Accepted Manuscript

Harmony search for the layout design of an unequal area facility

Sumin Kang , Junjae Chae

PII: S0957-4174(17)30138-0
DOI: 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.02.047
Reference: ESWA 11155

To appear in: Expert Systems With Applications

Received date: 14 January 2017

Revised date: 18 February 2017
Accepted date: 28 February 2017

Please cite this article as: Sumin Kang , Junjae Chae , Harmony search for the layout design of an
unequal area facility, Expert Systems With Applications (2017), doi: 10.1016/j.eswa.2017.02.047

This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service
to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo
copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please
note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and
all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Highlights

 We consider a layout design of unequal area facilities.

 Harmony search method is applied with modification to improve its performance
 An effective slicing tree representation for layout configuration is presented
 New penalty scheme for solution selection is introduced
 The proposed approach generates the favorable solutions for well-known problem set

T
IP
CR
US
AN
M
ED
PT
CE
AC
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Harmony search for the layout design of an unequal area facility

Sumin Kang† and Junjae Chae‡*
†Research Assistant
School of Air Transport, Transportation and Logistics

T
Korea Aerospace University,
76, Hanggongdaehang-ro, Deogyang-gu, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, 10540, Korea

IP
email: smkang@kau.kr

‡Associate Professor

CR
School of Air Transport, Transportation and Logistics
Korea Aerospace University,
76, Hanggongdaehang-ro, Deogyang-gu, Goyang-si, Gyeonggi-do, 10540, Korea
email: jchae@kau.ac.kr

US
*Corresponding Author: jchae@kau.ac.kr (Tel: +82-2-300-0372)
AN
Abstract

An unequal area facility layout problem (UA-FLP) is a typical optimization problem that occurs when
constructing an efficient layout within given areas. In this research, a harmony search (HS)-based heuristic
M

algorithm is presented to solve UA-FLPs. In this study, the facility layout is represented as an allocation of blocks
with restrictions in terms of an unequal area and rectangular shape. A more effective facility layout representation
is proposed. This is done via a slicing tree representation as a form of layout structure, and via the HS-based
algorithm, which generates a quality solution. Once the basic HS solution is generated, modifications are
ED

introduced to facilitate improvements. Specifically, the structure of the slicing tree representation is modified, and
a re-adjustment operation is added to diversify the possible range of solutions. A penalty scheme is also proposed
to improve the feasible region searching capabilities. The effects of the alterations are evaluated by testing
well-known problems from previous studies. The proposed algorithm generates the solutions as proficiently as the
PT

best results provided by previous research. The proposed method is robust in terms of process, and it determines a
favorable solution within a short amount of time.
CE

Keywords: Facility design; Meta-heuristic; Material handling; Harmony search; Unequal area facility layout
problem
AC

1. Introduction
Facility layout problems (FLPs) are typical optimization problems. They require an efficient non-overlapping
arrangement of facilities and are considered as a rectangular block in a given space. They have been extensively
studied, and many variants have appeared in areas such as manufacturing facility layout and distribution center
layout design. Meller and Gau (1996) and Singh and Sharma (2006) reviewed these variants and solution
approaches. In most variant cases, determining the optimal arrangement of n departments on a floor space is a
primary concern. The variants known as unequal area facility layout problems (UA-FLPs) attempt to determine
the optimal arrangement by minimizing the total material handling cost between departments while satisfying the
unequal area and aspect ratio restrictions of the departments. Minimizing material movement is very important in

2
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

facility planning since material handling costs account for 20 to 50 percent of total operating expenses in
manufacturing (Francis et al., 1992).
UA-FLPs are NP-hard (Gonçalves & Resende, 2015; Paes et al., 2017). This is because the quadratic
assignment problem (QAP), which determines a layout within a finite set of department locations, is already
NP-hard (Castillo & Westerlund, 2005). The UA-FLP has unequal area requirements with continuous department
positions that have varying dimensions and can be anywhere in a rectangular floor space, and it increases its
complexity more than QAP (Castillo & Westerlund, 2005). Because the complexity exponentially increases as the
size of the problem increases, exact methods such as the branch and bound method run into difficulties when

T
attempting to solve a large-sized problem optimally.
To achieve favorable solutions in large-sized problems, significant efforts have been made to develop

IP
meta-heuristic algorithm-based approaches. In terms of developing meta-heuristic algorithms for UA-FLPs, two
views exist. First, encoding can be used to represent an FLP layout configuration, and second, a meta-heuristic
algorithm can be used to search a layout configuration region.

CR
The slicing tree structure (STS) is an encoding representation that organizes a layout into a tree structure. The
STS consecutively divides the floor space either in a horizontal or vertical direction with a given block space
(called a guillotine cut). The encoding vector of the STS is relatively long because it contains a variety of

US
information about the consecutive operations of the slicing tree. The STS requires a (3n-2)-sized encoding vector
to represent a layout with n departments, whereas the flexible bay structure (FBS), another well-known layout
representation, only requires a (n+α)-sized vector (where α is a decision variable related to the number of bays).
The STS, however, can represent a layout that cannot be constructed in the flexible bay structure. Notwithstanding
AN
this advantage, the STS has not received much attention because of its unwieldiness (due to the long and
complicated encoding vector).
As a search algorithm, HS was developed by Geem et al. (2001), and was inspired by a music improvisation
process that attempted to determine superior states of harmony. The HS algorithm has been applied to various
optimization problems, and it has thus far compared favorably with other traditional meta-heuristic approaches
M

such as GAs (Lee et al., 2005), PSOs and SAs (Al-Betar et al., 2015; Gao et al., 2015). The basic concept of the HS
algorithm is very similar with that of a GA. However, the HS algorithm generates a new solution after considering
all of the existing solutions, while the GA only considers two parent solutions. The remarkable advantages of HS
ED

are that its concept and steps are relatively simple, and it does not require initial solution settings (Geem et al.,
2001). These advantages make the HS flexible for implementation and combination with other meta-heuristic
approaches (Fesanghary et al., 2012). Until recently, however, only one paper has utilized an HS algorithm to
solve a UA-FLP, and the approach proposed in that paper did not directly use the original HS algorithm; rather, it
PT

modified and hybridized the algorithm (Chang & Ku, 2013). This hybrid approach incorporated quadratic
constraint programming (QCP) and HS, and it caused the algorithm to have a slower searching process. It was
only used to test problems with fewer than twenty departments. This motivated the current authors to develop an
CE

entirely new HS-on-UA-FLP approach.

Therefore, in this paper, a new approach is proposed that applies HS to solve a UA-FLP. This approach is
intended to produce quality solutions while utilizing the STS in a reasonable amount of time. The HS approach is
modified with respect to the procedure by which a new solution vector is generated. An additional adjustment
AC

occurs after the new solution vector is generated. This enhances the search process and enables the algorithm to
generate multiple solutions. The approach’s slicing tree encoding is represented in a (3n-2)-sized vector. Note that
the previous approach required a (4n-2)-sized vector (Chang & Ku, 2013). The smaller vector allows the
algorithm to achieve a relatively faster search process. Furthermore, the possible range of encoding values is also
modified to diversify the search range of the layout configurations. Finally, a penalty scheme is implemented to
improve the feasible region-searching capabilities. The results from the computational tests indicate that the
approach is relatively stronger and faster than the results offered by previous studies.
The outline of this paper is as follows. In Section 2, the literature on the UA-FLP is reviewed. Section 3
defines the objective function and constraints of the UA-FLP. In Section 4, the proposed approach is described in
detail. Subsequently, the computational results of the test problems from previous studies are provided in Section
5. Finally, the conclusions and future research considerations are provided.
3
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

2. Literature review
As mentioned, the UA-FLP is a block layout design problem concerned with the optimal arrangement of
departments on a floor space within given unequal areas. Armour and Buffa (1963) formally introduced this
problem, and they proposed heuristics to solve it. Heuristic algorithms such as CRAFT (Armour & Buffa, 1963),
CORELAP (Moore, 1974) and MULTIPLE (Bozer et al., 1994) have been proposed to solve UA-FLPs, but

T
large-sized unequal area problems were not considered because of the related computer performance limitations.
Since the 1990s, these limitations have been dramatically reduced, and this has facilitated new research in solving

IP
large-sized problems. Various approaches have been proposed, and they can be categorized according to
methodology. Recent studies have opted for methodologies relying on mathematical programming or

CR
meta-heuristics.
Several mathematical programming models based on the mixed integer programming (MIP) have been
applied to the UA-FLP. Montreuil (1991) introduced an MIP model to solve a UA-FLP. In particular, he used a
distance-based objective function and a continuous layout representation. He also adopted a quadratic assignment

US
problem (QAP) model that used a pre-defined discrete location to allocate department segments. However, only
problems with six or fewer departments could be solved optimally. Meller et al. (1998) reformulated Montreuil’s
model to solve large-sized problems by tightening the area constraint. They found an optimal solution for a
problem with eight departments. Afterward, Sherali et al. (2003) proposed an improved model by linearizing and
AN
approximating the non-linear area constraints to reduce the amount of error. The proposed model included fewer
binary variables and solved problems more efficiently. Two years later, Castillo and Westerlund (2005) used the
same model, but they controlled the error term generated by the linear approximation of the area constraints. This
allowed them to solve a problem with nine departments. In recent research conducted by Saraswat et al. (2015)
M

and Ridwan et al. (2016), the model offered by Sherali et al. (2003) was applied to determine various FLP
objectives. Huchette et al. (2016) presented a comparison of results generated by an MIP formulation with
different approaches, including previous FLP research. They examined the impact of varying the input to the
model. These studies commonly adopt the model by Sherali et al. (2003) as a starting point for their research. Chae
ED

and Regan (2016) introduced an MIP model for heterogeneous area constraints. The model determined the layout
of two different types of departments – (a) a fixed dimension department and (b) a flexible dimension department
that maintained area constraints – in one problem. They optimally solved the problem for up to 12 departments.
Regarding meta-heuristics, various algorithms, including SAs, GAs, tabu search (TS) and ant colony
PT

optimization (ACO), have been applied to UA-FLPs. The layout representation is an important issue as well as the
type of algorithm. It determines the encoding structure of the layout solution and has a significant influence on the
final objective function value (OFV). As mentioned, the FBS and STS are the two most common structures found
CE

in the literature. The searching algorithm and the representation proposed in the literature can be classified as
follows.
As one of the most studied representations, the FBS has been utilized for UA-FLPs with various
meta-heuristics. Tate and Smith (1995) opted for the FBS as their layout representation and a GA as their
AC

searching algorithm. They tested a number of problems, including the well-known AB20 large-sized problem,
which was presented in (Armour & Buffa, 1963), with various aspect ratio restriction values. Norman and Smith
(1997) also used the FBS with a GA, and they represented their layout into an n-sized chromosome by generating
random keys that determined the gene order. Wong and Komarudin (2010) initially proposed an ant system (AS)
and FBS representation-based approach to solve UA-FLPs. Kulturel-Konak and Konak (2011a) presented an
approach using the FBS and ACO. Kulturel-Konak and Konak (2011b) also presented an initial application of a
particle warm optimization (PSO) with the FBS. Recently, hybrid models embedding linear programming were
developed in Kulturel-Konak, (2012) with a TS, and in Kulturel-Konak & Konak (2013) with a GA. The hybrid
approach proposed by García-Hernández et al. (2015) consisted of an interactive genetic algorithm and two
niching methods. The approach allowed for the direct intervention of a decision maker, so the qualitative aspects
in the layout design could be considered. Palomo-Romero et al. (2017) proposed an island model genetic
4
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

algorithm (IMGA) for a UA-FLP for the first time. To diversify the population and obtain a wider searching space,
their IMGA implemented the parallel evolution of several populations. As this review demonstrates, the literature
on FBSes has competitively introduced new applications for relatively less studied algorithms such as the PSO
and AS, or of hybrid algorithms.
The STS, another thoroughly studied representation for UA-FLPs, was introduced by Tam (1992a, 1992b)
with an SA and GA, respectively. Tam (1998) improved these studies by applying a parallel GA-based algorithm.
The encoding scheme is changed and allowed the approach to explore the wider search space. Azadivar and Wang
(2000) presented GA- and STS-based approaches with dynamic characteristics. They considered time

T
requirements of the manufacturing process such as the processing time of the machines and movement time of the
transporters. The encoding of this approach contained arithmetic symbols that decided the direction of the cut.

IP
Shayan and Chittilappilly (2004) developed a GA-based approach with a new slicing tree representation. The new
representation always produces legal chromosomes that are encoded into a (4n-2)-sized vector. Meanwhile,
Scholz et al. (2009) utilized a TS algorithm with a slicing tree representation to solve a UA-FLP. They presented a

CR
bounding curves concept to represent a layout into an STS. The bounding curve could handle various types of
geometric facility requirements. Komarudin and Wong (2010) introduced a new approach with an AS algorithm to
solve a UA-FLP. The approach divides the STS representation into three different parts and uses a (3n-2)-sized

US
vector to represent these. Chang and Ku (2013) proposed a hybrid model based on HS and quadratic constraints
programming (QCP). They used the STS representation proposed by Shayan and Chittilappilly (2004). Because
Chang and Ku (2013)’s approach incorporated mathematical programming and had a self-learning period to set
the input parameters, it tended to be rather slow in the solution searching process. In addition, the present authors
AN
found that a couple of their numerical value results varied slightly from the final layout configuration, while most
of the results were very favorable.
Recently, several studies proposed unconventional facility placement strategies to solve UA-FLPs.
Gonçalves & Resende (2015) proposed an empty maximal-spaces (EMSes)-based placement strategy and a biased
random-key genetic algorithm. In the placement strategy, a department was located on the best empty
M

maximal-space, which minimized the total cost between all departments already placed on the floor space. For the
constrained problems where the constraints on the floor space were activated, a linear programming model was
used to fit the placement in the floor space. Paes et al. (2017) proposed a hybrid GA and used the placement
ED

strategy of (Gonçalves & Resende, 2015) with some modifications. The strategy divided the floor space into the
four quadrants of the Cartesian plane and placed departments so as to not cross the x- or y-axes.
As the literature review so far demonstrates, the STS has been continuously utilized because it has more
shape and orientation flexibility, although the representation requires a very complex procedure to obtain
PT

feasibility (Chang & Ku, 2013). Furthermore, it is clear that the HS has been scarcely utilized in solving UA-FLPs,
whereas there are many applications of well-known meta-heuristics. In the present study, a general HS proposed
by Geem et al. (2001) is utilized and modified to improve performance.
CE

HS was inspired by a music improvisation process for genres such as jazz in which better states of harmony
were sought. When a solution vector is considered in terms of harmony, each value of the solution vector
corresponds to the pitch of each musical instrument. The OFV of the solution is evaluated by this set of values, just
as the aesthetic quality of music is determined. Individual harmonies are remembered and recalled by the
AC

musicians when the improvisation is performed to achieve a better overall state. Such a procedure is analogous to
an improvement operation for an evolutionary algorithm like a GA. The main difference between GA and HS
algorithms, however, is that the HS algorithm generates a new solution after considering all of the existing
solutions in the harmony memory, while the GA only considers the two parent solutions.
HS algorithms have been shown to accomplish quality results with a wide range of optimization problems.
For instance, discrete structural optimization problems were solved in (Lee et al., 2005). A vehicle routing
problem (VRP) was solved in (Geem et al., 2005), and a cost minimization model for a water distribution network
design was presented by (Geem, 2006; Geem, 2009). As mentioned above, Chang and Ku (2013) applied HS to a
UA-FLP just as this study and most of the results are favorable.
Several advantages can be derived from using the HS algorithm as a solution searching algorithm
(Abdel-raouf, 2013; Geem et al., 2001). First, the HS algorithm imposes fewer mathematical requirements and
5
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

does not require initial value settings for the decision variables. Second, as the HS algorithm uses stochastic
random searches, derivative information is also needless. Finally, the HS is good at identifying the high
performance regions of the solution space in a reasonable amount of time. Notwithstanding these advantages, the
main drawback of the HS is that it tends to fall into a local optimum in multi-modal problems (Abdel-raouf, 2013).
To improve the global searching performance and avoid the local optimum, there have been many studies
modifying the HS and hybridizing it with other algorithms (Valian et al., 2014; Wang & Guo, 2013; Wang et al.,
2016). Just as in previous research, the authors also present a modified HS algorithm by adding an adjustment
operation to improve the search performance.

T
IP
3. Layout design of unequal area facility

CR
Lx

c ix i
d ijx

US d ijy

Ly
AN
c y l jy j
i
( c xj , c jy )

l jx
M

Figure 1 Illustration of unequal area layout problem

ED

In this section, the mathematical model of a generic block layout design problem with unequal area restrictions is
addressed. Each department needs to be determined with respect to its position on a floor space and with respect to
the width and height dimensions of the unequal area.
Figure 1In Figure 1, the dimensions of the floor space are denoted by and , and for each department i,
PT

the coordinate of its centroid is denoted by ( ), and the width and height dimensions are and ,
respectively. The dimensions of each department are restricted by the aspect ratio restriction, which defines the
maximum acceptable ratio between its longest and shortest sides ( { } { }). (Some
CE

problems have a restriction on the maximum department length instead of the aspect ratio). The distance between
departments is denoted by , where , and the material flow volume from department i to j is denoted by
. The parameters and variables used in the UA-FLP formulation are summarized as follows.
AC

Parameters:

Number of departments
Dimensions of floor space (facility)
Dimensions of department i
Material flow volume from department i to j

Variables:

Distance between departments i and j

6
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Centroid coordinates of department i

{
otherwise
{
otherwise

Then, the objective function and the constraints are formulated as follows.

T
IP
∑ ∑ ( ) (1)

CR
| | (2)
(3)

( )
US (4)

(5)
AN
(6)

∑( ) (7)
M

{ } (8)
ED

Objective function (1) minimizes the total material handling cost, which is defined as the sum of the product
of the material flow ( ) and the distances ( ) between departments. Distance is measured according to
rectilinear distance, which is the most commonly used metric in the FLP literature. This is because rectilinear
PT

distance is based on travel along paths that are perpendicular to each other, and this travel is generally considered
in the block layout-based facility (Meller & Gau, 1996; Tompkins et al., 2010). As shown in (2), defines the
distance between department i and j on the s-axis, where . The primary concern of the UA-FLP is the area
CE

constraint (3). The dimensions of each department are required to meet the given unequal area ( ) restriction
constraint (3). The total area of departments must be restricted in a given fixed space ( , as shown in
constraint (4). Since the area constraint is nonlinear, many previous studies have attempted to linearize the
constraint so that the model can be applied to regular optimization packages such as CPLEX. Various techniques
AC

have been used to linearize the constraint and convert the model to an MIP model (Castillo & Westerlund, 2005;
Meller et al., 1998; Sherali et al., 2003). Note that these studies underestimated the department area in the
linearization procedure, so the obtained optimal solutions were lower than they were in the original data.
Constraints (5)-(8) enforce the locational relationship between departments. Constraints (5) and (6) prevent
the departments from overlapping and ensure that they are located in the given floor space. The binary variables
( ) define the relative position of the departments. Binary constraints (7) and (8) ensure that constraint (5) is
activated on only one axis. Suppose that takes value one, which means department i is to the left of department
j. The overlap prevention constraint on the x-axis is then activated, so departments i and j are separated. (Note that
the authors have briefly addressed a generic UA-FLP model in order to help comprehend the problem, while there
have been many extensions to that model.)
7
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

The approach used in this study handles the aforementioned restrictions within heuristic procedures, and it
searches for a solution in a feasible region. This forces the search procedure to put more effort into determining a
feasible solution. To advance the search performance, a penalty scheme is developed for infeasible solutions. This
scheme enables the proposed method to impose a penalty cost on an infeasible solution rather than discard it, so
that a desirable representation can be kept even it is infeasible. The details of the penalty scheme are described in
the next section.

T
4. Harmony search approach

IP
In this section, details regarding the solution approach are explained. First, a discussion on the STS as a solution
representation is discussed with a focus on its encoding. Afterwards, an explanation is given regarding how the HS

CR
algorithm is implemented to solve UA-FLPs, and, in addition, the ways in which this study might contribute to the
original HS- and STS-based approaches are listed.

4.1. Layout representation

US
In the proposed approach, the STS proposed by Komarudin and Wong (2010) is used as the layout representation.
This STS consecutively divides the floor space either in horizontal or vertical directions in the given block space.
The departments placed to one side of the divided site take as much space as the proportion of the sum of their
AN
areas to the others. This consecutive cutting process is encoded into three different parts: the cut point sequence,
cut code sequence, and department sequence. For a UA-FLP layout with n departments, the encoding of this
approach takes a (3n-2)-sized vector. Because this is smaller than the encoding of other STS approaches, the
processing time and the required memory for a solution search operation could be much faster.
M

The department sequence is an arrangement of departments located on the floor space, which is composed of
integer numbers. The cut point sequence represents an arrangement of the cutting positions along the department
sequence. It has an (n-1)-sized vector because the size of the department sequence is n, and it needs to be cut (n-1)
times to make n space. A value of the cut code sequence represents a direction of the cut itself. In the previous
ED

literature on STSes, the slicing direction had either two or four cases. Initially, decisions on cutting directions
could be simply chosen between horizontal and vertical cuts. Tam (1992a) introduced an STS concept intended for
UA-FLPs, and he employed four cases: left, right, bottom, and top cuts. The present research uses four cases
considering the inverse cut concept: horizontal, inverse horizontal, vertical, and inverse vertical cuts. This is
PT

similar to the work provided by Tam (1992a). The values of the cut code sequence are defined as 0 for a horizontal
cut and 1 for a vertical cut, while 2 and 3 are the two opposite cases for 0 and 1, respectively.
CE

4 3 1 2 5 6
AC

1: Vertical cut 3: Inversed

Vertical cut

4,3,1 2,5,6 2,5,6 4,3,1

Figure 2 Example of the inverse vertical cut

8
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Because the number of combinations that can be generated by the binary values with horizontal and vertical
cuts are significantly limited, these opposite cases are necessary in order to diversify a combination of the
encoding and generate a greater variety of solutions. Notice that the sub-sequence (4-3-1-2-5-6) in Figure 2, is
placed in a totally opposite manner via an inverse cut. The sub-sequence (4-3-1-2-5-6) is divided into (4-3-1) and
(2-5-6) by a vertical cut, and the inverse vertical cut divides it into (2-5-6) and (4-3-1).
The cut code sequence corresponds to the cut point sequence. Therefore, a set of consecutive STS cuts are
completely expressed by both the cut points and the cut code sequence. For example, a slicing tree and its
encoding for the UA-FLP with six departments is shown in Figure 3. In this case, a solution vector for the block

T
layout is represented in 16 values: (3-2-4-1-5) - (0-0-1-1-3) - (4-3-1-2-5-6). Given these values, the STS works as
follows. In the first step, the value of the cut point is 3, and the value of the cut code is 0 (horizontal cut), which

IP
indicates a horizontal cut at the third position along the department sequence (4-3-1-2-5-6). In the second step, the
value of the cut point is 2, and the value of the cut code is 0. Accordingly, the sub-sequence (4-3-1) is horizontally
divided into two parts, (4-3) and (1). Such procedures are continuously repeated until a complete block layout is

CR
generated. Notice that the sub-sequence (5-6) is inversely divided since the corresponding cut code is 3, which
also means an inverse vertical cut.

4 3
US H
H

V
AN
1
V 1 2 V
2 6 5
M

4 3 6 5

(3 – 2 – 4 – 1 – 5) Cut point
ED

(0 – 0 – 1 – 1 – 3) Cut code

(4 – 3 – 1 – 2 – 5 – 6) Department
PT

Figure 3 Slicing tree and encoding of the block layout with six-departments
CE

4.2. Harmony search algorithm

The proposed approach uses an HS algorithm as a solution searching algorithm, which is inspired by the
AC

improvisation process used by musicians. The HS algorithm consists of three phases: 1) initialization, 2)
improvisation, and 3) update harmony memory.
In the initialization phase, three parameters – the harmony memory size (HMS), which represents the number
of solution vectors in the harmony memory (HM), the harmony memory consideration rate (HMCR), pitch
adjustment rate (PAR) – and stopping criterion are all specified. Afterwards, the HM is initialized. As shown in
Equations (9) and (10), the HM stores harmony solutions for which the total size is equivalent to
This is because the HM has HMS-sized harmony solutions, and each of the harmony solutions has
values with n departments. Each of the initialized values is determined randomly in the possible range.
As mentioned, the range of the cut point sequence and department sequence depends on the number of
departments, while the range is from 0 to 3 for the cut code.

9
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(9)
( M
[ ( M ) ]

T
[ ] (10)

IP
[ ]

CR
(11)

{ M ( M ) }
US
In the improvisation, a new harmony solution is generated based on the following three rules: random
(12)
AN
selection (RS), memory consideration (MC), and pitch adjustment (PA). Random selection generates a new
harmony solution by using a random number with the probability of . On the contrary, memory
consideration selects the values from the stored harmony solutions in the HM, and it processes these values with
the HMCR probability. Memory consideration is similar to crossover in a GA. It generates a new solution
M

(offspring) from the existing solutions (parents). However, the main difference between them is that crossover
only utilizes two solutions to generate a new solution, while the MC utilizes all of the solutions from the list. As
shown in Equations (11) and (12), all harmony solutions stored in the HM are candidates for the MC to use to
ED

generate a new harmony solution. If duplicated values appear in a department sequence or a cut code sequence
when the MC operates, a partially matched crossover, which is used in a GA crossover operation to avoid
department duplication in a representation, is performed.
PT
CE
AC

Figure 4 Memory consideration example

10
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Figure 4 shows how the MC and partially matched crossover are performed in a department sequence. First,
every value of a new department sequence is randomly chosen from the department sequence in the HM. In this
case, a set of values (3, 1, 5, 1 and 2) are chosen from the each of the columns. Because the sequence has doubled
the value of 1, the partially matched crossover is performed by replacing the latter 1 with the second value of
. This is because that the latter 1 is from and the former 1 is on the second position of the new
department sequence. This operation can eliminate duplication while maintaining the directivity of the existing
harmony solutions.

T
IP
H H

H V H V

CR
V 1 2 V V 1 3 V

4 3

4
6

3
5

US 4 2

4 2
6 5
AN
1 1

2 6 5 3 6 5
M

(a) before (b) after

Figure 5 Swap operation of the department sequence

ED

H H
PT

H V H V

V 1 2 V V 3 1 V
CE

4 3 6 5 4 6 2 5
AC

4 3 1 2 6 5 4 6 3 1 2 5

(a) before (b) after

Figure 6 Insert operation of the department sequence

After the new harmony solution is generated by the MC, it can be adjusted by modifying its values with the
PAR probability. This operation is called pitch adjustment, which refers to a local search in the algorithm. This
11
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

enhances the search performance as part of the improvement procedures. There are four PA rules in the present
approach. First, a swapping operation is carried out for two values in a department sequence. This operation
appears on the slicing tree as a pair of randomly selected leaf nodes that are swapped. As a result of this exchange,
the positions of two departments on a layout configuration are swapped. Examples of the first rule are shown in
Figure 5. In this case, Departments 2 and 3 are swapped. In the second rule, the positions of two randomly
selected values in a cut point sequence are swapped. When swapped, a layout cut position can be transformed.
According to the third rule, an insert operation for two values in a department sequence is carried out. In this rule,
a value randomly chosen from the department sequence is inserted into a new position along the sequence.

T
Figure 6 shows the third rule reacting to the department sequence. Department 6 is inserted to the right of 4,
and all departments on the right side of 6 are shifted. The fourth rule is an insert operation for the cut point

IP
sequence. Thus, when the pitch adjustment is performed, one of the four PA rules is randomly selected and
operated.
In a basic form of HS proposed by Geem et al. (2001), a new harmony solution was generated using only

CR
three rules: MC, PA and RS. However, the present authors implement an additional operation for a cut code
sequence. Because this is represented as a binary number, numerous duplications can occur. This can lead the
algorithm’s search direction to a local optimum.

US
Therefore, the present algorithm conducts a pitch re-adjustment on the cut code sequence of the newly
generated solution, and it is able to continuously produce diverse harmony solutions. Considering this
modification, rules regarding the cut code sequence in the PA operation are excluded. (Only local searches for a
cut point sequence and a department sequence are considered.) The pitch re-adjustment is performed by changing
AN
every value of the cut code sequence according to a certain probability. This is known as the rate of pitch
re-adjustment (PRAR). In other words, each value of the cut code sequence has a chance of re-adjustment into
either 0, 1, 2, or 3.
In the updated HM, the new harmony solution is compared to the worst harmony solution in the HM. If the
new harmony solution is better than the worst harmony solution based on the OFV, the new one replaces the worst
M

one.
The overall procedure incorporating the improvisation and updated HM phases is illustrated in Figure 7. The
procedure is continuously repeated until the stop criterion is satisfied. The stop criterion used in the present
ED

approach is the maximum number of iterations. The algorithm is stopped if the number of iterations (imp) reaches
its limit (stopImp). When the new harmony solution is better than the current best solution, the value of imp is
initialized to 0.
PT

Harmony Memory
𝑚
Memory Pitch
𝑚
CE

Consideration Adjustment
… 𝑚𝑛𝑒𝑤 𝑚𝑛𝑒𝑤 ′
𝑚
Pitch
𝑚 Random Re-adjustment
AC

Selection
𝑚𝑛𝑒𝑤 𝑚𝑛𝑒𝑤 ′′

Update Harmony Memory

Figure 7 Overall procedure of the proposed algorithm

12
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

4.3. Penalty scheme

6 2 6

3
1 2 3 4 5 1 5
7 8 7 8
4

T
IP
(a) (b)
Figure 8 Example of infeasible layout configurations

CR
The layout configurations are defined as an infeasible solution when they violate their dimension restrictions. In
the algorithm, a penalty is imposed on the OFV of the infeasible solution so that the infeasible layout
configuration is excluded from the best layout candidates. Without penalties, an unrealistic layout might be

US
selected as a final solution since the OFV of this kind of layout could be much better than a feasible one. Layout (a)
in Figure 8 shows an infeasible layout that is constructed as a simple series of long and narrow departments. Such
a layout configuration can achieve a very good objective value even though it is definitely infeasible. This leads
AN
the model to fall into a local optimum. In experiments on relaxed restrictions conducted by Tate and Smith
(1995), a number of unrealistic layout configurations were proposed with a much better objective value.
To prevent the harmony memory from taking an unrealistic layout as the best layout candidate, the proposed
algorithm performs its penalty scheme. The scheme focuses on the feasibility of each department instead of the
solution’s feasibility. As shown in Figure 8, it is obvious that the layout in (b) is more feasible than in (a) in that the
M

layout includes fewer infeasible departments (indicated by the shaded area). As such, the layout in (b) can make a
greater contribution to a new feasible solution. Even though the layout in (b) also has departments that violate the
dimension restrictions, it is not reasonable to penalize the layouts in (a) and (b) equally. The OFV of the layout in
ED

(a) is better than that of the layout in (b), and this does not change after the penalty is applied to the final value if
the same penalty is applied. Therefore, (a) is given priority as a candidate for the new layout since the OFV after
applying the penalty is better than it is for (b). Particularly with a large-sized problem, finding an initial feasible
solution is very difficult because there are many solutions like (a) - unrealistic but better. To avoid this situation,
PT

the penalty function can hold and express the degree of infeasibility. Therefore, the penalty scheme is formed by
considering the feasibility of each department. The scheme is as follows.
CE

(13)
(14)
AC

where is the given coefficient for a penalty. It is defined as a positive real number greater than 1. is the
number of infeasible departments in a layout configuration. As shown in Equation (13) and (14), if any of the
layout configuration of the harmony solution ( ) includes at least one infeasible department, the OFV of
the solution is multiplied by the penalty scheme . is used to impose the penalty. In other words, the
OFV of an infeasible solution is multiplied by . By using this scheme, the infeasible solution in (a) of Figure 8
would incur a penalty of to its OFV and be excluded from the best solution candidates. In (b),
however, a penalty of only would be incurred, and the solution would be given greater priority.
Several experiments are subsequently implemented to evaluate the penalty scheme. It is determined that this
scheme is superior in terms of its ability to search for feasible regions when compared to a scheme that applies the
same penalty to every infeasible solution. In addition, the penalty scheme finds feasible solutions in a much
shorter time, even in the largest problem tested.
13
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

5. Computational results
Table 1 Specifications of the problem sets

Problem Department Data

Floor space dimensions
name requirement reference

T
fO7 (Meller et al., 1998)

IP
fO8 (Meller et al., 1998)
fO9 (Meller et al., 1998)
O7 (Meller et al., 1998)

CR
O8 (Meller et al., 1998)
O9 (Meller et al., 1998)
*
vC10s (Van Camp et al., 1991)
vC10a (Van Camp et al., 1991)
Nug12
AB20
SC30
US (Nugent et al., 1968)
(Armour & Buffa, 1963)
(Liu & Meller, 2007)
AN
SC35 (Liu & Meller, 2007)
Du62 (Dunker et al., 2003)
*
Minimum length requirement for each department.

Computational experiments are implemented to evaluate the performance of the approach, and the results are
M

compared to those from the previous literature. The algorithm is coded using JAVA, and the tests are conducted on
a computer with an Intel Core i5 CPU (3.2GHz) and 8 GB of memory. Datasets of well-known problems with 7-62
departments are used. Table 1 shows the names and setups for the problems. Note that the number in the name of
ED

the problem indicates the number of departments required to be arranged.

These problems are classified into three different categories by considering the dimensions of the floor space.
In the first, the problems are considered with an area compactness of nearly 1.0, which means that there is barely
any empty space in a complete layout configuration. In the second, significant empty space exists, and the total
PT

area of the departments is much less than the area of the floor space. In the third, there are no restrictions on the
floor space boundaries, which indicates an open field layout.
CE

5.1. Parameter setting and basic result

To set the appropriate parameters for the algorithm, the iterated racing procedure is used. This procedure
focuses on the sampling parameter configurations according to a particular distribution, evaluating them using
AC

either the Friedman’s test or the t-test, and refining the sampling distribution to bias the sampling towards the best
configurations. ‘irace’ (version 2.1.1662) is a software package that implements the iterated racing procedure for
meta-heuristic parameter tuning (López-Ibáñez et al., 2016). The tuning procedure is performed for each problem
set with a budget of 1000 experiments. During the tuning procedure, the following ranges are considered for the
parameter sampling: where n
indicates the number of departments.
For each iteration, the irace package determines elite parameter configurations and selects the best of them.
The tuning procedure are conducted several times, and favorable parameter settings are selected. Table 2
summarizes the selected parameter configurations corresponding to each problem set.

14
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Table 2 Best parameter configurations tuned by the irace package

Problem HMS HMCR PAR PRAR

fO7 7 0.92 0.90 0.26

fO8 12 0.83 0.28 0.40
fO9 12 0.83 0.43 0.35
O7 15 0.89 0.30 0.15

T
O8 12 0.92 0.50 0.11
O9 18 0.92 0.35 0.18

IP
VC10a 18 0.92 0.59 0.28
VC10s 15 0.97 0.82 0.08

CR
Nug12 18 0.87 0.77 0.11
AB20 17 0.96 0.52 0.10
SC30 23 0.94 0.20 0.05
SC35 30 0.99 0.12 0.03
Du62 49 0.95 0.27 0.03

US
The value of the HMS is dependent on the problem size (n). HMS requires a minimum size where the
harmony memory can hold a sufficient number of solutions to maintain its diversity. As the problem size grows,
the required minimum size also grows. However, the increase in the HMS should be carefully considered because
AN
it causes a severe increase in computational effort. From the tuning procedure, the authors obtain a relatively
similar value to that of the problem size, and these values are remarkably smaller than the values from the previous
study (Chang & Ku, 2013). Accordingly, the proposed algorithm requires a relatively smaller effort to achieve
quality solutions. In the literature on HS, an HMCR is generally set to a high value ranging from 0.8 to 0.95. The
M

previous study (Chang & Ku, 2013) set the initial HMCR value to 0.95, and this was dynamically adapted with a
standard deviation of 0.01. Using a large value for the HMCR helps the algorithm to put a priority on memory
consideration instead of random selection. It also maintains the directivity of the harmony memory in a new
ED

solution. For this reason, it is generally better to use a large value for the HMCR (Omran & Mahdavi, 2008). The
tuned PAR values vary widely from 0.1 to 0.9. Chang and Ku (2013) used a relatively lower PAR value (0.3). This
difference occurred because the PA rules proposed in the present study differ from those in the previous study.
Most of the PRAR values are tuned to small values. This corresponds to the intention of the present authors to
PT

change one or two values in the cut code sequence for each iteration. The PRAR value should be kept low because
larger values cause a solution to lose the directivity inherited from the harmony memory and bring about a
randomly generated result.
The algorithm was replicated 30 times with the tuned parameter settings. Table 3 shows the obtained
CE

solutions and processing times for all experiments. In the small problem (i.e. fewer than 10 departments), the gap
between best OFV and mean OFV is quite narrow even though the processing time required for each execution is
less than 1 sec. In the larger problem, this gap increases slightly, but the required processing time is still less than
2 minutes in the largest problem.
AC

Table 3 Summary of the obtained results

Problem Processing time (sec) Average processing

Best OFV Mean OFV 1
name time (sec)
fO7 17.75 17.86 0.06 0.09
fO8 22.39 23.56 0.07 0.11
fO9 23.46 24.81 0.05 0.15
O7 131.69 133.28 0.08 0.08
15
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

O8 243.13 248.71 0.09 0.11

O9 236.14 246.59 0.14 0.19
vC10s 19973.66 22496.17 2.62 3.01
vC10a 18522.79 20614.30 0.33 0.27
Nug12 257.50 263.18 1.88 2.02
AB20 4959.11 5710.91 64.74 44.51
SC30 3352.70 4400.68 531.97 259.55

T
SC35 3978.62 5013.61 365.82 471.52

IP
Du62 3635307.3 3730550.23 462.17 511.23
1
Processing time for the best solution

CR
5.2. Problems with the compactness value of 1.0

In the first category, experiments are conducted with ten different problems: fO7, fO8, fO9, O7, O8, O9, vC10a,

US
vC10s, Nug12 and AB20. The area compactness of the vC10a, vC10s, Nug12 and AB20 problems is exactly 1.0.
In other words, there is no empty space in the given problems, and the area of the floor space exactly fits to the sum
of each department area. For the fO7-9 and O7-9 problems, there are a few empty spaces, and this could provide a
little flexibility in terms of achieving a feasible solution when the search procedure is applied.
AN
The vC10 problem is sub-classified into vC10a and vC10s problems according to shape requirements. The
vC10a problem is restricted by a maximum aspect ratio ( ), the ratio of the longer side to the shorter side in the
department length, while the vC10s problem requires a minimum width and length ( ) of 5 for all departments.
The AB20 problem is assumed to have the asymmetric flow matrix used in (Armour & Buffa, 1963), while the
M

others have symmetric matrices.

To evaluate the performance of the approach, the present results are compared to the results achieved in
previous studies. Three groups of approaches are used for comparison. They are classified as mathematical
ED

programming, meta-heuristic, and hybrid approaches. For the mathematical programming approaches, the
approach proposed by Castillo et al. (2005) is used for comparison. For the meta-heuristic approaches, the results
from (Gonçalves & Resende, 2015; Komarudin & Wong, 2010; Kulturel-Konak & Konak, 2011b; Scholz et al.,
2009) are used for comparison. The hybrid approach (Chang & Ku, 2013) is also used for comparison. As stated
PT

earlier, they proposed a hybrid QCP-HS approach. Note that the present work excludes a couple of results from
(Chang & Ku, 2013) because some of the final layout configurations did not generate the OFV as was presented. A
couple of the datasets they used might be different from the dataset used here. However, most of the results are
included here for comparison.
CE

Table 4 Comparison of results for the first category

AC

Best OFV
Problem (Kulturel-Konak
(Castillo et al., (Scholz et al., (Komarudin & (Gonçalves & (Chang & Ku,
name & Konak, This approach
2005) 2009) Wong, 2010) Resende, 2015) 2013) 1
2011b)
fO7 17.75 17.75†
fO8 22.31 22.39†
fO9 23.46 23.46†
O7 131.58 132.00 131.68 131.56 131.69†
O8 242.93 243.16 243.12 242.92 243.18 243.13†
16
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

O9 236.14 239.07 236.14 236.57 236.14 236.14†

vC10s 21297.98 19994.10 19967.60 22899.65 19951.17 20770.89 19973.66†
vC10a 20142.13 19465.77 18522.79†
Nug12 257.50 257.50
AB20 5225.96 4972.56 5336.36 5021.17 5151.86 4959.11
1
The proposed results that differ from the layout configurations are excluded.
†
The approach finds the optimal solution.

T
IP
The overall comparison between the best solutions obtained in this research and the best known solutions
provided by previous studies is shown in Table 4. It reveals that the present approach is quite robust in terms of
objective quality because it determined the best known solution in all problem sets. Since Castillo et al. (2005)

CR
used the MIP approach, they found optimal solutions for fO7-9 and O7-9, but not for vC10s because of the time
limitations of the experiment. There are few differences between their objective values of and the current objective
values, but it is confirmed that they used the same layout configuration. As mentioned, these gaps were derived
from an error that occurred by a linearizing technique applied to the area constraints. The layout configurations

US
from the present approach for the fO7-9 and O7-9 problems are illustrated in Figure 9. They are identical to the
optimal solutions offered by the MIP approach (Castillo et al., 2005).
For the vC10 problems, the present algorithm determined the best known solutions for the vC10s and
AN
improved the solution for vC10a by 4.84 percent. The layout configurations for the vC10 problems are shown in
Figures 10 and 11. Note that the best solution achieved for vC10s has the same layout configuration as that found
by (Gonçalves & Resende, 2015; Komarudin & Wong, 2010), although the present method reports a slightly high
OFV.
More importantly, the optimal solutions for these two problem sets have not yet been reported. (In other
M

words, the current study is the first to achieve optimal solutions for these problems.) The MIP model introduced
by (Castillo et al., 2005; Sherali et al., 2003) is used to solve the problems. It is known that a layout problem set
with fewer than 10 departments can be solved optimally (Castillo et al., 2005; Sherali et al., 2003). However, the
ED

optimal solution for a 10-department problem had not been generated due to the computer-derived memory and
the time limitations (Castillo et al., 2005). The present study uses the IBM ILOG CPLEX Optimization Studio
12.6 to solve these two problems and finally achieve the optimal solutions. It is confirmed that the layout
configurations generated by the proposed search algorithm are identical to the optimal layouts for vC10s and
PT

vC10a, respectively.
The proposed search algorithm generates the same solution for the Nug12 problem as reported in
(Kulturel-Konak & Konak, 2011b). As stated, 10-department problems could not be solved optimally due to their
CE

complexity. As such, it is not guaranteed that the present solution is optimal. However, it can be said that the
search algorithm has found the best known solution.

1 8
AC

1
2 7
5 4
2
3 6
3
6 3
4
5 7 2
4
5 8
7 1
6 9
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0 2 4 6 8
OFV = 17.75 OFV = 22.39 OFV = 23.46
(a) fO7 (b) fO8 (c) fO9
17
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

1
3 7
5
2 8
4 9
5 8 6 1 6
3 3
4 1
6
3 1
5

T
2 4
7

IP
0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
OFV = 131.69 OFV = 243.13 OFV = 236.14
(d) O7 (e) O8 (f) O9

CR
Figure 9 The best layout solutions for fO7-9 and O7-9 (This approach)

20
2 6
1
US 5
3
AN
10 8
4
9
7 10
0
M

0 10 20 30 40 50
OFV = 19973.66
From this approach and (Gonçalves & Resende, 2015; Komarudin & Wong, 2010) (found optimal)
ED

Figure 10 The best layout solution for vC10

7 4 5
3
PT

20 20
8
1 9 3 1
10 10 8 5 10 10
6 2 6 2 9
CE

4 7
0 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
AC

OFV = 18522.79 OFV = 19465.77

(a) This approach (found optimal) (b) (Chang & Ku, 2013)

Figure 11 The layout configuration for vC10a

18
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

16 11

13
17
15

T
14
12 9

IP
10

19 3

CR
6
4 2 7
18 5 1
8

0 0.5
20

1 1.5 2
US 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
AN
OFV = 4959.11 OFV = 4972.56
(a) This approach (b) (Komarudin & Wong, 2010)

Figure 12 The layout configuration for AB20

M

For the AB20 problem, the proposed algorithm finds a new solution that improves on the previous best
known solution. The new best solution for the AB20 problem is shown in Figure 12.
As compared to the previous HS-based approach (Chang & Ku, 2013), the present algorithm outperforms
ED

their algorithm for the vC10s, vC10a, and AB20 problems. This is due to the re-adjustment operation that is
carried out to diversify the generated solutions.
PT

5.3. Problems incorporating an empty space on the layout

When the total area of the departments is less than the floor space area, dummy departments must be adopted to
CE

ensure that the area compactness is virtually 1.0 where the STS can be performed. For this purpose, the SC30 and
SC35 problem sets are used. They have area compactness values equivalent to 0.9 and 0.8, respectively. These
problems have shape restrictions similar to others in which the maximum aspect ratio of the department
dimensions is constrained. For each of the problems, several dummy departments are added to represent an empty
AC

space with no material handling flow.

Table 5 Numerical results comparison for the second category

Best OFV
(Kulturel-Ko (Kulturel-Ko (Kulturel-Ko
Problem (Liu & (Wong & (Komarudin (Gonçalves (Palomo-Ro
nak & nak & nak & This
name Meller, Komarudin, & Wong, & Resende, mero et al.,
Konak, Konak, Konak, approach
2007) 2010) 2010) 2015) 2017)
2011a) 2011b) 2013)
SC30 3707.00 3679.85 3868.55 3562.90 3443.34 3370.98 3367.87 3613.11 3352.70
19
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

(CPUs) (14652) (19135) (23544) (11210) (873) (22038) (999) (419) (532)
SC35 3604.00 3962.72 4132.36 3750.74 3700.75 3385.48 3316.77 3885.29 3978.62
(CPUs) (57744) (28671) (83988) (30305) (1842) (29539) (1556) (804) (843)

12

26 28 1
27

T
25

IP
8 16 13 15 18 4 3 29 30 19 24

CR
20
17 14

US
11
21 22
4
23
AN
2 12 5 9 8 7 6 2 10

0
M

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14

OFV = 3352.7
Figure 13 The best layout solution of SC30 (This approach)
ED

These problems were also replicated 30 times with the tuned parameter settings shown in Table 2. The PRAR
value is set slightly low because the size of the SC30 and SC35 are larger than the problems previously referred to.
In these problems, the pitch re-adjustment operation would change more values in the encoding because the length
PT

of the encoding would increase.

A comparison of the results is given in Table 5. For the SC30, the proposed algorithm improves on the
previous best known solution in a very favorable time. Figure 13 illustrates the new best solution for the SC30
CE

problem. For the SC35 set, the search procedure finds a better solution than that provided in (Komarudin & Wong,
2010), which had the same slicing tree layout design structure. However, it achieves poorer results in an overall
comparison. As pointed out by Komarudin and Wong (2010), methods based on slicing tree representations must
add dummy departments for problems with an area compactness of less than 1.0, and this causes the algorithm to
AC

increase the problem size, which results in poorer solution quality.

5.4. Problem with the flexible dimensions of floor space

Table 6 Average objective function values for the Du62 with ten dimension sets

Sets no. Average OFV

1 3701232.2
2 3727726.2
20
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

3 3802387.0
4 3889417.5
5 3992663.3
6 4163404.2
7 4185812.0
8 4284671.3
9 4381766.1

T
10 4493922.6

IP
Table 7 Numerical results comparison for Du62

CR
Best OFV
(Kulturel-Kona (Kulturel-Kona
Problem (Scholz et al., (Komarudin & (Gonçalves &
k & Konak, k & Konak, This approach
2009) Wong, 2010) Resende, 2015)

Du62
(CPUs)
3871510.00
(252)
3720521.13
(86400)
US
2011a)
3642239.47
(12654)
2011b)
3641497.00
(29045)
3685136.02
(9)
3635307.3
(462)
AN
The Du62 problem is one of the largest problem sets used in the literature. The original problem introduced in
(Dunker et al., 2003) was an open-field type layout problem, but the problem has been modified, and the floor
space dimensions are predefined in the present approach as in (Komarudin & Wong, 2010). In the modified
M

version of the problem, there is no empty space, and the aspect ratio of the departments is restricted to a maximum
value of 4. The present approach is different from that used in (Komarudin & Wong, 2010) in that the dimensions
of the floor space are flexible. Ten different arbitrarily generated dimensions are used to test the layout in the
problem. These sets are constructed by considering various ratios of floor space width to height, which range from
ED

1:1 to 4:1. Table 6 shows ten sets of floor space dimensions and the average OFV values when these sets are tested
for the layout design of all 62 departments. The algorithm was replicated 10 times for every dimension set. From
the results, a certain directivity is found – the nearly square dimension sets are more likely to achieve better
performance. The proposed algorithm can improve Du62 results on the square floor space (Set 1), which has not
PT

been tested in any other studies.

The results in Table 7 show that the proposed algorithm outperforms the algorithms used in other studies.
Kulturel-Konak and Konak (2011b) reported that their best solution cost 3,641,497, and that solution was
CE

achieved on an FBS. The proposed algorithm in this paper improves on this result because it is based on an STS
that can produce a more diverse range of configurations. Figure 14 illustrates the new best solution for the Du62
problem, and it is obvious that this configuration cannot be achieved on an FBS. Notice that the solution from
(Gonçalves & Resende, 2015) was produced on the open-field floor space – there is no floor space limitation –, so
AC

their layout configuration differs from the current configuration.

In terms of CPU time, a direct comparison cannot be made since the experimental environment is quite
different. However, the proposed algorithm significantly reduces the required CPU processing time even though
the computer system used for the test of each proposed method is not comparable. The processing times required
for the best solutions are compared to those from other meta-heuristic and hybrid harmony search methods offered
by Chang and Ku (2013). The present algorithm finds the best known solutions for the fO7-9, O7-9, vC10s and
Nug12 problems, while it requires a minimal amount of CPU time as compared to the other approaches. The new
best solutions achieved for the vC10a and AB20 problems only require 0.33 and 64.74 seconds, respectively.
These CPU times are much faster than those achieved in (Chang & Ku, 2013; Komarudin & Wong, 2010). Even in
the large-sized problem tests, SC30 and Du62 sets, the proposed algorithm achieves a new best solution in less
than 8 minutes.
21
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

14 15 31 46

48 17
100 62 51
9
7 47
27

T
80

IP
54 49 44 29 38 2 11 59 5 40 37 33

CR
60

53 42 20 52 43 61 21 16 56 50 32 60 35 26

40
25

10
28 57
US 3 18 30 19
AN
12 24 36 8

20

6 13 41 58 1 23 55 34 22 4 45 39
M

0
0
ED

20 40 60 80 100

OFV = 3635307.3

Figure 14 The best layout configuration of Du62 (This approach)

PT

6. Conclusion
An unequal area facility layout problem is a typical optimization problem that occurs while constructing an
CE

efficient block layout within given unequal areas. In this research, a harmony search-based heuristic algorithm is
presented to solve UA-FLPs. The block layout configuration is represented via a slicing tree representation.
Modification methods are proposed to improve the performance of the algorithm. A more effective slicing
representation is proposed for the block layout to diversify the possible cut code range. A penalty scheme is added
AC

to produce feasible solutions more effectively. In addition, a re-adjusting operation is performed after a new
harmony solution is generated. This feature improves search performance as well as processing times by
decreasing the required HMS.
Computational results are presented showing that the proposed algorithm is robust since it determines the
best known solution in most problem sets. For small-sized problems, the algorithm improves on the solutions for
the vC10a and AB20 problems as compared to the best solutions found in previous studies. Moreover, for the
vC10s and vC10a problems, optimal solutions are determined through this research, and the proposed algorithm
determines an identical layout to the optimal solution for both problems. For the SC35 problem, in which the area
compactness is less than 1.0, the algorithm is not able to generate a favorable solution. As mentioned in
(Komarudin & Wong, 2010), the STS requires many dummy departments to represent an empty space, and this
causes poor performance. However, with these dummy departments, the search method finds the new best
22
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

solution for the SC30 problem sets, and it even finds a new best solution for the 62-department problem. Thus, the
solution quality of this layout problem is influenced by not only the structure of the layout scheme, but also the
data set. It is also shown that the processing times required to solve the problems are significantly reduced for all
problem sets. Thus, it can be said that the proposed search algorithm is able to find favorable solutions that are
optimal or close to optimal for small-sized problems, and it can find quality solutions for large-sized problems.
For future research, this approach can be utilized in two ways. First, consideration can be given to an
enhanced representation for the problem with empty space (that is, the problem in which the area compactness is
less than 1.0). Second, consideration can also be given to fixed department dimensions or locations. It was

T
mentioned that the STS can be applied to the mixed department-type problem in (Scholz et al., 2009). Developing
a search structure for such a problem would be valuable for cases in which mixed type departments must be

IP
allocated on a floor space with certain objectives.

Acknowledgement

CR
This research was supported by the MSIP (Ministry of Science, ICT and Future Planning), Korea, under the ITRC
(Information Technology Research Center) support program ((IITP-2016-H8601-16-1010)) supervised by the

US
IITP (Institute for Information & communications Technology Promotion).

References
AN
Abdel-raouf, O. (2013). A Survey of Harmony Search Algorithm. International Journal of Computer Applications
70(28): 17–26.
Al-Betar, M.A., Awadallah, M.A., Khader, A.T. & Abdalkareem, Z.A. (2015). Island-based harmony search for
optimization problems. Expert Systems with Applications 42(4): 2026–2035. Retrieved from
M

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.10.008
Armour, G.C. & Buffa, E.S. (1963). A Heuristic Algorithm and Simulation Approach to Relative Location of
Facilities. Management Science 9(2): 294–309.
Azadivar, F. & Wang, J. (2000). Facility layout optimization using simulation and genetic algorithms.
ED

International Journal of Production Research 38(17): 4369–4383. Retrieved from

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00207540050205154
Bozer, Y.A., Meller, R.D. & Erlebacher, S.J. (1994). An improvement-type layout algorithm for single and
mulitple-floor facilities. Management Science 40(7): 918–932.
PT

Castillo, I., Westerlund, J., Emet, S. & Westerlund, T. (2005). Optimization of block layout design problems with
unequal areas: A comparison of MILP and MINLP optimization methods. Computers and Chemical
Engineering 30(1): 54–69.
CE

Castillo, I. & Westerlund T. (2005). An ε-accurate model for optimal unequal-area block layout design.
Computers and Operations Research 32(3): 429–447.
Chae, J. & Regan, A.C. (2016). Layout design problems with heterogeneous area constraints. Computers &
Industrial Engineering 102: 198–207. Retrieved from
AC

http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0360835216303850
Chang, M.S. & Ku, T.C. (2013). A slicing tree representation and QCP-model-based heuristic algorithm for the
unequal-area block facility layout problem. Mathematical Problems in Engineering 2013: 1–19. Retrieved
from http://www.hindawi.com/journals/mpe/2013/853586/
Dunker, T., Radons, G. & Westkämper, E. (2003). A coevolutionary algorithm for a facility layout problem.
International Journal of Production Research 41(15): 3479–3500.
Fesanghary, M., Asadi, S. & Geem, Z.W. (2012). Design of low-emission and energy-efficient residential
buildings using a multi-objective optimization algorithm. Building and Environment 49(1): 245–250.
Francis, R.L., McGinnis, L.F. & White, J.A. (1992). Facility layout and location: an analytical approach. Pearson
College Division.

23
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Gao, K.Z., Suganthan, P.N., Pan, Q.K. & Tasgetiren, M.F. (2015). An effective discrete harmony search algorithm
for flexible job shop scheduling problem with fuzzy processing time. International Journal of Production
Research 53(19): 5896. Retrieved from
https://ezp.lib.unimelb.edu.au/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edb&A
N=108755627&site=eds-live&scope=site
García-Hernández, L., Palomo-Romero, J.M., Salas-Morera, L., Arauzo-Azofra, A. & Pierreval, H. (2015). A
novel hybrid evolutionary approach for capturing decision maker knowledge into the unequal area facility
layout problem. Expert Systems with Applications 42(10): 4697–4708.

T
Geem, Z.W. (2006). Optimal cost design of water distribution networks using harmony search. Engineering
Optimization 38(3): 259–277. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03052150500467430

IP
Geem, Z.W. (2009). Particle-swarm harmony search for water network design. Engineering Optimization 41(4):
297–311.
Geem, Z.W., Kim, J.H. & Loganathan, G. V. (2001). A new heuristic optimization algorithm: harmony search.

CR
Simulation 76(2): 60–68.
Geem, Z.W., Lee, K.S. & Park, Y. (2005). Application of Harmony Search to Vehicle Routing. American Journal
of Applied Sciences 2(12): 1552–1557.

US
Gonçalves, J.F. & Resende, M.G.C. (2015). A biased random-key genetic algorithm for the unequal area facility
layout problem. European Journal of Operational Research 246(1): 86–107.
Huchette, J., Dey, S.S. & Vielma, J.P. (2016). Strong mixed-integer formulations for the floor layout problem.
arXiv preprint arXiv1602.07760.
AN
Komarudin & Wong, K.Y. (2010). Applying Ant System for solving Unequal Area Facility Layout Problems.
European Journal of Operational Research 202(3): 730–746. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.06.016
Kulturel-Konak, S. (2012). A linear programming embedded probabilistic tabu search for the unequal-area facility
layout problem with flexible bays. European Journal of Operational Research 223(3): 614–625. Retrieved
M

from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2012.07.019
Kulturel-Konak, S. & Konak, A. (2011a). Unequal area flexible bay facility layout using ant colony optimisation.
International Journal of Production Research 49(7): 1877–1902. Retrieved from
ED

http://www.informaworld.com/openurl?genre=article&doi=10.1080/00207541003614371&magic=crossref
%7C%7CD404A21C5BB053405B1A640AFFD44AE3
Kulturel-Konak, S. & Konak, A. (2011b). A new relaxed flexible bay structure representation and particle swarm
optimization for the unequal area facility layout problem. Engineering Optimization 43(12): 1263–1287.
PT

Kulturel-Konak, S. & Konak, A. (2013). Linear Programming Based Genetic Algorithm for the Unequal Area
Facility Layout Problem. International Journal of Production Research 51(14): 4302–4324. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00207543.2013.774481
CE

Lee, K.S., Geem, Z.W., Lee, S. & Bae, K. (2005). The harmony search heuristic algorithm for discrete structural
optimization. Engineering Optimization 37(7): 663–684. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03052150500211895
Liu, Q. & Meller, R.D. (2007). A sequence-pair representation and MIP-model-based heuristic for the facility
AC

layout problem with rectangular departments. IIE Transactions 39(4): 377–394.

López-Ibáñez, M., Dubois-Lacoste, J., Pérez Cáceres, L., Birattari, M. & Stützle, T. (2016). The irace package:
Iterated racing for automatic algorithm configuration. Operations Research Perspectives 3: 43–58.
Meller, R.D. & Gau, K.Y. (1996). The facility layout problem: Recent and emerging trends and perspectives.
Journal of Manufacturing Systems 15(5): 351–366. Retrieved from
http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edswsc&AN=A1996VU60800007&site=eds-live
Meller, R.D., Narayanan, V. & Vance, P.H. (1998). Optimal facility layout design. Operations Research Letters
23(3–5): 117–127.
Montreuil, B. (1991). A Modelling Framework for Integrating Layout Design and Flow Network Design. In
Progress in Material Handling and Logistics. Springer.

24
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Moore, J.M. (1974). Computer aided facilities design: an international survey. International Journal of
Production Research 12(1): 21–44.
Norman, B.A. & Smith, A.E. (1997). Random keys genetic algorithm with adaptive penalty function for
optimization of constrained facility layout problems. In Evolutionary Computation, 1997., IEEE
International Conference on. IEEE.
Nugent, C.E., Vollmann, T.E. & Ruml, J. (1968). An Experimental Comparison of Techniques for the Assignment
of Facilities to Locations. Operations Research.
Omran, M.G.H. & Mahdavi, M. (2008). Global-best harmony search. Applied Mathematics and Computation

T
198(2): 643–656.
Paes, F.G., Pessoa, A.A. & Vidal, T. (2017). A hybrid genetic algorithm with decomposition phases for the

IP
Unequal Area Facility Layout Problem. European Journal of Operational Research 256(3): 742–756.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2016.07.022
Palomo-Romero, J.M., Salas-Morera, L. & García-Hernández, L. (2017). An island model genetic algorithm for

CR
unequal area facility layout problems. Expert Systems with Applications 68: 151–162. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2016.10.004
Ridwan, M., Purnomo, A. & Wiwoho, Y.S. (2016). Multi-objective Mixed Integer Programming approach for

US
facility layout design by considering closeness ratings, material handling, and re-layout cost. Materials
Science and Engineering 105: 0–10. Retrieved from http://iopscience.iop.org/1757-899X/105/1/012045
Saraswat, A., Venkatadri, U. & Castillo, I. (2015). A framework for multi-objective facility layout design.
Computers and Industrial Engineering 90: 167–176.
AN
Scholz, D., Petrick, A. & Domschke, W. (2009). STaTS: A Slicing Tree and Tabu Search based heuristic for the
unequal area facility layout problem. European Journal of Operational Research 197(1): 166–178.
Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2008.06.028
Shayan, E. & Chittilappilly, A. (2004). Genetic algorithm for facilities layout problems based on slicing tree
structure. International Journal of Production Research 42(19): 4055–4067.
M

Sherali, H.D., Fraticelli, B.M.P. & Meller, R.D. (2003). Enhanced Model Formulations for Optimal Facility
Layout. Operations Research 51(4): 629–644. Retrieved from
http://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/abs/10.1287/opre.51.4.629.16096
ED

Singh, S.P. & Sharma, R.R.K. (2006). A review of different approaches to the facility layout problems.
International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology 30(5–6): 425–433. Retrieved from
http://www.springerlink.com/index/10.1007/s00170-005-0087-9
Tam, K.Y. (1992a). A simulated annealing algorithm for allocating space to manufacturing cells. International
PT

Journal of Production Research 30(1): 63–87.

Tam, K.Y. (1992b). Genetic Algorithms, Function Optimization, and Facility Layout Design. European Journal
of Operational Research 63(2): 322–346.
CE

Tam, K.Y. (1998). Solving facility layout problems with geometric constraints using parallel genetic algorithms:
Experimentation and findings. International Journal of Production Research 36(12): 3253–3272.
Tate, D.M. & Smith, A.E. (1995). Unequal-area facility layout by genetic search. IIE Transactions 27(4): 465–
472.
AC

Tompkins, J.A., White, J.A., Bozer, Y.A. & Tanchoco, J.M.A. (2010). Facilities Planning (4th ed.). John Wiley &
Sons.
Valian, E., Tavakoli, S. & Mohanna, S. (2014). An intelligent global harmony search approach to continuous
optimization problems. Applied Mathematics and Computation 232: 670–684. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.amc.2014.01.086
Van Camp, D.J., Carter, M.W. & Vanelli, A. (1991). A nonlinear optimization approach for solving facility layout
problems. European Journal of Operations Research 57(2): 174–189.
Wang, G. & Guo, L. (2013). A novel hybrid bat algorithm with harmony search for global numerical optimization.
Journal of Applied Mathematics 2013.
Wang, G.G., Gandomi, A.H., Zhao, X. & Chu, H.C.E. (2016). Hybridizing harmony search algorithm with cuckoo
search for global numerical optimization. Soft Computing 20(1): 273–285.
25
 ACCEPTED MANUSCRIPT

Wong, K.Y. & Komarudin. (2010). Solving facility layout problems using Flexible Bay Structure representation
and Ant System algorithm. Expert Systems with Applications 37(7): 5523–5527. Retrieved from
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2009.12.080

T
IP
CR
US
AN
M
ED
PT
CE
AC

26