Fuzzy Multi-Objective Linear Programming and Simulation Approach to the Development of Valid and Realistic Master Production Schedule

Master production schedule (MPS) plays an important role in an integrated production planning system. It converts the strategic planning defined in a production plan into the tactical operation execution. The MPS is also known as a tool for top management to control over manufacture resources and becomes input of the downstream planning levels such as material requirement planning (MRP) and capacity requirement planning (CRP). Hence, inappropriate decision on the MPS development may lead to infeasible execution, which ultimately causes poor delivery performance. One must ensure that the proposed MPS is valid and realistic for implementation before it is released to real manufacturing system. In practice, where production environment is stochastic in nature, the development of MPS is no longer simple task. The varying processing time, random event such as machine failure is just some of the underlying causes of uncertainty that may be hardly addressed at planning stage so that in the end the valid and realistic MPS is tough to be realized. The MPS creation problem becomes even more sophisticated as decision makers try to consider multi-objectives; minimizing inventory, maximizing customer satisfaction, and maximizing resource utilization. This study attempts to propose a methodology for MPS creation which is able to deal with those obstacles. This approach takes into account uncertainty and makes trade off among conflicting multi-objectives at the same time. It incorporates fuzzy multi-objective linear programming (FMOLP) and discrete event simulation (DES) for MPS development.

Not for Designers: On the Inadequacies of EU Design Law and How to Fix It

Design rights represent an interesting example of how the EU legislature has successfully regulated an otherwise heterogeneous field of law. Yet this type of protection is not for all. The tools created by EU intervention have been drafted paying much more attention to the industry sector rather than to designers themselves. In particular, modern, digitally based, individual or small-sized, 3D printing, open designers and their needs are largely neglected by such legislation. There is obviously nothing wrong in drafting legal tools around the needs of an industrial sector with an important role in the EU economy, on the contrary, this is a legitimate and good decision of industrial policy. However, good legislation should be fair, balanced, and (technologically) neutral in order to offer suitable solutions to all the players in the market, and all the citizens in the society, without discriminating the smallest or the newest: the cost would be to stifle innovation. The use of printing machinery to manufacture physical objects created digitally thanks to computer programs such as Computer-Aided Design (CAD) software has been in place for quite a few years, and it is actually the standard in many industrial fields, from aeronautics to home furniture. The change in recent years that has the potential to be a paradigm-shifting factor is a combination between the opularization of such technologies (price, size, usability, quality) and the diffusion of a culture based on access to and reuse of knowledge. We will call this blend Open Design. It is probably still too early, however, to say whether 3D printing will be used in the future to refer to a major event in human history, or instead will be relegated to a lonely Wikipedia entry similarly to ³Betamax² (copyright scholars are familiar with it for other reasons). It is not too early, however, to develop a legal analysis that will hopefully contribute to clarifying the major issues found in current EU design law structure, why many modern open designers will probably find better protection in copyright, and whether they can successfully rely on open licenses to achieve their goals. With regard to the latter point, we will use Creative Commons (CC) licenses to test our hypothesis due to their unique characteristic to be modular, i.e. to have different license elements (clauses) that licensors can choose in order to adapt the license to their own needs.”