考虑时间满意度的应急物资储备库选址模型与算法

doi:10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.03.1158

中国安全科学学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (3): 188-194.doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2023.03.1158

考虑时间满意度的应急物资储备库选址模型与算法

周磊(), 李前鹏^**(), 李法朝

河北科技大学经济管理学院,河北石家庄 050018

收稿日期:2022-11-14 修回日期:2023-01-11 出版日期:2023-03-28 发布日期:2023-11-28
通讯作者: **李前鹏(1997—),男,江苏句容人,硕士研究生,主要研究方向为物流系统优化。E-mail:liqianpeng15@126.com。
作者简介:
周磊 (1981—),男,河北石家庄人,博士,副教授,硕士生导师,主要从事随机规划、物流系统优化方面的研究。E-mail:zhoulei19@126.com,
李法朝教授
基金资助:
国家自然科学基金资助(72101082); 河北省高等学校青年拔尖人才计划项目(BJ2021088); 河北省自然科学基金资助(F2021208011); 河北科技大学在读研究生创新能力培养项目(XJCXZZSS2022002)

Location model and algorithm of emergency material storage considering time satisfaction

ZHOU Lei(), LI Qianpeng^**(), LI Fachao

School of Economics and Management, Hebei University of Science and Technology, Shijiazhuang Hebei 050018, China

Received:2022-11-14 Revised:2023-01-11 Online:2023-03-28 Published:2023-11-28

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

为有效开展突发事件背景下的应急物资储备库选址工作。首先,考虑应急物资到达需求点的时间,以时间满意度最大和选址成本最小为目标,建立双目标混合整数规划模型;然后,在免疫算法中引入模拟退火算子,结合两者优点构建免疫模拟退火算法;最后,将位于四川省龙门山断裂带上的29个县市的汶川地震数据作为算例,求出选择2~8个应急物资储备库的选址方案并对比不同结果。结果表明:免疫模拟退火算法具有稳定性,选址数量为8的方案比之前研究时间满意度提升15.8%,选址成本减少26 268元。并且求得结果时间满意度与选址成本均优于免疫算法和模拟退火算法,有利于应急物资储备库选址。

关键词: 时间满意度, 应急物资储备库, 选址模型, 免疫模拟退火算法, 选址成本

Abstract:

The purpose of this paper aimed to effectively carry out the site selection of emergency material storage under the background of emergencies. Firstly, considering the time when emergency supplies arrive at the demand point, a bi-objective mixed integer programming model was established with the goal of maximizing time satisfaction and minimizing location cost. Then, the simulated annealing operator was introduced into the immune algorithm, and the immune simulated annealing algorithm was constructed by combining the advantages of the two operators. Finally, taking the Wenchuan earthquake data of 29 counties and cities located in the Longmenshan fault zone in Sichuan Province as an example, the site selection scheme for selecting 2-8 emergency material storage warehouses was worked out and the results of different schemes were compared. The results show that the immune simulated annealing algorithm is stable, and the time satisfaction of the scheme with 8 locations is increased by 15.8% compared with the previous study, and the location cost is reduced by 26 268 yuan. The time satisfaction and location cost of the results obtained are better than those of immune algorithm and simulated annealing algorithm, which is conducive to the location of emergency material storage.

Key words: time satisfaction, emergency material storage, location model, immune simulated annealing algorithm, location cost

周磊, 李前鹏, 李法朝. 考虑时间满意度的应急物资储备库选址模型与算法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2023, 33(3): 188-194.

ZHOU Lei, LI Qianpeng, LI Fachao. Location model and algorithm of emergency material storage considering time satisfaction[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2023, 33(3): 188-194.

图/表 11

图1

图2

表1

表2

表3

表4

图3

图4

表5

图5

图6

参考文献 10

[1]	应急管理部发布2021年全国自然灾害基本情况害[EB/OL]. (2022-01-22). https://www.mem.gov.cn/xw/yjglbgzdt/202201/t20220123_407204.shtml.
[2]	赖志柱, 王铮, 戈冬梅, 等. 多目标应急物流中心选址的鲁棒优化模型[J]. 运筹与管理, 2020, 29(5):74-83. doi: 10.12005/orms.2020.0121
	LAI Zhizhu, WANG Zheng, GE Dongmei, et al. A Multi-objective robust optimization model for emergency logistics center location[J]. Operations Research and Management Science, 2020, 29(5):74-83. doi: 10.12005/orms.2020.0121
[3]	CAO Qi, LEUNG K M, HOU Wenhua. Two-phase differential evolution for solving emergency response supplies optimisation problem[J]. European Journal of Industrial Engineering, 2021, 15(1): 103-130. doi: 10.1504/EJIE.2021.113507
[4]	YANG Jianliang, HOU Hanping, JU Yingjie, et al. The mechanism of distribution effectiveness of territory emergency public storage materials[J]. Sustainability, 2020, 12(21): DOI: 10.3390/su12218940. doi: 10.3390/su12218940
[5]	宋英华, 苏贝贝, 霍非舟, 等. 考虑动态需求的应急物资配送中心快速选址研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(8):172-177. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2019.08.027
	SONG Yinghua, SU Beibei, HUO Feizhou, et al. Research on rapid location selection of emergency materials distribution center considering dynamic demand[J] China Safety Science Journal, 2019, 29 (8):172-177. doi: 10.16265/j.cnki.issn1003-3033.2019.08.027
[6]	HUANG Xing. Emergency material collecting model of sudden disasters with fuzzy collecting time[J]. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 2016, 19:249-257. doi: 10.1016/j.ijdrr.2016.08.011
[7]	于冬梅, 高雷阜, 赵世杰. 给定需求区域应急物资储备库选址模型及其解法[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2015, 25(11):170-176.
	YU Dongmei, GAO Leifu, ZHAO Shijie. A location model with demand regions and algorithm for emergency supplies repository[J]. China Safety Science Journal, 2015, 25 (11):170-176.
[8]	ZHANG Yubo, ZHU Changfeng, MA Bin, et al. Research on bi-level optimal allocation of emergency materials considering material competition and game[J]. Engineering Letters, 2022, 30(2):163-174.
[9]	刘倩宇. 考虑优先级的应急物流选址-路径多目标优化研究[D]. 大连: 大连海事大学, 2020.
	LIU Qianyu, Multi-objective optimization of emergency logistics location-routing based on priority[D]. Dalian: Dalian Maritime University, 2020.
[10]	彭春, 李金林, 王珊珊, 等. 多类应急资源配置的鲁棒选址-路径优化[J]. 中国管理科学, 2017, 25(6):143-150.
	PENG Chun, LI Jinlin, WANG Shanshan, et al. Robust location-path optimization for multi-class emergency resource allocation[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2017, 25(6):143-150.

序号	名称	位置/km		需求量/m³	固定成本/元
1	平武	258	585	15 200	25 000
2	彭州	190	399	63 900	30 000
3	汶川	151	463	8 600	20 000
4	茂县	183	488	8 600	18 000
5	江油	281	502	71 600	27 000
6	都江堰	161	393	49 900	27 500
7	什邡	212	420	35 200	39 700
8	北川	237	525	13 100	13 600
9	青川	335	605	20 100	18 200
10	剑阁	366	566	54 800	25 000
11	绵竹	222	499	42 000	32 300
12	理县	105	458	3 700	30 600
13	松潘	152	616	5 800	19 000
14	小金	17	399	6 500	17 500
15	黑水	88	537	4 700	19 800
16	崇州	171	349	54 600	22 100
17	安州	263	468	41 100	19 400
18	游仙	283	462	43 400	43 900
19	盐亭	353	431	49 500	13 600
20	梓潼	329	478	31 000	17 600
21	朝天	408	622	17 000	20 200
22	旺苍	446	556	37 600	21 200
23	罗江	253	441	20 100	24 100
24	昭化	417	573	19 600	20 000
25	宝兴	64	317	4 700	15 000
26	汉源	47	192	26 400	27 900
27	石棉	15	173	9 800	18 700
28	九寨沟	227	691	5 400	43 500
29	旌阳	243	422	53 700	35 500

种群规模	迭代次数	适应度函数值/10⁶	运行时间/s
30	50	1.324	3.60
60	50	1.262	6.61
90	50	1.165	10.36
90	75	1.118	15.53
90	100	1.023	19.56

方案	选址结果	时间满意度/%	选址成本/元
1	{2,5}	45.7	1 314 598
2	{2,10,18}	63.7	1 353 875
3	{5,7,10,20}	66.0	1 361 808
4	{6,11,17,20,29}	68.1	1 383 768
5	{6,10,11,18,26,29}	78.9	1 435 628
6	{6,10,11,16,18,26,29}	79.7	1 457 160
7	{5,6,10,11,16,18,19,26}	80.7	1 462 010

算法	平均运行时间/s	时间满意度/%	选址总成本/元
免疫模拟退火算法	19.63	80.70	1 462 010
免疫算法	25.64	75.78	1 475 193
模拟退火算法	37.35	61.47%	1 463 775

考虑时间满意度的应急物资储备库选址模型与算法

Location model and algorithm of emergency material storage considering time satisfaction

RichHTML

PDF

可视化

摘要/Abstract

引用本文

使用本文

图/表 11

参考文献 10

相关文章 5

编辑推荐

Metrics

本文评价

选址数量	储备库	供给需求点
2	2	3,4,6,7,12,14,15,16,25,26,27,29
2	5	1,8,9,10,11,13,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,28
3	2	3,4,6,7,12,14,15,16,25,26,27
	10	1,9,21,22,24,28
	18	5,8,11,13,17,19,20,23,29
4	5	1,8,11,13,17,18
	7	2,3,4,6,12,14,15,16,23,25,26,27,29
	10	9,21,22,24,28
	20	19
5	6	2,3,12,14,16,25,26,27
	11	1,4,8,13,15,28
	17	5,18
	20	9,10,19,21,22,24
	29	7,23
6	6	2,3,12,14
	10	9,21,22,24,28
	11	1,4,8,13,15
	16	25,26,27
	18	5,17,19,20
	29	7,23
7	6	2,3,12,14
	10	9,21,22,24,28
	11	1,4,8,13,15
	16	25
	18	5,17,19,20
	26	27
	29	7,23
8	5	1
	6	2,3,7,12,14
	10	9,21,22,24,28
	11	4,8,13,15
	16	25
	18	17,20,23,29
	19	—
	26	27

[1]	张聆晔, 吕靖. 风险不确定的海上应急物资储备库选址[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(9): 173-180.
[2]	胡立伟, 何越人, 佘天毅, 孟玲, 杨锦青. 高速公路应急救援中心选址优化模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2019, 29(5): 145-150.
[3]	宋叶, 宋英华, 刘丹, 王喆. 基于时间满意度和胜任能力的地震应急救援队伍指派模型[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2018, 28(8): 180-185.
[4]	张鑫, 高淑春. 需求不确定下的应急物资储备库选址模型研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2017, 27(2): 169-175.
[5]	肖俊华，侯云先. 综合多属性决策的区域救灾物资储备库选址模型研究[J]. 中国安全科学学报, 2013, 23(7): 164-.