Hall, N.G., Kamoun, H., Sriskandarajah, C., 1997, Scheduling in robotic cells: classification, two and three machines, Operations Research,(45) 3, 421--439.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....cells. M (I) 0 M 1 M 2 M 3 M (O) 4 Robot Figure 1: The layout of a robotic cell. Management problems in robotic cells consist in concurrently finding a schedule for parts and robot moves which maximizes productivity. For two machine cells, the problem can be efficiently solved (see [5] for bufferless cells, and [1] for no waitcells) For cells with three or more machines, when the parts are different from each other, the overall management problem is very hard. In fact, for both bufferless and no wait robotic cells, if the time required by robot movement is negligible, the ....

....the problem arising in a three machine no wait robotic cell when the parts are different from each other. In particular, for each of the six possible one unit robot move cycles, we investigate the complexity of the resulting part sequencing problem. For bufferless robotic cells, Hall et al. [5] carried out a similar study, showing that for two out of six one unit cycles the part sequencing problem is NP hard, and providing polynomial algorithms for the remaining four cycles. From the part sequencing viewpoint, a major difference between bufferless and no wait cells is the following. ....

Hall, N.G., Kamoun, H., Sriskandarajah, C., 1997, Scheduling in robotic cells: classification, two and three machines, Operations Research,(45) 3, 421--439.

....parallel machines [HM95, M96] and in recurrent job shops [H94] with potential or conjunctive constraints [CC90, H94] originated from pipeline computing [K81] ON SCHEDULING CYCLE SHOPS 9 2.4. Job characteristics and minimization criteria. In comparision with the classification of Hall et al. [HKS97] for periodic robotic flow shop problems, our classification includes them as well but remains the job characteristics field the same as in the well known classification of classic nonperiodic problems, cf. LLRKS93, B95] fi ae ffi 1 ; fi 8 g introduces preemption, no wait, ....

.... O(n 2 ) K99] RF3jr j ; p oj = 1; p ej = q e Gamma1 jCmax O(n 2 ) K99] RF jn m Gamma 2; p oj = p; p ej = q e Gamma1 jCmax O(1) HK98] RF2jno waitjBmax O(h log h) A99] RF2kBmax O(n log n) AK99] R1ae2 F2kCmax O(n log n) KSI91] R1aeF2kBmax O(n log n) SSSBK92] R1 1;3;4;5 F3kBmax O(n log n) [HKS97] R1 1;4F3jno waitjBmax O(n log n) AP98] R1F jno wait; n = 1jP O(m 3 log m) KL98] R1Cjno wait; n = 1jP O( 5 ) KL97] R1F jn = 1jP O(m 3 ) CK97] C2jp ij = q i jCmax O(1) T85] C2jp ij = 1j P C j O(1) Section 4.1] C2jp ij = 1j P U j O(n 7 ) K99A] C2jno wait; p ij = 1j P f j O(n ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

N. G. Hall, H. Kamoun and C. Sriskandarajah, Scheduling in robotic cells: classification, two and three machine cells, Oper. Res. 45 (1997), 421--439.

....machine flowshop producing several jobs repetitively, and thus is solvable by the efficient algorithm of Gilmore and Gomory (1964) In the three machine robotic cell problem, it is not clear that the maximum throughput is given by a single routing between machines for the robot. Hall et al. 1996) [12] provide a polynomial time algorithm to minimize a general version of the two machine robotic cell throughput problem.They also show that, for four of the six possible robot routings in the three machine cell, polynomial time algorithms exist. Hall et al. 1996) generalize these results to robotic ....

Kamoun H. Hall N. G. and Sriskandarajah C. Scheduling in robotic cells: Classification, two and three machine cells. Operations Research, 1996.

....cells. M (I) 0 M 1 M 2 M 3 M (O) 4 Robot Figure 1: The layout of a robotic cell. Management problems in robotic cells consist in concurrently finding a schedule for parts and robot moves which maximizes productivity. For two machine cells, the problem can be efficiently solved (see [5] for bufferless cells, and [1] for no wait cells) For cells with three or more machines, when the parts are different from each other, the overall management problem is very hard. In fact, for both bufferless and no wait robotic cells, if the time required by robot movement is negligible, the ....

....the problem arising in a three machine no wait robotic cell when the parts are different from each other. In particular, for each of the six possible one unit robot move cycles, we investigate the complexity of the resulting part sequencing problem. For bufferless robotic cells, Hall et al. [5] carried out a similar study, showing that for two out of six one unit cycles the part sequencing problem is NP hard, and providing polynomial algorithms for the remaining four cycles. From the part sequencing viewpoint, a major difference between bufferless and no wait cells is the following. ....

Hall, N.G., Kamoun, H., Sriskandarajah, C., 1997, Scheduling in robotic cells: classification, two and three machines, Operations Research, (45), 3, 421--439.

....(for an overview see Crama et al. 1997] In most cases repetitive manufacturing is studied where the long run average cycle time has to be minimized. For special situations polynomial algorithms have been obtained by Kise et al. 1991] Sethi et al. 1992] Crama van de Klundert [1995] and Hall et al. 1997]. Robotic cells with a single unit of buffer behind each machine have been studied by Finke et al. 1996] ffl Considering the case in which sufficient robots are available for transportation leads to problems where the transportation times only correspond to minimal time lags (delays) between ....

Hall, N., Kamoun, H., Sriskandarajah, C. [1997] Scheduling in robotic cells: Classification, two and three machine cells, Oper. Res. 45, 421-439.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC