COMPARISON OF AHP AND FAHP FOR SELECTING YARD GANTRY CRANES IN MARINE CONTAINER TERMINALS

The time that containerships or transportation trucks spend in marine container terminals for loading and unloading their cargo is a real cost scenario which affects, not only the smooth operation of ports, but also affect the overall cost of container trade. The operators of shipping lines and container terminals are required to realize the importance of this issue and the costs associated with dealing long queues of ships and trucks at loading or discharging ports. This paper introduces the concept of the classical Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) together with the Fuzzy AHP (FAHP) to help the decision makers in their judgments towards implementing costly loading and discharging facilities at their container terminals. The main objective of this study is to provide a decision-making tool and also to introduce the concept of the Multiple Attribute Decision-Making (MADM) technique by using and comparing both of the AHP and FAHP techniques for solving the problem of selecting the most efficient container yard gantry crane amongst three alternatives including Straddle Carriers (SCs), Rubber Tyred Gantry Cranes (RTGs), and Rail Mounted Gantry Cranes (RMGs) by incorporating the quantitative and the qualitative determining attributes into the problem. Both of the AHP and FAHP analyses in this study have shown that RMG, RTG, and SC systems are the best operational alternatives, respectively.

[1]  Seyed Hassan Ghodsypour,et al.  A decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear programming , 1998 .

[2]  D. Chang Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP , 1996 .

[3]  Ching-Hsue Cheng,et al.  Evaluating attack helicopters by AHP based on linguistic variable weight , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[4]  Branislav Dimitrijevic,et al.  Study to Determine the Need for Innovative Technologies for Container Transportation System , 2004 .

[5]  Der-Horng Lee,et al.  A Decision Support Method for Truck Scheduling and Storage Allocation Problem at Container , 2008 .

[6]  Jin Wang,et al.  Technology and Safety of Marine Systems , 2003 .

[7]  C. Kahraman,et al.  Multi‐criteria supplier selection using fuzzy AHP , 2003 .

[8]  Genevieve Giuliano,et al.  Reducing port-related truck emissions: The terminal gate appointment system at the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach , 2007 .

[9]  T. Saaty Decision making — the Analytic Hierarchy and Network Processes (AHP/ANP) , 2004 .

[10]  Henry Y. K. Lau,et al.  Integrated scheduling of handling equipment at automated container terminals , 2008, Ann. Oper. Res..

[11]  T. Saaty How to Make a Decision: The Analytic Hierarchy Process , 1990 .

[12]  Mario Rodríguez-Molins,et al.  A decision support system for managing combinatorial problems in container terminals , 2012, Knowl. Based Syst..

[13]  Matthew E. H. Petering Decision support for yard capacity, fleet composition, truck substitutability, and scalability issues at seaport container terminals , 2011 .

[14]  Rongfang Liu,et al.  Container terminal gate appointment system optimization , 2009 .

[15]  Alan L. Erera,et al.  Planning local container drayage operations given a port access appointment system , 2008 .

[16]  Loo Hay Lee,et al.  A yard storage strategy for minimizing traffic congestion in a marine container transshipment hub , 2008, OR Spectr..

[17]  S. S. Ganji,et al.  Multi-criteria evaluation of stacking yard configuration , 2012 .

[18]  Zeki Ayağ,et al.  A fuzzy AHP-based simulation approach to concept evaluation in a NPD environment , 2005 .