00 upvotes00 downvotes

3 views11 pagesProduction System With Modeling

Nov 06, 2017

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

Production System With Modeling

© All Rights Reserved

3 views

00 upvotes00 downvotes

Production System With Modeling

© All Rights Reserved

You are on page 1of 11

Publisher: Taylor & Francis

Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,

37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tsys20

modelling and application

a

Jia-Chi Tsou

a

Department of Business Administration , China University of Technology , No. 530, Sector.

3, Jung Shan Road, Hu Kou Township, Hsinchu County 303, Taiwan, ROC

Published online: 08 Jun 2010.

To cite this article: Jia-Chi Tsou (2010) Production system with process quality control: modelling and application,

International Journal of Systems Science, 41:7, 865-874, DOI: 10.1080/00207720903470130

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained

in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no

representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the

Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and

are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and

should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for

any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever

or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of

the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic

reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any

form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://

www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

International Journal of Systems Science

Vol. 41, No. 7, July 2010, 865874

Jia-Chi Tsou*

Department of Business Administration, China University of Technology, No. 530, Sector. 3, Jung Shan Road,

Hu Kou Township, Hsinchu County 303, Taiwan, ROC

(Received 3 June 2008; final version received 29 October 2009)

Over the past decade, there has been a great deal of research dedicated to the study of quality and the economics

of production. In this article, we develop a dynamic model which is based on the hypothesis of a traditional

economic production quantity model. Taguchis cost of poor quality is used to evaluate the cost of poor quality

in the dynamic production system. A practical case from the automotive industry, which uses the Six-sigma

DMAIC methodology, is discussed to verify the proposed model. This study shows that there is an optimal value

Downloaded by [University of Louisville] at 10:58 20 December 2014

of quality investment to make the production system reach a reasonable quality level and minimise the

production cost. Based on our model, the management can adjust its investment in quality improvement to

generate considerable financial return.

Keywords: Taguchi cost function; six-sigma; economics of production

Product quality is a major concern in todays modern tity model. Hong, Xu, and Hayya (1993) established

production systems. Poor quality products decrease the relationship between process quality and invest-

customer satisfaction, reduce operating production, ment. Ng and Hui (1996) developed a cost model to

overall efficiency and increase the cost of business determine the optimal number of learning actions to be

operation. Accordingly, there have been a vast number taken and the optimal action limit. The model offers

of studies dedicated to the relationship between quality insight into the tradeoff of cost of quality and the cost

and economics of production over the past decade. of prevention. Banker, Khosla, and Sinha (1998)

Porteus (1986) was one of the earliest researchers to developed formal models of oligopolistic competition

provide a mathematical model to characterise optimal to investigate whether equilibrium level of quality

simultaneous investment in setup cost reduction and increases as competition intensifies. Krishnan, Kriebel,

quality improvement. Rosenblatt and Lee (1986) Kekre, and Mukhopodhayay (2000) examined the

formulated and analysed a similar model that considers relationship between life-cycle productivity and con-

investment in process improvements. In a subsequent formance quality in software products. Salameh and

article, Lee and Rosenblatt (1987) considered the use Jaber (2000) considered a special production/inventory

of process inspection during the production run so that situation where items, received or produced, are of

a shift to out-of-control state can be detected and imperfect quality. Ganeshan, Kulkarni, and Boone

restoration made earlier. Tapiero (1987) linked optimal (2001) brought Taguchis cost of poor quality into the

quality inspection policies to the resulting improve- economic production quantity model and linked

ments in manufacturing costs. Fine (1988) used a lot-size determination to the loss-based quality

stochastic dynamic programming model to character- accounting system. Jaber and Bonney (2003) investi-

ise optimal inspection policies and added the gated the effects that learning and forgetting in set-ups

quality-based learning effects into the model. Fine and product quality have on the economic lot-sizing

and Porteus (1989) refined Porteus original work to problem. Jaber and Guiffrida (2004) considered a

allow smaller investments overtime with potential modification of Wrights learning curve with no

process improvement of random magnitude. Chand discarded defects and constant defect rate. Tsou and

(1989) validated Porteus model when learning effect Chen (2005) developed a dynamic model for a defective

is present in setups and process quality. In a series of production system with Poka-Yoke. Wu and Xie

papers, Cheng (1989, 1991) included the production (2008) analysed the replacement cost for nonrepairable

*Email: jtsou.tw@yahoo.com.tw

2010 Taylor & Francis

DOI: 10.1080/00207720903470130

http://www.informaworld.com

866 J.-C. Tsou

Uthayakumar and Parvathi (2009) investigated a during the N-th period planning horizon

continuous review inventory model to reduce lead K Taguchi loss parameter

time, yield variability and setup cost simultaneously L loss of poor quality per unit product

through capital investments. LSL lower specification limits

In this article, there are three significant contribu- N production period

tions to the production and quality research. First, P production cost of unit product

we develop a dynamic model that can help make joint Qi production lot size in period i

decisions on aspects of finance and quality, a task S setup cost per period

which is very difficult for the traditional production- U distance of the target mean from the

quality model. In our model, we focus on the financial specification limits

return of quality investment but not the lot-size USL upper specification limits

optimisation. Second, the Taguchis cost of poor (I) population mean of quality

quality factor has been brought into our model. This characteristic

extension makes it easier to evaluate the cost of poor 0 initial value of population mean of

quality in a dynamic production system. Third, a quality characteristic

Downloaded by [University of Louisville] at 10:58 20 December 2014

practical case in the automotive industry, which obeys t target value of population mean of

the Six-sigma DMAIC methodology, is discussed to quality characteristic function

verify the proposed model. (I) population standard deviation of quality

In the next section, we introduce the model characteristic

proposed in this article. Then, a quality improvement 02 initial level of the variance of the system

case in automotive industry is used to verify this L2 minimum level of the variance of the

model. In this case, the Six-sigma DMAIC methodol- system

ogy will be used in the process of problem solving. X value of the quality characteristic

Then, we analyse the production cost of the case, and

Each term in our objective function is defined

the optimal value of quality investment with minimum

as below:

production cost is found. The last section presents

conclusions for this article. X

N

Production cost Qi P: 2

i1

2. The model

The production cost during the N-th period can be

We assume a dynamic production line over N-th written as the summation of the lot size multiplied by

periods. The primary goal of this model is to search out production cost of a unit product in every period.

the minimum cost of a production system. I is the

money spent on improving product quality. The total X

N

Holding cost hGi1 Qi di : 3

cost, TC(I), is the combination of the production cost,

i1

the holding cost, the setup cost, the poor quality cost

(PQC) and the cost of improving quality. This com- The second term in the equation is the holding cost.

bination is based on the hypothesis of the traditional The holding cost on the production line is the

EPQ model. The total cost, TC(I), can be written as: summation of the holding cost of the inventory in the

N-th period. In Equation (3), Gi1 is the inventory

TCI Production cost holding cost setup cost carried from pervious period, Qi is the production lot

poor quality cost cost of quality investment: size in period i and di is the demand. Gi1 Qi di is

1 the inventory in period i and hGi1 Qi di is the

holding cost in period i. Hence, the total holding cost is

The notation of our model is summarised below. equal to the summation of the holding cost from

Notation: period 1 to N.

Cr rejection cost/unit X

N

i1

D(I) quality distribution function; (normal

distribution function) The third term in our objective function is the setup

Gi1 inventory carried from period i to i 1 cost. Setup cost includes the cost to change the mould,

h holding cost per unit per period the cost to prepare material, the cost to adjust

International Journal of Systems Science 867

machines, etc. In our model, the setup cost is equal to 02 is the initial level of the variance of the system and

the summation of the setup cost in every period. In L2 is the minimum level of the variance of the system.

Equation (4), (Qi) is a function of lot size. (Qi) is As 0 0.1, L 0.05 and b 0.01, the function,

equal to zero when lot size is zero and (Qi) is equal (I), can be drawn as Figure 2.

to one when lot size is larger than zero. There are two categories of the cost of poor quality.

X

N Z1 One is direct cost and the other is indirect cost. The

PQC Qi L DI dX: 5 direct PQC encompasses two major types of expendi-

i1 1 ture: controllable PQC and resultant PQC.

The fourth term is the cost of poor quality. This Controllable PQC includes prevention cost and

term is the summation of the product of lot size and appraisal cost. Resultant PQC includes internal error

Taguchis PQC of unit product in every period. cost and external error cost. The other category, the

In Equation (5), D(I) is the quality distribution indirect PQC, includes customer-incurred PQC,

function of production, and we suppose the quality customer-dissatisfaction PQC and loss-of-reputation

characteristic performs as a normal distributive func- PQC (Harrington 1987).

tion. Under this hypothesis, we can write the quality In order to link the costs of poor quality and

distributive function as: quality performance, Taguchi has provided a quadratic

Downloaded by [University of Louisville] at 10:58 20 December 2014

1 2 2

DI p eXI =2I : quality as, The quality of a product is the (minimum)

I 2 loss imparted by the product to the society from the

(I) and (I) are defined as functions of quality time product is shipped (Bryne and Taguchi 1986).

investment, I. The value of (I) has an initial value and Taguchis function directly links to the internal error

a positive lower bound. The boundary is produced by cost and external error cost in direct PQC and indirect

the nature of the production system or the limiting of PQC. In our model, L has been used to denote

practice. It is noted as, 0, the initial level of the Taguchis function.

variance and, L, the minimum level. In Taguchis function as shown in Figure 3, this cost

There is an initial mean of the population of quality reduces to zero when the output of the process exactly

characteristic, 0, and t is the target value of quality meets the target, and it increases quadratically as the

characteristic. Both (I) and (I) are functions of process moves away from the target. If X is the value of

quality investment, I. The function of (I) and (I) can the quality characteristic, Taguchis PQC function, L,

be written as (Hong et al. 1993; Ganeshan et al. 2001): can be expressed as (Taguchi and Wu 1985):

(

2 I 2t 20 2t eI , 4 0: KX t 2 if LSL X USL

L

0 is the initial value of population mean of quality Cr if X LSL, X USL

characteristic and t is the target value of population K Cr =U2

mean of quality characteristic.

As 0 4.99, t 5 and 0.01, the function, U USL t t LSL 6

(I), can be drawn as Figure 1. where K is defined as K Cr =U2 , Cr is the rejection

2

I L2 02 L2 bI

e , b 4 0: cost of unit product and U is the distance of mean from

the specification limits. It is assumed that the upper

Figure 1. Relationship between population mean and quality Figure 2. Relationship between population standard devia-

investment. tion and quality investment.

868 J.-C. Tsou

Downloaded by [University of Louisville] at 10:58 20 December 2014

limits (LSL) are equidistant from the mean, i.e.

U USL t t LSL. Cr includes the internal

error cost and external error cost in direct PQC and Figure 4. Roadmap of Six-sigma DMAIC methodology.

indirect PQC to reject one unit of product.

Quality investment cost I: 7 3. Six-sigma quality improvement case for the

The fifth term in the objective function is the cost automotive industry

of quality investment. We define the cost invested in In the next section, we will consider a practical

improving the product quality to ensure that only Six-sigma quality improvement case to verify our

customer-acceptable products and services are delivered model. The Six-sigma DMAIC methodology has

to the customer as the cost of quality investment, I. been diversely applied in different kinds of situations

It is believed that the total quality investment, I, will in current business operations, and quality improve-

affect the population mean and standard deviation ment is one of the most suitable conditions to use it

of product quality distribution in the mathematical (Harry and Schroeder 2000). The roadmap of

formula that we mentioned above. Six-sigma DMAIC methodology is shown in Figure 4.

Based on the definition above, we can develop the In the definition phase, things which are critical to

dynamic model of the cost of a defective production consumers (CTC) will be defined. What is the most

system. This is the objective function of our model. important thing to your consumer? What do they care

about? The purpose and goal of the Six-sigma project

X

N X

N

will also be clearly defined in this phase.

Minimise TCI Qi P hGi1 Qi di

i1 i1

In the measurement phase, the performance stan-

X

N X

N dard of the process will be verified and the measure-

Qi S Qi ment system will also be established to obtain a

i1 i1 baseline for improvement in the future. In the analysis

Z1

phase, the performance objective will be defined and

L DI dX I, the key variation sources will be identified. The

1

relationship between variation sources and perfor-

subject to mance objectives will also be established in this stage.

I, P 0, In the improvement phase, all the potential causes

will be screened and possible solutions will be verified.

G0 0

Improvement activities will be proposed in this phase.

and The process capability after improvement will also be

confirmed in this phase. Finally, the long-term process

0 if Qi 0 control will be implemented in the control phase. The

Qi : 8

1 if Qi 4 0 control plan to maintain progress and verify the

International Journal of Systems Science 869

Downloaded by [University of Louisville] at 10:58 20 December 2014

completed. All corrective actions will feedback to the The production manager gathered a group of experts

quality operation system. Now, we introduce a prac- to find the root causes of oil leaks. The C&E matrix

tical case in the automotive industry. and failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) have

been used to determine the reasons. After analysis, it

was found that the root cause of the oil leakage

3.1. Define problem is defects in the bottom tube diameter. The

MACUTO Co. is a local supplier of shock absorbers. operation definition and measure system analysis to

This company produces vehicle and motorcycle shock measure the bottom tube diameter were developed in

absorbers, selling to both the original equipment this phase.

manufacturer (OEM) and after market with its own In historical records, the defect rate of this bottom

brand. Its management has found that the company tube is 4.65%, and this defect rate means a 3.18 sigma

loses a great deal of money in warranty claims every process. In the original design, the diameter of the

year. In order to decrease warranty cost and increase bottom tube was 5 cm, and the upper and lower

customer satisfaction, the production manager has specifications were 4.8 and 5.2 cm. After analysis, the

been assigned to reduce warranty claims, and the short-term process capability of the bottom tube

Six-sigma DMAIC method has been used in this manufacturing is 1.06 Cpk value. The population

assignment. To provide a clear picture of the related mean of the quality characteristic in present stage is

process, Figure 5 is the flow chart of the manufacturing 4.99 cm and the level of the variance of the production

process of the shock absorber. line is 0.01 cm2. In the original design of the production

In order to find the root causes, all the warranty line, the optimal level of the production variance is

claim parts were recalled for analysis. After analysis, it 0.0005 cm2.

was found that 87% of the warranty claims were

caused by oil leakage, 10% were due to noise and 2%

are from other issues. Based on the 80-20 rule, the oil

leakage problem was clearly recognised as the major 3.3. Analysis

concern for the quality issue. The drawing of the bottom tube is shown in Figure 6.

After companys experts opened the cover of According to the process failure mode and effects

damage shock absorber, they found that the oil had analysis (PFMEA) of the shock absorber, the defect

leaked from the gap between the bottom tube and the bottom tube will cause the oil leakage problem. We

internal tube. further check the assembly of the internal tube and the

870 J.-C. Tsou

bottom tube, and found that the assembly of the 3.5. Control

defective absorber was too loose. This evidence further We identified the bottom tube diameter as the high

supports our conclusion. We also arranged a series of impact characteristic (HIC) and drew X-bar R chart to

tests to verify our logic. According to the conclusion control the manufacturing process. All these actions

above, we focus on controlling the dimension of the were fed back to the quality control plan of shock

bottom tube, which is controlled by the dimension of absorber. We also fed back this case to the PFMEA of

the pressing mould in the manufacturing process. A the manufacturing process. To sustain the benefit of

picture of the pressing mould is shown in Figure 7, quality improvement in the long run, the board decided

indicating its two pieces: the external mould and the to invest some money in quality improvement every

internal mould. The matching of the external mould year, and how much money to invest is the topic of the

and the internal mould will determine the dimension of next section. This money should be spent both in

the bottom tube. prevention and in appraisal quality activities.

Prevention activities include: developing and imple-

menting a quality data-collecting and reporting system,

3.4. Improve developing the quality process control plan, quality-

related training, job-related training, preventing this

Downloaded by [University of Louisville] at 10:58 20 December 2014

dimension of the pressing mould, bottom tube and problem from recurring, etc. Appraisal activities

internal tube. After discussion with the master worker include: quality-assurance audit of the manufacturing

of the mould, we decided to shrink the diameter of the process, review of completed designs, review of test and

external mould from 50.8 to 50.3 mm, in order to inspection data, quality data processing and reporting,

decrease the variation and dimension of bottom tube field performance testing, etc.

diameter.

of shock absorber

In this section, we want to investigate closely the costs

of the absorber assembly line to verify the modifica-

tions proposed. We assume that there are 10 produc-

tion periods and that inventory in the beginning is 0.

The production cost is $12 for each absorber, and the

setup cost per production run is $100. The holding cost

is $0.05 per unit per period. The cost on each quality

claim is $15, including both material cost and labour

cost. We invest $1000 on quality improvement in the

overall production period, and assume that supply and

demand are changing with time. The supply and

demand for each period are listed in Table 1.

As we mentioned above, the target value of bottom

tube diameter is 5 cm and the upper and lower

specifications are 4.8 and 5.2 cm. The population

mean of quality characteristic at the initial stage is

4.99 cm, and the level of the variance of the production

Figure 6. Bottom tube of shock absorber. line is 0.01 cm2. In the original design of the production

Figure 7. Pressing mould of bottom tube: the internal mould (left) and the external mould (right).

International Journal of Systems Science 871

line, the minimum level of the production variance t target value of population mean of

was 0.0005 cm2. quality characteristic function 5 cm

With this information, the loss of poor quality 02 initial level of the variance of the

function, L, can be written as: system 0.01 cm2

( L2 minimum level of the variance of the

KX t 2 if 4:8 cm X 5:2 cm system 0.0005 cm2

L ,

Cr if X 4:8 cm, X 5:2 cm To calculate the objective function, we use the

K Cr =U , 2 computer software Mathematica 4.1 to do the calcu-

lation. The result has been listed in Table 2 and the

U 5:2 5 5 4:8 0:2 cm, computer program to do the calculation has been

shown in the appendix.

K 15=0:22 375:

The shifting of demand, supply, inventory and cost

The relationship between quality investment and is presented in Figures 811. In these figures, it can be

value of quality characteristic can be expressed as the noticed that the supply volume is the major effect too.

functions below: With the coefficient above, we can find the

Downloaded by [University of Louisville] at 10:58 20 December 2014

2 I 2t 20 2t eI , 40 cost. The relationship between quality investment and

0:0001 total cost of production has been shown in Figure 12.

From software computation, the initial value of the

I L2 M

2 2

L2 ebI , b40

production cost is $80,755.90 when quality investment

b 0:00035 is zero. We notice that the total cost decreases with the

increasing of quality investment until reaching a

and b are constants to control the equation.

With information above, we find the value of

factors in our objective function as follows:

Table 2. Inventory and cost changing with time.

P production cost of unit product $12

I investment on quality improvement Period Supply Demand Inventory Cost

during the 10 period planning (time) (units) (units) (units) ($)

horizon $1000

1 500 450 50 7566.82

Cr rejection cost per unit $15

2 510 520 40 7713.61

S setup cost per period $100 3 490 510 20 7418.04

h holding cost per unit per period $0.05 4 510 480 50 7714.11

(per unit per period) 5 490 470 70 7420.54

G0 inventory in the beginning 0 6 500 510 60 7567.32

7 550 530 80 8304.76

N production period 10 8 490 510 60 7420.04

USL upper specification limits 5.2 cm 9 500 490 70 7567.82

LSL lower specification limits 4.8 cm 10 510 500 80 7715.61

0 initial value of population mean of Total 5050 4970 80 76,408.7

quality characteristic 4.99 cm

1 500 450

2 510 520

3 490 510

4 510 480

5 490 470

6 500 510

7 550 530

8 490 510

9 500 490

10 510 500

Figure 8. The shifting of supply with time.

872 J.-C. Tsou

Figure 9. The shifting of demand with time. Figure 11. The shifting of cost with time.

Downloaded by [University of Louisville] at 10:58 20 December 2014

total cost of production.

Based on our model, the management can adjust the

investment on quality improvement to generate remark-

minimum cost. Using the computer software

able financial return. The model can be diversely

Mathematica, we make the optimisation calculation

applied in different kinds of quality improvement

to find the minimum cost, as shown in the appendix.

cases. Further study in this field can focus on a quality

According to the calculation, the minimum production

investment model for a stochastic dynamic production

cost is $70,756.10 when the quality investment is

system. Research also may include more financial

$5295.47.

factors or different quality evaluation models into the

Passing through the minimum cost, the total cost

model.

increases with the increase in quality investment to

infinity. In managerial practice, the minimum produc-

tion cost is the ultimate target of business operation Notes on contributors

which means the appropriate quality investment to

Jia-Chi Tsou is an Associate Professor

reach a reasonable quality level and minimise the in the Department of Business

production cost. Administration at the China

University of Technology, Taiwan.

He received the PhD degree in

Industrial Management from the

5. Summary and conclusion National Central University, Taiwan.

He graduated with an MBA in

In this article, we develop a dynamic model based on the Entrepreneurship from the University

hypothesis of a traditional economic production quan- of Liverpool, UK. He also gained an MS and a BS in

tity model. Taguchis cost of poor quality has been used Mechanical Engineering at the National Central University,

to evaluate the cost of poor quality in the dynamic Taiwan. His current research interests include supply chain

production system. According to our research, there management and quality improvement in the automotive

industry. Dr Tsou is an IRCA (International Register of

is an optimal value of quality investment which Certificated Auditors) registered ISO 9001 Lead Assessor.

causes the production system to reach a reason- He has worked as six-Sigma master black belt at the Ford

able quality level and minimise the production cost. Motor Company.

International Journal of Systems Science 873

159, 663672.

Banker, R., Khosla, I., and Sinha, K. (1998), Quality and Krishnan, M.S., Kriebel, C.H., Kekre, S., and

Competition, Management Science, 44, 11791192. Mukhopodhayay, T. (2000), An Empirical Analysis of

Bryne, D.M., and Taguchi, S. (1986), The Taguchi Productivity and Quality in Software Products,

Approach to Parameter Design, ASQC Quality Congress Management Science, 46, 745759.

Transactions, 168173. Lee, H.L., and Rosenblatt, M.J. (1987), Simultaneous

Chand, S. (1989), Lot Sizes and Setup Frequency with Determination of Production Cycles and Inspection

Learning in Setups and Process Quality, European Journal Schedules in a Production System, Management Science,

of Operations Research, 42, 190202. 33, 11251137.

Cheng, T.C.E. (1989), An Economic Production Quantity Ng, W., and Hui, Y. (1996), Interactive Quality

Model with Flexibility and Reliability Considerations, Improvement of a Process Subject to Complete

European Journal of Operations Research, 39, 174179. Inspection, International Journal of Production Research,

Cheng, T.C.E. (1991), Economic Order Quantity Model with 34, 32753284.

Demand-Dependent Unit Production Cost and Imperfect Porteus, E.L. (1986), Optimal Lot-Sizing Process Quality

Production Processes, IIE Transactions, 23, 2328. Improvement and Setup Cost Reduction, Operations

Fine, C.H. (1988), A Quality Control Model with Learning Research, 34, 137144.

Downloaded by [University of Louisville] at 10:58 20 December 2014

Effects, Operations Research, 36, 437444. Rosenblatt, M.J., and Lee, H.L. (1986), Economic

Fine, C.H., and Porteus, E.L. (1989), Dynamic Process Production Cycles with Imperfect Production Processes,

Improvement, Operations Research, 37, 580591. IIE Transactions, 18, 4855.

Ganeshan, R., Kulkarni, S., and Boone, T. (2001), Salameh, M.K., and Jaber, M.Y. (2000), Economic

Production Economics and Process Quality: A Taguchi Production Quantity Model for Items with Imperfect

Perspective, International Journal of Production Quality, International Journal of Production Economics,

Economics, 71, 343350. 64, 5964.

Harrington, H.J. (1987), Poor-Quality Cost, Milwaukke, Taguchi, G., and Wu, Y. (1985), Introduction to Off-line

WI: American Society for Quality Control. Quality Control, Meieki Nakamura-ku Magaya, Japan:

Harry, M., and Schroeder, R. (2000), Six Sigma, the Central Japan Quality Control Association.

Breakthrough Management Strategy Revolutionizing the Tapiero, C. (1987), Production Learning and Quality

Worlds Top Corporations, New York: Doubleday Business. Control, IIE Transactions, 19, 362370.

Hong, J., Xu, S.H., and Hayya, J.C. (1993), Process Quality Tsou, J.-C., and Chen, J.-M. (2005), Dynamic Model for a

Improvement and Setup Reduction in Dynamic Lot- Defective Production System with Poka-Yoke, Journal of

Sizing, International Journal of Production Research, 31, the Operational Research Society, 56, 799803.

26932708. Uthayakumar, R., and Parvathi, P. (2009), A Continuous

Jaber, M.Y., and Bonney, M. (2003), Lot Sizing with Review Inventory Model with Controllable Backorder

Learning and Forgetting in Set-Ups and in Product Rate and Investments, International Journal of Systems

Quality, International Journal of Production Economics, Science, 3, 245254.

83, 95111. Wu, S., and Xie, M. (2008), Warranty Cost Analysis for

Jaber, M.Y., and Guiffrida, A.L. (2004), Learning Nonrepairable Services Products, International Journal of

Curves for Processes Generating Defects Requiring Systems Science, 3, 279288.

Downloaded by [University of Louisville] at 10:58 20 December 2014

874

Appendix A

J.-C. Tsou

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.