1. ## Constructing Travel Charts / load matrix

Hi, this is my first visit here.

I'm not sure if this is an area anybody here knows about as it's certainly brand new to me, but I'm having some trouble getting to grips with the concept of constructing travel charts (also known as load matrix I believe). This is to do with business layout planning. Once I know how I can go about it I can probably do it, I'm not here to let you do my work I'm in uni. I need to construct one based on some information I have but pretty clueless how to go about it.

I know what travel charts look like and have examples of finished ones ("to" on one side, "from" on the other), but I just don't know how the figures are calculated. Hoping somebody here has some knowledge of this area.

Task is to make travel chart providing the number of units per month moving between d epartments

This is the data I have - 10 major products and 6 departments :

Have "definition" of travel chart - a travel chart lists the number of moves from one work centre to another over same time period

Any help at all with this is appreciated.

2. Originally Posted by trip62
Hi, this is my first visit here.

I'm not sure if this is an area anybody here knows about as it's certainly brand new to me, but I'm having some trouble getting to grips with the concept of constructing travel charts (also known as load matrix I believe). This is to do with business layout planning. Once I know how I can go about it I can probably do it, I'm not here to let you do my work I'm in uni. I need to construct one based on some information I have but pretty clueless how to go about it.

I know what travel charts look like and have examples of finished ones ("to" on one side, "from" on the other), but I just don't know how the figures are calculated. Hoping somebody here has some knowledge of this area.

Task is to make travel chart providing the number of units per month moving between d epartments

This is the data I have - 10 major products and 6 departments :

Have "definition" of travel chart - a travel chart lists the number of moves from one work centre to another over same time period

Any help at all with this is appreciated.
From your description, I'd guess the travel chart looks like this. "To" departments are along the side; "From" departments are across the top. To fill out the chart, the number of units going from department X to department Y is added up from all the processing sequences with XY in them. For example, the number of units going from B to D is 2000 for product 7, 2500 for product 8 and 1000 for product 10 for a total of 5500. For A to C, it is just 1500 from product 5.

$\displaystyle \begin{tabular}{c|cccccc} & A & B & C & D & E & F\\ \hline A & & & & & \\ B & & & & & \\ C & 1500 & & & & \\ D & & 5500 & & & \\ E & & & & & \\ F & & & & & \\ \end{tabular}$

3. ## Reply to help (travel charts, layout planning)

Originally Posted by JakeD
From your description, I'd guess the travel chart looks like this. "To" departments are along the side; "From" departments are across the top. To fill out the chart, the number of units going from department X to department Y is added up from all the processing sequences with XY in them. For example, the number of units going from B to D is 2000 for product 7, 2500 for product 8 and 1000 for product 10 for a total of 5500. For A to C, it is just 1500 from product 5.

$\displaystyle \begin{tabular}{c|cccccc} & A & B & C & D & E & F\\ \hline A & & & & & \\ B & & & & & \\ C & 1500 & & & & \\ D & & 5500 & & & \\ E & & & & & \\ F & & & & & \\ \end{tabular}$
Thank you taking the time to give me some advice, it helped. Using the advice I filled in the the travel chart (although with "From" down the side, and "To "at the top as it shows in some examples I have in a text book (but it's explanation is very complicated to me). I'm not entirely sure if the method of calculation you showed me is correct for the task, but I'm hoping it is. It's something to go on.

Noticed department A only ever is used at the beginning (and only is followed by B or C), and F only ever used at the end.

Does this seem right? This was my end result for the travel chart:

If you see, this is leading to developing a layout design by systematic approach, for the made up business and it's departments. Not too sure where to go from here (this was all new to me), but I believe I need a relationship chart, but again not sure how to construct it. These show relationships between the various work-centres within a factory for example.

I know they take this sort of shape, found the following example on the net, but probably more complicated than I need for my data..

In the end on one of these charts it has letters A, E, I, O, U, X in the spaces

A - For closeness Absolutely necessary, to X - Undesirable. I don't suppose you know about these, do you?

Thanks again

4. Originally Posted by trip62
Thank you taking the time to give me some advice, it helped. Using the advice I filled in the the travel chart (although with "From" down the side, and "To "at the top as it shows in some examples I have in a text book (but it's explanation is very complicated to me). I'm not entirely sure if the method of calculation you showed me is correct for the task, but I'm hoping it is. It's something to go on.

Noticed department A only ever is used at the beginning (and only is followed by B or C), and F only ever used at the end.

Does this seem right? This was my end result for the travel chart:

I checked a few entries on this. Looks good.

If you see, this is leading to developing a layout design by systematic approach, for the made up business and it's departments. Not too sure where to go from here (this was all new to me), but I believe I need a relationship chart, but again not sure how to construct it. These show relationships between the various work-centres within a factory for example.

I know they take this sort of shape, found the following example on the net, but probably more complicated than I need for my data..

In the end on one of these charts it has letters A, E, I, O, U, X in the spaces

A - For closeness Absolutely necessary, to X - Undesirable. I don't suppose you know about these, do you?

Thanks again
It looks to me that a relationship chart is just a compact way of holding data on pairs of departments (X,Y) where the order of the departments does not matter (unlike a travel chart where order does matter showing the direction of the flow).

This could be done using a regular matrix, like this, but it wastes space. Less than half the matrix is needed and there are two sets of labels.

$\displaystyle \begin{tabular}{c|cccccc} & A & B & C & D & E & F\\ \hline A & & & & & \\ B & a & & & & \\ C & e & i & & & \\ D & o & u & x & & \\ E & a & e & i & o & \\ F & u & x & a & e & i \\ \end{tabular}$

This chart holds the same information using only one set of labels.

$\displaystyle \begin{tabular}{ccccccc} A & & & & \\ a & B & & & \\ e & i & C & & \\ o & u & x & D & \\ a & e & i & o & E \\ u & x & a & e & i & F\\ \end{tabular}$

But if you want long labels it is better to rotate the chart into the position of the chart you show.

5. Originally Posted by JakeD
I checked a few entries on this. Looks good.

It looks to me that a relationship chart is just a compact way of holding data on pairs of departments (X,Y) where the order of the departments does not matter (unlike a travel chart where order does matter showing the direction of the flow).

This could be done using a regular matrix, like this, but it wastes space. Less than half the matrix is needed and there are two sets of labels.

$\displaystyle \begin{tabular}{c|cccccc} & A & B & C & D & E & F\\ \hline A & & & & & \\ B & a & & & & \\ C & e & i & & & \\ D & o & u & x & & \\ E & a & e & i & o & \\ F & u & x & a & e & i \\ \end{tabular}$

This chart holds the same information using only one set of labels.

$\displaystyle \begin{tabular}{ccccccc} A & & & & \\ a & B & & & \\ e & i & C & & \\ o & u & x & D & \\ a & e & i & o & E \\ u & x & a & e & i & F\\ \end{tabular}$

But if you want long labels it is better to rotate the chart into the position of the chart you show.

Hi again Jake,

Thanks for the response. Was what you shown just an example or how it should be? I'm unsure why the a,e,i,o,u,x letters appear where they do. You make this judgment from the travel chart? Could you explain that?

Is this right?

Yours:

To this:

But, still if you could explain why the a, e, i, o, u, x went in those particular spots please do.

Thanks, and sorry if I'm missing something obvious.

6. Originally Posted by trip62
Hi again Jake,

Thanks for the response. Was what you shown just an example or how it should be? I'm unsure why the a,e,i,o,u,x letters appear where they do. You make this judgment from the travel chart? Could you explain that?

Is this right?

Yours:

To this:

But, still if you could explain why the a, e, i, o, u, x went in those particular spots please do.

Thanks, and sorry if I'm missing something obvious.
Hi, trip62. Yes, the chart I showed was just an example and you translated mine to yours correctly.

I have no knowledge of how any of this is supposed to be used. I'm going off either what you say or my own experience. That's why I say things such as "It looks to me" or "From your description, I'd guess."

For the relationship chart, I only gave reasons why it might be convenient to arrange the chart the way it is based on how symmetric matrices are used.

As to how the relationship chart is built, it does not seem from the example you gave that it is built from the travel chart. Instead it seems to be for holding other requirements determining how close departments should be located. (Notice I'm using the word "seem" to flag again that I don't actually know what I'm talking about. )

7. Originally Posted by JakeD
Hi, trip62. Yes, the chart I showed was just an example and you translated mine to yours correctly.

I have no knowledge of how any of this is supposed to be used. I'm going off either what you say or my own experience. That's why I say things such as "It looks to me" or "From your description, I'd guess."

For the relationship chart, I only gave reasons why it might be convenient to arrange the chart the way it is based on how symmetric matrices are used.

As to how the relationship chart is built, it does not seem from the example you gave that it is built from the travel chart. Instead it seems to be for holding other requirements determining how close departments should be located. (Notice I'm using the word "seem" to flag again that I don't actually know what I'm talking about. )
Right, I guess it was just wishful thinking that anybody would know about this sort of thing on the forum as I bet it's not so common. I found this info on travel charts which actually may mean the way we talked of constructing them was wrong:

A Travel Chart is a simple table that is useful where there are multiple (and possibly irregular) movement between places. It is a variation on the Check Sheet, indicating movements from and to any combination of a given set of locations.

It appears the "distance" is recorded in the spaces, but I don't understand how the distance is worked out. Do you see it at all? Well this assignment worries me more and more.

8. Originally Posted by trip62
Right, I guess it was just wishful thinking that anybody would know about this sort of thing on the forum as I bet it's not so common. I found this info on travel charts which actually may mean the way we talked of constructing them was wrong:

A Travel Chart is a simple table that is useful where there are multiple (and possibly irregular) movement between places. It is a variation on the Check Sheet, indicating movements from and to any combination of a given set of locations.

It appears the "distance" is recorded in the spaces, but I don't understand how the distance is worked out. Do you see it at all? Well this assignment worries me more and more.
It looks like you have two different variations of the travel chart. The first counted units moving between departments. This one counts visits between departments and the total distance traveled (total distance traveled = visits x distance). Does a travel chart have to have distance between departments? I don't know. The data you presented first have did not have any distances.

Are you using a textbook? It appears to me you're trying to get your information from the web without a textbook. But given the many variations possible on all this, you're getting conflicting information. You need a textbook to lay out a consistent set of charts and a methodology to use with them.

9. Originally Posted by JakeD
It looks like you have two different variations of the travel chart. The first counted units moving between departments. This one counts visits between departments and the total distance traveled (total distance traveled = visits x distance). Does a travel chart have to have distance between departments? I don't know. The data you presented first have did not have any distances.

Are you using a textbook? It appears to me you're trying to get your information from the web without a textbook. But given the many variations possible on all this, you're getting conflicting information. You need a textbook to lay out a consistent set of charts and a methodology to use with them.
Sorry, I am partly using an Operations Man. text book but I can't make sense of the methodology of constructing the charts in there. So I admit to randomly searching the net. Yes, you're right perhaps distance isn't a factor with the data I have. I'm just confused by it, and concerned it's making a bit restless about it all.

The travel chart was the first task to carry out, the second is using a systematic approach to develop a layout plan for the company (original data I posted) but I can't see how the data we retrieved in the form of the travel chart gives any indication of for example where the different departments should be placed in a layout, or in what fashion.

The third task after developing a layout, is to calculate total distance travelled per month based on the design made.

10. Originally Posted by trip62
Sorry, I am partly using an Operations Man. text book but I can't make sense of the methodology of constructing the charts in there. So I admit to randomly searching the net. Yes, you're right perhaps distance isn't a factor with the data I have. I'm just confused by it, and concerned it's making a bit restless about it all.

The travel chart was the first task to carry out, the second is using a systematic approach to develop a layout plan for the company (original data I posted) but I can't see how the data we retrieved in the form of the travel chart gives any indication of for example where the different departments should be placed in a layout, or in what fashion.

The third task after developing a layout, is to calculate total distance travelled per month based on the design made.
OK. From what you just said, I conclude that you have to provide for the travel chart the distances between the departments based on your layout. The total distance traveled between two departments X and Y will be the units moved from your original chart multiplied by the distance between X and Y from your proposed layout. Your task is "using a systematic approach ... develop a layout" and I think you will want one that minimizes the total distance traveled. In developing the layout, you will need the required area for each department that you were given.

11. Right, that sounds accurate. So if I make a judgment as to where to place the departments, and which by which (based on different layouts in the text book I guess) that should develop a layout. However have you any ideas how, on the layout design, you would measure distance between them?

12. Originally Posted by trip62
Right, that sounds accurate. So if I make a judgment as to where to place the departments, and which by which (based on different layouts in the text book I guess) that should develop a layout. However have you any ideas how, on the layout design, you would measure distance between them?
I think you have to make a scale drawing on paper or computer and then measure the paths entrance to entrance.

13. I've done the assignment now to the best of my ability. I know it's not perfect but will have to do Thanks for your continued help.