District commander Crawford aims to optimally assign 23 patrol units among 6 road segments based on 5 goals: 1) daily costs under $450, 2) reduce accidents by 5 per million miles, 3) 350 physical contacts daily, 4) 30,000 sight contacts daily, 5) average response time of 15 minutes. The optimal assignment was: segment 1 & 5 get 5 units, segment 2 & 6 get 2 units, segment 3 gets 4 units. Goals 1-3 were met but sight contacts were 4,900 short and response time was 15.96 minutes. Adding 1 more unit could meet all goals.
District commander Crawford aims to optimally assign 23 patrol units among 6 road segments based on 5 goals: 1) daily costs under $450, 2) reduce accidents by 5 per million miles, 3) 350 physical contacts daily, 4) 30,000 sight contacts daily, 5) average response time of 15 minutes. The optimal assignment was: segment 1 & 5 get 5 units, segment 2 & 6 get 2 units, segment 3 gets 4 units. Goals 1-3 were met but sight contacts were 4,900 short and response time was 15.96 minutes. Adding 1 more unit could meet all goals.
District commander Crawford aims to optimally assign 23 patrol units among 6 road segments based on 5 goals: 1) daily costs under $450, 2) reduce accidents by 5 per million miles, 3) 350 physical contacts daily, 4) 30,000 sight contacts daily, 5) average response time of 15 minutes. The optimal assignment was: segment 1 & 5 get 5 units, segment 2 & 6 get 2 units, segment 3 gets 4 units. Goals 1-3 were met but sight contacts were 4,900 short and response time was 15.96 minutes. Adding 1 more unit could meet all goals.
District commander Crawford aims to optimally assign 23 patrol units among 6 road segments based on 5 goals: 1) daily costs under $450, 2) reduce accidents by 5 per million miles, 3) 350 physical contacts daily, 4) 30,000 sight contacts daily, 5) average response time of 15 minutes. The optimal assignment was: segment 1 & 5 get 5 units, segment 2 & 6 get 2 units, segment 3 gets 4 units. Goals 1-3 were met but sight contacts were 4,900 short and response time was 15.96 minutes. Adding 1 more unit could meet all goals.
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1/ 6
Josh Stevens: Case Project #2
Case Project #2: Catawba Valley
Highway Patrol MS 5023: Decision Analysis and Production Management Due: March 21, 2016
Joshua Stevens Student ID: @01099386
Josh Stevens: Case Project #2
I. Executive Summary District commander Broderick Crawford of the Catawba Valley Highway Patrol (in western Pennsylvania) is attempting to assign a total of 23 highway patrol units to six distinctive various road segments throughout his district. Commander Crawford has intentions of assigning a designated number of patrol cars to each distinctive road segment by optimizing his fleet in a way that best suits five primary goals/ objectives (listed in order of importance): maintain operating costs to less than $450/day, reduce average accident rate for the district by five accidents per million miles traveled, achieve at least 350 physical contacts/ day and at least 30,000 sight contacts/ day by patrol units, and lower average response time to distress calls from 28 minutes to 15 minutes. By setting up a linear goal programming equation, placing the set-up in Microsoft Excel, and using Solver to create a solution that optimizes the priorities of the objectives of commander Crawford, we are able to provide a model of the number of patrol units to assign to each of the six varying road segments. Based on the requirements set-forth by commander Crawford, we are able to create an optimal solution that keeps operating costs less than $450/ day, reduces accidents by 5 per million miles traveled, maintains at least 350 sight contacts/ day, with at least 2 patrol units/ road segment; yet a maximum of 5 patrol units per road segment. We were short 4900 sight contacts/ day (from a 30,000 goal), and the average response rate was lowered from 28 minutes to 15.96 minutes.
Josh Stevens: Case Project #2
II. Formulation of Goal Programming
Problem/ Setup Catawba Valley Highway Patrol: x = Road Segment 1: interstate, north x = Road Segment 2: urban area, north x = Road Segment 3: four-lane highway, east x = Road Segment 4: two-lane highway, west x = Road Segment 5: interstate/four-lane highway, south x = Road Segment 6: two-lane highway (heavy truck traffic), south
Objectives (goals) in order of importance:
1.) Limit daily operating costs to $450
20x + 18x + 22x + 24x + 17x + 19x 450
2.) Reduce average accident rate for the district by 5 accidents per million miles traveled
0.27x + 0.21x + 0.28x + 0.19x + 0.23x + 0.33x 5
3.) Achieve 350 physical contacts per day
18x + 26x + 10x + 34x + 25x + 17x 350
4.) Achieve 30,000 sight contacts per day
1700x + 900x + 650x + 230x + 1600x + 520x 30000
5.) Achieve average response time to distress calls of 15 minutes
Recommendations Assignment of Catawba Valley highway patrol units as follows: x = Road Segment 1: 5 patrol units x = Road Segment 2: 5 patrol units x = Road Segment 3: 4 patrol units x = Road Segment 4: 2 patrol units x = Road Segment 5: 5 patrol units x = Road Segment 6: 2 patrol units
d = 4,900 sight contacts (we were unable to meet goal of 30,000
sight contacts by 4,900) d = 1 minute (rounded to nearest integer; response time from average of 28 minutes to average of 15.96 minutes)
As a result of the prioritization of the goals laid out by Commander
Crawford of the Catawba Valley Highway Patrol, a goal programming linear programming equation was set up in Microsoft Excel. The results (as laid out above) show the optimal number of patrol units to assign to the various segments of road. Based on the results, we were able to meet the most pressing objective of setting a limit daily operating costs to $450/ day, reduce the average accident rate of the district by five accidents per million
Josh Stevens: Case Project #2
miles traveled, and maintain at least 350 physical contacts per day by patrol unit officers. Unfortunately, we were unable to meet the fourth goal of 30,000 sight contacts by 4,900 contacts/ day: the sight contacts per day fall short at 25,100. We were also unable to meet the goal of reducing the average response time in the district to 15 minutes; the average response time would be 15.96 minutes based on the results of the goal programming solution. Upon further analysis/ exploration, if the Commander of the Catawba Valley Highway Patrol were to change his mind related to the maximum of 5 patrol units per road segment, and allowed one more unit to his patrol fleet (for a new total of 24 patrol units), he would be able to meet all five of his goals: operating costs would remain less than $450/day, average accident rate for the district will reduce by five accidents per million miles traveled, patrol units will achieve at least 350 physical contacts/ day, patrol units will achieve at least 30,000 sight contacts/ day, and the average response time to distress calls will lower from 28 minutes to 15 minutes.
V. References Gonzalez, D. J. (2016). Multicriteria Decision Making: Chapter 9. University of Texas at San Antonio. San Antonio. Retrieved February 29, 2016 Hosein, A. (2005, September 1). Two Variable Goal Programming Model with Priorities. Retrieved March 17, 2016, from http://prejudice.tripod.com/ME30B/two_gp.htm Ignizio, J. (1976). Goal Programing and Extensions. Lexington, Massachusetts: D.C. Health and Company. III, B. W. (2016). Introduction to Management Science (12 ed.). (E. Gate, Ed.) Harlow, Essex CM20 2JE, England: Pearson Education.
