DOCSLIB.ORG

Simulators Comparison

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Simulators Comparison 1 CRITICAL MANUFACTURING SIMULATORS COMPARISON © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. INDEX 1 2 1 Steps to Follow 2 Detailed Evaluation 3 Solutions 4 Conclusions © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. 1 3 SIMULATORS COMPARISON STEPS TO FOLLOW © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. STEPS TO FOLLOW 1 7 STEPS PROGRAM 1. Establish the commitment to invest 2. Clearly state the problem 3. Determine the type of tool required 4. Do an initial survey 5. Develop the list of requirements 6. Choose some tools 7. Carry out a detailed evaluation © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. STEPS TO FOLLOW 1 5 CHOOSEN TOOLS 1 Arena 2 FlexSim 3 AnyLogic 4 Simul8 5 In-House Solution © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. 1 SIMULATORS COMPARISON DETAILED EVALUATION © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. DETAILED EVALUATION 1 7 SOURCES Trials/Demos Direct Contact Direct contact with the vendors in order Experimenting the software, doing some to get informations they don’t provide in examples and demos. the website. Information from Site Web Search Each product website has some relevant More but discarded solutions were found information about the software. through web seacrh. Papers and Journals Guides Consulting some papers and journals in To learn how to proper work with the the field was one of the best methods to software, the application guides and some gather information. videos were studied. © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. 1 8 SIMULATORS COMPARISON SOLUTIONS © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. 1 SOLUTIONS ARENA® © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. ARENA 1 INTRO Intro Background Customers • Object-Oriented • Released in 1993 • Novartis, Bayer, • SIMAN • Manufacturing, Pfizer • 60 Modules Packaging, Supply • FHB, CIB Bank, GE (Common, Support Chains, Health Care Money and Transfer) and Military • Vodafone, T-Mobile, • 300,000 Users WW Hungarian Police Price: 19.300 € + 3.500 €/year (Maintenance) © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. ARENA 1 11 PROS AND CONS Advantages and Extra Features Limitations and Disadvantages Most well-documented simulation Doesn’t allow WCF communication software in the market ODBC data compatibility Unintuitive and has a poor GUI Import AutoCad drawings Simulation consumes too many computer resources VB scripting, automation and macro Debugging is a pain recorder Easy to automate and easy to collect Most expensive tool of the chosen ones statistics © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. 1 12 SOLUTIONS FLEXSIM © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. FLEXSIM 1 INTRO Intro Background Customers • Open-GL (3D) drag- • Released in 2003 • TRW, Bechtel, and-drop • Manufacturing, General Mills, • Incorporates a C++ Logistics and Swisslog, Caterpillar, IDE and compiler in Distribution, DHL, Goodyear, the graphic modeling Transportation, Oil Corus, Michelin, environment field processes and ThyssenKrupp, Networking data Johnson Controls flow and Multiserv Price: € 16,500 © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. FLEXSIM 1 14 PROS AND CONS Advantages and Extra Features Limitations and Disadvantages Perform database queries to import data Doesn’t allow WCF communication into FlexSim using SQL Send messages (with parameters) Second most expensive tool of the between objects choosen ones Support DDE (Dynamic Data Exchange) Has too many resources and tools that will not be needed 3D Simulation and very clean GUI Lack of objects to use in the simulation (maybe it is possible to create some) Support any connectivity that C++ offers (including DLLs) Use sockets to send and receive data (useful for Scada) © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. 1 15 SOLUTIONS ANYLOGIC © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. ANYLOGIC 1 INTRO Intro Background Customers • 3 modeling • Released in 2000 • Toyota, Panasonic, approaches and last version in Rolls-Royce, IBM, • Extend simulation 2007 Louvre, Intel, with Java / UML-RT • Market and Delloite, UEFA, • Stock&Flow Competion, General Motors, Diagrams, Healthcare, Johnson & Johnson, State&Action charts, Manufacturing, US Navy, Volvo, HP, Process flowcharts Logistics • Red Cross, NASA, ... Price: € 13,950 © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. ANYLOGIC 1 17 PROS AND CONS Advantages and Extra Features Limitations and Disadvantages Allows three types of modelling: Agent Doesn’t allow WCF communication Based, Discrete Event and System Dynamics Because of that, allows all types of Difficult to use, requires a large study of simulations (Discrete/Continuous, documentation and tutorials Micro/Macro Level, …) Simulator with the most well-known clients Extend default models with Java © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. 1 18 SOLUTIONS SIMUL8 © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. SIMUL8 1 INTRO Intro Background Customers • Dynamic discrete • Founded in 1994 • Chrisler, Ford, simulation • Business, Fidelity • Work itens (Entities, Manufacturing, • McDonald’s, NIBCO, Queues, Activities, Health Care, Public Gatwick Airport Exit, ...) Sector, Supply • HP, American Red Chains, Energy and Cross, Inland Call Centers Revenue Price: $4995 © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. SIMUL8 1 20 PROS AND CONS Advantages and Extra Features Limitations and Disadvantages Has an excelent customer support, which Doesn’t allow WCF communication is always good (including web demos of the tool) Most cheap commercial tool Few modeling components Creation of a class of models (template Poor documentation/web-tutorials models) that can be easily tailored to different systems © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. 1 21 SOLUTIONS IN-HOUSE © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. IN-HOUSE 1 22 PROS AND CONS Advantages and Extra Features Limitations and Disadvantages Allows WCF communication Solution that doesn’t have market proofs Probably the cheapest solution Can become obsolete if not upgraded regularly Can be adapted to meet all Critical needs High risk of developing software from and requirements scratch Solution adapted to the Critical coding Only works with Critical’s software guidelines Can be adapted to each new product Will not have the level of functionality developed by Critical compared to a commercial-off-the-shelf product © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. IN-HOUSE 1 23 TASKS’ PRICE Cost (in ID Name Description Risk man/hours) An initial study of the technologies to be used has to be made. This includes the Technologies’ T01 study of cmNavigo, the programming High 64 - 8 days Study languages to be used, the Stress Test and MasterData already developed and the different simulators in the market. Since this is a one man job, the Architecture arquitechure will serve more to explain to T02 the client what’s the global vision of the Low 32 - 4 days Design solution, nevertheless this is an essential step of every project. Technical The requirements already agreed are only T03 macro-tasks, the technical ones are yet to Medium 16 - 2 days Requirements be discussed. In order to achieve the best simulation possible, it’s necessary to have a robust Model T04 simulation model behind. So is devoted High 80 - 10 days Development enough time to choose the best approach, as well as the design of the model for that approach. © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. IN-HOUSE 1 24 TASKS’ PRICE Cost (in ID Name Description Risk man/hours) Design and development of the simulator Solution T05 and respective integration with High 360 - 45 days Development cmNavigo. This macro-task will be divided as specified on T03. It is important to validate the application with test data to be able to understand if Tests with Test T06 each module is operating correctly. There Medium 40 - 5 days Data will be two stages of validation with test data, the first one to validate the model and the second to validate the simulator. The validation will only be completed Tests with Real when it is possible to simulate a real T07 factory with precision. In order to do that High 80 - 10 days Data it’s necessary to test the solution with data from a real company. The final documentation is the final step of every project. All of the steps that lead T08 Documentation to the development of the solution have Low 64 - 8 days to be documented and an user-manual has to be written. © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. 1 25 SOLUTIONS REQUIREMENTS © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. REQUIREMENTS 1 COMPARISON Arena FlexSim AnyLogic Simul8 In-House RF01 RF02 RF03 RF04 RF05 RF06 RF07 RF08 © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. REQUIREMENTS 1 COMPARISON Arena FlexSim AnyLogic Simul8 In-House RF09 RF10 RF11 RF12 RF13 RF14 RF15 RF16 © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. 1 28 SIMULATORS COMPARISON CONCLUSIONS © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. CONCLUSIONS 1 DIRECT COMPARISON Commercial In-House Price + Maintenence Man/Hours Company Support In-House Support Wait for Upgrades New Features Whenever Ready to Use Still Developing © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved. CONCLUSIONS 1 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? © 2014 Critical Manufacturing S.A. All rights reserved..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arena | Anylogic | Flexsim Dr. Alvin Ang
    D R. ALVIN’S PUBLICATIONS A BRIEF COMPARISON OF THREE SIMULATION SOFTWARES ARENA | ANYLOGIC | FLEXSIM DR. ALVIN ANG COPYRIGHTED BY DR ALVIN ANG WWW.ALVINANG.SG CONTENTS Introduction ................................................................................................................ 3 System Dynamics ............................................................................................................... 4 Discrete Event Modeling ..................................................................................................... 5 Agent Based Modeling........................................................................................................ 6 Arena.......................................................................................................................... 7 Made in… ................................................................................................................................................7 Good For… ..............................................................................................................................................7 Bad For… .................................................................................................................................................7 For a trial, ................................................................................................................................................8 Anylogic .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • General Dynamics: Capacity Analysis with Anylogic.Pdf
    Success Story: Capacity Analysis with AnyLogic As the West Coast’s largest new construction shipyard, General Dynamics NASSCO is a market leader in the design and construction of ships for the U.S. Navy and commercial customers. Playing a key role in maintaining this strong presence in the U.S. shipbuilding industry is NASSCO’s emphasis on pre-production planning and analysis. With hundreds of thousands of parts flowing through the shipyard each year, however, traditional spreadsheet analysis methods can only provide modest assessment of how those parts, ranging from a hand-sized piece of steel to a fully outfitted deckhouse weighing hundreds of tons, interact with labor, machinery, and workspace to govern NASSCO’s overall shipbuilding throughput and capacity. With AnyLogic simulation software as the centerpiece, NASSCO utilizes a custom-built analysis system called the Large Scale Computer Simulation Modeling System for Shipbuilding (LSMSe) to provide highly detailed and accurate capacity analyses for both current production and potential new work. Developed over a four year period, the LSMSe includes: • A simulation model of the entire shipyard modeled in AnyLogic • Software utilities to define facilities, processes, schedules, labor, and products • Links to product design, scheduling, and business systems software • Optimization software to control parallel scenario analysis over networked computers Implementation of the LSMSe has reduced NASSCO’s recurring analysis labor costs by 75% compared to the former spreadsheet analysis approach with increased detail in the analyses. While significant, an even greater impact is achieved with the ability to identify and eliminate bottlenecks across the integrated shipbuilding system, develop optimum labor assignments across the shipyard, and “right-size” facilities to meet production demand with appropriate capital investments, potentially saving millions of dollars with implementation of the analysis results.
    [Show full text]
  • Anylogic Overview and Roadmap
    overview & roadmap Dr. Andrei Borshchev, CEO, The AnyLogic Company AnyLogic Workshop London May 25 2018 © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com agenda 1. modeling & dynamic simulation modeling in 2 slides 2. about AnyLogic 3. product and models demo 4. what’s unique about AnyLogic? 5. simulation is migrating to the Cloud 6. AnyLogic Public & Private Cloud 7. AnyLogic roadmap © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 2 modeling & dynamic simulation modeling © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 3 our favorite slide about modeling Mental The model The solution at the model level Physical Analytical Dynamic (simulation) RISK-FREE SPACE The world of models The real world ? The problem The solution © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 4 AnyLogic is a dynamic simulation modeling software • A dynamic simulation model is an “executable”model ̶ A set of rules that allow us to obtain the next state of the system in time from the current state • The model produces a trajectory of the system state in time ̶ Outputs are “observed” as we move Inputs X1 Y X2 Simulation 1 Y2 X3 Model X4 Y4 Y3 © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 5 about AnyLogic © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 6 AnyLogic is the most popular simulation software LinkedIn user group case studies presented at members as of April 2018 WSC’17 (December 2017) Witness Enterprise Enterprise 2% ExtendSim Automod ProModel Dynamics Dynamics 8% 1% 7% 1% 1% AnyLogic FlexSim AnyLogic AutoMod 2% 3% 30% 33% Simul8 ExtendSim 3% 3% NetLogo Flexsim 8% 8% Repast 5% Simul8 6% Simio
    [Show full text]
  • Agent Based Modeling in Anylogic
    Multi-Method Simulation Modeling using AnyLogic Andrei Borshchev, CEO XJ Technologies INFORMS Roundtable Fall Meeting November 3-4, 2007 Seattle © 2007 XJ Technologies www.anylogic.com This presentation… •…is NOT about what you do with the model after it is completed and can be treated as a black box The Optimizer The Model © 2007 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 2 This presentation… The Optimizer The Model • …is about HOW you develop simulation models, choose abstraction level and methodology © 2007 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 3 Modeling The Real World ? The Problem The Solution © 2007 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 4 Modeling The Model The Optimized Model The World of Models The Real World The Problem The Solution © 2007 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 5 [Dynamic] Simulation Modeling The Simulation Model • Executable – A set of rules telling how to obtain the next state of the system from the current state • Gives the trajectory of the system in time •Dynamic – Causal and time dependencies – Time-related constraints • Complex – No analytical solution The System © 2007 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 6 Methods Process-centric System Dynamics (Discrete Event) Jay Forrester, 1950s Geoffrey Gordon, 1960s The System 1990s Agent Based © 2007 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 7 Methods Process-centric System Dynamics (Discrete Event) Jay Forrester, 1950s Geoffrey Gordon, 1960s The System System-level 1990s Agent Based Individual-centric © 2007 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 8 Methods Process-centric System Dynamics (Discrete Event) Jay Forrester, 1950s Geoffrey Gordon, 1960s The System 1990s Agent Based Continuous, Discrete, Aggregated Disaggregated © 2007 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 9 Abstraction levels.
    [Show full text]
  • Software in Support of the System Dynamics Modeling Process
    SILVER: Software in Support of the System Dynamics Modeling Process Nathaniel Osgood Department of Computer Science University of Saskatchewan [email protected] Abstract: While the System Dynamics modeling process can yield invaluable high level insights, it gives rise to a tremendous amount of detail complexity. In the course of their work, modelers must track successive model versions, the motivation for and assumptions underlying particular “what if” scenarios, and the implicit relationships between scenarios, model versions and various external artifacts such as spreadsheets, symbolic mathematics calculations, and external documentation. Failure to adequately manage such complexity can reduce the transparency, reliability, and credibility of the modeling process. While adherence to good modeling practices can aid this process, it often falls prey to corner-cutting or human error. This paper describes software that helps manage such complexity, by permitting modelers to easily access and succinctly compare historic versions of a model, by making explicit linkages between scenarios, the model versions and assumptions underlying them, and the motivations for and external files associated with model artifacts. 1 Introduction The System Dynamics modeling process offers great value in allowing stakeholders to rise above the welter of operational detail and perform long-term strategic planning. There is a certain irony in the fact that important higher-level insights can emerge from a modeling process that frequently generates and requires
    [Show full text]
  • Agent-Based Modeling and Simulation
    Proceedings of the 2009 Winter Simulation Conference M. D. Rossetti, R. R. Hill, B. Johansson, A. Dunkin and R. G. Ingalls, eds. AGENT-BASED MODELING AND SIMULATION Charles M. Macal Michael J. North Center for Complex Adaptive Systems Simulation Center for Complex Adaptive Systems Simulation (CAS2) 2 Decision & Information(CAS )Sciences Division Decision & Information Sciences Division Argonne National Laboratory Argonne National Laboratory Argonne, IL 60439 USA Argonne, IL 60439 USA ABSTRACT Agent-based modeling and simulation (ABMS) is a new approach to modeling systems comprised of autonomous, interacting agents. Computational advances have made possible a growing number of agent-based models across a variety of application domains. Applications range from modeling agent behavior in the stock market, supply chains, and consumer markets, to predicting the spread of epidemics, mitigating the threat of bio-warfare, and understanding the factors that may be responsible for the fall of ancient civilizations. Such progress suggests the potential of ABMS to have far-reaching effects on the way that businesses use computers to support decision-making and researchers use agent-based models as electronic laboratories. Some contend that ABMS “is a third way of doing science” and could augment traditional deductive and inductive reasoning as discovery methods. This brief tutorial introduces agent-based modeling by describing the foundations of ABMS, discuss- ing some illustrative applications, and addressing toolkits and methods for developing
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction Into Simulation Modeling for Business Applications
    AnyLogic 7 Dr. Andrei Borshchev, CEO George Meringov, Head of Development Nikolay Churkov, Technical Leader 1st AnyLogic Conference InterContinental Berlin December 2012 © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com Our ultimate goal: De-facto standard for simulation modeling (business applications) © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 2 These things are NOT going to change: • Flexible general-purpose simulation software ̶ With extended support for some verticals • Java / Eclipse ̶ Cross-platform (Windows, Mac, Linux) ̶ Models on the Web ̶ Object-oriented (hierarchy, reuse of objects) • Multi-method, multi-language ̶ Discrete event, agent based, system dynamics ̶ Statecharts, process flowcharts, stock and flow diagrams, actioncharts… ̶ Discrete and continuous dynamics, events and differential equations • Logics linked to graphics but defined separately • Compatibility with v 6 fully preserved © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 3 Key new features of AnyLogic 7 • “Merge and consolidation” • Uniform space markup for all kinds of activities • New library for discrete event (process) modeling August 2013 • New UI (focus on usability and minimum coding) • Extended support for "verticals“ • Scenario manager February 2014 © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 4 Merge and consolidation: Objects Agent Agent3D Agent2D Entity Resource unit Active object © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 5 Benefits for modelers • Use graphical editor to create entity internals: ̶ Fields ̶ Functions ̶ Animation • Define individual activities inside
    [Show full text]
  • Introducing Anylogic 7
    AnyLogic 7: New Features Overview Ilya Grigoryev Head of Training Services © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com AL7 New Features Overview. Agenda • AnyLogic UI & Usability • New Process Modeling library improvement ̶ “Pull” entity flow ̶ New workspace layout, more ̶ Flexible resource management / space for graphical editor alternative sets, preparation & wrap-up, ̶ Drop-down lists instead of typing shifts, breaks, preemption, preferences, … ̶ Probability distribution wizard, ̶ “Internals” of entities defined graphically custom distribution object • 3D • More support for agent based ̶ Gallery of more than 300 3D shapes modeling ̶ Painting 3D shapes ̶ True integration of modeling • Highly improved Pedestrian library methods (“The Great Merge”): ̶ Performance Entity = Resource unit = Agent ̶ Ease of use / markup ̶ Agent population wizard • Rail library improved ̶ Link object / network visualization ̶ Rail network construction / auto-connect, ̶ Inheritance between agent types curved segments, …. • Space markup ̶ Collection of US rail car 3D models ̶ Nodes, paths, walls, services, • Miscellaneous attractors, rail tracks, storages… ̶ Minor features ̶ One unified space for all objects ̶ AnyLogic roadmap © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 2 Stays the same: • Powerful and flexible multi-method simulation environment ̶ Agent based / statecharts, decision rules, networks, … ̶ Discrete event / process flowcharts ̶ System Dynamics / stock and flow diagrams, numeric solvers • General-purpose “horizontal” tool with support for several verticals: ̶ Pedestrian ̶ Rail ̶ Health ̶ Logistics • Written in Java /cross-platform, open, exportable, embeddable ̶ Windows ̶ Linux ̶ Mac OS © The AnyLogic Company | www.anylogic.com 3 New version release. What are users afraid of? I won’t cope with converting my models to AL7 • All AL6 models run in AL7 • All AL6 libraries are still included • We have developed tools for migration AL 7 will override AL6 While migrating to AL 7, you can continue work in AL 6.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluierung Der Simulationssoftware Anylogic, Arena Und SIMIO
    Evaluierung der Simulationssoftware AnyLogic, Arena und SIMIO Bachelorarbeit Abteilung Informatik Hochschule für Technik Rapperswil Frühjahrssemester 2013 Autor: Urs Baumann Betreuer: Prof. Dr.-Ing Andreas Rinkel Projektpartner: IBM Zürich Research Laboratory, Rüschlikon, ZH Experte: Dr. Ulrich Schimpel, IBM Zürich Research Gegenleser: Prof. Stefan F. Keller 1 ERKLÄRUNG Ich erkläre hiermit, dass ich die vorliegende Arbeit selber und ohne fremde Hilfe durchgeführt habe, ausser derjenigen, welche explizit in der Aufgabenstellung erwähnt ist oder mit dem Betreuer schriftlich vereinbart wurde, dass ich sämtliche verwendeten Quellen erwähnt und gemäss gängigen wissenschaftlichen Zitierregeln korrekt angegeben habe. das ich keine durch Copyright geschützten Materialien (z.B. Bilder) in dieser Arbeit in unerlaubter Weise genutzt habe. Ort, Datum: Name, Unterschrift: 2 AUFGABENSTELLUNG Ausgangslage, Problemstellung Im Modul System Modeling und Simulation wird momentan mit der Software Arena von Rockwell gearbeitet. Geplant ist, dass diese Software nächstes Jahr durch eine modernere Applikation, wie Simio oder AnyLogic abgelöst wird. Beide Programme verfolgen zum Teil unterschiedliche Modellierungsansätze und sind daher schwierig zu vergleichen. Im Rahmen der Bachelorarbeit sind die Unterschiede der beiden Softwarelösungen anhand eines universellen Beispiels aufzeigen und zu bewerten. Anschliessend sind die Ergebnisse mit den Erfahrungen von Arena gegenüber zu stellen. Ziele der Arbeit Inbetriebnahme der Software AnyLogic und Simio Einarbeitung
    [Show full text]
  • A Hybrid System Dynamics-Discrete Event Simulation Approach to Simulating the Manufacturing Enterprise
    A HYBRID SYSTEM DYNAMICS-DISCRETE EVENT SIMULATION APPROACH TO SIMULATING THE MANUFACTURING ENTERPRISE by MAGDY HELAL M.Sc. Benha Higher Institute of Technology, 1999 B.Sc. Benha Higher Institute of Technology, 1993 A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of the Doctor of Philosophy in the Department of Industrial Engineering and Management Systems in the College of Engineering and Computer Science at the University of Central Florida Orlando, Florida Summer Term 2008 Major Professor: Luis Rabelo © 2008 Magdy Helal ii ABSTRACT With the advances in the information and computing technologies, the ways the manufacturing enterprise systems are being managed are changing. More integration and adoption of the system perspective push further towards a more flattened enterprise. This, in addition to the varying levels of aggregation and details and the presence of the continuous and discrete types of behavior, created serious challenges for the use of the existing simulation tools for simulating the modern manufacturing enterprise system. The commonly used discrete event simulation (DES) techniques face difficulties in modeling such integrated systems due to increased model complexity, the lack of data at the aggregate management levels, and the unsuitability of DES to model the financial sectors of the enterprise. System dynamics (SD) has been effective in providing the needs of top management levels but unsuccessful in offering the needed granularity at the detailed operational levels of the manufacturing system. On the other hand the existing hybrid continuous-discrete tools are based on certain assumptions that do not fit the requirements of the common decision making situations in the business systems.
    [Show full text]
  • Discrete Event Simulation on the Macintosh for Business Students - Agpss and Alternatives
    Proceedings of the 2016 Winter Simulation Conference T. M. K. Roeder, P. I. Frazier, R. Szechtman, E. Zhou, T. Huschka, and S. E. Chick, eds. DISCRETE EVENT SIMULATION ON THE MACINTOSH FOR BUSINESS STUDENTS - AGPSS AND ALTERNATIVES Ingolf Ståhl Department of Economic Statistics Stockholm School of Economics Box 6501 SE-Stockholm, SWEDEN ABSTRACT The paper first discusses the importance of discrete event simulation (DES) in the business school curriculum. It next notes how small Macintosh lap tops have become increasingly popular among business students. We next discuss what DES software is available on the Mac, first directly, then indirectly by running DES software for Windows in some way on the Mac. Noting that there is not much simple DES software on the Mac, but yet a great demand for such software from many business students, we turn to the transfer of one pedagogical software system, aGPSS, from Windows to the Mac. We here first give a brief historic background of aGPSS. Next we discuss some of the problems encountered when transferring aGPSS to the Mac. The paper ends with a brief discussion of some pedagogical aspects of using aGPSS on the Mac in the teaching of basic management science. 1 INTRODUCTION As a teacher of simulation at a business school, I have often been asked: Why do you teach discrete event simulation, DES, at a business school? Why are you not content by just simulating financial flows in a spreadsheet? The answer is that I have found DES, implying dynamic stochastic simulation, to be of great importance in a business curriculum for several reasons.
    [Show full text]
  • Getting Started with Anylogic and Agent Based Modeling Workshop Materials
    Getting Started with AnyLogic and Agent Based Modeling Workshop Materials Includes a step-by-step tutorial showing how to - import a Vensim system dynamics model into AnyLogic - integrate it with an agent based model - export the combined SD+AB model as Java applet International System Dynamics Conference Albuquerque, USA July 2009 © 2009 XJ www.anylogic.com Quick facts about AnyLogic • Sells since year 2000 • Current version: 6.4.1 – Editions: Advanced and Professional – Licenses: Commercial, Educational, University Researcher • The leading professional tool for AB modeling • The only multi-method tool supporting – System Dynamics – Agent Based Modeling – Discrete Event (Process-centric) Modeling – Any combination of these approaches within a single model • User base: 350+ companies, ~600 universities © 2009 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 2 Methods in simulation modeling Process-centric System Dynamics (Discrete Event) Jay Forrester, 1950s Geoffrey Gordon, 1960s The System 1990s Agent Based © 2009 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 3 Methods in simulation modeling Process-centric System Dynamics (Discrete Event) Jay Forrester, 1950s Geoffrey Gordon, 1960s The System System-level 1990s Agent Based Individual-centric © 2009 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 4 Methods in simulation modeling Process-centric System Dynamics (Discrete Event) Jay Forrester, 1950s Geoffrey Gordon, 1960s The System 1990s Agent Based Continuous, Discrete, Aggregated Disaggregated © 2009 XJ Technologies www.xjtek.com 5 AnyLogic OO Language Java/Eclipse platform Windows, Mac
    [Show full text]