.

Research Article
Simulation-based Planning and Control of Transport Flows in
Port Logistic Systems
Antonio Diogo Passos Lima
1
, Frederico erner de !ascaren"as
1
,
#n$o !orosini Fra$$on
1
1
Graduate Program in Production Engineering, Federal University of Santa
Catarina (UFSC, !echnology Center, University Cam"us# !rindade,
Florian$"olis, P#P %o& '(), CEP **+'+,-++, %RA./0
Correspondence should be addressed to Enzo Morosini Frazzon:
enzo.frazzon@ufsc.br
In highly dynamic and uncertain transport conditions, transport transit time has to
be continuously monitored so that the service level is ensured at a proper cost. he
aim of this research is to propose and to test a procedure !hich allo!s for an agile
planning and control of port logistic systems. he procedure couples an agent"
based simulation and a #ueueing theory model. he obtained results indicate the
relevance of continuously considering, for the transport planning and control, the
e$pected transit time and further !aiting times along port logistic chains.
1% &ntroduction
In some situations, disturbances of internal or e$ternal origin can impact the consistency of
freight carried out through several shipments. In this case, the inconsistency of delivery
service generates inefficiencies associated !ith not only an increase in costs but also a
reduction in the service level. %mong the disorders that can impact the consistency of
transport t!o stands out: traffic congestion due to the increasing flo! of vehicles and
delays in the decision ma&ing process. 'ot!ithstanding these occurrences !hich indicate
capacity constraints, it is li&ely that the overall logistic infrastructure is still not used
optimally in full.
Infrastructure issues of road access can compromise the operational efficiency of the entire
port sector, thus becoming an obstacle for social and economic national development ()*.
%ccording to +i,,ar and %le$im (-*, !hen port access is inefficient, the entire cargo
transportation operation is compromised because bottlenec&s in the entrance of the port
terminal can result in delays and e$tra need for storage, therefore, increasing the total
logistical cost. o sum up, issues in port access directly affect the efficiency of terminals,
.
e$porting companies and transportation costs. Chin and ongzon (.* affirm that logistical
infrastructure ma&es up a vital lin& in the overall chain of commerce, contributing to the
international competition of a nation. /ittencourt (0* has stated that the logistical port
model to send and receive cargo usually consists in port operators ma&ing time !indo!s
available, in !hich each transporter sends their vehicles into the port. +o!ever, once
traffic conditions are uncertain and there is no access control to the port zone, transporters
ultimately send in their vehicles at same time !indo!, loo&ing either for convenience or to
guarantee merchandise delivery. 1tudies on ne! port logistic methods !hich enable
rationalizing vehicle traffic and optimizing port cargo load meet the current need to
improve road infrastructures, stimulating greater control and improvements to the national
logistic scenario (2, 3*.
/et!een t!o nodes in a logistics net!or&, it is possible that there is more than one possible
route. In other !ords, more than one route choice lin&ing the transport origin and
destination may be available. In this case, the decision on !hich route should be used can
reduce the impact caused by the large amount of traffic flo! at a given time, mainly if the
routing decision is ta&en #uic&ly on the basis of the observation of changes in the
environment. It is also pointed out that competitive mar&ets re#uire greater agility from
transport operations so that they can respond #uic&ly to fluctuations (4, 5, 6*. 'evertheless,
currently, most transportation schedules ta&e into account only local restrictions, ignoring
dynamic environmental variables or e$ternal disturbances ()7*.
%n important revie! of recent mathematical programming models that deal !ith this
sub,ect !as made by Mula et al. ())*. %part from that, note!orthy real"time approaches are
being studied in order to address re#uirements of highly dynamic systems. %mong the
programming techni#ues being studied, robust programming can be highlighted. his type
of programming is aimed at creating intelligent predictive schedules that minimize the
effects of disturbances on the performance of the program implemented. 8egarding the
various e$isting robust programming techni#ues, is #uoted those based on genetic
algorithms, multiple pre"defined schedules and fuzzy ()-, ).*.
he application of an agent"based simulation in the preparation of the transportation
schedule can be an effective solution to mitigate the aforementioned impacts of raising
transport volumes. a&ing into account the comple$ity of the involved structures and the
set of factors to be considered, the development of a procedure to decide the route to be
used by a transport vehicle so that it can be applied on port logistic chains is #uite
challenging, both in scientific and practical terms. In this conte$t, this paper proposes a
procedure, based on the application of stochastic #ueueing models, to reduce the impacts
caused by increased transport time due to traffic congestion on the route. he analysis of
the performance of the proposed procedure employs a test case, implemented through a
simulation model representing a port logistic chain that includes transport flo!s, an
intermodal logistics terminal and a port terminal.
.
'% Literature (e)iew
1everal transport flo! optimization problems can be solved using e$act methods, such as
/ranch and /ound ()0*: route displacement minimization, minimization of number of used
routes, and ma$imization of passagers9 number using different routes. +o!ever, despite the
capability of e$act methods to converge to a solution, these techni#ues are not the most
used for solving ':"hard problems, since the processing time increseases !ith the
comple$ity of mentioned problems ()2*. %ppart from e$act methods, other techni#ues
available for solving transport flo! optimization problems can be classified as ()3*:
heuristic methods, appro$imate methods based on e$pert systems ;meta heuristics<. In a
study by /onasser and =ualda ()4*, several techni#ues employed for each of these
methods are presented.
>hen there is a problem that ta&es into account only the length of the route to be used by a
vehicle, this problem can be classified as a vehicle routing problem ;?8:<. In /onasser
and =ualda ()4*, the follo!ing variants of the vehicle routing problem are presented:
heterogeneous fleet@ sizing and allocation of fleet ;fleet size and mi$ ?8:<. Furthermore,
this study sho!s sub variants of the heterogeneous fleet, and also techni#ues used to solve
each variant of the ?8:. Ather!ise, /odin et al. ()2* classifies routing problem into the
follo!ing types: single depot, multiple"vehicle, node routing problem@ multiple depot,
multiple"vehicle, node routing problem@ and single depot, multiple"vehicle, node routing
problem !ith stochastic demand. 8egarding the comple$ity of a routing problem, this is
enhanced through the inclusion of the follo!ing constraints ()2*: specifying a time period
in !hich a vehicle must be in service before it returns to its point of origin@ specification of
tas&s that can only be performed by certain types of resources@ and specification of
multiple garages !here the vehicles may be stored.
In addition to the concept of vehicle routing problems, it is necessary to differentiate it
from the concept of scheduling problems. he last is manly characterized by the routing
mechanism of each vehicle that is established in the transportation schedule and only ta&es
into account time and space.
Concerning the e$isting #ueueing models, depending on the perspective utilized those can
receive different classifications. hus, from the user point of vie!, the e$isting #ueues are
classified as follo! ()5*: generative models " provide the user !ith an optimal solution that
satisfies the ob,ective function@ and evaluative models " %lthough it does not provide an
optimal solution that satisfies the user ob,ective function, those models helps the
evaluation of a set of decisions by providing performance metrics. Bueueing net!or&s
models are classified as evaluative models.
/esides this form of classification, it is possible to classify #ueueing models through the
methods utilized to obtain its results. In this case, there are the follo!ing types of models
.
()5*. First, models that provide accurate results " these models are difficult to obtain and
are available for #ueueing net!or& models of small size. Ather!ise, the models only
provide appro$imate results. 1o, in this type of model there is a trade"off bet!een
comple$ity and accuracy. 1till, if one !ishes to efficiently analyze a net!or& #ueue model
!ith finite overall processing time, this approach is the most appropriate ()5*.
Ather recent studies involving #ueuing models are %bdel&aden and %l">ohaibe ()6*@
CragoviD et al. (-7*. he first study proposed a ne! measure of performance in a single
server Mar&ovian #ueuing system. he first paper proposed a ne! measure of performance
in a single server Mar&ovian #ueuing system. he second one refers to a model that
combines finite !aiting areas batch arrival #ueue !ith identical and independent cargo"
handling capacity. In a study by >u and Chen (-)*, the follo!ing methods of dispatching
,ob !ere listed: dispatching rules@ heuristics@ data mining based approaches@ agent
technologies@ and simulation. Moreover, the aforementioned !or& demonstraded that
several studies have been conducted in an attempt to solve the problem of scheduling.
8egarding the approaches used in these studies, >u and Chen (-)* highlights the
follo!ing: ;i< selection of the most appropriate dispatching rule among those that are
available@ ;ii< inclusion of ad,ustable parameters that can optimize the dispatching rule@ and
;iii< best estimate of the schedule through the results of a limited number of simulations. %s
for the approach ;ii<, it is emphasized that this can only be used !ith factors that are
defined at the beginning of the use of the approach and remain static (-)*.
8egarding the dispatching rules, these can be considered a practical method for scheduling
(--*. here are the follo!ing types of dispatching rules (-.*: static " the priority of !aiting
Eobs do not change over time@ dynamic " the priority of !aiting Eobs change over time@
local " decisions are ta&en only from the Eobs that are !aiting for service@ and global "
decisions are made !ith the use of additional information about Eobs or other !or&stations
machines.
In a study by :an!al&er and Is&ander (-.*, the rules of order and their respective
characteristics are also presented. In this case, the rules listed in this study are classified as
belo!: simple 8ules priority " based on information related to a single ,ob@ combination of
simple rules of priority " t!o simple priority information are used !hen defining the
priority@ !eighted priority rules " similar to the above classification, but !ith the use of
!eights@ heuristic 1cheduling 8ules " use of more comple$ rules@ and other rules F use of
specific rules for particular production line.
In the study of %zimi, +aleh and %lidoost (-0*, some &inds of dispatching rules !ere
detailed. %lthough this study focused on a multiple"load %=? 1ystem, the concepts related
to dispatching rules also apply to the problem of this research. he study also made a
differentiation of categories of route selection problem regarding the presence of stochastic
events.
.
Cue to the increasing comple$ity of transport flo! problems as it integrates a larger
number of elements in the model and the increase in the computing po!er, the use of
simulation to solve this &ind of problems has become an attractive option. In this case,
simulations are usually employed !hen (-2* a model presents variables that are not
deterministic and !hen the problem re#uires both time and space integration. Models are
the translation of operational re#uirements and constraints to the understanding of the
process by the computer (-3*. hus, the higher the representation of a model in relation to
the re#uired logistics process, the better the results provided by the model. Ance the model
of a logistics process is complete, the simulation is typically applied to one of the
follo!ing purposes (-2*: as a tool for identifying and evaluating the improvement of the
operating performance or as a tool to gain a better understanding of the costs and
performance potential of logistics operations.
In this sense, customized simulations can be used to support reengineering decisions (-4*.
%ccording to 1!aminanthan et al. (-4*, simulation is the only viable platform for detailed
analysis of alternative solutions because the comple$ interactions bet!een the entities of a
supply chain do not allo! the use of analytical solutions. Furthermore, non"prescriptive
insights generated from #ualitative analyzes, such as benchmar&ing, do not allo! other
conclusions that are not related to the current trends. 1!aminanthan et al. (-4* also points
out that the ma,or problems of simulation is associated !ith: the time and effort re#uired to
develop specific models !ith sufficient fidelity to the actual supply chain of interest and
the limited reuse of the simulation models.
*% Simulation-based Planning and Control of Transport Flows
he approach is embedded in a procedure, !hich is based on the application of stochastic
#ueueing models for improving dispatching rules and synchronizing transport flo!s in port
logistic chains. he aim of this research is to propose and to test a procedure !hich allo!s
for an agile planning and control of port logistic chains. he procedure couples an agent"
based simulation and a #ueueing theory model. he obtained results indicate the relevance
of continuously considering, for the transport planning and control, the e$pected transit
time and further !aiting times along port logistic chains.
he conceptual vie! !hich motivaed the proposed approach for the simulation"based
planning and control of port logistic systems is presented in Figure ). For a generic e$port
logistics chain the concept embraces the follo!ing stages: ;)< a representation of the real
scenario, occurring in real time, sub,ect to the input parameters and generating the output
data ;real performance< at each time interval@ ;-< a simulation model, sub,ect to the input
parameters and generating the output data ;simulated performance<, running in simulated
time, to be e$ecuted numerous times, so that the results can be evaluated by an e$ternal
control element@ ;.< a control element that evaluates the obtained simulated performance
and, according to a predetermined control logic, allo!s for the effective implementation in
.
the real sencario.
Figure 1+ %pproach to a simulation"based planning and control of port logistic system.
he research conducted in this paper comprises the stage - ;1imulation model< and .
;Control element< for a simplified port logistic chain embracing an intermodal terminal, a
transport operation and the arrival at a port terminal, as represented in Figure -:
Figure '+ %pproach to stage - and . of the simulation"based planning and control of
transport flo!s.
he simulation model represents the actual operation of a port logistic system comprising
an intermodal terminal, a transport operation and the arrival at a port terminal. %s for the
control element, this part has been accomplished through the use of predefined parameters.
hus, !ith the e$ception of the number of customers !aiting for service on the bottlenec&,
the control assumed that all other parameter settings of the model remained constant. his
case !ill be done using a model that includes a scenario of an e$port logistics chain in
!hich the cargo of an intermodal terminal should be dispatched at the lo!est possible cost
to a port terminal. he decision to dispatch the cargo is carried out early in the day and
involves only the choice of the route to be held by transport vehicles. /esides that, the
dispatching decisions vary in accordance to the follo!ing factors: #uantity of goods in
.
inventories of the intermodal terminal@ traffic congestion of each road@ and end time
scheduled for the carriage of goods by light vehicle.
Futhermore, in an effort to address the above problem as a non"deterministic, this problem
!ill not only have random components, but also possess #ueuing due to the lo! carrying
capacity of each route compared !ith the traffic demand. >ith this purpose, this study !ill
evaluate the impact of the transportation schedule !hen the agent responsible for this ta&e
his decisions based on the information provided by a control. he control agent can
monitor the traffic on the routes that can be used by transport vehicles. he information
that !ill be used as input to the control are: the #uantity of goods that are in the intermodal
terminal@ the estimated transport transit time on the routes due to the presence of traffic
congestion@ the amount of time remaining for the cargo transportation by the available
transport vehicles.
o calculate the transport transit time, it !ill be used the formula bello!:
T
T
=(T
P
+T
VT
+T
L
+T
U
+T
R
) ;)<
he table ) presents the description of the parameters of the above formula.
Table 1+ 'otation of the components of the formula of transport transit time.
Constant parameters

8
ravel time to the intermodal terminal ;hours<

G
ime to load the cargo at the vehicle ;hours<

H
ime to unload the cargo at the vehicle ;hours<
?ariables

?
ravel time to the port terminal ;hours<

:
:rocessing time at the bottlenec& ;hours<
In an effort to calculate the estimated processing time ;
:
< of the vehicles at the bottlenec&s
of the routes !here traffic congestion is presented, the problem !as modelled as the type
MIMIC: ;J, FIFA<. In this modelling, C is the number of trac&s of a given route. hus, to
support the transportation schedule of the day, the estimated transport transit time ;

< on
the routes !as calculated from an estimate of the average !aiting time of the vehicles in
the system !hen it !as observed a certain amount of vehicles in the #ueue. For instance,
this information could be obtained by monitoring cameras at the critical bottlenec& of each
route.
>ith the purpose of clarifying the understanding of the procedure used to calculate the
estimated processing time ;
:
< of the vehicles at the bottlenec&s, bello! the steps used by
the control element are described:
). Cata"collection regarding the amount of vehicles at the bottlenec& of each route@
-. hrough the use of a table previously generated, the control element ma&es the
.
identification of the class that includes, in its amplitude, the information collected
in step )@
.. %ssociation of the situation observed in step ) to a #ueue problem !hich presents a
service rate ;K< previously raised and an arrival rate ;L< corresponding to the class
identified in step -@
0. Htilization of the average !aiting time ;>< from the #ueue problem associated in
the step . as the estimative of the processing time ;
:
< of the vehicles at the
bottlenec&.
8egarding to the table used in step - from the aforementioned procedure, this !as created
using a computational algorithm. In this case, it !as defined, for each bottlenec&, a range
of data that !ould be used for the control decision. %fter that, this range of data !as
divided into 0 classes of e#ual amplitude. hen !ere performed, for each class, several
iterations in order to identify the #ueue model that possess the follo!ing characteristics:
service rate ;K< corresponding to the bottlenec& in analysis@ probability of finding a number
of customers at the top of the central element of the class greater than 27M. %fter that,
!ere recorded in the respective classes of the table, the information concerning the arrival
rate ;L< and average !aiting time ;>< of the identified #ueue model. his computional
algorithm is presented in algorithm ).
%lgorithm )
%lgorithm ) starts !ith the follo!ing input data:
" 1ervice rate of the modeled bottlenec& ;N<@
" lo!est average !aiting time in the system ;>min<@
Input: K, L
:
, :
C
, '
C,
:
M
, step
L
:
O K " )I>
min
au$ O 7
>hile au$ O 7
8o) O L
:
I K
: O ) F ro)
:
M
O ) F :
For i O )PQ '
C
Q
: O : R ro)
:
M
O ) F :
End For
If ;;:
M
S :
C
< or ;L
:
T K<<, au$ O )
If ;L
:
U K<, best O L
:
Else
best O L
:
L
:
O L
:
V step
End >hile
If ;best U K<, 8eturn best
Else, 8eturn L
:
not found
.
" number of customers that, above this, has a probability of occurrence greater than
:
C
;'
C
<@
" Minimum probability of occurrence that is re#uired to be a number of clients
greater than '
C
;:
C
<@
" step size used by the algorithm to find the arrival rate ;step<.
From the above data, the algorithm ) calculates the initial value of the arrival rate of
customers in the #ueue ;L
:
< that !ill later be incremented, throughout the e$ecution of the
algorithm. In doing so, !hile the probability of occurrence of more than '
C
customers in
the #ueue is less than :
C
, the value of the variable L
:
!ill be increased by the step value.
+o!ever, if the value of L
:
become greater than or e#ual to K, the value of the variable L
:
!ill no longer receive any increment. his !ay, in order to L
:
receive the least amount of
increment, a variable of control ;au$< !as included in the algorithm. hus, !hile this
control variable remain at zero, the algorithm through the !hile loop, calculates the
probability of finding more than one customer in the #ueue !hen it presents an arrival rate
L
:
and a service rate N. he result of this calculation is stored in the variable :
M
. 'e$t, the
algorithm uses the For loop to calculate the probability of finding more than '
C
customers
in the #ueue. his calculation involves an update on the value of the variable :
M
.
%t the end of the For loop, the algorithm ma&es a comparison of the value of :
M
found
!ith the value of :
C
, as !ell as the value of L
:
!ith the value of the service rate of the
modeled bottlenec& ;N<. In this case, the control variable au$ is updated !ith the value ) if
it is satisfied one of the follo!ing conditions: the value of the probability of finding more
than '
C
customers in the #ueue ;:
M
< is greater than :
C
@ the L
:
is greater than or e#ual to N,
in !hich the algorithm can not determine an arrival rate that meets the input re#uirements
!ithout a modification on the value of N or step. Furthermore, if the value of :
M
is greater
than the value of :
C
and L
:
is less than N, the algorithm stores the value of the variable L
:
on the variable best. If the re#uired conditions to an update of the variable au$ to ) !ere
not met, the algorithm stores the value of the variable L
:
on the variable best and
increments the L
:
value in a step value.
%t the end of the >hile loop, the algorithm returns the value of L
:
found in the last
iteration of this loop if that variable !as lo!er than N. Ather!ise, the algorithm reports that
failed to find a L
:
that meets the entry restrictions.
Moreover, as the goal of this study is to evaluate the impact of the transportation schedule
!hen it is prepared by an agent that see&s the lo!est possible cost on the cargo
transportation, this cost !ill be determined by the follo!ing formula:
minZ=

w=1
10
(c
I
t
I
+ct
N
t
N
+ct
D
t
D
)
;-<
.
he table - presents the description of the parameters of the above formula.
Table '+ 'otation of the ob,ective function of the problem.
Inde$
> Cays ;), ..., )7<
Constant parameters
c
I
1torage cost in the intermodal ;muIhour<
ct
C
Cost of the transportation to 6pm ;muIhour<
ct
'
Cost of transportation after 6pm ;muIhours<
?ariables
t
I
otal time in !hich the products !ere at intermodal
;hours<
t
C
otal time in !hich the products !ere in transit
;hours<
t
'
otal travel time after 6pm ;hours<
It is note!orthy that the decision of the control element !ill be based on estimates of the
traffic arrival rate ;L< at the bottlenec&. Moreover, as this decision is made based on
information gathered by an observer !ho is far from the decision ma&er, it is e$pected
differences bet!een the results obtained and those predicted for the processing time at the
bottlenec&.
Figure . illustrates the structure of the model.
Figure *+ Model structure.
he computational algorithm used by the control element is presented at the algorithm -.
Input:
a
,
b
If ;
a
U
b
<, 8eturn best
If ;Cloc& U ;-)"
a
<<, 8eturn 8oute %
Else, 8eturn 'o route
Else
If ;Cloc& U ;-)"
b
<<, 8eturn 8oute /
Else, 8eturn 'o route
.
%lgorithm -
he algorithm - receives as input the results obtainted by the use of Formula ) for each
one of the routes to the port. hus, algorithm - starts !ith the follo!ing input data:
" transport transit time for route % ;
a
<@
" transport transit time for route / ;
b
<.
From these data, the algorithm - chec&s !hich route has the lo!est transport transit time
;

<. his verification by the control element is re#uired every time there is a transport
vehicle available at the intermodal terminal and there is also a cargo that needs to be
transported to the port terminal.
%fter that the algorithm chec&s if the transportation of the goods is possible to be done
before -)h. If there is possibility, the transportation !ill be assigned to the vehicle.
Ather!ise there !ill be no more transportation on that simulation day for that vehicle.
,% Test Case of a Port Logistic Systems
his research comprised the modelling agents involved in the chain through the use of
process modelling techni#ues. %fter that, it !as analysed, using a simulation model, the
impact of decisions of an agent in the rest of the chain. he simulation model !as
implemented using 1imio GGC soft!are. Initially, the model !as calibrated so that,
depending on the traffic flo!, a #ueue could be formed in any of the routes used to
transport the cargo from the intermodal terminal to the port terminal. Moreover, an
additional calibration !as performed in the traffic flo! to eliminate the possibility of a
modelled route become predominantly better than others due only to their respectively
travel time ;
?
<.
In addition, it !as established the follo!ing operational constraints in the model: the
transport vehicle should return to its place of departure before the end of the day, the
carrying capacity of each vehicle is limited to only ) unit@ refusal of transport services
occurs if the total ,ourney is set to finish after 6pm@ and an additional cost is set !hen the
transport vehicle cannot finish its ,ourney before 6pm due to the elapsed time in the #ueue.
Figure 0 illustrates the simulation model that !as implemented in 1imio GGC to evaluate
the impact of decisions of an agent in the rest of the e$port logistics chain.
.
Figure ,+ 1imulation model implemented in 1imio GGC.
In order to enable the result9s comparison, the amount of products available to be shipped
at the intermodal terminal inventory9s !ill be set to the value of 6 units at the beginning of
each day. /esides that, . vehicles !ere also used, each one !ith the capacity to transport
one cargo at the time,contemplated in the period of simulation.
>ith regard to the traffic congestion representation in the model, this !ill be accomplished
!ith the inclusion of other vehicles in each one of the routes used at the cargo
transportation. In this case, the arrival rate of these other vehicles, at the bottlenec&s of
each route, can assume values varying in accordance to a fre#uency distribution. Figure 2
and 3 present, respectively, the fre#uency distribution of the possible values of the traffic
arrival rate ;L< that !ere used to induce traffic congestion at routes % and /.
Figure -+ Fre#uency distribution of the traffic arrival rate ;L< at the route %.
.
Figure .+ Fre#uency distribution of the traffic arrival rate ;L< at the route /.
Concerning the decisions to be ta&en by the control element, this !ill be done !ith the use
not only of information regarding the number of vehicles at the bottlenec&s of each route,
but also of information stored in its database. able . and able 0 sho!, respectively, the
information stored in the control element database that is used to assess the situation
observed at the bottlenec&s of route % and /.
Table *+ Control element database used to evaluate the traffic conditions of 8oute %.
Route A
Lower limit of
customers
Upper limit of
customers
Number of customers whose
probability of finding this
amount in the queue is
greater than 50%
Estimated traffic arrival
rate in hours (!
"verage waiting
time in the
system in hours
(#!
0 $% &0 %'($%5)'0$**'%)+ 0(',00
'0 )5% )*0 %'('%5)'0$**'%)+ )(%'0%
)+0 *,% *00 %%(,%5)'0$**'%)5 ,(*'0+
*&0 ,)% *'0 %%(5%5)'0$**'%)5 &(''*&
Table ,+ Control element database used to evaluate the traffic conditions of 8oute /.
Route B
Lower limit of
customers
Upper limit of
customers
Number of customers whose
probability of finding this
amount in the queue is
greater than 50%
Estimated traffic arrival
rate in hours (!
"verage waiting
time in the
system in hours
(#!
0 + , *5(,00000000000) 0(*)*'
$ ), )0 *'(*00000000000) 0(555+
)& *0 )$ *'(%00000000000) 0(%0%)
*) *$ *& *%(*00000000000) )(*500
Furthermore, in order to create a comparison among the proposed scenarios in this !or&,
the corresponding values of the variables that follo! a fre#uency distribution !ere selected
from random numbers. able 2 illustrates the values that !ere randomly selected for these
variables in each day contemplated in the simulation period.
Table -+ 1elected values for each random variable comprised in the period of simulation.
.
-ays
".N. /low of
vehicles0 1oute
"
2raffic arrival rate (! at
route " (nW vehiclesIhour!
".N. /low of
vehicles0 1oute
3
2raffic arrival rate (! at
route 3 (nW vehiclesIhour!
1 0($* %%(,%5* 0(5+ *'(%000
2 0(%& %%(5%5* 0(,, *'(*000
3 0(%) %%(5%5* 0(+% *'(%000
4 0(*5 %'('%5* 0($% *'(%000
5 0() %'($%5* 0(,) *'(*000
6 0(++ %%(,%5* 0(%, *%(*000
7 0(5% %%(,%5* 0(0$ *5(,000
8 0(5, %'('%5* 0(%& *%(*000
9 0(5' %%(,%5* 0(&* *'(%000
10 0(%& %%(5%5* 0(%+ *%(*000
8egarding the return of the vehicle to the intermodal terminal, it !as assumed in the model
that the vehicle !ould perform this route !ithout any delay caused by traffic. For each day,
in the simulation model, it !as run )77 times, in order to converge the stochastic results.
%s for the other parameters re#uired for the implementation of the model, their values did
not vary in the days contemplated in the simulation period. he values of these parameters
follo! bello!:
Table .+ ?alue of the constant parameters.
:aramete
r
?alue Cescription
a
)
7,6)34 ravel time of arc ) from route % ;hours<
a
-
7,6)34 ravel time of arc - from route % ;hours<
a
.
),-2 ravel time of arc . from route / ;hours<
a
0
),-2 ravel time of arc 0 from route / ;hours<
a
2
),5.. ravel time of the vehicle return path ;hours<
c
I
),542 1torage cost in the intermodal ;muIhour<
ct
C
)),-2 Cost of the transportation to 6pm ;muIhour<
ct
'
)3,-2 Cost of transportation after 6pm ;muIhour<
K
a
)77 1ervice rate ;nW vehiclesIhour< of the bottlenec& of the route %
K
b
.7 1ervice rate ;nW vehiclesIhour< of the bottlenec& of the route /
X
%
. Goading I unloading time of transport vehicles ;minutes<
In addition to the simulation model developed in 1imio GGC, for the impact analysis of the
transportation schedule performed by an agent that uses the proposed solution of this !or&,
comparisons of the results of the follo!ing scenarios !ere conducted:
;i< ransportation schedule !hen all transport is carried out through the arch !hich
presents a shorter route, but long traffic@
;ii< ransportation schedule !hen all transport is carried out through the arch !hich
presents a longer route, but shortly traffic@
;iii< ransportation schedule is ad,usted throughout the day according to an
e$pectation of the time spent by the available vehicles to perform a given
transportation@
.
-% (esults and Discussion
-%1% 1st

Scenario / Transportation Sc"edule w"en all 0e"icles use t"e (oute A
In this scenario, the transportation schedule is performed such that all transportation to the
port is made at the route % ;route that has the shortest path, but high traffic<. Moreover, the
transportation schedule did not ta&e into account an evaluation of the e$pected transport
transit time, in other !ords, did not evaluate the processing time at the bottlenec&.
hus, the informations ta&en into account in the transportation schedule are referring to:
" 'umber of vehicles available@
" %mount of each type of product to be transported@
" he remainder of the transport vehicle@
" ime needed for the transport vehicle can carry out the collection and delivery of the
product.
Futhermore, every day of the simulation period, the amount of goods available in the
intermodal terminal, 6 in total, can be sent to the port by . vehicles at the time. herefore,
from this consideration and also from the considerations above, the transportation schedule
for this scenario presents no difficulties.
Hsing the above transportation schedule as input to the simulation model implemented in
1imio GGC, the follo!ing results !ere obtained:
Table 1+ 8esults from the simulation model !hen all transports are made !ith the use of
the route %.
Average Results from 1st Scenario after Simulation Replications
2otal 2ime in
wich the
products were
in transit (h!
Number
of
vehicles
in use
after %pm
2otal travel
time after
%pm
2otal time in
wich the
products were
found stored
(h!
"mount of
products that
were not
transported
2otal 4osts
Average
Results after
simulation
replications
*%5$&(&'*' )+$' ''*5(*%00 5)5)+(+,00 5'+(55%0 5
Average
osts
,$+',%(,'*0 5 )&,&)0(%+*5 %+5%,(+'), )&++,%($500 +*00$*('),,

-%'% 'nd

Scenario / Transportation Sc"edule w"en all 0e"icles use t"e (oute 2
1imilar to the )st simulation described, a ne! simulation !as implemented, but used only
8oute / ;route that has the longest route, but little traffic< during the transport of goods
from the intermodal terminal to the port terminal.
Hsing the above transportation schedule as input to the simulation model implemented in
.
1imio GGC, the follo!ing results !ere obtained:
Table 3+ 8esults from the simulation model !hen all transports are conducted through
route /.
Average Results from 2n! Scenario after Simulation Replications
2otal 2ime in
wich the
products were
in transit (h!
Number
of
vehicles
in use
after %pm
2otal travel
time after
%pm
2otal time in
wich the
products were
found stored
(h!
"mount of
products that
were not
transported
2otal 4osts
Average
Results after
simulation
replications
,0+)*(,'&* )++$ ++,'()+00 50*0+($$00 *'&(0$%0 *'&(0$%0
Average
osts
,$$5'0()*)' 5 )0$'$0()000 %&),$(+%,' $)0)%($500 5&*$,$(5+55

-%*% *rd

Scenario / T"e Transportation Sc"edule is ad4usted t"roug"out t"e day
according to an e5pectation of t"e time spent by t"e a)ailable )e"icles to perform a
gi)en transportation
In this scenario, a change !as made in the process that generates the transportation
schedule. %t other scenarios, the transportation schedule !as used as input to the
simulation model in 1imio GGC. +o!ever, in this scenario, the transportation schedule !as
also generated at 1imio GGC. he transportation schedule at this scenario !as generated,
during the simulation, !hile the need for transportation and the vehicle availability !ere
presented. /esides that, this transportation schedule did also ta&e into account the traffic
conditions that !ere observed at each bottlenec&. Furthermore, a restriction in the model
!as included so that only freights !ith the e$pected completion time before 6pm !ere
scheduled.
hus, during the simulation period of )7 days, in the simulation model implemented in
1imio GGC, the follo!ing results !ere obtained.
Table 6+ 8esults of the simulation model !hen the decision ma&ing process uses the
proposed control.
Average Results from 3r! Scenario after Simulation Replications
.
2otal 2ime in
wich the
products were
in transit (h!
Number
of
vehicles
in use
after %pm
2otal travel
time after
%pm
2otal time in
wich the
products were
found stored
(h!
"mount of
products that
were not
transported
2otal 4osts
Average
Results after
simulation
replications
*&%'&()%'+ )*** +5''(5,,0 &+)&,($*00 ),*(&*00 5
Average
osts
,)&0)&('%%* 5 )0$0+,(++), '+5)%(&$50 ,,)05(0000 &,,+,%(,$&*
-%,% Analysis
It !as observed, in all scenarios, that there !as transport after 6pm during the simulation
period. In spite of that, it !as also possible to visualize different costs for each scenario.
In the first scenario, not only the transport time but also the storage time !as less than
those presented in the -nd stage. In this case, due to shorter travel time, in the days !hen
the traffic at the route % !as not intense, the transport transit time on this route became
significantly lo!er !hen compared to the transport transit time on the route /. 8egarding
the total of goods that !eren9t transported and the total travel time after 6pm, this scenario
had the !orst results, due to those days that presented high traffic at route %. Concerning
the total cost of this scenario, it !as the highest !hen compared to the cost of all other
scenarios.
In the second scenario, the dispatch of all goods !ere carried !ith the use of route /. In
this case, !ith the e$ception of the total time in !ich the products !ere in transit, all other
cost factors !ere lo!er !hen compared to the results of the )
st
)stscenario. hus, despite
the fact that the travel time of route / is greater than the respective time of the route %, it is
pointed out that the difference bet!een the results of the )stst and -ndst scenarios is due to
the lo! processing time ;p< that the transport vehicles had at the bottlenec& of route /.
Concerning the total cost of this scenario, !hen compared to the total cost of the )st
scenario, it presented a smaller value.
In the third scenario, the decision on the route that !as used to carry out the shipping of the
goods !as made !ith the aid of the proposed control element. In this case, it !as observed
that all cost factors !ere lo!er than the respective cost factors of all other scenarios. hus,
the total cost of this scenario, in comparison to the cost of all other scenarios, presented the
lo!est value.
For future !or&s, it is suggested the implementation of a computational algorithm that is
capable of calculating the customers9 arrival rate ;L< of a #ueue model that has more than
one service channel. In this case, this algorithm must meet the follo!ing constraints of the
desired #ueue model: service rate ;K<@ probability of finding a number of customers at the
top of a certain number of customers.
.
.% Conclusion
>hen it is considered the e$istence of uncertainties in the chain and it is #uantified their
potential impacts, it is possible to identify the set of decisions that minimize the ris&s faced
by the agent. hus, the results of this study confirmed the importance of considering the
possible interference of the behaviours of the agents involved, as !ell as possible
approaches to improve their decision ma&ing. Hpon completion of the !or&, it !as
possible to identify a greater consistency of freight carried !hen the decision of scheduling
transportation too& into account the e$pectation about the time, calculated by applying
#ueues stochastic models, !hich !ould be spent in #ueues. Furthermore, it !as also
possible to observe a reduction in storage time and the time of goods in transit after the
change in the decision process. a&ing in account the change that !as performed at the
decision process in this !or&, it could be reproduced in an e$isting supply chain through
the application of the proposed model and, furthermore, an increase in communication
bet!een the participants of the logistics net!or&. For e$ample, it is possible to increase the
communication through the follo!ing initiatives: use of information technology, and
sharing historical records among the participants. 8egarding reductions in storage time and
the time of goods in transit found in this !or& after the change in the decision process, it is
possible that these are considered beneficial in a supply chain. In this case, although this
study did not demonstrate these benefits, they are related to the reduction in the level of
safety stoc& held at the end of the supply chain as a result of a faster refuelling along the
chain. hus, this !or& demonstrated the possibility of achieving a better performance of a
port logistic chain !ithout necessarily ma&ing a change in its structure or infrastructure,
only by improving the synchronization of transport flo!s through the application of a
#ueueing model for supporting dispatching decision ma&ing.
Ac7nowledgment
his paper !as supported by 1imio GGC.
Conflict of &nterests
he authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this
paper.
(eferences
()* ?alente, %. M.@ :assaglia, E.@ Cruz, E. %.@ Mello, E. C.@ Carvalho, '. %.@ Mayerle,
1.@ 1antos, 1. Bualidade E :rodutividade 'os ransportes. 1Yo :aulo: Cengage
Gearning, -..p, -775.
(-* +i,,ar, M. F.@ %le$im, F. M. /. %valiaZYo do acesso aos terminais portu[rios e
.
ferrovi[rios de cont\ineres no /rasil. CoppeadIHF8E, Centro de Estudos em
Gog]stica, acessible at: http:II!!!.coppead.ufr,.brIpt"
brIuploadIpublicacoesI%rtGog^1E^-773.pdfI
(.* Chin, %.@ ongzon, E. Maintaining 1ingapore as a ma,or shipping and air transport
hub. In: oh, . ;Ed.<, Competitiveness of the 1ingapore Economy. 1ingapore:
1ingapore Hniversity :ress, p. 5."))0, )665.
(0* /ittencourt, 8. Modelo de apoio ao controle de acesso de ve]culos pelo modal
rodovi[rio ,unto aos portos utilizando tecnologia 8FIC. CissertaZYo ;Mestrado em
Engenharia Civil<, Hniversidade Federal de 1anta Catarina, Florian_polis, -7)-.
(2* 1harif, A., +uynh, '., ` ?idal, E. M. ;-7))<. %pplication of El Farol model for
managing marine terminal gate congestion. 8esearch in ransportation
Economics, .-;)<, 5)"56.
(3* Chen, =., =ovindan, a., ` bang, c. ;-7).<. Managing truc& arrivals !ith time
!indo!s to alleviate gate congestion at container terminals. International Eournal
of :roduction Economics, )0);)<, )46")55.
(4* bang, /.@ /urns, '.C. Implications of postponement for the supply chain.
International Eournal of :roduction 8esearch, v.0), n.6, p.-742"-767, -77..
(5* 1cholz"8eiter, /., Frazzon, E. M., Ma&usche!itz, . Integrating manufacturing
and logistic systems along global supply chains. CI8: Eournal of Manufacturing
1cience and echnology. , v.-, p.-)3 " --., -7)7.
(6* Frazzon, E. M.@ Goureiro, 1.@ Arlando Fontes Gima E8.@ 1cholz"8eiter, /.: %
ano!ledge Management %pproach for the Integration of Manufacturing and
Gogistics in =lobal :roduction 'et!or&s. In: 00th CI8: Conference on
Manufacturing 1ystems, -7)).
()7* 1choll, %. 8obuste :lanung und Aptimierung: =rundlagen, aonzepte und
Methoden " E$perimentelle Hntersuchungen. :hysica: +eidelberg@ -77).
())* Mula E., :eidro C., C]az"Madrodero M., ?icens E. Mathematical programming
models for supply chain production and transport planning. European Eournal of
Aperational 8esearch -7)7@ -70@ .44".67.
()-* +uisman, C., 8. Freling, et al.: % 8obust 1olution %pproach to the Cynamic
?ehicle 1cheduling :roblem, ransportation 1cience .5 ;-770< 0, pp. 004"025.
().* +erronelen, >.@ Geus, 8.: :ro,ect scheduling under uncertainty: 1urvey and
research potentials, European Eournal of Aperational 8esearch ;-772<, )32 ;-<, pp.
-56".73.
()0* %ssad, %. %. ;)646<. Models for rail transportation. ransportation 8esearch :art
%, )0, -72"--7.
()2* /odin, G., =odeln, /., %ssad, %., /all, M ;)65.<. 8outing and scheduling of
vehicles and cre!s: he state of the art. Computers ` Aperations 8esearch, v. )7,
n. -, p. 3."-)).
()3* Cunha, C. /. ;)664<. Hma contribuiZYo para o problema de roteirizaZYo de
ve]culos com restriZees operacionais. 1Yo :aulo: E:H1:, Cepartamento de
Engenharia de ransporte. ---p.
()4* /onasser, H. A., =ualda, '. C. F. Hm problema de roteirizaZYo nas operaZees de
transporte da forZa afrea brasileira, g?III %':E 5")- 'ovember -770,
Florian_polis.
()5* :apadopoulos, +.., +eavey, C. ;)663<. Bueueing theory in manufacturing
systems analysis and design: % classification of models for production and transfer
lines. European Eournal of Aperational 8esearch, 6-, )"-4.
()6* %bdel&ader, b. +., %l">ohaibi, M. Computing the :erformance Measures in
Bueueing Models via the Method of Arder 1tatistics. 1ournal of A""lied
.
2athematics, vol -7)), %rticle IC 467-2., )- pages, -7)).
(-7* CragoviD, /., :ar&, 'am"ayu, crniD, '. h., and MeitroviD, 8. Mathematical
Models of Multiserver Bueuing 1ystem for Cynamic :erformance Evaluation in
:ort. 2athematical Pro3lems in Engineering, vol -7)-, %rticle IC 4)75.0, )6
pages, -7)-.
(-)* >u, +sin"Chieh, Chen, . % Fuzzy"'eural Ensemble and =eometric 8ule Fusion
%pproach for 1cheduling a >afer Fabrication Factory. 2athematical Pro3lems in
Engineering, vol -7)., %rticle IC 623645, )0 pages, -7)..
(--* sai, +orng"8en, Chen, . % Fuzzy 'onlinear :rogramming %pproach for
Aptimizing the :erformance of a Four"Ab,ective Fluctuation 1moothing 8ule in a
>afer Fabrication Factory. 1ournal of A""lied 2athematics, vol -7)., %rticle IC
4-7374, )2 pages, -7)..
(-.* :an!al&er, 1.1, Is&ander, >. ;)644<. % survey of scheduling rules. Aperations
8esearch, v. -2, n. ), p. )")5.
(-0* %zimi. :., +aleh, +., %lidoost, M. he 1election of the /est Control 8ule for a
Multiple"Goad %=? 1ystem Hsing 1imulation and Fuzzy M%CM in a Fle$ible
Manufacturing 1ystem. 2odelling and Simulation in Engineering, vol -7)7,
%rticle IC 5-)47), )) pages, -7)7.
(-2* /o!erso$, C. E., Closs, C. E. ;)656<. % simulation in logistics: % revie! of present
practice and a loo& to the future. Eournal of /usiness Gogistics, v. )7, n. ), p. ).."
)05.
(-3* Micu, %., Micu, %. E., M%zilescu, ?., 'istor, C. ;-775<. 1imulation in logistics
net!or& conte$t: heoretical approach of the optimization process. Hniversitatii
:etrol F =aze din :loiesti, v. Gg, n. 0, p. 62")70.
(-4* 1!aminathan, E. M., 1mith, 1. F., 1adeh, '. M. Modeling supply chain dynamics:
a multiagent approach. Cecision 1ciences, v.-6, n.., p.374"3.), )665.