Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Dynamic yard allocation for automated container terminal

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Although research on traditional terminals has been well developed, research concerning automated terminals and especially the yard space management is at the early stage. Backgrounded by the application of the upgrading automated technology, yard allocation requires compatible methods to interpret the emerging features of automated container terminals and coordinate with other operational systems. Considering the mixed stacking of import and export containers in one block and the cooperation among multiple yard cranes, this study provides the dynamic yard allocation method for automated container terminals. In this paper the space allocation problem of automated yard is examined through two stages. In Stage-I a bi-objective model is established to balance the workload between seaside and landside in each time window and optimize the total moving distances of containers from the yard to the berth. In Stage-II, by minimizing the moving distances of yard cranes from seaside, the specific allocation of the bay position in each time window is determined. Furthermore, by the application of the real-life cases of the automated terminal operations, it is verified that the proposed method and mathematical models are efficient to allocate the yard space which improve the yard management for the automated container terminal.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Chen, L., & Lu, Z. (2012). The storage location assignment problem for outbound containers in a maritime terminal. International Journal of Production Economics, 135(1), 73–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He, J., & Tan, C. (2019). Modeling a resilient yard template under storage demand fluctuations in a container terminal. Engineering Optimization, 51(9), 1547–1566.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He, J., Tan, C., Yan, W., Huang, W., Liu, M., & Yu, H. (2020). Two-stage stochastic programming model for generating container yard template under uncertainty and traffic congestion. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 43, 101032.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He, J., Wang, Y., Tan, C., & Yu, H. (2021). Modeling berth allocation and QC assignment considering QC driver cost and operating efficiency. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 47, 101252.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, H., Chen, X., Wang, T., & Zhang, Y. (2019). A three-stage decomposition method for the joint vehicle dispatching and storage allocation problem in automated container terminals. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 129, 90–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, X., Lee, L. H., Chew, E. P., Han, Y., & Tan, K. C. (2012). A container yard storage strategy for improving land utilization and operation efficiency in a transshipment hub port. European Journal of Operational Research, 221(1), 64–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, K. H., & Park, K. T. (2003). A note on a dynamic space-allocation method for outbound containers. European Journal of Operational Research, 148(1), 92–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kovalyov, M. Y., Pesch, E., & Ryzhikov, A. (2018). A note on scheduling container storage operations of two non-passing stacking cranes. Networks, 71(3), 271–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ku, L. P., Chew, E. P., Lee, L. H., & Tan, K. C. (2012). A novel approach to yard planning under vessel arrival uncertainty. Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, 24(3), 274–293.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liang, C., Liu, H., & Zhang, Y. (2018). Research on dynamic stacking strategy of automated container terminal. Computer Applications & Software, 35(10), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma, H. L., Chung, S. H., Chan, H. K., & Cui, L. (2019). An integrated model for berth and yard planning in container terminals with multi-continuous berth layout. Annals of Operations Research, 273(1–2), 409–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mi, W., Yan, W., He, J., & Chang, D. (2009). An investigation into yard allocation for outbound containers. COMPEL-the International Journal for Computation and Mathematics in Electrical and Electronic Engineering, 28(6), 1442–1457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Park, T., Choe, R., Kim, Y. H., & Ryu, K. R. (2011). Dynamic adjustment of container stacking policy in an automated container terminal. International Journal of Production Economics, 133(1), 385–392.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, C., He, J., & Wang, Y. (2017). Storage yard management based on flexible yard template in container terminal. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 34, 101–113.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, C., & He, J. (2021). Integrated proactive and reactive strategies for sustainable berth allocation and QC assignment under uncertainty. Annals of Operations Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-020-03891-3

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tao, J. H., & Wang, M. (2009). Section allocation of container yard based on mixed mode. System Engineering Theory & Practice, 22(08), 15–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, B. (2007). A dynamic random stacking method for container terminal yard. System Engineering Theory & practice, 21(04), 147-153+170.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Y., Luo, J., Zhang, D., & Dong, M. (2013). An integrated programming model for storage management and vehicle scheduling at container terminals. Research in Transportation Economics, 42(1), 13–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yang, Y., Zhong, M., Yao, H., Yu, F., Fu, X., & Postolache, O. (2018). Internet of things for smart ports: Technologies and challenges. IEEE Instrumentation & Measurement Magazine, 21(1), 34–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, H., Ge, Y. E., Chen, J., Luo, L., Tan, C., & Liu, D. (2017). CO2 emission evaluation of yard tractors during loading at container terminals. Transportation Research Part d: Transport and Environment, 53, 17–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, H., Zhang, M., He, J., & Tan, C. (2020). Choice of loading clusters in container terminals. Advanced Engineering Informatics, 46, 101190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu, M., & Qi, X. (2013). Storage space allocation models for inbound containers in an automatic container terminal. European Journal of Operational Research, 226(1), 32–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, C., Wu, T., Kim, K. H., & Miao, L. (2014). Conservative allocation models for outbound containers in container terminals. European Journal of Operational Research, 238(1), 155–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhen, L. (2014). Container yard template planning under uncertain maritime market. Transportation Research Part e: Logistics and Transportation Review, 69, 199–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhen, L., Yu, S., Wang, S., & Sun, Z. (2019). Scheduling quay cranes and yard trucks for unloading operations in container ports. Annals of Operations Research, 273(1), 455–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is sponsored by the National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number 72072112, 72001135, 72002125]; Shanghai Rising-Star Program [grant number 19QA1404200]; Shanghai Sailing Program [grant number 20YF1416600, 19YF1418800].

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Engineering Research Center of Container Supply Chain Technology, Ministry of Education, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, China

    Junliang He

  2. China Institute of FTZ Supply Chain, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, China

    Junliang He & Hang Yu

  3. Logistics Engineering College, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, China

    Xin Xiao

  4. LIAONING PORT CO., LTD., Dalian, China

    Zhuo Zhang

Authors
  1. Junliang He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xin Xiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hang Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Zhuo Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hang Yu.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Appendix

Appendix

A1 Container volume to be allocated in each time window (TEUs)

 

t

Category

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Import container

2000

2000

2000

4000

2000

2000

4000

4000

2000

Export container

2200

3200

3000

2600

3200

2800

1800

1000

1000

A2 Container volume to be allocated in each time window (Bays)

 

t

Category

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Import container

40

40

40

80

40

40

80

80

40

Export container

44

64

60

52

64

56

36

20

20

A3 Distance from vessel berth to each block (m)

 

s

i

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

Block1

115

315

195

435

115

195

435

315

Block2

155

275

155

395

155

155

395

275

Block3

115

235

115

355

115

115

355

235

Block4

115

195

115

315

115

115

315

195

Block5

155

155

155

275

155

155

275

155

Block6

195

115

115

235

195

115

235

115

Block7

235

115

115

195

235

115

195

115

Block8

275

155

155

155

275

155

155

155

Block9

315

115

195

115

315

195

115

115

Block10

355

115

235

115

355

235

115

115

A4 Dynamic distribution of container capacity in each container block (Bays)

 

t

i

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Block1

22

29

41

37

49

51

44

48

31

Block2

26

30

38

52

41

35

38

44

34

Block3

24

33

35

33

42

41

40

34

30

Block4

22

29

29

46

49

52

44

32

32

Block5

22

30

31

45

50

43

31

33

31

Block6

25

31

35

39

43

41

43

25

9

Block7

26

30

30

28

29

26

30

22

6

Block8

23

28

28

29

28

46

32

34

25

Block9

22

28

34

26

33

28

38

44

60

Block10

22

30

35

25

22

29

40

44

60

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

He, J., Xiao, X., Yu, H. et al. Dynamic yard allocation for automated container terminal. Ann Oper Res 343, 927–948 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04458-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-04458-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation