A general flow shop scheduling problem with consideration of position-based learning effect and multiple availability constraints

  • Behdin Vahedi-Nouri
  • Parviz Fattahi
  • Reza Tavakkoli-Moghaddam
  • Reza Ramezanian


In this paper, a more general version of the flow shop scheduling problem with the objective of minimizing the total flow time is investigated. In order to get closer to the actual conditions of the problem, some realistic assumptions including non-permutation scheduling, learning effect, multiple availability constraints, and release times are considered. It is assumed that the real processing time of each job on a machine depends on the position of that job in the sequence, and after processing a specified number of jobs at each machine, an unavailability period is occurring because of maintenance activities. Moreover, it is supposed that each job may not be ready for processing at time zero and may have a release time. According to these assumptions, a new mixed integer linear programming (MILP) model is proposed to formulate the problem. Due to the high complexity of the problem, a heuristic method and a simulated annealing algorithm are presented to find the nearly optimal solutions for medium- and large-sized problems. To obtain better and more robust solutions, the Taguchi method is used in order to calibrate the simulated annealing algorithm parameters. Finally, the computational results are provided for evaluating the performance and effectiveness of the proposed solution methods.


Scheduling Non-permutation flow shop Learning effect Availability constraint Heuristic method 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Biskup D (1999) Single-machine scheduling with learning considerations. Eur J Oper Res 8:115–173Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Biskup D (2008) A state-of-the-art review on scheduling with learning effects. Eur J Oper Res 188:315–329CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang J-B, Xia Z-Q (2005) Flow-shop scheduling with a learning effect. J Oper Res Soc 56:1325–1330CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang J-B (2006) A note on scheduling problems with learning effects and deteriorating jobs. Int J Syst Sci 37:827–833CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cheng TCE, Wu C-C, Lee W-C (2008) Some scheduling problems with deteriorating jobs and learning effects. Comput Ind Eng 54:972–982CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wu C-C, Lee W-C (2009) A note on the total completion time problem in a permutation flowshop with a learning effect. Eur J Oper Res 192:343–347CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wu C-C, Lee W-C (2009) Single-machine and flowshop scheduling with a general learning effect model. Comput Ind Eng 56:1553–1558CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yin Y, Xu D, Sun K, Li H (2009) Some scheduling problems with general position-dependent and time-dependent learning effects. Inf Sci 179:2416–2425CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lee W-C, Wu C-C (2009) Some single-machine and m-machine flowshop scheduling problems with learning considerations. Inf Sci 179:3885–3892CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chung Y-H, Tong L-I (2011) Makespan minimization for m-machine permutation flowshop scheduling problem with learning considerations. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 56:355–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schmidt G (2000) Scheduling with limited machine availability. Eur J Oper Res 121:1–15CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ma Y, Chu C, Zuo C (2010) A survey of scheduling with deterministic machine availability constraints. Comput Ind Eng 58:199–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Aggoune R (2004) Minimizing the makespan for the flow shop scheduling problem with availability constraints. Eur J Oper Res 153:534–543CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aggoune R, Portmann M-C (2006) Flowshop scheduling problem with limited machine availability: a heuristic approach. Int J Prod Econ 99:4–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Perez-Gonzalez P, Framinan J (2009) Scheduling permutation flowshops with initial availability constraint: analysis of solutions and constructive heuristics. Comput Oper Res 36:2866–2876CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Safari E, Sadjadi SJ, Shahanaghi K (2010) Scheduling flowshops with condition-based maintenance constraint to minimize expected makespan. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 46(5–8):757–767CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hsu C-J, Low C, Su C-T (2010) A single-machine scheduling problem with maintenance activities to minimize makespan. Appl Math Comput 215:3929–3935CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liao L-M, Tsai C-H (2009) Heuristic algorithms for two-machine flowshop with availability constraints. Comput Ind Eng 56:306–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wu C-C, Lee W-C (2007) A note on single-machine scheduling with learning effect and an availability constraint. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 33:540–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ghodratnama A, Rabbani M, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R, Baboli A (2010) Solving a single-machine scheduling problem with maintenance, job deterioration and learning effect by simulated annealing. J Manuf Syst 29:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yang S-J (2010) Single-machine scheduling problems with both start-time dependent learning and position dependent aging effects under deteriorating maintenance consideration. Appl Math Comput 217:3321–3329CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Vahedi-Nouri B, Fattahi P, Rohaninejad M, Tavakkoli-Moghaddam R (2012) Minimizing the total completion time on a single machine with the learning effect and multiple availability constraints. Appl Math Model 37(5):3126–3137CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Sadjadi SJ, Aryanezhad MB, Ziaee M (2008) The general flowshop scheduling problem: mathematical models. J Appl Sci 8(17):3032–3037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mehravaran Y, Logendran R (2012) Non-permutation flowshop scheduling in a supply chain with sequence-dependent setup times. Int J Prod Econ 135(2):953–963CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lee W-C, Wu C-C (2004) Minimizing total completion time in a two-machine flowshop with a learning effect. Int J Prod Econ 88:85–93CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Graham RL, Lawler EL, Lenstra JK, Rinnooy KA (1979) Optimization and approximation in deterministic sequencing and scheduling: a survey. Ann Oper Res 5:287–326zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nawaz M, Enscore EE, Ham I (1983) A heuristic algorithm for the m-machine, n-job flowshop sequencing problem. OMEGA 11:91–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Framinan JM, Leisten R, Ruiz-Usano R (2002) Efficient heuristics for flowshop sequencing with the objectives of makespan and flowtime minimization. Eur J Oper Res 141:559–569CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kirkpatrick S, Gelatt C, Vecchi M (1983) Optimization by simulated annealing. Science 220(4598):671–680CrossRefzbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Phadke MS (1989) Quality engineering using robust design. Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle RiverGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wu CFJ, Hamada MS (2000) Experiments: planning, analysis, and parameter design optimization. WileyGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Behdin Vahedi-Nouri
    • 1
  • Parviz Fattahi
    • 1
  • Reza Tavakkoli-Moghaddam
    • 2
  • Reza Ramezanian
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Industrial Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringBu-Ali Sina UniversityHamedanIran
  2. 2.Department of Industrial Engineering, College of EngineeringUniversity of TehranTehranIran
  3. 3.Department of Industrial EngineeringK. N. Toosi University of Technology (KNTU)TehranIran

Personalised recommendations