Acta Polytechnica Hungarica Vol. 14, No.

4, 2017

Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel

Resource Scheduling Problem in the
Automotive Industry

Mónika Kulcsár-Forrai, Gyula Kulcsár

Department of Information Engineering, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and
Informatics, University of Miskolc, 3515, Miskolc-Egyetemváros, Hungary,
[email protected], [email protected]

Abstract: This paper presents an extended model for solving time-varying resource-
constrained scheduling problems. The motivation for our research comes from the
automotive industry. The problem is to create fine schedules for a complex manufacturing
system to satisfy diverse customer demands. The detailed characteristics of the analyzed
scheduling problem and the developed solving approach are described in this paper. To
consider the impact of the assistant processes that are connected to the manufacturing
primary processes, we elaborated a problem-transformation procedure and a new extended
scheduling model that can manage time-varying availability constraints of parallel
resources, unit processing times, job-dependent release times and due dates. This paper
also presents slack-oriented and JIT-oriented algorithms that can solve the resource-
constrained scheduling problems. The research results have been successfully applied and
tested in practice.

Keywords: scheduling; resource availability constraint; multi-objective optimization;

production planning and control; manufacturing operations management

1 Introduction
Production planning and scheduling systems deal with the allocation of limited
resources to production activities to satisfy customer demands over the actual time
horizon. Planning and scheduling tasks can be expressed as optimization
problems, in which the main goal is to create plans that meet constraints and
maximize production performance. These optimization models are very different
in practice, corresponding to the characteristics of the real production systems and
their business environments.
A hierarchical approach is one of the possible ways for solving such planning and
scheduling problems. The hierarchical optimization approach means that the

– 27 –
M. Kulcsárné Forrai et al. Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel Resource Scheduling Problem
in the Automotive Industry

decision process will run in a layered way by ordering the decisions according to
their relative importance. This decomposition technique uses a suitable
optimization model at each level of the hierarchical decision-structure. At a given
level the applied model extends the decision variables, the constraints and the
objective functions of the problem arriving from the upper level.
Production planning and scheduling process typically works according to the
rolling horizon principle. This means that an initial plan is created for the actual
time horizon, and its first part is executed. The system creates the plan for the next
period by considering the previous partially overlapped period in advance. Then,
the initial plan may be modified or re-planned by considering the changes and
disturbances. The actual plan can also be periodically revised due to the
uncertainties that may occur in the business and in the production processes.
Results of production planning and scheduling are usually not applicable to
managing operational manufacturing since the created plans are rough and large-
scale solutions, and they refer to aggregate resources. The role of fine scheduling
(detailed scheduling) is to make a precise executive fine program for a short time
horizon (for weeks/days/shifts) that concerns every detail.
To realize the created production fine schedule in practice, the complex decision
making has to cover the primary processes and also the most important
supplementary (e.g. logistical) and assistant processes (e.g. instrument supply) of
the production.
In this paper, we present fine scheduling models and algorithms for solving real-
life problems in the automotive industry. We focus on modeling and solving the
scheduling problems of vehicle seat element manufacturing. To solve the fine
scheduling problem, not only the main manufacturing processes, but the
configuration-preparation processes have to be considered.
This paper is organised as follows: Section 2 briefly describes the examined
production system. Section 3 reviews fundamental models for production
scheduling, while Section 4 introduces a new solution for fine scheduling. Section
5 proposes an extended parallel resource scheduling model and new solving
algorithms, and Section 6 shows an application of the theoretical results in
practice. Finally, conclusions are given in the last section.

2 The Examined Production System

In the examined vehicle manufacturer workshop, seat elements are made for
different types of cars. The customers (vehicle-assembly enterprises) generate
product demands (orders) for specified product types and numbers of items. These
production orders have to be fulfilled within strictly prescribed time limits.

– 28 –
Acta Polytechnica Hungarica Vol. 14, No. 4, 2017

The plant manufactures the seat elements (end products) on circle-shaped

manufacturing systems. The manufacturing systems of the plant complete the
orders together. It is possible to produce the specified product type on more than
one path. Every single path can perform a given amount of rounds (cycles) in one
shift, furthermore it possesses a specified number of attachment points (positions).
There are shape carriers in the system. A given type of shape carrier can be
connected to a given position of a specified path. The shape carrier can be one or
two sided depending on its formation. It is possible to attach tools (molds) to the
left and/or right side of the shape carrier. The attachments are determined by
technological rules. Strict rules prescribe:
 what kind of products,
 on which path,
 in what kind of position,
 on what type of shape carrier,
 on which side and
 with what kind of other products they can be manufactured.
A path can be considered as a production line that works according to an
independently defined calendar. The basic unit of the calendar is the shift. These
basic working time intervals are equal (e.g. eight hours) long. In every shift the
production lines can be adjusted. This means that it is possible to exchange a
given number of shape carriers which are connected to the positions. The unit of
one exchange is a given configuration that consists of one carrier and its
connected mold(s). A complete exchange happens when we take the current
configuration from the position and attach another prepared configuration to the
same position.
The constructions of the production lines (paths) are different, so the total number
of executable rounds in one shift can differ. In the system, various numbers of
molds and carriers are usually available for manufacturing products.
The preparation (assembly and disassembly) of the tool configuration, which is
needed for the production, is carried out by skilled workers. The preparation task
is time consuming. Therefore, the number of the performable configuration
preparations during one shift in the plant is restricted by tight capacity constraints.

3 Fundamental Models for Production Scheduling

Discrete manufacturing processes include a large variety of diverse and very
distinct technologies that require specific models when creating or improving their
efficient control systems. In this regard, there is a special demand for adequate
modeling, formulation and solving of scheduling problems [20].

– 29 –
M. Kulcsárné Forrai et al. Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel Resource Scheduling Problem
in the Automotive Industry

In the professional literature, many books and papers deal with scheduling models
and methods. There are well-structured books that focus on manufacturing
scheduling (e.g. [16], [17], and [21]). Several review and survey papers can also
be found on this topic, for example [1], [5], and [11]. Scheduling plays an
important role not only in manufacturing but in many different service industries.
Pinedo et al. [18] presented an overview of some of the more important
scheduling problems that appear in various service industries.
The scheduling problems lead to optimization tasks. Their complete review and
classification exceed the scope of this paper; there is a vast amount of literature
that deals with such problems. Therefore, only some of the most important solving
approaches are shortly mentioned. The main categories are as follows:
 Mathematical programming approach (e.g. linear, nonlinear, integer
programming, disjunctive programming, set assigning, set partitioning,
set packing and set covering, etc.).
 Exact optimization approach (e.g. branch and bound methods, dynamic
programming, etc.).
 Constraint programming approach (e.g. constraint satisfaction and
constraint programming).
 Heuristic approach (e.g. basic scheduling rules and composite dispatching
rules, etc.).
 Iterative improvement approach (e.g. beam search, local search and
genetic algorithms, etc.).
To solve a scheduling problem in practice, we have to deal with at least three
important issues. The first issue is the resource environment. This takes into
consideration all features of the resources concerned (machines, workplaces,
workers, tools, etc.) and characteristics of the relations among them. We also have
to pay special attention to the features of the operations to be executed. The
second issue focuses on the job characteristics and constraints. This group
includes all the technological rules, manufacturing restrictions, job execution
features and alternative process plans. The third issue is the production control
policy that specifies the priorities, requirements, objective functions and key
performance indices. The possible variants of these groups of issues result in
many scheduling problems.
The simplest resource environment of scheduling problems is represented by the
single machine type model, which refers to jobs containing one operation to be
performed. If the single resource is replaced by a given set or group of resources,
the scheduling problems become models of parallel resources. In this case, the
jobs are executed simultaneously on different resources (machines or workplaces).
Depending on the working resources capability of the parallel models, three basic
resource environments are categorized [16], [21]. The first is the model of
identical parallel machines, where each job can be processed on any machine, and

– 30 –
Acta Polytechnica Hungarica Vol. 14, No. 4, 2017

the processing time only depends on the dedicated job. The second variant is the
model of uniform parallel machines, where the processing time of a dedicated job
varies according to the machine speed. The third variant is the model of unrelated
parallel machines, where the processing time varies according to the job and the
machine. In this case, each machine can work at different speeds on the jobs.
Several papers give detailed reviews on parallel machine scheduling, for example
[4], [7], and [22]. However, Weng et al. [19] and later Lamothe et al. [13] have
shown that the scheduling problems on machines with limited flexibility, setup
and secondary resource constraints were poorly studied.
The shop scheduling models involve more machines and more jobs containing
more than one operation. However, each operation can be performed on a given
machine. According to different prescriptions, specific models can be formed
from this general shop, as follows [21]:
 Job shop: the set of operations is job dependent, and each job may have a
special precedence chain relation (operation sequence).
 Flow shop: a special case of the job shop in which the number and
sequence of operations is fixed for any job.
 Open shop: a special case of the general shop in which there are no
precedence relations between the operations.
 Mixed shop: a combination of the above models.
In the above-enumerated models, each operation can be assigned to a given
machine (dedicated resource). A further extension of the general shop model is the
flexible shop model, where the flexibility feature refers to the machine assignment
possibilities. In the flexible models (e.g. flexible flow shop and flexible job shop,
etc.) a given operation can be performed on any of the machines of a specified
machine group. In this way, the scheduling problem is supplemented with
machine selection tasks. The suitable machines from the group can simultaneously
work identically or uniformly or even in an unrelated way [6], [23]. These models
can be considered as the combined models of the shop models and parallel
machine models.
The extended flexible shop models represent a new generation of the scheduling
problem class (e.g. extended flexible flow shop and extended flexible job shop,
etc.). It often occurs in the manufacturing systems that there are some resource
objects (e.g. integrated production lines and cells) that can perform more than one
operation as a unit. In this case, some operations can be grouped into larger units
such as technological steps or even execution steps. These collecting steps can be
considered as basic units for scheduling [8], [9], and [15]. The extended flexible
shop models support the usage of alternative technological routings and resources.
Parallel machine models are the functional building blocks of these extended
models to support the parallel realization of the execution steps.

– 31 –
M. Kulcsárné Forrai et al. Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel Resource Scheduling Problem
in the Automotive Industry

For applying scheduling models in practice, it is very important to consider the

machine eligibility constraints. For example, Lin and Li [24] studied the parallel
machine scheduling problem with unit-length jobs in which each job is only
allowed to be processed on a specified subset of machines. Many other researchers
also have considered the machine eligibility constraints in parallel machine
scheduling problems. Lee et al. [14] studied the most general case of machine
eligibility constraints as well as special cases of nested and inclusive eligible sets.
From the practice-oriented point of view, flexible scheduling approaches have to
pay special attention to the job execution constraints related to the release times
and due dates. As is well known, the general case of this problem with only a
single machine is NP-hard if the optimization objective is to minimize the
maximum lateness. The NP-hard (non-deterministic polynomial hard) property
indicates that there is probably no polynomial-time algorithm to reach the optimal
solution of the problem. (The precise definition of the NP-hard problem is given
in [21].) Consequently, the parallel and extended variants of the problems are also
NP-hard. Special cases of the problem have been analyzed in recent years. For
example, Lazarev et al. [2] considered the problem with only a single machine and
identical processing times for all jobs.
In most of the scheduling problems, it is assumed that the resources (machines)
are continually available in time, and the number of resources is fixed in each
problem instance. These simple types of availability constraints can only limit the
number of parallel executable tasks. One other type of availability constraint is
connected to calendar elements or shifts. The resource availability constraints
specify the time intervals or windows in which the resources can perform the jobs.
Ma et al. [25] provided a detailed review of this topic. Kaabi and Harrath [12]
reviewed the models and results related to the parallel machine scheduling
problem under availability constraints. Nevertheless, it can be seen that parallel
resource scheduling problems with due-date related objective functions, resource-
availability constraints, distinct release times and due dates are poorly studied in
the literature.
Our problem has similarities to the problem addressed by Gharbi and Haouari [3]
in the sense that both models have parallel resources, distinct release times and
due dates. However, in our model, each resource has its own list of availability
time intervals, not only a single availability time window, and the objective
functions are also different. Brucker [21] presented the model P | pi=1; ri integer |
Lmax. This is similar to our scheduling model for configuration preparation in that
Brucker’s model also uses unit processing time, integer release times and due
dates, but we even take into account the distinct availability time constraints of
each machine.
In this paper, we study a special parallel resource scheduling problem in which
time-varying resource constraints, unit processing times, job-dependent release
times and due dates are considered to minimize the maximal tardiness and

– 32 –
Acta Polytechnica Hungarica Vol. 14, No. 4, 2017

earliness. In the literature we have not found any research papers considering this
set of constraints and objectives.

4 A New Solution for Production Fine Scheduling

The product-type dependent production intensity of the examined manufacturing
system can only be modified slowly because of the defined constraints. Therefore,
the service of diverse production orders generates a serious production fine
scheduling problem. Based on the necessary information the fine schedule is
usually created for a one-week time interval in advance. It is recommended to
keep product dependent stock levels adjusted individually due to the long reaction
time of the manufacturing system.
During the development, we focused on heuristic and knowledge-intensive
searching techniques because the addressed full scheduling problem is NP-hard.
At the beginning of the development we started out from our previous models
applied successfully in other situations [10].
In our approach, all the issues (batching, assigning, sequencing and timing) are
handled simultaneously (Figure 1). The values of the decision variables of the
problem are set by a multi-operator and multi-objective searching algorithm. The
developed scheduling software modifies the actual schedule iteratively and
prepares new solutions with consistent changes (modifications) based on multiple
neighboring operators, execution-driven fast simulation, and overloaded relational
operators.

Input

Production Configuration- Execution-

Model
Fine Preparation Driven
Building
Scheduling Scheduling Simulation

Advanced
Performance
Scheduling for
Evaluation
JIT Preparation

Output

Figure 1
Simplified flow chart of the integrated scheduling approach

– 33 –
M. Kulcsárné Forrai et al. Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel Resource Scheduling Problem
in the Automotive Industry

Based on the given input data, the model builder component defines the required
model objects and initializes them with start values (attributes). Its tasks include
the creation of the starting status of resources (paths, positions, carriers, molds),
the specification of the internal production orders, and furthermore the definition
of the restrictions and objective functions.
After carrying out the availability, applicability, and feasibility studies on the
created object model, the builder process defines the currently indexed
relationships of the entire system. Using these indices in each decision-making
situation (e.g. assignment, selection) of the solving process, the alternatives of
choices can easily be retrieved, so the chain of decision making produces feasible
solutions.
The core of the implemented solver explores iteratively the space of the feasible
solutions and creates neighbor candidate solutions by modifying the decision
variables of the fine schedule according to the problem space characteristics. For
each shift, the fine schedule specifies the configuration of shape carriers and
molds to be run and the kinds of products to be manufactured in each position of
each production line.
The candidate schedules are simulated by using an execution-driven fast
simulation algorithm that represents the real-world environment with capacity and
technological constraints. In this execution-driven simulation, the product units
are passive, and they are processed, moved and stored by active system resources
such as production lines, material handling devices, and buffers. The numerical
tracking of the entities (product units, shape carriers and tools) provides detailed
data of the manufacturing.
By using the results of the simulation, the actual values of the key performance
indicators (KPIs) can be calculated. To express the shop floor management’s
goals, we use the following objective functions to be minimalized in a multi-
objective optimization problem:
 The maximum product shortage at the due dates of the production orders;
 The sum of product shortages at the due dates of the production orders;
 The number of tardy production orders;
 The number of set-up activities;
 The maximum number of set-up activities in one shift;
 The number of product types with surplus;
 The sum of product surpluses;
 The maximum product shortage at the end of the time horizon;
 The sum of product shortages at the end of the time horizon;
 The sum of the priorities of tardy production orders;

– 34 –
Acta Polytechnica Hungarica Vol. 14, No. 4, 2017

 The maximum priority of tardy production orders;

 The number of product types with tardiness;
 The maximum product shortage (compared to zero);
 The sum of product shortages (compared to zero);
 The maximum tardiness of production orders;
 The sum of the tardiness of production orders;
 The number of configuration preparations;
 The sum of unused capacity of the production lines.
Every objective function has dynamically changing importance and sets of values
to be taken into consideration. The relative quantification of the currently
examined solution can be performed by comparing it to the best solution found so
far. The mathematical model of this qualification was described in [8].
In every iteration of the searching algorithm, the actual solution has to be
examined to decide whether the candidate fine schedule is feasible from the point
of view of configuration preparation. Each candidate fine schedule requires well-
defined preparatory activities for the tool configurations to be used. These tasks
have to be scheduled on time-varying capacity-constrained parallel resources
(skilled workers) to achieve zero tardiness. If this is possible, then the production
fine schedule is feasible, otherwise it cannot be executed. Successful adaptation of
this approach to practice is highly influenced by the efficiency of the solving
algorithm of this sub-problem.
When the final solution of the production fine scheduling is being prepared, it is
very important to pay special attention to the robustness of the configuration
preparations. In the searching iterations, the algorithm focuses on the
minimization of the maximal lateness. In the end, the final solution can be made
more sophisticated by using an advanced JIT-oriented scheduling algorithm that
adjusts the release time of the preparatory tasks to be as close as possible to the
due dates, considering the necessary preparation times and the prescribed safety
time intervals.
The complexity of the concrete industrial scheduling problem is described in
Section 2. The full (complete) production scheduling problem is handled by using
an advanced multi-objective and multi-operator searching algorithm. In each
iteration of the searching algorithm, the built-in scheduling sub-problem of the
configuration preparations has to be solved. These two scheduling problems
constitute a two-level decision hierarchy, in which each level uses its own specific
optimization model. The solution of the problem created at the higher level gives
input data, constraints and criteria to the lower level. The given set of constraints
is extended with the new constraints of the built-in problem at the lower level of
the hierarchy.

– 35 –
M. Kulcsárné Forrai et al. Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel Resource Scheduling Problem
in the Automotive Industry

The built-in sub-problem is a special scheduling problem. The “job” means one
preparatory task at the lower level. We have to schedule the preparatory tasks
(assembly the configurations of part-adequate tools and shape carriers) required
by manufacturing primary (main) processes. The current production schedule (the
solution of the overall problem) generates dynamically the jobs to be scheduled
and their release times and due dates for the built-in sub-problem (a given set of
configurations is used on the production lines and then a given subset has to be re-
assembled by due dates). In the following parts of the paper, we focus on
modeling and solving this sub-problem.

5 Modeling and Solving the Extended Parallel

Resource Scheduling Problem of Configuration
Preparations

5.1 The Description of the Problem

The scheduling problem of the configuration-preparations (jobs) can be

summarized as follows:
 There are n jobs Ji (i=1, 2, …, n). They are independent of each other and
bound by the earliest starting and the latest completion times.
 The availability time intervals of the resources are defined by a calendar.
This calendar consists of lists. Each resource has its own list, which is
built up from time intervals. Each interval means a shift. The shifts do
not overlap, and they are sorted by the starting times.
 The sets of available resources are classified by the shifts. Each set
consists of uniform parallel resources. The resources mean skilled
workers, who are able to prepare a prescribed number of configurations
separately in shifts.
 The shift calendar is an input data structure and the maximal number of
the executable preparatory tasks (jobs) can differ according to the
calendar.
 The goal is to create a schedule to minimize the maximal tardiness of the
configuration preparations by keeping the restrictions.

– 36 –
Acta Polytechnica Hungarica Vol. 14, No. 4, 2017

5.2 Problem Transformation

The problem described in the previous section is difficult to solve in its original
form. Many papers can be found in the literature on parallel machine scheduling,
but there is no suitable model for the examined time-varying resource availability
features of the current problem. Therefore, we elaborated a problem-
transformation procedure. Using this procedure we transform the problem to an
advanced parallel machine scheduling problem, in which the actual number of the
available machines depends on the time.
The essence of the transformation is the following:
 We give serial numbers in the form of decimal integers to the shifts in the
global system joint to the plant. These serial numbers are called slots (s).
The slots create a connected series that replaces the time axis. The last
slot is denoted by smax.
 The processing time of the configuration preparation cannot be longer
than one shift. This fact comes from the applied technology. Each
processing time takes one (unit value) slot (pi = 1).
 The time data of the jobs are also transformed to slots: the earliest
starting time is converted into the serial number of the next shift (ri), the
due date is converted into the serial number of the target shift (di), and we
search for the completion time in a form that expresses the serial number
of the assigned shift (Ci).
 The lateness of the job is also measured in slots: Li = Ci - di. The
tardiness is also calculated in slots: Ti = max (0. Li).
 The group of assembly workers changes with the set of parallel virtual
machines (resources). Each virtual machine can work on one job at one
time, and each job can only be executed on one virtual machine at a
particular time. The number of the available virtual machines can differ
according to the slot. This time-variable number of machines is denoted
by P(s). The original limitation in the number of executable jobs in the
shift gives the concrete number of the available virtual machines in the
specific slot.
The P(s) values (limits) define the time-varying resource availability constraints.
For example, the limit is 3 in the second shift, and 5 in the seventh shift. In the
transformed model, these constraints define the number P(s) of virtual machines
(special skilled workers) in slot s, so each job has a unit processing time (equal to
the shift length) without loss of generality. For example, one worker team
performs three jobs, or there are three workers and each worker performs
separately one job.

– 37 –
M. Kulcsárné Forrai et al. Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel Resource Scheduling Problem
in the Automotive Industry

Based on the formal description α | β | γ commonly used in the literature (e.g.

[21]) and the symbols introduced above, the new scheduling problem can be
formalized as follows:
P  s  pi  1; ri  integer; di  integer Lmax (1)

5.3 Slack-oriented Solving Algorithm

For solving the transformed scheduling problem of the configuration preparations

(1), we developed a relatively simple algorithm that gives an optimal solution
(Figure 2).
Start

Sort the jobs according to the non-decreasing order of release time

no
Are there any unscheduled jobs? Stop

yes
s := the earliest release time of the unscheduled jobs
H := the set of the unscheduled jobs that are releasable at s
k := 1;

yes
Is set H empty?

no

s := s + 1;
yes
H := the set of the unscheduled jobs
k > P(s)
that are releasable at s;
k := 1;
no

Find the job that belongs to the smallest due date in set H.
th
Schedule the selected job on the k available machine at s.
Remove the scheduled job from set H.
k := k + 1;

Figure 2
Simplified flow chart of the slack-oriented solving algorithm

The key element of the solving algorithm is that we store the actual number P(s)
of the available parallel machines in each slot and schedule the releasable jobs
according to the well-known SDS (Smallest Dynamic Slack first) rule. This rule

– 38 –
Acta Polytechnica Hungarica Vol. 14, No. 4, 2017

selects the releasable job that has the smallest dynamic slack time. The slack of a
given job is equal to the due date minus the sum of the actual time and the
remaining processing time: slacki = max(di−pi−t, 0), where t denotes the actual
time of the decision. As the processing time pi of all jobs is one unit time, in each
situation the job with the smallest dynamic slack can be achieved by using the
EDD (Earliest Due Date first) rule. This means that if we can find a free machine
at an intermediate slot s and there are at least one unscheduled and releasable job,
then we schedule the job Ji with the nearest due date di.
The proposed algorithm creates a solution that minimize the maximum lateness. It
produces an optimal solution in polynomial running time. If an ordered input data
structure is used for jobs (r1 ≤ r2 ≤ ... ≤ rn), the algorithm runs in O(n log n) time.
If the maximum lateness (Lmax) is not greater than zero, then the configuration-
preparation schedule is able to fully serve the execution requirements of the
examined production fine schedule. The algorithm calculates the value Ci and
thereby creates the required solution (schedule) at the same time. The job Ji
(configuration preparation) must be performed in the shift of slot Ci.

5.4 Optimality of the Slack-Oriented Algorithm

To prove the optimality of the presented algorithm, we show that all optimal
solutions can be transformed into the result of the slack-oriented algorithm by
retaining the optimal value of the objective function.
Each job has a serial number (index i) in order of release times (r1 ≤ r2 ≤ ... ≤ rn).
Let Sa be the schedule created by the slack-oriented algorithm. Let Sb be an
optimal schedule. Two vectors store the completion time of the jobs according to
the two solutions (Sa and Sb). Let index x be the smallest job index where the Cx
value (completion time) is different in Sa and Sb. This means that the first x−1 jobs
are processed in the same slot according to Sa and Sb. We suppose that the value of
index x is maximal because our assumption covers the relationship between these
two solutions.
Therefore, the job Jx is carried out in slot Cx according to Sa while the same job Jx
is processed in a later slot according to Sb. In this situation, two possible cases
may be distinguished.
In the first case, a given machine is free in slot Cx according to Sb. Therefore, the
job Jx can be moved to slot Cx on the free machine. This modification does not
spoil the maximal lateness because the target job starts earlier, so the schedule Sb
remains optimal.
In the second case, there is no free machine in slot Cx according to Sb. Therefore,
there exists a job Jy that is carried out in slot Cx according to Sb, but the same job
Jy is carried out in a later slot according to Sa. The due date dy of job Jy is greater

– 39 –
M. Kulcsárné Forrai et al. Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel Resource Scheduling Problem
in the Automotive Industry

than or equal to the due date dx of job Jx. This follows from the fact that the slack-
oriented algorithm scheduled the job Jx in an earlier slot than the job Jy according
to Sa. As the schedule Sb is optimal, we can interchange Jx and Jy in schedule Sb,
and the value of the objective function does not increase.
In both possible cases, the modified schedule Sb remains optimal, and the value x
has increased after modification. This result contradicts the assumption that value
x is maximum, so the modification can continue until the index x is greater than
the number of jobs. Finally, each job Ji is completed in the same slot Ci according
to schedule Sa and Sb. This proves that the slack-oriented algorithm creates an
optimal solution.

5.5 Advanced Scheduling for Just-In-Time Preparation

In practice, one very important expectation of production management is that the

manufacturing control system can fulfill the execution conditions of the released
production fine schedule according to the paradigm “Just-In-Time”. For example,
the needed tools should not be prepared too early, because if some kind of
uncertainty or unexpected events occur between the preparation completion time
and the actual starting time of the inducing operation, then the released production
fine schedule has to be modified, so some preparatory activities will have been
done unnecessarily. Consequently, it is appropriate to schedule the
implementation of each preparatory task as close as possible to the starting time of
the related operation by taking into account the necessary preparation time.
In scheduling the configuration-preparation tasks, the presented slack-oriented
algorithm is focused on the minimization of the maximum lateness. If there is a
solution in which the maximum lateness is not greater than zero, then we can
further refine the schedule so that the JIT principle can be validated. For this
purpose, we developed an advanced algorithm that is able to reduce the maximal
earliness without violating the due dates. The earliness of the job Ji is measured in
slots: Ei = max (0. -Li).
The essence of the JIT-oriented algorithm is the following:
1. Start from the schedule Sa generated by the slack-oriented algorithm.
Create an LDD (Latest Due Date) list by sorting the jobs in the non-
increasing order of due dates.
2. Select the first job from the LDD list.
3. Examine the loading of the slots. In order to find a free machine in a
suitable slot, start from the due date of the selected job and go backward
in time (slot by slot) until a free machine is found or the original slot of
the selected job is reached.

– 40 –
Acta Polytechnica Hungarica Vol. 14, No. 4, 2017

4. If a free machine can be found in a later slot than the original slot, then
break the searching loop and move the selected job into the first-found
free machine of the latest suitable slot.
5. If there is no free machine in the suitable slots, then the selected job
remains in its original place.
6. Delete the selected job from the LDD list. If the LDD list is not empty,
then go to 2, otherwise stop.
This JIT-oriented algorithm converts the schedule Sa into a new feasible schedule
SJIT, where the maximal tardiness is not increased, and the maximal earliness is
reduced. It is easy to see that if a selected job has been moved from its original
slot to a later slot, then its earliness is reduced, but the modification does not
violate the due date or release time restrictions because of the well-defined
boundaries of the searching loop. The modifications are carried out on the jobs in
the non-increasing order of due dates. Therefore, jobs can be moved into the
places which are freed by one of the previous job movements so the algorithm can
achieve the maximum improvement. In the worst case, each job remains in its
original place, and thus the tardiness and earliness are not changed.
The presented JIT-oriented algorithm creates a very sharp schedule in each
situation. To increase the flexibility of the solution, we extended the algorithm
with a set of job-dependent control parameters that specify the safety slack of each
job. In this case, the free machine searching loop of the algorithm starts at an
earlier (time) slot than the due date. For each job, the initial value of the first
examined slot is equal to the difference of the given due date and the given safety
slack control value of the job. This technique is well suited to the sophisticated
safety requirements of the manufacturing control and to creating not only effective
but also robust schedules.

6 Transfering the Theoretical Results into Practice

The scheduling problems outlined in this paper are inspired by a real case study
concerning the plant of Fehrer Hungaria Járműipari Kft. specialized in vehicle seat
products (Mór, Hungary). The firm produces different types of seat elements with
variable series simultaneously. It is typical that the customers set very strict
delivery due dates.
Many enterprise resources planning (ERP) and advanced production scheduling
(APS) systems can be found in the market. Their functionalities cover a very wide
range of different production systems and business environments. However, these
general solutions cannot be applied directly to the operational production
management in the plant under consideration because the created plans are based

– 41 –
M. Kulcsárné Forrai et al. Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel Resource Scheduling Problem
in the Automotive Industry

on aggregated resources and they consider only the primary manufacturing

processes.
We developed a new fine scheduling software based on the presented approach,
models and algorithms. Our software can automatically create short-term
execution plans that cover every important detail and process of the analysed
production system. The generated schedules specify the tasks that the
manufacturing system should perform in the planned time horizon. These detailed
solutions can be executable directly at the shop floor level.
The application has useful graphical user interfaces for supporting user
interactions in order to increase the flexibility of the production fine scheduling
and control process. For example, when the process engineers want to declare
mandatory configurations to be used for test manufacturing in a given time
interval, an advanced editor module is available for them to express their exact
requirements. The automatic scheduler takes into account these constraints. For
this purpose, the solver engine is equipped with blocking techniques that make it
possible to manage the modifiable and the protected configuration exchanges. The
software offers many formats to show the solutions. The most important results
are the fine schedule of the production processes, the schedule of the configuration
preparations, and the values of the performance indicators. The fine schedule can
be displayed as a list of the configuration exchanges with the corresponding data
that specify which carriers and tools have to be attached to which position in
which shift and what kind of product types have to be produced. The schedule of
the configuration preparations declares exactly what pre-assembly activity has to
be carried out in which shift.
The developed production fine scheduling system integrates many new functional
components. The most important functions are as follows:
 Multi-objective production fine scheduling;
 Scheduling the configuration preparations;
 Managing the time-varying availability-constrained resources;
 Managing the shared accessible resources;
 Managing the process engineers’ requirements;
 Managing the product-type dependent stock levels.
The multi-objective approach and these advanced functionalities of the fine
scheduling software effectively help satisfy the requirements of shop floor
management in practice.
For testing and evaluating the proposed models and algorithms, we used real
industrial problems. Practical experience confirms that the production orders can
be fulfilled with minimal tardiness and the manufacturing processes can be
realized with a minimal number of configuration preparations and exchanges. The

– 42 –
Acta Polytechnica Hungarica Vol. 14, No. 4, 2017

accumulation of excessive stock can be avoided and safe levels of product-type

dependent stock can be maintained. The utilization of the production lines can be
increased. The importance of these goals can vary over time, so our software
supports the user in expressing the actual importance of the objective functions by
adjusting the priorities.
Conclusions
In this paper, we summarized our research results on the practice-oriented
modeling and solving of fine scheduling problems related to vehicle seat element
manufacturing. Extended models and advanced scheduling algorithms were
presented to adapt to the concrete requirements of real-life situations by taking
into consideration the specific characteristics of modern manufacturing.
We introduced the full problem and the proposed solving approach (fine
scheduling); in addition the main part of the paper presented the concrete model
and the solving algorithms of a built-in sub-problem, which in itself is a
meaningful and important scheduling problem. This sub-problem focuses on
scheduling only the preparatory activities (jobs) required by the manufacturing
primary (main) processes.
The full production scheduling problem is NP-hard, so we handle this problem by
using an advanced multi-objective and multi-operator searching algorithm to
create near-optimal solutions. In each iteration of the searching algorithm, the
built-in scheduling sub-problem has to be solved in order to decide whether the
current full production schedule is feasible from the point of view of the
configuration preparation. The new model P(s)| pi=1; ri=integer; di=integer |
Lmax and the proposed algorithms are intended to solve only the built-in sub-
problem. This model includes a special resource environment that consists of
time-dependent sets of parallel machines, while a set of independent jobs with
release time constraints, due dates, and unit processing times is considered. To
minimize the maximum lateness, we proposed a new slack-oriented solving
algorithm that produces the optimal solution in polynomial running time. For
supporting the Just-In-Time paradigm in manufacturing control, we introduced a
JIT-oriented version of the scheduling algorithm that is able to reduce the
maximal earliness without violating the due dates. To increase the robustness of
the released schedule, safety slack control parameters can be used in the
scheduling process.
The application of the proposed approach in practice showed that multi-operator
and multi-objective fine scheduling based on simulation can determine what the
actual manufacturing system should perform in the planned time horizon. To solve
scheduling problems in real environments, the primary manufacturing processes
have to be considered, and special attention has to be paid to the preparatory
processes. The achievements and experiences of the software application have
been very positive. The obtained results encourage the application of this

– 43 –
M. Kulcsárné Forrai et al. Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel Resource Scheduling Problem
in the Automotive Industry

approach to other multi-objective optimization problems in production systems

and processes.
The presented new scheduling models and algorithms can be applied effectively to
solving different scheduling problems. One of the possible cases is the scheduling
of manufacturing processes to which time-dependent resource constraints of
assistant processes are connected. Another potential case is the scheduling of
direct manufacturing jobs with due dates on time-dependent sets of parallel
resources.
Our research and development project highlights the importance of modeling for
the treatment of production planning, scheduling and control problems; in addition
it emphasizes the interconnection of theoretical results and practical demands. The
main purpose of this paper was to share our experiences and results with
researchers and industrial practitioners working in the fields of production
information engineering.
Acknowledgements
This research was partially carried out in the framework of the Center of
Excellence of Mechatronics and Logistics at the University of Miskolc.
This research was partially connected to the TAMOP-4.2.1.B-10/2/KONV-2010-
0001 project with support by the European Union, co-financed by the European
Social Fund.
Software development and application of the research results in practice is
supported by Fehrer Hungaria Járműipari Kft. (Mór, Hungary).
References
[1] A. Allahverdi, C. T. Ng, T. C. E. Cheng, M. Y. Kovalyov, A Survey of
Scheduling Problems with Setup Times or Costs, European Journal of
Operational Research, Vol. 187, pp. 985-1032, 2008
[2] A. A. Lazarev, D. I. Arkhipov, F. Werner, Scheduling Jobs with Equal
Processing Times on a Single Machine: Minimizing Maximum Lateness
and Makespan, Optimization Letters, pp. 1-13, 2016
[3] A. Gharbi, M. Haouari, Optimal Parallel Machines Scheduling with
Availability Constraints, Discrete Applied Mathematics, Vol. 148, pp. 63-
87, 2005
[4] C. Koulamas, The Total Tardiness Problem: Review and Extensions,
Operations Research, Vol. 42, pp. 1025-1041, 1994
[5] D. Lei, Multi-Objective Production Scheduling: a Survey, The International
Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 43, Issue 9-10, pp.
926-938, 2009

– 44 –
Acta Polytechnica Hungarica Vol. 14, No. 4, 2017

[6] D. Quadt, H. Kuhn, A Taxonomy of Flexible Flow Line Scheduling

Procedures, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 178, pp. 686-
698, 2007
[7] E. Mokotoff, Parallel Machine Scheduling Problems: a Survey, Asia-
Pacific Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 18, pp. 193-242, 2001
[8] Gy. Kulcsár, F. Erdélyi, A New Approach to Solve Multi-Objective
Scheduling and Rescheduling Tasks, International Journal of
Computational Intelligence Research, Vol. 3, Issue 4, pp. 343-351, 2007
[9] Gy. Kulcsár, F. Erdélyi, Modelling and Solving of the Extended Flexible
Flow Shop Scheduling Problem, Production Systems and Information
Engineering, Vol. 3, pp. 121-139, 2006
[10] Gy. Kulcsár, M. Kulcsárné Forrai, Detailed Production Scheduling Based
on Multi-Objective Search and Simulation, Production Systems and
Information Engineering, Vol. 6, pp. 41-56, 2013
[11] H. Aytug, M. A. Lawley, K. Mckay, S. Mohan, R. Uzsoy, Executing
Production Schedules in the Face of Uncertainties: a Review and Some
Future Directions, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 161, pp.
86-110, 2005
[12] J. Kaabi, Y. Harrath, A Survey of Parallel Machine Scheduling under
Availability Constraints, International Journal of Computer and Information
Technology, Vol. 3, Issue 2, pp. 238-245, 2014
[13] J. Lamothe, F. Marmier, M. Dupuy, P. Gaborit, L. Dupont, Scheduling
Rules to Minimize Total Tardiness in a Parallel Machine Problem with
Setup and Calendar Constraints, Computers & Operations Research, Vol.
39, Issue 6, pp. 1236-1244, 2012
[14] K. Lee, J. Y.-T. Leung, M. L. Pinedo, Scheduling Jobs with Equal
Processing Times Subject to Machine Eligibility Constraints, Journal of
Scheduling, Vol. 14, Issue 1, pp. 27-38, 2011
[15] M. Kulcsárné Forrai, F. Erdélyi, Gy. Kulcsár, A New Extended Model for
Solving Flexible Job Shop Scheduling Problems, Proceedings of the
International Conference on Innovative Technologies, IN-TECH, pp. 325-
328, 2013
[16] M. L. Pinedo, Planning and Scheduling in Manufacturing and Service, 2nd
ed., Springer-Verlag New York, 2009
[17] M. L. Pinedo, Scheduling Theory, Algorithms, and Systems, 3rd ed.,
Springer-Verlag New York, 2008
[18] M. Pinedo, C. Zacharias, N. Zhu, Scheduling in the Service Industries: an
Overview, Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, Vol. 24,
Issue 1, pp. 1-48, 2015

– 45 –
M. Kulcsárné Forrai et al. Modeling and Solving an Extended Parallel Resource Scheduling Problem
in the Automotive Industry

[19] M. X. Weng, J. Lu, H. Ren, Unrelated Parallel Machine Scheduling with

Setup Consideration and a Total Weighted Completion Time Objective,
International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 70, pp. 215-226, 2001
[20] P. Bikfalvi, F. Erdélyi, Gy. Kulcsár, T. Tóth, M. Kulcsárné Forrai, On
Some Functions of the MES Applications Supporting Production
Operations Management, In G. Bognár, T. Tóth (eds.): Applied Information
Science, Engineering and Technology: Selected Topics from the Field of
Production Information Engineering and IT for Manufacturing: Theory and
Practice, (Topics in Intelligent Engineering and Informatics; 7), Berlin:
Springer-Verlag, pp. 103-129, 2014
[21] P. Brucker, Scheduling Algorithms, 5th ed., Springer-Verlag Berlin
Heidelberg, 2007
[22] T. C. E. Cheng, C. C. S. Sin, A State-of-The-Art Review of Parallel-
Machine Scheduling Research, European Journal of Operational Research,
Vol. 47, pp. 271-292, 1990
[23] W. Wang, Flexible Flow Shop Scheduling: Optimum, Heuristics, and
Artificial Intelligence Solutions, Expert Systems, Vol. 22, Issue 2, pp. 78-
85, 2005
[24] Y. Lin, W. Li, Parallel Machine Scheduling of Machine-Dependent Jobs
with Unit-Length, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 156,
Issue 1, pp. 261-266, 2004
[25] Y. Ma, C. B. Chu, C. R. Zuo, A Survey of Scheduling with Deterministic
Machine Availability Constraints, Computers & Industrial Engineering,
Vol. 58, pp. 199-211, 2010

– 46 –