Case Study Overview

Case Study in a talk bubble.

As we saw in the previous activity, there are many factors that go into a location decision. However, once the general region has been selected based on the factors that influence facility location, then a more detailed study has to be conducted to select the best site.

In this case study, the general region has been determined, and now it is your job to find the lowest cost location for your company.

Case Study Details

Find the Best Facility Location

Your boss has given you the task of recommending a location for a new warehouse in the country of Luxembourg. Your company is a wholesaler of fruit and needs to supply all of the stores of a major food chain in Luxembourg. Currently, all of the shipments of fruit comes out of the warehouse located in Germany and must travel into Luxembourg via the A$1$ motorway $($interstate$/$autobahn$),$ however, this road is often very busy and many delays typically occur. Therefore, to provide better customer service and reduce transportation costs and time the CEO wants to know where the best location in Luxembourg would be for a new warehouse.

You are provided a map of Luxembourg and the following daily shipment data by location. From this, you will need to calculate the best location based on the center$-$of$-$gravity approach.

For this assignment, you need to be as accurate as possible. If a location falls in the middle between the $1$ and the $2$ lines, you need to use $1\mathrm{.}5$ as your y or x location, $($or $1\mathrm{.}4$ or $1\mathrm{.}6-$ whichever is closest$).$

Daily Shipment Data

Shipping Data

Town Apples Oranges Bananas

Clervaux $10075125$

Wiltz $250200275$

Vianden $200150225$

Diekirch $300250325$

Ettelbruck $350300375$

Echternach $350300375$

Grevenmacher $300250350$

Luxembourg $800700900$

Remich $200150250$

Differdange $150100150$

Esch$-$sur$-$Alzette $250200225$

Dudelange $200200200$

Map of Luxembourg

Luxembourg Map $($PPTX Download Luxembourg Map $($PPTX$)$

Map of Luxembourg and the surrounding area.

Deliverable $-$ Video Presentation

Submission

Using Studio, record and save your presentation using a naming convention that includes your first and last name and the activity number $($or description$).$ Do not add punctuation or special characters.

Follow these instructions to submit your video presentation.Links to an external site.

Review the evaluation rubric for detailed grading criteria.

This activity supports Module Objective $3$ and Learning Outcome $3.$

LGMT $4407\mathrm{.}3$ Presentation Rubric

LGMT $4407\mathrm{.}3$ Presentation Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

Calculations

$38$ to $>35$ pts

Excellent $-$ A

All calculations were correct. Correctly used software tools.

$35$ to $>32$ pts

Above Average $-$ B

Most calculations were correct, but there were one or two minor errors. Software tools were appropriately used.

$32$ to $>30$ pts

Average $-$ C

Several calculations errors throughout the problem. Appropriate software used for problems.

$30$ to $>27$ pts

Near Failing $-$ D

Many calculation errors throughout the problem. Inappropriate software used for problems.

$27$ to $>0$ pts

Failing $-$ F

Mostly incorrect or incomplete calculations. Did not use software tools.

$/38$ pts

Analysis

$38$ to $>35$ pts

Excellent $-$ A

Answers to assigned problems were clear and accurate. Connection with class and study material goes well beyond the obvious connections among ideas; demonstrates insight, original thinking, and comprehensive analysis of results.

$35$ to $>32$ pts

Above Average $-$ B

Answers to assigned problems presented some irrelevant information. Little treatment went beyond obvious connections with class and study material. Good analysis but not complete.

$32$ to $>30$ pts

Average $-$ C

Answers of assigned problems were vague, unclear, and$/$or confusing in places. Very little treatment went beyond obvious connections with class and study material. Weak or somewhat incorrect analysis of results.

$30$ to $>27$ pts

Near Failing $-$ D

Answers of assigned problems were vague, unclear, and$/$or confusing in places. No treatment went beyond obvious connections with class and study material. Very weak or incorrect analysis of results.

$27$ to $>0$ pts

Failing $-$ F

Little to no analysis of the problem provided. Analysis mostly incorrect.

$/38$ pts

Presentation

$24$ to $>19$ pts

Excellent $-$ A

Very nice looking presentation with appropriate graphics$/$photos that enhance and align with the content. Voice is clear professional and easy to understand. Canvas studio used with video included. Presentation was completed within the time limit$.$

$19$ to $>15$ pts

Above Average $-$ B

Nice looking presentation with some appropriate graphics$/$photos that enhance and align with the content. Voice is not fully clear, professional, and easy to understand. Canvas studio used with video included. Presentation was completed within the time limit$.$

$15$ to $>9$ pts

Average $-$ C

Generic$-$looking presentation with some appropriate graphics$/$photos that do not always enhance and align with the content. Voice is not clear and easy to understand with a lot of $"$um$","$uh$",$ and "you know..."