Linear Programming Problem using the Simplex Method

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around a linear programming problem involving an electronics store's inventory of VCRs, stereo systems, and television sets. Participants explore how to formulate the objective function and constraints using the Simplex Method to maximize revenue while adhering to storage limitations and product relationships.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Kyle presents the problem and initial formulations, including the objective function z=450x + 2000y + 750w and constraints x + y + w <= 210 and w >= 30.
  • Some participants suggest using the relationship x=2y to reformulate the constraints, leading to the constraint 3y + w <= 210.
  • Kyle expresses confusion about how to incorporate the condition of having twice as many VCRs as stereo systems into the inequalities.
  • Mark proposes rewriting the objective function as z=2900y + 750w, which Kyle finds helpful but still feels it might be a workaround.
  • Chris suggests maintaining all three variables in the problem and provides a complete formulation, including the equality x - 2y = 0.
  • Participants discuss issues with the Simplex Method Tool not accepting the equality constraint and the need for proper formatting in the input.
  • Kyle discovers a missing plus sign in his objective function, which resolves his issue with the tool.
  • A later post provides a detailed breakdown of the simplex algorithm applied to the problem, presenting the steps and final results.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

While participants agree on the formulation of the problem and the use of the Simplex Method, there is no consensus on the best way to express the relationship between the variables, particularly regarding the equality constraint. Some participants feel that removing the x variable is a workaround, while others provide alternative formulations.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights limitations in the use of the Simplex Method Tool, particularly regarding the acceptance of equality constraints and the need for precise mathematical notation. There are also unresolved questions about the best approach to incorporate the relationship between VCRs and stereo systems.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and practitioners of linear programming, particularly those working with inventory management problems and the Simplex Method.

pHlawless
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Here is my story problem:

An electronics store stocks VCRs, stereo systems, and television sets. They have limited storage space and can stock a total of at most 210 of these three machines. They know from past experience that they should stock twice as many VCRs as stereo systems and at least 30 television sets. If each VCR sells for $450, each stereo system sells for $2000, and each television set sells for $750, how many of each should be stocked and sold for maximum revenues?

My professor has us using this site to solve these problems: Simplex Method Tool

Here is what I have so far:
My objective function is z= 450x + 2000y + 750w

My constraints are:
x + y + w <= 210
w >= 30The problem I am having is I am unsure as to how to incorporate the condition of there being twice as many VCRs as stereo systems. Obviously y = 1/2x. I tried to change my first inequality to 3/2x + w <= 210 (Since y = 1/2x and x = 2/2x then x + y = 3/2x) but this website calculator didn't seem to like that. Any idea where I'm going wrong here?

Thanks for the help,
Kyle
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
I think I would use $x=2y$ instead, so that your first constraint becomes:

$3y+w\le210$

Let us know if that works.(Smile)
 
Hey Mark,

Thanks for the response.

I tried that as well on the website and it keeps returning "No optimal solution exists for this problem."

Common sense and ability to do the problem in my head tells me the answer is more than likely x=120, y=60 and w=30. I just need to know how to put that into inequalities somehow for full credit on this problem (Worried)

Thanks,
Kyle
 
Did you try rewriting your objective function too?

$z=2900y+750w$

subject to the constraints:

$3y+w\le210$

$30\le w$
 
Thanks Mark, that did give me the correct answer. However, I feel like this is a workaround of some sorts. Is there another inequality or something I could add so I wouldn't have to get rid of my x variable?
 
pHlawless said:
Thanks Mark, that did give me the correct answer. However, I feel like this is a workaround of some sorts. Is there another inequality or something I could add so I wouldn't have to get rid of my x variable?

(Don't mean to steal your thunder Mark) If you leave all three variables in, the LP problem that you want to solve is:

Maximize: $z=450x+2000y+750w$

subject to $\begin{cases}x+y+w\leq 210\\ x-2y = 0\\ w\geq 30\\ x,y,w\geq 0\end{cases}$
 
Last edited:
Hey Chris, glad to have your input to see the problem properly stated, as it has been 20 years since I have done any linear programming, and like the OP I felt I was "cheating." (Smile)
 
MarkFL said:
Hey Chris, glad to have your input to see the problem properly stated, as it has been 20 years since I have done any linear programming, and like the OP I felt I was "cheating." (Smile)

It's been about 4 years since I last took linear programming, but yea...I kinda know that feeling. ;P
 
Chris L T521 said:
(Don't mean to steal your thunder Mark) If you leave all three variables in, the LP problem that you want to solve is:

Maximize: $z=450x+2000y+750w$

subject to $\begin{cases}x+y+w\leq 210\\ x-2y = 0\\ w\geq 30\end{cases}$

While that third condition you added makes perfect sense to me, this website just doesn't want to accept it. I'm assuming because it doesn't have a greater/less than sign? Sorry to be a pain here...

Simplex Method Tool

Here is what I am inputting for my linear programming:

maximize z = 450x 2000y + 750w
subject to x + y + w <= 210, w >= 30, x - 2y = 0

I've used this website (Professor has showed us and told us to use) on many different problems and never had an issue, however I've never had to use an "=" with no ">,<".

Thanks again,
Kyle
 
  • #10
pHlawless said:
While that third condition you added makes perfect sense to me, this website just doesn't want to accept it. I'm assuming because it doesn't have a greater/less than sign? Sorry to be a pain here...

Simplex Method Tool

Here is what I am inputting for my linear programming:

maximize z = 450x 2000y + 750w
subject to x + y + w <= 210, w >= 30, x - 2y = 0

I've used this website (Professor has showed us and told us to use) on many different problems and never had an issue, however I've never had to use an "=" with no ">,<".

Thanks again,
Kyle

Interesting, because I had no problem with this. Copy the following and it should work:

Code:
Maximize p = 450x + 2000y + 750z subject to
x + y + z <= 210
x-2y = 0
z >= 30

It gives me the following:

Code:
Optimal Solution: p = 196500; x = 120, y = 60, z = 30
 
  • #11
I ran the app you linked to and used:

maximize z = 450x + 2000y + 750w
subject to x + y + w <= 210, w >= 30, x - 2y = 0

(notice the "+" between 450x and 2000y you left out)

and it gave me a solution.
 
  • #12
Wow, through all of that editing of my objective function I was missing a plus sign. That's depressing. Thanks for all of the help gentlemen, it was greatly appreciated!
 
  • #13
Glad to help, Kyle, and please don't ever feel you are being a pain by asking questions...we are more than happy to help. (Smile)
 
  • #14
Although the problem has been solved, I write a version of the simplex method. The problem is equivalent to maximize $z=2900y+750w$ with the constraints:

$\left \{ \begin{matrix} 3y+w\leq 210\\w\leq 30 \\y\geq 0,\;w\geq 0\end{matrix}\right.$

We write the problem in standard form:

$\left \{ \begin{matrix} 3y+w+x_1= 210\\w-x_2= 30 \\y\geq 0,\;w\geq 0,x_1\geq 0,x_2\geq 0\end{matrix}\right.$

And now, the simplex algorithm:

$\left[\begin{array}{ccccc|c}
3 & 1 & 1 &0 & 0 & 210\\
30& 1 & 0 &-1 & 0 & 30\\
-2900 & -750 & 0 &0 & 1 & 0
\end{array}\right]$

$\left[\begin{array}{ccccc|c}
\boxed{1} & 1/3 & 1/3 &0 & 0 & 70\\
0& 1 & 0 &-1 & 0 & 30\\
-2900 & -750 & 0 &0 & 1 & 0
\end{array}\right]$

$\left[\begin{array}{ccccc|c}
\boxed{1} & 1/3 & 1/3 &0 & 0 & 70\\
0& 1 & 0 &-1 & 0 & 30\\
0 & 650/3 & 2900/3 &0 & 1 & 203000
\end{array}\right]$

$\left[\begin{array}{ccccc|c}
\boxed{1} & 0 & 1/3 &1/3 & 0 & 60\\
0& \boxed{1} & 0 &-1 & 0 & 30\\
0 & 0 & 8050/3 &650/3 & 1 & 19650
\end{array}\right]$

An optimal basic feasible solution is $(y,w,x_1,x_2)^t=(60,30,0,0)^t$ and $z_{\max}[(60,30,0,0)^t]=19650$.

Equivalently, we get the maximum at $x=120,y=60,w=30$ and the maximun is $19650$.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
28
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K