VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY — HO CHI MINH CITY HO CHI MINH UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
LE NGOC BAO LONG
DESIGNING CONTROL ALGORITHMS AND SIMULATING MONORAIL SYSTEM FOR INTER-
TERMINAL TRANSPORT AT BUSAN PORT
THIET KE GIAI THUAT DIEU KHIEN VA MO PHONG HE THONG MONORAIL TRONG VAN CHUYEN LIEN
TRAM O CANG BUSAN Major: Mechatronics Engineering
Major Code: 8520114
MASTER THESIS
HO CHI MINH CITY, September 2020
Trang 2
CƠNG TRÌNH ĐƯỢC HỒN THÀNH TẠI TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC BÁCH KHOA -ĐÐHQG -HCM Cán bộ hướng dẫn khoa học : PGS.TS Nguyễn Duy Anh
Cán bộ chấm nhận xét 1 : PGS.TS Nguyễn Thanh Phương Cán bộ chấm nhận xét 2 : TS Lê Ngọc Bích
Luận văn thạc sĩ được bảo vệ tại Trường Đại học Bách Khoa, ĐHQG Tp HCM
ngày 03 tháng 09 năm 2020
Thành phần Hội đồng đánh giá luận văn thạc sĩ gồm:
(Ghi rõ họ, tên, học hàm, học vị của Hội đồng chấm bảo vệ luận văn thạc sĩ) 1 PGS.TS V6 Tường Quân — Chủ tịch
2 TS Lê Đức Hạnh - Ủy viên
3 PGS.TS Nguyễn Thanh Phuong — CBPB1
4 TS Lê Ngọc Bích — CBPB2
5 TS Trần Việt Hồng — Thư ký
Xác nhận của Chủ tịch Hội đồng đánh giá LV và Trưởng Khoa quản lý chuyên ngành sau khi luận văn đã được sửa chữa (nêu có)
CHỦ TỊCH HỘI ĐỒNG TRƯỞNG KHOA CƠ KHÍ
Trang 3ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA TP.HCM CỘNG HÒA XÃ HỘI CHỦ NGHĨA VIỆT
TRUONG DAI HOC BACH KHOA NAM Độc lập - Tự do - Hạnh phúc
NHIỆM VỤ LUẬN VĂN THẠC SĨ
Họ tên học viên: Lê Ngọc Bảo Long MSHV: 1970029
Ngày, tháng, năm sinh: 19/10/1995 Nơi sinh: Cần Thơ
Chuyên ngành: Cơ Điện Tử Mã số : 8520114
I TÊN ĐÈ TÀI: Thiết kế giải thuật điều khiển và mô phỏng hệ thống monorail trong
vận chuyên liên trạm ở cảng Busan
II NHIỆM VỤ VÀ NỘI DUNG:
Định nghĩa các phương thức vận chuyền (transport modes) và hệ thông vận chuyển lién tram (Inter-Terminal Transport System)
Giới thiệu về dự án ITT Monorail đang được triển khai tại cảng Busan — Hàn Quốc
Thiết kế giải thuật tối ưu trong việc sắp xếp trình tự xuất hàng ở các vị trí loader
Thiết kế giải thuật tối ưu trong việc hoạch định đường đi giữa các trạm trong cảng
Thiết kế giải thuật tối ưu điều khiển quá trình phân bồ tác vụ cho các shuttle
Viết phần mềm mô phỏng hoạt động của hệ thống ITT Monorail ở cảng Busan dựa
trên các thông số đầu vào được cung cấp, thực hiện mô phỏng với 250 containers So sánh, đánh giá hiệu quả của các giải thuật đã thiết kế và đề xuất phương án cải
tiên
II NGÀY GIAO NHIỆM VỤ : 24/02/2020
IV NGÀY HOÀN THÀNH NHIỆM VỤ : 15/08/2020 V._ CÁN BỘ HƯỚNG DẪN : PGS.TS Nguyễn Duy Anh
Tp HCM, ngày 04 tháng 08 nam 2020
CÁN BỘ HƯỚNG DẪN CHỦ NHIỆM BỘ MÔN ĐÀO TẠO
(Họ tên và chữ ký) (Họ tên và chữ ký)
Nguyễn Duy Anh
TRƯỞNG KHOA CƠ KHÍ
(Họ tên và chữ ký)
Trang 4ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First of all, I would like to express my gratefulness to Assoc Prof Nguyen Duy Anh and Prof Kim Hwan-Seong for their best inspiration and guidance to this thesis Professors helped me a lot to overcome difficulties in accomplishing the project with great knowledge and
motivation
Secondly, I would like to acknowledge the support of lecturers at Faculty of Mechatronic Engineering, Ho Chi Minh City University of Technology for the essential knowledge over the past six years, which has built up the platform for me to complete the thesis
And finally, I also would like to thank my family and my friends, as well as my partners in the laboratory, who have always been by my side I just cannot think how I could be as I am now without your help
Le Ngoc Bao Long
Trang 5ABSTRACT
Trang 6TÓM TẮT LUẬN VĂN
Cảng Busan là cảng container lớn nhất ở Hàn Quốc và đứng thứ 6 trên thế giới, với khả năng xử lý gần 80% tổng lượng hàng container cả nước và hơn 21 triệu đơn vị TEU trong năm 2018 Nhu cầu vận chuyên tăng liên tục qua từng năm buộc chính phủ Hàn Quốc phải phát triển hệ thống vận chuyền ở cảng Busan để giảm thiểu thời gian và chi phí vận hành, cũng như tăng năng suất xuất nhập hàng Sau khi tham khảo các hệ thống vận chuyên liên tram (ITT) trên thế giới, chính phủ Hàn Quốc quyết định xây dựng một hệ thống ITT Monorail đọc theo cảng Busan để liên kết các trạm thành phần bằng một đường ray một chiều Hệ thống mới này được kỳ vọng sẽ giúp giảm bớt chỉ phí vận hành so với phương pháp vận chuyền truyền thống (dùng xe tải), tuy nhiên mức độ phức tạp của dự án yêu cầu phân tích cân trọng và các giải pháp tối ưu để
nâng cao hiệu suất Mục tiêu chính của luận văn này là tìm hiểu các bài toán tối ưu mà hệ thống
cần đạt được và thiết kế các giải thuật điều khiến để giải quyết chúng, đồng thời đánh giá tính hiệu quả của các giải thuật đó và đề xuất phương án cải tiễn Kết quả của luận văn chỉ ra chu trình xuất hàng tối ưu cho các loader, giải bài tốn tìm đường đi ngắn nhất cho các shuttle và
đưa ra chiến lược phân bố nhiệm vụ tốt nhất, cũng như làm nỗi bật sự khác biệt khi kết hợp các
Trang 7DECLARA TION
I pledge that this thesis “DESIGNING CONTROL ALGORITHMS AND SIMULATING MONORAIL SYSTEM FOR INTER-TERMINAL TRANSPORT AT BUSAN PORT” is conducted on my own, with supervision from Professor Duy Anh Nguyen and Professor Kim Hwan-Seong — who is head manager of the ITT Monorail Project in Busan Port, and has not been submitted to any other universities and institutes, or for any other personal purposes All data, formulas and materials used in this thesis are truthful and fully cited, as they were proposed, verified and permitted by Professor Kim Hwan-Seong
Le Ngoc Bao Long
Trang 8TABLE OF CONTENT ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .- << <6 S 9 0 9 01 9960809 08000080808 0800609060860 wee IV ABSTTRACCTT, so- s5 s6 0 9 09190090 000990 080909 1909999009009 080/900099080100 009000900906 6996010000000 Vv (90) /8 V000 9À2 007777 vi
DECLARA THN 5< << G6999 619Ĩ 0900.9910009 900008090801000006 6006 60060/9060096ø wo Vii TABLE OF CONTIEÏNT o s5 6 S9 9 99990 999609 990909090009 00060900006090609060966960 viii LIST OE EIGUIREE œ0 9 9 0 09 090 0990000000000 0090608 0000000900006 6906090009000808 xi LIST OF TABLUE œ- << < 2 <9 9 9 69 699099601909 19090 09980 0801068090 6006 690609.96080660 xiii LIST OF ACRONYMS o6 óc <9 0909060960190 00000 0009809 0801000090 6006 69060900080860 xiv Chapter 1:ENTRODUCTIONN co G G5 S95 9090 0900.94.0404 060 009900089899066899008860966 1 1.1 Definition of Transpor( ÏMO(Ì€S óc 5 SG 9 599 9968 909969889968666996 066666 1 1.1.1 In-land transportation 000 cố 1
II AM bi ác) vu on a 3
IV Váy) 00 na 6
II Nho i0iii ion 6
Trang 9IS ENNH - tua ae 16 Chapter 2: METHODOLOOY, co G0 0 990.990 900006 96008098.94.08004.9008899086009666666 17 2.1 General structure of [TT Monorail SyS(€nm .oo o5 c5 55555552 6555665 S656 17 2.1.1 Maln COTC€DK G0 G5 0990001 9 00000000 000000001 8 60006 96 17 2.1.2 9) cv 8 ii vn cố 17 MÃ h9 i32 ¿on 19 2.1.4 Prototypes of Loader and ShutfÌe .- <5 < Ă 5S 3 9 ng 6e 20 2.1.5 Loading and unÌloadingỹ DFOC€SS€S - G GG G5 109 3999910930 315888856511 8 s56 20
2.2 Transport demand at Busan POT( .oooooo Go 9 9 9 06 906 66699666999996606.0666 21
2.3 Calculating facilities required for the SYS{€IM o5 S025 5S6666 52 5e66 21 2.3.1 Calculating Shuttle Quantities Required << «55s 99 3 9 s2 21 2.3.2 Calculating Loader (QQuanttI(I©S 2-5 «s3 9 vn n0 ng ng 24 2.4 Applying ïn SUY CaASC 0 G5 9 9 90 090.00 09090 06 08008 0648969.96098909008666996.08 0066 24 Chapter 3: DESIGNING ALGORITHMS co Go 0090 090000600960666666086066 086 26 3.1 Dispatching algorithm for shu(fÏ©S os s55 55s 55 S5 5S655 S666 565856 woe 26 SN C220 e 27 3.1.2 Ant Colony Optim1Z41OTI << << + 1 99999 99 1 9 80110 60904 56 27 3.1.3 ComparIson between twO Ime€thOCỈS - 4o << s39 9991558885551 11 8 s56 30 3.2 Scheduling algorithm for ÏOAC€TS -o.o 5 G05 5S 5 6526 6 66866 96696696968666666.96 6666 32 3.3 Assigning algorithm for shUlf(Ï€S o oo <0 6G G62 255 56665 S66 96696668666666.96 6666 34 3.3.1 Distance-based aDDTOACH GG 5c 9001000099901 v1 00 0 100001 11 1100896 34 3.3.2 Tlme-based apDDTOACH Ặ G5 G5 99.00 9991.930899 994 899 4 109001008004 1 901 856 34 Chapter 4: SIMULA TION RESUL T oo.ooo- 5565 5 59 9999 900965 9096699696696966086066086 38 4.1 ASSUImDfÏOnS IACÍC do 5ó G555 96 9 9.96 99 99 96.99608996 99.96 99989999 906989 89999689666999 6066 38 4.2 Graphic User Ín(erfaC© DFOĐTAITI doo o6 G G6 6S 999 9 996896 9696966999666686696666666 38
Trang 104.3.1 EÍẨiCI€TCY CÏ4[ .GG Q 0000 0.0000 0010004 9 000896 40 4.3.2 Loader”s prodUcfIVItV CHaYFẲ 0G 0000000909080 30 10 0031 08005 1 8g ve 41 4.3.3 Container flow at terminals Go G5 5991388949999 9 8.90 89 000 3 4] 4.3.4 Shutfle”s r€COTC| ChF - G5 5 2.9 9 6 42 4.4 Comparison between aDDFOACHS oooco0G G0655 69 9096896 6696966999666686696666666 42 4.4.1 Distance-based approach without task scheduling - « «««s« «<< 43 4.4.2 Distance-based approach with task scheduling <5 «<< « ssss+se 44 4.4.3 Time-based approach wIthout task scheduling -s << ««sss+sss 45 4.4.4 Time-based approach with task scheduling -«- 5< « «sex ssssse 46 4.5 EVaÌUafÏOTA .ososcoso s0 0 90990090 0900990959 0900909 09009009069060900906090090690690090 48 Chapter 5: CONCLUUSTION oooc co 5 99.06 900009609600 88 989996006966 89999080666666 S0 53.1 ACHỈ€V©ITTIÉS 5-5 c6 S0 0 99% 9990999090098 99 960909090000 0000 6096090 0690609060906000 50 3.2 DrawWaCĂKS .ocooocoo so 6S 6 9 0 0.9090 000000000900 09690 9900009 0909000906999 990090000609069906000 31 3.3 EUCUT€ WOTKS co co so 0 0 9 9 9 0009000009090 9904.990900 000 0009000 090809.9069906600000906690.0600 31 APPENDIX: PUBLICA THÒNN .o-o o5 S0 9 9 0 909.09 0900006006 009060906006 6006090 060 53 APPENDIX: COMMENT LETTER FROM KMOOU cccccccsssssssccccescsescecsssesseess 34 REEFERENCES c5 << 5 Sc ĂĂ 0 99900900100 0000809996 090.06 0190000090 60 000996009000.006090660066 S5
Trang 11LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1 [2]: Containers are imported and exported by trucks at Cat Lai Port in Ho Chi
Mini G¡ Tố ốẽ ốố 1
Figure 1.2 [7]: Grabbing and releasing containers onto freight train at Port of Hamburg, Í€TTTIATNVV 0 G G 5060001008999 6 8 01030 006 0.040 000 1 000 8 080004.09.91 806094 2 Figure 1.3 [8]: Double stacked train operating at APM Terminal in Portsmouth, Virginia ¬ 3
Figure 1.4 [9]: International maritime trade over years (Unit: Million tons) 4 Figure 1.5 [9]: International maritime trade over years (Unit: Billion ton-miles) 5
Figure 1.6 [13]: HMM Algeciras — a 24000-TEU-class containership — docking at Busan I0 5 Figure 1.7 [15]: Loading ULD containers at an airport in Canada s «s2 6 Figure 1.8 [18]: General operational structure of rail-road intermodal transportation 7 Figure 1.9 [19]: Intermodal transportation at Bettembourg-Dudelande, Luxembourg 7
Figure 1.10 [21] : Sea-rail intermodal terminal at Long Beach, California 7 Figure 1.11 [22]: General structure of Water-Rail-Road intermodal transportation 8 Figure 1.12 [23]: Main components of an ITT System ccc ecsssccsseccsssecesscceeseeeceees 9
Figure 1.13 [30]: Terminal allocation In Maasvlakte I & II Project - 10
Figure 1.14 [32]: Overview of Port of HarmmDuTg . - << s5 + 3993 13 E324 11
Figure 1.15 [34]: Overview of Hong Kong POT( - -< «<< S S1 1195155885151 s25 12
Figure 1.16 [43]: Satellite Image of Busan POr( . <«- 5< S1 1353515551515 s25 13 Figure 1.17 [43]: Names and positions of terminals in Busan Port (Phase 1) 14
Figure 1.18 [43]: Layout of ITT System at Busan Port (Phase 3: 14 terminals) 14 Figure 1.19 [43]: Stages Of I”TT PTOJ€CCK - G5 Ă c9 39.990 9.0 00901 ng 15 Figure 2.1 [43]: Operational structure of ITT Monorail System .-««- «<< 18 Figure 2.2 [43]: Change station’s locations with respect to each terminal 19
Figure 2.3 [43]: Change station’s behaviors to direct shuttles onto different lanes 19
Figure 2.4 [43]: Prototypes of loader and shuttle used in prOJ€C - « «+ ss 20 Figure 2.5 [43]: Loading-unloading processes 1n [TT Monorail System 20 Figure 3.1: Pseudo code demonstrating Roulette rule’s implementation in computer Ea 28
Trang 12Figure 3.4: Weighted graph with numbered nodes - s5 +< «+ + £**£.#£#x se2 31 Figure 3.5: Example of using A* algorithm to dispatch from a loading position to an unloading DOSITIOTI - o << <9 3 0 0 00 06 32 Figure 3.6: Flowchart for distance-based approachh «ss« «sss1 s15 xe ss2 35 Figure 3.7: General flowchart for time-based approach with ACO implementation 37 Figure 4.1: Interface of program at the beginNiNG .- - << «<< s3 sssssesss 39 Figure 4.2: Interface’s appearance after Inttlalizing paraImef€r$ - - «s5 «<< 39 Figure 4.3: Announcement on status bar after completing the process 40 Figure 4.4: Animation result after finishing the DTOC©SS - - 555 Ă S121 S225 40 Figure 4.5: Comparison on efficiency Of tWO SVS(€TTS .-s- ác 1 01118811 5e 41 Eigure 4.6: Loader”s pTOdUCfIVIV CHATTÍ 5 G5 039930 8930 11 010 0031100118811 8e 41 Figure 4.7: Operation at €aCÌ: t€TTTIITA8Ì 5 << + s9 %1 9999999191 999 59 995983 81 5 5 42 Figure 4.8: Travel distance recorded of each shutfÌÏe - =5 << «<s<ss ssssssssss 42 Eigure 4.9: Evaluation between applied approaches - «5s «sex sssssssse 49
Trang 13LIST OF TABLES
Table 2.1 [43|: Transport demand at Busan Port (Unit: Contalner) - « «s 21
Table 2.2: Transport rate at Busan ÏPOFK << << + < 999 991.1 9 9v 01 0e 21
Table 2.3 [43]: Travel distance between terminals (Unit: Metre) .- s‹ 23
Table 2.4: List of inputs used for calculating shuttÏle quantitI€S - -« «« s55 23 Table 2.5: Number of shuttles required at each (€TTTITIAÌ 7c << 55s «s2 s2 23 Table 2.6: Number of loaders required at each terrn1nn .- -«-« «+ ss sssssssses 24 Table 2.7: Transport volume used in algorithm’s design and simulation 25 Table 3.1: List of terminals and corresponding CSS G1159 5551 552 26 Table 3.2: Time record for the twO rmnethOS - G5 <5 5s 9993 9x 999 59 ng ve 31 Table 3.3: Result of task scheduling at each terrm1ni «+ «+ ssss+ssssssssss2 33 Table 4.1: Result of distance-based approach with randomized schedule 43 Table 4.2: Result of distance-based approach with arranged schedule - 44 Table 4.3: Result of time-based approach with randomized schedule using ACO Table 4.4: Result of time-based approach with arranged schedule using ACO Algorithm
022080 , 46
Table 4.5: Result of time-based approach with arranged schedule using ACO Algorithm
(high Ant number) cc ccccsssssccesssssseceecesssecccessssssnceecessnseeeesesssseeeceessssaeseeesseesoes 47
Trang 14LIST OF ACRONYMS
ITT: Inter-Terminal Transport TEU: Twenty-feet Equivalent Unit FEU: Forty-feet Equivalent Unit
UNCTAD: United Nations Conference on Trade and Development ULD: Unit Loader Device
MTO: Multimodal Transport Operator MTS: Multi-Trailer System
AGV: Automated Guided Vehicle ALV: Autonomous Land Vehicle HKP: Hong Kong Port
KMOU: Korea Maritime and Ocean University CS: Change Station
Ter: Terminal
ACO: Ant Colony Optimization GUI: Graphic User Interface
Trang 15Chapter 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1 Definition of Transport Modes
According to Jean-Paul Rodrigue [1], transport modes are the means by which passengers and freight achieve mobility The common transport modes fall into three basic types: land (road, railway), water (shipping) and air (airplane) [1] In general, most of transport modes can carry both passengers and goods, depending on their set of technical (speed, capacity, motive technology), operational (working and safety conditions) and commercial (demand for transport) characteristics
In this thesis, we mainly concentrate on containerized transportation, in which goods are classified and quantified into standardized containers so that transport vehicles could handle easier
1.1.1 In-land transportation
Road infrastructures are large consumers of space with the lowest level of physical constraints among transportation modes [1] Container transportation is inseparable from roadway transport mode because it is usually an end mode of the process and gives connectivity to other modes such as railway transport, air transport or maritime transport
‘uid | } : :
bù MU oe Musffl
CN TE
Figure 1.1 [2]: Containers are imported and exported by trucks at Cat Lai Port in Ho Chi Minh City
ait S AT Aid 9
Trang 16Road transportation achieves high flexibility and convenience as vehicles can serve several purposes, especially in short and medium distance moving However, physiographical constraints are significant in road construction with substantial additional costs to overcome features such as rivers or rugged terrain [1] Road transport systems have low handling capacity, high energy consumption, high maintenance costs both for the vehicles and infrastructures, and significantly affected by traffic conditions As a consequence, they are mainly linked to light industries and freight distribution only, where rapid movements of freight in small batches are required
To overcome the disadvantages of low handling capacity and low flexibility, most of the modern in-land transport activities now comprise railway transportation Heavy industries are preferably linked with rail transport systems A standardized 20-feet dry container (one TEV)
has gross weight of about 30 tons [3] [4], and a freight train usually has 50-150 railcars [4]
which is designed to handle up to 2 TEUs at once (4 TEUs or 2 FEUs in case of double stacked train — see Figure 1.3) Average external cost (including fuel consumption, gas emission and safety insurance costs) of a freight train is 0.30-0.82 cent/ton-mile, while a freight truck cost
about 2.62-5.86 cent/ton-mile [5] [6] However, these comparative costs also depend a lot on
traffic network and reputation of the supplier companies
cosy
Z2 of
5⁄2
Trang 17Figure 1.3 [8]: Double stacked train operating at APM Terminal in Portsmouth, Virginia
1.1.2 Maritime transportation
Main maritime routes are composed of oceans, coasts, seas, lakes, rivers, and channels
However, due to the location of economic activities, maritime circulation takes place on specific parts of the maritime space, particularly over the North Atlantic and the North Pacific [1] Nowadays, large container ports in the world boost their shipping activities oversea, with more and more maritime trades over years (see Figure 1.4 and Figure 1.5 [9]) According to UNCTAD
(United Nations Conference on Trade and Development) [9] [10], seaborne trade accounts for
about 90% of the global trade [11] [12] Besides, the capacity of containerships also improves gradually At the moment, the biggest containership in the world is HMM Algeciras [13], was ordered in September 2019 and owned by HMM Enterprise — a shipping company of South Korea — with maximum capacity of 24.000 TEUs (see Figure 1.6 [13]) This giant containership is expected to reduce 15% operational cost compared to common containerships in Europe (15.000 TEU-class ships)
With physical properties such as buoyancy and limited friction, maritime transportation is the most effective mode to move large quantities of cargo over long distances, especially heavy
Trang 18cargo such as minerals, metals, ores, steel coils, etc which is hardly covered by air
transportation [14] However, high infrastructure cost (consisting of construction, operation and maintenance for ships) and low speed are critical points that managers must consider carefully
2018 2017 2016 — - 2003 2008 ohh 2005 si | _ _" ` i | 2000 4Œ0 600 800 1000 12000 fj Container] Drycarqgo = Main bulks JJ Tanker trade
Figure 1.4 [9]: International maritime trade over years (Unit: Million tons)
Trang 1970 000 £0 000 50 000 40 000 20000 20 000 10060 2003 2001 202 203 2(0/ 2(O5 202 2007 205 2002 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 20192 2012
ˆ Mam bulks fDivcargo — ffontaiersiÑTankei trade
Figure 1.5 [9]: International maritime trade over years (Unit: Billion ton-miles)
Trang 201.1.3 Air transportation
For air transportation, container freight is usually classified as ULD item (Unit-Load
Device) Most common of ULD types are LD3, LD6, LD11 for Airbus Wide-body class; LD2,
and LD8 for narrower fuselage class Air routes are practically unlimited, but they are denser over the North Atlantic, inside North America and Europe and over the North Pacific [1], where mega airports and flight networks locate
đÍ “
Figure 1.7 [15]: Loading ULD containers at an airport in Canada
To compare with other transport mode, air transportation helps minimize the travel time, with highly reliable schedules and low insurance costs Air transportation also does not require much time in stocking items at warehouses and depots However, the limited demand of air freight transport is caused by its considerable cost, which typically 4-5 times greater than of roadway transport and 12-16 times of sea transport [16] [17] Hence, only commodities with
high value, time-sensitive and short lives such as seafood, pharmaceuticals, electronic devices
and urgent documents, would be considered for air freight transport 1.1.4 Intermodal transportation
Intermodal transportation involves the use of at least two different modes in a trip from an origin to a destination through an intermodal transport chain, which permits the integration of several transportation networks [1] Intermodality enhances the economic performance of a transport chain by using modes in the most productive manner [1] For example, the line-haul economies of rail may be exploited for long distances, with the efficiency of trucks providing
flexible local pick up and deliveries [1] (see Figure 1.8 [18] and Figure 1.9 [19] [20]) Another
Trang 21t ‘ >} Lư + La | Ị i
| Fixed handling area | Fixed handling area | Fixed handling area | Fixed handling area | Rail mounted gantry
crane | "¡+ Thị Inbound container vard ArrivaHleparture lines Outbound container yard 2 1 FT fy uw rT | N1 many of | | E ES
Figure 1.10 [21]: Sea-rail intermodal terminal at Long Beach, California
Trang 22i | i
Water carrier Rail carrier Road carrier
ae: mẽ | Fh i i
Figure 1.11 [22]: General structure of Water-Rail-Road intermodal transportation
To best exploit intermodal transportation, there are some important points that the system
should follow [1]:
The nature and quantity of cargo: Intermodal transportation is usually suitable for intermediate and finished goods in load units of less than 25 tons The mode with the lowest capacity usually defines the intermodal load unit As such, intermodal transportation is constrained by the trucking load unit
The sequence of transportation modes being used: Intermodal transportation is organized as a sequence of modes, often known as an intermodal transport chain The dominant modes supporting intermodalism are trucking, rail, barges, and maritime Air transportation usually only require intermodalism (trucking) for its “first and last miles” and not used in combination with other modes Additionally, load units used by air transportation are not readily convertible with other modes
Trang 231.2 Inter-Terminal Transport System
Inter-Terminal Transport System (ITT System) [23] [24] [25] [26] [27] is a transport
system that connects organizationally separated areas and terminals of a container port through many kinds of transport mode and service station (depots, container yards, terminals, repair stations, value-added facilities, etc ) The value-added services may comprise inventory, inspection, labelling, packing, picking, bar-coding, customizing activities, etc [23], which are all fundamental to delight customers
ITT Systems is inevitable for most major container ports in the world, where millions of
TEU have to be handled each year [9] [28] Intense workload at those ports requires full
exploitation of capabilities and facilities, however difference in infrastructure results in unequal endowment of terminals Irrelevant use of port resources could lead to unexpected waste and lower system’s efficiency Thus, ITT Systems are particularly important to compensate the unbalances and strengthen the connection between inner terminals in a container port A general
ITT system can be summarized as illustrated in Figure 1.12 below [23]
Container Terminals Shipping Procedures
e Container yard ¢ Custom clearance facilites e Intermodal facilities Inter-Terminal e Screening and scanning facilities
Transport
Value-Added Logistics Dedicated Transport
& Facilities Terminals
e Container freight stations ¢ Barge terminal
eâ Warehouses đ Rail terminal
e Empty depots e Dry port terminal
e Cleaning and repair stations
Figure 1.12 [23]: Main components of an ITT System
1.3 Literature Review 1.3.1 ITT Systems in the world
= Poland: Port of Rotterdam (Maasvlakte I & Maasvlakte II Project)
Maasvlakte I & II is an ongoing project that carried out by TUDelft (Technische
Universiteit Delft), Eramus University and Port of Rotterdam Authority [29] [30], in which
Trang 24finished first stage (Maasvlakte I) in 2013 (see Figure 1.13 [30]) At the moment, Port of
Rotterdam has an annual throughput of 469.4 million tons (about 152.9 million tons of containers in 2019 in total [31]), approximately 30000 seagoing-vessel and 110000 inland- vessel visits, and is the largest container port in Europe Transport vehicles used include trucks,
MTSs (Multi-Trailer System), AGVs (Automated Guided Vehicle), ALVs (Autonomous Land Vehicle), barges, vessels and trains [30]
= 85 £D Mw: ~ — a 4ê D8 k Crores {Te } Cesy K! Bl _— ; ; Ca kÍ/ ; 31 > at " Am am 8 81 x ¬ j t4 / i \ —_
5 ash x | An} — CFDS Tor Line
f/f , a1 / c3 14 | ` 1 t9 ZạT VÀ \ ` F 83 \ ' F3 28 È wẽ a “9 tọ \ t4? ws » “ trả \ 43 1Š : \ HIẾP † chs, VIÊN FCT \ c ; ở 258 ‘A a Kiana \ APT Wyte? ne "7 t | ' ` si | : { \ 3 f \ J i \ fp i
Figure 1.13 [30]: Terminal allocation in Maasvlakte I & II Project = Germany: Port of Hamburg
Hamburg is accordingly the third largest container port in Europe and in the 17" place on the list of the world's largest container ports (see Figure 1.14 [32]) All terminals and industrial firms in Port of Hamburg hinterland are connected by Port Railway founded in 1866 [32], which takes top place among Europe ports with 2.3 million TEUs transported each year [32] For seaborne trade, there are around 8,000 ship calls per year, almost 300 berths and a total of 43 kilometers of quay for seagoing vessels [32] In total, 136.6 million tons of cargo crossed the quay walls of Germany's largest seaport in 2019, including around 9.3 million TEUs [32]
Trang 25Figure 1.14 [32]: Overview of Port of Hamburg = Hong Kong: Hong Kong Port (HKP)
The world’s fifth busiest container port, measured in TEU volumes, Hong Kong Port consists primarily of five major terminals, each operated by one of these companies: Modern Terminals, Ltd (MTL); Hongkong International Terminals Ltd (HIT); COSCO Information &
Technology (H.K.) Ltd.; Dubai Port International Terminals (DPI), and Asia Container Terminals Ltd (ACT); as well as four other minor terminals [33] The existing nine terminals
occupy over two square kilometers of land, providing 18 berths and more than 6,500 meters of deep water frontage Altogether, these terminals handle about 60 percent of total container
traffic handled in Hong Kong [33]
At Hong Kong Port, the deployment of larger vessels and larger alliances has produced a critical increase in the number of inter-terminal transfers, resulting in higher charges to shipping lines; extra handling time for shipments; and an increased burden on the port’s resources and roads HKP handled 18.3 million TEUs of containers in 2019, in which the Kwai Chung-Tsing Yi Container Terminals handled 14.2 million TEUs, representing 77% of the port container throughput [34] The port provided about 300 container liner services per week connecting to
around 420 destinations worldwide
Trang 26Figure 1.15 [34]: Overview of Hong Kong Port
1.3.2 Simulation and Optimization studies
Many studies about simulation and optimization control in ITT System are made based on the scenario of Port of Rotterdam (Maasvlakte I & II Project) because it is the busiest and largest container port in Europe [30], with mostly all transport modes and vehicles for hinterland and sea As summarized by Leonard and Stefan (2017 [23]), approaches obtained could be classified into simulation approaches, optimization approaches and information system approaches, which mainly focus on transport scheduling, vehicle routing and information technologies
For scheduling progresses, Evers and Koppers (1996 [35]); He et al (2013 [36]) proved the importance of scheduling in ITT System’s activities, in which integrative scheduling approaches are required to enhance traffic status and improve the resources dispatching’s procedure, in order to satisfy ITT demands under deadlines and priorities Qiu et al (2002 [37]) proposed scheduling and routing algorithms for AGVs; while Ng (2005 [38]) focused on scheduling for cranes Integrative approaches supporting interrelated decision problems became increasingly important for enhancing the coordination of sub-activities (Xin et al, 2014 [39))
Trang 27For routing progresses, studies pointed that a cost-effective route should be planned to pick up and deliver containers in multiple departure and destination points in time, after obtaining result from scheduling progresses [23] According to Paragh et al (2008 [40]); Steenken et al (1993 [41]), pickup and delivery positions would be paired
with constraints such as deadlines and time windows; as well as containers sometimes must be
swapped between transport vehicles Real-time tracking and communication between vehicles should also be considered so that they could response to new requests as soon as they finished
their duties [42]
1.4 ITT Project at Busan Port
1.4.1 Scenario
At present, in association with Korea Maritime and Ocean University (KMOU), managers of Busan Port are designing an ITT system, which will be operating by 2045 [43] In this ITT system, a monorail will be constructed along the entire port to direct shuttles in and out of terminals to load and unload containers The word “mono” indicates that shuttles could only move in one direction per lane Detailed explanation will be available in following sections in
this thesis
1.4.2 Overview of Busan Port
Figure 1.16 [43]: Satellite image of Busan Port
Trang 28@1 tal (PNIT—-HPNT FSS) €2 sere
C415) tel Pde)
Figure 1.17 [43]: Names and positions of terminals in Busan Port (Phase 1)
Full view of Busan Port is demonstrated in Figure 1.16 [43] At the beginning (phase 1), there are 5 terminals within, whose names and locations are presented as shown in Figure 1.17 [43] By the time, the layout more and more expands, from 5 terminals to 7 terminals (phase 2) and up to 14 terminals at present (phase 3 — see Figure 1.18) The concept and operational structure will be explained in detail in Chapter 2
§ wd | } | Tạ<Ð Co C35 a} — al ae ma ee 7
son |- G$15 S14 s13 esi2 cst! Ter1 Ted Tea Teed
| — —_—_— => 1000 F Ter12 Ter1! Tert0
| Ter Tes Tare 1900 = 4 | : csid Tar? css 3 5 | cs? Tem cs cse 2500 Tarts cere 3000 f Terta csi7 3500 - csia 4000 = 1 =i L„ ie L_ i sa 4060 2080 0 Tủ a Meter
Figure 1.18 [43]: Layout of ITT System at Busan Port (Phase 3: 14 terminals)
1.4.3 Stages and objectives of project
The whole project is divided into sequential stages, whose contribution are presented in Figure 1.19 [43] The thesis is now at stage 2, which means that objectives are to identify the configurations for the ITT monorail and define the best parameters After many times of
Trang 29simulation to confirm the effectiveness of the ITT monorail system, the last stage is to estimate costs and to operate in reality, which is planned to be covered in 2045
— | | | | || 1.1 Internal 1.2.Demand
-— | Transport Demand [—*> Scenario
| Analysis Generation | | | | | | | | L— yO 1.2 Facility and equipment Calculus Demand scenarios Adjustments
2.1 Create ITT 2.2 Facility and
operating equipment
principles and (Terminal layout procedures and ITT mono rail)
Ỷ |
|
2.4 Simulation 2.3 Simulation | Configuration
| | |
with Flexible with Fix Configuration) Configuration | L— ==—=—=—=—=——_—_—_—_—_—_—_—_—_— 4 Adjustments 3.1 Time/costs/ capacity/benefit Vv ad ad © 5 4 Độ = © 2
Figure 1.19 [43]: Stages of ITT Project
Trang 301.5 Thesis’s range and objectives 1.5.1 Author’s module in the project
As discussed with KMOU, the main module that author was assigned is to create a simulation model with MATLAB for ITT Project, based on the inputs and data sources given by project managers, to verify the possibility of the proposed configurations and the accuracy of the implemented algorithms, and then to analyze the advantages and disadvantages of applied methods and decide whether they suit the project’s requirements, as well as to suggest a solution that could further improve the system’s performance The simulation model including necessary computation processes and designed optimization algorithms would be introduced later in Chapter 2
1.5.2 Thesis’s range:
Maximum input for simulation: ~250 containers Layout: Specifications are given by KMOU
Input parameters (velocities, handling time, accessing time, positioning time ): calculated and proposed by KMOU
Output results: Algorithms design, efficiency charts, comparative data analysis and evaluation of each applied method
1.5.3 Thesis’s objectives:
Building Transport Table based on specific input (raw data or advanced data) Calculating number of shuttles and loader required from the Transport Table Designing dispatching algorithm for shuttles
Designing scheduling algorithm at loader’s positions Designing assigning algorithm for shuttles
Create a user-interface for flexible parameter adjustments
Validating the accuracy of algorithms via simulation charts and tables Highlighting the benefits of applied optimization algorithms
Proposing solutions for better performances of the system
Trang 31Chapter2: MMETHODOLOGY
2.1 General structure of ITT Monorail System
In this Chapter, we are going to describe general structure of the ITT Monorail System in detail, including the main concept, operational structure, equipment, as well as loading- unloading activities
2.1.1 Main concept
As revealed from Figure 1.18, the change stations (CSs) are laid between terminals to direct the shuttles in and out properly Since the word mono means single way, all shuttles are only able to move in one direction and can only turn at CSs One station is laid at the out port (departure CS), while another is at the in port (destination CS) Every shuttle must go through the destination CS to reach the corresponding terminal, and must pass the departure CS to leave that terminal This concept would be used later in the dispatching algorithm design and also in the container flow measurements, in which every movement on the rail needs to be referred at
the CSs
For loading-unloading activities, each terminal has special equipment called loaders that would grab containers onto and out of shuttles In operation, shuttles are set up with defined routes from one to another terminal where loaders are waiting Number of loaders and shuttles required are calculated based on transport demand, while handling speed of loaders and moving speed of shuttles are acquired with manager’s experiences and specific constraints
2.1.2 Operational structure
At each terminal, the internal trucks or cranes system are responsible of preparing containers at handling positions, where loaders are installed The monorail system links terminals via the CSs Whenever the assigned shuttles reached the loader’s positions and get ready for incoming actions, these loaders manage to grab the containers onto or out of them Those shuttles will then leave the handling position to do the assigned tasks (after loading actions) or wait for loaders to set up their new tasks (after unloading actions) The general operational structure of the system is depicted in Figure 2.1
In this thesis, we mainly concentrate on the activities of loaders and shuttles on the
monorail Furthermore, in our case, a loader is considered to take care both loading and
unloading actions without distinction, making the loading and unloading positions the same
Trang 32SUOTISOq 2uIp£o[un ØuIpso[u/ SUOTIISOq SUOTIISOq 8uIpeo[un | IIEIOUO[A L soImnqs peuZIssự _| | [IEIOUOIN L soInnwqs pou5Issự _| aa [IEIouoW[ | L So[nns pou8Issự _|
Figure 2.1 [43]: Operational structure of ITT Monorail System
Trang 332.1.3 Change station’s behavior
As mentioned above, there will be two CSs at two ends of a terminal to direct the shuttle’s
movements as presented in Figure 2.2 The CSs use a special mechanic that acts like a lane switch on the railway with behaviors illustrated in Figure 2.3 Four types of move through a CS include: passing forward, passing backward, turning backward and turning forward The forward lane is defined as the lane that can get access to the terminal directly, while the backward lane is defined as its reversed way In the lateral simulation part, the container flow through every CS is also measured in these four corresponding types
Departure CS Handling positions
Right driving monorail
- Left driving monorail
Figure 2.3 [43]: Change station’s behaviors to direct shuttles onto different lanes
Trang 342.1.4 Prototypes of Loader and Shuttle
Figure 2.4 describes the prototypes of a loader and a shuttle In the project, the shuttles are designed to be capable of handling a 40-feet container per time (or two TEUs per time) and moving with speed of 70-80 km/h, while the loaders can handle a 40-feet container at one time In fact, these equipments are still in design stage and need to be tested by simulation carefully before manufacturing, all specifications and properties are proposed by project managers
Figure 2.4 [43]: Prototypes of loader and shuttle used in project
2.1.5 Loading and unloading processes
To summarize, loading-unloading activities could be demonstrated via Figure 2.5
Trang 352.2 Transport demand at Busan Port
This subsection presents the base information for all of the design parameters below The transport demand is recorded by a company in Korea and will be used as the minimum standard for system design so that the real system can operate in future
Table 2.1 expresses the number of containers transferred among 14 terminals annually
that has been collected in the past (raw data) From Table 2.1, the transport rate (advanced data)
can be obtained as shown in Table 2.2 Assuming that this rate is static, we can scale the input range to an appropriate extent that can be used for evaluation without loss of generality
Table 2.1 [43]: Transport demand at Busan Port (Unit: Container)
Ter 2 Ter 3 Ter 4 Ter 5 Ter 6 Ter 7 Ter 8 Ter9 Ter 10 Ter 11 Ter 12 Total
444 444 1 117| 1 6| 1 6 772 | 19,772 | 17 17 194,793 - - 7,175 11,423 | 11,423 1 11 1 124,719 - - 7,175 11,423 | 11,423 11 1 124,719 11,177 17,794 | 17,794 18,440 207,145 - 1 1 17 17 199,616 14,137 | 14,137 14 164,188 - 14 154 3 154 11 135 10,156 119 10,156 119 9,135 106 454 454 109 9,135 7 106 454 454 109 144,231 | 117 117 103,641 147 | 168,429 | 168,429 164,489
Table 2.2: Transport rate at Busan Port
Fromn/To| Ter 1 Ter 5 Ter 6 Ter 7 Ter 8 Ter 9 Ter 10 Terll Ter 1 0.64 0.83 0.83 0.63 Ter 2 0.44 0.42 Ter 3 0.44 0.42 Ter 4 ` 0.68 Ter 5 ` 0.65 , 0.63 Ter 6 0.52 Ter 7 0 „ 0.52 Ter 8 0 , „ 0.52 Ter 9 ; 0.38 Ter 10 0.44 0.44 0 Ter 11 0.42 0.43 0.44 Ter 12 0.42 , 0.43 0.44 Ter 13 0.38 0.38 0 0.51 0.51 Ter 14 ` 0.38 0.38 0 0.51 0.51 Total 5.75 3,7 6.0 6 8.28 8.28 6.38
2.3 Calculating facilities required for the system 2.3.1 Calculating Shuttle Quantities Required
Due to financial constraints, the quantities of shuttle must be calculated in an optimal way that can both meet the transportation demand and lower the cost at many as possible In that case, shuttles have to move in the shortest way to minimize the travel cost Assuming that the
Trang 36shortest travel distance between terminals are acquired in Table 2.3 (will be described later in Chapter 3), the cycle time for a complete task can be expressed as in Eq.1 below:
min
C _ Vi
Tij ~ oy + Tịoading + Từưnloading + T positioning (1)
where:
Dy: shortest travel distance from terminal i to terminal j
V: shuttle’s velocity
Tioading: time for loading container onto shuttles
Tunloading: time for unloading container from shuttles
T, positioning: time for shuttles to reach and leave the handling positions
Ti: cycle time to complete a task from terminal i to terminal j
Number of containers per hour to be transferred is expressed as Eq.2 below:
hour _ Q¡/Xƒp
Qij WyxWa (2)
where:
Q¡¡: transport volume from terminal i to terminal j each year (refer Table 2.1) fp: peak factor
Wy: number of working days in a year Wg: number of working hours in a day
Qhe ur, ij: required volume per hour from terminal i to terminal j
Assuming that shuttle only carries one container per time, the number of shuttles required
to handle the demand 1s:
N§ = TE x Qheur (3)
With given parameters listed in Table 2.4, the final result is presented in Table 2.5 as
below:
Trang 37Table 2.3 [43]: Travel distance between terminals (Unit: Metre)
Erom/To | Ter Ter 2 Ter 3 Ter 4 Ter 5 Ter 6 Ter7 Ter 8 Ter 9 TerIO Terll Terl2 Terl3 Terl4
Ter 1 -| 1,050[ 2,050[ 3,150[ 6,310] 7,590| 7,563] 1863| 3448| 4164| 5539| 6,914| 10,354 11,454 Ter2 | 1,050 -| 1000| 2400| 5/260| 6540| 7765| 24913| 4498| 5214| 6/589| 7964| 11404| 12,504 Ter3 | 2050| 1,000 -| II00| 4260| 5540| 6765| 3913| 5498| 6214| 7589| 8964| 12⁄404| 13,504 Ter4 | 3150| 2/100| 1,100 -| 3160| 4440| 5/665| 5013| 6598| 7314| 8689| 10064| 13/504| 14,604 Ter5 | 6310| 5/260| 4260| 3,160 -| 1/80| 2505| 8173| 6620| 8496| 9/871| 11246| 14/686 | 15,736 Ter6 | 7590| 6540| 5540| 4440| 1280 -| 1225| 6925| 5/340| 7216| 8591| 9966| 13406| 14456 Ter7 | 7563| 7,765| 6765| 5/665| 2505| 1225 -| 5700| 4115| 5/991| 7366| 8741| 12181| 13.230 Ter 8 1,863 2,913 3,913 5,013 8,173 6,925 5,700 - 1,585 2,301 3,676 5,051 8,491 9,541 Ter 9 3,448 4,498 5,498 6,598 6,620 5,340 4,115 1,585 - 1,876 3,251 4,626 8,066 9,116 Ter 10 4,164 5,214 6,214 7,314 8,496 7,216 5,991 2,301 1,876 - 1,375 2,750 6,190 7,240 Terll | 5,539] 6,589|[ 7,589] 8689| 9,871[ 8,591 | 7,366[ 3,676 | 3/251| 1375 -| 1370| 4810| 5,860 Terl2 | 6914| 7964| 8964| 10064| 11246| 9966| 8744| 5051| 4626| 2750| 1370 -| 3440| 449 Ter13 | 104354| 1104| 12⁄404| 13,504| 14/686| 13406| 12,181[ 8491| 8066| 6190| 4810] 3.440 -| 1050 Ter 14 | 11,454] 12,504| 13/504 | 14/604| 15/736| 14456| 13,230[ 9,541| 9,116[ 7,240| 5,860| 4490| 1050 -
Table 2.4: List of inputs used for calculating shuttle quantities
Notation Description Value
Wy Number of working days in a year 330 (days)
Wa Number of working hours in a day 20 (hours)
fp Peak factor of demand 1.25
Qi Transport volume between 2 terminals Refer Table 2.1
Tioading Loading time 10 (second)
Tunloading Unloading time 10 (second)
T positioning Positioning time 10 (second)
Table 2.5: Number of shuttles required at each terminal
Trang 382.3.2 Calculating Loader Quantities
Assuming that loader only grabs one container per time, number of loaders required in the system can be calculated as below:
hour
Qi;
Nụ = CL (4)
where Cy (container/hour) is the desired capability of loader
Giving Cy = 60 containers/hour as proposed by the project managers, final values for loaders required are expressed in Table 2.6 as below:
Table 2.6: Number of loaders required at each terminal
From/To | Tl | T2 | T3 | 14 | T5 | Tó | T7 | T8 | T9 | T10 | T1l | T12 | T13 | T14 | Total Ter 1 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.56 Ter 2 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.36 Ter 3 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.36 Ter 4 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.60 Ter 5 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.58 Ter 6 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.48 Ter 7 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.45 Ter 8 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.45 Ter 9 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.34 Ter 10 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.39 Ter 11 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.35 Ter 12 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.35 Ter 13 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.32 Ter 14 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.32 Total 0.42 | 0.34 | 0.34 | 0.36 | 0.30 | 0.38 | 0.49 | 0.49 | 0.38 | 0.57 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.00 Final 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 14 2.4 Applying in study case
After calculating all necessary parameters for system’s facilities, we are going to design algorithms in Chapter 3 However, to reveal the advantages of each method and make the computation convenient, the following raw data, which has been scaled from real input to about 250 containers, will be applied instead in order to simplify the procedures and still remain the generality for evaluation It is due to the capability of computer of author and has been accepted by the project managers, in order to present the accuracy of the algorithms to an acceptable extent
Trang 40Chapter 3: DESIGNING ALGORITHMS
In this Chapter, all necessary algorithms will be discussed in detail to clarify how the whole system performs These algorithms will then be used later in Chapter 4 in which a simulation model is built and mimics real operation
3.1 Dispatching algorithm for shuttles
For every transportation activity, dispatching problem always plays a key role A good routing plan can help system avoid traffic congestions, as well as reduce travel cost significantly In this ITT Monorail System, all shuttles are automatically maneuvered and monitored by managers For each assigned task, a pair of departure and destination terminal is given to the shuttle, and it need to define the shortest route itself in order to complete the task as soon as possible
As mentioned above, all shuttles can only move in one direction per lane, and there are always two CSs at the two ends of a terminal, it is clear that there are always a pair of departure and destination CS for each terminal, meaning that every shuttle must get access to the terminal via these CSs Referring to Figure 1.18, the corresponding CSs for each terminal are listed in
Table 3.1 as below:
Table 3.1: List of terminals and corresponding CSs
Terminal 1 | 2 | 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 | l1 | 12 | 13 | 14 Departure CS 213 14| 5 7 8 9 1 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 16 | 17 DestinationCS | 1 | 2 | 3 4 6 7 8 11 | 10} 13 | 14] 15 | 17 | 18
Now, the dispatching problem has a new approach: Shaping a shortest path that link between a departure CS and a destination CS In fact, this approach helps a lot in measuring container flow later, in which the flow through each CS has to be counted to evaluate the effectiveness of the system
Considering each CS as a fixed node in a weighted graph, we are defining a path that link from a departure node to a destination node through the adjacent nodes, while the unconnected nodes are marked “out of reach” There are many algorithms that are specialized in solving this kind of problem, however in the range of this thesis, we introduce the common algorithms: A* algorithm and Ant Colony Optimization These ones are also used in scheduling and assigning algorithms as described later