Linear Programming:
Model Formulation and
Graphical Solution
Chapter 2
2-1
Chapter Topics
Model Formulation
A Maximization Model Example
Graphical Solutions of Linear Programming Models
A Minimization Model Example
Irregular Types of Linear Programming Models
Characteristics of Linear Programming Problems
2-2
Linear Programming: An Overview
Objectives of business decisions frequently involve
maximizing profit or minimizing costs.
Linear programming uses linear algebraic relationships
to represent a firm’s decisions, given a business
objective, and resource constraints.
Steps in application:
1. Identify problem as solvable by linear
programming.
2. Formulate a mathematical model of the
unstructured problem.
3. Solve the model.
4. Implementation 2-3
Model Components
Decision variables - mathematical symbols representing
levels of activity of a firm.
Objective function - a linear mathematical relationship
describing an objective of the firm, in terms of decision
variables - this function is to be maximized or minimized.
Constraints – requirements or restrictions placed on the firm
by the operating environment, stated in linear relationships of
the decision variables.
Parameters - numerical coefficients and constants used in the
objective function and constraints.
2-4
Summary of Model Formulation Steps
Step 1 : Clearly define the decision variables
Step 2 : Construct the objective function
Step 3 : Formulate the constraints
2-5
LP Model Formulation
A Maximization Example (1 of 4)
Product mix problem - Beaver Creek Pottery Company
How many bowls and mugs should be produced to maximize
profits given labor and materials constraints?
Product resource requirements and unit profit:
Resource Requirements
Labor Clay Profit
Product
(Hr./Unit) (Lb./Unit) ($/Unit)
Bowl 1 4 40
Mug 2 3 50
2-6
LP Model Formulation
A Maximization Example (2 of 4)
2-7
LP Model Formulation
A Maximization Example (3 of 4)
Resource 40 hrs of labor per day
Availability: 120 lbs of clay
Decision x1 = number of bowls to produce per day
Variables: x2 = number of mugs to produce per day
Objective Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
Function: Where Z = profit per day
Resource 1x1 + 2x2 40 hours of labor
Constraints: 4x1 + 3x2 120 pounds of clay
Non-Negativity x1 0; x2 0
Constraints:
2-8
LP Model Formulation
A Maximization Example (4 of 4)
Complete Linear Programming Model:
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
2-9
Feasible Solutions
A feasible solution does not violate any of the constraints:
Example: x1 = 5 bowls
x2 = 10 mugs
Z = $40x1 + $50x2 = $700
Labor constraint check: 1(5) + 2(10) = 25 < 40 hours
Clay constraint check: 4(5) + 3(10) = 50 < 120 pounds
2-10
Infeasible Solutions
An infeasible solution violates at least one of the
constraints:
Example: x1 = 10 bowls
x2 = 20 mugs
Z = $40x1 + $50x2 = $1400
Labor constraint check: 1(10) + 2(20) = 50 > 40 hours
2-11
Graphical Solution of LP Models
Graphical solution is limited to linear programming models
containing only two decision variables (can be used with three
variables but only with great difficulty).
Graphical methods provide visualization of how a solution for
a linear programming problem is obtained.
2-12
Coordinate Axes
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (1 of
12)
X2 is mugs
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
X1 is bowls
Figure 2.2 Coordinates for Graphical
Analysis 2-13
Labor Constraint
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (2 of
12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.3 Graph of Labor Constraint
2-14
Labor Constraint Area
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (3 of
12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.4 Labor Constraint Area
2-15
Clay Constraint Area
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (4 of
12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.5 Clay Constraint Area
2-16
Both Constraints
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (5 of
12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.6 Graph of Both Model Constraints
2-17
Feasible Solution Area
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (6 of
12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.7 Feasible Solution Area
2-18
Objective Function Solution = $800
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (7 of
12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.8 Objection Function Line for Z =
$800 2-19
Alternative Objective Function Solution Lines
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (8 of 12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.9 Alternative Objective Function Lines
2-20
Optimal Solution
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (9 of
12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.10 Identification of Optimal Solution Point
2-21
Optimal Solution Coordinates
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (10 of 12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.11 Optimal Solution Coordinates
2-22
Extreme (Corner) Point Solutions
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (11 of 12)
Maximize Z = $40x1 + $50x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.12 Solutions at All Corner
Points 2-23
Optimal Solution for New Objective Function
Graphical Solution of Maximization Model (12 of 12)
Maximize Z = $70x1 + $20x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.13 Optimal Solution with Z = 70x1 +
2-24
LP Model Formulation – Minimization (1 of 8)
Two brands of fertilizer available - Super-gro, Crop-quick.
Field requires at least 16 pounds of nitrogen and 24 pounds of
phosphate.
Super-gro costs $6 per bag, Crop-quick $3 per bag.
Problem: How much of each brand to purchase to minimize total
cost of fertilizer given following data ?
Chemical Contribution
Nitrogen Phosphate
Brand
(lb/ bag) (lb/ bag)
Super-gro 2 4
Crop-quick 4 3
2-25
LP Model Formulation – Minimization (2 of 8)
Figure 2.15 Fertilizing
farmer’s field
2-26
LP Model Formulation – Minimization (3 of 8)
Decision Variables:
x1 = bags of Super-gro
x2 = bags of Crop-quick
The Objective Function:
Minimize Z = $6x1 + 3x2
Where: $6x1 = cost of bags of Super-Gro
$3x2 = cost of bags of Crop-Quick
Model Constraints:
2x1 + 4x2 16 lb (nitrogen constraint)
4x1 + 3x2 24 lb (phosphate constraint)
x1, x2 0 (non-negativity constraint)
2-27
Constraint Graph – Minimization (4 of 8)
Minimize Z = $6x1 + $3x2
subject to: 2x1 + 4x2 16
4x1 + 3x2 24
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.16 Graph of Both Model Constraints
2-28
Feasible Region– Minimization (5 of 8)
Minimize Z = $6x1 + $3x2
subject to: 2x1 + 4x2 16
4x1 + 3x2 24
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.17 Feasible Solution Area
2-29
Optimal Solution Point – Minimization (6 of 8)
Minimize Z = $6x1 + $3x2
subject to: 2x1 + 4x2 16
4x1 + 3x2 24
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.18 Optimum Solution Point
2-30
Irregular Types of Linear Programming Problems
For some linear programming models, the general
rules do not apply.
Special types of problems include those with:
Multiple optimal solutions
Infeasible solutions
Unbounded solutions
2-31
Multiple Optimal Solutions Beaver Creek
Pottery
The objective function is
parallel to a constraint line.
Maximize Z=$40x1 + 30x2
subject to: 1x1 + 2x2 40
4x1 + 3x2 120
x1, x2 0
Where:
x1 = number of bowls
x2 = number of mugs
Figure 2.20 Example with Multiple Optimal
Solutions 2-32
An Infeasible Problem
Every possible solution
violates at least one constraint:
Maximize Z = 5x1 + 3x2
subject to: 4x1 + 2x2 8
x1 4
x2 6
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.21 Graph of an Infeasible Problem
2-33
An Unbounded Problem
Value of the objective
function increases indefinitely:
Maximize Z = 4x1 + 2x2
subject to: x1 4
x2 2
x1, x2 0
Figure 2.22 Graph of an Unbounded Problem
2-34
Characteristics of Linear Programming Problems
A decision amongst alternative courses of action is required.
The decision is represented in the model by decision
variables.
The problem encompasses a goal, expressed as an objective
function, that the decision maker wants to achieve.
Restrictions (represented by constraints) exist that limit the
extent of achievement of the objective.
The objective and constraints must be definable by linear
mathematical functional relationships.
2-35
Problem Statement
Example Problem No. 1 (1 of 3)
■ Hot dog mixture in 1000-pound batches.
■ Two ingredients, chicken ($3/lb) and beef ($5/lb).
■ Recipe requirements:
at least 500 pounds of “chicken”
at least 200 pounds of “beef”
■ Ratio of chicken to beef must be at least 2 to 1.
■ Determine optimal mixture of ingredients that will
minimize costs.
2-36
Solution
Example Problem No. 1 (2 of 3)
Step 1:
Identify decision variables.
x1 = lb of chicken in mixture
x2 = lb of beef in mixture
Step 2:
Formulate the objective function.
Minimize Z = $3x1 + $5x2
where Z = cost per 1,000-lb batch
$3x1 = cost of chicken
$5x2 = cost of beef 2-37
Solution
Example Problem No. 1 (3 of 3)
Step 3:
Establish Model Constraints
x1 + x2 = 1,000 lb
x1 500 lb of chicken
x2 200 lb of beef
x1/x2 2/1 or x1 - 2x2 0
x1, x2 0
The Model: Minimize Z = $3x1 + 5x2
subject to: x1 + x2 = 1,000 lb
x1 500
x2 200
x1 - 2x2 0
2-38
Example Problem No. 2 (1 of 3)
reading exercise on page 58
Solve the following model
graphically:
Maximize Z = 4x1 + 5x2
subject to: x1 + 2x2 10
6x1 + 6x2 36
x1 4
x1 , x 2 0
Step 1: Plot the constraints
as equations
Figure 2.23 Constraint Equations
2-39
Example Problem No. 2 (2 of 3)
Maximize Z = 4x1 + 5x2
subject to: x1 + 2x2 10
6x1 + 6x2 36
x1 4
x1 , x 2 0
Step 2: Determine the feasible
solution space
Figure 2.24 Feasible Solution Space and Extreme
Points 2-40
Example Problem No. 2 (3 of 3)
Maximize Z = 4x1 + 5x2
subject to: x1 + 2x2 10
6x1 + 6x2 36
x1 4
x1, x2 0
Step 3 and 4: Determine the
solution points and optimal
solution
Figure 2.25 Optimal Solution Point
2-41
Properties of Linear Programming Models
Proportionality - The rate of change (slope) of the objective
function and constraint equations is constant.
Additivity - Terms in the objective function and constraint
equations must be additive.
Divisibility -Decision variables can take on any fractional
value and are therefore continuous as opposed to integer in
nature.
Certainty - Values of all the model parameters are assumed to
be known with certainty (non-probabilistic).
2-42