Skip to main content
Log in

Integrated production and maintenance planning under uncertain demand with concurrent learning of yield rate

  • Published:
Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Strong interactions between decisions in the maintenance and production scheduling domains, and their impacts on the equipment yield rates necessitate maintenance and production decisions being optimized concurrently, with considerations of yield dependencies on the equipment conditions and production rates. This paper proposes an integrated decision-making policy for production and maintenance operations on a single machine under uncertain demand, with concurrent considerations and learning of yield dependencies on the equipment conditions and production rates. This policy is obtained through a two-stage stochastic programming model, which considers the variable demand, machine degradation, and maintenance times. This model incorporates outsourcing decisions and operational decisions regarding reworking, scraping of imperfect products to ensure the demand is adequately met. A closed-form reinforcement learning method is utilized to learn yield dependencies. Simulations confirm the necessity of yield learning and show the proposed method outperforms the traditional, fragmented approaches where the effects of production rates and machine conditions on the resulting yield rates are not considered. The two-stage stochastic setting is demonstrated by comparing with the traditional one-stage deterministic approach, where decisions are made based on the expected demand and production performance, with scrapping, reworking, and outsourcing decisions established before the demand and production performance are observed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Availability of data and material

The authors declare that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article.

Code availability

The code that supports the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Notes

  1. Note, degradation is modeled as a unidirectional process and hence working condition of a machine can only remain the same or deteriorate.

  2. I.e., in that case, no matter what the decision \(x_{RMO}\) is, machine will be restored to the perfect working condition after RM.

  3. Notice that demand is modeled as a random variable with a known discrete distribution.

  4. Excess products can also be put into inventory, but because of the holding cost this would incur, this can also be seen as equivalent to being sold at a lower price.

  5. The model of yield rates and its learning process are explained in Sect. 3.

  6. This cost parameter is taken to be big in order to penalize such events and prevent them from happening.

  7. As will be seen in the simulation results, highest values of the first-stage objective function in Eq.(1) can be achieved under that assumption.

  8. This, of course, is ideal and unrealistic.

  9. I.e. when it does not change with the underlying machine condition, nor with the production rates.

References

  • Aktekin T, Ekin T (2016) Stochastic call center staffing with uncertain arrival, service and abandonment rates: a Bayesian perspective. Nav Res Logist (NRL) 63(6):460–478

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Alaswad S, Xiang Y (2017) A review on condition-based maintenance optimization models for stochastically deteriorating system. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 157:54–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Turki UM, Ayar T, Yilbas BS, Sahin AZ (eds) (2014) Maintenance in manufacturing environment: an overview. In: Integrated maintenance planning in manufacturing systems. Springer, Cham, pp 5–23

  • Aramon Bajestani M, Banjevic D, Beck JC (2014) Integrated maintenance planning and production scheduling with Markovian deteriorating machine conditions. Int J Prod Res 52(24):7377–7400

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batun S, Maillart LM (2012) Reassessing tradeoffs inherent to simultaneous maintenance and production planning. Prod Oper Manag 21(2):396–403

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bearda T, Mertens PW, Beaudoin SP (2018) Overview of wafer contamination and defectivity. Handbook of silicon wafer cleaning technology, 3rd edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 87–149

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Birge JR, Louveaux F (2011) Introduction to stochastic programming. Springer, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Celen M (2016). Joint maintenance and production operations decision making in flexible manufacturing systems (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from University of Texas Libraries (OCLC number: 979556469)

  • Christensen R, Johnson W, Branscum A, Hanson TE (2011) Bayesian ideas and data analysis: an introduction for scientists and statisticians. CRC Press, Boca Raton

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Derman C (1970). Finite state Markovian decision processes (No. 04; T57. 83, D47.)

  • Djurdjanovic D, Mears L, Niaki FA, Haq AU, Li L (2018) State of the art review on process, system, and operations control in modern manufacturing. J Manuf Sci Eng 140(6):061010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekin T (2018) Integrated maintenance and production planning with endogenous uncertain yield. Reliab Eng Syst Saf 179:52–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ekin T, Polson NG, Soyer R (2014) Augmented Markov chain Monte Carlo simulation for two-stage stochastic programs with recourse. Decis Anal 11(4):250–264

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Ekin T, Polson NG, Soyer R (2017) Augmented nested sampling for stochastic programs with recourse and endogenous uncertainty. Nav Res Logist (NRL) 64(8):613–627

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Homem-de-Mello T, Bayraksan G (2014) Monte Carlo sampling-based methods for stochastic optimization. Surv Oper Res Manag Sci 19(1):56–85

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Iravani SM, Duenyas I (2002) Integrated maintenance and production control of a deteriorating production system. IIE Trans 34(5):423–435

    Google Scholar 

  • Khouja M, Mehrez A (1994) Economic production lot size model with variable production rate and imperfect quality. J Oper Res Soc 45(12):1405–1417

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lattimore T, Szepesvári C (2020) Bandit algorithms. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Russo D, Van Roy B, Kazerouni A, & Osband, I. (2017) A Tutorial on Thompson Sampling. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.02038

  • Shapiro A, Dentcheva D, Ruszczyński A (2014) Lectures on stochastic programming: modeling and theory. Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics

  • Sloan TW (2004) A periodic review production and maintenance model with random demand, deteriorating equipment, and binomial yield. J Oper Res Soc 55(6):647–656

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sloan T (2008) Simultaneous determination of production and maintenance schedules using in-line equipment condition and yield information. Nav Res Logist (NRL) 55(2):116–129

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sloan TW, Shanthikumar JG (2000) Combined production and maintenance scheduling for a multiple-product, single-machine production system. Prod Oper Manag 9(4):379–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sloan TW, Shanthikumar JG (2002) Using in-line equipment condition and yield information for maintenance scheduling and dispatching in semiconductor wafer fabs. IIE Trans 34(2):191–209

    Google Scholar 

  • Sutton RS, Barto AG (2018) Reinforcement learning: an introduction. MIT press, Cambridge

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Terwiesch C, Bohn RE (2001) Learning and process improvement during production ramp-up. Int J Prod Econ 70(1):1–19

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terwiesch C, Xu Y (2004) The copy-exactly ramp-up strategy: trading-off learning with process change. IEEE Trans Eng Manage 51(1):70–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson WR (1933) On the likelihood that one unknown probability exceeds another in view of the evidence of two samples. Biometrika 25(3/4):285–294

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson WR (1935) On the theory of apportionment. Am J Math 57(2):450–456

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Wang H (2002) A survey of maintenance policies of deteriorating systems. Eur J Oper Res 139(3):469–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yano CA, Lee HL (1995) Lot sizing with random yields: a review. Oper Res 43(2):311–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This study was funded by Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Texas at Austin.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huidong Zhang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

In order to formulate the degradation process in the two-stage stochastic programming problem, based on the DTMC model in Sect. 2.2, constraint (4) represents a block of constraints as follows.

We use binary vectors \({{\varvec{\upxi}}}_{{{\mathbf{PRM}}}}^{{\mathbf{t}}} ,{{\varvec{\upxi}}}_{{{\mathbf{MRM}}}}^{{\mathbf{t}}} ,{{\varvec{\upxi}}}_{{{\mathbf{PM}}}}^{{\mathbf{t}}} \in {\mathbb{Z}}_{2}^{{N_{w} + N_{m} }}\) to respectively denote the uncertain perfect reactive maintenance, minimum reactive maintenance, and preventive maintenance time with elements satisfying \(\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{{N_{w} }} {\xi_{*M}^{t,j} } = 0\) and \(\sum\limits_{{j = N_{w} + 1}}^{{N_{w} + N_{m} }} {\xi_{*M}^{t,j} } = 1\). Element \(\xi_{*M}^{t,j} = 1\) indicates that the realization of maintenance time is \((N_{m} + 1 - j)\). For example, in Eq. (14), vector \({{\varvec{\upxi}}}_{{{\mathbf{PRM}}}}^{{\mathbf{t}}}\) indicates that if perfect reactive maintenance starts to be conducted at time \(t\), the realization of maintenance time is 2.

$$\begin{gathered} \,States:\,\,\begin{array}{*{20}c} {W_{1} ,W_{2} ,...,W_{{N_{w} }} }, & {M_{{N_{m} }} ...M_{2} ,M_{1} } \\ \end{array} \,\,\, \hfill \\ {{\varvec{\upxi}}}_{{{\mathbf{PRM}}}}^{{\mathbf{t}}} = \left[ {\begin{array}{*{20}c} 0 & 0 & \cdots & 0 & 0 & \cdots & 1 & 0 \\ \end{array} } \right]^{T} \hfill \\ \end{gathered}$$
(14)

We use \(\Pr_{i,j}^{t}\) to denote the element of the realization of the Markovian transition matrix \({\mathbf{P}}_{{{\mathbf{trans}}}} ({\mathbf{x}},x_{PM} ,x_{RMO} )\) at time \(t\). Constraint (15) defines the Failure Transition Submatrix \({\mathbf{P}}_{{\mathbf{F}}} ({\mathbf{x}},x_{RMO} )\) in the Markovian transition matrix, where \(F_{qi}\) is the failure probability of the machine when it is working under production rate \(q\) and degradation level \(i\). This constraint aligns the vector of failure probability with the column determined by the realization of maintenance time. Other columns in the submatrix are zeros. The block of constraints (16)–(19) defines the Recovery Transition Submatrix \({\mathbf{P}}_{{\mathbf{R}}} (x_{PM} ,x_{RMO} )\). Constraint (16) defines the probability of restoring to the perfect working condition at time \(t\). If we decide to perform PRM, the probability is one. In the case of MRM, if the machine is working, the probability is \(\Pr_{{N_{w} + N_{m} ,1}}^{t - 1}\), if not, it equals to \(s_{1}^{t}\). Constraint (17) defines the probability of restoring to other working conditions at time \(t\). Constraint (18) and (19) define the initial probability of restoring to perfect and other working conditions (i.e. \(t = 1\)).

$$Pr_{{i,N_{w} + j}}^{t} = \left( {\sum\limits_{q = 1}^{{N_{P} }} {x_{q} F_{qi} } } \right)\left[ {\xi_{PRM}^{{t,N_{w} + j}} x_{RMO} + \xi_{MRM}^{{t,N_{w} + j}} (1 - x_{RMO} )} \right],\,\forall i \in \left[ {N_{w} } \right],\,\forall j \in \left[ {N_{m} } \right],\,\forall t \in \left[ T \right]$$
(15)
$$Pr_{{N_{w} + N_{m} ,1}}^{t} = x_{RMO} + (1 - x_{RMO} )\left[ {Pr_{{N_{w} + N_{m} ,1}}^{t - 1} \left( {1 - \sum\limits_{i^{\prime} = 1}^{{N_{w} }} {s_{i^{\prime}}^{t} } } \right) + s_{1}^{t} \sum\limits_{i^{\prime} = 1}^{{N_{w} }} {s_{i^{\prime}}^{t} } } \right],\,\forall \,t \in \left[ T \right]/\{ 1\}$$
(16)
$$Pr_{{N_{w} + N_{m} ,j}}^{t} = Pr_{{N_{w} + N_{m} ,1}}^{t - 1} \left( {1 - \sum\limits_{i^{\prime} = 1}^{{N_{w} }} {s_{i^{\prime}}^{t} } } \right) + s_{1}^{t} \sum\limits_{i^{\prime} = 1}^{{N_{w} }} {s_{i^{\prime}}^{t} } ,\,\forall j \in [N_{w} ]/\{ 1\} ,\,\forall t \in [T]/\{ 1\}$$
(17)
$$Pr_{{N_{w} + N_{m} ,1}}^{1} = s_{1}^{0} (1 - x_{PM} ) + x_{PM}$$
(18)
$$Pr_{{N_{w} + N_{m} ,j}}^{1} = s_{j}^{0} ,\,\,j \in [N_{w} ]/\{ 1\}$$
(19)

The second block of constraints (20)–(26) performs the transition of states to obtain the history of states of the machine over time \([T]\) represented by a binary matrix \({\mathbf{s}} \in {\mathbb{Z}}_{2}^{{(N_{w} + N_{m} ) \times T}}\). Constraint (20) defines the initial vector of state according to the decision for PM. Constraint (21)–(26) formulate the state transition over time \([T]\) using random variables \(\xi^{t}\) as a trigger of transition at each time \(t\). \({\mathbf{a}}^{{\mathbf{t}}} \in {\mathbb{Z}}_{2}^{{\left( {N_{w} + N_{m} } \right) \times \left( {N_{w} + N_{m} } \right)}}\) is a binary vector where only one element has value 1. The element \(a_{i,j}^{t} = 1\) indicates that at time \(t\), the machine is in state \(i\) and transition trigger is larger than \(\sum\limits_{j^{\prime} = 1}^{j - 1} {\Pr_{i,j^{\prime}}^{t} } ,\forall j \in [N_{w} + N_{m} ]/\{ 1\}\) or larger than 0 for \(j = 1\). \({\mathbf{b}}^{{\mathbf{t}}} \in {\mathbb{Z}}_{2}^{{\left( {N_{w} + N_{m} } \right) \times \left( {N_{w} + N_{m} } \right)}}\) is a binary vector where only one element has value 1. The element \(b_{i,j}^{t} = 1\) indicates that at time \(t\), the machine is in state \(i\) and transition trigger is smaller than or equal to \(\sum\limits_{j^{\prime} = 1}^{j} {p_{i,j^{\prime}}^{t} } ,\forall j \in [N_{w} + N_{m} ]\). \(M_{l\arg e}\) is a large positive number.

$${\mathbf{s}}^{{\mathbf{1}}} = {{\varvec{\upxi}}}_{{{\mathbf{PM}}}}^{{\mathbf{t}}} \,x_{PM} + {\mathbf{s}}^{{\mathbf{0}}} (1 - x_{PM} )$$
(20)
$$s_{i}^{t} \left( {\xi^{t} - \sum\limits_{j^{\prime} = 1}^{j - 1} {Pr_{i,j^{\prime}}^{t} } } \right) \le a_{i,j}^{t} M_{l\arg e} ,\,\forall i \in [N_{w} + N_{m} ],\forall j \in [N_{w} + N_{m} ]/\{ 1\} ,\,\forall t \in [T]$$
(21)
$$(a_{i,j}^{t} - 1)M_{l\arg e} \le s_{i}^{t} \left( {\xi^{t} - \sum\limits_{j^{\prime} = 1}^{j - 1} {Pr_{i,j^{\prime}}^{t} } } \right),\,\forall i \in [N_{w} + N_{m} ],\forall j \in [N_{w} + N_{m} ]/\{ 1\} ,\forall t \in [T]$$
(22)
$$a_{i,1}^{t} = s_{i}^{t} ,\forall i \in [N_{w} + N_{m} ],\forall t \in [T]$$
(23)
$$s_{i}^{t} \left( {\sum\limits_{j^{\prime} = 1}^{j} {Pr_{i,j^{\prime}}^{t} } - \xi^{t} } \right) \le b_{j}^{t} M_{l\arg e} ,\forall i,j \in [N_{w} + N_{m} ],\,\,\forall t \in [T]$$
(24)
$$(b_{j}^{t} - 1)M_{l\arg e} \le s_{i}^{t} \left( {\sum\limits_{j^{\prime} = 1}^{j} {Pr_{i,j^{\prime}}^{t} } - \xi^{t} } \right),\,\forall i,j \in [N_{w} + N_{m} ],\forall t \in [T]$$
(25)
$$s_{j}^{t} = a_{i,j}^{t - 1} \,b_{i,j}^{t - 1} ,\forall i,j \in [N_{w} + N_{m} ],\forall t \in [T]/\{ 1\}$$
(26)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, H., Djurdjanovic, D. Integrated production and maintenance planning under uncertain demand with concurrent learning of yield rate. Flex Serv Manuf J 34, 429–450 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10696-021-09417-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10696-021-09417-8

Keywords

Navigation