4.6 Article

New chance-constrained models for U-type stochastic assembly line balancing problem

Journal

SOFT COMPUTING
Volume 25, Issue 14, Pages 9559-9573

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00500-021-05921-z

Keywords

Stochastic assembly line balancing; U-type problem; Constraint programming; Mixed integer programming; Chance-constrained programming

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, two new chance-constrained nonlinear models were proposed for the stochastic U-type assembly line balancing problem (ALBP), one belonging to mixed-integer programming (MIP) and the other to constraint programming (CP). The linearized chance-constrained counterparts were developed using a transformation approach to reduce model complexity and solve the models linearly. Several numerical experiments were conducted to test the effectiveness of the proposed models, demonstrating that the CP and MIP models were more successful in solving the stochastic U-type ALBP.
U-shaped assembly lines are widely encountered in contemporary JIT systems. Unlike presumptions of deterministic studies, task times may vary according to a probability distribution. In this study, a stochastic U-type assembly line balancing problem (ALBP) is considered. For this purpose, two new chance-constrained nonlinear models are proposed. While the first model belongs to the mixed-integer programming (MIP) category, the other is constraint programming (CP). The linearized chance-constrained counterparts are developed using a transformation approach to reduce the model complexity and solve the models linearly. Several numerical experiments are performed to test the effectiveness of the proposed models. The results are compared with the results of modified ant colony optimization and a piecewise-linear programming model. The numerical results demonstrate that the proposed CP and MIP models are more effective and successful in solving stochastic U-type ALBP.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available