OptAtlas

2D Irregular Nesting

Place irregular parts on stock material without overlap, minimizing waste.

Also called: 2D Irregular Nesting · 불규칙 형상 패킹 · 트루셰이프 네스팅 · Irregular shape packing · True-shape nesting

On this page12 sections

Definition

Place a set of irregular (non-rectangular) 2D parts onto stock material without overlap and within the sheet boundary, so that material utilization is maximized.

Example

Place two “L”-shaped parts by their bounding boxes and the two rectangles claim a large area. Rotate one part 180° and tuck it into the other's concave notch (interlocking), and the pair fits into a much smaller region of the same sheet. Reducing waste by using each part's true shape, rather than a rectangular approximation, is the central gain of irregular nesting.

Industrial aliases

The same geometric core appears under many industry names:

  • Shipbuilding — plate nesting, steel plate part nesting
  • Apparel — marker making, lay planning
  • Sheet-metal fabrication — true-shape nesting

These are not loosely analogous; they are industrial instances of one abstract problem, differing mainly in their side constraints (see Cross-domain analogues).

Formal model

  • Input: a set of polygonal pieces (possibly with holes), one or more stock sheets, allowed rotations per piece.
  • Decision variables: placement position (xi,yi)(x_i, y_i) and orientation θi\theta_i for each piece ii.
  • Objective: typically minimize used sheet length (strip variant) or the number of sheets, equivalently maximize utilization.
  • Constraints: no pairwise overlap; containment within the sheet; allowed orientation set; (industry-dependent) spacing, grain, and cutting constraints.

Complexity

Irregular nesting is NP-hard. Exact methods exist for small instances, but industrial-scale instances are addressed with constructive heuristics and metaheuristics rather than guaranteed-optimal solvers. [grade B — survey-level]

Key constraints

  • Overlap-free placement (the hard geometric core)
  • Containment within the sheet boundary
  • Rotation — free, a discrete set, or fixed (apparel grain lines often fix it)
  • Material direction / grain (apparel, some composites)
  • Kerf and cutting-path constraints (sheet-metal, shipbuilding)
  • Bevel, bridge, common-cut manufacturability (shipbuilding)

Algorithm families

  • Constructive — bottom-left / bottom-left-fill placement rules
  • Geometry primitives — No-Fit Polygon (overlap test), Minkowski sums
  • Metaheuristic — genetic algorithms, simulated annealing, tabu search over sequence/orientation, with a placement heuristic as the inner loop
  • Learning-based — reinforcement-learning approaches have been reported in recent literature under benchmark conditions; maturity for industrial use is not established here. [unverified — no grade-A source recorded]

Benchmarks

  • Direct: ESICUP community instances for irregular nesting.
  • Adjacent: 2DPackLib — targets two-dimensional orthogonal cutting and packing, so it is methodologically related but not a direct irregular benchmark. Recorded explicitly as has_adjacent_benchmark.

Tools

Commercial true-shape nesting tools are vendor-reported (grade C) and connected to specific application problems rather than to the abstract problem directly — see the application pages for Shipbuilding Plate Nesting and Sheet-metal True-shape Nesting.

Cross-domain analogues

Shipbuilding plate nesting, apparel marker making, and sheet-metal true-shape nesting share the overlap-free placement core (an E1_variant relationship). What differs is the side constraints: shipbuilding adds cutting-path, bridge, and bevel manufacturability; apparel adds grain/orientation locking and pattern matching; sheet-metal adds kerf and common-line cutting. Recording the equivalence and the difference is the point — see the Evidence policy.

Open questions

  • How far do learning-based methods generalize across industry side-constraint sets, beyond single-benchmark reports?
  • Where is the boundary between "same problem, different constraints" (E1) and a genuinely distinct formulation?

Claims & evidence

Every relationship is a claim with an evidence grade; applicable problem-to-problem relationships also carry an equivalence level. See the evidence policy.

A–X describes evidence reliability; E0–E4 describes mathematical similarity between problems. The two axes are independent.

Relationships from this entry 16

  • uses method
    2D Irregular Nesting to No-Fit Polygon

    The No-Fit Polygon is the canonical geometric primitive for testing and resolving overlap between two irregular pieces in nesting.

    EvidenceA · Peer-reviewed / official

    Sources

    • Source grade: A — Peer-reviewed / officialThe geometry of nesting problems: A tutorial
      Citation details

      Bennell, J.A., Oliveira, J.F. (2008). The geometry of nesting problems: A tutorial. EJOR 184(2):397-415.

  • uses method
    2D Irregular Nesting to Inner-Fit Polygon

    Containment within the sheet boundary is encoded by the Inner-Fit Polygon, which together with the No-Fit Polygon's overlap test forms the two geometric axes of irregular-nesting placement.

    EvidenceA · Peer-reviewed / official

    Sources

    • Source grade: A — Peer-reviewed / officialThe geometry of nesting problems: A tutorial
      Citation details

      Bennell, J.A., Oliveira, J.F. (2008). The geometry of nesting problems: A tutorial. EJOR 184(2):397-415.

  • uses method
    2D Irregular Nesting to Phi-functions

    Overlap in irregular placement can also be encoded with phi-functions, an alternative to the No-Fit Polygon that enables nonlinear-programming formulations with continuous rotation.

    EvidenceA · Peer-reviewed / official

    Sources

    • Source grade: A — Peer-reviewed / officialPhi-Functions for 2D Objects Formed by Line Segments and Circular Arcs
      Citation details

      Chernov, N., Stoyan, Yu., Romanova, T., Pankratov, A. (2012). Phi-Functions for 2D Objects Formed by Line Segments and Circular Arcs. Advances in Operations Research, vol. 2012. Phi-functions encode pairwise interaction analytically (positive = apart, zero = touching, negative = overlapping), enabling nonlinear-programming packing models with continuous rotation.

  • uses method
    2D Irregular Nesting to Bottom-Left Fill

    Bottom-left and bottom-left-fill placement rules are widely used constructive heuristics for irregular nesting layouts.

    EvidenceB · Survey / tutorial / community

    Sources

    • Source grade: A — Peer-reviewed / officialOn genetic algorithms for the packing of polygons
      Citation details

      Jakobs, S. (1996). On genetic algorithms for the packing of polygons. EJOR 88(1):165-181. Origin of the bottom-left-fill placement heuristic.

  • uses method
    2D Irregular Nesting to Genetic Algorithm

    Irregular nesting has been reported with genetic-algorithm-based search over piece sequence and orientation, paired with a placement heuristic.

    EvidenceB · Survey / tutorial / community

    Sources

    • Source grade: B — Survey / tutorial / communityA tutorial in irregular shape packing problems
      Citation details

      Bennell, J.A., Oliveira, J.F. (2009). A tutorial in irregular shape packing problems. JORS 60(S1):S93-S105.

  • direct benchmark
    2D Irregular Nesting to ESICUP

    ESICUP distributes community instances for irregular (nesting) problems used to compare reported results.

    EvidenceB · Survey / tutorial / community

    Sources

    • Source grade: B — Survey / tutorial / communityESICUP — EURO Special Interest Group on Cutting and Packing
      Citation details

      ESICUP maintains community data sets and instances for cutting & packing, including irregular (nesting) instances.

  • adjacent benchmark
    2D Irregular Nesting to 2DPackLib

    2DPackLib is adjacent, not direct: it targets two-dimensional orthogonal (rectangular) cutting and packing, whereas irregular nesting handles arbitrary polygons. Relevant for shared packing methodology but not a like-for-like benchmark.

    EvidenceA · Peer-reviewed / official

    Sources

    • Source grade: A — Peer-reviewed / official2DPackLib: a two-dimensional cutting and packing library
      Citation details

      Iori, M., de Lima, V.L., Martello, S., Monaci, M. (2022). 2DPackLib: a two-dimensional cutting and packing library. Optimization Letters. Focuses on two-dimensional orthogonal cutting and packing instances.

  • open-source implementation
    2D Irregular Nesting to SVGnest

    SVGnest is an open-source implementation of irregular nesting using No-Fit Polygon placement and a genetic algorithm.

    EvidenceC · Vendor / case-reported

    Sources

  • open-source implementation
    2D Irregular Nesting to libnest2d

    libnest2d is an open-source C++ library providing 2D nesting of arbitrary polygons.

    EvidenceC · Vendor / case-reported

    Sources

  • open-source implementation
    2D Irregular Nesting to Deepnest

    Deepnest is an open-source desktop nesting app built on the SVGnest algorithm.

    EvidenceC · Vendor / case-reported

    Sources

  • uses method
    2D Irregular Nesting to Simulated Annealing

    Irregular nesting has been reported with simulated-annealing search over piece sequence and orientation, paired with a placement heuristic.

    EvidenceB · Survey / tutorial / community

    Sources

    • Source grade: B — Survey / tutorial / communityA tutorial in irregular shape packing problems
      Citation details

      Bennell, J.A., Oliveira, J.F. (2009). A tutorial in irregular shape packing problems. JORS 60(S1):S93-S105.

  • uses method
    2D Irregular Nesting to Tabu Search

    Irregular nesting has also been reported with tabu-search-based search, using a placement heuristic as the inner loop.

    EvidenceB · Survey / tutorial / community

    Sources

    • Source grade: B — Survey / tutorial / communityA tutorial in irregular shape packing problems
      Citation details

      Bennell, J.A., Oliveira, J.F. (2009). A tutorial in irregular shape packing problems. JORS 60(S1):S93-S105.

  • uses method
    2D Irregular Nesting to Reinforcement Learning

    RL-based nesting has been reported in recent literature, but its industrial maturity and generalization are not verified here. [unverified — no grade-A source recorded]

    EvidenceD · Expert inference

    Sources

    No source listed
  • uses method
    2D Irregular Nesting to Minkowski Sum

    Because the No-Fit Polygon used for overlap testing is computed as a Minkowski sum, irregular nesting directly relies on the Minkowski sum.

    EvidenceA · Peer-reviewed / official

    Sources

    • Source grade: A — Peer-reviewed / officialThe geometry of nesting problems: A tutorial
      Citation details

      Bennell, J.A., Oliveira, J.F. (2008). The geometry of nesting problems: A tutorial. EJOR 184(2):397-415.

  • generalizes
    2D Irregular Nesting to 2D Strip Packing

    Irregular nesting generalizes rectangular strip packing: rectangles are a special case of arbitrary polygons.

    EvidenceB · Survey / tutorial / community
    Equiv.E2 · shared methodology

    Sources

    • Source grade: A — Peer-reviewed / officialAn improved typology of cutting and packing problems
      Citation details

      Wäscher, G., Haußner, H., Schumann, H. (2007). An improved typology of cutting and packing problems. EJOR 183(3):1109-1130.

  • shares method with
    2D Irregular Nesting to 2D Bin Packing

    Irregular nesting and 2D bin packing belong to the same cutting & packing family and share metaheuristic search methodology.

    EvidenceB · Survey / tutorial / community
    Equiv.E2 · shared methodology

    Sources

    • Source grade: A — Peer-reviewed / officialAn improved typology of cutting and packing problems
      Citation details

      Wäscher, G., Haußner, H., Schumann, H. (2007). An improved typology of cutting and packing problems. EJOR 183(3):1109-1130.

Relationships to this entry 4

  • shares method with
    2D Strip Packing to 2D Irregular Nesting

    Rectangle strip packing and irregular nesting share placement heuristics (e.g. bottom-left) and sit in the same cutting & packing family; rectangles are the orthogonal special case.

    EvidenceB · Survey / tutorial / community
    Equiv.E2 · shared methodology

    Sources

    • Source grade: A — Peer-reviewed / officialAn improved typology of cutting and packing problems
      Citation details

      Wäscher, G., Haußner, H., Schumann, H. (2007). An improved typology of cutting and packing problems. EJOR 183(3):1109-1130.

  • industry instance of
    Apparel Marker Making to 2D Irregular Nesting

    Apparel marker making is a canonical industrial instance of irregular 2D nesting, with grain-line orientation constraints.

    EvidenceB · Survey / tutorial / community
    Equiv.E1 · same base, different side constraints

    Sources

    • Source grade: B — Survey / tutorial / communityA tutorial in irregular shape packing problems
      Citation details

      Bennell, J.A., Oliveira, J.F. (2009). A tutorial in irregular shape packing problems. JORS 60(S1):S93-S105.

  • industry instance of
    Sheet-metal True-shape Nesting to 2D Irregular Nesting

    Sheet-metal true-shape nesting is an industrial instance of irregular 2D nesting (vendor-reported framing).

    EvidenceC · Vendor / case-reported
    Equiv.E1 · same base, different side constraints

    Sources

    • Source grade: C — Vendor / case-reportedRADAN Radnest — sheet-metal nesting (vendor materials)
      Citation details

      Vendor-reported true-shape nesting for sheet-metal fabrication. [unverified specifics]

  • industry instance of
    Shipbuilding Plate Nesting to 2D Irregular Nesting

    Shipbuilding plate nesting is an industrial instance of irregular 2D nesting, adding manufacturability constraints (bevel, kerf, bridge, cutting path).

    EvidenceB · Survey / tutorial / community
    Equiv.E1 · same base, different side constraints

    Sources

    • Source grade: B — Survey / tutorial / communityA tutorial in irregular shape packing problems
      Citation details

      Bennell, J.A., Oliveira, J.F. (2009). A tutorial in irregular shape packing problems. JORS 60(S1):S93-S105.