GFGHDGH KK
GFGHDGH KK
GFGHDGH KK
BATCH SCHEDULING
Jaime Cerd
Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnolgico para la Industria Qumica
Universidad Nacional de Litoral - CONICET
Gemes 3450 3000 Santa Fe - Argentina
OUTLINE
Problem definition
Types of scheduling problems
Types of scheduling methodologies
Types of scheduling optimization approaches
Overview of network-type discrete and continuous time models
Comparison of network-type discrete and continuous time
formulations (benchmarking examples)
Overview of batch-oriented continuous time formulations
Conclusions
MAIN REFERENCES
Mndez, C.A., Cerd, J., Grossmann, I.E., Harjunkoski, I., Fahl, M. State-of-the-Art Review of Optimization
Methods for Short-Term Scheduling of Batch Processes. Submitted to Computers & Chemical Engineering
(July, 2005).
Castro, P.M.; Barbosa-Pvoa, A.P.; Matos, H.A. & Novais, A.Q. (2004) I&EC Research,
43, 105 118.
Cerd, J.; Henning, G.P. & Grossmann, I.E. (1997) I&EC Research, 36, 1695 1707.
Floudas, C.A.; Lin, X. (2004) Computers and Chemical Engineering, 28, 2109 2129.
Ierapetritou, M.G. & Floudas, C.A. (1998) I&EC Research, 37, 4341 4359.
Janak, S.L.; Lin, X. & Floudas, C.A. (2004) I&EC Research, 43, 2516 2533.
Kondili, E; Pantelides, C.C. & Sargent, W.H. (1993) Computers and Chemical Engineering, 2, 211 227.
Maravelias, C.T. & Grossmann, I.E. (2003) I&EC Research, 42, 3056 3074.
Mndez, C.A.; Henning, G.P. & Cerd, J. (2001) Computers and Chemical Engineering, 25, 701 711.
Mndez, C.A. & Cerd, J. (2003) Comp. & Chem. Eng., 27, 1247 1259.
Pantelides, C.C. (1994) Foundations of Computer-Aided Process Operations, Cache
publications, New York, 253 274.
Pinto, J.M. & Grossmann, I.E. (1995) I&EC Research, 34, 3037 3051.
Pinto, J.M. & Grossmann, I.E. (1997) Computers and Chemical Engineering, 21, 801 818.
Pinto, J.M. & Grossmann, I.E. (1998). Annals of Operations Research, 81, 433 466.
Reklaitis, G.V. (1992). Overview of scheduling and planning of batch process operations.
NATO Advanced Study InstituteBatch process systems engineering. Turkey: Antalya.
INTRODUCTION
PROBLEM DEFINITION
Scheduling is a decision-making process thay plays an important role in
most manufacturing and service industries
The scheduling function aims to optimally allocate resources, available in
limited supplies, to processing tasks over time.
Each task requires certain amounts of specified resources for a specific
time interval called the processing time
Resources may be equipment units in a chemical plant, runways at an
airport or crews at a construction site
Tasks may be operations in a chemical plant, takeoffs and landings at an
airport, activities in a construction project
AN ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLE
29 Tasks - 4 Equipment Units - One-month Period Horizon
4.6
10.7
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
Week 6
Week 2
Week 3
Week 4
Week 5
Week 6
Week 7
The full schedule for a 6-week horizon might be updated once a week using
updated order input and plant state.
There will be frequent corrections to the schedule in midweek to account
for unit breakdowns or late order arrivals
The scheduling function has to interact with other decision-making systems
used in the plant like the material requirement planning (the MRP system)
The MRP system provides information on the weekly production order
arrivals (product, arrival time, due date and order size), together with the
tasks required to complete each order.
7
MRP-II
Material Requirement /
Capacity Planning
Demand forecasts
Final product orders
Material Requirements
Capacity Requirements
Production Orders
Release Dates
Scheduling &
Rescheduling
Schedule
Dispatching
After the schedule has been developed, all raw materials and resources must be
available at the specified times
MRP-II aims to guarantee that the required raw materials and intermediates will
be available in the right amounts at the right times, and the plant capacity is
enough to process all the required productions orders
8
3
Flow-shop facility
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
20
18
19
2
2
21
23
24
25
Compound Flow-shop
facility
Job-shop
facility
10
11
OPTIMIZATION APPROACHES
- Discrete Time Models
- Continuous Time Models
Network-oriented Formulations
Batch-oriented Formulations
12
13
IMPROVEMENT ALGORITHMS
COMPOSITE DISPATCHING RULES
- Composite dispatching rules combine a number of basic dispatching rules
- Each basic rule in the composite dispatching rule has its own scaling parameter that is
chosen to properly scale the contribution of the basic rule to the final decision
OPTIMIZATION APPROACHES
DISCRETE TIME MODELS OF THE NETWORK TYPE
- State-Task-Network (STN)-based discrete formulation
- Resource-Task-Network (RTN)-based discrete formulation
15
1
1h 2
Heat
S2
1h
Reaction1
S3
10% 2h
Separation
40%
3
2h
3h
60%
70%
S5
Reaction2
Reaction 3
30%
S6
16
90%
S4
S7
...
0
Due
date 1
Due
date 2
Due
date NO
Due
date 3
Production
Horizon
(9) CHANGEOVERS
i
i
- None
changeover
- Unit dependent
- Sequence dependent (product or product/unit dependent)
17
18
TASK
TIME
TASK
TIME
TASK
TIME
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
20
18
19
2
2
21
23
24
25
- DISCRETE TIME
TASK
TIME
DISCRETE TIME
- Global time interval
- Profit
- Cost
20
State nodes: standing for the feeds, intermediates and final products and
represented by circles.
Task nodes: representing the process operations which transform material from
one or more input states into one or more output states, and denoted by rectangles
Directed arcs: linking states and tasks to indicate the flow of materials
21
The uniform time grid is valid for all shared resources like equipment, utilities or
manpower, i.e. global time intervals.
T1
T2
T3
0
8 t (hr)
22
23
Wi j t
a) BINARY VARIABLES:
task
time interval
unit
Bi j t
Ss t
Rr t
24
Equipment
Unit
Task i (Batch a)
j1
Wi, j1, t1 = 1
Just defined at
the start of task i
Task i (Batch c)
Task i (Batch b)
j2
Wi,
0
j2, t1 =
25
Time
Task i (Batch a)
j1
Bi, j1,t1= Ba
Task i (Batch b)
j2
26
27
ijt '
t '= t ptij +1
i Ij
j,t
i 'I sp
min
s
S st C
Rrt =
i
ijt
iI jf
iI jf '
BATCH SIZE
ij ( t pt is )
is Bijt + st Dst
i 'I sc
jJ i
s , t
ptij 1
max
rt
jJi
max
s
jJ i t '= 0
0 Rrt R
i , j J i , t
B
p
is
irt '
s , t
MATERIAL BALANCE
r , t
RESOURCE BALANCE
r , t
t
Wijt ' 1
CHANGEOVER TIMES
j , f , f ' , t
28
MAJOR DISADVANTAGES
Approximate processing times can lead to sub-optimal or infeasible solutions.
The batch size B is a problem variable despite constant processing times.
Handling of small sequence-dependent changeovers is rather awkward (very fine
time discretization).
Significant increase of the model size for longer time horizons
29
EQUIPMENT
-HEATER
- 2 REACTORS
-STILL
30
Task
Unit
Heating
Reaction 1
Heater
Reaction 2
Reaction 3
Separation
Processing
Time (h)
1
2
Reactor 1
Reactor 2
Still
2
1
2
Task
Heating
Reaction 1
States Produced
Hot A
Int. AB (60%)+ P1 (40%)
States Consumed
Raw Material A
Hot A (40%) + Int. BC (60%)
Reaction 2
Int. BC
Reaction 3
Impure E
Separation
Impure E
31
SCHEDULING EXAMPLE
STATE-TASK NETWORK REPRESENTATION (STN)
EQUIPMENT
-HEATER
- 2 REACTORS
-STILL
DECISIONS
Heater
Allocation
Reactor 1
Sequencing
Reactor 2
Timing
Still
Heating
Reaction 3
Reaction 1
Reaction 2
Separation
profit = 2805
32
MAJOR FEATURES
Similarly to the STN representation, it uses a predefined and fixed uniform time grid
that is valid for all shared resources (global time intervals)
Processing times are assumed to be independent of the batch size
It is based on the Resource-Task-Network (RTN) concept
All resources (equipment, materials, utilities) are treated in the same way
Its major advantage with regards to the STN approach arises in problems involving
identical equipment
It requires to define just a single binary variable rather than multiple ones for a set of
equipment units of similar type
Each task can be allocated to just a single processing unit
Task duplication is then required to handle alternative units and unit-dependent
processing times
Changeovers have to be considered as additional tasks.
33
Wi t
b) CONTINUOUS VARIABLES:
Bi t
Ri t
Since every task can be assigned to just a single unit, the subscript j can be
eliminated.
i r t
i r t
When rR stands for a processing unit, the meaning of parameters irt and irt
is somewhat different.
34
Rrt = Rr (t 1) +
iI r
0 Rrt Rrtmax
(
pti
t '= 0
irt '
RESOURCE BALANCE
r , t
r , t
J
i , r Ri , t
BATCH SIZE
If resource r corresponds to a processing unit and task i requires pti units of time, then:
i r t
i r t
i r t
and:
i r t
= -1
= +1
0 for any t
35
MAJOR DISADVANTAGES
Model size and complexity depend on the number of time intervals
Constant processing times independent of the batch size
Sub-optimal or infeasible solutions can be generated due to the use of
approximate processing times
Changeovers have to be considered as additional tasks
36
- CONTINUOUS TIME
TASK
TIME
EVENTS
CONTINUOUS TIME
- Global time points
(C) MATERIAL BALANCES
- Makespan
- Profit
- Cost
37
MAJOR FEATURES
A common time grid that is variable and valid for all shared resources (global
time points)
A predefined maximum number of time points (N) (a model parameter)
The time points will occur at a priori unknown times (model decisions)
Every event including the start and the end of a task must occur at a time point
The start of several tasks can be assigned to the same time point n but at different
units and, therefore, all must begin at the same time Tn.
The end time of a task assigned to time point n does not necesarily occur exactly at Tn
They can finish before except those tasks following a zero wait policy (ZW)
For storage policies other than ZW, the equipment can be used as a temporary
storage device from the end of the task to time Tn
Each task can be allocated to just a single unit. Task duplication is required to
handle alternative equipment units
38
T1
T2
T3
0
8 t (hr)
8 t (hr)
BINARY VARIABLES:
b) CONTINUOUS VARIABLES: Tn
40
Ws
iI j
in
j , n
iIj n ' n
Ws
in
in '
= Wf in
iI sp
s, n
s, n > 1
in
in '
iI sc
S sn C smax
Wf 1 j, n
(Ws Wf ) 1
iIj
j , n
i , n
V iminWf in Bf in V imaxWf in i, n
Tn+1 Tn
i, n > 1
Tf
i(n 1)
+ H ( 1 Wf
in
i, n > 1
Tf i ( n 1) Tn H (1 Wfin ) i I ZW , n > 1
Tsi 'n Tf i ( n 1) + clii '
sS j
jsn
j , i Ij , i ' Ij , n
1 j J T , n
SHARED STORAGE TASKS
S sjn CjVjsn j J , s Sj , n
T
S sn =
jJ sT
sjn
s S T , n
41
42
MAJOR DISADVANTAGES
- Need of computing the minimum number of time points
- Model size and complexity both depending on the number of predefined time points
- Suboptimal or infeasible schedules can be generated if the number of points is
smaller than required
43
T1
T2
T3
0
8 t (hr)
8 t (hr)
ADVANTAGES
Significant reduction in model size when the minimum number of time points is predefined
Variable processing times
Resource constraints are only monitored at each time point
A wide variety of scheduling aspects can be considered in a very simple model
DISADVANTAGES
Definition of the minimum number of time points
Model size and complexity depend on the number of time points predefined
Sub-optimal or infeasible solution can be generated if the number of time points is smaller than
required
44
iI r
BATCH SIZE
Rrn = Rr ( n 1) + irp Win 'n + irp Bin 'n irc Winn ' + irc Binn '
iI r n '< n
n '> n
min
r
Rrn R
Vi min Win ( n + 1)
r , n
max
r
rt
p
ir
Wi ( n 1) n irc Wi ( n + 1)
Vi max Win ( n + 1)
r , n > 1
i I s , n, (n | N |)
STORAGE CONSTRAINTS
rt
rRiS
RESOURCE
BALANCE
iI S
rRiS
Vi minWi ( n 1) n
) +
Vi maxWi ( n 1) n
i I s , n, (n 1)
45
It is a STN-based formulation but the global time representation has been relaxed
Different tasks assigned to the same event point but performed in different units can be
started/finished at different times
The number of event points is predefined (a model parameter)
The time points will occur at a priori unknown times (model decisions)
The start and the end of a task must occur at an event point
Each task can be allocated to just a single unit. Task duplication is required to
handle alternative equipment units
It considers processing tasks i and storage tasks ist
Event-Based Representation
J1
J2
J3
2
2
3
2
3
4
8 t (hr)
46
B. CONTINUOUS VARIABLES:
Wfi n (end)
8 x 10 x 3 = 240
(8 x 10 x 6) + 30 = 510
6 x 10
= 60
(end)
RAr n
570
47
48
W
iIj
1 j , n
in
n ' n
in
Ws
in
Bin Bi ( n 1) Vi
i, n
n '< n
Ws
= Wf in
1 Wsin' + Wf in'
n' < n
n '< n
i , n
n' <n
i, n
Win
(1 W
(1 W
i ( n 1)
st
I sST
+ Wf i ( n 1) )
st
I sst
i st n
i , n > 1
i , n > 1
i , n
Bf in Bin Vi max (1 Wf in )
i , n
i, n
Bf in Bin + Vi maxWf in
MATERIAL BALANCE
iI sp
max
i
max
Bin Bi ( n 1) Vi max
i ( n 1) + Wf i ( n 1) )
Bsin Bin
i, n
Bsin Bin + Vi maxWsin i, n
Bsin Bin Vi max (1 Wsin ) i, n
Bf in Bin
n '< n
Win Bin V
min
i
i , n
s, n
STORAGE CAPACITY
Bi st n C max
s
s, i st I sst , n
49
Tf in Tsin
i, n
Tf in Tsin + H Win
i, n
i, n > 1
) + H (1 Wfin' ) + H Wfin''
i, n > 1
nn ''n '
i, n, n' , (n n' )
) + H (1 Wfin' ) + H Wfin''
nn ''n '
i I ZW , n, n' , (n n' )
r , i Ir , n
R
R
r , n = 1
iIr
iIr
irn
+ RrnA = Rrmax
irn
RESOURCE BALANCE
r , n > 1
iIr
Tfr n Ts rn
r , n
Tf i ( n1) Tsrn H 1 Wi ( n1) + Wfi ( n1)
r , i I r , n > 1
Tf i ( n1) Tsrn H 1 Wi ( n1)
r , i I r , n > 1
Tsrn Tsin H (1 Win ) r , i I r , n
Tsrn Tsin + H (1 Win ) r , i I r , n
Tsrn = Tf r ( n1) r , n > 1
(
(
51
MAJOR DISADVANTAGES
- Definition of event points
- More complicated models
- Model size and complexity depend on the number of time points predefined
- Sub-optimal or infeasible solution can be generated if the number of time points is
smaller than required
- Additional tasks for storage and utilities
52
12
Tasks
Tasks
10-12
10-12
U6/U7
U6/U7
0.5
13
zw
Task
Task 11
U1
U1
Task
Task 22
U2
U2
Task
Task 33
U3
U3
Tasks
Tasks
4-7
4-7
U4
U4
16
7
zw
0.5
6
0.2 0.7
15
14
Tasks
Tasks
13-17
13-17
U8/U9
U8/U9
17
18
Tasks
Tasks
8,9
8,9
U5
U5
10
zw
zw
19
11
53
54
Task
Task 11
U1
U1
Task
Task 22
U2
U2
Task
Task 33
U3
U3
Tasks
Tasks
4-7
4-7
U4
U4
12
9
Tasks
Tasks
10-12
10-12
U6/U7
U6/U7
zw
15
14
16
7
zw
0.5
0.2 0.7
Tasks
Tasks
8,9
8,9
U5
U5
0.5
13
Tasks
Tasks
13-17
13-17
U8/U9
U8/U9
17
18
10
zw
zw
19
11
55
20
20
20
20
20
Instance
Formulation
time points
binary variables
continuous variables
constraints
LP relaxation
objective
iterations
nodes
CPU time (s)
relative gap
Discrete
30
720
3542
6713
9.9
28
728
10
1.34
0.0
A
Continuous
8
9
384
432
2258
2540
4962
5585
24.2
24.1
28
28
78082
27148
1180
470
108.39
51.41
0.0
0.0
Discrete
30
720
3542
6713
9.9
28
2276
25
4.41
0.0
B
Continuous
7
8
336
384
1976
2258
4343
4964
25.2
24.3
32
30
58979
2815823
1690
63855
66.45
3600.21
0.0
0.067
56
Discrete model
Time intervals: 30
Makespan: 28
Continuous model
Time points: 7
Makespan: 32
57
H = 24 h
10
Instance D
Formulation
time points
binary variables
continuous variables
constraints
LP relaxation
objective
iterations
nodes
CPU time (s)
relative gap
240
5760
28322
47851
1769.9
1425.8
449765
5580
7202
0.122
Discrete
LB
24
576
2834
4794
1383.0
1184.2
3133
203
6.41
0.047
Continuous
UB
24
576
2834
4799
2070.9
1721.8
99692
4384
58.32
0.050
14
672
3950
8476
1647.1
1407.4
256271
1920
258.54
0.042
58
H = 24 h
Discrete model
Time intervals: 240
Profit: 1425.8
Continuous model
Time points: 14
Profit: 1407.4
59
For Case I, instances comprising a larger number of demands were not possible to solve
in a reasonable time
60
61
U1
U2
U3
slot
Time
62
job
3
7
reaction
drying
packing
Neither the batch sizes nor the equipment capacities are model parameters
A batch size feasibility test is not required
Only batch processing times and setup times for each product at each stage are
problem data
Batch processing times can vary with the selected equipment unit
63
64
=1
ijkl
j kK j
lLi
ijkl
i , l Li
BATCH ALLOCATION
j , k K j
SLOT ALLOCATION
Tf il = Tsil +
W ( p
j kK j
Tf jk Ts j ( k +1)
Tf il Tsi ( l +1)
ijkl
ijl
+ suijl )
j , k K j
i , l Li
j , k K j
M (1 Wijkl ) Tsil Ts jk
BATCH TIMING
SLOT SEQUENCING
j , k K j
M (1 Wijkl ) Tsil Ts jk
SLOT TIMING
STAGE SEQUENCING
i , j , k K j , l Li
SLOT-BATCH MATCHING
i , j , k K j , l Li
66
DISADVANTAGES
Resource and inventory constraints are difficult to model
Model size and complexity depend on the number of time slots predefined
Sub-optimal or infeasible solution can be generated if the number of time
slots is smaller than required
67
X 2,3,J = 1
2
X 3,5,J = 1
3
X 4,6,J =1
X 1,4,J =1
Time
DISADVANTAGES
Resource and inventory constraints are difficult to model
Model size and complexity depend on the number of time slots predefined
Sub-optimal or infeasible solution can be generated if the number of time
slots is smaller than required
69
Xfi j
batch
,
unit
Xi i j
batch
unit
batch
6 batches, 1 stage
2 units per stage
(6 x 2) + (6 x 5 x 2) = 72 variables
slot-based approach
36
Tsi
Tfi
6 x 2 = 12 variables
Slot-based approach
(3 slots per unit)
24
C. MODEL PARAMETERS:
tpi j = processing time of batch i in unit j
cli i j = setup time between batches i & i
70
71
XF
ij = 1
iI j
XF + X
jJ i
ij
jJ i i 'I j
ii ' j 1
i 'ij
=1
i 'I j
XFij +
X + X
i 'ij
i 'I j
j 'J i i 'I j
j j'
ii ' j ' 1
i, j J i
jJ i
i
'
I
j
72
MAJOR ADVANTAGES
Sequencing is explicitly considered in model variables
Sequence-dependent changeover times and costs are easy to implement
MAJOR DISADVANTAGES
Larger number of sequencing variables compared with the slot-based approach
Resource and material balances are difficult to model
73
MAIN ASSUMPTIONS
Batches to be scheduled are defined a priori
No mixing and splitting operations are allowed
Batches can start and finish at any time during the scheduling horizon
UNITS
J
X =1
2,3
2
X 3,5 =1
3
X 4,6 =1
X 1,4 =1
Allocation variables
W 2,J = 1;W 3,J = 1 ;W 5,J = 1
74
Wi j
batch
,
unit
Xi i
batch
Xfi j
batch
batch
6 batches, 1 stage
2 units per stage
(6 x 5) + (6 x 2 x 2) =
slot-based approach
unit
54 variables
36
Tsi
Tfi
6 x 2 = 12 variables
Slot-based approach
(3 slots per unit)
24
MAJOR CONSTRAINTS
ALLOCATION CONSTRAINTS
- At most one batch i can be the first processed in unit j
ALLOCATION-SEQUENCING MATCHING
- Whenever a pair of batches are related through the immediate precedence
relationship, both batches must be allocated to the same unit
SEQUENCING CONSTRAINTS
- Every batch should be either the first processed or directly preceded by
another batch
- Every batch has at most only one successor
TIMING CONSTRAINTS
- The ending time of batch i can be computed from its starting time and the
sum of its processing time and the setup time in the allocated unit
- A batch can be started after its direct predecessor has been completed
76
XF
ij
iI j
XF + W
ij
jJ i
jJ i
j
ij
=1
ALLOCATION CONSTRAINT
XF + X
ij
jJ i
i 'i = 1
i, i ' , j ( J i J ii ' )
SEQUENCING-ALLOCATION
MATCHING
i'
ii '
i'
i
TIMING AND SEQUENCING
jJ i
jJ i
77
MAJOR ADVANTAGES
Sequencing is explicitly considered in model variables
Changeover times and costs are easy to implement
Lower number of sequencing variables compared with the immediate precedence
approach
MAJOR DISADVANTAGES
Resource and material balances are difficult to model
Large number of sequencing variables compared with the slot-based approach
78
MAIN ASSUMPTIONS
No mixing and splitting operations are allowed
Batches can start and finish at any time during the scheduling horizon
Batches to be scheduled are defined a priori
UNITS
J
X 2,3 =1
X2,5 =1
5
X 4,6 =1
X 1,4 =1
X 3,5 = 1
Allocation variables
Y2,J = 1; Y3,J = 1 ; Y5,J = 1
X 1,6 =1
Time
80
Unit
One-Stage
batch a
batch c
Unit 3
batch b
Time
Batches a and b are the (direct/non-direct)
predecessors of batch c
81
Wi j
A. BINARY VARIABLES:
batch
Xi i
unit
batch
i < i
batch
6 batches, 1 stage
2 units per stage
(6 x 5)/2 + (6 x 2) = 27 variables
slot-based approach
36
Tsi
Tfi
6 x 2 = 12 variables
Slot-based approach
(3 slots per unit)
24
82
A. BINARY VARIABLES:
batch
,
unit
Xi l i l
batch
stage
6 batches, 3 stages
2 units per stage
3 x (6 x 5)/2 + (6 x 2 x 3)
slot-based approach
i < i
stage
stage batch
= 81 variables
108
Tsi l
Tfi l
6 x 3 x 2 = 36 variables
Slot-based approach
72
(3 slots per unit)
84
i, l Li
Tfil = Tsil +
tp
ilj = 1
jJ il
iljWilj
ALLOCATION CONSTRAINT
i, l Li
PROCESSING TIME
jJ il
Tsi 'l ' Tf il + clil ,i 'l ' + sui 'l ' M (1 X il ,i 'l ' ) M (2 Wilj Wi 'l ' j )
SEQUENCING CONSTRAINTS
Tsil Tf i 'l ' + cli 'l ',il + suil M X il ,i 'l ' M (2 Wilj Wi 'l ' j )
Tsil Tf i ( l 1)
i, l Li , l > 1
STAGE PRECEDENCE
85
DISADVANTAGES
Material balances are difficult to model
86
1
Extruders
Batches to be
Processed
B1
B2
B3
....
....
B11
B12
3
Limited Manpower:
Case 1: 4 operator crews
Case 2: 3 operator crews
Case 3: 2 operator crews
87
88
(c ) 2 operator crews
89
Event
representation
Objective
function
CPU time
2.a
1.581
67.74
(113.35)*
General precedence
1.026
0.11b
2.424
1.895
2224
(210.7)*
7.91b
8.323
76390
(927.16)*
General precedence
7.334
35.87b
2.b
2.c
90
91
93
REACTIVE SCHEDULING
Problem Variables
New batch to
be inserted
94
95
SCHEDULE IN PROGRESS
96
Total Tardiness
13.55 d
8.84 d
97
CONCLUSIONS
Current optimization models are able to solve moderate-size batch processes
Small examples can be solved to optimality
Discrete-time models are computationally more effective than continuous-time models of the
network type
Difficult selection of the number of time or event points in network-oriented continuous time
formulations
Network-oriented continuous-time models become quickly computationally intractable for
scheduling of medium complexity process networks.
Problems with more than 150 time intervals are difficult to solve using discrete time models
Problems with more than 15 time or event points appear intractable using network-oriented
continuous time models.
Depending on the objective function, different computational performances are observed
Batch-oriented continuous approaches are computationally more efficient but usually
require to first solve the batching problem (a decomposition approach)
Combining other approaches with mathematical programming (hybrid methods) for solving
large scale problems looks very promising
98
Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.
Alternative Proxies: