Facility-layout decisions in small manufacturing firms are often evaluated with heterogeneous indicators, which complicates comparison and reproducibility. This study develops a traceable decision-support workflow and applies it to two manufacturing SME cases in Cotopaxi, Ecuador. Systematic Layout Planning and Guerchet were used as the common core, complemented by case-specific location and prioritization tools, three-dimensional discrete-event simulation in FlexSim, bounded surrogate-model screening, and Meta Quest 2-based immersive review. IPMATOAH’s model comparison increased output from 116 to 120 bales per working day (3.44%) while reducing flow-process-chart total time; VELPACK’s documented 112-to-360 bales/8 h comparison reflects the combined effects of layout redesign, machinery modernization, and capacity expansion and is therefore not attributed to layout alone. A 1200-scenario Latin Hypercube dataset was used only for exploratory screening: random forest reached 0.958 balanced accuracy with the full derived feature set, but a leakage-control analysis excluding direct target proxies reduced balanced accuracy to 0.656, confirming that field-level predictive interpretation is not warranted. Twelve domain professionals evaluated the two implemented immersive tasks (VRUC-01 and VRUC-02), yielding a SUS score of 86.25±9.74. The results support the workflow as a two-case methodological demonstration while identifying the need for replicated simulation experiments, longitudinal operational validation, and broader usability testing.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Naranjo et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: