In-built intelligence key to successful automation

This being the case, terminal automation has so far had most to offer in countries with high labour costs, at least those where flexible labour practices enable it to be introduced, such as at the big terminals in the Netherlands and Germany. But for many terminals, introducing automation simply isn't an option because restrictive labour practices rule it out.

In low cost labour environments, conventional terminals with manned RTGs and reachstackers will remain popular, with an increasing amount of 'intelligence' gradually built-in in order to remain competitive; but where terminal automation is possible, there seem likely to be an increasing number of very efficient, highly automated terminals using unmanned equipment supported by remote operators.

This is certainly the view of Kent Busk of Seaport Innovations Ltd, part of the Seaport Group of port management consultants, who believes that the market will continue to be characterised by a dichotomy between new, highly automated terminals, and older, conventional terminals, for the foreseeable future.

Mr Busk tells PS that the market for terminal automation technology is currently "very active", but warns ports thinking of investing in any level of automation that getting the choice, and specification, of the Terminal Operating System (TOS) right and building-in sufficient intelligence into an automated terminal is central to its success.

29"The future of terminal automation undoubtedly lies in more intelligence, " Mr Busk explains, noting that, in his view, the effectiveness of several well-known automation projects is held back by the TOS, and by the lack of in-built intelligence, rather than being enabled by it.

In Mr Busk's view, many fully automated terminals have yet to prove themselves, primarily, he says, because of the interdependencies and interrelations between handling processes.

Take for instance what he calls the 'vessel process' carried out by the crane on the quayside, and the yard process, carried out by unmanned cranes, which require transportation equipment in the form of AGVs, waiting ready, in order not to slow down the cranes on the quay. The challenge is, however, to synchronise the processes so that congestion does not arise and reduce productivity.

Despite these reservations, Mr Busk says that he believes that automated terminals have a considerable potential advantage compared with conventional terminals, primarily because of the significant reduction in man-hours that is achievable - up to 50% he believes in larger operations. Where terminal automation technology and the associated IT are correctly specified and implemented, the cost of high levels of productivity need not be much greater than those at operations where productivity is at much more modest levels. "The problem is, " he claims, "that terminals don't have the inhouse expertise they need to specify a TOS, and the other problem is that, to-date, there isn't the level of intelligence built in to systems that is required."

Where operators are attempting to pool the operation of RTGs or straddle carriers, very often 100% effectiveness is not being achieved because sufficient intelligence has not been built-in. It's not a hardware problem, he notes, as technology such as OCRs, vision systems, and wireless communications have all evolved rapidly. It's a software issue.

"The biggest failures and problems all come down to the IT system, " he tells PS. "What is really needed is that users get much more involved shaping the development of the technology, rather than accepting what they are offered. Operators need to develop a strategy for how they would like to see the software and the control systems develop. Likewise, manufacturers need to build-in operator expertise. The problem is that, at the moment, development is not being shaped by the terminals, and the terminals don't have the tradition themselves, " he says.

Hans Cederqvist, manager terminal projects at ABB Automation Technologies in Vasteras in Sweden, agrees with this view, and tells PS that, as in any automated operation, the process control system or TOS is fundamental.

As Mr Cederqvist explains, these include optimising the use of cranes and supporting vehicles; optimising the location of containers based on equipment work-load and factors such as available positions;

interfacing with and controlling external trucks which demand minimum waiting times; providing a 'look-ahead' for operations in order to achieve optimisation; and providing an overview of terminal status, in real time, to the operator.

"All this has to take place with a minimum of human interaction or control, and it goes without saying that in order to fulfil all of these tasks successfully, the TOS is highly dependent on accurate, timely information from the cranes and other units regarding their status and position. In today's automated terminals, the TOS and the equipment handling systems interface and communicate directly, which poses new challenges.

"Equipment handling systems such as automated RMGs, must be able to swiftly and safely interpret, carry out and report back that work-orders have been completed. In order to optimise the flow of work-orders these must be based upon correct information regarding crane and vehicle position and status and also that containers are located as anticipated. Consequently, the communication must be both fast and reliable, " Mr Cederqvist explains.

Terminal operators' 'wish lists' still tend to be led by things like better graphical user interfaces and better report generation, says Mr Busk, but in reality, these are relatively minor issues that are unlikely to have a significant impact on productivity.

What they really ought to be focusing on, he suggests, are improvement that could have a major impact on cost efficiencies and productivity. "Conventional IT systems don't have sufficient embedded intelligence, " he concludes, "or the kind of architecture that would allow them to run advanced strategies, realtime operations and automatic decision-making. The kind of system capabilities we should be looking for include overall terminal optimisation, 'look ahead' functions that help with planning of loading and discharging, realtime automatic job generation, and realtime inventory update and equipment position detection."