Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Abstract for export, creating a lot of incomes for all who are
Inbound logistics interconnection of sugar cane involved in this industry.
and sugar industry consists of planning sugar cane Inbound logistics of sugar cane and sugar
cultivation, harvesting, transportation to the mill, and industry consists of planning sugar cane cultivation,
management of factory front yard. At present, the harvesting, transportation to the mill, and
amount of sugar cane transported to the mill relies on management of factory front yard. In cultivation
production capacity of the factory such that sugar planning, major factors involved are for examples,
cane is continuously supplied to sugar production cane breeds, weather, etc., which have an effect on the
process at its fullest capacity. However, optimum commercial cane sugar. The results indicate the sugar
benefit of the industry also relies on the commercial cane product and value of commercial cane sugar.
cane sugar (CCS) value. This research was aimed at At present, harvest and transportation of sugar
prioritizing harvesting from the plantations of sugar cane to the factory is the function of productivity.
cane available for the factory, for example the This is because the production capacity of a factory
factory’s own plantations or farmers’ plantations. The each day is limited. Any remaining sugar cane at the
objective was to obtain optimum value of total sugar end of the day need to be pressed the following day
yield and the quantity of sugar cane is in accordance and cannot be retained for a longer period, for that
with the factory’s capacity. A mathematical model will reduce its commercial cane sugar value
was created for the study to solve small-scale (Semenzato, 1995), reducing the farmers’ sugar cane
problems, and a genetic algorithm was constructed for price and hence a less amount of cane juice on the
sugar cane harvesting decision for medium- and large- part of the mill.
scale problems. Assessment of the efficiency of the Thus, the study of sugar cane harvesting
constructed algorithm was done by comparing the prioritization aiming at obtaining the maximum total
solutions obtained from the genetic algorithm with sugar yield, which is related to the daily capacity of
those obtained from the mathematical model. Total the factory was important. Sugar cane harvested
sugar yield values were determined by designing four appropriately both in quantity as well as quality will
experiments, each with 10 iterations. Two factors benefit all stakeholders. This research explains the
were used in the experiment, i.e. the questionable problems of sugar cane harvesting allocation, which
number of harvesting days and the number of provides harvesting patterns a factory can choose, i.e.
plantations to be prioritized. These two factors were from the factory’s own plantations, or buying from
divided into two levels. Following this, the farmers’ plantations. The method used in the problem
experimental results were statistically analyzed using solution was to develop a mathematical model and
the factorial design and SAS version 6.12 program. apply the genetic algorithm, a technique for finding a
The result revealed the average differential percentage solution to a large-scale, complex problem with
of total sugar yield from the genetic algorithm and increasing variables and conditions. The mathematical
mathematical model of 10.99 percent. It was also model was found to be time consuming and difficult
found that the two factors used in the experiment had to find the answer. In addition, the efficiency of
an effect on the percentage of differences of the total genetic algorithm was assessed through comparison
sugar yield values at a significant level. of answers derived from them and from the
Keywords: Sugar cane harvest, Genetic algorithm, mathematical model.
Integer programming, Inbound logistics
2. Literature review
1. Introduction 2.1 Management of sugar cane harvest
Sugar cane and sugar industry is an important Problems related to sugar cane harvest are being
industry of Thailand since there are a great number of interested by many sugar cane-growing countries, for
sugar cane farmers spreading all over the different example Australia, Cuba, South Africa, Thailand, etc.
regions of Thailand. Thai sugar mills are known to There has been research work on sugar cane
produce sugar for domestic consumption as well as harvesting in many aspects, most of which were based
172
on the development of a mathematical model and procedures of genetic algorithm and linked to the real-
solution-finding technique. One example is Higgins world system as shown in Figure 1.
(1999) who developed an integer mathematical model
for scheduling harvesting periods, cultivating cycles Creating initial S = System answer
and ploughing of sugar cane plantations, with an aim population
E = Appropriate value
to obtain maximum return. The tabu search technique,
as apposed to the tabu list was applied for solution Population S
finding, and the linear mathematic patterns developed evaluation (for each
by Higgins et al (1998) were then used in chromosome)
approximating the initial solutions for Tabu search. E
Jiao et al. (2005) developed a Second-order Reproduction Objective System
polynomial mathematical model for allocation of Functions
appropriate harvesting and time of harvesting from
Crossover and
the relation of commercial cane sugar with the mutation E
plantation area, with an aim to obtain the maximum
commercial cane sugar value. Salassi et al. (2002)
developed an integrated integer mathematical model Population S
evaluation
to determine quality traits, i.e. stalk weight and
product per stalk in order to find the suitable
harvesting day, the major purpose of which was, Population replacement
again, to obtain maximum sugar product.
2.2 Genetic algorithm
Wanida and Supachai (2003) explained that the
genetic algorithm is an algorithm that is used to Figure 1. General procedures of GA in real-world
determine the most satisfying solution from the system
sample group of answers based on selection
mechanism and natural reproduction. Primarily, a 3. Mathematical model in prioritizing sugar
number of probable answers were randomly selected. cane harvesting
The most satisfying solution was selected from the The developed mathematical model explained
best ones among the surviving group or among the the problem found in prioritizing sugar cane
previously selected breed group by pairing a good harvesting. The aim was to obtain total sugar yield.
breed group and locating the position in which there The interesting point was the factory’s selectable
would be a change of pattern between the pair so that pattern. The details of this mathematical model are as
the new pair of solutions would emerge, which made follows:
it possible to develop a result nearest to the real target. 3.1 Assumptions
Although this is based on a simple principle but is In mathematical modeling, assumptions of sugar
effective for a large-scale problem without having to cane harvesting problems were made in line with
determine all probable variables and then select the various problems found. The factory was able to
best answer. Santi and Duangkaew (2005) discussed select the harvesting patterns as in the following
the function of genetic algorithm as follows. Firstly, details.
the initial population had to be created by randomly 3.1.1 Sugar cane prioritized for harvesting could
creating values of each bit of each chromosome. Then be supplied directly to the sugar mill, with minimum
the suitable value of each chromosome was analyzed sustaining time, hence not lessening commercial cane
followed by constructing a mating pool or parent sugar value.
chromosomes that could survive as the prototype. 3.1.2 There was a uniform commercial cane
Finally, genetic implementation was carried out by sugar value of sugar cane in each plantation.
sampling the mating pools to produce a new 3.1.3 Sugar cane prioritized for harvesting is
generation of population. The operation is as follows. ready for harvesting; there is no flooding problem or
1. Reproduction: the process of selecting plantation condition making it unable to harvest, or
highly appropriate chromosomes as the initial solution any problem related to shortage of harvesting labor.
for the next generation. 3.1.4 The total quantity of sugar cane grown is
2. Crossover: Crisscrossing by exchanging less than the total production capacity. This enabled
parts of parent chromosomes based on probability of us to stipulate the quantity of harvest of each
crossover: Pc in order to develop offspring plantation such that the total sugar yield was attained.
chromosomes. 3.1.5 Transportation cycles could be assigned
3. Mutation: the process of mutating some unlimitedly according to the determined quantity of
values of chromosomes to obtain new values at the harvesting, provided that the quantity of sugar cane
random position based on probability of determined reaped from each plantation was equal to one another
mutation: Pm. and not exceeding the payload.
Athit (2002) designed a flow chart of 3.1.6 Each loading of sugar cane on a truck had
173
to be from the same plantation. Sugar cane from any the total quantity of sugar cane of all harvesting days
other plantation should not be mixed. in Plantation j which did not exceed the total sugar
3.2 Parameters cane quantity of that plantation. Equation (4) was the
Following are the parameters used in the sum from multiplying results of number of trucks and
mathematical model of sugar cane harvesting truck payload, which was less or equal to sugar cane
prioritization. quantity harvested on Day i from Plantation j .
i harvesting day index; i = 1, 2,…, t
Equations (5) and (6) mean the number of trucks
j plantation index; j = 1, 2,…, n
used, which did not exceed the total number of trucks
k truck load index; k = 1, 2,…, m and was greater than or equal to 0 respectively.
Cij CCS value of sugar cane in Plantation j Equation (7) shows the amount of sugar cane
on Day i harvested on Day i from Plantation j which was
MC i Production capacity required by factory from greater or equal to 0.
the plantation to be selected on Day i
4. Genetic algorithm of sugar cane
TQ j Maximum harvested quantity per day of
harvesting prioritization
Plantation j Solutions of sugar cane harvesting prioritization
qt k Payload k per one truck derived from the mathematical model were limited to
small-scale problems with a small number of
Nmijk Maximum number of trucks having k capacity
variables and equality or inequality constraints. In
on Day i and Plantation j reality, however, there were many variables and
3.3 Decision variables equality or inequality constraints, and so solution
Following are the decision variables used in the finding would be time-consuming and complex.
mathematical model of sugar cane harvesting Hence, solving large-scale problems should be based
prioritization. on a heuristic approach. This research study applied
Qij Sugar cane quantity to be harvested from the genetic algorithm approach, which is one solution-
finding technique. This genetic algorithm application
Plantation j on Day i was based on the following procedures.
nijk Number of trucks having k capacity on First step: Produce initial chromosomes, with
Day i and Plantation j each having a number of bit and each bit having a
binary value of 0 or 1. The initial binary of
3.4 Objective Function chromosomes was derived randomly.
The objective function of the mathematical Second step: Find fitness value of chromosomes
model of sugar cane prioritization was from the objective function. The objective function of
t n
∑∑ C
the problem involving equality or inequality
Maximize ij * Qij (1)
constraints had to be changed to penalty function
i =1 j =1
f ' ( x) instead of the former objective function f ( x) ,
Equation (1) was the result of multiplication of
commercial cane sugar and amount, or the total sugar as can be seen from Equations (8) and (9),
f ( x)
yield, with an aim to obtain optimum values. f ' ( x) = + (1 − μ c ( x)) ⋅ K D (8)
3.5 Equality or Inequality Constraints 1 + f ( x)
The following equality or inequality constraints where
were used in the mathematical model of sugar cane ⎧0; if g i ( x) ≥ d i
harvesting prioritization. ⎪
⎪ g ( x) − ε i
n
μ c ( x) = ⎨1 − i
∑Q
; if ε < g ( x) < d
ij ≤ MC i ; ∀i (2) ⎪ di i i i
j =1 ⎪1;
t
⎩ if g ( x ) ≤ ε
i i
∑
i =1
Qij ≤ TQ j ; ∀j (3) (9)
where ε i และ d i was the probable scope value of each
m inequality constraint having i , K D as the penalty
Qij ≤ ∑ qt
k =1
k * nijk ; ∀i∀j (4) coefficient.
Third step: Produce a new set of chromosomes
nijk ≤ Nmijk ; ∀i∀j∀k (5) following three sub-procedures; reproduction, cross-
nijk ≥ 0 และ nijk integer ; ∀i∀j∀k (6) over, and mutation.
Step 3.1: In reproduction, sets of chromosomes
Qij ≥ 0 ; ∀i∀j (7) were selected in order to transfer good chromosomes
Equation (2) means sugar cane quantity from all to the production of the next set. Those having low
plantations on harvesting day i which did not exceed objective function values had a higher chance to be
the factory’s capacity of that day. Equation (2) means selected than chromosomes with high objective
174
function values. Selection was done by random using plantations under consideration was less than the total
a roulette wheel. quantity the factory required for the total production
Step 3.2: Crossover means the mixing of values days. The steps in computing by genetic algorithm
between parents that had low values of objective were as follows.
functions, resulting in one pair of offspring. There are First step Produce initial chromosomes by
a number of crossover approaches. This research sampling 50 chromosomes. Each was changed from
applied a two-point crossover as shown in Figure 2 the real number to a binary system, with the total bit
with probability value Pc. of 8. The quantities to be harvested each day from
Step 3.3: In mutation, new data were produced each plantation were set from 0 to 40.
for chromosome sets by mutating chromosomes as Second step Change the objective function from
shown in Figure 3. A chance that mutation would the problem of maximum value finding to the lowest
occur was very small, with a probability of Pm. one because the genetic algorithm applied in this
Step 3.4: The chromosomes that had undergone research was based on lowest value finding. Thus, the
the first three steps were taken to find objective value of objective function had to be changed to a
functions as in Step 2 to obtain data for the next lowest value according to Equation (10).
production. t n
Maximize ∑∑ C
i =1 j =1
ij * Qij =
Parent 1 :
t n
Parent 2 : Minimize −( ∑∑ C
i =1 j =1
ij * Qij ) (10)
175
plantations (N) and the length of harvesting period purpose of inbound logistics for sugar and sugar cane
from the beginning to the end (D). Table 2. Responses of experimental design from each
Factorial design 22 was used in the design in factor (Percentage)
which the factor values at each level could be differences of total sugar yield (%)
Iteration
stipulated, as in Table 1. Each combination of the Number
6 days 10 days
10 plan- 15 plan- 10 plan- 15 plan-
experiment was subject to 10 iterations. The value of tations tations tations tations
each iteration was the differential value of maximum 1
10.12 11.51 12.65 13.24
yields between the optimal solution from 2
10.17 11.79 8.24 13.67
mathematical model and solution obtained from 3
8.97 12.59 11.49 13.04
genetic algorithm application. Additionally, multiple 4
comparison was investigated using the Duncann’s 6.60 10.82 11.33 14.47
5
Multiple Range Test in order to observe any 8.13 12.94 7.32 13.36
6
statistically significant differences among the factors 10.65 11.91 5.77 14.12
at each level. 7
9.43 12.44 9.25 12.51
8
8.71 11.94 10.87 15.90
Table 1. Experimental design 9
7.32 11.81 8.66 13.22
N D 10
Combination 6.47 12.66 8.83 14.74
Number L H L H Average
(10 plantations) (15 plantations) (6 days) (10 days) 8.66 12.04 9.44 13.82
1 √ √
Table 3. Results of Factorial design statistic analysis
2 √ √
from SAS program
3 √ √ Source DF Anova SS Mean F Pr > F
Square Value
4 √ √ Day 1 0.001652 0.001652 8.13 0.0072
Plantation 1 0.015098 0.015098 74.26 0.0001
Day* 1 0.000252 0.000252 1.24 0.2732
Plantation
7. Results of Experiment
The factorial design 22 enabled us to determine
the percentage of differences of total sugar yield Table 4. Results of Multiple comparison of the
between the optimum solution and the solution number of harvesting days by Duncann’s Multiple
obtained from genetic algorithm, as shown in Table 2. Range Test
Duncan Grouping Mean N Level
It can be seen from Table 2 that the average A 0.116346 20 2
percentage of value difference between the optimum B 0.103491 20 1
solution and the solution from genetic algorithm was
10.99, with the lowest average being 8.66% and the
Table 5. Results of Multiple comparison of the
highest average being 13.82%. Following this, the
number of plantations by Duncann’s Multiple Range
percentages of differences among the solutions were
Test
analyzed statistically using SAS Version 6.12 Duncan Grouping Mean N Level
program. The results, which are shown in Table 3, A 0.129347 20 2
reveal that the two factors of the number of harvesting B 0.090490 20 1
176
approaches became higher when the problem was
bigger both in terms of harvesting days and number of
plantations taken into account in prioritization. Hence,
in order to obtain solution values from genetic
algorithm that were close to the optimum solution
values, genetic algorithm could be improved by such
methods as follows. (1) Creating heuristic to find
initial solutions prior to entering the genetic algorithm
process instead of sampling initial solution values,
which would be faster. (2) Increasing computation
cycles. (3) Increasing solutions or chromosomes in
each computation cycles in order to improve the
solution values from each set of crossover and to
accelerate solution findings. Such improvement could
be parallel among all sets so that the efficiency in
solution finding in genetic algorithm application is
increased in prioritizing sugar cane harvest.
References
[1] Semenzato, R. 1995. A Simulation Study of Sugar
Cane Harvesting. Agricultural Systems. 47: 427-
437.
[2] Higgins, A.J. 1999. Optimising cane supply
decisions within a sugar mill region. Journal of
Scheduling, 2: 229-244.
[3] Higgins, A.J., Muchow, R.C., Rudd, A.V. and
Ford, A.W. 1998. Optimizing harvest date in sugar
production: A case study for the Mossman mill
region in Australia. Field Crops Research. 57:
153-162.
[4] Jiao, Z., Higgins, A.J. and Prestwidge, D.B. 2005.
An integrated statistical and optimization
approach to increasing sugar production within a
mill region. Computers and electronics in
agriculture. 48: 170-181.
[5] Salassi, M.E., Breaux, J.B. and Naquin, C.J. 2002.
Modelling within-season sugar cane growth for
optimal harvest system selection. Agricultural
Systems. 73:261-278.
[6] Wanida Rattanamanee and Supachai Patumnakul.
2003. Satisfactory Solution Finding by Genetic
Algorithm. KKU Engineering Journal. 3: 319-326.
[7] Santi Suansri and Duangkaew Sawamiphak. 2005.
Use of Genetic Algorithm in Automatic
Composition of Web Service. Science and
Technology Journal. Thammasart University. 3: 1-
9.
[8] Athit Srikaew. 2002. Genetic Algorithm Section 1.
Journal of Suranaree Technological University. 1:
61-68.
177