various areas of the facility is not duplicated
unnecessarily. Thus, if the number of trucks determined is two, e.g. it might be 255
reduced to one after functional allocation (see also Welgama and Gibson (1995)
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

for performing functional allocation analytically).

An analytical model should address factors that affect the number of units of an
equipment type such as cost and utilization. Examples of models that can be used in this
step of the design can be found in Hassan et al. (1985) and Welgama and Gibson (1995)
(see also references in Le-Anh and de Koster, 2006; Vis, 2006; Roodbergen and Vis, 2009).
It should however be pointed out that some of the data needed to solve models such as
operating times and costs cannot be accurately known unless the MH system is
operating. An analytical model should therefore be solved several times using different
estimates of data to arrive at a reasonable estimate of the number of units of an
equipment type.

Step 9: determine specifications of the selected equipment type

This step requires performing the following actions:
(1) Determine from requirements information on weight, shape, and dimensions of
loads, volume handled, lifting height, and aisle width.
(2) Use the information from action (1) to determine attributes or specifications of
equipment (e.g. conveyor length and width, dimensions of pallets, dimensions of
racks, and speed, carrying capacity, and lifting altitude of trucks), or identify
commercial equipment whose specifications can meet requirements.
(3) If commercial equipment is not determined in action (2) select commercial
equipment whose attributes are close to the attributes determined in action (2).
Specified attributes should help reduce equipment purchasing and operating costs, and
improve efficiency of operations. Analytical models may be used to determine them
and/or match them to specification of commercial equipment. Examples of such models
can be found in Roll et al. (1989) for determining the size of containers, and Park (1996)
and Chan et al. (2001) for identifying commercial equipment whose attributes match
requirements.

Step 10: evaluate the design

The actions involved in this step are as follows:
(1) Build a model to simulate operations of the selected equipment.
(2) Run the simulation under the requirements specified earlier and evaluate
performance measures.
(3) Revise the number of equipment and some of their specifications if needed
(e.g. when they cannot support production volumes or bottlenecks develop).
Repeat action (2).
 JMTM (4) Perform economic evaluation of the MH system. A decision support system such
21,2 as the one in Usher et al. (2001) or an extension of it could be used to evaluate
life-cycle costs and benefits of the MH system such as flexibility, speed of service,
and defect prevention.

Simulation appears as a reasonable tool to use in this step since the MH system is not yet
256 operating and thus only estimates of data and conceptualization of actual operations can
be used. Simulation studies appeared in the literature for AGV (Vis, 2006), AS/RS
(Roodbergen and Vis, 2009), automated sortation systems (Johnson and Lofgren, 1994),
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

and MH in some industries such as semiconductor fabrication (Montoya-Torres, 2006)

but not for a complete MH system.

Remarks
Performing steps of the framework is a joint effort of facility managers and designers.
Information needed for Steps 1-4 have to be elicited by designers from managers and
other users of MH in a facility. Converting requirements into technical requirements,
decomposing objectives and functions, and executing Steps 5-10 should, however,
be performed by designers of the MH system. Managers of a facility and users of the MH
system have at the end to approve the design based on the evaluation performed in
Step 10, and could request revisions if they are dissatisfied with any aspect of the design.
The questioning approach suggested in Tompkins et al. (2003) for use when designing
an MH system can be used throughout the steps of the framework.
The steps of the framework are generic and thus not intended for a particular
industry or facility. However, through requirements, functions, and objectives of a
facility, and characteristics of the environment of the MH system they can be applied to
particular industries and facilities such as warehousing, semiconductor fabrication, and
flexible manufacturing systems.
Some of the actions of the framework were suggested before in the literature in
frameworks and ES developed for the selection of MH equipment. However, they have
not been included under one umbrella as in the framework suggested herein. These
actions include decomposing the main objectives of an MH system into sub-objectives
(Apple, 1977), stating requirements and criteria (Tompkins et al., 2003), identifying
physical limitations of the facility and developing a functional description of its
operations (Horrey, 1982), and selection of MH equipment in three levels (Park, 1996).
The framework embraces principles of MH (Tompkins et al., 2003) used in the design
and operation of MH systems. For example, principles on standardization, ergonomics,
and ecology would be considered in the design by stating, respectively, requirements
such as ensuring minimum variation among equipment types, avoiding manual
handling of heavy loads, and allowing for reuse of unit loads and packaging material.
Applying such principles is also a way of accounting in the design for, respectively, the
maintenance, operation, and retirement phases in the life-cycle of an MH system.
The suggested framework enhances selection of MH equipment as follows. First,
it alleviates the complexity of equipment selection by decomposing it into sub-problems.
Second, it relies on functions performed in a facility, and requirements and objectives
of users in identifying equipment and thus is capable of selecting various types of
equipment that meet user needs. Third, it ties MH in a facility to its layout (environment
of the MH system) whose characteristics have to be input to the design as requirements
 and constraints. Fourth, the framework ensures involvement of users of an MH system Material
in the design and selects equipment that satisfies their needs. Fifth, it allows for handling
consideration of several objectives, both quantitative and qualitative, not just one
objective as analytical models usually do. Finally, the suggested framework supports equipment
the use of analytical models since they can be used for determining the number of units of
an equipment type and equipment specifications, and their objectives and constraints
can be derived from user objectives and requirements. 257
4. An application of the framework
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

This section presents an example on application of the suggested framework to the

selection of MH equipment in a new pharmaceutical facility described in Maloney (2002).
MH equipment in the facility has already been selected as described in Maloney (2002).
However, information therein about operations of the facility, and requirements and
objectives of its managers are used herein to validate selection of MH equipment using
functional decomposition, requirements, and objectives as the suggested framework
emphasizes. The steps of the suggested framework as they apply to the pharmaceutical
facility are as follows.

Establishing requirements (Step 1)

From the description in Maloney (2002) requirements set by the facility managers
include using a mechanical MH system over a manual one for better efficiency.
Operational requirements include ability of the MH system to support a pull system,
using automation in some areas of the facility, and minimizing human interaction.
Maintenance requirements include cleaning unit loads easily and quickly, and
ensuring that automated equipment is working all the time. Material requirements
include capability of the MH system to move, store, and track raw material, products
in process, and finished products in heavy as well as light loads. Movement
requirements include using gravity whenever possible, and performing variable path,
fixed path, continuous, and intermittent movement. Physical restrictions in the facility
that have to be accounted for in the design include existence of multiple floors (four)
and a predetermined input/output point on each floor. There is also a narrow aisles
warehouse adjacent to the production facility for storing raw material and finished
products. Converting some of the requirements into technical requirements is shown
in Table III.

Setting and decomposing objectives (Step 2)

The main objectives of the facility set by its managers in order to be competitive are
improving accuracy, productivity, and throughput, ensuring compliance with the
guidelines of the pharmaceutical industry, and achieving movement economically.
Decomposition of these objectives into MH sub-objectives that could help achieve them
is shown in Figure 1.

Establishing performance measures (Step 3)

Based on the concerns and objectives of facility managers, performance measures
suitable for consideration could include throughput, number of unit loads moved
per time period, time of washing containers (maintenance), operator time spent on
handling, and cost of the system.
 Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

21,2

258

example
JMTM

Table III.

into technical
An example on

requirements for the

pharmaceutical facility
converting requirements
Technical requirements
User Plastic and metal Use Use Mechanical Track Fixed Vertical Variable path Continuous
requirements containers automation gravity means material path move equipment movement

Easy to clean unit

load †
Economical
system †
Move heavy
loads † † †
Connect floors † † † †
Move the right
material †
Fixed sequence †
High throughput † † † † †
Serve various
locations †
Move loose
material † †
 Material
Be competitive
handling
equipment

Compliance
Improve Improve
accuracy productivity
with
standards
259
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

Improve Reduce
Improve Increase Economic Prevent
product workers
security yield movement contamination
tracking injury

(Scan)

Prevent Reduce Reduce Reduce Sealed

No heavy Clean
damage product residual human processing
lifting unit load
to load loss waste interaction area

(Weigh (Weigh unit (Clean– inspect)

ingredients) loads) Figure 1.
Objective decomposition
Notes: Objectives and sub-objectives in the upper two levels are those of the facility, and in the lower two for the pharmaceutical
levels are those of the MH system; some of the functions needed to achieve some sub-objectives are facility example
shown in parentheses

Functional decomposition (Step 4)

From the description of operations in Maloney (2002) major functions performed in the
facility and functional decomposition are shown in Figure 2 and Table IV.

Equipment selection (Steps 5 and 7)

Identification of suitable classes of equipment based on functions (Step 5) and selection
of equipment types based on requirements and objectives (Step 7) are shown in
Table IV. Although hand scanners (also swing reach truck) is identified in Table IV for
each of the put away and retrieval operations, it would be considered as a needed
equipment type only once after functional allocation is performed since it is needed in
the same area (i.e. the warehouse). This is not the case, however, for the two AGV
identified for the retrieval from compaction operation since they are needed in two
different floors, and thus have to be considered twice.
The equipment selected is shown in Figure 3 in a hierarchy whose levels represent,
respectively, equipment category, classes, and type. A comparison of the classes of
equipment selected by the suggested framework in Figure 3 and Table IV with the
classes of equipment selected by each ES and analytical procedures in Table I reveals
that the suggested framework succeeds in designing a more complete system than
available approaches in the literature do. It identifies various categories of MH
equipment (unit loads, storage, transfer, identification, and support), and various
equipment classes and types within them. Further, the equipment classes and types
selected are those that satisfy the objectives and requirements of facility managers. It is
also interesting to note that the last function in Table IV is concerned with
 JMTM 8.0

21,2 Clean unit

load

1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

260 Receive at Retrieve
Transfer to
Receive
Put away & from and
WH from WH blend
blending
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

7.0 6.0
Retrieve
Transfer to
from
WH/coating
compaction

2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6

Find Display
Putaway Scan Move Unload Scan
location information

3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4

Retrieval Move to
Identify Load Unload
from WH dispensing

5.0 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4

Send unit
Receive Unload at Send to
Move load load to
Figure 2. blend I/O compaction
washing
Major functions using
functional block diagram Note: Pharmaceutical facility example (upper figure) and functional decomposition for some of the
functions (lower figure)

maintenance of unit loads, and suggests including washing machines in the MH

system. Such equipment has never been considered by ES and analytical models as
Table I reveals.

5. Conclusion
This paper presents a framework for selection of MH equipment in manufacturing and
logistics facilities. The framework specifies issues to consider and actions to follow in
the selection of MH equipment, presents a new way of prioritizing requirements, and
strives to design complete systems. It identifies categories of equipment based on MH
functions performed in a facility, and determines equipment classes and types based on
requirements and objectives.
The framework supports cooperation between designers and manufacturing,
logistics, and facility managers in the selection of MH equipment. The latter group
should not be isolated from the design task but participate in it as follows. First, they
have to provide information about issues and factors affecting MH, functions
performed in their facilities, and objectives, requirements, and characteristics unique to
 Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

Conceptual design Preliminary design

Functions and sub-functions Candidate classes Selected class Requirement and objectives Selected type Requirements and objectives

1. Receive material at docks

Print bar code labels Printer Printer Accuracy Printer Accuracy
Attach label to load Labor Labor (Only alternative) Labor (Only alternative)
Unload to facility unit loads Pallet – boxes Pallet Durability – heavy loads Plastic pallets Avoiding contamination
Move load to quarantine Truck – crane – labor – conveyor – Truck I. movement – v. path Lift trucks Heavy loads – lifting
AGV
2. Put away
Select a storage location Labor – software þ Software þ Automation WMS Accuracy – automation
computer computer
Display location information Terminal – printout Terminal Automation – accuracy RF terminal Automation
Move load to reserve and unload Labor – truck – crane – AGV Truck I. movement – V. path Swing reach Heavy load – lifting – narrow
truck aisles
Scan to confirm put away Labor þ scanner – labor Labor þ Automation – accuracy – tracking – Hand scanners Flexibility
scanner security
3. Retrieval from WH
Identify needed material Scanner þ labor – labor Scanner þ Automation – accuracy – tracking Hand scanner Flexibility
labor
Load material and move load to Labor – truck – crane – conveyor – Truck V. path – I. movement – heavy load Swing reach Heavy load – lifting – narrow
dispensing room AGV truck aisles
Unload at dispensing room Labor – cranes Labor Needed to measure Labor To measure

4. Send material to blending

Transfer loose material to lower Truck þ lift – conveyor Conveyor C. movement – loose material Chute conveyor Use gravity
floor – labor þ lift
Receive loose material Bin – drum – carton Bin Avoiding contamination – ease of Steel bin Ease of cleaning
cleaning
Verify material Labor – labor þ scanner Labor þ Accuracy – tracking Hand scanner Flexibility
scanner
Transfer material to (and from) Labor – truck – crane – conveyor – AGV I. movement – F. path – heavy load Design AGV (?)
blending AGV network
Move blend to upper floor Conveyor – lift Lift V. movement – heavy load Lift (?)

5. Receiving blend
Unload at I/O point Labor – truck – conveyor Truck Heavy load (?) (?)
Move load to delivery station Labor – truck – crane – conveyor – AGV I. movement – F. path – heavy load AGV network (?)
AGV
Send material to compaction Conveyor – truck þ lift Conveyor C. movement – loose material Chute Using gravity
Send unit load to washing Labor – truck – conveyor – AGV AGV I. movement – F. path – heavy load AGV network (?)
(continued)
equipment
handling

example
preliminary design
Functional decomposition

pharmaceutical facility
phases for the
conceptual and
equipment in the
and selection of
Material

261

Table IV.
 Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

21,2

262
JMTM

Table IV.
Conceptual design Preliminary design
Functions and sub-functions Candidate classes Selected class Requirement and objectives Selected type Requirements and objectives

6. Retrieval from compaction

Send material to lower floor Conveyor – truck þ lift Conveyor C. movement – loose material Chute Using gravity
Receive loose material Bin – drum – carton Bin Avoiding contamination Steel bin Ease of cleaning
Move load to I/O point Labor – truck – conveyor – crane – AGV I. movement – F. path – heavy load AGV network (?)
AGV
Move load to upper floor Conveyor – lift – truck þ lift Lift V. movement – heavy load (?) (?)
Move load to docking station Labor – truck – conveyor – crane AGV AGV I. movement – F. path – heavy load AGV network (?)
Send material to tabletting Conveyor – truck þ lift – labor Conveyor C. movement Chute Using gravity
þ lift – AGV
Receive (and collect) tablets from Carton – drum – tray – tote Tray (tote) Small (large) volume – avoiding Plastic tray (tote) Avoiding contamination
machine contamination

7. Move tablets to coating/WH

Load totes of tablets Labor – truck – crane Labor Small load Labor Small load
Transfer load to I/O or to Labor – truck – crane – conveyor – AGV I. movement – F. path AGV network (?)
coating AGV
Send load (uncoated) to fourth floor Conveyor – lift Lift V. movement Lift V. movement
Move load to adjacent WH Labor – truck – conveyor Conveyor Physical restriction – F. path – C. (?) (?)
movement
Send load to WH floor Lift – crane – conveyor Lift V. movement (?) (?)
Move load to staging area Labor – truck – crane – conveyor Truck I. movement – V. path Lift truck Heavy loads – lifting

8. Cleaning unit load

Move unit load to (and from) washing Labor – conveyor – truck – AGV AGV I. movement – F. path – heavy load AGV network (?)
Wash unit loads Labor – washing machine Washing Automation – quickness (?) (?)
machine
Send unit load to inspection Conveyor – lift Lift V. movement – heavy load (?) (?)

Notes: The first column in the table is functional decomposition in conceptual design; A (?) means no available information; I/O – input/output; RF – radio frequency; F. path – fixed path; V. path –
variable path; I. movement – intermittent movement; V. movement – vertical movement; C. movement – continuous movement; WH – warehouse; WMS – warehouse management system
 Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

Equipment in a material
handling system

Transfer Support Storage Identification &

Unit loads
equipment equipment equipment communication

Vertical
Pallet
Conveyor Lift AGV Truck storage Pallets Totes Bins Printers Scanners Terminals
rack
system

Lift Swing
Chute Belt Walkie
truck reach

Note: Examples of support equipment in the facility are washing machines and battery chargers (not shown in the figure) for maintenance of MH equipment
equipment
handling

pharmaceutical facility
Material

Figure 3.
Hierarchy of MH in a
263
 JMTM their working environments. Second, they have to ensure that the selection process
21,2 does not focus on specific equipment but covers all types of MH equipment needed in a
facility. That is, maintenance, support, communication, and identification equipment
have to be considered in addition to other traditional MH equipment. Third, they have
at the end of the design process to evaluate the design and ensure that equipment
selected is capable of meeting their true needs and requirements. Further, they have
264 to approve the design or request revisions if they are dissatisfied with any aspect of it.
The framework also suggests ways that ES developers can benefit from in
developing ES for the selection of MH equipment. These include decomposing
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

equipment selection into sub-problems, depending on functions in identifying

categories of equipment, and prioritizing requirements as the suggested framework
does. In this manner, ES can reduce the size of the data base needed and consider
various equipment categories, classes, and types.
Several steps of the suggested framework do, however, require further investigation.
First, the suggested manner of prioritizing requirements for some functions and
equipment, should be extended to other MH functions and equipment not addressed
herein. Second, procedures for preparing final specifications of equipment and matching
them with those of commercial equipment are needed. Third, a simulation of the
complete MH system should be part of any MH equipment selection procedure since it is
needed for estimating performance measures of the system, studying compatibility of
equipment and their capabilities, and evaluating the design.

References
Apple, J.M. (1977), Plant Layout and Material Handling, 3rd ed., Wiley, New York, NY.
Apple, J.M. Jr and McGinnis, L.F. (1987), “Innovations in facilities and material handling systems:
an introduction”, Industrial Engineering, March, pp. 33-8.
Baker, P. and Canessa, M. (2009), “Warehouse design: a structured approach”, European Journal
of Operational Research, Vol. 193 No. 2, pp. 425-36.
Beamon, B.M. (1998), “Performance, reliability, and performability of material handling
systems”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 36 No. 2, pp. 377-93.
Blanchard, B.S. and Fabrycky, W.J. (1998), Systems Engineering and Analysis, 3rd ed.,
Prentice-Hall, Englewodd Cliffs, NJ.
Chan, F.T.S., Ip, R.W.L. and Lau, H. (2001), “Integration of expert system with analytic hierarchy
process for the design of material handling equipment selection system”, Journal of
Materials Processing Technology, Vol. 116 Nos 2/3, pp. 137-45.
Childe, S.J. (2003), “Six things to manage – equipment”, Production Planning & Control, Vol. 14
No. 7, p. 587.
Chittratanawat, S. and Noble, J.S. (1999), “An integrated approach for facility layout, P/D location
and material handling system design”, International Journal of Production Research,
Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 683-706.
Cho, C. and Egbelu, P.J. (2005), “Design of a web-based integrated material handling system for
manufacturing applications”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 43 No. 2,
pp. 375-403.
Devise, O. and Pierreval, H. (2000), “Indicators for measuring performance of morphology and
material handling systems in flexible manufacturing systems”, International Journal of
Production Economics, Vol. 64 Nos 1/3, pp. 209-18.
 Fisher, E.L., Farber, J.B. and Kay, M.G. (1988), “MATHES: an expert system for material Material
handling equipment selection”, Engineering Costs and Production Economics, Vol. 14 No. 4,
pp. 297-310. handling
Fonseca, D.J., Uppal, G. and Greene, T.J. (2004), “Knowledge-based system for conveyor equipment
equipment selection”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 26 No. 4, pp. 615-23.
Hassan, M.M.D. (2002), “A framework for the design of warehouse layout”, Facilities, Vol. 20
Nos 13/14, pp. 432-40. 265
Hassan, M.M.D. (2006), “Engineering supply chains as systems”, Systems Engineering, Vol. 9
No. 1, pp. 73-89.
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

Hassan, M.M.D., Hogg, G.L. and Smith, D.R. (1985), “A construction algorithm for the selection
and assignment of materials handling equipment”, International Journal of Production
Research, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 381-92.
Horrey, R.J. (1982), “Choosing sortation equipment: a run down of system features and
characteristics”, Industrial Engineering, March, pp. 76-86.
Ioannou, G. (2007), “An integrated model and a decomposition-based approach for concurrent
layout and material handling system design”, Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 52
No. 4, pp. 459-85.
Johnson, M.E. and Lofgren, T. (1994), “Model decomposition speeds distribution center design”,
Interfaces, Vol. 24 No. 5, pp. 95-106.
Kulak, O. (2005), “A decision support system for fuzzy-multi-attribute selection of material
handling equipments”, Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 29 No. 2, pp. 310-9.
Le-Anh, T. and de Koster, M.B.M. (2006), “A review of design and control of automated guided
vehicle systems”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 171 No. 1, pp. 1-23.
Maloney, D. (1999), “Modular designs carry the future”, Modern Materials Handling, September.
Maloney, D. (2002), “Just what the doctor ordered”, Modern Material Handling, February.
Matson, J.O., Mellichamp, J.M. and Swaminathan, S.R. (1992), “EXCITE: expert consultant for
in-plant transportation equipment”, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 30
No. 8, pp. 1969-83.
Mirhosseyni, S.H.M. and Webb, P. (2009), “A hybrid fuzzy knowledge-based expert system and
genetic algorithm for efficient selection and assignment of material handling equipment”,
Expert Systems with Applications, Vol. 36, pp. 11875-87.
Montoya-Torres, J.R. (2006), “A literature survey on the design approaches and operational
issues of automated wafer-transport systems for wafer fabs”, Production Planning &
Control, Vol. 17 No. 7, pp. 648-63.
Newbern, D. and Nolte, J. (1999), “Engineering of complex systems: understanding the art side”,
Systems Engineering, Vol. 3, pp. 181-6.
Park, Y.B. (1996), “ICMESE: intelligent consultant system for material handling equipment
selection and evaluation”, Journal of Manufacturing Systems, Vol. 15 No. 5, pp. 325-33.
Roll, Y., Rosenblatt, M.J. and Kadosh, D. (1989), “Determining the size of a warehouse container”,
International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 27 No. 10, pp. 1693-704.
Roodbergen, K.J. and Vis, I.F.A. (2009), “A survey of literature on automated storage and
retrieval systems”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 194 No. 2, pp. 343-62.
Schultz, G.A. (1997), “How to design a successful processing and handling system”, Powder and
Bulk Engineering, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 25-37.
Tompkins, J.A., White, J.A., Bozer, Y.A. and Tanchoco, J.M.A. (2003), Facilities Planning, 3rd ed.,
Wiley, New York, NY.
 JMTM Usher, J.S., Kamal, A.H. and Kim, S.W. (2001), “A decision support system for economic
justification of material handling investments”, Computers & Industrial Engineering,
21,2 Vol. 39 Nos 1/2, pp. 35-47.
Vis, I.F.A. (2006), “Survey of research in the design and control of automated guided vehicle
systems”, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 170 No. 3, pp. 677-709.
Welgama, P.S. and Gibson, P.R. (1995), “A hybrid knowledge based/optimization system for
266 automated selection of materials handling system”, Computers & Industrial Engineering,
Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 205-17.
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

Appendix
A classification and prioritization of some requirements is suggested in this Appendix to help in
the selection of MH equipment. The requirements are classified herein in a manner consistent with
the three phases of design as follows:
(1) Requirements that can be used in conceptual design (Step 5) to distinguish between classes
of equipment needed to perform a function. For example, requirements for the function
move would help select a truck, crane, AGV, or conveyor to perform it.
(2) Requirements that can be used in preliminary design (Step 7) to distinguish between types
of equipment within a class. For example, they would help in deciding whether a belt,
roller, chute, etc. conveyor is the type of conveyor to use.
(3) Requirements that can be used in detailed design (Step 9) to help in specifying the
parameters of equipment. For example, they would help in determining length of a
conveyor and its weight carrying capability.

Requirements that can be used in conceptual design should be related to distinctive attributes of
functions. For a function such as move, requirements on frequency of move (continuous or
intermittent) and type of path (fixed or variable) are suitable for consideration in that order to
determine whether a conveyor, truck, AGV, or crane should perform the function. Frequency of
movement is a distinctive feature between conveyors, and each of trucks, AGV, and cranes, and
thus should be used first to distinguish between them. The type of path is also a distinctive feature
between trucks, AGV, and cranes, and should be used to select among them. Requirements and
their priority for use in conceptual design to determine equipment classes to perform the functions
move and store are given in Table AI. Requirements related to other handling functions could be
identified and prioritized in a similar manner.
Requirements on weight, shape, and size of load, throughput, and maintenance are suitable for
consideration in preliminary design to narrow the choice within a class of equipment. For example,
conveyor types can be distinguished from each other based on their carrying weight capability,
load shape, and load size in that order (Maloney, 1999). Tables AII-AV suggest a prioritization of
requirements that can help in selecting unit load conveyor type, truck type, rack type, and STO
storage type. Similar ordering of requirements could be established for other classes of MH
equipment.
Three examples available in the literature are used to validate the suggested prioritization
of requirements. In Fisher et al. (1988), it is required to move light weight bags over a variable path
intermittently. According to Table AI, trucks should be selected in conceptual design.
In preliminary design, a hand truck (the selection made in Fisher et al., 1988) or cart would be
selected according to Table AII since the items are light, no stacking is needed, and pallets are not
used. In Chan et al. (2001), it is required to move heavy items intermittently on the floor for an
assembly operation (i.e. fixed path). According to Table AI, AGV should be used, which is the same
 selection made in Chan et al. (2001). Finally, it is required to move subassemblies of lawn products Material
(presumably they are not very light) continuously overhead in a spray painting operation
(Fonseca et al., 2004). According to Table AI, a conveyor should be selected in conceptual design, handling
and according to Table AIII, a power and free conveyor would be identified in preliminary design, equipment
which is one of the alternatives suggested in Fonseca et al. (2004).

267
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

Function Prioritized requirement Class of equipment – action

Move 1. Frequency of move

Continuous Conveyor – select type in preliminary design
Intermittent Use priority 2
2. Type of path
Variable Truck – select type in preliminary design
Fixed
Overhead movement Cranes – select type in preliminary design
Floor movement AGV – select type in preliminary design
Store 1. Size of load
Small Small load equipment – use priority 3
Large Unit load equipment – use priority 2
2. Shape of load
Long Cantilever rack – go to preliminary design
Regular and same shape Block stacking – go to preliminary design
Different shapes Racks – select type in preliminary design
3. Important consideration
3.1. Low cost Shelving – select type in preliminary design Table AI.
3.2. Productivity Suggested prioritization
High STOa – select type in preliminary design of requirements for
Low Drawer consideration in
conceptual design for the
Note: aSTO – stock-to-operator storage equipment move and store functions

Priority Requirement Classification Type of truck

1 Weight of load Light Walking truck – use priority 2

$Medium Riding truck – use priority 3
2 2.1. Stacking Yes Walking stacker
No Use requirement 2.2
2.2. Move pallet Yes Pallet jack
No Use requirement 2.3
2.3. Various load shapes Hand trucks – carts
3 3.1. Lifting Yes Counter balance truck Table AII.
No Use requirement 3.2 Suggested prioritization
3.2. Move pallets Yes Platform pallet truck of requirements in
No Use requirement 3.3 preliminary design for
3.3. Large volume/various shapes Tractor trailer trucks
 JMTM
Type of
21,2 Priority Requirement Classification conveyor

1 Weight of part/load Less than medium Use priority 2

Medium or above
Overhead movement Power and free
268 Floor movement Tow
2 Shape of part/load Regular Use priority 3
Table AIII.
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)

Suggested prioritization Irregular Belt

of requirements in 3 Size of part/load Small Belt
preliminary design for Medium Roller – slat – belt
unit load conveyors Large Roller

Priority Requirement Classification Equipment type/action

1 Storage density Low Single or double rack

High Use priority 2
Table AIV. 2 Accessibility Low Mobile racks
Suggested prioritization High Use priority 3
for selection of racks in 3 Throughput Low Drive in/through racks
preliminary design High Pallet flow – push racks

Priority Requirement Classification Equipment type/action

1 Security Low Horizontal carousel

High Use priority 2
Table AV. 2 Maintenance Low Vertical carousel
Suggested prioritization High AS/RS
for selection of STO
equipment Note: Selection is among vertical carousels, horizontal carousel, and AS/RS

Corresponding author
Mohsen M.D. Hassan can be contacted at: mohsen@squ.edu.om

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
 This article has been cited by:

1. Kattiya Samee, Jakrapong Pongpeng. 2016. Structural equation model for construction equipment
selection and contractor competitive advantages. KSCE Journal of Civil Engineering 20, 77-89. [CrossRef]
2. Mohsen M.D. Hassan. 2014. An evaluation of input and output of expert systems for selection of material
handling equipment. Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management 25:7, 1049-1067. [Abstract] [Full
Text] [PDF]
3. Diana Rossi, Enrico Bertoloni, Marco Fenaroli, Filippo Marciano, Marco Alberti. 2013. A multi-criteria
ergonomic and performance methodology for evaluating alternatives in “manuable” material handling.
International Journal of Industrial Ergonomics 43, 314-327. [CrossRef]
Downloaded by FLINDERS UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA At 01:04 05 February 2016 (PT)