IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v28y1982i11p1341-1349.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Note---On the Optimality of Integer Lot Size Ratios in "Economic Lot Size Determination in Multi-Stage Assembly Systems"

Author

Listed:
  • Jack F. Williams

    (University of Wyoming)

Abstract

The proof of a well known theorem by Crowston and Wagner in Crowston, Wagner, and Williams (Crowston, W. B., M. H. Wagner, J. F., Williams. 1973. Economic lot size determination in multi-stage assembly systems. Management Sci. 19 (5, January) 517--527.) is shown here to be defective. According to this theorem, an optimal solution to the batch size determination problem for multi-echelon production/inventory assembly structures is characterized by a set of lot sizes, such that the lot size at each stage must be an integer multiple of the lot size at its successor stage. The theorem has been said to apply to uncapacitated assembly systems having constant final product demand over an infinite horizon, with no backlogs or lost sales permitted, where lot sizes must be rational numbers and time invariant. While the theorem supposedly applied to the case of both finite production rates and infinite production rates, the proof dealt only with the case of instantaneous production. Also, the proof implicitly assumed that lots were processed at any given stage only after unchanging spans of time. In this paper we show that with or without this implicit assumption, the theorem does hold true for the special case of instantaneous processing in two-level assembly systems; that is, configurations where there is only one successor stage in the entire system. However, we also show by counterexample that without this implicit assumption, the theorem is invalid for more general assembly structures. Furthermore, in the appendix of this paper we show that the proof is defective at the point where Crowston and Wagner extend their results for two-level systems to more general assembly systems. Thus it is an open question whether or not the theorem is valid for all assembly structures when processing at any given stage must occur only after unchanging spans of time.

Suggested Citation

  • Jack F. Williams, 1982. "Note---On the Optimality of Integer Lot Size Ratios in "Economic Lot Size Determination in Multi-Stage Assembly Systems"," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(11), pages 1341-1349, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:28:y:1982:i:11:p:1341-1349
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.28.11.1341
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.28.11.1341
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.28.11.1341?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Grubbstrom, Robert W., 1995. "Modelling production opportunities -- an historical overview," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1-3), pages 1-14, October.
    2. Beullens, Patrick, 2014. "Revisiting foundations in lot sizing—Connections between Harris, Crowther, Monahan, and Clark," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C), pages 68-81.
    3. Kimms, Alf & Drexl, Andreas, 1996. "Multi-level lot sizing: A literature survey," Manuskripte aus den Instituten für Betriebswirtschaftslehre der Universität Kiel 405, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel, Institut für Betriebswirtschaftslehre.
    4. Kim, DaeSoo, 1999. "Optimal two-stage lot sizing and inventory batching policies," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(3), pages 221-234, January.
    5. Abdul-Jalbar, B. & Gutierrez, J. & Puerto, J. & Sicilia, J., 2003. "Policies for inventory/distribution systems: The effect of centralization vs. decentralization," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 81(1), pages 281-293, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:28:y:1982:i:11:p:1341-1349. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.