Advertisement

Application of genetic algorithm to job scheduling under ergonomic constraints in manufacturing industry

  • Shib Sankar SanaEmail author
  • Holman Ospina-Mateus
  • Fabian Gazabón Arrieta
  • Jaime Acevedo Chedid
Original Research

Abstract

This research proposes a mathematical model of the problem of job rotation considering ergonomic aspects in repetitive works, lifting tasks and awkward postures in manufacturing environments with high variability. The mathematical model is formulated as a multi-objective optimization problem integrating the ergonomic constraints and is solved using improved non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm. The proposed algorithm allows the generation of diversified results and a greater search convergence on the Pareto front. The algorithm avoids the loss of convergence in each border by means of change and replacement of similar solutions. In this strategy, a single similar result is preserved and the best solution of the previous generation is included. If the outcomes are similar, new randomly generated individuals are proposed to encourage diversity. The obtained results improve the conditions of 69% of the workers. The results show that if the worker rotates starting from a high risk, his variation in risk always decreases in his next assignment. Within the job rotation scheme, no worker is exposed simultaneously to high ergonomic risk thresholds. The model and the algorithm provide good results while considering ergonomic risks. The proposed algorithm shows the potentiality to generate a set of quality of response (Pareto Frontier) in a combinatorial optimization problem in an efficient computational time.

Keywords

Job rotation Genetic algorithm Manufacturing Ergonomic constraints 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

We do hereby declare that we do not have any conflict of interest of other works.

References

  1. Aptel M, Cail F, Gerling A, Louis O (2008) Proposal of parameters to implement a workstation rotation system to protect against MSDs. Int J Ind Ergon 38(11–12):900–909Google Scholar
  2. Arya A (2004) Using job rotation to extract employee information. J Law Econ Organ 20(2):400–414MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. Asensio-Cuesta S, Diego-Mas JA, Canós-Darós L, Andrés-Romano C (2012a) A genetic algorithm for the design of job rotation schedules considering ergonomic and competence criteria. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 60(9–12):1161–1174Google Scholar
  4. Asensio-Cuesta S, Diego-Mas JA, Cremades-Oliver LV, González-Cruz MC (2012b) A method to design job rotation schedules to prevent work-related musculoskeletal disorders in repetitive work. Int J Prod Res 50(24):7467–7478Google Scholar
  5. Ayough A, Zandieh M, Farsijani H (2012) GA and ICA approaches to job rotation scheduling problem: considering employee’s boredom. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 60(5–8):651–666Google Scholar
  6. Azizi N, Zolfaghari S, Liang M (2010) Modeling job rotation in manufacturing systems: the study of employee’s boredom and skill variations. Int J Prod Econ 123(1):69–85Google Scholar
  7. Bhadury J, Radovilsky Z (2006) Job rotation using the multi-period assignment model. Int J Prod Res 44(20):4431–4444zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Brunold J, Durst S (2012) Intellectual capital risks and job rotation. J Intellect Cap 13(2):178–195Google Scholar
  9. Bureau of Labor Statistics (2017) Nonfatal occupational injuries and illnesses resulting in days away from work in 2016, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Washington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Cardenas-Barron LE (2010) Adaptive genetic algorithm for lot-sizing problem with self-adjustment operation rate: a discussion. Int J Prod Econ 123:243–245Google Scholar
  11. Cardenas-Barron LE, Taleizadeh AA (2012) Hybrid metaheuristics algorithms for inventory management problems. Meta-Heuristics Optim Algorithms Eng Bus Econ Finance 11:312–356Google Scholar
  12. Carnahan BJ, Redfern MS, Norman BA (1999) A genetic algorithm for designing job rotation schedules considering ergonomic constraints. Paper presented at the evolutionary computation, 1999. CEC 99. Proceedings of the 1999 congressGoogle Scholar
  13. Carnahan BJ, Redfern MS, Norman B (2000) Designing safe job rotation schedules using optimization and heuristic search. Ergonomics 43(4):543–560Google Scholar
  14. Chiasson M-, Imbeau D, Aubry K, Delisle A (2012) Comparing the results of eight methods used to evaluate risk factors associated with musculoskeletal disorders. Int J Ind Ergon 42(5):478–488Google Scholar
  15. Colombini D, Occhipinti E, Grieco A (2002) A check-list model for the quick evaluation of risk exposure (ocra index). In: Colombini DEO, Antonio G (eds) Ergonomics book series, Vol 2. Elsevier, New York, pp 111–117Google Scholar
  16. Coronado-Hernández JR, Ospina-Mateus H (2013) Incorporating ergonomic risks into U-shaped assembly line balancing problem. WPOM 4(2):29–43Google Scholar
  17. David GC (2005) Ergonomic methods for assessing exposure to risk factors for work-related musculoskeletal disorders. [Review]. Occup Med (Lond) 55(3):190–199Google Scholar
  18. Davis K, Jorgensen M, Schneider S (2005) Ergonomics-pros and cons of job rotation as a means of reducing injury costs. J Occup Environ Hyg 2(1):D1–D3Google Scholar
  19. Diego-Mas JA, Asensio-Cuesta S, Sanchez-Romero MA, Artacho-Ramirez MA (2009) A multi-criteria genetic algorithm for the generation of job rotation schedules. Int J Ind Ergon 39(1):23–33Google Scholar
  20. Ehrgott M, Ruzika S (2004) An improved e-constraint method for multiobjective programming. https://urn:nbn:de:hbz:386-kluedo-13962. Accessed 23 Mar 2018
  21. Eriksson T, Ortega J (2006) The adoption of job rotation: testing the theories. Indus Labor Relat Rev 59:653–666Google Scholar
  22. Ezeukwu AO, Ugwuoke J, Egwuonwu AV, Abaraogu UO (2011) Prevalence of work-related musculoskeletal pain among timber workers in Ehgu Metrepolis, Nigeria. Cont J Trop Med 5(2):11–18Google Scholar
  23. Filus R, Okimorto ML (2011) The effect of job rotation intervals on muscle fatigue–lactic acid. Work (Reading Mass) 41:1572–1581Google Scholar
  24. Frazer M, Norman R, Wells R, Neumann P (2003) The effects of job rotation on the risk of reporting low back pain. Ergonomics 46(9):904–919Google Scholar
  25. Ham M, Lee YH, Kim SH (2011) Real-time scheduling of multi-stage flexible job shop floor. Int J Prod Res 99:3715–3730Google Scholar
  26. Hazzard L, Mautz J (1992) Job rotation cuts cumulative trauma cases. Pers J 47(10):29–32Google Scholar
  27. Henderson CJ, Kumar S (1992) Ergonomic job rotation in poultry processing. Adv Ind Ergon Saf IV:443–450Google Scholar
  28. Ho WH, Chang CS, Shih YL, Liang RD (2009) Effects of job rotation and role stress among nurses on job satisfaction and organizational commitment. BMC Health Serv Res 9:8Google Scholar
  29. Hsieh A-T, Chao HY (2004) A reassessment of the relationship between job specialization, job rotation and job burnout: example of Taiwan’s high-technology industry. Int J Hum Resour Manag 15(6):1108–1123Google Scholar
  30. Huang HJ (1999) Job rotation from the employees’ point of view. Res Pract Hum Resour Manag Sci 7(1):75–85MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. ISO-11228-3 (2007) Ergonomics. Manual handling. Part 3: handling of low loads at high frequencyGoogle Scholar
  32. Jorgensen M, Davis K et al (2005) Characteristics of job rotation in the Midwest US manufacturing sector. Ergonomics 48(15):1721–1733Google Scholar
  33. Karagöz S, Yıldız AR (2017) A comparison of recent metaheuristic algorithms for crashworthiness optimisation of vehicle thin-walled tubes considering sheet metal forming effects. Int J Veh Des 73(1–3):179–188Google Scholar
  34. Karhu O, Kansi P, Kuorinka I (1977) Correcting working postures in industry: a practical method for analysis. Appl Ergon 8(4):199–201Google Scholar
  35. Kiani M, Yildiz AR (2016) A comparative study of non-traditional methods for vehicle crashworthiness and NVH optimization. Arch Comput Methods Eng 23(4):723–734MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Kogi K, Kawakami T et al (2003) Low-cost work improvements that can reduce the risk of musculoskeletal disorders. Int J Ind Ergon 31(3):179–184Google Scholar
  37. Kuah CT, Wong KY, Wong WP (2012) Monte Carlo data envelopment analysis with genetic algorithm for knowledge management performance measurement. Expert Syst Appl 39:9348–9358Google Scholar
  38. Kuijer PP, Visser B, Kemper HCG (1999) Job rotation as a factor in reducing physical workload at a refuse collecting department. Ergonomics 42(9):1167–1178Google Scholar
  39. Lodree EJ, Geiger CD, Jiang X (2009) Taxonomy for integrating scheduling theory and human factors: review and research opportunities. Int J Ind Ergon 39(1):39–51Google Scholar
  40. Mathiassen SE (2006) Diversity and variation in biomechanical exposure: what is it, and why would we like to know? Appl Ergon 37(4):419–427Google Scholar
  41. Mavrotas G (2009) Effective implementation of the ε-constraint method in multi-objective mathematical programming problems. Appl Math Comput 213(2):455–465MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. McAtamney L, Nigel Corlett E (1993) RULA: a survey method for the investigation of work-related upper limb disorders. Appl Ergon 24(2):91–99Google Scholar
  43. Michalos G, Makris S, Rentzos L, Chryssolouris G (2010) Dynamic job rotation for workload balancing in human based assembly systems. CIRP J Manuf Sci Technol 2(3):153–160Google Scholar
  44. Michalos G, Makris S, Mourtzis D (2011) A web based tool for dynamic job rotation scheduling using multiple criteria. CIRP Ann Manuf Technol 60(1):453–456Google Scholar
  45. Moore SJ, Garg A (1995) The strain index: a proposed method to analyze jobs for risk of distal upper extremity disorders. Am Ind Hyg Assoc 56(5):443–458Google Scholar
  46. Moreira MCO, Costa AM (2013) Hybrid heuristics for planning job rotation schedules in assembly lines with heterogeneous workers. Int J Prod Econ 141(2):552–560Google Scholar
  47. Mossa G, Boenzi F, Digiesi S, Mummolo G, Romano VA (2016) Productivity and ergonomic risk in human based production systems: a job-rotation scheduling model. Int J Prod Econ 171:471–477Google Scholar
  48. Occhipinti E, Colombini D (2007) Updating reference values and predictive models of the OCRA method in the risk assessment of work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limbs. Ergonomics 50(11):1727–1739Google Scholar
  49. Otto A, Scholl A (2013) Reducing ergonomic risks by job rotation scheduling. OR Spectrum 35(3):711–733MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. Öztürk N, Yıldız AR, Kaya N, Öztürk F (2006) Neuro-genetic design optimization framework to support the integrated robust design optimization process in CE. Concurr Eng Res Appl 14(1):5–16Google Scholar
  51. Pholdee N, Bureerat S, Yıldız AR (2017) Hybrid real-code population-based incremental learning and differential evolution for many-objective optimisation of an automotive floor-frame. Int J Veh Des 73(1–3):20–53Google Scholar
  52. Rissen D, Melin B, Sandsj L, Dohns I, Lundberg U (2002) Psycho physiological stress reactions, trapezius muscle activity, and neck and shoulder pain among female cashiers before and after introduction of job rotation. Work Stress 16(2):127–137Google Scholar
  53. Rodriguez AC, Barrero LH (2017) Job rotation: effects on muscular activity variability. Appl Ergon 60:83–92Google Scholar
  54. Santosa B, Damayanti R, Sarkar B (2016) Solving multi-product inventory ship routing with a heterogeneous fleet model using a hybrid cross entropy-genetic algorithm: a case study in Indonesia. Prod Manuf Res 4:90–113Google Scholar
  55. Seckiner SU, Kurt M (2008) Ant colony optimization for the job rotation scheduling problem. Appl Math Comput 201(1–2):149–160MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  56. Sekiner SU, Kurt M (2007) A simulated annealing approach to the solution of job problems. Appl Math Comput 188(1):31–45Google Scholar
  57. Snook SH, Ciriello VM (1991) The design of manual handling tasks: revised tables of maximum acceptable weights and forces. Ergonomics 34(9):1197–1213Google Scholar
  58. Tella B, Akinbo S, Saheed A, Caleb G (2013) Prevalence and impacts of low back pain among peasant farmers in south-west Nigeria. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 26:621–627Google Scholar
  59. Tharmmaphornphilas W, Green B, Carnahan BJ, Norman BA (2003) Applying mathematical modeling to create job rotation schedules for minimizing occupational noise exposure. Aiha J 64(3):401–405Google Scholar
  60. Waters T, Lu M-L, Occhipinti E (2007) New procedure for assessing sequential manual lifting jobs using the revised NIOSH lifting equation. Ergonomics 50(11):1761–1770Google Scholar
  61. Wells R, McFall K et al (2010) Task selection for increased mechanical exposure variation: relevance to job rotation. Ergonomics 53(3):314–323Google Scholar
  62. Yildiz AR (2012) A comparative study of population-based optimization algorithms for turning operations. Inf Sci 210:81–88Google Scholar
  63. Yildiz AR (2013) Comparison of evolutionary-based optimization algorithms for structural design optimization. Eng Appl Artif Intell 26(1):327–333Google Scholar
  64. Yıldız BS (2017) A comparative investigation of eight recent population-based optimisation algorithms for mechanical and structural design problems. Int J Veh Des 73(1–3):208–218Google Scholar
  65. Yıldız BS, Lekesiz H (2017) Fatigue-based structural optimisation of vehicle components. Int J Veh Des 73(1–3):54–62Google Scholar
  66. Yildiz AR, Saitou K (2011) Topology synthesis of multi component structural assemblies in continuum domains. J Mech Des 133(1):011008Google Scholar
  67. Yildiz AR, Solanki KN (2012) Multi-objective optimization of vehicle crashworthiness using a new particle swarm based approach. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 59(1–4):367–376Google Scholar
  68. Yıldız BS, Yıldız AR (2017) Moth-flame optimization algorithm to determine optimal machining parameters in manufacturing processes. Mater Test 59(5):425–429Google Scholar
  69. Yildiz BS, Lekesiz H, Yildiz AR (2016a) Structural design of vehicle components using gravitational search and charged system search algorithms. Mater Test 58(1):79–81Google Scholar
  70. Yıldız AR, Kurtuluş E, Demirci E, Yıldız BS, Karagöz S (2016b) Optimization of thin-wall structures using hybrid gravitational search and Nelder-Mead algorithm. Mater Test 58(1):75–78Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shib Sankar Sana
    • 1
    Email author
  • Holman Ospina-Mateus
    • 2
  • Fabian Gazabón Arrieta
    • 2
  • Jaime Acevedo Chedid
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of MathematicsBhangar MahavidyalayaBhangarIndia
  2. 2.Department of Industrial EngineeringUniversidad Tecnológica de BolivarCartagenaColombia

Personalised recommendations