Transportation model under weighted insecurity

• Autorzy: Kareem B.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.21008/j.2083-4950.2018.8.3.4

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The conventional linear programming based transportation model in the previous studies was examined and found to be deficient in practice. Modified transportation model has been developed to include some predetermined salient factors such as road safety and security. In the real sense these factors are accidental and they can occur without prior notice. Besides, weather change is also critical to transportation insecurity. In this paper a new transportation scheme’s model was deve- loped to take into consideration the incidental occurence nature of the insecurity factors as applicable elsewhere. The weighted loss cost function due to the insecurity factors on roads was formulated using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and its outcome was integrated into the conventional transportation model. The cost savings from three models namely conventional, modified-conventional, and the current (re-modified) were compared using the petrol’s transportation schedule of the Nigerian petroleum industry. The results showed that the re-modified transportation model was not in good agreement with the other two in term of flexibility. The findings showed that the cost price of the item has a wide margin depending on the incidence and the weight of insecurity.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

transportation model; weighted insecurity; accidental; integration; flexibility; AHP

• Wydawca: Publishing House of Poznan University of Technology
• Czasopismo: Research in Logistics & Production
• Rocznik: 2018
• Tom: Vol. 8, No. 3
• Strony: 237--249
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 22 poz., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Kareem B.

• Department of Mechanical Engineering, Federal University of Technology, Akure, P.M.B. 704, Akure, Ondo State, 340001, Nigeria

Bibliografia

• 1. Arinze B. & Banerje A. (1989) A knowledge-based approach for facilities location planning. Department of Management, Drexel University, Philadelphia P.A, USA.
• 2. Austin M.L. & Burns J.R. (1985) Management Science and Aid for Managerial Design Making, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York.
• 3. Basu P.B. (1989) Operation Research for Engineers, Oxford and IBH Publishing Company Ltd, New Delhi.
• 4. Eckenrode R.T. (2003) Weighting multiple criteria, Management Science, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 180-192.
• 5. Feinberg A. (1993) An experimental investigation of an interactive approach for multi- criteria optimization with application to academic resources allocation, Working Paper, N. 186, Western Management Science Institute, University of California at Los Angeles.
• 6. Fernando T.D.H., Podrebarac M.L. & Sengupta S.S. (2006) Probabilities with multi-objectives linear programmes, Working Paper, No. 63, Department of Management Science, University of Water Loo, pp. 132-138.
• 7. Finnie G.R., Wittig G.E. & Petkov D. I. (1993) Prioritizing software development productivity factors using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Journal of Systems & Software, Vol. 22 No. 2, pp. 129-139.
• 8. Gal T. & Nedona J. (2001) Multi-parametric linear programming, Management Science, Vol. 18, No. 7, pp 17-20.
• 9. Goodman L.J. & Ralph N.L. (2001) Project Planning and Management: an Integrated Approach, Pergamon, Press, New York.
• 10. Grant I.E. & Eugene L. (1989) Handbook of Industrial Engineering and Management, Prentice-Hall of India Private Ltd., New Delhi.
• 11. Green P.E. & Wind Y. (2007) Multi-attribute Decisions in Marketing: a Measurement Approach, Holt, Rinehart and Winson, New York.
• 12. Harold E.F. (2006) Organizational relationships in purchasing, Journal of Purchasing, and Materials Management, Vol. 20, No. 3, pp 3-12.
• 13. Kareem B. (2012a) Transportation model under predictable safety and security threats, Transport- Strategical and Operational Issues, A. Stachowiak (ed.), pp. 21-32, Poznan University of Technology Publishing House, Poland.
• 14. Kareem B., Oke P.K. & Lawal A.S. (2011) Determination of criticality of road accidents in Nigeria, Selected Logistics Problems and Solutions, K. Grzybowska & P. Golinska, (eds), pp. 209-325, Poznan University of Technology Publishing House, Poland.
• 15. Kareem B., Oke P.K. & Lawal A.S. (2012) Modelling fatality of road accidents in Nigeria, Research in Logistics & Production, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp. 259-271.
• 16. Kareem B. (2012b) Transportation under deplorable road safety and security maintenance, Research in Logistics & Production, Vol. 2, No.4, pp. 367-376.
• 17. Levin R.L., Rubin D.S., Simpson J.P. & Gardener E.S. (1989) Quantitative approach to management, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.
• 18. PPMC (2000) Pipeline and products marketing company limited, Bulletin and Profile, Port- Harcourt, Nigeria.
• 19. Shepard R.N. (2001) On subjectively optimum selection among multi-attribute alternatives, M.W. Shelly & G.L. Bryan (eds.); Human Judgment and Optimality, pp. 279-280, Wiley, New York.
• 20. Taha H.A. (2008) Operations Research: an Introduction, Prentice-Hall of India Private Ltd, New Delhi.
• 21. Wheelwright S.C. (2008) Manufacturing strategy: defining the missing link, Strategic Managerial Journal, Vol. 5, pp 71-91.
• 22. Yu P.L. & Zeleny M. (2002) On some linear multi-parametric programme, Centre for System Science,CSS 02-05, University of Rochester, New York.

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu w ramach umowy 509/P-DUN/2018 ze środków MNiSW przeznaczonych na działalność upowszechniającą naukę (2018)