2000
DOI: 10.1016/s0925-5273(99)00060-2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance evaluation and design of a CONWIP system with inspections

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0
2

Year Published

2006
2006
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
6
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…(See, for example, Berkley (1992) for a survey paper on Kanban, and Framinan et al (2003) for a survey paper on CONWIP. Also, see for example, Spearman et al (1990), Roof (1998), Huang et al (1998), Duri et al (2000b), Framinan et al (2000), Zhang and Chen (2001), Ip et al (2007), Yildiz and Tunali (2008) on the application of CONWIP in manufacturing systems, and Hopp and Spearman (1991), Duenyas andHopp (1992, 1993), Duenyas (1994), and Hazra and Seidmann (1996) for its application in assembly operations.) Sato and Khojasteh-Ghamari (2012) developed an integrated framework for analyzing performance of card-based production control mechanisms using the theory of token transaction systems.…”
Section: A Review On Pull Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…(See, for example, Berkley (1992) for a survey paper on Kanban, and Framinan et al (2003) for a survey paper on CONWIP. Also, see for example, Spearman et al (1990), Roof (1998), Huang et al (1998), Duri et al (2000b), Framinan et al (2000), Zhang and Chen (2001), Ip et al (2007), Yildiz and Tunali (2008) on the application of CONWIP in manufacturing systems, and Hopp and Spearman (1991), Duenyas andHopp (1992, 1993), Duenyas (1994), and Hazra and Seidmann (1996) for its application in assembly operations.) Sato and Khojasteh-Ghamari (2012) developed an integrated framework for analyzing performance of card-based production control mechanisms using the theory of token transaction systems.…”
Section: A Review On Pull Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The performance measures used were short-term profit and production rate. Duri et al [13] established an analytical method for evaluating the performance of CONWIP systems. This method involved inspecting a saturated system and a system with external demands by evaluating the throughput, average finished parts, and utilization rate of a station.…”
Section: Conwipmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Other studies of CONWIP simulate a whole supply chain, such as the works by Rubiano Ovalle and Crespo Marquez (2003), Özbayrak et al (2006), Pettersen & Segestedt (2009), or even extend the use of CONWIP to Project Management (Anavi-Isakow & Golany, 2003). Some papers also evaluate performances of CONWIP by studying card setting and control (Framinan et al, 2006;Renna, 2010;Braglia et al, 2011) or simulate a simple production system (Huang et al, 1998;Duri et al, 2000). However, though most of the papers claim that CONWIP is superior to both MRP and JIT (Roderick et al, 1994;Huang et al, 1998;Pettersen & Segerstedt, 2009), all the previously mentioned studies suffer from one specific limitation: they fail to address the integration of CONWIP into the shop floor of a real complex firm.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%