Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

NSGA-III-based multi-objective approach for reconfigurable manufacturing system design considering single-spindle and multi-spindle modular reconfigurable machines

  • ORIGINAL ARTICLE
  • Published:
The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

A reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS) is one of the next generation production systems widely used to meet uncertain market demands in the context of Industry 4.0. The design of the RMS aims to achieve sufficient responsiveness so that it can be quickly adopted to the changes required for a niche market of a customized product family. Most components of the RMS are designed to be modular. Reconfigurable machines are one of the main modular components of the RMS. In the design of the RMS, the problem of machine selection is of primary interest, as the modular machines, with their respective tools and configurations, are selected to perform a given part from the part family. Due to this trilogy of machine, tool, and configuration selection, only one type of machine is considered. To remedy this shortcoming, this work introduces a new concept of modular machine configuration capability, which leads to the selection of two types of machines, namely, the single-spindle modular reconfigurable machines (SRMT) and the multi-spindle reconfigurable machines (MRMT). This paper addresses the problem of machine selection and RMS design. Firstly, a bi-objective mathematical model is developed for the generation of the process plan and the selection of reconfigurable machines. The results obtained, together with an initial layout, are then used to generate the RMS design. Secondly, a new objective function is introduced to address the problem of under-utilization of reconfigurable multi-spindle machines. A NSGA-III (non-dominating sorting genetic algorithm III)-based approach is proposed to solve the proposed models. To help the decision maker, the pseudo-weight technique is used to determine the best process plan and the best machines to include in the new designed RMS.

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
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17

Similar content being viewed by others

Data availibility

All the data have been presented in the manuscript.

Abbreviations

NGMS:

Next generation manufacturing systems

OAC:

Open architecture control

RTOS:

Real-time operating systems

TADs:

Tool approach directions

RMS:

Reconfigurable manufacturing system

RMT:

Reconfigurable machine tools

RAM:

Reconfigurable assembly machine

RIM:

Reconfigurable inspection machine

MRM:

Modular reconfigurable machine

SRMT:

Single-spindle modular reconfigurable machines

MRMT:

Multi-spindle reconfigurable machines

NSGA-III:

Non-dominating sorting genetic algorithm III

References

  1. Ameer M, Dahane M (2020) New heuristic for setup plan generation and multi tool modules selection in reconfigurable manufacturing systems. In: 2020 7th International Conference on Control, Decision and Information Technologies (CoDIT), vol 1, pp 1069–1074. IEEE

  2. Ameer M, Dahane M (2021) Reconfigurability improvement in industry 4.0: a hybrid genetic algorithm-based heuristic approach for a co-generation of setup and process plans in a reconfigurable environment. J Intell Manufac 1–23

  3. Ameer M, Dahane M (2023) A novel reconfigurability effort index for process planning generation in reconfigurable manufacturing system: NSGA-III multi-objective based approach. Submitted Comput Ind Eng J

  4. Arnarson H, Yu H, Olavsbråten MM, Bremdal BA, Solvang B (2023) Towards smart layout design for a reconfigurable manufacturing system. J Manufac Syst 68:354–367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Asghar E, Baqai AA, Zaman U (2015) Performance of NSGA-II and WGA in macro level process planning considering reconfigurable manufacturing system. In: Proceedings of 25th International Conference on Flexible Automation and Intelligent Manufacturing, vol 2. pp 320–327

  6. Azab A, ElMaraghy H (2007) Mathematical modeling for reconfigurable process planning. Cirp Annals 56(1):467–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bechikh S, Datta R, Gupta A (2016) Recent advances in evolutionary multi-objective optimization, vol 20. Springer

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  8. Benderbal HH, Dahane M, Benyoucef L (2018) Modularity assessment in reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS) design: an archived multi-objective simulated annealing-based approach. Int J Adv Manufac Technol 94(1–4):729–749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bensmaine A, Dahane M, Benyoucef L (2013) A non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm based approach for optimal machines selection in reconfigurable manufacturing environment. Comput Ind Eng 66(3):519–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bensmaine A, Dahane M, Benyoucef L (2014) A new heuristic for integrated process planning and scheduling in reconfigurable manufacturing systems. Int J Prod Res 52(12):3583–3594

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Blank J, Deb K (2020) Pymoo: multi-objective optimization in python. IEEE Access 8:89497–89509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bortolini M, Galizia FG, Mora C (2018) Reconfigurable manufacturing systems: literature review and research trend. J Manufac Syst 49:93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cheung BC, Carriveau R, Ting DS (2014) Multi-objective optimization of an underwater compressed air energy storage system using genetic algorithm. Energy 74:396–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Deb K (2011) Multi-objective optimisation using evolutionary algorithms: an introduction. In: Multi-objective evolutionary optimisation for product design and manufacturing. Springer, pp 3–34

  15. Deb K, Jain H (2013) An evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithm using reference-point-based nondominated sorting approach, part i: solving problems with box constraints. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 18(4):577–601

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Dhupia J, Powalka B, Katz R, Ulsoy AG (2007) Dynamics of the arch-type reconfigurable machine tool. Int J Mach Tools Manufac 47(2):326–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gadalla M, Xue D (2017) Recent advances in research on reconfigurable machine tools: a literature review. Int J Prod Res 55(5):1440–1454

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Haddou-Benderbal H, Dahane M, Benyoucef L (2016) Hybrid heuristic to minimize machine’s unavailability impact on reconfigurable manufacturing system using reconfigurable process plan. IFAC-PapersOnLine 49(12):1626–1631

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Haddou Benderbal H, Dahane M, Benyoucef L (2017) Flexibility-based multi-objective approach for machines selection in reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS) design under unavailability constraints. Int J Prod Res 55(20):6033–6051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ismail N, Musharavati F, Hamouda A, Ramli A (2008) Manufacturing process planning optimisation in reconfigurable multiple parts flow lines. J Achiev Mater Manuf Eng 31(2):671–677

    Google Scholar 

  21. Jain H, Deb K (2013) An evolutionary many-objective optimization algorithm using reference-point based nondominated sorting approach, part ii: handling constraints and extending to an adaptive approach. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 18(4):602–622

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Kannan M, Saha J (2009) A feature-based generic setup planning for configuration synthesis of reconfigurable machine tools. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 43(9–10):994–1009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Koren Y (2013) The rapid responsiveness of RMS. Int J Prod Res 51(23–24):6817–6827

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Li X, An Q, Zhang J, Mao X, Tang R, Xu F, Dong Z, Feng Y, Li X (2021) A novel optimization framework for integrated local energy system multi-objective dispatch problem based on dynamic knowledge base. Int J Electr Power Energy Syst 128(106):736

    Google Scholar 

  25. Maniraj M, Pakkirisamy V, Parthiban P (2014) Optimisation of process plans in reconfigurable manufacturing systems using ant colony technique. Int J Enterp Netw Manag 6(2):125–138

    Google Scholar 

  26. Moghaddam SK, Houshmand M, Saitou K, Fatahi Valilai O (2020) Configuration design of scalable reconfigurable manufacturing systems for part family. Int J Prod Res 58(10):2974–2996

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Padayachee J, Bright G, Masekamela I (2009) Modular reconfigurable machine tools: design, control and evaluation. South African J Ind Eng 20(2):127–143

    Google Scholar 

  28. Pansare R, Yadav G, Nagare MR (2023) A hybrid framework to prioritize the performance metrics of reconfigurable manufacturing system (RMS) using fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS method. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 124(3–4):863–885

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ribau JP, Sousa JM, Silva CM (2015) Reducing the carbon footprint of urban bus fleets using multi-objective optimization. Energy 93:1089–1104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Singh A, Asjad M, Gupta P (2019) Reconfigurable machine tools: a perspective. Life Cycle Reliab. Saf. Eng 8(4):365–376

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Son H, Choi HJ, Park HW (2010) Design and dynamic analysis of an arch-type desktop reconfigurable machine. Int J Mach Tools Manuf 50(6):575–584

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Spicer P, Koren Y, Shpitalni M, Yip-Hoi D (2002) Design principles for machining system configurations. CIRP Annals 51(1):275–280

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Wang G, Shang X, Yan Y, Allen JK, Mistree F (2018) A tree-based decision method for the configuration design of reconfigurable machine tools. J Manuf Syst 49:143–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Wang Y, Zhang G, Han L (2019) A methodology of setting module groups for the design of reconfigurable machine tools. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 104(5–8):2133–2147

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Weston R, Cui Z (2008) Next generation manufacturing systems. In: Global Design to Gain a Competitive Edge. Springer, pp 701–710

  36. Yelles-Chaouche AR, Gurevsky E, Brahimi N, Dolgui A (2020) Reconfigurable manufacturing systems from an optimisation perspective: a focused review of literature. Int J Prod Res 1–19

  37. Zhang Z, Xu F, Sun X (2022) Optimization of process parameters during hydroforming of tank bottom using NSGA-III algorithm. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 119(5–6):4043–4055

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Université de Lorraine, LGIPM, Metz, F-57000, France

    Muhammad Ameer & Mohammed Dahane

Authors
  1. Muhammad Ameer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammed Dahane
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Muhammad Ameer: formal analysis, original draft writing, and validation.

Mohammed Dahane: conceptualization, methodology, writing—review and editing, programming, and validation.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammed Dahane.

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Consent to participate

Not applicable. The article involves no studies on humans.

Consent for publication

All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

Table 8 Operations that can be performed in parallel
Full size table
Table 9 Characteristics of reconfigurable machines
Full size table
Table 10 Machines and configurations capabilities
Full size table
Table 11 Processing time
Full size table
Table 12 Processing cost
Full size table
Table 13 Machines reconfiguration time
Full size table
Table 14 Machines reconfiguration cost
Full size table
Table 15 Time of the transfer of part between machines
Full size table
Table 16 Cost of the transfer of part between machines
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ameer, M., Dahane, M. NSGA-III-based multi-objective approach for reconfigurable manufacturing system design considering single-spindle and multi-spindle modular reconfigurable machines. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 128, 2499–2524 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-11847-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00170-023-11847-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation