Reconfiguration schemes evaluation based on preference ranking of key characteristics of reconfigurable manufacturing systems.

To address the problem of how to build quantitative evaluation index models that reflect the essential characteristics of reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS) and rank alternative reconfiguration schemes, which possess both advantages and disadvantages, an evaluation method based on the preference ranking organization method for enrichment evaluation (PROMETHEE) is proposed. Based on a consideration of the reconfiguration of the reconfigurable machine components and manufacturing cells, quantitative models of the key characteristics of an RMS (scalability, convertibility, diagnosability, modularity, integrability, and customization) are established, after which the quantitative models are used as the basis for constructing an RMS evaluation index system. The analytic hierarchy process (AHP) is used to assign the weights for these indices. During the evaluation process, PROMETHEE I is first applied to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of each alternative scheme. Then, PROMETHEE II is adopted to analyze the net advantages of the schemes. Finally, all of the alternative configurations are ranked according to the analysis results above. The workshop of an institute that has both research and production capabilities was used as an example to validate the effectiveness and practicability of the proposed method. The example contains 10 alternative reconfiguration schemes, and each scheme consists of six evaluation indices. The computation result shows that quantitative models of six key RMS characteristics are equipped with the ability of quantitative description of the RMS reconfiguration scheme, which gives intuitive decision-making information combined with PROMETHEE, including advantage and disadvantage between alternative schemes, for a decision-maker to select the satisfactory configuration. In addition, only a 7.2 % data loss during the evaluation data processing means the rationality of the selected evaluation index and evaluation algorithm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]