See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/282388502

Production inventory model with deteriorating items, two rates of production

cost and taking account of time value of money

Article in Journal of Industrial and Management Optimization · September 2015

DOI: 10.3934/jimo.2016.12.1153

CITATIONS READS

6 690

3 authors, including:

[Link] M
Kongunadu Arts and Science College
66 PUBLICATIONS 313 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by [Link] M on 30 January 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

JOURNAL OF INDUSTRIAL AND doi:10.3934/jimo.2016.12.1153
MANAGEMENT OPTIMIZATION
Volume 12, Number 3, July 2016 pp. 1153–1172

PRODUCTION INVENTORY MODEL WITH DETERIORATING

ITEMS, TWO RATES OF PRODUCTION COST AND TAKING
ACCOUNT OF TIME VALUE OF MONEY

Vincent Choudri∗
(a)Research and Development Centre, Bharathiar University
Coimbatore-641 046, Tamilnadu, India
(b)[Link] College, Chennai-601 206, Tamilnadu, India

Mathiyazhgan Venkatachalam
RVS Technical Campus-Coimbatore
Coimbatore-641402, Tamilnadu, India

Sethuraman Panayappan
CSIR Emeritus Scientist in Mathematics
Government Arts College, Coimbatore
Tamilnadu, India

(Communicated by Panos M. Pardalos)

Abstract. This paper presents production-inventory model for deteriorating

items with constant demand under the effect of inflation and time-value of
money. Models are developed without shortages while using two production
cost functions. In the first case, production cost is divided into two parts: an
initial cost which occurs at the beginning of each cycle and is applied to the
entire quantity produced during the cycle and a running cost that is incurred
as production progresses and is applied to the initial units produced. In the
second case, the production cost is incurred at the beginning of the cycle.
Numerical examples are given to illustrate the theoretical results and made
the sensitivity analysis of parameters on the optimal solutions. The validation
of this model’s result was coded in Microsoft Visual Basic 6.0

1. Introduction. Traditional inventory models do not take into account the time-
value of money and item during storage are assumed to be non-perishable. However,
in reality, most products will deteriorate during storage and there is the time-value
of money due to opportunity cost. With this in view, a deteriorating inventory
model is developed to take into account the time-value of money. Most researches
in inventory do not consider the time-value of money. This is unrealistic since
the resource of an enterprise depends very much on when it is used and this is
highly by correlated to the return of investment. Therefore, taking into account the
time value of money should be critical especially when investment and forecasting
are considered. Inventory problems considering deterioration of items and con-
stant demand were first studied by [Link] and [Link](1963)[4].[Link]

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 90B05, 90B30; Secondary: 90C46.

Key words and phrases. EPQ, deterioration, cycle time, optimality, present money value, de-
mand and production.
∗ Corresponding author.

1153
1154 V. CHOUDRI, M. VENKATACHALAM AND S. PANAYAPPAN

and [Link](1966)[3] extended the model to consider price-dependent demand.

The concept of the time-value of money and inflation are commonly applied to in-
vestment and forecasting where time is an important factor. [Link](1979)[1]
is perhaps the first author to include the concept of inflation in inventory modeling.
He developed a minimum cost model for a single item inventory with inflation. Ac-
cording to the study of H.M. Wee(1993)[13], deteriorating items refers to the items
that become decayed, damaged, evaporative, expires, invalid, devaluation and so on
through time. According to the definition, deteriorating items can be classified into
two categories. The first category refers to the items that become decayed, dam-
aged, evaporative, or expires through time, like meat, vegetables, fruit, medicine,
flowers film and so on; the other category refers to the items that lose part or total
value through time because of new technology or the introduction of alternatives,
like computer chips, mobile phones, fashion and seasonal goods and so on. Both
categories have the characteristic of short life cycle. In the first category, the items
have a short natural life cycle. After a specific period (such as durability), the
natural attributes of the items change and then lose useable value and economic
value; In the second category, the items have short market life cycle. After a pe-
riod of popularity in the market, the items loss the original economic value due to
the changes in consumer preference, product upgrading and other reasons. Wee et
al.(1999)[14] applied the discounted cash-flow approach to the deterministic inven-
tory model for an item that deteriorates over time at a varying rate and derived
optimal production and pricing policies to maximize the net present value of profits
over a finite planning horizon. I Moon and S Lee(2000)[6] considered extensions to
the EOQ model particularly recognition of the time-value of money and inflation
and developed simulation model that can be used for any distribution case, setting
out the associated algorithm. N. H. Shah(2006)[10] derived an inventory model by
assuming constant rate of deterioration of units in an inventory, time value of money
under the conditions of permissible delay in payments. The optimal replenishments
and fraction of cycle time are decision variables to minimize the present value of
inventory cost over a finite planning horizon. Chung and Chang (2007)[2] developed
a deterministic inventory model incorporating a temporary price discount, deteri-
orating items and time-value of money. [Link](2009)[11] proposed to derive a
deterministic inventory model for a stock with time-varying deterioration rate with
a linear trend in demand over a finite planning horizon in the study and assumed
that the supplier offers credit limit to the retailers during which there is no interest
charged. Widyadana et al. (2010) extended I Moon and S Lee’s model (2000)[6] to
examine a production system with a random life cycle, two conditions are discussed:
the first is when the product life cycle ends in the production stage and the second
is when the product life cycle ends in the non-production stage and developed an
algorithm to derive the optimal period time and expected total cost. Barzoki et
al. (2011)[7] presented the effect of inflation and time value of money on the EPQ
model with rework and the total cost relation involves a exponential function. S.
Singh et al. (2011)[12] developed an inventory model for decaying items with selling
price dependent demand in which inflationary environment and deterioration rate
is taken as two parameter Weibull distribution. Sarkar and Moon (2011)[9] consid-
ered a production inventory model for stochastic demand, with the effect of inflation
and profit function is derived by using both general distribution of demand and the
uniform rectangular distribution demand. A. Roy and G. P. Samanta(2011)[8] re-
flected the real life problem by allowing unit selling price and purchasing price to be
 PRODUCTION INVENTORY MODEL 1155

unequal and continuous production control inventory model for deteriorating items
in which two different rates of production are available. Lia et al. (2012) developed
an inventory model for exponential deteriorating items under conditions of permis-
sible delay in payments. The objective is to determine the optimal replenishment
policies, in order to maximize the systems average profit per unit of time. Factors
such as demand, deteriorating rate and so on should be taken into consideration in
the deteriorating inventory study. Other factors like price discount, allow shortage
or not, inflation and the time-value of money are also important in the study of
deteriorating items inventory. By making different combinations of these factors
stated above, we can get different inventory models. Time value of money was one
of the first special concepts considered as the basic EOQ model. The effect of time
value of money is very important and it should reflect the development of inventory
models. Since, money tied up in inventories can change its actual value over time;
the effect of inflation rate can affect the optimal policies. In this paper, models were
developed for an infinite planning horizon which considering time value of money.
Closed formulas are obtained in models, where shortage is not allowed for the opti-
mal policies and the corresponding cost. This paper is organized as follows. Section
2 is concerned with assumptions and notations, Section 3 presents the mathematical
model for finding the optimal solutions and numerical example. Finally, the paper
summary and conclusion in section 4.

2. Assumptions and notations.

2.1. Assumptions. The following assumptions are used to formulate the problem.
1. Initial inventory level is zero and planning horizon is infinite.
2. The demand rate is known to be constant and continuous.
3. Shortages are not allowed.
4. Holding cost per unit per year is known.
5. The lead time is known and constant.
6. Items are produced/ purchased and added to the inventory.
7. The item is a single product; it does not interact with any other inventory
items.
8. The production rate is always greater than or equal to the sum of the demand
rate.
9. The deteriorating items exist in lot size Q.
2.2. Notations.
1. P - Production rate in units per unit time
2. D - Demand rate in units per unit time
3. Q∗-Optimal size of production run
4. Cp - Production cost per unit
5. θ - Rate of deteriorative.
6. C1 - Production cost incurred at beginning of each cycle and C2 - production
cost incurred at production process takes place.
7. Ch -Holding cost per unit/year
8. C0 - Setup cost / ordering cost
9. T - Cycle time
10. T1 - The time during which the stock is building up at a constant rate of P −D
units per unit time that is Production time.
11. R - Rate of interest
1156 V. CHOUDRI, M. VENKATACHALAM AND S. PANAYAPPAN

3. Mathematical model. The objective of the inventory models is to determine

the optimal cycle time or the corresponding optimal production quantity in order
to minimize the total relevant cost. Consequently, the production time and the
maximum inventory level can easily be calculated. Figure 1 represents the EPQ
model with constant demand. The inventory on-hand increases with the rate
P − D, which is the production rate minus consumption rate, until time T1 when
the production process stops and the inventory on hand reaches its maximum level
Q1 . After that point, the inventory level decreases with the consumption rate D,
until it becomes zero at the end of the cycle T , when the production process is
resumed again.

Figure 1. Production Inventory Cycle

During the production stage, the inventory of good items increases due to produc-
tion but decreases due to demand and deterioration items. Thus, the inventory
differential equation is
dI(t)
+ θI(t) = P − D ; 0 ≤ t ≤ T1 (1)
dt
The inventory differential equation during the consumption period with no produc-
tion and subsequently reduction in the inventory level due to deterioration items is
given by

dI(t)
+ θI(t) = −D ; T1 ≤ t ≤ T (2)
dt
With the boundary conditions: I(0) = 0, I(T1 ) = Q1 , I(T ) = 0 During the first
cycle, the inventory level I(t), at time t is equal to From (1),
P −D 
1 − eθt ; 0 ≤ t ≤ T1

I(t) = (3)
θ
From (1),
Dh i
I(t) = 1 − eθ(T −t) − 1 ; T1 ≤ t ≤ T (4)
θ
We know that, I1 (T1 ) = I2 (T1 ) from the equations (3) and (4) ,
P −D h i Dh i
I(t) = 1 − eθT1 ) = eθ(T −T1 ) − 1 (5)
θ θ
 PRODUCTION INVENTORY MODEL 1157

In order to facilitate analysis, we do an asymptotic analysis for I1 (t). Expanding

the exponential functions and neglecting second and higher power of θ for small
value of θ . Therefore,

   
1 1 2
(P − D) T1 − θT12 = D (T − T1 ) + θ(T − T1 )
2 2

From Yong He and Ju He [10], T1 was considered as follows,

   
1 1
(P − D) T1 − θT12 = D(T − T1 ) 1 + θ(T − T1 )
2 2

From Misra [11] , T1 was considered as follows,

 
D 1
T1 = (T − T1 ) 1 + θ(T − T1 )
P −D 2

But in this model, we have considered T1 as follows,

D
(P − D)T1 = D(T − T1 ), Therefore, T1 = T
P

The maximum inventory is as follows:

P −D
1 − e−θT1 = Q1


I(T1 ) = Q1 ⇒
θ

Therefore, Q1 = (P − D)T1 (6)

3.1. Model - 1 Production inventory model with deteriorating items. The

total cost comprise of the sum of the production cost, ordering cost, holding cost,
deteriorating cost. They are grouped together after evaluating the above cost indi-
vidually.

TP
(i) Production Cost /unit time = P (t)CP = DCP (7)
T
C0 D
(ii) Ordering Cost / unit time = = C0 (8)
T Q

(iii) Holding Cost / unit time : Holding cost is applicable to both stages of the
production cycle, as described by
1158 V. CHOUDRI, M. VENKATACHALAM AND S. PANAYAPPAN

T 
Z1 ZT
Ch 
HC = I(t)dt + I(t)dt
T
0 T1
T 
Z1 ZT
Ch  P − D D  
1 − e−θt dt + eθ(T −t) − 1 dt


=
T θ θ
0 T1
 T 
Ch P − D −θt

T 1 D 
θ(T −t)
= θt + e − 2 e + θt
T θ2 0 θ T1
 
Ch P − D −θT1

D 
θ(T −t)
= θTP + e −1 − 2 1−e + θ(T − T1 )
T θ2 θ
" ( )#
2
Ch P − D θ2 T12 D θ2 (T − T1 )
 
= 2
+ 2
T θ 2 θ 2
" #
2
Ch (P − D)T12 D(T − T1 )
= +
T 2 2
2
 
Ch P T1
= + DT − 2DT1
T T
T Ch D(P − D)
= from equation (5) (9)
2P

(iv) Deteriorating Cost/unit time: Deteriorating cost, which is applicable to both

stages of the production cycle. Therefore,
T 
Z1 ZT
Cd 
DC = θI1 (t)dt + θI2 (t)dt
T
0 T1
T 
Z1 ZT
Cd  P −D D θ(T −t)
 
1 − e−θt dt + θ


= θ e − 1 dt
T θ θ
0 T1

Expanding the exponential functions and neglecting second and higher power of θ
for small value of θ .

T DθCd (P − D)
DC = (10)
2P

Therefore, Total Cost (T C)

= PurchaseCost + OrderingCost + HoldingCost + DeterioratingCost

+ PriceDiscount
C0 T Ch D(P − D) T DθCd (P − D)
= DCP + + + (11)
T 2P 2P
 PRODUCTION INVENTORY MODEL 1159

Differentiating the Total Cost w.r.t. T,

∂ −C0 (Ch + θCd )D(P − D) ∂2 2C0
(T C) = 2
+ = 0 and 2
= 3 >0
∂T T s 2P ∂T
s T
2P C0 2DP C0
Therefore, T = and Q = (12)
D(P − D)(Ch + θCd ) (P − D)(Ch + θCd )

Numerical example. Let us consider the cost parameters P = 5000 units, D =

4500 units, Ch = 10,
Cp = 100,C0 = 100,θ=0.01 to0.10,Cd = 100.
Optimum solution. Optimum Quantity Q∗ = 904.53; Tp = 0.1809, T = 0.2010 ,
Production cost = 450,000 , Setup cost = 497.49 , Holding cost = 452.27 , Deteri-
orating cost = 45.22 , Price Discount = 2250 and Total cost = 453244.99

Table 1. Variation of Rate of Deteriorating Items with inventory

and total Cost.

Setup Holding Deteriorative Total

θ Q T T1
Cost Cost Cost Cost
0.01 904.53 0.201 0.1809 497.49 452.27 45.22 450994.99
0.02 866.02 0.1924 0.1732 519.61 433.01 86.60 451039.23
0.03 832.05 0.1849 0.1664 540.83 416.02 124.81 451081.66
0.04 801.78 0.1782 0.1604 561.25 400.89 160.36 451122.5
0.05 774.60 0.1721 0.1549 580.95 387.30 193.65 451161.89
0.06 750.00 0.1667 0.1500 600.00 375.00 225.00 451200.00
0.07 727.61 0.1617 0.1455 618.47 363.80 254.66 451236.93

0.08 707.11 0.1571 0.1414 636.4 353.55 282.84 451272.79

0.09 688.25 0.1529 0.1376 653.84 344.12 309.71 451307.67
0.10 670.82 0.1491 0.1342 670.82 335.41 335.41 451341.64
Note : Production cost constant=450,000

From the table 1, a study in the rate of deteriorative items with optimum quan-
tity, cycle time, production time (T1 ) , set up cost, holding cost, deteriorating cost
and total cost is observed. It is also seen that when the rate of deteriorative items
increase then set up cost, deteriorative cost increases, as there is positive relation-
ship between them and optimum quantity, cycle time, production time, holding cost
decreases, there is negative relationship between them.
Sensitivity analysis. The total cost functions are the real solution in which the
model parameters are assumed to be static values. It is reasonable to study the
sensitivity i.e. the effect of making changes in the model parameters over a given
optimum solution. It is important to find the effects on different system performance
measures, such as cost function, inventory system, etc. For this purpose, sensitivity
analysis of various system parameters for models of this research are required to be
observed whether the current solutions remain unchanged or infeasible.
1160 V. CHOUDRI, M. VENKATACHALAM AND S. PANAYAPPAN

Table 2. Effect of Demand and cost parameters on optimal values

Optimum values
Parameters
Q T1 T Total Cost
0.01 904.53 0.1809 0.201 450994.99
0.02 866.02 0.1732 0.1925 451039.23
θ 0.03 832.05 0.1664 0.1849 451081.66
0.04 801.78 0.1604 0.1782 451122.5
0.05 774.6 0.1549 0.1721 451161.89
80 809.04 0.1618 0.1798 450889.94
90 858.12 0.1716 0.1907 450943.93
C0 100 904.53 0.1809 0.201 450994.99
110 948.68 0.1897 0.2108 451043.55
120 990.87 0.1981 0.2202 451089.95
8 1000.00 0.2000 0.2222 450900.00
9 948.68 0.1897 0.2108 450948.68
Ch 10 904.53 0.1809 0.201 450994.99
11 866.02 0.1732 0.1925 451039.23
12 832.05 0.1664 0.1849 451081.66
80 912.87 0.1826 0.2029 360985.9
90 908.67 0.1817 0.2019 405990.45
Cp 100 904.53 0.1809 0.201 450994.99
110 900.45 0.1801 0.2001 495999.5
120 896.42 0.1793 0.1992 541003.99

Observations.
1. With the increase in rate of deteriorating items, optimum quantity (Q∗),
production time (T1 ) , cycle time (T ) decreases but total cost increases.
2. With the increase in setup cost per unit (C0 ) , optimum quantity (Q∗), Pro-
duction time (T1 ) , cycle time (T ) and total cost increases.
3. With the increase in holding cost per unit (Ch ), optimum quantity (Q∗),
production time (T1 ) and cycle time (T ) decreases but total cost increases.
4. With the increase in production cost, optimum quantity, cycle time and pro-
duction time decreases but total cost increases.
Special case. If the production system is considered to be ideal that is no deteri-
oration is produced, it means the value of θ is set to zero. In that case, equations
(11) and (12) reduce to the classical economic production quantity model as follows
TotalCost(TC) = PurchaseCost + OrderingCost + HoldingCost + ShortageCost
C0 Ch P (P − D)T12 CS (P − D)
= DCP + + + (DT − P T1 ) 2
s T 2T D 2TsP D
2P C0 (Ch + CS ) 2P DCo (Ch + CS )
T = , Therefore Q =
(P − D)DCh CS (P − D)Ch CS

3.2. Model - 2 Production inventory model with present value money.

Case(i). Usually, in the analysis of an inventory system, normally three types
of costs are considered. These are production cost, inventory carrying cost and
 PRODUCTION INVENTORY MODEL 1161

holding cost. But purchasing cost is constant. This is not so if we considered the
value of money, hence this cost will be included in the analysis. In the first case,
the production cost Cp , has two components. The cost C1 , that is incurred at the
beginning of each cycle and is applied to the total quantity produced during the
cycle and a second cost C2 which is incurred as the production process takes place.
To incorporate the effect of time-value of money into the equations, the difference
between the interest rate and inflation rate is calculated as r, the inflation free or
real interest rate representing the time value of money. That is, r = R − f .

(i) OrderingCost = C0 (13)

ZT1
(ii) ProductionCost = QC1 + C2 P e−rT dt
0
P C2  −rDT

= DT C1 + 1−e P where CP = C1 + C2 (14)
r
(iii) Holding Cost : Holding cost is applicable to both stages of the
production cycle,as described by

T 
Z1 ZT
HC = Ch  I(t)e−rt dt + I(t)e−rt dt
0 T1
T 
Z1 ZT
P − D D  
1 − e−θt e−rt dt + eθ(T −t) − 1 e−rt dt


= Ch 
θ θ
0 T1
T 
Z1 ZT
P − D   D  
= Ch  e−rt − e−(r+θ)t dt + eθT −(r+t)t − e−rt dt
θ θ
0 T1

" T 1 T #
e−(r+θ)t e−rt D e−rt eθT −(r+θ)t
 
P −D
= Ch − + −
θ r+θ r 0 θ r r+θ T1
  −(r+θ)T −rT1

(P −D) re 1
− (r + θ)e +θ
Ch
=  (r + θ)e−rT − rerT 
rθ(r + θ) +D −rT1 θT −(r+θ)T1
−(r + θ)e + re
 −(r+θ)T
−
e 1 + P θ 1
− e−rT1
−rT


Ch Pr e 1
=
rθ(r + θ) −Dθ 1 − e−rT + Dr eθT − 1 e−(r+θ)T1

Substitute the value of and simplify.

 −(r+θ)DT −rDT
  −rDT

Ch Pr e P − e P + P θ 1 − e P

HC =   (15)
rθ(r + θ)
−(r+θ)DT
−Dθ 1 − e−rT + Dr eθT − 1 e


P
1162 V. CHOUDRI, M. VENKATACHALAM AND S. PANAYAPPAN

(iv) Deteriorating Cost/unit time: Deteriorating cost, which is applicable to both

stages of the production cycle. Therefore,
T 
Z1 ZT
DC = θCd  I1 (t)e−rt dt + I2 (t)e−rt dt
0 T1
"  −(r+θ)DT
−rDT
  −rDT
 #
θCd Pr e −e P
P + Pθ 1 − e P
=
−(r+θ)DT (16)
rθ(r + θ) −Dθ 1 − e−rT + Dr eθT − 1 e


P

Total Cost TC (T) = Purchase Cost + Ordering Cost + Holding Cost

+ Deteriorating Cost.
Assuming continuous compounding and a constant setup cost C0 , the present value
of the total cost of the inventory system for the first cycle, TC (T ), can be expressed
as,
P C2  −rDt

T C(T ) = C0 + QC1 + 1−e P
r     #
−(r+θ)DT −rDT −rDT
"
(Ch + θCd ) Pr e P −e P + Pθ 1 − e P
+
−(r+θ)DT
rθ(r + θ) −Dθ 1 − e−rT + Dr eθT − 1 e


P

According to Figure 2, the present value TC (T ), for the first period is repeated at
the start of each of the subsequent cycles. The present value of the total cost for N
cycles, TC (T ) can be calculated as follows:
T C(T ) = P 1 + e−rT + e−2rT + ... + e−(N −1)rT

Figure 2. Cash Flow Diagram

For an infinite planning horizon, N → ∞ and TC (T ) can be expressed as

 
1
T C(T ) = P
1 − e−rT
−rDT
!
C0 + DT C1 P C2 1 − e P
= +
1 − e−rT r 1 − e−rT
  −(r+θ)DT −rDT   −rDT
 
e P −e P 1−e P
Pr 1−e−rT
+ P θ 1−e−rT − Dθ 
Ch + θCd 
+  (17)
 −(r+θ)DT
! 
rθ(r + θ)  (eθT −1)

e P
+Dr

1−e −rT

The present value of the total cost function TC (T ) is a function of the length of
the cycle T . Taking the first derivative of TC (T ) w.r.t. T and equating to zero,
and using a common denominator and after some simplifications, the equation can
 PRODUCTION INVENTORY MODEL 1163

be written as follows:

d
(T C)
dT   
 (1 − e−rT ) rD e −rDT
  
P 
−rT

−rT P C2 P
 1−e DC1 − re (C0 + DT C1 ) +  −rDT
 
r  −re −rT
1−e P
  
 
−(r+θ)DT
    rDT
   
 1 − e−rT −(r+θ)D
+ rD e− P


e
 P  

  Pr P P 


 −re−rT e −(r+θ)DT
 −rDT

−e P
  P   
= =0
   
 n 

rD −rDT   −rDT
o 
−rT −rT
 +P θ 1 − e e − re 1−e
  P P
 
 Ch +θCd
 + rθ(r+θ) P
 
      
−(r+θ)DT
  θT  
  

 θe e P 

  
  −rT 


(r+θ)D
−(r+θ)DT   


 +Dr
 1 − e  − P
eθT
− 1 e P  
 


−(r+θ)DT
 

 −re−rT (eθT − 1)e P (eθT −1) 


Multiply both sides by erT and simplify

 ( −rDT ) 
rT

P C2
(erT − 1) Dr
P
e  P
e − 1 DC1 − r(C0 + DT C1 ) + r −rDT
−r 1 − e P
 
 
  
−(r+θ)DT
   rDT
 
 erT − 1 −(r+θ)D e + rD e− P


 P  
  Pr P P  
  −(r+θ)DT −rDT

 −r e  
−e P
  P 
  
  n −rDT
 −rDT
o   = rC0
erT − 1 rD

 
h +θCd  +P θ e P −r 1−e P

+ Crθ(r+θ)
 P
 
      
−(r+θ)DT
θT
   
  

 θe e P 
  
  rT

 (r+θ)D −(r+θ)DT   
 +Dr e − 1 θT
 −

e −1 e
 P   
   P   
−(r+θ)DT

(eθT − 1)
 
 −re P


r2 T 2 r2 T 2
 
P C2
[ rT + DC1 − rC0 + DT rC1 ) + { ( rT + )
2 r 2
r2 D2 T 2 r2 D2 T 2
   
Dr rDT rDT Ch + θCd
1− + −r − }+
P P 2P 2 P 2P 2 rθ(r + θ)
2 2
 
r T −(r + θ)D (r + θ)D
[ Pr { rT + ( (1− +
2 P P
2
(r + θ) D2 T 2 r2 D2 T 2
 
rD rDT
) + 1 − + )−
2P 2 P P 2P 2
2
(r + θ)DT (r + θ) D2 T 2 rDT r2 D2 T 2
r( 1− + 2
−1+ − )}
 P 2 2 2P P  2P 2
r2 D2 T 2

r T rD rDT
+P θ { rT + 1− +
2 P P 2P 2
2 2 2
r2 T 2
   
rDT r D T
−r − } + Dr { rT + ( θ ( 1 + θT
P 2P 2 2
1164 V. CHOUDRI, M. VENKATACHALAM AND S. PANAYAPPAN

2
θ2 T 2 (r + θ) D2 T 2 θ2 T 2
 
(r + θ)DT
+ )( 1 − + ) + θT +
2 P 2P 2 2
2
−(r + θ)D (r + θ)DT (r + θ) D2 T 2
( (1− + ))
P P 2P 2 !
2
θ2 T 2 (r + θ) D2 T 2
 
(r + θ)DT
−r θT + 1− +
2 P 2P 2
) } ] ] = rC0
Applying this expression and ignoring the cubit and higher terms, which are
very close to zero, the above equation can be reduced to,
DC1 r2 T 2 P C2 P Dr3 T 2 − r3 D2 T 2
 
+
2 r 2P 2
 ( ) 
r(r+θ)2 D 2 T 2 3 2 2

2P 2 − r 2P D T
2 −
 Pr r 2 (r+θ)DT 2 r 3 DT 2

(Ch + θCd )  n 32P2 2 + 3 2P2 o

+  = rC0
 
−r D T r DT
rθ(r + θ)  +P θ +

2
n 2P 2P 
 o 
−rθ(r+θ)DT 2 2 2 2 2
+Dr P + rθ 2T + r T2 θ
P Dr2 C1 + Dr2 C2 (P − D)
 
T2
2P
" 2 2
#
D 2 r 2 (r+θ)
(Ch + θCd ) r(r+θ)2P
D
− 2P
+ 2 = rC0
θ(r + θ) − D rθ(r+θ)
P + Drθ(r+θ)
2
Ch + θCd rθD2
   
P C1 + C2 (P − D) Drθ Drθ
r2 D T2 + − + T2
2P θ 2P P 2
= rC0

 2
D2 r Dr
  
P C1 + C2 (P − D) rD
r2 D T 2 + (Ch + θCd ) − + T 2 = rC0
2P 2P P 2
−D2
   
P C1 + C2 (P − D) D
rD T 2 + (Ch + θCd ) + T 2 = C0
2P 2P 2
rD(P C1 + C2 (P − D)) 2 (Ch + θCd )D(P − D) 2
T + T = C0
2P 2P
[Dr(P C1 + C2 (P − D) + (Ch + θCd )D(P − D)] T 2 = 2P C0
T 2 [P DrC1 + DC2 r(P − D) + D(P − D)(Ch + θCd ] = 2P C0

2P C0
Therefore, T 2 =
P DrC1 + DC2 r(P − D) + (Ch + θCd )D(P − D)
The optimal cycle time can be defined as
s
2P C0
T∗ = (18)
P DrC1 + D(P − D)(rC2 + Ch + θCd )
 PRODUCTION INVENTORY MODEL 1165

d2
and (T C) > 0. The corresponding production quantity is
dT 2
s
∗ 2P DC0
Therefore, Q = (19)
Pr C1 + (P − D)(rC2 + Ch + θCp )
Numerical example. Let us consider the cost parameters P = 5000 units, D =
4500 units, Ch =10,C1 =10, C2 =90, C0 =100, θ = 0.01 to 0.10, r= 0.01 to 0.10.
Optimum solution. Optimum Quantity Q* = 835.27; T1 = 0.1671, T = 0.1856,
Q1 = 83.53 Production cost = 449661.72, Setup cost = 538.75, Holding cost =
417.14, Deteriorating cost = 41.71, and Total cost = 450659.32.

Table 3. Variation of Rate of Deteriorating Items with inventory

and total Cost

Setup Production Holding Deteriorating Total

θ T Q
cost cost cost cost cost
0.01 0.1856 835.27 538.75 449661.72 417.14 41.71 450659.32
0.02 0.1788 804.66 559.24 449674.11 401.87 80.37 450715.6
0.03 0.1727 777.19 579.01 449685.24 388.17 116.45 450768.87
0.04 0.1672 752.35 598.12 449695.3 375.78 150.31 450819.51
0.05 0.1622 729.76 616.64 449704.45 364.5 182.25 450867.85
0.06 0.1576 709.08 634.63 449712.82 354.19 212.51 450914.15
0.07 0.1534 690.06 652.11 449720.52 344.7 241.29 450958.62
0.08 0.1494 672.5 669.14 449727.64 335.93 268.75 451001.46
0.09 0.1458 656.22 685.75 449734.23 327.81 295.02 451042.81
0.1 0.1424 641.06 701.96 449740.37 320.24 320.24 451082.81

From the table 3, it is observed that a study of rate of deteriorative items with
cycle time, optimum quantity, setup cost, production cost, holding cost, deteriorat-
ing cost and total cost. When the rate of deteriorative items increases then setup
cost, production cost, deteriorating cost and total cost also increases, then there
is positive relation between them. When the rate of deteriorative items increases
then the cycle time, optimum quantity, holding cost decreases then there is negative
relationship between them.

Table 4. Variation of rate of interest with inventory and total Cost

Setup Production Holding Deteriorating

r T Q Total cost
cost cost cost cost
0.01 0.1856 835.27 538.75 449661.72 417.14 41.71 450659.32
0.02 0.1733 779.81 577.06 449368.35 389.05 38.91 450373.39
0.03 0.1631 734.11 612.98 449108.05 365.92 36.59 450123.55
0.04 0.1546 695.61 646.92 448873.11 346.44 34.64 449901.12
0.05 0.1472 662.59 679.15 448658.26 329.75 32.97 449700.14
0.06 0.1409 633.87 709.93 448459.71 315.24 31.52 449516.4
0.07 0.1352 608.58 739.42 448274.67 302.47 30.25 449346.81
0.08 0.1302 586.1 767.79 448101.04 291.11 29.11 449189.06
0.09 0.1258 565.94 795.14 447937.16 280.94 28.09 449041.33
0.10 0.1217 547.72 821.58 447781.72 271.75 27.17 448902.23
1166 V. CHOUDRI, M. VENKATACHALAM AND S. PANAYAPPAN

From the table 4, a study of rate of interest with cycle time, optimum quantity,
setup cost, production cost, holding cost, deteriorating cost and total cost. When
the rate of interest increases then setup cost increases, then there is positive rela-
tion between them. When the rate of interest items increases then the cycle time,
optimum quantity, production cost, holding cost, deteriorating cost and total cost
decreases then there is negative relationship between them.
Sensitivity analysis. The total cost functions are the real solution in which the
model parameters are assumed to be static values. It is reasonable to study the
sensitivity i.e. the effect of making chances in the model parameters over a given
optimum solution. It is important to find the effects on different system performance
measures, such as cost function, inventory system, etc. For this purpose, sensitivity
analysis of various system parameters for the models of this research are required
to observe whether the current solutions remain unchanged, the current solutions
become infeasible, etc.

Table 5. Effect of Demand and cost parameters on optimal values

Optimum values
Parameters
T T1 Q Q1 Total Cost
0.01 0.1856 0.167 835.27 83.53 450659.32
0.02 0.1788 0.1609 804.66 80.47 450715.6
θ 0.03 0.1727 0.1554 777.19 77.72 450768.87
0.04 0.1672 0.1504 752.35 75.23 450819.51
0.05 0.1622 0.146 729.75 72.98 450867.85

Observations.
1. With the increase in the rate of deteriorating items (θ ), cycle time, production
time and optimum quantity, the maximum inventory decreases but total cost
increases.
2. With the increase in the rate of interest (r), cycle time, production time and
optimum quantity, the maximum production and total cost decreases.
3. With the increase in setup cost per unit (C0 ) , cycle time, production time,
optimum quantity, the maximum time and total cost increases.
4. With the increase in holding cost per unit (Ch ), cycle time, production time,
optimum quantity, the maximum inventory and total cost increases.
5. Similarly, other parameters C1 , C2 can also be observed from the table 5.
Note. The above formulae can be reduced to the standard equation of the optimal
production quantity and cycle time when the value of C1 , C2 ,r, and θ are equal to
zero, then
s s
∗ 2P C0 2DP C0
T = and Q∗ =
Ch D(P − D) (P − D)Ch
Case (ii). In the second case, the setup cost and the production cost are assumed
to be incurred at the beginning of each cycle and the inventory holding cost is
incurred continuously during the period T . To incorporate the effect of time value
of money into the equations, the difference between the interest rate and inflation
 PRODUCTION INVENTORY MODEL 1167

0.01 0.1856 0.167 835.27 83.53 450659.32

0.02 0.1733 0.156 779.81 77.98 450373.37
r 0.03 0.1631 0.1468 734.11 73.41 450123.55
0.04 0.1546 0.1391 695.61 69.56 449901.12
0.05 0.1472 0.1325 662.59 66.26 449700.14
80 0.166 0.1494 747.09 74.71 450589.76
90 0.1761 0.1585 792.41 79.24 450625.51
C0 100 0.1856 0.167 835.27 83.53 450659.32
110 0.1939 0.1745 872.66 87.27 495653.91
120 0.2025 0.1829 911.46 91.15 495682.96
8 0.1871 0.1684 841.82 84.18 441656.07
9 0.1863 0.1677 838.52 83.85 446157.7
C1 10 0.1856 0.167 835.27 83.53 450659.32
11 0.1849 0.1664 832.05 83.21 455160.94
12 0.1842 0.1658 828.87 82.89 459662.56
8 0.1856 0.1671 835.27 83.53 450659.32
9 0.1932 0.1739 869.66 86.96 450599.53
Ch 10 0.1856 0.167 835.27 83.53 450659.32
11 0.1788 0.1609 804.66 80.47 450715.6
12 0.1727 0.1554 777.19 77.72 450768.87
80 0.1863 0.1677 838.52 83.85 405695.43
90 0.1856 0.167 835.27 83.53 450659.32
C2 100 0.1849 0.1664 832.05 82.2 495623.5
110 0.1842 0.1658 828.87 82.89 540587.96
120 0.1835 0.1651 825.72 82.57 585552.71

rate is calculated as r, the inflation free or real interest rate representing the time
value of money. That is, r = R − f .
(i) Production Cost = QCP = DTCp (20)
(ii) Ordering Cost = C0 (21)
(iii) Holding Cost : Holding cost is applicable to both stages of the
production cycle, as described by

T 
Z1 ZT
HC = Ch  I(t)e−rt dt + I(t)e−rt dt
0 T1
T 
Z1 ZT
P − D D  
1 − e−θt e−rt dt + eθ(T −t) − 1 e−rt dt


= Ch 
θ θ
0 T1
T 
Z1 ZT
P − D −rt
  D θT −(r+t)t
 
= Ch  e − e−(r+θ)t dt + e − e−rt dt
θ θ
0 T1
−rt T1
" T #
e−(r+θ)t e−rt eθT −(r+θ)t
  
P −D e D
= Ch − + −
θ r+θ r 0 θ r r+θ T1
1168 V. CHOUDRI, M. VENKATACHALAM AND S. PANAYAPPAN

(P −D) re−(r+θ)T1 − (r + θ)e−rT1 + θ

  
Ch
=
rθ(r + θ) +D θe−rT − re−rT1 − θeθT1 + reθT .e−(r+θ)T1
  −(r+θ)DT −rDT
  −rDT

Ch Pr e P − e P + P θ 1 − e P

=   (22)
rθ(r + θ)
−(r+θ)DT
−Dθ 1 − e−rT + Dr eθT − 1 e


P

(iv) Deteriorating Cost/unit time: Deteriorating cost, which is applicable to both

stages of the production cycle. Therefore,
T 
Z1 ZT
DC =θCd  I1 (t)e−rt dt + I2 (t)e−rt dt
0 T1
  −(r+θ)DT
−rDT
  −rDT

θCd  Pr e −e P
P + Pθ 1 − e P
=  (23)
rθ(r + θ) −rT

θT

−(r+θ)DT
−Dθ 1 − e + Dr e − 1 e P

Assuming continuous compounding and a constant setup cost C0 , the present value
of the total cost of the inventory system for the first cycle, TC (T ), can be expressed
as,
  −(r+θ)DT −rDT
 
Pr e P −e P
(Ch + θCd )  
 +P θ 1 − e −rDT


= C0 + DT CP + P − Dθ 1 − e−rT  (24)
rθ(r + θ)  

−(r+θ)DT
+Dr eθT − 1 e P

According to figure 2, the present value of the total cost is multiplied by

 
1
TC(T ) = P
1 − e−rT
The present value of the total cost:
 (r+θ)DT −rDT  
e− P −e P
 Pr 1−e−rT 
  −rDT
 
C0 + DT CP Ch + θCd  +P θ 1−e −rT P
− Dθ

+ (25)

1−e
1 − e−rT rθ(r + θ) 
 
−(r+θ)DT
! 
(eθT −1)
 
e P
+Dr
 
1−e−rT

The present value of the total cost function TC (T ) is a function of the length of
the cycle (T ). Taking the first derivative of TC (T ) w.r.t. (T ) and equating to zero,
and using a common denominator and same procedure used in case (i) and after
some simplifications,
DCP r2 T 2 D(P − D)r(Ch + θCd )T 2
+ = rC0
2 2P 
DCp r (Ch + θCd )D
T2 + (P − D) = C0
2 2P
2P C0
T2 =
P DrCP + (Ch + θCd )D(P − D)
s
∗ 2P C0
therefore, T = (26)
P DrCP + D(P − D)(Ch + θCd )
 PRODUCTION INVENTORY MODEL 1169

∂2
and ∂T 2 > 0. The corresponding production quantity is
s
2DP C0
therefore, Q∗ = (27)
Pr CP + (P − D)(Ch + θCp )

Numerical example. Let us consider the cost parameters P = 5000 units, D =

4500 units, Ch =10,Cp = 100, C0 =100, θ = 0.01 to 0.10, r=0.01 to 0.10.
Optimum solution. Optimum Quantity Q* = 654.65; T1 = 0.1309, T = 0.1455,
Q1 =65.46, Production cost = 450,000, Setup cost = 687.38, Holding cost = 327.02,
Deteriorating cost = 32.70, and Total cost = 451047.11.

Table 6. Variation of Rate of Deteriorating Items with inventory

and total Cost

Setup Production Holding Deteriorating Total

θ T Q
cost cost cost cost cost
.01 0.1455 654.65 687.38 450000 327.02 32.7 451047.11
.02 0.1421 639.6 703.56 450000 319.51 63.9 451086.98
.03 0.1391 625.54 719.37 450000 312.5 93.75 451125.62
.04 0.1361 612.37 734.85 450000 305.92 122.37 451163.38
.05 0.1333 600 750 450000 300 150 451199.62
.06 0.1307 588.35 764.85 450000 293.93 176.36 451235.14

.07 0.1283 577.35 779.42 450000 288.44 201.91 451269.77

.08 0.126 566.95 793.72 450000 283.25 226.6 451303.57
.09 0.1238 557.09 807.77 450000 278.32 250.49 451336.59
.10 0.1217 547.72 821.58 450000 273.65 273.65 451368.88

From the table 6 is a study of the rate of deteriorative items with cycle time,
optimum quantity, setup cost, production cost, holding cost, deteriorating cost and
total cost. When the rate of deteriorative items increases, the setup cost, deteriorat-
ing cost and total cost increases, as a result there is positive relation between them.
When the rate of deteriorative items increases, the cycle time, optimum quantity
and holding cost decreases that results in a negative relationship between them.
The Table 7 is a study of the rate of interest with cycle time, optimum quantity,
setup cost, production cost, holding cost, deteriorating cost and total cost. When
the rate of interest increases, the setup cost and total cost increases. Then there
is positive relation between them. When the rate of interest items increases, the
cycle time, optimum quantity, production cost, holding cost and deteriorating cost
decreases. Then there is negative relationship between them.
Sensitivity analysis. The total cost functions are the real solutions in which the
model parameters are assumed to be static values. It is reasonable to study the
sensitivity i.e. the effect of making changes in the model parameters over a given
optimum solution. It is important to find the effects on different system performance
measures, such as cost function, inventory system, etc. For this purpose, sensitivity
1170 V. CHOUDRI, M. VENKATACHALAM AND S. PANAYAPPAN

Table 7. Variation of rate of interest with inventory and total Cost

Setup Production Holding Deteriorating Total

r T Q
cost cost cost cost cost
.01 0.1455 654.65 687.38 450000 327.02 32.7 451047.1
.02 0.1197 538.82 835.16 450000 268.99 26.9 451131.1
.03 0.1041 468.52 960.47 450000 233.8 23.38 451217.7
.04 0.0933 420.08 1071.21 450000 209.54 20.95 451301.7
.05 0.0853 384.11 1171.54 450000 191.54 19.15 451382.2
.06 0.0791 356.03 1263.92 450000 177.48 1.75 451459.2
.07 0.0741 333.33 1350 450000 166.12 16.61 451532.7
.08 0.0699 314.48 1430.91 450000 156.68 15.67 451603.3
.09 0.0663 298.51 1507.48 450000 148.69 14.87 451671
.10 0.0633 284.74 1580.35 450000 141.8 14.18 451736.3

analysis of various system parameters for the models of this research are required to
be observed whether the current solutions remain unchanged, the current solutions
become infeasible, etc.
Observations.
1. With the increase in the rate of deteriorating items (θ), cycle time, production
time and optimum quantity, the maximum inventory decreases but total cost
increases.
2. With the increase in the rate of interest (r), cycle time, production time
and optimum quantity, the maximum production decreases but total cost
increases.
3. With the increase in setup cost per unit (C0 ) , cycle time, production time,
optimum quantity, the maximum time and total cost increases.
4. With the increase in holding cost per unit (Ch ), cycle time, production time,
optimum quantity, the maximum inventory decreases but total cost increases.
5. Similarly, other parameters Cp , Cd , can also be observed from the table 8.
Note. The above formulae can be reduced to the standard equations of optimal
production quantity and cycle time when the value of r and θ are equal to zero.
s s
∗ 2P C0 ∗ 2DP C0
T = and Q =
Ch D(P − D) (P − D)Ch

4. Conclusion. The deterministic inventory control problem was considered for

the determination of optimal production quantities for items with constant demand
rate, while considering the effect of time value of money. Two different models are
developed. In the first model, deterioration is considered and in the second model,
deterioration with time value of money is considered. In the second model, two
different production cost functions are considered. In the first case, the production
cost is incurred at the beginning of the cycle, while in the second, the production
cost consists of two parts: an initial cost, which is incurred at the beginning of the
cycle and is applied to the entire quantity produced during the cycle and a running
cost that is incurred as production progresses and is applied to the individual units
produced. Closed formulae were obtained for the optimal cycle time and the corre-
sponding optimal production quantity for the models without shortage. Numerical
 PRODUCTION INVENTORY MODEL 1171

Table 8. Effect of Demand and cost parameters on optimal values

Optimum values
Parameters
Total
T T1 Q Q1
cost
0.01 0.1455 0.1309 654.65 65.46 451047.1
0.02 0.1421 0.1279 639.6 63.96 451087
θ 0.03 0.139 0.1251 625.54 62.55 451125.6
0.04 0.1361 0.1225 612.37 61.24 451163.1
0.05 0.1333 0.12 600 60 451199.6
0.01 0.1455 0.1309 654.65 65.46 451047.1
0.02 0.1197 0.1078 538.81 53.88 451131.1
r 0.03 0.1041 0.0987 468.52 46.85 451217.7
0.04 0.0933 0.084 420.08 42.01 451301.7
0.05 0.0854 0.0768 384.11 38.41 451382.2
80 0.1301 0.1171 585.54 58.55 450936.6
90 0.138 0.1242 621.06 62.11 450993.4
C0 100 0.1455 0.1309 654.65 65.46 451047.1
110 0.1526 0.1373 686.61 68.66 451098.2
120 0.1594 0.1434 717.14 71.71 451147
8 0.1529 0.1376 688.25 68.82 450963.3
9 0.1491 0.1342 670.82 67.08 451005.9
Ch 10 0.1455 0.1309 654.65 65.46 451047.1
11 0.1421 0.1279 639.6 63.96 451087
12 0.139 0.1251 625.54 62.55 451125.6
80 0.1529 0.1376 688.25 68.82 361032
90 0.1491 0.1342 670.82 67.08 406039.4
Cp 100 0.1455 0.1309 654.65 65.46 451047.1
110 0.1421 0.1279 639.6 63.96 496055
120 0.139 0.1251 625.54 62.55 541063.1
80 0.1462 0.1316 657.79 65.78 451039
90 0.1458 0.1312 656.22 65.62 451043.1
Cd 100 0.1455 0.1309 654.65 65.46 451047.1
110 0.1451 0.1306 653.1 65.31 451051.2
120 0.1448 0.1303 651.56 65.16 451055.2

examples were presented and sensitivity analysis was performed. This research can
be extended as follows:
1. In developing the models, only one concept was introduced at a time, along
with time value of money. One may investigate models with a combination of
several concepts and determine the optimal polices for these cases.
2. Another extension to this research could be an attempt to prove the convexity
of the total cost function where the interest rate is included in the total cost
function.
3. The models developed in this research were considered for a single item. One
may relax this assumption and consider models with multiple items.
4. The production rate in all the models was constant and the demand rate
was either constant or increasing linearly over time. Other extension to this
research could be to consider probabilistic demand or production rate.
 1172 V. CHOUDRI, M. VENKATACHALAM AND S. PANAYAPPAN

The proposed model can assist the manufacturer and retailer in accurately deter-
mining the optimal quantity, cycle time and inventory total cost. Moreover, the
proposed inventory model can be used in inventory control of certain items such as
food items, fashionable commodities, stationery stores and others.
REFERENCES
[1] J. A. Buzacott, Economic order quantities with inflation, Operational Research, 26 (1979),
553–558.
[2] C.-Y. Dye, H.-J. Chang and C.-H. Wu, Purchase-inventory decision models for deteriorating
items with a temporary sale price, Internat. J. Inform. Management Sci., 18 (2007), 17–35.
[3] S. Eilon and R. V. Mallaya Issuing and pricing policy of semi-perishables, in Proceedings
of the 4th International Conference on Operational Research, Wiley-Interscience, New York,
1966.
[4] P. M. Ghare and G. F. Schrader, A model for exponentially decaying inventory, J. Indust.
Eng., 14 (1963), 238–243.
[5] J. Min, et al., An EPQ model for deteriorating items with inventory-level-dependent demand
and permissible delay in payments, Internat. J. Systems Sci., 43 (2012), 1039–1053.
[6] I. Moon and S. Lee, The effects of inflation and time-value of money on an economic order
quantity model with a random product life cycle, European J. Oper. Res., 125 (2000), 588–
601.
[7] G. Moslehi, M. Rasti Barzoki and M. Fathollah Bayati, The effect of inflation and time value
of money on lot sizing by considering of rework in an inventory control model, Internat. J.
Indust. Eng. Prod. Man., 22 (2011), 181–192.
[8] A. Roy and G. P. Samanta, Inventory model with two rates of production for deteriorating
items with permissible delay in payments, Internat. J. Systems Sci., 42 (2011), 1375–1386.
[9] B. Sarkar and I. Moon, An EPQ model with inflation in an imperfect production system,
Appl. Math. Comput., 217 (2011), 6159–6167.
[10] N. H. Shah, Inventory model for deteriorating items and time value of money for a finite time
horizon under the permissible delay in payments, Internat. J. Systems Sci., 37 (2006), 9–15.
[11] S. R. Singh and R. Jain, On reserve money for an EOQ model in an inflationary environment
under supplier credit, OPSEARCH , 46 (2009), 303–320.
[12] S. Singh, R. Dube and S. R. Singh, Production model with selling price dependent demand
and partially backlogging under inflation, Internat. J. Math. Mod. Comput., 1 (2011), 1–7.
[13] H.-M. Wee, Economic production lot size model for deteriorating items with partial back
ordering, Comp. Indust. Eng., 24 (1993), 449–458.
[14] H.-M. Wee and S.-T. Law, Economic production lot size for deteriorating items taking account
of the time value of money, Comp. Oper. Res., 26 (1999), 545–558.
[15] J. C. P. Yu, et al., The effects of inflation and time value of money on a production model
with a random product life cycle, Asia-Pac. J. Oper. Res., 27 (2010), 437–456.

Received October 2014; 1st revision April 2015; 2nd revision May 2015.
E-mail address: schouarts@[Link]
E-mail address: venkatmaths@[Link]
E-mail address: panayappan@[Link]

View publication stats