11 views

Uploaded by Gopala Krishnan

hh

- Matching Dell Case Analysis
- 33137-Tjmaxx Fact Sheet Final
- atm1
- Ch13 Recovery System
- AC9800
- Strategic Mgt
- B.D
- A study on the consumer behaviour of zoom car akash.docx
- Strategic Mgt
- BALVBUFDEL
- 399 Postgresql 96 Scalability Perf Improvements 2
- Work Break Down Structure
- Difference Between Cache and Buffer
- 06 Chapter 19 Database Recovery Techniques
- Mr.
- Bcom-regular 2008 Pattern
- Konsep Manajemen Kinerja
- HR jd - nokia
- V6 Engineering.pdf
- 1 Page Guides - Seven Steps to a Successful Business Plan

You are on page 1of 6

73

CAPACITY

8.3 Solutions to the Problem Set

Problem 8.1

Increasing the number of WATS lines from 12 to 13 will

a. Decrease the proportion of customers who get a busy signal. Callers calling when there are 12 people

in the system will no longer get a busy signal.

b. Increase the average flow time experienced by customers since some customers served will have

waited for 12 customers ahead of them to be served. In the old system (with 12 lines) no customer

waited for more than 11 customers ahead of them to be served.

c. Increase the server utilization since the same number of servers will serve more customers (since

fewer are blocked).

Problem 8.2

Merging the two departments will

a. Decrease the proportion of callers getting a busy signal.

b. Decrease the average flow time experienced by the callers.

Problem 8.3

John Doe has promised a total service time of 20 minutes. The processing time at the oven is 15 minutes

with 2 minutes for preparation. This leaves at most 3 minutes in waiting time before the pizza has to be

given away for free. The average demand is anticipated to be 20 pizzas per hour. Since John plans to get 5

ovens (each with a capacity of 60/15 = 4 pizzas per hour) there is no safety capacity. Any variability in

arrival rate (or service time) will lead to a build up of queues and waiting time in excess of 3 minutes,

resulting in John giving up many free pizzas. Thus the potential partner should either get John to buy

more ovens or get out of the business, or stop giving the service guarantee.

a. We are given:

Average arrival rate Ri = 1/4 per minute,

Service rate capacity of each server Rp =1/Tp = 1/3 per minute,

Number of servers c = 1.

Using the Queue.xls spreadsheet, we get

Server utilization = Ri / Rp = 0.75,

Average waiting time Ti = 9 mins,

Average number of customers waiting in queue Ii = 2.25,

Average number of customers in the system I = 3.

The costs include the CSR wages and the cost of waiting (line charge + waiting cost for customers).

We have

74 Chapter 8

Hourly wages of CSR = $20 / hour,

Line charge = $5 / hour (for all lines used),

Customer waiting cost = Average number waiting in queue 60$2 = 2.25120 = $270.

Hence, the total hourly cost = $20 + $5 + $270 = $295/hour.

b. With only four lines and one CSR, we have

Average arrival rate Ri = 1/4 per minute,

Service rate capacity of each server 1/Tp = 1/3 per minute,

Number of servers c = 1,

Maximum queue capacity (buffer size) K = 3.

Using the spreadsheet Queue.xls we get

Average waiting time Ti = 3.45 mins,

Average # of customers waiting in queue Ii = 0.77,

Average number of customers in system I = 1.44,

Probability that system is full (probability of blocking) = 0.104.

In this case the costs incurred are the CSR wages, the cost of waiting (line charge + waiting cost for

customers) and the lost business because of blocked calls. We have

Hourly wages of CSR = $20 / hour,

Line charge = $5 / hour,

Customer waiting cost = Average number waiting in queue60$2 = .77120 = $92.4,

Cost of blocking = Calls blocked per hour$100 = Probability that system is full Average arrival

rate$100 = 0.10415$100 = $156.

This implies that

Total hourly cost = $20 + $5 + $92.4 + $156 = $273.4.

c. Upon adding another telephone line, we have

Average arrival rate Ri = 1/4 per minute,

Service rate capacity of each server Rp =1/Tp = 1/3 per minute,

Number of servers c = 1,

Maximum queue capacity (buffer size) K = 4.

Using the Queue.xls spreadsheet we get

Average waiting time Ti = 4.33 mins,

Average # of customers waiting in queue Ii = 1.005,

Average number of customers in system I = 1.70,

Probability that system is full (probability of blocking) = 0.072.

In this case the costs incurred are the wages of the CSR, the cost of waiting (line charge + waiting

cost for customers) and the lost business because of blocked calls. We have

Hourly wages of CSR = $20 / hour,

Line charge (of existing lines) = $5 / hour,

Customer waiting cost = Average number waiting in queue60$2 = 1.005120 = $120.6,

Cost of blocking = Calls blocked per hour$100 = Probability that system is fullAverage arrival

rate$100 = 0.07215$100 = $108.

Excluding the cost of the new line we have

Total cost per hour = $20 + $5 + $120.6 + $108 = $253.6.

As long as the cost of the new line is less than $273.4 (cost with 4 lines) - $253.6 (cost with 3

lines) = $19.8 / hour, it pays to install the new line.

d. Upon adding another server (assuming that the fifth line has been added) we have

Average arrival rate Ri = 1/4 per minute,

Chapter 8

75

Number of servers c = 2,

Maximum queue capacity (buffer size) K = 3.

Using the Queue.xls spreadsheet we get

Average waiting time Ti = 0.42 mins,

Average # of customers waiting in queue Ii = 0.105

Average number of customers in system I = 0.85,

Probability that system is full (probability of blocking) = 0.007.

In this case the costs incurred are the wages of the CSR, the cost of waiting (line charge + waiting

cost for customers) and the lost business because of blocked calls. We have

Hourly wages of CSRs = $40 / hour,

Line charge = $5 / hour,

Customer waiting cost = Average number waiting in queue60$2 = .105120 = $12.6,

Cost of blocking = Calls blocked per hour$100 = Probability that system is fullAverage arrival

rate$100 = 0.00715$100 = $10.5.

In this case we have

Hourly cost of system = $40 + $5 + $12.6 + $10.5 = $68.1/hour.

This is a significant reduction in cost. The new CSR should thus be hired.

a. We have:

Average arrival rate Ri = 18 per hour = 0.3 per minute,

Service rate capacity of each server Rp =1/Tp = 2 per hour = 1/30 per minute,

Number of servers c: To be determined,

Cost per server = $100 per hour,

Desired average time in system = 40 minutes.

To plan staffing, we know that we should have a utilization of less than 100%, thus:

Utilization = inflow/capacity = 18/hr/(c*2/hr) < 1 so that c > 9

Increasing the number of servers from 10 upward, we have the following results: (using the

Queue.xls spreadsheet with K=100):

Number of Servers (c)

10

11

12

15

11

10

50 minutes

36 minutes

32.7 minutes

Thus hiring 11 servers achieves a turnaround time of 36.46 minutes on average. This is under the

desired target of 40 minutes. The hourly cost of this system is $1,100.

b. Now consider the case where the service time is reduced to 20 minutes but the cost of the

equipment and radiologist is $150 per hour. In this case:

Average arrival rate Ri = 18 per hour = 0.3 per minute,

Service rate capacity of each server Rp =1/Tp = 3 per hour = 1/20 per minute,

Number of servers c: To be determined,

Cost per server = $150 per hour,

Desired average time in system = 40 minutes.

To plan staffing, we know that we should have a utilization of less than 100%, thus:

76 Chapter 8

Utilization = inflow/capacity = 18/hr/(c*3/hr) < 1 so that c > 6

Increasing the number of servers from 7 upward, we have the following results: (using the

spreadsheet (using the spreadsheet with K=100)

Number of Servers (c)

Avg. Number in System (I) Avg. Time in System (T)

6

Large

Large

7

9.7

32.28

The cost of hiring seven servers = 7150 = $1,050. Thus it is advantageous to lease the more

sophisticated equipment. It reduces the cost and reduces the overall time spent in the system.

a. We currently have:

Average arrival rate Ri = 30 per hour = 0.5 per minute,

Service rate capacity of each server Rp =1/Tp = 10 per hour = 1/6 per minute,

Number of servers c = 4,

Cost of customer waiting = $20/hour = $1/3 per minute.

Performance of the current system is (using Queue.xls)

Average waiting time Ti = 3.06 mins,

Average time in system T = 9.06 minutes,

Average # of customers waiting in queue Ii = 1.53.

We thus have

Hourly cost of customer wait = Average number waiting$20 = 1.53$20 = $30.6

b. If the new equipment is leased with the same number of servers, we have

Average arrival rate Ri = 30 per hour = 0.5 per minute,

Service rate capacity of each server Rp =1/Tp = 15 per hour = 1/4 per minute,

Number of servers c = 4.

Performance of the new system is (using Queue.xls)

Average waiting time Ti = 0.35 mins,

Average time in system T = 4.35 minutes,

Average # of customers waiting in queue Ii = 0.17.

We thus have

Hourly cost of customer wait = Average number waiting$20 = 0.17$20 = $3.4,

Hourly cost of high-speed equipment = $30 per hour.

This implies that

Total cost of new system = $33.4 per hour.

This is somewhat higher than the total cost of the original system and cannot be justified in

financial terms. However performance in terms of customer waiting is significantly improved with

total time in system reducing from 9.06 minutes to 4.35 minutes. If the goal is to reduce average

time in system below 8 minutes, the high-speed equipment is worth leasing.

Average arrival rate, Ri = 52 per hour = 52/60 per minute,

Service rate capacity of each server Rp =1/Tp = 20 per hour = 1/3 per minute,

Number of servers, c : To be determined,

Cost of customer waiting = $60/hour = $1 per minute,

Cost per server = $20 per hour.

Chapter 8

77

To plan staffing, we know that we should have a utilization of less than 100%, thus:

Utilization = inflow/capacity = 52/hr/(c*20/hr) < 1 so that c > 52/20.

Increasing the number of servers from 3 upward, we have (in the spreadsheet, set buffer capacity

K =100):

Number

of

Servers c

3

4

5

Server cost

per hour

Average Queue

length Ii

Average

waiting time Ti

hour = Ii60

Total cost

per hour

$60

$80

$100

4.95

0.66

0.16

5.71

0.76

0.19

$297

$39.6

$9.6

$357

$119.6

$109.6

Thus Global should staff with 5 agents. Hiring a sixth agent will raise the agent cost to $120 per hour and

is not worthwhile.

The industry norm of averaging under 3 minutes of waiting can be achieved using only 4 agents.

a. For one district, Ri = 3.5 claims/week = 3.5/5 or 0.7 claims/day, and Tp = 1.2 days, so Rp = 1/1.2 =

0.833 claims/day. With c =1, T = 1/ (Rp Ri ) = 7.5 days. From Littles Law, the average number of

claims in the system (for one district) is 0 .7 7 .5 5.25 . Out of those 5.25 - 0.84 = 4.41 will be

waiting to be processed. The total number of claims across all districts is then 3 4.41 13.23 .

Hence, utilization = 0.7/0.833 = 0.84.

10

The fraction of claims that take less than 10 days is given by 1 e 7 .5 0 .736 .

b. If we reduce the standard deviation of the service process by 50% but leave the mean unchanged,

C S2 0.25 . We then have (for one district), Ii = /(1- claims. The total

10

across all districts is then 8.28. The fraction taking less than 10 days is 1 e 5 .14 0 .857

a. Reducing variability will reduce the waiting time

b. Server utilization will remain the same, since the average demand and service rates do not change.

The average waiting time will decrease. Pooling of safety capacity through one waiting line yields lower

waiting times because idleness periods are re-distributed.

Arrival

Rate

Service

Time

# of

Servers

Buffer

Capacity

Average

Utilization

Probability

that system

is full

(probability

Average

queue

length

78 Chapter 8

of blocking)

Part

A

B

Ri

Tp

4

4

1

1

5

6

10

9

79.00%

66.50%

Pb

1.25E-02

2.48E-03

II

1.58

0.51

Blocking cost

= ($50/call)*(average # of blocked calls/hr) = $50/call * R * Pb = $149.93/hr

Staffing cost

= $15/SR * (# of SRs) = $15 c = $75/hr

Total cost

= $319.58/hr

b. Now the number of servers c increases to 6 while the buffer capacity K decreases to 9. Re-calculate

the performance with the Queueu.xls spreadsheet (calculations above).

Waiting cost

= $60 Ii = $30.77/hr

Blocking cost

= $50/call * R * Pb = $29.78/hr

Staffing cost

= $15 c = $90/hr

Total

= $150.54/hr

Hence, we should add a server, as it yields a cost savings of $319.58 - $150.54 = $169.04 /hr.

a. This is the resource pooling idea in the context of one queue vs. multiple queues. With the CRM

software, BizTravel will be able to meet its service guarantee better.

b. Now, average arrival rate equals the average service rate. This implies long queues and hence

BizTravel will pay out $10.00 often during the lunch hour.

a. The average waiting time in queue will decrease, because less variability leads to less waiting, by

the queue length formula.

b. The average waiting time in queue will decrease because shorter service time leads to lower

capacity utilization and hence less waiting

- Matching Dell Case AnalysisUploaded bypharmGife
- 33137-Tjmaxx Fact Sheet FinalUploaded bymyqlmoniqa
- atm1Uploaded byPunit Kumar
- Ch13 Recovery SystemUploaded byanfieldlad
- AC9800Uploaded byaruvindhu
- Strategic MgtUploaded bypuninagpal
- B.DUploaded bynancynagpal
- A study on the consumer behaviour of zoom car akash.docxUploaded byzolo
- Strategic MgtUploaded byjyotihunny
- BALVBUFDELUploaded bysaravanamuthusamy
- 399 Postgresql 96 Scalability Perf Improvements 2Uploaded bysanjeevparikh
- Work Break Down StructureUploaded byLijin Joseph Joy
- Difference Between Cache and BufferUploaded byedwin5203839
- 06 Chapter 19 Database Recovery TechniquesUploaded byRudra Sharma
- Mr.Uploaded byAJEETSINGH92
- Bcom-regular 2008 PatternUploaded bysamooo8
- Konsep Manajemen KinerjaUploaded bysaman
- HR jd - nokiaUploaded bygopigopal
- V6 Engineering.pdfUploaded byRRHH
- 1 Page Guides - Seven Steps to a Successful Business PlanUploaded bySteve Kiarie
- HR Dashbord2Uploaded byRana Rizwan Ul Haq
- MITablesFiguresPDF1-6,12Uploaded byperdo11
- PDF Avera Events Your Role as Project Manager IIUploaded byMohazfa
- Mba 2006521Uploaded bysaifuliu
- San Leandro Market DataUploaded bycaudet
- ArvindMills PSL ITImplementationFailure Analysis SuggestionUploaded byGyanbitt Kar
- 90. Sertifikasi Ahli Pengadaan BarangUploaded byMisbakhul Munir
- Creativity Inc SlidesUploaded byHenriqueSilva
- University Leadership Development Programme 2015 _ ParticipantsUploaded byJason Thomas
- Kirn AnnouncementUploaded byKHQA News

- Quant -DIUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- Radio PromotionUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- Manifesto TemplateUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- ISB Co2016 Orientation Week Schedule - Mohali (Horizontal)Uploaded byGopala Krishnan
- Catco AnalysisUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- StudentProfileBookUploaded bycbajaykumar
- Team-141_EOI_DealTVUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- Arthyantra AppUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- 03 Corporate Finance IIIUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- Bajrangi BeerUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- sdr_orich13Uploaded byGopala Krishnan
- 4181607Uploaded byGopala Krishnan
- Bom-blrUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- Logic PracticeUploaded byanuparyan2008
- invoice-DZSWQIJO-03-2016-0005121Uploaded byGopala Krishnan
- Test Code 28Uploaded byGopala Krishnan
- DR SDM600 ArchitectureUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- Lesson 1 Power ElectronicsUploaded byChacko Mathew
- Overview of Current Research Into Low Voltage CbUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- AnswersUploaded by101bus
- AnswersUploaded by101bus
- Petrol Bunk Automation_RMKUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- Cat 2008 Paper AnalysisUploaded byRishav Ankit
- Instruction to BidderUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- OutlookUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- MBAUploaded byJean David Chan
- Airport+LoungeUploaded byGopala Krishnan
- NTPC_Recr 2011Uploaded byabilitytowin
- AssignmentUploaded byGopala Krishnan

- Stakeholder Analysis in construction project managementUploaded byjst808
- Cpd General Principles of Smoke ControlUploaded byMemento Mori
- Dan Morrow Wertz, Bankrupt v. Rock-Ola Manufacturing Company, 329 F.2d 116, 4th Cir. (1964)Uploaded byScribd Government Docs
- Facility Perspectives v2#4 December 2008Uploaded byExecutive Media
- ss unit 1 organizerUploaded byapi-286762684
- April 22Uploaded byPCNR
- THE MISTUploaded byMaximilano ZH
- NBP KhurramUploaded byMRasul Salafi
- Voters on Both Ghanaian & Togolese Voters' RegistersUploaded byMahamudu Bawumia
- Suresh Guttula AWSUploaded byharanadh
- galileoUploaded byapi-336810789
- Indications and TechniqueUploaded byapi-19500641
- Polirev Digests - CarlaUploaded byCarla Virtucio
- Tripwire Vulnerability Management Buyers Guide_v2Uploaded byAndrew Richard Thompson
- XRays RoentgenUploaded byMarlon Sanchez Galvan
- 26 September 2016 Filipino Values and Culture Prof. Stella P. GoUploaded byAimee Diaz
- Non Woven Home FurnishingsUploaded byKhubab Shaker
- Finance.pdfUploaded byKevin Marshall
- Food Processing Ministry WriteupUploaded byabhayjadauns
- grantproposalUploaded byapi-278734738
- Rarest Blue ReviewUploaded byElli Fischer
- Dielectric ConstantUploaded byRishabh Shah
- Total-15-10-15-LawUploaded byMallikarjuna Sharma
- 25th ID Lessons Learned 30 Oct 1967Uploaded byRobert Vale
- Kalahasti Rural TourismUploaded byKiran Keswani
- EQUI Marginal Concept-word Doc.Uploaded bynithinsdn
- Letter of Authorization for Share TransferUploaded bysatheja
- 3-CONSTITUTIONAL-LAW-2-CASES.docxUploaded byNovi Mari Noble
- Associate Membership of Institution of EngineersUploaded byAjeet Bind
- HUNT_REGS_2010Uploaded byStabby Mcstabberton