# Copyright 2012, Brazilian Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels Institute - IBP

This Technical Paper was prepared for presentation at the Rio Oi & Gas Expo and Conference 2012, held between September, 17-
20, 2012, in Rio de Janeiro. This Technical Paper was selected for presentation by the Technical Committee of the event according to
the information contained in the final paper submitted by the author(s). The organizers are not supposed to translate or correct the
submitted papers. The material as it is presented, does not necessarily represent Brazilian Petroleum, Gas and Biofuels Institute’
opinion, or that of its Members or Representatives. Authors consent to the publication of this Technical Paper in the Rio Oil & Gas
Expo and Conference 2012 Proceedings.
______________________________
1
M.Sc., Industrial Engineer – Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
2
Ph.D., Industrial Engineer – Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
3
Ph.D., Computer Engineer – Federal University of Rio de Janeiro
IBP1533_12
REFINERY OPERATION PLANNING CONSIDERING
STOCHASTIC DEMAND
Leonardo M. Nascimento
1
, Virgílio J. M. Ferreira Filho
2
,
Laura Bahiense
3

Abstract

In this work, we deal with the midterm refinery planning problem considering stochastic demand. We model the
problem as a mixed-integer linear model composed by linear equations that represent the flow balancing of raw-
materials and products in the units, subjected to technological and market demand requirements. Binary decisions
regarding the availability of crude oils supply are also considered. To deal with the stochastic demand, we used the
concept of recourse model of the stochastic programming. Within this context, for each period, one must first take
decisions regarding the quantity of raw material to be supplied to the refinery without knowing exactly the demand of
each product. In a second stage of decision, when the demands are realized, one takes decisions regarding the flow
balancing of the units in order to try to attend the demand. The optimal solution of the model is that whose decisions of
supply maximizes the economic result of the production (profit). Given the multi-period characteristics of the problem,
the model is formulated as multistage one.

1. Introduction

The refining activity is one of the most important activities of the Oil Industry. It is only through the refining
processes that the market is accessed, once the refinery provides the transformation of crude oil into derivatives highly
demanded by several economic sectors.
During the refining, the oil is submitted to a series of processes defined accordingly to its properties and the
specification of the demanded derivatives. Such processes aim to separate the crude oil into pre-standardized fractions,
taking full advantage of its energetic potential. The way these processes can be combined result in a variety of schemes,
where each one can be used as a production plan.
Many researchers have focused their attention in developing mathematical models with different complexities
in order to support decision makers dealing with the refinery planning problem. Although Pinto, Joly and Moro (2000),
Göthe-Lundgren, Lundgren and Persson (2002), Li, Hui and Li (2005) all have proposed very highly detailed models,
their studies do not consider random events that could influence not only the economic efficiency of the refinery, but
also the attendance of the demand.
The operation planning must also be prepared to random events that might cause possible mismatches between
the demand and production. Since the Oil Industry deals with commodities, it is highly influenced by many
uncertainties. For instance, periodical variations of all instances, geopolitics issues, natural disasters, a more intelligent
use of the natural resources and local or worldwide economic crisis can impact the demand of the oil derivatives.
Liu and Sahinidis (1996), Wenkai et al. (2004), Neiro and Pinto (2005) and Pongsadki et al. (2006) proposed
different methods to treat uncertainties that can affect the efficiency of oil refineries.
The main objective of the work is to present a methodology based upon stochastic programming that supports
the decision makers in the midterm operations planning of an oil refinery under uncertainty. Moreover, it is proposed a
Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012
2
mixed-integer linear model that aims to find the supply decisions with the best expected economic result in a situation of
uncertain demand.

2. Stochastic Programming

Stochastic programming deals with situations where one wishes to optimize a system whose observed random
events greatly affect its efficiency. In this work, it is considered the multistage stochastic programming approach, as seen
below (Kall and Wallace, 2003):

{ } 2
2
T T
T
1 1 2 2
1
1 1 1 1
2
1
min c E c ( ) ( ) E c ( ) ( )
A b
W ( ) h ( ) T ( ) ( ),
,

2
0
x x x
st
x
x x
x x
t
t t t t t t t t t
e e t t t t
t
e e e t
e e
e
e e
÷ ÷ ÷ ÷
+ + +
=
(
>
¸ ¸
÷
>
=
(1)

The vectors b, q, h and matrices A, W
t
, T
t
are of appropriate dimensionality.
In the problem (1), the vector
1
x corresponds to the first stage decisions, also known as "here-and-now"
decisions. The vectors ( ) x
t t
e , for the subsequent stages ( 2 t > ), correspond to the "wait-and-see" decisions. These
last ones depend on the random vectors , 2
t
t e eO > . The first term of the objective function
T
1 1
c x represent the
deterministic cost associated to the first stage decisions. The second term represents the expected value of the "wait-and-
see" decisions ( ) x
t t
e for the stages 2 t > . The matrix W
t
, called recourse matrix, is fixed, that is, it is independent of
the random vector
t
e .
In the literature, it is common use of the value of the perfect information (EVPI) and the value of the stochastic
solution (VSS) to estimate the importance of considering a stochastic model. The former measures how much a decision
maker would be willing to pay if perfect information about the future is available. The latter measures the impact of
discarding the random nature of a problem, that is, using a deterministic model instead of a stochastic one. For
information regarding the calculation of these indicators, see Birge and Louveaux (2011).

3. Mathematical Model

3.1. Notes and Assumptions

In this work, it is defined as a stream the quantity (in volumetric units) of a given material that is pumped from,
to or between units. A stream can be raw material (i.e. crude oils), intermediate and final products. A campaign of a unit
is a process where information regarding input and output streams and properties specification of the unit are defined.
The processing units are divided in two groups: distillation and conversion units. The first one refers to the
distillation (atmospheric or vacuum) units, where the crude oils are separated into products accordingly to boiling
ranges. The second group refers to units where chemical characteristics are changed. Examples of this group are the
naphtha and distillate hydrotreaters, which desulfurize some of the oil derivatives generated in the distillation unit.
A deterministic version of the model aims to find the most profitable production plan meeting the
technological, resource and demand requirements. The main decisions of the model are:

- The raw material quantities needed to supply the refinery in each production period.
- The quantity of each possible stream to be pumped among each possible pair (units, campaign), for each
production period;
- The quantity of each stream to be stocked in each storage unit, for each campaign and production period;

In the stochastic approach considered, the model is conceptually structured in a way where a decision maker
must decide "here-and-now" the quantity of raw material that will supply the refinery in a stage before the stage of
production, so as to attend the stochastic demand of the current period. As the demand is not known yet, the decision
must be made so that the expected profit is maximized. That is, each production period is "divided" into two stages,
Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012
3
where, in the first one, decisions regarding the supply of raw material are taken; and, in the second one, decisions about
the flow balancing of the units are taken.

a) Material lost from interface between two different streams or from any other nature is not considered;
b) Only linear relations are considered in the flow balancing equations;
c) Properties of the streams are calculated on a volumetric base;
d) A load unit and a delivery unit are considered for both supplying the refinery and meeting the market
demand;
e) The random variables that describe the behavior of the stochastic parameters are known and can be
represented approximately by discrete values.

3.2. Model Description

The objective of the program is to maximize the expected economic result of the production (2). The economic
result (3) is the difference between the sum of all the revenue (4) and the total cost. The total cost is composed by the
raw material cost (5), utility cost (6), inventory cost (7) and the opportunity cost (8), which expresses the cost of not
attending the demand.

SCEN
max E( ) PROB
sc sc
sc
economicresult econocomicresult
e
= ×
¿
(2)
where

sc sc sc sc sc
economicresult rev rmcost utilcost invcost oppcost
sc
= ÷ ÷ ÷ ÷ (3)

, , 1 1 , ,
1 ( ) 1
PRICE
sc u s t u ,c ,s,u c t,sc
u U UD c C s S u UDc C t T
rev flow
e ÷ e e e e e
= ×
¿ ¿¿ ¿ ¿¿
(4)

, , , , ,
RMC
sc u s t u c s t,sc
u UF c C s S t T
mcost supp y r l
e e e e
= ×
¿ ¿¿¿
(5)

, , ,
1 1 ( )
UTILC
sc u c l t u1,c1,s,u,c,t,sc
u U c C s S u US UC c C l L t T
utilcost flow
e e e e e e e
= ×
¿ ¿¿ ¿ ¿¿¿
(6)

u,t , ,
INVC
sc u,c t sc
u UST c C t T
invcost stock
e e e
= ×
¿ ¿¿
(7)

, ,
OPPC
sc u s t
u UD
u,s,t,sc
s S t T
oppcost lost
e e e
= ×
¿ ¿¿
(8)

For each production period, the refinery is supplied by a quantity of raw material in the feed unit (9). The
amount supplied of each raw material is restricted to predefined lower and upper bounds (10). The quantity of each
product found in the delivery unit must be no more than each respective demand (11). The amount of the demand of
each product that is not attended is quantified by the variable
u,s,t,sc
lost (12).

2 U 2 C
0
u,c,s,t,sc u,c,s,u2,c2,t,sc
u c
supply flow
e e
÷ =
¿ ¿
(9)
, ,
UF, C, S, T, SCEN | OS
u c s
u c s t sc ¬ e e e e e -

MINRM MAXRM
u,c,s,t,sc u,c,s,t,sc u,c,s,t,sc u,c,s,t,sc
y supply y
u,c,s,t,sc
s s × × (10)
, ,
UF, C, S, T, SCEN | OS
u c s
u c s t sc ¬ e e e e e -

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012
4
1 U 1 C C
DEM 0
u1,c1,s,u,c,t,sc u,s,t,sc
u c c
flow
e e e
÷ s
¿ ¿¿
(11)
, ,
UD, S, T, SCEN | IS
u c s
u s t sc ¬ e e e e -

, , 1 1 , ,
1 ( ) 1
DEM 0 PRICE
u,s,t,sc u,s,t,sc u s t u ,c ,s,u c t,sc
u U UD c C s S u UDc C t T
lost flow
e ÷ e e e e e
÷ + = ×
¿ ¿¿ ¿ ¿¿
(12)
, ,
UD, S, T, SCEN | IS
u c s
u s t sc ¬ e e e e -

The quantity of a product or raw material stored in a period must consider the stock from the previous period,
and the difference between the sums of the input and output streams (13). The components of some mixtures to be stored
are given accordingly to recipes (14). Limitations to the storage capacity are also observed (15). Note that, for the first
period (t=1), the variable
, , 1 u c t ,sc
stock
÷
is parameterized.

, , , , 1 1 1 ,
1
,
1
0
u c t,sc u c t ,sc u ,c ,s,u
u U c C s S
c t,sc
stock stock flow
e e
÷
e
÷ ÷ =
¿ ¿¿
(13)
,
UST, C, T, SCEN| Cu
u c
u c t sc ¬ e e e e -

1 1 , , , , 1 1 1 , ,
1 1 1 1 1
R 0 EC
u ,c ,s,u c t,sc u c s u ,c ,s ,u c
u U c
t,s
C u U c
c
C s S
flow flow
e e e e e
× ÷ =
¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿
(14)
,
USTR, C, T, SCEN| Cu
u c
u c t sc ¬ e e e e -

, , , ,
MINSTK MAXSTK
u t u c t,sc u t
stock s s (15)
UST, C, T, SCEN u c t sc ¬ e e e e

The products generated in the distillation and in the conversion units depend on the yields of the load (16). To
generate the load of some units, it is required the use of mixers (17). Also, technological restrictions impose limitations
to the processing capacity of these units for each period (18).

2, 2, , , 1 1 1 ,
1 1 1
,
2 2
YIELD 0
u,c,s,u c t,sc u c s u ,c ,s ,u
u U c C u U c C s S
c t,sc
flow flow
e e e e e
× ÷ =
¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿
(16)
( )
, ,
US UC , S, C, T, SCEN| OS
u c s
u s c t sc ¬ e e e e e -

1
1 1 1
1 1
, 2
2
,
2
, , 2
0
u U c C s S u U
u ,c ,s ,u c t,sc u,c,s,u c
c C s S
t,sc
flow flow
e e e e e e
÷ =
¿¿ ¿ ¿ ¿ ¿
(17)
,
UM, C, T, SCEN| Cu
u c
u c t sc ¬ e e e e -

, 1 1 , , ,
1 1
MINU MAXU
u t u ,c ,s,u c t,sc u t
u U c C s S c C
flow
e e e e
s s
¿ ¿¿¿
(18)
( ) U UST , T, SCEN u t sc ¬ e ÷ e e

Due to quality and environment regulations, the properties of the selling products must be specified (19). For
the first period (t=1), the variables
, , 1 u c t ,sc
stock
÷
and
, , , u c p t,sc
A are parameterized.

, , , 1 , , 1, , , , ,
1 U 1 C S
, , , , , ,
, , 1, , , , 2, 2, ,
2 U 2 C S
PM stock IP
MINP
stock flow
MAXP
u c p t u c t sc u c s p t u1,c1,s,u,c,t,sc
u c s
u c p t u c p t
u c t sc u c s u c t sc
u c s
flow
÷ ÷
e e e
÷
e e e
× +
s s
×
+
¿¿¿
¿ ¿¿
(19)

Where:
Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012
5

( )
, , , 1 , , , 1
, , ,
M
PM
INP MAXP
2
u c p t u c
u c p t,
t
s
p
c
÷ ÷
+
= (20)

( )
, , , , , , ,
MINP M UST, C, T, SCEN Cu P | AX
u u c p t u c p c t
u c t sc . . ¬ e e e e -

In order to preserve the scenario tree structure of the multistage problem, the variable
, , u c t,sc
supply must present
the same value for all the scenarios in the first period (21). Also, this variable will have the same value in different
scenarios and subsequent periods if and only if the scenarios present the same history (sequence of realizations of the
random variables) (22). These last constrains are known in the literature as nonanticipativity constraints.

, , , , 1
0
u c t,sc u c t,sc
supply supply ÷ = (21)
, ,
UF, C, S, T, , 1 SCEN| 1, OS
u c s
u c s t sc sc t ¬ e e e e e = -

, , , , 1
0
u c t,sc u c t,sc
supply supply ÷ = (22)
( )
, , , 1, , , 1, 1 ,
UF, C, S, T, , 1 SCEN| 1, DEM D M 2 OS E
u ud c s s t sc ud s t sc
u c t s t sc sc t
÷ ÷
. . ¬ e e e e = e = > -

4. Case Study

4.1. Data Set

A relatively small refinery from Petrobras was chosen as a test case for assessing the stochastic model
presented in this article. The instance considers 38 units, 59 campaigns, 89 streams and 2 properties for specification.
Amongst the streams, there are two types of crude oil (A and B) and 18 products. The main processing units of the
refinery are the Natural Gas Processing Unit, the Vacuum Distillation Unit and the Hydrothermal Treatment Unit. The
remaining units are mainly storage and blending tanks. The blending can be done by using a recipe or by controlling its
properties.
Initial stocks of products and crude oils are also considered in the test case. The opportunity cost of a product is
ten times the price of the product. It is not considered the utility cost due to the lack of information.
The time horizon considered for the refinery production plan is formed by two periods of 30 days.
The stochastic demands of the products are generated considering the estimated market demand and a sample
generated by a triangular distribution. This sample is sorted independently from the product type and it is responsible for
the variation (increasing or decreasing) of the estimated demands for each scenario. All demands of a scenario vary
proportionally equal.
For the first period, the triangular distribution has a lower bound of 0.90, a upper bound of 1.20 and a mode of
1.10. For the second period, the lower bound is 0.90, the upper bound is 1.40 and the mode is 1.25. This change in the
parameters of the distribution represents a tendency of increasing demand.
The size of the sample considered for each period is 20, resulting in a total of 400 scenarios.

4.2. Results

The computational experiments were performed on an Intel QuadCore with four 2.5 GHz cores processor, 4GB
of RAM memory and Windows 7 64 bits operating system. The software used for implementation is the algebraic
modeling language AIMMS (Advanced Advanced Integrated Multidimensional Modeling Software) version 3.11 and
the instance was solved using CPLEX 12.2 solver.
Table 1 shows the expected profit obtained using the stochastic programming approach. The table also presents
the lower and upper bounds for the expected economic result when considering a 95% confidence interval.
Figure 1 displays the variation of the economic result per scenario. When considering the 95% confidence
interval, 24 scenarios, corresponding to the lesser efficient ones, can be discarded.
Figure 2 illustrates the share of each cost to the expected total cost. The figure shows that the raw material cost
greatly impacts the economic efficiency of the refinery, which makes the search of the optimal supply a priority.

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012
6
Table 1. Expected economic result

Expected Economic Result R\$ 26,974,842.61
Lower Bound R\$ 22,032,409.28
Upper Bound R\$ 31,917,275.94

R\$ 15
R\$ 17
R\$ 19
R\$ 21
R\$ 23
R\$ 25
R\$ 27
R\$ 29
R\$ 31
R\$ 33
E
c
o
n
o
m
i
c

R
e
s
u
l
t

(
I
n

M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
)
Economic Result per Scenario
Economic Result Lower Confidence Interval Bound Upper Confidence Interval Bound

Figure 1. Economic result per scenario

Figure 2. Expected total cost

The Table 2 shows the VSS and EVPI of the problem. The VSS represents the cost of discarding the random
nature of the problem and using a deterministic model instead of a stochastic one. In this case, the solution of a
deterministic model would be expected to be R\$ 1,040,462.75 less than the one obtained from the stochastic model.
This is true because the optimal supply solution found in the deterministic model becomes sub-optimal when it is
submitted to the randomness of the demand. Although, the VSS corresponds to approximately 4% of the expected
economic result, it would be of greater impact if one would plan the refinery for more than two periods, given the
increasing level of uncertainty along the time.
The EVPI measures how much the stochastic solution could be improved if perfect and accurate information
about the random variables were available. It can be interpreted as the value one would be willing to pay for obtaining a
Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012
7
good prediction of the behavior of the random variables. For instance, in this case, if a decision maker were to support a
research group in order to make a good prediction of the demand, he/she would be paying a fair value of R\$
1,333,794.43.
Both indicators show that optimal supply decisions based on good predictions are required to dismiss the
effects of the stochastic demand, regardless of the availability of stocks, which are also used as an instrument to control
these effects.

Table 2. VSS and EVPI of the problem

Indicator Value
VSS R\$ 1,040,462.75
EVPI R\$ 1,333,794.43

Tables 3 and 4 present, respectively, the supply for the first period and expected supply for the second period.
Table 4 also shows the lower and upper bounds for the expected supply for the second period, also considering the 95%
confidence interval. Due to its larger cost, crude oil B is only used in scenarios where it is advantageously profitable.
This is why it is observed a larger deviation in the quantity of crude oil B in the second period along the scenarios.

Table 3. Supply of crude oil for the first period

Raw Material Supply (m
3
)
Crude Oil A 19,513
Crude Oil B 5,500

Table 4. Expected supply of crude oil for the second period

Raw Material Expected Supply (m
3
) Lower Bound (m
3
) Upper Bound (m
3
)
Crude Oil A 19,947 19,629 20,264
Crude Oil B 6,367 1,924 10,811

Table 5 illustrates the expected cost and the bounds for its 95% confidence interval. It is not possible to run the
same statistical analysis for the second period due to the fact that only a few scenarios have stocks (the lesser
economically efficient ones). Since it is considered a finite time horizon, the optimization process of the model tends to
minimize the levels of stock as much as possible in the second period. Otherwise, the objective function would be
penalized due to a "profitless" quantity of stock. In this case, some scenarios present stocks of crude oils, and products.
This happens because of an unbalanced combination of high demand, oil yields and processing capacity of the
distillation unit.
For instance, we can take the family of asphaltic products. These ones are basically formed by the heaviest
fraction of the oil when processed in the distillation unit and their production is linked to other's due to oil yields. If the
demands were harmoniously tied to production of the refinery, that is, if the demands were proportionally equal to the
different oil yields, there would not be stocks. But, on the contrary, the asphaltic products is overproduced in scenarios
of high demands, until the other derivatives' demands are met or the processing capacity of the distillation unit is
reached. If the former occurs. then we have stocks of asphaltic products. If the latter occurs, we have stocks of asphaltic
products as well as of crude oils.

Table 5. Expected stock of crude oil in the end of the first period

Raw Material Expected Stock (m
3
) Lower Bound (m
3
) Upper Bound (m
3
)
Crude Oil A 5,227 374 10,080
Crude Oil B 5,085 431 9,740

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012
8
5. Conclusions

The stochastic model described in this paper provides a support for the decision maker in the midterm refinery
planning. By considering the stochastic nature of the market demand, the model focus on finding the optimal supply of
crude oil that maximizes the expected economic result of a set of periods.
The results of the test case point out how important it is to consider the influence of uncertain demand.
Otherwise, the decision maker can be generating production plans whose expected economic results will be shown as
unattainable along the periods. Moreover, the production scheme can lead to great mismatches between the demand and
the production, increasing the opportunity cost substantially.
In brief, the stochastic programming permits the analysis of more realistic results, making it a very useful tool
in applications that involve real production systems. Future work may concentrate on the development of more complex
models that consider other endogenous and exogenous uncertainties.

6. Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank the financial support of the National Agency of Oil, Natural Gas and Biofuel
(ANP), the Financial Supporter of Studies and Projects (FINEP) and the Ministry of Science and Technology (MCT),
through the Program of Human Resources of ANP for the Oil and Natural Gas Sector (PRH-ANP/MCT).

7. References

BIRGE, J. R.; LOUVEAUX, F. Introduction to Stochastic Programming, 2.ed, Springer, 2011.
GÖTHE-LUNDGREN, M.; LUNDGREN, J. T.; PERSSON, J. An Optimization Model for Refinery Production
Scheduling. International Journal of Production Economics, v. 78, p. 255-270, 2002.
KALL, P.; WALLACE, S. W. Stochastic Programming, 2.ed, John Wiley and Sons, 2003.
LI, W.; HUI, C.; LI, A. Integrating CDU, FCC and Product Blending Models into Refinery Planning, Computers
Chemical Engineering. v. 29, n. 9, p. 2010-2028, 2005.
LIU, M. L.; SAHINIDIS, N. V. Optimization in Processing Planning under Uncertainty, Industrial and Engineering
Chemistry. v. 35, p. 4154-4165, 1996.
NEIRO, S. M. S.; PINTO, J. M. Multiperiod for production planning of petroleum refineries, Chemical Engineering
Communications. v. 192, p 62-88, 2005.
PINTO, J. M.; JOLY, M.; MORO, L. F. L. Planning and Scheduling Models for Refinery Operation, Computers
Chemical Engineering. v. 24, p. 2259-2276, 2000.
PONGSADKI, A.; et al. Financial risk management in the planning of refinery operations, International Journal of
Production Economics. v. 103, p. 64-86, 2006.
WENKAI, L.; et al. Refinery planning under uncertainty, Industrial and Engineering Chemistry. v. 43, p. 6742-6755,
2004.

Rio Oil & Gas Expo and Conference 2012
9
Nomenclature
Sets
U: Set of units (indices: u, u1, u2).
C: Set of campaigns (indices: c, c1, c2).
S: Set of streams (indices: s, s1, s2).
L: Set of utilities (index: l).
T: Set of periods (index: t).
SCEN: Set of scenarios (index: sc).
UF: Set of feed units.
UD: Set of delivery units.
UC: Set of conversion units.
US: Set of distillation units.
UST: Set of storage units.
USTR: Set of storage units whose mixtures require
recipe.
u1,c1,s,u,c
F : Set of streams s that are pumped from the unit
u1 and campaign c1 to the unit u and campaign c.
,
Cu
u c
: Set of campaigns per unit.
, , u c s
IS : Set of input streams.
, , u c s
OS : Set of output streams.
Parameters
PROB
sc
: Probability of the scenario sc.
MINRM
u,c,s,t,sc
: Minimum quantity of the raw material s
available for supplying.
MAXRM
u,c,s,t,sc
: Maximum quantity of the raw material
s available for supplying.
, ,
RMC
u s t
: Cost of the raw material s.
, , ,
DEM
u s t sc
: Demanded quantity of the product s.
, ,
PRICE
u s t
: Price of the product s.
, , ,
UTILC
u c l t
: Cost of the utility l.
INVC
u
: Cost of storing in a unit u.
, ,
OPPC
u s t
: Opportunity cost related to the demand of the product s.
, ,
REC
u c s
: Recipe of a mixture in campaign c of a unit u.
,
MINSTK
u t
: Lower stocking bound of a unit u.
,
MAXSTK
u t
: Upper stocking bound of a unit u.
, ,
YIELD
u c s
: Yields of a load related to the product s.
,
MINU
u c
: Lower processing bound of a unit u.
,
MAXU
u c
: Upper processing bound of a unit u.
, , ,
MINP
u c p t
: Minimum specification of the property p.
, , ,
MAXP
u c p t
: Maximum specification of the property p.
, , ,
IP
u c p t
: Value of the property p of the input stream s.
Variables
, , , u c s t,sc
supply : Quantity of the raw material s supplied to the refinery.
u1,c1,s,u,c,t,sc
flow : Quantity of the stream s pumped between pairs of
unit-campaign.
u,c,t,sc
stock : Quantity of the stock of the campaign c in the storage
unit u.
u,s,t,sc
lost : Lost demand of the product s.
sc
rev : Total revenue.
sc
rmcost : Total raw material cost
sc
utilcost : Total utility cost.
sc
invcost : Total inventory cost.
sc
oppcost : Total opportunity cost.
u,c,s,t,sc
y : Binary decision regarding the supply of the raw material s.