Simulation-Based Approach to a More Efficient Handling Strategy for a Container Terminal Storage Yard: Case Study of the Baltic Hub Container Terminal

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. Search in Google Scholar

2 Brinkmann B. Operations systems of container terminals: A compendious overview. In Handbook of Terminal Planning, 2011, pp. 25-39; Springer New York. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

18 Zhu S, Tan Z, Yang Z, Cai I. Quay crane and yard truck dual-cycle scheduling with mixed storage strategy. Advanced Engineering Informatics 2022, 54:101722, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aei.2022.101722. Search in Google Scholar

19 Sha M, Notteboom T, Zhang T, Zhou X, Qin T. Simulation model to determine ratios between quay, yard and intra-terminal 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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

25 AMSA. Thinking Mooring Safety. AMSA, Canberra, Australia; 2015. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

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. Search in Google Scholar

30 Dragović B, Tzannatos E, Park N K. Simulation modelling 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. Search in Google Scholar

31 Witness Horizon. Visual Interactive Simulation Software: User manual. Lanner Group Ltd; 2023. Search in Google Scholar