Workplace Layout Optimization: A Systematic Approach to Minimize Operator Fatigue & Material Handling Bottlenecks

The route dataset is synthetic and contains no empirical worker trajectories. Consequently, the results quantify a specified scenario rather than demonstrate effectiveness at an operating facility. The model also excludes mixed product families, rework loops, variable container fill, and unplanned retrieval. Its equal return-distance rule is transparent but may not match multi-stop transport or opportunistic task chaining. A further limitation is the absence of a dimensioned layout. The route values are not certified shortest paths through a measured floor area. Equipment clearances and access restrictions could increase travel or invalidate an assumed adjacency. This limits interpretation of the improved scenario to a design target and prevents any claim that the arrangement is ready for physical installation. Within the defined boundary, loaded carrier-distance decreases by 56.14%, from 1,368 to 600 m per reference shift. Total defined worker-distance decreases by 58.33%, from 3,456 to 1,440 m. Route geometry alone produces a 44.44% worker-distance reduction; shorter ancillary supply trips account for the additional benefit. All results retain the original 72 loaded transfers. The main conclusion is that movement evaluation requires separate accounting for material and people. A shorter product route can understate the total walking benefit when empty returns also shrink, but it cannot establish fewer handling events or safer work. A robust interpretation therefore reports both the distance change and the unchanged elements of the handling task. Data availability. The model inputs and calculation rules are reported in the methods and tables. All results can be reproduced from the disclosed dataset.

Anjos, M. F., & Vieira, M. V. C. (2017). Mathematical optimization approaches for facility layout problems: The state-of-the-art and future research directions. European Journal of Operational Research, 261(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2017.01.049 De Carlo, F., Arleo, M. A., Borgia, O., & Tucci, M. (2013). Layout design for a low capacity manufacturing line: A case study. International Journal of Engineering Business Management, 5, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.5772/56883 Dombrowski, U., & Ernst, S. (2013). Scenario-based simulation approach for layout planning. Procedia CIRP, 12, 354–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2013.09.061 Hosseini-Nasab, H., Fereidouni, S., Fatemi Ghomi, S. M. T., & Fakhrzad, M. B. (2018). Classification of facility layout problems: A review study. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 94, 957–977. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-017-0895-8 Jayachitra, R., & Prasad, P. S. S. (2010). Design and selection of facility layout using simulation and design of experiments. Indian Journal of Science and Technology, 3(4), 437–446. https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2010/v3i4.20 Kikolski, M., & Ko, C.-H. (2018). Facility layout design—Review of current research directions. Engineering Management in Production and Services, 10(3), 70–79. https://doi.org/10.2478/emj-2018-0018