Monolithic and hierarchical method of scheduling for assembly of multi-option products – comparison of two concepts
PDF (Polish)

Keywords

assembly lines, assembly scheduling, scheduling, integer programming

How to Cite

Magiera, M. (2018). Monolithic and hierarchical method of scheduling for assembly of multi-option products – comparison of two concepts. Technologia I Automatyzacja Montażu (Assembly Techniques and Technologies), 101(3), 13-18. Retrieved from https://journals.prz.edu.pl/tiam/article/view/990

Abstract

The monolithic and the hierarchical method are compared in the paper. They are intended to build as short assembly schedules as possible. The methods are constructed for assembly lines with parallel machines and with intermediate buffers. A Fixed and an alternative assembly routes are regarded. The most important, distinctive feature of these methods, is that they are provided for multi-option products. Assembly of various products in different variants is the reply to the contemporary challenges faced by the manufacturers, who try to satisfy the demands of individual customers. The hierarchical method consists of two levels. The First level of the hierarchical method is connected with balancing machine workloads. The task scheduling is accomplished on the second level of the method. The mathematical models of integer programming tasks were built for its specific levels. The presented in the paper hierarchical method was compared with the monolithic method. The problems of balancing machine workloads and scheduling are solved simultaneously using the monolithic method. Using integer programming and the monolithic concept allowed to determine optimum solutions. The results of computational experiments with the proposed approaches for scheduling for assembly of multi-option products are presented.

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

PDF (Polish)

References

Akpinar S., A. Baykasoglu. 2014. “Modelling and solving mixed-model line balancing problem with setups. Part I: A mixed linear programming model”. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 33 (1):177–187.

Castillo L. et. al. 2005. “Planning, scheduling and constraint satisfaction: from theory to practice”. Amsterdam: IOS Press.

Fourer R., D. Gay, B. Kernighan. 2003. „AMPL, A Modelling Language for Mathematical Programming”. Duxbury Press, Pacific Grove.

Łunarski J. 2017. „Doskonalenie procesów projektowania działaniami innowacyjnymi w zautomatyzowanej produkcji masowej”. Technologia i Automatyzacja Montażu (3): 4–5.

Magiera M. 2015. “Comparative analysis of two hierarchical methods of assembly planning for producers of electric and electronic equipment”. Przegląd Elektrotechniczny (4): 86–90

Magiera M. 2017. „Monolityczna metoda harmonogramowania montażu wielowariantowych produktów w hybrydowych systemach przepływowych”. Technologia i Automatyzacja Montażu (2): 13–18.

Magiera M. 2016. „Wybrane metody planowania przepływów produktów przez linie produkcyjne i łańcuchy dostaw”. Kraków: Wydawnictwa AGH.

Sawik T. 1999. “Production Planning and Scheduling in Flexible Assembly Systems”. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

Schneeweiss Ch. 1999. “Hierarchies in Distributed Decision Making”. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

www.gurobi.com (Gurobi Optimizer), dostęp 01.2018.