0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)

0 просмотров6 страницJan 08, 2020

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT или читайте онлайн в Scribd

© All Rights Reserved

0 оценок0% нашли этот документ полезным (0 голосов)

0 просмотров6 страниц© All Rights Reserved

Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 6

com

ScienceDirect

Procedia CIRP 63 (2017) 354 – 359

Shanshan Zha*, Yu Guo, Shaohua Huang, Falin Wang, Xiao Huang

College of Mechanical and Electrical Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Nanjing, 210016, China

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +86-025-84895840; E-mail address: sszha@nuaa.edu.cn

Abstract

Facility layout problem (FLP) is one of the classical and important problems in manufacturing system. It involves determining the optimal

placement of different types of facilities within the boundaries of workshop so that materials handling cost is optimized. Aiming at dynamic

facility layout problem caused by uncertainty of product demands, a novel continuous formulation of robust facility layout is presented on the

basis of fuzzy-random theory. The main factors causing uncertainty demands are analyzed and the uncertain demands are represented by fuzzy

random variables. To minimize material handling cost between the various departments, a robust layout model with unequal-area departments

is established under fuzzy random environments. Moreover, the position-based flexible particle swarm optimization algorithm is proposed to

obtain feasible optimization solutions. Finally, a case study of manufacturing system has been utilized for the verification of the above model

and optimization.

©

©2017

2017TheTheAuthors. Published

Authors. by Elsevier

Published B.V. This

by Elsevier B.V.is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of The 50th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems.

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of The 50th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems

Keywords: Robust Facility Layout; uncertain product demands; optimization model

necessarily an optimal solution for every period of facility

Facility layout problem (FLP) has significant impact layout, but for entire time planning horizon. Unlike the

upon manufacturing costs, work in process, lead time and flexible layout needs rearrangement costs, robust layout has

productivity. FLP involves determining the optimal the advantage of low rearrangements and production

placement of different type of facilities within the space of interruption costs. It was proposed that robustness of a

workshop. Such facilities include machines, workstations, layout as the number of times that the layout falls within a

utilities etc. Material handling cost is the most critical pre-specified percentage of the optimal solution under

measure to determine the reasonability of a layout since it different material demands [5].

forms 20-50% of the total manufacturing costs and it can be

decreased 10-30% by efficient layout design [1,2]. Due to 2. Literature Review

the fact that FLP is an NP-hard problem and combinatorial

optimization problem (COP), various mathematical models Most of the researchers in the literature focused on the

and heuristic or intelligence methods have been developed changes of material demands from period to period under

in past two decades. deterministic environment [6,7]. With fuzzy production

Dynamic facility layout problem (DFLP) takes into information, changes of product volume, and product

account possible changes in the material demands over varieties, material demands for each period exist uncertainty

multiple periods [3]. The planning horizon is generally to some extent. Material demands is considered as a

divided into weeks, months, or years. There are two stochastic variable with the normal distribution, which could

approaches towards DFLP: flexible and robust. Flexible be predicted on the basis of past information relating to

approach assumes that layout will accommodate changes product [8]. Chan and Malmborg (2011) [9] adopted Monte

from time to time with low arrangements and easily Carlo simulation to empirically search for robust solution

relocated machines. It may delays the lead time and make under stochastic demand scenarios. G.Aiello et al. (2012)

customer satisfaction levels decline sharply with production [10] proposed that the uncertainty of material demands

2212-8271 © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license

(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of The 50th CIRP Conference on Manufacturing Systems

doi:10.1016/j.procir.2017.03.079

Shanshan Zha et al. / Procedia CIRP 63 (2017) 354 – 359 355

between facilities and defined the material demands for each material demands in this paper. Essentially, a facility layout

period as fuzzy numbers. Kaveh and Dalfard (2012) [11] plan is drawn up usually before the implementation.

defined product demand (i.e. material flow) as a fuzzy Uncertain fluctuation leads decision-makers difficulty for

number and modeled in fuzzy programming including estimate precise material demands changes in the process of

expected value, chance-constrained programming and production. Therefore, the material demands between

dependent-chance programming. workstations cannot be determined in advance for ambiguity

The first robust layout model was presented as a QAP of renewal information related to production, which leads to

model with stochastic material demands for a single period consider uncertainty. Because of multi-varieties and rapid

[5]. Afterwards, some researchers have established a robust response to market, it is appropriate to use fuzzy variables

layouts model for multi-production scenarios in to model the precise material demands history data and

manufacturing system [12,13]. Pillai and Subbarao (2008) decision-makers’ forecasting data. At the same time,

[14] developed a robust layout design methodology with material demands may to be adjusted from day to day or

equal-area department and adopted total penalty cost to test week by week, which indicate material demands is a

the suitability of the suggested layout model for DFLP. Liu variable in a period that exists probability to some extent.

(2014) [15] improved the existing robust indicator and As mentioned above, probability theory has been applied to

design a robust constrain to improve robustness of final solving FLP in previous researches, in which the material

layout. Neghabi et al. (2015) [16] proposed a robust layout demands approximately follows a normal distribution.

under uncertain environment with dynamic and uncertain Consequently, the material demands between any two

value for departments’ dimensions. Izadinia (2016) [17] departments or workstations at any period need to consider

proposed a mixed integer programming model to generate a both fuzziness and randomness. In a word, a fuzzy random

robust solution for multi-floor layout problem. variable is suggested in this paper to demonstrate the dual

Although previous studies have significantly improved uncertainty in the material demands.

FLP with uncertainty, it is difficult to reflect the subjective

and objective imprecision and complexity simultaneously. 4. Mathematic Modeling for DFLP

Decision-making processes often stay in a hybrid uncertain

environment. So it is hard to know precisely whether the Based on the problem statement above, a dynamic

uncertain environments is fuzzy or random. Therefore, this facility layout model with unequal area under fuzzy random

study proposes fuzzy random variables to handling with the environment established in this paper seeks to find a robust

dual uncertainty, which makes more comprehensive and layout. The model is formulated under the following

practical for facility layout design. assumptions:

(1) There are multi-periods consist of entire planning

3. Key Problem Statement horizon.

(2) The profile of department area is seen as rectangle

As mentioned in the literature, presence of ambiguity in ignoring its outline details.

material flow information and changes of product for each (3) Each facilities are placed parallel to x, y axis.

sections lead the dynamic facility layout problem. Realizing (4) The material demands between departments are

the idealistic of considering material demands as a certain defined as fuzzy random variables.

variable, most researchers consider its uncertainty of the Nomenclature

problem. The approaches solving uncertain facility layout

problems can be classified into two general groups of d tjk manhattan distance between facility j to facility k

probabilistic and fuzzy approaches [3]. d l , d u material demands maximum value and minimum

In practice, FLP decision-maker cannot estimate the

value respectively

precise product demand in advance for rapid changes of

f Dt ^D ,J ` ( x ) increasing functions

market and scarcity of accurate statistical demand data. p

p

environment is fuzzy or random. For the former, fuzzy logic

has been introduced to handle this imprecision in a certain rjt binary variable , denote whether the facility j is to be

range. For the latter, product demands fluctuate from day arranged at period t

to day or week by week with process adjusting, product x j the centroid of facility i at the horizontal coordinate

quality, and so on. As mentioned above, probability theory

y j the centroid of facility i at the vertical coordinate

has been applied to handle this kind uncertainty. Under this

situation, there is need to stress the twofold uncertainty, as it D pt demands of part p in period t

allows for a more comprehensive analysis of the FLP

EV ª Dpt ^D , J `º denotes the expected value of material

product demands uncertainty. ¬ ¼

There are two distinct characteristics considered in this demands at t period

paper. First, unequal-area facilities need to be considered. If Fpt delivery frequency of part p in period t

each facilities have been assigned with uniformly area, it L,W the length and the width of the workshop

will reduce the rate of area utilization. Second, fuzzy

MC1 total material handling costs for flexible model

random variables are applied to replace the deterministic

356 Shanshan Zha et al. / Procedia CIRP 63 (2017) 354 – 359

t

Fpt (4)

N p number of part p per transportation N pt

R kt relocation cost of facility k at period t

T

T number of periods in planning horizon

t

¦D t

p

t 1

Fp t

(5)

TN p

Based on the above transforming process, the new model

As mentioned above, the uncertainty demands between of the dynamic approach that has been proposed with

facilities was defined as a fuzzy random variable. The unequal-area under fuzzy random environment is seen as

follows respectively:

introduction of the fuzzy random variable D pt describes

uncertainty of the actual production, which leads model T q q EV ¬ª D p ^D , J `¼º

t

more difficult to solve. The expected value method first min MC2 ¦¦ ¦ TN p

t

t

d jk (6)

transformed the fuzzy random variable into fuzzy variable t 1 k 1 j k 1

deterministic optimal solution. In this paper, the fuzzy In order cater for real production condition and avoid

random variable D pt is converted into trapezoidal fuzzy overlapping between facilities, the constraints should be

consider as follows:

number W pt , where Dpt (dl ,W (d ), d u ) , and W (d ) is

estimated follow a normal distribution. The fuzzy random x j l j / 2 t bx (7)

variable is transformed into a D , J -level trapezoidal fuzzy

variable Wpt (dl , d , d , du ) , where D is a given possibility x j l j / 2 d L bx (8)

level of the fuzzy random variable and J is a given

possibility level of the random variable, both of it represents y j w j / 2 t by (9)

decision makers’ degree of confidence [18]. Based on the

method of expected-value operator proposed by Kruse and y j w j / 2 d W by (10)

Meyer theory and Heilpern theory [19], the fuzzy variable

transformed into a deterministic value EV ª¬ Dpt ^D , J `º¼ , (l j lk ) / 2 d fx d x j xk d L (l j lk ) / 2 2bx (11)

where

(l j lk ) / 2 d fy d y j yk d W ( w j wk ) / 2 2by (12)

d du

1

EV ª D ^D , J `º

¼ 2 [(d ³ f D ^D ,J ` ( x )dx ) (d ³ g D ^D ,J ` ( x )dx )] (1)

t

¬ p t

p

t

p

Where Eq. (7) and (10) are used to guarantee that each

d l d

facility is assigned within the boundary workshop

respectively. Where Eq. (11) and (12) are used to guarantee

4.2. Formulation for robust facility layout planning that the space for install, operation, and material

transportation between facilities.

As mentioned above, robust approach has more

advantages when the facilities are difficulty to shift, 5. Position-based on particle swarm optimization for

production disruption and rearrangement costs hard to bear. solving Robust Facility Layout Problem

Minimizing the total cost of material handling cost is an

important measure for rationality of layout. Therefore, a Because of easy to implement, efficient global search

typical model with flexible approach and robust approach approach, and few parameters adjustment, many particle

are described as follows respectively: swarm optimization (PSO) and its improved algorithm has

been applied in FLP. However, little research has been

T q q T q found on proposed a suitable PSO in robust facility layout

¦¦ ¦ F d ¦¦ ¦ R

q

t t t

min MC1 p jk k

(2) problem (RFLP) with uncertain environment. In this paper,

t 1 k 1 j k 1 t 2 k 1 m 1

a new algorithm position-based PSO is proposed, which

system layout planning method (SLP) is introduced to

T q q

min MC2 ¦¦ ¦ F d p

t t

jk

(3) improve the quality of initial solution. The whole procedure

for the position-based PSO for solving a RFLP with unequal

t 1 k 1 j k 1

Subjected to Step1: According to the method described in section 4.1,

transformed the fuzzy random demands into deterministic

demands before algorithm programming.

Shanshan Zha et al. / Procedia CIRP 63 (2017) 354 – 359 357

(position boundary, velocity boundary, popsize, maximum

iterations, constraint parameters in section4.2 and so on). In order to verify effectiveness of proposed model and

Step3: Decode for each particles into solution, a position- algorithm, the case study presents a practical application of

based solution representation is proposed. SLP method help the RFLP in a new assembly workshop of large-scale

acquire w part of higher-quality initial particles. Combined aeronautic equipment. From the view of economical and

with randomly generated n w part of initial particles safety, the workshop decision maker’s objective were to

compose of initial population n . The three-dimension save material handling costs and prevent overlapping

particles with different position values are used for represent between facilities. In this section, the flexible approach is

candidate solution. The position formulation can be compared with the robust approach, the optimal solution can

represented as follows: be obtained with minimum material handling cost.

I ^( x , y , r ,..., x , y , r ,..., x

t

1

t

1 1

t t

w

t

w

t

w

t

n 1 `

, ynt 1 , rnt1 ) (13)

6.1. Case study representation

Step4: Evaluate the each solution based on the This study attempts to choose 10 facilities to be placed

calculation of fitness value f A according to in workshop, including special equipment, transporting

equipment, large fixture for assisting assembly, deposit area

f A 1/ MCl (14) beside assembly line for storing standard parts, consumable,

attachment and so on. The new assembly workshop had a

Step5: Update the personal best solution and global best large planning area with its length L 220m and its

solution with iteration running. Check if the personal best width W 160m . The entire period of production is make up

solution and global best solution have changed with of 5 different periods. Each period has different product

iteration running or not. If yes, then go to step6 continue demand.

update particles, otherwise, check if particles fall into a Essentially, the aeronautic equipment demands can be

local optimum. acquired by market prediction in planning stage, but

Step 6: Update the particles velocity and position with fluctuate within a certain range. Therefore, the uncertainty

iteration running according to caused by market volatility can be described in fuzzy logic.

In production stage, since the limited type of parts,

p(k 1) p(k ) v(k 1) (15) components, attachment consist the large aeronautic

equipment, the product demands between facilities can be

v H 1 Z v H c1r1 ( pHpbest pH ) c2 r2 ( pHgbest pH ) (16) predicted by history data such as BOM, quality test data, et

al, which follows a normal distribution. Based on the above

statement, the product demands between facilities at the 1st

Then on the basis of step 5 and step6, update the personal period are partly listed in Table1due to the short text. Using

best solution and global best solution. the method introduced in Section4.1, the fuzzy random

Step7: Check the feasibility of the solution acquired. demand was transformed into a deterministic value.

Whether all the particles are obtained finally met the Before the proposed position-based PSO running in the

constraints, if not, then return to step 3, re-initialization. If MATLAB program, the algorithm-related parameters were

yes, output the global best solution. set as follows: popsize K 100 ; maximum iteration H 150 ;

acceleration constant c1 c2 2.

results have been obtained with the same position-based

PSO. The results can provide the theoretical optimal plan

for decision maker and layout designer. Further analysis on

the advantages in comparison with above models.

The results (showed in Table2) demonstrated that the

robust model had more advantages than the flexible solution.

For the material handling cost object, the best solution for

flexible approach was higher 4.42% than the robust

approach in this case, the worst and the average solutions

were 3.77% and 4.08% higher, respectively. Moreover, the

flexible solution involves 6 re-arrangement times and costs

in the entire planning horizon, while robust solution

(showed in Table3) suggests only one solution. Re-

Fig.1. The position-based PSO flowchart arrangement may leads production interruption and

358 Shanshan Zha et al. / Procedia CIRP 63 (2017) 354 – 359

increases unnecessary layout costs. Therefore, it can be with minimum material handling costs and improves the

concluded that the RFLP in this case has better solutions dynamic layout adaptability.

Table1. The fuzzy random material demands between any two facilities (1~5) at the first period

Facility index F1 F2 F3 F4 F5

F1 —— (50, W 12 ,70) (42, W 13 ,65) (7, W 14 ,10) (35, W 15 ,46)

F2 (50, W 21 ,70) —— (10, W 23 ,25) (20, W 24 ,32) (5, W 25 ,10)

F3 (42, W 31 ,65) (10, W 32 ,25) —— (20, W 34 ,32) 0

F4 (7, W 41 ,10) (20, W 42 ,32) (20, W 43 ,32) —— 0

F5 (35, W 51 ,46) (5, W 52 ,10) 0 0 ——

W 51 ~N(41,6) W 52 ~N(8,5)

F6 (5, W 61 ,8) (4, W 62 ,7) (15, W 63 ,25) (6, W 64 ,9) (2, W 65 ,7)

F7 (4, W 71 ,7) (5, W 72 ,8) (15, W 73 ,25) (20, W 74 ,28) (6, W 75 ,9)

F8 (90, W 81 ,120) (45, W 82 ,70) (55, W 83 ,75) (25, W 84 ,42) (5, W 85 ,10)

F9 (120, W 91 ,150) (200, W 92 ,220) (90, W 93 ,120) (60, W 94 ,80) (20, W 95 ,30)

F10 (7, W101 ,10) (5, W102 ,8) 0 (5, W104 ,8) (4, W105 ,7)

MHC best result MHC Worst result MHC average result Relocation time

Model type

( 1 u 10 CNY) ( 1 u 10 CNY) ( 1 u 10 CNY)

5 5 5

(frequency)

Flexible 7.46 7.71 7.59 6

Robust 7.13 7. 42 7.28 0

F10 165.21 145.37 r 0

Table 3. Robust model for optimal position value at all periods

Facility index Dimension( x ) Dimension( y) Relocation time

7. Conclusion and Future Work

F1 35.43 30.25 r 0

F2 40.08 105.24 r 0 A new novel robust method was proposed in this paper to

F3 90.65 62.96 r 0 solve DFLP in manufacturing system. First, the main factors

F4 119.28 92.31 r 0 causing uncertainty demands are analyzed and the uncertain

F5 136.18 91.01 r 0 demands are represented on the basis of fuzzy random

F6 78.05 80.79 r 0 theory. Second, a novel continuous formulation of robust

facility layout with un-equal area under uncertain product

F7 101.80 127.52 r 0

demands has been first developed. Subsequently, the

F8 182.36 166.12 r 0 developed model has been verified using a realistic

F9 75.34 102.78 r 0 industrial case study. This study developed a position-based

Shanshan Zha et al. / Procedia CIRP 63 (2017) 354 – 359 359

PSO algorithm to obtain a flexible and robust satisfactory Integrated Manufacturing Systems , 2014, 20 (8) : 1879-1886 (in

solution respectively. Compared with flexible solution, Chinese)

[16] Salmani M H, Eshghi K, Neghabi H. A bi-objective MIP model for

robust solution had advantage of minimum material facility layout problem in uncertain environment. The International

handling cost in all periods, without interrupting production. Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2015, 81(9):1563-

For future work, the quantitative index for choosing robust 1575.

approach will be focused and a multi-objective such as [17] Izadinia N, Eshghi K. A robust mathematical model and ACO

minimum actual route distance, area utilization, and so on solution for multi-floor discrete layout problem with uncertain

locations and demands. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2016,

will be considered. In addition, the three different models 96:237-248.

that include stochastic model, fuzzy model and fuzzy [18] XU J, Song X. Multi-objective dynamic layout problem for temporary

random model will be compared to further elucidating the construction facilities with unequal-area departments under fuzzy

advantages of the fuzzy random environment. random environment.Knowledge-Based Systems, 2015, 81(C): 30-45.

[19] S. Heilpern. The expected value of a fuzzy number.Fuzzy Set

Syst.47(1),1992,81-86

Acknowledgments

Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51575274), and

National Defense Basic Scientific Research (Grant

No.A2620132010).

Reference

work: John Wiley & Sons, Inc,2003.

[2] Neghabi H, Eshghi K, Salmani M H. A new model for robust facility

layout problem. Information Sciences, 2014, 278:498-509.

[3] Braglia M, Zavanella S Z L. Layout design in dynamic environments:

Strategies and quantitative indices. International Journal of Production

Research, 2003, volume 41(41):995-1016.

[4] Pillai V M, Hunagund I B, Krishnan K K. Design of robust layout for

Dynamic Plant Layout Problems. Computers & Industrial Engineering,

2011, 61(3):813-823.

[5] MEIR J. ROSENBLATT, HAU L. LEE. A robustness approach to

facilities design. International Journal of Production Research, 1987,

25(4):479-486.

[6] Hosseini S, Khaled A A, Vadlamani S. Hybrid imperialist competitive

algorithm, variable neighborhood search, and simulated annealing for

dynamic facility layout problem.Neural Computing & Applications,

2014, 25 (7-8) :1871-1885.

[7] Bozorgi N, Abedzadeh M, Zeinali M. Tabu search heuristic for

efficiency of dynamic facility layout problem.International Journal of

Advanced Manufacturing Technology,2014, 77(1-4):689-703.

[8] Fariborz J, Reza T, Mohammad T. A multi-objective particle swarm

optimisation algorithm for unequal sized dynamic facility layout

problem with pickup/drop-off locations. International Journal of

Production Research, 2012,50(15):4279-4293.

[9] Wai Kin (Victor) Chan, Charles J. Malmborg. A Monte Carlo

simulation based heuristic procedure for solving dynamic line layout

problems for facilities using conventional material handling devices.

International Journal of Production Research, 2010, 48(10):2937-2956.

[10] Aiello G, Scalia G L, Enea M. A multi objective genetic algorithm for

the facility layout problem based upon slicing structure encoding.

Expert Systems with Applications, 2012, 39(12):10352-10358.

[11] Kaveh M, Dalfard V M, Amiri S. A new intelligent algorithm for

dynamic facility layout problem in state of fuzzy constraints. Neural

Computing & Applications, 2014, 24(5):1179-1190.

[12] Benjaafar S, Sheikhzadeh M. Design of flexible plant layouts. IIE

Transactions, 2000, 32(4):309-322.

[13] Aiello G, Enea M.: Fuzzy approach to the robust facility layout in

uncertain production environments. International Journal of Production

Research, 2010, 39(18):4089-4101.

[14] V. Madhusudanan Pillai, Kankata Subbarao. A robust cellular

manufacturing system design for dynamic part population using a

genetic algorithm. International Journal of Production Research, 2008,

46(18):5191-5210.

[15] LIU QiongˈXU Jinhui, ZHANG Chaoyong. Robust layout of floor

shop based on improved shuffled frog leaping algorithm. Computer

## Гораздо больше, чем просто документы.