A multiobjective parallel machine problem considering eligibility and release and delivery times
Download
1 / 27

A multiobjective parallel machine problem considering eligibility and release and delivery times - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 87 Views
  • Uploaded on

A multiobjective parallel machine problem considering eligibility and release and delivery times. Manuel Mateo [email protected] Departament Organització d’Empreses, Universitat Politècnica Catalunya. Barcelona (Spain). HAROSA, Barcelona (14/06/12). Summary. Introduction: the real case

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'A multiobjective parallel machine problem considering eligibility and release and delivery times' - hiroko


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

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 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
A multiobjective parallel machine problem considering eligibility and release and delivery times

A multiobjective parallel machine problem considering eligibility and release and delivery times

Manuel Mateo

[email protected]

Departament Organització d’Empreses, Universitat Politècnica Catalunya. Barcelona (Spain)

HAROSA, Barcelona (14/06/12)


Summary
Summary eligibility and release and delivery times

  • Introduction: the real case

  • Scheduling of jobs The multiobjective problem

  • Problem Pm/rj,qj,Mj/(Cmax,W)

  • State of the art

    • A biobjective problem, the Pareto front

    • Algorithm

    • Computational experiments

  • Computational experience

  • Conclusions


Introduction the real case i
Introduction: the real case (I) eligibility and release and delivery times

  • The manufacturing of products is usually divided in operations or phases of transformation.

  • Usually one of them becomes the bottleneck of the process.

  • In the presented problem, we suppose this bottleneck is an intermediate phase.

  • Therefore, some operations are done before (the total time to work them out leads to a release time) and some others are done after (their total time is called delivery or queue time).

release times

bottleneck

queue times


Introduction the real case ii
Introduction: the real case (II) eligibility and release and delivery times

  • Manufacturing plants usually have several machines or assembly lines.

  • There are several products to be manufactured.

  • A usual situation is a product is assigned to a machine (line) and will be only manufactured in that machine.

Line 1

INITIAL SITUATION

Line 2

Line 3

2 l

1 l

50cl

33cl

Line 4


Introduction the real case iii
Introduction: the real case (III) eligibility and release and delivery times

  • Nevertheless, there could be more product-machine assignments according to capabilities of the machines.

High-level

machines

1 l

50cl

33cl

Line 1

2 l

1 l

50cl

33cl

Medium-level

machines

Line 2

CONSIDERED SITUATION

2 l

Med.-

level

High-

level

Low-

level

1 l

50cl

33cl

Line 3

2 l

Low-level

machines

1 l

50cl

33cl

Line 4

2 l


Introduction the real case iv
Introduction: the real case (IV) eligibility and release and delivery times

  • The managers prefer the use of the most modern resources (high-level machines). But if all the jobs were done in these machines, the makespan would be very high. The rest of machines would be completely free.

  • Some works from machines of the high-level are moved to the other machines.

  • Machinery for reduced products is considered in the low-level.

  • The medium-level machines can work the reduced products and also others. They are preferred to the low-level machines. 

  • We define a penalty or weight for job j:

  • wj=1 if a job (of medium-level or low-level) is scheduled in a medium-level machine;

  • wj=2 if a job (of low-level) is scheduled in a low-level machine.


Scheduling of jobs i
Scheduling of jobs (I) eligibility and release and delivery times

A set of n jobs (j=1,…,n) to be scheduled on m parallel machines (i=1,…,m)

Given a job j, it is known:

  • the processing time pjfor the operation,

  • the release time rj(also called head times),

  • the delivery or queue time qj(also tail times),

  • the associated level lj.

    The machines are distributed among p groups or levels (k=1,…,p).

    • Particularly, we propose an algorithm for p=3 (high-level, medium-level and low-level).

  • Any machine i and job j is classified into one of the levels.

  • A machine associated to a level k can produce jobs of its own level and from a lower level.

  • The processing time of a job is the same for any machine.


0 eligibility and release and delivery times

t

Scheduling of jobs (II)

For a job of any level: high (h), medium (m) or low (l)

  • The release times (rj) and the delivery times (qj) are considered due to the initial availability of the job and the necessary subsequent tasks.

  • After the delivery time, the job is considered finished (completion time, cj).

  • Setup times and pre-emption are not considered.

cj


Problem pm r j q j m j c max w tot
Problem eligibility and release and delivery timesPm | rj,qj,Mj | (Cmax ,Wtot)

  • Objective: find a feasible schedule  (where j includes the assigned machine and the start time of job j) of minimum completion time (cmax) and minimum total penalization (W).

  • Given tjthe starting time for the job j: ;

    the makespan is determined:

  • Given xjthe machine level where the job j is assigned,

    the weight for the job j is: wj=xj-1

    and the total weight is determined:

  • A schedule is feasible if the next conditions are accomplished:

    • Each machine processes at most one job at a time.

    • A job is only processed in a single machine.

    • Pre-emption is not allowed.

    • Starting time is not lower than the release time:

    • A job of level k is processed in a machine of the same level or a higher level.


HL eligibility and release and delivery times

HL

ML

ML

LL

LL

t

0

t

0

Problem Pm | rj,qj,Mj | (Cmax ,Wtot)

Machines

Jobs

High-level

High-level

Medium-level

Medium-level

Low-level

Low-level

Wtot=0

Wtot=8


Example 1 eligibility and release and delivery times

Wtot

(14;6)

Max Wtot

(36;0)

Min Wtot

Cmax

Min Cmax

Max Cmax


Basis for the main algorithm
Basis for the main algorithm eligibility and release and delivery times

  • Gharbi, A; Haouari, M. (2002). Minimizing makespan on parallel machines subject to release dates and delivery times. Journal of Scheduling; vol. 5; pp. 329-355.

  • It considers release and delivery times.

  • Problem without considering eligibility

  • It is the base for solving the problem (for mk>1)

Methodology

  • Classification of the jobs into 3 groups.

  • Scheduling of the 3 groups of jobs:

    • Scheduling of jobs with medium qj and rj values ( )

    • Scheduling of jobs with low qj values ( JQ )

    • Scheduling of jobs with low rjvalues ( JR )

Condition 1:

Condition 2:


Basis for the main algorithm (II)

Scheduling at each level

Selection of a job to be moved between levels

  • Which one to select? According to processing, release, queue times or an addition of these?

Sequence of changes between levels

  • Initial tests: High-medium, high-low, medium-low


The best of both solutions eligibility and release and delivery times

Scheduling Algorithm (I)

Generating a sub-solution per level

Heuristic 1

Heuristic 2

is a job of the set J such that or corresponds to

is a job of the set J such that or corresponds to

1

1

release time  first position; else, last position

release time  last position; else, first position

2

2

3

3

If , end; else, Step 1

If , end; else, Step 1


m eligibility and release and delivery timesl

t

0

10

20

25

30

5

15

Scheduling Algorithm (II)

Example 1: ml=1

j10

j9

j7

j11

j8


Step 0.1: eligibility and release and delivery times

Initialization

Step 0.2:

Condition 1.

If there is no job;

Step 0.3.

If not:

Step 2.1:

Assignment of jobs such that j

Update u0

Step 2.3:

Assignment of jobs such that j

Update u0

Step 2.2:

Invert scheduling

Step 2.4:

Invert scheduling

Step 0.3:

Condition 2.

If there is no job,

Step 0.4.

If not:

Step 1:

Assignment of jobs such that j

Scheduling Algorithm (III)

Generating a sub-solution per level

Step 0.4:

If there are no changes in Step 0.3,

STOP.

If not,

Step 0.2.

Process Gharbi & Haouari (2002) Pre-process


m eligibility and release and delivery timesl1

j7

ml2

j9

j11

j8

0

10

20

5

15

Scheduling Algorithm (IV)

Example 2 (algorithm of Gharbi & Haouari): ml=2

Step 1

Step 1

Step 2

10


How to face the multiobjective problem
How to face the multiobjective problem? eligibility and release and delivery times

  • At the beginning, all the jobs are scheduled in the high-level machine(s), as they are the preferred machines to manufacture any product.

  • This can induce a relative high Cmax.

  • Then, in order to improve this value, some of the jobs are moved from a level to another lower level. In this way, the orders can be finished in a lower Cmax.

  • The changes between adjacent levels will be denoted by a weight =1, i.e. between high and medium level and between medium and low level, and a weight = 2, i.e. between high and low level.

  • Therefore, the algorithm gives different solutions, characterized by two objectives:

    • Min {Cmax}

    • Min {W}


Main algorithm
Main Algorithm eligibility and release and delivery times

  • Basically the algorithm is divided in the following phases:

    • PHASE I.

      All the jobs are scheduled in the high-level machines.

      If mh=1, apply Heuristic 1 for all the jobs.

      Otherwise, apply Heuristic 2 for all the jobs.

      Compute Cmaxº

      This implies the first solution s1=(Cmax0; Wtot0=0)

    • PHASE II.

      While Cmax can be reduced:

      a) select a job to be changed to a different level (only a subset of jobs are available);

      b) the origin level of the movement is predetermined; the destination level should be selected.

      Machines in both levels will be re-scheduled.

      This leads to a new solution sz=(Cmaxz; Wtotz)


Main algorithm ii
Main Algorithm (II) eligibility and release and delivery times

PHASE II: Movement of jobs between different levels

  • II.1. Job movement from high to medium level

    Compute the new solutions (Cmax, CmaxH, CmaxM)

  • II.2. Job movement from high to low level

    Compute the new solutions (Cmax, CmaxH, CmaxL) 

  • II.3. Job movement from medium to low level

    Compute the new solutions (Cmax, CmaxM, CmaxL)


Main algorithm iii
Main Algorithm (III) eligibility and release and delivery times

II. Job movement from a level to a lower level

Given the previous solution s (Cmaxs; Wtots) and Cmaxº= Cmaxs

Briefly, the substeps in this phase are: 

  • Select the origin level of the movement is given (here is prefixed).

  • Select a job to be changed to a different level (only a subset of jobs is available):

    Search for job candidates: JC

    Select a job between the candidates according to a prefixed rule (j*JC)

  • Select the destination level of the movement (here is prefixed).

  • Reschedule jobs in both levels.

  • Compute both objectives of the new solution (Cmax; Wtot).

  • IF Cmax < Cmaxº 

    save the new solution (Cmaxs+1=Cmax ; Wtots+1=Wtot)

    Cmaxº=Cmax


Computational experience
Computational experience eligibility and release and delivery times

  • To check the efficiency of the algorithm, a set of instances similar to those used by Gharbi & Haouari (2002) are created:

  • # jobs (n = 20)

  • 100 instances

  • Jobs of high level, 20-30% of the total number; medium level, 20-50% of the total; low level, the rest (20-60% of the total)

  • # machines (m = 4, 5, 6)

  • Processing time: discrete uniform distribution .

  • Release and delivery times: discrete distribution .

    K=3,5


Computational experience rules
Computational experience. Rules eligibility and release and delivery times

  • Given the subset of candidates (considering the origin and destination levels), different rules are used to select the job to be reassigned:

    Consider the processing time and the other times (release and queue)

    j = argminj (rj+pj, qj+pj) min(rp,qp)

    j = argmaxj (rj+pj, qj+pj) max(rp,qp)

    Consider the other times (release and queue)

    j = argminj (rj, qj) min(r,q)

    j = argmaxj (rj, qj) max(r,q)

    Consider only the processing time

    j = argminj (pj) min(p)

    j = argmaxj (pj) max(p)


Comparison of results v1 rule selection
Comparison of results v1 (rule selection) eligibility and release and delivery times

  • Given the solutions in the Pareto front with two different rules A and B for the job selection:

  • Proportion of non-dominated solutions (overall 13 distributions)


Results v1 analysis by machines
Results v1 (analysis by machines) eligibility and release and delivery times

  • Proportion of non-dominated solutions for max(p) rule depending on the number of machines per level


Conclusions
Conclusions eligibility and release and delivery times

  • In the first situation all the jobs are assigned to machines of the high level; this solution shows a great cmax with wtot=0.

  • The rest of solutions in the Pareto front have a decreasing cmax while wtot increases.

  • Different rules are tested to select a job to be moved from a level to another.

  • The best results are achieved with the max(pj), although the rule max(rj+pj,qj+pj) has also a good performance.

  • About the current and future research:

    • Select the origin level of job movement (level in which there is the machine with the highest Cmax).

    • Use of metaheuristics.


A multiobjective parallel machine problem considering eligibility and release and delivery times1

A eligibility and release and delivery timesmultiobjective parallel machine problem considering eligibility and release and delivery times

Thank you

for your attention!


ad