IET Intelligent Transport Systems

Special Section: Scientific Seminar of the Italian Association of

Transport Academicians (SIDT) 2019

Modelling and simulation of a new urban ISSN 1751-956X

Received on 19th October 2019
Revised 14th May 2020
freight distribution system based on Accepted on 29th June 2020
E-First on 28th July 2020
automatic van platooning and fixed split up doi: 10.1049/iet-its.2019.0681
www.ietdl.org

locations
Marino Lupi1 , Antonio Pratelli1, Alessandro Farina1
1Department of Civil and Industrial Engineering, University of Pisa, Largo Lucio Lazzarino 2, Pisa, Italy
E-mail: marino.lupi@unipi.it

Abstract: A new freight delivery system based on automated vans is presented. Vans travel in platoons, whose first vehicle is
driven and the others are driverless, during large part of their delivery routes. Each platoon moves from the Urban Distribution
Centre (UDC) to a dedicated location close to the city centre, where the platoon is split up. At the split up location, the driver
gets off the first van and each van of the platoon, independently from the others, carries out the last part of its delivery route
moving without any driver. Meanwhile, the driver moves to another split up location or to the UDC, where a driver is needed.
After completing their deliveries, vans return to the same split up location and gather again in a platoon; a driver accesses the
first vehicle, then the platoon returns to the UDC. A methodology to design the proposed transport system has been developed.
The methodology comprises two routing algorithms to optimise: platoon routes from the UDC to split up locations; single van
routes from split up locations to receivers and return; and a microsimulator to assess, heuristically, the number of vehicles
needed to operate the system and the schedule of driver activities.

1 Introduction emissions; while urban mobility accounts for 32% of energy

The fragmentation of demand for urban freight transport (e.g.
numerous independent retail outlets located in a city centre),
combined with the fragmentation of supply of urban freight
transport (e.g. numerous wholesalers and other suppliers using
their own vehicles to make just-in-time deliveries), results in a
greater number of freight transport movements, with only part-
loads, than would occur if both demand and supply were more
concentrated. Instead, the larger retail chains have higher traffic
volumes and are more likely, by working with their logistics
providers, to be able to optimise their deliveries in terms of overall
efficiency. Diversity in the retail sector provided by small- and
medium-sized independent retail outlets offers greater choice for
consumers and consequently produces wider benefits to society.
However, large retailers have economies of scale in freight
transport services, greater logistics efficiency (particularly lower
transport costs), and a more sustainable distribution. Inefficiency in
urban freight distribution can be highlighted by the following
phenomena:
• low load factors of freight vehicles and empty trips;
• a high number of deliveries made to a given retailer within a
given time period;
• long dwell times at loading and unloading points.
Inefficiency in distribution leads to additional costs for transport
operators, which would normally be passed on to receivers/
shippers (in the case of third party transport operators) or absorbed
as costs for own account transport operators. These costs are
ultimately borne by the economy as a whole. However, shippers,
receivers, and their transport operators do not always have a
significant incentive to increase the efficiency of deliveries to
reduce costs. This occurs because transport cost is often only a
small proportion of the final value of the goods and the overall
costs borne by shippers/receivers (MDS [1]).
The current situation of freight deliveries in urban areas is no
longer sustainable from the environmental point of view. In ISPRA
[2] (in Russo and Comi [3]), it is reported that urban areas consume
about 70% of energy and produce about 80% of greenhouse gas
consumption and 40% of all CO2 emissions of road transport and
up to 70% of other pollutants from transport. Several empirical
studies have calculated that the total vehicle-kilometres (km)
travelled by freight vehicles account for 14% of total vehicle-km
travelled in urban areas; in addition, vehicles employed for city
logistics consume 19% of energy and are responsible for 21% of
CO2 emissions on the total vehicles travelling in urban areas
(Schoemaker et al. [4]).
Dablanc [5] reported that the dimension of freight vehicles is
too large and that their average load factor is very low, about 30%:
often deliveries are performed by trucks instead of vans. As a
result, it is common to see several trucks stopping one after another
in front of a retailer to discharge only a few items.
The establishment of Urban Distribution Centres (UDCs) is
considered one of the most effective measures against
environmental problems connected to city logistics (Allen et al.
[6]). At UDCs, freight is transhipped from large trucks, which
perform long-distance transport, to small and eco-friendly vans,
which carry out the last mile distribution. However, the localisation
of UDCs is problematic. Indeed, if UDCs are placed close to the
city centre, large trucks travel in congested parts of the urban area.
If UDCs are settled in peripheral zones, small vans must cover long
distances, therefore several drivers are needed: these results in high
operating costs (Crainic et al. [7]).
A possible solution to the above-mentioned UDC localisation
problems comes from the so-called ‘cross-docking’ concept. The
cross-docking has been applied for a long time in several logistic
fields and consists of a rapid (by using handling units) transfer of
freight, directly from a vehicle to another (see Gonzalez-Feliu [8]).
Several possible applications of cross-docking to city logistics have
been studied: for example in the project TraMeS, funded by the
Tuscany Region in Italy [9].
The freight delivery system based on cross-docking and
proposed in the project TraMeS works as follows. Freight is
consolidated at the UDC into load units of standard dimension,
equal to that of a euro pallet; each load unit contains freight
directed to a set of receivers close to each other. These load units
are transported by medium-sized trucks from the UDC to some
specific locations close to the city centre, where they are unloaded

IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047 1034
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
from trucks and directly loaded in small vans, with the help of a
handling unit, e.g. a forklift. Both trucks and vans are guided by a
driver. The usage of load units and handling units allows a rapid
transhipment of freight from trucks to vans. However, the cross-
docking system shows three main disadvantages:
(i) two cargo transfers take place instead of one, therefore delivery
times increase;
(ii) a large number of load units is necessary: this increases the
system costs;
(iii) it is necessary to reserve several locations around the city
centre for cross-docking operations and equip them with handling
units: this also increases the system costs. This space is much
reduced compared to that required by an UDC, but it must be wide
enough to allow a forklift to unload freight from a vehicle to
another, and it is considerably higher than the space required by the
proposed transport system to split up and recompose platoons.
Moreover, it is necessary to buy a handling unit for each cross-
docking place.
The current trends of city logistics are moving towards the
employment of electric and autonomous vehicles for last-mile
deliveries. As reported by Kusumakar et al. [10], autonomous
vehicles have been used in logistics for a long time: automated
vehicles have been operating since 1990 in the Delta terminal of
the port of Rotterdam.
Since that time, the technology lying behind autonomous
driving has deeply improved: currently, autonomous vehicles are
equipped by several types of sensors which allow them to travel in
real and congested urban environments: radars, sonars, LiDARS,
and video cameras: see Martìnez-Diaz et al. [11] (pp. 565–566).
These sensors are connected to a software which regulates the
motion of the vehicle, according to the information collected by
sensors.
Currently, the technology related to autonomous driving has
been developed in such a way that automated vehicles are capable
of performing any type of manoeuvre and of avoiding any kind of
obstacle. However, several legal issues are still a limit to the
development of transport systems based on fully driverless
vehicles. In ([11], p. 576), it is reported that, if a driverless vehicle
causes an accident, it is difficult to determine the responsible.
Several applications of fully automated vehicles to urban
transport have been performed, e.g. the CITYLOG project (see
Dell'Amico and Hadjidimitriou [12]) and the FURBOT project (see
Cepolina and Farina [13]), both for city logistics; the CityMobil
project (see Alessandrini et al. [14]) for urban passenger transport.
Other applications of fully automated and electric vehicles to urban
transport are the CRISTAL project [15] for passenger transport,
managed by the automotive French group Lohr, and the Velud
project [16] for freight transport, developed by the Ecole
d'Ingénieurs en Génie des Systèmes Industriels of La Rochelle, in
partnership with Renault, in the context of the ADEME call for
projects AACT-AIR 2014.
Stevens [17] proposed an important application of automated
vehicles: automated platooning. Automated platooning occurs
when a series of vehicles follow automatically behind a leading
vehicle. A useful platooning scheme could be platoons in which the
lead vehicle has a driver and the other follow driverless.
Such a vehicle platooning scheme shows several benefits.
Firstly, several legal issues are overcome: in case of an accident,
the platoon is ‘represented’ by the driver of the first vehicle.
However he is not the only responsible in case of an accident: the
responsibility must be determined case by case and it is shared with
the manufacturer of the automated vehicles, or the person in charge
of vehicle maintenance. Secondly, this vehicle platooning scheme
allows a relevant saving in staff costs, compared to the case in
which all vehicles are driven. Thirdly, driverless vehicles can travel
at a low speed, around 5 km/h (this speed value depends above all
on weather conditions: in case of very good weather a driverless
vehicle could reach the speed of 10 km/h, in case of very bad
weather the speed could be below 3 km/h), while the proposed
vehicle platoons can travel at a much higher speed, about 40–50  the following sub-problems:
km/h. Finally, vehicle platooning allows energy saving: the
IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
aerodynamic resistance is much lower than the case in which all
vehicles travel alone.
In order to allow a platoon to maintain a relatively high speed, it
is necessary to efficiently control the distances among the vehicles
composing the platoon: Xia et al. [18] proposed a novel platoon
distancing control system.
A similar application to that proposed in this paper has been
developed in the SafePlatoon project. Platoons of automated
vehicles are considered, in which only the first one is driven and
the others are driverless. Within this project, innovative platoon
control algorithms have been developed especially suited for
congested urban environments; they are described in Gechter et al.
[19] and Avanzini et al. [20].
In this paper, a new freight delivery system is presented; this
system is based on automated vans, capable of moving without the
need of a driver. However, during a large part of their delivery
routes, such vans travel in platoons, of which the first vehicle is
driven and the others are driverless.
In the proposed transport system, vehicles composing each
platoon are identical: each vehicle can both be driven and travel
driverless, each vehicle could transport both the driver and the
freight, all vehicles have the same dimensions and capacity.
The first vehicle of the platoon is driven and it does not
transport freight: it is used for the driver relocation after the
platoon is broken. The other vehicles of the platoon are driverless
and transport freight.
It was chosen to involve identical vehicles because if the freight
transport demand changes (e.g. a large retailer is settled or some
shops change their location) it is much easier to modify the scheme
of deliveries: e.g. it is easy to change the number of vehicles in
each platoon.
Each platoon of vans moves from the UDC to a dedicated
location, close to the city centre, so-called ‘split up location’,
where the platoon is split up. There are several split up locations in
the urban area, each one serves a specific part of the city centre;
but each platoon has only one destination, a split up location,
where the platoon is split up.
At the split up location, the platoon is broken and each van of
the platoon (apart from the first one, which is driven and does not
contain freight), independently from the others, carries out the last
part of its delivery route moving without any driver. During this
time, the driver continues driving the first vehicle of the broken
platoon to relocate to another split up location or to the UDC,
where a driver is needed.
After completing their deliveries, all vans return to the same
split up location and gather again in a platoon; here, a driver adds
to the platoon the vehicle he is driving, which becomes the platoon
leader; then the platoon (whose first vehicle is driven and does not
carry freight, while the others are driverless and transport freight)
returns to the UDC.
Then, the vehicles which have formed the given platoon could
be loaded again at the UDC with other freight and form another
platoon. This platoon of vehicles could transport demand directed
to the same split up location as before, or to another split up
location of the study area.
The design of the proposed transport system has been divided
into sub-problems; some of them have been solved by means of
optimisation algorithms, while the remaining ones have been
solved with the help of a micro simulator. All details of the
transport system design problem are described in Sections 2, 3, and
4.
The proposed freight delivery system has been applied to the
historical city centre of Lucca in Italy. The application case study is
described in Section 5, while the results of the application of the
proposed methodology to Lucca are shown in Section 6.
Conclusions follow.
2 Design of the proposed freight transport
system
The design of the proposed transport system has been divided into
1035
(i) assignment of each receiver of deliveries to the best split up
location;
(ii) aggregation of vehicles into platoons, for trips from the UDC to
the split up locations and vice versa;
(iii) optimisation of platoon trips from the UDC to the split up
locations and return;
(iv) optimisation of single vehicles trips from split up locations to
receivers and return;
(v) optimisation of drivers activities;
(vi) definition of the departure time of each platoon trip.
The methodology to solve the transport design problem consists of:
• a set of optimisation algorithms in sequence, which optimise the
first four sub-problems mentioned above;
• a simulator, which solves in a heuristic way the fifth and sixth
sub-problems.
The methodology receives in input:
• freight transport demand;
• road network;
• number of split up locations;
• positions of the UDC, of split up locations, and of receivers;
• time interval available to perform deliveries.
The methodology provides in the output:
• number of vehicles, number of drivers and number of platoons,
necessary to operate the system;
• time at which deliveries are completed;
• waiting time of platoons for a driver at split up locations.
The road network of the study area is represented through a graph,
where links represent road sections, while nodes represent: road
intersections, UDCs, split up locations, and receivers positions
(commercial activities). Since there is a very high number of
receivers in the study area, often very close to each other, a node
generally represents the position of more than one receiver. In the
proposed transport system, each node represents all receivers
located in a road section long about 50 m.
The cost of the links is taken equal to travel times, as this is the
most relevant cost component in urban areas. The average travel
times of links are determined according to the link lengths and
average speeds, which are calculated from the usual traffic
situation in the time period of the day when deliveries take place.
The first sub-problem concerns the assignment of each
receiver (commercial activity) to the best (closest) split up location.
This assignment has been performed by means of a simple k-means
clustering algorithm. Simple k-means clustering is a method of
cluster analysis which aims to partition n observations into k
clusters in which each observation belongs to the cluster with the
nearest mean (Zhu et al. [21]). In the case under study, the
observations are the receivers and there is a cluster for each split up
location.
Generally, in clustering algorithm, air line distances are used,
but in this specific case study, the use of air line distances is not
correct. Indeed, air line distances do not take into account the real
geometrical layout of the road network, the speed of each road link,
one-way restrictions, and other limitations currently in force. As a
result, each receiver has been assigned to the best split up location
taking into account the real paths of minimum travel time, from
split up locations to the receiver, and vice versa. The paths of
minimum travel time, from all split up locations to each receiver,
and vice versa, have been determined by means of the Dijkstra
algorithm. The number and position of split up locations are
defined a priori. Split up locations are placed in strategic positions
of the study area, where enough space is available.
As regards the second sub-problem, vehicles are aggregated
into platoons at the UDC according to the split up location of
destination. It is considered that each vehicle belongs to the same
platoon both from the UDC to the split up location and vice versa.
1036
The number of vehicles composing each platoon is not fixed.
However, it must be considered that long platoons travel with
difficulty, while short platoons are not convenient economically. As
reported in more detail at the beginning of Section 3, the vehicle
chosen is long 3.5 m, therefore, we assumed that the length of
platoons is comprised between 5 and 8 vehicles, excluding the
empty vehicle, added to allow the driver relocations. This
maximum platoon length is assumed because the proposed
transport system is applied to cities, where the dimension of the
roads does not allow too long trains of vehicles.
The length of platoons is different from a split up location to
another. For a given split up location, we aim at having platoons: as
long as possible, and of almost the same length. For example, if 42
vehicles are assigned to a given split up location, it is preferable to
have six platoons of seven vehicles each: if platoons of eight
vehicles are chosen, the first five platoons are composed of eight
vehicles, but the last one must be made of two vehicles: however,
we do not want this.
Delivery trips of vehicles composing the platoon must have a
similar duration: otherwise, some vehicles have to wait also for a
long time at the split up location before the platoon is recomposed.
Delivery trips are sorted in ascending order and are assigned one
by one to platoons: in this way, platoons are composed of vehicles
whose delivery trips are of similar duration.
The third sub-problem concerns the optimisation of platoon
paths from the UDC to the split up locations, and vice versa. These
optimal platoon paths (of minimum travel time) are determined
again through the Dijkstra algorithm.
The fourth sub-problem of the proposed transport system
concerns the optimisation of delivery trips from split up locations
to receivers. In each split up location, the deliveries are organised
independently from the organisation of the deliveries in the other
split up locations. Indeed, each platoon splits up and recomposes at
the same location; moreover, each customer is served by one and
only one split up location. Therefore, this sub-problem can be
addressed as a sum of independent single-depot capacitated vehicle
routing problems, where each split up location plays the role of a
depot. Each single-depot capacitated vehicle routing problem is
solved using a genetic algorithm. Further details on this sub-
problem are provided in Section 3.
The fifth sub-problem concerns: the definition of the number
of drivers and the design of driver activities.
In the proposed transport system, driver activities are the
following:
• drive the first vehicle of a platoon: from the UDC to a split up
location, or vice versa;
• wait at the UDC or at a split up location, for the first platoon to
be driven;
• move (‘relocate’) from a location to another (split up location or
UDC). The driver does not relocate on foot or by bike: it drives
an empty vehicle (i.e. it does not transport goods), added at the
beginning of the platoon, which will be used by the driver to
move to another location after the platoon is broken. This
vehicle is the same as the others which can all be driven or move
driverless.
The sixth sub-problem concerns: the definition of the number of
vehicles and the design of the departure time of each platoon trip
from the UDC. Indeed, after completing their delivery trips,
vehicles composing a platoon can be ‘re-used’ to perform other
delivery trips and to form other platoons.
The fifth and sixth sub-problems are solved through simulation,
as described in Section 4.
3 Proposed solution to the fourth sub-problem
The fourth sub-problem of the proposed transport system that
concerns the optimisation of delivery trips from split up locations
to receivers is faced as a set of single depot capacitated vehicle
routing problems, where each split up location plays the role of a
depot. This type of problem has been addressed several times in the
literature (Ho et al. [22]; Crevier et al. [23]).
IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Fig. 1  The chosen vehicle: it can both be driven (upper part of the figure) and move driverless (lower part)
The problem is faced independently for each split up location
and concerns the definition of the set of deliveries to be consigned
to the receivers in a given trip. All vehicles are considered of the
same size.
In order to determine the vehicle capacity, some types of
existing electric automated vans have been studied. A suitable van,
according to both dimensions and mechanical performances, is the
ATX 100E, produced by Alké, whose overall capacity is about 500  formalised as follows.
kg [24]. This type of vehicle has been chosen because it is capable
of travelling in very narrow roads, such as the ones of Lucca city
centre. The average weight of consignments in the proposed case
study is about 65 kg: as a result, each vehicle is capable of
transporting, on an average, seven consignments. The chosen
vehicle is shown in Fig. 1.
As each node represents more than one receiver, the demand
associated with a given node could be very high. In order to
simplify the solution algorithm, the demand is not expressed in kg
of freight but the number of standard deliveries: e.g. if a demand of
130 kg is associated with a given node, this demand is expressed as
two standard deliveries (of 65 kg). If the number of standard
deliveries associated with a given node is not an integer, it is
rounded to the closest integer: e.g. if the demand of a given node is
of 150 kg, equal to 2.31 standard deliveries (of 65 kg), this demand
is taken equal to two deliveries.
It is possible that the demand associated with a given node is
greater than the vehicle capacity. For example, the demand
associated with a node could be equal to nine standard deliveries
and the capacity of a vehicle is equal to seven deliveries. In this
case, in the model considered, the first seven deliveries are
consigned together in the same vehicle, which performs a single
stop at the receiver node. The remaining two deliveries instead are
consigned together with deliveries to other nodes, therefore a
vehicle transports these two deliveries plus the other five deliveries
directed to other nodes.
At first, we selected all delivery trips performing a single stop,
i.e. having a single destination node. These trips actually consist of
the paths from a split up location to the given destination node and
return. These are optimised simply by a Dijkstra algorithm and
therefore they are excluded by the vehicle routing problem.
IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
As a result, the only delivery trips solved by the vehicle routing
problem are those having more than one receiver node (therefore
more than one intermediate stop).
3.1 Capacitated vehicle routing problem
Each single-depot capacitated vehicle routing problem is
The target of this problem is to minimise the costs of the
deliveries. A route is a round trip with intermediate stops. The cost,
Cp, that in this case of study is the travel time, of a route p, is the
sum of the costs of the links belonging to p
1 if i ∈ p
Cp = ∑ ciδip; δip =
0 otherwise
(1)
i
The capacitated vehicle routing is one of the best-known problems
of operative research: a fixed fleet of delivery vehicles of a given
capacity must service known customer demands for a single
commodity from a common depot at minimum transit cost (Toth
and Vigo [25]).
The problem can be formalised as follows.
Given a complete graph G = (V, A), where V is the set of nodes
and A is the set of links, the nodes i = 1,…, n correspond to
customers, while node ‘0’ corresponds to the depot, which
represents the split up location. Each link (i,j)∈A has been
associated with a non-negative cost cij, which is the cost for
running from node i to node j. In general, loops are not allowed and
this is formalised by imposing cii = +∞, ∀i∈V. The number of
routes is fixed a priori. K is the set of all routes. qi is the demand
associated with each customer visited by a circuit and Ck the
capacity of the vehicle performing the route k
1 if(i, j) ∈ A belongs to the route k, k ∈ K
Variable: xikj =
0 otherwise
(2)
Cost function: min ∑ ∑ ci j xikj
k ∈ K (i, j) ∈ A
1037
 Constraints: route is composed of eight elements, i.e. the identifier of the depot
and the identifiers of the receiver nodes of the seven deliveries
∑ ∑ xikj = 1 ∀i ∈ V (3)
loaded in the vehicle.
k∈K j∈V
At each generic iteration t of the algorithm, the following
operations are applied:
∑ qi ∑ xikj ≤ Ck ∀k ∈ K (4)
i∈V j∈V
i. A given population of X t is known.
∑ xk j = 1
0 ∀k ∈ K (5)
ii. Selection of the two ‘parents’ chromosomes: from the
j∈V population X t of chromosomes available at iteration t, the two
chromosomes having the highest fitness are selected.
∑ xihk − ∑ xhk j = 0 ∀h ∈ V, ∀k ∈ K (6) iii. The following operations are applied n times: n is the number
i∈V j∈V of ‘children’ chromosomes created at the tth iteration of the
algorithm:
∑ xik ,0 =1 ∀k ∈ K (7)
i∈V 1. Among the two ‘parents’ chromosomes, the chromosome
is extracted, which will be used to generate the beginning
xi j ∈ 0, 1 ∀i, j ∈ V (8) of the child's genome. We will call this chromosome ‘first
chromosome’ in the following. The other chromosome will
The constraint (3) imposes that each customer is assigned exactly be called ‘second chromosome’.
to one delivery route; the constraint (4) imposes that the sum of the 2. Extraction of the routes in which crossover should be
demand values of all customers served by a given route must not performed: in order to preserve some parts of good
exceed the vehicle capacity. The constraint (5) imposes that each genome, crossover will be performed in such a way to
route must start from the depot; constraint (7) imposes that each keep some routes of the chromosome unaltered. Therefore,
route must end at the depot. The constraint (6) imposes that, given according to Ren [27], a string of 0 and 1 is extracted.
a generic node h, the number of times that a vehicle reaches the Each element of the string corresponds to a route,
node is equal to the number of times that the vehicle leaves the therefore, if K routes are performed, the string contains K
node. Finally, according to the last constraint, the decision variable elements. If the generic element k of the string, k = 1,…, K,
xij must be binary. is equal to 0, then the crossover will be applied to the
A genetic algorithm has been proposed for solving each single- corresponding route. If the element of the string is equal to
depot routing problem. The fitness function is 1, no crossover will be applied to the corresponding route.
For each route, the position of the crossover is extracted
− min ∑ ∑ ci j xikj (9)
randomly.
k ∈ K (i, j) ∈ A 3. Crossover: each route is composed of eight elements. The
position of the crossover, i.e. between the depot and the
3.2 Genetic algorithm first stop, between the first stop and the second stop,…,
between the seventh stop and the depot, is extracted
As reported in Goldberg [26], genetic algorithms are adaptive randomly.
heuristic search algorithms premised on the evolutionary ideas of 4. Integration of the missing elements, elimination of
natural selection and genetic. Genetic algorithms are aimed at repeated elements: it usually happens that for some
simulating evolution processes, similar to those that take place in receivers too many deliveries appear in the chromosome
natural systems that follow the principle by Darwin of the survival ‘son’ (e.g. for a receiver, which has a demand of two
of the fittest. deliveries, five deliveries may appear) and for some other
Genetic algorithms are based on the observation of the receivers too few deliveries appear (e.g. for a receiver,
evolution of a population of individuals: individuals combine which has a demand of two deliveries, only one delivery,
themselves to generate new individuals in successive generations or even no deliveries, may appear). Therefore, the
and the evolutionary process tends to select only the most suitable. deliveries in excess are deleted and the missing deliveries
Each individual is matched with a solution, and to each solution, a are integrated into the chromosome.
fitness (which is indeed a measure of the quality of the solution) is 5. Mutation: two positions in the chromosome are extracted.
associated: only the individuals of high quality (i.e. high fitness) These positions must not correspond to the split up
are selected. Each individual (i.e. each chromosome) is defined by location. The boxes corresponding to the two extracted
a set of n integer variables. The algorithm starts with an initial positions are exchanged.
population of chromosomes (distinct solutions generated in some iv. When the n children chromosomes are generated, the fitness of
way) and tries to optimise the fitness of the population by the children chromosomes is evaluated. The initial population
recombination (cross-over) and mutation of genes in the course of of the (t + 1)th iteration, i.e. Xt+1, is generated by deleting the n
several generations. The process is repeated until a given number
of populations is generated or the optimality of the best solution chromosomes having the least fitness.
found is demonstrated.
A solution algorithm for the capacitated vehicle routing A screenshot of this procedure is shown in Fig. 2.
problem has been proposed by Ren [27]. The algorithm is stopped when for 50 consecutive iterations the
The proposed algorithm works as follows. same two parent chromosomes are selected. Among these, the
An initial population of 50 chromosomes is randomly chromosome having the highest fitness will be the best solution.
generated: This algorithm works under the assumption that all deliveries have
the same weight and dimension, equal to the average one. This
assumption is much unrealistic but, for the proposed case study, the
X 0 = x10, …, x50
0
. (10) data at disposal concern only average values and not the detailed
weight and dimension of deliveries to each retailer.
The chosen dimension for the initial population is coherent with
the works by Zheng and Zhang [28] and Zhu [29], and, in the
chosen configuration, it ensures a good exploration of the search 4 Microsimulation
space. A simple event-based microsimulation of the proposed transport
Each chromosome is composed of all routes that are performed system model has been developed. The simulation model is used to
on a given day. At the beginning of Section 3, it was reported that solve, in a heuristic way, the above-mentioned sub-problems 5 and
each vehicle has a capacity of seven deliveries, therefore, each 6. The sub-problem 5 concerns the optimisation of the number of

1038 IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Fig. 2  Definition of the population of chromosomes

Table 1 Selection of the activity of each vehicle in the morning scenario

ID vehicle ID split ID platoon Departure time Arrival time of Return time of Waiting time Departure time of Arrival time of
up from UDC, min vehicle (being vehicle at the at the split up vehicle (being vehicle (being
part of a split up for the driver's part of a platoon) part of a
platoon) at the location, min arrival, min from the split up platoon) at the
split up location, location, min UDC, min
min
1 1 1.1 0 5.26 29.81 2.03 36 39.63
2 1 1.1 0 5.26 32.32 2.03 36 39.63
3 1 1.1 0 5.26 32.32 2.03 36 39.63
4 1 1.1 0 5.26 32.33 2.03 36 39.63
5 1 1.1 0 5.26 33.19 2.03 36 39.63
6 1 1.1 0 5.26 33.97 2.03 36 39.63
1 1 1.2 44 49.26 78.68 1.02 81 84.63
2 1 1.2 44 49.26 78.68 1.02 81 84.63
3 1 1.2 44 49.26 78.68 1.02 81 84.63
4 1 1.2 44 49.26 78.68 1.02 81 84.63
5 1 1.2 44 49.26 78.68 1.02 81 84.63
6 1 1.2 44 49.26 79.98 1.02 81 84.63
1 1 1.3 89 93.26 123.58 0 131 134.63
2 1 1.3 89 93.26 125.64 0 131 134.63
3 1 1.3 89 93.26 126.59 0 131 134.63
4 1 1.3 89 93.26 127.52 0 131 134.63
5 1 1.3 89 93.26 127.98 0 131 134.63
6 1 1.3 89 93.26 130.93 0 131 134.63
Each row of the table corresponds to a delivery trip. When a vehicle performs the first delivery trip, the corresponding row values are in roman. When it performs the second delivery
trip, the corresponding row values are in italic. When it performs the third delivery trip, the corresponding row values are in bold. A full description of the table content is provided in
the text.

drivers and the design of driver activities, while the sub-problem 6
regards the optimisation of the number of vehicles and the
definition of departure times of each platoon from the UDC.
The number of drivers and the driver activities, the number of
vehicles necessary to operate the service, and the departure times
of platoons, are strongly inter-related.
We defined several scenarios, each one consisting of a different:
number of drivers, schedule of driver activities, the sequence of
delivery trips that each vehicle performs during the time period.
For each scenario, we need to provide in input to the simulation:
• departure times of platoons from the UDC,
• number of drivers needed to operate the system.
We started with an ‘a priori scenario’, heuristically defined.
In addition to the previous two input data, the simulation
receives in input also all the transport system parameters,
optimised, or designed in the preceding phases of the methodology:
assignment of vehicle trips to split up locations; number of
platoons; optimal platoon trips from the UDC to split up locations
and return; optimal vehicle trips from split up locations to receivers
and return.
The simulator provides in the output:
• sequence of activities of each platoon and each vehicle (a
selection of them, for the application case considered in the
study, for the morning period, is reported in Table 1),
• waiting times of platoons at split up locations, before a driver is
available,
• time necessary to complete all deliveries.
We studied by simulation several scenarios until we found the one
for which they are minimum:
• the number of vehicles and drivers necessary,
• the time necessary to complete deliveries,
• the waiting times of platoons at split up locations before a driver
is available.
The simulator represents the second-by-second activity of each
vehicle, of each platoon of vehicles, and of each driver.
The simulated events, in temporal order, are the following:

IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047 1039
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
• departure of a platoon from the UDC;
• arrival of the platoon at the split up location;
• platoon split up (which occurs immediately after the arrival of
the platoon at the split up location);
• departure of each vehicle composing the platoon from the split
up location and beginning of the last part of delivery trips (it
occurs immediately after the platoon split up);
• return of each vehicle of the platoon at the split up location after
performing all delivery trips;
• departure of the platoon from the split up location;
• arrival of the platoon at the UDC.

Then also the following events were considered, which take place
in parallel to the previous ones and involve each driver:

• departure of a driver from the UDC,

• departure of a driver from a split up location,
• arrival of a driver at a split up location, Fig. 3  Traffic zones in the city centre of Lucca. Free access area is in
• arrival of a driver at the UDC. white. ‘LTZ’ is marked in yellow. ‘P’ zone is marked in green

The application to the Lucca case study, reported in Section 6.1,

allows us to clearly understand how the simulation process
operates.
In this paper, travel times are estimated according to the link
lengths and to the average speeds, which are calculated from the
usual traffic situation in the time period of the day when the
delivery takes place. Future development of the research will be to
solve sub-problems 5 and 6 by taking into account the real-time
traffic conditions and especially the real-time position of vehicles
and platoons. A more advanced object-oriented micro simulator
will be developed to dynamically represent and evaluate such a
scenario.

5 Lucca case study

The proposed freight delivery system has been applied to the case
study of the historical city centre of Lucca in Italy.
Lucca city centre is a flat oval area, with the diameters of
around 1.8 and 1.0 km. Access of commercial vehicles to the
historical city centre is restricted, due to narrow streets and high
pedestrian flows. The city centre (the part of the city which is
surrounded by the historical wall) has been divided into three zones
(see Fig. 3):
• Free access area: all vehicles can circulate and park (in the
allowed spaces). The free area corresponds to the most outer
parts of the city centre.
• Limited traffic zone (LTZ): access and parking is allowed only
for residents and freight delivery vehicles,
• ‘P’ zone (pedestrian area): only short-term parking of a
maximum 25 min along the road is allowed for residents and
delivery vehicles.
Additional restrictions apply to freight vehicles: they differ
according to the type of customer, type of cargo (perishable goods,
medicines & drugs, fuels, and tobacco), and they are different in
the LTZ and P zone. To simplify the simulation process, we take
into consideration only the additional restriction that commercial
vehicles must perform the shortest possible path inside the P zone.
In addition, it must be underlined that the situation of
congestion is different from morning to afternoon scenarios:
indeed, in the afternoon, high pedestrian flows in some main roads
of the city centre makes it difficult for commercial vehicles to
travel on them.
In the following, we will refer to ‘city centre’ as the ‘sum’ of
the three areas previously described.
The city of Lucca has only one UDC, called Luccaport, outside
the city centre, in the west part of the periphery and close to the
two existing toll gates to take motorways: see Fig. 4. Although the
position of Luccaport is strategic, it manages only 15% of
deliveries. The rest of the demand is managed by distributors and
by retailers on their own accounts. However, we hypothesise that
Fig. 4  Location of the UDC (in blue) and of the split-up locations (in red)
also these will make use of Luccaport if the proposed transport
system is in operation. Therefore, we consider, in this research, that
100% of freight transport demand use the proposed transport
system.
The proportion of deliveries in the various periods of the day is
the following (Di Bugno et al. [30]): from 6 to 8 a.m. 8.8%; from 8
to 10 a.m. 26.9%; from 10 to 12 a.m. 29.1%; from 12 a.m. to 2
p.m. 6.5%; from 2 to 4 p.m. 9.2%; from 4 to 6 p.m. 15.7%; about
4% in the rest of the day. We decided to simulate the proposed
methodology in two periods of the day: 8–12 a.m., and 4–6 p.m.: in
fact, the demand during these periods is higher; moreover, the
pedestrian flows on the city centre roads are very high in the
afternoon and much lower in the morning.
Two simulations have been performed for Lucca case study:
• morning simulation, with a duration of 4 h (from 8 to 12 a.m.)
and a demand equal to 56% of the overall daily demand;
• afternoon simulation, with a duration of 2 h (from 4 to 6 p.m.)
and a demand of 18% of the overall daily demand: in this period
only a few deliveries are performed if compared to the morning,
but it is an interesting scenario to study because some main
roads of the city centre, e.g. Via Fillungo, are characterised of
higher travel times because of high pedestrian flows.
In Di Bugno et al. [30], deliveries are divided by typologies (e.g.
clothes, groceries, furniture, paper, electronics etc.) and also shops
are classified in the same way (e.g. clothes shops, grocery shops
etc.); moreover, the following information is provided: the number
of shops of each typology in Lucca city centre, the average number
of deliveries of each typology performed in every day of the week,
the average weight of each typology of delivery.

1040 IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Fig. 5  Position of split up locations (blue dots) and of commercial activities (red dots). The dimension of red dots is proportional to the amount of freight
demand of each node. Split up location 1 is in Porta S. Anna, the second one is in Porta S. Maria, the third one is in Porta S. Pietro, the fourth one is in Porta
Elisa
Lucca area has been discretised into nodes and links: 210 nodes
and 418 uni-directional links. Nodes represent not only
intersections but also groups of receivers, located in a 50 m road
section; all receivers' positions are approximated to the closest
node. As a result, the demand of a node is equal to the sum of the
demand of all receivers approximated by that node. More details
about the discretisation of the study area are reported in Letnik et
al. [31]. The demand of a node is expressed in ‘standard’
shipments (of 65 kg each); if the demand of a node is not an
integer, e.g. it is equal to 6.2 standard shipments, it is rounded to
the closest integer: in this case, six shipments.
The overall demand of Lucca city centre is equal to 1332
‘standard’ shipments per day. The morning demand is equal to 56%
of 1332, which is 746 standard shipments, while the afternoon
demand is equal to 18%, which is 240 shipments. As the volume of
deliveries is not reported in Di Bugno et al. [30], the capacity of
vehicles is calculated in terms of weight.
The position of split up locations was determined according to
the conformation of the study area. Indeed, Lucca city centre is
completely surrounded by historic walls; split up locations are
located just inside the city centre, close to the four main historic
access gates, where there is a sufficient space to accommodate
several platoons of vehicles. In Fig. 4, the position of the UDC and
of split up locations, within the urban area of Lucca, is shown. In
Fig. 5, it is shown the position of split up locations (in blue) and of
commercial activities (in red).
6 Simulation results
6.1 Results concerning the morning simulation
The number of ‘standard’ shipments of the morning period has
resulted equal to 746. They are delivered by 108 trips. The number
of vehicle platoons has been equal to
• three platoons of six vehicles for the first split up location,
IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
• two platoons of seven vehicles and two platoons of six vehicles
for the second split up location,
• five platoons of eight vehicles and one platoon of seven vehicles
for the third split up location,
• two platoons of six vehicles and one platoon of five vehicles for
the fourth split up location.
In the simulation process, the number of drivers was initially set
equal to 4, one for each split up location, but, after the first
simulation results, it has been reduced to 3. The time necessary to
complete all deliveries has resulted in 165 min, which is less than
the time at disposal to perform the deliveries, i.e. 4 h. The
maximum waiting time of a platoon for a driver at a split up
location has resulted in nearly 10 min, at the second split up
location.
A selection of the activities, of each vehicle, for the morning
scenario, is reported in Table 1. Each row of the table corresponds
to a delivery trip, from the split up location to all receivers and
return. It does not simply refer to a vehicle because the same
vehicle may perform more than one delivery trip in the morning
period.
An identifier (a number) is associated with each vehicle
(vehicle, not trip). The identification number of the vehicle is
reported in the first column.
An identifier is associated with each split up location: 1 is the
split up in Porta S. Anna (west of Lucca), 2 that in Porta S. Maria
(north), 3 that in Porta S. Pietro (south), 4 that in Porta Elisa (east).
In the second column, it is reported the identifier of the split up
location: from which the vehicle departs to perform the last part of
delivery trips, and to which it returns after completing all deliveries
to receivers.
An identifier is given to each platoon. For example, the
identifier 1.2 refers to the second platoon of the first split up
location. In the third column, it is reported the identifier of the
platoon to which the vehicle belongs.
1041
Table 2 Selection of driver activities (considering only the first driver) in the morning scenario
Driver 1
type of trip Departure time of the Arrival time of the ID of the platoon ID split up location to
driver, min driver, min driven by the driver, which the platoon is
min assigned, min
driving a platoon from UDC to split up 1 0 5.26 1.1 1
relocating from split up 1 to UDC 6 11.26 — —
driving a platoon from UDC to split up 2 12 19.5 2.2 2
relocating from split up 2 to split up 1 21 27.1 — —
driving a platoon from split up 1 to UDC 36 39.6 1.1 1
driving a platoon from UDC to split up 3 47 54.66 4 3
driving a platoon from split up 3 to UDC 57 62.3 3.2 3
driving a platoon from UDC to split up 3 67 74.66 3.6 3
driving a platoon from split up 3 to UDC 76 81.3 3.3 3
driving a platoon from UDC to split up 3 85 92.66 3.5 3
driving a platoon from split up 3 to UDC 94 99.28 3.4 3
relocating from UDC to split up 3 100 107.7 — —
driving a platoon from split up 3 to UDC 120 125.3 3.6 3
relocating from UDC to split up 2 126 133.5 — —
driving a platoon from split up 2 to UDC 136 144 2.4 2
Each row refers to a driver activity: if the driver drives a platoon from the UDC to a split up location, the row values are written in roman; if the driver drives a platoon from a split
up location to the UDC, the row values are written in bold; if the driver relocates, the row values are written in italic. A detailed description of the table content is provided in the
text.

It can be seen that the same vehicle number may appear more
than one time in the table. For example, in Table 1, vehicles 1 to 6
appear three times. It means that after completing the first delivery
trip, the same vehicles are used to perform the other two delivery
trips. When a vehicle performs the first delivery trip, the
corresponding row values are in roman. When it performs the
second delivery trip, the corresponding row values are in italic.
When it performs the third delivery trip, the corresponding row
values are in bold.
The fourth column reports the time at which the vehicle (which,
in this phase of the delivery trip, is part of a platoon) departs from
the UDC, directed towards the split up location. The time is
computed from the beginning of the simulation and it is reported in
minutes.
The fifth column reports the time at which the vehicle arrives at
the split up location. The platoon, of which the vehicle is part, is
broken and the vehicle, moving automatically, begins performing
the delivery trip to retailers.
The sixth column reports the time at which the vehicle has
finished the deliveries to retailers and has just returned to the split
up location. The return times of the first five vehicles of the second
platoon are the same because these trips perform a single delivery
at the same receiver node; the return times, in general, are not,
obviously, the same.
The seventh column reports the waiting time of the vehicle at
the split up location, before the driver arrives. When all vehicles
forming the platoon have arrived at the split up, if a driver is
available, the platoon can depart immediately. Otherwise, vehicles
have to wait for a driver. For example, 2.03, in the first six rows,
means that the first platoon, which must depart from the first split
up location, has to wait 2.03 min for the arrival of the driver, who
is relocating from the second split up location. The waiting time
2.03 is the difference between the time at which the platoon could
depart if a driver were available, i.e. 33.97 min, and the time at
which the platoon really departs after the driver's arrival, i.e. 36
min.
The eighth column reports the departure time of the vehicle
(which, in this phase, is part of a platoon) from the split up
location, and towards the UDC.
The ninth (and last) column reports the arrival time of the
vehicle at the UDC. From this time, the vehicle is available to carry
out another vehicle trip (i.e. for being part of another platoon). An
average time for loading such small vehicles is about 4–5 min:
after that time, the vehicle can depart from the UDC in the platoon
for another delivery trip. For example, in Table 1, vehicles 1–6
arrive at the UDC at time 39.6 and depart again from the UDC at
the time 44 (red rows of the table).
From the simulation applied to the morning scenario, it turns
out that 50 vehicles are needed to operate all deliveries, while the
total number of delivery trips is 108. In addition, the other three
vehicles are needed for driver relocation: this number is equal to
the number of drivers; these vehicles are added at the beginning of
each platoon and do not carry freight.
In Table 2, a selection of the schedule of driver activities, for
the morning scenario, is reported. As reported in Section 4.1, we
defined, at the beginning of the simulation process, a schedule for
driver activities, that we defined ‘a priori scenario’, then we
determined heuristically the best scenario for each driver which
minimises: the number of drivers necessary, and the waiting times
of platoons for a driver at the split up locations. For each scenario,
we created a table reporting the schedule of driver activities,
similar to Table 2. Table 2 shows a selection of the schedule of
driver activities of the ‘optimal scenario’.
The first column of Table 2 reports the type of driver activity: i.e.
driving a platoon from the UDC to a split up location, driving a
platoon from a split up location to the UDC, relocating from a split
up location to another.
The second column reports the departure time of the driver, i.e. the
time at which the driver activity, reported in the first column,
begins.
The third column reports the arrival time of the driver, i.e. the time
at which the driver activity, reported in the first column, ends.
If the driver is driving a platoon, the fourth column reports the
identifier of the platoon and the fifth column reports the identifier
of the split-up location to which the platoon has been assigned. If
the driver is relocating, these two spaces are empty.
In Table 3, the values of some synthetic performance indicators,
for the morning scenario, are provided:
• travel time of automated vehicles while travelling in a platoon
(first column) [min];
• travel time of automated vehicles while moving driverless
(second column) [min];
• waiting time, at the split up location, for the arrival of the other
vehicles of the platoon (third column) [min]. It is calculated as
the difference between the time at which each vehicle of the
platoon has returned to the split up location (after completing all

1042 IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 deliveries), and the time at which the platoon is ready to depart 6.2 Results concerning the afternoon scenario
from the split up location if a driver is available;
The afternoon scenario takes place between 4 and 6 p.m. The
• waiting time for the driver at split up locations (fourth column)
number of ‘standard’ deliveries in the afternoon has resulted in
[min]. It is calculated as the difference between the time at
equal to 240. They are delivered by 35 trips.
which the platoon could depart if a driver were available, and
The number of platoons is:
the time at which the platoon really departs after the driver's
arrival;
• one platoon of six vehicles for the first split up location,
• distance travelled by automated vehicles while travelling in a
• one platoon of eight vehicles for the second split up location,
platoon (fifth column) [km];
• two platoons of eight vehicles for the third split up location,
• distance travelled by automated vehicles while moving
driverless (sixth column) [km]. • one platoon of five vehicles for the fourth split up location.

For these indicators, it is calculated for the morning scenario:
• the total value (first row): e.g. 1473 min is equal to the sum of
the travel times of all platoons in the morning scenario;
• the average value (second row): e.g. 13.64 is the ratio between
the total travel time of automated vehicles while travelling in
platoons (i.e. 1473 min) and the total number of delivery trips
(i.e. 108);
• the maximum value (third row): e.g. 18.43 min is the maximum
travel time of platoons in the morning scenario.
As far as the driver activities are concerned, the following synthetic
performance indicators have resulted:
(i) Driver 1:
• total working time: 108 min;
• total idle time: 36 min;
(ii) Driver 2:
• total working time: 128 min;
• total idle time: 37 min;
(iii) Driver 3:
• total working time: 122 min;
• total idle time: 13 min.
The total working time of a driver is the total time, spent by the
given driver, driving, and relocating. The total idle time is the total
time in which the driver is inactive, i.e. when he is not driving a
platoon nor relocating. The system is well managed when the total
working time is high and the total idle time is low.
The number of drivers has been initially set equal to 1 (in the ‘a
priori scenario’), but, with this choice, deliveries could not be
performed in the time available, which is equal to 2 h.
Consequently, the number of drivers was increased to 2. The total
time necessary to complete deliveries is 119 min, just below the
maximum time available, which is 2 h. The number of vehicles
necessary to perform deliveries in the afternoon scenario is 22, plus
two vehicles necessary to allow the driver relocations: two is the
number of drivers; these vehicles do not carry freight, they are
driven (by a driver) and are added at the beginning of each platoon.
Table 4 reports the performance indicator values in the
afternoon scenario. The type of information reported in Table 4 is
the same as in Table 3, which reports the performance indicator
values for the morning scenario.
The indicator ‘waiting time for the other vehicles of the platoon
at split up location’ (second column of Table 4) registers much
higher values in the afternoon scenario than in morning scenario,
for the reasons indicated below.
In general, the duration of a delivery trip, from a split up
location to a receiver and return, is very different from a delivery
trip to another. If several platoons arrive and depart to/from a given
split up location, as it usually occurs in the morning scenario, it is
possible to aggregate, in the same platoon, delivery trips having
similar durations: this results in a low waiting time for the other
vehicles of the platoon at the split up location. However, if only
one platoon serves a given split up location, as it usually occurs in
the afternoon scenario, all delivery trips to/from the given split up
location must be aggregated to the same platoon, even if their
duration is considerably different from a delivery trip to another:
this results in high waiting time for the other vehicles of the
platoon at the split up location, in the afternoon scenario.
As regards the ‘waiting time for the driver at the split up
location’ (third column), in the afternoon scenario it is
considerably lower than in the morning scenario, because in the
afternoon scenario there is an ‘excess of drivers’. Indeed the
system could have been operated also with only one driver, instead
of two drivers, but in this way, all deliveries would not be
completed within the time available.

Table 3 Performance synthetic indicators of the proposed transport system, morning scenario
Morning Travel time in Waiting time for the Waiting time for the Travel time Distance Distance
scenario platoons, min other vehicles of the driver at the split up driverless, min travelled in travelled
platoon at the split up location, min platoons, km driverless, km
location, min
total 1473.3 240.5 289.2 3383 613.9 169.2
average per trip 13.64 2.23 2.68 31.32 5.65 1.57
max per trip 18.43 10.66 9.74 45.11 7.68 2.26
(morning)

Table 4 Performance synthetic indicators of the proposed transport system, afternoon scenario
Afternoon Travel time in Waiting time for the Waiting time for the Travel time Distance Distance
scenario platoons, min other vehicles of the driver at the split up driverless, min travelled in travelled
platoon at the split up location, min platoons, km driverless, km
location, min
total 474.5 288.0 49.2 1228.6 197.7 61.4
average per trip 13.56 8.23 1.41 35.10 5.65 1.76
max per trip 18.25 18.62 4.62 51.53 7.68 4.29
(afternoon)

IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047 1043
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 As far as the driver activities are concerned, the following
synthetic performance indicators have resulted:
(i) Driver 1:
• total working time: 50 min;
• total idle time: 67 min;
(ii) Driver 2:
• total working time: 52 min;
• total idle time: 68 min.
The idle time of drivers in the afternoon scenario is very high
because, as reported above, in the afternoon scenario there is an
‘excess of drivers’ ought to the necessity to complete the deliveries
in the time available.
6.3 Comparison of the proposed transport system with the
current situation of freight deliveries in the Lucca scenario
The proposed transport system has been compared with the current
freight delivery scenario.
Data about the current scenario are reported in Di Bugno et al.
[30] and Letnik et al. [31].
In the current scenario, only 15% of delivery trips to Lucca city
centre are managed by the UDC ‘Luccaport’, i.e. 85% of delivery
trips are direct trips from outside Lucca to the city centre and
return: an example of such trips is represented in grey in Fig. 6. We
took as origins of these trips: the two motorway toll gates and the
intersection points of the main access roads to Lucca with the
Lucca urban area border (see the red dots in Fig. 6). These delivery
trips are round trip ones: they reach all receivers in the city centre
then return back to the origin.
Delivery trips managed by the UDC ‘Luccaport’ and
transporting freight directed to the city centre of Lucca are split
into two parts:
• ‘Outer’ delivery trips from outside Lucca to the UDC and
return. These trips have an origin at the two motorway toll gates,
and at the intersection points of the main access roads to Lucca
with the urban area border (see the red dots in Fig. 6), they reach
the UDC, then return back to the origin. These trips are
represented in blue in Fig. 6
• ‘Inner’ delivery trips, from the UDC to Lucca city centre and
return. At the UDC, the freight, transported to the UDC by the
‘outer’ delivery trips, is re-arranged, according to the receivers'
positions. The ‘inner’ delivery trips transport the freight from
the UDC to the receivers in the city centre and return empty to
the UDC. These trips are represented in green in Fig. 6.
For example (see Fig. 6) a shipment coming from O1 and with
destination, the receivers R1 and R2 in Lucca city centre, is carried
by an ‘outer’ delivery trip from O1 to the UDC, and by an ‘inner’
delivery trip from the UDC to the receivers.
In the proposed transport system, all delivery trips of freight
with destination the city centre are managed by the UDC.
Therefore, all delivery trips in the proposed transport system are
split into ‘outer’ delivery trips (represented in blue in Fig. 6) and
‘inner’ ones (represented in green in Fig. 6). The vehicles
performing the ‘inner’ delivery trips travel in platoons from the
UDC to the split up location, and vice versa. The blue dots in Fig. 6
represent the split up locations.
In Sections 6.1 and 6.2, we neglected the optimisation of ‘outer’
delivery trips as they are not an object of the optimisation proposed
in this paper. However, they have been taken into account in this
section in order to compare the proposed transport system with the
current scenario. Therefore the travel time, the km travelled, the
CO2 emissions, the fuel consumption, reported in the column
‘proposed transport system’ of Table 5, include also the travel time,
the km travelled, the CO2 emissions, the fuel consumption of the
‘outer’ part of the delivery.
In the current scenario, the number of delivery trips entering in
Lucca urban area is equal to 532 in the morning and 142 in the
1044
afternoon. The number of delivery trips not managed by the UDC
is equal to 85% of the total number of trips, i.e. 452 in the morning
and 121 in the afternoon. The number of trips managed by the
UDC is equal to 15% of the total delivery trips: 80 ‘outer’ delivery
trips in the morning and 21 in the afternoon. At the UDC, the
freight is re-arranged in 30 ‘inner’ delivery trips in the morning
and eight in the afternoon.
In the current scenario, the UDC manages some trips having
origin: at the two motorway toll gates, or on the west, on the south
or the north of Lucca. Trips having origin on the east of Lucca, in
the current scenario, are not managed by the UDC, as it is
necessary to cross the entire urban area to reach the UDC. As
shown in Fig. 6, the UDC is located on the west side of Lucca city.
In the proposed transport system, the number of ‘outer’ delivery
trips, of freight with destination the city centre, is the same as in
the current scenario: 532 in the morning and 142 in the afternoon.
In the proposed transport systems, all deliveries are considered
passing through the UDC (also trips having origin in the east of
Lucca). At the UDC, the freight is consolidated in the automated
vehicles, and it is transported to the city centre by the ‘inner’
delivery trips, which are considerably less: 108 in the morning and
35 in the afternoon, as shown, respectively, in Section 6.1 and 6.2.
In Table 5 it is reported:
• the total time, in minutes, travelled by freight vehicles to
perform all deliveries (first row):
– for trips not managed by the UDC, which are considered only
in the current scenario, it is equal to the sum of the travel time
of all trips, from the urban area border to all receivers and
return (an example of this kind of trip is shown in grey in
Fig. 6);
– for trips managed by the UDC, it is equal to the sum of the
travel time of all ‘outer’ and ‘inner’ delivery trips
(represented, respectively, in blue and green in Fig. 6);
• the maximum duration of a delivery trip, in minutes, from Lucca
urban area border to all receivers and return (second row):
– for trips not managed by the UDC, it is equal to the duration
of the longest delivery trip, from the urban area border to all
receivers and return;
– for trips managed by the UDC, a shipment is delivered to a
given receiver by a succession of an ‘outer’ + an ‘inner’
delivery trip. The maximum duration is equal to the sum of
the travel time of the longest succession of the ‘outer’ + 
‘inner’ delivery trip. Also the return trip, from the receiver to
the UDC and back to the urban area border, is taken into
account;
• the total distance, in km, travelled by freight vehicles to perform
all deliveries (third row):
– for trips not managed by the UDC, it is equal to the sum of
the length of all trips, from the urban area border to all
receivers and return;
– for trips managed by the UDC, it is equal to the sum of the
length of both ‘outer’ and ‘inner’ delivery trips;
• the length, in km, of the longest delivery trip, from Lucca urban
area border to all receivers and return (fourth row):
– for trips not managed by the UDC, it is equal to the length of
the longest delivery trip, from the urban area border to all
receivers and return;
– for trips managed by the UDC, freight is delivered to a given
receiver by a succession of an ‘outer’ + an ‘inner’ delivery
trip. The maximum length of a delivery trip is equal to the
length of the longest succession of ‘outer’ + ‘inner’ delivery
trip;
• the total kg of CO2 emitted by freight vehicles while performing
all delivery trips (fifth row);
• the total diesel fuel consumption and the total electric energy
consumption of freight vehicles while performing all delivery
trips (sixth and seventh row).
IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
 the CO2 emission of an electric vehicle is equal to 68.023 g
CO2/km.
The maximum travel time of a single trip has considerably
increased from the current to the proposed scenario. This occurs
because

(i) in the proposed transport system, delivery trips have become

much longer as they all cross the UDC. Instead, in the current
scenario, the trips having origin on the east of Lucca are not
managed by the UDC (the UDC is located on the west side of the
city);
(ii) the automated vehicles travel more slowly than vehicles
currently used to perform deliveries in Lucca city centre.

However, the total travel time has reduced significantly from the
current scenario to the proposed transport system. This reduction
has occurred because the freight distribution, from the UDC to the
city centre, has been optimised, therefore the number of ‘inner’
trips, from the UDC to Lucca city centre, is very low. This is also
Fig. 6  The proposed transport system: representation of delivery trips. The due to the high load factor of vehicles in the proposed transport
urban area border is represented with the red line. Origins of the ‘outer’ system, compared to that in the current scenario.
trips are the red dots. Some examples of ‘outer’ trips are represented in The length of the longest trip is considerably greater in the
blue. Some examples of ‘inner’ trips are represented in green. Split-up proposed transport system. This occurs because all delivery trips
locations are represented with blue dots. Some examples of receivers are (also those coming from the east of Lucca) have to reach the UDC.
represented with violet dots. In grey, it is instead represented an example of Instead, the total km travelled to perform deliveries have strongly
the trip, not managed by the UDC, which runs directly from the origin of decreased, because the freight distribution, from the UDC to the
the trip, on the border of the city centre, to the receivers: these kinds of trips city centre, has been optimised, therefore the number of ‘inner’
are the great majority in the current scenario, but they are not considered trips, from the UDC to the city centre, is very low.
in the proposed transport system As far as total fuel consumption is concerned, a sharp decrease
can be observed from the current scenario to the proposed transport
Table 5 Comparison of the proposed transport system with system; but in the proposed transport system there is a relevant
the current scenario electric energy consumption that does not exist in the current
Current scenario Proposed transport scenario.
system Finally, CO2 emissions significantly decrease in the proposed
Morning Afternoon Morning Afternoon transport system, compared to the current scenario: this is due to
tot. travel time, min 12,391 5254 10,136 3316 the decrease in the total km travelled by freight vehicles in the
max travel time, min/ 51.0 80.0 78.4 86.0 proposed transport system.
trip Furthermore, it must be underlined that in the comparison
between the current scenario and the proposed transport system, it
total distance, km 5078.5 1349 3828.2 1071.5
was not considered air pollutants, such as particulate matter, PM10
max distance, km/ 17.0 15.3 19.1 19.0
and PM2.5; acidifying pollutants, NOx, SO2; non-methane volatile
trip
organic compounds (NMVOCs) emissions. As far as these air
total CO2 emissions, 1542.8 397.6 1178.1 317.8
pollutants are concerned, the proposed transport system, based on
kg electric vehicles, is without any doubt superior to the current
tot. fuel 585.2 156.2 346.3 92.4 scenario.
consumption, l
tot. electric energy 0.0 0.0 525.0 147.0 6.4 Future developments of this study
consumption, kWh
In this paper, we provided the first design of the proposed transport
system, especially as regards sub-problems 5 and 6, i.e. the design
The calculation of fuel consumption and CO2 emissions for of, respectively, the driver and the vehicle activities.
In the evolution of the model, driver and vehicle activities will
vehicles with the thermal engine has been performed as suggested
be considered to be managed in real-time. A control centre for the
in Keller et al. [32]. Taking into account deliveries performed by
automated vehicles will be taken into account. The control centre
medium-sized commercial vehicles with diesel engine, the fuel
will receive in real-time the position of each freight vehicle, and
consumption is equal to about 11.4 l of diesel per 100 km, i.e.
the activities of vehicles and drivers (although planned ahead) will
0.114 l/km. Keller also proposes that CO2 emissions are equal to
be adapted in real-time to the system situation, especially if
2.65 kg/l. As a result, CO2 emissions are equal to 0.3021 kg/km. disruptions occur.
In the proposed transport system, only vehicles performing the A disruption may occur:
‘outer’ delivery trips are equipped with a thermal engine. Indeed,
the ‘inner’ delivery trips, i.e. from the UDC to the city centre, are • to a single-vehicle while moving driverless from the split up
performed by electric vehicles. location to receivers and return;
Electric vehicles do not directly emit CO2, but it was considered • to the vehicle platoon, while travelling from the UDC to the split
the CO2 emission due to electric energy production. In European up location or vice versa.
Commission, Directorate-General for Regional and Urban policy
[33] (p. 141), an emission factor is reported, for the calculation of If a strong delay occurs to a single-vehicle while moving
the economic impact of CO2 emissions of electric vehicles, in a driverless, the other vehicles composing the platoon, to which the
cost–benefit analysis: it is equal to 496 g CO2/kWh. delayed vehicle belongs, do not wait for it and form the platoon
The electric vehicle chosen to operate deliveries from the UDC without this vehicle. When the delayed vehicle has finished all
to the city centre in the proposed transport system, namely the Alké deliveries, the control centre checks all split up locations to
ATX 100E, consumes, on average, 0.137 kWh/km [24]. As a result, determine whether some platoons are expected to depart in a short
time, then the control centre redirects the delayed vehicle to the

IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047 1045
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
closest split up location from which a platoon is expected to depart
shortly. The delayed vehicle is joined to this platoon and then
returns to the UDC.
If a disruption occurs to a vehicle platoon moving from the
UDC to the split up location, this causes a delay in the arrival time
of the platoon at the split up location: therefore, the activities of the
driver leading the platoon will be modified in real-time.
If a platoon records a delay in the return trip from the split up
location to the UDC, the activities of the driver leading the platoon
must be modified in real-time. If the vehicles forming the delayed
platoon are necessary to form a second platoon, after they have
arrived at the UDC, it is necessary to avoid that the second platoon
departs late from the UDC. Therefore, other vehicles must be put in
operation to form the second platoon or some vehicles which have
finished their activities must be used for this purpose.
In the evolution of the system, the driver activities can be
assigned in real-time, by the control centre, according to these
criteria:
• for each platoon, the forecasted time at which the platoon is
ready to depart, from the UDC or from the split up location, is
calculated based on real-time position of vehicles;
• for each driver, the forecasted time at which he finishes the
current driving activity is calculated basing on the platoon he is
currently driving.
Consequently
• a driver is assigned to each platoon according to a priority order:
the first platoon ready to depart is the one to which the driver is
assigned;
• if more than one platoon is ready to depart almost at the same
time, the closest driver is assigned to the closest platoon.
This scenario will be dynamically managed by a more advanced
object-oriented micro simulator. Herewith, the fundamental
management strategies of this new micro simulator have been
presented. The development of the new micro simulator concerns a
further stage of the study.
7 Conclusions
The current situation of freight deliveries in urban areas is no
longer sustainable particularly from the environmental point of
view.
One of the best solutions to city logistic problems is the
establishment of UDCs, where freight is transhipped from large
trucks, which perform the long-distance distribution, to small,
electric, and eco-friendly vans, which carry out the last mile
distribution. However, the localisation of UDCs is problematic.
Indeed, if UDCs are placed close to the city centre, large trucks
travel in congested parts of the urban area, with a high
environmental impact. If UDCs are placed far from the city centre,
e.g. inside freight villages, small vans must cover long distances,
therefore several drivers are needed and this results in high
operating costs.
In this paper, a freight delivery system is proposed which
allows us to locate UDCs far from the city centre, without
incurring high staff costs.
A methodology has been developed to design and optimise all
components of the proposed transport system: assignment of
receivers to split up locations; aggregation of vehicles into
platoons, optimisation of platoon trips from the UDC to split up
locations; optimisation of single-vehicle trips from split up
locations to receivers and return; definition of the number of
platoon trips from the UDC to split up locations; definition of the
number of drivers and vehicles necessary to operate the system.
The proposed transport system and methodology have been
applied to the historical city centre of Lucca. Lucca city centre is
characterised by very narrow roads and by high pedestrian flows:
in this scenario, the environmental impact of freight deliveries is
particularly severe.
1046
In the proposed transport system, all delivery trips to the city
centre are managed through the UDC, therefore, they are split into
‘outer’ trips, from the urban area border to the UDC (and return),
and ‘inner’ trips, from the UDC to the city centre of Lucca and
return. This increases the distance that must be travelled in the
‘outer’ trip part of the delivery. However, the ‘outer’ trips were
considered in the same number and from the same origin as the
urban area border as in the current scenario. This was done for a
comparison with the current scenario. Instead, it is conceivable that
a less number of vehicles with a higher load factor, and from more
favourable origins in the urban area border, will be used if all the
deliveries (freight) directed to Lucca is concentrated in the UDC.
In any case, in the proposed transport system, the deliveries
from the UDC to the city centre have been optimised: therefore, the
number of ‘inner’ trips is very low. As a result, the total travel time
of delivery trips and the total km travelled are much lower in the
proposed transport system, than in the current scenario, also
considering the ‘outer’ trips unchanged.
In addition, there is a relevant saving also in fossil fuel
consumption and a less relevant saving in CO2 emissions.
However, it must be underlined that, as far as particulate matter,
acidifying pollutants, NMVOCs, the proposed transport system,
based on electric vehicles, is without any doubt superior to the
current scenario.
Currently, the methodology, proposed to design and optimise
the system, has been developed by using a ‘static’ approach: the
driver and vehicle activities are designed taking into account
average travel times. A future development of this study concerns a
dynamic management of driver and vehicle activities, according to
real-time positions of vehicles and drivers. To this purpose, a more
advanced object-oriented micro simulator will be developed.
8 References
[1] MDS: ‘European Commission: Study on Urban Freight Transport’, DG
MOVE final report, 2012
[2] ISPRA: ‘Qualità dell'ambiente urbano’, V rapporto ISPRA, 2009
[3] Russo, F., Comi, A.: ‘City characteristics and urban goods movements: a way
to environmental transportation system in a sustainable city’, Proc.-Soc.
Behav. Sci., 2012, 39, pp. 61–73
[4] Schoemaker, J., Allen, J., Huschebek, M., et al.: ‘Quantification of urban
freight transport effects’ (BESTUFS Consortium, Karlsruhe, Germany, 2006)
[5] Dablanc, L.: ‘Goods transport in large european cities: difficult to organize,
difficult to modernize’, Transp. Res. A, Policy Pract., 2007, 41, (3), pp. 280–
285
[6] Allen, J., Browne, M., Woodburn, A., et al.: ‘The role of urban consolidation
centres in sustainable freight transport’, Transp. Rev., 2012, 32, pp. 473–490
[7] Crainic, T.G., Ricciardi, N., Storchi, G.: ‘Models for evaluating and planning
city logistics systems’, Transp. Sci., 2009, 43, pp. 432–454
[8] Gonzalez-Feliu, J.: ‘Freight distribution systems with cross-docking: a
multidisciplinary analysis’. J. Transp. Res. Forum, 2012, 51, (1), pp. 93–109
[9] TraMeS Consortium: ‘Trames – trasporto merci sostenibile. Sviluppo e
applicazione di tecnologie intermodali e di procedure logistiche innovative’,
TraMeS project brochure, 2013
[10] Kusumakar, R., Buning, L., Rieck, F., et al.: ‘INTRALOG – intelligent
autonomous truck applications in logistics; single and double articulated
autonomous reward docking on DCs’, IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2018, 12, (9),
pp. 1045–1052
[11] Martìnez-Diaz, M, Soriguera, F, Pèrez, I: ‘Autonomous driving: a bird's eye
view’, IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2019, 13, (4), pp. 563–579
[12] Dell'Amico, M., Hadjidimitriou, N.: ‘Innovative logistics model and
containers solution for efficient last mile delivery’, Procedia – Soc. Behav.
Sci., 2012, 48, pp. 1505–1514
[13] Cepolina, E.M., Farina, A.: ‘A new urban freight distribution scheme and an
optimization methodology for reducing its overall cost’, Eur. Transp. Res.
Rev., 2015, 7, (1), pp. 1–14
[14] Alessandrini, A., Campagna, A., Delle Site, P., et al.: ‘Automated vehicles
and the rethinking of mobility and cities’, Transp. Res. Procedia, 2015, 5, pp.
145–160
[15] Lohr website: CRISTAL project webpage: https://lohr.fr/new-mobilities/
cristal/, accessed April 2020
[16] EIGSI website: VELUD project webpage: https://www.eigsi.fr/recherche/
mobilite-intelligente/, accessed April 2020
[17] Stevens, A.: ‘Automated platooning’. Proc. IET Autonomous Vehicles Conf,
Greenwhich, May 2015
[18] Xia, Q., Gao, F., Duan, J., et al.: ‘Decoupled H∞ control of automated
vehicular platoons with complex interaction topologies’, IET Intell. Transp.
Syst., 2017, 11, (2), pp. 92–101
[19] Gechter, F., Koukam, A., Debain, C., et al.: ‘Platoon control algorithm
evaluation: metrics, configurations, perturbations, and scenarios’, J. Test.
Eval., 2020, 48, (2), pp. 1478–1504
IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
[20] Avanzini, P., Thuilot, B., Martinet, P.: ‘Manual convoying of automated urban
vehicles relying on monocular vision’. 2012 Intelligent Vehicles Symp.,
Alcalá de Henares, Spain, 3–7 June 2012
[21] Zhu, S., Wang, D., Li, T.: ‘Data clustering with size constraints’, Knowl.-
Based Syst., 2010, 23, (8), pp. 883–889
[22] Ho, W., Ho, G.T.S., Ji, P., et al.: ‘A hybrid genetic algorithm for the multi-
depot vehicle routing problem’, Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell., 2008, 21, pp. 548–
557
[23] Crevier, B., Cordeau, J.F., Laporte, G.: ‘The multi-depot vehicle routing
problem with inter-depot routes’, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 2007, 176, pp. 756–773
[24] Alké website: catalogue of electric vehicles, https://www.alke.it/cataloghi-
veicoli-elettrici, accessed May 2020
[25] Toth, P., Vigo, D.: ‘The vehicle routing problem’ (SIAM, Philadelphia, USA,
2012)
[26] Goldberg, D: ‘Genetic algorithms in search, optimization and machine
learning’ (Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1989)
[27] Ren, C.: ‘Applying genetic algorithm for capacitated vehicle routing
problem’. Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. Electronic & Mechanical Engineering and
Information Technology, EMEIT 2012, Shenyang, China, September 2012
[28] Zheng, Y., Zhang, G.: ‘A genetic algorithm for vehicle routing problem with
forward and reverse logistics’. Proc. 10th Int. Conf. on Wireless
IET Intell. Transp. Syst., 2020, Vol. 14 Iss. 9, pp. 1034-1047
© The Institution of Engineering and Technology 2020
Communications, Networking and Mobile Computing, WiCOM 2008, Dalian,
China, October 2008
[29] Zhu, K.Q.: ‘Population diversity in genetic algorithm for vehicle routing
problem with time windows’. PhD thesis, National University of Singapore,
2003
[30] Di Bugno, M., Guerra, S., Ambrosino, G., et al.: ‘CEDM – centre for eco-
friendly city freight distribution. Un approccio integrato alla city logistics’
(CEDM Consortium edition, Lucca), 2008
[31] Letnik, T., Farina, A., Mencinger, M., et al.: ‘Dynamic management of
loading bays for energy efficient urban freight deliveries’, Energy, 2018, 159,
pp. 916–928
[32] Keller, M., Hausberger, S., Samaras, C., et al.: ‘Parametrization of fuel
consumption and CO2 emissions of passenger cars and light commercial
vehicles for modelling purposes’, JRC Scientific and Technical Reports,
Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg, 2011
[33] European Commission: ‘Directorate-general for regional and urban policy:
‘guide to cost-benefit analysis of investment projects’ (Publications Office of
the European Union, Luxembourg, 2015)
1047