Proceedings of the 2014 IEEE Emerging Technology and Factory Automation (ETFA) 2014
DOI: 10.1109/etfa.2014.7005201
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Lead time distribution in unreliable production lines processing perishable products

Abstract: The integrated analysis of quality and production logistics in manufacturing systems has recently attracted increasing interest among researchers and industrialists. It has been shown that several links exist among the manufacturing system design and the product quality, which are dominated by complex dynamic interactions. However, these interactions have never been addressed in manufacturing systems producing perishable products. The quality characteristics of perishable products deteriorate over time. Severa… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
3
2
1

Relationship

2
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 14 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We consider a system in which: i) the first machine has a single failure mode with parameters p 1,1 = 0.01 and r 1,1 = 0.1; ii) the second machine is characterized by three failure modes that occur with probability p 2,1 = 0.01, p 2,2 = p 2,3 = 0.005, and are repaired with probability r 2,1 = 0.1, r 2,2 = 0.05 and r 2,3 = 0.01 respectively; iii) the number of Kanbans is fixed at B = 50 items. As already shown in (Colledani et al, 2014b), under the single stage Kanban control policy (top box of Figure 1) the lead time distribution in a two machine line is characterized by a bi-modal distribution that has peaks at time units 1 and B − 1. The magnitudes of these peaks depend on the difference of the efficiencies of the two machines.…”
Section: Effect Of the Policy On The Lead Time Distributionmentioning
confidence: 87%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We consider a system in which: i) the first machine has a single failure mode with parameters p 1,1 = 0.01 and r 1,1 = 0.1; ii) the second machine is characterized by three failure modes that occur with probability p 2,1 = 0.01, p 2,2 = p 2,3 = 0.005, and are repaired with probability r 2,1 = 0.1, r 2,2 = 0.05 and r 2,3 = 0.01 respectively; iii) the number of Kanbans is fixed at B = 50 items. As already shown in (Colledani et al, 2014b), under the single stage Kanban control policy (top box of Figure 1) the lead time distribution in a two machine line is characterized by a bi-modal distribution that has peaks at time units 1 and B − 1. The magnitudes of these peaks depend on the difference of the efficiencies of the two machines.…”
Section: Effect Of the Policy On The Lead Time Distributionmentioning
confidence: 87%
“…The lead time of a part can be computed following the approach described in Colledani et al (2014b) for lines with machines of general complexity and in Shi and Gershwin (2012) for lines with up-down machines. In this paper we give a brief overview of this approach.…”
Section: Performance Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In other words, knowing the state of the system when a given part enters, we can calculate the probability that it will be ready (exits the system) in a given number of time units. Also in [9] a way to calculate lead time distributions is proposed. In that work however the lead time of a random part is determined assuming no knowledge on the state of the system when the part enters.…”
Section: B Lead Time Of Specific Partsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this paper we consider production line models composed of buffers and unreliable machines with Markov behavior. Building on previous works dealing with the same or similar models (see, e.g., [1], [2], [7]- [9]), in this paper we introduce an integrated framework for formal modeling and performance analysis of such systems. Our proposal is to describe the system with a well-known and widely applied model checking tool called PRISM [13] which allows for specifying the system in terms of a DTMC, expressing and calculating performance indices, and verifying complex temporal properties of the model [11].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%