Next Article in Journal
Economic Resilience in the Early Stage of the COVID-19 Pandemic: An Across-Economy Comparison
Next Article in Special Issue
An Efficient Approach to Investigate the Tradeoff between Double Handling and Needed Capacity in Automated Distribution Centers
Previous Article in Journal
The Reshaping of Neighboring Social Networks after Poverty Alleviation Relocation in Rural China: A Two-Year Observation
Previous Article in Special Issue
Total Costs of Centralized and Decentralized Inventory Strategies—Including External Costs
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Increasing Throughput in Warehouses: The Effect of Storage Reallocation and the Location of Input/Output Station

Sustainability 2022, 14(8), 4611; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084611
by Mohammed Alnahhal 1,*, Bashir Salah 2 and Rafiq Ahmad 3
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Sustainability 2022, 14(8), 4611; https://doi.org/10.3390/su14084611
Submission received: 19 March 2022 / Revised: 8 April 2022 / Accepted: 10 April 2022 / Published: 12 April 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Inventory Management for Sustainable Industrial Operations)

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Thank you for the opportunity to review this interesting article. I took interest and pleasure to read this paper. This study investigated two strategies to enhance the throughput and service time of the AS/RS system, which are the best location for the I/O station and the two-step method to reallocate the tote bins before the shift starts. Below are my comments:

Significance:

  • The scientific content of this paper is correct for me and deserves to be published.
  • Please clarify the hypotheses test used in this paper
  • The research gap should be emphasized in the literature review section. I would also kindly ask to cite the very relevant research paper on inventory policies which play an important role in warehouse operation, to increase the quality of the work

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2021.102508

 https://doi.org/10.3390/math8081210

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clscn.2022.100042

Scientific soundness:

  • The subject addressed in this paper is relevant.
  • The study has been correctly designed and is technically sound.

Overall evaluation:

  • The English language quality of this paper is globally appropriate and acceptable. However, some minor revisions and spell check seem to be necessary.

As a conclusion, my suggestion to the editor is to accept this paper for publication after minor revision.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

The paper deals with the detailed problem of rationalizing the transport cycle of the stacker crane in AS/RS taking into account the position of the I/O point and the possibility of relocating units during the idle time of the stacker crane to increase the throughput of the system.
The article presents a precise cause-and-effect sequence, a well-described methodology, and assumptions of the method. The obtained results are valuable, and experimental data are selected appropriately (but strictly for the experiment). It shows the usefulness of the method and its potential application to the efficiency of logistics processes.
The article is new, written in an appropriate language (both in terms of specialist and stylistic vocabulary), and may be published in Sustainability due to the topic; however, authors should consider the following comments:
1. The authors state that AS/RS is considered a green technology and make it one of the basic assumptions of the article. Still, they do not provide a sufficiently strong confirmation of it in the literature review. In the conclusions, this statement is also not emphasized enough (it is essential from the point of view of the journal's profile).
2. The statement: "In recent years, the shortage of land resources has prompted a desire for continual AS/RS development based on information and automation" requires additional elaboration.
3. The authors state that: "Since its introduction at the turn of the centuries ..." meanwhile, stacker cranes and their systems were used already in the 1980s and probably early.
4. Figure 2 is not precise. It is unknown whether the drawing shows the front of the rack zone or the side projection of one rack wall?
5. Literature review should be strengthened with a focus on the allocation problem. What is the advantage of the proposed approach over the others? I suggest considering other approaches, for example https://www.ein.org.pl/ein/sites/default/files/2021-04-13.pdf or https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0141933120305159?via%3Dihub
6. The authors should discuss the possibility of expanding the problem to a three-dimensional structure, possibly taking shifts between the shelving walls into account.
7. The middle I/O placement is not very common; why is it the main focus of the research?
8. The study would benefit significantly if the authors discussed the use of two- or four-container (totes) craner
9. "∗" should not be used as a multiplication symbol.
10. Do the authors consider the acceleration and braking characteristics of stacker cranes? They can be of great importance over short distances, sometimes even crucial.
11. Proposition "ready-to-use" simple heuristic guidelines in standard WCS or AS / RS control mechanisms could be a valuable outcome of the research.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop