Embed
Email

Disney

Document Sample

Shared by: xiaoyounan
Categories
Tags
Stats
views:
4
posted:
12/2/2011
language:
English
pages:
63
The dynamics of material

flows in supply chains

Dr Stephen Disney

Logistics Systems Dynamics Group

Cardiff Business School

1000 1000

1000









Orders

800 800

800







600 600

600









400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









Methodological

The bullwhip

Economics of

Implementing a

Supply chain

The golden

The future

approaches the

Solutions tolaw

Square root to

in

effect the

thebullwhip

bullwhip

smoothing rule

for

strategies for taming

of bullwhip rule

solving

bullwhip problem

replenishment

effect

in Tesco

chains

supply problem

the bullwhip effect

bullwhip

The bullwhip effect in supply chains

1000 1000

1000

Orders







800 800

800







600 600

600









400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

Measures of the bullwhip effect

Stochastic measures Deterministic measures









 Orders

2

Var(Orders)



 Demand Var( Demand)

2







 Orders Stdev(Orders)



 Demand Stdev( Demand)



 Orders

Orders COV Orders



 Demand COV Demand

 Demand

1000 1000

1000

Orders

800 800

800







600 600

600









The bullwhip effect is important

400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









because it causes

Unstable production schedules

Insufficient or excessive capacities

Increased lead-times





Poor customer service

due to unavailable products





Runaway transportation and

warehousing costs

Excessive labour and learning costs



Up to 30% of costs are due to the bullwhip

effect!

How the bullwhip effect

creates unnecessary costs

Demand +

+ Lead-time

Variance +

+

+ +

Capacity

+

Overtime / + +

+

Agency work / +

Stock-outs Stock

Subcontracting -

Utilisation







- + +

+

+ Costs + Obsolescence

1000 1000

1000









Orders

800 800

800







600 600

600









400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









Methodological

approaches to

solving the

bullwhip problem

Representations of time





Discrete Time v Continuous Time

Inventory positions are assessed Inventory positions are assessed

and orders are placed at discrete and order rates are adjusted at all

moments in time moments of time

- At the end of every day, or the end - May be suitable for a petrol refinery

of every week, for example or in a chemical plant

- May be suitable of the way a - The system states are known at

supermarket operates, or a every moment of time

distribution company

- In between the discrete moments

of time nothing is known about the

system

Continuous time approaches

L f (t )( s )   f (t )e  st dt

t



0



Laplace transforms Aleksandr Mikhailovich

Lyapunov 1857-1918



Leonhard Euler Pierre-Simon Laplace

1707 - 1783 1749 - 1827

 0



xt   f  t , xt ,  xt   d  

d

 

dt   

Differential equations





f (W )  We W



Johann Heinrich Lambert

1728 – 1777 Lambert W functions

Discrete time approaches

Stochastic processes / ARIMA

p d q

D   D  D   

t i   t j k t k

t

i 1

i  j 1 k 1

t



George Box

 

    

  White

Auto Regressive term s Moving Averageterm s noise

Integrative term s

The ARMA(1,1) demand process for 16

P&G products in their Homecare range

Discrete time approaches

Stochastic processes / ARIMA

p d q

D   D  D     

t i t j k t k

t

i 1

i  j 1 k 1

t



George Box

 

    

  White

Auto Regressive term s Moving Averageterm s noise

Integrative term s











F ( z )  Z  f (t )   f (t ) z t

E ft 1 f1,..., ft   ft t 0



Martingales z-transforms

Yakov Zalmanovitch Tsypkin

Joseph Leo Doob

1920-2004

1919-1997



State space

methods

Xt  1  Ax[t ]  Bu (t )

Y[t ]  Cx[t ]  Du (t )

Rudolfl Kalman

1930-

Table of transforms and their properties

Other useful approaches



F k    f x e 2ikx dx



Jean Baptiste Joseph

Fourier (1768-1830)

Fourier transforms





The beer game

John Sterman









Jay Forrester

(1918-)





System dynamics / simulation

1000 1000

1000









Orders

800 800

800







600 600

600









400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









Supply chain

strategies for taming

the bullwhip effect

Traditional supply chains

Definition: „Traditional‟ means that each level in the supply chain issues production

orders and replenishes stock without considering the situation at either up- or

downstream tiers of the supply chain. This is how most supply chains still operate; no

formal collaboration between the retailer and supplier.









Bullwhip increases geometrically in a traditional supply chain

Supply chains with information sharing

Definition: Information exchange (or information sharing) means that retailer and

supplier still order independently, yet exchange demand information in order to align

their replenishment orders and forecasts for capacity and long-term planning.









Bullwhip increases linearly in supply chains with information sharing

Synchronised Supply (VMI)

Definition: Synchronized supply eliminates one decision point and merges the

replenishment decision with the production and materials planning of the supplier. Here,

the supplier takes charge of the customer‟s inventory replenishment on the operational

level, and uses this visibility in planning his own supply operations.









Bullwhip may not increase at all in VMI supply chains

Integrating internal and external decision in

supply chains with long lead-times









RFID technologies now allow

us to monitor the distribution leg

1000 1000

1000









Orders

800 800

800







600 600

600









400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









Solutions to the

bullwhip problem

Replenishment rules and the

bullwhip problem

• Replenishment decisions influence both inventory levels &

production rates.



• A common replenishment decision is the “Order-Up-To” (OUT)

policy….

 

WIP

Desired





Target net stock



Net stock Tp 

Actual WIP



Ot  ˆ

Dt:t T p 1  ( TNS  NS t )  ( Dt:t i  WIPt )

ˆ

  

   i 1

Ordersat tim e t

Forecastof dem and Inventorydiscrepancy 

  

m adeat tim e t of dem and WIP discrenpancy

in period t T p 1



Set via the newsboy

Forecasts

approach to achieve

the critical fractile

Generating forecasts inside the OUT policy



• Exponential smoothing ˆ ˆ

Dt  Dt 1 

D  D 

t

ˆ

t 1



1  Ta

Tm



D t i

• Moving average ˆ

Dt  i 1



Tm



• Conditional expectation Dt ,t  x  EDt  x Dt i , i  0..

ˆ





We will assume normally distributed i.i.d.

demand & exponential smoothing

forecasting from now on

The inventory and

WIP balance equations



NSt  NSt 1  Ot Tp 1  Dt

 

 

Demandat time t

Previousordersat

time t T p 1









WIP  WIP1  Ot 1  Ot Tp 1

t t









The replenishment lead-time, Tp

The influence of the

replenishment policy

The inventory balance equation….

NSt  NSt 1  Ot Tp 1  Dt

 

 

Demandat time t

Previousordersat

time t T p 1





….shows us that the replenishment policy

influences both the orders and the net stock.

Therefore, when studying bullwhip we should also

consider

 Net Stock Var( Net Stock)

2

NSAmp  2 

 Demand Var(Demand)

The impact of forecasting on net

stock variance amplification

NSAmp 

 2

NetStock

 1  Tp 

1  T 

p

2





 2

Demand 1  2Ta 

• As Ta   then NSAmp approaches 1+Tp.

• Minimising the Mean Squared Error between the

forecast of demand over the lead-time and review

period and its realisation will result in the minimum

inventory variance.

• This holds in a single echelon (Vassian 1954) and

across a complete supply chain (Hosoda and Disney,

2006) when the traditional OUT policy is used

The impact of forecasting

on bullwhip

 5  2T  2T 3  T   T 7  4T 

2 2



Bullwhip  

Orders a p p a p



 2

Demand 1  Ta 1  2Ta 

23  2Ta Tp

2

5  2Ta 2Tp

  

1  2Ta 1  3Ta  2Ta 1  3Ta  2Ta 2

2







As Ta   then bullwhip approaches unity.



Thus, we can see that as we make more

accurate forecasts the bullwhip problem is

reduced (but is not eliminated in this scenario)

Reducing lead-times

• Reducing lead-times usually (but not always)

reduces bullwhip

5  2Ta 23  2Ta Tp

2

2Tp

Bullwhip   

1  2Ta 1  3Ta  2Ta

2

1  3Ta  2Ta

2









• However, reducing lead-times will always

reduce the inventory variance



NSAmp  1  Tp 

1  T 

p

2





1  2Ta 

The OUT policy through the eyes of a

control engineer… Desired 

Target

Target 

 

 WIP

WIP

Desired



1  Net stock

net stock

 Net stock 1 T pT p

net stock

 

WIP

Actual

Actual WIP



* TNS  NS  ( (ˆ tˆt t i WIP

OtOt   DtDtT:tpT1p 1   1*((TNS  NS t t )) 1* * DD:ti WIPt t ) )

ˆ ˆ

:t 

   

  

Ti   Tw i:  

 11

Ordersat tim e t e t

Ordersat tim Forecastof dem andand

Forecastof dem y

Inventorydiscrepanc y

Inventorydiscrepanc  

i

 

m at tim tim e of dem

m adeadeat e t of tdem andand WIP discrenpan

WIP discrenpan cy

cy

in period 1

in period t TtpT p 1

Unity feedback gains!

Inventory feedback gain (Ti) WIP feedback gain (Tw)



• A control engineer would not be at all surprised

that the OUT policy generates bullwhip as there

are unit gains in the two feedback loops

• Let‟s add in a couple of proportional feedback

controllers….

The first proportional controller:

The Maxwell Governor

1000 1000

1000









Orders

800 800

800







600 600

600









400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









The golden

replenishment rule

Matched feedback controllers

 Tp 

Ot  Dt:t Tp 1  TNS  NS t     Dt:t i

ˆ 1 1 ˆ  WIP 

t

Ti Ti  i 1 

• When Tw=Ti the maths becomes very much

simpler

• With MMSE forecasting ( Ta   ) we have…

 Orders

2

1

Bullwhip  2 

 Demand 2Ti  1

 NetStock

NSAmp  2

2

 1  Tp 

Ti  12  T  Ti 2

 Demand 2Ti  1 2Ti  1

p

The golden ratio in supply chains

For i.i.d. demand, matched feedback controllers, MMSE forecasting

The golden ratio

1 5

  1.618034

2









1.6180339887498948482045868343656381177203091798057628621354486227052604628189024497072...…

1000 1000

1000









Orders

800 800

800







600 600

600









400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









Economics of

the bullwhip

effect

Economics of inventory



Inventory costs are governed by the safety stock (TNS)



The Target Net Stock (TNS*) is an investment decision to be optimized





In each period, when the

inventory is positive a holding

cost is incurred of £H per unit.



In each period, if a backlog

occurs (inventory is negative),

a backlog cost of £B per unit

is incurred

The economics of capacity



Capacity per period = Average demand +/- slack capacity

The amount of slack capacity (S*) is an investment decision to be optimized





Production above capacity

results in some over-time

working (or sub-contracting).

The cost of this type of

capacity is £P per unit of

over-time.



Production below capacity

results in some lost capacity

cost of £N per unit lost.

Costs are a linear function of the

standard deviation

Setting the amount of safety stock we need via the

newsboy…  1  B  H  

*

TNS   NS 2  erf 

 



 B  H 

… and the amount of capacity to invest in…

 1  P  N  

S  O

*

2  erf 

 

  N  P

…for a given set of costs (H, B, N, P) and lead-time, (Tp)

2 2

1  2B  1  2N 

erf  B  H 1 erf 1 N  P 

 NS B  H e  

 O N  P e  

Total costs  

2 2



thus linearly related

Total costs are Constants Bullwhip costs

Inventory costs

to the standard deviations

Sample designs for the 4

different scenarios

Assuming the costs are;

Holding cost, H=£1, Backlog cost, B=£9

Lost capacity cost, N=£4, Over-time cost, P=£6

Lead-time

Tp=1 Tp=3

TNS*=1.81 TNS*=2.56

Inventory feedback





Ti=1









S*=0.25 S*=0.25

£T=6.34 £T=7.37

gain









TNS*=2.27 TNS*=2.99

Ti=Ti*









S*=0.1001 S*=0.091

Ti*=3.69 Ti*=4.32

£T=4.63 £T=5.49

1000 1000

1000









Orders

800 800

800







600 600

600









400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









Square root law

for bullwhip

Distribution Network

Design: Bullwhip costs

12 customers





… n DC‟s







One manufacturer



Each customer produces an i.i.d. demand,

normally distributed with a mean of 5 and unit variance



All lead-times in the system are one period long

…and it all depends on how many

distribution centres we have…



Each customer‟s demand = N(5,1)









DC demand= N (60 , 12 )





Factory demand=N (60 , 12 )



Number of DC‟s (n) 1 2 3 4 6 12

Demand process faced by each DC N (60 , 12 )

Factory demand

N (60 , 12 )

… for 2 DC’s…



Each customer‟s demand = N(5,1)









DC demand=

N (30 , 6 )

DC demand=

N (30 , 6 ) Factory demand=N (60 , 12 )



Number of DC‟s (n) 1 2 3 4 6 12

Demand process faced by each DC N (60 , 12 ) N (30 , 6 )

Factory demand

N (60 , 12 ) N (60 , 12 )

… for 3 DC’s…



Each customer‟s demand = N(5,1)









Each DC‟s demand=

N ( 20 , 4 ) Factory demand=N (60 , 12 )



Number of DC‟s (n) 1 2 3 4 6 12

Demand process faced by each DC N (60 , 12 ) N (30 , 6 ) N ( 20 , 4 )

Factory demand

N (60 , 12 ) N (60 , 12 ) N (60 , 12 )

… for 4 DC’s…



Each customer‟s demand = N(5,1)









Each DC‟s demand=

Factory demand=N (60 , 12 )

N (15 , 3 )

Number of DC‟s (n) 1 2 3 4 6 12

Demand process faced by each DC N (60 , 12 ) N (30 , 6 ) N ( 20 , 4 ) N (15 , 3 )

Factory demand

N (60 , 12 ) N (60 , 12 ) N (60 , 12 ) N (60 , 12 )

Inventory

n The Square Root Law

Bullwhip

n

Number of DC‟s, n

1 2 3 4 6 12

Inventory

£8.59 £12.15 £14.89 £17.20 £21.06 £29.78

cost

Inventory cost

£8.59 £8.59 £8.60 £8.60 £8.60 £8.60

n



“If the inventories of a single product (or stock keeping unit) are originally

maintained at a number (n) of field locations (refereed to as the

Number of DC‟s, n

but

decentralised system) 1 are then consolidated into one central inventory

2 3 4 6 12

Capacity decentralised systeminventory

then the ratio £13.38 £18.93 £23.18 £26.77  n

£32.78 £46.36

cost

centralised systeminventory

exists”,Capacity cost £13.38

Maister, (1976). £13.39 £13.38 £13.39 £13.38 £13.38

n

Bullwhip

Proof of “the Square Root

n Law for bullwhip” 2

 2N 

 erf 1 1

 O N  P e



 N P 

The bullwhip (capacity) costs are given by C£    OY

2

In the decentralised supply chain the standard deviation of the orders is ,



 O  n  c2

In the centralised supply chain the standard deviation of the orders is



 O  n c2

Thus,





decentralised bullwhip costs n  c Y

2



centralise d bullwhip costs





n c Y

2

 n



which is the “Square Root Law for Bullwhip”.

1000 1000

1000









Orders

800 800

800







600 600

600









400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









Implementing a

smoothing rule

in Tesco

Tesco project brief

• Tesco‟s store replenishment algorithms were

generating a variable workload on the physical

delivery process



– this generated unnecessary costs





• The purpose of the project was to;

– investigate the store replenishment rules to evaluate their

dynamic performance

– to identify if they generated bullwhip

– offer solutions to any bullwhip problems

Inventory replenishment approaches

High volume products

• Account for 65% of sales volume and 35% of product lines



• Deliveries occur up to 3 times a day

The simulation approach

Weekly workload profile:

Before and after

Peak weekly

Peak weekly workload workload amplified

smoothed by modified by existing system

system

Summary

• Tesco‟s replenishment system was found to increase the daily

variability of workload by 185% in the distribution centres



• A small change to the replenishment algorithms was

recommended that smoothed daily variability to

approximately 75% of the sales variability



• The solution was applied to 3 of the 7 order calculations. This

accounted for 65% of the total sales value of Tesco UK



• This created a The Tescoworking environment in the distribution

stable case study will be discussed in

system. more detail this afternoon in

the President’s Medal presentation

1000 1000

1000









Orders

800 800

800







600 600

600









400 400 400









200 200 200









0 0 0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









The future

of bullwhip

Multiple products with interacting

demand



Demand for product 1 at time t







D1,t  1,1D1,t 1  1, 2 D2,t 1  1,t

D2,t  2, 2 D2,t 1  2,1D1,t 1   2,t

Auto-regressive process with interaction with the other product

Demand for product 2 at time t Auto-regressiveitself Random processes

The Inventory Routing and

Joint Replenishment Problem

• In a multiple product or multiple customer scenario

• Place an order to bring inventory up-to S,

– if inventory is below a reorder point

– OR if inventory is below a “can-deliver” level AND another product (or retailer)

has reached its reorder point









Consolidation of orders/ deliveries can

generate significant savings

The interaction between bullwhip

inventory variance & lead-times

1000









800









600









400









200









0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









Replenishment orders



Production Lead time 1000









800









Retailer

600









orders 400





Manufacturer 200









0

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80









Consumer Demand





RetailerManufacturer his orders (with a onto the manufacturer

uses an OUT policy and places queuing model.

If the retailer smoothesis represented by aorders proportional controller)

Operates on a make to order principle

Processes can replenish first served basis

then the manufacturerorders on a first comethe retailers orders quicker.

Thus there is an interaction effect between bullwhip and lead-

times that allows supply chains to break the inventory / order

variance trade-off!

Multi-echelon supply

chain policies

The impact of errors

• Demand parameter mis-identification

• Demand model mis-identification

• Lead-time mis-identification

• Information delays

• Random errors in information

• Non-linear, time-varying systems

• …

Thank you

The dynamics of material flows in supply chains





Dr Stephen Disney

Logistics Systems Dynamics Group

Cardiff Business School







www.bullwhip.co.uk www.cardiff.ac.uk

Steve@bullwhip.co.uk DisneySM@cardiff.ac.uk

The IOBPCS family

Stability issues (Tp=1)

Stability issues (Tp=2)



Related docs
Other docs by xiaoyounan
irregular plural verbs spelling
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
pres8
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
50889
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
inscritos_andaluz_absoluto_05
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
Week 2 Term 3 Aug 8th
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
F1
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
suspensions_extensions
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
dangerous minds journal
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
CommitteeontheRightsoftheChild
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
projectsummary_1
Views: 0  |  Downloads: 0
By registering with docstoc.com you agree to our
privacy policy

You are almost ready to download!

You are almost ready to download!