A Schedule Optimization Tool for Destructive and Non-Destructive Vehicle TestsJeremy Ludwig, Annaka Kalton, and Robert Richards

Stottler Henke Associates, Inc. Brian Bautsch, Craig Markusic, and Cyndi Jones

Honda R&D Americas, Inc.

ICAPS-SPARK, June 2016

Overview• Introduction• Scheduling Framework• Scheduling UI• Domain Customization• Methods• Results• Deployment• Conclusion

Introduction• Create a schedule for testing new and

refreshed vehicle models• Only some tasks are destructive

• Most tasks are non-destructive but may have other constraints

• Test vehicles hand-built• Build order

• Not all available at once• Variety of models

• Frame, Market, Drivetrain, and Trim

• Project end date defined externally• Limited personnel and facility resources

Constraints• Temporal• Calendar• Ordering• Resource • Build Pitch• Exclusive• Destructive

Aurora Scheduling Framework• Create a high-quality schedule

• Based on a model of temporal, calendar, ordering, and resource constraints

• Uses graph analysis techniques and heuristic-based scheduling

• Customized for domain• Handle special kinds of tasks

• Exclusive, Destructive• Minimize the number of vehicles required

• Select the types of vehicles built• Select a build order for the vehicles

6

7

Scheduling UI

Initial Schedule by Resource

Scheduling Framework Components• Schedule Initialization

• Preprocessor• Prioritizer

• Scheduling Loop• Priortizier• Scheduler• Quality Criterion• Conflict Manager

• Schedule Finalization• Postprocessor

Differences From Prototype• Testing on more complex models that

require over 100 vehicles• Utilizing facility and personnel constraints

when creating a schedule • Supporting the transition of the software

into the hands of the actual planners

Domain Specific Customization• User Interface

• Wizard• Model Verification during Import

• Build Pitch• Manage Vehicles• Long Tasks• Optimization Dashboard

• Scheduling Components

Wizard

Build Pitch

Manage Vehicles

Long Tasks

Optimization Dashboard

Scheduling Component Customization• Preprocessor

• Override project end date• Prioritizer

• Exclusive Task• Long Task• Destructive Task• Tight Window• End Based• Load Based• Subsequent Duration

Methods• Actual Model

• ~340 tasks• ~4000 days of work • ~30-50 vehicle types

• Manual Solution• Not attempted

Results• Aurora Solution

• 60-200 Vehicles• Adhere to all constraints• Represents 6% reduction from best estimate• Prototype found 12% reduction in direct comparison

• Schedule created in 2 minutes from model vs. days of labor• Spend time using ‘What-if’ capability further

improve the schedule• Time• Build Pitch• Negotiation

Optimized Schedule

Deployment• Deployed and in use by novice planners

• Previous solution no longer used• Integrated with enterprise system

• Input data extracted from external data• Results exported to corporate format

• Providing huge savings and other benefits with every new test suite

Conclusion• Complex, real-world, scheduling problem • Added domain-specific heuristics to a

general intelligent scheduling framework• Added help for novice planners• Generated schedule for vehicle testing

• Significant reduction in the number of prototype vehicles required

• Still completed in the given timeframe• Extend to multiple projects in future

work