ASSIGNMENT 1

ENGG1400

Anurag Pattekar
Z5018086

Problem 1:
Part A)
Objective Function:
Maximise f ( x , y ) =2 x + y

Subject to:
x + y 3
x+ 2 y 9

x4
x , y 0

Part B)
The optimal solution occurs when:

x=4 , y=2.5
Value of objective function:

f ( 4,2.5 )=10.5

Part C)
The optimal solution occurs when:

x=4 , y=2
Value of objective function:

f ( 4,2.5 )=10
The reason the optimal solution has changed is because x,y are not continuous
variables anymore, but instead only take integer values, hence the value of the
objective function has decreased from 10.5 to 10.

Question 2:
Part A)

Part B)

Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Site 5
Value of objective
function ($)

Normal

No opening costs

Suburb 1 & 5
Not open
Suburb 2,3 & 6
Not Open
Suburb 4
23300

Suburb
Suburb
Suburb
Suburb
Suburb
17600

1&5
2
3
6
4

Opening costs x
10
Not open
Suburb 1,2,3 & 6
Not open
Not open
Suburb 4 & 5
49500

Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Site 5
Value of objective
function ($)

83.3% Suburb 1 & 66.7% Suburb 5

16.7% Suburb 1 & 100% Suburb 2
83.3% Suburb 3
16.67% Suburb 3 & 100% Suburb 6
100% Suburb 4 & 33.3% Suburb 5
25016.70

Part C)

The solution in Part C changes with respect to Part B, with two more extra waste
centres opening, hence increasing the value of the objective function. This has
come about the extra constraint of each centre having a capacity to the amount
of waste it can process, and ensuring that the demand of each suburb does not
exceed the capacity of any particular waste site.

Part D)

Site 1

Project 1
Suburb 1 & 5

Project 2
100% Suburb 1 &
5, 33.3% Suburb
6
100% Suburb 2

Site 2

Suburb 2

Site 3

Not Open

Site 4

Suburb 3 & 6

100% Suburb 3,
66.7% Suburb 6
Closed

Site 5

Suburb 4

Suburb 4

Value of objective
function ($)

23500

24066.70

Project 3
83.3% Suburb 1,
66.7% Suburb 5
16.7% Suburb 1,
100% suburb 2
83.3% Suburb 3
16.7% Suburb 3,
100% Suburb 6
100% Suburb 4,
33.3% Suburb 5
25016.70

Project 1 is the cheapest

Part E)
Project 1: 23500 + 1200 = $24700
Project 2: 24066.7 + 500 = $24566.70
Project 3: $25016.70 (No additional costs)

Yes the project selection would change to project 2 from project 1, as project 2 is
now $133.30 dollars cheaper than project 1.

Question 3:
Part A)
Definitions:
x ijamount of electricity flowing plant i city j
c ij cost of transmitting electricity plant i city j
s isupply plant i
d j demand at city j
i Pset of power stations
j Cset of cities

Decision Variable:
x ij 0 i P , j C
negative)

Objective Function:
Minimise Total Cost =1000000 x ij c ij
i P j C

Subject to (Constraints):

x ij=si i P
j C

x ij=d j j C
i P

Part B)
Data File:

Model File:

(Electricity flow cannot be

Solution:

Part C)
Project 1: Capacity of Station 1 is doubled
Electricity
supplied
to each
city (kwh
million)
Power
station 1
Power
Station 2
Power
Station 3

City 1

City 2

City 3

City 4

City 5

60

35

45

60

45

Objective Value: Total cost = $1.615Billion (+ $100 Million = $1.715 billion)

Project 2: Transmission cost decreases by 5%

Power
station 1
Power
Station 2
Power
Station 3

City 1
30

City 2
-

City 3
45

City 4
-

City 5
-

30

50

35

45

Objective Value: Total Cost = $1.6625 Billion (+ $50 Million = $1.7125 Billion)

Project 3: Power demand decreases by 5% in each city.

Power
station 1
Power
Station 2
Power
Station 3

City 1
24.5

City 2
7.75

City 3
42.75

City 4
-

City 5
-

32.5

47.5

25.5

42.75

Objective Value: Total Cost = $1.64325 Billion (+ $20 Million = $1.66325 Billion)

Project 3 is the best project out of the 3 alternatives with it being the
cheapest overall (inclusive of the annual cost) well as having the lowest
annual cost out of the 3 options. The state-wide sustainability incentive
program will also have a positive impact on the environment hence
making it socially optimal as well.

Question 4:
Part A)
Definitions:
x aamount of money ( $ ) invested asset a A
r ais the expected return of asset a A
ais the volatility of asset a A
a Aset of assets

Cisthe capital( $)

Decision Variable:
xa 0 a A

(Money invested cannot be negative)

Objective Function:
Maximise Return= x a r a
a A

Subject to (Constraints):

x a C

a A

0.25( x a + x b + x c ) x d

x b 0.05 C

Part B)
3 funds are selected: Fund 1, Fund 2 and Fund 4.
Fund 1 $15000
Fund 2 $1000
Fund 3 $0
Fund 4 $4000
Value of Objective Function: Return = $456

Part C)
Risk constraint:

x a ( a 1.05) 0

a A

3 funds are selected: Fund 2, Fund 3 and Fund 4.

Fund 1 $0
Fund 2 $1000
Fund 3 $6000
Fund 4 $13000
Value of Objective Function: Return = $387