An Analytical Method for Performance Evaluation of Kanban Controlled Production Systems

Author(s): Maria Di Mascolo, Yannick Frein and Yves Dallery

Reviewed work(s):
Source: Operations Research, Vol. 44, No. 1, Special Issue on New Directions in Operations
Management (Jan. - Feb., 1996), pp. 50-64
Published by: INFORMS
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/171904 .
Accessed: 16/07/2012 19:15

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

INFORMS is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Operations Research.

http://www.jstor.org
 AN ANALYTICALMETHODFOR PERFORMANCEEVALUATIONOF
KANBAN CONTROLLEDPRODUCTIONSYSTEMS
MARIA Di MASCOLO and YANNICK FREIN
Laboratoire d Automatique de Grenoble, Saint Martin d'Heres, France

YVES DALLERY
Universite6Pierre et Marie Curie, Paris, France
(Received August 1992; revision received September 1993; accepted February 1994)

The aim of this paper is to develop a general purpose analytical method for performance evaluation of multistage kanban
controlled production systems. We consider a single-part type production system decomposed into stages in series. Each stage
consists of a manufacturing cell and an output buffer. With each stage is associated a given number of kanbans. The kanban
controlled production system is modeled as a queueing network with synchronization mechanisms. The basic principle of the
proposed approximation method is to decompose the original kanban system into a set of subsystems, each subsystem being
associated with a particular stage. Each subsystem is analyzed in isolation using a product-form approximation technique. An
iterative procedure is then used to determine the unknown parameters of each subsystem. Numerical results show that the
method is fairly accurate.

Pull controlled production systems have received
much attention in the past decade. In a pull system,
production is driven by the flow of actual demands. Pull
systems are motivated by the concept of just-in-time
(JIT)whose objective is that material should be produced
only when it is needed, and in the quantities needed; see,
e.g., Shingo (1981), Monden (1983). The kanban system
is a simple way of implementing a pull control policy, by
transferring information from downstream to upstream.
The aim of this paper is to develop a general analytical
method for performance evaluation of a large class of
kanban systems.
In a kanban controlled production system, kanbans
(cards) are used as production orders. The production
system is decomposed into several stages. Each stage
corresponds to a subpart of the production system. A
stage may consist of a single machine, a set of identical
machines, or a more complex system (e.g., a manufac-
turing flow line). With each stage is associated a fixed
number of kanbans. A part can proceed to a given stage,
say i, only if there is a corresponding kanban (stage-i
kanban) available, i.e., a production order. In that case,
a kanban is attached to the part which can then be pro-
cessed at stage i. Upon completion of its processing, the
part is put into the output buffer of stage i. A part is
transferredto the next stage as soon as there is a produc-
tion order, i.e., a kanban of stage i + 1 is available. At
that time, the stage-i kanban that was attached to the part
is detached and is then availablefor allowing a new part to
enter the stage. In some kanban systems, kanbans are as-
sociated with containers rather than with individualparts.
Each container contains a certain numberof parts.
Such a multistage kanban system can be viewed as a
hybrid system combining push-and-pull control mecha-
nisms. Indeed, the coordination among stages is based
on a pull mechanism, i.e., order releases at any given
stage are triggeredby consumption of parts at the output
of this stage by the downstream stage. On the other
hand, once released at the input of a stage, parts are
pushed through this stage until they reach the output
buffer. Two special cases of this kanban control sys-
tem have received much attention: the simple kanban
system and the CONWIPsystem. The simple kanbansys-
tem corresponds to the case where each stage consists of
a single machine. This simple kanban control system can
thus be viewed as a pure pull system. The CONWIP
system (Spearman, Woodruff and Hopp 1991, Spearman
1992) corresponds to a single-stage kanban system, i.e.,
it releases raw parts at the input of the production system
based on consumption of finished products by demands
and then pushes materials through the whole production
system up to the finished good inventory. Different vari-
ants of the basic kanban system have also been consid-
ered. A generalized kanban system has been introduced
by Buzacott (1989); see also Zipkin (1989). It includes the
kanban system as a special case. The classical based-
stock control system (see Lee and Zipkin 1992) and the
references therein) can be viewed as a limiting case of
the generalized kanban system.
There has recently been considerable interest in the
application of JIT principles, and especially, a lot of
work has been devoted to improving the understanding
of the behavior of kanban systems and developing
methods to evaluate their performance (Uzsoy and

Subject classifications: Production/scheduling: kanban controlled production systems. Queues: decomposition and product-form approximations.
Area of review: MANUFACTURING, OPERATIONS AND SCHEDULING (SPECIAL ISSUE ON NEW DIRECnoNs IN OPERATIONS MANAGEMENT).

Operations Research 0030-364X696/4401-0050 $01.25

Vol. 44, No. 1, January-February 1996 50 ? 1996 INFORMS

Martin-Vega 1990). Many different models have been
proposed. However, each author uses his own represen-
tation and as a result, it is not easy to understand and
compare the different models. Di Mascolo et al. (1991)
have provided a unified modeling of these different rep-
resentations through the use of Petri nets. The use of
Petri nets for modeling kanban systems was suggested
independently by Di Mascolo et al. (1989) and Legato,
Bobbio and Roberti (1989).
Most authors use simulation to observe the effect of
some parameters of a given process on its performance;
see Uzsoy and Martin-Vega (1990) and Di Mascolo et al.
(1991) for a list of references. Recently, some analytical
methods have also been developed. Some are based on
discrete time models. In these methods, time is decom-
posed into periods. The state of the system is character-
ized by the states of the different stages of the kanban
system at the end of a period. Equations are derived that
relate the states corresponding to successive periods.
Kimura and Terada (1981) provide basic equations for a
kanban system consisting of stages in series. Bitran and
Chang (1987) have extended this work to assembly sys-
tems. These two models are deterministic and thus do
not incorporate uncertainties. Deleersnyder et al. (1989)
use a discrete time Markov chain to model a kanban
system with stages in series. The system state is defined
as the level of the buffers in each stage at the end of each
time period (a negative value corresponds to back-
orders). This model is stochastic because it takes into
account the failures of machines, using random service
times, and a random demand.
A second class of methods uses continuous-time sto-
chastic models. The behavior of the system is then rep-
resented by a continuous-time Markov chain (CTMC).
Exact or approximate solutions can then be obtained.
Karmarkar and Kekre (1987) analyze single-stage and
two-stage kanban systems. The associated CTMCs are
solved using numerical techniques. They then study the
effects of batch sizing on the costs (due to inventory and
backordered demands). So and Pinault (1988) show how
a single stage with a single machine can be modeled by a
single M/M/1 queue with batch service. Indeed, they
assume that the machine processes parts only by groups
of size B(B > 1). That is, B parts must be present before
the machine starts working and upon completion of the
last part of a group, all the parts of the group are deliv-
ered simultaneously. The analysis of this bulk queue pro-
vides the average proportion of backordered demands.
They then use this result to approximately determine the
number of kanbans for each stage of a kanban system
with stages in series, to achieve a target performance
level, namely that the average proportion of backordered
demands is below a given threshold. (Note that the batch
size B may vary from stage to stage.) So (1989) has ex-
tended this work to a general flexible manufacturingsys-
tem (stages not necessarily in series) with multiple types
of products. Legato, Bobbio and Roberti study a kanban
DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY / 51
system with N stages in series, each stage containing a
single station with exponential service time, and which is
saturated with demands. They use numerical techniques
to analyze the CTMC representingthe system. Mitra and
Mitrani (1990) study the same system, but they use an
approximationtechnique, which is based on the decom-
position of the kanban system into subsystems. Each
subsystem corresponds to a particularstage of the origi-
nal kanban system and is analyzed exactly. An iterative
procedure is then used to determine the unknown param-
eters of each subsystem. Mitra and Mitrani (1991) have
extended this technique to the case of stochastic demands.
Most analytical methods that have been proposed for
kanban systems assume that each stage consists of a
single machine, i.e., simple kanban systems. However,
this is usually not the case in actual implementation of
kanban systems in industry. Indeed a stage is usually
associated with a subpart of the production system, e.g.,
a manufacturing flow line or a flexible manufacturing
cell. It is thus importantto develop analytical techniques
that can handle such situations. In this paper, we present
a general purpose analytical method for performance
evaluation of a large class of kanban systems. We con-
sider a kanban production system consisting of stages in
series. Each stage consists of a subsystem of the original
production system. A given number of kanbans is asso-
ciated with each stage. We assume that there is a single
part type. The kanban system is modeled by a queueing
networkwith synchronizationmechanisms.The basic prin-
ciple of the proposed approximationmethod is to decom-
pose the originalkanban system into a set of subsystems,
each subsystem being associated with a particular
stage. Each subsystem is analyzed in isolation using an
approximationtechnique. An iterative procedure is then
used to determine the unknown parameters of each
subsystem.
The paper is organized as follows. The kanban system
under study and its associated queueing network model
are presented in Sections 1 and 2, respectively. The prin-
ciple of the decomposition technique is presented in
Section 3. The analysis of a single-stage kanban system is
derived in Section 4. The overall method is described in
Section 5. Numerical results are presented in Section 6.
1. KANBAN SYSTEMS
Let us first describe the principle of kanban systems by
means of an example. We consider a production system
consisting of ten machines M1 to M1o (see Figure 1). On
each machine, a certain amount of time, which may be
constant or variable, is required to process a part. All
parts visit successively machines M1, M2, and M3. After
completion of these three operations, some of the parts
require processing at machine M4 and then machine M5,
while others require processing at machine M6 and then
 52 / DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY
Figure 1. Example of a production system.
machine M7. After completion of either of these alterna-
tive sets of two operations, all the parts are then pro-
cessed on machines M8, Mg, and Mlo, successively.
To implement a control of kanban type, this produc-
tion system must first be decomposed into N stages.
Consider, for instance, the decomposition of the produc-
tion system into three stages as illustrated in Figure 2.
Each stage i consists of a manufacturingprocess and an
output buffer. The manufacturingprocess contains parts
that are currently being processed in the stage (either
waiting for or receiving service at the different ma-
chines). In the example of Figure 2, the manufacturing
processes of stages 1, 2, and 3 are the sets of machines
{M1, M2}, {M3, M4, M5, M6, M7}, and {M8, M19,M10o}
respectively. The output buffer contains the finished
parts of the stage. With each stage i is associated a fixed
number of kanbans, say Ki. A part is allowed to enter
stage i only if there is a kanban available for this stage.
In that case, a kanban is attached to the part which can
then be processed at stage i.
Parts that are in the output buffer of stage 3 are the
finished parts of the production system. These parts are
used to satisfy the external demands. When an external
demand arrives, it is immediately satisfied if there is at
least one finished part in the output buffer of stage 3.
Otherwise, the demand cannot be immediately satisfied
and is then backordered until a finished part is available.
When a demand is satisfied (either immediately or after
having been backordered), the stage-3 kanban associated
with the consumed part is detached and becomes imme-
diately available. It then allows a finished part of stage 2
(waiting in the output buffer), if any, to enter stage 3.
When a finished part of stage 2 is transferred to
stage 3, the kanban of stage 2 that was associated to it is
detached and a stage-3 kanban is attached to it. The
stage-2 kanban becomes immediately available to allow a
finished part of stage 1, if any, to enter stage 2. Again,
Manufacturing
~~~M4 pr~~~~~caa1
rawM89
Paru
stage sI 2stage
Figure 2. Production system of Figure 1 decomposed into three stages in series.
when a finished part of stage 1 is transferredto stage 2,
the kanban of stage 1 that was associated to it is de-
tached and a stage-2 kanban is attached to it. The stage-1
kanban becomes immediately available to allow a raw
part to enter stage 1. We note that, in such a kanban
control policy, the information of the consumption of a
part is immediately transferred from downstream to up-
stream as long as there are parts in the output buffer of
each stage. Moreover, since a kanban is attached to each
part, Ki is an upper bound on the number of parts in
stage i, either in the manufacturing process or in the
output buffer.
This example illustrates a basic kanban system having
the following features or assumptions: 1) the N stages
are in series, i.e., each stage has only one supplier and
one consumer; 2) the system produces a single part type;
3) kanbans are associated with individual parts; 4) any
kanban detached at the output of a stage is immediately
available for the upstream stage (no return delay);
5) there is an infinite supply of raw parts at the input of
the production system; 6) demands that are not immedi-
ately satisfied are backordered. In the remainder of this
paper, we develop an approximation method for perfor-
mance evaluation of kanban controlled production sys-
tems of the type described above. However, the method
can be extended to more general classes of kanban
systems.
2. QUEUEING NETWORKMODEL OF
A KANBAN SYSTEM
2.1. Modeling
The kanban system described in Section 1 can be mod-
eled as a queueing network with synchronization mecha-
nisms. For illustration purposes, consider again the
kanban system presented in Figure 2. The behavior of
this kanban system can be represented by the queueing
M5:~~
.demands
3

R2
om b Ms
Ri - IIV..~~~~~~~~~~~~~~......
supply '
M2~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~P
M33
M17
Ki P
K2
F-igure3. Queueing network model of the kanban system of Figure 2.
network shown in Figure 3. The manufacturingprocess
of each stage can be modeled by a subnetwork in which
each machine is represented by a station of the subnet-
work. (In Figure 3, M1 to M1o have been represented by
stations S, to S1o.) Let Ri denote the subnetwork asso-
ciated with the manufacturingprocess of stage i and let
mi be the number of stations of subnetwork Ri. The
kanban control policy is modeled by a synchronization
station at the output of each stage. Let Ji denote the
synchronization station at the output of stage i. Let us
first consider any synchronization station but that of the
last stage. A synchronization station Ji(i < N) repre-
sents the synchronization between a finished part of
stage i and a free kanban of stage i + 1. Let Pi and Fi+1
denote the two upstream queues of the synchronization
station J1. The content of queue Pi is the number of
finished parts in the output buffer of stage i. The content
of queue Fi+l is the number of free kanbans of stage
i + 1. The behavior of the synchronization station is as
follows. As soon as there is at least one entity in each of
its upstream queues (Pi and Fi,+i), one entity is removed
from each of them and one entity is added into each of its
downstream queues. Thus, as soon as there is an entity
in queue Pi (representing a finished part of stage i on
which a stage-i kanban is attached) and an entity in
queue Fi+1 (representing a free kanban of stage i + 1),
an entity (representing a finished part of stage i on which
a stage i + 1 kanban is attached) joins the first station
of stage i + 1 (i.e., a part of stage i is consumed by
stage i + 1) and another entity (representing a free kan-
ban of stage i) joins queue Fi (i.e., a stage i kanban is
detached from its associated part and becomes avail-
able). This exactly represents the behavior of the kanban
control policy described in Section 1. Note that a stage-1
kanban becoming available at J, immediately enables a
new raw part to enter the system because we assumed
that there are always raw parts at the input of the sys-
tem. Thus, there is no need for a queue F1.
Consider now the synchronization station of the last
stage, JN Station JN represents the synchronization be-
tween the finished parts of the system and the external
demands. Let PN and D denote the two upstream queues
of the synchronization station JN. The content of queue
PN is the number of finished parts currently available at
DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY / 53
12 13
~~~~~~~~~~~R3
K3
the output of the production system. The content of
queue D is the number of demands currently back-
ordered. Thus, as soon as there is an entity in queue PN
(representing a finished part of stage N on which a
stage-N kanban is attached) and an entity in queue D
(representing an external demand), a demand is satisfied
and a stage-N kanbanjoins queue FN.
A slightly different model is also of interest. This
model corresponds to the case of a so-called saturated
kanban system. In a saturated kanban system, there are
always demands for finished parts. In that case, a fin-
ished part at stage N is immediately consumed. In terms
of the queueing network of Figure 3, this means that
queue D is never empty. As a result, synchronization
station JN can be removed. As soon as the processing of
a part is completed at stage N, the stage-N kanban is
detached and is immediately fed back to queue FN. The
saturated kanban system corresponding to the example
of Figure 2 can be modeled by the queueing network
shown in Figure 4.
Note that a simple kanban system corresponds to the
special case where each subnetwork Ri consists of a
single machine, i.e., mi = 1, i = 1, ... , N. The
CONWIP system corresponds to the special case where
there is a single stage, i.e., N = 1.
2.2. Performance Analysis
The performancemeasures of particularinterest in a kan-
ban system are the following: the percentage of demands
that are backordered, i.e., not immediately satisfied; av-
erage waiting time of backordered demands; average
work in process (in each manufacturingstage and in each
output buffer). These performance measures depend on
the characterization of each manufacturingprocess, the
characterization of the arrival process of demands and
the number of kanbans of each stage. As for a saturated
kanban system, the main performancemeasure is its pro-
duction rate, say Xs, that is the average number of fin-
ished products leaving stage N per unit of time. It is
sometimes referred to as the production capacity of the
kanban controlled production system. This performance
parameter is of high interest because it represents the
maximum rate at which demands can be satisfied. In
other words, there is a stability condition for the kanban
54 / DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY
Ji ~~~~~~~~~~~R2
M4
infinite RI
supply .,13P
ml AU
Ki F2~~~~~....
K2
F'igure4. Queueing network model of the saturated kanban system associated with the queueing network of Figure 3.
system, namely that the average arrival rate of demands,
say AlD, must be less than the production capacity of the
system, that is, (Lavenberg 1978):
AD <XS. (1)
If this condition is not satisfied, the queue of back-
ordered demands will grow up to infinity.
The behavior of a kanban system (both the kanban
system with external demands and the saturated kan-
ban system) can be represented by a continuous-time
Markov chain (CTMC), provided that the distributions
of processing times as well as interarrival demands are
represented by phase-type (PH) distributions (Neuts
1981), i.e., mixture of exponential distributions. An exact
analysis can thus in principle be performed using numer-
ical methods (Neuts 1981, Philippe, Saad and Stewart
1992). However, the size of the underlying CTMC is usu-
ally much too large for a numerical method to be used.
As a result, the only viable alternative is to develop ap-
proximation methods. Approximation methods for
queueing network analysis have received considerable
attention in the past years. Most of these methods are
based on decomposition; see, e.g., Baynat and Dallery
(1993), Dallery and Frein (1993), Dallery and Gershwin
(1992), and the references therein. The principle is to
decompose the analysis of the original system into the
analysis of a set of smaller subsystems. Each decompo-
sition method involves three steps: characterizing the
subsystems; deriving a set of equations that determines
the unknown parameters of each subsystem; and devel-
oping an algorithm to solve these equations.
Our aim is to develop an approximation analytical
method, based on decomposition, to calculate the
steady-state performance measures of a kanban con-
trolled production system. Although its principle is fairly
general, the method will be presented in details under the
following assumptions: all queues have infinite capacity;
the routing throughout each subnetwork is probabilis-
tic; the service-time distribution of each server is rep-
resented by a PH distribution; the arrival process of
external demands is Poisson. The method is applicable
to both the saturated and the nonsaturated case. It will
be presented in details for the nonsaturated case. The
saturated case will be discussed briefly.
J2
M5
~~~~~~~~~R3
m ..........~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~9
S7
K3
3. DECOMPOSITION
Consider the queueing network model of a kanban con-
trolled production system consisting of N stages in series
as described in subsection 2.1 (see Figure 3). Our aim is
to analyze this queueing network, which will be denoted
by L, by decomposing it into a set of N subsystems Li,
i = 1, . . ., N. Each subsystem L' is a single-stage kan-
ban system consisting of subnetwork Ri, an upstream
synchronization station, denoted by P, and a down-
stream synchronization station, denoted by Oi. The num-
ber of kanbans of subsystem L1 is Ki. Each subsystem
Li, i = 2, ..., N, is synchronized with two external
arrival processes, one at synchronization station Ii
(stage-i raw parts), and the other at synchronization sta-
tion O' (stage-i demands). Subsystem L1 is synchronized
with a single external process at synchronization station
o1 (stage-1 demands). This decomposition is illustrated
in Figure 5 for a kanban system consisting of N = 3
stages. It appears that synchronization station Ji of net-
work L, linking stage i to stage i + 1, is represented
twice in the decomposition: first in subsystem Li by the
downstream synchronization station Oi, and second in
subsystem Li+' by the upstream synchronization station
Ii ?1
P+1.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To completely characterize subsystem LL,we assume
that each of its external arrivalprocesses is characterized
by a state-dependent Markovian process. Let A'(n') de-
note the state-dependent arrival rate of raw parts at sub-
system L', where n" denotes the number of raw parts
present at station P. Note that n' is such that 0 < n
Ki-1. Indeed, the number of raw parts at the input of
stage i cannot exceed the number of kanbans of stage
- 1. Thus, A'(Ki-1) = 0. Similarly, let Ad(nd) denote
the state-dependent arrivalrate of demands at subsystem
L', where nd denotes the number of demands present at
station oQ. Note that nd is such that 0 S n' < Ki+1.
Indeed, the number of demands at the output of stage i
cannot exceed the number of kanbans of stage i + 1.
Thus, A'(Ki+1) = 0.
To obtain the performanceof network L, the following
two problems must be addressed: how to analyze each
subsystem L' assuming that the external arrivalrates are

J1
\ K
Subnetwork R .
d d
I2
BU(nU-
L2 V1,,,,,,f.:,;,:SS
Figure 5. Illustration of the decomposition of a 3-stage kanban system.
known; how to determine the unknown external arrival
rates. These two problems are addressed in Sections 4
and 5, respectively. In the case of a saturated kanban
system, the decomposition is done in a similar way. The
only difference pertains to subsystem LN. In that case,
subsystem LN is synchronized with a single external ar-
rival process at synchronization station IN (stage-N raw
parts). Note that in that case, subsystem LN is the dual
of subsystem L1.
4. ANALYSIS OF A SINGLE-STAGE KANBAN
SYSTEM
In this section, we deal with the analysis of a subsystem.
We will present in details the analysis of any subsys-
tem Li, i = 2, ..., N - 1. The analysis of the other
subsystems, L1 and LN, is very similar and will be con-
sidered briefly at the end of the section. Throughout this
DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY / 55
~~
~~~~~J2 ~ J3
K2 \3 K
02
X ( 2) w , \
I3 03
X(n)- r
section, the state-dependent rates of the external arrival
processes, the parameters Al(n ), 0 < n' < Ki-1, and
A'(n'), 0 < n' < Ki,,, are supposed to be known.
Consider any subsystem Li, i = 2, ..., N - 1. This
system can be viewed as a closed queueing network,
as illustratedin Figure 6. Indeed, consider the kanbansas
the customers of the network and the raw parts and the
demands as external resources. In this case, there is a
constant number of customers in the network, which is
equal to the number of kanbans, Ki. Therefore, from this
point of view, the system is a closed queueing network
consisting of subnetworkRi and two synchronization sta-
tions. Station Ii represents the synchronization between
a customer (a free kanban) and a resource (a raw part).
Station O' represents the synchronization between a cus-
tomer (a kanban associated with a finished part) and a
resource (a demand). This closed queueing network does
56 / DIMASCOLO,FREINAND DALLERY
StationIi

Xu(n ) i SubnetworkR. StationO'

Figure 6. Closed queueing network model of a single-stage kanban system.

not satisfy the assumptions of product form networks technique, to obtain the steady-state probabilitiesof hav-
(Baskett et al. 1975). An exact analysis can thus only be ing nk customers in the isolated subsystem k, saypk(nk).
obtained by solving the underlying Markov chain using (This issue will be discussed at the end of this section.)
numerical techniques. However, the size of the Markov The conditional throughput Vk(nk) of this isolated sub-
chain will, in general, be too large for numerical tech- system with population nk can then be derived using the
niques to be used. In the remainder of this section, we relation:
show how this closed queueing network can be analyzed
using a product-form approximation technique. Details Vk(nk) = = Ak(k
k(nk k for nk = 1, ...,K
k1)
1)Pk(nlk)(3
and references on product-form approximation methods
can be found in Baynat and Dallery.
Since we are only dealing with a single subsystem, and The load-dependent service rates of the kth station of
for the sake of readability, we will no longer use the the equivalent network are then set equal to the condi-
index i to denote the variables pertaining to this sub- tional throughputs of the corresponding subsystem in
system. For instance, Ki, Ri, mi, I, Oi, will simply be isolation, i.e.:
denoted by K, R, m, I, 0. The closed queueing network
shown in Figure 6 can be partitioned into m + 2 sub- A k(nk) = Vk((nk) for nk = 1, ..., K. (4)
systems: the two synchronization stations I and 0, and Now, once the ,Uk(nk) have been obtained, the Ak(nk)
the m stations of subnetwork R. With each subsystem is can be obtained as:
associated an exponential service station with load-
dependent service rate. The subsystems as well as the Ak(nk) = Gk (K -nk-1) for nk =, ..., K-1, (5)
associated station will be denoted by the index k E S(k), Gk (K -nk)
where S(k) = {I, 1, 2, ... , m, 0}. Let .ak(nk) denote
where Gk(p) is the normalization constant of the equiv-
the load-dependent service rate of station k when nk cus-
alent network with station k removed and populationp.
tomers are present. The equivalent network is then a
Gk(p) is a function of the parameters ,th(nlh) for all h ?
product-formnetwork (Gordon and Newell 1967, Baskett k and nh = 1, ... , K, and can be calculated using any
et al. 1975), consisting of m + 2 stations and K custom-
computational algorithmfor product-formnetworks; see,
ers. We define the state of the network as the vector n =
e.g., Bruell and Balbo (1980).
(n1, n1, n2, ... , nm, no), where nk denotes the number
The iterative procedure can then be used to determine
of customers present at station k. The probability of be-
these unknown quantities. This procedure is described
ing in stage n, p(n), is then given by the product-form
by the following algorithm.
solution:
1 /nfk Vk Algorithm 1: Analysis of a Single-Stage Kanban
p(n)= G(K) kH(k) (n- ) (2) System in Isolation
STEP 0. Initialize the unknown parameters ,tk(nlk) to
where G(K) is the normalization constant and Vk is the some initial value for k E S(k) and nk = 1, ... , K.
average visit ratio of station k.
To determine the unknown parameters ,k(nk), each STEP 1. For k E S(k): Calculate the state-dependent
subsystem k is analyzed in isolation under a state- arrival rates Ak(nk) for nk = 0, .. , K - 1, using (5).
dependent Markovian arrival process whose rate Ak(nk) STEP 2. Fork E S(k):
depends on the total number of customers nk present in
the subsystem. Let Tk denote this open system with a a. Analyze the open queueing network Tk.
load-dependent arrival rate. Assume first that the rates b. Derive the steady-state probabilitiesPk(nk) of having
Ak(nk) are known for nk = 0, . . ., K - 1. The queueing nk customers for nk = 0, ... , K.
network Tk can then be analyzed, using any appropriate c. Calculate the conditional throughputs vk(nk) using (3).

STEP 3. For k E S(k): Set the load-dependent service
rates of station k in the equivalent product-formnetwork
to Plk(nk) = Vk(nk) for nk = 1, ... , K.
STEP 4. Go to Step 1 until convergence of the param-
eters Ilk(nk).
This iterative procedure enables us to estimate the
load-dependent service rates ytk(nk), k E S(k). All
the performance parameters are then easy to derive; see,
e.g., Bruell and Balbo. In Step 2a of the algorithm, an
analysis of the open queueing networks Tk, k E S(k) is
needed. Consider first the analysis of T1. T, is a synchro-
nization station fed by two Markovian arrival processes
with state-dependent arrival rates: Aj(nj), 0 % nu <
Ki-1, and AI(nj), 0 S n1 < Ki. An exact solution of this
queueing system is easy to obtain by solving the under-
lying Markov chain. The steady-state probabilitiesp1(n1)
of having n, customers in subsystem TI can then be de-
rived, from which an estimation of the conditional
throughput v1(n1)can be obtained using (3) (details can
be found in the Appendix). The analysis of To is identi-
cal. Network Tk, k = 1, 2, ... , m, is a A(n)/PH/1/K
queue, whose solution can be obtained by solving the
underlying Markov chain; see, e.g., Marie (1980).
In this section, we considered the analysis of any
subsystem Li, i = 2, ... , N - 1. The analysis of sub-
systems Ll and LN can be obtained using a similar ap-
proach. The analysis of L' is identical except that
synchronization station I is removed. The analysis of LN
is similar except that synchronization station 0 is, in this
case, fed by an external Poisson process. Thus, the anal-
ysis of TO must be slightly modified; see (Dallery 1990)
for details. In the case of a saturated kanban system, the
only difference is pertaining to subsystem LN. The anal-
ysis of LN is identical except that synchronization station
O is removed.
5. ANALYSIS OF A MULTISTAGEKANBAN
SYSTEM
In Section 3, network L was decomposed into a set of N
subsystems. In Section 4, we proposed a way of analyz-
ing each subsystem in isolation, provided the arrival
rates of the external arrival processes were known. In
this section, we address the problem of determining
these quantities.
5.1. Equations of the Decomposition
Consider again network L (see Figure 5), which has been
decomposed into a set of N subsystems. The unknown
parameters involved in the decomposition are the arrival
rates of raw parts at each upstream synchronization sta-
tion I, Au(nu), n' = 0,.. ,Ki-1 - 1, and i = 2,
N; and the arrival rates of demands at each downstream
synchronization station O, Ad(nd), nd = 0, ..., + -
1, and i - 1, ..., N - 1. Remember that the upstream
synchronization station Ii of subsystem L' and the
DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY / 57
downstream synchronization station 0'-1 of subsystem
L'-1, both represent the same synchronization station
Jij- of network L. Thus, the external arrival process of
raw parts at synchronizationstationI' in L' shouldbe iden-
tical to the arrival process of finished parts at synchro-
nization station 0i-i in L'-'. This latter process is
involved in the analysis of subsystem L"1 in isolation
and has been characterized by a state-dependent Mark-
ovian process with rate A'-l(n), n = 0, ..., - 1.
As a result, a first set of equations is:
A,'(n) = -b(n), for n = 0, . K. , - 1,
and i = 2, ..., N. (6)
In a similarway, the downstream synchronization station
O' of subsystem L' and the upstream synchronization
station I"'l of subsystem L"', both represent the same
synchronization station Ji of network L. Thus, the exter-
nal arrivalprocess of demands at synchronization station
O' in L' should be identical to the arrival process of
demands (free kanbans) at synchronization station j+ 1 in
L'+1. This latter process is involved in the analysis of
subsystem L'+1 in isolation and has been characterized
by a state-dependent Markovian process with rate
(n), n = 0, ... , 1 - 1. As a result, a second set
of equations is:
Ad(n) = A41(n), for n = 0, ..., K+- 1,
and i =1, ...,N- 1. (7)
It thus appears that the unknown parameters At(n')
and Ad(nd) are the solution of a fixed-point problem. In
subsection 5.2, we propose an iterative procedure to de-
termine these quantities.
5.2. Iterative Procedure
The iterative procedure is described in Algorithm 2. It
consists of successive applications of a forward pass
(Step 1) and a backward pass (Step 2). The forward
pass derives new estimates of the arrivalrates of the up-
stream arrival processes (upstream parameters), the
At(n'), given the current estimates of the arrivalrates of
the downstream arrival processes (downstream parame-
ters), the Ad(nd). Subsystem L' is first analyzed using
Algorithm 1 and the current estimates of the Ad(nd). This
yields the quantities Al(n ), which provides new esti-
mates of the A2(n2) according to (6). Subsystem L2 can
then be analyzed using Algorithm 1 and the current esti-
mates of the A2(n2) and Ad(nd). This yields the quantities
A4(n2), which provides new estimates of the A3(n3) ac-
cording to (6). Each subsystem is analyzed in turn up to
subsystem LN'. This forward pass thus provides new
estimates of the upstream arrival rates of all subsystems.
In a similar way, the backward pass derives new esti-
mates of the arrival rates of the downstream arrivalpro-
cesses (downstream parameters), the Ad(nd),, given the
current estimates of the arrival rates of the upstream
arrival processes (upstream parameters), the At(nt).
58 / DIMASCoLo, FREIN AND DALLERY
This backward pass involves the successive analyses of
subsystem LN up to subsystem L2. The procedure is
stopped when convergence of the unknown parameters
has been achieved. All performance parameters of inter-
est can then be derived.
Algorithm 2: Analysis of a Multistage Kanban
System
STEP 0. (Initialization) Set the unknown downstream
parameters of each subsystem L1 to some initial values,
e.g.
Ad(n) = AD, for n = 0, j, +j- 1,
and i= 1, ...,
STEP 1. (Computation of the upstream parameters,
A'(n')) For each subsystem Li, i = 1, ..., N - 1:
Calculate the quantities A' (n), for n = 0,...
Ki - 1, using Algorithm 1.
Set A"' (n) = A' (n), for n = 0, , Ki - 1.
STEP 2. (Computationof the downstream parameters,
Ad(nd) For each subsystem LZ, i = N, ... , 2:
Calculate the quantities A,(n), for n = 0, ...
using Algorithm 1.
Set A'-' (n) = A'(n), for n = 0, , Ki-
STEP 3. (Convergence test) Go to Step 1 until conver-
gence of the unknown parameters Au(n) and Ad(n).
In the case of a saturated kanban system, the same algo-
rithm can be used to determine the unknown parameters.
The only difference is pertaining to the analysis of sub-
system LN using Algorithm 1 as discussed in Section 4.
One question that naturally arises when dealing with an
iterative procedure is the convergence property of the
algorithm. On most examples we tested, Algorithm 2 has
converged. Moreover, in general, the number of itera-
tions required to reach convergence was less than 10.
(The convergence criteria was that, for every unknown
parameter, the relative difference between its values at
two consecutive iterations was less than 10-4). Note that
each iteration of Algorithm 2 requires 2(N - 1) analyses
of subsystems using Algorithm 1. There were, however,
some examples for which Algorithm 2, as described, did
not converge. In such cases, convergence was achieved
by slightly modifying Algorithm 2, especially by intro-
ducing a relaxation technique.
Once Algorithm 2 has converged, all performance pa-
rameters of interest can be calculated. Indeed, from the
analysis of each subsystem L' using Algorithm 1, it is
possible to derive the performance parameters of stage i
in network L, especially the throughputand the average
length of each queue, including the queues of the syn-
chronization stations. In terms of the kanban system, we
can thus derive, for each manufacturingstage, the aver-
age work in process, the average number of finished
parts, as well as the average number of free kanbans. In
the case of kanban systems with external demands, some
other performance parameters of high interest can be
derived from the analysis of subsystem LN, namely: the
proportion of backordered demands, PB; the average
number of backordered demands, QD; the mean waiting
time of a backordered demand, WB. They can be ob-
tained as (Dallery 1990, Di Mascolo, Frein and Dallery
1991):
PB =PO(O) QD = P() (0) WB -PA
AD
where p'(0) is the steady-state probability of having no
N- 1. finished part at synchronization station ON, and AN(0) is
the arrival rate of finished parts at synchronization sta-
tion oN when there is no finished part at that station.
Let us now briefly discuss some properties of our
method. One property of special interest is the so-called
conservation of flow. Indeed, all the stages of network L
are in series and must then have the same throughput.As
a result, all the subsystems L1, i = 1, ..., N, should
have the same throughput, i.e., X1 = .= .. =XN =
, Ki - 1, X. Though we did not explicitly use this equation in our
method, it is easy to check that it is indeed satisfied
1. (Di Mascolo, Frein and Dallery). The basic reason is that
all arrival processes, involved in both the decomposition
approximation and the product-form approximations,
have the same characterization, namely state-dependent
Markovianprocesses. Finally, we note that in the case of
a kanban system with external demands, the throughput
of subsystem LN, and as a result of the conservation of
flow, the throughput of all the subsystems is XN = AD.
One other structural property of kanban systems is the
so-called reversibility property (Cheng 1991, Tayur 1993,
Dallery, Liu and Towsley 1992). Consider an N-stage
kanban system in which each stage i consists of a series
of mi machines, i = 1, . . ., N. Consider another
N-stage kanban system, referred to as the reverse kan-
ban system, and defined as follows. Stage i of the reverse
kanban system consists of the series of mNi+ 1 machines
of stage N - i + 1 of the original system in reverse
order, i = 1, .. ., N. Its number of kanbans is the same
as that of stage N - i + 1 in the original system, that is
KN_i +, i = 1, . . ., N. The reversibility property states
that the throughputof the saturated reverse kanban sys-
tem is the same as that of the saturated original kanban
system. Now, it is easy to check that our analytical
method is consistent with this property. It follows from
the facts: 1) the equations of the decomposition (6) and
(7) are symmetrical with respect to upstream and down-
stream stages; and 2) the analysis of each single-stage
kanban system, since based on a product-form approxi-
mation technique, is consistent with the reversibility
property.
Finally, we briefly compare our method with that pro-
posed by Mitra and Mitrani (1990, 1991). More details
may be found in (Di Mascolo, Frein and Dallery). Mitra

and Mitrani also decompose the original kanban system
consisting of N stages into a set of N subsystems. The
major differences between Mitra and Mitrani's method
and ours pertain to the characterization of the arrival
processes of the upstream and downstream synchroniza-
tion stations of each subsystem and the way each sub-
system is analyzed in isolation. In their method, an exact
analysis of each subsystem is performed by solving the
underlying CTMC and, as a result, their method is re-
stricted to the case where each stage consists of a single
exponential station. Also, they have to use a nonsym-
metrical set of equations in their decomposition method
to satisfy the property of conservation of flow. This has
several drawbacks. For instance, the reversibility prop-
erty is not satisfied in the case of a saturated kanban
system (Mitra and Mitrani 1990). In the case of
kanban systems with external demands (Mitra and
Mitrani 1991), it turns out that the performance param-
eters associated with stage i do not depend on the
characteristics (the number of servers, service-time
distributions, the number of kanbans) of the down-
stream stages j = i + 1, ... , N, whereas in the kanban
system, they do.
6. NUMERICALRESULTS
In this section, we study the behavior of the method
proposed in this paper in terms of accuracy and rapidity.
The algorithm was implemented on an IBM/PC. We
tested it on several examples, obtained by varying the
number of stages, the number of kanbans in each stage,
the topology, and the service-time distributions of the
manufacturingprocess of each stage. The approximation
results were compared to simulation results obtained us-
ing the SIMAN simulation language, on the same PC.
We present three main examples to illustrate the results
obtained by our method. For each example, we consider
first the case of the saturated kanban system and then
the case of a kanban system with external demands. The
results reported here are representative of the results
that are generally obtained by our method.
Example 1 pertains to a kanban system composed of N
identical stages. Each manufacturingprocess contains a
single machine whose service time is exponentially dis-
tributed with mean equal to 1. All stages have the same
number of kanbans, i.e., Ki = K, for i = 1, ..., N.
Consider first the saturated kanban system. The main
performance parameter of the system is its throughput,
that is the production capacity of the kanban system.
The results are presented in Table I for different values
of the number of stages (N = 3, 5, 10) and of the
number of kanbans per stage (K = 1, 3, 5, 10, 15).
The confidence interval of the simulation, the percentage
of relative error of the analytical method with respect to
simulation as well as the number of iterations required
to reach convergence(for a precisionof 10-4) are also
given. The number of iterations increases with the
DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY / 59
number of stages but remains low, even in the case of
N = 10 stages (at most seven iterations). The computa-
tion time of the analytical method is low (around one
second on average and always less than 30 seconds)
when compared to that needed for the simulation (from
ten minutes to more than one hour for a total number of
30,000 parts produced). As expected, the production ca-
pacity is an increasing function of the number of kanbans
with an asymptote corresponding to the production rate
of each machine in isolation, i.e., 1. In terms of accu-
racy, it appears that the results provided by the analyti-
cal method are fairly good. The average relative error of
the approximation compared to simulation is equal to
2.5%. The only situation for which a large error may be
encountered is when K is very low, especially K = 1.
This comes from the fact that the arrival processes in-
volved in the decomposition method and in the product-
form approximations are assumed to be state-dependent
Markovianprocesses, which is not a good approximation
when the number of kanbans is so small. Indeed, with a
small number of kanbans, there are strong dependence
phenomena among stations that are not well captured by
the state-dependent Markovian processes.
Consider now the case of the kanban system of exam-
ple 1 with backordered demands. We consider configura-
tions 1-3, 1-8 and 1-13 appearingin Table I and different
values of the arrival rate AD satisfying the stability con-
dition given by (1). Table II shows the comparison
between analytical results and simulation pertaining to
the average number of backordered demands (QD), the
mean waiting time of a backordered demand (WB), and
the proportion of backordered demands (PB). Table III
shows the results pertaining to the average work in pro-
cess and the average number of finished products at each
stage for two of the configurations shown in Table II.
The number of iterations increases with the demand
arrival rate, but again it remains fairly low. There is a
fairly good agreement between approximationand simu-
lation results. Note that although the simulationwas long
(corresponding to 100,000 demands), the confidence in-
tervals are not very tight when the system is highly
loaded (i.e., AD is close to the production capacity).
Example 2 pertains to a kanban system consisting of
N = 3 identical stages. Each stage consists of a single
machine and all three machines have the same service
time distribution with mean equal to 1. The number of
kanbans is K = 5 for all three stages. We consider three
distributionsto observe the influence of the variability of
the service time on the performance of the kanban sys-
tem: an Erlang-2 distribution with cv2 = 0.5; an expo-
nential distribution (cv2 = 1.0); a Coxian-2 distribution
with cv2 = 2.0. The comparison between analytical and
simulation results pertainingto the production capacity is
shown in Table IV. As expected, the production capacity
decreases when the variability of the distribution in-
creases. Again, the analytical method is fairly accurate.
60 / DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY

Table I
Production Capacity (Example 1)
Simulation Approximation
Confidence
Production Interval Production Relative
Configuration Capacity (%) Capacity Error(%) Iterations
1- 1: N = 3; K = 1 0.562 +0.5 0.547 -2.7 2
1- 2: N = 3; K = 3 0.800 +0.7 0.792 -1.0 2
1- 3: N = 3; K = 5 0.869 +1.3 0.865 -0.5 2
1- 4: N = 3; K = 10 0.926 +0.8 0.928 +0.2 2
1- 5: N = 3; K = 15 0.952 +1.2 0.951 -0.1 2
1- 6: N = 5; K = 1 0.484 +0.6 0.449 -7.0 4
1- 7: N = 5; K = 3 0.746 +0.8 0.731 -2.0 4
1- 8: N = 5; K = 5 0.833 +0.8 0.822 -1.3 4
1- 9: N = 5; K = 10 0.901 ?1.2 0.904 +0.3 4
1-10: N = 5; K = 15 0.943 ?1.1 0.934 -0.9 4
1-11: N = 10; K = 1 0.429 +0.5 0.379 -11.6 7
1-12: N = 10; K = 3 0.704 +0.7 0.680 -3.4 6
1-13: N = 10; K = 5 0.806 +0.9 0.786 -2.6 5
1-14: N = 10; K = 10 0.855 +0.5 0.883 -3.2 5
1-15: N = 10; K = 15 0.917 ?1.3 0.919 +0.2 5

Table II
Average Number of Backordered Demands, Mean Waiting Time of a
Backordered Demand and Proportion of Backordered Demands (Example 1)
PB
Configuration QD WB (%) Iterations
=
1-16: N 3; K = 5; AD = 0.1
Simulation 0.0 0.0 0.0
Approximation 0.0 0.0 0.0 1
1-17: N = 3; K = 5; AD = 0.5
Simulation 0.033 (+30%) 2.16 (+17%) 3.1
Approximation 0.035 2.06 3.4 2
1-18: N = 3; K = 5; AD = 0.625
Simulation 0.230 (+17%) 3.26 (?15%) 11.78
Approximation 0.222 3.00 11.82 3
1-19: N = 3; K = 5; AD = 0.8
Simulation 4.26 (?19%) 10.3 (?13%) 52.1
Approximation 4.56 10.1 56.3 4
1-20: N = 5; K = 5; AD = 0.1
Simulation 0.0 0.0 0.0
Approximation 0.0 0.0 0.0 1
1-21: N = 5; K = 5; AD = 0.5
Simulation 0.038 (?30%) 2.16 (?9%) 3.58
Approximation 0.0353 2.07 3.40 2
1-22: N = 5; K = 5; AD = 0.8
Simulation 8.93 (?22%) 17.2 (?15%) 65.2
Approximation 11.26 19.3 73.0 7
1-23: N = 10; K = 5; AD = 0.1
Simulation 0.0 0.0 0.0
Approximation 0.0 0.0 0.0 1
1-24: N = 10; K = 5; AD = 0.5
Simulation 0.0368 (?30%) 2.18 (?17%) 3.38
Approximation 0.0353 2.07 3.40 2
1-25: N = 10; K = 5; AD = 0.77
Simulation 5.95 (?22%) 13.7 (?14%) 56.9
Approximation 6.89 13.9 64.2 11
 DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY / 61
Table III
Average Work in Process (WIP) and Average Number of Finished Products
(FP) in Each Stage (Example 1)
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
Configuration WIP FP WIP FP WIP FP
1-17: N = 3; K = 5; AD = 0.5
Simulation 0.94 4.06 0.95 4.02 0.94 4.04
(+3.2%) (+0.7%) (+3.1%) (+0.7%) (+3.2%) (+0.8%)
Approximation 0.97 4.03 0.97 4.01 0.97 4.00
Error +3% -0.7% +2% -0.2% +3% -1%
1-19: N = 3; K = 5; AD = 0.8
Simulation 2.54 2.47 2.52 1.98 2.55 1.58
(?3.0%) (?4.0%) (?3.2%) (?5.0%) (?3.1%) (?6.3%)
Approximation 2.61 2.38 2.58 1.85 2.66 1.40
Error +2.7% -3.6% +2.4% -6.5% +4% -11%

The comparison between analytical and simulation re-
sults pertaining to the proportion of backordered de-
mands (PB)' as a function of the arrivalrate of demands AD
is shown in Figure 7. It appearsthat for cv2 less than 1, the
analytical results are very accurate. On the other hand,
the differencebetween the analyticaland simulationresults
tends to increase when cv2 increases beyond 1.
Let us now consider a more complex example (exam-
ple 3) corresponding to the kanban system shown in
Figure 3. The service time distributions are exponential,
Erlang, or Coxian-2 distributions. They are characterized
by the following parameters:average service rate at stage s
of the distribution,A, and transitionrate from stage s to
stage s + 1, as. These parameters are given in Table V.
The average visit rate of each station are also given in
Table V. They express that all parts require processing at
machines M1, M2, M3, M8, M9, and M1o, 80%of the parts
requireprocessing at machinesM4 and M5, while the other
20%requireprocessing at machinesM6 and M7. All stages
have the same number of kanbans, K. Figure 8 shows
the production capacity versus the number of kanbans
K. The production capacity is an increasing function of
the numberof kanbansand tends toward 0.57, which is the
service rate of the bottleneck station, namely station 3 (see
Table I). Again, the relative error of the approximation
compared to simulation results is relatively low (3% on
average). The computation time of the analytical method
(average of 15 seconds) is still much lower than that of the
simulation (average of 30 minutes). For the case of the
kanban system with backordered demands, we varied
the number of kanbans for each stage, K, from 5 to 20.
We chose an arrivalrate AD = 0.45, to satisfy the stabil-
ity condition (1). Indeed, the production capacity of the
system varies from 0.466 to 0.561 when the number of
kanbans varies from 5 to 20. Figure 9 shows the propor-
tion of backordered demands, PBS as a function of K.
Again, there is a good agreement between approximation
and simulation results. Note that PB is a decreasing
function of the number of kanbans.
It appears that the results provided by our analytical
method are fairly accurate for a large class of system
parameters. The general conclusions that can be drawn
from the examples here and from other examples that we
tested are as follows. Performance parameters that per-
tain to the saturated kanban system, mainly the produc-
tion capacity, are always very well estimated except if
the number of kanbans at the different stages is very
small. Performance parameters that pertain to kanban
systems with backordered demands are well estimated
unless one or more of the following conditions is encoun-
tered: the number of kanbans at the different stages is
very small; the arrival rate of demands is close to the
production capacity; or the processing time distributions
have high variability.
7. CONCLUDINGREMARKS
We conclude the paper by addressing two issues: How
general is the method presented here? How can this
method be used for designing kanban control systems?

Table IV
Production Capacity (Example 2)
Simulation Approximation
Confidence Relative
Production Interval Production Error
Configuration Capacity (%) Capacity (%) Iterations
2-1: N = 3; K = 5; cv2 = 0.5 0.926 ?0.2 0.932 +0.6 2
2-2: N = 3; K = 5; cv2 = 1 0.870 ?0.1 0.865 -0.6 2
2-3: N = 3; K = 5; cv2 = 2 0.787 ?0.5 0.786 -0.2 2
62 / DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY

35 0.61
t 1
r 30 - t cv2=2 > 0.5-
o approximation
~25-
+ simulation s 04-
20- o / simulation
~~~~~+
c 0.3 approximation
15
0lo] cXc v2=1 0.2-
~10
0.1 - I .
5 cv2=0.5 0 5 10 15 20
numberof kanbansper stage

0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 Figure 8. Production capacity versus the number of kan-
averagearrivalrateof demands bans per stages (example 3).

Figure 7. Proportion of backordered demands versus the
average arrival rate of demands for different
values of the squared coefficient of variation
(example 2).
One attractive feature of our method is that it can be
extended to handle different and/or more general situa-
tions than that considered in this paper. A first extension
concerns the external demand process. In this paper, we
have assumed that this process is Poisson. However,
more general arrival processes (namely PH arrival pro-
cesses) can be handled as well (Di Mascolo 1993). It is
also possible to consider the case where demands that
cannot be satisfied immediately may be lost instead of
backordered. In both cases, the only modification of the
method pertains to the analysis of synchronization sta-
tion To of stage N. A second extension deals with han-
dling more complex manufacturingstages. It is possible,
for instance, to consider cases where intermediate buff-
ers between machines have finite capacity. The product-
form approximation technique used to analyze a single-
stage kanban system can be adapted to handle this
situation (Baynat and Dallery). Other possible extensions
are currently working on these extensions (De Aravjo,
Di Mascolo and Frein 1993, Frein, Di Mascolo and
Dallery 1995).
The method presented in this paper can be used to
design kanban control systems. In this context, the issue
is to determine the optimal values of the parameters of
the system, namely the number of kanbans at each stage.
A typical way to define this optimization problem is as
follows: Minimize the average inventory carrying cost
while attaining a given quality of service for the custom-
ers. Quality of service can, for instance, be defined as
ensuring that no more than a given percentage of the
total number of demands are backordered. The inventory
carrying cost must take into account parts in the output
buffer of each stage as well as work in process within
each manufacturingstage. Costs at different stages may
be different due to value added through the process. Al-
ternatively, the objective function may express the trade-
off between inventory carryingcosts and backlog cost. In
any case, the optimal values of the parameterswould be
100

include dealing with generalized kanban systems, multi-

ple producers and/or consumers, assembly systems. We 80

60
Table V Q 60 \ * approximation
Data for Example 3
* simulation
Visit 40 -
Station Rate Al a1 /2 a2 /3 Mean cv2
1 1.0 1.0 - - - 1.0 1.0
20 -
2 1.0 0.6 - - - - 1.67 1.0
3 1.0 0.6 0.1 1.0 - 1.77 0.95
4 0.8 3.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 0.33 0*
5 0.8 1.2 - - - - 0.83 1.0 0 5 10 15 20
6 0.2 2.0 0.2 0.9 - - 0.72 1.33 number of kanbans per stage
7 0.2 2.0 1.0 3.0 1.0 3.0 1.17 0.35
8 1.0 2.0 0.1 0.2 - 1.0 5.0 Figure 9. Proportion of backordered demands versus
9 1.0 1.0 1.0 2.0 - 1.50 0.56 the number of kanbans per stage (example 3,
10 1.0 1.0 - - - - 1.0 1.0
AD = 0.45).
 DIMASCOLO, FREIN AND DALLERY / 63
determined using a search procedure that would use the ni -1

analytical method proposed in this paper to evaluate any H1 As(n)

n =O
given set of parameters. Designing efficient search proce- pI(nI) = p(O, 0) for n1 = 1,* , Ki
dures is a very important topic (De Aravjo, Frein and [Aa (0)]nj (A.3)
Di Mascolo 1995). -nu -1

Ki-I fll A U(n)

APPENDIX p1(O)= + > ] p(O,0).
L nu =1 [A I(O)]nu
Analysis of Synchronization Station T,
T, is a synchronization station fed by two Markovian The conditional throughputs of subsystem I can then be
arrival processes with state-dependent arrival rates obtained using the previous expressions in (3):
Au(nu), 0 < nu < Ki-1, and Ak(n1), 0 < n, < Ki. The
underlying CTMC is shown in Figure 10. The state of v1(n1) = Aa(O) for nI = 2, , Ki (A.4)
this CTMC is (n1, nu), where n, is the number of cus- nu -1
tomers (kanbans) and nu is the number of external re-
Ki_ f1 AU(n)
sources (raw parts) currently present in subsystem I. [
vj(1) = Au([) 1 + n=O
The steady-state probabilitiesp(n,, nu) are solutions of nu=1 [AI(O)]nu
the balance equations:
p(nI, O)Au (0) = p(nI - 1, O)AI (n -1) ACKNOWLEDGMENT
forn, = 1, , Ki (A.1) The authors would like to thank an anonymous referee
for several useful suggestions for improvingthe presenta-
p(O, nu)AI(O) =p(O, nu - 1)Aa(nu - 1) tion of this paper.
for nu = 1, ,Ki1.
We are actually interested in calculating the marginal REFERENCES
probabilitiesp1(n1), n, = 1, ... , Ki, which can be ex- BASKETT,F., K. M. CHANDY,R. R. MUNTZ AND F.
pressed as: PALACIos-GoMEZ. 1975. Open, Closed and Mixed Net-
works of Queues With Different Classes of Customers.
p1(n1) =p(nI, 0) for n1 = 1, ..., Ki (A.2)
J. ACM. 22, N?2, 248-260.
Ki-i BAYNAT, B., AND Y. DALLERY. 1993. A Unified View of
PI(O) = E p(O, nu). Product-form Approximation Techniques for General
nu =0
Closed Queueing Networks. Perform. Eval. 18(3),
Using (A.1), we get: 205-224.
BITRAN, G. R., AND L. CHANG. 1987. A Mathematical Pro-
gramming Approach to a Deterministic Kanban Sys-
XI (0) XI (1) XI (1) XI (Kj-1) tem. Mgmt. Sci. 33, 427-441.
O
(?'? (1,0) Ki(2,0) . (Ki,O) BRUELL, S. C., AND G. BALBO. 1980. Computational Algo-
rithms for Closed Queueing Networks. Elsevier North-
I XU(?) xu (0) xu (0) xu (?) Holland, Amsterdam.
)\ x (0) BuzAcoYr, J. A. 1989. Queueing Models of Kanban and
MRP Controlled Production Systems. Engin. Cost and
(0,1)
Prod. Econ.
CHENG, D. W. 1991. Line Reversibility of Tandem Queues
(I (?) ( u(1 With General Blocking. Working Paper.
DALLERY, Y. 1990. Approximate Analysis of General Open
(0,2) Queueing Networks With Restricted Capacity. Perfonn.
Eval. 11(3), 209-222.
k1(O)( Xu (2) DALLERY, Y., AND Y. FREIN. 1993. On Decomposition
Methods for Tandem Queueing Networks With Block-
ing. Opns. Res. 41, 386-399.
DALLERY, Y., AND S. B. GERSHWIN. 1992. Manufacturing
Flow Line Systems: A Review of Models and Analyti-
cal Results. Queue. Syst. 12, 3-94.
(I (?) Xu (K_l- 1) DALLERY, Y., Z. Liu AND D. TOWSLEY.1992. Properties of
Fork/Join Queueing Networks With Blocking Under
(0,Kj_1) Various Operating Mechanisms. Technical Report
COINS, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.
Figure 10. Markov chain that represents the behavior of DE ARAvJo, S. L., M. Di MASCOLO AND Y. FREIN. 1993.
queueing network T,. Performance Evaluation of Kanban Production Systems
64 / DIMASCOLO,FREINAND DALLERY
With Multiple Customers and Multiple Suppliers. In In-
temational Conference on Industrial Engineering and
Production Management (IEPM'93), FUCAM/IFIE/
INRIA, Mons Belgium.
DE ARAvJo, S. L., Y. FREIN AND M. Di MASCOLO. 1995.
Efficient Procedures for the Design of Kanban Systems.
In International Conference on Industrial Engineering
and Production Management (IEPM'95), Marrakech,
Morocco.
DELEERSNYDER, J. L., T. J. HODGSON, H. MULLER(-MALEK)
AND P. J. O'GRADY. 1989. Kanban Controlled Pull
Systems: An Analytic Approach. Mgmt. Sci. 35,
1079-1091, September 1989.
Di MASCOLO, M. 1993. Analysis of a Synchronization Sta-
tion for the Performance Evaluation of a Kanban Sys-
tem With a General Arrival Process of Demands. Eur.
J. Opnl. Res. (to appear).
Di MASCOLO, M., Y. FREIN AND Y. DALLERY. 1991. An An-
alytical Method for Performance Evaluation of Kanban
Controlled Production Systems. Technical Report
LAG, N?91-09.
Di MASCOLO, M., Y. FREIN, Y. DALLERY AND R. DAVID.
1989. Modeling of Kanban Systems Using Petri Nets.
In Third ORSA/TIMS Special Interest Conference on
Flexible Manufacturing Systems, MIT, Boston.
Elsevier Science Publishers, Amsterdam, 307-312.
Di MASCOLO, M., Y. FREIN, Y. DALLERY AND R. DAVID.
1991. A Unified Modeling of Kanban Systems Using
Petri Nets. Int. J. Flex. Manuf. Syst. 3(3/4), 275-307.
FREIN, Y., M. Di MASCOLO AND Y. DALLERY. 1995. On the
Design of Generalized Kanban Control Systems. Int. J.
Opns. in Prod. Mgmt. 15(9), 158-184.
GORDON, W. J., AND G. F. NEWELL. 1967. Closed Queueing
Networks With Exponential Servers. Opns. Res. 15,
252-267.
KARMARKAR, U. S. AND S. KEKRE. 1987. Batching Policy in
Kanban Systems. William E. Simon Graduate School of
Business Administration, Working Paper N? QM 87-06,
University of Rochester, Rochester, N. Y.
KIMURA, O., AND H. TERADA. 1981. Design and Analysis of
Pull System, A Method of Multi-Stage Production Con-
trol. Int. J. Prod. Res. 19(3), 241-253. March 1981.
LAVENBERG, S. S. 1978. Stability and Maximum Departure
Rate of Certain Open Queueing Networks Having Fi-
nite Capacity Constraint. RAIRO Comp. Sci. 12(4),
353-370.
LEE, Y.-J., AND P. ZIPKIN. 1992. Tandem Queues With
Planned Inventories. Opns. Res. 40, 936-947.
LEGATO, P., A. BOBBIO AND L. ROBERTI. 1989. The Effect
of Failures and Repairs on Multiple Cell Production
Lines. In Proceedings of 20th International Sympo-
sium on Automotive Technology and Automation,
Florence, Italy.
MARIE, R. 1980. Calculating Equilibrium Probabilities for
A(n)/Ck/1/N Queues. Perfonr. Eval. Rev. 9, 117-125.
MITRA, D., AND I. MITRANI. 1990. Analysis of a Kanban
Discipline for Cell Coordination in Production Lines. I.
Mgmt. Sci. 36, 1548-1566.
MITRA, D., AND I. MITRANI. 1991. Analysis of a Kanban
Discipline for Cell Coordination in Production Lines,
II: Stochastic Demands. Opns. Res. 35, 807-823.
MONDEN, Y. 1983. Toyota Production System: Practical Ap-
proach to Production Management. Industrial Engineer-
ing and Management Press, Norcross, Georgia.
NEUTS, M. F. 1981. Matrix Geometric Solutions in Stochas-
tic Models. The John Hopkins University Press,
Baltimore.
PHILIPPE, B., Y. SAAD AND W. J. STEWART. 1989. Numerical
Methods in Markov Chains Modeling. Opns. Res. 40,
1156-1179.
SHINGO, S. 1981. Study of Toyota Production System from
Industrial Engineering View-Point. Japan Management
Association.
So, K. C. 1989. Allocating Buffer Storage in a Flexible Man-
ufacturing System. Int. J. Flex. Manuf. Syst. 1(3),
223-233.
So, K. C., AND S. C. PINAULT. 1988. Allocating Buffer Stor-
ages in a Pull System. Int. J. Prod. Res. 15(12),
1959-1980.
SPEARMAN, M. L. 1992. Customer Service in Pull Systems.
Opns. Res. 40, 948-958.
SPEARMAN, M. L., D. L. WOODRUFF AND W. J. Hopp. 1990.
CONWIP: A Pull Alternative to Kanban. Int. J. Prod.
Res. 28, 879-894.
TAYUR, S. 1993. Structural Properties and a Heuristic for
Kanban Controlled Serial Lines. Mgmt. Sci. 39,
1347-1368.
Uzsoy, R., AND L. A. MARTIN-VEGA. 1990. Modelling
Kanban-Based Demand-Pull Systems: A Survey and
Critique. Manuf. Rev. 3(3).
ZIPKIN, P. 1989. A Kanban-Like Production Control Sys-
tem: Analysis of Simple Models. Research Working Pa-
per N?89-1, Graduate School of Business, Colombia
University, New York.