# Use of Data-Driven Simulation Modeling and Visual Computing Methods for Workplace Evaluation
## 4 Results
Depending on the characteristics of the automated system, it allows a higher degree of flexibility with a lower degree of financial and time inefficiency. Graphical results of total finished products simulation scenarios' comparison are presented in Figure 7. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c} \hline \hline  & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**S\({}_{\mathbf{R}}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**S\({}_{\mathbf{1}}\)**} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**S\({}_{\mathbf{2}}\)**} \\ \cline{2-7}  & **Finished Products** & **Utilization (\%)** & **Finished Products** & **Utilization (\%)** & **Finished Products** & **Utilization (\%)** \\ \hline Worker 1 & 719 & 99.7 & 716 & 99.3 & 210 & 32.05 \\ Worker 2 & 715 & 99.2 & 719 & 99.7 & / & / \\ Worker 3 & / & / & 718 & 99.5 & / & / \\ Robot 1 & / & / & / & / & 2100 & 98.8 \\ Control 1 & 719 & 72.8 & 716 & 71.9 & 1049 & 97.7 \\ Control 2 & 715 & 71.3 & 719 & 72.8 & 1051 & 96.5 \\ Control 3 & / & / & 718 & 72.2 & / & / \\ \(\Sigma\) & 1434 & / & 2153 & / & 2100 & / \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Simulation scenarios result presenting workplace capacity. Figure 7: Total finished products simulation scenarios’ comparison. The numerical results of simulation cost modeling are based on the used numerical calculated values shown in Table 2. The results in Table 4 show a notable increase in the cost of the assembly process with the introduction of an additional manual assembly workplace and additional automated control station. The increase in the cost of the additional workplace in S\({}_{2}\) is almost half of the initial cost in S\({}_{\text{R}}\). Despite the increase in production capacity resulting from the introduction of an additional manual assembly workplace, there are additional costs for the initial investment and high operating costs. Adapting to the customer's needs and possible order fluctuations would make it even more difficult to plan the manufacturing process correctly, and additional problems would arise in ensuring the financial justification of the manual assembly operation. Compared to S\({}_{1}\), the S\({}_{2}\) assumes the validity of the collaborative workplace, allows a notable reduction in the operating costs of the automated assembly and testing workplace. The reduction of the operating costs of the workplace is 38.63% according to the data, and the higher initial investment cost would be refunded in 42 months. Calculation was made after the numerical calculation of the difference between the value of the operating costs and the initial investment, assuming that the workplace works in three shifts. In view of the reduction in the proportion of incorrectly assembled products and the resulting decrease in the duration of the reassembly process from 8% to 2.5%, the introduction of a cooperative workplace ensures a higher quality level of manufactured products in a shorter time at lower production costs. Figure 8 shows a graphic representation of the numerical results. The introduction of an automated collaborative workplace, depending on the results shown, allows a justified investment in terms of cost-time value and easier more flexible adaptation to the customer's needs. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c} \hline \hline
**Workstation** & \(\mathbf{S_{R}}\) & \(\mathbf{S_{1}}\) & \(\mathbf{S_{2}}\) \\ \hline  & **Costs (G)** & **Costs (G)** & **Costs (G)** \\ \hline Worker 1 & 118.40 & 118.40 & 37.88 \\ Worker 2 & 118.40 & 118.40 & / \\ Worker 3 & / & 118.40 & / \\ Robot 1 & / & / & 84.06 \\ Control 1 & 20.48 & 20.46 & 24.09 \\ Control 2 & 20.46 & 20.48 & 24.09 \\ Control 3 & / & 20.46 & / \\ \(\Sigma\) & 277.74 & 416.60 & 170.12 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Simulation scenarios result presenting workplace costs’ evaluation. Figure 8: Total workplace costs simulation scenarios’ comparison.