Chapter 10

Transportation and
Assignment Models

To accompany
Quantitative

10-1

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Learning Objectives
Students will be able to
Structure special LP problems
using the transportation and
assignment models.
Use the N.W. corner, VAM,
MODI, and stepping-stone
method.
Solve facility location and other
application problems with
transportation methods.
Solve assignment problems with
the Hungarian (matrix reduction)
method
To accompany
Quantitative

10-2

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Chapter Outline
10.1 Introduction
10.2 Setting Up a Transportation Problem
10.2 Developing an Initial
Solution:Northwest Corner Rule
10.4 Stepping-Stone Method: Finding a
Least-Cost Solution
10.5 MODI Method
10.6 Vogels Approximation Method
10.7 Unbalanced Transportation
Problems

To accompany
Quantitative

10-3

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Chapter Outline continued

10.8 Degeneracy in Transportation
Problems
10.9 More Than One Optimal Solution
10.10 Maximization Transportation
Problems
10.11 Unacceptable or Prohibited
Routes
10.12 Facility Location Analysis
10.13 Approach of the Assignment
Model
10.14 Unbalanced Assignment Models
10.15 Maximization Assignment
Problems
To accompany
Quantitative

10-4

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Specialized Problems
Transportation Problem
Distribution of items from several
sources to several destinations.
Supply capacities and destination
requirements known.

Assignment Problem
One-to-one assignment of people
to jobs, etc.

Specialized algorithms
save time!

To accompany
Quantitative

10-5

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Importance of Special
Purpose Algorithms
Fewer, less complicated,
computations than with simplex
Less computer memory required
Produce integer solutions

To accompany
Quantitative

10-6

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Transportation
Problem
Des Moines
(100 units)
capacity

Albuquerque
(300 units)
required

Cleveland
(200 units)
required

Evansville
(300 units)
capacity

Boston
(200 units)
required

Ft. Lauderdale
(300 units)
capacity

To accompany
Quantitative

10-7

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Transportation Costs
To
(Destinations)

From
(Sources)

Albuquerque
Cleveland
Boston
Des Moines
$5
$4
$3
Evansville

$8

$4

$3

Fort
Lauderdale

$9

$7

$5

To accompany
Quantitative

10-8

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Unit Shipping Cost:1Unit,

Factory to Warehouse
Albuquerque
Cleveland
Boston
Factory
(A)
(C)
(B)
Capacity
5
4
3
Des Moines
(D)
Evansville
(E)

Fort
Lauderdale
(F)

Warehouse
Req.

To accompany
Quantitative

10-9

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Total Demand and Total

Supply
Albuquerque
Boston
(A)
(B)

Cleveland
Factory
(C)
Capacity

Des Moines
(D)

100

Evansville
(E)

300

Fort
Lauderdale
(F)

300

Warehouse
Req.

300

To accompany
Quantitative

200

10-10

200

700

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Transportation Table For

Executive Furniture Corp.
Albuquerque
Boston
(A)
(B)

Cleveland
Factory
(C)
Capacity

Des Moines
(D)

Evansville
(E)

Fort
Lauderdale
(F)

Warehouse
Req.

300

To accompany
Quantitative

200

10-11

200

100

300

300

700

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Initial Solution Using the

Northwest Corner Rule
Start in the upper left-hand cell
and allocate units to shipping
routes as follows:
Exhaust the supply (factory
capacity) of each row before moving
down to the next row.
Exhaust the demand (warehouse)
requirements of each column before
moving to the next column to the
right.
Check that all supply and demand
requirements are met.

To accompany
Quantitative

10-12

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Initial Solution
North West Corner Rule
Albuquerque
Boston
(A)
(B)
Des Moines
(D)
Evansville
(E)

100

200

Fort
Lauderdale
(F)
Warehouse
Req.

Cleveland
Factory
(C)
Capacity

100

300

To accompany
Quantitative

100

200

200

200

10-13

100

300

300

700

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

The Stepping-Stone
Method
1. Select any unused square to evaluate.
2. Begin at this square. Trace a closed
path back to the original square via squares
that are currently being used (only
horizontal or vertical moves allowed).
3. Place + in unused square; alternate - and
+ on each corner square of the closed path.
4. Calculate improvement index: add
together the unit cost figures found in each
square containing a +; subtract the unit
cost figure in each square containing a -.
5. Repeat steps 1 - 4 for each unused
square.
To accompany
Quantitative

10-14

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Stepping-Stone Method The Des Moines-toCleveland Route

Albuquerque
Boston
(A)
(B)
Des Moines
(D)
Evansville
(E)

100

200

100

300

To accompany
Quantitative

100

300

Start

+
8

Fort
Lauderdale
(F)
Warehouse
Req.

Cleveland
Factory
(C)
Capacity

100

200

300

200

10-15

200

700

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Stepping-Stone Method
An Improved Solution
Albuquerque
Boston
(A)
(B)
Des Moines
(D)
Evansville
(E)

100

100

Fort
Lauderdale
(F)

100

Warehouse
Req.

300

200
9

To accompany
Quantitative

Cleveland
Factory
(C)
Capacity

200

10-16

200

200

100

300

300

700

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Third and Final Solution

Albuquerque Boston
(A)
(B)

Cleveland Factory
(C) Capacity

Evansville
(E)

Ft Lauderdale
(F)

9
200

Warehouse
Req.

300

Des Moines
(D)

100

100

200

To accompany
Quantitative

200

10-17

100

200

100

300

300

700

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

MODI Method: 5 Steps

1. Compute the values for each row and
column: set Ri + Kj = Cij for those
squares currently used or occupied.
2. After writing all equations,
set R1 = 0.
3. Solve the system of equations for Ri
and Kj values.
4. Compute the improvement index for
each unused square by the formula
improvement index:
Cij - Ri - Kj
5. Select the largest negative index and
proceed to solve the problem as you
did using the stepping-stone method.
To accompany
Quantitative

10-18

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Vogels Approximation
1. For each row/column of table,
find difference between two
lowest costs. (Opportunity cost)
2. Find greatest opportunity cost.
3. Assign as many units as
possible to lowest cost square in
row/column with greatest
opportunity cost.
4. Eliminate row or column which
has been completely satisfied.
4. Begin again, omitting
eliminated rows/columns.
To accompany
Quantitative

10-19

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Special Problems in
Transportation Method
Unbalanced Problem
Demand Less than Supply
Demand Greater than Supply

Degeneracy
More Than One Optimal
Solution

To accompany
Quantitative

10-20

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Unbalanced Problem
Demand Less than Supply
Customer
Dummy
Customer
Factory
1
2
Capacity
8
5
0
Factory 1
170
Factory 2

15

10

Factory 3

Customer
Requirements 150

To accompany
Quantitative

80

10-21

150

130

80

380

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Unbalanced Problem
Supply Less than Demand
Customer Customer Customer Factory
2
1
3
Capacity
Factory 1

16

Factory 2

15

10

Dummy

Customer
Requirements 150

To accompany
Quantitative

80

10-22

150

170

130

80

380

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Degeneracy
Customer Customer Customer Factory
2
1
3
Capacity
5

Factory 2

Factory 3

Factory 1

100

Customer
Requirements 100

To accompany
Quantitative

20

100
7

100

10-23

80

100

100

120

80

300

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Degeneracy - Coming Up!

Customer Customer Customer Factory
2
1
3
Capacity
Factory 1

Factory 2

Factory 3

70

16

15

10

10

50

80
3

30

Customer
Requirements 150

To accompany
Quantitative

80

10-24

50

50

70

130

80

280

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Stepping-Stone Method The Des Moines-toCleveland Route

Albuquerque
Boston
(A)
(B)
Des Moines
(D)
Evansville
(E)

100

4 Start

200

100

300

To accompany
Quantitative

4
100

300

+
8

Fort
Lauderdale
(F)
Warehouse
Req.

Cleveland
Factory
(C)
Capacity

100

200

300

200

10-25

200

700

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

The Assignment Problem

Person
Adams
Brown
Cooper

To accompany
Quantitative

1
$11
$8
$9

10-26

Project
2
$14
$10
$12

3
$6
$11
$7

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

The Assignment
Method
1. subtract the smallest number in each
row from every number in that row
subtract the smallest number in
each column from every number
in that column
2. draw the minimum number of
vertical and horizontal straight lines
necessary to cover zeros in the table
if the number of lines equals the
number of rows or columns, then
one can make an optimal
assignment (step 4)
To accompany
Quantitative

10-27

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

The Assignment
Method - continued
3. if the number of lines does not
equal the number of rows or
columns
subtract the smallest number not
covered by a line from every
other uncovered number
add the same number to any
number lying at the intersection
of any two lines
return to step 2
4. make optimal assignments at
locations of zeros within the table
To accompany
10-28
PG 10.13b
Quantitative

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Hungarian Method
Initial Table

Person

Project
1

Adams

11

14

Brown

10

11

Cooper

12

To accompany
Quantitative

10-29

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Hungarian Method
Row Reduction

Person

Project
1

Adams

Brown

Cooper

To accompany
Quantitative

10-30

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Hungarian Method
Column Reduction

Person

Project
1

Adams

Brown

Cooper

To accompany
Quantitative

10-31

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Hungarian Method
Testing

Person

Project
1

Adams

Covering
Line 2

Brown

Cooper

To accompany
Quantitative

10-32

Covering
Line 1

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Hungarian Method
Revised Opportunity Cost Table
Person

Project
1

Adams

Brown

Cooper

To accompany
Quantitative

10-33

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Hungarian Method
Testing
Person

Covering
Covering
Line 1 Project Line 3

Adams
Brown
Cooper

To accompany
Quantitative

10-34

Covering
Line 2

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Hungarian Method
Assignments

Person

Project
1

Adams
Brown
Cooper
To accompany
Quantitative

10
9
10-35

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Maximization Assignment
Problem

Adams
Brown
Cooper
Davis

1
$11
$8
$9
$10

To accompany
Quantitative

Project
2
3 Dummy
$14 $6
$0
$10 $11
$0
$12 $7
$0
$13 $8
$0

10-36

2003 by
Prentice Hall,

Maximization Assignment
Problem

Adams
Brown
Cooper
Davis

1
$32
$6
$5
$4

To accompany
Quantitative

Project
2
3 Dummy
$0
$8
$14
$4
$3
$14
$2 $77
$14
$1
$6
$14

10-37

2003 by
Prentice Hall,