©International Logistics and Supply

Chain Congress’ 2005

November 23-24, 2005, Istanbul,
TURKIYE
4
In a distribution center that
uses crossdocking, traditional
warehousing may also be
used. For example, in a
Supervalu distribution center
incoming products are either
crossdocked by feeding into a
sortation system and routed to
shipping doors, or moved to
the four-level inventory area
through conveyors [8].
WHEN IS CROSSDOCKING
APPROPRIATE?
Geoffrey Sisko suggests that
products with predictable, high
demand and high cubic
volume flow, and perishable
products are ideal candidates
for crossdocking [9]. For
example, [10] reports that the
supermarket chain Asda
initiated the crossdocking
scheme
partnering with Kimberly-
Clark, the paper industry giant
which supplies high-cube,
low-
value products such as toilet
tissue and paper towels.
Choice of these products for
the pilot
crossdocking program is very
appropriate, since these would
normally occupy significant
warehouse space and cause
congestion if traditional
warehousing were used [11].
Sisko warns that products with
“value-added requirements,
initial launches and
promotional products are not
good candidates for
crossdocking” [9]. However,
in [8] mass
merchandisers are reported to
implement crossdocking for
especially seasonal or
promotional items. This
conflict in business practice
literature suggests that a
scientific
approach, possibly through
building mathematical models,
should be followed for
identifying which of the two
conflicting statements hold
under which conditions.
One issue that rises with
perishable products
(especially cooled, chilled or
frozen
products) is “lot control” [12].
Manufacturers create products
by lots, and tracking the lot is
required to have a time-
sequenced availability to the
customers. Lot control only
further
complicates crossdocking. One
simplification is applying
“FIFO Granularity”: For
example,
if FIFO granularity is
defined for 3 months,
instead of pulling and
shipping the older
products from storage,
crossdocked items that just
came in are shipped ([6], page
39). In
this approach, the older items
are regularly replaced by
those that come in new,
avoiding
product spoilage
©International Logistics and Supply
Chain Congress’ 2005
November 23-24, 2005, Istanbul,
TURKIYE
4
In a distribution center that
uses crossdocking, traditional
warehousing may also be
used. For example, in a
Supervalu distribution center
incoming products are either
crossdocked by feeding into a
sortation system and routed to
shipping doors, or moved to
the four-level inventory area
through conveyors [8].
WHEN IS CROSSDOCKING
APPROPRIATE?
Geoffrey Sisko suggests that
products with predictable, high
demand and high cubic
volume flow, and perishable
products are ideal candidates
for crossdocking [9]. For
example, [10] reports that the
supermarket chain Asda
initiated the crossdocking
scheme
partnering with Kimberly-
Clark, the paper industry giant
which supplies high-cube,
low-
value products such as toilet
tissue and paper towels.
Choice of these products for
the pilot
crossdocking program is very
appropriate, since these would
normally occupy significant
warehouse space and cause
congestion if traditional
warehousing were used [11].
Sisko warns that products with
“value-added requirements,
initial launches and
promotional products are not
good candidates for
crossdocking” [9]. However,
in [8] mass
merchandisers are reported to
implement crossdocking for
especially seasonal or
promotional items. This
conflict in business practice
literature suggests that a
scientific
approach, possibly through
building mathematical models,
should be followed for
identifying which of the two
conflicting statements hold
under which conditions.
One issue that rises with
perishable products
(especially cooled, chilled or
frozen
products) is “lot control” [12].
Manufacturers create products
by lots, and tracking the lot is
required to have a time-
sequenced availability to the
customers. Lot control only
further
complicates crossdocking. One
simplification is applying
“FIFO Granularity”: For
example,
if FIFO granularity is
defined for 3 months,
instead of pulling and
shipping the older
products from storage,
crossdocked items that just
came in are shipped ([6], page
39). In
this approach, the older items
are regularly replaced by
those that come in new,
avoiding
product spoilage
LITERATURE REVIEW

The term “crossdocking" has been used to describe different types of operations, all of
which involves the rapid consolidation and shipment of products. Napolitano [3]
classified the various types of crossdocking operations. These include manufacturing,
distributor, transportation, retail and opportunistic crossdocking. Napolitano also describes
crossdocking as the “JIT in the distribution arena”. In the manufacturing area,
crossdocking constitutes the receiving and consolidating of inbound supplies where a
manufacture can use a warehouse to receive supplies of parts for demands ascertained
from an MRP. In retail crossdocking, retailers receive products from multiple vendors
who use distributors with multiple warehouses. In general, crossdocks are complex,
requiring a high degree of coordination between suppliers, customers and distributors
to create shipments based on anticipated supplies and demands [5]. One important
research area for cross-docking is to treat crossdocks as a network of distribution and
transhipment points. Donaldson et al. [6] studied a network of crossdocks for the US
Postal Service where 148 Area Distribution Centres serve as crossdocks, each receiving,
sorting, packing and dispatching mail according to operating schedules. Each distribution
center serves as an origin as well as destination nod where schedules were driven by mail
delivery standards. Ratliff et al. [7] studied a load-driven network, in which deliveries
take place when there are sufficient products waiting for transportation. They studied the
North American automobile delivery systems to determine the ideal number and location of
crossdocks in a network and how shipments flowed between them. In their study, a
minimum inventory strategy was the key in attempting to minimize the number of
vehicles at the mixing center (crossdocks). Chen, Guo and Lim [8] studied crossdocking
network scheduling where time windows for deliveries and pickups are considered.
They also considered crossdock-handling costs which are use to penalize delays.

Also there are quite amount of research work on crossdocking facility design. Barthold
and Gue [9] determined the best shape for a crossdock by analyzing the assignment of
receiving and shipping docks. The staging of products in a crossdock to avoid floor
congestion and increase throughput has also been studied together with the effects of
different combinations of number of workers in receiving and shipping on throughput
[10]. A simulated annealing procedure was used to construct effective layout to reduce
labour costs [11]. A simulation model of a generic cross-docking facility [12] to
examine the operational risks associated with individual crossdocking facilities within a
company’s distribution network under a dynamic environment. With the Just-in-time concept
being accepted widely, the implementation of crossdock operations repositions the focus
from warehousing inventory to the one of managing inventory through-flow in transit
from suppliers to customers. In all crossdocking situations, the timing of delivery and pickup
is crucial to effective operations. The performance of crossdocking depends on good
planning and scheduling. Based on literature review, there is still shortage of operations
planning solution for crossdocking logistics with considerations on vehicle arriving,
container allocation and exchanging sequencing. There is also shortage of real-time
scheduling for handle dynamics on container arriving, allocation and resource
uncertainties.

WHEN IS CROSSDOCKING APPROPRIATE

Geoffrey Sisko suggests that products with predictable, high demand and high cubic volume
flow, and perishable products are ideal candidates for crossdocking [9]. For example, [10]
reports that the supermarket chain Asda initiated the crossdocking scheme partnering with
Kimberly-Clark, the paper industry giant which supplies high-cube, low-value products such
as toilet tissue and paper towels. Choice of these products for the pilot crossdocking program
is very appropriate, since these would normally occupy significant warehouse space and
cause congestion if traditional warehousing were used [11]. Sisko warns that products with
“value-added requirements, initial launches and promotional products are not good
candidates for crossdocking” [9]. However, in [8] mass merchandisers are reported to
implement crossdocking for especially seasonal or promotional items. This conflict in
business practice literature suggests that a scientific approach, possibly through building
mathematical models, should be followed for identifying which of the two conflicting
statements hold under which conditions. One issue that rises with perishable products
(especially cooled, chilled or frozen products) is “lot control” [12]. Manufacturers create
products by lots, and tracking the lot is required to have a time-sequenced availability to
the customers. Lot control only further complicates crossdocking. One simplification is
applying “FIFO Granularity”: For example, if FIFO granularity is defined for 3 months,
instead of pulling and shipping the older products from storage, crossdocked items that
just came in are shipped ([6], page 39). In this approach, the older items are regularly
replaced by those that come in new, avoiding product spoilage.

Hybrid Descriptive and Analytical Models

Solution to mitigate

In order to reduce costs and increase efficiency of a supply chain

system, cross docking is one of the most important strategies of
warehousing for consolidation shipments from different suppliers to
different customers. Products are collected from suppliers by
inbound trucks and then moved to customers by outbound trucks
through cross dock. Scheduling of trucks plays important role in the
cross docking system. In this paper we consider a single cross
dock, multi-product with multiple dock doors which sequence of
products and trucks scheduling are specified simultaneously. Also
we have considered multiple temporary storages with different
capacities and equipment that each one is used for a specific set of
products. These products are perishable; so avoiding from storage
is necessary. A two- level optimization model for this problem is
proposed. First level includes scheduling of inbound and outbound
trucks aim to the minimizing make span and second level is
maximizing direct shipment in order to reduce the level of storage.
The problem is mathematically formulated by a mixed integer non
linier programming (MINLP). A real data set is used to solve the
model and results confirm better efficiency and less storage.