Analysis of the process of unloading containers at the inland container terminal

Abstract

Intermodal transport is a complicated way of transportation, where there is usually over a dozen means of transportation and many modes of transportation. As can be easily seen cargo is subjected redoubled number of transshipments in comparison to the number of vehicles, which is transported. Very popular transport relation Asia—Europe shipping takes around 25 days, while terminal operations take up 17% of the time transferring cargo container. In all decisive importance to the planning of operations to plan the operation of machinery—planning is affected by the resulting time. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate the direct impact duration elements of the service on the total time of the process.

Full text

1237
Safety and Reliability: Methodology and Applications – Nowakowski et al. (Eds)
© 2015 Taylor & Francis Group, London, ISBN 978-1-138-02681-0
Analysis of the process of unloading containers at the inland
container terminal
M. Zając & J. Świeboda
Wroclaw University of Technology, Wroclaw, Poland
ABSTRACT: Intermodal transport is a complicated way of transportation, where there is usually over a
dozen means of transportation and many modes of transportation. As can be easily seen cargo is subjected
redoubled number of transshipments in comparison to the number of vehicles, which is transported. Very
popular transport relation Asia—Europe shipping takes around 25 days, while terminal operations take
up 17% of the time transferring cargo container. In all decisive importance to the planning of operations
to plan the operation of machinery—planning is affected by the resulting time. The purpose of this article
is to demonstrate the direct impact duration elements of the service on the total time of the process.
The increase in intermodal transport is a natural
phenomenon in the face of the White Paper on
Transport recommendations. Nevertheless, inter-
modal transport as a logistics process requires
scientific work and research, the effect of which
is to strengthen the competitiveness of intermodal
transport to the traditional road to the carriage of
highly processed goods.
Intermodal technology functioning is mainly
based on experience in Poland. Over the years,
intermodal transport was underrated way of
transporting goods. Its principal advantage lies in
combining functionality with the ability to cargo
transport and storing in intermodal transship-
ment point. Intermodal transport technologies
are shown in (Nowakowski & Kwaśniowski &
Zając, 2008). Design rules container terminals are
presented in the (Steenken & Voss & Stahlbock,
2004). Both publications are land-based container
terminal.
Both the technology and design rules terminals
do not show know how to manage the movement
of cargo units inside the terminal. However, the
functioning of the inland container terminals is far
different from the typical container ports on which
there is a lot of information in foreign literature
(Vatanabe, 2005).
Sea terminals are to be run in such a way as to
reduce to a minimum residence time of the loading
units within the terminal [8]. This is due to the need
for high bandwidth as a result of the conditions
established infrastructure and container turnover.
Using sophisticated technology, handling, such as
full automation of the process can substantially
reduce the time cargo handling, eliminate errors,
increase the level of safety of the process. These
technologies are extremely expensive and are not
1 INTRODUCTION
After the difficult years of 2008–2010 container
transport becomes stronger. In Poland it is vis-
ible seeing more and more new container handling
transshipment points. Currently, the total container
turnover in the market of intermodal transport is
estimated by the owners of intermodal companies
over 2.5 million TEUs per year (for comparison, in
2007, there are approximately 1.7 million TEU).
Modern combined transport terminal is more
than a simple transshipment point. It develops in
the creation of centers freight with a wide range
of services (Braekers, 2011 and Jakubowski, 2009).
Sea terminals are to be run in such a way as to
reduce to a minimum residence time of the load-
ing units within the terminal. Using sophisticated
technology, handling, such as full automation of
the process can substantially reduce the time of
cargo handling, eliminate errors, increase the level
of safety and reliability (Ambrosino & Caballini &
Siri, 2013 and Boysen & Fliedner & Jaehn, 2011
and Gambardella & Rizzoli & Zaffalon, 1998).
Problems of vulnerability was mentioned also in
(Vališ & Koucký & Žák, 2012 and Vališ & Pietrucha-
Urbanik, 2014). These technologies are extremely
expensive and are not widely used. In smaller ports,
high throughput is achieved by streamlining opera-
tions. The inland terminals link transport and stor-
age functions. Problem in intermodal transshipment
hubs is linked with choosing appropriate method of
container warehousing (Zajac, 2011a and 2011b).
Very often it is necessary to move container several
times from one point to another during process of
storage. The results are more expensive container
service and probability that containers can’t be easy
available then are needed.

1238
widely used. In smaller ports, high throughput is
achieved by streamlining operations. One of the
solution is increasing tariff for storage of cargo at
the port (Vis & Koster, 2003).
Intermodal technology is mainly based on expe-
rience in Poland. Over the years, intermodal trans-
port was underrated way of transporting goods. Its
principal advantage lies in combining functionality
with the ability to cargo transport and storage in
intermodal transshipment point. Intermodal trans-
port technologies are shown for example in the
development of (Nowakowski & Kwaśniowski &
Zając, 2008).
Both the technology and design rules terminals
do not show know how to manage the movement
of cargo units inside the terminal. However, the
functioning of the inland container terminals is far
different from the typical container ports on which
there is a lot of information in literature (Braekers,
2011). There are some element of terminal opera-
tion management and reliability (Nowakowski &
Werbinska-Wojciechowska, 2012). There are also
some technical aspects described in (Vališ & Vintr &
Malach, 2012 and Vališ & Žak & Pokora, 2014).
Sea terminals are to be run in such a way as to
reduce to a minimum residence time of the loading
units within the terminal. This is due to the need
for high bandwidth as a result of the conditions
established infrastructure and container turnover.
Using sophisticated technology, handling, such as
full automation of the process can substantially
reduce the time cargo handling, eliminate errors,
increase the level of safety of the process. These
technologies are extremely expensive and are not
widely used. In smaller ports, high throughput is
achieved by streamlining operations. One of the
solution is increasing tariff for storage of cargo at
the port.
The inland terminals, as mentioned previously,
links Transport and storage functions. In this case,
the tariff for the storage of empty containers or
loaded is decreasing. Both types of containers are
stored within a storage space. Problem in inter-
modal transhipment hubs to adopt an appropri-
ate method of storage of intermodal units, the
implementation process container depots, so that
there was no need of their translocation to another
storage location. In reality Polish intermodal hubs,
stacking containers and large volume of financial
and intuitive decision-making, such situations
often occur. This is the reason for the formation
of additional costs and sometimes even necessary,
adjusting the container several times.
In the international literature, little space is
devoted to the theme of inland terminals. Generally
it is a showcase of new technologies intermodal
attempt to analyze their applicability, detailed
technical solutions. There is no literature on the
process of storage. There have been no analysis of
the arguments has to be taken into account when
storing. Do not analyzed the information con-
tained in the transport documents for their use in
the management of places components in intermo-
dal transshipment node. We can say that this area
of knowledge is not recognized, and the practice
sets the rules in force here. The article presents the
characteristics of unloading operations of con-
tainers in relation rail wagon—yard. Presented
times perform the duties of the components and
their impact on the whole process.
2 PROCEDURES CHARACTERISTICS
The inland terminals storage containers usually up
to three layers to four layers vain. The storage yard
in a terminal is usually divided into rectangular
regions called storage blocks or blocks. Each row
typically Consists of over twenty 20 -ft container
stacks stored lengthwise end to end. For storing a
40 -ft container stack, two 20 -ft stack spaces are
used. Load distribution and hence the allocation
of storage is done by machine operators. This is
done on the basis of their experience and relying
on the information derived from public goods.
Basic information to be taken when allocating
loads are:
• whether the container is empty, loaded, refriger-
ated, tank, ADR/RID;
• the size of the container,
• the expected storage time charge on the terminal,
• the recipient,
• the gross mass,
• operator.
The essential part of machine operator’s work
is to memorize and consistently putting in a stor-
age container so as not to turn the download
does not require adjustment of the upper layers
of containers. This task is difficult and involves
unreliability. This problem increases the lack of
information from one of the main customers of
schedule downloads terminal at the time of arrival
of containers by rail to unload the cargo units. As
a result, the containers are unloaded in free space
components (cached), and after being informed of
the date of delivery segregated and placed in the
correct order.
Schedules cargo operations are difficult to
define because they vary depending on the sender
or recipient, traffic conditions, etc., although this
time the service should be as short as possible.
Therefore, previous planning manual handling is
often very difficult, if not impossible, due to ran-
dom factors beyond the control of the operator
terminal. To transfer the containers in the number

1239
of hours between scheduled transport services
large batches, the temporary storage of containers
is essential. Meets the buffer function terminals.
Unfortunately, the container terminal is limited
capacity and technology used transport units, thus
piling up more layers to increase capacity. This
increases the number of containers in the landfill,
but very often difficult to locate the container, and
the effective execution of transhipment operations
on it. As the number of handled cargo units, there
are new problems. With little turnover of the cargo
container to find the company was not a prob-
lem for those involved in the physical handling of
cargo. Today, however, the terminal supports more
load and hence there is a possibility of a prob-
lem to locate the container that is to be assigned.
During the deployment analyze intermodal cargo
transshipment node can watch two indicators:
• rotation ratio,
• the intensity of use of the component.
Rotation ratio is the number of operations
performed per unit time with respect to one com-
ponent of the terminal. This means that the resi-
dence time of the free—space component may be
relatively short, but the number of containers in a
given location may be large. This means that the
area is heavily used, but due to the large rotation
load. Achieving high turnover ratio is desirable for
marine terminals, where it counts the technical effi-
ciency of the transport process and land-based ter-
minals, where the number of occupied seats begins
to cause complications in the implementation of
the basic functions of transport. The intensity of
the storage is a busy time of the landfill by the same
unit load per unit of time. The smaller the value
of this ratio the greater the rotation of the loading
unit is characterized by a terminal.
3 CHARACTERISTICS
OF THE STUDY AREA
The observations were done in 2014 on one of con-
tainer terminals in Poland. Observations treat han-
dling relation wagon-yard at the container terminal.
Containers were taken from the first or second rail
track, then put at the free space on the storage yard
in one of the 4 levels. The aim of the research was
to characterize the relationships binding site to
download and postpone load. Observations were
including duration of operation and the distance
moved both with load and without.
Figure 1 presents transshipment cycle.
It was assumed that the unloading of the con-
tainer from the train starts from the application to
the operating system needs to perform an operation.
Then crane begins the process of setting the drive.
After arriving at the wagon with maneuvering to
capture the correct container. Then retrieves the
container, and when set to begin driving transport
to postpone. The final step is to set aside container
at the storage location.
4 THE RESULTS
During the more than 800 observations the dis-
tance of transportation was measured and time
recorded. Table 1 shows summary information for
the group of observations.
As can be seen from the data presented in
Table 1 most of the time during the execution of
the discharge cycle takes a ride with the cargo,
immediately after driving without a load. The
total cycle takes an average 133 s reloading while
driving is more than 62 s. It can be seen here
that one of the fundamental option of shorten-
ing the cycle is shortened drive to and with the
container. Reloading cycle-times differ depend-
ing on the relationship of handling. The Tabl e 2
and Tabl e 3 present results for handling rela-
tionships and track—first floor, and track—the
fourth floor.
In relationships I track—I floor the average
operating time was 123 s. Like the collective results
are also driving time was the largest (total 55 s).
Due to the experience of the operators turned out
to be a very short time—away containers. Due to
the visibility of the container, and no need for very
precise withdrawal of the unit load on the already
standing—another—this time was the shortest of
all possible relationships.
Figure 1. Container transhshipment cycle. 1—setting
up the dribe, 2—drive, 3—setting to catch, 4—lifting the
container, 5—settitng up the drive, 6—drive, 7—setting
for unloading, 8—unloading.

1240
Unloading on the fourth floor proved to be far
more time-consuming. The average duration of
the operation was over 150 s., in this case, almost
one third the time it took defer the load on a high
level. Driving time with load were similar to those
obtained with the unloading of the first floor: a
little over 55 s. Table 4 contains the time and speed
of the crane with load. The observations can be
noted that the experience led operators overcome
the greatest distance putting the container on
the third layer. Regardless of the level of deposi-
tion of the load, the speed obtained without charge
are—as expected—higher than the load.
The studies lead to the following general
conclusions:
• If taking account time of operations it does not
matter whether the container is deposited on
level 1 or level 2.
• Postpone the level 3 lasts longer than half the
level of 1–2.
Putting container on level 4 in comparison to
the level 1 is three times longer.
• The difference between putting on levels 1–2 and
level 3 allows for passing around 5–10 m.
• The difference between putting on levels 1–2 and
level 4 allows the passing of about 50–60 m.
5 SUMMARY
As practice shows decision problem applies to
most containers. In addition, during the work sim-
ulation should pay attention not only to the time
of transhipment single container, but also groups:
there may be a situation where it is worth to lose a
few seconds for one to gain even a few minutes in
subsequent operations.
Implementation of the described research is
related to the development of effective methods of
reducing the operative time for the container ter-
minal cranes. The result, which seeks to provide the
following effects:
• reducing the number of meter hours by shorten-
ing cycles of loading.
• reducing the number of operations by 10%.
It is worth noting that the assumption that
the cycle will be shorter loading only 1 minute
obtain savings in the form of one review per year
(terminal, where the project is implemented annu-
ally performs about 150 thousand cycles). When
reducing the number of operations by 5% we
obtain a reduction of another review annually. By
reducing the cycle of 1 minute and reduction cycles
by 10% saving on fuel inspections and within five
years will amount to nearly EUR 550 000.
Table 1. The overall results of the observation.
Operation Mean
value Std
deviation Variance
Setting up the drive [s] 17.98 8.48 71.94
Drive [s] 28.45 20.49 419.87
Distance (without) [m] 54.04 38.37 1472.23
Setting to download
and download [s] 15.57 6.00 36.02
Setting up the drive [s] 18.57 10.34 106.90
Drive [s] 33.64 17.24 297.12
Distance (with) [m] 65.45 39.82 1585.83
The setting for unloading
and unloading [s] 19.00 11.00 121.08
Table 2. Results of the unloading in relation I
track—I floor.
Operation Mean
value Std
deviation Variance
Setting up the drive [s] 16.76 8.86 78.44
Drive [s] 25.29 20.18 407.22
Distance (without load) [m] 45.47 31.99 1023.14
Setting to download and
download [s] 14.71 5.16 26.60
Setting up the drive [s] 20.88 17.20 295.74
Drive [s] 30.12 18.98 360.11
Distance (with load) [m] 62.00 42.39 1796.50
The setting for unloading
and unloading [s] 15.29 7.74 59.97
Table 3. Results of the unloading in relation I
track—IV floor.
Operation Mean value
Setting up the drive [s] 22.00
Drive [s] 31.50
Distance (without load) [m] 50.00
Setting to download and download [s] 11.00
Setting up the drive [s] 14.00
Drive [s] 26.50
Distance (with load) [m] 20.00
The setting for unloading and unloading [s] 45.50
Table 4. Time and distance with and without load.
Without load Time Distance
Floor I track II track I track II track
1 30.12 21.25 62.00 32.50
2 34.45 26.67 71.68 43.33
3 40.64 26.83 71.18 46.50
4 26.50 26.00 20.00 30.60

1241
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The results presented in this paper have been
obtained within the project “The model of oper-
ations in intermodal terminal” (contract no.
POIG.01.03.01-02-068/12 with the Polish Ministry
of Science and Higher Education) in the framework
of the Innovative Economy Operational Pro-
gramme 2007–2013.
REFERENCES
Ambrosino, D., Caballini, C., Siri, S., 2013. A
mathematical model to evaluate different train load-
ing and stacking policies in a container terminal.
Maritime Economics & Logistics (2013) 15, 292–308.
Boysen, N., Fliedner, M., Jaehn, F. 2011. A Survey on
Container Processing in Railway Yards. Transportation
Science, Volume: 47 Issue: 3 Pages: 312–329.
Braekers, K. 2011. Optimization of empty container
movements in intermodal transport. 4or-A Quarterly
Journal Of Operations Research (2011) Volume: 11.
Gambardella, L.M., Rizzoli A.E., Zaffalon M. 1998.
Simulation and planning of an intermodal container
terminal. Simulation 71. 1998.
Jakubowski, L. 2009. Handling operation technology
(in polish). Warsaw University of Technology,
Warszawa.
Nowakowski, T., Kwasniowski, S., Zajac M. 2008.
Intermodal transport in logistics chains (in polish).
Of Wyd. PWr, Wroclaw, 2008.
Nowakowski, T., Werbinska-Wojciechowska, S. 2012.
Means of transport maintenance processes
performance. Decision support system. Carpathian
Logistics Congress, CLC’ 2012: congress proceedings,
Jesenik, Czech Republic, November 7th–9th 2012.
Ostrava: Tanger, cop. 2012.
Olivo, A., Di Francesco, M., Zuddas P. 2013. An
optimization model for the inland repositioning of
empty containers. Maritime Economics & Logistics
(2013) Volume: 15.
Steenken, D., Voss, S., Stahlbock R. 2004. Container
terminal operation and operations research—a classi-
fication and literature review, OR Spectrum 26/2004.
Vatanabe, I. 2005. Contaier terminal Planning.
Theoretical approach. WCN Pubishing.
Vis, I.F.A., de Koster, R. 2003. Transshipment of
containers at a container terminal. An overview,
European Journal of Operational Research 147/2003.
Vališ, D., Koucký, M., Žák, L. 2012. On approaches for
non-direct determination of system deterioration.
Maintenance and Reliability, vol. 14, no. 1, p. 33–41.
Vališ, D., Vintr, Z., Malach, J. 2012. Selected aspects
of physical structures vulnerability—state-of-the-
art. Maintenance and Reliability, vol. 14, no. 3,
p. 189–194.
Vališ, D., Pietrucha-Urbanik, K. 2014. Utilization of
diffusion processes and fuzzy logic for vulnerability
assessment. Mainteance and Reliability, vol. 16, no. 1,
p. 48–55.
Vališ, D., Žak, L., Pokora, O. 2014. Engine residual tech-
nical life estimation based on tribo data. Maintenance
and Reliability 16(2): 203–210.
Zajac, P. 2011a. Can the raising of energy consumption
of information interchange be a factor that reduces
the total energy consumption of logistic warehouse
system? Production engineering innovations and
technologies of the future, Edward Chlebus (ed.),
2011. s. 79–89, International Conference “Production
Engineering 2011”, Wroclaw, 30 June–1 July 2011.
Zajac P. 2011b. The choice of parameters of logistic
warehouse system, with taking the energy into
consideration. Selected logistics problems and
solutions. Publishing House of Poznan University of
Technology, 2011. s. 107–120.