Optimizing job shop scheduling in modern factories demands flexibility and adaptability to handle unexpected events and Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs) limitations. This paper addresses these challenges by introducing a novel multi-agent simulator for the Job Shop Scheduling Problem (JSSP) with UGVs handling transportation tasks. The simulator, designed with Netlogo, incorporates real-world constraints, such as collision avoidance, UGV fleet size, and battery limitations, often overlooked in prior studies. By comparing the two categories of UGVs, namely, Autonomous Guided Vehicles (AGVs) and Autonomous Intelligent Vehicles (AIVs), under different scheduling methods (static vs dynamic), we evaluate their performance in constrained manufacturing environments. Our findings highlight the superior performance of AIVs in terms of overall makespan and resilience to additional constraints. Among other results, we found that schedules with a fleet of 2 AIVs produced similar makespans than schedules with a fleet of 4 AGVs. Consequently, the simulator and the conducted study provide valuable insights for optimizing JSSP within constrained environments and making informed decisions regarding AIVs adoption.
LehmanR.Computer simulation and modeling: an introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1977.
2.
PritskerAAB. Compilation of definitions of simulation. SIMULATION1979; 33: 61–63.
3.
ChenRYangBLiS, et al. A self-learning genetic algorithm based on reinforcement learning for flexible jobshop scheduling problem. Comput Ind Eng2020; 149: 106778.
4.
AhmadianMMSalehipourAChengT. A metaheuristic to solve the just-in-time job-shop scheduling problem. Europ J Oper Res2021; 288: 1429.
5.
CroninCConwayAWalshJ. State-of-the-art review of autonomous intelligent vehicles (aiv) technologies for the automotive and manufacturing industry. In: 2019 30th Irish signals and systems conference (ISSC), Maynooth, 17–18 June 2019, pp. 1–6. New York: IEEE.
6.
HuHJiaXHeQ, et al. Deep reinforcement learning based agvs real-time scheduling with mixed rule for flexible shop floor in industry 4.0. Comput Ind Eng2020; 149: 106749.
7.
MartinLGonźalez-RomoMSahnounM, et al. Effect of human-robot interaction on the fleet size of AIV transporters in FMS. In: 2021 1st international conference on cyber management and engineering (CyMaEn), Hammamet, Tunisia, 26–28 May 2021, pp. 1–5. New York: IEEE.
8.
AizatMAzminARahimanW.A survey on navigation approaches for automated guided vehicle robots in dynamic surrounding. IEEE Access2023; 11: 33934–33955.
9.
DestouetCTlahigHBettayebB, et al. Flexible job shop scheduling problem under industry 5.0: a survey on human reintegration, environmental consideration and resilience improvement. J Manuf Syst2023; 67: 155–173.
10.
JianZGuofuDYishengZ, et al. Review of job shop scheduling research and its new perspectives under industry 4.0. J Intel Manuf2019; 30: 1809–1830.
11.
SanogoKMekhalef BenhafssaASahnounM, et al. A multi-agent system simulation based approach for collision avoidance in integrated job-shop scheduling problem with transportation tasks. J Manuf Syst2023; 68: 209–226.
12.
ParveenSUllahH.Review on job-shop and flow-shop scheduling using. J Mech Eng2011; 41: 130–146.
13.
RodriguesRPde PinhoAFSenaDC.Application of hybrid simulation in production scheduling in job shop systems. SIMULATION2020; 96: 253–268.
14.
MoussaA.Approach for energy management in industrial systems: use case: scheduling of automated guided vehicles in job-shop manufacturing system with energy constraints. PhD Thesis, Oran University, Es Sénia, Algeria, 2021
15.
AbderrahimMBekrarATrentesauxD, et al. Manufacturing 4.0 operations scheduling with AGV battery management constraints. Energies2020; 13: 4948.
16.
VisIF.Survey of research in the design and control of automated guided vehicle systems. Europ J Oper Res2006; 170: 677–709.
17.
De RyckMVersteyheMDebrouwereF. Automated guided vehicle systems, state-of-the-art control algorithms and techniques. J Manuf Syst2020; 54: 152–173.
18.
PritskerAPegdenC.Introduction to Simulation and SLAM. Ultimo, NSW, Australia: Halsted Press Book, 1979.
19.
Ruiz-MartinC.Theory and foundations of modeling and simulation. SIMULATION2023; 99: 431–432.
20.
Zambrano ReyGBonteTPrabhuV, et al. Reducing myopic behavior in FMS control: a semi-heterarchical simulation–optimization approach. Simul Model Pract Theory2014; 46: 53–75.
21.
DunkeFNickelS.Day-ahead and online decision-making for collaborative on-site logistics. J Simul2019; 13: 138–151.
22.
de MooijJBhattacharyaPDell’AnnaD, et al. A framework for modeling human behavior in large-scale agent-based epidemic simulations. SIMULATION2023; 99: 1183–1211.
23.
AdamCArduinH.Agent-based epidemics simulation to compare and explain screening and vaccination prioritization strategies. SIMULATION2024; 100: 335–355.
24.
IbrahimYHassanR.A revolutionary crowd model: implemented to contrast oscillating to consistent media influence on crowd behavior. SIMULATION2017; 93: 951–971.
25.
DatserisGVahdatiARDuBoisTC.Agents.jl: a performant and feature-full agent-based modeling software of minimal code complexity. SIMULATION2022; 100: 1091–1031.
26.
CollinsAJFrydenlundE.Strategic group formation in agent-based simulation. SIMULATION2018; 94: 179–193.
27.
YaoBWangZCaoQ, et al. Express bus fare optimization based on passenger choice behavior. SIMULATION2016; 92: 617–625.
28.
García-SuárezAGuisado-LizarJLDiaz-del RioF, et al. A cellular automata agent-based hybrid simulation tool to analyze the deployment of electric vehicle charging stations. Sustainability2021; 13: su13105421.
29.
BenhafssaAMSahnounMBettayebB, et al. Optimizing energy-conscious dynamic flexible job shop scheduling: multiagent simulation approach. In: 2021 1st international conference on cyber management and engineering (Cymaen), Hammamet, Tunisia, 26–28 May 2021, pp.1–6. New York: IEEE.
30.
SahnounMXuYAbdelazizFB, et al. Optimization of transportation collaborative robots fleet size in flexible manufacturing systems. In: 2019 8th international conference on modeling simulation and applied optimization (ICMSAO), Manama, Bahrain, 15–17 April 2019, pp. 1–5. New York: IEEE.
31.
SanogoKMekhalef BenhafssaASahnounM, et al. Multiagent simulation for flexible job-shop scheduling problem with traffic-aware routing In BorangiuTTrentesauxDLeit~aoP, et al. (eds) Service oriented, holonic and multiagent manufacturing systems for industry of the future. Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 573–583.
ZaidiLBettayebBSahnounM. Optimisation and simulation of transportation tasks in flexible job shop with multi-robot systems. In: 2021 1st international conference on cyber management and engineering (CyMaEn), Hammamet, Tunisia, 26–28 May 2021, pp. 1–6. New York: IEEE.
34.
BilgëUUlusoyG. A time window approach to simultaneous scheduling of machines and material handling system in an FMS. Oper Res1995; 43: 1058–1070.
35.
HamA.Transfer-robot task scheduling in job shop. Int J Prod Res2021; 59: 813–823.
36.
MalegaPGazdaVRudyV.Optimization of production system in plant simulation. SIMULATION2022; 98: 295–306.
37.
HeidaryMHAghaieAJalalimaneshA.A simulation–optimization approach for a multi-period, multi-objective supply chain with demand uncertainty and an option contract. SIMULATION2018; 94: 649–662.
38.
XuYSahnounMAbdelazizFB, et al. A simulated multiobjective model for flexible job shop transportation scheduling. Ann Oper Res2020; 311: 899–920.
39.
OuelhadjDPetrovicS.A survey of dynamic scheduling in manufacturing systems. J Schedul2009; 12: 417–431.
40.
ZhangMLuYHuY, et al. Dynamic scheduling method for job-shop manufacturing systems by deep reinforcement learning with proximal policy optimization. Sustainability2022; 14: su14095177.
41.
MengLZhangCShaoX, et al. MILP models for energy-aware flexible job shop scheduling problem. J Clean Prod2019; 210: 710–723.
42.
DaiMTangDGiretA, et al. Multi-objective optimization for energy-efficient flexible job shop scheduling problem with transportation constraints. Robot Comput Integr Manuf2019; 59: 143–157.
43.
McHaneyR.Modelling battery constraints in discrete event automated guided vehicle simulations. Int J Prod Res1995; 33: 3023–3040.
44.
BocciaMMasoneASterleC, et al. The parallel AGV scheduling problem with battery constraints: a new formulation and a matheuristic approach. Eur J Oper Res2023; 307: 590–603.
45.
BocciaMMancusoAMasoneA, et al. Exact and heuristic solution approaches for the multi-objective AGV scheduling problem with battery constraints. Transport Res Procedia2024; 78: 369–376.
MaddikuntaPKRPhamQVPrabadeviB, et al. Industry 5.0: a survey on enabling technologies and potential applications. J Ind Inform Integr2022; 26: 100257.
48.
KaderSM’hammedSAbdelkaderMB. Multi-agent simulation for scheduling and path planning of autonomous intelligent vehicles. In: Guisado-LizarJ-LRiscos-NúñezAMorón-FernándezM-J, et al. (eds) Simulation tools and techniques. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2024, pp. 195–205.
49.
TisueSWilenskyU.Netlogo: a simple environment for modeling complexity. Int Conf Complex Syst2004; 21: 16–21.
50.
RailsbackSFLytinenSLJacksonSK.Agent-based simulation platforms: review and development recommendations. SIMULATION2006; 82: 609–623.
51.
Leit~aoP. Agent-based distributed manufacturing control: a state-of-the-art survey. Eng Appl Artif Intell2009; 22: 979–991.
52.
HosseiniSAzgomiMATorkamanAR.Agent-based simulation of the dynamics of malware propagation in scalefree networks. SIMULATION2016; 92: 709–722.
53.
SanzVUrquiaA.Combining PDEVS and Modelica for describing agent-based models. SIMULATION2023; 99: 455–474.
54.
ZutshiAGriloANodehiT, et al. Simulation and forecasting of digital pricing models for an e-procurement platform using an agent-based simulation model. J Simul2018; 12: 211–224.
55.
AbderrahimMBekrarATrentesauxD, et al. Bi-local search based variable neighborhood search for job-shop scheduling problem with transport constraints. Optim Lett2020; 16: 255–280.
56.
EloundouJ.Moďelisation multi-contraintes d’un syst′eme de production flexible. Phd Thesis, INSA ROUEN, Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray, 2016
57.
KabirQSSuzukiY.Comparative analysis of different routing heuristics for the battery management of automated guided vehicles. Int J Prod Res2019; 57: 624–641.
58.
NiestŕojRRogalaTSkarkaW.An energy consumption model for designing an AGV energy storage system with a PEMFC stack. Energies2020; 13: en13133435.
59.
YesilyurtOKurrleMSchlerethA, et al. Modelling agv operation simulation with lithium batteries in manufacturing. Anwendungen Und Konzepte Der Wirtschaftsinformatik2022; 36: 7.
60.
SkobelevPOBorovikSY.On the way from industry 4.0 to industry 5.0: from digital manufacturing to digital society. Industry2017; 2: 307–311.
