Study of event-driven and periodic rescheduling on a single machine with unexpected disruptions

This paper studies the rescheduling problem of a single machine facing unexpected disruptions in order to determine which parameters can help reducing the negative impacts of these disruptions on schedule performance. A Genetic Algorithm (GA) is used to generate the initial schedule and the updated ones according to a reactive strategy. The performance of event-driven rescheduling and periodic rescheduling policies are compared in terms of total tardiness and total cost of rescheduling. Other factors that may affect rescheduling such as disruption time, disruption duration and number of disruptions are investigated. The sensitivity of results to both due date tightness and cost factor variation is tested. The results showed that the timing of the occurrence of disruption as related to scheduling horizon has a major effect on determining the best rescheduling policy. Event-driven policy is superior to other policies for short infrequent disruptions. It was found that the periodic policy is more appropriate for long and frequent disruptions

Aerial Refueling Process Rescheduling Under Job Related Disruptions

The Aerial Refueling Scheduling Problem (ARSP) can be defined as determining the refueling completion times for each fighter aircraft (job) on the multiple tankers (machines) to minimize the total weighted tardiness. ARSP assumes that the jobs have different release times and due dates. The ARSP is dynamic environment and unexpected events may occur. In this paper, rescheduling in the aerial refueling process with a time set of jobs will be studied to deal with job related disruptions such as the arrival of new jobs, the departure of an existing job, high deviations in the release times and changes in job priorities. In order to keep the stability and to avoid excessive computation, partial schedule repair algorithm is developed and its preliminary results are presented

Optimization Models and Approximate Algorithms for the Aerial Refueling Scheduling and Rescheduling Problems

The Aerial Refueling Scheduling Problem (ARSP) can be defined as determining the refueling completion times for fighter aircrafts (jobs) on multiple tankers (machines) to minimize the total weighted tardiness. ARSP can be modeled as a parallel machine scheduling with release times and due date-to-deadline window. ARSP assumes that the jobs have different release times, due dates, and due date-to-deadline windows between the refueling due date and a deadline to return without refueling. The Aerial Refueling Rescheduling Problem (ARRP), on the other hand, can be defined as updating the existing AR schedule after being disrupted by job related events including the arrival of new aircrafts, departure of an existing aircrafts, and changes in aircraft priorities. ARRP is formulated as a multiobjective optimization problem by minimizing the total weighted tardiness (schedule quality) and schedule instability. Both ARSP and ARRP are formulated as mixed integer programming models. The objective function in ARSP is a piecewise tardiness cost that takes into account due date-to-deadline windows and job priorities. Since ARSP is NP-hard, four approximate algorithms are proposed to obtain solutions in reasonable computational times, namely (1) apparent piecewise tardiness cost with release time rule (APTCR), (2) simulated annealing starting from random solution (SArandom ), (3) SA improving the initial solution constructed by APTCR (SAAPTCR), and (4) Metaheuristic for Randomized Priority Search (MetaRaPS). Additionally, five regeneration and partial repair algorithms (MetaRE, BestINSERT, SEPRE, LSHIFT, and SHUFFLE) were developed for ARRP to update instantly the current schedule at the disruption time. The proposed heuristic algorithms are tested in terms of solution quality and CPU time through computational experiments with randomly generated data to represent AR operations and disruptions. Effectiveness of the scheduling and rescheduling algorithms are compared to optimal solutions for problems with up to 12 jobs and to each other for larger problems with up to 60 jobs. The results show that, APTCR is more likely to outperform SArandom especially when the problem size increases, although it has significantly worse performance than SA in terms of deviation from optimal solution for small size problems. Moreover CPU time performance of APTCR is significantly better than SA in both cases. MetaRaPS is more likely to outperform SAAPTCR in terms of average error from optimal solutions for both small and large size problems. Results for small size problems show that MetaRaPS algorithm is more robust compared to SAAPTCR. However, CPU time performance of SA is significantly better than MetaRaPS in both cases. ARRP experiments were conducted with various values of objective weighting factor for extended analysis. In the job arrival case, MetaRE and BestINSERT have significantly performed better than SEPRE in terms of average relative error for small size problems. In the case of job priority disruption, there is no significant difference between MetaRE, BestINSERT, and SHUFFLE algorithms. MetaRE has significantly performed better than LSHIFT to repair job departure disruptions and significantly superior to the BestINSERT algorithm in terms of both relative error and computational time for large size problems

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

Adaptive Scheduling Systems: A decision-theoretic approach

Ph.DDOCTOR OF PHILOSOPH

Random Keys Genetic Algorithms Scheduling and Rescheduling Systems for Common Production Systems

The majority of scheduling research deals with problems in specific production environments with specific objective functions. However, in many cases, more than one problem type and/or objective function exists, resulting in the need for a more generic and flexible system to generate schedules. Furthermore, most of the published scheduling research focuses on creating an optimal or near optimal initial schedule during the planning phase. However, after production processes start, circumstances like machine breakdowns, urgent jobs, and other unplanned events may render the schedule suboptimal, obsolete or even infeasible resulting in a rescheduling problem, which is typically also addressed for a specific production environment, constraints, and objective functions. This dissertation introduces a generic framework consisting of models and algorithms based on Random Keys Genetic Algorithms (RKGA) to handle both the scheduling and rescheduling problems in the most common production environments and for various types of objective functions. The Scheduling system produces predictive (initial) schedules for environments including single machines, flow shops, job shops and parallel machine production systems to optimize regular objective functions such as the Makespan and the Total Tardiness as well as non-regular objective functions such as the Total Earliness and Tardiness. To deal with the rescheduling problem, and using as a basis the same RKGA, a reactive Rescheduling system capable of repairing initial schedules after the occurrence of unexpected events is introduced. The reactive Rescheduling system was designed not only to optimize regular and non-regular objective functions but also to minimize the instability, a very important aspect in rescheduling to avoid shop chaos due to disruptions. Minimizing both schedule inefficiency and instability, however, turns the problem into a multi-objective optimization problem, which is even more difficult to solve. The computational experiments for the predictive model show that it is able to produce optimal or near optimal schedules to benchmark problems for different production environments and objective functions. Additional computational experiments conducted to test the reactive Rescheduling system under two types of unexpected events, machine breakdowns and the arrival of a rush job, show that the proposed framework and algorithms are robust in handling various problem types and computationally reasonable

Match-up strategies and fuzzy robust scheduling for a complex dynamic real world job shop scheduling problem

This thesis investigate a complex real world job shop scheduling / rescheduling problem, in which the presence of uncertainties and the occurrence of disruptions are tackled to produce efficient and reliable solutions. New orders arrive every day in the shop floor and they have to be integrated in the existent schedule. Match-up algorithms are introduced to collect the idle time on machines and accommodate these newly arriving orders. Their aim is to obtain new schedules with good performance which are at the same time highly stable, meaning that they resemble as closely as possible the initial schedule. Subsequently, a novel approach that combines these algorithms with a fuzzy robust scheduling system is proposed. The goal is to associate an effective repairing mechanism with the production of initial robust schedules that are able to facilitate the accommodation of future disruptions. Statistical analyses reveal that match-up algorithms are effective repairing strategies for managing complex disruptions, in which high quality stable schedules are delivered. Moreover, their combination with fuzzy robust scheduling has a positive effect on responding to these disruptions leading to even more reliable solutions in a real world dynamic and uncertain shop floor

A real-time simulation-based optimisation environment for industrial scheduling

n order to cope with the challenges in industry today, such as changes in product diversity and production volume, manufacturing companies are forced to react more flexibly and swiftly. Furthermore, in order for them to survive in an ever-changing market, they also need to be highly competitive by achieving near optimal efficiency in their operations. Production scheduling is vital to the success of manufacturing systems in industry today, because the near optimal allocation of resources is essential in remaining highly competitive. The overall aim of this study is the advancement of research in manufacturing scheduling through the exploration of more effective approaches to address complex, real-world manufacturing flow shop problems. The methodology used in the thesis is in essence a combination of systems engineering, algorithmic design and empirical experiments using real-world scenarios and data. Particularly, it proposes a new, web services-based, industrial scheduling system framework, called OPTIMISE Scheduling System (OSS), for solving real-world complex scheduling problems. OSS, as implemented on top of a generic web services-based simulation-based optimisation (SBO) platform called OPTIMISE, can support near optimal and real-time production scheduling in a distributed and parallel computing environment. Discrete-event simulation (DES) is used to represent and flexibly cope with complex scheduling problems without making unrealistic assumptions which are the major limitations of existing scheduling methods proposed in the literature. At the same time, the research has gone beyond existing studies of simulation-based scheduling applications, because the OSS has been implemented in a real-world industrial environment at an automotive manufacturer, so that qualitative evaluations and quantitative comparisons of scheduling methods and algorithms can be made with the same framework. Furthermore, in order to be able to adapt to and handle many different types of real-world scheduling problems, a new hybrid meta-heuristic scheduling algorithm that combines priority dispatching rules and genetic encoding is proposed. This combination is demonstrated to be able to handle a wider range of problems or a current scheduling problem that may change over time, due to the flexibility requirements in the real-world. The novel hybrid genetic representation has been demonstrated effective through the evaluation in the real-world scheduling problem using real-world data

04231 Abstracts Collection -- Scheduling in Computer and Manufacturing Systems

During 31.05.-04.06.04, the Dagstuhl Seminar 04231 "Scheduling in Computer and Manufacturing Systems" was held in the International Conference and Research Center (IBFI), Schloss Dagstuhl. During the seminar, several participants presented their current research, and ongoing work and open problems were discussed. Abstracts of the presentations given during the seminar as well as abstracts of seminar results and ideas are put together in this paper. The first section describes the seminar topics and goals in general. Links to extended abstracts or full papers are provided, if available