Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multiple Train Repositioning Operations in a Railyard Network

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Operations Research Forum Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper considers the simultaneous movement of multiple trains within a railyard network, where each of a number of trains has an origin location and destination location on the network. We wish to minimize the total time required to move all trains from their origin to destination locations, while ensuring that at most one train occupies each track segment at any given time. We propose an integer programming model that is able to solve small problem instances exactly, as well as a heuristic solution method for solving problems of realistic size in acceptable computing time. Our constructive heuristic approach uses a ranked priority list of trains that require repositioning, and sequentially determines a route on the network for each train in priority order. We then relax the strict priority ordering rule by applying a Greedy Randomized Adaptive Search Procedure (GRASP) based on the underlying constructive heuristic. As we demonstrate via a set of computational tests, this heuristic approach is able to find good quality feasible solutions in fast computing time, drastically reducing the labor hours typically dedicated to routinely solving this problem in practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Notes

  1. A cycle in a rail network that does not require a train to traverse an acute angle using a double-back move is called an acute-angle-free (AAF) cycle. Such AAF cycles are sometimes used in a rail network to reverse a train’s orientation on the network. We assume that the rail network on which we solve the MSTR problem does not contain such AAF cycles. Thus, any existing such cycles in the network can be partially blocked to prevent AAF cycle traversal when solving an instance of the MSTR problem. Note that any route taken by a train that uses an AAF cycle without reversing orientation is dominated by a path that does not traverse the cycle. If a train on the network requires reversing its orientation, we assume the train travels to an AAF cycle and completes its orientation reversal prior to solving the MSTR problem instance in a preprocessing routine.

References

  1. Lusby RM, Larsen J, Ehrgott M, Ryan D (2011) Railway track allocation: Models and methods. OR Spectrum 33(4):843–883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Higgins A, Kozan E, Ferreira L (1996) Optimal scheduling of trains on a single line track. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological 30(2):147–161

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Carey M, Lockwood D (1995) A model, algorithms and strategy for train pathing. J Oper Res Soc 46(8):988–1005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Liu SQ, Kozan E (2011) Scheduling trains with priorities: A no-wait blocking parallel-machine job-shop scheduling model. Transp Sci 45(2):175–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lange J, Werner F (2018) Approaches to modelling train scheduling problems as job-shop problems with blocking constraints. J Sched 21(2):191–207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Caprara A, Fischetti M, Toth P (2002) Modeling and solving the train timetabling problem. Oper Res 50(5):851–861

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cacchiani V, Caprara A, Toth P (2008) A column generation approach to train timetabling on a corridor. 4OR 6(2):125–142

  8. Zwaneveld P, Kroon L, Romeijn H, Salomon M (1996) Routing trains through railway stations: Model formulation and algorithms. Transp Sci 30(3):181–194

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Fuchsberger M, Lüthi PDHJ (2007) Solving the train scheduling problem in a main station area via a resource constrained space-time integer multi-commodity flow. Institute for Operations Research ETH Zurich

  10. Mascis A, Pacciarelli D (2002) Job-shop scheduling with blocking and no-wait constraints. Eur J Oper Res 143(3):498–517

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. D’ariano A, Pacciarelli D, Pranzo M, (2007) A branch-and-bound algorithm for scheduling trains in a railway network. Eur J Oper Res 183(2):643–657

  12. Rodriguez J (2007) A constraint programming model for real-time train scheduling at junctions. Transp Res B Methodol 41(2):231–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cornelsen S, Di Stefano G (2007) Track assignment. J Discrete Algoritms 5(2):250–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pellegrini P, Marlière G, Rodriguez J (2014) Optimal train routing and scheduling for managing traffic perturbations in complex junctions. Transp Res B Methodol 59:58–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Samá M, Pellegrini P, d’Ariano A, Rodriguez J, Pacciarelli D (2017) The potential of the routing selection problem in real-time railway traffic management. In: 7th International Conference on Railway Operations Modelling and Analysis-Rail Lille, p 19p

  16. Samá M, Pellegrini P, D’Ariano A, Rodriguez J, Pacciarelli D (2016) Ant colony optimization for the real-time train routing selection problem. Transp Res B Methodol 85:89–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fischer F (2015) Ordering constraints in time expanded networks for train timetabling problems. In: 15th Workshop on Algorithmic Approaches for Transportation Modelling, Optimization, and Systems (ATMOS 2015), Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik

  18. Ahuja R, Jha K, Liu J (2007) Solving real-life railroad blocking problems. Interfaces 37(5):404–419

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Schlechte T (2012) Railway track allocation: Models and algorithms. PhD thesis, Technischen Universitat Berlin

  20. Borndörfer R, Erol B, Graffagnino T, Schlechte T, Swarat E (2014) Optimizing the simplon railway corridor. Ann Oper Res 218(1):93–106

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Borndörfer R, Klug T, Schlechte T, Fügenschuh A, Schang T, Schülldorf H (2016) The freight train routing problem for congested railway networks with mixed traffic. Transp Sci 50(2):408–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Schlechte T, Borndörfer R, Erol B, Graffagnino T, Swarat E (2011) Micro-macro transformation of railway networks. J Rail Transp Plann Manage 1(1):38–48

    Google Scholar 

  23. Borndörfer R, Klug T, Lamorgese L, Mannino C, Reuther M, Schlechte T (2017) Recent success stories on integrated optimization of railway systems. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 74:196–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bohlin M, Flier H, Maue J, Mihalák M (2011) Track allocation in freight-train classification with mixed tracks. In: 11th workshop on algorithmic approaches for transportation modelling, optimization, and systems, Schloss Dagstuhl-Leibniz-Zentrum fuer Informatik

  25. Bohlin M, Hansmann R, Zimmermann UT (2018) Optimization of railway freight shunting. In: Handbook of Optimization in the Railway Industry, Springer, pp 181–212

  26. Minbashi N, Bohlin M, Palmqvist CW, Kordnejad B (2021) The application of tree-based algorithms on classifying shunting yard departure status. J Adv Transp 2021

  27. Aliakbari M, Geunes J, Sullivan K (2021) The single train shortest path problem in a railyard. Optim Lett 15:2577–2595

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Peis B, Skutella M, Wiese A (2009) Packet routing: Complexity and algorithms. International Workshop on Approximation and Online Algorithms pp 217–228 Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  29. Yen JY (1971) Finding the k shortest loopless paths in a network. Manage Sci 17(11):712–716

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kanet JJ (1986) Tactically delayed versus non-delay scheduling: An experimental investigation. Eur J Oper Res 24(1):99–105

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Resende M, Ribeiro C (2014) GRASP: Greedy Randomized Adaptive Search Procedures. Search Methodologies - Introductory Tutorials in Optimization and Decision Support Systems (2nd edition):287–312

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Joseph Geunes contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Wm. Michael Barnes Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX, 77845, USA

    Mina Aliakbari & Joseph Geunes

Authors
  1. Mina Aliakbari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joseph Geunes
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joseph Geunes.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aliakbari, M., Geunes, J. Multiple Train Repositioning Operations in a Railyard Network. Oper. Res. Forum 3, 61 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43069-022-00171-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43069-022-00171-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation