Comparative evaluation of existing and innovative rail-road freight transport terminals

Abstract The paper evaluates technical and logistics developments that could lead to increased economic and technical efficiency of rail–road transport terminals. The main design parameters are identified (length and utilisation of transhipment tracks, train and truck arrival behaviour/patterns, type and number of handling equipment, mean stacking height in the storage area, terminal access system and procedures) and analysed. A comparative evaluation of selected conventional and advanced technologies is performed by use of an analysis tool that was developed on purpose. This tool consists of three modules (an expert system, a simulation model and a cost calculation module). The overall outcome of the analysis is a number of cost-versus-volume curves for various terminal configurations. The paper concludes with two groups of results: (a) a comparative evaluation of conventional and advanced technologies that reveals similarities in terms of track numbers and the associated area requirements as well as differences in terms of layout flexibility, number of equipment, stacking policies and personnel requirements. Each design is proved effective for a certain cargo volume range. (b) A critical assessment of terminal capacity issues. It is identified that the capacity limitations are imposed mainly by the sidings/transhipment track sub-system rather than by the handling equipment.

[1]  Carlos F. Daganzo,et al.  Storage space vs handling work in container terminals , 1993 .

[2]  Peter Boese.  APPLICATIONS OF COMPUTER MODEL TECHNIQUES FOR RAILROAD INTERMODAL TERMINAL CONFIGURATION, EQUIPMENT, AND OPERATIONAL PLANNING , 1983 .

[3]  Erwin Héjj.  ANALYSIS AND COMPARISON OF RAIL AND ROAD INTERMODAL FREIGHT TERMINALS THAT EMPLOY DIFFERENT HANDLING TECHNIQUES , 1983 .

[4]  Rajan Batta,et al.  Developing Conflict-Free Routes for Automated Guided Vehicles , 1993, Oper. Res..

[5]  Luis Ferreira,et al.  Modelling intermodal freight terminal operations , 1995 .

[6]  Athanasios Ballis,et al.  A comparison between conventional and advanced handling systems for low volume container maritime terminals , 1997 .

[7]  Ismail Sahin,et al.  Railway traffic control and train scheduling based oninter-train conflict management , 1999 .

[8]  Pierre Dejax,et al.  Models and Algorithms for Container Allocation Problems on Trains in a Rapid Transshipment Shunting Yard , 1998, Transp. Sci..

[9]  Johan Woxenius.  Inventory of Transshipment Technologies in Intermodal Transport (Study for the International Road Transport Union (IRU), Geneva) , 1997 .

[10]  Richard A Staley.  LAND USE CONSTRAINTS IN LOCATING INTERMODAL TERMINALS , 1983 .

[11]  P. Fabel,et al.  Umschlagtechnologien für den Kombinierten Verkehr , 1997 .

[12]  J. M. Pastor,et al.  Productivity, efficiency and technical change in the European railways: A non-parametric approach , 1999 .

[13]  Johan Woxenius,et al.  INVENTORY OF TRANSSHIPMENT TECHNOLOGIES IN INTERMODAL TRANSPORT. , 1997 .

[14]  Peter Nijkamp,et al.  INTERMODAL FREIGHT TERMINALS: AN ANALYSIS OF THE TERMINAL MARKET , 1999 .

[15]  Julius Sigut,et al.  Measuring the performance of intermodal freight terminals , 1993 .