0 Up votes0 Down votes

30 views11 pagessol

Jan 04, 2016

© © All Rights Reserved

DOC, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

sol

© All Rights Reserved

30 views

sol

© All Rights Reserved

- The Woman Who Smashed Codes: A True Story of Love, Spies, and the Unlikely Heroine who Outwitted America's Enemies
- Steve Jobs
- NIV, Holy Bible, eBook
- NIV, Holy Bible, eBook, Red Letter Edition
- Hidden Figures Young Readers' Edition
- Cryptonomicon
- Console Wars: Sega, Nintendo, and the Battle that Defined a Generation
- Make Your Mind Up: My Guide to Finding Your Own Style, Life, and Motavation!
- The Golden Notebook: A Novel
- Alibaba: The House That Jack Ma Built
- Hit Refresh: The Quest to Rediscover Microsoft's Soul and Imagine a Better Future for Everyone
- Hit Refresh: The Quest to Rediscover Microsoft's Soul and Imagine a Better Future for Everyone
- Autonomous: A Novel
- The 10X Rule: The Only Difference Between Success and Failure
- Everybody Lies: Big Data, New Data, and What the Internet Can Tell Us About Who We Really Are
- Life After Google: The Fall of Big Data and the Rise of the Blockchain Economy

You are on page 1of 11

Instructor : Spyros Reveliotis

Summer 2006

Solutions for Homework #4

Homework 4 Solution

Chapter 7

14.

Demand = (6, 12, 4, 8,15, 25, 20, 5, 10, 20, 5, 12)

Starting inventory = 4

Ending inventory = 8

h=1

K = 40

Net out starting and ending inventories to obtain

r = (2, 12, 4, 8,15, 25, 20, 5, 10, 20, 5, 20)

a) Silver Meal

Start in period 1:

C(1) = 40

C(2) = (40 + 12)/2 = 26

C(3) = [40 + 12 + (2)(4)]/3 = 20

C(4) = [40 + 12 + (2)(4) + (3)(8)]/4 = 21

Stop.

Start in period 4:

C(1) = 40

C(2) = (40 + 15)/2 = 27.5

C(3) = [40 + 15 + (2)(25)]/3 = 35

Stop.

Start in period 6:

C(1) = 40

C(2) = (40 + 20)/2 = 30

C(3) = [40 + 20 + (2)(5)]/3 = 23.3333

C(4) = [40 + 20 + (2)(5) + (3)(10)]/4 = 25

Stop.

Start in period 9:

C(1) = 40

C(2) = (40 + 20)/2 = 30

C(3) = [40 + 20 + (2)(5)]/3 = 23.3333

C(4) = [40 + 20 + (2)(5) + (3)(20)]/4 = 32.5

Stop.

Silver Meal solution: r = (2, 12, 4, | 8,15, | 25, 20, 5, | 10, 20, 5, | 20)

b) LUC

Start in period 1:

C(1) = 40/2 = 20

C(2) = (40 + 12)/(2 + 12) = 3.71

C(3) = (40 + 12 + 8) /(2 + 12 + 4) = 3.33

Homework 4 Solution

C(5) = (40 + 12 + 8 + 24 + 60) /(2 + 12 + 4 + 8 + 15) = 3.51

Stop.

Start in period 5:

C(1) = 40/15 = 2.67

C(2) = (40 + 25)/(15 + 25) = 1.625

C(3) = (40 + 25 + 40)/(15 + 25 + 20) = 1.75

Stop.

Start in period 7:

C(1) = 40/20 = 2

C(2) = (40 + 5)/(20 + 5) = 1.8

C(3) = (40 + 5 + 20)/(20 + 5 + 10) = 1.86

Stop.

Start in period 9:

C(1) = 40/10 = 4

C(2) = (40 + 20)/(10 + 20) = 2

C(3) = (40 + 20 + 10)/(10 + 20 + 5) = 2

C(4) = (40 + 20 + 10 + 60)/(10 + 20 + 5 + 20) = 2.3636

LUC solution: r = (2, 12, 4, 8, | 15, 25, | 20, 5, | 10, 20, 5, | 20)

c) Part Period Balancing

This method sets the order horizon equal to the number of periods that most closely matches

the total holding cost with the setup cost, which is $40 in this problem. Therefore, we

compute the absolute value of the difference between the holding and setup costs in each

period and find the one with the lowest value.

Start in period 1:

# of Periods

2

3

4

Holding Cost

12

20

44

28

20

4

closest

Start in period 5:

# of Periods

2

3

Holding Cost

25

65

15

closest

25

Start in period 7:

# of Periods

2

3

4

Holding Cost

5

25

85

35

15

closest

45

# of Periods

Holding Cost

2

3

Homework 4 Solution

5

45

35

5

closest

Part Period Balancing solution: r = (2, 12, 4, 8, | 15, 25, | 20, 5, 10, | 20, 5, 20)

d) Cost comparison of three methods.

1. SM incurs a setup cost of $200 from the 5 setups and a holding cost of 20+15+30+30 =

$95. The total cost is $295.

2. LUC incurs a setup cost of $200 from the 5 setups and a holding cost of 44+25+5+30 =

$104. The total cost is $304.

3. PPB incurs a setup cost of $160 from the 4 setups and a holding cost of 44+25+25+45 =

$139. The total cost is $299.

In this case, Silver Meal is the least expensive method.

17.

a) Average demand = (335 + 200 + 140 + 440 + 300 + 200) / 6 = 269.17

EOQ =

(2)(200)(269.17)

= 599

0.3

Week

Demand

Production

Inventory

1

335

599

264

2

200

0

64

3

140

599

523

4

440

0

83

5

300

599

382

6

200

0

182

b) Silver Meal

Start in period 1:

C(1) = 200

C(2) = [200 + (200)(0.3)]/2 = 130

C(3) = [(2)(130) + (2)(140)(0.3)]/3 = 114.67

C(4) = [(3)(114.67) + (3)(440)(0.3)]/4 = 185

Stop.

Start in period 4:

C(1) = 200

C(2) = [200 + (300)(0.3)]/2 = 145

C(3) = [(2)(145) + (2)(200)(0.3)]/3 = 136.67

Stop.

Hence y1= 335 + 200 + 140 = 675, y4= 440 + 300 + 200 = 940

c) LUC

Start in period 1:

C(1) = 200/335 = 0.597

Homework 4 Solution

C(3) = [200 + (200)(0.3) + (140)(2)(0.3)]/(335 + 200 + 140) = 0.510

Stop.

Start in period 3:

C(1) = 200/140 = 1.428

C(2) = [200 + (400)(0.3)]/(140 + 440) = 0.572

C(3) = [200 + (400)(0.3) + (300)(2)(0.3)]/(140 + 440 + 300) = 0.582

Stop.

Start in period 5:

C(1) = 200/300 = 0.67

C(2) = [200 + (200)(0.3)]/(300 + 200) = 0.52

Stop.

Hence y1= 335 + 200 = 535, y3= 140 + 440 = 580, y5 = 300 + 200 = 500

d) Part Period Balancing

Start in period 1:

# of Periods

2

3

4

Holding Cost

60

144

540

140

56

closest

340

Start in period 4:

# of Periods

2

3

Holding Cost

90

210

110

10

closest

e) Cost comparison

1. Lot-for-lot costs = 6(200) = $1200

2. EOQ costs: 3(200) + (0.3)(264 + 64 + 523 + 83 + 382 + 102) = $1049.4

3. SM costs: 2(200) + (0.3)(200 + 280 + 300 + 400) = $754

4. LUC costs: 3(200) + (0.3)(200 + 440 + 200) = $852

5. PP costs: same as SM.

The Silver Meal and Part Period Balancing heuristics resulted in the same least expensive

costs.

19. Using the hint the modified requirements vector is (10, 3, 0, 26, 23), K = 30, h = 1.

Define

cij : the setup and holding cost of ordering in period i to meet requirements through

period j-1 (notice that these quantities correspond to the costs of the various arcs

appearing in the shortest path formulation of the problem).

Homework 4 Solution

c12 = 30

c13 = 30 + 3 = 33

c14 = 30 + 3 + 0 = 33

c15 = 30 + 3 + (26)(3) = 111

c16 = 30 + 3 + (26)(3) +(23)(4) = 203

c23 = 30

c24 = 30 + 0 = 30

c25 = 30 + (26)(2) = 82

c26 = 30 + (26)(2) + (23)(3) = 151

c34 = 30

c35 = 30 + 26 = 56

c36 = 30 + 26 + (23)(2) = 102

c45 = 30

c46 = 30 + 23 = 53

c56 = 30

The optimal solution can be computed using the Wanger-Whitin algorithm in the forward

sense, as presented in class, or in the backward sense, as presented in your textbook (in

general, the forward version of this type of algorithms is preferred over the backward one,

since it is deemed to be more intuitive). Below, we demonstrate both.

The forward verion of the Wagner-Whitin algorithm will be illustrated first; notice the

employment of the cij variables in the implementation of this algorithm that demonstrates the

connection of the concepts underlying this algorithm to those underlying the shortest path

formulation.

f1 = c12 =30 at i = 1

c13

= min

f 1 c 23

f2 = min

c14

f3 = min f1 c 24 = min

f c

2 34

33

= 33 at i = 1

30 30

33

30 30

33 30

= 33 at i = 1

c15

f c

1 25

f4 = min

= min

f 2 c35

f 3 c 45

f 3 c 46

= min

f 4 c56

f5 = min

Homework 4 Solution

111

30 82

= 63 at i = 4

33 56

33 30

33 53

63 30

= 86 at i = 4

The optimal cost is 2(20)+3+23 = $86.

The backward version of the Wanger-Whitin algorithm for this problem is as follows:

f6 = 0

f5 = 30 at j = 6

c 45 f 5

30 30

= min 53 0 = 53 at j = 6

c 46 f 6

f4 = min

c34 f 4

c f

6

36

30 53

56 30

c 23 f 3

c f

24

4

f2 = min

= min

c 25 f 5

c 26 f 6

30 83

30 53

= 83 at j = 4

82 30

151 0

c12

c

13

f1 = min c14

c

15

c16

30 83

33 83

33 53

111 30

203 0

f2

f 3

f 4 = min

f5

f 6

102 0

= 83 at j = 4

= 86 at j = 4

The solution is the same as the one obtained by the forward dynamic programming method.

22. The given information is

r = (335, 200, 140, 440, 300, 200)

Homework 4 Solution

K = $200

h = 0.30

The resulting cij matrix for this problem is:

1

2

3

4

5

6

2

200

3

260

200

4

344

242

200

5

740

506

332

200

6

1100

776

512

290

200

7

1400

1016

692

410

260

200

As in problem 17, both forward and backward versions of the WW algorithm can be used.

We illustrate the backward version here:

f6 = c67 = 200

(c5 j f j ) = min (400, 260) = 260 at j = 7.

f5 = min

j 5

200 260

f4 = min

j 4

(c 3 j

f3 = min

j 3

410

200

410

332 260

f j ) = min

= 592 at j = 5.

512

200

692

(c 2 j

f2 = min

j 2

200 592

242 410

776 200

1016

(c1 j

f1 = min

j 1

200 652

260 592

344 410

f j ) = min

= 754 at j = 4.

740 260

1100 200

1400

The minimum cost is thus 754. In order to determine the optimal policy, we start with f1 and

retrace the optimal solutions at the correct stages. Since in period 1 the optimal i = 4, it

follows that y1 = r1 + r2 + r3 = 675, y2 = 0, y3 = 0. The next period of ordering is period 4. Since

the optimal value of j corresponding to f4 is j = 7, it follows that y4 = r4 + r5 + r6 = 940 and y5 =

y6 = 0. Note that this is the same solution obtained by the Silver-Meal heuristic.

8

Homework 4 Solution

27. Because of the maximum order size constraint, we first check the feasibility condition:

j

j

1 j

ci ri for j = 1, , n. Equivalently, we may check if ri is less than c=20 for all

j i 1

i 1

i 1

j.

Feasibility check:

r1

(r1+r2)/2

(r1+r2+r3)/3

(r1+r2+r3+r4)/4

(r1+r2+r3+r4+r5)/5

(r1+r2+r3+r4+r5+r6)/6

(r1+r2+r3+r4+r5+r6+r7)/7

(r1+r2+r3+r4+r5+r6+r7+r8)/8

(r1+r2+r3+r4+r5+r6+r7+r8+r9)/9

(r1+r2+r3+r4+r5+r6+r7+r8+r9+r10)/10

(r1+r2+r3+r4+r5+r6+r7+r8+r9+r10+r11)/11

(r1+r2+r3+r4+r5+r6+r7+r8+r9+r10+r11+r12)/12

=(2+12)/2

=(2+12+4)/3

=(2+12+4+8)/4

=(2+12+4+8+25)/5

=(2+12+4+8+25+15)/6

=(2+12+4+8+25+15+20)/7

=(2+12+4+8+25+15+20+5)/8

=(2+12+4+8+25+15+20+5+10)/9

=(2+12+4+8+25+15+20+5+10+20)/10

=(2+12+4+8+25+15+20+5+10+20+5)/11

=(2+12+4+8+25+15+20+5+10+20+5+20)/12

=2

=7

=6

=6.5

=10.2

=11

=12.2

=11.3

=11.2

=12.1

=11.4

=12.1

All the ratios are less than 20, so there exists a feasible solution.

Initial Solution:

Next, we obtain a feasible solution by back-shifting demands in the periods that is higher

than 20. Period 5 has a demand of 25 units, which is 5 units higher than the maximum order

size. The 5 units of excess is back-shifted to period 4, yielding a modified requirement

schedule: r = (2, 12, 4, 8, 20, 20, 20, 5, 10, 20, 5, 20). This is a feasible schedule and the

relevant data is shown in the following table:

Month

r'

c

y

Excess cap.

1

2

20

2

18

2

12

20

12

8

3

4

20

4

16

4

8

20

8

12

5

20

20

20

0

6

20

20

20

0

7

20

20

20

0

8

5

20

5

15

9

10

20

10

10

10

20

20

20

0

11

5

20

5

15

12

20

20

20

0

Improvement Steps:

Starting from the last period, consider shifting the demand to earlier periods:

From Period

12

12

To Period

11

9

15

= (12-11)(15)(1) = 15

5

= (12-9)(5)(1) = 15

The saving in setup cost of $40 is greater than the additional holding costs.

Month

r'

C

1

2

20

2

12

20

3

4

20

4

8

20

5

20

20

6

20

20

7

20

20

8

5

20

9

10

20

15

10

20

20

11

5

20

20

12

20

20

0

Y

Excess cap.

Homework 4 Solution

12

20

20

20

18

16

12

15

10

5

10

20

0

5

0

15

20

0

Shifting demands in period 11 to earlier periods does not result in a saving, but period 10

does.

From Period

10

10

To Period

9

8

5

= (10-9)(5)(1) = 5

15

= (10-8)(15)(1) = 30

Again, the saving in setup cost of $40 is greater than the additional holding costs.

Month

r'

c

Excess cap.

1

2

20

2

12

20

3

4

20

4

8

20

5

20

20

6

20

20

7

20

20

8

5

20

12

20

20

20

20

5

18

16

12

0

15

9

10

20

20

15

10

0

5

10

10

20

20

11

5

20

12

20

20

0

20

20

5

0

20

0

15

The next improvement step comes in period 4.

From Period

4

Month

r'

c

Excess cap.

To Period

3

8

= (4-3)(8)(1) = 8

1

2

20

2

12

20

3

4

20

4

8

20

5

20

20

6

20

20

7

20

20

8

5

20

12

12

4

0

8

20

20

20

20

5

8

16

20

12

0

15

18

9

10

20

20

15

10

0

5

10

10

20

20

11

5

20

12

20

20

0

20

20

5

0

20

20

0

0

15

20

0

10

20

20

11

5

20

12

20

20

20

From Period

3

3

Month

r'

c

To Period

2

1

8

= (3-2)(8)(1) = 8

4

= (3-1)(4)(1) = 8

1

2

20

2

12

20

20

3

4

20

0

12

4

8

20

0

5

20

20

6

20

20

7

20

20

8

5

20

20

9

10

20

20

15

10

y

Excess cap.

12

14

18

0

8

Homework 4 Solution

4

20

8

16

20

20

20

20

12

0

15

10

0

5

10

20

20

20

0

0

15

20

0

The capacitated solution is y =(6, 20, 0, 0, 20, 20, 20, 20, 20, 0, 20, 0)

50.

b) Using POQ, one will never order in periods in which there is positive inventory, which we

know from the results of section 3 is optimal. Hence, this method is likely to be better than

simple EOQ.

c) This method orders a fixed number of periods of supply and ignores the magnitudes of the

requirements. The three heuristic methods we discussed (S/M, PPB, and LUC) do take the

sizes of demands into account and for that reason are more likely to yield lower cost

solutions. However, the computations are simpler with this method.

d) From problem 17, we have

EOQ = 599

ri = 1615 which gives = 1615/6 = 269.17

P = EOQ/= 599/269.17 = 2.23

which we round to 2. Hence, the POQ solution is

y = (535, 0, 580, 0, 500, 0).

The cost of this solution is (3)(200)+(0.30)(200+440+200) = 852.

11

- A level Mathematics Practice Paper D – Pure Mathematics.docxUploaded byZaka Ahmed
- COURSE OUTLINE BA101 - Engineering Mathematics DBM1013 PoliteknikUploaded byFajrul Islam Ramdhan
- Wagner Whitin MethodUploaded byVikalp Awasthi
- hw01p0073n01_jmkUploaded byInho Woo
- page 65Uploaded byanon-115473
- MAT540 Stateline Shipping and Transportation CompanyUploaded byLorneStanley
- WC2Uploaded byAhmad Syazni Bin Moktar
- MSC III SEM - Copy.docxUploaded byparveshnain19
- Free CAT Mock Tests_basicsUploaded byNitish
- Transfer HiUploaded byAnonymous QlJjisdlLI
- Final ReportUploaded byAshwin Zade
- IE324 Lecture Week13 Scheduling IIIUploaded byElizabeth RC Tudor
- math in my future project militaryUploaded byapi-334137347
- Math 7Uploaded byDhen Velez Largo
- 01318710Uploaded byRavishankar Kankale
- G7_Pre-Test Math.docxUploaded bynancy cruz
- YUploaded bymarc7victor7sales
- math 7 diagnosticUploaded bySevenstar Look
- rec14Uploaded byMohammadChharchhodawala
- InequalitiesUploaded byKassandra
- Student.certificationUploaded byJash Tumbaga
- brochureUploaded byapi-398339755
- CB Yr 3 p.1Uploaded byImmanuel and St Andrew
- Math Enrichment Fall 2010Uploaded byMarkYama
- Chronological Cv Example(1)Uploaded byFuior
- MATH 11 2ND DEPEX (2)Uploaded byjohn smith
- 2011.04.29 How Do I Get My Students to Dig DeeperUploaded byColin Graham
- Outperforming the Market Portfolio With a Given ProbabilityUploaded byTraderCat Solaris
- 120Uploaded bytidjani73
- ProcedureUploaded byAli Ahmad

- Singapore Visa Application Form 14AUploaded bysatishakumara
- People Per HourUploaded byakshaymehra
- Business ProgramUploaded byakshaymehra
- CompoundingUploaded byakshaymehra
- Access Scholarship Rules CFA & FRMUploaded byAvinash Ghodake
- Current TopicsUploaded byakshaymehra
- Goa Carbon Stock Price, Quality, Valuation, Financial Trend, Stock Mojo, Share Price, Live Stock Price NSE_BSE, Goa Carbon Mojo Scorecard Goa Carbon News, Recommendations, & About Goa CarbonUploaded byakshaymehra
- HPUploaded byakshaymehra
- Indian Councils Act 1892 - General Knowledge TodayUploaded byakshaymehra
- ONGC UranUploaded byakshaymehra
- Waterfall ChartUploaded byakshaymehra
- Temporary Excel CalculationsUploaded byakshaymehra
- Multibagger AnalysisUploaded byakshaymehra
- Important QuestionsUploaded byakshaymehra
- Gas in GAILUploaded byakshaymehra
- Pre StrategyUploaded byakshaymehra
- 151106 49 Patterns of Problem SolvingUploaded byakshaymehra
- dasdasdUploaded byakshaymehra
- Basel I, Basel II and Solvency IIUploaded byakshaymehra
- Preparatory QuestionsUploaded byakshaymehra
- Upload a Document _ ScribdUploaded byakshaymehra
- Indian Councils Act 1861 - General Knowledge TodayUploaded byakshaymehra
- Master the MarketsUploaded byakshaymehra
- ExcelUploaded byakshaymehra
- fisd11Uploaded byakshaymehra
- Lecture 6_15.Uncertainty, Budgets, And CashflowUploaded byakshaymehra
- Lecture 5_15. Monitoring ProgressUploaded byakshaymehra
- UnleashUploaded byakshaymehra
- Mathematics IIUploaded byakshaymehra

- Ageing Baby BoomersUploaded bystephloh
- STID3023_Week11-StateDiagramUploaded byCik Ungu
- 10 Impact of Nursing Unit Turnover on PatientUploaded bySafrina Edayani
- 05_N006_2173Uploaded byGaoudam Natarajan
- Characterization of Soil Erosion under different Agricultural Land Use Types in a Semi-Arid RegionUploaded byAZOJETE UNIMAID
- ITP for CS is 1239 FittingsUploaded byMaan Rawat
- Week 1 aUploaded byswqaz1
- Flyers MNC (26April2018)Uploaded byAsyroful Anam Gucio
- A UML Pattern Language _ Paul EvittsUploaded bydanaesir
- Privacy Pia Dhs Lists 20111215 DHS Privacy Documents for Department-wide Programs 08-2012Uploaded byConstitutionalist
- Chn Lecture NewUploaded byljarseniorn
- Anti Sway Controlling the Swaying of the LoadUploaded byOkgi Kuswoyo
- xyyyyUploaded byJessica S. Borromeo
- First ImpressionUploaded byVinod Sharma
- Revision Exercise for ScienceUploaded bySumathi Murti
- Thesis Yan Albertin XAMK.pdfUploaded byGregory
- Traditional IR vs. Web IRUploaded byKaren Cecille Victoria-Natividad
- Full Paper KeynoteUploaded byYQN
- Towards a Conflict Competent OrganizationUploaded byapi-3709957
- COMPLETE1.docxUploaded byAliekfarsey Masukat
- Kaizen Guide (Kaizen)Uploaded byHarry Wart Wart
- Lesson Plan New-Language Arts 2Uploaded byMohd Irwandy
- APG EffectiveUseofISO19011Uploaded byMeer Shakeel
- WM Capture 6 Setup LogUploaded byMain Rizwan
- fieldcalcCookbookv12.pdfUploaded byuserdce
- The Ultimate LDom (Oracle VM for SPARC) Troubleshooting GuideUploaded bymmohali
- CristianUploaded bysrikantnairsemail8038
- Concrete.supp Lab ManualUploaded byFatmah El Wardagy
- introduction-a-l-econometrieUploaded bydriss_kaitouni
- Report - CopyUploaded byMagnusAfBerg

## Much more than documents.

Discover everything Scribd has to offer, including books and audiobooks from major publishers.

Cancel anytime.