ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Capacity choice, work-in-progress inventory and throughput: a simulation study
Full text PdfPdf (408 KB)
Source Winter Simulation Conference archive
Proceedings of the 20th conference on Winter simulation table of contents
San Diego, California, United States
Pages: 662 - 666  
Year of Publication: 1988
ISBN:0-911801-42-1
Authors
G. G. Hegde  Katz G.S.B., University of Pittsburgh
Sunder Kekre  Graduate School of Ind. Admn., Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh
K. Ramanurthy  Katz G.S.B., University of Pittsburgh
P. R. Tadikamalla  Katz G.S.B., University of Pittsburgh
Sponsors
ORS : Orthopaedic Research Society
SIGSIM: ACM Special Interest Group on Simulation and Modeling
TIMS :
IEEE-CS : Computer Society
IEEE-SMCS : Systems, Man & Cybernetics Society
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 9,   Downloads (12 Months): 20,   Citation Count: 1
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/318123.318292
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

We investigate in this paper alternative configuration choices of serial assembly lines. In particular, we analyze the impact on throughput and work-in-process inventory levels from several design choices. These are the number of work-stations, tasks allocated to various stations and buffers between workstations. A simulation model is used to evaluate the sensitivity of various designs to variability in the operating environment arising due to process time variations (operator variability) as well as variations due to breakdowns and repair (machine variability). Insights of the tradeoffs for making capital investment and setting operating policies are also discussed.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
Buzacott, J. A. (1967). Automatic Transfer Lines with Buffer Stocks. international Journal of Production Research 5, 184.
 
2
Chow, We-rain (~987). Buffer Capacity Analysis for Sequential Production Lines with Variable Process Times. International Journal of Production Research 25, 1183-1196.
 
3
 
4
Hackman, J. R. and Oldham, G. R. (1980). Work Redesign. Addision Wesley, Reading, MA.
 
5
Lyama, T. and Ito, S. (1987). The Maximum Production Rate for an Unbalanced Multi-Server Flow Line System with Finite Buffer Storage. International Journal of Production Research 25, 1157-1170.
 
6
JoneJa, D., Maxwell, W. L. (1986). Buffer Placement in Sequential Production Lines: Issues of Processing Time Variability, Tech. Report 700, SURIE, Cornell University.
 
7
Karmarkar, U. S. and Kekre, S. (1987). Manufacturing Configuration, Capacity and Mix Considering Operational Costs. Journal of Manufacturing Systems 6, 315~324.
 
8
Hillier, F. S. and Boiling, R. N. (1966). The Effect of Some Design Factors on the Efficiency of Production Lines with Variable Operations. Journal of Industrial Engineering 17, 651-658.
 
9
Rao, N. P. (1975). Two Stage Production Systems with Internal Storage. AITE Transactions 7, 4~4-221.
 
10
Rao, N. ~. (1985}. A Viable Alternative to the Method of Stages Solution of Series Production Systems with Erlang Services Times. International Journal of Production Research 14, 699-702.


Collaborative Colleagues:
G. G. Hegde: colleagues
Sunder Kekre: colleagues
K. Ramanurthy: colleagues
P. R. Tadikamalla: colleagues