IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ids/eujine/v14y2020i1p85-126.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic order quantity models for the shipment containing defective items with inspection errors and a sub-lot inspection policy

Author

Listed:
  • Harun Öztürk

Abstract

This paper assumes that there may be some defective items in the various lots of an ordered shipment and chooses a sub-lot inspection policy. Another assumption that this paper makes is that a shipment is sent by a distant supplier and, therefore, the replacement of the defective items is not economical if an additional order is given to the same supplier. This paper incorporates misclassification errors, which are of two types: type 1 and type 2. In order to deal with the received defective items in the shipment, two cases are discussed in this study. The first case is to send them back to the repair shop to be reworked, whereas in the second case, those defective items are sold and replaced with perfect items by buying at a higher cost from a local supplier. For each case, a mathematical model is developed, and an example is solved. The results show a close connection between the optimal order size and sample size, which can be adjusted to maximise the total profit. The results also indicate that the local purchase of replacements for defective items tends to produce greater total profit than reworking them. [Received: 26 June 2018; Accepted: 17 May 2019]

Suggested Citation

  • Harun Öztürk, 2020. "Economic order quantity models for the shipment containing defective items with inspection errors and a sub-lot inspection policy," European Journal of Industrial Engineering, Inderscience Enterprises Ltd, vol. 14(1), pages 85-126.
  • Handle: RePEc:ids:eujine:v:14:y:2020:i:1:p:85-126
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=105085
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ids:eujine:v:14:y:2020:i:1:p:85-126. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sarah Parker (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=210 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.