Jonghoe Kim and James R. Morrison Industrial and Systems Engineering of KAIST

1. Identification of Economically Promising Port Architectures via Enumerationand Capacity Evaluation Jonghoe Kim and James R. Morrison Industrial and Systems Engineering of KAIST

2. Presentation overview • Motivation • Overall process • Enumeration of port architecture • Capacity evaluation • Result • Concluding remarks

3. Motivation • Port is a complex system • Trade off between reducing cost and providing good service Method to identify economically promising initial design with reasonable service level

4. Overall Process

5. Enumeration of port architecture • It is impossible to find all feasible architecture by hand • Each part of system has several alternatives • Illogical combination • Object Process Network(OPN)[1] is a tool for enumerating complex system architectures • It automatically generates feasible architecture by using large number of options and relationship between options [1] B. H. Y. Koo, “A meta-language for systems architecting,” Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA,2005.

6. Enumeration of port architecture 1. Set the boundaries • Container transportation system between containerships and the inland yard Offshore Transfer Unit(TU) Container ship Land berth Land berth Traditional Mode Offshore Mode

7. Enumeration of port architecture 2. Functions of the system

8. Enumeration of port architecture 3. Explore decision variables(DVs) and options of each function 4. Find logical constraints • Prevent the generation of illogical architectures D1 D2 A E B F C

9. Enumeration of port architecture 5. Build OPN model to generate feasible architectures • All feasible architecture are enumerated by selection one options for DVs • Traditional mode (9 feasible architectures of 16 total combination) • Offshore mode (128 feasible architectures of 13824 total combination) <OPN model of offshore mode>

10. Enumeration of port architecture 5. Build OPN model to generate feasible architectures <Subset of the results of OPN model of offshore mode> [2] N. P. Suh (2008). Mobile Harbor to Improve Ocean Transportation System. Korean patent application No. 2008-41981, filed May 2008 [3] James Jixian Wang (1998). A container load center with a developing hinterland: a case study of Hong Kong. Journal of Transport Geography [4] James R. Morrison, Taesik Lee, Jong Hoe Kim, Minsung Kim, Kyuhyeon Shin and Inkyung Sung (2008). Hybrid mobile floating port. South Korean patent application, Filing number: 10-2008-0121984, Filing date: December 3, 2008. [5]Yongsan Yoon (2008). Fast Container Transfer Module. South Korean patent application, Filing number: 10-2008-0090655, Filing date: September 16, 2008

11. Capacity evaluation • Method to evaluate generated port design • Criteria : throughput , cost and ship staying time • Assumptions • Interarrival time and cargo volume/ship are deterministic and constant • Transfer unit conducts single cycle operation • Ship gets service right after entering port ( No waiting time ) • TU and berths make exclusive group to serve ship • Some architectures are dominated by other architecture • One dominant architecture for traditional mode • Six dominant architecture for offshore mode

12. Capacity evaluation • Ship service time approximation • To get average ship staying time of offshore mode with given number of resource • Three container flows of offshore mode • Ship to TU at ocean(l1) , TU at ocean to TU at berth(l2) , TU at berth to berth(l3) • Maximum container flows of system (m) • First order approximation for the SST

13. Capacity evaluation • Contention for transfer unit resources • Queueing time of TU occurs when number of transfer unit > number of servers • It depends on the arrival pattern of TU to the berths and docking points • Average waiting time for TUs <The assumed arrival pattern of MHs to their servers> Nc: Number of customer Ns: Number of servers T: Service time

14. Capacity Evaluation • Revised TU at ocean to TU at berth (l2*) Working time Approximated waiting time at berth and docking point cTU : capacity of TU tL : time to load cargo tT : time to travel tU : time to unload cargo Twb : waiting time at berth(using equation for Tw & appropriate input values) Twd : waiting time at docking point(using equation for Tw & appropriate input values)

15. Capacity Evaluation • Verification • Compare with result of simulation under same assumption • 154 systems and the average absolute gap between the SST approximation and the simulation was 6.49%. Blue : Simulation Red : Approximation SST(hours) # of TU # of berth <Graph of output of comparison>

16. Capacity Evaluation • Algorithm to find cost of offshore architecture for a market 1. Select market information(IAT , cargo volume/ship) and architecture 2. Generate configuration list of architecture ( # of TU, # of berth, # of truck and etc.) 3. Calculate SST and remove configurations which do not provide service in < 24hours 4. If SST > IAT, multiple by the number of resource/ship 5. Find minimum cost configuration among feasible configuration

17. Result • Cheapest configuration cost of architecture for 100 markets • 0.146 M TEU/year ~ 2.4 M TEU/year • IAT change 1.5 ~ 30 hours • Cargo changes 500~ 4100 TEU Total cost (B KRW) Cargo/ship(TEU) IAT(hour) <cheapest configuration for each market condition that meets the SST<24hours restriction>

18. Result (B KRW) <The subset of cheapest configuration of six offshore architecture for given market condition>

19. Concluding Remarks • Method to finding proper initial design for a market • 9 and 128 feasible port architecture are enumerated • Ship service time approximation • Algorithm to find cheapest configuration of a offshore architecture • Minimum cost architecture and its configuration for 100 markets • Future research • Multi criteria comparison • Simulation or queueing model for random data • Combination concepts with traditional and offshore mode

20. Comparison between traditional mode and offshore mode • A traditional port in Korea is more cost effective • There is very expensive land rental cost and tax in Hong Kong • Mid stream has 1/3 cost due to depth of berth • For collection of small market, having one MH is better than having each market have own crane <Construction information of Gwang Yang port in Korea >