fixed cost 2000

variable co 50
price 100

break even point= 40

break ev
7000

vol tc tr profit 6000

10 2500 1000 -1500
5000
20 3000 2000 -1000
30 3500 3000 -500 4000 3500
40 4000 4000 0 3000 3000
3000
2500
50 4500 5000 500 2000
2000
60 5000 6000 1000
1000
1000

0
10 20 30

t
 *

break even analysis

6000

5000 5000
4500
4000
3500
3000 3000

2000

20 30 40 50 60

tc tr
question 1
old system
staff 4

working hrs per day 8

units produced8 8 TILES PER DAY
pay roll cost 640 dollars per day
overhead expenses 400 dollars per day

labour productivity 0.25

multifactr poductivity 0.007692

new system

old system
staff 4

working hrs per day 8

units produced8 14 TILES PER DAY
pay roll cost 640 dollars per day
overhead expenses 800 dollars per day

labour hr productivity 0.4375 0.75 75

multifactor productivity 0.009722 0.263889 26.38889

multifactor productivity is always considered

both labour and multyfactoer productivity a

insight

overhead expenses 960 dollars per day

multifactor producticity 0.00875 titles per day

question 2

modern lumbers

output 240 crates per 100 logs

logs purcjased 100 logs per day
labour hrs 3 hrs/log
total labour hrs 300 hrs/day
current labour productivity 0.8 crates per labour hrs

output 260 crates per 100 logs

increse in labour hrs 8 hrs per day
labour procutivity with buyer 0.844156

increse in productivity 0.052308 5.230769

question 3

240 crates
labour hrs per day 300 hrs per day
labour(300@$10) 3000
capital cost 350 dollars
energy cost 150 dollars
material cost for 100 logs 1000 per day
labour cost per day 10 dollar per day

multofactor productivity 0.053333

output 260 crates

system with professional buyer
labour(308@$10) 3080
material 1000
capital 350
energy 150
total coat 4580

multifactor productoivioty 0.056769

incresed productivity 0.060513 6.051282
simple moving average method

question 1

Month Actual Sales

forecast
Jan 24500
Feb 27000
Mar 19950
Apr 26000 23816.67
May 21200 24316.67
Jun 18900 22383.33
Jul 17500 22033.33
Aug 19000 19200
Sep 18466.67

question 2

Month 1 Month 2 Month 3 Month 4 Month 5

100 90 105 95 ?

months weights
4 0.4
6 0.3
2 0.2
1 0.1
1

97.5
forecast for 5th
month 97.5

question 3
Month Load(Hrs) forecast weights
May-20 ----
Jun-20 585
Jul-20 610
Aug-20 675
Sep-20 750 0.2
Oct-20 860 0.3
Nov-20 970 696 0.5
Dec-20 773 1

Month weights
May-20
Jun-20
Jul-20
Aug-20
Sep-20 0.2
Oct-20 0.3
Nov-20 0.5
1

893

question 4

exponential
smoothing(alpha
) assumed value 0.2 f1=d1( when forecast for the first month is not given, the
Week Demand forecast error f2=f1+alpha*(d1-f1)
1 80 80 0 80
2 95 80 15
3 75 83 -8
4 110 81.4 28.6 Chart Title
5 100 87.12 12.88 120

6 90 89.696 0.304 100

7 89.7568
80

60

40

20

0
1 2 3 4 5

Demand forecast
 20

0
1 2 3 4 5

Demand forecast

inference: the forecast is not matching the demand, henc

question 5

case 1 alpha is 0.1 0.1

Period 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Demand 10 18 29 15 30 12 16 8
forecast 15 14.5 14.85 16.265 16.1385 17.52465 16.97219 16.87497
error -5 3.5 14.15 -1.265 13.8615 -5.52465 -0.972185 -8.874967

case 2 alpha is 0.3 0.3

Period 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Demand 10 18 29 15 30 12 16 8
forecast 15 13.5 14.85 19.095 17.8665 21.50655 18.65459 17.85821
error -5 4.5 14.15 -4.095 12.1335 -9.50655 -2.654585 -9.85821

0.1 is a better forecast since the erros is less in 0.1

st month is not given, the take demand is eqil to forcast)

Chart Title

4 5 6 7

Demand forecast
 4 5 6 7

Demand forecast

atching the demand, hence we can say that the forecast is not accurate

Chart Title
35

30

25

20

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Demand forecast

Chart Title
35

30

25

20

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Demand forecast
question 1

Period Actual Demand

Year 1: Q1 360
Year 1: Q2 438
Year 1: Q3 359
Year 1: Q4 406
Year 2: Q1 393
Year 2: Q2 465
Year 2: Q3 387
Year 2: Q4 464
Year 3: Q1 505
Year 3: Q2 618
Year 3: Q3 443
Year 3: Q4 540

solution
Y is the demand

Period Actual Demand X Y XY XX

Year 1: Q1 360 1 360 360 1
Year 1: Q2 438 2 438 876 4
Year 1: Q3 359 3 359 1077 9
Year 1: Q4 406 4 406 1624 16
Year 2: Q1 393 5 393 1965 25
Year 2: Q2 465 6 465 2790 36
Year 2: Q3 387 7 387 2709 49
Year 2: Q4 464 8 464 3712 64
Year 3: Q1 505 9 505 4545 81
Year 3: Q2 618 10 618 6180 100
Year 3: Q3 443 11 443 4873 121
Year 3: Q4 540 12 540 6480 144
SUM 78 5378 37191 650

X bar*Y bar
x BAR 6.5 2913.083
Y BAR 448.1667

b= 15.62 15.62238
a= 346.62 346.6212

year 4 X forecast(Y)
Q1 13 549.68
Q2 14 565.3
Q3 15 580.92
Q4 16 596.54

question 2

X Y xy xx
New Marriages Demand for Tricyles
200 165 33000 40000
235 184 43240 55225
210 180 37800 44100
197 145 28565 38809
225 190 42750 50625
240 169 40560 57600
217 180 39060 47089
225 170 38250 50625
1749 1383 303225 384073

x bar 218.625
y bar 172.875
b= 0.51041743
a= 61.2849886

Y=A+B*X @X =150 137.847604

Y=A+B*X @X =250 188.889347

QUESTION 3 question 3a
graph
PERIOD Y X XY XX forecast actual data
January 145 1 145 1 122.6282 145
February 110 2 220 4 126.5443 110
March 100 3 300 9 130.4604 100
April 140 4 560 16 134.3765 140
May 130 5 650 25 138.2925 130
June 140 6 840 36 142.2086 140
July 160 7 1120 49 146.1247 160
August 165 8 1320 64 150.0408 165
September 180 9 1620 81 153.9569 180
October 170 10 1700 100 157.873 170
November 150 11 1650 121 161.789 150
December 140 12 1680 144 165.7051 140
SUMMATION 1730 78 11805 650
 X bar 6.5
y bar 144.166667

b= 3.91608392
a= 118.712121
question 3b
x y forecast
13 y=a+bX @ x=13 169.621212
14 y=a+bX @ x=14 173.537296
15 y=a+bX @ x=15 177.45338
 short cut/ direct method

SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.730188
R Square 0.533175
Adjusted R 0.486493
Standard E 55.27864
Observatio 12

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 1 34900.39 34900.39 11.4213 0.007008
Residual 10 30557.28 3055.728
Total 11 65457.67

Coefficients
Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95%
a Intercept 346.6212 34.02165 10.18825 1.339E-06 270.8163
b X 15.62238 4.622632 3.379542 0.007008 5.322512
actual data question 3 a
200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

forecast actual data

Significance F

Upper 95%Lower 95.0%

Upper 95.0%
422.4262 270.8163 422.4262
25.92224 5.322512 25.92224
question 1

Serial
Age (years)(X) Weight (Kg)(Y) XY XX YY
No 14
1 7 12 84 49 144
12
2 6 8 48 36 64
3 8 12 96 64 144 10
4 5 10 50 25 100
8
5 6 11 66 36 121
6 9 13 117 81 169 6
66 41 461 291 742
4

0
NUMERator 10 4.5 5 5.
deniminator Err:502 Err:502
-200897.5 Err:502
13.17
r 0.759301442672741

infernce high degree of positive co reatipon since r is .75

question 2

Anxiety(X)
Anxiety(X) Test Scores(Y) xy xx yy Anxiety(X) 1
10 2 20 100 4 Test Scores-0.936915
8 3 24 64 9
2 9 18 4 81
1 7 7 1 49
5 6 30 25 36
6 5 30 36 25
32 32 129 230 204

numerator -41.6666666666667
denominator 1977.77777777778 44.47221
r=numerator/ denom -0.93691461124483
infernce : hights negative co relation since r value is -.91
 Weight (Kg)(Y)
14

12
Age (years)(X)
10 Age (years)
Weight (Kg)
8

0
4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5

Test Scores(Y)

1
Age (years)(X)
Weight (Kg)(Y)
1
0.759555 1
problem 2

Precedence
Task Description Duration(secs)
relationship
Assemble and position
A 70
the base unit
B Install hard disk 80 A

C Install mother board 40 A

D Insert ports 20 A
E Install speaker 40 A
Connect relevant
F modules to mother 30 B,C
board and disk
G Install controller 50 C
Visually inspect and
H close with a cover 50 D,E,F,G
plate

380
QUESTION 1 MID IMP TERM

Precedence
Task Time(sec)
relationship

A 45
B 11 A
C 9 B
D 50 A
E 15 D
F 12 C
G 12 C
H 12 E
I 12 E
J 8 F, G, H, I
K 9 J
195
 cd, is
given 80 seconds
time
a available 8hrs
28800

daily
proiductio
n 360units

desired
b prooducyi
on rate 320
cd 90

sumation round off

c of t/cd 4.222222 to 4

eavh
work
statiob
maximun for each
is actibvity
workstati or
on is 8 8 element

d
5 work stationa and cycle time of 90 sec CYCLE TIM 90

idel
time(cycle
time-
time of works
work that sation
station element time element) efficiency
1 A,D 90 0 100 EFFICIENCY 0.844444
2 B 80 10 88.88889
3 C,E 80 10 88.88889
4 F,G 80 10 88.88889
5 H 50 40 55.55556
 6 works staion and cycle time 80 sec cycle time 80

works
work sation EFFICIENC
station element time idel time efficiency Y 0.791667
1A 70 10 87.5
2B 80 0 100
3 C,E 80 0 100
4 D,F 50 30 62.5
5G 50 30 62.5
6H 50 30 62.5

INFEREN IT SIS BETTER TO GO WITH THE CYLE TIME 90 SEC AND 5 WORKSATIIONS BECAUSE THE EFFICIENCY O

500
WAGEN
S ARE
ARE
REQUIR
ED PER
DAY

PRODUCTION TIME 420 MINUTES

A B C F

D
G
1 CD 50.4 E I
2N 3.869048 4
3 EFFICIENCY 0.967262 H J
4 BALANCE D 0.032738
K

works
work sation
station element time idel time efficiency
1A 45 5.4
2D 50 0.4
3 B,C,E,F 47 3.4
4 G,H,I,J 44 6.4
5K 9 41.4

ACTUAL NO OF WORKSTATIONS REQUIRED IS 5

AVTUAL CYCLE TIME IS 50 SEC

EFFICIENCY 0.78
BALANCE D 0.22
ECAUSE THE EFFICIENCY OVERALL AS WELL AS WORK SATION EFFIVIENCY IS BETTER.
question 1

dails produ 1200

work hour 16

190

cd 48

efficiency 0.791667 79.16%

85% utilizatipn 1288.53

question 2

n 4
efficiency / 92%
time 180

3.68
cd 48.91304

total time/ cycle time

production 588.8

n 5
efficiency 79%

cd 45.56962

production 632

question 3

time 200
cd 50
efficiency 80%

n 6

production raate at 450 min

600
eff 74.07%
n 6
cd 45

production rate

production 600

74% 600
100% ?

production 810.0446

question 4

given:

Work Time(Se Preceden

Element c) ce
A 40 None
B 80 A
C 30 D,E,F
D 25 B
E 20 B
F 15 A
G 120 A A
H 145 G
I 130 H
J 115 C,I
720 B C
given
no of
192
units D
TIME 28800 seconds

cd 150
n 4.8 5

efficiency 0.96 96%

 idel
time(cycle
time-
time of works
work that sation
station element time element) efficiency
1 A+B+D 145 5 96.66667
2 G+E 140 10 93.33333
3H 145 5 96.66667
4 F+I 145 5 96.66667
5 J+C 145 5 96.66667
question 1

Month 2015 2016 2017 average demand avg monthy demand

Jan 80 85 105 90 94
Feb 70 85 85 80 94
Mar 80 93 82 85 94
Apr 90 95 115 100 94
May 113 125 131 123 94
Jun 110 115 120 115 94
Jul 100 102 113 105 94
Aug 88 102 110 100 94
Sep 85 90 95 90 94
Oct 77 78 85 80 94
Nov 75 82 83 80 94
Dec 82 78 80 80 94
total= 1128 94

avg monthy
demand=total
/no of months 94

question 2
Month Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 avg demad avg monthly demasesonal index
Jan 360 405 323
Feb 438 380 323
Mar 359 360 277
Apr 406 454 333
May 465 449 324
Jun 464 496 296
Jul 387 430 285
Aug 393 375 305
Sep 505 461 319
Oct 443 476 432
Nov 540 431 510
Dec 618 432 432
sesonal index month 2018
0.957446808511 jan 95.74468
0.851063829787 feb 85.10638
0.904255319149 mar 90.42553
1.063829787234 apr 106.383
1.308510638298 may 130.8511
1.223404255319 jun 122.3404
1.117021276596 jul 111.7021
1.063829787234 aug 106.383
0.957446808511 sep 95.74468
0.851063829787 oct 85.10638
0.851063829787 nov 85.10638
0.851063829787 dec 85.10638

annual
demand(g
iven in
question) 1200

monthy
demad=
annual
demand /
no of
months 100
question 1 coredinates

annual
supply(to
supply pintx Y nnes)
A 125 550 200
B 350 400 450
C 450 125 175
D 700 300 150
SUM 975 600

500
use sum product
Xc 366250 375.641 376 375.64102564103
400
Yc 356875 366.0256 366.02564102564
.
300

supply 200
pints x Y
A 125 550 100
B 350 400
C 450 125 0
0 100 200 3
D 700 300
new
location 376 366

questio n 2

annual
supply(to
supply pintx Y nnes)
1 15 22 200
2 10 40 130
3 35 15 80
4 50 5 120
5 40 35 170
6 700

xc 19900 28.42857 28
yc 17350 24.78571 25 45

40

35

30
supply pintx Y
1 15 22 25

2 10 40 20
3 35 15 15

10

0
5 10 15 20
 25

20

15
4 50 5
10
5 40 35
nf 28 25 5

0
5 10 15 20

question 3
trasportation method

Existing Supply Points Candidates for Proposed

Xi Yi Wi Xi
A 125 550 200 1 300
B 350 400 450 2 200
C 450 125 175 3 500
D 700 300 150 4 400

DA1 182.0027 LD1 224474.4

DA2 90.13878 LD2 258801.6
DA3 425 LD3 227410
DA4 445.1123 LD4 245000.8
DB1 111.8034
DB2 180.2776
DB3 158.1139
DB4 206.1553
DC1 403.8874
DC2 450.6939
DC3 230.4886
DC4 90.13878
DD1 447.2136
DD2 538.5165
DD3 206.1553
DD4 316.2278

question 4

Existing Supply Points

Xi Yi Wi
Cleveland 11 22 15 Mansfield
Cincinnati 4 1 10 Springfiel
Columbus 10 7 12
Dayton 3 6 4

DCL-Mmanf 8 Ldman 397.75587834066

DCIN-mansf14.76482 LDspr 363.36003322752
DCOL-mansf7.071068
DDAY-MAN11.31371
DCLEV-SPR 16.2865
DCINC-SPR 5.85235 infrenece: the least load distance is for springsfield, hen
DCOLO-SPR4.031129
DDAY-SPRI 3.041381

question 5

x y w proposed location
zone 1 15 22 200
zone 2 10 40 130 x
zone 3 35 15 80 29.14
zone 4 50 5 170
zone 5 40 35 120
700 D1P
D2P
Xc 20400 29.142857 D3P
Yc 15850 22.6428571 D4P
D5P

QUESTION 6
 Factors Rating RELATIVE WEIGHTS Factors L1 L2
Availabili 90 0.276923 Availabili 20 40
Size 60 0.184615 Size 30 30
Industrial 50 0.153846 Industrial 80 30
Tax benefi 30 0.092308 Tax benefi 80 20
Cheap Lab 30 0.092308 Cheap Lab 70 70
Nearness t 65 0.2 Nearness t 20 40
SUM 325

each rating/sum of every rating

 OVERALL SCORE
L1 L2 L3 L4 L5
SCORE 41.23077 37.5384615 54.76923 46.461538461539 56.15385
RANK 4 5 2 3 1
 Y

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55
 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55

Candidates for Proposed Facility

Yi
500
500
350
200

Candidates for Proposed Facility

Xi Yi
11 14
 6 6.5

ance is for springsfield, hence it is selected.

proposed location

y
22.64

14.15448 LD 13578.95
25.84007 COST 4073685
9.628562
27.31866
16.45324

L3 L4 L5
60 35 55
40 60 80
50 60 50
10 20 20
45 50 50
90 50 60
41.23077
 Existing Supply Points Candidates for Proposed Facility
Xi Yi Wi Xi
Cleveland 11 22 15 Mansfield 11
Cincinnati 4 1 10 Springfiel 6
Columbus 10 7 12
Dayton 3 6 4

distance t 8
14.76482306
7.071067812
11.3137085
springfield
a 16.28649747
b 5.852349955
c 4.031128874
d 3.041381265

load distance
397.7558783
375.1945082

combination of center og gravity and loaddistance

x y load
15 22 200
10 40 130
35 15 80
50 5 170
40 35 120
150 117 700

cg meyhod 29.14285714 Xj
22.64285714 Yj

diastance 14.15745999
25.84026679
9.629090702
27.31832382
16.44921064

load distance

13579.07426
4073722.279
Candidates for Proposed Facility
Yi
14
6.5
cost matrix

Distribu
tion chicago st louis cincinati Supply
Center
Kansas
6 8 10 150
City

Omaha 7 11 11 175

Des
4 5 12 275
Moines

demand 200 100 300 600

volume
matrix
Distribu
SUPPL
tion chicago st louis cincinati LHS RELATION
Y
Center
Kansas
150 0 0 150
City 150 equal

Omaha 175 0 0 175

175 equal
Des
0 0 275 275
Moines 275 equal

LHS
0 0 0
RELATI
ON equal equal equal

demand 200 100 300

 question 2

Market Market Market Market

Market 5
1 2 3 4
Wareho
100 70 50 30 40
use A
Wareho
30 95 40 125 50
use B
Wareho
75 20 65 40 30
use C
Wareho
20 40 95 85 80
use D

solution

cost matrix

Market Market Market Market

Market 4
1 2 3 5
Wareho
100 70 50 30 40
use A
Wareho
30 95 40 125 50
use B
Wareho
75 20 65 40 30
use C
Wareho
20 40 95 85 80
use D
deamns 2000 1500 1200 2800 2500

vloumw matrix

Market Market Market Market

Market 4
1 2 3 5
Wareho
2000 0 0 0 0
use A
Wareho
0 0 0 0 0
use B
Wareho
0 0 0 0 0
use C
Wareho
0 1500 1200 2800 2500
use D
lhs 2000 1500 1200 2800 2500
relation e
demand 2000 1500 1200 2800 2500

qjuestion 3

D1 D2 D3 D4
S1 50 50 45 29
S2 29 26 47 45
S3 44 31 50 26
S4 46 21 49 25
S5 48 47 43 40
Demand 560 580 459 700

D1 D2 D3 D4
S1 0 0 0 642
S2 0 103 459 58
S3 0 450 0 0
S4 560 27 0 0
S5 0 0 0 0
lhs 560 580 459 700
relan less than oless than oless than or eaualless than o
Demand 560 580 459 700
slack

question 4

Distribu
tion chicago st louis cincinati Supply
Center
 Kansas
6 8 10 150
City
Omaha 7 11 11 175
Des
4 5 12 375
Moines
demand 200 100 300
700

Distribu
tion chicago st louis cincinati lhs
Center

Kansas
0 0 150
City
150

Omaha 0 0 150
150

Des
200 100 0
Moines
300
lhs 200 100 300
relatio equal equal equal
demand 200 100 300 600

infefence: under utilized

case problem

Hyderab
Mysore Madras Kochi Pune Vizag
ad
Warehou
60 70 10 30 90 90
se A
Warehou
70 25 40 55 80 100
se B
Warehou
50 80 45 75 85 30
se C
Warehou
80 40 50 45 90 60
se D
Demand 1750 750 2000 1800 1200 800
cost
matrix

Hyderab
Mysore Madras Kochi Pune Vizag
ad
Warehou
60 70 10 30 90 90
se A
Warehou
70 25 40 55 80 100
se B
Warehou
50 80 45 75 85 30
se C
Warehou
80 40 50 45 90 60
se D
Demand 1750 750 2000 1800 1200 800

volume matrix

Hyderab
Mysore Madras Kochi Pune Vizag
ad
Warehou
0 0 1900 0 0 0
se A
Warehou
0 750 100 500 450 0
se B
Warehou
1750 0 0 0 750 800
se C
Warehou
0 0 0 1300 0 0
se D
lhs 1750 750 2000 1800 1200 800
relation
Demand 1750 750 2000 1800 1200 800

Hyderab
Mysore Madras Pune Vizag lhs
ad
Warehou
0 0 1900 0 0
se A 1900
Warehou
0 1800 0 0 0
se B 1800
Warehou
1750 0 0 750 800
se C 3300
 Warehou
0 750 100 450 0
se D 1300
lhs 1750 2550 2000 1200 800
relation
Demand 1750 2550 2000 1200 800

Hyderab
Mysore Madras Kochi Pune Vizag
ad
Warehou
0 0 1900 0 0 0
se A
Warehou
0 750 100 500 450 0
se B
Warehou
1750 0 0 0 750 800
se C
Warehou
0 0 0 1300 0 0
se D

E
e
lhs 1750 750 2000 1800 1200 800
relation
Demand 1750 750 2000 1800 1200 800
 Market Market Market Market Market
1 2 3 4 5
Wareho
100 70 50 30 40
use A
Wareho
30 95 40 125 50
use B
Wareho
75 20 65 40 30
use C
Wareho
20 40 95 85 80
use D
demand 2000 1500 1200 2800 2500

Market Market Market Market Market

1 2 3 4 5
Wareho
0 0 0 0 0
use A
Wareho
0 0 0 0 0
use B
Wareho
0 0 0 0 0
use C
Wareho
0 0 0 0 0
use D
total cost 5425 lhs 0 0 0 0 0
relation equal
demand 2000 1500 1200 2800 2500
supply

2900

2300

3700

1100
10000

lhs realtion supply

2900
2000 equal

0 2300

0 3700
 8000 1100
10000

10000
tc 812000

D5 D6 Supply
44 20 721
37 23 620
28 30 450
41 40 587
39 30 690 total supply
668 416

D5 D6 lhs reln Supply

79 0 721 equal 721
0 0 620 equal 620
0 0 450 equal 450
0 0 587 equal 587
274 416 690 equal 690
353 416 3068
less than oless than or eaual to
668 416 3383

tc 112398
 600

relation Supply

less than
or eqaul 150
to

less than
or eqaul 175
to

less than
or eqaul 375
to
700

tc 4450

Supply

1900

1800

3300

1300

8300
 c

Hyderab
Supply Mysore Madras Kochi Pune
ad
Warehou
1900 60 70 10 30 90
se A
Warehou
1800 70 25 40 55 80
se B
Warehou
3300 50 80 45 75 85
se C
Warehou
1300 80 40 50 45 90
se D
8300 E 45 75 30 65 90
Demand 1750 750 2000 1800 1200

Hyderab
lhs relation Supply Mysore Madras Kochi
ad
Warehou
1900 0 0 0 0
1900 se A
Warehou
1800 0 0 0 0
1800 se B
Warehou
3300 0 0 0 0
3300 se C
Warehou
1300 0 0 0 0
1300 se D
E 0 0 0 0
lhs 0 0 0 0
relan eq
tc 339000 Demand 1750 750 2000 1800

Hyderab
relation Supply Mysore Madras Pune
ad
Warehou
1900 60 70 10 90
se A
Warehou
1800 70 25 40 80
se B
Warehou
3300 50 80 45 85
se C
 Warehou
1300 80 40 50 90
se D
Demand 1750 750 2000 1200

tc 314750 inference:

lhs relation Supply

1900
1900

1800
1800

3300
3300

1300
1300
supply

2900

2300

3700

1100

10000

lhs relation supply

2900
0 equl

2300
0

3700
0

1100
0

total cost 0
Vizag Supply

90 1900

100 1800

30 3300

60 1300

80 900
800

Pune Vizag lhs relan Supply

0 0 1900
0 less equl

0 0 1800
0

0 0 3300
0

0 0 1300
0
0 0 0 900
0 0

1200 800
tc #VALUE!

Vizag Supply

90 1900

100 1800

30 3300
60 1300

800 8300
 facility design
question 1

Work Preceden Time(mi

Element ce n)
Press out
A sheet of _ 0.1
fruit
Cut into
B A 0.2
strips
Outline
C fun A 0.4
shapes
Roll up
D and B,C 0.3
package
1

cd 0.4
N 2.5 round off t 3

note: a is the first activity because in the table the precednece fpe a is blank

balancing the line: work station element/ activity, time and ideal time

work element/ total time

station activity time ideal time
1 0.3 0.1
A 0.1
B 0.2
2
C 0.4 0.4 0
D 0.3 0.3 0.1
0.2

EFFICIENCY 0.833333 83%

Performa
Work Preceden nce
Element ce Time(Mi
WORK
n) SASTION ELEMENY
A - 0.1 A,C .1+.5
B A 0.4 B,D .4+.2
C A 0.5 E 0.6
D - 0.2 F 0.4
E C,D 0.6
F B,E 0.4
2.2

CD 0.6 EFFICIENCY
N 3.666667 ROUNF OFF TO 4 BALANCE D
TOTAL IDEAL
TIME TIME
 0.5 0
0.6 0 OBJECTIVE IS TO REDUCE THE IDEAL TIME
0.6 0
0.6 0.2
0.2

EFFICIENCY 0.916667
0.083333
problem 2

Performa
Work Preceden nce
Element ce Time(Mi
n)
A - 0.1
B A 0.4
C A 0.5
D - 0.2
E C,D 0.6
F B,E 0.4

given
1 number of 4000
2 time avail 40 hrs 2400

solution
Performa
Work Preceden nce
Element ce Time(Mi
n)
A - 0.1
B A 0.4
C A 0.5
D - 0.2
E C,D 0.6
F B,E 0.4
summati
on of t 2.2

1 CD= 0.6
2 n=number o3.666667
4 work stations
3 efficiency 0.916667 91%

balancing line

elemnts time ideal time

A,C 0.6 0
B,D 0.6 0
E 0.6 0
F 0.4 0.2
 4 balance de 0.083333

problem 2

Preceden
Time(sec ce
Task
) relations
hip
A 45
B 11 A
C 9 B
D 50 A
E 15 D
F 12 C
G 12 C
H 12 E
I 12 E

J 8 F, G, H, I

K 9 J
195

cg given 80 n 2.4375 3

daily produ 360

efficiency 0.8125
balance 0.1875
rule-1
exponential smoothing
MODEL PARAMETER
smoothing constant IS
ALPHA 0.25

Week Demand forecast ABS- ERRO MAD

1 80 80
2 90 80 10
3 65 92.5 27.5
4 110 58.125 51.875
5 60 122.9688 62.96875
6 80 44.25781 35.74219
7 80 88.93555 8.935547
8 110 77.76611 32.23389
118.0585

RULE 2 MOVING AVG

MODEL PARAMETR
NO OF PERIODS FOR AVG 3

Week Demand FORECAS ABS

T ERROR MAD
1 80
2 90
3 65
4 110 78.33333 31.66667
5 60 88.33333 28.33333
6 80 78.33333 1.666667
7 80 83.33333 3.333333
8 110 73.33333 36.66667
90 20.33333

RULE 3 110% of the avg of the last four period demands

Week Demand FORECAS ABS

T ERROR MAD
1 80
2 90
3 65
 4 110
5 60 94.875 34.875
6 80 89.375 9.375
7 80 86.625 6.625
8 110 90.75 19.25
90.75 17.53125

RULE 4 linear regression technique and forecast the demand

Demand
Week X VALUE, X
Y
RANGE
RANGE forecast ?(ABS ERRORMAD
1 80 77.91667 2.083333
2 90 79.7619 10.2381
3 65 81.60714 16.60714
4 110 83.45238 26.54762
5 60 85.29762 25.29762
6 80 87.14286 7.142857
7 80 88.9881 8.988095
8 110 90.83333 19.16667
9 92.67857 14.50893

BY COMPARING THE MaD THE LEAST VALUEI SFOR REGRESSION TECHNIQUE.

HENCE THE REGRESSION TECHNIQUES IS APPROIATE FOR TJIS SITUATION
 SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R
R Square
Adjusted R
Standard E
Observatio

ANOVA

Regression
Residual
Total

Coefficients
Intercept
Week

GRESSION TECHNIQUE.
FOR TJIS SITUATION
SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
0.245545
0.060292
-0.096326
19.27377
8

df SS MS F Significance F
1 143.006 143.006 0.384965 0.557774
6 2228.869 371.4782
7 2371.875

Coefficients
Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95%Upper 95%Lower 95.0%
Upper 95.0%
76.07143 15.018 5.06535 0.002299 39.32371 112.8192 39.32371 112.8192
1.845238 2.974007 0.620455 0.557774 -5.431895 9.122371 -5.431895 9.122371
HENCE THE REGRESSION TECHNIQUES IS APPROIATE FOR TJIS SITUATION
DEMAND FOR DISPOSABLE
POPULATION(000'
ACS(00's) THIS INCOME(000's)
s, THIS IS X1
IS Y THIS IS X2 SUMMARY OUTPUT
115 240 12
125 230 18.5 Regression Statistics
110 155 14 Multiple R 0.778838
120 260 11 R Square 0.606589
160 340 9 Adjusted R 0.494186
90 165 11.5 Standard E 14.30292
120 125 15.5 Observatio 10
125 140 17
90 110 16 ANOVA
105 200 11.5 df SS
Regression 2 2207.985
Residual 7 1432.015
Total 9 3640

Coefficients
Standard Error
A Intercept 28.94856 39.81712
B POPULATION0.268567 0.08487
B DISPOSABLE2.520447 1.984631

WE GET 2 B IN THIS PROBLEM BECAUSE ITS MULTIPAL REGRESSION

Y=A+B1X1+B2X2
X1 IS POPULATOON
POPULATION 275000 X2 ID DISPOSABLE INCOME
DISPOSABLE INC 18000
DEMAND, Y=A+B1 119252.842482255
PRICE 20000
SALES REVENUE I 2385056849.64509
FOR TJIS SITUATION
 MS F Significance F
1103.992 5.396552 0.038191
204.5736

t Stat P-value Lower 95%Upper 95%Lower 95.0%

Upper 95.0%
0.727038 0.490796 -65.20396 123.1011 -65.20396 123.1011
3.164454 0.01583 0.067881 0.469252 0.067881 0.469252
1.269982 0.244675 -2.17246 7.213354 -2.17246 7.213354

S MULTIPAL REGRESSION
 Producti
Test
Worker on
Score
Rating
A 53 45
B 36 43
C 88 89
D 84 79
E 86 84
F 64 66
G 45 49
H 48 48
I 39 43
J 67 76
K 54 59
L 73 77
M 65 56
N 29 28
O 52 51
P 22 27
Q 76 76
R 32 34
S 51 60
T 37 32
 SUMMARY OUTPUT

Regression Statistics
Multiple R 0.965872
R Square 0.932909 THIS IS CO EFIICIENt OF DETERMINATION, THIS EXPLAINS THE VARIATION OF Y WRT TO
Adjusted R 0.929182
Standard E 5.126058
Observatio 20

ANOVA
df SS MS F Significance F
Regression 1 6576.824 6576.824 250.2933 5.27E-12
Residual 18 472.9765 26.27647
Total 19 7049.8

Coefficients
Standard Error t Stat P-value Lower 95%Upper 95%Lower 95.0%
Upper 95.0%
A Intercept 4.18441 3.475932 1.203824 0.244251 -3.118253 11.48707 -3.118253 11.48707
B Test Score 0.943062 0.05961 15.82066 5.27E-12 0.817827 1.068298 0.817827 1.068298

SIMPLE REGRESSION

Y=A+BX 79.62941 X VALUE IS 80 GIVEN IN QUSTION

93.2% OF PRODUCTION RATING VARIATION WILL BE EXPALINED BY TH EVARIATION IN THE TEST COURSE, THE
r IS THE COEFFICENT OF CO RELATION
r=srqt of R ^2, THE VALUE IS .932, WHICH IS CLOSE TO 1, THEREFORE HIGH DEGR
 VARIATION OF Y WRT TO VARIATIOON X

Upper 95.0%

IN THE TEST COURSE, THE REMAING I.E., 100-93.25 IS DUE TO UNKNOWN REASONS
NT OF CO RELATION
1, THEREFORE HIGH DEGREE OF POSITIVE CO RELATION