Collaborative batch aggregation and scheduling in a manufacturing environment
View Patent ↗In one aspect, a computer-implemented method is provided for aggregating and scheduling product batches in a manufacturing environment. Using a batch aggregation engine implementing a mathematical programming strategy, one or more product demands are allocated to one or more product batches having suggested sizes and suggested starting times. The mathematical programming strategy includes evaluating a number of time-based penalties relative to one another in allocating the demands to the batches, the time-based penalties being based on relationships between suggested starting times for batches and times of demands being considered for allocation to batches. The suggested sizes, the suggested starting times, and feedback relating to the suggested sizes and suggested starting times are communicated from the batch aggregation engine to a scheduling engine to assist the scheduling engine in scheduling starting times for the batches.
1. A computer-implemented method for creating and scheduling batches, comprising:
allocating one or more demands to one or more batches having suggested sizes and starting times using a first engine implementing a mathematical programming strategy comprising evaluating a plurality of time-based penalties in allocating the demands to the batches; and
communicating the suggested sizes and starting times, and feedback relating to the suggested sizes and starting times, from the first engine to a second engine for use in scheduling starting times for the batches.
2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the mathematical programming strategy comprises a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) strategy.
3. The method of claim 1 , wherein the feedback communicated from the first engine to the second engine comprises one or more penalties associated with deviating from at least one of the suggested sizes or starting times.
4. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:
scheduling starting times for the batches using the second engine according to the suggested sizes and starting times, and related feedback, received from the first engine; and
communicating the scheduled starting times and feedback relating to the scheduled starting times from the second engine to the first engine for use in re-allocating one or more demands to one or more batches according to the scheduled starting times and related feedback.
5. The method of claim 4 , wherein the feedback communicated from the second engine to the first engine comprises one or more time-based penalties associated with deviating from at least one of the scheduled starting times.
6. The method of claim 4 , wherein the steps are repeated in an iterative cycle until the first and second engines collaboratively reach a sufficiently optimal solution or until a predetermined number of iterations has been reached.
7. The method of claim 6 , wherein:
the feedback communicated from the first engine to the second engine comprises one or more penalties, associated with deviating from at least one of the suggested sizes or starting times, that increase for each iteration in the iterative cycle; and
the feedback communicated from the second engine to the first engine comprises one or more penalties, associated with deviating from at least one of the scheduled starting times, that increase for each iteration in the iterative cycle.
8. A computer-based system for creating and scheduling batches, comprising a first engine operable to:
allocate one or more demands to one or more batches having suggested sizes and starting times using a mathematical programming strategy comprising evaluating a plurality of time-based penalties in allocating the demands to the batches; and
communicate the suggested batch sizes and starting times, and feedback relating to the suggested sizes and starting times, from the first engine to a second engine for use in scheduling starting times for the batches.
9. The system of claim 8 , wherein the mathematical programming strategy comprises a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) strategy.
10. The system of claim 8 , wherein the feedback communicated from the first engine to the second engine comprises one or more penalties associated with deviating from at least one of the suggested sizes or starting times.
11. The system of claim 8 , further comprising the second engine coupled to the first engine, the second engine operable to:
schedule starting times for the batches according to the suggested sizes and starting times, and related feedback, received from the first engine; and
communicate the scheduled starting times and feedback relating to the scheduled starting times to the first engine for use in re-allocating one or more demands to one or more batches according to the scheduled starting times and related feedback.
12. The system of claim 11 , wherein the feedback communicated from the second engine to the first engine comprises one or more time-based penalties associated with deviating from at least one of scheduled starting times.
13. The system of claim 11 , wherein the first and second engines are further operable to communicate their respective outputs to each other in an iterative cycle until they collaboratively reach a sufficiently optimal solution or until a predetermined number of iterations has been reached.
14. The system of claim 13 , wherein:
the feedback communicated from the first engine to the second engine comprises one or more penalties, associated with deviating from at least one of the suggested sizes or starting times, that increase for each iteration in the iterative cycle; and
the feedback communicated from the second engine to the first engine comprises one or more penalties, associated with deviating from at least one of the scheduled starting times, that increase for each iteration in the iterative cycle.
15. Computer software for creating and scheduling batches, the software embodied in one or more computer-readable media and when executed operable to:
allocate one or more demands to one or more batches having suggested sizes and starting times using first software implementing a mathematical programming strategy comprising evaluating a plurality of time-based penalties in allocating the demands to the batches; and
communicate the suggested sizes and starting times, and feedback relating to the suggested sizes and starting times, from the first software to second software for use in scheduling starting times for the batches.
16. The software of claim 15 , wherein the mathematical programming strategy comprises a mixed-integer linear programming (MILP) strategy.
17. The software of claim 15 , wherein the feedback communicated from the first software to the second software comprises one or more penalties associated with deviating from at least one of the suggested sizes or starting times.
18. The software of claim 15 , further comprising the second software, operable when executed to:
schedule starting times for the batches according to the suggested sizes and starting times, and related feedback, received from the first software; and
communicate the scheduled starting times and feedback relating to the scheduled starting times from the second software to the first software for use in re-allocating one or more demands to one or more batches according to the scheduled starting times and related feedback.
19. The software of claim 18 , wherein the feedback communicated from the second software to the first software comprises one or more time-based penalties associated with deviating from at least one of the scheduled starting times.
20. The software of claim 18 , wherein the steps are repeated in an iterative cycle until the first and second software collaboratively reach a sufficiently optimal solution or until a predetermined number of iterations has been reached.
21. The software of claim 20 , wherein:
the feedback communicated from the first software to the second software comprises one or more penalties, associated with deviating from at least one of the suggested sizes or starting times, that increase for each iteration in the iterative cycle; and
the feedback communicated from the second software to the first software comprises one or more penalties, associated with deviating from at least one of the scheduled starting times, that increase for each iteration in the iterative cycle.