0 Votes +0 Votes -

0 vues6 pagesThis paper proposes a robust method of capacity requirements planning (CRP) that can generate a stable load plan against dynamic changes in a manufacturing environment. In our study, robustness refers to the degree of stability in the load plan for the occurrence of unexpected events. The purpose of the proposed method is to determine the processing periods of operation orders with the aim of minimizing the probability that the resource requirement of each operation order will exceed

Sep 24, 2019

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT ou lisez en ligne sur Scribd

This paper proposes a robust method of capacity requirements planning (CRP) that can generate a stable load plan against dynamic changes in a manufacturing environment. In our study, robustness refers to the degree of stability in the load plan for the occurrence of unexpected events. The purpose of the proposed method is to determine the processing periods of operation orders with the aim of minimizing the probability that the resource requirement of each operation order will exceed

© All Rights Reserved

0 vues

This paper proposes a robust method of capacity requirements planning (CRP) that can generate a stable load plan against dynamic changes in a manufacturing environment. In our study, robustness refers to the degree of stability in the load plan for the occurrence of unexpected events. The purpose of the proposed method is to determine the processing periods of operation orders with the aim of minimizing the probability that the resource requirement of each operation order will exceed

© All Rights Reserved

- Neuromancer
- The E-Myth Revisited: Why Most Small Businesses Don't Work and
- How Not to Be Wrong: The Power of Mathematical Thinking
- Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us
- Chaos: Making a New Science
- The Joy of x: A Guided Tour of Math, from One to Infinity
- How to Read a Person Like a Book
- Moonwalking with Einstein: The Art and Science of Remembering Everything
- The Wright Brothers
- The Other Einstein: A Novel
- The 6th Extinction
- The Housekeeper and the Professor: A Novel
- The Power of Discipline: 7 Ways it Can Change Your Life
- The 10X Rule: The Only Difference Between Success and Failure
- A Short History of Nearly Everything
- The Kiss Quotient: A Novel
- The End of Average: How We Succeed in a World That Values Sameness
- Made to Stick: Why Some Ideas Survive and Others Die
- Algorithms to Live By: The Computer Science of Human Decisions
- The Universe in a Nutshell

Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 6

Paper:

Daisuke Morita∗ and Haruhiko Suwa∗∗

∗ Takachiho University

E-mail: morita@takachiho.ac.jp

∗∗

Setsunan University

17-8 Ikeda-naka-machi, Neyagawa, Osaka 572-8508, Japan

E-mail: suwa@mec.setsunan.ac.jp

[Received December 1, 2014; accepted February 24, 2015]

This paper proposes a robust method of capacity re- were proposed [10–12].

quirements planning (CRP) that can generate a stable The citations above show that studies on schedule ro-

load plan against dynamic changes in a manufactur- bustness have mainly addressed shop-floor scheduling

ing environment. In our study, robustness refers to the problems; however, only focusing on the scheduling issue

degree of stability in the load plan for the occurrence is not enough because a schedule is generated based on

of unexpected events. The purpose of the proposed the load plan obtained from the results of capacity require-

method is to determine the processing periods of op- ments planning (CRP) [13, 14]. In other words, the out-

eration orders with the aim of minimizing the proba- come (load plan) of CRP limits the range of the schedul-

bility that the resource requirement of each operation ing decisions. Rom et al. provided a model considering

order will exceed the capacity of corresponding re- CRP and material requirements planning (MRP) under

sources. Through numerical experiments, we demon- job shop environments and based on resource-constrained

strate the effectiveness of the proposed CRP method in project scheduling concepts [15]. Wortman et al. re-

terms of its robustness. viewed the capacity planning techniques of standard soft-

ware packages [16]. Billington et al. presented a compre-

Keywords: capacity requirements planning, robust load hensive review of previous works in order to deal with

plan, dynamic environment, uncertainty, exact method linear and integer programming approaches to capacity

constraint MRP systems [17]. Matsuura et al. devel-

oped a method for setting appropriate lead times in order

1. Introduction to minimize capacity requirement variations in the CRP

phase [18]. Hastings et al. summarized traditional MRP

In a dynamic manufacturing environment, it is impor- logic and difficulties with lead time MRP and CRP [19].

tant to generate a robust plan to facilitate responses to cus- Various CRP methods have been proposed and reviewed

tomers quickly and highly productively [1, 2]. It seems to in the literature, including those mentioned above, but no

recognized that production/machine scheduling is key to CRP methods directing the robustness of a plan have been

solving such difficult challenges. Daniels et al. have pre- discussed. If a robust load plan could be generated at the

sented exact and heuristic solution procedures for min- CRP phase, it would be expected to be able to predict

imizing robustness measures. This solution was based productivity under dynamic manufacturing circumstances

on a worst-case absolute deviation (or percentage devi- and to conduct an effective scheduling decision flexibly.

ation) of total flow time from the optimal solution in a From the aforementioned point of view, we have pro-

single-machine environment [3]. Kouvelis et al. pro- posed a heuristic method for CRP in uncertain environ-

posed a method of minimizing the measurement of sched- ments [20]. The proposed heuristic method determines

ule robustness obtained from worst-case absolute devia- the processing periods of the operation orders with the

tion from the optimal makespan in a two-machine flow aim of minimizing the robustness measurement, which is

shop environment [4]. Leon developed a genetic algo- calculated from the probability that the resource require-

rithm to generate a robust schedule in job shop environ- ment of each of given operation orders exceeds the capac-

ments [5]. Briskorn et al. proposed a method for deter- ity of the corresponding machine resource. This study, as

mining a buffer time in order to protect a schedule from an extension of our conventional work, proposes an ex-

disruptions [6]. Yang presented an algorithm based on act method in order to minimize the robustness measure-

dynamic programming to find an optimal robust solution ment. We first describe a robust CRP model for generat-

that minimizes total completion time [7]. In recent stud- ing a robust load plan and then propose our robust CRP

ies regarding scheduling, environmental issues and man- method. In computational experiments, we demonstrate

ufacturing sustainability were addressed [8, 9], and then the effectiveness of the proposed CRP method in terms

scheduling techniques combined with an evaluation sys- of its robustness by comparing it with some conventional

tem and analysis method for the environmental burden methods.

An Exact Method for Robust Capacity Requirements Planning

M11 M21

i Qi nO

i diO Wi Ri1 Ri2 Di

1 2 8 1 16 0 1 M12 M22

2 2 4 1 8 0 2

3 6 3 4 2 0 12 3 Work Center 1 Work Center 2

4 1 8 1 8 0 2

5 1 8 2 0 8 3 Load Unload

6 2 4 2 0 8 3

7 2 4 1 8 0 1 Fig. 1. Example of manufacturing system.

8 16 1 8 1 8 0 2

9 2 4 2 0 8 3

10 1 8 1 8 0 3 Work Center 1

C1=24

11 2 8 1 16 0 4

2

12 1 8 1 8 0 3 1 11

13 3 4 2 0 12 4 4 10

14 15 1 12 2 0 12 4

7 8 12 15

15 2 4 1 8 0 4

1 2 3 4 period t

16 2 4 2 0 8 3

17 3 4 2 0 12 4

Work Center 2

C2=24

2. Description of Target Problem 13

3 6 14

2.1. CRP 17

5 9 16

We consider the time period t = 1, 2, . . ., T during 1 2 3 4 period t

which operation orders are to be processed. The pro-

cessing period of each operation order is determined so Fig. 2. Feasible load plan of the CRP scheme in Table 1.

that the total resource requirements for each manufactur-

ing resource incurred by operation orders at every unit

time never exceeds the predetermined capacity. Let W = k = k, k ∈ W .

{1, . . ., c} denote a set of work centers in the manufactur- Table 1 shows a CRP instance for a flexible job-shop

ing system. Work center k(k = 1, . . . , c) consists of NkW system consisting of two work centers, as depicted in

identical parallel machines; Mk1 , . . . , MkNW . Production Fig. 1. In this manufacturing system, work centers 1 and

k

capacity over a finite planning horizon, Ck , at work center 2 both consist of two identical parallel machines. Fig. 2

k can be expressed by shows a feasible load plan in the CRP instance appearing

Ck = ck NkW , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (1) in Table 1. According to this load plan, for example, or-

der 1 is to be processed in the period 1 since its due date

where ck denotes the maximum production capacity per is one.

machine in work center k.

Let A = {1, · · ·, N} denote a set of operation orders

which have to be processed and finished within the plan-

2.2. Machine Scheduling

ning horizon [1, T ]. Each operation order, i ∈ A , specifies At the phase of machine scheduling after CRP, a de-

production of nO O

i products (or parts) taking di unit time.

tailed shop-floor schedule is generated based on the load

Let Si (1 ≤ Si ≤ T ) denote the processing period of op- plan as follows. First, an operation order i is divided into

eration order i, which is a decision variable of focusing nOi tasks, and then each task is assigned to a machine in

CRP. Suppose that operation order i has to be processed in work center Wi . The processing time of each task in op-

the manufacturing system so that each of operation order eration order i agrees with diO . The number of tasks to be

i(i = 1, · · · , N) is completed by the deadline Di . The tech- processed in work center k over the period [ck (t − 1), ckt]

nological order in each operation order can be expressed (t = 1, · · ·, T ) can be given by

by a set, Q i , of its successive operation orders. Suppose ∑i∈AAt Rik

that resource requirement for operation order i, denoted nkt = , . . . . . . . . . . . . (3)

diO

by Ri , is given by

where At = {i | Si = t} expresses a set of operation orders

Ri = nO

i di . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (2)

O

that are processed over a period t(= 1, · · ·, T ).

Note that Rik will be utilized instead of Ri in the remainder For each period t, a detailed schedule is supposed to

of this paper to specify the work center where operation be generated through the use of a scheduling method. In

order i is to be processed, i.e., Rik = Ri , and Rik = 0 for this study, we propose the exact optimization method in-

Morita, D. and Suwa, H.

time

M11 7 1 4 2 10 15 11

M12 7 1 8 2 12 15 11

M21 3 3 6 9 14 13 17 17

M22 3 5 6 9 16 16 13 13 17

period 1 period 2 period 3 period 4

0 12 24 36 48

Fig. 3. Shop-floor schedule obtained from the load plan depicted in Fig. 2.

troduced in the next section. Fig. 3 shows an example of center k exceeds τ (Ck+1 ≤ τ ≤ Ukt ), and Ukt denotes

a shop-floor schedule obtained from the load plan illus- the upper limit of available manufacturing resources (i.e.,

trated in Fig. 2. From the result of scheduling, we have production capacity) of work center k during period t. The

(n11 , n12 , n13 , n14 ) = (4, 4, 2, 4) and (n21 , n22 , n23 , n24 ) = above CRP problem is to find a feasible load plan that

(4, 4, 3, 6). We can see idle times in the shop-floor sched- minimizes C. The precedence relations between opera-

ule, existing before processing the production orders 6, tions is expressed by Eq. (5). Eq. (6) represents a con-

13, 14, 15, and 16, due to a waiting time for their respec- straint that operation order i has to be finished by its dead-

tive preceding production orders to be finished. line Di . Eq. (7) also expresses a constraint that all opera-

tion orders have to be finished over the planning horizon

[1, T ], and Eq. (8) describes the production capacity of the

3. Robust CRP Method manufacturing system. Eq. (9) means the operation orders

have to be processed only one time, and, finally, Eq. (10)

3.1. Mathematical Model defines the decision variables xit .

Each task of given operation orders is processed ac-

cording to a released shop-floor schedule. However, in 3.2. Exact Method for Robust CRP Model

real manufacturing situations, the processing time of tasks We here propose an exact method to solve the CRP

are often extended due to unforeseen events. If we could problem defined in the previous section. Its procedure can

specify the processing period of each operation as well as be summarized as follows:

forecast the frequency of such unexpected events and the

delayed operation times beforehand in CRP, it would be Step 1 Set λ = 0. Initialize a set of solutions, Oλ = {X 0 }

expected to realize stable manufacturing. and O λ +1 = {0},

/ where X 0 indicates a matrix of

To describe the CRP problem, we use a binary decision decision variables x0it = 0 (i ∈ A ,t = 1, · · ·T ).

variable xit , which takes one if operations order i is pro-

∗

cessed over the period t and otherwise takes zero. With Step 2 If λ = T , then stop and output the solution X y ,

this notation, a CRP problem to find a robust load plan which is the best in O λ . Otherwise, select a solu-

can be described as follows: tion X y from O λ and calculate F y = {i | ∑t=1

Di

xit =

W T

k∈W Ukt 1}.

min . C= ∑∑ ∑ Gkt (τ ) . . . . . (4)

t=1 τ =Ck +1 Step 3 Identify all subsets E 1 , · · ·, E ξ ⊆ A \ F y and gen-

Dj 1 ξ

Di erate new solutions X y , · · ·, X y . The decision

s.t. ∑ txit < ∑ tx jt , (i ∈ A, j ∈ Q i ) . . . (5) z z

variable xyit in X y satisfies the following equation

t=1 t=1

Di

(z = 1, · · · ξ ):

∑ txit ≤ Di , (i ∈ A ) . . . . . . (6)

z

1 if i ∈ E z and t = λ + 1

t=1

xyit = (11)

Di xyit otherwise

max

i∈A

∑ txit ≤ T, . . . . . . . (7)

t=1 ξ

Step 4 Set O λ +1 ← O λ +1 ∪ {X y , · · ·, X y } and O λ ←

1

A

i∈A

T

Step 5 If any one of the following conditions holds, then

∑ xit = 1, (i ∈ A ) . . . . . . (9)

O λ +1 ← O λ +1 \ {X y }.

t=1

xit ∈ {0, 1}, (i ∈ A ,t = 1, · · · , T ) (10)

a) Two solutions X y and X y , in O λ +1 satisfy

where Gkt (τ ) in Eq. (4) expresses the probability that the F y = F y and Cy ≤ Cy where Cy is the total

total amount of resource required during period t on work probability obtained from the solution X y .

An Exact Method for Robust Capacity Requirements Planning

T

b) Both of the equations ∑t=1 xyit = 0 and λ + 1 ≥ Table 2. The number of problems solved optimally and

Di hold for X y . average CPU-time.

c) ∑i∈A xyiλ +1 Rik > Ck holds (k ∈ W ). Parameter Performance

(N1W , N2W ) N No. of solved CPU-time [sec.]

Step 6 If O λ = {0},

/ then set λ ← λ + 1. Go back to

(1,1) 45 5 2.2

Step 2.

50 5 43.5

55 5 1038.6

60 0 –

4. Computational Experiments (1,2) 45 5 2.5

50 5 193.6

4.1. Simulation Schemes

55 5 2137.4

The proposed method was applied to flexible job-shop 60 0 –

systems with two work centers (c = 2), each of which has (1,3) 45 5 6.4

a single machine or two machines in parallel. The pro- 50 5 66.7

duction capacity c1 at work center 1 (WC1) was set to 12, 55 4 3182.2

and c2 = 12 at WC2 as well. The requirement of resource 60 0 –

Rik and the number of products, nO i of operation order i (2,2) 45 5 2.2

were given by a discrete uniform distribution over [1, 12]. 50 5 6.1

The due date Di of operation order i was set to 3, 6, 9, or 55 5 433.4

12. We considered four time windows of the period, i.e., 60 0 –

[1, 3], [4, 6], [7, 9], and [10, 12], within the planning hori-

zon. The end of each time window, 3, 6, 9 or, 12, indicates

the due date of the corresponding operation orders. For

example, The operation orders with due date is 3 (Di = 3) schedules were executed. The unexpected events refer

are supposed to be assigned over the time window [1, 3]. to delays in material procurements, machine breakdowns,

etc. We postulate a delay time following an exponential

distribution with mean 1/λ . In other words, the proba-

4.2. Number of Problems Solved Optimally bility density function fX (≥ 0) with regard to a random

We considered four different problem groups which variable X denoting a delay time is defined by the follow-

have, respectively, (N1W , N2W ) = (1, 1), (1, 2), (1, 3) and ing:

(2, 2) in order to investigate the performance of our pro-

posed method. Five instances for each problem group λ e−λ x , (x ≥ 0)

fX (x) = . . . . . . . (12)

were randomly generated. We also considered the num- 0. (x < 0)

ber of operation orders N = 45, 50, 55, and 60, yielding

80 instances in total. Table 2 summarizes the number of Parameter λ was set to 2 in the computational experi-

problems solved optimally within one hour and also the ments.

average CPU time to find the optimal solution using the The proposed CRP method was compared to the fol-

proposed method. lowing two methods, which can be regarded as typical

Table 2 shows that 59 instances were solved optimally heuristics in practical use.

within one hour by using the proposed method. The time • Forward method: Determines the processing periods

needed to solve them using the proposed method tends Si of operation order i (∈ A) so that operation order

to increase with the number of operation orders N due to i is processed as early as possible; each operation

an increase in the number of existing feasible load plans. order is to be assigned with its earliest processing

In the case of the instances with N = 55, the average CPU periods on the load plan.

time becomes longer than those with N = 45 and 50. Note

that all of the instances with N = 45 were solved within • Backward method: Determines the processing peri-

several seconds while it took from seven to 53 minutes ods Si of operation order i (∈ A ) so that operation or-

to solve the instances with N = 55. One of the instances der i is processed as late as possible while still meet-

even took 1.5 hours (N1W , N2W ) = (2, 2), to obtain an op- ing its due date. This approach allocates each op-

timal load plan. For the instances with 60 orders, no op- eration order to the corresponding work center with

timal solutions were obtained within one hour using our its latest processing periods without violating its own

method. Considering this observation, we employed the due date.

instances with N = 45, 50, and 55 but not N = 60 for the

computational simulations described in the next section. For each instance, we applied the above delay schemes

for 100 times to the shop-floor schedule obtained from the

load plan by each CRP method. Note that the production

4.3. Comparison to Conventional Method schedule was generated by using Earliest Due Date (EDD)

We carried out scheduling simulations under situations first. Then, for each task, j, we calculated the deviation

with unexpected delays occurring randomly while the from the actual starting time sj from the planned starting

Morita, D. and Suwa, H.

Table 3. Average delay time in the instances with number Table 4. Average delay time in the instances with number

of machine (N1W , N2W ) = (1, 1), (1, 2). of machine (N1W , N2W ) = (1, 3), (2, 2).

(N1W , N2W ) N No. (P) (F) (B) (N1W , N2W ) N No. (P) (F) (B)

(1,1) 45 1 190.8 423.0 209.9 (1,3) 45 1 442.9 725.2 509.0

2 179.8 308.6 216.4 2 224.3 374.6 297.2

3 439.7 665.5 405.5 3 470.8 816.8 518.3

4 315.7 401.2 315.8 4 342.3 428.6 358.0

5 134.0 339.9 146.9 5 428.6 962.7 812.4

50 1 222.8 391.7 213.0 50 1 319.8 426.7 356.4

2 227.9 528.1 285.3 2 336.8 425.4 217.9

3 172.2 338.0 249.8 3 291.2 715.0 421.2

4 170.0 483.7 285.3 4 354.2 532.1 447.3

5 330.7 558.3 334.6 5 308.2 372.7 232.7

55 1 151.9 442.5 337.7 55 1 465.3 625.5 472.8

2 401.7 571.2 452.0 2 245.0 586.8 326.5

3 244.6 600.1 254.8 3 229.1 362.1 267.1

4 350.4 799.3 505.2 4 383.2 452.7 389.3

5 357.8 766.3 475.5 5 545.3 923.4 560.7

(1,2) 45 1 155.3 324.1 204.5 (2,2) 45 1 251.9 375.3 283.4

2 344.4 376.3 268.2 2 325.5 442.5 351.4

3 89.2 136.1 88.4 3 408.6 567.1 445.1

4 242.2 345.5 207.7 4 264.1 410.0 258.7

5 448.9 587.4 288.5 5 334.4 761.4 670.4

50 1 266.6 487.2 274.7 50 1 551.9 1265.3 1117.3

2 337.8 517.4 492.1 2 199.3 606.9 291.8

3 412.2 723.5 510.0 3 383.8 614.1 616.7

4 502.1 1040.1 810.9 4 520.4 596.8 513.7

5 312.2 530.3 418.6 5 712.6 659.7 590.9

55 1 264.1 453.4 224.0 55 1 302.3 546.5 449.7

2 365.7 459.0 381.8 2 419.3 1043.4 548.1

3 366.3 609.3 239.1 3 357.9 451.4 422.1

4 310.0 525.2 315.9 4 555.8 721.1 603.9

5 390.0 609.5 332.9 5 436.3 836.0 628.9

time s j , which is defined by the following:

reduction of the delay times. As a whole, it is revealed

h(sj , s j ) = max(0, sj − s j ). . . . . . . . . (13) that the proposed method is the most effective in terms of

the reduction in the delay time.

Table 3 shows the average delay time for the 100 simu-

lation runs in the instances with the number of machine

(N1W , N2W ) = (1, 1), (1, 2) for each method, and Table 4 5. Conclusion

summarizes the average delay time in the instances with

the (N1W , N2W ) = (1, 3), (2, 2) number of machine as well. We have proposed an exact method for CRP that can

The average delay time by the forward method is larger produce a robust load plan. The proposed CRP method

than the times by the other two methods, regardless of determines the period during which the operation or-

the number of orders and machines. This is because, by der is to be processed so as to minimize the probabil-

the forward method, the load plans with less production ity that the resource requirement of each of given op-

capacity at every period were generated. The average de- eration orders exceeds the capacity of the correspond-

lay time by the backward method is shorter than those by ing machine resource. In computational experiments, the

both the proposed method and the forward method for a load plans generated by the proposed method were com-

few instances. The backward method tends to allocate pared to those generated using the conventional method,

the operation orders based on their deadline, so the re- and the effectiveness of the proposed method was demon-

sulting load plans have longer time buffers than do those strated. The proposed method was compared to two con-

obtained by the forward method. This is why stable load ventional methods, and it was demonstrated that the pro-

plans against uncertainties were generated by the back- posed method outperforms them. Future work is to im-

ward method. Finally, judging by the results in Tables 3 prove the performance of the proposed method in order to

and 4, the proposed method outperforms the backward produce solutions for cases that are the larger in scale.

An Exact Method for Robust Capacity Requirements Planning

References:

[1] M. Sugi, M. Cheng, M. Yamamoto, H. Ito, K. Inoue, and J. Ota, Name:

“Online Rescheduling in Semiconductor Manufacturing,” Interna-

tional Journal of Automation Technology, Vol.4, No.2, pp. 184–197, Daisuke Morita

2010.

[2] J. Y. Chai, T. Sakaguchi, and K. Shirase, “Dynamic Controls of Ge- Affiliation:

netic Algorithm Scheduling in Supply Chain,” International Journal Assistant Professor, Faculty of Business Admin-

of Automation Technology, Vol.4, No.2, pp. 169–177, 2010. istration, Takachiho University

[3] R. L. Daniels and P. Kouvelis, “Robust Scheduling to Hedge

Against Processing Time Uncertainty in Single-stage Production,”

Management Science, Vol.41, No.2, pp. 363–376, 1995.

[4] A. Kouvelis, R. L. Daniels, and G. Vairaktarakis, “Robust schedul-

ing of a two-machine flow shop with uncertain processing times,”

IIE Transactions, Vol.32, pp. 421–432, 2000. Address:

[5] V. J. Leon, “Measures and robust scheduling for job shops,” IIE 2-19-1 Ohmiya, Suginami-ku, Tokyo 168-8508, Japan

Transactions, Vol.26, No.5, pp. 32–43, 1994. Brief Biographical History:

[6] D. Briskorn, J. Leung, and M. Pinedo, “Robust scheduling on a 2008 Bachelor of Engineering degree from Setsunan University

single machine using time buffers,” IIE Transactions, Vol.43, No.6, 2010 Master of Engineering degree from the Graduate School of Setsunan

pp. 383–398, 2011.

University

[7] J. Yang and G. Yu, “On the Robust Single Machine Scheduling 2013 Ph.D. in Engineering from the Graduate School of Setsunan

Problem,” Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Vol.6, pp. 17–33,

2002. University

[8] Y. Tanimizu, K. Amano, and K. Harada, “Multi-Objective Produc- 2014- Assistant Professor, Takachiho University

tion and Transportation Scheduling Considering Carbon Dioxide Main Works:

Emissions Reductions in Dynamic Supply Chains,” International • “A New Slack Protection Strategy in Dynamic Project Scheduling,”

Journal of Automation Technology, Vol.6, No.3, pp. 322–330, 2012. Electronic Proceedings of the 21th International Conference on Production

[9] D. Morita and H. Suwa, “An Optimization Method for Critical Research, 2011.

Chain Scheduling Toward Project Greenality,” International Journal • “Dummy-Based Critical Chain Scheduling in Project Management,”

of Automation Technology, Vol.6, No.3, pp. 331–337, 2012. Transactions of the Institute of Systems, Control and Information

[10] H. Hibino, T. Sakuma, and M. Yamaguchi, “Evaluation System Engineers, Vol.22, No.12, pp. 407–415, 2009.

for Energy Consumption and Productivity in Manufacturing Sys- Membership in Academic Societies:

tem Simulation,” International Journal of Automation Technology,

Vol.6, No.3, pp. 279–288, 2012. • Institute of Systems, Control and Information Engineers (ISCIE)

[11] H. Narita and H. Fujimoto, “Analysis of Environmental Impact due • Japan Industrial and Management Association (JIMA)

to Machine Tool Operation,” International Journal of Automation

Technology, Vol.3, No.1, pp. 49–55, 2009.

[12] S. Kondoh, N. Mishima, Y. Hotta, K. Watari, T. Kurita and K. Ma-

sui, “Total Performance Analysis of Manufacturing Processes,” In-

ternational Journal of Automation Technology, Vol.3, No.1, pp. 56–

62, 2009.

[13] H. Oden, G. Langenwalter and R. Lucier, “Handbook of Material Name:

and Capacity Requirements Planning,” McGraw-Hill, New York, Haruhiko Suwa

1993.

[14] T. Wuttipornpun and P. Yenradee, “A New Approach for a Finite Ca-

pacityMaterial Requirement Planning System,” International Jour- Affiliation:

nal of Science and Technology, Vol.12, No.2, pp. 28–51, 2007. Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineer-

[15] W. O. Rom, O. I. Tukel, and J. R. Muscatello, “MRP in a job ing, Setsunan University

shop environment using a resource constrained project scheduling

model,” Omega, Vol.30, pp. 275–286, 2002.

[16] J. C. Wortman, M. J. Euwe, M. Taal, and V. C. S. Wires, “A review

of capacity planning technique within standard software packages,”

Production Planning & Control, Vol.7, No.2, pp. 117–128, 1996.

[17] P. J. Billington, J. O. McClain, and L. J. Thomas, “Mathematical Address:

Programming Approaches to Capacity-Constrained MRP Systems: 17-8 Ikeda-naka-machi, Neyagawa, Osaka 572-8508, Japan

Review, Formulation and Problem Reduction,” Management Sci- Brief Biographical History:

ence, Vol.29, No.10, pp. 1126–1141, 1983. 1997 Ph.D in Eng. from Kobe University

[18] H. Matsuura and H. Tsubone, “Setting Planned Leadtimes in Ca- 1997- Assistant Professor, Setsunan University

pacity Requirements Planning,” The Journal of the Operational Re- 2001- Associate Professor, Setsunan University

search Society, Vol.44, No.8, pp. 809–816, 1993. 2010- Professor, Setsunan University

[19] N. A. J. Hastings, P. Marshall, and R. J. Willis, “Schedule Based 2012-2013 Visiting Scientist, Massachusetts Institute of Technology

M.R.P.: An Integrated Approach to Production Scheduling and Ma-

terial Requirements Planning,” The Journal of the Operational Re- Main Works:

search Society, Vol.33, No.11, pp. 1021–1029, 1982. • “Capability of Cumulative Delay Based Reactive Scheduling for Job

[20] H. Suwa and D. Morita, “A study on stability-directed capacity re- Shops with Machine Breakdowns,” Computers and Industrial Engineering,

quirements planning(Application to flexible job shops),” Transac- Vol.53, pp.63–78, 2007.

tions of the JSME, Vol.80, No.814, 2014. Membership in Academic Societies:

• Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers (JSME)

• Institute of Systems, Control and Information Engineers (ISCIE)

• American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME)

- NA387exam2-07.SOLUTIONS Pmf& Cdf QuestionTransféré parAhmed A Melbourne
- Discrete Distributions-Practice QuestionsTransféré parPIYUSH SINGH
- UNIT II Probability ProblemsTransféré parAbhijeet Tripathi
- MATHS - IIA QUESTION BANK - Chapter wise important questions for IPE.pdfTransféré parCharumathi Charumathi
- Probability definitions of statisticsTransféré parShihab Khan
- Probability DistributionsTransféré parrodwellhead
- Ec 3303 Spring 10 Intro 1Transféré parDuyen Cao
- 2005 GEOG090 ProbabilityTransféré parnarendra
- paper_1285Transféré parsresearcher7
- Probability DistributionsTransféré parBhargav Mendapara
- 1st Day for DLL Week 1Transféré parRazty Tiquez
- PCATransféré parChung-yi Lin
- DOM501Transféré parVikas Yadav
- STA301_LEC23Transféré parAtif Khan
- probabiltyTransféré parpappuyadav1996
- 00-Contents.pdfTransféré parAnonymous qyXIbN1LG
- DISTRIBUSI SAMPLING MENJELASKAN BAGAIMANA STATISTIK BERBEDA.docxTransféré parwangi salsabila
- 39 2 Norm Approx BinTransféré parsound05
- ENME 392 - Homework 12 - Fa13_solutionsTransféré parSam Adams
- CHE657 1st Tutorial SolutionTransféré parDaniel David Aranguren
- Plastic Product Design Using CAO TechniqueTransféré parLuis Gustavo Rodrigues Pereira
- Full-Doc.docTransféré parShilpashree.T
- final imdcTransféré parAhmad Zikri
- crsc-tr00-10Transféré parFarkhan Sungkar
- Vol 14 No 2 - September 2014Transféré parijcsbi
- Math 170A NotesTransféré parKai Yang
- OR_SW_1Transféré parnoah
- Report Evaporator Sculptor Behr 120405Transféré pargosculptor
- Portfolios of Everything Investment ManagementTransféré parbastian99
- Optimization ReportTransféré parAliRaza

- ames_expectancies.pdfTransféré parRiazboni
- 5165124.pdfTransféré parLatif Nuzul
- Optimization Methods SyllabusTransféré parHimanshu Mishra
- Optimal Design Methods for Hybrid RenewableTransféré parFulki Kautsar S
- Stochastic Augmentation by Generalized Minimum Variance Control With Rst Loop-shapingTransféré parTarcisio Carlos
- Nn for Linear FunctionTransféré parhalakurki2985
- modeFRONTIER - Formula Sae usersTransféré parEsteco
- Chapter 4-Duality & Sensitivity AnalysisTransféré parJoo Gabriel
- 1586036505Transféré parrolies28
- Incas Bulletin Vol 9 Iss 3 2017 InternetTransféré parCandace Frank
- ch15 (1)Transféré parChris Moody
- Fundamentos de Circuitos Elc3a9ctricos 3edi SadikuTransféré parNatsolar Ingenieria
- Math Cheat SheetTransféré parJad Bechara
- Avocet GlmTransféré parDucViking
- 4. LINEAR PROGRAMMING (2).pdfTransféré parElijah Soriano
- A56 2 Kumar Combined Reconfiguration and Capacitor Placement for Distribution System Volt Var Control Through Opposition Based Differential Evolution AlgorithmTransféré parVara Lakshmi
- 151722589-Brake-Calc.pdfTransféré parGregory Aguilera Lopes
- Bayesian Optimization Algorithm with Decision Graphs in C++Transféré parClara
- Adaptive Hard Handoff AlgorithmsTransféré parfajar_syahputra_1
- Optimal Trading Stops and Algorithmic TradingTransféré parMimum
- Gan TutorialTransféré pardgrnwd
- The Introduction of Risk into a Programming ModelTransféré parSusana
- EX Firetube Boiler Changed by Advances in Design TechnologyTransféré parXamir Suarez Alejandro
- Clm TutorialTransféré parTikva Tom
- 05 - The Minimum Required Muscle Force for a Sit-To-stand TaskTransféré parCristian Huequelef
- 2005 Performance Analysis of the Random Access in IEEE 802.16Transféré parkanyia
- 1-s2.0-S0895717713000290-main.pdfTransféré pardiegoman10
- Convex Optimization SyllabusTransféré parKoert Oosterhuis
- Solving Linear Programs Using Simplex Method-7Transféré parsayrabh5590
- VII International Conference. Industrial Engineeering and Environmental Protection (IIZS 2017)Transféré parNeagoie Sergiu

## Bien plus que des documents.

Découvrez tout ce que Scribd a à offrir, dont les livres et les livres audio des principaux éditeurs.

Annulez à tout moment.