Theory and MethodologyValid inequalities for a class of assembly system problems
Introduction
Cutting plane methods, which employ (strong) valid inequalities, have performed successfully in a variety of applications. The validity of an inequality must be evaluated with respect to a specific polyhedron. Inequalities that are valid relative to a polyhedron that contains another one are also valid for the latter (Crowder et al., 1983). This relationship motivated our research, which addresses a class of problems that are important to assembly systems, including assembly line balancing (ALB), workload smoothing (WS) and assembly system design (ASD).
The purpose of this paper is to establish the theoretical foundation for a cutting plane approach for this class of assembly problems. The ASD problem (ASDP) prescribes the minimum cost system design. It integrates design decisions such as (D1) the number of stations and (D2) type of machine located at each station with operating issues such as assigning tasks to each station (D3) while observing (O1) precedence relationships among tasks and (O2) cycle time restrictions at all stations. Closely related to the ASDP, the classical ALB problem (ALBP) prescribes the minimum number of identical stations, integrating (D1) and (D3) while (O1) and (O2). Solutions to the ALBP do not necessarily assign equal workloads to all stations and may, thus, create operating inefficiencies. The WS problem (WSP) deals with this issue, assigning tasks to a given number of stations with the objective of minimizing the maximum idle time on any station.
Prior research works concerning the ALBP, WSP, ASDP and to cutting plane methods are related to the current study. We give a brief review of each topic in this section.
Ghosh and Gagnon (1989) provided a recent survey of prior research works on the ALBP, which is well known to be NP-hard (Baybars, 1986). An extensive literature has dealt with heuristics and specialized branch-and-bound optimizing methods, but the current study appears to be the first one to develop a strong-cutting plane approach. It should be noted, however, that 0–1 integer programming (IP) formulations have been evolved over time (e.g., Bowman, 1960, Patterson and Albracht, 1975, Talbot and Patterson, 1984).
In contrast, research on the WSP has been rather limited. No optimizing methods for the WSP have, apparently, been proposed. Rather, heuristics such as those developed by Sarker and Shanthikumar (1983) and Rachamadugu and Talbot, 1987, Rachamadugu and Talbot, 1991 have predominated.
Research on the ASDP has typically sought to minimize the total cost of the system design. Ghosh and Gagnon (1989) have suggested that design issues (e.g., line size and machine selection) be integrated with operating issues (e.g., task-related considerations) as does our model. Ghosh and Gagnon (1989), and Soni (1990) have summarized important design issues. Researchers have studied various versions of the ASDP, typically applying branch and bound to prescribe optimal solutions (e.g., Pinto et al., 1983; Lee and Johnson, 1991). In particular, Graves and Lamar (1983) and Graves and Redfield (1988) have developed successful methods to solve actual, single- and multiple-product ASDPs.
Over the last two decades, a substantial effort has been directed towards the study of polyhedral structures and of cutting plane methods. Nemhauser and Wolsey (1988) describe this work and an extensive set of applications. In an early study, Padberg (1979) developed sets of valid inequalities and facets for covering, packing, and knapsack problems. Crowder et al. (1983) reported remarkable computational results in solving large-scale 0–1 integer problems using strong cutting plane methods. Their results motivate our use of valid inequalities.
In this paper, we establish a foundation for a cutting plane method by deriving strong valid inequalities related to the NPP and describing conditions under which they represent facets of polyhedra associated with the ALBP, WSP and ASDP. These inequalities can be extended to form inequalities that are valid for the ASDP by exploiting the relationships between the NPP and the ASDP that we describe in this paper. Pinnoi and Wilhelm (1998) describe this extension and incorporate the resulting inequalities in a branch-and-cut approach to solve the ASDP; they also report successful computational experience. Pinnoi and Wilhelm (1997a) describe a branch-and-cut approach to solve the WSP that incorporates the inequalities derived in this paper; they focus on pre-processing methods and separation algorithms and also report successful computational experience. In this paper, we establish the theoretical foundation for those implementations.
We have organized the body of this paper in five sections. Section 2 introduces mathematical models and discusses relationships among them. In Section 3, we show that the node packing problem (NPP) is a relaxation of the ALBP, WSP, and ASDP and identify some relationships among the associated polytopes. Based on node packing and knapsack structures, we derive families of clique inequalities and packing cover inequalities in 4 Families of valid inequalities based on cliques, 5 Families of packing cover inequalities, respectively (we establish conditions under which these inequalities define nontrivial facets in Appendix A). Finally, Section 6 gives concluding remarks and suggestions for future research.
Section snippets
Problem formulations and relationships
In this section, we formulate the ASDP, ALBP, and WSP and establish relationships among them. The following assumptions underlie the models:
(A1) Cycle time, processing times, and precedence relationships are known deterministically.
(A2) No task processing time is larger than the cycle time.
(A3) Task processing times are additive and independent of the task sequence.
(A4) An assembly system consists of a series of stations.
(A5) Setup time for a task is negligible (or included in task time).
(A6)
The NPP as a relaxation
A node packing (stable set) in an undirected graph is a node set of maximum cardinality whose elements are not pairwise adjacent. In this section, we show how to construct the NPP as a relaxation of the ALBP (and, consequently, of the WSP and the ASDP). Definition 1 An intersection graph G−=(U,Φ) is an undirected graph in which U={u:u=(s,t)} and for u1=(s1,t1),u2=(s2,t2)∈U, there exists arc (u1,u2)∈Φ if only if t1 cannot be assigned to s1 when t2 is assigned to s2, and vice versa.
U is the set of pairs (s,t),
Families of valid inequalities based on cliques
Since the NPP is a relaxation of the ALBP and the WSP, P⊂Q and W⊂QW. In this section, we derive several families of inequalities that are valid for the ALBP and the WSP based on the clique structure of the intersection graph G−. We also show that each family of valid inequalities defines facets of Q under certain conditions. We give propositions that establish the validity of the inequalities in this section and identify conditions under which they define facets in Appendix A. Definition 2 A node set K isNemhauser and Wolsey, 1988
Families of packing cover inequalities
A cover (or canonical) inequality is a well-known valid inequality for the knapsack polytope. Since Q has an embedded knapsack polytope associated with the cycle time constraint, the cover inequality is also valid for Q. In addition, Q also has a node packing polytope as an embedded structure. Therefore, it is logical to devise a new family of valid inequalities, based on the combined concepts of a cover inequality and a node packing. Definition 4 A node set C ⊆ V is a minimal packing cover of G− if C is both
Concluding remarks and future research
This paper establishes the theoretical foundation for a cutting plane approach to solving a class of problems that is important to assembly systems, including the ALBP, the WSP and the ASDP. It identifies and exploits relationships with the NPP, derives valid inequalities for the NPP and describes conditions under which they represent facets of the polytopes associated with the class of assembly problems.
We proposed rules to construct the intersection graph to represent the NPP that is related
Acknowledgements
This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation on Grant numbers DDM-9114396 and DDI-9500211.
References (20)
Covering, packing and knapsack problems
Annals of Discrete Mathematics
(1979)Valid inequalities for 0–1 knapsacks and MIPs with generalized upper bound constraints
Discrete Applied Mathematics
(1990)A survey of exact algorithms for the simple assembly line balancing problem
Management Science
(1986)Assembly-line balancing by linear programming
Operations Research
(1960)- et al.
Solving large scale zero one linear programming problems
Operations Research
(1983) - et al.
A comprehensive literature review and analysis of the design balancing and scheduling of assembly systems
International Journal of Production Research
(1989) - et al.
An integer programming procedure for assembly system design problems
Operations Research
(1983) - et al.
Equipment selection and task assignment for multi-product assembly system design
International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing Systems
(1988) - et al.
A line-balancing strategy for designing flexible assembly systems
International Journal of Flexible Manufacturing System
(1991) - et al.
Integer and Combinatorial Optimization
(1988)
Cited by (4)
A review of cost and profit oriented line design and balancing problems and solution approaches
2015, Annual Reviews in ControlCitation Excerpt :When assembly line balancing and equipment selection problems are simultaneously treated, the resulting more complex problem is called assembly system design problem (ASDP). Fixed cost of installing the equipment in the stations and the station dependent variable cost of operations are optimized (Gadidov & Wilhelm, 2000; Pinnoi & Wilhelm, 1997a, 1998, 2000, 1997b; Wilhelm, 1999; Wilhelm & Gadidov, 2004). A relevant interesting problem is multi-criteria ASDP.
A survey on cost and profit oriented assembly line balancing
2014, IFAC Proceedings Volumes (IFAC-PapersOnline)Multi-section electronic assembly line balancing problems: A case study
2002, Production Planning and ControlDynamic reconfiguration of assembly lines
2010, Pesquisa Operacional