STAT804 Optimization and Operations Research
Semester 2, 2023
Project

This project is based on the case study provided by SUEZ Smart Solutions NZ in class on 21 August 2023. It will contribute 40% towards the final mark for STAT804.

Project Aim: Build the most cost-effective 24 hour schedule for Suez Town water distribution network and conduct cost-benefit analysis to explore the impact of pump upgrades and a lockdown.

Summary of Deliverables:

Each group must complete:

Presentation	To be held between 10am and 4pm on Monday 25th September 2023 Upload slides by 10am 25th Sept. 2023	25 marks
Report	Due: 11:59pm Sunday 24th September 2023	55 marks
Each individual must complete:
Self and Peer Evaluation (mid point)	Due: 11pm Thursday 1st September 2022	0 marks
Individual Contribution Statement	Due: 11:59pm Sunday 24th September 2023	0 marks
Self and Peer Evaluation (end of project)	Due: 11:59pm Sunday 1st October 2023	0 marks
Individual Reflective Report	Due: 11:59pm Sunday 1st October 2023	20 marks

1 Group Work

Students will be assigned to a group in week 6. A Canvas group will be created so group members can communicate and share files. A mark will be awarded to the group based on the quality of the report (see section 5.1) and presentation (see section 5.2). This mark may be adjusted for each individual based on the “individual contribution statement” and the “self and peer evaluation” detailed below. If extenuating circumstances (e.g. illness) impede your contribution to your group, you should submit a special consideration application, refer to section 3 below. Groups should report any members not contributing to the project to the lecturer as soon as possible.

2 Late Assignments

Failure to submit the written components (group report and individual reflective report) of this assignment on time will result in a penalty in accordance with the DCT late policy (i.e. 5% per day up to 5 days). Failure to participate in the presentations on the scheduled day will result in a mark of 0 for that part of the project.

3 Special Consideration

If extenuating circumstances (e.g. illness) prevent the timely submission of, or your participation in, any part of this assignment (including the presentation) you can apply for special consideration. You may also apply if such circumstances result in your submission being incomplete. Applications for special consideration should be submitted via Canvas and are processed by the DCT Faculty Office.

4 Originality

Assignments that show similarities to work submitted by other individuals/groups will be investigated for plagiarism and treated very seriously. Plagiarism software, such as Turnitin, may be used to electronically compare submissions to those of other students and to documents on the internet. Talk to the lecturer if you have any questions about this requirement.

5 Group Tasks (80 marks)

5.1 Report (55 marks)

Each group should nominate one group member to upload the following to Canvas by the due date.

• 1 PDF file containing the group report.

The report should contain the following elements:

– Title page

– Abstract (150 – 250 words)

– Acknowledgements (optional)

– Table of Contents

– Introduction (0.5 – 1 pages)

– Schedule Optimisation

* Model Formulation (max 2 pages)

* Model Implementation (max 1 page)

* Model Solution (max 3 pages)

* Model Extensions (max 3 pages per extension)

– Cost Benefit Analysis

* Pump Upgrade Analysis (max 3 pages)

* Lockdown Demand Analysis (max 3 pages)

– Conclusion (1 – 2 pages)

– References

– Appendix A: Individual Contribution Statements

– Standard elements of a report: page numbers, figure/table captions.

• 1 zip file of the project directory containing the SAS program files, data files and other code files.

– All SAS program files should run on any computer (relative referencing only).

– All datasets should be provided.

– Use relative referencing to refer to datasets and libraries. (See guide on Canvas)

– Use comments within your code where appropriate.

– SAS code will be assessed based on its accuracy and elegance.

– If other code is used (e.g. R code), this also should be included.

Detailed Requirements & Marking Criteria

1.Introduction

The introduction should contain relevant background information and clearly state the purpose and scope of the report.

2. Schedule Optimization

A mixed integer linear programming model should be developed to obtain the most cost-effective 24 hour schedule for Suez Town water distribution network, while making sure each tank ends up with the same or similar volume of water as in the beginning of the day (starts at 6:00am).

(a)Model Formulation

The decision variables, constraints and objective function of the model should be clearly defined, using a mixture of words and mathematical notation, as required. A mathematical formulation of the model should also be provided. Assumptions should be clearly defined and justified.

The model should:

• meet the requirements specified by the client in the case study brief.

• ensure that each tank ends up with the same or similar volume of water as in the beginning of the day.

(b)Model Implementation in SAS

The model should be implemented with proc optmodel in SAS and used to obtain the most cost-effective 24 hour schedule for Suez Town water distribution network.

Notes:

• Any data manipulation (either before/after optimisation in SAS) can be done in software of your choice. However, it must be “reproducible” and any code used should be included in the zip file.

• Marks will be awarded for correct and elegant implementation of the model in SAS, and clear and logical presentation of the solution. Elegant code is easy to read, simple, concise, efficient, generalisable, minimises “hard coding of variables”, and well-commented.

• SAS code is not required within the report, but all SAS files should be included in the zip file submitted.

The results of the optimisation model should be presented in the report and accompanied by appropriate interpretation/discussion. The results should include:

• A schedule which specifies:

– Times and levels at which pumps should be operated.

– Times and levels at which valves should be open.

• The cost of the schedule.

• Graph/s of the water level of each tank over the 24 hour period (along with minimum and maximum allowable levels),

• Graph/s of the pump and valve levels over the 24 hour period (along with minimum and maximum allowable levels),

• An interpretation/discussion of the schedule.

Notes:

• Figures and tables etc. can be developed using software of your choice.

• Any figures and tables etc. should be clearly and professionally presented. Do not use screenshots of code or output in the report.

(d) Model Extensions

The case study brief includes two “extensions” regarding the operation of the source and pumps.

For each extension:

• Provide a modified problem formulation, including the mathematical formulation,

• Implement the model in SAS and provide the corresponding solution,

• Discuss/interpret the solution.

3. Cost Benefit Analysis

The model created in part 2 should be used to analyse the following two issues:

(a)Pump Upgrades: What benefit could be achieved by upgrading some or all of the pumps to more efficient modern pumps?

(b)Lockdown demand analysis: The town is in lockdown and this has resulted in a change in demand. How is the optimisation affected?

Refer to the case study brief for further details about these issues.

The cost benefit analysis conducted should investigate these issues and provide useful insights to a manager at Suez Town council. Appropriate graphs, statistics and explanations should be included.You can use software of your choice to do the cost benefit analysis.

Note: if you incorporated the extension(s) in part 2d, you should use the extended model to conduct the cost benefit analysis.

4.Conclusion

The conclusion should summarise the key findings and make recommendations based on the schedule optimisation and cost benefit analysis. Recommendations to the client should be sensible and backed up by appropriate analysis. Limitations of the analysis and suggestions for future work should also be discussed.

5. Report Structure & Quality

Report should be well-written, clearly structured, and contain all the required elements. No grammatical or spelling errors should be present. Any sources used should be correctly referenced using APA style 1 . A minimum font size of 11 points should be used for paragraph text.

6. Appendix A: Individual Contribution Statement

Together the group should agree on a percentage allocation of the work undertaken and should state this at the start of Appendix A. This information, along with the Individual Contribution Statement and the Self and Peer Evaluation, will be used to determine the marks allocated to each group member. The percentages must sum to 100%.

Example percentage allocation: Person A 25%, person B 30%, person C 20%, and person D 25%.

Each group member should write 200-300 words detailing their individual contribution to this project. These statements should be collated and included in the report. Marks are not awarded for this statement but if it is absent it will result in a deduction of marks for the corresponding group member.

5.2 Presentation (25 marks)

Each group should nominate one group member to upload the presentation slides/materials to the group submission page on Canvas by the due date. Do not submit a zip file.

• Presentations should be 20 minutes long.

• Following each presentation, there will be 5 minutes for Q&A.

• All team members should participate in the presentation.

• The presentation should be aimed at an data science manager who has some knowledge of optimisation models, but is also interested in the key insights for Suez.

• If you successfully incorporated the extension(s) in part 2d, you should present the findings from the extended model in the presentation, rather than the original model.

Detailed Requirements & Marking Criteria

1.Presentation Content

The presentation should demonstrate a good understanding of the case study and should highlight the key insights from the optimisation and the cost benefit analysis. Conclusions/recommendations from the analysis should be provided.

2.Presentation Mechanics & Style

The presentation has a clear and logical structure, flows well with points clearly linked, and adheres to the time limit. Visual aids (e.g. slides) are useful to the audience and are well laid out and accurate with correct spelling and grammar.
6 Individual Tasks (20 marks)

Each individual should complete:

• A self and peer evaluation at the mid-point (complete in Canvas),

• A self and peer evaluation at the end of the project (complete in Canvas),

• An individual reflective report (upload to Canvas).

6.1 Self and Peer Evaluation (0 marks)

Each group member should complete the self and peer evaluation (S&PE) via Canvas twice - once at the mid-point and once at the end of the project. Marks will not be awarded for this task, however failure to complete it will result in a mark of 0 for the assignment. The results of the S&PE will be used by the lecturers to determine how the members in each group have worked together. The results will not be released to students.

The mid-point S&PE will be used by the lecturers to determine how the groups are working together and whether or not any intervention is required. The results of mid-point S&PE will not directly influence the final grades in the project.

The end-of-project S&PE will be used to determine how the groups have worked together throughout the project. The results will be used, along with the individual contribution statements, to determine the marks that each individual will receive for the report and presentation.

6.2 Individual Reflective Report (20 marks)

In this part of the assignment you will write a reflective report about what you have learnt during this project. It should illustrate an ability to reflect upon your experiences and show awareness of your own

personal and professional growth as a result of the project. It should not be a description of what you did, but rather a critical evaluation of the success of the project, your performance in the project and your experience of undertaking the project. As part of this critical evaluation it is expected that you will reference the required reading and at least one other piece of relevant literature.

In the reflective statement it is okay to talk about things that did not go well, as these circumstances often provide rich learning experiences. The reflective statement should be written in the first person, i.e. “In this project, I ... ”.

Detailed Requirements & Marking Criteria

1.Introduction

The introduction should introduce the report and set out the structure for the remainder of the report. (100 - 200 words)

2.Three Learning Points (5 marks each)

You should identify three learning points from the case study. One learning point should be about

the technical aspects of the project (e.g. MILP, LP, SAS etc.), one should be about the social aspects

of the project (e.g. team work, working for a client etc), and the third can be about a topic of your choice.

For each learning point, write 200 - 300 words addressing the following points2 :

• What actually happened?

• What went well? Why?

• What did not go well? Why?

• What would you change if you could do this case study again?

• Is there anything you will do differently in the future? How will you apply what you have learnt

in your future work/study?

3.Conclusion (150 - 300 words)

The conclusion should summarise the key points from your report and briefly discuss future opportunities for your personal and professional development.

4.Presentation, Quality, and Literature

The reflective report should be well-written and clearly structured. No grammatical or spelling errors should be present. Appropriate literature should be incorporated into the statement. Any sources used should be correctly referenced using APA style 3