0% found this document useful (0 votes)
34 views44 pages

Taylor Introms12 PPT 02

Uploaded by

Dinda Lambang
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
34 views44 pages

Taylor Introms12 PPT 02

Uploaded by

Dinda Lambang
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 44

Programming:

Model Formulation
and Graphical
Solution
Chapter 2

Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-1


Chapter Topics

 Model Formulation
 A Maximization Model Example
 Graphical Solutions of Linear Programming
Models
 A Minimization Model Example
 Irregular Types of Linear Programming
Models
 Characteristics of Linear Programming
Problems

Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-2


Linear Programming: An
Overview
 Objectives of business decisions frequently
involve maximizing profit or minimizing
costs.
 Linear programming uses linear algebraic
relationships to represent a firm’s
decisions, given a business objective, and
resource constraints.
 Steps in application:
1. Identify problem as solvable by linear
programming.
2. Formulate a mathematical model of the
unstructured problem.
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-3
Model Components

 Decision variables - mathematical symbols


representing levels of activity by the firm.
 Objective function - a linear mathematical
relationship describing an objective of the firm,
in terms of decision variables - this function is to
be maximized or minimized.
 Constraints – requirements or restrictions
placed on the firm by the operating environment,
stated in linear relationships of the decision
variables.
 Parameters - numerical coefficients and
constants used in the objective function and
constraints.
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-4
Summary of Model Formulation
Steps

Step 1 : Define the decision variables

Step 2 : Define the objective function

Step 3 : Define the constraints

Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-5


LP Model Formulation
A Maximization Example (1 of 3)
Resource Requirements

Labor Clay Profit


Product
(Hr./Unit) (Lb./Unit) ($/Unit)

Bowl 1 4 40
Mug 2 3 50

Figure 2.6 Beaver Creek Pottery


Company
 Product mix problem - Beaver Creek Pottery
Company
 How many bowls and mugs should be produced
to maximize profits given labor and materials
constraints?
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-6
LP Model Formulation
A Maximization Example (2 of 3)

Resource 40 hrs of labor per day


Availability: 120 lbs of clay
Decision x1 = number of bowls to produce per
day
Variables: x2 = number of mugs to produce per
day
Objective Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
Function: Where Z = profit per day
Resource 1x1 + 2x2  40 hours of labor
Constraints: 4x1 + 3x2  120 pounds of clay
Non-Negativity x1  0; x2  0
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-7
LP Model Formulation
A Maximization Example (3 of 3)

Complete Linear Programming Model:

Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2

subject to: 1x1 + 2x2  40


4x2 + 3x2  120
x1, x2  0

Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-8


Feasible Solutions

A feasible solution does not violate any of


the constraints:

Example: x1 = 5 bowls
x2 = 10 mugs
Z = $40x1 + $50x2 = $700

Labor constraint check: 1(5) + 2(10) = 25


≤ 40 hours
Clay constraint check: 4(5) + 3(10) = 70
≤ 120 pounds
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-9
Infeasible Solutions

An infeasible solution violates at least


one of the constraints:

Example: x1 = 10 bowls
x2 = 20 mugs
Z = $40x1 + $50x2 = $1400

Labor constraint check: 1(10) + 2(20) = 50


> 40 hours

Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-10


Graphical Solution of LP
Models

 Graphical solution is limited to linear


programming models containing only two
decision variables (can be used with
three variables but only with great
difficulty).

 Graphical methods provide visualization


of how a solution for a linear
programming problem is obtained.

Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-11


Coordinate Axes
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (1 of 12)

X2 is mugs

Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

X1 is bowls
Figure 2.2 Coordinates for
graphical analysis
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-12
Labor Constraint
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (2 of 12)

Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.3 Graph of labor


Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd.
constraint 2-13
Labor Constraint Area
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (3 of 12)

Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.4 Labor constraint


Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. area 2-14
Clay Constraint Area
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (4 of 12)

Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.5 The constraint area for


Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. clay 2-15
Both Constraints
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (5 of 12)

Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.6 Graph of both model


Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. constraints 2-16
Feasible Solution Area
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (6 of 12)

Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.7 The feasible solution area


Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education,constraints
Ltd. 2-17
Objective Function Solution = $800
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (7 of 12)

Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.8 Objective function line for


ZLtd.
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, = $800 2-18
Alternative Objective Function Solution
Lines
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model
(8 of 12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0
Figure 2.9
Alternative objective
function lines for
profits, Z, of $800,
$1,200, and $1,600
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-19
Optimal Solution
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (9 of 12)

Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.10 Identification of optimal


solution
Copyright © 2016 Pearson point
Education, Ltd. 2-20
Optimal Solution Coordinates
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (10 of 12)

Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.11 Optimal solution


Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. coordinates 2-21
Extreme (Corner) Point Solutions
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (11 of 12)

Maximize Z = $40x1 +
$50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.12 Solutions at all


Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. corner points 2-22
Optimal Solution for New Objective
Function
Graphical Solution of Maximization
Model (12 of 12)

Maximize Z = $70x1 +
$20x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 
40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.13 Optimal solution with Z =


70xLtd. + 20x
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, 2-23
Slack Variables

 Standard form requires that all constraints


be in the form of equations (equalities).
 A slack variable is added to a  constraint
(weak inequality) to convert it to an
equation (=).
 A slack variable typically represents an
unused resource.
 A slack variable contributes nothing to
the objective function value.

Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-24


Linear Programming Model:
Standard Form

Max Z = 40x1 + 50x2 + s1


+ s2
subject to:1x1 + 2x2 + s1 =
40
4x2 + 3x2 + s2 =
120
x1, x 2, s 1, s 2  0
Where:
x1 = number of bowls
x2 = number of mugs
s1, s2 are slack variables
Figure 2.14 Solutions at points A, B, and
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-25
LP Model Formulation – Minimization
(1 of 7)
Figure 2.15 Fertilizing
 Two brands of fertilizer farmer’s field
available - Super-gro, Crop-
quick.
 Field requires at least 16
pounds of nitrogen and 24
pounds of phosphate.
 Super-gro costs $6 per bag,
Crop-quick $3 per bag. Chemical Contribution
 Problem: How much of each
Nitrogen Phosphate
brand to purchase to Brand (lb/ bag) (lb/ bag)
minimize total cost of
Super-gro 2 4
fertilizer given following data
Crop-quick 4 3
?
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-26
LP Model Formulation –
Minimization (2 of 7)
Decision Variables:
x1 = bags of Super-gro
x2 = bags of Crop-quick

The Objective Function:


Minimize Z = $6x1 + 3x2
Where: $6x1 = cost of bags of Super-
Gro
$3x2 = cost of bags of Crop-Quick

Model Constraints:
2x1 + 4x2  16 lb (nitrogen constraint)
4x1 + 3x2  24 lb (phosphate constraint)
Copyright © 2016 Pearsonx 1, x 2 
Education, Ltd.0 (non-negativity constraint) 2-27
Constraint Graph – Minimization
(3 of 7)

Minimize Z = $6x1 + $3x2


subject to: 2x1 + 4x2  16
4x2 + 3x2  24
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.16 Constraint lines for


fertilizer model
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-28
Feasible Region– Minimization
(4 of 7)

Minimize Z = $6x1 + $3x2


subject to: 2x1 + 4x2  16
4x2 + 3x2  24
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.17 Feasible solution


Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. area 2-29
Optimal Solution Point –
Minimization (5 of 7)
Minimize Z = $6x1 + $3x2
subject to: 2x1 + 4x2  16
4x2 + 3x2  24
x1, x 2  0

The optimal
solution of a
minimization
problem is at the
extreme point
closest to the
origin. Figure 2.18 The optimal
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. solution point 2-30
Surplus Variables – Minimization (6
of 7)
 A surplus variable is subtracted from a 
constraint to convert it to an equation (=).
 A surplus variable represents an excess
above a constraint requirement level.
 A surplus variable contributes nothing to
the calculated value of the objective
function.
 Subtracting surplus variables in the farmer
problem constraints:
2x1 + 4x2 - s1 = 16
(nitrogen)
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 4x1 + 3x2 - s2 = 24 2-31
Graphical Solutions – Minimization
(7 of 7)

Minimize Z = $6x1 + $3x2 + 0s1


+ 0s2
subject to: 2x1 + 4x2 – s1 = 16
4x2 + 3x2 – s2 = 24
x1, x2, s1, s2  0

Figure 2.19 Graph of the fertilizer


example
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-32
Irregular Types of Linear
Programming Problems

For some linear programming models, the


general rules do not apply.

Special types of problems include those


with:
 Multiple optimal solutions
 Infeasible solutions
 Unbounded solutions

Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-33


Multiple Optimal Solutions Beaver
Creek Pottery

The objective function is


parallel to a constraint
line.
Maximize Z=$40x1 + 30x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2  40
4x2 + 3x2 
120
x1, x 2  0
Where:
x1 = number of bowls
x2 = number of mugs Figure 2.20 Graph of Beaver
Creek Pottery example with
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-34
An Infeasible Problem

Every possible solution


violates at least one
constraint:
Maximize Z = 5x1 + 3x2
subject to: 4x1 + 2x2  8
x1  4
x2  6
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.21 Graph of an infeasible


problem
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-35
An Unbounded Problem

Value of the objective


function increases
indefinitely:
Maximize Z = 4x1 + 2x2
subject to: x1  4
x2  2
x1, x 2  0

Figure 2.22 Graph of an unbounded


problem
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-36
Characteristics of Linear
Programming Problems

 A decision among alternative courses of action is


required.
 The decision is represented in the model by
decision variables.
 The problem encompasses a goal, expressed as
an objective function, that the decision maker
wants to achieve.
 Restrictions (represented by constraints) exist
that limit the extent of achievement of the
objective.
 The objective and constraints must be definable
by linear mathematical functional relationships.

Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-37


Properties of Linear
Programming Models
 Proportionality - The rate of change (slope) of
the objective function and constraint equations is
constant.
 Additivity - Terms in the objective function and
constraint equations must be additive.
 Divisibility - Decision variables can take on any
fractional value and are therefore continuous as
opposed to integer in nature.
 Certainty - Values of all the model parameters
are assumed to be known with certainty (non-
probabilistic).

Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-38


Problem Statement
Example Problem No. 1 (1 of 3)

■ Hot dog mixture in 1000-pound batches.


■ Two ingredients, chicken ($3/lb) and beef
($5/lb).
■ Recipe requirements:
at least 500 pounds of
“chicken”
at least 200 pounds of
“beef”
■ Ratio of chicken to beef must be at least 2
to 1.
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-39
Solution
Example Problem No. 1 (2 of 3)
Step 1:
Identify decision variables.
x1 = lb of chicken in mixture
x2 = lb of beef in mixture
Step 2:
Formulate the objective function.
Minimize Z = $3x1 + $5x2
where Z = cost per 1,000-lb batch
$3x1 = cost of chicken
$5x2 = cost of beef
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-40
Solution
Example Problem No. 1 (3 of 3)

Step 3:
Establish Model Constraints
x1 + x2 = 1,000 lb
x1  500 lb of chicken
x2  200 lb of beef
x1/x2  2/1 or x1 - 2x2  0
x1, x 2  0
The Model: Minimize Z = $3x1 + 5x2
subject to: x1 + x2 = 1,000 lb
x1  50
x2  200
x1 - 2x2  0
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. 2-41
Example Problem No. 2 (1 of 3)

Solve the following


model graphically:
Maximize Z = 4x1 + 5x2
subject to: x1 + 2x2 
10
6x1 + 6x2 
36
x1  4
x1, x 2  0

Step 1: Plot the


constraints as equations
Figure 2.23 Constraint
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. equations 2-42
Example Problem No. 2 (2 of 3)

Maximize Z = 4x1 + 5x2


subject to: x1 + 2x2 
10
6x1 + 6x2 
36
x1  4
x1, x 2  0
Step 2: Determine the
feasible solution space

Figure 2.24 Feasible solution space and


extreme
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. points 2-43
Example Problem No. 2 (3 of 3)

Maximize Z = 4x1 + 5x2


subject to: x1 + 2x2 
10
6x1 + 6x2 
36
x1  4
x1, x 2  0
Step 3 and 4:
Determine the solution
points and optimal
solution
Figure 2.25 Optimal solution
Copyright © 2016 Pearson Education, Ltd. point 2-44

You might also like

pFad - Phonifier reborn

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


Alternative Proxies:

Alternative Proxy

pFad Proxy

pFad v3 Proxy

pFad v4 Proxy