A bi-objective MIP model for facility layout problem in uncertain environment

  • Mohammad Hassan SalmaniEmail author
  • Kourosh Eshghi
  • Hossein Neghabi


Facility layout problem (FLP) is one of the classical and important problems in real-world problems in the field of industrial engineering where efficiency and effectiveness are very important factors. To have an effective and practical layout, the deterministic assumptions of data should be changed. In this study, it is assumed that we have dynamic and uncertain values for departments’ dimensions. Accordingly, each dimension changes in a predetermined interval. Due to this assumption, two new parameters are introduced which are called length and width deviation coefficients. According to these parameters, a definition for layout in uncertain environment is presented and a mixed integer programming (MIP) model is developed. Moreover, two new objective functions are presented and their lower and upper bounds are calculated with four different approaches. It is worth noting that one of the objective functions is used to minimize the total areas, which is an appropriate criterion to appraise layouts in uncertain conditions. Finally, we solve some benchmarks in the literature to test the proposed model and, based on their results, present a sensitivity analysis.


Facility layout problem Mixed integer programming Robust optimization Uncertainty modeling 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Francis RL, JA White, F. McGinnis (1992) Facility layout and location: an analytical approach. Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Tompkins JA (2010) Facilities planning, 4th edn. John Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McKendall ARJ, Hakobyan A (2010) Heuristics for the dynamic facility layout problem with unequal-area departments. Eur J Oper Res 201:171–182CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Suresh G, Sahu S (1983) Multiobjective facility layout using simulated annealing. Int J Prod Econ 32(2):239–254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bazzara MS, Sherali MD (1980) Benders’ partitioning scheme applied to a new formulation of quadratic assignment problem. Nav Res Logist Q 27(1):29–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bukard RE, Bonniger T (1983) A heuristic for quadratic Boolean program with application to quadratic assignment problems. Eur J Oper Res 13:347–386Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kaku BK, Thompson GL (1986) An exact algorithm for the general quadratic. Eur J Oper Res 23(3):382–390MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kusiak, Heragu S (1987) The facility layout problem. Eur J Oper Res 29:229–251MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Chwif L, Barretto MRP, Moscato LA (1998) A solution to the facility layout problem using simulated annealing. Comput Ind 36:125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Matsuzaki K, Irohara T, Yoshimoto K (1999) Heuristic algorithm to solve the multi-floor layout problem with the consideration of elevator utilization. Comput Ind Eng 36:487–502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ning X, KC Lam, MCK Lam (2010) A decision-making system for construction site layout planning. Automation in ConstructionGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Wald A (1950) Statistical decision functions which minimize the maximum risk. Ann Math 46(2):265–280MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Mulvey JM, Vanderbei RJ (1995) Robust optimization of large scale systems. Oper Res 43(2):264–281MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ben-Tal A, LE Ghaoui, A Nemirovski (2009) Robust optimization. Princeton Series in Applied Mathematics. Princeton Series in Applied MathematicsGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ben-Tal A et al (2004) Adjustable robust solutions of uncertain linear programs. Math Program 99:351–376MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ben-Tal A, Nemirovski A (2002) Robust optimization—methodology and applications. Math Program 92:453–480MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bertsimas D, Sim M (2006) Tractable approximations to robust conic optimization problems. Math Program 107(1):5–36MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bertsimas D, Sim M (2003) Robust discrete optimization and network flows. Math Program 98:49–71MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Soyster A (1973) Convex programming with set-inclusive constraints and application to inexact linear programming. Oper Res 21(5):1154–1157MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shore RH, JA Tompkins (1980) Flexible facilities design. Am Inst Ind Eng Trans: p. 200–205Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kulturel-Konak S, Smith AE, Norman BA (2004) Layout optimization considering production uncertainty and routing flexibility. Int J Prod Res 42(21):4475–4493CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rosenblatt MJ, Lee HL (1987) A robustness approach to facilities design. Int J Prod Res 25(4):479–486CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kouvelis P, Kurawarwala AA, Gutierrez GJ (1992) Algorithms for robust single and multiple period layout planning for manufacturing systems. Eur J Oper Res 63(2):287–303CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Aiello G, Enea M (2001) Fuzzy approach to the robust facility layout in uncertain production environments. Int J Prod Res 39(18):4089–4101CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Azadivar F, Wang J (2000) Facility layout optimization using simulation and genetic algorithms. Int J Prod Res 38(17):4369–4383CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Cheng R, Gen M, Tozawa T (1996) Genetic search for facility layout design under interflows uncertainty. Jpn J Fuzzy Theory Syst 8(2):267–281Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pillai VM, IB Hunagund, KK Krishnan (2011) Design of robust layout for dynamic plant layout problems. Comput Ind Eng. 61Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Neghabi H, Eshghi K, Salmani MH (2014) A new model for robust facility layout problem. Inf Sci 278:498–509MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Izadinia N, Eshghi K, Salmani MH (2014) A robust model for multi-floor layout problem. Comput Ind Eng 78:127–134CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Heragu SS, Kusiak A (1991) Efficient models for the facility layout problem. Operations 53(1):1–13zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Olson DL, Swenseth SR (1987) A linear approximation for chance-constrained programming. J Oper Res Soc 38(3):261–267CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Legendre A (1794) Élements de géometrie. Paris: Firmin DidotGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tam KY, Li SG (1991) A hierarchical approach to the facility layout problem. Int J Prod Res 29(1):165–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mohammad Hassan Salmani
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kourosh Eshghi
    • 1
  • Hossein Neghabi
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Industrial EngineeringSharif University of TechnologyTehranIran

Personalised recommendations