This article was downloaded by: [York University Libraries]

On: 03 March 2015, At: 23:23

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,
37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

A I I E Transactions
Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/uiie19

Conveyor Theory: A Survey

a

Eginhard J. Muth & John A. White

Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering , University of Florida , Gainesville,

Florida, 32611
b

School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology , Atlanta,

Georgia, 30332
Published online: 09 Jul 2007.

To cite this article: Eginhard J. Muth & John A. White (1979) Conveyor Theory: A Survey, A I I E Transactions, 11:4, 270-277,
DOI: 10.1080/05695557908974471
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/05695557908974471

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) contained
in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no
representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of
the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied
upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be
liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities
whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of
the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic
reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://
www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Conveyor Theory: A Survey

EGINHARD J. MUTH
Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 3261 1

JOHN A. WHITE

Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 23:23 03 March 2015

SENIORMEMBER,AIIE
School of Industrial and Systems Engineering
Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, Georgia 30332

Abstract: This paper surveys the research which has been published in the area of conveyor theory.
Deterministic and probabilistic approaches, as well as descriptive and normative approaches to modeling
conveyor systems are discussed. Areas for further study are suggested.

The subject of material handling is one of current interest

in both the public and the private sectors. Whether the
material to be handled is people, mail, solid waste, raw
materials, finished goods, in-process goods, or information,
some material handling equipment is normally used to
facilitate the material transfer. Conveyor systems are very
universally employed, perhaps more than any other type of
material handling equipment.
The mechanical design problems of conveyor systems
have been well studied by mechanical and electrical engineers.
However, the operational problems of conveyor systems are
not as well understood. The study of the operational characteristics of conveyor systems has long been a concern of
industrial engineers. In an operational sense, the conveyor is
an element of a larger system, including loading and unloading stations, material supply and demand, operating disciplines, and human components as well. Hence, system
parameters include not only equipment parameters, but also
such considerations as waiting space allowances and the
number, spacing, and sequencing of loading and unloading
stations.
This paper is directed at conveyor theory in terms of the
operational setting. Its purpose is to provide a bibliography,

Received June 1977; revised July 1979. Paper was handled by

Scheduling, Planning and Control Department.

270

0569-5554/79/1200-0270/$02.00/0 @ 1979 AIIE

to classify conveyors, to give an overview of the literature,.

to discuss several representative research contributions, and
to point out areas for further study.

Conveyor Classification

There are many criteria by which one can classify conveyors.

We wish to classify models and methods used to describe
and to analyze the operation of conveyor systems. With this
purpose in mind we list some common criteria for classification.
1. Conveyor arrangement
a. Feedforward
b. Closed-loop (recirculating)

2. Conveyor use
a. Deliverv
b. Storage
"

3. Loading and unloading stations

a. Single
b. Multiple

4. Material flow in and out of stations

a. Continuous in time
b. Discrete in time.
c. Deterministic
d. Stochastic

AIIE TRANSACTIONS, Volume 11, NO.4

5. Placement of material on conveyors

a. Continuous placement
b. Discrete placement, uniformly spaced
c. Discrete placement, randomly spaced
6. Nature of material flows
a. Bulk loads
b. Discrete parts

Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 23:23 03 March 2015

7. Method of modeling
a. Analytical models
b. Simulation models
c. Deterministic models
d. Queueing models
e. Markovian models
f. Other stochastic models.

Overview of the Literature

It appears that the earliest published work seeking to

identify a body of knowledge called "conveyor theory" is
that of Kwo [34]. His appeal for analytical approaches in
the study of conveyors was followed by a surge of publications in the early 1960's. Among the earliest publications
were those of Kwo [34], [35], Mayer [37], Helgeson [29],
Reis and Schneider [56] ,Reis, Dunlap, and Schneider [57] ,
Reis and Hatcher [58], and Morris [39].
It is interesting to note that the authors of the first four
publications (Helgeson, Kwo, and Mayer) were employed as
engineers in industry. Thus, conveyor theory developed
from a concern within industry to develop analytical models
of a real world problem, the design of conveyor systems.
Also, it is worthwhile to observe that Helgeson and Kwo
employed a deterministic modeling approach, whereas Mayer
employed a probabilistic approach.
Since the initial surge of interest in the 1960's, conveyor
theory has attracted a steady following, as indicated by the
following chronological listing of known research efforts:
Disney [15] and Mednis [38] in 1962; Disney [16] ,Parker
[50], and Schumacher [61] in 1963; Ghare, Ward, and
Perry [20], Howell [32] , Perry [51], and Ward [64] in
1965; Gupta [26], Pritsker [54], and Vars [63] in 1966;
Crisp [12] and Reis, Brennan, and Crisp [59] in 1967;
Beightler and Crisp [4] and Phillips [52] in 1968; Crisp,
Skeith, and Barnes [13] and Phillips and Skeith [53] in
1969; Brady [5] and Burbridge [7] in 1970; Bussey and
Terrell [8] and Heikes [28] in 1971;Agee and Cullinane [I]
and Muth [40] in 1972; Brady [6] and Bussey and Terrell
[9] in 1973; Gourley and Terrell [21] [22] and Muth [43]
in 1974; Gregory and Litton [24] [25], Gourley, Terrell,
and Chen [23], Matsui and Fukuta [36] and Muth [44]
[45] in 1975; Chen and Terrell [lo] [l 11 ,Duraiswamy and
Terrell [17], El Sayed, Proctor, and Elayat [18], Hedstrom
[27], White [66] and White and Woodbury [67] in 1976;
El Sayed and Proctor [19], Muth [47], and Proctor, El
Sayed, and Elayat [55] in 1977.
December 1979, AIIE TRANSACTIONS

The majority of the conveyor research has concentrated

on conveyor systems consisting of equally spaced hooks (or
carriers) passing a number of work stations. Kwo [34] [35]
developed a deterministic model of material flow on a
conveyor having one loading station and one unloading
station, and time-varying patterns of material flow. His
concern was in developing feasibility conditions to insure
that the input and output rates of material were compatible
with the design of the conveyor. Muth [40] [43] provided
a thorough mathematical analysis of the problem studied by
Kwo and considered both continuous-time and discretetime material flow. He employed methods of systems
analysis and control theory to develop stability conditions
for the conveyor system. Subsequently, Muth [44] extended
his results to the case of multiple loading and unloading
stations.
Mayer [37] appears to have been the first to model a
conveyor system probabilistically. He considered a closed
loop conveyor having n loading stations operating independently. His analysis allowed each discretely spaced carrier to
have a capacity to handle multiple items. Morris [39] extended the probabilistic approach of Mayer to include
multiple loading and multiple unloading stations. A conservation of flow approach was employed to develop performance measures for the system. White and Woodbury [67]
used a simulation approach to test the validity of Morris'
model. Their results indicate the conservation of flow approach yields good approximations as long as the probability
of self-blocking is small. White [66] developed normative
models based on the descriptive models of Mayer [37] and
Morris [39].
A number of researchers have studied an individual work
station. Reis and Schneider [56], Reis, Dunlap, andschneider
[57], and Reis and Hatcher [58] developed probabilistic
models of an individual work station which performs loading andlor unloading operations. It was assumed that
temporary storage areas or "banks" are available so that in
the event of an unsuccessful loading attempt or unloading
attempt the worker is not unnecessarily delayed. The research focused on determining the effect of various banking
disciplines on the productivity of the work station. Reis,
Brennan, and Crisp [59] modeled the individual work
station as a Markov process. A banking discipline referred to
as the Sequential Range Policy was defined by Beightler
and Crisp [4], who also employed Markov processes in
analyzing the in-process storage requirements of the individual work station. A stationary Bernoulli arrival distribution
was assumed for each work station. In a later study, Crisp,
Skeith, and Barnes [13] employed simulation to test the
assumption that arrivals were Bernoulli distributed. It was
found that such an assumption could not be supported.
Schumacher [61] , Ward [ a ] , Perry [50], and Vars [63]
investigated conveyor systems involving variations of the
banking disciplines studied by Reis et al. Ghare, Ward, and
Perry [20] examined the effects of interaction for a number
of loading and unloading stations. Heikes [28] developed
approximations of the interaction effects and employed
them in an economic model of the conveyor system.

Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 23:23 03 March 2015

Queueing theory has been employed by a number of

researchers in analyzing conveyor systems. In particular, a
power and free conveyor system having two unloading
stations was studied by Disney [16]. The problem was formulated as a multichannel queueing problem with ordered
entry. Gupta [26] extended the results of Disney's research
to obtain the steady state distribution for material queued
at each of the two work stations. Pritsker [54] generalized
Disney's analysis to include m unloading stations with
storage allowed only at the last station. Whereas Disney
assumed an M/M/m queue, Pritsker considered the M/G/m
and DIMlm queueing situations. Additionally, Pritsker considered the effects of recirculation; this case was studied
using simulation. Gregory and Litton [24] modeled a
queueing system with m dissimilar service channels and
ordered entry, where the interarrival times are random
multiples of a fuced time interval. They showed that in order
to minimize the number of units which are lost, the
channels should be ordered by descending service rate, that
is, the fastest server should come first. Recirculation of units
is not allowed in their analysis. El Sayed, Proctor, and Elayat
[18], El Sayed and Proctor [19], and Proctor, El Sayed,
and Elayat [55] used queueing models which include bulk
arrivals, dual inputs with different service characteristics,
and heterogeneous servers; they determined the steady-state
probabilities of the system. It should be observed that all of
the work quoted in this paragraph addresses queueing systems rather than conveyor systems since there are no
conveyor parameters contained in the analyses. Also, the
assumption is made that items which find all servers busy
are lost to the system. This assumption is highly unrealistic.
Agee and Cullinane [I] studied a conveyor system which
connected a single loading point with a single unloading
point. Multiple loading (unloading) stations were allowed at
the loading (unloading) point. A nonstationary Poisson
process was assumed and blocking could occur when the
conveyor was full. A transient analysis was performed using
numerical methods. An economic model was developed to
determine the optimum number of loading and unloading
stations and conveyor length.
Hedstrom [27] appears to be the first to study the
problem of sequencing heterogeneous loading stations along
a continuous space conveyor. Workers are assumed to be
placing cartons of unequal length on a constant speed,
powered belt conveyor; workers operate independently at
different rates. An approximate analytical model and a
simulation model are developed to assist in the determination of the optimum sequence of workers along the belt.
Muth [47] analyzed a closed loop conveyor with one
loading station, one unloading station, and random material
flow. The flow is modeled as signal plus noise and recirculation is taken into account. It is shown that with a suitable
decision rule for unloading the conveyor acts as a smoothing
device, that is, the variance of the output flow is smaller
than the variance of the input flow.
Phillips and Skeith [53] performed a simulation analysis
of the m unloading station case involving homogenous and
heterogeneous service stations. Recirculation and storage at

each station are allowed. The simulation model was used to

validate the results obtained by Pritsker. Bussey and Terrell
[8] [9] employed a simulation model to account for the
discrete spacing of carriers on the conveyor, the storage of
units at each station, and the recirculation of units on the
conveyor. Their results indicate the importance of taking
into consideration the amount of spacing between carriers.
Gourley and Terrell[21] [22] developed a modular generalpurpose simulation model to study performance aspects of
constant-speed, discretely loaded, recirculating conveyors.
The simulation model was extended by Gourley, Terrell, and
Chen [23], Chen and Terrell [lo], and Duraiswamy and
Terrell [17] .The modular general-purpose simulation model
was extended by Chen and Terrell [ l l ] to include multiple
loop conveyor systems which service multiple floors.
Conveyors frequently serve as the link that transports
material to production lines. Therefore, a research area
closely related to conveyor theory is that involving production lines. Hillier and Boling [30] [3 1] , Anderson and
Moodie [2], Sadowski and Moodie [60], Knott [33], and
Muth 1411 [46], among others, have studied problems
related to the output rates of production lines. Another
production problem which relates to the design of conveyor
systems is the assembly line balancing problem. Over one
hundred papers are available on this subject; Panwalker
[49] provides a recent survey of assembly line balancing
techniques.

Representative Research Contributions and Results

1. Deterministic Models

Kwo [34] [35] develops a deterministic model of material

flow on a conveyor having one loading station, one unloading station, equally spaced carriers, and periodically timevarying patterns of material flow. His objective is to determine conveyor design parameters that will assure the
compatibility of different input and output patterns. The
problem development makes use of three intuitively derived
principles. The principle of "uniformity" leads to some
feasible solutions under very restrictive input output conditions, but it does not lead to a general solution procedure.
Muth 1401 [43] provides a thorough mathematical
analysis of the problem studied by Kwo. He treats conveyors for continuous bulk loads [40], and for discretely
spaced loads [43] . The material flow along the conveyor is
described by a difference equation whose solution yields
conditions under which stable conveyor operation is possible
for general periodic input and output flow patterns. It is
shown that a critical design parameter is the ratio SIP,
where S = T mod P, T is the conveyor revolution time, and
P is the work-cycle period. In a good design SIP should be
in the range (0.25, 0.75). In the continuous load case SIP
should not be a rational number whose denominator is a
small integer. In the discrete load case SIP =r/p, where r = k
mod p, k is the number of carriers on the conveyor and p =
kP/T. In that case r/p should be a proper fraction and for
--

AIIE 'IRANSACTIONS, Volume 11, No. 4

'

Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 23:23 03 March 2015

greatest operational flexibility p should be a prime number.

In [44] Muth extends the results of [43] to the case of
multiple loading and unloading stations, where each of the s
stations can perform either pure loading, or pure unloading,
or alternating loading and unloading operations. Station i
inputs fi(n) units of material to carrier n on the conveyor;
the amount of material in carrier n after it leaves station i is
Hi(n). The sequences Cfi(n))are periodic with periodp. For
given values of k and p the required carrying capacity of the
carrier is the maximum value in the sequence {Hi@))for all
i and n. A recursive procedure for computing the sequence
of values is given in [44].

Minimize

TC(x) = C 1RnD(x) D2Kx

Subject to

x = 1,.

.., n

where
TC(x) = total expected cost per shift as a function of x

C 1 = cost per unit set aside on the floor

Cz = cost per shift per loading position on a carrier

D(x) = fraction of loading attempts which are unsuccessful as a function of x

2. Stochastic Models

n = number of loading stations

Mayer [37] analyzes a conveyor with discretely spaced

carriers which pass by n work stations. All carriers arrive
empty at the first work station. The conveyor transports
the unit$ produced from all work stations to the next stage
of the production process. Each work station produces one
unit of product during one work cycle. The operator who
finishes work on a unit of product will place that unit on
the nearest carrier, or place it on the floor if the carrier is
already filed to capacity. A figure of demerit is D , the
probability that a unit of production will be set aside on
the floor. With the assumption that a loading attempt will
be made with probability p as a carrier passes a stat~on,the
total number of loading attempts per carrier as it passes n
work stations is binomially distributed. As a result Mayer
shows that when the carriers have capacity for one unit of
product, then

R = expected number of work cycles per shift

where q = 1 - p , and h = l l p is the expected number of

carriers passing a station during one work cycle. He further
shows that

for carriers with two-unit capacity.

White [661, considers the general case of a carrier with
capacity for x units. In that case

K = number of carriers on the conveyor.

Employing difference calculus methods White shows that
the optimum value of x is the smallest value satisfying the
relation

,.-

where F ( x t 1 ) is the complementary cumulative distribution

function of a binomial distribution with parameters n and p.
evaluated at x t l . In [66] additional normative models arc
constructed for the case where h is the decision variable,
and for the case where both h and x are decision variables.
D is shown to be a strictly convex function of h .
Morris [39] extends the probabilistic model of Mayer
using a conservation of flow approach. His model includes
multiple unloading stations, and not all product placed on
the conveyor is guaranteed to be removed during one cycle.
The operating discipline is that assumed by Mayer, namely,
if a loading attempt is unsuccessful, then the unit of product
is set aside on the floor. In addition, if an attempt to
unload a carrier is unsuccessful (due to an empty carrier
arriving next) then a unit of product is removed from the
reserve inventory located at the station. Each carrier is
assumed to have the capacity for carrying only one unit of
product. The following notation is used:
Aj = rate at which loading attempts are made by loading
station j

pi = rate at which unloading attempts are made by unloading station i

Based on this formulation White develops a normative
conveyor model. He notes that D is a function of two
equipment design parameters: h and x. D can be decreased
by either increasing the conveyor speed, or decreasing the
spacing between carriers, or increasing the number of loading positions per carrier. White's model for determining the
optimum value of x , given a value of h , is:
--

December 1979, AIIE TRANSACTIONS

s = rate at which carriers pass a station

= fraction of carriers arriving at loading station j which

are full

n = number of loading stations

pi

= fraction of carriers arriving at unloading station i

A n

which are fidl

C;=mp-s

fi m

1-(I-$

m = number of unloading stations

h n

(I-;)

Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 23:23 03 March 2015

Oj = rate at which units are set aside on the floor at

loading station j

Normative models are constructed by White [66] for the

multiple loading and unloading station conveyor system
studied by Moms. White treats the speed of the conveyor, s ,
wi = rate at which units are removed from the reserve at
as a decision variable and determines the value of s which
unloading station i.
yields an economic balance between the cost of unsuccessful loading or unloading attempts and the.cost of increasing
Assuming that loading stations are followed by unloading the speed of the conveyor. It is noted for the case of m = n =
stations, and that flow rate in equals flow rate out, Morris
1 that $J and t are strictly increasing functions of s; hence
provides the following relations
in that case s should be decreased rather than increased. For
other values of m and n it appears that @ and [ are strictly
convex functions of s and achieve a minimum value for
s > max (A, p).
An alternative to the models of Mayer [37] and Morris
[39] for a conveyor system consisting only of unloading
Assuming further that loading attempts and unloading stations is proposed by Gregory and Litton [24]. They
assume that the time between successive unloading attempts
attempts are completely random, such that O j = ajAj and
is exponentially distributed and that all carriers approaching
wi = pi(l Pi), the following balance equations apply
the first unloading station are loaded. If an unloading attempt is unsuccessful due to a carrier being empty, the
operator waits for the next loaded carrier to arrive. Hence,
reserve
accumulation is not provided at any station. Any
Pi+ 1s = Pi(s Pi)
i = l,...,m
carriers which pass all m unloading stations are automatically
to an accumulation line and processed at a later
S i n ~ e a ~ + ~ s = ~ , s a n d P ~ + ~ s = a ~ sandpi=
, i f h ~ =Ph V diverted
j
time.
The
conveyor speed is such that the equally spaced
Vi, the following solution to the balance equations is obtained
carriers pass a given point at intervals o f t time units and
the operator's service time is exponentially distributed with
(@)-I Hence, given that an operator is busy when carrier
i passes, the probability that he will still be busy when
carrier (i + 1) passes is e-Pt. Consequently, if an operator
unloads carrier k then the probability that the next carrier
he will unload is carrier k + y is given by

The rate at which unsuccessful loading attempts occur

for the system is given by
n

@=A

Gregory and Litton employ Palm's recurrence formula for

overflows in queues [48] in combination with a result given
by T a k h [62] to obtain a recurrence relation which is
used to analyze the individual work stations. Let A(')(z, @)
denote the probability generating function of the input to
the ith work station. The following result is used:

'Yj

j=1

where

Likewise, the rate at which unsuccessful unloading attempts

occur for the system is given bv
m

t =P
or

274

i=1

(1

Pi)

and
hk(z, @)=[ A ( ~ ) ( @ ~ z ) ]- 1
with D(')(z, @) = 1. Given the A(')(z, @), it is noted that
the input to the ith station is the output from the (i-1)st

AIIE lkANSACTIONS, Volume 11, No. 4

Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 23:23 03 March 2015

station. Gregory and Litton show that the proportion of

parts which are not unloaded by any of the unloading
stations is minimized by sequencing the servers using a
"fastest-first" rule.
Muth [47] introduces a model of a closed-loop conveyor
with a single loading station and a single unloading station
and with random material flow. The amount of material to
be loaded into bucket n as it passes the loading station is X,.
The sequence { X , ) is assumed t o be a wide sense stationary
process.This implies that the mean value function is constant
and that the covariance of Xn and ,f,,+i is a function of the
difference j only. The amount of material unloaded from
bucket n at the unloading station is Y , . Not all of the
material in the bucket will be unloaded. The idea is to use
the storage feature of the return loop to cause {Y,) to
have less random fluctuation than {X, 1 . In particular,it
is assumed that the fraction a of the amount G, arriving is
unloaded, leaving the amount H, = (1 a)G, in the bucket.
The sequence Y , is thus governed by the difference equation

determination of the optimum number of servers, the optimum combination of the conveyor speed and carrier spa.
ing, and the optimum carrier capacity.
The deterministic model of Muth [44] suggests several
optimization problems. 1) Given the sequences Cfi(n)) of
material flow, how many carriers of what capacity will
minimize the cost of the conveyor system? 2) Given the
total loading and unloading requirements, what sequences
&(n) )will minimize the cost of the conveyor system? Here
it is assumed that in process storage is available at the loading points and that delayed loading is permitted. This case
can be formulated as an integer programming problem.
3) Consider a single loading station having input sequence
X = {xi: j = 1, . . . ,p ) and a single unloading station having
output sequence Y = bj:
j = 1 , . . . ,p ) where xi and y are
nonnegative integers. The following optimization problem
is posed:
Minimize Ak, X, Y )
P

Subject to
where k is the number of buckets on the conveyor. Based
on this difference equation the stsady-state probability
properties of { Y , ) are derived. A measure of the reduction
in random fluctuation is the ratio of the variance of Y , to
the variance of X,. This variance reduction factor is found
to be equal to 4 ( 2 - a).It can be made arbitrarily small by
making cu small. However, the conveyor bucket capacity
required to accommodate the greatest possible load G, on
the forward leg grows in proportion to l/a. Thus the price
for decreased output variance has to be paid by providing
increased conveyor capacity.

Areas for Further Study

Further work in conveyor modeling is likely to continue in

two directions. On one hand, there is a place for large-scale,
general-purpose simulation models that can cope with the
complexity of actual conveyor systems and that allow
tradeoff studies in the design stage as well as the analysis of
operational problems of existing conveyors. Analytical
models, on the other hand, are inherently limited to a low
level of complexity but are designed to shed light on the
fundamental relationships among important conveyor parameters such as conveyor speed, length of forward and return
paths, spacing of carriers, number and spacing of work
stations, amounts of in process storage, service disciplines,
and material flow rates. Existing analytical models should
evolve towards greater complexity by including a greater
number of these parameters. In addition, considerable research opportunities exist for the formulation and solution
of optimization problems. Several examples of specific areas
for further work follow.
The descriptive model of Gregory and Litton [25] may
be extended to provide performance measures leading to
December 1979, AlIE TRANSACTIONS

C
j=l

xi =

yj = K

j=l

kmodp #O
k, xi, y j nonnegative integers.

The objective function will be a nonlinear function of k and

the sequences X and Y . Differences in the actual loading
and unloading sequences X and Y and the natural loading
and unloading sequences Cfi @ ) and Cf2 69) will result in
added costs, perhaps of the form [xi - fI(j)l2 and lyj
f26]I2. The value of k selected yields an associated value of
r from the relation r = k mod p, and the "relative" conveyor
loading can be determined from the recursive relation

where Hi:= 0. Letting c = min Hi* then the actual conveyor

i
loading is given by Hi = Hi* - c. The maximum carrying
capacity of carriers on the conveyor is given by

Knowing B and k the equipment cost component of the

objective function can be computed.
The stochastic model of Muth [47] offers the following
extensions. 1) Given the conveyor cost as a function of
conveyor capacity, and given the penalty one has to pay for
the randomness in the conveyor output flow, determine the
conveyor capacity that minimizes cost. 2) For a fmed
probability distribution of the input sequence {Xn } and for
fmed conveyor capacity, determine if there are nonlinear
decision rules for unloading that achieve a greater variance
reduction than the linear decision rule. 3) Extend this model
to the case of multiple loading and unloading stations, and

seek to reduce this to an equivalent two-station conveyor

model. One of the interesting aspects of this problem will
be the allocation of decision rules to the various unloading
stations, depending upon some predetermined expected
output rate at each station.

References
[I]

Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 23:23 03 March 2015

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

(61

[7]

[8]

[9]

[lo]

1111

[12]

[13]
[14]

Agee, M. H. and Cullinane, T. P., "Analyzing Two Link

Materials Handling Systems for Short Run Production Jobs."
presented at the 41st National Meeting of ORSA, Neu
Orleans, La. (1972).
Anderson, D. R. and Moodie, C. L., "Optimal Buffer Storage
Capacity in Production Line Systems," International Journal
of Production Research, 7, 3, 233-240 (1969).
Backart, L. G., "Equipment Selection Criteria-Conveyors."
ASTME Publication 73-MH-14, Materials Handling Engineering
Division, presented at the Joint Materials Handling Conference,
Pittsburgh, Pa., (September 1973).
Beightler, C. S. and Crisp, R. M., "A Discrete-Time Queyelng
Analysis of Conveyor-Serviced Production Stations," Operations Research, 16,5,986-1001 (1968).
Brady, W., "The Closed Free-Transfer Conveyor," Unpublished
B. Sci Thesis, Department of Engineering Production, University of Birmingham, England (1970).
Brady, W., "A Comparison of the Effect of Work-Time Variation in Two Types of Conveyor System," International Jouv.
nalofA.oduction Research, l l , 2 , 171-182 (1973).
Burbridge, J. J., "An Approach to the Analysis of a Conveyor
System," 38th National Meeting of ORSA, Detroit, Michigan,
(1970).
Bussey, L. E. and Terrell, M. P., "Some Operational Characteristics of Constant-Speed Recirculating Conveyors with
Markovian Loadings and Services," presented at the 39th
National Meeting of ORSA, Dallas, Texas (1971).
Bussey, L. E. and Terrell, M. P., "A Model for Analyzing
Closed-Loop Conveyor Systems with Multiple Work Stations,"
presented at the 1973 Winter Simulation Conference. San
Francisco, California.
Chen, T. C. and Terrell, M. P., "The Study and Developrnent
of a Utility Simulation Model for Conveyor System Analys~s
Using SIMSCRIPT 11.5," presented at the Joint ORSAITIMS
National Meeting, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (1976).
Chen, T. C. and Terrell, M. P., "A Modular General Purpose
Approach to the Simulation of Complex Multi-Loop, MultiFloor Conveyor System," presented at the 1st National Con>puters and Industrial Engineering Conference, Tulsa, Oklahoma (1976).
Crisp, R. M., "An Analysis of Conveyor Serviced Productit~n
Stations," Unpublished PhD dissertation, University of Texas.
Austin (1976).
Crisp, R. M., Skeith, R. W., and Barnes, J. W.,"A Simulated
Study of Conveyor-Serviced Production Stations," International Journal of Production Research, 7,4, 301-309 (1 969).
Cullinane, T. P., "A Transient Analysis of Two. Link Fixed
Conveyor Systems," Unpublished PhD dissertation, Virginia
Polytechnic Institute and State University, Blacksburg I 197 .!
Disney, R. L., "Some Multichannel Queueing Problems wliir
Ordered Entry," Journal o f Industrial Engineering, 13.1, 4648 (1962).
Disney, R. L., "Some Multichannel Queueing Problems with
Ordered Entry - An Application to Conveyor Theory,"
Journal o f Industrial Engineering, 14,2, 105-108 (1963).

,.

1151

[16]

[17] Duraiswamy, N. G. and Terrell, M. P., "Simulation el ('onstant Speed, Discretely Spaced Recirculating Convey c l r $) \
tems Using GASP IV," presented at the Joint ORSA'I IMS
National Meeting, Philadelphia, Pa., (1976).
[18] El Sayed, A. R., Proctor, C. L., and Elayat, H. A., "Andlc\~\
of Closed-Loop Conveyor Systems with Multiple Po~\\on
Inputs and Outputs," International Journal o f Protluc / / O N
Research, 14, 1,99-109 (1976).
1191 El Sayed, E. A., and Proctor, C. L., "Ordered Entry dnd Kdn
dom Choice Conveyors with Multiple Inputs," Internatronal
Journal o f Production Research, 1 5 , 5 , 4 3 9 4 5 1 (1977).
[20] Ghare, P. M., Ward, J. L., and Perry, C. R., "Development of
Conveyor Unloading Theory," Technical Report of the Department of Industrial Engineering, Texas Technological
College, Lubbock (1964).
[21] Gourley, R. L. and Terrell, M. P., "A Modular Utility Simulation Model Used to Test and Analyze Proposed Conveyor
Layouts," Joint ORSA/TIMS National Meeting, San Juan,
Puerto Rico (1974).
1221 Gourley, R. L. and Terrell, M. P., "A Modular General Purpose Approach to the Simulation of Constant Speed Discreetly
Spaced Recirculating Conveyor Systems," 1974 Systems
Engineering Conference, American Institute of Industrial
Engineers, Minneapolis, Minnesota.
[23] Gourley, R. L., Terrell, M. P., and Chen, T. C., "The Development of A General Purpose Conveyor Systems Simulation
Model Utilizing a Modular Format," presented at the 1975
Summer Simulation Conference, San Francisco, California.
Gregory, G. and Litton, C. D., "A Conveyor Model with
Exponential Service Times," International Journal o f Production Research, 13, 1, 1-7 (1975).
Gregory, G. and Litton, C. D., "A Markovian Analysis of a
Single Conveyor System," Management Science, 22, 3, 371375 (1975).
Gupta, S. K., "Analysis of a Two-Channel Queueing Problem
with Ordered Entry:' Journal of Industrial Engineering, 17, 1,
54-55 (1966).
Hedstrom, J. C., "Ordering Loading Stations Along a Delivery
Conveyor," Unpublished MS Thesis, Georgia Institute of
Technology, Atlanta, Georgia (1976).
Heikes, R. G., "A Markov Chain Model of a Closed Loop
Conveyor System," Unpublished PhD Dissertation, Texas
Tech University, Lubbock (1971).
Helgeson, W. R., "Planning for the Use of Overhead Monorail Non-Reversing Loop Type Conveyor Systems for Storage
and Delivery," The Journal of Industrial Engineering, 1 1, 6,
480-492 (1960).
Hillier, I:. S. and Boling, R. W., "The Effect of Some Design
Factors on the Efficiency of Production Lines with Variable
Operation Times," Journal o f Industrial Engineering, 7 , 12,
651-658 (1966).
Hillier, F. S. and Boling, R. W., "Finite Queues in Series with
Exponential or Erlang Service Times: 4 Numerical Approach,"
Operations Research, 15, 2, 286-303 (1967).
Howell, W. S., "The Analysis of Powered Monorail Conveyor
Systems," Unpublished MS Thesis, College of Engineering
Sciences, Arizona State University (1965).
*Knott, A. D., "The Inefficiency of a Series of Work StationsA Simple Formula," International Journal of Production
Research, 8, 2, 109-119 (1970).
Kwo, T. T., "A Theory of Conveyors," Management Science,
5, 1,51-71 (1958).
Kwo, T. T., "A Method for Designing Irreversible Overhead
Loop Conveyors," The Journal of Industrial Engineering, 11,
6 , 4 5 9 4 6 6 (1960).
Matsui, M. and Fukuta, J., "A Queueing Analysis of ConveyorServiced Production Station with General Unit-Arrival," Journal o f the Operations Research Society of Japan, 18, 3, 21 1227 (1975).

AIIE TRANSACTIONS, Volume 11, No. 4

[37] Mayer, H., "Introduction to Conveyor Theory," Western

Electric Engineer, 4,1,43-47 (1960).
[38] Mednis, O., "Conveyor Theory," talk delivered to the Contri-

[39]
[40]
141)

1421

[43]

Downloaded by [York University Libraries] at 23:23 03 March 2015

1441

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]
[49]

[50]

buted Papers Session of the 13th Annual Conference and

Convention of the American Institute of Industrial Engineers,
Atlantic City, New Jersey (1962).
Morris, W. T., Analysis for Materials Handling Manag~ment,
Richard D. Irwin, Inc., (1962).
Muth, E. J., "Analysis of Closed-Loop Conveyor Systems,"
AIIE Transactions, 4, 2,134-143 (1972).
Muth, E. J., "The Production Rate of a Series of Work
Stations with Variable Service Times," International Journal
of Production Research, 11, 2,155-169 (1973).
Muth, E. J., "Modeling and System Analysis of Closed-Loop
Conveyors," presented at the Joint ORSA/TIMS National
Meeting, San Juan, Puerto Rico (October 1974).
Muth, E. J., "Analysis of Closed-Loop Conveyor Systems; the
Discrete Flow Case," AIIE Transactions, 6, 1,73-83 (1974).
Muth, E. J., "Modeling and System Analysis of Multistation
Closed-Loop Conveyors:' International Journal of Production
Research, 13, 6,559-566 (1975).
Muth, E. J., "A Model of a Closed-Loop Conveyor with Dis
Crete Flow and Stochastic Input:' Joint ORSA/TIMS National
Meeting, Las Vegas, Nevada (1975).
Muth, E. J., "Numerical Methods Applicable to a Production
Line with Stochastic Servers," in Algorithmic Methods in
Probability, M. F. Neuts, Editor, TIMS Studies in the Management Sciences, 7 , 143-159 (1977).
Muth, E. J., "A Model of a Closed-Loop Conveyor with
Random Material Flow," AIIE Transactions, 9, 4, 345-351
(December 1977).
Palm, C., "Intensity Fluctuations in Telephone Traffic,"
Ericcson Tech., 1, 44, 1-18s (1943).
Panwalker, S. S., "A Survey of Assembly Line Balancing
Techniques," Proceedings, American Institute of Industrial
Engineers, 27th Annual Conference and Convention, St. Louis,
Mo., 259-263 (1976).
Parker, M. W., "Aspects of Clump Formation on Conveyors,"
unpublished MS thesis, University of Arkansas, Fayetteville,

Reis, I. L., Brennan, J. J., and Crisp, R. M., "A Markovian

Analysis for Delay at Conveyor-serviced Production Stations,"
International Journal o f Production Research, 5,3,201-211,
(1967).

Sadowski, R. P. and Moodie, C. L., "A Quantitative Methodology for Designing Handling Facilities for Continuous Production Processes with No In-Process Inventory," International
Journal o f Production Research, 11,3, 263-276 (1972).
Schumacher, F. W., "A Probabilistic Economic Model of an
Irreversible Loop Conveyor," unpublished MS thesis, Texas
Technological College, Lubbock, (1963).
Takdcs, L., "On the Limiting Distribution of the Number of
CoincidencesConcerning Telephone Traffic," Annals of Mathematical Statistics,30, 134-142 (1959).
Vars, J. J., "An Investigation of Parameter Relationships of
Closed Loop Conveyor System Models," unpublished MS
thesis, Texas TechnologicalCollege, Lubbock (1966).
Ward, J. L., "The Development of a Performance Characteris
tic Model for a Closed Loop Conveyor System," unpublished
MS thesis, Texas Technological College, Lubbock, (1965).
White, J. A., Schmidt, J. W., and Bennett, G. K., Analysisof
Queueing Systems, Academic Press, Inc., (1975).
White, J. A., "Conveyor Theory: A Normative Approach," unpublished working paper.
White, J. A. and Woodbury, W. C., "Validation of a Conservation of low Approach in Modelling a RecirculatingConveyor:'
unpublished working paper, School of Industrial and Systems
Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology (1976).

(1963).
[51] Perry, C. R., "Simulation of a Closed-Loop Conveyor System

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]
[58]

to Develop Relationships between Parameters," unpublished

MS thesis, Texas Technological College, Lubbock (1965).
Phillips, D. T., "A Markovian Analysis of the ConveyorServiced Ordered Entry Queueing System with Multiple
Servers and Multiple Queues," unpublished PhD dissertation,
University of Arkansas, Fayetteville (1968).
Phillips, D. T. and Skeith, R. W., "Ordered Entry Queueing
Networks with Multiple Servers and Multiple Queues," AIIE
Transactions, 1,4, 333-342 (1969).
Pritsker, A.A.B., "Application of Multichannel Queueing
Results to the Analysis of Conveyor Systems," Journal of
Industrial Engineering, 17,7,14-21 (1966).
Proctor, C. L., El Sayed, E. A., and Elayat, H. A., "A
Conveyor System with Homogeneous and Heterogeneous
Servers with Dual Input," International Journal of Production Research, 15,1, 73-85 (1977).
Reis, I. L. and Schneider, M. H., "Probabilistic Conveyor
Decisions," Kansas State University Experiment Station S p s
cial Bulletin No. 19 (1962).
Reis, I.L., Dunlap, L. L., and Schneider, M. H., "Conveyor
Theory: The Individual Station," The Journal of Industrial
Engineering, 14,4,212-217 (1963).
Reis, I. L., and Hatcher, J. M., "Probabilistic Conveyor
Analysis," International Journal o f Production Research, 2, 3,
186-194 (1963).

December 1979, AIIE TRANSACTIONS

Eginhard J. Muth is a Professor in the Department of Industrial and

Systems Engineering at the University of Florida. He received his
Diplom-Ingenieur degree in electrical engineering from the University
of Karlsruhe, Germany, and his MS and PhD in systems sciencefrom
the Polytechnic Institute of Brooklyn. He joined the University *of
Florida in 1969 and prior to that spent 18 years in industry in a
variety of engineering assignments. His research interests include reliability theory and modeling of materials handling processes. His
publications have appeared in various professionaljournals. He is the
author of a book on transform methods. Dr. Muth is a member of
IEEE and ORSA.
John A. White is a Professor in the School of Industrial and Systems
Engineering at Georgia Institute of Technology. He holds a BSIE
from the University of Arkansas, an MSIE from Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University, and a PhD from The Ohio State
University. He is currently performing research in the areas of
material handling and warehousing. He has published papers in
several professional journals and has coauthored 3 texts, with 2
others forthcoming in 1980. He is a member of ASEE, IMMS,
NCPDM, ORSA, TIMS, SME, and WERC, and serves as a Department
Editor for AIIE Dansactions

277