CRAFT

(Computerized Relative Allocation of Facilities Technique)

Prof. Ir. R. Chairul Saleh, M.Sc, Ph.D

One of the best-known Improvement procedures is Craft.

Craft was originally presented by Armour and Buffa.
Craft is typical example of a heuristic program based on
quadratic assignment interpretation of the process layout
program.
The basic criterion used is the minimization of the cost of
item movement, where this cost is expressed as a linier
function of distance traveled.
1

CRAFT
(Computerized Relative Allocation of Facilities Technique)
The improvement principle of Craft as follows :
1. Evaluates a given layout and then considers what the effect
will be if department locations are interchange.
2. If improvement can be made by making pair wise exchanges,
the exchange producing improvement is made
3. The process continue until no improvement can be made by
pair wise exchanges.

Input Craft
1. Initial Layout and Building Outline
This may consist of either an arbitrary initial layout or an existing layout, whichever is
appropriate. The configuration of the final layout can be significantly affected by the
configuration of the initial layout.

50

30

40

Gambar 1. Initial Layout

Gambar 1. The Craft input format is shown, where each line represented by a
punched card. The card is punched with with the sequence of letters
representing the various department.
3

In figure 2, one matrix element equals 100 square feet, each row and column equals 10
feet. Given the 4 row and 8 columns, an area of 80 * 40 feet is represented.

A
A
C
C

A
A
C
C

A
A
C
C

A
A
C
C

A
A
D
D

B
B
D
D

B
B
D
D

B
B
D
D

Gambar 2. Contoh format Input

2. Number of Departments, respective floor areas, number and location of fixed
departments
In common version CRAFT can handle up to 40 different departments. Maximum
allowable dimension of 30 * 30.
3. Flow and Distance Data
The flow matrix (from to chart) gives the number of trips made per time period
between combination of department. The cost matrix represents the material
handling cost required to move one unit of distance between combinations of
departments (see figure 3 a).

In figure 2, 1 square represents a 100square feet area. Since material

handling can be performed in a variety of way, the cost elements need
not be the same.
The cost matrix assumes, however, that the appropriate, materials
handling equipment has been selected for each move. Since the cost
data are expressed as cost per unit distance, it is necessary that the
distance unit be the same as the layout scale (see figure 4)

to
from

Figure 3 From-To Chart (Flow Matrix)

To

From

Figure 4 Cost Matrix

Method
Craft computes total materials handling cost for the initial layout by
computing the rectilinear distances between department centroids and
computing the resultant flow *cost * distance matrix.

From figure 1, the centriod location are :

(XA,YA) = (25, 30)

(XC, YC) = (20, 10)

(XB,YB) = (65, 30)

(XD, YD) = (60, 10)

For example , the rectilinear distance between the centroid coordinate location (X A,YA)
and (XB,YB) equals
X A X B YA YB 25 65 30 30 40

The resulting distance matrix is given in Figure 5.

to

40

25

55

40

65

25

25

65

40

55

25

40

from

Figure 5. Distance Chart

To

Total

80

100

220

400

40

65

75

180

50

65

80

195

220

25

245

Total

310

170

165

375

1020

From

Figure 6. Total Cost matrix

The total cost or the total distance traveled per unit time equals 1020 feet
for the initial layout as shown in figure 6.
The objective of CRAFT is to minimized materials handling cost, where
this cost is obtained as a linear function of distance traveled.
8

Pair wise Exchange

CRAFT applies the pair wise exchange heuristic. It considers exchange
of the centroid locations for those departments which either are same
area or have a common border. The interchange that produces the
greatest anticipated reduction in total cost is determined and the
department are interchanged.
Craft considers a possible interchange of departments A and B. If we
make this interchange we obtain the layout given in Figure 7.

Figure 7 . Layout after Interchange of Department A and B

9

As can be seen the new centroid coordinates for departments A and B are
(XA,YA) = (55, 30)

((XB,YB) = (15, 30)

But in estimating total cost CRAFT simply interchanges the original

coordinates yielding (XA,YA) = (65, 30) and ((XB,YB) = (25, 30). The
resulting distance chart and corresponding cost matrix are given in
Figure 8.
to
A
B
C
D
from

40

65

25

40

25

55

65

25

40

25

55

40

Figure 8. Distance Chart

10

The total cost is estimated by CRAFT to be 1060.after exchanging

department A and B. Craft decides that interchanging department A and
B is not advantageous due to an anticipated increase of 40 in total cost.
Figure 9, the matrix total cost after first iteration occurred.
To

Total

80

260

100

440

40

25

165

230

130

25

80

235

100

55

155

Total

270

160

285

345

1060

From

Figure 9. Total Cost Chart

11

Interchange A and K results in a estimated cost of 995. Interchange A and

D produces a cost estimated of 1095. The department B and K are not the
same area, and do not have a common border, consequently CRAFT
does not consider an interchange of B and K. Interchanging B and D
results in a total cost of 945, while interchanging K and D produce a total
cost of 1040. Consequently, CRAFT considers the best interchange to be
and will introduce the change in the layout.
Interchanging the centroid location of departments B and D yields the
layout of Figure 10.

Dept A
Dept C

Dept D
Dept B

Figure 10. First improved Layout after exchange of B and D

12

Since B and D are not the same size, we notice that department D is no longer
rectangularly shaped and that the department centroids were not exchanged exactly.
Rather a short calculation shows that
(XA,YA) = (25, 30) (XC, YC) = (20, 10)
(XB,YB) = (55,10)

(XD, YD) = (67.5, 25)

Due to the change of the centroid locations, the distance chart for the new layout needs
to be recomputed (see figure 11). On the multiplying the flow values of figure 3 and the
distance values in figure 11, we obtain a total cost of 985, rather the estimated cost of
945.

50

25

47.5

50

35

27.5

25

35

62.5

47.5

27.5

62.5

to

from

Figure 11. Distance chart for first improved layout

13

CRAFT continues evaluating pair wise interchanges and finds that

interchanging departments A and B give the greatest estimated cost
reduction with an estimated total cost of 945. Figure 12 give second
improved layout having the following centroid location :

Figure 12. Second Improved Layout after exchanging A and B

(XA,YA) = (49,18)

(XC, YC) = (20, 10)

(XB,YB) = (15,30)

(XD, YD) = (67.5, 25)

The estimated cost for this layout is 945; computation of the actual cost, however, yield
a value 969.
Applying the pair wise interchange on the second improved layout indicates K and D
should be interchanged. The estimated cost is 927 for exchange of K and D. K and D
have the same area, their centroids will be exchange exactly and the true total cost14will

CRAFT makes the indicated exchange of department locations, which

yield the layout shown in figure 13.
Dept B
Dept D

Dept C
Dept A

Figure 13. Third Improved Layout

In performing the pair wise interchange calculations for the third
improved layout, CRAFT finds that no pair wise interchange will
produce an estimated total cost less than 927. Consequently, the search
terminates with the layout shown in Figure 13

15