Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
mos
(All demands were met, slack of 14000 and 2000 on US and UK origins) Optimal
$185000
Also, to meet India and Russias demand, Denmark has to be supplied from US.
Reason for these major changes : Slack of only 2000 was available
previously. Any reduction of more than 2000 in RHS would cause the
optimal solution to change.
G. 9000 tons of capacity of US were unused (slack) in the previous model and the
dual for the constraint was 0. Hence, the worth of one less resource is 0. So,
reducing it by 7500 doesnt make any difference to the optimal. Now, there is a
slack of 1500 (previously 9000). Hence, unless it was reduced by another 1501, the
optimal solution would remain the same.
H. $36 is the highest shipping cost at which some goods will flow from Philadelphia
to India.
I. It is uneconomical for Philadelphia to supply to India now. A Denmark- India flow
of cost $25 becomes a part of the total optimal. Any slight increase above $36
for shipping cost of Philly-India will lead the optimal solution to deactivate
the flow over these. This knifes edge effect in linear programming is one in
which a small shift in the real-world prices could make a source-destination flow the
cheapest regardless of the other factors.
Reason: Reduced cost for variable Y(Philadelphia, India)= $9. So, this variable
will be a part of the optimum only when the objective coefficient (cost) is reduced
by $9 , i.e when it becomes at most 45-9=$36.
J. The model became infeasible because the demand constraint for Nigeria led to
total demand being more than the total supply. (Slack of only 1500 was available
from US from previous optimal) There is no solution which could meet the 2000 ton
min. requirement at Nigeria.
Transport data
Model file
When capacity at Pittsburgh is changed to 600 from 450, it still gives the
same optimal solution. The excess 150 is built up as slack. Reason: Total
demand=450, Total supply=600
When capacity at Pittsburgh is changed to 400, it gives an infeasible
solution. Reason: Total demand=450, Total supply=400. This is a big conflict, which
results in an infeasible solution space.
When capacity at Pittsburgh is kept at 600 & demand for Baltimore is
changed from 120 to 160
Optimal solution changed to $1974 (All demands were met, slack of 110 on
Pittsburgh)
Increased demand of 40 at Baltimore led to shipping of the same amount
from Pitts via SE. It could not take the other NE route as the arc-capacity
constraint was binding.
When capacity at Pittsburgh is kept at 600 & demand for Baltimore is at 160 and
cost of Pitts-SE is decremented from $3.5. The solution does not change
until its cost becomes $2. Here, Pittsburgh supplies 250 tons to SE and
240 tons to NE (inverted previously). This is due to the knifes edge effect.
Previous changes retained & when a new location Memphis is added with costs
$1 from NE and $0.5 from SE, arc capacity 100 on both arcs, and demand 15