Advertisement

OR Spectrum

, Volume 32, Issue 3, pp 427–452 | Cite as

Mathematical models and solution methods for optimal container terminal yard layouts

Regular Article

Abstract

In this paper, we introduce an integer linear program for planning the layout of container yards. We concentrate on a special layout class of container yards which we call yard layout with transfer lanes. For those layouts typically rubber tired gantry cranes are used for stacking operations and trucks for horizontal transports. We show that the optimization model can be formulated as a special type of a resource constrained shortest path problem for which the LP relaxation always has at least one integer optimal solution. This model is restricted to a rectangular storage yard which allows a linear formulation. For an arbitrary shaped container yard we adopt the model and develop a variable neighborhood descent (VND) heuristic for solving non-rectangular instances. Concerning the rectangular case, we show that the VND heuristic achieves optimal solutions for 38% of the realistic test instances.

Keywords

Container terminal Layout Yard layout Resource constrained shortest path problem Variable neighborhood descent 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ahuja RK, Magnanti TL, Orlin JB (1993) Network flows: theory, algorithms, and applications. Prentice Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  2. Beasley JE, Christofides N (1989) An algorithm for the resource constrained shortest path problem. Networks 19: 379–394CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Dekker R, Voogd P, van Asperen E (2006) Advanced methods for container stacking. OR Spectr 28(4): 563–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Drira A, Pierreval H, Hajri-Gabouj S (2007) Facility layout problems: A survey. Annu Rev Control 31(2): 255–267Google Scholar
  5. Duinkerken M, Dekker R, Kurstjens S, Ottjes J, Dellaert N (2006) Comparing transportation systems for inter-terminal transport at the maasvlakte container terminals. OR Spectr 28(4): 469–493CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Handler GY, Zang I (1980) A dual algorithm for the constrained shortest path problem. Networks 10(4): 293–309CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Hansen P, Mladenovic N (2001) Variable neighborhood search: Principles and applications. Eur J Oper Res 130(3): 449–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Imai A, Sasaki K, Nishimura E, Papadimitriou S (2006) Multi-objective simultaneous stowage and load planning for a container ship with container rehandle in yard stacks. Eur J Oper Res 171(2): 373–389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Irnich S, Desaulniers G (2005) Shortest path problems with resource constraints. In: Column generation. Springer, Berlin, pp 33–65Google Scholar
  10. Kim KH (1997) Evaluation of the number of rehandles in container yards. Comput Ind Eng 32(4): 701–711CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kim KH, Kim HB (1999) Segregating space allocation models for container inventories in port container terminals. Int J Prod Econ 59: 415–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kim KH, Park Y-M, Jin M-J (2008) An optimal layout of container yards. OR Spectr 30(4): 675–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Liu C, Jula H, Vukadinovic K, and Ioannou P (2000) Comparing different technologies for containers movement in marine container terminals. In: IEEE intelligent transportation systems conference proceedingsGoogle Scholar
  14. Liu C-I, Jula H, Ioannou P (2002) Design, simulation, and evaluation of automated container terminals. IEEE Trans Intell Trans Syst 3: 12–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Liu C-I, Jula H, Vukadinovic K, Ioannou P (2004) Automated guided vehicle system for two container yard layouts. Transpo Res C 12: 349–368CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mladenovic N, Hansen P (1997) Variable neighborhood search. Comput Oper Res 24(11): 1097–1100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. MOPS (2009) Mops—mathematical optimization system: About mops. MOPS Optimierungssysteme GmbH and Co. KG. http://www.mops-optimizer.com. Accessed 08 Mar 2009
  18. Petering MEH (2009) Effect of block width and storage yard layout on marine container terminal performance. Transp Res E Logist Transp Rev 45: 591–610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Petering MEH, Murty KG (2009) Effect of block length and yard crane deployment systems on overall performance at a seaport container transshipment terminal. Comput Oper Res 36(5): 1711–1725CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Saanen YA, Valkengoed MV (2005) Comparison of three automated stacking alternatives by means of simulation. In: WSC ’05: Proceedings of the 37th conference on winter simulation, pp 1567–1576. Winter simulation conferenceGoogle Scholar
  21. Singh S, Sharma R (2006) A review of different approaches to the facility layout problems. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 30(5): 425–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Stahlbock R, Voß S (2008) Operations research at container terminals: a literature update. OR Spectr 30(1): 1–52CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Steenken D, Voß S, Stahlbock R (2004) Container terminal operation and operations research—a classification and literature review. OR Spectrum 26: 3–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Suhl UH (1994) Mops—mathematical optimization system. Eur J Oper Res 72(2): 312–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. UNCTAD (2008) Review of Maritime Transport 2008. UNCTAD.Google Scholar
  26. Vis IFA (2006) A comparative analysis of storage and retrieval equipment at a container terminal. Int J Prod Econ 103(2): 680–693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Vis IFA, de Koster R (2003) Transshipment of containers at a container terminal: An overview. Eur J Oper Res 147(1): 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Vis IFA, Harika I (2004) Comparison of vehicle types at an automated container terminal. OR Spectr 26(1): 117–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wiese J, Kliewer N, Suhl L (2009) A survey of container terminal characteristics and equipment types. Technical Report 0901, DS&OR Lab, University of Paderborn. http://dsor.upb.de/uploads/tx_dsorpublications/DSOR_WP_0901.pdf
  30. Wiese J, Suhl L, Kliewer N (2010) Mathematical programming and simulation based layout planning of container terminals. Manuscript. Int J Simul Process Modell (to appear)Google Scholar
  31. Yang C, Choi Y, Ha T (2004) Simulation-based performance evaluation of transport vehicles at automated container terminals. OR Spectr 26(2): 149–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Decision Support and Operations Research LabUniversity of PaderbornPaderbornGermany
  2. 2.Freie Universität BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations