CRITICAL MANUFACTURING SIMULATORS...

1

CRITICAL MANUFACTURINGSIMULATORS COMPARISON

© 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved.

1


2INDEX

Intro

Detailed Evaluation

Requirements

1

2

3

Conclusions4

1

SIMULATORS COMPARISONINTRO


3

1INTRO


OBJECTIVES

Create a simulation tool that allows the user, after loading

data from MasterData, to specify

– Materials by product, processing time of a material, ...

And simulates:

– Stops, machine malfunctions, DataCollection, material rework, ...

Make that simulation tool able to run in multiple machines to

perform stress tests;

Export from database the data needed to create the

MasterData file (and create it);

1


5INTROCHOOSEN TOOLS

FlexSim

AnyLogic

Simul8

2

3

4

In-House Solution

Arena1

5

1

SIMULATORS COMPARISONDETAILED EVALUATION


6

1


7DETAILED EVALUATION SOURCES

Trials/DemosExperimenting the software, doing some examples and demos.

Direct ContactDirect contact with the vendors in order to get informations they don’t provide in the website.

Information from SiteEach product website has some relevant information about the software.

Web SearchMore but discarded solutions were found through web seacrh.

Papers and JournalsConsulting some papers and journals in the field was one of the best methods to gather information.

GuidesTo learn how to proper work with the software, the application guides and some videos were studied.

1DETAILED EVALUATION


8IN-HOUSE: PROS AND CONS

Advantages Limitations

Allows WCF communication Solution that doesn’t have market proofs

Can be adapted to meet all Critical needs and requirements

High risk of developing software from scratch

Solution adapted to the Critical coding guidelines

Can become obsolete if not upgraded regularly

Can be adapted to each new product developed by Critical

Will not have the level of functionality compared to a commercial-off-the-shelf product



9TASKS’ PRICE

ID Name Description RiskCost (in

man/hours)

T01Technologies’

Study

An initial study of the technologies to be used has to be made. This includes the study of cmNavigo, the programming

languages to be used, the Stress Test and MasterData already developed and the

different simulators in the market.

High 64 - 8 days

T02Architecture

Design

Since this is a one man job, the arquitechure will serve more to explain to the client what’s the global vision of the solution, nevertheless this is an essential

step of every project.

Low 32 - 4 days

T03Technical

Requirements

The requirements already agreed are only macro-tasks, the technical ones are yet to

be discussed.Medium 16 - 2 days

T04Model

Development

In order to achieve the best simulation possible, it’s necessary to have a robust simulation model behind. So is devoted

enough time to choose the best approach, as well as the design of the

model for that approach.

High 80 - 10 days



10TASKS’ PRICE

ID Name Description RiskCost (in

man/hours)

T05Solution

Development

Design and development of the simulator and respective integration with

cmNavigo. This macro-task will be divided as specified on T03.

High 360 - 45 days

T06Tests with Test

Data

It is important to validate the application with test data to be able to understand if each module is operating correctly. There will be two stages of validation with test data, the first one to validate the model and the second to validate the simulator.

Medium 40 - 5 days

T07Tests with Real

Data

The validation will only be completed when it is possible to simulate a real

factory with precision. In order to do that it’s necessary to test the solution with

data from a real company.

High 80 - 10 days

T08 Documentation

The final documentation is the final step of every project. All of the steps that lead to the development of the solution have to be documented and an user-manual

has to be written.

Low 64 - 8 days

1

SIMULATORS COMPARISONREQUIREMENTS


11

1REQUIREMTNS


DETAILS

ID Title Definition MoSCoW

RF01 Model of Production LineThe client must be able to model his production line in the simulator through the loading of the

MasterData.Must

RF02 Load MasterData The application must load data located in an excel file, called MasterData, into the simulator. Must

RF03 Save MasterDataThe application must save the data at the end of the simulation into an excel file, creating a

MasterData.Must

RF04 Save ModelThe application should permit the user to save the actual model so that he can use it in another

environment.Should

RF05 Load Model The application should let the user load an existing model into the simulator. Should

RF06 WCF Communication The application must allow WCF communication so that cmNavigo can be integrated. Must

RF07 Simulate System The client must be able to simulate the operations that cmNavigo can do in his production line. Must

RF08 Data AnalysisThe application should allow the client to analyse some data extracted from the simulation, either in

real-time or at the end.Should

RF09 Production Line Visualization The application must permit a visualization of the clients’ production line through the use of fabLive Should

RF10 Stress TestsThe simulation should be able to perform stress tests to the client’s current and modified production

line model.Should

RF11 CRUD OperationsThe application should allow the user to perform CRUD operations in the objects of the production

line model.Should

RF12 Real-Time Visualization The application could permit a real-time visualization of the simulation while it’s running. Could

RF13 Performance AdvicesThe application could suggest the user some improvements to his current production line, based on

the simulation just performed.Would

1


REQUIREMENTSCOMPARISON

Arena FlexSim AnyLogic Simul8 In-House

RF01

RF02

RF03

RF04

RF05

RF06

RF07

RF08

RF09

RF10

RF11

RF12

RF13

1

SIMULATORS COMPARISONCONCLUSIONS


14

1CONCLUSIONS


DIRECT COMPARISON

Commercial

Price + Maintenence

Company Support

Wait for Upgrades

Ready to Use

In-House

Man/Hours

In-House Support

New Features Whenever

Still Developing

1CONCLUSIONS


WHAT TO CHOOSE

All commercial simulators have the same big issue: they don’t allow direct communication with cmNavigo, but some can work with dll’s.

• Is it better to invest in an off-the-shelf product that has market proofs or develop one from scratch that is built arround cmNavigo?

• Will CM be dependent of an external company if choose a commercial simulator?

• Can an one-man-simulator have the power of one built by one large company?

Date post:	08-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	haxuyen
View:	217 times
Download:	1 times

CRITICAL MANUFACTURING SIMULATORS...

Documents