50 research outputs found

    Capacitated lot-sizing and scheduling with sequence-dependent, period-overlapping and non-triangular setups

    Get PDF
    In production planning, sequence dependent setup times and costs are often incurred for switchovers from one product to another. When setup times and costs do not respect the triangular inequality, a situation may occur where the optimal solution includes more than one batch of the same product in a single period - in other words, at least one sub tour exists in the production sequence of that period. By allowing setup crossovers, flexibility is increased and better solutions can be found. In tight capacity conditions, or whenever setup times are significant, setup crossovers are needed to assure feasibility. We present the first linear mixed-integer programming extension for the capacitated lot-sizing and scheduling problem incorporating all the necessary features of sequence sub tours and setup crossovers. This formulation is more efficient than other well known lot-sizing and scheduling models. ยฉ Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

    A novel flexible model for lot sizing and scheduling with non-triangular, period overlapping and carryover setups in different machine configurations

    Get PDF
    ยฉ 2017, Springer Science+Business Media New York. This paper develops and tests an efficient mixed integer programming model for capacitated lot sizing and scheduling with non-triangular and sequence-dependent setup times and costs incorporating all necessary features of setup carryover and overlapping on different machine configurations. The modelโ€™s formulation is based on the asymmetric travelling salesman problem and allows multiple lots of a product within a period. The model conserves the setup state when no product is being processed over successive periods, allows starting a setup in a period and ending it in the next period, permits ending a setup in a period and starting production in the next period(s), and enforces a minimum lot size over multiple periods. This new comprehensive model thus relaxes all limitations of physical separation between the periods. The model is first developed for a single machine and then extended to other machine configurations, including parallel machines and flexible flow lines. Computational tests demonstrate the flexibility and comprehensiveness of the proposed models

    Integrated capacitated lot sizing and scheduling problems in a flexible flow line

    Get PDF
    The lot sizing and scheduling problem in a Flexible Flow Line (FFL) has extensive real-world applications in many industries. An FFL consists of several production stages in series with parallel machines at each stage. The decisions to be taken are the determination of production quantities (lots), machine assignments and production sequences (schedules) on each machine at each stage in an FFL. Lot sizing and scheduling problems are closely interrelated. Solving them separately and then coordinating their interdependencies is often ineffective. However due to their complexity, there is a lack of mathematical modelling and solution procedures in the literature to combine and jointly solve them.Up to now most research has been focused on combining lotsizing and scheduling for the single machine configuration, and research on other configurations like FFL is sparse. This thesis presents several mathematical models with practical assumptions and appropriate algorithms, along with experimental test problems, for simultaneously lotsizing and scheduling in FFL. This problem, called the โ€˜General Lot sizing and Scheduling Problem in a Flexible Flow Lineโ€™ (GLSP-FFL). The objective is to satisfy varying demand over a finite planning horizon with minimal inventory, backorder and production setup costs. The problem is complex as any product can be processed on any machine, but these have different processing rates and sequence-dependent setup times & costs. As a result, even finding a feasible solution of large problems in reasonable time is impossible. Therefore the heuristic solution procedure named Adaptive Simulated Annealing (ASA), with four well-designed initial solutions, is designed to solve GLSP-FFL.A further original contribution of this study is to design linear mixed-integer programming (MILP) formulations for this problem, incorporating all necessary features of setup carryovers, setup overlapping, non-triangular setup while allowing multiple lot production per periods, lot splitting and sequencing through ATSP-adaption based on a variety of subtour elimination

    Modelling extensions and hybrid metaheuristics for the capacitated lotsizing and scheduling problem

    Get PDF
    Tese de mestrado integrado. Engenharia Industrial e Gestรฃo. Faculdade de Engenharia. Universidade do Porto. 200

    Industrial insights into lot sizing and schedulingmodeling

    Get PDF
    ยฉ 2015 Brazilian Operations Research Society. Lot sizing and scheduling by mixed integer programming has been a hot research topic inthe last 20 years. Researchers have been trying to develop stronger formulations, as well as to incorporatereal-world requirements from different applications. This paper illustrates some of these requirements anddemonstrates how small- and big-bucket models have been adapted and extended. Motivation comes fromdifferent industries, especially from process and fast-moving consumer goods industries

    Integrated capacitated lot sizing and scheduling problems in a flexible flow line

    Get PDF
    The lot sizing and scheduling problem in a Flexible Flow Line (FFL) has extensive real-world applications in many industries. An FFL consists of several production stages in series with parallel machines at each stage. The decisions to be taken are the determination of production quantities (lots), machine assignments and production sequences (schedules) on each machine at each stage in an FFL. Lot sizing and scheduling problems are closely interrelated. Solving them separately and then coordinating their interdependencies is often ineffective. However due to their complexity, there is a lack of mathematical modelling and solution procedures in the literature to combine and jointly solve them. Up to now most research has been focused on combining lotsizing and scheduling for the single machine configuration, and research on other configurations like FFL is sparse. This thesis presents several mathematical models with practical assumptions and appropriate algorithms, along with experimental test problems, for simultaneously lotsizing and scheduling in FFL. This problem, called the โ€˜General Lot sizing and Scheduling Problem in a Flexible Flow Lineโ€™ (GLSP-FFL). The objective is to satisfy varying demand over a finite planning horizon with minimal inventory, backorder and production setup costs. The problem is complex as any product can be processed on any machine, but these have different processing rates and sequence-dependent setup times & costs. As a result, even finding a feasible solution of large problems in reasonable time is impossible. Therefore the heuristic solution procedure named Adaptive Simulated Annealing (ASA), with four well-designed initial solutions, is designed to solve GLSP-FFL. A further original contribution of this study is to design linear mixed-integer programming (MILP) formulations for this problem, incorporating all necessary features of setup carryovers, setup overlapping, non-triangular setup while allowing multiple lot production per periods, lot splitting and sequencing through ATSP-adaption based on a variety of subtour elimination.EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

    ์ˆœ์„œ์˜์กด์  ์ž‘์—…์ค€๋น„๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ƒ์‚ฐ๊ณ„ํš ๋ฌธ์ œ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ •์ˆ˜ ์ตœ์ ํ™” ๋ฐ ๊ทผ์‚ฌ ๋™์  ๊ณ„ํš๋ฒ• ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ํ•ด๋ฒ•

    Get PDF
    ํ•™์œ„๋…ผ๋ฌธ(๋ฐ•์‚ฌ) -- ์„œ์šธ๋Œ€ํ•™๊ต๋Œ€ํ•™์› : ๊ณต๊ณผ๋Œ€ํ•™ ์‚ฐ์—…๊ณตํ•™๊ณผ, 2022. 8. ์ด๊ฒฝ์‹.Lot-sizing and scheduling problem, an integration of the two important decision making problems in the production planning phase of a supply chain, determines both the production amounts and sequences of multiple items within a given planning horizon to meet the time-varying demand with minimum cost. Along with the growing importance of coordinated decision making in the supply chain, this integrated problem has attracted increasing attention from both industrial and academic communities. However, despite vibrant research over the recent decades, the problem is still hard to be solved due to its inherent theoretical complexity as well as the evolving complexity of the real-world industrial environments and the corresponding manufacturing processes. Furthermore, when the setup activity occurs in a sequence-dependent manner, it is known that the problem becomes considerably more difficult. This dissertation aims to propose integer optimization and approximate dynamic programming approaches for solving the lot-sizing and scheduling problem with sequence-dependent setups. Firstly, to enhance the knowledge of the structure of the problem which is strongly NP-hard, we consider a single-period substructure of the problem. By analyzing the polyhedron defined by the substructure, we derive new families of facet-defining inequalities which are separable in polynomial time via solving maximum flow problems. Through the computational experiments, these inequalities are demonstrated to provide much tighter lower bounds than the existing ones. Then, using these results, we provide new integer optimization models which can incorporate various extensions of the lot-sizing and scheduling problem such as setup crossover and carryover naturally. The proposed models provide tighter linear programming relaxation bounds than standard models. This leads to the development of an efficient linear programming-based heuristic algorithm which provides a primal feasible solution quickly. Finally, we devise an approximate dynamic programming algorithm. The proposed algorithm incorporates the value function approximation approach which makes use of both the tight lower bound obtained from the linear programming relaxation and the upper bound acquired from the linear programming-based heuristic algorithm. The results of computational experiments indicate that the proposed algorithm has advantages over the existing approaches.๊ณต๊ธ‰๋ง์˜ ์ƒ์‚ฐ ๊ณ„ํš ๋‹จ๊ณ„์—์„œ์˜ ์ฃผ์š”ํ•œ ๋‘ ๊ฐ€์ง€ ๋‹จ๊ธฐ ์˜์‚ฌ๊ฒฐ์ • ๋ฌธ์ œ์ธ Lot-sizing ๋ฌธ์ œ์™€ Scheduling ๋ฌธ์ œ๊ฐ€ ํ†ตํ•ฉ๋œ ๋ฌธ์ œ์ธ Lot-sizing and scheduling problem (LSP)์€ ๊ณ„ํš๋Œ€์ƒ๊ธฐ๊ฐ„ ๋™์•ˆ ์ฃผ์–ด์ง„ ๋ณต์ˆ˜์˜ ์ œํ’ˆ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ˆ˜์š”๋ฅผ ์ตœ์†Œ์˜ ๋น„์šฉ์œผ๋กœ ๋งŒ์กฑ์‹œํ‚ค๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ ๋‹จ์œ„ ๊ธฐ๊ฐ„ ๋ณ„ ์ตœ์ ์˜ ์ƒ์‚ฐ๋Ÿ‰ ๋ฐ ์ƒ์‚ฐ ์ˆœ์„œ๋ฅผ ๊ฒฐ์ •ํ•œ๋‹ค. ๊ณต๊ธ‰๋ง ๋‚ด์˜ ๋‹ค์–‘ํ•œ ์š”์†Œ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ํ†ตํ•ฉ์  ์˜์‚ฌ ๊ฒฐ์ •์˜ ์ค‘์š”์„ฑ์ด ์ปค์ง์— ๋”ฐ๋ผ LSP์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ด€์‹ฌ ์—ญ์‹œ ์‚ฐ์—…๊ณ„์™€ ํ•™๊ณ„ ๋ชจ๋‘์—์„œ ์ง€์†์ ์œผ๋กœ ์ฆ๊ฐ€ํ•˜์˜€๋‹ค. ๊ทธ๋Ÿฌ๋‚˜ ์ตœ๊ทผ ์ˆ˜์‹ญ ๋…„์— ๊ฑธ์นœ ํ™œ๋ฐœํ•œ ์—ฐ๊ตฌ์—๋„ ๋ถˆ๊ตฌํ•˜๊ณ , ๋ฌธ์ œ ์ž์ฒด๊ฐ€ ๋‚ดํฌํ•˜๋Š” ์ด๋ก ์  ๋ณต์žก์„ฑ ๋ฐ ์‹ค์ œ ์‚ฐ์—… ํ™˜๊ฒฝ๊ณผ ์ œ์กฐ ๊ณต์ •์˜ ๊ณ ๋„ํ™”/๋ณต์žกํ™” ๋“ฑ์œผ๋กœ ์ธํ•ด LSP๋ฅผ ํ•ด๊ฒฐํ•˜๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์€ ์—ฌ์ „ํžˆ ์–ด๋ ค์šด ๋ฌธ์ œ๋กœ ๋‚จ์•„์žˆ๋‹ค. ํŠนํžˆ ์ˆœ์„œ์˜์กด์  ์ž‘์—…์ค€๋น„๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” ๊ฒฝ์šฐ ๋ฌธ์ œ๊ฐ€ ๋”์šฑ ์–ด๋ ค์›Œ์ง„๋‹ค๋Š” ๊ฒƒ์ด ์ž˜ ์•Œ๋ ค์ ธ ์žˆ๋‹ค. ๋ณธ ๋…ผ๋ฌธ์—์„œ๋Š” ์ˆœ์„œ์˜์กด์  ์ž‘์—…์ค€๋น„๊ฐ€ ์žˆ๋Š” LSP๋ฅผ ํ•ด๊ฒฐํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•œ ์ •์ˆ˜ ์ตœ์ ํ™” ๋ฐ ๊ทผ์‚ฌ ๋™์  ๊ณ„ํš๋ฒ• ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜์˜ ํ•ด๋ฒ•์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋จผ์ €, ์ด๋ก ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๊ฐ•์„ฑ NP-hard์— ์†ํ•œ๋‹ค๋Š” ์‚ฌ์‹ค์ด ์ž˜ ์•Œ๋ ค์ง„ LSP์˜ ๊ทผ๋ณธ ๊ตฌ์กฐ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ดํ•ด๋ฅผ ๋†’์ด๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•˜์—ฌ ๋‹จ์ผ ๊ธฐ๊ฐ„๋งŒ์„ ๊ณ ๋ คํ•˜๋Š” ๋ถ€๋ถ„๊ตฌ์กฐ์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ๋‹ค๋ฃฌ๋‹ค. ๋‹จ์ผ ๊ธฐ๊ฐ„ ๋ถ€๋ถ„๊ตฌ์กฐ์— ์˜ํ•ด ์ •์˜๋˜๋Š” ๋‹ค๋ฉด์ฒด์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ์ด๋ก ์  ๋ถ„์„์„ ํ†ตํ•ด ์ƒˆ๋กœ์šด ์œ ํšจ ๋ถ€๋“ฑ์‹ ๊ตฐ์„ ๋„์ถœํ•˜๊ณ  ํ•ด๋‹น ์œ ํšจ ๋ถ€๋“ฑ์‹๋“ค์ด ๊ทน๋Œ€๋ฉด(facet)์„ ์ •์˜ํ•  ์กฐ๊ฑด์— ๋Œ€ํ•ด ๋ฐํžŒ๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ, ๋„์ถœ๋œ ์œ ํšจ ๋ถ€๋“ฑ์‹๋“ค์ด ๋‹คํ•ญ์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๋‚ด์— ๋ถ„๋ฆฌ ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•จ์„ ๋ณด์ด๊ณ , ์ตœ๋Œ€ํ๋ฆ„๋ฌธ์ œ๋ฅผ ํ™œ์šฉํ•œ ๋‹คํ•ญ์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๋ถ„๋ฆฌ ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ๋“ฌ์„ ๊ณ ์•ˆํ•œ๋‹ค. ์‹คํ—˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ ์œ ํšจ ๋ถ€๋“ฑ์‹๋“ค์ด ๋ชจํ˜•์˜ ์„ ํ˜•๊ณ„ํš ํ•˜ํ•œ๊ฐ•๋„๋ฅผ ๋†’์ด๋Š” ๋ฐ ํฐ ์˜ํ–ฅ์„ ์คŒ์„ ํ™•์ธํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋˜ํ•œ ํ•ด๋‹น ๋ถ€๋“ฑ์‹๋“ค์ด ๋ชจ๋‘ ์ถ”๊ฐ€๋œ ๋ชจํ˜•๊ณผ ์ด๋ก ์ ์œผ๋กœ ๋™์ผํ•œ ํ•˜ํ•œ์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•˜๋Š” ํ™•์žฅ ์ˆ˜๋ฆฌ๋ชจํ˜•(extended formulation)์„ ๋„์ถœํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด๋ฅผ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜์—ฌ, ์‹ค์ œ ์‚ฐ์—…์—์„œ ๋ฐœ์ƒํ•˜๋Š” LSP์—์„œ ์ข…์ข… ๊ณ ๋ คํ•˜๋Š” ์ฃผ์š”ํ•œ ์ถ”๊ฐ€ ์š”์†Œ๋“ค์„ ๋‹ค๋ฃฐ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์ƒˆ๋กœ์šด ์ˆ˜๋ฆฌ ๋ชจํ˜•์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜๋ฉฐ ํ•ด๋‹น ๋ชจํ˜•์ด ๊ธฐ์กด์˜ ๋ชจํ˜•์— ๋น„ํ•ด ๋”์šฑ ๊ฐ•ํ•œ ์„ ํ˜•๊ณ„ํš ํ•˜ํ•œ์„ ์ œ๊ณตํ•จ์„ ๋ณด์ธ๋‹ค. ์ด ๋ชจํ˜•์„ ๋ฐ”ํƒ•์œผ๋กœ ๋น ๋ฅธ ์‹œ๊ฐ„ ๋‚ด์— ๊ฐ€๋Šฅํ•ด๋ฅผ ์ฐพ์„ ์ˆ˜ ์žˆ๋Š” ์„ ํ˜•๊ณ„ํš ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ํœด๋ฆฌ์Šคํ‹ฑ ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ๋“ฌ์„ ๊ฐœ๋ฐœํ•œ๋‹ค. ๋งˆ์ง€๋ง‰์œผ๋กœ ํ•ด๋‹น ๋ฌธ์ œ์— ๋Œ€ํ•œ ๊ทผ์‚ฌ ๋™์  ๊ณ„ํš๋ฒ• ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ๋“ฌ์„ ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ œ์•ˆํ•˜๋Š” ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ๋“ฌ์€ ๊ฐ€์น˜ํ•จ์ˆ˜ ๊ทผ์‚ฌ ๊ธฐ๋ฒ•์„ ํ™œ์šฉํ•˜๋ฉฐ ํŠน์ • ์ƒํƒœ์˜ ๊ฐ€์น˜๋ฅผ ๊ทผ์‚ฌํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ํ•ด๋‹น ์ƒํƒœ์—์„œ์˜ ๊ทผ์‚ฌํ•จ์ˆ˜์˜ ์ƒํ•œ ๋ฐ ํ•˜ํ•œ์„ ํ™œ์šฉํ•œ๋‹ค. ์ด ๋•Œ, ์ข‹์€ ์ƒํ•œ ๋ฐ ํ•˜ํ•œ๊ฐ’์„ ๊ตฌํ•˜๊ธฐ ์œ„ํ•ด ์ œ์•ˆ๋œ ๋ชจํ˜•์˜ ์„ ํ˜•๊ณ„ํš ์™„ํ™”๋ฌธ์ œ์™€ ์„ ํ˜•๊ณ„ํš ๊ธฐ๋ฐ˜ ํœด๋ฆฌ์Šคํ‹ฑ ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ๋“ฌ์„ ์‚ฌ์šฉํ•œ๋‹ค. ์‹คํ—˜ ๊ฒฐ๊ณผ๋ฅผ ํ†ตํ•ด ์ œ์•ˆํ•œ ์•Œ๊ณ ๋ฆฌ๋“ฌ์ด ๊ธฐ์กด์˜ ๋ฐฉ๋ฒ•๋“ค๊ณผ ๋น„๊ตํ•˜์—ฌ ์šฐ์ˆ˜ํ•œ ์„ฑ๋Šฅ์„ ๋ณด์ž„์„ ํ™•์ธํ•œ๋‹ค.Abstract i Contents iii List of Tables vii List of Figures ix Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Backgrounds 1 1.2 Integrated Lot-sizing and Scheduling Problem 6 1.3 Literature Review 9 1.3.1 Optimization Models for LSP 9 1.3.2 Recent Works on LSP 14 1.4 Research Objectives and Contributions 16 1.5 Outline of the Dissertation 19 Chapter 2 Polyhedral Study on Single-period Substructure of Lot-sizing and Scheduling Problem with Sequence-dependent Setups 21 2.1 Introduction 22 2.2 Literature Review 27 2.3 Single-period Substructure 30 2.3.1 Assumptions 31 2.3.2 Basic Polyhedral Properties 32 2.4 New Valid Inequalities 37 2.4.1 S-STAR Inequality 37 2.4.2 Separation of S-STAR Inequality 42 2.4.3 U-STAR Inequality 47 2.4.4 Separation of U-STAR Inequality 49 2.4.5 General Representation of the Inequalities 52 2.5 Extended Formulations 55 2.5.1 Single-commodity Flow Formulations 55 2.5.2 Multi-commodity Flow Formulations 58 2.5.3 Time-ow Formulations 59 2.6 Computational Experiments 63 2.6.1 Experiment Settings 63 2.6.2 Experiment Results on Single-period Instances 65 2.6.3 Experiment Results on Multi-period Instances 69 2.7 Summary 73 Chapter 3 New Optimization Models for Lot-sizing and Scheduling Problem with Sequence-dependent Setups, Crossover, and Carryover 75 3.1 Introduction 76 3.2 Literature Review 78 3.3 Integer Optimization Models 80 3.3.1 Standard Model (ST) 82 3.3.2 Time-ow Model (TF) 84 3.3.3 Comparison of (ST) and (TF) 89 3.3.4 Facility Location Reformulation 101 3.4 LP-based Naive Fixing Heuristic Algorithm 104 3.5 Computational Experiments 108 3.5.1 Test Instances 108 3.5.2 LP Bound 109 3.5.3 Computational Performance with MIP Solver 111 3.5.4 Performance of LPNF Algorithm 113 3.6 Summary 115 Chapter 4 Approximate Dynamic Programming Algorithm for Lot-sizing and Scheduling Problem with Sequence-dependent Setups 117 4.1 Introduction 118 4.1.1 Markov Decision Process 118 4.1.2 Approximate Dynamic Programming Algorithms 121 4.2 Markov Decision Process Reformulation 124 4.3 Approximate Dynamic Programming Algorithm 127 4.4 Computational Experiments 131 4.4.1 Comparison with (TF-FL) Model 131 4.4.2 Comparison with Big Bucket Model 134 4.5 Summary 138 Chapter 5 Conclusion 139 5.1 Summary and Contributions 139 5.2 Future Research Directions 141 Bibliography 145 Appendix A Pattern-based Formulation in Chapter 2 159 Appendix B Detailed Test Results in Chapter 2 163 Appendix C Detailed Test Results in Chapter 3 169 ๊ตญ๋ฌธ์ดˆ๋ก 173๋ฐ•

    Production lot sizing and scheduling with non-triangular sequence-dependent setup times

    Get PDF
    [NB some mathematical symbols in this abstract may not be correctly reproduced - please check the full text.] This article considers a production lot sizing and scheduling problem with sequence dependent setup times that are not triangular. Consider, for example, a product p that contaminates some other product r unless either a decontamination occurs as part of a substantial setup time stpr or there is a third product q that can absorb pโ€™s contamination. When setup times are triangular then stpr โ‰ค stpq + stqr and there is always an optimal lot sequence with at most one lot (AM1L) per product per period. However, product qโ€™s ability to absorb pโ€™s contamination presents a shortcut opportunity and could result in shorter non-triangular setup times such that stpr > stpq +stqr. This implies that it can sometimes be optimal for a shortcut product such as q to be produced in more than one lot within the same period, breaking the AM1L assumption in much research. This article formulates and explains a new optimal model that not only permits multiple lots (ML) per product per period, but also prohibits subtours using a polynomial number of constraints rather than an exponential number. Computational tests demonstrate the effectiveness of the ML model, even in the presence of just one decontaminating shortcut product, and its fast speed of solution compared to the equivalent AM1L model

    A review of discrete-time optimization models for tactical production planning

    Full text link
    This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published in International Journal of Production Research on 27 Mar 2014, available online: http://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2014.899721[EN] This study presents a review of optimization models for tactical production planning. The objective of this research is to identify streams and future research directions in this field based on the different classification criteria proposed. The major findings indicate that: (1) the most popular production-planning area is master production scheduling with a big-bucket time-type period; (2) most of the considered limited resources correspond to productive resources and, to a lesser extent, to inventory capacities; (3) the consideration of backlogs, set-up times, parallel machines, overtime capacities and network-type multisite configuration stand out in terms of extensions; (4) the most widely used modelling approach is linear/integer/mixed integer linear programming solved with exact algorithms, such as branch-and-bound, in commercial MIP solvers; (5) CPLEX, C and its variants and Lindo/Lingo are the most popular development tools among solvers, programming languages and modelling languages, respectively; (6) most works perform numerical experiments with random created instances, while a small number of works were validated by real-world data from industrial firms, of which the most popular are sawmills, wood and furniture, automobile and semiconductors and electronic devices.This study has been funded by the Universitat Politรจcnica de Valรจncia projects: โ€˜Material Requirement Planning Fourth Generation (MRPIV)โ€™ (Ref. PAID-05-12) and โ€˜Quantitative Models for the Design of Socially Responsible Supply Chains under Uncertainty Conditions. Application of Solution Strategies based on Hybrid Metaheuristicsโ€™ (PAID-06-12).Dรญaz-Madroรฑero Boluda, FM.; Mula, J.; Peidro Payรก, D. (2014). A review of discrete-time optimization models for tactical production planning. International Journal of Production Research. 52(17):5171-5205. doi:10.1080/00207543.2014.899721S51715205521
    corecore