Computers, Materials & Continua Tech Science Press

DOI:10.32604/cmc.2022.023880
Article

Optimization Model in Manufacturing Scheduling for the Garment Industry

Chia-Nan Wang1 , Yu-Chen Wei2 , Po-Yuk So3, *, Viet Tinh Nguyen4 and Phan Nguyen Ky Phuc5

1
Department of Industrial Engineering and Management, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology,
Kaohsiung, 80778, Taiwan
2
Department of Money and Banking, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung, 80778,
Taiwan
3
Ph.D. Program in Finance and Banking, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung, 80778,
Taiwan
4
Faculty of Commerce, Van Lang University, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
5
Faculty of Industrial Engineering and Management, International University, Ho Chi Minh City,70000, Vietnam
*Corresponding Author: Po-Yuk So. Email: [email protected]
Received: 24 September 2021; Accepted: 06 December 2021

Abstract: The garment industry in Vietnam is one of the country’s strongest

industries in the world. However, the production process still encounters
problems regarding scheduling that does not equate to an optimal process. The
paper introduces a production scheduling solution that resolves the potential
delays and lateness that hinders the production process using integer program-
ming and order allocation with a make-to-order manufacturing viewpoint. A
number of constraints were considered in the model and is applied to a real
case study of a factory in order to view how the tardiness and lateness would be
affected which resulted in optimizing the scheduling time better. Specifically,
the constraints considered were order assignments, production time, and
tardiness with an objective function which is to minimize the total cost of
delay. The results of the study precisely the overall cost of delay of the orders
given to the plant and successfully propose a suitable production schedule that
utilizes the most of the plant given. The study has shown promising results
that would assist plant and production managers in determining an algorithm
that they can apply for their production process.

Keywords: Production scheduling problem; order allocation; integer

programming; make-to-order manufacturing; apparel industry

1 Introduction
In according to a report in 2017, Vietnam has about 2,800 clothing enterprises, most of which are
located in Ho Chi Minh City and Ha Noi. In the past, around 70% of Vietnam’s clothing depended on
using imported raw materials such as fabrics and fibers from China due to the Vietnam’s regulation
about controlling tightly the dyeing segment. In 2001, when the trading relationships between Vietnam
and Western countries were established, exporting Vietnamese clothing began to develop. In 2016,
according to WTO, it is reported that around $28 billion of clothing were exported, which is the
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided
the original work is properly cited.
5876 CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3

third largest value in global apparel exporter, after China and Bangladesh. The 2017 US Fashion
Industry Benchmarking Study indicated that Vietnam is the second apparel sourcing country, after
China. In recent years, with the development of technology, the human’s standard of living tends
to be high considerably, and the needs of clothing is continuously changing. Many enterprises deal
with a considerable number of challenges with regard to the change in demands of customers, shorter
product life cycle. In addition, customer requirements for specialized and customized production tend
to increased. Therefore, to survive in the intensely competitive market place and quickly respond to this
changing environment, many firms have begun considering a change in service mode and improving
their production scheduling to meet the deadline committed to customers, otherwise the firms can
face to a significant loss of goodwill and penalty. It is obvious that more companies tend to offer
mass customization service to customers. Unlike in make-to-stock (MTS), in which the finished goods
are hold in inventory as a buffer to deal with the variations in customer demand, make-to-order
(MTO) operation starts performing an order only after it has been received. The most important
aspect in MTO is the effective and efficient utilization of available capacity to meet customer demands.
In make-to-order manufacturing, customer satisfaction is always the key to evaluate the success of
the performance of production planning and scheduling. In specific, a typical measure of customer
satisfaction is the customer service level which is the fraction of customer orders finished on or before
their due dates.
In this study, the authors will consider the problem of an apparel company which provide
customized products. The main objective of this paper is to minimize the cost of tardy orders by
allocating the order to produce for each day. After that, based on the final optimal result, the
authors will propose the days needed working overtime. Finally compare the cost of penalty and
cost of overtime to choose the better option. From that apparel company can increase its production
efficiency, reduce the loss of order, and improve customer’s satisfaction.

2 Literature Review
There have been multiple studies about the application of mathematical programming in the
solving optimization problems in manufacturing systems [1–5]. These researches look into different
productions systems and setups such as make-to-stock systems [6,7], make-to-order systems [8,9],
single processing line [10,11], or multiple processing lines [12,13], etc. with different optimization
objectives. These objectives can be minimizing tardiness [14,15], minimized inventory holding cost
[16,17], minimizing setup cost [18], etc. or a combination of these objectives [19,20]. With each different
production system and objectives, a unique model is developed to solve the scheduling problem
The Chen et al. [21] study an integrated scheduling model in production and distribution
operations. In this model, a set of customer orders are first planned to be performed and then delivered
directly to the customers without intermediate inventory. The goal is to find a combined schedule
in production and distribution to optimize both customer service level and total distribution cost.
The paper proposed a mixed integer programs to find the optimal value of the maximum earliness as
an application for long-term production schedules in make-to-order manufacturing. Ogun et al. [22]
showed three distinct mathematical models for a batch scheduling problem to minimize the earliness
and tardiness of customer orders with the consideration of issue about the excess inventory level
of finished products. Firstly, the study provided a nonlinear integer programming model, then this
model was converted into an integer programming format by using the piecewise linearizing method.
Finally, an alternative linear integer model was presented to deal with the larger sized problem. A
set of customer’s orders with multi-products made of multi-parts were considered. All parts of the
CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3 5877

same products from different orders were combined to process in the same batch and the orders were
evaluated as completed status when all related types of products in that order were completed. This
research contributes a new optimization model of batch scheduling problem.
The production planning problem was also presented by Sadeghi Naieni Fard et al. [23]. The
paper extended the problem by considering more criteria in supply network. The authors calculated
the production and packing time in the factories, delivery time in distribution centers and the
transportation section to define an optimal assignment and sequence for the customers’ orders
according to the capacity of centers and customer due dates with the aim to minimize the total
tardiness. This problem is firstly formulated by a mixed integer programming model and solved
by GAMS software. In addition, the authors also proposed two metaheuristics based on variable
neighborhood search and simulated annealing solve the larger sized problem. Finally, a metaheuristics
model was presented to compare the performance of models together. His study can be applied in
different industries which could cause large penalty and damage when the orders are delivered late.
Ben Hmida et al. [24] studied the production scheduling problem in a continuous manufacturing
system involving multi-products, multi-processing lines and conflicting objectives including inventory,
production and quality constraints. He built two practical heuristic optimization algorithms to
generate daily production schedules with the goal of minimization of order delays, minimization of
average inventory levels and satisfying the quality constraints. The study experimented on the chemical
industry He considered more than 200 customer orders in a month with the total of about four million
pounds of different types of chemical products which were processed on multiple processing lines. The
experimental results indicated that the performance of the algorithms is effectively improved to the
tardiness, inventory levels and quality of the products.
Shabtay [25] also studied production scheduling with the goal of minimizing earliness, tardiness,
delivery and holding cost, but he considered the due dates as controllable variables. This means that
each order had a lead time for its due date. Customers accepted the due date assigned in a duration,
and there was penalty if the due date was greater than the committed lead time. The penalty varied
proportionally according to the contract. To solve the problem, he built a polynomial time dynamic
programming algorithm and showed the order sequence with the final result. In his model, he presented
two cases. In the first case processing times are equal for each order. In the second case, he assumed
that all acceptable lead times are equal to zero. In addition, in his study, he proved the problem studied
as a N-hard problem by providing some properties of the optimal schedule.
Lee [26] proposed three heuristic algorithms to solve the order scheduling problem with the aim
to minimize total tardiness. The study built a system of multiple identical machines, orders with
multiple components processed on different dedicated machines. The order was completed when all
the components of that order are finished. Moreover, a branch-and-bound model was presented to
compare the performance of three heuristic algorithms. Three lower bounds are derived in the branch-
and-bound scheme to solve much larger problem instances.
Lin et al. [27] considered a problem of a number of orders which are assembled from different
items. They designed a heuristic algorithm to minimize the number of late jobs by sequencing the date
of production and analyze its performance ratio without weighted situation. After that, an LP-based
approximation algorithm was applied to the weighted situation of order scheduling problem with the
constant due date. The result of the model suggested the new factor for the model and proved that the
problem is a half of NP-hard problem.
Huang et al. [28] studied a case study of a MTO manufacturing company producing belt pulleys.
In their study, three sub-problems of order scheduling considered are the resource capacity (material
5878 CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3

resource, machine resource), order priority and lead time. Then three these sub-problems are analyzed
separately. They applied the Virtual Manufacturing technology, a heuristic arithmetic theory and
practical queuing model to help to arrange customer orders and fulfill customer orders on time. With
this model, the manager can get the optimal order release time with the high utilization of materials
and machines.
Chen et al. [29] addressed the short-term capacity planning problem in MTO environment for
product mix problem. He proposed the first mathematical model to help manager choose a set of
orders completed before their due date to maximize the overall profit. The input to the model 1 is the
characteristics of the order such as the processing route, processing time, processing cost and selling
prices of each order; the job shop configuration such as the capacity, the availability of resources. The
output from the model helps to unify two decisions: which orders to accept and their schedule about
how much capacity was required to complete the whole accepted order. From that, the secondary
objective was built to maximize the utilization of resources. The inputs to the second model are the
accepted customer orders found from the result of the first model and the characteristics of orders and
production configuration like model 1.
Sawik [30] proposed an integer programming approach for master production scheduling in make-
to-order manufacturing. The study considered a set of customer orders with various due dates which
were performed on multi-parallel machines. Each order is assigned in different processing stages, and
some orders may have the same production flow. They were scheduled to split and allocate among the
horizon planning periods to maximize the customer service level. In her study, three integer models
with various approaches were showed including minimizing the number of tardy orders, minimizing
the total of tardiness, or minimizing the ratio between total number of tardy order and all order.
This research differs from the above-mentioned literature in many aspects. The objective consid-
ered is to minimize the cost due to completing the orders after their due date base on the production
cost and the sales price on the contract with the customers. Many existing literatures just consider
the number of tardy orders or the profit. In addition, there are several papers which study how to
control and set the due date for orders. However, this research focusses on the way to allocate the
order for production with the constant due dates so that the manager can have an overview about
daily utilization and decide the necessary day for overtime to meet the due date commitment.

3 Mathematical Model
3.1 Research Process
In this section, the authors built a research process to solve the current problem of factory X
mentioned on the problem statement section (Fig. 1).
Step 1: Problem identification
The first step in the process is to identify a problem. Through the observation the operation of
factory, the primary problem of factory is responding to the customer’s orders is overdue date and pay
a constant amount of penalty cost or loss the whole order.
Step 2: Set long-term objectives
After defining the problem, the most important step is establishing the long-term objective which
can be applied to company for more than one year. The objective of the models in this paper applied to
solve the problem of company is to assign customer orders to planning periods to minimize the cost of
tardy orders. From that, company can offer the overtime day to achieve a high customer satisfaction
by meeting customers due dates and get a low penalty.
CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3 5879

Figure 1: The research process

Step 3: Model development

The model will be built with the constraint depending on the availability and capacity of company
and be compatible with the development of the technology. Apparel company currently set the
customer service level is the top priority. Therefore, the authors applied a linear integer model with
the primary objective of minimizing the total cost of tardiness by allocating all orders (Fig. 2).
Step 4: Data collection
The model will be built with the constraint depending on the availability and capacity of company
and be compatible with the development of the technology. Apparel company currently set the
customer service level is the top priority. Therefore, the authors applied a linear integer model with
the primary objective of minimizing the total cost of tardiness by allocating all orders (Fig. 2).
Step 5: Verification and validation
To ensure the validity of the model, the collection process is needed to plane carefully before
such as the number of team member for collection and the high concentration is required during the
collection period to make sure the high reliability of data.
Step 6: Run model
Running the model with a small sized problem is to test and fix model, then apply the real data
collected to the model for the result.
5880 CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3

Figure 2: A lexicographic approach with multi-objectives in production scheduling

Step 7: Result analysis

From the result, the authors can compare the improvement of tardiness after and before using the
scheduling model.
Step 8: Conclusion and recommendation
After analyzing results, the authors propose some alternatives method can be used and the predict
of the application of my model.

3.2 Approach Comparison and Selection

There have been many studies applying integer programming for production scheduling problems.
In fact, in day today life, many software have been developed to solve the optimization problem like
IBM CPLEX Optimizer. Through literature review, there is enough scope for the improvement in
the production scheduling environment when the processing time is not constant. This suggests and
motivates me to apply integer linear programming and CPLEX optimization which will provide the
best quality solutions and reduces the computational burden.

4 Modeling
4.1 Model Assumptions and Notations
4.1.1 Assumptions
To solve the problem statement of this study, the following basic assumptions are used:
• All machines at one workstation are same speed and functionality;
• The available day to start each order is known before;
• All orders arrive at the beginning of the planning horizon;
• The quantity of split order is not less than 30% of the total quantity of order.

4.1.2 Inputs and Outputs

The inputs of the model are shown in Tab. 1. The output of the model is the optimal total cost of
tardy orders.
CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3 5881

Table 1: Input data

Group name Input data
Order Quantity
Due day
Day of availability
Tardy cost of order
Unit processing time
Inventory Capacity
Flow Number of production line

4.1.3 Notations
The annotations of the model are defined as follows:
• O: set of order
• i: denote the order i
• O1 : set of small batches
• O2 : set of large batches
• T: set of planning periods
• t: denote the time period t (day)
The input parameters are denoted as follows:
• di : The due date of order i
• Di : demand of order i
• Wi : weight of delay cost for each order
• Pi : processing time of one unit of each order
• N: number of production lines
• Ai : available date of material of each order
• Ci : the cost of tardiness of each order
The decision variable notations are as follows:
• Xit : binary variable that indicates whether order i is performed in period t
• Yit : fraction of order i to be processed in period t
• Zi : binary variable that indicates whether order i is completed after duedate
• TCD: the total cost of delay

4.2 Mathematical Model

The objective is to minimize the total cost of delay value:

O

Minimize TCD = Zi ∗ Ci (1)

i=1
5882 CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3

Subject to the following constrains:


T

Xit = 1 for all i ∈ O1 , t ≥ Ei (2)

t

T

Yi = 1 for all i ∈ O1 , t ∈ T, t ≥ Ai (3)

t

Xit = Yit for all i ∈ O1 , t ∈ T, t ≥ Ai (4)

Xit ≥ Yit for all i ∈ O2 , t ∈ T, t ≥ Ai (5)

Yit ≤ 0.3Xit for all i ∈ O2 , t ∈ T, t ≥ Ai (6)

Constrain (2) is the order assignment constrain. Constraint (3) ensures that each order must be
completed. Constraint (4) ensures that each indivisible order is finished in one day. Constraint (5) and
(6) ensures each divisible order is allocated among all the periods according to its assignment.

T

Zi = Xit for all i ∈ B1 , t ∈ T, t > di (7)

t


T

Zi ≥ Xit for all i ∈ O1 , t ∈ T, t ≥ di (8)

t


T

Zi ≤ Xit for all i ∈ O2 , t ∈ T, t ≥ di (9)

t

Constraint (7) indicates the indivisible tardy order is finished after its due date. Constraint (8) and
(9) indicates the divisible tardy order is partly assign after its due date.

T

Pi Di Yit ≤ N for all i ∈ O, t ∈ T, t ≥ Ai (10)

t

Constraint (10) ensures the production time on one day cannot be over the maximum available
time on that day.

5 Computational Experiment
5.1 Data Input
In this case study, numerical data of apparel company are showed to illustrate possible applications
of approach. The authors will consider a set of total 28 customer orders recorded in August 2019 for
testing this model (Tab. 2).
CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3 5883

Table 2: Customer order

Order Quantity Due date (day) Available date (day)
1 500 25 1
2 1000 23 10
3 1000 23 7
4 500 25 9
5 1000 25 8
6 1000 23 7
7 500 25 12
8 500 23 7
9 1500 23 12
10 1000 25 9
11 1000 21 12
12 1500 26 10
13 1500 21 7
14 1000 26 7
15 1000 25 1
16 1500 23 7
17 1000 25 7
18 1000 21 10
19 1500 21 8
20 1500 26 7
21 2000 21 7
22 2000 23 14
23 1500 23 8
24 2000 21 8
25 2500 25 7
26 1500 21 14
27 2000 24 1
28 2000 23 8

Moreover, the processing time unit of each product type bases on the characteristics of that
products and the number of stages that are required for that process. The authors collected the unit
processing time of each stage and the processing time of each unit equals the sum of the processing
times of stages required. These collected data had measure unit as second unit. After that, we transfer
second unit into day unit base on the working time of labor. The working time is 10 h per day including
the lunch time with 1 h. Therefore, the processing time for each product unit is calculated according
to the below formula:
Unit processing time (s)
Unit processing time (day) =   (11)
h
3600 (day) ∗ 9
day
5884 CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3

The unit processing times in day are shown in Tab. 3.

Table 3: Unit processing time (day)

Order Unit processing time (s) Unit processing time
(day)
1 65 0.00201
2 70 0.00216
3 77 0.00238
4 85 0.00262
5 75 0.00231
6 80 0.00247
7 90 0.00278
8 78 0.00241
9 79 0.00244
10 74 0.00228
11 72 0.00222
12 61 0.00188
13 82 0.00253
14 72 0.00222
15 83 0.00256
16 80 0.00247
17 90 0.00278
18 80 0.00247
19 85 0.00262
20 84 0.00259
21 68 0.00210
22 75 0.00231
23 87 0.00269
24 82 0.00253
25 77 0.00238
26 88 0.00272
27 67 0.00207
28 72 0.00222

For each order, the classification about indivisible and divisible orders will be different according
to the productivity for each type of product, which is calculated using the following formula:
1 (day) ∗ Number of lines
Productivity/order/day = (12)
Unit processing time (day)
CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3 5885

The order division result is shown in Tab. 4:

Table 4: Order division result

Order type Order number
Divisible order Order 1 to Order 20
Indivisible order Order 21 to Order 28

Besides, when there is an order completed after due date, then there are two kinds of paying results.
The company will pay penalty cost with a certain penalty rate, or the customer cancel the order, the
company thus will bear whole the production cost. The costs of order delay of each order are shown
in Tab. 5:

Table 5: Cost of order delay

Order Cost name Value (VND)
1 Cancel order 100,250,000
2 Paying 11% of whole contract 42,068,840
for delaying within 14 days
3 Paying 11% of whole contract 41,041,220
for delaying within 14 days
4 Paying 11% of whole contract 22,327,910
for delaying within 14 days
5 Paying 11% of whole contract 33,132,000
for delaying within 14 days
6 Cancel order 150,200,000
7 Paying 11% of whole contract 18,645,000
for delaying within 14 days
8 Paying 11% of whole contract 22,327,910
for delaying within 14 days
9 Paying 11% of whole contract 65,340,000
for delaying within 14 days
10 Cancel order 215,477,000
11 Paying 11% of whole contract 38,544,000
for delaying within 14 days
12 Paying 11% of whole contract 66,036,630
for delaying within 14 days
13 Paying 11% of whole contract 66,495,000
for delaying within 14 days
14 Paying 11% of whole contract 42,900,000
for delaying within 14 days
15 Paying 11% of whole contract 42,900,000
for delaying within 14 days
(Continued)
5886 CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3

Table 5: Continued
Order Cost name Value (VND)
16 Paying 11% of whole contract 71,107,410
for delaying within 14 days
17 Cancel order 213,018,000
18 Paying 11% of whole contract 44,330,000
for delaying within 14 days
19 Paying 11% of whole contract 61,116,000
for delaying within 14 days
20 Paying 11% of whole contract 66,036,630
for delaying within 14 days
21 Paying 11% of whole contract 82,082,440
for delaying within 14 days
22 Cancel order 350,400,000
23 Paying 11% of whole contract 55,605,000
for delaying within 14 days
24 Paying 11% of whole contract 79,420,000
for delaying within 14 days
25 Paying 11% of whole contract 117,159,900
for delaying within 14 days
26 Paying 11% of whole contract 55,330,110
for delaying within 14 days
27 Paying 11% of whole contract 81,488,000
for delaying within 14 days
28 Cancel order 391,000,000

In addition, it is assumed that the percentage of productivity is 100%, the daily limited capacity
of production is calculated as:
Daily limited capacity (day) = Number of production lines × 1(day) (13)

5.2 Results and Discussion

The characteristics of integer programming model are summarized in Tab. 6 below:

Table 6: Computational results of the model

Variables Binary Constraints Non-zero Zsum CPU runtime
coefficients (s)
2381 671 1837 6647 33,132,000 21.84

After running the model, the optimal tardy order is 1 order. That is the order 5. From the result
of model, company can see the day which high utilization and offer the day that workers need to work
overtime so that there is no late order. Tab. 7 shows the utilization result of each day after allocating
orders according to the proposed model.
CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3 5887

Table 7: Utilization result of each day

Day Utilization (%) Day Utilization (%)
1 0.00 16 99.38
2 64.04 17 100.00
3 72.38 18 100.00
4 0.00 19 100.00
5 0.00 20 91.44
6 56.10 21 92.59
7 92.59 22 100.00
8 100.00 23 100.00
9 99.69 24 70.60
10 98.15 25 92.09
11 94.91 26 97.22
12 98.38 27 57.87
13 100.00 28 0.00
14 99.65 29 0.00
15 100.00 30 0.00

From the table of the utilization show that the utilization from day 7 to day 26 is quite high. This
prove that on this period, most of orders have enough resources to be ready for production before due
date. In addition, due to reduce the level of inventory of the finished products, the orders should not
be finished too early from the due dates. Therefore, the authors will choose day 21 and day 22 nearly
to the end of the total completion time on which workers will work overtime 2 h extra. As a result, the
number of tardy orders now equal zero and there is no fining cost happened.
The overtime cost paying for worker is 20,000 VND/hour. The estimated number of workers
needed for each production flow is 5 workers so the total number of workers working overtime is about
20 workers. Therefore, the total cost of working overtime (TCO) for two days is 800,000 VND/hour.
Since TCD > TCO, the better option should be working overtime.
With the amount of penalty of tardy order from the result of model, input to the extended model to
identify the minimum completion time for total 28 orders. The result of the extended model indicates
that although the time range the authors consider is 30 days (one month), the total time needed to
complete total 26 orders with 1 tardy order and the penalty cost is 33,132,000 VND.

6 Conclusion
The research is conducted to study how to minimize the cost of delay completion of orders in the
ideal condition by building a linear integer program. In this study, the current problems in operation
of garment company are analyzed. The main idea focuses on production scheduling problem. A
linear integer model for assignment and allocating orders with the aim to minimize the cost of tardy
orders is built. With the proposed model, plant and production managers can apply suitably in order
to optimize their production process in order to plan ahead should there will be an abundance of
customer orders that reaches the plant using contemporary and realistic constraints that can be applied
5888 CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3

in any circumstances. The model still needs to consider a number of different aspects such as resources
utilization or cost of materials when applied in the scheduling process which could be a further study in
the future. This model can be applicable from management perspective. The result of extended model
can provide for manager the optimal completion time and have the new schedule for the orders next
period.
Acknowledgement: The authors acknowledge and appreciate the support of Van Lang University,
Vietnam, National Kaohsiung University of Science and Technology, Taiwan.

Funding Statement: The authors received no specific funding for this study.

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest to report regarding the
present study.

References
[1] K. Lenin, “Hybridization of genetic particle swarm optimization algorithm with symbiotic organisms
search algorithm for solving optimal reactive power dispatch problem,” Journal of Applied Science,
Engineering, Technology, and Education, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 12–21, Jun. 2020.
[2] E. Jiang and L. Wang, “An improved multi-objective evolutionary algorithm based on decomposition
for energy-efficient permutation flow shop scheduling problem with sequence-dependent setup time,”
International Journal of Production Research, vol. 57, no. 6, pp. 1756–1771, 2019.
[3] A. Gupta and S. R. Chauhan, “A heuristic algorithm for scheduling in a flow shop environment to minimize
makespan,” International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 173–184, 2015.
[4] K. Ding, P. Jiang and M. Zheng, “Environmental and economic sustainability-aware resource service
scheduling for industrial product service systems,” Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, vol. 28, no. 6, pp.
1303–1316, 2015.
[5] T. Chen and G. Zhou, “Modeling production scheduling problem and its solution by genetic algorithm,”
Journal of Computers, vol. 8, no. 8, pp. 2126, 2013.
[6] H. Rahman, R. Sarker and D. Essam, “A genetic algorithm for permutation flow shop scheduling under
make to stock production system,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, vol. 90, pp. 12–24, 2015.
[7] F. Tubilla and S. Gershwin, “Dynamic scheduling in make-to-stock production systems with setup times
and random breakdowns: Performance analysis and improved policies,” International Journal of Production
Research, pp. 1–19, 2021.
[8] R. Kolisch and K. Hess, “Efficient methods for scheduling make-to-order assemblies under resource,
assembly area and part availability constraints,” International Journal of Production Research, vol. 38, no.
1, pp. 207–228, 2000.
[9] H. Garmdare, M. Lotfi and M. Honarvar, “Integrated model for pricing, delivery time setting, and
scheduling in make-to-order environments,” Journal of Industrial Engineering International, vol. 14, no.
1, pp. 55–64, 2017.
[10] F. Jaehn and H. Sedding, “Scheduling with time-dependent discrepancy times,” Journal of Scheduling, vol.
19, no. 6, pp. 737–757, 2016.
[11] A. Shioura, N. Shakhlevich and V. Strusevich, “Application of submodular optimization to single machine
scheduling with controllable processing times subject to release dates and deadlines,” INFORMS Journal
on Computing, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 148–161, 2016.
[12] J. Shi, W. Zhang, S. Zhang and J. Chen, “A new bifuzzy optimization method for remanufacturing schedul-
ing using extended discrete particle swarm optimization algorithm,” Computers & Industrial Engineering,
vol. 156, pp. 107219, 2021.
[13] J. Kim and H. Kim, “Parallel machine scheduling with multiple processing alternatives and sequence-
dependent setup times,” International Journal of Production Research, vol. 59, no. 18, pp. 5438–5453, 2020.
CMC, 2022, vol.71, no.3 5889

[14] F. Ahmadizar and J. Eteghadipour, “Single-machine earliness–tardiness scheduling with two competing
agents and idle time,” Engineering Optimization, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 499–512, 2016.
[15] R. Braune and G. Zäpfel, “Shifting bottleneck scheduling for total weighted tardiness minimization—
A computational evaluation of subproblem and re-optimization heuristics,” Computers & Operations
Research, vol. 66, pp. 130–140, 2016.
[16] E. Selvarajah and G. Steiner, “Batch scheduling in a two-level supply chain—A focus on the supplier,”
European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 173, no. 1, pp. 226–240, 2006.
[17] G. Fandel and C. Stammen-Hegene, “Simultaneous lot sizing and scheduling for multi-product multi-level
production,” International Journal of Production Economics, vol. 104, no. 2, pp. 308–316, 2006.
[18] D. Kress, M. Barketau and E. Pesch, “Single-machine batch scheduling to minimize the total setup cost in
the presence of deadlines,” Journal of Scheduling, vol. 21, no. 6, pp. 595–606, 2018.
[19] R. Ramezanian, M. Vali-Siar and M. Jalalian, “Green permutation flowshop scheduling problem with
sequence-dependent setup times: A case study,” International Journal of Production Research, vol. 57, no.
10, pp. 3311–3333, 2019.
[20] Y. Li, X. Li and J. Gupta, “Solving the multi-objective flowline manufacturing cell scheduling problem by
hybrid harmony search,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 42, no. 3, pp. 1409–1417, 2015.
[21] Z. Chen and G. Vairaktarakis, “Integrated scheduling of production and distribution operations,” Man-
agement Science, vol. 51, no. 4, pp. 614–628, 2005.
[22] B. Ogun and Ç. Alabas-Uslu, “Mathematical models for a batch scheduling problem to minimize earliness
and tardiness,” Journal of Industrial Engineering and Management, vol. 11, no. 3, pp. 390, 2018.
[23] F. Sadeghi Naieni Fard, B. Naderi and A. Akbari, “Production scheduling and customer orders assignment
in a three-level supply chain,” ISRN Industrial Engineering, vol. 2014, pp. 1–12, 2014.
[24] J. Ben Hmida, J. Lee, X. Wang and F. Boukadi, “Production scheduling for continuous manufacturing
systems with quality constraints,” Production & Manufacturing Research, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 95–111, 2014.
[25] D. Shabtay, “Scheduling and due date assignment to minimize earliness, tardiness, holding, due date
assignment and batch delivery costs,” International Journal of Production Economics, vol. 123, no. 1, pp.
235–242, 2010.
[26] I. Lee, “Minimizing total tardiness for the order scheduling problem,” International Journal of Production
Economics, vol. 144, no. 1, pp. 128–134, 2013.
[27] B. Lin and A. Kononov, “Customer order scheduling to minimize the number of late jobs,” European
Journal of Operational Research, vol. 183, no. 2, pp. 944–948, 2007.
[28] P. Huang, H. Li and L. Han, “Order scheduling problems in make-to-order manufacturing systems,” IEEE
International Conference Mechatronics and Automation, vol. 4, pp. 2179–2184, 2005.
[29] C. Chen, S. Mestry, P. Damodaran and C. Wang, “The capacity planning problem in make-to-order
enterprises,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 50, no. 9–10, pp. 1461–1473, 2009.
[30] T. Sawik, “Integer programming approach to production scheduling for make-to-order manufacturing,”
Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 41, no. 1, pp. 99–118, 2005.