Microsoft Excel 16.

0 Sensitivity Report
Worksheet: [28th feb.xlsx]Sheet1
Report Created: 28-02-2022 11:19:39

Variable Cells
Final Reduced Objective Allowable Allowable

Cell Name Value Cost Coefficient Increase Decrease

$C$11 x1 1 0 8 0.336210968 1E+030
$D$11 x2 0.622697455 0 10 0.429446287 0.666961637
$E$11 x3 0.343479402 0 7 0.381632653 2.011459969
$F$11 x4 1 0 6 1.816085017 1E+030
$G$11 x5 0.047572816 0 11 2.975225225 0.044638358
$H$11 x6 1 0 9 0.044161637 1E+030

Constraints
Final Shadow Constraint Allowable Allowable

Cell Name Value Price R.H. Side Increase Decrease

$D$19 particulates x2 60 0.1110469692994 60 14.29714286 7.48
$D$20 surphur oxides x2 150 0.12681710837051 150 20.453125 1.689655172
$D$21 hydrocarbon x2 125 0.06932563631593 125 2.041666667 21.69195612
$D$25 used 1 -0.3362109682498 1 0.246231156 0.748477435
$D$26 used 0.622697455 0 1 1E+030 0.377302545
$D$27 used 0.343479402 0 1 1E+030 0.656520598
$D$28 used 1 -1.8160850170559 1 0.110609481 1
$D$29 used 0.047572816 0 1 1E+030 0.952427184
$D$30 used 1 -0.0441616373655 1 0.048086359 0.962708538

one unit increase in PM, 0.112 inc in cost

one unit dec in SO, 0.127 dec in cost
0.112/0.127 = 0.87

1/14.29 + 0.87/1.68 <= 1

(g) keeping surphur constant,

a one unit increase in particulate matter results in 0.11 increase in the cost
one unit decrease in hydrocarbon results in 0.07 decrease in the cost
1.6 we have to reduce by 1.6 units so that the cost comes down to 0.07

We know that we have to move by 1.6, check whether this move is a valid one!

go back to 100% rule and check whether the change is feasible,

if it not feasible, the costs are no more valid!

particulate allow increase 1/14.29

hydrocarbon allowable decrease 1/21.69

equation: 0.1160832017799 <= 0

increase hydrocarbon and sulphur increase and PM decrease

a one unit increase in hydrocarbon results in 0.06 increase in the cost
a one unit increase in sulphur results in 0.12 increase in cost
one unit decrease in PM results in 0.07 decrease in the cost

increase 0.196142745
decrease 0.111046969

we have to decrease by 0.566153846

we have to increase by 1.766304348
 % %allowab
allowable le
range increase decrease
-1E+030 8.336211 4.202637 1.25E+31
9.333038 10.42945 4.294463 6.669616
4.98854 7.381633 5.451895 28.73514
-1E+030 7.816085 30.26808 1.67E+31
10.95536 13.97523 27.0475 0.405803
-1E+030 9.044162 0.490685 1.11E+31 which cost parameter is more sensitive?

% %allowab
allowable le
increase decrease
23.82857 12.46667 which RHS is more sensitive?
13.63542 1.126437
1.633333 17.35356
24.62312 74.84774
1E+032 37.73025
1E+032 65.65206
11.06095 100
1E+032 95.24272
4.808636 96.27085
mes down to 0.07

is a valid one!

(holds true)

particulate 60 0.111047
surphur ox 150 0.126817
hydrocarbo 125 0.069326
used 1 -0.336211

decrease particulate matter by this

Shadow price : range of feasibility changing one constraint at a time

100% rule : multiple changes to RHS changing multiple constraints at a time

Resource re allocation - in conjunction with the co
take form the non binding co
Re-allocation is possible!

cost 8x1+10x2+7x3+6x4+11x5+9x6
x1 x2 x3 x4 x5 x6
1 0.622697 0.343479 1 0.047573 1
particulate 12 9 25 20 17 13
surphur ox 35 42 18 31 56 49
hydrocarb 37 53 28 24 29 20

particulates 60 >= 60
surphur oxides 150 150
hydrocarbon 125 125

used <= restriction

1 1
0.622697 1
0.343479 1
1 1
0.047573 1
1 1

cost 32.15463 =

new objective
 nstraints at a time
on - in conjunction with the concept of binding concept
take form the non binding constraint and give it to the binding constraint
Re-allocation is possible!