- 173 Views
- Uploaded on
- Presentation posted in: General

The Job Shop Problem

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

The Job Shop Problem

Chapter 11

Elements of Sequencing and Schedulingby Kenneth R. Baker

Byung-Hyun Ha

- Introduction
- Types of schedules
- Disjunctive programming
- Schedule generation
- Shifting bottleneck procedure

- Job shop model
- Each job has operations with precedence constraint
- Each operation should be done by a specific machine

- Representation of a job
- (i, j, k) -- operation j of job i requires machine k

- Example
- 4 jobs with 3 operations and 3 machines

Processing time

Machine assignment

- Two views of a feasible schedule
- 4 jobs with 3 operations and 3 machines (cont’d)

221

111

431

331

Machine 1

Machine 2

212

412

322

122

Machine 3

313

423

233

133

14

111

122

133

Job 1

Job 2

212

221

233

Job 3

313

322

331

Job 4

412

423

431

431

331

221

111

412

322

212

122

423

313

233

133

431

331

221

111

412

322

212

122

423

313

233

133

- Semi-active schedules
- Idle time is not helpful for regular measures
- Local left-shift
- Adjusting start time of operations earlier, without altering the sequence, lest superfluous idle time exists

- Semi-active schedules (cont’d)
- Dominant set w.r.t. regular measures
- Number of semi-active schedules -- not more than (n!)m
- Network model
- Precedence constraints
- Disjunctive arcs
2 jobs and 2 machines, 3 jobs and 2 machines

Machine assignment

111

122

212

221

1,1

1,2

311

212

2,1

2,2

- Semi-active schedules (cont’d)
- Schedule generation using network model
- Resolve disjunctive arcs
- Schedule schedulable operation, all of whose predecessors are already scheduled
- Resulting schedules are semi-active, while some are infeasible
- Makespan is length of longest path

- Schedule generation using network model

1,1

1,2

1,1

1,2

1,1

1,2

2,1

2,2

2,1

2,2

1,1

1,2

1,1

1,2

2,1

2,2

2,1

2,2

2,1

2,2

431

331

221

111

412

322

212

122

423

313

233

133

111

431

331

221

412

322

212

122

313

423

133

233

- Active schedules
- Global left-shift
- Altering sequence and begin some operation earlier, without delaying any other operations
- Subset of semi-active schedules and dominant w.r.t. regular measures

- Global left-shift

111

431

221

331

412

212

122

322

313

423

133

233

111

331

221

431

412

322

212

122

313

423

133

233

- Nondelay schedules
- No machine is kept idle at a time when it could begin processing some operations
- No guarantee that nondelay schedules contain an optimum

- Summary

nondelay

schedules

semi-active

schedules

active

schedules

optimum?

- Notation
- M -- set of machine
- (i, j) -- operation of job j on machine i
- pij -- processing time of operation (i, j)
- N -- set of all the operations
- A NN -- set of precedence constrains of the jobs.
- yij -- starting time of operations (i, j)

- Objective
- min. Cmax

- Constraints
- yij + pij ykj ((i, j), (k, j))A
- yij + pij Cmax (i, j)N
- yij + pij yilor yil + pil yij (i, j) and (i, l) i M
- yij 0 (i, j)N

- Algorithm 1 -- Active Schedule Generation
1.Let k = 0 and begin with PS(k) as the null partial schedule. Initially, SO(k) includes all operations with no predecessors.

2.Determine f* = minjSO(k) {fj} and the machine m* on which f* could be realized.

3.For each operation j SO(k) that requires machine m* and for whichsj f*, create a new partial schedule in which operation j is added to PS(k) and started at time sj.

4.For each new partial schedule PS(k + 1) created in Step 3, update the data set as follows:

(a) Remove operation j from SO(k).

(b) Form SO(k + 1) by adding the direct successor of j to SO(k).

(c) Increment k by one.

5.Return to Step 2 for each PS(k + 1) created in Step 3, and continue in this manner until all active schedules have been generated.

sj -- the earliest time at which operation j SO(k) could be started

fj -- the earliest time at which operation j SO(k) could be finished

- Using Algorithm 1
- Generating only nondelay schedule
- Modifying Step 2 and 3

- Branch and bound
- Employing lower bound
- Not much practical (c.f., shifting bottleneck procedure)

- Dispatching
- Modifying Step 3 and employing priority rules (e.g. SPT, FCFS, MWKR, ...)

- Generating only nondelay schedule

- Overall procedure
- X -- set of machines already scheduled, X' -- complement of X
- Repeat the following steps
- Identify the next bottleneck machine from X'
- Solving HBT (head-body-tail) problems for machines in X' using precedence constraints and the confirmed schedule
- Select the critical machine, i.e., the machine with maximum makespan

- Schedule all of the operations of the machine by using the result of HBT solution

- Identify the next bottleneck machine from X'

- Difficulties
- HBT problem is NP-hard
- Nevertheless, there are heuristic procedures, such as Longest Tail (LT) procedure

- HBT problem is NP-hard
- Shifting bottleneck procedure for optimization
- Most effective optimization algorithm for job shop problems

- Example
- Problem
- Iteration 1

111

122

133

111

122

133

Job 1

212

221

233

Job 2

212

221

233

313

322

331

Job 3

313

322

331

412

423

431

Job 4

412

423

431

Machine 1

Machine 2

Machine 3

Solution 1-2-3-4 (12)

Solution 2-4-3-1 (11)

Solution 3-4-2-1 (12)

- Example (cont’d)
- Problem
- Iteration 2

111

122

133

111

122

133

Job 1

212

221

233

Job 2

212

221

233

313

322

331

Job 3

313

322

331

412

423

431

Job 4

412

423

431

Machine 1

Machine 2

Solution 1-2-3-4 (14)

Solution 2-4-3-1 (13)

- Example (cont’d)
- Problem
- Iteration 3

111

122

133

111

122

133

Job 1

212

221

233

Job 2

212

221

233

313

322

331

Job 3

313

322

331

412

423

431

Job 4

412

423

431

Machine 2

Solution 2-4-3-1 (13)

- Example (cont’d)
- Results

111

122

133

Job 1

Job 2

212

221

233

111

122

133

Job 3

313

322

331

Job 4

412

423

431

212

221

233

313

322

331

111

221

331

431

Machine 1

412

423

431

Machine 2

212

412

322

122

Machine 3

313

423

233

133

14

- Job shop model
- Mathematical programming
- Active schedule generation
- Shifting bottleneck procedure
- Anyway, optimal?
- M = 13