Q U A N T I T A T I V E
Linear Programming
B M O D U L E
DISCUSSION QUESTIONS
 1. Students may select from eight LP applications given in the
introduction. These include school bus scheduling, police patrol
allocation, scheduling bank tellers, selecting product mix, picking
blends to minimize cost, minimizing shipping cost, developing
production schedules, and allocating space.
2. LP theory states that the optimum lies on a corner. All three
solution techniques make use of the “corner point” feature.
3. The feasible region is the area bounded by the set of problem
constraints. A feasible solution is any combination of x, y
coordinates (or x1, x2 coordinates) that is in or on the feasible
region.
4. Each LP problem that has been formulated correctly does
have an infinite number of possible solutions. Any point within
the feasible region is a solution that satisfies all constraints
(although it is not necessarily optimal). In addition, for any
problem in which the optimal solution lies on a constraint that is
parallel to the objective function, all points along that constraint
are also both feasible and optimal.
 5. The objective function contains the profit or cost information
that enables us to determine whether one solution is better than an-
other solution. Our choice of best depends only on the objective.
 6. Before activity values can be placed into the objective, they
must meet the constraints. Notice that the objective function has no
minimum-required profit level unless it is included as a constraint.
 7. As long as the costs do not change, the diet problem always
provides the same answer. In other words, the diet is the same
every day. Unlike animals, people enjoy variety, and variety
cannot be included as a linear constraint.
 8. The number of feasible solutions is infinite. We only need to
consider extreme points—corner points—to find the optimal
solution. If we use isoprofit lines, we only need to examine one
corner point to determine the optimal solution.
 9. Shadow price or dual: the value of one additional unit of a
resource, such as one more hour of a scarce labor resource or one
more dollar to invest.
10. The isocost line is moved down in a minimization problem
until it no longer intersects with any constraint equation. The last
228
point in the feasible region that the line touches is the optimal
corner point.
11. The corner point method examines the profit at every corner
point, whereas the isoprofit line method draws a series of parallel
profit lines until one line finally touches the last tip (corner point)
of the feasible region. That last point touched is the optimal
solution, so other corner points need not be tested.
12. When two constraints do not cross at an axis, we use
simultaneous equations—there is only one point where two linear
equations (constraints) cross.
13. (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.
ACTIVE MODEL EXERCISE
ACTIVE MODEL B.1: LP Graph
1. By how much does the profit on x-pods need to rise to make
it the only product manufactured?
If the profit per x-pod is more than $10 per unit, then
it is the only product that should be manufactured.
2. By how much does the profit on x-pods need to fall to stop
manufacturing it?
At $6.66 and below, we should not manufacture any
x-pods.
3. What happens to the profit as the number of assembly hours
increases by 1 hour at a time? For how many hours does this
hold true?
The profit rises by $.50 per hour until we reach 120 hours,
at which point the rise stops.
4. What happens if we can reduce the electronics time for Blue-
berrys to 2.5 hours?
The profit rises by $70.
229 QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G

END-OF-MODULE PROBLEMS B.3 We solve this problem by the isocost line method:
B.1

X Y Z = 4X + 6Y
0 0 0
4 0 16 Unique optimal solution is (0, 4) with z = 4.
0 4 24
1.33 3.33 25.33 (optimal)
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.

B.2

Feasible corner points (x, y): (0,3), (0,10), (2.4,8.8), (6.75,3).

Maximum profit 100 at (0,10).
 QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G 230

x2 = number of fans to be produced

B.5

X Y Z = 24X + 15Y
Maximize 25x1 + 15x2
0 20 300
11 0 264 Subject to 3x1 + 2x2 ≤ 240 (wiring)
3.86 4.54 160.86 (optimal) 2x1 + 1x2 ≤ 140 (drilling)
x1, x2 ≥ 0 (nonnegativity)
B.6 (a) Let x1 = number of liver-flavored biscuits in a package Profit:
x2 = number of chicken-flavored biscuits in a @a: (x1 = 0, x2 = 0)  ∴Obj = $0
package @b: (x1 = 0, x2 = 120)  ∴ Obj = 25 × 0 + 15 × 120 =
Minimize x1 + 2x2 $1,800
Subject to x1 + x2 ≥ 40 @c: (x1 = 40, x2 = 60)  ∴ Obj = 25 × 40 + 15 × 60 =
2x1 + 4x2 ≥ 60 $1,900*
x1 ≤ 15 @d: (x1 = 70, x2 = 0)  ∴ Obj = 25 × 70 + 15 × 0 =
x1, x2 ≥ 0 $1,750
(b) Corner points are (0,40) and (15,25). Optimal solution is * The optimal solution is to produce 40 air conditioners and
(15,25) with cost of 65 cents. 60 fans each period. Profit will be $1,900.
(c) Minimum cost = 65 cents. B.8
B.7

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)
Let x1 = number of air conditioners to be produced 20x1 + 30x2 ≤ 6,000 (zinc)
231 QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G

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.
B.9 (a) Let T = number of trucks to produce per day
C = number of cars to produce per day
Maximize z = 300T + 220C
1 1 Let x1 = number of Alpha-4 computers
such that: T + C ≤1
40 60 x2 = number of Beta-5 computers
Maximize 1200x1 + 1800x2
1 1
T+ C ≤1 Subject to 20x1 + 25x2 = 800 (total hours)
50 50 x1 ≥ 10 (Alpha-4s)
T, C ≥ 0 x2 ≥ 15 (Beta-5s)
(b) Graph feasible region: 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.
B.11 Let: X1 = number of pounds of compost in each bag
X2 = number of pounds of sewage waste in each bag
Minimize cost = 5X1 + 4X2 (in cents)
Subject to X1 + X2 ≥ 60 (pounds per bag)
X1 ≥ 30 (pounds compost per bag)
(c) 
X2 ≤ 40 (pounds sewage per bag)
Point Coordinates z Value Corner point a:
O (0, 0) 0
(X1 = 30, X2 = 40) ⇒ cost = 5(30) + (4)(40) = $3.10
Corner point b (which is optimal):
A (0, 50) 11,000
(X1 = 30, X2 = 30) ⇒ cost = 5(30) + (4)(30) = $2.70
C (40 ,0) 12,000 Corner point c:
B Solve 2 equations in 2 unknowns 12,600 (X1 = 60, X2 = 0) ⇒ cost = 5(60) + (4)(0) = $3.00
←
derived from constraints (1) and
(2) to obtain (20, 30)
(d)  Produce 20 trucks and 30 cars daily for a profit of
$12,600 per day.
B.10
QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G 232

B.12

The optimal point, a, lies at the intersection of the constraints:

3x1 + 2x2 ≥ 120
x1 + 3x2 ≥  90
To solve these equations simultaneously, begin by writing
them in the form shown below:
3x1 + 2x2 = 120
x1 + 3x2 = 90
Multiply the second equation by –3, and add it to the first:
3x1 + 2x2 = 120  →  3x1 + 2x2 =
120
–3(x1 + 3x2 = 90) → −3x1 – 9x2 = –270
–7x2 = –150
Therefore, x2 = 150/7 = 21.43. Given: 3x1 + 2x2 = 120 then
3x1 = 120 – 2x2 = 120 – 2 × 21.43
and
77.14
x1 = = 25.71
3
Thus, the optimal solution is x1 = 25.71, x2 = 21.43.
The cost is given by:
C = x1 + 2x2 = 25.71 + 2 × 21.43 = $68.57
B.13 The last 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.
B.14 (a) Using software, we find that the optimal solution is:
x1 = 7.95
x2 = 5.95
x3 = 12.60
Profit = $143.76 (rounded)
(b) There is no unused time available on any of the three
machines.
(c) An additional hour of time on the third machine would
be worth $0.26.
(d) Additional time on the second machine would be
worth $0.786 per hour for a total of $7.86 for the
additional 10 hours.
233 QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G

B.15 (a)

(b)

(c) If X1’s profit coefficient was overestimated, but should

only have been $1.25, it is easy to see graphically that
the solution at point b remains optimal.
B.16 (a) Let Xij = number of students bused from sector i to
school j. Objective:
Minimize total travel miles = 5 X AB + 8 X AC + 6 X AE
+0 X BB+ 4 X BC+ 12 X BE
+4 XCB + 0 X CC + 7 X CE
+7 XDB + 2 X DC + 5 X DE
+12 X EB+ 7 X EC + 0X EE
Subject to:
X AB + X AC + X AE
= 700 (number students in sector A)
X BB + X BC + X BE
= 500 (number students in sector B)
XCB + X CC + X CE
= 100 (number students in sector C )
X DB + X DC + X DE
= 800 (number students in sector D )
 QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G 234

X EB + X EC + X EE Let xi = number of workers reporting for the start

of workin period i, where i = 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, or 6. The
= 400(number students in sector E ) equations become:
X AB + X BB + X CB + X DB + X EB Objective:
≤ 900 (school B capacity) x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 + x5 + x6 (Minimize staff size)
Subject to:
X AC + X BC + X CC + X DC + X EC
x1 + x2 ≥ 12
≤ 900 (school C capacity) x2 + x3 ≥ 16
X AE + X BE + X CE + X DE + X EE x3 + x4 ≥ 9
≤ 900 (school E capacity) x4 + x5 ≥ 11
(b) Solution: XAB = 400 x5 + x6 ≥ 4
XAE = 300 x1 x+6 ≥ 3
x1, x2 , x3, x4, x5, x6 ≥0
XBB = 500
XCC = 100 Note that three alternate optimal solutions are provided to
this problem. All solutions could be implemented using
XDC = 800 only 30 staff members.
XEE = 400 B.19 (a) Let X1 = wren houses
Distance = 5,400 “student miles” X2 = bluebird houses
Maximize profit = 6X1 + 15X2
B.17
4X1 + 2X2 ≤ 60
4X1 + 12X2 ≤ 120
(b)

Corner Points
X1 X2 Profit
0 0 0
X1 = $ invested in Treasury notes
15 0 90
X2 = $ invested in bonds
0 10 150
Maximize ROI = 0.08X1 + 0.09X2
12 6 162 (Optimal)
X1 ≥ $125,000
X2 ≤ $100,000
X1 + X2 = $250,000 The maximum value of the objective is $162, obtained by
X1 , X2 ≥ 0 producing 12 wren houses and 6 bluebird houses.
Point a (X1 = 150,000, X2 = 100,000),
ROI = $21,000 (optimal solution)
Point b (X1 = 250,000, X2 = 0), ROI = $20,000

B.18 Problem Data Solution

Workers Hire Hire Hire
Perio Time Period Required Solution Solution 2 Solution 3
d 1
1  3 A.M.–7 A.M. 3 0 3 3
2 7 A.M.–11 A.M. 12 16 9 14
3 11 A.M.–3 P.M. 16 0 7 2
4  3 P.M.–7 P.M. 9 9 2 7
5 7 P.M.–11 P.M. 11 2 9 4
6 11 P.M.–3 A.M. 4 3 0 0
∑= ∑ = 30 ∑=
235 QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G

B.20 The original equations are:

Objective: 9x1 + 12x2 (maximize)
Subject to: x1 + x2 ≤ 10 (gallons, varnish)
x1 + 2x2 ≤ 12 (lengths, redwood)
where: x1 = number of coffee tables/week
x2 = number of bookcases/week The original equations are:
Optimal: x1 = 8, x2 = 2, Profit = $96 Objective: 4x1 + 5x2 (minimize)
Subject to: x1 + 2x2 ≥ 80
B.21 (a, b) Let S = number of standard bags to produce per week 3x1 + x2 ≥ 75
D = number of deluxe bags to produce per week The optimal solution is found at the intersection of the two
constraints:
Maximum: z = 10S + 8D x1 + 2x2 ≥ 80
1 3x1 + x2 ≥ 75
S + D ≤ 300 ( A)
2 To solve these equations simultaneously, begin by writing
2 them in the form shown below:
S+ D ≤ 360 ( B)
3 x1 + 2x2 = 80
3x1 + x2 = 75
S, D ≥ 0
Multiply the second equation by –2 and add it to the first:
x1 + 2 x 2 = 80 → x1 + 2 x 2 = 80
−2(3 x1 + x2 = 75) → −6 x1 − 2 x 2 = −150
− 5 x1 = − 70
Thus, x1 = 70/5 = 14. Given: x1 + 2x2 = 80,
2x2 = 80 – x1 = 80 – 14 or x2 = 66/2 = 33.
The cost is given by:
C = 4x1 + 5x2 = (4 × 14) + (5 × 33) = 221
B.23 Let x1 = number of class A containers to be used
x2 = number of class K containers to be used
x3 = number of class T containers to be used
The appropriate equations are:
Maximize: 9x1 + 7x2 + 15x3
Subject to: 2x1 + x2 + 3x3 ≤ 130 (material)
Extreme (Corner) 2x1 + 6x2 + 4x3 = 240 (time)
Points x1, x2, x3 ≥ 0 (nonnegativity)
Point Profit Using software we find that the optimal solution is:
(0, 0) $0 x1 = 0, x2 = 14.29, x3 = 38.57
(0, 300) $2,400 and
(360, 0) $3,600 Profit = $678.57
(240, 180) $3,840 ←Optimal solution and answer B.24

B.22
 QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G 236

B.26 (a)   x ≤ 4 (line 1)
Minimize: –x ≤ 2 (line 2)
x +2y ≤ 6 (line 3)
–x +2y ≤ 8 (line 4)
y ≥ 0 (line 5)
There are 5 corner (extreme) points. 6 x1a + 5x1b + 3x1c + 8 x2 a + 10 x2b + 8x2 c + 11x3a + 14 x3b + 18x3c

B.25 Subject to: x1a + x2 a + x3 a = 7

x1b + x2 b + x3b = 12
x1c + x 2c + x3c = 5
x1a + x1b + x1c ≤ 6
x2 a + x 2 b + x 2 c ≤ 8
x3a + x3b + x 3c ≤ 10
All variables ≥ 0
(b) Solution:
x1b = 6
x2 b = 3
x2 c = 5
x3a = 7

Let: X1 = number of TV spots x3b = 3

X2 = number of newspaper ads
Maximize exposures = 35,000X1 + 20,000X2
Subject to: 3,000X1 + 1,250 X 2 ≤ $100,000
X1 ≥ 5
X1 ≤ 25
X 2 ≥ 10
Point a (X1 = 5, X 2 = 10) exposure = 375,000
Point b (X1 = 5, X2 = 68) exposure = 175,000 + 1,360,000
= 1,535,000 (this is optimal)
Point c (X1 = 25, X2 = 20) exposu re = 875,000 + 400,000
= 1,275,000
Point d (X1 = 25, X2 = 10) exposure = 875,000 + 200,000
= 1,075,000
Cost = $219
An alternate solution, at the same $219 ($219,000) cost, is
x1b = 1
x1c = 5
x2 b = 8
x3a = 7
x3 b = 3
B.27 (a) V1 fertilizer shipped to Customer A from Warehouse W1
V2 fertilizer shipped to Customer A from Warehouse W2
V3 fertilizer shipped to Customer A from Warehouse W3
V4 fertilizer shipped to Customer B from Warehouse W1
V5 fertilizer shipped to Customer B from Warehouse W2
V6 fertilizer shipped to Customer B from Warehouse W3
(b) Z = 7.5V1 + 6.25V2 + 6.5V3 + 6.75V4 + 7V5 + 8V6

(c) Description Variables and What Type? RHS?

Coefficients?
C1: Cust A’s demand formula: V1 + V2 + V3 = >| = 650 (either = > or =
okay)
(d) How many of the constraints are binding? 4 (tell by
C2: Cust B’s demand formula: V4 + V5 + V6 = >| = 800 (either = > or =
non-zero shadow prices)
okay)
C3: W1’s supply (e) +How
formula: V1 = < is there
V4 much slack/surplus 400with the non-binding
constraint(s)? 50 tons (= 600–550)
(f) The range of optimality on Variable V3? $6.25 to
$7.25 (to get this look at Allowable Increase (.75) and
Decrease (.25) for V3. Add/subtract from C3 (6.5):
6.25 = 6.5 – .25 & 7.25 = 6.5 + .75.
237 QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G

(g) If we could ship 10 tons less to Customer A, we might Hours on test device 2:
be able to save: $65 (shadow price = $6.5/ton). Cust B 2 X1 + 5 X2 + 3X3 + 2 X4 + 15 X5 + 17 X6
Shadow price is higher for filling Customer B’s demand =
60
$7.25 > $6.5 and we are trying to minimize costs.
Hours on test device 3:
B.28 Let x1 = number of medical patients
5 X1 + 1X2 + 3X3 + 2 X4 + 9 X5 + 2 X6
x2 = number of surgical patients =
The appropriate equations are: 60
Maximize 2280x1 + 1515x2 Thus, the objective function is
Subject to: 8 x1 + 5 x2 ≤ 32,850 (patient days available) Maximize contribution per unit = Revenue – Material
3.1x1 + 2.6 x2 ≤ 15,000 (lab tests) cost – Test cost
1x1 + 2 x2 ≤ 7,000 (X rays) = 200 X1 + 120 X2 + 180 X3 + 130 X4 + 430 X5 + 260 X6
x2 ≤ 2,800 (operations) − 35 X1 − 25 X 2 − 40 X3 − 45 X4 − 170 X5 − 60 X6
x1 , x2 ≥ 0 (nonnegativity) 7 X1 + 3 X2 + 12 X3 + 6 X4 + 18 X5 + 17 X6
− 15
60
Optimal: x1 = 2790, x2 = 2104, Profit = $9,551,659 2 X1 + 5 X 2 + 3 X3 + 2 X4 + 15 X5 + 17 X6
or 2,790 medical patients, 2,104 surgical patients, − 12
60
Profit = $9,551,659 (all numbers rounded) 5 X1 + 1X2 + 3 X3 + 2 X4 + 9 X5 + 2 X6
Beds required: − 18
60
Use: Medical: 8 × 2790 = 22,320
This can be rewritten as
Surgical: 5 × 2104 = 10,520 M aximize contribution
32,840 per unit: = $161.35X1 + 92.95X2 + 135.50X3
+ 82.50X 4 + 249.80X 5 + 191.75X6
22,320
Medical uses: = 68% → 61 beds
32,840 Subject to:
10,520
Surgical uses: = 32% → 29 beds 7 X1 + 3X2 + 12 X3 + 6 X4 + 18 X5 + 17 X6
32,840 ≤ 120 hours
60
Here is an alternative approach that solves directly for the
2 X1 + 5 X2 + 3X3 + 2 X4 + 15 X5 + 17 X6
number of beds: ≤ 120 hours
60
Maximize revenues = 104,025x1 + 110,595x2 5 X1 + 1X2 + 3X3 + 2 X4 + 9 X5 + 2 X6
≤ 100 hours
Subject to: x1 + x2 ≤ 90 beds 60
8x1 + 5 x2 ≤ 32,850 (patients/yr)
(b) The solution is
141.44x1 + 189.8 x2 ≤ 15,000 (lab tests)
X1 = 496.55 internal modems
45.63x1 + 146 x2 ≤ 7,000 (x-rays)
X2 = 1,241.38 external modems
73x2 ≤ 2,800 (operations)
X3 through X6 = 0
where x1 = no. of medical beds = 61.17 Profit = $195,504.80
x2 = no. of surgical beds = 28.83 (c) The shadow prices, as explained in Module B, for addi-
Revenue is $9,551,659, as before. tional time on the three test devices are $21.41, $5.75,
B.29 (a) Let X1 = no. of units of internal modems produced and $0, respectively, per minute.
per week
X2 = no. of units of external modems produced per
week
X3 = no. of units of circuit boards produced per week
X4 = no. of units of jump drives produced per week
X5 = no. of units of hard drives produced per week
X6 = no. of units of memory boards produced per week
Objective function analysis: First find the time used on
each test device:
Hours on test device 1:
7 X1 + 3X2 + 12 X3 + 6 X4 + 18 X5 + 17 X6
=
60
 QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G 238

B.30 
Cost/ Calories/ Percent Pro- Percent Percent Fruit/
Foods Serving Serving tein Carbs Fat Vegetable
Apple sauce(AS) $0.30 100 0% 100% 0% 1
Canned corn
$0.40 150 20% 80% 0% 1
(CC)
Fried chicken
$0.90 250 55% 5% 40% 0
(FC)
French fries (FF) $0.20 400 5% 35% 60% 0
Mac & cheese
$0.50 430 20% 30% 50% 0
(MC)
Turkey breast
$1.50 300 67% 0% 33% 0
(TB)
Garden salad
$0.90 100 15% 40% 45% 1
(GS)

AS CC FC FF MC TB GS
Cost 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.2 0.5 1.5 0.9
Servings 0 1.333 0.457 0 1.130 0 0 $1.51

Constraints AS CC FC FF MC TB GS LHS RHS

Cals min 100 150 250 400 430 300 100 800 500
Cals max 100 150 250 400 430 300 100 800 800
Protein min 0 30 137.5 20 86 201 15 200 200
Carb min 100 120 12.5 140 129 0 40 311.43 200
Fat max 0 0 100 240 215 99 45 288.57 400
Fruit/veg. min. 100 150 0 0 0 0 100 200 200

Target cell (Min.) Answer Report (Relevant Section)

Cell Name Original Value Final Value
$I$14 servings $2.91 $1.51
Adjustable cells
Cell Name Original Value Final Value
$B$14 serving AS 1.50 0.00
$C$14 serving CC 0.00 1.33
$D$14 serving FC 1.33 0.46
$E$14 serving FF 0.00 0.00
$F$14 serving MC 0.00 1.13
$G$14 serving TB 0.00 0.00
$H$14 serving GS 1.40 0.00
Constraints
Cell Name Cell Value Formula Status Slack
$I$17 Cals min LI 800 $I$17 ≥ $J$1 Not binding 300
$I$18 Cals max L 800 $I$18 ≤ $J$1 Binding 0
$I$19 Protein min 200 $I$19 ≥ $J$1 Binding 0
$I$20 Carb min L 311.43 $I$20 ≥ $J$2 Not binding 111.4286
$I$21 Fat max LI 288.57 $I$21 ≤ $J$2 Not binding 111.4286
$I$22 Fruit + Veg I 200 $I$22 ≥ $J$2 Binding 0
239 QUANTITATIVE MODULE B L I N E A R P R O G R A M M I N G

Adjustable Sensitivity Report (Relevant Section)

cells
Final Reduced Objective Allowable Allowable
Cell Name Value Cost Coefficient Increase Decrease
$B$14 serving AS 0 0.1726 0.3 1E + 30 0.1726
$C$14 serving CC 1.333 0 0.4 0.2589 0.2256
$D$14 serving FC 0.457 0 0.9 0.1051 0.1006
$E$14 serving FF 0 0.1527 0.2 1E + 30 0.1529
$F$14 serving M 1.130 0 0.5 0.0629 0.7078
$G$14 serving TB 0 0.1693 1.5 1E + 30 0.1694
$H$14 serving GS 0 0.6661 0.9 1E + 30 0.6882
Constraints
Final Shadow Constraint Allowable Allowable
Cell Name Value Price R.H. Side Increase Decrease
$I$17 Cals min LI 800 0 500 300 1E + 30
$I$18 Cals max L 800 – 0.00023 800 200 251.6129
$I$19 Protein min 200 0.008983 200 155 40
$I$20 Carb min L 311.43 0 200 111.4285 1E + 30
$I$21 Fat max LI 288.57 0 400 1E + 30 111.4286
$I$22 Fruit + Veg I 200 0.0015 200 485.7143 200