Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A fuzzy AHP decision support system for selecting yard cranes in marine container terminals

  • Article
  • Published:
WMU Journal of Maritime Affairs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

One of the most important issues that planners and developers of ports have to address at the planning process of container terminals is how to effectively optimize truck turnaround times. The time that a truck spends at a container terminal for loading and/or unloading of cargo is a real cost scenario which affects not only the smooth operation of ports but also the overall cost of the container trade. The main objective of this article is to provide a decision support tool for selecting the best container yard gantry crane for loading/discharging operation of trucks at the landside of marine container terminals. Achieving this goal, this study aims at introducing and recommending the multiple attribute decision-making and the fuzzy analytical hierarchy process models that have been proven to provide a concrete basis for such a selection decision.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Ayağ Z (2005) A fuzzy AHP-based simulation approach to concept evaluation in a NPD environment. IIE Trans 37:827–842

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Celik M, Er I, Ozok A (2009) Application of fuzzy extended AHP methodology on shipping registry selection: the case of Turkish Maritime Industry. Expert Syst Appl 36:190–198

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chan F, Kumar N (2007) Global supplier development considering risk factors using fuzzy extended AHP-based approach. Int J Manage Sci 35:417–431

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang Y (1996) Application of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP. Eur J Oper Res 95:649–655

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Containerization International (1996) Market analysis in terminal handling equipment, Journal of Containerization International, April

  • Ertugrul I, Karakasoglu N (2006) The fuzzy analytic hierarchy process for supplier selection and an application in a textile company. Sakarya University, 5th International Symposium on Intelligent Manufacturing Systems, Denizli, Turkey, 29–31 May 2006

  • Ghodsypour SH, O’Brien C (1998) A decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear programming. Int J Prod Econ 56(57):199–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huynh N, Walton C (2005) Methodologies for reducing truck turn time at marine container terminals. Center of Transportation Research, University of Texas, Austin

    Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman C, Cebeci U, Ruan D (2004) Multi-attribute comparison of catering service companies using fuzzy AHP: the case of Turkey. Int J Prod Econ 87:171–184

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahraman C, Kaya I, Cebi S (2009) A comparative analysis for multi attribute selection among renewable energy alternatives using fuzzy axiomatic design and fuzzy analytic hierarchy process. Energy 5:1–14

    Google Scholar 

  • Khoshnevis B, Asef-Vaziri A (2000) 3D virtual and physical simulation of automated container terminal and analysis of impact on in-land transportation. METRANS Transportation Center University of Southern California, Los Angeles, pp 1–25

    Google Scholar 

  • Kiani M, Bonsall S, Wang J, Wall A (2009) Application of Multiple Attribute Decision-Making (MADM) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) methods in the selection decisions for a container yard operating system. Int J Mar Technol Soc 43(3):34–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim S (2005) Formal fire safety assessment of passenger ships, PhD Thesis, School of Engineering, Liverpool John Moores University, UK, pp. 185–233

  • Kim K, Kim K (2003) Heuristic algorithms for routing yard-side equipment for minimizing loading times in container terminals. Nav Res Logist 50:498–514

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klodzinski J, and Al-Deek H (2002) Using seaport freight transportation data to distribute heavy truck trips on adjacent highways. Proceedings of the 82nd Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting, Washington, DC

  • Marchalleck N, Kandel A (1995) Fuzzy logic applications in transportation systems. Int J Artif Intell Tools 4(3):413–432

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mutry K, Liu J, Wan Y, Linn R (2005) A decision support system for operations in a container terminal. J Decis Support Syst 39:309–332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naghadehi M, Mikaeil R, Ataei M (2009) The application of Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process (FAHP) approach to selection of optimum underground mining method for Jajarm Bauxite Mine, Iran. Expert Syst Appl 36:8218–8226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nam K, Ha W (2001) Evaluation of handling systems for container terminals. J Waterw Port Coast Ocean Eng 127(3):171–175

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen HT, Walker EA (2000) A first course in fuzzy logic. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkash T (2003) Land suitability analysis for agricultural crops: a fuzzy multicriteria decision making approach. Master of Science Thesis, International Institute for Geo-Information Science and Earth Observation, Netherlands

  • Pillay A, Wang J (2003) Technology and safety of marine systems. Elsevier, Oxford, pp 213–242

    Google Scholar 

  • Regan A, Golob T (2000) Trucking industry perceptions of congestion problems and potential solutions in maritime intermodal operations in California. Transp Res A 34:587–605

    Google Scholar 

  • Saaty T (2004) Decision-making, the analytic hierarchy and network processes (AHP/ANP). J Syst Sci Syst Eng 13(1):1–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sii H (2001) Marine and offshore safety assessment, PhD Thesis, Staffordshire University, UK

  • Sii H, Ruxton T, and Wang J (2001) A design decision-support framework for evaluation of design options/proposals using a composite structure methodology based on the approximate reasoning approach and the evidential reasoning method. Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers 217 Part E 59–76

  • Su D, Liang G, Liu C (2003) A study on integrated port performance comparison based on the concept of balanced scorecard. J East Asia Soc Transp Stud 5:609–624

    Google Scholar 

  • Teodorovic D (1994) Fuzzy sets theory applications in traffic and transportation. Eur J Oper Res 74:379–390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UNCTAD (1988) Operating and maintenance features of container handling system. United Nations, Geneva, pp 26–49

    Google Scholar 

  • Ung S, Williams V, Chen H, Bonsall S, Wang J (2006) Human error assessment and management in port operations using fuzzy AHP. J Mar Technol Society 40(1):68–81

    Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe I (2001) Container terminal planning—a theoretical approach. World Cargo Publishing, Leatherhead

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Marine Engineering, Chabahar Maritime University, Chabahar, Iran

    Mansoor Kiani Moghadam & Ali Reza Moazen Jahromi

  2. Faculty of Maritime Economics & Management, Khoramshahr University of Marine Science and Technology, Khoramshahr, Iran

    Amir Saeed Nooramin

  3. Tehran, P.O. Box 16836-88415, Iran

    Amir Saeed Nooramin

Authors
  1. Mansoor Kiani Moghadam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ali Reza Moazen Jahromi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amir Saeed Nooramin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amir Saeed Nooramin.

Appendix: Experts’ judgments

Appendix: Experts’ judgments

The port operators, truck terminal managers, and academics were asked to rank the most important attributes identified for container yard gantry crane systems on a preference basis. In some cases, the conception has been taken by authors from the explanation, information, and instructions given by the operators that are presented in the same way as reflected in the tables.

Question forms:

Read the following questions and put check marks on the pair-wise comparison matrices (Table 7). If an attribute on the left is more important than the one matching on the right, put your check mark to the left of the importance “Equal” under the importance level you prefer. If an attribute on the left is less important than the one matching on the right, put your check mark to the right of the importance “Equal” under the importance level you prefer.

Table 7 Questionnaire forms used to facilitate comparisons of main attributes
Full size table

With respect to the overall goal “Selection of best yard crane system”

  1. Q1.

    How important is Operation Attributes (OA) when it is compared with Cost Attributes (EA)?

  2. Q2.

    How important is Operation Attributes (OA) when it is compared with Management Attributes (MA)?

  3. Q3.

    How important is Cost Attributes (EA) when it is compared with Management Attributes (MA)?

Other comparison matrices are obtained based on the questionnaire like the above table.

Table 8 represents the expert judgments for questions 1 to 3.

Table 8 Experts’ judgments for questions 1 to 3
Full size table

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moghadam, M.K., Jahromi, A.R.M. & Nooramin, A.S. A fuzzy AHP decision support system for selecting yard cranes in marine container terminals. WMU J Marit Affairs 10, 227–240 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-011-0007-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13437-011-0007-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation