Intelligent heuristic for FMS scheduling using grouping

Ben‐Arieh, David; Dror, Moshe

doi:10.1007/bf01471941

Cited by 5 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This constitutes a hierarchical GT approach where the initial families are formed based on the board-component incidence matrix and system component loading capacity, and the subfamilies are formed based on machine processing times. The use of groups to satisfy open-shop solution requirements has already been described in some detail in Ben-Arieh and Dror [9]. In the current work we include the critical issue of assignment of components to machines together with PCB scheduling, and also examine the importance of family formation.…”

Section: Open-shop Scheduling Of a Pcb Familymentioning

confidence: 99%

Printed circuit board family grouping and component allocation for a multimachine, open-shop assembly cell

Askin¹,

Dror²,

Vakharia³

1994

Naval Research Logistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article considers a particular printed circuit board (PCB) assembly system employing surface mount technology. Multiple, identical automatic placement machines, a variety of board types, and a large number of component types characterize the environment studied. The problem addressed is that of minimizing the makespan for assembling a batch of boards with a secondary objective of reducing the mean flow time. The approach adopted is that of grouping boards into production families, allocating component types to placement machines for each family, dividing of families into board groups with similar processing times, and the scheduling of groups. A complete setup is incurred only when changing over between board families. For the environment studied, precedence constraints on the order of component placement do not exist, and placement times are independent of feeder location. Heuristic solution procedures are proposed to create board subfamilies (groups) for which the component mounting times are nearly identical within a subfamily. Assignment of the same component type to multiple machines is avoided. The procedures use results from the theory of open‐shop scheduling and parallel processor scheduling to sequence boards on machines. Note that we do not impose an open‐shop environment but rather model the problem in the context of an open shop, because the order of component mountings is immaterial. Three procedures are proposed for allocating components to machines and subsequently scheduling boards on the machines. The first two procedures assign components to machines to balance total work load. For scheduling purposes, the first method groups boards into subfamilies to adhere to the assumptions of the open‐shop model, and the second procedure assumes that each board is a subfamily and these are scheduled in order of shortest total processing time. The third procedure starts by forming board subfamilies based on total component similarity and then assigns components to validate the open‐shop model. We compare the performance of the three procedures using estimated daily, two‐day, and weekly production requirements by averaging quarterly production data for an actual cell consisting of five decoupled machines. © 1994 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

show abstract

Section: Open-shop Scheduling Of a Pcb Familymentioning

confidence: 99%

Printed circuit board family grouping and component allocation for a multimachine, open-shop assembly cell

Askin¹,

Dror²,

Vakharia³

1994

Naval Research Logistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The OSSP has a number of industrial applications, such as plastic molding, chemical processes, oil industry, and food production, whereas in the service sector is used to model medical care services, vehicle maintenance, and telecommunications ( Gonzalez and Sahni, 1976;Lin et al, 2008;Naderi et al, 2010;. For some authors, the open shop layout is assumed implicitly as the operational scheduling discipline in Flexible Manufacturing Systems (FMS) ( Kusiak, 1985;Ben-Arieh and Dror, 1991 ), which in turn may be used within the smart manufacturing system envisioned by Industry 4.0 ( Yin et al, 2018 ). It is not then surprising that, nowadays, the OSSP is an active and promising research topic in the production scheduling area ( Anand and Panneerselvam, 2016 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%