Modelling and simulation of a flexible

manufacturing system with variable

production ratios
Hany M. El-Sayed

Electronics and Communications Engineering Depurtment, Cairo University, Gina, Egypt

Mahmoud A. Younis

Mechanical Engineering Department, Kuwait University, Sufut, Kuwait

Magdi S. Mahmoud

Techno-Economic Division, Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research, Sufut, Kuwuit

A flexible manufacturing system (FM9 is un integrcrted, c,otnplrtpr-~ontroll~~d corzfigrtrcltion qf arrto-

mated muterial handling devices and numerically controlled muchine tools thut can simultaneously
process medium-sized volumes of (1 vuriety c?f‘purt types. This puper uddresses the loading problem
in an FMS with variuhle production ratios. A simulation model is developed .for in~~estigating the
system performunce while minimizing the workloud unhalunce. It is shovt*n thut the developed upprouch
is quite efficient and yields reliable results.

Keywords: flexible manufacturing systems. simulation, production ratios, workload, hierarchical man-
agement structure

netted by a closed pelletized transportation system or

Introduction
Flexible manufacturing systems (FMS) are automated
manufacturing systems consisting of computer-con-
trolled machines linked together with an automated
material handling system and capable of simulta-
neously processing multiple part types.‘,’ FMS are re-
ceiving a growing interest as structures suitable for
increasing machine utilization, reducing manufacturing
lead time and in-process inventory, and providing flex-
ibility in small batch manufacturing.1-9 The aim of an
FMS is to achieve the efficiency of automated mass
production while utilizing the flexibility of a manual
job shop to simultaneously perform machine opera-
tions on several batches of parts.‘j.’
A typical structure of an FMS, schematically shown
in Figure I, consists of a set of workstations intercon-
Address reprint requests to Dr. Mahmoud at the Techno-Economic
Division, Kuwait Institute for Scientific Research, P.O. Box 24885,
13109-Safat, Kuwait.
Received 19 September 1988; accepted 17 February 1989
This paper is developed as part of project ASD-29 in ASDITED-
KlSR
loop conveyor.8 Workstations can be either machining
centers or service facilities where operations (like as-
sembly, testing, washing, drying, load/unloading) are
performed on a variety of parts in a random sequence.
The components of FMS control are implemented
by one or more computers which control the sched-
uling of operations at the workstations4 Through stored
program controllers, local operations can be coordi-
nated at workstations. Due to the potential diversity
of part routing and the variability in operation times,
it is mandatory to give careful consideration to the
overall control of FMS at three levels’,8 of a hierar-
chical management structure shown in Figure 2:
(4 Prerelease planning: the parts to be manufactured
by the system are decided, the constraints on the
operations are identified, and the durations of op-
eration are estimated.
(b) Release or input control: the purpose is to deter-
mine the job sequence and scheduling.
(cl Operational control: here the movement of parts
between machine centers or workstations must be
ensured. If a number of alternatives exist as to
which machine a part should go on, the conflict
must be resolved.

0 1989 Butterworth Publishers Appl. Math. Modelling, 1989, Vol. 13, July 397
Flexible manufacturing system with variable production ratios: H. El-Sayed et al.

locate the limited number of pallets and fixtures of

each fixture type among the selected part types.
(5) Loading problem: the objective is to allocate the
operations and required tools of the selected part
types among the machine groups subject to tech-
nological and capacity constraints on the FMS.
Looked at in this light, a review of the different FMS
0 Buffer
- conveyor
used for matching and assembly is given in Ref. 11.
This paper focuses primarily on the loading problem
Figure 1. FMS with closed transportation network in FMS with variable production ratios. A simulation
model is developed to investigate the FMS perfor-
mance while minimizing the workload unbalance. The
relevance of this problem stems from system consid-
Part selection eration that takes the outcome of the loading problem
Pre-release Planning to feed it into the part routing problem9 with appro-
and priate operational capabilities to be employed at the
Level
workstations. Next, we examine the basic features of
Product MIX
the loading problem.

Loading problem in FMS with variable

production ratios
Loading
Input Control In view of the precedence of the foregoing planning
and problems, we consider that part type selection, ma-
Level chine grouping, and resource allocation problems have
Job Scheduling
been solved. Thus, the loading problem can be spec-
ified as
Select a subset of jobs from the job pool and determine
the relative production ratios, then assign their operations
to the appropriate machines in the ensuing planning period
so as to achieve balancing the assigned machine process-
ing times subject to system constraints.
Operational Control
and
I
Level
The loading problem with known relative ratios of
Operation Processing production has been addressed in Refs. 10, 12, and 13
I I based on different approaches. In Ref. 13 the loading
problem has been viewed as a composite of product
Figure 2. A hierarchical management structure mix and process selection problems. A general frame-
work has been provided in Ref. 10 via mathematical
formulations with focus on the grouping and loading
problems. Balancing the shop workload by controlling
To best utilize the capabilities of an FMS, a well- the release of jobs has been studied in Ref. 12.
organized system setup is required prior to production. This paper addresses the loading problem in FMS
In Ref. 10, a framework is suggested to help a manager with the objective of balancing the workload under
in setting up an FMS for efficient production. Five variable production ratios. In the sequel, we consider
production planning problems were identified: an FMS with m machines grouped into M groups of
identical machines. Each machine in group r has a
(1) Part type selection problem: from a set of part types known tool magazine capacity rr. A set of b operations
that have production requirement, the objective is
is to be performed on p part types in the FMS. Each
to determine a subset for immediate and simulta-
operation is assigned to each machine in some group
neous processing.
r. Let di be the number of tool slots required for op-
(2) Machine grouping problem: partition the machines eration i, and pi,. be the corresponding processing time
into machine groups in such a way that each ma-
on a machine of group r.
chine in a group is capable of performing the same A summary of the subscripts used follows:
set of operations.
(3) Production ratio problem: it is required to deter- operation i= l,...,b
mine the relative ratios at which the part types machine j= l,...,m
selected in problem (1) will be produced. machine group r= l,...,M
(4) Resource allocation problem: the purpose is to al- set of operations k=l,...,K

398 Appl. Math. Modelling, 1989, Vol. 13, July


The decision variables are defined as
if operation i is assigned to group r
1
Xir =
10 otherwise
fori = 1,. . . ,bandr = 1,. . . ,M
ai = production ratio at which part i will be
produced
Thus,
O<a;< I i=
The selection of the decision variables should satisfy
the following system constraints:
(1) Unique-type routing: each operation must be as-
signed to at least one group. We consider that each
part type will be routed to a unique group. Thus,
,g, xir = 1 i=
(2) Tool magazine capacity constraint: the tool slots
capacity relates the number of tool slots required
by the operations assigned to machine (group) to
the total number of slots contained in the machine
tool magazine. Thus,
Flexible manufacturing system with variable production ratios: H. El-Sayed et al.
ternatives would yield the same objective of minimiz-
ing system imbalance. We are now in a position to
express the loading problem with variable production
ratios using the foregoing terminology:
{Determine the values of xjr, Ui (i = 1, . . . , 6,
r= l,..., m), which satisfy (6), or equiva-
lently (7) or (CC),subject to (1) through (5))
The complexity of the problem is due to the mixed
l,...,b nature between the continuous, bounded variable a,,
(I)
and the binary (O-l) variable xi,.
Solution algorithm
One difficulty in the formulation of the constraints (l)-(5)
is with respect to the nonlinear mixed integer con-
straint (4). Fortunately, methods of linearization of the
nonlinear terms containing products of binary variables
l,...,b (2) have been reviewed in Ref. 10 for the tool slot situa-
tions. The main idea is to reduce the nonlinear mixed
integer case to succession of linear constraints that can
be handled by standard techniques. However, the ex-
act solution procedure becomes computationally in-
feasible for realistic prob1ems.‘0,‘3 We propose here an
efficient heuristic algorithm to solve the loading prob-
lem. The rationale behind the heuristic algorithm is to

r=
5 d;Xi,
I
9 7jr r= l,...,M
separate the continuous variable from the binary vari-
able in numerical computation and to iterate on both
variables within different processing loops. By this way
Since several operations may require the same tools, the minimization of the workload unbalance becomes
the tool slot constraint may take the form’” relatively simple over each iteration. The results will
be the best pattern of production ratios and of assigning
,t d[Xjr - ‘5’ 5 ~‘ili?Xi,lXIy operations to machine groups. The algorithm is two-
;,=I i:=i,+l level as structured in Figure 3 and is summarized be-
h-2 h-l low:
+xX5 Wi,i2i,Xi,,-,~i,,.Xi,,- -
;,=I,=iz+Ii~=iz+I Level I
+. . ‘57, (4) Step 1. Suggest initial production ratios {a;‘} such
that constraint (1) is met. Set the iteration counter at
where wiL is the number of slots saved as a result of z = 1.
having common tools when operations i and k are as-
signed to the same machine.
The workload assigned to a machine in group r is
RFTFRMINE
Li- = 5 aiPirXir (5) The Feasible Loading
;_,

LEVEL 2 Pattern for Mlnimum

The objective of balancing workloads may be ex-
pressed in terms on one of the following alterna- Workload Unbalance
tives: I0
a
min (6)
,+,““:-, IL, - LJ ( %I I a, )
h= I....,m w
m-l m
DFTERMINE
minx 2 ILj-Lhly y>O (7)
;=I h=;+l
The production
m-1 m
LEVEL I
min 2 c ILj - Lh12 (8) Ratios
j=l h=j+l

Since L, is a measure of the relative utilization of

machine r, it is readily evident that the foregoing al- Figure 3. A two-level structure

Appl. Math. Modelling, 1989, Vol. 13, July 399

Flexible manufacturing system with variable
Step 2. Convey the values of {a;} to level 2 to find
a feasible loading pattern that minimizes the unbal-
ance. If such a feasible pattern is found, go to Step 4;
otherwise go to Step 3.
Step 3. If z = 1 select another initial ratio {a;} re-
ducing one or more of the ratios, and go to Step 2. If
z > 1, stop.
Step 4. Let r’ be the least loaded group in the pat-
tern, and let i’ be the job assigned to it. If operations
of more than one job are routed to Y’, select 1 as the
one with no operations assigned to the heavily loaded
group. Let uF+ ’ = a~ + Au such that constraint (1) is
satisfied.
Step 5. Set z, + z + 1 and go to Step 2.
Level 2
Step 1. For each job, consider all possible routes,
and for each route sum up the processing time on each
machine. The result will be a list for each machine
indicating the total time for each job and its route.
Make sure that constraint (2) is met.
Step 2. Determine the two least loaded groups in
the last step of Level 1 (two arbitrary groups in first
step). Select a job and its route such that no other job
and route would increase the workload of both groups.
Step 3. Test the feasibility of tool slot constraint (3)
and (4) and whether the workload of groups exceeds
the acceptable limit. If the answer is acceptable go to
Step 4. Otherwise go to Step 5.
Step 4. Assign the selected job to the specified route
and delete processing times related to it from all lists.
Go to Step 5.
Step 5. Delete to job route from the lists of the
groups being examined.
Step 6. Repeat Steps 2-5 until all the jobs are ex-
hausted.
Step 7. Go back to Level 1.
production ratios: H. El-Sayed et al.
We next present a typical case study of the devel-
oped algorithm.
Simulation studies
We consider an FMS in a machine tool plant. The parts
being machined on this system are three sizes of hous-
ing for gear boxes of turret lathes. Each type of gear
box housing is composed of two parts: a gear box case
and a cover. The parts arrive at the machining facility
in rough casting form and leave as an assembled matched
pair. There are three parts types: gear box cases, cov-
ers, and assemblies, each requiring four consecutive
operations (b = 4). The FMS consists of 10 machines
(m = 10) partitioned into four machine groups (M =
4). The groups are composed of three 4-axis milling
machining centers, three 3-axis drilling machining cen-
ters, two turret lathes, and two small center lathes. All
machines are considered to have a limited slot capacity
of five.
All of the four groups can process the four opera-
tions required by each part. The processing times of
operations on different groups are shown in Table 1,
and are obtained assuming a uniform distribution from
6 to 30 min. This reflects the fact that all machines are
identical in production operations. For each part type,
three operations need a single tool slot, and the fourth
operation is assumed to require two slots. Finally, the
maximum production demand is assumed to be 10 parts
of each type, and the group workload is not to exceed
8 h. The developed two-level heuristic procedure has
been coded for computer simulation on an IBM PC/AT
machine operating at 15 MHz, using PASCAL lan-
guage by Borland. I4 We have used Turbo PASCAL
version 4.0 and the associated toolbox of numerical
methods.ls The program has been structured into 12
procedures composed of 973 lines and took 1.3 s for
completion. Each simulation run covers a week of five
S-h workload shifts (equivalent to 2400 min) of simu-
lated time.
The application of the two-level computational al-
gorithm to the above system yields the results shown
in Table 2. In Step 4 of Level 1 an incremental change
Au = 0.1 was used in the iterations. The algorithm

Table 1. Processing times

Required
Job Operation tollslots Group1 Group2 Group3 Group4

1 1 1 17.8 10.9 13.8 10.3

2 1 14.6 13.8 21.0 30.0
3 1 21.7 24.9 27.5 27.4
4 2 16.7 26.7 11.3 20.3
2 1 1 26.1 9.2 30.0 23.6
2 1 29.7 19.5 8.6 29.2
3 1 27.8 29.9 15.3 19.1
4 2 11.1 15.1 13.8 29.0

1 1 1 26.8 21.1 29.5 20.4

2 1 15.5 9.1 6.4 12.9
3 1 18.1 19.4 17.6 11.3
4 2 21.8 27.3 18.4 15.1

400 Appl. Math. Modelling, 1989, Vol. 13, July

 Flexible manufacturing system with variable production ratios: H. El-Sayed et al.

Table 2. Summary of computer simulation workload unbalance. An efficient two-level heuristic

Group
algorithm has been proposed to solve the loading prob-
Production workloads Alternative Alternative lem. The iterative process has been designed to go back
Iteration ratios (min) (6) (8) and forth between the two levels of the algorithm in
1 0.5 334.5 225 10.25
order to find the optimal load balance between work-
0.5 428.5 stations. The algorithm has permitted an increase in
0.5 311.5 the production ratios accompanied by a decrease in
0.5 203.5 the load unbalance. However, the reduction was not
2 0.6 334.5 204.7 9.003 monotonic due to the discrete nature of the second-
0.5 428.5 level decisions for which the optimal routing is found
0.5 373.8 to be sensitive. The results of simulating a typical case
0.5 223.8
study have been compared with the simulation package
0.7 393.4 132 4.507 SIMFACTORY and found to be encouraging.
0.5 322.5
0.5 417.5
0.5 285.5
References
0.8 334.5 94 3.01
0.6 428.5 I Dallery, Y. On modelling flexible manufacturing systems using
0.6 420.8 closed queueing networks. Large Scale Systems 1986. 11,
0.5 324.0 109-I 19
2 Menga, G., Bruno, G., Conterno, B., and Dato, M. A. Mod-
0.8 449.6 134.1 4.81
elling FMS by closed queueing network analysis methods. lEEE
0.6 387.0
Trans. Components, Hybrids and Manufacturing Technology.
0.6 447.5
1984, CHMT-7, 241-248
0.5 315.5
3 Buzacott, J. A. Optimal operating rules for automated manu-
6 0.8 411.6 75.3 1.21 facturing systems. IEEE Trans. Automatic Control 1982, AC-
0.6 411.2 27, 80-86
0.6 462.6 4 Young, R. E. Software control strategies for use in imple-
0.7 387.2 menting flexible manufacturing systems. Industrial Engineer-
ing 1981. 23, 88-96
7 0.8 411.6 27.3 0.165
Wilhem, W. E. and Shin, H. H. Effectiveness of alternate
0.6 411.2
operations in a flexible manufacturing system. Int. J. Produc-
0.6 431.3
tion Research 1985, 23, 65-79
0.7 404.0
6 DuPont, C. and Gatelmand. R. A survey of flexible manufac-
8 0.9 411.6 51.3 0.533 turing systems. J. Manufacturing Systems 1982, 1, I-16
0.6 462.6 7 Eversheim, W. and Hermann, P. Recent trends in flexible au-
0.6 431.3 tomated manufacturing. J. Manufacturing Systems 1982. 1,
0.7 431.4 139-148
8 Buzacott, J. A. and Shanthikumai, J. G. Models for under-
standing flexible manufacturing systems. AIIE Tran.sactions
took eight iterations to converge within an accuracy 1980. 12, 339-350
9 Kimemia, J. and Gershwin. S. B. Flow optimization in flexible
of 10P4. The execution time was 9.3 s. As seen in Tuble
manufacturing systems. Int. J. Production Research 1985, 23,
2, the algorithm has permitted an increase in the pro- 81-96
duction ratios accompanied by a decrease in the load 10 Stecke, K. E. Formulation and solution of nonlinear integer
unbalance. It is to be observed, however, that this production planning problems for flexible manufacturing sys-
reduction is not monotonic due to the discrete nature tems. Manugement Science 1983, 29, 273-288
II Arbel, A. and Seidmann, A. Performance evaluation of flexible
of second-level decisions.
manufacturing systems. IEEE Trans. Systems, Man and Cy-
Using the same production arrangement, the routing bernetics 1984, SMC-14, 606-617
obtained in iteration 7 of Table 2 has been implemented 12 Blackstone, J. H., Phillips, D. T.. and Hogg, G. L. A state-
on a discrete simulation using a SIMFACTORY soft- of-the-art survey of dispatching rule for manufacturingjob shop
ware. l6 Almost identical results were obtained in terms operation. Int. J. Production Research 1982, 20, 27-39
of flow rates and loading patterns. 13 Nof, S. Y., Barash. M. M., and Solberg, J. J. Operational
control of item flow in versatile-manufacturing systems. lnt.
J. Production Research 1979, 17, 479-488
Conclusions 14 Borland Int. Turbo PASCAL 4.0. Owner’s Handbook, 1987
15 Borland Int. Turbo PASCAL Toolbox: Numerical Methods.
A simulation model has been developed to investigate Owner’s Handbook, 1987
the performance of a flexible manufacturing system 16 CACI Products Company, SIMFACTORY with Animation;
with variable production ratios while minimizing the Version I .4 User’s Manual, 1988

Appt. Math. Modelling, 1989, Vol. 13, July 401