Methodology of Evaluation of the Impact of Picking Area Location on the Total Costs of Warehouse

Open access

Abstract

The picking system and the layout of the picking area are the key drivers for the evaluation of a warehouse picking cost. There are five variants for organizing the picking process of orders in a warehouse. The choice of a specific variant depends on the total cost of picking. The picking cost is evaluated within an uninterrupted picking process. It means that no stock out occurs in the time period of the picking process. The storing area and the picking area are created as two separate zones for picking quantities of the customer’s orders; the principle of division of orders is observed strictly. Referring to the locations of stock keeping units (SKU), two approaches of the layout of SKU in the picking area can be estimated. The first one is the single picking location for each single SKU, where replenishment is realized in the picking process. The second one - various picking locations for each single SKU, and the replenishment here is realized just only prior to a picking process or after it. The main benefits of the economy of the picking cost as far as these two approaches are concerned are the shortest picking route in the first case and one common replenishment option in the second case.

1. Andriansyah, R., Etman, P. and Rooda, J. (2009) Simulation model of a single - server order picking workstation using aggregate process times. In: Advances in System Simulation, 2009, SIMUL ’09. First International Conference, Porto, pp. 23 - 31.

2. Apsalons, R. (2012) The management of logistics centres. Riga: Burtene (in Latvian).

3. Apsalons, R. and Gromov, G. (2015) Using of logistics’ principles for picking items in railway warehouses. In: Development of infrastructure and logistics technologies of transport systems. International scientific - practical conference September 23 - 25, 2015. Sankt - Petersburg: FGBOU VO PGUPS (in Russian), pp. 93 - 100.

4. Ballou, R.H. (1999) Business Logistics Management. 4th edition. USA: Prentice - Hall Inc.

5. Bustillo, M., Menendez, B., Pardo, E.G. and Duarte, A. (2015) An algorithm for batching, sequencing and picking operations in a warehouse. In: Industrial Engineering and Systems Management (IESM), 2015 International Conference on, Seville, pp. 842 - 849.

6. Frazelle, E.H. (2002) World-Class Warehousing and Material Handling. India: McGraw-Hill Education Pvt. Limited.

7. Koffler, M., Beham, A., Wagner, S. and Affenzeller, M. (2014) Affinity based slotting in warehouses with dynamic order patterns. - www.springerlink.com (2017.06.02)

8. Koster, D. (1999) Efficient order batching methods in warehouses. Intelligent Journal of Production, Res., Vol. 37, No. 7, pp. 1479-1504.

9. Lukinskiy, V. and Lukinskiy, Vl. (2016) Evaluation of the influence of logistic operations reliability on the total costs of supply chain. In: Transport and Telecommunication, November 23, 2016, volume 17, No. 4, pp. 307 - 313.

10. Lukinskiy, V.S., Lukinskiy, V.V. and Pletneva, N.G. (2016) Logistics and management of supply chains. Moscow: Jurite (in Russian).

11. “Lursoft” data bases of enterprises. "Lursoft IT” Ltd. - www.lursoft.lv (2017.06.10)

12. Mantel, R., Schuur, P. and Heragu, S. (2007) Order oriented slotting: a new assignment strategy for warehouses, Eur. J., Ind. Eng. 1(3), pp. 301-316

13. Solovyova, Т. (2008) Organising commissioning of wholesales. Technologies of warehouses (in Russian), 1/2008, pp. 16 - 23.

14. Tompkins, J.A., White, J.A., Bozer, Y.A., and Tanchoco, J.M.A. (2010) Facilities planning. 4th edition. UK: John Wiley&Sons, Ltd.

15. Won, J. and Olafson, S. (2005) Joint order batching and order picking in warehouse operations. International Journal of Production Research, 4/1/2005, pp. 1427 - 1442.

16. Yuryev, Е. (2008) Dynamic Slotting. Nowadays warehouse. Journal of warehousing logistics (in Russian), 3/2008, pp. 34-41.

Transport and Telecommunication Journal

The Journal of Transport and Telecommunication Institute

Journal Information


Cite Score 2017: 1.21

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2017: 0.294
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2017: 1.539

Cited By

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 228 228 41
PDF Downloads 144 144 31