Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-559fc8cf4f-x5fd4 Total loading time: 0.337 Render date: 2021-02-27T07:45:40.180Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true }

Article contents

Integrated optimization of mixed-model assembly sequence planning and line balancing using Multi-objective Discrete Particle Swarm Optimization

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 May 2019

Mohd Fadzil Faisae Ab Rashid
Affiliation:
Faculty of Mechanical Engineering, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, 26600 Pekan, Malaysia
Ashutosh Tiwari
Affiliation:
Manufacturing and Materials Department, Cranfield University, Bedford MK43 0AL, UK
Windo Hutabarat
Affiliation:
Manufacturing and Materials Department, Cranfield University, Bedford MK43 0AL, UK
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

Recently, interest in integrated assembly sequence planning (ASP) and assembly line balancing (ALB) began to pick up because of its numerous benefits, such as the larger search space that leads to better solution quality, reduced error rate in planning, and expedited product time-to-market. However, existing research is limited to the simple assembly problem that only runs one homogenous product. This paper therefore models and optimizes the integrated mixed-model ASP and ALB using Multi-objective Discrete Particle Swarm Optimization (MODPSO) concurrently. This is a new variant of the integrated assembly problem. The integrated mixed-model ASP and ALB is modeled using task-based joint precedence graph. In order to test the performance of MODPSO to optimize the integrated mixed-model ASP and ALB, an experiment using a set of 51 test problems with different difficulty levels was conducted. Besides that, MODPSO coefficient tuning was also conducted to identify the best setting so as to optimize the problem. The results from this experiment indicated that the MODPSO algorithm presents a significant improvement in term of solution quality toward Pareto optimal and demonstrates the ability to explore the extreme solutions in the mixed-model assembly optimization search space. The originality of this research is on the new variant of integrated ASP and ALB problem. This paper is the first published research to model and optimize the integrated ASP and ALB research for mixed-model assembly problem.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2019 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Ab. Rashid, MFF (2013) Integrated Multi-Objective Optimisation of Assembly Sequence Planning and Assembly Line Balancing using Particle Swarm Optimisation, PhD Thesis, Cranfield University.Google Scholar
Ab Rashid, MFF, Hutabarat, W and Tiwari, A (2012) Development of a tuneable test problem generator for assembly sequence planning and assembly line balancing. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture 226, 19001913.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ab. Rashid, MFF, Tiwari, A and Hutabarat, W (2017) Comparison of sequential and integrated optimisation approaches for ASP and ALB. Procedia CIRP. The Author(s) 63, 505510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Becker, C and Scholl, A (2006) A survey on problems and methods in generalized assembly line balancing. European Journal of Operational Research 168, 694715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buyukozkan, K, Kucukkoc, I, Satoglu, SI and Zhang, DZ (2016) Lexicographic bottleneck mixed-model assembly line balancing problem: artificial bee colony and tabu search approaches with optimised parameters. Expert Systems with Applications 50, 151166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, R, Lu, K and Yu, S (2002) A hybrid genetic algorithm approach on multi-objective of assembly planning problem. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 15, 447457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coello Coello, CA and Lechuga, MS (2002) MOPSO: a proposal for multiple objective particle swarm optimization. in Proceedings of the 2002 Congress on Evolutionary Computation. CEC’02 (Cat. No.02TH8600). IEEE, pp. 10511056. doi: 10.1109/CEC.2002.1004388.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Coolidge, FL (2000) Statistics: A Gentle Introduction. London: SAGE Publication.Google Scholar
Deb, K (2002) Multi-Objective Optimization using Evolutionary Algorithms. Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Hu, SJ, Zhu, X and Koren, Y(2008) Product variety and manufacturing complexity in assembly systems and supply chains. {CIRP} Annals – Manufacturing Technology 57, 4548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hu, Y-J, Wang, Y, Wang, Z-L, Wang, Y-Q and Zhang, B-C (2014) Machining scheme selection based on a new discrete particle swarm optimization and analytic hierarchy process. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing. Cambridge University Press 28, 7182.Google Scholar
Jusop, M and Ab Rashid, MFF (2015) A review on simple assembly line balancing type-e problem. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering 100, 12005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kara, Y, Özgüven, C, Seçme, NY and Chang, C-T (2011) Multi-objective approaches to balance mixed-model assembly lines for model mixes having precedence conflicts and duplicable common tasks. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 52, 725737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, M-C, Lin, C-C, Tai, Y-Y, Chen, M-S and Tseng, C-C (2012) A modularized contact-rule reasoning approach to the assembly sequence generation for product design. Concurrent Engineering 20, 203221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, C and Yang, Z (2016) Integrated assembly sequence planning and assembly line balancing with ant colony optimization approach. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology. Springer London, 83, 243256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marian, RM (2003) Optimisation of Assembly Sequences using Genetic Algorithm. Ph.D. Thesis. Adelaide, Australia: University of South Australia..Google Scholar
Mirabi, M (2015) A novel hybrid genetic algorithm for the multidepot periodic vehicle routing problem. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 29, 4554.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Penciuc, D, Duigou, JL, Daaboul, J, Vallet, F and Eynard, B (2016) Product life cycle management approach for integration of engineering design and life cycle engineering. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 30, 379389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahman, HF, Sarker, R and Essam, D (2017) A genetic algorithm for permutation flowshop scheduling under practical make-to-order production system. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 31, 87103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rameshkumar, K, Suresh, RK and Mohanasundaram, KM (2005) Discrete Particle Swarm Optimization (DPSO) algorithm for permutation flowshop scheduling to minimize makespan. Advances in Natural Computation 3612, 572581.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rashid, MFF, Hutabarat, W and Tiwari, A (2011) A review on assembly sequence planning and assembly line balancing optimisation using soft computing approaches. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 59, 335349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roshani, A and Nezami, FG (2017) Mixed-model multi-manned assembly line balancing problem: a mathematical model and a simulated annealing approach. Assembly Automation 37, 3450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shankar, P, Summers, JD and Phelan, K (2017) A verification and validation planning method to address change propagation effects in engineering design and manufacturing. Concurrent Engineering 25, 151162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tasan, SO and Tunali, S (2008) A review of the current applications of genetic algorithms in assembly line balancing. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing 19, 4969.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tseng, H-E and Tang, C-E (2006) A sequential consideration for assembly sequence planning and assembly line balancing using the connector concept. International Journal of Production Research 44, 97116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tseng, H-E et al. (2008) Hybrid evolutionary multi-objective algorithms for integrating assembly sequence planning and assembly line balancing. International Journal of Production Research 46, 59515977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, Z, Lu, C and Zhao, HW (2013) An Ant Colony Algorithm for integrating assembly sequence planning and assembly line balancing. Applied Mechanics and Materials 397–400, 25702573.Google Scholar
Yoosefelahi, A, Aminnayeri, M, Mosadegh, H and DavariArdakani, H (2012) Type II robotic assembly line balancing problem: an evolution strategies algorithm for a multi-objective model. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 31, 139151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeng, K, Tan, Z, Dong, M and Yang, P (2014) Probability increment based swarm optimization for combinatorial optimization with application to printed circuit board assembly. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing. Cambridge University Press, 28, 429437.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhong, Y (2017) Hull mixed-model assembly line balancing using a multi-objective genetic algorithm simulated annealing optimization approach. Concurrent Engineering 25, 3040.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhu, X, Hu, SJ, Koren, Y and Huang, N (2012) A complexity model for sequence planning in mixed-model assembly lines. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 31, 121130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 17
Total number of PDF views: 80 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between 06th May 2019 - 27th February 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Integrated optimization of mixed-model assembly sequence planning and line balancing using Multi-objective Discrete Particle Swarm Optimization
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Integrated optimization of mixed-model assembly sequence planning and line balancing using Multi-objective Discrete Particle Swarm Optimization
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Integrated optimization of mixed-model assembly sequence planning and line balancing using Multi-objective Discrete Particle Swarm Optimization
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *