# A Genetic Crow Search Algorithm for Optimization of Operation Sequencing in Process Planning
## 5 Case Studies
### Computational Results and Analysis
Under the first condition, the minimal TWPC is 4135, along with 4136 and 4137 which were the closest to the minimum. The average result is 4306.5, while the worst result is 4496. Only twice was the obtained TWPC above 4400, while all the other results were close to the average with four process plans reaching the TWPC below 4200. The GCSA achieved more superior result in terms of the minimal TWPC compared to the CPAGA and the GA-SA, while it showed slightly lower maximal and approximately the same average result compared to the CPAGA approach. The best solution for this condition is presented in Table 8.  
Figure 9: Comparison of the results under (**a**) condition 1, (**b**) condition 2 and (**c**) condition 3 for Part 1. Under the second condition, the best, the worst and the average TWPC using the GCSA are 4338, 4924 and 4544.7, respectively. The minimal result appeared three times in 20 runs, with more than half of the obtained TWPC being less than 4600. The best process plan for this condition is given in Table 9. Based on the comparative results in Table 7, a similar conclusion can be made as for the first condition. The GCSA overcome the results of the CPAGA and GA-SA in terms of the minimal TWPC. A smaller and larger deviation was shown in terms of the average and the maximal value, respectively. The graphical representation of the comparison with the two observed approaches is given in Figure 10. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Indices** & 1 & 2 & 3 & 4 & 5 & 6 & 7 & 8 & 9 & 10 & 11 & 12 & 13 & 14 & 15 & 16 \\ \hline
**Operation** & 1 & 22 & 2 & 3 & 10 & 11 & 15 & 16 & 12 & 14 & 13 & 17 & 18 & 19 & 20 & 9 \\
**Machine** & 1 & 5 & 2 & 2 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 & 5 \\
**Tool** & 1 & 7 & 1 & 1 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 & 8 \\
**TAD** & +z & -z & +z & +z & -z & -z & -z & -z & -z & -z & -z & - & -b & -b & -b & -b & +z \\ \hline
**Indices** & 17 & 18 & 19 & 20 & 21 & 22 & 23 & 24 & 25 & 26 & 27 & 28 & 29 & 30 & 31 & 32 \\ \hline
**Operation** & 27 & 24 & 28 & 26 & 25 & 45 & 46 & 36 & 37 & 34 & 35 & 7 & 32 & 33 & 31 & 4 \\
**Machine** & 9 & 9 & 9 & 9 & 9 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 \\
**Tool** & 13 & 11 & 14 & 12 & 22 & 19 & 27 & 17 & 25 & 28 & 24 & 8 & 16 & 23 & 15 & 4 \\
**TAD** & +z & +z & +z & +z & +z & -x & -x & -c & -c & -c & -c & -a & -a & -a & -a & -a & -y \\ \hline
**Indices** & 33 & 34 & 35 & 36 & 37 & 38 & 39 & 40 & 41 & 42 & 43 & 44 & 45 & 46 & & \\ \hline
**Operation** & 5 & 6 & 29 & 30 & 8 & 41 & 39 & 40 & 42 & 23 & 38 & 43 & 44 & 21 & & \\
**Machine** & 7 & 7 & 7 & 7 & 3 & 9 & 9 & 9 & 9 & 9 & 9 & 9 & 9 & 9 & 9 & \\
**Tool** & 5 & 5 & 6 & 6 & 8 & 18 & 18 & 26 & 26 & 20 & 21 & 18 & 26 & 10 & & \\
**TAD** & -y & -y & -y & -y & -a & -b & -b & -b & -b & -z & -z & -z & -z & & \\ \hline \hline TMC = 1319, TMCC = 840, NMC = 7, TTC = 281, TTCC = 435, NTC = 29, TSC = 1260, NSC = 14, TWPC = 4135 & & & & & & & & & & & & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: The best process plans for Part 2 (Condition 1).