IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/mag/wpaper/110004.html

A U-Shaped Layout for a Manual Order Picking System

Author

Listed:
  • Sebastian Henn

    (Faculty of Economics and Management, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg)

  • Sören Koch

    (Faculty of Economics and Management, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg)

  • Harald Gerking

    (Management Consulting)

  • Gerhard Wäscher

    (Faculty of Economics and Management, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg)

Abstract

In manual order picking systems, order pickers walk or ride through a warehouse in order to collect items requested by customers. The performance of such a system is significantly dependent on its layout which determines the lengths of the order pickers' tours and the corresponding picking times. Whereas for classic warehouse layouts all picking aisles are arranged in parallel to each other, in the warehouse layout presented here the picking aisles are arranged around a U-shaped central aisle. This layout has been developed for order picking systems in which slow-moving items are prevalent. A new routing strategy for such a warehouse is presented and an analytical expression for the expected tour length per picking order is derived. By comparing this estimation with those of routing schemes in classic warehouse layouts, it is demonstrated in which situations such U-shaped layouts allow for operating warehouses more efficiently.

Suggested Citation

  • Sebastian Henn & Sören Koch & Harald Gerking & Gerhard Wäscher, 2011. "A U-Shaped Layout for a Manual Order Picking System," FEMM Working Papers 110004, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    • Handle: RePEc:mag:wpaper:110004
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.fww.ovgu.de/fww_media/femm/femm_2010/2010_09.pdf
    File Function: First version, 2010
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Raj Chetty & Emmanuel Saez, 2013. "Teaching the Tax Code: Earnings Responses to an Experiment with EITC Recipients," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 1-31, January.
    2. Congdon, William J. & Kling, Jeffrey R. & Mullainathan, Sendhil, 2009. "Behavioral Economics and Tax Policy," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 62(3), pages 375-386, September.
    3. Raj Chetty & Adam Looney & Kory Kroft, 2009. "Salience and Taxation: Theory and Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1145-1177, September.
    4. de Bartolome, Charles A. M., 1995. "Which tax rate do people use: Average or marginal?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 56(1), pages 79-96, January.
    5. Seade, J. K., 1977. "On the shape of optimal tax schedules," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 203-235, April.
    6. Fujii, Edwin T & Hawley, Clifford B, 1988. "On the Accuracy of Tax Perceptions," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 70(2), pages 344-347, May.
    7. Swenson, Charles W., 1988. "Taxpayer behavior in response to taxation: An experimental analysis," Journal of Accounting and Public Policy, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 1-28.
    8. Efraim Sadka, 1976. "On Income Distribution, Incentive Effects and Optimal Income Taxation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 43(2), pages 261-267.
    9. Arrazola, Maria & de Hevia, Jose & Sanz, Jose F., 2000. "More on tax perception and labour supply: the Spanish case," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 67(1), pages 15-21, April.
    10. Edmund S. Phelps, 1973. "Taxation of Wage Income for Economic Justice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 87(3), pages 331-354.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Martin Fochmann & Joachim Weimann & Kay Blaufus & Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Dirk Kiesewetter, 2010. "Grosswage illusion in a real effort experiment," FEMM Working Papers 100009, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg, Faculty of Economics and Management.
    2. Sielaff, Christian, 2011. "Steuerkomplexität und Arbeitsangebot: Eine experimentelle Analyse," Discussion Papers 2011/13, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
    3. Louis Kaplow, 2024. "Optimal Income Taxation," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 62(2), pages 637-738, June.
    4. Blaufus, Kay & Bob, Jonathan & Hundsdoerfer, Jochen & Kiesewetter, Dirk & Weimann, Joachim, 2010. "It's all about tax rates: An empirical study of tax perception," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 106, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    5. Alex Rees-Jones & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2018. "Taxing Humans: Pitfalls of the Mechanism Design Approach and Potential Resolutions," Tax Policy and the Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 32(1), pages 107-133.
    6. David Masclet & Claude Montmarquette, 2008. "Approche expérimentale de l'incidence de la fiscalité sur l'offre de travail : une étude comparative des systèmes d'imposition," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(1), pages 47-59.
    7. Hagen Ackermann & Martin Fochmann & Nadja Wolf, 2016. "The Effect of Straight-Line and Accelerated Depreciation Rules on Risky Investment Decisions—An Experimental Study," IJFS, MDPI, vol. 4(4), pages 1-26, October.
    8. Louis Kaplow, 2022. "Optimal Income Taxation," NBER Working Papers 30199, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Fochmann, Martin & Hemmerich, Kristina, 2014. "Real tax effects and tax perception effects in decisions on asset allocation," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 156, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    10. Johannes Abeler & Simon Jäger, 2013. "Complex Tax Incentives - An Experimental Investigation," CESifo Working Paper Series 4231, CESifo.
    11. Claudia Keser & David Masclet & Claude Montmarquette, 2020. "Labor Supply, Taxation, and the Use of Tax Revenues: A Real-Effort Experiment in Canada, France, and Germany," Public Finance Review, , vol. 48(6), pages 714-750, November.
    12. Hirofumi Kurokawa & Tomoharu Mori & Fumio Ohtake, 2016. "A Choice Experiment on Taxes: Are Income and Consumption Taxes Equivalent?," ISER Discussion Paper 0966, Institute of Social and Economic Research, The University of Osaka.
    13. Boadway, Robin & Jacquet, Laurence, 2008. "Optimal marginal and average income taxation under maximin," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 143(1), pages 425-441, November.
    14. Goldin, Jacob, 2015. "Optimal tax salience," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(C), pages 115-123.
    15. Sillamaa, M. A., 1999. "How work effort responds to wage taxation: An experimental test of a zero top marginal tax rate," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(1), pages 125-134, July.
    16. Ackermann, Hagen & Fochmann, Martin, 2014. "The effect of straight-line and accelerated depreciation rules on risky investment decisions: An experimental study," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 158, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    17. Cerruti, Davide & Daminato, Claudio & Filippini, Massimo, 2023. "The impact of policy awareness: Evidence from vehicle choices response to fiscal incentives," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    18. Turner Nicholas, 2011. "Why Don't Taxpayers Maximize their Tax-Based Student Aid? Salience and Inertia in Program Selection," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 11(1), pages 1-24, December.
    19. Alex Rees-Jones & Dmitry Taubinsky, 2020. "Measuring “Schmeduling”," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 87(5), pages 2399-2438.
    20. Andrea Morone & Francesco Nemore & Simone Nuzzo, 2018. "Experimental evidence on tax salience and tax incidence," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 20(4), pages 582-612, August.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mag:wpaper:110004. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: IT Administrators at FWW (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fwmagde.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.