

Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Prepare for your exams
Study with the several resources on Docsity
Earn points to download
Earn points by helping other students or get them with a premium plan
Gagan Rudrani provided this handout for Operation Research subject at Chhattisgarh Swami Vivekanand Technical University. It includes: Simplex, Method, Sensitivity, Optimality, Range, Analysis, LP, , Model, Parameters, TOYCO
Typology: Exercises
1 / 3
This page cannot be seen from the preview
Don't miss anything!


2012
In LP, the parameters of the model can change within certain limits without causing the Optimal solution to change. This is referred to as Sensitivity analysis. In contrast, Post-optimality analysis deals with determining the new Optimal solution resulting from making targeting changes in the input data.
In LP model, parameters are usually not exact. With sensitivity analysis, one can ascertain the impact of this uncertainty on the quality of the optimum solution. For example, if sensitivity analysis reveals that the optimum remains the same for a ±10% change in unit ‘Ci’, on cane conclude that the solution is more robust than in case where indifference range is only ± percent. There are two major types of sensitivity analysis: (i) Optimality Range Analysis or Objective-Function Range Analysis (ii) Feasibility analysis or Right Hand Side (RHS) Range Analysis
Taking an example: TOYCO assembles three types of toys - trains, trucks and cars - using three operations. The limits on the available times for the three operations are 430, 460 and 420 minutes, respectively, and the revenue per unit of train, truck and car are $3, $2 and $5, respectively. The assembly times for train per three operations are 1, 3 and 1 minutes, respectively. The corresponding times per truck and car are (2, 0, 4) and (1, 2, 0) minutes (where a zero time indicates that the operation is not used). Letting X 1 , X 2 and X 3 represent the daily number of units assembled of trains, trucks and cars, respectively, the associated LP model is given as:
Maximize Z = 3 X 1 + 2 X 2 + 5 X 3 Subject to: X 1 + 2 X 2 + X 3 < 430 (operation 1) 3 X 1 + 2 X 3 < 460 (operation 2) X 1 + 4 X 2 < 420 (operation 3) X1, X 2 , X 3 > 0
Using X 4 , X 5 and X 6 as the slack variables for the constraints of operations 1, 2 and 3, respectively, the optimum tableau is:
Basic X 1 X 2 X 3 X 4 X 5 X 6 Solution Z 4 0 0 1 2 0 1350 X 2 - 1/4 1 1 ½ - 1/4 0 100 X 3 3/2 0 0 0 ½ 0 230 X 6 2 0 0 - 2 1 1 20
The result from above tableau can be summarized, as follows. X* = (X 1 , X 2 , X 3 ) = (0, 100, 230) Z* = $
2012
S = (S1, S2, S 3 ) = (0, 0, 20) Slacks Y = (Y1, Y2, Y 3 ) = (1, 2, 0) Shadow prices
If we further investigate into the output of this problem, we get data on optimality and feasibility ranges. Optimality Ranges (Ci) Reduced Cost For X 1 (Trains): - ∞ < 3 < 7 4. X 2 (Trucks): 0 < 2 < 10 0. X 3 (Cars): 2.33 < 5 < ∞ 0.
Feasibility Ranges (bi) Dual Price Operation 1: 230 < 430 < 440 1. Operation 2: 440 < 460 < 860 2. Operation 3: 400 < 420 < ∞ 0.
Optimality Ranges The above reported data on ‘ Optimality Ranges ’ suggest:
Feasibility Ranges In the same token, one can interpret the ‘Feasibility Ranges’ , namely: