2000
DOI: 10.1080/00207540050117440
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An improved pair-wise exchange heuristic for the dynamic plant layout problem

Abstract: Much of the research in facility layout has focused on static layouts where the material handling¯ow is assumed to be constant during the planning horizon. But in today's market-based, dynamic environment, layout rearrangement may be required during the planning horizon to maintain layout e ectiveness. A few algorithms have been proposed to solve this problem. They include dynamic programming and pair-wise exchange. In this paper we propose an improved dynamic pair-wise exchange heuristic based on a previous m… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
28
0
1

Year Published

2005
2005
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 47 publications
(29 citation statements)
references
References 8 publications
0
28
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Since in a dynamic layout the resource planning has a multi-period time horizon, at the beginning of each period in addition to variability in product demand and mix between two periods, a re-layout cost may be incurred (Balakrishnan et al 2000). In this approach, usually the objective is designing layouts with the aim of maximising material flow efficiency in each period besides balancing re-layout costs between periods Benjaafar 2002, 2005).…”
Section: (3) Dynamic Distributed Layouts Versus Static Distributed Lamentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Since in a dynamic layout the resource planning has a multi-period time horizon, at the beginning of each period in addition to variability in product demand and mix between two periods, a re-layout cost may be incurred (Balakrishnan et al 2000). In this approach, usually the objective is designing layouts with the aim of maximising material flow efficiency in each period besides balancing re-layout costs between periods Benjaafar 2002, 2005).…”
Section: (3) Dynamic Distributed Layouts Versus Static Distributed Lamentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The third heuristic (HAS III) adds the look-ahead/look-back strategy to the pair-wise exchange heuristic (local search). Their models had performed well with the two set of input data from Lacksonen and Enscore [5] and Balakrishnan and Cheng [7]. In summary, the main difference among the three algorithms is the local search/optimization─ HAS I uses a random descent pair-wise exchange heuristic; HAS II uses the Simulated Annealing (SA) as the local search; HAS III uses the random descent pair-wise exchange with the look-ahead/look-back strategy.…”
Section: Dynamic Facility Layoutmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Urban proposed a steepdescent pair-wise interchange procedure combined with the concept of forecast windows [6]. Balakrishnan, Cheng and Conway [7] proposed an improvement to Urban's forecast windows procedure for solving the dynamic layout problem by complementing it with the backward method.…”
Section: Dynamic Facility Layoutmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Balakrishnan et al [18] suggested some computationally efficient improvements to Urban's former pair-wise exchange procedure. Tests had shown that the improvements are worth to implement.…”
Section: Solution Approaches In the Literaturementioning
confidence: 99%