24 views

Original Title: QTM Cycle 7 session 9.ppt

Uploaded by Ottilie

- The Simplex Method
- Chap 7
- MIT15_093J_F09_lec03
- QM10 Tif Ch09
- LP.pdf
- Snyman 1988
- Lecture 4 Linear Programming II - Solving Problems Six Slides
- 67439_optimisasi Di Industri Migas Slides by Ss_sdr_01112017
- 0809 Sem 2
- Big m Method
- STPM MATHEMATICS M Coursework/Kerja Kursus (Semester 3)
- IEOR4004 Transportation Problem
- BasFinAcc4thEdi
- LP MODEL
- unit 1
- Operation_Research
- 2003 Yeomans and Huang An Evolutionary Grey, Hop, Skip, and Jump Approach: Generating Alternative Policies for the Expansion of Waste Management Facilities
- Lecture 2 (Notes)
- Khalek Ieee Tvt
- Global Issue Based Power Generation Expansion Planning for a Power System

You are on page 1of 75

DBM

Quantitative Techniques in Management

Semester - 1

Session - 9

OPERATION RESEARCH

Management Science

is the study and development of

techniques for the formulation and

analysis of management and related

business problems. Operations research

models are often helpful in this process.

are the numbers (parameters) located on

the right-hand side of the constraints. In a

production problem these parameters

typically indicate the amount, or quantity,

of resources available. In the conventional

literature these are known as the bs.

Objective Coefficients

are the coefficients of the variables in the

objective function. In a production

problem these typically represent unit

profit or unit cost. In the conventional

literature these are known as the cs.

Technological Coefficients

also known as exchange coefficients,

these are the coefficients of the variables

in the constraints. In a production problem

these typically represent the unit resource

requirements. In the conventional

literature these are known as the as.

Canonical Form

refers to an LP problem with an objective

function, all of the variables are nonnegative and where all of the variables

and their coefficients are on the left-hand

sides of the constraints, and all of the

parameters are on the right-hand sides of

the constraints.

Standard Form

refers to an LP problem in canonical form.

In addition, all of the constraints are

expressed as equalities and every variable

is represented in the same order of

sequence on every line of the linear

programming problem.

Resource Unit Requirements

Amount

Available

Table

Chair

Wood

30

20

300

Labor

10

110

Unit

Profit

Let:

MAX Z = 6 XT + 8 XC

s.t.

30 XT + 20 XC < 300

5 XT + 10 XC < 110

where: XT, XC > 0

Graphical LP Solution

Procedure

1)

2)

3)

4)

5)

6)

7)

8)

Plot the constraints on a graph

Identify the feasible solution region

Plot two objective function lines

Determine the direction of improvement

Find the most attractive corner

Determine the coordinates

Find the value of the objective function

XT = 4 tables

XC = 9 chairs

P = 6(4) + 8(9) = 96

dollars

Exercises:

Use the graphical solution procedure to

determine the optimal solutions for the

following linear programming problems.

For each, show the feasible solution

region, the direction of improvement, the

most attractive corner, and solve for the

decision variables and the objective

function.

Problem #1

MIN Z = 3A 2B

s.t. 5A + 5B > 25

3A < 30

6B < 18

3A + 9B < 36

where: A, B > 0

A=2

B=3

Z=0

Problem #2

MAX Z = 6X 3Y

s.t. 2X + 2Y < 20

6X > 12

4Y > 4

4X + Y < 20

where: X, Y > 0

X = 19/4

Y=1

Z = 51/2

Problem #3

MAX Z = 5S 5T

s.t. 3T < 18

4S + 4T < 40

2S < 14

6S - 15T < 30

3S > 9

where: S, T > 0

S=7

T = 4/5

Z = 31

Special LP Cases

For each of the following problems use the

graphical solution procedure to try to

determine the optimal solutions. You may

find it difficult to proceed in some cases,

and in all cases the results are interesting.

In each case proceed as far as you can.

Special Case #1

MAX Z = 4X1 + 3X2

s.t.

X2 > 6

X2 < 8

INFEASIBLE Problem

Special Case #2

MAX Z = 4X1 + 3X2

s.t.

X2 < 6

X2 < 8

Redundant

Constraint

UNBOUNDED Problem

Special Case #3

MAX Z = 4X1 + 4X2

s.t.

X2 < 4

X1 < 3

X1= 3

X2 = 2

Z = 20

X1= 1

X2 = 4

Z = 20

Formulating LP Problems

As is true with most forms of decision

modeling, the most difficult aspect is

defining the problem. Once the problem is

defined the rest of the decision process

follows relatively easily. Formulate the

following as linear programming problems:

Problem #1

Acme Widgets produces four products: A, B, C and D. Each unit of

product A requires 2 hours of milling, one hour of assembly and $2

worth of in-process inventory. Each unit of product B requires one

hour of milling, 3 hours of assembly and $5 worth of in-process

inventory. Each unit of product C requires 2 1/2 hours of milling, 3 1/2

hours of assembly and $4 worth of in-process inventory. Finally, each

unit of product D requires 5 hours of milling, no assembly time and

$16 worth of in-process inventory. The firm has 1,200 hours of milling

time and 1,300 hours of assembly time available. Each unit of

product A returns a profit of $40; each unit of B has a profit of $36;

each unit of product C has a profit of $24; and each unit of product D

has a profit of $48. Not more than 120 units of product A can be sold

and not more than 96 units of product C can be sold. Any number of

units of products B and D may be sold. However, at least 100 units of

product D must be produced and sold to satisfy a contract

requirement. It is otherwise assumed that whatever is produced can

be sold. Formulate the above as a linear programming problem to

maximize profits to the firm.

Problem #2

The Thrifty Loan Company is planning its operations for the next year.

The company makes five types of loans. The loans are listed along

with the annual return on the loans:

Legal requirements and company policy place the following limits upon

the various types of loans:

Signature loans cannot exceed 10% of the total amount of loans. The

amount of signature and furniture loans together cannot exceed 20% of

the total amount of loans. First mortgages must be at least 40% of the

total mortgages and at least 20% of the total amount of loans. Second

mortgages may not exceed 25% of the total amount of loans. The firm

can lend a maximum of $1.5 million.

Formulate the above as a linear programming problem to maximize the

revenues from loans.

Problem #3

Roscoe owns a used furniture store. He has 500 square feet of

floor space available for new purchases. The following pieces

of furniture are available to him:

Roscoe does not want to stock more sofas than beds. For

each patio set stocked he wants to have at least one of

everything else. He has $450 allocated for these

purchases. Formulate the above as a linear programming

problem to maximize Joe's profit from his purchases.

Problem #4

The marketing department for Omni World Enterprises would like to allocate next year's

advertising budget among the various media to maximize the return to the firm. The

year's expenditures for advertising are not to exceed $2 million, with not more than

$1.1 million spent during the first six months. The media used are newspapers,

magazines, radio and television. Spending on the different media is restricted by the

following company policies:

1.

At least $200,000 is to be spent on newspapers and magazines combined in each

half of the year.

2.

At most, 80% of the advertising expenditures are to be spent on television in each

six-month period.

3.

At least $50,000 is to be spent on radio for the year.

4.

At least 25% of the advertising expenditures on television are to be spent in the

second six-month period.

Returns from a dollar spent on advertising in each medium are as follows:

Linear Programming

The Simplex Method

...finding the maximum or minimum of

linear functions in which many variables are

subject to constraints.

A linear program is a problem that requires

the minimization of a linear form subject to

linear constraints...

Important Note

Linear programming requires linear

inequalities

In other words, first degree inequalities

only! Good: ax + by + cz < 3

Bad: ax2 + log2y > 7

Brief History

Was not prominent until around 1947

Emerging computers made mathematical

modeling in decision making attractive.

Each crop needs land, fertilizer, and time.

6 acres of land: 3x + y < 6

6 tons of fertilizer: 2x + 3y < 6

8 hour work day: x + 5y < 8

Apples sell for twice as much as oranges

We want to maximize profit (z): 2x + y = z

We can't produce negative: x > 0, y > 0

Traditional Method

x = 1.71

y = .86

z = 4.29

Look at the line we're trying to maximize.

Problems...

More variables?

Cannot eyeball the answer?

Simplex Method

George B. Dantzig in 1951

Need to convert equations

Slack variables

-z

s1

+ 2x + y = 0 (Objective Equation)

+ x + 5y = 8

+ 2x + 3y = 6

s2

s3 + 3x + y = 6

The Essence

Simplex method is an algebraic procedure

However, its underlying concepts are

geometric

Understanding these geometric concepts

helps before going into their algebraic

equivalents

Constraint boundaries

Feasible region

Corner-point solutions

Corner-point feasible (CPF)

solutions

Adjacent CPF solutions

Edges of the feasible region

X2

(0,9)

(0,6)

(2,6)

(4,6)

(4,3)

(0,0)

(4,0)

(6,0)

X1

Method:

If a CPF solution has no

adjacent solutions that are

better, then it must be an

optimal solution

Nutshell

An iterative

procedure

Initialization

(Find initial CPF solution)

Is the

current

CPF

solution

No

optimal?

Move to a better

adjacent CPF solution

Yes

Stop

X2

(0,6)

Z=30

(2,6)

Z=36

(4,3)

Z=27

(0,0)

(4,0)

Z=0

Z=12

X1

Initial CPF

Optimality test

If not optimal, then move to a

better adjacent CPF solution:

Consider the edges that

emanate from current CPF

Move along the edge that

increases Z at a faster rate

Stop at the first constraint

boundary

Solve for the intersection of

the new boundaries

Back to optimality test

Key Concepts

An iterative algorithm

If possible, use the origin as the initial CPF solution

Move always to adjacent CPF solutions

Dont calculate the Z value at adjacent solutions, instead

move directly to the one that looks better (on the edge

with the higher rate of improvement)

Optimality test also looks at the rate of improvement

(If all negative, then optimal)

Method

Initial Assumptions

All constraints are of the form

All right-hand-side values (bj, j=1, ,m)

are positive

Set up the method first:

Convert inequality constraints to equality constraints by

adding slack variables

Augmented Form

Original Form

Maximize

subject to

x1

4

2x2 12

3x1+ 2x2 18

x1,x2 0

subject to

Z = 3x1+

x1

5x2

+s1

2x2 + s2= 12

3x1+2x2 + s3 = 18

x1,x2 0

=4

X2

Augmented Form

(0,9,4,-6,0)

Maximize

Z=

subject to

3x1+

x1

+s1

3x1+

(0,6,4,0,6)

(2,6,2,0,0)

(2,3,2,6,6)

(4,6,0,0,-6)

(4,3,0,6,0)

(0,2,4,8,14)

(0,0,4,12,18)

(4,0,0,12,6)

5x2

2x2

2x2

+s2

+s3

=4

= 12

= 18

Augmented solution

(6,0,-2,12,0)

X1

In an LP, number of variables > number of equations

The difference is the degrees of freedom of the system

Can set some variables (# = d.f.) to an arbitrary value

(simplex uses 0)

These variables (set to 0) are called nonbasic variables

The rest can be found by solving the remaining system

The basis: the set of basic variables

If all basic variables are 0, we have a BFS

Between two basic solutions, if their bases are the same

except for one variable, then they are adjacent

Maximize

subject to

Z = 3x1+ 5x2

x1

2x2

3x1+ 2x2

+s1

+s2

=4

= 12

+s3 = 18

(x1,x2,s1)

(x1,x2,s2)

(s1,s2,s3)

Initialization

Maximize

subject to

Z = 3x1+ 5x2

x1

2x2

3x1+ 2x2

+s1

+s2

=4

= 12

+s3 = 18

Remember from key concepts:

If possible, use the origin as the initial CPF solution

Equivalent to:

Choose original variables to be nonbasic (xi=0, i=1,n) and let

the slack variables be basic (sj=bj, j=1,m))

Optimality Test

Maximize

subject to

Z = 3x1+ 5x2

x1

2x2

3x1+ 2x2

+s1

+s2

=4

= 12

+s3 = 18

Rewrite Z in terms of nonbasic variables and investigate rate of

improvement

Current nonbasic variables:

Corresponding Z:

Optimal?

Step 1 of Iteration 1: Direction of Movement

Maximize

subject to

Z = 3x1+ 5x2

x1

2x2

3x1+ 2x2

+s1

+s2

=4

= 12

+s3 = 18

Determine the direction of movement by selecting the entering

variable (variable entering the basis)

Choose the direction of steepest ascent

x1: Rate of improvement in Z =

x2: Rate of improvement in Z =

Step 2 of Iteration 1: Where to Stop

Maximize

Z = 3x1+ 5x2

subject to

x1

2x2

3x1+ 2x2

+s1

+s2

=4

= 12

+s3 = 18

(1)

(2)

(3)

How far can we go?

Determine where to stop by selecting the leaving variable (variable

leaving the basis)

Increasing the value of x2 decreases the value of basic variables

The minimum ratio test

Constraint (1):

Constraint (2):

Constraint (3):

Step 3 of Iteration 1: Solving for the New BF Solution

Z-

3x1- 5x2

x1

2x2

3x1+ 2x2

=0

+s1

+s2

=4

= 12

+s3 = 18

(0)

(1)

(2)

(3)

new BF solution

Elementary algebraic operations: Gaussian elimination

Eliminate the entering basic variable (x2) from all but its

equation

Optimality Test

Z-

3x1+

+ 5/2 s2

x1

+s1

x2

3x1

+ 1/2 s2

- s2

= 30

=4

=6

+ s3 = 6

(0)

(1)

(2)

(3)

Rewrite Z in terms of nonbasic variables and investigate rate of

improvement

Current nonbasic variables:

Corresponding Z:

Optimal?

Step 1 of Iteration 2: Direction of Movement

Z-

3x1+

+ 5/2 s2

x1

+s1

x2

3x1

+ 1/2 s2

- s2

= 30

=4

=6

+ s3 = 6

(0)

(1)

(2)

(3)

Determine the direction of movement by selecting the entering

variable (variable entering the basis)

Choose the direction of steepest ascent

x1: Rate of improvement in Z =

s2: Rate of improvement in Z =

Step 2 of Iteration 2: Where to Stop

Z-

3x1+

+ 5/2 s2

x1

+s1

x2

3x1

+ 1/2 s2

- s2

= 30

=4

=6

+ s3 = 6

(0)

(1)

(2)

(3)

Determine where to stop by selecting the leaving variable (variable

leaving the basis)

Increasing the value of x1 decreases the value of basic variables

The minimum ratio test

Constraint (1):

Constraint (2):

Constraint (3):

Step 3 of Iteration 2: Solving for the New BF Solution

Z-

3x1+

+ 5/2 s2

x1

+s1

x2

3x1

+ 1/2 s2

- s2

= 30

=4

=6

+ s3 = 6

(0)

(1)

(2)

(3)

new BF solution

Elementary algebraic operations: Gaussian elimination

Eliminate the entering basic variable (x1) from all but its

equation

Optimality Test

Z

+ 3/2 s2 + s3

+s1

x2

x1

= 36

+ 1/3 s2 - 1/3 s3 = 2

+ 1/2 s2

=6

- 1/3 s2 + 1/3 s3 = 2

(0)

(1)

(2)

(3)

Rewrite Z in terms of nonbasic variables and investigate rate of

improvement

Current nonbasic variables:

Corresponding Z:

Optimal?

Form

required calculations

Record only the essential information of

the (evolving) system of equations in

tableaux

Constants on the right-hand-sides

Basic variables corresponding to equations

Wyndor Glass

Z-

3x1 - 5x2

x1

=0

+s1

2x2

3x1+ 2x2

+s2

(0)

=4

= 12

+s3 = 18

(1)

(2)

(3)

Basic

variable

x1

x2

s1

s2

s3

r.h.s.

Basic

variable

x1

x2

s1

s2

s3

r.h.s.

-3

-5

s1

s2

12

s3

18

Optimality test (If all the coefficients of the cost function are non-negative)

Entering variable (steepest ascent) pivot column (The most negative in the cost function) (-5 is the most negative, x2 is the pivot column))

Leaving variable (minimum ratio test) pivot row (r.h.s./pivot column, pick least positive) (Ratios are 0/-5, 4/0, 12/2), minimun is 6(2 is pivot element)

s2 is leaving variable and x2 is entering variable.

Make the pivot element 1 by making row operations and other elements in the pivot coloumn as 0)

Gaussian elimination

Basic

variable

x1

x2

s1

s2

s3

r.h.s.

-3

-5

s1

s2

12

s3

18

Basic

variable

x1

x2

s1

s2

s3

r.h.s.

-3

5/2

30

s1

x2

1/2

s3

-1

Basic

variable

x1

x2

s1

s2

s3

r.h.s.

-3

5/2

30

s1

x2

1/2

s3

-1

Optimality test (If all the coefficients of the cost function are non-negative)

Entering variable (steepest ascent) pivot column (The most negative in the cost

function) (-3 is the most negative, x1 is the pivot column))

Leaving variable (minimum ratio test) pivot row (r.h.s./pivot column, pick least

positive) (Ratios are 4/1, 6/0, 6/3), minimun is 2 (3 is pivot element)

s3 is leaving the basis and x1 is entering variable in the basis.

Make the pivot element 1 by making row operations and other elements in the pivot

coloumn as 0)

Gaussian elimination

Basic

variable

x1

x2

s1

s2

s3

r.h.s.

3/2

36

s1

1/3

-1/3

x2

1/2

x1

-1/3

1/3

Optimal value= 36

X1=2

X2=6

If no variable qualifies to be the leaving variable, then the LP is

unbounded

If the Z-row coefficient of a nonbasic variable is zero, the variable

may enter the basis, however the objective function will not change

If, in addition, coefficients of all other nonbasic variables are 0, then

there are multiple optimal solutions

It will only affect the path taken, but the same optimal solution will be

reached

If there is a tie for the leaving variable, theoretically the way in which

the tie is broken is important

The method can get trapped in an infinite loop (cycling under

degeneracy)

Beyond the scope of this class

solving the primal

Duality of LP problems

with its counterpart known as Dual LP problem.

Instead of primal, solving the dual LP problem is sometimes easier

in following cases

a) The dual has fewer constraints than primal

Time required for solving LP problems is directly affected by the

number of constraints, i.e., number of iterations necessary to converge

to an optimum solution, which in Simplex method usually ranges from

1.5 to 3 times the number of structural constraints in the problem

It may be possible to avoid artificial variables that otherwise would be

used in a primal minimization problem.

Primal

Dual

Maximization

Minimization

Minimization

Maximization

ith variable

ith constraint

jth constraint

jth variable

xi > 0

if dual is maximization

if dual is minimization

contd. to next slide

Primal

Dual

variable in the objective function

ith variable in the objective

function

Note:

Before finding its dual, all the constraints should be

transformed to less-than-equal-to or equal-to type for

maximization problem and to greater-than-equal-to or

equal-to type for minimization problem.

It can be done by multiplying with -1 both sides of the

constraints, so that inequality sign gets reversed.

An example

Primal

Dual

Maximize Z 4 x1 3 x 2

Minimize

Subject to

Subject to

2

x 2 6000

3

x1 x 2 2000

x1

x1 4000

x1 unrestricted

x2 0

y1 y 2 y 3 4

2

y1 y 2 3

3

y1 0

y2 0

y3 0

before constructing the dual.

Primal-Dual relationships

If one problem (either primal or dual) has an optimal

feasible solution, other problem also has an optimal

feasible solution. The optimal objective function value is

same for both primal and dual.

If one problem has no solution (infeasible), the other

problem is either infeasible or unbounded.

If one problem is unbounded the other problem is

infeasible.

Simplex Method verses Dual Simplex Method

1. Simplex method starts with a nonoptimal but feasible

solution where as dual simplex method starts with an

optimal but infeasible solution.

2. Simplex method maintains the feasibility during

successive iterations where as dual simplex method

maintains the optimality.

Steps involved in the dual simplex method are:

1. All the constraints (except those with equality (=) sign) are

modified to less-than-equal-to sign. Constraints with greaterthan-equal-to sign are multiplied by -1 through out so that

inequality sign gets reversed. Finally, all these constraints are

transformed to equality sign by introducing required slack

variables.

2. Modified problem, as in step one, is expressed in the form of a

simplex tableau. If all the cost coefficients are positive (i.e.,

optimality condition is satisfied) and one or more basic

variables have negative values (i.e., non-feasible solution),

then dual simplex method is applicable.

contd.

3.

negative value is the exiting variable. If there are two candidates

for exiting variable, any one is selected. Find a row, call it r, with

the most negative right-hand-side constant. The row of the

selected exiting variable is marked as pivotal row.

4.

the pivot row, compute the negative of the ratio between the cost

and the structural coefficient in row r. If there is no negative

coefficient, stop; there is no feasible solution.

Let the column with the minimum ratio, designated by the index s,

be the pivot column and associated decision variable is the

entering variable.

contd.

5. Pivotal operation: Pivotal operation is exactly same as

in the case of simplex method, considering the pivotal

element as the element at the intersection of pivotal

row and pivotal column.

6. Check for optimality: If all the basic variables have

nonnegative values then the optimum solution is

reached. Otherwise, Steps 3 to 5 are repeated until the

optimum is reached.

To: sjain@amity.edu

- The Simplex MethodUploaded byStoryKing
- Chap 7Uploaded byCh V S Raju
- MIT15_093J_F09_lec03Uploaded byPankaj Kumar
- QM10 Tif Ch09Uploaded byLour Raganit
- LP.pdfUploaded byrollsroycemr
- Snyman 1988Uploaded byRenanto Pandu Wirawan
- Lecture 4 Linear Programming II - Solving Problems Six SlidesUploaded byNella King
- 67439_optimisasi Di Industri Migas Slides by Ss_sdr_01112017Uploaded byRay Yuda
- 0809 Sem 2Uploaded byAmine
- Big m MethodUploaded byأزرين رحيم
- STPM MATHEMATICS M Coursework/Kerja Kursus (Semester 3)Uploaded by진.율언
- IEOR4004 Transportation ProblemUploaded bygabboudeh
- BasFinAcc4thEdiUploaded byGEDDIGI BHASKARREDDY
- LP MODELUploaded byJorreyGarciaOplas
- unit 1Uploaded byNikhil Chauhan
- Operation_ResearchUploaded bySekla Shaqdiesel
- 2003 Yeomans and Huang An Evolutionary Grey, Hop, Skip, and Jump Approach: Generating Alternative Policies for the Expansion of Waste Management FacilitiesUploaded byf_caro01
- Lecture 2 (Notes)Uploaded byillustra7
- Khalek Ieee TvtUploaded byRicky Suradiradja
- Global Issue Based Power Generation Expansion Planning for a Power SystemUploaded byesatjournals
- Ee 686 Optimization Theory-2014Uploaded bynarendra
- Problem Formulation and LP BasicsUploaded bykishore123nand
- 1L LP Transformation TricksUploaded bycaspersoong
- Matlab ProgramsUploaded byxorand
- Interactive Fuzzy Goal Programming approach for Tri-Level Linear Programming ProblemsUploaded byAnonymous 7VPPkWS8O
- Aggregate Planning PPTsUploaded bySwati Sucharita Das
- PSK Method for Solving Type-1 and Type-3 Fuzzy Transportation ProblemsUploaded byP.SENTHIL KUMAR
- {i9F-ah2-Jdi}Intro (1)Uploaded byMartha Nita Florentina
- lec11Uploaded bykhalidscribd1
- Model PaperUploaded byRanjitMaiti

- SM Cycle 8 session 3.pptUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 8 session 3.pptUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 7 session 2.pptUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 7 session 8.pptUploaded byOttilie
- ME Cycle 8 session 8.pptUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 8 session 4.pptUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 7 session 5.pptUploaded byOttilie
- ME Cycle 8 session 4(1).pptxUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 7 session 7.pptUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 7 session 4.pptUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 8 session 1.pptUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 8 session 1.pptUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 8 session 1.pptUploaded byOttilie
- SM Cycle 7 session 9.pptUploaded byOttilie
- ME Cycle 8 session 1.pptxUploaded byOttilie
- QTM Cycle 7 session 4.pptUploaded byOttilie
- QTM Cycle 7 session 7.pptUploaded byOttilie
- ME Cycle 8 session 7.pptUploaded byOttilie
- QTM Cycle 7 session 1.pptUploaded byOttilie
- ME Cycle 8 session 9.pptUploaded byOttilie
- ME Cycle 8 session 4(1).pptxUploaded byOttilie
- QTM Cycle 7 session 6.pptUploaded byOttilie
- QTM Cycle 7 session 5.pptUploaded byOttilie
- ME Cycle 8 session 10.pptUploaded byOttilie
- ME Cycle 8 Session 2Uploaded byOttilie
- QTM Cycle 7 session 8.pptUploaded byOttilie
- ME Cycle 8 session 3.pptxUploaded byOttilie
- ME Cycle 8 session 5.pptxUploaded byOttilie
- QTM Cycle 7 session 10.pptUploaded byOttilie

- vision statementUploaded byapi-363611561
- Tourism Marketing Strategy 2005 2020Uploaded bySama Basnet
- Mine Haul Road Design, Construction and Maintenance management.pdfUploaded bymuhammadfarid
- Work Space Ergonomics.pdfUploaded byTim_C
- Ralph Waldo Emerson -- The conduct of lifeUploaded bytruepotentialz
- Kf Airline SimulationUploaded byMohsin Javed
- Adi ChieUploaded byChandra Sekhar
- Inherent Powers of the StateUploaded byMarko Lopez
- David Regal - Enough With the Tricks AlreadyUploaded bynirmal23
- Commonwealth Bank of Australia Case StudyUploaded bytest1234567x
- Co-ordinate Geometry.pdfUploaded byshyam
- L4_Matrix Method of Static AeroelasticityUploaded byAbaziz Mousa OutlawZz
- BASE Costello, 2003 Relationships Between Poverty and PsychopathologyUploaded byDoniLeite
- Maria Cristina Richaud (2005) Teoría de La MediciónUploaded byapi-3700278
- Cosca vs Palaypayon 237 SCRA 249Uploaded byjufaedel
- Advanced Business Law and the Legal EnvironmentUploaded bygelunn
- site report bqs sem1Uploaded byapi-417090110
- The Secrets of LifeUploaded by---
- Laravel 4 Official DocumentationUploaded byJesús Cárdenas
- LanguageUploaded byZwesty Rimba
- Pentaho Data Lake-1Uploaded byhokusmanoli
- Lembar DeskripsiUploaded byErwin Chandra N
- James Altucher I Was Blind but Now I SeeUploaded byMRT10
- Hindustan Unilever Limited is the Indian Arm of the AngloUploaded byParle Diamond
- Guidelines - Inferential Questions AssessmentUploaded byDavid Woo
- Primary Hyperparathyroidism QAUploaded byericlipton
- English Grammar - Cases of Nouns and PronounsUploaded byChiby Mirikitufu
- Resume - JordanUploaded byAnonymous bgbSZG49qP
- 02-V3N1-FullUploaded byKeyshia Koishi
- Uplift YogaUploaded byaryavraam