9
$\begingroup$

I'm trying to deal with a process planning and machine layout allocation simultaneously.

I have the following variables:

  • $X_p{_w}_{cj}=1$ if an operation $p$ is done by a machine $w$ with a configuration $c$ at process plan position $j$, and zero otherwise

  • $T_w{_{w'}}_{,jj+1}=1$ if there is a change of machine $w$ between position $j$ and $j+1$, and zero otherwise.

  • $C_w{_{cc'}}_{,jj+1}=1$ if for a given machine $w$ there is a change of configuration between position $j$ and $j+1$, and zero otherwise.

Since the variable $X_p{_w}_{cj}$ gives me the position of each machine and configuration on the process plan, I think I must establish a relation between this variable and $T_w{_{w'}}_{,jj+1}$ and $C_w{_{cc'}}_{,jj+1}$, respectively.

In order to do that, I created the following constraint:

$$\sum_{c}(X_p{_w}_{cj}+X_{p+1}{_{w'}}_{cj+1})\leqslant T_w{_{w'}}_{,jj+1} + 1$$

With this constraint I would like to state that for 2 followed positions on the process plan, the sum of variables $X_p{_w}_{cj}$ must be equal or less than the variable $T_w{_{w'}}_{,jj+1}+1$. In other words, this constraint states if there is a change of machine between $j$ and $j+1$.

Similarly, the following constraint states if there is a change of configuration for the same machine between $j$ and $j+1$.

$$X_p{_w}_{cj}+X_{p+1}{_w}_{{c'}j+1}\leqslant C_w{_{cc'}}_{,jj+1} + 1$$

I would like to know if it is correct or if there is a better way to express these relations. Could someone help me?

$\endgroup$
6
$\begingroup$

The following constraint should be correct:

$$\sum_{c}(X_p{_w}_{cj}+X_{p+1}{_{w'}}_{cj+1})\leq T_w{_{w'}}_{,jj+1} +1 \ \ \ \forall w,w',p,p+1,j,j+1$$

Because if in your machine layout allocation, the process flows from machine $w$ to machine $w'$ then $X_{pwcj}$ and $X_{p+1w'cj+1}$ both should be $1$. Otherwise, either $T_{ww',jj+1}=0$ that means one of the following situations:

  1. your process is $\{...,w,...,w',...\}$ ($w$ is in position $j$ but $w'$ is not in position $j+1$)

  2. your process is $\{...,w,...,w',...\}$ ($w$ is not in position $j$ but $w'$ is in position $j+1$)

  3. your process is $\{...,w,...,w',...\}$ (neither $w$ is in position $j$ nor $w'$ is in position $j+1$)

The same logic procedure can be seen in your second constraint.

| improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ thanks for your reply! It is not clear what you suggested to me "... so the model can then cover the situation in which operation p and p+1 can be done in the same machine but maybe with a change in configuration". With this constraint I want to state if there is a change of configuration in the same machine, so I fixed the machine and I try to evaluate just the changes in configuration. I am assuming that each operation is done once and j is the position on the process plan, so if I change the process position, operation also change. $\endgroup$ – campioni Oct 8 '19 at 17:04
  • $\begingroup$ @campioni, Now I understand the process so I modify my answer. But you did a good job in the modeling of this fairly complicated situation. $\endgroup$ – Oguz Toragay Oct 8 '19 at 17:04
  • $\begingroup$ thank you for your feedback! :) $\endgroup$ – campioni Oct 9 '19 at 7:05

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.