Advertisement

Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing

, Volume 22, Issue 4, pp 553–562 | Cite as

Solving production scheduling with earliness/tardiness penalties by constraint programming

  • Jan KelbelEmail author
  • Zdeněk Hanzálek
Article

Abstract

This paper deals with an application of constraint programming in production scheduling with earliness and tardiness penalties that reflects the scheduling part of the Just-In-Time inventory strategy. Two scheduling problems are studied, an industrial case study problem of lacquer production scheduling, and also the job-shop scheduling problem with earliness/tardiness costs. The paper presents two algorithms that help the constraint programming solver to find solutions of these complex problems. The first algorithm, called the cost directed initialization, performs a greedy initialization of the search tree. The second one, called the time reversing transformation and designed for lacquer production scheduling, reformulates the problem to be more easily searchable when the default search or the cost directed initialization is used. The conducted experiments, using case study instances and randomly generated problem instances, show that our algorithms outperform generic approaches, and on average give better results than other nontrivial algorithms.

Keywords

Production scheduling Earliness/tardiness cost Constraint programming 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. AMETIST (2002). European Community Project IST-2001-35304. Advanced methods for timed systems. http://ametist.cs.utwente.nl/.
  2. Baker K. R., Scudder G. D. (1990) Sequencing with earliness and tardiness penalties: A review. Operations Research 38(1): 22–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baptiste, P., Le Pape, C., & Nuijten, W. (1995). Constraint-based optimization and approximation for job-shop scheduling. In: AAAI-SIGMAN Workshop, IJCAI-95.Google Scholar
  4. Barták, R., Salido, M. A., & Rossi, F. (2009). Constraint satisfaction techniques in planning and scheduling. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing. doi: 10.1007/s10845-008-0203-4.
  5. Beck, J. C., & Perron, L. (2000). Discrepancy-bounded depth first search. In: CP-AI-OR 2000.Google Scholar
  6. Beck, J. C., & Refalo, P. (2002). Combining local search and linear programming to solve earliness/tardiness scheduling problems. In: CP-AI-OR 2002.Google Scholar
  7. Beck J. C., Refalo P. (2003) A hybrid approach to scheduling with earliness and tardiness costs. Annals of Operations Research 118(1–4): 49–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Behrmann, G., Brinksma, E., Hendriks, M., & Mader, A. (2005). Production scheduling by reachability analysis—a case study. In: WPDRTS 2005. IEEE Computer Society Press.Google Scholar
  9. Blazewicz J., Ecker K. H., Pesch E., Schmidt G., Werglarz J. (2001) Scheduling computer and manufacturing processes (2nd ed.). Springer-Verlag, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  10. Carlier J., Pinson E. (1990) A practical use of jackson’s pre-emptive schedule for solving the job-shop problem. Annals of Operations Research 26: 269–287Google Scholar
  11. Danna, E., & Perron, L. (2003). Structured vs. unstructured large neighborhood search: A case study on job-shop scheduling problems with earliness and tardiness costs. In: CP 2003. pp. 817–821.Google Scholar
  12. Danna E., Rothberg E., Le Pape C. (2005) Exploring relaxation induced neighborhoods to improve MIP solution. Mathematical Programming 102(1): 71–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Du J., Leung J. Y.-T. (1990) Minimizing total tardiness on one machine is NP-hard. Mathematics of Operations Research 15(3): 483–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. El Sakkout H., Wallace M. (2000) Probe backtrack search for minimal perturbation in dynamic scheduling. Constraints 5(4): 359–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Harvey, W. D., & Ginsberg, M. L. (1995). Limited discrepancy search. In: IJCAI-95. pp. 607–615.Google Scholar
  16. Hoogeveen H. (2005) Multicriteria scheduling. European Journal of Operations Research 167(3): 592–623CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. ILOG (2002). Ilog OPL Studio 3.6 Language Manual.Google Scholar
  18. ILOG (2005). Ilog Cplex 9.1 User’s Manual.Google Scholar
  19. Laborie P. (2003) Algorithm for propagating resource constraints in AI planning and scheduling: Existing approaches and new results. Artificial Intelligence 143(2): 151–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Loeschmann, S., Ludewig, D. (2003). Case study 4: Detailed description of the problem—model of a lacquer production. AMETIST Deliverable 3.4.1.Google Scholar
  21. Luh P. B. et al (1998) Job shop scheduling with group-dependent setups, finite buffers, and long time horizon. Annals of Operations Research 78: 233–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mercier L., Van Hentenryck P. (2008) Edge finding for cumulative scheduling. Informs Journal on Computing 20(1): 143–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nuijten W., Aarts E. (1996) A computational study of constraint satisfaction for multiple capacitated job shop scheduling. European Journal of Operational Research 90(2): 269–284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ohno T. (1988) Toyota production system: Beyond large-scale production. Productivity Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  25. Taillard E. (1993) Benchmarks for basic scheduling problems. European Journal of Operational Research 64: 278–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Control Engineering, Faculty of Electrical EngineeringCzech Technical University in PraguePraha 2Czech Republic

Personalised recommendations