Exploitation of Material Consolidation Trade-offs in Multi-tier Complex Supply Networks

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2210.11479
• Title: Exploitation of material consolidation trade-offs in multi-tier complex supply networks
• Authors: Vinod Kumar Chauhan, Muhannad Alomari, James Arney, Ajith Kumar Parlikad, Alexandra Brintrup
• Classification: cs.CE (Computational Engineering, Finance, and Science)
• Publication Date: November 21, 2023 (arXiv submission)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.11479

Abstract

While consolidation strategies constitute the backbone of many supply chain optimization problems, leveraging multi-tier material relationships through consolidation remains an understudied research area, despite being a prominent characteristic in industries producing complex customized products. This paper proposes an optimization framework for exploiting many-to-many relationships between supply chain tiers. The framework is flexible enough to incorporate quantity discounts, inventory holding costs, and transportation expenses. The framework introduces novel inter-tier trade-offs, reducing costs at one tier while increasing costs at another, thereby helping to reduce overall procurement costs in the supply chain. A mixed-integer linear programming model was developed and tested on small to large-scale problems in aerospace manufacturing. Comparisons with benchmark results demonstrate that cost trade-offs indeed exist between two tiers, and cost reductions can be achieved through a holistic restructuring approach.

Research Background and Motivation

Problem Definition

The core problem addressed in this research is material consolidation optimization in multi-tier supply chains. Specifically:

1. Research Object: Supply chains for complex customized products (such as aircraft engines, medical devices, wind turbines, and other precision engineering products)
2. Key Challenge: How to achieve overall cost optimization through material consolidation in supply chain structures with many-to-many relationships
3. Core Contradiction: The trade-off between cost savings from upstream consolidation and increased downstream processing costs

Research Significance

This problem has important theoretical and practical implications:

1. Industry Relevance: Prevalent in aerospace, medical devices, heavy machinery, and other high-value complex product manufacturing
2. Economic Impact: Procurement costs typically represent the largest proportion of total product costs
3. Supply Chain Complexity: Long-term supply relationships and multi-source procurement strategies increase optimization complexity

Limitations of Existing Approaches

Literature review reveals inadequacies in existing consolidation research:

1. Single-tier Limitations: Existing research primarily focuses on consolidation within a single supply tier
2. Lack of Many-to-Many Relationship Handling: Overlooks multiple correspondence relationships between materials and components in complex products
3. Insufficient Trade-off Analysis: Lacks systematic analysis of cost trade-offs across tiers

Core Contributions

1. Proposed a Multi-tier Material Consolidation Optimization Framework: First systematic modeling and solution of cross-tier material consolidation problems in supply chains
2. Established Novel Cost Trade-off Theory: Revealed and quantified the trade-off relationship between upstream consolidation cost savings and downstream processing cost increases
3. Developed Mixed-Integer Linear Programming Model: Provided exact optimization methods capable of handling problems from small to large scale
4. Verified Practical Application Effectiveness: Demonstrated method validity and practicality through aerospace manufacturing case studies
5. Provided Sensitivity Analysis Insights: Identified key factors affecting consolidation effectiveness (fixed ordering costs, number of processing options, etc.)

Methodology Details

Task Definition

Inputs:

• Demand quantities and inventory requirements for M components
• N forgings and their many-to-many manufacturing relationships with components
• Cost parameters for each tier (fixed costs, unit costs, transportation costs, holding costs)
• Quantity discount structures

Outputs:

• Optimal forging consolidation scheme (which forgings to retain)
• Optimal component-forging matching relationships
• Minimized total procurement cost

Constraints:

• Each component must have at least one manufacturing method
• Quantity discount constraints
• Inventory requirement satisfaction

Model Architecture

Mathematical Modeling

The objective function is the sum of three cost components:

min CM + CF + CI

Where:

• CM: Processing cost (first tier)
• CF: Forging cost (second tier)
• CI: Inventory holding cost

Core Decision Variables

1. zk: Binary variable indicating whether forging k is selected
2. xik: Binary variable indicating whether component i is manufactured from forging k
3. udk: Binary variable indicating whether forging k receives discount level d
4. vi: Continuous variable representing unit variable cost of component i

Key Constraints

1. Manufacturing Feasibility Constraints:

   ∑k xik = 1, ∀i  (each component must have a manufacturing method)
   xik ≤ zk, ∀i,k   (only selected forgings can be used)
   

2. Cost Minimization Constraints:

   vi ≥ zk × (CMUik + CMTik) - M × (1 - xik), ∀i,k
   

3. Quantity Discount Constraints: Handle segmented discount structures based on order quantities

Technical Innovations

1. Linearization Processing: Transforms the original cubic integer programming problem into MILP through auxiliary variables
2. Precomputation Optimization: Precomputes known information to simplify model complexity
3. Hierarchical Cost Modeling: Systematically models cross-tier cost interactions
4. Many-to-Many Relationship Handling: Effectively processes complex material-component correspondence relationships

Experimental Setup

Dataset

Synthetic Data Generation:

• Component order quantities: Uniform distribution 100, 500
• Inventory requirements: Uniform distribution 10, 50
• Manufacturing ratio: One forging manufactures at most 3 components
• Cost parameters: Various costs randomly generated within reasonable ranges
• Discount structure: Unified three-level discount (0%, 5%, 10%)

Test Problem Scales:

• Small-scale: 5 components/5 forgings
• Medium-scale: 100 components/100 forgings
• Large-scale: 3000 components/2500 forgings

Evaluation Metrics

1. Relative Cost Comparison: Cost ratio between consolidation and non-consolidation schemes
2. Consolidation Degree: Proportion of retained forgings to original total
3. Computation Time: Solution time performance evaluation
4. Cost Decomposition: Specific changes in various cost categories

Comparison Methods

• Baseline Scheme: Original supply chain configuration without consolidation
• Solver Comparison: CBC, Gurobi, CPLEX, Choco
• Modeling Language Comparison: Python MIP vs Pulp

Implementation Details

• Programming Language: Python
• Optimal Solver Combination: Python MIP + Gurobi
• Hardware Environment: MacBook Pro (16GB RAM, 2.5GHz Intel i7)
• Solution Strategy: Exact optimization method

Experimental Results

Main Results

500 Components/500 Forgings Case Study:

• Consolidation Degree: 74.2% of forgings retained (25.8% consolidation rate)
• Forging Cost: Reduced to 83.6% of original (16.4% savings)
• Processing Cost: Increased to 104.1% of original (4.1% increase)
• Holding Cost: Reduced to 92.1% of original (7.9% savings)
• Total Cost: Reduced to 93.5% of original (6.5% savings)

Large-Scale Test Results:

• All 20 test problems showed total cost reduction
• Cost savings range: 1.5% - 15.5%
• Computation time: From 0.001 minutes (small problems) to 106.6 minutes (large problems)

Sensitivity Analysis

Fixed Ordering Cost Impact

• Trend: Increased fixed costs → Higher consolidation degree → Further total cost reduction
• Mechanism: Higher fixed costs make economies of scale from consolidation more pronounced

Number of Processing Options Impact

• Trend: More processing options → More consolidation opportunities → Greater cost savings
• Explanation: More manufacturing options provide greater consolidation flexibility

Discount Level Impact

• Observation: Increased discounts promote higher consolidation degree
• Reason: Larger batch orders from consolidation more easily qualify for quantity discounts

Solver Performance Comparison

• Best Combination: Gurobi solver + Python MIP modeling language
• Performance Improvement: Gurobi 2-50 times faster than other solvers
• Scalability: Capable of solving large-scale practical problems in reasonable time

Related Work

Supply Chain Consolidation Research Classification

1. Procurement Consolidation: Product grouping and joint purchasing to achieve economies of scale
2. Transportation Consolidation: Combining small shipments for reduced logistics costs
3. Inventory Consolidation: Warehouse location optimization to reduce operational costs
4. Component Consolidation: Reducing component count through product redesign

Distinction from Existing Work

• Research Perspective: First to focus on cross-tier material consolidation trade-offs
• Problem Complexity: Handles many-to-many relationships rather than simple one-to-one relationships
• Optimization Objective: Global supply chain cost optimization rather than single-tier optimization
• Application Domain: Specifically addresses supply chain characteristics of complex customized products

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Trade-off Relationship Verification: Confirmed the existence and optimizability of cross-tier cost trade-offs
2. Holistic Optimization Value: Holistic approaches achieve better cost outcomes than local optimization
3. Key Influencing Factors: Fixed ordering costs and number of processing options are critical factors affecting consolidation effectiveness
4. Additional Benefits: Consolidation also brings secondary benefits such as simplified supplier selection

Limitations

1. Deterministic Demand Assumption: Assumes constant and known demand without considering uncertainty
2. Relationship Impact Neglect: Assumes consolidation does not negatively impact supplier relationships
3. Insufficient Risk Consideration: Does not adequately address supply chain risks from consolidation
4. Restructuring Cost Omission: Assumes capacity adjustment incurs no additional costs

Future Directions

1. Uncertainty Handling: Consider effects of demand fluctuations and supply disruptions
2. Supplier Relationship Modeling: Incorporate consolidation impacts on supplier relationships
3. Risk Management Mechanisms: Study risk mitigation strategies such as multi-source procurement
4. Dynamic Optimization: Consider time-dimensional dynamic consolidation strategies

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Problem Innovation: First systematic study of multi-tier material consolidation, filling an important research gap
2. Methodological Rigor: Rigorous MILP modeling, skillful linearization techniques, and reasonable solution method selection
3. Comprehensive Experimentation: Full-scale testing from small to large problems with multi-dimensional sensitivity analysis
4. High Practical Value: Addresses actual needs of high-value industries like aerospace with clear application prospects
5. Strong Result Convincingness: Consistent cost savings and clear trade-off relationship verification

Shortcomings

1. Overly Idealized Assumptions: Multiple key assumptions (such as deterministic demand, no restructuring costs) are difficult to satisfy in practice
2. Case Study Limitations: Primarily based on aerospace manufacturing; applicability to other industries remains to be verified
3. Missing Risk Analysis: Insufficient consideration of increased supply chain fragility from consolidation
4. Neglected Dynamic Characteristics: Static optimization model cannot handle market and technology dynamics
5. Absent Supplier Perspective: Primarily analyzes from buyer perspective; lacks consideration of supplier impacts

Impact

1. Academic Contribution: Provides new research directions and analytical frameworks for supply chain consolidation theory
2. Practical Guidance: Offers operational methodology for supply chain optimization in complex manufacturing
3. Reproducibility: Provides complete mathematical models and open-source code for verification and extension
4. Interdisciplinary Value: Combines operations research, supply chain management, and industrial engineering

Applicable Scenarios

1. High-Value Complex Product Manufacturing: Aerospace, defense, medical devices, and similar industries
2. Long-term Supply Relationships: Manufacturing enterprises with stable supplier networks
3. Multi-tier Supply Structures: Supply chains with clear upstream-downstream relationships
4. Cost-Sensitive Environments: Manufacturing operations where procurement costs represent high proportions

References

The paper cites important literature in supply chain management, consolidation strategies, and optimization methods, including:

• Amid et al. (2006): Fuzzy multi-objective model for supplier selection
• Chopra and Sodhi (2014): Supply chain disruption risk management
• Monczka et al. (1993): Procurement consolidation strategies
• Tomlin (2006): Value analysis of multi-source procurement

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality supply chain optimization research paper with significant contributions in both theoretical innovation and practical application. While subject to certain assumption limitations, it provides valuable methodology and empirical insights for material consolidation optimization in complex supply networks.