2009
DOI: 10.1080/10170660909509126
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Optimal Jit Production and Delivery Lot Size Model That Considers Vendor Reworking Process and Variable Setup Cost

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
4
2

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Tsou et al (2009) followed the studies of Salameh and Jaber (2000), Chan et al (2003) and Papachristos and Konstantaras (2006) to develop an EPQ model with continuous quality characteristic, rework and reject situations. Chiu and Chang (2009) studied a JIT lot sizing problem with rework and variable setup cost. They showed that the lot size and the rework cost have a direct relation with the fraction of defectives.…”
Section: Rework and Scrapmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tsou et al (2009) followed the studies of Salameh and Jaber (2000), Chan et al (2003) and Papachristos and Konstantaras (2006) to develop an EPQ model with continuous quality characteristic, rework and reject situations. Chiu and Chang (2009) studied a JIT lot sizing problem with rework and variable setup cost. They showed that the lot size and the rework cost have a direct relation with the fraction of defectives.…”
Section: Rework and Scrapmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Van Eijs [6] modified Goyal's model to make method of exhaustion more efficient. The model proposed by Sung & Gong [5] and Chiu & Chang [1] considered defective products. But Sung & Gong [5] did not consider re-working set up cost.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…But Sung & Gong [5] did not consider re-working set up cost. Chiu & Chang [1] ignored the replacement of material when defective products were re-worked. This research modified their models and porposed a new joint replenishment model with consideration of holding cost of material replacement and set up cost of replenishment.…”
Section: Literature Reviewmentioning
confidence: 99%