Replenishment Analysis in Distribution Requirements Planning

Most research on lot sizing has been for the case of a manufacturing system. In this paper, analogous issues are studied for a distribution network. Specifically, we consider the choice of shipment quantities within distribution requirements planning (DRP). A simulation model of DRP in a multi-echelon, rolling-schedule environment is used to examine, in conditions of both certain and uncertain demand, the performance of five lot-sizing rules. We conducted a full-factorial experiment in which four additional parameters were varied: distribution network structure (two options), demand distribution (three options), forecast error distribution (three options), and ordering cost (three values), as suggested by the consulting study which motivated our research. We found that for DRP, contrary to the “shop floor” wisdom on MRP, the choice of lot-sizing method can be important. Generally the Silver-Meal and Bookbinder-Tan heuristics were significantly better than the other methods.

[1]  Joseph D. Blackburn,et al.  A methodology for predicting single-stage lot-sizing performance: Analysis and experiments , 1985 .

[2]  H. Albert Napier,et al.  Optimal Multi-Level Lot Sizing for Requirements Planning Systems , 1980 .

[3]  James H. Bookbinder,et al.  Production lot sizing for deterministic rolling schedules , 1986 .

[4]  Suresh Chand,et al.  Rolling Horizon Procedures for the Facilities in Series Inventory Model with Nested Schedules , 1983 .

[5]  L. V. Wassenhove,et al.  COST INCREASES DUE TO DEMAND UNCERTAINTY IN MRP LOT SIZING , 1983 .

[6]  Candace Arai Yano,et al.  Safety Stocks in MRP-Systems with Emergency Setups for Components , 1986 .

[7]  James H. Bookbinder,et al.  Two Lot‐sizing Heuristics for the Case of Deterministic Time‐varying Demands , 1985 .

[8]  Eric M. Malstrom,et al.  Computer simulation of lot-sizing algorithms in three-stage multi-echelon inventory systems , 1984 .

[9]  Dean H. Kropp,et al.  A comparison of strategies to dampen nervousness in MRP systems , 1986 .

[10]  James H. Bookbinder,et al.  Rolling horizon production planning for probabilistic time-varying demands , 1986 .

[11]  Urban Wemmerlöv,et al.  Lot-sizing under uncertainty in a rolling schedule environment , 1984 .

[12]  U. Wemmerlöv,et al.  A comparison of discrete, single stage lot-sizing heuristics with special emphasis on rules based on the marginal cost principle , 1982 .

[13]  Basheer M. Khumawala,et al.  Multi-level lot sizing in material requirements planning: an empirical investigation , 1982, Comput. Oper. Res..

[14]  U. Karmarkar,et al.  Computationally Efficient Optimal Solutions to the Lot-Sizing Problem in Multistage Assembly Systems , 1984 .

[15]  H. L. Ong,et al.  Expected Performance of Some Lot-Sizing Heuristics in a Rolling-Schedule Environment , 1984 .

[16]  Joseph D. Blackburn,et al.  Improved heuristics for multistage requirements planning systems , 1982 .

[17]  John J. DeMatteis.  An Economic Lot-Sizing Technique I: The Part-Period Algorithm , 1968, IBM Syst. J..

[18]  Louis E. Yelle.  Materials requirements lot sizing: a multi-level approach , 1979 .

[19]  Avraham Shtub,et al.  An experimental study of the efficiency of integer multiple lot sizes in multi-echelon production inventory systems , 1985 .

[20]  Marc Lambrecht,et al.  A comparative study of lot sizing procedures for multi-stage assembly systems , 1983 .

[21]  An Experimental Analysis of the Use of Echelon Holding Costs and Single Stage Lot‐Sizing Procedures in Multi‐Stage Production/Inventory Systems , 1981 .

[22]  Joseph D. Blackburn,et al.  The impact of a rolling schedule in a multi-level MRP system , 1982 .

[23]  M. H. Wagner,et al.  Dynamic Lot Size Models for Multi-Stage Assembly Systems , 1973 .

[24]  Reuven Karni.  A LOWER BOUND FOR THE SINGLE-LEVEL DYNAMIC HORIZON LOT-SIZING PROBLEM , 1985 .