PROJECT-GROUP
15
Group members
Nguyễn Thị Mai Hương
Nguyễn Thị Tường Vi
Trần Hữu Vịnh Giang
Võ Hoàng Thanh Thủy
Angelique ...
USING AHP TO CHOOSE NEW PLANT
0 The company uses the following for pairwise comparisons:

1- equally preferred
2- equally ...
Looking at the factor “area”, based on some data collected, the
company finds that:
0 Amata is strongly preferred to Cu Ch...
Looking at the factor “power price” and based on some collected data, the
company finds that:
0 Nhon Trach is very strongl...
Looking at the factor labor force and some collected data, the company finds
that:
0 Cu Chi is very to extremely strongly ...
Looking at the factor “waste water treatment plant” and based on some
collected data, the company finds that:
0 Vina-sin i...
VN - Singapore

Nhơn Trạch

Labour Force

Củ Chi

Amata

VN - Singapore

Nhơn Trạch

Power Price

Củ Chi

Amata

VN - Sing...
Area
Area
Amata
Cu Chi
Vn-Sin
Nhon Trach
Total

Amata
1,00
0,20
0,25
1,00
2,45

Cu Chi
5,00
1,00
5,00
8,00
19,00

Vn-Sin
4...
Power Price
Power Price
Amata
Cu Chi
Vn-Sin
Nhon Trach

Amata
1,00
1,00
0,25
5,00

Power Price
Amata
Cu Chi
Vn-Sin
Nhon Tr...
Labor Force
Labor force

Amata

Cu Chi

Vn-Sin

4,19

Nhon Trach

Amata

1,00

0,13

3,00

0,33

Cu Chi

8,00

1,00

8,00
...
Waste Water Treatment
Waste
water
Amata
Treatment

Cu Chi

Vn-Sin

Nhon Trach

Amata

1,00

4,00

0,17

2,00

Cu Chi

0,25...
Determining factor weights
Area

Power Price Labour Force

Treatment

Area

1,00

3,00

0,25

0,50

Power Proce

0,33

1,0...
0.15
0.07
0.57
0.21

Row average

Factor Weight Table
0,61

Area
0,61

0,29
2,57

Weight sum factors

Power price
0,29

0,...
Overall ranking
After the factor weights have been determined, ABC multiplied the factor evaluations in
“Factor evaluation...
USING LP PROGRAMMING TO CHOOSE DISTRIBUTION CENTERS
AND RETAIL STORES
0 Firstly, we find the distance between plant and di...
Distance

HCMC Can Tho Da Nang

Ha Noi

Distance (km)

HCMC

Transportation cost
($/product)

(km)

Kien Giang

248

37.2
...
Distance (km)

Can Tho

Transportation cost

Distance (km)

Da Nang

($/product)

Transportation cost
($/product)

Kien Gi...
Distance (km)

Ha Noi

Transportation cost

Location

Distance

Holding cost at

($/product)

($/product)

Transportation ...
Month

Kien Giang

Can Tho

HCMC

Vung Tau

Month

Binh Thuan

Khanh Hoa

Binh Dinh

Da Nang

1

3780

5040

6300

4620

1...
Month

Hue

Nghe An

Ha Noi

Lai Chau

Month

Hai Phong

Lang Son

Cao Bang

1

4200

3780

6300

4200

1

5040

2940

294...
0 Objective function: Total transportation cost from plant to centers + total

transportation cost from centers to retaile...
Results are as following
X

Y

Z

W

AA3

AB2

AC8

AD11

15000

15000

15000

15000

15000

15000

15000

15000

Comparin...
Based on the data analysis, the ABC Company should choose to build new
plant in Cu Chi, and 2 distribution centers in HCMC...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Report of qm project group 15

523 views
375 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Technology, Business
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
523
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
1
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Report of qm project group 15

  1. 1. PROJECT-GROUP 15 Group members Nguyễn Thị Mai Hương Nguyễn Thị Tường Vi Trần Hữu Vịnh Giang Võ Hoàng Thanh Thủy Angelique Pattrick Yuson BABAIU11262 BABAIU11059 BABAIU11137 BABAUN11092 BABAIU11284
  2. 2. USING AHP TO CHOOSE NEW PLANT 0 The company uses the following for pairwise comparisons: 1- equally preferred 2- equally to moderate preferred 3- moderate preferred 4 - moderate to strongly preferred 5- strongly preferred 6- strongly to very strongly preferred 7- very strongly preferred 8- very to extremely strongly preferred 9- extremely preferred
  3. 3. Looking at the factor “area”, based on some data collected, the company finds that: 0 Amata is strongly preferred to Cu Chi 0 Amata is moderate to strongly preferred to Vn – Sin 0 Nhon Trach is very to extremely strongly preffered to Cu Chi 0 Nhon Trach is moderate preferred to Vn- Sin. 0 Vietnam- Sin is strongly preferred to Cu Chi 0 Nhon Trach is equally preferred to Amata
  4. 4. Looking at the factor “power price” and based on some collected data, the company finds that: 0 Nhon Trach is very strongly preferred to Cu Chi 0 Nhon Trach is strongly preferred to Amata 0 Nhon Trach is very to extremely strongly preffered to Vn- Sin 0 Amata is moderate to strongly preferred to VN-Sin 0 Cu Chi is equally preferred to Amata 0 Cu Chi is strongly to very strongly preferred to Vn- Sin
  5. 5. Looking at the factor labor force and some collected data, the company finds that: 0 Cu Chi is very to extremely strongly preferred to Amata 0 Cu Chi is strongly preferred to Nhon Trach 0 Amatar is moderate preferred to Vina-Sin 0 Cu Chi is 8- very to extremely strongly preferred to Vina-Sin 0 Nhon Trach is very strongly preferred to Vina-Sin 0 Nhon Trach is moderate preferred to Amata
  6. 6. Looking at the factor “waste water treatment plant” and based on some collected data, the company finds that: 0 Vina-sin is strongly to very strongly preferred to Amata 0 Vina- Sin is very to extremely strongly preffered to Cu Chi 0 Vina-Sin is very strongly preferred to Nhon Trach 0 Amata is moderate to strongly preferred to Cu Chi 0 Nhon Trach is moderate preferred to Cu Chi 0 Amata is equally to moderate preferred to Nhon Trach
  7. 7. VN - Singapore Nhơn Trạch Labour Force Củ Chi Amata VN - Singapore Nhơn Trạch Power Price Củ Chi Amata VN - Singapore Nhơn Trạch Area Củ Chi Amata VN - Singapore Nhơn Trạch Củ Chi Amata Choosing best industrial zone Treatment
  8. 8. Area Area Amata Cu Chi Vn-Sin Nhon Trach Total Amata 1,00 0,20 0,25 1,00 2,45 Cu Chi 5,00 1,00 5,00 8,00 19,00 Vn-Sin 4,00 0,20 1,00 3,00 8,20 Nhon Trach 1,00 0,13 0,33 1,00 2,46 Area Amata Cu Chi Vn-Sin Nhon Trach Amata 0,41 0,08 0,10 0,41 Cu Chi 0,26 0,05 0,26 0,42 Vn-Sin 0,49 0,02 0,12 0,37 1,68 Nhon Trach 0,41 0,05 0,14 0,41 Consistency Vector 0,21 0,65 1,68 0,39 0,05 Row averages 0,16 0,40 From the analysis, the company saw that it is relatively consistent with its responses, so there is need to reevaluate the pairwise comparison responses.
  9. 9. Power Price Power Price Amata Cu Chi Vn-Sin Nhon Trach Amata 1,00 1,00 0,25 5,00 Power Price Amata Cu Chi Vn-Sin Nhon Trach Cu Chi 1,00 1,00 0,17 7,00 Amata 0,20 0,20 0,05 1,00 0.15 Row average 0.28 0.05 0.73 Vn-Sin 4,00 6,00 1,00 8,00 Cu Chi 0,11 0,11 0,02 0,76 Vn-Sin 0,21 0,32 0,05 0,42 Nhon Trach 0,20 0,14 0,13 1,00 Nhon Trach 0,14 0,10 0,09 0,68 4.06 Consistency Vector 4.02 4.38 5.27 Consistency Index 0.09 CR 0.1 From the analysis, the company saw that it is relatively consistent with its responses, so there is need to reevaluate the pairwise comparison responses.
  10. 10. Labor Force Labor force Amata Cu Chi Vn-Sin 4,19 Nhon Trach Amata 1,00 0,13 3,00 0,33 Cu Chi 8,00 1,00 8,00 5,00 Vn-Sin 0,33 0,13 1,00 0,14 Nhon Trach 3,00 0,20 7,00 4,05 1,00 Labor force Amata Cu Chi Vn-Sin Consistency Vector 4,39 4,04 Nhon Trach Amata 0,13 0,25 0,12 0,19 Cu Chi 0,03 0,06 0,09 0,03 Vn-Sin 0,77 0,50 0,70 0,06 0,19 0,10 0,10 0.08 CR 0.09 0,68 Nhon Trach CI From the analysis, the company saw that it is relatively consistent with its responses, so there is need to reevaluate the pairwise comparison responses.
  11. 11. Waste Water Treatment Waste water Amata Treatment Cu Chi Vn-Sin Nhon Trach Amata 1,00 4,00 0,17 2,00 Cu Chi 0,25 1,00 0,13 0,33 Vn-Sin 6,00 8,00 1,00 0,50 3,00 0,14 4,19 4,05 4,39 7,00 Nhon Trach Consistenc y Vector 1,00 4,04 CI CR Waste Water Amata Treatment Cu Chi Vn-Sin 0.06 0.06 Nhon Trach Amata 0,13 0,25 0,12 0,19 Cu Chi 0,03 0,06 0,09 0,03 Vn-Sin 0,77 0,50 0,70 0,68 Nhon Trach 0,06 0,19 0,10 0,10 From the analysis, the company saw that it is relatively consistent with responses, so no need to reevaluate the pairwise comparison responses.
  12. 12. Determining factor weights Area Power Price Labour Force Treatment Area 1,00 3,00 0,25 0,50 Power Proce 0,33 1,00 0,20 0,25 Labour Force 4,00 5,00 1,00 5,00 0,20 Labour Force 1,00 Treatment Treatement 2,00 Area 4,00 Power Price Area 0,14 0,23 0,15 0,07 Power Proce 0,05 0,08 0,12 0,04 Labour Force 0,55 0,38 0,61 0,74 Treatement 0,27 0,31 0,12 0,15
  13. 13. 0.15 0.07 0.57 0.21 Row average Factor Weight Table 0,61 Area 0,61 0,29 2,57 Weight sum factors Power price 0,29 0,90 Labor Force 2,57 4,10 Consistency vector CI 0.08 CR 0.09 4,08 Waste water treatment 4,52 4,25 0,90
  14. 14. Overall ranking After the factor weights have been determined, ABC multiplied the factor evaluations in “Factor evaluations“ table times the “factor weights” table above. It gives him the overall ranking. Because Cu Chi had the highest priority, therefore, ABC company consider Cu Chi the best place to build industrial zone. 0,68 0,07 Amata Cu Chi Labor Force 0,57 Vn-Sin 0,83 Waste water treatment 0,21 Nhon Trach 1,13 Area 0,15 Power price 1,76 Because Cu Chi had the highest priority, therefore, ABC company consider Cu Chi the best place to build industrial zone.
  15. 15. USING LP PROGRAMMING TO CHOOSE DISTRIBUTION CENTERS AND RETAIL STORES 0 Firstly, we find the distance between plant and distribution centers, from distribution centers to retail stores and the radius of each province. 0 Multiply this with the transportation cost given to have the cost per product. 0 We will then find the demand for each store in each month 0 We will then solve 2 LP problems to select the distribution centers and retails stores
  16. 16. Distance HCMC Can Tho Da Nang Ha Noi Distance (km) HCMC Transportation cost ($/product) (km) Kien Giang 248 37.2 Plant- Can Tho 168 25.2 center Vung Tau 129 19.35 Cu Chi Binh Thuan 190 28.5 Khanh Hoa 441 66.15 Binh Dinh 649 97.35 Da Nang 872 130.8 Hue 1097 164.55 Nghe An 1323 198.45 Ha Noi 1710 256.5 Lai Chau 1996 299.4 Hai Phong 1639 245.85 Lang Son 1761 264.15 Cao Bang 1886 282.9 TC Holding cost at centers 60 1.5 0.02 181 2.715 0.015 829 8.29 0.01 1606 16.06 0.025
  17. 17. Distance (km) Can Tho Transportation cost Distance (km) Da Nang ($/product) Transportation cost ($/product) Kien Giang 128 12.8 Kien Giang 1246 149.52 HCMC 168 16.8 Can Tho 1032 123.84 Vung Tau 293 29.3 HCMC 872 104.64 Binh Thuan 366 36.6 Vung Tau 851 102.12 Khanh Hoa 616 61.6 Binh Thuan 759 91.08 Binh Dinh 854 85.4 Khanh Hoa 539 64.68 Da Nang 1032 103.2 Binh Dinh 290 34.8 Hue 1265 126.5 Hue 87 10.44 Nghe An 1371 137.1 Nghe An 568 68.16 Ha Noi 1877 187.7 Ha Noi 763 91.56 Lai Chau 1946 194.6 Lai Chau 1110 133.2 Hai Phong 1650 165 Hai Phong 784 94.08 Lang Son 1767 176.7 Lang Son 952 114.24 Cao Bang 1897 189.7 Cao Bang 1031 123.72
  18. 18. Distance (km) Ha Noi Transportation cost Location Distance Holding cost at ($/product) ($/product) Transportation cost stores Kien Giang 1958 293.7 Kien Giang 45 1.26 0.01 Can Tho 1877 281.55 Can Tho 21 0.651 0.015 HCMC 1710 256.5 HCMC 25.8 0.903 0.018 Vung Tau 1662 249.3 Vung Tau 25.2 0.756 0.015 Binh Thuan 1503 225.45 Binh Thuan 49.9 1.3473 0.01 Khanh Hoa 1262 189.3 Khanh Hoa 40.8 1.224 0.008 1049 157.35 Binh Dinh 43.9 1.317 0.01 Da Nang Da Nang 20 0.7 0.019 763 114.45 Hue 0.012 658 98.7 40 1.24 Hue Nghe An 0.015 292 72.5 2.1025 43.8 Ha Noi 32.6 1.141 0.017 Lai Chau 402 60.3 Lai Chau 53.7 1.6647 0.01 Hai Phong 103 15.45 Hai Phong 22 0.726 0.009 Lang Son 154 23.1 Lang Son 51.5 1.442 0.008 Cao Bang 272 40.8 Cao Bang 46.2 1.386 0.01 Binh Dinh Nghe An Now we find the demands for each month for each stores
  19. 19. Month Kien Giang Can Tho HCMC Vung Tau Month Binh Thuan Khanh Hoa Binh Dinh Da Nang 1 3780 5040 6300 4620 1 3360 4620 4200 5460 2 3150 4200 5250 3850 2 2800 3850 3500 4550 3 3960 5280 6600 4840 3 3520 4840 4400 5720 4 2610 3480 4350 3190 4 2320 3190 2900 3770 5 4770 6360 7950 5830 5 4240 5830 5300 6890 6 3420 4560 5700 4180 6 3040 4180 3800 4940 7 4050 5400 6750 4950 7 3600 4950 4500 5850 8 5580 7440 9300 6820 8 4960 6820 6200 8060 9 4680 6240 7800 5720 9 4160 5720 5200 6760 10 3510 4680 5850 4290 10 3120 4290 3900 5070 11 5040 6720 8400 6160 11 4480 6160 5600 7280 12 6300 8400 10500 7700 12 5600 7700 7000 9100
  20. 20. Month Hue Nghe An Ha Noi Lai Chau Month Hai Phong Lang Son Cao Bang 1 4200 3780 6300 4200 1 5040 2940 2940 2 3500 3150 5250 3500 2 4200 2450 2450 3 4400 3960 6600 4400 3 5280 3080 3080 4 2900 2610 4350 2900 4 3480 2030 2030 5 5300 4770 7950 5300 5 6360 3170 3170 6 3800 3420 5700 3800 6 4560 2660 2660 7 4500 4050 6750 4500 7 5400 3150 3150 8 6200 5580 9300 6200 8 7440 4340 4340 9 5200 4680 7800 5200 9 6240 3640 3640 10 3900 3510 5850 3900 10 4680 2730 2730 11 5600 5040 8400 5600 11 6720 3920 3920 12 7000 6300 10500 7000 12 8400 4900 4900
  21. 21. 0 Objective function: Total transportation cost from plant to centers + total transportation cost from centers to retailers + holding cost at centers. 0 Constraints:  Number of item shipped from plant to centers should be less than or equal the capacity of each center  Number of item shipped from centers to retailers should be less than or equal the capacity of each retail stores  Number of item shipped from center to retail stores should be less than or equal 15000  Number of item shipped from centers to retailers should be less than or equal the number shipped to that center  We assume that the number of item shipped to one center will be equal the number of item shipped out of that center in a month.
  22. 22. Results are as following X Y Z W AA3 AB2 AC8 AD11 15000 15000 15000 15000 15000 15000 15000 15000 Comparing total cost Cost HCMC Can Tho Da Nang Ha Noi Fixed cost 500,000 450,000 500,000 600,000 Operating cost 20000 14000 16000 20000 Transportation 0 0 0 0 Holding cost at center 22800 40950 124500 241275 + TC plant-center Total 542800 504950 640500 861275
  23. 23. Based on the data analysis, the ABC Company should choose to build new plant in Cu Chi, and 2 distribution centers in HCMC and Can Tho to provide its products to HCMC, Can Tho, Da Nang, Ha Noi.

×