IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2023i9p7195-d1133172.html

Comparing the Efficiency of Two Types of Yard Layout in Container Terminals

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaoju Zhang

    (School of E-commerce and Logistics, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing 100048, China)

  • Yue Gu

    (School of E-commerce and Logistics, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing 100048, China)

  • Yuqing Yang

    (School of E-commerce and Logistics, Beijing Technology and Business University, Beijing 100048, China)

  • Baoli Liu

    (Transportation Engineering College, Dalian Maritime University, Dalian 116026, China)

Abstract

Traditional container terminals usually use a horizontal yard layout, while automated container terminals usually use a vertical yard layout. The two types of yard layout perform differently in the vehicle travel routes, the handling interface points of vehicles and yard cranes, and the yard cranes travel routes. These differences result in the different indicators between the two types of yard layout, such as yard utilization, average vehicle travel routes, average yard crane travel distance, and overall terminal efficiency etc. This paper uses an analytic method to quantify these indicators of the two types of yard layout. Based on the analysis results, the terminal efficiency is approximated by a queuing network from the overall operations. In the experiment studies, we first evaluate the indicators of the two types of yard layout, respectively. Then, we change the length and width of the yard to compare the efficiency of the two types of yard layout in various yard sizes. Finally, the overall terminal efficiency is compared. Results show that the overall efficiency is significantly affected by the service rate of yard cranes. The results in this paper may provide references for terminal yard design.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaoju Zhang & Yue Gu & Yuqing Yang & Baoli Liu, 2023. "Comparing the Efficiency of Two Types of Yard Layout in Container Terminals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(9), pages 1-18, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7195-:d:1133172
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7195/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/9/7195/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Milorad Vidovic & Kap Kim, 2006. "Estimating the cycle time of three-stage material handling systems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 144(1), pages 181-200, April.
    2. Tierney, Kevin & Voß, Stefan & Stahlbock, Robert, 2014. "A mathematical model of inter-terminal transportation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 235(2), pages 448-460.
    3. Amir Gharehgozli & Nima Zaerpour & Rene Koster, 2020. "Container terminal layout design: transition and future," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 22(4), pages 610-639, December.
    4. Shy Bassan, 2007. "Evaluating seaport operation and capacity analysis—preliminary methodology," Maritime Policy & Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 34(1), pages 3-19, February.
    5. Roy, Debjit & de Koster, René, 2018. "Stochastic modeling of unloading and loading operations at a container terminal using automated lifting vehicles," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 266(3), pages 895-910.
    6. Akash Gupta & Debjit Roy & René de Koster & Sampanna Parhi, 2017. "Optimal stack layout in a sea container terminal with automated lifting vehicles," International Journal of Production Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(13), pages 3747-3765, July.
    7. Nossack, Jenny & Pesch, Erwin, 2013. "A truck scheduling problem arising in intermodal container transportation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 230(3), pages 666-680.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hsu, Wen-Kai K. & Huynh, Nguyen Tan & Quoc, Thanh Le & Yu, Hui-Lung, 2024. "An assessment model of eco-efficiency for container terminals within a port," Economics of Transportation, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    2. Yuanxu Li & Xin Tian & Zhaoxu Lu & Junfeng Wu, 2025. "Impact of Digital Transformation on Sustainable Development of Port Performance: Evidence from Tangshan Port," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(15), pages 1-21, July.
    3. Enna Hirata & Nailah Firdausiyah & Widha Kusumaningdyah, 2025. "Handling modular containers in a physical internet environment," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 27(3), pages 449-475, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Amir Gharehgozli & Nima Zaerpour & Rene Koster, 2020. "Container terminal layout design: transition and future," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 22(4), pages 610-639, December.
    2. Zhang, Xiaoju & Zeng, Qingcheng & Sheu, Jiuh-Biing, 2019. "Modeling the productivity and stability of a terminal operation system with quay crane double cycling," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 181-197.
    3. Roy, Debjit & van Ommeren, Jan-Kees & de Koster, René & Gharehgozli, Amir, 2022. "Modeling landside container terminal queues: Exact analysis and approximations," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 73-102.
    4. Amir Gharehgozli & Debjit Roy & Suruchika Saini & Jan-Kees Ommeren, 2023. "Loading and unloading trains at the landside of container terminals," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 25(3), pages 549-575, September.
    5. Zhang, Xiaoju & Jia, Nan & Song, Dongping & Liu, Baoli, 2024. "Modelling and analyzing the stacking strategies in automated container terminals," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    6. Serkan Karakas & Mehmet Kirmizi & Batuhan Kocaoglu, 2021. "Yard block assignment, internal truck operations, and berth allocation in container terminals: introducing carbon-footprint minimisation objectives," Maritime Economics & Logistics, Palgrave Macmillan;International Association of Maritime Economists (IAME), vol. 23(4), pages 750-771, December.
    7. Kumawat, Govind Lal & Tripathi, Divyansh & Bansal, Vishal, 2025. "Stochastic modeling and analysis of two-phase operations in container terminal with automated lifting vehicles: A novel queuing approach," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    8. Lyu, Xiaohuan & Lalla-Ruiz, Eduardo & Schulte, Frederik, 2025. "The collaborative berth allocation problem with row-generation algorithms for stable cost allocations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 323(3), pages 888-906.
    9. Arturo E. Pérez Rivera & Martijn R. K. Mes, 2019. "Integrated scheduling of drayage and long-haul operations in synchromodal transport," Flexible Services and Manufacturing Journal, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 763-806, September.
    10. Kenneth Stoop & Mario Pickavet & Didier Colle & Pieter Audenaert, 2024. "The dynamic stochastic container drayage problem with truck appointment scheduling," OR Spectrum: Quantitative Approaches in Management, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research e.V., vol. 46(3), pages 953-985, September.
    11. Kumawat, Govind Lal & Roy, Debjit & De Koster, René & Adan, Ivo, 2021. "Stochastic modeling of parallel process flows in intra-logistics systems: Applications in container terminals and compact storage systems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(1), pages 159-176.
    12. Elifcan Göçmen & Rızvan Erol, 2018. "The Problem of Sustainable Intermodal Transportation: A Case Study of an International Logistics Company, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-16, November.
    13. Raeesi, Ramin & Sahebjamnia, Navid & Mansouri, S. Afshin, 2023. "The synergistic effect of operational research and big data analytics in greening container terminal operations: A review and future directions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 310(3), pages 943-973.
    14. Hilde Heggen & Yves Molenbruch & An Caris & Kris Braekers, 2019. "Intermodal Container Routing: Integrating Long-Haul Routing and Local Drayage Decisions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-36, March.
    15. Zhongbin Zhao & Xifu Wang & Suxin Cheng & Wei Liu & Lijun Jiang, 2022. "A New Synchronous Handling Technology of Double Stack Container Trains in Sea-Rail Intermodal Terminals," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(18), pages 1-18, September.
    16. Song, Yujian & Zhang, Jiantong & Liang, Zhe & Ye, Chunming, 2017. "An exact algorithm for the container drayage problem under a separation mode," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 231-254.
    17. Claudia Durán & Ivan Derpich & Raúl Carrasco, 2022. "Optimization of Port Layout to Determine Greenhouse Gas Emission Gaps," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-18, October.
    18. Seo, Young-Joon & Park, Jin Suk, 2016. "The estimation of minimum efficient scale of the port industry," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 168-175.
    19. Xiaojun Li & Ran Zhou & Lequn Zhu, 2024. "Research on Energy Saving Effect of Parallel and Perpendicular Yard Layouts under Different Proportions of Transshipment at the Automated Container Terminal," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(17), pages 1-19, August.
    20. Facchini, F. & Digiesi, S. & Mossa, G., 2020. "Optimal dry port configuration for container terminals: A non-linear model for sustainable decision making," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 219(C), pages 164-178.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2023:i:9:p:7195-:d:1133172. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.