An Industry 4.0 approach to assembly line resequencing

  • Daniel Alejandro RossitEmail author
  • Fernando Tohmé
  • Mariano Frutos


Contemporary assembly line systems are characterized by an increasing capability to offer each client a different product, more tuned to her needs and preferences. These assembly systems will be heavily influenced by the advent of Industry 4.0 technologies, enabling the proposal of business models that allow the late customization of the products, i.e., the customer can modify attributes of its product once the production of it is started. This business model requires that the manufacturing tools are able to make decisions online and negotiate with the customer the changes that can be carried out, according to the workload flowing through the production system. In this work, we analyze the possibilities and limitations of this new paradigm. First, we show that Industry 4.0 systems can autonomously manage the production management process, and then, we present a framework based on tolerance planning strategies (tolerance scheduling problem), to determine which changes can be carried out. The ability of resequencing the production process is also implemented in the case that the operations associated with late customization allow it (i.e., when intermediate buffers are available). This establishes a parallelism with the problem of non-permutation flow shop. We finally discuss future developments necessary to implement these procedures.


Assembly line Resequencing Industry 4.0 Customization Cyber-physical Systems Tolerance scheduling problem Decision-making 



  1. 1.
    Hermann M, Pentek T, & Otto B (2016, January) Design principles for Industrie 4.0 scenarios. In 2016 49th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS), Hawaii USA (pp. 3928-3937). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Monostori L (2014) Cyber-physical production systems: roots, expectations and R&D challenges. Procedia CIRP 17:9–13Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rossit D, Tohmé F (2018) Scheduling research contributions to Smart manufacturing. MFGLET 15(B):111–114Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yao X, Zhou J, Lin Y, Li Y, Yu H, Liu Y (2017) Smart manufacturing based on cyber-physical systems and beyond. J Intell Manuf:1–13.
  5. 5.
    Lee E A (2008, May) Cyber physical systems: design challenges. In 2008 11th ieee international symposium on Object and Component-Oriented Real-Time Distributed Computing (ISORC), Orlando, FL, USA (pp. 363-369). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mueller B (2012) Additive manufacturing technologies–rapid prototyping to direct digital manufacturing. Assem Autom 32(2)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Yao X, Lin Y (2016) Emerging manufacturing paradigm shifts for the incoming industrial revolution. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 85(5-8):1665–1676Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kumar A (2007) From mass customization to mass personalization: a strategic transformation. Int J Flex Manuf Syst 19(4):533–547Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rossit DA, Tohmé F, Frutos M (2018b) Industry 4.0: Smart scheduling. Int J Prod Res:1–12.
  10. 10.
    Bortolini M, Ferrari E, Gamberi M, Pilati F, Faccio M (2017a) Assembly system design in the Industry 4.0 era: a general framework. IFAC-PapersOnLine 50(1):5700–5705Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ElMaraghy H, ElMaraghy W (2016) Smart adaptable assembly systems. Procedia CIRP 44:4–13Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pine BJ, Victor B, Boynton AC (1993) Making mass customization work. Harv Bus Rev 71(5):108–111Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Singer G, Golan M, Cohen Y (2014) From product documentation to a ‘method prototype’ and standard times: a new technique for complex manual assembly. Int J Prod Res 52(2):507–520Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bucklin LP (1965) Postponement, speculation and the structure of distribution channels. J Mark Res 2:26–31Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Naylor JB, Naim MM, Berry D (1999) Leagility: integrating the lean and agile manufacturing paradigms in the total supply chain. Int J Prod Econ 62(1-2):107–118Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Van Hoek RI (2001) The rediscovery of postponement a literature review and directions for research. J Oper Manag 19(2):161–184Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nieuwenhuis P, Katsifou E (2015) More sustainable automotive production through understanding decoupling points in leagile manufacturing. J Clean Prod 95:232–241Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shah R, Ward PT (2003) Lean manufacturing: context, practice bundles, and performance. J Oper Manag 21(2):129–149Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yusuf YY, Sarhadi M, Gunasekaran A (1999) Agile manufacturing: the drivers, concepts and attributes. Int J Prod Econ 62(1-2):33–43Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Boysen N, Fliedner M, Scholl A (2009) Sequencing mixed-model assembly lines: survey, classification and model critique. Eur J Oper Res 192(2):349–373MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Faccio M, Gamberi M, Bortolini M, Pilati F (2018) Macro and micro-logistic aspects in defining the parts-feeding policy in mixed-model assembly systems. IJSOM 31(4):433–462Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Boysen N, Scholl A, Wopperer N (2012) Resequencing of mixed-model assembly lines: survey and research agenda. Eur J Oper Res 216(3):594–604Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rossit DA, Tohmé F, Frutos M (2018a) The non-permutation flow-shop scheduling problem: a literature review. Omega 77:143–153Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Becker C, Scholl A (2006) A survey on problems and methods in generalized assembly line balancing. Eur J Oper Res 168(3):694–715MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Boysen N, Fliedner M, Scholl A (2007) A classification of assembly line balancing problems. Eur J Oper Res 183(2):674–693zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Faccio M (2014) The impact of production mix variations and models varieties on the parts-feeding policy selection in a JIT assembly system. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 72(1-4):543–560Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bortolini M, Faccio M, Gamberi M, Pilati F (2017b) Multi-objective assembly line balancing considering component picking and ergonomic risk. Comput Ind Eng 112:348–367Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bortolini M, Faccio M, Gamberi M, Pilati F (2018b) Motion Analysis System (MAS) for production and ergonomics assessment in the manufacturing processes. Comput Ind Eng Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Bard JF, Dar-Elj EZEY, Shtub A (1992) An analytic framework for sequencing mixed model assembly lines. Int J Prod Res 30(1):35–48zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bard JF, Shtub A, Joshi SB (1994) Sequencing mixed-model assembly lines to level parts usage and minimize line length. Int J Prod Res 32(10):2431–2454zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ouelhadj D, Petrovic S (2009) A survey of dynamic scheduling in manufacturing systems. J Sched 12(4):417–431MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Vieira GE, Herrmann JW, Lin E (2003) Rescheduling manufacturing systems: a framework of strategies, policies, and methods. J Sched 6(1):39–62MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bortolini M, Faccio M, Gamberi M, Pilati F (2016) Including material exposure and part attributes in the manual assembly line balancing problem. IFAC-PapersOnLine 49(12):926–931Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Battini D, Faccio M, Persona A, Sgarbossa F (2009) Design of the optimal feeding policy in an assembly system. Int J Prod Econ 121(1):233–254Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Faccio M, Gamberi M, Pilati F, Bortolini M (2015) Packaging strategy definition for sales kits within an assembly system. Int J Prod Res 53(11):3288–3305Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Bortolini M, Gamberi M, Pilati F, Regattieri A (2018a) Automatic assessment of the ergonomic risk for manual manufacturing and assembly activities through optical motion capture technology. Procedia CIRP 72:81–86Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bukchin Y, Cohen Y (2013) Minimising throughput loss in assembly lines due to absenteeism and turnover via work-sharing. Int J Prod Res 51(20):6140–6151Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cohen Y (2012) Absenteeism as a major cause of bottlenecks in assembly lines. Int J Prod Res 50(21):6072–6080Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wang L, Törngren M, Onori M (2015) Current status and advancement of cyber-physical systems in manufacturing. J Manuf Syst 37(Part 2):517–527Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Zhong RY, Newman ST, Huang GQ, Lan S (2016) Big data for supply chain management in the service and manufacturing sectors: challenges, opportunities, and future perspectives. Comput Ind Eng 101:572–591Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Xu X (2012) From cloud computing to cloud manufacturing. Robot Comput Integr Manuf 28(1):75–86Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zhou J, Yao X (2017a) A hybrid artificial bee colony algorithm for optimal selection of QoS-based cloud manufacturing service composition. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 88(9-12):3371–3387Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Zhou J, Yao X (2017b) DE-caABC: differential evolution enhanced context-aware artificial bee colony algorithm for service composition and optimal selection in cloud manufacturing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 90(1-4):1085–1103Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Zhou J, Yao X (2017c) Hybrid teaching–learning-based optimization of correlation-aware service composition in cloud manufacturing. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 91(9-12):3515–3533Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Porter ME, Heppelmann JE (2015) How smart, connected products are transforming companies. Harv Bus Rev 93(10):96–114Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Pfeiffer S (2016) Robots, Industry 4.0 and humans, or why assembly work is more than routine work. Societies 6(2):16Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Hedman R, Almström P (2017) A state of the art system for managing time data in manual assembly. Int J Comput Integr Manuf 30(10):1060–1071Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Xu P, Mei H, Ren L, Chen W (2017) ViDX: Visual diagnostics of assembly line performance in smart factories. IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph 23(1):291–300Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Gewohn, M., Beyerer, J., Usländer, T., & Sutschet, G. (2018, March). A quality visualization model for the evaluation and control of quality in vehicle assembly. In 2018 7th International Conference on Industrial Technology and Management (ICITM), Oxford, UK (pp. 1–10). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Gewohn M, Usländer T, Beyerer J, & Sutschet G (2017) Digital real-time feedback of quality-related information to inspection and installation areas of vehicle assembly. In 2017 11th CIRP Conference on Intelligent Computation in Manufacturing Engineering (CIRP ICME'17), Ischia, Italy. 10.1016/j.procir.2017.12.242.
  51. 51.
    Cohen Y, Faccio M, Galizia FG, Mora C, Pilati F (2017) Assembly system configuration through Industry 4.0 principles: the expected change in the actual paradigms. IFAC-PapersOnLine 50(1):14958–14963Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Vollmann Thomas E, Berry William L, Whybark DC & Jacobs R (2005) Manufacturing planning and control for supply chain management. McGraw-Hill/Irwin. 5th EditionGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Anderson C (2004) The long tail. Wired, http://www.wiredcom/wired/archive/1210/tailhtml
  54. 54.
    Anderson C (2008) The long tail: why the future of business is selling less of more. Hyperion BooksGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Yusuf YY, Gunasekaran A, Adeleye EO, Sivayoganathan K (2004) Agile supply chain capabilities: determinants of competitive objectives. Eur J Oper Res 159(2):379–392zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Alderson W (1950) Marketing efficiency and the principle of postponement. Cost and Profit Outlook 3:15–18Google Scholar
  57. 57.
    Alderson W (2006) Marketing efficiency and the principle of postponement. In: A twenty-first century guide to Aldersonian marketing thought. Springer, Boston, MA, pp 109–113Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Mason-Jones R, Naylor B, Towill DR (2000) Lean, agile or leagile? Matching your supply chain to the marketplace. Int J Prod Res 38(17):4061–4070Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Ghobakhloo M, Azar A (2018) Business excellence via advanced manufacturing technology and lean-agile manufacturing. J Manuf Technol Manag 29(1):2–24Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Aljorephani SK, ElMaraghy HA (2016) Impact of product platform and market demand on manufacturing system performance and production cost. Procedia CIRP 52:74–79Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Hu SJ, Zhu X, Wang H, Koren Y (2008) Product variety and manufacturing complexity in assembly systems and supply chains. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 57(1):45–48Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Abbas M, ElMaraghy H (2018) Co-platforming of products and assembly systems. Omega 78:5–20Google Scholar
  63. 63.
    Simpson TW, Jiao J, Siddique Z, Hölttä-Otto K (2014) Advances in product family and product platform design. Springer, New YorN Google Scholar
  64. 64.
    Simpson TW (2004) Product platform design and customization: status and promise. Ai Edam 18(1):3–20Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    ElMaraghy H, Abbas M (2015) Products-manufacturing systems co-platforming. CIRP Ann 64(1):407–410Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Manzini M, Unglert J, Gyulai D, Colledani M, Jauregui-Becker JM, Monostori L, Urgo M (2018) An integrated framework for design, management and operation of reconfigurable assembly systems. Omega 78:69–84Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Pereira J, Álvarez-Miranda E (2018) An exact approach for the robust assembly line balancing problem. Omega 78:85–98Google Scholar
  68. 68.
    Brucker P, Shakhlevich NV (2009) Inverse scheduling with maximum lateness objective. IJSOM 12(5):475–488MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Koulamas C (2005) Inverse scheduling with controllable job parameters. International Journal of Services and Operations Management 1(1):35–43Google Scholar
  70. 70.
    Brucker P, Shakhlevich NV (2011) Inverse scheduling: two-machine flow-shop problem. J Sched 14(3):239–256MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Rossit D, Tohmé F, Frutos M, Bard J, Broz D (2016) A non-permutation flowshop scheduling problem with lot streaming: a mathematical model. Int J Ind Eng Comput 7(3):507–516Google Scholar
  72. 72.
    Brucker P, Heitmann S, Hurink J (2003) Flow-shop problems with intermediate buffers. JACM 25(4):549–574MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Papadimitriou CH, Kanellakis PC (1980) Flowshop scheduling with limited temporary storage. Journal of the ACM (JACM) 27(3):533–549MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Ritt M, Costa AM, Miralles C (2016) The assembly line worker assignment and balancing problem with stochastic worker availability. Int J Prod Res 54(3):907–922Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Rossit DA, Vásquez ÓC, Tohmé F, Frutos M, Safe MD (2018c) The dominance flow shop scheduling problem. Electron Notes Discrete Math 69:21–28MathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of EngineeringUniversidad Nacional del SurBahía BlancaArgentina
  2. 2.INMABB-UNS-CONICETBahía BlancaArgentina
  3. 3.Department of EconomicsUniversidad Nacional del SurBahía BlancaArgentina
  4. 4.IIESS-UNS-CONICETBahía BlancaArgentina

Personalised recommendations