Indexing Structures in Database Management system.pdf
Report of qm project group 15
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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. 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. Distance
HCMC Can Tho Da Nang
Ha Noi
Distance (km)
HCMC
Transportation cost
($/product)
(km)
Kien Giang
248
37.2
Plant-
Can Tho
168
25.2
center
Vung Tau
129
19.35
Cu Chi
Binh Thuan
190
28.5
Khanh Hoa
441
66.15
Binh Dinh
649
97.35
Da Nang
872
130.8
Hue
1097
164.55
Nghe An
1323
198.45
Ha Noi
1710
256.5
Lai Chau
1996
299.4
Hai Phong
1639
245.85
Lang Son
1761
264.15
Cao Bang
1886
282.9
TC
Holding
cost at
centers
60
1.5
0.02
181
2.715
0.015
829
8.29
0.01
1606
16.06
0.025
17. Distance (km)
Can Tho
Transportation cost
Distance (km)
Da Nang
($/product)
Transportation cost
($/product)
Kien Giang
128
12.8
Kien Giang
1246
149.52
HCMC
168
16.8
Can Tho
1032
123.84
Vung Tau
293
29.3
HCMC
872
104.64
Binh Thuan
366
36.6
Vung Tau
851
102.12
Khanh Hoa
616
61.6
Binh Thuan
759
91.08
Binh Dinh
854
85.4
Khanh Hoa
539
64.68
Da Nang
1032
103.2
Binh Dinh
290
34.8
Hue
1265
126.5
Hue
87
10.44
Nghe An
1371
137.1
Nghe An
568
68.16
Ha Noi
1877
187.7
Ha Noi
763
91.56
Lai Chau
1946
194.6
Lai Chau
1110
133.2
Hai Phong
1650
165
Hai Phong
784
94.08
Lang Son
1767
176.7
Lang Son
952
114.24
Cao Bang
1897
189.7
Cao Bang
1031
123.72
18. Distance (km)
Ha Noi
Transportation cost
Location
Distance
Holding cost at
($/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
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. 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. 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.
