Solving a Dynamic Real-Life Vehicle Routing Problem

  • Asvin Goel
  • Volker Gruhn
Part of the Operations Research Proceedings book series (ORP, volume 2005)


Real-life vehicle routing problems encounter a number of complexities that are not considered by the classical models found in the vehicle routing literature. In this paper we consider a dynamic real-life vehicle routing problem which is a combined load acceptance and generalised vehicle routing problem incorporating a diversity of practical complexities. Among those are time window restrictions, a heterogeneous vehicle fleet with different travel times, travel costs and capacity, multi-dimensional capacity constraints, order/vehicle compatibility constraints, orders with multiple pickup, delivery and service locations, different start and end locations for vehicles, route restrictions associated to orders and vehicles, and drivers’ working hours. We propose iterative improvement approaches based on Large Neighborhood Search. Our algorithms are characterised by very fast response times and thus, can be used within dynamic routing systems where input data can change at any time.


Fast Response Time Large Neighborhood Large Neighborhood Search Transportation Request Daily Rest Period 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Antes J and Derigs U (1995). A new parallel tour construction algorithm for the vehicle routing problem with time windows. Department of Information Systems and Operations Research, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cordeau J-F, Desaulniers G, Desrosiers J, Solomon MM, and Soumis F (2002). VRP with time windows. In P. Toth and D. Vigo, editors, The Vehicle Routing Problem, pages 157–193. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cordeau J-F, Gendreau M, Hertz A, Laporte G, and Sormany J-S (2004). New heuristics for the vehicle routing problem. Les cahiers du GERAD G-2004-33, Université de Montreal HEC, Montréal, Canada.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Council of the European Communities (1985). Council Regulation (EEC) No 3820/85 of 20 December 1985 on the harmonization of certain social legislation relating to road transport.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Feillet D, Dejax P, and Gendreau M (2005). Traveling Salesman Problems with Profits. Transportation Science, 39(2):188–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fleischmann B, Gnutzmann S, and Sandvoß E (2004). Dynamic vehicle routing based on on-line traffic information. Transportation Science, 38(4):420–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hasle G (2003). Heuristics for rich VRP models. Presented at the Seminar at GERAD, 30.10.2003, Montréal, Canada.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Heckmann M (2002). DV-gestütztes Geschäftsprozeßmanagement in der Luftfrachtlogistik. Dissertation, Shaker Verlag Aachen.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kilby P, Prosser P, and Shaw P (2000). A comparison of traditional and constraint-based heuristic methods on vehicle routing problems with side constraints. Constraints, 5:389–414.zbMATHMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Laporte G and Semet F (2002). G. Classical heuristics for the capacitated VRP. In Toth P and Vigo D, editors, The Vehicle Routing Problem, pages 109–128. SIAM Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lourenço H, Martin O, and Stützle T (2002). Iterated Local Search. In Glover F and Kochenberger G, (eds), Handbook of Metaheuristics. Kluwer, pp 321–353.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Mitrović-Minić S (1998). Pickup and delivery problem with time windows: A survey. Technical report TR 1998-12, School of Computing Science, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Psaraftis HN (1988). Dynamic vehicle routing problems. In B.L. Golden and A.A. Assad, editors, Vehicle routing: Methods and studies, pages 233–248. North-Holland Amsterdam.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Psaraftis HN (1995). Dynamic vehicle routing: Status and prospects. Annals of Operations Research, 61:143–164.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Savelsbergh MWP and Sol M (1998). DRIVE: dynamic routing of independent vehicles. Operations Research, 46:474–490.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shaw P (1997). A new local search algorithm providing high quality solutions to vehicle routing problems. Technical report, APES group, Department of Computer Sciences, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scottland.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Xu H, Chen Z-L, Rajagopal S, and Arunapuram S (2003). Solving a practical pickup and delivery problem. Transportation Science, 37(3):347–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yang J, Jaillet P, and Mahmassani H (2004). Real-time multi-vehicle truckload pickup-and-delivery problems. Transportation Science, 38(2):135–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Asvin Goel
    • 1
  • Volker Gruhn
    • 1
  1. 1.Applied Telematics and e-Business, Computer Science FacultyUniversity of LeipzigLeipzigGermany

Personalised recommendations