Simulation Analysis of Scheduling Heuristics in a Flow-Line Manufacturing Cell with Two Types of Order Shipment Environments

Six scheduling heuristics are investigated in a flow-line manufacturing cell with two types of order shipment environments: Permitted Early Shipment (PES) and Forbidden Early Shipment (FES). Once an order is completed in the PES environment, it leaves the system without delay. In the FES environment, however, the suppliers must deliver materials to the system on a just-in-time basis; and a completed order cannot leave the system earlier than the customer has specified. The FES environment therefore captures many of the features of the currently popular just-in- time (JIT) approach to manufacturing The six heuristics include two single-stage scheduling heuristics and four group (two-stage) scheduling heuristics. Shop factors examined include the order shipment environment, interarrival time distribution, and order release policy. Computer simulation is used as the research vehicle in this study. The results of the study show that the performance of scheduling heuristics in the FES environment differs from their performance in the PES environment, except for tardiness-related measures. In general, group scheduling heuristics outperform single-stage heuristics in both types of order shipment environments. The study also identifies the best performing heuristics, which can provide guidance for schedulers or decision makers in the selection of preferable heuristics.

[1]  John J. Kanet,et al.  Manufacturing systems with forbidden early shipment: implications for choice of scheduling rules , 1990 .

[2]  A. Alan B. Pritsker,et al.  Introduction to simulation and SLAM II , 1979 .

[3]  Gary D. Scudder,et al.  Scheduling rule selection for the forbidden early shipment environment: a comparison of economic objectives , 1992 .

[4]  Asoo J. Vakharia,et al.  Job and Family Scheduling of a Flow-Line Manufacturing Cell: A Simulation Study , 1991 .

[5]  Patrick R. Philipoom,et al.  Sequencing rules and due date setting procedures in flow line cells with family setups , 1991 .

[6]  Sunder Kekre,et al.  SCHED-STAR A PRICE-BASED SHOP SCHEDULING MODULE , 1988 .

[7]  Farzad Mahmoodi,et al.  Dynamic Group Scheduling Heuristics in a Flow-through Cell Environment* , 1992 .

[8]  Gary D. Scudder,et al.  The use of value-based priorities when early shipments are forbidden , 1989 .

[9]  T. J. Greene,et al.  A review of cellular manufacturing assumptions, advantages and design techniques , 1984 .

[10]  Gary D. Scudder,et al.  Application of the Net Present Value Criterion in Random and Flow Shop Scheduling , 1989 .

[11]  John J. Kankt,et al.  Manufacturing systems with forbidden early order departure , 1984 .

[12]  Farzad Mahmoodi,et al.  An investigation of dynamic group scheduling heuristics in a job shop manufacturing cell , 1990 .

[13]  Gary D. Scudder,et al.  Use of the net present value criterion in a random job shop where early shipments are forbidden , 1990 .

[14]  J. Kleijnen.  Statistical tools for simulation practitioners , 1986 .

[15]  Stephen R. Lawrence.  Scheduling a single machine to maximize net present value , 1991 .

[16]  John J. Kanet,et al.  Open Order Rescheduling in Job Shops with Demand Uncertainty: A Simulation Study , 1988 .

[17]  Warren W. Fisher,et al.  Due Date Assignment, Job Order Release, and Sequencing Interaction in Job Shop Scheduling* , 1992 .

[18]  Barbara B. Flynn.  Repetitive lots: The use of a sequence-dependent set-up time scheduling procedure in group technology and traditional shops , 1987 .

[19]  Nancy Lea Hyer,et al.  Cellular manufacturing in the U.S. industry: a survey of users , 1989 .

[20]  John J. Kanet,et al.  Manufacturing systems with forbidden early shipment: Implications for setting manufacturing lead times , 1989 .

[21]  Gary D. Scudder,et al.  Sequencing with Earliness and Tardiness Penalties: A Review , 1990, Oper. Res..