Assessing the effectiveness of static heuristics for scheduling lumber orders in the sawmilling production process

Summary

No reviewed summary yet. Read the abstract below or open the original publication.

Abstract

Although optimization models can be used to plan the production process, in most cases static heuristics, such as earliest due date (E), longest processing time (L), and shortest processing time (S), are used because of their simplicity. This study aims to analyze the production cost of the static heuristics and to determine how this cost relates to the size of the production orders in the sawmilling industry. We set a planning problem with different orders and due dates and solved it using two cost-minimization models to compare their solutions. The first was a planning model (PL) where orders were split up into products demand by period, and the second, a planning scheduling (PS) where the sequence of processing orders based on static heuristics was assumed as known. In the latter, the minimum production cost for each static heuristic was found. In both models, the same resource constraints were assumed. The costs showed no significant changes based on order sizes. However, 0,5 % of orders were delayed using PS-E, and 17 % of orders were delayed using PL. PL was an efficient solution method when changing the orders´ size and when looking for the best static heuristic to process the orders. However, PS-E showed the ability to reduce the backlog close to zero while the PL backlog ratio was 17 %. No penalties were applied to backlogs due to their subjective nature; however, when shortages occurred, the demand was unmet or backlogged with substantial costs. Thus, in case the proposed method is adopted using a conservative backlog cost, a sawmill producing under the cut-to-order environment that produces 300000 m3 /year would reduce backlogged orders by 51000 m3. If the holding lumber cost is 2 $/m3, annual savings would be $408000.

Abstract as supplied by the source. Full text may be restricted by the publisher.