A Linear Programming Applicalion lo

Cupola Charging
by R. w. METZGER
General M otors Institute

and R. SCHWARZBEK
Central Foundry Division, Defiance Plant, General Motors COl"Poration

LEAST COST cupola charging can be accomplished Historically, these four plants operated independently
with a relatively new analysis tool called linear pro­ of one another. Linear programming was applied to the
gramming. The purposes of this presentation are to: distribution of the product from these plants to the cus­
1. Present some general information about linear programming. tomers on the basis of the total four plant system, and
2. Describe the cupola charge problem and the required linear resulted in a distribution pattern as shown in Figure 2.
programming formulation. This solution or pattern of shipping from the plants
3. Describe how linear progra~ming has been successfully used to the customers presents the lowest cost shipping pro­
in a production foundry making cast and malleable iron.
gramo If management devi ates from this plan, the total
No attempt wiIl be made to describe any of the methods costs \Vould increase. For example, if managemcnt de­
of linear programming. While the problems discussed cided not to ship from the plant in Washington to the
are concerned with making cast or malleable iron, the customer in Maine, but rather to ship to him froro the
general approach is equally valid for any blending type plant in Pennsylvania, it would mean:
problem, i.e., any problem where a variety of items are One or more changes in the shipments from the factory in
mixed, blended, or melted to form an end product. Pennsylvania.
Several changes in the shipments from the factory in Indiana.
INTRODUCTION Several changes in the shiprnents from the factory in Kansas.
Linear programming can best be defined as a group of
mathematical techniques that can obtain the very best
solution to problems which have many possible solutions.
While a great many industrial problems fit this category
of having many possible solutions, linear programming
is not a magic panacea which will solve ali problem5.
However, it can be used to solve a variety of industrial
problems. For example, consider a four plant manu­
facturing system which manufactures an item and then
ships it prepaid to a number of customers. Figure 1
illustrates the locations of the four plants, the customers
and the sales regions allotted to each planto

1 Based upon a presentation to the Saginaw Valley Chapter

of AlIE, April 19, 1960. FIGURE 1. Present Method of Di..;.iribmioD.

March-April, 196' lhe Journal of Industrial Engineering 87


FIGURE 2. Least Cost Shipping Method via Linear Progrnmming.
One or more changes in the shipments from the factory in
Washington.
The net effect of ali of the required shipping changes
would result in increased total shipping costs.
This solution (Fi/2;ure 2) also illustrates the situation
where the very best solution is not necessarily the one
that would be obtained by "cut and try" or intuitive
methods. This is sometimes the case when solving a
problem with linear programming.
The methods of linear programming present a step-by­
step approach which, when followed, will arrive at the
best solution. Not only is the best solution obtained, but
information is provided which permits a rather quick
analysis of the less-than-best or alternative answers . In
the preceding problem, if management said that they did
not wish to distribute from Washington to the customer
in Maine, the linear pr6gramming solution immediately
shows how much the total costs will increase and indi­
cates ali the prescribed changes that must be made to
obtain the Jess-than-best solution.
In problems like this, standard analytical procedures
fail because ali facets of the problem are so highly inter­
relãted. In these kinds of problems, it soon exceeds human
capabilities to be able to consider ali facets of the prob­
lem at the same time. Linear programming, however, is
a tool of analysis which can and does consider every
facet of the problem simultaneously.
THE CUPOLA CHARGE PROBLEM
The problem of charging or loading materiais into a
cupola is one which has many possible solutions. One of
the ba.sic problems in changing materiais into a cupola,
in making either ferrous or nonferrous alloys, is in de­
termining how much of the available materiais to charge
in order to obtain the proper chemical and metaliurgical
properties at the lowest possible cost. Linear program­
ming can be used to obtain the lowest cost charge which
meets ali the specifications of the melt.
In arder to illustrate the problem and to show the re­
sults that were obtained with linear programming, two
typic al cupola charging problems will be discussed. One
88 lhe Journal of Industrial Engineering
is typical of cupola charging in a high volume production
foundry while the other is more typicaJ of a smaller or
custom foundry operation.
The linear programming analysis requires much the
same information as presently used in cupola charging,
namely:
I. A Iist Df charge materiaIs, their chemical analysis and cost
per tono
2. Chemical specificatioDS Df the charge (percent rnnge for each
element) .
3. Any additional restrictions on the usage Df the various
charge materiais.
The last item of information will include limitations
on the use of certain materiaIs either because of limited
supplies or because of metallurgy requirements.
Before we consider a specific problem it may be advis­
able to examine the general linear programming ap­
proach to the cupola charging problem.
In order to use linear programming one must n.rst de­
scribe his problem mathematically, in a set of equations
or formulas.
To illustrate this, assume we have several materiais
that can be put into a cupola and melted to make grey
or malleable iron. We will call them materiaIs Number
1, Number 2, etc. Since we wish to determine how much
of the materiaIs to charge, we can let:
X, = percent of charge material Number 1 actually used.
Xz = percent of charge material Number 2 actually used.
Xn = perccnt of charge material Number n actually used.
Then, what we want to do is calculate values for X"
X" . . .x" which wilJ meet ali the specifications of the
charge at a minimum cost. Each specification takes the
form of an equation or inequality. For example, suppose
we consider the specifications for carbon obtained from
the materiais incl uded in the charge. We can say:
ax, + bX2 + CX + ... nx"
3 ~ maximum carbon
(percent)
where a, b, c, etc., are the percentages of carbon in each
material 1, 2, 3, etc. This reJationship says that the grand
total of carbon which is contained in the various materiais
included in the charge cannot exceed the maximum car­
bon specification. A similar relationship must be ex­
pre s~e d for the minimum carbon content nameJy:
ax, + bX + CX3 + ... nx" ~ minimum
2 carbon
(percent)
These two rela tionships together make certain that the
carbon specification will be satisn.ed.
In a similar manner, we can express the limitations for
ali the other elements like silicon, manganese, chrome,
etc. In this manner, we can consider any number of
chemical elements.
Volume XII . No. 2
 In developing a cupola charge, certain oí the charge The materiaIs to be considered are ~
materiais may be in limited supply and it may be un­ Cosl/ Carbon Silíc(m lV!ango'neseChrome
Ton Percenl Percent Percent Percettt
desirable to use more than a limited amount of other x, Pig Iron .90 O
S 60 4.00 2.25
materiaIs for various metallurgical reasons. These re­ x, Silvery Pig 129 O 15 .00 4.50 10.00
strictions must a lso be included in the mathematical x, Ferro-Silico n Nllmber 130 O 45.00 O O
statement of the problem. For example, suppose that x, Ferro-Silicon 1'\ umber 2 122 O 42.00 O O
material Number 5 (x õ ) is in limited supply and we x, Alloy Number 1 200 O 18 .00 60.00 O
x, Alloy Number 2 260 O 30.00 9.00 20.00
only have enough to permit charging 30 percent. There­ x, Alloy Number 3 238 O 25.00 33.00 8.00
fore, we want to limit Xo to a maximum value of .3 which x, Silicon-Carbide 160 15.00 30.00 O O
can be expressed: x, St.eel Number 1 42 .40 O .90 O
x,o Steel Number 2 40 .10 O .30 O
X; ::;; .3.
x" Steel Number 3 39 .10 O .30 O
In this way, we will permit no more than 30 percent of Maximum usages (cither due to limited supply or due
material Number 5 in the charge , if indeed it is profitable to metallurgy requirements) :
to use any of it at a li. Similar restrictions can be placed
Silicon carbide, 20 pounds per ch:lI'ge
on other materiais in limited supply as well as those Steel Number 1, 200 pounds per charge
materiais we wish to limit in the charge for metallurgical Steel Number 2, 200 pounds per charge
purposes. Steel Number 3, 200 pounds per charge
A final equation is required in order to make certain The problem is then to determine how much of which
that the solution gives percent of the various charge materiaIs (x, through Xll) should make up the 2000
materiaIs. The relationship : pounds at a minimum cost.
X, + X. + X3 + X, + ... X" = 1. The problem must be stated mathematically. For in­
stance, the carbon content of the input must be in a
Finally the formulation requires an objective. In this
certain range. Each possible material contains a certain
case our objective is minimum cost. Hence we include:
amount of carbono Therefore, one mathematical rela.tion­
px, + qx, + rX 3 ...I... ••• = minimum ship would be:
where: The sum or carbon in each material times the quantity or that
material, mUEt be above the minimum requirement or carbon in
p = the total cost per ton for material Number 1. the final blend.
q = the total cost per ton for material Number 2.
• Thus, in this problem the first relationship becomes:
• 4X, + I5xs + .4X9 + .lx lO +
.Ix l1 ~ 3
• (ali numbers in percent)
Now the formulation or mathematical statement of the where:
problem includes: X, = percent (decimal) of pig iron included in the charge.
X" = percent (decimal) of sil very pig included in the
I. The system ór relationships describing the probJem.
2. The desired objective. charge.
•
In this way, then, the ma thematical statement of the •
problem describes or defines the problem and its limits. •
What linear programming does is to seek the best solu­ Xli = percent (decimal) of Steel Number 3 included in
tion in terms of the objective within the Iimits described the charge .
by the system of relationships.
In order to assure that the carbon does not exceed the
A PROBLEM maximum specification we include:
In order to better illustrate this formulation consider the 4x , + 15xs + .4Xg + .Ix,o + .Ix" ::;; 3.4.
following problem :
Similar inequalities (relation ships which have other
A metallurgist has this problem:
than an equal sign) are established for ali the chemical
Size or total charge 5000 lbs. restrictions, i.e., silicon, manganese, and chrome.
Amount or sprue and iron briquettes charged 3000 Ibs.
The restrictions as to the use of these materiaIs can be
Amount or "other material" to be charged 2000 lbs.
sta.ted :
This 2000 Ibs. of "other material" must contain: X 9 ::;; .1

At Least No More ,Than which means that X o (percent of Number 1 stecl t o be

60 lbs. carbon 3.0 % 70 lbs. carbon 3.5 %
included in the charge) cannot exceed 10 percenl
54 Ibs. silicon 2.7 % 60 lbs. silicon 3.0 %
27 Ibs. manganese 1.35% 33 Ibs. manganese 1.65% The entire problem is then stated ma 1 m j ali.' li::­
6 lbs. chrome .30% 9 Ibs. chrome .45% given at top of the next page .

March-April, 1961 lhe Journal of Industrial Engineering 89

 Minimize:
60x, + 129x, + 130x, + 122x. + 200x, + 260x, + 23Sx, + 160x8 + 42x. + 40x\O + 39x"
Subject to:
(Carbon) 4x, + 15x. + .4x, + . lx\O + . 1x" :::::3.00
4x, + 15x. + .4x. + .1x" + .lx" ::s: 3.5
(Silicon) 2.25xl + 15x, + 45x, + 42x. + lSx, + 30x. + 25x, + 30X8 ::::: 2.70
2.25x, + 15x, + 45x, + 42x. + 1Sx, + 30x. + 25x, + 30X8 ::s: 3.0
(Manganese) .9XI + 4 .5x, + 60x, + 9x. + 33x, + .9x, + .3x" + .3x" ::::: 1 .35
.9XI + 4 .5x, + 60x, + 9x. + 33x, + .9x, + .3x" + .3xll ::s: 1.65
(Chrome) 10x, + 20x, + Sx, ::::: .30
10x, + 20x. + Sx, ::s: .45
(Total Melt) Xl + X, + X, + x. + x, + x. + X, + X8 + X, + X\O + XII = 1. O
Maximum usages: X8 ::s: . 01
x, ::s: .10
x,.::s: .10
x" ::s: . 10

With this mathematical statement, the problem is gives the following information for those materiais not
ready for linear programming. The objective or cost in charge:
equation indicates that we desire the answer with the Material Marginal C ost
lowest possible cost and one which is within the limita­ (x,) FeSi Number 1 2.07
tions described in the set of relationships . This formu­ (x.,) AlIoy Number 2 4l.01
lation or mathematical statement of the problem can be (x,) AlIoy Number 3 39.85
(x,) SiC 6.71
solved with the simplex method of linear programming.
While we wiU not consider the details of the simplex These marginal costs indicate the amount of reduction
method here, let's take a look at the lowest cost solution in price per ton that must occur before these material~
which the simplex method provides. can be included in the charge, i.e. , AlIoy Number 2 will
The least cost solution is as follows ! be profitable to use only if its price per ton is reduced by
Variable Value Description Ibs ./2000 lbs. . $41.01 per ton-from' $260.00 to $218.99 per tono These
Xn .10 100/0 Steel N umber 3 in the charge 200.00
marginal costs give management an indication of the
x. .011 l.l % FeSi N umber 2 in the charge 22.0 penalties incurred for deviating from the best solution.
x' .00711 .711 % A1I0y N umber 1 in the charge 14 .22 These can also be used very profitably by the purchasing
x, .03 30/0 Silvery Pig in the charge 60.0 agent in his dealings with suppliers.
x, .73713 73 .7130/0 Pig lron in the charge 1474.26 Additional marginal costs are provided which can be
x•• .01472 1.4720/0 Steel Number 2 in the charge 29.44
x. .10 100/0 Steel Number in lhe charge 200 .00
used to study the effect of changing the chemical re­
quirements of the charge. These marginal costs for this
1999.92Ibs. problem are:
Total Cost Per Ton $59.56. Element Marginal Cost
This charge results in minimum amounts of the four Carbon 3.67
elements carbon, silicon, manganese, and chrome. As Silicon 1.98
mentioned earlier linear programming not only provides Manganese 2.09
the best solution (lowest cost in the case) but it provides Chrome 5.09
information about less ' than best or alternative solutions. which can be interpreted :
The linear programming solution for this problem also Carbon-If we raise the minimum carbon content in the charge
by 1 percent this will increase the charge cost by 53.67 per tono
An increase of .1 percent \ViII increase the charge costs by S.3i
'It should be noted that the formulation of this problem can per tono Also a decrease of 1 percent in the minimum carbon con­
be reduced in size. The same solution ca n be obtained if we omit tent wiU decrease the charge cost by $3.67 per tono
lhe upper limit relationships on carbon, silicon, manganese and
chrome. In solving more than 30 similar cupola charging problema A similar interpretation can be developed for each of
for both cast and malleable iron it was found' that the optimum the other elements.
(lowest cost) solution always resu lted in charges exactly at the The analysis of the marginal cost provided by the
lower Iimit specification. With this experience it seems reasonable linear programming solution are often of more value than
to formulate a cupola charge problem without the upper limits
and incIude these only if the solution demands them. This is a
the specific least cost charge in that they give manage­
practical approach even when high speed computing equipment ia ment a quantitative measure of penalties and hence a
readily available. measure of operating flexibility .

90 lhe Journal of Industrial Engineering Volume XII • No. 2

THE PROGRAM IN A PRODUCTION FOUNDRY
Aside from the mathematics involved in applying
linear programming, many problems can be encountered
in putting this into effect in a production foundry.
In the summer of 1958 a study was initiated in a pro­
duction foundry to determine the feasibility of applying
linear programming to the cupola charge problem. Dur­
ing the early stages of the study it became apparent that
the linear programming calculations (for the simplex
method) presented an enormous chore. Therefore, a high
speed computer was used for these calculations. This is
not to say that these calculations cannot be accomplished
by hand. However a high speed computer can solve a
problem like the one described previously in several
minutes whereas it would require three to six hours to
accomplish the same thing by hand.
In addition to the bulk of calculations other prob­
lems were encountered. Initially, the solutions which
were obtained were not valid o Some of this was due to
incorrect data, errors in the data, and omissions in the
statement of the problem. In one case, a solution speci­
fied a relatively high usage of a certain scrap steel. This
was not acceptable because the supply of this scrap steel
was sufficient for only a few days of operation at the
rate of usage indicated by the solution. Since a solution
was desired which could be used throughout one produc­
tion month, it was necessary to restrict the permissible
amount of this scrap steel in the charge so that the
available quantity would last for one month 's operation.
In another case, a solution indicated sizable savings
over the present charge. However this solution was not
acceptable to the metallurgist because, while the low
limit on one element was .65 percent, the metallurgist
felt that the nature of the cupola operation required a
charge with closer to .70 percent of this element. Since
the linear programming solution usually develops a charge
with exactly minimum amounts of the various elements,
the data had to be revised so that in effect the minimum
specification on this element was .70 percent. This type
of thing may happen with the mor~ expensive elements
in a charge.
In still another case, the solution was invalid because
the data ignored the fact that one charge material was
not fully recovered in the melt. Neglecting losses in melt­
ing usually leads to an uousable solution.
Errors appeared in one solution because several charge
materiais were grouped together and handled coIlectively
as if they were one material. This resulted in erroneous
answers because the costs of each material as well as the
chemical analysis was slightly different. It was just
enough different that when the materiais were handled
individually , the linear programming solution used ali of
one and none of the other materiais. Here it became
apparent that in any solution, ali possible materiais
should be considered individually as separate materiais
even though costs and analyses a re nearly the same.
March-April, J 96 J The Journal of Industrial Engineering
These early solutions, even though invalid, were useful
in demonstrating the sensitivity of the linear program­
ming analysis and the need for a complete statement of
the problem.
It is important to realize that anyone beginning an
analysis oí cupola charging via linear programming
should not expect perfect results the first time. Indeed,
it is only after several invalid solutions that one fully
appreciates the ultimate value of the analysis.
In the early stages of the study, relati"ely few possible
charge materiaIs were considered. l\iany materiaIs were
omitted because at one time in the past they were evalu­
ated and were not profitable to use at that time. How­
ever, as cupola charge specifications change, and with
the tluctuations in material costs from time to time, it was
found that several of these materiais now could be profit­
ably included in the charge. Hence, subsequent problems
have considered ali possible charge materiais. Here, it is
necessary for us to consider an important factor in under­
standing the application of linear programming. Iotui­
tive or inspection method may often yield the best solu­
tion when relatively few charge materiais are considered.
These methods, however, become increasingly less effec­
tive as the number of materiais to be considered increases.
The larger the number of materiais, the more difficult it
becomes to analyze the complex interaction of material
analyses and costs by cut and try methods. Linear pro­
gramming can determine the lowest cost charge regardless
of the number of charge materiais to be considered.
Some of the results of the early parts of the study
were useful in indicating the effects of a change in chemi­
cal specifications on charge costs. It was found that for
certain elements a very slight change (in hundredths of
percent) would show a marked increase or decrease in the
cost and make-up of the least cost charge.
The initial study finally indicated that linear program­
ming was feasible and savings from $.15 to $.45 per ton
might be realized . Therefore, in the spring of 1959, it was
decided to use linear programming for cupola charging.
It was decided to solve the problem twice per month in
order to:
Determine the lowest cost charge considering all the materiais
available for purchase.
Determine the lowest cost charge in terms of the materiais on
haTid.
The first solution was developed from data prepared
by the purchasing agent and the metallurgist. The pur­
chasing agent indicated what materiais were available,
their delivered cost per ton, and available quantity . The
metallurgist specified the desired minimum chemical con­
tent of the charge, the approximate chemical analyses
of the charge materiais, and any limitations on the use
of certain charge materiais. This solution was then used
as a guide by the purchasing agent in buying mater· a15.
Later in the month the second solution was obtained .
Here the actual costs, quantities , and chemilla} analFes
91
~ ,

,:;':. ~
....
~
,­ '"""
~ """ '"
C.f.
',1.4.
...... ..... ....
...,. 'ri,. ""4.
. C.I. MoU •

'"
.
,- SUICoM Fe
e~
Fc~t.
!oi
h.~

'" Mil
$i .
1111_ '.... -
tpl. ,
Fe
H"
t~an_. IflASI n .~ n.~ n_ .-. 1--" .......

'""'
t IWh61 rn~ l

!
_... '" ," n. ... , , ,
.. n' ru no
n n
" " " W
'" U) n6 UO
'" '" '" '" "O

... -,..
" rJ~" ,'j.b."~ It1.}o
, ,
l II~'
~~
o} Ii :, . o~ ~
~ .~ .}
~/ 3'~o~ +."t.
'li ~o qq, ~o ,~
I~~' ~ .
,''}
I'?~' ~'t"r' "/J~. ~~. ~'t. ~.
I'
~O,v ~~ .
1'1" 1.". I· if "fo' '{,D'
~,

B .OO I..:: I." "'0,.. ,." ,q,lC ,.,0 3,1 0 .... ,." 4. 00 ,.., . 4-'~.6 O~ .15 \ . ~o
,.,. '." O 1-0 I~ " , ~~ . . . -." .. -- ....

_. '"
'UI_ :

~,5o

, ~~o
I":: "" ' .l) l."

.. ... .., ..,

·"~4. 1P

O
,." ,..,~ ,

.70
.10 . lO
....
.')
~ . IO

.~~
... 45,0
'.(0 ,
I
~.

'O
,
')~
40•0 16.?-6 1~·1~
O 4.b6 6°
1,1:1'
19.00

..."
,..,

.,..,
~I.~O ~~6 D·'!/! ."
q,').O l~C I .~~ .",
\.0'>

1.0<1
"" --"
. 1) . lll
--»

.l)
-.70

."
-­ TO

... ...
" lO

a.- ,
i'" .1' ." , , .,. , , O O
.~, O ~ 0,0 q}O
O ,
Iq·~O O O ." ,o~
, , , --" --'" --"
,~oo O O O O
.8.2Q
.0;;'0
- x,
x"
e.,.­
._ IQISAVAQAU:
( -~ -

=!!:-:~~ CO.sT MIN I MIZATIO N OF METALS ~Y LINEAR P ROGRAMMING

~ rt»T, CU'nW. ~ I mStCill, CDDAL 101'I:III ~CiII

--
~fObi. ;;;;;:­ or u."" Dlt.:
>< '" "­ xx. . . . a l, ~K ~~ n.. Pewr rw c.-... .... l041 .3/, 000
. ,­
_w,1M>UI\7 )
Sott.S}inIot
""""" .
.0075
:.
:.
XS'
~.u

.....1 ..' ..... __

"-1.... ~.
""".....
Ul~

uc.......
__
.3.l0
. o~o
-­ O)
"""'"
XU *-l.l._I°rtc

lIUr_~ ..
• .209
-­ 'J
-'"
'" n"';
"'5eUP
-­ :UT.I(,
J"~1
"
.;;1.00 )(., C.J . lf"t-'''"
IlJr_SlllC01 3g.0 X2) n..llLllco .//5K
. OI. O )(1/ PIif.fU C.:1B. I~"O Xl~ f E. CIl '" fLASH • 0:1.0
1,r.....-o(:_ • ()O75 u, fe!!.~ SI
n ósn....,.,'-4
0.80 '"
nó
.....
'1-..
8.V-'l
.'11{
3 .'/1.
n c - t.....n....,w. u, S' ri,
rLoooob.....
l8~c- tr.
• .;1.00

• O 14 ()
n8IUl ... ~ ••
13.(.1 m .....
:1.4. 75 ~ ~ .. . 0:1.0
-Y..12
.....
'rl~U •
• 0;;'0 X:J.4 IÓ;J.O u, s,.plol_ g.gQ .~!,...u •• / . ;1:1.
l[aoC . M: ~t. . . oof/'l J)O....u.. ,0;10
. /):>'0 )(~
n_
..... «aO
1J;J.f) )(~'7 1.:10 ~3.;2..6fS / íoN'
-­
( EX (.L. V/J 'J/& SI',eIlEJ
... '-"­ IoTAJ.. tos
. 030 }(:J.q Q30
"~f.5~V
,f):J.()

- Xq,
~OST (),s.:,iJIfIAl ~ :SP,é'tJ$
......M
t,,:J.o
,no ~ )( . 7f;TAJ..
e()~T'!' .; ~:1. ('9ff",()

FIGURE 3. The Data and Least Cost Solution .

of the materiais on hand were used to determine the least (X28, X29, X30) seem to have negative amounts of the
cost charge. This was used as a guide by the metallurgist various elements. During the course of the study it was
in charging the cupola. found that the use of plate and bundles in a charge tends
In putting the linear programming on a production to reduce the recovery of certain of the elements in the
basis a form was developed to facilitate data collection. final melt. The negative nurobers reflect the infiuence of
Figure 3 illustrates the forro that is used for the linear these materiais on the recovery of the chemical elements .
programming analysis. Space is provided for the data These corrections ar modifications were ma.de after
prepared by the purchasing agent, metallurgist, and the several months of operating experience with linear pro­
mathematician . The analysis of certain materiais re­ gramroing. It is interesting to note, here, that these cor­
mains relatively constant, so its analysis is printed on the rections came to light primarily due to the fact that the
formo Each column in the upper half of the form repre­ charges developed by linear programming always result
sents a charge material or space for one. The rows repre­ in exactly the miniroum chemical content. Without these
sent (froro top to bottom) : co rrection factors some charges resulted in melt which
1. Th e identification or name of the material. was below the minimum specification on certain elements.
2. Cost (including freight)-this may be cost per ton or cost This forro is started by the purchasing agent who fills
per car load. in data concerning the cost and availability of materiais
3. Code number-this identifies the material for the ma thema­
tician.
for charging the cupola. The form is then sent to the
4. Tolal cost per net ton delivered-this is the numerical roetallurgist, who indicates the minimum chemical speci­
quantity used in the linear programming analysis. fications, cheroical analyses of the available charge ma­
5-8. Four rows fo r the chemical content for carbon, si licon, teriais, any limitations on the use of charge materiais,
manganese, and chrome in the various materiais and the charge . and the total tonnage projected for the period.
You will note that plate (X25, X26, X27) and bundles The form is then sent to the mathematicia.n who checks

The Journal of Industrial Engineering Volume XII . No. 2

92
thc data to see that they are complete and converts the
availability of the materiais in limited supply from tons
to percent. The data are then ready for linear program­
ming.
The solution obtained with a high speed computer is
recorded by the mathematician on the data formo The
solution is in two parts. First, the percent of the various
materiais in the charge is noted in the Percent column.
The Di column is used to record the marginal costs of
the materiaIs not used in the charge. As mentioned
earlier, linear programming not only determines the best
solution but it also provides information about less-than­
best solutions. The numbers (Di) for those materiaIs not
used in the charge indicate the reduction in price per
ton required before these materiais could be profitably
used in the charge. This is commonly called a marginal
cost. This, then, provides the purchasing agent with a
bargaining point when talking with the scrap dealers.
If prices can be obtained which are lower than the origi­
nal quoted prices, by the amount of the marginal cost,
then the purchasing agent purchases the lower priced
material. When this happens it becomes necessary to
resolve the problem after the materiaIs are delivered in
order to determine the cupola charge.
The second solution per month, if necessary, is handled
by the metallurgist and the mathematician since they
are considering only those materiaIs available in inven­
tory.
After four months of operation, a cost and savings
analysis was made. To be certain, it is difficult to exactly
determine what might have been done without linear pro­
gramming. However, the analysis indicated savings from
$.10 to $1.40 per ton with the average at $.51 per ton for
the entire four month period. The cost of linear program­
ming solutions must be deducted from the foregoing.
However, since the total cost per solution is only about
$25.00, this is quite negligible. Each problem would rc­
quire a day or more to solve by hand, but requires les8
than one minute on an IB:M 704 compu ter.
This application of linear programming has not only
reduced cupola charge costs, but it has opened the door
to other operating cost reductions. In fa d the oLher cost
reductions in materiais and operating procedures have
been several times the savings obtained by linear pro­
gramming.
These savings have been realized in making malleablc
iron where we are concerned with only a fe\\" chemical
elements. In making aluminum alloys, usually a greater
number of elements with much closer specifications must
be considered. Here linear programming is e\'en more
valuable for determining the least cost cha rge which sat­
isfies ali the specifications.
SUMMARY
In the past decade, technological progress has been
made in mathematics as well as in other fields of sciencc.
The results obtained by using linear programming in
cupola charging reftect the advantages of this ne\\" mathe­
matical technique. Essentially, linear programming does
the clerical task that used to require a sizeable portion
of the metallurgist's time and energy. Linear program­
ming has become an important new tool which depends
very heavily upon the close cooperation of metallurgist,
purchasing agent, and mathematician. This is a new addi­
tion to the many mathematical and statistical tools
available for analyzing foundry operating problems.
REFERENCES
(1) METWER, R. W., Elemenlary M alhematical Programming,
John Wiley aud Sons, 1958.
(2) METZGER, R. W., ANil SCHWARZBEK, R., "Least Cost Cupola
Charging," presented before the General Motors Foundry
Committee (Rest ricted for General Motors distribution
only).

Uncover HIDDEN PROFITS in your plant or shop with the-­

• HOW FOREMEN
CAN CONTROl 5-volume McGraw-HiII
COSTS PRACTICAL COST CONTROL LlBRARY
• TIMESTUDY By PHIL CARROLL, J 372 pages, 460 iIIustrations, only $19.50
FUNDAMENTAlS An expert on the subject, Phil Carroll, shows you Tlmelludy lechnlquel and applicalionl
FOR FOREMEN exactly how to take on cost control problems--and
solve lhem-at ali leveis in the plant or shop. Fore­ From the ABC's of timestudy, this Library leads
men, supervisors, engineers, timestudy men-all can you step by step through the standarcl-setting proc­
• TIMESTUDY FOR use these specific facts, data, and methods to get on esses. Complete, practical explanations cover the
COST CONTROl top of cost problems in quick order. entire timestudy procedure-how and where to start,
Starting right at the front-line supervisory levei, bui!ding standard data, applying etandards, and
• HOW TO CON­ this Library points out the foreman's responsibilities maintaining a complete incentive installation.
TROl PRODUCTION for costs--gives scores of helpful suggestioos on such
typical foreman cost problems as changing setUpB, A full explanation of the total-coD\·ersion-cosl.
COSTS training new men, handling rush ordera, eliminating method of contro! gives you tested meaos of boosting
waiting time, scrap, and so on. pro/it and plugging cost leads.
• HOW TO CHART Qrder yoU( Library Irom: Amerlcan Institute of Industrial Engineers
TlMESTUDY DATA 32 Wesl Forlielh Slreel, New York 18. New York

March-April, 1961 The Journal of Industrial Engineering 93