Research on Allocation of Port Cargo Handling Machinery Based on
Production Efficiency of Handling System and Energy Consumption
Xue-shu Liu 1, Bin Yang 2
1
Logistics Research Center, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, China;
2
Logistics Research Center, Shanghai Maritime University, Shanghai, China;
（liuxshello@hotmail.com）
Abstract - At present, there are less economic researches
on port cargo handling machinery configuration than
researches about optimal scheduling port cargo handling
machinery. Studies that take economic factors into account
to establish the quantity allocation model of port cargo
machinery mostly pursue the lowest cost or maximum
operating efficiency and fail to consider the energy
consumption of port cargo handling machinery. This study
establishes the allocation model based on production
efficiency and energy consumption of port cargo machinery
following port cargo handling machinery allocation
principles after analyzing the economic factors of port cargo
machinery configuration. And this study helps improve the
efficiency of general cargo port and reduce its energy
consumption.
Keywords - Port cargo handling machinery, quantity
allocation model, production efficiency, energy consumption
I.
INTRODUCTION
Handling machinery constitutes the main productive
activities that generate income for port industries but also
requires huge initial capital investment. Therefore, it is
significant to allocate the quantity of port handling
machinery. Currently, there are many researches relating
to configuration of port cargo handling machinery. For
example, Dong Ming Wang proposed a new evaluation
index, developed an integer programming model and
solved the model using the dynamic programming
principle.[1-4]
However, careful analysis has discovered that, most
of the researches on port handling machinery
configuration problems departed from the perspective of
optimal
scheduling.
The
handling
machinery
configuration studies are mostly based on lowest cost or
operational efficiency as the objective function for the
consideration of energy consumption from the point of
view of reducing the logistics cost of the equipment.
These studies did not effectively control energy
consumption and take energy saving and emission
reduction in the port as a port management objective.[5][6]
Based on the above, this paper analyzes the basic
factors influencing port cargo handling machinery
configuration in accordance with the principles of
handling
machinery
configuration,
economically
analyzed the scheme of configuration of port cargo
handling machinery established a configuration model for
cargo handling machinery based on production efficiency
and energy consumption which will not only effectively
control the handling costs but also improve production
efficiency of the cargo terminal, while reducing the
energy consumption of the port handling machinery as
well as achieving the objective of saving energy and
reducing emission.
II. METHODOLOGY
A. Configuration principle
Configuration of port cargo handling machinery
directly affects the process and efficiency of the cargo
terminal’s handling, thereby affecting the productivity of
the entire port. To ensure the efficient and economic
operation of the port cargo handling system, the handling
machinery configuration should be according to the
following principles:[7-9]
1) Applicability and advanced principle: The
nominal operating capacity and quantity of machinery are
determined by various factors including the type of cargo.
The basic principle of cargo handling machinery
configuration must therefore be suitable to meet the
demand for cargo handling. In addition, mechanical
devices - handling machinery- have a certain degree of
operating capacity during their economic life. This must
therefore be fully considered in relation to obsolesce due
to future technological development and progress in port
handling machinery in order to maintain a high
technology in their economic life cycle.
2) Economic and systematic principle: economy is
an import index of measuring port handling system. The
economic benefit of port handling systems is directly
reflected by the cost of acquisition of handling machinery,
fuel costs and maintenance costs. The objective of port
handling machinery configuration is to minimize the cost
of handling machinery during its life cycle while meeting
the operating demand under reasonable technological
advancement. Therefore a rational economic analysis of
port handling machinery is of great significance for the
effective control of their cost and improvement in
production efficiency of the entire port.
B. Factors of Economic influence:
There are many economic factors that influence the
configuration of port cargo handling machinery
categorized into four major aspects: mechanical factor,
handling method factor, cargo factors and port factor.[10-12]
1) Mechanical factors: The technical performance,
handling volume etc. of the handling machinery itself is
an important factor which influences the configuration of
port cargo handling machinery.
2) Handling method factor: a reasonable port
handling method scheme not only can make full use of
handling machinery, but also avoid excessive waste of
handling machinery.
3) Cargo factor: cargo is the object of port handling
operation and therefore the one factor that affects the
configuration of port handling machinery the most.
4) Port factor: The port factor is an important factor
that influences the configuration of port handling
machinery as it is the port that provides the basic
infrastructure which determines the range and conditions
within which the machinery and equipment will operate.
C
The Model Establishment
According to the above, the article establishes a
configuration model of port cargo handling machinery
based on the production efficiency and energy
consumption with a full consideration of the energy
consumption of handling machinery. The notation and
model are as follows:[5][6][8][13][14]
Notation:
m planning horizon {1,…,m}
n planning horizon {1,…,n}
z set of integers
pi output per machine hour of handling machinery
type i
c gi annual fixed costs of per handling machinery
type i
c bi annual variable costs per handling machinery
type i
x i allocation quantity of handling machinery type i
y i annual operation hours of handling machinery
type i
equipment efficiency ratio of handling
machinery type i
k li equipment utilization ratio of handling machinery
type i
p j output per machine hour of handling machinery
k wi
type j
Model:
s.t.
y i  x i  k wi  24  365  k li  0 for all i  m (4)
'
y i  x i  k wi  24  365  k li  0 for all i  m (5)
m
n
 p x i   p q for all i  m ,all j  n (6)
i 1 i
j 1 j j
(7)
xi , yi  0, for all xi  z, i  m
The model maximizes the production efficiency of
the port cargo handling system and production efficiency
of the port cargo handling system (the ratio between total
output and total investment of the port cargo handling
system) and minimizes the variable costs of total
investment in port cargo handling system. Constraint (3)
specifies the rang of operating hours of handling
machinery of type i. Constraints (4) and (5) specify the
range of the utilization ratio of handling machinery of
type i, ensure that cargo handling tasks are completed on
time and avoid high intensity of work and a waste of
money because of a large number of idle handling
machinery. Constraint (6) ensures that the loading and
unloading speed of handling machinery of type i can fully
cooperate with the relevant fixed machinery.
III. RESULTS
A Data Analysis
This paper uses the data of A Port to examine the
validity of the model. This article takes forklift system as
a separate handling system after examining the actual
situation of A Port
There are 43 forklifts used for cargo handling in the
port cargo handling system of A Port whose different
types are as shown in table I.
TABLE I
QUANTITY CONFIGURATION OF FORKLIFTS IN A PORT
Type
Rated capacity
Age
Quantity
PD30
3t
5
4
PD50
PD60
PD70
TCMFD30T3
TCMFD50T9
HYSTERH7.00XL
q j allocation quantity of fixed machinery type j
m
 p y
i 1 i x i i
MAX m
m
 c gi x i   c bi x i y
i
i 1
i 1
m
MIN  cbi x yi
i
i 1
m
 y  x  k  24  365  0 for all i  m (3)
i
i
wi
i 1
5t
6t
7t
3t
5t
7t
15
6
15
1
1
15
25
3
3
2
3
3
(1)
(2)
Relevant data analysis combined with the model and
the actual situation of port cargo handling system is as
below.[15]
1) Equipment efficiency ratio and utilization ratio
We can calculate the forklifts’ efficiency ratio and
utilization ratio as shown in table II in A Port general
cargo handling system by the formula of equipment
efficiency ratio and utilization ratio.
TABLE II
RATIO OF PERFECTNESS AND UTILIZATION OF FORKLIFT
Type
Perfectness ratio
Utilization ratio
PD30
98.08%
9.30%
PD50
82.08%
31.17%
PD60
85.67%
24.22%
PD70
86.79%
38.87%
TCMFD30T3
97.65%
39.60%
TCMFD50T9
94.37%
31.03%
HYSTERH7.00XL
89.12%
38.79%
2) Output per machine hour
Output per machine hour represents the shipment of
handling through forklifts per hour and also means the
production efficiency of forklifts. The values are as
shown in table III.
TCMFD30T3
0.24
5.58
8.18
14.00
TCMFD50T9
3.16
6.38
7.58
17.12
HYSTERH7.00XL
4.7
8.57
9.44
22.71
B Model Calculation
A result as shown in fig 1 can be calculated with
Lingo after taking the objective function, constraints and
relevant values into the model established in Section II.
TABLE III
OUTPUT PER MACHINE HOUR OF FORKLIFT IN A PORT
Type
Inducement
Work
hour Average Output
per machine
per machine
per
machine
hour
PD30
7588.35
723
10.5
PD50
38909.51
2730
14.25
PD60
32807.43
2111
15.54
PD70
65768.08
3387
19.42
TCMFD30T3
53202.94
3444
15.45
TCMFD50T9
43874.99
2675
16.40
HYSTERH7.00XL
7949.99
3477
21.55
Fig.1. Result of the model with lingo
3) Fixed costs
Fixed costs of handling machinery consist of four
parts: depreciation, major repair cost, benefit and
cost-sharing whose values are as below in table IV.
IV. DISCUSSION
We have drawn the following conclusions by
comparing the original configuration plan of general
cargo handling machinery configuration in A Port with
TABLE IV
ANNUAL AVERAGE FIXED COSTS PER FORKLIFT
the new model.
Type
Depreciation
Major
Benefit
Cost-sharing
1) In the original configuration of forklift handling
repair fund
systems at A Port, with an annual throughput of up to
CPCD30
6401.67
1000.00
1005.32
26765.18
1,761,500,000 tons and the total annual costs of up to
CPDC5
5208.14
411.64
3339.29
32351.51
RMB 4,109,730 year-on-year and annual variable costs of
CPCD60
11446.00
856.00
5822.04
25867.79
up to RMB 2,190,821.The production efficiency value of
CPCD7
4928.75
756.50
3540.34
35654.17
TCMFD30T3
22916.00
1200.00
3000.37
27654.17
handling system is 0.429.
TCMFD50T9
41225.00
491.00
2536.09
26606.64
In the new configuration of forklift handling
HYSTERH7.00XL
17441.50
1347.50
2797.19
30675.33
systems, the annual throughput is up to 3,787,000,000
tons and the total annual costs is up to RMB 6,320,329
4) Variable costs
year-on-year with annual variable costs of up to RMB
Variable costs per forklift are made up of fuel costs,
3,578,196. The production efficiency value of handling
maintenance costs and running costs of material. The
system is 0.599.
results are as follows in table 5.
2) The production efficiency value of new
configuration is higher than that of the old one which
TABLE V
means that the new configuration is better than the
VARIABLE COSTS PER FORKLIFT
original one.
3) To complete the same cargo throughput in the
Running costs Maintena
Fuel
Variable
Type
same
year, the new configuration achieved RMB 823,224
of material
nce costs
costs
costs
less than the original one in terms of cost.
PD30
2.44
4.46
8.47
15.37
Variable cost per forklift is made up of fuel cost,
maintenance cost and running costs of material. Fuel costs
PD50
2.98
7.64
7.97
18.59
account for the largest proportion and running costs of
PD60
3.43
8.35
9.92
21.70
materials account for the smallest proportion. Both are
13.9
PD70
3.72
8.82
26.52
relatively stable whilst maintenance costs suffered great
8
random fluctuations, and less controllable.
Therefore, if we assume that annual total fuel costs
account for 50% of annual total variable cost, of the new
configuration this results in RMB 411,612 less than that
of the original one. And if we assume the price per litre of
petrol is RMB 8, the new configuration could save
51,451.5 litres of fuel than the original one.
By calculation, the model of port general cargo
handling machinery quantity configuration considering
production efficiency and energy consumption not only
help improve the production efficiency of handling
systems but also reduce energy consumption and pollutant
emission of handling machinery which fully shows the
usability and necessity of this study.
V. CONCLUSION
The study can help improve the production
efficiency of general cargo port and reduce energy
consumption and pollutant emissions of port general
cargo handling machinery. The model described in this
paper applies not only to forklifts as an example of
general cargo handling machinery configuration issue but
also applies to issues of other port general cargo handling
machinery allocation. This model can also be applied to
configure rationally cargo handling machinery in future
by forecasting cargo throughput and appropriately
changing the values of the other conditions.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This work was supported in part by National Natural
Science Foundation of China (71171129), Shanghai
Science Commission Project (No.10190502500 ，
11510501900) and Shanghai Education Commission
Project (No.J50604, 11YZ137, 11CXY47).
REFERENCES
[1] Zheng Youxin, Ma Yunxin, “Measures and suggestions of
saving energy and reducing emission in port”, in
containerization, press 8, 2009.
[2] Dong Mingwang, Guyong, Xielin, “Port operation line cargo
handling machinery configuration”, in Journal of Wuhan
Technology University, press, pp.695-701, 2003.
[3] Zhang Yuyi, Liu Xianfeng, Wang Guiqiang, “Logistics
machinery allocation research based on economic
evaluation”, in Logistics Technology, press, ch9, pp.60-62,
2005.
[4] Zhang Guohui, “Economic analysis of handling machinery
allocation in Dalian Port”, in Journal of Dalian Maritime
University, press, pp.12-20, 2007.
[5] Li Jingquan, “Analysis of Dalian Port’s handling mahicnery
disposition correlative factors and research of
countermeasures”, in Journal of Dalian Maritime
University, press, pp.14-17, 2006.
[6] Xing Qianhan, “Research on allocation of general cargo
handling machinery in Haikou port based on production
efficiency of system”, in Journal of Wuhan Technology
University, press, pp.31-34, 2010.
[7] Matthew Brian Malchow, “An analysis of port selection”, in
Engineering-Civil and Environmental, 2001 Spring.
[8] Bo Wanming, “Port cargo production line configuration
optimization”, in Journal of Wuhan Technology University,
pp.25-28, 2002.
[9] Song Bohui, Wang Yaoqiu, “Optimization research on
handling machinery ”, in Logistics Technology, ch7, 2006.
[10] Shank, John K,Govindaraian, “Strategic Cost Management
and the value chain”, in Journal of cost management, ch4,
pp.56-59, 1996.
[11] Daganzo C.F, “The crane scheduling problem”, in
Transportation Research, ch23, pp.159-175, 1989.
[12] Robin Cooper, Robert Kaplan, “The design of cost
management”, in Prentice-Hall, Upper Saddle River, ch9,
pp.67-68, 1999.
[13] Scharge, “Optimization Modeling with Lingo”, in Lingo
System Lnc, pp.23-25, 2004.
[14] Robinson B, “ Mobile harbor cranes extending its market”,
in Cargo System, ch10, pp.25-29, 2005.
[15] Kim K.H, Kim K Y, “An optimal muting algorithm for a
transfer crane in port container terminals”, in Transportation
Science, ch1, pp.17-33, 1999.