A branch and bound network algorithm for interactive process scheduling

  • Thomas E. Baker
Chapter
Part of the Mathematical Programming Studies book series (MATHPROGRAMM, volume 15)

Abstract

A multi-facility multi-product production scheduling problem is considered in terms of a general class of process unit operations scheduling problems which are common in the refining and chemicals processing industries. A generalized network formulation is used to model the conversion of unit processing capacity to finished products. A specialized branch and bound algorithm is used to enforce the restriction that only one operation can be run per unit at any given time. The algorithm minimizes total costs, which consist of unit operating costs, processing costs, inventory holding costs, setup and changeover costs. A procedure is developed by which the setup and changeover costs are used to estimate bounds for the network model in the branch and bound algorithm. All other costs are incorporated in the network formulation. It is shown that the algorithm is more efficient in those problems for which the setup and changeover costs are small, or in problems in which a lower bound for the setup and changeover costs can be accurately estimated. The implementation of the algorithm in an interactive process scheduling system is discussed in terms of the human engineering factors involved.

Key words

Production Scheduling Interactive Scheduling Branch and Bound Network Model 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    R.C. Dorsey, J.J. Hodgson and H.D. Ratliff, “A production-scheduling problem with batch processing”, Operations Research 22 (1974) 1271–1279.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. [2]
    R.C. Dorsey, T.J. Hodgson and H.D. Ratliff, “A network approach to a multi-facility multiproduct production scheduling problem without back ordering”, Management Science 21 (7) (1975) 813–822.MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. [3]
    A. M. Geoffirion and G.W. Graves, “Scheduling parallel production lines with changeover costs: Practical application of a quadratic assignment/LP Approach”, Operations Research 24 (4) (1976) 595–610.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    F. Glover, J. Hultz, D. Klingman and J. Stutz, “Generalized networks: A fundamental computer-based planning tool”, Management Science 24 (12): (1978) 1209–1220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. [5]
    B.J. Lageweg, J.K. Lenstra and A.H.G. Rinnooy Kan, “Job-shop scheduling by implicit enumeration”. Management Science 24 (4) (1977) 441–450.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. [6]
    R.R. Love, Jr. and R.R. Vemuganti, “The single-plant mold allocation problem with capacity and changeover restrictions”, Operations Research 26 (1) (1978) 159–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    A.S. Manne, “Programming of economic lot sizes”, itManagement Science 4 (1958) 115–135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. [8]
    A.T. Mason and C.L. Moodie, “A branch and bound algorithm for minimizing cost in project scheduling”, Management Science 18 (4) (1971) B–158–B–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. [9]
    A.H.G. Rinnooy Kan, B.J. Lageweg and J.K. Lenstra, “Minimizing total costs in one-machine scheduling”, Operations Research 23 (5) (1975) 908–927.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. [10]
    E. Uskup and S.B. Smith, “A branch-and-bound algorithm for two-stage production-sequencing problems”, Operations Research 23 (1) (1975) 118–136.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Mathematical Programming Society 1981

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas E. Baker
    • 1
  1. 1.Exxon CorporationFlorham Park

Personalised recommendations