American Institute of Mathematical Sciences

July  2017, 13(3): 1511-1535. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2017005

Stochastic machine breakdown and discrete delivery in an imperfect inventory-production system

 1 School of Industrial Engineering, College of Engineering, University of Tehran, Tehran, 14155-6619, Iran 2 Department of Industrial Engineering, Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, 145888-9694, Iran 3 Department of Industrial & Management Engineering, Hanyang University, Ansan Gyeonggi-do, 15588, South Korea

* Corresponding author: bsbiswajitsarkar@gmail.com (Biswajit Sarkar), Phone Number-+82-10-7498-1981, Office Phone: +82-31-400-5259, Fax: +82-31-436-8146

Received  July 2015 Published  December 2016

In this paper, we develop an integrated inventory model to determine the optimal lot size and production uptime while considering stochastic machine breakdown and multiple shipments for a single-buyer and single-vendor. Machine breakdown cannot be controlled by the production house. Thus, we assume it as stochastic, not constant. Moreover, we assume that the manufacturing process produces defective items. When a breakdown takes place, the production system follows a no resumption policy. Some defective products cannot be reworked and are discarded from the system. To prevent shortages, we consider safety stock. The model assumes that both batch quantity and the distance between two shipments are identical and that the transportation cost is paid by the buyer. We prove the convexity of the total cost function and derive the closed-form solutions for decision variables analytically. To obtain the optimal production uptime, we determine both the lower and upper bounds for the optimal production uptime using a bisection searching algorithm. To illustrate the applicability of the proposed model, we provided a numerical example and sensitivity analysis.

Citation: Ata Allah Taleizadeh, Hadi Samimi, Biswajit Sarkar, Babak Mohammadi. Stochastic machine breakdown and discrete delivery in an imperfect inventory-production system. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (3) : 1511-1535. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2017005
References:

show all references

References:
The vendors on-hand inventory of perfect-quality items in our EPQ model when machine breakdown does not occur
The vendors on-hand inventory of defective items when machine breakdown does not occur
The buyers inventory level when machine breakdown does not occur
The vendors on-hand inventory of perfect-quality items in our EPQ model when machine breakdown occurs
The vendors on-hand inventory of defective items when machine breakdown occurs
The buyers inventory level when machine breakdown occurs
The behavior of $E[TCU(t_1,q)]$ with respect to $t_1$
The behavior of $E[TCU(t_1,q)]$ with respect to $\frac{1}{\beta}$
The behavior of $E[TCU(t_1,q)]$ with respect to $q$
Sensitivity analysis of $t^{*}_{1}$ for various parameter values
Sensitivity analysis of $q^*$ for various parameter values
 Decision variables $t_1$ production uptime when a breakdown does not occur (year). $q$ shipment quantity (units/delivery). Parameters $A$ setup cost of vendor (＄/setup). $C$ production cost of vendor (＄/unit). $C_s$ disposal cost of vendor (＄/unit). $h$ holding cost of vendor (＄/unit/year). $h_1$ holding cost for defective units of vendor (＄/defective unit/year). $C_t$ transportation cost of buyer (＄/delivery). $D$ demand rate of buyer (units/year). $A_1$ ordering cost of buyer (＄/order). $h_2$ holding cost of buyer (＄/unit/year). $H_1$ maximum level of on-hand inventory when machine breakdown does not occur (units). $H_2$ maximum level of on-hand inventory when machine breakdown occurs (units). $M$ machine repair time (time unit). $n$ number of shipments delivered during a cycle when machine breakdown does not occur. $P$ production rate (units/year). $T$ cycle length when breakdown does not occur (year). $T'$ cycle length when breakdown occurs (year). $T_U$ cycle length for integrated case (year). $t$ production time before a random breakdown occurs (year). $t_d$ time required to deplete all available perfect-quality items when machine breakdown does not occur (year). $t'_{d}$ time required to deplete all available perfect-quality items when machine breakdown occurs (year). $t_r$ machine repair time (year). $TC(t,q)$ total inventory costs per cycle when machine breakdown occurs (＄/cycle). $TC(t_1,q)$ total inventory costs per cycle when machine breakdown does not occur (＄/cycle). $TCU(t_1,q)$ total inventory costs per unit time for integrated case (＄/year).
 Decision variables $t_1$ production uptime when a breakdown does not occur (year). $q$ shipment quantity (units/delivery). Parameters $A$ setup cost of vendor (＄/setup). $C$ production cost of vendor (＄/unit). $C_s$ disposal cost of vendor (＄/unit). $h$ holding cost of vendor (＄/unit/year). $h_1$ holding cost for defective units of vendor (＄/defective unit/year). $C_t$ transportation cost of buyer (＄/delivery). $D$ demand rate of buyer (units/year). $A_1$ ordering cost of buyer (＄/order). $h_2$ holding cost of buyer (＄/unit/year). $H_1$ maximum level of on-hand inventory when machine breakdown does not occur (units). $H_2$ maximum level of on-hand inventory when machine breakdown occurs (units). $M$ machine repair time (time unit). $n$ number of shipments delivered during a cycle when machine breakdown does not occur. $P$ production rate (units/year). $T$ cycle length when breakdown does not occur (year). $T'$ cycle length when breakdown occurs (year). $T_U$ cycle length for integrated case (year). $t$ production time before a random breakdown occurs (year). $t_d$ time required to deplete all available perfect-quality items when machine breakdown does not occur (year). $t'_{d}$ time required to deplete all available perfect-quality items when machine breakdown occurs (year). $t_r$ machine repair time (year). $TC(t,q)$ total inventory costs per cycle when machine breakdown occurs (＄/cycle). $TC(t_1,q)$ total inventory costs per cycle when machine breakdown does not occur (＄/cycle). $TCU(t_1,q)$ total inventory costs per unit time for integrated case (＄/year).
Variations of $\beta$ effects on $t^{*}_{1L}$, $w(t^{*}_{1L})$, $t^{*}_{1U}$, and $w(t^{*}_{1U})$
 $\beta$ $\beta^{-1}$ $t^{*}_{1L}$ $w(t^{*}_{1L})$ $t^{*}_{1U}$ $w(t^{*}_{1U})$ 0.1 10 0.398635 0.406528006 0.402628 0.410519 0.2 5 0.398597 0.414274 0.40662 0.422284 0.3 3.33 0.398559 0.421913 0.410651 0.43396 0.4 2.5 0.398521 0.429443 0.41472 0.445535 0.5 2 0.398483 0.436868 0.418826 0.456999 1 1 0.398294 0.472429 0.439923 0.512281 1.1 0.909 0.398256 0.479241 0.444254 0.522854 1.2 0.833 0.398218 0.485956 0.448623 0.533239 1.3 0.769 0.39818 0.492577 0.453028 0.543428 1.4 0.714 0.398142 0.499106 0.45747 0.553411 1.5 0.667 0.398104 0.505546 0.461949 0.563177 2 0.5 0.397915 0.5365 0.484882 0.608482 3 0.333 0.397538 0.593332 0.533358 0.679759 4 0.25 0.397161 0.645899 0.585075 0.727634 5 0.2 0.396786 0.696877 0.639708 0.762221 6 0.167 0.396412 0.748207 0.69691 0.794729 7 0.142 0.396038 0.801053 0.756338 0.831822 8 0.125 0.395666 0.855961 0.817668 0.875487 9 0.111 0.395295 0.913066 0.880606 0.925223 10 0.1 0.394925 0.972266 0.944891 0.979797
 $\beta$ $\beta^{-1}$ $t^{*}_{1L}$ $w(t^{*}_{1L})$ $t^{*}_{1U}$ $w(t^{*}_{1U})$ 0.1 10 0.398635 0.406528006 0.402628 0.410519 0.2 5 0.398597 0.414274 0.40662 0.422284 0.3 3.33 0.398559 0.421913 0.410651 0.43396 0.4 2.5 0.398521 0.429443 0.41472 0.445535 0.5 2 0.398483 0.436868 0.418826 0.456999 1 1 0.398294 0.472429 0.439923 0.512281 1.1 0.909 0.398256 0.479241 0.444254 0.522854 1.2 0.833 0.398218 0.485956 0.448623 0.533239 1.3 0.769 0.39818 0.492577 0.453028 0.543428 1.4 0.714 0.398142 0.499106 0.45747 0.553411 1.5 0.667 0.398104 0.505546 0.461949 0.563177 2 0.5 0.397915 0.5365 0.484882 0.608482 3 0.333 0.397538 0.593332 0.533358 0.679759 4 0.25 0.397161 0.645899 0.585075 0.727634 5 0.2 0.396786 0.696877 0.639708 0.762221 6 0.167 0.396412 0.748207 0.69691 0.794729 7 0.142 0.396038 0.801053 0.756338 0.831822 8 0.125 0.395666 0.855961 0.817668 0.875487 9 0.111 0.395295 0.913066 0.880606 0.925223 10 0.1 0.394925 0.972266 0.944891 0.979797
Sensitivity analysis of $t^{*}_{1}$, $q^{*}$, and $E[TCU(t^{*}_{1},q^{*})]$ for various parameter values
 Rate of $q^{*}$ $t^{*}_{1}$ $E[TCU(t^{*}_{1},q^{*})]$ Rate of $q^{*}$ $t^{*}_{1}$ $E[TCU(t^{*}_{1},q^{*})]$ A change h change -0.3 730.29 0.3613 11485.71 -0.3 778.49 0.4845 11382.55 -0.2 730.29 0.3789 11544.89 -0.2 761.38 0.4564 11477.72 -0.1 730.29 0.3985 11601.68 -0.1 745.35 0.4326 11568.80 0 730.29 0.4121 11656.35 0 730.29 0.4121 11656.35 0.1 730.29 0.4278 11709.14 0.1 716.11 0.3943 11740.79 0.2 730.29 0.4431 11760.24 0.2 702.72 0.3786 11822.47 0.3 730.29 0.4578 11809.83 0.3 690.06 0.3646 11901.69 $h_2$ -0.3 806.47 0.4121 11552.87 $\beta$ -0.3 730.29 0.40802 11608.71 -0.2 778.49 0.4121 11588.52 -0.2 730.29 0.40939 11624.56 -0.1 753.24 0.4121 11622.97 -0.1 730.29 0.41077 11640.44 0 730.29 0.4121 11656.35 0 730.29 0.41216 11656.35 0.1 709.32 0.4121 11688.73 0.1 730.29 0.41356 11672.29 0.2 690.06 0.4121 11720.21 0.2 730.29 0.41497 11688.26 0.3 672.29 0.4121 11750.86 0.3 730.29 0.41639 11704.27 $C_t$ -0.3 730.29 0.4121 11477.42 $t_r$ -0.3 730.29 0.41222 11643.20 -0.2 730.29 0.4121 11540.70 -0.2 730.29 0.41220 11647.58 -0.1 730.29 0.4121 11600.13 -0.1 730.29 0.41218 11651.96 0 730.29 0.4121 11656.35 0 730.29 0.41216 11656.35 0.1 730.29 0.4121 11709.81 0.1 730.29 0.41214 11660.73 0.2 730.29 0.4121 11760.90 0.2 730.29 0.41212 11665.11 0.3 730.29 0.4121 11809.90 0.3 730.29 0.41210 11669.50 P -0.3 730.29 0.7005 11590.45 D -0.3 611.01 0.31465 8589.613 -0.2 730.29 0.5664 11537.73 -0.2 653.19 0.34625 9625.374 -0.1 730.29 0.4767 11628.08 -0.1 692.82 0.37862 10647.10 0 730.29 0.4121 11656.35 0 730.29 0.41216 11656.35 0.1 730.29 0.3633 11678.38 0.1 765.94 0.44731 12654.21 0.2 730.29 0.3249 11696.05 0.2 800.00 0.48453 13641.47 0.3 730.29 0.2940 11710.54 0.3 832.66 0.52439 14618.68
 Rate of $q^{*}$ $t^{*}_{1}$ $E[TCU(t^{*}_{1},q^{*})]$ Rate of $q^{*}$ $t^{*}_{1}$ $E[TCU(t^{*}_{1},q^{*})]$ A change h change -0.3 730.29 0.3613 11485.71 -0.3 778.49 0.4845 11382.55 -0.2 730.29 0.3789 11544.89 -0.2 761.38 0.4564 11477.72 -0.1 730.29 0.3985 11601.68 -0.1 745.35 0.4326 11568.80 0 730.29 0.4121 11656.35 0 730.29 0.4121 11656.35 0.1 730.29 0.4278 11709.14 0.1 716.11 0.3943 11740.79 0.2 730.29 0.4431 11760.24 0.2 702.72 0.3786 11822.47 0.3 730.29 0.4578 11809.83 0.3 690.06 0.3646 11901.69 $h_2$ -0.3 806.47 0.4121 11552.87 $\beta$ -0.3 730.29 0.40802 11608.71 -0.2 778.49 0.4121 11588.52 -0.2 730.29 0.40939 11624.56 -0.1 753.24 0.4121 11622.97 -0.1 730.29 0.41077 11640.44 0 730.29 0.4121 11656.35 0 730.29 0.41216 11656.35 0.1 709.32 0.4121 11688.73 0.1 730.29 0.41356 11672.29 0.2 690.06 0.4121 11720.21 0.2 730.29 0.41497 11688.26 0.3 672.29 0.4121 11750.86 0.3 730.29 0.41639 11704.27 $C_t$ -0.3 730.29 0.4121 11477.42 $t_r$ -0.3 730.29 0.41222 11643.20 -0.2 730.29 0.4121 11540.70 -0.2 730.29 0.41220 11647.58 -0.1 730.29 0.4121 11600.13 -0.1 730.29 0.41218 11651.96 0 730.29 0.4121 11656.35 0 730.29 0.41216 11656.35 0.1 730.29 0.4121 11709.81 0.1 730.29 0.41214 11660.73 0.2 730.29 0.4121 11760.90 0.2 730.29 0.41212 11665.11 0.3 730.29 0.4121 11809.90 0.3 730.29 0.41210 11669.50 P -0.3 730.29 0.7005 11590.45 D -0.3 611.01 0.31465 8589.613 -0.2 730.29 0.5664 11537.73 -0.2 653.19 0.34625 9625.374 -0.1 730.29 0.4767 11628.08 -0.1 692.82 0.37862 10647.10 0 730.29 0.4121 11656.35 0 730.29 0.41216 11656.35 0.1 730.29 0.3633 11678.38 0.1 765.94 0.44731 12654.21 0.2 730.29 0.3249 11696.05 0.2 800.00 0.48453 13641.47 0.3 730.29 0.2940 11710.54 0.3 832.66 0.52439 14618.68
 [1] Yiju Wang, Wei Xing, Hengxia Gao. Optimal ordering policy for inventory mechanism with a stochastic short-term price discount. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (5) : 1-16. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018199 [2] Qi Feng, Suresh P. Sethi, Houmin Yan, Hanqin Zhang. Optimality and nonoptimality of the base-stock policy in inventory problems with multiple delivery modes. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2006, 2 (1) : 19-42. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2006.2.19 [3] Chui-Yu Chiu, Ming-Feng Yang, Chung-Jung Tang, Yi Lin. Integrated imperfect production inventory model under permissible delay in payments depending on the order quantity. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2013, 9 (4) : 945-965. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2013.9.945 [4] Magfura Pervin, Sankar Kumar Roy, Gerhard Wilhelm Weber. Multi-item deteriorating two-echelon inventory model with price- and stock-dependent demand: A trade-credit policy. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2019, 15 (3) : 1345-1373. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018098 [5] Ata Allah Taleizadeh, Biswajit Sarkar, Mohammad Hasani. Delayed payment policy in multi-product single-machine economic production quantity model with repair failure and partial backordering. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (5) : 1-24. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2019002 [6] Leiyang Wang, Zhaohui Liu. Heuristics for parallel machine scheduling with batch delivery consideration. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2014, 10 (1) : 259-273. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2014.10.259 [7] Bibhas C. Giri, Bhaba R. Sarker. Coordinating a multi-echelon supply chain under production disruption and price-sensitive stochastic demand. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2019, 15 (4) : 1631-1651. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018115 [8] Biswajit Sarkar, Bimal Kumar Sett, Sumon Sarkar. Optimal production run time and inspection errors in an imperfect production system with warranty. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2018, 14 (1) : 267-282. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2017046 [9] Alain Bensoussan, Sonny Skaaning. Base stock list price policy in continuous time. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - B, 2017, 22 (1) : 1-28. doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2017001 [10] Ganggang Li, Xiwen Lu, Peihai Liu. The coordination of single-machine scheduling with availability constraints and delivery. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2016, 12 (2) : 757-770. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016.12.757 [11] Jiayu Shen, Yuanguo Zhu. An uncertain programming model for single machine scheduling problem with batch delivery. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2019, 15 (2) : 577-593. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018058 [12] Wei Liu, Shiji Song, Cheng Wu. Single-period inventory model with discrete stochastic demand based on prospect theory. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2012, 8 (3) : 577-590. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2012.8.577 [13] Xiaolin Xu, Xiaoqiang Cai. Price and delivery-time competition of perishable products: Existence and uniqueness of Nash equilibrium. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2008, 4 (4) : 843-859. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2008.4.843 [14] Shichen Zhang, Jianxiong Zhang, Jiang Shen, Wansheng Tang. A joint dynamic pricing and production model with asymmetric reference price effect. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2019, 15 (2) : 667-688. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2018064 [15] Alexander O. Brown, Christopher S. Tang. The impact of alternative performance measures on single-period inventory policy. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2006, 2 (3) : 297-318. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2006.2.297 [16] Yunqiang Yin, T. C. E. Cheng, Jianyou Xu, Shuenn-Ren Cheng, Chin-Chia Wu. Single-machine scheduling with past-sequence-dependent delivery times and a linear deterioration. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2013, 9 (2) : 323-339. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2013.9.323 [17] Xiaoming Yan, Ping Cao, Minghui Zhang, Ke Liu. The optimal production and sales policy for a new product with negative word-of-mouth. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2011, 7 (1) : 117-137. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2011.7.117 [18] Dayi He, Xiaoling Chen, Qi Huang. Influences of carbon emission abatement on firms' production policy based on newsboy model. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2017, 13 (1) : 251-265. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016015 [19] Sanjoy Kumar Paul, Ruhul Sarker, Daryl Essam. Managing risk and disruption in production-inventory and supply chain systems: A review. Journal of Industrial & Management Optimization, 2016, 12 (3) : 1009-1029. doi: 10.3934/jimo.2016.12.1009 [20] Mathias Staudigl, Jan-Henrik Steg. On repeated games with imperfect public monitoring: From discrete to continuous time. Journal of Dynamics & Games, 2017, 4 (1) : 1-23. doi: 10.3934/jdg.2017001

2018 Impact Factor: 1.025