1. Proceedings
  2. I3M
  3. 2019
  4. HMS
  5. 10.46354/i3m.2019.hms.007

A generic terminal macro simulation model for measuring operational performance

  • a Sonja M. Protic  , 
  • b Manfred Gronalt   
  • a,bUniversity of Natural Resources and Life Sciences Vienna, Institute of Production and Logistics, Feistmantelstr.4 1180 Vienna, Austria
Cite as
Protic S. M., Gronalt M. (2019). A generic terminal macro simulation model for measuring operational performance. Proceedings of the 21st International Conference on Harbor, Maritime and Multimodal Logistic Modeling & Simulation (HMS 2019), pp. 47-54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46354/i3m.2019.hms.007

Abstract

Strategic decision making linked to the development of intermodal transport terminals is marked by high complexity. Terminal operators need to cope with uncertainties and potential cascading impacts of decisions which were taken a long time ago. The aim of this paper is to present a generic System Dynamics (SD) model of a terminal’s operational performance. SD is used to capture a holistic view on a dynamic system, which is characterized by complex feedback structures, nonlinear processes, uncertainties and time delays. After introducing the qualitative Causal Loop Diagram (CLD), the underlying hypotheses are transposed into a quantitative Stock-and-Flow (S&F) model. The main components and its input data are explained. The generic model can be used as a decision support tool to bridge the gap from a detailed view to an understanding of longterm consequences. It offers multiple areas of application, which are briefly discussed.

References

  1. Bundesministerium der Finanzen, 2000. Afa Table. Available from: https://www.bundesfinanzministerium.de/Content/DE/Standardartikel/Themen/Steuern/Weitere_Steu erthemen/Betriebspruefung/AfATabellen/Ergaenzende-AfA-Tabellen/AfATabelle_ AV.pdf?__blob=publicationFile&v=12 [Accessed April 2019].
  2. Cimpeanu, R., Devine, M. T., and O’Brien, C., 2017. A simulation model for the management and expansion of extended port terminal operations. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review 98: 105-131.
  3. Enei R., 2010. Freight trends and forecasts. ISIS, paper produced as part of contract ENV.C.3/SER/2008/0053 between European Commission Directorate-General Environment and AEA Technology plc. Available from: www.eutransportghg2050.eu [Accessed April 2019].
  4. European Commission, 2013. Regulation (EU) No 1315/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 December 2013 on Union Guidelines for the Development of the Trans-European Transport Network and Repealing Decision No 661/2010/EU Text with EEA relevance. Official Journal of the European Union, Vol. 348, No. 1.
  5. European Commission, 2014a. Mediterranean Core Network Corridor Study. Final report. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure /ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies [Accessed February 2019]
  6. European Commission, 2014b. Rhine-Danube Core Network Corridor Study. Final report. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure /ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies [Accessed February 2019]
  7. European Commission, 2014c. Scandinavian- Mediterranean Core Network Corridor Study. Final report. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure /ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies [Accessed February 2019]
  8. European Commission, 2014d. North Sea-Baltic Core Network Corridor Study. Final report. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure /ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies [Accessed February 2019]
  9. European Commission, 2014d. North Sea-Baltic Core Network Corridor Study. Final report. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure /ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies [Accessed February 2019]
  10. European Commission, 2014e. North Sea-Mediterranean Core Network Corridor Study. Final report. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure /ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies [Accessed February 2019]
  11. European Commission, 2014f. Baltic-Adriatic Core Network Corridor Study. Final report. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure /ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies [Accessed February 2019]
  12. European Commission, 2014g. Orient/East-Med Core Network Corridor Study. Final report. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure /ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies [Accessed February 2019]
  13. European Commission, 2014h. Rhine-Alpine Core Network Corridor Study. Final report. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure /ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies [Accessed February 2019]
  14. European Commission, 2014i. Atlantic Core Network Corridor Study. Final report. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/infrastructure/ten-t-guidelines/corridors/corridor-studies [Accessed February 2019]
  15. Eurostat, 2017. 2017/2H Eurostat database: Industry electricity prices. Available from:
    https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database [Accessed December 2018].
  16. Caris A., Macharis C., and Janssens G. K., 2013. Decision support in intermodal transport: A new research agenda. Computers in Industry 64: 105– 112
  17. Garro A., Monaco M.F., Russo W., Sammarra M., and Sorrentino G., 2015. Agent-based simulation for the evaluation of a new dispatching model for the straddle carrier pooling problem. Simulation 91(2):181–202.
  18. Garro A., Monaco M.F., Russo W., Sammarra M., and Sorrentino G., 2015. Agent-based simulation for the evaluation of a new dispatching model for the straddle carrier pooling problem. Simulation 91(2):181–202.
  19. Gronalt M., Benna T., and Posset M., 2006. SimConT Simulation of Hinterland Container Terminal Operations. In: Blecker, T., Kersten, W. eds. Complexity Management in Supply Chains - Concepts, Tools and Methods 2, Berlin: Ericht Schmidt Verlag: 227-246.
  20. Gronalt M., Haeuselmayer H., Posset M., and Royas- Navas S., 2011. Simcont - theory and practice in simulation of binnenland container terminals. International Conference on Harbour, Maritime and Multimodal Logistics Modelling and Simulation 1: 155-160.
  21. Gronalt M., Posset M., and Rojas-Navas S., 2012. Capacity evaluation of Inland Container terminals - the simulation based approach of SimConT. In: Guenther H.-O., Kim K. H., Kopfer H. (Eds.) LOGMS 2012, The 2012 International Conference on Logistics and Maritime Systems. University of Bremen, Bremen, 2012.
  22. Gronalt M, Voegl J, and Protic S.M., 2018. Final Report HubHarmony. FFG, Bundesministerium für Verkehr, Innovation und Technologie, 14, 89.
  23. Ho K.H., Ho M.W., and Hui C.M.E., 2008. Structural dynamics in the policy planning of large infrastructure investment under the competitive environment: Context of port throughput and capacity. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 134: 9-20.
  24. Hong Z., Merk O., Nan Z., Li J., Mingying X., Wenqing X., Xufeng D., and Jinggai W., 2013. The Competitiveness of Global Port-Cities: the case of Shanghai – China. OECD Regional Development Working Papers: 2013/23.
  25. Kavakeb, S., Nguyen, T. T., McGinley, K., Yang, Z., Jenkinson, I., and Murray, R., 2015. Green vehicle technology to enhance the performance of a European port: a simulation model with a costbenefit approach. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 60: 169-188.
  26. Lun Y.H.V. and Cariou P., 2009. An analytical framework for managing container terminals. International Journal of Shipping and Transport Logistics 1: 419-436.
  27. Mandl C.E., 2019. Managing complexity in social systems – Leverage points for policy and strategy. Vienna: Springer.
  28. Mella P., 2012. Systems Thinking – Intelligence in Action. Heidelberg: Springer.
  29. Morecroft J.D.W., 2015. Strategic Modelling and Business Dynamics. A Feed-back Systems Approach. John Wiley & Sons.
  30. Ng K.Y.A., 2006. Assessing the Attractiveness of Ports in the North European Container Transhipment Market: An Agenda for Future Research in Port Competition. Maritime Economics and Logistics 8(3): 234-250.
  31. Oztanriseven F., Lespier L.P., Long S., and Nachtmann H.L., 2014. A Review of System Dynamics in Maritime Transportation. Proceedings of the IIEAnnual Conference and Expo 2014, 2447-2456. May 2014. Montreal, Canada
  32. Petty N.J., Thomson O.P., and Stew G., 2012. Ready for a paradigm shift? Part1: introducing the philosophy of qualitative research. Manual Therapy 17: 167-274.
  33. Posset M., Gierlinger D., Gronalt M., Peherstorfer H., Prip H., and Starkl F., 2014. Intermodaler Verkehr Europa: FH O Forschungs & Entwicklungs GmbH - Logistikum Steyr.
  34. Protic S.M., Geerlings H., and van Duin R., 2018. Environmental sustainability of freight transportation terminals. In: Faulin J, Grasman S., Juan A. and Hirsch P. eds. Sustainable Transportation and Smart Logistics. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 233-260.
  35. Randers J. and Göluke U., 2007. Forecasting Turning Points in Shipping Freight Rates: Lessons from 30 years of Practical Effort, System Dynamics Review 23: 253-284.
  36. Schroër, H. J., Corman, F., Duinkerken, M. B., Negenborn, R. R., and Lodewijks, G., 2014.
    Evaluation of inter terminal transport configurations at Rotterdam Maasvlakte using discrete event simulation. In: Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference 2014: 1771-1782.
  37. Senge P.M., 2010. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. Crown Publishing Group.
  38. Sharif O., Huynh N., 2012. Yard crane scheduling at container terminals: a comparative study of
    centralized and decentralized approaches. Maritime Economics & Logistics 14(2):139–161.
  39. Shepherd S., 2014. A Review of System Dynamics
    Models applied in Transportation. Transportmetrica B: Transport Dynamics 2:2: 83- 105.
  40. Slack S.C. and Johnston R. 2010. Operations management. Prentice Hall: Pearson Education.
  41. Sterman J.D., 2000. Business Dynamics – Systems Thinking and Modeling for a Complex World.
    Boston MA: Irwin McGraw-Hill.
  42. Swinerd, C., and McNaught, K.R., 2012. Design classes for hybrid simulations involving agent-based and system dynamics models. Simulation Modelling Practice and Theory 25: 118-133.
  43. United Nations, 2001. Economic Commission for Europe - Terminology on Combined Transport. Available from: www.unece.org/fileadmin/DAM/trans/wp24/documents/term.pdf
    [Accessed March 2019].
  44. Weekly Oil Bulletin, 2018. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/energy/en/dataanalysis/ weekly-oil-bulletin/ [Accessed December 2018].
  45. Wiegmans B.W., Masurel E., and Nijkamp P., 1999. Intermodal freight terminals: an analysis of the terminal market. Transportation Planning and Technology 23: 105-128.
  46. Wiegmans B. and Behdani B., 2018. A review and analysis of the investment in, and cost structure of, intermodal rail terminals. Transport Reviews 38: 33-51.
  47. WienCont, 2018. WienCont Container Terminal GmbH Personal interview with Waltraud Pamminger.
  48. Woodburn A., 2007. Evaluation of rail freight facilities grant funding in Britain. Transport Reviews 27(3): 311-326.