AMO - Advanced Modeling and Optimization, Volume3, Number 1, 2001

Dynamic Multi-period Transportation Model for Vehicle Composition

with Transshipment Points
1
Qiu-Hong Zhao
a
, Shou-Yang Wang
b2
, K-K Lai
c
and Guo-Ping Xia
a
a
School of Economic & Management, Beijing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Beijing 100083, China
b
Institute of Systems Science, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Sciences
Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100080, China
c
Department of Management Sciences, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Abstract: In this paper, we present a multi-period dynamic programming (DP) model for vehicle
composition problems on fixed routes with transshipment points. An exact algorithm is developed
for the DP model. Based on some of the problems structural properties, the optimal solution can
be gained with reduced computational complexities. A few cases are given to prove the robustness
of our algorithm.
1 Introduction
In this paper, we study the vehicle composition problem on multi-period (VCMP). Transportation
in such a problem is accomplished by the use of company-owned vehicles and hired vehicles. In
each period, the vehicles travel continuously between two nodes on a fixed route so as to satisfy
the sales or production requirement. Examples of this transportation mode include the delivery of
material from the supplier to the production factory, or the delivery of products from the
manufacturer to the seaport at which the products are transferred to outward markets. Some
transshipment nodes may also be selected if the related transportation cost is lower or the
requirement can be satisfied. Transportation is mainly accomplished using company-owned
vehicles. However, it may be necessary for the company to hire vehicles so as to meet fluctuating
demand.
Due to the characteristics of continuous transportation in multi-periods, inventory occurs in
each period and the inventory costs have to be considered. The objective of this study is to
minimize the total cost of the vehicle transportation system for delivering the required cargoes on
the whole planning horizon.
1
Partially supported by a research grant of Hong Kong RGC, a research grant of City University of Hong Kong and a research
grant and the 100 Talent Program of Chinese Academy of Sciences.
2
Correspondence: Shou-Yang Wang, Institute of Systems Science, Academy of Mathematics and Systems Sciences, Chinese
Academy of Sciences, Beijing l00080, China. E-mail: sywang@iss02.iss.ac.cn
17
There has been a lot of literature dedicated to the study of transportation and logistics, but very
little discussed vehicle fleet composition with fixed routing on a multi-stage as well as on a
multi-period process. Etezadi and Beasley (1983) built a mixed-integer linear programming
model to find the optimal number of vehicles needed to supply a number of customers from a
central depot. The models objective is to minimize the total cost that consists of the fixed cost
associated with owning vehicles, hiring vehicles and the variable cost of delivery of the owned
and hired vehicles. Denardo, Rothblum and Swersey (1988) solved the problem of finding the
vehicle schedule which minimizes total inconvenience for travel along a fixed path, where service
times at nodes are constrained by time windows. Lai and Shirley (1991) presented a study on the
vehicle fleet size problem for a local supermarket in Hong Kong. Liu and Shen (1999) describe
several insertion-based savings heuristic algorithm for the fleet size and mixed vehicle routing
problem with time window constraints.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. A dynamic programming model for VCMP is
formulated in Section 2. In Section 3, we give some structure properties for the parameters and
use these properties to develop a DP algorithm. In Section 4, we give a number of special cases of
our model that can be solved with reduced computational complexity. We conclude the paper in
Section 5 with some future research directions.
2 Model
The VCMP problem mentioned above can be formulated as a mix-integer linear programming
model (P1) (see Appendix). Considering the complexity of the problem, it is difficult to solve it
when the parameters increase. In the paper, the problem is solved by two phases. In the first phase,
a mixed-integer linear programming model (P2) which considers only one period is set up to find
the optimal transport arrangement for the quantity to be delivered. Assume the number of the
variables in (P1) and (P2) are x
1
and x
2
respectively, and the planning horizon is P, then:
x
1
> x
2
.P
Due to the NP-hard attributes, the computation time of (P2) will decrease dramatically in
contrast with that of (P1) when the planning horizon is long. In our algorithm, the computation of
(P2) is repeated so as to cover the quantity that the vehicles may deliver in one period. And a
two-dimensional cost matrix can be found. In the second phase, The VCMP problem is
decomposed into some continuous sub problems based on a dynamic programming model. The
optimal solution can be achieved by the iteration of the dynamic process.
2.1 Assumptions
To formulate the model, we make the following assumptions.
1. Demand in each period is known beforehand. There is sufficient production capacity to
satisfy the transportation requirement. Backordering is not allowed.
2. The charge for the hired vehicles is calculated based on the hiring times. The number of the
18
hired vehicles in each type is infinite.
3. Only one transshipment point is considered.
4. The capacities of the vehicles are integer multiples of a constant , as is the requirement
quantity in each period.
5. The storage capacity is unlimited. There is no storage at the beginning and the end of the
planning horizon.
6. The loading and unloading time is included in the travel time. Different vehicles travel at the
same speeds.
2.2 DP model
2.2.1 A general model
Consider a planning horizon with P periods. Let d
p
and u
p
respectively denote the known
demand and the delivery quantity in period p; s
p
denotes the storage quantity at the end of period p,
1sps3.
The state movement formula is given below:
For each period p, denote f
p
(s
p
) as the minimum cumulative sum of the transportation and
inventory cost from 1 to p period with s
p
. c
p
(u
p
) represents the minimum cost to deliver u
p
, and
h
p-1
(s
p-1
) is the inventory cost at the beginning of period p. Then the DP recursions can be
expressed as follows:
t p p p
s d u s = +
1
(1)
} {

= =
+ + =

e
0
) ( ) ( ) ( min ) (
0
1 1 1 1
) (
P
p p p p p p
s D u
p p
s s
s f s h u c s f
p p p
(2)
Where D
p
(s
p
) is the set of decision variables u
p
with the storage quantity s
p
.
For each period p, c
p
(u
p
) as well as the corresponding transportation arrangement can be found
by solving a mixed-integer linear programming model (P2) illustrated in the next section.
2.2.2 A mixed-integer LP model
In the VCMP problem mentioned above, only three nodes and two circular routes need to be
considered for the company-owned vehicles. If we denote the nodes by n
1,
n
2
and n
3
respectively,
Figure 1 shows the routes between these nodes.
Transshipment point
r
2
r
1
n
3
n
1
n
2
Figure 1. The nodes and the routes
19
In each period, the vehicles departure from n
1
where the company locate, taking cargoes from
either n
2
or n
3
, and come back. For the sake of simplicity, we assume the delivery from n
2
to n
3
are
accomplished by the vehicles belonging to n
2
and the corresponding costs as well as the charge for
using the transshipment point are calculated into the transportation cost on r
2
. In our problem, the
charge for the hired vehicles is calculated based on the hiring times, so we need not consider
which routes may be employed.
The decision variable c
p
(u
p
) in the DP model is found by solving a mixed-integer LP model
(P2). The following are parameters using in the model.
Set and subscripts:
I: set of the company-owned vehicles;
J: set of the type of hired lorries;
i: index of company-owned lorry;
j: index of the type of hired lorry;
r: index of routes.
Constants:
v
i
: capacity of company-owned lorry i;
v
j
: capacity of hired lorry of type j;
c
ir
: transport cost of lorry i on route r;
c
j
: hiring cost of type j;
t
r
: travel time on route r;
w: permitted working duration for the company-owned lorry.
u
p
: quantity need to be delivered.
Variables:
N
ir
: travel times of lorry i along route r;
Q
i
: quantity to be delivered by lorry i;
N
j:
number of hired lorries of type j being used;
Q
j
: quantity to be delivered by hired lorries of type j;
The mixed-integer linear programming model (P2) can be expressed as follows:
minimize Z=
_ __
+
j
j j ir
i r
ir
N c N c
(3)
subject to
I i N v Q
ir
r
i i
e s s
_
, 0
(4)
(5) J j N v Q
j j j
e s s , 0
p
j
j
i
i
u Q Q = +
_ _ (6)
I i w N t
r
ir r
e s
_
, (7)
20
integers are and
j ir
N N
In this formulation, Constraints (4) and (5) state that the delivery cartons cannot exceed the
transportation ability of the corresponding lorries. Constraint (7) ensures that the total travel time
of lorry i falls within the working time limitation.
(8)
In our paper, the LP model is implemented by using LINGO ver.6.01 on a 586 machine running
at 330 MHZ.
3 Two Structure Properties and a DP Algorithm
The computation size of the DP model will still be large considering that both the state
variables and decision variables are of a large quantity. For example, the state variable s
p
in period
p may change from 0 to
3
LS
d
i
. For each s
p
, the range of decision variable u
p
is [0, d
p
+s
p
]. It
seems unreasonable to solve the DP model within a reasonable time under such conditions.
However, based on some structural properties of the parameters, the models computation size can
be reduced dramatically.
The following are some properties helpful in constructing the DP algorithm.
Property 1. The minimum cost and the optimal transportation arrangements of (P2) for
delivering quantity u
p
will not change until u
p
is larger than u
p
. u
p
can be calculated as follows:
(9) __ _
+ =
i r j
j ir i p
N N v u '
where N
ir
and N
j
are the optimal decision variables of (P2) given delivery quantities u
p
.
It is easy to verify Property 1 considering the constant property of the trip cost of the vehicles.
According to Property 1, we can classify {u
p
D
p
(s
p
)} into several continuous subsets in each of
which the minimum transportation cost is constant. If denote [u
i
, u
j
] as one of the subset of set u
p
,
u
p
D
p
(s
p
), for any u
i
su
x
s u
j
,
) ( ) ( ) (
j p x p i p
u c u c u c = =
Since s
p-1
=s
p
+d
p
-u
p
, then
) | ( ) | ( ) | (
1 1 1 1 1 1 i p p p x p p p j p p p
u u s h u u s h u u s h = s = s =

) | ( ) | ( ) | (
1 1 1 1 1 1 i p p p x p p p j p p p
u u s f u u s f u u s f = s = s =

Set K={u
J
|u
j
= max[u
i
, u
j
], [u
i
, u
j
] D
p
(s
p
)}, then
(10) )} | ( ) | ( ) ( { min ) (
1 1 1 1 j p p p j p p p j p
K u
p p
u u s f u u s h u c s f
t
= + = + =

e
With Equation (10), the computation size of f
p
(s
p
) can be reduced by considering a few discrete
points.
Property 2. In the optimal solution, the decision variable u
p
e{d
min
-v
maz
,d
maz
+v
maz
}, and the
state variables s
p
sd
max
. Where d
maz
and d
min
are the highest and lowest demand on the planning
horizon respectively, v
maz
represents the largest capacity of the vehicles.
21
Since it is cost ineffective to storage cargoes for the next period by using one vehicle that is at
leisure or still has surplus time over the next period, the optimal transport quantity in each period
should not be lower than the minimum demand nor higher than the maximum demand.
Considering that the vehicles may deliver with full capacity to escape partial loading, the largest
capacity constraint is added. The constraint on the storage variable is present for the same reason.
The more formal statements of our algorithm are as follows:
Step 1. Classify the decision variable u
p
e{d
min
-v
maz
, d
maz
+v
maz
} into several continuous subsets
so that the optimal arrangement and the transport cost in each of the subsets is constant. Construct
a two-dimensional matrix with the value of the right node of each subset and the corresponding
transport cost. Note the matrix as M.
Step 2. For each {s
p
|0s s
p
s d
max
, s
p
is the integer multiple of } in period p, compute f
p
(s
p
)
according to Equation (10). The value of c
p
(u
p
) is gained from matrix M, where u
p
eD
p
(s
p
)=
[d
min
-v
maz
,d
maz
+v
maz
][d
p
+s
p
-d
max
, d
p
+s
p
]. If p<P, repeat Step 2.
Step 3. Run the DP model with s
P
=0. Then the final optimal solution is found by following back
the results from Period P to Period 1.
4 Two Cases
The DP algorithm is coded in Turbo C running on the 586 personal computer and tested on two
randomly generated instances. In the first case, the planning horizon is seven days, there are six
company-owned vehicles with different capacities and costs. There are four types of hired
vehicles. Table 1 shows the parameters in this situation.
The transportation quantities considered in the first problem change from 1200 to 8300; the
number of subsets of the delivery quantities is 143; the constant is 50. The problem is solved
under two different storage costs as well as under two kinds of demand distribution: random
demand (as shown in Table 1) and increased demand. The results are listed in Table 2 and Table 3.
The result shows that the storage quantities increase when the storage cost falls from 0.67 to
0.20. The total cost of the optimal solution under two storage costs increase with the increased
demand.
In the second problem, we assume the planning horizon for the problem is 16 days, and there
are 12 company-owned vehicles with different capacities and costs. There are six types of hired
vehicles. Table 4 shows the parameters for the second case.
Table 1 Parameters for the first case
Variable parameters
d d
1
=2000 d
2
=4000 d
3
=3500 d
4
=7500 d
5
=2500 d
6
=4000 d
7
=5000
Company-owned
vehicles
v
i
c
ir1
c
ir2
i
1
100
400
450
i
2
200
660
780
i
3
250
740
850
i
4
350
940
1000
i
5
400
1140
1280
i
6
500
1320
1560
Hired vehicles
v
j
c
j
j
1
200
100
j
2
350
1550
j
3
450
2000
j
4
800
3500
t
r
t
r1
=7 t
r2
=4
W 12
22
Table 2 Optimal solution for the first case with random demands
c
s
=0.67
Day
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Vehicles and the
routes used
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
i
2.1,
i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.2
i
1.1
,i
1.2
,i
2.2
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.2
i
1.1
,i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
1.1
,i
2.1
,i
2.2
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.2
Hired vehicle
Used
j
3
=j
4
=1
u
p
2050
3950
4450
6550
2550
3950
5000
s
p
50
0
950
0
50
0
0
f
p
(s
p
)
5800
17804
31574
54970
62330
74330
90240
Cpu (sec.)
103
c
s
=0.20
Day
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Vehicles and the
routes used
i
2.1
,i
3.1
, i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.2
i
1.1
,i
2.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.2
i
3.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
, i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
2.1
,i
2.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.2
Hired vehicle
used
u
p
3300
4450
4450
4800
3100
3950
4450
s
p
1300
1750
2700
0
600
550
0
f
p
(s
p
)
9700
23730
37850
53520
62560
74650
88530
Cpu (sec.)
106
Table 3 Optimal solution for the first case with increased demands
c
s
=0.67
Day
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Vehicles and the
routes used
i
3.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
i
3.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.2
i
3.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
1.1
,i
1.2
,i
2.1
,i
2.2
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2,
i
6.2
Hired
vehicle
Used
j
4
=3
u
p
2200
2700
3300
4050
3950
5000
7500
s
p
0
200
0
50
0
0
0
f
p
(s
p
)
5680
13440
23270
35624
47627
63537
90357
Cpu (sec.)
104
c
s
=0.20
Day
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Vehicles and the
routes used
i
3.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
3.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1,
i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2,
i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
,i
3.2
,i
4.2
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
6.2
Hired vehicle
used
u
p
2700
3100
3550
4450
4700
5000
5000
s
p
700
1300
1350
1800
2500
2500
0
f
p
(s
p
)
7760
16940
27750
41970
56800
73290
89700
Cpu (sec.)
106
Table 4 Parameters for the second example
Variable Parameters
d d
1
=4000
d
9
=14500
d
2
=3000
d
10
=9500
d
3
=4000
d
11
=6650
d
4
=8500
d
12
=6500
d
5
=7500
d
13
=9300
d
6
=12500
d
14
=13650
d
7
=4000
d
15
=10000
d
8
=8000
d
16
=9000
company-owned
vehicles
v
i
c
ir1
c
ir2
i
1
100
400
450
i
2
200
660
780
i
3
250
740
850
i
4
300
900
1000
i
5
400
1100
1280
i
6
400
1100
1280
i
7
500
1480
2050
i
8
500
1480
2050
i
9
650
1900
2150
i
10
650
1900
2150
i
11
800
2350
2500
i
12
800
2350
2500
hired vehicles
v
j
c
j
j
1
200
900
j
2
350
1450
j
3
450
1800
j
4
800
3300
j
5
1050
3970
j
6
1250
4200
t
r
t
r1
=9 t
r2
=5
W 14
23
The transportation quantities considered in the second problem change from 1750 to 15750,
and the number of subsets of delivery quantities is 281. The constant is 50. The problem is
solved under two different storage costs: 0.67 and 0.20. The results are listed in Table 5 and Table
6 respectively.
The results show that the total storage quantities increase whereas the total cost decreases if the
storage costs fall from 0.67 to 0.20. This is because the vehicles can save on transportation costs
by storing cartons beforehand.
Computational experiments with different sizes of the problem have shown that the
computational time is mainly affected by the largest demand in the planning horizon, and the
number of the planning periods as well as the number of the vehicles considered also affect the
computational efficiency.
Table 5 Optimal solution of the second example with c
s
=0.67
c
s
=0.67
Day
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Vehicles and the routes used
i
3.1
,i
4.1
, i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
9.1
,i
11.1,
i
12.1
i
3.1
, i
4.1
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
11.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
4.1
, i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
9.1
,i
11.1,
i
12.1
i
2.1
,i
3.1
, i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1,
i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1
,i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
3.2
, i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1,
i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1
,i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
4.1
, i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1
,i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
4.1
, i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
9.1
,i
11.1,
i
12.1
i
1.1
,i
3.1
, i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,
i
8.1
,i
9.1
,i
9.2
,i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
1.1
,i
3.1
, i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,
i
8.1
,i
9.1
,i
9.2
,i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
3.2
, i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
i
2.1
,i
31
, i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
i
3.1
,i
3.2
, i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
1.1
,i
3.1
i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1.
i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,i
7.2,
i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
Hired
vehicle
used
j
5
=1
j
5
=5
j
5
=5
j
6
=1
j
5
=2
j
4
=1
j
5
=1
j
5
=6
j
5
=2
j
5
=1
u
p
4000
3000
4000
8500
7500
12500
4000
8000
14500
9600
6450
6650
9100
13650
10000
9000
s
p
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
50
200
0
0
0
0
f
p
(s
p
)
11440
19980
31420
56820
78970
117470
128910
152710
197810
226650
245520
265010
292384
334670
365000
392060
Cpu
(sec.)
1130
5 Conclusions
This paper considers vehicle composition problem with transshipment point on multi-period
(VCMP). The problems complexity prevents use of the general exact algorithm to solve it under
practical size. In this paper, we formulate a dynamic programming model geared to the
24
multi-stage attribute of the problem. In the DP model, the problem is solved with two phases. At
first, a mixed-integer linear programming model (P2) with fewer constraints than (P1) (see
Appendix) is set up to find the optimal transport arrangement in one period. The VCMP problem
is then decomposed into some continuous sub-problems based on a dynamic programming model.
The optimal solution can be achieved by the iteration of the dynamic process. Based on some
structural properties of the optimal solution, our model can be solved with reduced computational
complexity. A few cases are given, and these prove the robustness of our algorithm.
One possible extension of our model is to consider more delivery routes. Effective search
processes for DP model with fixed costs are expected so as to reduce the computation time as well
as extend the application of the model. More research is also needed to identify efficiently
solvable special instances
Table 6 Optimal solution of the second example with c
s
=0.20
c
s
=0.20
Day
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Vehicles and the routes used
i
3.1
,i
4.1
, i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
9.1
,i
11.1,
i
12.1
i
4.1
,i
4.1
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
101.1,
i
11.1
i
1.1
,i
2.1
i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
12.1
i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
4.1
, i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1
,i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
1.1
,i
2.1
i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
12.1
i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
4.1
, i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1
,i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
3.2
, i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
i
3.1
,i
3.2
, i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
2.1,
i
3.1
,i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1
,i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
3.1
,i
3.2
, i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
5.2
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
, i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
i
2.1
,i
3.1
i
4.1
,i
4.2
,i
5.1
,i
6.1
,i
7.1
,i
7.2,
i
8.1
,i
9.1
,
i
10.1
,i
11.1,
i
11.2
,i
12.1
,i
12.2
Hired
vehicle
used
j
5
=5
j
5
=6
j
5
=2
j
5
=2
j
5
=6
j
5
=2
j
5
=1
u
p
4000
2950
5450
7250
7250
12500
5450
7250
13800
9600
6450
6450
9600
13750
9600
9000
s
p
0
50
1500
250
0
0
1450
700
0
100
50
0
300
400
0
0
f
p
(s
p
)
11600
19960
35650
57250
78600
117100
132660
154250
197180
226020
244840
263650
292490
335150
364070
391130
Cpu
(sec.)
1128
Appendix
The following is the mixed-integer linear programming model (P1) for VCMP.
Set and subscripts:
I: the set of existing company-owned vehicles;
J: the set of types of hired lorries;
25
P: the set of working periods in the planning horizon;
R: the set of routes company-owned vehicles employ;
i: index of company-owned lorries;
j: index of type of hired lorry;
p: index of working period, p=1,.,P;
r: index of route company-owned vehicles can employ
Constants:
v
i
: capacity of company-owned lorry i;
v
j
: capacity of hired lorry of type j;
c
ir
: variable cost of lorry i on route r.
c
j
: hiring cost of single lorry of type j;
c
s
: inventory cost of unit product per period;
d
p
: sales requirement on period p;
t
r
: travel time of any lorry i on route r;
w: permitted working duration for any company-owned lorry each period.
Variables:
N
irp
: travel times of lorry i along route r on period p;
Q
ip
: quantity to be delivered by lorry i on period p;
N
jp:
number of hired lorries of type j used on period p;
Q
jp
: quantity to be delivered by hired lorries of type j on period p;
u
p:
delivery quantity on period p;
s
p
: inventory quantity on period p.
Mathematical formulation (P1):
minimize Z= (11)
p
p
s
p
jp
j
j irp
p i r
ir
s c N c N c
_ __ ___
+ +
subject to
P p I i N v Q
irp
r
i ip
e e s s
_
, , 0
(12)
P p J j N v Q
jp j jp
e e s s , , 0
(13)
P p Q Q u
j
jp
i
ip p
e + =
_ _
, (14)
(15) P p s d u s
p p p p
e = +

, 0
1
P p I i w t N
r
r irp
e e s
_
, , .
(16)
(17)
0
0
= =
P
s s
26
(18)
P p s
p
e > , 0
N
irp
and N
jp
are integers (19)
In this formulation, Constraints (12) and (13) state that the delivery cartons cannot exceed the
transportation ability of the corresponding lorries. Constraint (15) specifies that the total delivery
quantity on a particular period plus the quantities stored should satisfy the sales requirement for
quantity during that period. Constraint (16) ensures that the total travel time of lorry i cannot
exceed the working duration each period. Finally, technological constraints on the decisions are
enforced through constraint sets (17) to (19).
References
Etezadi,T. and Beasley,J.E.(1983), Vehicle fleet composition, Journal of the Operational Research
Society, 34 (1), 87-91.
Denardo,E.V., Rothblum,U.G. and Swersey,A.J.(1988), A transportation problem in which costs
depend on the order of arrival, Management Science, 34 (6),774-783.
Saksena,J.P. and Ramachanran,A.(1986), An optimal fleet utilization problem, European Journal
of Operational Research, 25,406-420.
Lai,C.H and Shirley (1991), A vehicle fleet size study for a local supermarket, Department of
Applied Statistics and Operational Research, City Polytechnic of Hong Kong.
Larson,R.C., Minkoff,A. and Gregory,P.(1983), Fleet sizing and dispatching in New York City,
Routing and Scheduling of Vehicle and Crews, the State of Art, 395-423.
Lam, William,H.K. and Huang,H.J.(1992), A combined trip distribution and assignment model
for multiple users classes, Transportation Research, Part B ,Methodological, 26B (8), 275-287.
Alfa,A.S.(1986), A review of models for the temporal distribution of peak traffic demand,
Transportation Research, Part B, Methodological, 20B9 (12), 491-499.
Sun,M.H., Aronson,J.E., McKeown,P.G. and Drinka,D.(1998), A tube search heuristic procedure
for the fixed charge transportation problem, European Journal of Operational Research,
106,425-436.
Guelat,J., Florian,M. and Crainic,T.G.(1990), A multimode multi-product network assignment
model for strategic planning of freight flows, Transportation Science, 24 (2), 25-39.
Current,J.R.(1988), The design of a hierarchial transportation network with transshipment
facilities, Transportation Science, 22 (11),270-277.
Daganzo,C.F. and Newell,G.F.(1993), Handling operations and the lot size trade-off,
Transportation Research, Part B, Methodological, 27B (3), 167-183.
Cruz,F.R.B., MacGregor,J. and Mateus,G.R.(1999), Algorithms for a multi-level network
27
optimization problem, European Journal of Operational Research, 118 (1),164-180.
Liu, F.H. and Shen, S.Y.(1999), The fleet size and mix vehicle routing problem with time
windows, Journal of the Operational Research Society, 50,721-732.
28