Evaluation of Pull Production Control Strategies Under Uncertainty: An Integrated Fuzzy Ahp-Topsis Approach

Purpose: Just-In-Time (JIT) production has continuously been considered by industrial practitioners and researchers as a leading strategy for the yet popular Lean production. Pull Production Control Policies (PPCPs) are the major enablers of JIT that locally control the level of inventory by authorizing the production in each station. Aiming to improve the PPCPs, three authorization mechanisms: Kanban, constant-work-in-process (ConWIP), and a hybrid system, are evaluated by considering uncertainty. Design/methodology/approach: Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods are successful in evaluating alternatives with respect to several objectives. The proposed approach of this study applies the fuzzy set theory together with an integrated Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and a Technique for Order Performance by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS) method. Findings: The study finds that hybrid Kanban-ConWIP pull production control policies have a better performance in controlling the studied multi-layer multi-stage manufacturing and assembly system. Practical implications: To examine the approach a real case from automobile electro-mechanical part production industry is studied. The production system consists of multiple levels of manufacturing, feeding a multi-stage assembly line with stochastic processing times to satisfy the changing demand. Originality/value: This study proposes the integrated Kanban-ConWIP hybrid pull control policies and implements several alternatives on a multi-stage and multi-layer manufacturing and assembly production system. An integrated Fuzzy AHP TOPSIS method is developed to evaluate the alternatives with respect to several JIT criteriaPeer Reviewe

Scheduling of non-repetitive lean manufacturing systems under uncertainty using intelligent agent simulation

World-class manufacturing paradigms emerge from specific types of manufacturing systems with which they remain associated until they are obsolete. Since its introduction the lean paradigm is almost exclusively implemented in repetitive manufacturing systems employing flow-shop layout configurations. Due to its inherent complexity and combinatorial nature, scheduling is one application domain whereby the implementation of manufacturing philosophies and best practices is particularly challenging. The study of the limited reported attempts to extend leanness into the scheduling of non-repetitive manufacturing systems with functional shop-floor configurations confirms that these works have adopted a similar approach which aims to transform the system mainly through reconfiguration in order to increase the degree of manufacturing repetitiveness and thus facilitate the adoption of leanness. This research proposes the use of leading edge intelligent agent simulation to extend the lean principles and techniques to the scheduling of non-repetitive production environments with functional layouts and no prior reconfiguration of any form. The simulated system is a dynamic job-shop with stochastic order arrivals and processing times operating under a variety of dispatching rules. The modelled job-shop is subject to uncertainty expressed in the form of high priority orders unexpectedly arriving at the system, order cancellations and machine breakdowns. The effect of the various forms of the stochastic disruptions considered in this study on system performance prior and post the introduction of leanness is analysed in terms of a number of time, due date and work-in-progress related performance metrics

The boomerang returns? Accounting for the impact of uncertainties on the dynamics of remanufacturing systems

Recent years have witnessed companies abandon traditional open-loop supply chain structures in favour of closed-loop variants, in a bid to mitigate environmental impacts and exploit economic opportunities. Central to the closed-loop paradigm is remanufacturing: the restoration of used products to useful life. While this operational model has huge potential to extend product life-cycles, the collection and recovery processes diminish the effectiveness of existing control mechanisms for open-loop systems. We systematically review the literature in the field of closed-loop supply chain dynamics, which explores the time-varying interactions of material and information flows in the different elements of remanufacturing supply chains. We supplement this with further reviews of what we call the three ‘pillars’ of such systems, i.e. forecasting, collection, and inventory and production control. This provides us with an interdisciplinary lens to investigate how a ‘boomerang’ effect (i.e. sale, consumption, and return processes) impacts on the behaviour of the closed-loop system and to understand how it can be controlled. To facilitate this, we contrast closed-loop supply chain dynamics research to the well-developed research in each pillar; explore how different disciplines have accommodated the supply, process, demand, and control uncertainties; and provide insights for future research on the dynamics of remanufacturing systems

Innovation, competition and public procurement in the pre-commercial phase

Should the supply or the demand side bear the risk connected to innovation? The two polar cases identified in the literature are the supply push and the demand pull. The former is the typical one, with the supplier bearing the costs and obtaining the benefits from innovating. The latter is technology procurement, where the buyer takes the risk, by procuring the innovative good or service. With respect to this, pre-commercial procurement is a peculiar solution that can explain the debate found in the literature relative to its configuration either as a supply-side or a demand-side instrument. The separation from the commercial phase allows the procurer to take only (part of) the risks connected to R&D services. Also, competition among suppliers gives the opportunity of evaluating different solutions and to obtain, in the commercial phase, a lower price for the innovative good. The counterpart of all this is a large portion of risk being left to the supplier. As a consequence, suppliers need to obtain a larger share of the benefits of the innovation process. This economic reason, besides the legal restrictions on State aid, explains the need for a shared risks-shared benefits approach, centred on the agreements on the assignment of IPRs

End-of-Life Inventory Problem with Phase-out Returns

We consider the service parts end-of-life inventory problem of a capital goods manufacturer in the final phase of its life cycle. The final phase starts as soon as the production of parts terminates and continues until the last service contract expires. Final order quantities are considered a popular tactic to sustain service fulfillment obligations and to mitigate the effect of obsolescence. In addition to the final order quantity, other sources to obtain serviceable parts are repairing returned defective items and retrieving parts from phase-out returns. Phase-out returns happen when a customer replaces an old system platform with a next generation one and returns the old product to the original equipment manufacturer (OEM). These returns can well serve the demand for service parts of other customers still using the old generation of the product. In this paper, we study the decision-making complications stemming from phase-out occurrence. We use a finite horizon Markov decision process to characterize the structure of the optimal inventory control policy. We show that the optimal policy consists of a time varying threshold level for item repair. Furthermore, we study the value of phase-out information by extending the results to cases with an uncertain phase-out quantity or an uncertain schedule. Numerical analysis sheds light on the advantages of the optimal policy compared to some heuristic policies.spare parts;end-of-life inventory management;phase-out returns

Fuzzy goal programming for material requirements planning under uncertainty and integrity conditions

"This is an Accepted Manuscript of an article published in International Journal of Production Research on December 2014, available online: http://www.tandfonline.com/10.1080/00207543.2014.920115."In this paper, we formulate the material requirements planning) problem of a first-tier supplier in an automobile supply chain through a fuzzy multi-objective decision model, which considers three conflictive objectives to optimise: minimisation of normal, overtime and subcontracted production costs of finished goods plus the inventory costs of finished goods, raw materials and components; minimisation of idle time; minimisation of backorder quantities. Lack of knowledge or epistemic uncertainty is considered in the demand, available and required capacity data. Integrity conditions for the main decision variables of the problem are also considered. For the solution methodology, we use a fuzzy goal programming approach where the importance of the relations among the goals is considered fuzzy instead of using a crisp definition of goal weights. For illustration purposes, an example based on modifications of real-world industrial problems is used.This work has been funded by the Universitat Politecnica de Valencia Project: 'Material Requirements Planning Fourth Generation (MRPIV)' (Ref. PAID-05-12).Díaz-Madroñero Boluda, FM.; Mula, J.; Jiménez, M. (2014). Fuzzy goal programming for material requirements planning under uncertainty and integrity conditions. International Journal of Production Research. 52(23):6971-6988. doi:10.1080/00207543.2014.920115S697169885223Aköz, O., & Petrovic, D. (2007). A fuzzy goal programming method with imprecise goal hierarchy. European Journal of Operational Research, 181(3), 1427-1433. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2005.11.049Alfieri, A., & Matta, A. (2010). Mathematical programming representation of pull controlled single-product serial manufacturing systems. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 23(1), 23-35. doi:10.1007/s10845-009-0371-xAloulou, M. A., Dolgui, A., & Kovalyov, M. Y. (2013). A bibliography of non-deterministic lot-sizing models. International Journal of Production Research, 52(8), 2293-2310. doi:10.1080/00207543.2013.855336Barba-Gutiérrez, Y., & Adenso-Díaz, B. (2009). Reverse MRP under uncertain and imprecise demand. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 40(3-4), 413-424. doi:10.1007/s00170-007-1351-yBookbinder, J. H., McAuley, P. T., & Schulte, J. (1989). Inventory and Transportation Planning in the Distribution of Fine Papers. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 40(2), 155-166. doi:10.1057/jors.1989.20Chiang, W. K., & Feng, Y. (2007). The value of information sharing in the presence of supply uncertainty and demand volatility. International Journal of Production Research, 45(6), 1429-1447. doi:10.1080/00207540600634949Díaz-Madroñero, M., Mula, J., & Jiménez, M. (2013). A Modified Approach Based on Ranking Fuzzy Numbers for Fuzzy Integer Programming with Equality Constraints. Annals of Industrial Engineering 2012, 225-233. doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-5349-8_27DOLGUI, A., BEN AMMAR, O., HNAIEN, F., & LOULY, M. A. O. (2013). A State of the Art on Supply Planning and Inventory Control under Lead Time Uncertainty. Studies in Informatics and Control, 22(3). doi:10.24846/v22i3y201302Dubois, D. (2011). The role of fuzzy sets in decision sciences: Old techniques and new directions. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 184(1), 3-28. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2011.06.003Grabot, B., Geneste, L., Reynoso-Castillo, G., & V�rot, S. (2005). Integration of uncertain and imprecise orders in the MRP method. Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, 16(2), 215-234. doi:10.1007/s10845-004-5890-xGuillaume, R., Thierry, C., & Grabot, B. (2010). Modelling of ill-known requirements and integration in production planning. Production Planning & Control, 22(4), 336-352. doi:10.1080/09537281003800900Heilpern, S. (1992). The expected value of a fuzzy number. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 47(1), 81-86. doi:10.1016/0165-0114(92)90062-9Hnaien, F., Dolgui, A., & Ould Louly, M.-A. (2008). Planned lead time optimization in material requirement planning environment for multilevel production systems. Journal of Systems Science and Systems Engineering, 17(2), 132-155. doi:10.1007/s11518-008-5072-zHung, Y.-F., & Chang, C.-B. (1999). Determining safety stocks for production planning in uncertain manufacturing. International Journal of Production Economics, 58(2), 199-208. doi:10.1016/s0925-5273(98)00124-8Inderfurth, K. (2009). How to protect against demand and yield risks in MRP systems. International Journal of Production Economics, 121(2), 474-481. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2007.02.005JIMÉNEZ, M. (1996). RANKING FUZZY NUMBERS THROUGH THE COMPARISON OF ITS EXPECTED INTERVALS. International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems, 04(04), 379-388. doi:10.1142/s0218488596000226Jiménez, M., Arenas, M., Bilbao, A., & Rodrı´guez, M. V. (2007). Linear programming with fuzzy parameters: An interactive method resolution. European Journal of Operational Research, 177(3), 1599-1609. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2005.10.002Jones, D. (2011). A practical weight sensitivity algorithm for goal and multiple objective programming. European Journal of Operational Research, 213(1), 238-245. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2011.03.012Lage Junior, M., & Godinho Filho, M. (2010). Variations of the kanban system: Literature review and classification. International Journal of Production Economics, 125(1), 13-21. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.01.009Jung, J. Y., Blau, G., Pekny, J. F., Reklaitis, G. V., & Eversdyk, D. (2004). A simulation based optimization approach to supply chain management under demand uncertainty. Computers & Chemical Engineering, 28(10), 2087-2106. doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2004.06.006Koh, S. C. L. (2004). MRP-controlled batch-manufacturing environment under uncertainty. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 55(3), 219-232. doi:10.1057/palgrave.jors.2601710Lai, Y.-J., & Hwang, C.-L. (1993). Possibilistic linear programming for managing interest rate risk. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 54(2), 135-146. doi:10.1016/0165-0114(93)90271-iLee, H. L., & Billington, C. (1993). Material Management in Decentralized Supply Chains. Operations Research, 41(5), 835-847. doi:10.1287/opre.41.5.835Lee, Y. H., Kim, S. H., & Moon, C. (2002). Production-distribution planning in supply chain using a hybrid approach. Production Planning & Control, 13(1), 35-46. doi:10.1080/09537280110061566Li, X., Zhang, B., & Li, H. (2006). Computing efficient solutions to fuzzy multiple objective linear programming problems. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 157(10), 1328-1332. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2005.12.003Louly, M.-A., & Dolgui, A. (2011). Optimal time phasing and periodicity for MRP with POQ policy. International Journal of Production Economics, 131(1), 76-86. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2010.04.042Louly, M. A., Dolgui, A., & Hnaien, F. (2008). Optimal supply planning in MRP environments for assembly systems with random component procurement times. International Journal of Production Research, 46(19), 5441-5467. doi:10.1080/00207540802273827Mohapatra, P., Benyoucef, L., & Tiwari, M. K. (2013). Integration of process planning and scheduling through adaptive setup planning: a multi-objective approach. International Journal of Production Research, 51(23-24), 7190-7208. doi:10.1080/00207543.2013.853890Mula, J., & Díaz-Madroñero, M. (2012). Solution Approaches for Material Requirement Planning* with Fuzzy Costs. Industrial Engineering: Innovative Networks, 349-357. doi:10.1007/978-1-4471-2321-7_39Mula, J., Poler, R., & García, J. P. (2006). Evaluación de Sistemas para la Planificación y Control de la Producción/[title] [title language=en]Evaluation of Production Planning and Control Systems. Información tecnológica, 17(1). doi:10.4067/s0718-07642006000100004Mula, J., Poler, R., & Garcia, J. P. (2006). MRP with flexible constraints: A fuzzy mathematical programming approach. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 157(1), 74-97. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2005.05.045Mula, J., Poler, R., & Garcia-Sabater, J. P. (2008). Capacity and material requirement planning modelling by comparing deterministic and fuzzy models. International Journal of Production Research, 46(20), 5589-5606. doi:10.1080/00207540701413912Mula, J., Poler, R., & Garcia-Sabater, J. P. (2007). Material Requirement Planning with fuzzy constraints and fuzzy coefficients. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 158(7), 783-793. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2006.11.003Mula, J., Poler, R., García-Sabater, J. P., & Lario, F. C. (2006). Models for production planning under uncertainty: A review. International Journal of Production Economics, 103(1), 271-285. doi:10.1016/j.ijpe.2005.09.001Noori, S., Feylizadeh, M. R., Bagherpour, M., Zorriassatine, F., & Parkin, R. M. (2008). Optimization of material requirement planning by fuzzy multi-objective linear programming. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part B: Journal of Engineering Manufacture, 222(7), 887-900. doi:10.1243/09544054jem1014Olhager, J. (2013). Evolution of operations planning and control: from production to supply chains. International Journal of Production Research, 51(23-24), 6836-6843. doi:10.1080/00207543.2012.761363Peidro, D., Mula, J., Alemany, M. M. E., & Lario, F.-C. (2012). Fuzzy multi-objective optimisation for master planning in a ceramic supply chain. International Journal of Production Research, 50(11), 3011-3020. doi:10.1080/00207543.2011.588267Peidro, D., Mula, J., Jiménez, M., & del Mar Botella, M. (2010). A fuzzy linear programming based approach for tactical supply chain planning in an uncertainty environment. European Journal of Operational Research, 205(1), 65-80. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2009.11.031Peidro, D., Mula, J., Poler, R., & Lario, F.-C. (2008). Quantitative models for supply chain planning under uncertainty: a review. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 43(3-4), 400-420. doi:10.1007/s00170-008-1715-yPeidro, D., Mula, J., Poler, R., & Verdegay, J.-L. (2009). Fuzzy optimization for supply chain planning under supply, demand and process uncertainties. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 160(18), 2640-2657. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2009.02.021Sabri, E. H., & Beamon, B. M. (2000). A multi-objective approach to simultaneous strategic and operational planning in supply chain design. Omega, 28(5), 581-598. doi:10.1016/s0305-0483(99)00080-8Selim, H., & Ozkarahan, I. (2006). A supply chain distribution network design model: An interactive fuzzy goal programming-based solution approach. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 36(3-4), 401-418. doi:10.1007/s00170-006-0842-6Suwanruji, P., & Enns, S. T. (2006). Evaluating the effects of capacity constraints and demand patterns on supply chain replenishment strategies. International Journal of Production Research, 44(21), 4607-4629. doi:10.1080/00207540500494527Torabi, S. A., & Hassini, E. (2008). An interactive possibilistic programming approach for multiple objective supply chain master planning. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 159(2), 193-214. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2007.08.010Torabi, S. A., & Moghaddam, M. (2012). Multi-site integrated production-distribution planning with trans-shipment: a fuzzy goal programming approach. International Journal of Production Research, 50(6), 1726-1748. doi:10.1080/00207543.2011.560907Zimmermann, H.-J. (1978). Fuzzy programming and linear programming with several objective functions. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1(1), 45-55. doi:10.1016/0165-0114(78)90031-

Optimization Versus Robustness in Simulation: A Practical Methodology, With a Production-Management Case-Study

Whereas Operations Research has always paid much attention to optimization, practitioners judge the robustness of the 'optimum' solution to be of greater importance.Therefore this paper proposes a practical methodology that is a stagewise combination of the following four proven techniques: (1) discrete-event simulation, (2) heuristic optimization, (3) risk or uncertainty analysis, and (4) bootstrapping.This methodology is illustrated through a case study on production control systems.That study defines robustness as the system's capability to maintain a short-term service measure, in a variety of environments (scenarios).More precisely, this measure is the probability of the short-term fill rate remaining within a prespecified range.Besides satisfying this probabilistic constraint, the system should minimize long-term work-in-process.Actually, the case study compares four systems: Kanban, Conwip, Hybrid, and Generic.These systems are studied for a well-known example, namely a production line with four stations and a single product.The conclusion of this case study is that Hybrid is best when risk is not ignored, but otherwise Generic is best: risk considerations do make a difference.simulation;experimental design;statistical methods;optimization;risk analysis;bootstrap;production control;robustness

Performance optimization of a leagility inspired supply chain model: a CFGTSA algorithm based approach

Lean and agile principles have attracted considerable interest in the past few decades. Industrial sectors throughout the world are upgrading to these principles to enhance their performance, since they have been proven to be efficient in handling supply chains. However, the present market trend demands a more robust strategy incorporating the salient features of both lean and agile principles. Inspired by these, the leagility principle has emerged, encapsulating both lean and agile features. The present work proposes a leagile supply chain based model for manufacturing industries. The paper emphasizes the various aspects of leagile supply chain modeling and implementation and proposes a new Hybrid Chaos-based Fast Genetic Tabu Simulated Annealing (CFGTSA) algorithm to solve the complex scheduling problem prevailing in the leagile environment. The proposed CFGTSA algorithm is compared with the GA, SA, TS and Hybrid Tabu SA algorithms to demonstrate its efficacy in handling complex scheduling problems