Journals / Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi / 2018 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 4

Forward supply Chain network design problem: Heuristic approaches

İleri tedarik zinciri ağ tasarımı problemi: Sezgisel yaklaşımlar

Pages
749–763
Publication Date
2018-08-17
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Comparative experiments show that both the GA and HHA can yield feasible solutions in much less computational time and, in particular, outperforms CPLEX regarding the solution quality as the number of echelon grows.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Determining positions and counting of actors, amount of product flow between and decreasing transportation costs are handled as a network design problem in supply chain management.
📊
Key Findings & Data:To this end, 450 new benchmark instances ranging from small to large size for forward SCND problems with two, three and four-echelon are generated and a mathematical model for each of the problems is formulated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Comparative experiments show that both the GA and HHA can yield feasible solutions in much less computational time and, in particular, outperforms CPLEX regarding the solution quality as the number of echelon grows.
🔬Design:Lab & Field Experiment
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Tedarik zinciri ağ tasarımı · karma tamsayılı programlama · genetik algoritma

Abstract

Determining positions and counting of actors, amount of product flow between and decreasing transportation costs are handled as a network design problem in supply chain management. Supply chain network design (SCND) problem belongs to the class of NP-hard problems. It has therefore appealed to a number of researchers’ close attention. However, existing literature lacks of common benchmark instances for forward SCND problems so as to make a fair comparison between developed and applied heuristic approaches. To this end, 450 new benchmark instances ranging from small to large size for forward SCND problems with two, three and four-echelon are generated and a mathematical model for each of the problems is formulated. Due to the complexity issues, we develop two heuristic solution approaches, genetic algorithm (GA) and hybrid heuristic algorithm (HHA), and we apply them to the large pool of benchmark instances. Comparative experiments show that both the GA and HHA can yield feasible solutions in much less computational time and, in particular, outperforms CPLEX regarding the solution quality as the number of echelon grows.

Özet

Tedarik zinciri içindeki tesislerin yerlerinin belirlenmesi, aralarındaki ürün akışlarının maliyeti minimize edecek şekilde optimize edilmesi tedarik zinciri ağ tasarımı (TZAT) problemi olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. TZAT problemleri NP-zor sınıfına girmektedir. Dolayısıyla çoğu araştırmacı tarafından üzerinde çalışılan bir konudur. Ancak literatürde araştırmacıların adil karşılaştırmalar yapabileceği test problemler mevcut değildir. Bu sebeple, küçük boyuttan büyük boyuta kadar iki, üç ve dört aşamalı olmak üzere 450 adet TZAT test problemi geliştirilmiş, matematiksel olarak da modellenmiştir. Problemin çözüm karmaşıklığından dolayı biri genetik algoritma diğeri de melez sezgisel bir yaklaşım olmak üzere iki farklı çözüm yöntemi önerilmiştir. Önerilen yaklaşımlar geliştirilen test problemlere uygulanmış ve karşılaştırmalar yapılmıştır. Elde edilen sonuçlara göre önerilen sezgisel yaklaşımlar küçük boyutlu problemler için CPLEX ile elde edilen optimal sonuçları yakalamış, büyük boyutlu problemler için ise çok daha kısa sürede kabul edilebilir sonuçlar elde etmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

KOÇ, Ç., ÖZCEYLAN, E., KESEN, S. E., ÇİL, Z. A., METE, S. (2018). Forward supply Chain network design problem: Heuristic approaches. Pamukkale Üniversitesi Mühendislik Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 4, 749–763. https://ajindex.com/articles/42344

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Paksoy T, Bektaş T, Özceylan E. “Operational and environmental performance measures in a multi-product closed-loop supply Chain”. Transportation Research Part E, 47(4), 532-546, 2011.
  2. Alayet C, Lehoux N, Lebel L, Bouchard M. “Centralized supply chain planning model for multiple forest companies”. INFOR: Information Systems and Operational Research, 54(3), 171-191, 2016.
  3. Ashtab S, Caron RJ, Selvarajah E. “A characterization of alternate optimal solutions for a supply chain network design model”. INFOR: Information Systems and Operational Research, 53(2), 90-93, 2015.
  4. Özceylan E, Paksoy T, Bektaş T. “Modeling and optimizing the integrated problem of closed-loop supply chain network design and disassembly line balancing”. Transportation Research Part E, 61, 142-164, 2014.
  5. Demirel N, Gökçen H. “A mixed integer programming model for remanufacturing in reverse logistics environment”. International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 39(11-12), 1197-1206, 2008.
  6. Tari I, Alumur SA. “Collection center location with equity considerations in reverse logistics networks”. INFOR: Information Systems and Operational Research, 52(4), 157-173, 2014.
  7. Soleimani H, Govindan K, Saghafi H, Jafari H. “Fuzzy multi-objective sustainable and green closed-loop supply chain network design”. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 109, 191-203, 2017.
  8. Syarif A, Yun Y, Gen M. “Study on multi-stage logistics chain network: A spanning tree-based genetic algorithm approach”. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 43(1-2), 299-314, 2002.
  9. Altıparmak F, Gen M, Lin L, Karaoğlan I. “A steady-state genetic algorithm for multi-product supply chain network design”. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 56(2), 521-537, 2009.
  10. Paksoy T, Chang CT. “Revised multi-choice goal programming for multi-period, multi-stage inventory controlled supply chain model with popup stores in guerrilla marketing”. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 34(11), 3586-3598, 2010.
  11. Paksoy T, Özceylan E, Weber GW. “Profit oriented supply chain network optimization”. Central European Journal of Operational Research, 21(2), 455-478, 2013.
  12. Badole CM, Jain R, Rathore APS, Nepal B. “Research and opportunities in supply chain modelling: A review”. International Journal of Supply Chain Management, 1(3), 63-86, 2012.
  13. Fahimnia B, Farahani RZ, Marian R, Luong L. “A review and critique on integrated production-distribution planning models and techniques”. Journal of Manufacturing Systems, 32(1), 1-19, 2013.
  14. Lambiase A, Mastrocinque E, Miranda