American Society of Civil Engineers


Comparison between ATC and ATCS in Parallel Machine Scheduling


by Yanru Li, (School of Logistics, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. E-mail: liyanru102@126.com), Qin Yang, (School of Economics and Management, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China), Guohua Zhou, (School of Economics and Management, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China), and Xi Zhao, (Commercial College, Sichuan Normal University, Chengdu, Sichuan, China. E-mail: huanshuizhidian@sina.com)
Section: Volume II - Infrastructure and Equipment of Logistics, pp. 1332-1338, (doi:  http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/41139(387)183)

     Access full text
     Purchase Subscription
     Permissions for Reuse  

Document type: Conference Proceeding Paper
Part of: ICLEM 2010: Logistics For Sustained Economic Development: Infrastructure, Information, Integration
Abstract: ATC (apparent tardiness cost) and ATCS (apparent tardiness cost with setups) are generally applied in parallel machine scheduling, where the total weighted tardiness is usually regarded as the objective function. ATCS considers setup time on the basis of ATC, so the objective function value of ATCS is better than that of ATC. Most research results have indicated this point, but few scholars have put forward different views. This paper has made a further analysis according to the theoretical studies which have been made before. First, it discusses the calculation procedures of the two rules and considers the internal and external factors of them by assuming that these factors are likely to affect the results. Then, it identifies these factors through case analysis and computer simulation. Finally, the conclusion is drawn — only if these factors meet certain conditions, can the objective function value of ATCS be better than that of ATC.


ASCE Subject Headings:
Comparative studies
Scheduling
Logistics