Accepted Manuscript

A coupled process configuration, lot-sizing and scheduling model for production

planning in the molded pulp industry

Karim Pérez Martínez, Reinaldo Morabito, Eli Angela Vitor Toso

PII: S0925-5273(18)30283-4
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.018
Reference: PROECO 7102

To appear in: International Journal of Production Economics

Received Date: 21 November 2017

Revised Date: 9 June 2018
Accepted Date: 15 July 2018

Please cite this article as: Martínez, Karim.Pé., Morabito, R., Toso, E.A.V., A coupled process
configuration, lot-sizing and scheduling model for production planning in the molded pulp industry,
International Journal of Production Economics (2018), doi: 10.1016/j.ijpe.2018.07.018.

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to
our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all
legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A coupled process configuration, lot-sizing and scheduling model for production

planning in the molded pulp industry

Karim Pérez Martı́neza,∗, Reinaldo Morabitoa , Eli Angela Vitor Tosob

a Production Engineering Department, Federal University of São Carlos. Rod. Washington Luı́s - Km 235, CEP: 13565-905. São Carlos,
São Paulo - Brazil
b Production Engineering Department, Federal University of São Carlos. Rod. João Leme dos Santos (SP-264), Km 110 - Bairro do Itinga,

CEP: 18052-780. Sorocaba, São Paulo - Brazil

PT
RI
Abstract

This paper proposes an application-oriented model for a coupled process configuration, lot-sizing and scheduling problem

SC
in the molded pulp industry. In this case, products are obtained by alternative process configurations, which can produce

one or more types of product simultaneously. A process configuration consists of defining a feasible setup state for the

U
main components of the production line, i.e., the molding machine, where molds to shape the products are attached,

and a set of conveyors, where products are transported. Production quantities depend on the configurations selected and
AN
the time that each one is used over the planning horizon. The number of possible configurations is large and sensitive

to the characteristics of the production environment, the size of the molding machine and the number of conveyors.
M

Therefore, determining all possibilities beforehand is a challenging and extensive task. We propose a novel formulation

to support production decisions in molded pulp companies, which generates the process configurations implicitly at the
D

same time that lot-sizing and sequencing decisions are made. This optimization problem involves challenging operational

and synchronization constraints, and sequencing decisions which include three types of setups. The objective is to
TE

minimize the total setup, inventory and backlogging costs. Several sets of instances based on real data and market

information were tested. Computational experiments using a commercial Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) solver
EP

show the capability of this approach to represent the problem decisions and to provide production schedules for different

production environments. Comparisons with real schedules and others formulations show the practical savings and the
C

advantages of this formulation over enumerating modeling approaches. A simplified version of this new formulation is

also proposed to solve more efficiently particular problem instances. In addition, a heuristic solution strategy is proposed
AC

to find feasible production plans fro all data sets in shorter computing times.

Keywords: lot-sizing and scheduling, process planning, production planning, molded pulp industry, mixed integer

programming

∗ Correspondingauthor
Email addresses: karim@dep.ufscar.br (Karim Pérez
Martı́nez), morabito@ufscar.br (Reinaldo Morabito),
eli@ufscar.br (Eli Angela Vitor Toso)

Preprint submitted to International Journal of Production Economics June 7, 2018

 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

A coupled process configuration, lot-sizing and scheduling model for production

planning in the molded pulp industry

PT
Abstract

This paper proposes an application-oriented model for a coupled process configuration, lot-sizing and scheduling problem

RI
in the molded pulp industry. In this case, products are obtained by alternative process configurations, which can produce

one or more types of product simultaneously. A process configuration consists of defining a feasible setup state for the

SC
main components of the production line, i.e., the molding machine, where molds to shape the products are attached,

and a set of conveyors. Production quantities depend on the configurations selected and the time that each one is

used over the planning horizon. The number of possible configurations is large and sensitive to the characteristics of

U
the production environment, the size of the molding machine and the number of conveyors. Therefore, determining
AN
all possibilities beforehand is a challenging and extensive task. We propose a novel formulation to support production

decisions in molded pulp companies, which generates the process configurations implicitly at the same time that lot-sizing

and sequencing decisions are made. This optimization problem involves challenging operational and synchronization
M

constraints, and sequencing decisions which include three types of setups. The objective is to minimize the total setup,

inventory and backlogging costs. Several sets of instances based on real data were tested. Computational experiments
D

using a commercial Mixed Integer Programming (MIP) solver show the capability of this approach to represent the
TE

problem decisions and to provide production schedules for different production environments. Comparisons with real

schedules and others formulations show the practical savings and the advantages of this formulation over enumerating

modeling approaches. A simplified version of this new formulation is also presented to solve more efficiently particular
EP

problem instances. In addition, a heuristic solution strategy is proposed to find feasible production plans for all data

sets in shorter computing times.

C

Keywords: lot-sizing and scheduling, process planning, production planning, molded pulp industry, mixed integer
AC

programming

1. Introduction the production quantities of each product and the timing

that each lot is produced over a limited planning hori-

Production planning typically includes decisions about
zon. When setup operations involve relevant costs and
assigning resources to production activities, so that market
10 times, making lot-sizing and sequencing decisions simulta-
requirements and demand are met efficiently. Lot-sizing is
neously may guide to important savings. This integrated
5 one of the most studied problems in the literature con-
problem comprises decisions about determining the pro-
cerning production planning. It focuses on determining

Preprint submitted to International Journal of Production Economics June 9, 2018

 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

duction quantities of each product, when they should be tion of molded pulp products and provide sector informa-

produced and how they should be sequenced, in order to tion for manufacturers, customers and organizations re-

15 meet the demand at the lowest cost. Some comprehen- lated to the development of molded pulp products [28, 11].

sive reviews about lot sizing problems and the integrated 50 Technical reports highlight a steady growth in demand for

lot-sizing and scheduling problem can be found in Drexl molded pulp packaging. According to projections, global

and Kimms [10], Karimi et al. [32], Guner Goren et al. sales of molded pulp products were valued at more than

PT
[24], Guimares et al. [23], Copil et al. [8]. US$ 6,000 million in 2015 and are predicted to reach nearly

20 This paper studies the production planning decisions in US$ 11,500 million by 2026 [17]. These market projections

RI
the molded pulp industry. In this context, the production 55 and the complexity of the production planning activities

lines can be set up according to alternative process config- instigate the development of optimization tools to support

SC
urations which can produce different products simultane- the decision making process in molded pulp industry. Fur-

ously. The mix of products and quantities depend on the thermore, production planning decisions are demanded to

25 configurations selected and the time that each one is used. be efficient in order to be economically sustainable, as this

U
The configuration changeovers require extra time to be ex- 60 industry usually involves a high machinery investment and
AN
ecuted, therefore setup times and costs are relevant for the products with low market value.

production planning. Then, the problem decisions include Many applications of lot-sizing and scheduling problems

determining which process configurations are used, how in different industries can be found in the production plan-
M

30 long they are used for and how they should be sequenced ning literature. These studies highlight the importance of

to minimize the overall costs. approaching real problems using mathematical models to
D

65

The molded pulp industry is an important sector that represent the decision making process and to include par-
TE

produces package solutions from discarded papers and car- ticular technological constraints of the production environ-

toon. This industry is well known for producing egg boxes ments. Some of these applications include the dairy indus-

and trays, but the applications go beyond. Products are try [34], brewery [4], soft drinks [13, 41], the tobacco in-
EP

35

100% recyclable, unaffected by extreme in temperatures 70 dustry [38], the glass industry [2, 42, 12], foundries [3, 26],

and involve lower costs than plastic and polystyrene pack- the chemical industry [44], pulp and paper [39, 15, 18],
C

ages. The production equipment and machines used in- animal feed [43, 7], tire manufacturing [29], among others.
AC

volve an important investment, yet they are very flexible Some discussions and insights of the industrial extensions

40 and allow producing a wide range of products. Applica- of lot-sizing and scheduling problems can be found in Jans

tions in this industry include fruit packages, drink carriers, 75 and Degraeve [30], Clark et al. [6], Almada-Lobo et al. [1].

hospital disposable products, packaging solutions for cos- Industrial applications which integrate lot-sizing with

metics, electronic, medical devices and many others. other optimization decisions also appear in the production

International organizations such as the International planning literature. We particularly focus on integrated

45 Molded Fiber Association - IMFA and the European Moulded problems which combine decisions about processes selec-

Fibre Association - EMFA promote the use and produc- 80 tion and lot-sizing. Similar to the molded pulp industry,

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

production planning decisions in other manufacturing en-115 decisions are especially important for this industry, as the

vironments depend on the choice of processes or configu- number of alternatives is extensive and challenging to be

rations to produce the demanded items. A given product defined.

can be produced by one or more alternative processes and In our previous study [36], we proposed a mathematical

85 a single process can produce one or more products of dif- model which selects the configurations by which products

ferent types simultaneously [31]. Commonly, a list of al-120 are obtained at the same time as lot-sizing and scheduling

PT
ternative processes is considered as input data, so that the decisions are made. However, this modeling approach re-

main decisions include selecting the processes to be used quires a pre-processing procedure to define settings be-

RI
(among the ones defined as input), determining how long forehand, which are required as input data to determine

90 or how many times each process is used for and how they the process configurations to be used over the planning

SC
should be sequenced. 125 horizon. This formulation and its dependence on the pre-

A classical problem that combines process selection and processing stage may affect the capability to solve more

lot-sizing decisions is the cutting stock problem, where the general problems, such as those that imply more complex

U
amount of produced items depends on the number of times and larger production environments in the same industry.
AN
95 that each cutting pattern is used [20, 21, 9]. Other sim- To overcome this limitation, this paper proposes an alter-

ilar problems appear in foundries [33], where production130 native and more general modeling approach, which implic-

quantities depend on the choice of sieves and the furnaces’ itly develops the process configurations to be used at the
M

configurations; lumber companies [19], where the amounts same time as lot-sizing and scheduling decisions are made.

and mix of products depend on the configurations of the The contributions of this paper are twofold. First, a
D

100 drying and finishing stages; refineries [22, 40], where pro- novel and general model (GM) to represent an integrated
TE

duction quantities depend on the operation modes set up135 production planning problem in molded pulp companies

in the production units; offset printing industry [5], where is proposed. This formulation, which combines decisions

the mix and production quantities depend on the designs of process configuration, lot-sizing and scheduling, is able
EP

allocated to the printing-plate slots; and in the molded to represent the problem for varied production environ-

105 pulp packaging industry [35, 36], which is the application ments in the same industry, with different molding equip-
C

studied in this paper, where the mix and production quan-140 ment and production line layouts. This formulation in-
AC

tities depend on the combination of molds attached to the cludes technical constraints, such as product incompati-

molding machine. bilities and synchronization of different production equip-

Different from the applications mentioned above, the ment. Although the modeling approach here is specifically

110 approach proposed here integrates process configuration proposed for the molded pulp industry, we believe that it

decisions to the process selection, lot-sizing and scheduling145 provides a guideline for modeling production decisions in

decisions. It implies that the configurations to be used are other manufacturing environments. Potential applications

generated implicitly, instead of considering them as input include production systems where two or more equipment

data. Integrated approaches capable of dealing with these of the same production line must be set up synchronously,

3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

and/or changeovers may include more than one setup op- attached to the molding machine. Next, the semifinished

150 eration. Second, this paper presents some insights about products are automatically placed from the molding ma-

the savings that may be achieved in practice by using this chine to a set of conveyors, which transports them to the

integrated approach, the complexity of the optimization185 drying step, and next for sorting and packing. All the

problem and its combinatorial behavior for different data stages take place in a continuous process, without inter-

sets. We compare the model solutions with real schedules, mediate inventory.

PT
155 and perform computational experiments for different sets All the equipment in the production line, i.e., the mold-

of instances to show how the number of possible config- ing machine, conveyors, presses and others, must be set

RI
urations grows up and, therefore, enumerating modeling190 up synchronously to guarantee a succeed production pro-

approaches became limited. In addition, we also present cess. The configuration of the molding machine, i.e., the

SC
a simplified version of this new formulation that only rep- combination of molds attached to it, define the alternative

160 resents the problem properly for some specific cases, but process configurations by which a mix of products is ob-

it is able to solve more efficiently these particular prob- tained. However, these configurations must satisfy some

U
lem instances, and MIP heuristics based on relax-and-fix195 technological and synchronization constraints to be feasi-
AN
and fix-and-optimize algorithms to find good feasible pro- ble in practice.

duction plans in shorter computing times for all problem The optimization problem studied here comprises inte-

instances. grating three decisions: determining the process configu-

M

165

This paper is organized as follows: the next section de- rations to be used, how long they should be used for and

scribes the optimization problem and planning decisions.200 how they should be sequenced. The process configurations
D

Section 3 presents the general formulation proposed (GM- consist of alternative combinations of molds attached to
TE

IPCLS), the simplified model proposed for particular prob- the molding machine. This combination of molds is called

170 lem instances (SM-IPCLS) and an illustrative example. (in practice) molding pattern. A molding pattern specifies

Section 4 describes a MIP-based strategy to solve the pro- which types of molds and how many molds of each type
EP

posed formulation and provide feasible solutions. Section205 are attached to the molding machine. Thus, the produc-

5 presents the results of the computational experiments. tion quantities depend on the molding patterns used, how
C

Finally, Section 6 provides the concluding remarks and long each pattern is used for and the speed of the molding
AC

175 comments on future research. machine, which is considered as a parameter of the prob-

lem. Sections 2.1, 2.2 and 2.3 describe how the problem
2. Problem description and planning decisions 210 decisions are made, respectively.

The production process in molded pulp industry com- 2.1. Process configuration decisions
prises steps such as blending, molding, drying, sorting and Defining process configurations, i.e., molding patterns,
packing. First, the pulp is made by blending the raw ma- consists of specifying how many molds of each type are
180 terials mainly consisting of paper fibers and water. Af- attached to the molding machine. A typical production
terward, the pulp is shaped according to the set of molds215 line in molded pulp companies uses rotary molding ma-

4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

chines, which consists of several faces where molds must Conveyors:

Faces: =
= 1, 2
∪ D D D
= 1,3,5 ∪ 2,4,6 C A B C =5
D D D
be attached. Other molding equipment can be considered B C A B =3
=
D D D
A B C A =1
as special cases, e.g., a vertical molding machine which = 1,2,3,4,5,6 A B C A B C A B C A B C
A B C
D D D =6
has a single face. The combination of molds attached to =1
A
A
B
B
C
C
=2
D D D =4
A B C

220 the machine must satisfy some technological and synchro- D D D =2

=2 A B C
A B C
A B C
D D D D
nization constraints to ensure that the upcoming produc- D D
D
D
D
A B C

PT
D D A B C

tion stages are carried out properly. The main constraints

include: (i) the total number of molds available of each Figure 1: Typical large scale production line in molded pulp pack-
aging industry

RI
type is limited; (ii) the total capacity of the machine faces

225 must be used, so there must be as many attached molds250 packaging, are set up according to this specific sequence.

SC
as possible; (iii) some products cannot be produced simul- Otherwise, these stages cannot be executed properly and

taneously because of incompatibilities of color and weight; the production process fails.

(iv) products must be transported orderly on the convey- In order to generate molding patterns accurately, the

U
ors to ensure that upcoming production steps are properly proposed formulation considers a production line composed
AN
230 carried out. 255 by one rotary molding machine and a set of K conveyors,

Figure 1 is presented to further describe the synchro- which must be set up properly and synchronously. The

nization constraints (iv). It illustrates a production line machine consists of a set F of faces of width L, where
M

composed by a molding machine of six faces and two con- molds of one or more types are attached. Products ob-

veyors. Note on the right side that the molding pattern tained by the molds attached to each machine face are
D

235 attached comprises 9 molds for product D (attached to260 exclusively unloaded to a specific conveyor according to
TE

faces 2, 4, and 6), 4 molds for product A, 4 molds for the layout of the production line. Each conveyor k ∈ K is

product B and 4 molds for product C (attached to faces dedicated to a subset of faces in F , denoted by Fk , where
[ \
1, 3 and 5). The products shaped by these molds are un- F = Fk and Fk = ∅ (see Figure 1). We refer to
EP

k∈K k∈K
loaded alternately to the conveyors to keep the process the set Fk as the machine faces for conveyor k.

240 synchrony, so that products obtained by molds in faces 1,265 Each conveyor k can be divided into lanes, in which the
C

3 and 5 are unloaded to conveyor k = 1, while products products are allocated after the molding step. The num-
AC

obtained by the molds in faces 2, 4, and 6 are unloaded to ber and the width of these lanes are variables, since they

conveyor k = 2. Note that the products are transported depend on the products to be produced over the planning

orderly in the conveyors for all the rotations of the mold- horizon. Therefore, we consider that conveyors can be set

245 ing machine, e.g., in conveyor k = 1, product A is always270 up according to a set E of possible arrangements. The set

in the first lane, product B in the second lane and product of possible arrangements is defined in advance according

C in the third lane. It is mandatory that products are to the width of products and the width of the conveyors.

transported orderly, i.e., only one type of product on each An arrangement specifies how many lanes are set up on

conveyor lane, since next production steps, as sorting and the conveyor (|Pe |) and the width of each lane (gpe ). Each

5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Arrangements: 𝐸 = {1,2} products are allocated to the lanes of a conveyor, hence

Set of lanes 𝑃1 = {1,2,3} Set of lanes 𝑃2 = {1,2}
the combination of molds must ensure that products are
𝑝 =1 𝑝=2 𝑝=3
𝑝=1 𝑝=2
not mixed up on the lanes eventually.
Arrangement 𝑒 = 1 Arrangement 𝑒 =2
305 A specific logical relationship between the setup state
𝑔11 𝑔21 𝑔31
𝑔12 𝑔22
of the conveyors and the machine faces must be defined to
Lane width (𝑔𝑝1 ) Lane width (𝑔𝑝2 )
generate feasible molding patterns. Note that if conveyor

PT
Figure 2: Possible arranges for a conveyor (Set E) k transports only one type of product, i.e., the same prod-

uct is assigned to all its lanes, the faces for this conveyor
275 lane of the conveyor must be filled by one single product

RI
310 Fk are full of molds of this type. Conveyor k = 2 in Fig-
and empty lanes are not allowed. For modeling purposes,
[ ure 1 illustrates this case. As product D is the only one
we also use a general set of lanes P defined as P = Pe .

e∈E
This set represents the maximum number of lanes that can
be configured in the conveyor, regardless of the arrange-
SC
transported by this conveyor, there is no conflict with the
number of molds attached to faces Fk , since only products
of type D are unloaded to the conveyor. In this case, the

U
280 ment set up.
315 number of molds of type D is as many as it is possible to
AN
Figure 2 illustrates two possible arrangements for a
attach to faces f ∈ F2 .
conveyor (E = {1, 2}). It can be observed that the first
In cases where different products are transported on
arrangement e = 1 consists of setting up three lanes (P1 =
the same conveyor, the combination of molds attached
M

{1, 2, 3}) of width g11 , g21 and g31 , respectively. It means

to the corresponding faces must satisfy some logical con-
285 that at most three different types of product can be trans-
straints to keep the process synchrony. We demand that
D

320

ported simultaneously by this conveyor, each one allocated

the number of molds for a specific product attached to
to a different lane. Similarly, arrangement e = 2 can trans-
TE

the subset of machine faces Fk is exactly an integer mul-

port at most two different types of products of width g12
tiple of the number of lanes assigned to this product on
and g22 , respectively. Therefore, we define the setup state
the corresponding conveyor k. Conveyor k = 1 in Figure
EP

290 of a conveyor by deciding which arrangement is configured

325 1 represents an example of this case. Note that 4 molds
and which product is assigned to each lane. Note that this
A, 4 molds B and 4 molds C are attached to the faces for
C

ensures that products will be transported orderly, i.e., only

conveyor k = 1 in such a way that, for every rotation of
one type of product in each lane, as required to keep the
AC

the molding machine, 4 products of each type A, B and C

synchrony with other equipment in the production line.
are produced. These products are therefore arranged on
295 At the same time as conveyors are configured, the com-
330 the conveyor, so that product A is always transported in
bination of molds attached to the machine faces must be
the first lane, product B in the second lane and product
determined. Modeling the synchronization between these
C in the third lane.
two equipment is a challenging task, as the combination

of molds must ensure that products are transported prop- 2.2. Lot-sizing decisions

300 erly on the conveyors for many rotations of the molding Production quantities depend on the molding patterns
machine. This is particularly important when different335 used, the time that each pattern is used and the speed
6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Speed Pattern 1 Time Pattern 2 Time Total production 3. Mathematical formulation

12 molds for A 8 molds for A 6,000 units of A
300 rot./h 12 molds for B 1h 8 molds for B 1h 6,000 units of B
8 molds for C 2,400 units of C
This section presents the general mathematical model
Table 1: Example of lot sizing decisions
to represent the decisions described above. Section 3.2 de-

scribes a simplified version of the general formulation to

of the molding machine. For instance, it considers that
370 deal only with particular problem instances. An illustra-
molding patterns 1 and 2 are used for 1 hour each, in
tive example is also presented in Section 3.3.

PT
a molding machine of 300 rotations per hour, as Table 1

presents. Pattern 1 consists of 12 molds for product A and 3.1. Integrated process configuration, lot-sizing and sche-

RI
340 12 molds for product B, whereas Pattern 2 consists of 8 duling problem (IPCLS)
molds of type A, 8 molds of type B and 8 molds of type C.
This formulation considers one single stage and one sin-

SC
In this case, the total product quantities are 6,000 units
375 gle production line. Multiple products are produced over
of products A, 6,000 units of product B and 2,400 units of
a multi-period planning horizon. Each product is obtained
product C.
by one mold, and one mold can produce only one product.

U
345 The speed of the molding machine is known, e.g., the
Backlogging is allowed to attend the demand, subject to
AN
maximum capacity of this equipment. Hence, lot-sizing
a variable cost. The time structure in this formulation is
decisions in this formulation consist of deciding how long
380 represented as in the classical General Lot sizing and Sche-
each generated pattern is used over the planning horizon.
M

duling Model - GLSP [16]. Every time period t ∈ T , i.e.,

2.3. Sequencing decisions one week, is divided into a set of sub-periods St . Only one
D

pattern is generated and used in each sub-period, there-

350 Since molding patterns are generated into the modeling
fore several molding patterns can be used to produce the
approach, setup times and costs must also be determined.
TE

385 demanded quantities for each period. The following pa-

We consider three different types of setups. Setup I is re-
rameters are required.
lated to stopping/starting the production line. It is done
Sets and indices:
EP

every time that at least one mold is attached or detached

T set of time periods (indexed by t)
355 to set a different molding pattern. Setup II is related to
S set of sub-periods (indexed by s)
C

attaching and detaching molds to the machine faces. The

St set of sub-periods in each period t
total time for Setup II is proportional to the total number
AC

N set of products (indexed by i, i0 )

of molds exchanged. Finally, Setup III is related to ar-
O set of incompatible pairs of product (i, i0 )
rangement changeovers on the conveyors. This is usually
F set of machine faces (indexed by f )
360 the longest setup operation and implies the configuration

of the lanes according to the width of the products that

will be obtained by the new molding pattern. If the new

molding pattern includes molds of the same width as the

previous one, then no adjustment is required and therefore,

365 setup times and costs for Setup III are equal to 0.
7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

K set of conveyors (indexed by k) Decision variables for process configuration:

Fk set of machine faces for conveyor k zkes 1, if conveyor k is set up for arrangement e

E set of possible arrangements for the conveyors in sub-period s; 0, otherwise

(indexed by e, e0 ) yipks 1, if product i is assigned to lane p of

Pe set of lanes in a conveyor according to conveyor k in sub-period s; 0, otherwise

arrangement e (indexed by p) xif s number of molds for product i attached to

PT
[
P set of lanes in a conveyor, i.e., P = Pe face f in sub-period s
e∈E
Decision variables for lot-sizing:
Parameters:

RI
ws production time in sub-period s
h+
i unit inventory holding cost for product i
+
Iit inventory of product i at the end of period t
390 h− unit backlogging cost for product i

SC
i
−
Iit backlogging of product i at the end of period t
scI setup costs for stopping/starting the
Decision variables for sequencing:
production line (cost for Setup I)

U
vs 1, if the production line is stopped/started
scII
i setup costs for attaching/detaching one mold
in sub-period s (Setup I); 0, otherwise
AN
for product i (cost for Setup II)
uiks number of molds for product i attached or
scIII
ee0 setup costs for changeovers from arrangement
detached to the molding machine faces
e to e0 (cost for Setup III)
M

for conveyor k, in sub-period s (Setup II)

dit demand of product i in period t 395

bee0 ks 1, if there is a changeover from arrangement

Qt total capacity (hours) in period t
D

e to e0 in conveyor k in sub-period s;
R speed of the molding machine
0, otherwise (Setup III)
TE

(rotations per hour)

Auxiliary variables :
L width of the molding machine faces
Yis 1, if product i is produced in sub-period s;
li width of molds for product i
EP

0, otherwise
Mi total number of molds available for product i

gpe width of lane p according to arrangement e αiks 1, if product i is in all the lanes of conveyor k
C

Hk proportion parameter to synchronize molding in sub-period s; 0, otherwise

machine and conveyors βks integer variable for synchronization between

AC

stI setup time for stopping/starting the the molding machine and conveyor k

production line (time for Setup I) in sub-period s.

Objective function
stII
i setup time for attaching/detaching one mold
Function (1) minimizes the total costs, which comprise
for product i (time for Setup II)
costs for Setups I, II, and III, total inventory and backlog-
stIII
ee0 setup time for changeovers from arrangement

e to e0 (time for Setup III)

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

ging costs. to at least one lane of any conveyor.

X XX X
I
Min sc vs + scII
i uiks +
XX
Yis ≤ yipks ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N (6)
s∈S s∈S i∈N k∈K k∈K p∈P
XX X
scIII
ee0 bee0 ks
XX
(1) M I Yis ≥ yipks ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N (7)
s∈S k∈K e,e0 ∈Ek
k∈K p∈P

+
XX
h+ + − −

400 M I in constraints (7) is an upper bound for the term
i Iit + hi Iit
t∈T i∈N
P P
Constraints related to process configuration decisions k∈K p∈P yipks , which can be approximated to the max-

PT
imum number of lanes that can be assigned to a given
Feasible molding patterns are generated by modeling
product, i.e., M I = |K||P |.
the setup state of conveyors, the molding machine and the

RI
Inequalities (8) ensure that incompatible products do
synchrony between them. Constraints (2)-(8) are related
not co-exists in each sub-period s.
to the setup state of the conveyors. Constraints (2) en-
Yis + Yi0 s ≤ 1 ∀s ∈ S; (i, i0 ) ∈ O

SC
(8)
sure that each conveyor is set up according to only one
The sets of constraints (9)-(11) are related to the config-
arrangement in each sub-period.
X uration of the molding machine. Constraints (9) ensure
zkes = 1 ∀s ∈ S; k ∈ K (2)

U
e∈E that the sum of the width of all molds attached to each
Constraints (3) ensure that there is at most one type of
AN
machine face does not exceed its width L.
product assigned to each lane p of each conveyor k in sub- X
li xif s ≤ L ∀s ∈ S; f ∈ F (9)
period s. i∈N
Constraints (10) ensure that each machine face is always
M

X
yipks ≤ 1 s ∈ S; k ∈ K; p ∈ P (3)
i∈N full of molds, i.e., the empty space in each face f ∈ Fk
Equations (4) ensure that all the lanes of each conveyor
must be smaller than the minimum width of the lanes set
D

k has one type of product assigned. Note that the total

up to conveyor k. This implies that the unused space on
lanes of each conveyor depends on the arrangement set up
TE

each face is not enough to attach any additional mold.

in such sub-period s, i.e., |Pe | : zkes = 1. X X
XX X L− li xif s < min{gpe }zkes
p∈P
yipks = |Pe |zkes ∀s ∈ S; k ∈ K (4) i∈N e∈E (10)
i∈N p∈P e∈E
EP

Equations (5) ensure that if product i is assigned to lane ∀s ∈ S; k ∈ K; f ∈ Fk

Constraints (11) ensure that the total number of molds
p, then the lane and the product i are of the same width.
for each product in a molding pattern does not exceed the
C

These equations are valid since each product is obtained

total number available.
by only one type of mold and inequalities (3) impose that
AC

X
X xif s ≤ Mi ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N (11)
yipks ≤ 1. f ∈F
i∈N Constraints (12)-(17) are imposed to synchronize the setup
X X
li yipks = gpe zkes ∀s ∈ S; k ∈ K; p ∈ P (5)
i∈N e∈E states of the molding machine and conveyors. They re-
It is demanded that incompatible products are not pro-
late the types of products assigned to the conveyors with
duced simultaneously. Constraints (6)-(7) make Yis = 1
the types of molds attached to the corresponding machine
when product i is produced in s; otherwise, Yis = 0. Note
faces. Inequalities (12) ensure that, no molds for prod-
that product i is produced in s if and only if, it is assigned
uct i are attached to faces f ∈ Fk , unless this prod-

uct is assigned to at least one lane of conveyor k (i.e.,

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
P P
p∈P yipks ≥ 1 ). Similarly, constraints (13) force the at-420 of conveyor k in sub-period s and p∈P yipks the number

tachment of molds for products i to the faces for conveyor of lanes assigned to product i. If the difference between

k, if this product is allocated to at least one lane of this these terms is equal to 0, it means that product i is in every

conveyor. lane of conveyor k; otherwise, there are more than one type
X X
xif s ≤ Mi yipks ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K (12) of product being transported simultaneously by conveyor
f ∈Fk p∈P P
425 k. Therefore, αiks = 1 if and only if e∈E |Pe |zkes −

PT
X
xif s ≥ Hk yipks ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K; f ∈ Fk (13) P
p∈P p∈P yipks = 0.
Note that the number of molds for product i attached
Constraints (16) and (17) relate the number of molds
to any face f ∈ Fk must be at least Hk times the num-

RI
405
attached to the set of faces for each conveyor with the
ber of lanes assigned to this product in conveyor k. Hk
types of products allocated to the corresponding conveyor.
is a proportion parameter which relates the width of the

SC
These nonlinear inequalities ensure the synchrony of the
machine faces with each conveyor calculated as the expres-
  production line when several products are produced simul-
L
sion Hk = max . It represents how many
e∈E { p∈Pe gpe } taneously. MkII is an upper bound for the left side of these
P

U
410 times, at least, the sequence of products on each conveyor
constraints, which is defined as the maximum number of
AN
is repeated on each face of the molding machine. For in-
molds of any type that can be attached to the faces for
stance, it considers that conveyor k = 1 in Figure 1 is
j k
L
conveyor k, i.e., MkII = |Fk | mine∈E;p∈P .
P e {gpe }
configured to an arrangement where p∈Pe gpe = 3 and X X X
yipks + MkII
M

xif s ≤ βks αi0 ks

the width of the machine faces is L = 4. In this case, f ∈Fk p∈P i0 ∈N (16)
H1 = 34 =1 and, according to (13), on each face f ∈ F1
 
415 ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K
D

X X X
there must be at least one mold for each product A, B xif s ≥ βks yipks − MkII αi0 ks
f ∈Fk p∈P i0 ∈N (17)
TE

and C to ensure that products are transported in the right

∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K
sequence on conveyor k = 1. P
Note that the term i0 ∈N αi ks can be either equal to
0

To appropriately relate the setup states of the mold-

EP

0 or 1, because of constraints (14) and (15). Therefore, if

ing machine and conveyors, it is also necessary to know
more than one product is assigned to conveyor k in sub-
whether there are different products being produced simul- P
430 period s (i.e., i0 ∈N αi0 ks = 0), the total number of molds
C

taneously or not. Constraints (14) and (15) define whether

attached to all the faces for this conveyor is exactly an
all the lanes of an specific conveyor are filled by only one
AC

integer multiple of the number of lanes filled by product i,

or different products.
X X since βks is an integer variable.
|Pe |zkes − yipks ≥ 1 − αiks
e∈E p∈P (14) Constraints related to lot-sizing decisions

∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K Inequalities (18) are the time capacity constraints. Note

that capacity is consumed by the production time of each

X X
|Pe |zkes − yipks ≤ |P |(1 − αiks )
e∈E p∈P (15) generated pattern ws and the time for Setups I, II and III.
∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K
P
Note that e∈E |Pe |zkes represents the number of lanes

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

proposed by Fleischmann and Meyr [16] for the GLSP.

X X X XX
I
ws + st vs + stII
i uiks +
X
bee0 ks = zke0 s ∀s ∈ S; k ∈ K; e0 ∈ E (22)
s∈St s∈St s∈St k∈K i∈N
X X X (18) e∈E

stIII
ee0 bee0 kt ≤ Qt ∀t ∈ T X
bee0 ks = zke(s−1) ∀s ∈ S; k ∈ K; e ∈ E (23)
s∈St k∈K e,e0 ∈E
e0 ∈E
Equations (19) are the demand balance constraints. Every time molds are attached or detached, the pro-
Note that the quantity produced of product i in sub-period duction line needs to be stopped to perform these oper-

PT
s is equal to the time that the pattern is used ws , mul- ations and started again to continue producing. Thus,
tiplied by the speed of the molding machine R and the inequalities (24) make vs = 1 if a new pattern is set up in
number of molds for product i attached to all the faces of sub-period s.

RI
the machine. Note that backlogging units are allowed in
XX X
uiks ≤ Mi vs ∀s ∈ S (24)
k∈K i∈N i∈N
each period and this set of constraints is nonlinear. Note that molds of the same size can be exchanged to

SC
X X
+ − −
Ii(t−1) + Yis ws R xif s + Iit = Ii(t−1)
s∈St f ∈F
generate different molding patterns, whereas the arrange-
(19)
+
+dit + Iit ∀i ∈ N ; t ∈ T ment in each conveyor remains the same. In this case,

U
435 Constraints related to sequencing decisions only Setups I and II occur. On the other hand, when
AN
Constraints (A.6)-(A.7) are related to Setup II. They molds of different sizes are exchanged, Setup III must be
determine the number of exchanged molds in each sub- performed as well, since a different arrangement must be
P P
period. Note that if f ∈Fk xif s > f ∈Fk xif (s−1) , molds set up to transport the new products. In this case, Setups
M

for product i are attached to the faces f ∈ Fk in sub- I, II and III occur in sequence. As Setups I, II and III
period s, then constraints (A.6) are active. Similarly, if are already related in constraints (A.6)-(24), constraints
D

P P
f ∈Fk xif s < f ∈Fk xif (s−1) , it implies that molds for (25) are not mandatory. However, they are valid inequal-
TE

product i are detached in sub-period s, then constraints ities and improve the performance of the model according
(A.7) become active. These setup operations for Setup II to our preliminary experiments. These constraints force
can be modeled as inequalities, since variables uiks are in vs = 1 if there is any changeover in any conveyor of the
EP

the minimizing objective function.

P
production line. Note that e∈E beeks = 1 means that the
X X
uiks ≥ xif s − xif (s−1) ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K (20) arrangement of conveyor k is maintained from sub-period
f ∈Fk f ∈Fk
C

s − 1 to s, so no Setup III is performed.

X X X
uiks ≥ xif (s−1) − xif s ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K (21) 1− beeks ≤ vs ∀s ∈ S; k ∈ K (25)
AC

f ∈Fk f ∈Fk e∈E

Equations (22) and (23) determine if a changeover from Finally, the domains of the variables are defined as fol-

arrangement e to e0 is carried out on conveyor k, in sub- lows:

zeks , yipks , Yis , vs , bee0 ks , αiks ∈ {0, 1};
period s. These equations replace the traditional inequali-
−
ties for the lot-sizing and scheduling problem with sequence- xif s , βks ∈ Z+ ; uiks , Iit
+
, Iit , w s ∈ R+ (26)

dependent setups, bee0 ks ≥ zke(s−1) + zke0 s − 1, originally ∀t ∈ T ; s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K; f ∈ F ; p ∈ P ; e ∈ E

Nonlinear constraints

The proposed model comprises the nonlinear constraints

(16), (17) and (19). Constraints (16) and (17) involve the
11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

multiplication of the integer variables βks and the binary Similarly, constraints (19) are also linearized by replac-

440 variables yipks . Similarly, in constraints (19), the integer ing variables xif s as expression (A.8) indicates.
X
variables xif s are multiplied by the continuous variables xif s = 2r̂−1 θr̂if s (34)
r̂∈R̂
ws and the binary variables Yis . As a technique to lin- Then, constraints (19) are replaced by the following
earize these constraints, the integer variables βks and xif s constraints and additional variables.
X X X
+ − −
are represented by a binary positional notation, so they Ii(t−1) + R(2r−1 Θr̂if s ) + Iit = Ii(t−1)

PT
s∈St f ∈F r−1∈
ˆ R̂
445 are substituted by a set of binary and positive variables,
+
+dit + Iit ∀i ∈ N ; t ∈ T
besides some additional constraints. This linearization has
(35)

RI
been used successfully in other production planning pro-

blems, such as in [27] and [25]. Thus, to linearize con- Θr̂if s ≤ ws ∀s ∈ S; f ∈ F ; i ∈ N ; r̂ ∈ R̂ (36)

SC
straints (16) and (17), variables βks can be replaced by

450 the sum of integer non-negative powers of two, as follows. Θr̂if s ≤ Qt Yis ∀t ∈ T ; s ∈ St ; f ∈ F ; i ∈ N ; r̂ ∈ R̂ (37)
X
βks = 2r−1 µrks (27)

U
k r∈R̃ Θr̂if s ≤ Qt θr̂if s
where r ∈ R̃k represents each bit of the notation and (38)
AN
µrks ∈ {0, 1}. The size of set R̃k , i.e., the number of ∀t ∈ T ; s ∈ St ; f ∈ F ; i ∈ N ; r̂ ∈ R̂

bits required for representing βks is calculated as follows: Θr̂if s ≥ ws − Qt (2 − θr̂if s − Yis )
(39)
Upper bound for βks = 2|R̃k | − 1
M

∀t ∈ T ; s ∈ St ; f ∈ F ; i ∈ N ; r̂ ∈ R̂
The nonlinear constraints (16) and (17) are replaced
θr̂if s ∈ {0, 1}; Θr̂if s ∈ R+ ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; r̂ ∈ R̂ (40)
by linear constraints (28)-(33):
D

X X X Then, the linearization of the proposed model (1)-(26)

xif s ≤ 2r−1 δriks + MkII αi0 ks
TE

f ∈Fk r∈R̃k i0 ∈N (28) consists of replacing variables βks by the expression (27)

∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K 455 and xif s by the expressions (A.8) in the model (1)-(26), ex-
X X X
xif s ≥ 2r−1 δriks − MkII αi0 ks cept for constraints (16)-(17) and (19), which are replaced
EP

f ∈Fk r∈R̃k i0 ∈N (29) by (28)-(33) and (A.9)-(A.14).

∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K
X 3.2. Simplified formulation
C

δriks ≤ yipks ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K; r ∈ R̃k (30)

p∈P
The formulation proposed in this paper can be sim-
AC

δriks ≤ |P |µrks ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K; r ∈ R̃k (31)

460 plified to represent special problem instances. Due to the
X dependency and synchronization constraints between the
δriks ≥ yipks − |P |(1 − µrks )
p∈P (32) equipment of the production line (i.e., molding machine

∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K; r ∈ R̃k and conveyors), it is possible to determine beforehand the

µrks ∈ {0, 1}; δriks ∈ R+ configuration of the machine for any possible arrangement
(33)
465 configured on the conveyors. Therefore, the number of
∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K; r ∈ R̃k
molds attached to the machine faces is defined as a con-
P
Note that if µrks = 1 then δriks = p∈P yipks . On the

other hand, if µrks = 0 then δriks = 0. sequence of the setup state determined for each conveyor

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

into the model. Set of lanes: 𝑃 = {1,2,3}

This formulation only represents the problem properly 𝑝 =1 𝑝=2 𝑝=3

470 for some specific cases. However, it results in a less com-

plex mathematical model able to be solved more efficiently,

as the set of constraints (9), (10), (12)–(17), and the lin- 𝑙 𝑙 𝑙

earization constraints (28)–(33) are not longer necessary.

PT
For this formulation, the additional parameter mpe is
Figure 3: Arrangement for the illustrative example
475 determined beforehand in a pre-processing stage and in-

RI
cluded in the simplified formulation as input data. It spec-
generated by the model using this arrangement in both
ifies the number of molds that must be attached for the
conveyors.

SC
product assigned to lane p of a given conveyor k, if this
To properly set up the molding machine, the model
conveyor is set up according to the arrangement e. This
505 imposes that molds for the products in each conveyor are
480 formulation and a description to define the parameter mpe

U
attached to the corresponding machine faces. Thus, as
is presented in AppendixA.
Figure 4 shows, molds to produce the products assigned to
AN
3.3. Illustrative example conveyor k = 1 (i.e., products A, B and D) are attached

to the machine faces for this conveyor F1 = 1, 3, 5; and

This example illustrates how a specific molding pattern
M

510 molds to produce the products in conveyor 2 (i.e., product

is represented by the proposed general model in Section
D) are attached to the faces for conveyor 2, F2 = 2, 4, 6.
485 3.1. It considers a production line composed by a 6-faces
D

As guaranteed by constraints (9)-(10), four molds are

molding machine and two conveyors. The width of the
attached to each face and there is no empty space large
machine faces is considered as L = 4 and the width of
TE

enough to attach any additional mold. Note that the num-

each conveyor equals 3. The production line can produce
515 ber of molds used for each type, i.e., 4 molds of type A, 4
a set of 5 different products (A, B, C, D, E), all of them
EP

molds of type B and 16 molds for type D, does not exceed

490 of the same size (i.e., li = l = 1 ∀i ∈ N ). The number
the total available, as ensured by constraints (11).
of molds available for each type is 24. We describe how
Synchronization constraints (16)-(17) ensure that, if
C

the molding pattern composed by 4 molds of type A, 4

different products are transported by the same conveyor,
molds of type B and 16 molds of type D (4A - 4B - 16D)
AC

520 then they are always transported in the same lane over the
is generated under such conditions by the general IPCLS
time that the molding pattern is used. Note in Figure 4
495 model.
that each product A, B and D is transported on lane 1,
As all the molds and products have the same size in
2 and 3 of conveyor 1, respectively. The molds for these
this example, conveyors can be set up according to only
products are attached to the faces 1, 3, and 5 in such a
one possible arrangement, as shown in Figure 3. It consists
525 way that, with every rotation of the molding machine, 4
of configuring three different lanes, each one of width l = 1.
units of each product A, B and D are produced, so that
500 It implies that any product can be assigned to any of the
product A ends in the first lane, product B in the second
three lanes, and all the possible molding patterns can be
13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT
𝑳
D D D D 𝑓=6
Molding pattern (4 A - 4 B - 16 D) 550 native formulation we proposed in our previous work. This
Molds Faces
D A B D 𝑓=5 4 molds of type A example shows that, although the integrated approach here
4 molds of type B 𝐹1 = {1,3,5}
D D D D 𝑓=4

B D A B 𝑓=3
4 molds of type D involves a more complex formulation, process configura-
12 molds of type D 𝐹2 = {2,4,6}

D D D D 𝑓=2 𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒗𝒆𝒚𝒐𝒓 𝟏 tion decisions are modeled implicitly, without demanding

A B D A 𝑓=1
preprocessing stages, as required by alternative enumerat-
A B D A B D A B D A B D

𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒗𝒆𝒚𝒐𝒓 𝟐 A B D 555 ing modeling approaches.

PT
A B D
A B D The formulation in [36] considers a set of preset settings
D D D D D D D D D D A B D
D D D
A B D as input data, which consists of combinations of molds
A B D

RI
D D D
D D D A B D that can be attached to the production line by satisfying

all the operational and synchronization constraints. For

Figure 4: Molding pattern 4A - 4B - 16D represented by the pro-

SC
posed model 560 this example, 10 possible preset settings were found as

Table 2 shows, which allow generating all possible molding

lane and Product D in the third lane. Note that in this
patterns to produce the set of five different products of the

U
case, variable β1s = 4. For conveyor 2, product D is as-
same size.
AN
530 signed to all the lanes, therefore faces 2, 4 and 6 are full of
Each setting is defined by a set of positions. Each po-
molds of this type. Thus, the proposed model represents
565 sition represents a different product to be produced, and
the molding pattern 4A - 4B - 16D by attaching 4 molds
it specifies the number of molds that must be attached
M

of type A, B and D to the faces for conveyor 1 and 12

to the molding machine. For instance, Setting 3 has two
molds of type D to the faces of conveyor 2.
positions, which indicates that two different products are
D

535 It is worth mentioning that this illustrative example

produced simultaneously, so that 16 molds of the first type
TE

can be also be solved by the simplified formulation pre-

570 and 8 molds of the second type are attached to the ma-
sented in Sections 3.2 and AppendixA. In this case, it is
chine. The type of products assigned to each position are
possible to determine the number of molds that should be
decision variables of the model.
EP

attached to the machine according to any possible config-

Figure 5 illustrates Setting 5 on the left side and Set-
540 uration of the conveyors. We present further details about
ting 8 on the right side. The right side also shows how
C

how the parameter mpe can be determined and the sim-

575 the molding pattern 4A - 4B - 16D is defined by using
plified formulation can be implemented for this example
AC

Setting 8. These settings already guarantee the synchrony

in AppendixA. We also describe briefly a small example
between the molding machine and the conveyors, i.e., the
where this simplified formulation cannot be applied be-
combination of molds in each setting ensures that the prod-
545 cause the input data of the problem instances.
ucts obtained are always transported in the same lane of

3.3.1. Molding pattern generation in an alternative model580 an specific conveyor during the production time. It im-
plies that the operational and synchronization constraints
We present this section to reinforce the originality of
modeled explicitly in the formulation proposed in this pa-
the model proposed in this paper. We illustrate how pro-
per must be taken into account in the pre-processing stage
cess configurations decisions are represented by the alter-

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Positions each type to attach to any settings position. Therefore,

Setting 1 2 3 4 5 the molding pattern considered in this example can be de-
1 24 - - - -
2 20 4 - - - 610 fined in this process selection model by using Setting 8
3 16 8 - - - and assigning product D to the first position, Product A
4 12 12 - - -
5 8 8 4 4 - to the second position and Product B to the third posi-
6 12 4 4 4 -
7 12 8 4 - - tion, as shown on the right side of Figure 5. Note that

PT
8 16 4 4 - - this formulation requires having a good knowledge of the
9 8 8 8 - -
10 8 4 4 4 4 615 problem and the production environment to accurately

RI
Table 2: Set of possible preset settings for the illustrative example consider the synchronization and operational constraints

in the pre-processing stage.

demanded by the formulation in [36] to determine all pos-

SC
This example shows two main advantages of the for-
585 sible Settings beforehand.
mulation proposed here to represent the process configu-
Setting 5 allows producing four different products si-
620 ration, lot-sizing and scheduling decisions in the molded

U
multaneously. It indicates that 8 molds for the first prod-
pulp industry. First, the proposed model does not re-
AN
uct, 8 molds for the second product, 4 molds for the third
quire a pre-processing stage which demands in-deep knowl-
product and 4 molds for the fourth product must be at-
edge and experience of the production environment. Com-
590 tached to the molding machine. It also guarantees that the
plete enumerating and process selection approaches, which
M

product assigned to the first position will always be trans-

625 determine molding patterns beforehand, may require the
ported by two different lanes on the conveyors (e.g., lane
development of specific algorithms to support the pre-
D

1 and 2 in conveyor 2), products assigned to the second

processing activities. This advantage makes the approach
TE

position will be transported by two different lanes (e.g.,

proposed in this paper a powerful tool for decisions mak-
595 lane 3 in conveyor 2 and lane 1 in conveyor 1), and prod-
ers and new practitioners to support the production plan-
ucts in the third and fourth positions will be transported
ning decisions. Second, the proposed formulation is able to
EP

630

in a single lane each (i.e., lane 2 and lane 3 of conveyor 1,

provide feasible production schedules for the planning de-
respectively).
cisions in different production environments, which com-
C

Besides determining all possible settings beforehand,

prise different equipment molding, transportation equip-
the formulation in [36] also requires as input a compatibil-
AC

600
ment and layout of the production lines. This provide an
ity parameter between the products and the positions of
635 important flexibility advantage over the enumerating ap-
each setting. This parameter should be determined during
proaches, where the number of possibilities may increase
the pre-processing stage by taking into account the size of
combinatorially depending on the characteristics of the
the products and the number of molds available of each
production line, so the scope of potential applications be-
605 type. Particularly for this example, all products are com-
come limited.
patible with all the positions of any setting in Table 2, as

they are of the same size and there are enough molds of

15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Pos. Setting Nº 5 Pos. Setting Nº 8 Assigment

1 8 molds D 1 16 molds Product D
𝑓=6 D D D 𝑓=6
2 8 molds 2 4 molds Product A
𝑓=5 3 4 molds D A B D 𝑓=5 3 4 molds Product B
4 4 molds 4 - -
𝑓=4 D D D D 𝑓=4
5 - 5 - -
𝑓=3 B D A B 𝑓=3

𝑓=2 𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒗𝒆𝒚𝒐𝒓 𝟏 D D D D 𝑓=2 𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒗𝒆𝒚𝒐𝒓 𝟏

𝑓=1 A B D A 𝑓=1

A B D A B D A B D A B D

PT
𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒗𝒆𝒚𝒐𝒓 𝟐 𝑪𝒐𝒏𝒗𝒆𝒚𝒐𝒓 𝟐 A B D
A B D
A B D
D D D D D D D D D D D D A B D
A B D

RI
D D D
A B D
D D D
D D D A B D

SC
Figure 5: Example of Setting 5 and molding pattern 4A - 4B - 16D in a process selection model

+ −
640 4. MIP-based solution strategy ables ws , Iit and Iit in order to allow adjustments on the

U
lot sizes until the last iteration. The pseudocode of this
In this section we propose an alternative to solve the
AN
algorithm is presented in AppendixB. Figure 6 shows an
proposed formulation, based on relax-and-fix (R&F) and
665 example of the 2nd R&F iteration of this algorithm for
fix-and-optimize (F&O) MIP-based heuristics. The objec-
a problem instance, which comprises a molding machine
M

tive is to find competitive solutions in shorter computing

of 6 faces and three conveyors (i.e., |F | = 6 and |K| = 3),
645 times by solving the formulation iteratively instead of solv-
and a planning horizon of 3 periods and 9 sub-periods
D

ing the complete model at once by CPLEX. We use R&F

(i.e., |T | = 3 and |S| = 9). All the problem variables are
and F&O MIP-heuristics, as they have been successfully
TE

670 presented in the vertical axis and the partitions according

used to solve production planning problems, particularly
to the sub-periods in the horizontal axis. Note that the
in lot-sizing and scheduling applied problems [14, 39, 37].
lot-sizing variables are free for all the iterations. Variables
EP

650 This alternative strategy consists of a R&F procedure

indexed to sub-period s = 2 are optimized (i.e., satisfying
to find an initial feasible solution, followed by a F&O
integrality constraints), as well as the binary variables Yis
heuristic as an improvement procedure. The R&F builds
C

675 for all the upcoming sub-periods that belong to the current
an initial solution by solving the formulation sub-period
period (i.e., s = 3). All variables indexed to the previous
AC

by sub-period, but considering some decisions for upcom-

sub-periods are fixed (except for the lot-sizing variables),
655 ing sub-periods. At each iteration, i.e., at each sub-period,
whereas the remaining variables are relaxed.
the integrality of all binary and integer variables indexed
Once an initial solution is found by the R&F, the F&O
to such sub-period, and the integrality of variables Yis in-
680 algorithm is applied to search improved solutions. The
dexed to the upcoming sub-periods belonging to the same
F&O basically tries to overcome the disadvantages of solv-
period are kept, whereas the remaining variables are re-
ing the model iteratively over the time. Therefore, it uses
660 laxed. At the end of each iteration, all variables indexed
variable partitions related to the process configuration de-
to such sub-period are fixed, except the lot sizing vari-

16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

𝑡=1 𝑡=2 𝑡=3

𝑠=1 𝑠=2 𝑠=3 𝑠=4 𝑠=5 𝑠=6 𝑠=7 𝑠=8 𝑠=9
Process configuration variables (𝑦𝑖𝑝𝑘𝑠 , 𝑧𝑘𝑒𝑠 , 𝑥𝑖𝑓𝑠 , 𝛼𝑖𝑘𝑠 , 𝛽𝑘𝑠 )
Product assigment variables (𝑌𝑖𝑠 )
Lot-sizing variables (𝑤𝑠 , 𝐼𝑖𝑡+, 𝐼𝑖𝑡−)
Variables for Setup I (𝑣𝑠 )
Variables for Setup II and III (𝑢𝑖𝑘𝑠 , 𝑏𝑒𝑒 ′ 𝑘𝑠 )
Iteration: 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 8th 9th

Fixed variables Unrelaxed variables Relaxed variables

PT
Figure 6: Example of the R&F heuristic (2nd iteration)

cisions for the entire planning horizon, instead of set par-710 resent different production environments in this industry.

RI
685 titions over the time. These partitions are defined based All the experiments were implemented in Python 2.7 and

on the set of conveyors K. Thus, at each iteration k ∈ K, solved by CPLEX 12.6.0 on a computer with 2 processors

SC
all the lot-sizing variables and other decision variables in- Intel(R) Xeon(R) X5675 / 3.07GHz and 96 GB of RAM.

dexed to k are re-optimized. This procedure searches for Results are presented in two sections. Section 5.1 presents

small modifications in the molding patterns used over the715 a numerical test to compare the model solutions with the

690 planning horizon that may lead to better solutions than

U real schedules implemented in a molded pulp company.

AN
the current one. The pseudocode of this improvement al- Section 5.3 presents computational experiments for dif-

gorithm is presented in AppendixB. Figure 7 shows an ferent groups of instances to analyze the advantages of
M

example of the 2nd F&O iteration for the same problem the proposed model to solve problems in different practi-

illustrated in Figure 6. In this case, the variables parti-720 cal contexts. We compare the results of this formulation

tions presented in the horizontal axis are defined accord- against process selection approaches, which demand pre-
D

695

ing to the set of conveyors K, where |K| = 3. Note that all processing steps beforehand to support the process con-
TE

variables related to index k = 2 are re-optimized, i.e., z2es , figuration decisions. We also present the results obtained

yip2s , αi2s , β2s , ui2s , bee0 2s , s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; e, e0 ∈ E; p ∈ P , by the simplified model of Section 3.2 and AppendixA for

and xif s , s ∈ S; f ∈ F2 . In addition, lot-sizing, Setup I (vs )725 the problem instances that it can be applied. This sec-
EP

700 and products assignment variables (Yis ) are also re-opti- tion also presents the solutions obtained by the MIP-based

mized, whereas the remaining ones are fixed. heuristics of Section 4 and AppendixB, which represents
C

an alternative and faster way to solve the model in order

AC

5. Numerical experiments to provide feasible production plans.

Computational experiments were carried out to vali-

730 5.1. Comparisons with real schedules
date the solutions obtained by the proposed formulation
Detailed results for two real instances are presented
705 and its capability to solve different problem instances. Data
in this section. We compare the model solutions with
sets are based on real information provided by a Brazilian
the schedules of a molded pulp company to show the po-
company, which produces molded packages for fruit and
tential savings that may be achieved by the optimization
eggs. We also considered information from manufacturers
735 approach proposed here. In practice, a production plan
of molding pulp equipment to create instances that rep-

17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

𝑘=1 𝑘=2 𝑘=3

Process configuration variables (𝑦𝑖𝑝𝑘𝑠 , 𝑧𝑘𝑒𝑠 , 𝑥𝑖𝑓𝑠 , 𝛼𝑖𝑘𝑠 , 𝛽𝑘𝑠 )
Product assigment variables (𝑌𝑖𝑠 )
Lot-sizing variables (𝑤𝑠 , 𝐼𝑖𝑡+ , 𝐼𝑖𝑡− )
Variables for Setup I (𝑣𝑠 )
Variables for Setup I and II (𝑢𝑖𝑘𝑠 , 𝑏𝑒𝑒 ′ 𝑘𝑠 )
Iteration: 1st 2nd 3rd

Fixed variables Varibales to be optimized

Figure 7: Example of the F&O heuristic (2nd iteration)

PT
is developed for each month, and some rescheduling de- tion lines of the real case. We set the time limit for this

cisions are made every one or two weeks. Demands are765 step as 1,800s. Next, the feasible/optimal solution found is

RI
dynamic, calculated based on real orders and forecasts on handled to split the production plan into the three produc-

future requirements, and provided on a weekly basis to the tion lines by satisfying their capacity constraints, initial

SC
740 production planning department. The production planner setup states and availability of molds.

usually lasts a day to develop a feasible production plan Figure 8 shows the company schedules (left side) and

U
based on his experience. For these instances, aggregated770 the model solutions (right side) for these two real instances.

demand information was provided in a monthly base. The Note that, for both instances, the company schedules con-
AN
two tested instances correspond to two non-consecutive sume the total time capacity of all the lines, use a big-

745 months, where a production schedule must be developed ger number of molding patterns and involve greater setup
M

for each one, respectively. Therefore, we consider a pro- times than the model solutions. In instance I, the pattern

duction planning horizon of one period, i.e., one month,775 composed by 24 molds of type B “24m(B)” and the pat-
D

divided into 8 sub-periods in our optimization approach tern with 24 molds of type E “24m(E)” appear in both

(i.e., |T | = 1 and |S| = 8). the company and the model schedules for Lines 1 and 2.
TE

750 Five different products (A, B, C, D and E) must be However, for Line 3, the model solution suggests the use

produced in three production lines, according to the infor- of only one pattern instead of three, as implemented by
EP

mation provided by the company. All the lines are com-780 the company. Thus, the model schedule involves only one

posed by a 6-faces molding machine, whose speed is 366 changeover lasting 10 hours on Line 3, meanwhile the com-
C

rotations per hour, and 2 conveyors. However, the time pany performs two changeovers lasting 24 hours in total

755 capacity of each line can be different. The relationship be- on the same Line. A similar result appears for Instance II,
AC

tween the size of the machine faces and conveyors is such where the model solution suggests a different molding pat-

that l∗ < L < 2l∗ (where l∗ is the size of conveyors), so785 tern in Line 3 (i.e., 20m(B)+4m(C)) and the total setup

that the model parameter Hk = 1 ∀k ∈ K in this case. time is shorter than the one in the company schedule.

As the proposed model considers a single production Table 3 provides additional information of the company

760 line, we define a procedure to find solutions that can be and model schedules. Note that the company produced a

properly compared with the company schedules. First, higher volume of products, which is expected since they

we solve the model using CPLEX by considering a “super790 used the total capacity available for all the lines. How-

line”, whose time capacity is the sum of the three produc- ever, a significant part of the produced amount is held
18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Company Schedule - I Model Solution - I

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0,00 100,00 200,00 300,00 400,00 500,00 600,00 700,00

Line Line
1
698 614.22 83.78
1

Line Line
2
696 625.59 70.41
2
14 10 10
Line Line
3
62 326 300 682.47 19.53
3

24m(B) 24m(E) Setup 12m(B)+8m(C)+4m(A) 12m(B)+8m(A)+4m(D) 24m(B) 24m(E) Available Setup 16m(B)+4m(C)+4m(D)

PT
Company Schedule - II Model Solution - II
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 0,00 100,00 200,00 300,00 400,00 500,00 600,00 700,00
26
Line Line 1 668
1
492 150

RI
Line Line 2 591.47 76.53
2
668

6 10 6 13.55

Line Line 3 627.86 48.59

3
230 470

SC
24m(B) Setup 24m(E) 12m(B)+8m(C)+4m(D) 12m(B)+8m(D)+4m(C) 24m(B) 24m(E) Available 20m(B)+4m(C) Setup

Figure 8: Company schedules and model solutions for Instance I (top side) and Instance II (bottom side)

in inventory, whereas part of the total demand is back-

U ered about 10 possibilities in this case), the schedules are
AN
logged. This behavior evidences how challenging the lot- limited by these alternatives whatever the demand levels

sizing decisions are in practice, mainly because the simul-815 are for an specific planning horizon. Thus, it may hap-
M

795 taneous production of different types of products by the pen that better alternatives which may lead to important

same molding pattern. In practice, production planners savings are not even considered for planning. This is one
D

usually prefer large lot sizes of a few patterns instead of of the most important advantages of the IPCLS model,

small lot sizes of many patterns, as strategy to take ad- which considers all possible molding patterns implicitly.
TE

vantage of the expensive setup operations. Since products820 This approach takes into account demand and setup in-

800 can have different demand levels, it may happen that a formation to determine the best possibilities that lead to
EP

large volume of low demanded products is accumulated in lowest total cost, which depends on the trade-off among

inventory meanwhile the demand of other products is pro- setup, backlogging ans inventory costs.

duced. On the other hand, other product demands may These results show the potential savings that may be
C

not be met because the time capacity became insufficient825 achieved in practice when an integrated optimization ap-
AC

805 to produce them on time. Therefore, the planners strategy proach supports the production planning. Critical issues

may lead to high backlogging levels which are also unde- such as total setup times and backlog demand can be re-

sirable in practice, e.g., in Instance II, where the company duced significantly, which also impact the total costs of

backlogged approximately 25% of the total demand. the production schedules. Note that the savings for these

Another planning issue that usually arises in practice830 instances might be even greater, since the models solu-

810 is related to the molding patterns used in the production tions were obtained by a heuristic procedure because of

schedules. As planners develop production plans based the multiple lines environment. It certainly instigates fur-

on a subset of all possible patterns (e.g., Planners consid- ther research on optimization approaches for multiple-lines

19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

production environments in this industry. Instance groups “F6K2” represent the same produc-

tion line of the company, which consists of a 6-faces mold-

835 5.2. Computational results for different data sets
870 ing machine and two conveyors. The relation between the
We analyze the capability of this formulation to sup-
width of the faces and the conveyors is such that l∗ < L <
port planning decisions for different environments in the
2l∗ , where l∗ is the conveyor width, so Hk = 1∀k ∈ K.
molded pulp industry. Table 4 presents the main charac-
Groups “F6̂K3” represent problem instances with a sys-

PT
teristics of the groups of tested instances. We consider 10
tem consisting of a 6-faces machine and three conveyors,
840 groups, where each group comprises 10 instances. These
875 where the faces are bigger than the ones in groups “F6K2”.
data sets consider varied production environments, plan-

RI
For these groups, the size of the machines faces is exactly
ning horizon and number of products. The inventory,
twice the size of the conveyors, i.e., L = 2l∗ and Hk = 2.
backlogging and setup costs in these data sets are based

SC
Groups “A1” represent production systems where all the
on real information. Demand levels were defined based on
demanded products are of the same width, i.e., |E| = 1,
845 real data and uniform distribution based on real average
880 whereas groups “A2” and “A3” represent the cases where

U
demand. Characteristics of the production line, i.e., the
the products are of different width, so |E| = 2 and |E| = 3,
AN
number of conveyors, number of machine faces, width of
respectively. Thus, for example, group T2P5 F6K2A1 rep-
products, faces and conveyors, were determined based on
resents a production planning problem for 2 weeks, where
a real environment and sector information.
5 products of the same size are produced in a produc-
M

850 For these sets of instances, we also present some results

885 tion line with a 6-faces molding machine and two convey-
for alternative enumerating approaches to analyze their
ors. Group T2P5 F6K2A2 have the same characteristics
D

advantages and limitations. We include results for the ap-

as T2P5 F6K2A1, however, the 5 products to be produced
proach in [36], which enumerates settings in advance to
TE

are of different sizes. According to the common character-

determine molding patterns, and a complete enumeration
istics of these data sets, we refer from here onward to the
855 approach, where all possible patterns are determined be-
first three groups as “instances with products of the same
EP

890

forehand. For convenience, we refer to these formulations

size”, the second three groups as “instances with products
as the process selection, lot-sizing and scheduling model
of different sizes” and the last four groups as “instances
C

(PSLSM), and the production planning model (PPM), re-

with products of different sizes and longest planning hori-
spectively.
AC

zon”.
860 The names of the data sets are defined as follows: “T”
895 Table 4 shows how the size of the problem varies for
indicates the number of periods, “P” the number of prod-
each optimization approach, when different production en-
ucts, “F” the number of faces of the molding machine,
vironments are considered. For the PSLSM, all the possi-
“K” the number of conveyors and “A” the number of pos-
ble settings were enumerated. As a complete enumeration
sible arrangements. Each time period is considered as a
is an extensive and complex task, which is not the main
865 week, and each period is divided into 4 sub-periods, which
900 focus of this paper, we provided a lower bound of the total
implies that at most 4 different patterns can be used per
number of possible patterns required as input for the PPM
week.
20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Instance I Instance II
Company Schedule Model Solution Company Schedule Model Solution
Total produced 18,304,250 16,900,019 17,671,250 17,019,924
Total inventory units 1,918,583 (10.5%4 ) 35,000 (0.2%4 ) 3,991,250 (22.6%4 ) 20,596.87 (0.1%4 )
Total backlogging units 829,333 (4.8%? ) 350,000 (2.0%? ) 4,591,000 (25.1%? ) 690,701.56 (3.8%? )
Met demand 16,385,667 (95.2%? ) 16,865,000 (98.0%? ) 13,680,000 (74.9%? ) 17,580,298 (96.2%? )
Total setup time 24h 10h (-54.3%) 32h 16h (-50%)
Cap. consumption 2,106h (100%) 1,932.28h (91.8%) 2,042h (100%) 1,951.92h (95.6%)
Total inventory costs 5,755.75 105 (-98.2%† ) 11,973.75 61.79 (-99.5%† )

PT
Total backlogging costs 8,293.33 3,500 (-57.8%† ) 45,910.0 6,907.02 (-85.0%† )
Total setup costs 20,256 8,440 (-58.3%† ) 27,008 13,504 (-50.0%† )
Total costs 34,305.08 12,045.0 (-64.9%† ) 84,891.75 20,472.81 (-75.9%† )

RI

At the end of the planning horizon; 4 Percentage based on the total produced amount; ? Percentage based on the total
demand; † Percentage based on the total cost of the same category in the company schedule

SC
Table 3: Detailed information of the company schedules and the model solutions for Instances I and II

model. Note that, the characteristics of the production915 about the suitability of each approach for specific types

U
environment highly impact the total possible settings and of problem. Note that loading times for the IPCLS in-

patterns for these approaches. The number of possibilities volve a few seconds for all the group instances, whereas the
AN
905 increases significantly for bigger production environments, PSLSM model can last some hours to load some problem

i.e, groups F6̂K3 with 6-faces molding machines, three con- instances. Note that the differences in the loading time of
M

veyors and Hk = 2, and manufacturing environments with920 the PSLSM for groups T2P8 F6K3A1 and T2P8 F6̂K3A3

products of different width. are such that the loading time for the last group is about
D

IPCLS PSLSM◦ PPM† 77.8 times greater than the loading time for the former.
Group |T | |S| |N | |F | |K| |A| # set. # pat.
Loading times for the PPM model also increase signifi-
TE

T2P5 F6K2A1 2 8 5 6 2 1 10 ≥ 220

T2P8 F6K2A1 2 8 8 6 2 1 11 > 1300 cantly from 100 to 200 patterns, particularly for the groups
T2P8 F6̂K3A1 2 8 8 6 3 1 20 > 1500
T2P5 F6K2A2 2 8 5 6 2 2 13 ≥ 111 925 with the longest planning horizon and products of different
T2P8 F6K2A2 2 8 8 6 2 2 16 > 1000
EP

T2P8 F6̂K3A3 2 8 8 6 3 3 169 > 1500 sizes.

T4P5 F6K2A2 4 16 5 6 2 2 13 ≥ 111
T4P5 F6̂K3A3 4 16 5 6 3 3 85 > 1000 Long loading times for the PSLSM and PPM approaches
T4P8 F6K2A2 4 16 8 6 2 2 16 > 1200
C

T4P8 F6̂K3A3 4 16 8 6 3 3 169 > 1200 can be explained by the number of settings and patterns re-

Integrated model proposed here; ◦ Model proposed in [36]; † Classical
GLSP model that considers all possible patterns as input data quired as input data, respectively. The size of the problem
AC

Table 4: Characteristics of the groups of instances 930 for these approaches depends on the number of possibilities

defined beforehand, which appears to be very sensitive to

We solved both IPCLS and PSLS models using CPLEX. the characteristics of the production environments. Unlike
910 Table 5 presents the average time that each model takes this, the variation of these parameters does not have sig-
to load the problem instances, i.e., the time elapsed be- nificant impact on the loading times of the IPCLS. These
tween the run start and the model solving. For the PPM935 results show that these approaches become unpractical to

model, we report the loading time when 100 and 200 pat- support planning decisions in some production environ-
terns are considered. These results provides some insights ments, as enumerating all possibilities may be an extensive

21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

and challenging task. the IPCLS (GM) and the PSLSM to describe the advan-

PPM tages of the new integrated model proposed in this paper

Group IPCLS PSLSM 100 pat. 200 pat. over alternative mathematical representations for the same
T2P5 F6K2A1 1.3s 1.7s 92s 2,329.8s
T2P8 F6K2A1 3.4s 4.3s 102.7s 2,437.4s 965 problem. Note that, although the PSLSM is supported by
T2P8 F6̂K3A1 4.3s 138.9s 99.1s 2,438.8s
a preprocessing stage and results in a less complex math-
T2P5 F6K2A2 1.6s 2.9s 94.5s -
T2P8 F6K2A2 4.7s 13.3s 98.1s 2,139s ematical model, the instances are still difficult to solve to

PT
T2P8 F6̂K3A3 6.0s > 10,800s 97.6s 2,456.7s
T4P5 F6K2A2 4.6s 9.8s 432.7s - optimality, even for the sets that comprise a few settings
T4P5 F6̂K3A3 8.1s >10,800s 433.1s 10,869.8s
T4P8 F6K2A2 14.8s 56.4s 493.2s 10,802.9s
(e.g., T2P8 F6̂K3A1). However, it presents advantages

RI
T4P8 F6̂K3A3 25.1s >10,800 s 588.1s 10,519.6s
970 for the smallest groups of instances with products of the
Table 5: Average time to load the IPCLS, PSLSM and PPM models same size and different sizes (i.e., Groups T2P5 K2A1 and
using Python-CPLEX

SC
T2P5 K3A1). In these cases, both approaches obtained
Table 6 presents the average results of the IPCLS and the same solutions, but the PSLSM involves shorter com-
940 PSLSM. The solutions obtained by these approaches can puting times and results in smaller average gaps.

U
be properly compared, since all the possible settings were975 Note that, for the instances with bigger production en-
AN
determined in advance for the PSLSM. Therefore, both ap- vironments and longer planning horizon, the PSLSM be-
proaches consider all possible patterns meanwhile lot-siz- came limited, as it involves unacceptable times to load and
ing and sequencing decisions are made. We do not present solve the problems. Unlike this approach, the formulation
M

945 the solutions obtained by the PPM, as we do not per- proposed here is able to provide production schedules for
formed a complete enumeration to properly compare these980 all the sets of instance. It makes this modeling approach
D

solutions. a powerful optimization tool to support the planning ac-

TE

For the IPCLS, we present the results obtained by the tivities in molded pulp industry, regardless of the char-
general model (GM), which represents properly the prob- acteristics and size of the production systems. However,
lem for all the data sets, and the results of the simplified large optimality gaps appears for most of the data sets,
EP

950

model (SM), which can be used for special problem in-985 which shows experimentally how complex is to deal with

stances as mentioned in the previous section (i.e., for 6 process configuration decisions, lot-sizing and scheduling
C

out of the 10 instances groups tested in this paper). The by integrated approaches.
AC

time limit was set to 3 hours for each instance. We present Note that the main drawback of the new formulation
955 the average objective value of the solutions (UB∗ ), average proposed in this paper is related to its complexity and diffi-
∗
lower bounds (LB ), average optimality gaps provided by990 culty to be efficiently solved by an optimization solver. The

CPLEX (Gap∗ ), average time (Time∗ ), the number of op- simplified model (SM), on the other hand, avoids many
timal solutions found (OS) and the number of times that complicating constraints of the general model by consider-
each approach found the best solution for each set of in- ing them beforehand in a pre-processing stage. As we have
960 stances (BS). mentioned above, the use of this simplified model depends
We first analyze the results of the general model for995 on the input data and may be not applicable for some

22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

IPCLS PSLSM
Group UB∗ LB∗ Gap∗ Time∗ OS BS UB∗ LB∗ Gap∗ Time∗ OS BS
GM 17,336.0 14,846.1 15.1% 10,298.2s 1 10
T2P5 F6K2A1 17,336.0 15,790.2 9.4% 9,854.7s 1 10
SM 17,336.0 17335.8 0.0% 15.7s 10 10
GM 26,749.4 18,978.4 29.0% 10,803.4s 0 8
T2P8 F6K2A1 26668.2 14,509.3 45.6% 10,800.0s 0 10
SM 26,668.2 26,665.8 0.0% 219.2s 10 10
GM 23,555.0 22,498.9 4.5% 10,804.3s 0 10
T2P8 F6̂K3A1 24,190.2 4,224.2 82.5% 10,800.1s 0 8
SM 23,555.0 23,552.9 0.0% 1,176.5s 10 10
GM 22,271.1 18,666.5 16.2% 10,800.0s 0 10

PT
T2P5 F6K2A2 22,271.1 22,269.9 0.0% 4,704.8s 10 10
SM - - - - - -
GM 28,263.4 27,491.7 2.7% 9,627.1s 3 10
T2P8 F6K2A2 28,263.5 27,508.4 2.7% 10,800.0s 0 10
SM - - - - - -
GM 33,700.4 29,605.5 12.1% 10,800.0s 0 10

RI
T2P8 F6̂K3A3 - - - - - -
SM 33,700.4 32951.0 2.2% 8,812.7s 6 10
- - - - - -
GM 103,525.7 79,983.1 25.2% 10,800.0s 0 7
T4P5 F6K2A2 10,4578.2 61,089.2 42.6% 10,800.0s 0 5
SM - - - - - -

SC
GM 100,455.3 62,281.0 38.4% 10,800.0s 0 3
T4P5 F6̂K3A3 - - - - - -
SM 95,024.7 69,421.5 27.8% 10,615.5s 1 10
GM 172,002.9 95,894.5 41.7% 10,800.0s 0 9
T4P8 F6K2A2 182,130.3 90,824.8 47.9% 10,800.1s 0 2
SM - - - - - -

U
GM 158,534.4 91,564.3 40.9% 10,800.0s 0 1
T4P8 F6̂K3A3 - - - - - -
SM 148,013.8 94,450.6 35.5% 10,800.0s 0 9
AN
*
Average results for the 10 instances in each group
GM
General model
SM
Simplified model
M

Table 6: Average results of the IPCLS (general and simplified version) and PSLSM models solved by CPLEX

problem instances. In this case, it was not possible to de- related to the stronger lower bounds obtained by the sim-
D

termine feasible parameters mpe for 4 out of the 10 tested plified model, which allows to reduce the average gap of
TE

group of instances, thus Table 6 presents the results of the the GM from 12.1% to 2.2%. For the remaining cases, al-

simplified formulation for only 6 data sets. Note that this1015 though the SF IPCLS reduced significantly the number of

1000 simplified model can be solved more efficiently by CPLEX, variables and constraints of the general model, it is still
EP

so that optimal solutions for several data sets can be found difficult to solve it efficiently for large problem instances

in few seconds. For the first 3 groups, where the SM IP- as groups T4P5 F6̂K3A3 and T4P8 F6̂K3A3. The gaps re-
C

CLS can be applied, it is possible to found optimal solu- duction in these cases are approximately between 5% and

tions for all the instances in short computing times (i.e.,1020 10%.
AC

1005 approximately 16, 219 and 1,177 seconds on average, re-

5.3. Computational results for the MIP-based heuristics
spectively for groups T2P5 F6K2A1, T2P8 F6K2A1 and
Table 7 presents a comparative analysis of the MIP-
T2P8 F6̂K3A1). These results also show that the optimal-
based heuristic results. We compare the heuristics results
ity gaps of the general model are more related to weak
with the general formulation to analyze the performance
lower bounds rather than the quality of the solutions ob-
1025 of this algorithm for all data sets. The first four columns
1010 tained. These results are similar for group T2P8 F6̂K3A3,
present a summary of the model solutions, i.e., the num-
where the differences between the GM and SM IPCLS are
ber of constraints, the number of binary variables, the av-

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

erage objective value of the best solutions and the average These results were found approximately 3.6 times faster

time in which such solutions were found, respectively. The than the model.

1030 next three columns present the results after performing the Note that the time comparisons here were made by tak-

R&F algorithm. They show the average objective value of1065 ing into account the computing time that CPLEX requires

the R&F solutions, the average deviation of these solutions to find the best solution reported and not the time limit,

in comparison with the best model solutions, and the aver- which was set as 3 hours. Particularly for the instances

PT
age computing time, respectively. The next three columns with the longest planning horizon, the best model solu-

1035 present the results after the improvement procedure F&O. tions were found close to the time limit. However, for the

RI
Note that in this case, the average time is cumulative, so1070 remaining groups, which still have significant optimality

that the time spent to find an initial solution via R&F is gaps at the end of the execution, the best solutions were

SC
already included. found within the first hour, approximately. In addition to

These results show that, in general, solving the pro- the previous results that analyze the differences between

1040 posed formulation by the heuristic procedures provides the general and simplified formulation, these heuristics re-

U
competitive solutions in shorter computing times. The re-1075 sults also suggest that the lower bounds may be enhanced
AN
sults after the initial heuristic (R&F) are already compet- to improve the CPLEX performance and instigate further

itive for all data sets, except for the group T2P5 F6K2A2. research to strengthen the general formulation.

For this particular group, the R&F solutions are found These results provide important information about the
M

1045 very fast (i.e., 14.1 seconds on average), but the total costs trade-off between quality solutions and computing time.

of these are approximately 35% higher that the total aver-1080 Planners can obtain feasible production plans for a wide
D

age costs of the solutions provided by the model. However, set of problems by solving the general formulation at once
TE

for the remaining 9 groups of instances, heuristic solutions using CPLEX. Although this alternative results in a com-

with deviations of at most 3.65% are found in at most plex model, it was the only approach able to provide feasi-

45% of the average time spent by the model. Note that ble solutions for all data sets tested in our computational
EP

1050

for the last four data sets, the best solutions obtained by1085 experiments. The simplified model, which is based on the

the general model were found closed to the time limit of general formulation, represents an effective alternative to
C

3 hours, whereas the R&F provides competitive solutions, solve special problem instances in acceptable computing
AC

some of them better than the model solution, in much less times. This approach solved to optimality and found good

1055 computing time. quality solutions for 40% of the total instances. This paper

Additional improvements on the heuristic solutions are1090 also proposed a faster approach to find feasible production

achieved after the F&O is performed. Results show that, plans for all data sets by solving the general model itera-

for 9 out of the 10 groups of instances, these solutions are tively using the R&F and F&O heuristics. Note that, even

better or equal than the model solutions. For the best case though the R&F alone is able to find competitive solutions

1060 in group T4P8 F6̂K3A3, the average objective value of the in short times, planners have the possibility of finding im-

F&O solutions are 5.66% better than the model solutions.1095 proved solutions by using the F&O algorithm at the cost

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

MIP model (GM) Relax-and-fix Fix-and-optimize

∗  ∗ † ∗
Group #Const. #Bin. var. Obj.Val. BS Time Obj. Val. Dev. Time Obj. Val.∗ Dev.† Cu.Time∗
T2P5 F6K2A1 6,823 1,632 17,336.0 307.5s 17,336.0 0.0% 29.2s 17,336.0 0.0% 53.9s
T2P8 F6K2A1 2,745 2,968 26,749.4 4,858.0s 27,721.5 3.65% 2,189.8s 26,668.2 -0.30% 3,024.9s
T2P8 F6̂K3A1 14,161 3,264 23,555.02 2,356.0s 23,555.02 0.0% 1,078.0s 23,555.0 0.0% 1,094.8s
T2P5 F6K2A2 6,973 1,728 22,271.1 88.7s 30,158.0 35.3% 14.1s 23,849.4 7.2% 707.1s
T2P8 F6K2A2 12,895 3,064 28,263.5 1,758.5s 28,263.5 0.0% 268.9s 28,263.5 0.00% 286.3s
T2P8 F6̂K3A3 14,438 3,552 33,700.4 1,927.1s 33,700.4 0.0% 705.7s 33,700.4 0.0% 749.9s
T4P5 F6K2A2 13,977 3,456 103,525.7 6,144.0s 107,873.2 2.9% 32.1s 103,379.4 -0.46% 1,182.5s
T4P5 F6̂K3A3 18,420 4,752 100,455.3 8,895.0s 103,442.9 3.28% 192.8s 98,638.9 -2.04% 702.0s

PT
T4P8 F6K2A2 21,993 5,328 172,002.9 9,032.9s 170,372.5 0.3% 350.7s 162,433.7 -3.8% 1,895.0s
T4P8 F6̂K2A2 28,926 7,104 158,534.4 9,045.0s 151,487.6 -3.5% 1,601.5s 147,593.6 -5.7% 2,497.2s
∗
Average results for the 10 instances in each group;  Average time that CPLEX takes to find the best model solution; † Average deviation
(%) between the heuristic solution and the best solution found by solving the model using CPLEX. It is calculated for each instance as

RI
Heu. Obj. Val. - Model Obj. Val.
Model Obj. Val. .

Table 7: Average results for the MIP-based heuristics

SC
of a few additional minutes in the total computing time. merical experiments showed the potential savings in prac-

tice and the capability of this formulation to provide pro-

U
6. Concluding remarks 1120 duction schedule for different sets of problem instances.
AN
They also highlighted the suitability of this approach to
This study proposed a general and extensive model-
represent different production systems with different mold-
ing approach for the coupled process configuration, lot-
ing equipment and characteristics of the production envi-
M

1100 sizing and scheduling problem in molded pulp companies.

ronments.
The processes used to produce the demanded items are
1125 Computational tests also showed how the character-
D

implicitly generated by this formulation, so that all plan-

istics of the production environment may influence the
ning and scheduling decisions are integrated into the MIP
TE

complexity of the problem. For larger instances, these re-

model. This study aimed to provide insights about differ-
sults suggested that generating parameters in advance for
1105 ent strategies to approach this problem in practice, as well
the process selection and enumerating approaches, may
EP

as contribute to the production planning and lot sizing-

1130 be an extensive and time-consuming task to be performed
literature. Although the proposed approach includes spe-
in practice. This formulation provides good feasible solu-
cific characteristics of the molded pulp industry, it may in-
C

tions for different situations where alternative approaches

spire mathematical representations to optimize production
AC

become limited. Besides, it does not require any impor-

1110 planning activities in other industries, particularly those
tant pre-processing stage to properly represent the process
ones which include molding stages (e.g., the production of
1135 configuration decisions, as the alternative formulation pro-
plastic parts) or require synchronizing different production
posed in our previous work and the simplified model pre-
equipment in the same production line.
sented here.
Unlike other approaches proposed in the literature for
As an alternative to solve the general model via CPLEX,
1115 similar problems, this formulation considers all possible
we also presented a simplified formulation for particular
process configurations implicitly, without requiring any
1140 problem instances and heuristic procedures to find com-
enumeration and pre-processing stages in advance. Nu-

25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

petitive solutions for all instances in shorter computing1175 duction problem for multi-line environments also involves

times. Results showed that this simplified formulation re- an interesting and challenging problem, whose contribu-

duces significantly the number of variables and constraints tions are valuable in practice.

of the general formulation by considering most of the tech-

1145 nical constraints of the problem in advance. This approach AppendixA. Simplified formulation

represents an efficient alternative to found optimal and

The general formulation can be simplified to represent

good quality solutions for special problem instances. How-
1180
ever, its applicability depends on the characteristics of the
PT
special problem instances. Due to the dependency and
synchronization constraints between the production equip-

RI
input data, which turns this approach limited for some
ment (i.e., molding machine and conveyors), it is possible
1150 data sets. Regarding to the heuristic approaches proposed
to determine beforehand the configuration of the molding

SC
here, results showed that solving the general model iter-
machine for any possible arrangement configured on the
atively by using R&F and F&O strategies allows to find
1185 conveyors. Therefore, the number of molds attached to
competitive solutions for all data sets in shorter computing

U
the machine is defined as a consequence of the setup state
times. Heuristic solutions with at most 3.5% average devi-
determined for each conveyor into the model.
AN
1155 ation from the model solutions can be found for most of the
For this simplification, the additional parameter mpe is
instances by using the R&F algorithm. In this case, the
included, the decision variables for lot-sizing and sequenc-
average time to get initial solutions for all instances was
M

1190 ing are the same, the auxiliary variables βks and αiks are
646s, which is about 14.5% of the average time required
removed and the decision variables for process configura-
to find the best solutions by solving the complete model.
D

tion are modified as follows:

1160 The F&O improved 4.7%, on average, the initial solutions Additional parameters:
TE

obtained by the R&F, by increasing approximately 20 min- mpe number of molds for the product assigned to
utes on the total average computing time. The improved lane p that must be attached to the faces
solutions present a total average deviation of -0.5% and
EP

dedicated to a given conveyor, if this

were found approximately 3.6 times faster than the model conveyor is set up according to arrangement e.
1165 solutions. Therefore, these heuristic approaches resulted Decision variables for process configuration:
C

in competitive and faster approaches to provide optimized zkes 1, if conveyor k is set up for arrangement e
AC

production plans in practice. in sub-period s; 0, otherwise

Future research might be focused on improvements and
reformulations for the proposed general mathematical model.
1170 Symmetry-breaking constraints may strengthen the lower
bounds and improve the convergence of the CPLEX branh-
and-cut algorithms. Alternative linearization techniques 1195
yipks 1, if product i is assigned to lane p of
conveyor k in sub-period s; 0, otherwise
xiks number of molds for product i attached to
faces for conveyor k in sub-period s
Objective function: (1)

may also be explored as well as other solution methods. Constraints related to process configuration decisions

The development of optimization approaches for this pro- Constraints (2)–(8) are the same, constraints (9) –(10)

26
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

and (12) –(17) are removed, and constraints (11) are mod-1215 following inequalities:

ified as follows:
X
xiks = 2r̂−1 θr̂iks (A.8)
X r̂∈R̂
xiks ≤ Mi ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N (A.1) +
X XX
− −
k∈K
Ii(t−1) + R(2r−1 Θr̂iks ) + Iit = Ii(t−1)
s∈St k∈K r̂∈R̂ (A.9)
1200 In addition, new constraints (A.2) are included, which
+
+dit + Iit ∀i ∈ N ; t ∈ T
impose that the total number of molds i attached to the

PT
faces for conveyor k in sub-period s is equal to the sum of Θr̂iks ≤ ws ∀s ∈ S; k ∈ K; i ∈ N ; r̂ ∈ R̂ (A.10)
parameters mpe , p ∈ P ; e ∈ E : yipks = 1 and zkes = 1.
XX
xiks = mpe yipks zkes (A.2) Θr̂iks ≤ Qt Yis ∀t ∈ T ; s ∈ St ; k ∈ K; i ∈ N ; r̂ ∈ R̂

RI
e∈E p∈P
(A.11)
These nonlinear constraints can be replaced by the fol-

SC
1205 lowing linear constraints (A.3)-(A.4):
Θr̂iks ≤ Qt θr̂iks
(A.12)
X ∀t ∈ T ; s ∈ St ; k ∈ K; i ∈ N ; r̂ ∈ R̂
xiks ≤ mpe yipks + MkII (1 − zkes )

U
p∈P (A.3) Θr̂iks ≥ ws − Qt (2 − θr̂iks − Yis )
(A.13)
∀s ∈ S; k ∈ K; e ∈ E; i ∈ N.
AN
X ∀t ∈ T ; s ∈ St ; k ∈ K; i ∈ N ; r̂ ∈ R̂
xiks ≥ mpe yipks − MkII (1 − zkes )
p∈P (A.4) θr̂iks ∈ {0, 1}; Θr̂iks ∈ R+ ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K; r̂ ∈ R̂
M

∀s ∈ S; k ∈ K; e ∈ E; i ∈ N. (A.14)
Constraints related to lot-sizing decisions

The capacity constraints (18) are the same and the AppendixA.1. Defining mpe
D

demand balance constraints are modified by: This parameter is defined in a pre-processing stage by
TE

X X taking into account the size of the machine faces, the size of
+ − − +
Ii(t−1) + ws R xiks + Iit = Ii(t−1) + dit + Iit
s∈St k∈K
the conveyors, the size of products, the original constraints

in the general model (9) –(10) and the synchronization

EP

1220
∀i ∈ N ; t ∈ T
constraints (12) –(17).
(A.5)
Constraints related to sequencing decisions Determining mpe consists of considering all possible ar-
C

Constraints (22)–(26) are the same and constraints (20)– rangements that can be configured on the conveyors (i.e.,
AC

(21) are modified by: ∀e ∈ E), and identifying the number of molds attached for
uiks ≥ xiks − xik(s−1) ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K (A.6)1225 the products assigned to each lane p ∈ Pe . This number

uiks ≥ xik(s−1) − xiks ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; k ∈ K (A.7) of molds mpe ∀e ∈ E; p ∈ P must be an integer number

1210 Nonlinear constraints satisfying all constraints of the general model (9) –(10)
As the original nonlinear constraints (16)–(17) of the and (12) –(17).
general model were removed, the linearization constraints For instance, consider a production line with a 6-face
(27)–(33) are also removed. Constraints (35)–(39) to lin-1230 molding machine of width L = 4 and two conveyors of

earize the demand balance constraints are replaced by the width lk = 3 ∀k ∈ K. Three machine faces are dedicated

27
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

to conveyor k = 1 and the other three faces are dedicated comprises two lanes of width gpe = 1.3 ∀e = 2; p ∈ P2 .

to conveyor k = 2. These conveyors can be set up accord- In this case, the number of molds attached to the machine

ing to only one arrangement e = 1, which comprises three faces should be 3, so that constraints (9) –(10) are satisfied.

1235 lanes of width gpe = 1 ∀e = 1; p ∈ P1 . This implies that a total of 9 molds should be attached to

In this case, it is possible to define parameter mpe =1270 the faces dedicated for each conveyor. However, it is not

4 ∀e = 1; p ∈ P1 , leading to a configuration of the possible to associate an integer number of molds for each

PT
molding machine that satisfies constraints (9) –(10) and product assigned to each lane of the conveyor that satis-

(12) –(17) of the general formulation. Note that each con- fies constraints (12) –(17) and the integrality constraints

RI
1240 veyor is set up for three lanes. Therefore, 4 molds for for variables xiks .

the product assigned to lane 1, 4 molds for the product

SC
assigned to lane 2 and 4 molds for the product assigned1275 AppendixB. Implemented R&F and F&O algorithms

to lane 3 can be attached to the faces dedicated to the

Algorithm 1 R&F algorithm to find feasible solutions
specific conveyor. In this way, a total of 24 molds can be 1: Step 1:

U
2: for all s ∈ S do
1245 attached to the machine faces, i.e. 4 molds attached to 3: t∗ ← t : s ∈ St
AN
4: Keep the integrality of the variables zkes , yipks , Yiŝ , xif s ,
each face. The sum of the widths of the molds attached to αiks , βks , vs and bee0 ks ∀i ∈ N ; k ∈ K; e, e0 ∈ E; p ∈
P ; ŝ ∈ St∗ : ŝ ≥ s;
each face is equal to 4 (i.e., equals L), thus constraints 5: Relax the integer variables zkes∗ , yipks∗ , Yiŝ , xif s∗ , αiks∗ ,
βks∗ , vs∗ and bee0 ks∗ ∀s∗ > s : s∗ ∈ S; ŝ > s : ŝ ∈ / St∗ ; i ∈
(9) –(10) of the general model are satisfied. The syn- N ; k ∈ K; e, e0 ∈ E; p ∈ P ;
M

6: Solve the model (1)-(19);

chronization constraints (12) –(17) are also satisfied, as 7: Fix the variables zkes , yipks , Yis , xif s , αiks , βks , vs , bee0 ks ,
uiks and βks ;
xiks can be expressed in terms of the original variables of 8: end for
D

1250
9: return A feasible solution for the original problem
P
the general model x̂if s as follows: xiks = f ∈Fk x̂if s =
TE

P
β̂ks p∈P yipks , where β̂ks = 4.
Algorithm 2 F&O algorithm to improve initial solutions
This simplified formulation allows to reduce the num- 1: InSol ← Feasible solution found in Algorithm 1;
2: F OSol ← Objective function value of InSol;
ber of variables and complicating constraints of the orig- 3: Fix all variables to the values of InSol;
EP

4: for all k ∈ K do
+ −
5: Release the lot-sizing variables ws , Iit , Iit ; the variables for
1255 inal formulation. However, defining parameter mpe may Setup II vs ; and the assignment variables Yis ∀i ∈ N ; s ∈
S; t ∈ T ;
imply significant pre-processing effort according to the size 6: Release variables zkes , yipks , xif s , αiks , βks , uiks and
C

bee0 ks ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; f ∈ Fk ; e, e0 ∈ E; p ∈ P ;
of set E. Besides, for some problem instances, it is not pos- 7: Solve the model (1)-(19);
8: if the FO value of the current solution is better than F OSol
AC

sible to find an integer parameter mpe that complies the then

9: Fix variables zkes , yipks , xif s , αiks , βks , uiks and
original synchronization constraints of the problem, so the bee0 ks ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; f ∈ Fk ; e, e0 ∈ E; p ∈ P to the
values of the incumbent solution;
1260 simplified formulation cannot represent properly the orig- 10: else
11: Fix variables zkes , yipks , xif s , αiks , βks , uiks and
inal problem (i.e., its solution would not be valid for the bee0 ks ∀s ∈ S; i ∈ N ; f ∈ Fk ; e, e0 ∈ E; p ∈ P to the
values of InSol;
original problem). For instance, consider a production line 12: end if
13: end for
with the same characteristics as the one described above 14: return A feasible solution for the original problem

(i.e., a 6-face machine with 2 conveyors). These conveyors

1265 can be set up according to an arrangement e = 2, which

28
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

References and scheduling in soft drink production. International Journal

of Production Economics 136, 255–265.
[1] Almada-Lobo, B., Clark, A., Guimares, L., Figueira, G.,
1320 [14] Ferreira, D., Morabito, R., Rangel, S., 2010. Relax and fix
Amorim, P., 2015. Industrial insights into lot sizing and sche-
heuristics to solve one-stage one-machine lot-scheduling mod-
duling modeling. Pesquisa Operacional 35, 439 – 464.
els for small-scale soft drink plants. Computers & Operations
1280 [2] Almada-Lobo, B., Oliveira, J.F., Carravilla, M.A., 2008. Pro-
Research 37, 684–691.
duction planning and scheduling in the glass container industry:
[15] Figueira, G., Oliveira Santos, M., Almada-Lobo, B., 2013. A
A VNS approach. International Journal of Production Eco-

PT
1325 hybrid VNS approach for the short-term production planning
nomics 114, 363–375.
and scheduling: A case study in the pulp and paper industry.
[3] Araujo, S., Arenales, M.N., Clark, A.R., 2008. Lot sizing and
Computers & Operations Research 40, 1804–1818.
furnace scheduling in small foundries. Computers & Operations

RI
1285
[16] Fleischmann, B., Meyr, H., 1997. The general lotsizing and
Research 35, 916–932.
scheduling problem. OR Spectrum 19, 11–21.
[4] Baldo, T.A., Santos, M.O., Almada-Lobo, B., Morabito, R.,
1330 [17] FMIG, Ltd., C.P., 2017. Moulded Fibre Pulp Packaging Market:

SC
2014. An optimization approach for the lot sizing and sche-
F&B Packaging Segment to Retain Its Dominance Throughout
duling problem in the brewery industry. Computers & Industrial
the Forecast Period: Global Industry Analysis and Opportunity
1290 Engineering 72, 58–71.
Assessment, 2016-2026. Technical Report.

U
[5] Baumann, P., Forrer, S., Trautmann, N., 2015. Planning of
[18] Furlan, M., Almada-Lobo, B., Santos, M., Morabito, R., 2015.
a make-to-order production process in the printing industry.
Unequal individual genetic algorithm with intelligent diversifi-
AN
1335
Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal 27, 534–560.
cation for the lot-scheduling problem in integrated mills using
[6] Clark, A., Almada-Lobo, B., Almeder, C., 2011. Lot sizing and
multiple-paper machines. Computers & Operations Research
1295 scheduling: industrial extensions and research opportunities. In-
59, 33 – 50.
M

ternational Journal of Production Research 49, 2457–2461.

[19] Gaudreault, J., Frayret, J.M., Rousseau, A., D Amours, S.,
[7] Clark, A.R., Morabito, R., Toso, E.A.V., 2010. Production
1340 2011. Combined planning and scheduling in a divergent pro-
setup-sequencing and lot-sizing at an animal nutrition plant
D

duction system with co-production: A case study in the lumber

through atsp subtour elimination and patching. Journal of Sche-
industry. Computers & Operations Research 38, 1238–1250.
duling 13, 111–121.
TE

1300
[20] Gilmore, P.C., Gomory, R.E., 1961. A linear programming ap-
[8] Copil, K., Wörbelauer, M., Meyr, H., Tempelmeier, H., 2016.
proach to the cutting-stock problem. Operations research 9,
Simultaneous lotsizing and scheduling problems: a classification
1345 849–859.
and review of models. OR Spectrum , 1–64.
EP

[21] Gilmore, P.C., Gomory, R.E., 1963. A linear programming ap-

[9] De Carvalho, J.V., 2002. LP models for bin packing and cutting
proach to the cutting stock problem-part II. Operations research
1305 stock problems. European Journal of Operational Research 141,
11, 863–888.
253–273.
C

[22] Göthe-Lundgren, M., Lundgren, J., Persson, J., 2002. An op-

[10] Drexl, A., Kimms, A., 1997. Lot sizing and scheduling - Survey
1350 timization model for refinery production scheduling. Interna-
AC

and extensions. European Journal of Operational Research 99,

tional Journal of Production Economics 78, 255–270.
221–235.
[23] Guimares, L., Klabjan, D., Almada-Lobo, B., 2014. Modeling
1310 [11] EMFA, 2015. European Moulded Fibre Association. URL:
lotsizing and scheduling problems with sequence dependent se-
http://www.emfa.eu. accessed: 2015-06-27.
tups. European Journal of Operational Research 239, 644 –
[12] Fachini, R.F., Esposto, K.F., Camargo, V.C.B., 2017. Glass
1355 662.
container production planning with warm-ups and furnace ex-
[24] Guner Goren, H., Tunali, S., Jans, R., 2010. A review of appli-
traction variation losses. The International Journal of Advanced
cations of genetic algorithms in lot sizing. Journal of Intelligent
1315 Manufacturing Technology 90, 527–543.
Manufacturing 21, 575–590.
[13] Ferreira, D., Clark, A.R., Almada-Lobo, B., Morabito, R., 2012.
[25] Hajizadeh, I., Lee, C.G., 2007. Alternative configurations for
Single-stage formulations for synchronised two-stage lot sizing
1360 cutting machines in a tube cutting mill. European Journal of

29
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Operational Research 183, 1385 – 1396.
[26] Hans, E., Velde, S., 2011. The lot sizing and scheduling of1405
sand casting operations. International Journal of Production
Research 49, 2481–2499.
1365 [27] Harjunkoski, I., Westerlund, T., Isaksson, J., Skrifvars, H.,
1996. Different formulations for solving trim loss problems in
a paper-converting mill with ilp. Computers & Chemical Engi-1410
paper mill planning and scheduling. Computers & Industrial
Engineering 63, 1–12.
[40] Shi, L., Jiang, Y., Wang, L., Huang, D., 2014. Refinery Pro-
duction Scheduling Involving Operational Transitions of Mode
Switching under Predictive Control System. Industrial & Engi-
neering Chemistry Research 53, 8155–8170.
[41] Toledo, C., Oliveira, L., Pereira, R., França, P., Morabito, R.,

PT
neering 20, Supplement 1, S121 – S126. 2014. A genetic algorithm / mathematical programming ap-
[28] IMFA, 2015. International Molded Fiber Association. URL: proach to solve a two-level soft drink production problem. Com-
1370 http://www.imfa.org. accessed: 2015-05-25. puters & Operations Research 48, 40–52.

RI
[29] Jans, R., Degraeve, Z., 2004. An industrial extension of the [42] Toledo, C.F.M., da Silva Arantes, M., de Oliveira, R.R.R.,
discrete lot-sizing and scheduling problem. IIE Transactions1415 Almada-Lobo, B., 2013. Glass container production scheduling
36, 47–58. through hybrid multi-population based evolutionary algorithm.

SC
[30] Jans, R., Degraeve, Z., 2008. Modeling industrial lot sizing pro- Applied Soft Computing 13, 1352–1364.
1375 blems: a review. International Journal of Production Research [43] Toso, E.A.V., Morabito, R., Clark, A., 2009. Lot sizing and
46, 1619–1643. sequencing optimisation at an animal-feed plant. Computers &

U
[31] Johnson, L., Montgomery, D., 1974. Operations research in1420 Industrial Engineering 57, 813–821.
production planning, scheduling, and inventory control. Wiley. [44] Transchel, S., Kallrath, J., Minner, S., Lohndorf, N., Ulrich, E.,
AN
[32] Karimi, B., Fatemi Ghomi, S., Wilson, J., 2003. The capacitated 2011. A hybrid general lot-sizing and scheduling formulation
1380 lot sizing problem: a review of models and algorithms. Omega for a production process with a two-stage product structure.
31, 365–378. International Journal of Production Research 19, 1–25.
M

[33] Luche, J.R., Morabito, R., Pureza, V., 2009. Combining process
selection and lot sizing models for production scheduling of elec-
D

trofused grains. Asia-Pacific Journal of Operational Research

1385 26, 421–443.
TE

[34] Marinelli, F., Nenni, M.E., Sforza, A., 2007. Capacitated lot
sizing and scheduling with parallel machines and shared buffers:
A case study in a packaging company. Annals of Operations
EP

Research 150, 177–192.

1390 [35] Martı́nez, K.Y.P., Toso, E.A.V., 2016. Lot sizing and scheduling
in the molded pulp packaging industry. Gestão & Produção 23,
C

649 – 660.
[36] Martı́nez, K.Y.P., Toso, E.A.V., Morabito, R., 2016. Produc-
AC

tion planning in the molded pulp packaging industry. Comput-

1395 ers & Industrial Engineering 98, 554 – 566.
[37] Menezes, G.C., Mateus, G.R., Ravetti, M.G., 2016. A hierar-
chical approach to solve a production planning and scheduling
problem in bulk cargo terminal. Computers & Industrial Engi-
neering 97, 1 – 14.
1400 [38] Pattloch, M., Schmidt, G., Kovalyov, M.Y., 2001. Heuristic
algorithms for lotsize scheduling with application in the tobacco
industry. Computers & Industrial Engineering 39, 235–253.
[39] Santos, M.O., Almada-Lobo, B., 2012. Integrated pulp and

30