Multi-objective Dynamic Layout Problems for Unequal-Area Workshop Facilities Based on NSGA-II

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 242)

Abstract

Workshop facility layout is directly related to the reasonable flow of the logistics and information of the entire production system, which has a great impact on production capacity and safety. For multi-type and batch production systems, it is a critical and complex issue for research and investigation. The production mode of mass customization asks for the dynamic, multi-objective and multi-constraints specifications of the workshop facilities layout problem. In this study, a multi-objective dynamic optimization model is established based on three optimization objectives including the total cost (the materials handling cost and the rearrangement cost), non-logistics strength relationship and the required total area. In order to find Pareto solutions, an adaptive non-dominated sorting multi-objective genetic algorithm is designed for the specific model. Finally, a numerical example is applied to demonstrate that the proposed method is quite effective.

Keywords

Multi-objective dynamic layout problem Workshop facilities NSGA-II 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Xu SY, Ding XH, Tao LY (2012) A review of multi-objective dynamic workshop facility layout problems. Mechanical Research & Application 6:40–45 (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Singh SP, Sharma RRK (2006) A Review of different approaches to the facility layout problems. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 30(5/6):425–433Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Tarun G, Ham IS (1990) Production data based similarity coefficient for machine–component grouping decision in the design of cellular manufacturing system. International Journal of Production Research 28(7):1247–1269Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zitzler E, Thiele L (1999) Multiobjective optimization using evolutionary algorithms: a comparative case study and the strength Pareto approach. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 3(4):257–271Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zitzler E, Thiele L, Laumanns M et al (2003) Performance assessment of multiobjective optimizers: an analysis and review. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation 7(2):117–132Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deb K, Pratap A, Agarwal S et al (2002) A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans on Evolutionary Computation 6(2):184-197Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zeng Q, Shen L, Pan Q et al (2012) Multi-objective optimization method for workshop facilities layout based on NSGA II. Computer Engineering and Applications 27:1–11 (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li MM, Liu SM (2012) Non-dominated sorting genetic algorithms-II based on multi-objective optimization model in the water distribution system. Procedia Engineering 37:309–313 (In Chinese)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fonseca CM, Fleming PJ (1995) An overview of evolutionary algorithms in multi-objective optimization. Evolutionary Computation 3(1):1–16Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Uncertainty Decision-Making LaboratorySichuan UniversityChengduPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations