Compromising system and user interests in shelter location and evacuation planning

Creative Commons License

Bayram V., Tansel B. C., Yaman H.

TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART B-METHODOLOGICAL, vol.72, pp.146-163, 2015 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 72
  • Publication Date: 2015
  • Doi Number: 10.1016/j.trb.2014.11.010
  • Journal Name: TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH PART B-METHODOLOGICAL
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI), Scopus
  • Page Numbers: pp.146-163
  • Keywords: Evacuation traffic management, Shelter location, Traffic assignment, System optimal, Constrained system optimal, Second order cone programming, MULTIOBJECTIVE APPROACH, MODEL, EQUILIBRIUM, CONSTRAINTS, ASSIGNMENT, NETWORKS, FLOWS
  • TED University Affiliated: No

Abstract

Traffic management during an evacuation and the decision of where to locate the shelters are of critical importance to the performance of an evacuation plan. From the evacuation management authority's point of view, the desirable goal is to minimize the total evacuation time by computing a system optimum (SO). However, evacuees may not be willing to take long routes enforced on them by a SO solution; but they may consent to taking routes with lengths not longer than the shortest path to the nearest shelter site by more than a tolerable factor. We develop a model that optimally locates shelters and assigns evacuees to the nearest shelter sites by assigning them to shortest paths, shortest and nearest with a given degree of tolerance, so that the total evacuation time is minimized. As the travel time on a road segment is often modeled as a nonlinear function of the flow on the segment, the resulting model is a nonlinear mixed integer programming model. We develop a solution method that can handle practical size problems using second order cone programming techniques. Using our model, we investigate the importance of the number and locations of shelter sites and the trade-off between efficiency and fairness. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.