Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Scheduling of the Shuttle Freight Train Services for Dry Ports Using Multimethod Simulation–Optimization Approach

  • Research paper
  • Published:
International Journal of Civil Engineering Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper introduces a simulation–optimization method for addressing scheduling problems for shuttle freight trains (SFTs) in a shared railway corridor between a seaport and dry port. We use dispatching delays for scheduling the SFT trips so as to not disturb the existing scheduled regular train (SRT) paths. The method employs a multi-method microscopic simulation model and an optimization framework. A swarm-based optimization algorithm is used for finding the best dispatching delays to preserve SRT paths. The method is demonstrated for a railway corridor between the Alsancak seaport and a close-distance dry port. The railway corridor is modeled using a simulation model considering single and double railway tracks, stations, and schedules. By running the simulation–optimization, the SFT freight transport capacity and the quality of the SFT and SRT operations were compared using key performance indicators (number of completed trips and station stops, average trip delay, and average station delay) addressing the throughput and punctuality after the application of dispatching delays. The results show that, by preserving the existing SRT paths, freight transport capacity decreased by 11.1% (from 18 to 16 completed SFT trips) and 13.8% (from 36 to 31 completed SFT trips) for single and couple SFT scenarios, respectively. The methodology also decreased the average SFT station delays by 45.2% and 45.6% for the single and couple SFT scenarios comparing with the unoptimized SFT trips. However, the number of SFT station stops increased by 12.5% and 57.1% for the single and couple SFT scenarios for prioritizing the SRTs. Also after the optimization, the average SFT trip delays decreased by 30.7% and 0.58% for the single and couple SFT scenarios. This study successfully demonstrates that the proposed method can be used for scheduling the SFT trips inside a congested railway corridor and can be implemented as a capacity assessment tool for cyclic SFT service using a series of key performance indicators addressing throughput and punctuality.

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
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Amtrak (2016) Monthly performance report for September. https://www.amtrak.com/content/dam/projects/dotcom/english/public/documents/corporate/monthlyperformancereports/Amtrak-Monthly-Performance-Report-September-2016-Final-Audited.pdf. Accessed 10 May 2020

  2. Transport, Maritime Affairs and Communications Research Center (2020) Freight statistics database. https://atlantis.udhb.gov.tr/istatistik/istatistik_yuk.aspx. Accessed 10 May 2020

  3. Pouryousef H, Lautala P, White T (2015) Railroad capacity tools and methodologies in the US and Europe. J Mod Transp. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40534-015-0069-z

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Yıldırım MS, Aydın MM, Gökkuş Ü (2020) Simulation optimization of the berth allocation in a container terminal with flexible vessel priority management. Marit Policy Manag. https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2020.1730994

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Panova Y, Hilletofth P (2019) Logistics setups in a third-generation port. In: Proceedings 9th international conference on operations and supply chain management. Vietnam.

  6. Solinen E, Nicholson G, Peterson A (2017) A microscopic evaluation of railway timetable robustness and critical points. J Rail Transp Plan Manag. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrtpm.2017.08.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Binder S, Maknoon Y, Bierlaire M (2017) The multi-objective railway timetable rescheduling problem. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2017.02.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Högdahl J, Bohlin M, Fröidh O (2019) A combined simulation-optimization approach for minimizing travel time and delays in railway timetables. Transp Res Part B Methodol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2019.04.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Potti P, Marinov M (2020) Evaluation of actual timetables and utilization levels of west midlands metro using event-based simulations. Urban Rail Transit. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40864-019-00120-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Bešinović N, Goverde RMP (2017) Microscopic models and network transformations for automated railway traffic planning: microscopic models and network transformations for automated railway traffic planning. Comput Aided Civil Infrastruct Eng. https://doi.org/10.1111/mice.12207

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Schlechte T, Borndörfer R, Erol B, Graffagnino T, Swarat E (2011) Micro–macro transformation of railway networks. J Rail Transp Plan Manag. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrtpm.2011.09.001

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Burggraeve S, Vansteenwegen P (2017) Optimization of supplements and buffer times in passenger robust timetabling. J Rail Transp Plan Manag. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrtpm.2017.08.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Hassannayebi E, Zegordi SH, Amin-Naseri MR, Yaghini M (2017) Train timetabling at rapid rail transit lines: a robust multi-objective stochastic programming approach. Oper Res. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-016-0232-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Pouryousef H, Lautala P (2015) Hybrid simulation approach for improving railway capacity and train schedules. J Rail Transp Plan Manag. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrtpm.2015.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Landex A, Kaas AH, Schittenhelm B, Schneider-Tilli J (2006) Practical use of the UIC 406 capacity leaflet by including timetable tools in the investigations. In: Proceedings of Computers in Railways X. WIT Press, Prague

  16. Shakibayifar M, Hassannayebi E, Mirzahossein H, Taghikhah F, Jafarpur A (2019) An intelligent simulation platform for train traffic control under disturbance. Int J Model Simul. https://doi.org/10.1080/02286203.2018.1488110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Dessouky MM, Leachman RC (1995) A simulation modeling methodology for analyzing large complex rail networks. Simulation. https://doi.org/10.1177/003754979506500205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Rizzoli AE, Fornara N, Gambardella LM (2002) A simulation tool for combined rail/road transport in intermodal terminals. Math Comput Simul. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4754(01)00393-7

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Marinov M, Viegas J (2011) A mesoscopic simulation modelling methodology for analyzing and evaluating freight train operations in a rail network. Simul Model Pract Theory. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2010.08.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Gambardella LM, Rizzoli AE, Funk P (2002) Agent-based planning and simulation of combined rail/road transport. Simulation. https://doi.org/10.1177/0037549702078005551

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Shirmohammadi H, Najib AS, Hadadi F (2018) Identification of road critical segments using wavelet theory and multi-criteria decision-making method. Eur Transp 68:2

    Google Scholar 

  22. Shirmohammadi H, Hadadi F (2019) Optimizing total delay and average queue length based on the fuzzy logic controller in urban intersections. Int J Supply Oper Manag. https://doi.org/10.22034/2019.2.4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Shirmohammadi H, Hadadi F (2017) Application of fuzzy logic for evaluation of resilient modulus performance of stone mastic asphalt. J Theor Appl Inf Technol 95:13

    Google Scholar 

  24. Cacchiani V, Caprara A, Fischetti M (2012) A lagrangian heuristic for robustness, with an application to train timetabling. Transp Sci. https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.1110.0378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Kroon L, Maróti G, Helmrich MR, Vromans M, Dekker R (2008) Stochastic improvement of cyclic railway timetables. Transp Res Part B Methodol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trb.2007.11.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Chow AHF, Pavlides A (2018) Cost functions and multi-objective timetabling of mixed train services. Transp Res Part Policy Pract. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tra.2018.04.027

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Fischetti M, Salvagnin D, Zanette A (2009) Fast approaches to improve the robustness of a railway timetable. Transp Sci. https://doi.org/10.1287/trsc.1090.0264

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Higgins A, Kozan E, Ferreira L (1996) Optimal scheduling of trains on a single line track. Transp Res Part B Methodol. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-2615(95)00022-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Li F, Gao Z, Li K, Wang DZW (2013) Train routing model and algorithm combined with train scheduling. J Transp Eng. https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)TE.1943-5436.0000461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Quaglietta E (2014) A simulation-based approach for the optimal design of signalling block layout in railway networks. Simul Model Pract Theory. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2013.11.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Goverde RMP, Bešinović N, Binder A, Cacchiani V, Quaglietta E, Roberti R, Toth P (2016) A three-level framework for performance-based railway timetabling. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2016.02.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Altazin E, Dauzère-Pérès S, Ramond F, Tréfond S (2017) Rescheduling through stop-skipping in dense railway systems. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2017.03.012

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  33. Zhang X, Li L, Afzal M (2019) An optimal operation planning model for high-speed rail transportation. Int J Civil Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-019-00401-w

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Singhania V, Marinov M (2017) An event-based simulation model for analysing the utilization levels of a railway line in urban area. Promet. https://doi.org/10.7307/ptt.v29i5.2306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Meirich C, Nießen N (2016) Calculating the maximal number of additional freight trains in a railway network. J Rail Transp Plan Manag. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrtpm.2016.06.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Zhang X, Li L (2019) An Integrated planning/pricing decision model for rail container transportation. Int J Civ Eng. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-019-00420-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Miandoab MH, Ghezavati V, Mohammaditabar D (2020) Developing a simultaneous scheduling of passenger and freight trains for an inter-city railway considering optimization of carbon emissions and waiting times. J Clean Prod. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119303

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Murali P, Ordóñez F, Dessouky MM (2016) Modeling strategies for effectively routing freight trains through complex networks. Transp Res Part C Emerg Technol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2015.08.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Dingler MH, Lai Y-C, Barkan CP (2014) Effect of train-type heterogeneity on single-track heavy haul railway line capacity. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part F J Rail Rapid Transit. https://doi.org/10.1177/0954409713496762

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Roso V, Woxenius J, Lumsden K (2009) The dry port concept: connecting container seaports with the hinterland. J Transp Geogr. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2008.10.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Wilmsmeier G, Monios J, Lambert B (2011) The directional development of intermodal freight corridors in relation to inland terminals. J Transp Geogr. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2011.07.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Facchini F, Digiesi S, Mossa G (2020) Optimal dry port configuration for container terminals: a non-linear model for sustainable decision making. Int J Prod Econ. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2019.06.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Abril M, Barber F, Ingolotti L, Salido MA, Tormos P, Lova A (2008) An assessment of railway capacity. Transp Res Part E Logist Transp Rev. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2007.04.001

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  44. Fox J, Hirsch P, Kanike O (2014) Capacity modeling guidebook for shared-use passenger and freight rail operations. https://doi.org/10.17226/22245

  45. Ferreira L (1997) Planning Australian freight rail operations: an overview. Transp Res Part Policy Pract. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0965-8564(96)00026-2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Kozan E, Burdett R (2005) A railway capacity determination model and rail access charging methodologies. Transp Plan Technol. https://doi.org/10.1080/0308106052000340378

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Lucidi S, Maurici M, Paulon L, Rinaldi F, Roma M (2016) A simulation-based multiobjective optimization approach for health care service management. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng. https://doi.org/10.1109/TASE.2016.2574950

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  48. Karaboga D, Basturk B (2007) A powerful and efficient algorithm for numerical function optimization: artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm. J Glob Optim. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10898-007-9149-x

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  49. Karaboga D, Basturk B (2008) On the performance of artificial bee colony (ABC) algorithm. Appl Soft Comput. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2007.05.007

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors express great thanks to 2. Directorate of Turkish State Railways for sharing the railway schedule data. We thank to the Turkish State Railways 3rd Regional Directorate for providing the required train and infrastructure data and their excellent support for developing the simulation model.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Civil Engineering, Manisa Celal Bayar University, Manisa, Turkey

    Mehmet Sinan Yıldırım & Ümit Gökkuş

  2. Department of Civil Engineering, Gelisim University, Istanbul, Turkey

    Mustafa Karaşahin

Authors
  1. Mehmet Sinan Yıldırım
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mustafa Karaşahin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ümit Gökkuş
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mehmet Sinan Yıldırım.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yıldırım, M.S., Karaşahin, M. & Gökkuş, Ü. Scheduling of the Shuttle Freight Train Services for Dry Ports Using Multimethod Simulation–Optimization Approach. Int J Civ Eng 19, 67–83 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-020-00553-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40999-020-00553-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation