English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Article history: Received 25 February 2012 Accepted March 23 2012 Available online 24 March 2012 In a previously published paper by Khan et al. (2011) [Khan, M., Jaber, M.Y., & Bonney M. (2011). An economic order quantity (EOQ) for items with imperfect quality and inspection errors, International Journal of Production Economics, 133, 113-118], we found that there is a contradiction between the cycle length and the holding cost per cycle. To obtain the cycle length, the authors assumed that the returned items from the market were replaced with good quality items. However, for the holding cost per cycle, the authors implicitly assumed that the returned items were not replaced by good quality items. In this note, we first point out the contradiction. Then we fix this flaw and develop a corrected EOQ. © 2012 Growing Science Ltd. All rights reserved

A note on "An economic order quantity (EOQ) for items with imperfect quality and inspection errors"