Analise de sensibilidade

Testes computacionais foram realizados com o intuito de analisar o comportamento do modelo e dos procedimentos heursticos ao deparar-se com algumas
situaco es adversas que poderiam ocorrer na pratica; por exemplo, alguns tanques estarem em manutenca o e nao poderem ser utilizados, ou ainda, a compra de novos tanques, como tambem a utilizaca o de algum recurso que propicie a aceleraca o do tempo de fermentaca o e maturaca o. Sendo assim, novas
instancias foram geradas a partir das 20 maiores instancias em dimensao. Estas
novas instancias foram geradas a partir da instancia original, alterando apenas o
numero de tanques ou a quantidade de dias necessarias para se completar o tempo
de fermentaca o e maturaca o:
- diminuir jos dias necess
karios para a fermentaca o/maturaca o em 10% de cada
original
lquido (l = l
x0.9 , l L)


- diminuir a quantidade de tanques em 5% (|O| = |Ooriginal |x0.95 )


- aumentar a quantidade de tanques em 5% (|O| = |Ooriginal |x1.05 )
 original

- aumentar a quantidade de tanques em 10% (|O| = |O
|x1.10 )
Para tais testes, o tempo de execuca o foi limitado em 3600 segundos para
todos os procedimentos. As heursticas tiveram o tempo maximo de 900 segundos
para a execuca o do relax-and-fix e o tempo restante foi utilizado pela combinaca o
dos procedimentos de melhoria fix-and-optimize. Analisou-se o Racio e o quao
a demanda nao conseguiu ser atendida. A analise do tempo de execuca o dos
procedimentos nao e relevamnet, visto que todos utilizaram o tempo limite para
a execuca o de todas as instancias. Nao foram realizados testes com variaco es de
custo de estoque e/ou de atraso, visto que qualquer alteraca o neste aspecto poderia
nao refletir o interesse principal da empresa: entrega da demanda.
Primeiramente, analisemos o comportamento para a resoluca o das 20 instancias
geradas a partir da reduca o do numero dej dias necessakrios para a completude do
original
estagio de fermentaca o e maturaca o l = l
x0.9 , l L, veja as Tabelas 1
e 2. Observe que mesmos com a reduca o do tempo de fermentaca o e maturaca o o
modelo apresenta dificuldade em encontrar uma boa soluca o quando comparados
a Pro Incr e Pro Dec, possuindo um Racio superior a 97% (Tabela 1) e com atraso
na entrega da demanda medio de 62,96%. Em seis casos com atraso de 100%, em
quatro com atraso entre 90%
j a 99.99%. kOu seja, metade das instancias geradas
original
pela alteraca o do l (l = l
x0.9 , l L) tiveram mais de 90% da entrega da demanda atrasada. Este fato nao ocorre com as soluco es obtidas pelas
1

Pro Incr e Pro Dec que entregam toda a sua demanda ate o final do horizonte de
planejamento.
As instancias geradas pela reduca o da quantidade de tanques em 5% mostrou
uma vantagem do modelo, pois este conseguiu obter uma soluca o viavel a todos os exemplares, enquanto Pro Incr e Pro Dec nao conseguiu encontrar uma
soluca o a tres deles. Ao analisarmos a qualidade das soluco es obtidas excluindose as tres instancias que nao foram resolvidas pelas heursticas, Pro Incr e Pro Dec
mostraram-se mais uma vez superiores com relaca o as soluco es obtidas pelo modelo. Pro Incr conseguiu obter soluco es que atendessem toda a demanda, enquanto
Pro Dec apresentou atraso para duas instancias, atrasos inferiores a 0,1%. Com
relaca o ao modelo, ha inumeros atrasos superiores a 90% da demanda.
Com
com o aumento
do numero de tanques
 relaca o as inst
ancias geradas


(|O| = |Ooriginal |x1.05 e |O| = |Ooriginal |x1.10 ), observa-se novamente a superioridade de Pro Incr e Pro Dec conseguindo atender toda demanda ate o final
do horizonte de planejamento, o que nao ocorre com as soluco es obtidas pelo
um melhor desempenho
medio para as
modelo. Nota-se que Pro Incr obteve
 original

instancias geradas a partir de |O| = |O
|x1.05 . Pro Incr foi melhor para
 original

|O| = |O
|x1.10 . E, mais uma vez, o Racio obtido pelo modelo foi inferior
ao das heursticas.
Resumidamente, ao analisarmos o Racio, observa-se a superioridade em qualidade de soluca o das heursticas, comparadas ao modelo. Dentre as heursticas,
ambas obtiveram um bom desempenho. Porem, em media destaca-se mais a qualidade das soluco es obtidas pelo procedimento Pro Incr. Entretanto, para as 80
novas instancias geradas, dentreas 20 geradas a partir da diminuica o do numero de
tanques (|O| = |Ooriginal |x0.95 ), tres delas nao foram resolvidas pelas heursticas.
Observa-se a dificuldade da resoluca o do modelo refletido no nao cumprimento
da demanda, mesmo quando estas
mais folgadas (por exemplo:
j apresentam-se
k
 original

original
|O| = |O
|x1.10 e l = l
x0.9 ). Com relaca o as heursticas,
a Proc Inc conseguiu atender toda a demanda (100%) ate o final do horizonte
de planejamento para todos os casos testados em que encontrou-se uma soluca o
viavel. Entretanto, a Proc Dec em pouqussimos casos nao conseguiu atender a
demanda e, quando isso acontecia, a taxa de demanda nao atendida ao final do
horizonte era inferior a 0,1%.

Average

40

35

Data

Average

40

35

Data

Average

40

35

Data

Model
97.89%
98.46%
98.93%
99.92%
98.72%
99.51%
99.93%
98.73%
99.92%
99.92%
99.89%
99.90%
99.90%
99.92%
99.80%
99.91%
99.92%
99.41%
99.87%
99.85%
99.51%

Model
97.89%
98.46%
98.93%
99.92%
98.72%
99.51%
99.93%
98.73%
99.92%
99.92%
99.89%
99.90%
99.90%
99.92%
99.80%
99.91%
99.92%
99.41%
99.87%
99.85%
99.51%

Model
97.89%
98.46%
98.93%
99.92%
98.72%
99.51%
99.93%
98.73%
99.92%
99.92%
99.89%
99.90%
99.90%
99.92%
99.80%
99.91%
99.92%
99.41%
99.87%
99.85%
99.51%

Proc Dec
26.22%
38.25%
27.75%
22.73%
37.95%
23.47%
30.88%
8.75%
32.77%
23.56%
84.69%
83.89%
6.85%
90.47%
38.11%
78.90%
64.30%
61.71%
60.20%
4.40%
42.29%

Proc Dec
26.22%
38.25%
27.75%
22.73%
37.95%
23.47%
30.88%
8.75%
32.77%
23.56%
84.69%
83.89%
6.85%
90.47%
38.11%
78.90%
64.30%
61.71%
60.20%
4.40%
42.29%

Proc Dec
26.22%
38.25%
27.75%
22.73%
37.95%
23.47%
30.88%
8.75%
32.77%
23.56%
84.69%
83.89%
6.85%
90.47%
38.11%
78.90%
64.30%
61.71%
60.20%
4.40%
42.29%

Proc Incr
0.00%
3.23%
0.00%
0.00%
4.41%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
53.19%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
3.04%

Original problem
Initial solution
Proc Incr
99.85%
0.00%
99.93%
3.23%
99.84%
0.00%
99.84%
0.00%
99.79%
4.41%
99.91%
0.00%
99.85%
0.00%
99.88%
0.00%
99.84%
0.00%
99.88%
0.00%
99.77%
0.00%
99.79%
0.00%
99.88%
0.00%
99.88%
0.00%
99.75%
53.19%
99.80%
0.00%
99.83%
0.00%
98.81%
0.00%
99.84%
0.00%
99.68%
0.00%
99.78%
3.04%

Original problem
Initial solution
Proc Incr
99.85%
0.00%
99.93%
3.23%
99.84%
0.00%
99.84%
0.00%
99.79%
4.41%
99.91%
0.00%
99.85%
0.00%
99.88%
0.00%
99.84%
0.00%
99.88%
0.00%
99.77%
0.00%
99.79%
0.00%
99.88%
0.00%
99.88%
0.00%
99.75%
53.19%
99.80%
0.00%
99.83%
0.00%
98.81%
0.00%
99.84%
0.00%
99.68%
0.00%
99.78%
3.04%

Initial solution
99.85%
99.93%
99.84%
99.84%
99.79%
99.91%
99.85%
99.88%
99.84%
99.88%
99.77%
99.79%
99.88%
99.88%
99.75%
99.80%
99.83%
98.81%
99.84%
99.68%
99.78%

Original problem

Model
97.27%
99.94%
99.93%
99.89%
99.93%
99.40%
99.63%
99.22%
98.95%
99.93%
99.89%
98.91%
99.89%
99.91%
99.90%
99.84%
99.29%
99.74%
99.22%
98.70%
99.47%

Model
99.03%
97.06%
99.92%
99.93%
99.93%
97.30%
96.28%
96.57%
99.93%
99.91%
99.88%
99.43%
99.36%
98.94%
99.85%
99.90%
99.91%
99.92%
99.86%
99.61%
99.13%

Model
0.00%
99.93%
98.40%
99.92%
99.91%
0.00%
98.12%
0.00%
99.89%
99.91%
99.92%
99.90%
99.88%
99.89%
99.90%
99.90%
99.90%
99.89%
99.89%
99.88%
84.75%

Proc Dec
5.61%
3.68%
78.06%
39.80%
41.00%
28.16%
69.33%
88.38%
33.96%
0.00%
42.89%
40.98%
39.90%
40.90%
71.12%
50.16%
25.68%
41.15%

Proc Dec
22.29%
7.91%
19.50%
18.75%
91.51%
12.13%
41.04%
14.68%
26.31%
9.17%
0.00%
0.00%
55.50%
9.42%
94.94%
59.92%
13.45%
88.40%
0.00%
75.08%
33.00%

Proc Dec
0.00%
0.00%
83.38%
49.96%
19.72%
40.23%
87.65%
7.34%
76.08%
69.02%
88.98%
75.95%
69.23%
12.76%
0.00%
67.03%
91.12%
37.03%
93.32%
44.22%
50.65%

Proc Incr
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
17.36%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
1.02%

l
m
|O| = |Ooriginal |x1.05
Initial solution
Proc Incr
99.87%
0.00%
99.87%
0.00%
99.83%
0.00%
99.84%
0.00%
99.70%
0.00%
99.75%
0.00%
99.86%
0.00%
99.85%
0.00%
99.84%
0.00%
99.88%
0.00%
99.75%
6.53%
99.81%
11.98%
99.68%
0.00%
98.92%
0.00%
99.83%
0.00%
99.78%
0.00%
99.83%
0.00%
99.83%
0.00%
99.70%
20.77%
99.79%
0.00%
99.76%
1.96%

j
k
original
= l
x0.9
Initial solution
Proc Incr
99.85%
4.48%
99.84%
5.03%
99.82%
0.00%
99.73%
0.00%
99.59%
0.00%
99.82%
0.00%
99.83%
0.00%
99.88%
0.00%
99.81%
0.00%
99.64%
0.00%
99.73%
0.00%
99.65%
0.00%
99.75%
0.00%
99.86%
0.00%
99.75%
24.21%
99.77%
0.00%
99.77%
0.00%
99.36%
0.00%
99.60%
0.00%
99.60%
0.00%
99.73%
1.69%

Initial solution
99.84%
99.80%
99.83%
99.87%
99.83%
99.78%
99.87%
99.83%
99.79%
99.77%
99.83%
99.79%
99.80%
99.80%
99.78%
99.76%
99.75%
99.81%

l
m
|O| = |Ooriginal |x0.95

Table 1: Add caption

Model
99.16%
95.71%
99.93%
99.91%
99.93%
97.81%
88.84%
99.39%
99.92%
99.90%
99.90%
99.45%
98.87%
99.47%
99.55%
99.90%
98.73%
99.92%
99.42%
90.73%
98.32%

l
m
|O| = |Ooriginal |x1.10
Initial solution
Proc Incr
99.86%
0.00%
99.87%
0.00%
99.84%
0.00%
99.81%
0.00%
99.63%
0.00%
99.85%
0.00%
99.85%
0.00%
99.89%
0.00%
99.83%
0.00%
99.53%
24.79%
99.78%
73.54%
99.71%
50.68%
98.87%
67.64%
99.48%
83.29%
99.81%
48.93%
99.80%
1.81%
99.58%
57.23%
99.83%
0.00%
99.75%
44.18%
99.71%
38.17%
99.71%
24.51%

Proc Dec
5.64%
9.44%
39.17%
27.91%
31.73%
11.03%
6.56%
17.54%
15.11%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
74.29%
0.00%
0.00%
11.92%

Average

40

35

Data

4.37%
7.37%
14.30%
100.00%
14.09%
17.14%
99.32%
14.23%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
99.48%
100.00%
98.88%
100.00%
98.80%
98.80%
100.00%
99.50%
98.84%
73.26%

Model
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%

0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.08%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.25%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.03%
0.00%
0.00%
0.02%

Original problem
Proc Incr
Proc Dec
14.14%
99.34%
10.67%
100.00%
100.00%
16.31%
7.78%
27.84%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
99.48%
100.00%
98.88%
100.00%
98.80%
98.80%
100.00%
99.50%
98.84%
78.52%

0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%

0.00%
0.10%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.01%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.01%

16.70%
7.19%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
5.50%
3.21%
5.99%
100.00%
87.64%
100.00%
28.12%
32.82%
35.85%
58.60%
98.83%
98.83%
100.00%
94.72%
38.73%
60.64%

0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%

0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%

13.51%
0.26%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
5.91%
1.46%
22.20%
100.00%
92.89%
100.00%
30.31%
28.83%
30.01%
27.00%
98.83%
29.11%
100.00%
31.61%
2.83%
50.74%

0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%

0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%

Undelivered demands after ending the planning horizon

l
m
l
m
l
m
original
|O| = |O
|x0.95
|O| = |Ooriginal |x1.05
|O| = |Ooriginal |x1.10
Model
Proc Incr
Proc Dec
Model
Proc Incr
Proc Dec
Model
Proc Incr
Proc Dec

Table 2: Add caption

6.86%
99.34%
100.00%
100.00%
100.00%
20.84%
26.12%
15.24%
11.69%
100.00%
92.88%
19.56%
95.38%
95.93%
100.00%
98.80%
22.86%
100.00%
32.67%
21.06%
62.96%

0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%

0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%
0.00%

k
j
original
x0.9
= l
Model
Proc Incr
Proc Dec