Fully automated container terminals are utilizing only unmanned terminal vehicles and using automatic stacking (AS) and retrieval systems (RS) for container storage, and many other automated systems.
For instance, it is known that the current limitation associated with the use of AGVs are slower than the manned terminal vehicles and thus have, to some degree, an adverse effect on terminal efficiency.
Slowness is offset by optimization of available space, ease of predictability, reliability, 24-hour operation, lack of labour strikes, lower long-term costs.
Slowness is offset by optimization of available space, ease of predictability, reliability, 24-hour operation, lack of labour strikes, lower long-term costs.
I agree with Ian Kennedy points. I think low speed and safety could be two main disadvantages.
I would have thought that a lower container velocity would be a safety advantage? Lower staffing levels would also increase the number of accident free-hours.
What is the problem with AGVs' lower speed? As long as the STS on the quay don't have to slow their rate of loading/unloading, the throughput is the same. For that, the terminal needs more AGVs (than manned trailers) to serve the quay gantries. And safety is kept. The disadvantage here is more investment in AGVs and ancillary equipment (refueling, control). Plus all the other factors stated by Ian Kennedy. A port container terminal, on the sea-side, is a three tier chain (STS, trailers, stackers) similar to an assembly line. The slowest tier determines the pace of the chain. The equipments in each tier work in parallel. So, just add more AGVs to compensate for their lower speed.
The unmanned terminal might sometimes have a little slower performances with respect to the vehicles. However, the energy consumption can also much lower since they are not sensitive to the driving behaviour of the drivers, especially in situations when they speed-up. Both energy costs and labour cost are the biggest share of the operations costs. Therefore in the long run new to built terminals will seriously become fully automated....fully?....not fully, the reefer stacking needs always personnel to plug in/out (due to the lack of standardization in reefer plugs).
Operations are procedural in nature. They can be described by business processes engineering methods. This means that they don't add knowledge. The knowledge is embedded in the design and engineering of the operations and the premises+equipments.
As such, operations will tend to become more and more automated. Competition will be played mostly at the design and engineering level. The human operators skills are being transferred to automation and to the control of the automated systems.
Goal of establishing automation container terminals is to improve all work processes at the terminal and to increase terminal’s competitiveness
- Main disadvantages are: very large investments and investments in development projects and equipment , communication systems , specific systems for determining the location of the container, much larger terminal surfaces (strips, and pathways of container movements ,...).
- To make those system to function optimally it needs to be integrated with all other systems and subsystems of all other entities whose activities are related to the work on the fully automated container terminal.
- The main advantages of fully automated container terminal are:
elimination of bottlenecks by the use of advanced technology, significantly higher TEU productivity, shortening the stay of the ship at the container terminal, the accuracy of the data flow, continuous monitoring of containers storage .
- Basic prerequisite for fully automated container terminal is : Container Automatic Identification and complete electronic exchange of information between shippers and terminal, terminal and railways, terminal and custom , ...and all other subjects.
As always automation brings more efficiency but you loose on flexibility. So as long as the business model does not require rapid changes and the automation is reliable it should work well.
I think you need to see the Chinese ports and you will understand the reason why it is needed. The shear volume of containers is staggering which requires fast extraction, storage and retrieval. This can only be achieved with automated systems that provides flexibility.
Nice discussion. You should put the terminals into perspective. Labour costs are considerably different at different places. A rule of thumb could be as follows: The higher it is the more automation could be expected. Also having a strong union might favor automation rather than manual operation. Though, sorry to say that, shear volume alone does not argue in favor of automation. There is a Long list of key performance indicators that need to be jointly considered to give you a good decision. Applying (discrete event) simulation to compare the different options is a good way to find out.
There is a whole bunch of literature on this applying mathematical and operations research methods.
Here is a nice film from the automated container terminal Altenwerder in Hamburg, Germany: http://hhla.de/en/container/cta/time-lapse-film.html
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Engineering
- Civil Engineering
- Transportation Engineering