Open Access
This article is
 freely available
 reusable
Sensors 2018, 18(8), 2591; https://doi.org/10.3390/s18082591
Article
A Framework of Joint Energy Provisioning and Manufacturing Scheduling in Smart Industrial Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks
State Key Laboratory of Fluid Power and Mechatronic Systems, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310027, China
^{*}
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Received: 1 July 2018 / Accepted: 5 August 2018 / Published: 7 August 2018
Abstract
:Energy provisioning is always a crucial problem restricting the further development and application of smart industrial wireless sensor networks in smart factories. In this paper, we present that it is necessary to develop smart industrial wireless rechargeable sensor networks (SIWRSNs) in a smart factory environment. Based on the complexity and timeeffectiveness of factory operations, we establish a joint optimization framework named JEPMS to effectively coordinate the charging strategies of wireless sensors and the scheduling plans of machines running. Then, we propose a novel double chains quantum genetic algorithm with Taboo search (DCQGATS) for JEPMS to obtain a suboptimal solution. The simulation results demonstrate that the DCQGATS algorithm can maximally ensure the continuous manufacturing and markedly shorten the total completion time of all production tasks.
Keywords:
SIWRSNs; energy provisioning; manufacturing scheduling; smart factory1. Introduction
With the rise of Industry 4.0 and smart manufacturing, smart industrial wireless sensor networks (SIWSNs) have become a vitally important part of smart factories. Manufacturing under smart factories gives access to actively acquiring production information, realtime analyzing the production status, and intelligently executing production decisions [1]. In order to accurately obtain process information in a timely manner, a large number of industrial sensors, such as acceleration sensors, vibration sensors, and displacement sensors, need to be deployed in smart factories and form industrial sensor networks. For a long time, the industrial sensor networks mainly adopted the wired field bus technology, involving wired nodes and Industrial Ethernet [2]. With the huge improvement in the level of information and automation of manufacturing plants, the wired industrial sensor networks have given rise to many intricate problems, including difficult regional wiring, limited network expansion, inconvenient nodes migration, and not applying for rotating parts [3]. At the same time, due to the fact that the wired sensors are hard to be mounted on the moving workpieces, all machines and workpieces are unable to form a selforganized system in smart factories. For these reasons, owing to the rapid development of wireless communication technology, wireless sensors have begun to partially take the place of wired sensors mounted on the mechanical devices or moving workpieces. After sensing the manufacturing process information, these wireless sensors will timely transmit data to external servers relying on the local wireless networks. In fact, hybrid industrial sensor networks, including both wireless and wired, have become the key component of information architecture in smart factories [4,5].
Industrial practices have proved that the largescale applications of industrial wireless sensors not only enhance the data collection capabilities of industrial sensor networks, but also accelerate the smart transformation processes of manufacturing plants [6]. Especially for the digital and intelligent upgrading of some old machines, the use of wireless sensors can avoid the trouble of secondary wiring. Meanwhile, wireless sensors can be mounted on moving workpieces to realize a portable dynamic configuration, which greatly enlarges the range of sensor applications and reduces the difficulty and cost of smart transformations. However, as far as the current application scenarios are concerned, energy provisioning is still a major bottleneck restricting the further development and application of industrial wireless sensor networks (IWSNs) [7]. Most of the traditional industrial wireless sensors are powered by nonrechargeable batteries. The battery capacity and work intensity determine the service life of the sensor. Once the battery is completely consumed, the sensor will permanently fail unless a new battery is replaced. In response to this problem, researchers in related fields have studied how to reduce energy consumption by optimizing the node layout, information fusion, and routing strategies of wireless sensor networks to maximize the lifetime of entire sensor networks [8]. In essence, these methods are mainly to reduce the quantity of sensors, data collection frequency, computational complexity, and network traffic as much as possible. Different from some common scenarios, in order to accurately monitor the production process in realtime, the industrial sensors must keep up highintensity work for a long time and continuously feed manufacturing data back to the controllers or actuators. For example, while a machine tool is working, some associated displacement sensors must monitor the position of cutters in realtime and send out these data in a timely manner. Due to the machining continuity and processing variability of industrial monitoring targets, sensors associated with the machine often need to keep up a long highload working time, and their continuous working current may reach more than 20 mA [9]. As a result, industrial wireless sensors often need to be equipped with large capacity batteries, which in turn will lead to a sharp increase in the overall weight of the sensor, and bring some trouble in the layout and selection of wireless sensors, especially in some highprecision manufacturing processes [10]. Beyond that, for the purpose of improving the reliability of data collection, many industrial sensors are highly integrated with the machine, or the deployment location is relatively narrow, and replacing batteries is often difficult to accomplish. In addition, with the aim of reducing the computing load of the central server and enhancing the realtime handling capability of production process data, edge computing technology will be massively adopted by smart factories in the near future [11,12]. Sensor nodes will undertake more singlepoint computing tasks in a smart factory, which obviously increase the unit energy consumption of sensors. Therefore, by reason of the imperfection of energy provisioning, the limited battery capacity means it is difficult to meet the requirement of continuous processing for a long time, and smart factories are restricted in the lifetime of IWSNs.
To implement energy replenishment in IWSNs, many researchers have made use of wireless charging technology to develop a new kind of sensor network called a Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Network (WRSN), which are considered to ultimately solve the energy provisioning problem of wireless sensor networks [13]. In recent years, wireless charging technology has made a great advance, and some industrial applications have been realized, such as charging for electric toothbrushes, Bluetooth headsets, mobile phones, etc. Existing wireless charging technology solutions mainly include inductive coupling, electromagnetic radiation, and magnetic resonant coupling [14]. Correspondingly, the energy replenishment technologies for wireless rechargeable sensor networks can be divided into two major aspects. One is to study how to use energy capture technology to actively harvest various energy sources from nature to charge the battery, such as solar energy. This method has extremely limited energy provisioning per unit time and is greatly restricted by the spatial and temporal distribution of energy in nature, and is not applicable to a smart factory environment. The other research being done is to monitor the battery status of sensor nodes and to make use of mobile chargers (MCs) to replenish energy of lowenergy sensor nodes in a timely manner. This type of energy replenishment is less affected by external environmental factors and is suitable for smart factories. As a result, in order to realize the largescale applications of industrial wireless sensors, smart factories should establish a stable and reliable wireless rechargeable sensor network, and make use of mobile chargers to supplement energy for lowpower sensors in time.
As far as we know, there is little research focusing on how to effectively schedule mobile chargers to replenish energy for smart industrial wireless rechargeable sensor networks (SIWRSNs) in a smart factory environment. In fact, this problem urgently needs to be solved to reliably operate a smart factory. Some scholars have highlighted the importance of the energy replenishment for industrial wireless sensor networks, but they did not extensively study the feasible charging strategies with consideration of the complex factory operations [8]. Compared to wireless sensor networks in other fields, i.e., forest monitoring [15], industrial wireless sensor networks must meet the requirements of continuous sensing, complex computing, and realtime communication for a long time in a smart factory. Once the machine begins to work, the measurement frequency of sensor nodes is usually at the millisecond level, the energy consumption per unit time is relatively high, and unpredictable node failures are absolutely not allowed. In this case, supposing that the battery capacity is fixed, the wireless charging strategies are closely correlated with the actual machining time of the equipment. Furthermore, according to Reference [16], the efficiency of wireless charging can be immensely influenced by the distance and angle between mobile chargers and sensor nodes. At the same time, the charging time of a single sensor node varies greatly with the battery capacity and remaining energy, and the frequency band of wireless charging may interfere with the accuracy of data acquisition and wireless communication of sensor nodes [17]. Hence, with the aim of not affecting the normal operation of factory equipment, smart factory operators should keep the charging process of wireless sensors and the associated machining process in a separate state.
In addition, minimizing the completion time of entire production tasks is a very important goal for factory operations in a smart factory [18]. Correspondingly, in order to ensure controllable manufacturing activities, a reliable production plan must be prearranged and rigorously executed, and unpredictable events should be prevented, such as unexpected interruptions caused by sensor failures [3]. So, for the purpose of effectively completing production tasks in a smart factory, it is necessary for factory operators to collaboratively consider the charging strategies and manufacturing scheduling for making an optimal production plan. Therefore, this paper is intended to build a framework of Joint Energy Provisioning and Manufacturing Scheduling (JEPMS) in SIWRSNs to obtain the optimal production plan. In view of the computation complexity of the problem, we design a corresponding approximate algorithm, and verify the feasibility of the algorithm by numerical simulations. The simulation results show that with the goal of minimizing the total completion time of the entire production tasks, the sensors charging and associated machines operating can be reasonably planned and separately executed.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces previous work related to the aforementioned WRSNs. Section 3 thoroughly discusses the problem studied in this paper and provides some model assumptions. Section 4 develops the framework of Joint Energy Provisioning and Manufacturing Scheduling (JEPMS) in smart industrial wireless rechargeable sensor networks and proposes a novel algorithm named DCQGATS for JEPMS. Section 5 shows some simulation results based on DCQGATS. Finally, the discussion and conclusions are presented in Section 6.
2. Related Work
The rapid development of wireless charging technology provides an effective solution for the energy provisioning problem of wireless sensor networks. In order to collect the object information for a long time, wireless rechargeable sensor networks are being extensively studied in some fields, such as forest monitoring [15], coal mines monitoring [19], civil infrastructure health monitoring [20], and smart grid monitoring [21]. The industrial wireless sensor networks are also receiving more and more attention [3]. Because smart factories are still a rising research field, smart wireless sensors are becoming an indispensable part of modern manufacturing plants and how to charge WRSNs in a smart factory environment remains to be further studied. Learning from these current research results, we can better carry out our research work. In recent years, some researchers have carried out a series of studies on wireless rechargeable sensor networks. By extensively reading these studies, four main aspects can be summarized: the scheduling policies of mobile chargers, the layout design of sensor nodes, network architecture in special scenarios, and the joint optimization in complex scenarios.
First of all, quantity of chargers, scheduling algorithms, and movement paths are focused on in the scheduling policies of mobile chargers. Xu et al. proposed using a single charging vehicle with separable charger array to charge a WRSN [22]. Dai et al. investigated the minimum mobile chargers problem (MinMCP) in a largescale WRSN [23]. Porta et al. studied an energy harvestingaware sensormission assignment distributed algorithm [24]. Chen and Feng et al. proposed a hopbased mobile charging policy to minimize the number of mobile chargers in a largescale WRSN [25,26]. Because these mobile chargers are often deployed on the automated guided vehicles (AGVs), researchers paid attention to reducing the number of mobile chargers in the case of ensuring the coverage. In a smart factory, in view of mobile chargers being handheld and lowcost, optimizing the number of mobile chargers is not very important. For scheduling algorithms, Ye et al. studied a kind of replenishing energy algorithm that maximized the charging utility of sensors [27]. Gao et al. studied the optimal scheduling problem with maximal optimal quality of monitoring (QoM) [28]. Lin et al. developed a hybrid clustering charging algorithm in a largescale WRSN [29]. Zhong et al. proposed a realtime ondemand charging scheduling scheme with limited mobile charger capacity [30]. Shih et al. studied a coverageaware recharging scheme for WRSNs [31]. Shu et al. put forward a joint energy provisioning and operation scheduling policy to maximize the lifetime of WRSNs [32]. Chang et al. developed a multimodule charging strategy to maximize the lifetime of WRSNs [33]. Because of the high randomness of the energy consumption of sensor nodes, scheduling algorithms are very complex. Different from these, the energy consumption of sensors can be approximately estimated in the case of a given production plan. The complexity of charging for wireless sensors in a smart factory environment is to avoid the simultaneous occurrence of the sensors charging and associated machines operating. Furthermore, Wang et al. developed a novel mobile data gathering framework with vehicle movement costs and capacity constraints [34]. Arivudainambi et al. developed the Daubechies wavelet algorithm to find the optimal position of mobile chargers [35]. Li et al. studied the cooperative deployments of chargers and sink stations [36]. Shu et al. studied how to control the moving velocity of mobile chargers for maximizing the charged energy of nodes [37]. Yang et al. presented an improved gridbased joint charging and routing method to achieve path planning for a mobile charger [38]. Fu et al. presented a novel energysynchronized mobile charging protocol [39]. Due to the wireless sensors being mounted on different kinds of machines in a workshop, optimizing the movement paths of charging for wireless sensors is not very necessary in a smart factory environment.
Moreover, the layout design of sensor nodes strongly associates with sensors for transmission and charging. Jiang et al. studied a wireless charger deployment optimization (WCDO) problem [40]. Rao et al. considered how to charge a wireless sensor network with some node deployment restrictions [41]. Feng et al. studied the energy allocation problem of sensor nodes for sensing and transmission [42]. Li et al. studied a dualfunctional mobile sink with data gathering and radio frequency (RF) energy harvesting [43]. Lin et al. proposed a power balance aware deployment method to maximize the lifespan of a WRSN [44]. Rout et al. presented a switching algorithm for sensor nodes based on a Markov decision process in a sustainable WRSN [45]. Shu et al. proposed a novel sensor localization design with the time of charge sequences in WRSNs [46]. Najeeb et al. presented a probabilistic algorithm to extend the lifetime of a wireless rechargeable sensor network without exploring the whole network [47]. In fact, the layout design and optimization of wireless sensor nodes is also a very important research subject in a smart factory. If the wireless sensors can be dynamically configured, the factory operators are able to adjust the layout of the sensor nodes according to the machine’s running time, to keep the machine working continuously.
Next, in some special scenarios, researchers have developed some customized network architectures of WRSNs. ErolKantarci et al. proposed a sustainable wireless rechargeable sensor network (SuReSense) for longterm monitoring smart grid [21]. Fu et al. studied an optimal movement pattern of the mobile radio frequency identification (RFID) reader to charge an RFIDbased wireless rechargeable sensor network [48]. He et al. studied the energy provisioning problem in a wireless rechargeable sensor network, built from the industrial wireless internet service provider (WISP) and commercial RFID readers [14]. Kaswan et al. studied the charging schedule with a single mobile charger in an ondemand WRSN [49]. Wei and Feng et al. proposed an energysaving traffic scheduling algorithm for hybrid softwaredefined WRSNs [50,51]. Ding et al. studied the optimal working schemes with plural base stations and wireless energy transfer devices for WRSNs [52]. Lin et al. proposed a temporalspatial charging scheduling (TSCS) algorithm to minimize the number of dead nodes for ondemand charging framework in a WRSN [53].
Lastly, some joint optimization problems in the complex scenarios have been studied. Han et al. proposed a gridbased joint routing and charging algorithm to balance the energy problem and survival rates of sensor nodes in an industrial WRSN [54]. Jia et al. presented a joint optimization model to maximize both charging efficiency and routing structure in a WRSN [55]. Zhong et al. developed a collaborative wireless energy replenishment and mobile data gathering mechanism [56]. Guo et al. developed an architecture of joint wireless energy provisioning and anchorpoint based mobile data collection in WSNs [57]. Zhao et al. developed a multifunctional mobile entity called SenCar, and proposed a collaborative optimization method of mobile energy provisioning and data gathering [58]. Actually, more and more scholars have found only optimizing the charging strategies of wireless sensor nodes is not always effective, and the joint optimizations with consideration of external constraints are more able to satisfy the actual requirements.
In addition, manufacturing scheduling problems are extensively studied in factory operations. In a smart factory, production operations are highly dynamic and flexible, and minimizing the total completion time of all the production tasks is a very key operational objective [18]. In order to shorten the completion time, factory operators should have the capability to reasonably schedule the production tasks and operable machines. It has been proved that manufacturing scheduling problems, essentially belonging to Job shop scheduling problems (JSP), are a class of NPhard problems [59]. Many models and algorithms have been proposed to obtain a suboptimal solution, such as PICRO (preferenceinspired chemical reaction optimization algorithm) [60], HPGA (hybrid PSOGA algorithm) [61], PRGASched (priority rulebased genetic algorithm scheduling) [62], LCAFS (league championship algorithm with free search) [63], MOGATIG (multiobjective genetic algorithm with tabuenhanced iterated greedy local search strategy) [64], and so on. Though an approximate optimal production plan can be effectively solved by these methods, the availability and reliability of sensor nodes is seldom followed closely. Especially in a smart factory environment, plenty of sensors need to be mounted on the machines, and the availability of sensor nodes is a nonnegligible problem. In other words, the suboptimal production plan must be workable in accordance with the availability of sensor nodes, and an unpredictable sensor failure is absolutely not allowed.
In summary, with smart industrial wireless sensor networks being widely applied in smart factories, wireless charging technology provides a good way to replenish energy for SIWSNs, but how to effectively control the charging process closely depends on the actual situation. At present, most studies focus on the application of WRSNs in an open outdoor environment. In these scenarios, wireless rechargeable sensor networks are laid out in a very large space, the distribution of sensor nodes is relatively sparse, the frequency of data acquisition is relatively low, and the energy consumption of sensor nodes is relatively low. Different from the application of WRSNs in a general environment, the complexity and timeeffectiveness of an industrial environment cannot be neglected. In fact, industrial wireless sensors are often densely laid out in a workshop with limited space, the frequency of data acquisition may be at the millisecond level on a working machine, and the energy consumption of sensor nodes is relatively high. At the same time, in the case of a given production plan, the associated wireless sensor failures must be prevented during the machine processing some work stage of one workpiece. Charging for the wireless sensors and processing on the associated machines must be separated from Therefore, only maximizing energy provisioning cannot meet the requirements of factory operations, and a framework of multiple constraints joint optimization is worth studying for SIWRSNs in smart factories.
3. Preliminaries
In this section, we briefly present an overview of the problem statement and model assumptions.
3.1. Problem Statement
In a smart factory [18], the production activities are highly adaptive and flexible. Each machine can process multiple types of workpieces. Material handling between machines mainly relies on a smart logistics system. Production plans can be automatically generated based on customer needs and manufacturing knowledge, and be actively sent to the corresponding fabricating machinery. In the meantime, in order to achieve a series of controllable manufacturing scheduling, manufacturing information should be acquired in realtime by sensor nodes, and the manufacturing process should be rigorously monitored by sensor networks, and the manufacturing status should be synchronously fed back to managers by control centers. In order to more flexibly and extensively collect manufacturing information, SIWRSNs will be applied to the smart factory.
For the purpose of accurately and reliably monitoring manufacturing equipment (e.g., machine tools) in a smart factory, SIWRSNs need to make use of reasonable charging policies to ensure the highload data acquisition process and prevent sensor nodes from stopping due to a low battery. At the same time, to avoid spatial intersecting and signal interference, charging for sensor nodes can only occur when relevant machines stop working. As a result, we must address two critical problems:
 The first problem is how to reasonably replenish energy for sensor nodes under the condition of insuring continuous machining and avoiding sensors failure, based on actively predicting the available electricity of wireless sensor nodes.
 The second problem is how to effectively assign production tasks to the optional machines under the constraint of operational relationships, and further minimize the processing time of the entire production tasks on the basis of separation between nodes charging and machines processing.
3.2. Model Assumptions
Given the complexity of the practical manufacturing processes, we set up some assumptions about this problem and appropriately refine the model. For SIWRSNs, we suppose the communication is very reliable, and the communication errors and retransmissions will not be considered. In addition, because the nodes’ operation is relatively stable in a smart factory environment [18], the variability of nodes’ operations will not be involved. This paper mainly focuses on how to jointly optimize charging strategies and scheduling plans for minimizing the total completion time of all the production tasks in a smart factory as much as possible.
In a smart factory, we suppose the production tasks have some workpieces requiring to be processed on some machines [65]. According to manufacturing requirements, each workpiece must successively go through several workstages, and the sequence of workstages is absolutely unalterable. On each workstage, multiple machines are optional, but only one machine can be selected. In the meantime, some industrial wireless sensors are mounted on these machines, which are used for the timely collection of manufacturing process information. According to the plan of charging scheduling, wireless sensors of low energy can be replenished by portable wireless chargers after the associated machine finishes some workstages. Considering the low power and low cost of portable plugin wireless charging devices [66], we suppose the wireless charging processes are not restricted by the number and capacity of chargers.
From the above, the detailed model assumptions are as follows:
 Each machine can only process one workstage at most in synchronization.Each workstage can only be processed by one machine at most in synchronization.
 The processing sequence of each workpiece must satisfy the requirements of production, and the different workstages of a workpiece cannot coincide.
 Once the workstage starts processing, it cannot be interrupted until processing is completed.
 The workpieces are independent from each other, there is no sequence constraint, and there is no difference between priorities.
 At the beginning, the initial state of all machines is idle.
 At the beginning, all the workpieces arrive at the factory to be processed.
 The transfer time between the different workstages of a workpiece is negligible.
 The working output current of wireless sensors is constant by default.
 The charging input current of wireless sensors is constant by default.
 When the machine is not working, wireless sensors can enter lowpower mode, regardless of the energy consumption during this period.
 At the beginning, all the wireless sensors are at full charge.
 Charging for wireless sensors starts with the associated machine finishing one workstage and has stopped working.
 When wireless sensors are charging, the associated machine must shut down.
 Regardless of the capacity loss of the battery, the maximum battery capacity of the wireless sensor is constant.
 The wireless sensor adopts greedy charging such that it charges until it is full.
 The maximum battery capacity of wireless sensors is sufficient to support any workstage.
 The uncertainty of communication and operations on the sensor nodes is negligible.
4. Joint Energy Provisioning and Manufacturing Scheduling (JEPMS)
In this section, we provide the detailed implementations of Joint Energy Provisioning and Manufacturing Scheduling (JEPMS) in smart industrial wireless rechargeable sensor networks. We first define the symbols and variables required for modeling. Second, we consider how to establish a model of JEPMS with charging strategies and scheduling plans. Finally, a novel solution algorithm is proposed.
4.1. Symbol Definition
Table 1 gives the notations that are defined for building a framework of JEPMS.
4.2. Decision Variables
These decision variables are defined for optimizing the charging strategies and production plans of JEPMS as given in Table 2.
4.3. Model Establishment
With the aim of building a framework of JEPMS, the battery capacity and charging time of wireless sensors must be taken into consideration in SIWRSNs. Meanwhile, production tasks are restricted by manufacturing techniques and machines’ capabilities in a smart factory [67]. On the basis of previously defined notations, we comprehensively establish an optimization model of JEPMS. This model mainly includes six types of constraints and an objective function.
First, Sequence Constraints of Workstages are presented as:
$$S{T}_{ij}\ge F{T}_{i\left(j1\right)},i=1,\text{}2,\dots ,n;j=1,2,\dots ,{N}_{i},$$
The Sequence Constraints of Workstages highlight that the processing sequence of each workstage cannot be violated. For each workpiece, the latter workstage only begins after the previous one has been completed.
Second, Exclusive Constraints of Workstages are presented as:
$$\sum}_{k=1}^{m}{x}_{ijk}=1,\text{}i=1,\text{}2,\dots ,n;j=1,2,\dots ,{N}_{i},.$$
The Exclusive Constraints of Workstages emphasize that each workstage of the workpieces can only be processed on one machine. In other words, each workstage of all the workpieces must be assigned to one machine.
Third, Processing Time Constraints of Machines are presented as:
where ${x}_{ijk}=1,\text{}{x}_{ftk}=1,\text{}{y}_{ftk}={y}_{ijk}+1$.
$$S{T}_{ftk}\ge F{T}_{ijk},\text{}k=1,\text{}2,\dots ,m,$$
The Processing Time Constraints of Machines highlight that the different workstages assigned to the same machine must be processed by order. The beginning time of the latter workstage must be equal or greater than the finishing time of the previous workstage on the same machine.
Fourth, Deployment Constraints of Wireless Sensors are presented as:
$$\sum}_{k=1}^{m}{d}_{rk}=1,\mathrm{r}=1,\text{}2,\dots ,q,$$
The Deployment Constraints of Wireless Sensors emphasize that each wireless sensor can only be mounted on one machine. However, a machine can hold multiple wireless sensors. In this paper, we suppose the wireless sensors have been mounted on the machines in advance, and the deployment optimization of wireless sensors will not be considered.
Fifth, Battery Capacity Constraints of Wireless Sensors are presented as:
where ${P}_{ij}\in \left(p{s}_{k}^{\left({v}_{1}\right)},p{s}_{k}^{\left({v}_{1}+1\right)},\dots ,p{s}_{k}^{({v}_{2})}\right);\forall {v}_{1}\in \left\{vv=1or{z}_{rk}^{\left(v1\right)}=1\right\};{z}_{rk}^{\left({v}_{2}\right)}=1;\forall v\in \left({v}_{1},{v}_{2}\right),$ ${z}_{rk}^{\left(v\right)}=0;{d}_{rk}=1$.
$$\sum}_{i,j}M{T}_{ijk}\le \underset{r}{\mathrm{min}}\left({C}_{r}/E{O}_{r}\right),k=1,2,\dots ,m,$$
The Battery Capacity Constraints of Wireless Sensors highlight that the continuous processing time of each machine cannot be greater than the maximum working time of each associated wireless sensor. The continuous processing time of a machine can be calculated by the time interval between charging for the associated wireless sensors. The maximum working time of wireless sensors can be calculated by dividing the battery capacity by the working output current.
Sixth, Charging Time Constraints of Wireless Sensors are presented as:
where ${P}_{ij}\in \left(p{s}_{k}^{\left({v}_{1}\right)},p{s}_{k}^{\left({v}_{1}+1\right)},\dots ,p{s}_{k}^{({v}_{2})}\right);\forall {v}_{1}\in \left\{vv=1or{z}_{rk}^{\left(v1\right)}=1\right\};{P}_{\alpha \beta}=p{s}_{k}^{({v}_{2})},{z}_{rk}^{\left({v}_{2}\right)}=1$, ${P}_{\lambda \mu}=p{s}_{k}^{\left({v}_{2}+1\right)};\forall v\in \left({v}_{1},{v}_{2}\right),{z}_{rk}^{\left(v\right)}=0;{d}_{rk}=1$.
$$S{T}_{\lambda \mu}F{T}_{\alpha \beta}\ge \underset{r}{\mathrm{max}}\left\{\left({C}_{r}{\displaystyle \sum}_{i,j}M{T}_{ijk}\right)/E{I}_{r}\right\},k=1,2,\dots ,m,$$
The Charging Time Constraints of Wireless Sensors emphasize that the charging time for wireless sensors must be enough to meet the requirement of greedy charging. In other words, when the wireless sensors are arranged to charge at the end of a workstage, the beginning time of the next workstage on the associated machine cannot be earlier than the finishing time of greedy charging. The time for greedy charging for wireless sensors can be calculated by dividing the remaining battery after the continuous processing by the charging input current.
Finally, the objective function was:
$$min{T}_{max}=min\left(ma{x}_{i=1}^{n}W{T}_{i}\right)$$
On account of the charging time for wireless sensors included in the processing time of the associated workpieces, our optimization objective is simply to minimize the maximum completion time of production tasks. In this model, a continuous timeline is considered, and the maximum completion time of production tasks can be represented by calculating the maximum completion time of all the workpieces.
4.4. Solution Algorithm
From the perspective of modeling, this framework of JEPMS is essentially the joint optimization of flexible manufacturing scheduling and charging schemes for SIWRSNs. As we know, the flexible manufacturing scheduling problem has been proved to be a NPhard problem [59]. So the theoretical optimal solution of JEPMS is too hard to be obtained. However, the approximate optimal solutions are also acceptable and meaningful in an industrial context. Due to the advantages of tactical applicability and computational feasibility, evolutionary algorithms are widely studied to search the approximate optimal solutions of these problems in recent years, such as simulated annealing, particle swarm, and genetic algorithms. On account of the validity and reliability of genetic algorithms, genetic algorithms are extensively studied to tackle the flexible manufacturing scheduling problem [68]. However, there exists rapid local convergence and low search efficiency for the classical genetic algorithm. To improve the search efficiency and rapid convergence, quantum genetic algorithm (QGA) is proposed by combining quantum computing with genetic algorithm [69,70]. QGA redefines quantum bits, quantum coding, and quantum superposition to replace classical chromosomal coding with the probability amplitude of quantum bits [71]. Additionally, double chains coding is widely used in solving manufacturing scheduling problems by genetic algorithms. Therefore, for the purpose of effectively obtaining the approximate optimal solutions of JEPMS, we propose a novel double chains quantum genetic algorithm with Taboo search (DCQGATS).
First, in DCQGATS, we utilized double chains quantum coding to represent the variant feasible solution of JEPMS, and the coding scheme is described as:
where i = 1, 2, 3, …, g; j = 1, 2, 3, …, h; g is the population size; h is the size of quantum bits and equals the total number of workstages of all workpieces; ${X}_{i}$ represents the ith doublechromosome; ${\gamma}_{ij}$ represents the jth quantum angle of ${X}_{i}$, ${\gamma}_{ij}\in \left[0,2\pi \right]$. Each doublechromosome ${X}_{i}$ represents a candidate optimal solution, containing two parallel gene chains, which is described as:
where ${X}_{i1}=\left(\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{i1}\left\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{i2}\right\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{i3}\cdots \mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{ih}\right)$ is defined as the selection chain of all machines and represents the candidate solution of selecting the processing machine for all workpieces; ${X}_{i2}=\left(\mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{i1}\left\mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{i2}\right\mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{i3}\cdots \mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{ih}\right)$ is defined as the sequence chain of all workpieces and represents the candidate solution of arranging the processing sequence for all workpieces.
$${X}_{i}=\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{i1}\\ \mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{i1}\end{array}\left\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{i2}\\ \mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{i2}\end{array}\right\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{i3}\\ \mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{i3}\end{array}\left\begin{array}{c}\cdots \\ \cdots \end{array}\right\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{ij}\\ \mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{ij}\end{array}\left\begin{array}{c}\cdots \\ \cdots \end{array}\right\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{ih}\\ \mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{ih}\end{array}\right),$$
$${X}_{i}=\left(\begin{array}{c}{X}_{i1}\\ {X}_{i2}\end{array}\right),$$
Second, we used a doublechain encoding scheme to map the doublechromosome ${X}_{i}$ to the solution space. For the gene chain ${X}_{i1}$, we utilized the linear transformation to map cosine function values into the solution space. The linear transformation formula is described as:
where $\lceil \xb7\rceil $ denotes rounding up to an integer; ${X}_{i1}^{\left(j\right)}$ represents the jth value of ${X}_{i1}$; ${X}_{i}^{l}=0,\text{}{X}_{i}^{u}=m$, where m denotes the total number of machines. Therefore, ${X}_{i1}^{\left(j\right)}$ can take any value between 1 and m.
$${X}_{i1}^{\left(j\right)}=\lceil {X}_{i1}^{l}+\frac{\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{ij}+1}{2}\left({X}_{i1}^{u}{X}_{i1}^{l}\right)\rceil ,$$
For the gene chain ${X}_{i2}$, we used a displacement encoding to transform sine function values into the solution space. In the population initialization, we randomly generated a feasible processing sequence of all workpieces for each chain ${X}_{i2}$ as parent individual P. For example, if we have three workpieces and each workpiece has two workstages, {1 2 1 3 2 3} is a feasible processing sequence, where the number denotes the serial number of the workpieces and the frequency of occurrence denotes the workstage of the corresponding workpiece, e.g., the first 1 denotes the first workstage of the first workpiece.
Then we utilized a random number $r\in \left[0,1\right]$ to generate a binary sequence S by comparing sine function values with r. If ${\left({X}_{i2}^{\left(j\right)}\right)}^{2}\ge r$, the jth value of S is 1; otherwise is 0. On the basis of the parent individual P and binary sequence S, we could generate a new feasible processing sequence as a child individual C. If ${S}^{\left(j\right)}=1,$ then ${C}^{\left(j\right)}={P}^{\left(j+1\right)}$, where ${S}^{\left(j\right)}$ denotes the jth value of the binary sequence S, ${C}^{\left(j\right)}$ denotes the jth value of the child individual C, and ${P}^{\left(j\right)}$ denotes the jth value of the parent individual P. We got a whole child individual C by filling in C with the residual values of P in turn. In the meantime, the child individual C was regarded as the parent individual P in the next iteration. For example, if P is {1 2 1 3 2 3} and S is {1 0 0 1 1 0}, then C is {2 1 1 2 3 3}.
Third, considering the fact that the processing time of all the workpieces is definitely much greater than the charging time for SIWRSNs and the charging time of wireless sensor is extremely unstable in a smart factory, Taboo search was applied to search the suitable charging windows for lowenergy wireless sensors on the basis of the decoded doublechromosome. The search strategy was to preferentially find a discontinuous time window of the workstage completion to charge the wireless sensors before the wireless sensors’ failure.
Fourth, we used the quantum rotation gate to update the doublechromosome [71], and the rotation gate is described as:
where $U\left(\theta \right)$ represents the quantum rotation gate, and θ represents the angle of rotation.
$$U\left(\theta \right)=\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\theta & \mathrm{sin}\theta \\ \mathrm{sin}\theta & \mathrm{cos}\theta \end{array}\right),$$
The rotation operation is:
$$\left(\begin{array}{cc}\mathrm{cos}\theta & \mathrm{sin}\theta \\ \mathrm{sin}\theta & \mathrm{cos}\theta \end{array}\right)\times \left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{ij}\\ \mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{ij}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{cos}({\gamma}_{ij}+\theta )\\ \mathrm{sin}({\gamma}_{ij}+\theta )\end{array}\right),$$
The rotation angle of each quantum bit ${\theta}_{ij}$was calculated using:
where ${\theta}_{0}$ denotes the basic rotation angle; $\mathrm{sgn}(\xb7)$ represents the direction of rotation; $\left(\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{pj},\mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{pj}\right)$ represents the quantum angle of the optimal doublechromosome.
$${\theta}_{ij}=\mathrm{sgn}\left(\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{ij}\mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{pj}\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{pj}\mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{ij}\right)\times {\theta}_{0},$$
Fifth, to increase the diversity of population, we used a Hadamard gate. The Hadamard gate is described as:
$$\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\begin{array}{cc}1& 1\\ 1& 1\end{array}\right)\times \left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{cos}{\gamma}_{ij}\\ \mathrm{sin}{\gamma}_{ij}\end{array}\right)=\left(\begin{array}{c}\mathrm{cos}(\frac{\pi}{4}{\gamma}_{ij})\\ \mathrm{sin}(\frac{\pi}{4}{\gamma}_{ij})\end{array}\right),$$
Finally, to minimize the maximum completion time of production tasks, we utilized the elite retention strategy to retain the optimal doublechromosome in each iteration. The detailed procedures of DCQGATS for JEPMS are given in Algorithm 1.
Algorithm 1. Presents the detailed procedures of DCQGATS for JEPMS. 

Since the computation complexity of JEPMS grows exponentially, we proposed the double chains quantum genetic algorithm with Taboo search (DCQGATS) to obtain a suboptimal solution. Some studies have proved that genetic algorithms can effectively tackle these kinds of NPhard problems [60]. Other studies have shown that the quantum genetic algorithm can more effectively and rapidly find a suboptimal solution, compared with the traditional genetic algorithm [72]. By analyzing the detailed procedures of DCQGATS, a welldesigned double chains quantum coding scheme of the quantum genetic algorithm was proposed for JEPMS. In order to further enhance algorithm efficiency, we used the Taboo search (TS) strategy to find the suitable charging windows for lowenergy wireless sensors based on the decoded doublechromosome. In a word, our proposed algorithm has an advantage over the traditional genetic algorithm for computation efficiency and accuracy.
5. Simulations
In this section, we take a production task on multiple machine tools in a smart workshop, for example, to verify the feasibility and efficiency of the proposed DCQGATS for JEPMS. It is important to be noted that these data have been collected and collated from the actual production environment. Since we mainly focus on the validity of the framework and algorithm, how to get these simulated data will not been further described.
For this production task, there were four types of workpieces required to be processed on five machines, and the detailed processing time is given in Table 3. The required quantity of these four types of workpieces was 30, 18, 25, and 20, respectively. There were two wireless sensors mounted on each machine, and the maximum battery capacity of each sensor was 600 mAH. The working output current of each wireless sensor was 15 mA, and the charging input current of each wireless sensor was 300 mA. We suppose that the working current and charging current of each wireless sensor were both constant. Therefore, we can calculate that the maximum working time of each wireless sensor was 40 h, and the maximum charging time of each wireless sensor was 2 h.
On the basis of above data, we implemented a MATLAB program for DCQGA on MATLAB 2017b. The population size g was 100; the maximum number of iterations MaxIteration was 2000; the basic rotation angle ${\theta}_{0}$ was 0.01π; the mutation probability ${P}_{\epsilon}$ was 0.1. The optimization iteration process is described as in Figure 1. The approximate optimal solution was 304 h after 2000 iterations. Accordingly, the charging strategies and manufacturing scheduling is shown as Figure 2. The simulation results show that the framework of JEPMS could ensure the separation between nodes charging and machines processing, and the algorithm of DCQGATS could optimize the maximum completion time of the entire production task.
In order to highlight the advantage of the proposed JEPMS, we also implemented a MATLAB program without the constraints of wireless sensors under the same parameters. The optimization process without sensor constraints is described as Figure 3. Since the charging time of wireless sensors is not considered, the approximate optimal solution of 301 h did not satisfy the practical needs. To avoid the appearance of unexpected processing interruption caused by wireless sensor failures, the wireless sensors should be charged before the batteries run out, with the associated machines stopping working. Therefore, executable scheduling plans involving charging time points and machines processing time is described in Figure 4. The true maximum completion time was 317 h, greater than the approximate optimal solution for JEPMS.
For the above simulation results, we can come to the following two verifications. First, our developed framework of JEPMS could ensure machines are not unexpectedly interrupted by wireless sensor failures. Second, our proposed algorithm of DCQGATS for JEPMS could effectively shorten the maximum completion time of the entire production task. Though the two simulated scenarios are not very complex, we could verify that the joint optimization framework of JEPMS was capable of describing the complex relationship between the charging strategies and manufacturing scheduling. At the same time, the comparison between the solved scheduling plans also confirmed that the proposed algorithm was able to obtain a suboptimal solution based on the calculation results of DCQGATS for JEPMS. In order to more effectively deal with different requirements of factory operations, some complex simulations are intensively focused in our future works.
6. Discussion and Conclusions
In this paper, we were concerned about whether factory operators can keep machines with some wireless sensors undergoing highintensity work for long periods of time by effectively arranging the processing and replenishing energy sequence for SIWRSNs in a smart factory environment. We developed a joint framework of JEPMS to jointly optimize charging strategies and manufacturing scheduling for minimizing the total completion time of all the production tasks as much as possible. To verify the feasibility of providing continuous factory operations, we set up some assumptions about this problem and appropriately refined the framework. The simulated results of our proposed algorithm of DCQGATS for JEPMS have demonstrated the correctness and practicability of our idea. However, some important factors are not further discussed in the framework, such as communication errors, uncertain nodes’ operations, and the capacity loss of the battery. In some smart factory contexts, the frequent communication errors and retransmissions lead to rapid power consumption, and the uncertain nodes’ operations cause the unavailability of the initial production plan. A dynamic joint optimization framework will be intensively studied in future works.
In summary, we present that it is necessary to apply SIWRSNs in a smart factory environment. In order to effectively replenish energy for SIWRSNs, we have studied how to jointly optimize the charging strategies of wireless sensors and scheduling plans of machines running for minimizing the total completion time of the entire production tasks in a smart factory. We established a collaborative optimization framework of Joint Energy Provisioning and Manufacturing Scheduling (JEPMS). In this framework, we concluded six types of constraints and an objective function. Since the theoretical optimal solution of JEPMS is difficult to obtain, we proposed a novel double chains quantum genetic algorithm with Taboo search (DCQGATS). The simulation results with DCQGATS showed that the framework of JEPMS can contribute to the reduction of the unpredictable interruptions by wireless sensor failures in production processes. At the same time, DCQGATS can decrease the maximum completion time of all the production tasks. In a word, our proposed JEPMS and DCQGATS can contribute to realizing the largescale applications of smart industrial wireless sensor networks in smart factories.
Author Contributions
Y.F., Y.W., H.Z., S.M., and J.T. have contributed to the scientific part of this work. All the authors have contributed to the writing of this article.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51775489), Science Fund for Creative Research Groups of National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 51521064), Zhejiang Provincial Natural Science Foundation of China (No. LZ18E050001), and the National Key Research and Development Program of China (No. 2017YFB1301201).
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank the associate editor and anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to improve this paper.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
 Lee, S.C.; Jeon, T.G.; Hwang, H.; Kim, C. Design and Implementation of Wireless Sensor BasedMonitoring System for Smart Factory; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2007. [Google Scholar]
 Ilyas, M.; Mahgoub, I. Handbook of Sensor Networks: Compact Wireless and Wired Sensing Systems; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2005; pp. 5–15. ISBN 9780849319686. [Google Scholar]
 Gungor, V.C.; Hancke, G.P. Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks: Challenges, Design Principles, and Technical Approaches. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 2009, 10, 4258–4265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Zoppi, S.; Van Bemten, A.; Gursu, H.M.; Vilgelm, M.; Guck, J.; Kellerer, W. Achieving Hybrid Wired/Wireless Industrial Networks with WDetServ: ReliabilityBased Scheduling for Delay Guarantees. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2018, 5, 2307–2319. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Flammini, A.; Ferrari, P.; Marioli, D.; Sisinni, E.; Taroni, A. Wired and wireless sensor networks for industrial applications. Microelectron. J. 2009, 9, 1322–1336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Willig, A.; Matheus, K.; Wolisz, A. Wireless Technology in Industrial Networks. Proc. IEEE 2005, 6, 1130–1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Wang, K.; Li, H.; Feng, Y.; Tian, G. Big Data Analytics for System Stability Evaluation Strategy in the Energy Internet. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2017, 4, 1969–1978. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Sheng, Z.; Mahapatra, C.; Zhu, C.; Leung, V.C.M. Recent Advances in Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks toward Efficient Management in IoT. IEEE Access 2015, 622–637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Feng, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Tian, S.; Tian, G.; Lv, Z.; Jia, H. Datadriven accurate design of variable blank holder force in sheet forming under interval uncertainty using sequential approximate multiobjective optimization. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2018, 1242–1250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Gao, Y.; Feng, Y.; Zhang, Z.; Tan, J. An optimal dynamic interval preventive maintenance scheduling for series systems. Reliab. Eng. Syst. Safe 2015, 19–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Wan, J.; Chen, B.; Wang, S.; Xia, M.; Li, D.; Liu, C. Fog Computing for Energyaware Load Balancing and Scheduling in Smart Factory. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Feng, Y.; Hu, B.; Hao, H.; Gao, Y.; Li, Z.; Tan, J. Design of Distributed CyberPhysical Systems for Connected and Automated Vehicles with Implementing Methodologies. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2018, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Yang, Y.; Wang, C. Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; ISBN 9783319176550. [Google Scholar]
 He, S.; Chen, J.; Jiang, F.; Yau, D.K.Y.; Xing, G.; Sun, Y. Energy Provisioning in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. 2013, 10, 1931–1942. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Gao, D.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, F.; Song, J. Anycast Routing Protocol for Forest Monitoring in Rechargeable Wireless Sensor Networks. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2013, 12, 239860. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Lu, X.; Niyato, D.; Wang, P.; Kim, D.I.; Han, Z. Wireless charger networking for mobile devices: Fundamentals, standards, and applications. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2015, 2, 126–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Cecilio, J.; Pedro, N.S.F. Wireless Sensors in Industrial TimeCritical Environments; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2014; ISBN 9783319028880. [Google Scholar]
 Radziwon, A.; Bilberg, A.; Bogers, M.; Madsen, E.S. The Smart Factory: Exploring Adaptive and Flexible Manufacturing Solutions. Procedia Eng. 2014, 1184–1190. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Ding, X.; Shi, L.; Han, J.; Lu, J. The study of crosslayer optimization for wireless rechargeable sensor networks implemented in coal mines. Sensors 2016, 16, 171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
 Zou, Z.; Nagayama, T.; Fujino, Y. Efficient multihop communication for static wireless sensor networks in the application to civil infrastructure monitoring. Struct. Control Health Monit. 2014, 4, 603–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 ErolKantarci, M.; Mouftah, H.T. Suresense: Sustainable wireless rechargeable sensor networks for the smart grid. IEEE Wirel. Commun. 2012, 3, 30–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Xu, C.; Cheng, R.; Wu, T. Wireless rechargeable sensor networks with separable charger array. Int. J. Distrib. Sens. Netw. 2018, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Dai, H.; Wu, X.; Chen, G.; Xu, L.; Lin, S. Minimizing the number of mobile chargers for largescale wireless rechargeable sensor networks. Comput. Commun. 2014, 54–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Porta, T.; Petrioli, C.; Phillips, C.; Spenza, D. Sensor Mission Assignment in Rechargeable Wireless Sensor Networks. ACM Trans. Sens. Netw. (TOSN) 2014, 4, 1–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Chen, Z.; Chen, X.; Zhang, D.; Zeng, F. Collaborative mobile charging policy for perpetual operation in largescale wireless rechargeable sensor networks. Neurocomputing 2017, 137–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Feng, Y.; Zhou, M.; Tian, G.; Li, Z.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, Qin.; Tan, J. Target disassembly sequencing and scheme evaluation for CNC machine tools using improved multiobjective ant colony algorithm and fuzzy integral. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Ye, X.; Liang, W. Charging utility maximization in wireless rechargeable sensor networks. Wirel. Netw. 2017, 7, 2069–2081. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Gao, Y.C.; Wang, Q.R.; Feng, Y.X.; Zheng, H.; Zheng, B.; Tan, J.R. An EnergySaving Optimization Method of Dynamic Scheduling for Disassembly Line. Energies 2018, 5, 1261. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Lin, C.; Wu, G.; Obaidat, M.S.; Yu, C.W. Clustering and splitting charging algorithms for large scaled wireless rechargeable sensor networks. J. Syst. Softw. 2016, 381–394. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Zhong, P.; Zhang, Y.; Ma, S.; Kui, X.; Gao, J. RCSS: A RealTime OnDemand Charging Scheduling Scheme for Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. Sensors 2018, 18, 1601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
 Shih, K.; Yang, C. A coverageaware energy replenishment scheme for wireless rechargeable sensor networks. EURASIP J. Wirel. Commun. Netw. 2017, 1, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Shu, Y.; Shin, K.G.; Chen, J.; Sun, Y. Joint Energy Replenishment and Operation Scheduling in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2017, 1, 125–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Chang, H.; Lin, J.; Wu, Y.; Huang, S. MMCS: Multimodule charging strategy for increasing the lifetime of wireless rechargeable sensor networks. Energies 2016, 9, 664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Wang, C.; Li, J.; Ye, F.; Yang, Y. A Mobile Data Gathering Framework for Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks with Vehicle Movement Costs and Capacity Constraints. IEEE Trans. Comput. 2016, 8, 2411–2427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Arivudainambi, D.; Balaji, S. Optimal Placement of Wireless Chargers in Rechargeable Sensor Networks. IEEE Sens. J. 2018, 10, 4212–4222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Li, S.; Fu, L.; He, S.; Sun, Y. NearOptimal CoDeployment of Chargers and Sink Stations in Rechargeable Sensor Networks. ACM Trans. Embed. Comput. Syst. 2018, 1, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Shu, Y.; Yousefi, H.; Cheng, P.; Chen, J.; Gu, Y.J.; He, T.; Shin, K.G. NearOptimal Velocity Control for Mobile Charging in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2016, 7, 1699–1713. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Yang, X.; Han, G.; Liu, L.; Qian, A.; Zhang, W. IGRC: An improved gridbased joint routing and charging algorithm for wireless rechargeable sensor networks. Future Gener. Comput. Syst. 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Fu, L.; He, L.; Cheng, P.; Gu, Y.; Pan, J.; Chen, J. ESync: Energy Synchronized Mobile Charging in Rechargeable Wireless Sensor Networks. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2016, 9, 7415–7431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Jiang, J.R.; Liao, J.H. Efficient Wireless Charger Deployment for Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. Energies 2016, 9, 696. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Rao, X.; Yang, P.; Yan, Y.; Zhou, H.; Wu, X. Optimal Recharging With Practical Considerations in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Network. IEEE Access 2017, 4401–4409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Feng, Y.; Gao, Y.; Tian, G.; Li, Z.; Hu, H.; Zheng, H. Dynamic process planning and Endoflife decision making for product recovery optimization based on hybrid disassembly. IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Li, X.; Tang, Q.; Sun, C. Energy efficient dispatch strategy for the dualfunctional mobile sink in wireless rechargeable sensor networks. Wirel. Netw. 2018, 3, 671–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Lin, T.L.; Li, S.L.; Chang, H.Y. A Power Balance Aware Wireless Charger Deployment Method for Complete Coverage in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. Energies 2016, 9, 695. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Rout, R.R.; Krishna, M.S.; Gupta, S. Markov Decision ProcessBased Switching Algorithm for Sustainable Rechargeable Wireless Sensor Networks. IEEE Sens. J. 2016, 8, 2788–2797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Shu, Y.; Cheng, P.; Gu, Y.; Chen, J.; He, T. TOC: Localizing Wireless Rechargeable Sensors with Time of Charge. ACM Trans. Sens. Netw. 2015, 3, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Najeeb, N.W.; Detweiler, C. Extending Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Network Life without Full Knowledge. Sensors 2017, 17, 1642. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
 Fu, L.; Cheng, P.; Gu, Y.; Chen, J.; He, T. Optimal Charging in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 2016, 1, 278–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Kaswan, A.; Tomar, A.; Jana, P.K. An efficient scheduling scheme for mobile charger in ondemand wireless rechargeable sensor networks. J. Netw. Comput. Appl. 2018, 123–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Wei, Y.K.; Ma, X.H.; Yang, N.; Chen, Y.J. EnergySaving Traffic Scheduling in Hybrid Software Defined Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. Sensors 2017, 17, 2126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Feng, Y.; Hong, Z.; Tian, G.; Li, Z.; Tan, J.; Hu, H. Environmentally friendly MCDM of reliabilitybased product optimisation combining DEMATELbased ANP, interval uncertainty and Vlse Kriterijumska Optimizacija Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR). Inform. Sci. 2018, 128–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Ding, X.; Han, J.; Shi, L. The optimization based dynamic and cyclic working strategies for rechargeable wireless sensor networks with multiple base stations and wireless energy transfer devices. Sensors 2015, 15, 6270–6305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
 Lin, C.; Zhou, J.; Guo, C.; Song, H.; Wu, G.; Obaidat, M.S. TSCA: A TemporalSpatial RealTime Charging Scheduling Algorithm for OnDemand Architecture in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. IEEE Trans. Mobile Comput. 2018, 1, 211–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Han, G.; Qian, A.; Jiang, J.; Sun, N.; Liu, L. A gridbased joint routing and charging algorithm for industrial wireless rechargeable sensor networks. Comput. Netw. 2016, 19–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Jia, J.; Chen, J.; Deng, Y.S.; Wang, X.W.; Aghvami, A.H. Joint Power Charging and Routing in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. Sensors 2017, 17, 2290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
 Zhong, P.; Li, Y.T.; Liu, W.R.; Duan, G.H.; Chen, Y.W.; Xiong, N. Joint Mobile Data Collection and Wireless Energy Transfer in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. Sensors 2017, 17, 1881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
 Guo, S.; Wang, C.; Yang, Y. Joint Mobile Data Gathering and Energy Provisioning in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2014, 12, 2836–2852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Zhao, M.; Li, J.; Yang, Y. A Framework of Joint Mobile Energy Replenishment and Data Gathering in Wireless Rechargeable Sensor Networks. IEEE Trans. Mob. Comput. 2014, 12, 2689–2705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Pezzella, F.; Morganti, G.; Ciaschetti, G. A genetic algorithm for the Flexible Jobshop Scheduling Problem. Comput. Oper. Res. 2008, 10, 3202–3212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Jiang, S.; Zheng, Z.; Liu, M. A preferenceinspired multiobjective soft scheduling algorithm for the practical steelmakingcontinuous casting production. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2018, 582–594. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Liu, L.; Hu, R.; Hu, X.; Zhao, G.; Wang, S. A hybrid PSOGA algorithm for job shop scheduling in machine tool production. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2015, 19, 5755–5781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Aydemir, E.; Koruca, H.I. A new production scheduling module using priorityrule based genetic algorithm. Int. J. Simul. Model. 2015, 3, 450–462. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Xu, W.; Wang, R.; Yang, J. An improved league championship algorithm with free search and its application on production scheduling. J. Intell. Manuf. 2018, 1, 165–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Zhang, R. Sustainable Scheduling of Cloth Production Processes by MultiObjective Genetic Algorithm with TabuEnhanced Local Search. Sustainability 2017, 10, 1754. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Tian, G.; Zhang, H.; Feng, Y.; Wang, D.; Peng, Y.; Jia, H. Green decoration materials selection under interior environment characteristics: A greycorrelation based hybrid MCDM method. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018, 682–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Boscaino, V.; Pellitteri, F.; Rosa, L.; Capponi, G. Wireless battery chargers for portable applications: Design and test of a highefficiency power receiver. IET Power Electron. 2013, 1, 20–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Framinan, J.M.; Ruiz, R. Guidelines for the deployment and implementation of manufacturing scheduling systems. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2012, 7, 1799–1812. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Bensten, A. Genetic Algorithms in Applications; Scitus Academics LLC: Valley Cottage, NY, USA, 2017; ISBN 9781681172637. [Google Scholar]
 Narayanan, A.; Moore, M. Quantuminspired genetic algorithms. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Evolutionary Computation, Nagoya, Japan, 20–22 May 1996. [Google Scholar]
 KukHyun, H.; JongHwan, K. Genetic quantum algorithm and its application to combinatorial optimization problem. In Proceedings of the 2000 Congress on Evolutionary Computation, CEC00 (Cat. No. 00TH8512), La Jolla, CA, USA, 16–19 July 2000. [Google Scholar][Green Version]
 Kong, H.; Li, N.; Shen, Y. Adaptive double chain quantum genetic algorithm for constrained optimization problems. Chin. J. Aeronaut. 2015, 1, 214–228. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
 Chen, P.; Yuan, L.; He, Y.; Luo, S. An improved SVM classifier based on double chains quantum genetic algorithm and its application in analogue circuit diagnosis. Neurocomputing 2016, 202–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1.
The variation of the maximum completion time optimizing with the constraints of wireless sensors.
Figure 2.
The time distribution of charging for wireless sensors and continuous processing for five machines based on JEPMS.
Figure 3.
The variation of the maximum completion time optimizing without the constraints of wireless sensors.
Figure 4.
The time distribution of charging for wireless sensors and continuous processing for five machines based on the strategy of passively arranging charging time for wireless sensors with the associated machine having stopped working.
Notation  Definition 

n  The total number of workpieces 
${W}_{i}$  The ith workpiece, i = 1, 2, …, n 
${N}_{i}$  The number of workstages for the workpiece ${W}_{i}$ 
m  The total number of machines 
${M}_{k}$  The kth machine, k = 1, 2, …, m 
q  The total number of wireless sensors 
${S}_{r}$  The rth wireless sensor, r = 1, 2, …, q 
${P}_{ij}$  The jth workstage of the workpiece ${W}_{i}$, j = 1, 2, …, ${N}_{i}$ 
$M{T}_{ijk}$  The processing time of the workstage ${P}_{ij}$ on the machine ${M}_{k}$ 
$S{T}_{ij}$  The beginning time of the workstage ${P}_{ij}$ 
$F{T}_{ij}$  The finishing time of the workstage ${P}_{ij}$ 
$W{T}_{i}$  The completion time of the workpieces ${W}_{i}$, i = 1, 2, …, n 
${C}_{r}$  The battery capacity of the wireless sensor${S}_{r}$, r = 1, 2, …, q 
$E{O}_{r}$  The working output current of the wireless sensor ${S}_{r}$, r = 1, 2, …, q 
$E{I}_{r}$  The charging input current of the wireless sensor ${S}_{r}$, r = 1, 2, …, q 
${T}_{max}$  The maximum completion time of the entire production tasks 
Variables  Definitions 

${x}_{ijk}$  If the workstage ${P}_{ij}$ is processed on the machine ${M}_{k}$, then ${x}_{ijk}=1$; otherwise ${x}_{ijk}=0$ 
${y}_{ijk}$  The sequence number of the workstage ${P}_{ij}$ processed on the machine ${M}_{k}$ 
$p{s}_{k}$  The processing sequence of the workstage ${P}_{ij}$ processed on the machine ${M}_{k}$ 
$p{s}_{k}^{\left(v\right)}$  The vth value of the processing sequence $p{s}_{k}$ indicates the workstage ${P}_{ij}$ is processed on machine ${M}_{k}$, where ${y}_{ijk}=v$ 
${d}_{rk}$  If the wireless sensor ${S}_{r}$ is mounted on the machine ${M}_{k}$, then ${d}_{rk}=1$; otherwise ${d}_{rk}=0$ 
${z}_{rk}^{\left(v\right)}$  If the vth workstage ${P}_{ij}$ of machine ${M}_{k}$ finishes and the associated wireless sensor ${S}_{r}$ starts charging at once, then ${z}_{rk}^{\left(v\right)}=1$; otherwise ${z}_{rk}^{\left(v\right)}=0$ 
Workpieces  Workstages  M1  M2  M3  M4  M5 

W1  O11  1  3  4  1  3 
O12  3  8  2  1  10  
O13  3  5  4  7  4  
O14  4  1  1  3  1  
W2  O21  2  3  9  3  6 
O12  9  1  2  5  7  
O13  8  6  3  5  6  
W3  O31  4  5  8  1  2 
O32  10  7  3  5  9  
O33  6  5  6  10  7  
O34  2  2  5  8  4  
O35  8  3  7  4  5  
W4  O41  7  6  4  7  3 
O42  5  3  7  9  2  
O43  4  5  9  3  6 
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).