Andreas Saupic - Justine Hialé-Guilhamou Compte rendu TP2

Optimisation et Analyse Prescriptive

TP2 - Linear Programing

Anadolu Efes Case

Context

In order to modelize the Anadolu Efes problem, we define those variables.

The objective function is subjected to the following ocnstraints :

1
Andreas Saupic - Justine Hialé-Guilhamou Compte rendu TP2

We add the data corresponding to the current problem :

2
Andreas Saupic - Justine Hialé-Guilhamou Compte rendu TP2

Question 1

❖ How can the current distribution plan be improved?

We execute the program with the following data associated with the new distribution
plan. We have obtained a total distribution cost of 9 908 million $.

The distribution plan was as following :

With the program iteration we obtain a new distribution plan where the amount of
beer shipped from brewery j to distribution center k have changed :

represented on the following table

3
Andreas Saupic - Justine Hialé-Guilhamou Compte rendu TP2

❖ Would the savings in costs justify changing the established relations between the
Ankara-Bursa and Istanbul-Antalya brewery distributor pairs ?

We can see that the relation Ankara-Busra and Istanbul-Antalya have been modified
to disappear in favor of the relation Istanbul-Busra and Ankara-Antalya. This decision
allows the company to save 1,33 million $.

4
Andreas Saupic - Justine Hialé-Guilhamou Compte rendu TP2

Question 2
❖ What should be the annual cost of shipping 1 million liters of beer from the Istanbul
brewery to the Antalya distribution center, and from the Ankara brewery to the
Bursa distribution center so that it becomes optimal for Efes to send beer between
these pairs ?

Table of the initial annual cost of shipping

We calculate the reduced cost of shipping beer from brewery to distribution center (ie
the reduced cost for each value in the matrix y of cost shipping beer from brewery
distribution center). Iterating the program give us (among other results without interest
here) :

We note that for y[1][3] (transport from Istanbul to Antalya), the reduced cost is 0,014 and for
y[2][4] (transport from Ankara to Bursa), the reduced cost is 0,009.

For the Istanbul-Antalya relation, the reduced cost is about 0,014 million $. As the initial cost
was 0,052 million $, we fix a new cost of 0,038 million $.

For the Ankara-Bursa relation, the reduced cost is about 0,009 million $. As the initial cost
was 0,027 million $, we fix a new cost of 0,018 million $.

5
Andreas Saupic - Justine Hialé-Guilhamou Compte rendu TP2

Question 3
❖ Is it cost-effective for Efes to import malt in the first year?

In the first year, it is not cost-effective to import malt. In fact, with x is the matrix of
the amount of malt shipped from plant i to brewery j, iterating the program indicate us that

x[3][1] = x[3][2] = 0
where plant 3 is the import.

❖ If not, under what input parameter changes would importing malt possibly become a
viable option ?

We look into the reduced cost of shipping malt from plant to brewery. The iteration gives us

x[3][1], reduced cost = 0,0036

x[3][2], reduced cost = 0,0144

If the cost of importing malt to Istanbul is reduced at least by 0,0036 million $, ie a cost of
0,0284 million $, importing malt will be a viable option.

If the cost of importing malt to Ankara is reduced at least by 0,0144 million $, ie a cost of
0,0186 million $, importing malt will be a viable option.

6
Andreas Saupic - Justine Hialé-Guilhamou Compte rendu TP2

Question 4
❖ Discuss the effects of beer demand variation on transportation costs.

We want to see the impact of beer demand variation on transportation costs. We

have year 2 and year 3 annual demand at distribution centers.

With the interactive solver we analyze the sensitivity intervals of constraints.

We can see that the variables associated with constraints 3,4,5 and 6 are basic
because their dual value is zero and the variable associated with constraint 7 is a surplus
variable because its dual is negative. The other variables are slacks because their duals are
negative.

When the demand changes the constraints 8 to 13 are impacted because the
maximum allowed will increase or decrease. As the variables included in constraints 8 to
13 are slacks, when the demand of beer increases the transportation costs decrease
(and when the demand decreases the costs increase).