Simulation-based approach to a more efficient handling strategy for a container terminal storage yard: case study of the baltic hub container terminal

• Autorzy: Moszyk, Karol , Janowczyk, Olga , Deja, Mariusz
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

The primary objective of this research was to implement a more efficient handling strategy in the container terminal storage yard at the Baltic Hub Container Terminal (BHCT). Following an analysis of the current logistics system associated with starboard-side mooring, an attempt was made to shift the mooring to the port side. Two routing strategies corresponding to the analysed mooring operations were tested using a developed model. Simulations were conducted to enable a comparison of various handling strategies that were suitable for the mooring arrangements and equipment under investigation. This analysis was based on reliable information obtained from a real process. Evaluative criteria for examining the impact of changing the handling strategy of internal movement vehicles (IMVs) in the terminal storage yard in terms of process efficiency included the total time and distance of container transportation and the truck utilisation level. A new route for IMVs was developed to accommodate the changed mooring operation. This adjustment aimed to enhance the discharge process and to reduce the distance travelled, resulting in a reduction in fuel consumption. The shorter travel distance also positively impacted productivity, and contributed to a reduction in operating costs. The changes to the mooring arrangement directly resulted in a 10% increase in the quay crane gross productivity, measured in moves per hour (mph). Given that many ports do not pay attention to how ships are moored, the case study and analysis presented here can help staff quickly improve their handling strategy and productivity, thus increasing the port’s competitiveness.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

container terminals; container handling; container transportation; simulation modeling; quantitative analysis

• Czasopismo: Polish Maritime Research
• Rocznik: 2024
• Tom: nr 2
• Strony: 121--131
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 31 poz., rys., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Moszyk, Karol

• Gdańsk University of Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Ship Technology, Department of Manufacturing and Production Engineering, Doctoral Studies - implementation doctorate, Gdańsk, Poland,
• Baltic Hub Container Terminal Gdańsk, BHCT Gdańsk SA, A member of PSA Group, Operations Department, Gdańsk,Poland

autor

Janowczyk, Olga

• Gdańsk University of Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Ship Technology, Department of Manufacturing and Production Engineering, Gdańsk, Poland

autor

Deja, Mariusz

• Gdańsk University of Technology, Faculty of Mechanical Engineering and Ship Technology, Department of Manufacturing and Production Engineering, Gdańsk, Poland,

Bibliografia

• 1. Carlo H J, Vis I F, Roodbergen K J. Storage yard operations in container terminals: Literature overview, trends, and research directions. European Journal of Operational Research 2014, 235(2):412-430, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.10.054.
• 2. Brinkmann B. Operations systems of container terminals: A compendious overview. In Handbook of Terminal Planning, 2011, pp. 25-39; Springer New York.
• 3. Chen X, He S, Zhang Y, Tong L C, Shang P, Zhou X. Yard crane and AGV scheduling in automated container terminal: A multi-robot task allocation framework. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 2020, 114:241-271.
• 4. Chen C, Hsu W J, Huang S Y. Simulation and optimization of container yard operations: A survey. In Proceedings of International Conference on Port and Maritime R&D and Technology, 2003, September, pp. 23-29, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trc.2020.02.012.
• 5. Peng Y, Li X, Wang W, Liu K, Li C. A simulation-based research on carbon emission mitigation strategies for green container terminals. Ocean Engineering 2018, 163:288-298, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oceaneng.2018.05.054.
• 6. Murty K G, Wan Y W, Liu J, Tseng M M, Leung E, Lai K K, Chiu H W. Hongkong International Terminals gains elastic capacity using a data-intensive decision-support system. Interfaces 2005, 35(1):61-75, https://doi.org/10.1287/inte.1040.0120.
• 7. Angeloudis P, Bell M G. A review of container terminal simulation models. Maritime Policy & Management 2011, 38(5):523-540, https://doi.org/10.1080/03088839.2011.597448.
• 8. Carlo H J, Vis I F, Roodbergen K J. Transport operations in container terminals: Literature overview, trends, research directions and classification scheme. European Journal of Operational Research 2014, 236(1):1-13, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2013.11.023.
• 9. Moszyk K, Deja M, Dobrzyński M. Automation of the road gate operations process at the container terminal—A case study of DCT Gdańsk SA. Sustainability 2021, 13(11):6291, https://doi.org/10.3390/su13116291.
• 10. Moszyk K, Deja M. Reduction of exceeding the guaranteed service time for external trucks at the DCT Gdańsk container terminal using a six sigma framework. International Journal of Lean Six Sigma 2023, 14(7):1566-1595, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLSS-05-2022-0100.
• 11. Tao Y, Zhang S, Lin C, Lai X. A bi-objective optimization for integrated truck operation and storage allocation considering traffic congestion in container terminals. Ocean and Coastal Management 2023, 232:106417, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2022.106417.
• 12. Elnaggar G, Abouelseoud Y, Fors M N. Dual cycle mode scheduling of internal transfer in container terminals using a genetic algorithm. In 2015 International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management (IEOM), IEEE, 2015 March, pp. 1-7, https://doi.org/10.1109/IEOM.2015.7093831.
• 13. Deniz E, Tuncel G, Yalcinkaya O, Esmer S. Simulation of multi-crane single and dual cycling strategies in a container terminal. International Journal of Simulation Modelling 2021, 20(3):465-476, https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12508/2033.
• 14. Tan C, Qin T, He J, Wang Y, Yu H. Yard space allocation of container port based on dual cycle strategy. Ocean and Coastal Management 2024, 247:106915, https://doi. org/10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2023.106915.
• 15. Ahmed E, Zayed T, Alkass S. Improving productivity of yard trucks in port container terminal using computer simulation. In 31st International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction and Mining, ISARC 2014 Proceedings, 2014, January, pp. 278-285.
• 16. Tang G, Qin M, Zhao Z, Yu J, Shen C. Performance of peak shaving policies for quay cranes at container terminals with double cycling. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 2020, 104:102129, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.simpat.2020.102129.
• 17. Zhang X, Zeng Q, Yang Z. Modeling the mixed storage strategy for quay crane double cycling in container terminals. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 2016, 94:171-187, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2016.08.002.
• 18. Zhu S, Tan Z, Yang Z, Cai I. Quay crane and yard truck dualcycle scheduling with mixed storage strategy. Advanced Engineering Informatics 2022, 54:101722, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2022.101722.
• 19. Sha M, Notteboom T, Zhang T, Zhou X, Qin T. Simulation model to determine ratios between quay, yard and intraterminal transfer equipment in an integrated container handling system. Journal of International Logistics and Trade 2021, 19(1):1-18, https://doi.org/10.24006/jilt.2021.19.1.001.
• 20. Steenken D, Voß S, Stahlbock R. Container terminal operation and operations research—A classification and literature review. OR Spectrum 2004, 26:3-49, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00291-003-0157-z.
• 21. Murty K G. Yard crane pools and optimum layouts for storage yards of container terminals. Journal of Industrial and Systems Engineering 2007, 1(3):190-199.
• 22. Rashidi H, Tsang E P. Novel constraints satisfaction models for optimization problems in container terminals. Applied Mathematical Modelling 2013, 37(6):3601-3634, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2012.07.042.
• 23. Deja M, Dobrzyński M, Siemiątkowski M, Wiśniewska A. Simulation studies into quayside transport and storage yard operations in container terminals. Polish Maritime Research 2017, 24(s1):46-52, https://doi.org/10.1515/pomr-2017-0020.
• 24. Zhao C, Zhang W, Chen C, Yang X, Yue J, Han B. Recognition of unsafe onboard mooring and unmooring operation behavior based on improved YOLO-v4 Algorithm. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 2023, 11(2):291, https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11020291.
• 25. AMSA. Thinking Mooring Safety. AMSA, Canberra, Australia; 2015.
• 26. Sáenz S S, Diaz-Hernandez G, Schweter L, Nordbeck P. Analysis of the mooring effects of future ultra-large container vessels (ULCV) on port infrastructures. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 2023, 11(4):856, https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse11040856.
• 27. Hu Z H. Low-emission berth allocation by optimizing sailing speed and mooring time. Transport 2020, 35(5):486-499, https://doi.org/10.3846/transport.2020.14080.
• 28. Díaz-Ruiz-Navamuel E, Ortega Piris A, López-Diaz A I, Gutiérrez M A, Roiz M A, Chaveli J M O. Influence of ships docking system in the reduction of CO2 emissions in container ports. Sustainability 2021, 13(9):5051, https://doi.org/10.3390/su13095051.
• 29. Park N K, Suh S C. Tendency toward mega containerships and the constraints of container terminals. Journal of Marine Science and Engineering 2019, 7(5):131, https://doi.org/10.3390/jmse7050131.
• 30. Dragović B, Tzannatos E, Park N K. Simulation modeling in ports and container terminals: Literature overview and analysis by research field, application area and tool. Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal 2017, 29:4-34, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10696-016-9239-5.
• 31. Witness Horizon. Visual Interactive Simulation Software: User manual. Lanner Group Ltd; 2023.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.2478/pomr-2024-0028