Skip to main content
Log in

Lot streaming for a two-stage assembly system in the presence of handling costs

  • Published:
Journal of Scheduling Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Lot streaming is a strategy of splitting a production lot into several sublots so that completed sublots can be transferred to a downstream machine before the entire lot has been completely processed at a current machine. Such a strategy increases the velocity of material flow through a system. However, an increase in the number of transfers between stages also increases material handling cost. In this paper, we address the problem of minimizing a weighted sum of the makespan and handling costs when multiple lots are produced in an assembly system consisting of s suppliers in the first stage and a single assembly machine in the second stage. We exploit a relationship between an optimal solution for this problem and that for a related single-lot, two-machine makespan minimization problem in developing a polynomial-time algorithm to obtain the optimal number and sizes of sublots for each lot when a sequence for processing the lots on the assembly machine is given. We also provide novel integer programming formulations to simultaneously determine an optimal production sequence for the lots and the number of sublots and sublot sizes for each lot, and present a polynomial-time method to obtain valid inequalities for this problem. Experimental results are presented to demonstrate the effectiveness of this formulation over the traditional linear-ordering-based formulations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

Notes

  1. The instances used in this work are available at https://github.com/DanielNeira/ALSP.git

References

  • Al-Anzi, F. S., & Allahverdi, A. (2006). A hybrid Tabu search heuristic for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem. International Journal of Operations Research, 3(2), 109–119.

    Google Scholar 

  • Al-Anzi, F. S., & Allahverdi, A. (2007). A self-adaptive differential evolution heuristic for two-stage assembly scheduling problem to minimize maximum lateness with setup times. European Journal of Operational Research, 182(1), 80–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Anzi, F. S., & Allahverdi, A. (2009). Heuristics for a two-stage assembly flowshop with bicriteria of maximum lateness and makespan. Computers & Operations Research, 36(9), 2682–2689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alfieri, A., Glass, C., & van de Velde, S. (2012). Two-machine lot streaming with attached setup times. IIE Transactions, 44(8), 695–710.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allahverdi, A., & Al-Anzi, F. S. (2006). Evolutionary heuristics and an algorithm for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem to minimize makespan with setup times. International Journal of Production Research, 44(22), 4713–4735.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allahverdi, A., & Al-Anzi, F. S. (2006). A PSO and a Tabu search heuristics for the assembly scheduling problem of the two-stage distributed database application. Computers & Operations Research, 33(4), 1056–1080.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allahverdi, A., & Al-Anzi, F. S. (2008). The two-stage assembly flowshop scheduling problem with bicriteria of makespan and mean completion time. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 37(1), 166–177.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allahverdi, A., & Al-Anzi, F. S. (2009). The two-stage assembly scheduling problem to minimize total completion time with setup times. Computers & Operations Research, 36(10), 2740–2747.

  • Baker, K. R., & Trietsch, D. (2013). Principles of sequencing and scheduling. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkhoff, G. (1946). Tres observaciones sobre el algebra lineal. Universidad Nacional de Tucumán Ser A, 5, 147–154.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, M., Mukherjee, N., & Sarin, S. (2013). A review of lot streaming. International Journal of Production Research, 51(23–24), 7023–7046.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haouari, M., & Daouas, T. (1999). Optimal scheduling of the \(3\)-machine assembly-type flow shop. RAIRO-Operations Research-Recherche Opérationnelle, 33(4), 439–445.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hariri, A., & Potts, C. (1997). A branch and bound algorithm for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem. European Journal of Operational Research, 103(3), 547–556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • İnkaya, T., & Akansel, M. (2017). Coordinated scheduling of the transfer lots in an assembly-type supply chain: A genetic algorithm approach. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 28(4), 1005–1015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Komaki, G., Sheikh, S., & Malakooti, B. (2019). Flow shop scheduling problems with assembly operations: A review and new trends. International Journal of Production Research, 57(10), 2926–2955.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, C.-Y., Cheng, T., & Lin, B. M. T. (1993). Minimizing the makespan in the 3-machine assembly-type flowshop scheduling problem. Management Science, 39(5), 616–625.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mukherjee, N. J., Sarin, S. C., & Singh, S. (2017). Lot streaming in the presence of learning in sublot-attached setup times and processing times. International Journal of Production Research, 55(6), 1623–1639.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potts, C., & Baker, K. (1989). Flow shop scheduling with lot streaming. Operations Research Letters, 8(6), 297–303.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Potts, C. N., Sevast’Janov, S., Strusevich, V. A., Van Wassenhove, L. N., & Zwaneveld, C. M. (1995). The two-stage assembly scheduling problem: Complexity and approximation. Operations Research, 43(2), 346–355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarin, S. C., Yao, L., & Trietsch, D. (2011). Single batch lot streaming in a two stage assembly system. International Journal of Planning and Scheduling, 1(1–2), 90–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sriskandarajah, C., & Wagneur, E. (1999). Lot streaming and scheduling multiple products in two-machine no-wait flowshops. IIE Transactions, 31(8), 695–707.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun, X., Morizawa, K., & Nagasawa, H. (2003). Powerful heuristics to minimize makespan in fixed, 3-machine, assembly-type flowshop scheduling. European Journal of Operational Research, 146(3), 498–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tozkapan, A., Kırca, Ö., & Chung, C.-S. (2003). A branch and bound algorithm to minimize the total weighted flowtime for the two-stage assembly scheduling problem. Computers & Operations Research, 30(2), 309–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trietsch, D., & Baker, K. R. (1993). Basic techniques for lot streaming. Operations Research, 41(6), 1065–1076.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yao, L., & Sarin, S. C. (2014). Multiple-lot lot streaming in a two-stage assembly system. In Essays in production, project planning and scheduling (pp. 357–388), Berlin: Springer .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work of Subhash Sarin was partly funded by a grant from NSF, CMMI 2034503.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Subhash C. Sarin.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendices

Appendix

A Proof of Lemma 1

Proof

Consider a two-machine flow shop consisting of a supplier \(v^{*}\) at the first stage and the assembly machine at the second stage, and a single-lot \(i^{*}\) is produced and transferred in \(q^{*}\) sublots. For the two-machine problem, \(q^{*}\) is fixed. (Note that there may be some other value of \(q^{*}\) for which the joint objective function is minimized for the two-machine problem, but that value is not relevant to any results presented in this paper.) Let sublot sizes \(u_{1},\,u_{2},\ldots ,u_{q^{*}}\) minimize the makespan for the two-machine problem. Then we need to show that if supplier \(v^{*}\) uses \(q^{*}\) sublots to transfer lot \(i^{*}\) in an optimal schedule for the ALSP, sublot sizes \(u_{1},\,u_{2},\ldots ,u_{q*}\) are optimal for that lot.

We prove the result by construction. Consider an optimal schedule for the ALSP in which supplier \(v^{*}\) uses \(q^{*}\) sublots of sizes \(u'_{1},\,u'_{2},\ldots ,u'_{q^{*}}\). In order to simplify the notation, assume, without loss of generality that the optimal sequence in which the lots are processed is \(1,\ldots ,l\). The makespan for such a production sequence is given by

$$\begin{aligned} \mathop {max}\limits _{\{ k,v\} }\left( \sum _{i=1}^{k-1}p_{i}^{v}+\sum _{q=1}^{n_{k}^{v}}f_{kq}^{'v}\delta _{kq}^{v}+\sum _{i=k+1}^{l}p_{i}\right) , \end{aligned}$$
(49)

where \(f_{kq}^{'v}\) is the makespan of the associated two-machine, single-lot flow shop problem when sublot sizes \(u_{1}^{'},\,u_{2}^{'},\ldots ,u_{q}^{'}\) are used by the supplier for lot k, and other terms in (49) are independent of the sublot sizes used. By definition, \(f_{k*q*}^{'v*}\ge f_{k*q*}^{v*}\) for all \(k=1,\ldots ,l\) and \(v=1,\ldots ,s\). Hence, replacing sublot sizes \(u_{1}^{'},\,u_{2}^{'},\ldots ,u_{q^{*}}^{'}\) for lot \(i^{*}\) from supplier \(v^{*}\) with \(u_{1},\,u{}_{2},\ldots ,u{}_{q^{*}}\), and hence, replacing \(f_{i^{*}q^{*}}^{'\,v^{*}}\) with \(f_{i^{*}q^{*}}^{v^{*}}\left( \le f_{i^{*}q^{*}}^{'\,v^{*}}\right) \) does not increase the makespan. Also, note that only the sublot sizes were altered; the number of sublots used remains unaltered as \(q^{*}\) in both the initial and the final schedules. So the transportation cost is not altered since it is a function of the number of sublots alone. Hence, the schedule remains optimal. \(\square \)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mukherjee, N.J., Sarin, S.C. & Neira, D.A. Lot streaming for a two-stage assembly system in the presence of handling costs. J Sched 26, 335–351 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-023-00777-7

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10951-023-00777-7

Keywords

Navigation