SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Naval Sciences and Engineering / 2018 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 1

Improving an Inefficient Production Line Via AHP and Value Stream Mapping

Gülçin Sedefoğlu
Gulsen Akman
Pages
1–22
Publication Date
2018-04-30
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The future state mapping is drawn up to improve the problems seen in the current state mapping and a plan of action was presented for improvements.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Nowadays competition among companies is rapidly increasing with the progress of technology.
📊
Key Findings & Data:In order to stand out in this competition environment, companies need to be renovated in their own fields.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The future state mapping is drawn up to improve the problems seen in the current state mapping and a plan of action was presented for improvements.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Analytic Hierarchy Process · Lean Manufacturing

Abstract

Nowadays competition among companies is rapidly increasing with the progress of technology. In order to stand out in this competition environment, companies need to be renovated in their own fields. Many companies use lean manufacturing techniques to achieve this renewal. In this study, it is aimed to show how Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is one of Multi Criteria decision making method can be used as in choosing which product line to initially apply value stream mapping method. The study was performed in a company operating in the automotive sector. Criteria for the AHP method were first determined by taking expert opinions and the most suitable product line was selected by applying the AHP method. After that value stream mapping has been applied to the determined product line. The future state mapping is drawn up to improve the problems seen in the current state mapping and a plan of action was presented for improvements.

🔖

Cite This Article

Sedefoğlu, G., Akman, G. (2018). Improving an Inefficient Production Line Via AHP and Value Stream Mapping. Journal of Naval Sciences and Engineering, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 1, 1–22. https://ajindex.com/articles/238097

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (2)

  1. Birgün S., Gülen K.G., Özkan K. 2006. Yalın Üretime Geçiş Sürecinde Değer Akışı Haritalama Tekniğinin Kullanılması: İmalat Sektöründe Bir Uygulama. İstanbul Ticaret Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi. Vol. 5 (9). Page: 47-59. [10] Balkuvar İ. 2015. Çok Kriterli Karar Verme Yöntemlerinden Ahp ve Vikor İle Tablet Seçimi. T. C. İstanbul Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Sayısal Yöntemler Anabilim Dalı. İstanbul. [7]Stadnickaa D., Ratnayakeb R.M.C. 2017. Enhancing Aircraft Maintenance Services: A Vsm Based Case Study. 7th International Conference on Engineering, Project and Production Management. Vol. 182. Page: 665-672. [8] Bernabe, R. D., van Thiel, G. J., Raaijmakers, J. A., & van Delden, J. J. (2012). Decision theory and the evaluation of risks and benefits of clinical trials. Drug discovery today, 17(23-24), 1263-1269. [9] Karatas, M. (2017). Multiattribute Decision Making Using Multiperiod Probabilistic Weighted Fuzzy Axiomatic Design. Systems Engineering, 20(4), 318-334. [11] KeçekG., Yıldırım E. 2010. Kurumsal Kaynak Planlama (Erp) Sisteminin Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci (Ahp) İle Seçimi: Otomotiv Sektöründe Bir Uygulama. Süleyman Demirel Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. Isparta. Vol. 15(1). Page: 193-211. [12] Başkaya Z., Akar C. 2005. Üretim Alternatifi Seçiminde Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci: Tekstil İşletmesi Örneği. Uludağ Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi. Bursa. Vol. 1. Page: 273-286. [13] Razi, N., & Karatas, M. (2016). A multi-objective model for locating search and rescue boats. European Journal of Operational Research, 254(1), 279-293. [14] Karacan, İ., Tozan, H., &Karataş, M. (2016). Multi Criteria Decision Methods in Health Technology Assessment: A Brief Literature Review. Eurasian Journal of Health Technology Assessment, 1(1), 12-19. [15] Göktolga Z.G., Gökalp B. 2012. İş Seçimini Etkileyen Kriterlerin Ve Alternatiflerin Ahp Metodu İle Belirlenmesi. C.Ü. İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Dergisi, Muğla. Vol. 13(2). Page: 71-86. [19] Özdamar D. Y. 2004. Analitik Hiyerarşi Süreci Yöntemi: Bir Satın Alma İhalesinde Uygulanması,Ankara Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü. Ankara. [16] Saaty T. L., Vargas, Luis G. 2001.
  2. Models, Methods, Concepts & Applications of The Analytic HierarchyProces.Kluwer Academic Publishers, London. [17] Saaty T.L. 1994. Fundamentals of Decision Making And Priority Theory With The Analytic Hierarchy Process. RWS Publications. Pittsburgh PA. [18] Saaty T. L. 2008.