2016
DOI: 10.17485/ijst/2016/v9i37/97527
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Single Machine Scheduling Model with Total Tardiness Problem

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
2
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
2
2
2

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
1
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The average of TFT taken over eleven thousand solved problems using different PDRs is shown in Figure 1. It is evident from Figure 1 that the least value of TFT (328.67 days) is obtained when job sequencing is done using SPT rule and this result is in line with the result reported in literature (Lu et al, 2012;Tyagi et al, 2016). Further, mean based PDRs i.e.…”
Section: Simulation Studysupporting
confidence: 89%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The average of TFT taken over eleven thousand solved problems using different PDRs is shown in Figure 1. It is evident from Figure 1 that the least value of TFT (328.67 days) is obtained when job sequencing is done using SPT rule and this result is in line with the result reported in literature (Lu et al, 2012;Tyagi et al, 2016). Further, mean based PDRs i.e.…”
Section: Simulation Studysupporting
confidence: 89%
“…To the best of authors knowledge, these rules have not been proposed yet in literature. Further, researchers have used single machine scheduling problem (SMSP) and simulation based study to compare the effectiveness of the newly developed PDRs over standard rules (Cheng and Kahlbacher, 1993;Tyagi et al, 2016). Therefore, a simulation study is also conducted in this work to evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed rules over FCFS, SPT, EDD, SLACK, CR and PDT on the basis of five performance measures viz.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For the tardiness related parameters, a few of the approaches tested to minimize the performance measures were the Branch and Bound algorithm (Tyagi et al, 2016), Excel Workbook tool, sequentially searching through each of the 'n!' sequences possible.…”
Section: Tardiness Performance Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%