Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Workflow balancing strategies in parallel machine scheduling

  • Original Article
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Workflow balancing on a shop floor helps to remove bottlenecks present in the manufacturing system. Workflow refers to the total time during which the work centres are busy. Idle time is not taken into account when calculating workflow. Earlier researchers have not specified the method for jobs to be executed in parallel in order to balance the workflow to each machine. In many manufacturing environments, multiple processing stations are used in parallel to obtain adequate capacity. In parallel machine scheduling there are m machines to which n jobs are to be assigned based on different priority strategies. The procedure is based on the idea of workload balancing and on balancing the workload among machines. In this paper, workflow and workload are assumed to have the same meaning. A machine with the lowest workflow is selected for assignment of a new job from the list of unfinished jobs. Different priority strategies are followed for the selection of jobs. Three different strategies are considered, namely random (RANDOM), shortest processing time (SPT) and longest processing time (LPT) for the selection of jobs for workflow balancing. The relative percentage of imbalance (RPI) is adopted among the parallel machines to evaluate the performance of these strategies in a standard manufacturing environment. The LPT rule shows better performance for the combination of larger job sizes and higher number of work centres or machines. A computer program was coded for validation in a standard manufacturing environment on an IBM/PC compatible system in the C++ language.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mokotoff E (2001) Parallel machine scheduling problems—a survey. Asia, Pac J Oper Res 18:193–242

  2. Karger D, Stein C, Wein J (1999) Chapter scheduling algorithms. Algorithms and theory of computation handbook, CRC Press

  3. Herrmann JW, Lee CY (1994) On parallel machine scheduling with operator constrained setups. Technical Research Report, T. R. 94-85, Institute for Systems Research, The University of Maryland

  4. Koltai T, Farkas A, Stecke KE (1998) Aggregate production planning of FMS using the concept of operation types. Working Paper 98007, Graduate School of Business, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

  5. Koltai T, Farkas A, Stecke, KE (1999) Workload balancing using the concept of operation types. Working Paper 99-002, Graduate School of Business, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

  6. Irastorza JC, Deane RH (1974) A loading and balancing methodology for job shop control. AIIE Trans 6:302–307

    Google Scholar 

  7. Liang M, Dutta SP (1990) A mixed-integer programming approach to the machine loading and process planning problem in a process layout environment. Int J Prod 28:1471–1484

    Google Scholar 

  8. Kumar N, Shankar K (2001) Comparing the effectiveness of workload balancing objectives in FMS loading. Int J Prod 39:843–871

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kuula M, Stam A, Leino S, Ranta J, Wallenius J (1999) Workload balancing in the manufacturing environment: a multicriteria trade-off analysis. Int J Prod 37:1459–1477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Gung RR, Steudel HJ (1999) A workload balancing model for determining set-up time and batch size reductions in GT flow line work cells. Int J Prod 37:769–791

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Hayrinen T, Johnsson M, Johtela T, Smed J, Nevalainen O (2000) Scheduling algorithms for computer aided line balancing in printed circuit board assembly. Prod Plan C 11:497–510

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Lejmi T, Sabuncuoglu I (2002) Effect of load, processing time and due date variation on the effectiveness of scheduling rules. Int J Prod 40:945–974

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Vilarinho PM, Simaria AS (2002) A two-stage heuristic method for balancing mixed-model assembly lines with parallel workstations. Int J Prod 40:1405–1420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Co HC, Araar A (1988) Configuring cellular manufacturing systems. Int J Prod 26:1511–1522

    Google Scholar 

  15. Chen IJ, Chung C (1991) Effects of loading and routing decisions on performance of flexible manufacturing systems. Int J Prod 29:2209–2225

    Google Scholar 

  16. Guerrero F, Lozano S, Koltai T, Larraneta J (1999) Machine loading and part type selection in flexible manufacturing systems. Int J Prod 37:1303–1317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Schriber TJ, Stecke KE (1986) Machine utilizations achieved using balanced FMS production ratios in a simulated setting. Working Paper 486, Graduate School of Business, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan

  18. Land M, Gaalman G (1996) Workload control concepts in job shops. A critical assessment. Int J Pro E 46–47:535–548

    Google Scholar 

  19. Oosterman B, Land M, Gaalman GJC (1998) The influence of shop characteristics on workload control. Research report 98a28, The University of Groningen

  20. Saad SM, Baykasoglu A, Gindy NNZ (2002) A new integrated system for loading and scheduling in cellular manufacturing. Int J Comput Integrated Manufacturing 15:37–49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Chen ZL (1999) Simultaneous job scheduling and resource allocation on parallel machines. Working paper 99-04, The University of Pennsylvania Research Foundation

  22. Pearn WL, Chung, Yang, SHM H (2000) A case study on the wafer probing scheduling problem. Prod Plan C 13:66–75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Park Y, Kim S, Lee JH (2000) Scheduling jobs on parallel machines applying neural network and heuristic rule. Comput Ind Eng 38:189–202

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Sri Ramakrishna Mission Vidyalaya Polytechnic College, 641 020, Coimbatore, India

    S. Rajakumar

  2. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Government College of Technology, 641 013, Coimbatore, India

    V. P. Arunachalam

  3. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Coimbatore Institute of Technology, 641 014, Coimbatore, India

    V. Selladurai

Authors
  1. S. Rajakumar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. V. P. Arunachalam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. V. Selladurai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to S. Rajakumar or V. Selladurai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rajakumar, S., Arunachalam, V.P. & Selladurai, V. Workflow balancing strategies in parallel machine scheduling. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 23, 366–374 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-003-1603-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-003-1603-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation