Discrete Event Dynamic Systems

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 59–82 | Cite as

A mixed dynamics approach for linear corridor policies: A revisitation of dynamic setup scheduling and flow control in manufacturing systems

  • Carlos HumesJr.
  • Leônidas De Oliveira Brandão
  • Manuel Pera Garcia
Article
Received:
Revised:

Abstract

Sharifnia, Caramanis, and Gershwin [1991] introduced a class of policies for manufacturing systems, called by themlinear corridor policies. They proved that their stability can be discussed by the study of a simpler subset of such policies (cone policies). This paper revisits their work presenting a different description of the dynamics of the systems under study and explores it to device a necessary and sufficient condition for stability, obtained by the strengthening of the assumptions in Sharifnia et al. (1991). This condition is shown to be simply tested (M−1≥0) and valid for various realizations.

Keywords

Decentralized scheduling manufacturing systems corridor policies stability 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Chase, C., and Ramadge, P. J. 1989. On real time flexible manufacturing systems.28th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp. 2026–2027, Tampa, Florida.Google Scholar
  2. Dantzig, G. 1963.Linear Programming and Extensions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  3. Gershwin, S. B. 1989. Hierarchical flow control: A framework for scheduling and planning discrete events in manufacturing systems.Proc. IEEE 77, pp. 195–209.Google Scholar
  4. Humes, Jr., C. 1994. A regulator stabilization technique: Kumar-Seidman revisited.IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 39(1), pp. 191–196.Google Scholar
  5. Humes, A. F. P. C., and Humes, Jr., C. 1992. Stability of open loop policies. Tech. Rep. RT-MAC 9204, Instituto de Matemática e Estatistica, USP, São Paulo.Google Scholar
  6. Kumar, P. R., and Seidman, T. I. 1990. Dynamic instabilities and stabilization methods in distributed real-time scheduling of manufacturing systems.IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 35, pp. 289–298.Google Scholar
  7. Mangasarian, O. L. 1969.Nonlinear Programming. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  8. Perkins, J. 1990. Stable, real-time scheduling of a single machine manufacturing systems. Master's thesis, University of Illinois, Urbana.Google Scholar
  9. Perkins, J., Humes, Jr. C., and Kumar, P. R. 1994. Distributed Scheduling of Flexible Manufacturing Systems: Stability and Performance.Trans. Robotics Automation 10(2), pp. 133–141.Google Scholar
  10. Perkins, J., and Kumar, P. R. 1989. Stable, distributed, real-time scheduling of flexible manufacturing/assembly/disassembly systems.IEEE Trans. Automat. Control 34, pp. 139–148.Google Scholar
  11. Sharifnia, A. Forthcoming. Stability and performance of distributed production control methods based on continuous flow models.IEEE Trans. Automat. Control. Google Scholar
  12. Sharifnia, A., Caramanis, M., and Gershwin, S. 1991. Dynamical setup scheduling and Flow control in Manufacturing Systems.Discrete Event Dynamic Systems 1, pp. 149–175.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Carlos HumesJr.
    • 1
  • Leônidas De Oliveira Brandão
    • 1
  • Manuel Pera Garcia
    • 2
  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentIME-Universidade de São PauloSão PauloBrazil
  2. 2.Applied Mathematics DepartmentIME-Universidade de São PauloSão PauloBrazil

Personalised recommendations