
<p>MODULE B</p><p>END-OF-MODULE PROBLEMS</p><p>B.1 Let x = number of standard model to produce y = number of deluxe model to produce Maximize 40x + 60y Subject to 30x 30y 450 10x 15y 180 x 6 x, y 0</p><p>B.2 y 20</p><p>18</p><p>16</p><p>14</p><p>12 Optimal x 0, y 10 10</p><p>8</p><p>6</p><p>4</p><p>2</p><p>0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 x</p><p>Feasible corner points (x, y): (0, 3), (0, 10), (2.4, 8.8), (6.75, 3). Maximum profit is 100 at (0, 10).</p><p>Quantitative Module B: Linear Programming 1 B.3 y 20</p><p>18</p><p>16</p><p>14</p><p>12</p><p>10 Optimal x 4, y 8 8</p><p>6</p><p>4</p><p>2</p><p>0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 x</p><p>Feasible corner points (x, y): (0, 2), (0, 10), (4, 8), (10, 2). Maximum profit is 52 at (4, 8).</p><p>B.4 (a) Corner points (0, 50), (50, 50), (0, 200), (75, 75), (50, 150). (b) Optimal solutions: (75, 75) and (50, 150). Both yield profit of $3,000.</p><p> x2 400</p><p>350</p><p>300</p><p>250</p><p>200</p><p>150 Feasible Region 100</p><p>50</p><p>0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 x1</p><p>2 Instructor’s Solutions Manual t/a Operations Management B.5 (a) Adding a new constraint will reduce the size of the feasible region unless it is a redundant constraint. It can never make the feasible region any larger. (b) A new constraint can only reduce the size of the feasible region; therefore the value of the objective function will either decrease or remain the same. If the original solution is still feasible, it will remain the optimal solution. </p><p>B.6 (a) Let x1 number of liver flavored biscuits in a package x2 number of chicken flavored biscuits in a package Minimize x1 2x2 Subject to x1 x2 40</p><p>2x1 4x2 60</p><p> x1 15</p><p> x1, x2 0 (b) Corner points are (0, 40) and (15, 25). Optimal solution is (15, 25) with cost of 65. (c) Minimum cost = 65 cents. </p><p>B.7 160</p><p>140 b Drilling Constraint 120</p><p>100</p><p>80</p><p>60 c</p><p>40 Wiring Constraint Feasible Region 20</p><p> d 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 Number of Air Conditioners: x1</p><p>Let x1 number of air conditioners to be produced x2 number of fans to be produced Maximize 25x1 15x2 Subject to 3x1 2x2 240 wiring</p><p>2x1 1x2 140 drilling</p><p> x1, x2 0 nonnegativity Profit: @ a: (x1 0 , x2 0) Obj $0 @ b: (x1 0 , x2 120) Obj 25 0 15 120 $1,800 @ c: (x1 40, x2 60 ) Obj 25 40 15 60 $1,900 * @ d: (x1 70 , x2 0) Obj 25 70 15 0 $1,750 The optimal solution is to produce 40 air conditioners and 60 fans each period. Profit will be $1,900. </p><p>Quantitative Module B: Linear Programming 3 B.8 300</p><p>250</p><p> a 200</p><p> x2 150 b</p><p>100 Feasible Region 50 c 0 50 100 150 200 250 300</p><p> x1</p><p>Let x1 number of Model A tubs produced x2 number of Model B tubs produced Maximize 90x1 70x2 Subject to 125x1 100x2 25,000 steel</p><p>20x1 30x2 6,000 zinc</p><p> x1, x2 0 nonnegativity Profit: @ a: (x1 0 , x2 200 ) Obj 90 0 70 200 $14,000.00 @ b: (x1 85.71, x2 142.86 ) Obj 90 85.71 70 142.86 $17,714.10 @ c: (x1 200 , x2 0) Obj 90 200 70 0 $18,000.00 * The optimal solution is to produce 200 Model A tubs, and 0 Model B tubs. Profit will be $18,000. </p><p>B.9 300</p><p>250</p><p>200</p><p> x2 150</p><p> a 100 Optimal Solution</p><p>50 Feasible Region b c 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350</p><p> x1</p><p>Let x1 number of benches produced x2 number of tables produced Maximize 9x1 20x2 Subject to 4x1 6x2 1,200 hours</p><p>10x1 35x2 3,500 board-feet</p><p> x1, x2 0 nonnegativity</p><p>4 Instructor’s Solutions Manual t/a Operations Management Profit: @ a: (x1 0 , x2 100) Obj 9 0 20 100 $2,000.00 @ b: (x1 262.5, x2 25 ) Obj 9 262.5 20 25 $2,862.50 * @ c: (x1 300 , x2 0) Obj 9 300 20 0 $2,700.00</p><p>The optimal solution is to make 262.5 benches and 25 tables per period. Profit will be $2,862.50. Because benches and tables may be matched (two benches per table), it may not be reasonable to maximize profit in this manner. Also, this problem brings up the proper interpretation of the statement that “One should make 262.5 (a fractional quantity) benches per period.” </p><p>B.10 40 Optimal Solution 30 Feasible Region is Heavily Shaded Line a x2 20</p><p> b 10</p><p>0 10 20 30 40 50 x1</p><p>Let x1 number of Alpha-4 computers x2 number of Beta-5 computers Maximize: 1200x1 1800x2 Subject to 20x1 25x2 800 total hours</p><p> x1 10 Alpha-4s</p><p> x2 15 Beta-5s</p><p> x1, x2 0 nonnegativity Profit: @ a: (x1 10, x2 24 ) Obj 1200 10 1800 24 $55,200 * @ b: (x1 21.25 , x2 15) Obj 1200 21.25 1800 15 $52,500 The optimal solution is to produce 10 Alpha-4 and 24 Beta-5 computers per period. Profit is $55,200. </p><p>Quantitative Module B: Linear Programming 5 B.11 50</p><p>5x1 3x2 150 40</p><p>30 x1 2x2 10 x2 20 a</p><p>Feasible Region 3x 5x 150 10 1 2 </p><p>0 10 20 30 40 50 x1</p><p>Note that this problem has one constraint with a negative sign.</p><p>The optimal point, a, lies at the intersection of the constraints: </p><p>3x1 5x2 150</p><p>5x1 3x2 150</p><p>To solve these equations simultaneously, begin by writing them in the form shown below: </p><p>3x1 5x2 150</p><p>5x1 3x2 150</p><p>Multiply the first equation by 5, the second by –3, and add the two equations and solve for x2: x2 300 16 18.75 . Given: 3x1 5x2 150 then </p><p>3x1 150 5x2 150 5 18.75 and 56.25 x 18.75 1 3 Thus, the optimal solution is: x1 18.75, x2 18.75 The profit is given by: </p><p>C 4x1 4x2 4 18.75 4 18.75 $150</p><p>6 Instructor’s Solutions Manual t/a Operations Management B.12 100</p><p>8x1 2x2 160 x2 70 80</p><p>60 3x1 2x2 120 x2 40 Feasible Region</p><p>20 a</p><p> x1 3x2 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 x1</p><p>The optimal point, a, lies at the intersection of the constraints: </p><p>3x1 2x2 120</p><p> x1 3x2 90</p><p>To solve these equations simultaneously, begin by writing them in the form shown below: </p><p>3x1 2x2 120</p><p> x1 3x2 90</p><p>Multiply the second equation by –3, and add it to the first and solve for x2:x2 150 7 21.43. Given: 3x1 2x2 120 then </p><p>3x1 120 2x2 120 2 21.43 and 77.14 x 25.71 1 3</p><p>Thus, the optimal solution is: x1 25.71, x2 21.43 The cost is given by: </p><p>C x1 2x2 25.71 2 21.43 $68.57</p><p>B.13 The fifth constraint is not linear because it contains the square root of x and the objective function and first constraint are not because of the x1x2 term. </p><p>B.14 (a) Using software, we find that the optimal solution is: </p><p> x1 7.95</p><p> x2 5.95</p><p> x3 12.60 Profit $143.76</p><p>(b) There is no unused time available on any of the three machines. </p><p>Quantitative Module B: Linear Programming 7 B.15 (a) An additional hour of time on the third machine would be worth $0.26. (b) Additional time on the second machine would be worth $0.786 per hour for a total of $7.86 for the additional 10 hours. </p><p>B.16 (a) Let Xij number of students bused from sector i to school j. Objective: </p><p> minimize total travel miles 5XAB 8XAC 6XAE 0XBB 4XBC 12XBE 4XCB 0XCC</p><p>7XCE 7XDB 2XDC 5XDE 12XEB 7XEC 0XEE</p><p> subject to </p><p>XAB XAC XAE 700 number students in sector A</p><p>XBB XBC XBE 500 number students in sector B</p><p>XCB XCC XCE 100 number students in sector C</p><p>XDB XDC XDE 800 number students in sector D</p><p>XEB XEC XEE 400 number students in sector E</p><p>XAB XBB XCB XDB XEB 900 school B capacity</p><p>XAC XBC XCC XDC XEC 900 school C capacity</p><p>XAE XBE XCE XDE XEE 900 school E capacity</p><p>(b) Solution: XAB 400</p><p>XAE 300</p><p>XBB 500</p><p>XCC 100</p><p>XDC 800</p><p>XEE 400 Distance 5,400 “student miles”</p><p>B.17 Because the decision centers about the production of the two different cabinet models, let: </p><p> x1 number of French Provincial cabinets produced per day x2 number of Danish Modern cabinets produced each day </p><p>The equations become: Objective 28x1 25x2 (Maximize revenue) Subject to 3x1 2x2 360 hours, carpentry</p><p>1.5x1 1x2 200 hours, painting</p><p>0.75x1 0.75x2 125 hours, finishing</p><p> x1 60 units, contract</p><p> x2 60 units, contract</p><p> x1, x2 0 nonnegativity The solution is: </p><p> x1 60 , x2 90 , Revenue = $3930/day </p><p>B.18 Problem Data Solution Workers Hire Hire Hire </p><p>8 Instructor’s Solutions Manual t/a Operations Management Period Time Period Required Solution 1 Solution 2 Solution 3 1 3 AM–7 AM 3 0 3 3 2 7 AM–11 AM 12 16 9 14 3 11 AM–3 PM 16 0 7 2 4 3 PM–7 PM 9 9 2 7 5 7 PM–11 PM 11 2 9 4 6 11 PM–7 AM 4 3 0 0 S = 30 S = 30 S = 30</p><p>Let xi number of workers reporting for the start of work in period i, where i 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6. The equations become: Objective: x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6 (Minimize staff size) Subject to: x1 x2 12</p><p> x2 x3 16</p><p> x3 x4 9</p><p> x4 x5 11</p><p> x5 x6 4</p><p> x1 x6 3</p><p> x1, x2, x3, x4, x5, x6 0 Note that three alternate optimal solutions are provided to this problem. Either solution could be implemented using only 30 staff members. </p><p>B.19 20</p><p>15 Feasible Region</p><p> x2 10</p><p>2x1 1x2 20 5 a</p><p> x2 5 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 x x1</p><p>Quantitative Module B: Linear Programming 9 Define the following variables: </p><p> x1 thousands of round tables produced per month</p><p> x2 thousands of square tables produced per month</p><p>The appropriate equations then become: Objective: 10x1 8x2 (minimize handling and storage costs) Subject to x2 5 square tabletop contract</p><p>2x1 1x2 20 total labor capacity</p><p> x1, x2 0 nonnegativity Cost: @ a: (x1 7.5, x2 5 ) Obj 10 7.5 8 5 $115* @ b: (x1 0 , x2 20 ) Obj 10 0 8 20 $160 The optimal solution is to produce 7500 round tables and 5000 square tables, for a cost of $115,000. </p><p>B.20 The original equations are: Objective: 9x1 12x2 (maximize) Subject to: x1 x2 10 gallons, varnish</p><p> x1 2x2 12 lengths, redwood where: x1 number of coffee tables/week x2 number of bookcases/week Optimal: x1 8, x2 2, Profit = $96 </p><p>B.21 10</p><p>2nd corner point 8</p><p>Optimal corner 6 b c</p><p> x2 4 1st corner point 2</p><p>4 th corner point a d 0 2 4 6 8 10 x1</p><p>The original equations are: Objective: 3x1 5x2 (maximize) Subject to: x2 6</p><p>3x1 2x2 18</p><p> x1, x2 0 nonnegativity The optimal solution is found at the intersection of the two constraints. Solving for the values of x1 and x2 at the intersection, we have: </p><p>10 Instructor’s Solutions Manual t/a Operations Management x2 6 18 2x 18 2 6 6 x 2 2 1 3 3 3</p><p>Profit 3x1 5x2 3 2 5 6 6 30 $36</p><p>B.23 Let x1 the number of class A containers to be used x2 the number of class K containers to be used x3 the number of class T containers to be used The appropriate equations are: Maximize: 8x1 6x2 14x3 Subject to: 2x1 x2 3x3 120 Material</p><p>2x1 6x2 4x3 240 Time</p><p> x1, x2, x3 0 nonnegativity Using software we find that the optimal solution is: </p><p>1 2 x1 0 , x 17 , x 34 2 7 3 7 or x1 0 , x2 17.143 , x3 34.286 and 6 Profit 582 $582.86 7</p><p>B.24 (a) The unit profit of the air conditioner must fall in the range $22.50–$30.00 (b) The shadow price for the wiring constraint is $5.00, and it holds within the range 210–280 hours. </p><p>B.25 Let x1 number of newspaper ads placed x2 number of TV spots purchased Given that we are to minimize cost, we may develop the following set of equations: Minimize: 925x1 2000x2 Subject to: 0.04x1 0.05x2 0.40 city exposure</p><p>0.03x1 0.03x2 0.60 exposure in NW suburbs Note that the problem is not limited to unduplicated exposure (for example, one person seeing the Sunday newspaper three weeks in a row counts for three exposures). Solution: </p><p> x1 20 ads, x2 0 TV spots, cost = $18,500 </p><p>B.26 (a) Minimize: 6x1a 5x1b 3x1c 8x2a 10x2b 8x2c 11x3a 14x3b 18x3c</p><p>Quantitative Module B: Linear Programming 11 Subject to: x1a x2a x3a 7</p><p> x1b x2b x3b 12</p><p> x1c x2c x3c 5</p><p> x1a x1b x1c 6</p><p> x2a x2b x2c 8</p><p> x3a x3b x3c 10 All variables 0 (b) Solution:</p><p> x1b 6</p><p> x2b 3</p><p> x2c 5</p><p> x3a 7</p><p> x3b 3 Cost $219</p><p>B.27 400 Labor Hours</p><p>300</p><p>Optimal Solution 200 Feasible Region 100 Production Limit</p><p>0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 Boy’s Bicycles</p><p>Maximize: 57x1 55x2 Subject to: x1 x2 390</p><p>2.5x1 2.4x2 960</p><p>@ (x1 384 , x2 0) Obj 57 384 55 0 $21,888 @ (x1 0 , x2 390 ) Obj 57 0 55 390 $21,450 @ (x1 240 , x2 150) Obj 57 240 55 150 $21,930 *</p><p>The optimal solution occurs at x1 240 boy’s bikes, x2 150 girl’s bikes, producing a profit of $21,930 However, the possible optimal solutions are so close in profit that sensitivity analysis is important here. </p><p>B.28 Let x1 number of medical patients x2 number of surgical patients The appropriate equations are: Maximize 2280x1 1515x2</p><p>12 Instructor’s Solutions Manual t/a Operations Management Subject to: 8x1 5x2 32,850 patient days available</p><p>3.1x1 2.6x2 15,000 lab tests</p><p>1x1 2x2 7,000 X rays</p><p> x2 2,800 operations</p><p> x1, x2 0 nonnegativity Optimal: x1 2790 , x2 2104, Profit = $9,551,659 or: 2790 medical patients, 2104 surgical patients, Profit $9,551,659 </p><p>Beds required: </p><p>Use: Medical: 8 2790 22,320 Surgical: 5 2104 10,520 32,840 22,320 Medical uses: 68% 61 beds 32,840 10,520 Surgical uses: 32% 29 beds 32,840</p><p>Here is an alternative approach that solves directly for the number of beds: </p><p>Maximize revenues 104,025x1 110,595x2 Subject to: x1 x2 90 beds</p><p>8x1 5x2 32,850 patients yr</p><p>141.44x1 189.8x2 15,000 lab tests</p><p>45.63x1 146x2 7,000 x-rays</p><p>73x2 2,800 operations where x1 no. of medical beds = 61.17 x2 no. of surgical beds = 28.83 Revenue is $9,551,659, as before </p><p>Quantitative Module B: Linear Programming 13</p>
Details
-
File Typepdf
-
Upload Time-
-
Content LanguagesEnglish
-
Upload UserAnonymous/Not logged-in
-
File Pages13 Page
-
File Size-