Large-scale Network

The large-scale network example is going to provide a more complex and real existed network so that we are able to proof that our model can be applied in the real word.

1. Network presentation parameters assumption

We design our large-scale network depending on the network from DHL. DHL network has three global hubs in Hong Kong, Leipzig and Cincinnati. Shanghai Pudong Airport

recently becomes the fourth global hub and services the shipments between China and countries in North Asia or the shipments from North Asia to America and Europe. The fourth global hub will share the freights volume in Hong Kong airport which handles the shipments between Asia and Europe, America originally. Thus, we choose Hong Kong Airport and Shanghai Pudong Airport to be our transshipping hub in the network and service the shipments from Taiwan and Japan to Germany which is the assumed demand for the large-scale network.

The nodes in large-scale network are presented in Table 4.7. There are 31 nodes

including service centers in Taiwan, Japan and Germany, transshipping airports and seaports.

Figure 4.2 is the locations of airports.

Table 4.7 The nodes in large-scale network

 Five service centers in Taiwan :

Neihu (Neh), Zhonghe (Zoh), Taoyuan (Tyu), Taichung (Tch), Kaohsiung(Khs)

 Five service centers in Japan

Minato (TYM), Nerima (TYN), Nagoya Central (NGC), Namiyoke (OAA), Osaka Central (OSC)

Service centers in the origin

Airport and Seaport in the origin

 Two airports and two seaport in Taiwan:

Taoyuan International Airport (TPE), Kaohsiung International Airport / Seaport (KHH), Keelung port (KEL)

 Four airports and two seaport in Japan:

Narita International Airport (NRT), Tokyo International Airport / Seaport (HND), Central Japan International Airport/ Seaport (NGO), Kansai

Transshipping global hub

 Hong Kong International Airport (HKG)

 Shanghai Pudong Airport / Seaport (SHA)

The other airport and seaport

 Five airports and seaports in America ,China, Dubai and Russia:

Dubai International Airport/ Seaport (DXB), Vancouver International Airport/ Port Metro Vancouver (YVR), Los Angeles International (LAX) Airport, Moscow Airport (MOW), Urumqi Airport (URC)

Airport in the destination

 Four airports in Europe

Leipzig/Halle Airport (LEJ), Frankfurt Airport (FRA), Vienna International Airport (VIE), Parchim International Airport (SZW)

Service center in the destination

 Three service centers in Germany

Berlin (Bel), Greven (Grv), Hanau (Han)

Figure 4.2 The rough location of the airports in the large-scale natwork

The network involves 30 potential O-D pairs. The intermodal connections exist at every node which are connecting the airports and seaports, highway network and rail terminals. The difference with small network is that after shipments are delivered through transshipping global hubs, the model can choose whether or not to pass by the other airports or directly arrive the airports in the destination in the large scale network. It means the more complex network it is.

Part of parameters is set according to the data from DHL. The others data are from the websites. For example, the travel time, available capacities from the other carriers and own flights capacities are set from the flight information in the airports’ and airlines’ websites. The demand in the large-scale network is presented in Table 4.8. The cargos with shipment

number 1 belong to the constant value commodities. The cargos with shipment number 2 are the technologic products whose value will decline after six days. The cargos with shipment number 2 are the holiday gifts whose value will decline after three days.

Table 4.8 The parameters assumption of demand and time value function in the large-scale network

b (origin, destination) shipment demand (ton)

time value function (thousand dollars) 1 (Osaka Central Service

Centre , Berlin)

28 𝜇^𝑏(𝑡) = 1000

2 ( Zhonghe, Greven) 20

𝜇^𝑏(𝑡) = {15000 , 0 < 𝑡 ≤ 5760 13670 , 𝑡 > 5760 3 ( Namiyoke Service

Centre , Hanau)

30 𝜇^𝑏(𝑡) = {9000 , 0 < 𝑡 ≤ 4320 0 , 𝑡 > 4320

2. Disruption scenarios design

Three disruption scenarios are developed for large-scale network. Scenario one is failed in Hong Kong International Airport. The real happened events, Japan earthquake and Icelandic volcano, are simulated in scenario two and three.

Scenario 1: Hong Kong International Airport failed

We know that all the shipments in DHL express need to be consolidated to the Hong Kong hub and then be transported to the destinations. The Hong Kong International Airport is the critical node in the DHL’s network. Thus, we are going to design the scenario which is failed in Hong Kong International Airport and realize which recovery activities will be adopted. The company can regard this result as the reference to develop the proactive strategies in advance.

In this scenario the impacted parameter is only 𝛾₁₈. Scenario 2 : Japan Earthquake

The massive magnitude 9 earthquake triggered a devastating tsunami in Japan on Friday, 11 March, 2011. The tsunami brought the big catastrophe to Japan. When a wall of water struck about 400 km north-east of Tokyo, many cars, ships and buildings were

broke out in the centre of the city. Four trains are missing along the coast, says Japan Railways.

Thus, it caused many transportation terminals to be shut down. Narita International Airport (NRT) and Tokyo International Airport (HND) were closed and checked the runways. The subway didn’t run. Six main harbors were destroyed by tsunami and also be closed. It predicted that they were difficult to recover in short term.

In this scenario, we consider that the links, nodes and modes failed simultaneously.

The scenario depict in Table 4.9.

Table 4.9 The scenario assumption for Japan earthquake Link failed: Road system in Japan failed partly.

Rail service in Japan doesn’t work.

The Flight which start from Tokyo International Airport (HND) to HKG and SHA are partly cancelled.

Node failed: Narita International Airport (NRT) is closed.

Mode failed: Trucks in Japan are broken.

Scenario 3 : Icelandic volcano eruptions

In April, 2010, a lingering ash which was spewed from an Iceland volcano continued to wreak havoc on air travel across Europe. It caused the largest shutdown of European air space. Major air cargo and passenger hubs were forced to be closed for days at a time and hundreds of flights were cancelled. The Emirates airline reportedly loses US$1 million in air traffic chaos. Similarly, other airlines are expected to lose hundreds and thousands of dollars.

In this scenario, we consider that all the flights which arrive airports in Europe are cancelled. The failure type belongs to failure link.