The effect of push and pull lot splitting approaches on lot traceability and material handling costs in stochastic flow shop environments

Citation
Hv. Kher et al., The effect of push and pull lot splitting approaches on lot traceability and material handling costs in stochastic flow shop environments, INT J PROD, 38(1), 2000, pp. 141-160
Citations number
11
Categorie Soggetti
Engineering Management /General
Journal title
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PRODUCTION RESEARCH
ISSN journal
00207543 → ACNP
Volume
38
Issue
1
Year of publication
2000
Pages
141 - 160
Database
ISI
SICI code
0020-7543(20000110)38:1<141:TEOPAP>2.0.ZU;2-P
Abstract
This study evaluates how the procedures followed in splitting job lots on t he shop floor influence both material handling and lot integrity in stochas tic flow shop environments. Former work has shown that lot splitting improv es flow time and customer service performance, but with an increased number of transfers along with a corresponding increase in material handling cost s. Physical lot integrity. which is important to lot tracing, has not been considered in prior literature. In order to overcome these limitations and address material handling concerns better, we define a new measure of perfo rmance called the lot integrity loss exposure (LILE). We use this and other measures to show that the traditional 'push' approach that has been follow ed in modelling lot splitting complicates lot traceability in the shop and leads to an excessive number of transfers. As an alternative. we propose a 'pull' approach in which an order is split between any successive pair of m achines only on an as-needed basis. The push and pull approaches for lot sp litting are compared under a range of conditions characterized by factors s uch as machine utilization levels within the shop, setup-to-processing time ratios, and number of splits created in job lots. Our results indicate tha t relative to the push approach, pull lot splitting helps significantly in reducing the number of transfers incurred and in maintaining a greater degr ee of physical lot integrity. At the same time, there is no significant dif ference in the two approaches with respect to improvements in flow time and customer service measures. Both the degree to which lot integrity is prese rved, and the extent of savings in material handling that result from using the pull approach, are shown to be most pronounced under conditions charac terized by high machine utilizations rates and setup-to-processing time rat ios. Managerial implications of our study along with further research direc tions in this area are also discussed.