New species of hybrid pull systems

production models;control systems;simulation

Customized Pull Systems for Single-Product Flow Lines

Traditionally pull production systems are managed through classic control systems such as Kanban, Conwip, or Base stock, but this paper proposes ‘customized’ pull control. Customization means that a given production line is managed through a pull control system that in principle connects each stage of that line with each preceding stage; optimization of the corresponding simulation model, however, shows which of these potential control loops are actually implemented. This novel approach may result in one of the classic systems, but it may also be another type: (1) the total line may be decomposed into several segments, each with its own classic control system (e.g., segment 1 with Kanban, segment 2 with Conwip); (2) the total line or segments may combine different classic systems; (3) the line may be controlled through a new type of system. These different pull systems are found when applying the new approach to a set of twelve production lines. These lines are configured through the application of a statistical (Plackett-Burman) design with ten factors that characterize production lines (such as line length, demand variability, and machine breakdowns).Pull production / inventory;sampling;optimization;evolutionary algorithm

Methodology for Determining the Acceptability of Given Designs in Uncertain Environments

Managers wish to verify that a particular engineering design meets their require- ments. This design's future environment will differ from the environment assumed during the design. Therefore it is crucial to determine which variations in the envi- ronment may make this design unacceptable. The proposed methodology estimates which uncertain environmental parameters are important (so managers can become pro-active) and which parameter combinations (scenarios) make the design unac- ceptable. The methodology combines simulation, bootstrapping, and metamodeling. The methodology is illustrated through a simulated manufacturing system, includ- ing fourteen uncertain parameters of the input distributions for the various arrival and service times. These parameters are investigated through sixteen scenarios, selected through a two-level fractional-factorial design. The resulting simulation In- put/Output (I/O) data are analyzed through a first-order polynomial metamodel and bootstrapping. A second experiment gives some outputs that are indeed un- acceptable. Polynomials fitted to the I/O data estimate the border line (frontier) between acceptable and unacceptable environments.Uncertainty modeling;Risk analysis;Robustness and sensitivity analysis;Simulation;Bootstrap

Customized Pull Systems for Single-Product Flow Lines

Traditionally pull production systems are managed through classic control systems such as Kanban, Conwip, or Base stock, but this paper proposes ‘customized’ pull control. Customization means that a given production line is managed through a pull control system that in principle connects each stage of that line with each preceding stage; optimization of the corresponding simulation model, however, shows which of these potential control loops are actually implemented. This novel approach may result in one of the classic systems, but it may also be another type: (1) the total line may be decomposed into several segments, each with its own classic control system (e.g., segment 1 with Kanban, segment 2 with Conwip); (2) the total line or segments may combine different classic systems; (3) the line may be controlled through a new type of system. These different pull systems are found when applying the new approach to a set of twelve production lines. These lines are configured through the application of a statistical (Plackett-Burman) design with ten factors that characterize production lines (such as line length, demand variability, and machine breakdowns).

Hybrid simulation-optimization methods: A taxonomy and discussion

The possibilities of combining simulation and optimization are vast and the appropriate design highly depends on the problem characteristics. Therefore, it is very important to have a good overview of the different approaches. The taxonomies and classifications proposed in the literature do not cover the complete range of methods and overlook some important criteria. We provide a taxonomy that aims at giving an overview of the full spectrum of current simulation-optimization approaches. Our study may guide researchers who want to use one of the existing methods, give insights into the cross-fertilization of the ideas applied in those methods and create a standard for a better communication in the scientific community. Future reviews can use the taxonomy here described to classify both general approaches and methods for specific application fields.The possibilities of combining simulation and optimization are vast and the appropriate design highly depends on the problem characteristics. Therefore, it is very important to have a good overview of the different approaches. The taxonomies and classifications proposed in the literature do not cover the complete range of methods and overlook some important criteria. We provide a taxonomy that aims at giving an overview of the full spectrum of current simulation-optimization approaches. Our study may guide researchers who want to use one of the existing methods, give insights into the cross-fertilization of the ideas applied in those methods and create a standard for a better communication in the scientific community. Future reviews can use the taxonomy here described to classify both general approaches and methods for specific application fields. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved

Real time selection of scheduling rules and knowledge extraction via dynamically controlled data mining

A new scheduling system for selecting dispatching rules in real time is developed by combining the techniques of simulation, data mining, and statistical process control charts. The proposed scheduling system extracts knowledge from data coming from the manufacturing environment by constructing a decision tree, and selects a dispatching rule from the tree for each scheduling period. In addition, the system utilises the process control charts to monitor the performance of the decision tree and dynamically updates this decision tree whenever the manufacturing conditions change. This gives the proposed system the ability to adapt itself to changes in the manufacturing environment and improve the quality of its decisions. We implement the proposed system on a job shop problem, with the objective of minimising average tardiness, to evaluate its performance. Simulation results indicate that the performance of the proposed system is considerably better than other simulation-based single-pass and multi-pass scheduling algorithms available in the literature. We also illustrate knowledge extraction by presenting a sample decision tree from our experiments. © 2010 Taylor & Francis

Facility layout design using a multi-objective interactive genetic algorithm to support the DM

The unequal area facility layout problem (UA-FLP) has been addressed by many methods. Most of them only take aspects that can be quantified into account. This contribution presents a novel approach, which considers both quantitative aspects and subjective features. To this end, a multi-objective interactive genetic algorithm is proposed with the aim of allowing interaction between the algorithm and the human expert designer, normally called the decision maker (DM) in the field of UA-FLP. The contribution of the DM's knowledge into the approach guides the complex search process, adjusting it to the DM's preferences. The entire population associated to facility layout designs is evaluated by quantitative criteria in combination with an assessment prepared by the DM, who gives a subjective evaluation for a set of representative individuals of the population in each iteration. In order to choose these individuals, a soft computing clustering method is used. Two interesting real-world data sets are analysed to empirically probe the robustness of these models. The first UA-FLP case study describes an ovine slaughterhouse plant and the second, a design for recycling carton plant. Relevant results are obtained, and interesting conclusions are drawn from the application of this novel intelligent framework

Discrete event simulation in livestock management

The agricultural sector in the UK is facing unprecedented challenges as a result of changes in the macroeconomic environment and the future of the livestock sub-sector is particularly uncertain. Farmer's businesses and livelihoods are at risk with the planned removal of subsidy payments as a consequence of emerging agricultural policy change as a result of Brexit. Farmers are forced to seek adaptive strategies to survive because of changing socio-political circumstances. This study explores the potential of an analytical tool, Discrete Event Simulation (DES) applied within the agricultural sub-sector of livestock management. It utilises a multi methodological approach using both interviews with farmers and a simulation of a real case; Colclough livestock farm, located in Yorkshire, England. The findings show that DES can be used by livestock farmers, helping to simulate potential growth strategies and observe the impact in relation to existing farm processes. Barriers to the sector wide adoption of new farm technologies are presented. This research captures the current views of farmers regarding technology adoption, showing empirically that technologies and software exist which can improve economic performance of farming enterprises, however, contingent factors, such as age, attitudes, skillsets and broadband connectivity, limits successful adoption

Flow shop rescheduling under different types of disruption

This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published by Taylor & Francis in International Journal of Production Research on 2013, available online:http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/00207543.2012.666856Almost all manufacturing facilities need to use production planning and scheduling systems to increase productivity and to reduce production costs. Real-life production operations are subject to a large number of unexpected disruptions that may invalidate the original schedules. In these cases, rescheduling is essential to minimise the impact on the performance of the system. In this work we consider flow shop layouts that have seldom been studied in the rescheduling literature. We generate and employ three types of disruption that interrupt the original schedules simultaneously. We develop rescheduling algorithms to finally accomplish the twofold objective of establishing a standard framework on the one hand, and proposing rescheduling methods that seek a good trade-off between schedule quality and stability on the other.The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for their careful and detailed comments that helped to improve the paper considerably. This work is partially financed by the Small and Medium Industry of the Generalitat Valenciana (IMPIVA) and by the European Union through the European Regional Development Fund (FEDER) inside the R + D program "Ayudas dirigidas a Institutos tecnologicos de la Red IMPIVA" during the year 2011, with project number IMDEEA/2011/142.Katragjini Prifti, K.; Vallada Regalado, E.; Ruiz García, R. (2013). Flow shop rescheduling under different types of disruption. International Journal of Production Research. 51(3):780-797. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2012.666856S780797513Abumaizar, R. J., & Svestka, J. A. (1997). Rescheduling job shops under random disruptions. International Journal of Production Research, 35(7), 2065-2082. doi:10.1080/002075497195074Adiri, I., Frostig, E., & Kan, A. H. G. R. (1991). Scheduling on a single machine with a single breakdown to minimize stochastically the number of tardy jobs. Naval Research Logistics, 38(2), 261-271. doi:10.1002/1520-6750(199104)38:23.0.co;2-iAkturk, M. S., & Gorgulu, E. (1999). Match-up scheduling under a machine breakdown. European Journal of Operational Research, 112(1), 81-97. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(97)00396-2Allahverdi, A. (1996). Two-machine proportionate flowshop scheduling with breakdowns to minimize maximum lateness. Computers & Operations Research, 23(10), 909-916. doi:10.1016/0305-0548(96)00012-3Arnaout, J. P., & Rabadi, G. (2008). Rescheduling of unrelated parallel machines under machine breakdowns. International Journal of Applied Management Science, 1(1), 75. doi:10.1504/ijams.2008.020040Artigues, C., Billaut, J.-C., & Esswein, C. (2005). Maximization of solution flexibility for robust shop scheduling. European Journal of Operational Research, 165(2), 314-328. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.004Azizoglu, M., & Alagöz, O. (2005). Parallel-machine rescheduling with machine disruptions. IIE Transactions, 37(12), 1113-1118. doi:10.1080/07408170500288133Bean, J. C., Birge, J. R., Mittenthal, J., & Noon, C. E. (1991). Matchup Scheduling with Multiple Resources, Release Dates and Disruptions. Operations Research, 39(3), 470-483. doi:10.1287/opre.39.3.470Caricato, P., & Grieco, A. (2008). An online approach to dynamic rescheduling for production planning applications. International Journal of Production Research, 46(16), 4597-4617. doi:10.1080/00207540601136225CHURCH, L. K., & UZSOY, R. (1992). Analysis of periodic and event-driven rescheduling policies in dynamic shops. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 5(3), 153-163. doi:10.1080/09511929208944524Cowling, P., & Johansson, M. (2002). Using real time information for effective dynamic scheduling. European Journal of Operational Research, 139(2), 230-244. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(01)00355-1Curry, J., & Peters *, B. (2005). Rescheduling parallel machines with stepwise increasing tardiness and machine assignment stability objectives. International Journal of Production Research, 43(15), 3231-3246. doi:10.1080/00207540500103953DUTTA, A. (1990). Reacting to Scheduling Exceptions in FMS Environments. IIE Transactions, 22(4), 300-314. doi:10.1080/07408179008964185Ghezail, F., Pierreval, H., & Hajri-Gabouj, S. (2010). Analysis of robustness in proactive scheduling: A graphical approach. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 58(2), 193-198. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2009.03.004Goren, S., & Sabuncuoglu, I. (2008). Robustness and stability measures for scheduling: single-machine environment. IIE Transactions, 40(1), 66-83. doi:10.1080/07408170701283198Hall, N. G., & Potts, C. N. (2004). Rescheduling for New Orders. Operations Research, 52(3), 440-453. doi:10.1287/opre.1030.0101Herrmann, J. W., Lee, C.-Y., & Snowdon, J. L. (1993). A Classification of Static Scheduling Problems. Complexity in Numerical Optimization, 203-253. doi:10.1142/9789814354363_0011Herroelen, W., & Leus, R. (2005). Project scheduling under uncertainty: Survey and research potentials. European Journal of Operational Research, 165(2), 289-306. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.002Hozak, K., & Hill, J. A. (2009). Issues and opportunities regarding replanning and rescheduling frequencies. International Journal of Production Research, 47(18), 4955-4970. doi:10.1080/00207540802047106Huaccho Huatuco, L., Efstathiou, J., Calinescu, A., Sivadasan, S., & Kariuki, S. (2009). Comparing the impact of different rescheduling strategies on the entropic-related complexity of manufacturing systems. International Journal of Production Research, 47(15), 4305-4325. doi:10.1080/00207540701871036Jensen, M. T. (2003). Generating robust and flexible job shop schedules using genetic algorithms. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 7(3), 275-288. doi:10.1109/tevc.2003.810067King, J. R. (1976). The theory-practice gap in job-shop scheduling. Production Engineer, 55(3), 137. doi:10.1049/tpe.1976.0044Kopanos, G. M., Capón-García, E., Espuña,, A., & Puigjaner, L. (2008). Costs for Rescheduling Actions: A Critical Issue for Reducing the Gap between Scheduling Theory and Practice. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research, 47(22), 8785-8795. doi:10.1021/ie8005676Lee, C.-Y., Leung, J. Y.-T., & Yu, G. (2006). Two Machine Scheduling under Disruptions with Transportation Considerations. Journal of Scheduling, 9(1), 35-48. doi:10.1007/s10951-006-5592-7Li, Z., & Ierapetritou, M. (2008). Process scheduling under uncertainty: Review and challenges. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 32(4-5), 715-727. doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2007.03.001Liao, C. J., & Chen, W. J. (2004). Scheduling under machine breakdown in a continuous process industry. Computers & Operations Research, 31(3), 415-428. doi:10.1016/s0305-0548(02)00224-1Mehta, S. V. (1999). Predictable scheduling of a single machine subject to breakdowns. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 12(1), 15-38. doi:10.1080/095119299130443MUHLEMANN, A. P., LOCKETT, A. G., & FARN, C.-K. (1982). Job shop scheduling heuristics and frequency of scheduling. International Journal of Production Research, 20(2), 227-241. doi:10.1080/00207548208947763Nawaz, M., Enscore, E. E., & Ham, I. (1983). A heuristic algorithm for the m-machine, n-job flow-shop sequencing problem. Omega, 11(1), 91-95. doi:10.1016/0305-0483(83)90088-9O’Donovan, R., Uzsoy, R., & McKay, K. N. (1999). Predictable scheduling of a single machine with breakdowns and sensitive jobs. International Journal of Production Research, 37(18), 4217-4233. doi:10.1080/002075499189745Özlen, M., & Azizoğlu, M. (2009). Generating all efficient solutions of a rescheduling problem on unrelated parallel machines. International Journal of Production Research, 47(19), 5245-5270. doi:10.1080/00207540802043998Pfeiffer, A., Kádár, B., & Monostori, L. (2007). Stability-oriented evaluation of rescheduling strategies, by using simulation. Computers in Industry, 58(7), 630-643. doi:10.1016/j.compind.2007.05.009Pierreval, H., & Durieux-Paris, S. (2007). Robust simulation with a base environmental scenario. European Journal of Operational Research, 182(2), 783-793. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2006.07.045Damodaran, P., Hirani, N. S., & Gallego, M. C. V. (2009). Scheduling identical parallel batch processing machines to minimise makespan using genetic algorithms. European J. of Industrial Engineering, 3(2), 187. doi:10.1504/ejie.2009.023605Qi, X., Bard, J. F., & Yu, G. (2006). Disruption management for machine scheduling: The case of SPT schedules. International Journal of Production Economics, 103(1), 166-184. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2005.05.021Rangsaritratsamee, R., Ferrell, W. G., & Kurz, M. B. (2004). Dynamic rescheduling that simultaneously considers efficiency and stability. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 46(1), 1-15. doi:10.1016/j.cie.2003.09.007Ruiz, R., & Stützle, T. (2007). A simple and effective iterated greedy algorithm for the permutation flowshop scheduling problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 177(3), 2033-2049. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2005.12.009Sabuncuoglu, I., & Goren, S. (2009). Hedging production schedules against uncertainty in manufacturing environment with a review of robustness and stability research. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing, 22(2), 138-157. doi:10.1080/09511920802209033Sabuncuoglu, I., & Kizilisik, O. B. (2003). Reactive scheduling in a dynamic and stochastic FMS environment. International Journal of Production Research, 41(17), 4211-4231. doi:10.1080/0020754031000149202Salveson, M. E. (1952). On a Quantitative Method in Production Planning and Scheduling. Econometrica, 20(4), 554. doi:10.2307/1907643Samarghandi, H., & ElMekkawy, T. Y. (2011). An efficient hybrid algorithm for the two-machine no-wait flow shop problem with separable setup times and single server. European J. of Industrial Engineering, 5(2), 111. doi:10.1504/ejie.2011.039869Subramaniam *, V., Raheja, A. S., & Rama Bhupal Reddy, K. (2005). Reactive repair tool for job shop schedules. International Journal of Production Research, 43(1), 1-23. doi:10.1080/0020754042000270412Taillard, E. (1990). Some efficient heuristic methods for the flow shop sequencing problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 47(1), 65-74. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(90)90090-xTaillard, E. (1993). Benchmarks for basic scheduling problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 64(2), 278-285. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(93)90182-mValente, J. M. S., & Schaller, J. E. (2010). Improved heuristics for the single machine scheduling problem with linear early and quadratic tardy penalties. European J. of Industrial Engineering, 4(1), 99. doi:10.1504/ejie.2010.029572Vallada, E., & Ruiz, R. (2010). Genetic algorithms with path relinking for the minimum tardiness permutation flowshop problem☆. Omega, 38(1-2), 57-67. doi:10.1016/j.omega.2009.04.002Vieira, G. E., Herrmann, J. W., & Lin, E. (2000). Predicting the performance of rescheduling strategies for parallel machine systems. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 19(4), 256-266. doi:10.1016/s0278-6125(01)80005-4Vieira, G. E., Herrmann, J. W., & Lin, E. (2003). Journal of Scheduling, 6(1), 39-62. doi:10.1023/a:1022235519958Yang, J., & Yu, G. (2002). Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, 6(1), 17-33. doi:10.1023/a:1013333232691Zandieh, M., & Gholami, M. (2009). An immune algorithm for scheduling a hybrid flow shop with sequence-dependent setup times and machines with random breakdowns. International Journal of Production Research, 47(24), 6999-7027. doi:10.1080/0020754080240063